Claire Lehmann: evaluation

Transcript context

…Whether deserved or not, Australia has a history of being somewhat racist or xenophobic. In the 1960s, immigration from places other than, say, Great Britain, is quite low. Now, Australians are extremely welcoming of immigration. What is it about how Australia did immigration that accounts for this? People will debate this question, but I’m quite persuaded by our former prime minister, John Howard’s perspective when he says that the people of Australia will accept very high immigration if they feel that their border is controlled. He brought in this policy whereby anyone arriving by boat was turned away, and boats were basically stopped by the navy before they could arrive. His general thesis is that you can have high immigration, and the voting public will accept it if they feel that it’s done in a controlled manner. I think that’s one aspect of it. Another aspect is that we also have very high-skilled immigration. It’s very noticeable that our immigrant communities are filling up professions and are very hardworking, and have immediately gone into the highest income brackets because we poach a lot of very talented people from all over the world to come out to Australia. I think that helps when it comes to things like assimilation and acceptance, that’s for sure. If I think of the comparative histories of Australia and New Zealand with regard to political correctness, I have the sense New Zealand gets there first. They have a very mild version of political correctness. Maori are rhetorically granted higher status much earlier than, say, Aboriginals and Torres Strait Island peoples are granted higher status in Australia. What do you think accounts for that difference? But yet, now, New Zealand has probably less immigration than Australia in percentage terms.…

Stored transcript either side of the excerpt. The highlighted words are the published quote; the surrounding text is unedited source, never generated.