Buzzy--Bee

From The Age today. The one reason for reduced immigration that doesn't seem to be mentioned is the exchange rate which I suspect is putting a lot of people off!


NET migration to Australia is in free fall. In two years, migration has plunged by almost half, intensifying the skills shortages that threaten to drive up interest rates.

The Bureau of Statistics reports that net migration was just 171,000 in 2010, down sharply from 316,000 in 2008, and the lowest since the bureau changed its measuring system in late 2006.

Australia's population growth fell to 325,500 in 2010, down from 467,300 in 2008.

On New Year's Eve, the bureau estimates, Australia had 22,477,400 residents, up 1.5 per cent over the year. There has been no let-up in the fall. In the six months to December, net migration slumped 37 per cent year on year, from 121,500 to 77,000, while the Reserve Bank said the economy was close to full employment.

Net migration into Victoria fell even more sharply. In 2010 it slumped 37 per cent, from 76,000 to 48,000, partly reflecting the impact of Indian media coverage of violence against Indian students.

Since 2003, Indians had been the main source of permanent settlers in Victoria.

But in 2009-10, their numbers slumped 14 per cent, and China became the state's main source of settlers.

Chinese (8151) and Indians (7739) easily outnumbered settlers from Britain (4282) and New Zealand (3696).

They were followed by Sri Lankans (2484), Filipinos (2112), Malaysians (1638), South Africans (1477) and Vietnamese (1347). Other bureau figures show the slump in migration has continued in 2011.

The government planned for an unchanged 168,700 family and skilled migrants in 2010-11, and 13,750 humanitarian refugees, but arrivals data shows a far different trend.

In the 10 months to April, excluding New Zealanders, just 83,750 people arrived as permanent settlers, down 20 per cent from 104,700 a year earlier. In 2011 alone, the number is down 17 per cent. The figures suggest that the anti-immigration rhetoric of the ALP and the Coalition in the 2010 election campaign has influenced either the way immigration applicants are being assessed, or overseas interest in coming in the first place, or both.

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott demanded a ceiling of 170,000 people a year on net overseas immigration (which measures the balance between arrivals of permanent and long-term settlers, and permanent and long-term departures from Australia). The Coalition has gone quiet on the issue since, after sharp criticism from its business allies.

A spokeswoman for the Immigration Minister, Chris Bowen, said the sharp decline in net overseas migration reflected immigration reforms that had tackled the potential abuse of student visas and shifted the focus to high-value occupations.

Source: http://www.theage.com.au/national/im...623-1ghjc.html

Trevski

Australia is a expensive place to live and its the same as all other countries with its homeless/ un employment and the every day cost of living, but the reason for the drop in migration is that people cant afford to sell their homes at a loss and come to a expensive place, their money does not go far with the exchange and cost of living is much more than some other countries, give it a year or two and the world will sort its self out

Amazulu

As the Terminator (almost) said:
They'll be back

Buzzy--Bee

I thought he said "I'm just off to shag the cleaner. I'll be back."

BB

What_a_life

Amazulu

But he didn't say that..........he just did it!
Terminator always gets his own way

chris955

That's exactly true, 10 years ago and if fact even 5 years ago when Australia was a cheap country to live in it was very attractive to immigrants. Now with it being an expensive place it is obviously less attractive. The shift in the make up of immigrants is interesting, it wont plaese the racists much.

koalakim

Apart from the financials these days, isn't it getting harder and harder to get the golden visa? They keep moving the goal posts every year so they must also be cutting down on numbers that way.

When we got the bug to come here, Oz was a cheap place to live, it meant we could have been almost part-time if we wanted, however, by the time we got the visa and moved out it was starting to change, we were on the cusp - those before us got it good, those afterwards knew what they were coming out to. If we'd been a couple of years later, I don't think we would have come, our major fault was not selling in the UK when we came and bringing the money out then....good old hindsight again!

As the OP says, interesting the mix of migrants but most of the ex-pats I've met have all been mid 30's-mid 40's with families and I guess nowadays it's hard to risk what you've built up over the years in the UK to come here and pay through the nose for everything. Maybe in other countries it's not so hard to risk everything, maybe other migrants are much better off than Brits these days!

chris955

I dont imagine that most Chinese and Indian migrants are better off than UK migrants but I agree that for many it is just too big a risk for no guarantee of a 'better' life.

Fluid36

A lot of the Chinese are LOADED, a lot of the remainder and the Indians are prob moving for a better life. This is a generalization.

I agree, it won't please the bogans.

Beoz

On the flip side, when the Aussie Dollars they earn land in the the bank account of their families back home it is worth a fortune.

Amazulu

Whatever the exchange rate, someone, somewhere is happy!

iamthecreaturefromuranus

Confucius?

Amazulu

he say

the troubadour

There are always the New Zealanders that can be relied on to keep the numbers up.