2006-2007 Echo Issue Outline ... to return to the page you "clicked" from, simply close this window



Related issue outlines:
2006/10: Are the Cronulla riots evidence of significant racism in Australia?
Dictionary: Double-click on any word in the text to bring up a dictionary definition of that word in a new window (IE only).
Analysing the language of the news media: Click here to read a useful document on media language analysis
Age, Herald-Sun and Australian items: Click this icon ...

... to search the Echo newspaper index and enter the following word(s), with just a space in between them.
citizenship
immigration
test
Sydney Morning Herald index: Click here to use the State Library of NSW's online index to the Sydney Morning Herald
Search for listed newspaper items online - see end of this page

2007/02 Should Australia require immigrants seeking citizenship to pass a formal citizenship test? <BR>

2007/02 Should Australia require immigrants seeking citizenship to pass a formal citizenship test?


What they said ...
'How can it be in the national interest, to impose new barriers to citizenship? Barriers that would have prevented its acquisition by so many who have demonstrably proven themselves to be model citizens'
Petro Georgiou, Liberal Member of Parliament

'There's overwhelming support in the Australian community for ... a requirement that people who become Australian citizens have a working knowledge of English'
The Prime Minister, Mr John Howard

The issue at a glance
On September 17, 2006, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, Andrew Robb, released a discussion paper for public reaction to a proposal to introduce a formal citizenship test.
The discussion paper seeks public comments on four key issues:
* Should Australia introduce a formal citizenship test?
* What level of English is required to participate as an Australian citizen?
* How important is knowledge of Australia for Australian citizenship?
* How important is a demonstrated commitment to Australia's way of life and values for those intending to settle permanently in Australia or to spend a significant period of time in Australia ?
The following day Prime Minister John Howard said he would hope to see changes to citizenship laws in place 'well before the next election', which is expected to be held late next year. He also said he expected bipartisan support for the new laws.
A compulsory citizenship test, assessing English skills and knowledge of Australian history and values, is expected to be introduced next year.
The proposal to introduce a compulsory citizenship test with an increased emphasis on English competence and knowledge of Australian culture and values has generated significant debate within the broader community.

Background
Each year about 70,000 migrants become Australian citizens. They have to have a basic knowledge of English and answer a few questions about the responsibilities and privileges of being Australian.

White Australia Policy
One of the criticisms given of the proposed citizenship test is that its operation could be similar to that of the White Australia Policy which prevented non-white people from settling in Australia. The following account of the White Australia Policy is an edited version of the explanation which can be found on the Making Multicultural Australia Internet site. If you wish to read the original it can be found at http://www.multiculturalaustralia.edu.au/hotwords/hottext.php?id=78
Definition
The White Australia Policy describes Australia's previous approach to immigration which favoured applicants from certain countries.
The first Act of Parliament passed after Federation was the Immigration Restriction Act (1901), better known as the 'White Australia Policy'. Its aim was to promote a homogenous population similar to that in Britain. Under 'White Australia' only Europeans, and then mainly northern Europeans, could immigrate to Australia.
The main method prescribed by the legislation for the administration of the White Australia Policy was a dictation test of fifty words in length. The test was carried out by Australian Customs officers and could be conducted in any European language nominated by the Officer.
If a person failed the test, they were refused entry into Australia or, if they were already here, imprisoned for six months and then generally ordered to leave. The Dictation Test was administered 805 times in 1902-03 with 46 people passing and 554 times in 1904-09 with only six people successful. After 1909 no person passed the Dictation Test.
The abolition of the White Australia policy took place over a period of 25 years, with the final vestiges being removed in 1973 by the Whitlam Labor Government.
The White Australia Policy discriminated against people according to their skin colour and was based on the assumption that someone with a 'white' skin was superior to a person with a different skin colour. This implied that the customs, values and beliefs of people with a 'white' skin colour were also superior. The policy is an example of overt discrimination, racism and xenophobia.

Multiculturalism
Supporters of the new citizenship test claim it is placing sensible limits on multiculturalism. Its opponents see it as an attack on multiculturalism. The following is an edited account of the policy of multiculturalism as defined on the Making Multicultural Australia Internet site. The original can be read at http://www.multiculturalaustralia.edu.au/hotwords/hottext.php?id=34
Definition
Multiculturalism is a term which recognises and celebrates the cultural diversity of Australia's population.
In the past 200 years this diversity has been augmented with the settlement of over six million migrants. The 2001 Census determined that 43% of Australians were either born overseas or had at least one parent born overseas. This diversity has had a marked influence on all aspects of our society.
In place since 1973, this policy respects and values the right of all Australians to express and share their individual cultural heritage within a cohesive and harmonious society, and within an overriding commitment to the basic structures and values of Australian democracy.
Government strategies, policies and programs have been implemented to promote social harmony among different cultural groups, optimise the benefits of cultural diversity for all Australians and make our administrative and economic infrastructure responsive to the rights, needs and responsibilities of different cultural groups. These have focussed on access and equity to public services, equal opportunity in employment, creation of the Special Broadcasting Service (SBS) and productive diversity. Productive diversity promotes utilising Australia's language and cultural diversity for the economic and social benefits of all Australians.
Some people fear that a society inclusive of many cultures will lead to a breakdown in the social cohesion of the Australian community. Others view multiculturalism as a type of reverse racism which discriminates against 'mainstream Australians' and benefits 'minority groups'.
However, many people recognise the reality of Australia as a multicultural society, and are proud of the harmonious coexistence of diverse cultures and value the benefits arising from this.

Citizenship
The following account of citizenship is an edited version of the explanation given on the Making Multicultural Australia Internet site. The original can be read at http://www.multiculturalaustralia.edu.au/hotwords/hottext.php?id=13
Definition
Citizenship refers to two related ideas. The legal meaning refers to the status of someone who is a citizen of a country - either born there or naturalised (having applied for and been accepted as a citizen of the new country).
Citizenship also refers to a moral code of practice in society in which, in exchange for the benefits they get - the right to vote, carry a passport and so on - citizens accept the basic structures and principles of society, observe the rule of law and contribute actively to that society.
You don't have to be a citizen in law to be a good citizen in practice - that is why the Community Relations Commission for a Multicultural New South Wales stresses the idea that citizenship encompasses all people living in the state.
The taking up of citizenship is seen by some sections of the community as being a manifestation of being Australian and of showing loyalty to the nation. About 3,150,000 Australian citizens were born overseas, making the current take up rate for all those eligible to assume citizenship as high as 74%.

(The information supplied under the next two headings comes from the federal government's discussion paper on citizenship testing. The full discussion paper can be read at http://www.citizenship.gov.au/news/DIMA_Citizenship_Discussion_Paper.pdf#search=%22%2B%22citizenship%20test%22%22)

Rights and responsibilities of Australian citizenship
Australian citizens have the right to live in Australia. A permanent resident on the
other hand has permission to live here indefinitely provided they remain of good character. A permanent resident who travels overseas must hold a resident return visa if they wish to return to Australia.
Australian citizenship brings with it considerable benefits. Australian citizens have:
the right to apply for an Australian passport
the right to register children born overseas as Australian citizens by descent
the capacity to seek election to parliament where eligible
the right to vote in federal and state and territory elections, subject to eligibility criteria
access to the full range of financial assistance from the government for higher education under the Higher Education Loan Programme (HELP)
access to the full range of employment opportunities, including employment in the
Australian Public Service and the Australian Defence Forces.
Australian citizens also have access to full consular assistance when travelling overseas.
Along with privileges, Australian citizens have certain legal responsibilities:
to obey Australian laws and fulfil their duties as Australian citizens
to enrol on the electoral register, and vote at federal and state and territory elections and referenda
to serve on a jury if called on
to defend Australia should the need arise (subject to the same rights and exemptions as Australian-born citizens).

How immigrants become citizens under the current system
The Australian Citizenship Act 1948 requires most applicants for Australian citizenship to have spent a specified period of time in Australia, to have an
understanding of the nature of their application, and to have a basic knowledge of English and an adequate knowledge of the responsibilities and
privileges of Australian citizenship.
There are some exemptions for older people and those suffering a permanent incapacity. It is also a requirement that applicants show that they would be likely to reside, or continue to reside, in Australia, or to maintain a close and continuing association with Australia. As required by legislation, all applicants over the age
of 18 years must be of good character.
An understanding of the nature of the application, knowledge of the responsibilities and privileges of Australian citizenship, and knowledge of the English language are generally required to be demonstrated at interview.
Policy provides that applicants may be assessed as meeting the English language requirements if they are able to speak and understand English sufficiently to respond in simple language during the citizenship interview. Applicants must be able
to answer questions in simple English concerning personal particulars (such as, how long have you lived in Australia? What are your children's names?).
To meet the responsibilities and privileges requirements, applicants must be able
to answer 'yes' or 'no' or reply in simple English to factual questions on the responsibilities and privileges of Australian citizenship.
Policy also provides that applicants who have been given an 'Australian Citizenship Language Record' issued by an Adult Migrant English Program (AMEP) provider, and who can respond in simple English on aspects of their application, are exempt from further testing of the English language requirement at interview.
The Australian Citizenship Language record is issued to AMEP students if they have:
participated in the AMEP for 300 hours been awarded Certificates II or III in Spoken and Written English or achieved functional English.
AMEP participants can complete a course called Let's participate: A course in Australian Citizenship. This covers many aspects of Australia and the Australian way of life, including how to become an Australian citizen - while focusing on improving English language skills. The topics include the values and principles of Australian
society, national symbols and emblems, Australia's parliamentary system of government, the responsibilities and privileges of being an Australian citizen, and Australian law. The course involves a minimum of 18 hours of classroom tuition. People who successfully complete this course are taken to satisfy the requirement to
have an understanding of the responsibilities and privileges of Australian citizenship.
Under current arrangements, an information booklet, What it means to be an Australian citizen, is made available to prospective citizens. It contains background material which includes an overview of our shared values, the responsibilities
and privileges of citizenship, our history from the first Australians through to Australia today and Australia's rule of law and form of government.
Once an application is approved, the final step is the making of the Australian citizenship pledge before a person authorised for this purpose under the Australian Citizenship Act 1948. This is usually done as part of a public citizenship ceremony.
Children under the age of 16 years are exempt from making the pledge.
The Australian Citizenship Pledge states:
`From this time forward, under God,* I pledge my loyalty to Australia and its people
whose democratic beliefs I share, whose rights and liberties I respect, and whose laws I will uphold and obey.'
* A person may choose whether or not to use the words 'under God'

Internet information
On September 17, 2006, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs issued a media release announcing a discussion paper on the introduction of a formal test for Australian citizenship. The media release calls for responses to the paper. The media release can be found at http://www.minister.immi.gov.au/parlsec/media/media-releases/medrel06/300610.htm

In September 2006 the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs released a discussion paper titled 'Australian Citizenship: much more than a ceremony. Discussion paper. Consideration of the merits of introducing a formal citizenship test'
The full text of this discussion paper can be found at http://www.citizenship.gov.au/news/DIMA_Citizenship_Discussion_Paper.pdf#search=%22%2B%22citizenship%20test%22%22

On September 17, 2006, Channel Nine's Sunday Program conducted an extensive interview with Andrew Robb, the Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs on the proposed formal citizenship test. The text of this interview can be found at http://sunday.ninemsn.com.au/sunday/political_transcripts/article_2071.asp

In October 2006 Federal Liberal Member of Parliament, Petro Georgiou, expressed his opposition to the proposed formal citizenship test. Mr Georgiou outlined some of his concerns in an interview on ABC National Radio's PM program aired October 4, 2006. A transcript of this program can be found at http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2006/s1755708.htm

The online opinion site Online Opinion posted a comment by Saeed Khan, a Marrickville Greens Councillor and a Vice Chairman of the Ethnic Communities Council of New South Wales, on the proposed formal citizenship test. Saeed Khan is sceptical about the Government's motives for introducing such a test, believes it would harm vulnerable migrant groups and makes links between its operation and that of the White Australia Policy. These comments can be found at http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=4980

On September 15, 2006, The Ethnic Communities' Council of Victoria issued a media release critical of the federal government's proposed formal citizenship test. The text of this release can be found at http://www.eccv.org.au/4.html

Arguments in favour of an Australian citizenship test
1. A similar test is in place in Britain, Canada, the United States, Denmark and the Netherlands
Supporters of an Australian citizenship test note that similar tests are in place in many other countries. The Australian Government's discussion paper on the question includes the following statement, 'each of these countries expects that a person who wishes to become a citizen must take active steps to learn key information about the country, be able to function in its primary language and demonstrate, by way of passing a formal test, that they have the capacity to be active citizens of their adopted
country
Historian Keith Windschuttle supports a citizenship test for Australia and has also noted that similar tests have been instituted successfully in other countries. Keith Windschuttle has stated, 'Insisting that people kind of make a break with the past and accept Australian values is something that's not only being seen as important in Australia but in Holland, Denmark, other European countries where they've had a large Muslim population which has been until now encouraged to remain separate. People have realised that that's a problem and that an integrationist or assimilationist form of immigration policy is a good thing to do.'
Paul Kelly, the editor-at-large of The Australian, has similarly stated, 'There has long been a critique that Australian citizenship needs to be invested with more meaning. Australia now lags America, Canada, Britain and the Netherlands in the conduct of citizenship tests.
If Canada, one of the most human rights sensitive and inoffensive nations on earth, conducts a test about its Aboriginal peoples, its white settler arrivals, its flag, its head of state, its capital cities and its constitution, by what logic does Australia's exercise became discriminatory, insulting and hurtful?'

2. A majority of Australians seem to be in favour of such a test
There is evidence to suggest that a majority of Australian citizens would favour the imposition of a fairly rigorous test for Australian citizenship. According to a Newspoll survey, taken for The Australian on the weekend of September 22-23, 77 per cent of respondents agreed there should be a test on language, Australia and our way of life.
The Australian newspaper, commenting on the results of the survey it had commissioned, noted, 'Despite fears that a proposed citizenship quiz for migrants using English would discriminate against non-English speakers, more than three-quarters of Australians agree there should be such a test.
A majority, 53 per cent, supported the idea "strongly" and only 19 per cent were against such a test.'
The Prime Minister, Mr John Howard, has stated, 'There's overwhelming support in the Australian community for ... a requirement that people who become Australian citizens have a working knowledge of English.'

3. A citizenship test would demonstrate the value Australia places on its identity and heritage
The suggestion has been made that Australian citizenship is currently too easily acquired and that this undervalues the privilege represented by becoming part of any country. This view has been put by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, Andrew Robb. Andrew Robb has stated, 'Australian citizenship is a privilege. In a sense, it gives us our identity. It tells us who we are, where we fit in the world. It is a unifying force in Australia, and if we give it away like confetti, it's not valued. It's not valued. And it's very important that people have the time - four years at least - and the understanding and the English skills that when they make the pledge to become an Australian citizen, that they know what they're pledging to and they have a keen sense so that they can make the most of the opportunity that Australia offers. If they do well, our new migrants, if they do well, we do well.'
Expanding his point further, Andrew Robb went on to say, 'Just last week I hear of a citizenship ceremony in Sydney where there were some several hundred. They were asked when they got their certificate and their tree and all the rest, having made the pledge, to take their seats so that they could all for the first time as Australian citizens sing the national anthem. When it got to the point of singing the national anthem there were less than 100 people left in the hall.
I thought ... that suggests that there are many people who are taking out the citizenship who may see it as no more than a passport. I have been to many citizenship ceremonies where it is a great sense of joy and celebration. And I think we should make sure that in every citizenship ceremony for every person taking out citizenship there is that great sense of joy and celebration and commitment to the country. And I do think we've got to do something to make people feel they've earned the privilege of citizenship.'

4. A guaranteed ability to speak English would ensure all new citizens contributed fully to their adopted country
Supporters of the new citizenship test proposal argue that the ability to speak English is vital if an immigrant is to have a full life in his or her adopted country. The federal Health Minister,Mr Tony Abbott has stated, 'It is impossible to be a first class Australian if you can't speak the national language.' Mr Abbott has stressed that for new Australians to vote and participate in the economy then English competence is important. Mr Abbott stated, 'If you want to enjoy full participation in the Australian community it is necessary to speak the national language ... in the end, it is difficult to be cohesive with your neighbour if you can't properly communicate with your neighbour.
I appreciate that lots of people come to this country without a good grasp of English, possibly without any English at all. But it is important that we promote the English language because rightly or wrongly it is the national language and if we want to make the most of our life here it is important to speak it.'
Speaking through an English interpreter, Sheikh Alhilali, the mufti of Australia, agreed with Mr Abbott's comments. 'I agree with the minister that everyone in Australia should speak English.'

5. A citizenship test would contribute to national cohesion
Historian Keith Windschuttle has studied Australian immigration policy history and believes that a citizenship test would be a good idea.
Keith Windschuttle has stated, 'It would help to break down the sort of tribalism that the multicultural policy that's dominated immigration affairs for the past 30 years has instituted.
We've had a policy that's been telling people that they can retain all of their previous cultures and that not only includes cultures but all the previous grievances, their local hatreds of various nationalities in their old country and we've seen people bring a lot of that baggage to Australia ... Government policy doesn't determine everything about the way people respond to a new society but if we're going to have a policy it should be integrationist, rather than segregationist.'
The Prime Minister, Mr John Howard, has made a similar point regarding the importance of national cohesion. Mr Howard has stated, 'Democracies around the world face challenges on where the issues of citizenship, immigration, culture and national security intersect. The maintenance of social cohesion in Australia is both our greatest national achievement and our greatest national challenge for the future. We rightly celebrate our cultural diversity, but this must never be at the expense of the greater importance we attach to the common values that bind us together as one people.'

6. A citizenship test would not be used prejudicially to discriminate against a particular set of migrants
Since the federal government issued its discussion paper on the introduction of a citizenship test a number of prominent members of the government have defended its proposal against accusations that the new test would target particular groups seeking citizenship, especially Muslims. The Prime Minister, Mr John Howard, has stated, 'We have no argument with faithful Muslims who practise their religion as part of our way of life. But we require everybody to be part of the mainstream of the community.'
Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, Andrew Robb, has said the test was 'certainly not' intended to discriminate against the Muslim community. Rather, he has argued, the expectation that all citizens will speak English and have an appreciation of Australian values should advantage all new citizens, irrespective of their countries of origin. 'Certainly, many areas of the Muslim community will be advantaged by this test as will every other non-English speaking [group] or every other migrant coming to this country. The important thing is that people, no matter where they come from ... that when they come here they become an essential part of our community very quickly, very effectively,' Mr Robb has claimed.
The Prime Minister, Mr Howard, has also claimed that any citizenship test would not be insensitively employed and that care would be taken not to disadvantage elderly immigrants. Mr Howard has said, 'There will be some flexibility in the new regime, catering for cases like elderly parents joining their children. (The proposals are) not a tablet from the mountain. There will be a commonsense approach taken to these things.'

Arguments against an Australian citizenship test
1. A citizenship test would discourage new arrivals to this country from taking out Australian citizenship
There are many who fear that the proposed citizenship test will discourage many immigrants who would like to become Australian citizens from attempting to do so.
The Victorian Multicultural Affairs Minister John Pandazopoulos has warned that federal proposals for the test would send a negative message to potential migrants at a time when Australia was competing internationally for skilled workers.
A related argument has been put by federal Liberal Member of Parliament Petro Georgiou. Mr Georgiou has stated, 'How can it be in the national interest, to impose new barriers to citizenship? Barriers that would have prevented its acquisition by so many who have demonstrably proven themselves to be model citizens.
In my view, the discussion paper does not demonstrate the need to change our long-standing processes and the proposed new approach potentially undermines our unquestioned success.'
Though he essentially supports the proposed citizenship test, The Australian's editor-at-large, Paul Kelly, has claimed, 'the test ...may discourage arrivals from taking out citizenship. It makes sense, as the discussion paper says, for citizenship to be seen as "a privilege, not a right". Robb doesn't want citizenship given away "like confetti". But he needs to be careful. The policy will fail if it discourages citizenship. In this sense the atmospherics must be welcoming, not discouraging.'

2. A citizenship test would disallow many suitable potential citizens
There are many who have argued that a sound knowledge of English, while highly desirable, should not be the primary or determining basis on which Australian citizenship is granted. There is concern that if this were the case, many valuable potential citizens would be turned away.
Greg Sheridan, in an opinion piece published in The Australian, stated, 'We also know that English language, while immensely useful, is not absolutely essential for the deep personal commitment that citizenship involves.
Surely we all know Cantonese grandmothers, east European family patriarchs and others who have made wonderful Australian citizens but who could not have passed this silly test.'
A similar point was made by Thomas Irish in an online response to Greg Sheridan's view, 'I work for an Australian Chinese who speaks little English but manages to inject several million dollars into the economy each year. He is doing the least poorly of his close knit group of friends, one of whom owns a paper company turning over half a billion.'
A related argument has been put by federal Liberal Member of Parliament Petro Georgiou. Mr Georgiou has stated, 'Where is the evidence showing who does not learn English and the reason for that? Do the immigrants not want to learn, or are they stymied by the lack of availability of classes? Or, are they inhibited by the demands of employment and raising a family?'
Mr Georgiou has further claimed that encouraging English has always been a key focus of multiculturalism, however, he maintains that very many people have become citizens despite having very little fluency in English, including his own immigrant parents.
Mr Georgiou noted, 'This did not prevent them from making substantial contributions to our society. People who worked hard in jobs that many English speakers were loathe to take. People that were successful across a range of professions and occupations. People who obeyed the law, who were good parents, and fine neighbours.'

3. A citizenship test would discriminate against migrants with non-English speaking backgrounds
There are many who have claimed that the proposed citizenship test would place immigrants from non-English-speaking backgrounds at a severe and unfair disadvantage.
The chairperson of the Federation of Ethnic Communities, Voula Messimeri, has argued that the English test would disadvantage people who came from a non-English-speaking country, particularly refugees who might be illiterate in their own language.
The Victorian Multicultural Affairs Minister, John Pandazopoulos, has claimed the test would create a two-tiered system, where people who did not speak fluent English were seen as less worthy of being citizens. He has also argued it would also be a massive insult to the six million migrants who had arrived in Australia since 1945, not all of whom had the opportunity to learn English.
Graham Matthews, in an opinion piece published in Green Left Weekly, has stated, 'Critics of the proposed emphasis on English competence claim it is unfair as many migrants will not have had an adequate opportunity to learn the language. How are citizenship aspirants to learn English to the appropriate level? As Labor Senator Annette Hurley pointed out on September 15, the federal government has cut $10.8 million from the Adult Migrant English Program. Only 11% of those who complete the courses have functional English and some 62% of migrants do not participate because the system is inflexible, not catering for those who have found work or need child care.
For those who are able to attend the language classes, the federal government offers only a certain number of hours. If you need more time, you pay it.'
Relatedly it has been claimed that a rigorously applied English language test would discriminate against older immigrants who find it harder to acquire a new language.
Justin Li, the Vice President of the New South Wales Ethnic Communities Council, has stated, 'Well, we accept that ... English is the official language of Australia, and where possible citizens should learn to speak English.
But, of course, we would hope that in any sort of English test it's not just a compulsory, across-the-board test for all migrants, because we would imagine that particularly some elderly migrants might have a lot of difficulties with a test like that.'

4. A citizenship test could be applied prejudicially
There are many who are concerned that any citizenship test, especially one containing a language test, could be applied unfairly in a way that specifically excludes targeted groups. In the current climate of fear surrounding terrorism, it has been suggested, for example, that a citizenship test might make it difficult for immigrants from Islamic countries to live permanently in Australia.
The environment-based party, the Greens, have expressed a similar concern. Greens senator, Kerry Nettle, has stated, 'The Greens are concerned that this kind of move is a step back towards a white Australia style policy that will use language and culture tests to exclude migrants.
Mr Robb claims this move would be part of a response to the threat of "global terrorism" but denying some Australian residents citizenship on the grounds that they do not agree with values defined by the government will not build harmony ...
The solutions to the perceived problems that Mr Robb is worried about are to be found through dialogue with the communities concerned not through the imposition of stigmatising tests.'
A related view has been expressed by Hass Dellal, the executive director of the Australian Multicultural Foundation. Hass Dellal has stated it is important the test apply to all communities. He has further said, 'It seems that it's always directed toward the Muslim community, that they are the people that aren't integrating or can't speak English.
Let's put it in balance a little bit and not just focus it totally on the Muslim community. This should apply for all if it's going to apply.'

5. The citizenship test is being proposed for blatantly political reasons
There are those who believe that the proposed citizenship test is a means of gathering support for the federal government from those fear that immigrants to Australia may swamp traditional Australian values. There are also those who have suggested that this proposal is a bid to exploit fear of terrorism to the advantage of the government.
Graham Matthews, in an opinion piece published in Green Left Weekly, has stated, 'The PM is attempting to position "Australian values" as the centrepiece of his re-election bid. Given the widespread anger about his anti-worker laws, including from many who voted for the Coalition last time, Howard thinks that he can win them back using the race card. After all, there is the Tampa precedent.
In 2001, the Norwegian freighter MV Tampa rescued 433 stranded Afghan refugees who the Howard government had refused to allow into Australia to seek asylum. The Coalition, with ALP backing, ran a racist campaign against asylum seekers, securing Howard an election victory despite his unpopular goods and services tax.
Today, Howard is whipping up racism to frighten workers into voting for him as the true defender of the "Australian way of life"'.
Greens Senator Kerry Nettle has similarly stated, 'This is TAMPA all over again. The government appears set to beat up on Arab and Muslim people all the way to the election. Mr Robb's manipulation of community proposals for more preaching in English in Mosques are all part of the same agenda.
If the government was serious about improving social cohesion they would put more resources into settlement services for migrants and school programs assisting new arrivals instead of beating a racist drum.'

6. There is no easy consensus on what constitutes Australian values
Among the critics of the proposed citizenship test are those who claim it is an artificial exercise which emphasises an arbitrary set of values.
The president of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils, Dr Ameer Ali, has stated that it is unclear which values will be singled out as 'Australian'.
Dr Ali has said, 'We are talking about Australian values which has become a political slogan in this country. Now it's one thing to talk about citizenship values - respect for rule of law, democracy etc - these are not Australian, these are universal values.
But when you say Australian values, no-one knows what those values are.'
As early as May 2006 when the values debate had not long begun, Greg Barnes' wrote an opinion piece which was published in The Canberra Times. He argued that those values being claimed as 'Australian' are not distinctly so.
Greg Barnes stated, 'The absurdity of Mr Robb's idea is that the 'values' about which the Prime Minister, Mr Costello and Dr Nelson speak, are not in fact uniquely Australian values at all. They are the values of the liberal democratic philosophical tradition. They are the values of European democracies, the United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa, and any other nation which subscribes to a belief that liberal democracy is the superior means to organise society ... So Mr Robb's citizenship test will serve no purpose in inculcating a sense of Australian 'values' to those who are forced to take it.'

Further implications
It is difficult to know what the impact of the proposed citizenship test will be.
If such a test is simply too difficult for many potential candidates, then the likelihood is that these candidates will not seek citizenship. The question then becomes whether similar obligations regarding English competence and cultural knowledge will be imposed on those to be granted permanent residence visas.
That possibility is also raised in the government's discussion paper though it has not been widely discussed in the media.
If successful completion of a substantial language and cultural knowledge test is made a requirement for both citizenship and permanent residency then this could indeed have the effect of restricting those who can remain in Australia.
If the Australian government has a serious desire to use English competence as a means of improving the life options of immigrants to Australia then it has an obligation to ensure that all new immigrants have a genuine opportunity to learn the language adequately. There are those who have argued that language learning opportunities are currently not adequate.
Finally, it is concerning that this proposal could dilute general community support for multiculturalism and the general tolerance of difference within Australia. If the proposal is taken up by mainstream Australians as an indictment of immigrants who have not mastered English adequately or who are ignorant of Australian cultural values then this could be a very unfortunate consequence of the current proposal.

Newspaper items used in the compilation of this issue outline
The Age:
AGE, September 18, page 2, news item by Jewel Topsfield, `Questionable test'.
AGE, September 18, page 1, news item by Jewel Topsfield, `Plan to test migrants "insulting"'.
AGE, September 23, Insight section, page 4, analysis (with sample questions from British test) by John Button, `Testing time for citizenship'.
AGE, September 23, page 9, news item by Barney Zwartz, `Christian academic doubts PM's test'.
AGE, September 23, page 9, analysis (with photos of and comments from migrants and their descendants) by Silkstone and Piera, `Australia's last generation of migrants spoke little English but gave us scientists and entrepreneurs'.
AGE, September 25, page 11, analysis by Julie Szego, `I am, you are, we are ...'.
AGE, September 27, page 12, cartoon by Leunig.
AGE, September 28, page 17, comment by Kenneth Davidson, `Politicians have skewed the debate on citizenship'.

The Australian:
AUST, September 16, page 25, comment by Mike Steketee, `Let's not go down that road'.
AUST, September 16, page 18, editorial, `Australian values on the front line'.
AUST, September 18, page 17, editorial, `Valuing freedoms'.
AUST, September 23, page 19, comment by George Megalogenis, `Our kind of people'.
AUST, September 23, page 10, news item by Simon Kearney, `New migrants struggle to forgo traditional laws'.
AUST, September 26, page 2, news item (with public opinion survey result) by Dennis Shanahan, `Citizenship test backed'.
AUST, September 28, page 12, comment by Greg Sheridan, `A test of our good faith'.

The Herald-Sun:
H/SUN, September 18, page 18, editorial, `The land of the fair go'.
H/SUN, September 25, page 19, comment by David Chalke, `Value-added values'.
Using google to find newspaper items still available on the Web
Use your mouse to copy a newspaper headline (just the headline, not the entire entry as it appears in the sources) and paste it into the google search box below. Click search to see if the item is still accessible.

Google