Immigrations must bring benefits to all

Comments on Paul Kelly “All out of options on boatpeople”, 18/12/2010, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/all-out-of-options-on-boatpeople/story-e6frg6zo-1225972956310

I have not read any of the three reports Kelly mentioned. However, it seems that it may not be a bad thing if "the Sustainable Development report chaired by former NSW premier Bob Carr proposes the biggest changes to immigration since its inception", with recommendations "that immigration levels be linked to sustainability indicators such as biodiversity preservation, reductions in urban encroachments, improved water efficiency and better housing affordability and availability."

Rather than using those popular indicators, it could just using a criterion that requires immigration be linked to demonstrable enhancement of the well beings of existing Australian residents.

There should and must be a appropriate balance between businesses that clearly benefit from more immigrations due to increases in both the supply of labour and the expansion of the markets for many things, and the real earnings of existing labour who may or may not necessarily benefit from more immigrations due to the downward pressure of their wages as a result of increased labour supply.

In the past, the government has been too heavily influenced by businesses because they have very strong lobby groups with loud voices backed by money from businesses. On the other hand, residents are not so strong in their presentations to influence government policies. As a result, there have been natural biases in favour of businesses and larger immigrations.

Now the government should recognise this and set up criteria for immigration policies that have an autonomous mechanism to keep a balance between businesses and labour.

This should be the right way for the population minister out on most of the population issues he is faced including immigrations.

It is a different matter for boat arrivals and border protection.

While many people may say that the Howard government's Pacific solution is on the cruel side, it is a fact that it was effective in preventing or significantly reducing boat arrivals to the Australia shores.

On the other hand, Gillard's regional processing centres are unlikely to produce results any time soon.

Maybe the Pacific solution could be an interim means, pending on a better solution if that could be found.