The Coalition’s plan to cut net overseas migration to 100,000 people a year has drawn scepticism from former immigration department deputy secretary Abul Rizvi, who said migrants were being blamed for problems that lay elsewhere in Australia’s economy.
Speaking on an Inside Politics episode, Mr Rizvi said the migration system was “clogged” and processing times were slowing, but argued that the performance of permanent migrants did not support claims that they were responsible for weak productivity.
Australian Bureau of Statistics data tracking permanent migrants who arrived since 2000 showed they were, on average, more highly qualified, more likely to be employed and more likely to earn higher incomes than the wider population, he said.
They were also more likely to have started a business, less likely to be unemployed and less likely to use health services, according to Mr Rizvi’s account of the figures.
“From an economic perspective, they have been remarkably successful,” he said. “The question that you have to ask is: why is immigration being blamed for low productivity if the migrants themselves are performing so well economically?”
Migration system under pressure
Mr Rizvi said net overseas migration, which stood at about 292,000, was too high if the aim was to reduce the number of people caught in immigration limbo.
He said the temporary graduate and student streams could be better targeted, with priority given to people whose skills were in long-term demand, such as nursing and engineering.
The backlog had been fuelled by decisions made by both major parties, Mr Rizvi said. After the Covid pandemic, the former Coalition government responded to intense pressure from businesses facing labour shortages by accelerating immigration changes.
Net overseas migration subsequently reached 538,000 in 2022-23. The initial response from the Labor government was that the increase was a form of catch-up and that net overseas migration was not something it managed, he said.
That position changed when the Prime Minister committed to delivering the net overseas migration forecasts set out in the budget, Mr Rizvi said.
The long-term impact of lower migration
Mr Rizvi also warned that cutting migration too far could accelerate Australia’s ageing population. If net overseas migration became negative, the point at which deaths exceeded births would arrive sooner, while the proportion of older people relative to those of working age would rise.
That would leave fewer working-age people supporting an older population and increase the contribution required from them, he said.
However, he acknowledged that migration at excessively high levels could place pressure on housing, infrastructure and public services. The debate, he argued, should focus on finding a sustainable balance rather than treating migrants as the cause of wider economic problems.
