The Migration Debate: Cutting Through the Political Noise
Australia's migration policy has become a political battleground, with accusations of "mass migration" flying between major parties. Yet the reality behind the numbers tells a more complex story about who truly drives migration patterns in the country.
Understanding Net Overseas Migration
Net overseas migration (NOM) experienced dramatic swings during the Covid-19 pandemic, collapsing below zero during lockdowns before rebounding to historically high levels as borders reopened. These post-pandemic fluctuations form the basis of claims that Labor pursues a "mass immigration agenda."
However, NOM is already dropping sharply toward historical levels as the government tightens visa rules and departures increase. Crucially, NOM cannot be directly controlled by government policy as it measures arrivals staying 12 out of 16 months minus residents leaving for similar periods.
The pandemic-driven migration patterns represent a global phenomenon rather than evidence of any government deliberately pursuing mass immigration policies.
The Real Migration Levers: Permanent vs Temporary Visas
Migration discussions should focus on permanent and temporary visa programs where governments actually exercise control. The permanent migration program remains stable at 185,000 people annually, with approximately two-thirds allocated to skilled visas and one-third to family visas, plus 20,000 humanitarian places.
In contrast, temporary visa numbers have exploded, becoming the dominant component of Australia's migration landscape. In 2024-25, authorities granted approximately:
- 372,000 student visas
- 321,000 working holiday visas
- 386,000 temporary skilled worker visas
Professor Alan Gamlen from ANU's migration hub explains that temporary migrants constitute 84% of the increase in skilled migrant employment, with at least 44% coming from current and former international students.
The Political Irony of Temporary Migration
Research reveals a striking contradiction in migration politics. While the Coalition positions itself as opposing high migration, successive Coalition governments drove the temporary migration surge through policy decisions over the past 25 years.
Conservative governments made universities dependent on international student fees, created the 457 temporary skilled migrant visa, expanded post-study work rights, and signed nearly 70% of Australia's working holiday agreements.
Meanwhile, Labor governments have typically tightened immigration rules when in power, raising compliance standards, cracking down on questionable education providers, and strengthening English language requirements.
Professor Gamlen notes the fundamental tension: "The temporary program creates many issues the Coalition worries about, yet they are the party most in favour of temporary migration."
The Political Dance on Migration
Both major parties face internal divisions on migration, forcing them to "walk both sides of the street" - saying one thing while doing another. Labor balances cultural openness to migration with union demands for regulated labour markets, while the Coalition navigates between business demands for flexible labour and nationalist anti-immigration sentiment.
As migration debates continue, understanding these underlying dynamics and factual patterns becomes crucial for informed policy discussions that move beyond emotive language and political point-scoring.
