7.30: In one question, Leigh Sales outshone three-part population special


OVER the three part population special it was reported as though we have no choice but “A Big Australia” …

However in Leigh Sales’ follow-up interview with Population Minister Alan Tudge, Sales asked the obvious question of why immigration shouldn’t be cut given the chronic problems it is creating in the big cities:

ALAN TUDGE:  ” …..  We need to better match those things so we can control the population growth, and that’s been my overall message.

LEIGH SALES: Well, on that point, you know, as we’ve heard over the past three nights for people in Brisbane, Melbourne and Sydney, there are constant complaints about overcrowding, about congestion, about housing. Why shouldn’t the Federal Government put a pause on immigration so the states can catch up with infrastructure?


In one question, Leigh Sales outshone three-part population special

By Leith van Onselen

Over the past several days I lambasted the ABC 7.30 Report’s three-part population special because it failed to mention the policy option of reducing immigration, instead presenting a ‘Big Australia’ as inevitable and maybe even desirable. It was reported as if we have no choice in the matter, so we must get used to it.

However, in Leigh Sales’ follow-up interview with Population Minister Alan Tudge, Sales asked the obvious question of why immigration shouldn’t be cut given the chronic problems it is creating in the big cities:

ALAN TUDGE: We evaluate that [the immigration intake] every year as part of the budget context, but one of the things I have foreshadowed is we do need a better population planning mechanism, whereby we better marry the population ambitions of the cities and the regions with the infrastructure and services, because one of the features of our federation is that we have the main population levers — be it migration and other levers — yet the states are largely responsible for the infrastructure and the services on the ground.

We need to better match those things so we can control the population growth, and that’s been my overall message.

LEIGH SALES: Well, on that point, you know, as we’ve heard over the past three nights for people in Brisbane, Melbourne and Sydney, there are constant complaints about overcrowding, about congestion, about housing. Why shouldn’t the Federal Government put a pause on immigration so the states can catch up with infrastructure?

ALAN TUDGE: Because in essence, there’s two issues going on here rather than one.

The first issue is indeed that our three big cities are growing very fast. Melbourne is growing the fastest at 2.7 per cent per annum, Sydney by 2.1, South East Queensland by about 2.3 per cent. Fast by international standards.

On the other hand, the second problem, though, is you have some regions and some smaller states who are crying out for more people.

Indeed, the regional institute of Australia reported this week that there are 47,000 vacancies in the regions alone as we speak. So if we can just ease the pressure on the big cities and enable the further growth in those jobs to be filled in the regions, then we actually achieve two objectives rather than one.

LEIGH SALES: But as we heard in that story, we’ve been trying for 100 years to decentralise Australia. You yourself say that the program you’ve been wanting to extend has been in place for a while and it hasn’t worked.

ALAN TUDGE: Oh, well, I think it has worked, but it’s been on a relatively small scale. One of—

LEIGH SALES: If you talk to people in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane, they wouldn’t agree with you.

ALAN TUDGE: But it’s been on a relatively small scale, and I suppose what I’m saying is that I understand the pressures which people in Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane feel…


Thankfully somebody at The ABC – Leigh Sales – possesses common sense and is not afraid to raise the most obvious solution.


Sadly, Alan Tudge’s response was pathetic. The evidence shows that the existing regional migration schemes have been systemically rorted with the overwhelming majority of these migrants ending up in Sydney and Melbourne.

In fact, 94% of migrants last financial year settled in the cities, whereas 86% of ‘skilled’ migrants settled in Sydney and Melbourne alone. Thus, in addition to running at triple the historical average, Australia’s immigration intake has become more centralised than ever, contrary to the claimed success of the existing regional migration schemes.

In fact, Alan Tudge admitted these problems in his speech last week to the Menzies Research Centre:

Our nation is adding a city the size of Canberra every year and the size of Adelaide every 3.5 years… In absolute terms, we grew by 3.75 million people [last decade] which is nearly twice as many as in the previous decade.

…the greatest challenge is the pressure it puts on our big cities in the form of congestion. This is a serious problem in Melbourne, Sydney and South East Queensland particularly… The Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics estimates the costs of congestion in Australia’s capital cities to be $25 billion a year in 2017/18 rising to $40 billion a year by 2030. This is a serious challenge for families and a serious economic challenge for the nation…

This challenge is exacerbated by the fact that 75 per cent of the population growth has been to our three largest population areas: Melbourne, Sydney and South East Queensland.

While the overall population of Australia has been growing at the rapid rate of 1.6 per cent per annum, our three large population centres have been some of the fastest growing cities in the world. Melbourne last year grew by 2.7 per cent, Sydney by 2.1 per cent and South East Queensland by 2.3 per cent…

The fact is that 87 per cent of all skilled migrants are going to Sydney and Melbourne, and nearly all of the humanitarian intake.

…the growth rate for our nation (and particularly our big cities) was well above projections. For example, the 2002 Intergenerational Report predicted Australia would grow by about 2.5 million over the last 15 years.  We actually grew by 5 million.

It’s a pipe dream to believe that the Coalition’s ‘migrants to the bush’ policy will work when existing smaller schemes have failed so dismally. Instead of deploying policy smokescreens, the Coalition needs to deal with the problem at its source and reduce immigration back to more manageable historical levels:



SOURCE:  https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2018/10/one-question-leigh-sales-outshone-three-part-population-special/





RENTING FOR LIFE is becoming Melbourne’s ( & Sydney’s) new normal — but is the law keeping up?

Between 1996 and 2011, the number of private tenants in Melbourne jumped by almost 60 per cent.

However, it would seem this escalated during the term of the Howard Government from 2004 and particularly towards the end of that term in 2006/07 when the migration floodgates opened increasing the competition with prices escalating for housing.

Then followed by the FIRB ruling (2008/09) allowing developers to sell 100% of “new homes” to foreign buyers!  Prior to 2008 50% of “new homes” could be sold overseas! (not able to confirm when this ruling was introduced).

MORE from the Big End of Town and Elite Housing Class … of the not so subtle message, that is we:

-should embrace renting for the rest of our lives 
-this is creating a pool of renters to sustain residential investment for the investor class
-creates a circumstance that ensures a class of renters unlikely to have access to much inherited wealth, and so, it’s possible that …

.less wealth, less competition for the investor class, able to maintain their control on the levers of social outcomes i.e. who gets to make the grade

IT is evident whilever those with vested interests can lobby and make political donations it is unlikely either major party will tackle the issues at the core of the housing affordability crisis namely:  foreign buyers, money laundering in our Real Estate, and the lure of Residency!

A bleak view but it seems things are going that way!

Renting for life is becoming Melbourne’s new normal — but is the law keeping up?


Towers dotted with windows and balconies rise into the sky.

Rental properties are now more expensive, and harder to find, than in the past.


There’s a good reason Melbourne is so wedded to the great Australian dream of owning a house and land: it was created here.

“We invented the quarter-acre block,” says demographer Bernard Salt. (Historian)

“The three-bedroom brick veneer, AV Jennings … that model actually came out of the suburbs of Melbourne.

“So we have this cultural history, reaching right back to Edna Everage’s era, where we have celebrated low-density suburbia.”

And, most importantly, owning our own piece of it.

But in the mid 1990s, something changed. We began shifting from a city of homeowners to a city of renters.

Melbourne's skyline is seen below a gloomy sky the tiled roofs of houses.

PHOTO Price growth in recent years means prospects are gloomy for many would-be homebuyers in Melbourne.



Between 1996 and 2011, the number of private tenants in Melbourne jumped by almost 60 per cent.

The number of privately rented households went up 50 per cent.

Nearly half of that growth was made up of families.

Rental properties are now more expensive, and harder to find.

“It’s different from what it was 20 years ago, when people might rent for a short time, while they were saving to buy a home, or while they’re studying,” says Emma King, the CEO of the Victorian Council of Social Service (VCOSS).

“So many Victorians are renting for life now, or renting for much longer periods.”

In 2011, the proportion of people renting in Melbourne was at 26 per cent and rising.

London leads on renters’ rights

It’s the same level as London, which — like Melbourne — is absorbing more than 120,000 new residents each year.

In London, as home ownership becomes ever harder to achieve, the number of people renting is climbing so fast that by 2025, there will be as many renters as owners.

And like Melbourne, London has a long — and growing — waiting list for social housing, and a rising population of homeless people.

This year, Lord Mayor Sadiq Khan released the London Housing Strategy. Significantly, it includes strengthening the rights of tenants, to make renting “more secure, stable, and affordable”.

It’s the sort of change Tenants Victoria CEO Mark O’Brien says is needed in the Melbourne housing market.

“We are a long way from the tenancy protections that exist in other parts of the world,” he says.

“There are significant groups now renting that weren’t a generation ago. Couples with young children, and over 55s.

“To make them feel more secure we are going to have to continue to improve or to restrict the circumstances under which they can be evicted for no fault of theirs.”

Mr O’Brien says Melbourne’s existing rental culture is directly linked to the rise in homelessness.

“The increased demand has squeezed out a lot of disadvantaged households who might have been able to find a place in the private market, but now can’t,” he says.

“They now end up in rooming houses, or living in caravan parks — who then squeeze the even more disadvantaged people out onto the street.

“We are going to hit a crunch where you have a whole generation who are going to be stuck in renting for longer, and the unaffordability of renting becomes a consequence and a cause of them not being able to afford to buy a home.

Mr O’Brien strongly supports changes to Victoria’s Residential Tenancies Act passed in September, giving renters dozens of new rights, such as owning pets and making minor modifications to homes without permission.



It also removes the 120-day ‘no reason’ notice to vacate, when a landlord wants their own property back for a reason not specified in the legislation.

“They are heading in the right direction,” Mr O’Brien says.

“But you can’t head in the right direction if every attempt is seen by the industry as an attack on property ownership.”

The Real Estate Institute of Victoria (REIV) is warning those changes will make renting harder, not easier.

“If the Government makes it too hard, then landlords will consider removing properties from the rental market,” the REIV’s president Richard Simpson says.

“Rents are likely to rise, and property owners will be forced to minimise their risk by offering shorter tenancies.”

Land sale billboards on Mickleham Road, Mickleham.

PHOTO Mickleham on Melbourne’s northern outskirts is Australia’s fastest-growing suburb.


Politicians warned on affordability meddling

The Greens want to extend tenancy rights further by banning “without grounds” evictions completely.

The Greens would also ban rental bidding, and — most controversially — cap the amounts landlords can charge for rent.

Neither major party is likely to support that idea, as they focus on offering policies to help aspiring homeowners by tackling housing affordability.


Ahead of next month’s election, Liberal leader Matthew Guy is promising to “flush the market with land”, by releasing 290,000 new blocks of land in Melbourne’s outer growth suburbs if he is voted into power.

He’s also trumpeting a strategy to help people relocate to regional cities, where it’s easier to buy a house.

Labor is offering stamp duty relief and first-home owner grants, as well as releasing new land in outer suburbs.

It is also trialling a scheme for low-income first-home buyers, in which the State Government pays 25 per cent of the price for homes in targeted areas.

But Brendan Coates, from think-tank the Grattan Institute, says adding more fuel to the fire of the housing market is the worst thing a government could do.

“While prices are now falling, things like first-home buyers grants or stamp duty concessions for first-home buyers are a bad idea,” he says.

“They get built into the price of the property [and] the main person who ends up winning is the person selling the property rather than the person who is buying it.”

ABC 7.30 Report shreds credibility in ‘Big Australia’ defence (Part 3)


Image result for Stawell, Victoria

Photo:  Stawell Victoria


By Leith van Onselen

ABC 7.30 Report last night aired part three of its three-part population special (click to read my previous comments on part one and part two). I haven’t bothered to download it, but you can watch it for yourself here.

Last night’s episode focussed solely on whether the Coalition’s ‘migrants to the bush’ policy could work but, yet again, did not entertain the option of actually reducing the immigration intake – a direct policy choice.

Basically, all guests largely rubbished the Coalition’s policy as unworkable and not realistic. I received two short quotes, namely:

“Too often politicians say we just need to shift, we just need to decentralise, we just need to shift Australia’s population growth to other regions. Well, Australia has been trying to decentralise for 100 years without much success”…

“I think it’s a bit of a pipe dream to think you can suddenly put up migrant-proof fences and electronic tags and somehow hold migrants to regional areas.”

However, the ABC conveniently left out the other part of my statement that this policy is a smokescreen to hide the fact that Australia’s immigration has been running at triple the historical average and needs to be lowered.

In fact, in my 30-minute interview with the ABC I stated that Australia had hit a population of 25 million 32 years earlier than projected in 2000 precisely because the federal government dramatically ramped-up the immigration intake from the early 2000s, which has since been running at roughly triple the historical average:

I also stated several times throughout the interview that it was a policy choice how big Australia becomes, and that if we simply returned net immigration back to the historical average of 70,000 people a year, Australia’s population would only hit around 32 million people mid-century, not 40 million-plus. Whereas Sydney and Melbourne would only hit 6-6.5 million people, rather than 8 million people.

I then called for a population plebiscite to determine Australia’s future size, the results of which could be used to calibrate the migrant intake.

I also comprehensively debunked the common claims used to defend mass immigration, such solving skills shortagespopulation ageing, etc.

All the key parts of my interview were left on the cutting room floor, with The ABC instead running a few incidental sound bites.

The overall message from The ABC’s three-part special was that Australia has heaps of room and that population growth is inevitable, so we better get used to it. We don’t have a choice. Mass immigration is also supposedly driving our economic prosperity by skilling the nation and driving exports (myths debunked repeatedly, such as herehere and here).

I was told that this segment was aiming to right the bias in the immigration debate at the ABC, such as was shown in the Four Corners ‘Big Australia’ report. However, instead of informing debate and presenting Australians with a choice, it merely reinforced the myths surrounding a ‘Big Australia’.


SOURCE:  https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2018/10/abc-7-30-report-shreds-credibility-in-big-australia-defence/


How can we encourage migrants out of our crowded cities and into regional towns?


Population Minister, Alan Tudge, has signalled the intention to make migrants settle in regional areas for up to five years to try and reduce the squeeze in the cities. It’s not the first time these kind of settlement programs have been attempted. There are some success stories, but also some vital history lessons for regional areas trying to boost their populations.



Corrupt RBA spears head into immigration sand

Corrupt RBA spears head into immigration sand

CAAN has reversed the order of the text of this article from Houses and Holes … because we figure the H & H analysis is based on the facts!

And it cuts to the chase rather than having to plough through the lengthy RBA Report!

THIS is how “Houses and Holes” from Macro Business sums up what the Deputy Governor of the RBA Guy Debelle had to say about “labour hire” and “underinvestment in training” copied below …

Corrupt RBA spears head into immigration sand


“When the RBA talks about “labour hire” and “underinvestment in training” what it is really referring to is this:

  • For years we have seen Dominos, Caltex, 7-Eleven, Woolworths and many other fast food franchises busted for rorting migrant labour.
  • The issue culminated in 2016 when the Senate Education and Employment References Committee released a scathing report entitled A National Disgrace: The Exploitation of Temporary Work Visa Holders, which documented systemic abuses of Australia’s temporary visa system for foreign workers.
  • Mid last year, ABC’s 7.30 Report ran a disturbing expose on the modern day slavery occurring across Australia.
  • Meanwhile, Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO), Natalie James, told Fairfax in August last year that people on visas continue to be exploited at an alarming rate, particularly those with limited English-language skills. It was also revealed that foreign workers are involved in more than three-quarters of legal cases initiated by the FWO against unscrupulous employers.
  • Then The ABC reported that Australia’s horticulture industry is at the centre of yet another migrant slave scandal, according to an Australian Parliamentary Inquiry into the issue.
  • The same Parliamentary Inquiry was told by an undercover Malaysian journalist that foreign workers in Victoria were “brainwashed” and trapped in debt to keep them on farms.
  • A recent UNSW Sydney and UTS survey painted the most damning picture of all, reporting that wages theft is endemic among international students, backpackers and other temporary migrants.
  • A few months ago, Fair Work warned that most of Western Sydney had become a virtual special economic zone in which two-thirds of businesses were underpaying workers, with the worst offenders being high-migrant areas.
  • Dr Bob Birrell from the Australian Population Research Institute latest report, based on 2016 Census data, revealed that most recently arrived skilled migrants (i.e. arrived between 2011 and 2016) cannot find professional jobs, with only 24% of skilled migrants from Non-English-Speaking-Countries (who comprise 84% of the total skilled migrant intake) employed as professionals as of 2016, compared with 50% of skilled migrants from Main English-Speaking-Countries and 58% of the same aged Australian-born graduates. These results accord with a recent survey from the Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre, which found that 53% of skilled migrants in Western Australia said they are working in lower skilled jobs than before they arrived, with underemployment also rife.
  • The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) latest Characteristics of Recent Migrants reportrevealed that migrants have generally worse labour market outcomes than the Australian born population, with recent migrants and temporary residents having an unemployment rate of 7.4% versus 5.4% for the Australian born population, and lower labour force participation (69.8%) than the Australian born population (70.2%).
  • ABC Radio recently highlighted the absurdity of Australia’s ‘skilled’ migration program in which skilled migrants have grown increasingly frustrated at not being able to gain work in Australia despite leaving their homelands to fill so-called ‘skills shortages’. As a result, they are now demanding that taxpayers provide government-sponsored internships to help skilled migrants gain local experience, and a chance to work in their chosen field.
  • In early 2018 the senate launched the”The operation and effectiveness of the Franchising Code of Conduct” owing in part to systematic abuse of migrant labour.
  • Then there is new research from the University of Sydney documenting the complete corruption of the temporary visas system, and arguing that Australia running a “de-facto low-skilled immigration policy” (also discussed here at the ABC).
  • In late June the government released new laws to combat modern slavery which, bizarrely, imposed zero punishment for enslaving coolies.
  • Over the past few months we’ve witnessed widespread visa rorting across cafes and restaurants, including among high end establishments like the Rockpool Group.
  • Alan Fels, head of the Migrant Workers Taskforce, revealed that international students are systematically exploited particularly by bosses of the same ethnicity.

The corrupt RBA has declared war on the immigration debate to protect its housing bubble.”




Over the past year, there have been welcome developments in the Australian labour market. Employment has grown strongly, the participation rate is close to its highest level on record and the unemployment rate has declined to be at a six-year low. This is consistent with the above-trend GDP growth in the economy. Despite these improvements, there is still spare capacity in the labour market. Unemployment is higher than is desirable and a number of workers would like to work more hours than are currently on offer. This is a large part of the explanation for the low wages growth in recent years. As detailed in our most recent Statement on Monetary Policy, we anticipate that GDP will continue to grow above trend over the next few years, which will see the unemployment rate decline further. This in turn should see wages growth pick up, providing a welcome boost to household incomes.

The dynamics at play in the labour market are important considerations for monetary policy. Full employment is an objective for the RBA in and of itself, and the state of the labour market has a significant influence on the achievement of the RBA’s inflation target.

Today, I will look at the labour market from a number of different angles. I will begin with the recent employment data, then discuss unemployment and wages before turning to the outlook for the labour market. In analysing the labour market it is important to not get hung up on one month’s data. The standard error on the change in employment each month is around ±30,000. Rather, it is more useful to look at the trends in the various labour market data, check that these are consistent and identify, and hopefully resolve, any anomalies.


Employment has grown by 2½ per cent over the past year (Graph 1). This is at the high end of historical outcomes and above the growth in the working-age population (around 1½ per cent currently). Over two-thirds of the increase in employment over the past two years has been in full-time work. Despite this, part-time employment as a share of total employment remains close to historical highs at around one-third of employment.

Quite a lot is often made of the full- versus part-time distinction, often with the unstated presumption that full-time jobs are better than part-time jobs. But of the one-third of the workforce which works part-time, three-quarters of them do so because that’s what they want. Some of them do want to work more hours, but generally more hours in a part-time job. They don’t want a full-time job. The important issue is whether there are enough jobs generating enough hours that people want to work.

Graph 1
Graph 1: Employment Growth

At the same time as there has been above-average employment growth, the participation rate has increased and is now close to its record high. Movements in the participation rate have been highly correlated with employment growth for some time (though this doesn’t have to be the case). I will invoke Chris Caton in noting that you should always avoid statements like: if the participation rate hadn’t increased, the unemployment rate would have been lower. Both the rise in the participation rate and the lower unemployment rate increase labour utilisation and reduce the amount of spare capacity in the labour market.

The rise in the participation rate has both structural and cyclical elements. Some part of the rise is occurring because each generation of women is participating more in the labour force than previous cohorts did at the same age. Some of it is because more people have joined (or deferred leaving) the labour force over recent years as employment opportunities have improved. In particular, the participation rates of older workers and females have increased notably in recent years.

Where Has the Jobs Growth Been?

Employment growth has been strong over the past year. What sectors of the economy have underpinned this strong growth?

There are two ways of looking at this. First, there is the Labour Force Survey, which asks households which industry they work in. Second, there are the labour account data, which incorporate employment information from businesses. It is similar to the payrolls data in the US.

According to the Labour Force Survey, the industries that have contributed the most to employment growth over the past two years are health care & social assistance, construction and (perhaps more surprisingly) manufacturing (Graph 2):

  • The increase in health-related jobs reflects both longer-term trends, such as the ageing of the population, as well as the rollout of the National Disability Insurance scheme over the past couple of years.
  • Construction employment is close to 10 per cent of total employment, and this is around its highest share of employment since the 1920s. Construction employment has been supported by the large amount of activity in residential and infrastructure construction, particularly in the eastern states.
  • More recently, there has been a noteworthy increase in manufacturing employment. This is a result of export demand for high-quality food and beverage products, demand for manufactured goods from mining-related activity as well as the high levels of residential and infrastructure construction. This more recent pick-up in manufacturing employment takes it back to its level around 2011.
  • Professional, scientific and technical (PST) services employment has also grown strongly over the past year, driven by computer system design and management consulting.
Graph 2
Graph 2: Employment by Selected Industry

The labour account data provide an alternative perspective on where the jobs growth has been. For example, businesses report that the number of jobs in construction has not increased anywhere near the extent that households have reported over recent years. This may be because construction workers hired or contracted out by labour hire or business services companies will not be recorded as construction workers in the labour account. Similarly, in answering a household survey, someone working for a professional services company who is deployed to a bank may think of themselves as working in the finance sector rather than in professional services. There is no ‘right’ way of measuring this. It depends on who you ask and what question you are trying to answer.

What sorts of jobs have been created in terms of pay? Drawing on the data from the (more than) 450 occupations tracked by the ABS, our assessment is that employment growth has been reasonably evenly distributed across pay levels over the recent period. There has been relatively strong employment growth in occupations with above-average rates of pay, such as jobs within health care, IT and engineering. But within the household services sector, employment growth has been strongest in occupations with below-average wages. These include bar attendants & baristas, waiters, child carers and aged & disabled carers.

It is also difficult to get a good read on the prevalence of ‘gig economy’ jobs. The share of people working as independent contractors has declined a little over the past decade, the share of people working casual jobs is also little changed. The labour account data reports information on workers with more than one job. It suggests that secondary jobs – i.e. filled by people who also have a primary job – account for around 6 per cent of total jobs, which hasn’t changed much over the past five years.


The aggregate unemployment rate has fallen over 1 percentage point since its recent peak in October 2014 and is now at its lowest level in six years. It has fallen from its peak across all states and territories. Recently, we have seen strong declines in the unemployment rates of Victoria and South Australia (Graph 3). In trend terms, my home state of South Australia has the third lowest unemployment rate for the first time since 2012 and its unemployment rate has fallen over 2 percentage points since its most recent peak.

Graph 3
Graph 3: Unemployment rates by state

The recent decline in the unemployment rate has also been broad based across all age groups in the economy. The unemployment rate of younger people (15–24 year olds) has recorded the sharpest fall over the past year (Graph 4). The youth unemployment rate tends to be more sensitive to economic conditions than the unemployment rate of other age groups. Despite this, the share of younger part-time workers who want to work more hours than they currently do remains high. Furthermore, the share of 20–24 year olds that are neither engaged in employment nor full-time education or training remains higher than it was a decade ago.

Graph 4
Graph 4: Youth unemployment rate

Looking at the duration of unemployment, the median duration of unemployment has declined over the past year to be around 15 weeks. There has been a noteworthy decline recently in those who have been unemployed for a year or less. However, the unemployment rate has not fallen for those who have been unemployed for over one year (Graph 5), remaining at around 1¼ per cent of the labour force. This is concerning given the adverse social and economic consequences that arise from long-term unemployment. That said, generally a sustained improvement in the economy does result, in time, in a decline in the average duration of unemployment.

Graph 5
Graph 5: Unemployment rates

At 5.3 per cent, the unemployment rate is above our estimates of the NAIRU. We also closely monitor broader measures of underutilisation. In that regard, here are some useful facts to keep in mind: around one-quarter of part-time workers are actively looking to work more hours than they currently do; on average they are seeking to work an extra two days a week. When combined with the number of hours of work that the unemployed are seeking, this gives a labour underutilisation rate of around 8½ per cent (Graph 6). While the underemployment rate has trended higher over time alongside the increasing prevalence of part-time work, movements in the unemployment rate remain the dominant driver of movements in the broader underutilisation rate. Hence, I still view the unemployment rate as the most useful summary indicator of the state of the labour market.

Graph 6
Graph 6: Labour underutilisation


Given this spare capacity in the labour market, wages growth has been subdued. The RBA monitors a range of available measures of labour costs as they each capture a slightly different concept of wages growth. The wage price index (WPI) measures the change in the average hourly wage rate for a given job compared to the same job in the previous period (excluding any changes to the nature of the job). In contrast, the national accounts measure of average earnings per hour (AENA) and average weekly full-time ordinary time earnings (AWOTE) are broader in scope in that they measure the average wage bill. They embody changes to the composition of the labour force (for example, the movement of people in and out of higher-paying jobs in mining-related industries). AENA also includes non-wage payments such as allowances, superannuation and redundancy payments. These measures tend to be more volatile than the WPI, but better capture any inflationary pressure stemming from labour costs.

On any of the measures, wages growth has been low over the last few years (Graph 7). One of the factors contributing to this is the low level of voluntary job turnover. Workers tend to choose to leave their job for a better job – be it in conditions or pay. The fact that little of this is occurring is likely to be contributing to the subdued wages growth. Recently, some of our liaison contacts are now reporting that turnover is increasing.

Graph 7
Graph 7: Labour costs

Also, as the labour market has tightened, businesses are finding ways to retain some of their employees without raising wages for everyone. Many businesses in our liaison program report that they are linking wages growth outcomes to individual performance, which provides employers the flexibility to reward and retain strong performers and valued skill sets while keeping average wages growth contained. The use of bonuses, especially to retain key staff, is also prevalent, which doesn’t permanently raise labour costs. Some firms are attempting to retain staff by using non-wage incentives, including flexible work arrangements, shares, subsidised gym memberships, development opportunities and additional annual leave.

All of the wage measures indicate that a slight pick-up in growth has occurred recently. This increase has been broad based across most industries, although it has been modest in all cases (Graph 8). We are anticipating that wages growth will continue to pick up gradually as the unemployment rate declines and the adjustment following the end of the mining boom is close to running its course. There are a few other factors that are likely to contribute to this. Around one-quarter of all employees will have received a 3.5 per cent pay rise following the increase in national minimum and award wages on July 1. For some retail and public sector employees, we are also seeing some new enterprise bargaining agreements signed following a lengthy period where wages had been frozen.

Graph 8
Graph 8: Wage price index by industry

Where to from Here?

Our outlook for the labour market is based on our outlook for the economy as a whole but also by a number of useful leading indicators.

While there is always uncertainty around our forecasts, there are currently conflicting signals from the various measures of labour demand. Job vacancies data and business survey hiring intentions have recorded strong growth this year, but there has been little growth in the job advertisements data (Graph 9). While divergences in the signal from various activity indicators are not unusual, the divergence between vacancies and job advertisements (as a share of the labour force) has been steadily increasing over recent years. This in part reflects changes in the way that businesses recruit and workers search for jobs. For example, the job advertisements data capture the main online recruitment websites, but they are not picking up newer recruitment sites or the use of social media sites, such as LinkedIn, so the usefulness of this series may be declining. Large corporations are also maintaining ‘expression of interest’ registers on their own websites, which reduces their need to advertise to fill a vacancy. Taking all of the information from these various indicators together suggests that employment is likely to grow a bit above its long-term average over the next six months. This is consistent with our forecast that GDP will also grow a bit above trend.

Graph 9
Graph 9: Labour market indicators

Empirically, there is a negative relationship between the number of job vacancies and the number of unemployed persons; when demand for labour is strong the number of vacancies will generally rise, which leads to a reduction in the unemployment rate as those vacancies are filled. This relationship is depicted as the Beveridge Curve, and this negative relationship has held over long periods of time and is observed in the data in other countries.

Over the past few years, there has been a large increase in vacancies but only a small decline in the unemployment rate to date (Graph 10). That is, firms are hiring fewer workers per job opening or vacancy than has been typical – suggesting a possible shifting to the right of the Beveridge Curve. A possible explanation for this would be an increasing skill mismatch between unemployed workers and available jobs. Structural changes in the labour market as a result of changes to participation, technological change or those stemming from a shock such as the mining boom can contribute to a mismatch. Lower mobility, either geographical or at the job level, can also reduce the ability of firms to find the appropriate worker. This last explanation seems unlikely given the relatively large net interstate migration flows we have seen as conditions in the state labour markets have varied, most notably the large flows in and then subsequently out of Western Australia. Finally, it may reflect underinvestment in training over recent years, including in technical skills.

That said, the vacancy rate is currently at its highest relative to the size of the labour force. That too is a very positive signal for the labour market outlook.

Graph 10
Graph 10: Vacancies and unemployment


To sum up, the labour market is in pretty good shape: employment growth is above average, the participation rate is at a high level, the vacancy rate is at an all-time high and the unemployment rate is falling. However, the long-term unemployment rate has been little changed of late and wages growth remains low. The near-term indicators suggest demand for labour remains above average and the expected growth in the economy over the next few years should gradually reduce the spare capacity in the labour market.

As we have stated many times, we expect that will lead to a gradual increase in wages growth and, in turn, inflation. There are a number of uncertainties around the extent and timing of the decline in the unemployment rate and the pick-up in wages growth. The recent international experience indicates that the unemployment rate could decline further than historical experience would suggest before we see a material increase in wages growth. But against this, further increases in labour demand may be met more from the pool of unemployed rather than from people not currently in the labour force. That is, the unemployment rate may decline faster than we expect, rather than the participation rate increase further.

SOURCE:  https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2018/10/corrupt-rba-spears-head-into-the-immigration-sand/





ABC 7.30 Report population special (Part 2)

WITH the lobby group PROPERTY COUNCIL holding the reins of Australia it comes as no surprise that those who contributed to a factual interview find it has been left on the cutting room floor …

… BECAUSE the emphasis was on delivering the message that Australia will be 40-plus million people with Sydney and Melbourne 8 million each, and that this is inevitable.

-Sydney’s west will take the lion’s share;  a minimal share for the inner east

A forecaster, originally a food technologist, who appears well nourished claimed Australia can take 200 million people …

-our children will be eating laboratory food

HOW can “A BIG AUSTRALIA” be a question of fairness and morality for Our Children and Grandchildren when we have finite resources

WHERE is the morality in this Nation selling our Property, Our Sovereignty to wealthy foreigners to gain residency simultaneously locking out our families from affordable home ownership and opportunities, AND a future when already we have seen over the past five years the lowest wages growth and high youth underemployment and unemployment?


Image may contain: skyscraper, sky and outdoor

CAAN PHOTO:  WENTWORTH POINT:  A local resident revealed in this 7.30 report that the commute to the CBD is a struggle; no park for the children to play; Wentworth Point has been developed for 10 years yet the school only opened early 2018! Another 2300 apartments to dwarf existing development. Mr Lun said:  “I think if I came here now, no, I wouldn’t choose to live here. It will be like a mini Hong Kong, I think.”


ABC 7.30 Report population special (Part 2)

By Leith van Onselen

ABC 7.30 Report last night aired part two of its three-part population special (see my comments on part one here). I haven’t bothered to download it, since I received zero airtime, but you can watch it for yourself here.

Once again, it was a massive disappointment whose critical failure was that it avoided altogether the fact the ‘Big Australia’ mass immigration program is a direct policy choice, not a thing that comes from heaven and there’s nothing we can do.

We are simply told by The ABC that Australia will be 40-plus million people mid-century and Sydney and Melbourne will be 8-million people, so we better get used to it. It’s inevitable.

It even showed Lucy Turnbull’s “three cities” plan without acknowledging that the lion’s share of the population growth is projected to occur in Sydney’s West, while the wealthy Inner East takes minimal additional population.

Sure, the segment gave lip service to some of the pains that come from growth, and featured some sceptics like Dick Smith and Tim Flannery.

But it then brushed those aside as easily managed if we simply plan and invest better, with some soothing words from Infrastructure Australia’s chief (completely ignoring her own organisation’s research and recent warnings), a cookie cutter ANU ‘demographer, a few state and local government representatives, and an “economic and social forecaster” who arrogantly claimed Australia can easily take 200 million people without adversely effecting the environment or quality of life. We are also told that increasing density is good and won’t destroy quality of life.

The overall message from The ABC is that Australia has heaps of space and the population growth is inevitable, so we better get used to it. Of course, I vigorously challenged these claims in my 30-minute interview with Andy Park, but have been completely ignored.

In my interview, I explained that by simply returning immigration back to the historical average of 70,000 per year, we could ensure Australia only hits around 32 million people mid-century, with Sydney and Melbourne only hitting around 6.5 million people, thus safeguarding living standards.

I also debunked the common claims about skills shortages, population ageing, etc, while also calling for a population plebiscite so that Australian voters can determine how big they want the country to become.

All the key parts of my interview have so far been left on the cutting room floor.

Let’s hope part three of this report lifts its game. I am not hopeful.




In the 2nd instalment on Australia’s population growth, Andy Park looks at cities. They draw almost 90 per cent of Australia’s migrants, yet are poorly equipped to manage our burgeoning population.



SOURCE:  https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2018/10/abc-7-30-report-population-special-part-2/





MELBOURNE’s population explosion threatens to create a ‘Bangkok situation’


NOTICE how the commentary on the ABC Media appears to be conveying that A BIG AUSTRALIA is a matter of fact!

The authors in opening: ” … the 2018 poll is about one issue more than any other, it’s probably Melbourne’s exploding population growth — and who has the best plan to keep up with it.”

WHY is this so?  Perhaps it is because the same ABC Board remains in tact … with the majority of its members involved in real estate and mining!

WHO pulled off the STING of high immigration and high density?  Cough … cough …

The Big End of Town … of property developers, shopping centre developers, toll road builders, retailers … they all have a vested interest … at our expense!

Bernard Salt is not a demographer!  He is a historian, however he is regularly deferred

to!  http://markoconnor-australianpoet.blogspot.com/2011/05/bernard-salt-is-not-demographer.html

QUESTION … who funds the Grattan Institute? Cough … cough …

The Victorian Premier and Opposition Leader are hamstrung by the Morrison Government high immigration both permanent and so-called temporary with visa holders gaining residency

WHY are the political parties hamstrung?

Obviously through lobbying and political donations The Big End of Town can play one party against the other …

The Big End of Town win no matter which leader wins the Victorian Election in November because the State Government will have to spend more money to make Melbourne liveable …

NSW is reported as spending twice that of Victoria on infrastructure but the people of NSW have been bulldozed with the destruction of where they live for developers and toll road builders, the public heavy rail is being pulled apart for a dinky privatised Metro, Mr Salt!

HOW will liveability be restored?  Reduce the immigration intake back to a sustainable level of 70,000 p.a.!



Melbourne’s population explosion threatens to create a ‘Bangkok situation’


Most elections are about the economy. Some are about leadership. Sometimes, they’re dominated by scandal.

This Victorian election has all of those elements. But if the 2018 poll is about one issue more than any other, it’s probably Melbourne’s exploding population growth — and who has the best plan to keep up with it.

Melbourne is growing by 125,000 people a year. That’s like adding a city the size of Ballarat.



By as early as 2028, it’s projected to be Australia’s biggest city. By 2050, it will have grown to 8 million — the size of London and New York.

“It’s the fourth-fastest growing developed city on the planet today,” demographer Bernard Salt said.

“If we don’t invest, and continue with this rate of growth, then we collapse under our own weight.

“You end up with a Bangkok situation — where you have an extraordinary level of growth and congestion, and you simply cannot move around the city.”

Protecting Melbourne’s ‘liveable’ status


Cameron Kusher, a property analyst with CoreLogic, said Melbourne was not ready to be Australia’s biggest city.


The ABC is diving deep into the issues that matter to you. Each week, we’ll investigate a new topic to help you make an informed decision in the state election. Tune into ABC Radio Melbourne Breakfast on Monday mornings, watch the stories on ABC TV and read all about the issues on the ABC News website and app.


“Melbourne has always hung its hat on the fact that it’s the world’s most liveable city, and we did see it slip from top place,” he said.

“You can’t just take these kinds of things for granted.

“If you want a lot more people coming and living in your city, you need to spend a lot more money to make the city liveable.”  

(CAAN:  This is directed at those responsible!  The Morrison Government)

In the past, Melbourne has been able to ease the pressure by continuing its sprawl.

This year, 17 new suburbs were added in the outer north and west. Greater Melbourne now includes the new neighbourhoods of Plumpton, Wollert, Lindum Vale and Cloverton.

But what worked for a city of 3 million won’t work nearly as well for a city of 5 million.

Daniel Mackertich bought a block in Cloverton, in Kalkallo, 30 kilometres north of Melbourne’s CBD, in 2016.

In February last year, he told the ABC he was optimistic that the facilities they had been promised would soon come.

“The masterplan sold us. Having eight schools planned in the area, sporting facilities, that definitely helped us make the decision,” he said.


But fast forward 17 months and Mr Mackertich and his partner are still waiting.

“The houses around us are “If you want a lot more people coming and living in your city, you need to spend a lot more money to make the city liveable.”

Mr Mackertich is still optimistic the promised schools and transport infrastructure will be built, but having grown up in Craigieburn, 15 minutes away, he’s seen promises broken before.

“They had a shopping centre promised from when I was in primary school — that wasn’t achieved until a good 15-plus years down the track,” he said.

Melton is now bigger than Ballarat

It’s a similar story across Melbourne’s growth areas on the urban fringe.

In Melbourne’s fastest growing municipality, the City of Melton, west of the city, a baby is born every four hours.

Seven thousand new residents move in every year.

Just 17 years ago, it had a population of just over 50,000. Today, it’s triple that size.

By 2031, it will be home to more than a quarter of a million residents.

The council said it needed two new schools every year to keep up with growth, as well as a hospital. None are in the works.

“Melton is now bigger than Ballarat, bigger than Bendigo,” National Growth Areas Alliance CEO Bronwen Clark said.

“Can you imagine those cities without a hospital?”


In the six years Larry Jarred has lived in the Melton area, the commute to his storeman job in Laverton has more than doubled in duration.

“It used to be half an hour there, half an hour home,” he said.

“It’s taken me up to an hour and a half just to do a half-hour trip.”

A choice between two visions

The election campaign hasn’t yet officially begun, but already, the two parties have laid out differing plans to cope with the next four years and beyond.

Labor Premier Daniel Andrews is sticking with big infrastructure projects, after reversing years of building inertia under Liberal and Labor governments.

Projects now underway include the Melbourne Metro Tunnel, the West Gate Tunnel, sky rail and a program of removing level crossings.

And a promised $50-billion suburban rail loop is aimed at allowing people to move more easily around Melbourne as it becomes more densely populated.

But there’s also scepticism about whether a project of the scale — and price tag — of the suburban rail loop is the answer to easing Melbourne’s congestion.

“More small scale, nimble public transport, that reflects the reality that small numbers of people are going to dispersed locations would be a better solution to the city as it really is,” Marion Terrill from the Grattan Institute argues.

Labor also set up the Victorian School Building Authority, which opened 11 new schools this year and has another 45 in the pipeline.


Opposition Leader Matthew Guy, on the other hand, is going big on decentralisation.

He wants to limit development in the inner ring of suburbs, and has promised to unlock almost 300,000 more blocks of land on the suburban fringe.

To take the pressure off Melbourne, he wants people to move even further out — promising economic development of the regional cities, faster rail links to get to them, and a Population Commission to encourage people to make the move.

Mr Kusher said moving to the regions was already an option people were choosing.

“We are seeing a bit of strength coming into the housing markets like Geelong, Bendigo, Ballarat,” the property analyst said.

“I think people are realising that if you buy a property in one of these towns and you commute to Melbourne maybe a couple of days a week, it’s potentially better than living in one of these new housing estates on the outskirts of the city and trying to commute into the city by driving every single day.”

But while decentralising is important, Bernard Salt said it was of limited value.

“You can’t shuffle off 120,000 people that would normally grow into Melbourne into the regions,” he said.

“Even if Ballarat’s rate of growth doubled from 3,000 people to 6,000 people, that’s not really going to make a dent in the 125,000 per year that’s being added to Melbourne.”

Where the money is being spent

Whichever party wins on November 24 — and whichever version of Melbourne and Victoria they end up building — there seems little doubt Victoria is headed for an even bigger infrastructure boom.

And so it should. For the last 14 years, Victoria has spent half as much on infrastructure as New South Wales, and barely more than Queensland, even though Brisbane had half Melbourne’s population.

At the same time, Victoria has only been getting half as much money out of the Commonwealth.


Marion Terrill of the Grattan Institute said the challenge for the next Victorian Government would be to demand its share of Commonwealth money.

“It does seem like those states where elections are won and lost do consistently do better out of Commonwealth money than those like Victoria, which are not that important for federal elections,” she said.

The Metro and West Gate tunnels will bump those figures up — but Mr Salt said that should be just the beginning.

“For New South Wales to be spending double the amount that the Victorians are actually spending on infrastructure would suggest that, to my mind, I think the 2020s is when Melbourne is going to cut loose,” Mr Salt said.

“I say that Victorians would be thinking, you know what? Our turn. It’s our turn, Canberra, to lift our city and to deliver the liveability that we deserve. That we demand, in fact.”

‘Soulless canyon’ fears as Premier plans 7500 more FLATS for Sydney’s north shore … AND lots more!



DUE to the Doo Doo on the face of this government from its OverDevelopment that previously due to the pressure exerted by Councils and the Constituency over the Medium-Density Housing it has been postponed by the NSW Government  … and that it was only this week, the 10 October Gladys Berejiklian called for a halving of immigration!


It seems Robbo has been silenced … he’s been quiet perhaps because …

Prior to this announcement by the Premier, on 14 September 2018 Planning Minister Anthony Roberts’ response to critics was:  “OverDevelopment does not exist”


WHAT HAPPENED?  How come they were not able to keep this “Planned Precinct” for St Leonards and Crows Nest quiet?  Oh, it’s been in the planning for 2 years …

THE LINK FOR “PLANNED PRECINCTS”  … there’s lots more “Soulless Canyons” … it’s not confined to the North Shore:


Initially there appeared to be a longer list!  But it disappeared and we were whisked to this!

Planned Precincts

  • Date: 01.06.2017
  • Author: NSW Department of Planning and Environment

“New Priority Precincts were announced on 1 June 2017. Priority Precincts provide a planned approach to growth in Sydney, with new homes and jobs located close to public transport, shops and services, while retaining and enhancing a community’s character. (???)

The new Priority Precincts include:

Also view:


NOTE that which CAAN has highlighted, and the comments of Cr Baker and Labor’s Spokesman for Planning Michael Daley!

P.S.  RYDE MAYOR MESSAGE:  St Leonards: State Government says 7500 flats in the next 20 years

Ryde: State Government sets target of 7600 in the next 5 years!!!
One rule for us. Another for them!

‘Soulless canyon’ fears as Premier plans 7500 more flats for Sydney’s north shore


Another 7500 apartments would be built in St Leonards and Crows Nest on Sydney’s lower north shore over the next 20 years, under long-delayed redevelopment plans being released by the Berejiklian government.

The volume of new housing to be created in the area, which intersects with NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian’s seat of Willoughby, is understood to be less than had been included in earlier drafts of the so-called Planned Precinct, which has been under development for more than two years.

NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian and the Transport and Infrastructure Minister Andrew Constance on the job.
NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian and the Transport and Infrastructure Minister Andrew Constance on the job.CREDIT:JESSICA HROMAS


The Crows Nest and St Leonards scheme intends to concentrate development along the Pacific Highway and around the commercial core at St Leonards.

It also intends to retain the village atmosphere around Crows Nest, and prevent further overshadowing of Willoughby Road.

The mayor of North Sydney, Jilly Gibson, praised the scheme for responding to community concerns about the shape of the development.

“I have only had an initial glance at it but, at this stage, it is looking pretty positive,” Cr Gibson said.

But independent councillor Zoe Baker criticised both the implied level of development and the process under which the scheme was being released in that councils were meant to be able to provide comment on plans before exhibition.

The draft plan aims to protect Willoughby Road, Crows Nest, from more over-shadowing
The draft plan aims to protect Willoughby Road, Crows Nest, from more over-shadowing CREDIT:NICK MOIR


“It’s just too much,” Cr Baker said of the 7500 extra dwellings potentially created by 2038. “It’s going to turn it into a soulless canyon of residential flat buildings.”

The main new “green space” to be provided under the plans is an expansion of the existing Hume Street Park. This park is already being expanded under a six-year-old North Sydney council policy.

“They’re relying on what we’re already doing to try and ameliorate some of the existing densification, let alone the additional,” Cr Baker said.

The St Leonards and Crows Nest plan was to have been released early this year. The plan comes on top of a separate project of building two new 27-storey residential towers on top of a Metro station, to be delivered by 2024.

Construction of the new Crows Nest Metro station.
Construction of the new Crows Nest Metro station. CREDIT:NICK MOIR


The government’s draft plan says a “height expectation” of towers up to 50 storeys along the Pacific Highway had already been created. The plan proposes that areas around St Leonards station and the new Crows Nest metro station form “height peaks” with a dip in between.

Of the suggestion that the housing figures in the St Leonards and Crows Nest area have been pared back, Labor’s planning spokesman, Michael Daley, said planning under Ms Berejiklian had become “out of control and unfair”.

“There seems to be one rule for the Premier and her Liberal friends and another rule for ordinary people all over Sydney,” Mr Daley said.

The St Leonards and Crows Nest precinct touches the North Sydney, Lane Cove and Willoughby Council areas.

The plans come as the Premier attempts to dissociate her government from perceptions of over-development.

Last week, Ms Berejiklian called for a sharp drop in immigration, while this year her government also started to hit the brakes on multiple polices that would boost housing supply.

The Herald has requested comment from the government.

SOURCE:   https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/soulless-canyon-fears-as-premier-plans-7500-more-flats-for-sydney-s-north-shore-20181014-p509kf.html








CAAN: We Solicit a Contrary View to Urban Taskforce on Sending Migrants to Country Towns

GIVEN Chris Johnson CEO of the developer lobby, Urban Taskforce seems to have an inside run in getting his piece up on the ABC Website, “Sending migrants to country towns will hurt cities like Sydney”, it might be time to openly solicit a contrary view on the basis of having balance once again on the ABC!

They should give it equal opportunity!

A credible person would be best to present an article detailing the menace created by the Greater Sydney Commission, and how communities are being damaged.

PHOTOS illustrating the impact of Greenland Lachlan’s Line on the village of North Ryde

Image may contain: sky and outdoor


Image may contain: tree, sky, plant, house, table, outdoor and nature


Image may contain: sky, cloud and outdoor


Image may contain: tree, house, sky, plant and outdoor

PHOTO:  A “duplex” that looks like a block of flats; built forward of the setback; dwarfs substantial two storey homes on either side.  At the rear it is built so close the neighbour can no longer enjoy the ambience or family gatherings on their deck; they have had to block out their windows to retain some privacy!


And how selling Australian homes to foreign buyers denies Australians a chance to buy a home.

And how this week we have learnt that Real Estate Agents, Lawyers and Accountants are exempt from the Anti-Money Laundering Legislation!  With Australian Real Estate Agencies now set up across Asia in India, Indonesia, Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia … to replenish their market from the fall off from Chinese buyers!

Who would be that credible Professional?

We suggest and recommend Leith Van Onselen, Chief Economist and Co-Founder at Macro Business … that’s who!

View for CAAN’S interpretation of Chris Johnson’s “Sending migrants to country towns will hurt cities like Sydney”


Scott Morrison slams Scott Morrison’s ‘Migrants to the Bush’ policy

How religion will divide the Liberals and inflame the Parliament


View the source link for the comments … not many are holding back with those more polite saying he believes his own drivel … to “A standing lying pr..k has no conscience!”


Scott Morrison slams Scott Morrison’s ‘migrants to the bush’ policy

By Leith van Onselen

Scott Morrison appeared on ABC Lateline denouncing the government’s plan to tag and release migrants to the bush as a policy brain fart:

TONY JONES: Can you have a debate on population without a debate on immigration numbers?

SCOTT MORRISON: Well of course you can’t… Two thirds of the increase in population is coming through immigration and so if that’s not part of the debate then I don’t know what these guys are going on about. You’ve gotta focus on the things that you can address. Now they can talk about all these other issues, they’re all really important, but those things are not going to solve themselves in the next term of government.

What you can do in the next term of government is ease the pressure on those problems by throttling back, and if this Government’s not prepared to throttle back then they are trying to put one over the Australian people…

We’ve also made it clear that we’re not comfortable with the 36 million [population] projection…

The Government says it is not about immigration and they want to put out this false hope that they can move all these people around the country differently. Well those who are coming into the country, less than 10 per cent of them currently go out and settle in regional areas and rural areas.

So to hold out some false hope that this problem’s going to be solved because a Population Minister is going to fantastically move people around like has never been done before in our history, is I think unfair to the Australian people to suggest that that is realistic option, certainly in the short or medium term. Long term I think there are still real doubts.

The history of settlement over centuries means that people will come and gravitate to areas where there is population…

Scott Morrison also appeared on ABC’s PM program, where he once again rubbished the ‘migrants to the bush’ policy:

It holds out unrealistic promises that all of this can be turned around by everybody moving to regional areas.

We simply know, through centuries of migration experience, that that simply isn’t how it happens.

Are you confused? Well you should be, because these interviews were done in 2010/2011 when the former Gillard Labor Government was also spruiking a ‘migrants to the bush’ policy to relieve population pressures in the major cities.

Fast forward to 2018 and Australia’s permanent migrant program is just as big as then, but even more concentrated than ever into Sydney and Melbourne, which received 86% of migrants last financial year.

History doesn’t repeat but it sure does rhyme. Don’t fall for the Coalition’s latest immigration smokescreen, especially when it has been cutting regional visas while in office:

Department of Home Affairs figures… show non-regional skilled migration visas have risen every year under the Coalition, while those dedicated to the regions dropped from a high of 20,510 in 2012-13 to 10,198 under the Turnbull government in 2016-17.

The five consecutive years of cuts to permanent regional migrant visas coincided with a rise in the total immigration level to record highs of 180,000 a year, meaning proportionally more migrants were arriving on non-regional skilled visas under the Coalition.



(So you see, by this simple proof, your theory is wrong and mine is correct. QED!”)



SOURCE:  https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2018/10/scott-morrison-slams-scott-morrisons-migrants-to-the-bush-policy/





Grattan spins more immigration propaganda






Gaslighting Grattan spins more immigration propaganda

By Leith van Onselen

The Grattan Institute has been quoted extensively in The Australian today spouting more pro-‘Big Australia’ propaganda:

Marion Terrill, a Grattan Institute researcher who recently has finished an analysis of the big five capitals’ resilience to immigration, says they could comfortably take more people…

“People coming to cities are voting with their feet, and there are a lot of economic and community benefits of people doing that”…

Terrill says a bigger city isn’t necessarily harder to get around.

“… from 2011 to 2016, a period of strong population growth, the distance people travelled and commute times have barely changed”…

As I noted last week, Grattan’s latest spruik directly contradicts its 2014 book entitled City Limits, which argued that Australia’s cities had become dysfunctional with workers increasingly separated from employment:

The divide between where people live and work in Australian cities is growing, with most new jobs being created close to city centres while most population growth is occurring in the outer suburbs

The distance between where people live and where they work is growing fast. The housing market isn’t working, locking many Australians out of where and how they’d like to live. The daily commute is getting longer, putting pressure on social and family life and driving up living costs…

In large outer areas of Australia’s biggest cities, less than 10 per cent of all jobs in the city can be reached in a 45-minute drive

One in four full-time employees in Australia’s big cities spends more time commuting than with their children.

The evidence also unambiguously shows rising congestion costs in the migrant hotspots of Sydney and Melbourne. Here’s TomTom’s traffic index:

Here’s the Bureau of Transport and Regional Economics (BTRE):

Along with Mike Seccombe’s explanation in the Saturday Paper:

The Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics estimates the “avoidable” social costs of traffic congestion in the eight Australian capitals cities. They reckoned it to total $16.5 billion in the 2015 financial year, up from $12.8 billion in the 2010 financial year. By 2030, they forecast, the cost of congestion would rise to between $27.7 billion and $37.3 billion. That is roughly the cost of the National Disability Insurance Scheme, fully implemented.

And here’s Infrastructure Australia’s projections for Sydney and Melbourne, where congestion is projected to soar and access to jobs, schools, hospitals and open space will all decline by 2046, irrespective of how these cities build-out to cope with populations of 7.4 million and 7.3 million people respectively:

Grattan has clearly morphed into a ‘Big Australia’ propaganda outfit.



SOURCE:   https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2018/10/gaslighting-grattan-spins-more-immigration-propaganda/