Posts

Record Surge in Foreign Students

,

According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), a record 201,490 new foreign students arrived in Australia in February alone. This surge raises a pressing question: where are these people going to sleep?

Senator Watt responded by highlighting the government’s efforts to build new housing (and claiming they’ve done more in three years than the coalition did in almost a decade), however he failed to address the core issue: the government’s inability to control immigration numbers.

Despite promises to bring numbers under control, the reality is stark. The latest data shows that housing starts have decreased since the current government took office, exacerbating the housing crisis. The government’s measures to reduce overseas student numbers have also fallen short, with significant increases in arrivals compared to previous years.

We need a government that put Australians first. One Nation is committed to addressing these issues head-on. We will continue to push for policies that prioritise the needs of Australians, hold the government accountable for its failures and make migration net-negative until our housing and infrastructure catches up.

Transcript

Senator ROBERTS: My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, Senator Watt. According to ABS data—that’s Australian Bureau of Statistics data—last month 201,490 new foreign students arrived in Australia. This is a new record for the month of February. Where are these people going to sleep? 

Senator WATT: Thank you, Senator Roberts. For starters, obviously, this government has done more in three years to build new housing than we saw in almost 10 years under a coalition government. That’s the first thing. Of course, what we know is that every measure this government has introduced to build more housing while the coalition have been in opposition they’ve voted against. So, for almost 10 years in government, they did nothing about housing, didn’t build a single public home and didn’t build a single social home; they get into opposition and they vote against everything we do to build more homes. That’s the first part of the answer.  

Senator Roberts, as you’ll recall, not that long ago, this government sought to pass legislation that would reduce overseas student numbers, because we did recognise there had been an increase to that. Who voted against that as well? That was the opposition that voted against that. Who was the shadow education minister who led the charge against that? That was Senator Henderson. She’s got a lot to say now, but she led the charge against our legislation to try to introduce caps on international student numbers. We will continue to act on both of these things. We will continue to deliver the housing that the opposition voted against; we have taken different measures outside of legislation to deal with the number of international students. 

I might also make the point that, in the meantime, our government has acted, and migration levels are coming down as a result of the measures that we’ve taken. In fact, there are fewer people arriving into Australia now than when someone else was the home affairs minister. Who would that be? Peter Dutton—Mr Dutton. So, for all of the promises Mr Dutton is making about immigration now, when he was actually the minister in charge of this, there were more people moving to Australia and migrating to Australia than there are now. (Time expired) 

The PRESIDENT: Senator Roberts, first supplementary? 

Senator ROBERTS: On 11 December 2023, the then home affairs minister, Clare O’Neil, issued a press statement, which included the comment, ‘We are going to make sure we bring numbers back under control.’ Minister, clearly you have not succeeded in getting the numbers back under control. Can you please explain the reason why this government has not been able to control how many people arrive in Australia? 

Senator WATT: As I said, as a result of the actions this government has taken, we are seeing migration numbers fall in Australia compared to what they were when we came to office, as a result of the policies of the opposition. In fact, to give you a few more statistics on this, Senator Roberts, there were 10,000 more overseas student arrivals in Australia in January 2019, when—guess who—Mr Dutton was in charge of our borders. More importantly, the number of student visa applications in Australia has dropped by 30 per cent compared with this time last year. This is proof that our measures are working, despite the coalition voting to block our plan to cap overseas student numbers. We’ve all seen, over the last couple of years, the results of Mr Dutton leaving us with a broken migration system—the Albanian crime gangs who have been rorting our visa system and more still. We have been dealing with that and cleaning it up, and we’re now seeing the results with migration numbers falling. 

The PRESIDENT: Senator Roberts, second supplementary? 

Senator ROBERTS: In the June quarter of 2022, just after your election, housing starts were 47,000. The latest ABS data for the September quarter last year shows just 42,000 starts. You are building fewer homes but bringing in more new arrivals and that has caused the housing catastrophe. If this government is not controlling immigration numbers, who is? Is it the bureaucrats? Is it the universities? Is it the Chinese and Indian governments? Who is in control of Australia’s immigration program? 

Senator WATT: I can assure you, Senator Roberts, it’s not the one world government in control of our policies. That’s definitely not the case. The Australian government, of course, is in charge of our migration policies, and it’s the Australian government who has reduced migration numbers over the last three years through a variety of measures— 

Senator Canavan: *interjecting—* 

Senator WATT: including a number of measures that the very vocal Senator Canavan over there voted against. They’ve got a lot of things to say from the cheap seats over there in the opposition, but, whenever they get the chance to vote on something, they vote against it. 

Senator Roberts, I don’t know whether the figures you have just quoted about the number housing starts are correct or not; I’d have to check them. But what I do know is that the construction of new housing being funded through our Housing Australia Future Fund was held up for month after month after month by the unholy coalition of the Liberals, the Nationals, One Nation and the Greens. They blocked our legislation and prevented spending on housing that has finally been passed by the Senate, still with the opposition of this lot over there. We’re now getting on with building those homes. 

/0 Comments/by

Australian Graduates at Risk: Concerns Over Indian Degree Equivalency

,

Australians have valid concerns about Indian degrees being considered equal to Australian degrees, especially given the serious issues with cheating and degree fraud in Indian universities, where degrees can be purchased for as little as $3,700.

Minister Wong’s response was unsettling in the lack of concern for Australians. The Minister did acknowledge that industries with professional associations, such as health, could require further study, testing, or mentorship.

However, Minister Wong did not mention that this agreement will lead to competition between Australians who have studied for 3-5 years and paid substantial fees, and Indian “graduates” who may not have. These Australians now have a substantial HECS debt, which requires a salary capable of paying off the debt while providing for their future.

This situation is a recipe for the erosion of wages and job prospects for Australian graduates, and ultimately, a reduction in the number of Australians prepared to risk the expense of university.

One Nation will tear up this agreement.

Transcript | Question Time

My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Wong. Minister, does the mechanism for the mutual recognition of qualifications between India and Australia give equal merit to an Indian degree in Australia as an Australian degree in Australia? 

Senator WONG: Thank you to Senator Roberts for the question. I will see what additional information I can get for you in relation to mutual recognition. I’m hoping that the appropriate portfolio finds some information for me. There are a number of economic agreements and other partnerships where we do have mutual recognition schemes with other jurisdictions, and obviously the safety of consumers remains paramount. I can’t recall at this moment whether that is delivered through the mutual recognition schemes themselves or through separate registration schemes for particular professions, for example, such as the health professions, but I’ll certainly find more advice for you and provide you with that. I’m assuming it’s the health sector that you are most interested in, but maybe you can clarify. 

The PRESIDENT: Senator Roberts, first supplementary? 

Transcript | First Supplementary Question

It’s all degrees. Indian universities have a substantial problem with cheating and with degrees being sold for as little as $3,700. Indian criminals are establishing ghost colleges in Australia. The Australian Skills Quality Authority acknowledged this in 2019. Minister, will there be any attempt to recognise qualifications on the basis of the originating institution or some other system for verifying the legitimacy of the qualification, especially in critical areas such as health services and engineering? 

Senator WONG: That covers a number of portfolios, certainly in relation to vocational colleges and so forth. You would have heard the minister and, I think, the representing minister here speak about the importance of better regulating the sector, and some of our forums in relation to international students and international education go to the issue of making sure that here in Australia students can attain high-quality qualifications. But, in relation to—I think you said—engineering and health, again I will see what we can find for you. My recollection is that these arrangements between countries which might give pathways to recognition are one thing, but the requirements of particular professions to ensure that people have the requisite qualifications to be able to provide the relevant services to consumers remain. (Time expired) 

The PRESIDENT: Senator Roberts, second supplementary? 

Transcript | Second Supplementary Question

I simply need to get the government’s logic straight, Minister. Are you saying we don’t have the places to train our own graduates because we have 500,000 foreign students occupying those places who will then take their degrees back home, so we have to bring in Indian graduates to get the skills we need? Minister, wouldn’t it just be easier to reduce foreign students and educate more of our own children? 

Senator WONG: The government’s view is that you need a vibrant, world-class, high-quality higher education sector. You do that in many ways, including by making sure it is appropriately funded. We do that also by making sure that there is some consideration to the mix of domestic and overseas students. You would have seen that the government has announced caps in relation to international students, and that is in part recognition of the quality of education provided to them as well as to the broader student community. So I think it is important to have both, but I would make the point that this is an important export industry. We are able to earn income for Australians, which we can then ensure is invested wisely. There is a reason Australia is an open and trading nation, and that is that it has grown our economy, but we are seeking to reduce the number of international students over time. (Time expired) 

/by

One Nation Plan: Two-Year Grace Period for Non-Citizen Property Owners

,

Under the One Nation plan, anyone that owns residential property yet isn’t an Australian citizen or permanent resident, will be given two years to sell their property back to an Australian. The two-year grace period will ensure there isn’t a flood of properties onto the housing market.

Let’s get Australians into affordable houses while keeping the market sound.

Transcript

Australians are rightly stunned and confused. Why are foreigners, people from other countries, allowed to buy real estate while Australians are made homeless and sleep on the street? China dominates foreign purchases of Australian real estate, snapping up the most of any country in the world. China snaps up houses and farmland across our country, yet Australians are banned from buying a house in China. Add to that Hong Kong, Taiwan, Vietnam, India, the United States and the United Kingdom. The list of countries that grab Australian real estate goes on and on. 

Australians are suffering through a housing crisis, a catastrophe. The average mortgage size has never been higher, with expensive repayments crushing household budgets. A house in Brisbane used to cost three times the average income. Now it’s 10 times. This combination of high house prices and high interest rates means the average Australian is paying more of their wage on mortgage repayments than a homeowner would in 1990, when the Reserve Bank of Australia’s cash rate was at 17 per cent. I’ll say that again. As a proportion of income, mortgages are more expensive today than when the RBA had rates at 17 per cent. 

The rental market in Australia is broken. Vacancy rates, a good measure of whether it’s even possible for people to find a rental, have been at crisis levels for years. The average rent for a house in Brisbane has gone from $467 a week in 2020 to $740. For a unit in Brisbane, rent has gone up from $381 to $587 in the same period, since 2020. What’s the government’s response to the hurt Australians are feeling trying to get into a house? Labor will keep letting foreigners buy residential real estate. 

While the Liberals signal they might do something about it, their proposal doesn’t go far enough. Peter Dutton doesn’t want to stop foreign ownership of real estate. He wants foreigners to be back here buying up the farm in two years. The Liberals’ temporary pause is not good enough. Australia needs a complete ban on foreigners owning houses in this country. The Liberals won’t do anything about the houses that are foreign owned right now—they can keep them. In 2017, ANZ estimated that foreigners owned up to 400,000 Australian homes. That’s enough for a million Australians to live in, and that number of homes can only have increased since then. 

One Nation would implement a true ban on foreign ownership. Under our plan, anyone that owns residential property yet isn’t an Australian citizen or permanent resident will be given two years to sell their property back to an Australian. The two-year grace period will ensure there isn’t a flood of properties onto the housing market. Let’s get Australians into affordable houses while keeping the market sound. When the Liberals would be opening back up purchases for foreigners, One Nation would be completing the greatest transfer of houses out of foreign hands and into Australian hands in history. In this debate, we will hear Labor senators get up and claim that foreign ownership is less than one per cent. We’ll hear them claim it’s foreign investment. That’s a lie. It’s ownership. And their numbers aren’t true. 

In that 2017 report I mentioned, ANZ said, based on Foreign Investment Review Board data, foreigners had purchased an estimated 25 to 35 per cent of new Queensland homes. Later in 2017, the government introduced a new annual vacancy fee for foreign owners of residential properties. You won’t believe this next coincidence. After the government started charging a fee on foreign owners, the number of foreign owners declaring themselves to the government dropped from between 25 and 35 per cent to one per cent. It was just like magic! When NAB asked real estate agents directly how many foreigners they were selling to, the percentages were in the double digits. That’s more than 10 per cent. We know that. It’s a fact. The New South Wales government has even recorded foreign purchases at more than double what the federal Labor government claims they are. It doesn’t matter what the real number is anyway. One foreign purchase is one too many while Australian families are sleeping on the street. 

Foreign ownership is one part of the housing puzzle. One Nation has comprehensive solutions to all of the levers we need to pull to get Australians into affordable houses. These including pausing immigration to reduce demand, abolishing GST on building materials, establishing five per cent fixed rate mortgages, enabling HECS debtors to get a loan and deporting 75,000 illegal residents now. 

On foreign purchases and ownership, we are clear. Only One Nation will implement a real, permanent ban on foreign purchases. Only One Nation will force foreign owners to sell their houses to Australians. Only One Nation will extend the ban on foreign ownership to our valuable farmland, to protect our ability to feed Australians first. Only One Nation can be trusted to truly put Australians first.

/5 Comments/by

Senator Watt Grilled on Immigration

,

Senate Estimates: I asked Senator Watt what was being done to reduce net immigration.  

The government’s planned reduction is insufficient.  Cutting immigration is not enough.  Temporary visa holders need to leave now.It’s time to put Australians first.

Transcript

Senator ROBERTS: My questions are concise and straightforward, and hopefully the answers will be the same—so that the chair is not disappointed! In the context of the mass release from immigration detention of
approximately 150 noncitizens awaiting deportation, how many of these detainees were in fact released as a result of the decision in NZYQ?

CHAIR: Senator Roberts, I’m very, very sorry: you asked me whether we were talking about migration in outcome 2, and we are, but the matters you’re raising with those questions are relevant to outcome 3, and we’ll be dealing with that tomorrow.

Senator ROBERTS: There you go; you got an early night!

CHAIR: Do you have other questions? I thought there were more general questions about migration numbers. I apologise.

Senator ROBERTS: No.

CHAIR: I’ve listened to so many of your Senate speeches, Senator Roberts. I thought I was pre-empting your questions. But we will be here tomorrow to ask questions of Border Force particularly around those issues.

Senator ROBERTS: And also Immigration, I hope—Home Affairs?

CHAIR: There are other questions that might be relevant to outcome 2. If you want to put them, they might have the officials here for you.

Senator ROBERTS: No, these are to do with the legality of immigration.

Ms Foster: If I can help: because the questions relating to the High Court cover both outcome 2 and outcome 3, we typically try to cover them as a group together so we’re not saying, ‘We can answer a little bit of that and not the rest of it.’ But if there are more general questions on the migration program then we should be able to answer them for you tonight.

Senator ROBERTS: These are more to do with the legalities and what is happening about removing people.

CHAIR: They are related to the same cohort of questions—is that right?

Senator ROBERTS: I think they are.

CHAIR: They are related to the same issues.

Ms Foster: If they are related to the same cohort, it is probably sensible to do them tomorrow as a batch.

Senator ROBERTS: The same cohort and a similar cohort.

CHAIR: It sounds like we will be able to deal with them tomorrow.

Senator Watt: I predict there will be many questions around this issue in the morning. So you will be in good company.

Senator ROBERTS: Perhaps one might be covered off now—the last one I had. For visas requiring accommodation in 2019 it was 1.9 million people; in 2024, at the start of the year, it was 2.3 million plus students
at over half a million, plus a higher percentage of non-productive people. Housing demand has been driven through the roof and prices and rents are skyrocketing. We are in a per capita recession and have been for three
quarters. Minister, it appears to a lot of Australians that the government does not want to be tagged as the government who took us into recession so it is flooding the country with migrants to avoid a technical recession.
Having said correctly that we’ve had three-quarters of a per capita recession, the government, to me, seems to be uncaring about the plight of Australians. In our state’s capital city there are people living under bridges, in cars and in caravans—and I’m talking about working families coming home with their two kids to sleep in a car. I don’t know where they go to the toilet and where they shower. We’ve got it right up the coast—not just in our capital city but right up the coast. The Labor government must remove visa holders. When will Labor resolve the housing crisis and stop the out-of-control and unsustainable growth of Australia’s population? We had 750,000 come in last year.

Senator Watt: I’m not sure that that 750,000 figure is correct, Senator Roberts. But the point really is that the government does believe that migration levels have been unsustainably high. We believe that that is a direct result of the failures of Mr Dutton and other coalition ministers to manage the migration program correctly. That is exactly why we have dramatically reduced the grants of international student visas and that is why we are on track to halve what is known as the net overseas migration figure by next financial year. If you look at the numbers, where they were when we came into office and post-COVID, we are on track to halve that figure by next financial year. I do not think the 750,000 figure is correct, Senator Roberts. What is known as the net overseas migration—

Senator ROBERTS: I wasn’t implying that was net; that was incoming.

Senator Watt: You also have to look at the number of people going out.

Senator ROBERTS: Correct; but 750,000 people coming in is a heck of a lot of people.

Senator Watt: Sure; I agree.

Senator ROBERTS: It is way above the previous record.

Senator Watt: Agreed. As I said, our government believes that migration has been too high. That’s why we’ve taken a range of steps to reduce it, and we are on track to achieve that target. On the point about housing—which is obviously a matter for a different committee—as I pointed out to you before, Senator Roberts, it would really help if we could get your vote in the Senate when we try to spend more money on housing. Unfortunately, so far, you haven’t—

Senator ROBERTS: How many houses have you built, Minister? Zero.

Senator Watt: We have committed about $32 billion worth of funding.

Senator ROBERTS: You have committed how much to housing? You have committed $20 billion to a housing future fund.

Senator Watt: Of the $32 billion that we have committed for housing, $10 billion was for the Housing Australia Future Fund, and unfortunately both you and Senator Hanson voted against that with the coalition.

Senator ROBERTS: We don’t want more bureaucracy; we want tradies to be set loose. That is why we did it.

Senator Watt: But the vote was about creating a housing fund and you voted against it. You voted for less spending on housing.

CHAIR: Senators, I don’t think the question is relevant to—

Senator ROBERTS: How many houses have been built in the last two years?

Senator Watt: You would probably need to go—

CHAIR: Senator Roberts, your question—

Senator ROBERTS: Okay; let’s come back to my question, as the chair is reminding us.

CHAIR: Minister, could you assist me in not speaking over me while I give Senator Roberts some direction. The question you have ultimately ended up asking is not relevant to this committee. That is probably why you have received a response of the kind Minister Watt has given you. If you have more questions in relation to migration, this is the outcome to put them. Otherwise, we will back tomorrow with outcome 3.

Senator ROBERTS: With due respect, Chair, this is calling out Senator Watt because he has not answered my question.

CHAIR: Senator Roberts, you say ‘with all due respect’ and then continue to talk over me when I have given you a direction as the chair to ask a relevant question, or I can give the call to someone else who has relevant
questions.

Senator ROBERTS: Thank you, Chair. The question for the minister is the same: when will the Labor government remove visa holders to ease the pressure on housing in this country?

Senator Watt: Sorry; are you saying that we should have zero migration to Australia?

Senator ROBERTS: We should have negative, until we get the housing pressure and the infrastructure to catch up.

Senator Watt: What do you mean by negative migration? Do you mean forcing people to leave?

Senator ROBERTS: More people who leave than come.

Senator Watt: The government’s policy is to halve the net increase in migration or net migration numbers by next financial year, and we are well on track to do that. We agree that we have a housing shortage in Australia. That’s why we’ve devoted so much money towards that project. We also recognise that we have a range of jobs and there are not enough people to fill them. If you speak to any building firm in Queensland, they will tell you they need more people. We are funding a lot of training of locals, but the reality is that we need some level of migration to fill those jobs. If you go to any aged-care facility in Queensland or anywhere in Australia—and I go to one pretty regularly to visit a family member—you will see lots of migrant workers there. Our aged-care system would collapse if we did what you suggested, which is stop migration. So it’s a balancing act to make sure that we don’t have too much migration in this country—as was occurring under the policy settings we inherited from the former government—while still making sure that we can deliver the workforce that we need.

Senator ROBERTS: Minister, isn’t it true that, under John Howard’s prime ministership, immigration was dramatically increased and it has stayed high since then under both parties—both Labor and Liberal and National party governments?

Senator Watt: My recollection is that the major change under the Howard government was a big shift towards temporary migration. I don’t know what the overall figures were under the Howard government.

Senator ROBERTS: I think it went from 80,000 to over 130,000. Then it went up under the Rudd-Gillard, and the subsequent LNP governments to over 230,000 net. What are you proposing for next year?

Senator Watt: We are proposing that net overseas migration next financial year would in the order of 260,000.

Senator ROBERTS: That’s still very, very high.

Senator Watt: It’s about half of what it was a year or so ago.

Senator PATERSON: This year?

Ms Foster: In 2022-23.

Senator ROBERTS: Senator Watt, I could say that you are much taller than me. That’s not saying much!

Senator Watt: A competition of the shortest men in parliament! Let’s put Senator Farrell in there as well. Senator Ghosh, do you qualify?

Senator ROBERTS: My point is that 250,000 is still a lot.

Senator Watt: But we’re big in heart, Senator Roberts.

Senator ROBERTS: But 250,000 is a lot. It may be half, but it is still very, very high and it is putting a lot of pressure on housing.

Senator Watt: I agree; which, again, is why we—

Senator ROBERTS: Do we agree?

Senator Watt: I agree that migration has been too high and it is putting pressure on housing, which is why we would have really liked your vote for the Housing Australia Future Fund—which is another committee.

Senator ROBERTS: I want to stay on immigration.

CHAIR: Me too.

Senator Watt: There are two parts of the equation. It is about immigration and—

Senator ROBERTS: That’s right: you’re driving up the demand for housing.

Senator Watt: If we had more homes we mightn’t have such an issue with migration numbers. But we don’t have the homes and that’s what we’re trying to fix. But we are halving migration numbers. International student grants in April were down 38 per cent on last year’s levels. We’ve taken a whole range of other actions to crack down on some of the rorts in the migration system that were left behind by Mr Dutton and his colleagues. But, equally, as I say, if you want to have people look after your family members in aged care, they are not all going to come locally. If you want people to build the homes, they are not all going to come locally. If you want people to work in hospitals, they are not all going to come locally. If we actually said, ‘Close the door entirely to migration,’ you will have a lot of people waiting to get into emergency departments and into aged-care homes et cetera.

Senator ROBERTS: That’s the state our country is in right now. Are you going to build 250,000 new homes next year to accommodate the 250,000 new people coming in?

CHAIR: Senator Roberts, I have given you direction about whether those questions are relevant to this committee.

Senator ROBERTS: How is 250,000 new net migrants a low number simply because it is half of what the previous one was? It’s not; it is a very high number.

Senator Watt: The departmental officials could probably take you through the work that was undertaken to determine that figure. I would be confident that, in developing that figure, they took into account the need to
reduce migration and the pressure on the housing system, but also the workforce needs of hospitals, aged-care facilities, construction firms, et cetera. It would be interesting to know what the opposition did to arrive at the various different figures we’ve heard from them. I don’t know if anyone from the opposition here can tell us what their policy actually is.

CHAIR: They’re not here to give evidence, Minister Watt. They are here to ask questions.

Senator Watt: But a lot of work has gone in from the government’s side to come up with the right figure.

CHAIR: Is that the end of your questions, Senator Roberts?

Senator ROBERTS: Yes, until tomorrow.

/by