Careful guidance ensured successful settlement

“Initial migrant settlement was aided by helpful Anglo-Australians through the Good Neighbour movement. Other aids to settlement included placement in jobs, and health checks. Those who arrived as war-Displaced Persons after World War Two also settled in excellently. This is not to deny, or to minimise, the stresses and difficulties experienced or suffered by the settlers, including the food in the hostels in the early years. Later, the cuisine reflected the culinary tastes of the residents; at one time, Polish cooks were cooking Vietnamese food in migrant hostels!

Many of these early immigrants had to work in specified locations for set periods. Professional skills were ignored. But then, the host people too had to adapt. Their country was being changed pretty fast. Yet, it was accepted that the country was being developed by the immigrants, providing necessary labour and skills.

The non-European immigrants who entered Australia following the introduction in the early 1970s of an official non-discriminatory entry policy were also successfully integrated. Skin colour was officially not a major issue any more. Yet, even in the mid-1960s, when Australia was forced to turn to the Levant for immigrants, it sought only European Middle Easterners. But there were no able-bodied men there looking to Australia, only the middle class.

There was also a clear but concealed preference in the ear¬lier years of the open door policy for the lighter-skinned East Asians (preferably, as ever, Christian). These and the potentially non-viable humanitarian entrants from Indo-China (part of the formerly feared ‘yellow hordes’) and (later) East Timor were gradually integrated quite successfully.”

(The above extracts from ‘Musings at Death’s Door’ do not cover the care taken in the selection process. The most essential approach to ensuring that an immigrant or refugee settles into the nation easily and successfully is through careful selection. Australian officials located overseas interviewed applicants personally.

Would reliance on the recommendations of immigrant agents in the country of origin of immigrants be as effective? Refugees selected overseas are likely to be known, whereas asylum seekers could be anybody (how would we know?). Sloppy policies, heart-on-sleeve lawyers, and decision makers who may not have considered adequately the security of the nation have resulted in jihad-minded citizens on Australian welfare – so it has been reported!

We now also have reports that some immigrants sneer at Australia’s social ethos, but who will take whatever we offer. Seeking nirvana on Earth may, however, be time-consuming and un-fulfilling.)