Australia’s Immigration Surge: Debunking the Myths, By James Reed

Australia's immigration debate is heating up, with outlets like The Sydney Morning Herald (SMH) and The Guardian arguing that the recent migration surge is merely a post-COVID "catch-up" and that concerns about a "Big Australia" are overstated. For protesters crowding streets and the homeless struggling to survive, these claims don't reflect reality. Let's examine the data, challenge the narrative, and highlight the real impacts on ordinary Australians, from housing crises to strained infrastructure.

SMH's Natassia Chrysanthos and Shane Wright argue that the migration spike is a correction for low arrivals during the 2020-2021 COVID border closures, suggesting the population is smaller than it would have been without the pandemic. This framing overlooks critical historical context.

For 60 years post-World War II, Australia's net overseas migration (NOM) averaged 90,000 annually, rarely exceeding 150,000. From 2005, under the Howard government, NOM surged to an average of 220,500 in the 15 years pre-COVID, a 145% increase over the post-war norm. In the five years to 2024, including the pandemic dip, NOM averaged 265,000, a 194% jump above the historical average. This isn't a temporary "catch-up," but a continuation of a high-migration policy driven by business interests.

The SMH's charts start at 2005, omitting the lower pre-2005 baseline, which distorts what's "normal." The Centre for Population projects NOM at 235,000 annually for the next 40 years, 160% above the post-war average, adding 13.5 million people by 2065, equivalent to three new Sydneys, Melbournes, and Brisbanes. This signal is of sustained, not temporary, growth. It also means that whites will become a racial minority in the country that they built.

Some commentators argue migration has a minimal impact on housing. However, data shows otherwise. The NOM surge, particularly temporary migrants like international students, correlates with soaring rents. In 2022, NOM reached 433,000, with millions of temporary visa holders entering Australia. Median rents in Sydney and Melbourne have risen 10-15% annually, pricing out families and hitting the homeless hardest, many of whom struggle to afford basic shelter.

Claims that migrants ease housing shortages by working in construction are also questionable. The Grattan Institute reports that recent migrants (in Australia less than five years) make up only 2.8% of the construction workforce, but 4.4% of all workers. This means migrants contribute more to housing demand than supply, exacerbating the crisis.

The 2025 "March for Australia" rallies and the plight of the homeless reflect growing public discontent. The Lowy Institute's 2025 poll found 53% of Australians believe immigration is "too high," up from 48% in 2024. The Scanlon Foundation's 2024 report links this sentiment to economic pressures, housing costs, wages, traffic, not solely cultural issues. Protesters include working-class families and young people struggling with unaffordable rents and crowded cities, not just fringe groups. The homeless, some forced to scavenge for food, are living evidence of a housing system under strain, creating Third World Australia.

Some argue the migration surge was driven by the Coalition post-COVID, but Labor's policies played a significant role. The 2022 Jobs & Skills Summit led to a visa processing boom, with 5.4 million visas finalised by March 2023, as announced by then-Immigration Minister Andrew Giles. Labor increased permanent migrant intakes by 35,000, humanitarian intakes by 7,000, and extended work rights for international graduates, effectively turning student visas into low-skilled work visas. This was a deliberate policy choice, not a passive "catch-up."

Claims that cutting NOM is nearly impossible, are also misleading. Canada has reduced immigration to stabilise its population, and Australia could follow suit. Options include tightening student visa requirements (e.g., higher English and financial standards, limiting work hours), restricting graduate visas to top performers, raising skilled visa wage floors above $90,000, reducing permanent skilled visas from 132,000 to 70,000, eliminating 8,000 elderly parent visas, and streamlining asylum processes to reduce the 370,000 bridging visa holders. These are feasible with political commitment.

Media and some academics align with business interests, retail giants and universities, that benefit from high migration through more consumers and cheaper labor. Yet, only 7% of Australians think immigration is too low, per Lowy's poll. Social cohesion is at a record low, per the Scanlon Foundation, driven by economic strain, not diversity itself. Protesters and the homeless aren't swayed by selective statistics, they feel the impact of overcrowded infrastructure and unaffordable homes.

Australia's immigration levels are historically high and unsustainable without massive investment in housing and infrastructure, which isn't happening. The "catch-up" narrative and downplaying of housing impacts don't align with the data: a 194% NOM increase over the post-war average and a projected 13.5 million population rise by 2065. Protesters and the homeless aren't misled, they're living the consequences of policy choices. Australia can reduce migration through targeted reforms, as Canada has shown. It's time for policies that prioritise ordinary Australians over vested interests. So, keep marching, legally of course!

https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2025/09/migration-lies-damn-lies-and-statistics/