Daryl Melham (Banks, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise this evening to grieve about the citizenship test that this government is about to introduce into this country. According to a press interview by the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship, he would like this test to start operation in September this year.

On 1 November, I spoke about this issue in the parliament, but I think I need to speak on it again. The information on citizenship that comes to hand is as follows:

Will everyone have to sit a test? Most will; however, there are some people who are not required to have a knowledge of the English language and of Australia and the responsibilities and privileges of Australian citizenship, and they will not be required to sit a test. This includes people under the age of 18 years or aged 60 years and over as well as those with a permanent physical or mental incapacity that means they are not capable of understanding the nature of their application.

How will the test work? The test would be in English, be computer based, take up to 45 minutes to complete, consist of around 20 to 30 multiple choice questions drawn randomly from up to 200 questions.

Further down it states:

What about people who do not have the literacy skills to take the test?

Special arrangements would be made for people who would have difficulty taking a test because of their low levels of literacy. They would be required to take the test in an alternate format.

A citizenship test does not determine whether you would make a good citizen or whether you should be granted citizenship of a particular country. It has nothing to do with literacy levels. It has nothing to do with whether you can answer 20 questions taken randomly from some 200 questions. At the moment, we have an Australian Citizenship Pledge, which is as follows:

From this time forward,

I pledge my loyalty to Australia and its people,

Whose democratic beliefs I share,

Whose rights and liberties I respect,

And whose laws I will uphold and obey.

The citizenship test discriminates against large sections of our community. Indeed, if this citizenship test had been in place from the last century, many of us would not be here today because our forebears would not have had the literacy skills to pass the test. What history shows is that those migrants who wanted to come to this country have made an enormous contribution to it, and so have their heirs and successors.

Why the need for this test? The test is based on an ignorant view of the world that basically sees people of a different colour, a different race and with a different language as just that: different, when they are not different. We are all equal. We had a White Australia policy in this country and, thankfully, over time it was wiped out. At the time of the White Australia policy, there were restrictions that included a dictation test. It was used to exclude certain applicants by requiring them to pass a written test in a language, which was nominated by an immigration officer, with which they were not necessarily familiar.

In relation to people seeking visas into this country in the thirties, there is the celebrated case of Egon Kisch. Mr Kisch, under the immigration act at that time, was subjected to a dictation test in any European language. This was used as a means of determining whether he was acceptable for a visa. That case went backwards and forwards to the High Court. Mr Kisch was multilingual. Because the government of the day had fears about his background, it produced a Gaelic dictation test. There would have been only one in about 600 people in Scotland who could have passed that test in Gaelic. Our current test is not as restrictive as that one, but the principles are the same. How do you judge someone’s eligibility for citizenship on the basis of whether they rote learn 200 questions and then successfully answer 20 of them? It is absurd, it is obscene and it is offensive—and we hold ourselves up as intelligent human beings! This test has nothing to do with producing better quality citizens. It is about restricting the intake of citizenship from particular countries and about excluding it from others.

People with low literacy levels or who are not literate at all cannot comply. There are many instances of migrants who have come to this country with no English skills—indeed, who were not literate in the language of their own country because of the lack of opportunities in that country. The 2007-08 budget provides funding in the order of $123.6 million over five years to deliver the Australian government’s new citizenship test—that is, $107.4 million over five years for the citizenship test; $6.2 million over five years for the Australian way of life booklet; and $10 million over five years for Australian values statements. What an absolute waste of money. Indigenous Australians in this country, who have been so shabbily treated over the years by governments of all political persuasions—federal and state—could do with that money when it comes to their health. If you go to the website of the Fred Hollows Foundation, you will find that 24 per cent of Aboriginal men and 35 per cent of Aboriginal women in this country live to the age of 65. And what have we got? A government that is wasting $123.6 million on a citizenship test.

What about the disparity between those who happen to be born here and those who want to migrate here? I just talked to a class of students, 90 kids, from my old alma mater—St Luke’s, at Revesby. Mr Deputy Speaker Causley, I bet you—and I know the Deputy Speaker is not allowed to engage in betting, so I am using it in a metaphorical way—that, if we gave those kids a test of 20 randomly selected questions, a lot of them would struggle to pass the citizenship test. That is where there is a disparity between those who were born here and those who aspire to be Australian. That is why I read out the pledge. It is about aspirations and commitment to those aspirations—to those views that we as a parliament have determined you need to become an Australian citizen. It is not about passing some dodgy test. The Herald Sun and the Daily Telegraph produced a list of questions that might be used in a citizenship test. I think that showed it all; it showed the ridiculousness of the tests.

When the minister is questioned about this, he does not give forth any specific views on the tests other than that people should understand the system of government in Australia just as much as they should understand the broad values which we share as Australians. But what are the broad values? The values that I share are not necessarily shared by some of my colleagues in the Labor Party or those on the other side. From my experience, because we have been so negligent in teaching civics in our schools, there are not many of our pupils in our schools, all the way up to year 12, that understand the system of government. This test that is being introduced by this government is a disgrace. Shame on the Prime Minister and shame on the government for saying, ‘You need to pass this test before you can become an Australian citizen.’ The test is the first thing that should be repealed when there is a change of government; it should not decide who becomes an Australian citizen.

See this speech in context