Introduction
The government proposals to
strengthen Australian citizenship through introduction of the English test,
civic participation in prescribed activities and demonstration of conformity
with Australian values received significant media attention. The English test
has especially dominated discussion. But there are other consequences to this change
that readers need to be aware.
Far Reaching Impacts
of Four-Year Wait
The effects are wide ranging, but
here I focus on impacts associated with the legislative proposal to increase
permanent residency period from one to four years before being eligible to
apply for citizenship.
The extended wait means exclusion
from significant federal public sector jobs because most of these roles require
applicants to be citizens.
Similarly, the change may also
effectively exclude some permanent residents from State government jobs. In
other words, the change puts added constraints on access to economic
participation.
Clearly, if supported in the
future such change will also ensure at least for the first four years of
permanent residency in Australia, more new migrants will face increased
exclusion from political participation. To some extent then this group will
have less opportunity to impact political outcomes.
There are also many permanent
residents that would wait for far longer than four years to gain citizenship
because the four year mark does not include residency period spent in Australia
under various temporary visa categories that come before permanent status is
granted. This is often the case for those on skilled entry, students and temporary
protection visa groups.
The attempt to strengthen
citizenship requirements also is likely to impact University fees. Students with
permanent residency status and their dependants will be required to cough up very
high unsubsidised fees due to imposed constraints in accessing the University
Commonwealth Supported Places. Those on humanitarian permanent visas are
exception.
There are also permanent resident
visa holders who for political reasons are Stateless and lack access to travel
document such as passports. Prolonging their eligibility to citizenship means
while Australia has already accepted them as permanent residents, yet the
proposed policies if implemented will restrict their geographical mobility for
many years.
Imagine if anyone of us were
restricted to take a short holiday to Bali or other nearby destinations at the
very least! Such impacts do not appear to align with Australian standards – for
a country where travel for leisure, work and overseas family visits are highly
valued and seen as a norm.
What Can we Conclude?
Whether these exclusion methods in
some areas of employment, affordable tertiary education and political
participation are intended or not, what is clear these policies limit the scope
for participation. Perversely, these practices may work against the aims of
building a cohesive and integrated society. After all permanent residents have
already been accepted to stay in the country permanently, so imposing barriers
to economic and political participation does not make sense.
And it is not as if conceptions
of citizenship can be defined and practiced in a vacuum without factoring in
their relationship to the persons’ economic, political and social welfare.
