From The Australian comes Frank Lowy:
“Australia needs immigrants, it has good natural growth, but immigrants at the time the Australian government decides to have them — not because there are major disturbances in other parts of the world,” Mr Lowy said.
“A government needs to be in control of its borders.”
“It is up to the country to decide how many immigrants it wants to absorb at any particular time,’’ he said. “The humanitarian issue is a separate issue from the immigration issues.
“There are many disturbances around the world. Immigration is one aspect. Big countries that are immigrant countries like Australia need a bigger population.”
Hmmm, well, what does that mean Frank? Given the utterances are attached to a PR blitz around his World Trade Centre redevelopment, which was triggered by Islamist maniac planes destroying the old one, are we to conclude that Mr Lowy is calling for a sectarian immigration policy? The Australian seem to think so, following on in the article with this:
Mr Lowy’s remarks come as analysis by The Australian shows the government is pursuing a strategy that makes it difficult for large numbers of Muslims from the Middle East to settle here.
It is an unintended consequence of a migration policy that is focused on attracting skilled and family reunion migrants from countries such as India (now Australia’s No 1 source of permanent migrants, with 34,874 arrivals last year) and China (27,874).
I don’t know what Mr Lowy means but here’s a few points anyway for the nineteenth century Australian newspaper:
- Australia does not need a bigger population, nor is it a big country, though delivering more people to Frank’s malls would certainly help him while other businesses, those that are tradable, will keep sinking;
- Australia cannot embrace a sectarian immigration policy. It violates every principle that underpins its magnificently modern and multi-cultural self and also intensifies the threat of the very radicalisation of local Muslims that this war is all about;
- Frank Lowy is wedged between his business interests and the most sensible strategy to prevent public panic from boiling over about immigration levels, which to lower the intake generally.
Are we really going to drift into apartheid just to protect the FIRE sector?
