Australian Multiculturalism for a New Century: Towards Inclusiveness

Appendix B - community consultations (continued)

Democratic institutions (continued)

The institutions of democracy underlie all policy, programs and practice in Australia and they are therefore central to policies for multiculturalism. (Australian National University, Department of Linguistics, ACT)

The role of the institutions of Australian democracy can best be recognised by emphasising their importance in any policy statements on 'multiculturalism’. And it will be necessary to spell out in detail what these democratic institutions are and why they have been, and remain, critical to a just and equitable society. It may also require education of both young people and the wider community. (Office of Ethnic Affairs, Department of the Chief Minister, NT)

There was also a view that, on the basis that we live in a democratic society, multicultural policy is not required:

The principles of democracy and rule of law are important to protect the interests of all people in Australia, with anti-racism and anti-discrimination principles enshrined in the law. It is true that Australian society itself embodies traditions of fair play and tolerance and that these core values and principles, coupled with our institutions and laws, should constitute sufficient basis for a sound society.

(Peter Bastaja, NSW)

Further, there was widely held recognition that the democratic foundations of our society contain a balance of rights and obligations. This included a clear appreciation that the freedoms that are available to us need to be balanced with a commitment to accept and contribute to the civic life of the community and that these obligations extend to all Australians.

The Saulwick research reported a firm view that migrants should be prepared to live under the one law, which means accepting Australia’s core values and institutions.

Achievements of earlier generations

On the question of how the achievements of earlier generations of Australians should be best acknowledged in multicultural policies, most respondents commented on a need for a good understanding of Australian history, including facing this history honestly. This was perceived as crucial to understanding present society.

While many people acknowledged the importance of accepting Australia’s core democratic institutions, there was a lack of understanding about how these institutions arose or how the contributions of earlier generations of Australians ought to be recognised. Some stated, however, that honest teaching of Australian history will in itself acknowledge the achievements of earlier generations and in a way which will underline the multicultural history of our nation.

Reconciliation and multiculturalism

Responses to the question about indigenous cultures and reconciliation in Australia’s diverse society identified clear support for reconciliation and recognition of the special place of indigenous people. The following responses were typical:

Any reaffirmation of multiculturalism should make clear that our collective responsibility for past events and future reconciliation extends to all of us, no matter where we come from or when we arrived. It should also be linked to a statement of the continued special status of Aboriginal people as the original owners of Australia. (Ethnic Affairs Commission of New South Wales)

The Reconciliation process for Aboriginal People involves reconciliation with the family, the community and the land. This understanding can be a unifying force for all Australians no matter their origins. (Ecumenical Migration Centre, VIC)

Multiculturalism for all Australians

The Council’s consultation process provided mixed messages as to whether multiculturalism is for all Australians. For some it is already an inclusive policy:

To take multiculturalism, for instance, if it seems to be simply a matter of providing special benefits to migrants, or more narrowly still, non-English-speaking background migrants, it will defeat its own purpose. There is, of course, the realm of settlement services, but this is not multiculturalism in the sense of a viable, inclusive national politics. Multiculturalism must include the descendants of the English, Irish, Scots, Welsh, New Zealanders, Americans and so on, as ethnic groups no less than any other group. (Prof Mary Kalantzis/Dr Bill Cope, VIC)

Multiculturalism is a reality. It exists in every aspect of our daily existence. It should not even be an issue for debate. It is for all Australians and defines who we are. Any attempt to abandon the term 'multiculturalism’ carries with it the very real danger of appearing to abandon the principles which underpin it. The achievements of the last twenty five years would be lost. (Federation of Ethnic Communities’ Councils of Australia Inc)

Others said that multiculturalism relates only to migrants from a non-English-speaking background:

I do not feel Multiculturalism relates to me as an Australian. I do feel it negates my own Australian heritage and culture ... It does not embrace those Australians of Anglo-Saxon background whose heritage it dismisses as irrelevant and pushes aside for newer cultures.

(Janice G Pavils, SA)

There are those who perceived the implementation of multiculturalism as morally right in our diverse community. These respondents stated that in order to participate equally in society and have equal access to the fruits of the society, some groups need more assistance than others.

Saulwick’s research identified a strong desire for unity in this country. He showed that the concept of multiculturalism raised in many minds an emphasis on separateness rather than togetherness. In contrast to this, as one respondent explained, people want a country in which many cultures, races and backgrounds 'live together under the one rule’.

Saulwick found that migrants from non-English-speaking backgrounds are accepted, but that acceptance is qualified. The more these people are like 'us’, or become like 'us’, the more readily they are accepted. Many respondents were critical of migrants who live in geographically closed communities. While they recognised that there is a natural tendency for people from the same background to be together, Saulwick found that many respondents are impatient with it; they see it as inhibiting integration.

Social harmony

Submissions pointed out that loyalty and commitment to the basic structures and principles of our society are necessary for social harmony. The importance of social harmony was widely appreciated in the community:

It is by ensuring that all Australians have equal opportunity to partake of the wealth of our society that commitment by all Australians to this nation is ensured, and that social harmony is fostered. (Immigrant Women’s Speakout Association of NSW Inc)

The shared values underpinning social cohesion revolve around being Australian and everyone being, and seen to be, treated equally at all times under all circumstances ... We need to emphasise social cohesion as the priority, not cultural diversity. (Ian Finlayson, QLD)

Saulwick found that Australians are, in the main, quite open people who feel that they live in an open society; and that this is one of Australia’s greatest strengths. However, respondents agreed that the subject of race is one which can easily give offence and which has acquired a patina of political correctness. Saulwick suggested that this demonstrated that Australian society has moved towards a greater degree of tolerance and acceptance.

Shared values

Community consultation showed that Australians generally agree about the attributes of a fair and just society and give credit to Australia as being such a society. Commonly stated shared values included such traditional notions as a fair go, democracy, the rule of law and equality. Other submissions noted the importance of community, respect for the intrinsic worth of all individuals, the place of commonsense, and the nexus between freedom and responsibility. (DA Hunt, SA)

Saulwick identified a feeling in the community that we have a set of values and a way of living in this country, which we have inherited from our European, and more particularly, British forebears. People holding this view considered that those who come here to live ought to be prepared to fit in with this value system rather than to expect it to change.

Some commentators pointed to a tension inherent in the evolving nature of shared values, vis-a-vis the fixed nature of core values. One respondent warned:

There are dangers in any talk about a set of Australian 'core values’, for we must be on guard to ensure that no deviations occur towards any formula privileging one set of 'traditional’ or 'mainstream’ values and beliefs (essentially the old 'British heritage’ ones, of the kind espoused by Blainey in 1984) at the expense of our minority groups, especially Aboriginals. (Racial Respect, ACT)

National Agenda for a Multicultural Australia

Submissions were largely positive about the relevance of the 1989 National Agenda for a Multicultural Australia for future multicultural policy and its implementation framework. There was, however, a perception that multiculturalism has been misrepresented and misunderstood by some members of the Australian community.

The term 'multiculturalism’

In discussing the appropriateness of the term 'multiculturalism’, views were polarised. Respondents who had a problem with the term tended to be those who opposed the underlying concepts. Changing the name of the policy may, therefore, not necessarily result in greater acceptance.

The word multicultural has never been clearly defined to the Australian public hence there is confusion, uncertainty and suspicion as to the implications and possible political agenda. (Louise Samways, VIC)

Saulwick’s research provided an explanation for some of the negative attitudes towards multiculturalism. He pointed out that people were feeling alienated and that this expressed itself in a 'them and us’ attitude. In some cases this negativity led to views opposed to immigration and multiculturalism. Saulwick found that across all social classes, age groups and regions, people were concerned about Australia’s future and some were pessimistic about it. The sense of having been left out and marginalised was stronger among blue-collar workers, older people and those in country areas.

In those submissions calling for change, a common theme was that multiculturalism, as a term, should not be retained because it is perceived that the policy gives migrants rights and privileges that are not available to other Australians. Many of them, however, wanted the integrity of multiculturalism to be kept intact.

Some respondents stated that they did not support multiculturalism as a policy or as a term to describe Australian society, but presented views that seemed to agree with the principles behind multicultural policy.

National Agenda for a Multicultural Australia

Some respondents stated that they did not support multiculturalism as a policy or as a term to describe Australian society, but presented views that seemed to agree with the principles behind multicultural policy.

---

Next: Australian Multiculturalism for a New Century: Towards Inclusiveness - community consultations 3
Previous: Australian Multiculturalism for a New Century: Towards Inclusiveness - community consultations 1