Want to be an Aussie ... er maybe ... do I have to do anything?

Recently the Federal Government has proposed changes to the process for gaining an Australian Citizenship. A discussion paper has recommended that to become an Australian all future migrants must pass a citizenship test and have four years as a permanent resident. In order to pass the test a person would need a minimum level of English language skills and an understanding of Australian values. At the moment you wait two years, fill in some forms and head along for a quick ceremony and bingo bango you are the latest in a long line of bronzed Aussies. If you stay for the whole ceremony this will be the only moment in your life where you actually know the words to Advance Australia Fair. Of course soon after this you learn that to know the words to our national anthem is 'Un-Australian'.

Now compare this to getting a car or motorcycle license. If you want to drive, you have to demonstrate a high level of technical knowledge and practical skill by passing a couple of tests. Then you have to serve what is effectively a two year apprenticeship. At the end of this you get to blow huge amounts of money tooling around the roads and wasting years trying to find a park.

On the other hand being an Aussie means you get to live in a peaceful country, you get to vote and enjoy a welfare safety net. Not to mention the great weather, beaches, a bucket load of public holidays, four weeks annual holiday (more if you are smart enough to be a teacher) and the Australian Football League (yes honest to god football not that round or pointy ball stuff).

Now I know having a driving license is important, but considering what you get from being an Australian shouldn't they be equally difficult to obtain? 

Given the response to the discussion paper from some quarters you would get the impression that our citizenship should be more like a plastic toy from a cereal packet or a store loyalty card rather than a serious commitment from people to the country in which they have chosen to live. 

As you would expect the more ridiculous comments have all come from left leaning politicians and commentators. Everyone's favourite deep thinking leftie Senator Bob Brown could only come up with "its a return to the White Australia Policy". So according to him requiring that someone actually be able to speak the national language and subscribe to values like equality between the sexes and the rule of law is a return to the bad old days when you didn't get into Australia at all if you weren't white. 

To put his comment in some perspective one of the notable 'achievements' of the White Australia Policy was to prevent Australian soldiers who had risked their lives fighting in Vietnam from bringing their Vietnamese or Thai wives back to Australia. This citizenship proposal is nothing like the White Australia Policy. Seriously Bob, stick to the environment, you are more likely to say something that passes for sensible and useful comment.

Other notable left wing contributions to the debate have been "it may be seen as anti Islamic and we must make sure it applies to all communities". Its a citizenship test, by definition it applies to all migrants not just one group. While there are different visa requirements, as far as I know there has never been differing citizenship requirements for different ethnic groups and as far as I can see there is nothing like that in this proposal. 

In any case, how can a requirement to speak the national language of the country in which you live and follow the rule of law be anti-religious? If this is the case why isn't the Left worried that this proposal could offend Buddhists or Hindus?. 

What concerns me is the subtext of the criticisms of the discussion paper. There is an insidious view held by the Left that only a few people are mature and evolved enough to have an opinion about issues such as values. The rest of us can't say anything because this could give rise to a 'divisive debate' and expose Australia's 'underlying racism'.  Have you ever noticed that only people from the Left are clever or aware enough to spot the 'underlying racism' that everyone else seems to miss? I thought it was just gas but apparently its my 'underlying racism'. This arrogant nonsense surfaces whenever anyone wants to debate immigration policy or law and order.

Everyone in a society has the right to participate in debates about the structure, make up and rules that govern behaviour of their society. In fact resentment and racism occurs when people are excluded or marginalised in these debates. The Left has to accept that even though someone may have a different opinion about something they have the right to express it notwithstanding that they might 'upset' someone else. Look up the definition of 'free speech'. 

No one forces anyone to become an Australian citizen and a lot of people live in this country quite successfully without becoming one.  Everyone in the world gets their first citizenship for free, if you want another one then you should have to put in a bit of effort. Becoming a citizen should be a very public expression of loyalty to your adopted country and everyone should understand clearly what making that commitment means. By clearly expressing the minimum level of behaviour we expect from our newest citizens we necessarily define the behaviour we expect from ourselves. This is a something in which every Australian should be involved.