Racial issue not new in Australia

By Kristanyo Hardojo

JAKARTA (JP): It has been more than a quarter of a century since Australia formally buried its "White Australia" policy, the infamous attempt to attract European-only immigrants. But lately after the installation of John Howard's government, the old issue of race has reared its ugly head again. This time, it was triggered off by federal independent member of Oxley, Pauline Hanson. She charged that the Labor government of former prime minister Paul Keating was "looking after Aborigines too much" and dedicated her parliamentary victory to "the white community".

It is fair to argue that racism has been an essential element of Australian history. The "White Australia" policy or, more specifically, the Immigration Restriction Act, which was passed by the Australian government in 1901, is testimony to this claim.

Referring to the act, two Australian historian scholars, Andrew Markus and M.C. Ricklefs in their book Surrender Australia? Essays in the Study and Uses of History (1985), state: "...'White Australia' policy had become distasteful to most historians and embarrassing to all the major political parties, whom were to blame for its existence in the first place?"

This article attempts to place the current Australian debate on issues of race in the context of the so called "White Australia" policy.

The transportation of English immigrants began almost immediately after the discovery of Australia in 1788. Although the need for a larger settled population for the production of food and provision of other basic requirements was obvious, it was equally obvious that convicts from the British Isles were given priority of entry, while restrictions where imposed on free settlers seeking entry. The question for the Crown then became how much money the British government was prepared to spend to establish its new colony of convicts.

The British government could supply labor -- mostly convicts -- only until about the 1830s. One reason for this was that funds for the transportation of convicts began to dry up in 1830s. However, the new colony's pressing need for labor led the authorities to look to new sources closer to the "new continent", i.e. from Asia and Pacific islands. It is not surprising therefore that in early 1830s the importation of Chinese indentured labor became "a regular and systematic trade"; in which a legal bond was made between the laborer and the employer.

The indenture system in Australia, however, ended in the late 1840s when a petition against cheap Chinese labor was delivered by the "working class" to the governor of New South Wales. While the petition expressed opposition to the importation of coolies from China, it supported and approved the importation of British convicts. This was a clear and early expression of anticolored sentiment.

As a result of the Chinese threat to the conditions of the white working class in Australia, a change in immigration policy took place. The indenture system was replaced with the credit- ticket system; an immigration policy that bonded an emigrant to an employer. One could say that whatever the purpose of changing the system, there can be no doubt that it was aimed at curbing, if not stopping, the inflow of Chinese people to Australia. The depression in Australia in the 1840s, due to plunging wool prices and increasing unemployment during that time, was a contributing factor to the change in immigration policy.

Immigrants became the scapegoat for Australia's economic problem in Australia at this time and were blamed for the continent's economic problems. The home government responded by closing its borders to non-white immigrants and channeled its resources into increasing the number of English immigrants. The discovery of gold in the early 1850s attracted a lot of free settlers. Chinese coolies were once again allowed into Australia to fill positions vacated by laborers who had gone off to make their fortune in the gold fields. This, the entry of non-white immigrants into Australia was a matter of economic expedience. They were admitted entry when there was a need for cheap labor and then blamed for the economic woes of the colony when there was an economic downturn.

Given that the prevailing argument against immigration claimed that the capital income per worker had dropped and that, hence, the average worker was worse off, racial hostility and hatred was at an all time high by the 1870s. From the turn of the 18th century until the end of the 19th century in Australia, Chinese, Indian and Kanakas immigrants faced similar deprivations.

Feeling threatened that non-European people might destroy the British character of their community, the white community brought a motion against Asian and Pacific immigrants in the 1880s. The anti-Asian and Pacific sentiment, which began with the trade unions, was so strongly felt that at the First International Trade Union Congress held in Sydney in 1879, a motion against "Asiatic immigration" was carried unanimously. In 1896, a Premiers' Conference decided that each colony should enact a Restriction Bill that would be applied to all non-British people and spawned the term "White Australia".

The policy that encouraged white people to stick together based on their language, principles and goals, showed the existence of a racist hegemony in the late 19th century in Australia. The attempt to curb the invasion of immigrants from other countries was merely a pretext to preserve the British character of Australia. The ready acceptance of a "White Australia" was dubbed "an expression and, at the same time, a condition of national self-determination and survival", was in reality an expression of fear, a concern for the preservation of Australia's British character, and racial superiority. This phenomenon, then, led to the passing of the 1901 act.

The Immigration Restriction Act was passed by parliament when the Commonwealth of Australia was inaugurated in January 1901. The implementation of the 1901 act, which endeavored to exclude all non-white people, then led to the so called "White Australia" policy. From the 1901 act, it shows that racism was inherent in Australia's general attitudes despite her geographical location and helped form her policies. As indicated by Humprey McQueen, racism found expression in Australia in various ways, among them the destruction of the Australian Aborigines and the fear of an Asiatic invasion.

Pauline Hanson's racist statements are one manifestation of a potential source of tension in Australian politics. History appears to be repeating itself. Hanson's support came from that segment of "the white community" residing in regions hit by greater poverty and unemployment, who perceived non-whites as threats and indeed the cause of their hardship.

This is an eerie echo of the sentiments that found expression in the colony of the 1870s, as illustrated above. Once again, the non-white community have become scapegoats for Pauline Hanson and others of her ilk, in Australia. A scrutiny of Australian history reveals that racism is indeed a repeating motif, in some sectors of Australian society, especially among the conservatives, among whom the idea of a "White Australia" prevails.

Hanson's shocking statements caused far-reaching ripples of concern especially since it comes in the wake of Keating's politically correct regime which courted Southeast Asia, and emphasized Australia's multiculturalism and her position in the Asia-Pacific region. To secure its relations with its neighbors, Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer stated: " ... the Australian government utterly opposes racist sentiment and will fight it in all its manifestations".

However, it will take much more than Downer's assertions to put people's minds at ease -- it will take concrete proof. At this juncture, it would be fair and fitting to quote Craig McGregor, who, in his book Profile of Australia (1971) states that: "... the quality of a nation can well be judged on how it treats the minorities in its midst ... "

The author works in the Department of Foreign Affairs. The opinion expressed in this article are solely those of the author.