The Suburbs at Breaking Point: A False Narrative

The One Nation party’s framing of immigration as a central election issue has sparked debate about Australia’s suburbs being at breaking point due to high migration levels and infrastructure strain. However, this narrative reveals more about the nation’s priorities than it does about the reality on the ground.

Ebenezer Church in Western Australia serves as a poignant reminder of the country’s complex history with immigration. Established by eight free families from Britain in 1802, the church has stood the test of time despite significant transformation in its surroundings. Today, this once-thriving hub of immigration is predominantly Australian-born, with few newcomers.

One Nation’s focus on immigration as a key election issue is not surprising given leader Barnaby Joyce’s statement that the party will challenge areas like The Ponds and Tarneit. These suburbs share common characteristics: high migration levels, strong house price growth, and infrastructure strain.

However, the narrative surrounding these suburbs reveals a more nuanced reality. In Tarneit, Mandy Gupta, an Indian migrant who has made Australia his home, notes that pressures on infrastructure are real. But he cautions against blaming immigration for all of society’s problems: “You can’t put everything on immigration.”

Treasury estimates suggest that a net overseas migration figure of 260,000 per year adds 0.8 percentage points to GDP. Without sustained migration levels, the country would face significant challenges in sustaining its current population, with fewer people contributing to tax revenue and supporting an ageing population.

Australia’s fertility rate has hit a record low of 1.48 per couple in 2024, below the level needed to sustain the current population. Treasury estimates that without migration, it will continue to fall further below the replacement rate because Australian-born residents have fewer babies than those born overseas.

Grattan Institute chief executive Aruna Sathanapally points out that politicians in favour of immigration have failed to articulate why Australia needs more people. Her insight into the need for sufficient population density to support infrastructure development is a timely reminder of the interconnectedness of economic growth, urban planning, and social welfare.

Australia has relied too heavily on a sprawled suburbia model of urban development, which is expensive to sustain. This pattern of development, coupled with inadequate investment in infrastructure, has created a perfect storm of challenges for suburbs like Tarneit.

The One Nation party’s focus on immigration distracts from the more pressing need for solutions to infrastructure funding and housing supply. Rather than scapegoating migrants for societal problems, we should be celebrating their contributions to Australia’s economy and culture.

As we move forward in this federal election campaign, let us engage with the complexities of this issue, acknowledging both the challenges and the opportunities presented by a diverse and vibrant population. Only through such nuanced discussion can we hope to build a more sustainable future for all Australians.