Australia’s opposition has put forward a tough new immigration policy which, if the Coalition comes to power, would introduce Trump-style social media screening for all visa applicants, including tourists, alongside broader tightening of immigration and asylum rules. Opposition leader Taylor accused the government of allowing migrants with “subversive intent” into the country and claimed that some migrants represent a “net burden” on Australia.
Taylor said a new “safe country list” would be created to determine which countries are considered safe for return. Asylum claims from these countries would be fast-tracked for rejection. The policy would also reinstate temporary protection visas, which were abolished in 2023.
The proposed measures further include increased enforcement resources to track, arrest and deport non-citizens who have exhausted all legal avenues but remain in the country. Visa holders would also be required to comply with a binding “Australian values statement”, and those who breach principles such as the rule of law, tolerance and equality of opportunity could have their visas cancelled and be deported. Waiting periods for non-citizens to access social welfare would also be extended, while legal aid funding would be reduced.
On security grounds, the policy proposes reviewing more than 2,000 Palestinians granted visas following the October 7, 2023 attacks and the Gaza conflict, despite them having already been cleared by Australian security agencies. Taylor argued that individuals from conflict zones may still pose risks.
Commentary:
Such policies risk labelling certain groups or regions in advance as “risks” or “burdens”, potentially deepening social division and anti-immigrant sentiment. Expanding social media screening also raises concerns about privacy and fundamental rights, effectively requiring applicants to surrender aspects of their private digital lives. When “values” become a selection criterion, questions remain over how these standards are defined, whether they are applied transparently and fairly, or whether they may be influenced by political bias.
More broadly, the policy may also conflict with Australia’s longstanding humanitarian values. Denying entry based on background or expression risks weakening the country’s commitment to protecting those fleeing conflict and hardship, and may deter genuine applicants in need of assistance.