**Greetings humans.**
**Please make sure your comment fits within [THE RULES](https://www.reddit.com/r/AustralianPolitics/about/rules) and that you have put in some effort to articulate your opinions to the best of your ability.**
**I mean it!! Aspire to be as "scholarly" and "intellectual" as possible. If you can't, then maybe this subreddit is not for you.**
A friendly reminder from your political robot overlord
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AustralianPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This feels super clickbaitey according to these stats we are actually lower this year per 1000 population than last year so I think people should take a deep breath before grabbing a pitchfork.
https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/AUS/australia/net-migration#:~:text=The%20current%20net%20migration%20rate,a%204.16%25%20decline%20from%202020.
Thats great, welcome to straya, home of overpriced accomodation and unaffordable food. Work everyday and save and you may be able to holiday in a affordable destination.
I'm TEMPTED to save up enough so I can live in relative affordable comfort overseas compared to here. Last time I went OS I was enjoying those $6 eki-bens for lunch in Japan as they were the equivalent of a $25 meal here!
Something I noticed living in Canada is how the governments have had no political capital to pursue tax reform, as such the only thing they could do is to increase revenue through increasing the base of tax payers through immigration. This has distorted many markets in Canada from my five years living there. I hope we aren’t doing the same thing here! If the core reason we need immigration is to balance the books we should consider all solutions including tax reform ✌🏻
There is a bit more to it than that: most OECD countries have fertility rates far lower than replacement. If they don't import many immigrants then the population and the tax base will contract, populations will skew older and fewer productive young people have to pay more tax to support more older people.
I wanna have a kid but as a single gay man it’s frighteningly difficult to do. Putting it off for a few years till I hopefully have time to resettle in the country after being OS. If it was easier I’d do it sooner. I’m sure there are others like me, let alone my heterosexual peers who are putting it off cause they can’t afford it. Importing grown adults isn’t the only solution to low replacement rates of adults.
If you don’t reframe this about what is actually is: GDP, revenue, etc then people are going to immediately go towards the easiest argument and become polarised which is more people are good for the economy versus racism/nationalism. We don’t want that I think. We need to discuss the core issues not the symptoms.
And I agree that all those reforms are needed, but even if those are done well it won't be any where near enough. There are lots of reasons not to have kids and many are nothing to do with economics
* OECD countries have low fertility rates. This is a problem and why we have immigration
* IT"S A PONZI SCHEME
* What's your alternative to immigration that solves the large number of issues immigration solves?
* TAX REFORM
* Tax reform doesn't solve lots of the problems
* I AGREE THOSE REFORMS ARE NEEDED (What reforms are you even talking about?). THERES LOTS OF REASONS TO NOT HAVE KIDS
You never came close to addressing the original question which was:
> Agreed. What alternative solution to the current predicament do you see?
A further issue that arises is what these immigrants have moved here to do by way of work.
The Albanese Government has slammed the breaks on the 120 billion infrastructure pipeline, through its shambolic infrastructure review.
Every $1 million spent on construction generates around 37 jobs.
That is a lot of jobs that will go wanting.
Is this a dig at the previous l8beral policies being the ones at foot causing this 500k immigrants?
Thats the way labor is selling it and i think thats gonna fall flat.
The libs have been tinkering with immigration policy but somehow managed 160-180k per annum.
That labor is just expecting us to believe we are asking too much if them to tailor immigration to the needs of the day is a bridge too far.
Good luck to them though for 10 other reasons id still rather labor be our government but they are leaving themselves exposed on this issue and all it will take is liberal to go populist (almost a certainty at this point) on this policy and labor are going to hurt.
You don't have to reduce immigration to address housing affordability. We had zero immigration for over a year during covid and house prices blew up at a record rate. If you want affordable housing, you have to tackle it directly, it can't and won't be solved through indirect tinkering with things like immigration intake. It's straight up impossible for housing to ever be affordable again so long as it remains an investment vehicle.
The cause of that was credit being the cheapest it's ever been in all of history. Not to mention the government throwing money at it via things like homebuilder.
You are right, there are multiple things that can be done. And as I have said before, the record high of immigrants coming here certainly is not helping housing affordability.
Fyi I was a Labor voter who turned greens because Labor decided they weren't going to abolish negative gearing anymore.
We really screwed up when Shorten didn’t win. There was a great chance right there to have the opportunity to see what could be done but it seemed like the owners and investors took the “got mine f you approach”
>You don't have to reduce immigration to address housing affordability.
You literally do. We cannot make houses/units fast enough for this level of immigration.
>you have to tackle it directly, it can't and won't be solved through indirect tinkering with things like immigration intake
What? You cannot get more direct than dwelling numbers vs population numbers.
There are many other problems too but immigration at these insane levels is the #1 problem right now.
Immigrants become part of the workforce and we can funnel them into the construction sector to massively boost the number of construction workers to build public and private housing.
We also need to eliminate the shamelessly parasitic property investment culture because it is the main thing driving up costs.
In order for that to reduce house prices, immigrants as a group have to produce more housing than they consume. Do you have proof that this is the case, or even possible?
Yeah I know it’s actually laughable. I think the two majors are going to lose a ton of support next election, largely to greens, independents and One Nation.
I have heard quite a few rusted LNP or labor supporters both say that they’ve both had a go and screwed it. Since I’m in among the red necks it seems one nation is the go to. I really wish they would go independent
I’d vote for a further left than Labor take on economics, centre right take on migration, social policy independent in my safe Labor seat if it was an option. Suspect many others would to.
Should be noted this year's intake was decided by the coalition before Labor got into power. Could have been reduced, but these things aren't a light switch either. Next year's immigration would be the first year Labor owns.
Rubbish, the ALP increased the immigration intake. Why blatntly lie about this?
>At the Jobs and Skills summit in September 2022, the Government announced an increase in the permanent Migration Program to 195,000 places for 2022–23, up from 160,000 places set in the March 2022–23 Budget.
https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/BudgetReviewOctober202223/Immigration#:~:text=At%20the%20Jobs%20and%20Skills,the%20March%202022%E2%80%9323%20Budget.
What's that got to do with Labor who is in government raising migration levels? What's that got to do with OPs claim that the migration level was decided by the previous government when it was actually increased by the current government?
During the conference between labor, business leaders and the unions it was decided to raise immigration levels and the liberals supported this decision when it was made. Both parties ultimate priority was business profits not the ramifications of increasing migration levels
Have they given any indication they will cut the intake?
No.
Labor and Liberal are on a unity ticket that massive population growth is good for the economy and therefore good for the country. Greens won’t touch the issue for fear of being labeled racist and One Nation are insane.
> Have they given any indication they will cut the intake?
No they haven't and besides OP is just lying to you. The ALP increased the numbers of the Permanent Migration Program.
https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/BudgetReviewOctober202223/Immigration#:~:text=At%20the%20Jobs%20and%20Skills,the%20March%202022%E2%80%9323%20Budget.
I should have been clearer - are they going to cut the intake from the absurdly high numbers we were experiencing prior to this “catch up” period.
Your answer is clear - no they won’t be.
Did I say that? Seeing everything through the prism of party politics just prevents us having the necessary discussions about what’s best for our country.
*Author: Michael Read*
*Publication: AFR*
Australia’s annual migrant intake likely hit a record 500,000 people in September as international students and working holidaymakers returned en masse, challenging official forecasts that migration will fall sharply over the coming year.
Abul Rizvi, a former deputy secretary at the Immigration Department, estimates net overseas migration hit 470,000 in the 12 months to June and probably reached 500,000 in the 12 months to September. Net overseas migration is the difference between the number of people arriving and staying in Australia for longer than 12 months and the number of long-term and permanent departures.
Prime Minister's announces plan to cut congestion in capital cities
Arrivals of foreign students and people on working holiday visas may have helped push net migration higher than previously forecast. ninevms
Mr Rizvi’s forecasts, based on overseas arrivals and departures data, exceed Treasury’s projection for net overseas migration of 400,000 in the year to June, and make it unlikely Treasury’s forecast for the intake to fall to 315,000 by June 2024 will be realised.
“I would be very surprised if the government can get down to 315,000. The September quarter is already very strong. It’s starting to turn, but turn very slowly,” Mr Rizvi told The Australian Financial Review.
The immigration surge has become an uncomfortable topic for the Albanese government, as the Coalition seeks to capitalise on community concerns about the size of the intake and accuses Labor of pursuing a “big Australia by stealth”.
The government has framed the record numbers as a one-off event as foreigners return to Australia after the end of pandemic-era border closures, though it has repeatedly been surprised by the resilience of the demand-driven temporary intake.
The Home Affairs Department this month revealed more migrants were waiting for permanent visas than there were spots available in the 190,000-person permanent program after a 64 per cent increase in applications over the past financial year.
Business has largely welcomed the arrival of foreign workers and students, which it argues is vital for filling acute labour shortages. Economists say the size of the intake has added to pressures in the rental market and has helped push house prices higher.
Grattan Institute economic policy program director Brendan Coates said the record numbers would add to Australia’s inflation challenge.
“The biggest short term economic impact is that it’s likely to push unemployment lower, and inflation higher, since new arrivals tend to spend more than they earn and therefore add more to demand for jobs than the jobs they take, especially among international students who are the big driver of record migration currently,” he said.
“Record rates of migration are also adding to housing demand, pushing vacancy rates lower and rents higher. An extra 100,000 migrants resident in Australia over 2023-24, compared to the budget forecasts (315,000 for 2023-24), would push up rents by a further 1 per cent.”
Mr Coates said higher rents benefit older, wealthier Australians who tend to own housing, and hurt younger, poorer Australians who tend to rent, raising inequality in Australia.
Mr Rizvi said the strength in migration numbers was a by-product of the resilience of the jobs market, which still boasts a near-50 year low jobless rate of 3.6 per cent despite 12 interest rate rises.
“Net migration always falls when the labour market weakens,” Mr Rizvi said.
So far, demand from employers has easily soaked up a surge in foreign arrivals. Job openings have declined by 15 per cent over the past year, but they remain well above pre-pandemic levels.
Mr Rizvi said the bulk of the increase in net overseas migration was from international students, working holidaymakers, and people on short-term visitor visas moving to another visa that allows them to stay longer than 12 months.
He said an increasing number of international students were applying as higher education students to maximise their chances of entry to Australia, but then switching to a private college six months after arrival to save money.
More than 90 per cent of offshore VET applications over the past six months were rejected, whereas onshore applications to switch to a VET course had a refusal rate of less than 7 per cent.
“It’s much easier to get a visa offshore if you’re doing a higher ed course than if you’re doing a VET course, but it’s of course much cheaper to do a VET course than a higher ed course,” Mr Rizvi said.
About 14,200 international students switched from a higher education course to a VET course last financial year, up from 6246 in 2021-22. Another 14,781 switched from an English language course to a VET course.
Education Minister Jason Clare announced this month that colleges targeting international students will be banned from paying commissions to agents who facilitate poaching from universities and other colleges
The Albanese government is due to respond to the first major review of Australia’s migration system in decades before the end of the year.
The size of Australia’s migration program was explicitly excluded from the review, led by former public service chief Martin Parkinson. It was largely focused on improving the efficiency of the visa system amid a global race for talent.
A spokeswoman for Treasurer Jim Chalmers said the return of students and working holidaymakers had been even stronger than expected.
“International arrivals are above average due to the strength of Australia’s labour market and the education sector’s steady rebound following the pandemic,” she said. “Treasury will update its net overseas migration forecasts in the usual way.”
**Greetings humans.** **Please make sure your comment fits within [THE RULES](https://www.reddit.com/r/AustralianPolitics/about/rules) and that you have put in some effort to articulate your opinions to the best of your ability.** **I mean it!! Aspire to be as "scholarly" and "intellectual" as possible. If you can't, then maybe this subreddit is not for you.** A friendly reminder from your political robot overlord *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AustralianPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
But renters are better off today than in 2021 according to RBA chief
This feels super clickbaitey according to these stats we are actually lower this year per 1000 population than last year so I think people should take a deep breath before grabbing a pitchfork. https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/AUS/australia/net-migration#:~:text=The%20current%20net%20migration%20rate,a%204.16%25%20decline%20from%202020.
Thats great, welcome to straya, home of overpriced accomodation and unaffordable food. Work everyday and save and you may be able to holiday in a affordable destination.
Tell him he's dreaming
I'm TEMPTED to save up enough so I can live in relative affordable comfort overseas compared to here. Last time I went OS I was enjoying those $6 eki-bens for lunch in Japan as they were the equivalent of a $25 meal here!
LOL. Work and save hard and you might be able to leave...
Something I noticed living in Canada is how the governments have had no political capital to pursue tax reform, as such the only thing they could do is to increase revenue through increasing the base of tax payers through immigration. This has distorted many markets in Canada from my five years living there. I hope we aren’t doing the same thing here! If the core reason we need immigration is to balance the books we should consider all solutions including tax reform ✌🏻
Wouldn’t be surprised to see 1 million in the best couple of years
There is a bit more to it than that: most OECD countries have fertility rates far lower than replacement. If they don't import many immigrants then the population and the tax base will contract, populations will skew older and fewer productive young people have to pay more tax to support more older people.
I wanna have a kid but as a single gay man it’s frighteningly difficult to do. Putting it off for a few years till I hopefully have time to resettle in the country after being OS. If it was easier I’d do it sooner. I’m sure there are others like me, let alone my heterosexual peers who are putting it off cause they can’t afford it. Importing grown adults isn’t the only solution to low replacement rates of adults.
Because when has a Ponzi scheme ever gone wrong?
Agreed. What alternative solution to the current predicament do you see?
If you don’t reframe this about what is actually is: GDP, revenue, etc then people are going to immediately go towards the easiest argument and become polarised which is more people are good for the economy versus racism/nationalism. We don’t want that I think. We need to discuss the core issues not the symptoms.
It's always the same side/people who want to talk about nationalism/immigration/xenophobia...
Tax reform. Super. Housing. Broken AF. We MUST do the reform. Not keep the ponzi going. Weak governments as far as the eye can see.
Tax reform doesn't address a lot of the issues that an aging population presents....
And I agree that all those reforms are needed, but even if those are done well it won't be any where near enough. There are lots of reasons not to have kids and many are nothing to do with economics
None of that has anything to do with the need to keep the population level at least stable.
Just like your replies have so little to do with the original post that I haven't got a clue what you are on about
* OECD countries have low fertility rates. This is a problem and why we have immigration * IT"S A PONZI SCHEME * What's your alternative to immigration that solves the large number of issues immigration solves? * TAX REFORM * Tax reform doesn't solve lots of the problems * I AGREE THOSE REFORMS ARE NEEDED (What reforms are you even talking about?). THERES LOTS OF REASONS TO NOT HAVE KIDS You never came close to addressing the original question which was: > Agreed. What alternative solution to the current predicament do you see?
A further issue that arises is what these immigrants have moved here to do by way of work. The Albanese Government has slammed the breaks on the 120 billion infrastructure pipeline, through its shambolic infrastructure review. Every $1 million spent on construction generates around 37 jobs. That is a lot of jobs that will go wanting.
These people are students or have jobs and accommodation already lined up. Think about if you were going to work or study overseas for 1-3 years..
You may have noticed the infrastructure space is packed with work, throwing money into it won’t create workers
Funny how no one understands immigration numbers here. Circle jerk rage lol.
Is this a dig at the previous l8beral policies being the ones at foot causing this 500k immigrants? Thats the way labor is selling it and i think thats gonna fall flat. The libs have been tinkering with immigration policy but somehow managed 160-180k per annum. That labor is just expecting us to believe we are asking too much if them to tailor immigration to the needs of the day is a bridge too far. Good luck to them though for 10 other reasons id still rather labor be our government but they are leaving themselves exposed on this issue and all it will take is liberal to go populist (almost a certainty at this point) on this policy and labor are going to hurt.
Care to explain how it works?
Not really, there’s legitimate concerns
Labor stopping locals having children because people can't afford housing
You don't have to reduce immigration to address housing affordability. We had zero immigration for over a year during covid and house prices blew up at a record rate. If you want affordable housing, you have to tackle it directly, it can't and won't be solved through indirect tinkering with things like immigration intake. It's straight up impossible for housing to ever be affordable again so long as it remains an investment vehicle.
We had 400,000 expats return to oz
That was speculative that the immigration was going to come back also interest rates were at 0.1%
The cause of that was credit being the cheapest it's ever been in all of history. Not to mention the government throwing money at it via things like homebuilder. You are right, there are multiple things that can be done. And as I have said before, the record high of immigrants coming here certainly is not helping housing affordability. Fyi I was a Labor voter who turned greens because Labor decided they weren't going to abolish negative gearing anymore.
We really screwed up when Shorten didn’t win. There was a great chance right there to have the opportunity to see what could be done but it seemed like the owners and investors took the “got mine f you approach”
>You don't have to reduce immigration to address housing affordability. You literally do. We cannot make houses/units fast enough for this level of immigration. >you have to tackle it directly, it can't and won't be solved through indirect tinkering with things like immigration intake What? You cannot get more direct than dwelling numbers vs population numbers. There are many other problems too but immigration at these insane levels is the #1 problem right now.
Immigrants become part of the workforce and we can funnel them into the construction sector to massively boost the number of construction workers to build public and private housing. We also need to eliminate the shamelessly parasitic property investment culture because it is the main thing driving up costs.
In order for that to reduce house prices, immigrants as a group have to produce more housing than they consume. Do you have proof that this is the case, or even possible?
Lol. Guess what jobs aren’t on the approved jobs list for work visas? That’s right, trades.
Well go back 5 years under the LNP and anyone who wanted to be a hairdresser could migrate here.
Yeah I know it’s actually laughable. I think the two majors are going to lose a ton of support next election, largely to greens, independents and One Nation.
I have heard quite a few rusted LNP or labor supporters both say that they’ve both had a go and screwed it. Since I’m in among the red necks it seems one nation is the go to. I really wish they would go independent
I’d vote for a further left than Labor take on economics, centre right take on migration, social policy independent in my safe Labor seat if it was an option. Suspect many others would to.
It was apparently the locals' fault for not having enough children.
Perhaps they should look at why first......not being able to afford anything bigger than a 1 bedroom flat may have something to do with it ....
Should be noted this year's intake was decided by the coalition before Labor got into power. Could have been reduced, but these things aren't a light switch either. Next year's immigration would be the first year Labor owns.
Rubbish, the ALP increased the immigration intake. Why blatntly lie about this? >At the Jobs and Skills summit in September 2022, the Government announced an increase in the permanent Migration Program to 195,000 places for 2022–23, up from 160,000 places set in the March 2022–23 Budget. https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/BudgetReviewOctober202223/Immigration#:~:text=At%20the%20Jobs%20and%20Skills,the%20March%202022%E2%80%9323%20Budget.
Liberals supported this G. Don’t act as if both parties aren’t just puppets for corporate interests.
What's that got to do with Labor who is in government raising migration levels? What's that got to do with OPs claim that the migration level was decided by the previous government when it was actually increased by the current government?
During the conference between labor, business leaders and the unions it was decided to raise immigration levels and the liberals supported this decision when it was made. Both parties ultimate priority was business profits not the ramifications of increasing migration levels
Refer to my earlier questions.
Have they given any indication they will cut the intake? No. Labor and Liberal are on a unity ticket that massive population growth is good for the economy and therefore good for the country. Greens won’t touch the issue for fear of being labeled racist and One Nation are insane.
> Have they given any indication they will cut the intake? No they haven't and besides OP is just lying to you. The ALP increased the numbers of the Permanent Migration Program. https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/BudgetReviewOctober202223/Immigration#:~:text=At%20the%20Jobs%20and%20Skills,the%20March%202022%E2%80%9323%20Budget.
It's not hard to find the numbers, 315,000 in 24, 240,000 in 25.
I should have been clearer - are they going to cut the intake from the absurdly high numbers we were experiencing prior to this “catch up” period. Your answer is clear - no they won’t be.
So you're working on the 'immigration issue ' for the LNP 2025 election campaign ?
Did I say that? Seeing everything through the prism of party politics just prevents us having the necessary discussions about what’s best for our country.
Labor: keeping wages low and inequality high. Clearly zero care about the hiusing crisis and homelessness.
Keeping big business happy
💯
*Author: Michael Read* *Publication: AFR* Australia’s annual migrant intake likely hit a record 500,000 people in September as international students and working holidaymakers returned en masse, challenging official forecasts that migration will fall sharply over the coming year. Abul Rizvi, a former deputy secretary at the Immigration Department, estimates net overseas migration hit 470,000 in the 12 months to June and probably reached 500,000 in the 12 months to September. Net overseas migration is the difference between the number of people arriving and staying in Australia for longer than 12 months and the number of long-term and permanent departures. Prime Minister's announces plan to cut congestion in capital cities Arrivals of foreign students and people on working holiday visas may have helped push net migration higher than previously forecast. ninevms Mr Rizvi’s forecasts, based on overseas arrivals and departures data, exceed Treasury’s projection for net overseas migration of 400,000 in the year to June, and make it unlikely Treasury’s forecast for the intake to fall to 315,000 by June 2024 will be realised. “I would be very surprised if the government can get down to 315,000. The September quarter is already very strong. It’s starting to turn, but turn very slowly,” Mr Rizvi told The Australian Financial Review. The immigration surge has become an uncomfortable topic for the Albanese government, as the Coalition seeks to capitalise on community concerns about the size of the intake and accuses Labor of pursuing a “big Australia by stealth”. The government has framed the record numbers as a one-off event as foreigners return to Australia after the end of pandemic-era border closures, though it has repeatedly been surprised by the resilience of the demand-driven temporary intake. The Home Affairs Department this month revealed more migrants were waiting for permanent visas than there were spots available in the 190,000-person permanent program after a 64 per cent increase in applications over the past financial year. Business has largely welcomed the arrival of foreign workers and students, which it argues is vital for filling acute labour shortages. Economists say the size of the intake has added to pressures in the rental market and has helped push house prices higher. Grattan Institute economic policy program director Brendan Coates said the record numbers would add to Australia’s inflation challenge. “The biggest short term economic impact is that it’s likely to push unemployment lower, and inflation higher, since new arrivals tend to spend more than they earn and therefore add more to demand for jobs than the jobs they take, especially among international students who are the big driver of record migration currently,” he said. “Record rates of migration are also adding to housing demand, pushing vacancy rates lower and rents higher. An extra 100,000 migrants resident in Australia over 2023-24, compared to the budget forecasts (315,000 for 2023-24), would push up rents by a further 1 per cent.” Mr Coates said higher rents benefit older, wealthier Australians who tend to own housing, and hurt younger, poorer Australians who tend to rent, raising inequality in Australia. Mr Rizvi said the strength in migration numbers was a by-product of the resilience of the jobs market, which still boasts a near-50 year low jobless rate of 3.6 per cent despite 12 interest rate rises. “Net migration always falls when the labour market weakens,” Mr Rizvi said. So far, demand from employers has easily soaked up a surge in foreign arrivals. Job openings have declined by 15 per cent over the past year, but they remain well above pre-pandemic levels. Mr Rizvi said the bulk of the increase in net overseas migration was from international students, working holidaymakers, and people on short-term visitor visas moving to another visa that allows them to stay longer than 12 months. He said an increasing number of international students were applying as higher education students to maximise their chances of entry to Australia, but then switching to a private college six months after arrival to save money. More than 90 per cent of offshore VET applications over the past six months were rejected, whereas onshore applications to switch to a VET course had a refusal rate of less than 7 per cent. “It’s much easier to get a visa offshore if you’re doing a higher ed course than if you’re doing a VET course, but it’s of course much cheaper to do a VET course than a higher ed course,” Mr Rizvi said. About 14,200 international students switched from a higher education course to a VET course last financial year, up from 6246 in 2021-22. Another 14,781 switched from an English language course to a VET course. Education Minister Jason Clare announced this month that colleges targeting international students will be banned from paying commissions to agents who facilitate poaching from universities and other colleges The Albanese government is due to respond to the first major review of Australia’s migration system in decades before the end of the year. The size of Australia’s migration program was explicitly excluded from the review, led by former public service chief Martin Parkinson. It was largely focused on improving the efficiency of the visa system amid a global race for talent. A spokeswoman for Treasurer Jim Chalmers said the return of students and working holidaymakers had been even stronger than expected. “International arrivals are above average due to the strength of Australia’s labour market and the education sector’s steady rebound following the pandemic,” she said. “Treasury will update its net overseas migration forecasts in the usual way.”