Angus Taylor pushes English requirement for permanent visa holders

Angus Taylor’s proposal to make English compulsory for permanent visa holders raises serious questions about fairness, practicality and underlying political intent. Dr Abul Rizvi reports.

OPPOSITION LEADER Angus Taylor He says he will Make learning English easier “Not an option, but a necessity for permanent visa holders”.

As with most policy announcements, Taylor gives no details about how this policy will work, to what extent this is a problem, or whether he has actually read any of the extensive research in this area. So how can his policy work?

It probably does not recommend that English language be a prerequisite for visa issuance in humanitarian and family migration flows. Very few people living in refugee camps around the world are fluent in English. Australians don’t marry people based on the strength of their English.

We also don’t know what consequences Taylor intends to have if permanent residents fail to make sufficient progress in learning English. Is he suggesting that their visas be canceled and they be deported? What level of progress in the English language does he suggest for such action?

What happens if the partner of an Australian citizen is not making sufficient progress in learning English? Would they be deported? Would Taylor try to send humanitarian arrivals who are not making sufficient progress in learning English back to refugee camps? What happens to the spouses of skill stream participants who do not make sufficient progress in English? Will they be deported?

Maybe he thinks we should go back to the 1950s and 1960s when we used straps for students who weren’t making adequate progress in their learning?

There is no doubt that it is vital for people to know at least a basic level of English to live in Australia. Few people would disagree. Therefore, those who apply for citizenship must take an exam conducted in English. If Taylor thinks this is insufficient, he could require citizenship applicants to take a formal English test.

But deporting permanent residents who fail to make sufficient progress in English seems like pure Hansonism. Maybe that’s the point?

Because of the importance of learning English, Australia runs the Adult Migrant English Program (AMEP) since the beginning of post-war migration. The first AMEP courses were opened in 1948.

AMEP is modified frequently based on regular evaluations. Major changes to the program were made at AMEP in 2017, when Taylor became senior minister.

We don’t know if Taylor agreed to the changes, but they included:

offering additional English tutoring hours to eligible students;

The Australian Basic Skills Framework, which introduces a new reporting systemACSF) monitor the student’s progress;

the creation of two new AMEP service streams: Social English and Pre-Employment English;

Improving targeting of existing subprograms by removing restrictions on access to the Special Preparation Program (SPP);

allowing providers to choose curriculum that suits their needs;

simplifying accountability processes by reducing the number of KPIs for service providers;

Trial of a multi-provider model in the Sydney South West contracting area with two providers contracted to deliver AMEP;

improving the efficiency and accountability of financing through changes to the financing model, including for child care; And

Increasing alignment between AMEP and Education and Employability Skills (TO SEE) program. SEE provides English language training for Australians more generally. A significant portion of Australians have inadequate English language skills.

The 2017 changes were: Evaluated in 2019.

This included recommendations for:

The Special Preparation Program remains unlimited and is made available to all persons applying to AMEP for humanitarian purposes;

AMEP Increase funding to better meet demand;

Stakeholders should consider ways to more systematically recruit and retain volunteers as part of the project. Volunteer Trainer Program;

The Home Office should consider adding more than one Distance Learning (DL) provider to AMEP; And

Review of childcare services under AMEP.

The 2019 Review recommended focusing on four Key Performance Indicators:

KPI 1 (Participation): 90% of eligible clients who complete the initial AMEP assessment or are referred to AMEP Distance Learning begin the program within six months.

KPI 2 (Success): 80% of clients in the Pre-Employment and Social English Streams achieve an ACSF benchmark per 200 hours of training.

KPI 3 (Timeliness): 95% of the data is recorded and reported within the required time periods.

KPI 4 (Correct Assessment): 80% of customer review results are accurate according to ACSF.

A more detailed evaluation of AMEP was conducted in 2024. It used longitudinal research analyzing the effectiveness of AMEP by linking participant information from more than 400,000 AMEP clients with administrative data from social services, taxation and the national census from 2003-2019. This is the first time AMEP participant data has been linked to other data sets.

This evaluation found:

‘AMEP participation was associated with increased clients’ English proficiency, particularly when clients worked longer hours. ‘Immigrants with higher levels of English at entry had better labor market outcomes, higher income levels (male and female), lower rates of public housing tenancy and were less likely to receive income support in the years following exit from the scheme.’

If Taylor were truly concerned about permanent residents’ English language levels, he would use this assessment to identify other ways to increase AMEP participation. But a sensible policy like this is unlikely to meet his political aim of fighting the war. Pauline Hanson.

Doctor Abul Rizvi He is an independent Australian columnist and a former Deputy Secretary of the Immigration Service. You can follow Abul on Twitter @RizviAbul.

Support independent journalism Subscribe to IA.