Welcome to Eureka Street
Looking for thought provoking articles?Subscribe to Eureka Street and join the conversation.
Passwords must be at least 8 characters, contain upper and lower case letters, and a numeric value.
Eureka Street uses the Stripe payment gateway to process payments. The terms and conditions upon which Stripe processes payments and their privacy policy are available here.
Please note: The 40-day free-trial subscription is a limited time offer and expires 31/3/24. Subscribers will have 40 days of free access to Eureka Street content from the date they subscribe. You can cancel your subscription within that 40-day period without charge. After the 40-day free trial subscription period is over, you will be debited the $90 annual subscription amount. Our terms and conditions of membership still apply.
There are more than 200 results, only the first 200 are displayed here.
As house prices soar, half the nation finds itself locked out of the property market. In conversation with Eureka Street, Alan Kohler untangles the web of tax incentives, population pressures, and government policies fueling the housing crisis to discover why, despite public outcry, solutions remain frustratingly out of reach.
Last week, Australia’s High Court blocked government restrictions on non-citizens with criminal records. As Parliament scrambles to impose new restrictions, Chief Justice Stephen Gageler’s court remains steadfast against policies deemed discriminatory and excessively punitive.
There is no doubt that laws for determining refugee status and onshore protection are complex. The cases of NZYQ and ASF17 demonstrate that when laws regarding asylum and protection intersect with laws regarding character and protection of the community, the results can be extremely messy.
In a significant thaw in Sino-Australian relations, Premier Li Qiang's visit to Canberra brought strategic agreements on education, climate change, and trade, and the promise of new pandas for Adelaide Zoo. Prime Minister Albanese emphasised cooperation and dialogue over confrontation, contrasting with the hawkish rhetoric of domestic critics.
The Labor government’s plans for managing overseas student numbers seem to be heavily influenced by the belief that these students are at least partly responsible for hikes in rents, housing shortages, and pressure on infrastructure.
The Albanese government’s refugee and asylum policy is in a mess. When Minister Giles introduced his Migration Amendment Bill, they bypassed typical parliamentary procedures, wanting to be seen as tougher than Peter Dutton in getting unvisaed non-citizens out of the country. It’s time for the government to return to due process in this whole field.
This week, the Federal Government quickly introduced a new policy in response to a recent High Court decision that prevents them from indefinitely detaining a small number of individuals they wish to remove from Australia.
Throughout recent decades of Australian history, the stance every government has taken on asylum seekers has reflected the shifting political landscapes and challenging humanitarian issues that have continually shaped Australia's response to those seeking refuge.
Accusing someone of being ‘un-Australian’ is easily done, but what crimes or potential threats to the security and safety of Australians should trigger the practice of stripping someone of their citizenship?
On 8 November, the High Court ordered a stateless Rohingya refugee known only as NZYQ to be released from detention. He could not be granted a visa because he was found gulity of sexually assaulting a minor, and he could not be sent anywhere because he is stateless. Until 8 November, he was stuck in indefinite mandatory detention.
Last month, the High Court overturned a controversial 2004 decision, reaffirming the principle that asylum seekers cannot be detained indefinitely without prospects of deportation. This ruling not only corrects a historical misstep but also reasserts the High Court's commitment to limiting executive overreach.
In a better world, people who seek protection in Australia and people removed from prison would not be detained in the same detention centres. But the grounds for differential treatment are not based on the difference between guilty and innocent people; between asylum seekers and 'hardened criminals'. Both groups are worthy of respect and compassion.
1-12 out of 200 results.