Shorten’s rhetoric on Dutton is dangerous

Bill Shorten’s political dissembling, deceit and distraction know no bounds but his efforts to exaggerate Peter Dutton’s unremarkable view that Malcolm Fraser made a mistake in relaxing normal immigration protocols in the 1970s are downright dangerous.

The Opposition Leader has typically embarked on a campaign of political distraction over a side issue, whipped up a frenzied outrage and suckered in social media sympathy without regard to the evil forces he may unleash. Superficial scare campaigns seem to be working for Shorten but there is a steep downside for Labor and the community. He has created an ugly public debate with the potential to divide society by creating a false argument based on spurious misrepresentations.

The Immigration Minister last week said Fraser had made some mistakes letting some people into Australia in the 70s. The mistakes, acknowledged by the ­Fraser cabinet, were that requirements on character and skills were relaxed so far to allow Lebanese Muslims escaping the civil war that they laid the foundation for unemployment and poor education for following generations.

In 1976, the Fraser government identified the potential problem and reimposed stricter criteria. Thirty years later, Fraser conceded the generational problems but blamed the “education system and the community” for not making special efforts. Demographer Bob Birrell said at that time the relatively depressed nature of the Muslim communities could be linked to a lack of skills of Lebanese refugees.

Labor chose to whip up a frenzy among migrant groups, building on its demonisation of the minister and suggesting ­Dutton’s identification of the high percentage of Lebanese Muslims facing terrorist charges was a threat to national security and slur on every migrant. There was a toxic and misinformed reaction.

Shorten told parliament yesterday that Dutton had claimed it was “a mistake to allow a generation of migrants to come to Australia” and were a repudiation of “migration and multiculturalism”. It was overreach of the most dangerous kind.