ABS - Migration censorship

Question

In August 2025, the ABS emailed journalists and media outlets-including MacroBusiness and Daily Mail-warning them not to use its monthly net permanent and long-term arrivals data as a ''measure of migration.'' The ABS claimed this practice was ''inaccurate and misleading,'' despite the fact that economists and analysts have used this series for years as a leading indicator of net overseas migration (NOM) because official NOM data is released with a six- to nine-month delay. The ABS even issued a media statement asserting that these border-crossing figures ''should not be used to measure migration or population change'' because they reflect traveller intentions rather than residency status. Yet, the Centre for Population (Australian Treasury) explicitly states in its official handbook that border crossings data are more timely than other migration flow data releases and can be used as a potential leading indicator for NOM. It also describes arrivals and departures as an early indicator of future migration flows. This contradiction raises serious questions about whether the ABS is overreaching, censorious, and incorrect, and whether it is acting under political pressure to stifle debate on immigration policy. 1. Why did the ABS email journalists and media outlets instructing them not to use monthly net permanent and long-term arrivals data as a migration measure? 2. Do the ABS accept that this looks like an attempt to censor public debate on immigration numbers? 3. What authority does the ABS have to tell independent media how to interpret publicly available data? 4. How does the ABS reconcile its claim that border-crossing data should not be used as a migration indicator with the Centre for Population's official guidance that these figures are a valid leading indicator for net overseas migration? 5. Are the ABS aware that its own position contradicts government documents stating that arrivals and departures data are an early indicator of migration flows? 6. Why is it acceptable for the Centre for Population to use these figures as a leading indicator of migration, but not for the media or independent analysts? 7. Did the ABS receive any communication from Treasurer or any ministerial office to issue these warnings to media outlets? 8. Have the ABS received any communication from the Department of Home Affairs, Treasury, or the Prime Minister's Office regarding how migration data should be presented? 9. Will the ABS publish all correspondence sent to media outlets on this matter, including any internal or external instructions? 10. Do the ABS accept that its intervention undermines confidence in its independence and impartiality as a statistical agency?

Answer

See attached response.

Documents

• Question with answer (PDF) (opens in a new tab)
• SQ26-000225 ABS - Migration censorship.pdf (opens in a new tab)
• SQ26-000364 Portfolio - Market Research.pdf (opens in a new tab)