Tuvalu Ballot System

Question

1. Under the Falepili Union deal, up to 280 people from Tuvalu per year can permanently relocate to Australia through a ballot system that is not tied to skills, occupations or workforce shortages. What is the strategic or economic benefit to Australia from importing a random intake of permanent migrants that is not connected to labour market need? 2. Given the Government says skilled migration should address workforce shortages, why was the Tuvalu pathway designed as a permanent migration ballot rather than a targeted skills-based or project-linked program aligned to Australia's economic priorities? 3. Can the Department identify any measurable economic, workforce or productivity dividend for Australia arising from the Tuvalu arrangement - beyond broad diplomatic goodwill? 4. More than 8,700 people reportedly applied for the initial ballot from a total Tuvalu population of around 11,000. Has the Department assessed the long-term fiscal and settlement implications for Australia of this arrangement, including if future governments potentially expand the intake beyond the current cap? 5. Critics in Tuvalu itself have raised concerns about sovereignty, transparency and long-term labour loss from the islands. What forms of modelling has the Government undertaken on the risks that this agreement could cause for population outflow from Tuvalu and the transfer of long-term service and settlement costs to Australian taxpayers?

Answer

Please see attached answer

Documents

• Question with answer (PDF) (opens in a new tab)
• 231.pdf (opens in a new tab)