2022代写代码澳大利亚research essay：Almost a quarter of migrants who emigrate
1.0 Introduction介绍澳大利亚是一个由移民组成的国家。战后初期，澳大利亚政府制定了主要针对英国的大规模援助移民政策。符合条件的英国移民可以从英国和澳大利亚政府获得全部旅行费，每个移民只需支付10英镑就可以移居澳大利亚，这部分移民被称为“10 poms”（Richardson，1957年；Richardson，1963年）。传统观念认为，白人，尤其是英国移民到澳大利亚的人，由于语言、文化等主流社会差异较小，适应上没有问题，因此英国移民的适应往往被忽视（Burnley，1978岁；然而，英国移民作为第二次世界大战后接受援助移居澳大利亚的“10人”也遭遇了挫折和困难。事实上，二战后，超过25%的英国移民返回澳大利亚（Hammerton和Thomson，2005年）。澳大利亚政府通过移民政策的援助吸引了英国移民到澳大利亚，他们当然希望移民能够在澳大利亚定居。1957年，高回报率促使澳大利亚联邦政府开始资助相关研究，如Appleyard、Ray和Segal（1988）进行的研究。本文旨在了解为什么1950年后移民到澳大利亚的“10个移民”中，有近四分之一的移民仍然选择在政府提供的有利条件下返回英国，社会文化差异很小。这项研究首先介绍了“10个POMS”返回英国的数据。然后，分析了这部分移民选择离开澳大利亚的原因，最后，对“10个POMS”返回英国的原因进行了深入分析。Australia is a country composed by migrants. At the beginning of the postwar period, the Australian government has developed a large-scale aid migration policy aiming primarily at the British. The eligible British migrants could acquire a total of travel payments from both British and Australian governments, and each migrant only needed to pay ten pounds to move to Australia, this part of migrants were called ‘10 Poms’ (Richardson, 1957; Richardson, 1963). Traditional concept usually believes that white people, especially the British migrating to Australia will have no problem in adaptation because of less differences in language, culture and other mainstream social differences, so the adaptation of British migrants are often overlooked (Burnley, 1978; . However, British migrants as ‘10 Poms’ who accepted aid to move to Australia after the Second World War also suffered setbacks and difficulties. In fact, after the Second World War, more than 25% of British migrants to Australia returned to Britain (Hammerton and Thomson, 2005). The Australian government has attracted British migrants to Australia through assistance of migration policies, and they certainly hoped that the migrants would be able to settle in Australia. In 1957, the high return rate prompted the Australian federal government to start funding related research, such as the study carried out by Appleyard, Ray and Segal (1988). This essay aims to understand why almost a quarter of migrants who emigrated to Australia after 1950 as ‘10 Poms’ still chose to return to Britain under the favorable conditions provided by the government and such little social and cultural difference. This study first introduces the data of the ‘10 Poms’ returning to Britain. Then, it analyzes why this part of the migrants chose to leave Australia, and finally, in-depth analysis is carried out on the causes of the return of the ‘10 Poms’ returning to Britain.2.0 Main body主体2.1 Data of the ‘10 Poms’ returning to Britain“10个POMS”返回英国的数据在Appleyard，Ray和Segal（1988）的研究中，他们发现20世纪50年代末移居澳大利亚的英国移民的回报率为29%。根据性别和婚姻状况，移民的回报率是不同的。按从低到高的顺序，男性移民澳大利亚后的结婚率为15%；已婚夫妇移民澳大利亚前的结婚率为18%；单身男性为20%；单身女性为37%。虽然联邦提名移民的回报率高于私人提名移民（Appleyard、Ray和Segal，1988年）。Hammerton和Thomson（2005）的研究指出，1959年至1964年间，已婚英国移民的回报率为24%，单身英国移民的回报率超过50%。Hammerton和Thomson（2005）发现，退休英国移民的回报率已经上升。很难计算返回移民的数据，因为这一数字是由移民年龄和移民类型的不同而区分的。”“再移民”也使数据统计更加困难。但肯定的是，“10个奥运会”返回英国的比例应该在25%左右，这仍然属于一个更高的水平。In Appleyard, Ray and Segal’s (1988) study, they showed that the return rate of British migrants who moved to Australia in the late 1950s was 29%. According to gender and marital status, the return rate of immigrants was different. According to the order of the rate from the lower to the higher, the rate of men who married after their immigration to Australia was 15%; the rate of those couples who have married before arriving in Australia was 18%; the rate of single males was 20%; the rate of single women was 37%. While the return rate of federal nominated migrants was higher than that of private nominations (Appleyard, Ray and Segal, 1988). Hammerton and Thomson’s (2005) study pointed out that between 1959 and 1964, the return rate of married British migrants was 24%, while the rate of single British migrants was more than 50%. Hammerton and Thomson (2005) found that the return rate of retired British migrants has risen. It is very difficult to count the data of returning migrants because this figure is differentiated by the difference in age of migrants and the type of migrants. "re-migrants" also make the data statistics more difficult. But certainly the proportion of the ‘10 Poms’ returning to Britain should be about 25%, which still belonged to a higher level.2.2 Reasons for ‘10 Poms’ returning to Britain2.2.1 Policy reasonsIn the past, the long distance between Britain and Australia has largely ensured that most migrants would stay. It is possible to return to the UK as ship transport is gradually replaced by airplane and the increase in personal income. Moreover, the British are open to those who are born in their own country, even in today's circumstances when passport and visa are increasingly strict, people who were born in Britain will meet no obstacle in returning to Britain for settling. In addition, Australia does not impose restrictions on those who want to return to the United Kingdom, but asks if they return to United Kingdom within two years of migration, it is necessary to return the funds received by the assistance (Jupp, 2004).2.2.2 National identityMany migrants, after moving to Australia, always think that they are still British people, they do not think that Australia is their own home. This has also made many people choose to return home after they have settled in Australia for many years. Many of the ‘10 Poms’ grew up in World War II, they had a strong sense of identity for the United Kingdom. This is why they could not always take Australia as their own hometown (Hammerton and Thomson, 2005).2.2.3 Adaptation issuesThinking of their hometown, the past lifestyle and the thoughts of their old friends is also an important reason for why many ‘10 Poms’ returned to Britain. Although the Australian society and the British society at the time had many similarities, but there were still many differences in climate, customs, environment, communication and other aspects, some of the migrants could not adapt to these differences, resulting in their thinking of their hometown, so after years of living in Australia, they still chose to return to the UK (Hammerton and Thomson, 2005).2.2.4 Local public’s attitude towards themPart of the Australian’s resistance and resentment to British migrants was also the reason why the ‘10 Poms’ returned to Britain. Some British migrants were surprised that Australia's official brochure showed that there was need of migrants in Australia, and the reality was that the Australian native's attitude to them was not always very friendly. For example, in the vicinity of the hostels where British migrants lived, there were often Australian locals holding sign of protest towards migrants and shouting some unfriendly slogans (Hammerton and Thomson, 2005). Some local store owners often pretended to misunderstand what British migrants said, they also told the migrants, "If you can not understand, you should go to other places, your migrants should learn English" (Hammerton and Thomson, 2005).2.2.5 Economic and career issuesIn order to settle in Australia, ‘10 Poms’ British migrants tried to find work, because only work allowed they to afford their expenses in the new country, it also allowed them to have more contact with the local people to better integrate into the Australian society. Part of the migrants could find a job more smoothly, some employers have already provided them with a job (Appleyard, 2002; Wills, 2005). Another part of the migrants encountered some twists and turns in the process of looking for work, for instance, some British occupation qualifications could not be accepted by Australian. Another important element of settling in Australia was to have their own housing, which was the dream of most ‘10 Poms’ British migrants. However, due to the shortage of housing in Australia after World War II, this dream was not easy to be achieved. Part of the migrants was through unremitting efforts to finally achieve the goal, while the other part of the migrants could not always have enough money, their dream could not be realized. Not all ‘10 Poms’ British migrants in Australia had successfully settled in this new land, so some of the migrants chose to return to Britain (Hammerton and Thomson, 2005).#p#分页标题#e#2.3 DiscussionIt can be learned from the above analysis that almost a quarter of migrants who emigrated to Australia after 1950 as ‘10 Poms’ returned to Britain, which might cause by the following reasons: policy reasons, adaptation problems, career issues, suffering unfair treatment, national identity and so on. However, it is worth noting that these reasons have deep-seated reasons, the following contents will be from three perspectives: the Australian public, British migrants, Australian migration policy to discuss the causes.2.3.1 Australian public and local awarenessAt the beginning of the war, both the British and the Australians regarded themselves as a member of the British Commonwealth. However, gradually, Australians began to think that they and the British should not have a common destiny, establishment of an independent and non-British consciousness began to form. As Hassam (2005, cited in Sydney Morning Herald, 2013, p.97) figured that native Australians were very sensitive to the British official, visitors’ and settlers’ comments and criticisms. Two weeks after the first settlers arrived in Sydney, Australians began to hear about their complaints about life and working conditions because what the migrants experienced was totally different from what the Australian authorities promised. "Daily Mirror" interviewed a migrant, he said, conditions of the barracks were too bad. The environment they lived was not as good as those during the war. The ‘10 Poms’ British migrants also protested the environment of barracks. According to Hassam (2005, cited in Sydney Morning Herald, 2007, p.81), most of the migrants living in the barracks were the ‘10 Poms’ British immigrants who accepted the Australian aid migration program. In 1962, a man who returned from Australia to Britain wrote to a local newspaper to warn readers that the Australian government's migration propaganda ignored its sharp problems of shortage of housing, widespread unemployment caused by economic landslides, and unsound societies security system (Hammerton and Thomson, 2005). While the mainstream media in Australia condemned British migrants as "Whingeing Pom", they criticized that British migrants enjoyed more favorable treatment than non-British migrants, but they had more complaints. Many Australians believed that it was fortunate for the British migrants to be able to get the Australian government’s migration policy support to move to Australia. Because they could escape from the post-war British poverty, they should thank Australia. Australians believed that British migrants were lucky than those European migrants who were facing great difficulties, they did not know why the British migrants complained so much (Hammerton and Thomson, 2005).The emergence of the term "Whingeing Pom" showed the change of the Australian public's attitude and concept to the British migration. During the short period of time after World War II, the British were admired for their courage in the war. But as time went on, the Australian people found that compared to British migrants, migrants from continental European countries seldom complained. They had no government assistance, no barracks to live, but they worked hard and kept their homes clean and tidy, and these people would be better Australians (Jones, 2006; Hammerton and Thomson, 2005).From the above analysis, it could be seen that Australia's rising local consciousness and some of the public's unfriendly attitude towards British migrants caused some British migrants’ suffering unfair treatment and problems in adapting to the new environment. The Australian government should take measures to guide the public to be more tolerant with the migrants, by taking certain measures to protect the legitimate rights of the migrants.2.3.2 Adaptability of British migrantsBritish migrants have their own unique characteristics. First, they came from a country in which the original economy was more developed, although they suffered war damage and there was a significant decline in their living standards, their requirements for living standards were not low (Hammerton and Thomson, 2005). Second, in the mindset, as citizens of a colonial country, British migrants had a certain sense of superiority, they were happy to accept Australia's special preferential treatment for them. However, after arriving in Australia, they found that there was a big gap between the actual situation in Australia and the situation they envisioned, which made the British migrants with poor ability to adapt to the new environment fail to live in Australia. For example, when the British migrants arrived in Australia to live in the barracks, which were used to resettle the refugees, the environment and health conditions were worse. The ‘10 Poms’ British migrants were not homeless refugees, they all came from the British decent families, so they were very dissatisfied with that (Hammerton and Thomson, 2005). What the ‘10 Poms’ migrants encountered in the Australian society made some British migrants very puzzled, the situation they encountered in Australia was totally different from that the Australian government mentioned in the pamphlets, if the Australians did not like them, why the government encouraged their migration (Hammerton and Thomson, 2005). In 1972, the Australian government cut the scale of aid to migration. At the same time, the government abolished the difference between British migrants and non-British immigrants, all migrants in Australia after three years of migration could get the Australian citizenship. Since then, in the hearts of Australians, British migrants were no longer "hero", but the same "outsiders" as migrants from other countries (Appleyard, 1962; Jones, 2006), this gap also caused a blow on the British migrants’ psychological sense of superiority.‘10 Poms’ British migrants’ failing to adapt to the Australian society and their not smooth development of career were related to they failed to understand the Australian society and their too good expectations for the country. The government should help the British migrants to have a correct understanding of the real situation in Australia and help them to better adapt to the local society.2.3.3 Migration policy of the Australian governmentThe original intension of the Australia's ‘10 Poms’ migration policy was good, they hoped to attract British talents to make up for the domestic demand for labor, from a realistic point of view, this policy to a considerable extent achieved this goal, the British migrants contributed a lot to the development of Australia. However, there are several major shortcomings in this policy that led to that some of the ‘10 Poms’ migrants finally returned to Britain. First, this policy aimed at British migrants, providing a larger concession for British migrants, which attracted a part of the British migrants who were not very competitive or were not very fond of Australia to come to Australia, as this part of people failed to adapt to the environment in Australia or they did not achieve the desired purpose in their career, and finally they returned to the UK (Hammerton and Thomson, 2005; Jones, 2006). Second, Australia's huge concession for the ‘10 Poms’ migrants had sparked dissatisfaction from some of the Australian people for the British migrants, they believed that the British migrants enjoyed Australia's concession and complained about Australia (Hammerton and Thomson, 2005; Appleyard, Ray and Segal, 1988). Finally, the Australian government overestimated the ability of British migrants to adapt to Australia and they did not take more measures to help the migrants to better adapt to the local society. For example, the Australian government should provide real publicity of the situation in Australia rather than exaggerate propaganda to attract migrants (Hammerton and Thomson, 2005; Jupp, 2004).The Australian government should improve the emphasis only on the introduction of British migrants and ignore the policy of helping the British migrants to integrate into local communities. Then, the Australian government should consider guiding the local public to hold a more inclusive attitude towards British migrants to avoid unfair treatment towards British migrants.3.0 ConclusionAlmost a quarter of migrants who emigrated to Australia after 1950 as ‘10 Poms’ returned to Britain, the reasons might lie in the following aspects: policy reasons, adaptation issues, career issues, unfair treatment, national identity issues, etc. Causes of these problems relate to both Australian migration policies and Australian public, there are also problems of British migrants themselves. To solve the problem of excessive migrants’ returning to Britain requires the government to improve immigration policy, to guide the local public to hold a more inclusive attitude towards migrants to help the British migrants to better adapt to the local society.ReferencesAppleyard, R. T., Ray, A. and Segal, A. (1988). The Ten Pound Immigrants. London: Boxtree.Appleyard, R. T. (1962). The Return Movement of United Kingdom Migrants from Australia. Population Studies, 15(3), 214-225.Burnley, I. H. (1978). British Immigration and Settlement in Australian Cities, 1947-1971, International Migration Review, 12(3), 341-358.Hammerton, A. J. and Thomson, A. (2005). Ten Pound Poms: Australia’s Invisible Migrants. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 145-289.Jones, R. (2006). Ten Pound Poms: Australia's Invisible Migrants. Journal of Historical Geography, 32(1), 237-238.Jupp, J. (2004). The English in Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 142.#p#分页标题#e#Hassam, A. (2005). From Heroes to Whingers: Changing Attitudes to British Migrants, 1947 to 1977. Australian Journal of Politics and History, 51(1), 81.Richardson, A. (1963). British Migration to Australia. International Migration, 1(3), 167-174.Richardson, A. (1957). The Assimilation of British Immigrants in Australia. Human Relations, 10, 157.Wills, S. (2005). Passengers of Memory: Constructions of British Immigrants in Post-Imperial Australia. Australian Journal of Politics and History, 51(l), 94-107.