Report: Inquiry into Multiculturalism in Australia - the cognitive view
The following represents an analysis of a report  that was issued on the 18 March 2013 by the Joint Standing Committee on Migration, from the perspective of the Otoom model. That is to say, it identifies the cognitive structures that constitute the semiotic framework of the report and compares them with their counterparts in society, with an emphasis on Australia.
The analysis does not follow any ideological or party-political directive, although some of the report's findings may well be described as such or some parts of the analysis itself may be found in another context. Since ideologies are created by members of a human activity system, different systems tend to produce different ideologies; yet the fundamentals of systems per se remain the same and they underpin the Otoom model.
Human activity systems follow certain rules which are ultimately determined by the laws of reality. They have been listed under "The 10 axioms of Life"  and "The 10 axioms of Society" .
As soon as such a system displays a dissonance between reality and its manifest behaviour and/or its statements, some form of reinterpretation has taken place and this imposes an additional cost upon its members.
The report contains a number of concepts that jar with the real and as a consequence their implementation has the potential of becoming a burden upon wider society.
The report begins with a definition of the word 'multiculturalism', noting that its meaning has been subject to change throughout the years as well as across various societies. In Australia its current intended meaning is "expressed as existing within the framework of Australian law, with a boundary set by the country's laws". At the same time it is not "a platform for legal pluralism based on religion, culture or ethnicity" .
The definition is restated on several occasions , an indication that the report's authors had been presented with a number of interpretations in the here and now.
If multiculturalism is simply the existence of differing skin colours, dress codes and culinary preferences and nothing more, and if any other cultural ingredients are removed as soon as they overlap the local laws with their own set of priorities and values, the meaning of the concept is rendered so shallow it would hardly give rise to the concerns expressed here and overseas. If that was all, any antagonists would sideline themselves through their obvious narrow-mindedness. However, the concerns go deeper and hence there is a more serious dimension to the concept, resulting in, among other things, an inquiry such as this one.
That the authors saw fit to emphasise that limited scope indicates that in practice the situation is more problematic. Yet the report does not enter into the details which produced the controversy, notwithstanding references to submissions (but not their content ) which expressed themselves along those lines. Therefore, as far as the report's basis is concerned, it has been formulated according to the authors' perception and not what society has to offer.
Mention is made of the Galbally Report dating back to 1978 . They are the "guiding principles" of this report and as such are emphasised here, namely that "...every person should be able to retain his or her culture without prejudice or disadvantage and be encouraged to embrace and understand other cultures" . The manner of wording overlooks the lack of precision in laying down the boundaries referred to above, instead losing itself in self-evident generalisations .
As the Committee Chair, Ms Maria Vamvakinou MP, has remarked, "Australia is a diverse society - it is part of who we are as Australians both in the city and the bush". She then continues by saying that for some European leaders multiculturalism has failed there but in Australia it is "quite different" .
At first glance that seems true, but the error lies in the mixing of semiotic connotations as they pertain to Europe on one hand and to Australia on the other. Europe is a collection not only of nations but also of cultures, evolved through centuries of mutual interaction. Although the word 'society' can be used to refer to a nation, a culture is more than a geographical, even legal entity; often cultures span across more than one society. Australian society, in its relatively short history of two hundred years, has not had the time to define itself more deeply and hence it is indeed different. Its constituents however, derived from so many cultures from around the world, are the parts making up the whole; they are not the whole. Their cultures are alive within them, just as they are in those who entered European nations.
The intent by successive governments to formulate a context uniquely Australian against the background of diverse parts is bound to create a conflict, however explicitly or otherwise that may have been referred to over time. The very existence of the report reflects the issue, and the stated need for a "new policy on multiculturalism" to "ensure the Government's social inclusion agenda"  speaks of the intent to combine diversity with some form of homogeneity.
Since cultures represent human activity systems which have settled into a contemporary state and have survived for centuries if not longer, they demonstrate the non-absolutist nature of behaviour forms. What matters in the end is the aggregate utility of those forms and whether they are able to stand up to a competitor should one present itself. The challenge for societies such as Australia therefore is to navigate between the perceived untouchables of its own identity and the variations on offer. That implies the possibility of change in migrants but also the readiness to change local laws; the latter has not been canvassed in the report.
One way to measure the effects of such a combination is the resultant productivity of the society as a whole. In the view of the report's authors Australia's productivity has increased because of immigration, although no specific statistics are supplied.
Top ten source countries 2011-2012 
The report features a table showing the top ten source countries for the year 2011-2012 . While not conclusive as far as the intake from every country is concerned, the prominence of certain nations in recent times is noteworthy.
Settler arrivals by region of birth for 2000-2001 
By comparison, in the year 2000-2001 Europe, North and South East Asia and Southern Asia were in the top six categories , whereas by 2011-2012 the top five included India, the People's Republic of China, the UK, the Philippines and South Africa. Clearly, the past decade has seen a considerable shift.
Immigrant Participation Rate between 2000-2006 
Figures from the Reserve Bank for the year 2000-2006 indicate that the labour force participation rate for immigrants has been above the national average since they were relatively more concentrated in the prime working-age group; note that the figures mainly relate to those having arrived under the Skills Stream programme .
One major component of the measurement of productivity is the gross domestic product per capita over the years. A study by Kitov and Kitov has come to the following conclusion: "We have addressed the most important question of real economic growth as related to the long term behaviour of real GDP per capita. The expectation of exponential growth is not supported by the whole set of observations and estimates as presented by the measured real GDP per capita since 1950 and the reconstructed time series before 1940. In both time intervals, the biggest developed economies have annual increments with small positive and negative slopes statistically not distinguishable from zero (except the case of Australia after 1950). This implies that the growth in real GDP per capita is linear in the long run." 
"The annual increment of real GDP per capita (in 1990 US dollars) as a function of real GDP per capita in Australia for the period between 1950 and 2011. The regression (red) line slope is $0.016 per dollar and the mean increment is $303. For the period between 1951 and 2007, the regression (black) line has a larger slope of $0.024 per dollar." Kitov and Kitov 
Although the real GDP per capita trends towards a zero slope in the countries surveyed, Australia is an exception. As the authors note, "...our prediction from 2006 that, in the long run, the regression line should be horizontal was valid and the slope has been falling since 2003. We expect the regression line approaching the zero line in the future. As we foresaw six years ago, the healthy growth of the 1990s and the early 2000s has been compensated by a significant fall in GDP." 
It is interesting to posit the marked change in the composition of immigrants against the GDP per capita trends during the coinciding years. Whereas usually the increase in GDP per capita remained steady against the rise in GDP itself combined with increases in population numbers, for Australia the situation is different. It seems that the notion of heightened productivity due to immigration overall is somewhat superficial once the finer details of the relationship are taken into account.
There is more to an economy than a couple of tables suggest. The report is quite correct when it acknowledges the need for further research. However, the kind of statistics which would provide the desired detail are difficult to compile. While there are the data derived from often painstaking surveys, privacy concerns prevent the degree of disclosure at a similar level of accuracy (at the same time, the precision of a survey depends on the correct choice of sample space). Instead, what enters the public domain is an aggregate version that tends to cover the broad canvas. In the end the general observer has to make do with a considerable degree of coarseness, and any further detail must be gleaned through more or less indirect circumscriptions.
Comparisons need to be treated with care. As the authors themselves note, "With almost two consecutive decades of economic growth, Australia's ongoing commitment to world trade liberalisation has led to the emergence of a competitive and innovative national export base. The Department of Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade (DFAT) notes that as a result of nearly three decades of structural and policy reforms, the Australian economy is flexible, resilient and increasingly integrated with global and regional markets." 
Under the auspices of globalisation, as well as technology and communication cross-fertilisation, many other countries have undergone similar changes towards openness and increased output, some of which are not immigrant nations at all (China and Myanmar come to mind as well as the 'Asian tigers').
The common denominator appears to be the characteristics of the demographics, whether pre-existent or contributed to by migration.
On many occasions the report makes reference to negative perceptions in the wider community. Some have found their way into the submissions, quite apart from the experiences recounted by migrants who had to deal with them face to face.
The word 'stereotyping' has acquired a negative connotation in its own right. From a cognitive point of view the phenomenon has evolved as a direct result of the pattern-seeking property of the mind. Without it we would not have survived as a species. We employ it every time we cross a road with care, because we know that to make contact with a moving car is injurious to one's health. This knowledge is not based on an ongoing analysis of each and every car we are about to encounter - we stereotype from information learned in the past.
To put this into the current context, our conception of people is based on the incoming stream of data via the media, tales from our social circles and from personal experience and travels. The more extreme a behaviour, the more likely it is to assume prominence within the wider realm of one's memory; hence the sum total of experience matters. As someone remarked, "not all Muslims are terrorists, but just about every terrorist is a Muslim". Add the constancy of negative reportage from places like Africa and the Middle East and it is no wonder certain generalisations emerge.
However presumptuous these perceptions may be in the end, they circulate through the wider community in the absence of any circuit breaker.
A tendency to chunk various attitudes that are deemed undesirable by regulatory officialdom into a single 'racism' basket results in the loss of functional detail which otherwise would allow for a more productive differentiation.
One such variance has been pointed out by the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils, referred to by the report as the "cyclic expression of racism towards new arrivals since 9/11": "...Members of diverse communities including the Sudanese, Greek, Turkish, Vietnamese, Arabic communities etc have often described the racism and intolerance they experienced as 'something that happens at first' and then is passed on to another newly arrived community, thus removing the pressure off the first community. This description is almost as though racism and intolerance expressed by fellow citizens is part of an initiation process." .
Actually, it may well be. Insisting on any negative behaviour as being an example of racism blinds the target of such behaviour to a possibility which would just as naturally be perceived as common under a different label. As can be observed - and personally experienced - in the case of arriving in a new school, finding yourself as a fresh recruit in the armed forces, or in any social environment that offers the prospect of close belonging, there exists an initial phase of some form of adversarial treatment which has the purpose of testing the newcomer. There is no malice in the personal sense; everyone gets it. The response by the recipient serves to categorise him or her as a particular type of person, to be judged and accepted as such from then onwards. On the larger scale of society the phenomenon is similar, except now in relation to the community as a whole.
In both cases such treatment will pass, as has been observed here. On the smaller scale the next arrival will cause the current focus to cease almost immediately, to be passed on down the line. Just as it happens with each new wave of immigrants.
A statement from the report seems to confirm this: "While Australia's cultural and religious diversity increased during the 2001-2006 census period and since, Scanlon research for 2012 has found that survey respondents almost unanimously expressed a strong sense of belonging to, and take great pride in, the Australian way of life (95 and 90 per cent respectively)" . The initial ribbing does make for cohesion in the end, whether in boarding school or in society in general.
Furthermore, the report's view about the above statement by the Federation appears contradictory. If what has been sheeted home to racism is indeed passed on to the various communities then the date of 9/11 would be largely irrelevant; no-one linked the New York terrorist attacks to the Greeks, Turks or Vietnamese. At worst some form of stereotyping took place with regards to Muslims and the rest could well have experienced an assimilatory testing.
One point missed completely is the local tendency for colourful language. Newcomers need some time to get used to the fact that words which anywhere else are an insult and nothing less can often be a term of endearment here. At times this is explained, but if the person spoken to interprets it as a personal attack their mind finds it that much harder to understand the situation. Combine such inexperience with the unfortunate readiness to use the label 'racist' and a vicious cycle begins.
Knowing how to speak the local language is crucial to one's status in life. Even professional skills that cannot be communicated properly are effectively non-existent. In acknowledging this the report mentions programmes designed to teach English.
In line with the general ambience of sanctioned attitudes in society the report adopts a one-size-fits-all approach to measures that eventually will include a variety of intellects, backgrounds and emotional states. The provision for English classes is one example. The report notes, "Job Prospects also found that many CALD [Culturally and Linguistically Diverse] job seekers have completed the AMEP [Adult Migrant English Program] without being able to effectively read, speak or write in English" .
In other words, some migrants are able to learn the new language within a reasonable time frame, but there are others who clearly aren't. Generally speaking, the recommendations in the report advocate an increased effort in areas that demonstrated an insufficient outcome. The authors do not mention the possibility that either more money could be wasted in some cases, or the selection of the candidates could be changed to begin with. Since budgets are limited in any case, the resultant feedback process creates the presumption that entire migrant groups warrant low expectations.
The use of language goes further. No workplace environment (let alone the wider community) exists without its social dimension. To be limited to basics and not being able to contribute to the 'colour' of a conversation quickly leads to a frustrating tedium where neither side is served. In particular the higher levels of repartee do require a flexibility and sensitivity to timbre only a certain familiarity with the language can furnish. Remove that and the conversation descends to the virtual level of a child.
As far as skills are concerned, "The Committee found that skilled refugee and humanitarian entrants are faced with significant barriers in attempting to participate in the Australian workforce. As with skilled migrants, the process of having their overseas qualifications recognised can be very difficult." 
A case study recounts the experience of a graduate from a dentistry school in Baghdad who eventually found work with the Arab Dental Federation in Amman. When trying to have his academic qualifications recognised here he received insufficient marks in the occupational English test. He also had little understanding of the Australian work culture.
Based on such cases the report recommends that the Australian Government "develop a process to periodically review and formally receive feedback on Australia's skills recognition framework including inviting post skills recognition feedback" .
It is not clear what exactly that means. The overall tone of the report would suggest the intent to assimilate overseas standards into the local framework if they are found wanting at the moment. Since having dentists for example who cannot understand their patients constitutes a serious matter (I would think), some clarification in the text would have been welcome.
As mentioned, a notable absence of a negativity's source is a common feature of this report. Although the insistence on local certification can be a matter of bureaucratic intransigence, it is no secret that many countries lack sometimes elementary standards. Their general level can already be inferred from a list of countries in terms of average life expectancy, infant mortality and literacy . Such a state of affairs invites responses. For example, in the European Union a number of airlines have been banned from its airspace due to safety concerns. Of all the 25 countries listed, 17 are in Africa .
By the same token, in some nations measures are in place which in Australia still fight for acceptance. In the wake of a recent accident in Brisbane that involved a train running into a building the investigation has come to the conclusion that 'sanding' (the dropping of sand onto the tracks in front of the wheels) would have prevented the damage . Well, sanding was used by the trams of Vienna as early as the 1950s.
Since the majority of migrants arrive under the Skills Stream programme and can therefore be considered professionals, the Government's social inclusion policy appears quite patronising under the one-size-fits-all umbrella. Categories such as the homeless, indigenous Australians and people living with mental illness or disability are not necessarily those a newly arrived professional would want to be identified with. Despite those groups having the highest priority, the report does not make it clear to what extent any migrant would be seen as a potential candidate. If they are, those programs would not be attractive to many.
What would have more resonance with an accomplished musician, the Sydney Opera House ,
or a performance by Didgeridoo players ?
The lack of differentiation identified above leads to a confusing labyrinth of incongruent connotations once over-arching labels like 'racism' are drawn into the picture. The report applauds the widening scope of Australia's immigration programme against the previous attention given to mostly European sources. The result is an Orwellian doublespeak: if I am in favour of immigrants coming from Europe, a continent arguably representative of the most advanced synthesis of sophistication and tolerance today, I risk being labeled a racist; if, on the other hand, I support the current intake from Africa and the Middle East, demographics that are one of the worst examples in terms of conservatism and intolerance, I am seen as open-minded and liberal.
Searching for one's identity as a nation while at the same time importing cultures from around the world, many of which are quite different from one another, leads to a mishmash of concepts when often conflicting ideas are being forced together. The words themselves become effectively meaningless.
Sure enough, the Government's Social Inclusion Agenda, as represented by the report, contains the kind of weasel words Don Watson found reason to complain about .
The Australian Social Inclusion Board's aim, "...[to engage] with the community, business, the not-for-profit sector, academics, advisory groups and all levels of government to connect better policy with the knowledge and experience of the research, business and community sectors" , has a sufficient sweep of foci which produced the following recommendation, equally global in its gathering of people and intents: "The Committee recommends that a strategic research partnership be investigated between the Social Inclusion Board and an independent research institute specialising in multicultural affairs, for the better collection and collation of data to inform the process of ensuring the inclusion of multicultural issues in the Social Inclusion Agenda" .
It certainly sounds inclusive! Not surprisingly, Mr Paul Ronalds from the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet recognised that the sheer breadth of the Social Inclusion Agenda is a challenge .
One wonders what the poor manager from some department would make from such a brief, now tasked to walk out the door and getting down to work. If the life cycle of bureaucracies is anything to go by the exercise would very quickly result in a never-ending expansion of sections and letterheads.
Part of the disconnect of official policies with broader society comes from the somewhat curious agitation by groups one could loosely circumscribe under the banner of 'human rights advocates'. Curious because during the past decades we have come a certain way towards achieving tolerance towards such issues as gay rights, cohabitation arrangements, topless bathing, indeed nudism, the personal choice of dress, hair style and general life style overall, and the rights of women and children (but only a certain way: I've heard tourists referring to Queensland as "Verbotenland"). None of these enjoy the same relaxed attitudes in the home countries of the immigrant demographics which are the focus of such groups. One would be justified in asking why we should roll back the advances gained. None of those issues have been raised in the report except for some extreme forms such as domestic violence and genital mutilation.
Given that other nations have achieved much more in that regard (think of gay marriage, voluntary euthanasia, illegal drugs) and considering that politicians here have shown particular disdain towards those matters, could it be that our decision makers are personally too weak to speak out against all that sinful waywardness and instead act by proxy through populating our society with traditional conservatism once again?
Any action needs resources; in one form or another that comes down to money.
Every one of the report's 32 recommendations requires additional funds; an existing activity is either to be expanded or a new activity is called for . None represent a substitution, a removal of an activity already taking place and now being replaced. It is also worth noting that the Coalition members of that inquiry (the current federal government is Labor) agreed with all the recommendations except for six of them, citing extra funds as a concern (ie, items 3, 14, 15, 17, 19, 32) .
Idealism notwithstanding, a system needs resources to function but at the same time is also subject to limitations related to the former's availability, the degree of adding value, and their appropriate placement within the system's framework. In other words, it is a matter of sustainability.
In the case of human activity systems it is the quality of their members which define their ultimate status. Policies which seek to improve the latter's quality attract a cost which is justifiable if the returns are able to compensate for the initial outlay.
Nations like Australia face an ongoing trend of ageing populations. So much so that preparing society for the future when the tax-paying population is seriously thinning out already impacts on current budget allocations. One example relates to the move in age pension eligibility . At the moment the year at which a person qualifies for the age pension has been raised to 67 for all those born after 1 January 1957.
Australia's change in age distribution, 1901 vs. 1999. 
Considering the dramatic change in the population pyramid across the decades the tax-paying sector is becoming smaller and smaller. Young blood can be made 'in-house', it can be imported, but in any case, numbers can't be raised indefinitely. Raising numbers belongs to the short term; the medium term would be across the board up-skilling; and in the long term we would most likely have to look in the direction of transhumanism . Every option faces its own challenges.
The report's recommendations mostly entail a grouping of people who need the most assistance. They do not enter the question of whether the money being spent can be recouped from a contingent that may not be as productive as the rest.
The smartest investment we can make. 
At the other end of the spectrum Universities Australia champions the "smartest investment we can make", and cites statistics that show Australia currently produces 3% of scientific output with 0.3% of the population . This kind of investment also costs money which competes with many of the report's proposals directed towards under-performing individuals.
Other nations are not squeamish in facing the issue head-on. In China for instance the drive towards increasing the intelligence of its population has put it at the forefront of such research . Australia faces serious competition.
The factors and their influences related to systems apply to any society because they all are human activity systems and are therefore subject to the rules of life.
Clearly, a considerable amount of work has gone into the report; its 292 pages contain a lot of information. It can be assumed therefore that whatever its authors wanted to convey had been included.
In addressing the issue of multiculturalism the report couches its aspects in a format that steers the reader away from many of the factors which were instrumental in producing the problematic nature of the concept in the first place. These factors do make up the fabric of our society, and one way or another they have to be dealt with.
There may have been misrepresentations in the press but the general media also include direct reporting on upheavals in so many trouble spots around the world, particularly in Africa and the Middle East. Not surprisingly, people concerned about multiculturalism tend to concentrate on those very demographics. In the absence of an explicitly defined immigration policy that proactively addresses the potential of these very behaviour forms which are brought into our homes virtually every day, one cannot blame the general population for making the link between what evidently happens overseas and what could happen here.
If certain immigrants come from countries which are in constant need of foreign aid or some other type of intervention because of their failed society, it is a legitimate question to ask whether the members of those demographics will be more successful once they are in Australia, especially since settling in a new country is acknowledged as being challenging in any case.
The semiotic environment surrounding efforts such as this report labours under a dichotomy: on one hand we have the analysts restricted to the broad sweep of composite redescriptions lacking the informative detail, and on the other there are the more or less anecdotal accounts which are forced to exist in a professional wilderness. Yet it is this very constituency that deals with the decisions coming from on high and which has to negotiate their effects on the ground.
Official pronouncements, pressed into the service of sweeping generalisations, result in doublespeak once their actual meaning is drawn into the wider reality. While the governmental processes creating them may be obtuse for the average citizen, on the ground level those ideas become visible and are being challenged. Simplistic denunciations do not clarify the situation.
Lowering a society's standards has insidious side effects. In order to solve a problem the mind must be capable of thinking above the abstractive level of the problem, hence lowering the overall standard makes for fewer and fewer individuals of that calibre.
Ideas, concepts and policies which are out of sync with reality have the tendency to create problems as soon as they get to the implementation stage. Once there the negative side effects become rather difficult to untangle. At the scale of society they impose a cost upon everybody.
1. Inquiry into Migration and Multiculturalism in Australia, Joint Standing Committee on Migration, The Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, March 2013, accessed on internet 26 March 2013, http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House_of_Representatives_Committees?url=mig/multiculturalism/report.htm
2. M. Wurzinger, The 10 axioms of Life, 24 June 2011, http://otoomblog.blogspot.com/2011/06/10-axioms-of-life.html
3. M. Wurzinger, The 10 axioms of Society, 30 June 2011, http://otoomblog.blogspot.com/2011/06/10-axioms-of-society.html
4. Report, p. ix.
5. for example, Report, p. xxii.
6. Report, p. 222.
7. Report, p. 9.
8. Report, p. 21.
9. Report, p. 18.
10. Report, p. 2.
11. Report, p. 2.
12. Report, p. 12.
13. Fact Sheet 2 - Key Facts about Immigration, National Communications Branch, Department of Immigration and Citizenship, Canberra, June 2012, accessed on internet 30 March 2013, http://www.immi.gov.au/media/fact-sheets/02key.htm#c
14. W. Hsieh, M. Kohler, Immigration and Labour Supply, Reserve Bank Bulletin, Reserve Bank of Australia, Sydney, September 2007, accessed on internet 30 March 2013, http://www.rba.gov.au/publications/bulletin/2007/sep/2.html
15. I. Kitov, O. Kitov, Real GDP per capita since 1870, Munich Personal RePEc Archive, Munich, 25 May 2012, p. 29, accessed on internet 30 March 2013, http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/39021/1/MPRA_paper_39021.pdf
16. ibid, p. 9.
17. ibid, p. 9.
18. Report, p. 169.
19. Report, p. 40.
20. Report, p. 58.
21. Pommy Bastards Mini Button, Cafe Press, 2013, accessed on internet 31 March 2013, http://www.cafepress.com/+pommy_bastards_mini_button,434196814
22. Report, p. 198.
23. Report, p. 185.
24. Report, p. 187.
25. M. Wurzinger, Demographic orientations, http://www.otoom.net/demographicorientations.htm
26. List of air carriers banned in the European Union, Wikipedia, 4 December 2012, accessed on internet 31 March 2013, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_air_carriers_banned_in_the_European_Union
27. R. Ironside, Trains require costly sand fix, Courier Mail, Brisbane, 28 March 2013.
28. Michiel2005, Old tram in Vienna, flickr, August 2005, accessed on internet 31 March 2013, http://www.flickr.com/photos/govert1970/60968017/
29. Accommodation Near Sydney Opera House, accommodationnearsydneyoperahouse.com, accessed on internet 31 March 2013, http://accommodationnearsydneyoperahouse.com/
30. AFP, Aborigines were first explorers, Sun Express, Fethiye, Turkey, March 2011, accessed on internet 31 March 2013, http://www.sunexpressnews.com/aborigines-were-first-explorers
31. Weasel Words, weaselwords.com.au, accessed on internet 1 April 2013, http://www.weaselwords.com.au/index.htm
32. Report, p. 88.
33. Report, p. 101.
34. Report, p. 97.
35. Report, throughout.
36. Report, p. 217.
37. A century of population change in Australia, Year Book of Australia 2001, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra, 26 January 2001, accessed on internet 30 March 2013, http://www.abs.gov.au/Ausstats/abs@.nsf/0/0b82c2f2654c3694ca2569de002139d9
38. Eligibility for Age Pension, Australian Government - Department of Human Services, Canberra, 29 June 2012, accessed on internet 26 November 2012, http://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/enablers/centrelink/age-pension/eligibility-for-age-pension
39. Transhumanism, Wikipedia, 26 March 2013, accessed on internet 1 April 2013, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism
40. Universities Australia, The smartest investment we can make, Courier Mail, Brisbane, 30 March 2013.
41. S. Wade, Inside China's Genome Factory, China Digital Times, US, 15 February 2013, accessed on internet 21 March 2013, http://chinadigitaltimes.net/2013/02/inside-chinas-genome-factory/
2 Apr 2013