Australia’s Race Discrimination Commissioner, Giridharan Sivaraman, issued a stark warning on 26 August 2025, saying that anti-migration rhetoric is distracting the country from the real causes of inequality and risking a rise in racism. His intervention comes amid a heated public debate and surging social media activity on migration, with nationwide anti-migration rallies planned for this weekend. He urged leaders and media outlets to keep the conversation respectful and fact-based, not driven by fear or anger.
“Inaccurate and dehumanising rhetoric over migration risks fanning the flames of racism, and distracts from the real causes of inequality,” Sivaraman said, calling out how parts of the conversation—especially online—have turned “explicitly racist.” He warned that people from migrant and multicultural communities are feeling rising anxiety and fear, and he asked the public to consider how words used in political debates affect families, children, and everyday life.
The Commissioner stressed that economic inequality, housing stress, and job insecurity are real and urgent challenges, including for people from migrant backgrounds. But he argued that turning migrants into scapegoats will not fix these problems. “We need genuine solutions,” he said, “not dangerous, exploitative anti-migrant rhetoric.” He also highlighted migration’s long-term positive role in Australia, pointing to the economic growth, skills, ideas, and energy migrants bring. “Half of us have a parent born overseas,” Sivaraman noted, underscoring how deeply migration is woven into Australia’s story.
He cautioned that dehumanising language “risks undermining the values that bind us” and urged a return to respectful discussion of migration policy. This includes speaking about data with care, acknowledging what we know and what we don’t, and avoiding claims that overstate migration’s link to housing prices or wages without context. Sivaraman repeated this message in a National Press Club address, reinforcing his appeal for a thoughtful, solutions-focused debate.
Commissioner’s warning and immediate context
At the center of the Commissioner’s call is the National Anti-Racism Framework, delivered to Parliament in November 2024 with 63 recommendations for systemic change across institutions, workplaces, and communities. He described racism toward migrants as a “symptom of flaws in our systems and institutions,” and pressed the government to adopt and fund the framework.
The document proposes a whole-of-society approach, including:
– Clearer standards and better accountability
– Improved reporting mechanisms for incidents of racial abuse
– Stronger education initiatives about inclusion and rights
– Practical tools to help communities respond to discrimination
Sivaraman singled out misreporting of migration numbers and the repeated claim that migration alone is driving housing stress. He said oversimplification spreads fast online, where posts can “go viral” before facts are checked. He urged public figures and media outlets to avoid headlines or commentary that inflame tensions, especially when:
– numbers are taken out of context, or
– different migration measures are mixed together (temporary flows, permanent intake, net change, etc.)
The Commissioner also affirmed the right to peaceful protest, including the rallies planned for the coming weekend, while drawing a clear line: this right “must never come at the cost of vilification or hate.” He called on rally organizers and attendees to reject slurs, threats, or any speech that targets people because of their background. He similarly urged counter-protesters to keep gatherings peaceful and to avoid confrontations that could escalate into harm.
Migrant and multicultural communities are watching closely. Community workers report rising anxiety about everyday interactions—on public transport, in schools, and at work. Parents fear bullying and exclusion; public-facing workers report more tense exchanges. These are the human costs of a debate that many feel has shifted from policy to identity, and from numbers to blame.
The Australian Human Rights Commission is backing the Commissioner’s push. The Commission has media contacts in place and provides resources on racism and discrimination, including how to report incidents and where to seek help. For official information and updates, readers can visit the exact Commission site: https://humanrights.gov.au. The Commission’s material explains the National Anti-Racism Framework, why it was developed, and how its recommendations could be implemented across government and civil society.
There has been no official government response to the Commissioner’s latest statement as of 28 August 2025. Policy watchers expect the government’s stance on the framework—and on the broader migration discussion—to become clearer in the coming weeks. The critical question is whether Parliament will:
1. adopt and fund the framework in full,
2. adopt parts of it, or
3. leave it pending during a noisy political season.
Policy stakes and community impact
Sivaraman’s statement sets out a simple message: anti-migration narratives may feel like easy answers, but they don’t help people facing inequality, higher rents, or unstable work. He urged a shift toward policies that tackle these problems directly.
Near-term implications based on his remarks and Commission guidance include:
– National Anti-Racism Framework: Full adoption and funding of the framework’s 63 recommendations to address systemic roots of racism rather than blaming communities.
– Public debate standards: Calls for media and social platforms to avoid exaggeration about migration, correct errors quickly, and resist linking migration to housing and wages without evidence.
– Community safety: Requests that protesters and counter-protesters protect peaceful assembly while rejecting vilification and hate.
– Institutional responsibility: Updates to policies, training, and accountability in schools, workplaces, and public services.
Australia’s migration story is long and complex. Many families have deep local roots; many others are first- or second-generation Australians. Communities blend languages, faiths, and cultures. In this context, rhetoric that labels migrants as a cause of economic pain can hit hard, especially when families are struggling to pay bills, keep a roof over their heads, and send their kids to school. Sivaraman recognises that strain—and argues strongly that the answer lies in policy, not prejudice.
He also addressed how data can be used and misused. Migration is measured in different ways—temporary flows, permanent intake, net change, and more. When these figures are mixed up or cherry-picked, people can draw the wrong conclusions. He urged broadcasters, publishers, and influencers to take special care with charts, captions, and headlines, so Australians hear clear explanations rather than scare stories. That is especially important now, when tensions are high and trust in institutions is being tested.
For readers seeking verified information:
– VisaVerge.com, which covers immigration policy worldwide, encourages cross-checking claims with official releases and focusing on context when interpreting migration numbers.
– The Commissioner’s appeal for careful, respectful debate mirrors that approach.
Sivaraman’s defence of peaceful protest, alongside his strong stance against hate, sets expectations for the weekend’s events. Police, local councils, and organisers will face pressure to ensure safety and to keep messages within the law. Community leaders are likely to attend to support peaceful expression and protect vulnerable groups who may feel targeted by loud anti-migration messages.
For parents and teachers, the hope is that calm public leadership now will reduce stress for children who may hear harsh words at school next week. Media organisations are also under scrutiny: irresponsible coverage can inflame division, so editors are urged to:
– avoid framing that pits groups against each other,
– consult subject-matter experts on complex economic trends, and
– consider the human cost before publishing.
Social platforms, meanwhile, will face questions about how quickly they remove hate and whether their systems amplify extreme content.
What government adoption of the framework could mean
If the government adopts and funds the National Anti-Racism Framework, practical steps could include:
– new training in public services,
– better reporting tools for discrimination,
– school resources on respect and inclusion,
– faster remedies when people are targeted because of their background.
Community advocates say these measures would make a real difference in daily life, especially during periods when migration is central to politics.
For now, the Commissioner’s message is a call to refocus. He asked the country to look at inequality directly—housing affordability, fair pay, secure work—and to resist shortcuts that blame neighbours, classmates, or coworkers who arrived from somewhere else. “Respectful discussion of migration policy” is the path he laid out; whether leaders choose it in the weeks ahead will shape both policy outcomes and the tone of national life.
This Article in a Nutshell
On 26 August 2025, Race Discrimination Commissioner Giridharan Sivaraman warned that anti-migration rhetoric is fueling racism and distracting attention from structural problems like economic inequality, housing stress and job insecurity. He urged leaders, media and social platforms to use facts and context—especially when reporting migration figures—and called for respectful debate ahead of planned anti-migration rallies. Central to his appeal is the National Anti-Racism Framework, delivered to Parliament in November 2024 with 63 recommendations to strengthen standards, reporting, education and community responses. Sivaraman affirmed the right to peaceful protest but insisted it must not enable vilification. He pressed the government to adopt and fund the framework, asked institutions to improve accountability and training, and warned that scapegoating migrants will not solve underlying policy challenges.
