Has Australia spent so long arguing about migration that it has stopped considering what population is for?
Australia is increasingly settling migration policy around an aggregate national number without an equally explicit strategy for the population it needs – one that accounts for its skills, age profile and, critically, its geographic distribution.
The government’s September decision around working holiday visas shows the tension. To receive a second or third working holiday visa, applicants still have to do regional work, but completing that work now only qualifies them to enter a ballot. Second-year places are being capped at 45,000, down from 57,000 in 2025; third-year places will fall dramatically from around 31,000 to 5,000.
The rationale is coherent when considered from the national perspective. As Immigration Minister Tony Burke said when announcing the changes, backpackers contributed to about 48,000 people to Australia’s net overseas migration in 2025. A government seeking to reduce migration cannot exempt every economically useful visa category. Burke said that migration was critical to regional economies, while also arguing it was critical to cities.
True. But migration policy looks fundamentally different depending on where you stand.
In Far North Queensland, working holiday makers are not simply visitors extending their stays in Australia. They form part of the workforce underpinning tourism, hospitality and agriculture. In September, ABC News investigated and reported on Crystalbrook Collection, a hospitality company that operates three five-star hotels as well as restaurants, bars and day spas in Cairns and employs close to 500 people locally. Around 45 percent of them, more than 220 people, are working holiday makers. Agricultural representatives estimate that working holiday makers account for around one-third of 15,000 farm workers across the region.
The changes won’t remove workers overnight, but they do make regional work less attractive. Completing months of specified work no longer provides certainty of another year in Australia. For third-year applicants competing for just 5,000 places nationally, the calculation changes considerably.
Cairns is not Sydney. Darwin is not Melbourne. Karratha is not Brisbane. And the pull towards Australia’s major cities is not confined to working holiday makers. As a mother of four raising my children in northern Australia, I see the same question confronting our young people: what will make them build their lives here rather than leave for the opportunities of a major city? For regional Australia, attracting people is only half the challenge. We also have to give them reasons to stay.
This is why Australia’s migration debate cannot simply be about numbers. Legitimate concerns exist around housing, infrastructure and the pace of population growth. The 2026 Lowy Poll found that 55 percent of Australians believed the number of migrants coming to Australia was too high.
However, reducing migration and designing migration well are not the same policy objective.
Australia is simultaneously confronting historically low fertility, an ageing population and persistent workforce shortages. The government’s 2025 Population Statement projects the fertility rate to fall to a record low of 1.42 children per woman in 2025–26.
Meanwhile, the 2026 Intergenerational Report projects that the proportion of Australians aged 65 and over will rise from around 17 percent in 2022–23 to 23 percent by 2062–63. At the same time, the 2025 Occupation Shortage List found that 29 percent of assessed occupations remained in shortage, including nearly half of trade roles.
These demographic and workforce pressures are not evenly distributed.
Successive governments have identified northern Australia as central to defence posture, critical minerals, energy, food production, supply chains and engagement with the Indo-Pacific. But infrastructure and investment alone do not create capability: people do.
People operate ports, build roads, service defence facilities, run farms, staff hotels, maintain equipment, teach children and provide healthcare. Strong northern communities require functioning local economies and enough people to sustain them.
Australia’s migration system already acknowledges that geography matters. Regional visas, Designated Area Migration Agreements and working holiday maker specified-work requirements all seek to direct people towards places with different labour needs.
Yet the national debate remains overwhelmingly about net overseas migration: whether it is too high, how quickly it should fall and what number the government should target.
A national number cannot tell us whether Australia has the skills it needs, whether strategically important regions have enough workers or whether people are settling where Australia needs capability.
The Regional Australia Institute has called for a national regional population and settlement strategy. This is not an argument for higher migration. Housing supply matters. Infrastructure matters. So does public confidence in the migration system. It is an argument for connecting migration to a broader population strategy that considers skill, ageing, housing, infrastructure, workforce requirements and geography together.
If Australia wants stronger regional communities and a capable north, policy must also consider what will make people choose those places and stay there. That applies to migrants and Australians alike.
The working holiday maker debate in Far North Queensland is about more than backpackers picking fruit or pouring beers. It exposes a larger question about how Australia plans its future. We need to move beyond asking how many people Australia should admit and start asking who Australia needs, where we need them, and why.
About Author
