The government has finalised its citizenship test – which will include 30 multichoice questions on “Australian values”, drawn from a bank of 200. Apparently one “value” to be examined will be that of “mateship” and another is “having a go”, according to Howard on ABC News tonight. As I’ve previously remarked, the government itself would probably fail a test on the core Australian value of “equality between men and women”.
Turn over the fold for a sample question. Do feel free to compose your own (in English of course). If you feel like having a go, that is, mate…
Elsewhere: More commentary from Blogocracy, Andrew Bartlett and Catallaxy. Update: And from No Right Turn over in Kiwiland.
Is the government’s commitment to gender equality
(a) demonstrated by having Lara Bingle prominently featured in government sponsored advertising;
(b) a barbeque stopper;
(c) demonstrated by Amanda Vanstone being as heartless a minister as Phillip Ruddock;
(d) all about TEH BURQAS;
(e) all of the above.
Totally unsurprisingly, we once more follow the USA with this further flexing of the nazi muscle.
has anyone actually seen the test that everyone is talking about? i would love to read it.
adam
I would have thought moving to another country and wanting to become a citizen was the ne plus ultra of ‘having a go’.
I’ve got a friend who’s taught his toddler to pat him on the back when he says “good one mate” – maybe this was the effect they were looking for.
Do Australian values include manly good looks and tight abs?
Have permanent residents stopped beating their wives yet?
That’s our core value is it? We come up with a synonym for friendship, claim that its unique, and then force immigrants to answer questions about it.
I propose a genuinely grassroots “are you an real bloody ken oath Aussie at heart” challenge. And like any good test where the answers really don’t fucking matter in the long run, it’s multiple choice.
The Australian National Anthem is:
a) Advance Australia Fair;
b) Waltzing Matilda;
c) Friday On My Mind; or
d) Better The Devil You Know.
Australia’s sense of self worth is geographically located in:
a) the Eureka Stockade;
b) Uluru;
c) the Macquarie Bank boardroom; or
d) the MCG
Great Australians are world famous for:
a) brillant medical stuff;
b) state of art drag queen acts;
c) sport – and swimming, cricket and tennis too; or
d) shit-hot popular and cult rock and pop
When first encountering an Australian, do you say:
a) my shout?
b) your shout?
c) whose shout now?
d) I hear that when a Ford Territory pulls a Porsche Cayenne out of a sloppy patch on the Daintree Road, it sounds remarkably like the kinda wet fart you may generate after a big Thai red curry dinner accompanied by an indifferent Green Point Brut sparkling wine
Name four great Australians who aren’t one of the following:
Don Laver, Dame Dundee, Kylie Norman or Crocodile Cave.
The transcendental drug of choice for most Australians is:
a) booze;
b) illegal;
c) uneasy self-esteem; or
d) most of the above
The supreme political leader of Australia is generally referred to in public as:
a) the Exalted Jewel in the Navel of the Great Elephant who is a River to his People;
b) that cunning little desiccated prick;
c) the Prime Minister; or
d) who cares? They’re all right conniving ratbags once they get to Canberra
Australia’s national animal is:
a) the dull but surprisingly tasty kangaroo;
b) the wombat, which eats roots and leaves;
c) the grumpy, sleepy, weak-bladdered, stoned and frequently psychotic koala; or
d) the larger often spotted hoon
Australia’s national drink is:
a) b**r;
b) abundant cheap wine;
c) B****y R*m: or
d) water, once we run out of it
When meeting an elected representative of what could possibly be your new homeland, should you:
a) kneel and knock your head three times on the ground;
b) sign anything he or she offers and don’t ask questions or declare the cash payments;
c) point out the local council is a bunch of time-serving self-obsessed toadspawn and you could do much much better once you had a decent party machine behind you; or
d) shudder and back away slowly and carefully while trying to avoid eye contact?
When asked to answer questionnaires about why Australia’s door bitches should let you through ,do you:
a) steadily work through the questions on a pattern recognition basis, answering to the best of your ability;
b) explain you’re a skilled and very wealthy migrant who has an overwhelming urge to donate to the major political parties that do so much to make Australia the vibrant democracy that it is;
c) do anything you think can with any document thrust at you while hoping like buggery someone, anyone, in this weird but apparently peaceful country will count and assess the number of ticks so you won’t be sent back to the fucking awful place where your wife was blown into bloody shreds while shopping at the local market for your daughter’s 5th birthday present. At least those gruff but strangely shy Aussie airport security people let her hold onto that battered birthday present and gave her an macadamia and apricot power bar to chew on while Daddy was taken off for a strip search and a serious grilling; or
d) just dream about making up your own questionnaire.
/\ Lol
‘Having a go’? And to think I’d always thought it was ‘Giving people a fair go’. Silly old me, eh?
Nabs, that was hysterical.
The irony is that right after we tell them that it is an important Australian value to “Have a go”, we’ll then expect them to speak English properly.
“If you wanna be an Aussie… you’ve gotta learn to verb a verb!”
Sorry… the pedant in me is obviously dominant at exactly 3:47 AM
Why does the left always focus on the negative Australian stereotypes? I for one think there are some positive aspects of Australian life/values. (sure, some need fine tuning, but overall I think they are good)
Mateship – social capital, eight hour work days, trade unionism, and positive masculinity (especially when you are living in an era when multinationals are trying to turning men into metrosexuals to sell products)
Egalitarianism – much needed when the gap between rich and poor is increasing, as more and more Australians aspire to live American lifestyles, as less and less Australians are willing to knock tall poppies
Fair go – education and healthcare for all, not just for those who can afford it. Consumer rights. Women’s RIghts. Gay Rights. Better treatment of refugees.
If Barry becomes Bazza and McKenzie become Macca please Australianise Apu Nahasapeemapetilon.
Nabakov, that was brilliant
Pavlov’s Cat:
Thanks for pointing that out. It appears that Howard is not averse to reworking ‘Aussie values’ that don’t suit his agenda. All my life, I’ve heard about giving people ‘a fair go’ but nothing about ‘having a go’. It sounds like some sort of aspirational claptrap a la the winners and losers discourses satirised in Little Miss Sunshine (and transgressively reinscribed)
Shaun: Aussie Apu Nahasapeemapetilon=”Apu the cricket nut”.
Bob: very funny
In fact the more I think about it, the most common context I can think of for the term ‘having a go’ is in belligerent situations where one bloke challenges another ‘have a go, ya mug’
I’ve assessed some federal politicians against mandated “Aussie values” here.
I think the fact that the ‘left wingers” (or should that be left whingers) have never heard of the term ‘having a go’ says quite a lot. They want it all handed to them on a plate.
“Totally unsurprisingly, we once more follow the USA with this further flexing of the nazi muscle.”
And of course, Nazi Canada, Nazi Britain, Nazi Netherlands, Nazi UK, Nazi Switzerland not to mention Nazi Germany, of course, all of whom also have citizenship tests.
I don’t have any problems with the principle of enshrining civic values in citizenship application evaluation. We could argue endlessly about the detail of them but what is the problem with getting aspirant citizens to attest to, say, acceptance of tolerance for – and legal protection of – gay men and lesbians? In a huge number of jurisdictions from whence migrants come, that doesn’t exist and I think it is a feature of our national fabric worth stressing.
I for one did not say I’d never heard of ‘Have a go’, BeeF, you well-named poppet, you. I’ve heard of ‘Have a go’ all right — mainly from weedy little urgers trying to get other men to fight. Sound like anyone we know?
While having a go is not a quintessential Aussie value (as opposed to giving peple a fair go), having a go is certainly a Howard gov’t value. From the very start they’ve been having a go at aborigines, single mums, the poor, gays and lesbians, the unemployed, immigrants, refugees and asylum seekers, the ABC, higher education, school teachers, workers, Iraq, the list goes on. Yep, have a go Howard, alright
No problem, “with getting aspirant citizens to attest to, say, acceptance of tolerance for – and legal protection of – gay men and lesbians?”, Geoff.
Howard and Co would unfortunately never allow any questions concerning this issue. Even basic tolerance of homosexuality is not something they want to make a big deal about, themselves. They are intolerant of gay marriage and are scared of bible bashers on these matters generally.
Are you expecting prospective immigrants to be more progressive in their idea of ‘a fair go’ than the government? Most probably they are, anyway, but the bar is pretty low at the moment. With no insult meant to prospective immigrants.
The repulsive aspect of this governments–lets not call them ‘nazis’–misguided little exercise is that they are hardly in a position to lecture newcomers on anything, let alone values.
but what is the problem with getting aspirant citizens to attest to, say, acceptance of tolerance for – and legal protection of – gay men and lesbians?
No problem at all in theory – the problem in practice is that the *government* doesn’t believe in legal protection of gay men and lesbians (as Joe also points out).
And mateship? I’m a fifth generation Australian woman and I’m not into “mateship” – so there. (And what does John Howard know about friendship – I’d really like to know who his true friends are.)
“Are you expecting prospective immigrants to be more progressive in their idea of ‘a fair go’ than the government? ”
I don’t think it’s got a lot to do with the perceived colouring of any particular government. The fact is that legal protection for homosexuality is an important point of difference between Australia and many other jurisdictions. The Dutch have in fact made tolerance of homosexuality a central feature of their citizenship test.
I don’t expect migrants to necessarily be “progressive.” I do expect them to understand and acknowledge that tolerance (as opposed to acceptance) is an important part of our national life.
I’m not much wedded to self-congratulatory notions of “mateship” or “fair go” which in fact have parallels in every society and culture. It’s actually more about having an understanding of Australian societal expectations when camaraderie isn’t obviously part of the mix. The whole point of a free society is that tolerance of legally sanctioned practices that you might find personally or morally objectionable is non-negotiable.
Similarly, I’m not that fussed about proficiency in English though obviously it’s very much in migrants’ interests to acquire language skills.
Jason makes the point at Catallaxy that the “values” to be examined will themselves be subject to culture wars:
http://catallaxyfiles.com/?p=2213
Geoff, endless American tv shows and movies show that the way you pass these tests is to crib. Does memorising a heap of facts really inculcate values?
I’m also wondering whether the Right’s sudden new-found crusading spirit about freedom and equality for women and respect of their rights and freedoms is going to find its way into the questions.
I believe so, Dr Cat. That was one area Howard specifically nominated as being the subject of questions.
“Having a Go” in modern parlance may well derive from JWH’s experience on the Jack Davey Persil “Give it a Go” show in the 1950s.
According to popular legend Mr H made an appearance one night but flunked out at the first question. That caused considerable mirth. He was asked what was a kiwi, and responded that it was a shoe polish. For his trouble he was given 200 packets of Persil, although Aussie Bob reckons it was 200 bars of Velvet Soap.
I think that’s what is meant these days by the saying, “Having a Go”.
Does memorising a heap of facts really inculcate values?
Excellent point. And the Howard government’s preferred method for “teaching” values in schools is not much better.
But it was, wasn’t it?
Pavlov’s Cat your doubts are probably well founded. Women will be included, though. Do you believe in motherhood ?
A) sometimes.
B) always.
C) not Dick Cheney’s daughter.
D) often and regular.
E) moms suck.
Nabakov is to blame.
A good test of Australianness after ten years of Howard can be found here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disorder
Although these days prospective citizens would probably need to meet more than five of the criteria to really fit in.
Geoff
I want to comment on your suggestion, but could you first tell me whether you meant it seriously.
I did, James. I don’t discount the potential downside in all of this and acknowledge the likely truth of Mark’s inference about shopping centres full of Citcram Centres ($50 a session, no refunds for failure).
Still, there is a point about tolerance, rights and acceptance of difference framing as a kind of liberal democratic value set…..it’s particularly relevant in settler societies like ours.
If you separate the proposal from it’s immediate Howardian genesis, reflect on the fact that Labor have been talking around this broad issue for several months as well and throw in the fact that societies like the Netherlands and Canada are grappling with the same sets of issues, I don’t think it’s usefully written off as just some ugly manifestation of Hansonist xenophobia,
How about “as well as”, Geoff?
Howard rarely does anything without the political angle being at the forefront.
I don’t care if you’re a good citizen. Just be a good consumer.
And as Andrew Bartlett commented, it’s worthwile as well looking at those who prefer to remain permanent residents. They’re much more likely to be English or Kiwis.
The thing is – the point about Canada and the Netherlands is valid – but in both cases there appears to have been much more of a debate and more of a holistic approach.
The easiest counter to Howard’s sincerity is the defunding of ESL classes for immigrants.
I do concede though that he’s long had an obsession with “mateship” etc – as the woeful 1999 preamble demonstrates. But Rudd has a point about the derivation of the value of fairness. How in practice do you give flesh to a bunch of cliches about “mates”, “fair go”, “Anzac spirit”, etc. That’s where Jason’s question about the culture warriors is key.
“The thing is – the point about Canada and the Netherlands is valid – but in both cases there appears to have been much more of a debate and more of a holistic approach.
Well I’m all for debate and an holistic approach.
just one more question to add to yours nabs
hayden – haydo or haydee
martyn – marto or marty
clarke – clarks or clarky
heal – heals or healy
gilchrist – gilly or jughead
ponting – punter or punts
langer – langs or the brown nosed gnome
warne – warnie or the fat boy
there was great quote from some english commentator in sat. sports pages:
“playing against australia ain’t over, until the fat boy spins”
Seriously, I’d have NO tests, but just make the waiting period much longer – sociopaths and extremists aren’t usually known for their patience, & surely that’s the aim, and not to reject dyslectic africans.
Citizenship Test
Category — Having a go.
Who of the following did not “have a go”?
a. William Buckley, when he ran away from captivity.
b. The Jolly Swagman, when he dove into that billabong.
c. R.F.X. (“The Strangler”) Connor, when he attempted to borrow money from Tirath Khemlani.
d. Christopher Skase, when he jumped bail.
I had to check that it wasn’t a leg pull, Geoff. Usually you’re the one pouring cold water on barmy ideas rather than offering them yourself.
As it happens, your gay tolerance test is actually the kind of thing I had in mind in this post. I don’t care whether immigrants know about Bradman, Blinky Bill and Gallipoli, and don’t insist they learn English (if they’re over 40, say). But I think it does make sense to insist on acceptance of Western liberal values. Your affirmation is not exactly comprehensive, but it’s a kind of threshold test that would separate the sheep from the goats. Someone who tolerates same-sex relationships is unlikely to practise female circumcision and honour killings.
The aim is to create a political diversion, and to once again play the race card.
Anyone who doubts how well this has succeeded should check out Blogocracy to see how brilliantlly this issue brings out the ignorant, bigoted and xenophobic in our population. It pushes all the right buttons, and Howard of course knows it.
Listening to Dear Leader on AM this morning, sounding as reasonable as can be for the ABC audience as Chris Ulhman fed him hand picked questions about dreaded muslims, made me realise yet again what a political master he is and what a difficult task Labor faces.
No doubt the right people will be able to download the questions first and pass the test.
However I think all politicians and bureaucrats should be made to take the test and their results published in the paper.
Only if the dad has helped around the house.
Notice that none of the Aussie-lite types here, have had the guts to attempt answers to Nabs’s Cultural Harmony Questionnaire.
You’re all wrong.
Sterne has the best take on this which, I’m afraid Nabs, puts your sterling initial reponse in the shade: http://sternezine.blogspot.com/
Which reminds me that I must really try doing things about stuff, like getting a life.
Indeed. I may be wrong, but if memory serves they were part of the “multicultural industry” that was bitched about throughout the 90s.
Reckon Ms PC is on the money re ‘have a go’ – brings a petite frisson of unpleasant remembrance of the drunken aggro bastards on the hill at the SCG. Raining bottles, cups and vomit upon anyone unlucky to be sitting near them – “Have a go, ya mug” they’d yell – barely able to stand. The little Aussie ugliness. So nice to see it back in vogue – thanks John.
Questions they won’t ask you in an Australian citizenship test.
The first quwstion should be: Why do pass through so many muslim countries to seek refuge in Australia?
They are ECONOMIC ‘refugees’ and we do not want them!
Speak for yourself, boyo.
Perhaps you’d like to explain to us which Aussie values motivate your attitude?
Good spelling, Mark. Good spelling, typing and proof-reading. You know, the things you’ll be nationally tested on and get a lettered grade for.
Why don’t we have an Australian values test for multinational corporations who whish to set up shop here as well.
i haven’t read all the comments, so i may be repeating myself. My father would have failed the English test when he arrived in Australia with less than conversational English. Yet he was sponsored by an engineering firm to come out here; his skills were needed, English could be learned. He has not taken out citizenship as this would require him to forgo the citizenship of his country of birth. So he’s failed, according to many, on two counts. However, this has not prevented him from paying the same rate of tax as someone born here, and generally being a benefit to society. Make no mistake. This citizenship test is another of Howard’s classic wedges. Beazley provided the sour cream by trying to out-right Howard. Thanks Rudd for putting the ALP back in the centre. Here’s hoping (again) the Australian see through Howard’s divisive politics.
Examples of Canada’s questions are here:
http://www.yourlibrary.ca/citizenship/
Actually, the real ones are a whole lot easier. Most fun were the questions asking for ways you could help protect the environment. Also the part in the official test preparation materials, which note that the responsibilities of Canadian citizens include:
“vote in elections;
help others in the community;
care for and protect our heritage and environment;
obey Canada’s laws;
express opinions freely while respecting the rights and freedoms of others; and
eliminate discrimination and injustice”
How Canadian is that?