PETER VAN ONSELEN: It’s the one Big Lie of Australian politics – now voters have woken up and politicians have been caught with their pants down

Immigration and its impact on the community will be a hot topic in this year’s federal election.

There is no escaping the fact that the pace of immigration in recent years has far exceeded expectations and promises.

The view of many voters is that this also has a detrimental effect on the cost of living.

Whether it is about house prices, the availability of rental properties or the traffic congestion in our many cities, the migration police are blamed.

That is undoubtedly why both major parties have committed to lowering the rate. At least if you believe the promises.

For years, immigration has stalled Australia’s economic growth. Treasurers have used it to shore up their budgets, covering up otherwise low per capita growth.

More recently, the role of immigration in averting a recession has been even more directly relevant.

Simply put, without the hundreds of thousands of migrants pouring into the country every year, Australia would be in a technical recession.

During the Howard years, the then coalition government used its tough border protection policies to mask potential public dissatisfaction with record levels of legal immigration.

John Howard was able to increase immigration rates, his supporters would say, because he was known for being tough on illegal immigration – “stopping the boats.”

Without that stick, the economic carrot of immigration, which helped the budget, would likely have drawn a backlash from voters.

Remember, city traffic congestion, rising real estate prices and a tight rental market are nothing new.

When Howard was walking a fine line on record immigration, there were isolated opponents who wanted to call him out.

And not just the usual suspects on the Coalition’s right flank, like Pauline Hanson.

Former NSW Premier Bob Carr was an outspoken critic of high immigration rates – a contrarian view within the Labor Party at the time.

As state premier, he clearly understood the downside of high immigration rates, contrary to what was conventional wisdom at the time about the economic boost immigration provided.

Fast forward to today, and Opposition Leader Peter Dutton is trying to have it both ways on this thorny issue.

His rhetoric consisted of a call for cuts to immigration, a populist position of course.

Dutton used his budget response last May to promise to reduce immigration to 140,000 a year. Remember that not so long ago the half-million mark was reached.

Peter Dutton during his period as Minister of Home Affairs. Migration is likely to be a major issue in the upcoming 2025 federal election campaign. He has slightly changed his rhetoric on the issue

As the next election campaign formally begins, you can expect the immigration debate to heat up even further

The opposition leader’s efforts focused on refugee and humanitarian migration. He also promised to reduce the number of international students.

But with the election on the line and the prospect of a coalition government no longer a fairy tale, Dutton has changed his rhetoric somewhat.

He now promises that he will read the economic tea leaves if he wins the election, and will only make good on his promise to cut the numbers if economic conditions support such a shift.

Why the change? It is partly a matter of how the coalition formulates its alternative budget forecasts, but it is also a response to the business community.

Major companies have expressed deep concern about the further reduction in immigration according to budget estimates.

Dutton said the same thing in the second half of last year.

Now the opposition simply says it will reduce immigration, but it will not commit to the precise target.

As the next election campaign formally begins, you can expect the immigration debate to heat up even further.

Even if the major parties try to avoid sharp contrasts in their approach to the issue, smaller parties will exert pressure on both the left and the right.