Greens Policy
Animals
Agriculture
Drugs
Health
Economy

News Articles
Economic Vandals
Domestic Violence
Queensland Turmoil
Greens Toned Down
Bob Brown Follies
Immature Greens
Cynical Greens
Lazy Bob Brown
Naive Defence Policy
Sour Grapes - 1
Sour Grapes - 2
Anti-Science Greens
Climate Change
Nettle Can't Count
$25 Billion at Risk
Greens Cut to Size
Group or Party?

Links
The Other Cheek
Greens-Liberal Deal
Stop The Greens

Re-think your report, Senator Nettle

http://www.freewebs.com/kisdm001/blog.htm?blogentryid=994079

RE-THINK YOUR REPORT, SENATOR NETTLE
by Dylan Kissane
Monday, Nov 20, 2006

Australian Greens Senator Kerry Nettle trumpets a self-commissioned report this morning that suggests Muslim migrants have greater proficiency in English than has been claimed in some media reports:

The report 'Talking Honestly' has been prepared as a submission to the Department of Immigration Discussion Paper on Citizenship Testing, and released today.

"The Prime Minister's rhetoric on English language proficiency in the Muslim community is dead wrong. During his time as Prime Minister English language proficiency for all new migrant groups has improved and Muslims are better English speakers than ever," Senator Nettle said...

"The report shows that there are more Australian Catholics who do not speak English than Muslims, and even as a proportion of the community Muslims are better English speakers than some other religious groups.

Read the report (it runs less than 5 pages, excluding the table of contents and a very poorly photoshopped cover), however, and you will find yourself asking a number of questions.

For example, the figures cited in the report don't seem to add up. Consider Table 1.1 where it is claimed that of Iraqi migrants:

66.4% speak English 'very well or well', 20.6% speak English 'not well' and 5.5% speak English 'not at all'

Now do the arithmatic: 66.4 + 20.6 + 5.5 = 92.5.

What happened to the other 7.5% of Iraqi migrants who answered that question? Did they not understand the question because their English was so poor? Or did Senator Nettle's report leave out some figures?

Or consider the English proficiency of the Russian Orthodox community (Table 1.2) where:

55.2% speak English 'very well or well', 11.2% speak English 'not well' and 2.8% speak English 'not at all'

Again: 55.2 + 11.2 + 2.8 = 69.2.

Where are all the non-reporting Russian Orthodox people? Nettle's report claims that all the figures are:

for migrants (those born overseas) who have nominated a level [of English proficiency]

If this is the case, why do the figures provided in the report not add to 100% (or very close if we allow for rounding)? Either the figures are wrong or the report has misrepresented them as figures for those "who have nominated a level". I suspect it is the latter - perhaps the author was looking at migrants who nominated a level as a proportion of the total reporting from that country/religion.

Questions are also raised about the proficiency in English displayed by the author of the report who, in his introduction to the report, comes out with this clanger of a sentence:

Callers have been particularly concerned with the role of the Muslim population in the Australian community identified them as the least likely to integrate.

In the words of Rove McManus (or is it Karl Rove?): what the?

The report goes on to claim in its conclusion that:

The Census data tells a story of steady and in some cases sharp improvement in English skills.

The "data" referred to in the report cites only two years of census reporting: 1996 and 2001. Without analysis of a third year it would seem impossible to conclude that any improvement (or decline, for that matter) is steady, sharp or otherwise. Two years alone cannot be used as a basis for claiming a long term trend (or any trend, really) as the report does.

If four-and-a-half pages of fuzzy figures followed by dodgy conclusions amount to a 'report' then we can only hope that The Greens never get themselves elected to govern this country.

		GREENS POLICY
		">