In the early 1970s, Australia underwent sweeping changes to its immigration system under the newly elected Whitlam Labor government. While this era is best remembered for the formal dismantling of the White Australia Policy, a lesser-known legacy was the introduction of Australia’s first immigration amnesty—an initiative that provided undocumented migrants with a path to permanency or citizenship without fear of punishment or deportation.
This humane approach to immigration was not a one-off event. Subsequent amnesties were implemented in 1976 and 1980 under both Labor and Liberal governments, enjoying bipartisan support. As Australia once again confronts the challenges posed by a growing undocumented population, questions arise: How did these past amnesties work, and could they happen again?
A Whitlam-Era Innovation
Australia’s first immigration amnesty was launched in January 1974 as part of the Whitlam government’s broader multicultural agenda. Designed to protect individuals vulnerable to labor exploitation, the amnesty allowed those who had lived in Australia for at least three years and were deemed of “good character” to regularize their immigration status.
Open for five months, the program had a modest uptake but set a critical precedent for future initiatives.
Fraser Continues the Approach
In the 1975 election campaign, caretaker Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser pledged to extend the amnesty if elected, promising to help undocumented residents “stay here and make Australia their permanent home.”
Following his election victory, Fraser’s government implemented an amnesty in January 1976, focusing on “overstayed visitors.” According to Department of Immigration figures, 8,614 individuals applied for legal status during the period, with 63% residing in New South Wales. Key applicant nationalities included Greeks (1,283), Britons (911), Indonesians (748), and Chinese nationals (643).
A third amnesty followed in 1980, initiated after another bipartisan commitment. Immigration Minister Ian Macphee described the six-month Regularisation of Status Program as a way to deal “humanely with the problem of illegal immigration” while deterring future unauthorized migration.
Overcoming Distrust
Despite good intentions, skepticism among migrants was high. Many feared the amnesties were government traps designed to facilitate deportations. Fraser addressed these concerns directly, assuring the public in 1980 that the program was “not a trap to lure people into the open so that they can be seized, jailed and deported.”
By the end of 1980, more than 11,000 applications had been received, covering over 14,000 individuals.
Why Past Amnesties Succeeded
Research into Australia’s immigration amnesties identified several factors crucial to their success:
Simple and inclusive eligibility criteria
Clear and accessible application processes
Effective communication campaigns to build trust within migrant communities
Clear pathways to citizenship
The 1980 amnesty, for example, featured high-profile media campaigns, with successful applicants publicized to boost confidence in the program. Amnesty information was also translated into 48 languages and widely disseminated through ethnic media.
In contrast, the 1974 amnesty struggled due to stricter eligibility rules, limited outreach, and minimal media promotion.
A New Amnesty for a New Era?
Today, calls for a new immigration amnesty focus on two primary groups: undocumented migrants—including international students and workers—and asylum seekers whose visa status has lapsed or who are unable to access permanent residency.
The Department of Home Affairs estimates that more than 70,000 people currently live in Australia without legal status. These individuals often fill critical labor shortages but remain vulnerable to exploitation and deportation. For asylum seekers, returning home is frequently not an option due to the risk of persecution.
Amnesties present a humane and cost-effective alternative to costly detention and deportation measures. In fact, prior governments cited the financial and logistical burden of enforcement as a reason to pursue amnesty programs.
As Immigration Minister Macphee put it in 1980, amnesty was a way to “clean the slate,” recognizing that regardless of how individuals arrived, they had become part of the community.
Lessons for the Future
Australia’s history shows that immigration amnesties can succeed when approached thoughtfully and inclusively. They offer a path not just to legality, but to dignity and belonging.
Moreover, past election campaigns have demonstrated that migration reform can be a rallying point for hope rather than fear—suggesting that with political will, Australia could again extend a hand to those living in the shadows.
Related topics:
- Trump’s Immigration Crackdown: 3 Ways It Could Affect U.S. Citizens
- Horse Racing Industry Faces Uncertainty Over Workforce Visas
- Quebec Calls for Federal Immigration Cuts, Sparking Concern Among Businesses
