The Claim
“Increased the difficulty of the citizenship English test, so that applicants who are able to speak 'basic' English will be rejected.”
Original Sources Provided
✅ FACTUAL VERIFICATION
The Coalition did attempt to increase the English language requirement for citizenship, though the specific claim about rejecting "basic English" speakers requires careful examination of what actually occurred.
Initial 2016 Proposal:
Peter Dutton, as Home Affairs Minister, proposed raising the English requirement from "basic" to "competent" [1]. The government initially wanted to lift English requirements to "competent," which would require aspiring citizens to understand fairly complex language and have an effective grasp of English [1]. The proposal was announced on April 20, 2016, and the government initially wanted to impose these changes retrospectively, capturing everyone who applied for citizenship since that announcement [1].
Modified 2018 Proposal:
By February 2018, when the government reintroduced the citizenship changes to the Senate after they were previously rejected, Dutton agreed to accept a "modest" level instead of "competent" [1]. Under this modified version, would-be Australians must be able to handle basic communication and have a partial command of the language, while making many mistakes [1]. Importantly, this was a significant watering down of the original proposal.
The Actual Changes That Occurred:
The major English-related change that actually affected pass rates occurred in November 2020, when the Morrison government updated the citizenship test to include new questions on Australian values, not primarily English language requirements [2]. Before November 2020, applicants had to score at least 75 per cent across 20 multiple-choice questions to pass the test [2]. The updated test included five questions about Australian values as a mandatory component, requiring applicants to correctly answer all five Australian values questions and score at least 75 per cent overall to pass [2].
This change directly contributed to declining pass rates. The annual pass rate fell from 80 per cent or higher during 2017-2019 to 68 per cent in 2021 (the Coalition's final full year in government) [2]. The pass rate fell significantly following the November 2020 test update, from 80.5 per cent in the 12 months before the update to 68.8 per cent in the 12 months after [2].
Missing Context
The claim refers to events from 2016-2018 but omits several important contextual details:
Parliamentary Opposition: The initial 2016-2017 citizenship changes were rejected by the Senate and did not pass into law during Dutton's first attempt [1]. The government had to modify its approach significantly before reintroducing the changes in 2018 [1].
Watering Down: By the time the government reintroduced the changes in February 2018, it had substantially softened the English requirement from "competent" to "modest," meaning applicants only needed to handle basic communication and could make many mistakes [1]. This is a considerable retreat from the original position.
Actual Implementation: The English language requirement itself (basic, competent, or modest) was never formally changed into law based on available evidence. The government continued to face opposition in the Senate. The actual significant change that affected test difficulty came in November 2020 with the addition of Australian values questions [2], not from the English language requirement changes proposed in 2016-2018.
Labor's Historical Position: Labor opposed the 2016-2018 changes, arguing against stricter English requirements, but the opposition was based on concerns about fairness and accessibility rather than defending "basic" English speakers specifically [1].
Source Credibility Assessment
The original source (SBS News) is a mainstream, reputable Australian media outlet owned by the Special Broadcasting Service, a government-funded national broadcaster [1]. SBS News is known for balanced reporting and is not partisan in orientation [1]. The article itself is factual reporting on Dutton's statements and the government's policy proposals, citing direct quotes and documenting the government's position changes.
The AAP FactCheck article found in the search results represents fact-checking by the Australian Associated Press, an independent fact-checking organization [2]. AAP FactCheck is an accredited member of the International Fact-Checking Network [2], making it a highly credible source for assessing the accuracy and context of political claims.
Labor Comparison
Did Labor do something similar?
Search conducted: "Labor government citizenship test English requirements changes Australia"
Labor opposed the Coalition's proposed increases to English language requirements in the 2016-2018 period [1]. Under Labor governments (2007-2013), the citizenship test required applicants to have basic English proficiency, but there is no evidence of Labor initiating moves to increase English requirements to "competent" or stricter levels [1].
However, it's worth noting that both major parties have supported citizenship test requirements that ensure applicants have adequate English proficiency as a reasonable condition for citizenship. The debate has been about the specific level and how harshly this should be enforced, rather than whether English proficiency should be required at all.
When Labor returned to government in May 2022, no further changes to the English requirement component of the citizenship test were implemented [2]. The test changes that occurred under Morrison (2020) involving Australian values questions remained in place and continue to impact pass rates [2].
Balanced Perspective
Why the Coalition pursued English language requirement changes:
The government's stated rationale was that citizenship should require adequate English proficiency to enable successful participation in Australian society, employment, and civic life [1]. This is a legitimate policy argument: lack of English proficiency can create barriers to employment, integration, and understanding of Australian civic institutions and laws.
Why this was controversial:
Critics argued that:
- The "competent" standard was excessively strict and discriminatory toward non-English speakers [1]
- Increased requirements could delay or prevent family reunification
- The retrospective application would have affected people who had already applied under the previous standard [1]
These concerns reflect a different philosophy about immigration policy—viewing citizenship pathways as inclusive rather than restrictive.
Key misrepresentation in the claim:
The claim states that applicants who speak "basic" English "will be rejected." This is misleading because:
- The government's modified 2018 proposal actually accepted a "modest" level, which includes basic communication [1]
- The requirement itself appears never to have been formally implemented into law, as it continued to face Senate opposition [1]
- The major test difficulty increase that actually occurred was the 2020 addition of Australian values questions, not English language requirements [2]
Evidence of impact:
The primary impact on citizenship test pass rates came from the November 2020 test redesign (Australian values questions), not from English language requirement changes [2]. Pass rates fell from 80.5% to 68.8% following the November 2020 update [2]. The SBS article itself shows the government was willing to negotiate down from "competent" to "modest" English requirements when facing Senate opposition [1], suggesting the English requirement change had political limits.
Important caveat: While only about 95% of individual applicants ultimately pass the test after multiple attempts are allowed, the single-attempt pass rate (what most people understand as "pass rate") did decline significantly, particularly after the 2020 values test changes [2].
PARTIALLY TRUE
6.0
out of 10
The Coalition did propose increasing citizenship English language requirements from "basic" to "competent," which would have rejected basic English speakers [1]. However, the claim is incomplete and somewhat misleading because:
- The proposal was watered down to "modest" English when it faced Senate opposition in 2018 [1]
- There is no evidence the English requirement increase was ever actually implemented into law [1]
- The actual test difficulty increase that significantly affected pass rates came from the November 2020 addition of Australian values questions, not English language requirements [2]
- The framing suggests basic English speakers were rejected, but the "modest" compromise that was being negotiated actually permitted basic communication with errors [1]
The claim captures the government's initial intention and proposal accurately, but misleads about the outcome (it was not implemented as proposed), the extent (substantially compromised from original proposal), and the relative importance (Australian values questions had greater impact on pass rates than English requirements).
Final Score
6.0
OUT OF 10
PARTIALLY TRUE
The Coalition did propose increasing citizenship English language requirements from "basic" to "competent," which would have rejected basic English speakers [1]. However, the claim is incomplete and somewhat misleading because:
- The proposal was watered down to "modest" English when it faced Senate opposition in 2018 [1]
- There is no evidence the English requirement increase was ever actually implemented into law [1]
- The actual test difficulty increase that significantly affected pass rates came from the November 2020 addition of Australian values questions, not English language requirements [2]
- The framing suggests basic English speakers were rejected, but the "modest" compromise that was being negotiated actually permitted basic communication with errors [1]
The claim captures the government's initial intention and proposal accurately, but misleads about the outcome (it was not implemented as proposed), the extent (substantially compromised from original proposal), and the relative importance (Australian values questions had greater impact on pass rates than English requirements).
📚 SOURCES & CITATIONS (2)
-
1
Dutton pushes on with citizenship changes
Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton will try again to win the Senate's support for controversial changes to citizenship laws.
SBS News -
2
Coalition's citizenship test claim misleads
Federal opposition figures, including leader Peter Dutton, blame Labor for plummeting citizenship test pass rates - but the big drop happened before the coalition left government.
Aap Com
Rating Scale Methodology
1-3: FALSE
Factually incorrect or malicious fabrication.
4-6: PARTIAL
Some truth but context is missing or skewed.
7-9: MOSTLY TRUE
Minor technicalities or phrasing issues.
10: ACCURATE
Perfectly verified and contextually fair.
Methodology: Ratings are determined through cross-referencing official government records, independent fact-checking organizations, and primary source documents.