Australia has always had a toe in globalisation simply because of the supposed geopolitical isolation, so Australians would look to foreign shores with awe and a glint of adventure. With the global economy integrating, the back-packing right of passage has become one of seeking economic opportunity.

The Lowy Institute's report on the Australia Diaspora in 2004 noted that it has become increasing white collar and even gold collar. While the diaspora may get public attention from time to time, gone unnoticed has been the increasingly globally integrated nature of the Australian workforce.

Australia has hit a population of twenty-one million. I have argued in the past that Australia should have population of sixty million, while the Imagining Australia folks have argued for forty million. That size of population is necessary for economic and political power.

Some are quite happy with Australia being in the quaint little back suburbs of Asia and watching the big boys pass us by, but without the economic and political weight, our policies will be stuck in the flotsam and jetsam of international policy.

For instance, why do we have an FTA with the US that heavily restricts trade and adds news layers to our legal system rather than negotiating an open borders treaty with the US?

Why wasn't Australia able to negotiate something truly wonderful such as what France, Belguim, Holland and Germany have done where they have the unrestricted movement of capital, goods and labor?

I am of the opinion that economic liberty is incomplete unless there is freedom of movement for labor as well as goods and capital; the FTA would have been a perfect opportunity to establish that style of relationship.

One of the reasons Australia was not, apart from it being rushed through on the last election campaign, was because Australia was not powerful enough, and the US did not have to treat us as equals.

Despite that, Australia is a leading nation in the rhythm of globalisation, we have nearly five percent of the population, or ten percent of the current workforce, outside of the country and working in other nations at any one time. We also have twenty-five percent of the current workforce as foreign born.

In this environment nativist or nationalist policies, such as the citizenship test, really have no place. The citizenship test is an electoral prop - not a policy. It goes against the increasingly integrated nature of the Australian workforce; at home and abroad.

The challenge for nation-states is going to be giving these global wanderers political voice, such that they don't become permanently stateless.

It is possible that at any one time one million Australians overseas have been purged from the Australian electoral rolls, and are not citizens of the country they are working. It is also possible that two and a half million people living in Australia who are foreign born face a similar issue.

Nation-state are based on political exclusivity for citizenry, presumably on some homogenising attribute, which makes that nation-state politically and socially stable. Globalisation has blown that out of the water and provided a liberal future where political stability is not dependent on nationalism or cultural homogeneity.

If nation-states are to survive under globalisation, and stave off a stateless political-underclass, they are going to have to find a way to give the diasporas full political expression - which includes voting rights.