Australian senate terms language test for citizenship "too hard"

The Australian government will need to head back to the drawing board on its proposed changes to the nation's citizenship test, after the Senate declared that the English language component was too hard.

Under the proposed changes to the citizenship test, prospective Aussies would need to show university-level proficiency in English, something which even the coalition government's own Senators said was too harsh.

In a Senate committee report handed down late on Tuesday night, it was argued that while a firm grasp on the English language was "essential" for citizenship, the government was setting the bar too high.

"(The proficiency requirement) should not be so high as to disqualify from citizenship many Australians who, in the past, and with a more basic competency in the English language, have proven to be valuable members of the Australian community," the report said.

"The committee agrees that a good understanding and use of the English language is essential in order to enjoy the benefits, and fulfils the obligations, of Australian citizenship.

"(But) the committee cautions, however, against the adoption of a standard that many current citizens could not reach."

Under the government's proposal, people applying for Australian citizenship must reach English proficiency level equivalent to 6 out of 9 in all of the four aspects of reading, writing, speaking, listening in the International English Language Testing System (IELTS).

Opposition Senators were particularly scathing of the government's proposed changes, with the report going so far as to label them as being "elitist."

"Requiring university-level English to become a citizen is clearly elitist and risks creating an entire class of people who may live in Australia their whole working lives but not be permitted citizenship," the report said.

"Setting arbitrary standards of citizenship that exclude people who are committed to Australian laws and making a contribution to our nation does nothing to enhance but rather places at risk our social fabric."

The government will need to rewrite the bill in order to get the changes through the Upper House.