|
Patrons: Professor Frank Fenner Professor Ian Lowe Professor Tim Flannery Dr Mary White Dr Paul Collins |
|
June 2001
No 50 |
The Newsletter of Sustainable Population Australia Inc
(formerly: Australians for an Ecologically Sustainable Population Inc.) |
Mary White grew up in Southern Rhodesia [now Zimbabwe] and attended the University of Cape Town where the subject of her Masters Degree thesis in Botany was Palaeobotany. It was supervised by Professor Alex du Toit, a 'father' of Continental Drift, and from this chance association a lifetime's interest in Gondwana and its environments and biota has evolved. After University, an interest in systematic botany in Africa, travelling and living in the wilds with her geologist husband and young children, provided more background to understanding southern flora.
The White family came to Australia in 1955 and from 1956 until the 1980s Mary White was a consultant to the Bureau of Mineral Resources in Canberra, reporting on field collections of plant fossils and producing 55 BMR Records. She was also part-time consultant to mining companies, while raising five children. As a Research Associate of the Australian Museum in Sydney since 1975, she has curated at the plant fossil collections, establishing a fully documented research collection of 12,000 specimens and writing scientific papers on her discoveries in the collection. This work showed her that there was no book which presented the big, interdisciplinary, picture of the evolution of a continent and its flora through time, and inspired The Greening of Gondwana.
Since 1984, Mary White has been a full-time writer and lecturer, presenting her interests in the prehistoric world and the evolution of the Australian continent and its biota to the enjoyment of everyone interested.
The Nature of Hidden Worlds and Time in Our Hands (on the fossil record and semiprecious gemstones) and four children's books followed The Greening of Gondwana. An account of how Australia became the driest vegetated continent, After the Greening, The Browning of Australia was published by Kangaroo press in 1994 and won the Eureka Prize. (The Nature of Hidden Worlds has been released as Reading the Rocks - Kangaroo press 1999 and Time in Our Hands is to be re-released in 2001)
Listen ... Our Land is Crying, on the Australian environment, its problems and solutions, followed in September 1997. Its companion volume Running Down - Water in a Changing Land - was launched on the 23rd of October 2000 by Dr Graham Harris, Chief of CSIRO Land and Water. It covers palaeodrainages, ancient river systems, what our rivers were like at the time of European settlement, and how they are today, groundwater and all aspects of Australia's most precious resource. Listen and Running Down explain how the geological history of the continent pre-determined many of the problems that European-style land and water use have caused. Continued Page 8.
Sustainable Population Australia, June 2001, Page 1
|
The SPA Newsletter is mailed quarterly to members of Sustainable
Population Australia Inc.
Membership is open to all who agree with SPA's aims and objectives. For further information, please contact the SPA National Office or your nearest SPA Branch. All membership applications and renewals, and Newsletter contributions, should be sent to the National Office. Newsletter Editor: John Coulter SPA NATIONAL EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
SUSTAINABLE POPULATION FUND TRUSTEES
SPA NATIONAL OFFICE
SPA REGIONAL BRANCHES
NSW: Ph (02) 99396889, PO Box 3070, DURAL, NSW 2158,
|
John Coulter A challenge to SPA membersR ecent polls have consistently shown that a Labor win is most likely in the forthcoming Federal election. Morgan Poll has the L-NP on 32%, the ALP on 44.5%, Democrats 10%, Greens at 4%, One Nation 5.5% and support for Other Parties and Independent Candidates at 4%. On a two-party preferred basis, support for the L-NP is 40.5% and support for the ALP 59.5%; a landslide win for Labor if these figures hold. Labor Leader, Beazley has said that Labor would adopt a population policy but has pre-empted what that policy will contain by announcing a larger immigration intake and an attempt to stimulate a higher fertility rate at home. SPA members will be alarmed that our next government is therefore likely to take us further away from an environmentally sustainable future for our country and our children. This Labor direction shows the party turning its back on its traditional supporters and playing to the big end of town. The light on the hill is being snuffed as the party snuggles up to the bright lights and support of real estate speculators, the building industry, and retail and media interests, in turn supported by these businesses. In this issue, the article by Sheila Newman compares immigration in France and Australia and shows that in France where urban and country planning are strong and government is a major provider of public housing, the pressure to increase population size does not exist. By contrast, in Australia where both urban planning and public housing have been emasculated and run down by Labor and Coalition governments since the days of Whitlam and Dunstan, real estate speculation, together with strong pressure for private building and construction interests have lobbied intensely, and largely effectively, for high immigration. Her article shows that the reason for this effectiveness lies in the fact that the costs of high immigration, while large in total, are spread thinly across a large population, while the benefits are concentrated in the hands of a few. It is these few who lobby hard, while the voices of the many remain muted. Furthermore, immigration continues the dispossession of Australia's indigenous people. Non-indigenous Australians stole this land from its previous owners and now we invite more and more of our own kind in to share the spoils. Neither of the old parties, with their economic rationalist ideology, want immigrants with indigenous attitudes toward land and environment. But they actively welcome business and skill migrants who share the same exploitative values as themselves. The ATSIC submission to the Jones Inquiry into Continued Page 8 |
Sustainable Population Australia, June 2001, Page 3
|
by Sheila Newman, member SPA National Executive & former President of the Victorian Branch S oon after the Second World War, France and Australia encouraged population growth. In both countries, immigrants were brought in to supply labour for manufacturing industries. Australia also wanted to increase the size of its local market. Both France and Australia wanted a bigger domestic population for defence reasons. France feared Germany's higher birthrate; Australia feared the high birthrates of its Asian neighbours. High immigration was a feature of both countries' population policies until the early 1970s. Then, following the first oil shock in 1973, France drastically reduced non-European immigration. Australia too cut immigration but then restored high levels after 1975. Why did immigration policies of these two countries diverge so markedly? Much of the answer lies in their respective housing and land development policies. Political scientist, Gary Freeman, has written extensively on immigration identifying 'diffuse' and 'focused' costs and benefits. Diffuse costs are borne by the general public and are difficult to quantify while focused costs are those borne by certain groups and are easy to identify. The groups affected are able to organise and lobby against them. Similarly, where benefits are focused, the beneficiaries lobby in favour of them. Freeman argues that high immigration becomes entrenched in countries where its benefits are narrowly focused but its costs diffuse. This is true of Australia. Freeman says, "businesses like real estate and construction benefit from population growth". In France, on the |
other hand, real estate and construction
businesses do not benefit from high
immigration since land development is
state planned. Because they receive
no focused benefit from higher
immigration, neither they, nor any other
significant group, lobbies for higher
immigration.
In the early part of the 20th century, the French instituted a system of land development planning whereby the national government co-ordinated and planned land-use and development in consultation with local government. It grouped land for similar purposes -- agriculture, housing, wooded reserves, conservation of existing open spaces. This planning system was modelled on Haussman's famous restructuring of Paris between 1853 and 1869. The government has the power to acquire land cheaply for public purposes, including housing. There are taxes on unearned improvements in land value. Companies with more than ten employees are required to pay one per cent of salaries in tax to subsidise employee housing. Industry also has major infrastructure obligations in localities where it sets up plant. This planning philosophy was built on the concept of "social solidarity": that those who have become rich in a society owe a debt to the society as a whole, for their wealth has been acquired through many anonymous acts of co-operation over time. It provided an important rationale for taxing speculative profits. In France, housing is regarded as a human right where the State has a duty to see that all citizens are provided with housing. It does this by building dwellings and by subsidising rents and purchases at all levels. Mortgages are state-guaranteed in cases of hardship and home loans are provided at low interest. While there is a private home-building market, the public housing system serves |
principally the lower socio-economic
strata, which is that of the traditional
immigrant worker.
After the Second World War there was a severe housing shortage in both France and Australia. In France, this lack of housing presented an obstacle to immigration and population building. Although employers were expected to provide housing for immigrant workers, they often failed to do so. French citizens were given priority in housing. In 1962, when the French colony Algeria became independent, nearly one million French colonials and a few hundred Moslem refugees landed in France. This added to the already severe housing shortage. In 1975 a flood of South East Asian refugees added to the influx. The repatriates from Algeria were frequently just as resented and traumatised as the Moslem refugees. But Moslems and other immigrants, if they did not have French citizenship, went to the bottom of the housing pile, to the bidonvilles, as the French call slums. There were fights, strikes, murders and fires associated with dreadful living conditions. The Left saw the violence and degradation of the bidonvilles as a way to shame the right-wing government. They called for more housing for immigrants. This was financially costly and difficult to achieve logistically since most local councils (communes) did not want immigrant housing. Immigrants were concentrated in communist local government areas and their mayors wanted other neighbourhoods to take responsibility for immigrants as well. Non-naturalised immigrants may not vote in local elections in France. Attempts were made to induce immigrants of bidonvilles to naturalise in return for housing but many were reluctant to apply. Problems finding suitable accommodation were a legal impediment to family reunion. |
Sustainable Population Australia, June 2001, Page 3
Page 4, Sustainable Population Australia, June 2001
In 1973 Algeria stopped emigration to France on the grounds of racist treatment of Algerians. That same year, Germany and the other European Economic Community (EEC) countries formally closed their borders to non-EEC foreign i m m i g r a n t workers. In 1974, France did the same.
André Postel-Vinay,
the Minister
responsible for
immigration, said
ceasing
immigration was a
preventative necessity due to: the
doubling of the third world's population
by late in the 20th century; the likelihood
of profound and lengthy economic crisis;
and the problem of the public housing
shortage for both French and foreigners.
This became the long-term policy in
France and the EEC.
In 1974, following closure of its borders to non-EEC immigrants, French immigration was the lowest since the war. Natural increase was also low, and thus demand for new houses fell drastically. There had been almost no protest about the closure of the borders by the housing industry that had never benefited from immigrants.
Unlike the Australian property development and housing industries, the French residential construction and property development industry did not seek to bolster itself with international loans, from Japan, for instance. In Australia Japanese construction companies provided important conduits for international loans for construction projects in Australia during the 1980s.
The chart below shows how the Australian housing industry maintained a high production rate, in contrast to the French housing industry, which was forced to adapt to new conditions. Instead, the French and West European residential construction industries rationalised, regrouped and restructured. They refocussed their designs and projects on energy-efficient renovation of existing structures.
Australia's property development and housing system, unlike that of France, is highly privatised and motivated by land speculation.
Although housing was affected by the depressions of the 1890s and 1930s, between the 1860s and the 1890s there had been a land speculation and building boom. This boom was largely immigration-dependent. Then gold ran out and drought set in. In the context of an international depression, immigrants dried up and Australians left the eastern states in search of gold elsewhere.
The 1903 the Royal Commission into the Decline of the New South Wales birth rate decided that the economic depression was due to a "birth dearth", and they immediately banned contraception and attempted to encourage high immigration.
Most of the members of the Commission were directors on the boards of companies and banks which had tied their wealth up in property speculation - so boosting immigration and the birth rate was a personal issue for the members of the Commission
After 1945, with the long boom, high immigration and the housing shortage, the speculative conditions of the 1850s goldrush were soon re-established. The property development industry became heavily dependent on immigration-fed population growth.
The combination of a baby boom and sustained high immigration meant that, in 1973, land prices increased by 46 per cent in Melbourne and 34 per cent in Sydney. In outer metropolitan areas, the demands of rapid population growth exceeded the availability of serviced blocks. The Whitlam government attempted to bring about changes to land development, urban planning and public housing to remove opportunities for land speculation.
In this they were bitterly opposed by, among others, the Hamer government in Victoria which was later implicated in a variety of scandals involving speculation and public housing. The Whitlam government also attempted, like the French, to drastically reduce immigration in order to protect local employment.
Also, like France, it attempted to make Australia energy self-sufficient and to rein in oil use. A project to create a vast pipeline network round the continent to distribute natural gas was proposed by the first Minister for Minerals and Energy, Rex Connor.
The Cabinet minutes of the infamous Khemlani loan of 1975, which ultimately brought the Whitlam government down, reveal a very distinctive policy: "...to deal with exigencies arising out of the current world situation and the international energy crisis...[and] to provide immediate protection for
Page 4, Sustainable Population Australia, June 2001
Sustainable Population Australia, June 2001, Page 5
Australia in regard to minerals and energy and to deal with current and immediately foreseeable unemployment in Australia."
Whitlam cut back immigration "due to
the advent of world recession", whilst
"the Australian Population and
Immigration Council was established to
assist the government in the accurate
assessment of Australia's immigration
and population needs."
But the Whitlam government was sacked and these policies, which some with hindsight would say showed foresight, were dropped.
The succeeding Fraser government led a return to high-energy consumption and a population building policy. States vied for the foreign capital of Japanese construction companies. Australia sought to attract investment by offering cheap energy leading to massive infrastructure development for rural industries.
As the economy was opened up to free market forces, speculation and housing price inflation increased, with strong encouragement from Treasury.
In Australia, the private development and housing industries flourish in the virtual absence of public housing competition. Although the Australian immigration rate drives private home- buying prices up, there is no strong national perception that population growth is costly - except perhaps environmentally.
Meanwhile, clearing of land, rezoning
and speculation continue unabated, aided
by the States. For instance, the
Department of Infrastructure in Victoria
provides a mirage of statistical trends
that make Victorians believe population
growth is inevitable. It prepares barely
referenced documents like Challenge
Melbourne to encourage the surrender
of yet more land to urban developments,
with more houses per square metre.
And, like the Kennett Liberal government in Victoria, the Bracks' Labor government aggressively endorses high immigration and population growth. At the national level, Kim Beazley, Labor Leader of the Opposition, calls for a bigger population, as did Paul Keating, Robert Hawke, and Malcolm Fraser, three of the Prime Ministers between Whitlam and the incumbent John Howard.
Meanwhile in France, no one except the United Nations is talking up population, and France's population is on a course to decline to 1960's size.
Post-script: It is interesting to note that
in 1996 France's external debt was
$117.6 billion. That of Australia, with a
third the population, was $222 billion in
1999, nearly twice as big. France had
net exports of $23.9 billion in 1999 and
Australia had net exports of minus $9
billion.
The longer paper is 43 pages long and will be available in .PDF form from the national website or electronically from smnaesp@alphalink.com.au
Sustainable Population Australia, June 2001, Page 5
Page 6, Sustainable Population Australia, June 2001
|
Our Habitat:
Cleared Land By Jill Curnow A ustralians note the environmental damage caused by loss of native species and deplore any further clearing of natural vegetation in order to establish crops or infrastructure. Regions rich in native biodiversity provide us with aesthetic satisfaction, recreational opportunity, clean air, water catchment, habitat for other species and a storehouse of genes. Many of these |
Australians now live wealthy, comfortable lives because earlier generations, here and overseas, cleared land to build infrastructure and produce goods. The loss of habitat for other species has provided habitat for us. In most cases land cannot serve both biodiversity and us at the same time. A mine site may be rehabilitated after the mine has closed but while it is operating it provides habitat for almost nothing. Cities provide for a few species - ornamental trees, cockroaches, rats, pigeons, but this is hardly biodiversity. A |
opinion has swung towards
conservation. Those who propose
further clearing, whether farmers,
developers or loggers, are regarded as
villains, and there are powerful reasons
to resist their proposals.
However there is a danger that we appear hypocritical and cruel if we seek to impose the cost of our (relatively new) conservation ethic on a small proportion of the population, and we often do. If a farmer seeks compensation or financial assistance to meet new conservation restrictions he may meet an angry |
|
functions can be provided by areas of
introduced vegetation but exotic
biodiversity is less prized.
However, while we deplore 'clearing', we all live, work and travel on cleared land. Almost everything we consume has been grown, harvested, transported, processed, quarried, mined, smelted, manufactured, transported, sold or consumed on areas where native species have been partly or wholly eliminated. |
wheat field can tolerate beneficial soil
organisms and insects but not species
such as kangaroos or parrots that will
consume the crop. Suburban gardens
can be home to native plants, birds and
lizards but higher density in Australian
cities is eliminating gardens.
Over the last two hundred years clearing and development were regarded as highly desirable, but now the cumulative damage has become apparent and public |
response from the city. I have heard a furious AESP member, commenting on proposed farming restrictions in Queensland, complain 'the farmers expect us to pay for it'. The member appeared unaware that he spends almost all his time on cleared land, that he consumes the products of cleared land, and that if conservation is necessary for the benefit of all Australians now and in the future, there is an argument that all Australians should share the cost. |
Page 6, Sustainable Population Australia, June 2001
Sustainable Population Australia, June 2001, Page 7
|
The habitat of modern Australians is
mostly cleared land, including places
such as quarries and factories many of
us never visit. They form part of our
habitat because we consume their
products. If we wish to retain and
enhance native biodiversity we must
restrict our impact - our habitat.
The number and/or per capita consumption of humans dependent on this continent must be restricted or it will be impossible to provide space for other species and the environmental benefits they bring. We may be more likely to achieve conservation goals if we approach the problem equitably so that all Australians share the costs of conservation as well as the benefits.
The ALP has been openly and consistently
|
Dear Editor
I wish to congratulate Professor Cliff Ollier for his letter in the March 2001 Newsletter where he provides a timely reminder for our organisation to concentrate on population issues and not be sidetracked with other environmental issues such as Australia's greenhouse emissions. The greenhouse issue seems to be quite trendy among environmentalists and unfortunately this shifts the focus from the far more pressing problem of population. Dr Clive Hamilton summarised the issue most succinctly by demonstrating that by 2020, our greenhouse emissions will be much higher (60% instead of 35%) under a high population growth scenario, so surely we as a group must focus on population and population alone. I also enjoyed reading the article by the CSIRO's Dr Graham Harris. However Dr Harris seems to be perpetuating the notion that much of the damage to our environment occurred in rural areas when our population was much lower. While significant damage did occur last century and our national population was much lower, less than 4 million, the distribution resulted in large numbers of people across much of what is now a depopulated rural Australia. The fact remains that many rural areas had much higher populations last century (even though our national population was much lower) and this only changed when either the natural resources underpinning these communities was removed, ie, gold or native pastures supporting sheep, or technology removed the need for such a large rural workforce. Last century for example, Wilcannia on the Darling river in western NSW had a population of over 30,000 people and was dubbed the "Queen city of the west" while Hill End in central NSW boasted a dozen hotels to support its |
many tens of thousands of gold miners.
Today, they are virtual ghost towns.
It would be ecological disaster to
require Australian rural environments to
support such large numbers of people
again, but similarly, our cities are at their
own bursting points. Perhaps listing
population growth as a 'key threatening
process' under the Federal
Government's recent Environmental
Planning and Biodiversity Conservation
Act will lead to a more sustainable future.
The impact of population growth
through new housing developments on
endangered or vulnerable species in
remnant native grassland ecosystems in
Sydney's Cumberland basin, is certainly
one compelling reason to have
population growth listed!
|
|||||
Sustainable Population Australia, June 2001, Page 7
|
Cont from P 1 The Greening of Gondwana, After the Greening, Listen, and Running Down form a four-part saga, a background to understanding why much of our current land and water use is unsustainable. Another book - on the Biosphere; bacterial origins for life; symbiosis; the microbiology of soils; and how Australian ecosystems function - is in preparation. Macquarie University granted Mary White a Doctor of Science degree in recognition of her contributions to science through her books in 1995. The Queensland University of Technology granted her the degree of Doctor of the University on the 20th September 1999. She received the Riversleigh medal 'for excellence in promoting understanding of Australian prehistory' in December 1999. Running Down is short-listed for the Eureka Prize in 2001.
Editorial Cont from P2 long term strategies in 1994 made this point eloquently: 'For Aboriginal people today, as in 1788, the land is not merely a resource to be exploited, a commodity to be traded; it is life itself... The Standing Committee's reference scenario for the year 2045 has only worse yet to come -a population almost doubled in size, taking over more and more of |
the best land for housing, suffering
greater pollution and congestion,
and natural resources under
increased threat of depletion and
degradation. Such a prospect must
be alarming for all Australians. For
indigenous Australians it is doubly
so, because the damage that will
inevitably be caused to the land
threatens the heart of our culture
and our way of being.'
Aboriginal people have never been consulted on immigration. Until the advent of multiculturalism Aboriginal people were an identified group of Australians even though their rights and opinions were largely ignored. The introduction of multiculturalism by Labor saw Aboriginal Australians relegated to a subset of a subset. Many SPA members would see Aboriginal Australians as having a unique and preeminent role in deciding how an environmentally sustainable future is to be secured. Mr Beazley has never addressed himself to the issue of population size and environmental damage. Like so many others who seek a larger population he merely asserts that the environmental consequences can be managed. He never quantifies the damage, the cost of prevention or repair or the precise management mechanisms he would put in place. As well as the obvious loss of good arable land around urban areas, a resource of which Australia has very little, there are the more intractable environmental impacts. Clive Hamilton of the Australia Institute has shown that immigration increases Australia's greenhouse gas emissions. Per capita increase in greenhouse gas emissions is accounting for only half Australia's increase, the other half is contributed by population growth. Growth of greenhouse emissions already exceeds the 8 percent increase allowed under the Kyoto deal. Again, the satisfaction of the greed of real estate and building/construction interests by a |
beholden Labor Party takes Australia
further away from sustainability.
The building of more houses not only means more land clearing, more greenhouse gas emissions as a direct consequence, but also more greenhouse gas emissions from the making of housing materials and the process of building. A rough calculation shows that the energy capital invested in each average house equates with the addition of another hundred cars to our roads for one year. The diversion of scarce capital into real estate speculation and an expanding housing stock means less money available for tackling the serious environmental problems which demand urgent attention. A Labor Party intent on appeasing the greed of powerful vested interests which offer it electoral support will be acting against the welfare of the majority of Australians and its traditional values. SPA members are urged to do whatever they can in the leadup to the election to change the direction in which, it appears, a Labor Government would take Australia's future population. Now is the time to influence the party that is very likely to form our next National government.
|
Page 8, Sustainable Population Australia, June 2001
Sustainable Population Australia, June 2001, Page 9
|
Going for Broke
by Tom Morrow E conomic policy is driven by politics and big business - with the wider community increasingly disenfranchised. Growing for Broke is a no-nonsense book written in lively layman's language by a one-time lecturer in economics and technology. The book disparages economic rationalism, corporate excess, self-serving politicians and environmental degradation. The book proposes that at the root of society's future problems lies in the pursuit of endless "growth" as the principal economic objective. Though the global economy is larger than can be sustained by the resources available, little sense exists of any limits to growth. Big business, the government and the media pursue economic growth before all other policies. As portrayed to the public, the idea that the economy must grow a bit more each year seems as natural and essential as breathing. Since 1900 gross global product has risen by about 20 times - an average annual growth rate over the period of 3%. By the end of the century the annual growth rate was around 4%. In the unlikely event that the economy succeeds in growing by 4% pa for the next 100 years, the economy in the year 2100 will be 50 times its present size. In the year 2082 the economy will be so large that 4% growth in that year will be the entire output of the existing global economy in the year 2000. The planet is not big enough to accommodate the unwanted by-products of the future growth economy - increased pollution, resource depletion and environmental destruction. Even at present levels the world is under stress. Alternative economic systems would provide a better quality life for most of the community. But changing the economic culture into something more sensible and more sustainable will not be easy. Vested interests have a big stake in the growth economy. In his 384 page book Growing for Broke, Tom Morrow develops the case that the economic growth/economic rationalist |
model is failing to deliver benefits to most
of the community. Some of the issues
and consequences of economic growth
examined in the book are:
* Population policy * Globalisation * The logging industry * Land clearing * Corporate excess and executive salaries * Emasculation of agriculture * Pollution * Global warming * Resource depletion A book that both informs and entertains, Growing for Broke criticises Australia's power brokers - economists, politicians, corporate leaders and the media for their refusal to tackle the longer-term problems of the growth economy. The price of Growing for Broke is a very reasonable $24.95 plus $5 handling and postage.(for a total of $29.95 - including GST). Payment can be made by cheque or postal order made out to "Tomorrow Press". To obtain a copy send request and payment to Tomorrow Press, PO Box 31, Holmesglen, Victoria, 3148. Email: alpha.au@bigpond.com. The book will then be mailed to you by return. If these delivery arrangements are inconvenient ring (03) 9813 8114. |
Sydney Population Future Conference, 3/3/2001 'Kim and I have argued previously for a moderate increase in our population, including through higher immigration, over the next 50 years. On the basis of the evidence that we have seen, and the views of the experts in the debate, that is both environmentally sustainable and to our economic benefit. To those who argue for a lower population, I suggest that you examine that approach in the context of a few global realities. First, the size of our population does affect our economic opportunities in a global economy, hence the interests of the business community in arguing for a higher population. That is why Labor will establish, as a matter of priority, a new Office of Population to research and advise on the range of population options and ways of getting there. The first step will be to undertake a wide-ranging inquiry to ascertain the levels of population that can be sustained into the long-term in order to pursue more favourable economic, social, and environmental outcomes.' The Bureau of Immigration Research revisited? -- Ed |
The source of Labor's Population/Immigration Policy?He said ACCI had suggested annual skilled migrant numbers be locked in at 0.67 per cent of the population, which would amount to about 130,000 people a year. Australia presently takes in between 35,000 and 40,000 skilled migrants annually. The chief executive of the Business Council of Australia, Mr David Buckingham, said the benefits of skilled migration programs to Silicon Valley had boosted the IT sector's economic benefits for the United States. "We as a country need to address the question of population policy as a matter of urgent national priority," Mr Buckingham said. Sustainable Population Australia, June 2001, Page 9 |
||
Paul Collins:
|
He is the author of Mixed Blessings
[Penguin, 1986], No Set Agenda:
Australia's Catholic Church Faces an
Uncertain Future [David Lovell, 1991],
God's Earth: Religion as if matter
really mattered [Harper Collins 1995],
Papal Power [Harper Collins, 1997],
Upon This Rock: The development of
the papal office from Saint Peter to
John Paul II [Melbourne University
Press, 2000], and From Inquisition to
Freedom [Simon and Schuster, 2001].
He is at present working on a book on
the ethics of population.
While he is well known as a commentator on the papacy, he also has a strong interest in environmental and population issues, and the ABC has made his book God's Earth into a major TV documentary. He is a member of the Australian National Committee for the Earth Charter and he was also one of a thousand world religious leaders invited to attend the United Nations Millennium Peace Summit in August 2000. Nowadays he works as a freelance writer, speaker and broadcaster on environmental issues, social ethics, theology, history and communication. P opulation pressure is rapidly changing the character of Sydney's suburbs, but not its richest waterfront suburbs, according to a report in The Sydney Morning Herald (17 April). Almost 96,000 homes will be crammed into existing suburbs over the next five years and 29,000 on the city's fringes. Eighty |
four per cent of the new homes will be
"multi-units" and all but a fraction will
cost more than $150,000. The march of
apartments has already spread to
traditional working class suburbs of
Parramatta and Bankstown.
D r Peter Whetton, head of the CSIRO's Climate Impact Group, referring to the Kyoto Protocol, says: "...factors such as the rates of population and economic growth would be significant determinants of the rate of growth in emissions. This accounts for at least half of the range of temperature projections." I n a study on the 100 largest urbanised areas in the United states, Roy Beck and Leon Kalankiewicz concluded that half the sprawl was related to land use decisions and the other half to population growth. Charlie Reese, writing in the Orlando Sentinel, said: "..if we do not stabilise growth, our country will eventually be ruined by sheer numbers. It should give folks a clue that most of the immigrants, legal or illegal, are trying to get away from countries that are overpopulated. Over-population is not only destructive of the environment, it guarantees the great majority will live in poverty."
|
Sustainable Population Australia, June 2001, Page 11
Please take this page which has a membership form on the reverse and give it to a potential new member. We do need to double our membership if we are to become independent of donations and to work more effectively to stabilise Australia's population and bring it into balance with our resource base. Nothing is more important to achieving an
ecologically sustainable future.
Population Stabilisation
At any given level of production, consumption and waste generation, the more people there are, the greater is the impact on the environment.
Australia's population, now 18.3 million, is growing by 1.2 per annum. If this rate of growth continues our population will double within 58 years.
Australia's population would stabilise at about 21 million, by 2030 except for Government intervention.
Australia's fertility rate, 1.87, is high by European standards. Spain has achieved a fertility rate of 1.23 and Italy 1.27. Australia could reasonably be expected to have a fertility rate of 1.6.
It would not be either reasonable or logical to ask our people to exercise restraint in their family size, while at the same time pursuing a policy of artificially increasing our numbers via a pro-growth immigration program.
It would not be either reasonable or logical to ask our people to exercise restraint in their purchase of consumer goods, while at the same time pursuing a policy of artificially increasing the numbers of consumers in Australia via a pro-growth immigration program.
There is a strong humanitarian argument for preserving the environment for the many millions of future generations rather than risking damage to it through over-exploitation by a swollen present-day population.
Biological diversity cannot be preserved in any ecosystem where any species continually increases its numbers.
Australia's population is not living sustainably within its environment - as demonstrated by forest depletion, soil degradation/erosion/salinisation, plant and animal extinctions, excessive greenhouse emissions, and declining fresh and marine water quality.
The report of the Parliamentary Inquiry into Australia's Population 'Carrying Capacity' urges the Australian Government to develop and implement an integrated population policy, and is critical of the existing situation where a de-facto population policy emerges as a consequence of year by year decisions on immigration taken in an ad-hoc fashion.
Let's work to make Australia a global model of sustainability!
Sustainable Population Australia, June 2001, Page 11
|
Membership Application and Donation |
Membership of SPA, formerly Australians for an Ecologically Sustainable Population is $25 per year, Concession $10, Organisation $25. Couples who share a Newsletter need only pay one subscription.
The Sustainable Population Fund is separately administered by Trustees whose names appear on page two of this Newsletter. Donations to the Fund are tax deductible.
Membership of SPA currently stands at approximately 1000. The organisation relies heavily on donations. We are seeking to double our membership as then we will be entirely supported from subscriptions and able to expand considerably the range and effectiveness of our activities.
Population Growth: the most important driver of environmental deterioration
Sustainable Population Australia was formed in 1988 as Australians for an Ecologically Sustainable Population.
The aims and objectives of SPA are:
|
1. To contribute to public awareness of the limits of Australia's
growth from ecological and social viewpoints.
2. To promote awareness that the survival of an ecologically sustainable population depends in the long run on its renewable resource base. 3. To promote policies that will eventually lead to stabilisation of Australia's population by encouraging near-replacement fertility rates and low immigration rates. |
4. To promote urban and rural lifestyles and practices that
are in harmony with the realities of the Australian environment
and its resource base.
5.To advocate low immigration rates while rejecting any selection of migrants based on race. 6. To promote policies that will lead to stabilisation of global population. |
|
Membership Application Title (Mr/Mrs/Ms/Prof etc) ........... Given Name ................................. Surname ............................................... Address ............................................................................................................................................................ State ............... Postcode ...................... E-mail .............................................................................................. Phone (H) ......................................... (W) ........................................... Fax ........................................... You may pay subscription of $25 ($10 concession) and/or donate by cheque, money order or credit card. If paying by credit card please provide the following details:
Name of card .............................................. No.
Expiry Date ................... Signature ............................................................. Date........................... |
| 216 ^ ^ < < Immigration CONTENTS 1-50 201-on Translate Links Events Books HOME Issue 51 > > v v 218 |
