Some letters saved from the last two months.
The Age, 2/2:
Real truth is taboo
ROGER Howard’s explanation for the violence in Mali is simplistic (“High population growth a seed to rising unrest”, Comment, 1/2).
The fact is this violence has been fostered and triggered by a radical interpretation of the Islamic religion. The men who committed systematic atrocities against the Malian civilian population chose to do so and this choice was based on religious belief.
Howard then states it is “taboo” to expose his reality; that rapid population growth has caused these atrocities. No, it is politically incorrect to expose the real truth; that this is a result of a flawed religious belief system. If you doubt this, direct me to the corresponding unrest in Singapore, China and India.
– Max Dunn, Kew
High population growth and overcrowding exacerbates frustration and violence – one way this can be expressed is through religious extremism. And there certainly has been unrest in the other countries he mentioned: India has its own problems with extremism, there were recently protests in Singapore against increasing the immigration rate, and Government suppression in China prevents most (but not all) unrest.
Easing our conscience, but that’s about it
THE linking of high population growth with international violence raises the issue of where Australia can get best value for its aid dollar. At present we are committing ourselves to billions of dollars of future expenditure to accommodate refugees, the consequence of high birth rates and limited resources in the conflict zones.
If that money was instead put to tackling the causes of the turmoil by providing resources for family planning we could have some impact. With 80 million people born into poverty each year, taking 20,000 refugees may ease our conscience, but will not solve the problem.
– Peter Liston, Southbank
Price of growth
PROBLEMS with population growth - driven by an unsustainable immigration program and an unwillingness of state governments to decentralise - have arrived in Australia, too, in the form of high rents, house prices and council rates, and congestion on roads and rail and so on.
Wait until we have diesel shortages when peak oil turns into another nasty oil war in the Middle East or when Mother Nature throws so many fires, floods and storms at us that our power supply breaks down. People living in high-rise flats - where much of the additional population is crammed - will be especially hard hit.
We have seen during the Queensland floods how quickly shelves in shops can turn empty when trucks come to a standstill. When will these lessons be learnt?
– Matt Mushalik, Epping, NSW
13/3:
Please consult experts
Denis Napthine thinks population growth is “good for Australia, good for Victoria, good for the economy, good for our diversity and good for our quality of life” (“Regional growth on Premier’s agenda”, 9/3). Wrong.
It’s bad for our biodiversity, bad for our environment, bad for our food and water security and bad for climate change. Congratulations on becoming Premier. I hope you book an appointment with a scientist … soon.
– Lizette Salmon, Wodonga West
16/3:
Look to own backyard
Can Bindi Irwin please get an education in something like environmental science or sustainable design (Postcode 3000, 15/3). The total global population is not the most pressing of our environmental problems.
It is the per capita consumption of each and every one of us. The average Australian creates an ecological footprint 100 to 1000 times that of a person in a developing nation. Global population becomes a problem when every person on the planet gets to live like Australians or Americans. I wonder what is the ecological rucksack of the business empire she calls a conservation zoo, let alone her carbon emissions as she jets around the world saving “the environment”. Yes movie stars and celebrities can sell a message effectively but it starts to wear thin if they appear ignorant about their own housekeeping.
Who and what exactly does she think is destroying “the environment” if it’s not her and us?
– Judith Glover, faculty of design, Swinburne University
Explode the myth
Like most politicians, Denis Napthine suggests that population growth is needed for economic growth. Victoria has experienced Third-World levels of population growth over the past few years driven by immigration, with a commensurate decrease in our quality of life due to crowded roads, public transport, schools and hospitals. Added stress is placed on our water and electricity supplies.
Yet Victoria is now reportedly in recession. How can that be? Or is the link between immigration and economic growth simply a myth, perpetrated by developers and big business to drive their profits and by political parties who receive sizeable donations from these profiteers?
– Andrew Verlei, Patterson Lakes
Replies to yesterday’s letter stating the “it’s not overpopulation, but overconsumption” fallacy, 18/3:
Give Bindi a break
Judith Glover’s criticism (Letters, 16/3) of Bindi Irwin is unwarranted. If population growth isn’t the biggest environmental issue, it’s a dangerous multiplier on all the others contending for top spot. The tired criticism of celebrities such Al Gore or Bindi “jetting around the world saving ‘the environment’” needs context. Changing public opinion takes resources, especially when it’s against vested interests and religious dogma.
Celebrities such as Bindi, “Carbon Cate” and Dick Smith are critical to cut through to the public where serious academics rarely can. I’m sure at age 14 her education is not over, and perhaps when Bindi reaches university age she will do environmental science; till then lay off. Australia could do with more passionate, active kids like her.
– David Blair, Healesville
Missing the link
Judith Glover needs to first join the dots between overpopulation and subsequent resource scarcity. We should not be asked to feel guilty about maintaining a good quality of life with a reasonable amount of resources per capita just because other countries have failed to maintain favourable population-to-resources ratios. We can, however, support other nations to turn things around, through foreign aid aimed at educating females and providing access to voluntary family planning services.
– William Bourke, Wollstonecraft, NSW
Herald-Sun, 11/3:
Feeling the pinch
MELBOURNE is groaning under the planning and environmental implications of being capital of the state with the highest population increase of any in Australia, with no relief in sight.
Last year’s report by The Climate Institute said that Australia will face huge human and economic costs because its infrastructure is poorly equipped to handle more frequent extreme weather events and other consequences of climate change. Conservative estimates put the annual cost of unmitigated climate change at about $9 billion in 2020.
An estimated $10 billion is needed in Victoria alone to provide new education, health and transport needs for growth-area councils that have been in catch-up mode for at least 10 years.
Our nation’s resources are finite, so increasing the number of mouths our nation must feed solves nothing but a short-term financial requirement. More people means less of everything for everyone.
– Chris Hooley, Viewbank
12/3:
Growing pains
ALREADY the new Premier of Victoria, Dr Napthine, has declared that he’s all for the benefits of population growth because it’s good for our economic future.
All the evidence shows that the costs of growth can’t be stretched to service all the people we have. Hospitals are struggling, TAFE funding slashed, schools funding insufficient, public transport can’t keep up with demand, and people spend years waiting for public housing. Infrastructure and services should be improved and updated, not stretched any further.
While population growth has benefited us in the past, this model can’t keep being propagated. Victoria is at a standstill and jobs are going offshore. What benefited us in the past can’t be extrapolated into the future.
– V Ortega, Heidelberg Heights
13/3:
Bigger is not always better
BIG business and the Government want a big Australia.
What about the public of Australia? Do they want a big Australia? I am betting not.
Now because of the overpopulation of our cities, we are expected to change the hours of schools so the roads are not so clogged. I wonder how parents and teachers feel about this.
We are expected to pay tolls to update infrastructure.
People are sitting on our freeways for hours trying to get to and from work. Ask them if they want a big Australia.
We are already playing catch-up, while at the same time more and more people are being encouraged to come to Australia either through temporary visas or the offer of permanent residency.
This is not in Australia’s best interests. As a letter (“Growing pains”, Mar 12) stated, high immigration in the past has been useful to Australia. But times have changed and we do not need high immigration now.
Wouldn’t it be nice if the Gillard Government worked in the best interests of your average Australian?
– Chris Hodgins, Frankston
