Some recent letters concerning population growth projections in Australia (see my previous entry):
The Age, 8/10:
Services are lagging
While the government might celebrate Melbourne’s “growth”, most of us aren’t. An economy based on an expanding housing market and revenue for land and property developments means we become entrenched in accumulating debt. Spending on essential services is not keeping pace with the extra 100,000 people coming to Victoria each year. No wonder emergency departments are overflowing and a seat on the train is a thing of the past.
The Victorian State of the Environment Report (2008) reveals that population growth and human activity have had ongoing detrimental effects on soils, coastal areas, marine and river systems, climate and biodiversity. All indications are that Victoria has reached the limit of its capacity to support human populations without irreversible environmental destruction.
The growth we need is in vital skills, technological advancements and knowledge to future-proof our nation from multiple global challenges ahead, and they rely on intangibles. Intangible wealth can grow infinitely.
A coalition of planning and environmental groups has produced a sustainable population charter and is calling for the government to reduce immigration intake from the unmanageable rate of 232,000 to 70,000 per year – at which point our essential services might be able to catch up to our dramatic population growth.
– JENNY WARFE, Dromana
Job prospects falter
Melbourne’s population is swelling by 2 per cent a year and putting it on track to be a city of 8 million people by 2050. The great majority of our growth is not due to baby booms but to deliberate government policies.
According to the Bureau of Statistics, our fertility levels have only increased slightly from 1.729 in 2001 to 1.884 currently. Net overseas migration has been the main driver of Australia’s population growth and has outstripped natural increase since 2005.
Immigration policies remain popularly entrenched with both sides of politics, uninfluenced by the voting public. The current immigration policy is so high that it even affects the job prospects of skilled migrants, many of whom cannot find work in their preferred profession within their first year of settling in Australia.
Since population growth affects almost every facet of our lives, from our hip pockets, the environment and living standards, to our future and that of next generations, it’s time the issue was put into the public domain for democratic and transparent debate.
– MICHAEL BAYLISS, Reservoir
Papering over cracks
Our prosperity is based on a Ponzi scheme of building more and more houses and apartment towers, papering over a state economy where the value of our exports is approximately half our overseas imports.
– LEIGH PLEWS, Elsternwick
Tide will consume us
As residents of this once liveable and happy city we are witnesses to a tragic disaster as year on year we see the destructive forces of uncontrolled population growth.
The silence of politicians on this subject is witness to their ambivalence to the wishes of the majority of Australians, who know this unsustainable tide will consume us if steps are not taken. Big Australia must be abandoned and replaced with policies that nurture, educate and develop our population and create wealth based on neutral population levels, not this Ponzi policy.
– BERNARD ELLIS, South Yarra
Is it a choice?
In “Lockin’ out their generation”, Mark Bouris (Money, 1/9) notes that Generation Y change jobs frequently and “have ready acceptance of contract and ‘project’ employment” with “no entitlements”. He finds this a strange choice and suggests this generation will “just have to knuckle down”. Shortly before Ken Henry retired as Treasury secretary, he and then PM Julia Gillard acknowledged that true unemployment was about 12 per cent. Many factories and other wealth-producing businesses have since closed or scaled down.
Gen Y are in the same position as teenagers, older workers and migrants – list ad infinitum. There are more people looking for jobs than there are jobs. A rotten job is better than no job. And don’t employers love it.
– DON HAMPSHIRE, Sunbury
Quality of life will continue to deteriorate
More and more people are unable to afford to buy the dream – a house where their children can play in a backyard. Bill Shorten’s call for an even larger Australia when we already have very high levels of immigration will worsen this situation. It is estimated that each additional person to this country costs $340,000 in total infrastructure requirements. Last year under Labor, Australia’s population grew by 400,000, 60 per cent of which was due to immigration. The total infrastructure cost was $136 billion. Is it any wonder conditions continue to deteriorate for the majority of citizens?
Bill Shorten says he understands the critical importance of climate change and that he’s committed to a 60 per cent reduction in our emissions by 2050. However, his population policy would negate all the emissions savings made by individuals. Is this why Anthony Albanese, who has been infrastructure minister, gained much more support from rank-and-file Labor members? Do the members have a much better grasp of these critical situations than the pollies?
– John Coulter, Bradbury, South Australia
Contributing to strong economy
Professor Michael Buxton claims Plan Melbourne is a hoax and fails to put certainty into long-term planning for a growing population (Comment, 10/10). When then NSW premier Bob Carr declared in 2000 that Sydney was full after it had passed the 4 million mark, the lack of investor confidence and job losses are estimated to have set Sydney back a decade. Victorians cannot afford this approach. In Victoria the development industry directly employs about 310,000 full-time employees, contributes about 12 per cent of the state’s GDP and contributes $4.6 billion in taxes. With Victoria’s population expected to grow over the next 20 years to between 5.6 million and 7.3million, Plan Melbourne, with its long-term outlook, is responsible and necessary.
– Tony De Domenico, executive director, Urban Development Institute of Australia (Victoria)
[Comment: relying on the hope that growth will create jobs is a precarious way to run the economy – many jobs are short-term (such as constructing buildings) and many businesses tend to need less people if they become more efficient (such as manufacturing).]
Headed for Carmageddon
Age readers continually voice concern over our car dependence and increased congestion, but few appear to register that it is caused by high levels of net migration. Monash University’s Centre for Population and Social Research advises that the number of cars registered in the Melbourne metropolitan area over the five years between the census of 2006 and that of 2011 increased by nearly 300,000. The total as at 2011 was 2,054,506. It is estimated, given the continuing population boom, that car numbers will have increased by another 120,000 in the past two years. Most of our suburban roads were built in the days of the horse and buggy and cannot take this increased traffic. Meanwhile the government ignores the ever-increasing calls to abandon the east-west link and instead invest in rail as the most efficient people mover. One train can replace 800 cars. Unfortunately, like human lemmings, we are headed for Carmageddon.
– Julianne Bell, Protectors of Public Lands Victoria, Parkville
The real threat to our way of life
The latest projections for Australia’s population (The Age, 27/11) made me choke on my breakfast cereal, but nothing like what the growth will do to choke our roads and hospital queues. Current responses to augment transport and health infrastructure will ameliorate only a tiny part of the problem. It will do nothing to stem the depletion of our limited water, clean air, fisheries and bushland. And what of our responsibility to share those precious resources with other species?
The projected population growth is a more certain threat to our way of life than climate change, and it is more within our control. However, governments are unashamed barrackers for it. Every effort being made to reduce individuals’ use of resources or quantity of waste will be made ineffective as the population grows. The “growth pushers” are the greatest threat to the lives of our children and the other beautiful species that call Australia home.
– Ian Penrose, North Warrandyte
It is not racist to debate growth
Your article states that the majority of the population increase will come from migration. I am concerned that this growth is inevitable. However, there has been no national debate or consensus that this growth is desirable or wanted. Any voice asking for such a discussion is decried as being racist, an implicit admission that most of the growth will come from Asia.
The promoters of growth refuse to accept the costs of increased population – congestion, pollution, declining social cohesion and the strain on education, health and housing. State governments are far behind current needs for infrastructure and it appears they will be playing catch-up for the next 50 years. Why can’t we voters have some input into our population future? Poor fella my country.
– Geoff Hall, Mentone
No, growth isn’t always good
Fifty million Australians when today’s babies reach their 80s. Will today’s politicians guarantee they will have a reasonable quality of life throughout this century of massive climate change and dwindling resources? I thought not. It’s all “growth”, isn’t it? I am glad I have no descendants to face up to the problems we have created.
– Mick Webster, Chiltern
Time to plan
A population boom is seen as good for the economy, but are we destroying all that is “liveable” about our cities in our pursuit of the dollar? Do our leaders see our children and grandchildren competing for their small share of diminishing resources and an ever-fading residue of “gross national happiness”? Is there any forethought in our governments’ planning?
– Vivienne Player, Beaumaris
Herald-Sun, 21/10:
Downside to growth
PLANNING Minister Matthew Guy keeps boasting about Melbourne’s population reaching eight million by 2050. It’s hard to feel any joy about it.
He talks of providing “affordable housing” and “jobs” but, on the contrary, the jobs market is shrinking while house prices are soaring.
While growth guarantees jobs in some sectors of the construction industry, other industries such as small business and manufacturing suffer due to soaring rents and outersuburb developments geared towards franchises.
The State Government should work on accommodating the people already here, including unemployed youth and skilled migrants who are struggling to find work.
As for “affordable housing”, a large proportion of our Government’s revenue comes from inflated housing and land prices. The ongoing costs of population growth are swallowing any revenues from growth.
Future generations should not be forced to inherit an overcrowded city.
– Michael Bayliss, Reservoir
23/10:
Plan for quality of life
PLANNING Minister Matthew Guy’s grandiose vision for Melbourne is for more towers and an abolition of height limits.
At least there is an expert planner, Guillermo Penalosa, who advocates a modest increase in density with more buildings of four to eight storeys at Fishermans Bend. In fact, Matthew Guy would like to demolish the profession of town planning altogether and simply allow developers the scope to do what they like.
His Plan Melbourne is more about fast-tracking our population towards 8 million people by 2050 than really improving our city.
People need to be accommodated with adequate open spaces, and “quality of life” needs to be the priority rather than the aim of a higher GDP, consumption rates and economic growth.
– Vivienne Ortega, Heidelberg Heights
3/11:
Addicted to growth whatever the cost
MIGRANTS are not “blamed” for high rates of population growth, as Planning Minister Matthew Guy warns (“Boom times warning”, HS, Aug 31). Having the immigration tap turned up full blast is a political decision, made at federal government level. State governments encourage and endorse the growth by accommodating and celebrating it as a sign of “progress”.
Mr Guy says the state’s population growth was higher in the 1950s and 1960s and migrants should not be singled out.
Back then, our population was small, houses were cheap, we needed labour and economies of scale needed to be built up. Now, in an era of declining natural resources, climate change, economic slowdown, overflowing demands for public services, traffic congestion and high unemployment, there is no economic rationale for such heavy rates of growth.
Many people are facing rising costs of living, unaffordable housing, rising poverty and entrenched debt. It is not migrants who are to blame for our population woes, but the greed of politicians who are addicted to “growth” at all costs.
– Margit Alm, Eltham
5/11:
Perish the thought
I’M proud to be in Kelvin Thomson’s electorate, with its diversity of residents from many migrant backgrounds (“Populate and perish”, HS, Nov 4). Many, including his migrant branch members, support his stance on population growth, overdevelopment, and reducing traffic congestion and council rates, to protect our way of life, environment and livability.
Even though they love their home country, they don’t want Australia to become like theirs — overpopulated, congested, polluted, noisy and people living on top of each other. They appreciate what we have (peace, space, room to move and breathe).
He is also right to attack the messiahs in the Labor Party who have lost touch with their supporter base and the concerns of their electorates.
– Vita Mezzatesta, Pascoe Vale
Federal level fault
IT is either dishonest or ignorant for Planning Minister Matthew Guy to accuse those of us wishing to lower immigration of blaming immigrants for Melbourne’s congestion and other woes.
To suggest we are ignoring other factors at play is ridiculous.
In the year ending December 2012, Australia’s population grew by 394,200, of which 60 per cent was from net overseas migration (235,900) and 40 per cent natural increase (158,300). Victoria had the highest numerical growth of all states of (99,500).
No, we don’t blame immigrants. We blame Federal Government’s policy.
– Jenny Goldie, president, Sustainable Population Australia
Bigger isn’t better
NOBODY would “blame” migrants for the overwhelming number who come to live in Melbourne.
Many must be disillusioned to find themselves in job queues, living in fringe suburbs with limited facilities and public transport, and dependent on welfare payments.
With a slashing of immigration levels to 70,000 permanent arrivals each year, as suggested by peak planning and environmental groups, we could stabilise our population to a manageable level.
It’s time Victoria, and Australia, left behind the shackles of the historical colonial mentality with its need for nation building.
The “immigration nation” and “populate or perish” phenomenon served us well in the past, but is now buckling our economy, causing the over-development of our city, increasing costs of living, and threatening our living standards.
Bigger is not always better.
– Beatrice Ortega, Heidelberg Heights
7/11:
Population nears its limit
WHILE all of us have benefited from immigration in the past (with the exception of indigenous Australia), Beverley O’Connor assumes that record-level rates of population growth will continue to benefit us (“Turning inward is not the way to put Victoria first”, Opinion, Nov 6).
This goes against Australian Academy of Science evidence that suggests we cannot pass 26 million people without substantial reductions in quality of life.
Much of our agricultural land is under threat and a net population increase of 250,000-300,000 people per annum can only make matters worse. Logic dictates that you cannot grow forever on a fragile continent.
By acknowledging the constraints of growth, Kelvin Thomson’s Victoria First organisation aims to preserve our living standards, environment, and the amenities we have traditionally enjoyed.
– Michael Bayliss, Reservoir
Growth a worry
IN the main, our politicians keep spruiking that population growth is needed to keep the economy growing. Have they ever thought there could be a limit to how much an economy can grow, and that such growth is destroying the environment?
Kelvin Thomson should be praised for raising an issue that needs to be addressed now.
Reducing immigration, but allowing for a system that will cater for asylum seekers, would be a first step in limiting population growth.
More people should be encouraged to forgo building oversized houses around city outskirts that are devouring our green belts and market garden land.
– James Lamb, Kilsyth
Think long-term
THE growth of Melbourne’s (and Australia’s) population has rarely been questioned, on the basis that continued population growth is an economic necessity.
It is unfortunate that our economic system seems to be based on the same principles as a Ponzi scheme— that is, it relies on everincreasing numbers of people to join in. At some point, resources start running out.
An economic system based on infinite growth is unsustainable. We should be looking at ways of changing our economic system accordingly. The longer we wait, the worse shape our cities will be in.
– Daryl Backwell, Breamlea
Liveable no more
BEVERLEY O’Connor is on the merry-go-forward of an economy built on an ever-increasing population. But sooner or later we have to get off.
This unstoppable urge to overpopulate Melbourne is now making our once liveable city more unliveable with every person who is encouraged to come here.
– Dally Messenger, Docklands
Expanding headache
I DOUBT Beverley O’Connor has had the opportunity I have had of living in a Third World city and watching it grow from a manageable three million to a gridlocked nightmare of 12 million.
Is this what she wants for Melbourne? Most of us don’t.
A growing number agree with Kelvin Thomson and applaud him for founding Victoria First with the aim to reduce immigration to a manageable level.
The countries with the lowest standard of living are the fastest growing ones.
– Mary Drost, convener, Planning Backlash
Quality of life at risk
KELVIN Thomson’s Victoria First movement is about preserving the quality of life we take for granted for future generations rather than exploiting it for ourselves.
As a nation, a people and a species, we can choose to control our growth and move to a steady-state economy now, while resources are still plentiful, or we can have the choice forced upon our children when water, energy and space are only available to the privileged few.
– Chris Hooley, Viewbank
It’s down to policy
BEVERLEY O’Connor presents a vastly increased population for Melbourne as inevitable.
Bureau of Statistics figures reveal Australia’s population grew at 1.8 per cent— more than India’s — with net overseas migration of 238,300 people (60 per cent) in the year ending March 31, 2013, and natural increase of 159,100 people (40 per cent).
The bulk of our population growth comes as a direct result of government policies.
– Warwick Sprawson, Brunswick
8/11:
Point of agreement
BEVERLEY O’Connor says we should debate the “balance” on rapid population growth from time to time (“Turning inward is not the way to put Victoria first”, Opinion, Nov 6). This is the only point I agree on.
We are told that rapid population growth (2 per cent, the highest rate in the developed world) is necessary for the economy.
As a former councillor, mayor and Senate candidate standing on the issue, I know the enormous cost of the infrastructure required per additional person and daily witness the destruction of a spacious and relaxed Melbourne way of life, and the cost to the environment.
– Clifford Hayes, Brighton
Quality of life slipping
MELBOURNE and Victoria have absorbed huge numbers of immigrants in the past few years, yet we face billions of dollars in additional infrastructure spending to accommodate these people’s needs.
Immigration serves the needs of big business and the governments to which they donate, but for the rest of us our quality of life goes down the toilet.
No wonder our politicians rarely raise this topic.
Andrew Verlei, Patterson Lakes
A GROUP that “promises to safeguard Victoria’s way of life, open spaces and its room to move and live”? Sounds excellent, Kelvin Thomson. Who would not want that?
– Suzanne, Hawthorn East
