You are here

New Aussi PM Julia Gillard not a big population fan!


Today, in a press release titled, 'Change of direction on 'Big Australia', Kelvin Thomson wrote: "I am really pleased by the announcement by the Prime Minister that she intends to take a new direction in population policy, and to chart a course away from growth towards sustainability." At candobetter.org we are delighted to be gob-smacked. Here's a pod-cast of the recent Insiders (ABC) program on the change of P.M. for those who are keen to hear more.

KELVIN THOMSON MP
Federal Member for Wills
MEDIA RELEASE
Sunday 27th June 2010

Change of direction on “Big Australia”

I am really pleased by the announcement by the Prime Minister that she intends to take a new direction in population policy, and to chart a course away from growth towards sustainability.

It shows the Prime Minister is on the wavelength of ordinary Australians. 70% of Australians don’t want our population to reach 36 million. When Treasury released its projections of a 36 million population for Australia in September last year, I said 36
million would be too many, and I called for a national debate on this issue.

We have been having this debate. Australians have expressed their concern about the impact of rising population on our food and water supplies, on housing affordability, on traffic congestion, on the quality of life in our cities, on our carbon emissions and on our endangered wildlife.

The Prime Minister has recognised this concern, and I am very encouraged by what this means for the kind of Australia we are going to leave as a legacy for future generations of Australians.

Comments

This is brilliant news. The question that vexes me is, why have Australians been able to exert their will upon their federal government in this matter whilst Canadians have not? What is it about Australian political culture that makes for a much more assertive electorate? An electorate that despite the constraints of corrupted and dictatorial representative "democracy" and a growthist media have nonetheless forced a once popular Prime Minister from office?

Perhaps we should hire Australian consultants and media experts to coach us, much in the way that national soccer teams like England or Greece hire foreign coaches to lead their teams to victory. There is a popular bumper sticker in Canada that reads, "The more people I meet, the more I like my dog". Well, the longer I live in this country of Canada, the greener foreign pastures look. Canada would be a great nation, if it were not for Canadians. The flip side to our polite reserve and tolerance is the meek acceptance of every imposition from government and industry alike.

Our national culture seems permeated by a desperate need to avoid conflict by unreasonable self-flagellent accommodations. The irony is, by smothering debate to preserve a superficial civic truce, the pressure for a wrenching rupture builds up. Manufacturing consent and stifling dissent is a proven recipe for civil war. Even in Canada. How far down the road to overshoot will this happen? Probably much too late.

Tim

Tim appears more naive than Envious to assume that K Rudd’s ousting was due to the single issue of population growth or that pre election spruiking of politicians is necessarily believable. Rudd’s demise was the result of internal party plotting not of any democratic process. Opinion polls are as meaningless as the pre election circus.

Actions speak louder than words. I await the outcome before I rejoice

Mr Shorten said voters had been critical of the Government's climate change policy and its explanation of the mining profits tax. Rudd's unpopular "big Australia" penchant, and non-apologetic attitude, has been down-played by the media as a triviality, a minor unpopular policy but unworthy of any reason for his real down-fall in the polls. Even the Liberals assume that we must have limitless, perpetual population growth in the name of "prosperity"! (We have always had immigration since Colonial times, and it is part of our tradition, our heritage, our history, and must continue!).
The ETS was doomed to fail. We cannot be addressing a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions whilst at the same time be increasing our population at world-record rates! It was contradictory in nature, despite Senator Wong's "de-linking" population growth from greenhouse gas emissions. Economic growth, and the support of business leaders, had priority over climate change, so ETS had to be sacrificed.

I have never read anything less edifying than the Thomson letter on this forum. It is nothing more than a blatant advertisement for Miss Gillard.

How he could have the hide to write such campaign drivel is beyond me. He is careful to promote Miss Gillard whilst satisfying both sides of the population debate. Clearly he does not want to make any commitment that would upset the Labor immigrant vote. You know - that perpetual "gratitude vote" that Labor increasingly needs to retain power. (To put it more accurately - Union Power).

Thomson should tell us how he and Miss Gillard intend to stop the illegal boats - now. Not next month, next year or never. Now.

The routine collection of forced illegal entrants to our shores by the Australian navy should be stopped now, before the election, so we get real evidence of Miss Gillard's desire to reflect the wishes of the Australian people.

The illegal boats (another yesterday carrying 96 more potential Centrelink recipients) were going to end Kevin Rudd's career, and if Miss Gillard doesn't stop them, they will end hers. And that's not forgetting the four Australians who died from the insulation debacle and the thousands who now live in fear under Labor Government-funded electrically charged ceilings.

We are sick and tired of seeing Australians, many of them mentally ill, sleeping in cardboard boxes, on wet lawns and without the basic living necessities, while illegals are being kept warm, well fed and spending money in their pockets either in Queensland motels or in comfortable taxpayer funded public housing.

While the polls are saying one thing, all the people I speak to are saying something entirely different.

I don't really think it is a blatant ad for Ms Gillard. At any rate, given the blatant ads for growth in all the mainstream media, it makes a nice change.

Do please try to understand that the "boat people" subject is a red herring by BOTH governments to take the attention of the proles away from the real problem, mass migration to Australia.
The total amount of migrants about 2000 a year from illegal boats really is such a drop in the bucket as to be unnoticed against the more than 300,000 a year by “legal” means. This is a result of big business wanting a mass of unemployed to enable them to reduce wages and conditions.

I cannot understand the boat people subject as a red herring. And yes, mass migration to Australia is well into the stage of highly problematic, but I don't believe as a result of scurrilous big business plotting to reduce wages and conditions through mass unemployment. Australian businesses are, on the whole, comprised and managed by decent people. Any idea that employers are hideous users of slave labour is simply unproven and in my experience, incorrect.

I wonder why we've just welcomed our first boatload in donkeys' years from Vietnam? The word is out, that's why. Australia is open to all-comers, and the Centrelink benefits are enticingly generous.

As for illegals who arrive by plane and outstay their visa conditions, that's never far under the critical radar. It is just not discussed sufficiently because it's difficult for the press to find them. Even if they could, I doubt that the offenders would be very willing to offer up their guilt for public consumption.

The illegal pay-to-enter boat arrivals can be stopped in their tracks by ruling out permanent visas - ever. And that should mean never. The same ruling can apply to visa over-stayers. If they have children while they are experiencing temporary Australian hospitality on the strict condition that they can work and save towards their return trip home when immigration deems it appropriate, their children should be deemed residents of their parent/s' former country.

Australian citizenship is being handed out like cheap lollies on throw-away sticks.

Here in Australia pensioners, students and the unemployed are being denied a liveable wage, and the funding to our public schools, hospitals, housing and higher education is continually being stretched. Our political leaders are more interested in corporate wealth and profits than the needs of people.

In a report released in December last year, the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) said 25 million to 1 billion people could be displaced by climate change by mid-century.

Our obligation under the UN charter is to provide refuge to those who are genuine refugees, but that does not mean that we are obliged to give those claimants any right to stay here permanently, nor does it oblige this country to accept their families either.

Some asylum seekers no doubt are unsuitable to assimilate, but where is our nation's compassion and duty of care towards people, climate justice, and protection for the environment that all life depends on? Our finite resources must first of all be conserved for those who live in our sovereign land. Overpopulation now would limit our future carrying capacity.

Our capacity to accommodate refugees is being impeded by the costs and stresses of our own, manufactured, population growth rate.

Having just heard the discussion on ABC radio about the ALP coup, I am inclined to agree with Realist. My enthusiasm could seem naive and unwarranted at this point. Population policy was not the only factor in Rudd's displacement. But from a Canadian viewpoint, let me give you some perspective. The phrase "sustainable population" is not even in the Canadian political vocabulary. The mere fact that a PM would call a portfolio "The Ministry for Sustainable Population" is in itself a huge step in the process. It represents a breakthrough in consciousness. Is it sufficent? Of course not. Gestures are not actions. Nothing will happen if you don't keep up the pressure. Don't just "wait and see". Keep pushing. We would love to be where you are at right now. Tim

First we congratulate to Julia Gillard for came to elected as PM of Australia.

I also appreciate to Aussi PM for give a new direction at population policy in Australia.

Can you explain me the full details of the newly intended population direction by the Aussi PM?

Thanks

In my break at work, I was reading the only paper you'll ever find on a psych ward - the Herald Sun - in particular, Andrew Bolt's bold heading: Nicer sell of same junk Pp. 30 -31 Wednesday 30th June 2010 - where he was busily denouncing and poo -poo-ing heralded (excuse the pun) change.

In discussing the revisions or variations which might be brought about by the new Captain at the Helm - he says ..

"About boat people she's said only that she doesn't believe in a "big Australia", which dummies are meant to see as a code for getting tough. Yet about actual boat people laws, let alone immigration levels, she's actually said zero."

... Further along in the same paper in Your Say a contributor heads his letter with
Stop miners threats ...

So those largely foreign controlled, big, greedy, bully boys of the mining industry have the audacity to give the Gillard Government just 14 days to reach agreement with them or they will campaign to install Tony Abbott as prime minister. ...

Not if another reader, in 50/50 has anything to do with the proceedings!

William Waugh says: Someone should give Tony Abbott a vuvuzela.

For ignorant dummies - a vuvuzela is described as being a monotonous, loud, raucus blowing horn.

Let us dummies believe what we like - we will have our say at voting time - anytime soon - if the whispers are correct.. does an August Election have the sound of a shot-gun wedding? (pregant pause, here)

... Oh, look... Just Shoot Me ... will Julia Gillard be the Runaway Bride ?