2020 summit

Scanlon report underpins threat to Australian democracy

Thu, 2008-04-24 03:28 by Sheila Newman

What organisation has only 24 members of which the first ten comprise the current Prime Minister and nine past and present Australian Prime Ministers or Prime Ministerial contenders? And why would they be so dedicated to an organisation with a focus so antithetical to democracy and Australians? Read on.
See also: "Nuclear power, totalitarian spin and overpopulation in Australia", "Bernard Salt on the Population 'debate'> and "Ziggy Switkowski, Population Numbers and Nuclear in the Australian" and "Normalising endless immigration and coupling it to nuclear power in Oz"

The document below probably furnished the blueprint for the Australian government to plan to transform Australian society in a manner which will displace and disenfranchise the bulk of its current population.

The Scanlon Report 30/50 - The Technological Implications of an Australian Population of 30 million by 2050

Note - this link no longer functions - see "Notes" [1]

Here is a new link: https://www.atse.org.au/Documents/reports/30-50-technological-implications-australia-population-2050-report.pdf. (Date last visited was 8 June 2018).

In the 150 pages the word 'democracy' is not mentioned once, although every aspect of Australians' lives and governance is dealt with here.

This is a 'peak oil' document, but it advocates a route whereby any choice Australians might have of reorganizing, locally, to adapt to declining availability of cheap energy, is being abrogated by the Scanlon Foundation’s grand plan to increase Australia’s immigration intake by 1.5% per annum to achieve a population of 30 million by 2050.

Australian politicians have apparently accepted the Scanlon prescription for continued economic growth through social and infrastructure engineering, and social indoctrination at the expense of democracy.

Immigration to increase by 1.5% of total population per year

To cater for our 'aging population' and 'economic growth', with immigration to increase by 1.5% of population every year, based on a recipe worked out by ANU demography, with demographer Peter McDonald, we are to have imposed upon us an unwanted and unsought massive population increase to accompany, service and pay for massive engineering works. Disappointingly, but not surprisingly, the report is the result of a study carried out by The Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering with money from the Scanlon Foundation. The Scanlon Foundation was, until 2001, the Brencorp Foundation, and the child of Peter Scanlon, of IXL and Patrick/Corrigan fame, currently marketing credit cards to Asia.

The Australian Multicultural Foundation and the Institute for Global Movements

In 2006, the Scanlon Foundation recently made “one of the biggest private sector donations for social sciences” to the Monash University Institute for Global Movements and the Australian Multicultural Foundation,[1] in the words of Professor Nieuwenhuysen (formerly Director of the Bureau of Immigration Research), now director of the Australian Multicultural Foundation and of the Institute for Global Movements.

The study in question seems to have been a project investigating ways to get Australians to accept a massive immigration program, draconian changes to their way of life, and loss of the natural amenities and space they grew up with, in the context of huge engineering works and infrastructure expansion proposed by the abovementioned Scanlon Report. Nieuwenhuysen commented in 2006, when the Monash University study began, that "The results of these studies are destined to generate much interest from government, academia and the wider community, both in Australia and internationally."

Membership list of this exclusive club

Indeed, if you look at the 24 person strong membership list of the Australian Multicultural Foundation, you might consider this a foregone conclusion. Here are the first 10 members:

The Hon Kevin Rudd MP (Prime Minister of Australia), Mr John Howard, The Hon Mr Simon Crean MP, The Hon. Mr Alexander Downer MP, Mr Robert Hawke AC, Dr J. R. Hewson, Mr Paul Keating, Mr Mark Latham, Mr Kim Beazley, andMr Andrew Peacock AC.

This must be the most exclusive club in Australia. I cannot help but wonder, what's in it for the members? Maybe this is how you get a crack at being the titular head of the country, by selling out your constituents to big business.

At any rate, any illusion some naive people may have been clinging to, that the Australia 2020 conference really meant to consult with Australians, rather than get them to do the bidding of engineers and industries which benefit from rapid population growth, should now be dispelled, along with the illusion that we are still living in some kind of democracy, or that the future is safe in the hands of our politicians.

[1] "Monash University > News and Events > Monash Memo
$600K for study on social cohesion

22 February 2006

The Monash Institute for the Study of Global Movements has received $600,000 from the Scanlon Research Foundation to study social cohesion in Australian and international societies.

The research program for the Social Cohesion Project will be undertaken in partnership with the Australian Multicultural Foundation.

The grant will fund major interrelated studies on social cohesion: analysing and measuring the components of social cohesion; how to constructively attain social cohesion in Australia; and a study on minorities in Australian and international society.

The research will be led by academics from Monash's Faculty of Arts, including School of Political and Social Inquiry senior lecturers Dr Nick Economou and Dr David Wright-Neville, lecturer in sociology Dr Michael Ure, and Professor Andrew Markus, Director of the Jewish Civilisation department within the School of Historical Studies.

The research will be undertaken in cooperation with scholars at Chatham House in London, the Australian National University and Macquarie University.

The institute's Director, Professor John Nieuwenhuysen, is managing the project in association with Multicultural Foundation Director Mr Hass Dellal.

"This is one of the biggest private sector donations for social sciences," Professor Nieuwenhuysen said. "The Scanlon Foundation is genuinely interested in research and public policy issues and is greatly impressed by the calibre of research staff at Monash.

"The Social Cohesion Project is of central importance to the future of Australia and the international community and is a significant event for the institute.

"The results of these studies are destined to generate much interest from government, academia and the wider community, both in Australia and internationally."

The findings from each study will be presented at the 12th International Metropolis Conference to be held in Melbourne in October 2007. The conference, to be co-hosted by Monash, is the world's largest annual conference on international migration and settlement issues. It is the first time it will be held outside North America and Europe.

The Scanlon (formerly Brencorp) Foundation was established by the Brencorp Group in Victoria in 2001. The foundation's current focus is population and cultural diversity in Australia."

NOTES

(Added to article on 2 April 2010.)

[1] The URL for "The technological implications of Australia at 30 million in 2030" was a href="http://www.atse.org.au/index.php?sectionid=128 but the file is no longer listed there. I have copied and pasted the Address by Peter Scanlon below, to document the launching of the document. This address is quite interesting because it gives us an economic belief context and even admiringly cites a chapter written by Harvard economist, Benjamin M. Friedman, written with the notorious Milton Friedman: Benjamin M. Friedman, Milton Friedman, A. W. Clausen, "Postwar Changes in the American Financial Markets," in Martin Feldstein, ed., The American Economy in Transition," University of Chicago Press, 1980.

If anyone wants an electronic copy of the 2007 ATTSE Report itself, "The technological implications of Australia at 30 million in 2030," contact me through candobetter.org and I will send one to you.

"ADDRESS BY

FOUNDATION CHAIRMAN, PETER SCANLON

TO ATSE REPORT LAUNCH

18th April 07

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Ladies and Gentlemen:

The Honourable Robert Smith MLC, President of the Legislative Assembly.

The Honorable Jenny Lindell MP. Speaker of the Legislative Assembly and Parliamentarians;

Mr. Peter Laver, Vice president of the Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering

Mr. Vaughan Beck
Distinguished guests.

The Scanlon Foundation is committed to the belief that Australia needs to continue to grow and that this growth will require a substantial and increasing role for migration. As a consequence we see social cohesion as critical to both migration and Australia’s growth.

In that context and separately from the study by ATSE The Scanlon Foundation’s Social Cohesion Research Program incorporates six (6) individual projects, managed by the Monash Institute for the Study of Global Movements and the Australian Multicultural Foundation.

One of these projects is the innovative benchmark survey throughout Australia measuring the current status of social cohesion in Australia. This survey has been commissioned and field interviews will commence in May. We anticipate results in July ready for analysis and preparation for release at Metropolis 2007.

However, the study released today by ATSE, and although very much part of our program, has different origins. In the early days of our work on social cohesion it was clear to us that there are a number of people in Australia across a broad spectrum who queried the underlying principal of growth because they worried whether the country was able to accommodate more people. In essence they asked “can we have a population of 30 million people by the year 2050 without creating substantial infrastructure and environmental issues”.
It was to deal with this perception, this question that led the Foundation to commission this study. That is why it is specific both as to numbers and Australia. That is why we went to ATSE as the independent expert with its 750 eminent Fellows.

Clearly the study says we can accommodate 30 million people by 2050. However it does say there are issues and that these are legitimate issues that need to be discussed and dealt with. ATSE concludes in fact they need to be dealt with irrespective to 30/50.

However I ask that as you reflect on this study that you do not do so in isolation. There is a flip side to the debate. That is the consequences of Growth. Too often growth is mistakenly seen to be only about material outcomes.

In his book “The Moral Consequences of Economic Growth” Benjamin Friedman demonstrates why the elements, held out by the Enlightenment thinkers so central to Western philosophy, of openness, opportunity, tolerance, economic and social mobility, fairness and democracy are all enhanced by growth.

Freidman explains that growth, rather than simply creating a higher standard of living, is the key to effecting political and social liberalization in the third world. He shows that even the wealthiest of nations puts its democratic values at risk when growth stops. Merely being wealthy is no protection against a turn toward rigidity and intolerance when a country’s citizens lose the sense that they are getting ahead.

Post war we had the growth of economic socialism which tried to deal with the imbalance of material well being by relying on redistribution rather than creation. It failed miserably.

Today, to me, in many ways there seems to be a populous move to a form of environmental socialism in that there is a concentration on regulating and redistributing what we have as was the case with economic socialism. It won’t be the answer. Separately from mans proven record of ingenuity and adaptation we need to get back to planning and doing. This will be the answer.

That we need to manage better is without doubt. The ATSE report is very clear about this. The short period of elected governments, our system of Federation together with upper and lower houses, the politicisation of the public service and so on has left us with ineffective long term planning. And this when there has never been a better time to set these priorities with our prosperity and surplus investment capital which is searching the world trying to find a home.

If Social Cohesion was not the Foundations main game I think we would have tackled this issue. Pressure and knowledge needs to be focused on our infrastructure and environmental planning. The current situation is a disgrace. We probably need for the want of a better title a Reserve Bank of Infrastructure.

However right now that’s not for us other than to support ATSE’s call for leadership and planning.

In conclusion the Foundation expresses it appreciation to ATSE. In particular my thanks to Vaughan Beck, Ian Duncan, Ian Rae and of course many talented authors and contributors to the 30/50 study.

We at the Foundation look forward to pursuing our ongoing work on social cohesion and positive migration strategies for the future prosperity of Australia.

Thank you"

Topic:

Submission to 2020 summit: End Population Growth, not just manage it

Fri, 2008-04-18 11:33 by admin

Sustainable Population Australia Media Release, 17 April 2008

The 2020 Summit needs to address how to end population growth, not just manage it, according to Sustainable Population Australia (SPA).

The terms of reference for the session on Population, Climate Change and Sustainability, only refer to managing population growth.

SPA National President, Dr John Coulter, says you cannot deal with climate change and water with a rapidly growing population.

"What does it profit humanity if all Australians reduce their greenhouse emissions by 20 per cent but our governments increase our population by 20 per cent?" says Dr Coulter. "How does it benefit our future if we all cut our water use by 20% but our governments continue to pursue population growth of 20% by 2020?"

"At present rates of growth, our population will be 20 per cent larger by 2020 and 50 per cent larger by 2035."

Population Growth makes every environmental problem harder to solve.

Dr Coulter noted that in 1969 the US National Academy of Science reported:

It now appears that the period of rapid population and industrial growth that has prevailed during the last few centuries, instead of being the normal order of things and capable of continuance into the indefinite future, is actually one of the most abnormal phases of human history. It represents only a brief transitional episode between two very much longer periods each characterised by rates of change so slow as to be regarded essentially as a period of non-growth.

It is paradoxical that although the forthcoming period of non-growth poses no insuperable physical or biological problems, it will entail a fundamental revision of those aspects of our current economic and social thinking which stem from the assumption that the growth rates which have characterised this temporary period can be permanent.

"Successive governments have ignored this message for the past forty years," says Dr Coulter. "Will Kevin Rudd finally initiate the paradigm shift that has to be made or will he merely seek to ring one more twist out of the old and clearly failing growth model?

"Will he recognise that environmental sustainability must be given the highest priority or will he attempt wresting more growth from an already overstretched Nature?"

Further information: John Coulter 08 8388 2153

Submission to Australia 2020 Summit says we cannot afford more population growth

Thu, 2008-04-17 14:51 by Sheila Newman

by Jennie Epstein, from her submission to the Australia 2020 summit. 1. The future of the Australian economy We need a sustainable economy that does not depend on moving our non renewable assets overseas and destroying our biological assets through "development". We need to improve quality of life and level of happiness rather than level of consumption. Our economy should allow everyone to have a reasonable quality of life, no matter what their health status, income, background, sex, religion, age or ethnicity. We also need to ensure that future generations are not disadvantaged by our overuse of resources. What we need is a sustainable, steady state economy that does not damage the environment on which we depend, and does not depend on population growth, which this country can no longer support. Encouraging small families and lower immigration, as well as increasing overseas aid to ensure human rights for all, and women in particular may alleviate the potential for starvation and conflict, which will do nothing for the world economy. Poaching skilled immigrants from developing countries is undermining their future. Our current prosperity should be used to introduce sustainable energy alternatives so we no longer depend on overseas oil markets and dirty coal. Subsidies for renewable enrgy and water supply to all householders and businesses would be more cost efficient than supporting polluting and energy intensive power stations and desalination plants. Encouraging community gardens and local agricultural pursuits would reduce the energy cost of food. Reducing our expenditure on weapons and military hardware and redirecting it to encouraging human potential (education & health) and environmental sustainability will improve our quality of life significantly, and reduce the likelihood of conflict these weapons would be needed for. We need to encompass a whole new way of living that cherishes people and our natural resources and does not destroy them in the name of endless growth which is not possible, and will severely impact on our children and theirs. 3. Population, sustainability, climate change and water I'm writing to express my concern about the continued high rate of population growth in this country. Many people see this as a good thing, and I'm sure it is for those in the building, real estate, car industries etc. but the overall cost to our environment and quality of life is immense. Just about any environmental issue you could think of is exacerbated by population and consumption growth which is encouraged by the government. Apart from environmental effects, there is heavy traffic/ train congestion, loss of open space in suburbs, loss of trees and other vegetation, loss of garden space and water for growing vegetables, and loss of agricultural land for growing food, thus higher transport costs and greenhouse gas emissions. The big issues at present are increasingly unaffordable housing, due largely to high levels of skilled immigrants so demand outstrips supply, and lack of a sustainable water and power supply. Yes, new technologies will "fix" some of these problems in the short term, but the extra energy used to develop pipe lines, desalination plants etc. will add to greenhouse gas emissions. The best thing we can do to reduce our "ecological footprint" is to reduce our level of consumtion and our population. We can reduce our footprints individually, but each extra person will nullify our efforts. Other species on this planet need to be here just as much as we do - please read "A big fix" by Tim Flannery or "On borrowed time: Australia's environmental crisis and what we must do about it" by David Lindenmayer. The economic and social cost of continued "growth" which is reducing our biological and mineral resources, and keeping people away from their families at work and in traffic needs to be taken into account. This is an issue which has been invisible for too long - we need a sustainable population policy to have any sort of sustainable future where we can live in harmony with the planet that supports us. See also: Submission to 2020 summit: End Population Growth, not just manage it

Peak Oil avoided at Rudd's Summit on the Future

Mon, 2008-04-14 18:31 by Sheila Newman

The following was adapted from an article written by Michael Lardelli

Last week Martin Ferguson, the federal Resources and Energy minister, told the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association conference in Perth,

"With only about a decade of known oil resources remaining at today's production rates, Australia is looking down the barrel of a $25bn trade deficit in petroleum products by 2015".

One might therefore expect this to be a hot topic at the summit, but there is not a hint of it in the discussion papers that will frame the debates.

There are only a couple of people on the delegate list with any known background in the area of future oil availability.
The 10 people who applied to attend from Australia's foremost "peak oil" organisation, ASPO-Aus, were all turned down.

Although it is clear that the Rudd government is very concerned about future oil supplies for Australia, bizarrely, all discussion at the summit will be based on the false assumption of ready future availability.