Rupert Murdoch never misses an opportunity to preach to his captive Australian audience that this country must continue rapid immigration-driven population growth.
He usually does so through his media outlets controlled by editors who apparently know instinctively what their master wants the Australian public to think. On other occasions he will do so in person, as he recently did on the occasion of a dinner in honor of immigrant Frank Lowy:
"'In my recent Boyer Lectures I spoke of the importance to Australia's future of a liberal immigration system,' Mr Murdoch said.
"'Few other Australians embody the breadth of achievement or the contribution to Australia's prosperity made by immigrants in this country than Frank Lowy.'"
One of Frank Lowy's more visible contributions to Australia has been the erection, by his Westfield Corporation, of massive sprawling shopping mall complexes in almost every substantial urban agglomeration in this country. Rupert Murdoch evidently fears that, if Australia's current record immigrant influx is not maintained, future generations of Australians will not be able to enjoy equivalent contributions from the potential Frank Lowy's that would be prevented from coming here.
In one of his Boyer Lectures referred to in his speech, Rupert Murdoch stated:
"In my view, Australians should not worry because other people want to come to our country. The day to worry is when immigrants are no longer attracted to our shores."
A possibility not acknowledged by Rupert Murdoch is that overcrowding this country may be precisely what will eventually make this country unattractive to immigrants, or, indeed, to people already living here. This was implicitly acknowledged in an editorial of 18 March 2008 "Queensland faces a tougher job on regional development", which stated#main-fn1">1:
"... much of (Queensland's) growth comprises city refugees making a sea change ..."
If high immigration is as beneficial as Rupert Murdoch insists, why is it that so many of Australians need to flee from the cities into which most immigrants have settled?
The story "English expats make Moreton the only Bay in the village" in Rupert Murdoch's Courier Mail newspaper of 10 January 2009 states:
ESCAPING the overpopulated boroughs of the UK, British immigrants are moving to Brisbane's bayside suburbs, creating their own Little Britain by the Bay."
In the story one women stated, "I would never raise my kids back in England." Another stated " Back in the UK, five-year-olds ... don't know how to play any more."
The overcrowding of both England and the larger southern cities of Australia are precisely the consequence of governments having accepted similar such gratuitous advice in the past from the likes of Rupert Murdoch.
As a consequence, not only have living conditions become intolerable for many, but our very capacity to sustain any sizable population in the longer term, is under threat by runaway population growth brought about to satisfy the insatiable short-term greed of the property speculators and related concerns, whose interests Rupert Murdoch's media promotes.
See also: "English expats make Moreton the only Bay in the village" in the Courier Mail of 10 Jan 09, "Rupert Murdoch urges Aust to open door to migrants" in the Courier Mail of 5 Feb 09, "Honour for Frank Lowy, king of the malls" in the Australian of 6 Feb 09, "How the growth lobby threatens Australia's future" of 24 Jan 09 (also published on Online Opinion with forum discussion).#CopyrightProblems" id="CopyrightProblems">Note: None of the Murdoch newspaper articles, linked to in this paragraph, were available online when I checked just now on 25 Mar 11. However, when I used the title "Rupert Murdoch urges Aust to open door to migrants" (omitting quotes) in a Google search, I found an article with the same title on a site which is openly touting immigration to Australia, www.liveinaustralia.com. Whether it was a straight copy or based on the original, now removed, article in the Courier-Mail it did not say. It seems that important historical documents that could well embarrass some powerful vested interests can no longer be directly cited on the Internet. Many, who would like to retain such records for future reference may not be able to legally do so legally, because of copyright laws. Perhaps it should be made a condition of granting copyright that the owners of the copyrighted work undertake to preserve the work and on-line access to it at least until such time as anyone, who had expressed to the copyright owner interest in having a copy of the work, had been given an opportunity to obtain his/her own copy. If the person seeking copyright is not prepared to give such an undertaking then copyright should be refused. The disappearance from the Internet of articles, cited by me in this article, has driven me to write another article, How copyright laws obstruct the preservation of historically important documents on 26 Mar 11.
#main-fn1" id="main-fn1">1. #main-fn1-txt">↑ See "The Australian laments outcome of Queensland local government elections" of 30 Mar 08. URL of original editorial unknown.