You are here

Short Critique of the Australian Greens policy on population growth and climate change

The Australian Greens state:

“We are a party with a philosophy we stand by, a party with its eyes fixed firmly on caring for people and the environment as we meet the 21st century challenges. No one should be left behind as we embrace the environmental, social and economic opportunities in everything from high-speed rail, high-speed broadband, medical technology, solar power, food production, communication, education and technical innovation.”

The Australian Greens will deliver a caring Australia, a safer climate and a proud global reputation. We are the strong, honest party who will stand up to those who protect their own interests to the detriment of the environment and deny everyone else a fair go. It is the Greens who will stand up for what matters.

Einstein once said that you cannot solve problems with the same mindset that created them. (Quote from Christine Milne)


The Greens support 45 million population by 2050 which will increase greenhouse gas emissions by over 90 million tonnes per year.

We produce the highest emissions per capita on earth and the Green plan for addressing this is to continue chaotic expansion of our carbon based economy with a Carbon Tax magic wand to make the fairytale work.

This is a form of pro-Growth extremism that denies reality.

This is the same Population/GDP growth rates that Australia has used since Federation. This is an outdated mindset.

The Greens want to build a population driven, growth-based, economy that defies all the basic rules of sustainability.

The Gillard Carbon Tax was allegedly going to reduce emissions by roughly 60 million tonnes per year.

The Greens seem to think growing the population of Australia at 1.8% per annum (doubling every 40 years) is “Green” when actually it is unsustainable and categorised by numerous "experts" as socially, environmentally and economically destructive.

Once your own environment is destroyed you cannot help others.

The Greens seem to think chaotic expansion at existing extreme growth rates, which are 4 times that of the OECD country average, is a way to achieve disciplined improvement and welfare for all?

They also seem to support deteriorating economic fundamentals driven by extreme population growth – which will directly reduce Australia’s capacity to pay for foreign aid in the future?

Why aren't they calling for a public inquiry? :
Australia requires a public inquiry to determine a basis for the optimum rate of population growth

Image icon greenwashing-tiny.jpg7.58 KB
Image icon greenwashing.jpg34.88 KB


There's no proof or evidence that the use of renewable energies can be ramped up and scaled to meet the needs of "big Australia". All the Greens platitudes about renewable energy, ignoring population growth, make them nothing but a whistle in the wind.

Population growth has a multiplying effect on pollution, land clearing, GHG emissions, demands for fossil fuels, and living standards. Living in apartments and towers, as we are being forced to more and more, is a higher energy consuming lifestyle. There's no recycling, gardening, water harvesting, composting or evaporative cooling of trees and vegetation.

They have become a social justice party, more interested in an open door to asylum seekers and gay marriage.

If you scratch a little under the green facade, you find they are simply a mainstream party with little to contribute to politics except as an alternative to the duopoly of Libs and Labs.

Without a meaningful population policy, one devoid of political correctness and oxymorons, then the Greens have little to offer.

Prominent barrister and asylum seeker advocate Julian Burnside QC is proposing the entire state of Tasmania be declared an immigration detention centre.

Mr Burnside has been in Hobart to talk about the off-shore processing of asylum seekers.

He floated the idea at a public lecture saying the entire state of Tasmania could be a place of detention for asylum seekers who arrive by boat.

Tasmanian solution for asylum seekers

Mr Burnside proposed his headline-grabbing 'Tasmanian solution' during a lecture entitled After the Election - The Future for Asylum Seeker Policy in Australia in the Stanley Burbury Theatre on Thursday 12 September 2013. He has suggested the Federal Government give the Tasmanian Government $1 billion a year as "a thank you".

He said his Tasmania idea was an extension of a "less ironic" proposal to house asylum seekers in regional communities, where they could boost struggling local economies by spending Centrelink benefits.

Tasmanian premier Lara Giddings said she was not aware of the plan.

"I don't really like detention centres for people who are asylum seekers," Ms Giddings said.

We may as well have flights directly from Kabul to Hobart, and declare that this jewelled heritage State rescinds from Australia's sovereignty, and initiates Sharia law!

Tasmanian Greens are backing the plan. State Greens leader Nick McKim has written to Prime Minister-elect Tony Abbott with an invitation to discuss the idea.

"Adoption of this proposal with policy and funding support from your government would be a massive economic, skills and jobs boost for Tasmania, which you recently acknowledged was necessary," Mr McKim's letter reads.

Most of the asylum seekers are low-skilled, and take many years to become employable. Just how does "boosting" the economy fit comfortably with any green" agenda of conservation in Tasmania? Ironically, he suggested that they could be used by build hydro-electric schemes, as done in the past. The Franklin Dam scheme was the very formation of the Wilderness Society, and the beginning of the Greens under Dr Bob Brown! The Greens have lost their way and have become human rights advocates rather than an environmental political party.

The picture says it: The Greens, business people in green suits; ideology masquerading as kindness.
And have the asked the people of Tasmania or Australia?
If they were sincere they would be calling for Australia to pull out of the illegal wars that create asylum seekers from the regions they are coming from.

They obviously have absolutely no interest in Tasmania's biodiversity, except as a marketing device for themselves. They are prepared to see every part of the earth urbanised. As for McKim suggesting boosting hydroelectricity - such a 'Green' is an insult to the history of the Greens in Tasmania.

And 'human rights advocates' is to put to kinder spin on it; these people don't care about our rights or needs or desires; they must be getting something else out of this.

I could say that I don't understand how the Greens got obsessed with the issue of receiving asylum seekers to the almost total exclusion of any environmental or democratic consideration, except that I assume that they benefit in some practical way from the wedge effect of this on Australian politics. Their old supporters have all gone away. I also think that the Socialist Alliance are a big part of what has happened; they have moved in on the Greens and intimidated the real Greens. I take your point, Against Slavery, about the illegal wars. It's like the Greens don't even understand the connection between so many asylum seekers and the wars Australia has joined up in.