You are here

Victorian Candidates who support wider public debate on stable population - per SOS survey

Save our Suburb's Planning Survey exposes some fascinating trends among independents and small parties on population policy. I have put together some data on Victorian candidates for this coming election with regard to the population question on the poll plus any remarks. This was a late night operation and some candidates' remarks were partly obscured in the copy I made. Some Greens said they were in favour of such a policy, but I note that their own policy has for years avoided mentioning immigration and places the issue at a vague global level. It is well-known that this is a contentious issue with the Greens and that members and candidates tend to get punished for mentioning it and every attempt at workable local policy is suffocated from the top. Two Labor candidates - amazingly - said they were in favour of the policy. Note that the responses to the whole questionnaire are available here: http://sos.asn.au/vic/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/141117-Planning-Survey-of-Candidates-RO.xlsx UPDATE: As the survey is updated every 48 hours to include candidate responses, It might be best to use these links: Trend results and Individual candidate responses

Here is the question candidates were asked in the SOS poll, to which 35 had responded positively by 21 November 2014:

"While ensuring that human rights are protected, would you support wider public debate on a stable population policy for Victoria in order to address ecological sustainability, as well as infrastructure and employment impacts?"

Candidates who said they were in favour of such a policy were:

Australian Cyclists Party (All regions)
Voice for the West (Altona, Broadmeadows, Essendon, Footscray, Koroit, Melbourne, Melton, Niddrie, St Albans, Sunbury, Sydenham, Tarneeit, Werribee, Williamstown.
John Rinaldi, Independent, for Broadmeadows.
Calre LeServe, Independent for Bass.

Nigel Hicks, Independent for Murray Plains.
Lynette Bell, Rise Up Australia for East Bendigo
Christopher Byrne, Independent for Eltham.

Peter Gardney, Climate Emergency, Gippsland East.
Robert Anderson, Independent for Hastings.
Matt DeLeon, Independent for Melton.
Jordan Crook, Save the Planet Party for Monbulk.
Dr Eleonora Lullone, Animal Justice Party, Prahran.
Alan Menadue, Independent: Anti GST, Anti-Privatisation of Social ... for Prahran.
Tom Keel, Independent for City Living of Richmond.
Michael Challinger, Independent opposing selling off of public assets ... for Ringwood.
Jamie Overend, Animal Justice Party for South Barwon.
Safwat Ali, Independent for Tarneit.
Thomas Di Parma, Independent for reducing congestion, crime... for Thomastown.
Brenton Edgecombe, Animal Justice Party for Eastern Metropolitan.
Voice for the West for Western Metropolitan, Western Victoria, Northern Metropolitan
Maria McLaverty, Animal justice Party for Northern Metropolitcan.
Bruce Poon, Animal Justice Party for Northern Metropolitan.
Andy Meddick, Animal Justice Party for Western Victoria.
James Purcell, Vote 1 Local, for Western Victoria.
Joel Martin, Independent, Return TAFE and uni to the Yarra Valley, for Croydon.

Greens who said, "Yes", (in contradiction to their party policy and record.)

Most people aware of population politics know that the Greens always support the Liberal Party and the Labor Party's big population policies and their policy is mostly a vague one about 'global' population.

Bill Pemberton of the Greens Box Hill, responded with "Yes," and stood out from his fellows by adding the following remark, courageous for a Green:

"Although a Federal issue 2000 people a week coming to live in Melbourne is unsustainable."

Daniel Caffrey of the Greens for Morewell, also responded "Yes."
Bruce Lindsay, Greens, Geelong also responded "Yes."
Rod May, Greens for Ripon, also responded "Yes."
Steven Merriel, Greens for Oakleigh, also responded "Yes."
Danel Caffrey, Greens for Morwell, also responded "Yes."
Paul Kennedy, Greens Ivanhoe, also responded "Yes."
Clem Stanyon, Greens, for Bundoora, also responded "Yes."

Labor Party candidates who said "Yes" in apparent divergence from Party policy.

Steve Hosing, Labor Hastings. This is exceptional for a Labor candidate!
Ian Spencer, Australian Labor Party for South East Metropolitan. This is exceptional for a Labor candidate!

Socialist Alliance vehemence against democratic consultation continues

Sean Brocklehurst, Socialist Alliance for Pascoe Vale is typically opposed to a democratic population policy and has written remarks to that effect, also relying on the old racists posing as ecologists argument to discredit the validity of the issue.

Comments

I think it was Steven Armstrong who told me there are two groups, the old Greens, the environmentalists, and the more Social Justice oriented (I would say quasi-Socialist) new Greens.

As for Socialist Alliance, I've had the fortune of speaking to some Socialists in the past, and many advocate violent revolution, have a disdain for working Australians and advocate some weird system where parents don't get to raise their children, rather children are raised communally by the state. Some boasted to me about using violence and intimidation to silence "facists" and "racists" and I've personally been threatened with violence by them.

It strikes me as odd that the state doesn't come down on them harder,

I'd like to point out the parties they accuse of fascism and racism, such as Australian First, don't engage in such behaviour.

PS. I've just gotten off the phone from a representative of the Greens party. She agreed that rampant growth and population is an issue, and pointed out that while I was sceptical of the effectiveness of their housing policy, at least they had one which puts them above the other candidates (with the possible exception of the Christians). I pointed out that while many in the Greens may share my view, the public message doesn't make this as clear and explicit as perhaps they should.

So I suspect the Greens is a party which is best examined by the inclinations of its individual members, rather than its publicly stated policies?

Robert Hoddle wrote the following, containing updates regarding the SOS survey:

Good on you for the CDB article
"Victorian Candidates who support wider public debate on stable population - per SOS survey"
Sat, 2014-11-22 23:15 which has kindly just been forwarded to me.

1) Are you aware that our most important candidate - Steven Armstrong - is missing from the article?
His results only went onto the SOS website yesterday as at
Latest update of individual responses: 141122 Planning Survey Candidates RO
http://sos.asn.au/vic/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/141122-Planning-Survey-Candidates-RO1.xlsx
It would be useful for completeness if the article included his results.

2) I found the Australian Democrats are unusual in having an explicit sustainable population policy as on their website at Population and Immigration. (pdf)
URL http://sos.asn.au/vic/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/141122-Planning-Survey-Candidates-RO1.xlsx viz..

"To ensure our continent’s long-term sustainability, we aim to first stabilise then reduce Australia’s population to an ecologically sustainable level."

Sadly in contradiction of this, I found in recent personal conversation with their Vic Upper House candidate (Southern Metropolitan Region), Clive Jackson from Oakleigh that he personally is quite unconcerned about rapid population growth and high immigration as "there is plenty of room left". [Guaranteed exact quote from personal convo last week]. His bio, otherwise environmentally aware, is at http://vic.australian-democrats.org.au/ He is actually a planner with the Victorian Dept of Human Services (DHS) concerned about housing unaffordability. Yet he has apparently not made the direct connection between high immigration and housing unaffordability.

Robert Hoddle

Next Thursday Catalyst on ABC TV will tackle Australia's soaring population problem and show some 'innovative solutions'. It seems likely that not even one of these 'solutions' will have anything to do with reducing population growth, let alone reaching a stable population. Techno-fixes to the rescue - rather than democracy and ceasing population boosting is probable since "Their" ABC supports the growth lobby and big business.

To be ready to point out the expected omission of population growth reduction be ready to send your feedback to:-

To be ready to point out the expected omission of population growth reduction be ready to send your feedback to:-

http://www.abc.net.au/contact/contactabc.htm

Did the candidates say yes to a wider public debate; or say yes to a stable population policy? These are completely different things.

NEARLY 200 people attended an anti-development meeting at Byron Bay Community Centre last Thursday night, organised by the Byron Residents Group.

The meeting brought together locals, including young people, opposing the West Byron Development and the planned Seniors Living development surrounding the new Byron Hospital, both on Ewingsdale Rd.

New Voice for youth

The Byron Residents Group say the minister is being misled by planning Minister Pru Goward's department about the supposed need for the housing development and state planners were ‘cooking up a planning shortage’ of housing in Byron shire that did not exist in order to justify the West Byron development.

Department of Planning and Environment (DoPE) population projections, which are used to identify future housing needs, varied widely. A 2013 estimate of a 3.2 per cent population growth for Byron Shire from 2011-2031 increased almost six-fold to 18 per cent less than a year later. Once the retrograde "developments" are approved, of course the population will increase six fold!

This revision is highly suspect and seems intended to justify the over-development of Byron Bay.

Residents are prepared to protect their living standards, amenities and local environment from predatory property developers, with their destructive intentions.

Rezoning approval by the state government of a 108-hectare site for the West Byron housing/commercial development angered residents who say the up to 1,100 houses proposed would make traffic congestion along Ewingsdale Road much worse than it already is.

They also say a large area of wetland and koala habitat there will be severely affected. A rezoning application for the controversial West Byron housing development was approved by the State Government in November.

The rezoning was the major hurdle for the developers of the West Byron Project, among them millionaire Queensland property developer Steve Agnew who is behind another controversial development at Great Keppel Island. And the state government is also backing the developers’ bid for tiny, 150-square metre allotments in both subdivisions.

94% of Ewingsdale residents say No! They don’t want to make Ewingsdale built up like Nerang on the Gold Coast. With all the hundreds of extra people in their cars attending to the seniors and adding to the Ewingsdale Road traffic chaos will just enrage the traffic gridlock situation. The plans are very ambitious profit driven for this sensitive rural ‘Regionally Significant Farmland’ area. This creek is below the heritage-listed Higgins Homestead on either side.

At West Byron, the minister for planning has now zoned core koala habitat for housing, allowed mapped actual acid sulfate soils to be drained and dug down to a metre without further assessment, failed to ensure development does not commence until the bypass and other traffic solutions are implemented, and taken the unprecedented step of allowing subdivisions down to 150 square metres in both residential zones.

Minister misled need for rezone of West Byron

Byron Residents' Group president Cate Coorey said the group had invited local MPs and Byron Shire councillors to attend the meeting at the Byron Community Centre. "The people of Byron are outraged at the town's future being decided by developers, aided by members of council," Ms Coorey said.