HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1)
2011-03-10 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

POPULATION POLICY

The Hon. R.B. SUCH (Fisher) (12:53): I move:

That this house—

(a) acknowledges the impact of population growth in Australia on climate change, infrastructure and our resources; and

(b) calls on the state and federal governments to develop an appropriate population policy as a matter or urgency.

It is not my intention to spell out what should be in the appropriate policy because there is no point calling for one to be developed if you already have the answers. What I am suggesting is that with a matter as important as the population of this state and this nation, the policy needs to be continually revised and changed in the light of changing circumstances.

We are well aware of the debate over the carbon issue and I will not go into that because that is coming up at a later date, but environmental issues are certainly part of concern about population growth. The impact on infrastructure was a very topical matter some months ago before we had the very generous rainfall, certainly in the eastern part of Australia. In addition, there are issues about impact on farmland such as, to use one example, the Mount Barker area, and pressures on areas like the Southern Vales, the Barossa and so on. There are those particular aspects.

The state government does have a population policy. In fact, the Premier released a publication back in 2004 called Prosperity through People in which, in part, in his foreword he said it is a policy that will see the state 'maintain its current national population share, effectively double its current population growth rate and achieve a population of two million by mid century'. Realistically, that means most of those people would be living in Adelaide, and there are many people who now question the wisdom of having two million people in Adelaide.

There has been a lot of debate about the urban growth boundary and I see, pleasingly, that the government and councils are taking on board the issue that I have been promoting for a long time, and that is to go up in terms of housing development along transport corridors—not just the TOD concept but also above shopping centres. Even allowing for that innovation, which is welcome, we still have significant issues in terms of population pressure.

Likewise, in Australia, where our population is now approximately 22.5 million, we have a major debate going on about what the ultimate population size should be. You cannot suddenly turn on or off the tap for population—it does not work that way—but you can make changes using immigration policies as well as policies that encourage more births in the country.

What I would like to see in terms of a revision of policy is an emphasis more on the quality of life rather than the quantity of life. Sometimes it is called the steady state economy. It does not mean you have no growth. It means you have growth which is focused on improving the quality of life and, for example, you try to have fewer people in prisons, better hospitals, better schools, and so on, rather than simply having more people.

You need a certain number, a critical mass, in order to defend yourself and have economies of scale, but I do not see any virtue in simply pursuing numbers for the sake of numbers. For what purpose? I do not see any value in that at all. Australia is not going to get close to the population of the United States or China in the near future so there is no point trying to gain world status by just having a larger population.

So I am not saying that state and federal governments should not have a population policy, but I am saying that at both a state and federal level it is time the policies and practices were revised and reviewed in the light of, as I said earlier, environmental issues, infrastructure pressures and demands on our resources. That is the purpose of raising this issue. It does get canvassed from time to time, but it is a fundamental issue.

Australia has an impact in the rest of the world because we supply a lot of food to others, we consume a lot of energy, and so on, and I would like to see that our population policies are compatible with not only a productive and constructive lifestyle for all Australians but also that, as a world citizen, we make a contribution in that respect. So I commend this motion to the house.

Debate adjourned on motion of Mrs Geraghty.


[Sitting suspended from 12:59 to 14:00]


PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT