Bipartisan support for a growing population policy for Australia is inextricably linked to Climate Change. In Australia, even if we ignore the issue of climate change it is clear the ecological carrying capacity of the Australian continent has been overstepped by a long way. Australia has the worst species extinction rate of anywhere on earth. We have also exhausted all our surface water supplies in nearly every major city and are now collectively moving to desalination as an answer to our water woes. Whilst we will have water, what will our ecosystems do as climate change intensity increases and rainfall decreases? If that's not bad enough, Australia carries the double whammy of our nation contributing the largest carbon footprint/capita of anywhere on earth.

Our unquestioned population growth policy has many unanswered questions: Some are listed here: What sort of an example are we setting for our nearest Asian/Pacific neighbours when we behave in such an unsustainable way? What hope have we got of influencing their population issues when we can't manage our own? What sort of mixed message are we sending to them and to our own citizens in tackling climate change when our carbon reduction aims are so compromised through a high immigration policy and a $5000 baby bonus? What hope have we got of supporting other countries in the future if we continue to overtax our own country's ability to produce food? Why as part of our immigration intake do we selectively pinch highly qualified persons from other countries to come and work here? Given that Australia could easily double its current intake of refuggees without affecting population growth, why don't we focus on doing that, and in the meantime reduce our overall immigration intake in accordance with an ecologically sustainable approach to managing this continent? Australia's current explosion in population means that amongst other things six new coastal towns are listed across Australia every year. These small towns are being carved into important coastal habitat. How long can this continue before the only thing left on this continent (at least in the medium term) is people?

Whilst nothing is absolute, there are many important advantages to imiting Australia's population to its present level. Eg. Less people means less highly congested roads, better housing affordability, more water, more native birds, animals and habitat; more arable land, and a capacity to produce more food. Most importantly, it means a real chance to tackle our carbon reduction targets. At the moment this is impossible to do effectively because the target has to keep increasing in line with increase in population. Our inability to do that is illistrated no less perfectly than by the present federal government's pathetic 5% carbon reduction targets by 2020. Goodbye Great Barrier Reef, Alps, Kakadu, etc.,eti.

I would love to see this issue discussed at the Summit. A good speaker (eg. Ian Lowe, Tim Flannery, John Coulter, Clive Hamilton, Bob Carr, Mark O'Connor, William Lines etal. could provide an informed perspective on this subject). 

Regards,

Graeme Stockton