Mark O’Connor to stand for the Australian Senate

16 06 2013

IF you live in Canberra………
There is a very positive article titled  “Advocate of stable population makes bid for ACT marko'connorSenate”   on page 8 of The Canberra Times today 16 June 2013.  It is also on line at http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/advocate-of-stable-population-makes-bid-for-act-senate-20130615-2obg3.html .

With its accompanying photo, it takes up about 4 fifths of the page.

By the way, the “ACT Senate” mentioned in the article’s title is actually the federal Australian Senate. (Two Senate positions are filled from the Australian Capital Territory).

There are a couple of simplifications of Sustainable Party party policy, and not much information about the Party; but all the main issues are well covered, e.g. about refugees not being the problem and about voters deserving a choice.

Omitting the photo, the text of the article runs:

 

MARK O’CONNOR is a somewhat reluctant politician, but for decades he has espoused the need for a sustainable population, born out of his interest in the environment, which he has documented around Australia, primarily through poetry.

 

He is co-author of a book on the population topic, Overloading Australia, which Dick Smith sent to every federal and state politician, and every mayor.

 

But with the major parties continuing to ignore population – what his Stable Population Party considers ”the everything issue” – Mr O’Connor, who also works as a marriage celebrant, is throwing his hat in the ring, running as a Senate candidate for the ACT.

”Until I was 30 I assumed there were old geezers somewhere who worried about the world … I think a lot of young people are that way,” the 68-year-old said.

”By the time they’re out of that phase they’ve got a family and their noses to the grindstone, so with a lot of these groups, it’s retirees who power [them].”

 

It’s one of many things the older generation are good for, he says, dismissing the notion that population growth is necessary to counter the ageing population.

 

”They’re raising this huge fear that there will be three times as many people over 65. But the point is that there are going to more people over 65, but there will be fewer people under 20, and the young are actually the most expensive in the population,” he said.

 

”Not only do they not produce anything themselves until such time as they finish their studies, but they pull other people out of employment – and they need constant minding. Very few old people need to be minded all the time.”

 

There is plenty of economic theory to back up the objection to the Big Australia we are heading towards, with current growth at 1.7 per cent, and a trajectory to 40 million by 2050

 

Mr O’Connor points to US economist Lester Thurow’s estimates that spending 12.5 per cent of GDP is required to expand infrastructure capacity by 1 per cent a year, or about $200,000 per extra person.

 

Against that necessary infrastructure spending, Treasury’s 2010 Intergenerational Report estimated 4.1 per cent of GDP would be needed for extra health and aged care, albeit using the figure of 35 million by 2050.

 

”Our [growth] levels are bizarre by First World standards,” Mr O’Connor said. ”Indonesia is 1.2 per cent – and actively trying to reduce it.

 

”[The birth rate] is just below two, which is exactly where it ought to be for Australia – nice, even-sided generations with some scope to bring in an excess of immigrants over emigrants,” O’Connor said.

 

The problem, he said, was the ”very powerful business lobbies” that want higher immigration levels to create new markets and fill jobs with cheaper labour.

 

”Refugees are not the problem,” he said. ”They’re still just 5 per cent of the intake. You could double refugees if you wanted to and still reduce the immigration intake enormously. There’s no reason we are seeking this huge intake of people. Most First World countries are stable populations and the claim it makes you richer isn’t true either – the world per capita wealth table is dominated by countries under 10 million – most of the Scandinavian countries, for instance.”

 

While Mr O’Connor is not optimistic about his own chances of election, he thinks the issue is gaining traction, and the electorate deserves a choice.

 

”Every nation has both a right and responsibility to keep its population in balance with its resources. The notion that you can grow forever is crazy economics.”

Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/advocate-of-stable-population-makes-bid-for-act-senate-20130615-2obg3.html#ixzz2WKVtC2Gm

Advertisements

Actions

Information

One response

19 06 2013
lemmiwinks

The whole “big = better” bullshit is (unsurprisingly) driven by vested interests. More people = more consumers = more economic “activity”/consumption = more jobs and so on, or so the theory goes. Until the dumb bastards figure out another way to “grow” the economy other than by endless, mindless consumption, they will keep flogging ever higher population.

It would be nice if some economists would promote a steady state economy, but that’s got about as much chance as the stable population party unfortunately.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s