The question is, where and when will it all stop.

I guess Australia might seem like the land of milk and honey, especially our welfare system.

Already housing affordability is beyond the reach of people like myself, waiting lists in public hospitals are getting longer and longer.

Paradoxically our Federal government wants to reduce green house gas emissions, and at the same increase the population size of Australia, I guess they can fit a square peg into a round hole.

The costs for a larger population are why they are talking up big massive cities to thrive and to accept the death of regional Australia. Without mining there would be nothing outside the big cities. Even in mining towns there is no investment in community. Housing prices are too high for non-mine workforce and the towns quite shabby. The money earned is taken back to town by FIFO workforce. Agriculture workforce is the exploited foreign worker. There is zero committment to growth outside cities because it is too expensive.

I favour separation of the North above the Capricorn line as nobody is interested in it aside as a money pit. This new nation has loads of water and loads of land and could easily support 20 million people on it's own. Indigenous could have a far greater say in this new mining rich country, it's culture and it's development and prosper as they should have already.

Not sure how Australia can keeping growing Sydney, Melbourne. Brisbane only.

The JamesH, TheMissus,

The whole premise of this article is flawed.

Boey provides ZERO evidence that Australians conflate asylum seekers and immigration. In my experience most Australians recognise that these are two separate issues.

Boey also writes:

"The government's obvious response to the asylum seeker issue should be to point out the tiny number of people arriving as asylum seekers relative to Australia's formal immigration program."

This is Taurine fertiliser on two levels.

--In the case of immigrants we hope we know who we are getting. We assume the vetting process has weeded out those able to adapt to life in Australia from those who cannot. As an immigrant I can attest that the vetting process is quite thorough. A mountain of documentation has to be supplied. By contrast asylum seekers deliberately destroy all means of identification before they arrive. Establishing the identity of an asylum seeker can be difficult. We have no idea whether they will sink or swim in Australia and, as a matter of plain fact, many sink.

--The numbers involved are small NOW. We have no idea how quickly they may grow. Evidence from Europe suggests that once a reliable people smuggling route is established the numbers balloon quickly.

None of this says we should refrain from taking in asylum seekers. But people who advocate an "open doors" policy need to be honest about the likely impact

No we should not.
Howard , Rudd and Turnbull are paranoid , these Shri Lankan people are not seeking a new zoo they are humans just like us . They seek a fair go in a civilized Country , hey "That's us !" Well nearly .

What we are doing with that ship is uncivilized for example it is set up for a crew of 45 ; this means it is deficient by a ratio of 2:1 for fresh water and Toilet facilities and Food preparation also adding to health considerations inadequate Air Conditioning and ventilation . Don't forget this is happening in the Tropics , the Galley will be a disaster area waiting for an outbreak to happen while "Nero Rudd" waits for something to pass?

Is it the "Black Bear and Faceless Woman" that they are escaping from or are they "Untouchables" what is driving the Oz paranoia and SL escapism .

Then we have Garrets Mob the Greens who have just found out that fire burns faster up hills (don't laugh it real , do Greens lack IQ?) (Marysville ABC) The Greens have found out that OZ is vastly overpopulated .........87 SL's will tip the balance !

SO that Ship is saving us , probably 750,000 dollars a day it's gotta be a great Kevvie solution plus it stops the Greens breeding .

Regarding GDP.

WE could probably increase productivity if we halted immigration a year or two. Immigration has becoming like buying a new outfit everytime you go out. At some stage it is best to re-visit what you already have and do some alterations.

We have a lot of inefficient business and government processes. We probably have 5 years immigration intake in under-employed labour. Many prejudices in the workplace and inflexible attitudes. Too many training centers and not enough on the job training.

Steven,
I agree with you, the illegal boat people debate has nothing to do with immigration or population levels.

People dislike the illegals coming simply because they are imposing themselves on us. They have not been invited or vetted and they hide their identities. In fact they are gate crashing and deceiving us.

We get about 2000 people a year arriving legally and then seeking asylum which is granted. The difference is that they have docs supporting their claim and we can check their bona fides. The ones that do not get refugee status are required to leave. Most people have no problem with genuine refugees being granted asylum.

General immigration policy is an entirely different matter and in my opinion the major parties have been lax in not putting forward any concept of a population policy.

We need an open and honest discussion on population. It is not helpfull in the slightest that the major parties have an agreement not to debate immigration matters.

KCB

<< And any sympathy for refugees has not been helped by the "tactics" used by some of them, such as resorting to hunger strikes and threats to blow up their ships, in trying to "force" the hand of Australian authorities. >>

I'm sure the asylum seekers are well aware that the tactics some of them are resorting to will not win them much in the way of community support. It speaks highly as to their level of desperation. They know they are genuine refugees. Many have a piece of paper to prove it and yet they're expected to wait indefinitely for years rolling into decades, with their lives on hold and no prospect of resettlement in sight. I think we'd all become a little desperate in such circumstances.

I'm not in favour of Kevin Rudd's 'big' Australia. Our land and water resources are already struggling and the situation will only worsen as the effects of climate change really start to kick in. I'm all for reducing our current levels of immigration, but strongly support an honouring of our humanitarian commitments.

The problem we and all modern consumerist societies have is that our continued economic 'growth' depends on having an ever increasing population and ever expanding markets. We're locked into a self-destructive cycle and unless we learn to live with less and live sustainably we're in for some very hard lessons ahead.

Banjo ' so you were invited to come here ?

I don't know that I was , all I know my family paid to come here , they bought a demountable building while the ship victualed at South Africa when the Ship arrived at Adelaide it was discovered that the first Governor of South Australia was to be accommodated in a Tent !
My forfather learning of this slight at the Kings Representative insisted the Gov vacate his tent to reside in his flash new demountable . So my family then became a guests of His Majesties Representative . So all this must better your tenure even though I can't flash an invitation like yours .
On the balance of probabilities I am the Stud .

Bronwyn,

The argument that high population growth is necessary for economic prosperity is belied by international comparisons. These statistics are from the CIA World Factbook for the top 10 countries on the World Economic Forum Competitiveness Index plus Australia. The population growth rate for Australia is from the latest (March 2009) ABS figures.

Country, Pop. Growth Rate, GNP per capita, Gini Index

Switzerland 0.276%, $41,800, 33.7
United States 0.975%, $46,000, 45
Singapore 0.998%, $51,500, 48.1
Sweden 0.158%, $38,100, 23
Denmark 0.28%, $37,100, 24
Finland 0.098%, $36,900, 29.5
Germany -0.053%, $35,400, 27
Japan -0.191%, $34,000, 38.1
Canada 0.817%, $39,100, 32.1
Netherlands 0.412%, $40,400, 30.9
Australia 2.1%, $38,100, 30.5

The Gini index measures social inequality. A higher number means more inequality. The GNP per capita figures are purchasing power parity. Note that none of these countries, all doing better than us by the reckoning of the World Economic Forum, has even half our population growth rate, and some are even losing population.

Population growth is good, however - for the top 1% of the population. They want bigger markets, effortless profits from real estate speculation, and a cheap, compliant work force, preferably educated and trained at someone else's expense. It is the rest of us who get to put up with crowding, water rationing, losing our gardens, etc.

Immigration to Australia should have stopped at least a decade ago. But, both major parties are obsessed with big populations while, at the same time, sitting back and watching Australia jobs going overseas, and the water supplies west of the Great Dividing Range steadily disappearing.

These brilliant ‘leaders’ now have us in a situation where there are not enough jobs for the people already here, and not enough water to guarantee supply in the future. But still they want more people!

Added to that, no recognition is given to the fact that two-thirds of the country is uninhabitable. And, there’s no point in talking about science and what it can do accommodate more people; our idiot politicians can’t even provide the current population with infrastructure or even proper housing.

We should be reducing population, not increasing it.

We have never had it better. More money, more toys, better cars, tons of food, plenty of water. We should be sharing but also should have a say who we share with. Even today we can't get fruit pickers and people to live outside of the cities. Get out of your self and see we have an abundance to share with other grateful recipients. My life has been greatly enhanced by immigrants that have integrated. I hope it continues for a long time. Having successive incompetent State Governments (mainly Labour) has led to jammed road systems in most cities. Sort that out and you can still have a beach to yourself in many parts of Australia. Stop being so selfish.

I think if there are no cities that can take any immigrants (be it too crowded, heavy consumption of resources, or just plain prejudiced) then those places need to be put off the list of places to go- and if none are present then it may have to be an option. We'd need to maintain a much more sophisticated (and publicly-accessible) index of such criteria than we do now.

I think we should also strongly favor conventional immigrants, and asylum seekers under clear danger from our immediate region (South-East Asia).

And we should also have very strict character-testing as a condition of gaining citizenship and willingness to respect local laws and rules.

Although keep in mind I'm also very wary of the above, as I don't think it quite appropriate that people need to be cross-examined so closely on condition of entry- perhaps only those who arrive without papers, as refugees from a more distant country, or have some other dubious aspect?

Excuse me, but isn't Australia 2/3 desert? Who will feed these newcomers? Currently a lot of agricultural land is being targeted/bought up for coal mining/gassification in Qld., e.g. around Miles/Chinchilla, Felton, Kingaroy, Alpha; is this why we are now buying frozen veggies from China, also biscuits? Toowoomba's water supply is now at 8%.

Perhaps you might all like to introduce a one child policy? It worked so well in China.

This is a big problem with conflicting needs and wants, doing just one thing will not solve problems elsewhere. All these "systems" are interconnected in some way. It takes a leader to step right back and re-adjust the chess board. This is an emotional issue where I don't believe for a millisecond that anyone has the right response or answer because their thinking is clouded in misinformation and assumptions. The only thing we can be sure about is that things change - how we deal with that change will either help us or hinder us.

Lets build at least one city that can sustainably support, say, half a million people.
When we can get one city to work...then we can plan for "big Australia".
The policy of Howard: high immigration to prop-up housing whilst vilifying refugees, has been continued by Rudd.
We did not weather the GFC...we delayed it by unsustainable growth. It will hit Australia soon.
Instead of being world leaders in solar, wind and sustainable building and farming we have followed England and the US by letting bankers control our economy. What fools our "leaders" (both business and government) are!

Yes we should, we need a bit of a rest from chewing. We have been eating wave after wave of people, chewing them up, & turning them into Ozies. We've been doing it for so long now, that we are quite a bit less Ozie than we were, & perhaps a bit less accepting, & definately tired of chewing.

There has always been the whinging pom, but after WW11 they were joined by the reffos. Well we put them to work, building the Snowy, & other stuff, & then they were Ozies.

The next lot, the dagoes, wops, & wogs were a bit harder. A few old ozies were hurt, when they took over some areas, but a bit more hard chewing, we put them to work, building cars, fridges, washing machines, & roads, & then they were Ozies.

Then it was the gooks, & this is harder. They not only talk different, they look different. But their kids do studdy hard, & do things some of us are getting too lazy to do, like become doctors, so I think we'll get there soon, & they'll all be Ozies.

I must say, the jury is still out on our Islamic new comers. It appears many of them don't want to be Ozies, which does not do much for the cause.

Now a new flood. When I go into a public housing area, & after asking 6 people for directions, I am yet to find someone who speaks english, I start to wonder what I'm paying taxes for. It is definitely not to house thousands of immigrants, when thousands of old Ozies can't afford the rents charged privately.

It is not to pay welfare to communities where 70% are still claiming it, 2 years after arival.

We have always looked after our own, but we are starting to disown more of those living among us. It's time to take some real care, old Ozies, with their backs up, are very dangerous people.

It is time for a new leader who is strong enough to lead this country. The only person who has stood up to be counted on the boat people joke is Barnaby JOyuce. And it is time to re look at the treaty signed with the united nations.

Runner says that there is "plenty of water". There are places in Tasmania and the tropical North where this is true, but it is a joke to most of the rest of us, especially when we read endless newspaper reports of conflict over water. According to this fact sheet from the Murray Darling Basin Commission, only 21% of the run-off now reaches the ocean, as opposed to 54% under natural conditions, i.e., we are already using most of the available water.

http://www2.mdbc.gov.au/__data/page/20/MDB-WaterResources-FactSheet-July2006.pdf

Note that 39% of our food (by value) is grown in the Murray Darling Basin.

There are also permanent water restrictions in most of our cities, with people encouraged to spy on their neighbours. Water bills are due to go up sharply, by 30% in the Sydney Basin according to a Sydney Morning Herald report, even though less is being used per capita, to pay for desalination plants. In Sydney's case, the plant will only be able to supply 15% of the requirements of the existing population. By the way, although some people may prefer the city, most have no choice. The city is where the jobs are, and unemployed people can have their dole cut off if they move to the country.

The argument to not be selfish can easily be extended into more and more areas. Private cars and air conditioners are selfish. Air travel is selfish. Having a pet or garden is selfish. Eating meat is selfish. Wanting clean clothes and a shower every day is selfish. Wanting privacy is selfish... The net result is for everyone to live like a battery chicken so that we can cram in more and more of us, but perhaps Runner doesn't care because he is expecting Brownie points in heaven for it.

The immigration tsunami unleashed upon this country by the Rudd Government is not only having a negative impact on our quality of life through a combination of higher housing costs, lower wages, increased job competition, growing urban congestion, worsening water shortages, strained public services and infrastructure etc., it also threatens the very survival of our country's historic population and culture. There is a strong feeling out there that we - unhyphenated Australians - are losing our country. The cultural and ethnic makeup of our society is rapidly changing, with many long-standing Australians increasingly feeling like strangers in their own land. At the current rapid rate at which immigration is transforming our nation, traditional Anglo-Celtic Australia will soon be little more than a fading memory.

Australians were never asked whether they wanted their country so radically and permanently transmogrified through massive immigration from the Third World. They were never asked whether they were comfortable with the prospect of becoming a minority in the country their forebears founded and built. And yet it is happening, highlighting the undemocratic manner in which immigration policy continues to be formulated in this country.

Sorry Efranke, I'm going to have to disagree with it all.

First of all, Kevin Rudd never unleashed ANY so-called 'immigration tsunami'. It was your own past governments collectively contributing to the current multiculturalist nature of Australian society, simply by leaving them be. Gough Whitlam first supported migrants and equality in the Australian attitude toward such people. Governments following showed support showing no objection to this policy and new-found attitude. Ergo, we cannot put such blame (if any) on Rudd. I'd like to highlight that if we are indeed discussing the matter of population increase via legal methods, we are not talking of immigrants, but simply migrants (ie. how can a prime minister allow for ILLEGAL migrants in Australia.. which he hasn't).

Moreover, you stated
"The cultural and ethnic makeup of our society is rapidly changing".
Allow me to bring you to the 21st Century buddy, this makup never rapidly changed, it slowly transformed from the Whitlam years (early 70's) to what it currently is. How can long-standing Australians feel neglected when they recieve EXACTLY the same treatment as migrants? If these long-standing Australians feel outcasted by a now diverse Australian society, then welcome to the world of a migrant. If my history study for Year 10 School Certificate has done me any good, it's shown me why we shouldn't keep people out of Australia.

Immigration policy was collectively formed through 30 years of politics, and should the government even think about changing its perspective on immigration it'll take 30 years of undoing such policy. Don't hold your breath mate.