This is great news. I have been watching this issue grow over the past few months. Increasingly it is being discussed on radio, newspapers etc. There is a website which has alot of information, sustainable population australia I think.
I believe many of our present concerns could be reduced by reducing population growth. We are just like any other animal, in that if you place too many in a confined area you get more competition, which means more stress, more violence, more wastage of resources, etc. The smart countries of the world are not greatly increasing their populations. Immigration adds very little or no benefit to the host population. This was recently demonstrated by some of the top economists in the UK including Lord Layard from the London School of Economics. Unfortunately we have too many uneducated people here that fall for the Politicians scams in that we need more people to support our ageing population. What a load of rubbish. Recently I heard one of the Politicians stating that we had an obligation to the rest of the world to ease their population pressures. I say we have no such obligation. Our first obligation is to our fellow Australians to help us live in peace and harmony. It is not our job to solve other nations problems, not at least at our expense. Let us set an example for many nations by limiting our population growth.

Runner

There are real world examples of the infrastructure burden of high population growth rates, and demonstrable benefits from giving people control of their fertility. Iran is a good example, where a high growth rate was causing significant problems. Offering family planning greatly improved things.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_planning_in_Iran

So much so that the Iranian President wants the service removed: He wants the population to double as he wants a big army to fight you know who. I mention this not to liken you to the Iranian President, but to demonstrate the foolishness of relating an opinion on population growth to one's morality.

Banjo

I wouldn't be so pessimistic about the media. And if you think the media had anything to do with Hanson's decline (I dont), then in my view they have done the nation a big favour. Look at the situation in the UK where you have the neo-nazi looney Nick Griffin and his BNP poisoning the debate. Hopefully the new party will be able to stay out of the gutter and stick with the facts. Plenty of those.

It will be interesting to see what the Greens come up with for the next election. I suspect they will remain silent on population sustainability, they are too scared it will impact on other aspects of their humanitarian philosophy. It shouldn't in theory, population sustainability is very much a humanitarian issue but can easily be turned into a racism issue or an issue about multiculturalism.

With poor water resources, continual deforestation and growing infrastructure problems in our cities it should be an open and shut case but if OLO is any indication it probably won't be.

If the Stable Population Party remains a one-issue alternative it might get up in the Senate but it will also need a clear set of policies on all vital areas such as economy, environment, health, education, transport, trade etc if it wants to win seats in the HOR.

Zero population means zero growth, sounds like another AU 1st party to me.

Ludwig,
one of the problem issues with a single issue and the concept is that without specific methods it is beyond the capacity of some to understand. They (I think you know what I mean [A]) tend to see issues overly simplistically or overtly parochially consequently it frightens the bjesus out of them, siege mentality and conspiracy theories ensue.
Without a larger philosophic focus it attracts those who are closet xenophobes.

Fester,
I was not being pessimistic. Just a real and objective look at the situation.

Yes the media had much to do with the rise and fall of Pauline. Firstly they took items out of context and made up much of what they wrote. Then did not print anything that was reasonable, like policies.
They were working at the behest of the two major parties.

All journalists felt it ok to say whatever they liked and did.

During that period my opinion of journalists fell dramaticly, as did my opinion of some polies that I had previously held in high regard.

Back to topic. There are some very powerfull people that support high immigration and the two major parties are in their pockets. The MSM will support these because of the money spent on advertising, especially during election campaigns.

He who pays the piper calls the tune.

So any new party is up against it, even to get the administrative work done beforehand and then will have to say some radical things to get any press attention. If they do not form branches and so on, they will be alleged to be non-democratic, when they get public support.

The greens will not publicly support them either because they want Labor preferences to gain Senate seats. Greens are hypocritics.

Take it from me, that is the situation even as I support the objectives of the new party.