Eco online

ECO talks with former Australian of the Year, author, scientist and renowned conservationist, Tim Flannery.

Tim Flannery

ECO: As far back as 1995 you were advocating a population policy by 2005 with an ultimate target looking out two centuries. Nothing has been done – in fact we seem to be heading to unsustainability at a much faster pace. What do you say to that?

TIM: I think that’s pretty much correct. Well, we need a population policy in this country rather than a series of programs that simply boost that population. We’ve got a number of pro-natalist programs and immigration programs, but we don’t have an over-arching population policy based on our environmental assessments, social assessments, and an economic assessment as to what the true population needs of our country are over the medium to long term. And that’s what we need.

ECO: How do you feel that even after all this time that the only decision as far as population policy is concerned is to not have a real decision at all and to let Australia head for limitless growth?
TIM: We have to win these battles but it takes a long time to do that. It took us a long time to get an environment minister in this country. Unfortunately, until enough people want this and understand the problem it doesn’t become a political priority. And, of course, one of the difficulties is we’re seeking to take something away from politicians effectively. At the moment they are at least arguably responsible for setting the programs and their parameters. It is all hard at the moment, but we have to keep pushing.

ECO: What size of population is sustainable in Australia and what should we do now that we may already be past that point?
TIM: We don’t know the sustainable population of Australia – and that’s one of the great tragedies. The government has never asked for a commission or commissioned a group to try to do that. That would be the first job of an independent body that would help set population targets into the future. But we just don’t know at the moment what the optimum population for this country is and therefore what sort of population size we should be aiming for by 2030 0r 2050.

ECO: Why can’t our leading decision-makers get their heads around this issue?
TIM: It’s a failing of all governments, not just this one. No government has done it before. Part of the problem is that government likes to have more taxpayers – they like growth just like businesses like to have more customers. They like growth as well.  But the populace as a whole doesn’t necessarily want high rates of growth. We have to deepen our democracy to the point where this becomes a real imperative politically.

ECO: Where should we be by 2020 let alone 2050 because of the world’s deteriorating food supply problem and with Australia having to feed more of its own? How will that change our dealings with the rest of the world?
TIM: A good question – for the agriculture minister. I haven’t seen the latest figures on our food security situation but my guess is that we are using more food domestically and exporting less than we were 30 years ago. I’d like to see the figures on that. That’s one of the factors that have to feed into a population policy.

ECO: How will the Catch 22 dilemma ultimately be resolved -- the dilemma being how to sustain the Australian lifestyle that some tell us needs a growing economy which in turn needs a growing population where more people use up more of our finite resources in a shorter space of time and quickly destroy the lifestyle  we love so much?
TIM: I don’t believe a vibrant economy needs a growing population. There are plenty of countries in the world with stable or even declining populations that have a good economic status. It’s a matter of decoupling those two things to some extent. I think that’s entirely possible and, of course, every country in the world is going to have to do that in the medium term. It looks as if the world population will peak around 2050. So I think we can do that.

ECO: The social culture of many immigrants is to have large families. How do we deal with that issue?
TIM: What you have to do is have a national population policy with some rough targets. They are only guidelines, of course. Government can’t dictate family size to people but what we want to do is just have an overall policy setting which at least nudges the population towards where we think we might want to be.

ECO: On the issue of carrying capacity how do we reach that figure and how do we manage the country once we go past it? Does it mean we would then have to sacrifice our present level of living, which would be political dynamite?
TIM: No one knows what the optimum population for Australia is at this moment. We don’t have those figures. That’s the first job of any government or anyone who is concerned with this; to try to set up some kind of medium- to long-term target. Of course, population only changes very, very slowly. So you really need to deal with 20 year and 40 year time frames and so forth.

ECO: How can we win the argument and get politicians to see commonsense and no longer be blinded by vested business interests and perhaps their selfishness?
TIM: Again, we have to deepen our democracy to the point where people actually do get a say in it. One political party needs to put up a strong proposal about some sort of Reserve Bank board- type structure that would help set those medium to long term targets. That’s the only way we’ll get change in this area.

ECO: Is stabilisation of population an option? How do you get to that steady state situation?
TIM: The United Nations projections for world population are that it will stabilise around 2050 at around 9 billion. Many countries have already stabilised their populations. Of course it’s an option. How you get there is through good government policy, if that’s what you want to achieve.

ECO: What are your views on the increasing number of debates and forums about the population/growth issue?
TIM: They’re useful. Where there is a rational debate about this and you have a good cross-section of views – yes, then I think it is worth discussing the issue.

ECO: What is your greatest fear and your greatest hope now on the population issue?
TIM: My greatest fear is that things continue as they are. My greatest hope is that we end up with a rational population policy and an independent body that sets the medium to long-term population figures for the country.

Advertisement
 Powered by Max Banner Ads 

Related articles:

1. Population: looking at the numbers with Bob Abbot
2. Population: perpetual growth is not the answer
3. Jamming us in
4. South East Queensland Regional Plan: a ‘scary blueprint’