Immigration

[Jezza]

With Australia's population having ticked over just 25 million people on Tuesday night, the debate about immigration in this country has intensified. There's strong sentiment from the electorate that immigration numbers to be reduced.

In 2002, the then Immigration Minister, Phillip Ruddock projected if the annual immigration numbers of the time, which were 93,000 a year remained indefinite, Australia wouldn't reach 25 million people until 2050, and later Ruddock increased the numbers to such a rate so that Australia would be on track to reach 25 million in 2040, and yet now the number has already been reached 22 years earlier than expected. If the current immigration numbers are not reduced, it is projected that Australia will have a population of 38 million in 2050.

With the struggles of keeping up with infrastructure, rising house prices, stagnant wages, congestion et al and the concern that new migrants are not dispersing and only settling in the two big cities (Sydney and Melbourne), can Australia afford to sustain the current immigration numbers it has right now?

The political class has tried to ignore this issue for a long time, but its gaining momentum amongst the electorate.

Amongst the G12 nations, Australia has experienced the largest population growth since 2000.

[watt price tully]

The immigration rate has reduced.

I think Tannin summed it up well (immigration) a while ago but bugger me (met of c) co I be stuffed trying to find it.

[Jezza]

True, but does it need to be reduced further?

[What'sinaname]

Wow. Needs to be halved at the very least.

[Pies4shaw]

I think if we start by kicking out all the fringe rightists to make more room for actual humans, that would be a step in the correct direction.

[Mugwump]

[Pies4shaw]

Jezza and his half a dozen or so mates are hardly the stuff of civil war - but I do appreciate that you think that his extreme views are mainstream, rather than extreme-fringe paranoid delusions.

[Mugwump]

[Pies4shaw]

[stui magpie]

Immigration is not a simple issue.

On one hand we have an ageing population population so with zero immigration the pool of taxpayers reduces along with the governments ability to pay for services.

On the other hand, population growth and urban sprawl is already happening faster than the services required. There's also the matter of land. Australia is a big joint but only a very small portion of it is arable land. The urban sprawl is rapidly converting that portion of land that was being used to feed us, into concrete.

Infrastructure planning and population growth may be two different topics but they're closely inter-related so you can't address one without the other.

Personally I think population growth needs to be checked, it can't be allowed to continue at the current rate, but we need to look closely at the consequences of that and how to deal with them.

[thesoretoothsayer]

[K]

[stui magpie]

^

He suggested that Dick the Butcher in Henry IV was correct?

[David]

[Mugwump]