Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Water shortages: It's the population stupid!

By Tom Gosling - posted Wednesday, 15 February 2006


This blow-out has been one of the most successful two-card tricks ever played in Australian politics: because it talks tough and acts tough on boat people, the public is convinced that the Howard Government is tough on immigration, while in reality it has opened the floodgates to the highest continuous rates of immigration the country has ever seen.

The property development lobby strongly supports this high immigration, as do Australia’s wealthy and government-protected media companies, whose “rivers of gold” flow from the weekly advertising of real estate. Powerful lobby groups such as the Housing Industry Association, the Australian Institute of Urban Development, the Australian Population Institute and the Australian Property Council keep the pressure on politicians and remind them where their bread and butter is.

If you doubt for a moment that these contributions exist and are important, have a look at the website of the Australians Property Council, complaining about a proposal by the NSW Greens to ban them from making following political contributions. The Property Council gripes “the NSW Greens that wish to impose political apartheid on a single sector of the community. Not only did (their) bill aim to ban companies from making donations, the directors of major development companies would have been barred from contributing financially to political parties. Even attending fund raisers could result in a fine. Are the Greens seriously saying that those who take this multi-billion-dollar risk should have less access to the political process than a convicted murderer?”

Advertisement

The fact that the Property Council is reacting so strongly to a suggestion that it be stopped from making political contributions is fairly strong evidence that the political contributions are very important to its members - not for the good of the community, of course, but to enable them to continue to be able to make a dollar - well, lots of dollars.

So what’s in population growth for the average Australian? Nothing, except higher house prices and rents, more congested roads and transport, more pollution and waste, more apartment blocks, more crowds everywhere, more pressure on our parks and nature reserves - AND, of course, less water per capita.

If you don’t believe me, check out the Productivity Commission’s report of January 17, 2006, which showed Australians’ per capita income would be only 0.06 per cent higher if we had 50 per cent higher skilled immigration over the next 20 years.

Not only would there be negligible economic gain, but the Productivity Commission said there would obviously be environmental costs, but it could not take these into account because they are “externalities”, too difficult to count using conventional economic methods.

The costs mentioned, but not counted, by the Productivity Commission included air, river and ocean pollution, land degradation, increased use of natural resources, biodiversity loss, increased congestion of roads and public transport - and, of course, the increased water use that would result from higher immigration.

According to the Productivity Commission, there would be an average increase in income (more for the rich, less for the poor) of $6.44 a week, in 2003 dollars. Let’s be very generous and say the average worker would get $3 a week extra. How much out of that would he or she have to pay to compensate for the environmental costs of higher population - for instance, how much extra would their water cost?

Advertisement

As a sign of things to come The Courier-Mail in Brisbane reported late in January that local government water charges could rise by up to $185 a year per ratepayer under a $3 billion emergency water package announced by the Queensland Government.

SEQ Water has blamed an “unpredictable climate shift” on dams drying up, but The Courier-Mail observed, “the situation is made more critical by the fact that, by 2026, the population of southeast Queensland is expected to top 3.7 million, more than twice the population in 1985”.

Of course, the water shortage has everything to do with population growth, and very little to do with climate shift - what has happened there is lower-than-average rainfall over the past five years in the main catchment areas, but that is not unusual in Australia and communities can generally ride through it, unless their populations are going haywire.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

61 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Tom Gosling is a freelance science journalist with an interest in population and environment. He started in Sydney as a general reporter for ABC News in the early 1970s, and was Editor of The University of Sydney News from 1974-84. He then worked with CSIRO’s national media office in Canberra before moving to Melbourne in 1989 to report on science for the Herald and Herald-Sun. In 1995 he returned to Canberra to edit Australian Innovation Magazine, In 2002 he joined He was formerly CMC Power Systems where he was a Director. It was one of the companies that contributed to the aXcess project.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Tom Gosling

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Tom Gosling
Article Tools
Comment 61 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy