
Dick Smithās Population Puzzle, a documentary that aired on ABC1 on August 12, made no modest claims. It went for the direct, hard sell. Its message: āCutting immigration to Australia is a great product, and you should buy it.ā
It said a smaller Australia would not solve just one or two social problems, but more than a dozen.
The documentary claimed cutting immigration would reduce overcrowding in our cities, end urban traffic jams and make houses more affordable. It would reduce hospital waiting lists and crime, improve public health and put a stop to unsustainable development.
It would help prevent water shortages, avoid expensive fuel imports, stop Australia turning into Bangladesh and ward off the prospect of widespread starvation by mid-century.
Having fewer people in Australia would also improve public transport, stop climate change and help Third World economies develop. Smith even appealed to unemployed Australians who, he said, were losing jobs to higher-skilled immigrants.
He spent little time trying to prove the link between population size and these various issues. Instead, he raised the alarm about a country bursting at the seams.
āWeāre in the middle of a population boom, the likes of which we havenāt seen since the 1950sā, said Smith. āAustralia is the gold medallist in population growth. No other major economy is growing at anything like the pace that we are.ā
As a nation, Australia (population 22 million) is āsetting a terrible example in a world already struggling with too many peopleā by āeven out-populating some of the poorest nationsā.
Smith said Australia needed a plan to stabilise population: immigration should be cut to 70,000 a year (down from 270,000 in 2009), he said.
Immediately after the hour-long documentary, the ABCās Q & A program hosted a debate on population that featured Smith; Liberal shadow immigration minister Scott Morrison; Greens' leader Bob Brown; Laborās sustainable population minister Tony Burke; former Liberal Party president John Elliot; and Curtin Universityās Suvendrini Perera.
Morrison, Burke and Brown all said Smithās documentary made valid points, but Perera asked the audience to look closer at the documentaryās argument. She compared it to a ārather long, negative commercialā.
She said: āI think [the documentary is] ingenuous in that it speaks to real concerns that people have about the environment, about overdevelopment. But I think it collapses them into a rather simplistic focus on population. And for that reason I think itās rather manipulative and rather dangerous.ā
Smithās documentary is manipulative because it advances a false solution to deal with very real problems.
The issues raised reflect many worrying things about our society: falling public investment in services and infrastructure, the strong corporate influence over government, undemocratic planning laws and the continued use of dirty fossil fuels.
But Smith tries to say he has the silver bullet, an easy way to deal with these problems in one hit: stop migrants coming here.
The documentary is dangerous because it distracts attention away from the real causes of social and environmental decay. Instead, migrants are cast as scapegoats, even though they are the least responsible for causing any of Australiaās problems.
Part of Smithās technique was to ignore any facts that contradicted his call to hit the panic button on population.
But the fact is that the UN projects global population will peak mid-century and then decline. Birth rates in most Western countries, including Australia, have already fallen below replacement levels.
The global āpopulation bombā has been defused. Yet human impact on the planet is gaining pace.
The ecological crisis is worsening. Greenhouse gas emissions are rising. The polar ice caps are melting. Extreme weather events are multiplying ⦠and all while population growth rates fall.
This speaks against the idea that population growth is the main factor driving the environmental crisis.
Perera also pointed out that Smith had disregarded the immense waste and consumption in countries like Australia.
She said: āIt seemed to me that the real elephant in the film and perhaps in this room is consumption, because we talk about population but we don't talk about the need for us in the rich world to reduce consumption.ā
And it is quite unbelievable that the documentary left this out. Australia is the worldās biggest coal exporter and emits the highest greenhouse gas emissions per person in the OECD.
Australians are the worldās most overweight people, but up to 40% of our landfills are made up of food we throw out. Australians have the largest houses of any country in the world. We have the worldās best solar energy resource, but we hardly use it.
If the rest of the world consumed like Australians, weād need the resources of four or five planet Earths.
In the face of this unsustainable consumption, to suggest that population is the key factor in Australiaās high ecological footprint betrays a distorted view of reality.
This high consumption serves a deeper purpose: to maintain the endless economic growth that is the stated policy of most governments and is the top goal for every corporation.
Australiaās high consumption is driven by the needs of the profit system, which has an inbuilt drive to grow and can accept no limits to its expansion.
So to deal with consumption we need to deal with its deeper economic cause. In the end, itās a struggle over who controls production: corporations or people?
Itās about who makes the decisions on whether we dig for coal or build solar plants, bulldoze new highways or plan train lines and cycleways. Itās about popular control over decisions ranging from development in our local communities right up to Australiaās international role.
The problems raised by Smith are not caused by overpopulation, but reflect a much bigger crisis to do with our entire profits-based system, which is threatening us with oblivion.
The alternative is to refashion the economy, so it serves to maintain the integrity of ecosystems and improve human welfare. But this also means a drawn-out political confrontation with the corporate elites who will not willingly give up their power and privileges.
Smithās documentary drew much of its power from the way it tapped into peopleās understandable feelings of powerlessness and alienation in the face of these big dilemmas.
The tragedy of the film is that it tried to foist the blame onto migrants ā another powerless group of people.
During the Q & A debate, Smith acknowledged that capitalist economic growth is unsustainable.
āThe problem is weāve had 150 years of addiction to growthā, he said. āThe god of capitalism is growth, but itās a false god because itās a finite world and you canāt always grow using resources. Itās impossible.ā
Itās true that endless growth is impossible. But Smithās assertion that cutting migration would help solve this problem too is his wildest claim of all.
He lets the real culprits for capitalist growth ā the corporate interests who benefit most from the status quo ā off the hook.
Smithās documentary obscures the most important āpopulation problemā in Australia. The scandal should be that such a small, wealthy part of the population has such overwhelming power and influence over our lives and future.
To win a sustainable future, the enemy is not the young migrant family, who, with a mixture of nervousness and excitement, plans to start a new life in Australia.
Our real target āpopulationā should be the coal company CEO, the oil executive, the big property developer, the finance mogul and the media tycoon.