Australia should consider having a one-child policy to protect the planet, an environmental lobby group says.
Sustainable Population Australia says slashing the world's population is the only way to avoid "environmental suicide".
National president Sandra Kanck wants Australia's population of almost 22 million reduced to seven million to tackle climate change.
And restricting each couple to one baby, as China does, is "one way of assisting to reduce the population".
"It's something we need to throw into the mix," the former Democrats parliamentarian told AAP.
More people means more coal-fired electricity, cars, houses, water use and food production, all of which increase greenhouse gas emissions, she said.
Ms Kanck, who has one child herself, expects her campaign will receive a hostile reaction.
"The Catholic church is going to be in like Flynn on an argument like this."
Sustainable Population Australia, which has about 1,300 members, is so worried about climate change it is preparing a formal submission to the United Nations.
It has also applied to attend high-profile world climate talks in Copenhagen in December.
Australia's population has been increasing steadily and the federal government plans to continue the trend, largely through immigration.
The world's population stands at 6.7 billion, according to the US Census Bureau.
"Increasing the population is basically suicide, it's environmental suicide, it's utterly irresponsible," Ms Kanck said.
"We are eating away at the planet, we are eating into all the resources, be it petrol, be it superphosphate, be it clear air."
Ms Kanck also suggested Australia scrap the baby bonus, and restrict paid maternity leave and IVF to the first baby only, to discourage large families.
She did not suggest restrictions to immigration, saying Australia should take responsibility for cutting its own population instead of barring entry to others.
China introduced its one-child policy in 1979.
A Chinese academic visiting Canberra last week said the policy had avoided 300 million births and had therefore made a major contribution to the fight against climate change.
- AAP
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/04/22/2549917.htm
Australia needs one-child policy: ex-MP
Posted
Updated
Former Democrat says Australia should look at one child policy (ABC News)
A former MP says Australia should consider having a one-child policy and other measures to ensure a sustainable population.
Former Upper House Democrat in South Australia, Sandra Kanck, now heads a group urging that Australia limit its population.
Ms Kanck says she knows the Catholic Church will object to her suggestion that Australia look to promoting one-child families.
She thinks the baby bonus needs to be discontinued or limited to the first child only.
The one-child limit could also be applied to paid maternity leave, she argues.
Ms Kanck says her group, Sustainable Population Australia, is worried about the strain on Australia's resources, such as water.
The man who replaced Ms Kanck on her retirement from the SA Legislative Council, Australian Democrat David Winderlich, has distanced the party from Ms Kanck's views.
"People might think that she's speaking for the Democrats. She's not," he said.
"She's expressing her view as spokesperson for Sustainable Population Australia.
"That view is different from the view of the Democrats, which is we do have a population problem but a draconian one-child approach is not the solution."
http://www.3aw.com.au/blogs/blog-with-derryn-hinch/one-child-australia/20090422-af63.html
One Child Australia
Peter Costello got it wrong. Terribly wrong when it comes to Australia’s population. Remember when he told Australia to go forth and multiply. Have one baby for Mum , one for Dad and one for the Treasurer. Or at least for the country.
And the Howard Government backed up those words with generous baby bonuses. The Rudd government kept up the ‘you lay, we pay’ policy.
But a group called Sustainable Population Australia says the government’s have it all wrong. Our 21 million population is already way to high. It should be cut to seven million. I’m not sure how. But one of their ideas is to adopt China’s one child policy because they reckon slashing population is the only way to avoid "environmental suicide".
Forget the fact that China’s one child policy has been a disaster. It led to girl babies being killed by parents because they wanted a boy –a bigger wage earner. And now, the Chinese wonder how to handle a new phenomenon. Forty million adulkt males who will never have a partner because there are not enough women of marriageable age to go around.
There are other obvious pitfalls in this reversal of the ‘populate or perish’ philosophy. There are currently about 7 million Aussies in the work force. Paying taxes for all our health and welfare services and pensioners. And we’re still struggling. Imagine what would happen if our population withered to 7 million. That would leave about two million to carry the financial burden. This is one of the craziest ideas I’ve ever heard.
Posts
