Latest Blog

Kevin's Minister for Overpopulation

Monday 5th April 2010

As Kevin Rudd welcomed his 100th boat last week, he also started to scramble on the even larger issue of his ‘Big Australia’.

The problem for Kevin Rudd is he seems to be repeating the same mistakes on both issues.

While some argue that concerns about increased boat arrivals is due to xenophobic fears of being overrun, there is a danger in impugning this motive. Every time Labor attacks the Coalition as racist dog whistlers for raising concerns about border protection, Kevin Rudd insults millions of Australians who share our concerns about Labor’s failures.

It is not unlike when Mr Rudd told millions of Australians last year they had no concern for their children’s future if they chose not to support his ETS.

Like the Coalition, the vast majority of Australians have no problem with accepting our fair share of refugees. They do, however, want to have a say about who comes and want them to apply off shore like everyone else who is seeking to come to Australia, including from refugee camps around the world.

This view is underpinned by some fundamental Australian character traits that Kevin Rudd would be wise to recognise.

Firstly, Australians like to see themselves as generous and compassionate. The idea of people having their lives put at risk in leaky boats by criminal gangs who seek to profit from their misfortune grieves our unique Australian sense of justice.

Equally, Australians don’t like to be considered anybody’s fool or a soft touch. The idea of someone being able to pay to get here, while others can’t, and may be much more deserving and miss out, violates our Australian sense of fairness. Everyone should get a fair go. We have our rules, everyone should play by them.

Interestingly, it is usually migrant communities in Australia who are most exercised on this point of fairness. After all they had to play by the rules, and for many the rules were a lot tougher, especially when they got here.

The fact that Kevin Rudd is dismissing people’s concerns on border protection is now being echoed in the emerging population debate.

On Saturday, Kevin Rudd announced Tony Burke as his Minister for a Big Australia. He reports back in 12 months. This is classic Rudd - a plan for a plan after the election. His pitch once again is ‘just trust me’.

But how can Australians trust Kevin Rudd on future population growth when he can’t even keep his promises to maintain the integrity of our borders. On his watch net overseas migration last year hit 285,000, that’s 105,000 more than the average forecast required for us to hit 36 million by 2050.

Tony Burke’s appointment is a cynical exercise in political backspin. This is the form of spin regularly practiced by Kevin Rudd to recast policy blunders as some sort of genius masterplan that we all just failed to appreciate. His blunder, signing Australia up to a 36 million population future without asking anyone.

Burke’s Ruddwellian task is to now re-educate Australians on why Kevin's idea for a big Australia will actually be good for them. There is no suggestion Kevin Rudd is walking away from his 36 million dream. If he were seriously contemplating moderating intake levels in the future, then Chris Evans would have been given the gig, as immigration Minister.

Now I can understand why Mr Rudd would be hesitant about increasing Chris Evans’ responsibilities given the self inflicted chaos in his portfolio at present. However, as Tony Abbott pointed out on the weekend, the fact he has handed this task to someone with no control over immigration, highlights that when push comes to shove, the task is not to review our migration intake going forward, simply to get every body used to the idea of Kevin’s Big Australia.

The Coalition has been seeking a national debate on sustainable population growth for months and has not signed up to any figures. Just a few weeks ago the Coalition joined forces with the Greens to call for an independent national inquiry into population sustainability. Kevin Rudd has not supported this call.

Bob Brown and I may make an unlikely partnership. And there’s Dick Smith as well. It will undoubtedly cause some from our respective sides of politics to move uncomfortably in their chairs. But while we may not agree on the end point, we most certainly agree on the need to start the journey in engaging a debate on a sustainable population path for Australia.

If Mr Rudd were serious he would have supported our call for the inquiry. Furthermore If Mr Rudd had been genuinely serious about sustainable population growth it would already be on the COAG agenda. It is not on that agenda and it is not seriously on Kevin Rudd's agenda now.

Concerns about water resource management and carbon footprints through to housing affordability, inadequate public transport, hospitals and traffic congestion, is causing many Australians from across the spectrum to say enough is enough.

Kevin Rudd’s answer is to commission one of his most effective spin doctors to go out and sell the PMs vision for 36 million plus to Australians and once again tell them why Kevin is right and they are wrong.

This article is also published on The Punch where you can make comment and join the conversation by clicking here.

Comments

Add a comment