Your reaction to Australia's high immigration policy

Hello Fellow Members

To those willing to stand for the recent election for Council members. 

Your email addresses attached to your resumes are the only chance that I have to express disappointment of the attitude of Council to population matters; that is; to totally ignore that input of 200,000 people pa by immigration to Australia is of no concern to environmental matters.


I hope that my concerns at the suppression of the discussion on population increase by high immigration is pertinent enough for you to raise the issue at any opportunity, inside or outside the ACF organization. Scott Morrison has recently defended the high intake as Government policy.


How will the ACF react?


Below is a copy of the latest issue.


The ACF continues to support a Big Australia


In the lead up to the federal election the ACF conducted a review of the policies of the three main parties. The coalition scored poorly, no surprises there. But one item not mentioned was attitudes towards population growth, also not mentioned by the parties, so one could assume that policy continued same as before.This was confirmed in a sentence slipped into a quiet press release from Minister Dutton; The official policy of the Government is to increase the population by 200,000 pa through immigration in as secretive a manner as possible. No comment from the ALP, i.e. support.


The fact that that the parties did not mention population is no excuse for the ACF not to raise it. They did not because ACF policy is to implicitly support Big Australia. There is in any ACF publication a suppression of raising the question of population in Australia. The equation to all environmentalists except the ACF subscribe is

I = P x A x T

(Impact = Population x Affluence x Technology)


The ACF deliberately omits to discuss, or even mention population.


This has been criticised in previous issues of The Independent Australian


The ACF calls for people to ‘tell us what you think’. It has ignored the letter from Dr John Coulter, which contained inter alia

…Why is it that ACF has refused to actively, urgently and very publicly address two of the most basic causes of Australia’s unsustainability - the push for population growth and and the push for economic growth…

It makes no mention of the policy 20 years before, which called for a zero target for immigration


The Australian Conservation Foundation votes for concentration of power in the hands of the Board


I wrote a short letter for publication in Habitat describing how population increase was increasing pressure on the quenda population in the out skirts of Perth. There was initially confusion, then a promise to consider publication after the special edition of Habitat in February. Nothing more has been heard and the latest edition of Habitat contained nothing.


The covert policy of the ACF council is clearly not to publish anything on the population increase. There is a long article by Kelly O’Shanassy (CEO) in February 1916

There is also the summary version, with attachments missing.  Our choices; ten actions to protect people. rivers, reefs, forests and wildlife.

There is no mention of population in this definitive statement. This was despite efforts by Mark O’Connor and Geoff Mosley to raise to raise concerns on the issue at Council meetings on November 2014 (Mosley also single handed attempted to raise the issue in April 2013). Their concerns were voted down.


There is no way that concerns of ordinary members can express themselves on the issue of population. The Executive refuses to allow access to ordinary members to approach other members.


Hence a copy of this message will be sent to all the members who submitted their background supporting their election to the Board in the past election in the hope that some at least will query the Executive decision to totally ignore the question of population. It is hoped that one or two successful members are open to raising it in Council and some of the hopefuls who did not succeed in the recent Council elections will raise their voices, both inside via letters to Habitat, and outside the ACF, if necessary 


Comment to would be welcome, even not for publication.