You are here

Stable Population Party leads field in Griffith By-Election 2014

Timothy Laurence is the only relevant and fresh candidate in this by-election in retiring (but not shy) Kevin Rudd's old seat. Relevant because he is the only one talking about the problems of population growth here, whereas the media and Tweedledum and Tweedledummer constantly promote the problems as if they were some kind of boon. Anyone half-awake knows that self-government, rights and freedoms, as well and the environmental beauty and health of Queensland are being buried in the ongoing tsunami of high immigration and growth-lobby activities to cater for it.

The full Griffith field, in order of appearance on the ballot:

  • Timothy Laurence – Stable Population Party
  • Geoff Ebbs – The Greens
  • Christopher Williams – Family First
  • Karel Boele – Independent
  • Anthony Ackroyd – Bullet Train for Australia Party
  • Anne Reid – Secular Party of Australia
  • Terri Butler – Australian Labor Party
  • Melanie Thomas – Pirate Party
  • Travis Windsor – Independent
  • Ray Sawyer – Katter's Australian Party
  • Bill Glasson – Liberal National Party

Young, plugged-in, family oriented

Timothy has strong interests in solving environmental and societal problems through systems thinking and stewardship of nature. He is keen to assist in raising public awareness of the sustainability equation, of which population is a crucial component. Recently married and looking to the future, Timothy is concerned about overdevelopment, housing affordability and cost of living for all citizens. He is 23 and encourages everyone to think "out of the box" to see the deeper solutions to global problems caused by unsustainable, exponential growth. Timothy, a software developer, is currently working as a games programmer and web designer in Taringa, Brisbane. He enjoys gardening and is an aspiring permaculturalist and cultivator-mycologist, while also being interested in philosophy, ethics, art and reading.

Would you like to help Timothy's campaign? contact the Stable Population Party

A weary uncritical mob of narrow focus

The other candidates in this election seem to be scraping to find anything to talk about, as they ignore the population elephant in the room. Indeed, they appear to be universally blinkered to the real problems of environment and population. This is bizarre since it was only recently that Queenslanders perished in massive floods due to persistent building on flood planes, mandated and encouraged by planners and politician, including Campbell Newman and Anna Bligh, who should have been tried for their responsibility in this. Brisbane itself was underwater for several hours.

6 reasons to stabilise Australia's population:

  • Relieve overstretched infrastructure including hospitals, schools, roads and public transport
  • Ease cost of living pressures including housing, energy, water and transport
  • Protect our environment including food, water & energy resources, native bushland and animal habitats
  • Promote education and training to increase job opportunities for all Australians
  • Minimise overdevelopment including high-rise and sprawl
  • Create a more resilient economy to sustain and enhance prosperity

Population is not a single issue, it is the everything issue.

National research confirms that over 70 percent of Australians reject the Liberal / National / Labor / Greens 'big Australia' policy outcome of around 40m (and rapidly rising) by 2050 . Yet until now we've had no choice. Powerful business lobby groups are pushing for this rapid population growth, in order to secure both cheap (including pre-trained) labour and more customers.


If, as Timothy claims, "Population ... is the everything issue", why has he not mentioned peace? In the last two decades, hundreds of thousands have died in criminal wars of aggression by the United States, Israel and their allies, a number of which Australia has directly participated in. These include:

  • Over two decades of aggression against Iraq, including war in 1991, invasion and occupation in 2003 and economic sanctions which have caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands. One estimate puts the death toll as high as 3.3 million, including 750,000 children who died of starvation and disease;
  • The invasion and occupation of Afghanistan justified by the fraudulent pretext of the 9/11 terrorist attacks in which the administration of former President George W Bush was clearly complicit. As a result the production of heroin from opium grown in Afghanistan, which had been almost eradicated in 2001 has since skyrocketed and is flooding into Russia and Europe;
  • The invasion of Libya and the theft of its oil wealth. Former 'Labor' Prime Minister and the local member for Griffith, whose retirement from Parliament has caused the by-election did his utmost to fan the flames of war as roving Australian Foreign Minister in 2011;
  • The war of terrorist aggression against Syria by 'rebels' armed and supplied by the United States and reactionary Arab dictatorships. So farm over 100,000 Syrians have died from this aggression. Australian has assisted this war of aggression by increasing economic sanctions against Syria and expelling the Syrian ambassador in June 2012 on the fraudulent pretext of the accusation that the Syrian government had murdered its own supporters and citizens at the Houla massacre in May 2012.

Almost continuously since the end of the Second World War, bloody wars have been fought in different corners of the globe. President Kennedy heroically tried to establish world peace, and on no less than three occasions, over-ruled the wishes of his Generals to start global nuclear war. For that he was murdered on 22 November 1963.

No candidate standing for Federal parliament, particularly in the seat of a person who helped bring about so much carnage and destruction as did former Foreign Minister and former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd did, should fail to take a stand against war.

Maybe the desire for economic power, and repression of other nations, is also part of the "population" cause. Once the greed for economic growth, and it's allied desire for power, natural resources, and military successes, come off the boil, so will the willingness to be involved in foreign wars.
There should be a Royal commission into why Australia went to Iraq and Afghanistan. At least 200,000 Iraqis and 5000 coalition troops died and a cost more than $1.5 trillion was lost in the coalition of the willing. As a result, women are more repressed than ever, most of the country's Christians have been driven to exile and the number of asylum seekers is swelling. Iraq's police force is full of sectarian thugs. "Liberation" has attracted jihadists into the hot-spots, and caused ongoing threats to stability.
To invade Iraq is the worst foreign policy blunder in Australia's history, possible exception for Vietnam. Under Bush, the USA is now declining economically. The US went into Iraq, not to help the Iraqis but to grab the oil and make a fortune rebuilding the country using American contractors and workers. It was in short to be a never ending cash cow for them.
W need to make sure that we don't repeat the same mistakes which led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent lives.
It was conservatives under Howard who lobbied hard for Australia to go to war in 2003. Thousands marched crying 'no war', the cries for peace were ignored, and the weapons of mass destruction were never found. It was also Howard who tried to allay the public's fears about loss of border control, but at the same time ramped up our population growth rate to present day record levels - quietly without democratic debate!
A political party not fettered for the desire for massive and perpetual "growth" inherently would and should be more at peace with the economy, the environment, the planet and other nations.

Overpopulation = resource conflict = war.

Sustainable population helps ensure peace.

Vote 1 PEACE (SPP)

Geoffrey, the Griffith by-election is hardly going to be won or lost by campaigning for world peace. Oh yes, I will vote for that nice Mr Lawrence because he is for World Peace. Well the good people of Griffith did vote for KRudd, so perhaps I am being a bit harsh, but somehow I don't think they would rush to vote for such a platform. If KRudd couldn't bring world peace, I am not sure who can do that! People have been fighting each other for over 160,000 years and I doubt that even the Stable/Sustainable Population will be able to turn the tide on that over the next 4 weeks.

But seriously, it is overpopulation that drives wars. Japan went to war in 1939 to get access to scarce natural resources (food, minerals, energy) to feed its growing population as the country industrialised. The conflicts we are now seeing in North Africa and the Middle East stem from overpopulation. Egypt, with 86 million people grows enough food for about 40 million and is now a net importer of oil and gas. Syria, had two years of very bad drought which drove people into the main towns like Aleppo, prior to the conflict breaking out. Lack of water and arable land to feed its booming population is the underlying factor behind the Syrian conflict.

So of all the parties standing in Griffith, the Stable Population Party's platform has the most chance of affecting world peace.

I can confirm that I stand for peace. Unfortunately, minor parties are not given enough media time to talk about all issues so they often have to focus on one issue.

The party focusses on population as it is a big "elephant in the room" rarely mentioned and is often an underlying catalyst of many wars fighting over resources, et cetera. Peace is a logical extrapolation of our party's core values.

A vote for the Sustainable Population Party is a vote for peaceful, ethical, sustainable population.

Thank you for your response, Timothy. It is reassuring to know that you have taken a stance in support of peace in this war-ravaged planet. Given that you are the only candidate so far known to me to have taken the right stance on these two most critical issues, you are clearly the most relevant candidate as Sheila has pointed out above. (However, it seems, that two other candidates, whilst ignoring these critical concerns, have some merit – see below.)

You wrote:

Unfortunately, minor parties are not given enough media time to talk about all issues so they often have to focus on one issue.

Whilst I can see it would not be advisable to campaign on too many issues, I see no reason, why other policies that a candidate supports can't be put on the record where sufficiently interested people can find them.

Second and third preferences

Even though none of the other candidates have (yet) taken a stance on these two critical issues, some are promoting policies which I think are also laudible. Voters giving you their first preference should consider giving their second and third preferences to:

  • Karel Boele : Electronic direct democracy 'PeopleDecide' independent
  • Melanie Thomas : Pirate Party

Karen Boele's electonic direct democracy seeems to be like Swiss Direct Democracy that has been previously promoted on candobetter.

Whilst I think that voters should give their third prefence to the Pirate Party, their web-site does them no credit. It's home page consists only of a membership application form. The only other content consists of the constitution. There is no material which explains the policies of the Pirate Party, nor news nor discussion forums.

Nonetheless, the Pirate Party's principle policy is opposition to the scam of proprietary copyright software such as Micro$oft Windows. The Windows Operating System has been used by the United States National Security Agency (NSA) to spy on its citizens and the citizens of allied countries by transmitting data from their computers' hard disk drives straight across the Internet to the NSA's storage systems.

For her opposition to proprietary software such as Micro$oft, Melanie Thomas should be put high in voters' preference allocations.

End economic neoliberalism

Another policy which should be raised with electors is the mad doctrine of neoliberalism first imposed upon Australia in 1983 by then Federal Treasurer Paul Keating. This doctrine dictates that only supposedly more efficient private enterprises driven by the profit motive, can own and operate services upon which Australian citizens depend – banking, telecommunications, transport, electricity generation, insurance, etc.

This doctrine has led to a succession of Australian Federal and state Govenments, never with any electoral mandate (with the arguable exception of Victorian Premier Jeff Kennet in the 1990's) flogging off to private profiteers the people's assets.

The doctrine of economic neoliberalism was codified in the 1993 Hilmer Report (pdf, 132k).

We are long past the time when this policy should be scrapped by Australian governments at all levels.

Any small party or independent candidate who campaigns energetically, and is known, at least by informed voters, to support all the above policies, should stand a good chance of getting a primary vote substantially more than what such candidates have become accustomed to.

Whilst this may not be sufficient to defeat the major party candidates, given the vast resources at the hands of the major parties and the media bias against decent candidates, this could improve the prospects of you and other good small party and independent candidates winning seats outright in subsequent federal, state or local elections in coming years.

IMMIGRANTS and refugees could have their visas fast-tracked if they agree to live in regional Queensland.

The state could even up its intake under the proposal designed to alleviate pressure on the booming southeast.

If they really wanted to release population pressure, there needs to be a call to slow down immigration, not assume that the immigrants will actually stay in regional Queensland in the long term.

Townsville, Rockhampton and Cairns have been earmarked for areas of future migrant growth, but only if the federal government commits to invest in more regional infrastructure. Infrastructure Partnerships Australia, a corporate lobby group, and Citibank have stated that Australia's ''infrastructure deficit'' is about $700 billion.

Townsville mayor Jenny Hill warns that without job opportunities, the proposal could encourage ghettos.

Foreigners could jump queue in Qld plan, 20 Jan 2014 at

About 100,000 overseas immigrants move to Queensland each year. The unemployment rate in the state lifted to 6.4 per cent in June, its highest level since October 2003 and up from 5.9 per cent in May. Only Tasmania has a worse unemployment rate at 8.9 per cent.

State deputy opposition leader Tim Mulherin said the unemployment figures were an "indictment on the Newman government's economic management".

Australian citizenship is being fast-tracked for bogus "economic growth", but with the engine-room of our economy flagging - i.e. job creation - the hopeful migrants will be isolated and impoverished.

Editorial comment: More propaganda from the Courier Mail:

The articles were posted yesterday (Monday) or today (Tuesday) to promote decentralisation as a 'solution' to the overcrowding of South East Queensland caused by the Brisbane City Council and various Queensland state governments for at least the last two decades. The Editorial was published on Monday 20 January and the on Tuesday 21 February. I am not prepared to give Rupert Murdoch's newspaper my personal details in order to be able to eead that article again to ascertain the publication dates and to read (I think) 5 free 'news' articles per day. I certainly have no intention of giving money to News Corporation to be further misinformed. – Ed

Bob Birrell, from the Centre for Population and Urban Research at Monash University, said there had been "good results" in Victoria when migrants moved to regional areas.

He said there was significant movement of Muslim people to Shepparton while some riverland areas had experienced growth in Chinese and south-east Asian populations.

Mr Birrell said the willingness to do field labour meant there was a niche for them in regional areas but the majority were still located in metropolitan areas. Mr Birrell said it was especially hard for refugees to work in regional areas because many did not speak English, had few skills and had distinct cultural backgrounds.

Crime in Shepparton, about 3 hours from Melbourne, is up more than 11 per cent, mainly due to a rise in family violence, theft and home burglaries. RACV’s analysis of Victoria’s 2013 crime statistics has revealed Greater Shepparton communities are some of the state’s riskiest regional areas for home break-ins.

High levels of relative socio-economic disadvantage exist, along with high rates of unemployment. Over 70% of individuals in focus areas did not complete year 12 at school which contributes to a highly significant measure of understanding food security. 24% of households have an income of less than $500pw and may experience difficulty buying enough nutritious food.

Ghettos of disadvantage and crime could easily form without investment in social and public support programs, and efforts to create integrated communities (despite government sanctioned "multicultural" agenda!).

Mr Birrell said establishing social and cultural programs would be fundamental to ensuring a smooth transition but noted there were already visas to attract skilled migrants to regional Australia.

Infrastructure needed before refugees go rural- Bob Birrell

Give Kiwis easier dole but limit migration, says federal MP Kelvin Thomson

from the Herald Sunof 21 Jan 2014

Labor MP Kelvin Thomson said there would have to be an annual limit on Kiwi migration, otherwise Australia would face a huge influx of jobless people.

More than 600,000 Kiwis, or about 10 per cent of the NZ population, live permanently here. Some 300,000 barred from accessing welfare.

Mr Thomson said that Kiwis should be given permanent residence and welfare entitlements, but only if the trans-Tasman migration agreement was changed to cap annual numbers at between 30,000 to 40,000 people. He said that his solution was fair because NZ citizens would have more security here and Australia would regain control of its migration program.

Monash University population expert Dr Bob Birrell agreed.