Comments

There are a lot of "racist" accusations going around, targeting Australians! Ironically, we are one of the most tolerant nations in the world. There are some bigots here, but when we are accused of racism, which "race" or ethnic group are they talking about? We are so multicultural that we almost have no real authentic identity any more. Many people coming here point the finger, and inspect and criticize our attitudes and policies with a fine-tooth comb, but they should first look at where they come from themselves. After years of multiculturalism, mass immigration and globalisation, people seem to think they have a right to come here and criticise our society and laws while in their own countries there are exclusion to other nations, ethnic wars, mono-cultures, dictatorships, theocracies, overpopulation and degrading conditions. We need to appreciate our wide open spaces, our vast and empty (but mainly uninhabitable) lands, our many wonderful coastlines, our unique history and heritage, and Jewelled seas. How many people have actually considered our indigenous peoples and what they think of our neo-colonialism? Why do people always assume that "vacant" land without housing estates and roads is wasted and should be filled with developments? Clearly our government has touted Australia as a safe and egalitarian, tolerant society. The attacks on Indian students have embarrassed our governments and revealed the rising violence and crime in our cities. That Australia is "racist" accusation is another population myth, or method of manipulating the public into silence regarding mass immigration and population growth.

You write much better than you interpret meaning Mr Marlowe. Your assumption that a contributor to this forum is not only ignorant, but a lemming who "needs" to follow your advice (with your footnoted explanation of lemming) is disrespectful. I appreciate your views, mostly thinking along similar lines to yourself. Try to be courteous. There's no need to drive harmless people away from Mr Sinnamon's forum with unnecessary personal attack. Thank you.

Have you noticed how the cultural elites who promote "Big Australia" are often the same people who attach themselves to indigenous rights?

How is it that Aborigines who tried to defend their land are seen as heroes (rightfully in my mind) but Australians today who fight the "Big Australia" vision of corporate interests and cultural elites are declared "racist" and "economically illiterate" (without ever justifying or articulating their own arguments for economic immigration)?

How do we translate majority opinion into political power? (besides boycotting the Lib/Lab pantomime for a start!)

There are many privileges in becoming an Australian citizens. The following are the only obligations:

• Pledge loyalty to Australia and its people;
• Share in Australia’s democratic beliefs;
• Respect other Australian citizens’ rights and liberties; and
• Uphold and obey the laws of Australia.

New citizens should be under probation. Car drivers must be under probation for 3 years, so Citizenship also should be, and the impacts of not complying with these few obligations could be more wide and perverse than breaking those of a probationary driver. Any abuse of our generous welfare system should immediately mean a revoking of citizenship.

People accepting Australian citizenship should deny citizenship to any other country when their probationary is over. Any indications that immigrants commit crimes, try an impose another type of government (such as sharia law) or who directly challenge our ideals should be deported.
Citizenship to Australia should not come cheap and easy!

I believe public anger about the asylum seeker boats has much to do with pay-to-enter persons aided by people smuggling personnel who will inevitably grow their businesses into an unstoppable industry - if the Australian government does not stop it as a matter of national interest. All businesses expand at some stage. In the case of people smuggling, we are going to see bigger, more efficient boats that remove the "leaky boat" argument from the equation. Visa over-stayers plan to disappear into their ethnic communities and are consequently very difficult to find. Although they are not paying people smugglers, I don't believe Australians are any less concerned about their illegality. This is the shared conclusion of an Asian student living in Sydney :- "Australians mad giving country away. Australia Asian country now. We take." Think about it. If any of you have been to Strathfield lately, you will understand what the student smugly told us. I don't hear anyone bagging Japan for refusing "asylum seekers". They are unapologetic about protecting their culture, race and country from outside influences.

It is time to accept that Melbourne has already grown past its optimum size. All three promulgated options to increase housing stock for a growing population threaten to harm both the quality of life and the resilience of our city. This is especially true with the added stressors of Peak Oil and Climate Change. 1) Expansion of the urban growth boundary increases our car dependence. It also destroys valuable farm land and market gardens on the city fringe, thus increasing the monetary and environmental costs of food. 2) In-fill of green-wedges destroys the "lungs" of our city, worsens the urban heat-island effect and worsens flooding from storm-water run-off. Large, open, vegetated spaces are necessary for both mental and physical health. 3) Densification along public transport routes has some merit but there should be a height-limit of five storeys, not the 22 floors plus promoted by the government. Outside of the CBD all buildings should be on a human scale. People should readily be able to climb to the top floor by stairs. Any footprint that these buildings cover should be compensated by extensive roof gardens.

Mr Abbott was asked about his views about Howard's immigration policies of late 2008 when he said one of the Howard government's "greatest but least recognised achievements" was to rehabilitate the immigration program to record levels, because asylum seekers boats had been stopped. "One of the reasons for that was the Howard government stopped the boats." Public support for immigration was falling away now because the government had not been able to control Australia's borders. Tony Abbott cannot be trusted to adhere to his promises to cut immigration. He is deliberately confusing our economic immigration with "border security" and asylum seekers. Howard's "protection" of Australia's borders was a smoke screen to distract the public from debating our immigration numbers. At the time of Howard's border protection issues, Abbott said that "as many people as possible" should be able to enjoy the freedoms and benefits of living in Australia. This is despite the fact that higher populations are reducing the "freedoms and benefits of living in Australia"! Tony Abbott admits he is an "immigration man" and wants a stronger (ie "bigger") Australia. Our refugee intake - that is, people who are processed offshore and come through the system - is anywhere between 12,000 and 14,000 [a year], with another 1000 to 5000 in any given year coming by boat. Many also arrive by air, but these numbers do not get the media frenzy of the boats! These numbers pale into insignificance with those of economic immigration, including students and New Zealanders making their homes here. Tony Abbott cannot be trusted to limit immigration, and is willing to use public fear of asylum seekers, and border protection issues, as smoke-screens to hide the real source of our population growth.

"Dawkins was asked if belief in evolutionary theory was enough to "get us through the night". Irrelevant. Whether a belief gets us through the night or not has no bearing upon its truth. " The only relevant question is, "Did you get through the night?" Breathing, sleeping, etc. are still there, whether you believe in them or not. The fact that you get through the night without believing anything is enough reason alone to ignore those who don't think they will make it through the night without belief. Nonbelief hasn't killed anybody (the tiger might, if you don't believe he's there, though). Belief has killed a lot of people: "Hold my beer and watch THIS!"

RSPCA Watch Dog The RSPCA are supposed to be there for the animals, "all creatures great and small". How native kangaroos don't fit into this category, and justifying the lethal "management" of thousands of kangaroos in Canberra, is simply inexcusable and totally contrary to their stated aims. They have their Million Paws Walk but then they serve another animals in their menus? What about the RSPCA approved eggs, yet the same company holds thousands of other chickens in tiny cages? There are too many conflicts of interests within the RSPCA, and clearly too many funds are going towards their own comforts and overhead costs.

Could not agree with you more James. I am utterly against the privitization policies of Anna Bligh. My attempts to draw attention to my concerns about her asset sale policies failed, but I will persist. I remain seriously concerned and believe that this particular Head of Government should be urgently replaced within the Labour Party. The Council of Australian Governments needs to have a different Queensland representative on it. I have concerns about energy policy in several States including Victoria, Queensland, NSW, ACT and South Australia. These concerns are closely associated with policies for disaggregation and sale of assets, property development and asset management practices that are common practice but not necessarily consistent with a range of laws already in place and those proposed, including generic laws, tenancy laws, owners’ corporations provisions; trade measurement provisions (proposed and pending lifting of remaining utility exemptions). In the case of Queensland certain warranties and assurances were made to purchasers of both contestable and uncontestable assets. See Energy (Restructuring and Disposal) Bill 2006 reported in Hansard 11 and 12 October 2006, and the warranties and guarantees made during the sale and disaggregation of energy assets. See the Queensland Auditor-General's 2007 Report with emphasis on energy asset sales and policies. Today I had occasion to write to the Prime Minister drawing attention in the first place to dissatisfaction with the governance and accountability of Anna Bligh as Premier of Queensland, copying that correspondence to other including the Queensland Auditor General. Though the Queensland matters are in some ways unique there are similarities with regard to the adoption and application of certain policies that also apply to other States including Victoria. I will elaborate further at a future stage. There seems to be nationwide dissatisfaction with the governance and accountability of Anna Bligh as Queensland Premier and a member of the Council of Australian Governments (COAG). Dissatisfaction with Anna’ Bligh’s governance and accountability appears to be reaching feverish levels despite some supporters. Something needs to be done to stem the ebbing confidence in the current Government. Last night I read an article online published by Inside Story.com authored by Jane Goodall, an independent writer and Adjunct Professor at the Faculty of Arts, University of Southern Queensland. The article pictures Julia Gillard as Prime Minister beside the Queensland Premier Anna Bligh. I endorse the succinct views expressed by Stephen Le Page as follows: Hate campaign”?…”Media vilification”? Because Bligh is a female politician? Hardly. Most -if not all – the criticism is being leveled at someone unable to come up with realistic policies. The Labor government in Queensland is tired and Bligh seems unable to cope with the challenges. It has nothing to do with gender and it is a pity Goodall discloses her own bias right at the end of an otherwise balanced article. http://inside.org.au/the-bligh-factor/ My attempt to respond to the article awaits moderation. Perhaps it was censored. I am keen to provide some public feedback and also to alert the Prime Minister and Jane Goodall personally as to my concerns. I share the view that the otherwise worthy article was compromised when the author revealed her biases. In addition I am copying this for the attention of the Queensland Auditor-General who will undoubtedly recall his 2007 report and reservations expressed therein. There has been long-standing unrest about Anna Bligh and her policies, especially with regard to her privitization schemes and accountability. Many would like to see a different leader in Queensland. When can the public expect that? On November 2009 in an article entitled “Anna Bligh admits failure to communicate” Andrew Fraser had reported in The Australian that Ms Bligh has been under strong attack from unions as well as the Liberal National Party (LNP) over the asset sale program. Fraser reported on Bligh’s concession that that “she could have better explained her government’s decision to sell $15 billion worth of state assets. I am not of the view that there is room to place any confidence in Anna Bligh's decision-making processes. Perhaps the new Prime Minister will see fit to address widespread and long-standing concerns about governance and decision-making in Queensland. I would be extremely sorry to see Anna Bligh remain in politics - anywhere. It is more than time for someone else to take her place within the Labour Party. I cannot possibly support her decisions, especially the manner in which she has handled the sale and disaggregation of energy and other assets. There is nothing new in concerns about accountability under Anna Bligh's governance. Her policies regarding disaggregation of public assets without any due regard for minimal levels of accountability have been topics of heated discussion since she took the charge and well before that during her time as Treasurer and Minister for Mines and Energy. See for example decisions associated with the inappropriate sale and disaggregation of energy assets under the Energy Assets (Restructuring and Disposal) Bill 2006, which was rushed through the Queensland Parliament on 11 and 12 October in the face of considerable opposition. As to the inappropriate “bulk hot water policies” adopted in Queensland and in other states, apparently violating the fundamental principles of government and non-government owned monopolies – that is another story – see my widely published material within the public consultation arena. Otherwise contact me directly to ascertain what the concerns are about. At a larger scale, these policies as adopted are contributing significantly towards detriments and alleged flaunting of existing legislative provisions including under s47 (exclusive dealings) of the Trade Practices Act 1974, which will be renamed Consumer and Competition Policy 2010 when all amendments are complete. I have uncovered rorts and inappropriate market conduct, specially within the energy arena, associated with policies perceived to be grossly flawed and am in the midst of exposing some of these practices with particular reference to Victoria’s “bulk hot water policies” as impacting adversely on large sectors of the community. I have already extensively published on this issue in the course of my public consultation participation. Many issues that have repeatedly been raised with the AER, ACCC, AEMC, MCE, AEMO, and other arenas, and though much of that material is re-submitted in the context of further material that has come to light, I make yet another attempt to call attention to my concerns, not only from the perspectives of residential tenants, but also that of many Owners’ Corporation entities (Bodies Corporate) who either occupy as owner occupiers or lease out their property to tenants; as well as those of shop-owners and many others who are apparently frequently exploited by practices and policies adopted by market participants, either licenced or unlicenced, including “metering data service providers” (MDS), property developers and others who see room in the marketplace for practices that should not be condoned. The national energy laws and rules have failed to appropriately clarify matters that will continue to facilitate rorts and misinterpretations as well as unacceptable conduct. The AER is on the brink of further facilitating the granting of exemption licences in the on-selling associated with alleged sale and supply of gas and electricity. Water meters are effectively posing as gas and electricity meters, whilst licenced and unlicenced providers normally known as “Metering Data Providers” are purporting to sell energy in caloric value, where for sale of goods , generic and energy laws the term energy means either gas or electricity. Many States mimicked Victoria’s inappropriate ‘bulk hot water policies” policies adopted in 2007, with Queensland adopting these discrepantly to most others, but in all cases the practices are unacceptable in terms of policy, consumer and business protection and compliance with various laws. Refer to Arrow Asset Management Case reported by Gary Bugden, Barrister I repeat: Queensland needs a new Leader for the Labour Party. When can the public expect at least that - and beyond that more responsible public policies generally? Madeleine Kinston Concerned Australian Voter [email protected]

Nearly all (90%) of the water used for agriculture in 2007-08 was used for irrigation. Pastures and crops used for grazing continued to be the largest users of irrigated water (26%). Other high irrigation users were cereal crops for grain and seed, excluding rice which used 15% of irrigation water and sugar cane which used nearly 14%. Rice was the most heavily irrigated crop in 2007-08, in terms of the volume of water applied per unit area. in 2004 -5, dairy farming used (2276 gigalitres or 19%), cotton (1822 gigalitres or 15%) and sugar (1269 gigalitres or 10%). In terms of food production, it's true that rice requires "many thousands" of litres of water to grow, but this amount shrink to microscopic proportions in comparison with the water needed to produce animal-derived foods, notably meat - the production of which might be described as "sheer, wasteful madness". Modern dairy farming is one of the most water intensive food industries. A dairy cow expected to produce an average of 35 litres of milk per day may need 4,700 kilos of forage and 1,600 kilos of concentrated feed in a year. This translates into a requirement of 13,000 litres of water per year to produce two cups of milk each week, or 1000 litres of water to grow pasture to feed a cow to produce 1 litre of milk.

No community or nation is free from discrimination, some division or racism. People naturally like to be with their own kind. However, Australia must be one of the most well integrated multicultural counties in the world, with so many national groups represented in our society. We are a very tolerant country and have a history of welcoming strangers and giving opportunities to settle here. There are some bigots, but on the whole, we have successful immigration. The problem now is massive and swelling population numbers, and our ongoing immigration is clearly not due to an inherent need for more "diversity", but a symptom of population growth from immigration (about 2/3) being greater than our natural growth. This means that our mainstream Aussies, our heritage, our history, is becoming fragmented and immigrants are no more a minority group but a majority! Our large numbers of overseas born people is a symptom of mass immigration. The "racism" accusation is one being used to manipulate us emotionally to feel guilt, and allow ongoing population growth for right-wing politics to continue. If mass migration and multiculturalism is good for the economy, then how is it that we are not longer the Lucky Country, decreasing per capita GDP, with an increasing crime rate? Nations with homogeneous populations, such as Hong Kong, can support high density living, but Australia as a multicultural nation will find increasing tensions as high populations are forced onto us. Thus, mainstream Aussies and our media will be further suppressed and emotionally manipulated with the "racist" card to keep them silent and to conform with the population agenda.

South Australia's oldest commercial vineyard is set to be bulldozed for housing. Stony Hill, at Old Reynella - named after its first settler and wine pioneer John Reynell - was part of the original 32ha planted with cabernet sauvignon vines in 1839. Devine Homes group is understood to be planning to subdivide the 2.13ha into 41 homes. Many neighbours were dismayed at the loss of the "historic value of the vineyard". The vineyard's State Heritage listing had been removed by the Department of Environment and Heritage. Very conveniently, the State Government simply deemed the site "did not warrant retention as part of the broader site listing". Any historical links, community opinion, or agricultural land, can simply be wiped away with a signature, leaving the way open for parasitic developers to bulldoze their way through! Wine is the area's biggest export. However, the site of the first commercial vineyard in SA will be "being flogged for houses" and will not alleviate any housing "shortages" while the "tap" of population growth, immigration, is still running! Like the word "racist" is a label to silence use on immigration issues, "nimby" is another emotional manipulator to silence those who object to developers having access to our suburbs, our heritage, our land for their own self-serving ends. Only 6% of Australia's land is arable, and covering food (or wine) producing food bowls with housing estates is simply reckless and madness.

Mrs Chaplin’s failed case echoes that of Nadia Eweida, who took British Airways to a tribunal over her refusal to remove the crucifix around her neck in 2006. In a long drawn out case, she finally lost her appeal in 2008. The Equality Bill will "harmonise and in some cases extend existing discrimination law covering the 'protected characteristics' of age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation. . ." Human rights sound "good", and so does equality, but it is impossible to be value-free, as people inherently have their cultures and beliefs. These ultimately clash in a multi-cultural society unless new-comers are prepared to adapt to the mainstream culture. The hospital had treated staff from ethnic minorities equally by ordering Sikhs to remove wrist bangles and Muslim doctors to switch to tight fitting sports hijabs. Mrs Chaplin's case was highlighted by the Archbishop of Canterbury in his Easter sermon last weekend when he referred to "wooden-headed bureaucratic silliness" which had prevented some Christians from being able to wear religious symbols at work. However, the rules must be applied in a non-discriminatory way and not target Christian symbols.

About 40% of the present Australian population were either born overseas or have parents who were born overseas. There is no doubt that past migration has added to Australia’s cultural mix but it does not follow that further large scale immigration can produce a still better society. Those of us who seek an environmentally sustainable future believe we can avoid this fate for our children by recognising that there are limits set by Nature and that humanity must live within those limits. As author Mark O'Conner notes , Australia has only 6 per cent of its land mass proven as arable. For Canada it is 7 per cent with soils marginal by European standards. “Baby boomers” argue that Australia could feed a far higher resident population than its current 22 million. But they forget that much of that foreign exchange is needed to pay for the fuel and nitrate fertiliser used for production, and also that soil loss, acidification, and climate change will diminish yields. The confusion for a herding species like humans is that they see the "vast" area of land as potential to increase the herd size, and simply ignore the fact that their herd's footprint is actually enormous! They see Canada and Australia as massive lands, ready to be utilized, tamed, developed and with great potential for more colonies, spreading cities, as resources, and for power. O'Conner asks: If the big empty land in fact suffers from a limited carrying capacity, if food self-sufficiency is a myth, if biodiversity is taking a beating, why then does Australia seem in a frenzy to add to its numbers? It is the land developers, the property markets, and the real estate industries, supported by "demographers" and political party sponsorships. If we can't have a great nation, a sustainable one, we at least we will have "diversity"! The HMS Ecological Titanic still robotically stopping to pick up more passengers as it ploughs forward towards the iceberg of over-population. The mulitculturalism of the Titanic won't make it less of a tragedy, but with cautious planning and and good leadership, at least it can be an avoidable one.

Earlier this month, Christian nurse Shirley Chaplin lost her appeal over a demand she remove the small cross she had worn around her neck throughout her 30-year nursing career. When she refused she was demoted to a desk job. On appeal an employment tribunal ruled that the health department was right to demand her 'jewellery' be removed as it could 'scratch patients'. Subsequently, the department ruled that Sikh nurses may wear bangles, and Muslim nurses exempted from the dress code mandating nurses wear short sleeves to help prevent the spread of hospital superbugs. Many Britons are confused and troubled by the way their historic freedom to exercise their Christian belief is being eroded while minority rights are being advanced. Most Westerners simply don't appreciate that their freedoms are intrinsically linked to Judeo-Christian culture which itself is based upon a Biblical foundation. Judeo-Christian culture is a tree that grows out of Biblical soil and religious freedom is a fruit of that tree. Throughout history, whenever a community has stopped attending to its Biblical foundation, the culture has declined and its fruits have failed. Erode the foundations and the tree eventually withers and dies as its roots cannot provide sustenance and stability. The only way to restore the fruits is to revive the culture. And the only way to revive the culture is to attend to the foundations. The post-Reformation Protestant culture of Christian liberty is so dynamic that unless that soil is right it will not be able to sustain or support it. Even when the soil is good, renewal of the plant through the restoration of its root system will only be possible through considerable struggle and long-term diligent care. This is the situation facing the UK. Foundations long neglected are being both subversively eroded and openly demolished, for UK elites determined some time ago that evolution mandates a transition to a 'post-Christian' culture. Therefore renovations are in order. However, it is coming as a shock to many to learn that 'fruits' long taken for granted -- such as religious liberty, benevolence and 'manners' -- are withering and disappearing before their very eyes. It is also coming as a shock to many in the demolition crew that they do not have control of the situation. The controversial Equality Bill -- which will challenge Christian consciences and criminalise Christian values -- completed its progression through the UK parliament on 6 April and now merely awaits Royal Assent to become law. Whilst many voices are declaring that the UK is already 'post-Christian', that is not the case. The UK is in transition. Source: Elizabeth Kendal Religious Liberty Monitoring

The Office of the Emergency Services Commissioner has put out a Fire Refuges Discussion Paper and is asking for community submissions. Unfortunately there is not much time left as submissions are due on Friday 30 July. It is really important that we put in submissions and that we tell as many people as possible about this. The community need to make sure we are heard about this issue, which is so critical for our safety and our communities. And if you fancy reading a bit of a rave about why this attempt at community consultation falls short, go to the Fire In Mind blog. Fire In Mind blog.

Coles have promised to ban sourcing their pork and ham products from producers who use sow stalls. Sow stalls are metal cages used to confine animals during their 16-week pregnancy. About 70% of our pork products come from overseas where sow stall are still in use. Unless the ban on pork producers who still use sow stalls covers imports as well, buyers will go for the cheaper options and thus all this good-will will be negated. The ban must include imported pork and ham too. Coles are to be congratulated for their step towards more human treatment of factory pigs. The New South Wales Farmers Association is concerned Australian pork suppliers will go out of business if major supermarkets ban pork from pigs raised in sow stalls. Britain has completely banned the use of sow stalls. The UK’s 500,000 sows are kept in more humane alternative systems. The rest of the European Union has a ban taking effect in 2013. More than 5 million pigs are raised and slaughtered in Australia each year. Few species are more social than pigs. They form close bonds with each other and other species and even sing songs to their young. The least we can do is allow their lives to be as natural, pain-free and humane as possible before their final trip to the abattoir. However, the ban must include pig products from overseas and not just from Australia.

Welcome back James, to your contributions to CDB. However, I don't agree with you. Bryant had the weapon, a chip on his shoulder, and was actually seen committing the crime. Nobody else has been a suspect and there are some survivors. Why make something difficult when it seems to be a clear cut case? He had the smoking gun, and defendants are always told to plea "not guilty" to get a lesser charge. More court cases, more complications, more appeals, more mitigating circumstances drags out these issues further and thus the barristers and lawyers accumulate higher fees.

Editor's comment: The comment below contains little original input from the commentator. It is almost, in its entirety, a copy of another earlier comment. We don't think this is good practice. The only original content:

"So if the below is correct should we refuse welfare
benefits to single parents in Australia?
Or maried ones for that matter!"

... needs development to constitute an argument. (Comment was originally posted on 15 July. My comment was added on 20 July 2010.)

James Sinnamon

SO IF THE BELOW IS CORRECT SHOULD WE REFUSE WELFARE BENEFITS TO SINGLE PARENTS IN AUSTRALIA?
OR MARRIED ONES FOR THAT MATTER!
"Homo sapiens are not an endangered species, or even vulnerable!
On August 16th, 2009 Bob (not verified) says:
Quite the contrary! The population growth in Africa is explosive, and they are causing their own hunger by out-growing their resources, and corruption of their leaders doesn't help the equitable distribution of food. However, money, or meat, does not justify the end! Drugs, slavery, unsustainable crops such as palm oil, destroying native species, theft, child labour all "help" the economy and short-term needs, but the means does not justify the end. African elephants are under threat from loss of habitat and an expanding human population. According to WWF, the influence elephants have over many plant and animal species means they are often referred to as keystone species that are vital to the long-term survival of the ecosystems in which they live.
Elephants are highly intelligent and social, and will care for each other if one is wounded, and they will even care for their companion's bones!
The real problem is too many humans, and their aggression, weapons, greed, and not enough elephants and reserves! Killing one (of a diminishing species) to advantage another species (humans) cannot, and never will, be justified no matter how much fun, or how convincing and warped the argument is! Hypocrisy is a trait that only humans are capable of!"

nicely said, Tim, and I couldn't agree with you more. To me, any equation of sustainability that is based on "cargo cult", smoke and mirrors, and , well, basically lies, deceit and overwhelming greed deserves to be pointed out loudly and clearly. And, unfortunately, our delusional elected "representatives" in government are so heavily immersed in their myopic moneybag self righteousness, that they probably believe that they are doing the "right thing" by our beautiful earth's future. They are ill. And their illness, more than cigarettes, obesity and petrochemical / lifestyle induced cancers etc has reached plague proportions, infecting our minds, our lives, and the immediate future of our entire planet. I used to think the issues you have raised come about because we, as humans, fail to learn from our historical lessons about greed, abuse and deceit. We hand our power over to liars,cheats and sociopathic hedonists, then cry about the injustices. And then, we do it all over again, generation after generation. Personally, I find it hard to believe almost anyone these days, but your brave article rings the truth bell beautifully. al polistchuk

It just shows that a kangaroo with a broken leg does not have to be 'humanely put down' at all. They can survive if people would just take the time to look after them, just as we would a child with a broken arm or leg.

I feel so honoured Steve and Rosemary named this little girl after me. Everyday I think of her and every day I think of the love and care given by two such good human beings. Wel done. I hope later in the year to be able to visit little Sylvie, if I am lucky I might receive a kangaroo hug.

By Dr Mark Zirnsak Director, Justice and International Mission unit "Dr Mathew’s letter (June edition of the Uniting Church's magazine, Crosslight) is of significant concern. It simplistically suggests population growth is responsible for most of the world’s problems and that people in developing countries would flood countries like Australia, threatening us with wars, death and destruction. While population growth is one factor in sustainability, so is consumption. The wealthiest people in the world, including Australians, consume far more than their fair share of resources. With regard to climate change, the World Bank Development Indicators 2010 report stated that in 2005 low-income countries with 15 per cent of the world’s population were responsible for 2.7 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions while the wealthiest countries with 16 per cent of the population were responsible for 50 per cent of emissions. Dr Mathew suggests less populated countries need to fear large numbers of refugees moving from overpopulated countries. I doubt that less populated Eritrea with 49 people per sq km needs to fear invasion from overpopulated Germany with 236 people per sq km or floods of refugees from overpopulated Japan with 350 people per sq km. Famine has far more to do with access to resources than population. Late-18th century France had a population of 29 million and famine was common, resulting in deaths and riots over food prices. Today France has a population of 62 million and famine is unheard of. France uses 2078 kg of fertilizer per ha of arable land, while impoverished Ethiopia only has access to 74 kg of fertilizer per ha of arable land. The surest cure to population growth is economic development. The problem is that wealthy countries with low population growth and high economic development are consuming unsustainably, even if there was no population growth at all in the developing world. A Christian response requires more than creating fear of people already suffering global injustice and poverty." http://blogs.victas.uca.org.au/crosslight/?p=1850#more-1850 ps Famine in France in the late 18th century, after the Revolution, was due to unseasonal weather, not population size. France now has a stable, ("stagnant") population growth. Ethiopia, on the other hand, has a population growth of over 3%. Decades of rapid population growth in Ethiopia have contributed to over-farming and deforestation, which have degraded the environment and undermined development. Of the country’s current 77 million people, an estimated 12 million Ethiopians are facing serious threats from food insecurity and famine. Economic development is not the solution to poverty and famine. The benefits have to be weighed against the costs, costs that are not always as obvious as increases in pollution and environmental degradation. We can't tell starving people to eat cake, but we can give them advice and the technologies that free women from the burden of big families, and allow their populations to take control of their own destinies. Runaway population growth is misanthropic, and causes poverty, environmental degradation and ultimately famine. Dr Mark Zirnsak is clearly a population denier, and how "social justice" can be implemented by ignoring it is beyond logic!

Earlier this year I went into the Bourke St Melbourne office of Marie Stopes to make a donation to their womens health clinic in Lae PNG. The middle aged woman in charge of PNG programs (herself an immigrant from NZ) told me with innocent faced wonder, that Australia didn't have a population probem. "Without immigration, Australia's population would be declining", he said sweetly. When people like this, who work hands-on, full-time in third world family planning, spout ignorant nonsense, the mountain ahead is steep. Too steep for dumb homo sapiens. Editorial comment: Offensive material has been removed.

Until the aid agencies and our governments recognise the unsustainable population growth rates, giving aid is like mopping up the floor while the tap is still running! This problem is simply ignored as irrelevant. People in the "West" use contraception, so why is the topic of family planning shunned for developing nations?

It is a shame James you miss the wider point that Chomsky may be making The title of your article does not ring true for me the " Noam Chomsky" part I can understand, its his name right but "phony" and "American" and "dissident" I don't get starting with "dissident" the etymology of the word means to "sit apart" www.merriam-webster.com defines it as " disagreeing especially with an established religious or political system, organization, or belief" wikipedia likewise or similar " is a person who actively challenges an established doctrine, policy, or institution" Yes he disagrees, yes is brilliant at challenging conventional held views !!!BUT Part does he "sit apart" hardly in reality is this accurate. No for me he does not He is not peddling the American is right line, and good on him, sooooo much American policy in the rest of the world leads to death and destruction, needless IMHO "phony" much is phony with American culture but alas not Noam Chomsky the man has rigor in his arguments and integrity As evidence i site his visit to Australia before the Australian SAS troops stopped the genocide in East Timor. Chomsky was a lone voice saying that this should not happen, he would speech of nothing else or always turn the topic back to what needed to be done. And history proved him right for once ! What was phony about his man I don't really get Sure he has said a lot and has a very deep eclectic knowledge, so the easiest thing to do is to single out a few viewpoints & connections were he can be "typed" or described as in a "mould". Which is silly really when you look at his broad contribution to establishing the truths in human affairs on this planet. Just as it is a little dumb to say Monbiot is a "mould" of Chomsky. Intellectuals of the left are way too diverse to simplistically categories this way, don't you think ? Wikipedia goes further correctly or not to say that the word "dissident" through the use about 'soviet dissidents' referring to themselves to mean "it came to refer to an individual whose non-conformism was perceived to be to the good of a society" not just those opposed to society. Chomsky I never thought was opposed to society per se. but with this new 20th century connotation it muddies the meaning for me to bang together "phony" and "dissident" in the same phrase. { bit oxymoronic } while being American is an accident of his birth he has to endure. He really is better at world humanitarian citizen than most Americans I have met. And James lighten up bit pleasse !