Why does the Australian Conservation Foundation defy the principles of conservation and instead, implicitly, support Big Australia?
The magazine The Independent Australian has today exposed the ACF’s failure to adhere to its own policy statement: ‘ACF urges the Commonwealth to reduce net migration to a level that is consistent with a goal of environmental sustainability.’
In a persuasive article, ‘The Australian Conservation Foundation Council votes to implicitly support ‘Big Australia’, Peter Wilkinson says:
The ACF is noted for challenging government policies, so by refusing to criticise the bipartisan Big Australia policy, the ACF implicitly supports it. The ACF thereby is comfortable with 200,000 net immigrants per annum pouring into Australia, putting pressure on the environment, causing cities to spread over farmland, crushing biodiversity, creating traffic congestion, depleting our water supplies.
Dr Wilkinson’s research reveals that the ACF has neglected or rejected many opportunities to translate its policies on population growth – and the need to reduce immigration – into meaningful action and advocacy.
The article concludes by urging readers to do their own research and take useful action:
- ACF members can express an opinion on the ACF blogsite.
- Members of other environmental organisations should examine their own position. If the organisation is silent on population/immigration, you must face up to the fact that you support Big Australia by default. Take it up with your organisation.
- Email everybody you know with an interest in the environment or population matters about this post. Express your opinion openly. Write to the papers. You may care to join a non-political organisation …
Dr Wilkinson has been a member of the ACF for over 40 years. He is a scientist by training who moved into corporate planning. He has consistently supported lower immigration as part of conservation policy. He founded The Independent Australian and is the author of The Howard Legacy (2007).