Australia's population is on a runaway train, and it seems no one's hitting the brakes! Remember those population forecasts from 2003? They predicted Australia would reach about 26.4 million by 2051. Well, spoiler alert: we've already zoomed past that, hitting nearly 27.9 million! How did this happen? It turns out the government's decision to dramatically ramp up Net Overseas Migration (NOM), more than doubling the initial assumption, has led to this massive overshoot.
But here's where it gets interesting: back in 2003, the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) actually suggested that NOM had a relatively small impact on the age distribution of the population. They even considered an 'extreme' NOM scenario of 200,000 per year, which was still less than the average NOM we've seen over the last 21 years! And under that 'extreme' scenario, the projected population for 2051 was only 32.5 million.
Now, fast forward to today, and the Centre for Population is projecting an even more dramatic surge. They anticipate Australia's population will swell by a staggering 13.4 million by 2065-66. This is like adding the populations of Sydney, Melbourne, and Perth combined to our current numbers in just over 40 years! This massive growth is again attributed to high NOM, projected to average 235,000 annually.
This brings us to a point former Prime Minister Julia Gillard made back in 2010. She famously stated she didn't believe in a 'Big Australia' and advocated for a sustainable approach, urging us to "pause, take a breath, and just get this right." Her words, it seems, are as relevant today as they were then. Sadly, despite these concerns, successive governments from both major parties, along with the Greens and the Teals, have continued with a substantial migration program.
And this is the part that might raise some eyebrows: the ABS in 2003 seemed to downplay the impact of NOM on population size and age structure, while current projections suggest an exponential increase. Is it possible that the initial assumptions about migration's long-term effects were too conservative?
Looking ahead, the Centre for Population's projections suggest Australia will barrel past 40 million people, irrespective of the potential downsides to productivity, sustainability, and our quality of life. What's particularly striking is that Australians haven't had a direct say in this path towards a 'Big Australia.' It seems to have been a policy choice made for us, often justified by concerns about an aging population – a concern the ABS itself seemed to largely debunk in 2003 regarding migration's impact.
What do you think? Should Australia continue on this trajectory of rapid population growth, or should we heed Julia Gillard's call for a more sustainable approach? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below – do you agree with the current direction, or do you believe we need a significant change in policy?
