In 2011 the world’s population will exceed 7 billion. Each year we add nearly 80 million people, and by mid-century we will require twice as much food and double the energy we use today.  Australia will be deeply affected by these trends—we have the fastest-growing population of any developed nation.

These are the staggering facts that confronted Dick Smith. They set him on his crusade to alert us to the dangers of unsustainable growth. They are the facts that have convinced him that if we are to ensure the survival of our civilisation and the health of the planet then we must put a stop to population growth—now.

As our cities continue their unrestrained growth, as we battle daily on crowded public transport and clogged freeways, and as we confront the reality of water and power shortages, Dick challenges the long-held myth that growth is good for us. But more importantly he offers ways for us to re-invent our economy, to reassess the way we live and to at least slow down that ticking clock. This is a provocative, powerful and urgent call to arms.

CALLS FOR RUPERT MURDOCH TO RETURN TO AUSTRALIA

On 30 May this year, Bindi Irwin launched my new book, “Dick Smith’s Population Crisis” at Dymocks great store in George Street, Sydney. 

The launch was a tremendous success.  Bindi, who represents the present generation and our future, launched my book in front of numerous radio and television media.  In her speech, Bindi used some simple metaphors to illustrate what can happen if we lurch blindly ahead with no clear plan on population. 

Here’s Bindi delivering her fantastic speech ….

Following Bindi’s speech, I gave my address to the media where I called for Rupert Murdoch to return to Australia.

And, for some great post-launch comments from Bob Carr, Professor Garry Egger, Peter FitzSimons, Dr. Anthony Kidman and Mark O’Connor, watch this …..

“recognizes [Dick's] great contributions in teaching the public and students about the issues of overpopulation, consumption, and economic growth“

Attached is a copy of the letter confirming Dick’s appointment from the Office of the Dean of the School of Humanities and Sciences at Stanford.

Dick Smith Letter of Appointment as Consulting Professor at Stanford University

What is even worse is the way our politicians appear to have been intimidated on this subject. Many politicians I speak to agree with the simple fact that we can’t always have growth and we need to move to a more stable system. However, a number of them have said to me ‘Dick, what you are saying is absolutely correct, but if I said it I would be crucified by the Murdoch press’. I think everyone should be horrified at this. I think Rupert Murdoch himself would be horrified if he knew about it.

The fact is we should be discussing all sides of the issue and acknowledging the fact that the growth we have had over the last thirty years cannot continue indefinitely. I am the first to admit that this growth has benefited people greatly, including Rupert Murdoch and myself. But it’s a simple fact that you don’t have to be a very good businessperson to be making more and more money in such a growth-fuelled environment – and we all know that one day there will be a limit to this growth.

It is very sad and also incredibly serious that we presently have a group of politicians, no matter how small, who agree with the important facts about this ‘growth reality’ but are not game to discuss it because they will be attacked.

Recently Barry O’Farrell, the Premier of New South Wales, stated that we would not have another airport in Sydney. He was attacked mercilessly by the Sydney Daily Telegraph. “How could someone doubt growth?” was basically the attitude of the Telegraph.

I have therefore decided on a special $5,000 prize for the first young person under the age of thirty who can get definitive coverage of the Wilberforce Award in the Murdoch press, including the fact that you can’t have constant growth of the use of resources and energy in a finite world.

So go for it! It must be possible. One day there will be a journalist working for Murdoch who understands the truth and believes responsible journalism means that both sides of an argument should be fairly shown.

Remember, this is not an emotive view – it’s a simple fact. We can’t always have growth in the use of material resources and energy in a finite world.

Check out what Sydney’s Channel 7 News had to say about the Award, as well as what The Australian and the SMH had to say about Dick, the doco and the award.

Channel 7 News Coverage of Dick’s launch of the Wilberforce Award on 11 August

SMH: Dick’s blonde ambition: $1m cash to save civilisation
The Australian: Dick Smith offers $1m for person who reduces population with Wilberforce Award

The award is designed to give a one million dollar prize to anyone under 30 who can impress Dick by becoming famous through his or her ability to show leadership in communicating an alternative to our population and consumption growth-obsessed economy.

The launch went off without a hitch – although, it was touch and go there for a while as it was unsure whether Dick’s dog was going to relieve himself on the million dollars prize money.

The media were well represented with members from Channel 9, 2UE and the ABC there, amongst others.

Dick took the opportunity to explain the details of the Wilberforce Award and its importance.

He said that he he will be looking for candidates whose actions over the next year show that they have what it takes to be among the next generation of leaders our incredible planet so badly needs.

Similar to the Nobel Prize, candidates will not apply for the Wilberforce Award.

Instead Dick will be following the media throughout the world to see who is the most outstanding individual in not only making a significant contribution to this important issue, but who also becomes famous through his or her contribution to the debate.

One year from now Dick will announce the winner of the $1 Million Wilberforce Award. The Award will go towards advancing the momentum the winner will have already achieved.

Further details on the Wilberforce Award will be provided on the DVD of Dick’s documentary, The Population Puzzle. You can purchase the documentary here.

Dick Smith and his family, including his wife and two daughters were there, as was the Director Simon Nasht, and many members of the crew.

Following the film a lively debate ensued with filmmakers, politicians and members of the Australian Population Party all contributing to the discussion with Dick and Simon.

To see what happened at the event, check out the photos below.

In September 2009, my youngest daughter, Jenny, phoned me and said, “dad, they are all talking about human induced climate change, and they’re all going off to Copenhagen. Why don’t they talk about the ‘elephant in the room’”. I said, “Jenny, what’s that?”. She said, “population!”.

The instant she said the word, it was almost as if a light was turned on in my head. Within seconds I realised how stupid I had been. Here we were talking about problems which are facing our planet, but people weren’t talking about the most obvious problem – too many people. I knew that we had something like 6.7 billion people in the world, and this was predicted to go to over 9 billion by 2050. But I’d never actually linked that with a great many of the problems we have in our world.

Yes, I knew that our oceans were being over-fished and stocks were reducing. I knew that our Federal Government was paying tens of millions of dollars to our farmers in the Murray Valley to stop farming and to bulldoze their crops because of a lack of water. But for some reason I’d never linked the two together – population and environmental degradation.

From that day on, I’ve spent my life getting as much information as I can about population and population growth. Yes, I’ve learned a lot. I have read over a dozen books on the issue – some claiming that the global warming / climate change story is all a giant hoax instigated by scientists who want more and more “gravy train” money from the government, others claiming that the world’s energy is a bottomless well and there will always be huge surpluses of energy available, and still others which say that there will be extraordinary problems in the future with our environment and quality of life as a result of unsustainable population growth.

However, a most important point is left out. Even though we may be able to grow to 100 million people in Australia – what would be the advantage in doing this? The question is why? Of course, to wealthy people, population growth will generally increase their prosperity and wealth. I know this, because I have made more money out of owning industrial and commercial buildings in Sydney over the last twenty-five years than I did in owning Dick Smith Electronics and Australian Geographic. So the wealthy will get more. But what about the average wage and salary earner and retiree? Possibly over 80% of our population?

I have a feeling it’s all “down hill” from now for most Australians as the population increases. I can’t think of any of our present problems in this world which are alleviated by more people. In fact, quite the opposite. I think unrestrained population growth will make virtually every problem more difficult.

Yes, we are told that efficiencies of scale will give us greater benefits. However, let’s look at our country compared with the USA. The USA has fifteen times our population, ie. fifteen times the efficiency of scale in a roughly similar land mass. Do the Americans have a higher standard of living? I don’t think so. Do they have better medical care? I don’t think so. Do they have better roads? Well, they certainly have more freeways, but their roads seem more gridlocked than ours. Do they have a better education system? There’s no evidence to suggest that they do.

I believe we in Australia are currently at a very “efficient” number of 22 million. Our Prime Minister said that he welcomed a “big Australia” of 36 million and at a later date said he didn’t really have a view on population numbers – that it was just going to happen.

But typical Australian families do have a view on population numbers. Believe it or not, an Australian family could have between fifteen and twenty children during their lifetime – few rarely do. Most Aussie families decide on an optimum number, whether it’s two, four or even more – the number that they know they can properly raise.

Seeing that Aussie families have a plan for population which isn’t the maximum, why doesn’t the same apply to Australia?

I believe it’s exactly the same with the population of a country. With 22 million, we have the potential to share in the wealth of this country. Increase the population to 44 million, and each person has the potential to share in half as much.

Now, by going to 44 million are we actually going to produce more? I doubt it. We are not a country who makes small gadgets in factories where you need lots of workers. We are, in fact, a country that earns most of its money from exporting minerals and from farming. Neither of these is labour intensive industries. I understand the total percentage of our workforce employed in mining in Australia is approximately 1.5%. Also, more people just means we can dig up our minerals and ship them off to other countries even faster, meaning less for future generations of Australians.

It’s the same with farming. Farming is highly efficient in Australia because of the broad acres, machinery and a small amount of labour. In fact, that’s the only way we can compete.

The big decision about a population increase is, “what’s in it for most Australians?”. I believe the answer is “less and less”. We would do better to try and curtail our population increase, and then concentrate on being truly sustainable – moving away from fossil fuels which are most likely polluting our environment into energy that is coming every day from the sun and other sustainable sources.