Mr HOLLIS (12:47 PM) —I am pleased to second this motion marking the Day of Six Billion People, moved by the honourable member for Bradfield. Global population has quadrupled this century, growing faster than at any other time in history. At the beginning of this century, the world's population was approximately 1.5 billion; in 1987, it was five billion; and tomorrow, 12 October, is the day designated by the UNFPA as the Day of Six Billion People. Of course we cannot know with certainty the exact day. Some experts would put it earlier this year, some later, but 12 October is the official day when the world's population reaches six billion. It is a day for reflection on what it means to our planet to be home to six billion people, its challenges and implications.

What especially does it mean for us living in Australia? Judging by the interest shown, not much. Most Australians are preoccupied with what is happening to our north in Timor, the implications of the GST, the republic debate or whether or not they got tickets to their favourite sporting event at the Sydney Olympics and will ignore this issue. I am not suggesting that these other issues are not important—but so is population. There are not enough votes in the issue for most members of parliament to be more than marginally interested, except for those who will be speaking in this debate and those who did not get on the speakers list. I am not expecting a prime ministerial statement or even a statement from the relevant minister, and the media will largely ignore the issue.

To give an example of the disinterest, I wrote to the Department of the Parliamentary Library suggesting that a vital issues seminar with the theme `World of six billion people: implications and challenges' be held on the Day of Six Billion People. I was not surprised when the Library declined my suggestion with the feeble excuse that topics were already in place for the remainder of the spring session. Seminars to be conducted are on Timor, the Ralph review, regional development and human rights protection in Australia. Important as these issues undoubtedly are, I would suggest that each of them will be thoroughly examined by the media and in the long term the question of population could be far more important than all of them.

While many countries in our region have ministers for population, we in this country do not even have a population policy, yet we live in the most populous part of the world and, increasingly, the most unstable. Three of the four most populous nations on earth are in this region. During this day, the global total will swell by another 214,000.

While it is important that this motion states that cultural sensitivities must be respected, I must say that too often cultural sensitivities have been used as an excuse to do nothing. How do you justify cultural sensitivity with the death and suffering of thousands of women throughout the world? Too often cultural sensitivity is nothing more than subjugation.

I also believe that many religions, especially the Catholic faith, have much to answer for. It is somewhat ironic that men, often elderly, in dresses are dictating to women how their bodies should be used. As an aside, I suspect that, if the Catholic Church did the unthinkable and permitted women to become priests, as eventually they inevitably will as the current generation moves on, the church's attitude to reproductive health would be vastly different. Put at its simplest, access to information on family planning must be regarded as a basic human right. All the evidence shows that, when you educate girls and when information is made available regarding family planning, birth rates decline.

The 1994 International Conference on Population and Development in Cairo was a turning point in many important respects. First, it convened the entire spectrum of population and development related issues; second, it adopted concrete goals, including resource goals, for the next 20 years; finally, and most importantly, it allowed 180 nations to resolve a basic controversy which had dogged international population activities during all of UNFPA's 30 years. The conference agreed on the paramount importance of guaranteeing human rights and protecting individual lives. It also agreed that world population growth should be slower. The unique contribution of the Cairo conference was to reach an agreement that these two aims are complementary. But I must say that not enough has been done since Cairo.

Experience and research both show that, if they have the choice, women and men will have fewer children and smaller families than their parents' generation. The result will be slower population growth. The Cairo conference accepted that freedom of choice must be the aim to secure individual wellbeing on one hand and slower population growth on the other. This means paying close attention to individual needs. It means the development of one person at a time.

The reproductive and sexual rights endorsed at the conference include the right to make free choices about marriage and about the number, timing and spacing of children as a basis of equality between men and women; the right to attain the highest standard of sexual and reproductive health; and freedom from sexual violence and coercion. Concrete goals centre on providing universal education and reproductive health care, including family planning, and reducing infant, child and maternal mortality.

Each year more than 585,000 women in developing countries die, and at least seven million suffer infection or injury, as a result of pregnancy. Some 70,000 women die every year from unsafe abortions. How does the Catholic Church remain with that? There are over 330 million cases of treatable sexually transmitted diseases annually and 11 HIV infections every minute. Of the nearly 175 million pregnancies each year, up to half are unwanted or ill timed. Over 350 million women do not have the choice of safe and effective contraception. Nearly half of the 130 million births annually are not assisted by a trained delivery attendant. More than half of all women will suffer some form of gender based violence in their lives. Each year two million girls and young women are at risk of female genital mutilation, and 960 million people cannot read or write, two-thirds of whom are women.

Progress and population cannot continue in the absence of economic, social and cultural conditions in which women and men can make free and informed choices about their lives. As we enter the 21st century, over a billion people are still deprived of basic needs. Of the 4.8 billion people in developing countries, nearly three-fifths lack basic sanitation. Almost a third have no access to clean water, a quarter do not have adequate housing and a fifth have no access to modern health services, including reproductive health services. In less developed regions, a fifth of children do not attend school to grade 5. Women are disproportionately affected by these deprivations. We are faced with not only personal tragedy but a daily violation of human rights on a massive scale.

Meanwhile, consumption—which reached $24 trillion in 1998—continues to rise, with the wealthiest groups and individuals controlling a larger share than ever. At the end of this century, the wealthiest fifth of the world consume more than 66 times the materials and resources of the poorest fifth. When economic crises come, the poor are hardest hit and women hardest of all. It was interesting that the first things to suffer cuts in so many countries affected by the Asian economic crisis were the family planning programs.

There is a looming crisis in basic resources. Though global food supplies remain adequate, distribution does not. In addition, grain output per capita has been stagnant for more than a decade and crop land is shrinking. Forest land, much of it crucial for upland watersheds, is being stripped. Access to water supplies is already a cause of conflict. More than 430 million people—eight per cent of the world's population—are living in countries affected by water stress or scarcity. A quarter of the world's population are likely to live in countries facing chronic or recurrent shortages of fresh water by the year 2050.

The needs of the oldest people, the over-80s, will also increase substantially over the next 20 years. For developing countries, the extended family has been the main support of people in old age but, as populations become more urban, the extended family is not as close as it used to be. Older people are also living longer, putting an additional responsibility on their families. Most developing countries still lack the social safety net that industrialised countries have, and for many it will be difficult to construct. For most countries, however, the prospect is still on the horizon. Half the world's population is under 25, and there are over a billion young people between 15 and 24, the parents of the next generation. With over 100 million births a year well into the next century, there is no danger of a global birth dearth.

Each year, for example, India is adding 18 million people—roughly another Australia. What can Australia do about this coming crisis? As the motion notes, uncontrolled population growth will lead to increasing pressure on the world's resources. We must do more. We cannot stand aside from this. We must increase our funding to UNFPA and restore IPPF funding to former levels. We have a special responsibility to our part of the world. (Time expired)