POPULATION & MIGRATION

Evening Star, Issue 19839, 12 April 1928, Page 12

POPULATION & MIGRATION

ADDRESS BY DR FISHER The Workers’ Educational Association classes were resumed yesterday. A meeting was held at the University last night, 'when an address was delivered by Dr A. G. B. Fisher (professor of economics at the University), who dealt with the questions of population and migration. In the course of his remarks Dr Fisher stated that there had been in recent years a marked revival of interest in the subject of population, and it was becoming more generally recognised that our economic welfare depended in part on having the right size of population, neither toe large nor too small. Popular thought had lagged behind a little, and was still under the influence of the unusual experience of the last century, wdien the world’s population increased much more rapidly than at any other period of history. People who had lived at that time had tended to believe that rapid population growth was “natural,” and they deplored the new tendency towards a slower rate of increase, wdiich was now seen in many countries. The French population had been practically stationary for some time, and the English population would probably be stationary fifteen years hence. Germany was moving in the same direction. New Zealand had shared in the worldwide decline of the birth .rate, but it was a mistake, to suppose that, compared with the rest of the world, our rate of natural increase was slow. On account of our low death rate, it was. in fact, definitely faster than that of Japan. It was also a mistake to suppose that the rate of increase by immigration was slow. There were, in fact, few countries in the world whose population was increasing so rapidly ns that of New Zealand. It was a mistake to suppose that additions to the population, either _by natural increases or by immigration, merely deprived people who were already" here of opportunities of employment. But it was equally a mistake to talk vaguely about magnificent natural resources and open spaces, taking it for granted, without examination, that there were opportunities sufficient tor immense numbers of people to get a good living here. The first view was certainly wrong, for newcomers wero just as likely as people already here to make useful contributions to the national volume, and so to provide employment for the others; but the second neglected the possibility already probably realised in some countries of large numbers necessitating a decline in the average standard of production. We wanted newcomers not only to make a contribution to the national income, but also to make a contribution at least as big as that made by people already in the country. We should aim at the optimum population, the size of which would make possible the best use of natural _ *esources, and would afford opportunities for further co-operation than were possible with very restricted numbers. To push increase beyond this point meant that everyone would be worse off; but not to reach the optimum' point would have a similar effect. It rvas improbable that New Zealand had yet reached the optimum level, but it was unwise to increase too rapidly, as otherwise the transitional difficulties which arose while the newcomers were being absorbed were likely to be serious.