REX'S VEXATIONS is the column from Esperance Express Journalist Rex Drabik.
On those rare occasions when he isn't working, Rex enjoys travelling, history, politics, economics, socialising, reading and ranting.
---
LAST year, without much in the way of media attention or public comment, Western Australia's population quietly ticked past 2.5 million.
At the time of writing, our state's population is somewhere around the 2.6 million mark, with WA holding the title as the fastest growing state in the country.
Figures released at the end of last year showed the state growing at an extraordinary rate of 3.3. per cent or 81,000 per annum.
In a new planning document released earlier this month, the state government forecast that Western Australia's population would expand to at least 4.4 million and possibly more than double to 5.6 million by 2056.
"Western Australia's population make-up is undergoing change that is set to continue into the future," the State Planning Strategy 2050 stated.
Now, this rapidly swelling population is not because of any exceptional strength in the loins of native-born West Australians.
Rather, as the strategy makes clear, it is migration, both from overseas and interstate, that has been the principle source of population growth in WA.
According to the State Planning Strategy 2050, around 78 per cent of the state's population now lives in the greater Perth area and this is set to keep growing by around 50,000 every year.
The strategy states that the "Perth, Peel and Greater Bunbury regions are in the midst of becoming a 'conurbation'.
In other words, Perth's urban sprawl is set to spread southward all the way down the coast to Bunbury, swallowing up the regional city.
Whatever your thoughts on this scenario, the strategy provides an opportunity for us to reflect on whether the state's rapid rate of population growth is really in our best interests.
I don't mean the best interests of certain industries or those projected to move here, but the interests of the existing Western Australian population who will have to live with and carry the costs of such growth.
During the dizzying heights of the mining boom, it was argued by business groups and politicians that WA needed more workers to sustain our economic expansion.
However, most commentators now agree that the state's mining boom has fizzled out.
The economy has slowed, the unemployment rate has jumped to its highest level in more than a decade and the state's revenue stream is under stress from falling commodity prices.
The end of the mining boom windfall saw the state go into budget deficit last financial year.
At the same time, the state's debt is expected to balloon to $24.9 billion in 2014-15.
Despite slowing revenue and growing debt, the state government has announced $23.7 billion in infrastructure projects over the next four years.
This big infrastructure spend is necessary to accommodate the state's expanding population, which has continued to grow rapidly despite the economic slowdown.
Perth is already struggling to accommodate its burgeoning population if the clogged roads, packed trains, overcrowded schools and hospitals, water shortages and housing crisis are anything to go by.
It makes little sense for the state government to continue to push for further population growth when it is already falling behind in infrastructure and service provision.
As Ian Lowe points out in his book Bigger or Better: Australia's Population Debate, any state or region with a population growth rate higher than two per cent will always struggle to meet its basic needs.
A common argument used to justify high population growth is that more people means more demand for goods and services and a larger GDP.
However, this does not necessarily translate into a higher GDP per capita.
Further, as Monash University's Bob Birrell has argued, in an economy dependent on the export of non-renewable resources, rapid population expansion dilutes the benefit from the eroding bounty that can accrue to existing residents.
Now, many will contend that in a state the size of ours, we have plenty of room to accommodate a significantly larger population.
This is may be true out in the regions if we ignore water as a limiting factor.
However, even then, unless the state government is prepared to invest heavily to develop WA's regional and rural areas, new arrivals will continue to flock to Perth, thereby exacerbating its problems.
It may be just my opinion but it would seem wise to err on the side of caution and slow growth a bit rather than rush to import millions more people.
The decisions we make now on population will have a lasting impact on our future.
What do you think? Do we need to look at ways to limit WA's population growth? Post your answers below.