---

This past Sunday on the Shirley Dill talk show, Rolfe Commissiong called in and spoke about Bermuda’s job market and the foreign-born population. In essence, Mr. Commissiong’s argument was that because Bermuda’s birth rate has been declining, we are having to import more foreign workers and will, in the future, import even more. His proposed solution, one he floated back in 2002, was that local women should increase their fertility.

A few weeks ago, BPSU General Secretary Ed Ball noted that there might not be enough young locals to replace those retiring from the workforce. He also suggested that a solution might be for Bermudian women to have more babies. As Family Services Director Martha Dismont intimated in response, this is a simplistic solution to a complex issue.

I would go one step further and label the notion absurd. Bermuda is already one of the most densely populated places on the planet. Proposing increased fertility to an already overloaded ecosystem is not only counterproductive it is suicidal.

Unfortunately, the segment of the childbearing population most likely to respond to have-more-babies exhortations is least likely to analyse just what is being asked of them. Similarly, they are least likely to be in the best position to raise offspring capable of replacing the categories of jobs now filled by foreigners, or of making substantial contributions to the pension pool. Furthermore, any success at increasing fertility today will not bring any results for the workforce or pensions before another 18 to 35 years.

Meanwhile, the costs to feed, clothe, house and educate will continue to rise and will require an acceleration of workforce imports to generate the incomes for this expanding population with correspondingly expanding consumer appetites.

It is obvious to me that most, if not all, the problems we are experiencing will be exacerbated by population growth:

Traffic congestion and related traffic issues of speeding, reckless riding/driving, resulting in more frequent and more serious collisions.

Energy costs. We have passed the era when increased energy use reduced the unit cost. Utility companies that once promoted reduced costs through increased use are now promoting energy conservation.

Housing ‘shortages’. At today’s rate of population increase (births minus deaths) we would need to complete 200-300 housing units each year just to keep up with current demand. We’re not keeping up. If fertility is increased we will have a more difficult time meeting the additional housing demand and we can forget about producing housing at prices approaching affordable.

Parenting and child-raising difficulties. Judging from juvenile and young adult behaviour in recent years, of which the habits and demise of the Cooper twins is but one example, we aren’t doing the best of jobs housing, feeding, educating and inspiring maturity in the children we’ve already got. What makes anyone think that stepping up the production of children by itself is going to subtract from rather than add to problems of delinquency?

Violence. There is overwhelming evidence that as population density increases there are corresponding increases in stress levels, aggressive behaviour and the intensity and frequency of violent encounters.

Why not try alternative approaches to the issue? Instead of promoting more babies to feed the economy, we might consider adjusting the economy to suit our needs. After all, the economy is supposed to exist for human benefit, not the other way around. Similarly, there are more sustainable ways to cope with current and future pension needs.

Given our limited resources, it would be absurd to suggest we could replace imported goods (everything from scotch tape to mangoes to refrigerators, TVs and cars) with local products. Given our prime industry, it is just as absurd to suggest we can replace the foreign workforce by merely producing more Bermudians.[[In-content Ad]]

---