We don’t technically know what the prime minister’s “10 year manufacturing plan” consists of until he announces it at a Press Club address at lunchtime today, but inevitably it has been dropped for extensive reporting this morning to a slew of press gallery journalists.
Or, as Anthony Albanese put it in a speech yesterday, a “carefully curated preview” as part of “the drip-feed of government drops to sympathetic journalists”. Albo’s speech, of course, had itself been dropped to journalists ahead of its delivery.
Unsurprisingly, the Labor leader said “we must get behind manufacturing”. Specifically, he wants a local rail carriage industry to meet the growing needs of state government public transport projects. And he wants it achieved through local content preferences by government. Train carriages are “just one example of how the government should use its purchasing power to create good, secure jobs while strengthening our sovereign industrial and research capabilities”.
Building rolling stock locally costs much more than buying it from overseas manufacturers who operate with economies of scale. That’s why overseas manufacturers win tenders for provision of rolling stock, unless local content rules deem otherwise. Taxpayers wear the cost, but that gets overlooked in the cheery media release about local manufacturers creating X number of jobs.
Industry Minister Karen Andrews has already flagged that local preference will be used by the federal government to support local manufacturing. Judging by the “carefully curated preview” of Morrison’s speech, he’ll go further and announce $130 million a year to fund projects by mining companies, medical suppliers, food manufacturers; “clean” (i.e. not renewable) energy investment and projects in space and defence. Packaging it up as a “10 year plan” enables Morrison to slap a billion-plus price tag on it.
This will be another business slush fund, yet again aimed at helping political donors — note that resources companies will be first in line — and select industries.
Theoretically, this kind of winner-picking and protectionism is anathema to the party of the free market, but the Liberals are now the party of radical interventionism, especially in energy policy. Bizarrely, Morrison will justify this winner-picking by saying that the selected industries are ones where Australia has a comparative advantage.
In more traditional economics, comparative advantage means you don’t have to offer handouts for industries to compete successfully against imports. Now, it seems, comparative advantage means you do get handouts.
Confused? Join the crowd. Australia has no comparative advantage in defence manufacturing, despite its status as an anointed Morrison industry. We’re far too small compared to the US and Europe. We can’t make naval vessels even remotely as cheaply as other countries. But we’re throwing $100 billion at least at making ships and subs locally for the sake of a few thousand jobs.
And Australia has no comparative advantage in space, other than that we point the other way to the northern hemisphere. But that’s getting funding as well. We have a comparative advantage in growing and exporting some foods, but our “comparative advantage” in food manufacturing is so great we have to use anti-dumping laws to keep foreign products out.
Media stenographers claimed the plan “could” create 80,000 jobs — which would be a mammoth 10% increase in the current manufacturing workforce. Taking the government’s numbers at face value, that means a $1.5 billion package will cost $19,000 a job. That’s around about what we used to pay for automotive manufacturing jobs in the old days when we handed huge sums of money to Japan and US-based multinationals to run some inefficient car plants here.
But at least that’s better than the hundreds of thousands per job we’re coughing up for our various naval construction follies. All thanks to the endless generosity of taxpayers.
Bernard needs to heed Lord Keynes’s view that economic theories needed to change in response to events.
In the real world, taxpayers continue to fork out, more than half a decade after the event, to rectify the innumerable issues with the India-manufactured Brisbane commuter train sets imported, of course, to save taxpayer money. This work has to be done on-shore, because the sets are already here. The only people able to do the rectification work are the very same domestic manufacturers Bernard so loathes.
And so, in the real world, the textbook-efficient decision to source the rolling stock overseas has led to taxpayers paying over the odds for trains that are put into operation years late.
Well said. The other point that seems to often be overlooked by BK is that money spent offshore is lost to our economy, while much of the money spent in Australia by the governments filters back to treasury through taxes and welfare savings, not to mention boosting economic growth often in regional areas. So the ‘saving’ has to be truly massive in order to have a real benefit to taxpayers.
…inevitably it has been dropped for extensive reporting this morning to a slew of press gallery journalists.
You’re too polite, BK, in using the term journalist to describe stenographers.
I submitted a comment under a Nine Crowe article earlier this week explaining how Crowe had basically just transcribed a govt press release and linking to Michael West’s description of this new media strategy. Needless to say it never saw the light of day.
I didn’t see Insiders last Sunday – should I check it on iView or not waste my time?
Maybe save the time for something useful that would give you a sense of achievement rather than the feeling of wasting 50 minutes. If you can scan through quickly to the Talking Pictures segment that is worth five minutes of your time.
Nah, just watch the 5mins Talking Pictures segment, the rest is a waste of one’s ever shortening Life.
Don’t waste your time, Speers is still providing a platform for Newscorpse hacks.
Thanks Fairmind for confirming my good decision to not bother watching insiders anymore.
It would be worth accessing ABC audience research findings to see if Insiders appeal has increased or diminished since Bazza’s departure. Chomsky’s observation that the so called “liberal media” (ie the ABC, the PBS and the BBC) determine the limits to the range/type of subject matter to be covered. Both Bazza’ previous and Speersie’s current cut off points on range of topics are almost identical. The current, but limited coverage of the politicisation of the RBA’s governor for instance, or the need for a third mainstream political party/alternative to Australia’s current, status quo maintenance duopoly, has only been alluded to in readers’ comments attached to opinion columns in say Crikey and the Guardian. Alan Kohler’s recent 7.30 interview with Peter Costello, where Alan suggested the RBA directly fund govt debt then cancel it was an aberration, as was the mainstream media’s, mostly negative coverage of Paul Keating’s recent critique of the RBA. Many media commentators fail to acknowledge/highlight Albo’s potential “cut through” moment on the fed govt’s serious failure of Aged Care management, as they fail to explore the reasons for that failure, apart from handwrenching reporting on the findings of the current Aged Care RC, or ineffective badgering of the relevant ministers. Yep, Bernard, the cynical management of the media cycle by govt – assisted by a generally complicit opposition – peddling distraction and superficial policies is working for some. And it seems the “gallery heavies”/”stenographers” are also part of the problem, given their addiction to the broadcast of their chicken feed from the smirking sower in the ” Lodge”.
BK, these simplistic arguments about manufacturing that you first heard in 1980 and have been repeating ad nauseam via Crikey for a decade have now been proven completely wrong by reality. Your theories are wrong. Your understanding of what the public wants and what the country needs is wrong. Can you see that? I doubt it. I suspect your years in Canberra have poisoned any residual ability you once had to think creatively, imaginatively, broadly, beyond this bean counter analysis here. I think you best change your mind or get left far behind on this one.
Who can believe a word that comes out of his “mouth”?
Did the water bombers get lost in the mua triangle with all the cargo ships and medical supplies?
They are currently stuck offshore in the 40 ships that are being held at bay by the Maritime Union.
Simply untrue maybe you call Indonesia offshore?
It was a joke.
Easy enough to check on MIA ships, use your smartphone and check the port arrivals and pending arrivals.
This Prime Minimal just lies and twists and slips past the truth.
Where is the recovery plans for the south coast of NSW?
How many very heavy lift water bombers has Sooty ordered?
Whatever happened to all that money ($400,000,000) that Slomo and Turnbull gave to a Barrier Reef charity with 10 employees?
Where are all those infrastructure spends going on and does Ian MacFarlane’s family earth moving equipment got work?
So much money of ours and no accountability!
Oh, of course Scottie from marketing is giving himself and every politician a tax cut, because they’ll spend it, won’t they?
I thought I heard the ghost of years gone by in Queensland “Don’t you worry about that” said Joh as he fed the chooks (journalists).
I know. I was taking the piss.
He’s so full of it, how could he take more?
Is it a mouth Stu? Looks – and certainly sounds – more like a cloaca to me.
After a derailment in Tasmania, an experienced rail employee told us that the imported rolling stock folded like sardine tins, not the old locally made ones. False economy is the expression I think.
Btw, Insiders has become a waste due mostly to bad choices of guests, but also Speers style of excessive management of the narrative, however this week Sam Maiden was good value as usual.
“…Sam Maiden was good value as usual.” Sky News’ plant getting a guernsey on Insiders, twice , is not “Good value” !