Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister Assisting the Leader for Science) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate—

(a) condemns:

(i) the failure of the Government to:

  (A) articulate a comprehensive innovation policy so that Australia has the high skill, high wage jobs of the future, and

  (B) fight for Australian jobs,

(ii) the deliberate and hostile actions of the Government in bringing about the end of Australia's automotive manufacturing sector threatening a further 50 000 jobs directly reliant and the 200 000 jobs that rely on it indirectly, and

(iii) the cowardice of the Government for blaming job losses on workers to distract from its own inaction and lack of any plan to deal with the crisis facing Australian manufacturing due to the strong dollar; and

(b) calls on the Government to immediately outline:

(i) its plans to support the 50 000 Australian workers who have lost their jobs since the election,

(ii) the industries in which it expects these workers to find new jobs, and

(iii) its plans to attract the billions in new investment, new jobs, new skills and new technologies to replace those lost in the automotive sector.

This morning we woke up to the news that the Canadian government is increasing its funding for its automakers by some $500 million. This is a bid to attract investment from Chrysler. The Canadian budget documents explain that this is being done 'to create and sustain jobs in Canada and to deal with the high Canadian dollar'. We heard this afternoon that the conservative government in Victoria has just announced $22 million for SPC Ardmona. Premier Napthine said:

Up to 2700 jobs in the Goulburn Valley depend on SPC Ardmona and this co-investment secures these jobs which are vital to this region’s economy.

Deputy Premier Peter Ryan said that this is another example of the Victorian coalition government supporting business to grow and thrive in the domestic and international market. I commend Daniel Andrews and Victorian Labor for forcing the Premier's hand on this issue. This is part of Labor's response to trying to find solutions, instead of passing the buck, when it comes to ensuring that we fight for jobs in Australia.

I trust that the Prime Minister has actually heard some of the statements being made internationally and domestically—even from within his own party. I expect that he would take no notice of what the labour movement has got to say, but he at least ought to understand what the conservative government in Canada and, I might add, the conservative government in the United Kingdom and the conservative government in Victoria are saying about the need to fight for jobs and investment. We know this because I recall before the election, when the Prime Minister was opposition leader, that he almost slept in his fluoro vest. He took the view that every opportunity had to be taken to ensure that he was at a factory being photographed in a high-visibility vest. He would do all he could to shake hands with workers and show off his RM Williams boots. He called himself 'the workers' best friend', if I recall rightly.

But what a difference an election makes. We are now looking at the highest unemployment rate in a decade, yet we have heard no solutions whatsoever from the Abbott government when it comes to the question of securing jobs and investment for this country. What we have heard from this Prime Minister is the sunniest optimism, outside any commune, since the 1960s. He goes along as if he were a 1960s folk singer: he argues that we can wait for a bright, new day. Of course, workers will not be satisfied with the notion that we will actually be better off for the loss of the automotive industry and our manufacturing industry. But that is what we are hearing from the right wing cheer squad of the textbook economists and those in the gallery who take the view that whatever the government does must be right. But we have to live in the real world where jobs do not just grow on trees. We have to be appreciative of the impact of the social catastrophe that awaits this country if this government and other governments do not fight for jobs.

Automotive industry jobs are concentrated in particular regions, locations and communities—like the north-west of Melbourne, the eastern suburbs of Melbourne, Geelong and the north of Adelaide. Some $2.25 billion is invested every single year in Victorian suppliers by the current industry. Some $630 million is invested every year in Adelaide suppliers. In fact, more than $80 million is invested around Western Sydney. We have huge investments, and we now are in a position where we cannot guarantee the future. We have tens of thousands of people with extraordinary skills who face the prospect of unemployment. We have very highly skilled people who have no real certainty about the future—the capacity to pay the mortgages, the capacity to support their families, the capacity of many other businesses that rely on the automotive industry. I am talking not just about the people who are directly employed but also the massive multiplier effect that ricochets right throughout the economy as a result of investment by our car companies.

I am particularly concerned about the 160 tier 1 suppliers currently registered on the Automotive Transformation Scheme. You would have to ask yourself how many of those—and they employ the better part of 40,000 people—will be able to survive as a result of the policies that this government has pursued. We know that many of those firms have already taken steps to transform their business. Many of their non-core functions, such as accounting, cleaning and catering, have already been outsourced. We know that many of those companies now face the prospect that they will not be able to sustain their existing employees. I have had the opportunity to go to Detroit on many occasions and watch firsthand what happens to a great industrial city that has been hollowed out by the loss of major industries. We have seen this in the United States and in other parts of Europe. In the case of Detroit, in many respects it resembles a wasteland.

In Australia, research by the Monash University Centre of Policy Studies and work undertaken by the Allen Consulting Group shows that, as a result of the loss of the automotive industry, the gross regional product in Melbourne and Adelaide will not recover for almost two decades— until 2031. Toyota last year spent $1.5 billion in connection with building cars in Australia. From 2001 to 2012, General Motors Holden generated some $32.7 billion worth of economic activity in Australia. During that period, Holden received $1.8 billion in Commonwealth assistance, returned $1.4 billion as income tax revenue, and paid $21 billion to other businesses in Australia for the supply of services to the industry. That is a return of $18 for every $1 spent by the Commonwealth.

We have heard from this government that these companies are somehow lazy and inefficient, that they are backward. In fact, they are far from it. The automotive industry in Australia is cutting edge. The General Motors plant in Elizabeth is among the most modern in the world. Data published by the Department of Industry shows that the number of motor vehicles produced per employee per year has increased from 11 in 1991 to 19.6 in 2012. In fact, when you include the R&D figures in that, it goes up to about 25. In other words, the number of cars produced per worker has almost doubled. What we have done is trade an industry that produces this level of wealth for Australia for a $20 billion welfare bill.

Of course, one would have to be out of one's mind to deliberately set out to do that. That is, I think, exactly what has happened with this government. They have deliberately set out to do that. I condemn this government. I condemn this government for raising the white flag when it comes to jobs, and I condemn this government for its failure to respond—if they knew these things were so inevitable and so predictable—and for not having a plan ready to go to defend these communities across Australia.

The Prime Minister likes to pretend that he had nothing to do with it and that nothing could be done. He argues that unless you are a chocolate factory there is really not much you can do. He says you cannot help a fruit-producing factory, but you can help a chocolate factory. He says we cannot help SPC because it had an international parent that was doing well. In the case of Cadbury, we know they have an international parent that is doing considerably better, and the figures produced today show that a profit of $3.9 billion for the parent of the Cadbury plant in Hobart. But this government cannot find the wherewithal to assist the people of Shepparton and cannot find the wherewithal to assist the automotive industry in this country.

What we know is that industries do need to transform. We do know that we need to modernise our economy. We do know that we need to be able to assist industries to do that task. We need to have the investment in cutting-edge science and technology to allow them to be able to do that task. We know that we need to assist our universities to develop that science and technology. We need to assist our science agencies to do that. We need the innovation incentives for companies to undertake that work, and we need to ensure that the research and innovation networks are available to assist companies to achieve those results. We know we need access to venture capital and we know we need modern infrastructure like the NBN.

We know that governments have to fulfil their obligations to the community and engender a sense of trust—to ensure that the conversations they have with private companies about investment are not put on the front page of the Financial Review by the Treasurer of Australia, as we saw yesterday. We have to be sure that the government is actually interested in finding solutions and fighting for jobs and investment, rather than trying to drive jobs offshore as if there is nothing that can be done. In my experience, governments have to be part of the solution. They have to want to be part of the solution, rather than throwing their hands up with the view that nothing can be done.

I wonder just what the Minister for Industry must make of all of this. I take the view that Minister McFarlane is concerned. Personally, I do believe he is concerned. But I wonder if he is even more concerned about the public humiliation that he has had to face: day after day of criticism by his colleagues from the cabinet, day after day of speculation about government decisions before they are actually in the cabinet room, and, of course, day after day of having to deal with public rejection by his colleagues—only to be asked to go out and announce the policy that he vigorously argued against in cabinet. We know that this is the situation because if he really did believe—in regard to SPC, for instance—that the government's position was the correct one, why did he take a submission to cabinet and argue exactly the opposite?

We know that the government have already taken steps to cut fundamental innovation programs. The Manufacturing Technology Innovation Centre was one of the first things they cut. Sixteen million dollars has already been taken from bringing designers and researchers together. We know that this is an investment that pays for itself through the opportunities to grow innovation between our researchers and our companies. The government are not interested and they have killed it. We know one of the first things they did in regard to the CSIRO was to put a freeze on the hiring of 1,400 non-essential staff. They have slashed $100 million from the Australian Research Council. They are ripping up the NBN. They have abolished the Cleantech program. They are going to cut $500 million from the automotive industry, which is one of our greatest sources of research and innovation in manufacturing.

They have failed to produce any plan in regard to innovation. What they are in the business of doing is tearing down the innovation programs that are currently there. It has taken the Abbott government less than six months to kill off the automotive industry in this country. They have killed it through their bungling, their incompetence and their arrogance. You would have thought that that would at least trigger a moment of self-reflection from this body of intellectual giants. No. What they do is resort to the textbook economists who, of course, have an answer for everything and an understanding of very little. The industry minister tells us he could have saved Toyota if he had been given more time. The Prime Minister says there was nothing the government could do. So which is it: incompetence or impotence? They cannot even get their stories straight. They cannot work out whether or not the government was in the business of genuinely negotiating with Toyota and General Motors or whether they were in the business of driving them out of the country.

They say they are not interested in blank cheques, but they are simply giving blank expressions when it comes to the need to secure jobs for the future. They could have secured this industry with an investment of $300 million per year, or about $13 per person. This is far less than the welfare bill the country will now have to face. This is another example of where proper government strategic investment, in fact, pays for itself. The automotive industry could have contributed $700 million a year in research and development. The spin-off of new firms in aerospace, advanced materials and electronics are the very pillars of innovation within the manufacturing sector in this country. It could all have been done at a very modest price. It is simply ludicrous to claim that government policy makes no difference. We know that the Productivity Commission heard from Toyota 'that government assistance needs to be consistent and it needs to be ongoing' in order for Australian manufacturing operations to be viable. So, when the Prime Minister point blank refused on 14 December to provide any further assistance, Toyota signed the death warrant. Toyota itself said the decision on the next generation was actually very close. The contrast is clear and, in my view, damning. If it wanted to, this government could have acted to preserve this industry.

Labor have strongly argued in the face of the worst economic conditions since the Great Depression that you can attract new investment in manufacturing, which is what we did. With the price of the dollar being so high, we did see there were substantial pressures on manufacturing. But, as a result of deliberate action, we were able to secure future investment. But not this government. This is not their approach. It is exactly the opposite.

I do not want to make light of the challenges facing manufacturing, but I do know this: the high dollar continues to play havoc with manufacturing and it has done for years. I know that badly managed firms invariably will hit the fence. But we are talking about good companies here. We are talking about companies that have weathered the storm of international crisis in recent years. With proper support from government, with proper policy settings, we can secure the future of advanced manufacturing in this country. But what we are seeing now is a government that is clearly not interested, that does not have a plan and that has no understanding of the implications of what is involved with the loss of so many jobs.

The Prime Minister promised at the last election to create one million jobs. What have we seen? The loss of 50,000 jobs. Where is the plan for new investment? Where is the plan to help people find new employment? There is no plan for science and research. Where is the bright promise that this government made prior to the election? All we have are peddlers of deceit and despair.