The Future (or Death) of Employment When the left and right agree on small business 30 November 2011
The Great Pub Debate between ICA's Ken Phillips and COSBOA's Peter Strong on The Future (or Death) of Employment took place on 30 November in Melbourne. Videos from the debate appear below.
Video 1: Introductions; Ken Phillips
Video 2: Peter Strong
Video 3: Q and A, Ken; Peter
Send us a Comment
To send us a comment on this story, click here.
"Pre-debate" comment
Dear Ken,
As I can't make your pub discussion, here's some input ...
"It" isn't, and will never be, nor should never be all separate from party politics. It's better being about party politics than other less transparent "hidden" politics, such as so called participatory democracy (the power of NGO's see attached), the excessive influence of corporations, special business interests, Unions, big donors or the dominance of power by bureaucrats. At least you can vote one party out and the other one in, and we have Hansard, and votes, etc, all the other transparent accountable stuff of our wonderful parliamentary democracy, which (although flawed) is one hell of a lot better than the alternative, where the country could be ruled by the invisible strings of interest groups (be that green NGO's, Get-up, big-industry associations, farmers, small business/contractor associations, Unions etc).
The less the power of interest groups (of all types and colours), and the greater the power of parliamentary democracy (for all its faults), the better the country will be, over-all. In a healthy democracy you will always have party politics and swings in ideology, that's a sign of democratic health and the natural outcome of the difference between people's intrinsic basic attitudes, personality and interests, reflected in a party system. Democracy and its outcome, party politics (and sometimes invective and polarization!), allow for natural human diversity and swings in public attitude, enabling us to all to live together in relative peace and harmony.
Of course, you have to keep on the right side of both sides of politics, that goes without saying. But you would never want to think that a Union funded organisation would ever really support or make life easier for non-unionised small businesses, unless they (this party) radically cut-off their support base. Nor would they ever really reduce the mind-numbing load of red-tape for small business, because that supports the careers of so many bureaucrats (who tend to vote on the left side of politics). Plus, the fundamental attitudes of the left (wealth redistribution) and the right (wealth creation), naturally mean that entrepreneurial small business will rarely find a haven in the left.
You may have a left-of-centre Government (or even right of centre!) giving out small business welfare, hand-outs and supporting protectionism for a few years, but that is not sustainable, because the money runs out, and protectionism makes life less affordable for the majority (whilst handing special favours to the minority). Plus it breeds laziness in business, and so is self-defeating. I admit, under the Hawke/Keating Government, we did have better conditions for small (and big) business than now, what would it take to get a return to such a situation?
At the end of the day, the "business of business is business", the business of many not-for-profit NGO's is lobbying/advocacy/media relations/getting members/donations. That should never be forgotten. If business ever finds itself in the position of having to do too much lobbying/advocacy to survive (or encourages this situation), the country and businesses are doomed, because business will then become uncompetitive, not being able to devote the funds and resources to making money/not being able to focus on what they are about. Politics doesn't pay the bills. We don't make money and employ people because of regulations and taxes, we make money despite them!!!
Every small and medium business person is different, just as every voter is. It isn't possible for anyone to speak on their behalf---you can only speak on behalf of your members (this is not the same as being able to speak on behalf of everyone!!). Also, on should never assume that what may be in the interests of one small business sector is necessarily in the interests of another. For instance small manufacturers may favour protectionism whilst small importers may favour free trade. Suppliers and manufacturers of certain product types want favours (eg Government mandated recognized environmental or Standards "favours"/benefits) for their products compared to other types of products or raw materials. Manufacturers and installers of solar cells and windmills want a high carbon price, other manufacturers or contractors don't generally want the increased power prices that will result from high carbon prices. The list goes on!
Any broad common ground for SME's/contractors (as opposed to what some may portray as the broad common ground) is hard to find. It is possible to come together on some single issues, I grant, such as IR matters. But looking at the broad field, the only answer, in my opinion, is less over-regulation, allowing each individual to better freely pursue our own business ends, within a framework that guarantees basic labour and environmental rights. The strength of small business is in its diversity, not uniformity. There are hundreds of small business associations, each looking after its members in for their unique needs. There is no "one answer" or common set of needs. To pretend otherwise would be to mislead policy makers and the general public.
|