This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/10/why-toyota-marks-the-start-of-the-real-political-battle

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Why Toyota marks the start of the real political battle Why Toyota marks the start of the real political battle
(7 months later)
Australian Australian politics is Seinfeld no more. The new battle-lines are real and deeply ideological. This is now, very definitely, a show about something.
politics is Seinfeld no more. The new battle-lines are real and deeply The transformation from shouting to substance has come about through a crystallisation and hardening of position by both major parties.
ideological. This is now, very definitely, a show about something. Having quite deliberately left its industry policy hazy in the run up to the poll, when Tony Abbott was still wearing a hi-vis vest and wooing the blue collar vote with the claim that axing the carbon tax could fix everything, the coalition is now brutally clear.
The There will be no more hand-outs to manufacturers and if that helps end Australian car-making or hastens the demise of a cannery that happens to be a region’s major employer - well that’s just how the market crumbles. If the economic settings are right, that investment will shift to other sectors and new jobs will be created.
transformation from shouting to substance has come about through a That has, of course, always been economic theory. But it’s a rare government willing to put it into practice and weather the political cost from the very human consequences of lost jobs and shattered lives.
crystallisation and hardening of position by both major parties. When Holden announced last year it would stop manufacturing in 2017 some thought the government would do more to try to prop up the last remaining carmaker, Toyota, who was otherwise facing almost inevitable demise. On Monday it was clear that idea was wrong. Prime minister Tony Abbott was resolute: in a modern economy you lose some jobs and then you gain some and he was all about getting the big economic picture right to maximise those gains.
Having The royal commission into unions that Abbott was announcing even as Toyota was trying to ring him Monday afternoon to tell him of its decision is part of that economic push but also designed to give the government political cover.
quite deliberately left its industry policy hazy in the run up to the Labor might be able to call the royal commission a witch-hunt, but it will also have to explain why it is continuing to oppose the coalition’s proposed construction industry watch-dog even as the inquiry investigates the claims of building industry kick-backs and connections with organised crime.
poll, when Tony Abbott was still wearing a hi-vis vest and wooing the For its part, Labor is also more explicitly and openly pro-intervention than it ever was in the Hawke and Keating years. Then car assistance was always at least dressed up as a temporary measure until the industry could stand alone at some future time.
blue collar vote with the claim that axing the carbon tax could fix As I wrote at the time, when Kevin Rudd, at his very first press conference as Labor leader, said he didn’t want to lead a country that didn’t make things any more, he was viewed with a mixture of hostility and cynicism even on his own side about what favours he might have owed the faction leaders who helped him get the job, because the whole idea of a government intervening to salvage the declining manufacturing industry was out of step with the times.
everything, the coalition is now brutally clear. Now Labor is happy to say ongoing assistance is the price a country pays to be able to make cars, and that while not every factory can be saved, it is the government’s role to “protect” jobs.
There Now Shorten is the hi-vis vest man, “fighting Aussie jobs” and demanding the coalition do the same. And Abbott is the prime minister trying to argue the merits of very difficult political decisions and positioning.
will be no more hand-outs to manufacturers and if that helps end
Australian car-making or hastens the demise of a cannery that happens to
be a region’s major employer - well that’s just how the market
crumbles. If the economic settings are right, that investment will shift
to other sectors and new jobs will be created.
That
has, of course, always been economic theory. But it’s a rare government
willing to put it into practice and weather the political cost from the
very human consequences of lost jobs and shattered lives.
When
Holden announced last year it would stop manufacturing in 2017 some
thought the government would do more to try to prop up the last
remaining carmaker, Toyota, who was otherwise facing almost inevitable
demise. On Monday it was clear that idea was wrong. Prime minister Tony
Abbott was resolute: in a modern economy you lose some jobs and then you
gain some and he was all about getting the big economic picture right
to maximise those gains.
The
royal commission into unions that Abbott was announcing even as Toyota
was trying to ring him Monday afternoon to tell him of its decision is
part of that economic push but also designed to give the government
political cover.
Labor
might be able to call the royal commission a witch-hunt, but it will
also have to explain why it is continuing to oppose the coalition’s
proposed construction industry watch-dog even as the inquiry
investigates the claims of building industry kick-backs and connections
with organised crime.
For
its part, Labor is also more explicitly and openly pro-intervention
than it ever was in the Hawke and Keating years. Then car assistance was
always at least dressed up as a temporary measure until the industry
could stand alone at some future time.
As I wrote at the time,
when Kevin Rudd, at his very first press conference as Labor leader,
said he didn’t want to lead a country that didn’t make things any more,
he was viewed with a mixture of hostility and cynicism even on his own
side about what favours he might have owed the faction leaders who
helped him get the job, because the whole idea of a government
intervening to salvage the declining manufacturing industry was out of
step with the times.
Now
Labor is happy to say ongoing assistance is the price a country pays to
be able to make cars, and that while not every factory can be saved, it
is the government’s role to “protect” jobs.
Now
Shorten is the hi-vis vest man, “fighting Aussie jobs” and demanding
the coalition do the same. And Abbott is the prime minister trying to
argue the merits of very difficult political decisions and positioning.
It is a real contest about the best path to national prosperity. And there’ll be some fascinating politics along the way.It is a real contest about the best path to national prosperity. And there’ll be some fascinating politics along the way.