War on terror

I’m glad the government is dumping use of the preposterous term “war on terror.” The term never made any sense. The Australian government joined the US to invade Iraq and create an enormous sense of terror amongst many Iraqi civilians. Both countries made stellar efforts to make many of their own Muslim citizens feel terrified. These events inspired further violent attacks by extremist groups throughout the world. The way events were spoken about and reported created a further sense of terror amongst voters, which politicians repeatedly reinforced.

This was not really a war on terror, but a war in support of it.

Planning boards

It seems like the Planning Minister is trying to make the large projects approval system more democratic and transparent. Instead of approving such projects herself, the Planning Minister is now devolving that power to regional boards. Great. The only problem is that the minister will appoint a majority of members on each board. Instead of decisions being made by an elected politician, they will now be made by faceless bureaucrats, non-elected non-experts or, it is possible, Labor party donors and development industry supporters. The minister can then praise these regional boards when good decisions are made, yet distance herself when politically controversial developments are approved.

Training schemes for youth

Kevin Rudd's latest scheme to cut welfare payments to unemployed youth who do not take up education or training places when out of work may seem a clever way to massage youth unemployment figures, but it is fundamentally a good scheme. With the level of unemployment predicted to rise so high in this recession, it will be vital to ensure that the skills of those who are unemployed do not lapse behind what the labour market is likely to demand in a recovery, and that existing skills do not deteriorate from lack of use.

It will be vital, however, that the government ensures there are sufficient training places available for those who will have their youth allowance cut off, and in the areas where these youth live. It is also essential that general skills are taught alongside occupation-specific skills to ensure that the workforce remains flexible. Decisions will have to be made about which skills will be in demand in the future, but it workers must also be able to adapt should labour demand evolve if the predictions of skills demands are off.

Nevertheless, the strong focus on education and training is good for Australia in the long-term. More productive workers and a more highly educated workforce leads to more people being employed in 'good' jobs and higher wages once the economy is back to normal.

Mardi Gras has become too congested

Mardi Gras has become too congested

Brad Ruting
The University of Sydney
b.ruting@usyd.edu.au

When the State Government first announced that it wanted to move Australia’s largest parade, the Mardi Gras, to Homebush I thought April Fools’ Day had come early. Except they were serious. How stupid, I thought, to move the parade away from Oxford Street, especially to somewhere without gay clubs or dance parties. Not having thousands of gay men, women and whatever-in-betweens march through Sydney’s gay district for Mardi Gras would be rather like trying to make pilgrims converge on Turin rather than Rome.

Yet on Mardi Gras night, as I stood on the tip of my toes in the crowd, I began to think the State Government had a point. Oxford Street may be the home of Mardi Gras, but when it came to squeezing in giant floats, dancers, officials and over 100,000 spectators the street felt a lot narrower than I’d remembered. The parade continues on to Moore Park but most people cluster at the city end, which is easier to get to and easier to get away from afterwards.

The crowd was mostly happy, jovial and in great spirits. But, like any big event, there were the occasional troublemakers, drinking alcohol, pushing, stealing and upsetting others. The police presence was commendable but it seemed a tad strange to put the coppers inside the barriers, making the public practically unreachable on the other side.

Then there’s the transport nightmare of getting home. Because of the big street closures many taxi drivers reckon it’s the worst night of the year. Buses are redirected, trains are overcrowded and everything departs late.

And here is the problem. Mardi Gras needs Oxford Street, but does Oxford Street need Mardi Gras? The ‘Golden Mile’ between the city and Paddington’s edge has been a significant milieu for gay people, businesses and services since at least the 1960s, attracted by the cheap prices, city location and the emergence of gay venues and a gay population. The first Mardi Gras in 1978 symbolically claimed Oxford Street by bravely marching down it, declaring it gay space. (A far cry from now, when gay and lesbian spectators are barricaded behind metal bars, and marching in the parade requires registering weeks in advance.)

The area is different now. Most of Darlinghurst, Surry Hills and Paddington have been gentrified and property is expensive. The Golden Mile end of Oxford Street has recently struggled with being dirty, run-down, unattractive, violent, loud and traffic-filled. The area has suddenly become less attractive to gays and lesbians. Not only is Oxford Street tackier and living nearby dearer, but the remarkable increase in public tolerance of homosexuality—to the point that ‘gay’ means cool in much media—has allowed gays and lesbians to live almost anywhere in Sydney without being persecuted.

There’s also the City of Sydney’s push to ‘revitalise’ Oxford Street by renovating council-owned buildings, opening up laneways and increasing retail space. The council says it wants to maintain the area as a gay district, but its main aim is to (somehow) create a cosmopolitan and ‘artsy’ precinct.

What remains understated, however, are Oxford Street’s three main non-gay functions: as a busy traffic thoroughfare, as an historic shopping street, and as a nightclubbing zone. These three are incompatible in the long-run. Heavy traffic makes shopping there undesirable (and unhealthy), and young and rowdy straight patrons spilling out of nightclubs make it unlikely to become a thriving urban village overnight.

So why does Mardi Gras persist there? Why should it march down this old haunt—a relic of the past when it was one of the few places where gay people could lead openly homosexual lives—when times have changed? Shouldn’t it barge down George Street to show it is now a mainstream event that has achieved global recognition? Or even head west to Homebush Bay, where organisers can not only reap more funding from the State Government but even charge an entry fee?

Despite now being one of Sydney’s largest (and most economically valuable) annual events, it is still important for the Mardi Gras parade to be on Oxford Street. It belongs there, amongst the bars, clubs, parties and history. Move it to Homebush and the crowds will wither away. A different approach to the parade route should be trialled, such as extending the starting point down Liverpool Street to George Street, to spread out the crowds and provide more space to watch. Extra bus and train services need to be put on. Festivities could be more dispersed, with events throughout the city in the afternoon. More rubbish bins should be provided to minimise the tons of waste left on the street afterwards.

Even if Oxford Street has lost its gay edge, the parade is a ritual that is repeated because it has an important message to send. Of course, crowds may be heavily diluted by young straight spectators; displays may be been toned down so families can attend; gay youth may be more interested in the partying than the politics.

Yet underneath all the consumes, banners and corporate sponsorship remains the same plea for acceptance, equality and peace that has been behind all Mardi Gras. Homosexuals are still widely discriminated against in Australia, both socially and legally. The challenges around the world are even greater. Mardi Gras remains an important way to communicate these challenges, as well as a party to celebrate Sydney.

The labour market and the downturn

New OLO article: http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=8630

The labour market

The geographic unevenness of job losses is one of many worrying developments in the labour market. The overall unemployment rate is forecast to rise above 7 per cent in the coming year, but the impacts will be much more severe for particular groups. Not only will some suburbs and regions suffer badly, but so will many part-time casual workers, unskilled workers, indigenous Australians and migrants with poor English skills. Particular occupations and industries, especially those that have been doing it tough for some time, will be hit much harder than others. Underemployment will rise markedly and the number of "hidden unemployed"--people whom remain outside the workforce because they have given up on finding a job or do not enter the workforce in the first place--will rise much faster than the number who are counted as unemployed.

The challenges for the government are large. More needs to be done to assist those who will be hit hardest to get by, and to help them up-skill, retrain and then find suitable work once the economy is growing again.

Don't turn migrants away

The government's decision to cut the immigration intake by 14 per cent is disappointing. This looks like a populist measure that will generate very few benefits. The impacts of immigration on the Australian labour market have been extensively studied and, contrary to popular opinion, there is no firm evidence to suggest that skilled migrants either steal jobs from locals or reduce wages.

Yet in the name of this populism--and to kowtow to the unions--the government wants to remove part of the boost that migrants give to aggregate demand. Many highly skilled migrants with good ideas and entrepreneurial drive will be turned away, hurting Australia in the long-run. Migration benefits both the migrants, whose lives and opportunities can improve markedly in Australia, and the economy as a whole, helping to make it stronger, more diverse, and more productive.

Carbon emissions trading

The federal government wants to reduce Australia's greenhouse gas emissions by implementing a carbon trading scheme. This will raise the prices of energy and energy-intensive goods and services for consumers. Yet, at the same time, it wants to give $9 billion to heavy polluting industries to "cushion" the effect of the scheme. This is great for those companies that churn out most of our greenhouse gas emissions, but what on earth is the point? If the aim is to preserve jobs, why spend oodles of money to subsidise jobs in these industries when it would be cheaper and more productive in the long-run to assist both labour and capital to switch to greener industries?

This kowtowing to business lobbies is ridiculous. The point of a carbon emissions trading scheme is to reduce emissions in a way that encourages efficiency and innovation by users of carbon. Doling out billions to heavy polluters defeats the point entirely.

Stimulus package

It seems that Nick Xenophon has unwittingly called Malcolm Turnbull's bluff. The package urgently needed to stimulate the economy and mitigate the severity of the coming economic downturn and rise in unemployment has been defeated in the Senate. Malcolm Turnbull took a political gamble by resisting the package, hoping that the crossbenchers in the Senate would let it pass, so that he could turn around later and blame the government when unemployment worsened or government debt rose (since no-one would know exactly how much extra unemployment the package would have avoided).

Of course, the type of stimulus used and long-run debt accumulation are important problems, yet the amount of debt as a proportion of GDP that Rudd has proposed pales into insignificance compared to the debt/GDP ratios of most other developed countries. Furthermore, Turbull's alternative package would have been less stimulatory (with tax cuts spread over time) and still require substantial government borrowing.

Now, if the package continues to flounder in the Senate, the Coalition will be conveniently blamed by Rudd when the economy inevitably does turn sour. That will also be counterproductive, reducing the possibility of cooperative policymaking to deal with the recession as it hits.

Hopefully the legislation will pass on the next attempt, as action is urgently needed on the fiscal policy front, according to most economists. It's been a long time since the last recession, but surely we don't forget how bad these things are, and how important it is to tame them early on?

Mardi Gras parade

The 'assimilation' and 'gentrification' of gay culture into straight culture that Elizabeth Farrelly laments is the cultural consequence of a much more important development, the growing social tolerance and acceptance of non-straight people. Gay people are now more visible in the Western suburbs and in the media precisely because of this growing acceptance. Perhaps that has blunted the edge of gay culture, but in the grand scheme of things it's a most welcome development.

The State Government's bizarre proposal to move the Mardi Gras parade to Homebush, on the other hand, most certainly is not. Oxford Street may not be the geographic centre of Sydney's gay population anymore, yet the symbolism still remains. Sure, Oxford Street is run down now but it's still the Golden Mile, however tarnished, that thousands have marched up defiantly to claim many of the rights that are now taken for granted.

Interestingly, this is the first year that any government has offered any funding to the event, despite its status as one of Sydney's largest which attracts thousands of people (and dollars) from all over the world. It seems the State Government wants to move it to Homebush and continue to offer funding, not because of a deep seated love for the event or gay people, but out of a desire to make more money out of it for itself. To capture, commercialise and tame it. To fence it into a stadium where people can be charged money to gawk at the show. The Mardi Gras organisers only considered it because they need the money.

Yet gay Sydney will never let that happen. Gay culture may be going straight but it's not dead yet. There are still rights to be fought for (and parties to be had). If the State Government tries to move the Mardi Gras parade it will still find people marching up and down Oxford Street.

Turnbull's claims

Malcolm Turnbull is absolutely right when he argues that, "somebody has to stand up for the taxpayers of Australia and ensure that we do not impose staggering levels of debt on future generations."

I suspect that Kevin Rudd agrees with this. That is why he is not proposing big tax cuts, as the Coalition would like, and instead wants to make direct payments that have a more up-front stimulatory effect on the economy. Tax cuts would permanently shrink government revenue and prolong the amount of time the budget is in deficit.

Rudd is also acting now, before the recession really hits and unemployment rises skywards, so that a moderate amount of debt is incurred in order to reduce the severity and (hopefully) the length of the coming recession. Once the economy is on the path to recovery this debt can be paid off. By contrast, Turnbull wants to hold back and tinker around the edges until the recession is fully upon us. Then, presumably, the fiscal stimulus needed (and thus total amount of debt) would likely be much bigger that what Rudd is proposing for now.

So I agree with Turnbull's statement. Rudd is standing up for Australian taxpayers, workers and businesses. His scheme is not perfect but then no policy is. It should be implemented immediately.

Commercial property loans

The Rudd Government's scheme to take over commercial property loans that are at only a small risk of being called in by foreign lenders at first looks bizarre. However, this is just another way for the Government to look like it is doing something to fix the financial sector and revive the economy by pouring taxpayer funds into a black hole. If this is the best they can up with, the public won't take long to see through it.

Harry Triguboff

Harry Triguboff isn’t paying his land tax and doesn’t agree that two separate houses are indeed just that. Is this the same Mr. Triguboff who, only recently, declared that his company’s donations to NSW Labour used to be very good investments? How strange that he is willing to make large donations to the ruling party but, when it comes to paying what he owes in tax to the state of NSW, he is fighting tooth and nail. How strange that the state government has had to cover some of the costs of providing infrastructure for new Meriton developments, yet that company’s managing director refuses to make a fair tax contribution according to the law. Who does this man think he is, a property developer?

Farming

If the aim of Kevin Rudd's new stimulus package is to stop the economy sliding into recession, create jobs and help address future challenges, why on earth is he giving $950 to drought affected farmers, when most of them will already receive $950 as workers earning less than $100,000?

It's been clear for a long time now that large swathes of Australia are being farmed when it is not environmentally or economically viable to do so in the long-run. The Australian environment is fragile and our topsoil among the world's thinnest, yet the expolitative farming mindset continues.

Kevin Rudd should be spending this money on helping these farmers to retrain and relocate, so they can work in more sustainable sectors when the economy does pick up. Now is the time to take action. Instead, we have a thinly veiled form of protectionism in an attempt by the government to prop up an unsustainable industry.

Job search assistance

The welfare system the Howard Government left us is starting to show major cracks. The point of the Job Network is to help people to find jobs and to minimise the length of time they spend in unemployment. However, the current rules seem to be effectively extending unemployment spells (and the corresponding erosion of skills) by holding back assistance for trivial reasons.

If the unemployment costs of this downturn are to be minimised, the Rudd Government needs to act straight away to fix up welfare and job assistance rules to ensure they are fair, as well as making sure they operate in ways that are in the long-term national economic interest.