Crispin Hull

Many suburban shopping centres in Canberra are in crisis. It is too easy to say that re-regulation is the answer. It may well be true that when shopping hours were more stringently regulated, the suburban shops had a more prosperous time. In particular, the local supermarkets which stayed open late attracted more business because the large supermarkets were not permitted to open all hours, either because of union-imposed labour restrictions or because of regulation about what things could be sold when. Nowadays the large supermarkets stay open 24 hours or close to it. The competitive advantage of the local supermarket of being open longer was lost. And as the larger supermarkets have a price advantage gained through economies of scale, the small supermarket has only one or two advantages left … the convenience of geographic closeness and perhaps intimacy of service and size. They have not been enough in a lot of Canberra local shopping centres.

However, the 24-hour large supermarket did not arise only because of de-regulation. There were other factors: mixed families; two working parents; greater mobility; more shift workers; societal demands for more goods and services to be available over greater time spreads.

The 24-hour supermarkets have been very convenient for these mobile, working families. But the cost is now coming through. Small business is suffering and people who are not mobile are inconvenienced. Older people, people on lower incomes and others who rely on public transport cannot easily go to bigger centres to shop at the larger super-markets.
Continue reading “1995_09_september_leader28sep”

Canberra Rugby League chief executive Kevin Neil has every right to be suspicious of the selection of the 25-man squad picked by Australian Rugby League selectors for next month’s World Cup in England.

The facts speak for themselves. Not one player who has signed up for the Super League was selected. Nor was any of the five star Canberra players who took the ARL to the NSW Industrial Court last week and won a ruling that they must been considered in the selection process. Nor was any Super League signee from the premiership Bulldogs side, yet all four ARL faithful in that side were.

The conclusion is obvious. Selection was made on allegiance, not merit. This selection was done in bad faith. It was a selection done by the dinosaurs of the ARL to stave off the onset of the effect of the meteoric Super League and the mammalian teams who will inevitably inherit the game when the Super League goes on to the world’s pastures.
Continue reading “1995_09_september_leader26sep”

Once again, the Federal Government’s communications policy is shown to be fundamentally unsound. Last week’s announcements on televisions news services will result in less diversity, less competition and less public broadcasting.

It was revealed that Kerry Packer Nine Network and Rupert Murdoch’s BSkyB would join forced to produce a 24-hour television news service for pay-television operators. The Seven Network has been asked to join as an equal partner. The joint venture has already signed up Australia’s two major cable operators … Optus Vision and, not surprisingly, Foxtel. Foxtel is jointly owned by Mr Murdoch’s News Limited and Telstra. Mr Murdoch also owns 14.9 per cent of Seven. Galaxy … the other major pay TV operator is also to be offered the 24-hour news service.

It means that the public broadcaster, the ABC, has no means of delivering its 24-hour news service which it was developing with Fairfax.
Continue reading “1995_09_september_leader25sep”

The grand vision and concept of the Museum of Australia is suffering the death of a thousand cuts. The vision was for some low-level buildings in a very large natural setting that would reflect key features of the Australian experience. It was a vision that reflected the history, culture and aspiration of both Aboriginal Australians and those that came later.

Those that had the vision saw Yarramundi Reach as the place to fulfil it. That was in the 1970s. In 1980 the first major step to fulfilment was taken with the passing of the Museum of Australia Bill. Labor MP Barry Cohen, then in Opposition, presumably was speaking for his party when he told Parliament, “”We would like an assurance that the passage of the Bill will not just allow a great fanfare of publicity, followed after the election by the project being quietly shelved.” His suspicion was directed at the wrong side of the House.
Continue reading “1995_09_september_leader23sep”

John Howard appears to be playing Paul Keating at his own game. In the 1993 election Mr Keating campaigned up and down the country with a disingenuous, simplistic argument about the goods and services tax.

This week Mr Howard launched his “”debt truck”. It, too, carries a simplistic and distorted message. The “”debt truck” displays the total foreign debt, the interest bill per day and then extrapolates that to every woman, man and child in Australia. It is inaccurate alarmism. Australia’s present foreign debt is a serious, but for different reasons than Mr Howard’s “”debt truck” portrays.
Continue reading “1995_09_september_leader22sep”

Some clever restaurants have exploited human nature to provide a better service for less cost. They do not provide a menu with detailed prices. Nor do they provide waiters who deliver the food and add up its cost to the last dollar. Rather than let the customers do their own thing. They are permitted to select eat as much as they like, with the restaurateur hoping they will not fill up doggy bags or feed their mates. Others at the wealthy end of society prefer fine dining with all the bells and whistles.

Tax is a bit like that. Some people cry for simplicity. Give us the smorgasbord and one price per plate, they cry. Others cry for fairness. Give us full attention and precise billing, they cry. The cries are hopelessly incompatible. With taxation law you cannot have both fairness and simplicity, just as in restaurants you cannot have both silver service and all-you-can-eat at one price.
Continue reading “1995_09_september_leader21sep”

It is very much a bottom-line-up Budget. The Chief Minister and Treasurer, Kate Carnell, has set some very firm targets, or bottom lines. They are not overall bottom lines within which the Government can rob Peter to pay Paul. Rather they are detailed prescriptions of spending limits within each of the 123 sub-programs. Moreover, with the on-set of accrual accounting next year where every cost has to be annualised and accounted for, there can be no fudging between capital and recurrent spending and no fudging with hidden costs like superannuation, future maintenance, accommodation and the like. Also, there can be no fudging figures by allowing for inflation on only one side of the ledger.

In some respects Mrs Carnell has viewed the ACT as being in the position of Victoria, Western Australia and South Australia 10 to 15 years ago … facing a financial cliff and walking rapidly towards it. She is determined that the ACT will not squander its inheritance at self-government. The Budget papers yesterday fairly convincingly showed that without action that was precisely what was going to happen.
Continue reading “1995_09_september_leader20sep”

The World Bank’s assessment that Australia is the world’s “”wealthiest” is certainly thought-provoking. Usually, Australia rates about 20th. The difference has arisen because the bank has counted natural resources, such as land, water, minerals and timber, whereas other surveys count income only.

In view of Australia’s high unemployment; the high number on social welfare and the number in at least notional poverty, does this indicate that Australia is not managing its wealth very well?

The bank’s assessment shows how limited some economic measures are. What does “”wealth” mean? Is it of much joy to most Australians that there are lots of unexploited resources on and in the land if they do not translate into not only higher income but an overall more fulfilling life. Further, do the unexploited resources add much to overall wealth if translating them to income necessitates widespread environmental damage that could ultimately lower the quality of life.
Continue reading “1995_09_september_leader19sep”

It is unfortunate that the closest jail to the Act is Goulburn Jail … the toughest NSW has to offer. People sentenced to jail in the ACT often go to Goulburn because it is close and families can visit them more easily. However, most of the prisoners from the ACT who go to Goulburn are not sentenced for the most serious or most violent offences. The result is low-security prisoners in a maximum-security, violent jail. The results are to very satisfactory as events last weekend showed when a man doing a six-month non-parole period was bashed … his jaw broken, stitches above his eye and bruising. He is apparently too scared to identify his attackers, so the cycle of violence is likely to continue unpunished.

At present the ACT has at maximum weekend detention. It does not have facility for a full-time jail. However, if bashing like last weekend’s continue, the option becomes more palatable, despite other drawbacks such as a greater propensity to use a jail if it is there … though this temptation will be reduced now that the ACT has a weekend jail as an alternative..
Continue reading “1995_09_september_leader18sep”

The Opposition is slowly adding detail to its industrial relations policy. Despite John Howard’s long-standing belief in radical reform, it is becoming more like a me-too policy with each detail. On Thursday the Opposition spokesman on industrial relations, Peter Reith, announced the Opposition would have a “”no disadvantage” test when awards are converted to enterprise awards, just like the Government. However, it appears that though the name is the same, they mean different things. The Government’s “”no-disadvantage” means the overall package for each worker will be at least as good after the first enterprise-bargain award as before it. The Opposition’s “”no disadvantage” means that a set of basic conditions will be set down which cannot be “”bargained” away … such as basic pay, holidays and parental leave.

The Opposition is picking a path between much needed-economic reform and not frightening the large number of voters who are subject to awards. The label “”no disadvantage” is at least superficially attractive to voters, but a more accurate description would be “”safety net”.

The Government is equally guilty of mis-labelling. It is nonsense to call the present system enterprise bargaining. The process almost always involves union officials who do not work at the enterprise negotiating the bargain. These officials are usually looking at the effect the bargain might have on other members outside the enterprise. Coupled with the no-disadvantage rule, little has changed. Many new enterprise bargains carry all the stiflingly detailed clauses about allowances, hours, special rates and the like that made the previous system so cumbersome.
Continue reading “1995_09_september_leader16sep”