data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/18492/18492fd15373bbfef88ff548c586eedfb65903d5" alt=""
BCA chair Grant King with Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull
One of the best traditions of the Australian Financial Review is when it holds a “roundtable” of business executives and report, as if bringing down tablets from the mountain, the views of such gatherings, no matter how bizarre. Personally, I enjoy reading such collections while listening to the third movement of Beethoven’s “Pastoral” Symphony No. 6 in F Major, “Merry gathering of rentseekers”.
For a sector that is faintly starting to realise something has gone seriously wrong with the neoliberal agenda that has delivered higher profits, lower taxes and more compliant, less expensive labour for decades, such gatherings have a particular resonance at the moment — especially around the issue of how business retrieves its reputation with the community out of the toilet.
The strategy, apparently, is to hit the flush button a few dozen more times.
Today’s effort was from the Business Council, the nation’s most powerful big business lobby group. How, the reader might wonder, would the council address the problem of wage stagnation, which is responsible for much the alienation toward our economic system felt across the electorate?
Well, if I rephrased the question to “what is the Business Council’s solution to anything?”, would that give you a hint?
According to BCA chair Grant King — that’s Grant King who performed so brilliantly at Origin Energy — the answer is, yes, company tax cuts.
“All we can rely on is productivity growth. Productivity growth is inhibited by excess regulation, by a whole bunch of things that cause doubt for businesses to invest … The Treasury, any economist, will tell you what drives productivity: it’s investment. So all roads lead back to business investment … We need investment to drive income growth. The only lever to pull is taxes to change, you know, the economics and investment.”
This is “give us a tax cut or the puppy gets it” approach to public policy. No one will get a pay rise until we give Grant and his mates at the Business Council a whopping big tax cut.
Don’t forget that the members of the Business Council only pay just over 24% in tax now, rather than the legal 30% rate. And the only reason it’s that high is that the big banks, almost uniquely, pay close to 30%, lifting the much lower rate of the rest of the BCA membership, which includes some of Australia’s most brazen major tax dodgers like News Corp, BHP, Google and Uber.
Of course, if you guessed that the answer would be “industrial relations deregulation”, you’d only be half right — the BCA have given up on IR for the moment because, according to Richard Goyder, “we’re certainly not holding our breath that we’ll get significant reform from any political party”. By the way Goyder is the one who thinks there’s no problem with high executive remuneration, saying about his Wesfarmers successor “my sincere hope is that he maxes out on his incentives every year”. Love your sincerity, Richard. Other participants, at least, had the good grace to mumble something about transparency or even, in one case, suggest that smaller pay packets might be a good idea.
So it’s fun to point out the utter cluelessness of these plutocrats, sure, but there’s a serious point. These people, with their facile, neoliberalism-as-usual approach, are strengthening the hand of populists and people who would pull the entire economic system down on their heads. Every demand for a company tax cut, every lamentation about the lack of industrial relations reform, adds to the backlash against companies, against politicians who support them, against an economic system that makes their interests the priority over those of workers and consumers.
If the Business Council wants a Corbyn, if it wants a Sanders, it’s going the right way about it. Attacking Bill Shorten and Labor for failing to be insufficiently worshipful of the business agenda misses the point: if Labor (or the Coalition) doesn’t shift to match the sentiment of the electorate, then someone else, from outside mainstream politics, will — someone whose idea of changing the system won’t involve a fairer tax system and a banking royal commission, but driving a truck through the whole show.
Business, evidently, needs saving from itself again. Pity the clown car on display in the pages of the Fin does so little to make the case for why anyone should bother.
They’re not tablets, they’re supposi-tories – and should be used accordingly……
Why not carry on down their road – it’s worked so well so far. But imagine if this (theirs – our captions of industry) is the wrong track?
It’s not amusing watching the well-heeled, overpaid likes of Westacott telling us we (the lower classes) are not sacrificing enough – we can be screwed down more, there’s money to be made from blood.
When it’s their “business acumen”, along with complicit governments, that has landed us in this ever expanding, all consuming, shit-hole of fast fading dreams.
The BCA and all their neolib mates will never understand anything other than tax cuts for the rich and austerity for the rest.
That is their default position and it is echoed in their political representatives, the LNP.
It will involve a truck to change it.
They lack understanding because as our mothers warned us, too much hand work makes you go blind. And blindness is their common affliction, having gotten to the top by being blind too everything outside their self indulgent ambition.
They don’t pay company tax now, how can we lower *that* ? !
I don’t have an issue with tax cuts, so long as they are aimed at the middle classes and working poor. Business can pay 20 percent tax, no deductions, no fiddling. Transnationals the same, in the country they make the profit. Also a Tobin tax that takes a clip from money shifts.
All good suggestions Karen, plus has the advantage of eliminating large blocks of accountants and lawyers, who could then find themselves on the dole and become the voice for the afflicted.
Possibly one of the reasons that the tax code is not simplified is the massive unemployment that would be caused to the enablers – accountants & lawyers.
Hell, they might have to find useful work – picking oakum would be favourite and, having unpicked it, they could then weave and splice it into nooses.
It has got to the point where neoliberalism has reached a tipping point… surely?