A good deal of idiocy is associated with many debates about preference to unionists and its perceived corollary, “compulsory unionism”. It must be stressed at the outset that, as a matter of law, there is no such thing as legal compulsory unionism in Australia.
It is an irony that for most of the 1970s and earlier, the most vocal and strident critics of the Australian centralised and regulated wages system were located well to the ‘Left’ of the industrial relations mainstream. Such critics alleged that the centralised conciliation and arbitration system acted against the interests of unions when seeking to extract the best possible deal from employers.
Thank you for this invitation to talk about a few ideas. In looking at Japan, in looking at the experience of the Japanese economy and the industrial relations system of Japan, it is interesting for an Australian trade union official to think about ‘how did Japan achieve the economic successes that it has over the last three decades?’ and ‘what lessons there might be there that are applicable to Australia?’
For some years now trade unions in New South Wales, and more recently the ACTU, have turned their attention to the possibilities and pitfalls of employee financial participation in the enterprises for which their members work.
Affluence: “union movement has completed its mission – one of the most successful organisations of this century”.
In 1990 there were many reminders that the post-war consensus about immigration to Australia no longer existed. Some spokespeople from all of the major parties were critical about some aspect of the immigration intake. The government decided to reduce the target of 140,000 – set after the Fitzgerald Committee review of Australia’s immigration policies – down to 125,000 for 1990-91.
With a million people from all over the world applying each year to migrate to Australia, it is natural to assume that much of the debate about Australian immigration policy revolves around the limited numbers, out of all those who apply, who are selected.
Recently I had occasion to think very hard about The Sydney Institute due to a contribution made by Sydney personality and political stirrer, Bob Gould, at a conference on privatisation which I was attending. There was a raging debate by various members of the Labor party over the privatisation issue.
Soon after the formation of the Labor Party there was an intense debate about what it means to be Labor. How could it be otherwise? After the Labor Party won 36 seats in the NSW Legislative Assembly elections in June 1891 splits occurred over the issue of caucus solidarity. Questions arose as to the right alliances and tactics to be pursued.
Over the New Year break I re-read Simon Leys’ polemic on the Maoist revolution and gulag (the Chinese equivalent are called Laogai camps), Chinese Shadows.