There goes the Community

If the comments made by Tim Costello last week over the impotence of government to face big business (see my post last Saturday) didn’t convince you, then the commentary this past week by Mr Martin Parkinson, Secretary of the Treasury, will. Mr Parkinson has commented that tax receipts are seriously reduced, in part because of the tax breaks given to mining. He also mentioned that miners receive 20% of corporate profits but pay only 10% of the tax. This is due, he says, to the tax deductions they are allowed for depreciation. It is quite clear that the efforts of big mining has been extravagantly successful in nobbling the politicians. Guy Pearce wrote extensively on the mechanism of this in Quarterly Essay No.33 in 2009.

There is, of course, a historical precedent for this. In the 17th century in England powerful land holders were still only tenants, the Crown owned the land. During a period of evolution of the relationship between the Crown and parliament where the Crown ceded absolute authority and much day to day power, including that of land title, these powerful land interests influenced a newly resurgent parliament, to pass land into private possession - theirs. Title enabled them to force less powerful tenants off the land they had previously shared with the result that for many connection to the land and the certainty of future provision for family was lost. The best they could hope for was to return to their land as paid laborers of their former co-tenants. This was called The Enclosures. The effect was the destruction of community and peasantry as it had been known.

I fear the same will be the effect of maintaining exceptional treatment of the mining industry. First of all, why does this industry deserve special treatment over any other? The answer is not that they are essential to Australia’s continuing prosperity. While they extract commodity minerals and metals for sale overseas, employing high technology and fewer people, and while there is no elaboration of the primary product and value add to produce secondary or tertiary goods of higher value (using our skilled workforce) , then it is the overseas customer’s prosperity which depends on it, not ours. Principally China. Further, what is the effect on the indigenous communities whose land (yes they ‘own’ it) is damaged in the process? Or the family relationships of the fly-in/fly-out workforce? And what of those on lower incomes and pensions struggling to make a go of their lives? Won’t they see that there is a rule and prosperity for one part of the community and hardship and poor opportunity for them. Finally, shouldn’t all Australians feel ashamed that they have elected a series of governments that are not true to their claims of democracy and equality and a fair go?

It seems to me history is repeating itself.