Buy Birdsville Made? « Economics.org.au

Other entries featuring Viv Forbes»

Viv Forbes, Our Sacred Land & Other Essays (first published by Business Queensland and Common Sense in 1995), issue no. 106.About the Author»

When Yul Brynner was dying of lung cancer, the WA government decided to feature Brynner in an anti-smoking ad as part of their Quit Campaign. Alas, it could not be screened because that would breach the foreign content rules of the ABT (Actor’s Benefits Tribunal).

An editorial of the West Australian summed it up better than I can:

Although the advertisement exceeds the 20% foreign content limit for paid commercials, the late Mr Brynner could hardly be accused of putting Australian actors out of work. He was not exactly acting when he made the advertisement, nor was he playing a role that other actors would want to emulate.

In another such incident, Actor’s Equity persuaded a federal Court to withhold visas from the pop group The Platters, “to protect the jobs of its members”.

Here in Queensland, the ever vigilant Actors’ Equity stopped Sesame Street’s Big Bird from appearing at a free concert at the Royal Children’s Hospital because the foreign actor did not have the requisite three local support acts. Three local stooges were roped in and the show went on.

Down in Wonderland, the ABT banned a TV ad which used Star Wars characters to encourage parents to have their children immunised because “the ad was not made in Australia”.

Another ABT rule says that Australian film crews must “participate” in overseas film shoots where more than 20% of a commercial comprises footage of foreign origin. To comply with this rule, some agencies resorted to “Ghost Crewing” where Australian crews were flown to the home city of the overseas shoot, but they didn’t do any filming — they went sight seeing and then flew home again.

Hog-tied by all these stupid rules, Kerry Packer’s PBL Media group moved its TV and film production to the US because “unions consistently blocks their attempts to use overseas talent”.

We can picture the logical end to this Aussie Actors’ Protection Racket — classical music without Beethoven, Country and Western without Johnny Cash, rock and roll without Elvis and schools were foreign works by people like Shakespeare, Karl Marx, Einstein, Tolstoy, Mark Twain, Confucius and St Paul are banned.

Can you imagine a typical TV day — one long yawn of re-runs of Neighbours, earnest documentaries by the Australian Conservation Foundation, tributes to Patrick White, Quit Ads, live parliamentary broadcasts and George Negus interviewing Ita Buttrose, or vice versa. (And, of course, the never ending cricket.)

Politicians are forever trying to foist mediocre products on unsuspecting consumers through all sorts of local content rules and subsidies. Some just rely on costly “Buy Australian” jingles designed to appeal to the patriotism, nationalism, racism and jingoism lurking in dark corners of most minds. (Surely such attempts to stir up racial hatred and discrimination are illegal under some act somewhere?)

While one bunch of politicians boasts about reducing tariffs to allow greater choice and lower costs to Australian consumers, another lot is quietly erecting local content rules, offset schemes, design rules and labelling barriers, all armed at keeping foreign goods out, or making them more expensive.

While federal enforcers are confining their attacks to people with slanty eyes or funny accents, to provincial protectors the most dangerous foreigners are those who love across state boundaries.

One of the chief reasons for federation was to protect the freedom to trade between states. However, in actions which seems clearly unconstitutional, all states have employed both open and underhand tactic to assist their local buddies in business and the unions against interstate competition.

Ten years ago, Nick Greiner estimated that these State Preference Schemes were costing Australian taxpayers $350 million per year.

Most states confined their interference with sound purchasing policy to state government departments and authorities. In Victoria, however, John Cain set up the “Industrial Supplies Office” to monitor the procurement policies of major private sector purchases, with a view to “encouraging” them to use local suppliers.

In assessing government contracts, Queensland added a 20% penalty to prices submitted by foreign companies and 15% penalty for out-of-staters or Kiwis. An additional rule was then introduced in which Queensland companies tendering for State Government contracts had the right to re-submit their tenders after the closing date. (If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again.) Mr Gunn assured Queenslanders that this policy “was in line with business practices in other states”.

(At the same time, most state bureaucrats insist on Quality Assurance Certification Procedures so complex and costly that many small local firms can’t be bothered trying to qualify for state supply contracts.)

The federal government has already spent $15M trying to convince canny consumers to forget quality, price and service and look instead for the “Australian Made” label.

Other taxpayers are funding schemes like “We Make it Great in the Sunshine State”. Where does it all end? Buy Brisbane Made? Fernvale First? Buy Birdsville?

Not one new Australian job is created by these programs, and consumers who are conned by them have their standard of living reduced.

When the cost of imports rises, most consumers will balance their budget by either reducing their purchases of the dearer goods, or economising on other goods. Thus, every dollar spent on expensive local goods rather than cheap imports immediately reduces the quantity of goods available per consumer — i.e., reduces living standards.

Some consumers will maintain their living standards by dipping into savings. The “Buy Dear” campaign will thus reduce local investment funds and increase our reliance on foreign capital.

“Putting Australia first” will also destroy Australian jobs among exporters and those employed to distribute imports.

Exporters suffer via the exchange rate. Every barrier to imports reduces the pool of Australian dollars available to foreigners to buy Australian exports. The price of the Australian dollar will thus rise in the currency market and the revenue of exporters will tend to fall to match the reduced imports. In this way, jobs gained by Australian manufacturers will be lost by both exporters and importers.

And the taxes levied to support the bureaux of officials monitoring all the preference clauses, offsets rules, design regulations, labelling laws, quotas and bounties will destroy more jobs in the tax paying sector.

“Australia First” and “Buy Queensland” are protection rackets as destructive as tariffs, but much more underhanded.

The Pacific, Indian and Atlantic Oceans and the Aussie Wharfies already constitute a hefty handicap for foreigners trying to get into the Australian market. If our factories and unions are still uncompetitive, let’s keep a flat 10% tariff on all imports, and abolish all the secret and costly trade barriers.

We have nothing to fear but higher living standards for all Australians (except for out-of-work bureaucrats).

(in order of appearance on Economics.org.au)

Forbes has long been active in politics, economic education, business and the global warming debate, and was winner of the Australian Adam Smith Award “For outstanding services to the Free Society” in 1986.Powered by Hackadelic Sliding Notes 1.6.5

ONE WORD

ONE SENTENCE

Name	Required.
Email	Required. Won't be published.
Web
Comment

ONE PARAGRAPH

"The government consists of a gang of men exactly like you and me. They have, taking one with another, no special talent for the business of government; they have only a talent for getting and holding office. Their principal device to that end is to search out groups who pant or pine for something they can’t get, and to promise to give it to them. Nine times out of ten that promise is worth nothing. The tenth time is made good by looting A to satisfy B. In other words, government is a broker in pillage, and every election is a sort of advance auction sale of stolen goods."
~ H.L. Mencken

"[T]he crucial question is not, as so many believe, whether property rights should be private or governmental, but rather whether the necessarily 'private' owners are legitimate owners or criminals. For ultimately, there is no entity called 'government'; there are only people forming themselves into groups called 'governments' and acting in a 'governmental' manner. All property is therefore always 'private'; the only and critical question is whether it should reside in the hands of criminals or of the proper and legitimate owners."
~ Murray Rothbard

"The most absurd public opinion polls are those on taxes. Now, if there is one thing we know about taxes, it is that people do not want to pay them. If they wanted to pay them, there would be no need for taxes. People would gladly figure out how much of their money the government deserves and send it in. And yet we routinely hear about opinion polls that reveal that the public likes the tax level as it is and might even like it higher. Next they will tell us that the public thinks the crime rate is too low, or that the American people would really like to be in more auto accidents." ~ Lew Rockwell, Speaking of Liberty, p. 281.

"A tax-funded protection agency is a contradiction in terms — an expropriating property protector — and will inevitably lead to more taxes and less protection. Even if, as some — classical liberal — statists have proposed, a government limited its activities exclusively to the protection of pre-existing private property rights, the further question of how much security to produce would arise. Motivated (like everyone else) by self-interest and the disutility of labor, but endowed with the unique power to tax, a government agent’s answer will invariably be the same: To maximize expenditures on protection — and almost all of a nation’s wealth can conceivably be consumed by the cost of protection — and at the same time to minimize the production of protection." ~ Hans-Hermann Hoppe

Economics.org.au

You are reading