More featuring Bert Kelly»

Three-part 1986 Bert Kelly series on the political process
(which is a nice extension to his 1980 feather bed series)

1. “The politics of protection”
2. “Bitter experience and learning economic laws”
3. “Same old song from the TCF”

1.
Bert Kelly, “The politics of protection,”
The Australian, November 10, 1986, p. 17.

The textile, clothing and footwear industries (TCF) are mounting their usual campaign to frighten the Hawke Government from accepting the IAC (Industries Assistance Commission) report on their industries.

Listening to them you would think that their protection was about to be slashed to ribbons tomorrow, but I think the IAC treated them far too leniently.

It recommended the sections with very high rates of protection, 134 per cent and above, should gradually have their tariffs reduced, beginning in January 1989 and reducing to 50 per cent in 1996. So the really highly protected ones would have 10 years from now to learn to stand on their own feet, though they would have to cling to the rest of us even then, with a 50 per cent duty.

Those with low protection would not have to face any reduction in protection until after 1996. Yet they are now squealing like stuck pigs. Wouldn’t farmers love to get such kid glove treatment.

The TCF Council have learnt from experience that politicians usually run to water if the pressure groups squeal loudly enough. In 1980, when the TCF Council was then facing a reduction in protection, they mounted a campaign as strident and as badly based as now and they scared the daylights out of the Fraser government which ran to water. So high protection was continued and the inevitable changes that must be made one day were postponed. Now the council wants them postponed again.

Both parties in the Fraser government were eloquent in their belief in lowering trade barriers. Whenever the National Party talked to farmers they made powerful speeches about their determination to reduce farmers’ tariff burdens but they went to water when the TCF Council huffed at them. Mr Fraser, the Liberal leader, used to lecture to the world about the dangers of trade barriers when he was overseas and even spoke softly on the subject on his return. Yet he and his Liberal wimps ran to water with the National Party when the TCF Council beat its drum.

In 1980, when the TCF question was before the Fraser Cabinet and the TCF Council’s list of marginal seats containing TCF factories was read out, that was sufficient to frighten the government. So the Fraser government did what they knew was wrong in order to hang on to some marginal seats. But who owns these seats now? Almost all of them are in Labor hands in spite of the Fraser government’s surrender. And why did this happen? I think it was mainly because the electorate ceased to believe what the Fraser government told them, not only about tariffs but other matters also.

In an article written by Paul Malone in the Canberra Times on October 25, he spells out the seats the Hawke Government might lose if it does not give in to the present TCF council campaign: Bendigo, Ballarat, Calare and Hunter are non-metropolitan seats that are said to be likely to be lost. Well, I remind the Hawke Government that the Fraser government went down the road of giving in to TCF pressure to devastating results. The electorate simply ceased to believe what we said. This is not surprising because we didn’t either. We are still trying to recover our self-respect.

Although the TCF Council is behaving as they did in 1980 there are many individual manufacturers who do not agree with its attitude. I quote from a letter in the Financial Review on October 27, written by Mr Barry Williams, managing director of Williams the Shoemen, who make shoes in Carlton.

He says: “It was Malcolm Fraser who ducked any tough decisions on the TCF industries in that years (1980). Australia has paid dearly ever since. But this time we have a different team which has already demonstrated a wealth of political courage in the tough industry policy decisions — steel, cars and heavy engineering. And a highly responsible and conscientious minister rightly described as neither New Right or New Left but simply as the Federal Government’s brightest and best.”

As a Liberal, I should not pay such a tribute to Senator Button however much it is deserved. But I cannot help worrying about where Liberal MPs in State and Federal Parliament stand on the TCF question this time around. I know that the Federal Opposition parties have an industry policy that speaks quite firmly about the benefits that would follow a gradual but certain lowering of trade barriers. Indeed it is so good I sometimes think that Eccles might have had a hand in it. Yet as soon as the TFC Council begins campaigning to prevent such a gradual but certain reduction, we find Liberal wimps running to water just as they did in 1980.

David Trebeck, who was then working for the National Farmers Federation, once said sourly: “Everyone is in favour of tariff reductions so long as they do not actually happen.”

I wonder where today’s Liberals stand on this question, on the parapet fighting for their professional policy or in the water, shivering.

2.
Bert Kelly, “Bitter experience and learning economic laws,”
The Australian, November 17, 1986, p. 9.

Eccles is a queer cuss. He is pigheaded and self-opinionated and I get awfully sick at him for nagging at me and everyone else, but he resolutely refuses to take the credit for the way the tariff wind has gone round.

“It is not me, Bert, and it is certainly not you. Neither of us have made people aware that tariffs do not create employment,” he says sourly.

“It is when people see that employment falls most in the heavily protected industries that they realise that they have been barking up the wrong tree. We have not changed people’s ideas, it is bitter experience.”

Eccles is not above saying I told you so when his prophesies are fulfilled, but he still gives the credit to economic laws, which he says always win in the end. That is why good economists are always unpopular. They tell us what we do not want to hear.

Eccles illustrated his argument by reminding me how in 1981, when the Fraser government was about to reduce the protection on cars, GM-H mounted a quite unfair campaign to stop it. The car maker placed a big advertisement claiming that 200,000 people would be flung out of work if protection were reduced. As there were only 79,000 employment in the car and component industries, this was clearly nonsense. However, it frightened the Fraser government which gave in, so GM-H won that battle and has been going downhill ever since because the company was not then forced to make the adjustments that bitter experience is now forcing it to make.

In 1980 the textile, clothing and footwear (TCF) industries mounted a powerful campaign to scare the Fraser government from reducing TCF protection. The Fraser government gave in without a struggle so the TCF group won that battle and has been going downhill ever since. There is a powerful economic law which says that if the price of a good goes up, the demand for it goes down.

Mavis could have told the Government that and she hasn’t got an economics degree, only an old sewing machine. Now the TCF people are at it again, trying to stop the Hawke Government giving them the medicine they one day will have to take to make them healthy so that they will not continue to need the $1 billion support we have to give them each year. To put it another way, we have to subsidise each person in the TCF group at a rate of $200 a week so that the industries will not have to face the trauma of change.

I am glad to find that there are some employers in the TCF group who do not believe the nonsense that their association puts out. Last week I quoted from a letter by Mr Barry Williams, a footwear manufacturer in Melbourne. I quote him again. He says: “About 50 footwear manufacturers make about 80 per cent of the total industry’s local production. Ten of them account for close to 60 per cent of its total employment. For the footwear industry at least, the increasingly shrill claims by an odd collection of bedfellows that ‘massive job losses’ will be the inevitable consequence of lower tariffs are just nonsense.”

An odd collection of bedfellows indeed: I would have been too nervous to say that.

Now let us hear from one of the best clothing manufacturers in the business. Mr David Jones, managing director of Fletcher Jones and Staff, which has an enviable reputation all round Australia, also seems a bit sceptical about the TCF’s claim that 60,000 jobs will be lost if the Government does what the Industries Assistance Commission recommends.

I quote him: “The scaremonger’s line of ‘60,000 jobs at risk’ is authorised primarily by a selfish and insular coalition of unimaginative managements wedded to the status quo and slick entrepreneurs who have made a new art form of rorting the present mish-mash of tariff and quota protection for the industry.”

If I had spoken so disrespectfully about unimaginative managements and slick entrepreneurs people would have said I was unkind, though Blind Freddy has known for years about the rackets that abound in the TCF area.

Then Jones faces the future that so terrifies the TCF Association. He says: “The IAC recommended that the TCF industries should have the same quota and tariff mix of protection for another six or seven years before proposed changes begin to bite. But why fiddle while Rome burns? Others aren’t waiting to make a judgment about this country’s future. Their valuation of our currency has already given manufacturers the bonus of an additional 30 to 40 per cent protection. Let’s not waste the extra windfall.”

So clearly there are some TCF people who are prepared to face the trauma of change. I warn the rest of them, the chicken-hearted ones, that they too will have to do this eventually. Economic laws always win in the end. If in doubt, ask GM-H.

3.
Bert Kelly, “Same old song from the TCF,”
The Australian, November 24, 1986, p. 7.

Before we had bulk handlers for our grain, the worst job on our farm was sewing the wheat bags.

City people probably think this would be an easy task, just a matter of climbing along the top of a heap of bags and quickly stitching them closed.

But it was not like that at all. Each bag had to be shaken down and then rammed full. You were really working to sew 200 bags in a day and the heat, the flies and the boredom were soul-destroying. I remember our relief when a portable radio allowed us to listen to the cricket. Fred says that he once even listened to Parliament.

Now we have bulk handling the memory of my unhappiness is fading and I have difficulty in holding the attention of my grandchildren when I tell them how hard I used to work.

They do not know how lucky they are because I feel sure that if our farmer organisations had had an attitude like that of the textile, clothing and footwear (TCF) industries, my grandsons would still be sewing bags and, in these days of affirmative action, my granddaughter might be also.

You can imagine the case which our organisation could have mounted if they had followed the pattern set by the car makers or the TCF people. “Look at the 200,000 bag sewers who will be flung out of work,” they would have sobbed, copying the GM-H advertisement. Or, using the TCF model, they would have pleaded pathetically for things to remain the same.

I suppose they would have tried to classify bag sewers as outworkers so we could then be kept under union control.

Lest you think this is just a nightmare, consider this statement by former prime minister Malcolm Fraser in February 1977. He said: “Because of rising labour costs, employers were tending to use machines rather than people in the production process. If tariff protection for Australian industry was reduced, this trend would worsen. The Government has worked to ensure that the push for lower tariff levels would not continue.”

I do not think that Mr Fraser was prepared to go quite as far as the Luddites in England in 1811: he did not advocate smashing up the power looms so that virtuous women could continue to weave contentedly in their cottages, but at least he was prepared to do what he could to discourage TCF manufacturers using more machinery in the effort to become more competitive.

So you can see that I am not imagining things when I say that my grandchildren do not know how lucky they are not to be condemned to sew bags forever.

Of course, we would have had problems in competing with farmers in other countries who had been encouraged to change with the times, but I suppose we could have confidently expected to get the same generous subsidy treatment as the TCF people get, that is, $1 billion every year.

The main plank in the TCF’s attack on the Industry Assistance Commission’s (IAC) recommendations is the effect on unemployment. There are about 110,000 people engaged in those industries and the IAC says that if the recommendations were adopted, employment would fall by about 20,000 by 1996. The TCF people are said to be broadly in agreement with these figures but they also contend that a further 30,000 people will be lost during this period through productivity changes.

I am uncertain whether or not they want these productivity changes stopped. Mr Fraser is not here to advise them now.

Using the IAC’s figures for jobs lost between now and 1996 — and these are more likely to be right than the TCF figures — (remember the GM-H advertisement) employment in the TCF group would fall at the rate of 3000 a year for seven years. Yet about 30,000 people leave the TCF industries each year now.

However, we would still be losing employment at the rate of 3000 a year.

“What are you going to do about these poor people, you hard-hearted monster?” the TCF people snarl.

I have to admit not knowing exactly where each of these displaced 3000 will be employed but I do know that, over the past eight years, while employment in the TCF industries fell by 16,000, employment in Australia rose by 800,000, so I guess some of the 3000 displaced people would fit in somewhere there.

Remember what Williams the shoemaker said: “For the footwear industry, at least, the increasingly shrill claims by an odd collection of bedfellows that massive job losses will be the inevitable consequence of lower tariffs are just nonsense.”

If the Hawke government gives in to this TCF pressure, it will be judged as being as gutless as the Fraser government — and that is not a nice thing to say.

(in order of appearance on Economics.org.au)
  1. Bert Kelly on his journalism
  2. Move for a body of Modest Members
  3. Modest Members Association
  4. Bert Kelly's Maiden Parliamentary Speech
  5. Government Intervention
  6. 1976 Monday Conference transcript featuring Bert Kelly
  7. Bert Kelly, Hayek and Mencken on the virtues of farmers
  8. Sound economics calls for quiet from government
  9. Petrol for Farmers
  10. Some Sacred Cows
  11. Experiences in Parliament
  12. Spending your Money
  13. Is Taxmania a politician fetish?
  14. How Bert Kelly repays a free feed
  15. Modest column #898
  16. Chicken-hearted feathered friends strange bedfellows on a feather bed?
  17. Who needs literary licence?
  18. A touch of Fred's anarchy
  19. Helping the farmers help themselves
  20. Standing on the shoulders of the downtrodden
  21. Supply and Demand
  22. Bert Kelly responds to claims he is arrogant and uncredentialed
  23. Politics: it's a very confusing business
  24. The best featherbeds run on rails
  25. Bert Kelly on Disaster Relief
  26. Bert Kelly Wants to Secede
  27. Blinded by their tears
  28. Anti-freedom pro-tobacco industry lobby harmed Australia
  29. Under Labor, is working hard foolish?
  30. An Idiot's Guide to Interventionism
  31. Is free priceless healthcare worthless?
  32. Can government kiss it better?
  33. Bert Kelly Destroys the Side Benefits Argument for Government
  34. Bert Kelly gets his head around big-headed bird-brained politics
  35. First Modest Member (Bert Kelly) AFR Column
  36. Second Modest Member (Bert Kelly) AFR Column
  37. Third Modest Member (Bert Kelly) AFR Column
  38. Fourth Modest Member (Bert Kelly) AFR Column
  39. Fifth Modest Member (Bert Kelly) AFR Column
  40. Sixth Modest Member (Bert Kelly) AFR Column
  41. Bert Kelly on the 2011 Budget and Australia's Pathetic Journalists and Politicians
  42. Bert Kelly, Bastard or Simple Sod?
  43. Liberal Backbencher Hits Govt. Over Import Restrictions
  44. Bert Kelly feels a dam coming on at each election
  45. Bert Kelly Enters Parliament
  46. Why take in one another's washing?
  47. Bert Kelly breaks the law, disrespects government and enjoys it
  48. Gillard's galley-powered waterskiing
  49. State Premiers are always asking for more taxing powers
  50. Can price control really work?
  51. Should we put up with socialism?
  52. We're quick to get sick of socialism
  53. Time the protection racket ended
  54. Can't pull the wool over Farmer Fred
  55. People not Politics
  56. Bert Kelly admits he should have had less faith in politicians
  57. The inspirational incentivising Dear Leader Gough Whitlam
  58. Labor: a girl who couldn't say no
  59. Why leading businessmen carry black briefcases
  60. Ludwig von Mises on page 3 of AFR
  61. Bert Kelly's empowering feminism
  62. Another shot at motor car madness
  63. Mavis wants the Modest Member to dedicate his book to her
  64. What if the whole country is swindled?
  65. Moss Cass: "Flood plains are for floods"
  66. A worm's eye view
  67. Eccles returns to haunt us
  68. How to grip a politician's ear
  69. It's hard to digest this economic cake
  70. Time to Butcher "Aussie Beef"
  71. Cold water on government-instigated irrigation schemes
  72. Hooray for Ord River Dam!
  73. Tariffs paid by exporters
  74. The problem of principles v popularity
  75. If you support State Quotas, where will your logic take you?
  76. Against guidance by government
  77. A socialist in Liberal clothing
  78. Never ask the government to help
  79. Don't listen to economists!
  80. Bert Kelly's revolutionary strategy
  81. Welfare state incentivises bludging and being thrown out of work
  82. It all sounds like bloody politics to Fred
  83. Mavis wants me to get in for my chop
  84. Whitlam's July 1973 25% tariff cut
  85. Bert Kelly on Import Quotas
  86. Good directions when government backseat driving, like reversing down wrong side of road
  87. Barriers to imports are barriers to exports
  88. "I was right" — but he's off to hospital ...
  89. Bert Kelly reviews The War Diaries of Weary Dunlop
  90. Bert Kelly reviews We Were There
  91. Tariffs get the fork-tongue treatment
  92. Bert Kelly reduces government to its absurdities
  93. Politician sacrifices his ... honesty
  94. It's all a matter of principle
  95. Bert Kelly Destroys the Infant Industry Argument
  96. Bert Kelly Untangles Tariff Torment
  97. Bert Kelly resorts to prayer
  98. Eccles keeps our nose hard down on the tariff grindstone
  99. "Don't you believe in protecting us against imports from cheap labour countries?"
  100. Even if lucky, we needn't be stupid
  101. Great "freedom of choice" mystery
  102. Small government's growth problem
  103. I like my kind acts to get a mention in the press
  104. A Modest Member rakes the embers
  105. Tariffs Introduced
  106. More About Tariffs
  107. Sacred cow kicker into print
  108. Bert Kelly's 1984 two-article quote-collection on Aboriginal policies
  109. Modest Member must not give up
  110. Traditional Wheat Farming is Our Birthright and Heritage and Must be Protected!
  111. Tariff-cut nonsense lives on
  112. Bert Kelly brilliantly defends "theoretical academics"
  113. The high cost of protection
  114. Generosity creates problems
  115. The Society of Modest Members
  116. John Hyde's illogical, soft, complicated, unfocussed and unsuccessful attempt to communicate why he defends markets
  117. Modesty ablaze
  118. Case for ministers staying home
  119. The unusual self-evident simplicity of the Modest Members Society
  120. Animal lib the new scourge of the bush
  121. The Association for the Prevention of Cruelty to Krill
  122. modest members society
  123. Repeal economic laws, force people to buy new cars and enforce tariffs against overseas tennis players
  124. Thoughts on how to kill dinosaurs
  125. Let's try the chill winds
  126. Taking the Right's road
  127. Bert Kelly: "I did not try often or hard enough"
  128. Bert Kelly "lacked ... guts and wisdom"
  129. A look at life without tariffs
  130. The Gospel according to Bert
  131. Tiny note on Bert Kelly's column in The Bulletin in 1985
  132. Why costs can't be guaranteed
  133. Hitting out with a halo
  134. Paying farmers not to grow crops will save on subsidies, revenge tariffs, etc
  135. "The Modest Farmer joins us" | "How The Modest Farmer came to be"
  136. Bert Kelly Destroys the Freeloading Justifies Government Argument
  137. Industrial Relations Club shovellers
  138. From Shann to Stone
  139. Government Intervention
    vs
    Government Interference
  140. A sojourn in the real world
  141. The tariff wind swings
  142. Bigger Cake = Bigger Slices
  143. Bert Kelly on the Political Process
  144. A charabanc called protection
  145. Taken for a ride - to nowhere
  146. Down hill, in circles, all the way
  147. Economic facts and figures are statistics who should speak out
  148. Any cons arguing small business bad but big government good?
  149. Relationships with the Liberal Party
  150. Tariffs = High Prices + World War
  151. Bert Kelly's Family History
  152. Bert Kelly's Pre-Parliament Life
  153. What the MP could say to the Bishop
  154. Why Bert Kelly was not even more publicly outspoken
  155. WEATHER IS USUALLY UNUSUAL
  156. How to stand aside when it's time to be counted
  157. How the Modest Member went back to being a Modest Farmer
  158. My pearls of wisdom were dull beyond belief
  159. Bert Kelly on Political Football
  160. Undigested morsels in Fraser spew
  161. Bert Kelly on LSD
  162. Bert Kelly reflects on the Australian car industry in 1992
  163. Bert Kelly wants reprinted Shann's Economic History of Australia
  164. If tariffs are opposed here then why not there?
  165. The emperor has no textiles, clothing and footwear sense
  166. Ross Gittins Wins Bert Kelly Award
  167. Interesting 1964 Bert Kelly speech: he says he is not a free trader and that he supports protection!
  168. This is the wall the Right built
  169. Tariff Protection in Australia (1970)
  170. Has Santa socked it to car makers?
  171. Is the Budget a cargo cult?
  172. Will we end up subsidising one another?
  173. Keeping the bucket of worms alive
  174. Can we get off the stomach-churning head-spinning tariff merry-go-round?
  175. Do we want our money to fly?
  176. Can a bear be sure of a feed?
  177. How to impress your MP -
    ambush him
  178. The time for being nice to our MPs has gone ...
  179. Don't feel sorry for him -
    hang on to his ear
  180. Trade wars can easily end up on a battlefield
  181. Tariffs Create Unemployment
  182. Bert Kelly recommends Ayn Rand
  183. Bert Kelly on Alf Rattigan's Industry Assistance: The Inside Story
  184. Bert Kelly's Satirical Prophecy: Minister for Meteorology (tick) and High Protectionist Policies to Result in War Yet Again (?)
  185. Bert Kelly in 1972 on Foreign Ownership of Australian Farmland and Warren Truss, Barnaby Joyce and Bill Heffernan in 2012
  186. Bert Kelly baits Welfare State Tiger
  187. Why does Govt wear two faces?
  188. Parliament a place for pragmatists
  189. Of Sugar Wells and Think-Tanks
  190. Bert Kelly: "I must take some of the blame"
  191. Bert Kelly on dumping duties
  192. The Govt's helping hand often hurts
  193. Unbuckling the hobbles on the motor industry
  194. A Modest Farmer looks at the Problems of Structural Change
  195. Government Fails Spectacularly
  196. Know your proper place if you want the quiet life
  197. Bert Kelly on political speech writers
  198. Having your cake and eating it
  199. Perish the thawed!
  200. Hooray for Northern Development!
  201. Politicians can resist everything except pressure
  202. The silly image of our MPs
  203. Bert Kelly Question Time highlights
  204. Modest Farmer sees his ideas take hold
  205. Should facts stand in the way of a good story?
  206. Fondling one another's glass haloes
  207. What is the sense in making the effort to look after yourself?
  208. Fred's Feeling: Counterpatriotic country contrarian
  209. Handouts for big boys only
  210. Mavis trying to buy a hand loom
  211. Bad news for bearers of bad news
  212. Is it time to get aboard the tariff band-waggon?
  213. Why farmers resent tariff protection for motor makers
  214. A sordid use of scare tactics
  215. Goods vs services
  216. Tariffs are hilariously counterproductive
  217. The dilemmas of Aboriginal Affairs
  218. Bert Kelly on decentralisation
  219. Inflation breeds moral decay
  220. Who envies equality?
  221. Growth – malignant or benign?
  222. Government wiser than Magna Carta
  223. Bert Kelly on looking to politicians for moral leadership
  224. Max Newton: Maverick in Exile
  225. Whitlam & co on the Dismissal
  226. 25% Tariff Cut
  227. Bert Kelly on pensions
  228. The backseat drivers of the Pilbara
  229. Mr Clunies-Ross of the Cocos Islands should rule Australia
  230. They get the wind up when it changes
  231. Why the Big Green Lie survives
  232. Ross McLean in 1982: "Malcolm! Why don't we try good government? It might be popular."
  233. Bert Kelly on the importance of exchange rate movements
  234. Bert Kelly shows how to attack
  235. Bert Kelly vs Bert Kelly vs Bert Kelly
  236. Industrial relations dinosaur, Bruce, chews his cud
  237. Hooray for "firmly entrenched"!
  238. Respect your dinosaurs
  239. What if something is "deeply ingrained" yet harmful?
  240. A case for ministerial inertia
  241. Why politicians don't like the truth
  242. Our great open spaces
  243. Ominous dark clouds are gathering
  244. Better to be popular than right
  245. Crying in the wilderness
  246. Ivory tower needs thumping
  247. Bert Kelly asks, "How can you believe in free enterprise and government intervention at the same time?"
  248. Politicians get undeserved praise, why not undeserved blame too?
  249. Feet in a bucket of champagne
  250. Rural Problems
  251. Health cover needs a $30 excess clause
  252. Unholy state of taxation
  253. Boring economics worth a smile
  254. The Libido for the Miserable
  255. Agricultural Development and Tariffs
  256. Fred's too poor to have principles
  257. Eccles Law of the constant wage share
  258. "He whom the gods would destroy ..."
  259. Low tariff torch burnt Eccles' fingers
  260. A cow of a car — with dual horns
  261. Tariffs: when to wean infant BHP?
  262. Keep any government as far as possible from farming
  263. The Playford charade is out of date
  264. Bert Kelly: the odd man out who's now in
  265. Dries must resist giving up struggle as going gets tough
  266. How a well meaning Government can be so stupid
  267. The icing on the economic cake
  268. Sir Roderick Carnegie's foreword to Bert Kelly's Economics Made Easy
  269. The Vale of Popularity and the Protection Procession
  270. Politics 101: Pay Lip Service to Capitalism and Shoot the Messenger
  271. Bert Kelly makes politicians eat their own words on tariffs, then says, "We cannot be blamed for treating the statements of our statesmen with cynical contempt"
  272. Bert Kelly on Free Enterprise
  273. Cartoons of protected industry, the welfare teat and the nanny state
  274. Bert Kelly on the theory of constant shares and the Fabian Society
  275. Bert Kelly vs Doug Anthony
  276. You're lucky if you escape being helped by government
  277. Bert Kelly on Small Farmers
  278. Bert Kelly on Apathy
  279. Bert Kelly in 1967 on "problems of government and things like that"
  280. The last "Dave's Diary"
  281. Bert Kelly vs The Australian on tariffs in 1977
  282. Bounties or Tariffs, Someone Pays
  283. Geriatric companies without a minder
  284. A free marketeer wary of free trade
  285. Nixon's puzzling profession of faith
  286. "Ford ... seems to spend more time bending its knees than its back"
  287. Clyde Cameron's weak ways with wise words
  288. Why flaunt what others flout?
  289. Bert Kelly yearns for Tim Flannery's powers of prediction
  290. Looking after yourself is silly
  291. Bert Kelly masterpiece on drought, fire, flood and other natural disaster relief schemes
  292. Government can take credit for our car industry mess
  293. Car makers want the 4wd driven deeper into tariff bog
  294. Why our MP is no longer prone to a good sob story
  295. Auto industry is in a straitjacket
  296. Bert Kelly on market predictions
  297. Why should dryland farmers subsidise irrigation farmers?
  298. How much should government decrease incentive for independence from government?
  299. Clarkson crowned Deputy Government Whip
  300. Bert Kelly to blame for soaring government healthcare costs
  301. 1959 return of Dave's Diary
  302. Bert Kelly in 1966 on developing northern Australia
  303. Successful government intervention can [sic] occur
  304. Vernon Report upholds Clarkson
  305. Quiet Man Makes An Impact
  306. Should it be compulsory to buy footwear and clothing?
  307. To save Australian clothing industry women must all wear same uniform
  308. Don't confuse plucking heart strings with plucking harp strings
  309. Speech only for public
  310. Catchy Tariff Circus Extravaganza
  311. Bert Kelly in 1985 on cars yet again
  312. Hurrah for the Gang of Five
  313. Thoughts on a verse about Balfour
  314. Bert Kelly pep talk to politicians
  315. Government intervention = Agony postponed but death brought nearer
  316. Recipe for disaster: Freeze!
  317. Recipe for government intervention: Gather winners and scatter losers
  318. Recipe for industry destruction: Blanket market signals
  319. Mavis writes!
  320. Bert Kelly's empiricism is not kneejerk reaction kind
  321. The $2,000 song of the shirt worker
  322. Subsiding only small farmers means subsiding the big banks
  323. Difficult to be fast on your feet when you've got your ear to the ground
  324. It would surprise people to see how sensible MPs behave if they think they are not being watched
  325. Bert Kelly on "this land of limitless resources" and "great open spaces"
  326. Growing bananas at the South Pole
  327. Car components tariff protection under fire
  328. Why carry a $300m car subsidy?
  329. Tariff feather beds for the foreign giants
  330. Bert Kelly says end compulsory voting to stop donkey vote
  331. Perhaps being smart and insured isn't all luck
  332. You gets your tariff, you pays a price
  333. More funds to train Olympians?
  334. Fire in their guts and wind in ours
  335. Should free universal healthcare include pets?
  336. Sound advice from a modest farmer
  337. A tottering monument to intervention
  338. Cunning meets wisdom
  339. Competition, Aussie-style: Who's the bigger parasite?
  340. Australians are proud patriotic parasites, says Bert Kelly
  341. Taxpayer-funded sport is cheating
  342. Being loved by all is not always a good thing
  343. Welfare State Destroys Society
  344. 1980 Bert Kelly feather bed series
  345. The White Mice Marketing Board
  346. Government intervention and advice can be harmful, even when right, even for those it tries to help
  347. One small step on the compulsory voting landmine
  348. The free & compulsory education sacred cows have no clothes
  349. Holding a loaded wallet to an economist's head
  350. Political No Man's Land
  351. Only blind greed demands both equality and prosperity
  352. A cow that sucks itself — that's us!
  353. Nip the bud of incentive; mock community spirit into submission
Powered by Hackadelic Sliding Notes 1.6.5