government | Paul Wallbank - Communications Professional

Australia in the Asian Century – Chapter 8: Building sustainable security in the region

What are the security issues for the Asia in the 21st Century

This post is one of the series of articles on the Australia in the Asian Century report.

The eighth chapter of Australia in the Asian Century looks at the security picture of the region, this is one of the bigger chapters and like some of the others it’s as notable for what it leaves out as for what it says.

National objective 20. Australian policies will contribute to Asia’s development as a region of sustainable security in which habits of cooperation are the norm.

That’s nice, worthy and has been undoubtedly true for most previous Australian governments. Except of course when Australian Prime Ministers join the prevailing colonial power in wars like Iraq, Afghanistan, Malaya, Korea, Vietnam or kicking around the German territories in World War I.

Chapter Eight partly dives into territory already covered in Chapter Three, this time though the analysis does discuss the United States’ role in more detail and makes the observation that US military spending dwarfs that of any other Asian nation – interestingly this is one of the few times Russia gets a mention in the entire report.

Encouragingly, the paper doesn’t confine the concept of ‘security’ just to military matters and takes a broader view of issues such as guaranteeing access to resources, food and water. There is some discussion of climate change and on regional responses to natural disasters such as tsunamis and earthquakes.

One notable omission is that of refugees. Given that most of the asylum seekers arriving by boat are Asian – currently coming from Afghanistan and Sri Lanka – and almost all pass through other Asian countries, it would be expected this issue would get some exploration. Sadly it doesn’t and once again skirting over an important issue detracts from the paper’s substance.

As befits Australia’s most important relationships in Asia, there is a lot of discussion of the three way relationship between China, the United States and Australia with a detailed breakout box in section 8.4.

The discussion on Australia’s relations between China and the US makes an interesting statement;

In managing the intersections of Australia’s ties with the United States and China, we will need a clear sense of our national interests, a strong voice in both relationships and effective diplomacy.

Undoubtedly this statement is true, however successive Australian governments have conflated the interests of the United States with being the same as Australia’s. In recent times Australian leaders have followed the US lead even when it has been clear American policy conflicts with Australia’s Chinese relations.

Moving away from a reflex support of the United States is going to be one of the biggest challenges for Australian governments in the Asian Century and one hopes the process is as gradual and incident free as the white paper hopes.

National objective 21.The region will be more sustainable and human security will be strengthened with the development of resilient markets for basic needs such as energy, food and water.

National objective 21 is an interesting statement in itself – “resilient markets for basic needs such as energy, food and water” smacks of the 1980s privatisation and corporatism that has left Australia with duopoly industries and an excessive financialisation of those markets for basic needs.

It may well turn out to be the case that Asian countries choose not to follow that path, particularly those like the Philippines and Indonesia who have experienced the effects of crony capitalism in recent history.

Chapter 8 of Australia in the Asian Century finishes with a detailed look at the regional efforts aimed at building trust and co-operation on trans-national issues. Much is made of various international groups such as the G20 and the UN.

An interesting case study is that of the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty with an examination of Japan’s and Australia’s work in that field. Sadly this is another area that’s let down by the actions of current and previous Australian governments in selling uranium to India.

The nuclear weapons stand off between India, Pakistan and China is another ‘elephant in the room’ issue that doesn’t really get the coverage it should in such a report.

Chapter 8 of Australia in the Asian Century is a very optimistic section of the report however it does hint at the path Australia could follow to being a credible, medium sized economy and influencer in the region. However one has to consider the actions of Australian leaders when asking if the nation is really interested in taking that path.

Australia in the Asian Century – Building the agriculture industry

How can Australia improve agricultural exports to Asia?

Before going into Chapter 8, the Australia in the Asian Century report has a detailed look at the agriculture industry. Which kicks off with National Objective number 19;

National objective 19. Australia’s agriculture and food production system will be globally competitive, with productive and sustainable agriculture and food businesses.

While this objective seems to have already been achieved, the bulk of the chapter does a good job of identifying the opportunity and challenges for the industry.

The examination of trade treaties, biosecurity and food security is a good overview of the industry however it does suffer from a rose coloured view of prospects and government programs.

Issues such as protectionism, genetically modified foods and the running sore of live cattle exports don’t get a mention.

Another aspect of this section is how the aspirations don’t match the actions of governments, for instance the industry capture of regulators – the case of defining free range eggs being a good example – is a real barrier to Australia selling quality produce internationally.

While the section does discuss ‘value adding’, the tenor of the section seems to be focused on bulk exports and really doesn’t identify industries such organics and free range which are an opportunity for the agricultural industry.

Overall though, this section at least does give a reasonably detailed snapshot of an industry and its a shame the paper doesn’t attempt to profile other sectors in the Australian economy.

Australia in the Asian Century – Chapter Seven: Connecting to Asian Markets

How can Australia improve its business, trade and government links with Asian countries?

This post is one of the series of articles on the Australia in the Asian Century report.

The seventh chapter of Australia in the Asian Century looks at how the country’s businesses and governments can engage with markets in Asia. In some ways this is the most effective chapter of the report.

At the beginning of the chapter introduction points out that Asia offers bigger markets than Australia and says “Australian businesses need to build on their existing advantages by developing new capabilities and approaches as they become fully part of the region.”

This is true, but the Chapter never really identifies what Australia business’ existing advantages really are and again this is a weakness in the report.

National objective 17. Australia’s businesses will be recognised globally for their excellence and ability to operate successfully in Asian markets.

How this comes about is difficult to say, and what governments can actually do to help businesses be recognised globally isn’t really identified.

The CPA case study is notable for illustrating the number of Australian expats working in Asia. In many ways these people are the wasted talents that should have been cultivated by domestic businesses through the 1990s and 2000s.

Saying that businesses need to be part of the global supply chain is a statement of the obvious and Chapter 7.3 does discuss the importance of efficient ports, fast customs procedures and reduced barriers to trade. This ties into National Objective 18a.

National objective 18a.The Australian economy will be more open and integrated with Asia, through efforts to improve our domestic arrangements. The flow of goods, services, capital, ideas and people will be easier.

Australia’s trade links with Asia will be at least one-third of GDP by 2025, up from one-quarter in 2011.

It’s difficult to argue with this objective, although one wonders what Canberra has been doing for the last twenty years on smoothing the flow of goods, services, capital and ideas. Hopefully this is one of the relatively easy areas where a Gillard, or Abbott, government can deliver.

National objective 18b. The Australian economy will be more open and integrated with Asia, through comprehensive regional agreements, better aligned economic regulations, greater infrastructure connectivity and enhanced understanding of each country’s arrangements. The flow of goods, services, capital, ideas and people will be easier and Australian businesses and investors will have greater access to opportunities in Asia.

This objective focuses around formal trade links and really only describes the current policy – continued from the Howard government – of signing bilateral trade agreements rather than waiting for the cumbersome and possibly never ending global negotiations to actually deliver something.

Most of Chapter Seven is focused on describing the various trade initiatives the Australian government is engaged in through APEC, ASEAN and various other forums.

All of these are good initiatives and these are the brightest spot in the entire report, this is where the Australian political system has delivered bipartisan support for a long term plan and it’s a shame we can’t see more actions similar to this in areas like education, taxes and sustainability.

Australia in the Asian Century – Chapter Six: Building capabilities

How can Australia build a productive workforce to take advantage of the Asian Century

This post is one of the series of articles on the Australia in the Asian Century report.

Of all the chapters in the Australia in Asian Century discussion paper, Chapter Six has probably attracted the most opprobrium because of the fine words which haven’t been matched by government policy and action.

Parts of this chapter have a strong “school marm” tone as it tries to mandate the composition of company boards or the locations of where students will study. Overall though, most of the objectives are either motherhood statements, impractical or at odds with the actions of both state and Federal governments.

National objective 9. To build the capabilities of Australian students, Australia’s school system will be in the top five schooling systems in the world, delivering excellent outcomes for all students of all backgrounds, and systematically improving performance over time.

By 2025, Australia will be ranked as a top five country in the world for the performance of our students in reading, science and mathematics literacy and for providing our children with a high?quality and high?equity education system.

By 2015, 90 per cent of young Australians aged 20 to 24 years will have a Year 12 or equivalent qualification, up from 86 per cent in 2010.

While these objectives are worthy, there’s little discussion of exactly how this will be achieved beyond broad statements. Again it’s notable that these aspirations are being laid out at a time when funding is being cut and staff retrenched in both state and Federal government education departments.

National objective 10. Every Australian student will have significant exposure to studies of Asia across the curriculum to increase their cultural knowledge and skills and enable them to be active in the region. All schools will engage with at least one school in Asia to support the teaching of a priority Asian language, including through increased use of the National Broadband Network.

Says who? Who exactly is going to force a school to engage with at least one school in Asia? These are the sort of broad brush statements that detract from the report.

These kind of statements are the “thought bubble” approach to policy that marks much of what passes for governance in Australia today and such poorly thought out programs end up at best wasting money. At worst, the unintended consequences of a ‘policy’ thought up on the back of beer mat end up causing more damage than good.

Such a program could work well if properly thought out and integrated properly into the long term curriculum of the students but it would take proper leadership from state and Federal education ministers.

National objective 12. All students will have access to at least one priority Asian language; these will be Chinese (Mandarin), Hindi, Indonesian and Japanese.

This is good and fair, but is something that was supposed to have been put in place thirty years ago. Instead the proportions of students studying Asian languages has steadily dropped.

As newspapers have reported there are barely a dozen Hindi language teachers in New South Wales, so the priority needs to be training teachers to deliver the courses.

Such inconvenient logistical problems are an excellent example of those well meaning but poorly thought through “thought bubbles.”

National objective 12. Australia will remain among the world’s best for research and teaching in universities, delivering excellent outcomes for a larger number of Australian students, attracting the best academics and students from around the world and strengthening links between Australia and the region.

By 2020, 20 per cent of undergraduate higher education enrolments will be people from low socioeconomic backgrounds, up from 17 per cent in 2011.

By 2025, 40 per cent of all 25 to 34?year?olds will hold a qualification at bachelor level or above, up from 35 per cent in 2011.

By 2025, 10 of Australia’s universities will be in the world’s top 100.

A larger number of Australian university students will be studying overseas and a greater proportion will be undertaking part of their degree in Asia.

This objective really smacks of poorly thought out ideas on the run and illustrates starkly the differences between the well meaning objectives and the behaviour of governments.

It’s almost impossible for ten of Australia’s universities to make it into the more reputable measure of top 100 universities when for the last three decades research and post graduate programs have been slowly strangled by falling government funding.

Even if a Gillard government were to change that trend, it’s unlikely Australian universities could make up the lost ground in 13 years.

Mandating that “a larger number of Australian university students will be studying overseas and a greater proportion will be undertaking part of their degree in Asia” is nice but who is going to force students to study overseas and specifically in Asia?

More to the point, what are notoriously conservative Australian employers going to do with all these graduates of Asian universities?

National objective 13. Australia will have vocational education and training systems that are among the world’s best, building capability in the region and supporting a highly skilled Australian workforce able to continuously develop its capabilities.

By 2020, more than three?quarters of working?age Australians will have an entry?level qualification (at Certificate III level or higher), up from just under half in 2009.

Australia’s vocational education and training institutions will have substantially expanded services in more nations in the region, building the productive capacity of the workforce of these nations and supporting Australian businesses and workers to have a greater presence in Asian markets.

Given the week before the Gillard government cut apprenticeship funding and the NSW government announced it was further emasculating its state TAFE system a few days after the report was released, this objective can be treated purely empty words.

Business capacity

One of the reasons why Australia engaged so little with Asia over the last twenty five years is because the business community became focused inwards rather looking for opportunities in foreign markets. So the idea of getting more Asian experience into boardrooms is laudable but the solutions proposed impractical.

National objective 14. Decision makers in Australian businesses, parliaments, national institutions (including the Australian Public Service and national cultural institutions) and advisory forums across the community will have deeper knowledge and expertise of countries in our region and have a greater capacity to integrate domestic and international issues.

One?third of board members of Australia’s top 200 publicly listed companies and Commonwealth bodies (including companies, authorities, agencies and commissions) will have deep experience in and knowledge of Asia.

One?third of the senior leadership of the Australian Public Service (APS 200) will have deep experience in and knowledge of Asia.

This objective has drawn a lot of scorn from the business community and for good reason – how is a Federal government going to mandate that a third of the ASX200 will have “deep experience and knowledge of Asia”?

While the aim of having a third of the senior public service possessing Asian experience is worthy, this is almost impossible given the deadline for this is thirteen years away, any bureaucrat hoping to have “deep experience and knowledge of Asia” would have had to have been working on it for the last five or ten years. If this program isn’t in place now, it isn’t going to happen.

Society

Probably the biggest strength of Australia as a nation is in its diverse and relatively tolerant society so this section of the report is notable for what it misses in opportunities.

National objective 15. Australian communities and regions will benefit from structural changes in the economy and seize the new opportunities emerging in the Asian century.

Another worthy aim and its notable that the region cited in the case study is Darwin, a city whose economy is being wildly distorted by the LNG boom which is driving up prices and labour costs. If anything Darwin is an example of Australia turning its back on opportunities and focusing on a quick, resources driven buck.

National objective 16. By preserving and building on our social foundations, Australia will be a higher skill, higher wage economy with a fair, multicultural and cohesive society and a growing population, and all Australians will be able to benefit from, and participate in, Australia’s growing prosperity and engagement in Asia.

Cant and motherhood statements as one would hope all government seek to build a fair and cohesive society on our social foundations. It’s interesting that much of the poorly thought out, short term tactics by publicity hungry politicians probably does more to damage Australia’s institutions than other factors.

Overall this chapter deserves to have drawn the most criticism with its motherhood statements and wholly unachievable aims.

Most disappointingly, it skates over Australia’s diverse workforce and provides no ideas on how to harness the talents of the country’s ethnic groups in building ties and improving the nation’s skills.

Image of the Harbin Snow and Ice Festival from EmmaJG on Flickr

Double guessing the boss

What do the BBC, the Chinese government and Australian banks have in common?

Two interesting articles, one from English media writer Nick Cohen and the other from American journalist Eveline Chao, show how effective fear is for driving self censorship.

Eveline’s story, Me and My Censor, tells of her relationship with the Chinese Government censor appointed to monitor the publication she worked for in Beijing.

As well as having to avoid the 3Ts – Taiwan, Tibet, and Tiananmen – there were also a range of other delicate issues an active writer could find themselves being censored for as she relates in this conversation with her censor Snow;

We couldn’t use the cover image I had picked out for a feature on the rise of chain restaurants, because it was of an empty bowl, and, Snow told me, it would make people think of being hungry and remind them of the Great Famine (a period from 1958 to 1961 when tens of millions of Chinese starved to death, discussion of which is still suppressed). Even our Chinese designers began to roll their eyes when I related this change to them, and set them to work looking for images of bowls overflowing with meat.

Snow had learned the hard way about the power of imagery to upset the party functionaries. Snow explained why when she urged Eveline didn’t illustrate a story with a graphic showing stars;

I once published, in a newspaper, a picture of a book put out by the German embassy, introducing China and Germany’s investment cooperation. The book’s cover had a big stream on it, half of it the colors of the German flag, half of it red with yellow stars. I decided since it wasn’t a flag it was okay, and sent it to print. Our newspaper office was slapped with a fine of 180,000 yuan [today, around $28,000] and I had to write a self-criticism and take a big salary cut.

Self criticism and big salary cut – the things that middle managers fears regardless of whether they work in the Chinese Communist Party, the BBC or a bank.

The same fear of upsetting those in power is discussed in Nick Cohen’s article on the BBC’s disastrous and scandalous decision to pull a documentary exposing Jimmy Savile as a child abuser. Cohen quotes an interview where George Entwhistle, the executive responsible for pulling the program, was interviewed on the matter.

When Entwistle implied that the editor of Newsnight had no need to worry about his bosses circling over him like glassy-eyed crows, Evan Davis did what any sensible person would have done and burst out laughing.

Nick Cohen’s point was emphasised to me during the week when a former bank worker mentioned an executive had been disciplined for letting slip the bank was running several instances of a cloud computing service. Apparently the press and regulators could have been in the room where he discussed this.

Another example is a big organisation I’ve been regularly writing on where staff members regularly say “this is not a place where you question management.” An acquaintance that recently started there had to agree that they wouldn’t mention anything about the organisation, ever.

The problem with this self-censorship is that it quickly becomes destructive. In the United Airlines dead dog case, staff subject to arbitrary whims and discipline of management avoid taking decisions which often escalates situations where common sense would quickly find a simple solution.

It also means people jump to conclusions. Eviline relates the story of the tourist story;

One month, we ran a short news brief with figures on the number of mainland Chinese tourists that had visited the United States in 2007, and Snow flagged the number for deletion. We wondered what dirt we had unwittingly stumbled upon. Which government bureau oversaw tourism figures? What were they hiding? Finally, I called Snow, and learned that the numbers we had cited were for the number of Chinese tourists worldwide, not just in the United States.

So much for the would-be plot. Chagrined, I had to announce to my colleagues that we’d made a mistake.

A culture of secrecy also creates an atmosphere of distrust with every decision being analysed by staff, customers and outsiders for what nefarious motives lie behind even the most innocuous management decision.

Eventually those organisations become insular and inward looking with only those perceived as being ‘safe’ allowed to move into responsible positions which further entrenches the culture of secrecy and blame.

This is not healthy, but it’s where many of our government departments, political parties, sporting organisations and business are today including the BBC, Chinese media organisations and Australian banks.

For the disrupters, this is another competitive advantage.

Building new technological Jerusalems

Britain’s hopes of building a new technology hub are similar to those of Harold Wilson – how much do they owe the ideology of our times?

A Telegraph profile of Joanna Shields, the incoming Chief Executive of London’s Tech City Investment Organisation, is an interesting view of how we see economic development and the route to building the industrial centres of the future. Much of that view is distorted by the ideologies of our times.

London’s Tech City is a brave project and somewhat reminiscent of future British Prime Minister Harold Wilson’s 1963 proclamation about the UK’s future lying in harnessing the “white heat of technology.” From Dictionary.com;

“We are redefining and we are restating our socialism in terms of the scientific revolution…. The Britain that is going to be forged in the white heat of this revolution will be no place for restrictive practices or outdated methods on either side of industry.”

Fifty years later a notable part of Wilson’s speech is the use of the word “socialism” – the very thought of a mainstream politician using the “s-word” today and being elected shortly afterwards is unthinkable.

Today the ideology is somewhat different – much of Tech City’s objectives are around aping the models of Ireland and Silicon Valley – which in itself is accepting the failed beliefs of our times.

Based around London’s “Silicon Roundabout” – a term reminding those of us of a certain age of a childhood TV series – the heart of the Tech City strategy lies the tax incentives used by the Irish to build the “Celtic Tiger” of the 1990s and government investment funds to create an entrepreneurial hub similar to Silicon Valley, something also done in Dublin with the Digital Hub.

It’s hard not to think that copying these models is a flawed strategy – Silicon Valley is the result of four generations of technology investment by the United States military which is beyond the resources of the British government, and probably beyond today’s cash strapped US government, while the Celtic Tiger today lies wounded in the rubble of Ireland’s over leveraged economy.

At the core of both Silicon Valley’s startup culture and Ireland’s corporate incentives are the ideologies of the 1980s which celebrates a hairy-chested Ayn Rand type individualism while at the same time perversely relying upon government spending. Ultimately failure is not an option as governments will step in to guarantee investment returns and management bonuses.

Just up the M1 and M6 from London’s Silicon Roundabout are the remains of what were the Silicon Valleys of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.

The manufacturing industries of the English Midlands or the woollen mills of Yorkshire revolutionised the global societies of their times. These were built by individuals and investors who knew they could be ruined by a poor investment and managers who retired to the parlour with a pistol if the enterprise they were trusted to run failed.

Today’s investment attraction ideologies – tax discounts to big corporations and grants to entrepreneurs – are in a touching way not dissimilar to Harold Wilson’s 1960s belief in socialism.

At the time of Wilson’s 1963 speech China and much of the communist world were showing that socialism, with its failed Five Year Plans and Great Leaps Forward of the 1950s, was not the answer for countries wanting to harness the “white heat of technology.”

Similarly today’s Corporatist model of massive government support of ‘too big to fail’ corporations is just as much a failed ideology, like the socialists of the mid 1960s had their world views had been framed in the depression of the 193os, today’s leaders are blinded by their beliefs that were shaped by the freewheeling 1980s.

Whether the next Silicon Valley will be in London, or somewhere like Nairobi or Tashkent, it probably won’t be born out of a centrally planned government initiative born out of the certainties of Margaret Thatcher or Ronald Reagan anymore than the 1960s technological revolution was born out of Karl Marx or Josef Engels.

Silicon Valley itself was the happy unintended consequence of the Cold War and the Space Race, which we reap the benefits of today.

Every ideology creates its own set of unintended consequences, those created by today’s beliefs will be just as surprising to us as punk rockers were to the aging Harold Wilson.

Maybe Tech City will help Britain will do better at this attempt to regain its position as global economic powerhouse, but you can’t help thinking that economic salvation might come from some West Indian or Sikh kid working out of a storage unit in Warrington than a bunch of white middle class guys celebrating a government grant over a glass of Bolly in Shoreditch.

Google announces eTown awards for Australian towns

How prepared are communities for the digital economy?

I don’t normally post media releases onto the site, but it appears there’s no posting of the Google eTowns announcement. As I’m writing a story for Technology Spectator on it, here’s the release.

One thing that leaps out when reading the media reports on this is how many outlets just copy and paste. Only the Fairfax entertainment reporter went to the effort of rewriting the release and adding some additional context. You have to wonder how long ‘churnalism’ can survive given readers are onto this laziness.

EMBARGOED UNTIL THURSDAY 30th AUGUST, 4:30PM (EST)

Perth wins top spot in Google’s eTown Awards

Western Australia capital beats out eastern states as centre of digital boom

Perth leads the list of Australia’s top 10 eTowns, Google announced today. This new Google award recognises and ranks those communities which are outpacing the rest of the country in having its small businesses use the web to connect with customers and grow.

The web is transforming all businesses in Australia, not just those typically considered to be “Internet businesses”. The digital economy is already worth as much as Australia’s iron ore exports, according to Deloitte Access Economics, and it’s forecast to grow by $20 billion to $70 billion by 2016.

To provide a snapshot of this vital economic activity, Google looked at more than 600 local government areas to analyse which communities are contributing the most to the digital economy. The top 5 metropolitan and top 5 regional eTowns for 2012 are:

Metropolitan

City of Perth, WA

City of Yarra, VIC

City of Adelaide, SA

North Sydney, NSW

Ryde, NSW

Regional

Byron Shire, NSW

Meander Valley, TAS

Cessnock, NSW

Wingecarribee Shire, NSW

Scenic Rim Regional Council, QLD

Federal Small Business Minister Brendan O’Connor, who is launching the inaugural eTown Awards at an event in West Perth today, said;

“The digital economy is fuelling Australia’s economic growth and it’s important businesses of every size are well equipped to take advantage of the potential. I hope this award encourages other small businesses to get online to connect with people who are actively looking for their products and services.”

Perth’s Lord Mayor Lisa Scaffidi said, “Perth may be known for its mining boom but this award shows that our businesses are actively grabbing hold of the digital boom. The City of Perth is proud of its eTown Award and I am delighted to represent an area whose businesses are so connected with both their local community and the entire world thanks to the web.”

Online advertising is a growing phenomenon and Google, through its online advertising and other services, is in a good position to act as a barometer for the strength of this commercial activity – particularly in small businesses. To come up with the eTown Awards list, Google analysed data on the number of local businesses in each local government area which are advertising with Google AdWords and/or have created a free website using Google and MYOB’s Getting Aussie Business Online initiative.

Byron Shire, home to the popular holiday destination, leads the regional eTowns list with a high proportion of accommodation, recreational hire and tours providers using the web to drive their businesses.

Claire Hatton, Head of Local Business for Google Australia said, “The eTown Award winners show that anyone anywhere can reap the benefits of the digital economy. These days being on the web is as important as having a phone. Australians expect to be able to seek out products and services online, and local businesses need to be found to compete.”

For more information about the eTown Award winners and for case studies on how local businesses are succeeding online and driving economic growth, visit www.google.com.au/ads/stories [NB: website will be available after embargo lifts].

Media are invited to attend the announcement of the eTown Awards with the Minister for Small Business, Perth’s Lord Mayor and Google Australia.

Local businesses located in each eTown may be available for interviews.

Thursday, 30th August at 2:00pm – 3:00pm
The Yoga Space
Shop 11, Seasons Arcade,
1251 Hay Street, West Perth.

To RSVP to the event or for interviews please contact:

Redacted

Notes to Editors

AdWords is Google’s online advertising system which enables businesses of all sizes to advertise relevant text ads next to Google search results. Businesses decide the text and their budget and only get charged when someone clicks on their ad.

The Google eTown award top ten list was created by comparing the number of small and medium sized enterprises that used AdWords in each local government area and/or have created a website using Google/MYOB’s Getting Aussie Business Online. The results have been normalised for the relative population of each LGA.

Economic cholesterol

How Australia’s property prices are the real reason for the country’s poor productivity.

Australia’s productivity isn’t growing and it’s fashionable among business community to blame Australia’s productivity decline on high labour rates.

While there’s an argument that the cafe worker earning $25 an hour is overpaid – although we don’t hear the same criticism of multimillion dollar packages paid to executives with at best mediocre track records – the argument is far more complex.

In the McKinsey report linked to above, the mis-investment is put down to the recent resource boom, but is this really true?

To really understand why Australia hasn’t performed well, we need to look at why the country is so reluctant to invest in assets that will increase our productivity.

The role of property

Underlying the recent Australian “economic miracle” is the property industry. The country’s domestic building sector is one of the most efficient job generators in the world. Stimulate the Aussie property market and job growth ripples quickly through the economy.

This was one the lessons learned in the 1990s recession – successive governments and bureaucrats have learned the mantra “go early, go hard and go residential” when it comes to cutting interest rates and introducing home building incentives like the first home owners grants.

It was no coincidence that when the Rudd Government was faced by the Global Financial Crisis they launched a wave of initiatives to boost the property industry and shore household wealth. Just as the Howard and Costello governments did in response to the Long Term Capital Bank collapse, Asian economic crisis or the 2001 US recession.

While those stimulus measures have kept Australia out of recession for two decades, the failure to unwind the measures after the economic shock has passed leaves the nation’s property market remains “hyper stimulated” and over valued. That over investment in property has sucked funds away from other areas which affects the competitiveness of Aussie industry.

The great property squeeze

One of the great tragedies of the 1990s was Sydney’s East Circular Quay precinct which could have been one or two of the world’s greatest hotel sites, literally on the steps of the Sydney Opera House.

Instead, high priced apartments were built on the site and Sydney’s tourism and convention industries are crippled by a shortage of top end hotel rooms.

Tourism isn’t the only industry affected by the Australia’s obsession with residential property – across the country service stations, sports clubs and convention centres are being demolished to make way for high rise apartment developments. No economic activity seems to trump property speculation when it comes to attracting Australian investors.

Ideological beliefs

Adding fuel to the property obsession are the ideologies of the 1980s which are still closely held by the nation’s business and political leaders.

Capital gains tax concessions introduced by the Howard government in the late 1990s made property and share speculation far more attractive that invention, innovation or entrepreneurship.

To make matters worse, Australia’s social security policies and taxation laws favour capital gains – any Australian over thirty who has tried to build a business has plenty of mates who did far better out of negatively geared property than those who foolish enough to create new enterprises.

For those older entrepreneurs facing retirement, they are in for a nasty shock if their businesses don’t sell for what they hope. They would have been far better staying in a safe corporate job and buy a few negatively geared investment properties.

Again, this ideological belief that capital gains trumps wage or business income means investment is steered away from productive assets and into residential property that can be held for a capital gain.

The Ticket Clipping Culture

Australia’s failure to invest in productive assets is not just a feature of the household investor, the corporate sector has a lot to answer for as well.

While good in theory, the superannuation system has been a failure in providing a capital pool for new and innovative businesses and productive investments.

The superannuation trustees have largely focused on hugging the index, the ticket clipping funds management culture means that any real investment for productive assets is restricted to funding toll roads where fat management fees and guaranteed commissions mean an easy life for those fund managers.

In a perverse way, the short term appearance of the ticket clipping might mean increased productivity as costs are cut to improve profits. In the medium and long term, the lack of investment in these assets means in the long term these assets too cease to add productive capacity to the economy.

Of course there’s more to infrastructure investment than toll roads and airports with crippling parking charges, but the ticket clipping classes of Australia’s investment community don’t see a quick buck in that.

Increasingly the boards of Australia’s major companies are appointed by those running the superannuation funds and these people have the generational bias away from productive investment. Instead they see slashing IT, training or asset investment as costs to be cut in the quest of boosting bonus delivering profits.

More fundamentally, three decades of consolidation in most of Australia’s industries has seen a generation of Australian executives whose main expertise is that of maximising their market power at the expense of their competitors. Investing in productive capacity is not a major concern for those corporations.

Fixing the problem

Getting Australians – whether mom and dad property speculators or high paid fund managers parking money in the ASX 200 or plonking money in the latest toll road boondoggle – to change attitudes and invest in productive capacity is going to take a generational change.

As long as the attitude persists that property is a safe investment that doubles in real value every ten years then Australians are going to continue to ply cash into apartments and houses.

It is possible that a period of Australian Austerity that suppresses property prices may force that change in investment attitudes. An weak property market is one of the unspoken effects of the spending cuts advocated by many right wing commentators,

The question is whether those commentators, or the political classes who derive their much of their policies from right wing ideologues, view have the stomach for disruption that will come when weaning Australians from the teats of corporate ticket clipping and property speculation.

Reliving the Hong Kong Handover syndrome

Scaring customers away is rarely a good idea

After Margaret Thatcher 1984 agreement to hand Hong Kong over the People’s Republic of China, the hoteliers of the British Colony sent out the message “book now, or pay dearly for rooms at the time of the handover.”

It became perceived wisdom that the territory would be booked out for years in advance and any rooms available would cost a fortune. So people made other plans.

As a result, Hong Kong’s hotel occupancy rate during the handover was only 45%. The “buy now or you’ll miss out” message backfired as people decided they’d rather miss out.

In the second week of the London 2012 Olympics the same thing is happening – the regular tourist trade has been scared away and even the locals who haven’t left town are staying home to avoid the transport and other hassles.

For London, the Olympics have backfired.

This is what is always missed when cities or governments make bids for big events, they displace existing trade and the benefits, if any, are short lived.

At least the Olympics do attract millions of visitors and the eyes of the world are on the host city for two weeks.

Far worst are the pointless heads of government meetings that pop up with monotonous regularity, for a few days of fleeting notoriety a city is locked down and its citizen corralled as Presidents and Prime Ministers meet to discuss something that will be forgotten in weeks.

The Sydney APEC meeting of 2007 was case in point, nothing was achieved for the weeks of disruption to normal business except for the spectacle of the so called leaders of the Asia Pacific region scuttling between hotels like frightened cockroaches in their armour plated motorcades.

Governments around the world keep falling for the myth that these major events generate some sort of economic benefits when it’s clear to the population who aren’t invited to the VIP cocktails parties that their money isn’t being well spent.

For businesses, the lesson is not to make too many “buy now or miss out” claims. If customers take you at your word then you may find your shop is half empty, just as Hong Kong did in 1997.

Closed data doors

It’s time to reform government.

“Sydney now joins global cities including London, New York and Hong Kong that also have public transport on Google Maps” boasted Gladys Berejiklian, New South Wales minister for transport, last week that Sydney’s complex and confusing public transport system will now appear Google’s mapping service.

The minister neglected to mention the other 400 cities that already offer this service including Perth, Adelaide and Canberra in Australia. What’s more concerning is the attitude of public servants and governments towards access to what should be freely available data.

It’s difficult to think of anything less innocuous than public transport timetables yet access to the data is carefully guarded by most Australian governments under the claim of ‘Crown Copyright’.

Underlying the idea of Crown Copyright is all the information held by governments is the property of the state – or the monarch in Australia – rather than belonging to the people. This is a great example of governments and the law living in the 18th Century which gives a modern perspective of what the US founding fathers were thinking of when they wrote their constitution in 1787.

This refusal to make data available is not the attitude of any single government, the Victorian government notoriously refused access to fire information during the tragic 2009 bushfires and Google are still negotiating to add Melbourne’s public transport information to the Maps service.

‘Open Data’ is a concept that many agencies pay lip service to, as do many politicians while they aren’t in government, but in practice information is a precious resource which should be hoarded and hidden.

In the public service itself, information is power – your position and status with an agency is directly proportional to the knowledge you possess and the contacts you can hoard. This attitude spills over into the way services are delivered, or not as the case may be.

For startup businesses, this hoarding of data hurts local industry – with transport timetables application developers have to negotiate on a case by case basis for data access meaning that only big companies with plenty of resources are able to get hold of the information.

The tragedy is government are trying to encourage smaller developers and startups. New South Wales had its Mobile Concierge program but these well meaning initiatives fall down when agencies won’t open their data.

It’s time to scrap the idea of Crown Copyright and the philosophy that all government data is the property of the public service, or the monarch of the day. Certainly there are plenty of areas where it isn’t in the public interest to release confidential information but bus timetables are not one of those areas and there are plenty of laws already in place to protect that sensitive data.

Like many things in our political and legal sectors, thinking is stuck not in the 1980s but in the 1780s. Maybe it’s time to grab our politicians and their learned lawyer friends and drag them by their horse haired wigs into the 21st Century.

Redefining affluence

Are we at the end of the Western world’s era of great prosperity

Finance writer Scott Pape always has an interesting perspective in his regular columns.

This week he talks about Melissa a mother of three who lives in the US state of Georgia who also happens to be Scott’s virtual PA.

Scott hires Melissa because she’s cheap; far cheaper than her competitors in Australia.

For the $8 an hour she earns, she gets no sick pay, no health insurance and no retirement benefits. Unless Melissa has a well paid partner and her work for Scott is just a sideline to help pay the bills, she will work until she drops.

This is the new reality for those in America, Spain, the UK and most of the West. It’s slowly becoming the reality in Australia as well despite the current hubris about the Down Under Economic Miracle.

Melissa’s job as a secretary or PA was safe and comfortable twenty years ago. Today – just like auto workers, shop assistants, accountants and even lawyers – secretaries are having to trade their secure jobs for precarious, and reduced, incomes in the globalised and casualised marketplace.

Scott makes perfectly valid points that individual drive and determination will be important in the globalised economy, but nothing changes the fact that Melissa and millions like her – including ourselves – will not have the living standards of her parents.

While we can talk about billions of Indians and Chinese improving their standard of living the new globalised world, we shouldn’t forget for a moment that living standards are declining for the most of developed world’s middle and working classes.

This decline isn’t totally due to globalisation and was probably going to happen regardless of the rise of China. The West’s prosperity was built upon the post World War II reconstruction and the credit booms of the 1980s and 2000s. Eventually the money – or the credit – had to run out.

How we as a society deal with this will define our nations and communities over the next fifty years. Our governments, business leaders and media commentators are ill prepared for the effects even if they recognise the problem.

Those most deeply affected are the businesses based on the twentieth century model of ever increasing prosperity. As our retailers are finding, this model is running out of steam.

While some expect the newly affluent Chinese and Indians to save their well padded hides, most will find Asian consumption patterns in the 21st Century will be different to US auto workers of the 1950s or English real estate agents of the 1980s.

Even financial planners like Scott are going to find things different – many financial planners thought they could get rich just skimming commissions off their clients’ portfolios which grew with the ever climbing stock and property markets. That model dropped dead in September 2008.

For those of us born and raised during the Western world’s era of great prosperity, we’re going to find we have to work a lot harder and not take affluence for granted.

Melissa and her eight dollar an hour secretarial service is the future and it’s probably Scott’s, yours and mine as well.

Some may say that’s a pessimistic view of the world, but a leaner, harder economy may be the best thing could happen for us as individuals and a society.

Australia – the Noah’s Ark of business

Cosy duopolies leave the Australian business community exposed to a changing world.

During a week of big business news, the buyout of another boutique brewery by a big corporation was barely noticed, but Lion Nathan’s takeover of the Little Creatures brewery illustrates the duopoly problem that is crippling Australian business.

A few days after that deal was announced, rumours that Business Spectator – which the above link takes you to – would be taken over by News Limited started circulating. These turned out to be true.

In both cases, existing duopoly players bought out small competitors, a process that’s been going on since Australia decided industry duopolies were necessary to protect the nation’s managerial classes, and these takeovers kill genuine innovation and stymie new thinking.

For those duopolies the definition of success is grabbing a few percent of market share off each other while using their market powers to screw down supplier costs.

A good of example of this is the retail duopoly, the farmers and producers get screwed while the supermarket chains engage in price wars driven by truly awful advertising campaigns.

Un-imaginative, un-original and plain un-inspiring. Any smart young kid wanting to get ahead in the retail industries knows they have to look overseas for job opportunities or inspiration.

Therein lies the real problem with Australia’s duopoly business culture – it triggers a brain drain as comfortable managements block any innovative new thinking as being too hard or just unnecessary.

In the media duopoly, telecoms analyst Paul Budde illustrated the problem in his account on trying to convince Fairfax of where the media industry was heading in a connected economy.

Fairfax’s management didn’t get it and didn’t care – today they still don’t get but they care deeply as their business model crumbles.

It’s not just future managers that are looking overseas for opportunity, the customers are well.

The duopoly model that evolved in Australia over the last thirty years depended upon the tyranny of distance to act as an effective trade wall. The Internet has demolished that wall for most industries.

Almost every Australian duopoly is living on borrowed time. If, like the proprietors of Business Spectator or Little Creatures, your business plan relies on selling out to a local duopolist then you’d better move quick.