
Issue No 111		14 September 2001

LaborNET	Ask Neale	Tool of the Week

Interview

Amidst the Debris

ACTU President Sharan Burrow surveys the wreckage from a week that rocked the world.


	Sharon Burrow

Who should the Ansett workers be blaming for the company's collapse today?

Ansett workers should first of all blame Air New Zealand on what is appalling management. It is management that amounts to corporate crime, given that the victims are the workers - and not only their jobs but their entitlements. We understand that not only are the entitlements for working members of Ansett Airlines not secure, but they have not paid deductions that have been taken out of their wages to institutions like health societies and the like. There will be $500 million dollars at least owed to working Australians, in entitlements.

John Howard must guarantee today that those entitlements will be paid. The Australian Government has bungled the management of this crisis. They knew in June that Ansett was in some difficulty. John Anderson ignored it. They knew in August again that there was some difficulty. John Anderson ignored it. And so having bungled the solutions to the Ansett/ Air New Zealand crisis, then the workers should blame Ansett New Zealand for bad management and John Anderson directly, and the Howard Government as a whole for failing to take the issue of jobs in a national airline seriously enough to find a solution.

How long has the ACTU been aware of the problems in Ansett?

We first approached government officials ourselves some four months ago. We sent messages to the New Zealand Government. We talked to the New Zealand unions. We have known since about the same time as the chairman wrote to John Anderson - that was in June - that a solution needed to be found.

The pleas from the unions, from the airline itself, have been ignored by John Anderson, who shows that he simply does not have either the concern or responsibility for Australian jobs at heart - or he is totally incompetent. Whatever the outcome, politicians who don't take Australian jobs seriously, don't deserve to have their own.

So this is really a case, where in the interests of, I guess Australian investment with lots of Australian jobs, do we need to re-think about the way we think about foreign investment in Australian companies?

We need to think about a number of things. Competition policy for example. The unions for more than six years now have said that the Australian market is too small to have a de-regulated approach. Governments ignored that. They have proceeded with competition policy. The result we see, is not in the case of the airlines - the Two Airlines Policy - but will eventually be almost a single monopoly in terms of a major player, with some crumbs for minor players.

That is not about serious competition. It certainly isn't in the interests of Australians or the traveling public globally.

We need to think beyond that. We do need to think about foreign investment. We need to think about what the regulations are that protect Australian interests. When a major airline like Australia (sic) which goes down - not only resulting in the loss of some 17,000 direct jobs, but up to 60,000 indirect jobs.....

Beyond competition policy, we certainly do need to think about other issues. Foreign investment is something that companies pursue, so there must be a regulatory framework which government controls, that makes sure that Australian interests are protected. First and foremost Australian jobs, but also Australian investment by other companies, servicing in this case the airline industry - or indeed, the tourism sector that depend on the airline industry - or any other supply enterprises associated.

Isn't it one of the problems that it was a Labor government that (a) privatized Qantas and (b) moved to de-regulation in the airline industry? I know Kim Beazley was saying fantastic words today - but what sort of responsibility should he be taking at the moment?

If you have a look at Labor's competition policy, they have obviously had a re-think. They have looked at the impact on regional Australia. They have seen that the issues we talked about in terms of a guarantee of working conditions; wages; entitlements - all those issues across transmission of business - the risks that we predicted some six or seven years ago have absolutely been affirmed.

And Labor has now said there will be regulations. That competition policy will come with a sensitivity around Australian jobs, Australian investment, round particular Australians' interest.

Now, the Labor government has acknowledged that there needs to be some stronger regulation in this area, but what we have seen is a Liberal government who has taken no responsibility for regulation, whether it is regulation in the financial sector, preceding the collapse of HIH; the telecommunications sector - One.Tel; or now the airline industry and Air New Zealand, and of course the consequences for Ansett.

It's definitely been a traumatic couple of weeks. We've had Tampa, terrorism and now Ansett collapsing. How do you think it has changed the political landscape in this country?

I think people are confused about issues, or I suppose foundations, they thought were solid. The terrorist acts against America have certainly frightened people. It is not an adequate response that we have seen from our government here, where they talk about somehow tightening up our borders. What we need to do is make sure that people are tolerant of each other, and strongly opposed to terrorist acts, or any acts against people's freedom. But acts against people's freedom doesn't justify that we take away the freedom of others. And of course I refer to the experience of some of the ethnic communities in our midst - particularly communities from the Middle East. As unionists and responsible Australians we couldn't condone people actually accusing others of some sort of lack of respect for fundamental freedom. All too often these people have fled countries where fundamental freedom has been denied to them.

So there has got to be a sensitivity and a re-commitment to the multicultural nation that we are. The issue of refugees I think has been handled appallingly by any humanity standards.

You have to say that aside from matters of law, the only person to give people hope to those foundations around law and around humanity and around tolerance, has been Justice North - and of course the government is appealing his decision.

It does raise an interesting issue for union officials. We've got a poll saying 70 per cent of people support the government's position. What responsibility or role do you see unionists and union officials having in running what can be quite unpopular lines out in the broader community?

Union leaders made it clear that we feel there has been a lack of moral leadership. That you don't deny asylum seekers the right to seek refugee status. You don't treat asylum seekers - people fleeing from terror - as disposable cargo in a political game that appears to be in John Howard's interests but not in the interests of a fairer Globe.

The issue of refugees is a worldwide issue. It can only be dealt with, with nation's leaders and other stakeholders in our society, sitting down and talking about how we deal with the problem. It can't be dealt with by taking 300, or 460 as in the case of the Tampa or an extra 200 people picked up off Indonesia last week, and saying you can't come here - you can't have legal rights to seek refugee status.

There are lots of things we could do about this, and what is missing from the debate is that moral leadership that might turn around some of those 70% of people who are operating from often a lack of understanding of the Rule of Law, a lack of knowledge about the countries from which these people have fled.

But most of all, they are operating on the basis of a Prime Minister's word - of the word of a Prime Minister, who has sought to use sensational mechanisms against refugees in his own political interests.

Finally, do you feel it is going to be harder for Labor to win the election after the last couple of weeks?

I think there will be genuine debate in our country that could possibly be a good thing. I think if we can open up the debate about what kind of nation we want to be, and it is genuine, and there is strong leadership. If we can shoot home to the government their lack of responsibility for jobs if we lose thousands of full time jobs every month. If people can say, well, what is the mix of policies we want from a government and make a decision based on a decent future, then John Howard can't win.

If John Howard is to win, then it will be a continuation of the use of wedge politics, where he frightens people; he takes no responsibility either for starting jobs; or indeed for the world's most disadvantaged communities - but seeks to use those things in a way that amplifies people's fears. And that will be unacceptable.

So, from where we sit of course, our nation can't afford John Howard for the next term of office, but it will certainly be, I think, a very close election, and the community will be challenged to debate issues they probably had not thought would be part of this campaign.

  Vist the ACTU

  View entire issue - print all of the articles!

  Issue 111 contents

Interview: Amidst the Debris
ACTU President Sharan Burrow surveys the wreckage from a week that rocked the world.

Politics: Consequences of Empire
The horror of the events in New York has not led to all American and international observers feeling committed to bloody revenge.

Industrial: Grounded
Ansett workers lay bare their feelings at seeing their company driven into oblivion.

International: Election Results from East Timor
Fretelin as expected has topped the poll in East Timor�s first free democratic election and the violence predicted by some has not eventuated.

E-Change: 3.2 The Electronic Consumerist
In their latest instalment Peter Lewis and Michael Gadiel ask how effective has the law become in safeguarding the things that really matter to us?

Legal: Howard's Falkland War
Zoe Reynolds chronicles the bizarre tale of the Tampa and how a group of refugees bacame pawns in a bigger political game.

Compo: Round Two Begins
Nancy Searle reviews the Sheahan Report and highlights some of the areas of concern to injured workers.

Economics: Knowledge, Power, Banking
Raj Patel questions whether a new World Bank initiative is actually designed to control the way the Third World thinks.

Review: Political Theatre
The Naked Theatre Company is a youthful, adventurous, professional, Sydney theatre company committed to the development and production of Australian playwrights.

Satire: Howard US Visit "Marginally Overshadowed"
Australian Prime Minister John Howard has said his US trip was a complete success, if slightly upstaged towards the middle.

» Howard Deserts Ansett Workers

» Trans Tasman Battle for Entitlements

» Qantas Workers Move To Protect Their Entitlements

» Unions Denounce Muslim Attacks

» Fund Established for New York Workers

» Australian Unionist Lost in New York

» US Flight Crews Support Ansett Workers

» Compo: Threshold Too High

» Della Moves on Premium Evasion

» Travel Site Severs Burma Links

» Paint Company Wants Strike Declared Illegal

» Casino Staff Locked Out Again

» Tax Staff to Strike Back

» Union Applauds Deet Ruling On Clothing

» Unions Take Message to Migrant Workers

» Get Ready to Wobble

» Activists' Notebook

» STOP PRESS: Howard Rolls Abbott on Entitlements