LaborNET

  Ask Neale

  Tool of the Week

Interview

Surviving The Firestorm

After several years as the focus of some brutal politics Carmen Lawrence is back on the ALP front bench. She talks to Workers Online about her new portfolio, unions and the ALP and mud slinging in politics.

The ALP has combined the portfolios of Industry, Technology and Innovation. Why is that, and what are the challenges that would face you as a minister in that portfolio?

Obviously the critical thing for Australia is to take advantage of the emerging challenges in the so-called new economy; that we are not only developing the skills of our workers at every level, but also taking advantage of research and development to produce new products and services. So bringing Industry, Technology and Innovation together allows us to look at all elements of the problem that we confront: from what is required in schools, universities, TAFEs and other re-training organisations and in industry itself to modernise and upgrade processes as well as taking our share of the emerging opportunities in bio-technology, information technology and so on.

So it gives me an opportunity to work with my colleagues to try and jointly - and we will all work together on this - to pull together what is required to stimulate a culture of innovation as it has been called by some.

Do you think governments are powerless before the forces of globalisation?

Well no I don't. I think that globalisation is a fact, and governments need to work with the understanding of what forces exist in societies as a result of it. Some of those forces create benefits. Some, clearly, cause difficulties. Governments are not powerless in the face of these changes. It is an ideological position to suggest that.

I think what a lot of people talk about as the consequences of globalisation, are actually policy failure by governments. Governments are able, for instance, to improve educational opportunities and ensure that taxation benefits those who have lower incomes. In other words, that we have a progressive taxation system, and so on.

What role do you see for Government in providing infrastructure?

Very important. One of the things that we have seen just recently is a steady decline in the provision of infrastructure in Australia and both government and the private sector's figures suggest that we at the moment are facing significant problems with capital investment. So government is important in that field. It is also important of course in investing in the less visible infrastructure - that is the skills of the population. That is strictly my area of interest.

But if we don't have the infrastructure in areas like communications for instance, and transport, the skills won't be able to be used as effectively as they should be. So they go side by side. Investing in the nation means investing in infrastructure; investing in skills; investing in knowledge. And at the moment we have got a pretty patchy record. We are riding off a lot of the changes that were made in the 80s and early 90s and we are now facing skills shortages, and as I say, a decline in capital investment, which will, in future put us further behind than we are already in participation in the new economy.

How important is your portfolio do you think in promoting greater equality in society?

Very considerable because it is by participating in changes - innovation if you like - and making sure that they are distributing wealth equally, that our society can become what it is capable of, that is a wealthy society which respects the talents and interests of all of its citizens and doesn't simply allow, if you like, random market forces to dictate the way we operate. So by producing new wealth, by developing means to ensure that it is spread fairly in the community,

We don't want a low skill/low wage economy. We want a high skill/high wage economy where the jobs are secure; where people aren't working excessively long hours which destroy family life; and where people can actually participate fully in the society and not just in the workplace.

What role do you see for unions in reversing that trend of growing inequality?

They are critical. There is a lot of evidence to show that in those workplaces and areas of employment where unions are most active and effective, that is where the gaps, if you like, between high and low income earners are lowest. They are very successful indeed in ensuring that people get a fair share that protects conditions. They ensure that workers get a share of the profits and the wealth that is being generated in the community. And it is very clear, that where unions for various reasons - often historical - are not active - wages are lower or working conditions are poorer. And the consequences for individuals and families are more disastrous. As a woman I am particularly concerned about that because it is often women who are in that position.

You have been critical lately of the level of union influence in the ALP. Why is that?

No. I haven't been critical of the level of union influence in the ALP. I am very pleased that we have a strong connection with the unions historically. I would want to see union involvement continue, and indeed strengthen. But it should be on the basis in my view of the principle that we hold dear in every other area of our activity, and that is one vote one value. I think a lot of people, including in the union movement are really not entirely comfortable with the view that people can become members of the Labor Party without necessarily even realising that they are, through affiliation, and then exercise a disproportionate influence on the outcome. Disproportionate only in the sense of it not being one vote one value. I think if we signed up our individual union members and members of the ALP with their full knowledge and participation, we would actually get a much more lively ALP, and I suspect the people signed up would give it their full commitment, rather than just the occasional, if you like, connection through an affiliated vote.

At the moment there is a real cultural change going on in the union movement, towards more grass roots involvement and more member focus. If that transformation ends up being thorough, how that will affect the relationship between the unions and the ALP?

Well, as I say, I would hope that what happens is that people who are becoming more active in the grass roots of the union movement and the unions that are most successful in cultivating new young members, will also see the ALP - as they have in the past, as the political party most likely to share their values and implement many of the recommendations and policies.

So I want to see that relationship strengthen, by direct involvement rather than indirect involvement. I think it is more likely if you have committed yourself to an organisation, whether it is a union or the ALP, that you will feel deeply about its future. That you will throw your energy behind it, and the result will be better for both the unions and the ALP. So I think to the extent that the unions are reforming and regenerating new members that will also benefit the Labor Party, but only to the extent that we reach out and develop policies that are relevant to workers and consistent with the challenges that they understand that they face.

But it is probable that there is going to be a different kind of union movement isn't there, and that it is going to have to be a different relationship between the ALP and the leadership of that union movement?

Well, I think that is right, and I think in many respects that is what I am pointing to. That if we don't recognise the fact that we don't have these monolithic organisations that rely on, if you like, a fairly extensive discipline of their members to achieve an outcome, then Labor Party's membership will get thinner and thinner and we won't be drawing on the most talented people in the labour movement as a whole.

What progress do you see been made in reducing the gender gap in Australian politics?

It has actually been very substantial. At the last election for the first time more women than men voted for the ALP and they did so on the basis of issues like commitment to education, health, and a general appreciation that government services made the difference to the quality of people's lives and standards of living. Women, for instance, were more likely to oppose the GST and were more critical of the Government's tax package because it redistributed wealth from the lower and middle-income earners to those who were already pretty well off. In other words, it was the reverse of what you would expect a government to do.

The other good thing that has happened is that through Emily's List, particularly, we have insisted on getting more women pre-selected. 35% in winnable seats by 2002, and I believe we will meet that. And we now have some superb younger women in the parliament as a result of changing the rules of the Party. Some of the safest seats are now held by women. Places like Sydney with Tanya Plibersek, for instance. We have a handful of women that are now in seats that even if our electoral fortunes were to turn around completely, would still be safe and they could still build a career.

You have had a very hard time in politics in recent years. How much would you attribute that to being a woman?

It is very hard to say. Obviously as a woman in politics you tend to stick out, even today. In the past when we were talking about one woman in Cabinet at a time, in the Federal Parliament particularly, you were a very visible target, and I suspect that that has more to do with it than being a woman per se.

On the other hand, having said that, there have been moments when the quality of the attack has been defined by my being a woman. It is very hard for me to judge, because I have always been in the middle of that firestorm. But plenty of others who have made observations about the way the attack has been conducted and the issues that have been raised being at least partly the result of my being a woman.

What insights have you picked up about the political process from those experiences?

One of the things I think is very clear is that the wider community gets extremely fed up with politicians throwing mud at one another. The personality politics. The conditions in the parliament that are essentially designed just to put down your opponent. They want to see us engaged in a debate about the issues and they want to see us working to improve their lot in life. We are, after all, paid by taxpayers to produce results for them. Not to indulge ourselves in whatever petty fights that might perhaps attract some people.

So the feedback I am getting is: We are sick and tired of - not just people throwing mud at you - but people generally in the parliament wasting our money and our time, when they should be engaged in more serious work.

And how do you feel about being back in the Shadow Cabinet?

I am very pleased to have been given the opportunity. A lot of people supported me through what was a very difficult time, so in a sense I feel a responsibility too to repay the very considerable generosity that I have been shown. And having spent a couple of years on the back bench, I have also had a chance to sit back and have a good look at some of the things that we do; some of the policies that we might develop. So I feel as if I can work very closely with my colleagues to develop some really good policy for Australia in the next ten or fifteen years.

What do you think you will inherit from the present government?

One of the serious problems at the moment if you take the innovation area to start with, is that business research and development funding has declined very dramatically and showing no signs of returning, despite the government exhorting the private sector to do better. The reality is that this government changed the tax policies, and it has had an immediate and predictable effect of reducing business research and development spending.

At the level of universities and TAFEs a lot of funding has been taken out of science, engineering and technology training, and that is starting to produce skills shortages. And of course, the decline in investment in capital infrastructure, both public and private, so there is a real deficiency for us to make up in those three areas alone.

  View entire issue - print all of the articles!

  Issue 71 contents

»	Protesting Posties Blast Bosses in Swank Hotel
»	Mario Carries Torch For Workers
»	Union Flag Flies High At Olympic Park
»	International Passport for IT Workers
»	Homecarers Strike Another Blow Against Outsourcing
»	Alliances The Legacy of S11 Say Protestors
»	Violence Rife Against Union Activists
»	Call Centre Workers Compo Call Answered
»	Better Pay, Big Screens and Ice Cream for Bus 2000 Drivers
»	'Appalling' Detention Centres Behind Riots
»	Election of Burmese Official A Slap In The Face

»	Away For The Games
»	Sport
»	Labour Review
»	Tool Shed

»	Listen To The Young

Notice Board
- Check out the latest events

Latest Issue

View entire latest issue
- print all of the articles!

Previous Issues

Subject index

Search all issues

© 1999-2000 Labor Council of NSW

LaborNET is a resource for the labour movement provided by the Labor Council of NSW

[ Privacy Statement | Disclaimer | Credits ]

LaborNET is proudly created, designed and programmed by Social Change Online for the Labor Council of NSW