The Sydney Morning Herald from Sydney, New South Wales, Australia • Page 11

The Sydney Morning Herald, Friday October 3, 1986 Page II if 9 1 on policy is wice aeiay wage JOL 1 OR politicians with a sense of adventure, there is no time like the present. John Howard said recently "the times will suit which was really a shorthand way of saying that the policy prescriptions he is propounding, which were considered last year to be too radical to be electorally successful, are now in the mainstream of thinking about the future. Even Malcolm Fraser felt compelled this week to break his vow of 3': years not to comment on domestic issues by delivering a speech which argued that, because of changed community attitudes, much more could now be done by governments. He was referring in particular to the scope to cut spending but the sentiment was a broader one. For the Hawke Government, which is in the hot seat, the times often seem more terrifying than exciting.

But Bob Hawke, who these days is projecting an image of unbounded political optimism, is at least prepared to take up the challenge. The biggest hurdle for the Government over the corning months is to formulate a new wages policy which fits economic reality as well as strengthening its hand in the political struggle. Unlike many other issues, where the Government is struggling to catch up with a debate quickly moving the Opposition's way, it still has a chance in wages to take control of the agenda. It has to do so by arguing that wages overall would rise less under its centralised approach than under John Howard's decentralised alternative. It is instructive to chart the course of this Government's wages policy.

It started off by persuading the unions to forgo one of the six-monthly wage cases looked at times as though he is still trying to catch up with the Prime Minister's rhetoric. Two weeks ago, Hawke said the ideal outcome would be an agreement between the Government, employers and trade unions covering the whole of 1987. Some broad agreement on wages was "not impossible in the present challenging economic climate, he added. That killed three birds with one stone. flagging his preferred solution as one involving employers, he was acknowledging that a 2 per cent discount was not enough.

Employers are intent on going into the next case arguing for no wage increase and it will be very hard to shift them from this line. The." industrial relations reality of recent, years is that the trade unions have shown a much greater willingness to adapt their position than business. That is because they have a largely united and vested interest in the present wage-fixing system, and the Labor Government, continuing. THE employers are every bit as ideological as the unions: most want to see this Government replaced by a Liberal one. The major employer groups are sprinkled with leading figures who have been active in Liberal politics, such as Andrew Hay of the Australian Federation of Employers who was the senior adviser to Sir Phillip Lynch as Treasurer and Minister for Industry; and Geoff Allen, executive director of the Business Council of Australia (BCA), who was the senior private secretary to Bill Snedden as Opposition Leader.

While some will be more co-operative than others, now that there is a scent of burning Labor flesh in their nostrils, they are not going to go out on a limb to help the Government out. The employers are also much more disparate in their attitudes than the unions. Some, like Bryan Noakes of the Confederation of Australian Industry (CAI) and Brian Powell of the Australian Chamber of Manufactures, who have worked within the Industrial following the dip in the consumer price index caused by the introduction of Medicare. In 1983, it was considered a considerable achievement to stop the unions claiming more than the CPI increase. After the Budget last year, Paul Keating pulled off what was widely seen as a spectacular coup by negotiating with the unions to accept 2 per cent less than the CPI in return for this year's income tax cuts, now to be introduced on December 1, and Government support for the unions superannuation push.

In this year's Budget, the Government announced that it would argue for another 2 per cent discount. But it had not obtained union agreement first and it was not offering a trade-off. Six weeks later, it is in the process of hardening this policy. When Hawke agreed publicly last week that full wage indexation had seen its day in present economic circumstances, he was really doing no more than paying his last respects to the corpse. The Prime Minister has launched an effort to fundamentally reshape the wages system.

It is only a few months since the Conciliation and Arbitration Commission completed its overhaul of the wage fixing principles. While Hawke and Keating have been stumping the country selling the virtues of the Budget, the Prime Minister was quick to acknowledge privately that the wages policy outlined in it was not tough enough. It was a message which business, which he has been consulting extensively in recent weeks, conveyed to him forcefully. Keating's explanation, given on the day after the Budget, was that a discount of 2 per cent from a 4 per cent CPI increase was "all that the traffic will bear" that to have sought a larger discount would have led to the collapse of the Accord and a wages break-out. Keating has remained uncharacteristically quiet on the issue since then, while Hawke has been pushing the debate forward, largely on his own.

There have been virtually no Cabinet discussions on wages policy since the Budget and the Industrial Relations Minister, Ralph Willis, has Relations Club, might be persuaded of the merits of sitting down with the trade unions. But at the moment, they are still holding out for no increase in wages in the next case. Others, such as- Andrew Hay, would no more consider reaching an agreement with the unions than supping with the devil. If employer groups such as the CAI and the BCA were willing to negotiate an agreement, it would require something more than a wage discount of 2 per cent. This is what Hawke is tacitly acknowledging in his encouragement of employer involvement But the reality is that it would be very difficult to achieve a discount of more than 2 per cent in the next case.

For one, the Government is offering no trade-off this time, such as tax cuts. The ACTU has rejected the 2 per cent cut up to now, although Willis said this week he now believed an agreement was likely. But there is little chance of that holding if the Government then makes a bid for a larger discount. As a result, there is a general assumption inside the Government that the next case will involve a 2 per cent discount. But Hawke's ACTU experience has taught him there is more than one way to skin an industrial relations cat and he has been making a few exploratory excisions in recent weeks.

He has thrown up the idea of only one wage case for 1987 instead of two. Simon Crean, President of the ACTU, is said to favour annual wage cases and it would provide greater certainty for business. On Thursday night, in a speech in Maitland, Hawke referred to the next case being held late this year or early next, which seems to suggest a delay. The commission's hearings are due to start next month in time for a decision to apply from January. That timing in itself involved building in the delay caused by the review of principles conducted in conjunction with the last case.

All this is designed to achieve what the Government is now promoting more openly as its benchmark for setting wages: ensuring that labour costs move roughly in line with those of our major trading partners. It is healthy that people hold views one way or another. However, I would argue that it would be a brave or ignorant observer who believes the abolition of the present system would fundamentally change the pressures in society or the ultimate wages outcome of industrial claims and expectations. We have developed a can of worms and have accepted standards of behaviour in industrial relations which we would never condone elsewhere. What do we do about it? For a start, there would be great value in getting the States out of the system.

This would end the all too frequent situation where one tribunal demonstrates its independence by reversing the decision by another. Would it not also be a good idea if more managements worked to win the confidence and support of their workers rather than being aloof? This would be one way of reducing the tensions and has worked for virtually everyone I know who has tried it. That is why Hawke is also holding open the idea of a new two-tiered wage system along the lines of that being canvassed within the ACTU. One option is a plateau indexation system, with percentage cost-of-living adjustments applying up to a certain income level perhaps average award wages of $292 a week and a flat increase thereafter. This is the proposal Senator John Morris, national president of the Federated Liquor Industries Union, won endorsement for from the NSW ALP's Administrative Committee on Wednesday.

It reflects the concern among Labor's traditional constituents that they are being squeezed too hard by a Government purporting to represent their interests. But there are problems with such a system. In a situation where youth unemployment is still above 20 per cent, it makes little sense to give larger percentage increases to younger workers, predominantly in the lower income brackets, than to those whose labour is more in demand. The other effect of plateau indexation is to compress relativities between awards, creating pressure for "catch-up" increases. An alternative is to provide a basic wage for everyone probably still adjusted for the CPI with increases above that negotiated on an industry level according to such factors as productivity and capacity to pay.

Opposition to this would come from the weaker unions and those representing the public service, because they would get little out of the second tier. The Conciliation and Arbitration Commission probably would have to put some cap on total wage increases to prevent an outbreak of wages leapfrogging that did so much damage to the economy in the early 1980s. The Government is still a long way from putting a new wages system in place or even working out what it wants. But there is a great deal at stake: John Howard is waiting in the wings and the more trouble the Government has coming up with a viable alternative wages policy, the more attractive his deregulated model will look. I understand and sympathise with those who have spent most of their working careers buying industrial peace and who now find that they have reared a monster which is crushing them; a monster of high labour costs, inexplicable add-ons and incredible work practices.

However, the last 12 months in Australia have been characterised by change and this will continue. Much of this has been brought about behind the scenes by people like Bryan Noakes of CAI and by those of us in the employer groups working within the rules of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act. We have been able to achieve a lot because we have avoided the confron-tationist huffing and puffing of a few vocal stirrers. It is not our role to adopt the tactics that we abhor in some unions. The admission of the right-wing unions into the ALP, the damages awarded against the AMIEU after the Mudginberri dispute, and the de-regis 1 hy employers should be wary of the 'fascist' New Right tration of the BLF all show that change is truly with us.

Both the Federal Government and the ACTU have become very pragmatic in dealing with changed economic circumstances and it will be interesting to see how that pragmatism survives the present call for further wage discounting when there seems to be nothing tangible available to offer in return. On the other side of politics we see hard-line policies being espoused which suggest abolition or neutering of the commission, and attacks on unions. Australia is at the crossroads both politically and economically. We are going to find it difficult to restore living standards and employment levels whether we are blessed with a new Government in 1988 or not. The question is really one of working ourselves out of the mess or fighting each other to see who presides over it.

I am an advocate of the former. I can find no reason to justify hoping that the vast majority of business will A eacenik The purpose of the speech was to examine the benefits as well as the disadvantages of the present Conciliation and Arbitration system, and to warn of the danger of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. My phones ran hot for much of the next 24 hours. Many people phoned to congratulate me on daring to speak out. They agreed we needed to face our problems with unity and that destructive elements should not distract us from working together to improve our living standards.

I was encouraged by the strength of support which came from both large and smaller operators in the business community. Even when people expressed concern a gratifying number supported my view that while change is needed there is more to be said for change within the broad parameters of the existing system than through uncertainty outside the system. ST it i i i the 'CP- I YM chean in thus and Gore, learn by these by public leader they this receive the consistency or protection operating outside of the centralised system of wage fixation as can be achieved through that system. The view of some that the present economic climate would ensure a better labour cost outcome operating outside the commission is, I believe, naive and, even if attainable in some areas in the short term, would be disastrous in the long term. I see the responsibility of my chamber to maintain a rational apolitical stance rather than be driven by the politically warped or the fringe industrial mavericks.

I must see my members through the peaks and troughs, take advantage of the environment now more receptive to consultation, and keep an eye on the long term. If Australia is to overcome the present difficulties it will be by pulling together, not by pulling apart. Brian Powell is chief executive of the Australian Chamber of Manufactures. PROBE 15231 (03)729 7233 Telex: AA37264 TESSA BRIAN POWELL, employer representative, created a storm in yesterday's newspapers by accusing the New Right of showing "truly fascist Here he develops his attack. A I was leaving the ABC studios in Melbourne yesterday "A morning after a debate about --the impact of the New Right on industrial relations, a stranger came up to shake my hand.

He was one of many people who have gone out of their way to contact me since my speech on Tuesday to a manufacturing industry conference. Nile Probably the most interesting listed speaker is Dr John Whitehall, a Sydney paediatrician and long-time Nile associate who heads an organisation called Christian Crusade Against Communism. At a press conference Dr Whitehall ticked me off for referring to himself and his principal colleagues as "belligerent. He would prefer the term "strong Nile sees no incongruity about the weekend conference. "Peace cannot be seen in isolation.

Almost everyone wants peace. The question is how to achieve it. We are concerned at the manipulation of the peace movement, which creates greater danger of war. Ours will be a real peace conference, unlike the usual USA bashing exercises, perhaps the first real peace conference in Australia. Somehow he also finds time to be a Uniting Church minister and Parliamentarian.

The latter was not achieved without trauma. When the Festival of Light banned direct political involvement, Nile resigned, formed the Family Action Movement, then re-joined the day after his (at that time unsuccessful) election attempt. The conference is not organised by the Festival of Light, and certainly not by the NSW Parliament. But material mailed to the press carried the NSW Legislative Council letterhead and the phone numbers of both FOL and Mr Nile's Parliamentary office. Nowadays the Call to Australia movement a name pinched from a similar group in the 1950s has replaced the Family Action Movement as the political arm of the Festival of Light In all this Nile is unrepentant He' argues that the political arena is where decisions are made, and that Christians should be in the thick of it.

At election times Call to Australia candidates take care to describe themselves as non-party candidates. The main speaker at the weekend conference, introduced to newsmen as a prize trophy, is a softly-spoken Filipino a former Commander of the Communist National People's Army, Juan Alcover. Alcover, who renounced his for- mer comrades and now heads an anti-communist coalition, believes Fred Dr fears Cory the whom the along him that with and i Brian Powell pulling together, not pulling apart, is the answer. Enter The Fred Nile peace conference will offer some odd peaceniks among its main speakers, writes ALAN GILL, including an Afghan guerilla, the US Consul-General and the RSLs Bruce Ruxton. THE REV FRED NILE, Parliamentarian and Uniting Church minister, wears many hats.

Organisations he has led or indirectly controlled include the Jesus Movement, Festival of Light, Family Action Movement, Community Standards Organisation, and Call to Australia. This weekend he will wear yet another hat as convenor of a conference in Sydney under the banner of the International Year of Peace. Mr Nile is miffed that the Federal Government refused an I YP grant for his National Conference for Peace, Freedom and Justice. It even refused to send an application form. The US Consul-General will address the meeting, along with some other unlikely peaceniks.

They include a member of the Afghan rebel army (the Mujahideen) Mr Ghairat Baheer; a former ASIO intelligence analyst Mr Pat Jacobs; and RSL stalwarts Sir Colin Hines and Bruce Ruxton. There will be a conglomerate of right-wing Christians including Bishop Geoff Maync, an Armed Forces chaplain embroiled in a row over leftist tendencies in Catholic organisations, and Father Terence Purcell, formerly secretary of the Sydney Senate of Priests, whose letters against the peace marches have created censorship problems at the Catholic Weekly. Mr Nile will make several contributions including a talk on conventional, biological and chemical weapons. It is worth noting that Mr Nile was for many years an officer in the Australian Army Reserve not as a chaplain, you understand, but as a fighting man. Khmer Rouge.

Translations of Khmer Rouge jargon could be found the handbooks of so-called Filipino popular liberation movements, providing a clue to their origin inspiration. Mr Alcover singled out the Australian missionary priest, Father Brian the Australian Council of Churches, and the Catholic Commission for Justice and Peace for particular criticism. He said he had been shocked to (a view echoed at the meeting Mr Nile and Dr Whitehall) that two Church bodies were sponsoring public meetings in Australia a fellow-Filipino, Joma Sison. Sison, who is due to address a meeting in Melbourne today is described in promotional literature as of a new political grouping, Partido ng Bayan (People's Party). Mr Alcover and Dr Whitehall said had incontrovertible proof that was actually a front for a wing of the outlawed Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP), and that Partido ng Bayan had been formed specifically to initiate the first stage of the revolution.

Dr Whitehall, who returned a few weeks ago from the Philippines, said he had attended a meeting at which a speaker inadvertently identified Sison as the author of Philippines Society and Revolution, the outlawed party's major ideological textbook, published under the pen name of Amado Guerrero. The secretary of the CCJP, Mr Eric Sidoti, said yesterday that the two Church agencies had in no way funded or sponsored Mr Sison's visit, their only connection being membership of a now-disbanded committee which had been set up to organise today's meeting in Melbourne. Mr Sidoti said Sison would be just one of several speakers at the conference, whose title, Filipinos in Australia, A Struggle for Justice, indicated its true purpose. Some churchmen are taking the claims of Mr Nile and others more seriously. Sison was billed to speak in a Catholic Church hall in Brisbane last week.

Following complaints about the speaker's political allegiance. Archbishop Frank Rush banned the use of church property for the meeting. Li uJ jijJ Available in Sydney from: Keith Lord; David Jones; Grace Brothers; Fanuli's Lifestyle Leather. Sydney showroom: 100 Harris Street, Pyrmont 2009 Open lOanwpm Moru-Sat. Phone (02) 660 0420 ITonrTrochurepTease Mswater, Vic 31531 or ring Melbourne 7297233, Sydney 6600420 John Whitehall, left, Juan Alcover and The Rev Fred Nile.

communists may gain power in the Philippines within two years. He this will result from "conciliatory" moves by the Government of Aquino, whom he admires, and muddled thinking of church groups, who, wittingly or unwittingly, support the various Marxist factions. In his first six months as a guerilla leader, Mr Alcover ordered the executions "of 90 people, only 1 8 of turned out to be the actual "enemy" he was seeking. He still feels guilt of it all, which he resents with the trickery used to recruit and other young idealists into guerilla movements. Nor can Australians afford to be complacent, he says.

Alcover argues there is5 a strategy to install communist governments in the Philippines, Malaysia, and Indonesia, the long-term hope that Australia itself will ultimately fall. He said the. Filipino communist guerilla leaders were utterly ruthless, were influenced by the Kampu- Superb comfort Impeccable craftsmanship Timeless design Name I Address I Jersey Rd, Bayswater, Victoria 3153. Phone Our responsibilities are strictly subject 10 our written warranty Tessa, a division of Zipor PtyXtd. (inc in NSW) 10 i 3.