Create a free account, or log in

Swan mangles the tune

No one wants an economy divided between rich and poor, but is this really happening in Australia? As Swan points out in his lecture, “while median household wealth in the US declined by more than 30% between 2004 and 2010, here in Australia it has increased by more than 20% over the same period”. Are […]
James Thomson
James Thomson

No one wants an economy divided between rich and poor, but is this really happening in Australia? As Swan points out in his lecture, “while median household wealth in the US declined by more than 30% between 2004 and 2010, here in Australia it has increased by more than 20% over the same period”.

Are any of the actions of Clive Palmer or Gina Rinehart or Andrew Forrest really putting this growth – which came without a mining tax, of course – in peril?

Swan makes the argument that any threat to the mining tax is a threat to “stymie economic reform which aims to spread opportunities to others”.

But if Tony Abbott was to win government and rescind the tax as promised, would we really be plunged into a Sprinsteenian nightmare of ghost towns and ghettos? It’s very hard to see.

Maybe I am naive. Perhaps Andrew Forrest, Clive Palmer and Gina Rinehart could seize control of Australia’s society and economy.

But what does Swan suggest we should do to stop this potential scenario? Do we stop certain people from running for Parliament on the basis of their wealth and views? Do we restrict access to the legal system if people are too wealthy? Do we limit media ownership based on wealth or political leanings (sorry, Rupert Murdoch)?

Those are clearly undemocratic ideas and ones Wayne Swan could never support. But he doesn’t offer any practical solutions in his lecture, so it’s hard to say exactly what he thinks should be done – other than speaking up (or singing).

Swan’s lecture is a lovely journey through the Springsteen back catalogue, but offers no solutions to fix a problem (mass inequality) that Swan himself says doesn’t exist.

It’s hard to see it as anything other than a colourful, tuneful spray against three people that Swan clearly dislikes and disagrees with.

There’s nothing wrong with that, but the idea that Clive Palmer, Gina Rinehart and Andrew Forrest imperil “Parliament, the Constitution, independent journalism” is just Dancing in The Dark.

James Thomson is a former editor of BRW’s Rich 200 and the publisher of SmartCompany and LeadingCompany.