The Bob Hawke Prime Ministerial Centre
Bob Hawke was born in 1929 at Bordertown, South Australia. He was
educated at Perth Modern School, the University of Western Australia,
and Oxford University, which he attended from 1953-1955 as a Rhodes
Scholar. In 1958 he became Research Officer and Advocate with the
Australian Council of Trade Unions and was elected ACTU President in
1969. He joined the Australian Labor Party in 1947 and was its President
for the period 1973-1978.
If we were to be holding a Convention now to draw up a Constitution
for Australia in the twenty-first century one thing, would certainly
distinguish it from those responsible in the 1890’s for creating the
present document. Women would be represented. While we have had the good
sense to draw to an infinitely greater extent upon the resources of that
half of our population previously excluded from a meaningful
participation in national affairs, more remains to be done.
The impact of that participation in economic terms is indicated by the
statistics. In 1901 women constituted 21% of those employed – by July
2001 that figure had more than doubled to 44%. The figures show the
broad lateral extension of women across the work force and a less marked
but significant permeation of management positions. The further
facilitation of this process will be one of the most important issues in
shaping our approach to the twenty-first century.
In operating as we will, in an increasingly competitive globalised
economy we will need to shape our institutions and our attitudes in a
way which optimises the opportunities for women to contribute their
talents to the national enterprise. Some of my unreconstructed male
colleagues may see this as a peripheral matter. It is not. In that
competitive globalised economy which, whether you like it or not, will
constitute the environment for the twenty-first century Australia, those
nations which do not best harness the capacities of half their
populations will be at a serious disadvantage.
This will require more than the elimination of any remaining explicit or
practical discrimination. In a very positive sense, flexible
arrangements will have to become the norm, for both women and men, to
balance the demands and obligations of employment with those of child
rearing.
I turn now to the critical issues raised by this fact that the
Federation of Australia in the twenty-first century will be operating in
an international environment unrecognisably different from that which
characterised the relations between nation-states a hundred years ago.
The revolutions occurring in the fields of computers, telecommunications
and bio-technology are transforming the processes of production, the
provision of services, communication and transportation. Professor
Geoffrey Blainey wrote of “The Tyranny of Distance” – an appropriate
title now would be “The Death of Distance.”
This technological revolution has stimulated the growth of the
multinational corporation and the emergence of globalisation. The rise
of the multinational corporation with the capacity to evade the
jurisdiction of national governments – including that of the countries
in which they are incorporated – has involved a distinct shift in
emphasis from political to economic decision-making. More and more,
decisions are being made by market forces.
Corporations can jump over what they regard as objectionable regulations
and pit government against government. In fact one of the major results
of globalisation has been the extension of competition from the level of
companies to the level of governments.
The sheer comparative size of corporations – as measured by their annual
sales or capitalisation – compared with government budgets dramatises
this power shift. The OECD has pointed out that if the top 100 economic
entities were assembled in a new OECD, with both private and public
participation, 52 of the major players would be corporations and 48
national governments.
The process of globalisation is accelerating. The volume of world trade
is growing twice as fast as the volume of world output – which means,
simply, that the international division of labour is deepening and the
world economy is becoming increasingly integrated.
In this respect the impact of the technological revolution is being
reinforced by another factor, the dimension of which, I believe, is not
sufficiently appreciated. Consider these facts:
All of this has meant that an additional 40% of the world’s
population is becoming increasingly integrated into a globalised world
economy.
One of the most profound implications of what I have said is that the
capacity of many national governments to sustain the revenue base
necessary to undertake the services expected of them by their citizens
is being increasingly put at risk. Remember that this risk occurs after
a century which has witnessed an extraordinary expansion in the scope of
national governance. At the beginning of the twentieth century,
governments of European States taxed and spent somewhere between 5 and
10 percent of GNP ? at the end of the last century between one third and
one half of the GNP of industrialised countries passed through the
public exchequer.
The distribution of capital assets is more skewed and concentrated so
that the income tax base is more unequally distributed nationally and
globally. And the tax rates that can be applied may be lowered because
of competition between governments and the capacity of those with wealth
to organise their affairs to minimise tax.
As a practical matter the threat of the loss or serious erosion of the
tax base is as difficult as it gets in terms of providing good
governance. This is not just a question of the capacity to provide
services but goes to the very stability and workable cohesion of
society. How to handle this problem in an equitable and efficient manner
will be one of the more important issues in the new century.
Many proposals have been advanced from time to time which go to or
impinge upon these questions including the Tobin tax on short-term
movements of capital. I am not arguing here for any particular proposal.
But I do argue in this forum that it will not be good enough simply to
throw up our hands collectively and say that loopholes would make any
scheme unworkable. I do say that what is required is more effective
international co-operation – global governance – covering sufficient of
the major economic players to make the regulation and contribution of
capital effective.
If this is not done, good governance in the widest sense – the capacity
of governments to consider best choices will be severely constrained.
Australia will have to speak with a more cohesive and united voice if it
is to contribute meaningfully to such global co-operation and if it is
to optimise decisions both in regard to domestic resource allocation and
in regard to attracting, on the right terms, foreign investment into
Australia. This will require a strengthening of consultative mechanisms
between the Commonwealth, States and Territories.
Like capital, pollution is mobile across borders. The facts about the
threat of global warming are becoming increasingly indisputable. It is
global in its impact and therefore requires constraints upon the
exercise by individual nation/States of their sovereign powers. There
have been some tentative steps – Kyoto, for instance – but the measure
of our collective maturity will be how quickly we transform these steps
into effective supra-national mechanisms.
One point underlies all the issues I have addressed to this stage.
Society no longer has boundaries that coincide with the nation/State.
The actual and potential well-being of our people is increasingly
affected by what happens in other countries. In one sense the horrific
events of September 11th were a dramatic manifestation of this truth.
Our capacity to influence issues that will impact on us depends more and
more on building constructive relationships extending beyond our own
borders. The OECD pointed out last year that in the seven year period
1992-98 following the end of the Cold War, official aid to developing
countries fell by US$88.7 billion – and the OECD estimates that those
developing countries will have 90% of the world’s population by 2056.
The overwhelmingly important issue for the new Australian federation of
the twenty-first century will be to strengthen a tolerant society at
home which will not countenance discrimination in any form on the basis
of race, colour, creed or gender: and, on that solid basis, and from
considerations of morality and enlightened self-interest, to invest more
of our time, energy and resources together with other developed nations
– in providing help and hope to those billions on Earth who still exist
in poverty and despair.
