Auto industry blasts ‘pointless’ reform

    The Australian
    September 05, 2014


COALITION plans to allow personal imports of new cars have been savaged by the automotive sector, amid warnings that the move will cause job losses without providing consumer benefits.      :(

As reported by The Australian yesterday, Assistant Infrastructure Minister Jamie Briggs has released a policy discussion paper on changes to the Motor Vehicle Standards Act. He said the federal government would look at easing restrictions on individual imports.

This would allow consumers to potentially save thousands of dollars on vehicles bought from overseas dealerships, particularly in the luxury segment.

In Britain, a high-end Land Rover Discovery has a listing price of about £54,500 ($96,350), compared with $88,000 in Australia, but once the luxury car tax and other charges are included, the on-road cost jumps to about $105,000.

Industry groups in the automotive sector reacted angrily to the mooted changes yesterday, saying the government had created uncertainty in the sector that may further dampen demand.      :(

Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries chief executive Tony Weber said the changes would only benefit the “top end of town”, and called for the government to instead focus on removing the 33 per cent luxury car tax and import tariffs.

“There is this notion in this country that people pay much more for cars, but the vast major­ity of cars are very competitively priced, and certainly at the low end there is absolutely no evidence of any differential,” he said.

The head of corporate affairs for Mercedes-Benz in the Asia-Pacific, David McCarthy, agreed, saying the “mass-market consumer” would not benefit from the measure.   :(

“There is a real and present risk that investment, skills training and employment levels will be adversely impacted not just by the uncertainty that now exists but by the possibility of decisions made to change the nature of a market that is operating effectively, ­efficiently and for the benefit of the Australian consumer,” he said. “One has to ask: why disrupt investment, employment, skills training and business confidence to try and make the most expensive cars cheaper?”

Australian Motor Industry Fed­eration chief Richard Dudley said industry had “multiple concerns” about some of the ideas included in the discussion paper.

If ever proof was needed that this mob dont support local industry and seem determined to destroy whatever we have left, this is it. Please somebody explain to me the reasoning behind this idea. >:( >:(

I've always found the land rover discovery a great car for ploughing through level crossings crook.
you should be all over this one, good news for consumers.

Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries chief executive Tony Weber said the changes would only benefit the “top end of town”      :(

what auto industry?

we have no local manufacturing at all now after a couple years time.  perhaps if the lazy auto industry had been better at their job and made cheaper, better cars this wouldn't be happening.

Protective measures are not required from an industry winding up its operations, not that I have ever been a fan of protectionism

there is no Australian car Industry any more ....Abbotts screwed that up  All we have left are shops that sell impoted cars ... we can buy anything else from overseas, why not cars too? We've been getting ripped off for years.

I'm happy to have protections if we are protecting our industry, but now that the industry is finished, why should consumers pay more?

John Smith wrote on Sep 5^th, 2014 at 8:19am:

there is no Australian car Industry any more ....Abbotts screwed that up  All we have left are shops that sell impoted cars ... we can buy anything else from overseas, why not cars too? We've been getting ripped off for years. I'm happy to have protections if we are protecting our industry, but now that the industry is finished, why should consumers pay more?

ford and Mitsubishi left under labor.  GMH decided to do so under labor and Toyota were fed up with unions destroying their viability - under labor - and when GMH left, they followed.

get over it.

Catastrophic outcome from the Government’s biggest economic decision yet

An appalling lack of leadership from Government will cost up to 50,000 Australian workers their jobs following the announcement by Holden that it will cease production in 2017, unions said today.

ACTU Secretary Dave Oliver said the Liberal Government has comprehensively failed its first test.

“As a result of Government inaction Australia will lose up to 50,000 direct skilled jobs in the automotive industry, $21 billion will be wiped from the economy and regions will go into recession,” Mr Oliver said.

“This is the most significant economic decision the Abbott Government has made and it’s going to have catastrophic consequences for our country.

“Tony Abbott has played politics with this issue and this is the result.”

Mr Oliver said it was the Government’s job to save jobs, not sink jobs.  But faced with the choice of supporting an iconic industry that generates billions of dollars of economic activity, or adhering to a free market ideology, Mr Abbott chose the latter, he said.

“Mr Abbott has made it clear that he has no jobs plan for the future,” Mr Oliver said.

“The departure of Holden will sink the car industry in this county and the flow on effects for jobs and manufacturing will be cataclysmic.

“Tony Abbott’s legacy will be as the Unemployment Prime Minister.

“The Liberal Government has no plan for future industries beyond the mining boom and under their watch the car manufacturing industry has been demolished.

“This is devastating news for car manufacturing in Australia and for the tens of thousands of workers who will be left without a job.

“The indifference that the Coalition has displayed towards Holden and the workers who rely on them is astonishing. It begs serious questions about the Government’s ability to protect jobs and its commitment to this vital task.

“This will be a legacy this Government will carry and be judged upon: the death of the car industry in Australia due to mismanagement, politicising and a fundamental lack of care for people’s jobs.

“Australia's claim to be a modern growing productive economy is in serious doubt under this Government.
“The question for Tony Abbott is – why didn’t he fight to protect Australian jobs?”

wrote on Sep 5^th, 2014 at 8:54am:

Catastrophic outcome from the Government’s biggest economic decision yet An appalling lack of leadership from Government will cost up to 50,000 Australian workers their jobs following the announcement by Holden that it will cease production in 2017, unions said today. ACTU Secretary Dave Oliver said the Liberal Government has comprehensively failed its first test. “As a result of Government inaction Australia will lose up to 50,000 direct skilled jobs in the automotive industry, $21 billion will be wiped from the economy and regions will go into recession,” Mr Oliver said. “This is the most significant economic decision the Abbott Government has made and it’s going to have catastrophic consequences for our country. “Tony Abbott has played politics with this issue and this is the result.” Mr Oliver said it was the Government’s job to save jobs, not sink jobs.  But faced with the choice of supporting an iconic industry that generates billions of dollars of economic activity, or adhering to a free market ideology, Mr Abbott chose the latter, he said. “Mr Abbott has made it clear that he has no jobs plan for the future,” Mr Oliver said. “The departure of Holden will sink the car industry in this county and the flow on effects for jobs and manufacturing will be cataclysmic. “Tony Abbott’s legacy will be as the Unemployment Prime Minister. “The Liberal Government has no plan for future industries beyond the mining boom and under their watch the car manufacturing industry has been demolished. “This is devastating news for car manufacturing in Australia and for the tens of thousands of workers who will be left without a job. “The indifference that the Coalition has displayed towards Holden and the workers who rely on them is astonishing. It begs serious questions about the Government’s ability to protect jobs and its commitment to this vital task. “This will be a legacy this Government will carry and be judged upon: the death of the car industry in Australia due to mismanagement, politicising and a fundamental lack of care for people’s jobs. “Australia's claim to be a modern growing productive economy is in serious doubt under this Government. “The question for Tony Abbott is – why didn’t he fight to protect Australian jobs?”

old issue loserboy.  GMH themselves stated that only a BLANK CHEQUE would have kept them in Australia.  no govt was ever going to do that and nor should they.  the unions were half of the problem.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 5^th, 2014 at 8:48am:

John Smith wrote on Sep 5th, 2014 at 8:19am: there is no Australian car Industry any more ....Abbotts screwed that up  All we have left are shops that sell impoted cars ... we can buy anything else from overseas, why not cars too? We've been getting ripped off for years. I'm happy to have protections if we are protecting our industry, but now that the industry is finished, why should consumers pay more? ford and Mitsubishi left under labor.  GMH decided to do so under labor and Toyota were fed up with unions destroying their viability - under labor - and when GMH left, they followed. get over it.

up until abbott took office, we had a auto industry ... Abbott  (or Hockey) issued an ultimatum and the remaining players decided to leave 

What part of that are you struggling with?

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 5^th, 2014 at 8:48am:

John Smith wrote on Sep 5th, 2014 at 8:19am: there is no Australian car Industry any more ....Abbotts screwed that up  All we have left are shops that sell impoted cars ... we can buy anything else from overseas, why not cars too? We've been getting ripped off for years. I'm happy to have protections if we are protecting our industry, but now that the industry is finished, why should consumers pay more? ford and Mitsubishi left under labor.  GMH decided to do so under labor and Toyota were fed up with unions destroying their viability - under labor - and when GMH left, they followed. get over it.

By the way, as usual, your facts are wrong ...GM did not decide to leave under labor, they decided to leave in December ... Abbott was the PM

Let's get some facts straight. The industry was already struggling, and it was likely at some point soon the decision to go would have happened. This is more to do with global economic conditions than any particular government.

The Liberals basically forced the hand of the remaining players by saying you have to make it on your own. Had they provided money it might have staved off the moving for a while, but ultimately it isn't economically viable for the foreseeable future.

Kytro wrote on Sep 5^th, 2014 at 7:20pm:

Let's get some facts straight. The industry was already struggling, and it was likely at some point soon the decision to go would have happened. This is more to do with global economic conditions than any particular government. The Liberals basically forced the hand of the remaining players by saying you have to make it on your own. Had they provided money it might have staved off the moving for a while, but ultimately it isn't economically viable for the foreseeable future.

sure it was struggling, it was trying to compete with foreign companies that were being subsidised much more then aussie cars were being subsidised  ... hardly a level playing field

Whilst I'm not a fan of subsidising private industry, it is to simplistic to just say no ...  we were subsidising the auto industry about $400 million per annum and they employ in excess of 50 000 people .... you need to look at the cost of subsidising versus the cost of not ...

on the other hand, we subsidise mining $5 BILLION per annum and they employ 100 000 people ... there is no consistancy with this government. they say one thing with one group, and do the opposite with the other ... it looks to the averag eperson like they simply chose based on who donates the most money.

John Smith wrote on Sep 5^th, 2014 at 8:54pm:

Kytro wrote on Sep 5th, 2014 at 7:20pm: Let's get some facts straight. The industry was already struggling, and it was likely at some point soon the decision to go would have happened. This is more to do with global economic conditions than any particular government. The Liberals basically forced the hand of the remaining players by saying you have to make it on your own. Had they provided money it might have staved off the moving for a while, but ultimately it isn't economically viable for the foreseeable future. sure it was struggling, it was trying to compete with foreign companies that were being subsidised much more then aussie cars were being subsidised  ... hardly a level playing field Whilst I'm not a fan of subsidising private industry, it is to simplistic to just say no ...  we were subsidising the auto industry about $400 million per annum and they employ in excess of 50 000 people .... you need to look at the cost of subsidising versus the cost of not ... on the other hand, we subsidise mining $5 BILLION per annum and they employ 100 000 people ... there is no consistancy with this government. they say one thing with one group, and do the opposite with the other ... it looks to the averag eperson like they simply chose based on who donates the most money.

My point was despite subsidies, other players left and those that remained struggled to find reasons not to do the same, despite the support. There was a good possibility this was always going to happen, the lack of subsidies just made them announce it a bit sooner.

Kytro wrote on Sep 5^th, 2014 at 8:59pm:

John Smith wrote on Sep 5th, 2014 at 8:54pm: Kytro wrote on Sep 5th, 2014 at 7:20pm: Let's get some facts straight. The industry was already struggling, and it was likely at some point soon the decision to go would have happened. This is more to do with global economic conditions than any particular government. The Liberals basically forced the hand of the remaining players by saying you have to make it on your own. Had they provided money it might have staved off the moving for a while, but ultimately it isn't economically viable for the foreseeable future. sure it was struggling, it was trying to compete with foreign companies that were being subsidised much more then aussie cars were being subsidised  ... hardly a level playing field Whilst I'm not a fan of subsidising private industry, it is to simplistic to just say no ...  we were subsidising the auto industry about $400 million per annum and they employ in excess of 50 000 people .... you need to look at the cost of subsidising versus the cost of not ... on the other hand, we subsidise mining $5 BILLION per annum and they employ 100 000 people ... there is no consistancy with this government. they say one thing with one group, and do the opposite with the other ... it looks to the averag eperson like they simply chose based on who donates the most money. My point was despite subsidies, other players left and those that remained struggled to find reasons not to do the same, despite the support. There was a good possibility this was always going to happen, the lack of subsidies just made them announce it a bit sooner.

GM was waiting to see what the govt. would offer .. if the subsidies continued, so would they ... i know that through a contact that works with GM

John Smith wrote on Sep 5^th, 2014 at 9:01pm:

GM was waiting to see what the govt. would offer .. if the subsidies continued, so would they ... i know that through a contact that works with GM

No offence, but that's kind of difficult to verify, so I tend to be sceptical on these sorts of claims. People have been known to offer their opinion as fact, and if not your contact, then wherever they got their information from.

Now I'm not saying it isn't true, it very well could be, but It's not something I can really accept as a valid argument.

Kytro wrote on Sep 5^th, 2014 at 9:06pm:

John Smith wrote on Sep 5th, 2014 at 9:01pm: GM was waiting to see what the govt. would offer .. if the subsidies continued, so would they ... i know that through a contact that works with GM No offence, but that's kind of difficult to verify, so I tend to be sceptical on these sorts of claims. People have been known to offer their opinion as fact, and if not your contact, then wherever they got their information from. Now I'm not saying it isn't true, it very well could be, but It's not something I can really accept as a valid argument.

I don't expect you to verify it .. how could you? nevertheless, thats what I was told

If it'll make you feel better my contact is a dept. head at GM  and not prone to exaggeration ... although I concede that again, its not something you can verify

John Smith wrote on Sep 5^th, 2014 at 9:11pm:

Kytro wrote on Sep 5th, 2014 at 9:06pm: John Smith wrote on Sep 5th, 2014 at 9:01pm: GM was waiting to see what the govt. would offer .. if the subsidies continued, so would they ... i know that through a contact that works with GM No offence, but that's kind of difficult to verify, so I tend to be sceptical on these sorts of claims. People have been known to offer their opinion as fact, and if not your contact, then wherever they got their information from. Now I'm not saying it isn't true, it very well could be, but It's not something I can really accept as a valid argument. I don't expect you to verify it .. how could you? nevertheless, thats what I was told If it'll make you feel better my contact is a dept. head at GM  and not prone to exaggeration ... although I concede that again, its not something you can verify

The biggest complaint I have about government and jobs is the lack of any decent forward planning. It's so reactionary, for the most part. If an industry is not economically viable, and not essential the government should be looking at alternatives and funding accelerated start ups and transitioning. There are cases of this happening, but it's all so hodge podge, there is no defining strategy.

The same can be said of the governments and budgeting. They only look to fix short term things with very little examination of how policies will help in the long term.

The NBN could have created a lot of jobs.

The Australian economy only has 23 million consumers (if you count children) which is not enough to support an automotive industry without generating exports for the global market.....The car industry was unsustainable without a viable export market no matter who was in Government!!!

:-? :-? :-?

John Smith wrote on Sep 5^th, 2014 at 5:39pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 5th, 2014 at 8:48am: John Smith wrote on Sep 5th, 2014 at 8:19am: there is no Australian car Industry any more ....Abbotts screwed that up  All we have left are shops that sell impoted cars ... we can buy anything else from overseas, why not cars too? We've been getting ripped off for years. I'm happy to have protections if we are protecting our industry, but now that the industry is finished, why should consumers pay more? ford and Mitsubishi left under labor.  GMH decided to do so under labor and Toyota were fed up with unions destroying their viability - under labor - and when GMH left, they followed. get over it. By the way, as usual, your facts are wrong ...GM did not decide to leave under labor, they decided to leave in December ... Abbott was the PM

If you honestly believe a global car manufacturing giant like GMH was struck by so much trouble between September and December last year that they decided to cease manufacturing here, you truly are delusional in every sense of the word.  The truth is that GMH had made it's decision well before Abbott became PM, due to Labor policy and Union militancy.

St George of the Garden wrote on Sep 5^th, 2014 at 10:54pm:

The NBN could have created a lot of jobs.

Only in the construction phase and we don't have enough skilled workers for that, hence Labor's use of 457 visa workers to fill that gap.

No, it would have created lots of jobs and improved productivity in most other industry including farming! Try reading the NBN thread, it is all spelled out there.

St George of the Garden wrote on Sep 6^th, 2014 at 5:15am:

No, it would have created lots of jobs and improved productivity in most other industry including farming! Try reading the NBN thread, it is all spelled out there.

Is it in the Science Fiction part of the forum?

The main NBN thread here in Pol Sux.

But you won’t read it—might learn a couple of things not complimentary to the Liberals and your crap hero Abbott.

In fact I reckon a state NBN might be a way to help SA overcome the loss of Holdens and the subs: http://wp.me/p30JJG-5V

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 6^th, 2014 at 5:11am:

John Smith wrote on Sep 5th, 2014 at 5:39pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 5th, 2014 at 8:48am: John Smith wrote on Sep 5th, 2014 at 8:19am: there is no Australian car Industry any more ....Abbotts screwed that up  All we have left are shops that sell impoted cars ... we can buy anything else from overseas, why not cars too? We've been getting ripped off for years. I'm happy to have protections if we are protecting our industry, but now that the industry is finished, why should consumers pay more? ford and Mitsubishi left under labor.  GMH decided to do so under labor and Toyota were fed up with unions destroying their viability - under labor - and when GMH left, they followed. get over it. By the way, as usual, your facts are wrong ...GM did not decide to leave under labor, they decided to leave in December ... Abbott was the PM If you honestly believe a global car manufacturing giant like GMH was struck by so much trouble between September and December last year that they decided to cease manufacturing here, you truly are delusional in every sense of the word.  The truth is that GMH had made it's decision well before Abbott became PM, due to Labor policy and Union militancy.

who said they had trouble between Sept. & December ?  You make this sh1t up as you go? GM knew its exact financial position and exactly what they would need  to stay. GM was quite prepared to stay long term if the subsidies were maintained ...  Hockey and Abbott pulled the subsidies, GM pulled out .. was that simple enough for you?

not sure why you continue to struggle with it

And now $A is lower GM would have found exports easier, it was the high dollar killed Holden.

Have the shambles got some job creation lined up? Of course not!

Abbott seems intent on destroying Australias manufacturing sector so we're gonna have to import everything in the near future.

Did we not rush to sign some stupid FTA, with Japan or Korea, that let them export cars to Australia with zero tariff? (Of course, Aussie exports were very limited under this stupid FTA!) That is what caused GM to leave I believe.

I am beginning to think we need to reassess our tariff policy—why should Riverland orange growers have to go broke because Brazil is dumping OJ concentrate here? Have to unwind stupid neoconservatism!

St George of the Garden wrote on Sep 6^th, 2014 at 8:33am:

Did we not rush to sign some stupid FTA, with Japan or Korea, that let them export cars to Australia with zero tariff? (Of course, Aussie exports were very limited under this stupid FTA!) That is what caused GM to leave I believe. I am beginning to think we need to reassess our tariff policy—why should Riverland orange growers have to go broke because Brazil is dumping OJ concentrate here? Have to unwind stupid neoconservatism!

Actually Riverland growers in SA are doing quite well exporting fresh fruit to Asia and the US.

Are they? Last I heard it was all doom and gloom and tree pulling. . .if they are exporting to China good on them and thanks should be given to PM Gilard who negotiated to have the $A freely convertible into the Chinese currency.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 6^th, 2014 at 5:11am:

John Smith wrote on Sep 5th, 2014 at 5:39pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 5th, 2014 at 8:48am: John Smith wrote on Sep 5th, 2014 at 8:19am: there is no Australian car Industry any more ....Abbotts screwed that up  All we have left are shops that sell impoted cars ... we can buy anything else from overseas, why not cars too? We've been getting ripped off for years. I'm happy to have protections if we are protecting our industry, but now that the industry is finished, why should consumers pay more? ford and Mitsubishi left under labor.  GMH decided to do so under labor and Toyota were fed up with unions destroying their viability - under labor - and when GMH left, they followed. get over it. By the way, as usual, your facts are wrong ...GM did not decide to leave under labor, they decided to leave in December ... Abbott was the PM If you honestly believe a global car manufacturing giant like GMH was struck by so much trouble between September and December last year that they decided to cease manufacturing here, you truly are delusional in every sense of the word.  The truth is that GMH had made it's decision well before Abbott became PM, due to Labor policy and Union militancy.

due to Labor policy and Union militancy


They have specifically stated that neither of these points were relevant.

But Joe Hockey did tell them to rack off a few days before they announced their decision and this was probably the clincher.

St George of the Garden wrote on Sep 6^th, 2014 at 9:19am:

Are they? Last I heard it was all doom and gloom and tree pulling. . .if they are exporting to China good on them and thanks should be given to PM Gilard who negotiated to have the $A freely convertible into the Chinese currency.

Having said that I do get your point...reduced and zero tariffs with countries that continue to screw us over is pretty stupid.

It was Howards Tarrif reductions that slowly crippled car industry, it's all good though, Tony has said they will all be re-trained, to do what exactly, well even the LNP cant answer that one, good timing with unemployment and inflation rapidly rising.

Quote:

Auto Industry Blasts Pointless Reform

Most reform is pointless these days.

It is primarily used to justify the existence of management or any decision making position.

Most industrial reform I have seen mainly comes in the form of a move back to something which had previously been seen to have failed and goes on to do so again while achieving management bonuses all round. This then goes on to a second round of reform required to fix what they have done by putting things back to the way it was previously working (with a different name) resulting a another round of well deserved management bonuses.

St George of the Garden wrote on Sep 6^th, 2014 at 8:33am:

Did we not rush to sign some stupid FTA, with Japan or Korea, that let them export cars to Australia with zero tariff? (Of course, Aussie exports were very limited under this stupid FTA!) That is what caused GM to leave I believe. I am beginning to think we need to reassess our tariff policy—why should Riverland orange growers have to go broke because Brazil is dumping OJ concentrate here? Have to unwind stupid neoconservatism!

that FTA that allows Japan to sell whatever they want here, also prevents Aussie manufacturers from selling Aussie made gearboxes in Japan

why does their industry get protection whilst ours gets the heave ho?

zero tariffs with countries with similar or higher living standards and pay and conditions to ours and also with zero tariffs makes sense..otherwise we are just screwing ourselves over.