Image by Webdiary artist Martin DaviesLots of political commentators write that Mark Latham is concentrating on the “little things” and avoiding the big issues. Are they stupid, ignorant, or corrupt?
He’s promised to strengthen competition laws to protect small business against big business predators. Who does that piss off? Big business. What does that mean? More money in Liberal Party coffers.
He’s promised to stop easy credit at pubs with pokies and to limit withdrawals on debit accounts to $200. Who does that piss off? The powerful pubs and gambling lobbies. What does that mean? As above.
He’s promised to stop junk food advertising during children’s television time slots. Who does that piss off? The big junk food companies. What does that mean? As above.
He’s promised a 4th television network and to keep cross media laws. Who does that piss off? Murdoch and Packer. What does that mean? You know what.
Small is BIG. He’s fighting hard, our Mark, against powerful interests few would take on, for us, the people.
And now, the US Free Trade Agreement. I think he was wrong not to veto the dud just about every economist who hasn’t been bought off by big business said it was straight off. A bad tactical error, to say the least, to put off a decision and give Howard the chance to run the ridiculous anti-American line the entire press gallery seems to have bought hook line and sinker. (Would America have signed up if it wasn’t good for American business? Of course not. Never. Ever. Would that have been anti-Australian? No. Would Howard have looked like the fool he is? Yes.)
Still, what Latham has done, to everyone’s surprise given the incredible political and media pressure on him to cave in completely, is to avoid the Beazley small target disaster and pick a do or die issue of crucial importance to the Australian people which could show Howard up for what he is.
He’s said he won’t let the FTA through the Senate without legislative safeguards to stop the huge US drugs companies with bottomless pockets maintain their super-profits by gradually destroying our PBS drugs subsidy scheme, admired around the world, which keeps medicine within the price range of ordinary Australians like you and me. Unlike in America.
The issue is complex (for more on the detail see Latham’s conditions for FTA support: the facts behind the politics). But by bringing the seemingly esoteric topic of the FTA down to one basic point, he’s given the Australian people a chance to get their heads around the big picture. Yet Howard says no to the “micro issue”. Why? First take – “unnecessary”. If so, why not agree to Labor’s proposal? Second take – it’s “dangerous”. Why?
Howard and his minions promised us over and over there’d be nothing in the FTA to threaten our PBS scheme. So why did they agree to letting the Americans have a “review” process when our experts turned their latest drug down?
And why won’t he protect Australians, and Australia’s budget, against the possibility ” no certainty ” of US drugs companies playing dirty tricks to destroy our system?
You’ll find a possible answer in the Crikey piece I published in Latham’s conditions for FTA support: the facts behind the politics. It’s about political donations and Liberal Party hacks earning big money in the drugs companies. Self interest, in other words.
What Latham has done by shocking the right of his party which wanted the FTA buried as an issue is hone down the argument to something every Australian can understand. The “small picture”. The one that affects their lives. And each small picture tells a bloody big story.
The SMH news story today said that Cabinet rejected the drugs amendment because “of its earlier insistence that it would not sign the agreement in the first place if it diminished the (PBS) benefits scheme in any way. Giving in to Labor’s demand would undermine the deal and send the public the message that it adversely affected the scheme, senior government sources said.”
Crap. It would be a one day wonder for the government to say “Good idea – let’s go with it.” It’s already said yes, effectively, to Latham’s demand for legislative protection for local content on TV. There’s something much deeper and more sinister going on here.
Giving in, while demanding a concession, is sensational politics by Latham given the mess he’d got himself into and the forces ranged against him. He won’t back down, and Australians will at last get to know a lot more about this “deal”, the one Howard said he’d never sign unless it was unequivocally good for Australia but did anyway to be SEEN to be getting some payoff for taking Australia to war against the wishes of the Australian people.
And don’t believe the rubbish reported in one Australian newspaper that unless Parliament ratified the deal by October 1 it was off. The FTA deal takes effect 60 days after Bush and Howard exchange letters saying their respective Parliaments have endorsed it. Howard wants it signed by October 1 so it starts on January 1 next year. That’s all. If it’s delayed, then the start date is deferred. Unless, of course, the deal depends on the big US drugs companies getting their foot in the door, something Howard has denied.
Over to you, John Howard. Thank you, Mark Latham, for not caving in completely, and for giving the Australian people the chance to work out what’s really going on here.
PS: I haven’t published any reader emails on this issue yet because it’s moving so fast. For the latest world trade developments see FTA lessens our world power on trade: Brazil picks up our dropped ball