Certain elements of the media
have referred to it simply as the dumbing down of Australia. In any case the
problem is no less real because the decline of Australian creativity
for more than a decade rather than being absolute is, for the most part, "merely" relative compared with our OECD cohort. The fact is, it
imparts a certain insidiousness because our leaders can claim that Australia
is moving forward. The most recent example, of course, is the promulgation
of the Government's $2.9 billion innovation plan
Backing
Australia's Ability.
It's quite true that more funding is being
injected into higher education, research and development than has been the case
over the previous five years. On the other hand the prognosis is that by 2005-06 the
fraction of GDP that will be designated by our government for higher education and R&D will
actually decline while the OECD average is slated to increase further causing
Australia not only to slip further behind but at an increasing rate.
The grim comedy that is currently being played out by our major political parties to the accompaniment of an ineffectual Greek chorus from the minor parties is analogous more to ageing than an acute infection. You might say we're "suffering from the crumbles". But we are being told by the governing Coalition that in effect there is no solution because there needn't be; there is no real problem. Well, "there was a bit of a problem but we've fixed it AND while exercising sound fiscal management."
The result? We are becoming increasingly dependent on and users of first world
innovation which we pay for with
The excuse for this charade is the spectre of economic chaos which is instantly and categorically equated by the Coalition to deficit expenditure of any sort. And this scare mongering works. The Labor Party is so spooked by the threat of being called the Party of financial mismanagement that its leader feebly says that Labor would, assuming they succeeded to office, sort out the mess if they were left any money . We poor slobs are left with the choice of re-electing a government which will do nothing because it denies that there is any substantial problem or putting into office one which may well claim it can't do anything of immediate consequence because it wasn't left sufficient resources.
If we were dealing with personal money management, surely most would agree that there are noteworthy differences between assuming a mortgage to finance the purchase of a home for one's family compared with borrowing to finance a gambling habit. But in essence this is just the argument that is being put forward. So far the one sane political comment made has been by the leader of the Australian Democrats, Senator Stott Despoja, when she told Kerry O'Brien in a 7:30 Report several months ago that running a temporary fiscal deficit to achieve a worthwhile goal such as significantly raising the quality of our teaching and research institutions would be appropriate and sustainable.
It is common and accepted business practice for commercial firms to borrow in order to improve their facilities so as to increase productivity. Certainly, it's to be undertaken judiciously. But to equate borrowing with shear recklessness in the circumstances is odious. If Australia wants just to retain its current position in the OECD hierarchy it must improve its educational and research institutions, it must start to do so now and it needs to do so effectively. And if that requires well thought-out short term borrowing, so be it. The fact of the matter is that the Coalition has grossly mismanaged Australia's intellectual infrastructure in the guise of sound economic policy. Certainly it accrued a monetary surplus which rather than being invested in the Nation's tools for 21st century productivity is being scattered as largess in a manner that appears to be cynical, self-serving and wanton. Nonetheless, they have succeeded admirably in keeping Mr Beazley on the back foot. With very few exceptions, most batsmen drive far better when on the front foot.
Alex Reisner
The Funneled Web