Viewpoint-30 June 2005 |
Harry Robinson on Spin, Scruples and the Costello Future Fund |
Where did the Future Fund go? Born along
with the last budget, it was all the go for a week or perhaps ten days. Then the
infant idea --pfui!-- vanished, sank without
|
trace, dropped off the
radar screen.
It must be living somewhere in cyberspace, waiting for a call back to the real
world. We shouldn't let it go. The idea has possibilities.
As outlined by Treasurer Costello, the Future Fund (the FF) was to soak up some
of the government's current surpluses and hitch them to a good chunk of money
from the eventual sale of Telstra. Presto! Thirty or even forty billion dollars
devoted to securing the nation's future, to making it safe to live until 2040 or
thereabouts.
Few politicians are as kind, caring and generous as Peter Costello.
He also had an idea for how the FF could be put to work -- form a trust directed
by totally brilliant and superbly honest men and women and have them invest the
money in securities .. shares, debentures with maybe some gilt edged bonds
thrown in. The FF was bound to grow and grow for the benefit of the good
citizens of 2040.
There were some critics. There always are some carping nigglers. This lot
pointed out that if so much money were injected into the stock exchange the
effect would be to inflate share prices and thus, in time, to devalue the FF.
That was the point at which the infant FF floated off screen.
Curiously, no sector of the public came out to lodge a claim on Costello's
golden casket. Not even farmers who have a great thirst for public money. Nor
did health funds ask for a slice. And especially not the intellectual end of
town. Universities, strapped for cash as they are, kept mum. The scientific
community let the FF pass. As for the people of the arts, writers, painters,
film makers, theatre producers, actors -- all those scaly fringe dwellers who
bewail their lot to a continuo in the key of p for poverty -- they sat on their
hands.
The most surprising absentees were the knowledge people, the mind people, the
teaching institutions, the researchers; surprising because they can offer high
returns to a nation all too used to the low returns of commodities trading.
Four Corners in its last program for June tore into the short changing of
universities, their declining reputation for teaching students from abroad.
Killing the goose that had, at least, been keeping the unis going, said Four
Corners.
Education minister Dr Brendan Nelson was unmoved. With a face as cold as any
stone, he said more changes were on the way and they would not be popular but
they had to come. Like all good authoritarians Dr Nelson knew all that anybody
needed to know.
One change was flagged pretty well while Four Corners was going to air -- future
research funds were to be tied to commercial outcomes. The consequences hardly
need spelling out.
So we have a Philistine government determined to sit on a heap of money and damn
all pointy heads with their airy fairy stories about what they might find if
they were allowed to waste enough treasure.
The other side of politics offers little hope. When Bob Hawke was prime minister
he made Barry Jones Minister for Science but dropped him when he began to talk
of actually doing things with and for science. PM Keating gave John Dawkins the
order to take an axe to universities. The main opposition party is now too
troubled to think of setting the nation off on adventures of the mind.
And yet, and yet . nothing in politics is written in stone. Persistent public
argument can move dense politicians and change lumpen policies. The argument
must be carefully designed and expressed not in the flat style of academia, not
in the prolix style of philosophers and certainly not in the frozen prose of
university senate pronouncements.
A campaign to capture a slice of the Future Fund would need to be designed by a
practised manipulator of public attitudes -- oh, to be frank, a spin doctor. Not
all spin doctors are evil geniuses. Some are filled with good intentions --
these cannot be trusted. Others are amoral and hungry for success in
manufacturing consent, to steal a phrase from that wizard of words Noam Chomsky.
Such are fine candidates for isolating a few billions to advance the cause of
the intellectual end of town.
It may be that many Mind People would shudder at the idea of hiring a spin
doctor or getting into the dust of public campaigning.
Scruples when faced with a Philistine government?
Harry Robinson -- for 25 years worked in television journalism in Oz and the US and was for several years air media critic for the Sydney Morning Herald and the Sun-Herald.