It was former Australian Prime Minister, Paul Keating who remarked that when faced with the choice of deciding between a stuff-up and a conspiracy, always choose a stuff-up.

Examining the question of 457 visas raised by John Kelly in his recent post Conspiracy of Convenience, one can come to the firm conclusion that the Abbott government’s policies surrounding 457’s are certainly not a stuff-up.

Kelly’s article is both thoughtful and timely, and raises the issue of whether or not that proliferation of 457’s are a conspiracy on the part of the Abbott government to create an even larger buffer stock of unemployed – that is, over the figure of between 5.1 to 5.8% advocated by Chicago School economic theory to offset inflation.

For the sake of clarity, a conspiracy is normally confined to a single group which plan to achieve its ends through illegal means, whereas a collusion involves two or more groups to achieve the same ends, again, usually through illegal means but not in every instance.

A conspiracy always requires the utmost secrecy therefore making it far more difficult to carry out its intended goals without discovery, whereas a collusion may be masked as a mutual and beneficial agreement conducted in privacy.

If the answer to Kelly’s question is a resounding ‘Yes!’ and one could hardly come to any other conclusion, then the next question is ‘but why?’

The answer lies in part, to further the government’s agenda of breaking unionism and the dismantling of the minimum wage in line with the Neo-liberal philosophy of ‘free markets’ and the right to employ workers at the wages and conditions set down by the employer without government interference or oversight.

It also enables the government to cripple any opposition from either unions which it can easily negate due to rapidly dwindling membership, and more importantly, – any political opposition that relies on a worker support base.

The tricky part of this agenda is to keep the pool from growing too large.

While the whip hand of cutting unemployment benefits and importing 457 visa workers serves to curtail any form of collectivism as people scramble to find a job at any price in order to simply survive – the dog eat dog scenario – if the pool of unemployed grows too large, then the lubricant of consumer spending evaporates and the entire economy grinds to a halt.

Should this happen, there are only two alternatives; either embark on a massive public spending program – something which is an anathema to the concept of Neo-liberalism – or go to war.

The second alternative is far more likely, especially if the pool of unemployed is large enough and coupled with only subsistence wages for those who are employed, then in all likelihood extreme right wing nationalist organizations would have already sprung up in protest against ‘foreigners taking our jobs!’

Extreme nationalism is always wedded to militarism, and bellicosity is always a short step away from confrontation and conflict.

While the reader may find the above argument too far fetched or bordering on paranoia, the author would add the caveat that historically, this is the likely outcome should the government’s agenda go unchecked.

Moreover, the author is not arguing that war or the emergence of extreme nationalist organizations are the intended outcome of this agenda, for the simple reason that the current government is not that bright.

They are however, willfully pursing an ideology without thought of long term consequence which may easily lead to the above outcomes.

Arguably, the proliferation of 457 visas is far less conspiracy and far more a matter of collusion between between business and government to break both unionism and the minimum wage to achieve the maximum level of exploitation for the maximum return of profit, and more importantly – the minimum level of accountability.

There can be little argument that since being elected to government, the Coalition and big business having been moving closer together to form a relationship which is far less than a healthy distance to ensure the well-being of all strata of the population.

This in itself puts democracy at risk, and like children playing with matches inside a powder magazine, both parties seem oblivious to the consequences of their actions.

It is the role of democratically elected governments to ensure the safety and well being of all citizens while at the same time formulating policies that enable the private sector to flourish but only under the guidance of regulations to prevent worker exploitation. This is considered the normal fulfillment of the Social Contract.

The easing of restrictions which apply to the issuance of 457 visas and of their purpose to fill jobs which cannot be carried out by local workers and the exploitation of those restrictions by unscrupulous employers is not only a clear breach of the law and detrimental to the economy in the long term but also creates the conditions for social dislocation and unrest.

It is highly unlikely that the Coalition will reimpose stricter conditions on businesses that wish to use 457 visa holders rather than local labour due to the nature of the dominant ideology driving their political agenda.

Therefore, it will be left to the Opposition to act in a role of watchdog against abuses of the system while at the same time formulating policies to tackle both unemployment and under utilization of the available work force.

For the ALP, this will mean establishing a sharp and clearly defined difference between themselves and the LNP.

The most obvious and easiest place to start would be for the Labor Party to reject all economic policies which are based on Ricardian and ‘Supply Side’ theory and adopt Post-Keynesian economic models as the way forward.

While it may be argued that there is not a conspiracy between the Abbott government and business who wish to use 457 visa holders as workers, there is certainly a strong sense of collusion between the LNP and the business sector to dismantle existing regulations governing the use of local employment in favour of overseas workers.

Should this be allowed to continue unchecked, social dislocation and the emergence of a hard right nationalism will surely follow.

The question now remains whether or not the new Senate line-up will be able to thwart much of the Abbott government’s agenda to ‘restructure’ health, welfare, education and employment, or will Australians be faced with a truly dark and deep Winter of discontent?

Share this:

Tweet



Email

Print



