Hey guys,
This is my year 12 oral on the topic of SPC. I was originally arguing that the government should give the grant SPC requested, however, yesterday the grant was given. Therefore my contention is now, The Federal Government should have given the grant SPC requested rather than the Victorian State Government.
ANY CRITIQUE WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED
SPC Ardmona - a company whose name is synonymous with a century of history and Australian pride. Yet less than 72 hours ago, our last Australian fruit processor and cannery would have been doomed. Less than 72 hours ago, hundreds upon hundreds of workers would have had to confront their families with the shocking news that they may be unemployed, or would have to leave behind the lives they had built in the Goulbourn Valley area to find employment elsewhere. Less than 72 hours ago, farmers would have been preparing themselves to leave behind the soil, plants and pastures which have been in their families for generations. If it were not for the Victorian State Government’s 22 million dollar grant, SPC Ardmona would have closed down, causing detriment to and potentially destroying the lives of the countless struggling Australians who are dependant upon it. Yet, this decision, which was refused by the Federal Government whose responsibility it should have been, was only made less than 72 hours ago.
According to Victorian Premier Bill Napthine, if the partial care package had not been given to the company, about 2700 jobs and millions of dollars of the Greater Shepparton’s economy would have been at dire risk. 2700 hardworking Australians like you or I, who may be unemployed or forced relocate their families to an area with a larger availability in career options. Thus, Australian jobs would have been sacrificed for overseas employment. For a government who claims that they are “all about jobs,” to risk such a large number seems callous and vexing. In fact, the federal government truly is all about jobs as under jurisdiction of Australian law, it is the federal government’s responsibility to maintain employment and industrial relations. Tony Abbott himself recognised this; before he was elected Prime Minister, he was sympathetic to the plight of the thousands who would be affected by the company’s closure. At a rally to save SPC Ardmona Abbot stated, “this is a government in chaos which is completely disregarding you in a time when they should be doing whatever they can to support you.” Despite these claims, Abbot rejected the company’s request for financial aid, illustrating blatantly through his actions that he did not care for the hundreds of Australian families in crisis.
So what was the reasoning behind Abbott’s decision? Why did it fall upon the Victorian State government to aid these people in need when it should have been the federal government’s responsibility? Is it not common sense that the Victorian State government, with far less available funds, will not be as effective at rectifying the issue? Abbot engaged in a coward’s game – instead of assuming responsibility for his people and this iconic company of Australia, he claimed that the fate of the company was not his party’s obligation. Passing the baton, Abbot instead pushed that the jobs were a concern of SPC’s parent corporation Coca Cola Amatil, stating it was a highly profitable enterprise with sufficient funds to reform the company. Coca Cola Amatil is undeniably one of the most successful corporations in Australia. Nevertheless, maintaining jobs does not fall under their jurisdiction as they have already attempted to restore the ailing business and lost over 400 million dollars in the last five years in the process. No matter how much they earn, a corporation’s primary responsibility is to maximise profits, while the federal government’s responsibility is to maximise employment and industrial relations. Abbott’s justification for evading the duty of his government its people is therefore, redundant in its nature.
It can be contended, however, that the money the Federal Government should have granted SPC Ardmona is, as Treasurer Joe Hockey continuously asserted on the 7:30 ABC News, taxpayer’s money. What is taxpayer’s money invested in if not to enrich employment opportunities and Australian health and welfare? According to Liberal MP Dr Sharman Stone, who vehemently argued against her party’s decision, the Greater Shepparton area would have had a loss of about $650 million to the region’s economy. Furthermore, the Federal Government would have had to spend about $15 million in redundancy benefits and relocation costs for the hundreds of Australians that SPC Ardmona employs. Shadow manufacturing minster Kim Carr disputes that Shepparton is one the poorest regions in Australia, and without SPC Ardmona, rates of unemployment would increase by up to 4% accompanied by the gargantuan loss of the regions’ economy and deteriorating social welfare. Investing a mere $25 million seems a far more logical and crucial use of taxpayer’s money.
Hockey further rationalised the liberal party’s verdict by inquiring to the public on who should be entitled to receive Government “bailout benefits.” Why are small businesses not given rescue packages? He questioned. Napthine of the Victorian State government drew light to a point that the Federal Government failed to address; numerous small businesses would feel the profound impact of SPC Ardmona’s termination. Small businesses in the Greater Shepparton area such as cafes, supermarkets and convenience stores would lose a valuable source of economic stimulus – causing a decline in not only their profit but also the region’s socioeconomic stability. Subsequently, the farmer’s who source the fresh fruit processor would also face hardship and calamity. Before the Victorian State government’s grant, farmers succumbed to anxiety and depression. They believed they had to desert generations of farmland and find a viable occupation elsewhere in order to make ends meet, according to an article by an unnamed author published in the Business Spectator. Abbott’s government was willing to allow Australians to face such adversity in the name of impartiality to individual small businesses, with complete knowledge of the broader consequences of SPC Ardmona’s closing.
I ask the Federal Government, who had sufficient resources and should be endorsing Australian products and Australian employment, why did the Victorian Government have to fund what should have been your responsibility?
Home
Help
Search
Login
