Labor Dances Around Issues in Housing, First Nations rights and Industrial Relations: Red Report Back 21.8.23-4.9.23
Voice Date Announced as Prison Industrial-Complex Strengthened
Recently, Prime Minister Albanese announced that the referendum on constitutional recognition and the Voice to Parliament is to be held on the 14th of October. Albanese announced the date with the narrative-shaping that has been used to mischaracterise the Voice throughout his Yes campaign, stating “the idea for a voice came from the people and it will be decided by the people”. However, this is not quite the case. Most of our readers would be aware of how the campaign for constitutional recognition came from above and has been used to quash the demands of First Nations peoples and communities that don’t fit within it. An idea rejected time and time again, that has only been further watered down and weakened to conform to the interests of the colonial state.
Labor Premier Malinauskas spoke at the launch, pushing for a yes vote by tying the Voice in to a long line of progressive reforms such as universal franchise, migration and the 1967 referendum and his parents’ generation saying “yes to land rights” means that we are “capable of saying yes to an advisory committee”. However, once again, we see Labor misrepresenting what the historical record has shown. His parents’ generation quashed land rights and pushed in the weak concept of native title, despite multiple Labor governments promising to follow through on land rights. Once again, we are seeing Labor’s words communicating one way, while they act in the opposite manner. Once more, they push for tokenistic actions that won’t impact big business, mining interests or the colonial state apparatus.
The vote itself continues the constitutional recognition movement first launched by Howard, and which Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has now also pledged himself too. Dutton has promised this week to hold a referendum on constitutional recognition if the Voice is defeated, albeit without the vague Voice being pushed by Labor. In announcing this, Dutton also took aim at the lack of details provided on the form the Voice will take, its size and electoral process.
In response, key Vote Yes figure Megan Davis said “There’s no use going to referendum if it’s not going to change the daily lives of First Nations peoples,” adding that “there’s zero evidence anywhere in the world that a statement of recognition changes anything.” We agree with this - constitutional recognition and a declawed, confined Voice that the colonial state can simply ignore and dictate how it’s run will not change the daily lives of working class First Nations peoples. The proposals by both Labor and the Opposition are hollow, tokenistic measures that seek to avoid real change to the colonial system and channel dissent into a controlled, bureaucratic space.
At the same time that these bureaucrats have been running around the nation spewing out promises and empty platitudes, First Nations people continue to suffer. Thousands have been mobilised to push a Labor plan formulated by John Howard, with liberal-minded progressives flooding the streets to speak over First Nations voices. Yet, a Black Lives Matter rally held in Sydney over the weekend was attended by barely a hundred supporters. The hypocrisy and disconnect between those speaking over First Nations voices and those they claim to be representing has been highlighted in Queensland this fortnight.
The Palaszczuk Labor government has made a decision to ‘suspend’ its Human Rights Act so that it can detain children in adult watch houses. This law, part of Labor’s ‘tough stance on crime’, has been heavily derided for the way it disproportionately targets First Nations youth, and has seen children as young as 10 being held for weeks at a time. In Queensland, 65% of the youth prison population are First Nations children. The move has prompted the Queensland Labor government to be referred to the United Nations Committee Against Torture.
The fact that this legislation was passed in a rushed process as ‘emergency legislation’ has set a dangerous precedent for human rights and the democratic legal process in Australia. Once again, we are shown that the rights of the working class and vulnerable can be destroyed with the flick of a pen by those who prop up the colonial state, all so that they can maintain their control and protect their electoral interests. Over 180 organisations and individuals representing Aboriginal, disability, human rights and legal groups have written to the Premier about the issue - however, she’s unlikely to care as she’s taken off to Europe on holiday.
Labor and the Opposition are using all sorts of tricks and strategies to try and convince Australia they know what’s best for First Nations peoples. But the fact remains that their primary aim is to craft a progressive veneer around their First Nations policy, while strengthening the colonial state to continue its exploitation of Mob and Country.
We maintain that the contradictions of the colonial system cannot be solved under capitalism. We maintain that the movement must not channel its energies into bureaucratic bodies controlled by the colonial apparatus, but rather must build grassroots strength to fight for material changes. We maintain that the snakes in Parliament cannot be trusted, as history and recent events have shown us. Those who imprison children, break up families, blow up sites and destroy Country are not on the side of First Nations people - they are our enemies, and must be treated as such.
The Housing Front
Labor Glosses over Concerns Around Waterloo Estate Demolition
The NSW Labor government has put forward a revised plan that promises 500 extra homes in the Waterloo public housing estate demolition and redevelopment will be social or affordable housing. Housing Minister Rose Jackson said the proposed Waterloo South precinct would comprise 50 per cent social and affordable homes, up from the previous 34 per cent that was planned.
Jackson attempted to justify the move in stating that it would increase the supply of affordable housing and provide secure, long-term homes for vulnerable people in the community. However, as we have previously discussed, what the demolition is actually doing is removing thousands of public housing homes from housing stock. Instead, it is replacing them with ‘affordable’ homes tied to the market that at the $800 average will be unaffordable not only for the most vulnerable in our community, but also for the existing residents whose homes are being demolished. This is occurring while 51,000 people sit in limbo on the public housing wait list in NSW.
Jackson continued to display her political spin to mask the criminal demolition of homes in saying it is a “significant step forward in addressing injustices by the former government while ensuring our commitment to providing more homes for those who need it most”. If this was truly the case, then consultation with residents and the promise to not demolish public housing would be adhered to. But as per usual, Labor is dismantling and privatising public institutions all so that it can appease the wealthy, and will sacrifice the poor and working class to do so.
If Labor wanted to address the issue, it would not be making 50% of the homes private dwellings that will be sold to millionaires, landlords and investors while thousands wait for housing and millions suffer from inflationary rents and mortgage hikes. Similarly, they could address the issue of low income tenants being priced out of renovated boarding houses who are being forced into homelessness and insecure housing.
We must recognise that the Australian Labor Party will continue to smile while it plunges the knife into the flesh of the working class. Its refusal to address the housing crisis through a firm commitment to public housing demonstrates its alignment with the interests of landlords and developers. Its continued attacks on public housing and attempts to gloss over its crimes highlight how it has no issue with lying and deceiving workers. The Australian Communist Party and Community Union Defence League will continue to resist their attacks on the Waterloo estate, and will prioritise the needs of workers and tenants who are silenced by the ALP and its cronies. To get involved in the campaign, contact us via our website today.
South Australia and NSW Pursue Affordable and Social Housing
A new development in Adelaide’s north will see the state government implement affordable rentals in an attempt to ease the impact of the housing crisis in South Australia. The project will see 161 homes of the 249 new dwellings listed as affordable.
Housing Minister Nick Champion also stated that Renewal SA will deliver a further 25 affordable rentals to the site, which will be leased to tenants at less than 75% of market rent. He continued in saying "Affordable rental locks in affordability full time, it locks in that affordability for the community and we know that continues tenant after tenant because the community housing provider will be here to provide that affordable rental project."
For those who are unfamiliar with the issues around affordable housing, let us briefly summarise them. In the case of this new development, developers, landlords and money-hungry housing providers will reap in profits from housing that is only slightly more affordable for potential tenants. For the majority of workers however, this housing remains unaffordable. A proper approach would see a larger portion of the development be solely allocated as public housing, owned and maintained by the government with rents set at people’s incomes.
In NSW, a Sydney council has adopted a similar move in pushing to develop social housing on council owned land. The Inner West Council has proposed 10 sites that could be developed with community housing providers to build affordable housing units. However, many have noted that this is in effect privatising public land by handing over to notorious and problematic community housing providers.
As with the affordable housing development in South Australia, the moves by this council highlight how those in power don’t want to touch the taboo issue of public housing. Rather, leaders at federal, state and council level all want to gloss over the solution of public housing and channel resources into housing providers and developers that line their own pockets. They continue to try and use the terms as interchangeable when there is a huge difference. Social and affordable housing keep the majority of workers priced out of housing and privatises public land and assets. Public housing prioritises the needs of residents, rather than profit. Say yes to public housing. Say no to misleading half measures.
From the Picket Line
Closing Loopholes Bill Introduced by Labor
There have been developments in the landscape of industrial relations recently with the introduction of the Closing Loopholes Bill in federal parliament. The bill seeks to set minimum standards for thousands of “employee-like workers”, as well as making it a criminal offence to deliberately underpay workers. This would be punished with up to 10 years of jail time and maximum fines of $7.8 million.
The bill grants new powers to the Fair Work Commission to initiate investigations around allegations of deliberate underpayment. However, it also allows the FWC to not pursue criminal proceedings if the business cooperates. When did the law state that a bank robber doesn’t need to go to prison if they agree to not rob banks in the future? Once again, we see the shortcomings of the pro-business agenda of the ALP, who purport to address the issues impacting workers, but refuse to act against the interests of their mates in business.
The other main area addressed by the bill centres on minimum standards for gig economy workers. This would seek to set standards for pay, penalty rates, superannuation, payment terms, record-keeping, deactivation and insurance. Additionally, the bill proposes safeguards for gig economy workers and same job, same pay protections for labour-hire workers.
Naturally, there has been pushback from the capitalist class, with the Business Council of Australia and Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry criticising the bill for being to radical and that it will make services expensive and less accessible. The Minerals Council of Australia has also been funding a campaign to vote down the bill, seeking to demonise the impacts of same job, same pay.
As with many issues in industrial relations, this concern for the prices of goods and services on consumers is nowhere to be seen when companies hike prices to make record-breaking profits. Their hypocritical concern for consumers does not seem to exist when it relates to them sacrificing multi-million dollar bonuses or luxurious expenditure or tax avoidance.
While it is good to see some of the issues with wage theft being addressed, it is a shame to see these laws once again undone by the toothless, pro-business agenda of the major parties. The pro-employer Fair Work Commission can let off these criminals that keep us in poverty. Corporate criminals who deliberately keep workers in substandard conditions merely have to apologise and they are able to continue as they were with minimal enforcement or oversight. We must call out these shortcomings and push for change in our workplaces and in our unions. We deserve better, and the major political parties are not going to give it to us. We must seize it.
NSW Teacher’s federation votes to accept Minn’s new deal
On Saturday the 9th of September, the NSW Teacher’s Federation Council voted to accept a proposal from the NSW state government offering a $10,000 pay increase for teachers. Under the new agreement, starting teacher salaries will be raised from $75,791 to $85,000, while the highest pay band will be increased from $113,042 to $122,100. This amounts to a 12% and 8% respective pay raise. These increases will be implemented in the first year of the newly minted, four-year deal. Fortuitously, prior threats to introduce a 2.5% cap on teacher pay effective from the second year of the deal have been binned. Alongside an inflation rate full of helium and sitting at 7%, this would have meant a pay cut that draws blood in real terms. The agreed deal follows weeks of bitter exchange, no doubt reaching fever-pitch with a decision by the government to abandon the offer after having initially reached agreement on May 31st during a meeting between the TFA, Treasurer Daniel Mookhey and Education Minister Prue Car.
The pay increase, alongside the scrapping of pay caps, is a sight for sore eyes – especially for teaching staff. It wasn’t long however, before a nod towards cuts by Car in early September was confirmed by the Education Minister, issuing a media release soon after stating that the funds needed for increased teacher wages will be recouped by “…removing waste and duplication and will instead get some of the state’s most experienced teachers back in front of the students”. Some of the waste further identified by Car in the same document includes:
-funds allocated for moving teachers into admin roles to help in completing a back log of paperwork
-“Reducing programs that don’t directly support schools, including failed recruitment initiatives and unnecessary communications contractors…”
-“Removing duplication of programs in digital learning
-renegotiated commercial contracts
The timing of the pay increase so soon after winning election is a little uplifting. This is especially considering that the first year of an election cycle is frequently a full-moon for the business-owning class, having more time to sooth the resentment of those who felt it’s fangs over the following years. Labor’s suggestion that these cuts be focused on LNP money-bins is also street-smart, likely meant to signal to workers that the only public ‘goods’ cut will likely be nonsense put in place by the party which is unfamiliar with useful work anyway and who therefore couldn’t help workers if they tried.
Nonetheless, it’s best for our children and hard-working teachers that we keep both eyes fixed on the government. NSW Labor inspired all the confidence of a soaked power-point at the bargaining table when nearly handing workers an effective pay cut after the first year of the deal. Premier Minns also deserves suspicion. In a slightly fawning article in the Guardian, his ‘common sense approach’ to politics has included pressuring the Rail, Tram and Bus Union to abandon strike action in 2022 and vocal support for an LNP bill seeking to more severely punish climate protestors.
Similarly, Minns attempted to drum up support for further neutering the role of Unions in the Labor party in 2015. At the risk of sounding nasty, perhaps his biggest red flag is his many years spent as a party official after graduating from Princeton University. Considered together, the question bares asking: if Minns opposes so strongly the interests of unions and the workers and hasn’t worked at a job that creates value, then whose interests does he support?