commerce and industry magazine - summer 2014

V O L U M E 1 2 - S U M M E R 2 0 1 4 - $ 9 . 5 0 P E R E D I T I O N - $ 3 6 A N N U A L S U B S C R I P T I O N

A U S T R A L I A N C H A M B E R O F C O M M E R C E A N D I N D U S T R Y

BUSINESS LEADERSHIP WILL PAVE THE WAY FOR

GENDER EQUALITY

WORKCHOICES – DISPELLING THE MYTH

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF

HIGHER EDUCATION

REFORM PROSPECTS

FINELY BALANCED

AS NEW SENATE TAKES SHAPE

327978A_Commsys Aus | 2146.indd 1 28/10/14 10:11 AM

A MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT 2

FEATURESWHO IS BEST EQUIPPED TO SPEND THE COUNTRY’S MONEY? BY SENATOR BOB DAY AO 4

COMPETITIVENESS AGENDA: A WIN FOR ENTREPRENEURS 6

THE WORKPLACE REFORM PROSPECTS FINELY BALANCED AS NEW SENATE TAKES SHAPE 8

WORKCHOICES – DISPELLING THE MYTH 10

BUSINESS TO EDUCATE THE PUBLIC ON THE NEED FOR WORKPLACE RELATIONS REFORM 12

SUPPORTING RESOURCE INDUSTRY COMPETITIVENESS THROUGH WORKPLACE REFORM 1 4

SUPERANNUATION IN AWARDS? PUTTING AN END TO DUAL REGULATION 16

BUSINESS LEADERSHIP WILL PAVE THE WAY TO GENDER EQUALITY 18

ACCI EMPOWERING WOMEN IN AUSTRALIA AND ABROAD 20

EMPLOYMENT, EDUCATION AND TRAINING THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF HIGHER EDUCATION 22

INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS IORA’S OUTREACH PROGRAM AND THE UNTAPPED POTENTIAL OF THE INDIAN OCEAN RIM 24

THE G20 EMPLOYMENT PROCESS: NATIONAL EMPLOYMENT PLANS MUST DELIVER ON STRUCTURAL REFORMS 26

THE LIGHT SHINES ON TRADE FINANCE 27

ACCI MEMBER AND PARTNER NETWORK THE STRENGTH OF THE ACCI NATIONAL WORK, HEALTH AND SAFETY NETWORK 28

FROM SME TO SME: FIVE TECH TIPS TO ADD ROCKET FUEL TO YOUR BUSINESS 30 ACCI AND THE CENTRE FOR WORKPLACE LEADERSHIP 31

REMOVING RED TAPE FOR HEALTHCARE PRODUCT MANUFACTURERS 32

CONSULT AUSTRALIA: VALUING BETTER ENGAGEMENT 33

THE WORLD LOOKS TO AUSTRALIA FOR NATION BRANDING 34

SMALL BUSINESS, MAMMOTH CONTRIBUTION 35

AUSTRALIAN SECURITIES AND INVESTMENTS COMMISSION HELPING SMALL BUSINESSES 36

CONTENTS

COMMERCE & INDUSTRYPublished by the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ACCI) Commerce House 24 Brisbane Avenue BARTON ACT 2600

ISBN 9780646534091

EDITORSarah McGregor Senior Manager Marketing and Communications P: 02 6273 2311 E: [email protected] www.acci.asn.au

DESIGN3 Degrees Marketing 3dm.com.au

No part of this publication may be reproduced in any manner or form without written permission from ACCI.

The views expressed in Commerce & Industry are not necessarily those of the editors or the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry.

REFORM PROSPECT FINELY BALANCED AS NEW SENATE TAKES SHAPE

P.8

327978A_Commsys Aus | 2146.indd 1 28/10/14 10:11 AM

THE EFFECTIVE MORATORIUM ON LARGE-SCALE COAL SEAM GAS EXTRACTION IN MAJOR PARTS OF AUSTRALIA IS CONTRIBUTING TO THE SLOW-MOVING TRAIN WRECK OF INEVITABLE GAS PRICES RISE, AND WILL HAVE DISASTROUS CONSEQUENCES FOR ENERGY USERS AND BUSINESSES THAT RELY ON COMPETITIVELY PRICED GAS AS A MAJOR ENERGY SOURCE AND FEEDSTOCK. NOW IS THE TIME FOR A NATIONALLY COORDINATED APPROACH TO REMOVE POLITICALLY MOTIVATED BARRIERS TO DEVELOPMENT, AND HELP SECURE AUSTRALIA’S LONG-TERM POTENTIAL TO BE A GLOBAL POWERHOUSE OF ONSHORE GAS PRODUCTION.

2 COMMERCE & INDUSTRY SUMMER 2014

BY PETER HOOD, PRESIDENT, ACCI

UNLOCK THE GATE: COAL SEAM GAS KEY TO COMPETITIVELY PRICED ENERGY

WITH OUR ABUNDANT COAL RESOURCES AND ENGINEERING KNOW-HOW AUSTRALIA IS PERFECTLY PLACED TO FOLLOW THE LEAD OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO REPLICATE THE BOOM OF ONSHORE GAS PRODUCTION THAT HAS DRAMATICALLY LOWERED ENERGY PRICES AND REVITALISED THEIR MANUFACTURING SECTOR.

With our abundant coal resources and engineering know-how, Australia is perfectly placed to follow the lead of the United States of America and to replicate the boom of onshore gas production that has dramatically lowered energy prices and revitalised their manufacturing sector. It beggars the belief that good energy policy in places like New South Wales and Victoria has become beholden to noisy opposition groups such as the Lock the Gate Alliance, and those aligned with broadcaster and strident coal seam gas opponent Alan Jones. What this shows is that barriers to onshore production are political and not based on sound science or reasonable risk-based assessments. To solve this problem we need good policy to trump bad politics.

There is a regrettable amount of myth-making and fear mongering about coal seam gas, with much of it resting on exaggerated environmental and safety concerns relating to hydraulic fracturing, or as it is more commonly known – fracking.

Firstly, not all coal seam gas extraction requires fracking. The reality is that in many parts of Australia, such as the Gippsland region of Victoria, the geology often does not require fracking of the type that is currently safely underway in Queensland. Where coal seam gas extraction does take place, it actually degasses coal, assisting in the safe mining of the coal when eventually extracted.

Secondly, don’t let anyone tell you that fracking coal seam gas is new, dangerous or threatening to underground water supplies. There have been some 2.5 million wells developed worldwide since the practice was commercially pioneered in the 1950’s and independent Australian

studies have demonstrated that coal seam gas development poses no significant risk to underground water supplies. Former Howard Government Minister the Hon. Peter Reith, produced a comprehensive report as chairman of the Victorian Gas Market Taskforce in 2013 that found no significant risk and recommended an immediate lifting of the bans on fracking and exploration for coal seam gas in Victoria. When handing down the report Reith noted evidence from respected expert, Professor Peter Hartley from the University of Western Australia, who said, “There is no proven case of fracturing fluid or hydrocarbons produced by fracturing diffusing from the fractured zone into an aquifer”.

The important next step to resolve this issue is to ensure that good factual information dominates the debate and that landholders and those with a genuine stake in affected communities are consulted and, where appropriate, compensated. A well designed compensation package for landowners that properly aligns the interests of further development will be critical to the successful expansion of the industry.

At the national level, ACCI supports policies that assist domestic gas users, including small business, to access competitively priced energy through a transparent, open and competitive gas market. Our strong focus is on stimulating gas supply and ensuring that market based policies that concentrate on promoting greater competition and private sector investment. We do not support crude interventions to deal with these issues – such as reservation policies. These are unlikely to solve the problem,

and risk making it worse in the long run by compromising price signals and incentives that would lead to greater production. The federal government’s recently released Energy Green Paper accepts this point and provides a sensible blueprint for the energy and resources sectors, but there needs to be greater focus on working with states to remove local development barriers.

The way to protect domestic customers is through the development of markets, not intervention. The most compelling short to medium strategy for that is to remove artificial barriers to coal seam gas production.

Failure to address this issue now will see wholesale gas prices that have already doubled in New South Wales and the rest of Eastern Australia - in anticipation of the new liquefied national gas market - continue to rise and increase costs for businesses beyond breaking point. Adding to this problem is the forecasted gas shortages during winter peak periods from 2016 that are likely to cause supply interruptions to major industrial gas users. This eventuality would create uncertainty of supply and sharp fluctuations in price, and would damage the ongoing viability of gas-intensive businesses in Australia.

COMMERCE & INDUSTRY SUMMER 2014 3

BY SENATOR BOB DAY AO, SENATOR FOR SOUTH AUSTRALIA

THE AUSTRALIAN ECONOMY CONTAINS APPROXIMATELY $1500 BILLION PER ANNUM. OF THAT $1500 BILLION, FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS SPEND ABOUT ONE-THIRD ($500 BILLION).

The first and most important thing to remember is that the government has no money of its own – it only has your money. The

question, therefore, is, ‘Who is best equipped to spend the country’s money?’

There are two competing views on this: Keynesian vs. Austrian.

Keynesians believe in politicians and government bureaucrats deciding how to spend your money, and once they’ve spent it all, how much more they should spend by borrowing and going into debt.

The Austrian school says that politicians and public sector bureaucrats have no expertise in how markets work, how real jobs are created or why investment decisions are made, and should therefore stay right out of it.

University Professor Luigi Zingales summed up the Keynesian approach after the global financial crisis:

‘Keynesianism has conquered the hearts and minds of politicians and ordinary people alike because it provides a justification for irresponsible behaviour. Medical science has established that one or two glasses of wine per day are good for your long-term health, but no doctor would recommend that an alcoholic follow this prescription. Unfortunately, Keynesian economists do exactly this. They tell politicians, who are addicted to spending our money, that government expenditures are good. And they tell consumers, who are affected by severe spending problems, that consuming is good, while saving is bad. In medicine, such behaviour would get you expelled from the medical profession. In economics, it gets you a job in government.’

I have met politicians and government bureaucrats – a lot more in fact since I took my seat in the Senate on 1 July. Let me tell you, most of them know nothing outside of politics and the arcane, plodding, compliance-laden workings of bureaucracy. Believe me, they are the last people you want deciding where best to spend the nation’s money.

WHO IS BEST EQUIPPED TO SPEND THE COUNTRY’S MONEY?


FEATURES

Economies that are blessed with governments that know how to get out of the way, and how to stop pretending that they are the solution to every problem, are the economies that lead the world.

Think car manufacturing, pink batts, school halls, desalination plants and special interest projects too numerous to list.

We have to stop thinking of government as our ‘friend’ or ‘trusted financial adviser’. They are killing our economy. The sooner the Australian public wakes up to this reality, the sooner we will turn the nation around.

The government arms itself with ever-increasing armies of former journalists and spin doctors to help feed the 24-hour media cycle with sound bites and messages about how the government is the solution to every problem. Governments claim they can ‘turn economies around’ or ‘stimulate economic growth’. Anyone with experience in how economies truly work, however, knows that it is free markets, property rights and the rule of law that deliver economic growth and wealth for a nation. Economies that are blessed with governments that know how to get out of the way, and how to stop pretending that they are the solution to every problem, are the economies that lead the world.

Governments should not get involved in industry plans or investment spending or growth stimulation or industry subsidies, for the simple reason that those making the decisions on these things – politicians and government bureaucrats – do not know enough to make the correct decisions. If they did, like the former

Member for Wakefield and original Modest Member Bert Kelly once said, ‘They wouldn’t be here, they’d be sitting in the South of France with their feet in a bucket of champagne!’

Now, I understand that it can be difficult for lobby groups and representative bodies to maintain an arms-length relationship with governments after a sustained period of Keynesian economic thinking. Governments also need to be courageous on economic policy when they have been in the habit of trying to pick winners, rewarding fellow travellers and throwing subsidies to the masses – not to mention the rent-seekers and crony capitalists whose job it is to enrich one group of Australians – themselves – at the expense of another. But we need to call a spade a spade: rent-seekers and crony capitalists are the scourge of business and politics. They tarnish the political process, distort the market and, in the case of sectors like property development, distort the entire economy.

Senator Bob Day AO, is the Family First Party Senator for

South Australia.


FOR ALL THE TALK FROM BOTH SIDES OF POLITICS ABOUT CREATING JOBS YOU COULD BE EXCUSED FOR THINKING THAT THE SOURCE OF OUR NATIONAL PROSPERITY IS GOVERNMENT. WELL, IT’S NOT – IT’S BUSINESS, AND THE HARD WORKING MEN AND WOMEN WITHIN THOSE BUSINESSES WHO TAKE RISKS, MAKE SACRIFICES AND DO WHAT THEY CAN TO TURN A PROFIT. TO SOME, THAT’S A DIRTY WORD – PROFIT. BUT IT’S NOT, OR AT LEAST IT SHOULDN’T BE BECAUSE A PROFITABLE BUSINESS IS A SUSTAINABLE BUSINESS AND ONE THAT CAN PROVIDE VALUE TO ITS SHAREHOLDERS AND OPPORTUNITY TO ITS STAFF.

The appropriate role of government in industry policy must therefore be limited to ensuring the right fiscal and monetary conditions and preventing interventions into the marketplace that stifle productivity and harm our national competitiveness. To its credit, the Abbott-led federal government recently released a long rumoured Industry Innovation and Competitiveness Agenda. The competitiveness agenda outlines detail of the government’s approach to industry policy in four overarching ‘ambitions’: one, lower costs and complexity for business – tick; two, a more skilled workforce – tick; three, better economic infrastructure – tick; and four, industry policy that fosters innovation and entrepreneurship – definitely a tick.

The most encouraging aspect of the competitiveness agenda is the acknowledgement that businesses – not politicians or bureaucrats – are best placed to assess commercial opportunities and make investment decisions for the future. This means that the government has avoided the trap of proposing subsidies or direct market interventions that attempt to pick winners. This is where industry policy can go wrong.

The government has identified five growth sectors in which Australia already has a competitive advantage; including food and agribusiness; mining equipment, technology and services; medical technologies

and pharmaceuticals; advanced manufacturing; and oil, gas and energy resources. These sectors provide the structure for an Industry Growth Centres Initiative that will enable national action on key issues such as deregulation, skills, collaboration and commercialisation. Despite some initial concerns within business arising from early speculation about picking winners, the sector approach outlined in the detail of the agenda in substance does no such thing.

ACCI has welcomed the Agenda’s focus on innovation and fostering excellence not only within the five priority sectors but across the entire economy. It’s important to remember

Competitiveness Agenda: a win for entrepreneursBY JOHN OSBORN, DIRECTOR OF ECONOMICS AND INDUSTRY POLICY, ACCI

FEATURES


Competitiveness Agenda: a win for entrepreneurs

THE GOVERNMENT HAS AVOIDED THE TRAP OF PROPOSING SUBSIDIES OR DIRECT MARKET INTERVENTIONS THAT ATTEMPT TO PICK WINNERS. THIS IS WHERE INDUSTRY POLICY CAN GO WRONG.

that innovation is predominantly a dynamic firm-level process that can come from anywhere at any time, so we cannot afford to be too prescriptive. Our modern economy is so complex, we must ensure a policy framework that caters for a dynamic economy, as free as possible from the rigidities that limit business responsiveness to ever changing technological and global forces. The challenge for any government is to go beyond the rhetoric and motherhood statements that will see tangible benefits trickle down to the main-street and hip pockets of consumers. There are a number of initiatives in the Competitiveness Agenda that achieve this.

One stand-out win for entrepreneurs and start-ups is the reversal of changes to employee share scheme arrangements

that will now see options taxed when they are converted to shares and not when an employee receives them. The changes made in 2009 by the then Labor Government had seriously negative ramifications for entrepreneurs who could no longer use options to attract necessary talent into start-ups. To its credit, the now opposition has publically recognised the failure of those changes and will hopefully support measures to correct the problem. Fixing up the mess with employee share schemes is something that ACCI has been strongly advocating for with both the government and the opposition over the past year and we are confident that we will be able to reach a compromise here. We can no longer let the tax system stave our small business start-ups of the vital cash flow they need to grow and reach critical mass.

The government has announced an extensive ongoing business consultation around the four ambitions within the competitiveness agenda. ACCI’s CEO Kate Carnell AO will act as Deputy Chair for the roundtable considering Ambition 2: A more skilled labour force. This roundtable will play an important role in bringing to life the government’s vision to boost our productivity and our competitiveness by producing workers with the skills that employers need.


THE WORKPLACE

REFORM PROSPECTS FINELY BALANCED AS NEW SENATE TAKES SHAPEBY RICHARD CLANCY, DIRECTOR WORKPLACE RELATIONS, ACCI

The first anniversary of the election of the Abbott Government provides an opportunity to reflect on the current state of play in workplace relations. A recurring feature of Australia’s workplace relations system in recent decades has been reform following a change in government; however, events of the past year indicate that advocates for workplace relations reform will require patience, at least in the short term.

The government’s minimalist and cautious 2013 workplace relations election policy contained the express commitment to ‘…keep and improve the Fair Work laws.’ (‘The Coalition’s Policy to Improve the Fair Work Laws’, page 4) It has consistently stated since its election that it will only implement changes outlined in its policy, no more and no less. Should we be surprised?

The most senior members of the government remain deeply affected by the anti-WorkChoices campaign waged against the Coalition from 2005 onwards. They are only too aware of the accusations that the Howard Government exceeded its electoral mandate during its fourth term, and failed to explain to the community in advance why the WorkChoices reforms were necessary and beneficial.

Future reform beyond the 2013 election policy depends on the looming inquiry by the Productivity Commission – still unannounced at the time of writing. The government consistently maintains that it will not introduce any reforms unless it has an electoral mandate to do so. This is no more succinctly encapsulated in the following statement from the 2013 election policy: ‘The Productivity Commission will be asked to make recommendations about how the laws can be improved … Although the Coalition has no plans to change the Fair Work laws, we will carefully consider the recommendations and findings of the Productivity Commission. If there is a good cause for sensible and fair changes,

they will be taken to an election before they are implemented.’ (‘The Coalition’s Policy to Improve the Fair Work Laws’, page 13)

In the interim, the government is quick to counter any suggestion that it has plans beyond those outlined in the policy. Most notably, when discussion about penalty-rate reform and the setting of minimum wages and conditions takes place, often stimulated by ACCI and its members, it reaffirms that these matters remain for the Fair Work Commission (FWC) to decide.

While undoubtedly correct, the government’s responses do not, however, address a fundamental problem with the current framework. There are more than 20 competing considerations contained in the ‘Objects’ of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act), its ‘Minimum Wages objective’ and its ‘Modern Awards objective’, leaving the FWC to perform its wage-setting and award powers within a system that mitigates against flexibility and change. Nothing short of legislative reform will change this.


The Opposition has foreshadowed that any reform proposal is likely to be met with resistance. This is unsurprising, given the belief within the ALP that its election victory in 2007 was secured on the back of the anti-WorkChoices campaign. It remains entirely comfortable debating on those terms again.

Likewise, the ACTU will revert to an anti-WorkChoices campaign without much prompting, as evidenced by its President’s statement when draft terms of the proposed Productivity Commission Inquiry were leaked earlier this year: ‘Everything is up for grabs – penalty rates, our collective bargaining system, unfair dismissal protections, and individual agreements. The whole lot is on the plate. It is the complete opposite of what the government said it would do.’ (Ged Kearney – ‘Productivity Commission to conduct wide-ranging inquiry’ – Workplace Express – 7 March 2014)

More recently, with the Fair Work Amendment Bill 2014 before the Senate, Kearney stated, ‘Tony Abbott and the Coalition Government can repeat their mantra of workplace reform being “evolution not revolution”, but no-one should be fooled. This is the first step of the Coalition’s agenda to strip away workers’ rights and wages. Whatever the government calls it, and however they plan to do it, the end result is still the same – workers will be worse off under the government’s anti-worker agenda.’ (Ged Kearney – 25 September 2014)

Nonetheless, a number of specific measures from the policy have been included in Bills currently before the Senate, including the Building and Construction Industry (Improving Productivity) Bill 2013, the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment Bill 2013 and the Fair Work Amendment Bill 2014. With four parliamentary sitting weeks to go in 2014, all eyes will turn to

the cross-bench senators.

Their response to the Fair Work Amendment Bill 2014 (the Bill) will

provide perhaps the clearest indication

of how the newly constituted Senate will treat even the most modest of workplace relations reform proposals. The Bill contains amendments that deal with a range of measures, including individual flexibility agreements (IFAs), greenfield agreements, right of entry rules, and the taking of industrial action. They also include amendments of a technical nature, such as the attempt to clarify the rate of payment for accrued annual leave upon termination of employment.

Already, Senator Madigan of Victoria has ruled out support for the Bill in its entirety, based on his opposition to the IFA amendments, stating on 25 September 2014, ‘I am imploring the cross bench to stay strong and united to block this bill.’ ACCI, however, is prepared to remain cautiously optimistic. Our early engagement with the cross-bench Senators has been positive, and it is clear that they share ACCI’s interest in creating circumstances that will help more people secure employment – particularly young people.

In an encouraging sign, the government secured the support of the three Palmer United Party Senators – Senator Ricky Muir, Family First’s Senator Bob Day, and the Liberal Democratic Party’s Senator David Leyonhjelm – to preserve a regulation that assists third parties wanting to stop significant damage to the economy caused by strike action. Although seemingly minor in the overall scheme of things, this was very much a victory for jobs, investment and productivity.

It will therefore be interesting to see whether the various amendments in the Bill end up being modified or removed, or whether support for the Bill in its entirety can be secured. The final outcome will indicate the likely fate of the other workplace relations bills before the Senate and, possibly, the remainder of the government’s first term agenda. In these circumstances, patience during the required negotiations will indeed be a virtue.

Whatever the fate of the Bill, the requirement for ACCI to make the case for change will continue, whether it is in dialogue with parliamentarians, advocacy at the Fair Work Commission, or broader community conversation. It may take more time than would ideally be the case, but we must not relent in regard to our goals of more jobs, greater prosperity for workers and their employers, and a workplace relations system that will enable our nation to reach its full potential.


We think that the first and easiest thing for them to do, in order to increase GST revenue, is to look at the loopholes where money is leaking from the system – and the exemption for overseas-based retailers should be first on the list.

THE WORKPLACE - ACCI MEMBER NETWORK

EVERYONE AGREES THAT PRODUCTIVITY IS AN ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF ECONOMIC GROWTH IN AUSTRALIA. AND EVERYONE AGREES THAT AN ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF PRODUCTIVITY IS HAVING AN INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS SYSTEM THAT FACILITATES PRODUCTIVITY AND FLEXIBILITY IN AUSTRALIAN WORKPLACES.

Our current industrial relations system – The Fair Work Act – does neither.

Quite the contrary; the Act has reduced productivity and flexibility, and has tied employers up in more regulation and red tape, and cost many Australians their jobs.

As part of the Labor movement’s campaign in the lead-up to the 2007 federal election, the union bosses ran a very effective scare campaign about the supposed ‘evils’ of WorkChoices.

Today, when anyone mentions reforming our industrial relations system to increase productivity and flexibility, the Labor Party and the union bosses bring out the scare campaign of a ‘return to WorkChoices’.

And most people when they are asked, ‘what is WorkChoices?’ can’t tell you, but they say it was bad.

That’s why it is so important that we all understand what WorkChoices really was, and dispel the union bosses’ myth.

For 10 years, from 1996 to 2006, we had individual workplace agreements that worked fairly for employees and employers, and provided the flexibility and productivity that was needed.

It was only in 2006, when the then federal government removed the ‘no disadvantage’ test from agreements, that a handful of employers took unfair advantage of their employees.

Additionally, the then federal government excluded employees

who worked for businesses with fewer than 100 employees from taking legal action if they were dismissed.

And that really is the answer – WorkChoices was the removal of the no disadvantage test on agreements, and excluding employees from the unfair dismissal jurisdiction.

However, Prime Minister Tony Abbott and his government have made it very clear that WorkChoices, in Abbott’s own words, is ‘dead, buried and cremated’.

Yet the Labor Party and the union bosses still want to keep talking about WorkChoices.

Why? The answer is obvious: to prolong the scare campaign.

In the lead-up to the 2007 federal election, the Labor Party released its workplace relations policy, called ‘Forward with Fairness’. As part of implementing the policy, they promised workable individual agreement-making, no increases in costs to business from modern awards, no extension to the right to strike, and no extension of union right of entry.

But when they were elected to government in 2007, each promise was broken.

In addition, the former Labor Government granted a series of longstanding union demands.

This included increasing union right of entry, which allows union bosses to meet employees in their lunchrooms during

BY RICK CAIRNEY, DIRECTOR OF POLICY, BUSINESS SA

WORKCHOICES – DISPELLING THE MYTH


meal breaks. So employees have to sit and listen to a sales pitch about joining a union, or leave the lunch room.

Surely employees are entitled to eat a meal without being potentially harassed about joining a union?

Can you imagine going to your local café to have a meal and a chat with a friend only to be confronted with someone who is trying to sell you something, and your only options are to sit and listen or leave?

Is that fair?

Fairness is about even-handedness; it is about balance.

The current workplace laws are not balanced.

The character of the current Act is one of regulation and collectivism, and yet, the majority of workplaces do not conduct their industrial relations by way of a collectivist approach. In fact, only 12 per cent of employees in the private sector are union members.

South Australia is a state built on small business, with over 90 per cent of businesses employing fewer than 20 people.

So South Australia really is the small business state.

Small business owners are decent, hardworking people who provide other decent, hardworking Aussies with jobs and a future.

These are small businesses like the local café that provides your morning coffee on a daily basis, the pharmacy that dispenses the medication you require, the mechanic that performs repairs to your vehicle in an emergency, or the family-oriented pub that’s so often the meeting place of your local community.

The majority of these workplaces do not operate their employment relationships by way of a collectivist approach.

Most employers prefer to deal with employment issues on a one-on-one basis, between the employer and employee.

Negotiations are usually around an employment contract within the framework of a safety net of minimum wages and conditions.

It is important that small businesses be allowed to negotiate directly with their employees, but there are also a number of other issues in the legislation that are restricting productivity in Australia.

It is time that the Federal Government addressed the deficiencies within the

current system, and implemented balanced reforms that will give workplaces the flexibility to support job security and boost productivity.

Small businesses are major contributors to our economy, both socially and financially. We must help small businesses to grow and prosper so that they can provide much-needed jobs for us and our young people.

But we can no longer allow political spin to stop much-needed productivity and flexibility changes to our industrial relations system, so when the union bosses and the Labor Party yell ‘WorkChoices’, it must be seen for what they have made it – just a campaign slogan without substance.

About Business SA: Business SA is the voice of Business in South Australia, assisting organisations of all sizes to manage people and tackle the issues faced in todays competitive business environment. For more information, visit www.business-sa.com.

IT IS SO IMPORTANT THAT WE ALL UNDERSTAND WHAT WORKCHOICES REALLY WAS, AND DISPEL THE UNION BOSSES’ MYTH.


BUSINESS TO EDUCATE THE PUBLIC ON THE

NEED FOR WORKPLACE RELATIONS REFORM

BY TREVOR EVANS, CEO, NATIONAL RETAIL ASSOCIATION



NO DOUBT THE MAJORITY OF BUSINESS ORGANISATIONS WILL GIVE THE GOVERNMENT A PASS MARK OF SOME DESCRIPTION FOR ITS YEAR-LONG EFFORTS TO RETURN THE BUDGET TO SURPLUS, REDUCE DEBT, MANAGE THE SENATE AND IMPLEMENT ITS ELECTION COMMITMENTS. SIMILARLY, MOST EMPLOYER GROUPS WILL LAMENT – WITH GOOD REASON – THE LACK OF DISCERNIBLE PROGRESS IN RELATION TO IR REFORMS. AFTER THE RUSH OF ANTI-JOBS LEGISLATION WAS RAMMED THROUGH THE PREVIOUS PARLIAMENT BY THE LABOR/GREENS GOVERNMENT IN ITS DEATH THROES, WE ALL HOPED THAT THE NEW

GOVERNMENT WOULD BE BOLD IN ITS EFFORTS TO RETURN THE POLICY PENDULUM TO THE SENSIBLE CENTRE.

Still haunted by the spectre of WorkChoices, however, the Abbott Government has made very clear in both its public and private utterances that it has absolutely no intention of tackling comprehensive IR reforms any time soon. There have been some notable individuals calling for reform – most recently from New South Wales MP Alex Hawke and Queensland Senator James McGrath – who have tried commendably to get the job-destroying nature of penalty rates in the retail and hospitality industries onto the agenda.

Senator McGrath, who has previously worked closely with the National Retail Association (NRA), accurately described penalty rates as being like a cyclone that devastates the tourism sector every Sunday and public holiday.

By and large, however, these are isolated voices. And even though the sentiments are broadly supported across the government party room, it’s highly unlikely that support will translate into action any time soon. The Abbott Government, smarting from the public reaction to its first budget, has no appetite for another fight that will allow its political rivals to portray members of the federal government as heartless, ideological warriors.

So how are business groups to respond to this? Are we entitled to believe that a Coalition Government elected with a thumping majority would spend some of its political capital on this

most fundamental of its economic and philosophical beliefs? Of course we are; however, we also need to understand the political reality confronting the Abbott Government. And if we don’t like that reality, it is up to us to change it, rather than simply complain about the outcomes. We understand that the most compelling argument for IR law reform is around job creation. We understand that employment growth can only accelerate once the shackles are removed from businesses – particularly small businesses. We understand this, but the voting public does not necessarily understand it. And that is where business organisations must step up.

There is a ready army in the trade union movement that will do the hard work on its behalf to convince voters – erroneously – that their jobs are threatened by workplace reform. It is up to employers to make the counter-argument – and to win it – that workplace reform is the only path to sustainable jobs growth. We need to produce example after example of how existing laws restrict employment, especially in these times of rising unemployment – notably youth unemployment. And we need to provide those examples to the public, to legislators, to media, and of course to the Productivity Commission when the government acts on its election commitment for a comprehensive review of the IR system.

We can agree with each other that the first 12 months have been disappointing from an IR point of view. We can argue, na�vely, that the Federal Government should take up the fight for employers simply because we are right. Or we can accept the political reality that in a three-year election cycle, no government will move on a major issue such as IR reform unless there is a clear voter mood in favour of change. It’s up to employer groups to help create that mood by educating Australians about the indisputable link between workplace laws and jobs growth. If we fail to do our share of the heavy lifting, we shouldn’t be surprised that the overall job doesn’t get done.

About NRA: The National Retail Association (NRA) has been representing the interests of the retail, fast food and broader services sector for almost 100 years. The NRA delivers critical information and advice to thousands of businesses nationally, ranging in size from the smallest corner store to the majority of Australia’s major retail chains and franchising groups. For more information, visit www.nra.net.au.

It is up to employers to make the counter-argument – and to win it – that workplace reform is the only path to sustainable jobs growth.



THE AUSTRALIAN MINES AND METALS ASSOCIATION (AMMA) HAS LONG BEEN A VOCAL ADVOCATE FOR REFORM OF HOW WE REGULATE WORK IN AUSTRALIA, AND THE URGENT NEED TO FIX SIGNIFICANT FLAWS IN THE PREVIOUS GOVERNMENT’S FAIR WORK ACT. HERE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF POLICY AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS, SCOTT BARKLAMB, REVIEWS PROGRESS IN WORKPLACE REFORM AFTER THE COALITION’S FIRST FULL YEAR IN GOVERNMENT, AND THE RESOURCE INDUSTRY’S PRIORITIES FOR FUTURE CHANGE.

Sucessfully addressing the competitive challenges facing Australia’s resource industry won’t come from government and legislative reform alone – it will require our industry to continue to innovate, and to create new efficiencies and productivity improvements to better compete in ever globalising markets.

However, the role of government in creating a regulatory environment that supports and encourages industry innovation and investment remains absolutely critical. AMMA has long argued that one of the starting points must be genuine workplace relations reform.

Change commenced early in the year through the Fair Work Amendment Bill 2014, which has passed the lower house but is unlikely to be considered by the Senate until 2015. While ongoing delays are frustrating and unmerited, the bill encouragingly addresses three major areas of concern for Australia’s resource employers.

Firstly, the 2014 bill would uphold the Coalition’s commitment to restore the pre-2009 laws on how, when and why union officials can legally enter workplaces.

Despite the strongest possible promise not to amend the union entry laws, the former Labor government removed many of the key checks and balances, effectively exposing resource operations around the country to a deluge of deliberately disruptive, on-site union recruitment drives. Further changes in 2013 opened up lunch rooms and subsidised remote site visits to union officials. This typifies the problems created by the Rudd/Gillard government policy hubris on workplace relations and failure to respect and engage with the concerns of industry.

SUPPORTING RESOURCE INDUSTRY COMPETITIVENESS THROUGH WORKPLACE REFORMBY SCOTT BARKLAMB, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, POLICY AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS, AUSTRALIAN MINES AND METALS ASSOCIATION


The second major reform in the government’s first round of workplace amendments is creating more balanced, competitive and efficient process for setting the wages and conditions for new, or “Greenfields”, resource projects. Again, Labor’s poor policy and poor execution has delivered delays and cost overruns in major project construction across the past three years.

The existing flawed legislation will continue to harm major project investment in this country until the 2014 amendments are passed. The third significant positive to come from the Fair Work Amendment Bill 2014 is the introduction of a more workable system for flexible working arrangements.

Beyond these proposed reforms to Julia Gillard’s increasingly dysfunctional Fair Work Act, there have been other positive movements in workplace relations policy during 2014.

The government moved quickly to introduce legislation to not only restore the Australian Building and Construction Commission (ABCC), but also to extend its enforcement powers to offshore construction projects. The ABCC is a proven regulator, which should never have been abolished in favour of watered down enforcement. AMMA, along with the ACCI network, has consistently supported the restoration of the ABCC and will continue to do so.

Another significant problem with the previous government’s Fair Work Act is the ease with which unions can take legally-protected strike action during

bargaining – often over matters not relating directly to the employment relationship and previously considered ‘off limits’. While we are yet to see amendments to fix these problems, the government did go some way to addressing strike action and union militancy with the introduction of a new regulation that allows third parties to apply to stop damaging strike action before it occurs.

Also under consideration by the government is the creation of an independent, separate industrial relations appeals jurisdiction, which would review rulings by the Fair Work Commission to ensure greater consistency in decisions and that longstanding industrial precedents are followed.

AMMA has been at the forefront of advocacy for such a body, following employer concerns over decision making and restructuring that have reduced confidence in the Fair Work Commission. New appeals arrangements would also see Australia come into line with international best practice.

While the Coalition’s first year in government may not have delivered the scale of workplace relations reform sought by many in the business community, the various amendments before parliament as well as further foreshadowed reforms invite a positive outlook for a more balanced and competitive workplace system in the near future.

Importantly, the impending Productivity Commission review represents an historic ‘once in a generation’ opportunity

to ensure Australia’s industrial relations system can support the future aspirations and prosperity of our nation. This is set to a critical opportunity to address the big picture questions that will shape how we regulate work, and encourage employment, investment, and growth for decades to come.

The success of the Productivity Commission review in advancing genuine workplace reform, and of the government in securing the passage of the changes outlined above, will rely on the ACCI network and wider business community playing its part. In 2015, it will be more important than ever that AMMA, ACCI and each ACCI member organisation actively critique the existing system, explain the problems it is causing for their members, contribute to first rate policy development, and energetically pursue the best possible case for change

About AMMA: Australian Metals and Mines Australia (AMMA) is Australia’s national resource industry employer group, a unified voice driving effective workforce outcomes. Having actively served resource employers for 96 years, AMMA’s vast membership covers employers in every allied sector of this diverse and rapidly evolving resource industry. AMMA’s members include companies directly and indirectly employing more than half a million working Australians in mining, hydrocarbons, maritime, exploration, energy, transport, construction, smelting and refining, as well as suppliers to these industries. For more information, visit: www.amma.org.au


THE WORKPLACE

SUPERANNUATION IN AWARDS? PUTTING AN END TO DUAL REGULATION

THE AUSTRALIAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY HAS LONG ARGUED THAT AWARDS SHOULD NOT REGULATE SUPERANNUATION, AND THE QUESTION OF WHETHER A FUND SHOULD BE A DEFAULT IS BEST LEFT TO THE AUSTRALIAN PRUDENTIAL REGULATION AUTHORITY.

The bulk of employers’ superannuation obligations are regulated by guarantee legislation, and awards just add to them. It’s generally forgotten that, prior to the Fair Work legislation, there was legislation providing that superannuation terms in awards were to cease effect after 30 June 2008.

WHAT’S WRONG WITH REGULATING SUPERANNUATION IN AWARDS?

Specifying a small number of default funds in awards is anti-competitive. This does not necessarily mean that it’s bad for employers, but it does send a signal that we should look more closely at the claimed advantages.

AWARD SUPERANNUATION HAS BEEN AROUND FOR AGES

Specifying funds means that an employer cannot ordinarily use a different default from those named without breaching the award. Award modernisation reduced to 122 the number of awards, thus magnifying the competitive advantage of being specified. The concentration effect is yet to impact, because the modernisation bench decided to allow

employers to continue using the default funds they were using before 12 September 2008. This is set to change. After the current four-yearly review of default fund terms in modern awards is finished, the 12 September 2008 provision will not be there – only the new list of specified funds.

TILTING THE EMPLOYER’S ARRANGEMENT WITH ITS DEFAULT

An employer must be a ‘participating employer’ with any fund it uses as a default.

To become a participating employer, the employer must enter into a contractual relationship with the fund, but, when most funds are not options because not named in the award, it is not a fair negotiation. It’s not fair because employers must also make contributions that are consistent with choice requirements, and do so in time to meet statutory requirements. The employer’s need to have a default fund set up in time gives the funds specified in the employer’s award the whip hand. The smaller the number of specified funds, the greater the tilt.

AWARD PROVISIONS ARE ARBITRARY

The two main problems with prescribing additional superannuation obligations in awards are arbitrariness and inconsistency.

Until 1 January this year, most – but not all – modern awards contained superannuation provisions. The standard superannuation term requires employers to make the contributions necessary to avoid a guarantee charge. That is, if an employer incurs a guarantee charge, not only is the employer up for the additional direct and administrative costs, but it is also liable for penalty because of the award breach.

Putting this provision into all modern awards has not made the award penalty less arbitrary – it has merely moved the boundaries. Award superannuation terms do not apply to employees to whom the award does not apply. This includes employees who are award-free, and employees who are covered by an enterprise agreement – whether or not it mentions superannuation.

BY DICK GROZIER, SENIOR COUNSEL WORKPLACE RELATIONS, ACCI


Some modern awards provide superannuation benefits in excess of the legislated guarantee. It’s difficult to see why superannuation benefits, such as expanded eligibility, what’s included in ordinary time earnings or requiring contributions when not required under the guarantee, should be provided by an award-based industry- or occupation-specific minimum standard, rather than by an enterprise agreement appropriate to the workplace. It’s also difficult to see why in workplaces where more than one award applies, some employees should have these additional entitlements as part of their safety net, and their colleagues should not.

DOESN’T SPECIFYING FUNDS IN AWARDS MAKE IT EASIER FOR EMPLOYERS?

It’s sometimes said that naming funds in awards makes the employer’s job of selecting a default easier, because it’s difficult for employers to know what the best default for their employees is. It’s true that not having to make a decision is easier than having to, but this argument misses a couple of key facts.

Awards reduce the number of potential defaults; they do not eliminate decisions. The funds specified in awards were not put there on the basis of a disinterested assessment of performance or appropriateness; they are the result of industrial settlements. This basic fact is not changed by the new legislation requiring four-yearly reviews of default fund terms, and the new legislation perpetrates the problems of arbitrariness and inconsistency. Indeed, after the 12 September 2008 clause is removed, it is more likely that an employer may have to have more than one default to cover its workforce.

Default funds are ‘sticky’. Employers rarely just decide to change their default – usually they change defaults because they have to, or because they have had such a bad experience that they feel they must move. Changing a default means that the employer must enter into an arrangement with a new fund so as to become ‘participating’, register all affected employees and give them all a standard choice form, keep records of this, and respond to any choice forms that are returned properly completed.

The greatest sources of default fund change are the award system itself and fund amalgamations. When the new fund is the successor to the old one, an amalgamation seems more like a transfer, and this is how amalgamations are usually presented – business as usual, with new details. Although it’s a current requirement, when the new fund is the successor to the old one, an amalgamation shouldn’t require affected employers to issue a standard choice form.

SHOULD AGREEMENTS CONTAIN SUPERANNUATION PROVISIONS?

Employers and employees should be able to make agreements about superannuation, but one current consequence is that specifying a fund in an agreement overrules choice legislation. This is good, because choice remains a real headache for employers to administer, and taking it off the table has been a real benefit, particularly for larger employers. Having all of the employer’s contributions going into the one fund can often benefit employees, as well, because funds can reduce fees where their employer makes bulk member contributions.

However, if SuperStream lives up to its promise so that employees actually must and do provide all relevant fund-related data for chosen fund contributions, and employers are easily able to make chosen fund contributions without complicated set-up, it may be that this aspect of policy should be reviewed. It remains to be seen whether SuperStream will deliver on this.

The two main problems with prescribing additional superannuation obligations in awards are arbitrariness and inconsistency.


THE WORKPLACE


BUSINESS LEADERSHIP WILL PAVE THE WAY FOR GENDER EQUALITYBY ALANA MATHESON, DEPUTY DIRECTOR WORKPLACE RELATIONS, ACCI

THE ISSUE OF WORKPLACE GENDER EQUALITY CONTINUES TO GAIN MOMENTUM, AND IS AN INCREASING AREA OF FOCUS FOR A NUMBER OF REGULATORY AGENCIES, COMMISSIONS, UNIONS, EMPLOYERS AND WOMEN’S GROUPS. COMPLIANCE OBLIGATIONS ARISE FROM THE WORKPLACE GENDER EQUALITY ACT 2012, ASX CORPORATE GOVERNANCE PRINCIPLES, AND ANTI-DISCRIMINATION LAWS.

The pay equity provisions introduced by the Fair Work Act 2009 have resulted in unions seeking equal pay orders across female-dominated sectors. Publicly commissioned research and data has suggested systemic problems, and further research programs and government-led campaigns targeting the issue of gender equality are in the pipeline.

With heightened awareness and interest in workplace gender equality, ACCI’s views have been and will continue to be sought. ACCI has sought to play a constructive role in identifying strategies to address the issue without unnecessarily increasing the regulatory burden for business. ACCI recognises the importance of:

• promoting gender equality in the workplace

• supporting employers to remove any barriers they may face regarding participation of women in the workplace

• promoting the elimination of discrimination on the basis of gender

• improving productivity and competiveness of Australian business through the advancement of gender equality in employment and in the workplace.

Apart from the important social outcomes that effective gender equality initiatives deliver, they are also good for business productivity, competitiveness and the broader economy. The Grattan Institute has stated that a six per cent rise in women’s participation would increase the size of the Australian economy by around $25 billion per year – a significant observation, as Australia strives toward the growth target of 1.8 per cent agreed by the G20 finance ministers.

With the productivity imperative and growth targets in mind,

in July 2014 ACCI hosted an event – Women’s Empowerment Principles: Equality Means Business – which was held alongside the B20 Summit, and at which ACCI signed the the Women’s Empowerment Principles. The Women’s Empowerment Principles are a joint initiative of UN Women and the UN Global Compact, and offer guidance for businesses, based on best practices from around the world.

ACCI’s support for the Principles reflects ACCI’s acknowledgement of the need for a contemporary response in pursuit of gender equality; however, the approach requires careful consideration to prevent the imposition of impractical or duplicative regulatory requirements that will detract from, or add no value to, the advancement of gender equality and participation of women in the workplace. ACCI has suggested that the issue of gender equality is one that needs to be pursued through a process of cultural change, and that it is counterproductive to implement a policy response that will see the matter treated as a compliance or regulatory exercise.

These sentiments have been reflected in ACCI’s submissions in relation to the reporting framework arising under the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012 (Act), which ACCI has suggested will benefit from further analysis and revision in a number of key areas. While ACCI recommends deferral of the expansion of mandatory reporting, the simplification and streamlining of current reporting requirements is also necessary. This approach is consistent with the government’s commitment to cut red tape and reduce the regulatory burden upon business. ACCI is seeking changes to convert the reporting exercise from a compliance burden to a meaningful tool that delivers value for effort.

ACCI also considers that a more contemporary response to the objects identified in the Act will be achieved via initiatives that are educational, promotional and advisory in nature. Such initiatives must not centre on mandatory reporting, but must instead adopt a more holistic approach to the issue of women’s empowerment and workforce participation.

The policy framework should positively encourage employers to formulate and implement customised strategies in addressing gender equality, and support them in promoting their efforts and achievements. Government should identify and address different agencies and tribunals being tasked with initiatives relating to gender equality and women’s participation, in order to achieve optimal results through collaboration, as well as pursuing appropriate consolidation and savings. To the extent that government has a role to play, it will be important that government partners with business to deliver enhanced outcomes through targeted support and education. In order to build momentum and continue to attract positive support for gender equality, it is important that such an approach is adopted, rather than compliance-based activities or approaches that would ‘name and shame’ businesses considered by the regulator to have fallen short of expectations.

There is also merit in exploring these issues outside the employment relationship to better understand and address the social and cultural factors that drive and inhibit women’s ambition, desire to engage in their workplace, career advancement, and pursuit of leadership roles. Initiatives targeted at assisting women to further their ambitions as entrepreneurs and leaders must also be considered.

Apart from the important social outcomes that effective gender equality initiatives deliver, they are also good for business productivity, competitiveness and the broader economy.


THE WORKPLACE

ACCI empowering women in Australia and abroad

ACCI THROUGH ITS PRODUCTIVITY LEADERSHIP PROGRAM HAS RECENTLY HOSTED TWO EVENTS TO FOCUSING ON THE IMPROVEMENT OF WOMEN’S ENGAGEMENT AND EMPOWERMENT IN THE WORKFORCE.

As a part of the B20 Business events that took place in mid-July, ACCI along with the input from our associated partners the UN Global Compact Australia, UN Women, Australian Human Rights Commission, the Australian Mines and Metals Association (AMMA), BPW Australia, Australian Women in Resources Alliance and Corporate Sustainability Australia, hosted the ‘Women’s Empowerment Principles : Equality Means Business’ luncheon.

The main message from event was the importance of increasing women’s participation rates - halving the difference in participation rates between women and men would deliver $25 billion in growth to the Australian economy according to research conducted by the Grattan Institute. The event was a great start to the B20 Summit that saw 160 national and international delegates come together to engage in discussion and hear from our panellists on policy recommendations

and implementations to improve women’s engagement and empowerment in the workforce. ABC journalist Virginia Haussegger facilitated the event and panel discussions with David Thodey, Chief Executive Officer and Executive Director of Telstra, Cassandra Kelly, Joint Chief Executive Officer of Pottinger, Simon Rothery, Chief Executive Officer of Goldman Sachs Australia, Elizabeth Broderick, Sex Discrimination Commissioner at the Australian Human Rights Commission, Brent Wilton, Secretary-General of the International Organisation of Employers and John Danilovich, Secretary-General of the International Chamber of Commerce. The event concluded with Nigel McBride, CEO of Business SA, Kate Carnell ACCI CEO, and Daniel Musson, Group CEO of AIM, signing the Women’s Empowerment Principles CEO Statement of Support. For more information on the Principles, visit weprinciples.org.

IN OCTOBER, AS A PART OF THE INDIAN OCEAN RIM ASSOCIATION (IORA) COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS MEETING TAKING PLACE IN PERTH, ACCI hosted a breakfast which engaged 100 business leaders and senior politicians to discuss how both business and government can practically deliver on gender diversity and economic empowerment throughout the Indian Ocean Rim. The group was addressed by the Australian Minister for Foreign Affairs Julie Bishop MP, and Chamber of Commerce and Industry Western Australia CEO, Deidre Willmott facilitated a discussion panel comprising of Kate Carnell, Chief Executive Officer, Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Michael Anghie, Managing Partner, Ernst & Young, Julie McKay, Executive Director, UN Women Australia, Veronica Lukito, Chief Executive Officer, Ancora Capital Management (Indonesia), Revathy Ashok, Managing Trustee & CEO, B.PAC.


level 1 454a ChurCh St riChmond viCtoria | t: +61 3 8416 5999 | [email protected] i www.3dm.Com.au

PR & communications • events • sPonsoRshiP • gRaPhic design

Exceptional ResultsWe are a Melbourne based marketing agency with a strong

reputation and a proud history of helping brands come to life.

Specialising in creative marketing and communication solutions, we maintain a flexible approach to delivering for

our clients. Our team utilises a strong network of contacts to provide exceptional results.

EMPLOYMENT, EDUCATION AND TRAINING

THE ABBOTT GOVERNMENT’S PROPOSED REFORMS TO HIGHER EDUCATION HAVE PUT THE SECTOR IN SHARP FOCUS ON THE NATIONAL CURRENT AFFAIRS AGENDA.

ACCI, in representing the business community, is focused on ensuring that the higher education sector delivers the skills that enterprises need, as well as ensuring that the significant public investment is delivering a return that is of benefit not only to the economy, but also to the student. As Table 1 indicates, according to projections released by the Department of Employment, the demand for skills at Skill Level 1, which generally equates to bachelor’s degree or higher qualifications, at a projected five-year growth of 10.3 per cent outstrips average demand of 7.2 per cent.

Growth in the number of higher education graduates has been strongly underpinned by a shift to an uncapped, demand-driven system; however, the big questions are: Is the cost of this growth sustainable in fiscal terms? And, just as importantly, are the quality and types of skills being produced going to meet the needs of the labour market into the future? The proposed higher education reforms in large part address these issues.

The reforms reflected in the Bill are underpinned by the principle that the higher education sector should be more open to the market through fee deregulation and contestability – an approach that resonates strongly and favourably with the business community. As the leading voice for Australian business, it is not unexpected that ACCI, at the time of the Bradley review in 2008/09, advocated in favour of, and continues to support, a market-driven approach to higher education.

With 39 current universities, including two private universities and the prospect of funding to other private higher education institutions, there will be sufficient competition in the market to encourage institutions to compete on price and service.

ACCI identifies and supports much strength in the reforms, including the opportunity for providing additional revenue streams to achieve a more sustainable funding basis for a diverse university sector. These reforms will contribute to establishing a platform for research-intensive universities to invest; drive quality improvements in teaching and academia through increased competition and reputation enhancing mechanisms; encourage universities to specialise; and allow higher education providers to form strong collaborations with vocational training providers. This will provide clearer pathways

THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF HIGHER EDUCATION

BY JENNY LAMBERT, DIRECTOR OF EMPLOYMENT, EDUCATION AND TRAINING, ACCI

Federal Department of Employment Projections

Skill Level Employment Level - November 2013 (‘000)

Projected employment level - November 2013 (‘000)

Projected five-year employment growth to November 2018

(‘000) (%)

Skill Level 1 3161.6 3821.5 356.9 10.3

Skill Level 2 1366.0 14839.5 117.5 8.6

Skill Level 3 1746.3 1813.2 67.0 3.8

Skill Level 4 3.52.7 3278.0 225.3 7.4

Skill Level 5 2015.9 2067.4 71.5 3.5

Total Employment

11,645.5 12,483.5 836.1 7.2


for students, and greater efficiencies through the potential for better articulation across the system.

Extending the uncapped, demand-driven system to non-universities and below the bachelor’s degree level will also assist in achieving other benefits such as;

• improving the sustainability of those VET providers such as TAFE which may be in a position to offer higher education qualifications;

• increasing the attractive offerings of regional and other universities operating in lower socio-economic demographic areas; and,

• by providing more accessible pathways to university through better funded associate degree courses.

Moves to increase funded support for qualifications below bachelor also directly address Skill Level 2 needs – the demand for which, as Table 1 figures show, is also expected to grow above the average.

To address quality and labour market alignment most directly, one aspect of the reforms that needs to be brought to the forefront is the essential requirement

to have an informed market. A robust approach to an informed market should limit the concerns about the potential fee increases, and, most importantly, will generate real choice for students based on quality information.

Outcomes from the proposed Quality Indicators for Learning and Teaching (QILT) program should be better highlighted and linked to the reform. This will provide students, parents and careers advisers with information on the performance of universities, including:

• graduate employment outcomes, including the percentage employed and whether the employment related to the area of their study

• salary outcomes on graduation.

This information is already available, but the intention of QILT is that it is more extensive and more accessible. If regional universities have stronger industry engagement and get better outcomes, the student demand will move to where the jobs are, particularly if the fees are cheaper. The QILT program needs to be supplemented by a better approach to reaching students at enrolment time, to educate them

about where the jobs will be in future. Good careers advice will also lead to better job outcomes. For some students, better jobs and salary outcomes may not be with universities at all, but instead through the vocational system, such as apprenticeships. Businesses need both.

Although recent world university rankings have indicated the strength of our higher education sector, evidence about industry/university collaboration has demonstrated that Australia still has a lot of work to do. ACCI has held recent discussions with a range of university stakeholder groups to identify strategies and activities that can improve collaboration. We have also been doing extensive work on improving work-integrated learning, or internship, opportunities to address the job-readiness of graduates and improve the links between businesses and universities.

The higher education landscape is changing, and needs to continue to evolve to meet the needs of the labour market, both in skill requirements and quality of outcomes.

Although recent world university rankings have indicated the strength of our higher education sector, evidence about industry/university collaboration has demonstrated that Australia still has a lot of work to do.


INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

THE INDIAN OCEAN RIM ASSOCIATION FOCUSES ON SIX PRIORITY AREAS WHICH ARE OF COMMON INTEREST TO ITS 20 MEMBER STATES. THESE ARE: MARITIME SAFETY AND SECURITY; TRADE AND INVESTMENT FACILITATION; FISHERIES MANAGEMENT; DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT; ACADEMIC, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY; AND TOURISM AND CULTURAL EXCHANGES. IN 2013, UNDER THE CHAIRMANSHIP OF AUSTRALIAN FOREIGN MINISTER JULIE BISHOP, WOMEN EMPOWERMENT WAS INTRODUCED AS A CROSS-CUTTING CONCERN ACROSS THESE SIX PRIORITY AREAS.

It is evident from this prioritized agenda that the development and empowerment of the Indian Ocean citizen stands at the core of our common objective. Our regional perspective allows us to connect to employees and employers in the occupational sectors in IORA’s priority areas.

IORA encourages the involvement of officials, the private sector and academia in decision-making mechanisms. The Working Group for Trade and Investment (WGTI) consisting of officials, business persons and academics the Indian Ocean Rim Business Forum (IORBF) consisting of business persons and the Indian Ocean Rim Academic Group (IORAG) composed of academics are platforms for discussions that feed into the agenda for decision-making at the highest official and ministerial levels. The institutional structure of the IORA facilitates a mechanism that is flexible, consensual and inclusive.

IORA is at the initial stage of launching the IORA Outreach Program that is an attempt to connect and strengthen awareness of the Association with the public and the intelligentsia directly. For this purpose, a web interface is being designed which would be

complemented by ground activities to interact with students and professionals and regular media releases on common issues of interest in the Indian Ocean region.

The Secretariat believes that the coming-together of the private sectors of 20 Member States of the Indian Ocean Rim region can be a leitmotif for engagement of peoples in this region. The private sector acts as a developer of opportunities and facilitator, and enables inhabitants of the Indian Ocean to explore new opportunities for trade, investment and employment in the region. As a regional private sector cohort is established, automatically, it would generate a degree of internal competitiveness that should attract the best human resources from the region. The view is held that this approach would result in the creation of better employment opportunities and conditions in the region. A sharing of best practices and experiences will certainly improve the workplace scenario across the Indian Ocean Rim region.

In 2014, IORA conducted two workshops on the economic empowerment of women in the tourism and textile sectors, and on poverty alleviation, respectively.

These two events were the beginning of IORA’s commitment to extend more opportunities, and especially, create a better prospect for an equitable engagement of women in our workforce. In order to broaden its capacity to deliver on the latter objective, the IORA has taken up the challenge to bring together the 20 Member States in formulating a promising Indian Ocean Blue Economy framework.

Our Member States have the privilege of bordering the vast Indian Ocean coastline. As the global economy becomes volatile and competitive, our common Indian Ocean heritage presents us with the opportunity to evade dependency on traditional economic pillars and explore new, niche areas of sustainable economic development of the blue economy. The common objective to explore the untapped potential of our coasts, sea, waves, sea-bed, sea animals and sea-minerals, all in the spirit of sustainability and equitability, is IORA’s challenge for the future.

IORA’s Outreach program and the untapped potential of the Indian Ocean RimBY AMBASSADOR K.V BHAGIRATH, SECRETARY GENERAL OF INDIAN OCEAN RIM ASSOCIATION (IORA)

The common objective to explore the untapped potential of our coasts, sea, waves, sea- bed, sea animals and sea-minerals, all in the spirit of sustainability and equitability, is IORA’s challenge for the future.


Study with one of Europe’s leading universities without leaving home.

canberra.edu.au/london

The University of Canberra’s unique new Master of Management is the only Australian master’s degree to include a postgraduate diploma awarded by the prestigious University of London. Choose between their specialisations in Economic Policy, Policy Studies and Public Management and take advantage of face-to-face support from University of Canberra academics and classmates. Then graduate with two impressive qualifications.

We can also support you through an online Master of Business Administration (International Management) from the University of London.

Check out these new degrees and our range of other career-enhancing postgraduate qualifications.

330376A_Uni of Canberra | 2146.indd 1 28/10/14 9:52 AM

INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

BY BRENT WILTON, SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATION OF EMPLOYERS

WHEN THE G20 LABOUR MINISTERS MET ON 10–11 SEPTEMBER 2014 IN MELBOURNE, THEY IDENTIFIED THE RIGHT PRIORITIES: STRENGTHENING NATIONAL EMPLOYMENT PLANS, PREVENTING STRUCTURAL UNEMPLOYMENT, CREATING BETTER JOBS, ADDRESSING INFORMALITY AND UNDEREMPLOYMENT, PROMOTING SAFER WORKPLACES, AND BOOSTING PARTICIPATION IN THE WORKFORCE, ESPECIALLY AMONG YOUTH AND WOMEN.

The B20 shared this focus: IOE President Daniel Funes de Rioja, who joined the discussion of G20 labour ministers as part of the B20 delegation, called on them to create an enabling environment for businesses to employ and grow in the formal sector as a fundamental prerequisite to bring the world back to work. Similarly, Steve Sargent, chair of the B20 Human Capital Task Force and head of the B20 delegation, stressed the need to increase flexibility, adaptability and mobility within and across labour markets.

However, the final outcome of the G20 labour ministerial is mixed. Although G20 labour ministers committed to important issues, such as the reduction of non-wage labour costs and the development, maintenance and adaptation of skills, as well as supporting the important role of social partners in national employment policies, concrete recommendations to improve the legislative and administrative environment for business are missing. This is a step backwards from last year’s meeting in Moscow, where ministers committed, for instance, to embracing multiple forms of work. It is understandable that governments are inclined to focus especially on the lower-hanging fruit, where it is easier to find consensus with all stakeholders, but the more painful reforms can no longer be postponed.

The lack of structural reforms is not only of relevance for fighting unemployment, but also for promoting the transition of the informal economy to the formal economy; higher shares of fixed-term contracts and temporary agency employment positively correlate with higher employment levels, and the undeclared economy is smaller in countries where firms can easily resort to temporary employment and temporary work agencies.

Insufficient implementation and the lack of impact at national level have been issues in the G20 process – especially around employment and social policy – from the beginning. The IOE-BIAC monitoring report about implementing the commitments of the Moscow G20 labour ministerial from July last year shows that, especially in promoting different forms of work, there was even a deterioration of the situation in some G20 countries. The B20 Human Capital Task Force has therefore also identified the monitoring and measuring of G20 nations’ commitments to human capital and employment actions as a priority. The introduction of national employment plans, which were discussed during the labour ministerial, is an important step in the right direction in this regard. National employment plans will increase accountability and strengthen implementation, starting to give the G20 process the much-needed teeth it deserves; however, the impact of these employment plans depends largely on how ambitious they are. Business does not want to see employment plans that only state what is already done; they must include concrete commitments to structural reforms. Moreover, these employment plans must not be a ‘one-hit wonder’, but must become part of a long-term measurement mechanism, which would monitor the implementation efforts of G20 members.

Business at G20, as well as at a national level, is prepared to support governments in their implementation endeavours. Business has already started to respond to the call of promoting quality apprenticeships, and in late 2013 the IOE and BIAC launched the Global Apprenticeships Network (GAN). The GAN brings together companies,

employers’ federations and associations dedicated to apprenticeships and training with the ultimate goal of creating job opportunities for youth, and ensuring skills for business.

To achieve these goals, the GAN acts on a global stage, providing visibility and recognition for companies offering workforce-readiness opportunities for youth; facilitating the exchange of best practices and knowledge on work-based training; elevating the status of apprentices and advocating for vocational training; organising GAN national networks to promote apprenticeships at national level, raising awareness at the local level and influencing public policies; and promoting and connecting different initiatives in this arena. GAN national networks are commencing in Colombia, Indonesia, Turkey, France and Tanzania.

The IOE: The International Organisation of Employers (IOE) is the largest network of the private sector in the world, with a membership of 150 business and employer federations in 143 countries. In social and labour policy debate taking place in the International Labour Organization, across the UN and multilateral system, and in the G20 and other emerging processes, the IOE is the recognised global voice of business. For more information, visit www.ioe-emp.org.

THE G20 EMPLOYMENT PROCESS: NATIONAL EMPLOYMENT PLANS MUST DELIVER ON STRUCTURAL REFORMS


TRADE FINANCE IS WIDELY RECOGNISED AS A VITAL INSTRUMENT IN THE WORKINGS OF A HEALTHY GLOBAL ECONOMY; YET, AS A TECHNIQUE, IT HAS BEEN UNDER ENORMOUS PRESSURE IN RECENT YEARS AS BANKS HAVE FOUGHT WITH RISK-ORIENTED CONSTRAINTS AND HAVE BEEN POTENTIALLY FENCED IN BY REGULATORY TIGHTENING.

BY JOHN DANILOVICH, SECRETARY-GENERAL, INTERNATIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

Given this, over the past six years, the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) Banking Commission has worked to inform the debate surrounding trade finance by offering hard data and survey-based evidence. The findings of our two most recent reports – the ICC Global Survey 2014: Rethinking Trade and Finance and the Trade Register Report 2014 – have produced the best evidence yet that trade finance is a technique worth supporting.

The Trade Register Report – an empirical study of more than 4.5 million transactions totalling an exposure in excess of US$2.4 trillion – reveals that trade finance is a very low-risk banking discipline. Meanwhile, the Survey – involving responses from 298 participants in 127 countries – represents the widest survey ever of market practitioners, and brought attention to a shortfall in the availability of trade finance. Together, they shed light on the impact of both regulations and the continued perceived market risk on trade finance, and therefore on the potential for global economic growth.

Certainly, of the Survey’s findings, the most significant was the global shortfall of availability of trade finance. Some 41 per cent of respondents believe that additional liquidity is required to support current trade flows. To be competitive in trade, firms must have access to financial support that offers a choice of appropriate instruments to support trade and growth – and it is this access to finance that has become increasingly strained.

This is especially the case for SMEs and those in emerging markets. Indeed, in the developing world, access to affordable hard-currency finance is still one of the most problematic factors for companies

trying to grow internationally. Certainly, such access can help boost productivity and generate sustainable jobs.

Despite the continued squeeze, growth in trade is forecast to pick up to an annualised 4.1 per cent in 2014, against 3 per cent in 2013; however, this performance is still weak compared to the pre-crisis years when trade tended to grow at close to double the pace of GDP growth – compared to around the same rate of GDP growth since the crisis, despite the more recent pick-up.

The Survey’s findings also reveal that ‘know your customer’ (KYC) and anti-money laundering (AML) regulations globally are having an impact – causing 68 per cent of respondents to decline transactions, and more than one-third to close down correspondent account relationships due to regulatory concerns.

Additionally, the Survey brought to attention other potential constraints – notably the claim by 68 per cent of respondents that Basel III regulations are affecting their cost of funds, as well as the overall liquidity of trade finance. Also, 87.5 per cent of respondents stated that Basel III had impacted their operations, with nearly three-quarters reporting that Basel III regulations had generated a rise in the cost of export-credit agency backed financing.

SIGNS OF PROSPERITY

What is encouraging, however, is the emergence of new trade corridors. Although emerging market growth may be decelerating, the importance of south-south trade (that is, trade between emerging markets) has grown more significant since the crisis. Since 2010, south-south trade has accounted for more than half of developing country exports,

and it has grown by 17 per cent since 2001. South-south exports now represent 46 per cent of global exports – up from 35 per cent in 2001 with the trend expected to continue, though perhaps at a slower pace.

What’s more – with the WTO agreement reached at the Ninth World Trade Organization Ministerial Conference in Bali in December 2013 – a long-awaited breakthrough in trade facilitation appears to have been achieved, which will give a significant boost to demand for trade finance, even if supply remains problematic.

Supply, however, should be encouraged by the Register. Brought out just prior to the Survey, the Register provides robust evidence that banks and regulators have little to fear. Default rates across trade finance instruments range from 0.0332 per cent to 0.241 per cent – a fraction of the default rates reported by Moody’s for all corporate products (which average at 1.38 per cent), and even better than AAA corporate credit default rates.

While the Survey provides a consensus that there is a significant shortfall in trade finance supply, the Register should help convince financiers to join the fray. Certainly, through data-driven analytics and powerful surveys, we hope that trade finance will enter a new age of prosperity that will consist of appropriate regulation and, ultimately, greater respect for this low-risk financing technique.

About ICC: The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) provides a forum for businesses and other organisations to examine and better comprehend the nature and significance of the major shifts taking place in the world economy. ICC also offers an influential and respected channel for supplying business leadership to help governments manage those shifts in a collaborative manner for the benefit of the world economy as a whole. For more information, visit www.iccwbo.org.

THE LIGHT SHINES ON TRADE FINANCE


THE STRENGTH OF THE

ACCI MEMBER AND PARTNER NETWORK

BY CAROLYN DAVIS, MANAGER WORK, HEALTH, SAFETY AND WORKERS COMPENSATION, ACCI

THE NEW FEDERAL GOVERNMENT’S FIRST YEAR HAS BEEN A PRODUCTIVE AND BUSY TIME FOR ACCI’S WORK HEALTH AND SAFETY (WHS) NETWORK.

ACCI members have been involved in national decision-making on work health and safety (WHS) for more than 30 years, with government support. As a result of ACCI’s advocacy, Australian business has enjoyed a unique opportunity to contribute and influence outcomes in WHS. This strong advocacy has continued over the last 12 months under the current federal government.

ACCI’s advocacy for business has been particularly important during the development of the new model WHS legislation with its supporting documents. ACCI’s advocacy has been stronger and more authoritative thanks to the intensive two-way communication with its WHS network of members.

ACCI has coordinated and supported 29 Reference Groups, sharing views and supporting members’ understanding and direct involvement in specific

issues. These groups include worker’s compensation, bullying, explosives, asbestos, construction, high-risk work licensing, chemicals and more.

Throughout the development of the model legislation, and now through the current review process, ACCI’s WHS network has sustained a substantial effort.

During this year, ACCI has:

• coordinated a national voice on WHS for Australian business

• maintained recognition of the diversity of businesses, particularly small businesses ; for example, testing how proposed first-aid requirements or emergency plans will be managed by small businesses, as well as by large, multi-state employers

• advocated for a reduction in

regulatory burden

• maintained strong, direct involvement using industry expertise on specific issues

• informed, involved and empowered members to influence national outcomes through ACCI

• provided a collective national voice representing Australian business.

Nine of 12 of the reviewed SWA Codes of Practice have recently been released, but as Guides rather than as legally binding Codes. These Guides are now more useful and more practical documents.

The impact of the model legislation is now being assessed through research and surveys conducted by Safe Work Australia. ACCI members have been actively involved in this process. In the last few months, ACCI has collected

NATIONAL WORK, HEALTH AND SAFETY NETWORK


further information to enable it to make constructive submissions to two major reviews: the review of the WHS laws, and a governance review.

REVIEW OF WHS LAWSThe Council of Australian Governments (COAG) agreed to review how the WHS legislation has been operating since its adoption. Five jurisdictions have been operating under the new laws for 12–18 months, and another two for 6–9 months. This review is intended to investigate ways in which model Work Health and Safety (WHS) laws could be improved – in particular, by identifying ways to reduce red tape.

GOVERNANCE REVIEWACCI’s network has also been involved in a review on governance.

In July 2008, COAG signed the Intergovernmental Agreement for Regulatory and Operational Reform in Occupational Health and Safety (IGA), a formal commitment to harmonise work health and safety laws in Australia. This established the principles and processes for cooperation between the Commonwealth, states and territories to achieve harmonisation of work health and safety laws.

This year, COAG asked ministers with responsibility for work health and safety for recommendations on how to improve the governance arrangements, in particular possible duplication in the roles of Safe Work Australia and the Heads of Workplace Safety Authorities, and whether these bodies could be rationalised. The Heads of Workplace Safety Authorities is a group of general managers of WHS authorities responsible for the regulation and administration of work health and safety in Australia and New Zealand. There is a similar body of Heads of Workers Compensation Authorities.

The outcomes may have an impact on the work involved in work health and safety over the next 12 months, and longer-term. ACCI and its network has been involved in preparing comments and submissions on both the reviews. An SWA agency report will be provided to WHS ministers in November, and resultant recommendations to COAG in December 2014. ACCI awaits this report and the recommendations.

WORKERS COMPENSATIONACCI, with the sustained and active support and engagement of members, continued to represent and articulate the needs of employers on workers compensation matters.

In particular, ACCI would like to thank the now retired Greg Pattison from the NSW Business Chamber for his contribution

in workers compensation. Greg has now passed the baton to Karin Lee, Chamber of Commerce and Industry Western Australia.

Workers compensation is, and will remain to be, primarily an issue for each jurisdiction, with greater alignment between jurisdictions on key issues such as access and benefits proving to be both an impossibility, and not necessarily desirable, in the foreseeable future.

This situation, however, does mean that multi-state employers remain burdened by the diverse requirements of each of the jurisdictions within which they operate. Consequently, the decision of the federal government to amend the Safety Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 to give effect to some of the recommendations of the Hanks Review, which will give more multi-state employers the opportunity to self-insure under Comcare, was a welcome development, and has been supported by ACCI. While it won’t provide a solution for all multi-state employers, it is a step in the right direction. The amendments are still before the Parliament.

ACCI WHS MEMBER NETWORK – REVIEWS AND MORE REVIEWSThe NSW Business Chamber, in looking back over the last 12 months, notes that the work undertaken at federal/national level, through ACCI and its coordination of the WHS member network, has allowed the NSW Business Chamber to focus on state issues. This has meant that the NSW Business Chamber has been heavily engaged in two reviews on a state level: the ‘Review of the exercise of the functions of the WorkCover Authority’, and the ‘Statutory review of the Workers Compensation Legislation Amendment Act 2012’. The Chamber has also been successful in calling for further average premium rate reductions for NSW businesses, with 200,000 employers across 414 industries benefiting from an average rate of five per cent from 30 June 2014.

The advocacy provided by ACCI as a national tripartite member of Safe Work Australia has meant that WHS has a practical focus, not just a regulatory one. Government needs input from all stakeholders to ensure that proposals are relevant and are conducive to compliance. The current government needs to strengthen national tripartite forums even further, so the Chamber can focus on our business.

Business SA has also been involved in a review of the South Australian Work Health and Safety Act 2012, in accordance with Section 277 of the Act.

Section 277 of the WHS Act provides that a review of the operation of this Act be conducted as soon as practicable after one year from its commencement. The review must also include a specific report on the extent to which SafeWork SA inspectors have attended at workplaces in cases where union officials have contacted the regulator as required by section 117 of the WHS Act, and an assessment of the operation and effectiveness of the policy established under that section by SafeWork SA.

Although the review does not refer to the regulations and codes of practice, these are integral to the operation of the Act, and will also be subject to comment by stakeholders.

The South Australian review and a final report will be completed by the end of 2014.

CCIWA has had a strong presence in occupational health and safety policy for over the last decade, and actively engages with members to provide a range of resources to support their member businesses in this arena. As the new ‘harmonised’ legislation has been introduced in other states, CCIWA has been heavily involved in the review of the model legislation and relevant codes and guides, in anticipation of its adoption in some form in Western Australia. On 12 August 2014, the Hon. Michael Mischin announced that a version of the model Work Health And Safety (WHS) Bill would be introduced into Western Australian State Parliament with a consultation period of three months. CCIWA has been actively providing information and updates to members on the proposed changes and importance of ensuring current compliance. CCIWA will work closely with member businesses in collecting information and commenting on the proposed Bill, as and when it is released. This is just a sample of the work undertaken in WHS.

There is much change ahead, and ACCI and its member network looks forward to another busy and productive year advocating for business in WHS.



SMALL BUSINESS LEADERS ARE SOME OF THE BUSIEST PEOPLE IN THE WORLD. Finding time to wade through the mountains of tech and digital options available can

be totally overwhelming, and might seem unnecessary in the scheme of things; however, spending time researching and setting up technology and digital tools now could save you time later on. Why? Because the potential for your business to boom will be much greater if you implement a digital strategy.

The facts:

• Small businesses that fully utilise digital technology (using search engine optimisation (SEO), search engine marketing (SEM), having a web presence, running online advertising) are twice as likely to grow as those that don’t.

• Tech-minded small businesses are twice as profitable as those that don’t have a digital strategy or focus.

• The biggest barrier for SMEs taking up and implementing technology is the time it takes to understand and learn about it.

At a recent seminar run by Google and ACCI for Australian SMEs starting out in technology, Maile Carnegie, Managing Director of Google Australia, said that: ‘the internet is rocket fuel for small biz’. One of the small business leaders at the session also spoke of the internet being like a shopfront on the high street – a vital place to be in an age when the internet has increasingly opened up new markets and serves to equalise all businesses across the globe. In other words, you need to get amongst it to be seen and to grow your business.

So if one of the biggest hurdles for SMEs is finding out what digital tools and technology are available, and how they work, then it’s important that this information is available to those who want it. All the small business leaders at the session agreed that they learnt more about technology not from academia or from whiz-bang IT gurus, but from other SMEs who have been through similar teething problems and experienced similar barriers to themselves.

FROM SME TO SME: FIVE TECH TIPS TO ADD ROCKET FUEL TO YOUR BUSINESS BY SUSANNAH WOODWARD, MARKETING AND COMMUNICATIONS OFFICER, CENTRE FOR WORKPLACE LEADERSHIP


#1. START WITH JUST ONE THING. Learn to use Twitter, set up a new website, or to use MailChimp – and learn as you go by talking to people who have already done it. Do that one thing really well – and then move on to the next thing. But don’t forget about that first thing – always keep it fresh and current. No-one wants to see posts from 2012 at the top of your Facebook page.

#2. GIVE YOURSELF ONE GOAL. Work out how to achieve that goal within your budget. Find ways to do this by talking to other people in your industry who are already out there in tech land, then work out the most cost-effective way to get to your end result. A lot of tech stuff is available for free, and for trial periods. Work out which tools will best help you to reach your goals.

#3. RESEARCH YOUR COMPETITION. Firstly, don’t be afraid of your competitors – use their knowledge and their experience, and then do it better. Find out who they are, what they’re doing online and how they’re interacting with their customers online through your own research on the Net. Then find out what sets you apart, and hone in on your point of difference.

#4. TRY OUT YOUR COMPETITION. By personally trying and buying, or using your competitors’ services, you can find out what works and what doesn’t work – and then you can pinch those ideas and better them. It’s basically mystery shopping, but it’s valuable firsthand research. Look particularly at who’s doing what well, and why they’re doing it well, and then use that knowledge for your own business.

#5. SEE THE INTERNET AS AN OPPORTUNITY. ‘Things happen’ because of the internet, and things happen because you have a website and social media and people can find you all across the world. The truth is that the more you put in, the more you get out, and the more you build up your online community, the more you’ll learn and grow over time.

FIVE TIPS FOR STARTING OUT IN TECH FROM FOUR AUSTRALIAN SMES THAT HAVE DONE THE HARD YARDS AND ARE NOW PAVING THE WAY IN DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY:

This article was first published on the Centre for Workplace Leadership Blog.

ACCI AND THE CENTRE FOR WORKPLACE LEADERSHIP

PRODUCTIVITYLEADERSHIP

The world of work is changing… are you ready?Early-bird tickets available from 3 November 2014

workplaceleadership.com.au

THE CENTRE FOR WORKPLACE LEADERSHIP WAS ESTABLISHED IN 2013 AS A JOINT INITIATIVE SUPPORTED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND THE UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE’S FACULTY OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS.

Recognising the importance of their mandate, ACCI has been involved with the Centre right from the start, and continues to serve on its Advisory Board.

The Centre is dedicated to excellence in leadership research, improving the quality of leadership in Australian workplaces, and developing individual leaders. It aims to bridge the gap between research insights and leadership practice, and ACCI will be working closely with the Centre to fulfil this aim.

THE FUTURE OF WORK CONFERENCE

The Centre for Workplace Leadership, in partnership with ACCI, Cisco Systems Australia and Clayton Utz, explored workplaces of the future at the inaugural conference The Future of Work: People, Place, Technology (9–10 April 2014).

The Future of Work: People, Place, Technology bring together business leaders and thinkers to examine what

is happening to work and workplaces, and how we can prepare. With a program of keynote lectures, panel discussions, workshops and networking opportunities designed to share tools and ideas, increase productivity and boost profits, the conference enables employees, managers, business leaders and business owners to access cutting-edge technology, research and thinking on the modern workplace and beyond. ACCI is now working with the Centre to help plan the next Future of Work conference for April 2015.

LEADERSHIP IN MANUFACTURING RESEARCH PROJECT

The Centre was commissioned by the Department of Industry to conduct research on Australian manufacturing SMEs and their use of management practices that drive productivity. ACCI helped with securing research participants, and is now assisting the Centre to disseminate the findings of their research via a series of forums around Australia on the future of manufacturing leadership and skills.

SURVEY OF AUSTRALIAN LEADERSHIP

The Centre has commenced development on a national workplace-based survey, the Survey of Australian Leadership (SAL). SAL is the first survey of its kind that aims to collect data from all levels of management and employees within a workplace, to access management capability and the impact on performance outcomes.

ACCI is represented on the Survey of Australian Leadership Steering Committee, will provide guidance and leadership to the Centre’s research team and will, in particular:

• review the overall content of the survey

• Provide advice on strategies for increasing participation

• Provide input into the analysis and dissemination of the survey results.


THE DENTAL INDUSTRY COMPRISES BUSINESSES THAT MANUFACTURE AND SUPPLY DENTAL PRODUCTS, WITH THESE BUSINESSES RANGING IN SIZE FROM SMALL FAMILY ENTITIES THROUGH TO LOCAL OPERATIONS OF LARGE, MULTINATIONAL THERAPEUTIC PRODUCT SUPPLIERS.

They share common aspirations for the growth of their businesses,

the creation of jobs and the financial sustainability of the dental industry in Australia. Naturally, they are bound by a universal commitment to the supply of quality dental products and services. To excel, these businesses will benefit from a reduction in red tape and lifting restrictions that limit flexibility and innovation. The Australian Government’s commitment to reducing red tape is therefore a high priority for the dental products sector.

Australian manufacturers of dental and other healthcare products welcomed the Prime Minister’s statement in October 2014 that, as part of the Industry Innovation and Competitiveness Agenda, the Australian Government will examine opportunities for greater acceptance of international standards and risk assessments. The open dialogue that Australian Dental Industry Association (ADIA) has had with the Abbott Government built an understanding that manufacturers in the healthcare sector often have to undertake a regulatory approvals process to supply products in Australia, duplicating a process that has already occurred in other developed countries. This additional red tape adds to costs and provides little or no additional protection.

The underpinning principle adopted by the Australian Government is that if a system, service or product has been

approved under a trusted international standard or risk assessment, then our regulators should not impose any additional requirements for approval in Australia, unless it can be demonstrated that there is a good reason to do so. This approach has been a basic tenet of ADIA’s demands for a regulatory framework for healthcare products this is based upon a risk management approach to ensure public health and safety, while at the same time freeing industry from any unnecessary regulatory burden.

The Australian Government has advised that as an important first step, the government will enable Australian manufacturers of medical devices the option of using European Union certification in place of Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) certification. This will place Australian manufacturers on the same footing as overseas competitors, something welcomed by ADIA.

The recent announcements are sure to fast-track reforms that have been long muted by the TGA. Over the course of the past decade the TGA has supported the global harmonisation and convergence of the regulatory standards for medical devices through the International Medical Device Regulators Forum (IMDRF). This umbrella group brings together regulators from Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, the European Union, Japan, the Russian Federation, and the United States of America that share a commitment to an efficient and effective regulatory model for medical devices. IMDRF member states aim to develop aligned regulatory

systems that are responsive to emerging challenges in the sector while protecting and maximising public health and safety. Despite considerable effort and goodwill, after more than a decade there had been little to show in terms of real outcomes for Australian manufacturers. As a result of the recent announcements, there is now a flurry of activity on the part of the TGA to progress the alignment of Australia’s regulatory framework with our overseas counterparts.

It is pleasing to see that the Australian Government’s commitment to removing regulatory duplication is more than rhetoric. It would be a challenge to find a stronger advocate for red tape reduction than the Minister for Small Business, the Hon Bruce Billson MP, who has engaged in a meaningful dialogue with ADIA and its members to identify unnecessary regulatory processes and target these for elimination. The work of the Hon Josh Frydenberg MP, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister with responsibility for the Abbott Government’s deregulation agenda needs to be acknowledged – as a result of their advocacy even the TGA has embraced the need for reform. As a result of their efforts, along with those of the health portfolio Ministers, Australian manufacturers of healthcare products are seeing the long awaited and welcome removal of red tape across the sector.

About ADIA: The Australian Dental Industry Association (ADIA) is the peak business organisation representing manufacturers and suppliers of quality dental products. For more information, visit www.adia.org.au.

BY TROY WILLIAMS, CEO, AUSTRALIAN DENTAL INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION

Removing red tape for healthcare product manufacturers

BUSINESSES IN THE DENTAL INDUSTRY WILL BENEFIT FROM A REDUCTION IN RED TAPE AND THE LIFTING OF RESTRICTIONS WHICH LIMIT FLEXIBILITY AND INNOVATION.


‘COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT’ IS OFTEN IDENTIFIED BY POLICY MAKERS AS AN IMPORTANT COMPONENT OF GOOD POLICY AND PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT AND PROJECT DELIVERY. HOWEVER, TOO OFTEN, PARTICULARLY WHEN IT COMES TO INFRASTRUCTURE, WE SEE THIS MENTIONED AS AN IMPORTANT ‘BOX TO TICK’, BUT WITH NO REAL IDEA OF (AND SOMETIMES NO REAL INTEREST IN) HOW TO MEANINGFULLY ENGAGE COMMUNITIES AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS EFFECTIVELY.

Ultimately engagement is the process by which organisations, communities and individuals connect in the development and implementation of decisions that affect them. Engagement is a tool to achieve outcomes, develop understanding, educate and/or agree on issues of concern. Often challenging, frequently undervalued, but all too often the barrier to change, our understanding of how we can engage better as policy-influencers and stakeholders is worthy of more attention.

In a more democratised modern society—particularly when any citizen with a facebook identity, email address or hashtag seems to be able to communicate with infrastructure decision-makers—it is more critical than ever before that we get the community consultation process right to ensure projects are not unduly delayed.

To support better engagement by any organisation, public or private, Consult Australia, alongside our member firms AECOM, GHD, KBR, Parsons Brinckerhoff, Jacobs, and Hyder, has launched our Valuing Better Engagement project to improve the procurement, implementation and understanding of engagement practices, their value and what constitutes effective practice.

The first part of this project, Consult Australia’s Guide to Procuring Engagement Services is now available to download free from our website. The Guide explains the procurement process for engagement services across eight key steps and aims to support organisations to:

• enhance their understanding of engagement

• identify the need for engagement

• ascertain when engagement services external to their own organisation need to be acquired

• develop their capability to procure engagement services that meet their needs.

The Guide explores the benefits and risks associated with effective engagement, and explains the procurement process for acquiring engagement services in detail across a number of stages, including: moving from the decision to procure professional engagement services, through to developing a brief, going to market and signing the contract.

Drafted for project leads and procurement professionals at all levels, the Guide recognises that there is no ‘one size fits all approach’ to engagement, and that achieving effective engagement is about tailoring the approach to the situation at hand.

Supported by the International Association for Public Participation Australasia (IAP2), the Guide is a valuable tool to make sure engagement is more than just a box to tick.

A second project now being progressed by Consult Australia is exploring the value of engagement activity at a project level and the potential return on investment it brings. Ensuring engagement activity is properly prioritised will be supported through this improved understanding of its economic benefits.

Download the complete Guide and learn more about this exciting project at: www.consultaustralia.com.au

Consult Australia: Consult Australia is the industry association for consulting companies in the built and natural environment industry. For more information, visit: www.consultaustralia.com.au.

Consult Australia: valuing better engagementBY MEGAN MOTTO, CHIEF EXECUTIVE, CONSULT AUSTRALIA



THE SUCCESS OF AUSTRALIA’S ONLY COUNTRY-OF-ORIGIN CERTIFICATION PROGRAM, ADMINISTERED AND PROMOTED BY THE NOT-FOR-PROFIT AUSTRALIAN MADE CAMPAIGN, HAS BEEN PROMPTING OTHER COUNTRIES TO REVISIT THEIR OWN BRANDING SCHEMES.

THE WORLD LOOKS TO AUSTRALIA FOR NATION BRANDING

Speaking alongside Irish Prime Minister (Taoiseach in the Irish language) Enda Kenny at an event in Dublin in August, Australian Made Campaign Chief Executive Ian Harrison shared details about the program with Ireland’s business community.

When the then Canadian Finance Minister, Jim Flaherty, attended Australia’s first ministerial-level G20 meeting earlier this year, he also came to the Australian Made Campaign to learn more about the creation of a national logo for locally made and grown products, and a strategic plan to market that brand.

Other countries – including New Zealand and South Africa – have also come to Australia for advice.

The green-and-gold Australian Made, Australian Grown (AMAG) kangaroo logo has been identifying genuine Aussie products and produce for almost three decades, in accordance with a Deed of Assignment and Management Deed with the Federal Government. The AMAG logo remains the only country-of-origin certification trademark registered in Australia for the full range products and produce, and its strict compliance program has earned it credibility both in Australia and abroad.

According to Roy Morgan Research, 98 per cent of Australians recognise the logo, and 88 per cent trust it to identify locally made and grown goods. Research by YSC Online also found that products carrying the logo in export markets were more likely to increase sales than those that did not carry the logo. Today, more than 2000 Australian businesses are registered to use the logo on more than 15,000 products sold here and around the world.

For many small businesses, particularly those involved in export, the logo, with its proven, established links to Australia, is their strongest brand in the marketplace. The same can be said for

State, Territory and Local Government branding activities overseas, when the AMAG logo is used as an overarching brand to establish the Australian connection for ‘sub-brands’.

Promoting Aussie food to China under a single brand

In this context, the Australian Made Campaign has welcomed the private industry initiative being championed by Andrew Forrest of Fortescue Metals Group to position Australia as a primary food and fibre supplier to China – the Australian Sino Hundred Year Agricultural and Food Safety Partnership (ASA 100). The ASA 100 proposal, with its emphasis on a collaborative, cohesive approach to export marketing – at the heart of which is a single brand and a single logo – is a fantastic opportunity for consistency in labelling, and a global approach for our food exporters.

The fact that the AMAG logo is already a registered certification trademark in China for all food groups – and a number of other classes – ideally positions it to support this great initiative.

The support of ACCI and its network of state and territory chambers and national industry associations will play an important role in the success of the initiative overall.

ABOUT AMCL: The Australian Made, Australian Grown logo was created by the Federal Government in 1986, but the not-for-profit organisation Australian Made Campaign Limited was founded by the Australian Chamber of Commerce network in 1999 to administer and promote the logo under a formal agreement with the Federal Government. It continues to do so today. The National Farmers Federation became a Member in 2007.

To find out more about the Australian Made Campaign, or the Australian Made, Australian Grown logo, visit www.australianmade.com.au.

ACCI’S NEW CEO, KATE CARNELL, WAS RECENTLY ELECTED TO THE AUSTRALIAN MADE CAMPAIGN BOARD OF DIRECTORS TO FILL THE CASUAL VACANCY CREATED BY FORMER ACCI CHIEF EXECUTIVE, PETER ANDERSON.

BY IAN HARRISON, CHIEF EXECUTIVE, AUSTRALIAN MADE CAMPAIGN LIMITED


BY TIM REED, CEO, MYOB

IT’S NO SECRET THAT AUSTRALIA’S SME SECTOR HAS FACED CHALLENGING TIMES OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS, BUT TIMES ARE CHANGING. ACCORDING TO INDUSTRY RESEARCH THE HARD WORK IS STARTING TO PAY DIVIDENDS FOR ONE OF AUSTRALIA’S MOST IMPORTANT SECTORS.

The hard and fast figures underpin what many already know – Australian SMEs are major contributors to Australia’s economic stability and continued growth. The November 2013 NSW Business Chamber’s Small Business Access to Finance Thinking Business Report revealed Australia’s SMEs are producing more than half a trillion dollars in output – equating to nearly 60 per cent of the private sector economic output. Unsurprisingly such growth is fuelling confidence and helping drive Australian SMEs forward to greener pastures.

Research from the MYOB Business Monitor supports the Chamber’s findings showing Australian SMEs are finally consolidating gains for the first time in three years. Figures from the latest report show SMEs are experiencing the highest levels of revenue growth in three years; while businesses experiencing revenue declines have fallen to a five year low.

Further reaffirming the sectors’ confidence, nearly a quarter (24 per cent) of SMEs are expecting the economy to improve, while 36 per cent of business operators are reporting more work or sales booked in the next 12 months, setting the stage to end 2014 on a high note.

MYOB CEO Tim Reed said, “The expectation amongst the sector is that this trend of growth is set to continue. The MYOB Business Monitor shows that almost a third of business operators (32 per cent) expect to see revenue increase in the next 12 months while fewer businesses are expecting to see revenue to decline over the next 12 month period (to August 2015).”

The report also sheds light on the key pressure points facing business owners and impacting revenue and growth.

Pain at the pump remains the major pressure for a third of business owners, who have voiced a consistent concern about the cost of fuel since 2011. Other key pressures include attracting new customers (32 per cent – up from 26 per cent at the start of the year), cash flow (30 per cent), profitability and price margins (28 per cent) and the timing of customer payments – another rising concern, up from 27 per cent.

Reed added, “Small businesses have to work hard for every customer and every sale, while feeling the squeeze from both external pressures like the cost of fuel and the high dollar; and market conditions, such as competition, margins and cash flow.

In this environment, where the revenue outlook is improving but is not yet strong, we need to remain focused on doing everything we can to support our SME community.”

Reed sees the continued success of SMEs across the country as a key foundation to Australia’s continued economic growth as both the mining boom slows and the Australian dollar weakens.

“The success of SMEs means success for Australia as a whole. This success isn’t a responsibility that should fall at the feet of individual business owners. Like we have for years, we’ll be the voice of small business and continue to work with peak industry bodies and Government to

help ensure our SMEs are able to do what they

do best – build a strong economic

contribution. ”

SMALL BUSINESS, MAMMOTH CONTRIBUTION



Australian Securities and Investments Commission helping small businesses IN 2012, THE AUSTRALIAN SECURITIES AND INVESTMENTS COMMISSION (ASIC) CONDUCTED A SURVEY WHICH LOOKED AT HOW MUCH SMALL BUSINESS KNEW ABOUT AUSTRALIA’S CORPORATE REGULATOR AND THEIR LEGAL OBLIGATIONS. RESULTS SHOWED ASIC NEEDED TO ADOPT A MUCH MORE FACILITATIVE AND EDUCATIONAL APPROACH TO REGULATING SMALL BUSINESS. BRETT BASSETT TALKS ABOUT THE AGENCY’S EFFORTS TO BETTER ENGAGE AND SUPPORT SMALL BUSINESS OPERATORS.

Who is ASIC? The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) is an independent Commonwealth Government body that regulates Australian companies, financial services organisations, and professionals who deal and advise in investments, superannuation, insurance, deposit-taking and credit. With almost every Australian adult owning one or more financial product, making sure that consumers and investors have trust and confidence in the financial system is at the heart of everything we do.

This is why our regulatory strategic priorities are to:

• promote investor and financial consumer trust and confidence

• ensure fair, orderly and transparent markets

• provide efficient and accessible registration.

But how does this affect small business?

Small business is ASIC’s largest customer. Of all of the Australian companies and businesses registered with us, approximately 96 per cent are considered to be small businesses with fewer than 20 employees (using the Australian Bureau of Statistics definition).

Small businesses also make a significant contribution to the Australian economy. They collectively employ half of the Australian workforce, and account for one-fifth of Australia’s gross domestic product. If ASIC’s fundamental objective is to maintain, facilitate and improve the Australian financial system and the businesses that operate within that system, regulating and assisting small business must be an integral part of what we do.

BY BRETT BASSETT, QUEENSLAND REGIONAL COMMISSIONER AND SENIOR EXECUTIVE LEADER, SMALL BUSINESS COMPLIANCE AND DETERRENCE, ASIC


In 2012, ASIC’s first small business stakeholder survey showed that small business operators knew little about us and the laws we administer, and found it difficult to find clear and concise information. Subsequent discussions with industry revealed that many businesses lacked not only the knowledge to effectively manage their regulatory obligations, but also the time. If ASIC’s aim was to achieve better compliance, we needed to make it easier for small businesses to meet our requirements.

How is ASIC helping small business? The way we interact with small business and deliver regulation is changing. Last year, we established a small business engagement team that is responsible for helping small business operators, and their advisers, better understand and comply with their legal obligations. This includes taking appropriate action against those who break the law. Both are important, because they help businesses operate fairly and transparently, which, in turn, ensures that there’s integrity in the commercial system. In other words, it provides a level playing field for everyone involved in commerce.

Almost universally, a lack of staff, time and resources means that small businesses face greater challenges than other businesses in understanding ASIC-related laws and meeting their compliance obligations. To help with this, we’ve published a booklet and a dedicated online hub for small business. The hub is available on our website (asic.gov.au), and brings together practical information on starting and closing a small business, legal requirements for small business operators, and one-minute guides on popular topics.

Most recently, we launched our first dedicated smartphone app for small business. Called ASIC Business Checks, the app provides some practical and easy checks that individuals can do to verify information about businesses they’re currently dealing with, or potential business partners. Our app is free, easy to use, and available on iTunes and Google Play.

We’re also developing new partnerships with other regulators, industry associations and business advisers, such as accountants and lawyers, to communicate with small businesses and better understand the impact of policy and compliance issues upon the sector. This consultation is helping us to improve our processes and our programs that inform companies, directors and small business operators about their compliance obligations; for example, to lodge financial reports.

ASIC is committed to getting its engagement with small business right. Over the last two years, considerable progress has been made to better communicate with the sector, but there is scope to do more. We look forward to meeting with professional and industry associations, intermediaries and business owners over the next 12 months to better understand their needs.

For more information about ASIC’s small business initiatives, please contact Brett Bassett via email, [email protected].

find small business loans

www.loandesk.com.au

ONE APPLICATION GET FUNDEDINSTANT RESULTSGain access to 50+ lenders by

completing one simple application within 2 minutes.

You select the lenders you wantto speak with & receive loan

offers to choose from, it’s free.

We match you to the rightloans for your situation &provide you with options.

choose lender offer

choose lender offer

choose lender offer

trade finance

line of credit

finance lease

working capital

buy inventory

------------------

------------------

------------------ buy equipment

APPLY

APPLY

$

$

APPLY

$

327975A_Loandesk | 2146.indd 1 21/10/14 9:11 AM COMMERCE & INDUSTRY SUMMER 2014 37

ACCI NATIONAL MEMBER NETWORK: ACT & REGION CHAMBER OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY

BUSINESS SA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE NORTHERN TERRITORY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE &

INDUSTRY QUEENSLAND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY WESTERN AUSTRALIA NSW

BUSINESS CHAMBER TASMANIAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY VICTORIAN EMPLOYERS

CHAMBER OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY ACCORD - HYGIENE, COSMETIC AND SPECIALTY PRODUCTS

INDUSTRY AIRCONDITIONING & MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION AUSTRALIAN BEVERAGES

COUNCIL AUSTRALIAN DENTAL INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION AUSTRALIAN FEDERATION OF EMPLOYERS

AND INDUSTRIES AUSTRALIAN FOOD & GROCERY COUNCIL AUSTRALIAN HOTELS ASSOCIATION

AUSTRALIAN INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES OPERATIONS GROUP AUSTRALIAN MADE CAMPAIGN

LIMITED AUSTRALIAN MINES & METALS ASSOCIATION AUSTRALIAN PAINT MANUFACTURERS

FEDERATION AUSTRALIAN RETAILERS ASSOCIATION AUSTRALIAN SELF MEDICATION INDUSTRY

BUS INDUSTRY CONFEDERATION CONSULT AUSTRALIA HOUSING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION LIVE

PERFORMANCE AUSTRALIA MASTER BUILDERS AUSTRALIA MASTER PLUMBERS & MECHANICAL

SERVICES ASSOCIATION OF AUSTRALIA NATIONAL BAKING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION NATIONAL

ELECTRICAL & COMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION NATIONAL FIRE INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION NATIONAL

RETAIL ASSOCIATION OIL INDUSTRY INDUSTRIAL ASSOCIATION PHARMACY GUILD OF AUSTRALIA

PLASTICS & CHEMICALS INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION PRINTING INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION OF

AUSTRALIA RESTAURANT & CATERING AUSTRALIA VICTORIAN AUTOMOBILE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

commerce and industry magazine - summer 2014

Documents