Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Labor and globalisation: from Keating to Latham

2005; Routledge; Volume: 40; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1080/10361140500049255

1363-030X

Ashley Lavelle,

New Zealand Economic and Social Studies

Abstract This paper documents the Federal Parliamentary Labor Party's (FPLP) approach to globalisation under four different leaders, starting with Paul Keating in the early 1990s, and ending at the early stages of Mark Latham's leadership in 2004. It argues that, despite some notable differences, there was a considerable degree of consistency in Labor attitudes to globalisation under successive party leaders: globalisation was seen as inevitable, irreversible, as beneficial for the majority of the population, and as destructive to states' capacity to intervene in the economy. The paper suggests that a number of factors explain Labor's continued support for globalisation in the face of growing public discontent, including the pressures of international institutions such as the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and big business, ideological factors, and comparatively low levels of economic growth, both in Australia and internationally. He thanks the anonymous referees of this journal for their very helpful comments on an earlier draft of the paper. Notes 1Although far from being the same thing, a pro-globalisation stance goes hand-in-hand with supporting economic rationalist policies, which as many have noted have made globalisation possible (Weeks Citation2001, 281). There is, of course, debate about what the term ‘economic rationalist’ means, but generally it refers to policies that favour markets over state intervention. Jupp, in the context of immigration policy, uses the term economic rationalism to describe policy whose success or failure is measured by economic criteria, including ‘budgetary savings, efficient and effective administration, and outcomes which would increase the national wealth’ (Jupp Citation2002, 142). For a broad definition see Pusey Citation(2003b). 2Although this paper is concerned primarily with the Keating Labor government's (1991–96) stance on globalisation, it must be noted that many of the decisions made by that government to internationalise the economy overlapped with those of the Hawke government (1983–91). 3The party lost 31 seats, and its primary vote fell to its lowest level (38.75%) since 1931 (Ramsey Citation1996, 37). 4Although most associated with Keating, the emphasis on ‘enmeshment’ with Asia had been in place under Bob Hawke (Kelly Citation1999, 237, 238). 5Indeed, Keating claims that the distribution of income was more equal at the conclusion of Labor's reign than at the beginning Citation(1999a). 6For a discussion of the reasons for Labor's election loss, see Lavelle (Citation2003, 178–88). 7An ALP National Committee of Inquiry (NCOI) discussion paper in the late 1970s complained about the ability of foreign corporations to ‘frustrate individual national government's policies and, indeed, entire strategies’ (APSA Citation1979, 56). 8Indeed, according to Don Watson, the term ‘Creanite’ came to be used in the same disparaging fashion as the term ‘Trotskyite’ (2002, 136, 137). 9The Third Way is the term that Latham gives to his preferred model of government, which he promotes as being an alternative to both old-style labourism, with its emphasis on protectionism and public-sector involvement, and the free-market individualism of Thatcher, Reagan and Howard. Where the Hawke and Keating governments fit along this spectrum Latham does not say, and it can be argued, as many have, that the Third Way simply provides ideological cover for neo-liberal policies (see Callinicos Citation2001; Clark Citation2003). 10Witness Latham's opening address to Conference, where he reminded delegates that ‘[c]ompetition and productivity are Labor words. They don't belong to the Tories. They belong to us’ (Latham Citation2004b). 11This is a sample of the literature produced in recent times: Albert Citation(2003); Monbiot Citation(2004); Danaher and Burbach Citation(2000); Callinicos Citation(2003); Bello Citation(2002). 12See the Australian Electoral Commission's Website for a detailed account of the differences in party funding from business (http://search.aec.gov.au/annualreturns/). 13Leigh quotes John Button, who claims that those in Cabinet with ‘a strong commitment to internationalising the Australian economy’ outnumbered those sympathetic to protectionism (Leigh Citation2002, 495). Additional informationNotes on contributorsAshley Lavelle Ashley Lavelle is a Lecturer in the Department of Politics and Public Policy at Griffith University.