Why a Rudd-led Labor has surrendered to big business

It is in this sense that we should construe the term "trust" as used by John Howard upon calling the 2004 election.

Consider how, in the business pages of The Age, it was observed that "Mark Latham is an enigma for business. In his 10 months as Opposition Leader he has rarely discussed his business and economic views, and Australia's leading business lobby groups have had relatively little access to him."

The article furthermore noted that, "Latham intends to rid the economy of sweetheart deals and unacceptable business practices. He warns that a range of government grants, concessions and subsidies would be scrutinised and are likely to have to be justified on public policy grounds. His approach will do little to dispel concern that a Latham Labor government would be far from business as usual."

Latham's actions and statements since his political retirement tend to confirm this analysis, all of which are consistent with his well known speech to parliament on civility in politics. The language of class warfare permeates both.

Latham has spoken out squarely against the United States-Australia alliance, in essence an investor rights alliance, and is the only major contemporary commentator that dares to use the term "socialism". Every time he does so you just know that in Toorak and Double Bay, upon being confronted with another dose of Lathamalia in the Australian Financial Review, that they are feeling more than satisfied that they stopped him from becoming Prime Minister.

Kevin Rudd has learnt from the lesson that corporate Australia dished out to Latham. In the run up to the 2007 election The Australian reported that Rudd, "has a specific goal of meeting business groups - from boardroom lunches to meetings with business organisations - twice a week every week. Friday is his preferred day for high-level meetings." The report cites the ALP secretary, Tim Gartrell, as stating, "'we have to admit that under Mark Latham there was a rift between Labor and the business community. That has been well and truly healed,' he said." This healing process even included Rudd flying to New York as the supplicant before Rupert Murdoch, the enemy of organised labour everywhere.

None of the grand policies announced by Rudd demonstrate even the tiniest of hints that he seeks to develop, let alone enhance, a Labor redistributive agenda. Nor does he show any interest in seriously constraining the power and privilege of corporate Australia.

This is not to say that he has not fooled the intelligentsia, which is not a very difficult thing to do.

Conferences are organised under the comical title "the Rudd Revolution" (which has been appropriately cancelled) and Robert Manne was able to observe that "in its first year, the Rudd Government has begun upon an impressive, far-reaching and practical program of reform." He states, "already, in one area after another, his government has broken with the neo-liberal and neo-conservative trajectory of its predecessor".

Manne concedes that he can only draw upon micro-economic policy to make his case on the economy. Notice that this aspect of policy he divides into two components, automotive industry assistance and "nation-building". In so far as the car industry is concerned the government is not "picking winners". It is bailing out incompetent management, as in the US.

That is not inconsistent with operative neoliberalism, which is why President Bush is doing the same thing.

On "nation-building" Manne neglects to say that Howard dispensed plenty of pork for infrastructure projects. Indeed, the Liberal Party has argued that Rudd is implementing Howard era funded projects (like the Deer Park Bypass at my own Deer Park) and that current outlays are less than that promised by the previous government.