A key report commissioned by the federal and Victorian governments into the future of the Latrobe Valley has found that, regardless of the impacts of a carbon price, the region faces long-term structural challenges across its key big-employing growth sectors such as health care and agriculture.
That should have been the lead for media reports on a new report released yesterday into the restructuring of the Latrobe Valley region. AAP, in a piece run in the Herald Sun under the headline “Call for action on Vic’s Latrobe Valley” got it pretty right. The Australian had, shall we say, a different take.
“Carbon tax ‘a threat to power jobs’, says report” screamed the headline. “Deep uncertainty among the Latrobe Valley power generators and potential sweeping cuts to the local economy and employment have been sheeted home to the new carbon pricing regime,” began John Ferguson’s article. On and on it went about the impact of a carbon price on power generation jobs.
The few people who will bother to read the report will find Ferguson’s article bears minimal relationship to it. For a start, the report makes the interesting point that electricity and coal mining, even combined, are only the sixth-biggest employer in the region. Health, retail, agriculture, construction and education all employ significantly more people in the region than coal and electricity, although that sector is just ahead of health care as the largest sector by output.
And the impact of the carbon price? “The introduction of a national carbon price will drive substantial change in the Latrobe Valley’s economy over the next decade and beyond,” the report concludes. But the committee overseeing the report “believes that regardless of the short-term uncertainty associated with the introduction of the Commonwealth government’s Clean Energy Future (CEF) policy including the Contract for Closure program, there will be major structural change in the Latrobe Valley’s power generation sector over the next decade and beyond.” It also notes that the region is still recovering from the Kennett government’s privatisation.
But wait — still recovering? How could that be? We’ll be coming up to 20 years since privatisation. Well, see, the impact of privatisation in the Latrobe Valley was massive. According to another report cited by the committee from 2011, employment in the utilities sector in the region fell from more than 8000 jobs in 1986 to less than 1800 in 2001. Full-time employment fell 9% in the region between 1994 and 2001. The current number of electricity sector employees in the Latrobe Valley is 1570, with another 1000 contractors. Even if a carbon price were to wipe out the entire electricity sector in the region in one go, it would have much less than half the impact of Jeff Kennett’s privatisation.
Which, needless to say, failed to attract such widespread concern about job losses among commentators.
The report recommends that, in order to ensure workers displaced by structural change, including the carbon price and possible closure of a generation facility, can move into growth sectors such as health and agriculture, skills and training should be a priority. As well, infrastructure investment should be better co-ordinated, private sector investment should be facilitated and the region’s “liveability” should be targeted.
For anyone who’s read regional development reports before, there’s very little that’s new. The Latrobe Valley is in the fortunate position of having growth industries already present — a lot of regional communities have to work out ways to lure growth industries into the area — which means the challenge is primarily of reskilling its workforce and ensuring investment continues to flow into the area. But let’s not allow any of that to sully a good anti-carbon price yarn.

33 thoughts on “Carbon price v privatisation — which is worse in the Latrobe?”
Harry1951
July 3, 2012 at 2:34 pmYou are so right Jimmy. What I omitted in my post is the devastation caused by those job losses, widespread social problems and the communities arguably bear the scars today. It would have been better for the government to mandate a gradual reduction in staffing and perhaps stop the reform at the corporatisation stage rather than the ideological privatisations which did little for the consumer, the employees and the environment. Kennett did virtually nothing to ameliorate the serious side effects of his neo-con policies. Yet the Valley is represented in parliament by coalition MP’s. Go figure!
James K
July 3, 2012 at 3:00 pmSpot on Bernard.
Privatisation has been much more expensive, much more job destroying and much more hurtful than this tax on the 500 most polluting companies in the country.
But we hardly ever talk about it! It is so good to read this and to remember what is really going on.
geomac62
July 3, 2012 at 3:06 pmHarry1951
Glad you added that last bit Harry . The for sale signs around Morwell were everywhere you walked and it seemed like at least one for every street . Of course the big ticket item hardly ever talked about regarding privatisation is the loss of a steady stream of revenue from public utilities . Its like selling your house and then having to rent a place to live in with less income .
Harry1951
July 3, 2012 at 3:39 pmGEOMAC62
Yes the government and hence the people forego lose the loss of the revenue from public utilities when sold. And of course those benefits will then be harvested by the new owners. This “capture” of an asset that once provided benefits to all by the few is perhaps the real agenda of the privateers. Slogans such as “governments should steer and not row”, or the “private sector does it better” or “we must reduce government debt” are thus convenient excuses.
Jimmy
July 3, 2012 at 3:41 pmHarry – “Slogans such as “governments should steer and not row”, or the “private sector does it better” … are thus convenient excuses.” And yet even these seem to be invalid when the libs talk carbon pricing these days.
Holden Back
July 3, 2012 at 4:46 pm“When WE do it, it’s ‘creative destruction’ . . .”
CML
July 3, 2012 at 4:47 pmPrivatisation is the biggest con ever invented by the rich and greedy. Here in SA we have had a privatised electricity system for a couple of decades, and we now have the most expensive power supply in the world! Now that’s progress – NOT!!!
Bill Hilliger
July 3, 2012 at 5:02 pmThe public voted for the Liberal coalition in Victoria/NSW and the LNP in Queensland; the cuts and privatisations have started. There is only one conclusion that can be drawn from the current situation and future voting trend if the polls are correct about a federal government change to the coalition. We, the Aussie voters just love being shat on!
klewso
July 3, 2012 at 5:37 pmI think it’s more a case of Aussie voters “believing in the Trooth Fairy”?
Sell off assets now rather than take the hard unpopular fiscal decisions – leave those for later generations – how much did Costello and Coward sell off to earn their “financial miracle”?
fractious
July 3, 2012 at 5:44 pm“Sell off assets now rather than take the hard unpopular fiscal decisions”
But that’s the lie we’re all being sold – there are no “hard fiscal decisions” here. This is one of the world’s biggest exporters of minerals and foodstuffs – especially coal and iron ore. This isn’t Greece.