If it talks like a duck ...
George Orwell's novel 1984 depicts a futuristic totalitarian regime characterised by wars, oppression and public mind control.
In the fictitious superstate of Oceania, the ruling Party attempts to control not only the speech and actions but also the thoughts of its citizens by changing facts and rewriting history to fit Party propaganda and destroying any dissenter from the Party line.
The latest episode of spin-doctoring by the Rudd government with its $38 million advertising campaign to correct, as a matter of "national emergency" the "misinformation" in the public debate over the super tax on mining profits, could be a chapter straight from 1984.
Having campaigned on an "absolute undertaking" to ban publicly funded advertising for the three months before an election unless there was bipartisan agreement, Kevin Rudd has broken yet another solemn promise to the Australian people. According to Kevin Rudd before the last election, government advertising is "a cancer on democracy".
The Prime Minister's claim that the government taxpayer funded advertising campaign on a mining tax is a matter of national emergency simply beggars belief.
A tax that is still the subject of "consultation" with the mining sector, a tax that is not to be imposed for another two years, requires "national emergency" measures? The only emergency is a political one for Kevin Rudd.
There is nothing to prevent the Prime Minister from calling press conferences to correct any misinformation he claims is being raised about the mining tax. He can make speeches in the national parliament to justify, defend and argue his case. After all, the government has the ear of every journalist in Australia.
Why exactly does the government need to resort to taxpayer funded advertising when it has access to all the free media coverage it could wish for? The answer is that its arguments are simply not credible.
The ultimate irony, of course, is the fact that it is the mining sector that has had to defend itself from the misleading claims of the government and not vice versa.
The government claimed the additional 40 per cent tax will apply to "super profits". Not true. The threshold is any profit in excess of the long-term bond rate (currently under 6 per cent) or the risk-free rate of return, which is not a super profit by any stretch of the imagination.
The government claimed that mining companies are "foreign owned". Not true. Many mining companies are Australian-owned or have a majority Australian ownership. Even the Big Australian, BHP Billiton, singled out by the government in its xenophobic rant against foreign companies, is 60 per cent Australian owned.
The government claimed these foreign companies are taking their profits offshore. Not true. Over the past decade mining companies have reinvested about 75 per cent of their cash generation back into Australia through royalties, taxes and capital development, with shareholders receiving 25 per cent.
The government claimed that despite increased profits the mining companies paid only an additional $9 billion in tax over the past decade. Not true. That figure relates to royalties paid to state governments and ignores company, payroll and other business taxes.
The government claimed that multinational mining companies paid an effective tax rate of 13 per cent and domestic mining companies paid 17 per cent. Ministers Gillard and Swan claimed that as a "cold hard fact". Not true. These figures came from a draft student research paper at the University of North Carolina which has since been dismissed as not relevant to the debate in Australia.
The government said that the effective tax rate was 17 per cent, based on a paper prepared by three Treasury staff. Not true. The Treasurer's own economic note of May 9 shows that the current effective tax rate for mining companies is up to 45 per cent.
The government claimed the proceeds of the proposed super tax on mining would fund an increase in compulsory superannuation contributions from 9 per cent to 12 per cent. Not true. The increased contribution will be paid by employers.
The government claimed that it was necessary to spend $38 million in taxpayer-funded advertising to counter the advertising campaign by the mining companies. Not true. The government decided to spend the money and mount the campaign before the tax was even announced.
It is true that the mining companies have been placing advertisements in the media, sending letters to shareholders and filing notices with the ASX which contain information about the impact of the super tax on their operations. Mr Swan has dismissed such statements saying the mining companies are either "lying" or "ignorant".
The public statements of mining companies are governed by law, including provisions in the Corporations Law and the Trade Practices Act. It is an offence for directors to make false, misleading or deceptive statements, punishable in a court of law.
The Rudd government's Gang of Four – Rudd, Swan, Gillard and Tanner – can only be judged in the court of public opinion.
Such is the level of public discourse from this government that anyone who disagrees with it is subjected to abuse, denigration and personal attack. Disagree with the government's Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme and you're labelled a sceptic or a denier. Disagree with the government's Resources Super Profits Tax and you're called a liar or ignorant.
These are the actions of a desperate government desperate to cling to power.
Which brings me back to 1984. George Orwell introduced the term "duckspeak" meaning to speak without thinking, as in the ceaseless and thoughtless nonsense sprouted by some politicians, quack-quack-quacking away.
Kevin Rudd on the super tax? "Quack foreign mining companies quack quack fair share quack quack working families quack quack quack misinformation quack national emergency quack quack quack." No one is listening.
102 comments so far
More comments
New user? Sign up
Make a comment
You are logged in as [Logout]
All information entered below may be published.
Thank you
Your comment has been submitted for approval.
Comments are moderated and are generally published if they are on-topic and not abusive.