Written by Rob Carter   

When your excellent article today came from a USA Politician of such powerful position, I near fell over.

"Bernie Sanders: New Fed Chief Must Make Jobs Priority" ~ By Bernie Sanders, Reader Supported News ~ 29 July 13"

Of course he's right but will he learn from a baby brother Australia Left? I very much doubt it as Yankees see Australia as peasants good for allied war service and little else? Refer the Australian Parliamentary library reports on REDS Scheme of the Whitlam era.

I guess the fact that the Queen's Governor General sacked him on my Liberal Party Malcolm Fraser's opposition advice has probably tainted all he ever did well. Much as Nixon's good administration fails to be recognised today. But so to huis sin of welcoming PRC into the USA fold as now proves USA's worst economic disaster maker ever.

Extracts from the REDS Report Viz., ( With few comments from me Rob Carter).

1. Introduction
This paper examines the Australian experience in tackling the problem of entrenched unemployment and under-utilisation in the past few decades. The persistence of regional unemployment disparities is well documented (Webster, 2000; Mitchell and Carlson, 2003; Trendle, 2004). Regional growth in Australia has been divergent and “there had been no trend towards long-run equilibrium growth for all regions” (Garlick, Taylor and Plummer, 2007: 9).

The paper is organised as follows. Section 2 traces the development of ALMP in Australia. The shift to neo-liberal economic policies has been reflected in employment policy through a shift from the view that unemployment is a systemic problem requiring a collective solution, to the idea that unemployment is due to individual failings in regard to skills, abilities or motivation. Early responses to higher unemployment included job creation schemes and subsequently, training courses to increase the employability of the unemployed. More recently these have been replaced with a regime that focuses on forcing the unemployed to comply with ‘responsibilities’ including Work for the Dole, an approach enforced by the CES, Job Network and Centrelink as discussed in Section 3.

Section 4 outlines Australian regional policy developments in relation to the federal, state and territory governments. Concluding remarks follow.

RGVC Comment:- I came to this site when I searched the REDS Scheme (Regional Employment Development Scheme) of 1974 for this study of the USA 10% 2011 [NB: USA say 8.2% 2012, lies they deleted long standing unemployed etc, real is 22-23% unemployed now] and Spain now 24-26% made a point of Governments following the Capitalist Super Rich 1% lobby for the so called "Trickle Down employment Bribe). Their idea convinced Government to finance Corporate America Profit motive and some benefit trickles down to permanent employment of more labor. ~ What nonsense the effect is that the Capitalist gets richer and labor gets the crumbs. As soon as Profit reserves get up enough we will employ new technology and greater mechanization to lay off that increased employment, to increase our productivity of cheaper mechanized labor man hours the ultimate looser.

As a Deputy Mayor of a WA Metropolitan Town which even preceded State foundation based at Perth City, I helped REDS projects get moving in my Town. Why do I believe that was better than many of the schemes here discussed:-
1. All Government schemes come at a cost to taxpayers, including the rich 1% and middle and lower brackets.

2. First increase in employment comes from the additional Government employment needed to run, oversee and exercise Governance of the scheme.

3. Then at the Local Government, and some other Community welfare bodies there is needed a new planning, design, engineering & Supervision staff.

4. Of course there is of necessity a material and equipment factor part provided by the Local Government benefactor of the REDS financed projects.

5. That in-turn causes a "trickle-up" increased sales factor to suppliers who in turn employ more delivery and other staff, but I consider it far more economic value than giving the money to Banks to lend and Corporate American War Machine industries to produce more of their poisons and cause some minor "Trickle-down" employment that they soon replace with increased mechanization, thus restarting the unemployment cycle when the subsidy is done.

6. Local Governments specifically design improvements, reinstatement infrastructure projects, years earlier than they coud have on purely their own resource s of taxation collecting from the mainly labor sector housing etc. Thus Infrastructure built by past Generations gets updated now rather then be left to Next Generation being faced with an even harder to finance repair and expansion cost factor.

7. The Commonwealth in effect forces Local and State Governments to catch-up and get ahead, and that force is not felt as a National pressure on local and State political will. They do it for the money subsidy and to alleviate their unemployment whilst doing things they would have had to face sooner or later, so politically all can embrace the scheme.

8. Federal Government is saving the UEB cash otherwise ensuing to those workers, the Federal Government would likely have paid part sums as subsidies to State or Local Government whenever they did get to those projects later, and so on many hidden benefits besides relief of unemployment and hence improving disposable consumer incomes to absorb more industrial product and hence economic recovery improvements unseen by voters.

The real problem causing return of recession and depression in economic Nations, as I see it we can now discuss in a different frame of mind. But first consider the Conclusion of the subject cofFEE Paper:-

Reported ~ Conclusion
This paper has provided a broad outline of employment and regional development policies in Australia over the past few decades. This period is marked by the demise of full employment that was characteristic of the post-war period until the mid 1970s. In addition, de-industrialization occurred as major manufacturing industries such as passenger motor vehicles, and textiles, clothing and footwear were exposed to international competition in a rapidly globalizing economy. There have also been periods of prolonged drought that have affected the viability of rural industries as well as significant changes in relative prices for goods. These major transformations have impacted unevenly over the Australian geography producing pockets of high and entrenched unemployment and labor underutilization. There are a number of trends that are discernible in regard to the trajectory of Australian policies.

Developments in ALMPs in Australia have mirrored international developments. In the mid 1970s the emphasis was on reducing unemployment through the demand-side strategy of direct public sector job creation and this strategy resurfaced in periods of very high unemployment in the 1980s and 1990s. Over time employment conditions attached to these jobs deteriorated. In contrast to earlier programs such as REDS, WPP and CEP that included payment of award wages, programs in the 1990s.

Such as 'Jobskills' and NWO paid a reduced ‘training’ wage. In retrospect, these programs can be viewed as a transitional phase between genuine job creation and the current Workfare situation characterized by Work for the Dole. From the late 1970s demand-side labor market policies privileged wage subsidies to private sector rather than public sector job creation. Job creation programs were initiated in times of very high unemployment following the recessions in the early 1980s and early 1990s but were short-lived. Subsidies were also intended to impact on the supply-side of the labor market by enhancing employability and to improve equity by improving employment outcomes for the long-term unemployed and disadvantaged groups.

From the 1980s the abandonment of the government commitment to full employment was evident in the shifting emphasis toward enhancing employability through increased commitment to vocational training programmes such as Jobtrain and Skillshare. With the shift to the Active Employment Strategy other ‘inadequacies’ of the unemployed were addressed through programmes to provide jobsearch skills, improve literacy and numeracy and provide soft job skills. In the last decade ALMPs have been restricted to ‘employability’ strategies that concentrate on unpaid work experience in the form of voluntary work and WfD which is designed to discipline workers to accept any employment. There has been very restricted access to training courses which must be ‘earned’ by WfD participation or funded by Job Network providers. Since the abandonment of Jobstart wage subsidies have been at the discretion of Job Network providers, with the exception of the Wage Assist programme that is restricted to the very long-term unemployed. The transformation of ALMPs could be categorised as a transition from full employment to employability and then Workfare.

Regional and local policies to stimulate economic and employment growth are implemented by all 3 levels of government to varying degrees, but Australian policies are notable for the lack of a coordinated national approach and attempts to shift responsibilities and costs. While Commonwealth involvement in regional development has fluctuated over time, state governments have provided the major impetus to regional policies. State governments have implemented a range of programmes designed to attract business, stimulate new business formation or expansion of existing businesses. Attempts to increase international competitiveness have included assistance with international marketing, trade fairs etc... States have also offered inducements to business including payroll deductions, discounts on charges, or reductions in regulations. There is a long history of interstate rivalry, particularly in attempts at business attraction, that produced few results at the national level and, in many cases, only short-term gains at the state level.

There is widespread recognition that although local government is ideally placed to assess community needs, councils are financially constrained due to limited revenue raising abilities and the increasing burden of service provision due to reductions in services provided by other levels of government.

Major themes in the regional literature in Australia are: Australia lags behind North America and Europe in its commitment to regional development; regional Australia is vulnerable to economic shocks; and there is continued regional divergence of economic and employment performance. In contrast to Europe and the US, where regional policy has a strong focus on disadvantaged urban regions, regional policy in Australia has almost exclusively been restricted to regions outside metropolitan areas.

The major impetus for the development of localised initiatives has been the failure of national policies to address the major problems associated with unemployment over a prolonged period of time. Compounding the ineffectiveness of employment policy that has concentrated on supply-side solutions has been the preoccupation of governments with fiscal responsibility that is interpreted to mean that deficit budgets cannot be tolerated. Hence, there have been significant cuts in the financial resources devoted to public services by both federal and state governments and local government is financially constrained. Other policies, notably the contraction of public housing and restricted eligibility has further entrenched areas composed largely of people suffering extreme disadvantage and amplified social problems. In these circumstances the contribution of initiatives such as social enterprise to solving the unemployment problem can only be described as woefully inadequate.

In summary, regional policies implemented by the federal, state and local governments have generally been small scale and incapable of addressing the major problem of labour underutilisation that has persisted over the past 3 decades.

OK Try someone else with my experiences with REDS in the 1970's ~ RED schemes are good
The Australian Newspaper ~ April 22, 2009 ~ op ed by:- Barry Cohen former Minister (Hawke National Labor Government and a Labor MP in the Whitlam government.


TRUCKING magnate Lindsay Fox and former ACTU secretary Bill Kelty have been recruited by the Prime Minister to assist in the saving and creation of jobs in seven specific areas in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane. No doubt critics will attack this scheme for being a feel-good re-run of the Whitlam Government's Regional Employment Development scheme.

The media finds billion-dollar national infrastructure projects - roads, rail, ports - perfectly acceptable but become agitated by projects that improve the lives of ordinary citizens. The big projects get the tick with the barest scrutiny while community halls, youth centres, sports facilities and libraries are ridiculed as outrageous examples of pork-barrelling. The critics conveniently ignore the fact that large infrastructure projects are capital intensive, with about 15percent labour content, while community projects often run to 40 to 50percent labour.

I am, by nature, a modest and unassuming fellow but no other MP had more hands-on experience with Whitlam government's RED scheme. With more than 150 projects costing, in today's prices, tens of millions of dollars, if pork-barrelling was a crime, I would have been hanged from every gibbet in my electorate.

There were weaknesses in the scheme, as detailed in a paper I wrote for the Labor caucus some years later, but they were mainly due to the Whitlam cabinet's failure to endorse Labor minister Clyde Cameron's recommendations to have job creation schemes in place in readiness for a sudden rise in unemployment. In early 1973, with near full employment, cabinet ignored his submission. When unemployment rose dramatically the following year the RED scheme was created on the run. Most flaws occurred due to this ad hockery.

The benefits of the scheme can best be illustrated by describing its impact on my NSW Central Coast electorate. Once a sleepy rural backwater populated by holiday-makers, weekenders, retired, its population exploded in the '60s after the electrification of the railway line from Sydney. Its natural beauty and stunning beaches became a honey-pot for commuters and developers who subdivided vast areas of beachfront land and flogged building lots off for pound stg. 100 each at pound stg. 1 a week.

Local councils, desperate for rates, let developments through without provision for sewerage, drainage, kerbing, guttering, paving and community facilities. Fine, until rain came and left the locals wandering around in water up to their proverbials.

Happily, the dreadful RED scheme provided the wherewithal to have the area properly drained. As well, kerbing, guttering, paving and footpaths were advanced 20 years while the National Sewerage Backlog Program ended the region's reputation as the most "effluent" region in NSW.

When you add the provision of youth centres, playing fields, swimming pools, senior citizens centres and surf life saving clubs that were either built or refurbished by the RED scheme you can understand why the phrase "feel-good" was apposite.

All of the above were simple but essential facilities that had been neglected for decades by state and federal governments. Commuters who spent hours journeying to and from work were finally able to enjoy a lifestyle available to those in elite inner-city suburbs. The critics saw it as a waste of taxpayers' money.

The RED scheme, and similar schemes that followed, were ridiculed as pork-barrelling aimed at propping up MPs in marginal electorates. Ros Kelly, during the Keating reign, experienced similar unfair criticism for devoting more funds to Labor electorates than Coalition ones. It apparently never occurred to the critics that the Labor electorates were the poorest and most lacking in basic facilities. Similar unfair accusations were levelled at the Howard government when environmental grants were disproportionately provided to Coalition seats for the simple reason that the large rural electorates, that contained the most sensitive environmental areas, were invariably held by Coalition MPs. It was cheap-shot journalism.

Local job creation schemes are as necessary now as they were when an OPEC cartel forced a massive surge in oil prices leading to the worst recession in 30 years. What is essential is ensuring adequate pre-planning involving the local community to guarantee that projects are not only evenly dispersed throughout the region but they cover different welfare, environmental, heritage, cultural and sporting facilities. Otherwise there will be considerable jealousy and public criticism.

The media are quick to highlight such criticisms and accept any wild allegation of abuses. During the RED scheme's operation a persistent charge was that materials being used were made by hand to create work. The allegations, never proven, were enough to damn the RED scheme.

I can't speak for the thousands of RED scheme projects throughout Australia but I was intimately involved in every one of the 150 in Robertson.

Some, on reflection, should not have been approved but overwhelmingly they were successful. Apart from the fact that jobs were provided for thousands of unemployed for periods of three to 12 months, the enthusiasm of local workers ensured many projects came in under budget.

Hopefully, Fox and Kelty will recognise the need to co-opt local community leaders to vet all proposals and prioritise them to avoid charges of pork-barrelling and the inevitable local jealousies that such projects engender. They will underestimate the dangers at their peril.