People who rely on newspapers to do their thinking for them are happy in the belief that government is some all-wise, mystical, fair-minded God which has a crystal ball enabling it to do all the thinking and planning for everyone for hundreds of years hence, and that it operates at all times to act for the benefit of the national interest in a perfectly fair manner not subject to personal pressures or lobbyists and to protect the liberties of individuals at all costs.
Let me quote from a newspaper: "Australian taxpayers in the next few years will be digging deep into their pockets to help finance the vast new mineral projects which are planned."
Could anything be more in error?
Let's look at the Pilbara where over $2,000 million of private risk capital has been invested. This private money has built the schools, the hospitals, the gaols, the customs houses, the railways, the ports and towns and developed the world's largest iron mines. In fact, for every man employed, $230,000 of private money has been spent on infrastructure which in capital cities is provided by the taxpayer.
Far from "Australian taxpayers digging deep into their pockets", the government takes nearly half of all company profits, plus 66.67% of dividends plus royalty, plus income tax on all employees, plus direct and indirect tax of sub-contracting companies, plus import duties on materials, etc. and provides nothing in return except an ever increasing mountain of bureaucratic strangulation.
Such a mammoth misconception can only come about by forgetting that the tax on nothing is nothing!
How can a robber steal half a loaf of bread before it is baked? How on earth can there by any possibility of taxpayers "digging deep into their pockets to help finance the vast new mineral projects that are proposed"! I ask you, how can a robber steal half a loaf of bread before it is baked?
The only way the taxpayer can be involved is if he allows his government (Liberal or Labor) to continue their socialist practises and waste his money on unsound schemes.
You might have heard of a certain Premier who wishes to borrow money over and above the staggering sums borrowed by the Loan Council to grow bird seed on the Ord River.
Four great fallacies which are prevalent in Australia today are responsible for many of our problems. They are:
1. The theory that increased taxation reduced inflation;
2. That governments act in the national interest; so justifying their interference in industry, etc.;
3. The belief that mines not in existence yield taxes; and
4. The Robin Hood Syndrome.
It is a tragedy that successive governments, simply for the sake of adding to bureaucratic power or scoring political points over their opponents, aggravate the cost price squeeze by increasing tax, royalty, and infrastructure loads, to the point where new proposals are not profitable.
An example can be seen by referring to the Pilbara iron field again.
No government created the ore, found the ore, proved the ore, nor developed the ore; they did not finance it nor even formulate the agreements under which Parliament granted rights to Hamersley Iron, Mount Newman, Goldsworthy or to Robe River.
The initial agreement was formulated by Hancock and Wright. The others were modelled on it. What I mean by this was we explained to Mr Val Duncan, head of Riotinto, that the State Government was without funds and without knowhow and that in order to secure the right to mine our discoveries a proposition would have to be made to the Government whereby all infrastructure etc. would be provided out of private funds with the Government providing nothing.
In other words, keep the governments out of it.
The Hamersley Iron Agreement, as signed after two years delay with the WA Government, was identical with the Hancock and Wright formula supplied to Riotinto.
Unfortunately, each succeeding agreement has done nothing for the industry and nothing for Australians. It has simply added greater power to the bureaucracy within this country as well as increasing enormously the cost of production and hence the price of ore to Japan.
This iron field, as I explained, was opened up purely with private risk capital invested by the much maligned multinationals, as a result of which Mr Court said his "government has spent less money in the North-West than any government in history" and yet, with such a bonus from private capital, each succeeding government agreement that was drawn up with various companies gave more and more power to an ever increasing number of civil servants. These government encroachments on private industry added immensely to the cost of both investment and production.
This interference has now reached such staggering proportions that, before even a $1,000 million mine could get under the way, 16 different departmental approvals (right down to the local Shire Clerk) have to be secured. Yet nothing of value has been added to help "Blow Joe".
This type of socialist interference has flourished under Liberal Governments.
For instance, according to Western Intelligence Report, September, 1970, Sir Charles Court said:
[P]rojected rail networks [built with private money] will be government-owned, government-controlled, government-maintained and placed where the government feels they will best serve most big users more economically.
The companies [who paid for them] stake will be a contribution, possibly assessed on ratio usage, which will afford them freight concessions.
How about that for Liberal Party thinking? Can any socialist do better?
Let me say here that I believe in the basic free enterprise principles of the Liberal Party. I abhor their governments socialist practises.
This is at State level. On the Canberra level the picture is even worse.
Here we have a situation where, for the sole purpose of giving more power to the bureaucracy, the Australian Government brazenly dreamed up the idea of the export licence.
Why it should be necessary to limit the export of iron ore (of which in the Hamersley field alone there is some 125 million million tons) is beyond explanation other than that it is a blatant grab for power.
This position has got so bad that the power has now gravitated to one man who is not even an elected representative of the people.
By wielding this export licence power, one man has it within his grasp to bring Australia to its knees if he so wishes, or by muddled thinking.
I ask you! What happens to this power when "The Quiet Revolution" has been achieved and the communist-controlled unions complete their takeover of the Australian Government?
