Draft:New Protection
The New Protection was an economic policy introduced by the Australian Government in the early 20th century, in the first decade after Federation in 1901. It proposed that government support to Australian industries be conditional on companies paying a "fair and reasonable" wage to their workers. Specifically, it exempted manufacturers from tariffs
In the Harvester case of 1907, Judge H. B. Higgins of the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration held that a "fair and reasonable" wage required a living wage. However, in R v Barger the High Court of Australia.
Background and aims
[edit]Alfred Deakin articulated the principles of New Protection as early as 1895, when he was a member of the Parliament of Victoria. He stated that the Protectionist Association of Victoria had recently resolved "industries which enjoy the benefits of fiscal legislation [...] can reasonably be quired to submit themselves to such conditions as to minimum hours, rates of wages and monopolies as this House may think fit to adopt".[1] The term "New Protection" was coined by Samuel Mauger, a labour advocate who would later serve under Deakin as a federal government minister. The term and concept were popularised by David Syme, the proprietor of The Age newspaper and a mentor of Deakin.[2]
The term "New Protection" has been attributed to Samuel Mauger.[3]
Brett's description: "producers who received the benefits of protection must share them with their white workers in the form of higher wages".[4]
In late 1907 Deakin tabled a self-written memorandum explaining the aims of the New Protection.
Hearn (2018) has assessed New Protection as a response to globalisation and the rise of multinational corporations.[5]
Legislation
[edit]New Protection was not enacted through a single piece of legislation, but rather through.
Deakin's biographer Judith Brett has cited the Sugar Bounty Act 1905 as the first legislative embodiment of the New Protection. The act gave Queensland sugar-growers exemption a rebate on the sugar excise if they employed only white workers and paid the wages "standard in the district".[4]
After the High Court ruling, at an interstate conference in July 1908 the ALP added a plank to its platform calling on the constitution to be amended to guarantee the New Protection.[6] They eventually brought this to a referendum in 1911, but it was unsuccessful and was opposed by Deakin.[7]
In 1906, the government, supported by the ALP, passed the Excise Tariff (Agricultural Machinery) Act 1906, which implemented a special tariff on agricultural machinery "fair and reasonable". On 8 November this phrase was judicially defined by Justice H. B. Higgins of the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration.[8]
In 1906 the government passed the Customs Tariff Act 1906 and Excise Tariff Act 1906. The former increased the existing tariff on items imported into Australia and the latter introduced a matching excise tax on products manufactured in Australia. However, manufacturers who could prove were exempt from the latter.[9]
In 1909 Deakin proposed using the Interstate Commission to oversee working conditions, and suggested the states establish wages boards.[10]
Opposition
[edit]Free Trade Party leader Joseph Cook unsuccessfully campaigned against the new tariff and the New Protection. It has been suggested that its adoption rendered the tariff issue moot and contributed to his willingness to lead the party into Fusion in 1909.[11]
The Victorian Socialist Party opposed the New Protection as "one of those palliatives which obscured the workers' perception of the need for total emancipation from wage-slavery". However, some self-proclaimed socialists supported the policy, with Harald Jensen's work The Rising Tide lauding it as a "historic compromise between capital and labour".
Court actions and aftermath
[edit]In his work The History of Australia, Manning Clark concluded that the ultimate beneficiary
Legacy
[edit]See also
[edit]References
[edit]- ^ Plowman 1992, pp. 49–50.
- ^ Plowman 1992, p. 50.
- ^ http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/mauger-samuel-7529
- ^ a b Brett 2017, p. 357.
- ^ Hearn 2018, p. 344.
- ^ Brett 2017, pp. 370–371.
- ^ Brett 2017, p. 400.
- ^ Brett 2017, p. 361.
- ^ https://books.google.com/books?id=Jxo9DAAAQBAJ&dq=%22new+protection%22+%22australia%22&pg=PA232 p 232
- ^ Brett 2017, pp. 392–393.
- ^ http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/cook-sir-joseph-5763
Sources
[edit]- Brett, Judith (2017). The Enigmatic Mr Deakin. Text Publishing. ISBN 9781925498660.
- Dick, Caroline (2014). "Taxation in Australia up until 1914: the warp and weft of protectionism". eJournal of Tax Research. 12 (1). University of New South Wales: 104–129.
- Hearn, Mark (2018). "'Industrial Defence Against the Whole World': Deakinite New Protection as Narrative of Global Modernity". Journal of Australian Studies. 42 (3): 343–356. doi:10.1080/14443058.2018.1485723. S2CID 150131017.
- Plowman, David H. (1992). "Industrial Relations and the Legacy of New Protection". Journal of Industrial Relations. 34 (1). Industrial Relations Society of Australia: 48–64. doi:10.1177/002218569203400103. S2CID 154587343.