BHP Billiton's announcement this week of a record $8.66 billion profit is cause for celebration and reflection.
Millions of Australians own shares in the big Australian and thus share its profits.
BHP Billiton is also one of the largest contributors to government revenue including taxation, royalties and fees.
While credit for BHP's success must be given to the Chinese, and the management and staff of the firm past and present, decisions by governments also contributed.
One of the remarkable facts accompanying the profit announcement was that China has replaced Japan as our major trading partner for resources.
The Australian Government's approach toward China has helped.
Three decades ago when the country was still under the sway of the Mao administration, Australia began a policy of dialogue focused on encouraging China to join the world economy and encouraging other countries to let them do so.
After Deng Xiaoping gained power in the late 1970s, Australian governments continued to urge China along the path of economic liberalism.
Its policy was to emphasise the need for economic freedom over political freedom, knowing that increased wealth would provide the best path towards eventual political freedom in China.
Then BHP (now BHP Billiton) and CRA (now Rio Tinto) were closely associated with the government policy and dialogue and it is paying off -- for China, the firms and Australia.
One of the few negatives in the BHP's announcement was the $266 million writedown against the hot briquette iron facility in the Pilbarra. This closes the book on the project and brings its total lose to date to $1.7 billion.
It also highlights the last vestiges of old, failed policy.
For decades, governments saw resources not as source of export wealth in itself, but as means to developing down-stream industries.
Of course, the market saw little sense in building steel mills in the Pilbara. To fix this "market failure" governments used a array of measure, including tax and royalty incentives, condition on mineral leases, infrastructure and preferential access to government deals, to induce miners to become processors.
The policy failed. It not only resulted in series of dud processing plants, but slowed development of resource and distracted management from the real game. The policy was, quietly, down graded in the 1990s to the benefit of the overall economy as well as the resource sectors.
BHP has also been one of the key beneficiaries of the economic reforms in particular industrial relations reform.
The mining sector led the adoption of individual workplace agreements allowed firstly under the WA state legislation and then under federal legislations.
Indeed, this former bastion of union influence is now virtually a non-union shop and largest adopter of the individual agreements.
This was achieved not by force but through choice.
The workforce decided that the higher wages and more flexible arrangements available under individual agreements suited them best. It was Rio Tinto not BHP that led the way in IR reform.
Nonetheless, BHP eventually saw the gains being made by its arch-rival and jettisoned its long held partnership with the union movement.
This decision has paid off greatly for BHP and the nation as a whole.
ADVERTISEMENT
No comments:
Post a Comment