
Rebecca Tomkinson: WA miners get productivity and the State deserves a seat at Chalmers roundtable
Which makes it all the more remarkable that the 0.3 per cent of humanity lucky enough to call this country home operate the world's 13th biggest economy.
Generating that kind of output, and the prosperity that flows from it, would not be possible without the minerals and energy that account for two thirds of all Australian exports.
The Australian success story is grounded firmly in two things: access to international customers and cost-competitive products to sell them.
And it's grounded firmly in WA. Which is why it is so important WA is strongly represented at Treasurer Jim Chalmers' economic reform roundtable.
Of the 24 invitations issued to date, just one has been delivered this side of the Nullarbor.
The balance seems questionable when you consider that without the commodities produced in WA, Australia's productivity woes would have forced a reckoning years ago.
Instead, the resources sector has papered over the cracks, helping disguise the economic drag of an outdated and ill-equipped tax and regulatory system.
The irony is that our miners and energy producers have only been able to perform this act of sorcery through a laser-like focus on maximising productivity in their own operations.
Capital deepening — improving the equipment and technology available to workers — has been an essential driver of those gains.
But it hasn't come cheap. Tens of billions of dollars have been invested in ports, rail, roads, machinery and automation to improve efficiency and drive down costs.
Securing that level of investment doesn't happen by accident. It requires a sustained focus on delivering fundamentals that attract businesses with no shortage of global options for their capital. There is an important lesson here.
The crux of the challenge facing the national budget is this: our tax base is narrowing as the proportion of working Australians shrinks, while demands on government spending for health, aged care, infrastructure and defence continue to rise.
Shifting to a more equitable and sustainable tax system is a significant piece of the puzzle — and at this point it is worth highlighting the Prime Minister categorically ruled out any new resources taxes during a visit to WA ahead of the recent election.
But just as important as tax reform is improving the productive output of every Australian worker.
That doesn't mean forcing everyone to work around the clock. Far from it.
It means equipping the workforce with the technology, training and tools they need to get more done in the same amount of time — and then sharing the spoils with them.
It means identifying Australia's most productive sectors (that's easy, they're the ones paying the highest wages) and supporting them to thrive through a generational energy transition.
And it means fostering the conditions needed for those sectors to unleash a new wave of productivity-enhancing investment.
For the resources industry, those conditions are sadly heading in the wrong direction.
Energy costs, historically an Australian advantage, have skyrocketed at the precise time access to cheap electrons has become perhaps the most important factor in global industrial competitiveness.
One of the primary obstacles to building out the transmission lines and low-emission generation required to bring energy costs back down is a complex and protracted assessment system that leaves projects in limbo for years.
Approvals can be both efficient and rigorous. Cutting unnecessary waiting times, which are hurting investment in both resources and energy, must be a national priority.
Equally important is incentivising businesses, through grants and tax rebates, to explore and prove up the new processes and technologies — such as green metals and low-carbon fuels — that will be critical to decarbonisation.
Damaging recent industrial relations reforms will harm rather than promote productivity. Carve-outs for the resources sector, in line with the original intent of the workplace changes, would restore some much-needed confidence.
Artificial intelligence has the potential to supercharge output across the entire economy. It's vital that potential is given space to flourish and not suffocated by yet more rules and regulations.
Many of these suggestions aren't new. But Australia doesn't need more productivity sermons. It needs action.
If we want our economy to keep punching above its weight, we must unshackle the sectors that already do.
That means looking west. The WA resource sector isn't just a passenger in the Australian economy. It's the engine room.
Ensuring WA's voice is heard in economic reform discussions can't be a courtesy. It's a necessity.
Rebecca Tomkinson is Chief Executive Officer of the Chamber of Minerals and Energy of WA

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Sydney Morning Herald
an hour ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
The opera lover, the aromatherapist and the $1m inheritance fight
It was a costly court fight over the million-dollar estate of an elderly opera aficionado. An aromatherapist who struck up a friendship with the woman stood to inherit everything if she won. Eva Marie Easton died in September 2021, aged 89. The German migrant made a will in November 2020 naming the Sydney Opera House Trust as sole beneficiary. It was her wish that the funds be used for the promotion of performances of German classical music. The 2020 will superseded a will from 2019, leaving everything to her friend Isabelle Agnes Peacock, an aromatherapist she met in 2004 when she started having monthly massages. Easton's Australian ex-husband had died years earlier, and she was unaware of any other living relatives. By about 2009, Easton and Peacock 'had developed a good friendship', Supreme Court Justice James Hmelnitsky said in a decision last year. 'Mrs Peacock would drive Mrs Easton to places she needed to be, such as dental and medical appointments.' Loading Easton was diagnosed with cancer and moved to a NSW aged care facility in 2017. Peacock continued to visit. The elderly woman made a will in December 2017 leaving her estate to a couple with whom she was friends. If they predeceased Easton, everything would go to Peacock. The court heard Easton became upset when the couple moved to Queensland. She executed a new will in May 2019, leaving her estate to Peacock.

The Age
an hour ago
- The Age
The opera lover, the aromatherapist and the $1m inheritance fight
It was a costly court fight over the million-dollar estate of an elderly opera aficionado. An aromatherapist who struck up a friendship with the woman stood to inherit everything if she won. Eva Marie Easton died in September 2021, aged 89. The German migrant made a will in November 2020 naming the Sydney Opera House Trust as sole beneficiary. It was her wish that the funds be used for the promotion of performances of German classical music. The 2020 will superseded a will from 2019, leaving everything to her friend Isabelle Agnes Peacock, an aromatherapist she met in 2004 when she started having monthly massages. Easton's Australian ex-husband had died years earlier, and she was unaware of any other living relatives. By about 2009, Easton and Peacock 'had developed a good friendship', Supreme Court Justice James Hmelnitsky said in a decision last year. 'Mrs Peacock would drive Mrs Easton to places she needed to be, such as dental and medical appointments.' Loading Easton was diagnosed with cancer and moved to a NSW aged care facility in 2017. Peacock continued to visit. The elderly woman made a will in December 2017 leaving her estate to a couple with whom she was friends. If they predeceased Easton, everything would go to Peacock. The court heard Easton became upset when the couple moved to Queensland. She executed a new will in May 2019, leaving her estate to Peacock.

AU Financial Review
2 hours ago
- AU Financial Review
How AI risks repeating the IT productivity paradox
'You can see the computer age everywhere but in the productivity statistics.' This now-famous observation by Nobel Prize-winning economist Robert Solow, made in 1987 in response to the so-called IT productivity paradox, captured one of the most perplexing economic puzzles of the late 20th century. Despite billions invested in IT and computers throughout the 1970s and 1980s, no aggregate productivity effects had shown up in national accounts. Today, artificial intelligence is everywhere, and the world is again investing (many) billions. As Treasurer Jim Chalmers sets out to host an economic reform roundtable focused on rekindling sluggish productivity growth, with AI firmly on the agenda, we had better learn from history.