PM on winning strategy for hearts and minds in Beijing
As he met with leaders in Beijing's Great Hall of the People on Tuesday, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was given the red carpet treatment.
Rows of immaculately decorated soldiers were wheeled around the hall in perfect synchronicity and a People's Liberation Army brass band played Chinese covers of Aussie pub rock classics by the likes of Paul Kelly and Midnight Oil.
The lavish display may be par for the course for world leaders ushered into the grand neoclassical sanctum of Chinese power.
But the warm reception to the prime minister's six-day trip of China and gushing praise heaped upon him was notable in the highly choreographed world of Chinese political theatre, where symbolism and ritual are key.
Protocols matter, says Associate Professor Graeme Smith, an expert on Chinese politics at the Australian National University.
"All foreign policy, but particularly for China, is for a domestic audience," he tells AAP.
"This is not about us. It's about citizens, about Chinese Communist Party members. That's what these are for and we're just a nice prop for them."
The constant refrain of co-operating where they can, disagreeing where they must and engaging in the national interest was calibrated to chime with Beijing's own goals.
Focusing on moving the relationship forward gave them an out for their unilateral decision to torch relations in 2020 while allowing them to save face.
The unusually long duration of the prime minister's trip and the fact it occurred so soon after being re-elected, was interpreted by both sides as a sign of the importance of the two nations' relationship.
Likewise, Mr Albanese remarked that the length of the meetings he had with President Xi Jinping, Premier Li Qiang and National People's Congress Chairman Zhao Leji was a sign of "respect" - a word he would keep coming back to through the course of his trip.
"I had meetings for around about eight hours yesterday," he said at the Great Wall on Wednesday.
"It was a very long meeting but it also showed respect to both sides, the fact that President Xi didn't just have a meeting but we had a lunch where President Xi as well invited Jodie to attend.
"That lunch was a sign of respect to Australia, to our country."
The fact the military band at the leaders' meetings learned to play songs specifically chosen to suit the prime minister's taste showed the effort they were willing to put in.
"Those gestures matter, respect matters between countries," he said.
"The opportunity to sit down and have a meal and talk about personal issues, talk about things that aren't necessarily heavily political, is really important part of diplomacy.
"One of the things that my government does is engage in diplomacy. We don't shout with megaphones."
The contrast to the way the US conducts diplomacy under Donald Trump couldn't be more stark.
The US president was a constant elephant in the room during the trip.
From his first day in Shanghai, Mr Albanese's visit was almost derailed after it emerged Pentagon strategist Elbridge Colby had been pressuring Australian and Japanese diplomats to provide assurances about joining the US in a hypothetical conflict with China over Taiwan.
But Mr Albanese refrained from engaging in the transactional style of diplomacy his American counterpart trades in.
When the opposition criticised him for failing to bring back tangible results and "indulgent" visits to the Great Wall and a panda research centre, the prime minister said they were missing the point.
"The Great Wall of China symbolises the extraordinary history and culture here in China and showing a bit of respect to people never cost anything," he said
"You know what it does? It gives you a reward."
Patient, consistent diplomacy is the government's modus operandi.
Tracing the footsteps of Labor leader Gough Whitlam along the Great Wall was a powerful bit of symbolism, Prof Smith says.
Mr Whitlam visited the wonder in a landmark trip as opposition leader acknowledging communist rule of the People's Republic of China in 1971, becoming one of the first Western politicians to do so.
It sent a clear message about the enduring strength of the relationship, Prof Smith says.
"This is probably one of the strongest cards we've got to play in terms of the relationship, that we were a first mover in recognising China. That gets us a lot of points."
Premier Li praised Mr Albanese for his personal role in mending Sino-Australian relations in their meeting on Tuesday.
Chinese state media, which poured endless scorn on Australia when relations were at their lowest, was glowing in its coverage of Mr Albanese, casting the previous coalition government as the source of the conflict.
"In recent years, as China-Australia relations have continued to improve, the Australian government's understanding of its relationship with China has also deepened," according to an opinion piece in Chinese state-owned tabloid the Global Times.
"(Mr Albanese) has demonstrated a pragmatic and rational approach to China policy.
"Today's China-Australia relationship is like a plane flying in the 'stratosphere' after passing through the storm zone and the most turbulent and bumpy period has passed."
Australian Strategic Policy Institute executive director Justin Bassi says the prime minister's visit was positive for economic relationships and trade.
But the approach is not without its risks.
"I think here the risks are threefold," he told ABC News.
"I think there is a risk that we are used for propaganda purposes. There is a risk that … trade becomes an over-dependency and the third risk is that we provide a perception, both to China and to our own public, that short-term economics are outweighing long-term security."
Few do pomp and ceremony as well as the Chinese.
As he met with leaders in Beijing's Great Hall of the People on Tuesday, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was given the red carpet treatment.
Rows of immaculately decorated soldiers were wheeled around the hall in perfect synchronicity and a People's Liberation Army brass band played Chinese covers of Aussie pub rock classics by the likes of Paul Kelly and Midnight Oil.
The lavish display may be par for the course for world leaders ushered into the grand neoclassical sanctum of Chinese power.
But the warm reception to the prime minister's six-day trip of China and gushing praise heaped upon him was notable in the highly choreographed world of Chinese political theatre, where symbolism and ritual are key.
Protocols matter, says Associate Professor Graeme Smith, an expert on Chinese politics at the Australian National University.
"All foreign policy, but particularly for China, is for a domestic audience," he tells AAP.
"This is not about us. It's about citizens, about Chinese Communist Party members. That's what these are for and we're just a nice prop for them."
The constant refrain of co-operating where they can, disagreeing where they must and engaging in the national interest was calibrated to chime with Beijing's own goals.
Focusing on moving the relationship forward gave them an out for their unilateral decision to torch relations in 2020 while allowing them to save face.
The unusually long duration of the prime minister's trip and the fact it occurred so soon after being re-elected, was interpreted by both sides as a sign of the importance of the two nations' relationship.
Likewise, Mr Albanese remarked that the length of the meetings he had with President Xi Jinping, Premier Li Qiang and National People's Congress Chairman Zhao Leji was a sign of "respect" - a word he would keep coming back to through the course of his trip.
"I had meetings for around about eight hours yesterday," he said at the Great Wall on Wednesday.
"It was a very long meeting but it also showed respect to both sides, the fact that President Xi didn't just have a meeting but we had a lunch where President Xi as well invited Jodie to attend.
"That lunch was a sign of respect to Australia, to our country."
The fact the military band at the leaders' meetings learned to play songs specifically chosen to suit the prime minister's taste showed the effort they were willing to put in.
"Those gestures matter, respect matters between countries," he said.
"The opportunity to sit down and have a meal and talk about personal issues, talk about things that aren't necessarily heavily political, is really important part of diplomacy.
"One of the things that my government does is engage in diplomacy. We don't shout with megaphones."
The contrast to the way the US conducts diplomacy under Donald Trump couldn't be more stark.
The US president was a constant elephant in the room during the trip.
From his first day in Shanghai, Mr Albanese's visit was almost derailed after it emerged Pentagon strategist Elbridge Colby had been pressuring Australian and Japanese diplomats to provide assurances about joining the US in a hypothetical conflict with China over Taiwan.
But Mr Albanese refrained from engaging in the transactional style of diplomacy his American counterpart trades in.
When the opposition criticised him for failing to bring back tangible results and "indulgent" visits to the Great Wall and a panda research centre, the prime minister said they were missing the point.
"The Great Wall of China symbolises the extraordinary history and culture here in China and showing a bit of respect to people never cost anything," he said
"You know what it does? It gives you a reward."
Patient, consistent diplomacy is the government's modus operandi.
Tracing the footsteps of Labor leader Gough Whitlam along the Great Wall was a powerful bit of symbolism, Prof Smith says.
Mr Whitlam visited the wonder in a landmark trip as opposition leader acknowledging communist rule of the People's Republic of China in 1971, becoming one of the first Western politicians to do so.
It sent a clear message about the enduring strength of the relationship, Prof Smith says.
"This is probably one of the strongest cards we've got to play in terms of the relationship, that we were a first mover in recognising China. That gets us a lot of points."
Premier Li praised Mr Albanese for his personal role in mending Sino-Australian relations in their meeting on Tuesday.
Chinese state media, which poured endless scorn on Australia when relations were at their lowest, was glowing in its coverage of Mr Albanese, casting the previous coalition government as the source of the conflict.
"In recent years, as China-Australia relations have continued to improve, the Australian government's understanding of its relationship with China has also deepened," according to an opinion piece in Chinese state-owned tabloid the Global Times.
"(Mr Albanese) has demonstrated a pragmatic and rational approach to China policy.
"Today's China-Australia relationship is like a plane flying in the 'stratosphere' after passing through the storm zone and the most turbulent and bumpy period has passed."
Australian Strategic Policy Institute executive director Justin Bassi says the prime minister's visit was positive for economic relationships and trade.
But the approach is not without its risks.
"I think here the risks are threefold," he told ABC News.
"I think there is a risk that we are used for propaganda purposes. There is a risk that … trade becomes an over-dependency and the third risk is that we provide a perception, both to China and to our own public, that short-term economics are outweighing long-term security."
Few do pomp and ceremony as well as the Chinese.
As he met with leaders in Beijing's Great Hall of the People on Tuesday, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was given the red carpet treatment.
Rows of immaculately decorated soldiers were wheeled around the hall in perfect synchronicity and a People's Liberation Army brass band played Chinese covers of Aussie pub rock classics by the likes of Paul Kelly and Midnight Oil.
The lavish display may be par for the course for world leaders ushered into the grand neoclassical sanctum of Chinese power.
But the warm reception to the prime minister's six-day trip of China and gushing praise heaped upon him was notable in the highly choreographed world of Chinese political theatre, where symbolism and ritual are key.
Protocols matter, says Associate Professor Graeme Smith, an expert on Chinese politics at the Australian National University.
"All foreign policy, but particularly for China, is for a domestic audience," he tells AAP.
"This is not about us. It's about citizens, about Chinese Communist Party members. That's what these are for and we're just a nice prop for them."
The constant refrain of co-operating where they can, disagreeing where they must and engaging in the national interest was calibrated to chime with Beijing's own goals.
Focusing on moving the relationship forward gave them an out for their unilateral decision to torch relations in 2020 while allowing them to save face.
The unusually long duration of the prime minister's trip and the fact it occurred so soon after being re-elected, was interpreted by both sides as a sign of the importance of the two nations' relationship.
Likewise, Mr Albanese remarked that the length of the meetings he had with President Xi Jinping, Premier Li Qiang and National People's Congress Chairman Zhao Leji was a sign of "respect" - a word he would keep coming back to through the course of his trip.
"I had meetings for around about eight hours yesterday," he said at the Great Wall on Wednesday.
"It was a very long meeting but it also showed respect to both sides, the fact that President Xi didn't just have a meeting but we had a lunch where President Xi as well invited Jodie to attend.
"That lunch was a sign of respect to Australia, to our country."
The fact the military band at the leaders' meetings learned to play songs specifically chosen to suit the prime minister's taste showed the effort they were willing to put in.
"Those gestures matter, respect matters between countries," he said.
"The opportunity to sit down and have a meal and talk about personal issues, talk about things that aren't necessarily heavily political, is really important part of diplomacy.
"One of the things that my government does is engage in diplomacy. We don't shout with megaphones."
The contrast to the way the US conducts diplomacy under Donald Trump couldn't be more stark.
The US president was a constant elephant in the room during the trip.
From his first day in Shanghai, Mr Albanese's visit was almost derailed after it emerged Pentagon strategist Elbridge Colby had been pressuring Australian and Japanese diplomats to provide assurances about joining the US in a hypothetical conflict with China over Taiwan.
But Mr Albanese refrained from engaging in the transactional style of diplomacy his American counterpart trades in.
When the opposition criticised him for failing to bring back tangible results and "indulgent" visits to the Great Wall and a panda research centre, the prime minister said they were missing the point.
"The Great Wall of China symbolises the extraordinary history and culture here in China and showing a bit of respect to people never cost anything," he said
"You know what it does? It gives you a reward."
Patient, consistent diplomacy is the government's modus operandi.
Tracing the footsteps of Labor leader Gough Whitlam along the Great Wall was a powerful bit of symbolism, Prof Smith says.
Mr Whitlam visited the wonder in a landmark trip as opposition leader acknowledging communist rule of the People's Republic of China in 1971, becoming one of the first Western politicians to do so.
It sent a clear message about the enduring strength of the relationship, Prof Smith says.
"This is probably one of the strongest cards we've got to play in terms of the relationship, that we were a first mover in recognising China. That gets us a lot of points."
Premier Li praised Mr Albanese for his personal role in mending Sino-Australian relations in their meeting on Tuesday.
Chinese state media, which poured endless scorn on Australia when relations were at their lowest, was glowing in its coverage of Mr Albanese, casting the previous coalition government as the source of the conflict.
"In recent years, as China-Australia relations have continued to improve, the Australian government's understanding of its relationship with China has also deepened," according to an opinion piece in Chinese state-owned tabloid the Global Times.
"(Mr Albanese) has demonstrated a pragmatic and rational approach to China policy.
"Today's China-Australia relationship is like a plane flying in the 'stratosphere' after passing through the storm zone and the most turbulent and bumpy period has passed."
Australian Strategic Policy Institute executive director Justin Bassi says the prime minister's visit was positive for economic relationships and trade.
But the approach is not without its risks.
"I think here the risks are threefold," he told ABC News.
"I think there is a risk that we are used for propaganda purposes. There is a risk that … trade becomes an over-dependency and the third risk is that we provide a perception, both to China and to our own public, that short-term economics are outweighing long-term security."
Few do pomp and ceremony as well as the Chinese.
As he met with leaders in Beijing's Great Hall of the People on Tuesday, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was given the red carpet treatment.
Rows of immaculately decorated soldiers were wheeled around the hall in perfect synchronicity and a People's Liberation Army brass band played Chinese covers of Aussie pub rock classics by the likes of Paul Kelly and Midnight Oil.
The lavish display may be par for the course for world leaders ushered into the grand neoclassical sanctum of Chinese power.
But the warm reception to the prime minister's six-day trip of China and gushing praise heaped upon him was notable in the highly choreographed world of Chinese political theatre, where symbolism and ritual are key.
Protocols matter, says Associate Professor Graeme Smith, an expert on Chinese politics at the Australian National University.
"All foreign policy, but particularly for China, is for a domestic audience," he tells AAP.
"This is not about us. It's about citizens, about Chinese Communist Party members. That's what these are for and we're just a nice prop for them."
The constant refrain of co-operating where they can, disagreeing where they must and engaging in the national interest was calibrated to chime with Beijing's own goals.
Focusing on moving the relationship forward gave them an out for their unilateral decision to torch relations in 2020 while allowing them to save face.
The unusually long duration of the prime minister's trip and the fact it occurred so soon after being re-elected, was interpreted by both sides as a sign of the importance of the two nations' relationship.
Likewise, Mr Albanese remarked that the length of the meetings he had with President Xi Jinping, Premier Li Qiang and National People's Congress Chairman Zhao Leji was a sign of "respect" - a word he would keep coming back to through the course of his trip.
"I had meetings for around about eight hours yesterday," he said at the Great Wall on Wednesday.
"It was a very long meeting but it also showed respect to both sides, the fact that President Xi didn't just have a meeting but we had a lunch where President Xi as well invited Jodie to attend.
"That lunch was a sign of respect to Australia, to our country."
The fact the military band at the leaders' meetings learned to play songs specifically chosen to suit the prime minister's taste showed the effort they were willing to put in.
"Those gestures matter, respect matters between countries," he said.
"The opportunity to sit down and have a meal and talk about personal issues, talk about things that aren't necessarily heavily political, is really important part of diplomacy.
"One of the things that my government does is engage in diplomacy. We don't shout with megaphones."
The contrast to the way the US conducts diplomacy under Donald Trump couldn't be more stark.
The US president was a constant elephant in the room during the trip.
From his first day in Shanghai, Mr Albanese's visit was almost derailed after it emerged Pentagon strategist Elbridge Colby had been pressuring Australian and Japanese diplomats to provide assurances about joining the US in a hypothetical conflict with China over Taiwan.
But Mr Albanese refrained from engaging in the transactional style of diplomacy his American counterpart trades in.
When the opposition criticised him for failing to bring back tangible results and "indulgent" visits to the Great Wall and a panda research centre, the prime minister said they were missing the point.
"The Great Wall of China symbolises the extraordinary history and culture here in China and showing a bit of respect to people never cost anything," he said
"You know what it does? It gives you a reward."
Patient, consistent diplomacy is the government's modus operandi.
Tracing the footsteps of Labor leader Gough Whitlam along the Great Wall was a powerful bit of symbolism, Prof Smith says.
Mr Whitlam visited the wonder in a landmark trip as opposition leader acknowledging communist rule of the People's Republic of China in 1971, becoming one of the first Western politicians to do so.
It sent a clear message about the enduring strength of the relationship, Prof Smith says.
"This is probably one of the strongest cards we've got to play in terms of the relationship, that we were a first mover in recognising China. That gets us a lot of points."
Premier Li praised Mr Albanese for his personal role in mending Sino-Australian relations in their meeting on Tuesday.
Chinese state media, which poured endless scorn on Australia when relations were at their lowest, was glowing in its coverage of Mr Albanese, casting the previous coalition government as the source of the conflict.
"In recent years, as China-Australia relations have continued to improve, the Australian government's understanding of its relationship with China has also deepened," according to an opinion piece in Chinese state-owned tabloid the Global Times.
"(Mr Albanese) has demonstrated a pragmatic and rational approach to China policy.
"Today's China-Australia relationship is like a plane flying in the 'stratosphere' after passing through the storm zone and the most turbulent and bumpy period has passed."
Australian Strategic Policy Institute executive director Justin Bassi says the prime minister's visit was positive for economic relationships and trade.
But the approach is not without its risks.
"I think here the risks are threefold," he told ABC News.
"I think there is a risk that we are used for propaganda purposes. There is a risk that … trade becomes an over-dependency and the third risk is that we provide a perception, both to China and to our own public, that short-term economics are outweighing long-term security."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Perth Now
34 minutes ago
- Perth Now
Fast approvals only add to housing construction logjam
Adding new housing projects to Australia's already swollen pipeline has been likened to turning the "tap on a bath that is already full", as analysis shows faster approvals are no silver bullet in fixing the nation's crisis. Data from property research firm Cotality shows approvals could move higher in the coming months due to rezoning reforms and incentives for new builds coinciding with falling interest rates. But rather than fix the shortage of homes, it could cause a problem for the construction industry by adding new projects to an already long list. "It's like turning up the tap on a bath that is already full," said the analysis from head of research Eliza Owen. It found delivery to be the problem, not approvals, with 219,000 homes under construction and completion times ballooning. "The real bottleneck lies in the build phase, not planning reform," the analysis said. The federal government's goal to build 1.2 million new homes in five years, adopted in August 2023, is thought of as unachievable by the industry. "With completion times already above average, and construction costs elevated, it seems an odd time to be incentivising more dwelling approvals and commencements to the backlog of work to be done," the report stated. Ahead of the Albanese government's national productivity summit later this month, the report calls for a move away from demand stimulation to sustainable delivery. "Making homes faster and cheaper to build, while still maintaining quality, resilient homes is the key challenge for policymakers to focus on right now," the report reads. Labor's massive election win has prompted union bosses to call for the government to revisit potential changes to negative gearing and capital gains tax concessions. But proposals to scale back the tax deduction is tricky for the government, after Labor took reforms for negative gearing to the 2019 federal election and lost. Negative gearing allows investors to claim deductions on losses and the capital gains tax discount halves the tax paid by Australians who sell assets owned for 12 months or more. The analysis says if governments are serious about delivering on the housing target, they "must focus on building capacity, lifting productivity, and ensuring every approved home actually gets built".
Sky News AU
34 minutes ago
- Sky News AU
Labor's international student backflip a 'farce', as economist claims Albanese government 'selling migration and work rights'
MacroBusiness Chief Economist Leith Van Onselen has claimed the Albanese government's backflip on international students will add to the already 'massive' number of migrants seeking permanent residency, favourable labour laws and work rights. The Albanese government announced on Tuesday a 'sustainable' increase of 25,000 additional international student places for 2026, bringing the National Planning Level to 295,000. Mr van Onselen branded the government's announcement 'ridiculous' and argued the 'farce' would contribute to a decline in university standards. 'Australia has the highest concentration of international students in the world… the government needs to get the numbers down,' he told 'We've diluted teaching standards massively, there's cheating scandals and soft marking. 'The integrity's been shot, the government should be focusing on a far smaller number of high skilled, high quality students. We're scraping the bottom of the barrel. (The government) should be going for the best of the best.' The MacroBusiness economist claimed 'enrolments are at a all time high' not because of the standard of Australian degrees, but because of Australia's work rights and potential access to permanent residency. 'We're not selling education, we're selling migration and work rights,' he said. 'If you took away Australia's work rights and permanent residency, none of them would come. Perhaps a small number would come to learn, but most are coming to work and gain permanent residency.' A joint statement put out by Education Minister Jason Clare and Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke said all international education providers will receive at least their current allocation next year, with the Australian Tertiary Education Commission to oversee future growth in international student numbers from 2027. 'International education is an incredibly important export industry for Australia, but we need to manage its growth so it's sustainable,' Mr Clare said. 'International education doesn't just make us money, it makes us friends.' Mr Clare said the Albanese government was increasing international student intake in a way which supported 'students, universities and the national interest'. Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke said Labor was maintaining the 'integrity of the migration system' while supporting a 'strong international education sector'. 'We are making sure student visa processing supports genuine education outcomes and our strategic priorities - including increasing provision of student accommodation,' he said. In March, Mr van Onselen wrote some domestic students had been 'forced' to help non-English-speaking students complete their courses through group assessments. 'Some tutorials have even been conducted in foreign languages, degrading the experience for local students,' he said, telling some students have claimed to have been subjected to tutorials delivered entirely in Mandarin. The economist also pointed to a 2024 Guardian article which revealed Australian academics were being pressured to pass hundreds of students suspected of plagiarism and other forms of cheating to maintain revenue streams. He claimed the government's media release on Tuesday was loaded with 'political spin' and was 'loose with the truth' about the 2026 planning level increase being eight per cent below the post-COVID peak. The eight per cent figure related to the flow of international students, which Mr van Onselen said was below the 'tidal wave' of commencements after Australia's borders reopened at the end of the pandemic. As a share of population, international students have doubled since 2012 when they made up 1.5 per cent. 'What it means is the numbers are going to keep growing, the total stock of international students is going to rise,'Mr van Onselen said. According to the Department of Education, in the year-to-date to April there were more than 794,000 international student enrolments, which Mr van Onselen said was up 105,000 since the pre-COVID peak. 'It's a disaster and hasn't boosted productivity,' he said. 'We've had 20 years of massive migration, no one can say this has made the economy or standard or living better, it's made it worse. 'They talk tough before the election and now with their stomping mandate they've gone back to their big Australia approach.'
The Age
34 minutes ago
- The Age
Roundtable will fix nothing unless we can all park our self-interest
I'm not sure if it's happening by accident or design, but we may be about to convince ourselves that, though our democracy isn't nearly as stuffed up as America's, we're fast making ourselves ungovernable, unable to agree on how to fix our problems. I fear that Treasurer Jim Chalmers' economic roundtable in a fortnight's time won't reach agreement on any measures of substance. The players – business on one side, the unions on the other, plus assorted experts – confidently assume that the Albanese government will use this indecision to come up with its own set of solutions. But what if it doesn't? Everyone complains that this government's too timid, unwilling to risk losing votes by making the controversial changes we need. Surely, it could use the roundtable's failure to agree on anything as its justification for doing nothing. 'When you guys can agree on what we should do, we'll do it.' Initially, the roundtable was to discuss the great worry of our times – productivity. Almost every year since forever, our economic production machine has got a fraction more efficient at turning economic resources into goods and services, thus raising our material standard of living. But for the past decade or so, it seems to have stalled. Why? And what can we do to get it going again? Loading But Treasury would have been quick to remind Chalmers that the budget is expected to be in deficit for as far as the eye can see. Something needs to be done about this, and the government is certainly in no position to try to fix productivity by cutting taxes. And, led by former Treasury secretary Dr Ken Henry, the nation's economists will tell you our biggest economic problem is that our tax system, which is little changed since the introduction of the goods and services tax 25 years ago, is no longer working properly. It needs a major overhaul. In economics, you can't get away from tax. Our productivity is determined largely by what happens inside the nation's factories, mines and offices. Ask any economist what can be done to make our businesses more productive, and they'll want to do it by changing the 'incentives' businesses face. Translation: pull some kind of tax lever. So it's no surprise that, when the Productivity Commission was asked to offer some suggestions, its first was to rejig company tax in a way that encouraged greater business spending on more and better machines for the workers.
