PRIME MINISTER CAIM51 A
FOR MEDIA SUNDAY 3 AUG lk81% 8
ELECTORATE TALK
TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE JOBS PEOPLE
Technological change is one of the challenges of a developing
society. Australia cannot, and should not, isolate itself
from it. It affects people and jobs and must be faced up to.
It was against this background that the Government initiated
the Myers Inquiry into technological change in Australia, the
report of which I released last week.
For many years there has been a great deal of public debate
about the merits of technological change, and concern at its
possible adverse effects. That is why the Government decided
to establish an independent and representative committee under
Professor Myers to examine the many implications of technological
change. The Committee comprising members drawn from the academic world,
business and the trade union movement was asked in particular
to report and make recommendations on how the Australian
community could maximise the economic, social and other benefits
of technological change, and minimise any possible adverse
consequences. I believe that the Committee has responded to that task in a
most constructive fashion and that its report will greatly assist
the community and the Government in understanding and dealing
with technological change.
The report will also do much to allay fears in the community
that the introduction of new technology represents a threat to
the well-being of society and in particular a threat to employment
opportunities. Looking first at the benefits, the Committee stresses the strong
positive links between technological changre, economic growth
and improved living standards. It emphasises that it is essential
for Australian industry primary, secondary and tertiary to
keep up with technological developments if it is to compete
internationally and if we as Australians are to realise the full
potential of our economy.
Rather than see the acceptance of new technology as a threat
to employment opportunities the Committee points out that to
resist change may be self-defeating. 1glogf?' I A-ze C-
At the same time, the Committee was in no way complacent about
fears in some sections of the community of so-called
" technological unemployment". These fears usually stem from a
belief either that the pace of technological change has become,
or is likely to become a threat to jobs; or that labour saving
devices will in the future allow society to produce the goods
and services it needs with a significantly smaller workforce.
The Committee's words speak for themselves when it says it has:
" Found no convincing evidence that change will be so
fast or so extensive in the foreseeable future that
significant sect-ions of the community will. be unable
to adjust and will therefore remain unemployed"..
The Committee's Report notes that accurate predictions of the
employment effects of particular technological changes cannot
be made. It shows also that the pessimistic forecasts of the
job destroying effects of new technologies almost invariably
prove to be exaggerated. The Committee also demonstrates
and here it has got very much to the heart of the matter that
the indirect effects of technological changes can in fact create
jobs.
This is because most innovations are adopted because they produce
new things that people want, or because they satisfy existing
needs at lower cost. Either way they are usually accompanied by
higher productivity and increased incomes which will be
distributed as a mixture of higher profits, increased wages and
lower prices to consumers.
The spending of these increases in incomes leads to the creation
of new employment opportunities in the economy, often quite
unrelated to the sector in which the-. initial change took place.
There are, as the Report illustrates, many everyday examples of
these processes at work such as the rising proportion of average
household expenditure on services entertainment, sport and
recreation, meals away from home, travel and education.
It is all too easy to forget that as our living standards
increase, assisted by technological advances; so do our demands
for these goods and services. More people have to be employed
to provide them.
Technological change can, of course, be accompanied by adverse
consequences. The Committee was very much aware of the hardships
that may be imposed on some individuals and their families.
Although it does not see these problems as being widespread the
Committee was concerned that more can be done by governments,
employers and unions alike to protect these people. In particular,
the Committee emphasises the need for a more co-operative and
mutually-supportive approach than has generally prevailed in
Australia in the past.
A great many of the Committee's recommendations are aimed at
fostering such an approach at ensuring, for eicample, that
workers are adequately consulted about the introduction of new
technologies; that the environment in which they work and the
work they do is improved as a result; and that the community in
general is as well informed as possibli about the process and
implications of technological change.
As I said when releasing the Report last week, the Government
strongly supports the general objectives of fostering a more
co-operative approach, as well as a wider understanding and
acceptance of technological change.
I have appointed a special Committee of Cabinet to examine the
Committee's recommendations as a matter of high priority and
I am confident that this consideration will lead. to substantial
acceptance of the Committee's recommendations.
I believe that the Committee's Report has brought out in a very
balanced and constructive way not only the benefits to be
derived from new technologies by the very great majority of
Australians, but also the responsibilities that fall on all
sections of the community to ensure that the introduction of
those technologies is accomplished with the least possible
disruption. 000---