Australia must ‘go for hat-trick' on economy
In a speech to mark the 100th anniversary of the Economics Society of Australia as part of the Australian Conference of Economists in Sydney, Reserve Bank deputy governor Andrew Hauser pointed to the challenges facing the economy.
Mr Hauser called the current issues 'unprecedented' but pointed to the lessons of the past in helping Australia solve them.
'Indeed Australian macroeconomic research has pulled that trick off twice,' he said.
'First, powering the ideas that lifted the country out of the Great Depression to flourish after the Second World War.
'And, second, helping to design a reform program that rescued the country from the slump of the 1970s, and led to more than a quarter century of recession-free growth. RBA deputy governor Andrew Hauser warns of the importance of economists puling off a trick for a third time. NewsWire / Max Mason-Hubers Credit: News Corp Australia
'Two Golden Ages, marshalling thought into action.'
Mr Hauser alluded to US President Donald Trump's tariff policy, which has now seen 14 countries receive letters dictating new tariff rates.
These include some of Australia's major trading partners, Japan and South Korea.
' … the tectonic plates of the global economic system are once more in flux, as free trade is rolled back; geopolitical alliances shift; climate change accelerates; and productivity growth slows to a crawl in most developed countries,' he said.
Earlier this week, the Productivity Commission said Australia could be a winner from the trade tariffs directly, although it warned the second order impacts of a trade war could hurt Australian living standards.
Productivity Commission deputy chair Alex Robson said the ensuing global uncertainty could 'affect living standards in Australia and around the world'.
'Uncertainty is a handbrake on investment – when businesses are uncertain about the future, they are less likely to invest,' Dr Robson said.
'Further retaliatory escalation could spiral into a broader trade war, which would bring serious consequences for Australia and the world.'
Mr Hauser also pointed to Australia's falling productivity as a key risk to living standards. Australia needs to lift its productivity. NewsWire / John Appleyard Credit: News Corp Australia
'One of the most profound issues of our time is how to reverse the productivity slowdown,' he said.
'Important work is underway on this topic in the public sector, some of it in conjunction with academia: for example, researchers at the Productivity Commission, Treasury and RBA have analysed the causes of the productivity slowdown, its links to competition, innovation and dynamism, and the implications for the wider economy.'
He said economics will need to go for the 'hat trick' with Australian academics helping to drive the next leg of economic growth.
Mr Hauser's speech follows a cautious RBA monetary board holding the official cash rate at 3.85 per cent following its July meeting, with the shock move defying expert commentators and predictions from the money markets.
Australia's Cash Rate 2022
The board voted 6-3 in favour of the hold but Ms Bullock, fronting the media after the 2.30pm decision, said the votes were 'unattributed' and declined repeatedly to reveal her position.
Prior to Tuesday's announcement, the money market had placed a 92 per cent chance on a rate cut off the back of weaker-than-expected economic data.
Mortgage holders will now have to wait until August at the earliest to get further interest rate relief.
bRight Agent co-founder Aaron Scott called the surprise hold a 'cruel blow' for millions of Australian homeowners.
'Despite the fact that a July cut would not have been enough to give most mortgage holders a meaningful reprieve, it would have been welcome by the millions of Aussies who are holding out for more cost-of-living relief,' he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Advertiser
3 hours ago
- The Advertiser
Employers urged to double down on workplace diversity
Australian workplaces are being urged to double down on diversity, equity and inclusion programs rather than follow the United States in dismantling them. Known colloquially as DEI, these initiatives are designed to create a fair and inclusive workplace with diverse people, where the playing field is levelled and all feel welcome. Since his most recent election as United States president, Donald Trump has wound back government DEI programs with many private sector companies following suit. But the former head of the Australian Retailers Association, Paul Zahra, wants Australian businesses to take a different path. Recently appointed patron of Pride in Diversity, an organisation that supports employers in all aspects of LGBTQ workplace inclusion, Mr Zahra said the need for diverse visibility had never been greater. When appointed chief executive of David Jones in 2010, he was the only openly gay leader in the ASX 200. During his time at the retailers association, Mr Zahra then championed DEI by signing retailers up to gender and LGBTQI equity statements and advocating for First Nations peoples. "I bring lived experience and I understand the complexities," he told AAP. "For LGBTQI people there is still a social taboo and it's not always socially acceptable." But rather than going down a rabbit hole of winding programs back, diversity, equity and inclusion should represent an opportunity for employers. "People need to see it as an economic imperative and what is happening in the US means Australia can position itself advantageously," Mr Zahra said. "While Washington rolls back DEI initiatives ... Australia has a unique chance to position itself as a global leader in inclusive business practices and reap the substantial economic benefits that come with it." The White House has defended its shutting down of DEI programs within government, calling the framework a form of discrimination and says its transgender policy protects women by keeping transgender women out of shared spaces. But Mr Zahra, who led the retailers association through the COVID-19 pandemic which was one of the toughest periods in retail history, said he had seen time and again how diverse leadership teams outperformed homogeneous ones. "As this continues in the US, more of the talent will be forced out and Australia has a real opportunity to capture that talent," he said. "When your competitors abandon proven business practices, Australia can capture the talent that values inclusion." Recent Diversity Council Australia research shows some progress has been made in Australian workplaces towards diversity and inclusion but opposition to these efforts has doubled to seven per cent since 2017. Despite having more ways of reaching colleagues than ever, the Inclusion at Work Index found workers report feeling less connected and able to contribute to their teams. Australian workplaces are being urged to double down on diversity, equity and inclusion programs rather than follow the United States in dismantling them. Known colloquially as DEI, these initiatives are designed to create a fair and inclusive workplace with diverse people, where the playing field is levelled and all feel welcome. Since his most recent election as United States president, Donald Trump has wound back government DEI programs with many private sector companies following suit. But the former head of the Australian Retailers Association, Paul Zahra, wants Australian businesses to take a different path. Recently appointed patron of Pride in Diversity, an organisation that supports employers in all aspects of LGBTQ workplace inclusion, Mr Zahra said the need for diverse visibility had never been greater. When appointed chief executive of David Jones in 2010, he was the only openly gay leader in the ASX 200. During his time at the retailers association, Mr Zahra then championed DEI by signing retailers up to gender and LGBTQI equity statements and advocating for First Nations peoples. "I bring lived experience and I understand the complexities," he told AAP. "For LGBTQI people there is still a social taboo and it's not always socially acceptable." But rather than going down a rabbit hole of winding programs back, diversity, equity and inclusion should represent an opportunity for employers. "People need to see it as an economic imperative and what is happening in the US means Australia can position itself advantageously," Mr Zahra said. "While Washington rolls back DEI initiatives ... Australia has a unique chance to position itself as a global leader in inclusive business practices and reap the substantial economic benefits that come with it." The White House has defended its shutting down of DEI programs within government, calling the framework a form of discrimination and says its transgender policy protects women by keeping transgender women out of shared spaces. But Mr Zahra, who led the retailers association through the COVID-19 pandemic which was one of the toughest periods in retail history, said he had seen time and again how diverse leadership teams outperformed homogeneous ones. "As this continues in the US, more of the talent will be forced out and Australia has a real opportunity to capture that talent," he said. "When your competitors abandon proven business practices, Australia can capture the talent that values inclusion." Recent Diversity Council Australia research shows some progress has been made in Australian workplaces towards diversity and inclusion but opposition to these efforts has doubled to seven per cent since 2017. Despite having more ways of reaching colleagues than ever, the Inclusion at Work Index found workers report feeling less connected and able to contribute to their teams. Australian workplaces are being urged to double down on diversity, equity and inclusion programs rather than follow the United States in dismantling them. Known colloquially as DEI, these initiatives are designed to create a fair and inclusive workplace with diverse people, where the playing field is levelled and all feel welcome. Since his most recent election as United States president, Donald Trump has wound back government DEI programs with many private sector companies following suit. But the former head of the Australian Retailers Association, Paul Zahra, wants Australian businesses to take a different path. Recently appointed patron of Pride in Diversity, an organisation that supports employers in all aspects of LGBTQ workplace inclusion, Mr Zahra said the need for diverse visibility had never been greater. When appointed chief executive of David Jones in 2010, he was the only openly gay leader in the ASX 200. During his time at the retailers association, Mr Zahra then championed DEI by signing retailers up to gender and LGBTQI equity statements and advocating for First Nations peoples. "I bring lived experience and I understand the complexities," he told AAP. "For LGBTQI people there is still a social taboo and it's not always socially acceptable." But rather than going down a rabbit hole of winding programs back, diversity, equity and inclusion should represent an opportunity for employers. "People need to see it as an economic imperative and what is happening in the US means Australia can position itself advantageously," Mr Zahra said. "While Washington rolls back DEI initiatives ... Australia has a unique chance to position itself as a global leader in inclusive business practices and reap the substantial economic benefits that come with it." The White House has defended its shutting down of DEI programs within government, calling the framework a form of discrimination and says its transgender policy protects women by keeping transgender women out of shared spaces. But Mr Zahra, who led the retailers association through the COVID-19 pandemic which was one of the toughest periods in retail history, said he had seen time and again how diverse leadership teams outperformed homogeneous ones. "As this continues in the US, more of the talent will be forced out and Australia has a real opportunity to capture that talent," he said. "When your competitors abandon proven business practices, Australia can capture the talent that values inclusion." Recent Diversity Council Australia research shows some progress has been made in Australian workplaces towards diversity and inclusion but opposition to these efforts has doubled to seven per cent since 2017. Despite having more ways of reaching colleagues than ever, the Inclusion at Work Index found workers report feeling less connected and able to contribute to their teams. Australian workplaces are being urged to double down on diversity, equity and inclusion programs rather than follow the United States in dismantling them. Known colloquially as DEI, these initiatives are designed to create a fair and inclusive workplace with diverse people, where the playing field is levelled and all feel welcome. Since his most recent election as United States president, Donald Trump has wound back government DEI programs with many private sector companies following suit. But the former head of the Australian Retailers Association, Paul Zahra, wants Australian businesses to take a different path. Recently appointed patron of Pride in Diversity, an organisation that supports employers in all aspects of LGBTQ workplace inclusion, Mr Zahra said the need for diverse visibility had never been greater. When appointed chief executive of David Jones in 2010, he was the only openly gay leader in the ASX 200. During his time at the retailers association, Mr Zahra then championed DEI by signing retailers up to gender and LGBTQI equity statements and advocating for First Nations peoples. "I bring lived experience and I understand the complexities," he told AAP. "For LGBTQI people there is still a social taboo and it's not always socially acceptable." But rather than going down a rabbit hole of winding programs back, diversity, equity and inclusion should represent an opportunity for employers. "People need to see it as an economic imperative and what is happening in the US means Australia can position itself advantageously," Mr Zahra said. "While Washington rolls back DEI initiatives ... Australia has a unique chance to position itself as a global leader in inclusive business practices and reap the substantial economic benefits that come with it." The White House has defended its shutting down of DEI programs within government, calling the framework a form of discrimination and says its transgender policy protects women by keeping transgender women out of shared spaces. But Mr Zahra, who led the retailers association through the COVID-19 pandemic which was one of the toughest periods in retail history, said he had seen time and again how diverse leadership teams outperformed homogeneous ones. "As this continues in the US, more of the talent will be forced out and Australia has a real opportunity to capture that talent," he said. "When your competitors abandon proven business practices, Australia can capture the talent that values inclusion." Recent Diversity Council Australia research shows some progress has been made in Australian workplaces towards diversity and inclusion but opposition to these efforts has doubled to seven per cent since 2017. Despite having more ways of reaching colleagues than ever, the Inclusion at Work Index found workers report feeling less connected and able to contribute to their teams.
The Advertiser
3 hours ago
- The Advertiser
Lockheed Martin confirms rethink on leasing Williamtown aerospace hub building
Defence contractor Lockheed Martin has confirmed it has gone back to the drawing board on plans to lease a building at the Williamtown aerospace hub to be built by Newcastle Airport's property development arm. Both the global giant and Newcastle Airport have declined to comment on an industry report that Newcastle Airport's finances were a "key issue" in Lockheed Martin's rethink. The new approach could see Lockheed Martin build its own factory at an estimated cost of $74million, delaying its initial plans to be operational at Williamtown in the first quarter of next year. Williamtown is proposed to be one of three Australian sites delivering a $500 million defence contract awarded last year for Lockheed Martin's integrated air and missile defence system, AIR6500. The company told the Herald in March that it was moving ahead with a long-term lease on a building to be built by Newcastle Airport's property-development arm, Greater Newcastle Aerotropolis (GNAPL), at the 76-hectare innovation, defence and aerospace hub. It has now confirmed it is rethinking its Williamtown plans. "Lockheed Martin is currently assessing the most suitable facility option to support Australia's Integrated Air and Missile Defence ecosystem," a spokesperson said. "Commercial builders were recently engaged to inform both build costs and schedules." Property Daily reported in June that Lockheed Martin had gone to tender and reviewed submissions from construction firms Multiplex, Built and Richard Crookes. The commercial leasing news outlet had previously reported that the defence tech giant had "effectively paused planning for its upcoming 3500sqm office fitout in the NSW regional city of Newcastle". "The defence prime contractor had seen delays with the development of the new building, it has agreed to pre-commit to - and at this stage it remains unclear if the project will proceed as envisaged. "A key issue was Newcastle Airport not having the readily available capital to proceed with a pre-commitment leasing deal." Lockheed Martin declined to respond to the Herald when asked whether the airport's position was a factor in its reconsideration. Newcastle Airport declined to answer this week if its financial situation had an impact on the plan falling through or reveal how much money it spent trying to secure the deal. A spokeswoman said this week its role was to help Lockheed Martin obtain development approval and provide infrastructure. "Newcastle Airport is continuing to work with the preferred contractor to support the project," she said. "Questions regarding the project are best directed to the Commonwealth." Newcastle Airport documents seen by the Herald reveal Lockheed Martin and the airport signed a preliminary agreement for the long-term lease of the proposed building in July last year, after lengthy negotiations. A solvency resolution presented to Newcastle Airport's board late last year detailed concerns about spending on the project, given the airport's financial constraints. "The protracted negotiation and planning of Lockheed Martin and Kongsberg Defence Australia projects has required GNAPL Board approval for $1.2 million in unbudgeted, non-recoverable, capital expenditure approvals in FY2024/25, plus a further $0.5 million requested for approval at the October 2024 meeting," it reads. "If the projects are successful in reaching bank-funded construction phase, there is a mechanism by which legal and management costs incurred to date could be retrospectively funded by a bank loan approval, however, this is subject to negotiation and approval with CBA, and is currently unapproved by CBA. There is a risk that not all funds expended are recovered under bank funding, once a loan is approved." The document also details "insufficient funding headroom for further unbudgeted funding approvals" last financial year, without cost savings, due to fears that the airport's cash reserves would "fall below the $15 million working capital policy limit". The news comes after Herald scrutiny of the airport's financial situation revealed the airport was looking to cut staff, had asked Defence to waive its rent, had been in discussions with councils to access a financial injection of up to $40 million, had been diverting millions in cash reserves to prop up its burgeoning property-development arm and was looking to borrow more money. Last month, the airport announced flights to Perth, and earlier this month, it said it had secured its first ongoing international service beyond Australasia, with flights direct to Bali. The Herald reported in April last year that the Lockheed Martin project included contracts to build a mixed office building with a workshop, collaboration space, training room, and car parking. Lockheed Martin Australia employs about 30 full-time staff in the Newcastle region, and this number is expected to grow to about 60. Once completed, the building is expected to accommodate 150 to 200 people, and result in $70-80 million invested in the Williamtown region for the AIR6500 facility. Defence contractor Lockheed Martin has confirmed it has gone back to the drawing board on plans to lease a building at the Williamtown aerospace hub to be built by Newcastle Airport's property development arm. Both the global giant and Newcastle Airport have declined to comment on an industry report that Newcastle Airport's finances were a "key issue" in Lockheed Martin's rethink. The new approach could see Lockheed Martin build its own factory at an estimated cost of $74million, delaying its initial plans to be operational at Williamtown in the first quarter of next year. Williamtown is proposed to be one of three Australian sites delivering a $500 million defence contract awarded last year for Lockheed Martin's integrated air and missile defence system, AIR6500. The company told the Herald in March that it was moving ahead with a long-term lease on a building to be built by Newcastle Airport's property-development arm, Greater Newcastle Aerotropolis (GNAPL), at the 76-hectare innovation, defence and aerospace hub. It has now confirmed it is rethinking its Williamtown plans. "Lockheed Martin is currently assessing the most suitable facility option to support Australia's Integrated Air and Missile Defence ecosystem," a spokesperson said. "Commercial builders were recently engaged to inform both build costs and schedules." Property Daily reported in June that Lockheed Martin had gone to tender and reviewed submissions from construction firms Multiplex, Built and Richard Crookes. The commercial leasing news outlet had previously reported that the defence tech giant had "effectively paused planning for its upcoming 3500sqm office fitout in the NSW regional city of Newcastle". "The defence prime contractor had seen delays with the development of the new building, it has agreed to pre-commit to - and at this stage it remains unclear if the project will proceed as envisaged. "A key issue was Newcastle Airport not having the readily available capital to proceed with a pre-commitment leasing deal." Lockheed Martin declined to respond to the Herald when asked whether the airport's position was a factor in its reconsideration. Newcastle Airport declined to answer this week if its financial situation had an impact on the plan falling through or reveal how much money it spent trying to secure the deal. A spokeswoman said this week its role was to help Lockheed Martin obtain development approval and provide infrastructure. "Newcastle Airport is continuing to work with the preferred contractor to support the project," she said. "Questions regarding the project are best directed to the Commonwealth." Newcastle Airport documents seen by the Herald reveal Lockheed Martin and the airport signed a preliminary agreement for the long-term lease of the proposed building in July last year, after lengthy negotiations. A solvency resolution presented to Newcastle Airport's board late last year detailed concerns about spending on the project, given the airport's financial constraints. "The protracted negotiation and planning of Lockheed Martin and Kongsberg Defence Australia projects has required GNAPL Board approval for $1.2 million in unbudgeted, non-recoverable, capital expenditure approvals in FY2024/25, plus a further $0.5 million requested for approval at the October 2024 meeting," it reads. "If the projects are successful in reaching bank-funded construction phase, there is a mechanism by which legal and management costs incurred to date could be retrospectively funded by a bank loan approval, however, this is subject to negotiation and approval with CBA, and is currently unapproved by CBA. There is a risk that not all funds expended are recovered under bank funding, once a loan is approved." The document also details "insufficient funding headroom for further unbudgeted funding approvals" last financial year, without cost savings, due to fears that the airport's cash reserves would "fall below the $15 million working capital policy limit". The news comes after Herald scrutiny of the airport's financial situation revealed the airport was looking to cut staff, had asked Defence to waive its rent, had been in discussions with councils to access a financial injection of up to $40 million, had been diverting millions in cash reserves to prop up its burgeoning property-development arm and was looking to borrow more money. Last month, the airport announced flights to Perth, and earlier this month, it said it had secured its first ongoing international service beyond Australasia, with flights direct to Bali. The Herald reported in April last year that the Lockheed Martin project included contracts to build a mixed office building with a workshop, collaboration space, training room, and car parking. Lockheed Martin Australia employs about 30 full-time staff in the Newcastle region, and this number is expected to grow to about 60. Once completed, the building is expected to accommodate 150 to 200 people, and result in $70-80 million invested in the Williamtown region for the AIR6500 facility. Defence contractor Lockheed Martin has confirmed it has gone back to the drawing board on plans to lease a building at the Williamtown aerospace hub to be built by Newcastle Airport's property development arm. Both the global giant and Newcastle Airport have declined to comment on an industry report that Newcastle Airport's finances were a "key issue" in Lockheed Martin's rethink. The new approach could see Lockheed Martin build its own factory at an estimated cost of $74million, delaying its initial plans to be operational at Williamtown in the first quarter of next year. Williamtown is proposed to be one of three Australian sites delivering a $500 million defence contract awarded last year for Lockheed Martin's integrated air and missile defence system, AIR6500. The company told the Herald in March that it was moving ahead with a long-term lease on a building to be built by Newcastle Airport's property-development arm, Greater Newcastle Aerotropolis (GNAPL), at the 76-hectare innovation, defence and aerospace hub. It has now confirmed it is rethinking its Williamtown plans. "Lockheed Martin is currently assessing the most suitable facility option to support Australia's Integrated Air and Missile Defence ecosystem," a spokesperson said. "Commercial builders were recently engaged to inform both build costs and schedules." Property Daily reported in June that Lockheed Martin had gone to tender and reviewed submissions from construction firms Multiplex, Built and Richard Crookes. The commercial leasing news outlet had previously reported that the defence tech giant had "effectively paused planning for its upcoming 3500sqm office fitout in the NSW regional city of Newcastle". "The defence prime contractor had seen delays with the development of the new building, it has agreed to pre-commit to - and at this stage it remains unclear if the project will proceed as envisaged. "A key issue was Newcastle Airport not having the readily available capital to proceed with a pre-commitment leasing deal." Lockheed Martin declined to respond to the Herald when asked whether the airport's position was a factor in its reconsideration. Newcastle Airport declined to answer this week if its financial situation had an impact on the plan falling through or reveal how much money it spent trying to secure the deal. A spokeswoman said this week its role was to help Lockheed Martin obtain development approval and provide infrastructure. "Newcastle Airport is continuing to work with the preferred contractor to support the project," she said. "Questions regarding the project are best directed to the Commonwealth." Newcastle Airport documents seen by the Herald reveal Lockheed Martin and the airport signed a preliminary agreement for the long-term lease of the proposed building in July last year, after lengthy negotiations. A solvency resolution presented to Newcastle Airport's board late last year detailed concerns about spending on the project, given the airport's financial constraints. "The protracted negotiation and planning of Lockheed Martin and Kongsberg Defence Australia projects has required GNAPL Board approval for $1.2 million in unbudgeted, non-recoverable, capital expenditure approvals in FY2024/25, plus a further $0.5 million requested for approval at the October 2024 meeting," it reads. "If the projects are successful in reaching bank-funded construction phase, there is a mechanism by which legal and management costs incurred to date could be retrospectively funded by a bank loan approval, however, this is subject to negotiation and approval with CBA, and is currently unapproved by CBA. There is a risk that not all funds expended are recovered under bank funding, once a loan is approved." The document also details "insufficient funding headroom for further unbudgeted funding approvals" last financial year, without cost savings, due to fears that the airport's cash reserves would "fall below the $15 million working capital policy limit". The news comes after Herald scrutiny of the airport's financial situation revealed the airport was looking to cut staff, had asked Defence to waive its rent, had been in discussions with councils to access a financial injection of up to $40 million, had been diverting millions in cash reserves to prop up its burgeoning property-development arm and was looking to borrow more money. Last month, the airport announced flights to Perth, and earlier this month, it said it had secured its first ongoing international service beyond Australasia, with flights direct to Bali. The Herald reported in April last year that the Lockheed Martin project included contracts to build a mixed office building with a workshop, collaboration space, training room, and car parking. Lockheed Martin Australia employs about 30 full-time staff in the Newcastle region, and this number is expected to grow to about 60. Once completed, the building is expected to accommodate 150 to 200 people, and result in $70-80 million invested in the Williamtown region for the AIR6500 facility. Defence contractor Lockheed Martin has confirmed it has gone back to the drawing board on plans to lease a building at the Williamtown aerospace hub to be built by Newcastle Airport's property development arm. Both the global giant and Newcastle Airport have declined to comment on an industry report that Newcastle Airport's finances were a "key issue" in Lockheed Martin's rethink. The new approach could see Lockheed Martin build its own factory at an estimated cost of $74million, delaying its initial plans to be operational at Williamtown in the first quarter of next year. Williamtown is proposed to be one of three Australian sites delivering a $500 million defence contract awarded last year for Lockheed Martin's integrated air and missile defence system, AIR6500. The company told the Herald in March that it was moving ahead with a long-term lease on a building to be built by Newcastle Airport's property-development arm, Greater Newcastle Aerotropolis (GNAPL), at the 76-hectare innovation, defence and aerospace hub. It has now confirmed it is rethinking its Williamtown plans. "Lockheed Martin is currently assessing the most suitable facility option to support Australia's Integrated Air and Missile Defence ecosystem," a spokesperson said. "Commercial builders were recently engaged to inform both build costs and schedules." Property Daily reported in June that Lockheed Martin had gone to tender and reviewed submissions from construction firms Multiplex, Built and Richard Crookes. The commercial leasing news outlet had previously reported that the defence tech giant had "effectively paused planning for its upcoming 3500sqm office fitout in the NSW regional city of Newcastle". "The defence prime contractor had seen delays with the development of the new building, it has agreed to pre-commit to - and at this stage it remains unclear if the project will proceed as envisaged. "A key issue was Newcastle Airport not having the readily available capital to proceed with a pre-commitment leasing deal." Lockheed Martin declined to respond to the Herald when asked whether the airport's position was a factor in its reconsideration. Newcastle Airport declined to answer this week if its financial situation had an impact on the plan falling through or reveal how much money it spent trying to secure the deal. A spokeswoman said this week its role was to help Lockheed Martin obtain development approval and provide infrastructure. "Newcastle Airport is continuing to work with the preferred contractor to support the project," she said. "Questions regarding the project are best directed to the Commonwealth." Newcastle Airport documents seen by the Herald reveal Lockheed Martin and the airport signed a preliminary agreement for the long-term lease of the proposed building in July last year, after lengthy negotiations. A solvency resolution presented to Newcastle Airport's board late last year detailed concerns about spending on the project, given the airport's financial constraints. "The protracted negotiation and planning of Lockheed Martin and Kongsberg Defence Australia projects has required GNAPL Board approval for $1.2 million in unbudgeted, non-recoverable, capital expenditure approvals in FY2024/25, plus a further $0.5 million requested for approval at the October 2024 meeting," it reads. "If the projects are successful in reaching bank-funded construction phase, there is a mechanism by which legal and management costs incurred to date could be retrospectively funded by a bank loan approval, however, this is subject to negotiation and approval with CBA, and is currently unapproved by CBA. There is a risk that not all funds expended are recovered under bank funding, once a loan is approved." The document also details "insufficient funding headroom for further unbudgeted funding approvals" last financial year, without cost savings, due to fears that the airport's cash reserves would "fall below the $15 million working capital policy limit". The news comes after Herald scrutiny of the airport's financial situation revealed the airport was looking to cut staff, had asked Defence to waive its rent, had been in discussions with councils to access a financial injection of up to $40 million, had been diverting millions in cash reserves to prop up its burgeoning property-development arm and was looking to borrow more money. Last month, the airport announced flights to Perth, and earlier this month, it said it had secured its first ongoing international service beyond Australasia, with flights direct to Bali. The Herald reported in April last year that the Lockheed Martin project included contracts to build a mixed office building with a workshop, collaboration space, training room, and car parking. Lockheed Martin Australia employs about 30 full-time staff in the Newcastle region, and this number is expected to grow to about 60. Once completed, the building is expected to accommodate 150 to 200 people, and result in $70-80 million invested in the Williamtown region for the AIR6500 facility.
The Advertiser
3 hours ago
- The Advertiser
Polestar won't rejoin Australia's top auto industry body
Electric vehicle (EV) brand Polestar says it's not ready to rejoin Australia's peak automotive industry organisation, the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI), because it still believes it doesn't truly represent the local auto industry. Along with US EV brand Tesla, Polestar Australia quit the FCAI in March 2024 in protest of the body's criticism of the federal government's now-implemented New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (NVES). A statement from Polestar announcing its exit claimed the FCAI was attempting to "deliberately slow the car industry's contribution to Australia's emissions reduction potential". The Chinese-owned Swedish EV-maker told media this week its view of the FCAI hasn't changed – and it is not considering rejoining its ranks, which includes most auto brands present in Australia. Hundreds of new car deals are available through CarExpert right now. Get the experts on your side and score a great deal. Browse now. "I haven't seen the FCAI say or do anything that would indicate that they're being more progressive when it comes to the electrification of the Australian vehicle fleet," Polestar Australia managing director Scott Maynard said on a media call. "In fact, most of the comments I've seen earlier out of the FCAI would indicate the opposite is true." Officially commencing on January 1, 2025, the NVES is designed to reduce the carbon-dioxide (CO2) tailpipe emissions of all new cars sold in Australia, with CO2 targets lowering annually until 2029. Automakers began accruing financial penalties for exceeding emissions targets from July 1, 2025. The initially proposed targets were raised – meaning new vehicles could emit more CO2 – with the final figures implemented after pressure from the FCAI on the federal government. A public statement on March 5, 2024, said the FCAI was "concerned at the rate of total battery electric vehicle sales which recorded just 5.9 per cent of total sales [in February 2025] compared with 9.6 per cent in February 2024". Further, the FCAI was critical of the way NVES was implemented, saying: "Our grave concern has always been the rate of EV adoption and what assumptions the Government had made in its modelling around consumer demand for EVs in the NVES. This modelling remains secret." Another FCAI statement made three months earlier said: "It is significant that the Government has recognised the need to do more to support sales of EVs in order to get anywhere near the challenge of achieving its extremely ambitious emissions reduction targets under the New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (NVES)." These were the comments that prompted Polestar to quit the group, along with Tesla, which only joined the FCAI less than 12 months earlier. Tesla was even more critical in public comments upon its exit, accusing the FCAI of misleading Australian consumers and engaging in anti-competitive behaviour. "Tesla is also concerned that it is inappropriate for the FCAI to foreshadow or coordinate whether and how competitor brands implement price changes in response to environmental regulations such as the NVES," it said at the time. The FCAI describes itself as the 'peak representative organisation for companies who distribute new passenger vehicles, light commercial vehicles and motorcycles and all-terrain vehicles in Australia'. Essentially, it represents the interests of automakers, with membership fees based on sales volume. Non-member brands – including Polestar and Tesla, as well as Mahindra, Smart, Cadillac, Ineos and Xpeng, among others – do not supply sales figures for the FCAI's monthly VFACTS reports. The FCAI's board includes – among others – Mazda Australia managing director Vinesh Bhindi, Mitsubishi Australia CEO Shaun Westcott, Nissan Oceania managing director Andrew Humberstone, Renault Australia general manager Glen Sealy and Mercedes-Benz Australia/Pacific's Jaime Cohen. Many of the automakers represented by FCAI board members offer EVs in their local lineups, including Penny Ferguson from JLR, which is currently reinventing Jaguar as an electric-only brand. Mr Maynard reiterated that his company's stance this week hasn't changed – even if Polestar's parent company, Geely, is a paid-up member. "The fact that they're [the FCAI] so hard against the NVES and tried to water that down didn't sit with our brand or what we would consider is in the best interests of the Australian buying public or the environment or the economy. "So at this stage, there wouldn't be any reason for us to go back. "The FCAI does an important job of representing its brands. Those brands, too, have spoken out against things like the NVES. "They have spoken out against things like fringe benefits tax (FBT), which continues to disproportionately serve the sale of dual cab utes – not what I would consider to be a far more progressive style of transportation, which is electric vehicles. "So it doesn't sit with our brand to rejoin. I've always said and will continue to say if that position changes, then of course it makes sense for us to join a vehicle-based chamber that represents the industry. But at the moment, I think it represents the industry [only] in part." MORE: Everything Polestar MORE: What the first emissions standard means for Aussie car buyers Content originally sourced from: Electric vehicle (EV) brand Polestar says it's not ready to rejoin Australia's peak automotive industry organisation, the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI), because it still believes it doesn't truly represent the local auto industry. Along with US EV brand Tesla, Polestar Australia quit the FCAI in March 2024 in protest of the body's criticism of the federal government's now-implemented New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (NVES). A statement from Polestar announcing its exit claimed the FCAI was attempting to "deliberately slow the car industry's contribution to Australia's emissions reduction potential". The Chinese-owned Swedish EV-maker told media this week its view of the FCAI hasn't changed – and it is not considering rejoining its ranks, which includes most auto brands present in Australia. Hundreds of new car deals are available through CarExpert right now. Get the experts on your side and score a great deal. Browse now. "I haven't seen the FCAI say or do anything that would indicate that they're being more progressive when it comes to the electrification of the Australian vehicle fleet," Polestar Australia managing director Scott Maynard said on a media call. "In fact, most of the comments I've seen earlier out of the FCAI would indicate the opposite is true." Officially commencing on January 1, 2025, the NVES is designed to reduce the carbon-dioxide (CO2) tailpipe emissions of all new cars sold in Australia, with CO2 targets lowering annually until 2029. Automakers began accruing financial penalties for exceeding emissions targets from July 1, 2025. The initially proposed targets were raised – meaning new vehicles could emit more CO2 – with the final figures implemented after pressure from the FCAI on the federal government. A public statement on March 5, 2024, said the FCAI was "concerned at the rate of total battery electric vehicle sales which recorded just 5.9 per cent of total sales [in February 2025] compared with 9.6 per cent in February 2024". Further, the FCAI was critical of the way NVES was implemented, saying: "Our grave concern has always been the rate of EV adoption and what assumptions the Government had made in its modelling around consumer demand for EVs in the NVES. This modelling remains secret." Another FCAI statement made three months earlier said: "It is significant that the Government has recognised the need to do more to support sales of EVs in order to get anywhere near the challenge of achieving its extremely ambitious emissions reduction targets under the New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (NVES)." These were the comments that prompted Polestar to quit the group, along with Tesla, which only joined the FCAI less than 12 months earlier. Tesla was even more critical in public comments upon its exit, accusing the FCAI of misleading Australian consumers and engaging in anti-competitive behaviour. "Tesla is also concerned that it is inappropriate for the FCAI to foreshadow or coordinate whether and how competitor brands implement price changes in response to environmental regulations such as the NVES," it said at the time. The FCAI describes itself as the 'peak representative organisation for companies who distribute new passenger vehicles, light commercial vehicles and motorcycles and all-terrain vehicles in Australia'. Essentially, it represents the interests of automakers, with membership fees based on sales volume. Non-member brands – including Polestar and Tesla, as well as Mahindra, Smart, Cadillac, Ineos and Xpeng, among others – do not supply sales figures for the FCAI's monthly VFACTS reports. The FCAI's board includes – among others – Mazda Australia managing director Vinesh Bhindi, Mitsubishi Australia CEO Shaun Westcott, Nissan Oceania managing director Andrew Humberstone, Renault Australia general manager Glen Sealy and Mercedes-Benz Australia/Pacific's Jaime Cohen. Many of the automakers represented by FCAI board members offer EVs in their local lineups, including Penny Ferguson from JLR, which is currently reinventing Jaguar as an electric-only brand. Mr Maynard reiterated that his company's stance this week hasn't changed – even if Polestar's parent company, Geely, is a paid-up member. "The fact that they're [the FCAI] so hard against the NVES and tried to water that down didn't sit with our brand or what we would consider is in the best interests of the Australian buying public or the environment or the economy. "So at this stage, there wouldn't be any reason for us to go back. "The FCAI does an important job of representing its brands. Those brands, too, have spoken out against things like the NVES. "They have spoken out against things like fringe benefits tax (FBT), which continues to disproportionately serve the sale of dual cab utes – not what I would consider to be a far more progressive style of transportation, which is electric vehicles. "So it doesn't sit with our brand to rejoin. I've always said and will continue to say if that position changes, then of course it makes sense for us to join a vehicle-based chamber that represents the industry. But at the moment, I think it represents the industry [only] in part." MORE: Everything Polestar MORE: What the first emissions standard means for Aussie car buyers Content originally sourced from: Electric vehicle (EV) brand Polestar says it's not ready to rejoin Australia's peak automotive industry organisation, the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI), because it still believes it doesn't truly represent the local auto industry. Along with US EV brand Tesla, Polestar Australia quit the FCAI in March 2024 in protest of the body's criticism of the federal government's now-implemented New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (NVES). A statement from Polestar announcing its exit claimed the FCAI was attempting to "deliberately slow the car industry's contribution to Australia's emissions reduction potential". The Chinese-owned Swedish EV-maker told media this week its view of the FCAI hasn't changed – and it is not considering rejoining its ranks, which includes most auto brands present in Australia. Hundreds of new car deals are available through CarExpert right now. Get the experts on your side and score a great deal. Browse now. "I haven't seen the FCAI say or do anything that would indicate that they're being more progressive when it comes to the electrification of the Australian vehicle fleet," Polestar Australia managing director Scott Maynard said on a media call. "In fact, most of the comments I've seen earlier out of the FCAI would indicate the opposite is true." Officially commencing on January 1, 2025, the NVES is designed to reduce the carbon-dioxide (CO2) tailpipe emissions of all new cars sold in Australia, with CO2 targets lowering annually until 2029. Automakers began accruing financial penalties for exceeding emissions targets from July 1, 2025. The initially proposed targets were raised – meaning new vehicles could emit more CO2 – with the final figures implemented after pressure from the FCAI on the federal government. A public statement on March 5, 2024, said the FCAI was "concerned at the rate of total battery electric vehicle sales which recorded just 5.9 per cent of total sales [in February 2025] compared with 9.6 per cent in February 2024". Further, the FCAI was critical of the way NVES was implemented, saying: "Our grave concern has always been the rate of EV adoption and what assumptions the Government had made in its modelling around consumer demand for EVs in the NVES. This modelling remains secret." Another FCAI statement made three months earlier said: "It is significant that the Government has recognised the need to do more to support sales of EVs in order to get anywhere near the challenge of achieving its extremely ambitious emissions reduction targets under the New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (NVES)." These were the comments that prompted Polestar to quit the group, along with Tesla, which only joined the FCAI less than 12 months earlier. Tesla was even more critical in public comments upon its exit, accusing the FCAI of misleading Australian consumers and engaging in anti-competitive behaviour. "Tesla is also concerned that it is inappropriate for the FCAI to foreshadow or coordinate whether and how competitor brands implement price changes in response to environmental regulations such as the NVES," it said at the time. The FCAI describes itself as the 'peak representative organisation for companies who distribute new passenger vehicles, light commercial vehicles and motorcycles and all-terrain vehicles in Australia'. Essentially, it represents the interests of automakers, with membership fees based on sales volume. Non-member brands – including Polestar and Tesla, as well as Mahindra, Smart, Cadillac, Ineos and Xpeng, among others – do not supply sales figures for the FCAI's monthly VFACTS reports. The FCAI's board includes – among others – Mazda Australia managing director Vinesh Bhindi, Mitsubishi Australia CEO Shaun Westcott, Nissan Oceania managing director Andrew Humberstone, Renault Australia general manager Glen Sealy and Mercedes-Benz Australia/Pacific's Jaime Cohen. Many of the automakers represented by FCAI board members offer EVs in their local lineups, including Penny Ferguson from JLR, which is currently reinventing Jaguar as an electric-only brand. Mr Maynard reiterated that his company's stance this week hasn't changed – even if Polestar's parent company, Geely, is a paid-up member. "The fact that they're [the FCAI] so hard against the NVES and tried to water that down didn't sit with our brand or what we would consider is in the best interests of the Australian buying public or the environment or the economy. "So at this stage, there wouldn't be any reason for us to go back. "The FCAI does an important job of representing its brands. Those brands, too, have spoken out against things like the NVES. "They have spoken out against things like fringe benefits tax (FBT), which continues to disproportionately serve the sale of dual cab utes – not what I would consider to be a far more progressive style of transportation, which is electric vehicles. "So it doesn't sit with our brand to rejoin. I've always said and will continue to say if that position changes, then of course it makes sense for us to join a vehicle-based chamber that represents the industry. But at the moment, I think it represents the industry [only] in part." MORE: Everything Polestar MORE: What the first emissions standard means for Aussie car buyers Content originally sourced from: Electric vehicle (EV) brand Polestar says it's not ready to rejoin Australia's peak automotive industry organisation, the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI), because it still believes it doesn't truly represent the local auto industry. Along with US EV brand Tesla, Polestar Australia quit the FCAI in March 2024 in protest of the body's criticism of the federal government's now-implemented New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (NVES). A statement from Polestar announcing its exit claimed the FCAI was attempting to "deliberately slow the car industry's contribution to Australia's emissions reduction potential". The Chinese-owned Swedish EV-maker told media this week its view of the FCAI hasn't changed – and it is not considering rejoining its ranks, which includes most auto brands present in Australia. Hundreds of new car deals are available through CarExpert right now. Get the experts on your side and score a great deal. Browse now. "I haven't seen the FCAI say or do anything that would indicate that they're being more progressive when it comes to the electrification of the Australian vehicle fleet," Polestar Australia managing director Scott Maynard said on a media call. "In fact, most of the comments I've seen earlier out of the FCAI would indicate the opposite is true." Officially commencing on January 1, 2025, the NVES is designed to reduce the carbon-dioxide (CO2) tailpipe emissions of all new cars sold in Australia, with CO2 targets lowering annually until 2029. Automakers began accruing financial penalties for exceeding emissions targets from July 1, 2025. The initially proposed targets were raised – meaning new vehicles could emit more CO2 – with the final figures implemented after pressure from the FCAI on the federal government. A public statement on March 5, 2024, said the FCAI was "concerned at the rate of total battery electric vehicle sales which recorded just 5.9 per cent of total sales [in February 2025] compared with 9.6 per cent in February 2024". Further, the FCAI was critical of the way NVES was implemented, saying: "Our grave concern has always been the rate of EV adoption and what assumptions the Government had made in its modelling around consumer demand for EVs in the NVES. This modelling remains secret." Another FCAI statement made three months earlier said: "It is significant that the Government has recognised the need to do more to support sales of EVs in order to get anywhere near the challenge of achieving its extremely ambitious emissions reduction targets under the New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (NVES)." These were the comments that prompted Polestar to quit the group, along with Tesla, which only joined the FCAI less than 12 months earlier. Tesla was even more critical in public comments upon its exit, accusing the FCAI of misleading Australian consumers and engaging in anti-competitive behaviour. "Tesla is also concerned that it is inappropriate for the FCAI to foreshadow or coordinate whether and how competitor brands implement price changes in response to environmental regulations such as the NVES," it said at the time. The FCAI describes itself as the 'peak representative organisation for companies who distribute new passenger vehicles, light commercial vehicles and motorcycles and all-terrain vehicles in Australia'. Essentially, it represents the interests of automakers, with membership fees based on sales volume. Non-member brands – including Polestar and Tesla, as well as Mahindra, Smart, Cadillac, Ineos and Xpeng, among others – do not supply sales figures for the FCAI's monthly VFACTS reports. The FCAI's board includes – among others – Mazda Australia managing director Vinesh Bhindi, Mitsubishi Australia CEO Shaun Westcott, Nissan Oceania managing director Andrew Humberstone, Renault Australia general manager Glen Sealy and Mercedes-Benz Australia/Pacific's Jaime Cohen. Many of the automakers represented by FCAI board members offer EVs in their local lineups, including Penny Ferguson from JLR, which is currently reinventing Jaguar as an electric-only brand. Mr Maynard reiterated that his company's stance this week hasn't changed – even if Polestar's parent company, Geely, is a paid-up member. "The fact that they're [the FCAI] so hard against the NVES and tried to water that down didn't sit with our brand or what we would consider is in the best interests of the Australian buying public or the environment or the economy. "So at this stage, there wouldn't be any reason for us to go back. "The FCAI does an important job of representing its brands. Those brands, too, have spoken out against things like the NVES. "They have spoken out against things like fringe benefits tax (FBT), which continues to disproportionately serve the sale of dual cab utes – not what I would consider to be a far more progressive style of transportation, which is electric vehicles. "So it doesn't sit with our brand to rejoin. I've always said and will continue to say if that position changes, then of course it makes sense for us to join a vehicle-based chamber that represents the industry. But at the moment, I think it represents the industry [only] in part." MORE: Everything Polestar MORE: What the first emissions standard means for Aussie car buyers Content originally sourced from:
