Opinion

Late last year the Mayor of the German town of Triberg introduced women-only parking spaces because, he said, women were worse at parking than men. The wider spaces are better lit, marked with a female symbol and not next to any concrete pillars. Mayor Gallus (rhymes with phallus) Strobel then revealed the real reason behind this considerate gesture. "While they're at it," he sold Der Spiegelmagazine "they can see the town's attractions." He suffered worldwide criticism when all he wanted to do was promote tourism but he was successful. Following his comments tourists flocked to the town to try out the parking spaces. His lateral thinking is catching on. A shopping centre in the Chinese city of Shijiazhuang built a car park with spaces nearly a metre wider than normal and just for women drivers. The parks were painted in a delicate pink and light purple and according to the manager Mr Wang (rhymes with bang) Zheng, these pretty lines would appeal to women's "strong sense of colour and different sense of distance." Furthermore, female parking attendants were employed to guide the female drivers into their berths. Given the reasoning applied to gender-specific wider parking spaces, surely having women guiding women drivers is the blind leading the blind? And women aren't the only problem drivers in China when you consider there are more than 200 road accident deaths there every day. It took scientists from a German university conducting research into the "spatial intelligence" of women to conclude that spatial performance (part of which involves getting a ginormous car into a ridiculously small space) is sensitive to hormonal fluctuations during the menstrual cycle. It means we're dangerous at a certain time of the month but it surely didn't need a collegial geek on a grant to point that out. Ask any bloke. Come to think of it, pedestrians need somewhere to park too. Maybe town seats sited in the middle of nowhere could be painted pink and purple so women with spatial difficulties and a fondness for colour could plonk themselves down after shopping and without scraping pillars. Better still, ban all women from driving. They do in Saudi Arabia and there's a reason for it. Blame the ovaries and upward thrusts of the pelvis. Yes, driving can affect not just a woman's child-bearing properties but her kids as well, at least according to a judicial advisor to an association of Gulf psychologists. Sheik Saleh bin Saad al-Lohaidan is reported to have suggested that if a woman drives a car not out of 'pure necessity' it would have negative physiological impacts. "Functional and physiological medical studies show that (driving) automatically affects ovaries and pushes the pelvis upwards," he said. "That's why we find those who regularly drive have children with clinical problems of varying degrees," he added while not citing specific medical studies to support his argument. But the Middle East is not alone in singling out women drivers. A couple of years ago Bernie Ecclestone, the man who tacitly heads the sport of Formula One, scored an own goal when asked in a television interview if American driver, Danica Patrick, could make it to Formula One. "Women should wear white, like all the other kitchen appliances," he opined. It was probably meant as a joke but it backfired quicker than a car with fuel mix problems and the old adage about fools opening mouths to confirm their status springs immediately to mind. Motor racing is replete with such men of similar intellectual rigour. Former world champion, Mika Hakkinen, reportedly suggested he'd welcome women into Formula One "as long as they were pretty." Danica Patrick can sleep at night knowing this. This is the same man who drove a McLaren Supercar – which has two seats in the front and one for the driver slightly behind those. "Good design," mused Hakkinen. "One seat for the wife and the other for the mistress." Still, he exhibited more animation with this utterance than he ever did at his post-race press conferences. Then there's the driver of an historic car fussed over whether a female journalist should accompany his group from New Zealand on an overseas racing foray. "What will my wife say?" he whined, appearing to mistake one ancient profession for another and confirming that his line of thought pre-dated his racing steed. And this in a country where women were the first in the world to receive the vote. Sandy Myhre is a female motoring journalist of many years standing, and president of the Women's World Car of the Year organisation.

A week or so ago I noted that every car on the road was silver, black or white. There are very few cars of colour. A generation back, people bought orange, blue, green cars. The roads are duller. I've realised that the same thing has happened to men's suits. Men wearing suits wear black, grey and occasionally deep navy suits. That's it. You can barely buy a brown suit. No tan. No light blues. No greens. And like the car fleet, this wasn't always the case, particularly in the '70s and '80s. Then, men would happily wear a big flared pale blue suit with lapels you could park a Monaro on. They would team this with a pastel green body shirt and a floral tie. And this was not just the fashionable few. This is what car dealers, real estate agents, school teachers wore. This was the look of blokes on the stock exchange floor. I didn't wear a lot of suits at the time, but I owned a basil green suit that was not considered outlandish. There is nothing like it on a rack in the menswear department today. Why has colour faded from our world? Whatever happened to neon? Look at a photo or footage of William St leading up to the Cross in the 1950s and there are bright flashing signs on every building. A corner fish shop used to have a neon. The technology of neon itself may have dated and have its problems, but why haven't we replaced it with contemporary arrangements of LEDs and fibre optics, for example? Why did we light up the night so garishly at one time and then stop? We've made our world less colourful. Once we would have jumped out of a canary yellow Torana, wearing a deep tan suit and gone into a nightclub with a giant flashing green and blue sign. Now we don't. What happened?  

The Rudd Government’s changes to the Fringe Benefits Tax rules are so flawed it is difficult to know where to start. By increasing the tax on the personal use of company cars -- from the previous flat rate of 20 per cent to one requiring drivers to fill-out log books or risk being taxed 100 per cent -- the Rudd Government kicked one of the biggest own goals of this election campaign. It immediately cost jobs, slowed new-car sales, put the brakes on a significant number of orders and deliveries, and threatened the survival of the already struggling car manufacturing industry. Not bad for a morning’s work. The announcement was made without warning -- or consultation of the industry -- on July 16. The Rudd Government showed its ignorance of the FBT changes on the very first day when the Deputy Prime Minister Anthony Albanese told ABC Radio: “The chances are it’s not a Holden Commodore (driver rorting the current system) it’s a BMW (driver)”. However Treasury has since been exposed for not having access to that level of detail. Disturbingly, this means the Rudd Government overturned the previous FBT rules -- which had been in place for 27 years and supported by successive Federal Governments from both sides of politics -- on a hunch. Data from the biggest leasing firms in Australia show luxury cars such as BMWs, Audis and Mercedes-Benzes combined account for just 5 per cent of vehicles bought under a novated lease or salary-packaging deal. The average price of all cars bought under these arrangements is $34,900. It became even more apparent that the Rudd Government didn’t do its homework when industry figures showed more than 80 per cent of drivers who buy cars under these arrangements are public sector workers. A study of 100,000 novated leasing contracts by the Australian Salary Packaging Industry Association found State and Federal Government public servants represent the largest portion (33 per cent) ahead of those in charities and public health (28 per cent), police and teachers (21 per cent) and then the private sector (18 per cent). As an example, one of Australia’s largest charities, the Salvation Army, says the new FBT rules will add $4 million to its tax bill each year -- equivalent to almost half the money raised by door-knockers in its annual Red Shield Appeal. Then there is the catastrophic impact on locally-made cars, up to 70 per cent of which are bought under novated lease or salary-packaging deals. Ford announced 12 down days on its production line as demand for the Falcon fell off a cliff in the fortnight after the announcement. Toyota, the biggest manufacturer of cars in Australia, also warned the FBT changes “would significantly affect … locally built vehicles which are heavily reliant on sales to business and government fleets”. Holden remained relatively quiet because it is in the middle of sensitive negotiations for further taxpayer support. But the boss of Holden Mike Devereux is said to be furious about the FBT changes. Federal Industry Minister, Senator Kim Carr, came up with a $200 million rescue package for the local car makers -- Toyota, Holden and Ford -- without knowing how it would be implemented. Furthermore, a study by News Corp found the $200 million (about $3000 per car) wouldn’t go near covering the average $8400 increase in FBT. In another example of the Rudd Government not thinking things through, the FBT changes will simply mean drivers will either keep their cars longer or buy new vehicles with a car allowance from their employer, thus avoiding the FBT hike. This means the Rudd Government would not get the $1.8 billion it was banking on to help pay for abolishing the carbon tax -- and it would have to pay out more money to help prop-up local car makers. A month after the FBT changes were announced the Rudd Government announced a $2 billion assistance package to the car industry from 2016 to 2025 -- on top of the $200 million FBT patch-up. Putting aside for a moment that Prime Minister Kevin Rudd would need to be re-elected twice for this to occur, the FBT overhaul made in a heartbeat now looks like costing the Rudd Government at least $2.2 billion rather than raising the $1.8 billion it had banked on. Oops. FBT: What Labor will do To distinguish between personal and work use of a car it will be compulsory for drivers of novated lease or salary package vehicles to fill out a logbook for three months that are “indicative” of the vehicle’s annual use. In practice this will mean the Fringe Benefits Tax will increase for most company-car drivers from the previous statutory method of 20 per cent to between 80 and 100 per cent. FBT: What the Coalition will do The Coalition has vowed to drop the changes to Fringe Benefits Tax proposed by the Rudd Government on July 16 and revert to the previous statutory method. The Coalition says it won’t need to increase taxpayer funding to the car industry because reverting to the previous FBT system will ensure new-car demand remains high.  

Holden factory workers may have sacrificed their wages to save the manufacturing future of the company but the nation will in fact have the final say on September 7. Even though approximately 70 per cent of the workforce voted in favour of new wages and conditions, the vastly different policies on both sides of politics will either seal the fate of Elizabeth — or secure its future. The new round of funding to be announced in Adelaide today by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd will create at least a $1 billion gap between the support for the industry from Liberal and Labor. The Coalition Opposition wants to cut $500 million from car manufacturing industry funding — the Rudd Labor Government plans to increase it by the same amount. And then add a further $1.5 billion ($300 million a year over five years) beyond 2020. There is another less well known hurdle for Holden that doesn’t involve cash: and that’s time. The Coalition Opposition says it will start with a Productivity Commission review into the car manufacturing industry and wait until the findings of the report before deciding on any future funding. That process could take 12 to 18 months. The problem is Holden has barely three months to decide the future of its Elizabeth factory. General Motors head honchos in Detroit and senior management at Holden in Australia must make the call either way by December this year at the absolute latest. That’s when the ground works for new equipment for future models begins and when the new workplace deal kicks-in. If the Rudd Government gets re-elected Holden will be home free — providing it sticks to its pledge of $2 billion in assistance across all sectors of the industry to 2025. If the Coalition Opposition is elected Holden will have an uphill battle on its hands convincing Tony Abbott about the merits of keeping local manufacturing alive. A big education process lies ahead given some of the naive comments from the Opposition Leader in recent weeks. Mr Abbott says he will talk to Holden about export potential to increase the output — and therefore the viability — of the Elizabeth factory. But Australia’s strong currency makes exports next to impossible and at the very least unprofitable. Holden won’t admit it publicly but it loses money on every Caprice police car it exports to the US. And Toyota loses money on every Camry it ships to the Middle East. Even if the strength of the Australian dollar eases in the coming years there is yet another barrier to exports. The two cars Holden will build from 2016 to 2022 will be built in other General Motors factories far more cheaply than they can be built here — even with Holden workers taking a hit to their hip pockets. This reporter is on Twitter: @JoshuaDowling  

Holden workers have courageously taken a hit to their own hip pockets to help the car giant survive for another 10 years. By voting yes to new wages and conditions they have set the scene for a showdown with General Motors and the Federal government. Factory workers have helped Holden slash $15 million in production costs at Elizabeth -- in itself no mean feat -- with wage freezes that will see the income of 1700 workers slip behind the rate of economic growth. Whoever leads Australia after the September 7 election needs to step up to the plate and find a way to work a deal with Holden. The car maker is eyeing an untapped portion of funds in the $3.3 billion Automotive Transformation Scheme.  But the Coalition has vowed to rip $500 million out of the package if it wins government. Here’s hoping, either way, there’s still enough money to get a new Holden deal over the line. After two months of speculation and uncertainty sadly the wait is not quite over for Holden workers. They now have another torturous two months or so while we wait for an election -- and then a meeting between General Motors heavyweights and the Prime Minister of the day. If those negotiations go well Holden will build two new cars from 2017 to 2022. If those negotiations stall Holden will likely shut shop by the end of 2016, not long after Ford. Here’s hoping the government recognises the very personal sacrifices made by 1700 Holden factory workers -- and doesn’t let them down. You could see the emotional stress this whole episode has had on SA secretary of the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union John Camillo, the face of the debate over the past few months. He had to compose himself as he delivered the good news through moist eyes -- because he knows a new battle has just begun. This reporter is on Twitter: @JoshuaDowling  

It’s been a long and bumpy ride for the 1700 Holden factory workers over the past two months. If you think you’re tired of reading about it, imagine how tired the workers themselves feel about being held to such scrutiny from friends, family - and members of the public who don’t know them or what they’re going through. As one worker told us this week the Holden factory uniform stands out a little more than unusual these days - even in a queue at the local grocery store. Hopefully some good news is just around the corner for the workers and the communities they live in. We hear from unions and Holden insiders that a yes vote is looking more likely now than a fortnight ago, when 85 per cent indicated they would vote no. Since then, Holden has backed down from some of the measures in its 41-point plan. Future voluntary redundancies of long term employees are capped at 90 weeks (not 52 week as was once floated). Only the redundancies of new starters are capped at 52 weeks. And the 17.5 per cent leave loading has been maintained (it too was under the knife). If any Holden worker has any lingering doubt, however, they need only look at the first point on the first page of the 30-page amendment to their workplace agreement. If Holden does not go ahead with the planned $1 billion of investment in two new models over the next 10 years then the new wages and conditions do not kick in - and the factory will close in late 2016. If workers vote “yes” to the new agreement - and Holden has successful talks with whoever is leading Australia after the September 7 Federal election - then their livelihoods are assured for at least 10 years. And they’ll be able to negotiate new terms in 2017. Think Holden’s bluffing? It’s not. General Motors is poised to close one of Germany’s oldest car factories, the Opel site in Bochum, because workers wouldn’t sign up to new conditions put to them last year. But GM’s UK factory at Ellesmere Port got a stay of execution after 94 per cent of workers there voted to new wages and conditions and the UK government increased its level of support. The next generation Astra will be made there beyond 2020. While it is of course important to go through the details of the document, it’s worth noting a few other key facts. Workers may miss out on planned 3 per cent pay rises each year for the next three years. But they can make up for most of that with productivity bonuses of between $1200 and $1800 per worker per year - if Holden cars sell well and the factory reaches its cost reduction targets. To put that in perspective Toyota factory workers get a $250 bonus in a good year. Under the new conditions Holden workers will also still be paid between $1000 and $5000 more per annum than Toyota workers. If you’re not a Holden worker and are concerned about all the taxpayer money that’s been spent over the past 12 years - all $1.8 billion of it - then consider this. Over that period Holden received on average of about $150 million a year from the public purse - but its workforce paid about $120 million back to the Federal Government in income tax annually. The net result is a handout of $30 million per year - less than $1.50 for every man, woman and child in Australia.  

The decision they collectively make in the vote for changes to their wages and conditions next Tuesday will not only affect Holden but communities far and wide — and the future of the entire Australian automotive manufacturing industry. If the majority vote ‘no’ to the new conditions Holden is almost certain to lock the gates at the end of 2016, not long after Ford. Toyota will likely follow in 2017 because the supply sector won’t be able to survive on the volume of one manufacturer. If they vote ‘yes’ to the changes then Holden will approach whoever is leading the country after the Federal election on September 7 and ask for more money to get them over the line. In that scenario at least Holden management will be able to say they have done their best — as have the workers. Holden workers have put their bodies on the line for “the Lion” before. They worked one day on and one day off during the Global Financial Crisis, and helped Holden soak up some down days when no-one knew what was around the corner. It’s a good thing they hung on because the then boss of Holden, Mark Ruess, navigated them out of certain disaster. Did you know Holden narrowly avoided being shut down in 2009 along with General Motors’ US brands such as Pontiac, Oldsmobile and Hummer? Four years on and now Mike Devereux is trying to save Holden from the heavyweights in Detroit. Fortunately, the Holden boss is an optimist. He can also see further in the future than we can (at least in terms of his company’s business plans). He can see a time when the Australian dollar might not be riding a mining boom and the balance will swing back in favour of locally-made cars. He also genuinely believes in the importance of manufacturing (he must, because building cars is a loss-making exercise for Holden). But Mr Devereux is also a businessman. Holden is asking its workers to swallow a bitter pill with some of the concessions we’ve revealed in our story — but in some cases it’s bringing them in line with other manufacturing sectors, and the real world. No-one denies that building cars is hard and highly technical work. But things are about to get tougher. Workers will be required to be trained across more areas — and have fewer breaks. Even some of the suits in the office will have to roll up their sleeves and learn how to build at least part of a car. It’s all designed to keep the Holden factory running as efficiently as possible and as leanly as possible while fighting against wages in nearby developing countries that are a fraction of Holden’s. The harsh reality is that it is cheaper and more profitable to make cars overseas. And that’s why we’re heading for two elections. The Holden vote will determine whether Australian manufacturing is in with a chance. But whoever the country decides should lead the nation after September 7 will have the final say. This reporter is on Twitter: @JoshuaDowling  

Industry Minister, Senator Kim Carr deserves credit for extracting $200 million for Australia’s three local car makers at a time when the Federal Government is slashing budgets. But the $200 million is too little too late. Car company insiders say the deal nearly fell over because it wasn’t enough. And these guys are used to taking money! For starters, the $3000 concession per car (based on Government estimates, the industry says it will be closer to $1100 per car) will do little to offset the fact that an average wage earner who buys an average-price car will be $8400 worse off over a four-year lease period. So guess what? As soon as people do the sums, they won’t novate lease a new vehicle. They will do what most other people will do and simply take a car allowance. This is why the car industry and salary packaging firms are sweating razor blades. The fact is under the new system people simply won’t update their cars as often because it is now suddenly less attractive financially. And that means the Federal Government won’t get anywhere near the $1.8 billion it was banking on to make up for the scrapping of the carbon tax. And that is why promising $200 million is not even a band-aid. It’s a band-aid that won’t stick. This reporter is on Twitter: @JoshuaDowling  

Electric cars have got off to a faltering start and it seems for every flop, such as Mitsubishi's iMiev runabout, there's an absolutely ruinous failure such as the flawed Better Place battery swap scheme. One of the few exceptions is Tesla, the Californian EV specialist started by PayPal entrepreneur Elon Musk. The Model S sets out to be a desirable premium sedan first and an electric car second. It's been so successful in its home market that deliveries to Australia, originally scheduled to begin now, have been pushed back to mid-next year. This means it will arrive about the same time as the BMW i3, the first electric car from the Munich badge, which was unveiled with much fanfare this week. The i3 is a 4m-long city runabout and it will soon be joined by the i8, a sportscar. The i3 uses a 125kW electric motor to drive the rear wheels and can travel at least 130km on batteries alone. BMW is also offering a “range-extender” version that adds a 650cc two-cylinder engine acting as a generator to recharge on the run. In this respect it's similar to the Holden Volt, but the i3 has a better chance of success. It will be about the same price as a Volt, which is $59,990. BMW buyers expect to part with that sort of money for their badge but for Holden fans, it's a stretch. The i3 is the first mass-produced car made from carbon fibre, which adds to its buyer appeal, and BMW has ticked all the environmental boxes throughout the manufacturing process. It's also pitching the i3 as part of a total approach to personal transport that takes in more than the car. Apps, connectivity, car and garage sharing, charge locations and even holiday loaner vehicles are all part of the picture -- at least in Europe and the US. BMW Australia spokeswoman Lenore Taylor is confident the same level of technology will be available here when the i3 arrives. “We're the only ones looking at it from a holistic, 360-degree point of view,” she says. It's been a long time coming, but 2014 is finally looking like the dawn of the EV.

Before the Rudd Government rushes to put its signature on a crisp cheque to Holden for a further $200 million in bailout money it may want to pause for a moment to consider what exactly it is saving. The Holden that the Federal Government is trying to rescue is not the same Holden we’ve grown to know and love since Prime Minister Ben Chifley rested his knuckles on the first Holden in 1948 and declared her “a beauty”. For starters the workforce is a fraction of the size it once was. Holden had a blue-collar workforce of more than 7000 just 10 years ago. Today it employs just 1700 workers on its car assembly line. Taxpayers are spending more money today to keep fewer workers employed at Holden and its parts suppliers than they were 10 years ago. Today’s Commodores -- and most of Holden’s big-selling sedans over the past 65 years -- were designed and engineered from the ground up in Australia and drove jobs in design and engineering as well as manufacturing. But the cars that Holden plans to build in Australia beyond 2016 -- the changeover point for the current Cruze small car and Commodore range -- are global designs that require very little localisation. And that means Holden will need fewer people to design, engineer and build them. Holden has already openly declared it cannot attach job guarantees to any future government funding because it needs to be able to adjust vehicle output and workforce numbers to suit market conditions. The Cruze is already made in eight other General Motors factories including Asia-Pacific neighbours China, South Korea and Vietnam where labour costs are a fraction of Australia’s. Holden has already said it is cheaper and more profitable to import the Cruze from one of these countries. Who knows? They might even be cheaper for us to buy if sourced overseas. Holden claims the car that replaces the current VF Commodore will wear a “Commodore” badge -- but it will be a large front-drive sedan designed for global markets. The type of car that Holden has historically mocked. The 2017 Cruze and Commodore, therefore, will in fact be about as Australian as a Toyota Camry. It would be a national tragedy to lose car manufacturing in Australia but it’s time to ask ourselves at what cost are we prepared to hang on to an industry in decline will little signs of hope? There are no harder working employees on the planet than auto factory workers. The work is technical yet done in trying conditions amid heat, sweat, grease and machinery that can kill if you turn your back on it. But the reality is the domestic new-car market is too fragmented to build a top-seller in sufficient volume to justify the investment in local manufacturing -- and the strong Australian dollar makes exports unviable. Check. Australia’s three manufacturers combined today do not produce enough cars to reach the global industry minimum average output for one. When Ford goes no later than 2016, there will be even further pressure on the two remaining manufacturers: Toyota and Holden. Checkmate. When Holden announced the $275 million rescue package in March last year -- with Julia Gillard standing alongside the very same 48-215 Holden sedan that Chifley so cherished -- we thought Holden’s woes were over. But alas they are not. Ford’s shutdown delivered Holden more bargaining power than it’s ever had, and the hand is out again. This proposed new round of taxpayer funding might eke Holden through the next phase -- or this Federal election campaign -- but what happens next time? How much more money must be pledged before the Australian public decides enough is enough? This reporter is on Twitter: @JoshuaDowling