Australian Politics and Workforce - Book Report/Review Example

In assessing the strength of Barbara Pocock's arguments and the validity of the supporting evidence, it is vital to outline the key points made by the author regarding the changing nature of the Australian workforce, and the implications of this for parliamentary politics. Moreover, it is necessary to examine the evidence she uses to support her arguments, identifying areas in which sounder evidence, and perhaps a more systematic approach, could buttress her line of reasoning. Pocock makes several interesting observations concerning the substantial changes affecting industrial relations in Australia, painting a somewhat bleak picture of the situation in the opening section of her speech.

For instance, she laments the decline in previously entrenched worker's rights, such as protection from unfair dismissal and the right to collective union organization (1). She also identifies the widening gap between the top of the labor market and the bottom, a phenomenon certainly not unique to Australia. Furthermore, there is a clear negative tone as she introduces the subject of the social implications of the aforementioned changes in industrial relations, including increasing indebtedness and a somewhat fragmented household structure (2).

As evidence of Australia's growing debt, the danger it poses for the economy, and the loosely linked political climate she cites Clive Hamilton's 2003 book Growth Fetish. Hamilton's book is an anti-capitalist slant against free market enterprise. Hamilton argues that capitalism transfers the power of the state to private enterprise and is responsible for a myriad of social ills (17). The argument could also be made that the paradox of thrift could place the economy in a recession by excessive saving and lowering of private debt.

While Hamilton is an interesting work, it is a political opinion that is not edited, cited, or substantiated with statistics. Likewise, Pocock's fear of the erosion of worker rights is based on assumptions with respect to the future actions of the houses of parliament (1). There are no facts or statements from public officials to support her argument in this area.This opening section is rather powerful, skillfully drawing the reader's attention to the gravity of change in Australian industrial relations.

Pocock continues with an examination of the link between "labour market status"' and political identity, contending that this link is "increasingly mysterious" (2). By summarizing the diverging opinions of key scholars on the matter, the author appears to avoid presenting a strong viewpoint of her own. Indeed, one could suggest that Pocock's argument suffers due to her refusal to sit firmly in the economic/political camp or sufficiently emphasize the centrality of cultural and 'values' identities.

In her explanation of worker status, Pocock relies on a balanced input from a broad spectrum of experts such as Charles Handy and his well-respected Age of Unreason. Pocock presents a balanced augment for the weakening and shifting links between work and politics. In addition she has included a substantial quantity of data, drawn from the Australian Bureau of Statistics, that indicates the shift in the labor market towards feminism as well as casual labor (6,20). These statistics serve her argument as she contends that there is a dynamic shift towards