Productivity Commission review

[BroadyFord]

I took the day off work today to attend the Productivity Commission's public hearing into the future of the car industry (in Melbourne).

Some observations:

- The commissioners continually referred to "certainty for taxpayers" when a party outlined the need for policy certainty and very much gave the impression that they don't see the industry as having a viable future.

- The best presentation was by FAPM who thoroughly and carefully outlined the value of the industry to the economy and explained that it was critical that the industry gets back up to 300,000 units per annum in order to increase competitiveness. They also mentioned that they believe this could be done by attracting another niche manufacturer to Australia - something which easily be achieved should the right policy settings be in place.

- Graziano spoke as president of the FCAI, along with Tony Weber. They're presentation was actually quite weak and both of them struggled to give meaningful answers when pressed about whether or not it's worth taxpayer's money to invest in R&D.

- Toyota had a good presentation but again struggled to provide an answer when pressed about the cost to taxpayers.

- The underlying themes regarding policy settings included not proceeding with the $500 million cut to the ATS, the need for fairer rules with the regard to FTAs and long-term certainty. Not much was discussed in terms of IR or labour policy.

[GASWAGON]

More commitment to fuel saving technology/cars like the EcoBoost 1.0 are the only way they will get out of the ****.......V6 EcoBoost from F150 in states for FH Falcon and Territory next.

Otherwise cars like the Mazda CX5 and Toyota Hybrid and any other fuel miser will continue to make sales.

Seriously who can afford to run a Watercooled/Supercharged/6.2 litre V8 in this country anymore?

[Wretched]

Is it this report?
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B98g...dTQ/edit?pli=1

[BroadyFord]

Originally Posted by Wretched

Is it this report?
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B98g...dTQ/edit?pli=1

That's the one.

[GREGL]

So who on here got paid the big bucks as the author of this report .
Basically what has they have said has been debated here for ages , while I understand it has to be put forward in concise and easily readable format without all the angst that this topic causes within this forum , surely they could have told the committee members to spend a night or two surfing F.F.A and saved a couple of million dollars !

[Road_Warrior]

Originally Posted by BroadyFord

I took the day off work today to attend the Productivity Commission's public hearing into the future of the car industry (in Melbourne).

Some observations:

- The commissioners continually referred to "certainty for taxpayers" when a party outlined the need for policy certainty and very much gave the impression that they don't see the industry as having a viable future.

- The best presentation was by FAPM who thoroughly and carefully outlined the value of the industry to the economy and explained that it was critical that the industry gets back up to 300,000 units per annum in order to increase competitiveness. They also mentioned that they believe this could be done by attracting another niche manufacturer to Australia - something which easily be achieved should the right policy settings be in place.

- Graziano spoke as president of the FCAI, along with Tony Weber. They're presentation was actually quite weak and both of them struggled to give meaningful answers when pressed about whether or not it's worth taxpayer's money to invest in R&D.

- Toyota had a good presentation but again struggled to provide an answer when pressed about the cost to taxpayers.

- The underlying themes regarding policy settings included not proceeding with the $500 million cut to the ATS, the need for fairer rules with the regard to FTAs and long-term certainty. Not much was discussed in terms of IR or labour policy.

Interesting. If that is your impression from the hearing then i'm not liking the 'tone' of this review.

Good on you for going btw.

[nstg8a]

Originally Posted by EF_6

More commitment to fuel saving technology/cars like the EcoBoost 1.0 are the only way they will get out of the ****.......V6 EcoBoost from F150 in states for FH Falcon and Territory next.

Otherwise cars like the Mazda CX5 and Toyota Hybrid and any other fuel miser will continue to make sales.

Seriously who can afford to run a Watercooled/Supercharged/6.2 litre V8 in this country anymore?

Sooo, Ecoboost and ecolpi don't count? Holden has the sidi and LPG as well, Toyota has the hybrid Camry.
It's got nothing to do with what engines they have, or how many doors they have, or whether or not you can negotiate a 40% discount on rrp...

Simple reason is choice. The consumer is overwhelmed with choice, and they are voting with their wallets.

And considering the amount of v8 sales Vf is getting, obviously plenty aren't too concerned with fuel prices.