Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Disclaimer: The Parliamentary Library does not warrant the accuracy of closed captions. These are derived automatically from the broadcaster's signal.
Lateline Business -

View in ParlView

(generated from captions) continue, that the indexation

arrangements will continue and

we will make sure we deliver on

each of those election

promises. But beyond that, we

want to have a conversation

with the States and Territories

about what else we can be doing

to look at disadvantage. Are

you talking about additional

funding from the Federal

Government? Yes, Tony, we're

talking about a conversation with the States and Territories

in the lead-up to the schools

agreement at the end of the

year which would be about

additional resources to help

combat disrang in education. So

beyond the pool of roughly $30

billion that goes to education

funding now, public and

private, you're talking about

extra billions of dollars from

the Federal Government, are

you? Well, Tony you're putting

the word 'billions' in there.

What I'm talking about is

States and Territories working in partnership with our

colleagues to do more and we

recognise that will require

additional resources. But we

also say money spent on the

education of children and

making sure every child,

including children from

disadvantaged communities, get

the best possible start in life

is money well spent. And all

of the research from around the

world would confirm that, that

if you spend a dollar investing

in education, then you will

save dollars later on in

welfare and other costs. Will

we be seeing additional Federal

funding before the next Budget,

or during the next Budget, in

the next Budget, or is this a

long-term project over years

that you're talking about? This

is part of the conversation we

are having through the Council of Australian governments

process. You'd recall the

Prime Minister had COAG at the

end of last year. It set in

train a series of working

groups. I've been chairing one

of them. The productivity

group. I've also been talking

regularly to my State and

colleagues. These Territory ministerial

conversations will inform the

funding agreements that we need

to enter into at the end of

this year. At the end of this

year, so this won't be touching

the current Budget, but it will

very likely be in the following

Budget? That's right. The

schools funding agreement

currently in place is in place

until the end of this year.

Then we need to enter a new schools funding agreement for

the next four years. We've

given a set of guarantees about the treatment of non-Government

schools in that funding round.

We want to explore with our

State and Territory colleagues

in the course of making those

agreements what extra can be

done to assist disadvantaged

schools. Do you have any idea

at all prior to that

conversation how much hundreds

of millions or billions of

dollars will be needed to help

the disadvantaged schools in

the public system that you're

talking about? Well, we need to

work through that in the conversation Tony, and the

reason that you have a Federal

Government, the Rudd Labor

Government that's prepared to

work with State and Territory

colleagues to end the blame

game is precisely because those

conversations are valuable.

You actually can't make a

difference for kids around the

country unless you work in

cooperation with the State and

Territory levels of government.

So that's what I'm going to do.

I'm not going to rule in or out

what could be the contents of

that conversation. But the aim

is clear, there is more that

should be done in this country

to assist kids from

disadvantaged backgrounds who

come to school, maybe never

even having opened a book, and

they need a world-class

education, an education that

makes sure they hit all of the benchmarks and they leave

school ready for the world of

work, or ready for the world of

further study. So we should

anticipate a funding revolution

for public schools, not just a

revolution, but a funding

revolution in terms of the per

capita amount that goes to

students in public

schools? Tony, you should be

looking forward to an education

revolution, because that's what

we promised to deliver, and

deliver it we will. We've got

our election promises which are

substantial, all the way from

universal preschool, right the

way through to universities and

everything in between. This is an additional conversation

about school funding and

disadvantage. Alright. I

presume then that all public

schools, in fact, all public

school funding, including I

think the 20-odd billion

dollars that the States

currently spend on public

schools, that will be subject

in your new formula to the SES system? Well, what we're

talking about with the SES

system is we know sitting in Canberra and the socioeconomic

We know that because of the status is of private schools.

system of the funding that's

used, so we have information

about income and resources for

those schools. We don't have a

comparable set of data for

public schools. That makes it hard to identify where

disadvantage is, and we, of

course, want to identify where disadvantage is because we want

to act to fix that

disadvantage. Sorry to

interrupt you there. What I'm

trying to get at here is you're not simply talking about the

the Federal Government to tranche of money that goes from

public schools, you're talking

and Federal, that goes to about all the money, both State

public schools, are you? That

will all be subject to the SES

funding arrangements under your

new scheme? I'm talking about

two things Tony, I'm talking

about having all of the

information which would enable

us to locate dis advantage, and

SES information is important to

that task. And then I'm

talking about a conversation with the States and Territories

as to how we combat that

disadvantage when it's been identified. Yes, but you're

talking about the two pools of

talking only about Federal funding. You're not just

Government funding to public

schools, you're talking about

the whole pool of funding? I'm

talking about funding which in

the lexicon of the Commonwealth

Government would be national

partnership funding, the

funding that funds schools is

called a Specific Purpose

Payment, it's funding for the

specific purpose of funding

schools. We are obviously

looking forward to a

conversation about something

more than that to address

disadvantage. If you're going

to address disadvantage you

need to know where it's

located. That's where

instruments like SES status can

come in to their own. They

help you work out those schools that are at particular risk.

And I would say Tony, there are

other measures that are useful

as well, and we funded one of

them. We've spent $16 million

funding the Australian early

development index, which was

formulated by Professor Fiona

Stanley and is a population

measure to identify kids in the

early years of schooling that

have particular risk of educational or development

delay. OK, at the current

moment with private school

funding that you said, or

non-Government school funding,

the SES system works but only

for half of those schools, the

half that accept that system.

Half of them opt out of it.

Therefore, you don't actually

have a level playing field in

terms of funding in the

non-Government sector. Should

that change if all schools fall

under an SES system and creates

an across the board level

playing field? Tony, the Rudd

Government has given a set of

guarantees to the non-Government schools to

independents and to Catholic

schools. Those guarantees are

that we would maintain the SES

model, we would maintain the

status of funding maintained or funding guaranteed. We'd

maintain the way in which the

Catholic system is funded and

we would maintain indexation

arrangements. We're a

government that keeps its

promises. Not for us the

terminology of non-core, which

was of course, the terminology

of the Howard Government. When

we give our word we intend to

keep it. We've given our word

on those matter s and we will

honour that in the forthcoming

schools funding agreement. Meaning in the

coming years you'll honour

that, will you, and right

through the course of this

Government, or just for the

coming year? Well, no, no, our

commitment Tony was very, very

clear. It is for the next

schools funding quadrenium for

the next agreement. Julia

Gillard, I think we've actually

gotten to the bottom of that.

We thank you very much for

coming in to talk to us. We

are out of time. Thanks Tony, a


Researchers hope to soon shed

more light on the circumstances

surrounding Australia's worst

single naval disaster. After

decades of speculation and

intrigue, the wreck of 'HMAS

Sydney' has been found. The

'Sydney' sank in 1941 off the

coast of Western Australia

after a battle with a German

ship 'Kormoran'. The discovery

of the wreck has brought some

relief to the families of the

645 who've lived for 66 years

without knowing what happened

and where. Michael Troy reports. 66 years after 'HMAS

Sydney' disappeared with all hands, experts found her more

than 2.5 kilometres below the

surface. The 'Sydney' lies

just 12 nautical miles away

from the ship that sank her,

the German raid er the

'Kormoran', which was found

yesterday. It's a historic day

for all Australians and a sad

day for all Australians, as we

confirm the discovery of 'HMAS

Sydney'. We believe that the

hull is largely intact and

sitting upright on the floor of

the ocean. After 66 years, it's

a hell of a shock. For Bob

Honor, the discovery brings an

end to uncertainty over the

father he lost when he was 4.

Ah, it's a lot of... it will

be satisfaction. The area has

been placed under Heritage

protection for the Australian

and German crews alike. The

protection of the site to

maintain the dignity of the

site will be the main interest

of my government. These war

dead will be treated with

complete respect. It's hoped

with further investigation the

wreck will provide clues as to

why the light cruisers went

down to so rapidly with no

survivors. It's possible men

did get off but in the vastness

of the Indian Ocean their

bodies were never

recovered. 300 German sailors

from the 'Kormoran' said the

'Sydney' had taken a tremendous

battering and the wreck seems

to support their accounts. If

the bow's blown off, I think

that supports the idea that one

of the magazines exploded,

because the forward magazine

exploding could well have blown

the bow off and could well have

plunged the ship into the sea.

Most ships were Mortally

damaged and the 'Sydney' was

last seen steaming over the

horizon in a blaze and

disappeared at about 10 o'clock

at night. Several months after

the battle, all that was found

was a lifetime raft with a body

in it near Christmas

Island. We're almost certain

that the body identified at

Christmas Island was from the

'Sydney'. The first real images

of the 'Sydney' should come

later this week when the

Geosounder will send cameras

down to the wreck.

That's all from us.

'Lateline Business' coming up

in just a moment. If you'd

like to look back at tonight's

interviews with Julia Gillard

or Stephen Smith or review Lateline's stories or

transcripts, you can visit our

website. But now here's

'Lateline Business' with Ali

Moore. Thanks, Tony. Tonight

- fire sale, global investment

bank Bear Stearns all but wiped

out before being swallowed by a

rival for a pittance. Its

actual headquarters in New York

is worth approximately $1.2

billion. So it tells you how

distressed that institution was

and how much distress its

assets were under that it could

be bought so cheaply. It's

phenomenal. The fallout spreads

to the local stock market once

again. And glass ceiling - the barriers that prevent women

from climbing the corporate

ladder. Management is seen as a masculine enterprise dominated

by male discourse and male

behaviours. To the markets, and

news of Bear Stearns's demise coupled with the Federal

Reserve's shock decision to cut

its discount rate strengthened

fears the global credit crisis

has deepened. The All Ords

gave up more than 2%, with

financial firms again being

heavily battered. Despite a

late afternoon recovery, the

ASX200 shed 120 points to close

at an 18-month low. The

selloff was more pronounced

across Asia. In Japan the

Nikkei fell nearly 4%. Hong

Kong's Hang Seng tumbled 5% and

in London, the news isn't much

better, with the FTSE down 2%.

It's clear the moves by the

Federal Reserve to try to

restore stability to financial

markets is making investors

more nervous than calm. That's

despite not just the Fed's

interest rate cut but also the

announcement more financial

institutions will be able to

access the Central Bank's

discount lending. Uppermost in

the minds of many is the fate

of Bear Stearns, once the

country's fifth largest

investment bank which has now

been bought by rival JP Morgan

for a mere US $2 a share. Neal

Woolrich reports. Once a giant

on Wall Street, now Bear

Stearns is being sold off at a

fire sale price. Last week

America's fifth largest bank

was valued at nearly $4

billion. Now JP Morgan will

take over its stricken rival

for just $270 million. Its

actual headquarters in New York

is worth approximately $1.2

billion. So it tells you how

distressed that institution was

and how much distress its

assets were under that it could

be bought so cheaply. It's

really phenomenal. Today the US

Federal Reserve announced more

measures to revive America's

troubled financial industry.

The nation's 20 primary lenders

can join banks in accessing the

Fed's discount window and the

rate to financial institutions has been cut by

has been cut by 0.25%. Banks

are subject to a stricter

regulation than security

dealers. What the Fed's announced is that the 20

primary dealers, some of which

are depository institutions but

some are securities, brokerage

houses will be able to access

the discount window. This is

the first time this has ever

happened. The Central Bank has

pumped more than $130 billion

into the US financial system

this month alone. The market

is now expecting the Federal

funds rate to drop by 0.75% on

Tuesday. I think the moves will

be welcome, but some of the

moves by the Fed in recent times haven't been probably as

successful as they would have

hoped. Despite the bailout of

Bear Stearns and the US dollar

charting fresh lows,

policymakers have put on a

brave face. Our financial

institutions, our banks and

investment banks are very

strong and I'm convinced that

they're going to come out of

this situation very strong.

Our markets are resilient,

they're flexible. I'm quite

confident we'll work our way

through this situation. But

global investors failed to

share that optimism. Local

banking stocks fell by 4%

pushing the Australian market

more than 2% lower while Asian markets suffered heavier falls.

People are just too worried

that there's more bad news out

there to sort of take comfort

and restore liquidity and

confidence to the market. Last

month, Macquarie agreed to sell

its private capital arm to Bear

Stearns for $116 million - a

deal that will now hinge on the

Bear Stearns's takeover

package. And investors fear

there's more bad news to come

locally, with bad debts

expected to pick up in the next

round of profit reporting. The

banks have enjoyed an

unprecedented period of benign credit experience for a number

of years now. It's natural

reget reversion back to the

longer term averages. Despite

the recent share price plunge

in banking stocks, John Miles

argues that the underlying business in Australia remains

sound. If I look at the actual

level of activity, it's still

quite solid. We've had pretty strong asset growth through

last year, albeit some of it

through the remediation as a

result of the kind of crisis

we're in at the moment. But

the banks have had a pretty

healthy time and continue to

trade reasonably well gempb the

environment. But despite the

Federal Reserve's latest

intervention, it's likely that

banking stocks still have some

way to fall. Well, as we said

earlier markets in Europe are

doing no better than those in

our region today. Investors

clearly worried about what will

happen next - a question no-one

can answer. To look at

reaction to the Fed moves and

the bailout of Bear Stearns I'm

joined by Nick Parsons head of

market strategy at NAB Capital

in London. Nick Parsons, welcome to the program. Good

evening, pleasure to be

here. We just heard that those

woes of Bear Stearns are

certainly fuelling more fears

of just what is to come? Share

prices in Europe down somewhere

between 2-3% on average, but

that average itself masks some

fairly substantial declines in

the banking sector. One or two

names that are fairly familiar

up here are down around 10%,

over in Ireland one of the

banks is down 20%. So

certainly quite a lot of

pressure in this financial

sector still to come. Clients

pulled something like US $20

million in Bear Stearns, could

what happened to them happen to

other banks? Oh, the banking

system is built on confidence.

Banks borrow short and lend

long and if they're unable to

cover those short-term

borrowings then the downward

spiral can kick off very

quickly. We saw as recently as

Thursday evening we were told

that Bear Stearns easily quidity situation was not under

any stress. By Friday evening

it had effectively gone

bankrupt. So yes, we can hear

the confidence. You would have

heard from the US authorities

at the top of your program

talking about the need to

really try and boost investor

confidence, but really it's so

fragile, it's very, very little

effect at the moment. Indeed,

you talk about how fragile it

is and just tonight our time,

morning your time Lehmann

Brothers has had to come out

and say that their liquidity

position is OK? They're all OK

as of now. As of this moment

we don't know what those liquidity positions would look

like in an hour's time, let

alone 24 hours or a week. I

think we can expect a barrage

of similar comments from all

the US authorities, and I think

that we're going to hear

similar things from the

Europeans, from G-7, from G 20,

you name it, every global and supernational organisation is

going to be telling us that the

fundamentals are sound and we

don't need to worry. Well, I

think last Friday's events

showed us we should take those

sorts of comments with a bit of

a pinch of salt. Nick Parsons,

why wasn't Bear Stearns allowed

to collapse completely and

utterly. The question is being

asked as to whether this raises

the issue of moral hazard, or

is that insignificant in terms

of the systematic risk that

this posed? For all practical

purposes, Bear Stearns was

allowed to go bankrupt. $2 a

share isn't going to buy you a

coffee. $2 a share is derisory

when you compare it with the

$35 at which it closed on

Friday, the $65 at which it

opened on Friday morning. The

reason it didn't go down to

zero because frankly there

would have been a feeding

frenzy for the lawyers. Once a

firm actually goes into

bankruptcy then every contract

it's actually entered into is

up for grabs and up for

renegotiation. And basically,

to avoid a feeding frenzy

amongst our friends in the

legal profession they accepted

a takeover at $2 a share. $2 a

share to all intents and

purposes certainly if you're a

Bear Stearns shareholder, it's

as good as bankrupt. If it is

all about a crisis of

confidence and that's not been

fixed. We've seen a 0.25% cut

in the discount rate, what's

going to turn this? If we get

another cut in the Federal funds rate which everyone is expecting on Wednesday, will

that do it? There's no single

event, there's no short-term

fix for this market. What we

need to happen is a period of

several months, possibly even

several quarters where we stop

getting bad news, where the

news stops getting worse where

banks can finally start to have some confidence in the value of

their assets, where US house

prices begin to stabilise,

where economic activity and consumer confidence pick up.

That's a long process and just

as we saw a lot of investors

last week trying to jump on one

signal from the fund and one

day's market movements trying

to tell us that was the bottom. The bottoming process is going

to take quite some time and I

think it's going to be at least

a couple of quarters before we

can start to entice real money

investors and individual

investors back into this. It's

going to take time, there's no

easy fix. Especially, as

they're now saying we've had

write-downs of $250 and $200

billion. There's talk that the

actual losses could be upwards

of $600 billion? I think the

interesting thing to note here

is it's a problem that's going

beyond subprime. We've gone

beyond subprime, we're now

looking at ul, the A mortgages,

home equity line of credit,

we're going to be looking at

auto loans. There's a range of

lending that's been done

against some fairly stretched

asset valautions, and I think

across all sorts of lending

classes we're going to be

reconsidering the amount of

business that's going to be

written and really trying to

put a proper valaution on the

assets that banks have already

got. So really, there's no

rush to be writing new business

right now. What about

Australian banks? Obviously you

work for NAB Capital, we've

been hit in your market just as

your financial institutions

have been hit. How are we

viewed from a European

perspective? Is our asset

quality any better? Well, it's

certainly not viewed as being

dramatically worse, let's put

it that way. The European

investment community has been

very I think complimentary

towards the RBA and towards its interest rate policy, towards

its focus on inflation and really that's helped to

maintain confidence in the

system. However, I do detect

over the last week or so that

perhaps some investors are

starting to worry that a 7.25%

cash rate is hurting banks'

ability to finance themselves

and to finance some of those

loans. So the market I think

is very supportive of the monetary policy. It's just

beginning to get a little bit

concerned about whether the

price of that is appropriate,

and whether, in fact, we

shouldn't be looking at some cuts in interest rates towards

the end of this year with

perhaps substantially more rate

cuts to come in 2009. Globally

I guess we look so out of

whack, don't we? Well,

absolutely. Australia and the

kiwi dollar have been there as

the great carry plays and I

think really right now that

there doesn't seem to be the

need against the background of declining economic activity to

have those rates so high. What

we've got here if you like is a

problem of cause and effect,

that raw materials and commodities prices have been so

high because the dollar is weak

and that's why some central

banks have needed to have very

high interest rates. Actually,

if we were to see intervention

from this central banks

concertedly to drive down the

value of the US dollar then I

think in turn so we would see

those commodity prices coming

off and that would give room to

the RBA and others in its

position to be cutting domestic

interest rates. The classic

chicken and egg, Nick Parsons,

many thanks for talking to

us. You're welcome. To the major movers on our market now:

The gloves are off in the

battle for control of West

Australian newspapers. The

newspapers board launching a

campaign against billionaire

Kerry Stokes. Mr Stokes wants

the whole board dumps. Directors have issued

shareholders with an ultimatum

- it's us or them. Dianne Bain

reports. Perth may be where

the West is sold, but it's the

hearts and minds of retail

investors nationally that the

paper's board needs to win

over. Their votes are crucial

in the boardroom battle. There

is a significant risk that Mr

Stokes and Seven Network may

gain effective control of Wan

without paying a control

premium. Kerry Stokes, the

West's biggest shareholder,

wants the board dumped and two

seats on a new board. In a

statement today he asks:

But the board argues even if

the circulation is dropping,

the return to shareholders has outperformed all other Australian newspapers and

Channel 7. It's one of the

industry leaders in terms of

revenue growth and margin performance. The board claims

Mr Stokes and Channel 7 will

have a conflict of interest in

a competition for advertising

revenue. Today the director

gave shareholders a stark

choice, if Mr Stokes wins his

two seats then the rest of the

board will resign. Where we

believe that some of our fellow

directors have another agenda

running, it just wouldn't operate. Some believe the

board's ultimatum to walk is a

wise move. Given the nature of

Seven and Kerry Stokes's complaints that it's going to

be very difficult going forward

if they are on the board to

have an effective working relationship. Kerry Stokes will

speak publicly about his push

for change at the West at a

business breakfast to be held

in Perth at the start of April.

Just one week later, and the

West board will release its

full-year results earlier than

planned, and with the expectation that shareholders

will receive a healthy

dividend. Rio Tinto's top

executives have given

themselves big pay rises as the

company tries to fend off a

hostile takeover bid from BHP

Billiton. Rio's annual report

shows the pay package of chief

executive Tom Albanese almost

quadrupled to more than $13

million. Former CEO Leigh

Clifford took home nearly $8

million, up from nearly $4

million in 2006. Rio Tinto's

after-tax profit for the year

fell 2% although its underlying

earnings rose. While the

Federal Government is busy dis

mantling the workplace laws of

the Coalition, big business is

urging action on another front,

calling for a uniform system of

business regulation, and after

years of reviews and

commitments but no action, the Business Council of Australia

says if the States won't agree the Federal Government should

override them and set up a

national scheme. The council's

president is Greg Gailey and he joined me from our Melbourne

studio. Greg Gailey, welcome

to the program. Pleasure. You

want a single system of

regulation within two years,

the Rudd Government even has a

minister in charge of deregulation, what chance

you'll get what you want? Well,

Ali there is something like 32,000 businesses that now trade nationally in Australia

and the fact that you can can

front eight different regimes,

six States two Territories means there's an unnecessary

cost to consumers and we'd be

very keen to see a common set

of regulation across those

eight jurisdictions. But as I

said, what chance you'll

actually get what you want?

Your report details the lack of

action with Federal and State Government meetings, first of

all February 2006, then July

2006, April 2007, then December

2007, the latter obviously

under the few government, and

as your report details, each

meeting just started the cycle

again - more commitment to reform and yet more

reviews? Well, unfortunately

you've hit the nail on the

head. That's been the whole

issue so far. The Government

has had very good intentions

but it has failed similarly to

deliver. What we're saying now

is we think there's a golden

opportunity to make progress.

We have a Prime Minister that

believes COAG needs fixing and

we have no elections federally

and no elections in any State

for the next 12 months. So we

think this is a perfect

opportunity to make

progress. And an implied

criticism there that the

previous government lacked the

will? Well, I think COAG was

pretty dysfunctional towards

the end of the previous

administration and it just

wasn't achieving what it needed

to do. Or even what it said it

was going to do. And it should

have been up to the Federal

Government to drive that

process? Well, it takes two to

tango, and what we're hoping

for is that with a new

government there'll be a new

approach to. That but if

there's not Ali we're actually

saying that we think the Federal Government should

actually implement legislation

in areas where Commonwealth,

where corporate powers allow it

to do so and provide corporations with the right to

opt in, rather than be

administered under a State

scheme. Indeed that proposal

that if there's no national

agreement by 2010 the Federal

Government creates national

schemes, that would be a

political minefield, wouldn't

it? That it occurs in some

areas already. If you can't

get it one way you desperately need to get it another.

Because this burden that currently falls on the

community, something like $16

billion, ultimately it gets

passed through to consumers.

They pay. Which areas under the

constitution would it be

achievable? It's a complex area

and a difficult one and you'd

have to look at that area by

area, but the corporation

powers are fairly wide and

there are certainly aspects

which effect companies that we believe the Commonwealth would

be able to legislate. Would you

see them simply overriding

State wishes? You'd have to

imagine it would effect State

revenue and be opposed at the

State level? Some areas are

revenue raising, but a lot of

them aren't. You go from the

trivial to the more significant

and just to give you an

example, a fairly trivial one,

each branch of a bank in

Australia is required to have a

first aid box and yet in every

State there is a different

requirement as to what is

actually in that first aid box.

So it's not a revenue raiser in

every instance, it's often

quite often a trivial issue,

but it's costly. You've

obviously had numerous

discussions with the Rudd

Government since they took

power. Do you think that they

have significant political will

to fix this problem and indeed

to override the States if it

comes to that? Well, I think

the fact they've appointed a

minister and I think Lindsay

Tanner certainly recognises the

issues he has and we're delighted they have gone to the extent of appointing a

minister. That gives us great

hope we will see real

progress. Greg Gailey, many

thanks for talking to us. A

pleasure. One of Australia's

most respected female company

directors has accused her male

colleagues of not taking the

issue of women in the workplace

seriously. Woolworths'

director Diana Grady says male

bosses have snubbed the launch

of a new report which details

the issuing preventing women

reaching key management issues.

Women make up half the

workforce, but only a handful

make it to senior management

and in the last decade this has

hardly changes. Dr Hannah

Piterman has attempted to find

out why and in her report -

Women in Management - she

concludes a bloky culture is

one of the key

reasons. Management is seen as

a masculine enterprise... With

little time to be concerned

about the issues facing women,

and according to Woolworths'

director Diana Grady, the proof of the pudding is in the

eating. The committee for the

economic development of

Australia, it was

overwhelmingly attended by

women. That tells me that the

CEOs and the male leaders in

organisations don't see it as

an issue worth lerpg about and

engaging in. So women in

effect are still talking to

themselves. Which Diana Grady

believes means chief executives

are not doing their jobs properly and at the same time, shortchanging their

shareholders. The male leaders

need to understand that this is

a business issue that using

their talent, and that includes

the 50% of the workforce that

are women, is critical to their

long-term success. A big

barrier to women making it to

the top is an atmosphere which

makes it difficult to combine a

senior management role and a

family. Male bosses have been

challenged to change that by

examining their own work

habits. Realising the fact that

family friendly and work-life

balance policies are important

to all employees, not just

women, and making sure that

they're actually espousing behaviours themselves that can be seen by the rest of the

workforce, and reinforcing

positive behaviour. While women

continue to struggle to make

headway at the top of the

corporate ladder, there is hope

in changing demographics.

Members of Generation Y are now

in large numbers in the junior

ranks of companies all over

Australia and unlike previous

generations they're very up-front about what they expect

and what they won't put up with

from their employers. With

Generation Ys we all know

they've got lots of opportunities out there and if

we muck them around and don't

give them what they had hoped

they had get when they arrived

they'll vote with their

feet. Which Mr Butler says for

a law firm like Freehills could

cost up to $500,000 per person

to replace and that's a

powerful incentive to give

women a go. A look at

tomorrow's business diary:

A look at what's making news

in the business sections of

tomorrow's papers. The 'Age'

says Australia's mining giants

have been banned from selling

iron ore into China's daily

spot market. The 'Australian'

says the Bear Stearns rescue

has focussed attention on what

local banks may be hiding. The

'Australian Financial Review'

says despite its drastic action

the US Federal Reserve hasn't

managed to win back investor

confidence. And the 'Sydney

Morning Herald' says Federal

Treasurer Wayne Swan has used

margin loans to invest in

financial markets. The FTSE is

down 164 points and the Dow

Futures are down 211. We'd

love to get your feedback. Our

email address is on the screen: I'm Ali Moore, goodnight.

In 1940, we looked disaster in the face - total defeat, German occupation. We were losing the war against the Nazis. As we stared into the abyss,

a group of men embarked on a secret mission. And I was one of them. Lieutenant Colonel David Strangeways. I brought together a team of mavericks who could conjured up entire armies out of canvas, wood and rubber.