Australian PM Kevin Rudd: The final decision is up to him

Books are expensive in Australia. So, the country’s Productivity Commission has recommended that the Australian government do something no other country has ever done: lower those prices by opening up the market to competing volumes from other countries. That means that it would be permissable for, say, the British and American versions of an Austalian novel to be for sale in Australia. It is, in other words, an end to the country’s “territorial copyright” — a move that allows the world’s major conglomerate publishers and a flood of others from around the planet to, essentially, crush the Australian publishing industry.

The decision has been a long time coming (see the earlier MobyLives story). But it’s had an even less modulated and definitive ending than expected — as a simple synopsis from the Sydney Morning Herald put it: As “feared by most authors, booksellers and publishers, the Productivity Commission has recommended to the Federal Government that it lift all restrictions on parallel importation of books.”

The SMH report goes on to include the full text of the commission’s press release and summary document, the former of which explains the commission’s reasoning on removing parallel importation restrictions (PRIs):

By removing the restrictions, local booksellers would have the option of accessing better value books from overseas. Local publishers would have a strong incentive to make their prices more competitive and to look for greater efficiencies in their operations, the report said. Some books have important cultural value, but the Commission found that the support to Australian authors provided by the restrictions is poorly targeted. ‘One of the Commission’s concerns is that consumers pay higher prices for books, regardless of their cultural significance’ the Commission’s Deputy Chairman, Mike Woods, said.

Realizing the drastic nature of its recommendation, the commission recommends “a period of three years to adjust before the changes take effect,” however.

As the comments below the SMH report show, reaction is divided and heated — “Um – disgusting. I’m a microeconomics graduate and this decision insults the common sense,” says one. “Lower prices for consumers. Inefficient local producers wiped out. I think this is good in the long run,” says another.

Meanwhile, a Bookseller report by Catherine Neilan notes many in the UK are also upset about the decision. In a story headlined “Australian importation proposals dubbed ‘horrendous’,” various sources break it down:

Rights agents in the UK have slammed as “horrendous” and “destructive” proposals put to the Australian government to remove restrictions on the importation of books, amid warnings that the proposals could also hit the profitability of UK publishers’ subsidiary companies in Australia.

Curtis Brown chief executive Jonathan Lloyd and Blake Friedmann agent and joint m.d Carole Blake have warned that adoption of an open market would weaken the value of Australian rights, and undermine the Australian publishing industry.

A third observer, who wished to remain anonymous, suggested that move could undermine Australian operations run by UK publishers, however a number of UK publishers spoken to by The Bookseller were unwilling to be quoted on the issue. The observer said: “These subsidiaries are highly profitable, not because of the importation restrictions, but certainly their existence has protected them from competition, particularly from US editions.’

In any event, it’s up to Prime Minister Kevin Rudd to approve the commission’s recommendations. As this report from the Brisbane Times notes, the commission also recommends the government consider a direct subsidy to writers, at least, if not publishers, to make up for the damage it admits the removal of PRIs is likely to cause.

Nonetheless, even that would have “marginal” impact, says the Times report, and the overall reaction of the literary community remains “dismay”: “It is inconceivable that a national Labor Government would so casually destroy Australian culture in support of the free-trade zealotry that gave the world the global financial crisis,” author Richard Flanagan tells the paper. “Yet it is that which the Australian people must now conceive of as possible. If Kevin Rudd adopts this report he will go to his grave as the man who made a bonfire of Australian writing, and hailed the ash as reform.”