The coming federal poll is rapidly turning into a policy desert for business. In what should be dubbed ''2010 Race to the Bottom'', both major candidates to date have appeared desperate to highlight their credentials of being devoid of meaningful policy on any important issues, economic or business.
Tax policy remains one of the few areas where there is a notable distinction between the muddled policies of either party.
In a novel twist, the Coalition's opposition to the resources rent tax appears to have split the resources industry. It is stirring up support from the junior and mid-tier miners while the industry giants - BHP Billiton, Rio Tinto and Xstrata - appear rather pleased with the deal they cut with the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard.
By default, however, the Coalition is also opposed to the cut in corporate tax from 30 per cent to 29 per cent. As tiny as it is, it at least is a step in the right direction. Instead, the Coalition is pushing for a hike in corporate taxes to pay for childcare, the sort of policy you'd expect from Sussex Street.
There also is a clear line in the sand on the national broadband roll-out. The ALP is hell-bent on rolling it out but the Coalition would like to roll it back in.
This is despite rare agreement within the telecommunications industry over the policy and Telstra's about-turn, urging its shareholders to support the deal it has struck with the federal government.
But when it comes to almost every other major issue, nothing.
Both sides are ''deeply committed'' to climate change policy so long as it involves nothing to do with setting a price for carbon, the only area of any real interest to business.
Labour market reform has been abandoned - but only for the next three years. Then it's all systems go.
And as for immigration - a crucial element for economic growth - well, we'll have none of that, thank you.
Putting aside the environmental debate, the four-year impasse on carbon pricing has played havoc with Australia's power generation needs. We have abundant energy sources. Oodles of coal, enormous gas reserves, untold amounts of uranium and what many consider an oversupply of solar radiation.
But the endless bickering over emissions trading and carbon pricing has kept energy companies in limbo.
Origin Energy's chief executive, Grant King, in a speech to the Committee for the Economic Development of Australia in April, outlined the conundrum facing energy companies now.
It is not so much that investment decisions have been delayed, he said, but decisions in a policy vacuum such as exists today - and for possibly the next electoral term - will be skewed towards projects that employ the least capital and have the lowest risk. What is built will not necessarily be what is in our long-term interests.
Power plants take years to develop, typically a 40-year process from construction to decommission. And with a significant proportion of our infrastructure nearing the end of its useful life, now is decision time.
Renewable energy plants can be horrendously expensive. Old-style coal-powered plants may not conform to environmental standards. Carbon capture technologies may not be economic. The wildcard in all of these cases is the price of carbon.
King made a couple of crucial points in that speech. The first was that our population grew 90 per cent in the past 40 years - and our power consumption grew 650 per cent. Each of us now uses far more power than members of the previous generation.
And despite what the leaders of the main parties have been saying in recent weeks, our population is certain to expand rapidly within the next 40 years. Take it as read that our energy demands are likely to grow at least at the same pace.
For that reason, King said, any decision to limit emissions by even 5 per cent within the next decade would be a mammoth task, made almost impossible by the continued failure to reach a consensus on policy.
And so to the issue of population. In their populist rush to capitalise on prejudice and insecurity, to tap and mine the lowest common denominator, both sides of politics have exhumed the ''yellow peril'' spectre. The peril these days is more Middle East than near north but the sentiment is the same. ''Foreigners'' are bad. The Coalition is vowing to slash immigration. The government now believes we shouldn't necessarily be a ''big'' Australia. This is worrying from a business perspective and for the economy.
Australia has an ageing workforce. Our natural birthrate will be insufficient to fund the health needs of those currently employed - unless there are massive increases in the tax take - and to maintain economic growth.
The economy currently is approaching full employment and, in a recent report, the Australian Industry Group highlighted a shortage of skilled workers as one of the greatest challenges facing its members. Limiting immigrants will exacerbate labour shortages, adding pressure to wage costs.
Business and economics are about growth - in demand, sales and profits. A vibrant economy requires a vibrant community, not a stilted, inward-looking society overseen by a bigoted leadership.
If the world's population continues to expand, it is difficult to understand how Australia can maintain its economic status in the world by restricting its growth.
