The former Prime Minister of Australia, Tony Abbott, was replaced by Mr. Turnbull. Abbott had received numerous poor reviews and was ousted by Turnbull’s party, who replaced Abbott middle of the way in 2015. The article shows that despite the initial praise of Turnbull and the strength of his positions, he has failed to show much power and strength in his position as Prime Minister. The article in the Economist outlines a few places where this doubt of his power shows true. In the first place, the author mentions the Senate, where Turnbull has failed to gain the approval and influence that one might expect. Second, the article also focuses on the nation’s polls. It seems the the reviews from the population have fluxuated since Turnbull entered power and that this shows a predictive line of concern, according to the author.

The significance of this article for the present assignment about the economy is its reference to labor unions. Unions are groups of people, organized outside of the government and private business, that become an organization and entity in and of themselves on behalf of a certain community. For example, the article states, “The prime minister called a press conference to declare that he would recall Parliament three weeks early, in order, he said, to consider legislation to police the building industry and the unions that play a powerful part in it. (The industry harbours two-thirds of Australia’s industrial disputes.) He wants to re-establish the Australian Building and Construction Commission that the previous Labor government abolished.” This excerpt considers a piece of legislation about the building industry and their regulations. It seems to be a central aspect for the approval polls and most importantly involves the labor unions. In this case, the unions have a powerful sway in the building industry. It seems that this industry harbors a majority of the industrial disputes and that the group of labor unions have a lot of influence over the decisions. It is immediately apparent the power and importance of such labor unions for a politician like Turnbull.

In the first place, this article shows the tight link between politics and industry. Turnbull is so dependent upon the unions when it comes to his approval ratings. These labor unions, while the article does not directly explain it, do have a lot of sway among the population. The labor union leaders can influence and persuade the workers to certain positions, for the good or the bad of a political candidate. Thus, Turnbull draws attention to the industry unions as they play a part in his political action. In no uncertain way, the business industry and labor unions connect to the political landscape. In the second place, I wonder what would change if Australia had no labor unions? In places among the United States, for instance, labor unions do not have a strong or any presence.

There are not unions of this nature in some areas. In this case, what would an article like this refer to? Well, it seems that the political context would relate more to the private business sector and deal more with executives and finances. I think that someone like Turnbull would look to business leaders, maybe big funders of the government parties and possibly to other non-profitable organizations. While he could draw on the employees of businesses, it seems that the centrality of influence among them would be more dispersed. This shows the opportunities and challenges that the labor unions provide for the political sector. The economy of a country directly informs its government. There is no guarantee, however, that this influence is good or bad.