Activism is not the job of CEOs

Most members of the flying public had and have their own opinions on important social issues such as the voice referendum and the same-sex marriage postal vote. In their patronage of the airline, however, they were almost certainly more interested in punctuality, prices and service than what former Qantas chief executive Alan Joyce believed about those issues. The same applies to the customers of banks, supermarkets and other companies.

For that reason, recommended changes to corporate governance rules – which would require Mr Joyce’s successor, Vanessa Hudson, to get board approval to involve the airline in any social or party-political issues – make sense.

In a free society, a range of opinions on contentious issues is part of the democratic process. But boards and executives, however woke or conservative on social issues, are unwise to dragoon shareholders or customers along for the ride.

Recent history shows that where they do enter the public debate, corporate leaders would provide most benefit by championing important economic issues that will boost living standards. Their views on the benefits of a more flexible workplace relations system, the impact of working from home, productivity, skilled migration, energy policy, education standards, federal-state duplication, environmental regulation, encouraging investment and tax reform would improve the quality of economic debate. Australia’s uncompetitive 33 per cent company tax rate, the adverse impact of state payroll taxes on jobs and of land taxes on many businesses’ viability, especially, need wider discussion.