Coalition Policies and the Environment

In the election campaign both major parties are short-changing the environment but by far the weakest response to environmental issues comes from the Coalition.

The Coalition parties' attitude is encapsulated in a comment made by Nationals leader Warren Truss in an election broadcast – "You don't improve the environment by trashing the economy." Truss and many other politicians miss the point entirely when they speak of the economy and the environment as being separate entities with the economy the central matter. They do not understand that the economy and the human community are subsets of the natural environment.  A healthy economy is dependent ultimately on a healthy environment.

Politicians such as Warren Truss may learn this in the future as the effects of climate change start to impact severely on our way of life – and on the economy.

Truss' comment referred to the carbon tax which he and his Coalition allies have promised to abolish.

While the Coalition officially acknowledges that climate change is a problem, there is still the taint of climate scepticism about some Coalition politicians including the Opposition Leader Tony Abbott.  His climate change is "absolute crap" statement was made some time ago but more recently we have had his disparaging comment about the "invisible substance".

Two major components of the Coalition's Direct Action policy on climate change are planting trees and paying farmers for storing carbon in their soils.  Another more significant one is paying polluters to reduce their emissions rather than making them pay for polluting.  Just how effective an incentive this will be in encouraging polluters to move to a low carbon economy is very doubtful.

There are serious questions about the effectiveness of this policy in meeting the target reductions to which the Coalition committed.  There are also questions about the cost of the scheme.  A recent report commissioned by the independent Climate Commission highlights the problems with the Coalition scheme.

http://www.climateinstitute.org.au/verve/_resources/TCI_CoalitionClimatePolicyandtheNationalClimateInterest_15August2013.pdf

For another view of the recent ALP-Coalition "debate" on Direct Action's likely effectiveness see Politifact   http://www.politifact.com.au/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/aug/20/mark-butler/how-much-direct-action-cost/

Another Coalition policy which has serious implications for the natural environment is the pledge to reduce what developers call "green tape" and to leave much environmental governance to the states.  The idea behind this is to make it easier for business and prevent duplication – naturally something business and industry applauds.  However, removing federal oversight is not in the interests of the natural environment or the broader community.  Consider, for example, what has happened to environmental regulation / environmental protection in NSW under the current state government where, for example,  marine reserve protection has been downgraded, national parks are to be opened up to recreational hunters and land-clearing regulations have been eased.  Giving the states either too much power or sole power on environmental protection is almost certain to be disastrous for the natural environment. 

The Coalition has committed $20 billion to road infrastructure but is ignoring investment in rail which is a much less carbon intensive method of transport.  According to the Australasian Railway Association (quoted in Smoke and mirrors, with no policy on smoke   http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2013/smoke-and-mirrors-with-no-policy-on-smoke-20130825-2sjoc.html) 14% - 76 million tonnes per year - of Australia's greenhouse emissions are generated by transport.  90 % of these emissions are attributable to road transport and only 2% to rail.  Investment in rail in this carbon-constrained world is sensible policy.  Why is this not obvious to Mr Abbott and his team?

Other policies/announcements which are cause for concern include:

* The scrapping of the Biodiversity Fund (originally $1 billion but which now stands at $600 million) and replacement with a $300 million "Green Army".
* Slashing of the $10 billion renewable energy fund and replacement with a $1 billion solar roofs program. Plans to review and possibly weaken the current renewable energy target.
* A proposal to build up to 100 dams throughout the country.

Simplistic sloganeering has been the hallmark of the Coalition in Opposition.  If they win government, they won't be able to rely on slogans.  Environmental challenges such as biodiversity loss, and particularly preparing Australia for the climate challenge ahead, will test the new government.  The Coalition's policies show that it is ill-prepared to meet that challenge.

Hildegard

Northern Rivers

30 August 2013

* Guest Speak is a North Coast Voices segment allowing serious or satirical comment from NSW Northern Rivers residents. Email ncvguestpeak at gmail dot com dot au to submit comment for consideration.

Australian Pre-Election Fiscal Outlook 2013

Australian Pre-Election Fiscal Outllook 2013

Australian Government Economic Statement August 2013

Full Economic Statement here.

Post-Budget 2013 reaction on the NSW North Coast? Yawn......

 

After all that pre-Budget heat in the national media over the last few weeks, a quick Google search this morning revealed a surprising level of what might be described as post-Budget apathy here on the NSW North Coast.

 

Two days after the Federal Treasurer’s 2013 Budget Speech the Nationals candidate standing for election in the Page fereal electorate in four months time, Kevin Hogan, had no post up on his Twitter account that even mentioned the budget. While his Facebook entry was barely more than a photo opportunity and a mention of a televised NBN interview. Hogan’s campaign website has one lonely post which merely responds to a pre-Budget Pacific Highway funding newspaper article and he had a brief highway funding quote in local media on 16 May.

 

Luke Hartsuyker, the National’s Federal Member for Cowper, had a single website post on Budget night and nothing else two days later. His Twitter account is still tweetless and the Facebook page carrying his name remains silent.

 

Curiously both men appear to have sent out almost identical media releases, which probably means that there was a Budget night Coalition cheat sheet for sitting MPs and candidates.

 

A point picked up by APN media the day after the Budget speech:

 

Both National party members today put out eerily similar press statements attacking the budget delivered by Treasurer Wayne Swan last night.

While Mr Hartsuyker and Mr Hogan's statements focus on different elements of Pacific Highway funding, both use the same dot points and even an identical direct quote…..

While it is common for members of the same party to "stay on message", it is unusual that the two men have said almost exactly the same thing.

 

Similarly Janelle Saffin, Labor’s Federal Member for Page, was very low key post-Budget. With no media releases concerning the Budget posted on her personal web page by the morning of 16 May. Ms. Saffin’s Twitter account and Facebook page also had nothing to say on the subject. However, she was quoted in local media on 16 May concerning health and education measures contained in the 2013 Budget.

 

Labor's Richmond Federal MP Justine Elliot was quoted in The Northern Star as backing the Budget the day after its delivery, but appears to have had nothing to say on the subject on her Facebook site.

 

Matthew Fraser, the Nationals candidate standing in the Richmond electorate at the September federal election, was quoted by APN media the day after the Budget speech and was predictably staying on message allegedly big debt and broken promises. His campaign website has had nothing to say since 10 May. Fraser’s Facebook page links to that APN article and a campaign propaganda site, with one lonely post on alleged overspending.

 

By Wednesday 15 May 2013 ABC North Coast’s Facebook page could barely give ABC News a handful of budget quotes from local residents and the Clarence Valley Rate Payers, Residents & Business Owners had nary a mention of budget issues by Thursday morning.

 

Also on Thursday morning the Rural Doctors Association of Australia had what was essentially a generic response on budget changes to indexation of Medicare Benefits in a brief The Northern Star article and, in the same issue there was a mixed response to health, education, superannuation, housing and cash transfers by two members of the business and community sectors .

 

No local residents appear to have been so hot under the collar on Budget night that they fired off letters to editors in time for inclusion in Northern Rivers newspapers over the last two days and, the main online community newspapers haven’t caught up with the budget details yet.

 

Perhaps tonight’s Budget Reply Speech by Opposition leader Tony Abbott will draw more of a response from voters on the North Coast?

The state of the Australian economy confuses the average voter?

It rather beggars belief that so many political commentators have been talking down the Australian economy for the last five years, when overall that same economy has been the envy of the developed world during that same period.

It seems that hardly a week has gone by when somewhere in the national media there hasn’t been a journalist reporting economic doom and gloom, aided and abetted by various Liberal and National Party politicians.

Yet in 2013 gross government debt stands at a comparatively modest $271 billion by international standards and net government debt is estimated at $145 billion to date in Australia as the world’s 12th  largest economy. The nation still has GDP growth, a budget deficit of around 1 per cent of GDP or less, an across the board AAA international credit rating, low inflation, low unemployment and is considered a safe haven for investors.

To say that this disconnect between negatively-coloured reporting and verifiable fact may have led to voter ambivalence is positing the obvious and it can possibly be seen in this survey.

Between Wednesday 1 May and Sunday 5 May 2013 an estimated 1,000+ survey respondents answered questions concerning the Australian economy and, their replies were published as part of the broader Essential Report on 6 May 2013.

These respondents were drawn from among the same 7,000-8,000 people who have been answering this regular Essential Services survey for years.

What is interesting about this latest report is the respondents answers to questions about government debt.

In one question 25% think that Australia’s national debt is higher than other developed countries and 48% think it is lower – 18% think it about the same.

In another 46% think the main reason for Australia’s national debt is that the Government are poor economic managers. 26% think it is due to the world economy and 17% blame the high Australian dollar.

However, in yet another question 39% think that government’s management of the Australian economy compared to how governments in other countries around the world have managed their economies has been good/very good and 32% think it has been poor/very poor.

While the conclusion arrived at in the final question was that 32% trust Wayne Swan more to handle Australia’s economy and 35% trust Joe Hockey more. With those on incomes under $1,000pw favour Wayne Swan 34%/31% while those earning over $1,000pw favour Joe Hockey 37%/32%.

So while the biggest percentage blocs in two questions realized that Australia’s national debt was lower than most other developed countries and considered that the Gillard Government's management of the economy was good to very good in comparison with the rest of the world - at the same time the biggest percentage bloc in another question decided that the federal government’s poor economic management was the root cause of the national debt.

Leading to the untried Opposition Shadow Joe Hockey being seen by three per cent more respondents as being better trusted when it came to handling the Australian economy than Treasurer Wayne Swan and, that 3% looking suspiciously like a group earning over $1,000 per week.

It would appear that five years of relentless negative comment in the media may have left many unable to reconcile political rhetoric with Treasury’s annual economic data and, choosing to believe the former rather than the latter much of the time.

* Graph from ABC News

I don't know how many times reputable economists have to say it before the Murdoch media will believe it....

 

Here is Stephen Koukoulas at Market Economics trying for the xxxxth time to demonstrate the obvious fact that Australia’s public debt is not at a problematic level:

 

 

Sloan fails to mention in her piece the actual indicators which determine whether a particular level of government debt is a problem or not. These indicators are not opinion or a hunch or a doctrinal Tea Party like fear but simple and observable benchmarks.

Perhaps most important of all of these is the level of government bond yields, or the interest rate that a government pays on its debt. This is a good benchmark on which to judge whether or not government debt is something to be nervous about. In simple terms, if there is too much debt, yields are high. If bond yields are low and the bond market is free of government intervention, there is no fear about government debt.

The Australian 10 year government bond yield is currently around 3.3%, marginally above the record low reached in the middle of 2012. In the last 50 years, there have been only a few months, all of them in the last year, where yields have been lower than they are today. No nervousness here.

Has the Australian small business community stopped listening to Opposition Leader Tony Abbott's doom and gloom?

 

It would seem that by the first quarter of 2013 Opposition Leader Tony Abbott’s scare tactics may have ceased cutting though when it comes to how people starting new businesses see the economy and their chance of success as they are still registering in high numbers.

 

These are the active Australian Business Numbers in 2013, of which 3,557,412 are individual/sole traders, 1,354,105 are private companies and 513,116 are family partnerships:

 

 

Here are the number of new business numbers registered so far this year, of which 74,574 are individual/sole traders, 24,596 are private companies and 3,578 are family partnerships:  

 

 

This is the number which also registered for the Goods & Services Tax for the first time:

 

Click on tables to enlarge

Stephen Koukoulas on the subject of Tony Abbott as an economic forecaster

From Market Economics 9 March 2013:

In his Budget reply speech in May last year, Mr Abbott made the following claim:

§  “Madam Deputy Speaker, from an economic perspective, the worst aspect of this year’s budget is that there is no plan for economic growth; nothing whatsoever to promote investment or employment.”

Since that speech was delivered, this has what has happened to growth, investment and jobs:

§  The economy (real GDP) has grown by 1.9% in the three quarters to December 2012. This is an annualised increase of 2.5%.

§  Private sector business investment has risen by 2.5% in the three quarters to December 2012 to be a thumping 70.0% higher than the  level of investment when the Coalition was last in office. The capital expenditure expectations data were, according to Westpac, “robust” with investment likely to rise a stunning 11% in 2013-14 to fresh record highs.

§  Since June 2012, 53,400 jobs have been created, 30,000 of these full-time positions.

 Stephen Koukoulas

Liberal Party Lies: What is wrong with this graph?

 

This rather crude graph can be found in the Liberal Party’s Our Plan Real Solutions for all Australians: The direction, values and policy priorities of the next Coalition Government recently released by Leader of the Opposition Tony Abbott.

 

I draw your attention to the fact that the left hand sidebar indicates the rankings are out of one hundred.

 

 

However, the World Economic Forum’s The Global Competitiveness Report 2012–2013 clearly shows that the ranking is out of one hundred and forty-four (up from one hundred and forty-two in 2011-12 and one hundred and thirty-four in 2007-2008):

 

Australia’s national economy ranks 20^th out of 144 countries, with the third lowest ratio among advance economies of Public debt to Gross Domestic Product.

Australia ranks 48^th out of 144 countries when it comes to Wastefulness of government spending.

While the nation ranks 96^th out of the same 144 countries in the category of Transparency of government policymaking.

Finally, when a ranking for Pay and productivity is calculated Australia is 80^th of 144 countries.

 

No reputable statistician would eliminate 44 countries and still keep the same ranking as does this graph. Nor would they try to merge two separate financial year ranking results in the same graph without adjusting for the 10 country difference.

 

Therefore this graph may be nothing more than a sly attempt to skew the electorate’s perception of how the country is faring in the lead up to the September 2013 federal election.

Something to think about in the 2013 federal election year

 ABS trend estimate of unemployed persons

Australia’s unemployment rate is currently running at 5.4% according to the folks who know.

Jericho over at Grog’s Gamut points out that it would be 5.1% if Queensland LNP Premier Campbell Newman hadn’t taken a scythe to that state’s public service after he took office in March 2012.

Now how many times has Tony Abbott held Newman’s government as a pattern card of fiscal responsibility?

Well, there’s this:

“Mr Abbott said it was unfortunate that some of the Newman government's decisions were unpopular, even within its own ranks.

But he said those decisions were necessary and Mr Newman was doing a great job given the "economic basket case" he inherited from Labor.

"Sometimes they cause stresses and strains even within the ranks of the coalition here in Queensland," he said.

"But you've got to do what is necessary to bring this country and this state back to health."

Gee, sorta sounds like Abbott’s plan for the Australian economy doesn’t it?

It's an election year and some Coalition candidates will probably mention productivity growth and labour costs

 

Whenever a Coalition candidate mentions ‘low’ annual productivity growth or ‘rising’ labour costs, in the lead up to the 2013 federal general election, remember these graphs from Greg Jericho .

Australia is doing very nicely thank you.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-01-16/jericho-big-1/4466256

 

Oops! Uncle Joe spoke too soon

Australian Shadow Treasurer Joe Hockey on the 19^th September 2012 at 2.17pm, presumably waving a report he hadn't read and relying on something he watched on the tube or heard on the radio as he chomped his morning cornflakes:

“I seek to table the report of S&P that says Australia is heading for a $20 billion deficit this year,“

ABC News on 20^th September at 6.44am:

“Global ratings agency Standard and Poor's has moved to correct an earlier statement it made about the Federal Government's prospects of returning to surplus.

An S&P analyst originally told the ABC the agency was predicting a budget deficit of up to $25 billion this year.

But S&P now says the analyst was referring to old figures from the last financial year.

It says the Federal Government remains on track to deliver the predicted modest surplus in 2012-13.

The agency says given the current forecasts the surplus is likely to be about $1 billion.”

49 Days Since That Carbon Tax Ended Life As We Know It

Or is it?

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott has now spent years telling Australians that the sky would fall and our way of life would end once the Gillard Government put a price on industrial greenhouse gas emissions.

Forty-nine days have now past and there appears to be little discernible difference to life before and after July 1, 2012.

At Day Two according to Peter Martin:

Also from July 1...
PAY RISE $17.10 per week for low-paid workers
TAX FREE THRESHOLD No tax until $18,200
TAX CUTS For everyone up to $80,000
PENSION INCREASE 1.7% from May 2013
FAMILY TAX BENEFIT BOOST $300 per child
DOUBLE NSW FIRST HOME BUYERS GRANT $15,000 for purchase of new home
CREDIT CARD LENDERS Forced to clear high interest debts first
TICK AND FLICK BANK SWITCHING Sign one form once
TOUGHER MEDICARE LEVY SURCHARGE 1.25% to 1.5% for high earners without private insurance
LOWER PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE REBATE 10% to 20% instead of 30% for high earners
INSTANT ASSET WRITE-OFF Up to $6500 per small business
MINERALS RESOURCE RENT TAX To raise to $3 billion in its first year

On Day 20 according to Market Economics:

Since November 2007, there have been a series of income tax cuts, some large, some small and all set across different income brackets. Suffice to say that for the high income earner in the above example, they will be paying around $1,850 less income tax than had the tax scales prevailing in November 2007 been left in place. The lower income earner in this household is paying around $2,050 less in income tax, meaning an ongoing saving of around $3,900 a year. The combined effect of the wage increases and lower income tax rate translates to a rise in take-home income in this household is around $16,500 a year.

Day 21 from The Finnigan's Home of The BISONs:

No interest rise for the 20th consecutive month Vs 10 consecutive rises under Howard/Costello. Last interest rise was Nov2010. At July 2012. And an economy that is travelling well above trend growth.

Again at Day 27 according to Market Economics:

Indicator	Change since end June 2012
Market Indicators
Official cash rate	No change
Australian dollar (vs USD)	+2.0%
10 year govt bond yield	-0.14 percentage points
ASX200	+2.1%
Change in market cap of ASX	+$23 billion
Economic Indicators
RP Data house prices	+0.6%
Change in Housing Wealth	+$24 billion
Westpac index of Consumer sentiment	+3.7%

Day 32 per the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission:

In April 2012, GFC Berwick Pty Ltd sent a letter to 2,122 of its members promoting a 'RATE FREEZE' offer, which offered members a range of lengthy contract extensions at current or reduced membership rates. The letter represented to members that by taking up this offer members could avoid a fee increase of 9-15 per cent due to the carbon price.

ACCC chairman Rod Sims said, "The ACCC believes that GFC Berwick did not have a reasonable basis for claiming the carbon price would increase the cost of gym memberships by 9-15 per cent. We understand that over 200 members took up the offer and extended their contract. We are concerned that the false claims about the carbon price may have encouraged these people to sign lengthy contract extensions they otherwise would not have."

"Businesses are free to set their prices as they see fit but must carefully consider the basis for making carbon price claims and ensure such claims are truthful and have a reasonable basis," Mr Sims said.

As part of the resolution of this matter, the CEO of the Genesis Division of Belgravia Health & Leisure Group Pty Ltd, the company which manages the franchise network, wrote to all affected members on behalf of GFC Berwick offering them the opportunity to withdraw from the contract extensions at no cost.

Day 37 on Twitter:

TheFinnigans天地有道人无道‏@Thefinnigans

Australia's GOLD GOLD GOLD GOLD GOLD - Unemployment 5.1%, GDP 4.3% - Inflation 1.2% - Interest 3.5% with $500B investment pipeline

On Day 49 according to The Sydney Morning Herald:

In a Treasury research paper released yesterday, economists Will Devlin and Deepika Patwardhan used prices in the so-called inflation swaps market to derive traders' expectations about the price impact of the tax.

Inflation swaps allow one trader to agree to pay another the inflation rate on a specified sum in return for a price. It is worth $12 billion per year.

Advertisement

The paper said inflation swaps pricing was a good guide to what the market thought would happen because it ''reflects the collective actions of actors who have to back their views by putting their money where their mouths are''.

Their analysis found the market expected a one-off jump in inflation of between 0.6 per cent and 0.7 per cent followed by a return to the previous rate, as forecast by the government. It did not support claims by the Coalition spokesman, Greg Hunt, that price rises would "take time to flow through the economy" or that "this is just the beginning as the carbon tax goes up every year".

The first TD Securities-Melbourne Institute inflation reading since the start of the tax showed a total price increase for the month of just 0.2 per cent, even after accounting for a rise in electricity prices of 14.9 per cent and in household gas prices of 10.3 per cent.

Reserve Bank Governor reminds Australia that its economy is sound

Peter Martin quoting Governor Glenn Stevens on 8th June 2012:

"According to data published this week by the Australian Statistician, real GDP rose by over 4 per cent over the past year. This outcome includes the recovery from the effects of flooding a year ago, so the underlying pace of growth is probably not quite that fast, but it is quite respectable – something close to trend. Unemployment is about 5 per cent. Core inflation is a bit above 2 per cent. The financial system is sound. Our government is one among only a small number rated AAA, with manageable debt. We have received a truly enormous boost in national income courtesy of the high terms of trade. This, in turn, has engendered one of the biggest resource investment upswings in our history, which will see business capital spending rise by another 2 percentage points of GDP over 2012/13, to reach a 50-year high."

Of course that didn't stop a privileged blowin like South African-Israeli-Australian Ivan teh Grate from spouting this nonsense, from atop the dizzying peak of his 'on paper' fortune, to the Herald Sun on the very same day:

"IVAN Glasenberg, the nation's second wealthiest person, says Australia is a less attractive place to invest than the world's poorest country, the Congo.
Mr Glasenberg, pictured, the South-African-born head of commodities giant Glencore, said the carbon tax and mining resources rent tax had damaged Australia's reputation.
He told an industry dinner in London that mining companies were disadvantaged in Australia as they had less leverage.
"At least in the Congo they need you, they want you there, and if they start changing the rules you may not continue investing," said Mr Glasenberg, an Australian citizen whose wealth is estimated at more than $7 billion.
The war-torn Democratic Republic of Congo this year was named by The Richest magazine as the world's poorest nation."

Teh Kouk kicks out at Abbott's economic credentials and Pure Poison follows with a boot to the rear

Stephen Koukoulas of Market Economics had this response to the Australian Leader of the Opposition’s Budget Reply Speech on his blog on 10 May 2012:

ABBOTT: People who work hard and put money aside so they won’t be a burden on others should be encouraged, not hit with higher taxes.
FACT: The tax to GDP ratio of the first 5 Labor Budgets averaged 21.1%. The lowest ever tax to GDP recorded under the Howard government was 22.2% and the average was 23.4%. The last time a Coalition Government delivered a tax to GDP ratio below 21.1% was in 1979-80. Cannot see where the “hit with higher taxes” statement fits these facts in the current Budget context.

ABBOTT: And people earning $83,000 a year and families on $150,000 a year are not rich, especially if they’re paying mortgages in our big cities.
FACT: Average annual earnings are around $53,500 in NSW and $51,500 in Victoria. Maybe they are “not rich”, but someone on $83,000 is earning around 60% above the average wage whether they have a mortgage or not.

ABBOTT: Madam Deputy Speaker, from an economic perspective, the worst aspect of this year’s budget is that there is no plan for economic growth; nothing whatsoever to promote investment or employment.
FACT: After registering a 19^th straight year of economic growth in 2010-11, the Budget shows Australia growing at 3% in 2011-12, 3.25% in 2012-13 and 3% in 2013-14. Having risen a Chinese-type 18% in 2011-12, business investment is forecast to rise a further 12.5% in 2012-13. Employment is forecast to rise by 1.25% in 2012-13, which will see the creation of around 175,000 new jobs from now until June 2013.

Read the rest here.

The full transcript of Tony Abbott's budget reply (containing no specific economic/funding information concerning his own inchoate policies) can be found here.

Over at Pure Poison they are wondering when the press gallery is finally going to call Abbott out on the rubbish he's spouting:

Contrasting the GFC deficits with the pre-GFC boom as if there wasn’t a GFC – surely someone could ask Abbott if he even noticed the existence of a global financial crisis or if he’s a weirdo conspiracy theorist who thinks the rest of the world just made it up.

The “cuts to defence” line, which are mainly to do with delaying the disastrous Joint Strike Fighter that’s running late and is a step backward anyway. Could someone ask Abbott whether he’d insist on going ahead with it right now while other buyers are backing away?

The “we’ll find savings” line – could someone ask Abbott just why any Australians should believe that he’ll find $70 billion savings in a way that none of us will mind? And why he thinks we shouldn’t all be very worried that something we or a family member or friend rely on might not be one of the things he slashes in order to give “incentives” to big polluting companies?

How about his “trickle down” theory, where you don’t need any actual plan for growth other than slashing taxes for big business (except when Labor proposes them) and the super rich?

You could question his complaints about not enough money going into the NDIS and dental care given that the Liberals haven’t promised to put in any more either.

How about asking him to reconcile his demand for “growth” with his previous fixation on interest rates being low? Is that suddenly not important now that interest rates are lower under Labor than they ever were under the Coalition?

Australia's unemployment hits 4.9% low. Something the Federal Coalition has to suck up before Abbott's Budget Reply Speech 10 May 2012

ABS MEDIA RELEASE
10 May 2012		67/2012
Australia's unemployment rate decreased 0.2 percentage points to 4.9 per cent in April 2012

Australia's seasonally adjusted unemployment rate decreased 0.2 percentage points to 4.9 per cent in April, as announced by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) today. There was also a decrease in the labour force participation rate of 0.1 percentage points in April to 65.2 per cent.
The ABS reported the number of people employed increased by 15,500 to 11,501,000 in April. The increase in employment was driven by increased part-time employment, up 26,000 people to 3,438,200, and was offset by decrease in full-time employment, down 10,500 people to 8,062,800. The increase in employment was mainly driven by an increase in male part-time employment.
The number of people unemployed decreased by 28,800 people to 598,200 in April, the ABS reported.
The ABS monthly aggregate hours worked series showed an increase in April, up 6.6 million hours to 1,633.9 million hours.
There has been some interest recently in how changes in the Australian population impact on the estimates of employment from the Labour Force Survey. The responses collected from the sample of people in the survey are weighted to projections of the Australian population for the current quarter. These population projections are based on the most up-to-date information available, but are different to the official estimates of resident population that are calculated at a later date. In order to explain these issues, the ABS has produced a special feature article "Population Benchmarks and the Labour Force Survey" in this month's publication.
More details are in the April 2012 issue of Labour Force, Australia (cat. no. 6202.0), as well as the upcoming April 2012 issue of Labour Force, Australia, Detailed (cat. no. 6291.0.55.001) due for release next week on May 17. Both publications are available for free download (after release) from the ABS website - www.abs.gov.au.

Sometimes I wonder into which alternate universe I have wandered

Australia successfully survived the Global Financial Crisis under the stewardship of a federal Labor Government which did not panic and, with the cooperation of states and territories, acted swiftly to support weak points in the national economy.

So well did the nation weather this financial tsunami that a year on from the initial rolling economic destruction it was being openly stated by northern hemisphere economic commentators that Australia was the envy of the rest of the developed world and, in 2012 in comparison with that same developed world we still have low unemployment, low levels of government debt, low interest rates, an economy which is holding its own despite an historically weak manufacturing sector and good international credit ratings.

Which begs the question of why this Essential Report survey question elicited negative attitudes in these responses below - from 42 per cent of the very people who barely felt any effect of this global crisis.

Trust to deal with GFC

May 7, 2012

Q. If there was another Global Financial Crisis, which party would you trust most to deal with it?

	15 Aug 11	Total	Vote Labor	Vote Lib/Nat	Vote Greens
The Labor Party	31%	25%	68%	2%	42%
The Liberal Party	40%	42%	5%	83%	5%
No difference	20%	23%	19%	11%	39%
Don’t know	9%	10%	8%	4%	14%

If there was another GFC, 42% would trust the Liberal Party more to handle it and 25% would trust the Labor Party more. This represents a shift to the Liberal Party from net +9% to net +17%

The Liberal Party was rated higher than Labor with all demographic groups. Those most likely to trust the Liberal Party more were men (47%), aged 55+ (48%), full-time workers (50%) and income over $1,600 pw (50%).