Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Politicians’ promises: either Peter pays Paul, or productivity pays all

By Geoff Carmody - posted Monday, 16 August 2010


The financial markets

Prudential requirements, but more importantly the policing thereof, do need tightening, I suspect. Doing the job properly is essential. Recent government intervention in other markets (cars, education, insulation, etc.) isn’t encouraging.

Peter, Paul and Mary just pay.

The macro-economy

Australia has avoided recession so far, and the loss of human capital associated with high unemployment. This success has many fathers. Low interest rates, a flexible exchange rate, a relatively sound financial sector, still-booming China, and the current government’s stimulus measures, are all undergoing paternity tests.

Advertisement

Nobody knows what the “counterfactual” scenarios might have been. Stopping the collapse in confidence as the GFC emerged was crucial. Government action might have helped a fair bit. There remains a debate about how much stimulus was needed. Much of it was inefficient (e.g., the BER).

In hindsight, if we had to get the money out really fast, and to households, the better option might have been to provide all of it as a one-off, somewhat better-targeted, “cash splash”.

Peter, Paul and Mary paid themselves, but maybe they’ve paid to keep their own jobs - so far.

Improving productivity to pay for election promises has gone missing in the campaign.

Running projects through rigorous cost-benefit analysis is also absent. The national broadband network has escaped this filter. Resurrection of expectations about very fast trains based on yet another review doesn’t cut the mustard. (Incidentally, has anybody commented on the geomorphology between Sydney and Newcastle?)

Most policies in this election campaign are about trying to redistribute resources, and hoping those who pay won’t notice. This is not a “zero-sum” game. Redistribution often has “deadweight costs” due to losses in national efficiency. These adversely affect Peter, Paul and Mary.

Advertisement

We need a productivity filter.

The Productivity Commission is the appropriate “citizen’s assembly” filter. It already has the right focus.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. All

First published in the Australian Finanical Review on August 10, 2010.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Geoff Carmody is Director, Geoff Carmody & Associates, a former co-founder of Access Economics, and before that was a senior officer in the Commonwealth Treasury. He favours a national consumption-based climate policy, preferably using a carbon tax to put a price on carbon. He has prepared papers entitled Effective climate change policy: the seven Cs. Paper #1: Some design principles for evaluating greenhouse gas abatement policies. Paper #2: Implementing design principles for effective climate change policy. Paper #3: ETS or carbon tax?

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Geoff Carmody

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment Comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy