Joe Hockey's debt and deficit disaster

Thu, 17 Sep 2015  |  

Treasurer Joe Hockey released a very short statement outlining a couple of key points on the budget outcome for 2014-15, with the full document to be released next Monday.

Mr Hockey noted that the budget deficit for 2014-15 was $38 billion, which he said was “over $3 billion better [sic] that expected”.

There are, as there always were with Mr Hockey, a few issues with his take on fiscal issues.

Importantly, a lower budget deficit is not always “better”. If it is because the government has tightened fiscal policy into a weak economy, it is plain silly policy – it would have been better for growth and jobs to have had a wider deficit. With GDP growth at 2.0 per cent through to the end of 2014-15 and unemployment locked in at 6.0 per cent or more, who knows, that extra $3 billion may have helped growth.

Anyway.

And $3 billion lower than expected? Expected by whom and when?

Let’s have a look at the evolution of the 2014-15 budget outcome under the stewardship of Mr Hockey as Treasurer.

When the Pre Election Fiscal Outlook was prepared in August 2013, independent of any political influence by the Secretary’s of Treasury and Finance, the 2014-15 budget deficit forecast was $24.0 billion. Yep, $24.0 billion – no more, no less.

After the election and as Treasurer, Mr Hockey then went about changing policies and when he released the Mid Year Economic Fiscal Outlook in December 2013, the forecast for the 2014-15 budget deficit was $33.9 billion. Hhhmmm.

In Mr Hockey’s first budget, in May 2014, you know, the one that cut and diced everything in a decent society, he was forecasting the deficit to come in at $29.8 billion. So a little smaller than the forecast at the MYEFO, but still well up on the PEFO estimate.

Let’s now fast forward to the 2014 MYEFO, in December last year, and at that time, the budget deficit was forecast to hit $40.4 billion. To be sure, there was the impact of falling commodity prices and weaker growth, but the deficit was nearly double the PEFO forecast.

Moving on, finally, to the Budget in May 2015 and a deficit for 2014-15 (with over three-quarters of the year in the bag!) was forecast to be $41.1 billion.

And now we have the final outcome – a deficit of $38 billion.

That’s a $14 billion blow out from the projected deficit in PEFO and that is the key takeaway.

To be sure, the deficit was not as wide as Mr Hockey’s worst case projection four months ago but that is like me saying I won $20 at the races last Saturday after losing $50 the week before.

comments powered by Disqus

THE LATEST FROM THE KOUK

“Bitterly disappointing”: We are seeing a once in a generation policy failure

Thu, 12 Sep 2019

This article first appeared on the Yahoo Finance website at this link: https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/rba-interest-rates-government-can-stimulate-economy-but-wont-210050650.html 

---------------------------------------

“Bitterly disappointing”: We are seeing a once in a generation policy failure

Imagine having the power to promote economic growth, lower the unemployment rate and set in train the conditions to boost real wages growth and inflation?

It would be immensely satisfying to change policies to improve the living standards and quality of life for every day, hard-working Australians and their families.

Wouldn’t it?

Next imagine a harsh reality where economic growth is weak and slowing, the unemployment rate is rising and wages growth and inflation well below a satisfactory level, and you choose not to wield the power reverse these uncomfortable circumstances?

Doing nothing, unwilling to pump some much needed cash into the economy because of a political dogma wedded to a notion that budget surpluses are good and that holding interest rates unnecessarily high so you might dampen demand for houses – which is seen as a problem - and household debt overwhelms your power to make things better.

The RBA admits it stuffed things up – sort of

Mon, 22 Jul 2019

This article first appeared on the Yahoo website at this link: https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/did-the-rb-as-monetary-policy-put-our-economy-at-risk-033940907.html

---------------------------------------------

The RBA admits it stuffed things up – sort of

The Reserve Bank of Australia needs to be congratulated for publishing research which implicitly confirms that it made a mistake when setting monetary policy in the period mid-2017 to early 2019.

Not that the research explicitly says that, but the RBA Discussion Paper, Cost-benefit Analysis of Leaning Against the Wind, written by Trent Saunders and Peter Tulip, makes the powerful conclusion that by keeping monetary policy tighter in order to “lean against” the risk of a financial crisis, there was a cost to the economy that is three to eight times larger than the benefit of minimising the risk of such a crisis eventuating.

The costs to the economy includes lower GDP growth and higher unemployment, that lasts for at least for several years.

A few terms first.

According to the Saunders/Tulip research, “leaning against the wind”, a term widely used in central banking, is “the policy of setting interest rates higher than a narrow interpretation of a central bank’s macroeconomic objectives would warrant due to concerns about financial instability”. In the RBA’s case, the “narrow interpretation” of the RBA’s objectives are the 2 to 3 per cent inflation target and full employment.

In the context of the period since 2017 and despite the RBA consistently undershooting its inflation target and with labour underutilisation significantly above the level consistent with full employment, the RBA steadfastly refused to ease monetary policy (cut official interest rates) because it considered higher interest rate settings were appropriate to “lean against” house price growth and elevated levels of household debt.