[foxdemon]

link


Kevin Rudd and Tony Abbott have put the economy at the centre of what is expected to be a gruelling five-week election campaign.

Prime Minister Rudd called the election for September 7, after meeting with the governor-general in Canberra on Sunday.

The battle will be about who Australians trust to steer the economy through the challenges now that the Chinese resources boom is ending, he said.

"The boom, of course, has fuelled so much of our nation's wealth," Mr Rudd told reporters.

"That boom is over."

The opposition leader, who flew to Canberra on the election announcement, said he and his coalition team were determined to build a "better Australia".

"We will build a stronger economy, so that everyone can get ahead," Mr Abbott said.

Business groups were relieved to see an election finally get off the ground after three years of minority government, urging both sides to take the opportunity to lay out plans for Australia's future.

"Finally, a light at the end of what has been a very long and dark passage in Australia's federal leadership," CPA Australia chief executive Alex Malley said in a statement.

"An election has always been the only way to put an end to the indulgent political games the nation has been forced to endure for years."

Opening salvos from the two leaders centred on the economy's triple-A rating, one of only eight countries in the world to have the top ranking from all three major agencies.

Mr Rudd took issue with coalition claims the nation was facing a debt and deficit crisis when it had a top tier rating.

"It just doesn't add up. It's a false claim, and should be named and nailed as such through this campaign," Mr Rudd said.

But Mr Abbott said Australia's rating was the result of reforms by previous governments.

He took a swipe at Labor's economic statement that was released on Friday.

It showed larger budget deficits and debt, weaker growth and higher unemployment forecasts than predicted in May.

"What's Mr Rudd's solution to this? Three new taxes," Mr Abbott said.

"The last way to build a strong economy is to clobber people with taxes."

Still, the election campaign looks set to start with a bang, with the Reserve Bank widely tipped to cut the cash rate at its monthly board meeting on Tuesday.

It would take the cash rate to a fresh all-time low of 2.5 from 2.75 per cent, and would cut nearly $50 per month on repayments on an average $300,000 mortgage.

The central bank will also revise its economic forecasts in its quarterly statement on Friday, providing scope to compare them with the government's latest effort.

The departments of Treasury and Finance will also release their independent pre-election economic and fiscal outlook before August 15.
One crucial piece of data will be released in the final weak of the campaign - the June quarter national accounts - which will give a comprehensive reading on the economy, and mark the first anniversary of the carbon and mining taxes.

Well, the election date has been declared and the economy will be the focus of campaigning. I hope the matter of ballooning health expenditure gets some focus.

[foxdemon]

According to this survey by Shell Australia, the three biggest issues we are worried about are living costs, the public health system and energy. Of course Shell is most interested in energy with solutions relevant to their industry. None the less, these three issues are much more significant that Asylum seekers. Perhaps the media is failing in it's duty as a forum of public debate by ignoring these important issues?

link

Future Energy in the Top Three Issues for Australians in 2013
14/02/2013
Research commissioned by Shell Australia has found that future energy (71%)#, living costs (78%)# and the public health system (79%)# are the most important issues facing Australians in 2013.

Shell Scenarios suggest that the global population is expected to grow from 7 billion today to 9 billion by 2050 causing energy demand to double in less than a century, placing significant stress on energy resources~. Australians are increasingly aware of this issue and our role in securing an energy future.

Ann Pickard Country Chair, Shell Australia commented; “We are not surprised to see Australians rating future energy as one of the most important issues for Australians. Over the next 30 years, the global energy system needs to undergo a transition as profound as any in its history and Australia has a key role to play in this.”

The “Future Energy Survey 2013” revealed that Australians most favoured a mix of energy sources to help meet this growing demand. Natural gas, a clean-burning ally to renewables, is considered by more than 40%^ of all Australians as the logical bridge between the reduction in oil and coal - the least favoured energy sources. Growth in renewable energy take up was also considered key with solar (87%)^ and wind (70%)^ viewed as the most preferred sources of energy for the future.

“Natural gas is able to play a much bigger role in meeting the future energy challenge than we had previously assumed. Australia is at the heart of the “natural gas revolution” - In this past decade alone we have seen our industry develop and perfect the technology needed to unlock gas from places previously assumed to be out of reach.” Ms Pickard said.

The survey also revealed over one third of Australians believe collaboration between industry, Government and the community will be key to finding the solutions to meeting future energy demand, although 65%^ of Australians believe Government has the most significant role to play.

“We, industry, the community and Government all have a responsibility to find innovative solutions to meet future energy needs. The power of our collaboration will define how successful we will be in addressing the challenges of the future.”

Smart policy decisions, community engagement and consultation will be critical. And the energy industry will have to learn how to scale up and integrate new processes and inventions quicker than ever before.” Ms Pickard said.

According to the survey, the majority of Australians want to reduce CO2 emissions with 85%^ of respondents recycling and 76%^ using energy saving products as a personal bid to help reduce CO2 emissions.

“Our increasing demand for energy is taking place against a backdrop of environmental concerns. Our challenge is to produce far more energy for a world with far more people while continuing to reduce CO2 emissions.”

Survey highlights:

Future energy needs (71%)#, the public health system (79%)# and living costs (78%)# are the three most important issues facing Australians during 2013.
Gas (42%)^ and renewable energy (including solar 87% and wind 70%)^ are among the most preferred future energy sources for Australians.
Over one third of Australians believe industry collaboration is the most important factor in building future energy solutions.
65%^ of Australians think that Government has the biggest role to play in creating a better energy future.
Around three in five Australians are surprised to know the oil and gas industry is the leading investor in new energy technology.
56%# of Australians consider it very important to reduce CO2 emissions while only 4%* believe it is not important at all.
The most important issue facing development of future energy solutions is cost (36%), followed by the environment (23%).

In regard to energy, I have been looking at alternatives. The hydrogen economy might not be a good idea as it requires extensive infrastructure and is not efficient. Shell suggests natural gas, which is much easier proposition to achieve.

When talking of energy, there are two areas in particular that we need to address. One is general power generation. That is power plants and the distribution network. The other is economically or vital transport, trucks, trains and farm machinery. Those matter for making the economy function whereas private transport (cars) don't matter and can be substituted for. So alternative power for transport need only focus on trucks, trains and farm machinery. It is childish for people to worry only about running their own private car in regard to this issue.

Natural gas does seem to be a good option for power stations. As the atricle shows, there is wide recognition in the public of the need for government investment in this sort of thing to make it happen. But the government needs to means to invest without raising taxes too much. That means cutting back on spending elsewhere. This brings us to health funding.

link


Bringing the budget back into shape
By ABC's Alan Kohler

Updated Wed Apr 24, 2013 10:27am AEST
Treasurer Wayne Swan Photo: In his sixth and final budget Wayne Swan will bring down a deficit of $10-15 billion, saying: "it's not my fault - the terms of trade made me do it". (AAP: Samuel Cardwell)

The federal budget is now in the position where it can't grow its way out of deficit. To return to surplus we now need spending reductions or increased taxes, or both, writes Alan Kohler.

......


But according to the Grattan Institute, the problem is not mainly caused by Government decisions, but a blow-out in health spending, mainly hospitals, caused by the fact that Australia's health system is demand-driven - and everyone is demanding more.

Health expenditures by Australian governments grew by 74 per cent in real terms over the last decade, or $42 billion, of which $30 billion was due to "new, improved and more services per person" - not the ageing of the population or rising per unit costs. Spending on hospitals has grown $11 billion more than GDP growth would have implied.

link

Australia spends more than $130 billion each year on health, approximately 9.2% of our GDP. The outcome of this and other investments is that our life expectancy puts us very high on the global “league table”.

But a recent Grattan Institute report has pointed out that health expenditure is one of the major drivers of budget deficits. Growth in health spending above GDP over the past ten years was greater than the growth above GDP of all other spending combined.

If the Grattan Institute report is right, then public spending on health is the main area that government needs to reform to free up revenue to spend on other areas, such as addressing the energy issue. I hold the opinion that the 'other areas' to spend money ought to be things such as energy that will further reduce costs in future. For example, moving away from petroleum will help reduce long term costs.


I also believe it is time to revisit some parts of the constitution pertaining to the responsibilities of states and federal government. Both education and health would be better dealt with at the federal level, resulting is savings due to removal of duplicate and redundant administration, and also the opportunity to create more transparent and accountable health and education administrations. This can also help address the cost of living issue.

If health and education are shifted away from state governments, then a large part of their costs are removed. This means that state governments won';t need so much GST revenue. Lower the GST will help to bring the cost of living down. However I would suggest not lower the GST until state government debts have been retired. Retiring debt means no interest pays and thus reduced future costs. It fits my criteria than government revenue freed up from reforms in health spending be used to lower future costs in the economy.


OK, so that little monograph is much better than raving on about Asylum seekers, no? What do other people think the big issues are and what can we do about it?

[pugsville]

I agree that the State/Federal responsibilities should be clearly defined. Each level of Government should either do ALL of a sector or none, the blame game and mismatching and inefficiencies of shred spheres of action I think is no longer worth it.