A Government without a fiscal strategy.

As a piece of economic management, the Coalition Government’s second MYEFO should come in for significant and serious criticism. It shows a deteriorating budget position and a deteriorating economy, but more worryingly, it shows a Government that is unaware of what good economic management actually means.

Commodity prices have obviously played a role in the economic and budgetary situation, and there is no doubt both have also been made worse by the real economic impacts of endless and unfounded cries of ‘debt and deficit disaster’ from the Government. But neither of these serve as a justification or excuse for the real problems with the Government’s fiscal strategy.

As Stephen Koukoulas has written elsewhere, “Hockey seems to have forgotten or ignored that budgets and fiscal policy are about the government managing the business cycle, not perpetually striving for the smallest budget deficit possible”.

The Kouk, as he is known, is exactly right; the short to medium term purpose of fiscal policy is to smooth business cycles – the Keynesian role so to speak. He is right to conclude that based on this basic criterion, the Government is failing Australians, especially those unemployed or likely to become unemployed. The Government is making a decision that arresting the misery of the unemployed is not as important as being seen as tough on deficits, even if being seen to be tough actually has no impact on the government’s solvency, Bond market’s willingness to hold our sovereign debt, or rating agencies assessment of the same debt.

However, this is just one of at least three criteria by which any fiscal strategy should be judged. The second and third are both longer term policy considerations and have little to do with Keynesianism.

The second concerns how the government spends its money, regardless of where we are in the cycle. It is a question of the role of government in the economy as well as a question of societal values. How much support for health and education should be public? How much basic research or industry development should be publicly funded? What type of welfare system achieves societal goals of equity, security and efficiency. If we believe the academic literature, the answers to these questions are even more important for growth and people’s wellbeing than whether the government engages in counter-cyclical fiscal policy or not.

On this score, there can be little doubt that the Government is steering Australia in the wrong direction, both for reasons of growth and for reasons of equity. Cutting CSIRO and other research funding, making university education and health care more expensive, ignoring all but road infrastructure, eliminating industry policies to promote industry growth, collaboration, development and take-up of new technologies; through all of these policies the Government is degrading its rightful role in the economy and society. In the long term, they degrade our growth, erode opportunity and stifle our potential. In addition and as has been made clear in the months since the May budget, in the public’s view they violate the basic Australian social contract.

The third consideration of fiscal policy is its constraint, namely the need to maintain solvency. Too often, this has been equated with the achievement of a surplus as soon as possible. In reality, solvency is determined by maintaining access to capital markets by preserving the confidence of those markets that debt will be repaid, in full and on time.

The common equation of achievement of a surplus with solvency is perhaps the most misunderstood aspect of fiscal policy.

It originates from the standard microeconomic analysis where past deficits (and therefore accumulated debt) can only be repaid by future surpluses. But this is an overly simplistic analysis that isn’t suited to assessing a government’s fiscal constraint. It excludes two crucial aspects of the real economy; economic growth and inflation.

Once we take a macroeconomic view of government solvency and incorporate economic growth and inflation, it becomes clear that debt can be paid back through inflation as the value of nominal debt diminishes over time and economic growth which boosts future revenues, as well as through future surpluses.

Financial markets and economists are perfectly aware of this fact. That is why ratings agencies are more interested in the profile of the net debt to GDP ratio and the growth outlook than they are in the size of this year’s deficit or when we project a surplus.

Yet these intricacies rarely filter through to the public debate. Attempts by economists to make these points are rare, but on the occasions they are made, as with the public statement from 63 economists in September this year, a list of signatories that included the Kouk, former RBA chief Bernier Fraser and Former Minister Emerson, as well as the author, they are largely ignored by the media and therefore by the public.

Instead what we get is the identification of a surplus as being the government’s equivalent to a business’s profit. This is fundamentally wrong and should be called out as such.

This common misperception has lead to one side of politics successfully misrepresenting a strong fiscal position as a ‘debt and deficit disaster’ because both sides, in an attempt to out-bid each other as the better economic manager, elevated the importance of achieving a budget surplus far above its real economic meaning. This came at a huge political cost to the ALP when the achievement of surplus was rightly delayed for good economic reasons. The consequence has been the Coalition’s ability to use this now successful misrepresentation of the fiscal legacy of Labor as a basis for an attack on the role of Government and the Australian social contract. This was the greatest bait-and-switch play in modern Australian politics and the ALP would be wise to learn its valuable lesson.

A solid fiscal strategy needs to articulate clearly how the government will approach all three aspects of fiscal management. And in doing so, it needs to respect the public and if need be to educate them, not treat them with contempt by pandering to their fears and misunderstandings as this Government continues to do.

MYEFO exposes a Government that doesn’t have a fully developed fiscal strategy. Their only claim to good management is the maintenance of solvency, which was never in danger. On the more pressing issue of managing the current economic situation and building prosperity and a fair and decent society, they are badly lacking, to the detriment of all Australians.

About Tom Skladzien

Tom Skladzien

Tom Skladzien holds a PhD in economics, was an economic adviser to Minister Combet and Treasurer Bowen in the last government and is currently the National Economic and Industry Adviser to the Australian Manufacturers Workers’ Union.

    CONTRIBUTOR click to Donate

    The Chifley Research Centre relies on contributions from individuals and organisations to fund our operations, events and research. Without your donations, nothing we do would be possible.

  • Andrew Giles & Ryan Batchelor

    Andrew Giles is the Federal Labor Member for Scullin in Victoria. Ryan Batchelor is a director of the Chifley Research

    Ben Hugosson

    Benedict Hugosson is an Organisational Ombudsman for the Swedish Social Democrats, focusing on training and membership development. Benedict has experience

    Cameron Clyne

    Cameron Clyne is the former CEO of National Australia Bank and now chairman of advisory firm Camel Partners and a

    Carol Johnson

    Professor Carol Johnson - Carol is an Adjunct Professor of Politics at the University of Adelaide and has written extensively

    Catherine King

    Catherine King is the Shadow Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development.

    David Coats

    David Coats is in Australia as a Visitor at the Chifley Research Centre. He is a research fellow at the

    Gabrielle Kuiper

    Dr Gabrielle Kuiper has a background in science, sustainability and urban planning. She was previously Senior Adviser, Climate Change, Energy

    Emma Maiden

    Emma Maiden is the former Assistant Secretary of Unions NSW. She is currently Head of Advocacy for Uniting, leading their

    Erin Watt

    Erin Watt is the National Secretary of the Labor Environment Action Network. Erin is a National Political Coordinator for United

    Jim Chalmers

    Jim Chalmers MP is Shadow Treasurer, and the federal Labor Member for Rankin. Prior to his election he was

    Jo-anne Schofield

    Jo-anne Schofield is the National President of United Workers Union.

    Josh Burns

    Josh Burns is the federal member for Macnamara in Victoria.

    Linda Tirado

    Linda Tirado is a completely average American. She also has good rants about how much it sucks to be poor

    Lindy Edwards

    Dr Lindy Edwards is the Associate Head of School in the School of Humanities and Social Sciences at the University

    Rebecca White

    Rebecca White, Leader of the Tasmanian Labor Opposition

    Terri Butler

    Terri Butler is the Shadow Minister for the Environment and Water, and the federal Labor Member for Griffith, Queensland.

    Tim Kennedy

    Tim Kennedy is national secretary of the United Workers Union, organising for secure jobs and a fair Australia.

    Website design and development by