The desecration continues. Another 20 hectares, this time in the iconic Dial Range on Tasmania’s Central Coast has been earmarked for clear-felling by Sustainable Timber Tasmania STT later this year.
The desecration continues. Another 20 hectares, this time in the iconic Dial Range on Tasmania’s Central Coast has been earmarked for clear-felling by Sustainable Timber Tasmania STT later this year.
Viewing problems facing State
governments through the same lens used to look at Federal budgets run the very
real risk of erroneous conclusions.
The Australia Institute wrote an opinion
piece titled Tasmania's fear of Government debt is hurting the State published in The Mercury on 22nd March reassuring Tasmanians
that deficit spending was fine because our assets are growing. “That does not sound like a government
about to go broke“, it
was said, ignoring the fact insolvency
isn’t triggered by a lack of assets, rather an inability to service liabilities.
There followed an assertion because our
per capita net debt was lower than other States, despite other financial
liabilities such as the much larger unfunded defined benefit scheme for
government employees, Tasmania was sitting pretty. Our biggest challenge is to unshackle
ourselves from a restrictive self-imposed borrowing constraint.
The pro-forma response to the Tony Abbott-Joe
Hockey debt and deficit doomsday scenario was trotted out. Most economists agree
with this knowing the Australian government is not revenue constrained and more
significantly, controls its own currency, neither of which are true in the case
of state governments.
The weeties choking moment came when
it was stated: “Tasmania currently is able to meet its spending commitment
to pay teachers, nurses and other public sector workers. The
“cash flow” of the government is actually in surplus “.
That statement shows a complete
misunderstanding of Tasmanian government financials. The suggestion that operating
revenue is enough to cover operating spending is simply wrong.
This blog will pinpoint the errors whilst also having a look at the way State governments report their budget outcomes compared to the way the Federal government does.
Our less than honest politicians continue
to rely on an endemic misunderstanding of State government debt when spruiking
their credentials as economic managers.
Rebecca White harks back to 2014 when general government net debt was absent. But there was plenty of unfunded superannuation liabilities and borrowings by government businesses, some of which were needed to pay returns to government, that she conveniently sidestepped.
Jeremy Rockliff’s advertisements have
a fleeting glimpse of a chart showing net debt across states with Tasmania
having a small amount compared to other States. A disingenuous comparison given
we’re the smallest State.
Treasurer Ferguson when defending the
level of debt in his 2023/24 Budget the day after the budget was handed down in
May 2023 told us our net debt is
quite low:
“…our borrowings are very, very small in comparison to other
jurisdictions per capita, just have a look across the waters that Victoria what
they are doing……..I wouldn’t want to be in their shoes.”
There’s plenty of metrics to suggest our predicament is not much different to Victoria, perhaps even worse given we are still deluding ourselves about our true position, and about to be lumbered with another round of unfunded election promises no matter who wins.
Just when one thinks
things can’t get any worse the Tasmanian Labor Party put out its Fiscal Strategy Statement with an accompanying media release declaring Treasurer
Ferguson “simply has no idea what he’s doing.”
It’s a classic case of a kettle being called black by a
particularly sooty pot.
The Fiscal Strategy is a statutory requirement of the
Charter of Budget Responsibility Act 2007. Opposition parties need to lodge a
Strategy with the Treasury Secretary ten days after an election is called.
The Tasmanian Labor Party outsourced the preparation of its fiscal strategy to its media minders. As a consequence, the strategy is a flawed document replete with dubious and at times incorrect assertions.
Reading between the lines of the Liberals’ statement vowing to block the sale of UTAS’ Sandy Bay properties, one gets the feeling it’s a PR masterstroke from UTAS. They’ll now be able to say they were forced to change course rather than having to admit it was a crock of an idea in the first place.
The Clark electorate in Hobart is
particularly crucial. If major parties only manage to get two seats each at the
State election on March 23rd they will need four seats in the other four
electorate to achieve a majority in the new parliament. That’ll be a tough ask.
Given the poll 18 months ago revealing three quarters of Hobart City electors are opposed to UTAS’ move into the City it is a little surprising there hasn’t been a greater willingness by third parties and potentially key independents vying for the three remaining seats to discuss their views with voters.
In the previous four blogs we looked at the fiscal landscape confronting Tasmania and the major flows in the current government’s budgets - revenue, operating expenses and debt servicing costs. This blog will try to reconcile these flows with the increasing levels of borrowings that awaits any future government.