Joe Hockey

<html><body>
What a hoo-ha we experienced this week with Treasurer Hockey's comments when he dismissed suggestions that property in Sydney was unaffordable when he went on to say "If you've got a good job and it pays good money and you have security in relation to that job, then you can go to the bank and you can borrow money and that's readily affordable."
and "...if housing were unaffordable in Sydney, no one would be buying it," he said.
You know, it got me thinking back to 2003/4 when something similar was going on.  We copped the same media frenzy about the overheated Sydney market and that the boom would crash soon etc.
Then like now, when property becomes too expensive, usually in the cities, investors start to look for more affordable areas.
I was in the market investing in the early 2000's and that is exactly what I did. After settling four negatively geared Sydney properties, I realised there was no point to continue to buy such expensive property after all the capital growth had been realised as the market was peaking and back then the rental market was not as strong as it is now. I needed to find more cash flow positive property. Property that I could add value to and big blocks we could build multiple dwellings on so I could keep buying more. 
That’s when I discovered the Lower Hunter Region of NSW.
There are some people that think regional areas do not experience good capital growth. I track the quarterly median price in three of the regional cities Property Bloom develops in and my graph looks very healthy. There are no extreme spikes but healthy long term growth. Rental yields are around 7% gross on most of our completed developments and with cash so cheap right now, this is sure to present a good return in anyone's book. Also, the depreciation benefits on new property is a nice bonus.
Property Bloom has found a prime location that is currently experiencing good growth and high demand for the housing we are building for our clients. So forget about what some of our politicians are saying and get stuck into some solid research on regional cities and I bet you'll be pleasantly surprised.
<h1 class="Normal"> </h1>
 Jo Chivers is Chief Executive Officer of property development project managers <a href="https://www.propertybloom.com.au/about" target="_blank">Property Bloom</a>.
</body></html>

jochivers-wq5Bp59R5a

Copping the media frenzy: Jo Chivers

<html><body>
Joe Hockey, the ambassador to the United States and his investment banker wife, Melissa Babbage have listed their Hunters Hill trophy home with $8 million plus price guidance.
<div class="in-content-ad">Their Federation mansion cost $3.5 million in 2004 through LJ Hooker when Hockey was a Liberal MP in the Howard Government.</div>
<div class="in-content-ad"> </div>
<div class="in-content-ad">Hockey was instrumental in the crack down on unauthorised Chinese residential purchasing in Australia, even referring to one of his own neighbours has having "got approval on pretty spurious grounds.”
</div>
<div class="in-content-ad"> </div>
<div class="in-content-ad">
<a href="http://www.pillinger.com/properties/52-woolwich-road/" target="_blank">The four bedroom house with study and media room </a>has been renovated by heritage architect firm Clive Lucas Stapleton.</div>
Te Roma, built in 1905 on its 1400 sqm Woolwich Road block, has been leased since 2015, when Hockey took the diplomatic posting.
<img class="attachment-full size-full" src="https://static.domain.com.au/domainblog/uploads/2018/01/20001625/2_h0jfua.jpg" alt="The property includes four bedrooms, formal living and dining rooms, a separate study, media room, landscaped gardens, a cabana, swimming pool and spa." width="1498" height="844">
The family sold their <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/52372-joe-hockey-sells-forrest-canberra-bolthole" target="_blank">Forrest, Canberra residence</a> for $1,515,000 in 2016.
The Hockey’s cattle farm holdings in <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/54082-former-federal-treasurer-joe-hockey-lists-atherton-tablelands-farm" target="_blank">Malanda</a>, north of Cairns, were sold in 2016 too.
They retain ownership of their South Coast retreat at Stanwell Park bought in $782,500 in 2002. 
</body></html>

firstname1-iYD4UYzvBa

Diplomat Joe Hockey lists Hunters Hill home with $8 million plus hopes

<html><body>
Across Canberra 69 auctions were held this week with a 64 percent sales success including the $1,515,000 sale of the former bolthole of the former Federal Treasurer Joe Hockey.
The three-bedroom property in the prestigious suburb of Forrest sold soon after being passed in on a $1.5 million vendor bid at its <a href="https://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-act-forrest-122178762" target="_blank">25 Furneaux Street</a> onsite auction.
There were just the three registered parties for the house Hockey and his wife, Melissa Babbage, bought the house in 1997 for just $320,000.
The 1930s house on the market after he quit parliament to take the plumb diplomatic job of Australian ambassador to the United States.
Its LJ Hooker Canberra City agent Kaylene King told News Ltd that the price reflected "good buying.’’
Another five properties fetched $1 million elsewhere in Canberra, with the weekend top seller at 32 Carrington Street, Deakin at $1,965,000, just shy of the $2 million plus pre-auction expectations. The 2010 home sits on a 660 square metre block that cost $710,000 in 2009.
Over the three months to December 2015, 7.6 percent of Canberra homes re-sold at a loss compared to 11.2 percent over the previous quarter and 10.9 percent a year earlier, according to the latest <a href="/news/51993-losing-resale-levels-falling-across-canberra-corelogic-rp-data-s-pain-gain" target="_blank">Pain &amp; Gain report from Core Logic RP Data</a>.
The fringe property market of Canberra has undergone significant development within the past 24 months, say valuation firm Herron Todd White in their <a href="/news/52342-canberra-s-fringe-suburbs-seeing-spike-in-home-prices-htw" target="_blank">April 2016 property clock</a>. 
The median price for a house in Forrest is $2,150,000, <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/property-observer" target="_blank">according to CoreLogic RP Data</a>. 
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Joe Hockey sells Forrest, Canberra bolthole

<html><body>
“Joe’s discovered the Intergenerational Report,” a Labor figure said last week.
Indeed. Suddenly retirement issues are front-of-mind for Hockey, something they very much weren’t when he sacked the Advisory Panel on Positive Ageing, chaired by Everald Compton, last year. As Compton (not exactly a raving lefty, given his long links with the Nationals) <a href="https://www.crikey.com.au/2013/11/15/why-joe-hockey-should-not-have-sacked-me/" target="_blank">noted in Crikey</a>, dumping the panel was primarily about obliterating any reminders of the treasurership of Wayne Swan.
But there’s one legacy of Swan’s that Hockey must be grateful for — Labor in 2009 decided the pension age would rise from 65 to 67, from 2017 through to 2023. In that period, the preservation age — at which you can access your superannuation — will also rise from 55 to 60.
Why did the preservation age rise as well? Because the policy problem here is removing disincentives for people to keep working if they can. Both access to the age pension and access to super create financial and social disincentives to keep working. The Henry Review recommended that eventually the preservation age rise to the same level as the pension age.
Then again, if you have a set of superannuation tax concessions that cost the budget nearly as much in lost revenue as the cost of the pension itself, you’re offsetting a fair amount of your savings from lifting the pension age — which is exactly what Hockey did last year when he dumped Labor’s (modest) proposal for higher taxes on super earnings over $100,000 pa.
All this could be called the Education of Joe, a process that has been in train since late last year when Hockey got a look at the real numbers about the economy, not the confections from consultants and compliant business economists. The Coalition had blithely issued pre-election assurances that it wouldn’t make any changes to pensions, and they were doubtless honest ones; why on earth would the Coalition want to alienate its key support base? The Coalition had gone after Labor in 2008 for failing to increase the cost of pensions by lifting the pension level, which the Rudd government eventually did. And as Labor’s Chris Bowen pointed out back in February, Hockey remained in that mindset right through until November, when the <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/property-observer" target="_blank">Productivity Commission</a> recommended the pension age be increased to 70 by 2035. “We have no plans to change the age,” <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/no-plans-to-raise-pension-age-further-says-coalition-20131122-2xzev#ixzz2yoXjfzE2" target="_blank">Hockey’s office said</a>, dismissing the PC as “an adviser to government, it’s not the government”.
Well, that’s all changed now. Maybe he had a chat with his new Future Fund chairman Peter Costello, who began the Intergenerational Report process in the Howard years.
As the PC explains, this is complex — it’s not as simple as bumping up the retirement age because we’re living longer. Note that we’re talking about the 2030s and not now, the next budget year or the run-up to the federal election. This is fair dinkum long-term policy making. Some of the complications the PC teases out are:
<ul>
<li>Large numbers of older workers are on the Disability Support Pension because they can’t get work — employers are stigmatising them, or they physically can’t keep working; 
</li>
<li>The practical issue isn’t increase in life expectancy but increase in years of “healthy life expectancy” in which one can actually work, which is less (how many 69-year-old construction industry workers do you know?); 
</li>
<li>Large numbers of workers work more part-time as they near retirement, and our volunteer workforce is primarily people near or in retirement; 
</li>
<li>The interaction of the age pension and superannuation is complex: leaving the preservation age at 60 will leave in place incentives to retire early, especially if one can take super as a lump sum then move onto the age pension or part thereof (with its attendant health care cost benefits). Watch out for changes to the preservation age if and when Hockey’s changes to the retirement age are announced; and 
</li>
<li>On the positive side, the older workforce of the 2030s will be very different to the older workforce of today in educational and skills terms.</li>
</ul>
There are also equity issues: high income earners aren’t affected by pension age changes, because they won’t qualify. Low-income earners, those with low super and those on the DSP are likely to be affected significantly more. Still, the savings from getting it right are significant — the PC estimated $150 billion would be saved between 2025 and 2060 from lifting the retirement age to 70.
And, as always in retirement policy, there is the unseen hand of the fee clippers in banks, insurance companies and financial planning sucking tens of billions of dollars a year from the $1.8 trillion dollar super pot, which will be affected by changes to the preservation age (Australians will be drawing much more on the super pot in the 2030s than they are currently, so an increase in the preservation age will offset some of that, to the benefit of the wealth management industry.
This links into the muddled (we’re being generous) thinking on the FOFA repeal, which will mean retirees have significantly lower retirement incomes in the 2020 and 2030s because of fee-skimming by planners and the banking/insurance cartel. It also means Hockey’s financial system inquiry should make retirement policy and superannuation its first order of business. The submissions from the Reserve Bank, APRA and federal Treasury show they understand the primacy of this issue. Will Joe follow up and tell the Murray Inquiry that its priorities have changed?
Compton’s panel was looking at many of these issues when it was axed by Hockey. The Treasurer is to be commended for trying to drive a debate on this, and more broadly on the long-term sustainability of the budget. Too bad he dumped something that could have ensured that debate was significantly better informed.
One more thing: in 2012, the average life expectancy of an indigenous male was 69.1 years. There’s something horrific about proposing to lift the retirement age to above how long Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander men currently live. By the 2030s, one can only hope the Gap will definitely have been Closed. But what are the chances?
This article first appeared on <a href="https://www.crikey.com.au/" target="_blank">Crikey</a>.
</body></html>

jake-cSmGT7VXVf

Pensions, superannuation and the education of Joe Hockey

<html><body>
Australian workers may be required to work until they are 70 years old, with Federal Treasurer Joe Hockey flagging the possibility of the government raising the retirement age for Australian workers in this year’s budget.
In <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/prepare-for-a-retirement-age-of-70-joe-hockey/story-fn59niix-1226882446948?utm_source=The%20Australian&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=editorial&amp;net_sub_uid=68625280" target="_blank">an interview with ABC TV</a>, Hockey said his generation may have to “work for an extra three years and we need to redesign our systems to manage that fact”.
The previous Labor government raised the retirement age from 65 to 67, which will come into effect from 2023. <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/policy/pension-tests-facing-budget-axe/story-fn59nsif-1226883098733?utm_source=The%20Australian&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=editorial&amp;net_sub_uid=87677912" target="_blank">The Australian</a> reports an increase in the retirement age to 70 may not come into effect until 2040.
While many <a href="https://www.smartcompany.com.au/people/industrial-relations/34750-australians-could-be-forced-to-work-into-their-80s-how-to-get-more-from-your-superannuation" target="_blank">Australian workers will need to work their entire lives out of financial necessity</a>, Pitcher Partners executive director of business advisory and assurance Adrian Fitzpatrick says a further change in the retirement age could be a positive thing for Australian businesses.
“Businesses can benefit from good employees staying on longer with the business,” Fitzpatrick told SmartCompany. “These employees often take on a mentoring role with younger employees and they can help with transitions.”
Fitzpatrick says the change is also a chance for employees to become more engaged in the business, as they have an opportunity to add additional funds to their superannuation savings.
“We often find that people become distracted if they are approaching retirement concerned about their superannuation,” says Fitzpatrick. “Employees who feel secure with their super are often more engaged.”
However, Fitzpatrick says it will be critical for businesses to manage salary expectations for workers who will be working longer. He says working arrangements will also need to be more flexible as older workers seek to balance work commitments with other interests such as travel and family time.
There is also a danger of companies becoming too conservative if they are dominated by older employees, says Fitzpatrick. He says it is important for businesses not to “dampen new business opportunities” that often come from young, entrepreneurial workers.
Hockey has also hinted at a possible change to the way the aged pension is indexed, moving from the current system, which links the pension to the average male weekly earnings, to a system whereby the pension would be linked to the inflation rate.
“I’m not going to speculate on the budget but I will note that … over the last 40 years 60% of male workers in the USA have had a real cut in their incomes,” said Hockey. “In Australia we haven’t had that. Male weekly total earnings have been at a higher rate but it is not always going to be the higher rate.”
Opposition finance spokesperson Tony Burke has criticised the government, which he said would be breaking a pre-election promise if it was to raise the retirement age. <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-13/joe-hockey-flags-changes-to-age-pension-eligibility-age/5386828" target="_blank">Burke told the ABC</a>  the change would hit blue-collar workers the hardest and would be a “very big deal” for individuals with small superannuation savings who may be required to do physical labour for longer.
While the proposed changes are not likely to come into effect any time soon, Fitzpatrick advises businesses owners to sit down with employees who are in their late 50s and early 60s to start planning now. “It’s never too early to start talking about these things,” he says.
This article first appeared on <a href="https://www.SmartCompany.com.au" target="_blank">SmartCompany</a>.
</body></html>

Joe Hockey flags plans to raise retirement age

<html><body>
Australia’s budget has deteriorated faster than any other developed nation’s in the past six months, as Treasurer Joe Hockey continues to prepare Australians for a tough May budget.
Just over a month away from the budget, the International Monetary Fund’s <a href="https://www.imf.org/External/pubs/FT/GFSR/2014/01/pdf/text.pdf" target="_blank">Global Financial Stability Report</a> released yesterday suggests a need for taxation changes in order <a href="https://www.smartcompany.com.au/legal/politics/41251-hockey-claims-labor-hid-spending-tsunami-as-small-business-prepares-for-painful-budget" target="_blank">to reel in the budget deficit.</a>
According to <a href="https://www.afr.com/p/national/imf_says_budget_fall_fastest_of_nreHL5ZcDI84gjokyEAp6H" target="_blank">The Australian Financial Review</a>the budget would need to improve by at least $50 billion by 2020 to bring gross debt down to 70% (or 4.7% of GDP).
Speaking in Washington yesterday, Hockey said IMF estimates showed Australia’s increased healthcare and pension spending alone, unless changed, would cost an extra $93 billion of government spending per annum by 2030.
“That is the equivalent of an extra $61 billion a year in today’s dollars or the equivalent of an extra 4% of today’s GDP,” he says.
To pay for the ageing population, Hockey says Australia will need to raise the equivalent of the existing company tax, indicating major changes will be needed to Australia’s taxation system.
Hockey says with the current budget deficit and below trend growth, there could be budget deficits for the next decade.
“We are now grappling with growth stubbornly below trend as our economy rapidly transitions from the end of the resources investment boom, with rising unemployment and a deteriorating budget position,” he says.
The latest figures from <a href="https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2014/01/pdf/text.pdf" target="_blank">the IMF’s Global Economic Outlook report</a> released earlier this month show Australia is still struggling to recover from the slowdown in mining-related investment.
The Australian economy is tipped to remain 0.5 percentage points below the trend growth rate of 3% to 3.25%. The IMF predicts Australia’s growth will remain “broadly stable” at 2.6% in 2014.
In 2015, GDP is only tipped to have increased 0.1 percentage point to 2.7%.
JP Morgan chief economist Stephen Walters told SmartCompany Australia has struggled to adjust to the post-mining boom.
“However, in context we’ve had the biggest boom we’ve seen in 120 years, so it’s not a surprise we’re having an adjustment period,” he says.
“As other economies come out of a recession, in this context we seem sluggish, but we’ve avoided having a recession for 23 years.”
Walters says JP Morgan is anticipating Australia to grow at 2.75% this year and 3% in 2015.
“Our estimates are a bit below the Reserve Bank of Australia’s estimates. We think the economy is still in an adjustment period… and when an economy goes through an adjustment, some sectors of the economy shrink by comparison. This is being seen in manufacturing and mining,” he says.
“The economy will start to pick up though, and growth numbers are expected to be higher each year. By 2016 things will be looking better. There will be boosts to exporting markets and consumer spending and construction will be strong.”
Walters says looking forward Australia’s biggest challenges will be recovering from a high exchange rate and managing the relationship with China.
“There has been a big hollowing out of the economy, with the exchange rate being too high for many businesses such as the car manufacturers and SPC Ardmona,” he says.
“[In the budget] welfare looks like an obvious target to hit. Also on the agenda will be negative gearing, the pension age and in the long term possibly GST.”
This article first appeared on <a href="https://www.SmartCompany.com.au" target="_blank">SmartCompany</a>.
</body></html>

yredrup-o4Anfe78KF

Australia's budget detoriated faster than any other developed nation in past six months: IMF

<html><body>
Modern governments believe that during budget framing, it is politically savvy to parade the pain. We saw it with Labor and the Coalition is doing the same.
There are scary scenarios of what would happen without remediation, with warnings about problem areas. Some surprises will be held for the night, but other measures will be strategically “leaked” beforehand.
Tony Abbott, in Perth campaigning for the West Australian Senate election, let it be known he was chairing Wednesday’s meeting of cabinet’s expenditure review committee.
Shadow treasurer Chris Bowen declared it was the first time in Australian history a PM had chaired the ERC, claiming it showed dysfunction at the highest level.
This was nonsense. The government could quickly counter that Bob Hawke, John Howard and Kevin Rudd had also done so.
But it was surprising Abbott gave such a high profile to this “razor gang” meeting.
The ERC is all about nasties and, after all, Labor is making the prospect of deep budget cuts a centrepiece of its WA Senate campaigning. Abbott seemed to be providing ammunition. On the other hand, he could take the view Labor had the bullets anyway so he might as well play the longer game.
Treasury secretary Martin Parkinson publicly chimed into the pre- budget debate with a speech reinforcing the government’s lines about spending growth in the big areas.
But Parkinson also sent a public message to the government for later about what it should do on taxation.
With Hockey shining attention on health and pension costs, Parkinson documented the escalation.
Total Commonwealth spending on health is set to rise from $64.7 billion in nominal terms in 2013-14 to $74.6 billion in 2016-17, and to $116 billion in 2023-24.
The Commonwealth’s three main pension payments - for the aged, those on disability support and carers – will grow at an annual 6% in nominal terms over the forward estimates, adding $13 billion to annual payments by 2016-17, and another $39 billion by 2023-24. “Of this nearly $52 billion in additional payments in 2023-24, compared to 2013-14, over half is a result of indexation with the remainder due to increases in the number of recipients.”
That seems a fair hint that both drivers are being looked at. It should be remembered that successive governments have been trying to curtail the numbers on the disability pension but it has seemed a losing battle. It’s never as easy as it looks in theory.
Parkinson then turned to the tax side. His argument, aimed well beyond this budget and directed squarely at the political masters he will leave in December, is crystal clear. Australia needs a tax system it relies more on indirect tax, less on direct tax. The king of indirect taxes is, of course, the GST.
Parkinson pointed to one rather surprising fact, given the tax debates we’ve been through over many years. “Despite reforms that broaden the tax base (such as the GST), and decisions that have lowered corporate and personal tax rates across the decades, the share of direct and indirect taxes (as well as Australia’s reliance on income taxes) has changed little since the 1950s.”
Australia had relatively high reliance on direct taxes as a proportion of revenue raised compared with other OECD countries, he noted, before observing that: “Research consistently says that reduced reliance on income taxes and increased reliance on other, more efficient sources of revenue, including indirect taxes, can support higher growth and higher living standards by increasing workforce participation and lifting productivity.”
The problem is that “without conscious change, Australia’s tax mix will move in the opposite direction as personal income tax increases through fiscal drag”.
“We will move even further in this direction if, as we anticipate, the relative share of total indirect taxes (including GST) continues its long-term decline. Contributing to this decline is the non-indexation of fuel excise (unlike other excise rates) and a rising proportion of consumption outside the GST net, for example, in increased health expenditure.”
Parkinson warned that “continued increases in the personal income tax burden will hit lower and middle income earners with higher marginal and average tax rates. This will have adverse labour force participation impacts, while sharpening incentives for tax minimisation by higher income earners”.
The globalised economy meant Australia would be under pressure to cut the company tax rate.
“Given the pressure to return fiscal drag and to reduce the burden of corporate income tax, it will be a challenge to maintain the current levels of revenue over the medium term, let alone the increases required to achieve the budget projections.”
In the past, Parkinson said, tax reform had largely been pursued through broadening tax bases as an offset for lowering tax rates.
“However, a key challenge for the upcoming White Paper on Taxation will be to consider the mix of taxes, including whether there is a role for a greater contribution from indirect taxes.”
The opportunity were there to plot a path to a better tax system and the dangers clear if it was not done.
“If we do not start making these changes and simply keep drifting along we will be increasingly vulnerable to the next global crisis and will also lose out on the opportunities presented by the rising Asian middle class. The exceptionalism of this ‘lucky country’ will become just a distant, ironic memory and our children may really end up ‘doing it tough’”.
So there you have it. Parkinson, axed by the government (though extended until year’s end) won’t be around for the battles after the white paper, which has a long time table.
But he has signposted another lot of unpalatable truths. In terms of painful decisions ahead, this budget is only the start of it for the Abbott government, which hates the idea of tax increases, fears the politics of a robust debate about needing a higher, broader GST and has promised to take any major tax changes to the election.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/25161/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="line-height: 1.3em;">
Michelle Grattan is professorial fellow at the <a href="https://www.canberra.edu.au/" target="_blank" style="line-height: 1.3em;">University of Canberra</a>.
This article was originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

Treasury boss hints at the need for a broader GST

<html><body>
We’ve now entered the traditional pre-budget softening-up period in which treasurers engage in expectations management ahead of the fiscal set-piece of the year in May. But even given that, Joe Hockey is treating us as complete idiots.
The line Hockey has been pushing for some days now, and which he gave a big push to yesterday in a flurry of media appearances, is that not merely did Labor hide the level of deficits in the current budget cycle, but that it left a series of hidden spending commitments in the unpublished years beyond forward estimates. Hockey has been circulating a document to journalists portrayed in the media as a “Treasury analysis” that shows how “the Coalition inherited an unsustainable budget position” and Labor “hid [expenditure] from the public”. Hockey would like us to see him as a budgetary innocent who has found himself in the middle of a fiscal minefield planted by Labor.
<a href="https://media.crikey.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/BRIEFING-NOTE.pdf"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-431677" src="https://media.crikey.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/2014-04-01_11-33-411.jpg" alt="" width="520" height="180"></a>
Well <a href="https://media.crikey.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/BRIEFING-NOTE.pdf" target="_blank">here’s the document</a>, and it isn’t a “Treasury analysis” — it’s prepared by Hockey’s media adviser, former Australian Financial Review journalist Gemma Daley. And if Hockey seriously expects us to believe his latest argument, he must have nothing but contempt for us. This is Hockey yesterday: “We didn’t anticipate that everything else would be of equal or larger scale as a tsunami coming across the water. The fact is Labor’s left us with a massive forecast increase in foreign aid, a massive increase in defence – for example in one year, there’s meant to be a real increase in defence spending of 13%, a 66% increase in foreign aid.”
<blockquote>
Hockey would like us to see him as a budgetary innocent who has found himself in the middle of a fiscal minefield planted by Labor.
</blockquote>
At another media conference, he said: “If no action was taken on the budget, what the fifth-year deficit would look like, contrary to what both Labor promised was a surplus, if no action was taken, based on the approximately 6% increase in expenditure between the fourth year and the fifth year, which Labor locked in on NDIS, on Gonski, on overseas aid, on hospitals, on defence …”
Well, um, tsunamis are actually tiny when they’re on the ocean — but never mind that, let’s look at the detail. Labor in fact revealed the funding for the National Disability Insurance Scheme — or DisabilityCare as it had been renamed — in the budget last May, with new spending broken down out to 2019:
<img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-431667" src="https://media.crikey.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/2014-04-01_11-24-28.jpg" alt="" width="501" height="179">
In addition to the numbers in the budget papers, there was a specific “glossy” with funding graphs for <a href="https://budget.gov.au/2013-14/content/glossy/NDIS_policy/download/NDIS.pdf" target="_blank">DisabilityCare</a> and one for <a href="https://budget.gov.au/2013-14/content/glossy/gonski_policy/download/NPSI.pdf" target="_blank">education funding</a> as well, which was still being finalised in deals with the states. The increase in foreign aid was also in both the budget papers and a <a href="https://budget.gov.au/2013-14/content/ministerial_statements/download/AusAid_MS.pdf" target="_blank">ministerial statement by Bob Carr</a>  — not that the government got any credit for it, because it was actually a reduction, with the government’s Millennium Development Goal commitment to lifting foreign aid to 0.5% of gross national income put back another year to 2017. The government spelt out its planned increase in foreign aid up to and including 2017-18.
In fact in question time last week, Labor invited the Prime Minister to spell out the government’s MDG policy, which he duly did: aid is to reach 0.5% of GNI when the budget returns to surplus. Which raises the question of why, in Hockey’s Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook in December, Hockey left Labor’s MDG aid funding increase intact, in defiance of the government’s own policy. The answer, of course, was that it would inflate the budget deficit for 2017 and beyond.
As for defence, the Gillard government <a href="https://www.minister.defence.gov.au/2013/05/14/minister-for-defence-budget-2013-14-defence-budget-overview/" target="_blank">gave the portfolio a “guidance”</a> that it would receive around $220 billion in the six years from 2017-18, which Hockey’s document proposes to mean funding would leap 13% in 2017, when in fact the “guidance” reflects a growth rate in defence spending from 2017 lower than the average between now and 2017 of nearly 7%. And remember that Labor was repeatedly criticised fordecreasing defence spending — every armchair general and arms industry lobbyist in the joint was whinging about how we weren’t spending enough taxpayer money on buying gear from the US military-industrial complex. “Military spending slumps to 1930s level,” The Australian’s <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/military-spending-slumps-to-1930s-level/story-e6frg74x-1226352458112" target="_blank">Paul Kelly shrieked</a>. The 1930s theme — hint,appeasement!­ —  was picked up by the Coalition, including Tony Abbott and Barnaby Joyce. Abbott “aspired”, he said, to lift defence spending to 3% of GDP.
So, Labor were both neo-Chamberlain surrender monkeys for not spending enough on defence when in government and now, magically, reckless spendthrifts who committed too much to defence at the same time.
Hockey’s fiscal innocent act is a little hard to believe given we were told what an exhaustive, indeed exhausting, shadow ERC process Hockey was leading within the opposition at the time to establish its fiscal credibility.
And above all, there’s this point: if Hockey seriously believes his own claims about the budget beyond forward estimates, why did he remove Labor savings measures that offset future spending? Why did he remove the 15% tax on superannuation income over $100,000 a year, costing the budget billions beyond forward estimates, for the benefit of high income earners? Why did he restore the Fringe Benefits Tax rort on novated leases — remember Joe being photographed in front of a sports car? And why have Hockey and his leader pushed for the abolition of the mining tax, which even in its crippled form, according to Hockey’s own MYEFO, is worth more than $3 billion over forward estimates? Eventually it will be the only way of recovering some of the profits offshore owners of LNG and iron ore projects will make and ship overseas (over 60% of these projects are foreign owned or controlled).
Then there’s the silly decision to hand $8.8 billion of borrowed money to the Reserve Bank in one hit, when it doesn’t need the capital. And the sale of Medibank Private — a $4-5 billion contribution to the budget — will be spent on roads because Abbott wants to be an “infrastructure prime minister”, when it could cut the budget deficit or the debt. That could be $13-14 billion off the deficit and debt right there — or an interest saving of more than half-a-billion dollars a year.
Hockey is talking about sharing the budget burden around, but that’s only after the government plans to increase its own spending for political purposes and sought to hand billions of dollars in tax revenue back to foreign mining companies, large carbon emitters and the well-off in the community — revenue that would have offset exactly the spending on education, disability and foreign aid that Hockey is now claiming to have only just discovered.
This article originally appeared on <a href="https://www.crikey.com.au/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Crikey</a>.
</body></html>

Joe Hockey

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Joe Hockey

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News