62 comments

1. Kaye LeeAugust 22, 2015 at 12:39 pm

   Tony Abbott ‏@TonyAbbottMHR · 27m27 minutes ago  Perth, Western Australia
   Good to be at Lathlain Park to announce plans for the development-an investment in jobs, growth & the local community

   Lathlain Park is the ground of the West Coast Eagles, the team that Julie Bishop was a board member for until she became foreign minister.

   Tony Abbott ‏@TonyAbbottMHR · 21h21 hours ago  Perth, Western Australia
   At Austal in Perth to talk about our historic shipbuilding announcement – good for jobs and growth.

   I thought that SA was getting the ship building contract…aside from which, they are not scheduled to start for years. Not costing Tony a thing so he can promise it to everyone.

   Tony Abbott ‏@TonyAbbottMHR · Aug 18  Yass, New South Wales
   The China FTA will drive exports & jobs growth. Bill Shorten & unions must end their dishonest campaign against it.

   The ACTU claims the China free trade agreement allows Chinese companies to bring in their own workforce for projects over $150 million and removes the requirement for jobs be offered to local workers first.

   The written agreement does state that Chinese companies can set up a large infrastructure project without testing the market to see if there are Australian workers to do the jobs.

   It also says that when issuing visas for these jobs, labour market testing is done “where required” and both the Foreign Affairs and Immigration Departments say companies will have to advertise jobs on these projects to local workers first.

   But the agreement does not specify that labour market testing must occur before visas are granted and the Department told Fact Check that requirement could be waived in “unique and exceptional circumstances”.

   Experts contacted by Fact Check say the China free trade agreement allows the Immigration Department to decide that jobs should be offered to local workers before it issues visas to overseas workers, but it does not require this to happen.

   The ACTU’s claim checks out.

   http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-08-12/china-free-trade-agreement-cost-australian-jobs-fact-check/6653214

   On his budget night speech last year, Treasurer Joe Hockey boasted that he would fund “the equivalent of eight Snowy Mountains Schemes in new infrastructure over the next decade”, because he had “significantly increased” infrastructure investment in an “Infrastructure Growth Package”. “Shovels will start moving within a matter of months,” he promised, issuing a budget glossy claiming over one-eighth of a trillion dollars in infrastructure spending.

   That’s not going so well either with infrastructure spending dropping lower than any time under Labor

   Abbott presides over a lost year on infrastructure

2. BlinkyewokAugust 22, 2015 at 12:41 pm

   They have to get their slogans from somewhere. I doubt Abbott could think up his own or explain what they mean.

3. HarquebusAugust 22, 2015 at 1:10 pm

   Tony Abbott and Co have been banging on lately about growth. They are short sighted and have no grasp of reality. Those that espouse growth and pursue it, both economic and population are fools who will destroy everything in their quest to achieve it.

   What has this quest produced so far and will only produce more of?
   Here are just a few:
   Poverty, overcrowding and slums
   Increased inequality
   Environments in terminal decline
   Soil degradation
   Resource depletion and scarcity
   Water shortages
   Ocean acidification and hypoxic dead zones
   Global warming and desertification
   Melting glaciers and rising ocean level
   Massive amount of debt that can not possibly be repaid

   What is waiting in the wings to destroy us all?
   Arctic methane and CO2 release on an unimaginable scale.

   For what possible reason must economic and population growth take priority? Only our current crop of inglorious leaders who, have no background in the sciences, could contemplate worsening all of these conditions and introducing new dangers all for the sake of economic and population growth.

   Here is a quote that I came across recently that sums up this absurd ideology perfectly.

   “There is no point in saving the planet if we ruin the economy doing it.” — former NSW Premier Morris Iemma

   I urge you all to question our politicians basic ideology and to query them as to why your children must be sacrificed for their absurd and impossible quest for infinite growth in our finite world.

   “It is vital for the world to stabilize its population, not only because of the threat of a catastrophic future famine, but also because rapid population growth is closely linked with poverty.”
   “think carefully about the scope and consequences of the catastrophic global famine which will undoubtedly occur within the next 50 years if population is allowed to increase unchecked.”
   “Like a speeding bus headed for a brick wall, the earth’s rapidly-growing population of humans and its rapidly growing economic activity are headed for a collision with a very solid barrier – the carrying capacity of the global environment.”
   http://www.cadmusjournal.org/article/issue-4/entropy-and-economics

   “Methane releases from the seafloor of the Arctic ocean threaten to cause rapid local warming that in turn will trigger further methane releases, in a vicious cycle of runway warming that could destroy habitat for humans within decades.”
   http://arctic-news.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/the-methane-monster.html

4. pudden'headAugust 22, 2015 at 1:13 pm

   Does the mantra have personal meaning for our PM, for example are his “jobs” for preferred folk who will further the Coalition ambitions? ( I was tempted to use the words Coalition plan but apart from their desire to stay in power there does not appear to be much of a plan). As for “growth” could it be a direct reference to the additional income and goodies for Coalition MP’s and their press,mining, industry and retail owner and executive mates should the Coalition continue in power? We Australians are so lucky to have a thoughtful leader such as our Tony. Tony gives the impression that he wants to help other countries wherever he can. Maybe, if we asked nicely, the troubled Greeks could use him and his “good government” to get them out of the frying pan and on the way to a red hot future.

5. babyjewels10August 22, 2015 at 1:52 pm

   Not just three word slogans but totally devoid of any kind of reality. Jobs and growth? We’re going backwards in both jobs and growth, that’s how much they care about jobs and growth.

6. slorterAugust 22, 2015 at 2:08 pm

   They do have a plan! The policy that Abbott has tried and is trying to implement is neoconservative global policy. Abbott is attempting to implement austerity along with Hockey and the rest. To change leader is wonderful, but the philosophy behind what they are trying to do is not going to change; they intend to deliver austerity for the poor and banquets for the rich that is their real slogan; you can have it delivered with an Abbott personality or Bishop personality or Turnbull personality but it will be delivered! Jobs and growth will never be delivered with austerity mentality; they know this and they couldn’t care less!

7. brickbobAugust 22, 2015 at 2:24 pm

   I believe they do care about jobs and growth,they care about their own jobs and the growth in their personal bank accounts and to achieve these two aims they would push their own Grandmothers over a cliff in their wheel chairs.””””””

8. Matters NotAugust 22, 2015 at 3:06 pm

   Interesting article from Paul Krugman. He opens by pointing out that:

   The last time the United States was debt free was 1835. …

   The British government, by the way, has been in debt for more than three centuries, an era spanning the Industrial Revolution, victory over Napoleon, and more.

   He concludes:

   In other words, the great debt panic that warped the U.S. political scene from 2010 to 2012, and still dominates economic discussion in Britain and the eurozone, was even more wrongheaded than those of us in the anti-austerity camp realized.

   Not only were governments that listened to the fiscal scolds kicking the economy when it was down, prolonging the slump; not only were they slashing public investment at the very moment bond investors were practically pleading with them to spend more; they may have been setting us up for future crises.

   And the ironic thing is that these foolish policies, and all the human suffering they created, were sold with appeals to prudence and fiscal responsibility.

   http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/08/debt_is_good_paul_krugman.html

9. DianeAugust 22, 2015 at 3:55 pm

   Having managed to get elected on so many empty promises last time, they obviously believe (and I fear) that it’s enough just to talk about something to get that phrase associated with your party when it comes to voting time. i bet if a survey were carried out with the question “Which political party do you associate with jobs and economic growth?” there would be a scary number of people who would reply “The LNP” and likewise “Which political party do you associate with Debt and Deficit” would answer “Labor” as that is the message that has been thrust down our throats for the last two years, without even asking themselves whether there was any evidence or intention of action behind the words. There are some clever people behind the LNP politicians, who know their voting audience all too well and know the best way to ensure they keep their lucrative positions.

10. Möbius EckoAugust 22, 2015 at 4:12 pm

    Tony Abbott: “What right do we the members of Parliament have, to inflict our views on the whole of the Australian population?

    Irony meter explosion.

11. Neil of SydneyAugust 22, 2015 at 4:31 pm

    The last time the United States was debt free was 1835. …

    The British government, by the way, has been in debt for more than three centuries, an era spanning the Industrial Revolution, victory over Napoleon, and more.

    One big difference between those countries and us. The USA and Britain can obtain the majority of their debt money from their own people. With Australia, 70% of our debt needs to be funded from overseas investors.

    Currently our debt repayment is costing us $1B/month. Of that $700M goes to overseas investors never to return.

12. seaworkAugust 22, 2015 at 4:32 pm

    A new three word slogan for Tone;

    Coal will kill.

13. corvus boreusAugust 22, 2015 at 5:03 pm

    “The USA and Britain can obtain the majority of their debt money from their own people.”
    1 minute on wiki-phuqing-pedia reveals;
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_external_debt

14. Matters NotAugust 22, 2015 at 5:11 pm

    Never let the facts get in the way of a chosen ‘mantra’. He’s been doing that for years.

15. Neil of SydneyAugust 22, 2015 at 5:20 pm

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_of_the_United_States#Debt_holdings
    
    As of September 2014, foreigners owned $6.06 trillion of U.S. debt, or approximately 47% of the debt held by the public of $12.8 trillion and 34% of the total debt of $17.8 trillion.[41] The largest holders were China, Japan, Belgium, the Caribbean banking centers, and oil exporters.[43] The share held by foreign governments has grown over time, rising from 13% of the public debt in 1988[44] to 25% in 2007.[45]

    I believe the comparative figure for Australia is that 70% of our debt needs to be sourced from overseas. For the USA the figure is 34% but the USA has vast overseas assets like GM, Ford, govt bonds etc which covers most of their foreign debt.

16. Kaye LeeAugust 22, 2015 at 5:54 pm

    cb,

    Your list includes private debt as well which makes us look worse. NoS has no idea what he is talking about.

17. AorticAugust 22, 2015 at 6:06 pm

    When the NZ Prime Minister, the Premiers of Vic, Qld and SA look into the camera lens they have a coherent sounding unhesitating message which presumably gives electors some semblance of hope they have progressive policies for their country and States. When Abbott fronts it is almost cringeworthy as you watch him disintegrate as he searches for something even remotely sensible to utter. It almost always ends up with one or other of his chosen mantras leaving people reaching for the “mute” button or the channel change. If it was just a hesitant delivery style one could possibly forgive, but the fact there is no substance behind it, aye there’s the rub.

18. AndrewAugust 22, 2015 at 6:27 pm

    NoS and cb,

    suggest you look at this from wikipedia for Public Debt (Govt) by nation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt

    Australia is at 27.159% of GDP (Gross Govt Debt)
    UK 90.314%
    US 106.525%
    as at 2012,

    Figures from the IMF (American and UN established for comparison and control of international Money lending to Gov’ts, after the conclusion of the Marshall Plan)

19. Neil of SydneyAugust 22, 2015 at 6:59 pm

    suggest you look at this from wikipedia for Public Debt (Govt) by nation

    Didn’t you listen to what i said? Now i am willing to admit i am wrong but we have to source 70% of our debt from foreign sources whereas most other Western Nations can source the money from their own people. Compare Japan

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_public_debt
    
    Around 70% of Japanese government bonds are purchased by the Bank of Japan, and much of the remainder is purchased by Japanese banks and trust funds, which largely insulates the prices and yields of such bonds from the effects of the global bond market and reduces their sensitivity to credit rating changes.

    Most of our debt is foreign which is more dangerous than if our govt debt was owned by Australian lenders eg Superannuation funds, mum and dad investors etc.

20. Kaye LeeAugust 22, 2015 at 6:59 pm

    Neil,

    from June 2013…

    “They carry on about the federal ”net public debt”, which is expected to have reached $162 billion – equivalent to 10.6 per cent of gross domestic product – by the end of this month. It’s now expected to peak at $192 billion – 11.4 per cent of GDP – in June 2015, before it starts falling.

    But that’s chicken feed compared with our ”net foreign debt”, which reached $760 billion – 51 per cent of GDP – in December.

    Whereas the net public debt is the net amount owed by the federal government to people who hold its bonds (whether they’re Australians or foreigners), the net foreign debt is the net amount Australian governments, companies and households owe to foreigners.

    Throughout the history of white settlement, Australia has always been a net importer of foreign capital because our scope for economic development has always been greater than we could finance with just our own saving.”

    http://www.smh.com.au/business/no-need-to-worry-over-debt-you-never-hear-about-20130531-2nhg9.html

21. HarquebusAugust 22, 2015 at 7:15 pm

    Andrew
    NoS stated that 70% of our debt needs to be sourced from overseas and not that our debt is 70% of GDP.
    If you add private debt, our debt to GDP is just over 56% of GDP. If the link you posted is accurate of course.

    Search criteria: history global debt

22. Neil of SydneyAugust 22, 2015 at 7:45 pm

    The reason it is not good for Australia to get into debt is that we cannot fund our debt locally. We have to go overseas.

    http://budget.gov.au/2015-16/content/bp1/html/bp1_bs6-01.htm

    Non‑resident holdings of CGS on issue

    The sale of CGS is not restricted to Australian residents. As at the December quarter 2014, 65.9 per cent of total CGS on issue were held by non‑residents of Australia (Chart 2).

    The proportion of CGS held by non‑residents has risen significantly since 2009 and remains around historically high levels. This appears to reflect an increased tendency for global foreign reserves to be invested outside of the major currencies (such as the yen, the US dollar and the euro).

23. James HarrisAugust 22, 2015 at 9:40 pm

    Nice nod at Utopia there.

24. John KellyAugust 22, 2015 at 11:30 pm

    Neil of Sydenny, all Commonwealth Government bonds are sold in Australian dollars. It doesn’t matter who buys them. All interest is paid in $A. All maturities are paid in $A. I could go on and tell you from what source they are paid but you are not ready for that.

25. John KellyAugust 22, 2015 at 11:36 pm

    Furthermore adding private debt to public debt is silly because private debt is not the responsibility of government and the appropriate risk applies to any overseas lender. In short, it isn’t our problem. Nor is our government debt because as a currency issuer it is impossible for us to default. We will always be able to meet our bond commitments. To think otherwise is ignorance. Furthermore we don’t need debt to fund our spending. Why we do it is another matter. But you’re not ready for that, either.

26. Möbius EckoAugust 23, 2015 at 7:45 am

    And if debt is such a huge thing for the Liberals and their gormless supporters why have the L-NP government quadrupled it breaking Hockey’s major promise, and why aren’t their supporters berating them for this unprecedented increase in debt expansion?

    Joe Hockey pledges coalition will deliver first-year budget surplus
    Coalition faces its own surplus questions

    Debt only became a problem when Howard discovered he could use it to win an election campaign as he didn’t have any policies for that campaign. Even then he campaigned on the current account deficit, not government debt. He went on to break the current account deficit record for nearly every year he was in power. Howard then shifted the attack to government debt, “Beazley’s black hole,” as an excuse to bring in severe austerity measures at a time of growth. This was a deliberate tactic taken out of the Kennett book.

    Howard would have gone the way of Kennett as well if it weren’t for the twin fortunes for him of Tampa and the attacks in the US on September 11.

    Before Howard made debt a beating stick, Australia had spent most of it’s Federation in debt without detriment to the country or the supposed damage that debt would do to future generations who would be lumbered with it.

27. proudlyprogressiveAugust 23, 2015 at 8:37 am

    It comes from Crosby and Text or who told them, based on their success for the Tories in Britain, that people wanted to hear about jobs and growth. To be fair to the C&T team, they probably meant people wanted to hear about how their govt would deliver more jobs and greater growth, but Abbott doesn’t do complexity…or policy…or, well, anything other than three word slogans.

28. John ArmourAugust 23, 2015 at 9:23 am

    “Currently our debt repayment is costing us $1B/month. Of that $700M goes to overseas investors never to return”.

    Not one dollar leaves these sunny shores Neil. The foreign bond holder has an account with an Australian bank.

    “I believe the comparative figure for Australia is that 70% of our debt needs to be sourced from overseas”.

    Not “needs to” Neil. Our bonds are highly sought after. We don’t even need to issue bonds. It’s just a hangover from the era of the gold standard, but highly profitable to some sections of the financial community.

    “Most of our debt is foreign which is more dangerous than if our govt debt was owned by Australian lenders eg Superannuation funds, mum and dad investors etc.”

    Actual Australian government foreign debt is negligible. Bonds held by foreign entities are not “foreign debt”, just “debt held by foreigners”.

    Sounds like you’ve been listening to Barnaby again.

29. John ArmourAugust 23, 2015 at 9:47 am

    “The last time the United States was debt free was 1835. …”

    What a pity Krugman hadn’t rammed home the point that the subsequent shrinking of the money supply precipitated a depression in 1837.

30. John ArmourAugust 23, 2015 at 9:53 am

    JK, if there was a kind of “swear box” at JQ’s website where one had to donate a dollar every time one misspelt his name, he could retire on the proceeds.

    Quiggin.

    : )

31. KeithAugust 23, 2015 at 10:24 am

    The line that politicians will create jobs is becoming thinner and thinner; two years of Abbott has seen unemployment go up.

    The motor manufacturing industry will be closing soon thanks to Abbott; equals job loss for those in the industry and a negative multiplier effect generally.
    The renewable energy industry is being white anted by Abbott, which potentially could create huge numbers of positions.

    There is a proposal to develop the far North of Australia; through climate change that can lead to stranded assets. Already several nations in the last months have been subjected to heat and humidity that a healthy adult would find difficult to cope with. The heat and humidity was deadly for thousands and on the cusp of being deadly for anybody outside of an air conditioned building.

    In relation to climate change Abbott is a disaster. Who now believes Abbott anyway.

32. JeanetteAugust 23, 2015 at 10:48 am

    “Jobs and Growth” just another slogan. Has any journalist or commentator asked the question of Abbott/Hockey what infrastructure/project has been achieved in their term alone, not anything Labor had initiated. What has happened to that new you beaut railway line in Sydney, 2nd airport for Sydney etc. Living in Qld there has been a continuation of Bruce Hway but started with Labor. Can anyone tell me just what has this govt. has done apart from non productive Draconian Secrecy Laws. What have they built? I guess they are following the same script as Utopia on ABC. OR maybe this govt. wrote the script. Action talks bullshit walks.

33. Neil of SydneyAugust 23, 2015 at 11:38 am

    The motor manufacturing industry will be closing soon thanks to Abbott;

    You really should not say things like that. In 2006, 25% of cars were locally made. After 6 years of Rudd/Gillard we only made 10% of cars locally. The car industry was dead long before Abbott won govt.

34. Kaye LeeAugust 23, 2015 at 12:03 pm

    Neil,

    The car industry could not survive without subsidies (all car manufacturing countries subsidise the industry). Abbott withdrew that support which was the final nail in the coffin of what I agree was an ailing industry. They also knew that the free trade agreements were coming which would decimate what little local market they had left (along with Abbott placing orders for BMWs)

    The same cannot be said for the renewable enrgy industry which is booming everywhere except here where it was most definitely Abbott who killed investment and jobs.

    Australia’s large-scale renewable energy industry has entered an investment freeze, with just one project securing finance in the past six months amid political uncertainty, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance.

    For the year to March, investment totalled $206.9 million, which was 90 per cent lower than the previous 12 months, the consultancy said.

    “Investment has been stifled by policy uncertainty for over 13 months since the Abbott government’s [Renewable Energy Target] review was announced on 17 February 2014,” BNEF said. “The Australian large-scale clean energy industry has become practically uninvestable due to ongoing uncertainty caused by the government’s review.”

    The dive in investment comes as the Australian Bureau of Statistics estimated that more than 2000 jobs had been lost in the industry over the past two years. Some 12,590 people were employed full-time in the wind, solar and other renewable energy industries last year, down from almost 15,000 two years earlier.

35. corvus boreusAugust 23, 2015 at 12:05 pm

36. Kaye LeeAugust 23, 2015 at 12:16 pm

    http://asset-8.soup.io/asset/3807/7334_834b_670.jpeg

37. corvus boreusAugust 23, 2015 at 12:22 pm

    Kaye Lee,
    I quote corvus.
    “Nibbling at parasitic bait is even less rewarding than playing chess with a pigeon”.

38. HarquebusAugust 23, 2015 at 12:23 pm

    John Kelly
    Is that why our government guarantees private bank deposits? It’s not their responsibility.

39. Neil of SydneyAugust 23, 2015 at 2:10 pm

    The car industry could not survive without subsidies (all car manufacturing countries subsidise the industry). Abbott withdrew that support which was the final nail in the coffin of what I agree was an ailing industry.

    Wrong. No support was withdrawn. What happened is that after Ford left under Labor it made it more difficult for Holden and Toyota to stay. They went to the newly elected Coalition govt and asked for double the money that was promised. Hockey said no. What Labor promised was all you were going to get. Funding was there until 2020. It was legislated and in the budget.

    http://www.business.gov.au/grants-and-assistance/manufacturing/ats/Pages/default.aspx

    The Automotive Transformation Scheme (ATS) commenced on 1 January 2011 and will run until 31 December 2020.

    The ATS will provide $2.5 billion in capped assistance and approximately $348 million in uncapped assistance.

40. Möbius EckoAugust 23, 2015 at 3:24 pm

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CNEblmmVEAEXA1A.jpg

    All Howard’s fault and the current quadrupling all Abbott’s.

41. Kaye LeeAugust 23, 2015 at 3:27 pm

    August 2013: Coalition rules out further funding for car industry

    By committing to only $1 billion in support for this crucial sector, Mr Abbott has committed to the same policy he took to the last election – to cut funding to 2015 by $500 million and to cut all funding beyond 2015.

    This represents a total cut in funding in assistance to the automotive industry of almost $2 billion compared to that committed by the Gillard Labor Government.

    Mr Abbott’s reckless plan to cut $2 billion of support to the industry threatens the jobs of more than 250,000 workers and the proud history of automotive manufacturing in this country.

    The automotive industry has made it perfectly clear that due to the intense pressures imposed by the high Australian dollar and increased international competition, they cannot continue to make Australian made cars without the support of governments.

    http://archive.industry.gov.au/ministerarchive2013/gregcombet/mediareleases/pages/abbottconfirmshewilldestroycarindustry.aspx.htm

    March 2015: Car industry funding: Abbott Government aware only $100 million of $900 million budget backdown to flow to industry

    No more than $100 million of a $900 million budget backdown in car industry support will actually flow through to the sector – and the Government is aware of the discrepancy.

    Government sources have told the ABC that, based on business decisions and reduced production volumes in the car industry, the Abbott Government expects to save $800 million of the $900 million it has planned to cut from the Automotive Transformation Scheme.

    The Government had tried to wind up the scheme by legislation but it had no hope of clearing the Senate.

    However, in reviewing the future of the scheme, the Government became aware of the fact that most of the savings would be realised as car production in Australia slowed.

    Those savings will be booked to the budget and not set aside for car industry assistance.

    This is completely at odds with a story briefed to the Adelaide Advertiser this morning and confirmed by the Government to the ABC which heralded that $900 million in car industry assistance was being saved.

    Independent South Australian senator Nick Xenophon said the Government needed to bring forward $400 million in funding for the components sector slated to be spent after 2017 on work for car companies in Australia “otherwise we’re still staring at over 100,000 jobs being lost in the next three years”.

    “Under the current rules of the ATS, the Government will never have to spend that $400 million, because Ford, GM Holden, and Toyota will have ceased car manufacturing by then,” he said in a statement.

    Greens deputy leader Adam Bandt said the Government must spend the entire $900 million on the industry before the three car makers leave Australia.

    “This is a Clayton’s background that’ll see thousands of car part makers go to the wall and tens of thousands of people lose their jobs in South Australia and Victoria,” he said.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-10/government-reinstating-car-industry-funding/6292868

42. Neil of SydneyAugust 23, 2015 at 3:45 pm

    “Under the current rules of the ATS, the Government will never have to spend that $400 million, because Ford, GM Holden, and Toyota will have ceased car manufacturing by then,” he said in a statement.

    Yep, under the Automotive Transformation Scheme (ATS) funding was there until 2020 as long as Holden/Toyota continued to make cars.

    Of course there was some talk about cutting funding AFTER Holden/Toyota announced they were leaving. But these cuts never happened. Funding was there until 2020. After Holden/Toyota announced they were leaving the ATS scheme will stop in 2017 rather than 2020.

    The car industry could not survive without subsidies (all car manufacturing countries subsidise the industry). Abbott withdrew that support which was the final nail in the coffin of what I agree was an ailing industry.

    Wrong. Funding was there until 2020 as long as the auto manufacturers stayed. Funding has since been stopped at 2017.

    http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2015/03/10/government-puts-car-sector-cut-reverse

    Car makers and the auto component industry will keep access to about $100 million in public funds to the end of 2017 after a government policy backdown.

    Since last year’s federal budget, Labor, the Greens and crossbench senators have been blocking a government bill to close the Automotive Transformation Scheme.

    The coalition had argued the scheme – which included funding until 2020/21 – was not needed as Holden, Ford and Toyota would no longer be making cars in Australia from the end of 2017.

    But Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane on Tuesday said the legislation would be scrapped and the scheme would remain open until the final car rolled off the production line in 2017.

43. John KellyAugust 23, 2015 at 4:09 pm

    Harquebus, I think it’s a bit weird to compare Australian retail bank deposits with bonds held by foreigners. The guarantee came about as a consequence of the GFC to prevent a run. Not sure what you’re getting at.

44. HarquebusAugust 23, 2015 at 7:26 pm

    John Kelly
    “Furthermore adding private debt to public debt is silly because private debt is not the responsibility of government” while private deposits which are essentially loans to the private banks are.
    BTW: I advise everyone to get in early and get your deposits before the bank runs begin.
    Cheers.

45. KeithAugust 23, 2015 at 7:39 pm

    Neil, I mentioned the motor industry as GMH had made a submission just prior to the motor industry being scuttled by the ideologically driven Coalition. GMH indicated that for every $1 of subsidy there was a return of $18. Research and Development was stated as a very positive outcome as was the job multiplier effect.

    The reference is no longer available as it had become academic.

    A commentary about closure of GMH by University of Adelaide:

    http://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/automotive/submissions/initial/counter/sub008-automotive.pdf

46. Neil of SydneyAugust 23, 2015 at 7:58 pm

    Neil, I mentioned the motor industry as GMH had made a submission just prior to the motor industry being scuttled by the ideologically driven Coalition.

    Telling falsehoods helps nobody. Certainly not the workers who are going to lose their jobs. Why don’t you say the same thing when Ford left? Google Ford leaving yourself. Ford left under the Gillard govt. It was Ford leaving that destroyed any chance of survival for the car industry. Actually it was already dead. Under Labor local sales went from 25% of the market in 2006 to only 10% in 2013. You cannot have a local industry in anything with 10% of the market.

    Fact is funding was legislated until 2020 in spite of what Labor supporters say. AFTER Holden announced they were leaving the Coalition did think about passing legislation to stop funding in 2015 but never put the legislation to parliament because they did not have the numbers to get the legislation through the Senate. Subsidies will continue until 2017 until Holden leaves.

    The fact that legislation had to be passed to stop funding shows funding was there until 2020.

47. John KellyAugust 24, 2015 at 12:12 am

    Harquebus, not really. Banks don’t lend depositor’s’ funds. They count them as reserves.

48. Möbius EckoAugust 24, 2015 at 7:44 am

    So today we will have Hockey promising income tax cuts for low to middle workers. Something he will take to the next election, most likely using his already universally slammed projections as a basis for costing.

    Since bracket creep along with the low Australian dollar are things keeping Hockey in the budget game you have to speculate on why he’s willing to forgo a large chunk of the revenue gained from bracket creep. The only thing I can think of is this is a policy to win an election and prop up a floundering Abbott, not one based on any conservative economic principals.

    Indeed as has been widely pointed out recently this government seems to be all about electioneering and little to nothing about sound planning, policy frameworks or reforms. http://tinyurl.com/qjd95x9

    I’ll also be keenly listening for the either/or trade off Hockey will certainly raise in order for low to middle income earners to be able to have an income tax cut. GST raise almost certain but there will be other stings in the tail somewhere. It’s what Howard always did.

49. stephentardrewAugust 24, 2015 at 7:50 am

    John your article is clear precise and unequivocal:

    These polemic game-plays do not change anything. Auto industry or whatever the fact is this government has no cohesive policy for job creation or growth because it is anathema to its neo-conservative ideological fixity and austerity addiction.

    In short they have no deep understand of economics simply an ideological compulsion driven by conservative fixity and backward referral. If they were honest about the empirical evidence they would realise that L-NP governments are not good financial managers and that the body of proof for their failure is substantial and the body of supporting proof for austerity is literally non-existent.

    The nature of conservatism is to hold onto a dystopian past irrespective of facts because they fear challenges to their religious dogma through social reformation because science proof and fact may well destroy their magical mythical belief system. So rather than objective and logically derived policies they fabricate opinion to support their magical and mythical beliefs in the invisible hand which is a metaphor for the hand of God and, as ideologues do, they all think they have a direct line of communication with the cruel God of their imaginations and irrational ideologies.

    Endlessly rebooting the same old fiscal, monetary, debt, austerity mantra achieves nothing unless you understand the deep subconscious drives the propel ideologues. So it is not an economic problem it is a problem of primitive inflexible minds incapable of breaking habit. They will willingly cause untold suffering jut to protect their demonstrably irrational ideology. Magic and myth over logic and rationality is a recipe for disaster and this is what we have in all western economies.

    Dare I say it religion, ideology, fixity and rigidity are the problem. I don’t care about peoples religions as long as they have flexibility to change and learn from the facts. Problem is in many cases it is self-contradictory.

50. KeithAugust 24, 2015 at 7:59 am

    “Telling falsehoods helps nobody.” @Neil
    I have been storing web sites for some time that appear interesting, this is the skeleton of the site that showed the submission by GMH to continue subsidies via the Productivity Commission:

    http://www.pc.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/130211/sub058-automotive.pdf

    Points in that submission were:
    These are points that GM raised with the Productivity Commission:
    In 2012, Holden:

    x generated $4.0 billion in revenue
    x paid over $420 million in taxes and government charges
    x spent a total of $2.3 billion on goods and services within Australia
    x paid over $1 billion to local suppliers for production components
    x spent $197 million on R&D x paid $410 million in wages x received $96 million in Australian Government assistance; and
    x returned $100 million to the Australian Government as PAYG (income tax) revenue. From 2001-2012, on average Holden:
    x received $153 million per year in Australian Government assistance x returned $127 million per year to the Government as PAYG (income tax) revenue x spent $484 million per year on capital, engineering and design investment
    x paid $488 million per year on wages; and x spent $1.75 billion per year on Australian supplier businesses.

    Those comments are dated 16.12.2013

    Another comment from same date emanating from GMH submission: “…it has been estimated that for every dollar subsidized that the return is eighteen dollars.”

    You need to be very careful about who you call a liar, Neil. It can come back and bite, through making false accusations. I guess we are so used to lies being perpetrated by the Federal Government that now anybody with a different opinion to our own, is a liar.

    An apology would be appropriate.

51. Möbius EckoAugust 24, 2015 at 8:05 am

    And on cue.

    “The Coalition will use its plans to cut personal income taxes to further pressure the states to think of new ways to raise revenue after they failed to agree to NSW Premier Mike Baird’s proposal to increase the GST to 15 per cent.

    Like the GST, shift the raising of revenue onto the States so they can be blamed for any tax rises or revenue shortfalls. Hockey blamed the States for the implementation of a GST on online goods and services the day after his meeting with them on this wrapped up.

    By the way on that implementation of an online GST there are now reports showing it will cost more to collect than the revenue it raises. One of those making the claim is the IPA.

    Collecting GST From Online Purchases Will Cost More To Do Than Revenue Made From It

    Lowering the online shopping threshold to $20 would raise more than $550 million in extra revenue per year however the cost in administering such a change would be up to $1.5 Billion per year – 1.5 Billion taxpayer dollars. It seems unlikely the Government will choose this option and take the cost from the Federal Budget. eTax Accountants

52. Neil of SydneyAugust 24, 2015 at 8:09 am

    I have been storing web sites for some time that appear interesting, this is the skeleton of the site that showed the submission by GMH to continue subsidies via the Productivity Commission:

    Subsidies were continued. They were legislated to 2020.

    http://www.business.gov.au/grants-and-assistance/manufacturing/ats/Pages/default.aspx

    The Automotive Transformation Scheme (ATS) commenced on 1 January 2011 and will run until 31 December 2020.

    The ATS will provide $2.5 billion in capped assistance and approximately $348 million in uncapped assistance.

    The Coalition would have to pass legislation to stop auto subsidies and they do not have the numbers to stop auto subsidies in the Senate.

    Fact is nobody wanted to but Australian made cars and that is one reason they left. Only 10% of cars were locally made in 2013 after being 25% of the market in 2006. Local cars sales crashed under Labor. Another industry they destroyed.

53. HarquebusAugust 24, 2015 at 9:04 am

    John Kelly
    “essentially” There are lots of tricks and terms that the banksters use to steel our money.
    The CEC have some interesting information on the CBA this week. Not that I take everything they say seriously of course but, I occasionally find them to be a good source.
    http://cecaust.com.au/
    Cheers.

54. KeithAugust 24, 2015 at 10:51 am

    @Neil
    The automotive industry was hectored after the election; with the dollar high and no support from an ideologically driven COALition they felt pushed out. The motor vehicle industry needed to be given the push due to “Free Trade Agreements” being set up with South Korea and Japan.

    Once GMH decided to leave; economies of scale already beginning to be a problem, meant the rest had to follow.

    http://www.theguardian.com/business/grogonomics/2013/dec/12/holdens-fate-draws-attention-to-government-assistance

    This comment is dated 20.12.2013:

    “… Will Hagon, a motoring journalist did some investigation in relation to why Holden is leaving. He found that GM reacted to the hectoring from Abbott gang leaders; they found it offensive and virtually said “stuff you.””

55. Neil of SydneyAugust 24, 2015 at 11:30 am

    The automotive industry was hectored after the election; with the dollar high and no support from an ideologically driven COALition they felt pushed out.

    No support? How many times do i have to post the link? Under the ATS support was there until 2020. The Coalition would have to pass legislation to stop that support and they do not have the numbers in the Senate to do that.

    Once GMH decided to leave; economies of scale already beginning to be a problem, meant the rest had to follow.

    Rubbish. The rest? After Holden announced they were leaving there was only Toyota left. It was actually Ford announcing they were leaving under Rudd/Gillard that made it impossible for Holden and Toyota to stay. You are inventing a story you want to believe but is wrong.

    Will Hagon, a motoring journalist did some investigation in relation to why Holden is leaving. He found that GM reacted to the hectoring from Abbott gang leaders; they found it offensive and virtually said “stuff you.”

    You got that the wrong way around. It was Holden who hectored the govt. After Ford left they went to Hockey and asked for double the money promised under the ATS. Hockey said no. What was promised under the ATS was all you are going to get.

    Keith- inventing fairy stories helps nobody. Why didn’t Rudd/Gillard give more money to Ford so Ford would stay?

    Fact is in 2013 only 10% of cars were made in Australia and that is why they left. Nobody wanted to buy the stuff. Take away fleet car sales and personal sales would be less than 5% of the market.

56. KeithAugust 24, 2015 at 5:15 pm

    What garbage, Neil; 3 senior members of the Abbott gang hectored the motor industry generally. Will Hagen is a motoring journalist and has well placed contacts. Will Hagen does not lie, politicians do.

57. Neil of SydneyAugust 24, 2015 at 8:36 pm

    Keith

    Support was there until 2020. It was Holden who threatened Hockey. Give us more money or we will leave they said. They also threatened Gillard but she gave them all the money they wanted. And with that money they built cars nobody wanted to buy.

    You continually give the Labor story which is wrong helps nobody and causes people to blame the Coalition for what happened.

    It was Labor who destroyed our auto industry. Under their watch locally made cars went from 25% of the market to 10%.

    Believe what you want but your beliefs are wrong and help nobody.

    And as if a multinational company would leave because they were hectored.

58. KeithAugust 26, 2015 at 9:00 am

    @Neil
    No, I was not giving the Labor story, the points I listed above came from a submission GMH made to the Productivity Commission.
    GMH from your point of view was apparently pushing a fairy tale.
    I am not a member of any political party.

    But, something I have learnt very quickly is that whatever the Liberals try and tell us needs very close scrutiny.
    The latest being the cost to the economy of an increased impetus on climate change emissions.
    Check out how many positions were really going to be created by the Carmichael mine in the Galilee Basin; definitely not 10,000 as the Land Court has uncovered.

    I’m afraid that through prior lies emanating from Abbott, whatever the government states is a load of you know what.

59. Neil of SydneyAugust 26, 2015 at 9:49 am

    No, I was not giving the Labor story, the points I listed above came from a submission GMH made to the Productivity Commission.

    Still cannot work out what your point is. Funding for GMH was there until 2020.

    Why didn’t Rudd/Gillard stop Ford from leaving?

60. KeithAugust 26, 2015 at 11:15 am

    My point about GMH is that at the time they felt they were being driven out of Australia. Confirmed by what motoring journalist Will Hagan stated at the time. I did follow the matter quite closely at the time. I began to store many references after the Abbott gang were elected; my main interest being in relation to climate change. Sadly, the GMH submission has been taken off the web; but, some of the points raised by GMH are still about though dismissed by the Abbott gang. Trust has been lost by your inept Abbott “government” generally as displayed by poor showing in the opinion polls from one month to the next.

    The Labor change in leadership was a dog’s breakfast. But, if the Liberal’s wish to gain a little credibility they will ditch Abbott. People would understand such a move; the Liberals need to move away from their extreme right wing view which means governing for corporations and bugger the populace. Telling the truth, and not using manipulation would be novel ways for the Abbott gang to operate.

61. Neil of SydneyAugust 26, 2015 at 11:18 am

    My point about GMH is that at the time they felt they were being driven out of Australia

    Rubbish. AS if the Coalition wanted to drive Holden from Australia and as if a multi-national company like GM has feelings. If it was profitable to stay they would have.

    Being in leftiee laa laa land helps nobody. They left because nobody wanted to buy local products.

62. Pingback: Jobs and Growth – Part 2 – Australia Awaken – ignite your torches