Commission of Audit released Today.

http://ncoa.gov.au/

Had a quick look. So far it's been more interesting reading comments on some of the news sites. Lefties screaming about rich CEO's setting the agenda, Righties saying it was all labors fault that we are in this.

I lean right, especially after the last 6 years of Labor. However, need time to consider the report and see what I think.

Thoughts?
 
I lean right, especially after the last 6 years of Labor. However, need time to consider the report and see what I think.

Thoughts?
It's a bit of a shocker of a report. Ideas like cutting the minimum wage are unproductive considering it won't help the budget bottom line.

I think that Howards selling of government assets temporarily hid fundamental underlying problems with the budget... that as a country our government spends more than it makes. This is not labors mess that the current government inherited. This is a structural issue that has been present at least since Howard. The only way to address is to wind back spending over time and to increase revenues over time. The focus is on cutting spending, but that won?t fix this problem. The other idea floated is to increase taxes... but that might not be necessary. I would first look at some of the deductions made by higher income earners and see if winding some of those back would assist in bringing back the budget into structural surplus.

In terms of the report, I don't agree with selling off all the government assets it recommends. But I do agree with abolishing some govt deparments and merging others. Govt depts are pretty expensive to run and we don't need as many as we have.
 
You gotta laugh at this report. The people of Australia will now understand the true meaning of the Liberals. Oh well, the govt was elected by a majoity.....enjoy!
 
I received in the mail yesterday from the state gov asking for consultation about how to reduce their debt of i think $80 billions.

Either to sell assets, raise tax and/or reduce services.

Then i think if it was me with my personal finance and if i was in debt what i would do: i would spend less, earn more and if the interest bill is too high then i would have to sell some of my assets to reduce debt. What else can one do ?

What would you do ?

Ta

Anne
 
You can be in debt and enjoy a high standard of living. Most property investors are. It's not a problem.
 
It's a nice party trick. Scare people with this report so that when the actual budget is announced, we think "oh, it's not as bad we thought". I feel embarrassed to associate with this country when I read things like this. What a shame :rolleyes:
 
Australia will go backwards....we will all suffer either directly or indirectly by this govt. You can envisage more crime as things get tougher.
 
Giving the states genuine power to raise their own taxes is a great idea. It would also allow the federal government to reduce situations where they are co-funding state responsibilities like health and education, and stop the blame game when government services fall short of public expectations. I doubt we'll ever have a political party/s brave enough to push for such a reform though.
 
I have not read the Audit report yet.

But, I think there is wastage in government driven in the past by interests demanded successfully by special interest groups. So, unfortunately for people working for governments when some special interest groups fall out of 'fashion', diverting government resources from those areas will translate to 'cuts'. Anyway, it seems Labor was already reducing the number of public servants when the Coalition won government and discovered that it was happening in earnest.

The recommendation to pull back the scope of Abbott's visionary PPL is a good idea. Abbott's ego will have to make a 'contribution' if everyone else is subject to a levy.

Levy is a good idea to reduce the need for a larger cut on welfare programs. Those who have steady earnings are ahead of those who have to rely on welfare.

Revisiting the conditions for getting welfare payments is always a good idea. Access to entitlements should not be the first port of call but a safety net after an approach based on self-reliance is exhausted.

It is understandable that the Opposition is there to present a negative perspective on every government initiative. Government will fall or succeed on its own record of performance. In the first year of government, the Coalition cannot afford to take the 'easy' and 'political' way of doing things, a la Labor style with debt. Government can only borrow to 'spend', not produce directly like a business. It's serviceability is credible because of its power of taxation. Australia does not have a reserve currency like the US and cannot afford to try and copy failed financial systems of most of the developed nations.

Australia's interest on its debt for 2013 financial year was mentioned as $12.5 billion. The government is already in deficits for the foreseeable future. It can stretch the last leg with more debt because it is not as bad as other countries based on debt as a proportion of GDP. But to go down that path is joining nations with bad financial records - not a good league. Unlike a nation, there is no way a bank will lend to anyone who spends more than he can earn without additional collaterals and guarantees.

All property investors have to be assessed by the banks as able to service their debts. Nations are more credible and reliable debtors assuming they have taxation power and are prepared to use it! With the proposed levy, Australia's AAA sovereign financial rating will be secure! :D
 
When either side of politics (or the tabloid media) whip up a bit of hysteria, Ross Gittins is usually pretty good at hosing it down. He even on occasions hoses down the stuff writers on his own paper say.

I like the title of his piece today: Be afraid, but only mildly so.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...afraid-but-only-mildly-so-20140501-zr2qn.html

Here's a bit of it:

Audit reports are never put into practice because they are commissioned from worthies who make radical proposals no politician hoping for re-election would ever implement. The cuts we do see in the budget will have been worked up by the professionals: Treasury and Finance.

This report?s proposals go so far over the top ? are so impolitic, impractical and improbable ? that today is the last you will hear of most of its 86 recommendations
 
When either side of politics (or the tabloid media) whip up a bit of hysteria, Ross Gittins is usually pretty good at hosing it down.

He also goes onto say this -

What distinguishes this report from its predecessors is the blatancy of its commissioning. It comes from an "independent" inquiry effectively handed over to just one business lobby group, the one composed of the most highly paid chief executives in the country, the (big) Business Council.

Not surprisingly, the commission found ways to solve our budget problem at the expense of almost everyone bar the top "1 per cent" whose interests the council represents. Speaking as a near one percenter myself, there's little in its 86 recommendations that would make a dent on my pocket


* * *

Imo "Independent" reports to the government (any government) are always a matter of convenience.

If the government doesn't like what is written, they can wash their hands of it. After all, it is not an official government policy document, it is "independent".

Otoh, if the overnment does like what is written, then they can crow about its apolitical objectiveness. After all, it is not an official government policy document, it is "independent".

The Productivity Commission (an independent statutory authority) has been used that way for years.
 
Last edited:
Common ploy, not restricted to politics. Fear is whipped up ahead of an unpleasant announcement so that the actual one is seen as good news.

Expect a sigh of relief on budget day.
 
Can someone correct me if I am wrong but was not the audit only commissioned to look at ways to cut expenditure and not look at areas that should possibly be increased?

If that is correct and noting who the commissioners were, why is so much attention placed on its release?
 
Back
Top