The Australia Institute Feed Items

Too often other Australian governments kowtow to the gas and coal industry. But, heading into a tough state election, Queensland Premier Steven Miles is bucking the trend.

The Queensland Government’s decision to boost coal royalties and stand up to the inevitable industry scare campaign has already paid off big time for Queenslanders.

In 2022, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine sent commodity prices soaring and the Queensland Labor government changed its royalty scheme so a greater portion of the windfall was paid to the community. The Australia Institute estimates that the revised policy raised $4.3 billion in revenue in 2022-23.

This money, that would otherwise have gone to multinational shareholders, is mainly being spent on better public services. All Queenslanders will receive a $1,000 rebate on their power bills (on top of the $300 rebate the Commonwealth is giving) and, for the next six months, everyone in South East Queensland will enjoy a reduction of public transport fares to just 50 cents.

It has also pledged to pour $1 billion over five years into a health strategy for women and girls aimed at achieving gender equality. This will include Australia’s first publicly funded endometriosis and pelvic pain clinic, expanded access to IVF, and free period products in all state schools.

Treasurer Jim Chalmers said “any growth is welcome” at his recent press conference on Australia’s March quarter economic performance.

But the Treasurer was surely hoping to welcome a little more than the 0.1 per cent gross domestic product (GDP) growth we got.

“It’s really hard to sugar coat this,” said Australia Institute Chief Economist Greg Jericho.

“It’s a rounding error away from nothing.”

The story gets worse when you exclude population growth, with GDP per capita falling 0.4 per cent in the March quarter.

“That was the fifth quarter in a row that our economy has contracted on a per capita basis,” Jericho said.

“The last time that happened? Ah, it’s never happened before…”

Treasurer Chalmers described the weak growth as “the inevitable consequence of these rate rises which are in the system.”

Apparently the RBA thinks there is too much demand in the economy. Have they seen the latest GDP figures????

My column. https://t.co/qKdhTKzKXr

— Greg Jericho (@GrogsGamut) June 5, 2024

The Wrap with Ebony Bennett

Australia is a big country.

We’re the 12th largest economy in the world. We’re the third largest exporter of fossil fuels. We’re a country that’s also a continent.

But too often, we act small.

Some might argue that there’s not a great deal Australia can do about issues beyond our borders. But Australia matters.

Here at the Australia Institute, we have a 30-year track record of bringing big ideas and big thinkers into Australia’s public policy debate to help Australia think big.

That’s why we’re delighted to be hosting Nobel Prize-winning economist Professor Joseph Stiglitz for his ‘Economics and the Good Society’ national speaking tour, as part of our 30th anniversary celebrations.

It’s also why I was so proud this week to launch The Odd Couple: the Australia-America relationship, a new book by our International & Security Affairs Director, Allan Behm.

America needs a friend, not a flunkey, and Australia may become its best ally.

Join International & Security Affairs Director Allan Behm on a tour for his book ‘The Odd Couple: The Australia-America Relationship’

Coming to cities across Australia!#auspol @Mirandaprorsus pic.twitter.com/Q9i9GTLkKy

Would the divestiture powers proposed by the Federal Opposition and supported by the Greens help keep inflation down? And what impact will the new and improved stage three tax cuts have in the economy? On this episode of Dollars & Sense, Australia Institute Senior Economist Matt Grudnoff talks about supermarket divestiture and the changes brought in with the new financial year.

Host: Matt Grudnoff, Senior Economist, the Australia Institute // @MattGrudnoff

Host: Elinor Johnston-Leek, Senior Content Producer, the Australia Institute // @ElinorJ_L

Theme music: Blue Dot Sessions

We’d love to hear your feedback on this series, so send in your questions, comments or suggestions for future episodes to podcasts@australiainstitute.org.au.

The post Supermarxist? Dutton and the duopoly appeared first on The Australia Institute.

Unsurprisingly, the RBA’s call to keep rates unchanged was met by some in the media and conservative commentariat as a failure to be tough. Some would prefer the RBA to be less concerned about the risk of a recession or rising unemployment than getting inflation from 3.6% to below 3%.

Such views are much easier to make when your own job is safe and your income is very comfortable.

It is worth remembering that in the past two years the share of household income spent on mortgage repayments has risen by the amount it did in five years during the mining boom, and by more than occurred in the run-up to the 1990s recession:

Oil and gas extraction in South Australia employs just 833 people, 0.1% of SA jobs. Petroleum royalties make up 0.4% of the state budget. On oil and gas production worth $1.7 billion in 2021-22, the industry paid at most $99 million in federal tax, of which Santos paid zero.

Despite this, the industry has significant influence in the state.

The post The oil and gas industry in South Australia appeared first on The Australia Institute.

Will the government’s political finance reforms keep vested interests out of politics or ensure the major parties dominate Australia’s political landscape? Could South Australia’s proposed political donations ban become a model for the rest of the country? And what home-grown innovations have insulated Australia from some of the democratic backsliding seen in the United States? On this episode of Follow the Money, the Australia Institute’s Democracy & Accountability Director Bill Browne joins Ebony Bennett to discuss political finance reform.

This discussion was recorded on Tuesday 2 July 2024 and things may have changed since recording.

Guest: Bill Browne, Director, Democracy & Accountability program, the Australia Institute // @Browne90

Host: Ebony Bennett, Deputy Director, the Australia Institute // @ebony_bennett

Show notes:

Principles for fair political finance reform by Bill Browne, The Australia Institute (August 2023)

The Coalition’s proposed divestiture powers to break up major hardware and grocery retailers could help keep inflation down and assist with cost-of-living pressures.

“The introduction of divestiture laws is a sensible tool to stop large companies like Woolworths and Coles misusing their market power. It would be good for prices at the checkout and help keep inflation down,” said Matt Grudnoff, Senior Economist at the Australia Institute.

“Research from the Australia Institute’s Centre for Future Work, released at the beginning of 2023, showed that corporate profits, not wages, were the major driver of the burst of inflation in Australia that followed the Covid lockdowns.

“The Australian economy has become less competitive over the last few decades and these laws would go some way to addressing that structural imbalance.

“Our current competition laws have few ways of making an already uncompetitive industry more competitive.

“Divestiture powers will enable the government to break up large businesses abusing their market power and force them to compete, leading to lower prices and better service for consumers.

“In other economies, including the UK and the US, broad ranging divestiture powers are already in place. If adopted in Australia, these new powers would just bring us into line with other OECD countries.”

What does the release of Julian Assange reveal about the Australia-US relationship? And is Trump’s authoritarian behaviour really an outlier in American political history?

On the first episode of After America, Dr Emma Shortis reflects on the first presidential debate performance and the release of Julian Assange, before former BBC United States correspondent Nick Bryant joins the show to discuss the country’s long history of authoritarianism.

This discussion was recorded on Tuesday 25 June and Monday 1 July 2024 and things may have changed since recording.

australiainstitute.org.au // @theausinstitute

Guest: Nick Bryant, former BBC correspondent and author of The Forever War: America’s Unending Conflict with Itself // @NickBryantNY

Host: Emma Shortis, Senior Research for International & Security Affairs, the Australia Institute // @EmmaShortis

Show notes:

The Forever War: America’s Unending Conflict with Itself by Nick Bryant (June 2024)

The changes coming into effect from today – under the federal government’s Closing Loopholes Act – guarantee the rights of volunteer union delegates to represent workers and paid training leave.

The Centre for Future Work’s Carmichael Centre analysis found employees wanted their union to cooperate with employers and vice versa, and that giving workplace delegates a greater voice made this more likely.

“Those who claim that guaranteeing the rights of union delegates must lead to greater conflict are dead wrong,” said Professor David Peetz, research fellow and author of Employee voice and new rights for workplace union delegates.

“Workers expect their union and employer to cooperate effectively to solve problems, and reach agreements over pay and conditions, in both parties’ mutual interests.

“Well trained delegates are best-placed to represent workers. They don’t acquiesce but they do cooperate. After all, they know it’s in workers’ interests for workplace productivity to rise.”

The paper found this could help boost productivity, which on average was at least as high in unionised as in non-union workplaces. Strong representation and consultation made workers less resistant to productivity-boosting technology including artificial intelligence.

In the past, many volunteer union delegates have been obstructed from properly doing their job to allow employees’ voices to be heard in the workplace. Now, their rights will be guaranteed.

Some employers have actively placed barriers in the way of volunteer union delegates and paid officials. One study in the early 2000s found that 23% of delegates found management
hostile, while 22% of delegates reported that management opposition to their role as a delegate had become more intense over the previous two years. Examples from various case studies, including court and industrial cases, illustrate some of the ways in which that minority of employers from workplaces with delegates expressed their hostility towards unionism and their opposition to delegates, including by placing barriers in the way of workplace union activists and delegates.

The new regime of workplace delegates’ rights is very likely, overall, to increase the voice of employees, and thereby have positive consequences, over the long run, for pay and conditions, union membership, workplace cooperation, grievance resolution and productivity. However, the effects of new rights for paid union training leave depend very much on union responses, in particular on their subsequent reliance on classroom versus informal training and the ‘follow up’ of classroom education.

The post Employee voice and new rights for workplace union delegates appeared first on The Australia Institute.

The latest inflation figures that saw annual inflation rise from 3.6% to 4.0% in May have caused some economists and commentators to argue the Reserve Bank needs to raise interest rates.  However new data from the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations on enterprise agreements shows yet again that wage growth and increased income are not fueling inflation and thus an interest rate rise would do more harm than good.

In the first three months of this year, 1,022 enterprise agreements were approved by the Fair Work Commissions covering some 365,000 employees. Across all these employees the average annual wage growth of the agreements was 3.9%, down from 4.4% in the last three months of 2023.

Among private sector workers, the average agreed annual wage rise fell from 3.9% to 3.6% – a rate in line with the 3.6% annual inflation in the first three months of 2024.

The figures demonstrate yet again that wage growth has not driven inflation. Indeed a rate of 3.6% would see workers’ real wage fall after taxation and interaction with entitlements.

Poverty has long-lasting and insidious impacts on a child’s health and well-being and can affect their schooling and employment opportunities throughout their entire lifetime. Given that the low rate of income support payments keeps many families in poverty, reducing child poverty is not inherently complicated. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Australian Government managed to lift 650,000 Australians, including children, out of poverty overnight by supplementing existing income support payments.

The Australia Institute recently conducted polling to determine community attitudes towards child poverty in Australia. This polling found that respondents were overwhelmingly supportive of government measures to reduce child poverty, including:

With emissions reduction efforts stalled and energy bills spiking, why is Australia’s political class talking about nuclear plants that wouldn’t be ready for decades? On this episode of Dollars & Sense, Greg Jericho addresses the Coalition’s nuclear ‘nothingburger’ and what’s happening in Australia’s decarbonisation process.

Greg Jericho is Chief Economist at the Australia Institute and the Centre for Future Work and popular columnist of Grogonomics with Guardian Australia. Each week on Dollars & Sense, Greg dives into the latest economic figures to explain what they can tell us about what’s happening in the economy, how it will impact you and where things are headed.

Host: Greg Jericho, Chief Economist, the Australia Institute and Centre for Future Work // @GrogsGamut

Host: Elinor Johnston-Leek, Senior Content Producer, the Australia Institute // @ElinorJ_L

Theme music: Blue Dot Sessions

The Federal Government has no official definition or measure for tracking and reporting on national poverty levels.

Key findings:

• Four in five Australians (83%) want the Federal Government to regularly measure and report on poverty rates in Australia.
• An overwhelming majority of Australians (81%) agree that income support payments should be set at a rate that does not cause any child to live in poverty.
• Australians are highly concerned that Australia has a high child poverty rate compared to other developed countries (69%), and about the effects of this on health and lifespan (83%) as well as education and employment (85%).
• One in six Australian children (about 761,000 children) live in poverty according to research from ACOSS and UNSW.
• The OECD finds that Australia’s youth poverty rate is the 13th-highest among member nations, surpassing the UK, Germany and Canada.

“There is no excuse for a country as rich as Australia to have one in six children growing up in poverty,” said Greg Jericho, Chief Economist at the Australia Institute.

“Adopting an official definition of poverty in line with the OECD or European Union – either half or 60 per cent of median income – would provide important information to inform government policy and would allow public oversight to keep elected representatives accountable.

Who will benefit most from the Coalition’s new nuclear energy plan? And why does the media fall into the trap of covering it like genuine policy? On this episode of Follow the Money, the Australia Institute’s Dr Matt Ryan and Rod Campbell discuss the Coalition’s nuclear announcement and the cost of Australia’s failure to decarbonise.

This discussion was recorded on Tuesday 25 June 2024 and things may have changed since recording.

Guest: Matt Ryan, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, the Australia Institute // @mattdjryan

Guest: Roderick Campbell, Research Director, the Australia Institute // @R_o_d_C

Host: Ebony Bennett, Deputy Director, the Australia Institute // @ebony_bennett

Theme music: Pulse and Thrum; additional music by Blue Dot Sessions

The Australia Institute surveyed a nationally representative sample of 1,005 Australians about the prosecution of Julian Assange.

Respondents were asked if they think the Federal Government is doing too much or too little to secure the release of Australian citizen Julian Assange.

• One in three Australians (34%) think that the Federal Government is doing too little to secure the release of Julian Assange, the single most popular choice.
• Australians are more likely to answer “Don’t know / Not sure” (31%) than that the Federal Government is doing the right amount (24%) or too much (11%).
• Three times as many Australians think the Federal Government is doing too little to secure the release of Assange as think it is doing too much (34% vs 11%).
• Labor voters are as likely as Australians overall to think that the Federal Government is doing too little to secure the release of Assange (33% vs 34%).
• The single most popular response among Labor, Coalition, Greens and One Nation voters is that the Federal Government is doing too little.

The post Polling – Prosecution of Assange appeared first on The Australia Institute.

“To have that message then sitting alongside the pursuit of an Australian publisher for the publication of information that embarrassed the United States, really became irreconcilable and I think exposed some of the hypocrisy of that relationship and of the United States in particular.”

– International & Security Affairs Senior Researcher Dr Emma Shortis

The post What Assange means for the AUS/US relationship – Dr Emma Shortis on ABC News | Video appeared first on The Australia Institute.

The Australia Institute conducted a national poll of 1,005 people, between 21 May to 23 May 2024, about the United States’ prosecution of Australian publisher and founder of Wikileaks Julian Assange, currently imprisoned and facing extradition to the United States.

Key Findings

Climate & Energy Director Polly Hemming and Research Director Rod Campbell are here to unpack the spin, and give you the facts.

The post The Minerals Council REALLY wants you to feel good about coal: Spin Bin | Video appeared first on The Australia Institute.

The Wrap with Ebony Bennett

This week, Peter Dutton finally released the Coalition’s nuclear power strategy.

Well, sort of…

The Opposition Leader’s uncosted ‘plan’ offers very little detail, while committing Australia to the most expensive form of new energy to build and eschewing cheap and abundant renewables.

“This is the most expensive form of new energy to build, that’ll push up electricity prices. In the meantime we going to see much more polluting fossil fuels staying in the national electricity market for longer.”@ebony_bennett joins @abcnews Breakfast. #nuclear #auspol pic.twitter.com/GfEgzxNGgD

— Australia Institute (@TheAusInstitute) June 19, 2024

When they were last in office, the Coalition had trouble building all the car parks that they promised, so the idea that seven nuclear plants are going to be built from scratch – in a country with next-to-no existing nuclear workforce – is very hard to believe.

Workers’ compensation and rehabilitation are amongst the most important legal issues facing the ‘gig’ economy. This reflects the potential vulnerability of these workers and their families, co-workers, and community to harsh and long term consequences from injuries. For a while, it looked like federal industrial policy might ‘solve’ the workers compensation problem by redefining ‘gig’/platform workers as employees.

However, the policy decision to enshrine minimum rights for a separate ‘employee-like’ category of workers leaves gig workers outside the scope of workers compensation protections.

In this discussion we will hear from those researching and advising on the reforms necessary to better protect injured gig workers, a worker who has been seriously injured, and those who are organising and advocating for policy and law reform.

Free Event – Register Now

Speakers:

• Michael Kaine – National Secretary Transport Workers’ Union
• Professor Emeritus David Peetz – Carmichael Centre’s Laurie Carmichael Distinguished Research Fellow.

When:
Thursday, July 18, 2024 at 12:30 pm AEST

Where:
Zoom

What is driving the current uncertainty about the country’s economic trajectory? Why did the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) decide to keep interest rates on hold? And what does the latest data reveal about workplace gender inequality? On this episode of Dollars & Sense, Greg Jericho reflects on the latest interest rate announcement and the barriers to closing the gender pay gap.

Greg Jericho is Chief Economist at the Australia Institute and the Centre for Future Work and popular columnist of Grogonomics with Guardian Australia. Each week on Dollars & Sense, Greg dives into the latest economic figures to explain what they can tell us about what’s happening in the economy, how it will impact you and where things are headed.

Host: Greg Jericho, Chief Economist, the Australia Institute and Centre for Future Work // @GrogsGamut

Host: Elinor Johnston-Leek, Senior Content Producer, the Australia Institute

Theme music: Blue Dot Sessions

Rising demand as the world emerged from COVID-19 lockdowns, coupled with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, has led to massive windfall profits for the gas industry. But according to new Australia Institute research, the gas companies aren’t paying royalties on most of the gas they export.

So what exactly is happening to Australia’s gas? How do we compare with other major fossil fuel exporters when it comes to collecting royalties? And what would it take to ensure Australians get a better deal for our gas? On this episode of Follow the Money, the Australia Institute’s Mark Ogge joins Ebony Bennett to discuss Australia’s great gas giveaway.

You can sign our petition calling on the government to collect royalties on Australia’s gas exports on our website.

This discussion was recorded on Tuesday 18 June 2024 and things may have changed since recording.

Guest: Mark Ogge, Principal Advisor, the Australia Institute // @MarkOgge

Host: Ebony Bennett, Deputy Director, the Australia Institute // @ebony_bennett

Theme music: Pulse and Thrum; additional music by Blue Dot Sessions

The results show that most Australians are not prepared to pay anything extra to have nuclear power in the mix.

Key Findings

• Two in three Australians (65%) are not prepared to pay anything extra to have nuclear power in the mix.
• Only one in 20 Australians (4%) are prepared to pay more than $500 per year to have nuclear power in the mix.
• One in five Australians (19%) are prepared to pay up to $250 (13%) or up to $500 per year (6%) to have nuclear power in the mix.
• Across the four large states, between 61% and 69% of residents are not prepared to pay anything extra to have nuclear power in the mix.
• Most Australians are not prepared to pay anything extra to have nuclear power in the mix, regardless of voting intention.

The post Polling – Willingness to pay for nuclear appeared first on The Australia Institute.

The research finds only one in 20 voters (4%) are prepared to pay more than $500 extra per year for nuclear power, highlighting a lack of support for the technology.

Key Findings

• A majority of Australians (65%) are not prepared to pay anything extra to have nuclear power in the mix, regardless of voting intention.
• A majority of residents in NSW (61%), QLD (64%), VIC (68%) and WA (69%) are not prepared to pay anything extra for nuclear power, although each is set to host a nuclear reactor under the Coalition’s plan.
• Only one in five Australians (19%) are prepared to pay up to $250 (13%) or up to $500 per year (6%) to have nuclear power in the mix.

“Our research shows that most Australians have absolutely no appetite when it comes to paying more money to put nuclear power into the energy mix,” said Dr Richard Denniss, Executive Director of the Australia Institute.

“CSIRO research shows that electricity from nuclear power is significantly more expensive than from renewables. The Coalition’s plan is completely uncosted, meaning we have no idea how much this will cost taxpayers when it comes to construction or to their power bills.

“The numbers are clear: Residents across the country, regardless of who they vote for, don’t support a nuclear future that requires them pay more for electricity than they already do.”

The Seamless Scheme

On June 18, 2024, the Federal Government announced that Seamless, a clothing product stewardship scheme to make Australian clothing circular by 2030, will be operational on July 1, 2024. The scheme is tasked with addressing the critical problems facing the clothing industry, with over 200,000 tonnes of waste ending up in Australian landfill annually. 62 brands will be signed up as members of the scheme by the time it officially launches. It’s commendable that the Government has taken the initiative to back a scheme addressing Australia’s enormous textiles waste problem.

From July 1, members of Seamless will contribute $0.04 for each new garment placed on the Australian market. $0.04 is not nearly enough of what is needed for the reuse, collection, sorting, decommissioning, recycling, transportation, labour and other costs involved in creating a circular clothing industry in Australia by 2030.

Instead, a contribution of $0.50 for each new garment (a more than 12-fold increase on the current proposal) is a more realistic figure that could support the above-mentioned circular operations. And indeed, there is speculation that the $0.04 levy of Seamless will be raised to a higher fee in the future. In its first 12 months, however, it is likely the initial goals Seamless may instead focus on developing better circular design practices.

The groups say the 2024 State of the Environment Report must be made public before the Government settles its Budget in September and before parliament debates changes that could see the logging of 39,000 additional hectares of native forest, and the over-development of some of the state’s most beautiful coastal beauty spots.

On Wednesday, Tasmanian Planning Minister Felix Ellis allowed a further delay for the Tasmanian Planning Commission to deliver the report, pushing the due date out to August 31.

Consequently, the groups are now concerned the Minister may not table the SOE Report before the parliament rises for the year on November 15, which would mean the report may not be made public until the first sitting week of 2025, which isn’t until next March.

“This delay is yet another example of environmental neglect by the state government, which is threatening the Tasmanian way of life,” said Eloise Carr, the Australia Institute’s Tasmanian Director.

“Chronic underfunding has delayed the report for a decade, and it continues to be delayed for this reason. The funding the Tasmanian Planning Commission received for this report was about one-third of the money it cost to produce the report in 2009.

“The government now needs to commit appropriate funding to implement the report’s recommended actions in this year’s Budget and the Minister should also commit to releasing the report as soon as it is received.

The tour will see Professor Stiglitz speak at events across the country; one of several major speaking tours hosted by the Australia Institute to mark its 30th anniversary.

“Professor Joseph Stiglitz is not only one of the world’s leading economists; he has a unique ability to communicate complex economic ideas in an engaging and informative way. Professor Stiglitz’s imagination and clarity are just what Australia’s public debate needs as we face a cost-of-living crisis, a climate crisis, and declining faith in democracy,” said Dr Richard Denniss, Executive Director at the Australia Institute.

“During his last visit, Professor Stiglitz spoke forcefully about the need for Australia to reconsider the Stage 3 tax cuts and made a strong case for a windfall profits tax on the fossil fuel industry. While the government has delivered much-needed reforms to Stage 3, there is clearly still a lot of room for improvement in the way Australia taxes its gas and coal exports.

“We look forward to welcoming one of the world’s most respected economists and policy advisers back to Australia to help Australians better understand the challenges and the opportunities that face us.

“The Australia Institute is delighted to host Professor Stiglitz at such an important time in Australia’s policy debate, and we are thrilled he can join us to celebrate our 30 years of big ideas,” said Dr Denniss.

The latest taxation statistics released today by the ATO reveal that while the overall gender pay gap might be closing, when we examine the gap across occupations, women continue to earn less than men in almost all occupations.

The taxation statistics reveal the earnings each person makes in a financial year. The figure therefore gives an honest account of how much people actually earn for their labour. Because it is the total amount earned over a year, the amounts take into account those who may earn the same hourly rate but who work fewer hours.

The results are damning for gender pay.

Men had a higher average salary in 368 of the 383 occupation groups. This 96% result is the same as was the case in 2020-21.

The good news (such as it is) is that the gender pay gap improved in 59% of occupations, but it worsened in 41%.

The figures also show that higher-paid occupations are more likely to be male-dominated. Among the 77 highest-paid occupations, where the average salary was above $100,000, only 2 were jobs where women make up more than 60% of the workforce. By contrast 40 of the 70 lowest-paid occupations, where the average salary was less than $45,000, were jobs where women make up more than 60% of the workforce.

In every occupation that had an average salary above $100,000 men had a higher average salary than women, and in only 2 of the top 225 paying occupations did women have a higher average salary.

There are two main ways of participating in cooperative housing: as an owner-occupier (which includes selling rights) or as a ‘non-equity’ renter. In Sweden, owner-occupiers have unlimited occupancy rights (so long as members fulfil their obligations) while renters get more secure tenancy than they would have in the private market.

Although subject to market prices, cooperative dwellings in Sweden, Norway and Denmark are some of the most cost-efficient, good quality, well-maintained and secure forms of housing.

Australians buy an average of 56 new clothing items a year, more than the US (53), UK (33) and China (30).

Circular Economy & Waste Program Director NinaGbor on The Today Show

The post Australians buy more clothes than any other country | Video appeared first on The Australia Institute.

Isn’t a surplus in the current economic climate a good thing? What causes productivity growth? And how do other nations measure unemployment? On this episode of Dollars & Sense, Greg Jericho answers your questions and explains why some commentators are getting giddy for Canadian rate cuts.

Greg Jericho is Chief Economist at the Australia Institute and the Centre for Future Work and popular columnist of Grogonomics with Guardian Australia. Each week on Dollars & Sense, Greg dives into the latest economic figures to explain what they can tell us about what’s happening in the economy, how it will impact you and where things are headed.

Host: Greg Jericho, Chief Economist, the Australia Institute and Centre for Future Work // @GrogsGamut

Producer: Jennifer Macey // @jennifermacey

Theme music: Blue Dot Sessions

Key Points:

• Expenditure caps should account for the taxpayer-funded incumbency benefits MPs enjoy that their challengers do not:
  • Parties that run candidates in most or all seats and in both houses of Parliament can “pile in” funding to target areas, effectively allowing them to exceed the spending cap.
  • New entrants have fixed costs that established parties can spread across many seats, meaning new entrants must spend more to catch up to a major party rival.
• If parties are to receive administrative funding from the taxpayer, it should be based on the actual costs of running a political party – not how many MPs a party has.
• In South Australia, major parties are less dependent on political donations than new entrants because the parties receive significant public funding:
  • Premier Malinauskas has flagged changes to public funding to make allowances for new entrants, who under current laws cannot access public funding until the election is over.

“It is heartening that Premier Malinauskas has identified a level playing field for new entrants as the number one concern of political finance reform, even ahead of a possible High Court challenge,” said Bill Browne, Director of the Australia Institute’s Democracy & Accountability Program.

“South Australia has a proud history of electoral reform, including universal suffrage and preferential voting. The Malinauskas Government’s new bill could follow that legacy, but only if it safeguards diverse voices.

This American presidential election will be unique for many reasons, not the least of which is Donald Trump becoming the first American president to be found guilty of a crime. So what impact – if any – will that have on the outcome? Is Biden going to be able to mobilise enough support in key states to win a second term? And what might another Trump presidency mean for Australia? On this episode of Follow the Money, the Australia Institute’s Emma Shortis joins Ebony Bennett to discuss US politics after her recent trip to Washington DC.

This discussion was recorded on Tuesday 11 June 2024 and things may have changed since recording.

Guest: Emma Shortis, Senior Researcher in International & Security Affairs, the Australia Institute // @EmmaShortis

Host: Ebony Bennett, Deputy Director, the Australia Institute // @ebony_bennett

Producer: Jennifer Macey // @jennifermacey

Theme music: Pulse and Thrum; additional music by Blue Dot Sessions

To hear Machiavelli tell it, 16th century Italy was plagued by expensive, flashy contractors who bled the public, failed to deliver what they promised and then turned around and robbed the ones who paid them.

Those faults will ring a bell for those who have followed the consulting firm scandals exposed over the past year, including misusing government secrets and taking money for buried reports. With the inquiry into the NSW Government’s use and management of consulting services releasing its damning findings earlier this week, and the Senate inquiry into consulting service integrity due any day now, fresh light has been cast on the behaviour of these large, well-paid government contractors – and the picture is no prettier than it was in Machiavelli’s day.

Of course, by contractors Machiavelli meant the mercenary captains whose private armies did most of the city-states’ fighting, but the word, condottieri, literally means contractors, and the parallels are remarkable.

Like the mercenaries, today’s consultants favour style over substance. Academics Mariana Mazzucato and Rosie Collington call this “the Big Con”: the undeserved confidence of consultants tricks clients, journalists, politicians and the public into placing more trust in their words than they deserve. The Renaissance equivalent was for mercenary companies to fight flashy but ineffectual battles. A colourful, if apocryphal, tale has it that at the 1440 Battle of Anghiari mercenary companies fought round the clock with only one death: when a soldier fell off his horse.

The Wrap with Ebony Bennett

Senator David Pocock made headlines last week when, in a press conference at Parliament House, he called gas companies “leeches” that are getting away with “state-sanctioned daylight robbery”.

As Dr Monique Ryan said, “We are allowing multinationals to take our oil and gas and sell it off overseas at massive, massive profits and not pay tax.”

New Australia Institute research shows that governments charge no royalties on 56 per cent of the gas that’s exported from Australia.

Gas companies are getting away with state-sanctioned daylight robbery.

The value in Australian gas should be used to build a better future for Australians, not to inflate the profits of multinationals. pic.twitter.com/wD5XU5WG0N

— David Pocock (@DavidPocock) May 30, 2024

This means that Australians have missed out on at least $13 billion in royalties over the last four years.

Remember that figure next time governments tell you that they can’t afford to spend more on social housing, increasing Jobseeker or supporting victims of domestic violence.

Treasurer Jim Chalmers said “any growth is welcome” at his recent press conference on Australia’s March quarter economic performance.

But the Treasurer was surely hoping to welcome a little more than the 0.1 per cent gross domestic product (GDP) growth we got.

“It’s really hard to sugar coat this,” said Australia Institute Chief Economist Greg Jericho.

“It’s a rounding error away from nothing.”

The story gets worse when you exclude population growth, with GDP per capita falling 0.4 per cent in the March quarter.

“That was the fifth quarter in a row that our economy has contracted on a per capita basis,” Jericho said.

“The last time that happened? Ah, it’s never happened before…”

Treasurer Chalmers described the weak growth as “the inevitable consequence of these rate rises which are in the system.”

Apparently the RBA thinks there is too much demand in the economy. Have they seen the latest GDP figures????

My column. https://t.co/qKdhTKzKXr

— Greg Jericho (@GrogsGamut) June 5, 2024

• The final report of the Robodebt Royal Commission was delayed in order to allow the Royal Commissioner to refer individuals to the NACC.
• The NACC’s decision to not investigate these public officials means further details about how Robodebt happened and who was responsible may not come to light and preventative measures may not be implemented.
• Gaps in government accountability in Australia include that:
  • The NACC can only hold public hearings under “exceptional circumstances”.
  • Whistleblowers in Australia are vulnerable to retaliation and prosecution, hampering anti-corruption investigations.
  • According to the APS Employee Census, 3,800 public servants witnessed potential corruption last year, and two-thirds of them did not report it.

“The NACC’s decision to not investigate Robodebt makes the Public Service Commission responsible for investigating these alleged wrongdoers and addressing the broader cultural problems exposed by the Royal Commission,” said Bill Browne, Director of the Australia Institute’s Democracy & Accountability Program.

“Australians will wonder why there is a disconnect between the Royal Commissioner, who delayed her report so she could refer potentially corrupt conduct, and the NACC, which decided that it was not in the public interest to investigate that conduct.

While it is true that the super scheme helps many people save for their retirement, the scheme disproportionately benefits wealthier Australians. Superannuation tax concessions come at a huge cost in foregone revenue that is growing so quickly they will soon become more expensive than the age pension. In coming years, the solution will become worse than the problem.

Reform is needed to ensure these concessions are limited to those who really need them. The income level or super balance at which tax concessions cut out should be lowered. This would lead to significant savings in forgone revenue, reduce inequality, and significantly increase the ability of the Commonwealth Government to properly fund the age pension system.

The post Who benefits? appeared first on The Australia Institute.

The report shows superannuation tax concessions help high income earners avoid tax, exacerbate income and gender inequality and come at a huge cost in foregone revenue, and recommends ending or at least limiting superannuation tax concessions for the top 10% of earners and those whose high super balances do not meet the asset criteria for the part pension.

Key findings:

• Super tax concessions cost $54.56 billion in foregone revenue during 2022-23, and disproportionately benefit the wealthy:
  • The top 20% of income earners receive more than 50% of superannuation tax concessions.
  • The share of Australian workers with a super fund above $1 million is just 2.5%, but those people made 20.1% of all personal super contributions in 2020-21.
• Removing the tax concession for both super contributions and earnings from the top 10% of earners would save more than $12 billion every year.
• Women retire with a super savings gap of nearly 25% compared with their male counterparts.
• Australia still experiences above average rates of poverty in retirement (6th highest rate of retiree poverty in the OECD)
• Superannuation tax concessions are forecast to overtake the cost of the age pension in 2045-46.

“While super tax concessions are designed to help all Australian workers saving for retirement, the distribution of these benefits is incredibly unequal,” said Dr Minh Ngoc Le, a postdoctoral research fellow at the Australia Institute.

In the latest Labour Accounts released today by the Bureau of Statistics a record, 1.106m jobs held in Australia are being worked by someone who has another job.

The more than 5% fall in real wages over the past 3 years as inflation has soared above wage growth has meant that a record 7.1% of all the jobs in Australia are someone’s second or third (or more) jobs. In the March quarter some 974,000 Australians were working in more than one job. This disparity between the number of employees working multiple jobs and the total number of “secondary jobs” implies that there is now a record number of people as well working more than 2 jobs.

This is not a sign of a healthy labour force.

While it is good that Australians are able to find work, that nearly 1 million are clearly needing to seek more hours form a secondary job suggests that there has been growing problem of working poor.

In the past year, 13% of the new jobs created have gone to someone who already has a job. Until wages consistently grow fast the prices, this trend of ever-increasing proportion of workers taking on another job to make ends meet will continue.

Particularly concerning is the increase in multiple job holders is occurring among older workers. Historically younger workers are more likely to work more than one job, but over the past year, the percentage of workers aged 35-44 holding more than one job has risen from 6.7% to 7.2%.

Since the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released their First Assessment Report in 1990, the Australian Government has subsidised fossil fuel consumption through the Fuel Tax Credits Scheme to the tune of over $200 billion. This year, the OECD called for an end to this long-standing fossil fuel subsidy.

Australia charges a fuel tax (also called a fuel excise) of around $0.49 per litre for common fuels like diesel and petrol. The Fuel Tax Credits Scheme (FTCS) offers a refund of this tax to certain fuel users.

The FTCS meets the World Trade Organisation’s criteria for a subsidy, as it involves government revenue that would otherwise be due, but is foregone or not collected.

The WTO is not alone in viewing the fuels tax credits as a subsidy. As our recent report highlighted, the OECD, the International Energy Agency (IEA), the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), Overseas Development International (ODI) and Oil Change International all recognise the FTCS as a fossil fuel subsidy.

But more importantly, not only is it recognised as a subsidy, it is also recognised as a subsidy that should end.

After multiple interest rate increases in recent years, it’s the economy – not inflation – that’s slowing, with the latest figures showing that the Australian economy grew just 0.1 per cent in the last quarter. So why is gross domestic product (GDP) growth so hard to come by at the moment? On this episode of Dollars & Sense, Greg Jericho discusses Australia’s fragile economy and how governments – and the Reserve Bank – can respond.

Greg Jericho is Chief Economist at the Australia Institute and the Centre for Future Work and popular columnist of Grogonomics with Guardian Australia. Each week on Dollars & Sense, Greg dives into the latest economic figures to explain what they can tell us about what’s happening in the economy, how it will impact you and where things are headed.

Host: Greg Jericho, Chief Economist, the Australia Institute and Centre for Future Work // @GrogsGamut

Producer: Jennifer Macey // @jennifermacey

Theme music: Blue Dot Sessions

Across the country, house prices have skyrocketed, putting the prospect of buying a home well out of reach for too many people. Rents have also soared, placing huge financial pressure on people and pushing many into homelessness. On this episode of Follow the Money, housing advocate and creator of shitrentals.org Jordan van den Berg, Maiy Azize from national housing campaign Everybody’s Home, and Australia Institute Senior Economist Matt Grudnoff examine how Australia got itself into this situation – and how it can get out of it.

This discussion was recorded on Tuesday 4 June 2024 and things may have changed since recording.

Guest: Jordan van den Berg, Lawyer and Founder of shitrentals.org // @purplepingers

Guest: Maiy Azize, National Spokesperson, Everybody’s Home // @MaiyAzize

Guest: Matt Grudnoff, Senior Economist, the Australia Institute // @MattGrudnoff

Host: Ebony Bennett, Deputy Director, the Australia Institute // @ebony_bennett

Producer: Jennifer Macey // @jennifermacey

Additional editing: Emily Perkins

On paper, the Australian Government’s Future Made in Australia plan is a great idea, making Australia a renewable energy superpower, with more capacity to make clean energy at home and for export.

But simultaneously, the Government is planning for “gas to 2050 and beyond“.

It’s a contradiction that has the potential to undermine our aspirations to become a renewable energy superpower.

Polly Hemming, Director of the Climate & Energy Program at the Australia Institute, unpacks the words and actions of the Government to paint a full picture of the plan for Australia’s energy future.

“Gas Industry Leeches”

We recently held a press conference with independent MPs David Pocock and Dr Monique Ryan, launching a new report showing that 56% of gas exported from Australia attracts zero royalty payments, effectively giving a public resource to multinational gas corporations for free.

Australia’s addiction to consultants extends from the public sector to public universities. The final report of the NSW Government inquiry into the use of consultants was released last week. The number one finding is that there is no clear and readily available public record of exactly how much the NSW Government spends on consultants – far from encouraging. If this is the situation for the NSW Government, then what does it look like for Australia’s public universities?

Public universities in Australia spend big on consultants. In 2023, universities in two states alone spent $209 million on consultants – Victorian universities spent at least $72 million while Queensland universities spent a whopping $137 million. Compare this to 2022, when just ten universities across the country spent $249 million on consultants. With amounts like these, is it any wonder then that universities have been accused of being captured by private consultancies? In the meantime, consultancy companies are increasingly partnering with universities to deliver programs, making their continued use more likely.

Oil and gas lobby group Australian Energy Producers (AEP) has published a media release claiming “record” government payments, with “industry expected to pay $17.1 billion in taxes in 2023-24”.1 This briefing note provides context for the AEP claim, and makes other criticisms such as the conflation of royalties and taxes and the unreliability of lobby group data.

The post Gas industry claims debunked appeared first on The Australia Institute.

The anti-siphoning laws, Communications Legislation Amendment (Prominence and Anti-siphoning) Bill 2024, currently before Parliament give free-to-air broadcasters the first opportunity to acquire broadcast rights for sporting events such as the AFL and the Olympic Games, however are currently limited to aerial coverage only (i.e. does not cover broadcasters’ digital streaming services.)

Key Findings:

• Majority of Australians (56%) support extending anti-siphoning laws to cover digital rights as well as aerial rights, with one in five (21%) Australians voicing strong support for extending the laws (only 12% oppose).
• Sports currently on the anti-siphoning list include the AFL, the Melbourne Cup and Australian Open, Test cricket, and the Olympic and Commonwealth Games.

“Sport plays an important role in Australia’s social fabric, and it’s clear Australia’s anti-siphoning laws need to be updated to keep pace with modern viewing habits,” said Rod Campbell, Research Director at the Australia Institute.

“Given the rise of digital streaming, Australians rightly expect free-to-air sport to be available in the manner which they consume it. It is nonsensical in this day and age to differentiate between free-to-air television broadcast via aerial and free-to-air television broadcast by digital app.

The results show that most Australians support extending anti-siphoning laws to cover digital rights as well as aerial rights.

The post Polling – Anti-siphoning laws appeared first on The Australia Institute.