|
|||||
Cameron Dick misses the markDear , This Twitter incident from Wednesday last week reveals a few interesting things about the state government, and the AIP. I’m regularly back on-air with Steve Austin at 5:30 pm each Wednesday (bookmark it on your computer or smart phone) discussing state politics with Rachel Nolan. If you’ve ever listened in you’ll know it is a pretty freewheeling conversation and both of us are called on to express opinions on a wide range of subjects. If you listen to last week’s episode around 2:14 you’ll hear me unload on Scott Morrison’s financial profligacy in reacting to COVID-19 ($800 billion in additional debt by 2030 according to the Parliamentary Budget Office). I follow this up by riffing on Victoria’s debt, announced in their state budget. I’d glossed a news report and got the Victorian figure more or less right at $156 billion in 2024, but didn’t realise it was net debt, rather than gross debt. I compared it to Queensland’s gross debt of around $118 billion in 2024 (according to our report produced during the election). For some reason best known to himself, three hours later, on a parliamentary sitting day, Cameron Dick, State Treasurer, decided to tweet, calling me out for quoting net debt against gross debt. He pointed-out the gross Vic figure was $196 billion and quoted Queensland’s as $102 Billion. This made Queensland’s position look even better, which was fine by me because my point was that Victoria had jumped the shark, and while Queensland was bad, it was nothing like Victoria. So he drew attention to his own poor debt position for no rhetorical advantage But it gets worse for Dick. If you’re going to be pedantic, and have the whole resources of treasury behind you, then you should make sure you haven’t made any mistakes yourself. The Victorian figure is for 2024, but the figure Dick quoted for Queensland is this year’s – a case of comparing lemons against limes, which I was happy to point out. Unlike Dick I had a 2024 Queensland debt figure because after he had refused to provide one during the election we commissioned Gene Tunny and Joe Branigan to work it out for him, which we released as “Queensland Budget Update Report”. This minor skirmish tells us a lot about this government. It is obsessed with intimidating critics, to the point that it will criticise a critic even when it means revealing its own shortcomings. Despite a huge number of staff most aren’t competent. (Perhaps this is because it does have a huge staff: too many with too little to do lured into manufacturing work like encouraging their boss to tweet when he has nothing substantive to say, or perhaps grabbing the password to the social media account and doing it themselves). It also tells you that the AIP has made a mark. For too long elections have been fought by the ALP, the Greens and their union and community group allies on one side, and just the LNP and some minor parties on the other. It makes it look like there is the community, and then the “conservatives” and suppresses the influence of the silent majority. The whole purpose of the AIP is to broaden the debate and show that there are good arguments supporting policies that support individuals and individual rights, are financially sound and lead to increased individual and community well-being. This year has been the biggest for us so far. Highlights include:
We now face 4 more years of Labor government in this state. We’ll have a better idea of what that will look like after Cameron Dick delivers his budget today, and actually gives us some forward estimates. I can only hope that his budget will be more fiscally conservative than Victoria’s (which deservedly sees its credit-rating under review). It is our job to push for good policy. Three and a half years ago we published out Ten Big Ideas document. Early next year will be a good time to review it. Most of the big ideas have worn well, but I think we might have to rethink some. Maybe we need to ditch our coal-fired power station in favour of nuclear and hydro. When we do review the ideas we’ll ensure members get to have their say. The basis for the Ten Big Ideas was that Queensland should be as competitive as possible, maximising its strengths. As part of a functioning federation it should be able to innovate its way to a higher standard of living. COVID-19 has been poorly handled by state and federal governments, but the disruption to our way of living and thinking brings some opportunities as well as risks. The risks are pretty obvious – nanny state governments want to intrude into more areas of our life than ever before while they are dysfunctionally risk-averse in some areas, like health, and completely reckless in others, like finance. At the same time there have been some experiments in deregulation that appear to have paid-off, and some changes in habit, such as working from home and Zoom meetings, that may lead to a more flexible and satisfied workforce. There has also been a mountain of poor and contradictory government regulations which should convince anyone who thinks about it hard enough that there are very definite limits to government, and that the best government is limited government. The way that societies have been so easily disrupted and re-organised, with citizens co-opted into abandoning their own economic self-interest, has also been observed by radical groups for whom panics are integral to resetting society. We can also expect a decrease in living standards to contribute to higher levels of social unrest, as we have recently seen in the USA, and to a lesser extent here. As a champion of the individual and a decentralised, resilient society, the AIP needs to ensure that the right lessons are learned from COVID, and that politicians are encouraged to be courageous and implement good policy. Since the 70s Australia has become significantly richer. This was because of a good policy mix which unleashed individuals and companies to follow their own ideas and needs. If it wasn’t for this good policy, legislated by both left and right, we wouldn’t have been in a position to spend as we have during this crisis. But being rich enough to be profligate doesn’t mean that the ideas and techniques that gave us this wealth have become irrelevant. They’re more relevant than ever before, even if the lessons we learned 40 years ago have to be relearned. Regards, GRAHAM YOUNG 
|
||
|
|||||
 |