The Dead Roo

The Economist never wastes words, and this week (2007-05-10) again gives credit to the last ALP federal government for economic reforms and damns Howard and Costello with faint praise.  Let’s deconstruct their statement.

Here’s the key sentence:

Thanks to reforms inherited from its Labor predecessor, its own prudent fiscal management and a revenue boom from China’s demand for Australia’s minerals, the government is blessed with an enormous fiscal surplus, low inflation, unemployment at a 33-year low and a reputation for competent economic management.

Here’s my interpretation, as a person used to reading the between-the-lines messaging from The Economist reporters:

Thanks to reforms inherited from its Labor predecessor, … Simple enough - Hawke and Keating did the hard work and improved productivity.

its own prudent fiscal management … Why did they think it necessary to add the qualifier "fiscal", rather than give them more general praise for "prudent management"?  The obvious answer is that Howard and Costello do not deserve such praise, and only know how to decrease spending relative to taxation!

and a revenue boom from China’s demand for Australia’s minerals, … Nobody in Australia can claim credit for this!

and a reputation for competent economic management … Why use "reputation for" rather than "record of"?  The between-the-line message is that the reputation may not be earned.

How come a reputable English journal can cut through the smoke and mirrors, and further, have the guts to publish critical analysis, (although in their standard diplomatic way), while the Australian economic press, apart from a couple of individuals (e.g. Davidson), perpetuates the myth of the Liberal Party as good economic managers?

When will the ALP have the good sense to point out that they have the better record?

Share This