Tuesday, September 17, 2002

Information Technology - use it, don't make it

Noël Coward is said to have observed that TV is for appearing on, not for looking at.

The Wall Street Journal is now saying something similar about IT. It's for importing, not making.

And it cites Australia as the success story.

"...one of the biggest beneficiaries from information technology is Australia, which hasn't any high-tech industry at all. Yet it is one of the few economies to have enjoyed a 1990s surge in productivity (or output for each hour of work) as impressive as the one the U.S. has seen. Its secret: import high-tech gear that others make. As in the U.S., the spread of bar-coding, scanning and inventory-management systems is making Australian wholesalers much more efficient, and that is paying economywide dividends. Compared to its population, Australia has more secure servers, the sort used in e-commerce, than anyone else besides the U.S. and Iceland (that is another story)."

In 1997 our own Information Industries Taskforce produced a report entitled The Global Information Economy: The Way Ahead in which it advised the government quite differently. We had to make, not just use.

"Australia’s future as an advanced economy will depend on the extent to which it participates in the evolving global information industries as a provider of products and systems; not just a taker. Full participation in the digital economy will require a significant increase in current exports by the information industries based on a much more focused and cohesive export strategy."

Perhaps it is just as well the report lay largely unread...

As did many reports commissioned by the new government. What about the one by Charlie Bell advising the government to cut the burden of red tape on small business?
Read more >>

Tipping

This week on Monday Economics with Geraldine Doogue I discussed the economics of tipping. Pure economic theory would suggest that we should not. We try to get the best possible price for things. So why pay more, and why do it after the service has been rendered? Especially if you are not likely to ever go to that town or restaurant again?

The Research at Cornell University suggests that we do it in large measure to ensure good service. Tipping is a sort of shadow market which fulfils a role legal contracts cannot. These days there is such a contract for employment. I will work more than the strict number of hours required, and in return you will pay me more than you are legally required to, and keep me on in a downturn.

We also do it for status. Ray Williams of HIH did it a lot. Men do it much more than women.

We are more likely to tip when other people are watching (say, in a big group).

And women are significantly more likely to do it when their waiter is a man, especially a man of eligible age.

For men, apparently, there is no such effect.

Some of the references are here.
Read more >>

Happiness 3

The debate continues in Ross Gittins' column over the weekend. Many people find these conclusions shocking. They are debating at Henry Thornton.
Read more >>

Tuesday, September 10, 2002

Happiness 2

Tom V writes: the correlation between having a job and being happy might be because theres so many negative connotations of being unemployed. perhaps because were stuck with the protestant notion of work ethic.

To decipher this cause, it would be interesting to take some people, and pay them the same amount but they dont actually have to turn up to work. i doubt their happiness will decline.

So two things: searching for a job might cause total misery, and then getting a job makes one happy. second, there may be a big difference in happiness for the small difference in income between welfare and entry level job.

...tom

I agree, there must be reasons why we want to work, and those reasons might be social, as well as biologicial.

But the experiment about taking some people, and paying them the same amount with some not having to turn up to work has been done (on paper and with economietrics at least). The finding, reported by Frank and Stutzer is that for the European countries observed, "a move from the lowest income quartile to the highest income quartile would not be enough to offset the adverse effect of unemployment."

It is true that some days I would quite like to be paid not to work. I would like to volunteer for any experiment in which I was paid not to work, but I am not sure I would like to be part of that experiment for ever.
Read more >>

Monday, September 09, 2002

Happiness

Today on Life Matters with Geraldine Doogue I spoke about happiness.

Money doesn't matter much. The average Japanese can buy five times what they could after the war but is no more happy. The average American can buy 2.5 times what they could and is no more happy. Psychologist Bob Cummins from Deakin University refers to "homeostasis". He says our body regulates how happy we feel to keep our mood in a tight band, in much the same way as it regulates blood pressure and temperature. There are doubtless good adaptive reasons for doing that. Too little happiness and we'll commit suicide or forget to eat. Too much happiness and we won't bother to hunt, or look out for predators.

One way in which adaption happens is rising expections. The higher our income, the more income we feel we need. So we believe that a certain increase in our income will make us happy, but it never does. The Journal of Economic Literature article includes a graph which describes the process perfectly.

What does make us happy is work. Having a job is usually far more important to happiness than the income the job provides.

Even moving from the lowest quartile of income to the highest won't be enough to compensate for losing a job. It's worth paying money in order to be in work...

The implications for policy: a tax on employed Australians designed to create employment is a good idea. Also the economists obsession with GDP is probably the right one - but for the wrong reasons! We need high GDP not because of the goods that it will deliver us but because of the work that getting the high GDP will make for ourselves along the way!

The other thing that matters is democracy. The Swiss local government areas where citizens can take part in direct elections are far more happy than those where citizens can not. The process matters. Economists Frey and Stutzer determine this by observing that immigrants to Switzerland who can't vote, aren't made nearly as happy by living in a district with direct referenda as are those who can vote, even though they enjoy the same outcome in terms of good government.

Taken all together - the implications are that redistribution of income is a very good idea, positional goods should probably be banned (in aggregate they make people unhappy by raising expectations) jobs matter, and that democracy matters in its own right, regardless of where it leads us.

After the discussion Geraldine told me of a Background Briefing program on happiness which noted the importance of festivals. Experiences give a much bigger happiness bang for the buck than goods. (Unless it is the experience of buying the good. A new kitchen increases happiness at the time it is bought, but not a lot after that). Much of India is very poor, but poor Indians devote a lot of effort to festivals (and weddings, as some recent films make clear).

Also aftert the discussion Kathy Golllan, the Life Matters Executive Producer, told me of her amazing finding. Teaching English to upper class children in Indonesia, she asked, as a language excercise: "What would you do if you had a million dollars?" One of the replies shocked her. "I would get a job".
Read more >>

Thursday, September 05, 2002

Game Shows.

Each Monday I discuss economics with Geraldine Doogue on Life Matters on ABC Radio National.

This Monday I talked about what economists are learning from TV game shows. The Price is Right and The Weakest Link are almost-perfect laboratories in which to study financial behaviour. Unlike artificial laboratories the money is real (six million for the price is right) and the data is rich (7,000 banking decisions in 70 episodes of the Weakest Link.)

The findings are that we don't behave entirely rationally. We approximate rational behaviour by using easy rules of thumb.

We make a rational decision to be economical with our thinking resources. Ironic, huh?

And there was more besides.

Here are some of the references.

Next Monday, I'll be discussing happiness, using the references dug up this week by Ross Gittins.

I'll go further. I'll reveal what really does make us happy.

For the SBS Business Show I am researching a panel discussion about the unwieldy nature of taxation in Australia.

The problem is that it is an unwieldy topic.

That discussion should go to air on Sunday September 15.
Read more >>

Monday, September 02, 2002

Hello

This is my first post.

I report for "The Business Show" on SBS television in Australia. 6.00pm Sunday nights.

For most of the two decades before that I was the Economics Correspondent for ABC Radio Current Affairs.

I am a former Treasury economist with an honours degree in economics.

I am married to the award winning journalist Toni Hassan, and I have two children, Alexandra and Grace.

My email address is peter at petermartin.com.au
Read more >>

Monday, January 08, 2001

2001 Economic Survey. Rates cut to soften landing; economy to grow far less than officially forecast

Josh Gordon:

Australia's private forecasters believe the economy is coming in to land after a period of soaring growth and this could see the jobless rate shooting back towards 7 per cent before next Christmas.

The half-year economic survey by The Age has found that an overwhelming consensus predict that the Reserve Bank will cut interest rates this year - possibly by as much as one full percentage point - to cushion the landing.

The economists have also tipped a modest recovery of the Australian dollar, a slowing world economy and a continuation of the housing construction slump that hit the industry after the GST was introduced.

The survey of 25 economists from business, academia and the finance sector predicts the economy will expand by 3.18 per cent in 2000-1 - far below the federal government's November budget up-date forecast of 4 per cent growth. It is also less than the growth rate of 3.50 per cent forecast by The Age panel in the previous survey, published six months ago. Looking ahead to 2001-2, the forecasters predict the economy will grow by 3.12 per cent - again well below Federal Treasury's forecast of 3.75 per cent growth.

The survey reflects a substantial change in sentiment about the economy following a string of economic signs pointing to slower growth. But most said a recession, which would technically require two quarters of negative growth, was unlikely. There were, however, some dissident voices.

The major pessimist was Duncan Ironmonger, from Dun and Bradstreet. He predicted that a recession would hit the economy in 2001, with GDP contracting by 0.4 per cent in 2001-2 on very weak private investment and a slowing world economy.

Richard Robinson, from BIS Shrapnel said he did not believe there would be a recession in 2001, "just a major down-turn" and tipped the economy would grow by 1.5 per cent next financial year.

Others were very optimistic, with five economists forecasting the economy would grow by 4 per cent or more in 2001-02.

Rothschild's Alan Siew, who tipped 3.8 per cent growth in 2001-2, said the GST, higher interest rates and soaring oil prices had weakened the economy, but growth would return to a solid pace as these factors disappeared over the next few months.

One forecaster, Shane Oliver from AMP, took a jab at his own kind and warned, "Economists, almost without exception, are notoriously bad at forecasting recessions".

The tipsters were at particular odds with the Federal Government about the outlook for Australia's jobless. Federal Treasurer Peter Costello believes the unemployment rate will fall below 6 per cent before next June on 3 per cent employment growth. For the Treasurer to be right, about 25,000 jobs would need to be created each month.

According to the panel, this could be a brave prediction. The consensus was that the decade low of 6.3 per cent unemployment achieved in October would be as good as it gets for the jobless. Seven of the economists tipped that unemployment would be at or over 7 per cent by Christmas, while on average the forecasters predicted a jobless rate at 6.75 per cent with very modest 1.27 per cent employment growth.

A year ago, many of The Age panelists were worried that workers would chase pay rises as extra compensation for the GST. However, the latest survey shows this concern has diminished. Wages growth should be solid, but not a major threat to inflation. Average weekly earnings were tipped to rise by 4.24 per cent and the more reliable wage cost index by 3.48 per cent over the year to December.

There was also optimism that economy would continue to take the GST in its stride. Most felt that by the September quarter its inflationary effects would well and truly have washed through the economy. On average, the panel forecast that annual inflation would be a benign 2.59 per cent in December, comfortably within the Reserve's 2 to 3 per cent target band. Two of the economists, Shane Oliver from AMP and Steven Kates from ACCI, predicted the official interest rate would be 5.25 by December, a full percentage point lower than the current level.

However, some warned that oil prices and the dollar were still a la+.1major threat to interest rates.

The panel also saw the dollar shrugging off some of its weakness in 2001, with predictions that the investor love affair with the US would begin to turn sour. By December, the dollar would be trading at 61.19 US cents, 66.21 Yen and 62.16 Euros. .

Almost all of the economists surveyed said the dollar had been extremely undervalued. But many, including Bruce Freeland from the Commonwealth Bank, urged caution, arguing a recovery could not be guaranteed since the dollar was no longer trading off Australian economic fundamentals.

The survey predicts the account deficit will shrink to $26.45 billion for the calender year. Exports will by boosted by the low dollar and imports constrained by the slowing domestic economy. Australia's net foreign debt is expected to rise from about $268 billion in the June quarter last year to $298.35 billion by December.

Changing conditions to keep lid on CPI


Three months ago, with the release of better-than-expected inflation data for the September quarter, local businesses were hailed as the saviour of a potential CPI blowout.

This year, leading economists in The Age's half-year economic survey are predicting that it will be lower oil prices, a stronger Australian dollar and a global economic slowdown that will keep inflation under control.

While many analysts expect that at least part of the raft of additional costs absorbed by business in the September quarter - GST, rising oil prices and higher import costs - will be passed on to consumers this year, changing economic conditions should counter any substantial increase in the CPI.

The consensus view from the survey is that by the end of 2001, underlying inflation will be at 2.59 per cent, well within the Reserve Bank's target band of 2-3 per cent.

"The most important factor for CPI-inflation over the next 12 months is oil prices. We assume the price of oil in Australian dollars will begin to fall shortly due to a nominal appreciation of the Australian dollar and a drop in world prices," said Philip Adams of Monash University's Centre of Policy Studies.

"Importantly, the risk of a sharp acceleration in wages growth has not yet materialised and labor market conditions are expected to ease during 2001 as a lagged response to the sharp fall in job ads," said Macquarie Bank senior economist Andrew Hanlan.

While economists predicted that the effect of the GST was largely a "one-off" and would not boost inflation, the effect of higher import prices had five economists surveyed tipping inflation would exceed 3 per cent by the end of December.

"December quarter 2000 and March quarter 2001 will exhibit quite strong increases reflecting the flow through of higher import and export prices," said UBS Warburg chief economist Mark Rider.

Illustration

Pundits forecast strong trade


The low dollar will boost exports while the slowing economy will limit imports and this will help shore up Australia's trade position over the new year, according to The Age half-year economic survey.

Despite predictions of a modest recovery of the Australian dollar, most economists said it would be a strong year on the trade front.

The annual current account deficit is tipped to narrow to $26.45 billion by December, compared with $33.68 over the year to June 2000.

Some even predicted a sustained run of trade surpluses.

Shane Oliver from AMP said: "Thanks to the low Australian dollar, export growth should be solid and imports restrained over the next 12 months.

"This will help hold up growth and should also ensure a trade account near balance. This does imply that we will see several monthly trade figures in surplus."

Bill Evans from Westpac agreed, and said even if the dollar recovered to 60 US cents it would still be a very competitive exchange rate and would continue to deliver a windfall to exporters.

The Federal Government believes the economy will grow by 4 per cent this financial year.

This prediction, which is regarded as highly optimistic by most private sector economists, is based on the assumption that strong exports will keep the economy humming. Australia's exporters have already received a windfall from the stunningly competitive dollar and a strong world economy.

Over the year to September 2000, the value of Australia's exports soared by 40 per cent, and in September and October the trade balance was in surplus for the first time in three years.

According to the private sector forecasters, the key risk to Australia's exports will be a hard, rather than soft, landing for the global economy.

Geoffrey Sims from Telstra said the trade performance would critically depend on the extent and timing of the US slowdown.

"With the global economy more highly leveraged to the US economy than ever before, the looming US slowdown will have a more pronounced impact on the global economy and hence demand for Australian exports," Mr Sims said.

Despite strong exports, some economists warned that imports would pick up over the year, ensuring the trade balance remained in deficit.

Alan Siew from Rothschild said: "To achieve sustained trade surpluses next year would need a slump in imports, which in turn would only occur with a recession. This is very unlikely."

Anthony Thompson, from HSBC, said there was a risk that imports would pick up if business investment recovered more rapidly than the pessimistic business surveys suggested.



Read more >>

Wednesday, January 05, 2000

2000 Economic Survey. Full speed ahead in 2000

Phillip Hudson:

Although interest rates could rise by up to one percentage point, the economy will continue to boom and the unemployment rate could be as low as 6 per cent by next Christmas, according to The Age half-year economic survey.

The new year is also tipped to see the sharemarket reach new highs and the dollar pick up ground, but Australia still faces another tough year on the trade front.


The survey of 30 economists from business, academia and the finance sector predicts economic growth will average 3.9 per cent in 1999-2000 — above the Government's November Budget update of 3.5 per cent.

It is also much stronger than the 3.4 per cent rate of growth forecast by The Age panel in the previous survey, published six months ago, and substantially stronger than the 2.6 per cent average forecast this time last year by the group. It reflects a substantial change in sentiment about the Australian economy, which has prospered despite the Asian financial crisis.

Looking ahead to 2000-01. the panel believes growth will slip to 3.65 per cent — slightly lower than the forecast made by the Treasury of 3.75 per cent.

One of the optimists is Mr Bruce Hockman, from Deutsche Bank, who predicts growth will be 4.2 per cent for 1999-2000 and a huge 4.8 per cent for 2000-01.

Mr Hockman is one of the 11 economists to predict the official interest rate will rise from 5 per cent to more than 6 per cent. However, he does not believe this will he enough to slow the economy.

He says private consumption will remain strong and that the $6 billion being spent from the Budget surplus to help pay for the GST tax cuts will boost already strong growth.

Mr Tooby Johnston, from AXA Australia, is also bullish about the economic outlook. He is among four experts predicting growth of 4.5 per cent for 1999-2000 — a full percentage point higher than the Government. Mr Johnston says domestic demand "looks pretty good to us" and it will be complemented by stronger international growth.

The pessimist is Professor Neville Norman, of the University of Melbourne, who predicts growth of 3.2 per cent this financial year and just 1.8 per cent next year. Professor Norman says he had a "sombre view", especially about the risk of a downturn in the United States. He believes "somebody ought to be alerting the business community of this risk".

The panel predicts employment will grow by 2.3 per cent and the unemployment rate, which fell to a decade-low 6.7 per cent last November, will average 6.5 per cent by next Christmas.

Mr Hockman and Mr John Edwards, from HSBC, predict it will be as low as 6 per cent, while Mr Bill Evans, from Westpac, and Mr Philip
Adams, of Monash University's Centre of Policy Studies, forecast 6.1 per cent. Only Mr Geoffrey Sims, from Telstra, believes the jobless rate will be back above 7 per cent.

For those with a job, the average wage is tipped to rise by 3.9 per cent, but the cost of living may increase by more than 5 per cent. The outlook for inflation is distorted by the introduction of the 10 per cent GST on 1 July.

The panel believes the GST will cause prices to leap by 3 per cent in the September quarter. The full-year effect of the GST will be a 2.6 per cent lift — slightly lower than the Government's estimate of 2.75 per cent.

The biggest risk to interest rates is perceived to be the threat of a wages breakout by workets chasing extra GST compensation, although some economists say an already strong economy could be overheated by the $8 billion being taken out of the Midget to help pay for tax cuts.

For the first time, the panel was asked to predict the Reserve Bank's official cash rate. Dr Steven Kates, from the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry. and Ms Heather Ridout, from the Australian Industry Group, believe it will stay unchanged at 5 per cent throughout the year. Mr Hockman, Mr Johnston and Mr Mark Rider, from Warburg Dillon Read, predict it will be at 6 per cent by June.

Ms Ridout said there was no need for an interest-rate rise since the economy was enjoying "Goldilocks growth — not too hot and not too cold. it's good for job growth with no inflation pressures."

In the next six months. 18 economists expect a 0.5 per cent rate rise and nine economists expect that, by December. rates will be at 6 per cent. Professor Norman and Mr Richard Robinson. from BIS Shrapnel, believe they will reach 6.5 per cent. Many economists said one of the key risks for investors in the year ahead was the possibility that the Wail Street bubble would be pricked.

However, the panel said the All Ordinaries Index, which ended last year at 3152.5 points, was expected to break records and be 3238 at the end of this year. The dollar, which ended last year at 65.33 US cents, is forecast by the panel to rise to about 69 US cents over the year.

The trade outlook will continue to be tough. despite a brighter position for international growth and demand for Australia's exports. The current account deficit is expected to be $33 billion for the calendar year. The net foreign debt is tipped to rise marginally from $239 billion in the September quarter last year to $242 billion by year's end.


GST hit will be a one-off: analysts


The introduction of the GST will only threaten low inflation and put upward pressure on interest rates if workers chase pay rises as added compensation for the tax changes, according to economists surveyed by The Age.

In fact, the greatest pressure on rates flowing from the tax revolution will be the $12 billion tax cuts, with $6 billion being spent from the Budget surplus to sweeten the tax package.

Economists surveyed by The Age generally agreed with the Reserve Bank's view that the GST would have a one-off impact on the cost of living.

The panel believes the rise in the cost of living will average 5.4 per cent in the year to December. The Age also asked the panel to predict the exact impact of the GST on the September quarter Consumer Price Index and on inflation in the year to June 2001.

The average forecast was that prices would leap by 3 per cent in the September quarter due to the GST and the one-off rise in prices would be 2.6 per cent for the first year.

This average is slightly lower than the Government's prediction that the GST would add 2.75 percentage points to the CPI in the first year.

Aside from the tax cuts, the Government will increase social security and family payments, but some unions have suggested they will seek higher wages to compensate for the GST.

ANZ's chief economist, Mr Saul Eslake, expects a 3.5 per cent jump in prices in the September quarter after the introduction of the GST. He said that as the benefits of the removal of other taxes flowed through, the impact on prices in the year to June 2001 would be 2.25 per cent.

"The GST's impact on the CPI is one-off," Mr Eslake said. "There will be lasting effects only if wage claims also increase by way of completely unjustified compensation for this one-off impact, or if businesses increase profit margins, the ACCC notwithstanding."

Dr Steven Kates, from the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, said employers wanted the Government to carefully manage the issue because any rate rise would have no immediate impact on prices "but would have harmful longer-term consequences for growth and employment".

"It must be clearly articulated by the Government that there are compensating tax cuts taking place, which more than repay the cost of the goods and services tax," he said.

Ms Heather Ridout, from the Australian Industry Group, said rates would rise if workers sought to "double dip" by getting GST compensation from the Government and their employer.

"Low interest rates and rising employment opportunities are much more valuable than an illusory wage increase," she said.

St George Bank's Mr Tim Crawford said he did not believe the GST would affect interest rates, but the tax cuts might. "The tax cuts associated with the GST will add impetus to economic growth and add to the case for modest monetary policy tightening," he said.

AMP's Mr Shane Oliver shared that view, saying: "The interest rate impact relates more to the tax cuts and the net fiscal easing. This is probably worth 25 to 50 basis points of monetary tightening. If we see wages rising, then the GST effect could add another 25 basis points or so to cash rates."

Economists also said traditional measures of inflation would be distorted by the GST and Mr Steven Wojtkiw, from the Victorian Employers' Chamber of Commerce and Industry, said it was crucial for business to make sure prices and contracts linked to the CPI were not based on the GST-inclusive rate.
Read more >>

Thursday, July 29, 1999

1999-2000 Economic Survey. Growth, imports set to rise


Phillip Hudson:

Australia can look forward to a sustained period of high growth and low inflation, but the unemployment rate will remain stuck around 7.2 per cent and the nation faces a continued tough time on the trade front, according to the Age half-year economic survey.

Home loan interest rates are expected to remain unchanged, the dollar is predicted to rise and the stockmarket tipped to be largely unchanged amid nervousness about the high prices of Wall Street stocks.

While the current-account deficit is tipped to reach $35 billion, some economists have raised the prospect that it could climb to 7 or 8 per cent of national output without sparking a Banana Republic-type crisis - a view that was previously considered unthinkable.


The survey of 32 economists from business, academia and the financial sector predicts economic growth will average 3.4 per cent in 1999-2000 - well above the Government's May Budget prediction of 3 per cent.

It is also a massive increase from the 2.6 per cent average forecast by the Age panel in the previous survey published six months ago. It reflects the significant shift in the economic outlook for Australia and the expectation that the Asian economic crisis will not have a savage effect on the economy.

Looking ahead to 2000-01, the panel believes growth will largely hold up at around 3.3per cent - slightly below the Treasury's 3.5 per cent projection.

The optimist in the survey is Mr Peter Summers, from the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, who predicts growth of 5.2 per cent this financial year and 4.8 per cent next year.

"Australia's external environment should improve, with US growth remaining strong, and Europe and Asia (especially Japan) experiencing accelerated growth," he said.

Five economists take a pessimistic line: Professor Neville Norman from the University of Melbourne, Mr Ric Simes from Rothschild, Mr Michael Blythe from Commonwealth Bank, Mr Joseph Capurso from Econotech, and Mr John Kyriakopolous from J.P. Morgan. They predict growth will drop to 2.75 or 2.8 per cent this year.

Mr Blythe said that although the economic performance had been exceptional, a period of slower growth lay ahead.

"Some imbalances are now emerging that point to slower growth. The pace of activity is increasingly reliant on the consumer and increasingly leaking into imports. Neither of these trends is sustainable over the longer term," he said.

But the most bearish is Ms Shangitha Rajendan, from the National Institute of Economic and Industry Research, who says growth will tumble from 3.3 per cent this year to just 0.8 per cent in 2000-01 - the year of the Olympics, the $12 billion tax cuts and the GST.

The panel predicts employment will grow by 2 per cent but the unemployment rate will average 7.2 per cent. But, within the group there is a massive divergence of opinion.

Mr Richard Robinson, from BIS Shrapnel, predicts the national jobless rate will fall to 6.3 per cent and Dr John Edwards, from HSBC, tips 6.6 per cent. But Mr Bruce Hockman, from Deutsch Bank, and Mr Blythe say it will rise to 8 per cent.

For those with a job, the average wage is tipped to rise by 3.6 per cent while prices rise by 2.2 per cent.

Asked about the outlook for inflation, the panel said the introduction of the GST could pose a threat if wage claims were made by workers seeking extra compensation. Professor Norman said "wage retaliation" could push inflation above 3 per cent and cause the Reserve Bank to lift interest rates.

The panel predicted that home loan interest rates would not change significantly.

The dollar, which was yesterday trading at 64 US cents, is forecast to have a more stable 12 months than last year when it tumbled to a record low. The panel expects it to average 67 US cents in the next six months.

Most economists said one of the key risks for investors in the year ahead was Wall Street's overpriced stocks.

The panel said the All Ordinaries Index, which closed yesterday at 3059.8 points, was expected to be 3068 at the end of the year and 3151 next June.

The trade outlook will continue to be grim, with imports expected to outstrip exports.

GST may push inflation over 3%


The GST could pose a threat to low inflation - and force up interest rates - if workers chase wage claims to compensate for tax changes, according to economists.

The Age's panel of economists believes inflation will average 2.2 per cent in the year to June - well below the Reserve Bank's medium-term comfort limit of 3 per cent. The prediction is bang on target with the Government's Budget forecast of 2.25 per cent.

But despite the Bureau of Statistics yesterday saying inflation was still at historic lows and sitting at an annual rate of 1.1per cent, some economists are nervous about the introduction of the 10per cent GST on 1 July.

The Government will deliver $12 billion in income tax cuts plus increased social security and family payments as a sweetener. The Reserve Bank has said it will ignore the expected one-off inflation jump of 2 per cent.

However, some unions have suggested they will seek higher wages to compensate for the GST. The ACTU has said it believes the tax cuts will not even return bracket creep of the tax scales for the past decade.

The Age asked the panel what the risk was of Australia's inflation rate rising above 3 per cent.

Dr Barry Hughes said the key issue was wages. "If there is a significant wage flow-on in compensation then the Reserve Bank will worry and hike rates," he said. Dr Hughes rates this a 25 per cent chance.

Professor Neville Norman, from the University of Melbourne, also warned that "wage retaliation" would pose a significant chance of inflation rising above 3 per cent.

Dr Steven Kates, from ACCI, said underlying inflation would rise above 3 per cent "if wage increases rise to compensate for the perceived increase in the cost of living".

8% deficit is safe, say economists


The current-account deficit could climb to 7 or 8 per cent of national output without triggering an economic crisis, according to economists.

In a significant shift of market sentiment from the panic of the 1980s and early 1990s, economists surveyed by The Age said a current-account deficit of 6per cent of gross domestic product - the same level that caused the Banana Republic crisis in 1986 - was manageable.

Mr Des Moore, from the Institute for Private Enterprise, said he believed Australia's more flexible economy could cope with a current-account deficit as high as 8per cent of GDP as long as it was fuelled by productive investment. "It could reach 8 per cent if it was investment-driven and it was clear that it was productive investment and not investment in real estate or speculative assets," he said.

"If the US is chugging along OK, 8 per cent with an investment surge would be acceptable by financial markets, but if it is consumption-driven it will be a major risk."

Mr Peter Horn, from Credit Suisse First Boston, has the most pessimistic current-account forecast for the year ahead, predicting that the deficit will be $42.1 billion or 6.7 per cent of GDP.

This is well above the panel's average prediction of $35 billion and $10billion higher than the Federal Government's May Budget forecast of $32 billion.

Mr Horn said he believed low commodity prices would continue to cause problems, and while sales would increase to Asia as the region recovered from the economic turmoil, Australia could find lower-volume sales to many of the new markets developed last year. He believed it was possible for Australia to run a current-account deficit of 7 or 8 per cent but it would need tight interest rate and Budget policies.

The Reserve Bank has indicated that interest rates are set to encourage expansion and the Government is preparing to loosen the Budget purse strings to help fund its $12billion GST-tax cut sweetener.

Mr Horn said that if the current-account deficit stayed at high levels after the tax cuts were paid next July "then monetary policy may need to be tightened". Mr Paul Brennan, from Salomon Smith Barney, also suggested financial markets could wear a larger balance of payments problem.

"It would need to push towards 7 per cent of GDP accompanied by further measures that reduced the Budget surplus (for there to be a crisis)," he said.

Commonwealth Bank's Mr Michael Blythe says Australia's high current-account deficit is "the price we have to pay for a strong domestic economy at a time when our major trading partners have been pretty subdued".

The survey revealed that economists and the markets had largely accepted the case put forward by the Treasurer, Mr Peter Costello, and the Reserve Bank governor, Mr Ian Macfarlane, that the deficit was beyond Australia's control but it was not out of control.

"It is only a crisis if international financial markets decide it is," said Telstra's Mr Geoffrey Sims. "So far they have been quite accommodating and have recognised that, unlike past blowouts in the current-account deficit, this one has been caused by demand contraction in Australia's major export destinations rather than overly strong domestic economy," he added.

But the Australian Industry Group's Ms Heather Ridout took a different view saying that the critical issue was whether the deficit stayed at 6 per cent of GDP. "If, as forecast, domestic demand slows and moderates imports and export markets recover this shouldn't happen," she said. "However, the possibility cannot be excluded. The need for strategic action to address the current-account deficit remains: increasing national savings and further diversifying our export base are key issues."

Dr Steven Kates, from ACCI, said the deficit was of less concern than in past years because the Federal Government was not borrowing money and had returned its Budget to surplus. The debt was entirely private sector and commercially based.

"However, with recovery in Asia expected, export volumes and prices should begin to rise and the current-account deficit fall to more acceptable levels. A current-account deficit of 6 per cent is not sustainable in the long term," he said.

Mr Geoff Bills, from the Housing Industry Association, said there was no crisis if the funds to finance the deficit were invested wisely. "But they usually aren't and if investors or lenders fear they aren't then the dollar will fall and interest rates rise," he said.

J.P. Morgan's Mr John Kyriakopolous said a deficit of 6 per cent was not sustainable and "could make Australia vulnerable to sharp swings of investor sentiment towards domestic financial assets".

BIS Shrapnel's Mr Richard Robinson was one of the few economists to say 6 per cent was a crisis level. "It will add to foreign debt, or worse, force us to sell more of the farm (local companies and assets). This will add to foreign interest payments and profit repatriation and ultimately worsen the current-account deficit," he said.

Mr John Edwards, from HSBC, predicted the deficit would drop, but stay above 4 per cent of GDP this year. He said it continued to underline the nation's savings problems.

Mr Ric Simes, from Rothschild, said such a high deficit was "a clear sign that something is seriously out of kilter". "Policy needs to be directed at boosting national saving and to do so quite aggressively over the next few years. Disturbingly, Government policy on superannuation has gone backwards over the past few years," he said.

Recession unlikely, say tipsters


The pace of economic growth in Australia will slow in the next two years but the risk of a recession is low, according to most economists surveyed by The Age.

But there are one or two predicting a post-Olympic slump.

"If interest rates are not raised, if public spending is not increased, and if protection levels do not go up, the risk of recession remains minimal," said the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry's Dr Steven Kates.

Mr Peter Horn, from Credit Suisse, rates the chance of a recession at less than 10 per cent. He said Australia's economy would be supported by a pick-up in global growth, the GST-linked tax cuts, worth $12billion next year, and the Sydney Olympics.

Mr Steven Wojtkiw, from the Victorian Employers Chamber of Commerce and Industry, agrees. He also believes the privatisation of a further 16per cent of Telstra, continued low inflation, and the increased social security benefits that flow from the GST package are reasons why growth will continue.

However, Colonial State Bank's Mr Craig James sounded a warning about a switch in economic conditions in early 2001. "A post-Olympics slump in construction is expected in Sydney," he said. "Further, in New Zealand and Canada monetary policy was kept overly tight on the introduction of a GST. A similar risk exists with Australia."

BIS Shrapnel - one of the survey's most accurate tipsters - says there is only a 5 per cent chance of a recession in the next 18 months. But after that? It's more likely than not.

Colebatch: Rough time for our economics tipsters


For four years the economics tipsters in The Age survey were hitting smoothly down the fairways of forecasting. Then came 1998-99: the Carnoustie of financial years for a forecaster.

Most of our tipsters' growth forecasts for 1998-99 ended up in the rough, half-buried in waist-high grass. A couple landed in the lake, and a few got some bunker practice. No one overshot the green.

Only two landed on the fairway. Dr Peter Summers, of the Melbourne Institute, went in the right direction with his forecast of 3.6 per cent, though he might wish he had used a stronger club. (Actual GDP growth in 1998-99 is estimated at 4.7 per cent).

And the one tipster on the edge of the green is the reigning champion: Richard Robinson, of BIS Shrapnel. The firm's uncanny record in the "90s continued in 1998-99; its tip of 4.1 per cent was easily the most accurate.

In July 1993, Shrapnels were among the few to predict the imminent boom. In the five years since, on average, its tips have been out by less than 0.5 per centage points, a gold medal achievement.

This year, too, it has struck out boldly. Apart from Shrapnels and the Melbourne Institute, our other forecasters tip growth to slow sharply, to around 3.25 per cent. But Shrapnels predict another boom year, with the economy growing 4.3 per cent. It tips extraordinary growth in employment, with almost 400,000 new jobs, and unemployment plunging to 6.3 per cent by June 2000.

The Melbourne Institute, our silver medallist, is buoyant too, tipping 5.2 per cent growth in 1999-2000. But Dr Summers sees most of this coming from investment and productivity growth, with unemployment still 7.5 per cent in mid-2000.

In a welcome return to form, our new bronze medallist is the Federal Treasury. It, too, undershot last year, tipping 3 per cent growth, but that was better than most. In the past five years, Treasury's tips on average have been within 0.6 percentage point of the actual growth.

For 1999-2000, Treasury has repeated its 1998-99 forecasts: 3 per cent growth, unemployment at 7.5per cent, and the current-account deficit held to just $32 billion. It stuck to these numbers in last week's quarterly roundup, although its comments seemed to imply stronger growth.

EXCHANGE RATES: Last year the panel tipped the dollar to be worth 65.58 US cents at 30 June. It ended up at 66.01 US cents. Bruce Hockman, of Deutsche Bank, and Barry Hughes both hit the bull's-eye, and many others came close. Hughes and Hockman both tip the dollar to reach 69 or 70 US cents by June 2000.

Last year's yen guru was Bruce Freeland, of Commonwealth Bank, who hit the bull's-eye with his 80-yen forecast; everyone else tipped the yen to be weaker by now.

INTEREST RATES: Last year the panel tipped the 90-day bill rate to be a tad below 5.25 per cent at mid-1999; it ended up a tad below 5 per cent. Not a bad outcome, given that in four of the previous eight years, the actual outcome was outside the entire range of forecasts.

Several hit the bull's-eye, including Paul Brennan, of Salomon Smith Barney, Chris Cheatley, of the EIU, Saul Eslake, of ANZ Bank, and Barry Hughes (again!). All four tip 90-day rates to be virtually unchanged in a year's time.

A year ago our panel tipped the major banks' mortgage rate to be 6.62 per cent by now; it is actually 6.55 per cent. The gold medal will go to the tipster who best answers the question: if we have real competition in banking, how come all four major banks charge the same mortgage rate?

No one can fault our panel on business ethics. Disdaining the chance to use insider knowledge, our tipsters from Commonwealth, National and Westpac declined to predict the mortgage rate in mid-2000. Only ANZ's Saul Eslake took a punt: no change.

Last year the panel thought 10-year bonds would end June 1999 at 6.22 per cent; in fact, they ended at 6.27 per cent, a stellar performance for the team. Des Moore earns the gold for his tip of 6.25 per cent.

BUDGET: Our panel last year thought Treasury had overestimated the Budget surplus. Thanks to "the Australian miracle", it underestimated it, and the gold medal in this class goes to: Treasury (along with Commonwealth Bank and VECCI, which took Treasury at its word).

UNEMPLOYMENT: The panel thought jobs would grow by 130,000 and unemployment would stay at 8.1per cent. The tipsters underestimated jobs growth and the fall in workforce participation rate, which cut trend unemployment to 7.3 per cent in June. Econtech was closest, tipping 7.4 per cent. It predicts a rebound to 7.7 per cent in June 2000.

INFLATION: As usual, the panel was far too pessimistic; the CPI rose 1.1 per cent, less than half our team's 2.4 per cent forecast. Mike Nahan, of the Institute of Public Affairs, hit the bull's-eye; but then, Mike also tipped a recession.

CURRENT-ACCOUNT DEFICIT: Treasury tipped a deficit of $31billion. The panel tipped $32.7 billion. That looks like being very close to the final figure due on 30 August. We will take a punt and provisionally award the gold to Bill Evans, of Westpac, for his tip of $33.2 billion.
Read more >>

Monday, January 04, 1999

1999 Economic Survey. Continued growth tipped


Phillip Hudson:

The Australian economy will avoid recession this year and continue on its path of high growth and low inflation despite the worst effects of the Asian financial crisis reaching our shores, according to The Age half-year economic survey.

However, the unemployment rate will remain stuck above 8 per cent and the current account deficit is set to become a hot political issue.

The survey of 33 economists from business, academia and the financial sector predicts economic growth will average 3.4 per cent in 1998-99, slightly better than the pre-Christmas Budget update from the Treasurer, Mr Peter Costello, which revised the Treasury forecast from 2.75 to 3.25 per cent.

But looking ahead to 1999-2000, the panel believes growth will drop back to just under 2.6 per cent.

The majority of those surveyed said the chance of a recession in Australia in 1999 was less than 20 per cent.

The optimist in the survey is Mr Peter Summers, from the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, who predicts growth of 4.3 per cent this financial year due to strong consumption, business investment and real share prices.

The pessimist is Professor Neville Norman, from the University of Melbourne, who says growth will be 2.5 per cent, based on a "fairly sombre view about private business investment" due to last year's gloom about Asia and a trade blow-out due to poor

commodity prices, aggressive import competition and some weakness in sales to Japan.

Professor Norman said growth of 2.5 per cent in the ninth year of an economic expansion was a strong result. He almost takes the prize as optimist for 1999-2000 with his prediction against the trend that growth will soar by 3.8 per cent.

That forecast - bettered only by Mr Richard Robinson, from BIS Shrapnel - is based on the improving mood about business investment next year, some pick-up in commodity prices, and economic recovery in the Philippines and Malaysia.

The 1999-2000 pessimist is Mr David Corby, from National Mutual Funds Management, who believes the worst effects of the Asian economic crisis will crunch growth to 1.3 per cent.

The international outlook is for a further slowdown in the United States and a continued malaise in Japan.

On the employment front, Mr Geoff Bills, of the Housing Industry Association, and Mr Des Moore, from the Institute of Private Enterprise, predict a gloomy 9 per cent jobless rate for next Christmas but Mr Phillip Adams, from Monash University's Centre

of Policy Studies, is punting on 7.2 per cent. The majority said the jobless rate would stay at 8.2 per cent.

For those with a job, average earnings are predicted to rise by 3.75 per cent, well ahead of price increases of 2.24 per cent. All the economists believe inflation will stay below the Reserve Bank's 3per cent "comfort zone".

Professor Norman is warning home buyers that the standard variable home loan interest rate could be above 7 per cent by Christmas but he said interest rates would "still not be back to where they were three years ago".

The dollar, which ended 1998 at 61.45 US cents after its record low of 55.30 last August, will have another rocky year, according to the panel, which values it between 57 and 70 cents by next Christmas.

The Asian economic crisis will continue to bite into exports (despite efforts to find new markets) and strong domestic demand will increase the appetite for imports. This will feed into a rising current account deficit - nominated by some as the key domestic issue to watch in 1999 - which is expected to rise to $32 billion.


Downturn on Wall Street big risk ahead


The overvalued United States sharemarket poses the greatest risk for investors in the year ahead, and any severe correction could drag down the Australian economy, according to The Age economic survey.

While the most pressing domestic concerns are the rising current account deficit, a rapid change in the value of the dollar, and the implementation of the goods and services tax, almost half the economists surveyed nominated Wall Street as the big risk in 1999.

Mr Rob Henderson, from Dresdner, said Wall Street was "overvalued on practically all measures used by equity analysts". Using historical data by the Australian National University academic Professor Adrian Pagan - who is a member of the Reserve Bank board - Mr Henderson said the chances of the US bull market continuing "are getting very low".

The Westpac analyst Mr Bill Evans noted concern about "irrational exuberance" in the US stockmarket while many others simply said 1999 would be the crunch year when the bubble would burst and the US economy would slow.

The other flashpoints to watch, according to the experts, include economic troubles in Brazil and Russia, the continuing sluggish performance of Japan, how the troubled South-East Asian economies perform, and whether China is dragged into the financial crisis.

The wildcard for 1999 comes from Mr Craig James, from Colonial State Bank, who suggested plunging oil prices could spell the end of the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries.

"If oil prices fall further, then the contagion spreads to the Middle East with pressure for devaluations, the collapse of OPEC could be the X factor for 1999," he said.

The primary domestic concern is not a slowing of economic growth but what happens if growth remains strong.

Mr Saul Eslake, from ANZ, summed it up: "If the Australian economy does not slow, as almost universally expected, it will raise renewed concerns regarding the current account deficit and inflation, with the possibility that interest rates rise rather than fall."

Telstra's corporate economist Mr Geoffrey Sims said a "rapidly" rising current account deficit would constrain the Reserve Bank in further cuts to interest rates.

The 33 experts were asked their view on the risk of a recession in Australia in 1999.

Many said while there would be a recession at some stage, there was less than a 20 per cent chance of it being in 1999.

The Melbourne Institute's Mr Peter Summers used historical data to calculate that the possibility of a recession by the end of 1999 was 33.8 per cent.

The Victorian Employers' Chamber of Commerce and Industry's Mr Steven Shepherd was one of the few to mention the GST, saying business must focus on how tax change would affect investment strategies.

At the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Mr Stephen Kates warned an ACTU wage claim of up to 7 per cent "would cause deep problems within Australian industry".

The Australian Industry Group's Ms Heather Ridout said while the threat of a recession in 1999 "seems ridiculous, post 2000 might be another story".
Read more >>

Thursday, July 02, 1998

1998-99 Economic Survey. Asia to hit growth



Philip Hudson:

Lower export sales, weaker job growth and depressed consumer and business confidence due to the Asian economic crisis will combine to cut Australia's growth rate in the new financial year, according to the Age half-yearly survey of economists.

But while some experts believe up to three percentage points could be wiped from growth, there is a majority view that the worst of the Asian crisis will be over by the year 2000.

Economists were asked by The Age to predict how many percentage points the Asian economic crisis would subtract from Australia's rate of economic growth in 1998-99 and 1999-2000.

Nikko Securities' chief economist, Mr Peter Horn, said the effects of the Asia slowdown would cut 3 percentage points from growth this year and 0.75 per cent next year.

"The direct effect of lower exports will detract two percentage points in 1998-99 and indirect effects, including lower employment growth and consumer spending and deferred business investment will detract 1 percentage points," he said.


ANZ's economist, Mr Saul Eslake, said Australia's heavy trade reliance on Asia would cut growth by 1.5 per cent this year and a further 1 per cent for the following year.

"Asia's financial crisis is one of the largest of the post-war era and will cost Asian economies at least 20 percentage points in terms of forgone growth relative to trend over the next four to five years," Mr Eslake said.

"Australia is more exposed to these losses than any other non-Asian OECD country. Direct losses through weaker exports and (eventually) heightened import competition will be compounded by income and employment losses and by adverse effects on business and consumer confidence."

Mr Steven Shepherd, from the Victorian Employers Chamber of Commerce and Industry, said domestic consumption would remain robust but cheap Asian imports and weaker business investment would cut growth by 0.75 per cent each year.

The Australian Chamber of Manufactures' Mr Tony Pensabene said the Asian economic crisis would hurt business much sooner and harder than originally anticipated.

"Key metals and engineering industries are highly exposed to Asia and given these are among our largest corporations the effects are flowing quickly through the rest of the economy," he said.

Mr Steven Kates, from the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, believes that, barring any destabilising developments, most of our trading partners should be well into recovery by 1999.

"There are, however, still enormous downside risks, particularly if the measures taken to revive the Japanese economy fail to achieve their intended aim," he said.

"This would be compounded by any serious downturn in the Chinese economy, which would significantly lower business confidence."

Mr Bruce Hockman from Deutsche Bank said that the Asian impact might not be as large as feared as many exporters were finding new buyers.


We'll take a big hit from Asia: economists


The Asian economic crisis could wipe as much as three percentage points from Australia's rate of economic growth in 1998-99, according to economists surveyed by The Age.

The brakes will be applied to the economy in the year ahead as the Asian slowdown reduces imports, dampens the hopes of the unemployed and hits consumer and business confidence.

But the dollar is predicted to rise after its slump last month.

The Age half-yearly survey of 28 economists also predicts inflation will rise, the Government is unlikely to meet its Budget surplus prediction and the current-account deficit and foreign debt will increase during 1998-99.

Every aspect of the Australian economy will be touched by the economic trouble in Asia. The overall prediction for economic growth in 1998-99 is 2.27 per cent - well below the Government's May Budget forecast of 3 per cent.

The pessimists are Mr Mike Nahan, from the Institute of Public Affairs, and Mr David Corby, from National Mutual Funds Management, who forecast a recession.

The most optimistic person in the survey was BIS Shrapnel's Mr Richard Robinson, who expects the economy to grow by 4.1 per cent.

Only two others predict growth will be stronger than 3 per cent while six said it would be less than 2 per cent.

Mr Peter Horn, from Nikko Securities, believes the Asia crisis will cut growth by three percentage points.

The outlook for employment is mixed, with most economists predicting job growth will be lower than the Government expects.

Three economists believe the jobless rate will be above 9 per cent by this time next year.

Yet 10 others have predicted the unemployment rate will be less than 8 per cent.

Wages are expected to grow by 3.85 per cent, which is below the Government's forecast 4.25 per cent.

There is broad agreement prices will rise by less than the Government's 2.75 per cent forecast.

Six economists are punting on a cut in interest rates.

And despite the dollar's recent plunge below 60 US cents, most economists believe it will be above that mark by Christmas.

Surprisingly, six of the experts believe the current-account deficit will be lower than the $31 billion forecast by the Government.

Not one of the economists surveyed believes the Treasurer, Mr Peter Costello, will do better than the May Budget prediction of a $2.7 billion surplus.

How the tipsters fared


OK, so 28 tipsters have told us what they think will happen to Australia in the next 12 months. But their forecasts differ, so the question any market punter should be asking is: what are these guys' records?

It is a fair question, given that in our Sunday paper's $50,000 investment race, racing tipster Lucky Phil has taken a commanding lead over the brokers investing in share portfolios. So we decided to benchmark past Age survey forecasts and came up with interesting results.

For example, on average, our panel does better than Treasury at tipping the Budget deficit. It also does better than Treasury at tipping growth rates: over the past five years, our panel's average tip has been within 0.5 percentage points of the actual growth rate.

Yet the panel, although dominated by market economists, is no good at tipping what markets will do with interest rates and currency. It tends to assume little change ahead; no one has predicted big shifts, such as the interest rate rises of 1994 or last year's currency plunge.

Let's look at the details:

GDP: The best news in today's survey is that Sydney consultants BIS Shrapnel forecast growth of 4.1 per cent for 1998-99. That matters because in the past five years, Shrapnel has been the most accurate forecaster of GDP in Australia.

On average, BIS Shrapnel has come within 0.3 per cent (percentage points) of tipping the actual growth rate each year. By contrast, the Treasury has been wrong on average by 0.7 per cent and the panel on average by 0.5 per cent.

Shrapnel won its gold medal partly in 1993-94, when it was one of few to predict the acceleration into rapid growth. And in four years since, it has scored two bullseyes and been within 0.5 per cent twice.

Runners-up, with an average error of 0.5 per cent, are Chris Cheatley of the Economist Intelligence Unit, Saul Eslake and predecessors at the ANZ Bank, and David Corby and predecessors at National Mutual. Corby is one of the two panelists now forecasting a recession.

EXCHANGE RATE: Last year blitzed the reputations of all exchange-rate forecasters. No one foresaw Asia dragging down the Australian dollar to these levels.

At the end of 1996, when the dollar was worth 79.65 US cents, the panel believed it would be the same a year later. By June 1997, when the dollar had fallen to 74.5 US cents, the panel forecast it would be at 77 US cents by now. On average, the best of the currency tipsters has been Alan Oster of the National Australia Bank. He virtually hit the bullseye in the 1995 and 1996 mid-year polls, came closest to tipping the dollar's plunge in late 1997 and has been on the leaders board in every survey.

Honorable mentions are also due to Peter Horn of SBC Warburg, Chris Murphy of Econtech, Chris Cheatley of the Economist Intelligence Unit and Des Moore of the Institute for Private Enterprise.

INTEREST RATES: Here too, the panel missed the big shifts. In July 1994, it saw little change ahead; short-term rates promptly rose 2.75 per cent in four months. By January 1995, with two exceptions, it tipped further rises of 1.75 per cent; instead, rates then held tightly. In July 1996, only two forecasters tipped any fall, let alone five drops, totalling 2.5 per cent.

In every mid-year survey since 1991, the panel has tipped short-term rates to stay within 0.5 per cent of current levels. In four of the past eight years, the actual outcome was outside the entire range of forecasts.

That said, the best recently has been Don Harding of the Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, the only one to correctly tip the past two turning points. Alan Oster and Des Moore tipped one each.

BUDGET: Treasury ought to do far better than the private forecasters in tipping the Budget deficit. Not so. In most years, the Treasury and panel forecasts have been almost identical.

The big difference was in 1995-96, when Treasury forecast a headline surplus of $718 million, The Age survey tipped a $900 million deficit - and the outcome was a $5 billion deficit!

The accurate one in 1995-96 was Dr Philip Adams of the Centre of Policy Studies, who tipped a $5.6 billion deficit, while the National Institute of Economic and Industry Policy tipped $3 billion. In 1996, Treasury understated the headline surplus by $2 billion, and the panel by $2.3 billion. Only Paul Brennan, Nigel Douglas and David Lansley came close.

Will this year restore Treasury's reputation? Has BIS Shrapnel got it right again, or David Corby? See you next year.

Read more >>

Friday, January 02, 1998

1998 Economic Survey. Strong growth ahead tipped



Phillip Hudson:

The economy will continue to grow strongly in the year ahead, with the only wild card being the impact of Asia's economic troubles, according to economists surveyed by 'The Age'.

Inflation and home-loan interest rates are widely predicted to stay low, housing and private investment to pick up, and the unemployment rate to fall slightly in 1998.

The overall prediction for growth in 1997-98 is 3.7 per cent, virtually the same as the Government's 3.75 per cent Budget forecast that was restated in the mid-term review delivered on 18 December.

The most optimistic forecast in the biannual survey of economists from business, academia and the financial sector comes from BIS Shrapnel's Mr Richard Robinson, who expects the economy to grow by 4.3 per cent.

Other bullish forecasts were from Deutsche Morgan Grenfell's Mr Bruce Hockman, for 4.2 per cent, and Macquarie Bank's Mr Bill Shields and F.W. Holst & Co's Mr Michael Heffernan, for 4.1 per cent.


The pessimist is National Mutual Funds Management's Mr David Corby, who believes growth will be restricted to 2.5 per cent.

The outlook for employment growth is generally stronger than the Government's revised expectation of 1.25 per cent. The economists are sticking to the Government's original forecast of 2 per cent.

But most of the economists do not believe the Government will achieve its aim of cutting the jobless rate from 8.4 per cent to 8 per cent by June.

The average forecast is for unemployment to drop to 8.2 per cent.

Wages are expected to grow by 4.1 per cent, which is below the Government's forecast 4.25 per cent.

Inflation is expected to average 1.6 per cent, higher than Canberra's 1 per cent prediction. The latest Consumer Price Index showed in the year to September the cost of living had fallen by 0.3 per cent.

The National Australia Bank's Mr Alan Oster predicts that inflation will rise by 2.75 per cent in the four quarters to June. Citibank's Mr Stephen Koukoulas said inflation would average just 0.6 per cent.

Mr Oster is also the only one to believe short-term interest rates will rise above 6 per cent in the next six months. He says they will rise to 6.6 per cent by the end of the year.

Most economists believe rates will stay between 5 and 6 per cent, although Mr Corby has predicted an official rate of just 4 per cent by year-end.

Mr Stephen Shepherd, from the Victorian Employers' Chamber of Commerce and Industry, is the only one who believes home-loan interest rates of the big banks will rise above 7 per cent by June. He is also alone in forecasting them to be above 8 per cent by December.

Only five of the 27 economists polled believe the dollar will rise above 70 US cents by June while eight believe it will be worth 65 US cents or less. Mr Tim Toohey, of the National Institute of Economic and Industry Research, is the most bearish, expecting 62.5.

The Government believes the current account deficit will rise from $18 billion last year to $23 billion. All the economists agree it will top $20 billion. Mr Toohey said it would rise to $27.3 billion by June and then reach $33 billion by December.

The level of net foreign debt is expected to continue to rise from its present $217 billion. Mr Shields, Bankers Trust's Mr Chris Caton and Mr Hockman believe it will top $240 billion by June, although five economists believe it will decrease.

The Government's mid-term review said this year's Budget bottom line was expected to reveal a $2.75 billion deficit, an improvement on the $3.8 billion predicted at Budget time.

Mr Caton and Merill Lynch's Mr Paul Osborne believe it will be a better-than-expected $1.5 billion deficit. Mr Des Moore, from the Institute of Public Affairs, said it would be closer to $1 billion while J. B. Were & Son's Mr Simon Calder is predicting a balanced Budget.

What the economists say about Asia's slowdown:

Shane Oliver, AMP Investments

"As a result . . . Australian growth in 1998-99 will be around 1.25 per cent lower than otherwise would have been the case. Growth in 1999-2000 will be around 0.75 per cent lower than otherwise."

Bill Evans, Westpac

"The negative effect of the fast emerging recession in East Asia will ... in 1998-99 subtract about one percentage point off growth and pull it down slightly below 3 per cent."

Saul Eslake, ANZ

"The loss of economic growth and employment stemming from weaker exports of goods and services and to a lesser extent heightened import competition (is the biggest threat to Australia's economic future)."

Des Moore, Institute for Private Enterprise

"We could be faced with an extended period of slow growth in East Asia, including Japan. The effects of this on Australian growth will depend on how quickly and how extensively the Government responds with micro-economic reforms, particularly in the labor market and social welfare areas."

Tony Pensabene, Australian Chamber of Manufactures

"The Asian troubles could dampen the export spirit of small to medium manufacturers, making them more cautious in seeking new export opportunities in Asia."

Chris Caton, Bankers Trust

Asian economic troubles will have "very little effect. Long-term growth is determined from supply side considerations".

Asian crisis will stunt Australia's growth


The Asian financial crisis could wipe as much as 1.25 per cent from Australia's economic growth next financial year and add $5 billion to the current account deficit, according to The Age survey of top economists.

However, some economists also believe the economic turbulence and currency instability creates huge opportunities for Australian companies to open and expand business ventures in Asia because our dollar has up to 50 per cent more buying power than it did last year.

The Age half-yearly survey reveals a strong outlook for the domestic economy with inflation and home loan interest rates predicted to stay low, housing and private investment to pick up and the unemployment rate to improve slightly over the course of the year.

But the chief economist with AMP Investments, Mr Shane Oliver, said slower Asian growth could wipe 1.25 per cent from economic growth in 1998-99 and 0.75 per cent in 1999-2000. "The key driver will be substantially lower export growth and a dampening impact on domestic confidence." Westpac's Mr Bill Evans believes growth will be cut by 1 per cent to below 3 per cent and County NatWest's Mr Paul Brennan has also cut 1 per cent from his forecast for 1998-99 and 0.75 per cent for in 1999-2000.

ANZ's Mr Saul Eslake said between 0.75 and 1 per cent could be cut from growth and an extra $5 billion added to the current account deficit.

The Federal Government last month said it expected the economy to grow by 3.75 per cent in 1997-98 but only 3.25 per cent in 1998-99 due to the loss of income from Asia.

Describing the Asian crisis as "the biggest financial meltdown we have ever seen in our lifetime in our region", the Treasurer, Mr Peter Costello, indicated that without it, Australia's economic growth would have moved above 4 per cent, which suggests the Government believes it will reduce growth by about 0.75 per cent.

However, not all economists believe Australia will suffer. Bankers Trust chief economist Dr Chris Caton and the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry's Dr Steven Kates both said the impact over the longer term would be minimal.

Mr Peter Summers from the Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research at the University of Melbourne said "Australia's long-run growth rate will be determined more by domestic factors such as balanced budgets and stable economic policies" than the "cyclical phenomenon of the Asian crisis".

Mr Michael Heffernan, from stockbrokers FW Holst & Co, says Australian companies have a unique opportunity to establish and build business in the region because of the higher value of the Australian dollar.

The Australian Chamber of Manufactures' economist, Mr Tony Pensabene, said many smaller firms had built growing export markets in Asia but the recent trouble could "dampen the export spirit . . . making them more cautious in seeking new export opportunities in Asia".
Read more >>

Monday, July 14, 1997

1997-98 Economic Survey. 200,000 new jobs tipped



Tim Colebatch:

Market economists have largely endorsed the Federal Government's forecasts of a strong economic recovery in the new financial year, predicting that jobs and output will take off in the 12 months to June.

The Age half-yearly survey of economists found that on average they expected Australia's gross domestic product to grow by 3.8 per cent in the year ahead, almost exactly matching the Budget forecast of 3.75 per cent growth.

Most significantly in political terms, the economists on average are tipping employment to grow by 2.3 per cent in the 12 months to June 1998, adding almost 200,000 new jobs, also in line with the Budget forecast.


That would more than treble the job growth actually recorded in the 12 months to June 1997, when just 61,000 jobs were created and full-time employment fell by 34,000.

But unemployment is tipped to fall less than the Government predicts. The economists on average forecast it to be still 8.3 per cent by next June, midway between last month's 8.7 per cent and the Budget forecast of 8 per cent next June.

The group verdict amounts to a solid vote of confidence in the Budget forecasts, despite a generally gloomy run of statistics and business surveys since the Budget was delivered on 13 May. It implies that the economy is about to change gear - probably moving up two gears in the space of months.

But with the recovery the economists foresee two minor drawbacks. Interest rates and the dollar are expected to start heading back up, reversing the slide that has allowed business some relief from the tight conditions of late 1996.

Ten-year bond rates are expected to climb back to 7.3 per cent by Christmas and 7.6 per cent by the end of next June.

Despite the expectation of an interest-rate cut next month, 90-day bill rates were tipped to be back to 5.4 per cent by December, rising to 5.8 per cent by June 1998. But if it's any consolation, the panel got all this totally wrong a year ago. Expecting much stronger growth than the economy delivered, on average it tipped 90-day bills at 30 June 1997 to be 7.9 per cent, almost half as high again as the actual 5.35 per cent.

Similarly, the banks were expected to be offering home mortgage loans at 9.8 per cent (actually 7.2 per cent) and 10-year bonds were tipped to be 8.8 per cent (actually 7.09).

On the financial front, even the most optimistic forecasters - Mr Des Moore, of the Institute of Private Enterprise, and Mr Don Harding, of the Melbourne Insitute - proved far too conservative last year. And the economists were far too optimistic on employment growth, predicting a 2 per cent rise in jobs rather than the 0.75 per cent we actually got. But Mr Phil Graham, of ANZ Securities, was spot-on, with Mr Harding the only other one to get close.

This year, Mr Graham has joined the optimists, predicting employment to grow by 2.6 per cent despite foreseeing the dollar bounding back to 82 US cents and 92 yen by June 1998.

Overall, the latest forecasts show a high degree of consensus. In detail:

GDP is forecast to grow by between 3.2 and 4.5 per cent, with all but six forecasters within the range of 3.5 to 4.3 per cent. At the top end, Mr Bill Shields, of Macquarie Bank, is predicting that low interest rates will promote an investment-led recovery, with business and housing investment alike growing by 12 to 12.5 per cent.

At the bottom end, Mr Saul Eslake, of ANZ Bank, also sees the housing recovery lifting investment in dwellings by 13 per cent, and business investment rising by 7.7 per cent. But he predicts private consumer spending will remain subdued, growing only 2.5 per cent, whereas most forecasters on average predict an increase of 3.3 per cent.

Business investment is one of the few areas where the forecasts diverge widely. Mr Shields is the most optimistic of the 31 forecasters with his tip of 12.3 per cent growth, a far cry from the 2.6 per cent rise in investment plans revealed to the Bureau of Statistics.

But at the other end, Mr Richard Robinson, of BIS Shrapnel, forecasts business investment will grow just 2.1 per cent this financial year. BIS is perhaps the most pessimistic of all forecasters overall, seeing GDP rising just 3.3 per cent, unemployment still 8.7 per cent in a year's time and the dollar and interest rates rising. (Over the past five years, BIS Shrapnel has proved the most reliable GDP forecaster in The Age survey.)

Trade is expected to detract from GDP again, with imports outpacing exports enough to take 0.3 percentage points off the nation's output. Mr Paul Brennan, formerly of the National Farmers Federation but now with County NatWest Securities, is the most pessimistic, predicting net exports to drag GDP down by 1.2 percentage points (about $6 billion) and the current-account deficit blowing out to $26 billion.

At the other extreme, Mr Mike Nahan, of the Institute of Public Affairs, forecasts net exports to add 0.75 per cent ($4 billion) to GDP growth, even though he sees the current-account deficit worsening by $4 billion, growing to $22 billion.

Wage growth is seen as moderating slightly, with forecasters on average tipping 4 per cent for the year to June. But two forecasters see wage growth blowing out to 5.1 per cent while two see it falling sharply to 3 or 3.1 per cent.

Unemployment is generally seen as staying between 8 and 8.5 per cent, although two forecasters - Mr Brennan and the Bankers Trust economics group - predict it will edge down to 7.9 per cent by June.

The Budget is expected to return a bottom line on average of $3.4 billion, slightly better than the Government's prediction of an underlying deficit of $3.9 billion. But among the pessimists is Mr Alan Oster, of National Australia Bank, who predicts that as growth falls short of the Budget forecast, so the underlying deficit will end up at $5 billion.

Interest rates yield a more diverse range of forecasts. At the pessimistic end, Ms Mardi Dungey, of Econtech, predicts that by June 90-day bank bills will be at 7 per cent despite very low growth in consumer spending (1.6 per cent) and wages (3.3 per cent). But Mr Nigel Stapledon, of Westpac, tips little change over the next year, with the 90-day rate still at 5.1 per cent and 10-year bonds at 6.8 per cent.

The dollar is generally seen as drifting back up, although there is no consensus. Mr Bruce Hockman, of Deutsche Morgan Grenfell, sees it soaring to 82 cents and 94 yen by next June while Mr Steven Shepherd, of VECCI, and Mr Peter Osborne, of Merrill Lynch, see it nudging 100 yen by then.

Mr Chris Cheatley, of the EIU, thinks the dollar will lock in its recent fall, staying at 74 cents through to next June, as does Mr Simon Calder, of J.B. Were.

Foreign debt is expected to climb again to $216 billion by July, with the current-account deficit on average tipped to rise to $21.6 billion compared with about $18 billion in the year just ended.

Mr Eslake and Mr Oster disagree, predicting that relatively slow growth will hold the deficit around present levels. But Mr Shane Oliver, of AMP Investments, predicts it will blow out to $27 billion, boosted by higher interest rates and sluggish world growth.

Read more >>

Monday, January 06, 1997

1997 Economic Survey. Economists tip glum half-year


Paul Chamberlin:

A rapid relaxation of monetary policy in the second half of 1996 has not been enough to brighten the economic hopes of Australia's leading forecasters, who see growth continuing to fall and little improvement in unemployment.

Six months of indifferent economic performance will be followed by a similar span in 1997, according to The Age's six-monthly survey of 28 economists from business, academia and the financial sector.

Amid the sober predictions are others that will please home owners - half of those surveyed believe the Reserve Bank has too tight a grip on interest rates, arguing for another cut in the new year. Only one, Econtech's Mr Chris Murphy, thinks monetary policy is too loose and that rates should climb, while 11 believe it is now "about right".

And inflation appears to be a word of the past. The average forecast is 1.7 per cent for the four quarters to June, significantly below the 2.5 per cent predicted by much the same group only six months ago.


In a further pointer to new interest rate cuts, wages growth should average 3.7 per cent to June, well below the Reserve Bank's speed limit of 4 to 4.5 per cent.

The central bank has been concerned about accelerating wage demands, but the economists point to a consistent lack of underlying pressure. They predict weekly earnings will again average 3.7 per cent over the four quarters to December.

By implication, they believe the ACTU's Living Wage claim - which the Government believes could spur inflation and reduce employment - will not succeed in its entirety.

Following up his July prediction of only 2.5 per cent economic growth in 1996-97, Mr Don Harding, of the Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, again claims the low mark with a revised 2.3 per cent.

Close by are National Australia Bank's Mr Alan Oster with 2.4 per cent, and Westpac's Mr Nigel Stapledon with 2.5 per cent. This is actually an improvement for the latter, who thought six months ago growth would splutter along at 2.2 per cent.

At the other end of the scale is Mr Michael Heffernan, formerly with the Australian Stock Exchange, who plumped for an extremely healthy rise in gross domestic product of 4.7 per cent over the year, down from his 5 per cent tip in July.

No others are even in range of this robust view but Mr Bill Shields, from the Macquarie Bank, forecasts 3.9 per cent.

The biggest revision comes from SBC Warburg's Peter Horn, who has dropped his 4.6 per cent prediction to 3.4 per cent, below the Government's Budget forecast of 3.5 per cent.

Unemployment appears resolutely stuck above 8 per cent. No one believes it will drop below that rate by the end of June, and only Mr Heffernan predicts it will slip below that level by December, to 7.9 per cent.

The average forecast is 8.8 per cent by the end of the financial year, rebounding from November's 8.5 per cent. Victoria's rate will be 9.1 per cent seasonally adjusted, down slightly on the 9.2 per cent officially recorded in November.

The economists remain apprehensive about any significant pick-up by December. Unemployment will still be at 8.5 per cent Australia-wide, and 8.9 per cent for Victoria, they say.

Mr Murphy is pessimistic about a recovery in Victoria's labor force, predicting it will be floating at 9.8 per cent in June and 9.5 per cent in December. Mr Tony Pensabene, of the Australian Chamber of Manufactures, believes it will remain rooted at 9.5 per cent at both points.

Close to the Government's Budget forecast of 8.25 per cent are VECCI's Mr Steven Shepherd (8.2), Dr Philip Adams of Monash University's Centre of Policy Studies and the Commonwealth Bank's Mr Bruce Freeland (both 8.3).

The reluctance to embrace the Government's prognosis on jobs is based on recent figures showing employment is growing at nowhere near enough to meet the Budget hope of 2 per cent for 1996-97. The average expectation is only 1.5 per cent (advancing to 2 per cent for the 12 months to December), with Mr Nigel Douglas, of Merrill Lynch, arguing it will only reach 0.5 per cent this financial year.

The economists as a whole are confident the Budget claim of a $5.6 billion deficit will be met. Individually, however, there is wide variation in the forecasts: Macquarie Bank's Mr Shields tips a $500 million surplus and Mr Phil Graham, of ANZ Securities, sees a blowout to $7 billion.

Net foreign debt is expected to knock on the door of $200 billion by June and crash through to $202 billion by December. It follows a further $19.5 billion deterioration in the current account, down slightly on the $20 billion the Government expects.

The old gauges of full employment, where the rate of unemployment was 5, 4 or even as low as 2 per cent, no longer apply in the minds

of the economists. Most take a similar view to Dr Shane Oliver, from AMP Investments, feeling the level is now around 7 per cent but that it could fall as low as 5 per cent after further labor market deregulation and micro-economic reform.

Mr Graham said that while full employment was difficult to define, it now meant unemployment of between 7 and 8 per cent.

"Such an outcome is too high from the community's point of view, but significant progress in lowering unemployment towards a more acceptable level will require more micro-economic reform (including more radical industrial relations reform)," he said.

"While Australia dawdles, the rest of the world is steadily becoming more efficient. There is a strong need to increase the efficiency of Australian infrastructure, and doing so would reduce the cost of doing business in Australia and help all industry (rather than assist specific industries)."

Merrill Lynch's Mr Douglas said 5 per cent unemployment remained a viable target in the long term if the Government adopted the United States social security system, which now cuts people off after set periods.

Mr Mark Jolley, from Deutsche Morgan Grenfell, put his answer to the question of full employment in simple terms. Australia would have full employment when there was "a job for everyone who wants to work, at the prevailing wage without putting sustained pressure on wages".

Mr Rob Henderson, of Dresdner Australia, said the area of industry policy most in need of reform was the relatively high level of import protection afforded to the production of motor vehicles and textiles, clothing and footwear.

Even if our trading partners did not reciprocate with micro-economic reform of their own industries, the benefits for Australia's already largely reformed manufacturing sector had become apparent in it being internationally competitive and providing a growing percentage of exports.

Westpac's Mr Stapledon said the Howard Government had come under strong pressure from some quarters to return to more interventionist policies. It had resisted them and should continue to do so.

But National Australia Bank's Mr Oster said more attention needed to be given to specific industry requirements, rather than the Government implementing broad industry policies.

Mr Richard Robinson, from BIS Shrapnel, said three key elements were needed: a long-term strategic plan; targeted sectoral plans, and a return to the 150 per cent tax concession for research and development.

The Australian Chamber of Manufactures' Mr Pensabene questioned whether the Government even had an industry policy, while Mr Tim Toohey, from the National Institute of Economic and Industry Research, was one of many who suggested immediate tax reform.

Mr Chris Cheatley, of the Economic Intelligence Unit, was critical of a lack of communication from the Government on its industry policy: "Business does not know where it stands."

What is a sustainable rate of growth or Australia?


Stephen Koukoulas, Citibank: 3.5 to 3.75%. It has increased thanks to labour market flexibility, lower tariffs and the drive for greater competition.

Chris Caton, Bankers Trust: 3.5%. But that's in a built-up area. At present we're on the highway so we can drive a little faster, say 4.5%.

Michael Heffernan, formerly ASX: 5%. Given the twin forces of low inflation and the increasingly deregulated labour market and industrial environment.

Phil Graham, ANZ Securities: 3.5%. Micro-economic reform to free up capacity constraints might allow this speed limit to be raised.

Phil Graham, ANZ Securities: Given Australia's long term balance of payments problem, somewhere in the region of 3 to 3.5%.

HOW FAST WILL WE GROW IN 1997?

Highest prediction for GDP growth: 4.7%

Lowest: 2.3%

Average: 3.1%

Government Budget forecast: 3.5%
Read more >>