Vic v Qld v NSW: who’s the winner of the first-term governments?
- Share
Three Coalition premiers are running the east coast states. A Crikey analysis of their economies shows Barry O’Farrell is streets ahead, while Victoria marks time and Queensland is in the doldrums.
The Barry O’Farrell government in NSW has significantly lifted the state’s economic performance since coming to office, in contrast to its conservative Victorian and Queensland counterparts, a range of economic indicators show.
In the death throes of Ted Baillieu’s premiership, the Victorian government was forced to reject claims the state was in recession after national accounts figures for the December quarter showed state final demand (which doesn’t include production inputs or exports) contracting by 0.7%, on top of a 0.4% fall in the September quarter. However, multiple indicators drawn from ABS economic data show it is the Coalition government in Sydney that has topped the economic honours on the east coast.
In the December quarter national accounts, NSW final demand grew at 0.4% and has averaged 0.6% growth per quarter since O’Farrell came to office — matching the performance of the NSW economy in the last year of the Keneally government. However, Victoria’s final demand has averaged just 0.3% per quarter, compared with 1.1% a quarter in the last year of the John Brumby government.
In Queensland, where final state demand fell to 0.2% growth in the December quarter, it has averaged 0.5% per quarter in the three quarters after Campbell Newman was elected, compared with 2.3% per quarter in the last year of the Anna Bligh government.
It’s a very similar story on employment. Under O’Farrell, unemployment in NSW has fallen in trend terms from 5.5% to 5.1%, driven by jobs growth of 60,000 jobs (again, trend numbers) since he was elected, although under the last year of Labor 100,000 jobs were created. However, the participation rate in NSW has held more or less steady since March 2011. In Victoria, the Baillieu government oversaw a rise in unemployment from 5.4% to 5.7%, with only 40,000 jobs created since the end of 2010, compared with 79,000 in the last year of the Brumby government. Worse, Victoria’s unemployment rate has only been held down by a significant fall in participation, of 1.1 points.
But Newman’s performance has been worse still — just 8000 jobs have been created in Queensland in trend terms since his government was elected, compared with 27,000 in the final year of the Bligh government (though that’s a full year compared with just 10 months for Newman’s government). Unemployment has risen 0.3 points to 5.8% off a 0.7-point fall in participation.
Unemployment in Queensland has been particularly affected by the Newman government’s public service cuts — the number of both public servants and medical professionals has fallen significantly in the past nine months, whereas their numbers have stayed the same or increased slightly in NSW and Victoria.
In retail sales, despite the rise (and, now, fall) of the “cautious consumer”, retail sales growth has averaged 1.4% per month since the O’Farrell government was elected, compared with 1.3% per month in the final year of the Kristina Keneally government. In Victoria, however, retail sales fell from a healthy 4% per month growth in the last year of Labor to 1.2% under the Baillieu government, including several quarters of negative or flat growth. And in Queensland, retail sales growth has fallen from an average of 3.8% growth per month in the last year of Labor to 3% a month under Newman.
In commercial finance, monthly investment has increased by nearly 6% on average under the Baillieu government from the last year of his predecessor, and about 5% under the O’Farrell government. But in Queensland, monthly average commercial finance commitments have actually fallen by 4.5%.
As Australia’s largest state economy, the performance of NSW is critical to Australia’s overall economic performance. O’Farrell has got the state moving again from its dark times under Labor. The performance of the Liberal government in Victoria, however, is decidedly mixed, and Campbell Newman has been taking Queensland backwards.
RELATED ARTICLES
Bernard Keane Here’s a new way of looking at the budget — but it won’t suit Hockey
Crikey The mystery of Treasury’s disappearing revenue: Parkinson explains
Glenn Dyer No, News Ltd, RBA’s rate cut had nothing to do with the dollar
AUTHOR ARTICLES
Bernard Keane Ford closure is overdue and irrelevant to Australian manufacturing
Bernard Keane Here’s a new way of looking at the budget — but it won’t suit Hockey
Bernard Keane Reporters as ‘co-conspirators’ in Obama’s war on journalism










And the LNP are doing well in turning over staff. Victoria 2 x Premiers and 3 x Chief Ministers and one resignation to become an Independent. Queensland - 3 x Ministers sacked. MP’s under investigation 3 x defect to Katters party. NT - leader stabbed in the back while overseas. WA - MP’s under investigation, and a bra snapping chair sniffer as Treasurer.
This is a bit unfair to Bailleau/Napthine, or overly generous to O’Farrell, because NSW had a natural rebound effect after the state was left in a pretty shoddy position, while in Vic they didn’t have the easy wins.
Eagerly awaiting for an Abbott federal government to make it a lay down misere on fiscal and economic management.
Waitng for any sort of economic policy from Abbott …or any properly costed policy
It’s a pity dumbing down can’t be quantified, Newman would take the trophy.
I think the stats Bernard has provided are very interesting. I’d be interested for someone who knows more than me to delve a bit deeper into why these trends are as they are.
As a NSW resident, I can think of some infrastructure work that is going on now that would lead to some job creation, but not a whole lot. My thoughts would be that it is probably as much to do with the global economy. Financial services and the like tend to be Sydney centric so there are probably some positives there for NSW. Coal appears to be a bit more stable than some of the things other states dig up but I can’t really see what else is causing a positive result for NSW.
The article is confused and confusing by jumping from one relative comparison to another, that is, NSW does well economically by comparison with contemporary Victoria and Queensland but not so well compared with its predecessor ALP government. Yet, Bernard says that “O’Farrell has got the state moving again from its dark times under Labor”. This contradicts the job creation figures quoted where Labor’s performance was substantially better. Moreover, for unexplained reasons, Bernard has compared O’Farrell’s performance since he was elected 2 years ago with the last year of Labor.
Barry got the state moving….come on Bernard, it’s not quite as simple as that. I know politicians like to claim personal responsibility for economic success (and to blame reverses on their predecessors) but I’m surprised to find you peddling such naive claptrap….
Under the ALP, I kinda have to say that the press, and generally public perception, is skewed horribly. Yes there are differences, but a heck of a lot is determined by perception.
In NSW it was worse because we had an inept govt for too long. Now we have a rather equally inept govt that at first said they would fix things, but now claim they need more time (and will after that). Problems are always someone elses, victories their own.
Most of the data for NSW is almost the same under each govt, except unemployment, BUT that is more that companies are hiring again after such a bad outlook (media shit storm) previously.
To me this demonstrates that economically conservative governments do better when they do nothing.
There are just too many variables to draw conclusions as to why a result happens. No mention is made that in many cases a delay in effect occurs when a policy is implemented. This can be many years. As such this article is a nice read but in my opinion doesn’t really prove much.
I must give it to Bernard Keane. He is a prolific writer.
Another day, another article, another topic. Similar to Ben Eltham (New Matilda)and Michelle Grattan (The Conversation). Mostly skirting around the main issue.
All very well.
However the real and present danger is overlooked! In a nutshell:
When someone continuously trashes our economy and democracy for power and profit (MSM/ABC/LNP and their backers) its time to do something about it, don’t you think? Common sense! Get it out there, tell the public and stop the rot. This article may be alright in isolation but does next to nothing to solve our nation’s real dilemma.
Please read:
http://www.independentaustralia.net/2013/business/media-2/honest-politicians-must-hold-nerve-on-media-reform/
and
http://www.independentaustralia.net/2013/business/media-2/australias-print-media-needs-urgent-reform/
We are on a downhill slide. Wake up guys before it’s too late!.
Gocomsys - it is not the responsibility of Bernard to solve the dilemma.
Achmed. True. However “real” engaged journalists do not sit on the fence. They should have a deeper understanding of vital issues, take a stand and actively spread the NEWS in the interest and well being of our nation. In other words feeling responsible for the eventual results.
Winners? Only losers under conservative governments!
Who are the biggest losers under these first- termers?
Everyone?
Winners; hardly an apt term, unless some “Big Lying” is the hidden purpose?
Still can’t say L-y-ing on Creaky without moderation? Sad lot.
Winners? Who are the biggest losers under these first termers?
Everyone?
Winners? Hardly an apt term here except, perhaps, for slanting the truth?
Remember how the austerity measures of these three losers sabotaged the Federal Budget surplus by reducing the gst intake and putting hundreds of thousands onto Federal welfare?
Gee, even non-economists noticed.
Queensland is a perfect example of why no government should be given a massive majority, especially when there isn’t even an upper house to supposedly review the actions of the hoi-polloi. Mind you one could argue that the governor has a responsibility to ensure good government but when the incumbent is only interested in swanning around the country big-noting herself, that doesn’t work either. Politicians being the avaricious self-serving lower life forms they are, giving them effectively unlimited power is crazy. Adding insult to injury by allowing them to avoid any semblance of accountability whilst adorning their worthless selves with the ‘honorable’ title is something expected in some tin-pot african dictatorship.
Why is it voters believe they fill in their votes and the result of that vote, is what those people are going to finish up with. Edward James
Our politicians across the board are not worth there weight in salt ! Edward James