Ross Guest and Nicholas Rohde (Griffith University) explain in The Conversation that foreign investment was only a minor factor in the decade long boom in Sydney and Melbourne and housing affordability.
Highlights from interesting research or insightful analysis, particularly in the areas of policy, strategy, economics, agriculture and governance
Sunday, December 27, 2015
Saturday, December 19, 2015
How the ‘fair go’ became the last bulwark for Australia’s freedoms
Gillian Triggs (University of Sydney, Human Rights Commission) writes in The Conversation that successive governments and political leaders since 2001 have played on community fears of terrorism and the unauthorised entry of refugees to concentrate power in the hands of the executive – to the detriment of Australian liberty. Most Australians are unlikely to be able to describe the doctrine of the separation of powers, but they’re quick to assert their liberties under the rubric of a ‘fair go’.
Location:
Canberra ACT 2601, Australia
Thursday, December 17, 2015
Interest rates could stay low for decades
Rodney Maddock (Monash University) writes in The Conversation that saving has tended to increase and investment to fall; more money is available but fewer people want to borrow, thus driving down rates. The trends will not likely change abruptly so we can expect low rates for a long time.
Labels:
economics,
monetary policy
Location:
Canberra ACT 2601, Australia
Wednesday, December 16, 2015
Unwritten rules shape ministerial accountability
Ryan Goss (Australian National University) writes in The Conversation that Australia’s constitutional system is built on the assumption that all ministers will be responsible to the parliament and, through the parliament, responsible to the Australian people. But there’s no precise legal statement of how that assumption works, what it covers, and what happens if the ministers are not sufficiently responsible. It’s incumbent on all of us, as citizens in a democratic society, to ensure that our representatives hold our government to account.
Location:
Canberra ACT 2601, Australia
Tuesday, December 15, 2015
We all have a role in protecting democracy’s unwritten rules
Danielle Celermajer (University of Sydney) explains in The Conversation that our democracy is only safeguarded by informal conventions and the robustness of our political culture. When the actions and words of our leaders model an ethos where political differences are more important than democratic conventions, we’re all enfeebled.
Location:
Canberra ACT 2601, Australia
Mutated conventions: how secrecy in the name of security harms democracy
Jude McCulloch (Monash University) writes in The Conversation that secrecy is a weapon of information control that valorises official stories and outlaws those who expose governments and police and security agencies to scrutiny.
Labels:
democracy,
policy,
public sector
Location:
Canberra ACT 2601, Australia
Monday, December 14, 2015
Confusion reigns in options for Australia’s misuse of market power laws
Stephen King explains reforms to the misuse of market power laws in The Conversation and deficiencies in the Government's options paper.
Labels:
competition,
policy,
reforms
Location:
Canberra ACT 2601, Australia
Friday, December 11, 2015
Yes minister: how political appointments tip the scales of fearless advice
Chris Aulich (University of Canberra) writes in The Conversation that the public service has gradually become more politicised in recent years. But this is a bigger problem for agencies broadly described as integrity agencies and for bodies where public perception of neutrality are important to their operations.
Labels:
democracy,
policy,
public sector
Location:
Canberra ACT 2601, Australia
Thursday, December 10, 2015
Innovation statement’s significant insolvency changes are well overdue
Jason Harris (University of Technology Sydney) and Michael Murray (Queensland University of Technology) explain the proposed insolvency law changes in yesterday's innovation statement.
Labels:
innovation,
policy,
reforms
Location:
Canberra ACT 2601, Australia
Innovation package just gets us back to square one
Mark Dodgson (University of Queensland) writes in The Conversation that faith in innovation policy in Australia over the last 30 years has continually been dashed—wrecked on the reefs of institutional inertia, political myopia, management gaming and bureaucratic incompetence. The prime minister has placed a great deal of political capital in promoting the innovation agenda, but success in this area will require his continued and forceful leadership if we are not to repeat the mistakes of the past, and lose the momentum he has created.
Labels:
innovation,
policy,
reforms
Location:
Canberra ACT 2601, Australia
Wednesday, December 9, 2015
Australia’s innovation problem explained in 10 charts
Charis Palmer, Darcy Shilton, Emil Jeyaratnam and Wes Mountain (staff at The Conversation) explain why Australian has a long way to catch up to its regional and global counterparts, and identify the biggest innovation challenges.
Labels:
innovation,
policy
Location:
Canberra ACT 2601, Australia
Following suit: why political conventions matter
Richard Mulgan (Australian National University) explains in The Conversation that political conventions may be challenged and redefined by every new government, but it is their role in promoting political accountability that ensures the health of our democracy.
Thursday, December 3, 2015
Government policy, not consumer behaviour, is driving rising Medicare costs
Stephen Duckett (Grattan Institute) writes in The Conversation that Medicare expenditure was presented in the 2014 Budget as part of the government’s mantra of a “debt and deficit disaster”, and massaged to create maximum shock and awe. The minister’s numbers did not adjust either for population growth or inflation. Furthermore, of the $325 real increase in MBS spending per head since 1993-94, all but $74 has been the result of explicit government decisions.
Labels:
fiscal policy,
healthcare,
policy
Location:
Canberra ACT 2601, Australia
Wednesday, December 2, 2015
Why levying GST on banking has been in the ‘too hard’ basket
Kevin Davis (Australian Centre for Financial Studies) explains in The Conversation the complexities in levying GST on money lending. The relevant tax base is the sum of profit and wages paid (i.e. the value added) of banks, which is a very large sum and largely not subject to GST. In addition, the banks currently pay large amounts of GST (on their purchased inputs), much of which they cannot claim as input tax credits. Consequently, the cost of financial services is lower for consumers (around $3.5b) and higher for businesses (around $1b) than if GST applied similarly to other services. Also, the GST revenues for the States are also much lower, as money lending is a large segment of the economy.
Location:
Canberra ACT 2601, Australia
Virtues and pitfalls of China’s state-driven growth
China’s model for growth has been enormously successful, but it comes with some unresolved risks. Yukon Huang looks at how China has recorded double-digit growth for more than three decades, and why it’s now slowing down.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)