Congratulations to the Turnbull government for fulfilling its (well, Tony Abbott’s) promise of creating 1 million jobs since the September 2013 election. From September 2013 to April this year, 1,013,631 jobs have been created. The government has been quick to celebrate its achievement, and rightly so.
Alas, the jobless-less rate (in seasonally adjusted terms) was 5.6% in April … which just so happens to have been the rate in September 2013. That reflects what is actually the government’s real achievement — a big rise in the participation rate from 64.8% to 65.6%. That includes a 1.8-point jump in female participation. That’s an achievement to be genuinely proud about. It means greater economic empowerment for women. It may well be Turnbull’s lasting economic legacy.
Something conspicuously missing from the boasting this week was wages. The March quarter wage price index (WPI) showed a 0.5% quarterly rise and 2.1% increase in the year to March. In the September quarter 2013, there was a 0.6% rise and 2.8% year on year. But by then, the stagnation had already set in. Six months earlier, when Julia Gillard and Wayne Swan were in charge, the quarterly rise was 0.7% and the annual rate was 3.1%. Unemployment was 5.6% then, too.
And funny how these million jobs have been created despite Australia’s supposedly punitive company tax rate of 30%, except for small businesses, which have just recently begun enjoying a lower tax rate. The government claims that wages growth will pick up when large corporations get a massive tax handout. But it can’t have it both ways — either the current tax rate has helped achieve strong jobs growth, or it has helped retard wages growth. Both can’t be true.
Worse, the biggest sources of jobs growth have been in healthcare and education, where the company tax rate is almost completely irrelevant. That’s also the reason for the surge in female participation, giving both sectors are dominated by women; indeed, it maybe that the establishment of the NDIS — a Labor creation — is the basis for Turnbull’s legacy of female economic empowerment. The other big driver of job growth in 2017 (after a quieter 2016) was construction — reflecting both the housing investment boom and increased infrastructure spending in Sydney and Melbourne by the NSW and Victorian governments. Again, virtually nothing to do with the company tax rate.
But all this is looking back. The jobs boom, it seems, is history. Yesterday’s jobs figures confirmed an emerging theme of the past three months: full-time job creation has slowed, from 321,000 between December 2016 and December 2017 to 265,300 between April 2017 and April this year. The annual rate of seasonally adjusted jobs growth is down from 3.3% to 2.9%. That’s still strong — it’s well above the average for the past 20 years of 1.9% — but we’re past the peak of job creation.
JP Morgan economist Tom Kennedy told Fairfax that the employment surge was largely due to a spate of hiring in the healthcare and construction sectors. “Together they contributed more than half of last year’s total employment growth,” he said. And he (along with other economists) have pointed out that the outlook for the jobs market was not as solid as last year.
The first quarter of data showed the slowdown was more “pronounced than we had anticipated” and April’s figures added to that. If the first quarter trend continues for the rest of the year, the annual rate of job creation will slow from 2.9% back towards the 1.9% average.
So don’t hold your breath for strong jobs growth to drive higher wages.
And with migration running at close to 200,000 a year, we’d be in deep shit if we weren’t growing at this rate! The real question is what did THIS Government do to stimulate that jobs growth? The answer is….Nothing!
TurnBull said “there are one million more *Australians* in work in the last 5 years”
This is BS: Most of the people who got the jobs are not Australians.
5 years x 190,000 “skilled” migrants a year means 950,000 of these 1,000,000 jobs went to migrants.
Even if we assume 20% unemployment among migrants, it means 3/4 of the jobs went to migrants, not Australians.
That’s an hilarious boast to make regardless. According to Trading Economics, 1 million jobs were added between September 2008-September 2013, during which we also had a significant global financial crisis. Yet I don’t recall anyone praising Labor at the time.
I recall an article from around the time that Abbott made the promise, probably in here, that they would have to do little or nothing for the number of jobs to grow by 1,000,000 in 5 years. And so it has turned out.
Though they have done literally *nothing* to create 1,000,000 jobs, they have actively pursued policies that have prevented jobs growth from being higher. Ending all subsidies for the automotive industry, undermining the domestic Renewable Energy Industry, pursuing defence contracts that intentionally excluded local manufacturers, & pursuing Free Trade Agreements that allowed for a significant shift in jobs offshore and/or the importation of foreign workers via the 457 Visa system.
That’s not quite fair. Closing down the car industry was a definite policy
Yeah, & those workers still haven’t hit the unemployment queues yet.
And with migration running at close to 200,000 a year, we’d be in deep shit if we weren’t growing at this rate! The real question is what did THIS Government do to stimulate that jobs growth? The answer is….Nothing!
The reality is that Labor achieved much better Job Statistics, even against the backdrop of the GFC
https://tradingeconomics.com/australia/unemployment-rate
https://tradingeconomics.com/australia/labor-force-participation-rate
https://tradingeconomics.com/australia/
https://tradingeconomics.com/australia/wage-growth
yet that didn’t stop the Coalition & their MSM lackeys from declaring the economy “dead on arrival” during Labor’s tenure. So why the heck should the Coalition receive any accolades for worse trend figures?
One of the ‘facts’ that is conveniently ignored in this debate is that the definition of a ‘job’ is so easy to meet that creating ‘jobs’ doesn’t mean much in the context of what it means to be employed in a job where you work a sufficient number of hours and get paid enough to live decently. But then given that the politicians who trumpet this stuff and the bureaucrats who back them up earn three or four times what ‘ordinary people’ earn there is no surprise in that. Tie the salaries of politicians and bureaucrats to a fixed multiple of median family incomes and see how the management of ’employment’ by the government, especially this government, changes.
“It may well be Turnbull’s lasting economic legacy.”
To be Turnbull’s economic legacy wouldn’t he need to be able to point to SOMETHING he did to create it, to say “this is what I did to raise job creation above what was naturally happening anyway:?
Especially when you go on to point out that the main driver of jobs growth is probably the NDIS and education and healthcare generally, where Turnbull inherited Labor initiatives, and that said growth has stalled under Turnbull. So isn’t the jobs growth really Julia Gillard’s legacy, and the current stall is Abbott and Turnbull’s?