Surplus unlikely says Swan.

[Rorschach]

Despite record mining figures and extra taxes... Surplus unlikey.
wait... it's not bloody funny at all.

One 'huge whack' smashes Wayne Swan's surplus
* by: Simon Black
* From: The Daily Telegraph
* December 20, 2012 2:27PM

TREASURER Wayne Swan says it is "unlikely" Labor will be able to achieve the promised budget surplus in 2012/13.

The wafer-thin budget surplus Swan had promised to deliver was placed under under increased pressure today when company tax payments came in almost $4 billion under expectations, reflecting commodity price falls and weakness in the global economy.

"Tax receipts are well below our forecast," Mr Swan said. "It was a substantial hit to profits that Australian companies have experienced in the first half of this year." Now who was it saying the treasury is always right?

Mr Swan said the impact on tax reserves in six months was already at the level the Labor government had predicted for the entire year.

"It's a really big hit to revenue. It's a huge whack," he said.

"Given what we've seen it's unlikely that there will be a surplus in 2012/13."

Overall, the federal budget is so far running at a deficit of $12.3 billion and the government had promised to deliver a surplus of $1.1 billion for 2012/13. A piddling surplus and we are not even going to make that. Hockey said they will never deliver a surplus.

The Finance Department's latest monthly statement released today showed cash receipts for 2012/13 so far totalled $111.6 billion at the end of October, down almost $4 billion on expectations.

The main factor was company tax revenue, which was impact by profit declines.

However, total government payments of $123.9 billion was ahead of projections by just over $1 billion, reflecting savings made.

The government also in October collected $501 million in resources rent taxes, which includes the petroleum resource rent taxes (PRRT) and proceeds from the minerals resource rent tax (MRRT).

[Neferti]

Ha ha ha. Wayne says "unlikely". Right!

[Rorschach]

An email from J.Hockey...

Dear Rorschach,

Today, Wayne Swan dumped Labor’s solemn promise to the Australian people to deliver a Budget surplus in 2012-13. It's not like they ever keep them Joe.

This is despite Wayne Swan guaranteeing on 200 occasions Labor would deliver a surplus. Just before the 2010 federal election he said that he will deliver the surplus "come hell or high water" and Julia Gillard promising in 2011: “My commitment to a surplus in 2012-13 was a promise made and it will be honoured.” Well it looks very unlikely Julia.

Labor have a history of breaking promises that hurt all Australians - 'there will be no carbon tax under a government I lead". Yes I have my bat ready for that one...

For Labor this is another failure of competency and failure of trust. Julia Gillard said it best: “You can’t run this country if you can’t manage its budget."

With the four biggest Budget deficits in Australian history, today's back-flip confirms Labor have no economic plan and no economic strategy.

Labor just can't be trusted to manage our economy.

[Rorschach]

It's probably a good time for monk to run away...

[IQS.RLOW]

Core Labor promise= There will be no surplus under a govt I lead.
Never ever.

Can you believe these fuckwits were still banging on about it just 4 days ago.
http://anthonyalbanese.com.au/transcrip ... nda-sunday" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

PETER VAN ONSELEN: On The Nation with David Speers, Joel Fitzgibbon, the Whip on your side of the Parliament, made the point that he felt that Labor needed to just be prepared to embrace the fact that the surplus was gone and that it needed to consider not having to have a surplus. Do you accept that?

ANTHONY ALBANESE: No, I don’t. The government’s been determined to return the Budget to surplus. We’ve shown in the past that we can make tough savings decisions. We’ve created space in the Budget, for example, to provide support and rebuild Queensland after the floods.

PETER VAN ONSELEN: So you’re confident that you will still deliver this surplus in May when the Budget’s handed down?

ANTHONY ALBANESE: Yes, we’re working hard to make sure that that can happen. I know I’ve been a part of the process, and we’ve recently brought down the mid-year economic forecast, and in that we had a range of measures that went through the Parliament in the last week. …

PETER VAN ONSELEN: But there’s also a lot of speculation, you know, about whether the government will achieve its surplus or not. You’ve got members – senior members of your own side saying that it should be prepared to give up on the surplus. You’ve got the latest monthly release of revenue figures showing that, I believe, revenue windfalls are down $1.8 billion in the last month alone – which is more than the surplus.

At the end of the day, when is the point going to come where the government is going to do what we all expect it do – and admit that the surplus is too hard, albeit perhaps for reasons outside of the government’s control? It looks like we are being baby-stepped towards that.

ANTHONY ALBANESE: No, if you look at what we’ve actually done and you look at the mid-year economic forecast which was just weeks ago, you’ll see what the government’s actions have been, rather than speculation about what might happen in terms of global economic forecasts.

Indeed, just this week the OECD brought down a report that once again heralded the Australian economy, indeed spoke about the Australian economy as the Iron Man of the global economy – that shows how strong we are going as an economy. We’re a government’s that’s produced lower unemployment, lower interest rates, lower spending as a proportion of GDP. All of the key economic indicators are very positive.

PETER VAN ONSELEN: And some economists would say, because of the strength of the Australian economy, it can afford to dip into a small deficit, given the nature of what is happening globally. But let me put it to you this way – because we can’t seem to find a minister that’s prepared to do more than slightly soften the rhetoric on whether the surplus is going to be achieved – if you had to walk through a door and your life depended on it, is the government going to deliver a surplus or is it going to fall into a small deficit in May?

ANTHONY ALBANESE: Well the government’s going to deliver a surplus. That’s our policy. That’s what we’ve been working towards. We’ve shown that we’ve been prepared to make appropriate cuts that don’t affect low and middle income earners, that provide that protection there. We’ve shown also we can make tough decisions without endangering that long-term economic growth – so you’ll notice we’ve continued to invest in infrastructure, because that’s about future growth, and it would be cutting off our nose to spite our face if we went down the road of just cuts for cuts sake.

[IQS.RLOW]

Only a month ago Swan released his MYEFO.

Any CFO that performed like this would resign in fucking shame

[Rorschach]

Excerpts...

Surplus swansong leaves Labor in stormy waters
December 21, 2012
Michelle Grattan

THROW out the bad news before Christmas. Hope that nobody notices. Who cares about a surplus anyway? The economists have been saying it doesn't matter, indeed that we would have been better off if the government had not locked itself into it. But Wayne Swan's ditching of the promise that the government first made in 2010 - in the budget when Kevin Rudd was still prime minister and the government expected to reap lots of loot from a robust mining tax - is a difficult and humiliating backflip.

It is a broken promise of the first order. True, in its October budget update and ever since, the government has put some qualification around its pledge. The $1.1 billion surplus was so thin there was always the risk it could not be produced.

The opposition can crow. It has said all along that the government would never deliver a surplus and, if Labor loses the election, that (probably) will be true.

Tony Abbott was quick to link them: ''You just can't trust this government to manage the economy. You just can't trust this government to tell the truth.''

At his news conference, Swan was awkwardly reminded that in 2008 he had talked about a ''temporary'' deficit, and there had been a deficit ever since. For good reasons, certainly, but words and pledges come back to haunt politicians.

One problem Swan will have is containing expectations that the way is now open for more spending. Without the discipline of the surplus target, all sorts of groups will be making demands. There will be pressure from the welfare lobby to give those on the dole a better deal, from the foreign aid lobby to restore the money diverted this week to spending on asylum seekers. Swan is adamant the government remains tough on the expenditure side.

But, of course, there will be big spending promises in the May budget, coming not long before the election. The government has said it will give firm commitments to the billions of dollars needed for the National Disability Insurance Scheme and the Gonski school funding. Swan insists these will be financed by changing priorities - in other words, there will be savings.

Every promise broken makes people more suspicious of future promises. When the government outlines the funding for the NDIS and Gonski, critics will question whether these promises will be delivered.

In moving to reposition itself from promising a surplus to convincing people that another deficit is the only responsible course, the government will be relying heavily on the weight of the experts who are saying this is the right thing to do.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politi ... z2FdGTTx5Y" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[IQS.RLOW]

Just imagine what the next fiscal years deficits will be bring considering how Swan manipulated the figures to try an get his wafer thin projection.

Swan just cemented the two things the ALP will be remembered for
Worst. Govt. Evah.
Worst. Treasurer. Evah.

[Rorschach]

thank you....
thank you so much

[IQS.RLOW]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7w8gXEusSQ8" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;