Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 62

Budget time and Labor v Liberal on fiscal discipline

Part 1: Which political party has produced more government surpluses and deficits?

Much of the media coverage and debate surrounding the federal budget is coloured by political bias, uninformed rhetoric, misinformation and value judgments about whether deficits are inherently good or bad. Here we stick to the facts. While the impacts of fiscal policy on such things as jobs, pensions, debt burdens and the implications for current and future taxpayers make for heated dinner conversations, investors are primarily interested in the impacts on investment markets.

This 3-part series will put the federal budget into perspective and address questions such as:

  • How often have governments produced budget surpluses? (Part 1)
  • How do Labor and Liberal governments compare when it comes to deficits? (Part 1)
  • How do Labor and Liberal governments compare when it comes to running up (or paying off) debt? (Part 2)
  • How serious are the current levels of deficit and debt? (Part 2)
  • Have government deficits been good or bad for stock markets? (Part 3)

Issues such as whether deficits are good or bad for the country as a whole or what the money is actually spent on (i.e. productive assets or recurrent welfare, etc) are questions for another day.

History of federal government surpluses, deficits and debt

The first chart shows the history of federal government fiscal balances and debt levels since Federation, and it also shows the various governments in power. Labor governments are shown in pink and ‘right-leaning’ governments, mainly Liberal and Liberal Coalitions, in blue.

Chart 1: Federal government deficits and debt since Federation

The top section shows the annual government balance (surplus or deficit) expressed as a percentage of GDP, for June years up until June 2013. (Gross Domestic Product, or ‘GDP’ is a common measure of total national output, production, income and spending). A government surplus or deficit in a given year is the total amount of government revenues collected (mostly through taxation) minus total government outlays.

Most of the media attention each year is centred on the budget speech in May of each year (was August in the early years) for the following fiscal (June) year. The budget speech is a statement of policy and intent, but budget measures announced are often amended or modified during the year. What we are concerned about here is the actual outcome each year. That is not just talk or policy or politics, it is fact.

We can see that federal governments have run surpluses (green bars in the top section of the above chart) in only a very small number of years since Federation.

Chart 2 shows that Labor governments have achieved government surpluses in just 18% of all years they were in power, while right-leaning governments have done marginally better, with surpluses in 26% of years in power.

Chart 2: Surplus/Deficit years

Surplus years are rare

Surplus years have been few and far between. Aside from the early years of balanced budgets (before Canberra existed!), the only surplus budget outcomes have been in the following years:

  • 1933, 1934 and 1936 resulting from the depression austerity plan under Joe Lyons (UAP). Deficit spending to stimulate the economy was not an option because foreign credit markets refused to lend to Australian governments following the default and restructure on the entire stock of domestically held government bonds in 1931. The government had no option but to balance the budget by imposing austerity measures including savage cuts to wages and spending
  • 1949 (just) under Chifley (Labor)
  • 1988, 1989, 1990 and 1991 under Hawke/Keating, in the late 1980s boom prior to the deficit spending in the 1990-1991 recession
  • 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2001 under Howard/Costello, in the ‘dot-com’ boom prior to the impact of the ‘tech wreck’ slowdown
  • 2003 through to 2008 under Howard/Costello (although Labor under Kevin Rudd won the election during the 2008 fiscal year), in the 2000s mining/credit boom prior to the ‘global financial crisis’.

Chart 3 shows Labor budget balances have been worse on average than Liberal/right governments (ie deficits under Labor governments have been double the size of deficits under Liberal/right governments).

Chart 3: Median government balance since federation (as percentage of GDP)

Even if we just look at the post-war era the differences are still significant, and reflect the philosophical differences between the major parties on the role of government in society and in the economy.

Changes in government fiscal balance

More important than the actual level of government fiscal balance from year to year is the change in the balance. This is the case for a couple of reasons. The first is that every government inherits the budget position from the prior government and so the incumbent government has more control over changes in government spending and revenues than it has over the levels of spending and revenues.

The second reason is the change in balance rather than the level reflects the incumbent government’s fiscal stance and its effects on the economy. For example if a government goes from a deficit of $50 billion in one year (as it will in 2013-14) to a deficit of ‘only’ $30 billion in the next year (as is forecast in 2014-15), the $20 billion in lower spending and/or higher taxes in the second year represents a substantial tightening of fiscal policy even though the deficit in the second year appears expansionary if viewed in isolation.

Chart 4 shows that Labor governments have a slightly better record of reducing deficits over the whole period since Federation and also in the post-war period, although in the majority of cases it was reducing their own deficits, since Labor governments also ran significantly larger deficits than Liberal governments.

Chart 4: Median change in government balance (as percentage of GDP)

Some conclusions

Some conclusions include:

  • Apart from the golden era before Canberra existed, and in the 1930s depression when Australian governments were excluded from foreign debt markets (and therefore unable to run deficits) following the default, government surpluses have been very rare.
  • The surpluses occurred in unsustainable economic booms – the late 1980s credit-driven ‘entrepreneurial’ boom, the late 1990s ‘dot-com’ boom, and the 2000s credit and mining boom.
  • Australia’s unusually high levels of population growth, economic growth, favourable demographics and broadening tax revenue base are conducive to central governments running modest on-going deficits, as long as the deficits are used to invest primarily in productive assets rather than recurrent spending and welfare. To date this has tended to be the case in Australia.
  • The string of government deficits during Labor’s most recent period in office was not unusual compared to prior Labor or Liberal/right-leaning governments.
  • Labor governments have run fewer surpluses and larger deficits (expressed as per cent of GDP) compared to Liberal/right-leaning governments.
  • In the post-war era, Labor has produced four surplus years compared to the Liberals’ eleven. In the pre-war era, the big debt build-ups in WW1 and WW2 were bi-partisan, but the 1930s surpluses were the result of partisan austerity measures of the Lyons UAP governments (forerunner to Liberal Party).
  • The pre-WW1 period was a golden fiscal era of balanced budgets and no Canberra!

In Part 2, we will look at the record of Labor versus Liberal governments in running up (or reducing) government debt levels. Then in Part 3, we will examine the impact of government deficits and surpluses on stock market returns, under Labor and Liberal governments.

 

Ashley Owen is Joint CEO of Philo Capital Advisers and a director and adviser to the Third Link Growth Fund.

 

5 Comments
Alan Austin
May 07, 2022

The problem with this analysis is that it fails to take into account the global economic conditions at the time of each government.
A much more sound approach is to look at where Australia ranked in the world, or among developed economies, on deficits and debt for each year. That is the approach taken here and elsewhere:
https://michaelwest.com.au/scott-and-josh-superior-economic-managers-not-according-to-the-imf/
Can you please try this, Ashley, and see how your results compare with those in Michael West Media.
Happy to discuss. Cheers, AA.

mkin
November 18, 2017

Govt deficits help grow the economy to the point where the non govt sector booms. Then when the economy is net spending govt debt falls. Govt borrowing is for liquidity control not to fund spending.
A fiat currency govt creates dollars when it spends. The is the whole reason govts abandoned the fixed exchange rate system.

James Davey
May 16, 2014

As Dickens correctly said "Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery".

LKB
May 16, 2014

And as a mentor of mine once drilled into me: when in debt, a dollar spent is a dollar borrowed.

Pat Connelan
May 16, 2014

The state of the budget is largely a reflection of what's happening in the global and local economic cycles.

It's in the media's interests to talk up whether brand Pepsi or brand Coke is better at balancing the budget, but discretionary outlays are just one part of the input to the process.

Howard and Costello governed during a boom; Rudd, Gillard and Swan during the worst developed economy recession since the 30s.

When comparing outcomes you need to look at what was achieved given the parameters of the time. Arguably, a government which delivers small surpluses at a time of glorious prosperity and massive tax receipts is less capable than one who manages aggregate demand successfully during a global bust but at the expense of modest deficits.

Budget surpluses aren't ends in themselves. There is no right or wrong about them. What matters is good policy attuned to the needs of the cycle and the social and civic obligations of government.

 

Leave a Comment:


RELATED ARTICLES

Running up and paying off government debt

Federal Government budgets and their impact on the stockmarket

Which political party is best for share prices?

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

The nuts and bolts of family trusts

There are well over 800,000 family trusts in Australia, controlling more than $3 trillion of assets. Here's a guide on whether a family trust may have a place in your individual investment strategy.

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 581 with weekend update

A recent industry event made me realise that a 30 year old investing trend could still have serious legs. Could it eventually pose a threat to two of Australia's biggest companies?

  • 10 October 2024

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 583 with weekend update

Investing guru Howard Marks says he had two epiphanies while visiting Australia recently: the two major asset classes aren’t what you think they are, and one key decision matters above all else when building portfolios.

  • 24 October 2024

Preserving wealth through generations is hard

How have so many wealthy families through history managed to squander their fortunes? This looks at the lessons from these families and offers several solutions to making and keeping money over the long-term.

A big win for bank customers against scammers

A recent ruling from The Australian Financial Complaints Authority may herald a new era for financial scams. For the first time, a bank is being forced to reimburse a customer for the amount they were scammed.

The quirks of retirement planning with an age gap

A big age gap can make it harder to find a solution that works for both partners – financially and otherwise. Having a frank conversation about the future, and having it as early as possible, is essential.

Latest Updates

Investment strategies

Warren Buffett is preparing for a bear market. Should you?

Berkshire Hathaway’s third quarter earnings update reveals Buffett is selling stocks and building record cash reserves. Here’s a look at his track record in calling market tops and whether you should follow his lead and dial down risk.

Economy

US election implications for investors and Australia

The return of Donald Trump to the US presidency brings the prospect of more US tax cuts and deregulation, but also more tariff hikes, trade wars and policy uncertainty. Here's what it means for markets going forward.

Retirement

The rising tension between housing debt and retirement balances

Australians are taking more mortgage debt into their 60s than ever before. Retirement planning assumptions haven’t adapted and could result in future income projections that ultimately disappoint retirees.

Investment strategies

Why megatrends can deliver big upside (and downside)

The magnitude and duration of society's most important trends are often underestimated. While these trends are usually touted as a tailwind, one in particular could have dark consequences for many assets.

Property

Fixing the construction industry house of cards

Australia needs to build new homes like never before but construction firms keep going belly up. Unless regulators act now, consumers will continue to carry the can.

Investment strategies

How investor portfolios have become riskier versus history

Risk in portfolios has dramatically increased as time horizons have shortened and investors have piled into equities. It's resulted in a growing disconnect between what investors need and what the financial industry is delivering.

Shares

The abacus, big data and a brief history of indexing

Equity indices have evolved over time, led by step-changes in our ability to manipulate data. Despite the rise of passive investing, they weren't initially meant to be investment tools.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2024 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.