With Mark Vaile stepping down from the trade portfolio so he can focus on rearranging deckchairs, his deputy Warren Truss has taken over. Which makes it timely to ask: when the Coalition is in power, why does the National Party get the trade portfolio? Sure, the Nats know farms. But in an economy where agriculture makes up only 3% of GDP, and only 50% of our exports, shouldn’t the PM give the portfolio to the best person in the Coalition caucus, not the next National Party MP in line?
-
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
PJD on Turning Points PJD on Turning Points Clinton McMurray on Turning Points ChrisPer on Turning Points Daniel Waldenström on Turning Points Archives
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- February 2005
- January 2005
- December 2004
- November 2004
- October 2004
- September 2004
- August 2004
- July 2004
Categories
- Australian issues
- Australian Politics
- Behavioural Economics
- Blogging
- Book launch stuff
- Books
- Coming Events
- Current Affairs
- Development Economics
- Eclectic Observations
- Econometrics
- Economics & Public Policy Course
- Economics for Government Course
- Economics Generally
- Economics of Education
- Economics of Elections
- Economics of National Security
- Economics of the Family
- Election
- Environmental Economics
- Film
- Finance
- Food and Drink
- From the Frontiers
- Games
- Global issues
- Health economics
- Indigenous Policy
- Inequality
- Interesting stuff
- Iraq
- Jobs
- Labour Economics
- Law
- Low Wage Work
- Macroeconomics
- Media
- Prediction Markets
- Randomisation
- Religion
- Social Capital
- Sport
- Sports
- Tax
- Television
- Thinktanks
- Trade & Development
- Travel
- Uncategorized
- Universities
- Urban Economics
- US Politics
- Web/Tech
- Weblogs
- What I'm Reading
Meta
The evidence that the “Nats know farms” is in fact rather thin: Don Day held the rural NSW state seat of Casino for many years on the basis of farm votes because the National Party’s agricultural policies discriminated against dairy farmers from the Far North Coast (in favour of farmers closer to Sydney). When Labor was elected to Government under Wran in 1976, they were able to introduce a fairer and more efficient system of milk distribution. Over the last 40 years, Labor has been by far the better manager of agriculture in NSW, in terms of both policy and execution.
I should have said that Don Day held Casino for the ALP.
I agree. I’d even go further and say that agriculture accounts for only 15% of exports – there’s a lot of minerals and fuel exports in the 50% you cite. And it’s not at all clear to me that Nationals have any special knowledge about the resources sector.
Although, perhaps the Nats would counter by saying that trade in resources, services and manufactures (to some degree, at least) is relatively free, but a host of restrictions remains for agricultural trade, making their special knowlege valuable.