‘Pretty soft': First quarter GDP numbers analysed
Principal at Economics Unchained Stephen Halmarick discusses Australia's first quarter 2025 GDP figures, claiming they are 'pretty soft'.
'Unfortunately, it looks like the first quarter GDP numbers are going to be pretty soft, maybe around 0.3 per cent for the quarter,' Mr Halmarick told Sky News host Ed Boyd.
'That's slower than the fourth quarter of last year, which was 0.6.
'So, you know, continuously, it's like a very subdued economic environment we've had for a number of years now.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News.com.au
32 minutes ago
- News.com.au
Australian company Intrepid Travel fights back against Donald Trump threat to US national parks
An Australian company is fighting back against Donald Trump's planned upheaval of US national parks. Since US President Donald Trump took office, more than 1000 park workers have been laid off (more than 700 others took buyouts), and more are expected to be let go. There is also a proposal to cut more than $US1 billion ($A1.5 billion) in federal funding for the US National Parks Service (nearly 40 per cent of the agency's current budget). NPS oversees 85 million acres of federal land and there are 433 sites in the National Park System, with parks in every state. National Park Conservation Association president Theresa Pierno described Mr Trump's proposed budget plan as 'catastrophic,' arguing that the 'national park system would be completely decimated'. Mr Trump wants to see some parks (that the White House describes as 'not 'national parks' in the traditionally understood sense') go to the states, but there are concerns states don't have the resources to maintain the parks, which will force them to close. The White House claims the proposed budget would 'continue supporting many national treasures, but there is an urgent need to streamline staffing and transfer certain properties to state-level management to ensure the long-term health and sustainment of the national park system'. Aussie-born company fights back A Melbourne-born global travel company, which runs tours across 18 US national parks, has made its stance clear. Speaking to on Thursday, Intrepid Travel's Leigh Barnes described national parks as 'incredibly important' to the US and said the White House's massive proposed funding cuts are 'putting access at risk'. 'We need healthy, vibrant national parks for our business, and also the impact of not having tourism go to national parks in the USA is going to put local businesses underground,' said Mr Barnes, an Australian who relocated to Seattle this year to take up the role of managing director of the Americas. In response to the Trump Administration's actions, Intrepid has now launched limited edition 'Active-ism' trips in the parks, hosted by influential activists and local guides. The trips are about $US500-$600 ($A770-$920) cheaper than a standard itinerary, despite the addition of an activist. 'That has been a deliberate focus, making them as accessible as possible,' Mr Barnes said. 'They're not going to be the world's greatest profit generator for the organisation, but that's not the purpose.' Intrepid will also donate $US50,000 ($A77,000) on behalf of its travellers to nongovernmental organisations protecting the US national parks. Intrepid has 26 trips across 18 national parks, and employs 200 local guides and 60 staff there. The company has taken more than 20,000 travellers and expects to host another 5000 this year. Mr Barnes explained that it's not just direct jobs at the US National Parks Service at risk. 'They (national parks) are absolutely amazing economic drivers for these areas. Having these national parks creates jobs in and around the national parks ecosystem. Not just the national parks employees but all the little smaller businesses and ecosystems it supports,' he said. He added: 'They're a massive pride and icon in the USA. 'We want to ensure these amazing parts of the USA are not just here for this generation but the generations beyond.' Mr Barnes said the more people who experience nature, the more that are likely to advocate for these spaces, so his team simply asked themselves, 'how do we encourage more people to go out to national parks?'. The Active-ism trips include two five-day 'Zion and The Grand Canyon' trips hosted by public lands advocate Alex Haraus in November and environmental advocate Wawa Gatheru in April next year, and then two six-day 'Yellowstone and The Grand Tetons' trips hosted by climate educator Michael Mezzatesta and environmental author Leah Thomas in June next year. The target market is Americans but anyone can book. Discussions guests can expect include the current threats facing US national parks, the impact of climate change, Indigenous land rights, equity in outdoor spaces, and how to turn awareness into advocacy. Mr Barnes, previously Intrepid's chief customer officer in Melbourne, took on leading the Americas side of the business at a challenging time for US tourism. March — the same month Mr Barnes relocated his family to the States — saw the sharpest drop in Australians travelling to the US since during the height of the Covid pandemic, according to US International Trade Administration statistics. Australian visitor numbers fell 7 per cent in March this year, compared to March 2024 — the biggest drop since March 2021. Flight Centre and Intrepid Travel told last month bookings to the US had dropped significantly as Aussies, Canadians and Europeans choose to travel elsewhere. Globally, Intrepid saw a year-on-year 9 per cent decline in US sales for the first four months of the year. US sales for Australian and New Zealand travellers in particular were down 13 per cent. April alone was down 44 per cent on last year. But other areas such as South America are 'booming'. As a result, Mr Barnes said his team had increased their focus on domestic travel within the US, promoting the right products at the right time, and increasing their brand presence (last week Intrepid became an official partner of the Seattle Storm WNBA team). All eyes on American tourism The global tourism industry is keeping a close eye on the impact of Mr Trump's strict border stance and other controversial government policies like sweeping tariffs are having on travel. On Thursday, Mr Trump signed a new travel ban banning people from 12 countries to 'protect Americans from dangerous foreign actors'. The ban targets nationals of Afghanistan, Burma, Chad, Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. Flight Centre CEO and founder Graham Turner told it was an 'unsettled climate' impacting business travel, while tourists worry about passport control and others simply don't want to go to the US 'because they don't like what Donald Trump's doing'. Tourism Economics — which forecasts foreign traveller arrivals in the US will sharply decline this year resulting in a loss of $9 billion in spending — said decisions from the Trump Administration are creating a 'negative sentiment shift toward the US among travellers'. The travel data company's April report cited Mr Trump's stance on border security and immigration as one of the factors discouraging visits. Mr Trump rejects the notion that the country's tourism industry is in any trouble — saying 'tourism is way up'. Security checks at US airports have garnered much attention in recent months amid Mr Trump's 'enhanced vetting' for arrivals at US airports and cases of tourists being denied entry on arrival, and at times, strip searched and thrown in prison. Former NSW police officer Nikki Saroukos is one of those people who recently travelled to the US using an Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA) under the Visa Waiver Program and was deported, but first she had to spend a night in a federal prison. She said she was subjected to invasive searches and humiliating treatment for trying to spend time with her US military husband stationed in Hawaii. The US Department of Homeland Security later issued what it described as a 'fact check' on X after she went public with the ordeal, accusing her of having 'unusual activity on her phone, including 1000 deleted text messages from her husband'. Homeland Security said 'officers determined that she was travelling for more than just tourism'. But Ms Saroukos strongly denies having any plans to live permanently in the US. The Sydney resident, who married her husband Matt in January after a whirlwind long-distance romance, told she was 'in disbelief at how ridiculous' the statement was and claimed that some of the information included had been 'twisted'. Why denied tourists can end up in federal prison CBP has long had strong powers to deny entry, detain and deport foreigners at their discretion when travellers arrive in the country even if they have a valid visa or ESTA. However, what we are seeing under the Trump administration is described as 'enhanced vetting'. Australians are being warned to not assume they are exempt to more intense checks, including inspections of emails, text messages or social media accounts at the airport. Melissa Vincenty, a US immigration lawyer and Australian migration agent who is managing director of Worldwide Migration Partners, told recently that being taken to federal prison with no criminal record, no drugs or anything that is a danger to society is the reality of being denied entry to the US in Hawaii. Ms Vincenty, a dual-citizen who was a deportation defence lawyer in Honolulu before moving to Australia, explained the state did not have an immigration facility so people were taken to the Federal Detention Center Honolulu, where there was no separate wing for immigration. It meant tourists who were denied entry to the US could be held alongside those awaiting trial — or who have been convicted and were waiting to be transferred to a mainland prison for serious federal crimes, such as kidnapping, bank robbery or drug crimes. 'It's like in the movies — you go there and there's bars, you get strip searched, all your stuff is taken away from you, you're not allowed to call anybody, nobody knows where you are,' Ms Vincenty told in April after the experience of two young German tourists being strip searched and thrown in prison made global headlines. Ms Vincenty said for Australians who were denied entry to the US in other locations like Los Angeles, San Francisco or Dallas, being held in detention facilities until the next available flight home was a real risk as there weren't constant return flights to Australia — meaning you might have to wait until the next day. If not taken to a detention facility, some travellers may stay sitting for hours in what is called a secondary inspection at the airport. A secondary inspection includes further vetting such as searching travellers' electronic devices. 'That period can last from half an hour to 15 hours or more,' she said.
News.com.au
an hour ago
- News.com.au
Experts back NSW Premier Chris Minns' plea for cigarette tax cut despite opposition
NSW Premier Chris Minns says law-abiding citizens are being 'dragged into the black market' by the federal government's tobacco tax – and he wants that to change. Mr Minns threw down the gauntlet this week when he called for a re-evaluation of the tobacco excise, kicking-off political rows in both Sydney and Canberra. Twice yearly, the federal government sets the excise for tobacco products but in this year's budget recorded a $5.2bn decline in revenue since 2022-23. The NSW Premier has pointed the finger at illicit sales at tobacconists, some 5000 of which have opened up across NSW over the past few years. 'There's a whole bunch of law-abiding people who wouldn't break the law in a million years,' Mr Minns said. 'But, they're being dragged into a black market where they go to the store and they can either buy a $17 packet of illegal cigarettes or a $60 packet of cigarettes. 'It's a no-brainer.' Despite pushback, Mr Minns said every tax change started with 'an idea from someone who calls out a policy that's no longer fit for purpose'. 'So, let's get the ball rolling here because these illegal tobacco stores are pushing out hot bread shops, small businesses and restaurants. 'Because the sales from illegal tobacco are so lucrative, they can just pay the rent at a higher price. 'Something's gone amiss here and we need to have a crack at fixing it alongside our federal colleagues.' Mr Minns earlier signalled that police resources may have to be moved from domestic violence and organised crime to combat illicit tobacco. Mr Minns said the situation was 'intolerable', with 'every to-let shop in every high street in Sydney taken over by a tobacconist'. 'The biggest supporters of a massive excise on tobacco sales in NSW are probably organised criminals,' he said. 'It's a giant black market and major display on every street in every suburb in NSW.' No easy answers On Wednesday, federal Treasurer Jim Chalmers ruled out any change to the excise, saying making cigarettes cheaper wouldn't solve the issue of the booming illegal tobacco trade. In NSW, there are about 19,500 tobacco stores across the state – up from 14,500 a few years earlier – that are overseen by only about 30 health inspectors. A parliamentary inquiry into illicit tobacco sales, pushed for by the NSW opposition, will later this year examine which agency is best suited to the task. Until now, Liberal leader Mark Speakman has remained mum on whether NSW Police should takeover illicit tobacco enforcement from NSW Health. On Thursday, Mr Speakman said illicit tobacco had exploded under Mr Minns and organised criminal gangs were 'raking in big money'. 'They know NSW has minimal enforcement and some of the weakest penalties in the country,' Mr Speakman said. 'While other states have acted to drastically increase penalties and improve enforcement, Chris Minns has been missing in action. 'Now that the federal Treasurer has ruled out changes to the federal excise, Chris Minns needs to tell people how he is going to tackle this issue.' Under law, an individual found to be selling a prohibited tobacco product faces a maximum fine of $55,000 for a first offence. Those laws will change on July 1 when a new tobacco licensing scheme is introduced, requiring businesses to obtain a tobacco retailing licence. Businesses found to be selling tobacco products without a licence will face fines of up to $220,000 and $44,000 for an individual. Nonetheless, the issue sparked a fierce debate in NSW parliament on Wednesday between Mr Speakman and Police Minister Yasmin Catley. Asked about whether anti-gang Taskforce Falcon will expand its remit to illicit tobacco, Ms Catley struck out. 'The leader of the opposition knows that it is Health that enforce illicit tobacco. He knows that,' she said. 'And, he has come in here and has the audacity to come in here and say the police are not doing their job. Well, shame on you. Shame on you. 'NSW Police are doing absolutely everything they can and I am disgusted that the leader of the opposition could come to the NSW parliament and suggest otherwise.' For his part, NSW Health Minister Ryan Park has pointed the finger at the former Coalition government for not earlier introducing a licensing scheme. What do the experts say? Over the past six years, the duty price put on a 20-pack of cigarettes has gone up by about 75 per cent – from $16 to $28. As a result, the price of a packet at the counter sits about $40-50, with the cheapest little more than $30. Illicit cigarettes, meanwhile, cost about $13-15 per 20-pack and up to $20 for premium brands. University of Sydney School of Public Health researcher Edward Jegasothy supported Mr Minns' comments on the tobacco excise. He said there was no solution to the prevalence of illicit tobacco without a re-examination of the 'punitive' policy. 'There's really no ethical basis for the policy because it's essentially just a punitive policy attack on the poor,' he said. Mr Jegasothy said the policy had failed to demonstrate any 'meaningful health benefits and certainly no equitable health benefits'. 'I can't see a solution that doesn't have involve bringing down the tax,' he said. 'It has to be part of the solution … because it is essentially putting more holes in the bottom of the boat.' Mr Jegasothy said the belief that the excise, in increasing the cost of cigarettes, would reduce rates of smoking 'didn't hold water'. With rates of smoking higher among poor and marginalised groups, he instead encouraged solutions that addressed the root causes, 'which is largely poverty'. He urged for a review of the excise as a public health policy, including up until the explosion of black market sales in the early 2020s. That explosion, Mr Jegasothy suggested, came as a result of a combination of factors, including the cumulative impact of the excise and a tightening on loose leaf tobacco. The Australian Association of Convenience Stores has also backed Mr Minns' call for a rethink of the tobacco excise. Chief executive Theo Foukkare said it was 'extraordinary that it's gotten to this point'. 'Tobacco is a price-sensitive consumer product,' he said. 'If you put a price on it that is manifestly higher than what people can afford, they'll find a cheaper alternative and that's where this incredibly dangerous black market is cashing in – and even worse, they're using that money to fund the most atrocious crimes.' What about other states? NSW is far from the only state or territory in Australia where the issue of illicit tobacco has become a hot-button topic in recent years. In Victoria, police have continuingly battled the so-called tobacco wars, conflict between organised crime groups during which stores have been burned. According to Victoria Police, there were about 1300 stand-alone tobacco stores in the state – of these, 1000 sell some kind of illicit tobacco. From July 1, business caught possessing or selling an illicit tobacco product in Victoria face fines of up to $1.7m. For an individual, that penalty is about $830,000 or 15 years in prison. Further north, Queensland Health seized more than 15.2 million illicit cigarettes worth $12.2m across the state between July 1, 2024 and February 28, 2025. Mr Jegasothy said outside of NSW and Victoria, there was little publicly available information about the prevalence of illicit tobacco.
ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
Aldi is known for drawing inspiration from big brands. Here's how experts say the retailer does it
It's no secret that Aldi, the supermarket chain that once had the slogan "like brands, only cheaper", sells products visually similar to well-established competitors. In the cereal aisle of each store, brown boxes of Power Grain are reminiscent of their Kellogg's counterpart, and in the snack aisle packets of Blackstone chips appear to draw inspiration from Red Rock Deli. In the US, blue boxes of Aldi-brand cream-filled biscuits are so similar to Oreos that the company behind the snack giant is suing the supermarket for "blatant copying". It's not the first time the chain has landed in legal trouble over its cheaper, duplicated private-label brands. In Australia, there have been several legal cases against Aldi. But intellectual property and consumer experts are not worried about this case creating legal implications for Australian consumers, who they say are largely unphased by Aldi's "phantom labels". "Ultimately the key reason they [Aldi] do this is about visual congruence," retail expert Gary Mortimer said. "So, when we're shopping in a supermarket, it's historically a mundane, habitual, low-involvement decision-making context. 'You walk down an aisle and you think Cadbury is purple. They [consumers] are influenced by pack colour, brand name or packaging shape." Professor Mortimer said when a consumer saw a product similar to another brand's, they might infer it was the same. "What the danger is, is a customer goes, 'Well, actually, their cereal is just as good as the Kellogg's version,'" he said. "Brands themselves spend a lot of money ensuring their brand is high quality. "Then a new player enters with a private label that looks very similar and, therefore, all of that positioning you've done with that product, the private label takes advantage of that position. "Brands would be concerned about that." Professor Mortimer said the private Aldi label was perceived as higher value than, say, the Coles or Woolworths generic-brands. "You won't get Aldi-brand biscuits, you'll get Belmont." In fact, they are so popular, other chains are taking a leaf out of the Aldi playbook, creating their own, cheaper, private brands. He said Woolworths and Coles had created private labels that sold cleaning products and pet food. "To some point, supermarkets understand we won't feed our dog Woolworths pet food but we might feed them a cheaper brand like Baxter's, which is actually Woolworths owned." With Choice ranking Aldi as the cheapest supermarket in Australia in its past five surveys, legal experts say the occasional legal challenges Aldi faces for sailing "close to the wind" with its packaging and branding are largely justified. While Aldi has faced legal challenges in Australia in the past over its packaging and the likeness of its products to rivals, the University of Sydney's Fady Aoun says it is far more challenging to take Aldi to court here. The senior lecturer in intellectual property law said this was because Australia's legal systems were vastly different to those in the US, for instance. "In the realm of trademark law and other forms of forms of policing commercial practices, American law is vastly different to Australian law," he said. "And, in addition to trademark infringement, they have something called unfair competition, which Australian law doesn't adopt "Their trademark law is far more protective of arguably trading interests and goes further than the Australian law in this respect." But there are several ways legal action can be pursued. Last year in Australia the company Hampden Holdings and Lacorium Health Australia successfully sued Aldi Foods for breach of copyright in relation to children's food products. Hampden licenses intellectual property to Every Bite Counts, which sells children's food products under Baby Bellies, Little Bellies and Mighty Bellies, which are sold in Australia. In 2018 and 2019, Aldi engaged the company Motor Design to re-design the packaging for its baby food and product range. The case found that in April 2019, Aldi instructed Motor Design to reuse the Little Bellies brand as the "benchmark" for the re-design of the packaging for its Mamia dry food range. The packaging and labelling were put side by side in court documents to highlight how similar each looked. "Aldi, they sail close to the wind," Dr Aoun said. "They sometimes overstep the mark. Other times they're just short of what is impermissible. "I suspect there is a strong legal department there and that's their business mode." The court found Hampden and Lacorium's owned the packaging designs. Aldi is currently appealing against the court decision. It was approached for comment. "The typical claims in Australia here are trademark infringement, misleading and deceptive conduct and — much more difficult — the common law action of 'passing off'," Dr Aoun said. "Hampden is just a company that holds IP rights and they are the holder of the copyright," Jane Rawlings, an intellectual property barrister said. "So they weren't suing on the trademark; they were suing on the look of the packaging, how it presents itself to consumers. "That was successful because the court had found Aldi had deliberately modelled their snacks on the Baby Bellies." Separately, Aldi won a federal court appeal in 2018 against a deceptive conduct ruling over hair care products brought against the supermarket chain by Moroccanoil Israel. Dr Rawlings said this was harder to prove. "You have to show there is reputational goodwill in the brand, and in this purpose it is by using a similar name, brand or look that misleads consumers and that damages the goodwill of the brand because they're being diverted to a cheaper alternative or because the brand owner is losing sales," she said. "You have to still prove the conduct has been deceptive and what Aldi do is tread a fine line where they've got a lookalike brand but it's not enough to argue consumers are being misled." In the UK in 2023, Cider producer Thatcher's successfully won a legal battle against Aldi, claiming it "copycatted" its Cloudy Lemon Cider in "taste and appearance". This was a lookalike trademark case that argued Aldi's Taurus drink had been "deliberately riding on the coat-tails" of the cider company's reputation as a brand. Dr Rawlings said she believed registering a brand as a trademark was one of the best ways to protect it. "To be honest, and if I were a brand owner trying to protect the look of packaging, I'd be looking very seriously at trademarking registration because it's relatively cheap and then you can basically sue on the trademark registration." Ultimately, experts agree the impact on consumers is relatively low. "What Aldi will typically say is our consumers are not confused [and that] while they may draw inspiration from leading brands there's no confusion people know what they're getting," Dr Aoun said.
