Latest news with #MichaelBailey
ABC News
10 hours ago
- Business
- ABC News
Tasmania's election campaign should be fought on the budget, business leader and economist say
When Labor declared it had tabled a motion of no-confidence in Premier Jeremy Rockliff, it listed three main reasons. They were the potential privatisation of public assets, the failure to deliver the new Spirit of Tasmania ferries on time, and the state of the Liberal government's budget. On that budget, here are a few quick figures: Now, with Tasmania in an election campaign, business leaders and economists are hoping to hear the major parties' plans for repairing the balance sheet. The Tasmanian Chamber of Commerce and Industry's Michael Bailey says as the election is largely about the budget, the campaign should be fought on it. "Tasmania has a spending problem at the moment. "We need to make sure that we can get our spending back under control." That partially refers to the fact the state has a history of spending more than it budgets for, particularly in health. Here's how the Liberals and Labor have been treating the issue of spending and budget repair: Elections are often a big-spending affair. The Liberals have previously been accused of pork barrelling (slang for bribing the electorate for their votes), but they say they are simply listening to community concerns. Labor also promised a whole heap of community grants last election. The main difference is the relevant department would eventually assess them to decide if they were worthy of spending money on. There are also a whole heap of other policies, such as the stamp duty exemption for first home buyers, that will cost taxpayers money. And those spending promises really add up. Economist Saul Eslake says Treasury data shows the 2018 and 2021 elections each added $1.4 billion of spending to the budget without any mention of how to pay for the promises. Last year's was even more expensive. "[The levy is] about the only election commitment that hasn't been met since the election. "Labor would've spent an additional $2 billion over five years if they had won. "So, to hope that that wouldn't be repeated in the election campaign would be a bit like Samuel Johnson's definition of second marriage — a triumph of hope over experience." At the moment, 40 per cent of Tasmania's money comes from the carve up of GST. Around a third is own-source revenue. Mr Eslake has put forward several options to raise more money, including collecting more payroll tax from businesses, raising car registration fees, adding a duty on the purchase of expensive new motor vehicles — "with appropriate concessions for pensioners and other low-income earners". He also suggested switching stamp duty to a land tax and increasing mining royalties. He says Tasmania collects about $40-50 million a year less than it would if its scheme was equivalent to those of other states. Money could also be found by asking the salmon industry to pay royalties for the use of Tasmanian waters. "That wouldn't solve Tasmania's problems, of course, but it would make a useful contribution to reducing the deficit over time." All of these ideas have been rejected by the major parties. Mr Rockliff also pointed out that legislative changes in 2023 meant the salmon industry now pays for its own regulation. "The salmon companies cost government. They return that to government, so it's cost neutral and that's been a significant reform under our government," he said. Another way to raise revenue, selling off state-owned companies and government business enterprises has been ruled out by both major parties already. As have any new taxes. Growing the economy is also a big part of how both major parties plan to get the state out of debt. As part of that, the Liberals have been waging a war on red tape, and if some of Labor's new policies are anything to go by, they're planning to do the same. When asked about increasing revenue, Labor leader Dean Winter talked about growing the economy by unlocking $25 billion in renewable energy developments. Premier Jeremy Rockliff on the other hand said investments in key services such as health, education and community safety would help increase revenue. The TCCI's Michael Bailey is less worried about the revenue side of things. "You don't give someone with a spending problem more money," he says. Mr Bailey wants the parties to find efficiencies in the public service, arguing that it's grown by 30 per cent since the COVID pandemic. "We know that we're borrowing to pay for those wages," he said. "They do wonderful work, but it's simply too big for what Tasmania can afford right now, so we would argue that that's the first thing that should be looked at." Both major parties have revealed their plans to find some savings, and they include the creation of new units. The Liberals' plan, which was announced in March, is called the Efficiency and Productivity Unit (EPU); Labor has the Review and Evaluation Unit (REU). Two names and slightly different descriptions for two things that will do very similar things — examine the effectiveness and value for money of government programs to try and identify savings. The Liberals are assuming they will be able to cut spending to the point where in three years' time overall government expenses will be less than they are this year. They hope to find savings through: Labor's plans to "save the budget more than half a billion dollars", while not outlined in an alternative budget, were part of leader Dean Winter's budget reply speech. They hope to do this by: This list is far from extensive, however, none of the policies have been costed by treasury. If the party that wins government does not right the ship, Mr Eslake estimates Tasmania is heading to a debt of $16 billion by 2035 with repayments to hit $750 million a year. "We've gone from in the middle of the past decade, being a net creditor, that is having more money in the bank than the government owes by way of debt, to now having debt and other liabilities," Mr Eslake said.
New York Times
28-02-2025
- Sport
- New York Times
Is the modern game leaving the traditional No 9 behind?
Football is constantly evolving, but it feels like one position has been through more iterations than the rest. On the latest episode of 'The Athletic FC Tactics Podcast', Michael Bailey, Michael Cox, Mark Carey and Liam Tharme discussed the evolution of every role on the pitch. In this section, they focused on the striker, how it has changed over the last five years and what demands the top teams expect from those leading the line. A partial transcript has been edited for clarity and length. The full episode is available on the 'The Athletic FC Tactics Podcast' feed on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Michael Bailey: Let's talk about strikers. If you're Liverpool or West Ham you don't even need one anymore to win some might say. But the number nine; where are we at with how that position has evolved in the last five years Mark? Mark: It sounds counterintuitive, but I wanted to start by how much focus there is on the out-of-possession element. It just feels like you cannot carry a striker if they're not willing to put in the hard work and make sure they're closing down either the number six or one of the centre-backs. I'd heard this quote from Thiago Motta. He said, 'I count the goalkeeper as one of the seven players in the middle of the pitch.' But he then said, 'For me, the striker is the first defender and the goalkeeper is the first attacker. The goalkeeper starts the play with his feet and the attackers are the first to put pressure to recover the ball.' That's not an outrageous thing for a modern-day manager to say. But it speaks to the fact that we're thinking about a striker and the attacking output, and that's key. But without the defensive output, I don't think strikers would be considered as much now at the elite level. Advertisement Michael Cox: Maybe the most interesting thing I've seen in football in the last couple of years was in the Women's World Cup final in 2023 in Sydney. England were 1-0 down to Spain at half time and Sarina Wiegman made a double change where she took off Alessia Russo, who was the centre forward, and she took off Rachel Daly who was playing on the left but had finished as top goal scorer in the WSL. She then brought on two wingers, but they were 1-0 down and needed a goal. I remember in the press conference afterwards asking her, 'Not being funny, but why on earth did you do that? You need a goal (laughs)?' And she said, 'Spain had so much of the ball and we weren't getting any of the ball, so there's no point in having players who are good in the box.' So she played three wingers in an attempt to press high up and win the ball back. England lost 1-0 and she didn't bring on another centre forward until the 87th minute. I just thought that was incredible. I would never have thought any manager would do that when they were trying to get a goal. Taking off your two best goal scorers because all the focus was on pressing, I thought that was fascinating. Liam: There's a prime example also with Ange Postecoglou when Tottenham… or Tottenham Hotspur as they wish to be called… Michael Bailey: No we can still call them Tottenham… Liam: When they signed Dominic Solanke. His goal record at Bournemouth was really good and he's scored goals this season. But Postecoglou has made a really big deal about what he does out of possession. Spurs are a great example because they are probably the most intense team without the ball in the league in terms of the physical numbers, the regains of possession and various other data points. And Postecoglou is someone that speaks very openly about that sort of thing. Advertisement Michael Bailey: It's quite an interesting comparison that we've got with the top two number nines in the league in Erling Haaland and Alexander Isak. One feels a more modern version of the role than the other. That seems a harsh thing to say on someone like Haaland with where he is and everything he's proved to be. Essentially the three other positions we've spoken about before this; if you've got good players there, you can afford a number nine to be less involved in the build-up because you're covered off elsewhere. Liam: With the caveat of Manchester City having quite a poor season and looking at them when they've been stronger in recent years, with Haaland at the top of the pitch there's no benefit to him going to drop in and play. Because that's going to start him running into space where the number tens or the wingers are. We spoke about how good Phil Foden was last season, that was partly because he had a striker that would occupy centre-backs. Isak can also do that really well but Newcastle are a very different team in the way they attack. They can be a bit more vertical, they use the wide areas more, they like to cross quite a lot and they've got flying fullbacks on the overlap. We were speaking about Joško Gvardiol earlier on down the left, but Lewis Hall is one of the top players for (overlapping) with Gordon coming in from the left as well. I think it's just the profile that suits the team rather than any specific trends either way. Michael Cox: I don't think that much has changed from 2020 in terms of reality because there's no evidence that the big teams in the Premier League get better with a proper number nine. Good spells tend to come when they play a slightly falser player up front and have lots of others contributing. I know Haaland has won the league twice and finished top goal scorer twice, but I don't think City were necessarily better than the previous season before he came. When you look at the numbers, the season before he came they scored more goals, got more points and conceded fewer goals. I'm not saying he's been bad — individually he's been magnificent. But they're roughly on the same level. He's the best goal scorer out there and even he's not definitively made them better. Arsenal were not great when they had Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang as their main striker. Manchester United were not great when Cristiano Ronaldo came back, even though he scored lots of goals. Romelu Lukaku didn't work out for Chelsea. Tottenham lost Harry Kane and were OK last year. Solanke's come in and he's done quite well, but they're a worse team. And with Liverpool, Darwin Núñez tends to make them worse. They're better when they play a bit more of an all-rounder up there. So I'm still quite sceptical of the value of a good number nine. The big teams need it in their armoury; a bit like Núñez at Brentford when he scored two in stoppage time, that's the perfect role, a plan B to come off the bench. But as a default strategy, I'm not sure you want someone like that. You can listen to full episodes of The Athletic FC Tactics Podcast for free on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. (Top Photo: Simon Stacpoole/Offside/Offside via Getty Images)
