Matthew Canavan Barnaby's Economist

 

Matthew Canavan Fax 074922004

This is a continuation of a debate challenge  following my letter to you on 9th July 2013.

You were recommended as Barnaby Joyce's chief economist. I had told by a professor at Monash University in Churchill Victoria that Australia has no future in fruit growing. i added some other items for consideration but after many reminders on the phone following that letter I gave up - until now. There is a by-election in New England so this seems to be an opportune time- especially as I have just presented a debate challenge to Malcolm Turnbull relating to the contention that free trade in water will cripple Australian agriculture.

 

Australian agriculture is in bad shape. We recognised it a long time ago. For years we tried to contact Barnaby but he employed someone we described as ‘the Bureaucratic Wannabe.’ Melinda Hashimoto diverted and delayed us for years. One memorable high point was when I asked for Barnaby to comment on a report from a professor at Monash University who stated that Australia has no future in fruit growing and other contentious statements. Melinda referred us to Barnaby’s chief economist Matthew Canavan. We felt that we had achieved something special. After some initial discussion I summarised our requirements in a letter on 9th July 2013.

‘Dear Matthew,

 

‘My principal requests seem to me to be easy to define. The one economist I talked to said:

 

  1. Australia has no future in fruit growing
  2. The reduction in tariffs since 1970 has been good for Australian manufacturing to minimise traditional manufacturing   to provide a transition to capital based activities. Cutting edge animation design might support a dozen jobs. There were have to be a lot of them to balance the million or so conventional jobs lost.    
  3. I have the names of economists I contacted but there has been no response. It seems that economists now have debt – not production – as a basis for comparisons
  4. I phoned Matthew a number of times but he kept putting me off. Then I gave up.
  5. ‘Please find attached a graph (Attachment xxx) comparing two Developing Countries (China and Indonesia) and of two Developed Countries (USA and Australia). It also shows the deterioration in Australia’s situation. Please comment on the 30:70 rule.’
  6. ‘My understanding is that Lance felt that at least 30% of Production (manufacturing and agriculture) is needed to support 70% of Services each as percentages of GDP. It is also my understanding that under 30% (and we are well under that) represents a government in paralysis.
  7. My life was changed when I saw a DVD produced by Lance Endersbee in 1996. I did not see it until 2011 after Lance had passed on. I could not believe the low figures for Production and Agriculture. I checked and found that each had reduced since then. A few years on I found manufacturing to be down to 7.2% and agriculture down to 1.2% each as a percentage of GDP. Referri

    ‘My understanding is that Lance felt that at least 30% of Production (manufacturing and agriculture) is needed to support 70%  of  Services each as percentages of GDP. It is also my understanding that under 30% (and we are well under that)  represents a government in paralysis.

     

    ‘Please find attached a graph (Attachment xxx) comparing two Developing Countries (China and Indonesia) and of  two Developed Countries (USA and Australia). It also  shows the deterioration in Australia’s situation. Please comment on the 30:70 rule.’

     

    I phoned Matthew a number of times but he kept putting me off. Then I gave up.

     

    I have the names of economists I contacted but there has been no response. It seems that economists now have debt – not production – as a basis for comparisons

    ng to the attachment the four columns on the left hand side were produced by Lance and I have added the others
  8.