The Dim-Post

February 20, 2012

Treasury analysts optimistic about outlook for Treasury analysts

Filed under: economics,satire — danylmc @ 7:47 am

Citing favorable conditions and a general mood of optimism, Treasury officials are upbeat about their own prospects according to forecasts in the Budget Policy Statement released earlier this week.

Although the department’s forecasters have once again revised back their predictions of economic growth and positive terms of trade – pointing to the gloomy prospect of global recession triggered by the debt crisis in Europe – they remain extremely positive about their own departmental appropriations, raising expectations that this year will see yet another record increase in Treasury funding.

The introduction to the policy statement states, ‘Treasury has taken a very hard line about waste and expenditure in the public service and has been a driving force behind the down-sizing of over 2500 jobs in the public service. This hard work has yielded significant dividends, with taxpayer funding to Treasury increasing by over twenty-three million dollars in just three years, a spectacular 37% increase, bringing the total funding to eighty-three million dollars.’

A spokesperson for the department explained, ‘This is all the more impressive when you consider the dire economic conditions prevailing during this period. We expect this trend to continue and even accelerate over the medium term, especially if our forecasts continue to predict that the government’s policies will lead to robust economic growth. Our models indicate that our 2010 budget forecast of 3.2% growth, when the actual rate was barely 1% played a key role.’

‘Increased funding will go towards recruiting additional staff. Our motto is: ‘Do more with more.’ Current staff will continue to receive salary increases and ongoing training to improve their performance, measures which are vital to improving productivity amongst Treasury analysts, but absolutely useless when implemented in any other aspect of the public service.’

Treasury Secretary Gabriel Makhlouf has warned the department against complacency. ‘If we are to continue to capitalise on our recent successes and grow Treasury at an optimum rate, we must be inaccurate about all key economic indicators in ways that are advantageous to the current government. Simply getting the deficit forecast wrong by six billion dollars in an election year is no longer enough.’

But Makhlouf shares the overall optimism about his departments’ prospects.  ‘If Treasury is to continue to scale back the public service and reduce inefficiencies in government expenditure, then significant, ongoing expansion of this department is vital. Failure to give ourselves yet another huge funding increase would be a form of false economy.’

17 Comments »

  1. Oh, yeah, that’s the stuff. You been holding out on us, D-Mac.

    Comment by Andrew Geddis — February 20, 2012 @ 9:34 am

  2. So sad, so true…

    Change a few key words and something similar could be written about the State Services Commisison, who are so keen on the restructuring/downsizing (but of course it doesn’t apply to them).

    Comment by MeToo — February 20, 2012 @ 9:46 am

  3. Yeah baby.

    Comment by merv — February 20, 2012 @ 10:19 am

  4. Same rule for success applied to the doubling of the PM’s staff.

    Comment by ianmac — February 20, 2012 @ 10:33 am

  5. I was skim reading this and had to go back to the top to make sure it was satire.

    Comment by alex — February 20, 2012 @ 10:46 am

  6. Actually if you read treasury documents you will know they predict a spectrum of forecasts based on the inherent uncertainty of economic modelling.

    The fact that the media and politicians choose to run only with central estimates as if they are the result of a deterministic calculation says more about the critical faculties of the media and public than Treasury itself.

    Comment by swan — February 20, 2012 @ 11:56 am

  7. “Actually if you read treasury documents you will know they predict a spectrum of forecasts based on the inherent uncertainty of economic modelling.”

    Actually if you read treasury documents you’ll know they produce a range of forecasts based on what the government want to hear so that the government can pick the one that plays best in press releases at any given time.

    all fixed.

    Comment by nommopilot — February 20, 2012 @ 1:12 pm

  8. Granted there is plenty of truth in what you are saying. But none of this nonsense from the government would be possible if we had a slightly more sophisticated media.

    Why were people not asking during the election campaign: “But you are only telling us what you will do under one particular scenario. We want to know how you will respond when conditions inevitably deviate from this one projection.”

    Its like how the media trumpets HOUSE PRICES RISE/HOUSE PRICES FALL based on one months bit of noise/data from a real estate agency.

    Comment by swan — February 20, 2012 @ 3:25 pm

  9. Why were people not asking during the election campaign: “But you are only telling us what you will do under one particular scenario. We want to know how you will respond when conditions inevitably deviate from this one projection.”

    Possibly because of a fairly sophisticated media capture campaign that has been emanating from Stephen Joyce’s office for the past 3 years?

    Comment by Gregor W — February 20, 2012 @ 3:35 pm

  10. “that has been emanating from Stephen Joyce’s office for the past 3 years?”

    to be fair this was hard to spot due to being masked by the thick black cloud of PURE EVIL…

    Comment by nommopilot — February 20, 2012 @ 4:11 pm

  11. In related news…

    “Treasury predicts that futures in personal and national security-related industries look bullish. In particular, manufacturers of barbed wire, concrete barriers, and electronic security systems look set to benefit from increased public safety concerns. Security personnel firms have also reported a geometric increase in recruitment. In addition, the New Zealand Police have released statistics showing an big jump in Type ‘E’ military-style semi-automatic weapons licences, which is likely to further benefit investors who hold shares in small arms and body armour contractors. Investors are further spoilt for choice with the Government’s recent approval of ICBM silos in the country.”

    Comment by DeepRed — February 20, 2012 @ 4:53 pm

  12. Why were people not asking during the election campaign: “But you are only telling us what you will do under one particular scenario. We want to know how you will respond when conditions inevitably deviate from this one projection.”

    I think there are various laws of the universe that would prevent Treasury from being able to give scenarios for every possible future.

    I’ve always assumed that Treasury forecasts are conditional and I’m pretty sure they always make that clear. Govts will of course try and frame things in their own interest but I can’t see how that can be prevented.

    One of the reasons we have politics is because the future is and always will be unpredicatble, until the final heat death.

    Comment by NeilM — February 20, 2012 @ 7:24 pm

  13. Danyl you have missed your vocation.

    You should be a speech writer for Bill English.

    Well done!

    Comment by peterlepaysan — February 20, 2012 @ 8:43 pm

  14. Very nice with a great contribution too from Deep Red. Now, please, can we have a Shelley Bridgeman.

    Comment by Maura — February 21, 2012 @ 7:27 am

  15. Oh yes???? Because NZ is a fascist state since when???

    Comment by merv — February 21, 2012 @ 8:54 am

  16. A Treasury budget policy statement in the style of Shelley Bridgeman?? Why not? C’mon DM!

    Comment by Leopold — February 21, 2012 @ 9:01 am

  17. “Actually if you read treasury documents you will know they predict a spectrum of forecasts based on the inherent uncertainty of economic modelling.”

    In other words, the sort of predictions that make Ken Ring look completely reliable.

    Comment by Neil — February 22, 2012 @ 7:03 am


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: