Lucky, Lucky, Lucky?
Flying back into Australia this morning after a short sojourn in Europe felt like returning to a fiscal safe haven and a veritable economic oasis.
The southern spring has well and truly sprung, no banks or savings institutions have been nationalised and even the normally nervy Treasurer Wayne Swan is starting to sound like an Iron Chancellor compared to some of his counterparts elsewhere.
Last month, the IMF decided that Australia was well placed to weather the financial storm.
It also commended the Australian authorities on 'their impressive economic management in the fiscal, monetary and structural areas, which has spurred a sustained and long- lasting economic expansion."
What other countries would give right now for a similarly clean bill of financial health.
To quote the great Kylie Minogue - if only to juxtapose her words against those of the big brains at the IMF - is Australia "lucky, lucky, lucky?"
At times like this, it's tempting to fall back on the old Lucky Country argument: that Australia's economic growth is almost preordained because of its rich supply of natural resources, like coal, liquid natural gas, iron ore and uranium.
Certainly, the flourishing mining sector has stimulated a massive investment boom in Australia. That also helps explains why the federal government is flush with cash at a time when other developed nations are mired in debt. The government has forecast a surplus of A$22bn (US$17bn).
Still, there's more to Australia's comparatively strong position than luck. I'm usually one of the first to have a moan about this country's bureaucratic overkill and official petty-mindedness. But the strict regulation of the banking sector is one of the main reasons why Australia has had no Lehman Brothers or Northern Rock.
It is no coincidence that of only 20 banks in the world with a top-line AA credit rating, four are Australian.
This is one of the few OECD countries which does not guarantee bank deposits. But arguably it does not have to, because the regulatory framework is so strong. As a result, the banks are sound.
"The bottom line is this," boasts Kevin Rudd. "Strong regulation, the best regulatory system in the world, strong balance sheets on the part of our banks, as well as a strong budget situation on the part of the Australian Government means that Australia's situation in this period of global financial turbulence is the best that you could have."
It would be wrong to gild the lily. Australia has its fair share of economic problems. The turbulence on the markets is a huge concern for those approaching retirement, whose pensions are bound up in stock portfolios.
Rising fuel and food prices remain a problem. Mortgage payers are struggling still with high interest rates, which the Reserve Bank looks set to drop by 0.5% next week (although the banks will not necessarily pass the full cut on to consumers).
Growth is negligible, at 0.3% in the last quarter, but predicted to be 2.7% for the year overall.
Rather like Gordon Brown, Rudd is positioning himself as a serious man for serious times. As your comments on After the Honeymoon demonstrate (see paulcrossleyiii, BrightonStevie) many of you are happy with a fairly boring leader.
Others clearly hope for an end to what some journalists have taken to calling Rudd's policy constipation.
Many thanks to klldbbydth for providing some rich historical context, and to Carlton Blue for coming up with an enviably deft line: "The honeymoon is definitely over for Kevin 747 and what have we got? Symbolism and jetlag."
Australiana also pre-empted this blog. "Well capitalised financial system, interest rates threatening to go down, unemployment rate low and apparently going nowhere, large budget surplus, summer almost upon us." Australiana, you seem to be channeling Kevin Rudd.
I'm 
Comments
or to comment.