A fascinating post from Gene Tunny at Adept Economics over the weekend which attempts to dispel the (widely held) view that the North of the state has received less than its “fair share” of capital expenditure from Brisbane.
I would point out that the imbalance, as evidenced by Gene’s data, is greater for the Rest of Queensland (approx +45%) as a whole than it is for North Queensland (approx +32%). Also, within Gene’s definition of North Queensland, the imbalance comes largely from a significant overspend in the Fitzroy region where capital expenditure appears to be some 60% above that justified by population levels. A similar level of overspend is also seen in Inner Brisbane. One might also argue that Darling Downs-Maranoa would be considered as SEQ (certainly by those in the North) where the “overspend” seems to be close to double that justified by population.
A problem with any analysis of capital expenditure is that during any one year expenditures are inevitably very lumpy; large scale expenditure projects tend to be like that. Even considering for a longer period, as Gene has done (in this case 5 years), is unlikely to smooth out all this lumpiness; mining related infrastructure in the Fitzroy region could well be a case in point here.
Nevertheless, however one wishes to cut the cake, the data seems to show clearly that over the period analysed (the past 5 years) the North of the state certainly hasn’t done badly from State government spending; no matter what the received wisdom seems to suggest.