The coronavirus hit has exposed the extraordinary depth of Australia’s economic dependence on China and fueled questions over whether the nation is too reliant on the Asian behemoth.
That dependence is on display in the Western Australian coastal town of Geraldton, where an ocean “dragon” fires the incomes of local fishermen.
The longxia (龍蝦), literally “dragon shrimp” in Mandarin, is prized at celebrations in China for its rich red color, horns and spine that remind Chinese of the mythical creature. The coronavirus shutdown on the eve of Lunar New Year means Geraldton’s fishing fleet is stuck at port during this traditionally bountiful period.
Illustration: Louise Ting
Geraldton Fishermen’s Co-operative chief executive officer Matt Rutter estimates that the rock lobster catch between then and the end of March would normally be close to 2,000 tonnes, with a market value of more than A$120 million (US$78.3 million), but not this year — boat captains, deckhands, truck drivers, export packers and others have seen little work and even less cash.
“It’s the first time there’s been a stop on fishing,” Rutter said.
Australia is the most China-reliant economy in the developed world, with about one-third of its exports going there. Chinese nationals make up about 38 percent of its foreign students and 15 percent of its tourists.
“We’re getting a test run on what many people worried might have happened as a result of political tensions, but instead it’s a result of a health crisis,” said Richard McGregor, a senior fellow at the Lowy Institute in Sydney. “So we’ll see how the Australian economy holds up and we’ll get a test of the ability of various sectors like tourism and education to diversify their customer base.”
A shipment of honey illustrates how quickly the scales have turned.
In December last year, wellness and nutrition group Eve Investments struck its first deal with a Chinese distributor for organic honey from its Meluka Australia brand. The shipping container holding that order of more than 21,000 units from its property outside Ballina on the New South Wales north coast is now being held up on the docks in Sydney, awaiting clearance from its destination port in Shanghai.
“The biggest issue at the moment is one of logistics. With some of the ports sending people home, it does complicate getting product in there in a timely manner,” Eve Investments managing director Bill Fry said.
For now — like many Australian businesspeople — Fry remains fixed on the massive dividends a country of 25 million can reap by tapping into the demand of 1.4 billion people.
Longer term, the virus could drive demand for Meluka honey as people turn to products with medicinal value “to try and boost their immune systems,” Fry said.
Ben Woodward, who along with his two brothers runs the CaPTA Group, with nature parks and jungle tours across Far North Queensland, says the cascading effect of the coronavirus’ fallout is in a league of its own.
“This is uncharted territory,” he said. “It doesn’t just affect tourism, the spillover affects other industries like retail, transport, cafes and so forth as well.”
The family — whose business started in 1976 — has cut hours for some of the 200-odd staff across its butterfly sanctuary, wildlife reserve and other businesses.
It is smaller firms in Australia that are “working-capital dependent” that are most at risk, said Tim Toohey, a former chief economist for Australia at Goldman Sachs Group Inc.
He said he was surprised that the government has not put in place a system to cushion the blow.
“It wouldn’t cost a lot, and it would probably save a lot of jobs and businesses that would be very hard to restart again,” said Toohey, now head of macro and strategy at Yarra Capital Management.
The terrible timing of the hit to fishing and tourism was matched by the blow to Australia’s education sector — the fourth-largest export industry.
In Sydney, the nation’s oldest university is scrambling to cope with 15,000 Chinese visa holders locked out by the travel restrictions just as the academic year begins.
The danger is that Chinese parents could pull their children out of Australian institutions and instead send them to the UK or Canada, where the year begins in August or September.
Officials at Sydney University are trying to be flexible and keep communication open, with a dedicated Web site and videos for Chinese students.
It has been made clear that they can catch up if needed and that there are alternative paths if the travel ban is prolonged.
Chinese nationals made up just under one-quarter of the university’s total student population last year.
Students would “have the option to defer or withdraw without penalty by the final census date of 31 March 2020,” said Michael Spence, vice chancellor and principal of the University of Sydney.
The one-child policy has meant that Chinese students have the most disposable income of any international group. That produces a “ripple impact” on accommodation providers, cafes and restaurants when their spending dries up.
Australia’s retail industry, already struggling for sales among frugal customers, is also in the firing line. Major outlets such as Harvey Norman Holdings Ltd and JB Hi-Fi Ltd face potential shortfalls of stock.
China is the key source for mobile phones, computers and televisions, and for Harvey Norman, furniture and mattresses and cushions.
Should a supply shortage emerge, it would be difficult to offer the sales and discounts that have been necessary to bring customers through the door. The scale of China’s dominance in these sectors means there is not another country that can easily step in to make up the shortfall. That could trigger something unseen for almost 20 years: inflation on electrical and other consumer goods.
The ripple effect across Australia’s economy has rekindled the question of whether the country is too concentrated on supplying and being supplied by China — a debate that has flared before, but never with such a compelling backdrop.
Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) Governor Philip Lowe has in the past said that Australia would find alternative markets if Chinese demand waned, but prices would probably be lower and therefore the country would not be as prosperous.
The central bank — which hit pause on last year’s interest rate cuts for fear of driving up home prices and debt — is clearly worried about the growth risks.
“The outbreak presented a material near-term risk to the economic outlook for China and for international trade flows, and thereby the Australian economy,” the RBA said in the minutes of its Feb. 4 meeting, where it kept rates at a record-low 0.75 percent.
S&P Global Ratings said that Australia faces a “material knock to growth” from the virus, and has cut its GDP forecasts by half a percentage point. It expects the RBA to respond by easing twice more this year, taking the cash rate to its estimated lower bound of 0.25 percent.
Even before the virus, Australia’s government was trying to diversify export markets with a series of free-trade agreements. The latest was with northern neighbor Indonesia, the world’s fourth most populous country; it is still negotiating one with India, on track to overtake China as the world’s most populous nation this decade.
Australia is also in talks with the EU and UK and has inked deals with Japan and South Korea, and has joined the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership.
Yet it is hard to escape China. Even where Australia started off with diverse customers, such as with its vast liquefied natural gas projects, Beijing is increasing its purchases of the fuel each year.
Up in northwest Australia, the site of major iron ore mines and offshore liquefied natural gas (LNG) projects — the No. 1 and No. 3 exports — the news is better.
Iron ore ships take 14 days or so to sail to China, covering the quarantine period, and LNG is relatively well insulated by long-term contracts.
However, prices have slid as traders factor in the blow to demand; that effect would eventually find its way to Australians’ pockets.
High iron ore, coal and natural gas prices are key to the terms of trade — the economy’s income — and this filters through taxes to government coffers, underpins Australia’s “AAA” credit rating, and makes its way to households in the form of welfare payments, tax cuts or health and education spending.
In other words, a threat to commodities revenue is a threat to Australia’s financial muscle.
Longer term, there is another side to the picture.
China’s top leaders have signaled that they are planning to increase stimulus this year through fiscal and monetary policy. When China stimulates, it tends to build, and while observers do not expect anything on the scale of 2009 after the global financial crisis, the injection is set to translate into demand for steel-making iron ore.
“China’s vast supply of goods has seen Australia’s income stretch further, and purchase more, than ever before. So to lose your largest customer and largest supplier at the same time is a shock of unfathomed proportions,” Bloomberg economist James McIntyre said. “The longer the disruptions persist, the deeper the unknowns and the larger the shock becomes for the economy.”
Australia’s currency has depreciated a bit more than 3 percent in the past month as investors — who use the Aussie as a proxy for China — pushed it to decade lows in response to the crisis.
Even still, UniSuper chief investment officer John Pearce worries that the financial market is still not grasping the scale of the crisis.
“We have the world’s second-largest economy, the world’s engine of global growth, effectively in shutdown. It’s only a matter of time before this starts impacting on short-term corporate profitability,” Pearce said. “I’m astounded at how complacent the market has been.”
Meanwhile, Rutter said that boat owners are waiting for the lobster market to re-stabilize before getting skippers and deckhands out to sea, and onshore staff like truck drivers and export packers back to work.
Still, he is philosophical: “All our concerns and the issues we face just pale into insignificance compared to what the Chinese people are going through.”
Chinese strongman Xi Jinping (習近平) hasn’t had a very good spring, either economically or politically. Not that long ago, he seemed to be riding high. The PRC economy had been on a long winning streak of more than six percent annual growth, catapulting the world’s most populous nation into the second-largest power, behind only the United States. Hundreds of millions had been brought out of poverty. Beijing’s military too had emerged as the most powerful in Asia, lagging only behind the US, the long-time leader on the global stage. One can attribute much of the recent downturn to the international economic
Asked whether he declined to impose sanctions against China, US President Donald Trump said: “Well, we were in the middle of a major trade deal... [W]hen you’re in the middle of a negotiation and then all of a sudden you start throwing additional sanctions on — we’ve done a lot.” It was not a proud moment for Trump or the US. Yet, just three days later, John Bolton’s replacement as director of the National Security Council, Robert O’Brien, delivered a powerful indictment of the Chinese communist government and criticized prior administrations’ “passivity” in the face of Beijing’s contraventions of international law
In an opinion piece, Chang Jui-chuan (張睿銓) suggested that Taiwan focus its efforts not on making citizens “bilingual,” but on building a robust translation industry, as Japan has done (“The social cost of English education,” June 29, page 6). Although Chang makes some good points — Taiwan could certainly improve its translation capabilities — the nation needs a different sort of pivot: from bilingualism to multilingualism. There are reasons why Japan might not be the most suitable role model for the nation’s language policy. Bluntly put, Japan’s status in the world is unquestioned. The same cannot be said of Taiwan. Many confuse