When Scott Morrison was asked to respond to economic data that showed our economy was weaker than in 2013, his answer betrayed his level of annoyance and he descended into waffle. Here's how he could have answered, writes Greg Jericho.

Last week during his first interview on ABC's 7.30 as Treasurer, Leigh Sales asked Scott Morrison to respond to economic data that suggested the economy was in a poorer shape than it was at the time of the 2013 election

His response was not strong, but it was at least better than that given by Tony Abbott to the exact same question the week before he was dumped as Prime Minister.

While the question is not that difficult to answer, it does contain a few traps down the line.

Leigh Sales's questions to Tony Abbott on September 9 was in no way aggressive or unfair, as some suggested. She merely listed economic data:

When Labor left office, unemployment was 5.8 per cent; it's now 6.3 per cent. Growth was 2.5 per cent; it's now two per cent. The Australian dollar was 92 cents; it's now around 70 cents. The budget deficit was $30 billion when you took office and now it's $48 billion. How do you explain to the Australian people that you were elected promising, in your words, to fix the budget emergency, yet in fact, Australia's economic position has worsened under your leadership?

The then prime minister responded by saying, "Well I don't accept that. The boats have stopped. The carbon tax has..."

It was clear his mind was on autopilot and he hadn't noticed he was flying into a mountain.

The answer Abbott gave presented a man lacking sharpness and one who, when forced to debate details, immediately flicked the switch to slogans.

The interview did not finish off Abbott, but it reinforced to anyone watching that he appeared a parody of himself.

Last Wednesday, the new Treasurer Scott Morrison was on 7.30 and Sales asked him almost word for word the same question. She even acknowledged as much.

Treasurer Morrison's answer betrayed a level of annoyance that had resonated through much of the interview. He responded to Sales suggestion that "Australia's economic position has worsened" by arguing, "Well I don't agree it has, Leigh, but when you look at the rate of jobs growth..."

When Sales suggested that she had "just cited all the numbers", he replied, "Well Leigh, that's your take on what all that means ... What I'm saying is that going forward we've got enormous opportunities and we've got opportunities..." (after which he fell into blah-blahville).

We don't have to do that, so let's try to answer the question.

'When Labor left office, unemployment was 5.8 per cent; it's now 6.3 per cent.'

At least Morrison can say it is now 6.2 per cent: the day after Sales asked the question to Tony Abbott the August figures came out showing a drop to 6.2 per cent. Small mercies, and Morrison can hardly claim credit and it still doesn't hide the fact unemployment has risen.

The reality is that the unemployment rate has gone up since the election, but when the LNP took office the rate had been climbing steadily for more than 18 months:

It takes a while to turn the economic ship around. And such has been the turn, that the Reserve Bank, which had been forecasting the unemployment rate to rise to 6.5 per cent, now suggests it will be "lower than previously forecast" and that "in part, this reflects the generally better-than-expected labour market conditions of late".

As Morrison did note, "the rate of jobs growth" is very good - much better than it was in September 2013:

And as he had also mentioned earlier, the reason the unemployment rate is higher now is because the participation rate has increased: more people have gone from neither working, nor even looking for work, to now looking for work. This is a good thing, as it reflects greater optimism at getting a job:

Positive spin: We're turning the ship around, things are getting better.

Reality check: Yes greater participation is good, but in the long run a higher unemployment rate just reflects higher unemployment. You can only keep up the "higher participation rate" line for so long. If employment growth doesn't continue, things will get nasty, quickly.

'Growth was 2.5 per cent; it's now 2 per cent.'

Yes, it is just 2 per cent but this is due to the end of an unprecedented investment boom, and the Treasurer could argue government spending and polices are working to assist the transition to the post-boom economy.

OK, that reasoning might come across as pretty lame, but the reality is that economic growth is pretty lame too. But it was also weak at the end of Labor's reign in September 2013 - growth of just 1.9 per cent in actual fact, not 2.5 per cent.

(Annual growth for the 2012-13 financial year was 2.5 per cent, but annual growth for 2014-15 was 2.4 per cent. Whichever measure you use, the best you can say is GDP growth is as bad now as it was then.)

A big reason it is bad now is collapsing investment - especially in the mining sector. But one thing that did keep GDP growth positive in the past quarter was an abnormally large spend by the federal government on defence:

The other big hope for the Government is that the $20,000 instant asset write-off will help drive investment in the non-mining sector; although for now it looks, at best, to be holding things steady, but it might not stop a fall in the investment in machinery and equipment in 2015-16:

So growth is weak, and there isn't much the Government can do to stop the collapse of the mining boom (just as there as little the Howard government did to start the mining boom). But low interest rates are helping the non-mining construction sector and the asset write off may be working, and certainly the defence expenditure helped in the June quarter.

Positive spin: Low growth is hard to spin, but hey look how our policies and government spending has kept things on track.

Reality check: Those polices were in Joe Hockey's last budget and were the brain child of the Minister for Small Business Bruce Billson, both of whom have been sacked. Also there won't be an abnormal defence spend every quarter, and it sure as heck wasn't planned.

'The Australian dollar was 92 cents; it's now around 70 cents'

This is the easy one: I'd just answer "Good!"

Wayne Swan would have killed for a dollar worth $0.70. The high dollar slaughtered the non-mining sector, making imports cheap and exports expensive. The government and the RBA's Glenn Stevens have been desperate for the dollar to get down to $US0.70, and now finally it is:

The dollar is not an international Newspoll on the economy; it pretty much follows commodity prices and reacts to the strength of the US dollar. And in the past two years the US dollar has become stronger and commodity prices have fallen through the floor:

Iron ore is down 58 per cent from where it was in September 2013. If our dollar didn't fall, our economy would be truly stuffed.

Positive spin: Great for the non-mining sector, great for our exporters.

Reality check: Odd that Morrison wasn't all over this. Instead he tried to talk about the China Free Trade agreement. Cripes. A lower dollar will assist our exporters a hell of a lot more than will the ChAFTA. Fortunately the new PM understands it. He told Sales last week, "The automatic stabilisers such as the exchange rate, in particular, are providing a lot of cushioning against that shock." Full marks, Prime Minister Turnbull.

'The budget deficit was $30 billion when you took office and now it's $48 billion.'

I would answer, "And so it should be. Anything else and we would be utterly irresponsible!"

When the economy is weak there is absolutely no reason to try to get to surplus. Cutting expenditure or raising taxes to rush back to surplus would only serve to stifle growth.

Positive spin: The end of the mining boom has reduced taxation. With the economy adjusted from the end of the mining boom, it is sensible to allow the deficit to increase - much like Peter Costello did during in 2001-02.

Reality check: The problem is that answer goes against pretty much everything the Liberal Party has preached for nigh on two decades, and also admits that the economy is weak, which kind of brings us back to where we started.

When you preside over a weak economy, there are usually only a few nuggets of joy to find. But you are always better off confronting the issues and data head on, than trying to blather your way through.

Expect Leigh Sales and others to keep throwing the data in the Government's face. In future, it will be interesting to see if our new Treasurer can react with less annoyance.

Greg Jericho writes weekly for The Drum. He tweets at @grogsgamut.