Budget 2016: The election will be won or lost elsewhere
Updated
Scott Morrison's first budget won't help win an election, but it probably won't hurt the Government either. Back to the slogans, the scare campaigns and the targeted advertising, writes Barrie Cassidy.
So what has been the point of the Coalition Government?
That's a reasonable question to ask of this Government and of every government before it.
And if immediately after the presentation of its third budget is not a fair time to raise it, then how about the 1,000-day milestone that falls slap bang in the middle of the formal election campaign?
By any measure 1,000 days is plenty of time to make a difference on budget repair, taxation reform, debt, deficit, unemployment, interest rates and inflation.
Yet this budget barely shifts the markers on any of the above.
Unemployment - perhaps the most important of them all - is right where it was in 2013 - 5.7 per cent.
Budget repair too has been delayed because of a soft economy and the closeness of an election.
The Treasurer argues that nobody obsesses about debt and deficit anymore. He might be right. Except it was the Coalition that was once the most obsessive.
The fact is the budget never was in a crisis. It isn't now.
The one area though where the Coalition should have made a difference is government spending and, in that regard, it's done next to nothing.
The one area though where the Coalition should have made a difference - given its political ideology and constant rhetoric - is government spending and, in that regard, it's done next to nothing.
According to the Treasurer's own figures, government spending as a share of the economy is running at 25.8 per cent. It will still be as high as 25.2 per cent four years from now.
By comparison, when Paul Keating and Peter Walsh ran the economy in the late 80s it was as low as 22.9 per cent. At the height of the GFC, under Rudd and Swan, it was just a touch higher than it is now at 26 per cent.
And even then they managed to reduce it to 24.1 per cent before it rose again.
Labor left it at 25.6 per cent.
In the end, this budget is the sum of its smaller parts.
More budget analysis from The Drum
- Annabel Crabb: Guru Morrison's budget that's totally a plan
- Barrie Cassidy: The election will be won or lost elsewhere
- Ian Verrender: There's no surplus in sight
- Terry Barnes: Morrison has delivered a Menzian budget
- Greg Jericho: Budget 2016 is a story with a few loose ends
- Alan Duffy: Scientists live to fight another year
On that score there are pluses and minuses.
The biggest plus is the taxation boost to small business. The small business tax rate will be lowered to 27.5 per cent and the threshold - the definition of what is a small business - will be increased from $2 million to $10 million in turnover.
Then each year the threshold rises from $10 million to $25 million, to $50 million and eventually to $100 million.
The second plus is that the Turnbull government has embraced revenue raising and gone where Tony Abbott would not have gone - on tobacco excise, excesses around superannuation and probably on multinationals and their tax arrangements as well.
The minus strangely enough is the personal tax cut.
By granting a tax cut at $80,000 and beyond - and denying it to everybody below that salary - the government has given Labor a free kick on fairness. They've done it to try to better balance the tax to GDP ratio, and to modestly tackle bracket creep.
But it's a bad look. It has that downside and no upside because who on $80,000-plus is going to be grateful for $6 a week? It's the classic sandwich and milkshake tax cut without the sandwich.
The one saving grace perhaps is that those on less than $80,000 won't be as resentful as they might have been, because they'll probably say, who cares? Six bucks!
This has for so long been flagged as the budget that must save the Government from deteriorating polls. It probably won't do that, and it probably won't do any harm either.
The election will be won or lost elsewhere as a range of issues come into sharper focus.
Back to the slogans, the scare campaigns and the targeted advertising.
Barrie Cassidy is the presenter of the ABC TV program Insiders.
- Check out our dedicated budget 2016 news site
- Take a look back over our blog to see how budget night unfolded
- Winners and losers of the 2016 budget
- Budget sliced and diced: Where every dollar comes from
- Work through the waffle with our budget jargon buster
- Take the world's hardest budget quiz
- Cut through the BS (budget spin) with our pass notes
Topics: turnbull-malcolm, scott-morrison, budget
First posted
Comments (180)
Comments for this story are closed.
Jenny:
03 May 2016 9:00:05pm
Turnbull and Morrison should be judged on this Budget. The Turnbull-Abbott Government have had three years, three Budgets to address the "debt and deficit disaster'. What have they done? They have trebled the deficit and increased spending. They have given up on doing anything about debt and deficit. They killed the economy. When was the last time the Reserve Bank cut interest rates just a few hours before the Budget was delivered in order to kick start the economy? It has never happened before. Turnbull and Morrison have no idea how to manage the economy now, or to take the country forward. They have failed dismally and deserve to be booted out of office as soon as possible.
Alert moderator
John:
03 May 2016 9:59:22pm
Jenny, I have not been at all impressed with the Abbott-Turnbull governments. I won't go into why as the list is long.
However to be fair Abbott and Hockey did attempt budget repair in their first budget. They were then purposefully obstructed in the senate, and the senate was cheered on by people such as yourself, hence no real fiscal policy of any substance or consequence was passed.
Forgive me if I find all the people squealing about this a little hypocritical, or at least politically opportunistic.
Alert moderator
bobrox:
03 May 2016 10:22:28pm
If by doubling the government debt is how you judge hockey as trying to fix the defecit then yes.
Alert moderator
harvey:
04 May 2016 8:09:56am
Morrison says that our company tax rates have to be cut to be competitive across the world in 10 years time.
The competitive tax rate these days is Zero %.
Does this mean the LNP is aiming to tax large multinationals nothing in 10 years time ?
Alert moderator
Blzbob:
04 May 2016 8:53:35am
Only the one who give them political donations I'll bet.
Tax cuts! Tax cuts! Tax cuts!
Seems this government believes it has no other duty than to deliver unconditional tax cuts.
If you want to grow employment, then why not tie those tax cuts to the amount of tax paid by the businesses employees and share holders to the ATO.
Reward companies that are Australian owned, and companies that employ the most and pay the best.
Alert moderator
deluded_jim:
04 May 2016 9:10:10am
... and that's essentially what they did with the 40% profit shifting penalties.
Alert moderator
Peter:
04 May 2016 8:58:25am
Does this mean the LNP is aiming to tax large multinationals nothing in 10 years time ?
Why would you make such a stupid comment? In 10 years businesses with a turnover below $100 million will pay 25% Most multinationals have a turnover over this and will continue to pay30%
Alert moderator
harvey:
04 May 2016 10:34:00am
Peter, the Tax Office has a big list of multinationals that pay NO tax now. No tax at all. Some of them even get refunds.
If a company is getting away with paying no tax now, why on earth do you think in 10 years they will be paying 25% or 30% tax ? Ain't gonna happen.
Meanwhile the few suckers that pay tax are getting their rates cut again. And again. I guess we don't need no stinkin' schools or roads or hospitals.
Alert moderator
Eric:
04 May 2016 11:46:57am
So Harvey - why don't you tell us if you are one of the 50% of families who pay NO net income tax? If you fall into this category you are relying on the other 50% to pay for those things you take for granted.
Alert moderator
Rhonda:
04 May 2016 1:33:34pm
Eric, everyone pays tax - we have a GST which ensures that.
Alert moderator
Rhonda:
04 May 2016 1:33:34pm
Eric, everyone pays tax - we have a GST which ensures that.
Alert moderator
Kocsonya:
04 May 2016 10:38:58am
Peter:
Most multinationals have a turnover over this and will continue to pay3%
There, I fixed it for you.
Alert moderator
Alpo:
03 May 2016 10:24:16pm
John, the Senate saved Australia from the horrible consequences of the 2014 Budget from Hell.... But I understand your feelings. As a Neoliberal you are shocked that your Liberal Government was incapable of pushing the Neoliberal budget through the Senate. Lesson to learn: The majority is fed up with the Neoliberal experiment, John!
Alert moderator
Rhino:
03 May 2016 10:54:09pm
Like everything else there is the right way to do it and the wrong way to do it.
Which way do you think the 2014 budget did it?
Alert moderator
ThingFish:
03 May 2016 11:09:12pm
"Forgive me if I find all the people squealing about this a little hypocritical, or at least politically opportunistic."
And the fact that Abbott and Hockey blatantly lied to the voters before the election and therefore had no mandate for their 2014 "budget" counts for nothing? The Senate did the job it was there to do and deserves to be cheered for carrying out it's democratic and constitutional duty.
Alert moderator
Jerry Attrick:
04 May 2016 12:51:38pm
Bravo, ThingFish!
The 2013 election lies invalidated any action by that government.
Alert moderator
Anon E Mouse:
03 May 2016 11:12:34pm
John, rather than budget repair, the Libs just took money from services to fund their pet punitive projects.
The Greens gave the Libs an unlimited deficit, and they have almost doubled what they inherited from Labor.
Vast amounts of money is being spent on things like the new border control, contracts to run the off-shore gulags, and gifting lucrative contracts for work-for-the-dole and making life as hard as possible for welfare recipients.
Sure they saved money by cutting 10-15% of staff from crucial areas like the ATO, so that they struggle to combat the big end of town dodging their taxes.
Libs splashed the cash on 2 political witch hunt Royal Commissions.
The Lib/Nats are a profligate and reckless govt with no plans to rule, except to make the rich richer and the poor poorer.
Alert moderator
Lucy:
04 May 2016 8:32:42am
That is where you are wrong, the Libs did not take money from services as they couldnt - the senate did not pass the budget.
Alert moderator
Jean Oliver:
04 May 2016 9:18:45am
Most of the budget was passed Lucy just not the insane bits. The GP co-payment was not to reduce the deficit but to go into a new Medical Research fund. That budget was the most idiotic document I've ever read.
Alert moderator
Circular:
04 May 2016 9:32:14am
Lucy, the budgets were passed. There was no blocking of supply and no dissolution of parliament. The appropriation bills went through and the vast majority of cuts and increases made it through with Labor's support. Some issues, such as the Medicare copayment didn't see the light of accession but these would not have contributed enormously to deficit reduction. It did though severely dent the Libs political capital.
Alert moderator
Chubblo:
03 May 2016 11:14:34pm
John: Can you outline the specific debt and deficit disaster measures you're referring to? My memory's a little bit lazy but I'm jus wondering exactly what Abbott and Hockey couldn't get through that would have stamped their legacy in Australian history...as opposed to the flushable wipe that's now stuck in the sewage system and now no one knows how to get rid of it.
Alert moderator
Rae:
04 May 2016 9:27:46am
The Libs managed to get the senate to pass the self funded retirees legislation and to make it retrospective. It hasn't hit yet but the effect on superannuation will be very much like those wipes stuffing up the system.
No one would put non concessional amounts into super now so this years changes are unnecessary. They still have no idea what they have done.
Alert moderator
Old Red:
04 May 2016 12:39:56am
@John
Problem was that they were completely inflexible in how they tried to fix the budget and the way that all measures were targeted was to screw the poorest and most vulnerable while actually giving more to those who already have the most. That was never going to fly and they didn't help their case given Joe Hockey's ridiculous comments and the image of him smoking expensive cigars while criticizing 'leaners' and planning to leave young unemployed people penniless for half a year. The later helicopter ride of Bronwyn Bishop and her attitude towards being called out on it merely confirmed the sense that the government had one law for the rich and another for the poor.
Many other options were available than just budget cuts aimed squarely downwards - indeed this budget's changes to super for the wealthy as well as Shorten's attempt to reduce negative gearing and capital gains tax benefits shows clearly just a couple of the other options were. As does removing loopholes that allow tax avoidance. So would raising more revenue via removing some of the unsustainable tax cuts and other middle and upper class welfare measures that John Howard took us into our long period of structural deficit with.
Simple fact is that the ALP accept that spending cuts are necessary but the LNP doesn't accept that increasing revenue is and we can't fairly and responsibly fix the problem without both. Finally at the end of the day it's up to the government of the day to negotiate passage of bills through the senate - the Abbott-Turnbull government did not do so effectively despite an opposition far more willing to practice bipartisanship than they had been at any point in opposition themselves.
Without being willing to deviate from their ideological position to get things passed or to negotiate properly instead of stomping their collective feet like children not getting their way they let the economy slide and problems worsen. They don't now get to blame this on other people - they were the government, the buck stops with them at the end of the day.
Alert moderator
Lucy:
04 May 2016 8:34:52am
Yep, many other options such as raising taxes which all Australians agree with, as long as it isnt them paying the extra tax.
If you cant raise revenue, then you must cut costs to try and balance the budget.
Of course in real terms they couldnt do either since they couldnt get a budget passed by the senate.
Alert moderator
Jess:
04 May 2016 10:23:56am
I'm just below where the tax cut will cut in. If it had been a tax hike for me of $6 a week for me I really wouldn't have noticed it. It would have had no impact on what already spend my money on.
If it went to public health, public education even primary source of income centrelink payments I would have been fine with it.
A $10 a week infrastructure project levy with a choice of what it went to - fine.. The vast majority would choose FttP NBN.
Alert moderator
Eric:
04 May 2016 11:50:45am
So you won't notice an increased $6 into your bank eh? Bet you would have said something quite different had the Govt decided to take %6 out of your bank account.
Alert moderator
rusty cairns:
04 May 2016 4:20:52am
GDay John
I disagree about them trying to repair the budget in 2014.
They used accountants to formulate a health policy that was to see every man, woman and child to pay an extra $7 to see a GP (remember it was only after each individual child had visited the GP 7 times in a year that the further consultations for the child were to be fully covered by medicare ) the health care providers explained very clearly that health issues not treated early often become a lot more expensive to treat at a later date. So any savings in the first few years would have been negated by an increased cost in later years.
No unemployment benefits for people under 25 years old for the first 6 months they are unemployed, I ask how could that have not cause a downturn in our economy ? Surely they didn't think that these young people were banking ( i.e. not spending it back into the economy ) their unemployment benefits did they ?
Having a high HECS debt to pay back at a later date isn't budget repair it's just more budget pressure for someone at a later date.
The budget delivered last night without the income tax cut is more like the budget that Hockey should have delivered in 2014 in my view.
That 2014 budget should have done something to stop the tax minimisation for the rich that superannuation has become.
That 2014 budget should have increased the number of tax investigators not decreased them.
Believing there wasn't going to be a RET target had an negative effect on investment in cleaner more sustainable energy production. Why did it take so long for Abbott and Hockey to recognise this, the industries involved made enough noise for them to hear. It was the ALP that had to ask (beg ) them to come back to the negotiation table to negotiate a Renewable Energy Target.
Gees mate they sacked a commissioner for the disabled but appointed one for wind farms. We that live in the tropics have lived with the "whosh" noise our ceiling fans and air conditioners make for decades, has any sickness because of that noise been identified over those decades?
As it has suggested in the article above, what was all that crap about budget emergency and where has that so called emergency gone ?
I believe that Turnbull and Morrison could have sold us an increase in the GST had the learners Abbott and Hockey done the work on how those people that would have needed to be compensated for the same, been done. I believe Turnbull and Morrison found that only slogans were on that policy table when they took control.
Alert moderator
Circular:
04 May 2016 5:29:36am
The Lib method is 'My way or the highway' John. If the Libs had even a modicum of the negotiation skills of just about any previous gov't in the last 30 years, with special reference to Gillard, then they could have got so called 'disaster measures' through. But they didn't and so we are reduced to banal assertions of obstructionism. The fact that they actually increased the deficit is an indication to me that we are being treated as fools by the puppet masters.
They are reaping what they sowed.
Alert moderator
Forrest Gardener:
04 May 2016 6:14:39am
Yeah C, because you can see the sweetness and light coming from your team every day on these pages.
And the greens were really going to do something other than form a coalition with Labor, weren't they.
Be serious.
Alert moderator
Circular:
04 May 2016 9:17:05am
FG I am serious. You may be just a bit tainted by a rusted on ideology. Again, I ask you to prove my statement wrong that this government is incapable of negotiation to create a workable compromise. Ever since the Senate became a real house of review, and not just a rubber stamp (have a look at the constitution and consider the role of parties on the concept of a states house), governments have had to negotiate in a responsible and constructive way. This present government is a little like a spoiled child in its relationship with the Senate. In some ways they are behaving in a similar fashion to, no doubt your fav Labor identity, Paul Keating with his 'unrepresentative swill' statement (directed to a different Senate makeup but still based on the problems of legislative passage).
Personally, I believe the present Senate has saved us numerous times from hard line ideological agendas. BTW, have you even noticed how the Greens side with the Libs on occasion eg Senate reform bill?
So ... be serious
Alert moderator
Eric:
04 May 2016 11:58:41am
Hi Circular, I spent most of my professional life as a negotiator/ mediator. So I think I know a thing or two about negotiations.
Couple of key points to undermine your argument: (i) if one party does not want to negotiate [eg the Greens and/ or the ALP] then then will be no negotiation; (ii) no other fed govt has had to 'negotiate' with 8 cross benchers - each with their own agendas; (iii) negotiation a la Gillard style [ie roll over and give away the farm] does not constitute effective negotiating skills IMHO; (iv) when 2 Senators refuse to engage in any dialogue [ie Lambe and Lazarus] then getting 6 cross benchers to pass legislation becomes exponentially more difficult.
Alert moderator
rusty cairns:
04 May 2016 1:13:55pm
Umm Eric the independent senators were complaining that the government wasn't even trying to negotiate with them.
Hockey was asked on budget night 2014 "was there a plan B"
He answered "plan A was plan B"
We were told that the $7 dollar GP co-payment was the only way.
Odd how after a a change of health minister it is believed there is another way, don't you think ?
What a shock the government has problems with one of the strongest Unions in Australia that being the AMA.
How many questions did they have to answer in the TURC ?
Alert moderator
OneObserver:
04 May 2016 6:01:56am
John, every government has to deal with the senate, which has been no more or less obstructionist than in the past. Perhaps if we really did get grown ups, rather than Abbott's shirtfront govt. they would have got more through the senate. Saying this is all the senates fault is disingenuous and childish. Regardless of what your opinion is of that first "budget".
Alert moderator
Helvi :
04 May 2016 7:20:47am
Dear John, we have not had any time to squeal about this non event of Morrison.
Not a skerrick of innovation there, yawn....
Alert moderator
Waterloo Sunsettttt dd:
04 May 2016 8:40:47am
Clearly you don't understand the measures to stimulate employment.
It seems silly to comment; at the same time as professing your ignorance.
Alert moderator
Kocsonya:
04 May 2016 10:52:13am
> Clearly you don't understand the measures to
> stimulate employment.
Neither do you if you think that tax cuts to companies and the wealthy is the way to do it.
Employment grows when demand grows, which grows when consumption grows, which grows when the people have enough to spend on discretionary items and services, and when large-scale infrastructure projects with long-term benefits are built.
The past 40 years of the neo-liberal experiment has proven that it doesn't work and the only thing it achieves is an ever-increasing wealth accumulation by a very small segment of society, by the detriment of all others.
It's not trickle-down but syphon-up.
Alert moderator
Waterloo Sunsetttt 2016DD:
04 May 2016 11:24:11am
40 years?
Where on earth have you been? Policies have been developed over the last few hundreds.
Consumption grows, when consumers have money.
Tickling the tax, will provide it. And work; the vehicle for earning.
Or would you rather it be given to you?
Alert moderator
Eric:
04 May 2016 12:04:49pm
'Employment grows when demand grows'
Interesting concept: we have had an increase of somewhere between 8k - 10k of public servants in Qld over the last 12 - 18 months. I'm pretty sure that demand for increased public sector services has not created that level of demand.
Alert moderator
Peter J:
04 May 2016 11:13:24am
"Clearly you don't understand the measures to stimulate employment."
By that comment, nor do you.
In any event, Helvi mentioned "innovation." Measures that are supposed to boost employment are not about innovation.
Alert moderator
Waterloo Sunsetttt 2016DD:
04 May 2016 12:07:54pm
" Measures that are supposed to boost employment are not about innovation."
Clearly, you weren't paying attention when our Prime Minister linked them.
Alert moderator
Eric:
04 May 2016 12:02:45pm
Waterloo: I suspect the majority of those who comment here are either (i) retired public servants or (ii) current public servants who have never had to run a business or division of a large corporation. Their lack of knowledge of business practices is clearly evident from their comments.
Alert moderator
Kocsonya:
04 May 2016 2:29:28pm
Eric:
I'm sorry to disillusion you: I am not retired and never been a public servant.
Rather, I'm a small business owner; the business has been up and running for over 20 years. I'm not eligible for any government handout, support or assistance. I have private health insurance, as per government guidelines a la Howard. I'm in the 25% whom this budget supposed to reward with a tax cut and I have an investment property, negatively geared. I think I should be the polar opposite of your image of them lefties who dare to criticise Liberal policies.
The only thing I can say in my own defence against the charge of class-traitorship is that I was lucky enough to have a decent education...
Alert moderator
Waterloo Sunsetttt 2016DD:
04 May 2016 7:02:05pm
If you have any business, which I doubt, I'm sure that it's eponymous.
Alert moderator
Reinhard:
04 May 2016 12:15:25pm
"However to be fair Abbott and Hockey did attempt budget repair in their first budget."
Really? If they were serious about budget repair why did they spend over $15b in the three months between the 2013 election and MYEFO?
Alert moderator
John:
04 May 2016 5:10:14pm
For all those reading the above post, please be aware that it was not written by "John" but by some impostor.
Alert moderator
bobrox:
03 May 2016 10:23:59pm
hear hear
Alert moderator
Alfie:
03 May 2016 10:46:28pm
"Turnbull and Morrison should be judged on this Budget"
Likewise, Shorten and Bowen should be judged on their irresponsible high taxing, big spending alternatives.
Alert moderator
Waterloo Sunsettttt DD:
04 May 2016 6:59:35am
I think Bowen, will get the boot, although personally I am happy to see him stay on and keep giving us his bloopers.
You don't get many Bowens, in a lifetime and we should savour this one.
Alert moderator
Alfie:
04 May 2016 8:18:52am
Agreed Waterloo. But we also had Wayne "rolled gold surplus" Swan who seemed to get away with unimaginable budget exaggerations and straight out lies.
The problem is, the average dumb Labor voter is only interested in handouts, not the economy.
Alert moderator
rusty cairns:
04 May 2016 9:36:44am
How come the 2 highest ranked self called "adults in charge " aren't in charge of anything now ?
Sorry I forgot that one is now in charge of holding to door open for visitors to an embassy in the USA.
Same fellow cried "budget emergency" let believed he couldn't wait about a year for a general election without plotting revenge on his team mates and therefore cost us tax payers over million dollars for a bye-election.
Alert moderator
Waterloo Sunsetttt 2016DD:
04 May 2016 10:43:51am
If history teaches you anything, it is to look to the future, rusty old son.
I have been a supporter of Turnbull for may years and could sense his strategy, hence my pseud (appendage)for two years: DD 2016.
The shame is that the terms are only 3 years, which means that we go into election mode again in 2 1/2 years time.
We need 6 years of Turnbull, to put us on the path to stability. We may get that, however the election in the middle, is a massive distraction and a waste of taxpayer's money.
Don't worry about Hockey; Bowen's twenty billion, black hole, or Wayne Swan's invisible surplus. Just focus on the future.
And the weather.
Alert moderator
rusty cairns:
04 May 2016 11:42:56am
Err WS I remember hearing before the 2013 election that the LNP coalition was going to repair the budget without hurting anyone's hip pocket and it was going to be easy for them to do just by cutting waste. I also remember Turnbull saying that the government was going to run full term. An election around September he said, remember. Mate this is the liberal party, they are prepared to say anything to win votes . How long had they deceived us that parents had tried to drown their children? They persisted with one "unconfirmed" report even to the point of denying it was wrong when the media had confirmed by eyewitnesses that it was wrong.
I'm also pretty sure I remember reading a comment of yours not so long ago saying that Abbott should be given more time.
I also remember you changing the name you posted under when it was suggest by others that a DD should be called not long after the senate had rejected 2014 budget measures for a second time and added DD 2016 to your name.
I can't remember you suggesting that Turnbull should replace Abbott as leader until after it had happened, sorry.
As for the weather well here in Darwin records have been broken every month this year. I suggest it is something to do with human caused climate change as all those scientist have predicted and no scientist can find any other cause for the records to broken.
Alert moderator
Waterloo Sunsetttt 2016DD:
04 May 2016 12:18:46pm
Actually, I supported Turnbull, about 8 years ago. Right here in The Drum.
It was called, 'Unleashed', then.
In fact I have kept a couple of posts, but won't bore you with them. Other posters laughed when I called Abooot, 'the battering ram to get Turnbull up'.
Others will remember rusty, however thanks for your revision once more.
My wife went to the UK, over the Easter short break, to see our grandchildren, and boy was it cold. It was a hot, looong summer here.
Alert moderator
barnwitch:
05 May 2016 6:38:05am
You sure about the grand-kids bit? Had a long chat to a stranger about retirement and how men get to retire and how wives just get to look after another stroppy child. And how wonderful long distance is in keeping a relationships going.
I think I met your wife on board to UK.
Alert moderator
rusty cairns:
04 May 2016 12:41:10pm
Gday Again WS
I work nightshift and should be sleeping at the moment but having just tried I know I wont get to sleep without attempting to find out why you like Malcolm Turnbull so much. Or at least tying to ask if the moderator here allows.
Was it his past belief that negative gearing was a simple form of tax avoidance ?
Was it the lateline interview where he said that the direct action plan was a fraud ?
Was it the fact that he believed that MP's should get a free vote (i.e. conscience vote ) regarding any same sex marriage bill's introduce to parliament ?
Or is it the fact he has abandoned all these past long held beliefs just to get support in the party room ?
I'll finish with this fact; It only took 3 days of this month of May 2016 for a weather record to be broken in Darwin for the month of May. The total month of May rainfall record was broken in one day, that being yesterday the 3rd of May 2016.
Alert moderator
Wsdd:
04 May 2016 1:06:37pm
Excuse me rusty, I've just changed venues, so I'm relying on my iPhone, which often changes word, plus I can't really see all of the posts in an analogue way.
I formed a view about 15 years ago, that Turnbull, was amongst the brightest Australian, having a high profile and I liked the way that he dealt with The British Establishment. He's capable and intellectually superior to anyone on either side of politics. He did make some mistakes, however he learned from those , and, I think that he's fiercely loyal to his country. He also ( like I do) has a slightly left social side and it will be to the befit of all.
You should support him, instead of those low brow Union apartchiks. He will do what he thinks is best for all.
Even shoe-shine Bussiness will be graft full of the $5 tax relief for their customers.
Good luck. And for Gods sake look forward. We have a chance now.
Alert moderator
rusty cairns:
04 May 2016 1:29:00pm
Well I'll agree he certainly is an improvement on Tony Abbott or should that read Credlin ?
Maybe should write that sentence 3 times so it can be understood by the people whom would like Tony as PM again.
Alert moderator
tsj:
04 May 2016 9:47:38am
As someone who intends to vote Labor this election, I resent and refute that statement. I would actually benefit (tax wise) by voting LNP, but unlike more self-interested voters, I am looking at the bigger picture of fairness to all, real action on the environment and education and health. The LNP seem to think that aiding the wealthy and business moguls will magically fix everything else, but it won't.
Like many Australians, I was relieved and even a little elated when the formerly charismatic Turnbull took the reins last September, only to be bitterly disappointed with his lacklustre performance and bowing to far right conservative rule since then, backflipping on many of his own previously strongly held beliefs. I would like a government and a Prime Minister who has integrity, consistency, honesty and transparency, who leads a unified team. A Labor-led government under Bill Shorten is shaping up as the better contender to be able to deliver this, so far.
Alert moderator
rusty cairns:
04 May 2016 7:37:41am
Gday Alfie
MMmm yet the figures state that government spending went from 26% of GDP in 2009-2010 ( the ALP's governments stimulus packages ) to 24.6% in 2012-2013 and hansard records that the LNP coalition voted against most of the measures implemented that gave that savings between those years.
By the way I believe Turnbulls/Morrisons budget is 100 times better than the 2 Abbott/ Hockey produced and could have been even better had Abbott/ Hockey actually done some work on policy for Turnbull to fine tune and legislate.
Alert moderator
rabbie:
04 May 2016 7:42:51am
Alfie, all the figures show that this Liberal Government of Abbott/Hockey, Turnbull/Morrison has been high taxing and big spending. Under them the budget deficit is now three times higher than under Labor.
Alert moderator
bobtonnor:
04 May 2016 7:55:37am
read the papers, the news sites mate, the LNP are higher taxing, higher spending, its all there in black and white, go dig out the facts and take a look.
Alert moderator
firthy:
03 May 2016 10:55:28pm
Killed the economy? Really? Good to see hyperbole is alive and well on the drum. Our economy isn't going well; it isn't in a bad state either. Positive, but low growth and unemployment at 5.7%. Personally I'm not convinced the government had much control over that - so you couldn't blame them for the low growth but couldn't praise them for the pretty good unemployment number.
As for the interest rate cut. Low growth plays a part in that. the spectre of deflation, caused in part by technological advancements, plays a part too (Alan Kohler has written some excellent articles on the latter phenomenon on the drum - you would be well served reading those). Personally I was surprised at the cut - sure the inflation number is low but I thought the RBA might have kept it's powder dry for a day when they really needed to stimulate the economy...
Alert moderator
rusty cairns:
04 May 2016 7:17:38am
Gday firthy
I don't think daring our last two car manufactures to leave was good for future employment figures ?
Hasn't it been mentioned that for every dollar the government gave to them meant that $20 was gained in our economy ? It will be interesting to see what the employment figures are when the car manufactures have stopped manufacturing here next year.
I believe that this government has placed more importance on cattle sperm and ovaries than on jobs for people that need work. If only we could get cattle to survive and fatten by eating very dry dirt, eh ?
Didn't I read that one full quarters just above negative growth last year was only because of defense spending.
Gees mate every household better off by $550 because the carbon price is gone and about a 30% reduction in our currency exchange rate combined with instant $20,000 write off for small business investment shouldn't our economy be booming now ?
How odd that's is now believed that we need more public servants employed by the tax department, not less ?
How odd that now it believed we need federal government investment in railways in city's and rural areas rather than roads to support our steel industry.
All of a sudden it became more important to build submarines in Australia to provide Australian's jobs rather than getting the cheapest submarines available.
Why was it believed that halfway through a term of government that good government should start at that halfway point ?
Alert moderator
Helvi :
04 May 2016 7:29:55am
Wayne Swann was hardly lucky , being the Treasurer during the GFC, yet he rose to the occasion and was praised by the world for his efforts.
Alert moderator
Waterloo Sunsettttt dd:
04 May 2016 8:43:35am
Swan, was praised by a magazine, not the world.
We all know the truth.
Alert moderator
rusty cairns:
04 May 2016 10:13:18am
The award is judge by leading European and banking finance magazine Euromoney on advice from global bankers and investors
is the truth WS.
Alert moderator
rusty cairns:
04 May 2016 10:39:45am
I'd like to add :
Whom gave health minister Tony Abbott the title of "best friend medicare has ever had " ?
What a surprise, that would be Tony Abbott.
Whom gave PM Tony Abbott the title of "the infrastructure PM " ?
Another surprise, that would be Tony Abbott.
I suspect some in the coalition were a little worried that the PM Tony Abbott would make a captains call and award himself a knighthood before they could demote him.
Surely he believed "Sir Tony" was appropriate.
Alert moderator
Chubblo:
04 May 2016 10:30:19am
Waterloo Sunsettttt dd: That you're just another Liberal schill who has absolutely nothing of benefit to offer? Indeed.
Alert moderator
Kocsonya:
04 May 2016 11:09:39am
> We all know the truth.
Indeed.
During the Swan era Australia rose to be the best economy in the OECD (we are down now and still heading South), we achieved a AAA credit rating (we're likely to lose it soon), we did not go into recession during the GFC when every other developed nation did (but we're heading towards one now).
As you said, we all know the truth.
Alert moderator
Zing:
04 May 2016 11:50:26am
"During the Swan era Australia rose to be the best economy in the OECD"
During the Jeffery Skilling Era, Enron was the most profitable company in the world.
Labor ran the budget into the dust and they knew they'd messed it up. So they did what Skilling did. Spent money hand over fist to make things look good. Accepted all the praise. Handed over the keys to the office - and then ran for their lives.
And when the next guy took over and realised the crunch was coming, Labor turns around and pleads innocence. Place was looking fine when we left it. What did *you* do wrong? Don't blame us.....
As you said, we all know the truth.
Alert moderator
Kocsonya:
04 May 2016 12:43:17pm
Run it by me again?
The last year of Labor actually saw a decrease of deficit. Then came your warriors and started to increase it at a rate 1.5 times faster than Labor ever managed to achieve?
I appreciate that you stand by your team, but facts are facts. They spend more, tax more and have absolutely no clue about running an economy, let alone a country.
Oh, and by the way, it wasn't Fidel Castro who praised Swan but the business elite. So if you say that Swan was the worst and all, then you're saying that the big bankers and business leaders are all dumb asses.
I don't think they are. They are infinitely selfish, merciless, unethical and immoral but dumb they ain't.
Alert moderator
Zing:
04 May 2016 1:40:25pm
The Coalition can fix the deficit easy.
But it involves people not preferencing Labor and the Senate not undermining the Coalition's budget policies. Be an obstruction or be blameless - but you can't be both.
Alert moderator
John:
04 May 2016 5:17:16pm
Facts are indeed facts, Kocsonya.
When Costello left office he handed over a $93 billion surplus.
When Swan left office he handed over a $600 billion deficit.
Alert moderator
rusty cairns:
04 May 2016 12:59:05pm
Err Ran for their lives ?
I'm pretty certain Wayne Swan is contesting in this coming election.
How about "surplus in the first year and every year after, it's easy Hockey " is he standing for re-election or has he found a better job where the Australian tax payers are expected to pay for all the food he eats ? One has to wonder how he finds it so easy to live within his means ? But I expect it pretty easy when you rarely have too take your own after tax earning out of your pocket and spend it, I suspect.
Alert moderator
Waterloo Sunsettttt DD:
04 May 2016 2:57:02pm
If I gave you a million dollars, you would have the best economy in your street.
Alert moderator
bobtonnor:
04 May 2016 8:00:30am
at the rate of the cut they have a potential of 7 further .25 cuts, problem is with China still slowing, remember their growth rate is still (apparently) near to 6.7% so they may have a way to fall yet, those cuts may not be enough, whether they will do anything at all is another matter
Alert moderator
Dazonthecoast:
04 May 2016 8:09:23am
Firthy,
I would be very careful implying that 5.7% unemployment is not too bad given our current economic position. (I think that is what you were saying).
I am not sure we can compare 5.7% today with a claim of 5.7% say 20 years ago. Both parties have changed the criteria defining employed / unemployed so may times it is like comparing apples and onions.
In a post on an earlier article I proposed that the criteria for being employed should be 40 hours a week for a year. All other scenarios (eg students working part time to supplement study expenses) be placed in another category.
This should be set and then NEVER changed so that we can compare the same set of figures over successive years and successive governments.
Otherwise we are at the mercy of Spin Doctors and Bush Lawyers.
Alert moderator
TombeiTheMist:
04 May 2016 8:28:59am
Hmm.... The RBA rate cut is a very poiinted action. Pretty certain they have been giving the govt a number of hints as to concerns they have. Not an action taken by the RBA that says great work govt keep it up. Voting this lot in without a fight is not a good option.
Alert moderator
Kevin:
03 May 2016 11:02:57pm
This government have been in power for almost three years and coming into an election are hiding their performance over this time. Even Turnbull's seven months has been seven months of do nothing government, lies, back flips, back benchers vetoing the PM, fear campaigns, trying to ambush and bully the states, etc.
How can anyone say this government deserves another term? Even most of the positives in the budget, changes to super, chasing big business etc are policies the government have been forced to take because of pressure from Labor. Has an opposition ever determined so much of a governments budget before?
Useless government scratching around for some issue they can use to save themselves without any consideration for the nation and its future. Where are the deficit lowering measures? Where are the measures for growth and jobs? I guess they will just continue to plagiarise Labors policies and rhetoric, especially on innovation.
Alert moderator
TombeiTheMist:
04 May 2016 10:20:34am
It will be interesting to see whether or not the media broadly give labor a fair go because you are dead right about the performance of the LNP with or without Abbott at the helm. LNP missteps aside (of which there have been plenty) Labor have got their act together. They have policy, leadership is much improved and they sound positive. They have a large target to aim at which is a poorly performed govt who by their own standards are duds. They were sent that message last year when it was clear that if a snap election was held (pre turnbull) they'd have been murdered. One sided politics is good for none of us and in this case they may get over the line but on evidence another leap of faith with the LNP is not a great option. Big noted about much, got nothing. Ohh did I forget 50 billion on subs, don't forget the billions on new fighter jets, border protection - millions on that and nothing for education, nothing for health, environment, go figure, the CSIRO unit that developed WiFi (yes folks we aussies did that) likely to disappear. There is a lot going on behind the smoke and mirrors budget, designed only to make themselves a small target. One hopes the general public will not be so easily manipulated this time. Well, they have a new 3 word slogan which is consistent, Jobs and Growth.
Alert moderator
PCman:
04 May 2016 12:27:10pm
Kevin, you are on to something. This current government is pretty much the Seinfeld government ... a government about nothingness. This underwhelming budget is what you would expect - a budget about nothingness.
Despite Turnbull being a total bore, and prattling on with big words to hide what little they are up to, it's probably not all his fault. When Abbott was deposed, his office (ie a certain chief of staff?) shredded everything. The PM's diary, the plans, costings, everything. Turnbull started with nothing, and it gave the impression that he came to office with no ideas. The trouble is after these 7 or 8 months, he still has next to no ideas, and we don't know what he stands for, except that he believes that wealth should firmly remain in the hands of the rich.
The LNP are welded to their ideology, and are only looking to get re-elected. No sense of governing for all Australians, only their own.
Alert moderator
Lucy:
04 May 2016 8:29:58am
Jenny, considering none of the NLP budgets have been passed by the senate, they havent been able to do anything. The nation is still running on the last Labor budget
A budget is just a media stunt until such time as it is approved by the senate. If it wasnt, we would currently have paid maternity leave at full pay for all Australian women, and so many more things that have been read on budget nights over the last 3 years.
This is probably the biggest media stunt of all time since the senate wont have time to pass it, if they were inclined to, before the election is called.
*yawn*
Alert moderator
Chubblo:
04 May 2016 10:32:14am
Lucy: I'm going to repost my question to John as he hasn't responded and both of you seem to be harping on about the same topic.
Can you outline the specific debt and deficit disaster measures you're referring to? My memory's a little bit lazy but I'm just wondering exactly what Abbott and Hockey couldn't get through that would have stamped their legacy in Australian history...as opposed to the flushable wipe that's now stuck in the sewage system and now no one knows how to get rid of it.
Alert moderator
rusty cairns:
04 May 2016 10:53:52am
Umm Lucy I don't believe the Abbott's maternity leave scheme was even tried to be negotiated through the senate before his party room abandoned it and tried to reduced the amount of paid leave parents of newborn children could receive?
Alert moderator
rumpole:
04 May 2016 8:47:54am
This Budget is pretty irrelevant, if Labor win the election it won't even be voted on.
What is more important is the next Budget, by whoever wins the election, and I don't think the LNP deserves to.
Their initial budget, Hockey's pathetic effort, showed what was in their DNA to to do.
Hit the lowly paid, unemployed and pensioners. By dismissing negative gearing changes, the LNP has acted in their interests of their supporters and not in the interests of the families without the security of their own home.
Typical Tories in other words. Three years of their incompetence has failed to make any impact in debt and deficit. They have destroyed the renewable energy industry and the car industry and have no plan for carbon reduction.
The importance they place on small business tax cuts is misguided. Small business don't make money unless consumers are ready, willing and able to consume the products of small (or large) businesses. The focus of tax cuts should be on the consumers, and especially those on lower incomes as they spend more of their income.
The "Tony Tradies" asset write off has failed to produce any benefit. Throwing more money at small business will be more money down the drain.
Alert moderator
Quis-Separabit:
03 May 2016 9:03:48pm
Back to the seemingly endless parade of leftie commentators with very little of value to offer.
Alert moderator
Hooza Looza:
03 May 2016 11:12:45pm
"Back to the seemingly endless parade of leftie commentators with very little of value to offer."
Which are always followed by the seemingly endless parade of welded-on neo conservative rants with even less of value to offer. I mean, is trotting out the "leftie" label the best response you have to the article above?? That's pretty sad. Also completely worthless, like I said.
Alert moderator
floss:
04 May 2016 1:20:23am
Quis-Separabit, I am having difficulty finding the value in your comment.
Perhaps you are a prophet because at around midnight the 'Parade' you so denigrate amounts to one comment only, the opening comment by Jenny.
I expect very few unemployed young people are likely to post a comment here, although the new scheme of so called internships effectively removes real jobs from our community. For every subsidized position not only removes one unsubsidized position, but also means that those businesses employing people on a proper wage cannot compete, on costs, with the business receiving generous government subsidies to employ a cut price worker.
However, the scheme will allow our home grown young people to compete with the various imported visa workers, who already have their wages undermined by exorbitant 'fees' charged by their employers in return for assistance with government paperwork.
Further, do the young people serving internships have superannuation paid on their behalf? Does this reduce the amount they receive in each 'pay' packet?
Are the young workers covered by Work Cover in case of injury? Are they allowed sick leave, or do they lose all benefits if illness prevents them from attending the work place?
Who is responsible for supervising the young people, to prevent exploitation by employers who only focus on their business bottom line?
Given that their actual income is still very low, will they be entitled to concession fares to travel to and from their place of employment?
Do the interns receive any kind of formal educational recognition at the end of their period of service? This based on the skills which have been acquired as a result of their work experience, similar to a mini-apprenticeship.
Is there going to be a performance review of the businesses subscribing to the scheme to assess their suitability to participate, both initially and after internships have been served?
If the above factors have not been considered and appropriate policies put in place as part of the scheme advocated by Mr. Morrison, then perhaps there is a need for a new Union representing the concerns of the young interns who have been placed by this scheme.
Alert moderator
Peterwalker58:
04 May 2016 7:07:46am
7 eleven are already writing the ads Contract cleaners will win and lose A full time office slave for $2 an hour trumps an after hours contractor Especially if the can make coffee and wash cars
Alert moderator
dr dig:
04 May 2016 9:20:22am
These workers you are talking about are the ones nobody wants to employ- the unemployable if you like. The businesses taking them on are doing us a service by training them to be employable again.
Internships benefit the intern more than the business. Hence why there are incentives in place for businesses to take them on.
Alert moderator
Newbie:
04 May 2016 4:34:14am
QS, I'd like to read some articles that are not written by "leftie commentators" to whom you refer. If such articles give a different perspective that would offer more value, would you be able to direct us to the your recommended reading sources?
Alert moderator
Dazonthecoast:
04 May 2016 8:15:26am
Newbie,
Think I can help here. Just go to the IPA website. You should get balanced information there.
If not you at least get to see how the other half "thinks".
Glad to help.
Alert moderator
R Supwood:
03 May 2016 9:04:50pm
This is a stand still, incompetent government and the budget has shown this. You can't pump up a few tyres and say you'll win the battle of the bulge. There is no real adjustment, as is necessary, to balance declining receipts and high maintained expenditure. Debt has gone up, in three years of this government, from $257 billions to 426 billion, the worst ever record actually and proportionally. There is no real future planning, despite tiny readjustments, Abbott cut off a leg and we get back a toe. Cuts to the guts of the economy are ruinous. We cannot trust an incompetent, inadequate, deficient government that uses lies and deviations as policy. No.
Alert moderator
firthy:
03 May 2016 10:59:03pm
what are these cuts you speak of? Abbott TRIED to implement some pretty major cuts but couldn't get those through the senate. Are you thinking of Gonski and the Hospital funding? The ALP announced those things but didn't announce any tax increase to PAY for them. Funny you don't mention that.
Time you took the blinkers off - neither side can crow about their "achievements" in regard to budget repair. For me the LNP is simply the best of a bad bunch. The ALP might have some policies which will increase revenue but they will blow the cash. So no solution to the budget "crisis" there.
Alert moderator
rusty cairns:
04 May 2016 8:08:46am
Gday firthy
If I remember correctly many months after that 2014 budget Abbott said " that good government starts today "
I believe had good government started before that 2014 budget maybe some acceptable bills good government provides would have been passed by the senate and more saving could have been made by the more acceptable saving measures bills.
Negotiating bills through both houses of parliament, haven't most federal governments had to do that ?
Since when have Australians had dictators as leaders, I ask?
Alert moderator
Chubblo:
04 May 2016 10:37:23am
firthy: I'll repost the same question that I have asked of John & Lucy because I'm genuinely interested in a response now.
Can you outline the specific debt and deficit disaster measures you're referring to? My memory's a little bit lazy but I'm just wondering exactly what Abbott and Hockey couldn't get through that would have stamped their legacy in Australian history...as opposed to the flushable wipe that's now stuck in the sewage system and now no one knows how to get rid of it.
Alert moderator
Forrest Gardener:
04 May 2016 6:12:00am
Yet another hate filled reply showing only that you have nothing of substance.
Tell us how much you are looking forward to Labor's new spendathon!
Alert moderator
R Supwood:
04 May 2016 8:29:48am
Ah, F G's day begins with a childish response and will end with further support for lying, incompetent, non effective government by fools. This government has racked up c. $170 billion in debt in three years, a record, pro rata. It is the biggest taxing and spending government ever, in ratio to GDP. It has no clue, no plan no decency; neither do its yabbering supporters. You need a new telescope; yours is blocked.
Alert moderator
dr dig:
04 May 2016 12:31:23pm
The problem, backside pointing to the sky, is that your description equally fits both major parties. This leaves people with voting for the least worse option, which on that basis is the LNP for mine.
I am inclined to not vote for either now that Abbott and the idea of staying strong to the cause is gone from the LNP and Labor seems to have learned nothing from their last stint in office.
The ALA are looking good to me.
Alert moderator
R Supwood:
04 May 2016 2:34:07pm
You are welcome, Doc, but I mentioned some accurate facts, which suggest that anyone but the tedious Turnbull should attract a sensible voter.
Alert moderator
TombeiTheMist:
04 May 2016 8:33:34am
I reckon the RBA rate cut yesterday was another way of saying "for god sake get on with it" something the LNP has failed miserably at.
Alert moderator
Waterloo Sunsetttt 2016DD:
04 May 2016 11:29:12am
It follows the same pattern as small tax cuts. It releases money into circulation.
Alert moderator
Forrest Gardener:
04 May 2016 1:09:26pm
TTM, those who understand these things realise that it underlines how little control governments have over economies.
That is why the Rudd spendathon was such a waste of money and why Labor's new spendathon is so misguided.
Alert moderator
Major hazard :
04 May 2016 8:43:11am
Don't sound so dejected Forrest even though things look pretty bleak and getting darker your policital team has not lost yet.
Alert moderator
Forrest Gardener:
04 May 2016 1:10:37pm
MH, you mistake me for a political partizan.
I am having great fun today watching the Labor Fan Club try to figure out which way it up, though.
Alert moderator
Reinhard:
04 May 2016 1:29:26pm
Forrest just because you have declined to defend the indefensible Liberals does make you less partisan, simply more hypocritical
Alert moderator
Forrest Gardener:
04 May 2016 5:45:54pm
Reinhard, my patience is boundless. I'm quite happy to wait for you to find anything by me praising your enemies.
It is not my fault that Labor has become what it once despised.
Alert moderator
Reinhard:
04 May 2016 6:23:45pm
Forrest that's exactly what I said, just like your hero Abbott you don't actually stand for anything, only against Labor.
It can't be healthy to hold a grudge so tightly.
Alert moderator
R Supwood:
04 May 2016 2:35:49pm
Poor ood F G, out on the far right wing, lost, behind the grandstand with Adolph and Benito and jolly old Francisco.
Alert moderator
Pollywantsacracker:
03 May 2016 9:14:20pm
I find the budget a bit of a damp squib.
And I look forward very much to the further election issues which will be argued about in the coming weeks - for they really are going to have the most profound effects on our economy. I speak of course primarily of climate change and the economic challenges that will flow from that... are flowing from that already. The insurance industry, urban planning and costly planned retreat, coastal refineries and ports, defence, water refugees, the Murray Darling, the CSIRO... on it goes.
Whatever government shows it is fit to tackle these challenges will get my vote.
Alert moderator
B. Ford:
03 May 2016 9:17:37pm
One thing is for certain. Glen Stephens is past his use by date and the whole Reserve Bank board should be replaced. The country's biggest social issue is low interest rates which give the banks unbridled opportunity to coerce borrowers into overextending their repayment capabilities. The housing market is out of balance with the rest of the economy and needs to be restrained. Interest rates need to rise not fall.
it is obviously vested and self interest which has prevented and overhaul of negative gearing being included in the budget.
Alert moderator
Rhino:
03 May 2016 10:58:20pm
I disagree with you on the performance of the Reserve bank and Glenn Stephens. Glenn and the board has reacted to a negative CPI, i.e. deflation in the part of the economy and consumes stuff.
The Reserve banks authority is to managing the economy, not just the housing market and the consumptive economy is more important that the housing market. What Glenn isn't getting is the back up from the state and federal governments to do those things to take the heat out of the property markets.
Alert moderator
Spotted gum:
03 May 2016 11:41:40pm
If you understood the role of the RBA, then you wouldn't be blaming Glenn Stevens for the state of the economy and low interest rates. Glenn Stevens has done all he can on the monetary policy side to stimulate the economy The government has not played its part with fiscal policy.
For example, the RBA have been urging the government to increase spending on infrastructure to boost the economy. Instead Abbott/Turnbull have been stuck in some paralysis about spending any money on infrastructure. Tony Abbott said he'd be the infrastructure prime minister. The reality couldn't have been further from the truth.
Alert moderator
Brad:
04 May 2016 4:26:31am
Maybe the RBA Board thinks the economy needs a greater immediate kick start than the Budget/Govt will give it. Despite the banks being directed to increase their reserves, they will continue to see private loans/housing loans as their cash cow & not direct the majority towards productive investment. Since their recent balance sheets show some bad debts to industry/mining on their books (despite continuing profits), they may be unwilling to loan for productive investment that is much needed in the transition towards what appears to be in the main, a service economy (with a dash of innovation?). Then again, how many businesses are wiling to put themselves in (further) debt given their level of confidence & sales outlook? Consumer debt is growing impacting on domestic consumption and exports are below imports with a negative terms of trade. The interest rate decrease may see the $A drop further to assist the trade balance, hopefully.
Alert moderator
Chrisentiae Saint-Piaf:
03 May 2016 9:23:21pm
$6 is a lot of money. A simple loaf of bread costs 85 cents and 2 litres of milk is $2.00.
So what do the LNP do? They give $6 to the rich and nothing for the poor who actually would really benefit.
The poor should have received the $6 NOT the rich.
The LNP stink !!!
Alert moderator
firthy:
03 May 2016 11:02:49pm
Why should the poor have received this? You do realise that the $6 a week is simply reducing the tax burden these people face don't you (so it simply reduces the amount the government takes from these people as taxes in the first place)? But I suspect that point is lost on you. Because if you understand the point you might have actually argued that the cost of that tax cut might have been better spent on welfare. Maybe that really was the point you were trying to make...
Alert moderator
Gaga in Greenacres:
04 May 2016 7:18:32am
Apart from the obvious equity angle that a healthy human mind would find compelling; $6 in a poor household is $6 more consumption in the economy, boosting GDP, profits and tax receipts while $6 in in a plutocrat's pocket is just $6 on their victory scoreboard.
Alert moderator
Nasan Turtle:
04 May 2016 7:05:41am
Hey there Chrisentiae, I get $80,000 a year but I am NOT rich. I am part of the forgotten middle-income group. After paying my tax bill, I probably am on a lower nett pay than you. If the "poor" are so unhappy being "poor" then they should either get off welfare and get a job or get a better paying job and stop the complaining. If the people in the former less-developed country of Singapore could do it as a nation then surely the supposed "poor" in this rich country can do it. Getting welfare is NOT a God-given right - its a privilege !!!! So if you don't like it, do something about it and get a job or a better paying job and stop complaining. If I can do it, are you sooooo special that you can't ? Really ?
Alert moderator
Salient Green:
04 May 2016 9:31:19am
Nasan Turtle, to someone on the $33,300 minimum wage, $80,000 makes you rich. After paying tax, you are on $60,800 disposable income while the minimum wage earner is taking home $29,700.
This means that you take home in one year what the other takes two years to earn. Assuming of course that the minimum wage earner has a full time job which brings us to the second part of your diatribe.
There are over 2million unemployed and under-employed chasing less than 200,000 jobs, many of which are for highly skilled workers.
I would say then that having a job is a privilege while getting welfare is not just a right but an imperative, especially as our government quite deliberately keeps a large pool of unemployed to keep labour costs down.
Alert moderator
Peter J:
04 May 2016 11:27:32am
I am paid well over $80,000 and will get the full tax cut. I think it is completely unnecessary and should never be implemented. There are innumerable ways that this money can be spent to improve the lot of less fortunate people in our society and giving people like me a windfall is not one of them.
I am happy to live in this country and am willing to pay for the privilege of doing so.
Alert moderator
Waterlogged after reading this:
03 May 2016 9:26:32pm
Lowering the interest rate ( the rba, for anyone unaware), in tandem with lowering ordinary-middle-income-producers' tax, slightly pushes money into the economy.
Hopefully, Cassidy will leave a tip for Subday workers now that he can afford to; something We should copy from other nations.
Yes, keep the money going around. It all goes back into the coffers anyway.
Alert moderator
Filz:
03 May 2016 9:30:54pm
This budget indicates several things; firstly, that the government has been sitting on its hands for nearly 3 years and had it not been for treasury head Parkinson, this budget might never have been written.
Secondly, the government's been crying poor, but appears disinterested in raising money from those seemingly best equipped to pay it - the rich individuals and corporates. Instead, the government is lowering the company tax rate, instead of raising it. It's ludicrous that when some corporates aren't paying tax in the first place, that the government gives a tax cut! Why didn't the government examine deductions and get rid of some of those - like interest payable on inter-company loans with interest rates of 9 or 10%.
There's really nothing in this budget for the average PAYG wage-earner. So, come election time, put the Liberals where they put you - last.
Alert moderator
S.T.K.:
04 May 2016 3:34:46am
While I hear your cries. Have you ever thought why big corporations are trying to hide there money offshore away from our nation's to aviod tax? Maybe just maybe politics is becoming the greater of the two unviable systems (Both which need a change). I am wondering why most of the world let everyone switch to FIAT currencies. No fiat currency has ever stood the test of time, what made the world think it could this time? Money, not currencies make the world go round this is all a pharse that would have had a real break down if it wasn't for our naition's just printing this fiat currency like it will fix the problem (this is meant to happen in these systems) selling out all our future genarations to debt that can never be paid back. The worst and most funniest thing about it is that all the worlds money is based of faith and has no real vaule in reality only in our minds ROFL.
Alert moderator
Brad:
04 May 2016 4:47:21am
Seems both the Coalition & Labor are intent on tax avoidance by multinationals but one aspect of that, to which you refer, is thin capitalisation & the subsequent windfalls & deductions against tax payable. On face value, it does appear that little is being done in this area to rectify the situation but hopefully that is a target area of the ATO. Maybe the rate of interest upon which such a deduction is based could be capped at current domestic commercial borrowing rates given global rates currently.
Alert moderator
RobP_63:
03 May 2016 9:36:58pm
The threshold shift from $80k to $87k is almost a joke. As explained, it's piddling and it is so obviously aimed exclusively at the richer end of the spectrum. It's a symbol of unfairness which is as obvious as a boil in the middle of someone's face. It was described on TV tonight as Step 1, so maybe it's going to get extended in future Budgets (nudge, nudge).
While that's one thing, the Government should bite the bullet and reform the APS.
Cut out all excessive use of contractors and start staffing it so that the Service lives up to its name and delivers something of value to the public. The ongoing projects need an infusion of new energy and money needs to be spent on them rather than you-beaut contractors that deliver little of value anyway. Too many Government websites don't work and databases aren't complete even after millions have been poured into them. Good old fashioned project auditing/QC just doesn't exist any more and it needs to inculcated back into the APS, even if in more modern form. The phenomenon of "learned helplessness" needs to be gotten rid of.
Alert moderator
Jill:
03 May 2016 9:41:29pm
Can we have more detail on the cuts to DSP? They've already tightened the eligibility criteria to a level where many genuinely disabled people can't access the pension they need to live, who are they going to be targeting with these new reassessments? For someone who's been on a pension for years, it would be too big an adjustment for them to lose that pension and to try to live on the dole.
Alert moderator
JamesH:
03 May 2016 10:56:26pm
No they are leaving the DSP alone until the get back into power and shift the index line further to the right making even harder to obtain the DSP or the Age Pension. Forget the unemployment they will have to work for it while looking for real work.
Alert moderator
Eric:
04 May 2016 8:30:32am
Christian Porter has already stated there at least 70k of people rorting the disability pension. Too many people claiming the disability allowance on dubious grounds.
Alert moderator
Jess:
04 May 2016 10:52:28am
Amazingly the NDIS will slowly combat this.
which will eventually lead to a tiered disability support pension.
One level for those who grew up in the NDIS with reams of evidence to support their claim that they will never work. This will be a tick and flick catergory. Apply once and be done with it.
Then there will be a second category for acquired injuries or degenerative diseases. These will be lightly monitored - appropriate engagement with medical and support services.
The 3rd category will be category will be monitored and temporary pending weekly engagement with medical professionals... this will cover mental illness and temporary physical injuries. It won't be the set and forget. It won't be annoying for the genuine people because they do that already... more people get the help they need, for the rorters it will be too much of a burden to maintain.
Alert moderator
Lisa:
03 May 2016 9:42:09pm
Liberals have totally missed the mark. Average wage is $80,000, yeah right...most full time workers do not earn $40 per hour, based on a standard 38 hour week. They have totally disregarded working families. I am a mother and can only afford to work part time due to the high costs of Childcare, i make half of the so called "average" income, even if i was to work full time i certainly still would not make this.
Alert moderator
Alpo:
03 May 2016 10:33:21pm
$80,000 and more is earned by the top 25% of the income distribution.
I guess that the other 75% are thinking of voting for Labor at the moment.
Alert moderator
Splore:
04 May 2016 7:19:24am
Alpo...SUCCINCT. That's the only word I can think of....oh, and NICE
Alert moderator
Dazza:
04 May 2016 12:07:54pm
"$80,000 and more is earned by the top 25% of the income distribution."
That may be right Alpo.
I earn over $80k but I have to work weekends and night shifts to do so, so Turnbull's claims of the "average" wage must be his personal calculations of a percentage of his own income?
My son, who is an IT professional, earns more than I do and he works day work Monday to Friday!!
Alert moderator
the munz:
03 May 2016 9:43:43pm
Is this "do nothing to scare the horses" budget the trojan horse to get through the nasties from 2014 which are still embedded in the estimates.
The omission of mentioning these "zombies" and many other issues makes one suspect that surprises are lurking.
Alert moderator
Filz:
03 May 2016 10:28:49pm
On past form, I wouldn't be trusting this government to carry out any of its budget promises!
We definitely need a federal ICAC and Royal Commissions into banking/finance/insurance and also one into Liberal Party fundraising. The Liberals are against these, as we know that in at least one case, they've got something to hide.
The government has also gone very quiet on tax evasion using tax havens and it's noteworthy that we seem to be the only ones quiet on the matter. On 09 May, the ICIJ will be publishing further details on the Panama Papers and will be naming names - including, we hope, the names of the 800 Australians mentioned earlier. The information will be searchable.
Fun for the family on these cold autumn evenings.
Alert moderator
Gp:
03 May 2016 9:45:50pm
3 years in govt for the Abbott/ Turnbull regime and what have they achieved Nothing. All their rhetoric of debt and deficit disasters and budget emergencies and they have done nothing. Was it all a big con , and one must remember that the senior leadership now in charge were spoting forth the same nonsense when they were campaigning.
The company tax cuts stretching way into the future is just a pie in the sky, which will never happen. Another con like their emergency con.
Alert moderator
Ted:
03 May 2016 9:50:58pm
Smallish business gets a tax cut getting progressively bigger and more widespread but what about the budget deficit. I hope Morrison has done the figures.
His personal income tax cut is not about bracket creep and should not be reported in those terms no matter what he says. People's wages our at a standstill so it is not about bracket creep, it is about giving an immediate tax cut to high wage earners, otherwise known as vote buying. With cuts to business and personal tax where does he really believe the money will come from.
Superannuation was a missed opportunity. Chris Richardson picked up my suggestion of giving a tax discount for contributions instead of the flat 15% which gave maximum benefit to the high paid and penalised the low paid. Instead of fixing that up Morrison has cut the very top to look good but that is not where the real money lies. The 15% remains firmly ensconced.
The Google tax gets my tick. I am uncertain about some of the other areas. Health, education, universities, renewable energy, cuts to the ABC et al. A comprehensive budget would have properly covered these things.
Alert moderator
bobrox:
03 May 2016 10:37:07pm
Barry:
On a number of fronts you're wrong.
This budget comes across as another nail in the coffin of the government.
As for the six bucks a week, it's the principle of the thing.
Hitting invalid pensioners is an easy target, while forgetting that they AND their families vote. Most of these people have severe handicaps or are slowly dying and unable to work because of it.
Australia is getting sick of the self righteous saying that greed is good ,when in actual fact it's ugly.
Alert moderator
John of Adelaide:
03 May 2016 10:44:30pm
So the debt and deficit emergency is now over? Is that right? I suppose at least we will be spared the its "spending not revenue that's the problem" rhetoric from here on in.
Alert moderator
Forrest Gardener:
04 May 2016 6:07:39am
Yes JoA, to their eternal discredit the government gave up repairing Labor's damage some time ago.
Labor of course never admitted to its damage. Now it promises another spendathon.
You might be pleased not to hear about the problem. Rational thinkers simply have to wait until somebody finds a way to change the national political conversation onto this growing intergenerational debt.
Alert moderator
R Supwood:
04 May 2016 8:31:50am
You never cease boasting of your presumed wisdom and superiority, but reveal ignorance and display ego; amazing. Amazingly primitive.
Alert moderator
Rae:
04 May 2016 9:52:06am
Do you mean the intergenerational debt where the LNP governments stole the public assets built by the high taxes of the boomers and squandered the money on baby bonuses, childcare rebates and home owner grants for the young?
Last year they destroyed the retirement plans of hundreds of thousands of hard working ordinary workers, many cannot even change the impact of the retrospective legislation. It was an attack purely on workers stupid enough to believe that saving for retirement would be better than welfare.
I used to vote for them so I'll take some of the blame. Hell will freeze over before I ever vote LNP again.
Alert moderator
Dazza:
04 May 2016 12:15:17pm
"It was an attack purely on workers stupid enough to believe that saving for retirement would be better than welfare."
And welfare is the topic that Liberal commentors like to attack the most, while defending taxpayer handouts for the wealthy!
Liberal by name only, not by action!!
Alert moderator
michyzelski:
04 May 2016 10:50:20am
That's the problem FG, they gave up.
Couldn't or wouldn't negotiate with the Senate, wouldn't listen to the RBA, continued to bow down to their corporate and media owners, continued to govern like they were still in opposition, still wont take responsibility for the last 3 years in office, and still think that 3 word slogans will bluff the electorate in to giving them another term.
The lnp are duds FG, a 1,000 days and a dream run from the media and they are clutching at straws to try and stay in power.
Alert moderator
Jessica:
03 May 2016 10:49:10pm
I'm on over $80K and I can tell you that I am not impressed by the govt shifting the threshold to $87K. It makes no real difference to me and just alienates people earning less than $80K. Today's cut by the RBA was worth twice as much to me. In addition, cutting small business tax to less than my effective tax rate (inc ML) just makes me cringe.
Further, no way does giving me an extra $6 a week make up for their attempt to make unemployed people live on thin air for 6 months, their attempt to deregulate uni fees, the slashing of family tax benefit threshold from $150K to $100K, their push for higher GST or their hair-brained idea to devolve taxes to the states.
Barry's right. This election will not be fought on this budget.
Alert moderator
Todd:
03 May 2016 10:54:50pm
Barrie, I've already crunched the numbers on the tax cut for the all too often forgotten "people in the middle". You know, those who don't qualify for benefits or any assistance whatsoever, yet cannot use Trusts, corporate trustees, and other tax "strategies available to the wealthy. You know, the men and women who derive their income from their exertions, rather than capital.
I know journalism has no mathematical prerequisite, therefore, I offer my assistance to you. The ACTUAL difference due to Malcolm's easing of the yoke around salaried workers' necks is actually 7% of $7,000. Which is approximately $10 per week. I ask where did you get the $8? Now, I understand $500 a year is not that much, but it's a move to counteract "bracket creep" which is the single biggest killer of the middle class in this country. "What about the poor?", I hear you say? Well, aside from jagging a Lotto win, how else can an individual, or more importantly, a family, improve their lot in life if, when if one manages to climb out of a financial ravine, they have the ALP and Greens beating them down?
This is a masterful budget in terms of fairness and providing opportunity to those who need it. It takes from the GENUINELY wealthy, and gives to those climbing the walls of the ravine. I agree, that those wallowing in the comfort of the bottom of the ravine have only been given a ladder, not a helicopter, but to most of us, that ladder is appreciated. I recall Gillard calling those on $75k (irrespective of their independents) "well off". As convenient as that would be, I respectfully disagree. Gillard had no idea. The fact is, a single person on $50k is infinitely better off than someone on $100k trying to support a family of four (necessary to merely maintain our population. Believe it or not, most "bread winners" at least have hopes of earning over $80k. If the ALP/Greens see those on over $80k as "wealthy", what hope is there? Howard got it. The ALP and the Greens most assuredly do NOT get it. And I am happy to say that Turnbull also gets it.
Alert moderator
Eric the Echidna:
04 May 2016 7:41:58am
Todd: "Now, I understand $500 a year is not that much"
It would mean more to a pensioner.
Alert moderator
DarylS:
04 May 2016 9:04:07am
The $8 or $10 a week doesn't apply just to someone on $81,000 a year, but to all above, thus someone on $200,000 a year will also benefit. As to the supperanuation cap, I'm sure that their accountants are already working on ways to counter that.
Alert moderator
Chubblo:
04 May 2016 12:13:24pm
Todd: "but it's a move to counteract "bracket creep" which is the single biggest killer of the middle class in this country"
You know what the single biggest killer of "bracket creep" is? Wage stagnation. And what is Australia experiencing now? You guessed it...wage stagnation!
Alert moderator
Brucimus:
03 May 2016 11:01:07pm
This whole Budget is based on smoke and illusions. 10 years for company tax to drop to 25% if the Libs get elected for the next 10 years. Typical spin from the Pollies. None of this Budget means a thing if Labor gets back in. Where are the policies that are actually going to get Australia moving again. All this is about saving their jobs. Meanwhile the so called economic managers are running up our debt to very scary heights. Where is the infrastructure spending that Queensland, for instance, so desperately needs? Where are the Snowy Mountains schemes of the future to irrigate the inland? All these training plans for the youth of our country come to nothing if we do not have the jobs for them to fill.
Alert moderator
Forrest Gardener:
03 May 2016 11:03:23pm
Gosh. Who was it saying only last week that the government faced a no win situation with the budget? The Labor Fan Club was sure beyond reason that the election result was a certainty.
And without even grudgingly admitting that they didn't see budget measures coming, the Labor Fan Club now flips on a dime and claims the budget never really mattered much anyway.
If there's ever a lesson to be learned, it is not to trumpet your master strategy too early. Your opponents will either defeat it or pinch it.
The sad thing for the nation is that the government still shows no signs of wanting to live within its means and Labor still promises nothing more than another spendathon.
Alert moderator
tonyp:
04 May 2016 11:40:05am
I take rather a different view.
One of the reasons the budget was brought forward was so that it could form part of the lead up to the election. If it was going to be fairly non-eventful why bother?
Alert moderator
Forrest Gardener:
04 May 2016 1:13:54pm
Good for you TP.
Not for you to do headless chook impressions like the rest of the Labor Fan Club, eh?
Alert moderator
tonyp:
04 May 2016 3:13:53pm
The ALP and the LNP are, as you're doubtless aware, political institutions. Neither of them are infallible. Neither of them are the Nazis.
I disagree with the ALP over many things, I disagree with the LNP over many more things.
I don't like this budget. There are good things in it and there are bad things in it. The thing I really dislike about it is that there are a whole bunch of good ideas that could have been in it but aren't because politicians on all sides are too pusillanimous to make meaningful reforms in an election year.
The LNP has decided that a whole bunch of tax reforms just can't be discussed or considered. So they hit up smokers and backdoor in corporate tax breaks.
It's lazy and cynical, but this is politics.
Alert moderator
Gr1m:
03 May 2016 11:32:19pm
I guess the one thing the Government probably has going for it coming into an election with a budget like this is that it's so unremarkable that Labor will have a difficult time gaining traction railing against it.
Of course, this isn't necessarily a good thing either. You can probably argue that the electorate tend to expect incentives from the incumbent to keep them in office, and given the Coalition's sliding poll results, that they may have politically shot themselves in the foot. But that's a diversion really.
The main issue is that the budget was the Turnbull Government's chance to finally take charge, outline a clear agenda for the election and, perhaps most importantly, differentiate themselves from Labor's proposals, which we've actually heard a lot more about - for better or worse will be up to the individual to determine.
Unfortunately, this budget seems almost intentionally meek, and meekness is pretty much what has defined the Turnbull government so far, and that's not a good thing. For all the faults of the Abbott and Hockey administration, they were at least prepared to take risks. The problem with the Turnbull/Morrison budget is one that, in the political sphere, is actually more lethal.
In the world of politics, being unremarkable and unmemorable is much, much worse than being hated.
Alert moderator
Alpo:
04 May 2016 8:16:42am
Well, these are pretty remarkable times. If Morrison expects to excite the voters with an allegedly "unremarkable" Budget he is up for a pretty nasty surprise.
This Budget is fundamentally a Neoliberal Budget with some concessions to the pressures put by Labor on the Liberal Government. This means that the Liberals have learned nothing, they still cling onto a defeated ideology and are trying to save themselves by asking for help from the ALP.... This won't attract moderate voters and indeed it may alienate hard conservative voters who like purity of purpose and ideology.
It's over, it's well and truly over for Turnbull & Co.
Alert moderator
John:
04 May 2016 5:23:18pm
I've saved that entry Alpo, and I'll enjoy sending it back to you on July 3rd.
Alert moderator
El Viajero Sin Hogar:
03 May 2016 11:38:22pm
For a Government which has been much maligned for its refusal or inability to take a stance on issues of importance or otherwise, the release of this wishy-washy "nothing" Budget is perhaps more telling in what it omits. Is the plan, once again, to "tell 'em to think what we want 'em to think, rather than what they think they know"? A "Budget with teeth", indeed!
The paradigm shifted with the scandalous Bush/Blair/Howard "weapons" campaign; the wider electorate is awake to lies and spin. Any party prepared to acknowledge such, to go where no political party has gone before, and to "tell us how it is", may just find that they break the current impasse seen in Australia (and around the world) as voters shun business-as-usual snake-oil salesmen and turn, in frustration, to candidates who might otherwise have been considered unpalatable.
Alert moderator
Dove:
04 May 2016 6:21:05am
Bringing down a budget in what is essentially an election campaign always runs the risk of being an electoral catastrophe. This budget might not be lots of things, but it's not a disaster- and that makes it a triumph for the government
Alert moderator
gc:
04 May 2016 6:32:57am
Barrie conveniently forgets the obstructionist Senate blocking reforms!
Alert moderator
Peter J:
04 May 2016 11:33:26am
What reforms? Please enlighten me.
I genuinely don't know of ANY reforms proposed that have been blocked by the Senate. Plenty of spending cuts or impositions on those less well off, but you can't call them reforms!
Alert moderator
Dazza:
04 May 2016 12:27:22pm
"Barrie conveniently forgets the obstructionist Senate blocking reforms!"
What reforms?
Abbott had his chance to negotiate with the Senate!
Turnbull has a chance to negotiate with the Senate!
Leave the negotiations with the "adults" please!!
Alert moderator
Stirrer:
04 May 2016 7:39:54am
I thought the PM promised not to insult our intelligence . So why promise tax cuts to small business when it's turnover and profits are falling and do nothing to increase the spending power of household experiencing falling incomes? Why try to tell us deflation is a good thing and why in defending negative gearing does he lie about US rents be higher than here , when they are. 15 per cent lower .
Well they insulted our intelligence over the budget emergency and that worked a treat. Maybe they know us all to well but seeing the mess they are in, maybe not.
Alert moderator
purgatory:
04 May 2016 8:20:00am
The speed at which the corporate sector representatives (Willox, Westacott, et al) came out congratulating the government for the budget was probably the scariest part, as there appears little in the immediate future beneficial for corporates, unless there are some hidden gems for big business in the fine print, or is Turnbull's 'real' plan to 'legislate' the 5% (and more if outside 10 years) corporate tax cuts after the election.
The only part (not previously announced) the corporate sector would be extremely happy about is the 6 months or more 'free labour' and up to $12,000 handout (on top of gov't training the unemployed so the corporate sector also avoids these costs) that Morrison promised (uncosted) in the budget. (The lessons from 'work for the dole' rorting by employers apparently have not been learnt)
The Champaign popping responses of the corporate sector seemed out of whack with what the budget promises on the surface, particularly if the government is 'fair dinkum' about stopping corporate tax rorts as the major revenue generator, so what is 'The Real Plan'. What is 'on the table' and clearly being hidden from voters.
The government must think voters have 'bloody idiots' printed on their foreheads thinking they can get away with not providing costings of the government's corporate/business largesse.
Alert moderator
Giles:
04 May 2016 8:28:43am
The leftist media is somewhat disappointed that there is nothing in the budget that will harm the government. Accordingly, it has resorted to hyperbole about the small tax cut.
If the tax cut wasn't available Mr Cassidy would have something else to complain about.
Alert moderator
Reinhard:
04 May 2016 12:30:46pm
That would be the hyperbole concerning the $6.4billion deterioration in tax revenue in this budget and the budget deficit that has blown out by $3.4billion to $37.1 billion since MYEFO.
That hyperbole?
Alert moderator
LBJ71:
04 May 2016 8:49:58am
Blame the senate, they are still running the show. We deserve a Govt. who can actually govern and be judged on that alone. Time to get rid of the bludgers in the senate and save ourselves millions.I don't care who the govt. is but I want them to be unfettered and able to do the very job they were voted in for. Then let the voters decide if they have done a good job or not.
Alert moderator
Stone Motherless Last:
04 May 2016 9:13:19am
No attempt to address the housing affordability issue in this budget.
How can an Australian city (Sydney) have a median house price of around 1 million AUD, when the average annual salary of Australians is $60K? There is a serious disconnect here that is poison for social cohesion.
I want our Federal Government to take action on negative gearing, CGT discount, land release, unsustainable population increases, stamp duty waivers on the elderly so they can vacate their 4 bedroom homes into something smaller and any other idea that can REDUCE over inflated house values.
I'm an old bugger who paid off my house 25 years ago and I am happy to see its value decline in the interests of the younger generations and social harmony.
Alert moderator
Regionalgranny:
04 May 2016 9:27:22am
Six dollars may only be the cost of a coffee and a sandwich without one or the other, but collectively it represents an amount which could have been spent on lower income earners or benefits for the less well off. Mr Morrison's shrugging off the adjustment as minor suggests he hopes those lower income workers will not notice the unfairness.
Anything that encourages greater investment by small business is a good thing but moving the goal posts to broaden definitions of what is a small business falls into the same category as referring to those who indulge in negative gearing on a large scale as 'Mum and Dad' investors. The major beneficiaries of tax largesse under the negative gearing rules are the top ten percent of income earners. Incidentally, they would also mostly be LNP supporters, but that is incidental to the LNP philosophy of fairness.
The trickle down theory is alive and well in this budget and much of the 'plan' is on the never never. I wonder how the Treasurer will explain away the revelation that he has found some funds under his mattress and can now promise additional goodies just before the election.
Alert moderator
Rae:
04 May 2016 3:44:14pm
Small business benefited so the local shop can do a bit better than the $14 an hour cash in hand they are paying the kids that keep it running seven days a week. I've never seen the owner in there.
Alert moderator
fcg:
04 May 2016 9:48:44am
Three words. What about pensioners?
Alert moderator
michyzelski:
04 May 2016 12:41:40pm
Three word answer. Suck it up!
Pensioners are now classed as welfare recipients remember. They once were lifters but now they are leaners according to ScoMo and are to be demonized, made scapegoats of and herded into the growing under class of our society.
Luckily they still get to vote.
Alert moderator
Reinhard:
04 May 2016 10:36:42am
Barrie the govt is not reverting back to slogans, scare campaigns and targeted advertising, it is a continuation of the same old Abbott style fear and smear politics, just a little bit more "agile". Turnbull has come out with the usual "class war" accusation of Labor's response and Morrison's budget speech made the usual pitiful excuses for tax cuts that will no nothing but damage the budget bottom line.
There was their favourite mantra of late, "jobs and growth", ScoMo used the phrase 13 different times during his speech and seemed to be channeling a certain ex treasurer, Wayne Swan. I find it utter hypocrisy for Morrison and Turnbull to constantly pillory Swan one moment and then parrot him incessantly the next, more hypocrisy is evident in the measures the govt claims will address bracket creep. Raising the 32.5% threshold from $80,000 to $87,000 does but removing the temporary deficit levy for high income earners does not.
The incremental increases in the small business threshold, tax cuts for business, middle and upper class income tax cuts will see a further $6.4billion deterioration in tax revenue and the budget deficit has blown out by $3.4billion to $37.1 billion since MYEFO. while $51.4 million will be ripped from rebates for on the Medicare Benefits Schedule.and $224 million from Foreign Aid budget.
It seems the "budget emergency" is now a distant memory.
Alert moderator
AdelaideLawyer:
04 May 2016 10:43:10am
One thing this budget does that has never been done before in my lifetime is actually cut Age Pensions.
Any senior going onto the Age Pension after today will receive less than those already on it. The rationale is that with the "carbon tax" gone, they no longer need the offset payments brought in by Gillard.
Maybe, if we ignore the fact that the pension is grossly inadequate anyway, but why then allow all existing pensioners to keep it? Fear of the voter backlash perhaps?
So we now have a two tier Age Pension - a cynical and gutless ploy from a cynical and gutless government!
Alert moderator
jilll2:
04 May 2016 1:04:12pm
Everything the Coalition has announced over the past month or so, including in the Budget, seems to me aimed at reconnecting with their traditional base.
The big end of town will allows vote LNP. Unions and poor people will never vote LNP. So, to win the election, they need to bring back any aspirational voters who might have turned away during the Abbott experiment; small business, upper-middle income earners, people with rental properties...
From that perspective, it seems like a smart budget. It looks like we might actually have a close election contest.
Alert moderator
Ceratodus:
04 May 2016 1:18:29pm
Why are political commentators ignoring savage cuts to the age pension announced in the Coalition's previous budget (and which passed though Parliament with the support of the Greens), that will come into effect on 1 January 2017?
Why isn't the Labor Party promising to reverse, or at least modify those savage cuts?
Alert moderator
JohnnyWop1upya:
04 May 2016 1:24:36pm
The increase in personal tax threshold from $80k to $87k demonstrates the Full-a-bull connection to the rich. Increasing the tax free threshold, or the $37k threshold would have had a positive impact for everyone.
Alert moderator
foolking:
04 May 2016 2:25:15pm
Whomever produced this budget had to pay for good ideas, Gonski and NDIS, it also had to invest in R&D and infrastructure while money is cheap.
Neither party can do this without raising income tax, a carefully explained 5 year plan where politicians also take a hit is necessary.
Any other approach depends on good luck.
So now the load falls to the next budget, it wasn't as gormless as Hockey's ,they are listening a bit.
Alert moderator
Nova4avr:
04 May 2016 3:23:48pm
This is the second Govt. budget that has said that a small business tax cut will lead to Jobs & Growth, no it wont. The only thing that will encourage small business to employ more people, is for more people to spend money in those small businesses.
The whole problem with the economy is that people are short of money & are worried about where we are heading. So until people have more disposable income this will remain. Wages growth has remained static for years, yet cost of living is still rising & the Govt. seem to think that cutting wages will increase employment.
Already I am detesting the damned 3 word "Jobs & Growth" slogan & yet we have 2 torturous months of an election campaign.
Alert moderator
JessC:
04 May 2016 3:51:26pm
"the Turnbull government has embraced revenue raising and gone where Tony Abbott would not have gone - on tobacco excise"
I don't understand this, Barrie. Abbott embraced the 4 x 12.5% tobacco excise increases put in place by Rudd in 2013 before he left Australian politics for a UN career, so he didn't have to touch the issue while he was PM.
Are you suggesting that Abbott would not have started up ANOTHER round of increases in 2016, perhaps in sympathy for Indigenous Australians who smoke the most?
Alert moderator
Comments for this story are closed.