Australia's two most senior finance ministers have been at pains to draw the public into a long, deep talk about money.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
This week's budget was the latest effort from Treasurer Jim Chalmers and Finance Minister Katy Gallagher to focus the nation on its finances.
It offered sobering reading after the heady promises of recent budgets past. Global economic conditions are deteriorating as nations try to curb inflation with higher interest rates, and Russia's invasion of Ukraine ratchets up volatility. Australia's own economic growth will slow next financial year to 1.5 per cent, on the latest Treasury forecasts. In the meantime, inflation will remain high this year, returning to the Reserve Bank's target range by 2024-25.
Labor's first budget in nearly a decade responds to the conditions with a concerted effort not to worsen inflation with the kind of spending that became commonplace in the Morrison government's response to COVID. Economists have applauded the new government's caution.
There was one large, unanswered question in the budget. Having spelled out the growing spending pressures baked into the nation's finances, the Labor government gave no solution. It was a deliberate move. Dr Chalmers and Senator Gallagher want to hear what the voters think.
The Finance Minister made this clear in a barrage of media interviews immediately before and after the release of the budget this week.
"Part of this budget is dealing with the first phase of budget repair and also being up-front about the state of the budget and really starting a conversation about how we manage these pressures against a very challenging set of circumstances," she said on Tuesday.
"And I think part of that is how do we pay for the things that Australians value the most."
The government's largest costs are stark in the budget papers. The age pension, medical benefits, defence spending, aged care and hospitals are among the fastest growing. On a steeper path still is the NDIS, which is set to grow on average about 14 per cent each year until 2033. The only cost that will increase faster is interest payments, at 14.4 per cent.
Spending on each of these will grow quicker than the economy, Treasury says. While the government found $28.5 billion in spending cuts in this budget, largely from scrapping Coalition spending promises and making multinational companies pay tax, there is much heavier lifting to do in future budgets.
University of Canberra economics expert John Hawkins sees the budget this week as the first step in a longer game for the Labor government.
"It's about priming the public for the idea that there's going to be some tough decisions coming, and lifting the quality of the economic debate," he says.
An awkward conversation
Almost all measures for fiscal repair are on the table, the government says. Dr Chalmers this week hinted the solutions could involve a combination of spending restraint and cuts, and tax reform.
"I don't want to limit the conversation," he said.
Some options will make a larger dent in the growing debt than others. Nearly all of them come with political risks.
Dr Hawkins says the stage three income tax cuts were the "elephant in the room" in the latest budget. Ahead of its release, Labor tested the waters on changing them, and baulked.
The government could build a case with the public for tweaking the stage three tax cuts, removing only those that apply to the higher income earners, Dr Hawkins says.
It could take the changes to the next election, and try winning a mandate by arguing the package would otherwise be unaffordable in tougher economic and fiscal conditions.
READ MORE:
Labor could also cut back on superannuation tax breaks. Grattan Institute economic policy program director Brendan Coates says the Turnbull government wound back some without political damage.
"There are measures you can put in place in the design that mean it really does only largely hit higher income earners, because that is who is benefiting the most from these concessions," he says.
"By definition, you're not going to be hurting anyone that's anywhere near middle Australia, and that would raise substantial revenues."
A more fraught political task awaits in halting the growth in NDIS spending.
"The costs there are just blowing out so quickly. And that's obviously a difficult balancing act, because a lot of that spending is worthwhile spending and supports that needed to happen," Mr Coates says.
"But it's not sustainable to have 14 per cent year on year increases in spending on the NDIS."
Labor has plenty of recent government attempts at economic reform to learn from, for the task ahead. One is the Abbott government's disastrous budget in 2014, which shocked the public with major spending cuts and hobbled the Coalition for years.
Another was Labor's decision to introduce a carbon price - a reform that broke an election promise.
They point to some common but obvious lessons. Governments need to build consensus, bring the public along, and keep promises. As recent governments would say, it's easier said than done.
Australian National University economics professor Robert Breunig identifies another theme.
"The main lesson is that you need to educate people about the need for tax reform," he says.
"It's really hard to educate people about tax. But I think you have to at least educate people sufficiently that they say, 'oh yeah, I recognise there's a problem. And I recognise we need to do something'."
Senator Gallagher says Australians are up for the tough "conversation" ahead, even if they have some ground rules.
"They want us to do what we said we'd do, but they also want honesty about challenges when they emerge," she said this week.
Dr Chalmers and Senator Gallagher may have paid attention to political history.
Their government's future will depend on it.