Table of Contents
Power Struggle in Focus as a budget looms up
How the budget is received from Tuesday evening is the most important moment of Jim Chalmers' career.
Not because the success or otherwise of the budget could determine the fate of the Albanian government – although that is certainly a stepping point why it is so important for Jim.
The greater reason is that if the treasurer can successfully get the sale of Budget 2025, it will help him place one foot in the lodge …
… and that will be the first step to kick Albo.
Everyone knows that Chalmers will not be satisfied with the Treasurership. His ambition is to become prime minister, and his best chance to achieve that is to help Labor win the next elections, albeit scary before the tightness of the result is used as the reason why Albo should go.
A successful budget, well sold to the public, is vital for the strategy of Chalmers.
Albo is almost beside himself that ex-tropical cyclone Alfred forced him to postpone the elections until after the budget. This enables Chalmers to step centrally just before it is called, and then claims credit for every victory.
I hear that Albo is almost next to himself that ex-tropical cyclone Alfred forced him to postpone the elections until after the budget. Now it is the time of Jim Chalmers to be central
Perhaps all that stands in the way of chalmers who rise on the throne – if all the above goes his way – are those much speculated 'skeletons in his cupboard' that nobody seems to be willing or able.
The speculation about what they could be, has gotten wild since Chalmers did a profile piece that was in possession of not being proud of his behavior in recent years when drinking too heavy during the parliamentary seating weeks.
I have heard that Albo will not leave without a fight, and such a fight would of course see the knives play.
After the election, even in the victory, things can be rather common on the work side.
Almost ironically it is difficult to see too much instability on the liberal side if they eventually lose the elections.
There is really no one else to lead the coalition alongside Peter Dutton, which means that he would almost certainly get a second crack at the top track in the defeat if he wants it.
Apart from a large change in the polls that sees that Labor retains its majority, any result that immerses work in minority government can only be seen as a good result for an opposition leader in the first term.
Especially in view of the fact that the liberal party does not have the same leadership rules that protect the leader in opposition that Labor does.
Voters for government spending are now the majority. How can a large party be expected to deliver a responsible budget against that overwhelming tide of public opinion?
The costs of a hand -out
Returning to the budget, fiscal discipline is now completely thrown out of the window. Unfortunately, voters no longer seem to be able to save it.
They are insensitive to debts or too much worries about their home finances to stop and wonder whether the government can afford to continue to increase the expenditure. A recent newspapers showed that 80 percent of us want more government spending to help livelihood costs.
I am old enough to remember when Australia had no net debt at the end of the Howard years. Since then, 26 budgets and counting have been transferred, with the only two surpassed that come in the first two years in function of this government.
They came from the back of unexpected business taxes and mining income as raw materials rose.
Since then, recurring editions have been baked in future budgets, just as these sources of income have dried up.
If voters no longer give to run budget deficits for another 10 years, how can we expect the politicians to give it?
They lead by following the will of voters. It is not inspiring, but it is how it works.
Here is a cold, difficult fact: a growing percentage of the population entitled to vote pays little or no tax. Whatever they pay is more than compensated by hand -outs from the government.
When the tax and spending system is oriented in this way, what hope have tax conservatives to win the argument to balance the books and to bring recurring expenses to tackle the structural deficit?
Very little, is the answer.
What is the solution? I'm sorry to say, but I have no idea. It's too late. Those who get handouts now prevail. They are the voting majority. They won. Which means that the nation will eventually lose – and lose a lot.
Peter Dutton has the floor on Thursday evening while giving his speech from the budget. Will he casty work for excessive editions and cuts to recommend? I don't hold my breath
Dutton's chance – will he waste it?
One last thought.
Budget week is always about what the treasurer has to say and what the budget delivers. But don't forget the opposition leader who has the floor on Thursday evening while giving his speech from the budget.
With an election around the corner, probably next weekend, there will be extra importance associated with what Dutton says and what does not say.
He will undoubtedly focus on work. But will he announce an alternative policy?
If he does that, will they just be new editions and tax cuts to lure ambitious voters? Or will he be brave and tell us whether we like it or not, that the budget is out of shape and cutbacks are the only responsible answer?
The latter is absolutely right, but I don't see it happening. New expenditures of his own expenses would make little more of the proud conservative than Labor-Lite. Changes in the tax system, in particular tax reforms, would split the difference.
Let's hope he does that at least. The tax-to-BBP ratio of Australia is much too high.
