Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you to the wonderful member for Calwell for her question. There's a very good reason questions on inflation are coming from this side of the House and not from that side. It's because we got some new numbers between the last time parliament sat and parliament's sitting today. Those numbers show that headline inflation has fallen substantially, from 3½ per cent to 2.7 per cent in monthly terms. That is less than half what we inherited from those opposite and it's less than a third of its peak in the year we were elected.

Our cost-of-living help is a really important part of this story, but it's not the only part of the story. Trimmed mean inflation also went down, from 3.8 to 3.4. The measure that excludes volatile items went down from 3.7 to 3. Non-tradeable items went down from 4½ to 3.8. Services inflation went down as well. What all this means is that we are making welcome and encouraging progress in the fight against inflation. Headline inflation was down. Underlying inflation was down. And domestic, homegrown inflation was down as well.

Our policies are helping, but we know that the monthly numbers are volatile. We know that there's upward pressure on oil prices because of what's happening in the Middle East, and we know that people are still under pressure. That's why our cost-of-living help is so important and so necessary. Our energy bill relief helped ensure that electricity prices fell by 17.9 per cent instead of falling by 2.7 per cent. Rent assistance took some of the sting out of rents as well. All of this is making a meaningful and measurable difference according to the ABS. And we did this while we turned two big Liberal deficits into two big Labor surpluses—surpluses that are also helping in the fight of inflation, according to the governor of the Reserve Bank.

Those opposite oppose our cost-of-living help, and they wouldn't know the first thing about responsible economic management. We are 2½ years into a three-year term, and they still don't have any costed or credible economic policies. They say they want to cut $315 billion in spending, but they won't come clean on what that means for pensions, housing or Medicare. They want higher inflation, higher interest rates and a hard landing, because they think that will help them politically. They are focused exclusively on their petty, divisive and damaging politics, whilst this side of the House is focused on fighting inflation, on helping with the cost of living and on paying down Liberal debt. We've obviously got more work to do, but we are making encouraging and substantial progress on all these fronts, while those opposite just play their usual divisive politics.

See this speech in context