Libby Coker (Corangamite, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. How is the Albanese Labor government's budget right for the economic conditions and helping to ease cost-of-living pressures for Australians, and what approaches were rejected?

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

Thank you to the wonderful member for Corangamite for her question. The member for Corangamite understands how important it is that we give a tax cut for every taxpayer in her community and right around the country and that we provide energy bill relief to every household in her electorate and right around Australia.

The national accounts yesterday were confirmation that the economy is soft and that people are under pressure. We saw it in the savings numbers. We saw it in the consumption figures. We saw it in the impact of rents and rate rises in our economy and on household budgets. These are the conditions that we anticipated in the budget, because we don't just acknowledge and understand that times are tough for too many people; we're actually doing something about it in the budget.

The primary way that we're doing that is with our cost-of-living relief: our tax cut for every taxpayer, energy bill relief for every household, cheaper medicines, getting wages moving again and our help with rent and with student debt. At the same time, we're making really important investments in housing, in skills and in the industries which will power the future in the context of the global net zero transformation—all at the same time as we repair the budget. We turn big Liberal deficits into Labor surpluses and pay down the debt that we inherited from those opposite when we came to office. Our approach is responsible. It is methodical, it is considered, and it is calibrated.

We reject a lot of the free advice that we got around budget time—that we should have slashed and burned in the budget, when the economy was already weak and when people were already under enough pressure. We reject as well the chaotic and catastrophic approach which was pitched up by those opposite. We know that they didn't want everyone to get a tax cut, because they called for an election over it. We know that they don't want people to get energy bill relief, because last time they voted against it. They described the indexation of the age pension as 'overspending' in the budget. They called for the type of slashing and burning in the budget which would have smashed the economy and left people to fend for themselves at a time of extreme pressure. They have proven again and again—before, during and after the budget reply—that their nasty negativity is no substitute for economic credibility.

In these difficult circumstances, the best thing to do is to provide cost-of-living relief in the most responsible way, invest in housing, skills and industry, and repair the budget without smashing the economy. That's what our budget is all about. The national accounts showed again why that's so important and why the approach that we are taking in the budget and in our economic strategy is exactly right for the challenging circumstances that we all confront.