Welcome to Eureka Street

back to site

ECONOMICS

Abbott and Hockey more Prince John than Robin Hood

  • 05 May 2014

In politics, one should never opt for a balanced and thoughtful description of the truth when wild exaggerations will do. Especially when you want to take from the poor and give to, if not exactly the rich, at least the investor class. Tax concessions to superannuants and those using negative gearing amount to more than the aged pension. Yet there is no mention of that; the silence is deafening.

The Commission of Audit's 86 recommendations to the Federal Government have prompted outbursts of alarm and criticism for those affected: mostly in the health sector and the aged. It is likely most of them will not be adopted, just another episode in the softening-up process the Government is orchestrating. Two messages are being sold: 'We have to do something drastic,' and 'We will all try to share the pain.' Thus Treasurer Joe Hockey can 'refuse to rule out any recommendations' then listen to the huge sighs of relief on Budget night.

At first glance, it seems a justifiable political tactic. The Budget does need some repair, as the wealth benefit from a once-in-a-generation mining boom comes to an end. And it is perhaps unrealistic to expect politicians not to spin, distort and lie. Nevertheless, spin, distortion and lies it is.

The Audit report concentrates mainly on government services and the social safety net. While not exactly engaging in class war (there is a proposed one-off debt payment for high income earners) it nevertheless reveals a lack of concern about the less well-off.

To some extent this is inevitable, because Australia has the most targeted social welfare system in the OECD, directing more of its government spending to the poorest 30 per cent, and less to the richest 30 per cent, than any other nation. So if government spending is to be curtailed, it will inevitably affect the worst off.

Yet a glance at the actual evidence about Australian government spending shows just how much the government is exaggerating for political effect.

The claim that ageing is making pension payments unsustainable is not supported by the evidence. The government spends about $40 billion on the aged pension (total assistance to the aged is about $55 billion). Public spending on pensions is 3.5 per cent, the fourth lowest in the OECD (America's is 6.8 per cent).

And, far from having become out of control, government spending has actually fallen over the last two decades. In 1995, and then again in