Apart from Colebatch's column linked above, there seems to be little in the way of commentary about on whom the Coalition's claimed savings are falling.
In fact, there seems to be little skepticism about the claim that the Paid Parental Leave plan would actually save money in the long run. To give just one example, I'm pretty sure that in the summary Hockey provided, it made mention of savings from double dipping being reduced in State public service schemes. How does that work? Why is a saving to a State budget being credited to a Federal bottom line?
But back to Colebatch:
The Coalition will pay for its campaign promises by raising taxes on business, cutting support for middle-income and low-income earners, and cutting environmental programs, under the list of savings given out by shadow Treasurer Joe Hockey and shadow finance minister Andrew Robb....
The decision to hit business - mostly small business - with $4.6 billion of tax hikes was politically shrewd. Not one business lobby came forward on Wednesday to criticise the Coalition's new taxes on its members. They would have screamed had Labor done the same.
The Coalition made its riskiest cuts known long ago, and they don't seem to have hurt it.
The savings claimed are surprisingly large - $4.6 billion from axing the Schoolkids' Bonus, $3.7 billion from scrapping superannuation contributions for low-income earners and $5.2 billion from cutting 12,000 public service jobs.
These claimed savings are higher than previous estimates, even by the Coalition. It was a surprise to learn that the Coalition will over-fund its controversial paid parental leave scheme by $1.1 billion in its first two years. The policy it released two weeks ago made no such claim.
There are some errors in Hockey's costings. Innovation Minister Kim Carr pointed out that the Coalition could not claw back the $680 million it claims from axing two business programs without breaking contracts: the money it already committed.
Repeat after me: Prime Minister Abbott. LOL. JC's Lefty Suicide Hotline is already open for business. Get in before the rush.
ReplyDeleteSteve, I think they will drop the ridiculous paid maternity scheme once elected. They'll note - shock horror! - the cupboard is bare, and the scheme can't be afforded. They won't cop any criticism - everyone thinks the policy is a dud - and Abbot doesn't have to be seen as backing down.
ReplyDeleteMore importantly, with any luck the greens will prevent any carbon price repeal, and we can keep up with the rest of the world in reducing our carbon emmissions, rather than throwing money away on Abbott's "direct action" plan.
In some ways I'm glad Abbott stayed as leader. With Turnbull the libs might have stayed in for a long time. He may even have appealed to your kind of conservatism.
But people will quickly work out what a flake Abbott is. As you said, I don't care if he's a Rhodes scholar, he's just not that smart.
The policy is heavily weighted to high income earners when you take into account what the savings are.
ReplyDeletevery strange.
I think Steve is correct he will bleat about a bare cupboard but nothing will change from PEFO so he will end up with egg on his face like Barry O'farrell had when he tried something similar.