A FOOTNOTE to decades of well- intentioned budgets is that governments have never got the narrative right.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The May federal budget, for instance, was a contradiction in terms. It was branded an emergency repair job involving all of us, but battlers suffered while high-income earners were barely scratched.
Parliament was handed a wages freeze, after just receiving a 38 per cent pay rise, and apart from the carbon tax gains, the bad news was mixed with plans to abolish the mining tax, introduce a generous paid parental leave scheme, introduce a $20 billion medical research fund and create a giant infrastructure package.
Australians were left confused about the philosophy behind the budget, and this played into the hands of those who had actually created the problem with a massive spending spree over six years.
Next month state Treasurer Peter Gutwein brings in his first budget. It's late, in that he's had almost half a year to prepare it. This budget, ahead of future efforts, will shape his credentials as a future alternative to Premier Will Hodgman.
Before the May federal budget, Treasury had already identified the risks of a growing debt and a worsening deficit, that it said required immediate attention.
This is usually Treasury code for a looming crisis. The Tasmanian government simply lacks the economic firepower to ignore spiralling costs. It must contain them if cabinet is to maintain some discretion over economic growth.
Cabinet has ensured there will be a wages freeze for politicians, and now will legislate a freeze to public sector wages, and peg future increases to 2 per cent to save jobs. The state public sector is far too large for a state this size. The wages bill alone is more than $2 billion, plus more than $500 million in annual entitlements.
This is the aftermath of previous government decisions to overspend in successive budgets and double the wages bill of the public sector.
Yes that's true, but slashing and squeezing the livelihoods of thousands of employees comes at an economic cost. It betrays a capacity to change the goal posts, by meddling with employment compacts.