Most of budget in place
TREASURY figures have punctured claims of a crisis over the passage of the federal budget, revealing that 98.9 per cent of expense measures are already legislated despite a savage political fight over a handful of reforms.
Parliament has passed more than $1.8 trillion in expense items for the next four years, according to an official analysis that shows hundreds of policy decisions are already in force, while a few face a Senate veto.
The Australian can reveal that $25 billion in savings are already taking effect to improve the budget bottom line following the passage of appropriations bills.
The Treasury figures cast new light on the brawl over the budget as Tony Abbott confronts claims that he cannot get essential measures through the parliament.
As talks continue with crossbench senators to pass the most contentious reforms, Joe Hockey said he was prepared to negotiate with “sensible people” but stood by the overall plan to cut outlays and reduce debt.
Finance Minister Mathias Cormann hardened the message on the budget last night by declaring there was “ample time” to legislate the changes, saying no recent government had passed all of its budget changes by the end of August.
Senator Cormann also opened a new front in the fight over the fairness of the budget by warning that the greater injustice would be to deepen the deficit and leave a growing debt burden for the next generation.
“Labor and others argue that our budget is unfair; that is nonsense,” he said last night.
“What is unfair is to promise what you cannot deliver; to hold out hopes you know will be dashed; to rob from tomorrow, to live it up today. That, for the last six years, has been Labor’s way. It is not our way.”
The Australian obtained the estimates of the legislated expenses after requesting the government analysis of the appropriations bills that have passed the parliament since May. The figures show that parliament has approved $440bn in expenses for the current financial year and $1.8 trillion over the four years to 2017-18.
Most of the budget’s 400 policy decisions have already been put into force as capital investments, expenses or revenue measures over the four years. Changes already implemented have produced a “net improvement” of about $15bn in the budget bottom line, according to the figures compiled by the Treasury and the Department of Finance and Administration.
Included in those decisions is a $7.6bn saving by scaling back growth in foreign aid, the single largest saving in the budget but one that does not require legislation.
The government analysis notes that some of the biggest structural savings in the May budget are yet to be legislated, highlighting the importance of measures that are yet to be successfully negotiated with Labor, the Greens or minor parties in the Senate.
The official assessment concludes that only about $20bn in net expense measures over the next four years have not yet been implemented by legislation.
Even so, the structural changes are important because they increase the savings over time. The reductions in Family Tax Benefit Part A and B are estimated to save $7.4bn over four years but larger amounts in later years as fewer people qualify for payments.
Yes and I agree its a rotten bit of hit the pensioners and battlers in the hip pocket and in the case of Joe who,seemingly like Gillard, has a thing about age pensioners, she let the singles have a $30 rise but the cost was to cut the married rate down from 167% of the singel rate to 150%. Meaning today a married couple who are said to have a **whopping higher figure as this is a way of manipulating those who dont bother to work things out, lok like in clover when in fact living off one single pension and one half of a single pension. OK? And Joe himself has a thing re poorer people and is taking it out on pensioners and a lot of the Liberal MPs are uneasy and in reality hoping the senate not let it go through.
** this is why they always state single pension say $890 and married couple $1335.Really sounds so much more no wonder it works - but is actually only the ratio today one pension plus one half pension again added on but divides the pensioners enough so argure instead of being a group.
Why is the question
Who knows but something there and it all started back in 1990 with the then Reserve Bank Governor saying the baby boomers were the cause of *high property prices, and of course, were spending their 'kids inheritance' on having a good time in their golden years reverse mortgaging and taking cruises etc or buying a van and going around Australia. Naughty things should maybe die and that would solve their kids problems and his at the time too? Makes one think something behind these sort of things.
? Because we are all human and the 7 deadly sins ar no myth thy exist all right and motive many these days, greed and avarice come to mind.
* And Bob Carr then Premier of NSW said no, its the fact here in Sydney that over 1000 people a week are arriving from overseas seeking properties to buy or rent that is pushing up the demand so that is the reason not older people who bought back when Sydney was smaller and the city grew out around them making the land their homes sit on more valuable each year.
Whatever. Folks if you lot would stop bloody arguing long enough to sit down and think things out and then form a block of voters that would make the politicians shake in their shoes and have and is the reason for all the attacks and the divide and rule manipulation tht has gone on since 1990's when the sh*t hit the fan and all over the world western governments realized hadnt made provision for pensions enough or like here - half inched them and spent them.
And today tell us older folk - you should have saved for old age, when we were told, work, pay income tax as your pension is covered by that levy on it. It existed.
In there is reason enough and dont forget the MPs and Joe himself didnt save their pensions are straight out of consolidated revenue or were, maybe included now in payment of public servants nice little earners from Future Fund set up by Costello.
But that hasnot stopped anyone telling younger ones - they pissed it all away instead of saving and you are having to pay for them whilst saving for your own in super
Plus super savers have had either dollar for dollar paid into it or savings on incoming tax little as they pay for the better off in concessions that mount up to billions, but he hastnt cut them and could have if in strife.
So why not stop arguing and start emailing or writing letters and maybe even holding rallies in your town or city get the pensioners and SFR together, and like Betty who got you an extra $30 if single. Shame no one noticed the cut to marrieds as well as not getting that $30 either all in the name of divide and rule.
People power works. Have to have enough people, with over 2+ million on age pension and another 2+ million SFR/part pensioners and even count in the over 50's either on the dole or facing it and you have a huge block of votes enough to scare the pants of this lot for sure. As well as the Opposition.