Never has a government done so little for so many

Australians deserve better than the law of the market jungle

Never has a government done so little for so many. This epitaph could easily sit on the tombstone of governments who have implemented policies that have shifted wealth from the struggling to the well-off , and influence from the public to the private sector. In this company the Howard Coalition Government stands tall. The irony of it all is that the clampdown on public spending and public interest has intensified at the time of considerable growth in wealth. Australia, along with the rest of the world, particularly the industrialised nations, has never been richer.

This may be a total surprise to low-income earners and people dependent on welfare benefits but it would not be a secret to the well-off who benefit from the current economic structure. As icing on the cake they benefit from government largesse such as lower income taxes, greater corporate welfare and increasing shift to regressive taxes.

Even Federal Treasurer Peter Costello, in promoting the Government's Budget on the ABC's Radio National (12/5/04) acknowledged that the companies' profit share of gross domestic product is at a historical record.

The 2004/05 Budget

The 2004/05 Budget, for all its largesse, is not public spending. It does nothing to address structural and entrenched problems in employment (unemployment, the working poor, work and family imbalance), health, education, the environment. The only value it promotes is the one of self-interest based on a tawdry view of the family as a mythical unit cut off from what is happening in the real world and how that world is putting pressure on families.

The strong play with one-off payments is the clearest sign that this Budget is a blatant attempt at buying the votes of a targeted group. To give away money, when there is a need and potential to fund public works and projects related to current problems, is a dereliction of government duty.

The one-off concept says it all. It acknowledges there is a problem that needs to be addressed. It throws some money at it telling recipients that beyond that it's their business. This is a cynical bribe the Howard Government has given to a section of the electorate, the aspirational voters who both major parties are courting to win government.

The Budget in general has no vision and no aim other than winning the next election. For example, how much better would it have been to legislate for paid maternity, if not parental, leave instead of a one-off parental payment. It would have provided a long-term right for parents, it would have been a positive move in alleviating the family versus work tensions and said something about the real importance of family and community relations.

Instead, Costello's giveaways worth $37 billion over five years is a squandering of an enormous public saving paid for by the people.

Under the Budget's provisions taxpayers earning less than $50,000 (the overwhelming majority of the workforce) get no tax relief while those above do, on an increasing scale as the income increases. There is no doubt that people who are eligible for this one-off costly handout will receive some relief. However, the fundamental trends, that point to a worsening quality of life for those on lower incomes, from monetarist and market economics will continue.

The Howard Government has shown once again in this Budget example, that the long term interests of the nation and particularly of the disadvantaged take second place to cynical political self interest.