The Point Live: Government pushes for mining friendly environment law pass, Coalition wants tax cuts

Today we will get inflation data – but this is a little different from the usual ABS releases – today marks the official transition from quarterly to monthly headline inflation.

Headline is the stuff that bounces around a lot – underlying inflation (the trimmed mean) is the metric that the RBA and economic watchers say gives us a better idea of where inflation actually is (the pulse, as it were)

The Coalition is claiming Labor’s figures on keeping coal fired power stations running – the business as usual approach the opposition seems to think is the way of the future (I mean sure, if you want to just pretend there is no better way and surrender to a burning planet without a fight) are bupkis.

To this Jim Chalmers says:

Well, one of the reasons that the Coalition’s approach to the net zero energy transformation is insane in economic terms is because it would cost the budget billions of dollars to extend the life of the least reliable parts of the energy system.

So what they’re proposing would swing a wrecking ball through the budget, through the economy, and push power prices up, not down. That’s because it would require billions and billions of dollars of subsidies to extend the life of these coal-fired power stations, which have been slated for some time to come out of the system.

Any reasonable, rational person who cares about responsible economic management knows that these power assets are coming out of the system. And so the onus is on governments to work out the best way to replace that energy which is coming out of the system.

The rational economists and experts and analysts in the energy system know that the best way to do that is with cleaner and cheaper renewable, more reliable energy. That’s why it makes no sense in economic terms what the coalition is proposing.

They’ve got this harebrained position on net zero which is driven more by the internal politics of their coalition party rooms than it is by the national economic interest.

But to the question, Chalmers says:

What we’ve done here is taken what it’s cost to extend power plants in the past, and we’ve applied it from 2028 to the power assets which are slated to close. I think, as your viewers would understand, for a long time now and a long run-up, some of these power assets – coal-fired power assets – are going to come out of the system. And so, in order to extend them, it requires very substantial billions of dollars in government subsidies that the coalition has told us how they intend to go about that or how much that will cost. So we’ve done a calculation for them which recognises that, if they want to extend the life of these power assets, it will smash the budget and will also smash the economy, and it will push power prices up, not down. And that’s why what they’re proposing to do on net zero and the energy transformation is an act of economic insanity.

On the public service cuts, treasurer Jim Chalmers has appeared on ABC News Breakfast to say it is business as usual:

First of all, you’re right to say it’s not an efficiency dividend. And it’s also very different to what our opponents were proposing in the lead-up to the last election, which is to slash tens of thousands of jobs. As I said to you a moment ago, we’re not asking every department to cut their staff by 5%. We’re not asking them all to cut their budgets by 5%. We’re doing what responsible governments do, which is – in the lead-up to budgets, we say, “Where is your spending lower priority, and do we need to redirect that to higher-priority areas?” We’ve been doing that now for four budgets, and it will be part of our efforts in the fifth, because there are very substantial pressures on the budget. We are cutting taxes, providing cost-of-living relief, strengthening Medicare, and doing all of the things that we said we would do. And in order to do that, you need to make room in budgets. We’ve been doing that for 3.5 years now, and people should expect that to continue.

Ted O’Brien isn’t giving his press club speech until midday, but Jim Chalmers already thinks he knows what Super Ted will be saying:

Ted O’Brien went to the last election promising higher taxes for every taxpayer and he’ll go to the next election with a plan for higher power prices for every household.

The Coalition are making billions of dollars’ worth of uncosted commitments, but can’t tell us how they’ll pay for them and that means savage cuts to essential services which they should come clean about.

What the Coalition is proposing is a recipe for higher taxes, higher power prices, bigger deficits and more debt.

They’re hopelessly divided, they have no credibility on the economy and Ted O’Brien will prove that again today.”

Sussan Ley thinks the reports departmental heads have been told to find 5% in savings in their public service departments is a broken promise by Labor and also might mean cuts in services, and she supports the public service, but also doesn’t think the cuts go far enough. So bit all over the place it seems.

Ley tells ABC News Breakfast:

In making the commitments that they made, they have let Canberrans down. I’ve said – and I said in an earlier speech – that we do need to live within our means, and we want an efficient Public Service that delivers for all Australians and recognises the responsible role of the Public Service.

I’ve been a public servant in this city and outside it, and I support our Public Service. So it’s not about that. But what on earth is going on in the Labor Party if they are writing to department heads asking for savings – perhaps, I think, it was 5%. By the way, how is that going to solve the over $1 trillion debt that this country is facing? And when we talk about living responsibly within our means, we do it because, when we do live responsibly within our means, we can look after Australia’s most vulnerable. This is because every dollar that you spent on interest on the debt – right now, it’s $50,000 a minute on interest on the debt – is a dollar that you can’t spend on looking after people who are vulnerable, employing doctors and nurses in the public health system, and so on.

What does Sussan Ley think of Barnaby Joyce and Pauline Hanson having sandwich press steak in Hanson’s office earlier this week?

Ley tells ABC News Breakfast:

The great Wagyu producers in my electorate would be a bit worried about the steak on the sandwich press. Putting that aside, Barnaby’s a friend. I’ve known him for many years as a colleague in the parliament. What he does is entirely to him, and I would leave it there!

Q: Would you be sad if he jumped ship from the coalition? Obviously there are some people in the National Party who have voted for the Nationals purely for him?

Ley:

These are questions for the National Party, James. I’m the Leader of the Opposition, yes, but my party room is united behind a serious, compelling policy agenda that we want to take to the Australian people that we are developing, and that involves living within our means, managing the budget responsibly, lower personal income tax cuts – a substantial package that I will take to the next election – addressing issues of migration that Australians are concerned about, because infrastructure is failing.

And, of course, addressing something that’s very close to the heart of small business, which is – how do we manage industrial relations in a setting that actually works for both employers and employees and generates productivity? Because – remember that productivity summit? Was it more than 100 days ago now? Absolutely nothing has come out of it.

I am sure this all seemed very clever in the tactics meeting with Ley’s team about how she would answer these questions.

The AFR reported this yesterday and today (and managed to almost contain the WE WERE RIGHT smugness in the article – public service spending is a particular bugbear of this incarnation of the Fin) and Clare O’Neil has been asked about it on the Seven network – where are departments going to find these cuts?

O’Neil:

This is a really important and practical part of government. Taxpayer dollars are really precious. This is not our money and for everyone whose watching at home, they hard for their salaries and contribute to the tax system in good faith that their dollars will be looked after and invested on critical things like supporting our aging population, supporting child care, supporting our Medicare system, the National Disability Insurance Scheme and other services that many Australian families rely on is absolutely appropriate that every year we take an absolutely strong look at the budget and make sure when we’re making these big improvements to services as our government is doing on Medicare on bulk billing on cheaper medicines and energy bill price relief we’re thinking about where we can rationalise on the budget.

What about that $96m on the BoM website (which was started in 2019 under the Morrison government)

O’Neil:

That’s an historic spend. The minister said he’s unhappy about that. There’s absolutely areas in the public service where we do need to think about making sure that we’re spending taxpayers money wisely and for everyone who is watching at home I really want them to understand we see that your struggling the cost of living, you’re struggling with energy prices and other matters we want to do everything the government can do to help you in those areas. It means having a strong look at the budget and make sure every dollar is spent wisely

Matt Canavan isn’t above creating headlines himself – he attended Melissa McIntosh’s rival Christmas drink event for Coalition colleagues, which was held at the same time Sussan Ley was hosting drinks for the media (so she couldn’t attend). About 40 Coalition MPs visited McIntosh’s shindig, including Canavan who says it was all very festive.

The Nationals have also held their stand alone Christmas party, which had an 80s theme, which fits really, because that was maybe the highpoint of the Nationals popularity.

Canavan told the Nine network there was a “strict” no photos rule, but he dressed as Maverick from Top Gun (because of course he did)

There were a few gooses, actually, last night with the 80s team. And and you’ve lost that loving feeling was was was was a really, really good. We hit we hit the high notes.

One of Jim Chalmers’ goals has been to reverse the (on the data, wrong) idea that the Coalition are better economic managers, so you can imagine that the annual electoral survey would have been some cause for a quiet fist pump (he strikes me as the private fist pump kinda guy).

The other affirming part of that survey was that it found Peter Dutton was the most unpopular Labor leader for 40 years which – ummm, yes? Told you so?

Sussan Ley could take that mantle though, so there is always further to fall

The coalition has lost its 40-year streak of being preferred over Labor when it comes to managing the economy.

The Australian Election Study, led by Australian National University and Griffith University, shows voters now trust Labor’s approach to economic issues, with the coalition losing its long-held advantage.

The Liberals suffered their lowest rating in the 2025 study, dropping to an average score of 4.2 on a zero to 10 scale of how much people like the party.

Voters signalled a clear preference for Anthony Albanese as prime minister, with former opposition leader Peter Dutton’s lack of popularity at May’s federal election breaking several records in the study.

“Dutton was the least popular major party leader the study has ever polled,” co-author Ian McAllister said.

“According to voters, the leadership qualities he most lacked were ‘inspiration’, closely followed by ‘compassion’.”

The Australian Election Study has been held after every federal poll since 1987.

The full report on the 2025 election will be released at Parliament House on Wednesday.

The federal election saw the coalition sink to its worst election result, winning just 43 seats in the House of Representatives.

The study’s results show voter volatility continues to rise, with 25 per cent of participants reporting they don’t feel close to any political party.

Co-author Sarah Cameron said the wide gender gap that emerged over the past decade had remained.

“The coalition attracted the lowest share of votes from women on record, with nine per cent fewer women than men voting for the coalition,” Dr Cameron said.

“Conversely, Labor attracts more votes from women than men.

“The gender gap in voting for Labor, at five per cent, is about half the size of the coalition’s.”

There has also been a dramatic drop in confidence in Australia’s relationship with the United States, with 55 per cent of voters saying they trust in the US to come to Australia’s defence, down from 73 per cent in 2022.

The dire results come as the coalition’s primary vote also failed to lift beyond record low levels in the latest Newspoll data, which revealed most voters support Andrew Hastie as preferred opposition leader.

Labor continues to lead the two-party preferred vote by 58-42 per cent.

Opposition treasury spokesman Ted O’Brien will use a keynote address on Wednesday to outline some of the principles of the coalition’s economic policy.

Mr O’Brien will describe a new focus on intergenerational equity and criticise backsliding levels of productivity.

“Today, we are living off the productivity gains of the generations before us,” he will say.

“The generation before you builds your foundation; then you build on it for the next generation. That is the intergenerational compact.

“But that intergenerational compact is breaking.”

He will also use the speech to reiterate the coalition’s promises to cut income taxes and restore a Howard-era measure limiting government spending.