A tale of two budgets

This year Tasmanians were blessed with an unprecedented political event: two complete full year budgets. The first from Guy Barnett in May, and the second from Eric Abetz last Thursday.

The numbers are basically the same, in fact the Abetz budget comes in with an ever so slightly worse deficit for 2025-26, $1008 million versus $1002 million.

Sure, Abetz shows lower deficits and debt in the out years (we’re even promised a mythical surplus in 2028-29) but these are premised on truly unbelievable assumptions. For example, we are told with a straight face that expenditure will actually reduce year on year - pig’s arse. I’m not sure that this has ever happened before, for example, expenditures continued to rise even after the 20-21 and 21-22 Covid budgets. 

More tellingly, even in the “horror” Giddings  2011-12 budget the then Treasurer tried to reduce spending including by cutting frontline health, education and policing jobs - but it still ended up increasing.

Truth be told, it’s simply not possible for a State Government to reduce spending, the best they can hope for is to constrain growth.

Just one example. Public sector wage growth is assumed to be 2.5 per cent in the budget, already the Government has exceeded this by offering three per cent. The unions want five per cent a year and are marching in the streets for it.

Another: as the Labor opposition have pointed out, health spending is budgeted to be $26 million less than was actually spent on health last year. Does anyone think that is actually going to happen? What are they going to do, stop treating people when they reach budgeted expenditure? 

And yet, while the Barnett budget was widely ridiculed and was the catalyst for bringing down the Government, the Abetz budget has landed as somewhat of a “nothing-burger”; a few shoulder shrugs here and there from the suddenly supine independents, and some hopelessly confused political attacks from Labor (too much debt/cutting too much/not spending enough).

Abetz’s secret is the messaging, and the political context.

Eric Abetz has always been a very persuasive communicator, you don’t last 30 years in politics rising to the highest levels in the Federal Parliament if you aren’t. Indeed, his greatest skill is to take a proposition, and develop and deliver a strong and coherent message to advance it.

This is clearly in evidence with the Macquarie Point Stadium for which Abetz is now the responsible Minister, where he has crafted a bold (some would say courageous) new narrative likening the Stadium to iconic buildings such as the Eiffel Tower, Sydney Harbour Bridge, and even Wrest Point Casino. Initially these arguments raised more than a few eyebrows, however as Abetz repeated them and they sank in, they arguably have had more positive effect for the Stadium than the trite “We can’t afford not to” and “Do it for the kids” defenses.

So too, on his budget.

First, weeks before it was delivered Abetz basically told everyone not to bother, it was an “interim” budget and the real budget will be in May next year. So, expectations were set extremely low for budget repair.

Second, in stark contrast to Barnett who steadfastly proclaimed a fiscal nirvana, Abetz openly admitted that the budget is completely stuffed. And then, with next level chutzpah, said “I’ll fix it later.”

And third, Abetz has done a much better job across a diversity of media platforms selling his “interim”, “It’s bad but I’ll fix it later” message to great effect.

Finally, of course, Abetz has been helped by the political context. No one wants a second election this year.

Earlier this year then Opposition Leader (now Shadow Treasurer) Dean Winter moved a no confidence motion in the Barnett budget because, he told us, he wouldn’t be able to live with himself if he voted it through. This carbon copy budget? Well that’s completely different apparently.

As for the independents, a number of whom were elected on platforms that included fiscal responsibility? All good, let’s wait for the May budget. I will be very interested to see what the Alternative Shadow Treasurer in the Upper House (Ruth Forrest) does, given she indicated she would have likely voted against the Barnett budget.

So, we wait for another six months while the State’s debt continues to inexorably rise. And even then, as I indicated in my budget preview column, anyone wanting meaningful action is dreaming.

As for me, all I’ll be wishing for Christmas is for Abetz to muscle up and take on the Feather Duster’s club, and seriously rein in the annual superannuation bill for retired public servants which is now costing the budget $400 million per year and growing.

• Brad Stansfield is a partner at Font PR and part-owner of this newspaper. He worked for Eric Abetz from 2004-2010.