Abbott a threat both to fairness and prosperity

In keeping with this logic, we may see a further deepening of the “user pays” principle. Where access to such infrastructure and services takes this form, and is levied at a flat rate, those on lower incomes are again disadvantaged or even excluded entirely.

Tendencies towards labour market polarisation also mean that there are many who are adversely affected by this deepening of “user pays”, especially in the absence of a sufficient social wage.

What we certainly don’t want in this country is a slippery slide towards an American-style polarised labour market, with the material needs and rights of citizens undercut further as a consequence of only-threadbare social services and protections.

A strong social wage is necessary to provide a fair baseline with regards to access to services and amenities; and to make up for distributive injustices that arise as a consequence of unequal bargaining power among workers in the labour market.

Abbott has provided strategic policy announcements in areas of special concern to the public. Although the overall picture under Abbott would be one of savage austerity, the would-be Prime Minister has attempted to trump Labor with announcements of funding for mental health and aged care.

In aged care the Opposition has pledged a “$935 million package” including “21 days of convalescence care for around 20,000 eligible patients at a cost of $300 million”, “$14 million for pet therapy programs”, and “$12 million to promote wellbeing and funding for companionship programs”.

And in mental health Abbott has promised a $1.5 billion package including “800 new hospital beds”, “$440 million for the creation of 20 Early Psychosis Prevention and Intervention Centres” and “$225m would be allocated to build 60 Headspace services - treatment centres for young people”.

Experts remain critical. Australian Nursing Federation (ANF) spokesperson Yvonne Chaperon has highlighted insufficient wages for qualified aged care nurses, with the consequence of many skilled professionals leaving the system. In turn, this leaves aged care facilities with an insufficient skills mix.

And Australian Medical Association president Dr Andrew Pesce has slammed Abbott’s proposal to cut Labor’s $98.4 million in incentive payments for GPs to provide services in aged care homes. 

In the bigger picture it is well worth noting that the Australian economy is valued well over AUS$1 trillion.

The commitments of the major parties seem paltry in this context. Quality of services in aged care and mental health fall way short of the real human need, and that needed to uphold human dignity for our most vulnerable. Across the political spectrum parties are “scraping the bottom of the barrel” for desperately needed funds in these and other critical areas: but few confront the need for progressive tax reform to turn the situation around.

Nevertheless, despite shortcomings, Abbott appears so far to have “trumped” Labor in these sensitive areas. In effect he is challenging Labor on its own traditional terrain of health services. Labor cannot afford to cede this terrain, the consequence of doing so would be to lose crucial credibility and support.