Abbott breaches trust on budget

Abbott has broken faith with the Australian people. And unlike with Julia Gillard, he has broken that faith without the Greens 'holding him over a barrel' lest he lose Government. Just as Gillard was hounded until the very end on her carbon tax promise – Labor needs to ensure Abbott – and the Australian people – never forget these broken promises.

The Government's plans to raise taxation slightly for the wealthy while 'coming down like a ton of bricks' against welfare recipients is also offensive. (his move to exempt upper middle class taxpayers also discredits any pretension of 'spreading the burden'; for our purposes we will define that asincluding those on $100,000/year to $150,000/year)

Oscar Wilde once said: "To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less."

He could just as well have been speaking to Abbott, Hockey or Cormann.

A wealthy taxpayer might barely notice a marginal increase in tax. But for the poor and vulnerable the impact of welfare austerity would be crushing.

But Shorten's response to the Government's plans is also very disappointing.

He has been quoted as arguing:

"Increasing taxes on working class and middle class Australians is a terrible mistake and people will not forgive Mr Abbott for breaking this very big promise to increase taxes."

Again: Abbott must be held accountable for the breach of trust.

Yet Shorten's apparent opposition to any increase of tax on the middle class is also deeply concerning. Yes, removing superannuation concessions from the most wealthy could save over $15 billion. But a more ambitious program of welfare, infrastructure and social wage expansion would necessitate a broader base. And over the longer term even 'treading water' on welfare and social wage provision would require a proportionate increase in tax. The 'good news', however, is that tax increases on the middle class don't have to be too severe – because of that broader base.

Labor should never have abandoned its support for a retirement age of 65. Arguably for retirees there are 'quality of life' issues that go beyond the drive to extract more revenue and press ever-growing consumption. Under these circumstances the middle class would have to shoulder partof the responsibility for making Australia a truly 'Good Society'. If Shorten does not take account of this the Greens most likely will. And Labor will progressively 'lose ground' to the Greens 'on their left flank'; while floundering in its attempts to inspire a rush in membership levels and activity.

All said, though, it is the austerity rather than the tax measures which are the most concerning aspect of the Conservative agenda in Australia. 'Distributively fair' tax measures on their own could provide a 'silver lining'. Some debt is arguably necessary to spread the cost of infrastructure over generations. But cutting debt servicing costs in half could be workable, and arguably see all that money saved (approx. $4.5 billion) redirected every year toward the most vulnerable and needy. For instance: for those in need of Aged Care.

With Hockey's priorities, reduced debt servicing costs would likely be passed onto corporations, the wealthy and the upper middle class rather than the poor and vulnerable. But if there are those in the Government who would rather aspire towards 'Catholic social welfare Centrism' – then this would be a crucial issue on which to take an uncompromising stand. (both on social welfare; and in opposition to US-style exploitation of the working poor)

The same principle should apply to others in the Government identifying as 'compassionate Christians' as well.