By Joe Montero
The 2035 election campaign is in full swing now that Anthony Albanese has called it for 3 May. Neither Labor nor the Coalition have taken on the key challenges of today. Australia faces an ongoing cost of living crisis and a deepening disillusionment with the major political parties, within the context of ab underperforming economy and the social dislocation that this is causing. Climate has been silenced for this election, despite most of Australia being deeply concerned about it.
Instead of this, there is a focus on secondary issues, with the addition of the small give aways that usually characterise election campaigns. Migration is being used as a whipping boy to hide attention from the key issues. Dutton has called for a permanent cut in total net migration by 25 percent. Lebor is pulling in the same direction, although they haven’t yet said by how much.
Whether or not cut migrants is warranted or not, it remains that this still doesn’t touch the need to build he economy and reverse the rising cost of living. Albanese has at least promised to act on price gouging by the supermarkets. This is a good thing. The Prime Minister’s calling out that the supermarkets are “taking the piss” out of Australians might by a little colourful. But this is the truth and should resonate with the lectorate.
The problem is that no more than a taskforce to consider unfair pricing practices is on offer. Australia needs price gouging to be outlawed. Not more taking about it. There are already laws against artificially manipulating prices for predatory practices and eliminating competition. Why then. are our political leaders failing to move towards implementing them?
Dutton’s side won’t even countenance talking about price gouging or any other form of price manipulation.
Price gouging is important because it attracts attention to the broader problem of the cost of living. Inflation plays its part. The key factor here, however, is the shift on national income away from wages, and towards corporate profits. Neither of the main contenders will touch the notion of significantly reversing this.
This could be achieved by industrial relations policy fit for the purpose. There could be support for wage growth in the public sector, instead of jobs destruction.
Big business organisations are calling for productivity increase instead. In normal language this means a labour force that produces more in less time. The myth that Australia lags the rest of the world is created. Not true. Technological advances and fewer employed in the workplace, meaning more output over the same time. This has been the principle means for shifting national income away from wages. These organisations want more of this.
According to the Treasury, nominal wages growth since the start of the pandemic to now has been just 0.6 percent per annum, and well under the inflation rate.
Understanding this helps to appreciate why our politicians are so afraid to act on the cost-of-living crisis. Neither party is prepared to cross the interests of the big corporations.
Extend this to housing affordability. Labor is spruiking its $33 billion housing spend. Looks good on paper. The problem is that most of this money is designed to be leaked to property developers, rather than spending it all on actual housing. The approach is based on reliance on a market solution when the problem is market failure in the first place.
The market has not been able to deliver the type of housing Australia needs. A sensible and efficient approach would be to rely on direct government intervention is housing provision, and not merely as a prop for a failed market.
Australia’s housing crisis is real and neglected in the 2025 election campaign
What does the Coalition offer? Their only promise is to abolish the Albanese government’s Housing Australia Future Fund behind its promised spend. And there is a promise to spend $5 billion on upgrading existing public housing estates. Too little to make any real difference. The Coalition’s policy amounts to almost nothing.
This will not be accepted by the two parties for the same reason of avoiding taking on the big corporations.
Such reluctance to take on the economically powerful is what lies behind the growing disillusionment with the major parties and the fact of their shrinking bases of political support. There is a growing perception that the major political players are not on the side of the Australian people, and small signs of a realisation that the political system fails to deliver.
Neither Labor nor the Coalition are offering an answer to this. On these grounds alone, neither deserve support. But for voters this becomes a tactical problem. The simple truth is that at least in the short-term, the only possibility is a government led by one or the other of these two parties. The question is which is the best option and on what terms?
The good part is that the trend away from the major parties and rise of a third force provides an opportunity. The prospect of a minority government or some form of new coalition is real. The polls are predicting this. It means whoever forms government after this election will be subject to more pressure from voters. The next question is where can this be taken best advantage of, through Labor or the Coalition?