Summary of Is the budget bold enough to stop One Nation’s rise?

Overview of Is the budget bold enough to stop One Nation’s rise?

This ABC News Daily episode examines whether major policy shifts from Labor and the Coalition can reverse voter cynicism, slow the rise of One Nation, and shore up Australia’s struggling two-party system. Political correspondent Michelle Grattan argues that while bold policy matters, deeper problems — mistrust, perceptions of inauthenticity, and broken promises — are doing more damage than any single budget measure.

Main themes

Voter disillusionment and the rise of alternatives

• The discussion opens on growing frustration with the major parties, reflected in:
  • the rise of independents,
  • stronger support for One Nation,
  • and broader cynicism about politics.
• Grattan says this distrust has been building for decades in Australia and overseas.
• The major parties are seen by many voters as disconnected, self-interested, and unresponsive.

Labor’s budget and younger voters

• Labor’s budget was framed as an attempt to appeal to younger Australians and promote “intergenerational equity.”
• Measures affecting negative gearing and capital gains tax were intended to signal action on housing affordability and fairness.
• Grattan says the government is likely disappointed by the reaction:
  • the budget has not translated into support,
  • and the response has been more negative than expected.

Why the housing measures proved controversial

• The capital gains tax changes were criticized because many younger people use property-adjacent assets, like shares, to build wealth before entering the housing market.
• The housing package is presented as having limited short-term impact:
  • it only slightly slows house-price growth,
  • and the modelling suggests around 30 fewer new homes in the short term.
• The budget also broke an election promise, which creates lingering political damage even if attention later moves on.

“Death tax” politics and social media amplification

• The opposition quickly framed the budget changes as a “death tax” or tax on family trusts and estates.
• Grattan notes that social media can magnify even small policy changes into major political liabilities.
• The controversy extends beyond young voters to:
  • people doing estate planning,
  • families leaving assets to children,
  • and some small businesses.

Angus Taylor’s budget reply: bold but risky

• The Coalition’s response also included major policy ideas.
• Two standout proposals:
  1. Denying welfare benefits to permanent residents
     • Positioned as putting Australians first.
     • Grattan says it is politically aimed at voters drifting toward One Nation.
     • She also warns it risks alienating ethnic communities and is weak in substance.
  2. Indexing income tax brackets
     • This would prevent bracket creep, where inflation pushes workers into higher tax bands without real gains in purchasing power.
     • Grattan sees this as more principled and potentially popular, especially with younger workers.
     • But it may be hard to sell as a retail political message compared with something like a tax cut.

Key takeaways

• Bold policy alone is not enough to rebuild trust in the major parties.
• Labor’s housing and tax changes were intended to help younger voters but have so far generated backlash instead.
• The Coalition is also chasing disaffected voters, including those leaning toward One Nation, but some of its proposals may be socially divisive.
• Political authenticity matters:
  • misuse of entitlements,
  • over-reliance on talking points,
  • and overly scripted politics all reinforce cynicism.
• Grattan’s bottom line: Australia’s two-party system is in deep trouble, though not necessarily on the verge of collapse.

Notable insights from Michelle Grattan

• The current distrust of major parties is not a short-term issue; it has been growing for years.
• Breaks in trust create legacy effects, especially when people feel they may be worse off.
• The two major parties are trying to clarify what they stand for, which is necessary, but it may not be enough to reverse public disengagement.
• The political system may need not just better policy, but better candidates and more authentic behavior from politicians.

Conclusion

The episode’s core argument is that Australia’s political fracture will not be repaired by one budget or one reply speech. Labor and the Coalition are both trying to define themselves through bolder policy, but Grattan suggests the deeper problem is structural: widespread distrust, weak authenticity, and a growing sense that neither major party fully represents ordinary voters.