Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Disclaimer: The Parliamentary Library does not warrant the accuracy of closed captions. These are derived automatically from the broadcaster's signal.
Australian Agenda -

View in ParlView

(generated from captions) It's PM agenda. Welcome to

the program. It's nearly 24

hours since Wayne Swan handed

down his budget. So far

neither the coalition, the

Greens nor the independents

have said that they will be

voting against any particular

measure. Yes, the opposition

isn't happy with this budget.

They've called it a dud.

They're making somewhat

conflicting arguments, that

there aren't enough serious

spending cuts on the one hand.

On the other the cuts that are being made to family payments

are going too far. The Greens the welfare to work measures are similarly concerned that

they could be too tough, the

Greens are guaranteeing supply.

Coming up we're going to look

at the details of the fallout

from the budget, the political

fallout, what is likely to be

held up, where is the coalition

likely to create the fight. We

will be talking to at assistant treasurer Bill Shorten and

later in the program we will

hear some of the interview from

earlier in the today with Tony

Abbott. Let's look at the hard

sell and spin of budget 2011 We

deliver tax cuts for every year

of the last three years, I

don't like these cuts because

they are targeting families at

a time when families are under

extreme and increasing

pressure The right thing to do

is to bring the budget back to surplus, Thane chrudz making some of the tough decisions What this government

is doing, it's basically dem

Monday nicing aspiration This

is about getting the budget

back into the black It's not

worth a mark out of 10 it's a dud The debt is getting

bigger This is just an excuse

from the on significance to

they're simply a wrecking simply have no alternative,

ball This government thinks if

you're earning over 100,000

dollars you're rich We're on

track for surplus in 2012/13 on

time as promised Confused and

it's directionless, they're

cutting two billion dollars out

of families Let's be under no

illusions here, they have not

cut spending in any serious

way My belief is that we are on

the verge of something truly

great if we're willing to get

the policy settings

right They're not being tough

on themselves, on waste I commend the bill to the

house Here here. So it does

look like the political battle

Lions will fall on the question

of cuts to family payments.

The opposition believes this is

class warfare, is suggesting

that it will do whatever it can

to force an election, an early

election over this budget and

the Government's plans for a

carbon tax as well. To look at

the budget, the fallout, this

particular battle over family

payments I'm joined now live by

the assistant treasurer Bill

Shorten, thanks for joining us.

The families that the

Government is talking about here are those earning as

little as 45,000 a year who

will be worse off in real terms

under the cuts you're making.

Why do they deserve to loose

out Let's be clear, what

happens is nearly three in

every four households,

families, when John Howard was

in pouer was receiving some

form of government subsidy,

that's not a sustainable model.

At some point - no nation can

still keep app Fording so many

of its citizens receiving

government money. What we

proposed is not cutting anyone,

the threshold is 150 ,000, if

you earn more than 150,000 you

can't claim family tax

benefits, but if you earn less

than that you can. What we

have said is for this budget we

have said we're not going to

increase the amount, so we're

freezing it You're also at the

lower end in the lump sum

payment that families get for

each child at the end of the

year, you're going to freeze

that as well. That does hit

those on much lower incomes,

around the 45,000 dollar mark I

think you'll find when you look

at the benefits we're providing

for families with low incomes

the bundle of goods that we're

providing is pretty reasonable.

What we're trying - I don't

accept the proposition that in

overall terms families who are

earning incomes of 45,000

dollars are losing money So

no-one on 45,000 will be worse

off I don't believe the measures we're put ago cross

the spectrum, the education tax

refunds, at built to claim

school uniforms, these go to

cost of living. When I look at

the low income tax offset

that's an extra 300 dollars, I

previous what we're doing is

we're looking after the low

paid, what we are saying

there's got to be some sort of

limb mits Even those at the

higher end on the family

benefits, you could be talking

about a policeman and a nurse,

a couple of teachers, mum and

dad, are they rich if they're

earning 120, 150 grand I don't

think people are rich if

they're on 155,000 or 160,

they're not rich. Let's be

clear, the opposition are

trying to say they're scram ling to find a problem with the

budget, so they say they're

picking on people who earn more

than 100,000 dollars a year.

The Government offers a range

of benefits for people

regardless of income, other

programs, you can't keep

funding everyone. So I think

what treasurer swan is doing is

getting the balance right. We

do have to reduce spending,

such tremendous creep under the

Howard creep, it's never

popular, we do have to make

sure that government can life

within its means. The key

issue, I'll be very quick on

this, the best solution to

coping with cost of living is

solution to having a job is to have a job, the best

which budget, is it the

Government or opposition a

better I'd yaf creating jobs

rbs we have created 700,000

jobs, this budget, our efforts

to get us back into the black

by 2012 is all about jobs,

that's the best strategy to

deal with cost of living This

welfare creep as you call it,

is a legitimate problem. What

you like to see further action

on this front in future years,

you talk about the three and

four households getting some

form of welfare, the changes in

last night's budget do a little

bit, surely there's an argument

to do more then down the track

if that's the case The

Government's been trying to get

the right mix of expenditure

policies in place for three

years, so I'm a bit amazed, the

first time I've been assistant

treasurer, the way that the

budget gets looked at it's

groundhog day, this is all new,

they say this is all new, the

reality is each budget builds

on each other. We have handed

out significant tax cuts, we're

trying to make sure that

families can cope with cost of

living, a real issue, but at

the same time we went through

the global finance that crisis, corporate revenues why way

down, we need to get back into the black, this is a lean but

not mean budget One of the other points of attack from the

coalition is there's no details

of the carbon tax in the

budget, there is nearly 14

million dollars to advertise

the carbon tax in the budget,

why Again, I think the

opposition don't always do

their homework. This same line

item was in the last budget

where there was no discussion

about a carbon price, there is

discussion about in the budget

about the advertising in terms

of carbon policies. We have

rolled it over for this year.

The real issue isn't I'd suggest to you a particular

line in the budget. The real issue that the opposition is

saying if you're going to have

a carbon price it should be in

this year's budget Advertising

gets up people's knows Sure Why

not cut 14 million there We

have cut government advertising

revenue since we got elected in

2011 significantly. We're way

different to what was happening

in the Howard years. Again,

whilst every budget stands

alone it has to also be seen with what has happened before. We have cut government

advertising, that's a fact.

Beyond that what the opposition

are saying, because there's no

carbon price therefore the

budget is not legitimate. The

reality is we haven't finalised

what the mechanism is, the

compensation is, you can't put

it in until we have those

things to find. We're not

dragging our feet on these

matters. Meem should remember

when John Howard announced the

GST there was then a budget,

because he hadn't finalised it

he didn't put it into the budget. What we're doing is

nothing knew The economists are saying you should have gone

further with spending the cuts,

this isn't going to be enough

to stop interest rates from

going up. The Reserve Bank

will have to put up rates by a

full 1 per cent over the next

12 months, hitting families to

the tune of extra mortgage

payments a year. When you do

look at the next financial

year, I know there are savings

of 2 billion over four years,

next financial year you're

going to be increasing spending

by more than what you're

actually saving There is a straightforward explanation for

some of that, probably about

four questions in that. The

first point I make there are

costs which are going to be ib

curred in 2011/12 which are unvoidable, costs to do with

the reconstruction with the

floods, there's the legitimate

costs of our engagement in Afghanistan, there are some

things we're not going to cut.

These things continue on, so

therefore there is certainly

some lumpy in terms of shom of

the numbers Given that

inflation is going to be a

problem in that year shouldn't

you make big rer cuts in that

year We have outlined what we

will do. The issue of how big

the cuts are, our poe nents,

the 07 significance want to

have their cake and eat it too.

We're cutting too much, on the other hand they're saying we're

not cutting enough. I think

there's a bit of a test. Budgets are not just a test for

the Government, also a test for

the opposition. This is as a

beauty parade between the

coalition and the Labor party, who forms the Government. They

need to demonstrate what would

they do. They can't say our

cuts are wrong, we need to cut

more, what would they cut?

This balance that the

Government talks about, getting

the right amount of spending

cuts, we hear you and the

treasurer talk about the

economy being in transition, I

guess for a lot of people it

might sound a bit confusing,

why do you need to cut down, if

there are areas of the economy,

like retail and housing where

people are struggling with the

high dollar and various other

reasons, why do you have to

have a tough budget in this

situation? You're quite right,

the economy isn't even, clearly

if you're in a mining related industry, supplying services to

mining you name your own price,

you're cooking with gas. If

you're running a domestic

tourism operation or a manufacturer competing with

imports with our dollar so high

they're doing a lot harder.

What we want to do is share the prosperity around, that's why

we're putting through the

mining rent resource tax for

instance so we can help fund

tax cuts for corporations and

businesses, that's why, for

instance, we're proposing that

if you're a small business or a

trades person who has to bye a

vehicle for your work you can

claim 5,000 in tax write off,

we have got measures to try and

share the prosperity. At the

same time we're investing in

the regions, doing our work

with the hospital funding, put

propositions forward to help

improve the lives of people

with mental illness A final question, it wasn't in this

year's budget, get in early for

next year's budget, a national disability insurance scream

will we see that next

year We're still selling this

budget, I love sky TV. In all

seriousness, I do think that

people with disabilities don't

get a fair go in our society.

In this budget we're funding

more money for schools, introduced

introduced 150 million to help

parents of preschoolers with

Downs Syndrome, going to start

working hard with disabilities

pensioners to engage in work. The productivity is commission

is yet to report on this, we're

going to have to assess the mum

bers, an issue coming down the

road, it would be proo mature

to attach it to a particular

year, the Government is

committed to do doing more in

the disability space. Later we

will look at the fallout from

the budget, don't go away.

Before we get to our panel,

let's check the news headlines

with Nina. Treasurer Wayne Swan

has told the National Press

Club that Australia's return to surplus will be light years

ahead of our advanced economies

around the world. Mr Swan

handed down his fourth federal

budget last night, the first

under the Prime Ministership of

Julia Gillard. Middle income

families were targeted as part

of a 22 billion dollar savings

measure, the Government saying

the cuts are necessary to bring

the budget back into the black.

Julia Gillard has defended the budget, saying it will boost

the economy, getting people

back to work. The opposition

has hit back saying the

Government's spending cuts will

be tough on families and those

who are trying to make end

meets. Tony Abbott called the

budget was a dud. Joe Hockey

said it was misleading because

it does not include figures for

the carbon tax. He says that government calculations for the

return to surplus need to

include costs related to the

carbon tax and without that the

budget isn't worth the paper it

was written on. To other news,

parts of Victoria's southwest

and Gippsland regions have

shifrd through their coldest

May on record. Snow is falling

before the official ski season

begins. Forecasters are

predicting colder temperatures

and more snow in the leadup to

the weekend. The Duchess of

York has spoken publicly for

the first time about her hurt

from being snubbed from the

Royal wedding. Sarah Ferguson

told Oprah she blames herself

for not being invited and hid

her personal pain by holidaying

in Thailand. A tourism

official in the say shells

confirmed that the buk and bush

chess of Cambridge are hoony

mooning there. The storms have

been stripped of their title in

2010, it follows the report

into the club's infamiliar mus

into the salary cap breach

which cleared the club's

current playing roster of any

wrongdoing. Brian wal don

should never be employed in any

capacity in rugby league

gevenlt taking a look at

tomorrow's forecast, cold and

gusty showers with snow in the

southeast, mostly sunny

elsewhere Neen arks thank you,

let's go to the panel, joining

me the political editor of the

Australian Financial Review,

Laura continuing l and Dennis

Shanahan from the Australian

newspaper. Thanks for joining

us a day after the budget,

still wide awake. Looking at

how this day of selling the

budget has gone, attacking it

from the opposition, Laura, has

either side come out on the

top The interesting thing is we

haven't had a discussion about

the budget today on both sides.

Julia Gillard's best most in

parliament this afternoon was

pointing out that the questions

that the opposition were asking

were actually about the carbon

tax and boat people. The Government is looking

reasonably confident about the

way it's selling the budget and

fairly confident that it will

get it through the

parliament We will get to that,

how the prospects of the budget

look. Dennis, has the

coalition punched a hole in it

today I don't think so. I

think that the coalition has

criticised the fact that the

carbon tax isn't there. Now,

it's perfectly reasonable that

it not be there, but of course

it's also perfectly reasonable

and understandable were the

opposition would continue to

pursue the carbon tax, because

the political point of this

budget was to break the nexus

of carbon tax and a siel lum seekers Spread the debate

out Have a circuit breaker,

what Tony Abbott is trying to

do is keep it focused on carbon tax and asylum seekers. That

will be the political upshot of

the budget, not so much the

economic side of it Nonetheless

he and Joe Hockey have zeroed

in on the spending cuts that

will affect families, capping,

freezing, the family payments.

This goes into the cost of

living argument as well I guess

at a certain level, that

families we know with the inflation figures are under

pressure, electricity prices

are going up, the carbon tax is

part of that argument as well.

Is this a reasonable line of of

attack for the opposition It's

a reasonable line for them to attack because the cost of

living issue is such a huge one

politically, but the Government

has plent yif counter arguments

to make, that is they're not

taking money away from anybody

at such. What's happening is

if your income rise is above

these new caps that are in

place you'll start to lose your

benefits which is a bit

different, that's over a four

hf year period. Treasurer swan

said there will be 44,000

families that will be affected.

The Government isn't saying you

can't have that money tomorrow,

it will be a gradual process,

on lower incomes There is the it won't necessarily hit people

contradiction too, in that the

coalition says there needs to

be more spending cuts, the

Government hasn't gone far

enough. It's suggesting it

might not vote for this one I

suspect what the coalition is

looking at doing is finding a

symbolic gesture, one

particular point which they can

oppose, dependant spouse rebate

perhaps, Tony Abbott has

indicated he doesn't like that.

Then shift the debate back to a

general economic management,

carbon tax and so forth. We're

not going to see a great deal

of coalition cost cutting

suggestions, what they will do

is argue more generally that

the budget should have done

more without specifying where

it should do it This one

particular item, the depend ent

spouse tax break, Tony Abbott

has been arguing it's largely

mothers who do have children

that claim that. Government

sources to me were saying

they're not eligible, only

those without children who can

get it. Would it seem to be a

funny one to spik a fight over,

if this is going to stay at

home wives without any kids.

Do they really deserve a

government handout I think the

point is people with children

get all the family tax

benefits, if you like, so, as

you say this sort of eye lates

the group who get this

particular offset as well, as

the biggest winners, if you

like, so I think it does make

it a much smaller group. If

the Government puts it in the

context of well we're looking

at every way we can to encourage people to get into

the workforce, not to be

subsidising not to be in the

workforce, that makes sense,

that goes very much against the

arguments of the last decades

that John Howard put up which were to the effect that people should have a choice about

whether they stay at home or go

the Government here, Dennis, into the workforce Looking at

this is their budget, a very

important budget for them in

terms of the political and

economic outlook, have they

done enough to sell a clear

message to the electorate today

and last night about what this

budget is about Well, I think

this is a political problem for

them. We saw bch hand the talk

of an extremely tough budget,

lots of cuts, people weren't

going to like it, stuff started

to come out about teenage

mothers and so on, disability

pensioners being hit, so it

started to take on a very nasty

flavour. The Government

started then to leak out more

handouts and soften the

approach. In night last's budget speech and today Julia

Gillard in question time have

both now flipped the message

completely. This is now a

Labor government and a Labor

budget. Now, everyone knows,

and of course the opposition

has leapt on this with their

own slogan, saying yes, waste,

death and deficit. Labor

budget has a signal out there

for hard core Labor voters

we're here to look after you,

this is a much softer budget.

The message has switched What's

the reality, is this a tough

budget or Labor budget. A a

Labor budget not a tough

budget, as Laura said, a lot of

these very small areas, you

know, not too many enemies

made, and they could have done

more to satisfy the economic

experts, but I think that the

practicalities of it are that

once people start to look at it

the number of people actually

getting something will be much

fewer than what the expectation

of a Labor budget may build, so

that might be a problem here We

may not hear too much from Tony

Abbott about exactly what he

will vote for and against. The Greens are going to be

important too, they'll have the

balance of power in the Senate

from the middle of the

greefrment - year. Bob Brown

in his reaction did raise some

concerns about the welfare to

work measures The intention is

to put people into work, but

there can be some really distressing out comes from

this, which simply will put

people into a greater pof tea,

not to work. The Government's

got some skills programs which

we think are great, but there

will be some fine tuning, I

think needed here to make sure

that some people don't fall victim to a government policy

setting that is going to be

unnecessarily harmful to that

household. So Bob Brown's

talking about some fine tuning,

tweeking to those welfare to

work changes, do you think the

Government will cop that It

may, I think one of the

interesting questions here is

there's the general position of

whether the budget will get

through, then there's the thee

at tricks of the parliament,

what you're seeing with Bob

Brown and the independents is

they will milk all of this for

what it's worth, draw all the

process out for as long as they

can, really sort of say we want

to get into the nitty gritty of

this. This is the new par dime

at work, we want to see how all

this plays out in great detail Keep everyone guessing Yes, I don't think

there will be that sense of

uncertainty over the bung jet

not passing, it would be a bit

like the fiscal stimulus

package Bob Brown has

guaranteed supply He has, we're

talking about swapping

messages, the Government might

look back on this budget, look

at all the noise it made in the

budget, say we really did get

it more implicated, we will get

a bit for confidence from the

way the budget has been delivered, Dennis, you did

mention earlier that the

political message for the

Government is to switch it from

the carbon tax and the siel lum

seekers, do you think by the

weekend we will be talking

about the budget I expect not,

the opposition hasn't punched a

hole in it, the Government

hasn't come out with a huge

success either. I think that

the budget will pass on and we

will go back to the previous

narrative Do you think so,

Laura I think so, but it's

partly a question, this is one

of the dil lem as for the

opposition, does it really want

to keep going for the arlgment,

for example, about class

warfare, the longer it keeps on

that the longer it is before it

can get back to its usual things Good to talk to you,

thanks for joining us this afternoon, after the break we

will be playing you some interview with Tony Abbott

earlier in the day. Stay wus. - stay with us.

Welcome babbling, so what

can we expect in Tony Abbott's

budget reply tomorrow night.

Well, it seems we won't be

getting any detailed spending

cuts, the opposition leader

tells us he will instead be

make ag critique of Wayne

Swan's budget presenting a

vision of where the coalition

would go instead. The

specifics will be spoken of

later. I spoke earlier today

to the opposition leader. Tony

Abbott good morning Good

morning, David You've been calling on the Government to

cut spending for a long time,

now they've done it are you

going to block any of these

spending cuts Let he is be

under no illusion s, they have

not cut spending in any serious

way, the treasurer talks about

22 billion worth of cuts, in

fact there's 19 billion worth

of new spending of the cuts 6

billion are actually tax

increases, so yet again this is

straight with the Australian a budget which can't really be

people There are spending cuts

there, particularly targeting

so-called middle-class welfare,

family benefits being capped at

the top end. Are you really

going to say to people on

150,000 dollars should have

their family benefits continue

to rise? Well, we will give

you a detailed response to all

of that kind of - all of that

in good time, but, David, the

point I make is that a

policeman living with a nurse

is not super rich. Two

teachers in a household in

Sydney in a family in Sydney

are not super rich. What this

government is doing it's

basically dem Monday nicing

aspiration. It's saying that

people who want to get ahead

are going to get screwed over

by the Government. It's a

class car budget in these

sense, these are class war cuts

that the Government is

inflicting on people Therefore

which side of this class war

will you come down on I want

people to be able to get ahead,

I want to encourage freedom and

choice, encourage and reward

success. Frankly that's what

Bob Hawke and Paul Keating in their prime would have been

doing Isn't this the very sort

of tough decision that

governments need to make to get

the budget into surplus They're

not being tough on themselves

and the waste. There's a 1.7

billion blowout because of the

border protection disaster,

still going ahead with the 50

billion plus national broadband

bhiet elephant. They haven't

got the carbon tax in the

budget, but we have got the

carbon tax propaganda campaign

in the budget, typical of the

spin and dishonesty we have

become used to from this

mob Will it be economically

responsible for you to oppose

the flood tax, the mining tax,

to also oppose what are

spending cuts in this budget to

get the budget back into the

black When we had to go to the

people we produced 50 billion

dlargs worth of saving which

over time would have produced

an 11 billion I am pruflt to

the bottom line of the budget

and a 30 billion reaction in

debt The treasurer found a 10

billion hole in it They did

not. It was such a hole that

some of those measures were

subsequently adopted by the

budget. Let's not repeat any of treasurer of the government's spin on this

matter, please, David,

but What's what treasury

said They did not say that.

What they said, what was

pedestrian ld ags the treasury

view against us on a

contingency reserve was then

adopted by the Government

itself. Please, David, none of

that, please, government

Ministers put out that kind of

stuff, you're better than that,

David. To the point is that in

good time before the next election we will put it all

out, we will be honest and

prudent fiscal managers, but

the point I make today is that this is a government which has

been tough on families, but it

hasn't been tough on waste. I think the families of Australia

who are being hit by this

budget are entitled to say,

hang on a minute, if you're

fair dinkum look at your own

waste One of the other cuts is

for dependant spouses, a tax

break for them, this is largely

stay at home wives who get a

tax break of 2 or 300 dollars a

year they don't have to have

kids Most of them do Why should

they who don't have kids get a

handout That's not what the

Government is doing you loose

the dependant spouse rebate

under this budget. The thing

is that mothers at home with

kids are doing a great job for

our country, because they're

bringing up the next generation

of Australians, they're

producing the next generation

of Australian workers, I mean,

they are investing in our

future, I don't think it's a

bad thing What about in you

don't have kids, do you deserve

that money We're getting into a hip thet kal discussion,

because that is not what the

Government is doing. Typically

they're taking a blunt

instrument to what is a complex problem Okay, so you'll oppose

that I'm not saying that. I'm

just not going to play this

game David You're the leader,

you can tell us what you think

about these cuts David, I don't

like these cuts, because

they're targeting families at a

time when families are under

extreme and increasing

pressure, but I'm not going to

play your game, 12 hours after

the budget of ruling in or

ruling out micro details Will

we know tomorrow night whether

you're going to support any of these What you will know

tomorrow night there is a clear

alternative vision for our

country, will you know there

are people in this country who

could run our country who

believe in choice, who believe

in freedom, who believe in

opportunity have got real

policies to bring it about Did you see the budget reply as

something you should actually

put out some specifics or

not It's a budget reply, not a

counter budget, if they give me

a parliamentary budget office

that's as well resourced and

well staffed as treasury, then

I'll have aim counter budget

two days after the Government's

budget On the initiatives, well

tear to work you've been out

early on this issue, calling

for some tough love measures, has the Government gone tough

enough They've after adopted

our rhetoric, not our policies,

if you look at what's in the

budgets it's mostly trials, not

fair dinkum across the board

changes to policy. If you

look behind the ret trick the

people impacted tend to be

under 35, the real problem on

the disability pension are the

muscular schedule letal cases

are the once parked on welfare.

Some of them sadly will stay on

the pension, we can do a lot

more to get some of them

earning for everyone's benefit You've been talking

about a separate disability

payment for that category our

talking about That's right What

about the other areas those,

this does also have new participation requirements for long-term unemployed for the

youth unemployed, they're going

to fast tougher tests under

this budget When you look at

it, it's not mandatory work for

the doll, they made it sound

like it was mandatory work 2004

the doll, but it's not. Again,

I don't believe the above the's

ret trick, look at what they've done, the actual number of work

for the doll places has

declined by 60 per cent since

this government came into power, on young unemployed

people, well, sure, they've

extended the pilot relocation

program, but there's no across

the board program, there are no

really tough measures. In

towns where there is unskilled

work readily available in

cleaning, in agriculture,

fringes, why should any person

under 30 still be able to go on

the dole Mental health 2.2

billion dollars, do you give

them a tick for this I'm pleased we have shamed them

into finl lie doing something.

Again when you look behind the

ret trick the reality is quite

different. Sure they're

adopting some of our poll

seerks more head space centres

erks epic centres, they won't

go ahead unless the states tip

in money, they're not fully

funded by the Commonwealth,

back end loaded in some cases beyond the forward estimates.

The real killer they're

actually cutting mental health

spending on things like

Medicare funded psychologist

consultations and Medicare

funded longer GP consultation

snooze is that value for money I think the people who

are getting them think they're

very good value for money. You

tell me that a typical mental health problem can't be

addressed by a psychologist,

can't be helped by a

psychologist. Look, I just

think it's hip Chris she

bordering on dishonesty for the

Government to now trum pet it's

mental health spending without

also being up front about the

cuts. My take on this is that

the net new spend on mental

health is well under a billion

dollars, more like 500 million dollars Finally, Tony Abbott,

given the economy that we face,

it is a patch work economy as

people call it. Is this budget

appropriately targeted whachlt

do you give it out of 10 I

think it's a complete dud

frankly. It's a nothing budget from a floundering government.

When you look at their badge of

virtue the surplus, it's not a surplus that's achieved by

reform, it's a lazy surplus

achieved entirely by the sky high world record terms of

trade. It's a surplus made in

chien arks not made in

Australia Tony Abbott, thank

you Thanks, David Finally, this

afternoon we're going to check

in on what the market reaction

has been to the budget, John

Kerrison from the business

channel, John, what has been

the impact, the reaction from

the markets David, look, it's a

little hard to tell, most

analysts were saying there was

very little effect. We did see the Australian dmrar climb

about a cent against the US

dollar, there was nothing

dramatic in the budget. The S

and PASX 200 up 1.2 per cent,

from good leaves from the ut

stad states and a rally in commodities Thanks for that, we

will catch up tomorrow. That's

all we have time for on PM

Agenda. Back tomorrow, stay

with us for the latest Sky News.

auf

Live captioning by Ai-Media

www.ai-media.tv