Chalmers needs to show some courage to help save Australian economy
This month's Economic Reform Roundtable should have been the vehicle for substantial reform. But, amid the Productivity Commission recommendations for tax reform, unions calling for curbs on negative gearing, the capital gains discount and the use of family trusts, business groups railing against too much change and suggestions that the transition from fossil fuels to renewables be speeded up, the government appears to have lost some chutzpah.
A day after Prime Minister Anthony Albanese talked down the roundtable's significance, Treasurer Jim Chalmers also started hosing down expectations, sending a clear message around parliament: excited observers should curb their enthusiasm.
Beginning on August 19, the three-day Economic Reform Roundtable aims to build consensus on ways to improve productivity, enhance economic resilience and strengthen budget sustainability in the face of global uncertainty. It brings together a mix of leaders from business, unions, civil society and government. Some 900 submissions have been received and anticipations of change were running high.
But the Herald' s chief political correspondent Paul Sakkal said cabinet had become concerned about the huge expectations stoked, and the summit is expected to produce a handful of policies to which Chalmers would immediately commit. Speedier approvals for energy projects, cutting red tape and new incentives for home building were seen as quick wins with wide support from warring unions and business lobbies. More significant changes that gain support from assorted experts, captains of industry and unions will be put off for further examination.
The roundtable was already seen at risk of becoming a Canberra gabfest. But tax will undoubtedly be the elephant in the room, given Albanese's refusal to consider changing the GST, a veto that is already tying one of the government's hands behind its back. The exclusion of those major players in taxation and deregulation, states and territories, is another handicap.
For a summit considering Australia's economic future, ignoring the GST seems blinkered, especially as economist Richard Holden and independent MHR Kate Chaney suggested to the Herald 's Shane Wright that a 15 per cent GST could deliver a $28 billion boost to government coffers while providing an annual $3300 rebate to all Australians as an offset.
However, almost all other taxes are on the table. The Productivity Commission has proposed a company tax cut for smaller businesses, while larger companies pay more.
New visions are required in a world where old certainties are quickly fading, and the one reality is that productivity is key to meeting future challenges. That said, courage and big ideas – including controversial reform of the GST – will help drive the Australian economy, not the risk aversion displayed by a Labor government too afraid for, or of, its own mandate to act for the greater good.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


SBS Australia
a few seconds ago
- SBS Australia
No new taxes before the next election, declares PM
No new taxes before the next election, declares PM Published 7 August 2025, 9:03 am The Prime Minister has all but ruled out any tax changes before the next election. There have been competing pitches for reforms ahead of the government's upcoming economic roundtable. One proposal is increase to the GST, but with every Australian to receive a cashback compensation.

Sydney Morning Herald
30 minutes ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Former Melbourne barrister among four people charged with money laundering
A former Melbourne barrister is among four people charged with money laundering offences over an investment scam targeting Australians with bogus comparison websites and social media advertisements. Dimitrios (James) Podaridis is accused of helping to facilitate the scam, which offered investors fraudulent bonds and other financial products. The corporate watchdog, in announcing charges against Podaridis on Thursday, said he and his co-accused were not 'directly involved' in operating the scam, but allegedly dealt with victims' funds. The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) alleged fictitious investment comparison websites and Facebook advertisements were used to attract investors, who would then be contacted by phone or email and 'provided with fake, branded prospectuses and other documentation'. Podaridis' co-accused are former director of Melbourne food importer Oliana Foods, Bassilios (Bill) Floropoulos, Harry Tsalikidis and Peter Delis. Their money laundering charges date back to between January and July 2021. Loading 'The falsified documentation was of a high quality, mimicking or copying actual prospectuses from major financial services providers,' ASIC alleged. 'The fictitious offerings ranged from 1[to]10 years with fixed returns between 4.5 per cent and 9.5 per cent per annum.' The watchdog alleged victims' money was deposited into Australian bank accounts operated or controlled by Podaridis, Floropoulos or Delis, and subsequently transferred to offshore bank accounts or crypto exchanges.

The Age
30 minutes ago
- The Age
Allan's WFH plan respects flexibility, not dogma
To submit a letter to The Age, email letters@ Please include your home address and telephone number below your letter. No attachments. See here for our rules and tips on getting your letter published. WORK FROM HOME The revelation that Labor considered a federal work-from-home policy before the 2025 election, only to shelve it to highlight Peter Dutton's ill-fated office mandate, underscores a stark contrast in political acumen (″ Labor's work-from-home strategy outshines Coalition's misstep″ , 6/7). Labor's strategic pivot capitalised on Dutton's misjudgment, which ignored the realities of modern work-life balance, particularly for women and carers. His backflip, prompted by voter backlash, exposed a policy rooted in control rather than progress, echoing Tim Wilson's recent Australian Financial Review critique of flexible work as 'professional apartheid' despite his own party's retreat. Labor's 2023 Fair Work Act amendments already strengthened remote work rights, fostering inclusivity and productivity, as evidenced by a 4.4 per cent rise in workforce participation. Premier Jacinta Allan's bold plan to legislate two days of remote work further cements Labor's forward-thinking approach, while the Coalition's flip-flops erode trust. Australians deserve leadership that respects flexibility, not dogma. Sue Barrett, Caulfield South Proposal discriminates essential workers Working from home should be left as an agreement between the employer and the employee based on the needs and capability of both parties. It appears to be already working quite well without government intervention or interference. It does not need to be, and should not be, a 'right' cemented in law. In doing so, it risks introducing an adversarial atmosphere into what should be a matter of negotiation between adults. Instead, it creates a two-tier level of employment that discriminates between those who can work from home (primarily white-collar workers) and those whose jobs require physical engagement (primarily essential workers such as nurses, teachers, police etc). The only real beneficiaries of this will be the legal fraternity who are already preparing for some lovely taxpayer money as one arm of the public service takes on the other (' High Court battle looms for state Labor's work-from-home push ', 6/8). The law will no doubt also be tested in terms of what 'compensation' will be provided to blue collar workers who believe themselves to be discriminated against. I would rather see laws enacted that protect workers from corrupt unions and predatory work practices, than ones that provide meaningless 'human rights'. But it's such a lovely distraction from the real woes of the state isn't it, premier? Stephen Farrelly, Donvale Employers' bait and switch I disagree with your characterisation that Premier Jacinta Allan's working-from-home push is a 'furphy' (Editorial, 6/8). I work in the private sector and there have been numerous cases where my manager unilaterally changed my WFH days when it suited him. A two-day WFH would already rubber-stamp what is already considered 'hybrid' in the workplace and prevent a bait-and-switch by overzealous employers who promise 'hybrid', but is in fact a full return to the office. People would be outraged if employers just felt like changing people's yearly salaries, so why do it to their working conditions? Christopher Lam, Saint Kilda East Debate irrelevant to teachers A letters correspondent to these pages (6/8) wonders if the new working from home proposals will apply to teachers. While long past the joys of going to that workplace every day, and having 'missed' the experience of working from home during COVID, I doubt that there are many teachers who would voluntarily choose to 'work from home'. The policy is pretty irrelevant to the teaching profession and I'm sure that most teachers have no desire to work from home again. Let those who enjoy the benefits of such work practices continue to do so, without introducing irrelevant furphies. Graeme Gardner, Reservoir THE FORUM Election on horizon Chip Le Grand's incisive article ″ Dear Leader Jacinta Allan will fight for your right to do what you're already doing ″, 7/8), hits the spot about the state of politics in Victoria and the focus of the Victorian Labor conference. As one of your letter correspondents recently remarked, we only seem to see our Premier in a hard hat (and high-vis jacket) along with several other ministers similarly attired, seemingly projecting their strong support of so-called 'working people'. But, I seem to recall that our leaders have committed to govern for all. And of course, bashing the opposition (notwithstanding they have been severely depleted) is a worthy parliamentary sport. Forget the ongoing youth crime, tobacco wars, childcare problems, health waiting lists, alleged CFMEU corruption, the dire straits of our finances etc., many of which have plagued us for years now. Warning us about what the opposition did decades ago seems to be more productive in the eyes of our leaders than addressing some of these issues constructively and urgently. Must be an election coming. Charles Griss, Balwyn Putting people first I was at the Labor State conference and found it interesting that Chip Le Grand's article focused on just one speech of about 20 across one-and-a-half days. I witnessed passionate individuals, (politicians, union members and delegates like myself), present on what the government is doing for, among others, First Nations people, the LGBTQI community, the disabled, women, renters, retirement home residents, regional Victorians, front-line workers, office workers, the elderly, the young, those with and those without. So, yes the premier highlighted what the Liberals did, close schools, cut services and more, as a reminder to those of us who put people first, what we are fighting for. Samantha Keir, East Brighton