Federal Budget 2020: What can we expect to see?

In what is shaping up to be one of the most significant federal budgets in memory – or recent memory for some – there is a bit of speculation going on as to what we can expect to see announced on 6 October.

The PM says the government will need to do some heavy lifting to help Australians and the economy out from under this COVID-19 crisis.

It plans to do this with targeted spending to improve employment prospects, with the federal treasurer calling it a “jobs budget”.

“It’s going to be a great budget. It’s going to be a budget that’s going to have the most unprecedented investment in Australia’s future,” said the PM.

But where will the money go? According to 7News, here’s where:

Infrastructure
The government plans to expand two NSW dams, Wyangala and Dungowan, spend $53 million on gas infrastructure and $211 million for domestic fuel security facilities.

Hip-pockets
The PM has already floated the notion that 2.5 million pensioners will get extra help to make up for an inflation-related rise not going ahead. Let’s see if he puts our money where his mouth is. There is a chance personal tax cuts due to start in 2022 will be brought forward, the HomeBuilder package may be extended and that there will be no changes to the JobSeeker dole payments.

Business
There are talks of a business investment allowance, wage incentive for small and medium-sized businesses to take on new workers and possible incentives to support regional manufacturing. Another $800 million may be set aside to help individuals and businesses work online as well as a possible $53 million for television and film production.

Health
Telehealth and e-prescription services will likely be extended, and there should be extra funding for aged care, including help for young people to get out of residential aged care. Another $9 million fwill hopefully go towards research into cancer in children and young adults.

Education
An extra $326 million will go towards funding 12,000 extra uni places for domestic students.

Where would you like to see the money go?

6 comments

Of course lots of money will go into gas, including largely unregulated fracking.  Future generations will pay for this.  Degradation of productive farmland and water contamination will reduce food production, with rural productivity severely reduced.  Better to spend the money on non polluting renewables, the cheapest source of energy available.  China is well aware of this and is spending vast amounts on renewables, so before long we won't have much of a market for our coal and gas anyway.  Have you ever heard of nuclear fusion?  (NO, not fission, with its radioactive waste issues that last hundreds of years.)  China, France, Germany and Great Britain have and are spending large sums of money to cooperatively develop this renewable, non polluting and nuclear waste- free source of energy.  We used to lead the world in this area of research, but now are only at "observer" status in the project, predicted to become viable in the next decade.  Once again, 20th century solutions and short term electoral gains rule in the Canberra leadership (I use the word loosely!) bubble.

what a load of hogwash - renewables are not cheaper and cannot provide baswe laod power -another who has drank te kool aid - more coal, gas and nuclear is what is needed.  Why di you think over 440,000 jobs from over 100 manutacturing companies have left australia - 3 compaines have invested nearly 1b in USA and stated it was because wages are cheaper and energy is 33% cheaper than australia - facts are facts

Renewables are not the answer for base load consistent power supply. Any electrical engineer will tell you that. Great advances in  nuclear power and definifely needs to be encompassed in power strategy. Coal is and will continue to be a substantial provider and gas.

China will build 200 coal fired power strations in the ensuing years, so 'renewables' will only play a small part in their plans.

Qhat ww do here is so insignificant 8  the world picture.

 

 

Mogo51, obviously you know nothing about nuclear fusion technology, in which the Chinese government is investing billions at this very time both through basic research in China and in the development of the first commercial plant projected to come online in France near Paris within the decade.  The purpose of nuclear fusion power plants is to provide a massive amount of baseload power without contributing to global warming or producing undesirable radioactive waste.  Its the way of the future, its happening NOW and we in Aus will be left behind as usual.  Ho hum, PM Scumbag, Mr Fossil (Fuels)  strikes again!

Renewables are definitely the answer, "baseload" is an outdated term that Coal companies still use, but it doesn;t even mean the same as it once did. South Australia has already replaced "baseload" with renewables.

Mogo 51 - your absolutley right but there are zealouts in this site - forgot last election was. fought over cliamte change with bob brown and his bandwagon going to QLD - and what did the people say 23 of 29 seats to coalition - cheap energy = fossil fuels of which Austrlai has an abundnace and should use

DISCON, reneweables are cheaper in the long run, better for the planet and more jobs are being created in this industry than in fosil fuel industry. Even China is going for Zero net emissions, ZERO, CHINA !!

With private investors already refusing to fund a coal burning energy station, it will be interesting to see if any are interested in gas, particularly if sourced by fracking. Whilst exisiting gas energy stations have a role to play, increasingly shareholders directly and indirectly, via super funds, aren no longer interested in new energy schemes that support global warming and farm land and waterways pollution.  Perhaps the feds should accelerate Snowy 2.0 and Marnius link, increase renewable incentives and give Elon a call.

Government seems to be hoping we’ve all forgotten the Future Fund.  As we are now desperate to pay off our Covid debt it is time to use the fund.  It is, after all, made up from taxpayers surplus so should come back to taxpayers not be locked away for the use of retired politicians.

Australia cannot have too many dams. Increasing the capacity of Wyangala and Dungowan is a good start. The gas exploration should lower the price of gas as we have to buy it from other states and the conditions imposed on Santos should reduce any problems to the environment. It's all well and good to promote renewables  but until a battery storage system is invented to replace baseload power we must continue to maintain coal or gas fired power stations.

The real solution is nuclear but that will involve overturning legislation that outlawed the use of nuclear that was passed by the parliament in 1998 and that will certainly be opposed in the senate. It is absolutely certain that there is climate change just as there has always been climate change and geologists have shown that the earth has been hotter and colder on a regular basis going back before man first trod the earth. Alarmists want us to believe that the current climate change is all the fault of man and therefore man can fix it and politicians have jumped on board as it looks like a vote winner. I would respectfully suggest to the current government to go ahead and build dams where needed, open gas fields, allow access to national parks and build infrastructure without trying to placate the Greenies. The coalition should by now understand that neither Labor nor the Greens voters will vote for the coalition regardless of how much they try and please them nor will they grant preferences on How To Vote cards.

Surely no one would want nuclear -- have you not read up and also seen the damge nuclear can do -- and the waste from it -- it also costs a fortune to build and has a very short life and is very dangerous if it is damaged as e have found out with Chernobyle and Fukushima  

 

 

 

Horace Cope, your head must really be in a very dark place.  i suggest that to remove it you stand up straight, look around you and then examine the scientific evidence supporting man made climate change. DO you also believe that the earth is flat?  Or that the Moon landing was staged in the Arizona desert?

Isn't it interesting that those who disagree resort to personal abuse without any supporting counter arguments? PlanB, there are currently about 50 nuclear power reactors being constructed in 15 countries so surely someone wants nuclear.

Buggsie, there are reputable scientists who disagree with climate change being man made and the link is here: https://electroverse.net/the-list-scientists-who-publicly-disagree-with-the-current-consensus-on-climate-change/

Doesn't matter what we expect   -- we will have our  "specs"  knocked off same as everything this government promises and never delivers

 

6 comments



To make a comment, please register or login

Preview your comment