Both major parties, and almost all minor parties and independents, have listed the cost of living as their top policy priority for the upcoming federal election, and for good reason. The cost of living is hitting Australians hard, with the WA Council of Social Services (WACOSS) reporting single-income families, dual-income families, singles and renting pensioners are all in the red after paying basic living expenses. While reports like the Doing It Tough report lay out the statistical reality of our current circumstances, even with the numbers most people can recognise it in the wince they make when paying for two bags of groceries. Somewhere out there, Curtis Stone is softly weeping into his once $10 dinner.
Now, major political party election promises, interlaced with jabs at their opponents, are hitting mailboxes. Labor is subsidising energy bills and household batteries; the Liberals claim they will curb costs through nuclear power. Labor says individual tax cuts for all; Liberals say no cuts for you, but we’ll cut the fuel excise tax. Both major parties are promising checks and balances on the grocery duopoly. In the housing arena, the focus is almost exclusively on deposit support, either through home buyer guarantees or allowing home buyers to pull from their super contributions.
The tone is generalist, sweeping policy, with no hint of a sliding scale. These so-called cost of living policies – particularly those put forward in the 2025 federal budget – have taken an equality over equity approach: Gina Rineheart gets the same energy rebate as a sharehouse of students on Austudy. It begs the question: have political parties even considered looking after the most vulnerable in their policy design? And how do voters, including the over 2.5 million adults living in poverty, respond at the ballot box when the cost of living relief doesn’t even touch the sides for them?
Speaking to ABC Breakfast, Antipoverty Centre spokesperson Kristin O’Connell said the federal election landscape seems “depressing” and bleak. “I think for people on Centrelink, you look at politics and think, ‘who are these people and what world are they living in?’ We don’t get hundreds of dollars a day in a travel allowance, I’m paying 83% of my disability support pension in rent, which leaves me very little over at the end. And I consider myself one of the lucky ones.”
Still, in Australian politics conversations about the cost of living are framed almost entirely around the middle-class. Both major parties are catering policy to the ‘median’ Australian household, when in reality 80% of taxpayers make less than the average full-time earner, according to the Grattan Institute. At best, it feels like political spin, announcing sweeping policy to hawk on every platform possible for the best chance at catching a disengaged swing voter’s eye. At worst, it’s a refusal to engage in policy that might address some of the root causes of the ‘crisis’ part of the cost of living crisis, for fear of alienating both high-income donors and voters.
In reality, it is probably both.
House deposit support is cost of living relief, but it’s not helpful when you cannot save due to uncapped rental increases, or afford to live near your workplace or community. PBS medication caps are cost of living relief, but they are not helpful when your essential medication isn’t on the PBS, or you can’t find a single bulk billing doctor. Energy bill relief is cost of living relief, but not when you still can’t afford to put groceries in a fridge running on that subsidised power. There is no doubt these the proposed cost of living measures will provide some relief to some Australians, but no crisis will be solved.
As the May 3 election date looms, voters who are facing financial hardship are looking for cost of living relief that can stick the landing. But they feel disillusioned with the policies currently on the table.
Evee, a 26-year-old support worker in Western Australia, says it’s frustrating to see policy miss the mark. “A lot of the policies do not even begin to tackle major issues such as rent increases and instead go for other smaller issues that don’t feel relieving in the slightest,” she says.
For Evee the housing crisis will be her top priority at the polling booth, but she doesn’t feel particularly inspired by her choices, especially as a renter. “I am usually pessimistic going to elections, a lot of the major parties policies make it more of a detriment than anything to vote for when I am worried about housing. I tend to vote for the Greens, just to have the chance to be able to rent a home instead of needing to move every few months on temporary accommodation or short leases.”
There has been limited consideration for rental reform and regulation this year, while home prices and rents are at record highs, and quality – particularly when it comes to heating, cooling and dampness – is declining. Policies to regulate rental investments have been announced by the Australian Greens and a smattering of independents, but have not been picked up by the majors, who have instead decided to focus on building housing supply in the private market.
Georgia, a 27-year-old aviation worker and mum from Queensland, says that she’s been looking for policy that helps her young family but is coming away short-changed. “I feel invalidated, skipped over, and angry. Why implement something to ‘help’ but then a massive chunk of our society won’t be able to access it?”
She is unsure how she will vote. “To me, unfortunately it’s about the lesser of all evils. I can’t say I stand strongly with one or even two candidates – more that I have to make peace with one choice and hope it’s the right one.”
Unless the coming weeks of the campaign see policies aimed at refusing financial and economic hardship of the millions currently living in poverty, alongside helping the ‘average’ household, any claim that this is “cost-of-living” election will ring hollow.
Comments are closed.