High inflation and a darkening global outlook would also dampen economic growth. The revised forecasts shaved half a percentage point from growth in the last financial year, this one, and the next one.
Given everybody already knows consumer prices and borrowing costs are going up, and the budget is coming up in October, some voters may wonder why all the political foregrounding? A few thoughts in response to that question.
When he was last in government, Chalmers was in the backroom, advising a treasurer managing the fallout from the global financial crisis. That was invaluable experience, but offering counsel and writing lines is different to delivering them.
All new governments blame their opponents for any bad news. The Coalition was still blaming Labor for things in their ninth year of office, which tells you the Liberal and National parties pursue legacy assassination with focus and vigour.
They are generally much better at it than Labor. Labor tends to have a swing, and then wander off and focus on its own program, so it will be interesting to see whether this new government has sharpened the brutal politics of blame shifting.
The answer is both absolutely, and not entirely.
But Scott Morrison did have a good year as prime minister: 2020. Significant fiscal support was required to preserve lives and livelihoods, and minimise the risks of labour market scarring. Instead of being ideological or parsimonious on principle, as some Liberals would have been, Frydenberg and Morrison pinned their ears back, and spent the money. Not all the interventions were perfect, but lives, businesses and jobs were saved.
The new government is clearly taking out political insurance as it walks the narrow path of trying to subdue inflation without catapulting the economy into recession.
The overreach musing could have been a rookie error. But political strategy seems more likely on the balance of probabilities. In the event the hoped-for soft landing is harder than expected, apportioning blame will be an inevitable part of the wash-up.
Stirring stuff, and Taylor has a valid point. A picture is different to a plan.
But Taylor criticising anyone for lacking a plan is the stuff of standup comedy.
A good part of the reason centre-right progressive voters turned their back on the Coalition on 21 May was because Taylor, then climate and energy minister, had no coherent plan to manage the climate crisis or the transition to low emissions.
So, memo to Peter Dutton.
If Taylor is your messenger, I strongly suspect the battle is already lost.
