Katina Curtis: Chalmers’ latest Budget buzzword points to easing burden on younger Australians

Every Federal budget comes with a buzzword that offers a shorthand for what the Treasurer and colleagues are trying to do.

This year’s is already getting a fair workout, even though it hardly rolls off the tongue: intergenerational.

As in, intergenerational inequity or fairness or issues.

Jim Chalmers mentioned it seven times in quick succession in a single interview on Sunday.

Decoded into real English, this is about young people not getting a fair go. Younger, that is, than the baby boomers.

They’re locked out of the housing market, unless the bank of mum and dad (or grandma and grandpa) can help out.

Prices are rising, AI is coming for entry-level jobs, and wages are set to stagnate again.

To top it all off, as the wave of baby boomers ages out of the workforce and starts to shift into aged care, the base of taxpayers is shrinking.

That places a heavier burden on workers in the first half of their career to cover the cost of the services older Australians increasingly need.

Governments are also expanding services that will benefit these younger workers — like childcare and Medicare — but this too comes at a cost.

The Coalition is still flailing from its devastating election loss, wandering around rudderless as its polls tank further.

The Treasurer is already worried about the shrinking taxpayer base.

Chalmers and others in the Cabinet room are also worried about the housing issue and how to turbocharge it beyond the existing efforts on supply.

It’s all but certain now that, although the budget is still 13 weeks away, scaling back the capital gains tax discount on investment properties will be part of it.

Chalmers and colleagues are rolling out the old “our policy hasn’t changed” line, which handily is true right up to the point that Cabinet makes a decision.

But he’s been leaving big pointers about the direction.

The Liberals — whoever their leader is by May — should take note.

Shifting on the tax break has the advantage of being as much a symbolic move — its retention has become emblematic of inaction on housing affordability — as a budgetary one.

But it alone won’t fix either the housing crisis or the budget bottom line.

Both need to be addressed to truly deal with intergenerational fairness.

And helping younger people, restoring the faith that governments can help, should also have benefits for democracy if it stems the flight away from major parties.

Anthony Albanese is acutely conscious that he might hold 94 seats in the lower house but the foundations of voter support don’t run deep.

The Coalition is still flailing from its devastating election loss, wandering around rudderless as its polls tank further.

It’s hardly inspiring stuff.

Coming up with some answers that give hope to Gen X, Millennials and Gen Y would be a start.

So too would be dropping the knee-jerk “no” to tax changes that would start to tackle the fairness problem.

That’ll take real leadership.