Both the Coalition and Labor have kept very quiet about a long list of policies, putting them in the too-hard basket

Plenty of noise about jobs and growth and Medicare, but deathly silence on so much else

We’ve heard a lot about jobs and growth and Medicare and education in this election campaign – the things the major parties want to talk about. But there is also a long list of policies about which we’ve heard very little, mainly because they don’t exist.

In a range of important policy areas, both the Coalition and the Labor party have declined to tell voters their intentions, effectively putting pre-election policy development in the too-hard basket. In a few really important areas – such as the long-term funding of public hospitals – there is a tacit bipartisan commitment to figure it all out later.

Here are some of the policies each major party does not have.

The Coalition

Higher education: After failing to get its highly controversial 2014 higher education changes through the Senate, the government released an “options paper” alongside the 2016 budget, which said the Coalition would continue with the 20% cut to commonwealth grants to universities, but would only deregulate fees, that is, allow them to rise, for some (unidentified) courses. The aim was to stymie Labor’s “$100,000 degrees” attack but at the same time leave all the details until after the election. The Coalition is effectively going to the election without a higher education policy.

Vocational education: In response to widespread rorting of vocational education funding, the new minister, Scott Ryan, announced a series of immediate changes and a discussion paper, with submissions due after the election, leaving the future policy uncertain.

Coalition 'hiding' plans for industrial relations reform, say unions Read more

Industrial relations. The former prime minister John Howard pointed out this week the Coalition had not, in fact, ruled out further deregulation of industrial laws after the election. It was, he said “unfinished business” which at some point needed to be addressed.

“And I don’t see anything in what the government has said to rule that out. But as to when it happens and what form it takes is obviously a matter for the government of the day,” he said.

In fact, it doesn’t seem to have an industrial relations policy at all. It has a policy to protect vulnerable and exploited workers and the prime minister told the Facebook leaders’ debate the Coalition would not legislate to overturn Fair Work Australia’s decision on whether to reduce Sunday penalty rates. Some conservative commentators think this means the Coalition won’t do anything. The employment minister, Michaelia Cash, has said there will be no “lurch to the right”. The absence of a policy means that if the Coalition did push changes, it would not be breaking an election commitment.

Climate details: Industry and environment groups assume the Coalition will tighten its so-called safeguards mechanism after the election so that it becomes a type of emissions trading scheme and helps force down industrial greenhouse emissions. But the Coalition refuses to say, one way or the other.

Long-term hospital funding: Malcolm Turnbull has offered the states an extra $2.9bn over the next three years for public hospitals, but has said longer term funding – which the states insist will need to be substantial – would depend on a post-election negotiation.

Research and development tax breaks: The government said it would save $900m by cutting the research and development tax break, but this was never legislated and it then commissioned a review of the entire policy which it has received but not released.

Arts: The arts minister, Mitch Fifield, did not have a policy when he attended a campaign arts policy debate, but said he was “absolutely committed” to the existing architecture of the arts and wanted to consult more with the sector to bring the arts into the Coalition’s innovation agenda.

Labor



Some details of climate policy: Labor is proposing two different emissions trading schemes, one for the electricity sector and one for industry. The fine details of both are to be determined after the election, but the form of the latter is particularly vague.

Long-term hospital funding: Labor has offered an extra $2bn on top of Turnbull’s $2.9bn over the next three years. Despite having long criticised the Coalition for “cutting” $57bn from long-term hospital funding over 10 years, Bill Shorten announced two weeks ago that his long-term funding will also depend on negotiations after the election. Labor has not set aside any contingency or extra money to cover its extra hospital funding in its 10-year costings.

Superannuation: Labor has banked the savings from the Coalition’s superannuation changes, and says it will adopt those which achieve the same ends as its own previous policy, but will also “consult with stakeholders”, including on the $500,000 lifetime cap on non-concessional super contributions, about which it holds grave concerns. It will also ask Treasury to conduct a review.

Research and development: Labor has said it will wait for the government’s review and then find some other way to save the same $900m.

Energy supplement: Despite railing against any reductions in what it says are already inadequate unemployment benefit and pension payments, Labor is now banking the savings from the Coalition’s 2016 budget decision to axe an “energy supplement” for new pension recipients, but at the same time says it would also “seek further advice about the impact” of the measure as part of a review into the inadequacy of unemployment benefits.