Even so, Mr Eslake estimates, the Coalition has so far committed to $28.4 billion of tax cuts and $14.8 billion on new spending in the next four years, a total of $43.25 billion. But he estimates the nine savings measures the Coalition has announced so far would save only $13.44 billion over the same period. Joe Hockey. Credit:Alex Ellinghausen "By our reckoning, over the remainder of the election campaign, the Coalition needs to announce additional savings measures totally in the vicinity of $30 billion over the four years to 2016-17 in order to be able credibly to claim that it would produce better bottom line outcomes than those projected (by Treasury and the Department of Finance), he said." "That is a substantial sum, although it is considerably less than the $70 billion 'black hole' suggested by the government." A former federal president of the Young Liberals and member of the Kennett government's commission of audit, Mr Eslake is the first independent economist to quantify the cost of the Coalition's policies. His estimate adds to growing concerns that the Coalition will hold back its savings measures until the eve of the election, to avoid public scrutiny.

Mr Eslake questions how serious the Coalition will be in tackling the budget deficit – and warns that as the mining boom ends, economic growth could be so weak that it would be better for Australia if it put it off. "Given its persistent opposition to attempts to restrain growth in entitlement programs, its commitment to introducing its own big new entitlement program (paid parental leave), its equivocation about the GST, and its general commitment to cutting taxes, it's unclear whether and how a Coalition government would deal with the longer-term challenges confronting Australia's public finances", Mr Eslake said. Former Treasury secretary Ken Henry put a similar view recently, arguing that as baby boomers move from the workforce to the pension, and spending on schools and disability care cranks up, the parties should be focusing on how to increase taxes to pay for all the new spending, not cut them. Mr Eslake praises the Coalition's key economic spokesmen – Mr Hockey, shadow finance minister Andrew Robb and shadow assistant treasurer Matthias Cormann – as "safe pairs of hands", and genuine economic liberals who "instinctively favour market-based solutions to economic problems". But he questions whether Mr Abbott and leading National party frontbenchers share that instinct. He notes that Mr Abbott rose to the party leadership by opposing market-based policies to tackle global warming, opposed the floating of the dollar even 10 years after it had happened, and "has opposed every measure the present government has undertaken to subject benefits to some form of means test."

While a Coalition victory could lift business confidence immediately, Mr Eslake says, "whether that's sustained will depend on the Coalition's performance in office". "We see as an important risk to business and investor confidence in a Coalition government the possibility of significant and ongoing cleavages between genuine economic liberals such as Messrs Hockey, Robb, Malcolm Turnbull, Senator Arthur Sinodinos . . . and a combination of the National Party and other Liberals who are more sceptical of markets, and more inclined to favour universal welfare entitlements, including in many cases Tony Abbott as Prime Minister." Mr Eslake said similar tensions in the Fraser government resulted in a "singular lack of economic policy achievements".