One thing that won't be in NSW budget
NSW Treasurer Daniel Mookhey has definitely ruled out any announcement on the government's 'Plan B' for housing in next week's budget, after a $5bn proposal to turn Rosehill racecourse into 25,000 homes was shot down.
Mr Mookhey will hand down his third budget since Labor's 2022 election on Tuesday, as NSW continues to grapple with a worsening housing crisis and the fallout from a summer marred by anti-Semitic attacks.
Billions of dollars in spending has already been announced ahead of the budget, expected to feature the same fiscal restraint as the previous two years, including in housing, justice reform, and Western Sydney airport.
The budget comes after a majority of members from the Australian Turf Club voted down plans in May to turn the historic Rosehill racecourse in Sydney's west into a first-of-its-kind mini-city with a Metro station.
Premier Chris Minns has since said the state government was working on its 'Plan B', with reports the port of Glebe Island was being eyed for housing, but has so far remained mum on what that project would be. NSW Treasurer Daniel Mookhey will hand down his third state budget on Tuesday June 24. NewsWire / John Appleyard Credit: News Corp Australia
Asked about whether the 'Plan B' for housing near Sydney's CBD would feature in the budget, Mr Mookhey on Friday told NewsWire '(in) next week's budget, we will make progress in dealing with the housing challenge'.
'We will not be sort of announcing Plan B on budget day. But we're pretty clear that we need to build more homes.'
Mr Mookhey said he was 'disappointed' in the failed sale of Rosehill.
'What it means for the state is that we do need to build more homes,' he said.
A raft of policy measures has already been announced ahead of the budget to target housing, including making tax cuts to build-to-rent schemes indefinite and draft guidelines for the 'build-in-kind' scheme.
Despite a damaging few weeks for the Treasurer, whose workers compensation reform measures were sent back for another inquiry amid fierce push back from the Liberals, Greens, and the unions, Mr Mookhey was optimistic.
Asked about the message of the 2025-26 budget, Mr Mookhey said it was about the 'future of our essential services and the future of our economy', and touted the work of the NSW Labor government until now. The ATC voted in May not to sell Rosehill Gardens Racecourse. NewsWire / Monique Harmer Credit: News Corp Australia
'It is about making sure that we are making the right investments to deliver the world class public services that people will expect, and to make sure that the NSW economy continues to grow so we can lift people's living standards, improve their wages and create jobs,' Mr Mookhey said.
'That's been what this budget has been about, and the reason why we can now make these investments is because we've made real progress in stabilising the state's finances.
'We've inherited a $15bn deficit, which we've made good progress in turning around. We can report now for the first time in years, the NSW government is back into cash surplus.
'We can say that the debt is stabilising. We've kept our promise to keep debt at below $187bn at this point in time. So, that gives us that platform for more progress.'
The budget comes after the Western Australian budget on Thursday reported a $2.5bn surplus off the back of a 2018 deal that gave it an guaranteed share of the country's GST carve-up. Premier Chris Minns, left, with Treasurer Daniel Mookhey. NewsWire/ Gaye Gerard Credit: News Corp Australia
Mr Mookhey previously said he would advocate to the Albanese government to reform the tax allocation, which he said cost the state government $12.6bn last year – for which the state was 'still recovering'.
'It's undoubtedly the case that that remains a challenge for NSW, and it doesn't matter whether there's a Labor treasurer or a Liberal treasurer, the state would have to be dealing with that.
'Which is why I am glad that here in NSW, we do have bipartisanship about the need for GST reform.
'But, in arguing for NSW's position, I don't talk down any other states and I accept the fact that every state will always argue for what they consider to be their interest.
'I'm simply saying that there's a simpler system, that more predictable system, a more certain system that is available, and we'll continue to argue our case for change.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Advertiser
4 hours ago
- The Advertiser
Workers' retirement nest eggs set for super boost
Australian workers can look forward to a bigger nest egg, with an increase to the superannuation guarantee to add tens of thousands of dollars to the average super account. From July 1, employers' minimum required contribution to employees' superannuation accounts will rise from 11.5 per cent to 12 per cent. It's the latest and last in a series of incremental increases from nine per cent over more than a decade since they were legislated by the Rudd-Gillard Labor government in 2012. With the latest bump, a 30-year-old earning $60,000 would have an extra $20,000 in super by retirement, according to the Association of Superannuation Funds Australia. It will add about $300 each year to the superannuation of a worker on a $60,000 salary, or $500 for someone on a $100,000 salary. "The system foundations are cemented for young, working people to have a comfortable retirement," ASFA chief executive Mary Delahunty said. "It's a moment all Australians should be proud of." The association says the cost of a comfortable retirement increased 1.6 per cent in the past year, while the cost of a modest retirement rose 1.7 per cent. A "comfortable" retirement includes top-level health insurance, a reasonable car and leisure activities. The cost of either outcome was increasing slower than Australia's current 2.4 per cent headline inflation but retiree budgets remained under pressure from rising food, energy and health costs. Couples on average need $73,900 annually for a comfortable retirement, while most singles needed $52,300 per year, ASFA says. For a modest retirement covering the basics, couples needed $48,200 each year, singles $33,400, or for renting couples, $64,250, and $46,660 each year for singles who rent. The figures underlined the importance of increasing Australia's housing stock, Ms Delahunty said. "They also illustrate how super can be the difference between hardship and stability later in life, especially for renters." For some workers, the extra contribution will come from their existing pay package, according to CPA Australia's superannuation lead Richard Webb. "It's a good idea to check with your employer to see how they view the changes and what it means for you," he said. Workers on contracts with a total remuneration package could see a slight drop in their take-home pay, while those on award or enterprise agreements would likely receive the contribution on-top of their current pay. When compulsory superannuation was introduced in 1992 - in part to reduce government spending on the Age Pension - only one in 10 Australian retirees listed super as a source of income. Nine in 10 people between 30 and 50 now have super. Government spending on the Age Pension is projected to fall from 2.3 per cent of gross domestic product in 2020 to two per cent by 2062/63, despite a doubling of the over-65 population and a trebling of over-85s over the same period. However the super guarantee increase wouldn't help those who missed out on paid work for extended periods, Super Consumer Australia chief executive Xavier O'Halloran said. "(For) people who have caring responsibilities or who have been locked out of the unaffordable housing market ... increasing SG further won't address those inequalities," he told AAP. Mr O'Halloran said there was more that could be done to support people struggling in retirement, when a significant portion of their autumnal years' savings were made. "Right now, there are no minimum standards for retirement products like there are for MySuper," he said. "There is also no performance testing of retirement products, so super funds can still sell poor products." Australian workers can look forward to a bigger nest egg, with an increase to the superannuation guarantee to add tens of thousands of dollars to the average super account. From July 1, employers' minimum required contribution to employees' superannuation accounts will rise from 11.5 per cent to 12 per cent. It's the latest and last in a series of incremental increases from nine per cent over more than a decade since they were legislated by the Rudd-Gillard Labor government in 2012. With the latest bump, a 30-year-old earning $60,000 would have an extra $20,000 in super by retirement, according to the Association of Superannuation Funds Australia. It will add about $300 each year to the superannuation of a worker on a $60,000 salary, or $500 for someone on a $100,000 salary. "The system foundations are cemented for young, working people to have a comfortable retirement," ASFA chief executive Mary Delahunty said. "It's a moment all Australians should be proud of." The association says the cost of a comfortable retirement increased 1.6 per cent in the past year, while the cost of a modest retirement rose 1.7 per cent. A "comfortable" retirement includes top-level health insurance, a reasonable car and leisure activities. The cost of either outcome was increasing slower than Australia's current 2.4 per cent headline inflation but retiree budgets remained under pressure from rising food, energy and health costs. Couples on average need $73,900 annually for a comfortable retirement, while most singles needed $52,300 per year, ASFA says. For a modest retirement covering the basics, couples needed $48,200 each year, singles $33,400, or for renting couples, $64,250, and $46,660 each year for singles who rent. The figures underlined the importance of increasing Australia's housing stock, Ms Delahunty said. "They also illustrate how super can be the difference between hardship and stability later in life, especially for renters." For some workers, the extra contribution will come from their existing pay package, according to CPA Australia's superannuation lead Richard Webb. "It's a good idea to check with your employer to see how they view the changes and what it means for you," he said. Workers on contracts with a total remuneration package could see a slight drop in their take-home pay, while those on award or enterprise agreements would likely receive the contribution on-top of their current pay. When compulsory superannuation was introduced in 1992 - in part to reduce government spending on the Age Pension - only one in 10 Australian retirees listed super as a source of income. Nine in 10 people between 30 and 50 now have super. Government spending on the Age Pension is projected to fall from 2.3 per cent of gross domestic product in 2020 to two per cent by 2062/63, despite a doubling of the over-65 population and a trebling of over-85s over the same period. However the super guarantee increase wouldn't help those who missed out on paid work for extended periods, Super Consumer Australia chief executive Xavier O'Halloran said. "(For) people who have caring responsibilities or who have been locked out of the unaffordable housing market ... increasing SG further won't address those inequalities," he told AAP. Mr O'Halloran said there was more that could be done to support people struggling in retirement, when a significant portion of their autumnal years' savings were made. "Right now, there are no minimum standards for retirement products like there are for MySuper," he said. "There is also no performance testing of retirement products, so super funds can still sell poor products." Australian workers can look forward to a bigger nest egg, with an increase to the superannuation guarantee to add tens of thousands of dollars to the average super account. From July 1, employers' minimum required contribution to employees' superannuation accounts will rise from 11.5 per cent to 12 per cent. It's the latest and last in a series of incremental increases from nine per cent over more than a decade since they were legislated by the Rudd-Gillard Labor government in 2012. With the latest bump, a 30-year-old earning $60,000 would have an extra $20,000 in super by retirement, according to the Association of Superannuation Funds Australia. It will add about $300 each year to the superannuation of a worker on a $60,000 salary, or $500 for someone on a $100,000 salary. "The system foundations are cemented for young, working people to have a comfortable retirement," ASFA chief executive Mary Delahunty said. "It's a moment all Australians should be proud of." The association says the cost of a comfortable retirement increased 1.6 per cent in the past year, while the cost of a modest retirement rose 1.7 per cent. A "comfortable" retirement includes top-level health insurance, a reasonable car and leisure activities. The cost of either outcome was increasing slower than Australia's current 2.4 per cent headline inflation but retiree budgets remained under pressure from rising food, energy and health costs. Couples on average need $73,900 annually for a comfortable retirement, while most singles needed $52,300 per year, ASFA says. For a modest retirement covering the basics, couples needed $48,200 each year, singles $33,400, or for renting couples, $64,250, and $46,660 each year for singles who rent. The figures underlined the importance of increasing Australia's housing stock, Ms Delahunty said. "They also illustrate how super can be the difference between hardship and stability later in life, especially for renters." For some workers, the extra contribution will come from their existing pay package, according to CPA Australia's superannuation lead Richard Webb. "It's a good idea to check with your employer to see how they view the changes and what it means for you," he said. Workers on contracts with a total remuneration package could see a slight drop in their take-home pay, while those on award or enterprise agreements would likely receive the contribution on-top of their current pay. When compulsory superannuation was introduced in 1992 - in part to reduce government spending on the Age Pension - only one in 10 Australian retirees listed super as a source of income. Nine in 10 people between 30 and 50 now have super. Government spending on the Age Pension is projected to fall from 2.3 per cent of gross domestic product in 2020 to two per cent by 2062/63, despite a doubling of the over-65 population and a trebling of over-85s over the same period. However the super guarantee increase wouldn't help those who missed out on paid work for extended periods, Super Consumer Australia chief executive Xavier O'Halloran said. "(For) people who have caring responsibilities or who have been locked out of the unaffordable housing market ... increasing SG further won't address those inequalities," he told AAP. Mr O'Halloran said there was more that could be done to support people struggling in retirement, when a significant portion of their autumnal years' savings were made. "Right now, there are no minimum standards for retirement products like there are for MySuper," he said. "There is also no performance testing of retirement products, so super funds can still sell poor products." Australian workers can look forward to a bigger nest egg, with an increase to the superannuation guarantee to add tens of thousands of dollars to the average super account. From July 1, employers' minimum required contribution to employees' superannuation accounts will rise from 11.5 per cent to 12 per cent. It's the latest and last in a series of incremental increases from nine per cent over more than a decade since they were legislated by the Rudd-Gillard Labor government in 2012. With the latest bump, a 30-year-old earning $60,000 would have an extra $20,000 in super by retirement, according to the Association of Superannuation Funds Australia. It will add about $300 each year to the superannuation of a worker on a $60,000 salary, or $500 for someone on a $100,000 salary. "The system foundations are cemented for young, working people to have a comfortable retirement," ASFA chief executive Mary Delahunty said. "It's a moment all Australians should be proud of." The association says the cost of a comfortable retirement increased 1.6 per cent in the past year, while the cost of a modest retirement rose 1.7 per cent. A "comfortable" retirement includes top-level health insurance, a reasonable car and leisure activities. The cost of either outcome was increasing slower than Australia's current 2.4 per cent headline inflation but retiree budgets remained under pressure from rising food, energy and health costs. Couples on average need $73,900 annually for a comfortable retirement, while most singles needed $52,300 per year, ASFA says. For a modest retirement covering the basics, couples needed $48,200 each year, singles $33,400, or for renting couples, $64,250, and $46,660 each year for singles who rent. The figures underlined the importance of increasing Australia's housing stock, Ms Delahunty said. "They also illustrate how super can be the difference between hardship and stability later in life, especially for renters." For some workers, the extra contribution will come from their existing pay package, according to CPA Australia's superannuation lead Richard Webb. "It's a good idea to check with your employer to see how they view the changes and what it means for you," he said. Workers on contracts with a total remuneration package could see a slight drop in their take-home pay, while those on award or enterprise agreements would likely receive the contribution on-top of their current pay. When compulsory superannuation was introduced in 1992 - in part to reduce government spending on the Age Pension - only one in 10 Australian retirees listed super as a source of income. Nine in 10 people between 30 and 50 now have super. Government spending on the Age Pension is projected to fall from 2.3 per cent of gross domestic product in 2020 to two per cent by 2062/63, despite a doubling of the over-65 population and a trebling of over-85s over the same period. However the super guarantee increase wouldn't help those who missed out on paid work for extended periods, Super Consumer Australia chief executive Xavier O'Halloran said. "(For) people who have caring responsibilities or who have been locked out of the unaffordable housing market ... increasing SG further won't address those inequalities," he told AAP. Mr O'Halloran said there was more that could be done to support people struggling in retirement, when a significant portion of their autumnal years' savings were made. "Right now, there are no minimum standards for retirement products like there are for MySuper," he said. "There is also no performance testing of retirement products, so super funds can still sell poor products."
The Advertiser
4 hours ago
- The Advertiser
Trump says possible Harvard deal 'good for the country'
US President Donald Trump appears to be softening in his campaign against Harvard, saying his administration could soon announce a 'deal' with the country's oldest and richest university. In a post on his social media platform Truth Social, Trump raised the prospect of a truce with the Ivy League school, which has sued after his administration terminated billions of dollars in grants awarded to Harvard and moved to bar the school from admitting international students. The Republican president's administration has said its actions against Harvard are justified based on a litany of allegations, including that the institution was not doing enough to combat anti-semitic harassment on campus. Trump said his administration is addressing "improprieties" at Harvard. He said individuals at Harvard "have acted extremely appropriately during negotiations, and appear to be committed to doing what is right." "If a Settlement is made on the basis that is currently being discussed, it will be 'mindbogglingly' HISTORIC, and very good for our Country," Trump wrote. He made the statement shortly after a federal judge in Boston issued an injunction blocking the US Department of Homeland Security from immediately revoking Harvard's ability to enrol international students. That injunction prevents the US Department of Homeland Security from revoking Harvard's certification in the Student and Exchange Visitor Program without first going through a months-long administrative process, which it now plans to do. Harvard had no immediate comment on Trump's post, but in a statement it welcomed US District Judge Allison Burroughs' order, adding it "will continue to defend its rights—and the rights of its students and scholars." Massachusetts-based Harvard has filed two lawsuits seeking to unfreeze around $2.5 billion in funding and to prevent the administration from blocking the ability of international students to attend the university. Harvard alleges that Trump has been retaliating against it, violating its free speech rights under the US Constitution's First Amendment, because it refused to accede to the administration's demands to control the school's governance, curriculum and the ideology of its faculty and students. Burroughs is expected to rule in the coming days on Harvard's related request that she continue blocking implementation of a proclamation Trump signed barring foreign nationals from entering the US to study at the university. International students comprise about a quarter of its student body. US President Donald Trump appears to be softening in his campaign against Harvard, saying his administration could soon announce a 'deal' with the country's oldest and richest university. In a post on his social media platform Truth Social, Trump raised the prospect of a truce with the Ivy League school, which has sued after his administration terminated billions of dollars in grants awarded to Harvard and moved to bar the school from admitting international students. The Republican president's administration has said its actions against Harvard are justified based on a litany of allegations, including that the institution was not doing enough to combat anti-semitic harassment on campus. Trump said his administration is addressing "improprieties" at Harvard. He said individuals at Harvard "have acted extremely appropriately during negotiations, and appear to be committed to doing what is right." "If a Settlement is made on the basis that is currently being discussed, it will be 'mindbogglingly' HISTORIC, and very good for our Country," Trump wrote. He made the statement shortly after a federal judge in Boston issued an injunction blocking the US Department of Homeland Security from immediately revoking Harvard's ability to enrol international students. That injunction prevents the US Department of Homeland Security from revoking Harvard's certification in the Student and Exchange Visitor Program without first going through a months-long administrative process, which it now plans to do. Harvard had no immediate comment on Trump's post, but in a statement it welcomed US District Judge Allison Burroughs' order, adding it "will continue to defend its rights—and the rights of its students and scholars." Massachusetts-based Harvard has filed two lawsuits seeking to unfreeze around $2.5 billion in funding and to prevent the administration from blocking the ability of international students to attend the university. Harvard alleges that Trump has been retaliating against it, violating its free speech rights under the US Constitution's First Amendment, because it refused to accede to the administration's demands to control the school's governance, curriculum and the ideology of its faculty and students. Burroughs is expected to rule in the coming days on Harvard's related request that she continue blocking implementation of a proclamation Trump signed barring foreign nationals from entering the US to study at the university. International students comprise about a quarter of its student body. US President Donald Trump appears to be softening in his campaign against Harvard, saying his administration could soon announce a 'deal' with the country's oldest and richest university. In a post on his social media platform Truth Social, Trump raised the prospect of a truce with the Ivy League school, which has sued after his administration terminated billions of dollars in grants awarded to Harvard and moved to bar the school from admitting international students. The Republican president's administration has said its actions against Harvard are justified based on a litany of allegations, including that the institution was not doing enough to combat anti-semitic harassment on campus. Trump said his administration is addressing "improprieties" at Harvard. He said individuals at Harvard "have acted extremely appropriately during negotiations, and appear to be committed to doing what is right." "If a Settlement is made on the basis that is currently being discussed, it will be 'mindbogglingly' HISTORIC, and very good for our Country," Trump wrote. He made the statement shortly after a federal judge in Boston issued an injunction blocking the US Department of Homeland Security from immediately revoking Harvard's ability to enrol international students. That injunction prevents the US Department of Homeland Security from revoking Harvard's certification in the Student and Exchange Visitor Program without first going through a months-long administrative process, which it now plans to do. Harvard had no immediate comment on Trump's post, but in a statement it welcomed US District Judge Allison Burroughs' order, adding it "will continue to defend its rights—and the rights of its students and scholars." Massachusetts-based Harvard has filed two lawsuits seeking to unfreeze around $2.5 billion in funding and to prevent the administration from blocking the ability of international students to attend the university. Harvard alleges that Trump has been retaliating against it, violating its free speech rights under the US Constitution's First Amendment, because it refused to accede to the administration's demands to control the school's governance, curriculum and the ideology of its faculty and students. Burroughs is expected to rule in the coming days on Harvard's related request that she continue blocking implementation of a proclamation Trump signed barring foreign nationals from entering the US to study at the university. International students comprise about a quarter of its student body. US President Donald Trump appears to be softening in his campaign against Harvard, saying his administration could soon announce a 'deal' with the country's oldest and richest university. In a post on his social media platform Truth Social, Trump raised the prospect of a truce with the Ivy League school, which has sued after his administration terminated billions of dollars in grants awarded to Harvard and moved to bar the school from admitting international students. The Republican president's administration has said its actions against Harvard are justified based on a litany of allegations, including that the institution was not doing enough to combat anti-semitic harassment on campus. Trump said his administration is addressing "improprieties" at Harvard. He said individuals at Harvard "have acted extremely appropriately during negotiations, and appear to be committed to doing what is right." "If a Settlement is made on the basis that is currently being discussed, it will be 'mindbogglingly' HISTORIC, and very good for our Country," Trump wrote. He made the statement shortly after a federal judge in Boston issued an injunction blocking the US Department of Homeland Security from immediately revoking Harvard's ability to enrol international students. That injunction prevents the US Department of Homeland Security from revoking Harvard's certification in the Student and Exchange Visitor Program without first going through a months-long administrative process, which it now plans to do. Harvard had no immediate comment on Trump's post, but in a statement it welcomed US District Judge Allison Burroughs' order, adding it "will continue to defend its rights—and the rights of its students and scholars." Massachusetts-based Harvard has filed two lawsuits seeking to unfreeze around $2.5 billion in funding and to prevent the administration from blocking the ability of international students to attend the university. Harvard alleges that Trump has been retaliating against it, violating its free speech rights under the US Constitution's First Amendment, because it refused to accede to the administration's demands to control the school's governance, curriculum and the ideology of its faculty and students. Burroughs is expected to rule in the coming days on Harvard's related request that she continue blocking implementation of a proclamation Trump signed barring foreign nationals from entering the US to study at the university. International students comprise about a quarter of its student body.
Perth Now
4 hours ago
- Perth Now
Trump says possible Harvard deal 'good for the country'
US President Donald Trump appears to be softening in his campaign against Harvard, saying his administration could soon announce a 'deal' with the country's oldest and richest university. In a post on his social media platform Truth Social, Trump raised the prospect of a truce with the Ivy League school, which has sued after his administration terminated billions of dollars in grants awarded to Harvard and moved to bar the school from admitting international students. The Republican president's administration has said its actions against Harvard are justified based on a litany of allegations, including that the institution was not doing enough to combat anti-semitic harassment on campus. Trump said his administration is addressing "improprieties" at Harvard. He said individuals at Harvard "have acted extremely appropriately during negotiations, and appear to be committed to doing what is right." "If a Settlement is made on the basis that is currently being discussed, it will be 'mindbogglingly' HISTORIC, and very good for our Country," Trump wrote. He made the statement shortly after a federal judge in Boston issued an injunction blocking the US Department of Homeland Security from immediately revoking Harvard's ability to enrol international students. That injunction prevents the US Department of Homeland Security from revoking Harvard's certification in the Student and Exchange Visitor Program without first going through a months-long administrative process, which it now plans to do. Harvard had no immediate comment on Trump's post, but in a statement it welcomed US District Judge Allison Burroughs' order, adding it "will continue to defend its rights—and the rights of its students and scholars." Massachusetts-based Harvard has filed two lawsuits seeking to unfreeze around $2.5 billion in funding and to prevent the administration from blocking the ability of international students to attend the university. Harvard alleges that Trump has been retaliating against it, violating its free speech rights under the US Constitution's First Amendment, because it refused to accede to the administration's demands to control the school's governance, curriculum and the ideology of its faculty and students. Burroughs is expected to rule in the coming days on Harvard's related request that she continue blocking implementation of a proclamation Trump signed barring foreign nationals from entering the US to study at the university. International students comprise about a quarter of its student body.
