The Greens and the Liberals agree cost-of-living support in the ACT budget has not done enough to deliver relief to the majority of Canberrans doing it tough.
"For the Treasurer to make grand announcements that this would be a cost-of-living budget and then to deliver little to no relief for the majority of Canberrans just goes to show this Labor-Greens Government is out touch and out of ideas," Opposition Leader Elizabeth Lee said.
Ms Lee also hit out at government debt, which she said would cost $855 million a year in interest repayments alone.
"To put that into context, the annual interest bill alone is almost the anticipated cost of the entire North Canberra Hospital," she said.
"The deficit is also anticipated to be over $1 billion, which is double what was forecast last year."
Meanwhile, the ACT Greens have said they would go further and faster on the budget, especially in areas such as public housing, health and the environment.
Greens Leader Shane Rattenbury, who is one of three ministers who sits on the government's economic review committee, said there was a lot missing in the budget.
Mr Rattenbury said the Greens would put forward some of the measures they believed were missing as election commitments.
"The ACT is different to the rest of the country. We're progressive, we look after each other and we take the climate crisis seriously. But we still have a cost-of-living crisis and not enough housing, so there are things the Greens would do differently," he said.
"Despite the Greens' best efforts, there's a lot missing from this budget that you'll see us put forward as election commitments in the coming months, because they're really important investments in this community."
The Canberra Business Chamber said the budget was "business as usual" and had not put enough focus on supporting a thriving private sector.
Greg Harford, the chamber's chief executive, said businesses were hurting and it was the right time to improve conditions for private operators.
"While the chamber wasn't looking for large spending initiatives, we would have liked to see a program announced for removing barriers to doing business here in the ACT. Instead, the Government is bringing forward its plans to bring in a payroll tax surcharge for large firms operating here in the ACT," Mr Harford said.
"This sends a message not only that business may not be welcome here in the Territory, but also means that Canberrans are likely to pay even more for some goods and services over time."
YWCA Canberra welcomed cost-of-living support and support for frontline domestic and family violence services, but said it was concerned by longstanding and unaddressed housing supply issues.
"We have consistently called for a more affordable land release scheme that permits community housing providers to access land parcels at discounted rates so as to make building desperately needed social and affordable housing financially viable," YWCA Canberra chief executive Frances Crimmins said.
The Property Council said the budget was a "mixed bag" that missed chances to support a more vibrant and faster-growing national capital.
"This is two thirds of the Budget we needed, and it's certainly not the bold kind of a budget one would expect in the lead up to an historic election," the Property Council's ACT and Capital Region executive director Gino Luglietti said.
"Some obvious and important omissions include tax reform, overdue zoning updates, and the lack of a new Canberra Stadium."
Mr Luglietti said a new payroll tax surcharge on large national and multinational employers sent a bad signal to companies who may have considered expanding for the first time in Canberra.
"This is a make-or-break year for the future of the ACT. The decisions taken in this Budget, and at the ballot box in October, will determine whether we enter 2025 with a running start on growth or with more hill to climb," he said.
