When Jim Chalmers announced in July that his first budget would include options to measure community wellbeing – rather than just measuring GDP – it didn’t take a genius to predict some of the media coverage.
The young, lefty treasurer, in an ashram with a yoga mat and some kombucha, limbering up for his next downward dog.
The approach that’s been labelled by some as “hippy economics” is actually an idea that experts and the public are crying out for.
Don’t take my word for it: the Nobel laureate economist Joseph Stiglitz was in Australia at the time and said: “The responsibility of the treasurer is really to make sure the budget – the money – is used to improve the wellbeing of the people of Australia.”
The other point is that a “wellbeing budget” isn’t new. The notion of measuring the health and wellbeing of a society through accessibility to housing and community cohesion was first floated by the US presidential aspirant Bobby Kennedy in the 60s.
It was more than 20 years ago that the former Treasury secretary Dr Ken Henry developed and implemented a wellbeing framework for his department to measure whether economic policies improve people’s lives or whether they are falling short.
New Zealand’s doing it, as well as Scotland and Canada. The Liberal-led New South Wales government is working on an approach as well and the Australian Capital Territory has a well-developed wellbeing framework it applies to all government decision making.
If you move beyond pure economics and focus on politics, a wellbeing budget is an even better idea for a new government.
Exclusive research commissioned by the data, strategy and delivery agency 89 Degrees East shows 69% of Australians are supportive of a wellbeing budget. That’s because people are concerned about their own health and safety and that of the community, and understand that these are the things that really matter to their quality of life.
More than a third of respondents (38%) felt their mental and physical health was “just OK”, which is perhaps unsurprising in the context of the pandemic. For younger Australians the research findings are more concerning. Eighteen- to 29-year-olds are the least satisfied with their health and feeling secure about their housing arrangements.
The research drilled down to where the government should concentrate its efforts. The overwhelming majority of respondents (73%) wanted housing to be the priority, just in front of mental and physical health (71%) and job and income security (70%).
Women rated these factors and others including prioritising education and environmental quality as extremely important, which could lead you to conclude that a wellbeing budget will be of higher value to female voters.
And therein lies the risk to the opposition, which scoffed at this idea while in government. The then treasurer, Josh Frydenberg, teased Chalmers that if he ever won power, he’d walk into parliament to deliver a budget with a speech in one hand and yoga beads in the other.
Three years later Frydenberg’s government was abandoned by women, many of whom voted for female “teal” independent candidates. The Coalition needs to get these voters back if it’s to win power again. The overwhelming majority of women who took part in this research have made it clear that they want a different relationship with government and the criteria by which they measure economic success.
There are political risks for Labor, too. While the research reveals strong support for wellbeing measures, it also shows the more familiar framing of the budget still holds sway.
About half those surveyed agreed to the statement “if we lose focus on traditional economic fundamentals we could put our standard of living at risk”. Fifty-nine per cent agreed with the statement “economic success should be measured by jobs, growth, investment and low taxes”.
That might make some in the government nervous but it shouldn’t. The research shows that 61% of people agree “the traditional way of managing our economy fails to measure the things that really matter to people”.
The challenge for Labor now is explaining what a wellbeing budget is and offering specific examples of how new policy measures will improve people’s lives.
Dr Rebecca Huntley is director of research at 89 Degrees East
