Drivers face petrol excise hit as cabinet searches for budget savings

Lenore Taylor, political editor

theguardian.com, Wednesday 7 May 2014

Ministers risk wrath of motorists all over the country by considering increasing a tax frozen since 2001

Raising fuel excise has been discussed by the federal cabinet. Photograph: AAP

Federal cabinet is considering a controversial move to increase petrol excise as it searches for budget savings.

Several sources have told Guardian Australia that the tax on fuel – frozen since 2001 – has been discussed in the budget process.

But with fuel prices over $1.60 a litre in parts of the country, it would be a politically dangerous decision.

Former prime minister John Howard reduced petrol excise by 1.5 cents a litre when he was under assault over “cost of living” concerns after the introduction of the goods and services tax in 2001.

He then froze it at 38.14 cents a litre, abolishing the twice yearly automatic indexation of the tax that Labor had introduced in 1983.

It was a decision with a cost that escalated over the years, and now leaves the budget well over $5bn a year worse off.

Revenue from a fuel excise hike could be funnelled towards building new roads – which the government argues increases economic growth and national productivity and are also popular with the motorists who would be paying the increase in excise.

The executive director of the Australian Automobile Association, Andrew McKellar, said he had not had any confirmation of an excise increase and urged the government to consult properly before announcing any change.

“Motorists already pay too much tax and are not getting fair value for money for what they pay,” McKellar said.

After cabinet met on Wednesday to finalise the budget, finance minister Mathias Cormann appeared to confirm that it would include a “deficit levy” for high income earners.

Asked whether the government would impose such a levy he said there was a need for “an immediate special effort in order to put ourselves into a stronger starting position as we repair the budget”.

In a scene-setting speech in early April, treasury secretary Martin Parkinson urged the government to increase the proportion of government revenue collected from indirect taxes such as the goods and services tax or fuel excise.

He said research consistently showed that “reduced reliance on income taxes and increased reliance on other, more efficient sources of revenue, including indirect taxes, can support higher growth and higher living standards by increasing workforce participation and lifting productivity”.

He said without changes to indirect taxes such as fuel excise and the GST, Australia was heading in the opposite direction, with much more government revenue coming from personal taxation as inflation pushed more taxpayers into higher tax brackets.

But considering the idea of reintroducing fuel excise indexation, the Grattan Institute think tank said it would hit the bottom 20% of households the hardest because they spend a greater proportion of their income on fuel.

As Guardian Australia reported, the government was also seriously considering changes to the rebate paid to farmers and miners for the off-road use of diesel, but after fierce lobbying from both sectorsit is understood to have dropped the idea.

It is, however, likely to change a $150m a year subsidy for ethanol producers which rebated them a full subsidy on the excise paid on ethanol as a transport fuel.

Excise on fuel has declined from 1.7% of gross domestic product in 2000-01 to just over 1% in 2012-13, according to a parliamentary budget office report on government revenue trends published last month.

Drivers face petrol excise hit as cabinet searches for budget savings | World news | theguardian.com

This is what Turnbull's NBN looks like

 

Van Badham theguardian.com, Wednesday 7 May 2014

Lagging speed, inevitable costly updates, the creation of a digital divide ... There are many questions to be asked about the Coalition's NBN plans, but don't expect to get a reply

'Australian people are being denied the quality of essential infrastructure'. Photograph: Lukas Coch/AAP

Communications minister Malcolm Turnbull may not want to answer many questions about the National Broadband Network, but it shouldn't stop Australians from asking them. After all, since last September, Turnbull has reneged on pre-election NBN commitments, admitted to giving misleading statements about Labor's costings, made chummy appointments, ignored expert economic consideration, and infuriated the near-entirety of the professional tech community.

And yet, the minister has been able to dodge much deserved public excoriation. His advantage is administering a policy area that significant chunks of the electorate just don’t understand, as well as speaking to an industry that by practice and tradition is pretty insulated from the broader democratic conversation.

An analysis in layperson’s terms of what Turnbull has been doing with the NBN makes clear how Australian people are being denied the quality of essential infrastructure.

Started by the previous Labor government in 2009, the ambition of the NBN project was investment in the to-every-home-and-office installation of the latest-and-best fibre-based communication cables. These new cables are strong enough to enable a “broad band” of communication frequencies simultaneously and at great speeds. The copper wires through which most telecommunications are presently run (and on which the bulk of the Coalition's NBN policy is based on) were built decades before the internet, and our increasing internet usage tax them heavily. Copper wires also corrode, can cease to work in heavy rain, and parts of the old network consists of wires that are actually wrapped in paper, not plastic.

For a society that’s increasingly running everything from the stock market, to defense systems, education, remote surgery, entertainment, home security and even dating through the internet, powerful and reliable internet service that works when it rains is no small social necessity.

Labor’s plan was to connect the fibre cables house-to-house, office-to-office, in the same way telephones once had to be connected; this is what’s meant by the acronym “FTTP” or “fibre-to-the-premises”. The 7% of premises that geography prevented from the fibre-cable installation were to be connected to the National Broadband Network with satellites and mobile technology. The NBN "roll-out" refers to the physical installation of these fibre cables around the country.

It’s not a cheap project, but major national infrastructure is built by governments because it’s for the national good, and every cut corner compromises that good – not to mention the ability of an improved means of productivity and efficiency to pay for itself.

Why anyone would wish to deny the nation the latest-and-best in essential infrastructure is confounding for an economy that must compete globally, but that’s precisely the policy that the Coalition took to the last election – even though a study from the University of Melbourne found that despite negative media representation, more than 58% of Australians believed that Labor’s NBN would bring them direct benefit.

Despite the widespread approbation of the traditionally politically quiet tech community, the Coalition promoted a “fibre-to-the-node” (FTTN) network instead. Turnbull’s broadband uses the old copper wires to link to fibre cables only as far as a single box on each street, and is the internet equivalent of installing one telephone for an entire apartment building.

Their policy slogan “Fast. Affordable. Sooner” was perhaps misleading; “fast” referred to the speed at which the street boxes would be installed, as the actual internet speeds provided by this system are significantly slower, and subject to copper’s tempermentality. To compare: Labor’s NBN guaranteed an upload speed that is absolutely towering over the maximum of that guaranteed by the Coalition (and that's not to mention that a strategic review of the NBN has found it will not get halfway to meeting its speed targets).

Despite the promise of the inferior system being taken to the last election, what Turnbull is actually providing now in government reneges even on that. The Coalition is currently proposing a “multi-technology mix” that will string together bits of the network with the old and very inferior “HFC” cables from cable-TV.

The tech community is up in arms, with many arguing this would create a digital divide. “This approach will place Australia far out on its own in terms of its national telecommunications infrastructure”, railed tech journal Delimiter. Commentator Paul Budde was more blunt, and called the surprise policy turnaround a “dogs’ breakfast”, while technology journalist David Braue made the point that the Coalition “now faces an uphill struggle to deliver a functionally limited NBN that will already be outdated by the time it's complete.”

It’s precisely for this reason that other countries are staying clear of such a system. It’s why our cousins in New Zealand actually replaced the fibre-to-the-node system they had with a fibre-to-the-premise one – and the reason why the tech community in Australia is anxious about the superior economic opportunities this now means for that country in our region, though Indonesia is also planning for fibre-to-the-premises. The Coalition makes much of Britain having the node system, but British Telecom is beginning to roll out fibre-to-the-premises over the top of it.

The Coalition have declared Australia must spend $12bn for the best fighter jets, yet with crucial infrastructure they are installing a system that evolving technological needs will inevitably demand be replaced with a proper fibre network, with us lagging behind our economic competitors all the way. If you think, like Tony Abbott does, that the internet is just “a video entertainment system” anyway, maybe you’re not alarmed. If, however, you make the connection that everything from emergency management systems to banking security relies on functional telecommunications that can speak to world standards, you might want to take a closer look at what’s going on.

Do not expect scrutiny from those Turnbull has surrounded himself with; the report from the Coalition’s recent Strategic Review had outcomes that dovetailed exactly with Turnbull’s surprise “multi-technology” policy. And Turnbull’s demand that the previous Labor government submit the NBN to a cost-benefit analysis has, now he’s in government, neatly reversed: his NBN will not be subjected to such an analysis, he just wants to “get on with (the) job”.

There are two lessons to be learned from what is emerging as yet another expensive Coalition debacle. The first is that Australia’s telecommunication infrastructure has been made vulnerable to the same Coalition malaise of mismanagement that is tainted with ideologically-laden incompetence. The second is that the Australian tech community has a fight on its hands to retain its international competitiveness and professional vitality.

As one of the most under-unionised professions in the economy, it may be worth considering the impact Australia’s IT workers could have by downing tools, before Turnbull’s policy takes them away.

Slower. Less reliable. Less productive. This is what Turnbull's NBN looks like | Van Badham | Comment is free | theguardian.com

Budget 2014: Abbott, Cormann downplay debt tax concerns

By political correspondent Emma Griffiths

Photo: Prime Minister Tony Abbott says next week's budget will be "fair" (file photo) (AAP: Alan Porritt)

Related Story: Coalition MP says proposed debt levy will 'devastate economy'

Related Story: The Drum: Abbott left himself little wriggle room on promises

Prime Minister Tony Abbott and Finance Minister Mathias Cormann have emerged from a key Cabinet meeting, all but confirming next week's budget will include a debt tax.

Cabinet has today considered imposing higher taxes on workers in the top income brackets to share the burden of paying back the nation's debt.

Liberal figures, including former treasurer Peter Costello, and current backbenchers have joined business groups in criticising the idea of raising taxes for high income earners.

Senator Cormann says the Government will deliver the "lowest possible taxes" given the dire budget situation.

"There is a need for an immediate special effort, in order to put ourselves in a stronger starting position as we repair the budget," he said.

"And that special effort needs to be spread fairly and equitably and the only way you can ensure you do that is by also considering appropriately targeted measures in the tax system."

People in the top income tax bracket of $180,000 and above are in the Government's sights and the next bracket down, which kicks in at $80,000, may also be hit.

"What we would ask people across Australia to do is to trust us," Senator Cormann said.

Mr Abbott denied accusations from his Liberal MPs, including Queenslander Teresa Gambaro, that the new tax would be a broken election promise.

"I'm going to be able to look people in it eye on Tuesday night and on Wednesday morning and beyond and say we are all in this together, we are all doing our bit," he said.

He says the budget will keep the Coalition's commitments and be "fair".

"We will honour the commitment we gave to the Australian people pre-election to get the budget back under control, but we will do it in ways that are fair," he said.

The Coalition's policy document from last year's election states: "We pledge to the families of Australia that we will never make your lives harder by imposing needless new taxes".

It also highlights a quote from Mr Abbott, who said in March 2012 that "no country has ever taxed itself into prosperity".

Treasurer Joe Hockey will hand down the budget on Tuesday.

More on this story

• Coalition MP says proposed debt levy will 'devastate economy'
• Voters will thank me for trying to repair budget: Abbott
• Peter Costello warns debt levy has 'no economic benefit'
• Fact file: What Tony Abbott promised on tax

Budget 2014: Abbott, Cormann downplay debt tax concerns, say budget will be 'fair' - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Tony Abbott's popularity plunges, latest polls show

Daniel Hurst, political correspondent

theguardian.com, Tuesday 6 May 2014

Labor's lead strengthens to 53%-47% after preferences, Newspoll says, as dissatisfaction with PM rises nine points

Abbott: net approval rate of minus 21%. Photograph: Saeed Khan/AFP/Getty Images

The Abbott government has suffered a slump in opinion polls a week out from its first budget when voters have been warned to expect across-the-board pain.

Labor's lead over the Coalition has strengthened to 53%-47% after preferences, according to the Newspoll published in the Australian on Tuesday.

The newspaper said the five-point drop in the Coalition's primary vote to 38% was the largest single fall since Julia Gillard announced her carbon tax plans in early 2011, and support for the Coalition was at its lowest level in almost four years.

A separate ReachTEL poll published on Monday put Labor's two-party lead at 54% to 46%, while the latest Morgan poll put the lead at 55% to 45%.

They follow a Galaxy poll published in News Corp’s Sunday papers which put the two-party split at 52% for Labor to 48% for the Coalition, with 72% agreeing with the proposition that a mooted “deficit tax” for higher income earners would represent a broken promise.

The Liberal-National Coalition attracted 53.5% of the two-party-vote at the September election.

The Newspoll of 1,143 voters between Friday and Sunday showed a big drop in satisfaction with Tony Abbott's performance as prime minister since the last poll nearly a month earlier.

In this time satisfaction with Abbott declined five points to 35%, while dissatisfaction rose nine points to 56%. This produces a net approval rate of minus 21%, compared with minus 7% on 4-6 April.

Over the same period, Bill Shorten's net satisfaction rating as opposition leader improved from minus 11% to minus 6%. He was preferred prime minister by 38% of those polled, nearly level with 40% for Abbott. Newspoll had a 3% stated margin of error.

The Newspoll showed a 10-point decline in the Coalition's support among people aged over 65 years and six-point drop in the age group 50 to 64, coinciding with debates over increasing the pension age and changes to entitlements.

"What we did notice was a fairly stronger effect among older voters, so it would be fairly safe to assume that [the] pension age, the issues around the family home going into the calculations for pension entitlements and possibly the Medicare co-payment, all of which have been talked about but yet to be announced in the budget, probably would affect older Australians," the Newspoll chief executive, Martin O'Shannessy, told the ABC on Tuesday.

Abbott sought to play down the government’s opinion poll slump on Monday, saying the budget would be framed in a fair way.

He dismissed claims of a broken promise over the proposed deficit levy, saying the “most fundamental commitment of all was to get Labor's debt and deficit disaster under control”.

“No one likes difficult decisions – governments don’t like taking difficult decisions, voters don’t like the consequences of difficult decisions – but you’ve just got to make hard decisions at a time like this, otherwise our country is doomed to years of economic stagnation,” Abbott told the Nine Network.

“I think in the long run, the voters will thank us for doing what is absolutely necessary if Labor’s debt and deficit disaster is to be tackled.”

Shorten said Abbott’s first major economic statement was “shaping up to be a budget of broken promises and twisted priorities” including increased income taxes and “a new GP tax for the sick”.

“And yet Tony Abbott has said today that Australians should be thanking him for these problems – for the extra pressure on families, the extra taxes, the extra fears which pensioners now have,” Shorten said.

“Prime minister, Australians will not be thanking you for your broken promises.”

Tony Abbott's popularity plunges, latest polls show | World news | theguardian.com

Don't take these dystopian budget ideas seriously

By Mungo MacCallum

Photo: The economic benefits of the proposed deficit levy are both small and short term. (AAP: Alan Porritt)

The neoconservative thought bubbles emanating from the Commission of Audit are designed to make Joe Hockey's upcoming budget look moderate by comparison, writes Mungo MacCallum.

Even after 15 hours of surgery, my recovery was not entirely beset by hallucinations.

But given the amount of kites, balloons, smoke and mirrors emanating from the government about what will and won't, might and mightn't, be in the budget, it may as well have been. Or to put in Bazza McKenzie terms: from the safety of a hospital bed, it has all been one massive Technicolor yawn.

The initial emetic was the revival of the claim of budget emergency, necessitating urgent and drastic action to smash the deficit within five years. Since this unlikely proposal was not only rejected by an army of economists but also contradicted most of Treasurer Joe Hockey's actions since his election, this always appeared dubious at best. But for the sake of argument, let's assume that he is fair dinkum, and examine a few of the ideas floated to make us all suffer for his ambition.

First there was the Medicare co-payment, predictable enough; in spite of their regular pre-election protestations, the Liberal have always been unhappy with the idea of a universal public health care system, and having failed in their zealous attempts to strangle it at birth 40 years ago, have invariably spent their time in government seeking to undermine it. A co-payment would be a useful wedge, aimed at driving more people towards the well-cosseted private health insurance industry.

It is obviously inequitable and also silly; if we are serious about containing health costs, the only fair and sensible course is simply to increase the existing Medicare levy on progressive income tax. Double it if you like: with a proper explanation, voters would accept and even embrace the need for a little evenly-spread pain to preserve the much-loved institution. But while it may be good economics, that solution is, for this government, bad politics.

And the same applies to Hockey's eminently sensible proposition that the age for pension eligibility will have to be raised, and sooner rather than later. Of course, if his conservative colleagues had allowed the Hawke-Keating superannuation scheme to develop seriously, instead of turning it into yet another tax lurk for the well-off, the problem would be far less acute. But as it is, something will have to be done. However, let's get some sort of order into it. Before pushing up the age limit, it would be smart to make sure that the non-pensioners have something to do with their time other than hanging around Centrelink.

So far, the controlled leaks were at least consistent, if not exactly best practice. But then came the Deficit Levy, now morphed into a temporary increase in the top two marginal tax rates. The justification is that this is the only way Abbott, Hockey and the rest of the gang can think of to make sure that the very rich make at least a token contribution to the common weal, a moderately worthy aim which raises the question: why didn't they do it sooner and make it permanent? Answer: because not only would it break the habit of a lifetime, but because it is, as the panicked party room has discerned, a really great big broken promise.

It wasn't the first and it won't be the last, but because of its fundamental nature, and also because of the inanity of the justifications offered (it's only a levy, not a tax) it has assumed totemic status. This one is not just bad politics; the economic benefits are both small and short term. It may well prove as ephemeral as the business lobby's dystopian Commission of Audit.

This, as Ross Gittins among others has pointed out, was never meant to be taken seriously; it was only ever set up to produce a recipe for the kind of scorched earth feudalism which would make Abbott and Hockey look like moderates in comparison. It is no more than a cloud of thought bubbles, a neo-conservative wet dream. If it was so easy to abolish Medicare, restrict education to the wealthy, reduce the impoverished to serfdom and introduce not just one but six new taxes (one for each state), John Howard would have done it years ago. Abbott can't and won't.

But it adds to the plethora of confusing and essentially contradictory signals emanating from the Prime Ministerial bunker. We'll keep our promises, no surprises, but suddenly we have discovered a crisis invisible to the world's economists and plan to make you miserable for a while so you'll thank us when we remove the thumbscrews.

Of course there are easier ways. If the mining boom is really winding down, like, say, the car industry, is it not time, indeed past time, to remove the massive taxpayer funded subsidies given to them? If we are really facing an ageing population, should not the superannuation tax breaks at least be means tested so that the money can be redirected where it is needed? And surely it would be a good opportunity to reinstate fuel excise indexation, precipitately abandoned by Howard in the polling panic of 2001?

But these are apparently among the dwindling list of still sacred bovines confined to the luxurious corral guarded by the people who really run the Liberal Party. And of course, if Abbott and Hockey were serious about finding easy and painless ways to collect money, they would abandon the costly and ineffective policy of Direct Action on climate change and set up the emissions trading scheme Kevin Rudd planned to bring in on July 1. And while they're at it, that they could rejig the Mining Resource Rent Tax to make it a genuine revenue raiser ...

But now I'm sure I'm hallucinating.

Mungo Wentworth MacCallum is a political journalist and commentator. View his full profile here.

Don't take these dystopian budget ideas seriously - The Drum (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Coalition deflects budget criticism and plunge in voter confidence

 Bridie Jabour theguardian.com, Sunday 4 May 2014

Former Howard minister Peter Reith says Liberal supporters are angry as new poll shows support for government at 48%

The treasurer, Joe Hockey, says there is no such thing as free welfare. Photograph: Julian Smith/AAP

The Coalition government is defying criticism of its budget plans and says it will press on with some measures, including a controversial deficit levy and possible cuts to education, Medicare and unemployment payments.

As the Labor party attacked what it called broken promises by the prime minister, Tony Abbott, a former minister in John Howard’s Coalition government, Peter Reith, joined the ranks of internal Coalition critics who think next week’s budget might contain some cuts that go too far.

Reith said a proposed deficit levy on people earning more than $80,000 was a “whopping great big tax” which many Liberal supporters were angry about.

“People are not happy. I mean, they were angry and I’m talking about solid Liberal party people who have supported the party for years,” he told Sky’s Australian Agenda program on Sunday.

The education minister, Christopher Pyne, brushed aside the findings of a Galaxy poll showing that the government would lose an election if it were held today. He said Australians knew the government had to make tough decisions to improve the budget on 13 May.

“They know it won’t be easy and it is important that everyone shares in that burden of repairing the damage Labor did to the economy and to the budget,” Pyne said on ABC TV’s Insiders program on Sunday. The government has yet to confirm that a deficit levy will be included in the budget.

Almost three-quarters (72%) of respondents in the poll, published by News Corp Australia, said a rise in taxation would represent a broken promise by the government. Two-party preferred support for the Coalition has plunged by 5.5 percentage points since the election last September. Support for the Coalition now stands at 48% and that for Labor at 52%.

Support for the Coalition has slumped since the Commission of Audit’s report and policy hints by the government pointed to a possible increase in the age of eligibility for Newstart from 22 to 25; a $6 co-payment for a consultation with a general practitioner; a rise in the pension age to 70 and potential changes in the way university graduates repay their higher education contribution scheme debt.

The plan to raise the age of eligibility for Newstart to 25 means people younger than that will have to apply for youth allowance, which is about $100 less a fortnight.

The opposition’s deputy leader, Tanya Plibersek, said young people were being “left to fend for themselves”.

“Tony Abbott came to government saying that there’d be no cuts to health, no cuts to education, no change to the pension and no new taxes. He’s already broken every one of those promises,” she said.

Most of the speculation about the budget had revealed “nasty” proposals, she said.

Pyne has left open the door to increasing the percentage of university fees that students pay, which is now about 40%.

“I do think there is capacity for students to contribute more to their own education, especially knowing they are likely to have [an] unemployment rate below 1% and they will earn, over a lifetime, 75% more than a person without a university degree,” he said on Insiders.

In his last major speech before the budget next week, the Treasurer, Joe Hockey, continued to signal certain cuts would be in the budget, with his comments that there was no such thing as a “free visit to the doctor” or “free welfare”.

“In the private sector, no one questions the concept of user pays. You get what you pay for. And yet, over the years, we seem to have developed an attitude that this principle should not apply to government services,” he said in Victoria on Friday.

“Government services are somehow deemed to be magically free but, of course, they’re not free. They are paid for by the taxpayer. And so asking those who use government services to at least make some contribution to their delivery seems a logical and equitable step.

“Sooner or later, everyone that receives a benefit or a payment pays a price through the tax system,” he said.

The budget was going to replace a culture of entitlement with a culture of enterprise, Hockey said.

The opposition’s leader, Bill Shorten, said it was becoming apparent that the budget was full of “broken promises and twisted priorities” but he stopped short of saying Labor would block a deficit levy in the Senate, if it was attached to the budget.

“This is a bad idea. Mr Abbott has seven or eight days. He can just keep his promises, not break them; not increase taxes and look after ordinary Australians, rather than increasing their taxes and increasing their healthcare costs,” he said on Sunday.

Labor opposed the idea of a deficit levy and would oppose it in the Senate, if it was introduced as a separate bill to the budget, he said.

“Australians do not want to see themselves paying more taxes, cuts to the pension, and more expensive healthcare,” he said.

“Mr Abbott, Australians don’t want to pay your taxes. Australians do not want to pay increased taxes for Tony Abbott.”

Coalition deflects budget criticism and plunge in voter confidence | World news | theguardian.com

Abbott dismisses claims lobbyists are buying influence with Joe Hockey

Australian Associated Press

theguardian.com, Monday 5 May 2014

Prime minister says the only alternative to private political fundraising is a slug on taxpayers

Abbott said it was typical for government figures to attend fundraising events. Photograph: Alan Porritt/AAPIMAGE

Tony Abbott has hosed down claims lobbyists are buying influence within the Liberal party, saying the only alternative to private political fundraising would be a slug on taxpayers.

Joe Hockey is facing questions about whether or not he offered privileged access to business and industry lobbyists in return for annual political donations.

While the donors' identities remain confidential, Fairfax Media alleges he offered access to members of the North Sydney Forum, a campaign fundraising body run by the North Sydney Federal Electoral Conference, which itself is linked to the Liberal party.

A spokeswoman for the treasurer said any suggestion the North Sydney MP was “for sale” was "offensive and repugnant".

The prime minister said he had not read the story, but added it was typical for government figures to attend fundraising events.

"All political parties have to raise money," he told the Nine Network on Monday. "The alternative to fundraising in this time-honoured way is taxpayer funding." It would be wrong to consider slugging taxpayers at a time of budget austerity, he said.

Abbott also played down calls for a federal anti-corruption body, like the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption, saying Canberra had a "pretty clean polity" and people should be careful about "casual smearing".

Hockey's Liberal colleague Josh Frydenberg said the treasurer had done nothing untoward: "This is an absolutely outrageous story," he said.

But the Labor frontbencher Andrew Leigh said the report showed how much it cost to be Hockey's "friend".

"Joe Hockey likes to give the impression that he's everyone's friend," Leigh told Sky News. "But now we learn it costs $5,500 to be a friend of Joe's, or $11,000 if you want to be a friend with benefits."

The Australian Greens said the treasurer should reveal details of who belongs to the North Sydney Forum – and the prime minister should follow suit and reveal who belongs to the Warringah Forum in his nearby electorate.

"These two forums effectively sell access to the two most powerful politicians in Australia," NSW senator Lee Rhiannon said. "Wealthy individuals and companies donate money to election campaigns through these shady organisations but the public is not informed of these connections. This is unacceptable."

Tony Abbott dismisses claims lobbyists are buying influence with Joe Hockey | World news | theguardian.com