Thursday’s budget reply from the Leader of the Opposition continues a familiar pattern—addressing short-term pressures while ignoring the deeper, structural issues facing our country.

The proposed 25-cent-per-litre cut to fuel excise for 12 months may offer fleeting relief at the pump, but it comes at the cost of long-term progress. At a time when we should be accelerating the transition to clean transport, this move instead subsidises fossil fuel use and delays the broader uptake of electric vehicles. It’s borrowing from the future to pay for a short-term fix today.

Equally concerning is the silence on nuclear energy. With a $331 billion price tag, the Opposition’s nuclear plan would only drive electricity costs higher over time, not lower—despite rhetoric to the contrary. If it truly offered a cost-effective solution, it would be front and centre in their economic pitch. Instead, it was notably absent.

While retaining more Australian gas for domestic use may sound sensible, increasing gas supply is another example of mortgaging our future. We already have the tools and technologies for a renewable-powered future. What we lack is the political will to act—and both the government’s budget and the opposition’s reply make that abundantly clear.

The promise to cut 41,000 public sector jobs without a clear plan is deeply worrying. These aren’t just numbers—they’re people providing essential services. In a growing nation facing mounting cost-of-living pressures, such drastic cuts risk gutting the public service just when Australians need it most. We’ve seen what happens when ideological cuts replace thoughtful reform: a reliance on expensive consultants, reduced services, and broken systems. The supposed savings simply don’t stack up.

Then there’s housing. Allowing young Australians to dip into their superannuation to enter the property market may seem like a helping hand, but it’s yet another way of borrowing from our future to avoid genuine reform today. Withdrawing heavily from super at such a formative stage—when the balance is limited and before it has had a chance to grow—will have a lasting impact on long-term financial security, while doing little to meaningfully improve housing affordability now. 

At the same time, cutting migration and failing to reform tax settings like unlimited negative gearing only pushes the housing crisis further down the road. With an ageing population and declining fertility rates, the economic pressure on future generations will only increase. Draining their super early won’t solve the problem—it will only compound it.

Still, there are moments of light. The $400 million boost to youth mental health is a much-needed and welcome investment. Young people are facing immense pressure, including rising climate anxiety, and this funding is a step in the right direction. 

But overall, this reply echoes the same short-sightedness we've seen time and again—delaying hard decisions, avoiding structural reform, and leaving future generations to pick up the tab.