To quote Frontline (arguably one of the greatest TV satires this country has ever produced, which was created by my old Degeneration colleagues from the Triple M breakfast show in Melbourne decades ago) “this is a great story”.

To reveal all journalists, this is a “gotcha” story, where Treasurer Jim Chalmers and his boss PM Anthony Albanese look like they’ve misrepresented the truth over the Stage 3 tax cuts.

The problem with this story is that it does suggest that the Government’s likely ‘lie’ has only hurt richer Australians. Since the days of the revered-by-many John Howard, we were taught that there are “core promises” that have to be kept but there are also “non-core promises” that were breakable!

Howard actually said it but past politicians have thought it, acted on it and got away with it. But break a core promise and you’re cooked at the next election.

Julia Gillard found that out with her “…there will be no 'carbon tax' under the government I lead”.

So, what is a core promises?

While you can come up with many definitions, the critical point is that if a politician breaks a big promise that hurts lots of voters, then it’s a core promise.

And that’s the trouble with this great story that shows the Labor team have told ‘pork pies’ on their intentions with the Stage 3 tax cuts.

A news.com.au story by Jack Quail reveals the following: “Amendments to the later overhauled stage 3 tax cuts were examined by the federal government as early as June 2022, correspondence between Treasury and Treasurer Jim Chalmers’ office has revealed. A two-page ministerial submission, released under freedom of information laws, shows Treasury officials presented three separate options to amend the tax package in July 2022 following a request from the Treasurer’s office weeks after Labor won the 2022 election”.

Be clear on this: none of the options put forward were used in the ultimate changes to the tax cuts, which the PM promised not to tinker with, but under the new tax cuts he has.

While the government ultimately didn’t pursue any of three options, it had staunchly denied claims that it was seeking to alter the tax package until it finally amended them earlier this year.

That looks like a lie but I’m sure a good lawyer could convince a jury in a court of law that it’s not really a lie as Seinfeld’s George Costanza character once said, “if you believe it!”

Politicians actually have a right to break core promises if they prove to be bad promises economically, but when it’s politically driven, that’s when purists might be very critical of a PM and a broken core promise.

The trouble is that while this broken promise is economically questionable, it’s socially and politically a vote winner for the promise-breakers!

As Quail reported: “…despite receiving the costings in July 2022, it wasn’t until 18 months later that Labor proceeded with the tax shake-up, providing additional relief to low and middle-income earners while slashing the benefits for approximately one million taxpayers that earnt more than $150,000.”

And a big chunk of those losers under the new tax cuts are likely to be non-Labor voters, given their income.

Treasurer Jim Chalmers can use economic reasons for these changes, but others would say it’s pro-inflationary because lower income people will spend their tax cuts while richer people will save or invest the tax cuts. However, the many beneficiaries of these bigger tax cuts will say “you little beauty” and not care that Shadow Treasurer Angus Taylor has branded the act as an “egregious breach of trust”.

By the way, most of those people wouldn’t understand the word “egregious”, just like they wouldn’t understand the economic consequences of these changes. They could care a little bit about the changes that will come at a cost of $8.4 billion in the four years to mid 2026, but they probably won’t care that much because most voters glaze over when they hear billions and budgets.

By the way, Quail reports 51% supported the changes, 32% opposed them, 17% were undecided but 84% will be better off.

Case closed!