Economic growth is up but there is no guarantee it will stay there, especially if house prices fall significantly in Sydney and Melbourne. Business confidence is fragile, with political instability and uncertainty over future tax rates definitely not helping. Wages growth is still far from satisfactory and, though unemployment is down, its still a long way above where it was in 2008.

Morrison can argue that the economy is going well, but to win the next election he needs to sell a plan to keep it there.

While he can claim some credit for the personal income tax cuts that have already been locked in, his room to promise additional cuts is limited. Company tax cuts for larger companies the ones that would have delivered the biggest bang for our buck have been rejected by the Senate and time to the next election is ticking away.

He needs a bold step, and so much the better if he can wrongfoot Labor, who are weak over which companies deserve to keep their own income and those who are unworthy.

One way to do this is for Morrison to adopt Labors idea of an investment guarantee.

One of the main reasons an investment guarantee is inferior to company tax cuts is that it serves as a backdoor way for the government to favour certain companies and types of investment. Invariably the deduction is limited to certain types of investment, and over time there will be pressure to cap the maximum amount that can be deducted.

By stripping it of its limits and restrictions, Morrison can apply the guarantee to all companies and all types of investment, effectively giving tax relief to all companies.

Another area in which the government must find some courage is industrial relations. The current industrial relations system is largely the product of Labor-initiated reforms; specifically, Julia Gillards Fair Work Act but also reforms by Paul Keating in 1993. It would be a mistake to stand by while Labor dismantles its own reforms because they are supposedly unfair.

As the Productivity Commission confirmed in their recent work on inequality: Australia has seen wage growth at all income levels. The system, though not without its flaws, has been working reasonably well for most people other than the unions, who have seen their membership and importance fall for decades.

The important thing is that the government is not fighting against unions and workers but for consumers.

There are two key battlegrounds. The first is the gig economy, where flexibility and innovation have delivered genuine improvements to consumers in areas that were riddled with regulation and bureaucratic red tape.

The campaign to regulate and tax food delivery companies, ride-sharing companies and others will mean those services arent as flexible, arent as affordable and ultimately harm consumers.

The second area is childcare, where the campaign for even greater subsidies is just winding up.

The cost of childcare directly impacts the decisions of parents to work. As recent CIS research has highlighted, government regulation has been a key factor in driving up those costs. The government must resist this move. Parents want flexibility, and they want childcare to be available. If regulation works against that goal, then it should be opposed or better still, repealed.

The last area where Morrison needs to take a stand is financial services. While the revelations from the Banking Royal Commission have been terrible, the government must resist the urge to pass needlessly punitive legislation solely to satisfy the public appetite for vengeance. Bank taxes, such as the one in Morrisons 2017 budget, may be popular but in the end, they are passed on to mortgage holders.

Regulation may protect vulnerable groups from abuse by unscrupulous bankers, but it may also have the effect of making it much harder for them to access finance at all. We dont need to put additional barriers in the way of these groups.

The government should absolutely crack down on wrongdoing, in the gig economy or the banking sector, but it should always remember the negative effects of regulation on consumers.

Indeed, if the government is looking for a new economic narrative, it could start by positioning itself as the party of consumers. After all, not everyone is a small business owner or union member, pensioner or public servant but every voter is a consumer.

Simon Cowan is Research Director at the Centre for Independent Studies.