The Coalition looks almost certain to hold 77 seats in the new parliament, representing a slim but workable majority.
However, despite Mr Turnbull's apparent confidence, it appears some on his backbench are already moving to try to force him to modify some of those promises.
Malcolm Turnbull insists the superannuation laws will be presented to parliament as outlined in the May budget.
The Prime Minister says the Government has been re-elected with a clear mandate to implement its economic plan.
But he accepts there may need to be some negotiation with the Senate to have it passed.
News that makes sense
Your trusted source for staying up-to-date with the world around you. Get free daily news updates and analysis, straight to your inbox.
"Well, I know that Mr Shorten's attempt at a victory lap might have misled you, but we have actually won the election. That's the mandate. We've won the election. We have a majority in the House of Representatives. Well, our priorities are as we have set out. We have a Budget. We went to the election with the Budget. We will be presenting our Budget, our Budget measures, in the same manner that we took them to the election. And, obviously, we don't have a majority in the Senate and, plainly, there is ... as you know, there is always debate and sometimes compromise."
However, at least two Liberal backbenchers do not agree the problems will start in the Senate.
Conservative Liberal Eric Abetz has warned Mr Turnbull to start listening to his backbenchers' superannuation concerns after what he calls the poor Coalition showing at the polls.
Senator Abetz says he believes the Government's proposed superannuation changes should be reconsidered, insisting they were never properly discussed in the party room.
"When you've just had such a big kick up the pants* as we just had as a Coalition, and especially the Liberal Party element of the Coalition, then I think it is worthwhile to ask the question, 'Why did we haemorrhage so many seats? Why did we haemorrhage so many votes, especially in the Senate, to more conservative parties? Is there a lesson to be learnt, and would the Australian people actually want us to recalibrate some of those policies?'"
Senator Abetz says voters are not angry about just this particular policy but the very fact the Coalition was prepared to look at superannuation issues at all.
Liberal West Australian senator Chris Back says the Coalition was punished at the election because of its $500,000 cap on non-concessional contributions to superannuation, backdated to 2007.
Senator Back says the Government's insistence that the changes were not retrospective angered voters.
He says Liberal voters told him they were upset by the suggestion and he is hoping his colleagues can help Mr Turnbull find other cuts instead of the superannuation changes.
"I look forward to a debate on Monday, and, indeed, I can understand the position of the leadership team, saying, 'We've got to make these savings' -- and they do. The challenge, I think, has been put out by the Prime Minister and the Treasurer to say, 'Well, if we are to make changes, come forward with where you believe there are other savings to be made.' And I am sure that there will be colleagues who will come forward with those suggestions."
Mr Turnbull says he is confident he can negotiate his agenda by working with the crossbenches in the Senate.
"All of our election commitments will be delivered. That's our commitment. And where they need to be legislated, we'll obviously require the support of the Senate."
But the reality could be quite different.
The Government is on track to win around 30 Senate seats, but, to pass legislation, it needs 39 votes.
If the Greens and Labor do not offer support, the Government could be relying on up to nine crossbenchers for help, compared with the six required in the last parliament.
