Photo: APRIL 26, 2025: An Australian Labor poster against Peter Dutton at an early voting polling station in Heidelberg, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia,
In launching his campaign for the recent election Opposition Leader Peter Dutton claimed that the election would be “a Sliding doors” moment for Australia. Not in the way he meant but it certainly was such for him and the opposition parties.
The Liberal /National Coalition was smashed (including Dutton making history as the first Opposition leader to lose his own seat) in a landslide win for the Albanese government, for a second term, and probably the possibility of a third term. It has also resulted in serious division within the Coalition between the Liberals and Nationals, with the risk of a permanent split.
Dutton’s strategy was a repeat of the Abbott strategy, negativity against just about everything the government tried to do, seeking to undermine their credibility as an effective government in very challenging times, both economically and geo-politically.
It was divisive by design, hoping to repeat the success they enjoyed with the “NO” campaign against the Voice Referendum. This had worked for Abbott in undermining and ultimately defeating the Rudd and Gillard governments, a strategy that ironically resulted in the demise of his own government.
However, it didn’t work for Dutton as although he was very critical he went to the election with an attitude of what I would call as Reckless Arrogance hoping that he could win on criticism and fear alone with a policy vacuum. He simply hadn’t done the hard yards in proper policy development, leaving him and his candidates unable to provide any detail of the policy aspirations he propagated.
For example to suggest that he would “fix” the economy, and control inflation, lower energy prices and provide solutions to the continuing cost of living and housing crises, without demonstrating “HOW” and with necessary policy detail, quickly drove voters to the conclusion that he wasn’t ready to govern and indeed his attempt at government would be Trump-like chaotic.
Moreover, his approach was very akin to Trump, floating outrageous criticisms and promises trying to scare voters such that he was seen to be harsh, hateful, and untrustworthy, lacking empathy and, in the end, attacking so many constituencies that he was unelectable.
In the latter respect, his attacks on immigration, as with his Voice campaign, bordered on racist and certainly offensive to our tolerant multi-cultural, multi-religious society, the development and nurturing of which was surely one of our great national successes of the post-WWII era.
By comparison, and despite considerable angst from sections of the media, Albanese maintained his composure and was able to demonstrate a range of honest attempts to deal with the most challenging issues as they had arisen , obviously on top of the detail, appearing as a more moderate leader.
Indeed, much of the media should hang their heads in shame for very poor journalism as the major media groups ran their agendas in support of their chosen champions. Truth was a significant casualty, with most failing to do their job in calling out untrue statements and commitments, abuse of data, unjustified criticisms and so on.
Sky News were the worst offenders so blatantly supportive of Dutton, as they were of Morrison. That’s two losses for them, they should no longer be able to consider themselves as a News Service and, I believe, they carry some of the blame for the whitewash of the Coalition. It became the SKY LNP.
My greatest disappointment with the election is that it really wasn’t a contest of longer-term visions for our nation, challenging all candidates to say detail a vision for our nation in 2050 and to detail the policies that they would pursue to achieve them. A genuine contest of ideas , preferably an evidence based discussion.
Unfortunately, I will be considered by many as an idealist, but yes, this is what our country desperately needs.
Comments