A choice between Morrison’s details and Shorten’s emotion

Leader of the Opposition Bill Shorten and Prime Minister Scott Morrison during the third Leaders Debate. Picture: AAP

The final leaders debate of the campaign has confirmed what was clear from the beginning of the campaign and won’t shift a vote: Scott Morrison is across detail and Bill Shorten is not.

What’s more, the Opposition Leader continues to be more emotive and vibrant, citing individual examples while the Prime Minister continues to stick to a simple, austere message of economic management for “people”.

Although it won’t shift votes, it’s clear Morrison was in a better shape last night than in earlier ­debates. Shorten continued to ­“entertain” and stick to his broad arguments on climate change and a fair go.

This debate has personified the election campaign: two closely matched leaders, putting out messages they believe will resonate but little is separating them in an election that is now too close to call.

Morrison was unrelenting in his message of Labor’s proposed taxes “weighing down” the economy, while Shorten was equally stubborn with his argument that he wanted to extract a “fair go” for everyone from the “top end of town”.

Both leaders now have their messages clear and rehearsed, such that advantages in the debate were peripheral and predictable.

Morrison was still weighed down by the instability of the Liberal leadership and the ongoing “climate wars”, while Shorten again was unable to provide detail on the cost to the economy or the budget of his self-proclaimed ­ambitious carbon emissions target. He doubled down on his ­earlier dismissive description of a question on the costing being “dumb”, now calling it dishonest.

Shorten continues to argue that it’s impossible to put a cost on Labor’s policy while claiming it’s dishonest to talk about a cost without looking at the cost of “not taking action”. He also refused to provide a guarantee that house prices would not fall or rents rise as a result of Labor’s negative gearing policy.

Shorten tried to embarrass Morrison over Labor’s $2.3 billion cancer care package and sought a guarantee that the Coalition would support the initiative, but was forced into meandering on the detail of how the package would work.

In keeping with the tight election, both leaders sought common ground on religious freedom, border protection, ensuring leadership stability and families (especially mothers) being kept out of the fray.