Anthony Albanese’s response to Dutton nuclear plan is just odd

Peter Dutton and Anthony Albanese are, and have been for some considerable time, firmly in negative approval territory. Artwork: Emilia Tortorella

Canberra appears to be willing the nation toward the double-hater phenomenon that has gripped the US political landscape for years.

The double-hater is described as the voter who doesn’t like Joe Biden and doesn’t like Donald Trump – a voter starved of choice and aggravated by the lack of it.

Plenty of senior Labor figures fear a less vexed version of this phenomenon may be starting to become more permanently applicable in Australia, minus the obvious and nefarious vaudeville.

There have been milder manifestations of this in the past. Anthony Albanese and Scott Morrison were both in negative approval territory prior to the 2022 election.

As had been traditional practice, Australia’s unpopular leaders, even prime ministers, had been quickly dispatched by their parties at the slightest whiff of trouble. And as Coalition figures have attested, had it not been for Covid, Morrison might have been moved on as well.

The double-hater is described as the voter who doesn’t like Donald Trump and doesn’t like Joe Biden – a voter starved of choice and aggravated by the lack of it. Picture: Sergio Flores and Brendan Smialowski/AFP

But Albanese and Peter Dutton are, and have been for some considerable time, firmly in negative approval territory. Only a whisker separates them.

And a similarly small margin now separates both as preferred prime minister, suggesting a lot of voters would prefer neither of them.

This has more downside risk for Albanese than it does Dutton, considering it is Labor that is in government.

In this context, Albanese’s reaction to Dutton’s nuclear policy is all the more odd.

Of all the responses that Labor could have mounted last week, having had two years to think about it, Albanese and his cabinet chose the worst one available.

In a presidential-style battle, if this is what Labor wants, this matters.

Albanese last week made a conscious decision to abandon the one thing he has going for him – the power of incumbency and the podium of a prime minister – when he lapsed into the psychosis of an opposition leader by harnessing the three-eyed fish attack on nuclear energy.

Not that Dutton covered himself in leadership glory either at the weekend, with his description of Albanese as a child in adult clothing, as entertaining as this non-rehearsed brain snap might have been for the Liberal Party faithful.

When parliament returns on Monday for the final sitting fortnight before the winter break, ­nuclear energy is likely to be a focus of the political contest.

It would be strange if it wasn’t considering Labor’s hyperventilated reaction so far.

One might assume, however, that David Epstein has had a quiet word in the Prime Minister’s ear at the weekend, on the need to calm down a bit.

While this might cut against the grain of Albanese’s natural ­instincts, it is the issue of cost and delivery rather than mushroom clouds that will end up being the central issues as to who can win this argument.

Albanese may think that the Opposition Leader has given him a political lifeline but this will depend on how he handles it from here.

Labor sold its right to a radiation scare campaign on nuclear power the minute Albanese signed up to the AUKUS pact and the reality that one day a nuclear reactor will be parked in a submarine at the naval docks opposite Kirribilli House in Sydney Harbour.

The only credible line of attack for Albanese is on cost and be­lievability – as in if anyone really believes that there will ever be a domestic nuclear industry in ­Australia.

Not that Labor is on firm ground either when it comes to its own costings on the renewables plan – for there are none. Or on fantasy projects. Nuclear exists as a baseload source of electricity, green hydrogen doesn’t.

While Dutton risks making the mistake Labor made in the past of refusing to provide modelling on the cost of its climate change targets, Labor still has to make the case that whatever the eventual true cost of the renew­ables and transmission pipeline will be, it won’t be in the order of multiples when compared to ­nuclear and renewables.

But how Albanese conducts himself as Prime Minister on the nuclear debate also feeds into the perception of his leadership and how much voters may eventually have to hold their nose at the ­ballot box.

Back the double-haters.

This is what Dutton has been counting on. For the Liberal leader sees this issue as the launching pad for a reassessment of him as an alternative prime minister.

Whipping up the outrage mach­ine over nuclear power ­allows the more hysterical interlocutors to do his work for him.

Albanese taking the low road on this debate will only reinforce in voters’ minds that the election becomes a choice between which leader they dislike less.