Voters should demand a high-energy campaign

Whoever wins the May 3 federal election, the result will have a profound impact on the nation’s future that extends well beyond the next term of government. While many of the details are still missing, it is clear that both major parties have very different priorities and will take a different approach.

Anthony Albanese said on the first anniversary of his prime ministership he wanted to lead an activist government that changed Australia fundamentally. “You can’t do that in just one term,” he said.

Based on first-term performance and budget priorities, the Prime Minister’s fundamental change involves embracing a more European style of high-taxing, welfare-centred big government that is more involved in the day-to-day life of citizens. The evidence already is a bigger public service, higher spending and more debt, with a promise to continue building a care economy that locks in future spending for generations. This has led Peter Dutton to declare in his budget reply speech on Thursday that this is a sliding-doors moment for the nation. The Opposition Leader says a returned Albanese government in any form won’t just be another three bleak years. “Setbacks will be set in stone. Our prosperity will be damaged for decades to come,” Mr Dutton said.

The differences between what is on offer from Labor and the Coalition is most stark in the area of energy policy, which quickly has emerged as the foundation on which the opening stages of the election campaign will be fought. Energy has been a problem area for the Albanese government, which overpromised in opposition that it could cut power bills by $275 a year but has been unable to deliver. The challenge of decarbonisation is proving to be more difficult to achieve than expected. This is something that is not unique to Australia but has challenged governments everywhere. As a result, the fervour that surrounded climate change and renewable energy as an election campaign issue in 2022 has waned in the face of economic and practical reality.

Neither major party has based their early appeal to voters on the issue of net zero. Both are more challenged to explain how they will reduce energy costs in a sustainable way, rather than simply moving the problem away from consumers and on to consolidated revenue via subsidies. Labor insists it will stay the course with renewable energy. But Mr Dutton has embraced a gas-led intervention as part of a transition to nuclear energy. There are a lot of details still missing in Mr Dutton’s proposed nuclear rollout but he is correct to point out that nuclear is now firmly part of the energy solution in the world’s major economies.

Energy is not the only issue that matters in this election but it is one that has an oversized influence over many other areas of government and the economy. Both sides must convince voters they are able to manage the many economic challenges the nation faces. Government debt is set to pass $1 trillion and the budget is stuck in structural deficit. Major spending areas such as the National Disability Insurance Scheme will require ongoing close management. NDIS spending is on an unsustainable footing but all sides of politics remain committed to it – just as both sides are committed to Medicare, despite a Labor scare campaign against Mr Dutton that was never based in fact.

The early campaign contest, including the government’s promise of a small change to the bottom end of the tax scales and Mr Dutton’s promise to cut fuel excise for one year, cannot be considered as meaningful reform. The election outlook is complicated by the significant drift away from the major parties in favour of minor parties and independent candidates. The numbers make it difficult for both major parties to win an outright majority. Mr Dutton will need a net gain of 22 seats after redistributions and when defections are taken into account – a bigger total than Scott Morrison’s seat loss in 2022. Labor can afford only a net loss of up to two seats to hold on to power in its own right.

If Mr Albanese and Mr Dutton are not able to arrest the drift away from the major parties, the prospect of good government involving hard decisions in the national interest will be made more difficult. Voters must think hard about the prospect of a minority government and what this would mean for stability and the priority issues of energy, economic management, housing and defence. The onus is on Mr Albanese and Mr Dutton to detail why they are the better choice.