Why little lies are more of a big problem for Dutton than Albanese

The federal election has entered a final phase when character and trust become even more important to the outcome – and when both sides rely more heavily on personal attacks to gain an edge. Anthony Albanese and Peter Dutton have to watch every word when each is branding the other a liar.

Both Anthony Albanese and Peter Dutton have been economical with the truth at times this election.Credit: Joe Benke

Both leaders are exposed. The prime minister is reminded daily that he once told voters their energy bills would be $275 lower, while the opposition leader had to admit this week he made a false claim about the Indonesian president. The campaign teams are sending daily alerts about the lies from the other side.

But there are big questions about the scale of the lies and the way they rebound on each leader. This week, at least, Dutton was caught out on a bigger mistruth: his assertion, that the Indonesian president had announced a defence agreement with Russia, tried to play domestic politics with national security. He put his foot in his mouth on the field where he is supposed to be strongest: defence.

Albanese has played fast and loose at times. “I didn’t fall off the stage,” he said on April 3. The video of his campaign event in Cessnock that day shows that he most certainly did. “We’re good mates,” he said of Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek. Voters aren’t blind: they can read the body language.

Now there’s a new vulnerability: negative gearing. Albanese claimed in the ABC debate on Wednesday night that the government did not commission modelling on this potential change to housing taxes. But this masthead reported last September that the government had sought exactly this kind of Treasury modelling. The government is not proceeding with any changes.

Treasurer Jim Chalmers tried to limit the damage. “I sought a view. Now that’s different to commissioning modelling,” he said on Thursday. As an answer, this is technically true and broadly inadequate. The language sounds tricky. In any case, Dutton was in cabinet when the Coalition modelled changes to negative gearing.

Some of the accusations are sheer hyperbole. The Coalition says Labor is lying when it says Dutton was part of a government that cut $80 billion from schools and hospitals. In fact, the May 2014 budget showed two things: future spending would be cut; spending would rise more slowly each year. The truth is very clear: the Coalition forecast the $80 billion saving.

Other claims are about predictions proven false. Labor promised the $275 saving on energy by 2025 based on a rough guess. The Liberals say they can build nuclear power stations for $331 billion – not $600 billion as Labor insists – on the basis of the same sort of wild hope. As Julius Caesar said: “Men willingly believe what they wish.” Dubious modelling is a bipartisan failing.

Dutton, however, has fallen into the habit of casual falsehoods. “The waste of the small modular reactor is about a Coke can size per year,” he used to say of his nuclear plan. Wrong. As my colleague, Mike Foley, found after talking to experts, it would fill thousands of them.

Another example: “We are the only one of the top 20 economies in the world not going down the nuclear path,” says Dutton. False. Germany has phased it out. Some other big economies do not use nuclear. It would be accurate for Dutton to say that most big economies have embraced nuclear energy, but he exaggerates instead.

Dutton also makes this claim: “Labor’s ripped about $80 billion out of defence.” Not true. This dates back to a Coalition claim one year ago about the value of “cuts and delays” to defence spending, but it overlooks the increases in spending. And what of the $368 billion cost for the AUKUS submarines?

In the strangest jab of the campaign so far, Dutton suggested Albanese had been drinking when he went on radio on April 4 to say he wanted to restore Australian ownership of the Port of Darwin – getting ahead of a policy the opposition leader announced hours later. “After a couple of wines, he called into ABC Radio in Darwin,” said Dutton in his address to his campaign launch last Sunday. Albanese has sworn off alcohol for the campaign; when he is photographed with a beer, it is a non-alcohol variety.

Most voters will never see these drive-by lies. Even so, character and trust are always central to the contest.

Who do voters think is more honest and trustworthy? Albanese led on this measure in the Resolve Political Monitor for most of this term, but Dutton took the lead last July and held it for months. Then the campaign began. In the latest survey, published this week, Albanese led by 26 per cent to 23 per cent. Half the electorate clearly mark down both leaders, but Dutton has lost his advantage.

The mistakes are catching up with Dutton. His loose language came without a penalty when he spent most of this term talking to his echo chamber. He preferred to answer safe questions on Sky News at night rather than holding regular press conferences with the Parliament House press gallery. He was not match-fit for the daily media scrutiny of the campaign.

Beneath the tactical dilemma is a deeper challenge. Dutton has done well for most of this term by complaining about Labor, but now he needs a broader agenda to convince voters he has a better plan. The key problem is policy. Paul Kelly, editor-at-large of The Australian, nailed it this week: “The Liberals are weak on a future vision for the country.”

Many voters like Dutton’s cut to fuel excise and his one-off tax cut, as well as his plan for tax deductions on mortgage interest payments. Some will want to believe his “aspirational” pledge to reduce tax rates, vague though it is. But the shadow treasurer, Angus Taylor, claimed two weeks ago that Australia was facing an “absolute economic catastrophe” under Labor. If the crisis is that daunting, the Coalition should have a more convincing solution.

Loose talk reflects on every leader, whether it is about a stumble on stage or the Indonesian president. This is now a bigger problem for Dutton than Albanese. It is easy to shoot from the hip when nobody is looking, but things change when voters start paying attention in the election campaign. That’s when the little lies come with a big cost.

David Crowe is chief political correspondent for The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.

Get a weekly wrap of views that will challenge, champion and inform your own. Sign up for our Opinion newsletter.