Mark Riley: Peter Dutton’s appeal to public about whether they are better or worse off a political classic

Elections are generally seen as contests for the hearts and minds of voters. But they are also about their wallets. And that is where Labor is concentrating its energies as it prepares to seek re-election. The preponderance of polling shows the Government lagging behind the Coalition and Peter Dutton overtaking Anthony Albanese for the first time as preferred prime minister. In the hearts and minds of many voters, Albanese’s first-term Government has been a disappointment. Not a disaster. But a disappointment, nonetheless. The greatest example of that was the failure of the Voice. Albanese’s quest to ingrain the Uluru Statement From The Heart in the Constitution didn’t win over enough hearts. Or minds. There is growing sentiment coming through in focus group surveys that the hope Albanese offered with his election in 2022 has not been converted into tangible action. Labor strategists accept that this feeling is out there and presents a considerable danger to their chances of re-election. They don’t think it is justified, reeling off the Government’s impressive list of first-term reforms. But they accept that it is real. The Government is now appealing to those voters’ pockets in the hope of changing their perceptions. One of Peter Dutton’s most effective challenges is one pulled from the opposition leaders’ time-honoured political playbook. He asks Australian voters whether they believe they are better off or worse off than they were when Albanese was elected. Their instinctive belief is that they are worse off. Even if the official economic data would suggest otherwise. Real wages are higher, inflation is considerably lower, job creation is stable, medicines are cheaper, child care is cheaper and despite the prevailing public narrative, the Government’s energy bill relief has made household power bills cheaper, too. Labor’s critical failing, though, is that none of this has really “landed” with the electorate. Anthony Albanese’s address to the National Press Club on Friday will signal a big push by his Government to change that before the election. The timing of the speech, as this column pointed out last week, is no coincidence. It will be one year and one day since Albanese announced the redesigned stage three tax cuts from the same podium. Treasurer Jim Chalmers, the Government’s most effective communicator, got that ball rolling in a round of breakfast television interviews on Thursday. He did it by making three short, sharp points. The tax cuts were giving average workers about $1500 relief from the hardships of a cost-of-living crisis. The Government’s redesign of those tax cuts meant they were going to everybody, not just the higher paid as had been the plan under the Morrison government. And the Coalition had voted against them and had initially promised to roll them back before retreating from that threat and now considering keeping them if the Budget allows. Chalmers commuted that third point into the central theme Labor is developing for its counter-offensive to Dutton’s growing challenge to its hold on government. That theme is “risk”. “These tax cuts aren’t safe under Peter Dutton and the Coalition,” the Treasurer warned darkly. “We know Peter Dutton is a risk because we know his record. He came after Medicare when he was the health minister, he will push wages down again, he will push electricity prices up with his nuclear insanity.” It is a warning as time-honoured and familiar as Dutton’s better-off/worse-off challenge. Telling people that they are better off is a risky business for governments. Voters rarely believe it. Even if the economic data suggests it is true. The reason? A philosophical subtlety. Voters never in reality feel “well off”. They just feel “a little less worse off”. And that’s rarely good enough. Often, it’s cause for disappointment. Peter Dutton knows this and is doing an impressive job of capitalising on it. By doing so, he hopes to direct voters’ hearts and minds towards change. Anthony Albanese’s challenge is to convince them to stay the course by warning of the impact change would have on their wallets.