Peter Dutton’s pre-Dunkley detainee scare blew up, but cost of living is the real electoral dynamite

The scare campaign was going so well.

It was question time on Thursday, two days out from the Dunkley byelection. Victoria Police had just confirmed the arrest of a man released from immigration detention who was issued with four assault and stalking charges.

The opposition leader, Peter Dutton, made the alleged incidents in Richmond the centrepiece of the Coalition’s question time attack; soon after his deputy, Sussan Ley, tweeted an inflammatory claim about “foreign criminals”.

But just hours later, Victoria Police conceded they had got the wrong man. After reviewing footage, they no longer believed the person involved was someone released from immigration detention.

The Coalition campaign – supported by negative ads from right-wing campaign group Advance to try to make a four-month-old high court decision a central issue in Saturday’s byelection – had come unstuck.

Dutton defended his actions on the basis he was entitled to rely on a Victoria Police statement. Fair enough, as far as concerns believing the narrow fact of an arrest and charges.

But that’s not an excuse for Coalition questions implying that Labor had endangered the community by releasing someone who had since reoffended, a premise that would reverse the presumption of innocence and proved to be incorrect.

It wouldn’t really have mattered if the man were let off charges two hours, two days, or two weeks later, it was still an irresponsible line for Dutton to have pursued. First, because as the prime minister, Anthony Albanese, noted there was potential prejudice to a court process.

And second, because the smear only really works if there were some alternative to letting 149 people out of detention. There wasn’t. The government was required to conform with a high court order and the threshold of evidence required to apply to re-detain someone pre-emptively hasn’t been reached.

By contrast, Labor’s question time strategy was to boast about its income tax cut package, more generous for low and middle income earners.

The mantra of repeating key messages until you’re sick of hearing them went well, so well that independent MP Allegra Spender accused Labor of “tedious repetition”.

Labor asked who won from the tax cut package so many times and so many different ways that the industry minister, Ed Husic, was allowed to vamp about how much a marine biologist called George stood to save – a reference to Seinfeld.

Labor’s bold move to break its election commitment to stage three to help those earning $147,000 or less gives it another weapon in its arsenal in the cost of living battle, an argument to Dunkley voters, that although they are hurting, the government has done something.

skip past newsletter promotion

Sign up to Afternoon Update

Our Australian afternoon update breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it matters

Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

after newsletter promotion

The Coalition is actually favoured on handling the cost of living, despite its lack of policy

But both sides believe the government is still vulnerable going into Saturday’s poll, despite a 6.3% buffer. Cost of living is the major issue, but because there is no chance of changing the government, the Coalition and Advance campaigns can frame the vote as a consequence-free way to send a message to Albo that he hasn’t done enough.

Never mind that the Coalition voted against many of Labor’s cost of living measures, never mind that grumbling as they waved through the income tax cuts they weren’t able to articulate an alternative. If you hate rent and interest rate rises, power price rises, grocery and petrol prices (who doesn’t?) – vote Liberal. Potent stuff.

Albanese attacks Coalition as stage-three tax cuts are passed through the Senate – video

Despite agreeing that the result is basically a coin toss, both sides seem relatively relaxed going into the byelection.

For the Coalition, they seem confident of a swing toward the opposition even if they fall short, thus validating the cost of living campaign and its latest scare about fuel efficiency, falsely labelled a new car and ute tax. On Thursday Dutton suggested anything more than a 3% swing would be disastrous for the government, so that’s a good indication he’s expecting at least that.

As for the government, Labor is acutely aware of where the byelection fits in the electoral and economic cycle. The once-in-a-century Aston byelection win was early in the cycle, during Albanese’s honeymoon period. This one comes midterm, after 13 interest rate rises. With inflation softening, the hope is that the Reserve Bank will have started cutting interest rates by the time of the next election, due by May 2025.

Even if the Liberals achieve a 7% swing and win Dunkley, there’s no sense panicking about a one seat snapshot months before the water hose that would be income tax and interest rate cuts are applied to the cost of living fire.

But Labor will have its work cut out for it: this week’s Essential Poll shows the Coalition is actually favoured on handling the cost of living, despite its lack of policy.

To an extent, the dynamics of byelections can encourage a protest vote. But a big swing to the Coalition would be a proof of concept about negative campaigns that will reappear in the next federal election.

Opposition leaders – even unpopular ones, even in the first term of government – can do great damage: think of Tony Abbott pushing the Gillard government into minority at the 2010 election or how Bill Shorten’s Mediscare pushed Malcolm Turnbull to the brink in 2016.

Framing Dutton as a man with no solutions is a smart move in the medium term. But relentless negativity, even without a well-defined alternative platform, has worked before.

A win on Saturday would put Dutton one step closer to the Lodge, which would be cause for concern, if not panic, for Labor.