Sorry doesn't cut it: How female voters turned on the Coalition's confusing cost-of-living pitch in the space of just a few months
Just over two hours after polls closed on Saturday, the election results unfolded into a story not only about party leaders but about two women.
There was the rightly-proud Jodie Haydon planting a passionate smacker on her victorious fiancé Anthony Albanese, now a back-to-back PM.
And then stoic Kirilly Dutton, her eyes brimming and mustering up a smile on stage for her husband Peter while he apologised to the nation for losing the only political fight of his life that mattered.
'We didn't do well enough during this campaign,' Mr Dutton said, swallowing hard.
'That much is obvious tonight. I accept full responsibility for that.'
But in reality the now ex Opposition leader should have said sorry for letting down Australian women, especially working mums, because he pitched confusion ahead of reassurance especially on household finance.
It was no secret that women had abandoned Mr Dutton before Saturday's vote.
For 11 days before the ballot box, we all knew via a Newspoll for The Australian that there was a staggering reversal in the attitude of female voters who once favoured the Coalition.
A lead of 51-49 in January slumped to an eye-watering shift of 46-54 to Labor by April.
Just like the Coalition failed to capitalise on momentum after the failed Voice referendum, they did not seriously address the concerns of women even though the data was there.
Three words Mr Dutton - cost of living.
And if you lose the CEO of households across Australia you are, to be plain speaking, stuffed.
The Coalition's crushing defeat is more than a political misstep.
It is a backlash from women fed up with being treated like a test subject in focus groups.
No matter our views on Trump and a legitimate fatigue with woke ideology, we didn't want Mr Dutton to align himself with the MAGA movement as a campaign strategy.
We didn't want more than a dozen campaign press conferences at petrol stations talking about 12 months of somewhat cheaper fuel, a tactic which only reinforced his blokey focus.
Mr Dutton's ham-fisted attempt to roll back remote work then hit women the hardest and you have to wonder why he did not see the backlash coming.
The eventual policy backflip did nothing to suture the wound especially when approximately 40 per cent of Australians now work from home on a regular basis.
Sorry, Mr Dutton said.
Again with the 'sorry' from the first Federal Opposition leader to then lose his seat.
'We made a mistake on the policy,' Mr Dutton later admitted.
'We got it wrong. We're listening to what people have to say and we apologise.'
He also backed down on a goal to slash 41,000 public service jobs which meant many perplexed female voters I know were now asking one key thing.
How will the Coalition deliver its major election promises when they are linked to savings from the public sector cuts?
Sure Labor ran a dirty campaign with Mediscare and lured voters with fear politics but the party did prioritise the material concerns of women and made those policies public early, forcing the Coalition to play catch up.
These included the much-vaunted universal early childhood education pledge for a guaranteed three days of subsidised childcare per week, investment in women's health and significant funding to tackling domestic and family violence.
In his concession speech, Mr Dutton said: 'One of the great honours of being the leader of this party is we have met people from every side, every corner, the length and breadth of this country. And there are many amazing stories.'
But did those stories - particularly from women - sink in?
We are not liabilities to be managed.
The message here for the freshly buffed-up Labor is important to note, too.
The trust women have placed in your promises is not a blank cheque.
You got the female votes and now it is time to deliver.
Louise Roberts is a journalist and editor who has worked as a TV and radio commentator in Australia, the UK and the US. Louise is a winner of the Peter Ruehl Award for Outstanding Columnist in the NRMA Kennedy Awards for Excellence in Journalism and has been shortlisted in other awards for her opinion work.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News AU
6 hours ago
- Sky News AU
‘Needs to be removed': Sustainability education linked to climate anxiety
Institute of Public Affairs Brianna McKee says sustainability must be removed from the Australian schooling curriculum to reduce climate anxiety. 'Children are at a particular stage of psychological development where they think about things in very concrete or literal terms,' Ms McKee told Sky News host Rowan Dean. 'So, when they hear phrases like 'climate action now' or 'sea levels are rising', they interpret that literally, and that causes anxiety. 'The first step towards addressing this is to take sustainability out of the curriculum. 'It needs to be removed.'
The Age
7 hours ago
- The Age
‘Progressive patriot' prime minister faces his call to arms
'In today's Australia, the new default should be that patriotism is a love of country that is democratic and egalitarian. It is something that includes those of different races and backgrounds,' he wrote in this masthead a couple of weeks ago. 'With his political authority unquestioned, Albanese has an opportunity to craft a nation-building agenda. The significance is more than just national. At the moment, parties of the centre-left are struggling to find compelling alternatives to Trumpist populism.' Albanese's defiance of America doesn't come out of nowhere. It rings a Labor bell. It resonates with the decision by Labor's celebrated wartime leader, John Curtin, to defy Australia's great and powerful friend of his time, Britain. 'I'm conscious about the leadership of John Curtin, choosing to stand up to Winston Churchill and say, 'No, I'm bringing the Australian troops home to defend our own continent, we're not going to just let it go',' Albanese said last year as he prepared to walk the Kokoda Track, where Australia and Papua New Guinea halted Imperial Japan's southward march of conquest in World War II. Defiance of allies is one thing. Defeat of the enemy is another. In a moment of truth-telling, the Chief of the Defence Force, Admiral David Johnston, this week said that Australia now had to plan to wage war from its own continental territory rather than preparing for war in far-off locations. 'We are having to reconsider Australia as a homeland from which we will conduct combat operations,' Johnston told a conference held by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. 'That is a very different way – almost since the Second World War – of how we think of national resilience and preparedness. We may need to operate and conduct combat operations from this country.' He didn't spell it out, but he's evidently contemplating the possibility that China will cut off Australia's seaborne supply routes, either because it's waging war in the Taiwan Strait or South China Sea, or because it's seeking to coerce Australia. 'The chief of the defence force is speaking truth,' says Professor Peter Dean, co-author of the government's Defence Strategic Review, now at the US Studies Centre at Sydney University. 'There's a line in the Defence Strategic Review that most people overlook – it talks about 'the defence of Australia against potential threats arising from major power competition, including the prospect of conflict'. And there's only one major power posing a threat in our region.' History accelerates week by week. Trump, chaos factory, wantonly discards America's unique sources of power and abuses its allies. China's Xi Jinping and Russia's Vladimir Putin are emboldened, seeing America's credibility crumbling. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, alarmed at the rising risks, this week declared a campaign to make Britain 'battle ready' to 'face down Russian aggression'. Loading Starmer plans to enlarge the army, commission up to a dozen new nuclear-powered submarines jointly built with Australia under AUKUS, build six new munitions factories, manufacture 7000 long-range weapons, renew the nuclear warheads on Britain's strategic missiles, and put new emphasis on drones and cyberwar as war evolves daily on the battlefields of Ukraine. Starmer intends to increase defence outlays to the equivalent of 2.5 per cent of GDP with an eventual target of 3 per cent. Ukraine's impressive drone strike on Russia's bombers this week knocked out a third of Moscow's force, with AI guiding the drones to their targets. The Australian retired major-general Mick Ryan observes that Ukraine and Russia are upgrading and adapting drone warfare weekly. 'The Australian government has worked hard to ignore these hard-earned lessons and these cheaper military solutions,' he wrote scathingly in this masthead this week, 'while building a dense bureaucracy in Canberra that innovative drone-makers in Australia cannot penetrate in any reasonable amount of time.' At the same time, the FBI charged two Chinese researchers with attempting to smuggle a toxic fungus into the US. It's banned because it can cause mass destruction of crops. A potential bioweapon, in other words. What would John Curtin do today? 'Curtin, like Albanese, was from the left of the Labor Party,' says Dean. 'He was not an internationalist, he was very domestic focused.' Indeed, he was an avowed Marxist who believed that capitalism was in its late phase and bound to fail, leading to world peace. He abandoned his idealism when confronted by the reality of World War II. 'He realised that a leader has to lead for his times. He had to bend his interests from the domestic sphere to the international.' Curtin famously wrote that, after Britain's 'impregnable fortress' of Singapore fell to the Japanese in just a few days, Australia looked to America as its great and powerful friend. 'Albanese can't repeat that,' observes Dean, 'because there's no one else to turn to.' 'A modern John Curtin,' says the head of the National Security College at ANU, Rory Medcalf, 'would take account of the strategic risk facing the unique multicultural democratic experiment of Australia. He'd unite the community and bring the trade unions, industry, the states and territories together in a national effort. 'It's certainly not about beating the drums of war, but we do need a much more open conversation about national preparedness. Australia might be directly involved in war, but, even if we aren't, we will be affected indirectly [by war to our north] because of risks to our fuel security, risks to the normal functioning of the economy and risks to the cohesion of our society. Is there scope to use national cabinet' – which includes the states and territories – 'to talk about these issues?' And the defence budget? Albanese is dismissive of calls to peg spending by set percentages of GDP. Apply that to any other area of the budget and you'd be laughed out of the room. The prime minister prefers to decide on capability that's needed, then to fund it accordingly. How big a gun do you need, then find money to pay for it. Medcalf endorses this approach of deciding capability before funding, but says that risk should come before both. 'And if you look at risk first, it will push spending well above 2 per cent of GDP and much closer to 3 or 4 per cent.' Regardless of what the Americans say or do. Do they turn out to be dependable but demanding? Or uselessly absent? 'Australia will need to spend more either way,' says Medcalf. 'The only future where we don't need to increase our security investment is one where we accept greatly reduced sovereignty in a China-dominated region.'
Sky News AU
8 hours ago
- Sky News AU
Victorian Labor government to spend $81 million on economic and policy advice
Victoria Shadow Treasurer James Newbury discusses the prediction of the Victorian Labor government to spend $81 million in the current budget on economic and policy advice. 'The government is hiring an executive on $220,000 a day,' Mr Newbury told Sky News host Steve Price. 'For $81 million, I don't think we're getting very good advice because the government doesn't seem to be getting any better. 'What's this $81 million going towards?'
