Dutton tried to make my people political footballs. Australians chose not to play
In the wake of the federal election, one thing is abundantly clear: Peter Dutton misread the nation. While Australians grappled with a cost-of-living crisis, a fragile health system, and worsening housing insecurity, the former opposition leader chose to focus on the wrong things.
In the final weeks of the campaign, the opposition doubled down on stoking fear and division, reviving culture-war rhetoric, attacking diversity initiatives, and once again turning Aboriginal people into political targets. They aligned with fringe narratives pushed by groups like Advance Australia and Trumpet of Patriots, who sought to undermine and discredit cultural practices like Welcome to Country.
Dutton appeared to assume that because the country rejected the Voice to parliament, there was a green light to keep attacking Aboriginal people – this time by going after Welcome to Country and other expressions of identity and sovereignty. It might have seemed like a politically advantageous tactic. It wasn't. Australians saw through it.
'It's dividing the country,' Dutton said of the ceremony, which I recently described in this masthead as 'an inclusive protocol, as simple and profound as removing a hat in respect [or] standing silently for an anthem'.
It didn't have to be this way. Australians want leadership with a bold economic vision, focused on uniting people. They want practical solutions: affordable groceries, accessible health care, a path out of the housing crisis. Instead, what they were offered was a campaign that leaned into division and recycled resentment from the 2023 referendum. It was no surprise to me that this approach failed to resonate.
Loading
Coalition Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price said on election night that 'if you sling enough mud during the election, it will stick'. But that sentiment overlooks the reality of this campaign. Voters didn't respond to mudslinging against the Coalition. They responded to substance. The strategy of division didn't stick. It backfired.
For many Aboriginal people, this campaign was another exhausting chapter in a long history of being vilified for political gain, treated like political footballs. After campaigning hard against the Voice to parliament, Dutton could have shown some humility or a willingness to listen. Instead, he kept attacking us, our culture, our traditions, our very presence in the national story.
When Dutton announced he would not stand in front of an Aboriginal flag if elected prime minister, Australians noticed. They rejected the idea that the nation's First Peoples are the problem. They voted for leadership grounded in values, not vendettas.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Perth Now
38 minutes ago
- Perth Now
Liberals concede tax cut stance a 'strategic mistake'
The coalition's new finance spokesman has conceded campaigning against tax cuts was a significant error, promising to push for lower rates in the next term of parliament. James Paterson said the coalition's position against Labor's two-part tax cuts, which would be a reduction of more than $500 a year from July 2027, had cost votes at the May election. While a review of policies was being carried out after the election loss, Senator Paterson said lower taxes would be a significant part of the platform. "We made a strategic mistake at the last election by opposing a tax cut and taking to the election repealing of that tax cut, and that's not a mistake we'll repeat," he told ABC's Insiders program on Sunday. "It's certainly in the Liberal Party's DNA to argue for and advocate for lower taxes whenever they can be afforded and whenever they are achievable." It comes as the coalition has come out against Labor's policy to double the tax rate on superannuation balances above $3 million. The tax rate would increase to 30 per cent in a bid to limit the number of people using their super balances for tax deductions, rather than their retirements. Senator Paterson said the policy was a grab for revenue. "We're never going to make that easier for the government, and we're fighting this because we're opposed to it in principle and we're proud to do so," he said. The median super balance for 60 to 64-year-olds is roughly $200,000 for men and $150,000 for women, with the vast majority of retirees unlikely to feel the impact of Labor's proposal. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese on Thursday said the changes would make the superannuation system fairer. Opposition industrial relations spokesman Tim Wilson said the government had broken trust with voters on the proposal. "Many people walked into the polling booth at the last election didn't think that the government was going to impose a new tax on unsold assets that was going progressively creep into the superannuation balances of millions of Australians," he told Sky News.
West Australian
43 minutes ago
- West Australian
Liberals concede tax cut stance a 'strategic mistake'
The coalition's new finance spokesman has conceded campaigning against tax cuts was a significant error, promising to push for lower rates in the next term of parliament. James Paterson said the coalition's position against Labor's two-part tax cuts, which would be a reduction of more than $500 a year from July 2027, had cost votes at the May election. While a review of policies was being carried out after the election loss, Senator Paterson said lower taxes would be a significant part of the platform. "We made a strategic mistake at the last election by opposing a tax cut and taking to the election repealing of that tax cut, and that's not a mistake we'll repeat," he told ABC's Insiders program on Sunday. "It's certainly in the Liberal Party's DNA to argue for and advocate for lower taxes whenever they can be afforded and whenever they are achievable." It comes as the coalition has come out against Labor's policy to double the tax rate on superannuation balances above $3 million. The tax rate would increase to 30 per cent in a bid to limit the number of people using their super balances for tax deductions, rather than their retirements. Senator Paterson said the policy was a grab for revenue. "We're never going to make that easier for the government, and we're fighting this because we're opposed to it in principle and we're proud to do so," he said. The median super balance for 60 to 64-year-olds is roughly $200,000 for men and $150,000 for women, with the vast majority of retirees unlikely to feel the impact of Labor's proposal. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese on Thursday said the changes would make the superannuation system fairer. Opposition industrial relations spokesman Tim Wilson said the government had broken trust with voters on the proposal. "Many people walked into the polling booth at the last election didn't think that the government was going to impose a new tax on unsold assets that was going progressively creep into the superannuation balances of millions of Australians," he told Sky News.
ABC News
2 hours ago
- ABC News
Coalition sticks to defence spending pledge but won't say how it'll pay for it
The Coalition remains committed to lifting defence spending to 3 per cent of GDP but won't detail where the money will come from, as the shadow finance minister suggested the opposition would be open to considering broader tax reform. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese is expected to meet with Donald Trump on the sidelines of G7 summit next week, amid pressure from the United States to increase defence spending from the current level of 2.04 per cent to to 3.5. Trade Minister Don Farrell on Sunday said the government was committed to a "significant uplift in the amount of defence spending". "We're focused on what Australia needs to do and we'll make our decisions based on what's in our national interest," he told Sky News. The Coalition went to the election promising to earmark an additional $21 billion for the military between now and 2030, almost double what Labor had pledged. Appearing on Insiders on Sunday, Shadow Finance Minister James Paterson said the Coalition's target of 3 per cent of GDP in a decade had not changed since the party's devastating election loss last month. "The exact profiling of that increase is something that we'll determine through the policy process and closer to the next election. We'll be completely up front and transparent about that," he said. "But yes, we have an objective of reaching the 3 per cent of GDP because we think it is in our national interest." Senator Paterson said the Coalition had three years to outline where that additional funding would go, but listed some potential areas for investment as recruitment and retention, a munitions stockpile, northern military bases, air and missile defence and drones. "There is no shortage of good things we could spend on that would increase our ability to defend ourselves and safeguard our sovereignty," he said. But he would not be drawn on where the money to pay for the increase would come from, saying that work would occur over the coming years. Senator Paterson did suggest the opposition was open to a discussion about the way superannuation is taxed, despite its rejection of the government's plan to double the tax on super balances above $3 million from 15 to 30 per cent. "We're happy to contemplate tax reform. We're happy to talk to the government about tax reform. But we are not interested in increasing taxes, because I don't think that that is what the Australian economy needs right now," he said. "If the government was genuinely serious about a broad-based tax reform process, then we'd be up for that conversation. Now, the government has to take the first steps there." US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth asked Defence Minister Richard Marles to increase spending to 3.5 per cent of GDP "as soon as possible" on the sidelines of a dialogue in Singapore this week, according to a statement from the US Department of Defense. Mr Hegseth had previously made similar requests, but it was the first time the administration nominated an exact figure. Negotiations with the United States over Mr Trump's 10 per cent tariffs on Australian exports continue, with the subject likely to dominate the anticipated meeting between Mr Albanese and Mr Trump. Access to Australia's critical minerals has been put forward as a potential bargaining chip as Australia continues to push for an exemption. The Coalition had previously said they would oppose Labor's plan to acquire stockpiles of critical minerals from commercial projects, to be held in a national reserve and made available to domestic industry and international partners. But Senator Paterson told Insiders it "might be necessary" for the government to support the mining and processing of critical minerals. "We're very happy to see what the government is proposing here. I can't commit to it in principle without having seen the details, but we're certainly open to it," Senator Paterson said. "Any sensible steps that represent an economic opportunity for Australia and an opportunity for us to demonstrate that we are a good alliance partner of the United States is something that we would offer bipartisan support to." Mr Farrell said Australia had offered the United States "an expanded arrangement in regards to critical minerals" as part of efforts to secure an exemption from the tariffs, which came into force in April. The trade minister met with his American counterpart, trade representative Jamieson Greer, in Paris last week, where he said he made clear that Australia wanted "all of the tariffs removed, not just some of them". "The position I put to Jamieson Greer is that the tariffs the United States has imposed on Australia are unjustified."
