How can the Coalition keep talking about the ‘$100bn’ of ‘wasteful spending’ it says Labor is carrying out this election, when it now has tax cuts and a housing policy tax cut that there is no detail for?

Peter Dutton:

As I say, all that detail is provided in due course in the run-up to the election. What we have said is we’re not supporting Labor’s wasteful spending because I don’t want inflation to go up. A big spending Labor-Greens Government is going to drive up the cost of inflation and the cost of interest rates are higher always under Labor. Now this is the biggest spending Government in 40 years. They’re the biggest spending Government because Labor can’t help themselves. They always tax, they spend.(Labor had legislated tax cuts the opposition has vowed to repeal ahead of the election campaign) Look at what the Victorian Labor Party has done to the economy there. Look at what Annastacia Palaszczuk and Steven Miles have done in damaging the Queensland economy. We will always be better economic managers and we’ll always provide support to families. 30% more people is what are paying for groceries at the moment (it’s 12%)

We are going to provide more of people’s own money back to them through the $1200 tax cut. Going to provide a 25 cent a litre cut on fuel and going to provide an opportunity for young Australians to realise the dream of home ownership again.

I love election campaigns where leaders act like everything in the campaign is a bubble, untouched from any previous decision, or indeed time – like here, where Peter Dutton pretends housing affordability is a new problem and not one created by the policies of his party, which he supported for the past 20 years:

We’re providing $5 billion for 500,000 new homes. We’re cutting the migration program by 25% because Labor’s had it at a record high.(you already know that won’t help housing costs and also why its at a high) And that’s increased the demand for housing. So we create 100,000 homes in that policy, we now provide another 30,000 homes a year being built – and the Labor Government’s got demand side pressures that they’re not addressing through supply side. (sigh, Labor also has a supply side promise)

That is extra homes being built. We are the only party that is addressing the supply side and by providing an opportunity to young Australians – look, I moved around the country over the course of the last three years, there were many messages of people under pain under the Labor’s cost-of-living crisis. (Sigh, it was global inflation)

It kills me to hear young Australians saying I’m working hard, we’re both working hard, we’re putting money aside, we just can’t afford – we don’t think we’ll ever be able to afford a home. That’s the common story. Now, I’m not going to accept that as Prime Minister of this country. I want to make sure that we can do everything we can if we’re fortunate enough to win the election to restore that dream of home ownership and this is the way we can do it. A Generation ago, you didn’t require the same amount of disposal income because housing was cheaper, units were cheaper, and we have to deal with the reality for this generation. (The Coalition have been in charge for the majority of tht period) That’s exactly what we do through our policy. We hope that Australians can see some light past this dark period of the Albanese Government. Help is coming. People need to vote for the Coalition at the next election and we can deliver that.

This is one of those questions where a little economic history WOULD actually help.

Q: One of those elections that you spoke about that Labor one in 2007 when the Labor leader went to the election promising far less spending than the Coalition at the time, in fact less spending [more in every] single policy you announced yesterday, isn’t it time [that] this reckless spending has to stop?

OK. Now in 2007, it was the tail end of the mining boom. The economy was awash in money. Inflation was rising. And so what happens when governments follow neo-liberal economic policies when inflation is rising and there is too much money in the economy – say it with me guys – governments cut down on their spending. Yes! Correct – gold stars for all of you. And let’s say there is a global financial crisis and suddenly all the money drains out of the economy and inflation isn’t a problem, but recession could be – what do governments following those same policies do? Anyone? Anyone? Yes! Gold star to Grogs who is yelling very loudly in the office – governments INCREASE spending to stimulate the economy.

So do you see how different economic circumstances have different policies? If someone was to go to an election promising to cut spending all over the place in a time of mass global economic uncertainty – for example if a batshit crazy dictator was elected by the world’s largest economy and he started wrecking havoc with the world’s markets, then you wouldn’t want to cut, because people would panic and you would create – what? Anyone? Anyone? Yes – a recession. Snaps all round.

Albanese:

What we’re doing is putting out responsible policies and that’s why if you look at our $10 billion program that we are now desperate that we announced its four grants match, $8 billion is for loans and equity, that will produce income back in be able to be reinvested.

That is the difference here. Between that and a one off cash payment for one year that disappears then and then higher income taxes so that is what the alternative policy is and the housing policy that doesn’t do anything about supply.

What we’ve done is very carefully calibrated the cost of living measures that were put in place in a way that have continued to put downward pressure on inflation. Inflation had a six in front of it, it is now at 2.4. Interest rates started to climb before the last election. Now they’ve started to fall that’s because of our responsible economic management that we will continue to pursue.

Anthony Albanese is then asked to comment on Trump’s trade strategy and says:

We live in an era of strategic competition. The United States elected President Trump on a platform. We respect democratic processes. What we will continue to do is engage constructively not just with the US but importantly as well engage in our region.

One of the things we’ve done under this Foreign Minister and under our trade Minister Don Farrell, two great South Australians, South Australia does punch above its weight in this show, that’s the truth – we have improved relations not just the obvious of restoring trade with our major trading partner in China, we even got the pandas back here in Adelaide, we have the pandas back in Adelaide.

…I sat down with the wine industry in Australia because they had a number of good years, they were pretty keen on getting wind back into China now it’s going back in premium wines going into higher levels than they were beforehand.

We have restored our relationship with the Pacific, our Pacific relationship is important. Our COP bid is important for battle to our relationship with Indonesia had never been stronger and a relationship with India, India grew to be our fourth major export destination just in recent times. They are our fifth-largest trading partner. We can build on the relationship even more.

Asked about Labor’s bid to host the next UN climate conference, Albanese says:

We do have the bid in, it will be determined as the climate change conference later this year. If we are re-elected.

If Peter Dutton is elected, you can see him copying policies from other jurisdictions and pulling out of Paris. We know a whole lot of their mob are still in climate denial, they’ve been unequivocal about it. But we will put forward our bid to host a climate change conference and I can’t think of anywhere better than Adelaide to host that event.

…One of the things that are climate change conference would do is showcase this beautiful city of Adelaide to the entire world. And when you look at the work that their premier is doing in renewables, leading Australia as South Australia has for a long period of time then I can’t think of anywhere better than South Australia was a bit like the election, we are not getting ahead of ourselves.

Albanese adds:

Can I make one more point about that which is our bid is in partnership with the Pacific so it’s a joint bid. It’s one of the ways that we’ve repaired the relationship with the Pacific. Australia was in the naughty corner with a couple of other countries only a couple, when it came to climate action and our response. And that is why it is so important. Every Pacific leader remembers what my opponent said about water lapping at their doors and that is our credibility in the region is really important. And that’s why this joint bid overwhelmingly has the support of the Pacific.

Yeah, not so sure Pacific leaders are exactly thrilled with how climate has been treated under the Labor government either. Being better than the other guys doesn’t make the policies good.

Lol. Anthony Albanese is then asked if he will keep Tanya Plibersek in the environment portfolio if he wins the election and says:

I will commit to trying to win this election. I don’t assume, you might. Tanya Plibersek has been a friend of mine for a long period of time. We live in neighbouring seats and we good mates and she is doing a fantastic job.

Asked about the median house prices in capital cities being over $1m Albanese says:

Historically in Australia, prices tend to rise. What we want to do is to make sure that people have accessibility for homeownership. What we want to do is to take away the disincentive which is there were people just can’t get a deposit. When I bought my first home he didn’t need a 20% deposit. What has happened is a range of changes particularly rising out of the GFC that occurred to have that 20% deposit and what we’re doing in allowing for a 5% deposit with the government going guarantee is making sure people don’t have to wait so it means they get into that homeownership earlier.

AGAIN – WHY ARE THEY RISING? WHAT COULD HAVE CHANGED THAT MEANT HOUSING WENT FROM BEING ABOUT 0.3% HIGHER YEAR ON YEAR THAN THE AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD WAGE IN THE 1990S TO ALMOST 9% HIGHER YEAR ON YEAR FROM 2000?

What else happened in 2000? Oh, the introduction of the capital gains tax discount? Which turbo charged the negative gearing loophole that was meant to be for business investment but canny accountants showed people how to use it for housing? And then no one changed it and just let it take off? Could that maybe have contributed?

Q: We have spoken with homeless women about some of the stucco government is doing about housing and they said that this is all well and good these 5% programs but they can’t even put together 5% for a deposit. What they really need is emergency housing specifically for them fleeing domestic violence and the need to be able to live with their teenage sons. What is your government going to do about that?

Albanese:

The Housing Australia Future Fund [included funding for ] emergency accommodation women and children escaping domestic violence.

They were saying that we pointed out when the Greens and the Liberals and the Nationals in the Senate held it up for month after month after month, they held up that funding.

That is just one element in addition to the work that Claire and Amanda Rishworth, another great South Australian Cabinet minister that is not here, has done in getting agreement for increased funding for emergency funding for women and children escaping domestic violence as well. We know there is more need to be done.

That is why we have attempted to put in place programs earlier to make sure that we address those issues on top of the additional community workers that we have put in place as well.

Q: There will be a lot of people this morning saying that I don’t qualify for this. They are not first-time buyers looking at buying a home and saying what does this mean for us? The majority of the people in the housing market, what this mean?

Albanese:

It means if you increase supply, you assist everyone because you have an impact on affordability. Across the board whether it is Housing Australia Future Fund, the Social Housing Accelerator that we put in, the immediate fund we were able to do, with what they did there are now people living in homes that were left derelict.

They basically were not being fixed up. I remember under the former government here in South Australia going to homes that were unlivable here.

They are now being fixed up because there is a specific fund for them. We are about Housing Australia Future Fund, looking after social housing, emergency housing and by helping people into homeownership through shared equity.

Our housing Australia fund is as well. Peter Dutton speaks about housing infrastructure to help with electricity, water supply and those measures. We have announced two rounds of that program, ensuring private developers to be able to have that increasing housing supply. The board, we know supply is the key. Only Labor is looking at supply as well as demand.

Right, on the issue of the 100,000 houses the government has committed to building for first home buyers, Clare O’Neil, the housing minister says:

We don’t just have a commitment to build 100,000 homes for first-time buyers. The government has been working on building more homes for three years now and it is working. Let me just canvass some numbers with you. We have a commitment to build 1.2 million homes with estates over the coming five years. We are making real progress on that. We have got 500,000 homes across this country since we came to government and that has been assisted by the policies we have put in place, fee free tape has trained 500,000 people around our country, 40,000 of them in construction professions and don’t forget that is one of the myriad things that Peter Dutton wants to slash and burn if he is elected.

The PM has led the states undertake significant planning reform and traffic that we have a generational investment under way in the government actually rolling up its sleeves and building more homes we are adding 100,000 homes to what is already a massive homebuilding program that we have across the states and territories.

Let me add one more thing. I wanted to look at what is going on in construction today. If you look at the approval numbers that came out just a couple of days ago, approvals have gone up 25% of the previous year.

The Coalition ‘s approach to this is we can’t do anything about this, it is the private sector, nothing to do with us. We take a fundamentally different view. A government is stepping in to support first-time buyers and we will build more homes around the country and I not possible because it is already happening.

Now, as most of the economists at the Australia Institute know, I tend to treat economists like a packet of Arnott’s Favourites – there are a couple of good ones, and wayyy too many orange creams (the worst of all the biscuits). And just like Orange Creams, the neo-liberal economists tend to stink up the whole place with their neo-liberal views and every economist smells a little like Orange Cream, even when they’re at the other end of the packet.

And that’s kinda what has happened here.

But the problem is, economists (even the annoying ones) do know what they are talking about on certain issues. So by politicians attacking economists for populist reasons, then it just contributes to the undermining of experts, which isn’t a great thing overall.

So criticise economists – Dolly knows I do it on a daily basis – they don’t have all the answers and a lot of the time they are so blinded by their own ideologies and the economic school they favour, they can’t actually see when they have absolutely no idea about what’s actually happening in the real world (profit gouging anyone?) Economics is a social science. But criticise them for the right reasons.