A journalist prefaces their question with ‘you had a nice walk in Cabramatta with your Labor candidate yesterday…but before they can finish Albanese says:

I am not frightened of getting out there and talking to people and environments that are not controlled and I must say it is very warm, the reception we got and that is not surprising. Because she is from the community, of the community and will make a fantastic representative for the people of Fowler.

The journalist says they didn’t even get to their question. Which is:

An organisation she founded [while she worked for the former Labor Fowler MP received government grants]. Is there a conflict of interest, the grants were received while she worked for the former Fowler MP. Do you know if a conflict of interest was declared?

Albanese:

Despite the date you network the Liberal Party will do, Tu Le is someone of extraordinary capacity and integrity. She has been involved in not-for-profit community-based organisations in her local community for a long period of time. She will make an extraordinary local member.

Which doesn’t answer the question. Dai Le looks like holding the seat of Fowler.

On campaign interviews, Anthony Albanese says:

I do interviews and I know I did the 7.30 Report last night and I note Peter Dutton has correctly shown strength by doing Paul Murray tonight for the second time in the campaign. I’m sure that will be a rigourous cross-examination of the costings. The truth is there is a big difference between the two sides. Outside have put out our costings, we had a budget on the 25th. We then had the pre-election fiscal outlook and then released our costings yesterday.

Is Jim Chalmers worried by rating’s agency S&P’s assessment that the election spends promised by the major parties this campaign puts the AAA credit rating at risk?

(spoiler – it doesn’t. A AAA credit rating just means Australia can borrow money at a better interest rate because it is more of a sure bet of paying it back. And the ratings agencies look at the 10-year bond yield rate, which as Grog’s points out:

The reality is the best way to gauge the risk of Australia’s debt is to look at the 10 year bond yield on Australian government bonds. In effect this is the interest rate the government pays when it borrows money. At the moment the rate is around 4.4%. Back when S&P gave Australia a AAA rating and back when Australia had budget surpluses due to the mining boom, the rate was around 5.5%.

So Australia is seen as a better investment now then the mining boom.

Jim Chalmers says:

One of the things we have done is put our costings out there. The other side have not. The other thing we have done is currently $78 billion deficit into a $22 billion surplus and followed it up with another so plus and followed up with halving the deficit and the we released yesterday, we made the budget bottom line better. We have improved the budget bottom line by 200 and $7 billion since we came to office. We have improved the bottom line, save some $60 billion in interest payments as well.

While we wait for the questions at Albanese’s press conference:

Almost two years after the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) began operations, it is at a crossroads. 

It is yet to hold a public hearing. Its decision regarding the Robodebt referrals was subject to adverse findings. And its findings so far have been limited.  

Reform is needed if the NACC is to win the confidence of the Australian people.  

It comes as new polling research from The Australia Institute, undertaken in collaboration with the Human Rights Law Centre and Whistleblower Justice Fund, finds Australians overwhelmingly support a Whistleblower Protection Authority. 

Key findings

• 84% of Australians support the establishment of a Whistleblower Protection Authority.  
• Polling research last year found that 67% of Australians say that public hearings should be held more frequently than the current legislation stipulates, under either unlimited circumstances or when a public hearing would be in the public interest.
• Nine thousand Australians have signed a petition calling for five key reforms:
  • Immediately bring forward the independent review of the NACC 
  • Give the NACC the power to hold public hearings whenever it is in the public interest 
  • Expand the Inspector’s powers to review more of the NACC’s operations 
  • Ensure no party has the majority vote on the NACC’s parliamentary committee 
  • Implement a Whistleblower Protection Authority 

“When the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) was created in 2022, Australians had high expectations, given a string of high-profile integrity issues in government had been identified,” said Bill Browne, Director, Democracy & Accountability Program at The Australia Institute. 

“Expanding the scope of the NACC Inspector and allowing for a non-government majority on the committee scrutinising the NACC would improve oversight of this important body. 

“A Whistleblower Protection Authority would support and protect whistleblowers, who risk their own health, careers and, in some cases, freedom in order to expose wrongdoing. 

“The NACC is yet to hold a public hearing, but public hearings are important to ensure that justice is done and to reassure Australians that the NACC is functioning well. 

“Australia Institute polling research confirms that Australians overwhelmingly believe that the NACC should be empowered to hold public hearings whenever they are in the public interest.” 

It is hard hat time for Albanese, who is in the seat of Griffith.

Albanese is at a housing development and accusing the Greens of “holding up” housing developments like the one behind him (the Greens were negotiating for a better spend on housing and rental rights, and also the Coalition refused to even enter negotiations so….)

Max Chandler-Mather is a personal bugbear for Albanese – MCM kinda drives Albanese nuts, with some in Labor speculating its because MCM has similar traits and a lack of respect for position to a young Albanese when he started making a name for himself in Labor politics.

MCM was in the Labor party, but abandoned it for the Greens.

Opposition leader Peter Dutton has also hit the radio this morning, calling in to Brisbane radio 4BC (Brisbane’s version of 2GB) to say that the internal polls for the Coalition were very positive and he thinks that the ‘quiet Australians’ (Scott Morrison’s favourite cohort) would deliver him the Lodge.

There’s a lot of quiet Australians … particularly people in suburbs, who believe that the government hasn’t delivered for them.

I think there are a few surprises coming and there’s no doubt in my mind that we can win this election.”

Morrison used to refer to the “quiet Australians” frequently – which was an expansion of the Howard’s “battlers” and Menzie’s “Forgotten Australians”. Morrison meant white, older, suburban voters of lower to middle class. It is the cohort that Dutton has staked his entire political career on.

Essentially Dutton is asking people to believe that the ‘quiet Australians’ are so quiet they are never polled. And while yes, in 2019 the expectations were that Bill Shorten would win the election, and the two-party preferred polls did have Labor in the lead, the polls were right on the primary vote for each of the major parties, which suggested Labor would fall short. And pollsters have made a lot of adjustments since then and were right about 2022.

Greens leader Adam Bandt is in his own electorate of Melbourne today, to start the campaign day.

He’ll be talking housing and regulating the big banks. Which, you know, are among the most profitable in the world?
Why? Well you and the interest you pay has a massive amount to do with it.

Sandra says:

The Exclusive Brethren doesn’t participate in voting I thought.

They don’t. But that apparently doesn’t stop them from handing out how to vote cards for the Liberal party.

Fiona says:

But omg we need something better than paper straws

To which also, yes. Anyone with a disability, mobility issues, or a toddler knows the struggle. And it is not feasible to carry around reuseable ones (forget to wash them etc). But it is also part of the transfer of responsibility fossil fuel companies and the big polluters have managed, making us all responsible for cleaning up their messes.

Back to James Paterson, who is asked whether he agrees with Peter Dutton that a Welcome to Country may not be appropriate at an Anzac Day ceremony.

Again. The ONLY reason this is on the national agenda is because of NAZIS.

Paterson:

What Peter said is, in his judgement, he thinks probably the majority of veterans don’t want to have a Welcome to Country at these events, but he also said it’s a matter for organisers. We’re not proposing new legislation or laws to dictate when there should or shouldn’t be Welcome to Countrys. We’ve said we think they’re appropriate at some events, and Peter’s given the good example of the opening of Parliament. He says he thinks it can be overdone. We’ve all seen events why where on Zoom calls people are doing various acknowledgements of country or conferences where every single person does it. It cheapens it if it’s tokenistic.

For Dolly’s sake – an Acknowledgement of Country is different to a Welcome to Country in that it is largely done by white people, acknowledging the country that they are on. What are they even on about at this stage? Paterson and co are deliberately conflating Welcome to Country, which is a ceremony welcoming people to an Indigenous person’s country, which is performed by Indigenous people who belong to that country. It teaches you about the land and sends a message as to how we can all care for each other, through the land.

An Acknowledgement of Country is something anyone can do, acknowledging the land that they are on and the peoples who belong to that land. It is literally the bare minimum. The absolute bare minimum.

But because NAZIS gatecrashed an Anzac ceremony complaining about Welcome to Country ceremonies, now we have to question the bare minimum on inclusion we do. WTAF is happening.

Albanese was also asked over his comment ‘kindness isn’t weakness’ in one of the leaders’ debates (which I maintain is a paraphase of a Lana Del Rey quote)

Q: You used the phrase ‘kindness is not a weakness’ in the second Leaders’ Debate. What do you mean by that?
 
Albanese:

What I mean by that, Sarah, is that Peter Dutton seems to think that bluster and yelling and interrupting and being rude is strength. It’s not. One of the things that you have to do as a leader is show kindness and compassion to the vulnerable. That’s part of who I am. It’s part of my character. That’s not weakness. Strength is having the capacity to go to the National Press Club, as I did, and say we are going to change the tax cuts that have been legislated because we don’t want some people to be left behind –
 

Q: Come back, let’s come back to strength. Because you gave that answer in response to a question, ‘do we need more of a hard man as a leader?’ And of course, that is how Peter Dutton has been styling himself. So, my question is, has Donald Trump come to your aid during this campaign, darkening the brand of hardmen leaders?
 
Albanese:

I think Peter Dutton has darkened his own brand. He has made a career out of promoting division, about punching down on vulnerable people, about seeking to divide the community, engaging in culture wars. What I’ve done is to try and bring people together. That’s a part of who I am.