Anthony Albanese went on 7.30 last night and was asked about some of the costings.

Q: What about student debt? How does that generate a return when you’ve just taken such a large chunk off it?
 
Albanese:

Well, that’s a benefit. That’s about intergenerational equity, Sarah. Young people feel like they’re not getting a fair crack and fair enough. And as part of our cost of living measures, we wanted to make sure that we could deliver for them, and in particular, they’ll be the big beneficiaries. 3 million Australians will get an average of $5,500 cut from their debt.

Q: But the question is, why is it sitting in an off-budget measure
 
Albanese:

Well, what it is, is making a difference by making sure that we reduce that debt. We make no apologies for that, Sarah. One of the differences at this election campaign is that the Coalition, identifying that there are cost of living pressures, identifying issues, but not coming up with any solutions. What we’ve done is, quite clearly, through a range of measures, identify where improvements can be made, whether it’s rental assistance for people who are renting, cutting student debt for students, Free TAFE to give people the option forward.
 

James Paterson does find some volunteers he has a problem with though.

Q: You’ve been quoted this morning concerned about some volunteers in Kooyong. Can you tell us about those concerns?

James Paterson:

So the Age first reported – and other media has picked this up – that an organisation connected to the united front work department, which is the overseas influence arm of the Chinese Communist Party that Xi Jinping has described as his “magic weapon” has been directing people to volunteer on the campaign of Monique Ryan in Kooyong. If those reports are confirmed, that could constitute a serious act of foreign interference which is against the law and so I think it’s critical that the Federal Police and ASIO investigate this and Monique Ryan be transparent about what involvement she’s had.

A spokesperson for Ryan told the Age:

“On April 21st, Monique attended a community dinner hosted by the Hubei Chamber of Commerce, which Mr Ji Jianmin also attended,” the spokeswoman said.

“Following the event, some attendees, including Stephen – one of the people in the video – signed up to volunteer. Monique has had no interaction with Stephen beyond being present at that dinner. Monique cannot confirm whether Jessica attended the dinner and, to her knowledge, she has not met her.

“They are not personally known to her. She is aware that they have handed out flyers at a pre-poll location in Kew, but has no knowledge of any further involvement in her campaign.”

This has been blowing up on social media and the Age recently did a report on the same – members of the Exclusive Brethren sect have been spotted handing out how to vote cards for the Liberal party at poll booths.

The sect is….problematic to say the least. Now known as the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church, the group believe the only authority is the Bible and have very strict gender rules, as well as some pretty cooked ideas about what constitutes ‘evil’

Paterson says it isn’t a problem:

There’s no religious test for participation in public life in Australia and the Liberal Party won’t start enforcing one. We do not asked ask our volunteers about their religious beliefs. Anyone who wants to sign up to our agenda to get our country back on track is very welcome to volunteer for us, regardless of their religious background. Speaking about our candidates, I can say that we have atheists, agnostics, Catholics, Anglicans, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs.

It’s probably the most diverse range of Liberal Party candidates we’ve ever put forward at a federal election because we’re united on principles of religious pluralism and religious freedom and whether you have no faith like me, or you’re a person of faith, you’re welcome in the Liberal Party.

Q: Do they share your values, though, the people within that sect? Has enough been done to vet people on the pre-polls?

Paterson:

Hang on. Are you suggesting that we should interview potential volunteers about their religious beliefs? And is that a test that just applies to this community or should we apply it to all communities? And are all parties being held to this same standard? I think that would be an extraordinary thing in a country that has no official state religion, that has freedom of religion, that we would say that some people are not welcome to participate in the political process because of their beliefs. If you support our agenda, you’re welcome to assist our campaign

And yet, the Coalition has had massive issues with people campaigning for the Greens, and Greens candidates, who oppose genocide. Huh.

Was it a mistake for Peter Dutton to so closely align himself with Donald Trump’s style of politics ahead of this campaign? James Paterson responds

There’s no need for Australians to have that concern about Peter Dutton as Prime Minister. He’d be a much stronger Prime Minister than the current one and would always stand up for our country to anybody who threat our interests and stand up for Australia in our US relationship or other relationships. Peter has demonstrated that he’s a strong leader, willing to make tough decisions whether it’s allies or enemies.

The latest Guardian Essential poll shows the two party preferred at 52-48 and Coalition campaign spokesperson James Paterson (who seems to be sent out only when Jane Hume isn’t available) says that isn’t what he is hearing on the ground.

I’ve canvassed 11 candidates and colleagues around the country in a range of different seats for their feedback and they said yesterday on pre-poll was the best reception they’ve received on pre-poll to date and it’s been pretty good generally over the first few days but yesterday was particularly strong across the country.

We’re encouraged by that.

We think the Australians who are deciding early and are turning up are very strongly backing the Coalition but of course there is a large number who have not yet made up their mind who will be tuning in particularly closely in the next couple of days to make up their mind and it’s critical from our point of view that they understand we’re going to cut their petrol tax by $14 a tank and give them up to $1200 back on tax next year and they’ll be safer under a Coalition government.

Bill Browne reported yesterday on a 180 that Jason Fallinski had seemingly done over truth in political advertising laws.

Pollietragic says:

Jason Falinski -unbelievably once regarded as a bright young rising star of the LNP, lost his seat to a Teal, scaremongered how Teals were a single party threatening democracy as he knew it. Rehoused in the executive of the NSW Liberal Party, apparently failed to operate amongst the factional war fallout of the 2022 LNP preselection bile. Rehoused now in ‘Australians For Prosperity’, comfortably cocooned amongst the the fossil fuel donors, minimising short term rejection and providing him with healing time. Aww.

Here is what Bill reported yesterday:

An interesting about-face today from former Liberal MP Jason Falinski, now head of right-wing campaign group Australians for Prosperity. He wrote in a fundraising email:

“Extremism has always benefited from an under-informed people, which is precisely why Anthony Albanese, Adam Bandt, and Simon Holmes a Court’s Teals are carrying out the most sweeping assault program of propaganda in Australian electoral history.

“Albanese is proposing to introduce Orwellian “truth in political advertising” laws that will severely limit Australians’ free speech rights.

“He is backed by Zali Steggall.”

When he was in Parliament, Falinski was a champion of truth in political advertising laws. Ahead of the 2019 election, he said:

“We definitely need rules in political advertising to make sure that people are not misleading the voters when it comes to making a decision about who to vote for. We have truth in advertising across the board. It just doesn’t apply to political campaigns.” After the election, he collaborated with independent MP Zali Steggall on a submission which used Australia Institute research to make the case for truth in political advertising laws, concluding:

“In order for Australia to keep up with international best practice and build confidence in our democratic systems we strongly urge that the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters investigates options to ensure truth in political advertising.” Truth in political advertising laws are overwhelmingly popular among Australians of all political persuasions. They have existed in South Australia for forty years, where academic research shows they are supported by most political participants, “have had no ‘chilling’ effect on freedom of speech” and “have undoubtedly changed the face of electoral campaigning” because party directors closely scrutinise all political ads for accuracy.

As Falinski pointed out in 2019, truth in advertising is no less than we already expect of for-profit corporations.

The ACT adopted truth in political advertising laws in 2020, with the unanimous support of Labor, Liberal and Greens parliamentarians, and last year Liberal Opposition Leader described them as “probably welcome”.

Australians for Prosperity has reportedly failed to authorise its social media advertising and run paid ads that feature people who did not consent to have their interviews used in that way.

Does material like this further strengthen the case for clear, nationally consistent and constitutional truth in political advertising laws?

Greens senator Peter Whish-Wilson says the final Senate inquiry report into the Albanese Government’s waste reduction and recycling policies “reveals Australia is losing the war on waste and that our current and historic federal policy framework has failed”.

As if Tanya Plibersek wasn’t having a hard enough campaign as it is. I mean she had to resort to the CPRS last night on Q&A. That’s pretty desperate.

For the record, it was also 13 years ago. And it comes up so much (Jon Kudelka, one of our best cartoonists and all round incredible human added it to his Rusted On politics tea towel for a reason) the Greens have had to create a ‘why we voted against this’ page on their website)

But now it turns out we are still pretty shit when it comes to waste (surprising no one!) and maybe that is something we should act on now.

Whish-Wilson says the major parties need to “unequivocally commit to mandating our nation’s waste reduction targets, banning harmful single-use plastics, and legislating extended producer responsibility schemes in the next parliament”.

Whish-Wilson:

Plastic pollution is one of the biggest environmental challenges facing the planet – and like most environmental problems, it is also a filthy political problem. 

This report outlines compelling evidence that Australia is losing the war on waste and that our current and historic federal policy framework has failed. This is hardly surprising given our framework hinges on industry self-regulation and voluntary systems of reducing waste. 

It is absurd that Australia’s waste reduction targets are not government regulated or legally binding. Successive federal governments have chosen to put the responsibility of waste reduction and recycling at the feet of consumers, rather than hold to account the big producers, brands, and retailers of plastic packaging and other waste that is polluting our planet. 

There are many critical recommendations made by this report that our future government could act on to turn the toxic tide of waste in Australia. These include legislating a Circular Economy Act, implementing an ambitious producer-funded mandatory national product stewardship scheme, and enforcing packaging design requirements with mechanisms to drive demand for recycled materials. 

The evidence in this 200-page report is clear – there is no more time to waste. The time for constant reviews and consultation is over, we have all the evidence we need to fix the waste crisis, what we are lacking is a government with the political ambition to do it. 

In Your Comments, Simon says:

Tiny plastic soy sauce fish and those fruit stickers … its totally insane!

Sam says:

Nothing like supermarket chocolate at 7am. Life choices. Shrug.

We agree Sam. We agree.

AAP has an update on the campaign to push for gambling reform:

Gambling harm advocates are ramping up pressure on major parties in marginal seats as documents reveal a go-slow on government talks.

Paid posts comparing candidate stances on banning ads have targeted three key electorates: Gilmore in NSW, Brisbane in Queensland and Deakin in Victoria.

At least 20,000 voters in each seat have been reached ahead of the May 3 election, the Alliance for Gambling Reform says.

Labor has no public policy but has previously floated bans on gambling ads during live sports and hourly caps outside that, alongside a social media crackdown.

The coalition has proposed banning gambling ads during sports broadcasts, including an hour either side of the games.

Labor’s campaign team have been in the archives again