Audio Excerpt - David Speers:

“You two have known each other a very long time. I've witnessed you both over the despatch box in parliament. You're able to have a chat. You seem to get on. I just want to ask...”

Audio Excerpt - Peter Dutton:

“I don't want you to overstate it. This has been the kiss of death for both of us.”

Audio Excerpt - David Speers:

“What I wanted to ask is, would it really be a disaster for the country, or is this just a bit of political hype if the other guy won? Mr Albanese?”

Audio Excerpt - Anthony Albanese:

“I think there are very different values that we have.”

RUBY:

In the second leaders debate last night, those different values and the two leaders opposing visions for Australia were stark.

Audio Excerpt - Anthony Albanese:

“I'm really optimistic about Australia's future if we seize the opportunities that are right in front of us.”

RUBY:

Anthony Albanese continued his pitch to voters that they should trust him with another term, while Peter Dutton continued to press the line that Australians have gone backwards.

Audio Excerpt - Peter Dutton:

“As we approach the third of May, many Australians will be asking themselves, are you better off today than you were three years ago?”

[Theme Music Starts]

RUBY:

But Albanese and Dutton were united on one thing. Neither leader really landed a blow, or won the night.

From Schwartz Media, I’m Ruby Jones. This is 7am.

Today, my co-host Daniel James on the biggest moments from the debate – from energy to housing to diplomacy and defence – and why Dutton has had to admit another mistake.

It's Thursday, April 17th.

[Theme Music Ends]

RUBY:

Daniel, the debate itself, it started with this question about housing and the new housing plans that both major parties have released in the last week. And there has been widespread criticism from analysts that both plans run the risk of driving up house prices. What did you make of the way that both men defended what their plans are?

DANIEL:

I thought Albanese was able to speak to his plan a little bit more clearly. He was able to mention things directly like building 100,000 homes.

Audio Excerpt - Anthony Albanese:

“What we have is a reservation of 100,000 homes, just for first home buyers, that will give them an opportunity because they won't be competing with investors.”

DANIEL:

The 5% deposit.

Audio Excerpt - Anthony Albanese:

“Now, a 5% deposit rather than 20 will mean that instead of paying off someone else's mortgage, they can pay off their own mortgage.”

DANIEL:

Whereas Dutton’s plan around being able to claim tax rebates on interest rates paid for mortgages is a little bit more convoluted and difficult to cut through.

Audio Excerpt - Peter Dutton:

“For the first $650,000 of your mortgage, that will be interest that you could claim against your income. So for an average couple, that would be about $11,000 or $12,000 a year over five years.”

Audio Excerpt - David Speers:

“It'll be a lot more for high income earners.”

DANIEL:

But they were both also not willing to go near things like negative gearing.

Audio Excerpt - David Speers:

“Neither of you seem willing to touch the negative gearing or capital gains tax breaks at this election. You've both been property investors over the years. Can you understand younger Australians locked out of the market feeling that it is people like you who are to blame for the fact the system's rigged against them? Mr Albanese?”

Audio Excerpt - Anthony Albanese:

"Well, could I make this point, David..."

DANIEL:

Both leaders were not willing to go near it with a barge pole.

RUBY:

Yeah, and there was this question that was put to both men around what they'd want to be remembered for if, you know, they were the prime minister for the next three years and Dutton's answer was, basically, energy policy.

Audio Excerpt - Peter Dutton:

“Energy is the economy, David. Everything we use, everything around us, is either running or has been created because of the use of energy. Farming…”

RUBY:

So what's your read on which leader had the most realistic and best version of our energy future?

DANIEL:

I'd have to say that neither leader was particularly convincing when talking about their own energy policies. Dutton really struggled with being able to explain the detail about how much water would be used for modular reactors compared to the larger scale nuclear reactors.

Audio Excerpt - Peter Dutton:

“I mean, we could spend all night on what I think is…”

Audio Excerpt - David Speers:

“This is the detail people are after, Mr Dutton.”

Audio Excerpt - Peter Dutton:

“Yes, but there are different, depending on the small modular reactor as well, and obviously the size of the reactor, as to the amount of water that's required.”

Audio Excerpt - David Speers:

“But of the large reactors you're talking about in Queensland. You've got one plan...”

DANIEL:

When David Spears pressed to Albanese on when his plan for renewables would bring down the cost of energy prices for consumers. He couldn't answer that.

Audio Excerpt - Anthony Albanese:

“Peter raised gas. Gas is now $13, it was $30 when we came...”

Audio Excerpt - David Speers:

“And when does it get cheaper?”

Audio Excerpt - Anthony Albanese:

“When we came to office. $13 is cheaper than $30, David.”

Audio Excerpt - David Speers:

“When do we see the bills come down?”

Audio Excerpt - Anthony Albanese:

“Well, what we need to do is to roll out renewables, make sure there's energy security, make sure it's backed up...”

DANIEL:

Which is, you know, pretty symptomatic of the way that this entire, sort of, election is being run. Both leaders, when it comes to the cost of living in particular, really seem to struggle around the edges as to what their policies would mean for people in everyday life.

RUBY:

Coming up after the break - Peter Dutton is not a scientist.

[Advertisement]

RUBY:

Let's turn to foreign policy. That is where Albanese started to make this case that Dutton was being reckless or immature in his responses to world events.

Audio Excerpt - Anthony Albanese:

“Diplomacy means engaging seriously in a calibrated, serious way, treating Indonesia with respect as we do other nations that we deal with.”

RUBY:

Do you think that he landed that idea?

DANIEL:

We've had the big furor in the last 72 hours around Dutton claiming the Indonesian president had spoken about having Russian military resources placed in Indonesia, something that the Indonesians have refuted and that there is no actual evidence of the president actually having said that. It plays into a broader narrative around Dutton, around being a bull in a china shop, for want of the much better phrase, when it comes to world affairs and policy affairs. He's someone who, I think over the last three years in particular, and maybe over the course of his entire political career now that I think of it, has been someone that has been sort of willing to shoot off at the mouth when it comes to particular issues and not really think through either the policy or political consequences.

RUBY:

I think the way that Dutton spoke about his previous comments around Russia and Indonesia was interesting. He admitted that he had made a mistake.

Audio Excerpt - David Speers:

“So was that a mistake?”

Audio Excerpt - Peter Dutton:

“It was a mistake, and I'm happy to admit that what we…”

RUBY:

This is not the first time we've heard an apology from Dutton. Last week it was about his position on working from home. So what does this say to you, this kind of walking back, this apology for things that he said. What does that say to you about how Dutton is handling himself at this point in the campaign?

DANIEL:

It shows that his campaign is not going so well, and he's actually, I would say, struggling in this moment to be able to cut through, provide a clear narrative, and meet up to his own expectations as being seen as a strong man in a time when we here in Australia are looking abroad to see what other strong men are doing around the globe. His traditional strong man approach is now a double-edged sword for him.

RUBY:

Yeah and there was nowhere that that was more evident in the way that he spoke about Donald Trump. So he wouldn't really answer the question as to whether or not he trusted Donald Trump, which was interesting. But at the same time, he was also trying to make this case that he could have gotten Australia out of the tariffs that Trump is imposing. So he's walking this very, very tricky line there, isn't he? Is he or is he not close to Trump? What is the message that we're supposed to take?

DANIEL:

I don't think there's anyone in the country that thinks that Peter Dutton isn't more closely aligned to the politics of Trump than he has let on during this campaign. He was asked on a couple of occasions by David Speers whether he trusted Donald Trump and his line was, well, I haven't met him.

Audio Excerpt - David Speers:

“So you're not going to say you trust Donald Trump?”

Audio Excerpt - Peter Dutton:

“I don't know Donald Trump, is my point. My point is that who I trust is the Australian people.”

DANIEL:

He was asked the same question about the Chinese President Xi Jinping.

Audio Excerpt - Peter Dutton:

“Well, David, again, I don't know the President of China, but I believe very strongly in the relationship.”

DANIEL:

Albanese was using the office of the Prime Minister to say, well, I've dealt with both men and I have no reason not to trust either.

Audio Excerpt - Anthony Albanese:

“We have different political systems and that means different values and we have very different values with China but what I've said is we'll cooperate where we can, we'll disagree where we must.”

DANIEL:

Pointing out, of course, that the Morrison government had no diplomatic contact with the Chinese regime throughout their three years of government.

Audio Excerpt - Anthony Albanese:

“There was no contact, no phone calls, no meetings, no trade.”

Audio Excerpt - David Speers:

“Well, there was a diplomatic freeze.”

DANIEL:

So there was a point that Albanese was able to score, but for Dutton, it's a particularly tricky line in that he doesn't want to be seen to be too close to Trump, but he also wants to highlight the fact that he is better placed than Albanese to be able to deal with the Trump presidency, which is a very, very, very fine line to walk.

RUBY:

Yeah. And there was this other really interesting moment, Daniel, where Peter Dutton, he said that he does believe in climate change, but he sort of refused to link it to more regular extreme weather events saying, you know, I'm not a scientist.

Audio Excerpt - David Speers:

“Is it getting worse though?”

Audio Excerpt - Peter Dutton:

“Well, I'll leave others to…”

Audio Excerpt - David Speers:

“What do you think? You're a Queenslander.”

Audio Excerpt - Peter Dutton:

“I'll let scientists and others pass that judgement but…”

Audio Excerpt - David Speers:

“Really? You're not willing to say this is climate change happening right now?”

Audio Excerpt - Peter Dutton:

“Well, as the Prime Minister refused to do the other day, to make comment in this regard as well, I don't know David because I'm not a scientist and I can't tell you...”

RUBY:

Do you think that this really ultimately tells us anything about Peter Dutton or about Anthony Albanese that we didn't know about their different approaches?

DANIEL:

I think that was a striking moment in the campaign. There was enough said by Dutton, enough intimated by him, to raise the question as to, well, does he believe in climate science? Does he believe that severe weather events are occurring more commonly now because the climate is changing? I don't want to give the Prime Minister too much credit for his response either, but he said obviously that he does believe in climate science.

Audio Excerpt - Anthony Albanese:

“The cost to our economy as well as the cost to our environment ,of not acting on climate change, of not being a part of the global solution, are severe.”

DANIEL:

And if there is a large proportion of the community and the electorate that are concerned about both major parties' climate policies, Dutton's refusal to go full in and respect the science around climate, for me, was a pretty big moment.

RUBY:

Yeah, another big moment, I think, was when both leaders were asked about Indigenous affairs in Australia and David Spears, he pointed out the fact that neither leader has actually visited an Indigenous community during this campaign so far. Meanwhile, the gap widens, you know, on many fronts.

Audio Excerpt - Anthony Albanese:

“Neither side of politics has done well enough for First Nations people. That's just a fact. And that's something that breaks my heart.”

RUBY:

What did you think as you listened to Anthony Albanese defend his post-Voice plan for Indigenous affairs?

DANIEL:

Well, you know, with this one, I've got a bit of skin in the game, of course. What it speaks to is that Labor and Anthony Albanese lost so much political capital during the referendum that they do not want to go near Indigenous affairs as a major issue. But as things stand at the moment the same policy settings that have been in place now for close to 20 years remain around close in the gap. And neither leader this election has painted out a big vision, post-Voice for what they see the future is for Indigenous affairs and Indigenous Australians.

RUBY:

Daniel, just finally, who do you think in this debate ultimately made the most coherent, the most convincing, the strongest case as to why Australians should vote for them?

DANIEL:

It has to be said that both leaders acquitted themselves very well. Peter Dutton, as we got towards the end of the debate, became stronger. He was very clear about his vision about making Australia a more prosperous country, a safer country.

Audio Excerpt - Peter Dutton:

“I want to make sure that we can invest into defence and make sure that we can take crime seriously and reduce the problem of crime as it exists in our communities, in our suburbs, across the country. My vision for our country..”

DANIEL:

Crime in Victoria and in Melbourne in particular, in electorates that he needs to win in outer suburbs, is a state issue but is an issue that is on the screens of Victorians every night and day. And even though his ability as a prime minister or a federal leader is somewhat limited to that, to be able to cast himself in a position where he can intimate he will have an impact on crime rates was something that I think he was able to weave in quite cleverly throughout the debate. But overall, I'd have to say that it was Albanese that carried the day. But having said that, neither leader landed a knockout blow.

RUBY:

Well, Daniel, thank you so much for your time.

DANIEL:

Thank you, Ruby. Good to speak to you.

RUBY:

As always.

[Advertisement]

[Theme Music Starts]

RUBY:

Also in the news today...

The UK supreme court has ruled in favour of gender critical rights campaigner and against the Scottish government over the definition of a woman.

Five judges ruled unanimously that the legal definition of a woman did not include transgender women who hold gender recognition certificates. The ruling will mean transgender women will not be able to sit on public boards in places set aside for women.

The campaign group Scottish trans urged people not to panic as they work through the implications of the court’s decision.

And,

Widespread bleaching of the Great Barrier Reef has become normalised, according to scientists.

Government authorities have recorded the sixth widespread coral bleaching event in less than a decade, with back-to-back bleaching's over the past two summers.

The Ningaloo reef off the coast of Western Australia has also been hit by extreme bleaching and heat stress this year.

I’m Ruby Jones, this is 7am. Thanks for listening.

[Theme Music Ends]