14 April 2025

Campaign launches put housing at the centre of the election fight

| Chris Johnson
Join the conversation
111
Hon Anthony Albanese MP

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has made housing affordability an election priority. Photo: Michelle Kroll.

Housing access and affordability have taken centre stage in the federal election, with both major parties using their official campaign launches to offer competing policies aimed at getting more people into their own homes.

Labor will spend $10 billion to build 100,000 new homes across Australia, specifically for first home buyers.

It will also introduce a plan to allow all first home buyers to buy with just a 5 per cent deposit.

The plan would help first-time home buyers avoid lender’s mortgage insurance, which the government says adds about $23,000 to an average first home buyer’s mortgage.

The Coalition’s big housing announcement is to allow first-time buyers who buy newly built homes to deduct mortgage payments from their income taxes.

The offer would only apply to newly built homes and would be available to first-time buyers earning less than $175,000 a year for an individual or $250,000 for a couple.

The Opposition’s scheme would apply to the first $650,000 and first five years of a mortgage, with no limit on the purchase price of the house or size of the mortgage.

The Coalition says its policy would save a first home buyer with a $650,000 mortgage and taxable income of $120,000 about $12,000 a year.

Both parties launched their campaigns on Sunday (13 April): Labor in Perth and the Coalition in Sydney.

READ ALSO Dutton to dump ‘tax on families’ over utes and 4WDs that don’t meet fuel-efficiency standards

Anthony Albanese offered a $1000 instant tax deduction for work-at-home expenses.

“No paperwork, no box of receipts, no scrolling through your online banking – just tick the box and your return is ready,” the Prime Minister said.

“Every year, millions of people who work part time, or work from home, or don’t have an accountant to navigate the tax system for them miss out on claiming deductions they are entitled to and pay more tax than they should.

“This reform fixes that, and it fixes it forever. It takes away the hassle of tracking your expenses, especially if you work from home.

“And it gives you back more of your own money, faster.”

It was Labor’s housing policy, however, that the PM spent the most time spruiking, saying his party was “backing the great Australian dream”.

He said buying a first home has never been easy, but for the current generation, it has never felt further out of reach.

“At the moment, if you can’t get that 20 per cent deposit, the only other option is to pay $20,000 or more in mortgage insurance,” Mr Albanese said.

“The only thing that buys you is higher repayments down the track. That is no kind of choice at all.

“Our Labor government is going to fix it.

“Today I announce that under a Labor government, you will be able to buy your first home with just a 5 per cent deposit.

“Our Five Per Cent Deposit Plan will be open to every Australian looking to buy their first home.

“It will be available for homes valued all the way up to the average price in every city and region.

“And you won’t have to pay a single dollar for mortgage insurance; our government will cover it.

“If you’re looking to buy your first home, Labor’s got your back.”

Peter Dutton

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton says he will be a PM who restores the dream of home ownership. Photo: Peter Dutton Facebook.

During the Coalition’s campaign launch, Peter Dutton said he won’t accept a situation in Australia where the only people who can buy a home are those who can rely on the “bank of mum and dad”.

The Opposition Leader said if elected, he would be a prime minister who restores the dream of home ownership.

A Coalition government would ease demand on housing by banning foreign investors and temporary residents from purchasing existing homes for two years.

It would also lower the permanent migration program by 25 per cent for two years and bring down the number of new foreign students commencing in higher education by 30,000 each year.

READ ALSO Labor will have to ‘learn to play well with others’ in minority government, says Greens leader

“We will allow Australians to access up to $50,000 of their super towards a deposit for their first home,” Mr Dutton said.

“Your super is your money – not the government’s.

“We will also work with the prudential regulator to ease rigid and overly-strict lending criteria, and that will result in tens of thousands more Australians being able to get a home loan.

“Today, I announce a new policy for first home buyers who purchase a newly built property to live in.

“A Coalition government will allow you to deduct interest payments on the first $650,000 of a mortgage against your taxable income.

“We will allow these deductions for five years, provided you continue to live in that home for that period.

“This policy will be available to individuals with a taxable income of $175,000 or less – and joint applicants earning a combined income of $250,000 or less.”

Greens leader Adam Bandt has already launched his party’s policy to build more public housing, cap rent increases, and to limit negative gearing and the capital gains tax discounts to one property.

Combined, these policies from across the parties are ensuring housing is very much a federal election main game.

Join the conversation

111
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

On a different front, I saw a report, from Michelle Grattan, that in an interview with The Australian, Dutton floated the idea of indexing income tax, to avoid the killer “bracket creep”.

Great idea. It’s a pity he has flagged it as something that will be looked at “after a Coalition government had the budget back in shape”. So basically not in any government Dutton may lead.

As Grattan further reported, a Coalition government under Malcolm Fraser did index income tax in 1976. However, it didn’t last long, as Fraser cut it back in 1979 and then scrapped it in 1982.

Sadly, “bracket creep” is a silent windfall for every government (irrespective of its flavour), that’s why we will probably be stuck with ‘after the fact’ adjustments to the income tax brackets every now and then.

Maybe after a couple of minority government parliaments, the cross bench may be in a position to push for a serious overhaul of the whole tax system. Now that would be aspirational reform.

A bit like his gas reservation policy (which Labor are already doing anyway), a Dutton promise that he knows will be done away with by the fossil fuel lobby’s Nats as the first order of business once they’ve sat on the government benches.

The cross bench – mainly the green teals – believe the rich should be smashed at every step. Despite the top 10% of taxpayers already paying 50% of income tax. In fact the top 1% already pay a record 19.6%.

If we want serious tax reform, let’s get all those who don’t pay any net tax – 50% of Australians – to start contributing.

https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/top-earners-and-companies-bear-record-tax-burden-20240617-p5jmg0

Good plan Penfold,
Let’s get rid of Negative Gearing, bring in a resource rent tax and increase the GST to reduce the tax burden on individual income taxes. That should be a good start.

HiddenDragon10:07 pm 14 Apr 25

Both major parties have reconfirmed that they want to see the cost of already ridiculously expensive housing continue to rise, in spite of (or more truthfully, because of) the debt-funded bribes offered yesterday – which means that those bribes are, to quote one of the Liberals’ campaign cliches, “Band-Aids on bullet wounds”.

Policies which produced gently falling (i.e. without threatening the stability of the banking system) or at least stable home prices for several years would be positive for equity between generations and socio-economic classes and would also help to re-balance the Australian economy away from its short-sighted, inward-looking focus on the property and related sectors.

A perusal of the register of politicians’ financial interests and reflection on the major sources of funding for political parties suggests that such policies are highly unlikely to be pursued or even considered – so the Australian property Ponzi scheme will lurch on, doing ever more damage, until it meets its inevitable fate. That will not be a happy time for the nation or for our political class.

None of them give two hoots about intergenerational equity, and frankly these policies as you outline are a kick in the butt for future generations coming through.

But as you say – the pollies well and truly have their fingers deep in the pie, their snouts in the trough.

GrumpyGrandpa5:21 pm 14 Apr 25

We go through the same rubbish every election cycle, both locally and Federally. Politicians from both sides committing to spend more of our money, to secure our votes.
Both fools have housing policies that will create demand and push up housing prices, making it even harder for our kids to buy a home.

Its Dumb & Dumber as the housing policies of both parties will only push up house prices.

Stupid selfish short-sighted politicians don’t care that these policies will increase prices of houses. We need more public and social housing, not higher prices housing and more debt for those who’ve purchased it.

Accessing super is a poor policy, resulting in people retiring with less money. Not just the loss of the amount they withdraw now, but the loss of compound interest.. whoever’s in power down the track, are they willing to pay for more full or part pensions? Super is meant for your retirement. So shortsighted.

Users of superannuation under this scheme at some stage have to pay that money back into their Super. So they lose a little in compound interest….big deal! They have a house because of the scheme and under the ALP they have NO house and are permanently a renter. Better the users money (& it is their money) gets them into the housing market at an earlier stage of life and gets their Super working for them. Whereas right now their Super money is controlled by the Unions. That’s the only reason the ALP are against the scheme as well.

That is all rubbish, Rob. If they could put the money back into Super later, why not into a house?

Both parties’ handouts on the demand side are a payout to house owners (not least many MPs) at the expense of hopeful buyers. The Libs one is worse because it further impoverishes the buyers beyond the effect of driving up house prices.

The bit about union control is kook-level.

It is dreadful policy. All it will do is add 50K to prices at the end of day. Another brain dead, demand enhancing, problem worsening policy. Both sides are a disgrace in this space – but fiddling with super is a dreadful idea for the fact it will also significantly impact on the ability of people to be well prepared to fund their retirements.

You can’t eat bricks after all.

Capital Retro10:04 pm 16 Apr 25

The Industry super funds were financially stressed when the Morrison government allowed super up tp $30K per contributor to be drawn down during the COVID crisis.
Labor are terrified of that happening again.

Got even the slightest shred of evidence to support that CR?

$36 billion was withdrawn during Covid in a total super system of $4trillion.

You think that remotely “finacially stressed” funds?

Although everyone should be worried about it happening again, it puts significantly higher strain on taxpayers who will be forced to fund higher welfare payments in the future.

@chewy14
Seriously? You are just another one of those in the CR-pile-on mob.

How dare you suggest that his comment has no supportive evidence. It has to be true, because, CR said so. LMAO

Capital Retro,
What exactly in that link makes you think there was a concern about the funds being “finacially stressed”?

Lack of immediate liquidity doesn’t say anything about funds viability.

Particularly when your own link specifically says they weren’t distressed:

“Sources across the industry said no fund was in danger of collapse, but if funds were forced to sell assets it would hurt returns for all members, not just the ones making a withdrawal.”

Or was this just another attempt for you to “pile on” with your anti Industry super rhetoric?

Denizkoy – the union control comment from Rob is hardly “kook-level”. Take Cbus for example, you’ve got Paddy Crumlin (CFMEU) on the board, he drove Maritime Super into the ground. And guess what – he’s on Cbus’ investment and risk committees !

For transparency, i’m a Cbus member.

Penfold, I addressed that line in the context of Rob’s entire post. His comment or claim is not rational.

Super Funds are highly regulated, and the average performance of industry super funds shows that they are sufficiently well managed.

@Penfold
Gee that’s really smart, Penfold. You obviously have concerns about the Cbus board and investment/risk committees, yet you leave your retirement investment funds with them!

Wow that’s next level financial masochism.

Luckily, JS, there’s some other very smart people on the Cbus board and committees and the returns over years have been solid.

Capital Retro9:25 am 18 Apr 25

Chewy, it’s no coincidence at that time that the sale of ME Bank to the Bank of Queensland (BOQ) did positively impact the liquidity of the Industry Funds (owners of ME Bank). The sale allowed the Industry Funds to receive a significant capital injection, freeing up funds for other strategic investments and objectives.
I don’t know if you can gat a handle on that statement “significant capital injection” but the spin they gave (objectives) confirmed there was a problem or two.
I was a customer of ME bank for a long time and I found them very professional and efficient to deal with. I only left them recently because they ceased offering business term deposits however their new owner, BOQ do so I will be dealing with them too.
While the Industry Funds made a mess of running their own bank the have been investing heavily in other banks since and currently have about 8% in bank shares.

@Penfold
So, you use a single employee, in a large superannuation institution, to echo Rob’s negativity, over the union control of industry super funds, yet you are happy to support your particular union controlled fund, because they give you solid returns.

Hmmm – I think that shows Denizkoy’s point, about the irrationality of concerns over union control of industry super funds, is well made.

Capital Retro,
ME Bank was sold for $1.3 billion.

The 26 Industry funds that owned it have assets under management north of a trillion dollars.

Once again, what on earth would make you think they were at risk of anything more than their members having to take a hit if the funds had to rebalance their books?

JS – Crumlin is a board member, not an employee. Unions and employer groups equally manage superfunds. Unions receive “rivers of gold” in terms of sponsorships, backroom deals, rights to supply and so on. Their influence is significant and Rob saying so can hardly be described as “kook level”.

Yes I can Penfold. After all, I did.

I remind you that Rob’s post needs to be read in its entirety. His conclusion is ridiculous, my description appropriate.

On Cbus itself, given the split of board members is 50:50 union and employer, why are you not railing against undue employer influence, or is that just uncontrolled prejudice? No employer has ever engaged in fraudulent activity nor demonstrated incompetence?

Why not just be happy with the competent directorship team you have? They seem to be doing a decent job. Perhaps a little tension rather than me-too on the board is helpful?

Capital Retro1:45 pm 18 Apr 25

I’m glad you a not my super fund manager, chewy.
When you withdraw money from your super fund the transaction must be cash and most super funds don’t hold much liquidity.
But you knew that, didn’t you?

@Penfold
I can only speak to my own super fund, AusSuper, which has a board of 14 members, of which 4 have current of former links to unions. Notably, Deputy Chair of the AusSuper Board is that well known ‘champion of unions and worker rights’ (not!), Innes Willox.

So, I’m pretty comfortable with under one third of the board being unionists – doesn’t seem like a significant influence to me.

JS – of the 14 Aussuper directors, 7 are union appointees, appointed by ACTU Super Shareholding Pty Ltd.

Why would you make such a false statement ?

https://www.australiansuper.com/about-us/our-people#meet-our-team

Capital Retro,
What are you on about now?

I havent recommended anything to you about super or suggested anything about good investment strategies, just provided you the facts.

You said the super funds were financially stressed. Ive provided you the evidence to show it was not remotely the case.

You brought up the ME bank sale as if it had some relevance, when it was a tiny proportion of the funds managed.

None of the funds were in danger of failure, your “point” simply makes no sense except to continue your illogical dislike of industry super funds.

@Penfold
Perhaps you should take off your right-biased glasses and put on your reading glasses, then you can actually read the facts, clearly visible in the very link you provided to my super fund’s board. I’m certainly familiar with the web page.

If you actually took the time to read about each director, you would find that 7 were appointed by ACTU Super Shareholding Pty Ltd and 10 were appointed by the Ai Group (Australian Industry Group).

Wait, that’s 17 directors – yet there are only 14 listed – how can that be? Oh, hang on, 3 of those directors were jointly appointed by ACTU Super Shareholding Pty Ltd and Ai Group – which just means they were acceptable to both the unions and industry. And if you had bothered to read the bios of the 3 joint appointees, you would find that none of them are currently affiliated with, nor have a history of affiliation with, unions.

So, no false statement on my part – just a jaundiced and partisan misreading of the facts on your part.

It’s pretty basic logic JS. People appointed by a union have obvious links to the union. Are you now arguing night is day ?

@Penfold
So following your logic, these directors have dissociative identity disorder, as they have links to both unions and industry. Are you arguing that the earth is both flat and round?

Penfold not understanding basic facts.

What a surprise.

JS – it sounds like you’ve finally come around to the realisation that being appointed by the union means they have links to the union. Good job. .

I can’t speak as to the state of mind of the directors. But i can speak to maths and logic. The Aussuper board actually has 11 people on it, not 17 or 14. And of those 11, 6 have links to the unions. Perhaps you’d like to reread the board structure.

You might even want to update chewy on basic facts, though i suspect there’s little point.

Thank you for your irrelevance, Capital Retro.

Penfold,
Using your own logic, 7 of the 11 board members were appointed by an employer group.

Hardly union controlled then is it?

You and basic facts aren’t really well acquainted, so it’s hardly surprising.

@Penfold
Yes, you are correct, there are 11 members of the Board of Directors. The other 3 are members of the Investment Committee.

Perhaps you’d like to take you own advice and “reread the board structure”, because, if you were to do so and could comprehend what you read, you would find, that of those members of the Board of Directors:
– Dr Don Russell and Philippa Kelly were both appointed as an “Independent Director” (2)
– Innes Willox, Gabrielle Coyne, John Dixon, Claire Keating and Janice van Reyk were all appointed as an “Employer Director” (5)
– Michele O’Neil, Jo-anne Schofield, Glenn Thompson and Misha Zelinsky were all appointed as a “Member Director”

Hopefully you can understand that an “Employer Director” represents employers and a “Member Director” represents unions – which means 4 members are affiliated with the unions.

Now I know for a rusted-on disciple of the conservatives, the concept of an “Independent Director” would be foreign to you, but it actually means they have no affiliation – and certainly not with unions.

No matter how you try to spin it, only 4 of the 11 members of the Board of Directors have union affiliation.

So, unless you can produce actual evidence, rather than your jaundiced opinion, that any of the five “Employer Directors” or two two “Independent Directors” are affiliated with unions, you might want to quit because, without facts, there’s no path for you, except to look even more foolish.

Looks like both parties are throwing money around willy nilly at the demand side of housing. But Albo’s problem is his track record.

Miles behind his promised 1.2 million new houses, 40% higher building costs under his watch and refuses to let tradies come to Australia to help with the housing shortage.

It’s hard to believe a word he says.

Bit like your posts then Penfold, which have been shown time and time again to be evidence free zones. Egregious is your middle name.

The intellectual depth and rigour was the highlight of your post JS9.

@Penfold
“It’s hard to believe a word he says.”
… and of course you believe every word Dutton says, because he tells you what you want to hear.

Dutton doesn’t have a track record of lying JS. Albanese does.

$275 energy bills, stage 3 tax cuts, no cuts to superannuation, not falling off a stage, mediscare, uniting Australians, it just doesn’t stop.

@Penfold
“Dutton doesn’t have a track record of lying”
Really? This 2023 article from Crikey (https://www.crikey.com.au/2023/09/25/peter-dutton-believes-his-own-untruths/) has the quite a chronicle of untruths.

He also got caught out in Feb this year by Amnesty International (https://www.amnesty.org.au/duttons-lie-on-fast-tracked-citizenship-for-palestinians-recklessly-irresponsible/)

So, perhaps neither Albo nor Dutts can be trusted to tell the truth?

Crikey and the Guardian …. are there any references from believable news outlets ?

As for Amnesty, the Palestinians were “fast tracked” and barely had any security checks. I wouldn’t believe a word out of them or the UN on Gaza. Both are Anti-semitic.

@Penfold
Yes, as expected, you can’t dispute the content therefore you denigrate the delivery medium.

Perhaps this excerpt (https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/dutton-wrongly-says-labor-is-fast-tracking-citizenship-for-gazans-to-win-votes-20250220-p5ldv2.html) from the SMH, generally seen to be a centrist news outlet, calling out Dutton’s “lie” and this fact check (https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck/false-claims-swirl-over-aussie-citizenships-from-gaza/) from AAP, which disproves in general fast tracking of Palestinians to citizenship, will satisfy you.

If these don’t suffice, unfortunately I can’t help you, as I don’t have a Telegram account, which is obviously your preferred source of news.

Well JS the stats are far more illustratory than left leaning media’s take on things. We let in almost 3,000 refugees in the time the USA let in 17 and the UK 68. Many didn’t even have identity documents. If that’s not fast tracking, what is ?

Penfold should once again take advice off this other poster:

Penfold 29th March:
“when you choose to attack the journalist and not the substance of the issue then the white flag has come out.”

Didn’t attack the journalist chewy, attacked the journal.

Btw what’s Telegram ?

@Penfold
What stats? Do you actually read your comments before posting or do you hope to get away, unchallenged, with nonsense.

I have not denied that Palestinians, wanting to escape the horrors of Gaza, were given visas to come to Australia. The issue is that Dutton stated in a Sky News forum, that these Palestinians were fast-tracked to citizenship – I imagine the inference being, so they could vote Labor at the election. A piece of factual misinformation (or to call it what it is: “a lie”) that has been refuted in the many articles to which I, and JS9, have provided links.

So unless you can prove that Dutton didn’t lie in stating that these Palestinians were fast tracked to citizenship – you know some kind of factual evidence to refute the articles, thyen it’s settled that neither Albo or Dutts can be trusted or to follow on from the concept pioneered by one J.W. Howard … core and non-core promises.

“Didn’t attack the journalist chewy, attacked the journal.”

So glad you’ve admitted to putting up the white flag, when you can’t address the substance of the issue.

Please do tell how the UN is Anti-semitic?

By wanting Israel to not blow the utter s*** out of Gaza?

The drivel knows no end with you.

JS9 – from 2015 to 2023 the UN adopted 154 resolutions against Israel and 71 against the rest of world countries. Can’t get any more anti-semitic than that. Go to unwatch.org.

White flags, games over. Geez chewy you blokes can’t accept anything that falls outside narrow world views. Look how JS9 just made a fool of himself by calling simple facts “drivel”.

Penfold,
Your hypocrisy is just hilarious in your inability to form the most basic logical argument.

Even when the facts are handed to you on a platter you can’t accept anything outside of your paper thin ideology.

Even above youve somehow attempted to claim resolutions against Israel are somehow inherently anti Semitic. You can’t even understand the basic logic as to why those two things aren’t the same.

Too funny.

Ahh chewy, the comedian once more. In your posts in this thread you’ve just blurted a few things but haven’t addressed any of the issues raised about housing. You seem to just enjoy arguing about arguing ! 🤣

@Penfold
I’m still waiting for you to show that Dutton didn’t lie about Palestinians being fast tracked to citizenship … You know something more than because the reports were detailed in journals you attacked.

Well don’t look now chewy but you just attempted to mount and argument. The answer is simple, no lie. Tony Burke’s own words “speeding up”.

And notably they’ve sped up so much they’ve missed doing character checks properly, having o revoke one visa. Everyone is “going through ASIO checks”, which means they weren’t completed when onshore. That’s what you call fast tracked.

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/800-palestinians-in-australia-granted-more-rights-after-visa-move/3iewi6vw2

Don’t believe any leftist sources on anything to do with refugees.

@Penfold
Yes … as I have agreed earlier, there were Palestinians who were given visas, but visas are not citizenship and no visa holder has a right to vote.

Check out this video, which has an excerpt from the Sky News summit, in which (at the 49 second mark) Dutton asks: “… why would you expressly push people through the process to receive citizenship in advance of an election which is pending”. This is a bold faced lie – as nobody has ever been fast tracked through the citizenship process.

I suppose you think 10 News is a leftist source, so you won’t watch the whole video. However, if you could get over your jaundiced ideological views and fast forward to the 1m:16s mark, a former Immigration Dept Deputy Secretary completely refuting Dutton’s claim.

So again, I ask. What evidence can you provide to show that Dutton didn’t lie about Palestinians being fast tracked to citizenship?

Penfold,
I don’t need to argue on this thread to show your position has no merit, you’ve done enough of that yourself with every comment.

You’ve now linked an SBS article that doesn’t remotely say what you’re claiming and actually provides the evidence against your position.

You know a visa isn’t citizenship right?

If shooting yourself in the foot was an Olympic sport, you’d be a multiple gold medal winner.

@Penfold
Apologies – I neglected to provide the link to the video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJsNbbd4o1s

Well JS i’ve provided you ample evidence. So the question is what evidence can you provide to show that Dutton did lie ? Btw your quote (without link) is a question Dutton asked. Questions aren’t lies. They’re questions.

As a suggestion, start with the pub test.

Multiple Gold Medal Winner, thank you !

chewy i’m guessing you weren’t on the school debating squad. Start dealing with issues, not sledging. It’s far more fun and you don’t show yourself to be a fool.

@Penfold
Other than irrelevant remarks about visas, you’ve provided nothing. Perhaps look up the definitions of “visa” and “citizenship” then you may learn which of the recipients gets to vote.

Now that I have corrected my oversight and provided the video link you can validate exactly what Dutton has said … and it’s a rhetorical question, suggesting to the interviewer that Palestinians were being fast tracked to citizenship – a lie. It would be a lie in any pub in Australia, irrespective of your feeble attempts to avoid that reality.

“Start dealing with issues, not sledging. It’s far more fun and you don’t show yourself to be a fool.”

The king of irony at it again.

I would suggest being consistently wrong makes you look significantly more foolish and its not “sledging” to point out your factual errors.

A Visa does not equal citizenship, no matter how much you want to ignore reality in your narrow, partisan world view.

JS – there were several Palestinian groups fast tracked into the country and fast tracked into citizenship. Burke and the government have made Australia more dangerous as a result.

That one person was later put into detention means quite obviously that the proper checks (there’s 2 main ones) weren’t initially done. Clearly you’re convinced Dutton lied – I’d be far more concerned about the daily lies the Prime Minister tells.

Capital Retro8:42 am 17 Apr 25

What’s the latest with the remaining hostages, JS9?

@Penfold
There is no evidence Palestinians have been “fast tracked” into citizenship. Even the link to the SBS report you provided mentions VISAS not CITIZENSHIP. You still don’t know the differnce!

As I have stated many times, refugees from Gaza were given expedited (“fast tracked” if you will) visas to escape the horror of the conflict – just as many flavours of Australian government have expedited visas for victims of conflicts in the past.

You salivate like one of Pavlov’s dogs, over Dutton lie about Palestinian “fast tracked” citizenship, even though Dutton has ceased to repeat that claim, because it’s the type of narrative that you want to hear.

Unless you can provide actual evidence that Palestinians were fast tracked to citizenship, then I suggest you admit your … what does Dutton call his lies on which he gets caught out? Oh yes “a mistake” … admit your “mistake” and move on.

Well JS in your haste to claim “gotcha” you seem to have forgotten that the first step to gaining citizenship is a permanent residency visa.

Clearly nothing will refrain you from shrilling “Dutton lied”, it’s a shame you don’t hold the government to the same standard. Different rules hey. When a person falls off a stage and declares they didn’t fall off a stage the state of the truth in politics is in a swamp.

How does that affect housing policies in the Australian election, Capital Retro?

About as much as fast tracked Palestinians it would seem Denizkoy.

Capital Retro11:05 am 17 Apr 25

I am assuming you are referring to my comment about the plight of the hostages in Gaza?
That was a comment directed at JS9 who said: “By wanting Israel to not blow the utter s*** out of Gaza?”
Nothing to do with the housing debate but if someone makes an off topic comment I am entitled to make a comment referring to that.
Don’t they teach comprehension on skools these days?

@Penfold
Oh dear, you really don’t understand that you need for facts to support an argument, do you Penfold?

Yes, the path to Australian citizenship is via permanent residence.

Three issues with your intransigent stance (or calling it what it is really – perpetuating Dutton’s lie) that the Palestinian refugees from Gaza were fast tracked to citizenship “in advance of an election which is pending”:
1. One of the prime (and still current) criteria for permanent resident migrants to apply for citizenship, is that they have to resided in Australia for a minimum of 4 years;
2. According to the latest ABS figures I could find, 59% of permanent migrants, who arrived in Australia between Jan 2001 and August 10, 2021, became Australian citizens – i.e. attained eligibility to vote, which is Dutton’s concern; and
3. Many Palestinian and Israeli nationals have been offered temporary humanitarian visas in Australia since October 2024. However, while the temporary visa provides those fleeing the conflict with additional rights, the Home Affairs department warned individuals, it precludes them from also applying for a permanent protection visa.
So, even if the Palestinian nationals had been ‘fast tracked’ to getting temporary humanitarian visas, in the same vein as Ukranian refugees, fleeing the Russian invasion, the facts prove, there is absolutely no way the Palestinian refugees from Gaza, have been fast tracked to citizenship at all, let alone in time to vote at the election.

I’m not shrilling anything – I am just presenting facts. Something, you have been unable to do since you started to defend Dutton’s dog whistling.

Oh and seriously, you are now accusing me of not holding the the government to the same standard? Is your argument that weak, that you have to lie on that too? Check out my response to you above – 6:23 pm on 14 Apr 25, and I quote: “So, perhaps neither Albo nor Dutts can be trusted to tell the truth?”

So, no effect from fantasies. Thanks.

Wonderful copy and pasting JS. As CR suggests, perhaps it’s more applicable in an article about the Gaza conflict.

Btw thanks for quoting my presented fact in your second sentence.😆

LOL,
First it was “they’ve been fast tracked to citizenship.”

Now it’s “the first step in getting citizenship is a permanent resident visa.”

A visa that none of the people from Gaza have been given.

Different rules hey. LOL

Except CR did not remotely suggest that, Penfold, I did, referring back to the topic of the article. Capital Retro appears to believe that people learn on skools rather than in schools, which may explain quite a bit.

I wonder at people who present “water is wet” as a fact relevant to the price of fish while thrilling themselves with the irrelevance of denying lies obvious to most of the population.

Denizkoy, looks like that one went strate threw to the keepa.

@Penfold
I agree that Dutton’s lie – which you have continuously perpetuated, is related to the Gaza conflict. Yet you continue to deny the lie – even stating further lies to justify it.

I’m happy to accept that you and Dutts lied and move on.

Capital Retro3:24 pm 17 Apr 25

Your doing well as the latest apprentice on the CR/Penfold pile-on team, Denizkoy.

No, Penfold, I recognise triteness when it appears.

Are you a victim, Capital Retro? How?

No-one has sensibly disputed the economic critiques of the two policies.

@Capital Retro
“the CR/Penfold pile-on team”
Yes indeed, CR, the cohort of RiotACT posters, who choose to challenge your regularly occurring inane and/or factually incorrect posts, is growing.

Well Denizkoy, glad you can recognise triteness. Perhaps you can now progress to recognising satire.

JS – your favourite line seems to be “show me the evidence”. The problem is when presented with the evidence you refute it with inane nothingness.

@Penfold
The only thing which outweighs your lack of ability to provide evidence, is your self delusion as to your ability to prosecute an argument.

You can’t even recognise the difference between a visa and citizenship, as I and others have frequently stated. So any further discussion on the subject, is fruitless – you have nothing relevant or cogent to contribute.

JS looks like you weren’t able to read my posts which discussed both visas and citizenship. Though i’m having a quiet chuckle that on a article about housing you’re banging on about abilities to prosecute arguments.

@Penfold
Actually, Penfold, you brought up the matter with your sycophantic “Dutton doesn’t have a track record of lying JS. Albanese does.” I, and others, have just provided evidence and example, to show you are, at best, misguided but increasingly demonstrating you are just a coalition shill.

Politicians lie … it’s in their DNA. The challenge, for each electors is to decide which of those lies really matters.

I’m done trying to present a logical position to you, as your ideological intransigence makes it a futile endeavour.

JS – yes it’s true politicians lie, but your whole example here is rather naive. Tony Burke amazing ran a whole bunch of citizenship ceremonies, including in his Western Sydney electorate, less than three months before an election and just weeks before the electoral rolls closed. He personally attended many himself, upsetting the local mayors. And you claim that Dutton suggesting he was fast tracking ceremonies was a lie.

Well i hate to break it to you JS but Burke – the bloke who charged taxpayers for his family trip to Ayers Rock some years back – is not above finding ways to take political advantage. To be frank i’d be arguing it’s up to Burke – and now yourself by extension – to prove Dutton did lie. Which you most certainly haven’t done.

Penfolds position is so convoluted, we could solve the world’s energy needs with his spinning.

First it was fastracked Gazan citizenships, then it was visas they don’t have, now its citizenship ceremonies for completely different groups of people.

Although one thing is clear, we should probably defer to Penfold’s knowledge of lying, he seems to be an expert in the subject.

chewy – at one stage in this thread you almost mounted an argument. For the rest of it you’ve just sledged. Let me provide some advice young chap, every time the word “you” is used, it’s attacking the poster and not the argument or issue. Is the 14 a reference to age, or perhaps birth year ?

Penfold,
Pointing out the errors and inconsistencies in your comments isn’t “sledging”.

And sorry, I don’t take advice off people who are unable to provide any form of coherent or consistent position.

Particularly not those whose grasp on understanding facts is so loose.

And no, 14 is just a reference to the amount of times I have to correct you on each thread. Obviously I need to update it to a number much higher.

@Penfold
PMSL at your ridiculous hypocrisy. You – yes, I’m “attacking you” – have used the term repeatedly in your previous posts … so take your own advice, because your posts have been bereft of anything approaching a rational argument which can be “attacked”. Instead you introduce straw man arguments – as in of what relevance to Palestinian refugees being “fast tracked” to citizenship, is Burke’s trip to Ayers Rock. It’s about as relevant to this discussion, as Peter Dutton billing taxpayers for flights to Sydney on the days of three NRL grand finals, a rugby tournament and a Matildas World Cup game.

When you are faltering, you try to divert attention from your lack of any argument – as in your latest post to me, where you have introduced recent citizenship ceremonies conducted by the minister.

Well OK, I’ll make it easy for you to prove Burke has tainted the citizenship process for political purposes. Just answer, what will obviously be for you, a simple question, as you have all the facts and supporting evidence.

Of those migrants, who participated in these “fast tracked” citizen ceremonies – how many Palestininian refugees from Gaza, who were granted humanitarian visas after October 2024, received citizenship at any of these ceremonies?

Well JS in the world some of us occupy a person’s history is an indicator of character. Burke’s character is central to his motivations.

Despite your comment above to the contrary, you introduced the fast tracking to the discussion (6:23 14/4) as an example of Dutton “lying”. So like i said, the burden of proof sits with your good self to prove that he did. Otherwise you’re just slinging mud.

@Penfold
You are certainly right about Burke’s character being ‘central to his motivations’. With regard to that Uluru trip, as cited in this AFR article (https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/labor-s-burke-repays-uluru-flights-for-family-20201210-p56m9a), which was not a breach of the rules, “after further reflection he decided the costs associated with his family’s travel did not meet community expectations”. So Burke repaid $8,656.48 (of the $12,000) for the four family traveller airfares. I’m sure you would agree that a politician who, while not breaking any rules, reflects on community expectations (as per your previously mentioned ‘pub test’ measure), and acts accordingly, shows good character.

Indeed, I did introduce Dutton’s accusation that Labor ‘was expressly pushing people through the process to receive citizenship in advance of an election which is pending’ as an example that he lied. This assertion, at a Sky news hosted event, was allowed to go unchallenged by the conservative-friendly political commentator, but it was not ignored by many other (admittedly not conservative-friendly) media outlets who questioned the validity of the statement.

So, Dutton was called out on his comment, with it being labelled a “lie” in some publications, while others used the less inflammatory, but equally damaging “falsely claims”. So, as the source of this unfounded claim, it is on Dutton to back up his “concerns that the Albanese government is fast-tracking citizenship” with facts – which to date he has failed to do. That’s exactly where the burden of proof lies (pardon the pun).

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Region Canberra stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.