Looking forward, looking back | Between the Lines
The Wrap with Amy Remeikis
In October 1980, before almost half the people voting in this election were born, Ronald Reagan posed what became one of the defining questions of modern politics.
Are you better off today than you were four years ago?
Reagan would go on to beat Carter and along with Margaret Thatcher, usher in the neo-liberal era to western democracies.
It’s been a standard in campaigns ever since.
Peter Dutton has revived it for the 2025 Australian campaign, asking voters to think about if they are better off now, than they were three years ago. He has been deploying it with increasing frequency (with four references in the most recent leaders debate alone) confident that the retrospection will fall his way, because the rear vision mirror is always a safer bet for a politician than the windscreen.
But it’s the wrong question. It always has been. In this current context, the question is asking you what? Are you better off now than you were before a global pandemic rocked your entire foundation? Are you better off than before you survived the global inflation crisis that followed that pandemic? Are you better off than before you watched Israel carry out a genocide against the Palestinian people while your leaders pretend it’s not only not happening, but they have no role to play in it?
Are you better off than before Donald Trump was elected? Were you better off before you saw the worsening impacts of climate change continue to devastate communities and the planet?
Why not take it further? Why limit it to just one parliamentary term? Are you better off now, or before you had consciousness? Would you be better off if you could go back to the 90s, when the average home price only grew 0.3% above household incomes and instead of being born, or going to school, or even just existing as cells, you bought a house?
Is Australia better off now, or before when it had a focus on trying to raise people out of poverty and the Hawke government raised welfare payments to try and achieve that goal? Are you better off now as a worker, or before, when unions had power, before the ultimately successful 30-year neo-liberal campaign to destroy union’s collective bargaining power and usher in the era of employer dominance? Are you better off having eaten the 20 mini easter eggs, or before you found the stash? Were you better off before, or after you discovered why the chainsaw was invented (don’t do it if you don’t know, I beg you).
Looking backwards, it’s easy to just focus on how maybe things were better. There are all sorts of reasons the past seems more rosy, one of which is because favourable events may take fewer neural connections to store, and therefore make up more of our long term memory.
Looking forward? That’s tricky. It’s murky. Unclear. Things could go anyway. To look forward positively is to have faith in yourself, and others, to get through unknown terrain. Are you better off now than you could be in three years? No one can answer that. It could be worse. This could be as good as it gets.
In which case, in three years time, you’ll be asked to reflect on this period, the right now, the very same present moment you’re being asked to judge negatively when compared to the supposed sunshine and lollipop era of 2022 and decide THIS was actually the utopia.
It’s the wrong question. It always has been.
The question isn’t are you better off now than you were three years ago, before world events conspired to bring about a downturn that led to the rise of far-right populists across western democracies, mask off authoritarian cheerleading and indifference to the genocidal impulses of nation states.
The question is who do you want making the decisions in the world we are about to face.
Because the world is only getting more messed up. Trump, to the surprise of absolutely no one, except those who believed the sanewashing of ‘take Trump seriously, not literally’ is literally doing exactly what he said he would. He’s gleefully swiped the chess pieces off the board and called it winning, not noticing the game has already moved on without him. New alliances are forming in this shifting world, and voters need to think through who they want navigating it.
That’s not just a question about a prime minister. It’s one for the parliament as a whole.
It suits Dutton and the Coalition to have voters looking backward. So far, their policy platform has offered nothing for Australia beyond big dumb utes and tax breaks for those already wealthy enough to get into the housing market. Like Harry Dutton and his siblings.
Anthony Albanese and Labor haven’t offered much better, hoping voters will settle for the tinkering of existing policies with the promise that if things go right it’ll get better.
Australia doesn’t need anymore regressive tendencies. Looking back has held the country back but there’s not enough rosy reflections in the world to restrain the uncertainty of what’s coming.
Dutton is asking Australians to compare the now to a world that no longer exists. Albanese is trying to paint a picture of a future that pretends nothing has fundamentally changed in the now.
‘Let’s make America great again’ Reagan supporters cheered in 1980, setting the United States onto the path that ultimately led to Trump and MAGA. Australia isn’t going to define who it is by looking back. It can only do that by looking forward, with clear eyes.
Who ends up in the drivers’ seat should be judged on the ability to guide the nation through the tumultuous world we’re facing, not the world we’re leaving.
We’re glad to be on this journey with you and thankful you’ll be helping make the decisions that set us on our next path.
Stay safe out there and please – take care of you. Amy x
— Amy Remeikis is the Chief Political Analyst at the Australia Institute
The Big Stories
Richard Denniss on ABC’s Q+A
There have been some glaring holes in the political debate leading up to the election – like how to raise more revenue so we can have world-class services and a dignified welfare system that a country as rich as Australia ought to have.
Our Executive Director Richard Denniss joined ABC’s Q+A, hearing questions from a young teacher struggling to save up to by a house, a small business owner worried about Government spending too much, and a pensioner struggling with ever-increasing bills and income support that is lagging behind. He provided some simple solutions to all three quandaries: simply tax the big business that can afford to pay it.
“Norway, which is also a big fossil fuel exporter, they tax their fossil fuel industry and give their kids free university education…In Australia, we subsidise the fossil fuel industry.”
“When we elect people – when they form budgets – they’re the big choices we get to make. We’re choosing to be poor. We’re choosing to have expensive childcare. Expensive health. Expensive education. Other countries, they tax the fossil fuel industry.”
How the housing policies from the major parties weigh up
The housing crisis continues to grip Australia and it’s a central part of this election campaign. Unfortunately, while both major parties have made housing policies key parts of their election platforms their policies mostly tinker around the edges and both fail in four key ways.
However, it’s not all bad. “We welcome the government’s plan to build 100,000 homes,” said Matt Grudnoff, Senior Economist at The Australia Institute.
“The Australia Institute has long argued the best way for the government to improve housing affordability is to build and own more homes for people to live in – much as it does for Defence Housing Australia. This plan is not radical and should become standard for all governments.”
Raising the minimum wage still doesn’t cause inflation
A fair and appropriate increase to the minimum wage, and accompanying increases to award rates, would not have a significant effect on inflation, analysis from the Centre for Future Work has shown.
“This analysis shows there is no credible economic reason to deny them a decent pay raise above inflation,” said Greg Jericho, Chief Economist at The Australia Institute’s Centre for Future Work.
“It’s vital the Fair Work Commission ensure that the minimum wage not only keeps up with inflation but also returns the value to the real trend of before the pandemic.”
Sickening salmon revelations hit the airwaves
Last week the salmon industry in Tasmania has conceded – following ongoing mass deaths on the state’s east coast – salmon from diseased commercial pens are being sold for human consumption.
This is the same industry that our Government, with the Coalition’s support, gutted our environment laws to protect.
The same industry that is run by multinational companies that haven’t paid any tax in Australia since 2019.
To help inform the public, we launched a new TV ad featuring Richard Flanagan.
Weakening environmental laws doesn’t help the Australian community or the Australian economy. It simply boosts the profits of salmon corporations, coal companies and other corporate interests.
You can help by sharing this video on Facebook, Instagram, or Bluesky.
We’re hiring: Communications and Events Specialist
Would you like to use your marketing and communications skills to help shape national conversations and create real change? Be part of an organisation that punches above its weight in shaping national conversations? Work alongside a smart, passionate, and collaborative team that values integrity and creativity?
If the answer is yes, you can find more information in the position description.
If you have any questions, please email recruitment@australiainstitute.org.au and we will get back to you.
Applications close on Sunday 4 May 2025. We look forward to hearing from you.
The Win
Peter Dutton has a good idea
The Coalition’s plan to impose a levy on gas companies which prioritise exports over Australian businesses and households marks a turning point for energy policy in Australia.
“Australians have been told for a decade that we had a shortage of gas, but now even Peter Dutton is saying Australia has an abundance of gas and that all we need to do is to tax gas exports to ensure our gas flows first to Australian businesses and households. This is a big shift,” said Dr Richard Denniss.
Moreover, Dutton’s insistence that Australia does not have a shortage of gas and that the Coalition is “not here to line the pockets of big gas companies” is a big hit with voters, particularly conservative voters, according to new polling released by The Australia Institute.
The Bin
Peter Dutton ‘doesn’t know’ if climate change is occurring
“I don’t know…I’m not a scientist,” was Petter Dutton’s response after David Speers asked him whether climate change was happening, during the Leader’s debate on the ABC.
The Quote
“If you take a good hard look at Ute Man, you discover that he’s not a real person at all. He’s two car salesmen and a tax accountant in a Driza-Bone, and I’m about to explain why.”
– Annabel Crabb in Ute Man is the Coalition’s favourite political figurine but he’s a fraught mascot
Our politicians love to talk about utes. But the increase in huge cars on our roads has come with serious consequences.
Our research shows there are more utes than tradies on Australian roads (3.1 million vs 1.9 million). Why? Scott Morrison’s tax concessions that subsidise utes if you have an ABN, regardless of whether you work with lumber or a laptop.
Podcasts
The cruel housing hoax | Follow the Money
Amy Remeikis and Bill Browne join guest host Stephen Long to discuss housing policy, the Australian electoral system, and the need for truth in political advertising laws.
Listen now:
Golfing while Rome burns | After America
Daniel James, award-winning journalist and host of the 7am podcast, joins Dr Emma Shortis to discuss the potential blowback against Trump’s tariffs at the midterms and whether the next federal government might introduce a little more transparency into Australia’s foreign and defence policy-making processes.
Listen now:
Actually though, what the hell is going on in the economy? | Dollars & Sense
Greg and Elinor discuss Trump’s tariff turmoil, the dodgy numbers doing the rounds in the election campaign, and the Coalition’s big fund boondoggle.
Listen now:
What’s On
FREMANTLE: Burned by Big Fossil Fuels | 6:30-7:30pm AWST, Monday April 28
From extreme weather to soaring bills, fossil fuels are burning you twice.
Richard Denniss breaks down the issues, solutions, and what can be done about it.
WEBINAR: Australia’s Biggest Book Club: Losing it with Jess Hill | 11-12pm AEST, Wednesday April 30
Join journalist and author Jess Hill to discuss her new essay, Losing it: Can we stop violence against women and children?
CANBERRA: Politics in the Pub: What Just Happened…Federal Election Review | 6:30 pm AEST, Wednesday May 7
Join us for an in depth discussion by an incredible Australia Institute panel who will provide their expertise, perspective and insight on what just happened, how we got here and where we are going.
Climate Academy: Trump and the Climate Debate | 11am AEST, Tuesday April 22
Since becoming US President, Donald Trump has abandoned both the Paris Agreement and the COP process. Join the Institute’s International & Security Affairs Director, Emma Shortis, and Strategy Director Leanne Minshull, who will discuss the impact on the Australian election and our approach to climate, and what it means for climate policies around the world.
Policy School – Democracy Agenda | 11am AEST, Thursday April 24
An election campaign and a new Parliament present an opportunity for democratic reform: to make Australian elections fairer, Parliament work better and government more open and transparent.
Between the Lines Newsletter
The biggest stories and the best analysis from the team at the Australia Institute, delivered to your inbox every fortnight.