Peter Dutton has a nasty habit he just can’t break: attempting to stir public resentment towards — and let’s not mince words — dark-skinned immigrants, actual or potential. It’s his go-to comfort zone. African gangs; the Fraser government’s Lebanese intake; all those refugees who either take Australians’ jobs, he warns, or languish on the dole.
Casting further (and this one suggests he spends too much time in the far-right reaches of social media, where it’s a cause célèbre) he’s been down the rabbit hole where white South African farmers “need help from a civilised country like ours” and would be “the sorts of migrants that we want to bring into our country.” Julie Bishop had to clean up that mess.
This all happened when he was a government minister. Since becoming opposition leader in 2022 he’s made the threat of asylum seekers a regular component of his repertoire, regardless of any particular political logic. And the latest version, of course, is people fleeing Gaza, none of whom should be allowed into Australia.
This brand of politics goes down a treat in a section of the party room and the wider conservative movement, and Dutton might not have become Liberal leader without it. Scott Morrison also rode to the top employing inflammatory rhetoric in the immigration portfolio but, always a wilier individual, he shifted his presentation towards the centre once he got there. It’s worth noting that in both cases the path to the pinnacle was strictly an internal matter; there was little public desire for either man to become leader.
The inevitable, interminable “Dutton is racist!” “No, you’re out of touch!” back-and-forth misses the point. Most of us have elements of such prejudices lurking inside; if nothing else they’re the remnants of early socialisation. Human beings with a degree of self-awareness attempt to transcend harmful thought patterns. It’s part of the process of growing up.
Some politicians consciously try to capitalise on these sentiments and some consciously don’t, and Dutton resides firmly, more than any of his senior major-party contemporaries, in the former group.
For twenty-three years it’s been an article of faith among political participants and observers that this is powerful politics in Australia, capable of swaying election results. But I have long been sceptical. Of course, race-based messages have a visceral appeal for some people, and a subtle effect on many more. But like that other supposed Coalition trump card, opposition to action on climate change, it’s a two-edged sword. At some level voters know they’re being played. And they know it’s not dignified behaviour.
Ask John Howard. No, not the 2001 Tampa–“children overboard” version, but the 1988 one, whose proposal to limit Asian immigration was approved by 77 per cent in a Newspoll but didn’t improve his standing in the opinion polls, and indeed contributed to his removal as opposition leader the following year.
Five years later a rejigged Howard felt the need to half-heartedly apologise to the Asian community. It’s true that later again, in the second half of his prime ministership, he delighted in this politics of division, but you can get away with more as incumbent than aspirant. And if you’re in office for a long time — a roaring economy with historically low interest rates can do that for a government — everything you do comes to be seen as the secret to your success. Perceptions from that time pollute our politics to this day.
Over the last decade, “immigration” has grown as an election issue around the world. If Kamala Harris fails against the easybeat Donald Trump in November it will be largely due to the southern border. But the per-capita “illegal immigration” numbers in America (in 2023) are roughly ten times what ours were at their peak (in 2013); and ours are close to zero today. Comparisons with Europe are similarly one-sided.
The refugees from Gaza Dutton is talking about aren’t “illegal” anyway. But it’s really all about the vibe.
This first-term Labor government, with an election due within nine months, is already looking shopworn. Anthony Albanese’s pragmatic, slow-and-steady, erring-on-the-side-of-caution strategy was supposed to facilitate a long time in office, but it’s not looking so great. I’m a believer in investing political capital to do unpopular things which, after being bedded down, generate more capital when voters give you credit for making them eat their greens. This often involves breaking election promises. But it’s too late to do that now.
Dutton’s apeing of Trump excites the crazies in the Coalition base, and as with climate change they’ve convinced themselves it’s great politics. But to voters looking for solutions to their cost-of-living problems it’s just off-topic. And it obviously doesn’t help Dutton in “teal” seats.
So bring on the analyses of Dutton’s political craftiness, his crude but effective manoeuvres. Prepare also for the puff pieces quoting family and neighbours attesting that Peter is misunderstood, he doesn’t really enjoy inflicting distress on the powerless. But he has no one but himself to blame for perceptions that he carries a lot of hate.
Peter’s neurotic vice damages not just the nation but also himself. Electorally, it’s a road to nowhere. •
