Peter Dutton labels Anthony Albanese a ‘failed PM’ as political fight over Jim Chalmers’ speech gets bitter

Peter Dutton has lashed out at Anthony Albanese, labelling him a failed PM, as the war of words between the two major parties continued after Treasurer Jim Chalmers stoked the flames, labelling the Opposition Leader “divisive” and “dangerous”.

Mr Dutton hit back on Tuesday, arguing if the economy was running as well as the Government claimed, the Treasurer should not have to spend time on political attacks.

“When you have a look at the Labor Party at the moment, you’ve got Tony Burke saying, ‘Look at me’. You’ve got Bill Shorten saying, ‘Look at me’. We’ve now got Jim Chalmers saying, ‘Look at me’,” he said.

“People know that Anthony Albanese is a failed Prime Minister … and now we’ve got the alternate prime ministers in the Labor Party ranks who are positioning themselves if there is a change of leadership in Labor.”

Mr Dutton accused Labor’s ministers of focusing on themselves, “which is exactly what we saw in the Rudd-Gillard years”.

The political debate became mired in highly personal attacks after Dr Chalmers used a speech to a Labor-aligned think tank on Monday to label the Opposition Leader the most divisive figure in modern politics.

“He divides deliberately, almost pathologically. This is worse than disappointing, it is dangerous. His divisiveness should be disqualifying,” Dr Chalmers said, in a sharpening of the Government’s attacks on Mr Dutton.

The name calling comes as a string of polls shows the standing of the Prime Minister and his government more generally continues to slide.

With the prospect of an election looming, both parties are aiming to control the shape of the contest.

Some within Labor see the attention on the polarising nature of US presidential contender Donald Trump as a chance to focus voters’ minds in Australia and paint Mr Dutton with a similar brush.

Mr Albanese backed in his Treasurer, accusing Mr Dutton of never having a positive or constructive answer on anything.

“He’s yet to announce a single fully costed policy. This compares with what I did as (opposition) leader, we had policies that were costed — about energy policy, about health policy, we had the child care policy as well,” he said.

“Peter Dutton just constantly is looking for the negative — and you can’t run an economy, you can’t actually take Australia forward by just being someone who’s opposed to everything and is constantly negative and relying upon fear campaigns.”

Deputy Liberal leader Sussan Ley returned the personal attacks, saying Dr Chalmers was merely “trying to talk tough” to his colleagues.

“Divisive is to unleash the voice, spend $500 million and then say that if you vote no, you’re a bad person - that’s divisive,” she told Sky News on Tuesday.

“I feel a bit sorry for Jim Chalmers, he spent his whole life planning and plotting in Labor’s factional queue, only to come up with this sort of stuff.

“He’s got a PhD in politics, not economics and that’s on full display.”

Dr Chalmers also attacked the Opposition’s economic credibility on the basis it was yet to release a substantial costed policy with less than a year to go before the election.

The Coalition is reportedly seeking to find between $50 billion and $100 billion in budget cuts. Mr Dutton and shadow treasurer Angus Taylor would not confirm that figure on Tuesday.

When asked how much the Coalition was looking for in total savings in the Budget, Mr Dutton said: “We’ll have more to say about our policies in the run up to the election.”

“We’ll have more to say in relation to the specific programs, but, for example, the Government’s increased the public service by about 30,000 people in Canberra.”

About a quarter of that increase to public servants is in the Department of Veterans Affairs, Services Australia and Home Affairs clearing a backlog of claims and visa processing.

Mr Taylor pointed out the Coalition had “voted against … over $92 billion of government spending” in the Parliament.

When asked if the Coalition was still committed to further personal tax cuts, he said: “We’ll talk about tax cuts another time.”