If Peter Dutton isn’t an outright liar, he’s a clear-eyed believer of his own untruths

I think we can all agree that whatever the media thought they were doing to effectively report on Donald Trump didn’t work. He continues to defy every form of political and moral gravity, his lies having accumulated such mass and density that they constitute a black hole.

Yet the lesson that flows from this has not been realised, certainly not by the US media. It’s important, because our political trend is the same, just more Australian (slower and with more irony).

Former PM Scott Morrison lied constantly, but couldn’t hide the smug self-awareness that his resting smirk face betrayed. Opposition Leader Peter Dutton, by contrast, only has one face, and it always looks sincere. The trouble is that he says things that are objectively untrue, things he cannot possibly believe. He does so often, with increasing frequency and flagrancy. As with Trump, this presents the media with a big challenge. So far, they’re failing the test.

Last week Dutton stated two bald facts at a press conference: “Look at what’s happening in Canada, where 60% of their energy source comes from nuclear, they pay half the electricity price that we do here.” Sounds compelling, but neither assertion is true. The true proportion of electricity generation from nuclear power stations in Canada is 15%, and the latest OECD comparison has Canadian power prices closer to two-thirds of ours.

Around the same time, The Australian falsely reported that Professor Marcia Langton had called No voters in the referendum “racist and stupid”. The newspaper took down its headline subsequently, but in the meantime Dutton had posted it on his official Instagram, and has refused to remove what is, objectively, a lie.

Also on the Voice, Dutton stated that all Australians “are treated equally under the law. A Voice will change this fundamental democratic principle”. Simply untrue, as he well knows. The constitution includes a race power as an explicit entrenchment of inequality, a power that has only ever been used to make laws for First Nations peoples.

It’s quite a call, especially coming from a guy who, in government, wanted to be able to strip Australians of their citizenship at his discretion, even if it would render them stateless.

On radio 2GB, Dutton speculated whether Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has been doing “sweetheart” deals for Qantas, saying: “It’s clear the relationship between the prime minister and Alan Joyce — it’s been on display for all to see — their red carpet events and dinners at the Lodge and Kirribilli and the rest of it.” The dinners part was simply made up. They never happened.

Minor? In the bigger scheme of things maybe, but that’s just the past week’s worth. Dutton has form, of course, reaching particularly egregious levels during his reign as Home Affairs minister, when he created a sub-genre of using false allegations to demonise asylum seekers and justify their mistreatment.

Highlights include claims that offshore asylum seekers were being encouraged to self-harm, or making false allegations of sexual assault and then “trying it on” with abortion requests to get to Australia (baseless); that there were murderers, rapists and paedophiles among the Nauru contingent (baseless); that the father of the Biloela family left Australia while he was seeking asylum here (false).

If it were just that Dutton was relentlessly negative, a cherrypicker of convenient statistics, a master of misleading three-word slogans, and an expert at punching down on the vulnerable (all of which he is), then he’d be in the Tony Abbott realm where taking his words seriously would still serve some arguably useful social purpose.

But Dutton goes further. When he’s cornered, he just makes shit up.

Exhibit A: on April 24, 2017, Dutton is interviewed on Insiders by the ABC’s Barrie Cassidy after a claim he made that a five-year-old boy had been raped by Manus Island detainees.

Cassidy: You said that a five-year-old boy was led away by three asylum seekers, and that caused the mood to elevate quite quickly. Now that’s not true is it?

Dutton: Yeah, of course it is true.

Cassidy: It’s not true.

Dutton: It is true and the briefing that I’ve had is particularly succinct and clear.

It wasn’t true. Cassidy went on, quoting the PNG police commissioner, who had confirmed that the boy was 10, hadn’t been lured anywhere, and had left the centre untouched — as CCTV footage showed. Dutton simply pivoted, saying “I have facts you don’t have”.

Because he is opposition leader, Dutton’s words are treated by the media as inherent matters of public interest, regardless of subject and regardless of their truth. As with Trump, when he says something patently false, for the media that is a reportable thing in itself. Which suits him fine, because flooding the body politic with garbage, until truth itself becomes meaningless and all we are left with is anger, is the whole strategy.

The notion that political leaders are always newsworthy is fine, so long as the individuals in those positions observe some basic attachment to their social responsibility as leaders. By (slightly strained) analogy, anything a convicted mass murderer might have to say would be highly newsworthy — but as a society, we have decided that we should not hear it as it would harm us and benefit the murderer.

When a public figure of any type has become a cause of social harm by virtue of their own actions, and it is clear they will consciously compound that harm every time they’re given a platform, the normal rules of engagement also become enablers of harm.

At that point, the platform providers — certainly the media, among other institutions — are obliged to reassess what they’re doing and consider whether it’s time to stop pretending that the conversation we’re having with this person has any social utility at all.

Even America draws the free speech line at the person who falsely shouts “Fire!” in a crowded theatre.

When was the last time you took Peter Dutton at his word? Let us know by writing to letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name to be considered for publication. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity.