There’s no danger that Liberal or Labor will peak too early. The problem is they might not peak at all.

This morning Dutton began walking back policies to cut public servants and ‘end’ work from home. Turns out that once the Liberal leader began to think about it - or get some intelligent advice - he realised they were stupid ideas. Who would have guessed?

But both sides are at it.

Take last week’s battle over the Port of Darwin. It wasn’t about strategy. It was theatre - a shadow play, complete with fanciful bogeymen, faux ‘solutions’, and paid for with imaginary money.

No sooner had Peter Dutton pledged to take the port back from its Chinese operators than Anthony Albanese was on the airwaves, insisting it was his idea all along. No paper trail, no prior statement, no policy. Just a Prime Minister dialing in to say, ‘me too’.

Meanwhile Dutton, of course, was Minister in the very government that signed off on the lease in 2015, a $506 million deal handing control to Chinese company Landbridge for 99 years. Not one but two government-commissioned reviews have subsequently insisted there is no problem with the lease.

Now, both major parties claim the lease is a mistake, just not their mistake.

Darwin is a symbol. It speaks to sovereignty, national security, and the illusion of control. But while the political class haggles over who wanted it back first, vital questions go begging: How will we pay for these ballooning costs? What about the collapsing rental market, climate resilience, and the NDIS?

The danger is that one day a government will have to be elected. When it is, someone will have to foot the tab. It’s unclear exactly where the money to do this will come from.

This is a real concern for the disability sector. We depend on a healthy, growing economy capable of financing a $50 billion bill.

Neither side is currently demonstrating how they might pay for the growing cost of the NDIS.

Voters want clarity, courage, and a campaign addressing our lives. So far, all we’ve seen are old men jabbing at ghosts. The biggest dispute so far appears to be over which party thought Darwin first.

Characterized by controlled media appearances and ambiguous policy pronouncements, the campaign so far has offered little inspiration to an electorate seeking decisive leadership.​

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's campaign strategy has been notably lacking in genuine public engagement. While visually appealing, scripted events do not provide any suggestion of responsiveness to public concerns. It’s about image rather than than substantive dialogue.

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton's campaign is similarly struggling. His policy announcements lacking in detail and clarity, heavy on rhetoric but light on specifics, dominated by photo opportunities at petrol stations. ​More seriously, a serious disconnect is becoming apparent between the leader’s latest pronouncement and the party’s back-end operations.

This should be offering Labor a chance to strike by highlighting the increasing disconnect between Dutton’s spending promises and his saving rhetoric. Albanese’s becomes distracted and rushes off after shining bits of tinsel (like Darwin) instead of sticking to the message. The result is a nil-all draw.

In a political landscape where voters are increasingly driven by specific issues rather than party loyalty, the failure of both major parties to articulate compelling policy visions is a significant oversight. The electorate deserves more than rehearsed soundbites and stage-managed events; they require leaders willing to engage openly, answer hard questions, and present detailed plans that address the complexities of contemporary Australian life.

The biggest of these is how we will manage to continue having a thriving economy, particularly as the world becomes engulfed in a trade war.

The last thing we need to do is worry about who owns a port if we’re not exporting anything.