Anthony Albanese likes to decry misinformation, but the irony is that his government is one of its biggest proponents. As leader, his rhetoric has become a fascinating exercise in gaslighting, hypocrisy, and obfuscation. Jim Chalmers – a socialist-leaning Treasurer – is complicit.

Albanese’s broken promises are adding up. Even if you like one of his many backflips, do you trust him to pursue the policies you do like?

The absurdity has reached grotesque levels. Albanese keeps breaking promises and speaking policy mistruths while promoting a Bill to clamp down on misinformation. It’s almost a Kafka-esque nightmare: Albanese says something blatantly preposterous, then growls at people who point out the absurdity.

Let’s look at some examples.

Albanese promised – over 100 times – that he would deliver the Stage 3 tax cuts in full. He has broken that promise. He insisted that this was because of changing economic circumstances and cost of living pressures. However, those have existed for over a year, during which time he wasted $450 million on a referendum that 60 per cent of Australians rejected. He said his word was his bond. Now we know his word means nothing.

Albanese promised he would not touch superannuation. Albanese and Chalmers have imposed a superannuation tax grab. They painted this as a tax on the wealthy, as has become popular with the left. However, it is more accurately described as a tax on unrealised capital gains for funds above $3 million. This threshold is not indexed, thereby baking in bracket creep. Further, the tax on unrealised capital gains creates a dangerous precedent in other areas. There is no limiting principle: now that the precedent is set, what is to stop a Labor government from expanding the tax grab?

Jim Chalmers is central to this broken promise. His word also means nothing. Chalmers is presented as an economic expert and a deep thinker. One need not hold degrees in finance or economics to be an expert, but they are indicia. He has been a member of Parliament for over a decade, but has not held a serious position in industry or academia, for whatever that is worth. In my opinion, it is deeply concerning that he is presented as a serious financial economist when he is a Labor ideologue.

Albanese promised that he would lower power prices. The market is not directly in his control. This promise was always impossible to keep, but he made it anyway. Further, he has made it worse through a relentless and ideological focus on a narrow set of energy-generating plans, refusing to consider alternatives such as nuclear energy. He also refused to extend the fuel excise reduction despite being pressured on this in Parliament. If he was about cost-of-living relief, as he pretends to be, he would have taken steps to mitigate such costs.

Albanese was unreliable when it came to concrete information about the Voice and a potential treaty. He stated that a treaty was not on the ballot during the referendum. He argued that the Uluru Statement was only one page. However, the words on that one page were broad and required extraneous material to interpret them. Ergo, the words were not merely those on the one page. The words incorporated their connotations, which was clear from the extended background text. This would involve a treaty. This was something the government was already funding work towards. Voice architects specifically said that a Voice would increase the likelihood of a treaty, and with it reparations. This would involve a financial impact as the money must come from somewhere. Albanese pretended this was scaremongering and misinformation. This was an exercise in gaslighting and Australians saw through it.

Albanese has promulgated a draconian Misinformation Bill. The Bill would effectively deputise social media companies to police so-called misinformation on behalf of the government. The definition of misinformation is broadly construed. The government (but not its detractors) are deemed incapable of misinformation under the Bill. It would incentivise social media companies to suppress more speech than necessary because there are penalties if they fail to suppress misinformation but no penalties for failing to allow correct speech. The great irony is that Albanese would entrench the government’s ability to spread misinformation while hypocritically accusing his detractors of the same.

Albanese and Chalmers are the true source of policy misinformation. They are not to be trusted.