"the information in the 2021 Census is out of date in 2022"

The Census? It has nothing to do with it.

"but it is the most recent data available"

Well, no there is plenty of 2021 data available. The author just chose to ignore it.

"I have done some checking,..."

Oh, this'll be good. Well show us your sources. Let's take Lithuania. What was it's debt to GDP ratio in 2020 as compared to 2021 and the equivalent numbers for Australia? Note: I already know the answer and it ain't good for your case.

mhaze,

Comprehension please, the point I was making just as you believe data on debt from 2020 (Austin claims its the latest available date at the time of writing) and its relevance to Dutton claims in 2022 budget reply that "(Australia has) debt lower than any other major advanced economy.” As Dutton failed to give a reference, the question is where did he get HIS later data from that would support HIS claim. Do YOU have it. I'm very interested to see it.

The Census was simply an analogy, nothing to do with debt data. If you are going to claim 2020 data about debt is irrelevant in 2022, and it would be if there is new later data which makes the 2020 data obsolete. The Census was taken in 2021, so any thing claimed based of that is irrelevant in 2022, because it can be claimed its out of date.

"Well, no there is plenty of 2021 data available. The author just chose to ignore it." Can you produce it and show how it supports Dutton's assertions.

When I said checking, I was checking for countries that said that they were envious of Australia's economic performance. I Googled; "France envious of Australia's economic performance". Nothing, couldn't find anything Macron seems didn't say that, then tried in the place of France I tried Canada, Britain, New Zealand, United States, China, Japan, then I gave up, none had expressed economic envy of Australia. Where did Dutton get that from? Can you explain.

Foxy,

AA was sued for defamation because what he printed was defamatory and false. The suit was discontinued because as I understand AA settled, and Twaites won his case overwhelmingly.

AA's politics has always been on the extreme left and his association with the truth has always been very loose to the point that when writing on economics and finance it bordered on fantasy.

You only quote AA and IA because they reinforce your prejudices.

Paul,

I can't help but notice that you're trying very hard to move away from your original claims and now trying to find an entirely different alleged error that might stand the slightest scrutiny.

"I was checking for countries that said that they were envious of Australia's economic performance..."

Dutton never said that they'd expressed envy, only that they would be envious. I know that others are envious of my good looks without them actually saying it.

As to the original claim, which you are now trying to run away from as fast as those aged legs can manage, "As Dutton failed to give a reference, the question is where did he get HIS later data from that would support HIS claim.". That isn't the point. You and your journo hero made the claim that Dutton was wrong but if you don't know which data he was using, how do you know he was wrong? But the point is that when he made his point, the then most current data supported his point. So NO LIE.

This isn't going anywhere. You and your Vulpes-ian sidekick made wild claims that you had no evidence were true. Those claims have been shown to be a million miles away from established fact and are, as with most of what you write, unresearched assertions that you just hoped were right.

Fin

shadowminister,

I don't quote Alan Austin to re-inforce my prejudices
as you claim. I simply provided what I considered
useful facts and information as a reply to your claims
on the man. You obviously have your own prejudices
regarding him

cont'd

I simply provide what I consider useful facts and
information. And I did that with Alan Austin because
as I understand it the man has never had an adverse
finding against him by any court, tribunal and
professional body anywhere relating to factual
inaccuracy or any breach of media codes of ethics.
Not once. Not ever.