Albanese and Dutton have agreed on something. Just don’t expect a lasting bromance

It is hard to imagine Anthony Albanese and Peter Dutton forming a unity ticket on any subject when their mutual sledging is getting sharper by the day as the election nears. But the prime minister and the opposition leader have just moved a little closer on two big policies, like old foes reluctantly sharing a bench. They seem to agree about social media and aged care, no matter how they try to hide it. The question is whether they can stay on the bench together until the two reforms are done.

Albanese and Dutton have been known to have a civil conversation every now and again behind closed doors, but they have no time for each other in parliament. With so much at stake before the election, the rivalry is becoming more intense as each tries to burn the other with a rhetorical branding iron. Dutton calls Albanese weak, and Albanese calls Dutton angry. It’s personal, and sometimes petty, but it’s also pivotal to the contest.

“You sit down, boofhead,” Albanese once told Dutton in parliament, around this stage of the electoral cycle three years ago. “If there was a standing order on glass jaws, he would be in order,” Dutton replied.

They compete daily with attack lines designed to make the other look tetchy, even when the sheer pressure of political life means they would have to be superhuman to remain genuinely affable with each other. And their immediate interest is in finding ways for the other to fail, rather than working on a shared success.

This week began with a policy rift on the economy when the Coalition ruled out a deal with Treasurer Jim Chalmers on governance changes to the Reserve Bank. Soon afterwards, Dutton promised miners he would be the best friend they ever had and warned against the Labor agenda on environmental law. On both fronts, Dutton turned his back on negotiation and tried to force Albanese to do a deal with the Greens.

Things changed on Tuesday, however, when Labor chose to jump the policy gulf on big tech and land with Dutton in favour of banning children from social media. It changed again on Thursday when Dutton did a little jump of his own: after months of talks, he accepted the need to work with Labor on a funding change for aged care.

The social media plan is vague and fraught with practical problems. The statement to announce the policy was a mere 302 words and came without a briefing document to explain how the policy would work. Albanese launched a minor blitz on breakfast television to announce his plan, but he did not call a press conference. There was no policy briefing for the media, let alone a press event for Communications Minister Michelle Rowland to take questions.

This made the policy look like a statement of intent rather than a formal proposal that could be tested on its details. The work seemed too hasty and the structure looked too flimsy – just as other Labor policies suffered this week from a lacklustre explanation. Rowland held no press conference to explain her misinformation laws on Thursday; Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus did not do one to unveil his laws to protect privacy and crack down on hate crimes.

Are ministers so anxious these days that they will not stand up and outline their major policy decisions? Is the prospect of a surprise question really such a danger that ministers will hide in their offices, to venture out occasionally for a few breezy soundbites, rather than risk a press conference where they might get asked about the details? This was not the case with Chalmers, who called journalists to the ministerial wing of Parliament House to launch a broadside at the Coalition over the Reserve Bank, and it was not true of Albanese, Chalmers and Aged Care Minister Anika Wells when they revealed the aged care package on Thursday afternoon. But it is a giveaway for some of the others: the media tactics can advertise a minister’s timidity.

So it is impossible to judge whether the social media age limit can work. As I wrote on Tuesday, there is a deeply troubling decline in mental health since the advent of the iPhone and the rise of Facebook, but the onus is on Albanese to demonstrate the idea can be put into practice. Most of the reaction from academic experts has been fairly dismissive, because they prefer measures that educate children about social media rather than forcing them off the platforms, and the Greens reject the age limit on similar grounds.

This makes the sudden unity ticket all the more startling. The two contenders to be prime minister after the next election are ferociously in favour of the age limits. They are making a shared assumption that this is a net winner among voters – and that parents will back them despite the technical arguments. They both argue a moral case for doing something about the social harm from social networks.

Even so, Dutton is obviously uneasy at having Albanese on his side. The Opposition Leader attacks Albanese for coming up with such a thin plan. The Coalition communications spokesman, David Coleman, who put forward the idea of age verification last year, has told the Inside Politics podcast at this masthead that Labor has taken the idea without knowing how to turn it into action.

It is quite possible for Albanese and Dutton to share the same pledge – ban social media for everyone under 16 – while being utterly at odds about the mechanism to make it happen. Labor promises to put a draft law to parliament this year, but Dutton has made no promise to help it pass.

Aged care is different. Labor and the Coalition have talked for months about the calls from aged care providers for a new funding model that gives them the confidence to invest in more residential aged care places. This meant the shortage of places would probably worsen without a new package – and both major parties would be blamed. Dutton held out on a deal, but the lengthy talks meant there were pages and pages of detail when the deal was done.

The new approach drew quick approval from the major aged care providers, who say it will lead to more investment in aged care places. Yes, some older Australians will pay more, but the providers warned that nursing home beds would be removed if a new funding model was not found. The more those providers demonstrate their investment, the better the prospect for the bipartisan deal to survive a Senate inquiry and pass into law.

This was a pragmatic outcome, not the start of a beautiful friendship. Dutton is hardening his stance on almost every front, such as the Reserve Bank, environmental law, workplace rules and support for the mining industry. He wants to drive Albanese into the arms of the Greens on almost every bill in parliament, hoping to paint the prime minister as a reckless leftie.

Aged care, as well as social media, set up two exceptions to the rule. There may be another, if we see a deal to limit gambling advertising, but do not expect any more. Albanese and Dutton may share that bench for now, but it will not last long.

David Crowe is chief political correspondent.