a nut to crack or to crack a nut?

The Labor government's replacement of the stage 3 tax cuts with its own new package has turned the March 2 Dunkley by-election into a referendum on tax.

And that could become more difficult for the opposition than for Labor, despite Peter Dutton being handed the ammunition of Anthony Albanese breaking his much-repeated promise to deliver the Morrison government's (already legislated) version.

The vast majority of taxpayers in Dunkley — 87 per cent — will be better off under the government's tax cuts than they would have been under the Coalition's stage 3. This is a strong campaign line for Labor.

That's the first problem for Dutton. But then there is the question of the opposition's response.

The government will move quickly to legislate its package, which is due to start July 1. Does the Coalition vote against that legislation? It wouldn't be a good look.

Dutton said he wanted to look at the detail of the government's package before announcing the Coalition's position.( ABC News: Matt Roberts )

And what does it say it would do in the longer term? On Wednesday deputy Liberal leader Sussan Ley suggested the Coalition would roll back the Labor policy. She later claimed she was verballed — she wasn't — and retreated from her position. (Ley, who is always anxious to be out in the media, is a loose cannon for the Liberals, often making statements and claims that are counter-productive.)

The opposition presumably will have to reassure voters in Dunkley that it would keep the new tax cuts, which will soon be in people's pockets.

But what does it say about those taxpayers who will be disadvantaged by the changes, compared to stage 3? It would be hugely expensive to promise to look after them as well.

ABC LINK

Michelle Grattan writes and the result? what a can of worms Dud has to choose from in how to address this change.

Can Dud vote it down after arguing strenuously against the bill in the House? Must he vote for it and still say he would "wind it back" when he gets the chance? - in maybe 4-5 yrs? can he ignore it and abstain? a Dud sitting on the fence like a crow too tired to flap.

what should he propose as an alternative? would he go for another cut to the lowest paid as a softener along with a kid and make up deal for the wealthy? would he get Treasury to assess it before he announced it?

I'm only guessing but I reckon Dud is having some sleepless nights with his advisors. its a tough nut to crack.