With News Corp openly backing Scott Morrison being replaced by either Peter Dutton or Josh Frydenberg, it’s worth reflecting on the kind of political party a successor would inherit.
Although Morrison is now a serious burden on the Coalition’s electoral hopes and shows no competence or policy substance, the government’s problems don’t end with him.
There are more minor problems such as the loss of talent in the three years since Malcolm Turnbull was ousted, and poor quality ministerial staff. But the overwhelming problem is serious divisions over fundamental issues.
Consider the policies over which the government is deeply conflicted:
- On climate and energy, it remains paralysed, incapable of any meaningful policy, having come close to ripping itself apart even over a meaningless 2050 target. A rump of extremist Nationals and Liberals who enjoy a flow of fossil fuel donations and employment opportunities from fossil fuel companies block any effort by a ineffectual and mostly cowed self-described moderates to support even more ambitious goals — let alone effective action
- On fiscal policy, there’s a more fundamental, but less-acknowledged, tension: this is postwar Australian history’s biggest spending government, running eye-watering deficits years before the pandemic in complete defiance of the Liberal Party’s small-government, low-taxing mantra. Like most politicians, Liberal MPs are adept at basic hypocrisy, but for many in the wider party, Morrison and his commitment to massive spending and a trillion-dollar deficit is the very antithesis of a Liberal and a blot on the fiscal record of John Howard and Petr Costello, Tony Abbott and Turnbull
- On integrity, there’s a similar dynamic to that of climate and energy: Nationals MPs who regard pork-barrelling and rorting of public money as a core part of their political life, and Liberals who engage in the soft corruption of trading donations for policy influence deeply oppose an independent anti-corruption commission, while a small number of Liberals who know the Coalition’s tolerance of corruption is hurting it in traditional Liberal seats
- On basic rights, there’s a serious division between right-wing MPs — mostly senators who don’t have to deal with electoral realities — who share the conspiracy theories, anti-lockdown sentiment and anti-vaccination mentality of extremist protesters outside Parliament versus the leadership of the government and adherents of mainstream science and evidence-based policy
- On discrimination, there’s a critical ideological divide between religious and right-wing MPs who claim religion is under attack and moderate MPs, more firmly in the pre-Howard Liberal tradition, who are prepared to oppose efforts to enable religious institutions to discriminate on the basis of sexuality or gender
- On Indigenous recognition, there’s another divide as well, between MPs and senators who genuinely support recognition and a Voice to Parliament, and those who oppose both, including outright racists who reject any special status for our First Peoples, and those eager to portray a Voice to Parliament as a “third chamber”.
While there’s a vague liberal/right-wing split in a number of these areas, they stretch from the economy to social issues to pandemic response, and MPs are increasingly willing to not only threaten to cross the floor but to do so. This is exacerbated by Morrison’s low and diminishing authority and the growing belief he can’t win the election so it’s every woman and man for themselves.
But more important is Morrison’s lack of substance.
The Liberals and the Coalition have always had ideological divisions but authoritative leaders with a track record of winning elections — Malcolm Fraser, Howard — or leaders with a strong personal brand like Abbott and Turnbull set the direction for the governments they led.
Morrison might be demonised by critics as too religious or too neoliberal or too conservative, but in fact he is incoherent and lacks any interest in a broader agenda. Morrison can tell you how to market your ideology, but not what ideology should be pursued — such issues of policy substance are well outside his wheelhouse and area of interest.
Other Liberal governments contain similar divisions far more successfully: the NSW Liberals have even formalised their ideological divisions, but function highly effectively in partnership with the Nationals, turning problems like climate and energy into policy wins and successfully navigating tensions over social policy.
Unlike the federal government, the NSW government has managed to avoid the kinds of tensions created by the pandemic on civil liberties and fiscal policy. But in Canberra the pandemic has simply added to an already long list of issues over which the Coalition can’t hope to resolve its internal fractures.
Scott Morrison might be on the nose, but how would you feel about Peter Dutton as PM? Let us know your thoughts by writing to letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name if you would like to be considered for publication in Crikey’s Your Say column. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity.
