Christopher Pyne: Joyce is very popular where he is liked and very unpopular where he is not

The return of Barnaby Joyce was inevitable, writes Christopher Pyne. But those who think he’s good news for Labor are mistaken.

Not surprisingly, Barnaby Joyce returned as leader of the National Party and Deputy Prime Minister on Monday last week.

It was always going to happen. The inevitability of Joyce.

Having been through the mill in late 2017, Joyce was forced out as leader in early 2018. Just over three years later, he is back.

Back in 2017, he discovered he had an entitlement to New Zealand ­citizenship. He resigned from the House of Representatives and recontested his seat of New England, in NSW, which he won convincingly in a by-election.

Around the same time, it emerged that he had been in a relationship with Vikki Campion while married. He owned up, owned it, and he is now the proud father of two sons with Ms Campion, to add to his four daughters from his first marriage.

All of this proved too much for his colleagues in the National Party and he exited from the leadership to be ­replaced by Michael McCormack.

McCormack is a thoroughly decent individual and a perfectly competent minister.

While he is a notable Elvis impersonator in his down time, he would be the first to admit that he isn’t as colourful as Joyce. Few are.

Deputy Prime Minister of Australia Barnaby Joyce, Vikki Campion and their children, Sebastian and Thomas in his office at Parliament House. Picture: Martin Ollman

For those who know their cricket, McCormack is former England Test captain Mike Brearley to Joyce’s Ian Botham.

Too many commentators have rushed to judgment to condemn the return of Joyce as foolhardy at best and political suicide at worst.

It is no such thing. While, from a South Australian perspective, the new Nationals approach to policy got off to a rocky start (more later), Joyce represents a threat to Labor in the regions, not a boon.

Joyce is very popular where he is liked and very unpopular where he is not liked.

Joyce will add to the Coalition’s vote at the next federal election in places such as regional Queensland, the Hunter Valley, where there are potentially two or three seats for the Coalition to gain, regional NSW and in parts of Tasmania.

He will be less popular in South Australia, the cities, particularly the inner-city, and in peri-urban ­communities.

In an election where the Coalition needs to gain seats to hold government, thanks to some unhelpful redistributions of electoral boundaries, Joyce could be a net positive.

Much will depend on how Joyce conducts himself over the next year.

Knowing him as well as I do, I imagine he knows that as well as anyone. Joyce is a pragmatist and an instinctive politician.

He knows when to flick the switch to vaudeville to ensure his point is picked up by the voter and he knows when to compromise for the benefit of the team.

Anyone who thinks he is going to blow up the show doesn’t understand Joyce. Labor demonstrated that this week. They are fighting the last war, not the one they are in now.

All of that said, South Australians felt the burn of the change first this week. Inexplicably, the Nationals in the Senate and then the House of Representatives went rogue on the legislation to establish the role of the Inspector General of Water ­Compliance.

It had the effect of creating an unlikely alliance of Liberals, the ALP, Greens and crossbenchers, who ­defeated the Nationals’ amendments in the Senate.

In the House of Representatives, the Leader of the House, Peter ­Dutton, didn’t even allow the ­amendments to get to the point of being debated.

Those amendments had the affect of altering the Murray Darling Basin Plan. In particular, the return of an extra 450GL of water to the environment by 2024.

I suspect the Nationals knew all along that their ill-fated attempt to change the legislation would not ­succeed. Instead, they wanted to demonstrate to their voting base in the NSW and Victorian parts of the Murray Darling Basin that the Nationals are “on your side”.

South Australian Liberals – ministers Simon Birmingham and Anne Ruston, Member for Sturt James Stevens and Senator Andrew McLachlan – passionately defended the carefully negotiated and scientifically based water allocations contained in the Murray Darling Basin Plan.

They are required to take into ­account the effect of the health of the Murray Darling river system and ­balance the legitimate demands of the environment, the economy and river communities.

Achieving a balance between those three priorities and the competing interests of South Australia, Queensland, NSW, Victoria and the ACT is one of the thorniest thickets of the federation.

It has been the source of great angst between those parties since the debates about the shape of the Australian Constitution started in the 1890s.

What was most surprising about the action of the Nationals was that support for the legislation would already have been agreed within the government.

It was taken through the cabinet by Water Minister and Nationals MP Keith Pitt and agreed to in a joint-party meeting of the Coalition.

The two days of debate were a real headache for relations between the Coalition partners.

No doubt, the necessary reshuffle of ministerial portfolios due to the change in leadership and the return of the Prime Minister from quarantine will settle emotions this week.

Meanwhile, the Murray Darling Basin Plan remains intact, the Inspector General of Water Compliance will be established as proposed, and South Australia continues to be the beneficiary of sound management of our precious water resources across the basin.