Sharri Markson: Focus on Liberals campaign ignores issues that mattered

ASTONISHINGLY, the review into the Liberals’ faulty election campaign has barely touched on the elephant in the room — the knifing of Tony Abbott which handed power to Malcolm Turnbull.

Scott Morrison and Malcolm Turnbull contemplate the next budget. Art: John Tiedemann

• Young Greens boycott Australia’s Jewish student organisation
• Sharri Markson: First up, cut the housing tax bite

THE team reviewing the Turnbull government’s calamitous election campaign were given strict instructions not to focus on the PM’s own performance.

The reviewers, led by former Liberal Party director Andrew Robb, were advised Malcolm Turnbull and the parliamentary party’s failings were off-limits in their official review into the federal election campaign.

Astonishingly, the review has barely touched on the leadership transition from Tony Abbott to Turnbull. Some would argue the transition is a crucial factor in how the party fared at the election and should have been examined.

Also outside of the terms of reference were Malcolm Turnbull and Scott Morrison’s kite-flying on economic policy, which may have played into the government’s performance during the campaign.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull meets Nauru president Baron Divavesi Waqa yesterday in Sydney to discuss refugee resettlement deal and immigration detention arrangements.

The review had a narrow scope of the eight weeks of the campaign. Within that remit, the review is understood to have made the pointed observation that the Liberal Party needs greater understanding of what the electorate wants, and they have been flying blind on that front from 2013 to 2016.

In simpler words, they’re out of touch.

The Liberal Party ran out of money to conduct regular research, polling and community feedback in the three years leading up to the federal election.

This led to an over-reliance on Newspoll.

The review is understood to say that Liberal research was accurate but underfunded.

In the past the Liberal Party would conduct very frequent polling and research. But outside of the campaign window, barely any was done.

Had there been regular research, it is unlikely that Turnbull’s innovation message would have survived. It’s quickly been dropped in the months since the campaign and now Turnbull is focusing on terrorism, national security, cost of living, electricity bills — issues that resonate with punters.

The effect of Tony Abbott’s abrupt overthrowing is barely mentioned in the review. Picture: Kym Smith

The reviewers were told Turnbull’s focus on innovation did not play out well on the ground, particularly in marginal seats.

As reported by my colleague Kylar Loussikian yesterday, the NSW submission to the federal review also claimed the Liberal Party failed to properly plan for a negative federal election campaign.

There was a serious misallocation of resources with marginal electorates such as Lindsay, where Liberal MP Fiona Scott was swept out of office, deprived of volunteers and funds which instead went to unwinnable seats.

Already there is immense criticism internally about the lack of appetite for also examining the Party’s performance in the months immediately before the campaign.

Senior Liberals are frustrated the reviewers were forced to focus on the eight-week campaign and had to ignore the “elephant in the room”, the fact the party knifed its own leader and the damaging kite-flying on the GST.

Of course, Turnbull is under pressure. Leadership in the current climate is a high-stakes game.

That knifing gets only a brief mention in the scope of the hefty document. As does the kerfuffle over the GST last February and March. Sources familiar with the review say its subtle message is that the party cannot make strategic mistakes for three years and expect to win.

The review is also said to discuss the sheer scale and scope of Labor’s on-the-ground operations, which have overtaken the Liberals.

The Liberals’ fundraising debacle and the party’s scarce finances are delved into at length. It recommends going back to the 1996 model with regional campaign offices, so there would be less conflict between the states and the federal secretariat.

It speaks to the vulnerability of the party and PM that they are unable to cop constructive criticism when there is a one-seat majority.

Of course, Turnbull is under pressure. Leadership in the current climate is a high-stakes game.

There is a juvenile, short-termism media environment, an irresponsible and eclectic Senate and a global environment that embraces anti-authoritarianism. Coupled with that is the understandable fury and ideological differences of journalists, such as Andrew Bolt and Paul Murray, and politicians snapping at him for cutting down a first-term elected prime minister.

Meanwhile, Shorten sits on the sidelines, without a care in the world on how to fix the budget or whether Australia loses its credit rating, throwing political bombs while boosting his profile in spreads in The Australian Women’s Weekly.

The review into the Liberal Party’s federal election campaign will be handed to the federal executive today and already there has been a scapegoat in Tony Nutt — a divisive figure.

Nutt’s supporters point to his experience and deep understanding of politics. They say he’s been unfairly targeted and criticised by the state directors. Meanwhile his detractors highlight a flawed and outdated campaign, and a lack of communication with state divisions and the parliamentary team.

The Liberal Party spoke about innovation but ran a slow, old-fashioned campaign.

Labor campaigned ruthlessly and, at times misleadingly, but were truly innovative in their approach.