Coalition civil war truce called just as David Littleproud was making National MPs ‘shadow ministers’
Nationals leader David Littleproud was in the middle of handing out ‘shadow’ portfolios to his country party MPs when Sussan Ley summoned him to her office to discuss a civil war truce.
Nationals leader David Littleproud was in the middle of handing out “shadow” portfolios to his country party MPs when Sussan Ley on Thursday summoned him to her office to discuss a Coalition civil war truce, as frustration grows in Mr Littleproud’s own partyroom over his handling of the split.
Just 48 hours after declaring he was taking a “principled position” in walking away from the Coalition agreement, Mr Littleproud announced in a chaotic Canberra press conference that he was pausing his move to split from the Liberals. Earlier on Thursday, he had convened his chosen Nationals MPs in his parliamentary office to assign portfolios and discuss the party’s strategy.
But halfway through the meeting, which Nationals such as Bridget McKenzie and Matt Canavan attended in person and other MPs joined virtually, Mr Littleproud received a text from Ms Ley asking to meet in her office.
Mr Littleproud said Ms Ley put forward “an offer” to reconvene her partyroom and discuss the National Party’s four policy conditions for remaining in the Coalition.
But the new Liberal leader instead pointed to a key concession made for “the first time” by Mr Littleproud as being the reason behind restarting talks.
“David Littleproud … made a public statement that the Nationals are willing to accept shadow cabinet solidarity as part of a Coalition agreement,” she said in a statement.
“This is the first time this commitment has been made and I welcome it as a foundation to resolve other matters.
“Earlier today I wrote to, and met with, David inviting him to re-enter good-faith negotiations. I am pleased he has accepted.”
The restarting of negotiations came after widespread calls for Liberal and National elders to save the 80-year-old electoral pact and the country party’s MPs began to speak out against Mr Littleproud’s shock political manoeuvres.
The Australian understands Mr Littleproud first raised with Ms Ley last Thursday the issue of shadow cabinet solidarity and his desire for the Nationals to be given their own “party vote” on certain matters.
Shadow cabinet solidarity refers to the convention that binds the Coalition’s leadership to holding the same policy position, whereas backbenchers are allowed to speak and vote against policies they don’t agree with.
Mr Littleproud did not bring the matter to his partyroom meeting on Tuesday, citing only four policies the Liberals must accept should they wish the Nationals to continue in the Coalition.
These included a recommitment to nuclear power, divestiture laws to break up supermarkets, service obligations for telcos to increase phone and internet obligations in the bush, and a $20bn regional future fund.
Ms Ley remained firm that Mr Littleproud had not made clear he had ditched his call to forgo shadow cabinet solidarity until his public comments on Thursday morning.
Sources close to Ms Ley said this prompted her to restart Coalition talks and pause the announcement of her own exclusively Liberal shadow ministry.
Nationals sources said this claim was “convenient” for the Liberal leader to make, and argued that it was being used as an excuse to resume negotiations on a Coalition.
Mr Littleproud said the reason he had brought up the issue of shadow cabinet solidarity in the first place was that the Nationals had technically already broken with the convention during the last term of parliament.
“It came from the intent about the fact that the Nationals actually breached cabinet solidarity last term in the voice (debate). I and my partyroom got to a position on the voice before the Libs … it did really disturb me that I had to do that,” he said.
“I’ve got to say that actually hurt in some small way the relationship I had with Peter (Dutton), and I lost trust, and I had to rebuild that … I didn’t want that to happen again and I made that clear … I didn’t want to have to repeat that circumstance.”
The fight over which leader blinked first came as Nationals MPs criticised Mr Littleproud’s handling of the matter, with senior sources agreeing the negotiations could have been “managed better” by the leader, who appeared to have backflipped on the “principled” decision to leave the Coalition.
“The reality is, it’s a bit of a f..k-up,” one Nationals MP said.
“We didn’t need this.”
Despite questions over his leadership, even staunch critics of Mr Littleproud conceded he was “pretty safe” given there were no clear alternatives thanks to “geographic and ideological divides” in the party.
While Nationals MPs were yet to agree on when they would next meet, Liberals were convened virtually on Thursday afternoon for an update on the negotiation.
The Australian understands Ms Ley will bring her colleagues together on Friday for a formal partyroom meeting, with MPs urging for her to “take the time” to discuss the four policies demanded by the Nationals.
Chief among Liberals’ concerns are the divestiture powers, but one senior source said while no one “loved” the idea, securing the Coalition was more important.
The back-and-forth over the Coalition agreement follows the opposition’s thumping election loss on May 3, with the Nationals losing their deputy leader but otherwise managing to retain all of their lower house seats, while the Liberals were smashed by Labor across a number of electorates.
To join the conversation, please log in. Don't have an account? Register
Join the conversation, you are commenting as Logout