Cormann, Dutton, Frydenberg feel betrayed by Abbott’s sniping

Illustration: Eric Lobbecke

What is motivating Tony Abbott to be so disruptive? Is he driven by vengeance or genuine policy goals that make life awkward for the government, Malcolm Turnbull in particular? Or is it something else?

It’s hard to take Abbott’s policy pronouncements too seriously. His strongly held convictions have long been a movable feast, especially on climate change, but also across many other areas of policy. I would understand it if Abbott’s goal were simply to harm the Prime Minister, meaning he was motivated by spite and bitterness. Although some of his one-time sidekicks are driven by such negativity, Abbott really isn’t.

To be sure, he questions Turnbull’s character and laments his own fate in being dumped as prime minister. But Abbott has never been one to hold a grudge. For all his philosophical inconsistencies, as a man and as a politician he knows how to forgive like few others. Abbott is not hellbent on destroying Turnbull, he just doesn’t care if that’s a byproduct of his actions. Not everyone agrees with this assessment. His reactionary cheer squad in the media certainly wants to destroy Turnbull, and it is happy to use Abbott as a blunt trauma weapon.

The former prime minister is bored. He needs something to do, which is perhaps why in hindsight it was a mistake not carving out a role for him. It’s too late now — the distrust between the two most prominent figures in the parliamentary Liberal Party over the past decade is toxic. Abbott likes to brawl, he likes the adversarial nature of political debate. Unfortunately for the government, his wrath and pugilistic ways are hurting his own side.

It has reached a point where those close to Abbott when he was prime minister are frustrated and feel betrayed by his actions. Mathias Cormann, Peter Dutton, Josh Frydenberg, Christian Porter, Dan Tehan and Angus Taylor were Abbott loyalists, one and all. The gang of six frontbenchers, who stood by Abbott to the bitter end, have had a gutful of the destabilisation he is causing now.

Cormann and Dutton were two of Abbott’s most loyal lieutenants when Turnbull was coming after him. Both took to the media in an effort to avert a challenge, and both worked the numbers for Abbott. Cormann walked into the partyroom shoulder to shoulder with Abbott to show his loyalty. Dutton is now the unofficial factional leader of the right in parliament. But this pair has had enough.

Cormann started getting teed off by Abbott’s destabilising commentary months ago. He has spoken to Abbott privately, but to no avail. Dutton largely avoids rebuking Abbott publicly, assuming it’s akin to poking a bear. But he too is sick of the damage Abbott is causing and has told him directly.

Cormann wants to become Senate leader one day; Dutton would like to rise to the party’s leadership. But if the government can’t be competitive in the polls, Cormann would be forced to run the Coalition in the Senate from opposition — not his life’s ambition. Dutton will probably fail to hold his marginal Queensland seat if the Coalition can’t retain government. These two take Abbott’s attacks personally. They were loyal to him, he’s now harming them — it’s that simple. This is one reason they have become Turnbull’s protectors, helping to prevent Abbott’s discontent from turning into factional discontent.

Frydenberg and Porter were Abbott’s parliamentary secretaries, working closely with him while being groomed for higher office. Now, as cabinet ministers, they are determined to do whatever they can to assist the government. Like Cormann and Dutton, they are thoroughly at their wits’ end with Abbott’s undermining.

Frydenberg, the Environment and Energy Minister, has to confront Abbott’s policy contortions on climate change in his portfolio. His career is being damaged by Abbott feeding reactionary commentators on this issue. Frydenberg feels personally betrayed by a man he loyally served until the bitter end. Just this week he publicly rebuked Abbott on climate change, pointing out the Turnbull government’s policies reflect Abbott’s policies as prime minister.

Porter voted for Abbott and, like the others, stayed loyal to the end. Now he’s trying to manage a difficult portfolio — social services — while holding a marginal seat in the political wasteland of Western Australia. Abbott, Porter believes, is making that a tougher task. Like the others, he too feels betrayed.

Tehan and Taylor round out the gang of six one-time Abbott supporters who have had a gutful. Both voted for Abbott, both harmed themselves with Team Turnbull by sticking their necks out for Abbott when the challenge loomed. Tehan, who was once among Abbott’s most vocal defenders, has now publicly lambasted him. In part this is virtue-signalling to the Prime Minister’s office for promotion, but it’s mostly driven by frustration and a sense of personal betrayal. When Abbott undermines Turnbull, he undermines the entire government: that’s how Tehan sees it.

Taylor has avoided publicly responding to Abbott, but like the others he has privately sought to pull him into line. Taylor seemed set for rapid promotion when Turnbull cleaned out the likes of Eric Abetz and Kevin Andrews from the ministry. He was held back, however, because of the loyalty he had shown to Abbott — a loyalty that is not being repaid.

All six of these names are what you may call conservatives in parliament (to varying degrees). They backed Abbott but will never vote for him again. The difference between Kevin Rudd’s undermining of Julia Gillard and what is happening with Abbott and Turnbull is that Rudd always had ­sup­porters on the frontbench (Anthony Albanese, Chris Bowen, Martin Ferguson and Kim Carr). Abbott doesn’t have a single one. Not even among those who were once his most loyal lieutenants.

The government’s political problems are of its own making. Abbott can’t be blamed for its poor polls or its missteps. But his white-anting is preventing a recovery (that may or may not be otherwise possible).

Conservatives such as the gang of six are doing everything they can to improve the government’s political fortunes. The likes of Dutton and Cormann are using their influence on Turnbull to prevent his moderate tendencies coming to the fore. Frydenberg is trying to hold together the most difficult ministry. Other members of the gang are variously trying to save themselves and manage their portfolios effectively.

Given that Abbott (as opposed to some of his supporters in the commentariat) isn’t driven by spite but rather by a sense of boredom, he should reflect on how those who were most loyal to him feel about his actions. Especially given that the former prime minister prides himself on being a loyalist, having promised the day after the challenge there would be no sniping or undermining.

How’s that going?

Peter van Onselen is a professor at the University of Western Australia and Sky News presenter.