Bishop's a pawn as Robb tries to replace Hockey

THE Liberal partyroom meeting on Thursday went according to plan for Tony Abbott, but that doesn't tell the story of divisions bubbling under the surface. He was re-elected leader unopposed and, despite Andrew Robb taking soundings from colleagues about a possible challenge to Julie Bishop for the deputy's position, she too was re-elected unopposed.

Abbott's objective is simple: to appear unified and ready to govern should the unholy alliance that delivered Julia Gillard and the Labor Party government fall over.

It could take a fortnight or it could take six months: either way Abbott wants his team to avoid the pitfalls of opposition and not descend into internal divisions, to give the impression of a viable alternative.

It may be easier said than done. Robb's push for the deputy's position was part of a wider battle over who is going to take the blame for the costings error and the Coalition's loss of standing on economic management during the campaign.

Robb and his supporters have tried to argue that he had a good campaign and should therefore be rewarded with promotion.

Part of that push for promotion included a condemnation of Bishop's performance, although, despite slip-ups in the lead-up to the election being called, she had a solid campaign.

She was the senior figure in Western Australia, where the Coalition won 12 of 15 seats on offer and raised enough funds to send money east to help the party in struggling states such as NSW.

Although she didn't have as high a public profile on the campaign trial as deputies often do, she played an important role in the Coalition's marginal seats strategy, electorate hopping between more than 50 seats in support of individual candidates.

After Bishop's brand had been damaged at the national level by mistakes during the Coalition's first term in opposition, it was the perfect opportunity to rebuild herself while helping the Coalition's election chances.

Divisions in the Liberal Party seem deeper when the implications of Robb's push are considered. If he had seized the deputy leadership, he would have been entitled to choose his portfolio, and that would have led him to take over the post of shadow treasurer from Joe Hockey.

That was the primary target of Robb's ambition. The justification? Hockey presided over the costings debacle and the decline in the Coalition's economic management credentials.

The only problem with this thesis is that it isn't true. Costings are the responsibility of the finance spokesman, not the shadow treasurer. And although the Coalition's economic credibility did take a dive during the campaign, it wasn't because of anything Hockey did wrong. It was because Abbott refused to debate Gillard on the economy, Labor mounted a vicious attack in its advertising campaign on his economic understanding, and the refusal to release full costings to Treasury for assessment - Robb's call - exacerbated the problem.

By the end of the campaign the parties were level-pegging on economic management, although after Hockey took over the Treasury portfolio the Liberals had steadily been pulling away from Labor, and he beat Wayne Swan in their National Press Club debate.

Insight into who is really to blame for the slide in the Coalition's economic management credentials becomes apparent when the names of the leaders are included in the polling question. Gillard is well ahead of Abbott, highlighting that the Opposition Leader was the problem.

The division just below the surface inside the Liberal Party has a long way to go before it blows up, but it is part of a long-term contest for credibility, and the disputes are driven by a merry-go-round of self-interest.

Abbott wanted Bishop to remain deputy leader to discourage the beginnings of a division that could harm his chances of seizing the prime ministership in the short term, but he doesn't mind the Robb push for the damage it does to Hockey as they battle it out to avoid blame on the costings (for a start, it keeps the focus off him).

Bishop, courtesy of her previous missteps, has shelved ambitions to be leader; instead she is content to play the role of the loyal deputy, no matter who the leader may be. Hockey and Robb see themselves as future leaders and both are playing a long-term game. Whoever wins will be better placed to emerge as an alternative leader if the halo comes off Abbott.

Bishop is a pawn in the bigger contest and her continued presence as deputy leader could go one of two ways.

Either she will continue to rebuild her credibility, in which case she will be able to hold on to the position even if yet another leader falls over; or she will make more mistakes, in which case one of the ambitious men down the line would initiate a challenge.

The risk for Abbott is that deputies rarely get challenged without a leadership coup being a part of the package.

If his personal ratings don't hold up, underperformance by Bishop could contribute to both of them going. But that is a risk Abbott is prepared to take now that he and Bishop have grown closer: he values her supporting role in a way he initially did not.

At the moment the idea Abbott could be under any leadership pressure seems fanciful. He is a hero for his campaign performance, and rightly so. But opposition is a dark time for political parties and, if Abbott's play for a short-term transition to government fails, he may pay the price for not instituting changes that could help the party in the longer term.

We will have a better idea of whether Abbott is aware of this dilemma - short-term viability as an alternative government v medium and long-term credibility - once he reshuffles his front bench. An important part of planning for the medium to long term is to move young talent on to the front bench, not just to reward their abilities but to pre-empt their disappointments at being overlooked, which could lead to divisions.

There may not have been many standouts during a lacklustre first term in opposition before Abbott pulled the Coalition away from the precipice but there are some well-credentialled backbenchers waiting to see if they get promoted.

Jamie Briggs, Paul Fletcher and Kellie O'Dwyer are just three of them. The likes of Ian Macfarlane, Bronwyn Bishop and Kevin Andrews are the sort of frontbenchers who could be put out to pasture to make room for the next generation.

It is no coincidence that Macfarlane was doing the numbers for Robb. He was lucky to retain his frontbench role after he backed Malcolm Turnbull to the bitter end over the emissions trading system dispute, and Abbott is believed to be strongly considering dumping him. By aligning himself with Robb, Macfarlane hoped to reinsert himself as a senior ally of the new leadership team.

That name Turnbull just won't go away. Speculation over what portfolio Abbott will give him is rife inside the Coalition. The smart money suggests communications, with Robb's fellow Victorian Tony Smith's head on the chopping block after a poor campaign. But it is doubtful if communications would satisfy Turnbull for very long; he would rather have an economic portfolio. Yet if Turnbull did throw his all into the communications portfolio to unpick the government's National Broadband Network, the key policy issue of this term, it would be one helluva platform for a comeback.

While debate rages internally over who is to blame for the recent damage to the Coalition's economic management credentials, the likeliest culprit is probably the leader, rather than any of his lieutenants.

But that won't stop them fighting among themselves for seniority in the opposition ranks. Such divisions could harm the Coalition in the short, medium and long term.