As Morrison steps up, Turnbull really must back off

Former prime minister Malcolm Turnbul. Picture: AAP

Scott Morrison’s decision to change Liberal Party rules to make it harder to execute serving prime ministers was smart, sensible and in synch with the sentiments of the bulk of his party and the electorate. It was both necessary and overdue. The onus is now squarely on Liberal MPs to choose their leaders wisely, lest we all repent at leisure.

The Prime Minister was the only one who could have got it through so quickly and so free of rancour. As well as capitalising on the angst over the oustings of Malcolm Turnbull and Tony Abbott, he also capitalised on the angst caused by them.

Labor had got used to thrashing the government every day in parliament, on the theatrics if not the numbers. For a couple of question times at least, government backbenchers seemed genuinely enthused and united behind Mor­rison. That hasn’t happened for a long time, and the person who helped make that happen was Turnbull, which makes such virulent criticism of him so misplaced.

There is certainly no pleasing those who hated him when he was there and who hate him more now he is gone. Both Abbott and Turnbull support the rule change, although if either of them had attempted it while in office, the other — and his followers — never would have accepted it.

The rule change requiring a two-thirds majority to move a spill motion, approved by a late-night meeting on Monday of only Liberal ministers, then backed by a meeting of Liberal MPs only, helped shift the suffocating atmospherics from the weekend, when the Prime Minister, his immediate predecessor and the one before him had all said or done the wrong thing. There were all the makings of a bleak end to a bleak year for the Liberal Party.

Morrison should not have intervened to ask the NSW Liberal Party to surrender to Craig Kelly’s threats, preserve his preselection and — assuming Kelly wins next year — thereby allow him to keep his arse on the green benches for another three years. Just paraphrasing here, you understand.

Morrison disenfranchised grassroots members and sent a message that deliberate disruption has its own reward. It encouraged Jim Molan, who was dumped down the Senate ticket, to seek a similar rescue mission. To those pondering what Kelly has that Molan does not, it all comes down to a backside on a green bench. Again, just paraphrasing.

Not that it would have made a huge difference if Kelly had been left to the not so tender mercies of his preselectors, then followed through on his threat to sit on the crossbench. There are too few sitting days between now and the election for that to matter much.

The optics would have been bad, but only marginally worse than having to rescue a divisive MP. The fact this is the second time a prime minister has had to use his authority to save Kelly from his preselectors tells you a lot about Kelly’s standing with his own people, and does nothing to increase party membership.

It also was bound to antagonise Turnbull, although Morrison’s patience with him has not worn thin, it has worn out. Having been alerted to Morrison’s request, Turnbull should not have intervened to ask the state executive to deny the Prime Minister’s request, while dumping on Morrison along the way by accusing him of delaying the election so he could keep his arse on C1 (the prime ministerial car). That’s not a paraphrase, it’s a brief summary. His conversation was bound to leak, making him look and sound vengeful.

Turnbull’s anger over Kelly is understandable and justifiable. After Turnbull rescued him in 2016, Kelly spent every day and night in a television studio undermining any chance of a consensus on energy policy.

The switch from sabotage to blackmail was seamless.

However, when he learned what Morrison had done, Turnbull should have stayed out of it and left it to the executive, not pitted himself against his successor. Once Turnbull’s intervention became public, it was obvious the executive would have no choice but to back the serving Prime Minister. There is nothing more ex than ex.

The reserves of goodwill towards him are running dangerously low. There is palpable anger towards Turnbull, not only among his enemies in the parliamentary party — his friends, too, are exasperated. Turnbull is damaging himself and the government. And for that reason alone, if no other, he needs to stop.

As a former prime minister his words carry weight. He still has the power to do good. He knows better than most the impact of these interventions on the body politic and on voters generally. MPs are sick of getting caught in the crossfire when leaders fall out. Voters are sick of politicians arguing.

As for Abbott, his support of Kelly and Molan, after they campaigned so vociferously for greater party democracy before demonstrating their reluctance to subject themselves to it or to accept the consequences of it, is breathtakingly hypocritical.

Abbott was fresh from declaring in The Weekend Australian that he would not rule out returning to the leadership and becoming prime minister again. One can only imagine what the columnists and commentators who delight in excoriating Turnbull for daring to breathe or speak would have said if Turnbull had stayed on in par­liament and expressed a similar desire.

After what happened in Victoria, in electorates a lot like Warringah, to people who did nothing to deserve it, at the hands of people who barely lifted a finger to earn it, Abbott should be very worried about the next election. The “anybody but Abbott” sentiment is becoming embedded, and it would be extremely difficult, if not impos­sible, for him to rebuild his dream without a seat. It was not the cashed-up, high-profile independents who ripped into the Liberal heartland in Victoria’s leafy green electorates. They were Labor unknowns in their teens, in their 70s, and places between.

Morrison is dogged. He is doing his best to fix things. He will not always hit the mark, but he did on the leadership rule change at least.