Liberal right has it all wrong: it’s not all Malcolm Turnbull’s fault

Prime Minister Scott Morrison during Question Time. Picture: AAP

Scott Morrison’s comparison of himself to Daniel Andrews was filled with bravado. And a couple of grains of truth, which in the overall scheme of things could end up mattering not very much at all.

Andrews, a strong leader with a united team, had lots of money, an overflow of volunteers, a clear agenda, a record of delivery, a clever campaign exploiting oppon­ents’ weaknesses and was able to transmit his daily message ­regardless of whiffs of malfeasance or chaos. All of that secured Labor’s base and swung the swingers. Malcolm Turnbull’s ousting was the icing on the cake, with a cherry on top. That is what ripped the vote out of the Liberal heartland.

The combination delivered a thumping victory for Andrews. Every factor was critical. It is no good saying Turnbull’s removal was in there somewhere, as if it was somehow incidental to the ­result. The Liberal name turned to mud on August 21 when 35 MPs voted against Turnbull, and it will take a long time to clean off the splatter. The backlash came not only because they preferred Turnbull but also because of the self-indulgent folly of killing a still-popular, competitive prime minister.

The repercussions continued on Tuesday with the defection of Julia Banks to the crossbench, even while the Prime Minister and Josh Frydenberg, oblivious to her plans despite the warnings, were desperately trying another reset, this time ­announcing an April 2 budget, foreshadowing both a surplus and a May election.

It should have been all about the economy, stupid; instead, once again, it was about the internals. Morrison’s was not an idle boast. The government has runs on the board, particularly on jobs growth and budget management. Bill Shorten is wildly unpopular. When they are in the pits, thinking about these things keeps their hopes alive and prevents mass droppings of bundles.

Ultimately, in the face of ill-disciplined, rampant disunity, that may not be enough to stave off a bloodbath. There appears no end to the disruption. Peter Dutton may be ­referred to the High Court. Banks, who always credited Turnbull and Julie Bishop for delivering her seat of Chisholm, will vote for it. It will not bring the government down but it will add to the sense of chaos and dysfunction. With nothing left to lose, Bishop is finding her voice on issue­s beyond ­foreign affairs.

There will be more before the election, and much more after it. Others will soon decide they have to get on with the rest of their lives. Preselection for Craig Kelly’s seat of Hughes has been delayed until February through fear that if he loses, which seems near certain, he too will go to the crossbench.

While vilifying Banks (it’s all Turnbull’s fault), no doubt the hard right will find arguments to justify his desertion (it’s all Turnbull­’s fault), just as they were found for Cory Bernardi’s defection (it was all Turnbull’s fault), just as they have been found for Jim Molan’s slide down the NSW Senate ticket. That, of course, was all the fault of the moderates and the soft right, not because Hollie Hughes put in the best performance on the day and was smart enough to corral the numbers, while Andrew Bragg put in the second-best performance.

What the Victorian result showed, what people on the ground picked up, and what scares the hell out of federal Lib­erals now is that voters were only limbering up last Saturday.

Liberals copped it at booths in leafy suburbs on which they could once rely. Voters did not care if the alternatives were a teenage boy or a 71-year-old living in a retirement home. One MP on polling duty was asked if he was federal or state. “State,” he answered. “Lucky for you,” the voter replied. Just how lucky was soon revealed. Unlike many colleagues, he clung to his formerly blue-ribbon seat.

Many voters no longer recognise the Liberal Party. It has forgotte­n how to speak to women and young people. Kelly O’Dwyer laid it out at a private meeting called by the Prime Minister to allow his Victorian MPs to vent when she warned the party was regarded as homophobic, anti-women, climate-deniers. “It has to stop,” she said, regretting the ­demise of the live-and-let-live philosophy of the Liberal Party she joined as a teenager. Scott Ryan put it only a little less bluntly when he said Liberals did not want views rammed down their throats, nor litmus tests for what it meant to be a real Liberal.

A party that prided itself on being a broad church is now marked by intolerance. Alternative views are treated contempt­uously, as is anyone who dares put them forward. This is the modern face of the Liberal Party created by those who hog the airwaves and the screens, still parroting the mantra that Morrison has to get out of Paris, as if that is going to convince any normal person — emphasis here on normal — that this will make it rain in Longreach, give the cows in Gippsland free rein on emissions or cut power bills in Brisbane or Boothby.

If the next-generation leadership of the Nationals, represented by Agriculture Minister David Littleproud, can talk easily about climate change because he thinks it’s real, because his constituents think it’s real, because they see its effects on the quality of the envir­onment around them, then surely it’s safe for suburban Liberals to say those words about a policy that dare not speak its name without being pilloried: Climate. Change.

The other complaint by O’Dwyer, echoing the sentiments of senior Victorian Liberals, is that the state president, Michael ­Kroger, should resign. There was speculation he could face a no-confidence motion at the party’s administrative committee meeting tomorrow.

Kroger’s disastrous decision to sue the Liberals’ main donor, the Cormack Foundation, polarised the party and guaranteed the state branch had no money to run a mini-campaign well in advance of the election to sell leader Matthew Guy and his policies. Thanks to a peace deal brokered by the federal Treasurer, the money flowed last month. By then it was too late. There are other reasons why Kroger should go, ­including seemingly turning a blind eye to branch stackers who signed up the religious right. That helped change the character of the members­hip base and guaranteed its separation from its voting base.

As the most senior Victorian, Frydenberg has begun the search for a new president. It is not an easy task. As soon as someone willing and able is found, Kroger will be gone. The grim task of ­rebuilding the party’s campaign structure and reshaping its image will then begin.