Liberal Party woes

A week before Christmas, a newsletter arrived from the President of the Liberal Party in Victoria. It noted the loss of seats and members at the State election and the election of some new faces. Members were invited to contribute to the review of the recent electoral disaster, and then stated he had reviewed previous election reviews: ‘So many of the “lessons” are the same, and so many of the recommendations seem to remain unimplemented,’ he wrote. ‘So rather than produce yet another review, I’ve asked the team to instead produce several products, anchored on the “2026 Campaign Handbook”. I think it’s critical to embed the immediate lessons and observations into an action plan rather than a report.’

Of more significance was an attached excerpt from the 2014 Review by David Kemp which highlighted one of the most significant issues facing the party. ‘There must be a comprehensive change in the way the party goes about its business. It needs to become an organisation facing not inwards, but outwards. It needs to become an accessible community organisation, welcoming and open. Liberals need to engage better with each other and with the external world. The Liberal Party will not win the 2018 State election, nor be as effective as it must be in the 2016 Federal election, unless it is prepared to revitalize its approach to politics and to transform its approach to campaigning and to engaging with the electorate.’

The history since Dr Kemp’s observations is stark. The party lost seats at the 2018 state election – and a further one in 2022. It also lost seats at the 2016 federal election and just clung on to government in 2019 before losing in 2022. This reflects a much longer trend. Since 1990, Liberal/National Parties have only been in government in the States and Territories for an average of 12 years. While this varies between jurisdictions, State and Territory Liberal/National coalitions have only sat on the Treasury benches for a little over one-third on average of the past 30 years. Only in Western Australia has the Liberal Party been in government for more than 50 per cent of the time since 1990. Currently, it is likely to be some time before the party is returned to government on the west coast. Nationally, the situation much better, with the Coalition in government for more than 60 per cent of the past three decades.

There is a recurring theme in state politics that is ignored often by the Liberal Party, namely while there is validity to the adage that ‘governments lose, oppositions don’t win’ the reality is that poorly performing governments will be re-elected unless there is a credible opposition. The pattern has repeated itself many times over the past few decades - in New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia and now Victoria. 

Of the more than five million Victorians aged 18 and over, less than 15,000 are members of the Liberal Party. In other words, only about 1 in 300 people belong to the Party, a fraction of what it was decades ago. Nationally, the proportion is less than 1 in 400 people. Instead of representing the broad cross section of the community, membership is concentrated increasingly in coteries which seek to control the party. Constitutional reforms of more than a decade ago in many states largely destroyed the local branches, lessening the influence of the remaining members. Factionalism is rife. As John Howard observed of the Party in New South Wales, these factions have become ‘preselection co-operatives’.

In his latest book, A sense of balance, Mr Howard observes: ‘The greatest cultural change of the past few decades has been in the attitude towards what was once called branch development. Previously the main pursuit of a lively branch was to build membership. These days building membership has given way to adopting strategies to stop the branch being ‘taken over’ by a rival faction. New members are viewed suspiciously, lest they upset the factional balance.’

Alternatively, factional aspirants for pre-selection spend years recruiting their supporters into friendly branches in the hope that ultimately, they will be rewarded with the numbers to win a contest. This is particularly the case in the plebiscite systems for preselection that operate in states like Victoria and South Australia.

When I was first preselected three decades ago, I was able to succeed without factional membership or endorsement. That is virtually impossible today. A consequence is that an inordinate amount of time and effort is expended on internal factional warfare. A ‘winner takes all’ attitude dominates the party. Much of the time of the state administration is expended on these activities. Many operatives would prefer to defeat their internal opponents than the Labor Party.Ordinary people who join the party often feel estranged by the whole process. These observations can also be made about the Labor Party, but it seems more adroit in resolving the conflicts.

A number of serious consequences flow from the declining membership and the rise in factionalism in the contemporary Liberal Party. First, the quality of candidates has fallen. Many people who would make good members of Parliament shy away from the invitation, often citing factionalism and social media intrusion as their main reasons. As a result, candidates for preselection become experts in counting the internal numbers, but often have little real-world experience. There are some notable exceptions, but too often parliaments now comprise managerial careerists in all parties. As John Howard writes, ‘within the Parliament elected in 2016, 49 per cent of Liberal MPs had previously worked in state or federal politics – as staffers, party officials or corporate affairs employees of companies involved in political liaison.’ Many candidates can’t even add the membership of the local kindergarten parents’ group to their resume, let alone involvement in a service club or local charity!

Until its leaders recognise that a successful party must reflect a coalition of interests, not narrow factional interests, the Liberal Party will not regain its former success. Tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of voters including small business owners and operators and people of faith have fled to minor parties because they believe the Liberal Party no longer represents their values. Instead of reflecting John Howard’s ‘broad church’ the modern party seems incapable of tolerating a range of views and moulding the compromises that are required for widespread support.

 A week before Christmas, a newsletter arrived from the President of the Liberal Party in Victoria. It noted the loss of seats and members at the State election and the election of some new faces. Members were invited to contribute to the review of the recent electoral disaster, and then stated he had reviewed previous election reviews: ‘So many of the “lessons” are the same, and so many of the recommendations seem to remain unimplemented,’ he wrote. ‘So rather than produce yet another review, I’ve asked the team to instead produce several products, anchored on the “2026 Campaign Handbook”. I think it’s critical to embed the immediate lessons and observations into an action plan rather than a report.’

Of more significance was an attached excerpt from the 2014 Review by David Kemp which highlighted one of the most significant issues facing the party. ‘There must be a comprehensive change in the way the party goes about its business. It needs to become an organisation facing not inwards, but outwards. It needs to become an accessible community organisation, welcoming and open. Liberals need to engage better with each other and with the external world. The Liberal Party will not win the 2018 State election, nor be as effective as it must be in the 2016 Federal election, unless it is prepared to revitalize its approach to politics and to transform its approach to campaigning and to engaging with the electorate.’

The history since Dr Kemp’s observations is stark. The party lost seats at the 2018 state election – and a further one in 2022. It also lost seats at the 2016 federal election and just clung on to government in 2019 before losing in 2022. This reflects a much longer trend. Since 1990, Liberal/National Parties have only been in government in the States and Territories for an average of 12 years. While this varies between jurisdictions, State and Territory Liberal/National coalitions have only sat on the Treasury benches for a little over one-third on average of the past 30 years. Only in Western Australia has the Liberal Party been in government for more than 50 per cent of the time since 1990. Currently, it is likely to be some time before the party is returned to government on the west coast. Nationally, the situation much better, with the Coalition in government for more than 60 per cent of the past three decades.

There is a recurring theme in state politics that is ignored often by the Liberal Party, namely while there is validity to the adage that ‘governments lose, oppositions don’t win’ the reality is that poorly performing governments will be re-elected unless there is a credible opposition. The pattern has repeated itself many times over the past few decades - in New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia and now Victoria. 

Of the more than five million Victorians aged 18 and over, less than 15,000 are members of the Liberal Party. In other words, only about 1 in 300 people belong to the Party, a fraction of what it was decades ago. Nationally, the proportion is less than 1 in 400 people. Instead of representing the broad cross section of the community, membership is concentrated increasingly in coteries which seek to control the party. Constitutional reforms of more than a decade ago in many states largely destroyed the local branches, lessening the influence of the remaining members. Factionalism is rife. As John Howard observed of the Party in New South Wales, these factions have become ‘preselection co-operatives’.

In his latest book, A sense of balance, Mr Howard observes: ‘The greatest cultural change of the past few decades has been in the attitude towards what was once called branch development. Previously the main pursuit of a lively branch was to build membership. These days building membership has given way to adopting strategies to stop the branch being ‘taken over’ by a rival faction. New members are viewed suspiciously, lest they upset the factional balance.’

Alternatively, factional aspirants for pre-selection spend years recruiting their supporters into friendly branches in the hope that ultimately, they will be rewarded with the numbers to win a contest. This is particularly the case in the plebiscite systems for preselection that operate in states like Victoria and South Australia.

When I was first preselected three decades ago, I was able to succeed without factional membership or endorsement. That is virtually impossible today. A consequence is that an inordinate amount of time and effort is expended on internal factional warfare. A ‘winner takes all’ attitude dominates the party. Much of the time of the state administration is expended on these activities. Many operatives would prefer to defeat their internal opponents than the Labor Party.Ordinary people who join the party often feel estranged by the whole process. These observations can also be made about the Labor Party, but it seems more adroit in resolving the conflicts.

A number of serious consequences flow from the declining membership and the rise in factionalism in the contemporary Liberal Party. First, the quality of candidates has fallen. Many people who would make good members of Parliament shy away from the invitation, often citing factionalism and social media intrusion as their main reasons. As a result, candidates for preselection become experts in counting the internal numbers, but often have little real-world experience. There are some notable exceptions, but too often parliaments now comprise managerial careerists in all parties. As John Howard writes, ‘within the Parliament elected in 2016, 49 per cent of Liberal MPs had previously worked in state or federal politics – as staffers, party officials or corporate affairs employees of companies involved in political liaison.’ Many candidates can’t even add the membership of the local kindergarten parents’ group to their resume, let alone involvement in a service club or local charity!

Until its leaders recognise that a successful party must reflect a coalition of interests, not narrow factional interests, the Liberal Party will not regain its former success. Tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of voters including small business owners and operators and people of faith have fled to minor parties because they believe the Liberal Party no longer represents their values. Instead of reflecting John Howard’s ‘broad church’ the modern party seems incapable of tolerating a range of views and moulding the compromises that are required for widespread support.

Next, I will discuss the consequences of these developments – and offer some solutions.

This article was first published in the Spectator Australia.