logo
The post-Howard identity of the Liberal party has failed to gel into a contemporary form. Now is the time for reflection

The post-Howard identity of the Liberal party has failed to gel into a contemporary form. Now is the time for reflection

The Guardian04-05-2025

It was a tall order for Peter Dutton to topple a first-term government – and so it proved. But first-term governments have often gone backwards.
The scale of the Labor victory highlights structural problems with the Liberals that have been papered over for years.
Dutton lost because of mixed messaging and not the medium.
Labor had done its best to lose the election over the last three years but came good at the right time when people were switched on and thinking about the election. Labor was well organised and coherent, their presentation firmly grounded in Labor values and appealed across various demographics.
Sign up for the Afternoon Update: Election 2025 email newsletter
There was a clear choice and Australia opted for a version of relaxed and comfortable over a leap into the unknown. The risk of a prime minister Dutton was leveraged with none too subtle references to the 'Americanisation' of policies. Just as in Canada, the Trump factor played to the incumbent's strengths. All politics is local.
The danger for Labor now is hubris and overreach. In no small measure, this victory is thanks to their opponents' fumbles. If they think this victory is an endorsement of the status quo they are setting themselves up for a mighty fall. Labor does not have a proper mandate to grapple with the tough questions of economic reform and grand strategy in a world order that is changing rapidly. Australia cannot stand still.
Grievance politics was not enough to win. An opposition must have a clear and coherent plan that demonstrates they are ready to govern.
The polls over the preceding few years were a false dawn for Liberals. They were not an indicator of final voting intention but a snapshot of voter frustrations. Dutton amplified those frustrations and acted as if the deal was sealed before the campaign started.
As the election came into view, the scrutiny of the opposition increased, and things fell apart.
Matching your opponent's policies only works if you then move the agenda on to your preferred areas of battle, for the Liberals this has always been the economy and national security. They fluffed both. Too little too late on defence and mixed messages on the economy (higher deficits in the next two years and then budget improvement).
Now is the time for serious reflection.
When the Liberals lost in 2022 it was easy to pin it all on Scott Morrison who ran a very centralised operation.
The Abbot-Turnbull rivalry pitted the broad church of liberals and conservatives against itself. Longstanding differences over climate crippled the government.
The Morrison era moved somewhat on issues like net zero but was consumed by the urgency of dealing with a once-in-a-century pandemic. Necessary deficit spending in that era played into a public insouciance about debt and deficits.
The Coalition franchise has been very successful in winning elections but in a world of AI, changing geopolitical circumstances and wall-to-wall social media, there is room for adaptation. This can be done without abrogating long-held values and principles that can help us navigate the current trends. Liberals preserve the best of the past while adapting to the future.
The decision to target outer suburban and regional seats made sense, given Dutton's persona – but it conceded inner-city seats to the teals and other minor parties.
A broad church has an all-of-the-above seat strategy.
Sign up to Afternoon Update: Election 2025
Our Australian afternoon update breaks down the key election campaign stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters
after newsletter promotion
The Menzies Liberals were not populists and would be bemused by the so-called culture wars. Menzian Liberals do not divide the electorate into us and them. No snide references to the elites v 'the real people'. We value education and science, and meritocracy based on having a fair go. Pragmatism and practicality are preferred to social experimentation and ideology.
Liberals eschew identity politics, considering people on their own merits rather than as part of a group, and upholding the rights of the individual in the face of the collective.
Economic populism or business bashing is also at odds with traditional Liberal equities around smaller government and lower taxes. The argument for these traditional policies is economic efficiency (a bigger pie that makes more fairness possible) and restraining the power of government over people. Effective competition policies are the best way to restrain the power of big business.
A further round of economic reforms in the Hawke-Keating and Howard-Costello mould has become increasingly urgent. Along with smart industrial policies to leverage sovereign capabilities in critical and emerging tech. But advocates need to stand up and explain why and how. It won't happen by itself.
Rational economic policies are entirely compatible with a strong social safety net that balances protection with incentives to self-improvement. Strong families and communities are part of that safety net. The social role of housing is an important priority given the fracturing between generations that we are witnessing in Australia.
On social cohesion, the Liberal creed used to be that the things that unite us are greater than those that divide. Social cohesion is not a function of enforcing conformity to a predetermined set of national characteristics.
In liberal democratic Australia, freedom to celebrate one's heritage, religion or beliefs is baked into our values. The only caveat is an overriding loyalty to Australian institutions like democracy and the rule of law that make this freedom possible. Rights and responsibilities in equal measure.
This second-term opposition should go back to first principles and build policy on those foundations, in tandem with keeping the government of the day accountable.
Listening to our fellow Australians, grappling with the complexity of demographic and social change in a way consistent with Menzian values will succeed if we do the hard work.
The countdown to the next election has begun.
Arthur Sinodinos is a former Australian ambassador to the US. He is the partner and chair of the Asia Group's Australia practice and was a former minister for industry, innovation and science

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Sussan Ley says name spelling change was due to ‘punk phase'
Sussan Ley says name spelling change was due to ‘punk phase'

The Guardian

time7 hours ago

  • The Guardian

Sussan Ley says name spelling change was due to ‘punk phase'

The opposition leader, Sussan Ley, has walked back claims that an interest in numerology was the reason she added extra 's' in her name, claiming her comment she made to a journalist in 2015 was a 'flippant remark' and not correct. Ley told Melbourne radio station 3AW on Friday that the name change came during her 'punk phase' as a teenager, shooting down a long-running story that she had added the extra letter because of a belief it would make her life more exciting. The Liberal leader has also conceded women were 'disappointed' with the opposition's policies at last month's election, promising the Coalition would 'modernise' and offer new ideas on housing, especially for young people, as well as childcare and aged care. In a 2015 profile with the Australian newspaper, Ley was quoted as saying: 'I read about this numerology theory that if you add the numbers that match the letters in your name you can change your personality. 'I worked out that if you added an 's' I would have an incredibly exciting, interesting life and nothing would ever be boring. It's that simple … And once I'd added the 's' it was really hard to take it away.' Asked about the quote on 3AW on Friday, Ley claimed it was a 'flippant remark' and numerology was 'actually not the reason'. 'It was something I did during my rebel teenage years and, you know, I went through a punk phase in those years and added the extra 's'. People have been fascinated by the numerology angle, but it's actually not correct,' Ley said. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email It is not the first time Ley has walked back the 2015 claim, seeking to explain her earlier quote in several media interviews when asked in recent years. In mid-May, shortly after being elected Liberal leader, Ley told Kyle and Jackie O's Kiis FM program that the original quote was 'an offhand remark to a journalist, which sort of took off'. 'The real reason is I was rather rebellious in my youth. That's been covered in my punk rock past, and so I just added the extra 's' and annoyed my family members. At that time, by the way, I certainly didn't think I would end up being leader of the opposition or even a politician,' she said. In the 3AW interview, Ley also said the Liberals 'we must listen, we must change, we must develop a fresh approach'. 'That listening is very important in what we do next. We will modernise. We will rebuild,' she said. The Coalition will be left with just 43 seats in the House of Representatives, and the Labor government holding a large majority with 94 seats. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion 'We've got to have a party that respects modern Australia, reflects modern Australia, and represents modern Australia. And we've got to meet modern Australia communities, the people who listen to your program, where they are,' Ley said. 'I stood on the pre-poll in the last fortnight [of the election] all around the country, including Melbourne, and I talked to women and I saw the look of disappointment on many of their faces, and I asked them what they were thinking, and they didn't feel that we had a policy offering that was relevant to them.' Ley was this week critical of former Liberal president Alan Stockdale, who reportedly claimed women had become 'so assertive' that the party might need to consider extra support for men. The Liberal leader admitted that housing was a key issue the opposition had to work on, especially to win the votes of younger Australians. She also nominated childcare, aged care and policies on students as priority issues. 'They [young people] are worried about work. Of course, they're worried about studying, but they're worried about housing too, and if we can't find a pathway, or articulate a pathway into housing for young people, then they're not going to support our political party,' she said. 'We had some policies at the last election. We'll review those. I'm always very frustrated by what state governments are not doing when it comes to supporting young people in housing. But I'm not saying that it's only in their court. There are things the federal government can do as well.'

Worried about the tax on $3m plus super balances? Here's how you'll survive
Worried about the tax on $3m plus super balances? Here's how you'll survive

The Guardian

time8 hours ago

  • The Guardian

Worried about the tax on $3m plus super balances? Here's how you'll survive

Imagine you have $3m in super and have just retired, only to hear that Labor plans to hit you with a new tax. Or perhaps you're worried (dream?) that at some point in the near or distant future you might cross that multi-million-dollar savings threshold. Either way, you might be wondering whether the government's proposal to whack an extra 15% tax on earnings on balances over $3m is going to put a major crimp in your retirement plans. Breathe easy, your annual trips to Europe are safe, as are your smashed avocado brekkies. According to Guardian Australia's analysis, a wealthy Australian retiring with $3m in super today would pay an extra $2,355 in tax. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email And that's from annual retirement income of more than $170,000, based on an estimate from Asic's MoneySmart retirement calculator. In other words, the tax represents barely 1% of your income. If that doesn't make you feel better, then remember that the median full-time salary in Australia is $88,400, according to the ABS, and $72,590 across all employees. So you are making nearly twice the median full-time salary – and those suckers are paying income tax! Well, consider this: The Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia reckons that a single person with a paltry $595,000 in savings can generate a 'comfortable' lifestyle in retirement with $51,807 in income a year. You're making more than three times as much, even after paying Labor's damned extra tax! What's that? You only have $800,000 in savings? Gosh, how sad. (If it makes you feel any better, that's still four times the median super balance among 65-69 year-olds, according to the ATO). Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion Don't worry, though, you won't be paying the proposed extra 15% tax - remember it only starts kicking in on balances over $3m. And anyway, you can still live pretty well on $67,000 a year, tax-free. That all sounds OK for the small-fry with $3m in super. But what about the serious savers with $5m? How much extra tax will they have to suffer in the name of making the super system 'fairer'? Bad news. They could be paying something like an extra $25,000 in tax under the proposed policy, if they earn the average 7.5% annual return in the year. The good news is that they'll still have nearly $270,000 left over to … wait, can a single retiree even spend that much in a year?

Nicolette Boele on climate, business and making a difference
Nicolette Boele on climate, business and making a difference

The Guardian

time9 hours ago

  • The Guardian

Nicolette Boele on climate, business and making a difference

Nicolette Boele was declared the winner in the Sydney seat of Bradfield this week, after a month of counting and recounting in her race against Liberal Gisele Kapterian. She is preparing to take her seat in parliament after a wafer-thin victory of just 26 votes. Boele speaks to chief political correspondent Tom McIlroy about why Labor needs to stop 'walking both sides of the fence' on climate and energy and where she thinks the government could improve productivity.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store