Coaltion split to give parties a chance to speak to voters ‘authentically'
Political Strategist and adviser Yaron Finkelstein has said the Nationals' split from the Coalition is an opportunity for both parties to speak to voters in an "authentic way".
"There'll be Liberals who will want to be talking about different things that perhaps they couldn't when they were bound with the National Party and vice versa," Mr Finkelstein said.
"It doesn't mean they'll be radically different in those policy areas but give them a chance to breathe."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Age
3 hours ago
- The Age
Why the Liberals should accept defeat in Bradfield
It is hardly surprising that the battered and bruised Liberal Party does not want to surrender one of its last bastions of metropolitan Sydney without a fight. To give up on Bradfield, which has been in Liberal hands for 75 years, would be the final nail in the coffin for the party, which has watched its heartland turn teal or, in the case of John Howard's former seat of Bennelong, stay firmly red. The Liberals have an exceptional offering in Gisele Kapterian, who still has a frontbench spot on hold for her in the hope that she and not her teal nemesis Nicolette Boele ends up in Canberra. But for her sake and the party's, the Liberals should accept the loss in Bradfield, learn its lessons and focus on rebuilding the NSW division ahead of its next battle: the 2027 state election. The party's only hope of retaining Bradfield rests on petitioning the Court of Disputed Returns to overturn the result. The Liberals are seeking legal advice. The appeal of pursuing court action is obvious from the party's perspective. Kapterian won the first count, albeit by just eight votes, only for Boele to overtake her on the recount and to emerge victorious with a final lead of 26. Liberals who are agitating for a court challenge say it is a no-brainer because Kapterian won initially. But eight votes is far from a resounding win and the Australian Electoral Commission 's formal policy is to recount any result under 100. By the time the AEC wrapped up the final recount, most ballot papers in Bradfield had been counted seven times. The AEC, a well-established impartial and independent institution, followed due process but the final result was always going to disappoint someone. That is democracy. Mistakes can be made, which is why the AEC welcomes scrutineers for all candidates, but seeking to cast doubt on the electoral watchdog would reek of sour grapes. There would also be costs to the party in mounting a legal challenge, although friendly Liberal-aligned barristers would be likely to offer their services pro bono. Kapterian was one of the most successful fundraisers for the Liberals ahead of the May poll, but given that some of their federal campaign was debt-financed based on pre-election polling (which turned out to be vastly wrong), the party will not recoup the public funding it had anticipated. A court challenge would be a financial impost on a party that will struggle to fundraise after such a monumental election loss. Depleted coffers will not help their NSW colleagues in March 2027. Loading There is, of course, the argument that the Liberals have nothing to lose by throwing everything at retaining the seat. If the results were reversed, Boele, who devoted three years to campaigning as the shadow MP for Bradfield, would no doubt be considering the same. The worst-case scenario, as many Liberals see it, is the status quo. Boele remains the MP for Bradfield and Kapterian suffers a respectable defeat. So why not take a risk? There are other possible scenarios from a court challenge. The best, but also highly unlikely, would be that the result is overturned, and Kapterian is declared the winner. Even the most optimistic Liberals accept that will not happen. The second-best outcome would be for the election to be declared void, forcing Bradfield voters back to the polls. Kapterian would have several factors on her side. There is no Peter Dutton factor, which was a drag on her vote, and her name recognition is higher thanks to coverage of the never-ending count. But there are cons, too. Firstly, the voters of Bradfield would be rightly annoyed at being dragged back to the polls. Secondly, the Liberals' dirty laundry has been well and truly aired post-election.
Sydney Morning Herald
3 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Why the Liberals should accept defeat in Bradfield
It is hardly surprising that the battered and bruised Liberal Party does not want to surrender one of its last bastions of metropolitan Sydney without a fight. To give up on Bradfield, which has been in Liberal hands for 75 years, would be the final nail in the coffin for the party, which has watched its heartland turn teal or, in the case of John Howard's former seat of Bennelong, stay firmly red. The Liberals have an exceptional offering in Gisele Kapterian, who still has a frontbench spot on hold for her in the hope that she and not her teal nemesis Nicolette Boele ends up in Canberra. But for her sake and the party's, the Liberals should accept the loss in Bradfield, learn its lessons and focus on rebuilding the NSW division ahead of its next battle: the 2027 state election. The party's only hope of retaining Bradfield rests on petitioning the Court of Disputed Returns to overturn the result. The Liberals are seeking legal advice. The appeal of pursuing court action is obvious from the party's perspective. Kapterian won the first count, albeit by just eight votes, only for Boele to overtake her on the recount and to emerge victorious with a final lead of 26. Liberals who are agitating for a court challenge say it is a no-brainer because Kapterian won initially. But eight votes is far from a resounding win and the Australian Electoral Commission 's formal policy is to recount any result under 100. By the time the AEC wrapped up the final recount, most ballot papers in Bradfield had been counted seven times. The AEC, a well-established impartial and independent institution, followed due process but the final result was always going to disappoint someone. That is democracy. Mistakes can be made, which is why the AEC welcomes scrutineers for all candidates, but seeking to cast doubt on the electoral watchdog would reek of sour grapes. There would also be costs to the party in mounting a legal challenge, although friendly Liberal-aligned barristers would be likely to offer their services pro bono. Kapterian was one of the most successful fundraisers for the Liberals ahead of the May poll, but given that some of their federal campaign was debt-financed based on pre-election polling (which turned out to be vastly wrong), the party will not recoup the public funding it had anticipated. A court challenge would be a financial impost on a party that will struggle to fundraise after such a monumental election loss. Depleted coffers will not help their NSW colleagues in March 2027. Loading There is, of course, the argument that the Liberals have nothing to lose by throwing everything at retaining the seat. If the results were reversed, Boele, who devoted three years to campaigning as the shadow MP for Bradfield, would no doubt be considering the same. The worst-case scenario, as many Liberals see it, is the status quo. Boele remains the MP for Bradfield and Kapterian suffers a respectable defeat. So why not take a risk? There are other possible scenarios from a court challenge. The best, but also highly unlikely, would be that the result is overturned, and Kapterian is declared the winner. Even the most optimistic Liberals accept that will not happen. The second-best outcome would be for the election to be declared void, forcing Bradfield voters back to the polls. Kapterian would have several factors on her side. There is no Peter Dutton factor, which was a drag on her vote, and her name recognition is higher thanks to coverage of the never-ending count. But there are cons, too. Firstly, the voters of Bradfield would be rightly annoyed at being dragged back to the polls. Secondly, the Liberals' dirty laundry has been well and truly aired post-election.
West Australian
4 hours ago
- West Australian
Education non-profit group Teach for Australia apologises for MAGA-style email
A national organisation that recruits high-achievers to become teachers has issued an apology for circulating an email entitled 'help make education great again'. Teach for Australia sent out an email seeking donations on Wednesday morning with a heading that reflected US President Donald Trump's election slogan of 'Make America Great Again'. A few hours later, TFA sent out another message, signed by 'the TFA philanthropy team', apologising for the previous 'poorly worded' subject line. 'We sent an email this morning with a subject line that was poorly worded and unintentionally did not reflect our intent or values,' it said. 'Our intended message was: 'Help Give Every Child a Great Education'. 'We sincerely regret our initial wording and any confusion or concern that may have been caused. 'We apologise and thank you for your understanding and support.' Former Coalition frontbencher Jacinta Nampijinpa Price copped criticism for engaging in US-style politics during last month's Federal election when she vowed in a speech to 'make Australia great again'. She later claimed she had not even realised she was echoing Mr Trump's slogan. TFA is a non-profit organisation that recruits talented individuals to teach in schools serving disadvantaged communities. Its first email called for donations to help students who were being left behind because of where they lived. 'Through no fault of their own, and without being able to change these factors, their postcode or socioeconomic background hinder their access to the same quality of education that their inner city counterparts often enjoy,' it said.
