tip off

Party mole: what’s going wrong in Campbell Newman’s LNP

As the Queensland government loses another MP today, an anonymous party insider explains what’s behind the Liberal-National Party turmoil and how Campbell Newman could try to fix it.

The current turmoil in Queensland’s Liberal-National Party is an amalgam of many small cracks that are making a big crater.

Here’s an insider’s perspective on the recent defection of LNP MP Ray Hopper to Katter’s Australian Party, and last night’s dramatic disendorsement of fellow MP Carl Judge — thrown out over accusations he lacked loyalty to the party. Judge was first banned from the party room, then exiled for good.

The LNP is a uniquely Queensland phenomenon. The National Party has been a major force in Queensland politics for a long time, more than any other state; everyone remembers Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen. Depending on which side of the fence, barbed wire or not, Sir Joh was admired for his ability to build and progress Queensland, or derided for his social conservatism and lack of personal freedoms.

But he did rule Queensland for 20 years, much of that as a total dictator with an electoral gerrymander used to his advantage, and made decisions without cabinet approval or vetting. His government was found to be institutionally corrupt during the Fitzgerald inquiry in the late 1980s.

With the LNP in the opposition wilderness for 11 years, we now see a government in George Street that is still finding its feet. We have a leader in Campbell Newman who is new to the Parliament, to a lot of his colleagues, and to a large portion of the LNP. While the Coalition was in power in Queensland for all those years, it was primarily the National Party with the most seats. Today in the Newman government we see Newman and his 13 cabinet colleagues from the Liberal side of the fence — and only five from the Nationals.

This power imbalance has led many … to question the contribution of the Nationals’ ideology and wonder why things aren’t as they were during the Joh years.”

This power imbalance has led many like Clive Palmer and Ray Hopper to question the contribution of the Nationals’ ideology and wonder why things aren’t as they were during the Joh years — corruption notwithstanding.

We can relate the Newman government to the early years (actually all the years) of the Rudd government. Both arrived after long stints in opposition with little experience to speak of; both had new, charismatic leaders who surrounded themselves with people who were loyal to the party. In Rudd’s case the implosion happened rather dramatically with him losing the top job.

I don’t think Newman is headed that way, however there are many backbenchers who are getting frustrated and impatient. Newman comes at least with a legacy of proven leadership. For eight years he was lord mayor of Brisbane, and although there were many critics of his dictatorial style, no one can suggest he didn’t oversee a growth in Brisbane that resulted in it becoming a new World City.

As with any government new to power, there are many players who will find themselves a little lost. In the Newman government we see this with many members who now have become first-time members or ministers and are trying to understand their role, the Parliament and their portfolios. There are also a number of very junior party members, some part time, who have been given impressive titles and salaries, way above their capabilities, advising various ministers.

There are also a number of members who rode in on the coat-tails of Newman and find themselves in positions they never thought possible, and are scrambling to understand what they need to do.  Many will take the opportunity to cement their place, many others unfortunately will be out at the next election due to their inability to get things done, or their own incompetence.

With 77 seats out of 89 going to the LNP in Parliament, there will always be the issue of access for backbenchers to ministers. Many ministers are still finding their feet, whilst others are trying to sort through the issues of their departments. It’s meant any local issues members may have in their electorates are not being attended to because 58 members need to get their voices heard.

In the case of Carl Judge, we see an intelligent, educated backbencher who won his seat of Yeerongpilly by 700 odd votes — a seat that can be lost easily come the next election. Judge must be getting frustrated at the inability to get things done. The previous Labor members for Yeerongpilly have been ministers in government and the area has been well looked after. Not sure what Judge had in mind, but if he thought becoming an independent was going to get him results for his electorate, not only will he never see a minister but it also gets quite lonely on the crossbenches. Time will tell, now he’s out of the party.

The Newman government will have many hurdles to overcome before the next election two-and-a-half years away. What they need to do is keep delivering their legislative agenda, and keep a tight rein on their media spin (and can someone give elocution lessons to Newman please?).

While the party room may be a tad crowded, they need to manage their backbenchers well, break them into teams, give them mentors, bring in some ex-ministers to help, do something to appease them. You shouldn’t bite the hand that feeds you, and some are dumb enough to do it.

12
  • 1
    j.oneill
    Posted Thursday, 29 November 2012 at 2:38 pm | Permalink

    An interesting comment but one that fails to mention what is a fundamental problem in the Queensland electoral system. At the last election the LNP polled just under 50% of the vote, yet they have 86% of the seats. There are insufficient opposition members to give proper effect to the committee system and thereby properly scrutinise government legislation. This poses a very real threat to parliamentary democracy. It is naive and simply not good enough to argue that the government will be held accountable at the next election. A lot of damage can be done in three years.

    There needs to be a fundamental change in the electoral system. Don’t expect Labor to argue for it because they hope to be beneficiaries next time around or the time after.

    The only system that meets the demands of democracy and works is a modified form on proportional representation, along the New Zealand or German models. It is interesting that at the last general election in NZ the public were given an opportunity through a referendum question, to vote for a change to their PR system that had worked tolerably well for more than two decades. They voted overwhelmingly to retain the status quo.

    It is time the Queensland public had a similar opportunity to express a view. Given the history of this state however I am not so foolish as to hold my breath.

  • 2
    klewso
    Posted Thursday, 29 November 2012 at 2:59 pm | Permalink

    What we need is a “Hare of the Clark”?

  • 3
    robinw
    Posted Thursday, 29 November 2012 at 3:09 pm | Permalink

    Living in the ACT has given me an appreciation of proportional representation and I wouldn’t change it for quids now. At least here the number of seats held by the various groupings approximates far more closely to the numbers of votes actually received by them.

    For once in my life I feel that I have representation whereas previously for over 45 years of voting I had none. In other words I have felt disenfranchised within my country for that time. I would vote for this to be Australia wide if given the opportunity.

  • 4
    beachcomber
    Posted Thursday, 29 November 2012 at 3:26 pm | Permalink

    The article is a very kind description of the worst Government Austrlaia has ever endured.

    Maybe if Newman had not sacked all the Senior Public Servants, and filled these spots with LNP hacks, and filled the Ministers offices with LNP children, the Ministers would not be operating in such a vacuum.

    The suggestion that Newman was a good though dictatorial Mayor defies history, as he left the place with an enormous debt and failed projects.

    But to address the proposed cures to the LNPs woes:
    1 “What they need to do is keep delivering their legislative agenda” What legislative agenda? Apart from mass sackings, it’s all crisis management.
    2 “keep a tight rein on their media spin”. Newman is all spin and no substance, which is one reason why there’s a big problem.
    3 “they need to manage their backbenchers well, break them into teams”. One of the problems the LNP has is that there are too many teams, or factions, warring with each other.
    4 “give them mentors, bring in some ex-ministers to help, do something to appease them” Basket weaving classes perhaps.

    The real solution is simpler. Newman has to go.

    An Army life was not ideal training for a politician. Giving orders, and ignoring dissent and the opinions of others, are not qualities you need in a Premier. This caused him problems on Council (he expelled one of his own LNP Councillors and pushed on with failed projects).

    He got away with it on the Council as it is largely ignored by the media and the community. A Premier as to listen, and has to negotiate. He does not have those skills. He did not learn them on Council, and he won’t learn them as Premier. Newman has to be replaced before the next State election. The Federal Liberal Party may decide he has to be replaced before the next Federal election.

  • 5
    Posted Thursday, 29 November 2012 at 3:52 pm | Permalink

    I guess to qualify as a “World City” you need at least one multi-billion-dollar white elephant toll road or tunnel. Cando got that done alright.

  • 6
    zut alors
    Posted Thursday, 29 November 2012 at 4:20 pm | Permalink

    Agree with j.o’neill and beachcomber’s analyses.

    Today Clive Palmer is doing a good job of tenderising Soup. Stay tuned for his next press conference.

  • 7
    Liz45
    Posted Thursday, 29 November 2012 at 4:58 pm | Permalink

    Couldn’t happen to a more deserving b*****d! Hope he goes soon, and takes his Party with him - before he does any more damage to that State!

  • 8
    Ben Joseph
    Posted Thursday, 29 November 2012 at 8:19 pm | Permalink

    What agenda? - There are no policies. 8 months after the election, the MOG has not been completed. The QLD public service has little direction, no leadership and spend most of their time contemplating their future and polishing their resumes. There is no governing - just political infighting and spin.

  • 9
    Karen
    Posted Friday, 30 November 2012 at 8:55 am | Permalink

    Agree with comments above. The Labor governments had more to do with dragging Qld, and Brisbane out of the Bjelke Petersen dark ages and making Brisbane into a ‘world class’ city. To suggest that Newman created a world class city given his dealings as Lord Mayor is plain crazy.

    Now that Queensland has a dictatorial, rigid leader in Newman who has a military-style penchant for driving out or expelling people, a directionless, morale-wrecked and diminished public service, jobs for talentless stooges and their children, Queensland risks descending back to the institutionalised corruption of its previous political history.
    Back to the future.

    And as for Clive Palmer, perhaps he should throw his considerable weight behind resurrecting Labor who, ironically, has done more for him than any LNP government.

  • 10
    sottile6
    Posted Friday, 30 November 2012 at 10:02 am | Permalink

    Carl Judge had no hope of retaining the seat of Yeerongpilly as an LNP member and the characterization of an ex policeman as intelligent and educated would bring a smile to many lips, but perhaps the author is comparing him to other LNP politicians. Carl Judge has received little positive feedback on the government’s performance since he was elected. He hopes to mimic the success of another Liberal renegade, now an independent, in the council who has beeen bullied and villified by Campbell Newman during his time as mayor. This will not happen. Yeerongpilly does not include the Liberal areas necessary.Judge was always a one term politician and he must have worked this out by now.

  • 11
    Hugh (Charlie) McColl
    Posted Friday, 30 November 2012 at 1:33 pm | Permalink

    Worth noting that between 2009 and 2012 the ALP vote dropped from 42% to 26%. Anna Bligh suffered a dive in the opinion polls because of something about her government’s style and substance. There was a shitfight about asset sales remember with trade unions up in arms and however it was brought about, the Queensland community had had a gutful of the ALP. Campbell Newman is a bit of a shock to the system but we can’t forget that voters deserted the ALP in droves because they were sick of it. Plenty thought that Peter Beattie and Anna Bligh also had their Joh Bjelke-Peterson moments in their day so let’s be a bit more original in our comparisons.

  • 12
    michael r james
    Posted Saturday, 1 December 2012 at 2:15 pm | Permalink

    Charlie, I think your shallow analysis and primitive response to politics is typical of Australian politics, and why we get what we deserve. To me the major difference between the Beattie and Bligh governments was that Beattie was an unreconstructed populist while Bligh actually began some activist government which is always tricky, especially in a backward electorate. The privitizations were incompetent politics but I don’t know the alternative — what, propose it in the election campaign in a an election Labor expected to lose?
    Anyway below I re-post part of another response to a banana-bender (the other day in Crikey).

    The reality for Queensland is that Labor dragged the state out of the dark ages to the point, on almost all important criteria and indexes (education, health, infrastructure, state GDP per cap; higher Ed & R&D, the arts, environment), it finally reached parity with the southern states. What didn’t happen is that this equality of lifestyle and opportunity was not matched by appropriate government income. We (actually you and your ilk) are like those idiot dumb Republicans we saw during the recent American election: they want a modern state without paying for it.
    .
    Having said that, the debt is not as horrendous as Newman and others grotesquely distort for purely ideological reasons. And who (Newman) IS reminiscent in actuality, of the Bjelke era. Read John Quiggin (a Queenslander and rare sensible economist). (Try his article, crikey.com.au/?p=306762).
    .
    Finally, my own position is that yes, it was time for a change of government, to refresh the ranks (after almost 20 years in power). My prediction seems to be coming true: that with any luck Newman will be a one-term wonder. (I thought with that majority he would have to get two terms at least but he is so p*ssing off his own team, he’s losing ministers at a great rate, and his policies …).

Womens Agenda

loading...

Smart Company

loading...

StartupSmart

loading...

Property Observer

loading...