There’s a predictable press gallery consensus on Liberal leadership “viability”
Tony Abbott
The overwhelming consensus in the Canberra press gallery has been that Joe Hockey would be a “consensus” candidate who would bring unity to the Liberal Party.
Closely related to the “consensus” line is that other constant gallery theme: Joe Hockey is the only “viable” alternative leader.
Age political editor Michelle Grattan expressed this view on ABC Radio National on 11 November.
“The only viable alternative candidate at the moment is Joe Hockey and he would be in the same position as Malcolm Turnbull on this [climate change] issue,” Ms Grattan said.
Conservatives, of course, are never considered “viable” by a significant segment of the press gallery. However, in the current situation, Grattan’s assessment should spur on Tony Abbott.
Fifteen years ago, Michelle Grattan gave another conservative the same kind of “encouragement”.
In December 1994, when Alexander Downer’s leadership of the Liberal Party had entered a terminal phase, ABC morning show presenter Ranald Macdonald asked Grattan if a return to John Howard was a viable option for the Liberals.
“Going back to John Howard would be quite a gamble,” Ms Grattan said.
“I think that he looks a strong candidate now, he looks quite an attractive alternative given all this shambles. However, once in the leadership I think he would be quite vulnerable to criticism and there would be a lot of media criticism and also quite a lot of discontent in the Liberal Party.
“Despite an attempt by Mr Howard to remake his image somewhat, he is on the conservative end of the Liberal spectrum.
“I think the moderates would be concerned about him and probably discontented and so you would continue with a divided party and equally importantly, from the Liberals’ point of view, he would be seen as a voice from the past, a man of the 80s who would probably have quite a lot of difficulty appealing to the younger voters.”
It is a predictable, but quite outrageous, proposition that a conservative must not be considered for the leadership of the Liberal Party because he or she might upset the liberals.
At the same time, Joe Hockey, indistinguishable from Malcolm Turnbull on the issue that has triggered the latest leadership challenge, is labelled a “consensus” candidate.
The more apt description for Mr Hockey might be the “compromise” candidate. Because the election of Mr Hockey, on the basis of all that he has said on the issue of Labor’s CPRS, could undermine and compromise an effective political challenge to Labor’s massive tax.
It has been reported that Tony Abbott would withdraw from the contest if Joe Hockey expressed his intention to stand in the event of Malcolm Turnbull deciding not to seek re-election to the position.
There has also been the suggestion that Hockey could lead a ticket with Peter Dutton running for the deputy’s job. As talented as Mr Dutton might be, his recent ham-fisted attempt to switch seats indicated, surely, that more experience is needed.
And, of course, written off before the spill motion had been defeated last week, and dismissed again, even as a candidate for deputy leader, there is Kevin Andrews.
Any fair assessment of his performance in interviews before and after last week’s party room vote would have to acknowledge that Andrews performed with great credibility. Andrews presented as articulate, considered and forthright – and he kept the focus exactly where it had to be: on Rudd Labor’s plan for a massive new tax.
Writing off conservatives and boosting liberals is the default position of journalists like Michelle Grattan. But, as history shows, their predilections can be at odds with the preferences of the majority of Australian voters.
