Agmates Editor Steve Truman writes:
The Liberals have given away any legitimate claim they had to National Party & Rural Australian support by their betrayal of both in the parliament this week.
What an incredible scene. It will be noted in the annals of history, the day the entire Liberal party crossed the floor of parliament to join forces with their lifetime Labor enemies to kill off Australian Wheat farmers hopes and dreams.
Looking from the outside, the scene was bizarre. The Liberals to a man and women deserted their National Party partners who have stood shoulder to shoulder with them for almost 12 years in government and the last 6 months in opposition.
They walked across the political divide to the enemy trenches, settled in alongside their Labor colleagues. Willfully at the behest of their new labor commander they raised their guns and fired, killing off the Australian Single Desk Export Wheat Marketing system.
The Liberal Party have had the unquestioning & Loyal support of the National party for decades. Yet on this one issue of critical importance to Australian wheat farmers, that was backed and championed by their National Party colleagues, the Liberals gleefully to a man and women not only killed off the single desk but also any pretense of a meaningful coalition.
The Nationals, left stranded and hopelessly out numbered on their side of the house where annihilated in the vote. A crushing defeat and humiliation at the hands of their coalition partners.
“Forgive the Liberals - for they know not what they’ve done”
How can National party rank and file federally now even consider an merger with the treacherous Liberal’s?
We have always been lead to believe that the Nationals controlled Coalition policy on Rural affairs in the coalition. It is now clear this is not the case.
What then is the point of a coalition let alone a merger? Let the National party stand alone federally to represent rural and regional Australia. Scrap the coalition.
The Nationals have the opportunity to become the most powerful federal party in Australia. A third Stand alone party with representation in the house of Reps and the Senate.
When elections are close they can then decide who they will join with - Liberal or Labor to form a coalition government for that term.
That way Rural and Regional Australian would nearly always have their party involved in government and both the Liberal party and the Labor party would have to work for they’re support to form government.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Have your say! Are you outraged by this Liberal treachery? Do you believe like I do that this act has killed off any chance of a merger?
Tags: National Party
Well if only it were so simple. You see the real problem is and has been for years that the Nationals have in fact behaved just like the Liberals. The philosophical differences have been minuscule in policy outcomes, I hope ed, your memory can go that far back…should remind you of the complete removal of Dairy regulations and the resultant chaos of restructure from this little micro economic reform, or perhaps the partial and then final sale of Telstra….my phones are much worse than they used to be Barney.
In fact, it was this very reason that some of us formed the New Country Party in an effort to counter this phenomenon of our political party running away with the wild men from the Liberal and Labor parties. Of course that attempt is now history, however if the Nationals were, as a result of them now being in opposition to see the error of their ways, then some may see them as a real alternative once again. The difficulty will be to sell the idea that the party responsible, even the minister responsible for dairy deregulation now pretends to champion wheat growers in their (now lost) battle to retain the only countervailing measure available against excess market power by a market dominated by huge oligopolistic players.
Perhaps in the face of failure of the reinstatement of the old system (no single desk) we may need to reconsider our options to obtain reasonable returns to wheat growers, maybe the European or American models of direct subsidies may be better.
It seems such a dreadful waste of time to have to re learn the lessons of history. One thing is for sure, it will make interesting reading in a century or so, but an independent National party would necessarily have to join with Labor to prove that they would use their balance of power, I doubt their would be the stomach for that in the now Nationals.
But I like the concept of bargaining the best deal for the bush, no matter if it was the Liberals or Labor, yes an Independent National Party… that sounds interesting.
Rowell Walton
G’day Rowell,
The Nationals are looking to become relevant once again to their supporter base - rural & regional Australia.
The Single desk debacle has now proven the answer is NOT to merge with the Liberals who have moved so far to the centre left that they a virtually indistinguishable from the Labor party.
I’m now convinced that if they do this there will be a new 3rd party spring up not unlike your New Country Party that will represent Rural & Regional Australians.
All you say about the Nationals over the past decade and a half is true and look whats happened to their support base. Getting into bed with and so closely aligned to the Liberal Party philosophy has been the downfall of the party and will be the death of them if they pursue a merger.
As to the question of do the current Federal National party have the stomach to be a truly independent political force….. I have my doubts. But in my opinion it is the only way forward for the party.
The demise of the Democrats this month after 30 years leaves a gapping hole in Australian politics, that the Greens will gladly fill, if no other party puts their hand up. The Nationals are in the box seat to do this over the next decade with strong leadership and direction.
The question remains through - do they have that leadership capacity?
Finally the “crunch” has come. I was at the Victorian National Party State conference in 1985 as a representative delegate from our Ovens Valley branch.
Discussion was whether the National Party of Vic should join with the Liberals in a coalition in opposition. I was disappointed when my motion to remain as an independent party in opposition and indeed I spoke that the party should always bargain its position in opposition and remain an independent third force representing the Country vote.
The issue went to a Division and we “the country people” lost 2 to one. I must say I have waited for this situation to develop and I can now repeat the words “That the State party will come to Rue the day they made this decision“, albeit at the Victorian conference. I left the party soon after in protest.
Now we only have one small chance to regain the credible vote of country people. I know it is difficult to convince leaders like Mr Sinclair and the decadent and present Leaders and the like to relinquish their elevated pay packets as part of the Government or opposition but as as matter of principle these things are totally irrelevant to country people.
I have learnt to trust no one in politics . I hope that it could be possible to regain the Country credibility.”Small Chance” but one that must be attempted.
KEVIN J SMITH
G’day Kevin,
The Nationals policy of Coalition with the Liberals has not worked on a State of federal level.
Federally the decline of the National Party in Coalition has been quiet stunning. In 1975 the National Country party (as it was know then) held 23 seats in 127 seat House of reps which represented 18% of the nationwide vote.
Twelve years later in 1987 that was down to 19 seats in the 148 seat chamber with their vote sitting at 11.5%.
After last years 2007 election the party is now down to just 10 seats in the 150 seat assembly and can only poll 5.5% of the vote nationally. The parties vote had more than halved in the last 2o years, down a whopping 6%.
Is it any coincidence that in Queensland where the Nationals have been a ’stand alone’ party they are stronger than in any state of Australia?
Being a Victorian perhaps you can tell us what the hell the Liberals are doing standing a candidate in Gippsland?
If the Nat’s lose Gippsland in the upcoming bi-election they can thank the Liberals for standing a candidate. The numbers I’m seeing show the Libs have no hope but will rob the National / conservative candidate of 20% of the Primary with a possible ‘bleed’ of preference votes away from the Nats?
What favors are the Lib’s doing the Nat’s here? It’s just crazy.
Hi Steve,
Yes it seems so treacherous for the Libs to be opposing the traditional seat of the retiring National Mcgauran but as I see it the Vic libs are hiding behind the fact that they have an agreement that they will not stand a candidate against a sitting National member, However in this case the retiring member is not technically the sitting member.
Thus the extremely treacherous Victorian Liberal party think they have the chance of taking the seat at the expense of their co alition party. This also happened when the seat of Benalla became vacant at election by the retirement of sitting National member. This time the result could give a lead as to the result in Gippsland.The Labor party took the seat,however at the proceeding election some sense was found in hindsight and only the National party stood a candidate and took the seat back.
Don’t any one misjudge the covetous and treacherous Vic Liberals. This treachery was successful in winning the parliament back off the Cain- Kirner era by blatant lies and misinformation.
I repeat I am very unlikely to trust “any” political party.The party principle I believe, is really a conspiratorial scheme to win Government in spite of the wishes of of the constituents.
Kevin J Smith
G’day Kevin,
Thanks for that overview, very instructive. It’s good too have you there with your insight into Victorian politics.
I see the commentators are today calling Gippsland as a win for the Nationals. Would you keep an eye on Saturdays result and give us your summation the result early next week? It would be great for the community if you’d do that.
I’ll send you my email address shortly so you can update us by email.
Thanks Kevin.
Cheers
Rowell
Its interesting to look back from here let alone look back in a hundred years time.
The concept of a National Party that could hold a balance of power is not new .
The problem has allways been the coalition and the deterioration in the Nationals support base as a result of it.
I can remember the frustration with falling support both in numbers attending meetings and plummeting financial support in the very heartland of western Queensland in the mid 80’s because of a perception at grass roots level that the coalition was pandering to the urban vote and all the resolutions at district council didnt matter a toss to the coalition.
Even more frustrating was the fact that the grass roots were right and they showed it with their abandonment of a once very powerfull party in Queensland.
Of course you didnt rock the boat in those days and the woollen tie brigade suppressed all reform attempts.
They felt that we were better off as part of a Govt than none at all which was sort of reasonable but the grass roots felt the price was too high .
I must say at the time I did agree to a certain extent as some power was better than no power that may have been the case had they split from the coalition.
Consequently we saw the emergence of all sorts of fledgling party shows that came and went with all the best intentions and some of them with not so palatable intentions or outcomes .
The shame of it all was that the Nationals were allways there, the structure was there, its respect was there but their people chose to walk away from it.
In some ways it serves the bush right that it has let what influence they had slip away over the years instead of getting stuck into their party and getting it doing what was required .
The blame for that lies in the inability of the Nats to risk it or go down that independent path that is now being proposed.
It has become painfully obvious that the Liberals havent got time to be a bush sympathiser and the Nationals hanging in there in the hope that the coalition will feed the bush a few crumbs is no longer an option.
The independent option opens a great opportunity for the rebuilding of the Nationals with appeal to a rural/mining electorate that is well aware that most of Australia makes a quid out of the primary sector one way or another.
Do the Nats merge to achieve an outcome for the bush or go independent as proposed .
I say go independent and give it everything they can throw at it.The structure is there so give it ago.
Independence will be gone for ever if they merge and the option is allways there down the track.
Greg - Can I weigh in here,
I agree with what you have said. The political framework / structure is already in place with the Nationals.
All that is required is more of them to have the same clear sighted thinking that Barnaby Joyce has. He makes no apologies for representing the people who put him in the Senate, no matter who it upsets.
In Canberra he is considered a ‘redneck joke’ by Labor & the Libs and some of the Nats just think he’s the Anti-Christ. But in the Bush where it matters - he highly respected which is very unusual for a politician.
Perhaps John Anderson and the Federal National leadership should just look up for a minute from their interminal party review to see the Barnaby phenomena. If they have eyes to see they would instantly recognize the answers they seek to what has gone wrong with the National party.
Get back to REPRESENTING people in Rural and Regional Australia and make no apologies for it.
One of the very big reasons the Nats have done them selves in is the fact that they will not represent their constituents, all I hear is that they want to defeat labor, its no longer a battle for ideas, it is to defeat labor. They should focus on finding the failings of the current government…its weakness’s, health care, education, industry policy, infrastructure, rural and urban as well.
Is there no point in a battle for ideas, I believe that the philosophical ideas are the same in both labor, Liberal and dare I say the Nationals as well, until opposition and the Nats needed to find a place to rescue themselves…the single desk of the wheat industry, and it was clear from day one that nothing could be done to save it, the numbers simply were not obtainable.
McEwen by the way would have unwound the co-alition long before opposition, he like most of us would see that the game set up by the Liberal prime minister he was in co-alition with, to lay the political frame work to entirely remove the wheat single desk.
He would have said…stop the rot, this wheat industry single desk is central to the well being of our people and you will not with our support continue down this path, the choice is yours, stop or we will leave. …and he meant it.
Barney Joice it seems may well be doomed to go the way of Bob Katter, perhaps one of the best representer s of his people, who could no longer belong to a party destroying day by day its people…..but independents can never govern.