S1: From the newsrooms of the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.
S1: This is the morning edition. I'm Samantha Sellenger Morris. It's Thursday,
S1: May 8th. Since the Liberal Party's election wipeout, liberals and
S1: their media allies have turned to sources of conservative wisdom,
S1: including Margaret Thatcher, in search of guidance. But as our
S1: political and international editor Peter Hartcher writes, I haven't seen
S1: any of them, citing Thatcher's 1975 observation in politics if
S1: you want anything, said, ask a man. If you want
S1: anything done, ask a woman. Today, Peter Hartcher joins me
S1: to discuss when the Liberal Party's women problem first began
S1: and whether the party is destined for extinction. Okay, Peter,
S1: I was hoping you could take us back to when
S1: this problem between the Liberal Party and Australian women began.
S1: Because we know that the party itself was formed in
S1: part through the efforts of highly organized and powerful women's groups,
S1: and the party's founder, Robert Menzies, directed that specific leadership
S1: roles be reserved for women. So I guess maybe start
S1: there before we then get into what happened.
S2: What's gone wrong? Yeah. Menzies designed the Liberal Party to
S2: be a party big enough for everyone, including women and women,
S2: were an essential part, he thought, a vital part of
S2: the Liberal Party from the very beginning. The first woman
S2: to enter the House of Representatives was for the Liberal Party,
S2: Enid Lyons. The first labor woman was Dorothy Tangney, who
S2: entered the Senate at the same election as Enid Lyons
S2: in 1943. But the two parties diverge there because when
S2: Dorothy Tangney eventually retired from Parliament in 1968, she was
S2: still the only labor woman in the parliament, but there
S2: were five Liberal women in the parliament by then, and
S2: there was a reason that the Liberal Party put a
S2: huge emphasis on women, apart from wanting to be a
S2: successful political party and wanting to appeal to half the country. Yeah,
S2: that's a small detail. Yeah.
S1: No biggie.
S2: That's right. And they didn't have to rediscover the existence
S2: of this exotic species called women. That's right. They knew
S2: it from the from the outset. One of the big
S2: philosophical reasons is that this was the era when communism
S2: was the big threat. And Menzies was the anti-communist, the
S2: staunch anti-communist campaigner against what he saw as labor and
S2: its pernicious subjugation to to socialism and communism. And women
S2: were seen to be a more conservative, socially conservative force,
S2: and therefore politically conservative than Labour. So that's why it
S2: was so important to the early Liberal Party to make
S2: sure women were on side. And they were. The Labour
S2: Party really only caught up on the whole women thing
S2: in the 1990s. So it's a recent phenomenon that the
S2: Liberal Party has failed to appeal to women and Labour
S2: Party has succeeded.
S1: Okay, so I'm going to get into what happened at
S1: the election. But when did it start to go wrong?
S1: The Liberal Party obviously had that incredible beginning, I guess
S1: with regards to women. So when did it start to
S1: go seriously wrong?
S2: The peak of the Liberal women's vote, where the Liberal
S2: Party had its greatest share of women voting for it,
S2: was in 1996. Howard era and as recently as 2001.
S2: I suppose that's recent. Most women still voted liberal, and
S2: it's just continued to decline from 1996 onwards. It's been gradual,
S2: but it's accelerated. So at the last election, we know
S2: from the Australian Electoral Study produced out of the Anu,
S2: that only about a third of Australian women voted for
S2: the Liberal Party. Yet women make up by a slim
S2: margin the majority of the country. So how can the
S2: Liberal Party hope to win office again. And then at
S2: this latest election, we don't know for sure, but indications
S2: are it was around the same and perhaps a little less.
S2: And once again, two consecutive elections now where women of
S2: every age group voted in majority Labour and not Liberal.
S2: The liberals, in other words, can't get women of any
S2: age to vote for them in majority anymore.
S1: And just before we move on, was there anything that
S1: happened around 96, 2001? Was there any sort of major
S1: scandal or anything that sort of sparked the women's turn
S1: away from the Liberal Party or not really?
S2: Not really. It was, um, it was a gradual transformation
S2: of the Liberal Party. One of the big debates you'll
S2: remember in in Howard and the transition then to Rudd was, um,
S2: climate change, where Howard initially resisted recognising the problem or
S2: doing anything about it, whereas Labour campaigned on it. And
S2: ultimately it was a big vote winner for Labour, for Rudd.
S2: And it was such a compelling case politically, to do
S2: something about it, that Howard changed his position and came
S2: on board at the last minute before the 2007 election.
S2: Women are seen to be more concerned about the environment
S2: than men. And so that was a big and enduring influence.
S2: Can I just point out that that in 2018, Kelly O'Dwyer,
S2: who was a cabinet minister in in successive Liberal governments,
S2: she famously told the Liberal Party room that they were seen.
S2: The liberals were seen in the general public as being homophobic, anti-women,
S2: climate deniers. That's devastating. Now, if if she were to
S2: update that today about the Liberal Party's image, I think
S2: we can probably assume that she would say the Liberal
S2: Party today is seen as being transphobic, Anti-women climate deniers.
S2: Now that is a deadly cocktail. And the party has
S2: completely failed to deal with with the problem that their
S2: own cabinet minister pointed out to them seven years ago.
S1: Okay, so tell us, just how bad is the result then,
S1: with regards to female Liberal MPs in Parliament now compared to, say, Labour?
S2: Well, although they had an internal review and recommendation ten
S2: years ago recommending that they put up 50% of women
S2: candidates for pre-select, 50% of women candidates for federal parliament.
S2: They went to this latest election with only a third.
S2: So it was already destined to fail. And of that third,
S2: only a few were actually preselected for or had winnable
S2: so-called winnable seats. And now, as the vote count is
S2: coming in, it's still unfolding. We don't have the full results,
S2: but it looks like there'll be 40 or so. Liberal
S2: MPs in the House of those there. It's shaping up
S2: that there will be maybe five women. Wow. Five out
S2: of 40.
S1: And then in comparison, you've got, you know, Labour. All
S1: seven newly minted Labour MPs in Queensland are women.
S2: Yes, it could be a bit of a clue there.
S2: The other clue that the Liberal Party might pick up
S2: is that in the last, in the last two elections,
S2: excluding Saturdays, they lost seven Liberal heartland formerly Liberal heartland
S2: seats to teal so-called teal independents. Every one of them
S2: was a woman. Every one of them. Another little clue
S2: there that the liberal heartland was electing women who cared
S2: about guess what their number one priority was? Women. Number two,
S2: climate change. Number three integrity. And the Liberal Party ignored,
S2: just ignored all of these signs, their own internal recommendations
S2: for year after year. And now we've reached the culmination point.
S2: Or maybe, maybe it hasn't yet culminated. Maybe if they
S2: fail to act on this problem, it could get worse.
S2: They could become an extinct party like the Australian Democrats
S2: or the Communist Party or the DLP. It's possible this
S2: is how political change happens.
S1: Wow. That's incredible. And you know, you pointed out in
S1: your column that Peter Dutton's campaign specifically was very male centric.
S1: You know, he was constantly photographed driving trucks, pumping petrol
S1: in cars, wearing hi vis. You know, it was sort
S1: of like the fast and the furious, minus the muscles
S1: and the bikini clad women.
S2: And it was furious without the fast.
S3: Yeah, exactly. Exactly. So was it really his policies.
S1: That did him in specifically.
S3: At this election?
S1: You know, as opposed to the optics, obviously weren't great
S1: in terms of appealing to women, perhaps.
S2: Well, it was both. So it was the party organization
S2: only putting up preselecting a third of their candidates as women.
S2: It was the policy offering and the single most powerful
S2: signal to women that the Liberal Party weren't interested in
S2: them was the working from home policy, which the liberals
S2: announced a bit over a month before the campaign proper
S2: kicked in. And it was it was very deliberate. Jane
S2: Hume launched it with a speech where she set up
S2: the whole argument for it, in which, by the way,
S2: there was no evidence that the policy was to require
S2: all federal public servants based in Canberra to come to
S2: the office five days a week. And it was a
S2: great long speech she gave about it. The only evidence
S2: was a one research paper from Stanford University in the
S2: US talking about a different country in a different system,
S2: not the Australian public service. And based on that, they
S2: announced this policy. It sent a huge signal that the
S2: party was anti-women, of course, because women have benefited so
S2: much from working from home. And although the policy itself
S2: only applied to the federal public service, it just sent
S2: the signal that the Liberal Party is against working from home.
S2: And if they're going to start with the federal public service,
S2: where does it end? So that was a huge problem.
S2: And then that just kept rolling through into the campaign
S2: and the optics and the whole the whole whole disaster.
S1: And it's safe to say that women really did revolt.
S1: I think I saw some research put out by Redbridge
S1: which said that in February they polled people in 20
S1: key marginal seats. The first wave found that Dutton had
S1: a net approval rating of -11 among women, and then
S1: by late April it was down to -28 among women.
S1: And it wasn't nearly as bad among the men.
S2: Yeah, that's absolutely right.
S1: So they just really turned against him, I guess, in response. Okay.
S2: And so isn't it interesting that even in spite of that,
S2: the debate this week about who to replace Peter Dutton
S2: with two of the three leading names are men. I mean,
S2: that would be crazy. We'll see what they do.
S1: Well, this is what I kind of wanted to ask
S1: you about, because we know that five out of seven
S1: leadership positions in the coalition are women, and I think
S1: it's safe to say most of them were pretty much
S1: invisible during the campaign. Like, do you reckon that's a
S1: directive that came from Peter Dutton? What was that about?
S2: Well, Susan Lee, the deputy leader. She she was pretty visible,
S2: but that's very much the exception, right.
S1: Yeah.
S2: The story. Yeah. And so she's because she was the
S2: deputy leader. Yeah. She is now being talked about as
S2: the only woman possibility to to lead the Liberal Party. Um,
S2: they could do worse. They could do worse. But, um,
S2: whoever is the first to take the leadership after this
S2: devastating wipeout will have to be prepared to be sacrificed
S2: on the altar of, um, of a party that's lost
S2: its way. It's going to be full of angry recriminations.
S2: So if whoever is anointed initially is unlikely to get
S2: through to the next election. So if they put Susan
S2: Lee up, she might not make it that far. But
S2: we'll see.
S1: Okay, so why did all of this happen? I'm just
S1: wondering because, you know, we know that the party had
S1: its own internal review after the 2022 election, and it
S1: revealed much of what we've already talked about. You know,
S1: that the Liberal Party was failing to appeal to female
S1: voters and that yes, it should pre-select women in 50%
S1: of seats. So did they just ignore it?
S2: Yes they did.
S1: Why, though?
S2: They'd rather be comfortable with their existing boys club and
S2: the factional system that has produced that. It's a lot.
S2: A lot of the blame for this falls on the
S2: factional system which reproduces more of its own right. It's
S2: reproducing itself.
S1: Yes.
S2: They'd rather do that than succeed. They would rather become
S2: extinct than change their behaviour to actively include women.
S1: Okay, now that would seem, on the face of it,
S1: to be so irrational. It is. So why do you
S1: have any insight into why? Why? I mean, I understand,
S1: you know, human nature. We can all be a bit
S1: resistant to change. It can be a bit painful. But
S1: if you're constantly getting information that this is and, you know, obviously,
S1: like you say, this has been a slow dying, I guess,
S1: for the party. And they've been indicated for so long,
S1: this is the problem. Why would you avoid it?
S2: It's a simple fact of people. Networks of allies and influence.
S2: Seeking to reward itself and therefore reproduce itself. So it
S2: requires a drastic intervention. And remember, the state divisions are
S2: responsible for the Pre-selections and the state division, especially New
S2: South Wales and Victoria, have been in a state of
S2: total disarray. Factional war, you'll remember in New South Wales,
S2: the Liberal Party state division couldn't even do the paperwork
S2: to nominate candidates for local local government elections across the
S2: entire state. There was not a single Liberal candidate for
S2: any local council.
S1: Okay, so here's my question then. Because like you say,
S1: there's been this very long term resistance to change. You know,
S1: obviously people don't want to lose their power. Well, I
S1: guess the question is, is gender quotas going to be
S1: a real answer for them? Because we know that labor
S1: introduced gender quotas some 30 years ago. So I guess
S1: tell me a bit about what that process was like
S1: for labor. And, you know, whether you think quotas or
S1: what really might change the fortunes for the coalition, I guess.
S2: Well, there was a lot of resistance in the Labor
S2: Party because the whole concept was seen as being anti merit.
S2: We just do our pre-selections on merit. And but again,
S2: it was the real argument was the factions just wanted
S2: to continue doing what they'd always been doing and they
S2: had to be forced to change their ways. And that's
S2: what labor did. They imposed the quota and it's worked.
S2: So at the last federal election, there were just under 50%
S2: of the successful MPs that went into Parliament were for labor,
S2: were women. And at this election, it's going to be
S2: a little over. It looks like about 54% of the
S2: labor caucus in the House this time is going to
S2: be women. So it's really worked. Now, as you know, Samantha,
S2: the liberal argument is we're not going to do that
S2: because we're the party of freedom, of individual Dual responsibility
S2: of merit and of choice. We're not going to put
S2: a quota on ourselves. This is a pretext. This is nonsense,
S2: because the coalition imposes a quota at the core of
S2: its existence, which is with the National Party. They have
S2: a rigid formula about how many nationals will be in
S2: the frontbench in the cabinet of a coalition government. So
S2: this is a this is a group of people who
S2: work very happily and successfully. Well, let me rephrase that.
S2: They work very happily with a quota at the core
S2: of their organisation. So it's a straw man argument.
S4: So do you think there is.
S1: Fundamentally some sort of anti-woman attitude or belief system then
S1: at work.
S2: I thought it was really revealing that the party, when
S2: it was faced with a choice of leader between Julie
S2: Bishop and Scott Morrison, chose Scott Morrison.
S1: And not only did they choose Scott Morrison. But in
S1: the most humiliating of ways, I think Julie Bishop got
S1: something like 11 votes in her favour or something. I mean,
S1: it was it was horrible. Right.
S2: It was it's bizarre because she was by far the
S2: most popular. Her approval rating among coalition MPs was head
S2: and shoulders above any of the others. She had a
S2: high profile. She was actually competent. Maybe that's why they
S2: found her so threatening. So that was as the teal
S2: independent from the West Australian seat of Curtin, which was
S2: Julie Bishop's former seat. Kate Cheney has said that was
S2: a sliding doors moment that showed her and many, many women,
S2: that this was a party that was basically, as you've
S2: just suggested, Samantha, it's at its core, is sexist. They
S2: simply did not want a woman leader, and they got
S2: Scott Morrison to get what you deserve.
S1: Never a dull moment with you, Peter Hartcher.
S2: Well, we've been given this rich fodder. Bye bye. The
S2: electoral outcome to work with. And it's a it's a
S2: remarkable one.
S1: Well, thank you so much as always, Peter, for your time.
S2: It's a pleasure, Samantha.
S1: Today's episode was produced by myself, Josh Towers and Julia Karkazis,
S1: with technical assistance by Taylor Dent. Our executive producer is
S1: Tami Mills. Tom McKendrick is our head of audio. To
S1: listen to our episodes as soon as they drop, follow
S1: the Morning Edition on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you listen
S1: to podcasts. Our newsrooms are powered by subscriptions, so to
S1: support independent journalism, visit The Age or smh.com.au. Subscribe and
S1: to stay up to date, sign up to our Morning
S1: Edition newsletter to receive a summary of the day's most
S1: important news in your inbox every morning. Links are in
S1: the show. Notes. I'm Samantha Selinger. Morris. Thanks for listening.