S1: From the newsrooms of the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.
S1: This is the morning edition. I'm Samantha Cylinder Morris. It's Tuesday,
S1: May 6th. The knives have been out for Angus Taylor
S1: for a while. Former opposition leader Peter Dutton was forced
S1: to defend the shadow treasurer in June last year after
S1: one of his own Liberal frontbenchers attacked him with accusations
S1: that he was incompetent. And now, in the wake of
S1: the coalition's election bloodbath, many of his colleagues are not
S1: just lobbying their own accusations that Taylor is perhaps the
S1: main reason they lost, but they're spilling the beans to
S1: our reporters today. Foreign Affairs and national security correspondent Matthew
S1: Nord and federal politics reporter Natassia Chrysanthos. Give us an
S1: inside look at when coalition MPs realised that their campaign
S1: had gone off the rails. Welcome to you both. Okay, Taz,
S1: I'm going to start with you because I want you
S1: to take us back to the start of the election campaign,
S1: the end of March. You've written about what was happening
S1: within Peter Dutton's camp. You know, now we know there
S1: was a complete overconfidence there. But can you take us
S1: inside the room, like what was going on back at
S1: the start?
S2: So if we go back to the final, final day
S2: of Parliament, which was two days after the budget and
S2: a day before the election was called.
S3: The Prime Minister has. The Prime Minister has caused a
S3: lot of pain to Australian families over the last three years?
S3: Will the Prime Minister join with me in cutting the
S3: price of petrol and diesel to save? You had this.
S2: Very recent tightening in the polls. So I think you
S2: started to see signs of confidence, I suppose, from both sides.
S4: I wonder, I wonder if I wonder if when he
S4: sat there, members on my when he sat there and
S4: reintroduced in organization in 2014, I wonder.
S2: I wonder what hadn't really happened at that point was
S2: that kind of quite steady week by week decline in
S2: the coalition standing? You know, as we as we wrote
S2: in the piece, you had some coalition MPs saying we
S2: can pick up 18 seats. Um, so feeling pretty good
S2: about their chances.
S1: Okay. And then even back in late January, Matt, there
S1: was one prominent sign that perhaps some Liberal senators were
S1: really feeling too cocky. So tell me about that.
S5: Yes. Now, this is something that at some stage in opposition,
S5: you would have to get around to if you thought
S5: you had a chance of victory. But, uh, this is
S5: being reflected on by several people in the coalition that
S5: at the very first shadow Cabinet meeting of the year.
S5: This was on the agenda was for the coalition frontbenchers
S5: to do what are called statements of expectations. This is
S5: what you would deliver to the public service if you win.
S5: To set out your priorities. The fact this was being
S5: discussed then is seen as a sign that expectations had
S5: got completely out of control of victory. Coalition frontbenchers were
S5: talking about the public service chiefs that they might want
S5: to depose and appoint their own people. So it shows
S5: that at this time, it feels like a long time ago.
S5: At the start of the year, there was a very
S5: different vibe that there was a feeling that they could win.
S5: And yeah, there was a bit of hubris starting to
S5: creep in.
S1: And at this time, the coalition is soaring in the
S1: polls and an insider told you that, you know, the
S1: party room was getting reassurance that the policy work had
S1: been done right. So they were going to have a
S1: clear economic vision about what they'd be selling to their electorates, right?
S2: Yeah. So MPs have said this is what they were
S2: being told. And even in in the public commentary, um,
S2: that was coming from the frontbench and opposition leader Peter
S2: Dutton at the end of last year, um, with nuclear,
S2: for example, it was like, oh, we've got the stuff
S2: ready to go. We're just waiting for the right time.
S2: They've done all these other things, for example, blocking student caps.
S2: They were assuring everyone that we have our own student
S2: cap policy ready to go. And every time the question
S2: was when, when, when the kind of line you'd hear
S2: from Dutton was, well, you know, why would we come
S2: out with stuff when Labor's doing such a good job
S2: of stuffing things up for themselves? We're just going to
S2: let the wheels fall off labour and we'll come in
S2: with our stuff when we need to.
S5: And this was a big difference between the two campaigns,
S5: the two sides of politics. Looking back to the start
S5: of the year, the coalition began the start of the
S5: year with their policy offering being a taxpayer subsidies for
S5: business lunches, which is a really minor policy that actually
S5: proved a very easy to ridicule and wasn't going at
S5: the heart of voters worries about cost of living. Whereas
S5: the Prime Minister and Labour, they kicked off the year
S5: with a big focus on health and Medicare and getting
S5: down what you paid to go to the doctor, it
S5: was much more substantial. The coalition had a very threadbare
S5: policy offering then, and it was clear at the time
S5: that that wasn't very useful. And with hindsight now, you
S5: can see that they were focusing on the wrong things.
S1: And Matt and Taz, you you know, you've really given
S1: us an inside look into when coalition MPs started to realise,
S1: oh my God, the wheels are about to fall off here,
S1: so take us inside that.
S5: Well, no one expected the result to be as bad
S5: as it was. Even in the few days before the election,
S5: MPs who were very disappointed with what the coalition had
S5: come up with were telling me they were thinking perhaps
S5: they could get say into the mid 60s in the
S5: number of seats. Now they're currently in the low 40s,
S5: which is a huge difference. And that goes to the
S5: terrible internal polling that the party was getting, which seems
S5: to be even worse than the published polling that we
S5: were producing in the media, which was pretty accurate. You
S5: usually hear that the polling political parties get is way
S5: more accurate, and if you could only see the special
S5: magical polling we're seeing, you'd understand. And in fact, it
S5: turned out to be even worse. But what we saw
S5: was this policy making process got even worse throughout the campaign. Uh,
S5: you know, and in the days leading up to it,
S5: Dutton's big announcement on a domestic gas reservation policy. This
S5: was only done in the couple of days leading up
S5: to his big budget reply Speech.
S3: And tonight I announce our national gas plan. This plan
S3: will prioritise domestic gas supply, address shortfalls and reduce energy
S3: prices for Australians. This is all about ensuring Australian gas
S3: is for Australians.
S5: The industry was very unhappy about it, very hard to
S5: explain to voters they didn't have the modelling on how
S5: this would bring anybody's energy prices down. So in the
S5: early days of the campaign I was travelling with Peter
S5: Dutton and this was what the press pack wanted to
S5: know was what's the impact for voters? I don't think
S5: it was even a tricky gotcha question. We were trying
S5: to find out for our readers what the impact would be,
S5: and they didn't have it. And Peter Dutton just kept saying, oh,
S5: we've got it, we'll bring it to you. And it
S5: seems that they didn't release it yet because they didn't
S5: have it, and they were cooking it up to essentially
S5: backfill the policy they'd already announced. We saw this with
S5: the very expensive a one year a tax cut which
S5: cost $10 billion for a single year of tax relief
S5: that was being written in real time the day before
S5: the speech, with the numbers being plugged in to the documents. Uh,
S5: and that's not the way policy should be made. So
S5: there's going to be a lot of questions to be
S5: asked about why it was all so last minute.
S2: To jump in there quickly with the two other examples
S2: that to me, really stood out, were on immigration, was,
S2: you know, that's one of the areas where the coalition
S2: is seen as strongest amongst the public. They had a
S2: really solid ground to make that attack against Labour, because
S2: Labour did have, uh, immigration numbers blowing out year on year.
S2: 18 months earlier, the coalition had started putting out some
S2: of its targets, um, or suggestions of where it wanted
S2: migration figures to be. And come the week before the election,
S2: they still had no detail about where those cuts were
S2: going to come from. And they were they were talking
S2: across each other and ruling one visa class out, but
S2: then someone else would rule it in. Um, similar with
S2: the public servants policy that had been floated, uh, back
S2: in August last year. And again, come the costings, the
S2: policy and numbers were changing week by week.
S1: I'm also really curious about the exasperation that you've heard
S1: from coalition MPs because they've they've told you some stunning things.
S1: Tell us what they've told you about how exasperated they've been.
S5: Uh, yes. Yes. MPs are absolutely exasperated. Uh, shadow ministers
S5: are talking about they were doing work. They were submitting
S5: a policy proposals that went into a void and were
S5: never really seen again. I know that the defence policy
S5: was being worked up and consulted on at least six
S5: months ago, but only materialized with no detail in the
S5: penultimate week of the campaign. We're starting to hear more
S5: about the dysfunctional relationships between Peter Dutton and Susan Lay,
S5: between Peter Dutton and Angus Taylor, between Peter Dutton and
S5: Andrew Hastie. They weren't all on the same page. We're
S5: hearing a lot about decision making being held within a
S5: very small group in Peter Dutton's office that's been nicknamed
S5: the FM crew to avoid using too crude language. So
S5: this wasn't a broad cabinet style process of decision making,
S5: and there's a lot of retribution about that, because this
S5: isn't the way things are supposed to work.
S2: And on that, I think one coalition MP put it
S2: quite aptly in the piece, which is they said we
S2: didn't do the work. We haven't had a serious small
S2: business or industrial relations policy or tax policy or anything
S2: on investment and cutting regulation. We cautiously trusted them at
S2: the time, but it became obvious nearer to the campaign
S2: that the work was not actually done, and that we
S2: believed we could win the election without a proper economic agenda.
S1: Will, this feeds into a question I was really, uh,
S1: stuck with after I read your piece, which is why
S1: did these insiders actually speak to you? I mean, was
S1: it just anger over how badly things went? You know,
S1: are they talking behind their colleagues backs because they're hoping
S1: for change? Perhaps something else. Matt?
S5: Uh, well, they've been living this for several years, and
S5: people want to vent. People want to get things off
S5: their chest. People have grievances about their colleagues. You know,
S5: people want to point fingers at others. People want to
S5: control their narrative. During the campaign itself, everyone's very determined
S5: to stay on message and help the team. And knowing
S5: that a piece like this, which is only going to
S5: appear the day after and the result is known, people
S5: are more comfortable to talk then, and we're seeing it.
S5: We're going to see it in the days following the election.
S5: People will be speaking out. So, uh, yeah, there's a
S5: lot of reason why people want to get things off
S5: their chest in the days after such a disastrous result.
S1: Okay. And now we inevitably we've got to talk about
S1: shadow treasurer Angus Taylor because, you know, the knives are
S1: out for him. So what are members of the coalition
S1: saying about him now? I mean, are they placing much
S1: of the blame on him for this catastrophic loss?
S5: Yes, this was a big thing that was coming up
S5: in the days leading up to Election Day, when it
S5: looked like the coalition wouldn't win. Uh, a lot of
S5: feedback coming back that the main source of blame should
S5: be the coalition's economic team, which simply didn't produce the
S5: type of policies that you would expect they'd had three
S5: years of opposition to develop policies, and what came out
S5: was very threadbare and then done at the last minute.
S5: Now there's a lot of back and forth about this.
S5: We're seeing briefing from people close to the shadow treasurer,
S5: Angus Taylor, who are talking about some of the great
S5: ideas they think they had that never went anywhere. Clearly,
S5: there was a dysfunctional relationship between him and Peter Dutton.
S5: But throughout opposition, Angus Taylor has struggled to go up
S5: against a Jim Chalmers, the treasurer. It's been a running
S5: joke in labor about how few questions Angus Taylor asks
S5: of Jim Chalmers in Question Time. We've seen Liberal Senator
S5: Hollie Hughes out on Monday morning very critical of Angus Taylor,
S5: saying she has concerns about his capability.
S6: I think the fact that the economic narrative was just
S6: completely non-existent, I'm not quite sure what he's been doing
S6: for three years. There is no tax plan. I think
S6: the economic team has significant something.
S5: You were hearing from her colleagues in the lead up
S5: to polling day was just the economy is supposed to
S5: be a strength for the coalition, but they felt they
S5: had very little to sell there, particularly in a long
S5: term sense beyond a few temporary one off measures that
S5: were going to expire within a year.
S1: And do you reckon it's fair their criticisms of him,
S1: or do you think that's just them, you know, trying
S1: to shift the blame because, you know, obviously the recriminations
S1: are savage now. So do you think this is just
S1: protecting their backs or do you think it's fair, especially
S1: what Hollie Hughes says. She said that, you know, they
S1: had a complete lack of policy and economic narrative and that,
S1: you know, she says, I don't know what he's been
S1: doing for three years. Is that fair? That really he
S1: just hasn't done much?
S5: It's certainly fair. Based on the results. Now, Angus Taylor
S5: and people close to him will tell you that work
S5: was being done. It didn't all get through the leader's office.
S5: You know, there are conflicting accounts here, but whatever the case,
S5: you only need to look at the results, that it
S5: wasn't effective. There wasn't good economic policy, and he was
S5: the shadow treasurer. And he has to bear a big
S5: responsibility for that.
S2: I think as well, since so much of the criticism
S2: that had come from Taylor was around tax and Australians
S2: are paying too much income tax. So I think one
S2: could expect and a voter could expect, given that he's
S2: identified this big problem, well, you'd expect some kind of
S2: solution to that. And what we saw at the end
S2: of the day was the coalition coming in to raise
S2: income taxes, um, by repealing Labor's recent tax cut, which was,
S2: as many people have pointed out, a very absurd position
S2: for them to be in and probably really hurt their
S2: credibility on that issue going into the election.
S5: Well, yeah, it was absolutely bizarre. It was bizarre as
S5: it was happening that the Labor Party came out on
S5: budget night with pretty modest tax cuts and what everyone
S5: in the press gallery expected was. Of course, the coalition
S5: would match them and maybe try and outdo them. But no,
S5: that wasn't the decision. So Jim Chalmers has said that
S5: he couldn't believe they gave them such a political gift. And,
S5: you know, this will be a key source of the
S5: retribution within the party. And as he was saying, what
S5: a gift it was. I was thinking of his political hero,
S5: Paul Keating, who used the phrase getting hit in the
S5: arse by a rainbow. And that's really what labor was
S5: with decisions like this from the coalition to go to
S5: an election promising to raise income tax.
S1: I love that so much. I mean, it's commentary like that.
S1: This is why we love politics. But but just to
S1: wrap up on Angus Taylor, you know, was he once
S1: considered a forerunner to lead the liberals after Dutton? And
S1: if so, what are his prospects now?
S5: Well, he's still very much one of the leadership contenders.
S5: What everyone within the Liberal Party is saying is we
S5: don't have a lot of great choices. They're not very
S5: enthused about any of the candidates. So Angus Taylor has
S5: a support base. You know, he's he's a factional player.
S5: He has numbers within the party. He's been working on
S5: that throughout opposition. Uh, Sussan Ley clearly was a bit
S5: disconnected from Peter Dutton, as she would present probably a
S5: more moderate face than some of the others. The Liberal
S5: Party is struggling with women. She would be a good
S5: choice there. You couldn't say. She did a lot during
S5: the campaign. And then Dan Tehan, when Taz was talking
S5: before about the immigration policy, he had a battle to
S5: hold on to his seat and he did win, but
S5: he did absolutely no national media during the campaign, which
S5: he could have still done while campaigning for a seat
S5: to talk about immigration, which was supposed to be a
S5: strength for the coalition. So no one within the party
S5: is very excited about any of the candidates, and it's
S5: being seen as it's a job, perhaps for someone to
S5: do for a few years while they rebuild, and then
S5: they can think again about who an actual alternative prime
S5: minister would be.
S1: Okay, well, definitely a space to watch. So thank you
S1: so much, Natasha and Matt, for your time.
S5: Thank you.
S7: Thank you.
S1: Today's episode of The Morning Edition was produced by Tammy Mills,
S1: with technical assistance by Josh towers. Tom McKendrick is our
S1: head of audio. To listen to our episodes as soon
S1: as they drop, follow the Morning Edition on Apple, Spotify
S1: or wherever you listen to podcasts. Our newsrooms are powered
S1: by subscriptions, so to support independent journalism, visit The Age
S1: or smh.com.au. Subscribe and to stay up to date. Sign
S1: up to our Morning Edition newsletter to receive a summary
S1: of the day's most important news in your inbox every morning.
S1: Links are in the show. Notes. I'm Samantha Selinger. Morris.
S1: Thanks for listening.