WEBVTT - Why did the Coalition lose?

0:00:00.520 --> 0:00:06.800
<v Speaker 1>Already and this is the Dahlias. Oh now it makes sense.

0:00:14.760 --> 0:00:17.560
<v Speaker 2>Good morning, and welcome to the Daily Os. It's Tuesday,

0:00:17.640 --> 0:00:19.640
<v Speaker 2>the sixth of May. I'm Zara Seidler.

0:00:19.880 --> 0:00:21.000
<v Speaker 1>I'm Billy fit Simon's.

0:00:21.440 --> 0:00:24.720
<v Speaker 2>As the results from Saturday's federal election continue to roll in,

0:00:25.079 --> 0:00:28.080
<v Speaker 2>it's clear that Labor will govern with a significant majority.

0:00:28.520 --> 0:00:31.200
<v Speaker 2>It's also clear that the Liberal Party has endured one

0:00:31.280 --> 0:00:35.120
<v Speaker 2>of its worst electoral defeats in modern history. There are

0:00:35.360 --> 0:00:38.560
<v Speaker 2>many reasons and many critiques being thrown around when it

0:00:38.640 --> 0:00:41.800
<v Speaker 2>comes to explaining what happened to the Liberal Party, some

0:00:42.040 --> 0:00:45.200
<v Speaker 2>from inside the party and others from outside the party.

0:00:45.760 --> 0:00:47.880
<v Speaker 2>On today's podcast, we're going to talk through some of

0:00:47.960 --> 0:00:50.959
<v Speaker 2>the features of the Liberal Party's campaign that have been

0:00:51.000 --> 0:00:52.800
<v Speaker 2>focused on since their loss.

0:00:57.200 --> 0:00:59.000
<v Speaker 1>So Zara, we're going to get into all of the

0:00:59.080 --> 0:01:01.800
<v Speaker 1>reasons that are kind of being thrown around about why

0:01:01.920 --> 0:01:06.479
<v Speaker 1>the coalition lost this election so substantially. We did briefly

0:01:06.560 --> 0:01:09.120
<v Speaker 1>touch on it on yesterday's podcast, but we think we should.

0:01:08.840 --> 0:01:09.720
<v Speaker 2>Go into a blur.

0:01:10.000 --> 0:01:12.920
<v Speaker 1>We should go into more detail today. But before we

0:01:13.000 --> 0:01:14.760
<v Speaker 1>get to that, do you want to just set out

0:01:14.840 --> 0:01:17.000
<v Speaker 1>the state of play as to where things are at

0:01:17.400 --> 0:01:19.160
<v Speaker 1>with accounting for the election.

0:01:19.760 --> 0:01:22.880
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, so at the time of recording, the Liberal Party

0:01:22.959 --> 0:01:26.880
<v Speaker 2>has picked up just thirty nine seats in the next parliament,

0:01:26.959 --> 0:01:30.520
<v Speaker 2>as we spoke about yesterday. That's down from fifty eight seats.

0:01:31.040 --> 0:01:34.880
<v Speaker 2>The coalition's primary vote fell more than five percent, and

0:01:35.000 --> 0:01:39.000
<v Speaker 2>the Liberal Party and certainly the Coalition lost votes universally.

0:01:39.160 --> 0:01:41.360
<v Speaker 2>And by that, I just mean there wasn't one key

0:01:41.440 --> 0:01:44.800
<v Speaker 2>demographic that they lost. You know, last election, the fact

0:01:44.800 --> 0:01:47.480
<v Speaker 2>that they lost women was focused on a lot. It's

0:01:47.560 --> 0:01:49.560
<v Speaker 2>not really the same thing here. They kind of lost

0:01:49.840 --> 0:01:54.680
<v Speaker 2>everybody across the board. All in all, I'd say one sentence,

0:01:54.840 --> 0:01:57.400
<v Speaker 2>the state of play is very dire for the Liberal Party.

0:01:57.840 --> 0:02:00.080
<v Speaker 1>And so we're going to talk about kind of of

0:02:00.200 --> 0:02:04.120
<v Speaker 1>the domestic and internal reasons as to why some experts

0:02:04.160 --> 0:02:06.840
<v Speaker 1>are saying that was. But first let's look at the

0:02:06.880 --> 0:02:10.400
<v Speaker 1>potential influence that US President Donald Trump had, because some

0:02:10.520 --> 0:02:12.760
<v Speaker 1>are saying that that is one of the reasons why

0:02:12.880 --> 0:02:15.560
<v Speaker 1>they lost as much as they did. Yeah, what are

0:02:15.639 --> 0:02:16.519
<v Speaker 1>people saying about this?

0:02:17.240 --> 0:02:19.440
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, this is a really interesting one because you're right,

0:02:19.560 --> 0:02:22.919
<v Speaker 2>it is an external factor. It is international news, but

0:02:23.040 --> 0:02:26.840
<v Speaker 2>it does have quite a tangible effect locally, and I

0:02:26.919 --> 0:02:30.480
<v Speaker 2>think that's for two reasons. The first is that at

0:02:30.560 --> 0:02:32.960
<v Speaker 2>a time where I don't think it's contentious to say

0:02:33.000 --> 0:02:35.959
<v Speaker 2>that Donald Trump there's quite a lot of unpredictability in

0:02:36.120 --> 0:02:40.280
<v Speaker 2>his politics at a time like that, voters wanted stability,

0:02:40.480 --> 0:02:43.079
<v Speaker 2>and so we are seeing, as we spoke about yesterday,

0:02:43.440 --> 0:02:46.720
<v Speaker 2>a real turn back to the incumbent and sticking with

0:02:46.800 --> 0:02:50.040
<v Speaker 2>basically a safe pair of hands. But the second part

0:02:50.120 --> 0:02:52.720
<v Speaker 2>of this is that analysts are saying that the Liberal

0:02:52.800 --> 0:02:57.160
<v Speaker 2>Party didn't separate themselves enough from Donald Trump. So just

0:02:57.240 --> 0:02:59.400
<v Speaker 2>to explain that a bit more, a couple of months

0:02:59.440 --> 0:03:03.520
<v Speaker 2>Agonald Trump and his policies were fairly popular. I mean,

0:03:03.639 --> 0:03:06.320
<v Speaker 2>he won the US election, he's inauguration, he did a

0:03:06.360 --> 0:03:09.520
<v Speaker 2>whole bunch of things, and at that time Peter Dudden

0:03:09.800 --> 0:03:14.119
<v Speaker 2>seemed to reflect quite a few of those features here

0:03:14.360 --> 0:03:17.400
<v Speaker 2>in Australia. So we've spoken about before the fact that

0:03:17.639 --> 0:03:21.359
<v Speaker 2>he announced a shadow portfolio that was the Department of

0:03:21.520 --> 0:03:25.600
<v Speaker 2>Government Efficiency that was understood to be related to the

0:03:25.680 --> 0:03:28.680
<v Speaker 2>same thing that is led by Elon Musk in the US.

0:03:29.280 --> 0:03:32.120
<v Speaker 2>He announced plans to cut the public service similar to

0:03:32.240 --> 0:03:35.240
<v Speaker 2>the way that Donald Trump did, and he announced plans

0:03:35.280 --> 0:03:37.680
<v Speaker 2>to end working from home for the public service. Again

0:03:37.880 --> 0:03:39.560
<v Speaker 2>similar to what we were seeing in the US.

0:03:40.160 --> 0:03:40.280
<v Speaker 1>Now.

0:03:40.440 --> 0:03:44.320
<v Speaker 2>While he backflipped on those policies, at the end they

0:03:44.360 --> 0:03:47.400
<v Speaker 2>were largely seen to be influenced by the US and

0:03:47.520 --> 0:03:50.880
<v Speaker 2>so when public sentiment turned away from Donald Trump and

0:03:50.960 --> 0:03:53.480
<v Speaker 2>when the tariffs were announced and there was a lot

0:03:53.520 --> 0:03:56.960
<v Speaker 2>of instability, analysts are saying Peter Dudden didn't do enough

0:03:57.440 --> 0:03:59.920
<v Speaker 2>to separate himself and say no, we are very different.

0:04:00.600 --> 0:04:04.000
<v Speaker 2>That also wasn't helped when members of his party of

0:04:04.160 --> 0:04:07.160
<v Speaker 2>the Coalition were seen wearing Make America Great Again hats.

0:04:07.240 --> 0:04:10.840
<v Speaker 2>That was just enterprise a senator, and so taken together,

0:04:11.320 --> 0:04:14.160
<v Speaker 2>there was this idea that Peter Dudden had not done

0:04:14.320 --> 0:04:17.440
<v Speaker 2>enough to say we are different to Donald Trump and

0:04:17.560 --> 0:04:20.040
<v Speaker 2>to the Trump administration, and that that had quite a

0:04:20.080 --> 0:04:22.640
<v Speaker 2>big effect when it came to this election.

0:04:23.160 --> 0:04:26.200
<v Speaker 1>I also think their messaging was quite confusing because you

0:04:26.279 --> 0:04:30.520
<v Speaker 1>mentioned the Department of Government Efficiency that exists under Trump's administration,

0:04:31.000 --> 0:04:33.839
<v Speaker 1>and then Peter Dudden announced that if he was elected

0:04:33.880 --> 0:04:36.600
<v Speaker 1>to government, there would be a Minister for Government Efficiency.

0:04:37.000 --> 0:04:40.599
<v Speaker 1>And we spoke to the Shadow treasurer Angus Taylor and said, clearly,

0:04:40.680 --> 0:04:43.280
<v Speaker 1>those two things are related. It's not a coincidence that

0:04:43.400 --> 0:04:46.000
<v Speaker 1>you guys have something that is named exactly the same

0:04:46.120 --> 0:04:48.880
<v Speaker 1>as what is under Trump's administration, and they said, no,

0:04:48.960 --> 0:04:51.240
<v Speaker 1>they're not related. And I think that was quite confusing.

0:04:51.360 --> 0:04:54.039
<v Speaker 1>Like if you, I think a lot of people said,

0:04:54.400 --> 0:04:57.960
<v Speaker 1>if you're going to replicate something from Trump's administration own

0:04:58.320 --> 0:05:00.760
<v Speaker 1>and then set yeah, and then say, but they're not related,

0:05:00.880 --> 0:05:04.360
<v Speaker 1>that's really confusing. And so I think it was, Yeah,

0:05:04.400 --> 0:05:07.240
<v Speaker 1>they didn't distance themselves enough, but I think they kind

0:05:07.279 --> 0:05:09.840
<v Speaker 1>of weren't clear on how they wanted it to be

0:05:09.960 --> 0:05:12.599
<v Speaker 1>related between the two, and that's why it came across

0:05:12.640 --> 0:05:13.520
<v Speaker 1>as so confusing.

0:05:13.920 --> 0:05:16.479
<v Speaker 2>Well, I think this goes to a bigger issue, which

0:05:16.480 --> 0:05:18.800
<v Speaker 2>we'll talk about, which is that I don't think the

0:05:18.920 --> 0:05:21.839
<v Speaker 2>party itself had settled on whether or not they wanted

0:05:21.880 --> 0:05:25.240
<v Speaker 2>to be emulating the Trump presidency or not. And you know,

0:05:25.400 --> 0:05:28.480
<v Speaker 2>there are lots of different perspectives in modern political parties,

0:05:28.520 --> 0:05:31.160
<v Speaker 2>and I don't know that they necessarily communicated that in

0:05:31.240 --> 0:05:32.520
<v Speaker 2>the most effective way possible.

0:05:32.960 --> 0:05:36.120
<v Speaker 1>Okay, let's move on to what happened domestically now. In

0:05:36.200 --> 0:05:39.120
<v Speaker 1>the lead up to this election, part of the electorates

0:05:39.200 --> 0:05:42.039
<v Speaker 1>that Peter Dudden was trying to win were the outer

0:05:42.240 --> 0:05:45.880
<v Speaker 1>suburban areas of Australia. Now we've seen in the results

0:05:45.960 --> 0:05:48.760
<v Speaker 1>that they have not picked up those seats, they've actually

0:05:48.880 --> 0:05:51.200
<v Speaker 1>lost pretty much all of them. Yeah, do you want

0:05:51.240 --> 0:05:52.040
<v Speaker 1>to take us through that?

0:05:52.640 --> 0:05:55.880
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, it's interesting. So it was very clear in Peter

0:05:56.000 --> 0:05:59.000
<v Speaker 2>Duddan's strategy that, as you said, he was really trying

0:05:59.040 --> 0:06:01.920
<v Speaker 2>to focus on those out suburban seats, and like you

0:06:02.080 --> 0:06:04.920
<v Speaker 2>just said, not only did he not win those, but

0:06:05.120 --> 0:06:08.800
<v Speaker 2>because he wasn't focusing on those inner city seats, they

0:06:08.920 --> 0:06:11.840
<v Speaker 2>actually lost those seats as well. So when you look

0:06:11.880 --> 0:06:14.560
<v Speaker 2>one way and don't look the other, that ends up,

0:06:14.760 --> 0:06:17.280
<v Speaker 2>you know, kind of with nothing. And that's what happened here.

0:06:17.520 --> 0:06:20.520
<v Speaker 2>So Peter Dudden's strategy was to appeal to those outer

0:06:20.640 --> 0:06:23.880
<v Speaker 2>suburban voters by focusing on what he labeled the cost

0:06:23.920 --> 0:06:27.720
<v Speaker 2>of living failures of the Albanese government, and also by

0:06:27.800 --> 0:06:31.600
<v Speaker 2>pitching more i guess, socially conservative policy ideas, So those

0:06:31.640 --> 0:06:35.440
<v Speaker 2>ideas that might stick more in those suburbs as opposed

0:06:35.480 --> 0:06:38.800
<v Speaker 2>to in the kind of metropolitan urban city seats.

0:06:38.920 --> 0:06:40.840
<v Speaker 1>Do you want to explain why did he think that

0:06:41.200 --> 0:06:43.720
<v Speaker 1>those kind of policies would be more popular in the

0:06:43.760 --> 0:06:44.839
<v Speaker 1>outer suburban seats.

0:06:45.520 --> 0:06:48.640
<v Speaker 2>It's hard to generalize because you know, no two seats

0:06:48.680 --> 0:06:50.400
<v Speaker 2>are the same, no two people are the same. But

0:06:50.680 --> 0:06:54.240
<v Speaker 2>generally he was looking away from the more affluent areas

0:06:54.279 --> 0:06:57.240
<v Speaker 2>that the Liberal Party had typically always held and he

0:06:57.480 --> 0:07:00.680
<v Speaker 2>was trying to win back new seat and he was

0:07:00.720 --> 0:07:03.480
<v Speaker 2>trying to appeal to them with cost of living related

0:07:03.560 --> 0:07:06.000
<v Speaker 2>stuff and that's why the pitch was that he thought

0:07:06.040 --> 0:07:08.719
<v Speaker 2>he could get those seats that way, but it didn't work.

0:07:09.480 --> 0:07:13.080
<v Speaker 2>One Liberal MP, Keith Wallahan, who looks like he's going

0:07:13.240 --> 0:07:15.720
<v Speaker 2>to lose his seat in Victoria, he's been doing a

0:07:15.800 --> 0:07:19.080
<v Speaker 2>lot of media. He was on ABC's Insiders on Sunday.

0:07:19.520 --> 0:07:22.080
<v Speaker 2>He said, ever since election night on twenty twenty two,

0:07:22.240 --> 0:07:24.160
<v Speaker 2>it was clear that our party had an issue in

0:07:24.360 --> 0:07:27.520
<v Speaker 2>urban Australia, which is where most people live. Most people

0:07:27.680 --> 0:07:30.280
<v Speaker 2>live in cities. He said, we need to really dig

0:07:30.360 --> 0:07:32.080
<v Speaker 2>deep and think about who we are and who we

0:07:32.160 --> 0:07:35.640
<v Speaker 2>fight for and who makes up Australia professional people, professional women,

0:07:35.840 --> 0:07:39.200
<v Speaker 2>younger people. He said that regional and rural party members

0:07:39.440 --> 0:07:42.800
<v Speaker 2>need to consider what metropolitan based Aussies are thinking and

0:07:43.000 --> 0:07:45.480
<v Speaker 2>doing when it comes to the big issues. So basically

0:07:45.600 --> 0:07:48.600
<v Speaker 2>he's saying we took our eye off the Liberal base

0:07:48.800 --> 0:07:51.400
<v Speaker 2>by trying to get these outer suburban voters and that

0:07:51.520 --> 0:07:54.200
<v Speaker 2>that backfired and that the party needs to rethink the

0:07:54.280 --> 0:07:56.800
<v Speaker 2>way that they're going to keep their base moving forward.

0:07:57.120 --> 0:07:59.160
<v Speaker 1>Sounds like they're having an identity crisis.

0:07:58.960 --> 0:08:02.960
<v Speaker 2>Genuinely, which is quite really. I mean, say, do you.

0:08:03.000 --> 0:08:06.840
<v Speaker 1>Want to just explain then, who do the Liberal Party

0:08:07.080 --> 0:08:08.880
<v Speaker 1>see that they are representing?

0:08:09.640 --> 0:08:11.680
<v Speaker 2>I mean, if I could answer that, then I think

0:08:11.800 --> 0:08:15.800
<v Speaker 2>I would solve all of the Liberal Party's problems. Again,

0:08:16.120 --> 0:08:18.640
<v Speaker 2>I think that all we can draw on is what

0:08:18.920 --> 0:08:21.760
<v Speaker 2>Liberal Party members themselves are saying, like they're kind of

0:08:21.800 --> 0:08:26.040
<v Speaker 2>self diagnosing the problem. Here we heard from Simon Birmingham.

0:08:26.120 --> 0:08:30.200
<v Speaker 2>He was a very long time serving Liberal senator who

0:08:30.320 --> 0:08:33.800
<v Speaker 2>posted a very long post to LinkedIn over the weekend

0:08:34.280 --> 0:08:36.439
<v Speaker 2>where he said the problem was that the party was

0:08:36.480 --> 0:08:40.240
<v Speaker 2>trying to court both kind of the centrist economic liberals

0:08:40.320 --> 0:08:44.800
<v Speaker 2>but then also the ideologically conservative right wing liberals, and

0:08:45.000 --> 0:08:50.000
<v Speaker 2>that tension was getting very hard to reconcile. That someone

0:08:50.040 --> 0:08:53.640
<v Speaker 2>like Peter Dunden, who was more conservative, wasn't appealing to

0:08:53.679 --> 0:08:56.640
<v Speaker 2>those kind of centrist old school liberals, and that as

0:08:56.679 --> 0:09:00.360
<v Speaker 2>a result, they weren't kind of speaking to anyone. He said,

0:09:00.559 --> 0:09:03.640
<v Speaker 2>the broad Church model of a party that successfully melds

0:09:03.720 --> 0:09:07.360
<v Speaker 2>liberal and conservative thinking is clearly broken. The Liberal Party

0:09:07.520 --> 0:09:09.800
<v Speaker 2>is not seen as remotely liberal, and the brand of

0:09:09.840 --> 0:09:13.560
<v Speaker 2>conservatism projected is clearly perceived as too harsh and out

0:09:13.679 --> 0:09:14.160
<v Speaker 2>of touch.

0:09:14.600 --> 0:09:17.240
<v Speaker 1>So, just to explain if I'm understanding it, right, is

0:09:17.280 --> 0:09:19.800
<v Speaker 1>he saying that they went too right correct?

0:09:20.040 --> 0:09:20.160
<v Speaker 2>Right?

0:09:20.280 --> 0:09:23.240
<v Speaker 1>So they're saying that their policies were too conservative. Yep,

0:09:23.320 --> 0:09:25.319
<v Speaker 1>too right wing and they need to move back to

0:09:25.400 --> 0:09:25.800
<v Speaker 1>the center.

0:09:26.160 --> 0:09:29.640
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. And this has been repeated by a lot of

0:09:29.679 --> 0:09:32.680
<v Speaker 2>different people. The fact that the Liberal Party, for example,

0:09:32.720 --> 0:09:36.080
<v Speaker 2>were against the tax cuts that labor put on the table,

0:09:36.520 --> 0:09:39.640
<v Speaker 2>Like traditional liberal thinking is that taxes need to be

0:09:39.800 --> 0:09:42.640
<v Speaker 2>as low as possible. And so what Simon Birmingham is saying,

0:09:42.760 --> 0:09:45.319
<v Speaker 2>what others are saying is by focusing on kind of

0:09:45.400 --> 0:09:49.280
<v Speaker 2>that culture war stuff, that they are abandoning the very

0:09:49.400 --> 0:09:53.319
<v Speaker 2>traditional liberal policies and ideals that made the party who

0:09:53.400 --> 0:09:53.679
<v Speaker 2>it was.

0:09:54.280 --> 0:09:57.840
<v Speaker 1>I think that's also particularly interesting based on the fact

0:09:57.840 --> 0:10:01.280
<v Speaker 1>that they lost the last election. They were learnings from

0:10:01.679 --> 0:10:04.680
<v Speaker 1>that election, although I guess it's up for debate whether

0:10:04.760 --> 0:10:07.320
<v Speaker 1>they actually took on those learnings exactly.

0:10:07.600 --> 0:10:10.320
<v Speaker 2>Again, one of the learnings was about how to reach

0:10:10.520 --> 0:10:14.559
<v Speaker 2>more professional women. One of those things was about getting

0:10:14.640 --> 0:10:17.920
<v Speaker 2>more women pre selected in winnable seats. The Liberal Party

0:10:18.000 --> 0:10:20.760
<v Speaker 2>did not do that this time. And so what Ti'm

0:10:20.800 --> 0:10:23.439
<v Speaker 2>in Birmingham saying is we aren't learning our lesson, we

0:10:23.559 --> 0:10:26.520
<v Speaker 2>aren't changing. But I do think now there is kind

0:10:26.520 --> 0:10:29.880
<v Speaker 2>of this existential crisis of identity, as you said, for

0:10:30.000 --> 0:10:32.800
<v Speaker 2>the Liberal Party, and something is going to have to change.

0:10:32.880 --> 0:10:36.000
<v Speaker 2>To have their lowest primary vote on record, you can't

0:10:36.080 --> 0:10:38.079
<v Speaker 2>really just move forward the same way you've done it

0:10:38.559 --> 0:10:40.720
<v Speaker 2>and expect any kind of different outcome there.

0:10:41.320 --> 0:10:44.599
<v Speaker 1>One thing we haven't spoken about is the personal popularity

0:10:44.760 --> 0:10:47.079
<v Speaker 1>of Peter Dudden as the leader of the coalition.

0:10:47.640 --> 0:10:50.920
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, it is interesting because this podcast I focused on

0:10:51.040 --> 0:10:54.760
<v Speaker 2>what Liberal Party members are saying. And obviously they're not

0:10:54.920 --> 0:10:58.319
<v Speaker 2>going to say that their leader was unpopular or that

0:10:58.400 --> 0:11:00.880
<v Speaker 2>they didn't back their leader, because you know, at the

0:11:00.960 --> 0:11:03.160
<v Speaker 2>end of the day, they are a party. But it's

0:11:03.320 --> 0:11:06.719
<v Speaker 2>impossible to ignore the swing that Peter Dudden saw in

0:11:06.800 --> 0:11:09.079
<v Speaker 2>his own personal seat of Dixon. Of course, we know

0:11:09.160 --> 0:11:13.079
<v Speaker 2>he lost that seat and by quite a lot, and

0:11:13.240 --> 0:11:14.800
<v Speaker 2>so I think it would be remiss of us not

0:11:14.960 --> 0:11:17.640
<v Speaker 2>to highlight the fact that Peter Dudden was not a

0:11:17.800 --> 0:11:21.160
<v Speaker 2>popular leader, and certainly if the lessons that the Liberal

0:11:21.160 --> 0:11:23.319
<v Speaker 2>Party are talking about, you know, about coming closer to

0:11:23.400 --> 0:11:26.200
<v Speaker 2>the center, about including more women, those sorts of things,

0:11:26.600 --> 0:11:29.080
<v Speaker 2>then Peter Dudden is not the leader that they would

0:11:29.160 --> 0:11:32.679
<v Speaker 2>have chosen moving forward. On the flip side, though, on

0:11:32.920 --> 0:11:35.800
<v Speaker 2>election night, just Enterprice was saying that she thinks part

0:11:35.840 --> 0:11:38.760
<v Speaker 2>of the Liberal Party's loss was actually the result of

0:11:38.800 --> 0:11:42.400
<v Speaker 2>a smear campaign by Labor against the character of Peter Dudden.

0:11:42.440 --> 0:11:44.800
<v Speaker 2>So she was saying that the reason that they lost

0:11:45.040 --> 0:11:49.280
<v Speaker 2>was that Peter Dudden's character was basically decimated by these

0:11:49.360 --> 0:11:52.600
<v Speaker 2>negative campaigns by Labor. But I'm not really seeing many

0:11:52.640 --> 0:11:55.600
<v Speaker 2>people talking about this. It does seem to be more

0:11:55.679 --> 0:11:59.240
<v Speaker 2>about the campaign was just not as effective as they

0:11:59.320 --> 0:11:59.839
<v Speaker 2>wanted it to be.

0:12:00.480 --> 0:12:03.640
<v Speaker 1>And we briefly touched on yesterday who will replace Peter

0:12:03.760 --> 0:12:06.360
<v Speaker 1>Duncan now as the leader of the Liberal Party. Yeah,

0:12:06.440 --> 0:12:08.520
<v Speaker 1>do you want to explain a little bit more who

0:12:08.640 --> 0:12:12.240
<v Speaker 1>the contenders are and kind of what their politics are? Yeah.

0:12:12.400 --> 0:12:15.280
<v Speaker 2>So, I mean all we can go off is media reporting,

0:12:15.320 --> 0:12:17.720
<v Speaker 2>because no one's explicitly put their hand up and said

0:12:17.760 --> 0:12:20.760
<v Speaker 2>I'm going to run for this. And before I go

0:12:20.880 --> 0:12:24.439
<v Speaker 2>through who is actually in contention, it's important to say

0:12:24.520 --> 0:12:27.360
<v Speaker 2>that the vote for who becomes leader won't happen until

0:12:27.880 --> 0:12:30.439
<v Speaker 2>a bit more of the counting is done, because we

0:12:30.600 --> 0:12:33.080
<v Speaker 2>still don't know who's basically going to be in contention,

0:12:33.160 --> 0:12:34.600
<v Speaker 2>because we don't know who's going to be in Parliament.

0:12:35.080 --> 0:12:38.120
<v Speaker 2>But when that does happen. The people that have emerged

0:12:38.160 --> 0:12:41.560
<v Speaker 2>as front runners are Angus Taylor, who you sat down

0:12:41.640 --> 0:12:45.080
<v Speaker 2>with and interviewed. He was the shadow treasurer. He's part

0:12:45.120 --> 0:12:48.760
<v Speaker 2>of the conservative faction of the Liberal Party. He's deemed

0:12:48.760 --> 0:12:51.120
<v Speaker 2>a front runner just because the treasurer is pretty much

0:12:51.160 --> 0:12:54.400
<v Speaker 2>a two ic to the leader. One of the kind

0:12:54.440 --> 0:12:57.640
<v Speaker 2>of downsides I guess for him is that people are

0:12:57.720 --> 0:13:00.640
<v Speaker 2>saying he was in charge of the economic narrative this

0:13:00.880 --> 0:13:04.520
<v Speaker 2>campaign and that there was a pretty big rejection of

0:13:04.640 --> 0:13:07.200
<v Speaker 2>that narrative by the people. And could he be seen

0:13:07.240 --> 0:13:10.280
<v Speaker 2>as too close to Dudden's campaign, who he's failed campaign

0:13:10.480 --> 0:13:13.880
<v Speaker 2>to be successful. I know that Holly Hughes, who is

0:13:13.920 --> 0:13:17.520
<v Speaker 2>one of Angus Taylor's colleagues, was very clear speaking to

0:13:17.640 --> 0:13:19.920
<v Speaker 2>media saying she does not think it should be him

0:13:20.320 --> 0:13:23.400
<v Speaker 2>because of how badly the Liberal Party did when it

0:13:23.480 --> 0:13:27.319
<v Speaker 2>came to their economic policies. But he is considered a

0:13:27.400 --> 0:13:31.600
<v Speaker 2>front runner so who knows. Another person is Susan Lee.

0:13:32.000 --> 0:13:35.520
<v Speaker 2>She is a moderate. She is also a woman, and

0:13:35.880 --> 0:13:38.120
<v Speaker 2>given the fact that a lot of the post mortem

0:13:38.280 --> 0:13:40.719
<v Speaker 2>seems to be that the Liberal Party has lost its

0:13:40.840 --> 0:13:44.560
<v Speaker 2>female base, this could be an interesting way to try

0:13:44.960 --> 0:13:48.439
<v Speaker 2>win women back over. Susan Lee was serving as the

0:13:48.559 --> 0:13:51.360
<v Speaker 2>deputy leader of the Liberal Party, so she has held

0:13:51.480 --> 0:13:55.079
<v Speaker 2>senior positions before, so she is definitely one of the

0:13:55.120 --> 0:13:58.319
<v Speaker 2>ones to keep an eye on. And then, lastly, the

0:13:58.600 --> 0:14:03.280
<v Speaker 2>contender that has emerged, which perhaps most unexpectedly is Dan Tian,

0:14:03.440 --> 0:14:05.800
<v Speaker 2>and I say unexpectedly only because he was kind of

0:14:05.880 --> 0:14:09.559
<v Speaker 2>expected to lose his seat. Alex Dyson, who has spoken about,

0:14:10.160 --> 0:14:13.679
<v Speaker 2>was expected to get very close to unseating him and

0:14:14.000 --> 0:14:17.200
<v Speaker 2>that didn't happen. Dantin did maintain his seat, and he's

0:14:17.240 --> 0:14:19.160
<v Speaker 2>been one of the few people of the list I

0:14:19.280 --> 0:14:21.040
<v Speaker 2>just spoke about who's been out in front of the

0:14:21.120 --> 0:14:24.000
<v Speaker 2>media talking about the Liberal Party loss and he's really

0:14:24.080 --> 0:14:27.200
<v Speaker 2>kind of gotten ahead of the news cycle there. So

0:14:27.560 --> 0:14:29.760
<v Speaker 2>he is seen as kind of a safe pair of hands.

0:14:29.800 --> 0:14:31.960
<v Speaker 2>He's been in Parliament for a long time, he's not

0:14:32.200 --> 0:14:35.360
<v Speaker 2>very extreme in either direction, so he's also an option

0:14:35.520 --> 0:14:36.720
<v Speaker 2>for the Liberal Party.

0:14:36.800 --> 0:14:40.200
<v Speaker 1>So interesting we'll definitely keep everyone updated once we know

0:14:40.280 --> 0:14:42.720
<v Speaker 1>who the leader is. Last election, I think it took

0:14:42.920 --> 0:14:44.960
<v Speaker 1>just over a week for us to know that Peter

0:14:45.040 --> 0:14:47.640
<v Speaker 1>Dunnan would be the next opposition leader.

0:14:47.560 --> 0:14:50.120
<v Speaker 2>And he was unopposed. Like the voting is a lot

0:14:50.200 --> 0:14:52.680
<v Speaker 2>easier when it's unopposed. You just need a majority of

0:14:52.760 --> 0:14:56.600
<v Speaker 2>the party room. But if whoever it is isn't unopposed,

0:14:56.640 --> 0:14:58.320
<v Speaker 2>then it gets a bit more complicated and it could

0:14:58.360 --> 0:15:01.720
<v Speaker 2>take quite a bit longer. I think interestingly, Peter Duddan

0:15:01.800 --> 0:15:05.240
<v Speaker 2>last time was the very clear next step, like he'd

0:15:05.240 --> 0:15:06.840
<v Speaker 2>tried to do it before it was clear it was

0:15:06.840 --> 0:15:09.120
<v Speaker 2>going to be him this time. I don't think anyone

0:15:09.280 --> 0:15:12.240
<v Speaker 2>really stands out as the clear next choice, perhaps only

0:15:12.360 --> 0:15:15.360
<v Speaker 2>Angus Taylor, but as I said, there are some downsides

0:15:15.440 --> 0:15:16.360
<v Speaker 2>to that for the party.

0:15:16.720 --> 0:15:19.040
<v Speaker 1>Will be very interesting to watch. Thanks for taking us

0:15:19.040 --> 0:15:21.680
<v Speaker 1>through at Zara, Thanks Billy, and thank you for listening

0:15:21.840 --> 0:15:24.440
<v Speaker 1>to this episode of The Daily OS. We'll be back

0:15:24.520 --> 0:15:27.360
<v Speaker 1>again this afternoon with your evening headlines, but until then,

0:15:27.520 --> 0:15:33.920
<v Speaker 1>have a great day. My name is Lily Madden and

0:15:34.000 --> 0:15:37.720
<v Speaker 1>I'm a proud Arunda bunge lung Kalkutin woman from gadighl country.

0:15:38.600 --> 0:15:41.720
<v Speaker 1>The Daily oz acknowledges that this podcast is recorded on

0:15:41.760 --> 0:15:44.240
<v Speaker 1>the lands of the Gadighl people and pays respect to

0:15:44.320 --> 0:15:47.640
<v Speaker 1>all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island and nations. We pay

0:15:47.680 --> 0:15:50.560
<v Speaker 1>our respects to the first peoples of these countries, both

0:15:50.680 --> 0:15:51.520
<v Speaker 1>past and present