Sydney Morning Herald Online

Home   >   Opinion   >   Article

Dethroning a King will not a messiah make

March 1, 2004

Printer friendly version Print this article
Email to a friend Email to a friend

Malcolm Turnbull is no sure thing as leader for a simple reason: the Libs have better options, writes Greg Barns.

Malcolm Turnbull's victory in the Wentworth preselection has the sent the hares running. There's speculation that Turnbull will elbow long-serving leadership aspirants out of the way to quickly gain the reins of the Liberal Party. It is also said that the supposedly unorthodox tactics Turnbull used against the hapless incumbent, Peter King, will be used to ensure that the former Australian Republican Movement chairman achieves that aim.

Such theorising fails to take account of the federal Liberals' history and culture and misjudges Turnbull's temperament. There's little doubt that if Turnbull had put his hand up for Wentworth a decade or more ago, the party grandees would have acclaimed him a new "messiah".

In the late 1980s the Liberal Party, rent asunder by election losses and the leadership tussle between Andrew Peacock and John Howard, became obsessed with the idea of a successful business person leading the party out of the electoral wilderness. It was desperately looking for someone unsullied by the leadership battles of the previous decade.

There were efforts to draft the beer baron and then Federal party president, John Elliott, into the leadership. In 1990, after the party lost its fourth successive Federal election, the investment banker, academic and then Wentworth MP, John Hewson, became leader after only three years in Parliament.

Some might see a parallel with Hewson in Turnbull's induction into the federal party. Like Turnbull, Hewson was wealthy, had a successful business career but also a broader interest in public policy. Like Turnbull, who claims to be able to take on Mark Latham, Hewson was seen as one who could challenge Paul Keating's economic credentials.

Hewson's policy strengths were undoubted and he was responsible for producing the most comprehensive and honest manifesto in Australian political history, but his political inexperience saw him beaten in the 1993 election by the seasoned Keating.

The Hewson experience appears to have made the Liberal Party wary of shoehorning exceptional talents into leadership roles without them having served a long apprenticeship. It is worth remembering that Peter Costello, Brendan Nelson and Tony Abbott - the three most likely contenders for the leadership of the post-Howard party - have been in the parliament for a period of 14 years, eight years and 10 years respectively. And all have had senior ministerial experience of some years.

It can also be argued that the precedent of Hewson and the attempt to draft Elliott into the leadership of the party in 1988 (Elliott had had no parliamentary experience at all) were simply aberrations and reflected the party's desperation. Generally speaking, leaders of the federal Liberal party have served long periods as backbenchers and frontbenchers before becoming leader.

History also shows us that the tactics used by Turnbull in ousting King are by no means unique in the Liberal Party, despite what Turnbull's detractors may say. Costello and the Environment Minister, David Kemp, used similar strategies, namely building massive branch support and running high profile media campaigns to oust sitting members in 1989. Neither Kemp nor Costello has used the same strong-arm tactics to assume senior positions in the federal party because they know that such aggression would not work with their colleagues. In fact, Costello has been accused of showing too much patience in staking his leadership claim.

So to suggest that Turnbull will attempt to blow up leadership contenders in the post-Howard party in the same way he has removed King is nonsense.

Not only would it be impossible to do, but the party is not desperate for a new "messiah" as it was in 1990 when Hewson assumed the leadership. It has been in government for eight years and has a number of able leadership contenders.

There also seems to be a misunderstanding of Turnbull's character. He is not one-dimensional. As someone who worked closely with Turnbull in the republican movement for a number of years I can tell you that this is a man who, while intellectually restless and exhibiting seemingly indefatigable work habits, is capable of playing the long game.

He chaired the Australian Republican Movement for almost a decade and was assiduous in his prosecution of the cause even when it seemed, with the election of John Howard in 1996, to have less likely chance of success.

Turnbull is a great addition to the Liberal Party but his rise needs to be put in perspective. He is not operating in a vacuum but within the culture of a party that respects longevity and patience. Just ask John Howard.

Greg Barns is author of What's Wrong with the Liberal Party and was chairman of the Australian Republican Movement from 2000 to 2002.

Paul Sheehan is on leave.








Latest news by email
Get free news emails from The Sydney Morning Herald
Sign Up Now!