1 / 25

Liberal Party of Australia

Liberal Party of Australia. Origins. Early Party Politics 1901-45

fletcher-maddox
Download Presentation

Liberal Party of Australia

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Liberal Party of Australia

  2. Origins Early Party Politics 1901-45 Early part of 20th Century Australian party politics was dominated by Labor and Non-Labor parties. Apart from the Country Party (which represented small rural farmers) – Australian parties were organised along “Labor” and those “opposing Labor”

  3. Origins The non-Labor side suffered at the hands of the ALP’s early success and realised it needed to organise to oppose Labor’s socialist ambitions. Employer groups became organised and supported parliamentary opposition to “organised labour”. They supported various parliamentary groups (often former enemies) to group together to oppose Labor.

  4. Origins The first non-Labor party was the Fusion Party (as the name suggests – a grouping of former opponents) to oppose the ALP in parliament; it became the original Liberal Party (not the current one) from 1910-17 “Liberal” was chosen as the name because the party stood for the individual (the philosophies of economic and socialliberalism – 2 strands of liberalism that still cause tension in the modern party) and was opposed to “state power” (something the ALP wanted to use to reform society) Non-Labor parties formed from these parliamentary groupings – thus they were cadre parties

  5. Early Organisation The non-Labor parties were characterised by loose organisation and a weak link between the parliamentary wing and the extra-parliamentary electoral organisation Policy was set entirely by the parliamentary members within parliament. There was no pledge to support the party in parliamentary votes supporting the belief that individuals should make own judgements (a feature of modern the Liberal Party that allows for “backbench revolts”) Early liberals believed that parliament had just won power from monarchs outside parliament – they weren’t going to surrender power to parties outside parliament

  6. Summary of Early Years Differed from Labor in attitude to the role of the state in society Differed in origin – cadre v mass parties. Formed in response to threat from organised labour Differed in organisation – parliamentary membership very powerful and independent Tended to be supported by wealthy members of society who benefited from the status quo

  7. Interwar Years – Two ReformationsReformation 1 Wartime ALP Prime Minister Billy Hughes left Labor (crossed the floor) with some of his senior minister, joined the non-Labor opposition, formed a new non-Labor government and a new party – the National Party. The issue that caused this was conscription in World War One, which the ALP opposed but Hughes and the non-Labor side supported.

  8. Interwar Years – Two ReformationsReformation 1 ALP identified as the party of Australian independence Non-Labor parties identified as the imperial loyalists Nationalist Party identified with protestants – supportive of Britain ALP identified with Catholics – less sympathetic to Britain The Russian Revolution spread fear across the Western World about socialism and made it easy to associate communism with Labor. This sharpened the distinction of the Nationalist Party and other non-Labor parties

  9. Interwar Years – Two ReformationsReformation 2 1931 defection of Joseph Lyons (ALP Senior Minister in the Scullin Government) from the Labor Government over financial policies (Great Depression was at its height) Lyons was convinced by non-Labor side to form a new non-Labor party– United Australia Party (UAP) UAP won 1932 election and governed until 1941 Lyons died in 1939, his deputy, Robert Menzies became UAP leader & Prime Minister – as WW2 began

  10. Interwar Years – Two ReformationsReformation 2 UAP under Menzies had bad relations with coalition partners and lost the confidence of the House. Labor, under Curtin, formed the wartime government. 1940’s became a “Labor Decade” and the non-Labor parties were in the political wilderness. 1943 election was won by ALP but the non-Labor vote was split between many parties and independents (there was no unity on the non-Labor side of politics)

  11. Interwar Years – Two ReformationsReformation 2 This lack of unity lead non-Labor politicians – lead by Robert Menzies, to form the Liberal Party of Australia (LPA) All non-Labor parties (except the Country Party) voluntarily disbanded and amalgamated into the new LPA It has lasted 50 years +. No other non-Labor party lasted more than 15 years Why has it been so successful?

  12. LPA Organisation The new party modelled the organisational strength of the ALP to overcome the problems of the weak organisation of all the early parties The new LPA structure closely mirrors that of the ALP. • The LPA has branches (like the ALP) • The LPA has State Divisions lead by State Councils (like the State Conferences of the ALP). • It has a Federal Division headed by a Federal Council composed of delegates from the State Councils and the Federal Parliamentary leadership (like the ALP National Conference) • A Federal Secretariat coordinates, researches, publicises and assists the Federal Parliamentarians (analogous to the ALP National Executive)

  13. LPA Organisation It is different from the ALP in 4 key ways… 1. It is strongly federalist – the Federal Division could not (until 1994) interfere with the State Divisions decisions. Thus State Divisions are far more autonomous than ALP State Conferences 2. The Parliamentary Wing is the engine of policy, not the Federal Conference. ALP policy is set outside parliament by National Conference. This is especially so when the LPA is in government. When in Opposition, the extra-parliamentary party asserts itself more strongly

  14. LPA Organisation • Liberal Prime Ministers are more powerful than Labor Prime Ministers Liberal PM’s are not bound by the Party Room (Liberal equivalent of Caucus) and they may select their own ministers. The Party Room cannot veto Cabinet ALP PM’s are tied to Caucus, which can veto Cabinet decisions and select the members of the Ministry (the PM can choose which portfolios each minister gets but can’t choose who will be a minister) 4. It is more tolerant of internal dissent. This has roots in the cadre nature of early parties and the belief in individual choice (which applies to a limited extent to backbenchers)

  15. Backbenchers have a Greater Role This has become increasingly important with the Parliamentary dominance of the Party at present. Some argue that Coalition backbenchers have replaced the Opposition as a check on executive excess. “Ginger Groups”, groups of backbenchers who pressure the Gov’t on issues, are becoming more common. Tax and Immigration are 2 recent examples

  16. LPA Organisation Dependency on strong leadership… Because of the dominant role of the PM in the LPA its success depends on having an electorally successful leader. Robert Menzies and John Howard are examples When it has poor leadership, the LPA fails. John Hewson and Andrew Peacock are examples The ALP is less dependent on the character of its leader

  17. Whose the Next Electorally Successful Leader?

  18. LPA 1945-1972 LPA philosophy was “social liberalism” – an idea that accepted a role for the government in minimising the negative impacts of unconstrained capitalism Thus the LPA agreed with the ALP to some degree on the role of the state. It disagreed as to the extent of the government’s role The LPA saw a greater role for private enterprise “Social liberalism” is today associated with the “Wets”

  19. LPA 1945-1972 LPA governed for 23 years due to… • A prolonged post War economic boom. Most voters saw no reason to change • Cold War fear of communism – with which the ALP was tainted It lost office in 1972 due to economic downturns, social change (a move away from conservatism in society), leadership instability and the rise of a resurgent ALP under Whitlam

  20. LPA 1972-1983 LPA didn’t adapt to Opposition well – seeing itself as the “natural party of government”. In government again from 1975 to 1983 the LPA, under Malcolm Fraser, was very static – not undoing Whitlam’s reforms nor pressing ahead with any ideas of its own – it achieved little It was a period dominated politically by “social liberalism” and economically by stagflation(high inflation and high unemployment

  21. Wets v Dries The economic problems were blamed on “social liberalist” economic policies. This led to a revival of “economic liberalism” - the belief that the economic problems facing Western countries were due to the large size of government. Economic liberalism argues for a small role for the government. It is also known as “economic rationalism” “Economic liberalism” is today associated with the “Dries” RESULT = tension in the LPA between the “social liberals” (Wets) and the “economic liberals” (Dries)

  22. Wets v Dries The argument within the party over social versus economic liberalism was destructive Because the leader is so important in the LPA he determines policy and it is hard to disagree with him without being “disloyal”. The result was bitter in-fighting in the LPA The ALP can resolve policy conflict via a Caucus debate and vote In the 1980’s the social liberals (Ian McPhee etc) were defeated and driven out of the party. When John Hewson went to the 1993 election with the “Fightback” package of economic policies it was the high point of the Dries in the LPA

  23. Wets v Dries “Fightback” caused the LPA to lose the unlosable 1993 election (Labor’s victory of the “True Believers”) There were recriminations and accusations in the LPA, more leadership instability and a decision to abandon hard economic liberalism in favour of a more moderate philosophy 8 months after the election loss John Howard was selected (for a 2nd time) to lead the LPA

  24. The Modern LPA Howard came to government on the unpopularity of Paul Keating and “reform fatigue” (the people were tired of constant economic reform and change under Labor). The LPA slogan for the 1996 election was “For All of Us” Howard promised a return to mainstream values not based ideology (such as economic rationalism). This was a return to the ideals of Menzies and appealed to reform fatigued voters Howard’s LPA is opposed to trade unions, the feminist lobby, the multicultural lobby and the Aboriginal lobby. In this he appealed to traditional ALP voters who felt they’d been abandoned by Labor (Howard’s Battlers)

  25. The LPA Today After11 years in office the “return to comfortable mainstream values” has ended and the Howard government is keen to restart reforms – especially economic reforms. Workplace reforms (WorkChoices) & the sale of Telstra are examples of these reforms Yet there is still talk of family values and other socially conservative ideas. Thus there is a tension at the centre of the government that is unresolved

More Related