Should the Queensland Nationals and Liberal Party merge

1
Should the Queensland Nationals and
Liberal Party merge?

• Toby Ralph
• October 2004

2
Background

• Qualitative research intercept interviews
• Brisbane, Surfers Broadbeach, Kawana and
  Maroochydore
• 82 qualitative interviews over five days
• 44 women
• 38 men
• All 18

3
Research agenda

• Its been suggested that the Queensland Nationals
  and Liberals merge to form one Party. Do you
  think that is a good or a bad idea?
• Why are you for a merger?
• Why are you against a merger?
• The Parties have had some differences in the
  past. Do you think a merger would be more or less
  likely to help them overcome these difficulties?
• If the Parties merged, would they be a more or
  less effective Opposition?
• Why would they be more effective?
• Why would they be less effective?
• If these Parties merged to form a single Party
  and became the State Government, would they do a
  better or worse job than the current State
  Government?
• At the last State election did you vote National,
  Liberal, Labor, or for someone else?

4
What well cover

• The answers to the questions posed
• The deeper concerns raised
• The key findings
• Conclusion
• Recommendation

5
The answers to the questions posed
6
Its been suggested that the Queensland Nationals
and Liberals merge to form one Party. Do you
think that is a good or a bad idea?
7
Why are you for a merger?

• At long last it may give Beattie a decent
  Opposition
• We need a conservative Opposition
• Queensland State Politics is too one sided
• It might stop all the infighting
• They might fight Labor rather than each other
• Only need two Parties
• The only chance of Government

8
Why are you against a merger?

• Theyve never worked together properly, and
  couldnt now
• Two losers dont make one winner
• Theyd screw it up, and thatd be it for me and
  most others I reckon
• You get the worst of both Parties, Incompetent
  rednecks. Whod vote for that?
• The merger exists. Its called the Coalition.
  Make that work for starters.
• Springborg Quinn couldnt galvanise a roofing
  nail, let alone two political Parties

9
The Parties have had some differences in the
past. Do you think a merger would be more or less
likely to help them overcome these difficulties?
10
If the Parties merged, would they be a more or
less effective Opposition?
11
Why would they be more effective?

• In theory theyd present a united conservative
  view
• Fighting Labor not each other
• Get rid of the City / regional divide
• No distracting arguments, and not fighting each
  other for the same seat.

12
Why would they be less effective?

• Watered down policies to appease both
  constituencies
• Thinking too much about themselves, not the
  people theyre supposed to represent
• They couldnt agree on what to take to a picnic,
  let alone what to do if they ran the place.
• Never have agreed, never will agree. There are
  too many nitpicky people involved

13
If these Parties merged to form a single Party
and became the State Government, would they do a
better or worse job than the current State
Government?
14
At the last State election did you vote National,
Liberal, Labor, or for someone else?
15
The deeper concerns raised
16
Two losers dont equal one winner

• The Parties were generally judged to be
  underperforming. A merger was not an easy answer
  to this
• They should get their act together before they
  try anything like that.
• The Liberals are hopeless, and the Nationals are
  worse. A merger isnt the answer, getting some
  sensible policies and decent leadership is.
• Two bad parties dont make one good one.
• If they put them together and they could be
  voted out simultaneously.
• The Nats are lost in the (nineteen) forties,
  while the Libs are trapped in the seventies.

17
Two and two is two

• Voters, particularly current Liberal voters, felt
  joining with the Nationals would make their Party
  less relevant
• Id be less likely to vote Liberal if they were
  tied up with those rednecks
• Liberals are in enough trouble but not as
  much as the Nationals. It would be like putting
  on a concrete lifejacket.
• The Nationals lost me when they cuddled up to
  Hanson I couldnt vote for a party that did
  that.
• There are few enough reasons to think about
  voting Liberal now this would just make it even
  less appealing.
• Theyre bad already. That would be worse.

18
Whats in it for me?

• Many respondents could see no tangible personal
  benefits in the merger, just negatives
• Why? I mean, whats the point? It might make
  them feel bigger or more important, but whats
  the benefit for us?
• Their policies would have to be watered down so
  they could appeal to both City and Country. That
  would be hard. We dont want the same things.
• Its about them, not me.

19
Whats the point?

• A number of respondents simply could not see the
  point of a merger
• I thought there was a coalition already. Whats
  the problem with having that. The only reason I
  can see that they might want to get together is
  to try to look a bit bigger, or make the Leader
  look less irrelevant. Other than that I just
  cant see any point and by the way I dont think
  it would help him anyway. I dont vote for them,
  but Id not even think about it if they merged.
• Its just silly isnt it? Plain silly.

20
If it helps

• Reaction was superficially supportive, but the
  possibility of the Parties getting it right was
  overwhelmingly negative, however some people were
  ambivalent
• If it helps them get on with being a decent
  opposition well why not?
• I suppose theyve got good reasons for doing it.
  Get with the power and all that. I dont mind.
• It doesnt matter, but if it makes them feel
  good well get on with it.

21
Conservative tensions

• Some Liberals and people who have an
  understanding of the local political scene see a
  merger as a likely source of conflict
• The members cant talk to each other now, just
  look at Brisbane and the Gold Coast. Imagine the
  ruckus if they joined.
• If they got together then it would leave space
  for someone to start a new Party. Katter or
  Hanson or someone would fill the vacuum.
• Its not happening nationally, so why would it
  happen just here? It would be the tail wagging
  the dog.
• John Howard is the best leader the Nationals
  have ever had. Thats how to do it.

22
The key findings
23
Key findings

• People are frustrated by the one-sided nature of
  Queensland State politics. There is insufficient
  balance. Beattie dominates.
• People want a decent opposition, but the
  fragmented Nationals and Liberals are not judged
  to be one, in fact they are pretty pathetic and
  the Liberals are now a minor Party
• The Opposition Parties need to become effective,
  and in this context, one way of doing so may be
  to merge

24
Merging is a good idea but

• Scale is not a replacement for performance
• Two losers dont make a winner
• The merger has been mooted in ways that are
  advantageous for politicians and insiders, not
  for voters. It should not be a power grab. It
  should be a way to be a more effective
  Opposition.
• It must put an end to three corner contests,
  factions and infighting

25
Merging is a good idea but

• Choosing any brand name will cause vote leakage.
  Loyalists expect their Liberal or National brand
  to dominate. A third brand, such as CLP, is
  equally offensive to these people
• If Parties are to merge the public face
  thereafter must be of a united, positive, active
  and effective Opposition
• Any factional bickering will be a sign that
  nothing has changed, leading to massive and
  possibly irreparable vote loss

26
Merging is a good idea but

• Any disagreements need to be settled before an
  announcement
• If the Parties merge messily (meaning public
  disagreements continue) then there is strong
  potential for major damage to the combined vote.

27
Who supports a merger?

• Support is strongest with older people, and with
  opinion leaders
• Others can agree with the merger proposition, but
  are less committed
• All segments can readily articulate why a merger
  will not work, and further indicate that if it
  proceeds and is badly handled (as evidenced by
  infighting) they will walk away from the Party

28
Who opposes a merger?

• People who are highly cynical and
• Think the Liberals are totally incompetent,
  irrelevant or beyond redemption
• Think the Nationals are rednecks
• Think that the two Parties have never worked
  together, so will not now
• Think that two losers dont make a winner
• Have an irrational brand loyalty to one Party,
  and believe the other side is attempting to
  grab power

29
Whats a bad merger?

• A bad merger that would cost both Parties votes
  would demonstrate
• Failure to become an effective Opposition that
  can take it to Beattie
• Factional disputes
• Weak, compromised policies
• Weak leadership or joint leaders
• Snide stories in the media

30
Whats a good merger?

• A good merger that would have the potential to
  attract soft and swinging voters would
  demonstrate
• Cohesion no disputes
• Activity and a positive challenge to Beattie
• Strong policies
• Strong leader

31
Conclusion
32
Conclusion

• A merger that immediately and unequivocally
  demonstrates that Queensland now has a cohesive,
  active, positive and effective Opposition will be
  well supported
• A merger that shows any sign of lingering dissent
  or discontent, through any public bickering or
  disagreement will be abandoned by disillusioned
  voters

33
Recommendation
34
Recommendation

• A very difficult four stage process is required
• Get both Parties to co-operate fully now, meaning
  overt public agreement, common policies, no three
  corner contests and most importantly no public
  disagreements
• Key Federal decision maker Brian
  Loughnane (thus Shane Stone and John Howard)
  should be engaged initially. Presumably Andrew
  Hall (thus John Anderson) should be engaged too.
  Without their endorsement and involvement the
  plan will certainly fail.
• Cut the merger deal, and get overt support and a
  no bickering agreement from all State Federal
  factions
• AS A TEAM develop a 100 day implementation plan,
  including policies and activities
• Announce, and control any possibility of
  break-outs.
• Unless all four stages can be assured, the
  process is extremely likely to be a catalyst that
  drives many current and potential voters away,
  thus utterly disastrous for the Coalition and
  suicidal for its political advocates
• Under no circumstance should Party leaders
  announce an unresolved merger in the hope that
  people will tolerate disagreements that will
  eventually be resolved. This would backfire
  badly.