Comparing the discussion of the 2022 election with previous post-mortems, one standard element is notable in its absence. The discussion has focused on the loss of the Liberal heartland, the concerns of women voters and the fact that climate policy mattered after all; what is missing is the ritual anointing of one group of voters (rural and regional Australians, people of faith, the residents of Western Sydney and so on) as the “real Australians” who have received inadequate respect from the political class and whose concerns must be attended to.
A look at the post-election map suggests that this year’s candidate group may be called “metropolitan Australians” — that is, residents of Australia’s state and territory capital cities. On current indications, the Liberal Party could hold as few as 10 to 12 metropolitan seats, less than the combined total of Greens and urban independents.
It is easy to imagine the kind of thing that might be written about these electorates if their inhabitants were seen as “real Australians”:
Metropolitan Australians are sick of being scorned and derided for everything from their coffee preferences to their over-education. Their concern about climate change is routinely mocked as a religious orthodoxy, often by commentators who claim to be concerned about religious freedom for “people of faith”. Although their income taxes and GST supply the great majority of government revenue, they are regularly treated as parasites living off the relatively modest amounts paid by mining companies in royalties and company taxes. While the struggles of other Australians are treated sympathetically, young metropolitans, unable to enter the housing market, are blamed for spending their money on smashed avocado — or just for not having parents wealthy enough to support them.
While both major parties have treated metropolitan Australians with disdain, the conservatives have been far worse, and have paid a higher price. When then deputy prime minister Michael McCormack described millions of hardworking metropolitans as “woke, inner-city greenies”, no one batted an eye. By contrast, the use of terms like “redneck” and “bogan” for rural and regional Australians has resulted in instant cancellation; indeed, Anthony Albanese was criticised on the basis that random residents of his electorate had used them.
On Saturday, however, metropolitan Australians found their voice. They are sick of being put down and ignored by the elite rural and regional minority who have held an unfair share of political power, and they are not going to take it any more.
Of course, this kind of thing is just as nonsensical as any attempt to divide us into “real Australians” and “the rest”. But if the Liberal Party ignores the results of the election or, worse still, follows the lead of Barnaby Joyce and the National Party in denouncing city-dwellers, they will face immense difficulties.
Historically, independents and Greens have found it hard to get into Parliament. But once elected, their major party opponents have found them hard to remove. Indeed, no Green candidate elected in a general state or federal election has subsequently been defeated (some byelection winners have lost their seats at the next general election). Independents have also held office for long periods.
Given this knowledge, the Liberal Party might decide to give up on winning back the seats of Greens and independents and focus on its conservative base in the hope that the inevitable difficulties of government will produce a swing away from Labor. But this would be a desperate strategy. Based on results so far, achieving a Liberal majority solely by winning seats now held by Labor would require a two-party-preferred vote of 54-46 — that is, a swing of 6%. In recent history, only the 1996 and 2007 elections have come close to this.
The Liberals could form a minority government with a smaller swing. But unless they came very close to an outright majority, they would be forced to deal with the same metropolitan independents they have treated with contempt so far.
The alternative strategy — of breaking the coalition with the Nationals and trying to regain the ground they have lost in metropolitan Australia — is the more promising in theory. But the handful of remaining metropolitan Liberals are a minority in their own partyroom. In any case, most are outer-suburban conservatives, more attuned to their regional neighbours than to the urban majority.
We are unlikely to see the “metropolitan Australians” trope in our political commentary. But in a country as urbanised as Australia, and with traditional party allegiances breaking down, it is the big cities where future elections will mostly be decided.
Great analysis, John. As a long time leftie from a Tory household, I’ve never been able to understand the mentality of the rusted on “ middle-class” Liberal vote which the Independents have infiltrated. Labor under Julia and Albo demonstrated that independent non-Coalition members will support Governments with good policy and sound economic management so hopefully they will get on with it and let the Lib/Nats continue to tear themselves apart
Yes, good analysis, John. One aspect of the Morrison government that could have received more public attention is its hostility to education, especially higher education. The underfunding of universities since 1996, briefly interrupted by Rudd and Gillard, has been abysmal. Morrison treated students doing Arts degrees as collateral in his idiotic culture wars and cut the funding available to universities in many other fields. Not enough journalists called out the government on this and asked them why dumber was supposed to be better.
Plus Scotty’s refusal to give JobKeeper to public unis. But private schools got it when they were not enttled to it.
Also Jobkeeper was given to private/church universities and Catholic priests. There was a report at the time that the Vatican wanted priests to remit half the payment to Rome.
I want the Libs to tear themselves apart wherever they are based and wherever they hold seats. I don’t see them as anything other than bad for democracy. The question now is that when Albo falls over the line, what will he do to engage and work for us voters in metropolitan Australia that have helped put him there. His Treasurer is already walking away from advocating to the FWC for a 5% minimum wage rise for minimum wage workers. We put Albo there either, as in Sydney. Melbourne and Perth, voting Labor and “teal” or as in Brisbane voting largely Green.
This was a victory for the cities, but I would caution your analysis. There has been considerable swings away from the conservatives in some of their regional heartlands as well – Cowper, Nichols and Groom. The “teal” movement largely began in Indi, a regional Victorian seat built around Wangaratta. I will forever be proud of the natives of Port Macquarie and New England for the likes of Rob Oakeshott and Tony Windsor. Don’t give up on regional and rural voters. Many of them have swung to Labor and Independent this election however slight and it is the regional cities of Tasmania and North Queensland like Townsville which have swung in behind the conservatives further.
I would be careful about metro concerns. People’s concerns there range from anything to the price of a loaf of bread to buying a multi-million dollar mansion. They are hard to please. The issues in our urban areas, particularly our capital cities, are many and varied. It is only that 1) The conservatives took them for granted and 2) undertook poor strategy and tactics in campaigning in them, that they lost so badly. The regional and suburban centres of Launceston, Townsville and Penrith swung in behind Morrison. It is this tradie, small business or aspirational constituency that Morrison hoped to win over with his Super for Home scheme policy. This was city centric and centred around largely the young voter and aspirational class in our capital cities.
Yes. It is important not to overstate the role of the cities but there are multiple concerns in all of them with differing emphases. In Brisbane it is climate change and aircraft noise – a NIMBY concern if ever there was. In Sydney it was the “teals” and in Perth it was all Labor. And that itself was a niche issue with the pandemic and responses to it in focus, transferring from State to Federal. It looks like Labor will get a net gain of 1 seat in NSW despite slightly increasing its vote. Get 3, lose 2 and the issues there seem to be based on the hurt and threatened feelings of Chinese born or descended Australian voters in Reid and Bennelong, the cost of living in Robertson, the feelings of exclusion and contempt felt largely by Vietnamese in Fowler costing Labor and Goodness know what in Gilmore to give it back to the Libs.
In Melbourne the Labor vote went down.
You need to look at things forensically.
Labor went backwards overall there and still won 2 seats – Chinese populated Chisholm, Higgins and threatened Aston, Deakin and Menzies in Melbourne’s east. Labor got swings in Melbourne’s eastern suburbs heartland despite going backwards overall in Melbourne and Victoria. You’re right, the Nats increased their vote in Victoria. But Labor got a net gain of 2 seats and were close to a 3rd and again you are right, in the state capital.
In WA the regional and rural seats suffered huge swings against the conservatives but they were on bigger margins than metro Perth.
I have said often that it is the feelings and thought processes of the ethnic community in our cities which plays a crucial role in determining election outcomes. In 2019 it was revenge for Labor supporting the marriage equality bill. Labor took a gamble which paid off this time in voting for the Religious Discrimination Bill, albeit with protective amendments which are yet to be worked through if they can at all. This was so Labor appears not to look so anti-religious. So the ethnic vote in the “No” seats don’t punish them a second time. Utterly cynical. There is no one metro voice per se but many. The concerns of the Mosman ladies bowling club will be different to those gambling their small fortunes away at the Marconi Soccer Club. God know what they were talking about at Penrith Panthers to give the Libs there another 3 years. They were smart enough to give the one that took over in 2013 just 3 years but this is a double for a notionally marginal seat which is now safe for the Libs on paper. Just the way it is. Where there are multiple concerns, ideals, pleasures, etc there is no one metro voice. The ethnic vote is easy to sway given the confluence of world events and won’t always vote in their best material interests.
Where there were teal independents and the main aim was to remove the Liberal incumbent from a safe seat, those who might have put Labor or the Greens first, voted for the Independent, so that will have some impact on the Labor first preference vote.
Yes but these people cannot bring themselves to vote Labor or Green. They had a very good reason to vote for their Independent. I am afraid they would rather lop off their right arm than vote Labor or Green. Some of them. The independent gave them an easier choice. Labor and Greens are just too left wing for them. They remind them of some of the students they used to see at uni and sit with in Politics tutorials – dungarees, dreadlocks, tobacco smell. And quite possibly challenged their bourgeois mores and thinking. Well off, toffy nosed, well-heeled students from the better part of town don’t like that, even though some of these Trots looking folk with Che Guevarra T-Shirts came from probably similar areas. The “teals” are the Bunyip Sloane Rangers who used to wear Country Road but have upgraded again. They wouldn’t be seen dead on a ballot paper with the likes of Eddie Obeid and Lee Rhiannon probably wants to join their circle and bore them to death with stories about the plight of the Palestinians and everyone else worse than them, which is everybody, but she would find herself excluded. There is a big RESERVED sign on the “teals” table.
Private school boys and girls with a great sense of entitlement and privilege.!
I agree up to a point. I think a lot of the independents would be Liberal moderates in the Ian McPhee, Fred Chaney mould but there is no room for them in the party.
However if you are a voter in a very safe Liberal seat which is not, at this point in time if ever , going to get anywhere near a Labor majority and the aim is to get rid of the Liberal Government, then these independents were the only chance in this election. And our teal independent,, standing against Frydenberg had a reasonable election manifesto and had a very good chance of beating him. So why vote Labor in this election when it wouldn’t change the incumbent but a moderate independent would and did.
You have described myself and approximately a d en of my friends an acquaintances. We voted strategically to get rid of Frydenberg. A vote for him was going to mean getting toxic Morrison and extra toxic Barnaby. The other interesting theme in Kooyong is the increasing numbers of young voters.
Many Labor supporters voted strategically to help Teals get elected so the Labor vote is under counted. They did finish up 52/48. Central Qld coal and gas and cattle country saw Labor increase its vote but not quite enough to win two seats. Demographic trends will work against the Nats with a continuing increase in sea change and tree change population.
And when the reckoning comes with renewables and climate change mitigation. And when other countries impose carbon pricing on our exports.
One strategy I hope the Libs and Nats adopt. As they are a fascist party and have turned more right wing with Dutton, he will try and wedge Labor on any issue or amendments with the Religious Discrimination Bill and try to pick up anti-LGBTQI and pro-religious sentiment in the suburbs of western Sydney and other cities which are very multi-ethnic and do the same in the regions which are socially conservative and not socially liberal or small l Liberal like the cities. This may be his tack. It would hopefully backfire but the Religious Discrimination Bill was another tactic that Morrison employed which did backfire. He hoped his Super for Home loans would work and appeal to young voters largely in the suburbs. It could have worked but didn’t. It was bad policy I know but when has bad policy been knocked back just because it is bad policy. Like Palmer’s 3% Mortgage interest rates for 5 years it is simple, simplistic and I can see it appealing to those not in the know about finance, business and world affairs.
Dutton jut doesn’t know enough about the economy and there is too much dirt on him. I never thought much about Josh and thought he was an ordinary Treasurer but he did know economics-speak which the conservative survivors don;t.
I am not impressed so far with Labor. They will walk back everything. Albo and Chalmers are another Rudd and Swan like pair. Walking back a commitment to raise real wages for the lowest paid. What do they think the rest of us deserve. Vouchers in lieu of pay rise? Like the stupid Food and Dine and Travel vouchers of the NSW Government. I think the Greens can gain a lot here if they can motivate the social justice elements of their platform and party into media announcements and workable policy and not whinge mealy-mouthed at aircraft noise.
I like your analysis, John. Thanks. Just one factual error, though. The Greens have lost a seat at a general election: Lance Armstrong in Tasmania in 1996. They lost another 3 seats in 1998, but that is likely the result in the shameful reduction from 35-25 members in the size of the House of Assembly.
Which was supposed to finish off the Greens, and the necessity to form coalition governments in Tassie, for good. Epic fail!
Thanks for this correction. I assume this was a multi-member electorate.