Amalgamation is not the answer for the Liberal and National Parties

‘If there was a new conservative force, headed by people from the old Nationals, we could regain the position in Queensland we held in the era of Joh (Bjelke-Petersen).’

Despite this wishful thinking, there is no evidence Queenslanders want a return of any "conservative force", the "old Nationals" or "Joh". This is taking nostalgia to a new and unacceptable extreme.

If this is as far as the National Party’s political thinking has moved in the four years since the 1998 electoral defeat the Labor Party has little to worry about.

The role of Federal Liberals in the latest moves is also puzzling. None of the proponents of amalgamation has revealed how the two parties could combine in Queensland but have their elected members picking and choosing the party they supported in Federal Parliament. One of the rocks upon which amalgamation foundered in 1994 was its inability to reconcile this problem.

One Federal member to address this problem was John Howard. The then Liberal frontbencher was reported in "The Australian" of 3 November 1993 as saying:

‘The idea of having political parties operating in the national parliament but entirely State-based is not acceptable to me …. I don’t want the Balkanisation of Australian politics."

Mr Howard indicated he was against a merger occurring in one State separate from the remainder of the country.

It is a legitimate concern which no one appears to have addressed. For a successful amalgamation to occur the National and Liberal Parties in all six states and territories would have to agree. There is no evidence that this is about to happen.

Before the amalgamation question goes any further, its advocates must answer the following questions:

• As it is vital for the Liberals to win seats in the more "Liberal" metropolitan areas and south-east how will a more "conservative" party help achieve this objective?
• What proof is there that present Liberal and National supporters will transfer their votes to a new party?
• What evidence is there that Labor voters will be prepared to support a more "conservative" party?
• What guarantees are there that splinter parties – which crippled the Nationals in particular in 1998 and 2001 – will not continue to emerge thus thwarting the very rationale behind amalgamation?
• Why will a close working relationship between the Liberals and the Nationals not achieve the desired electoral successes without the attendant risks of amalgamation?
• How will the difficulties highlighted by John Howard and other Federal members in 1993 and 1994 be resolved to ensure States do not "go it alone" and create even greater problems?

Until these questions are satisfactorily answered those advocating amalgamation should direct their energies to restoring the Liberal Party’s electoral standing. Positive policies, forward-looking leadership and strategic electoral thinking are the necessary ingredients for this. Looking to the past will solve nothing.

At the same time sensible, long-awaited constitutional reform of the Liberal Party to reduce opportunities for abuse and restore public confidence in the party’s ability to manage its own affairs would help establish the image of a party willing and able to face the greater electoral challenges.

To embrace amalgamation as a desperate measure to solve the National Party’s internal problems is self-defeating.