The Liberal Left is close to the centre of Australian politics. They have often been an important force. But they are now probably a minority in the Liberal Party throughout Australia. Given that, with or without the government of South Australia, Liberal blue is the colour of Australian politics at the moment, just what these Liberals stand for should not be overlooked.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
They are part of at least seven and possibly eight governments around Australia (federal, state and territory).
These moderate or progressive Liberals, sometimes called social Liberals, are the hope of everyone further to the left of them, including Labor and Green voters, for the time being. The latter should hope that the Liberal Left voice is heard loud and clear, at least in proportion to their numbers within the party and among Liberal voters. Yet their voice is strangely muted at the moment.
These centrist Liberals are also the hope for the preservation of the values encompassed in the various new social movements that have been so active since the 1960s and 1970s. These movements include environmental conservation, women's and indigenous rights, and the republican, peace and sexuality debates.
These movements are often mistakenly described as Left movements whose natural ally is Labor and whose natural opponent is the Liberals. But this is not correct. Most members and supporters of these movements were from the Left, certainly, but many were from the centre and some were even from the Right. Many of them were antagonistic to main party politics and unaffiliated to them.
Most of the movements tried to be non-partisan and accommodating to people from across the political landscape. They didn't always succeed and those people whose natural home was the Centre-Right often found it uncomfortable to be in movement gatherings. The discomfort came because of the imbalance of numbers from the Left and Right within the movements and a sort of reflexive criticism of conservative ideas and governments often to be found at movement events.
There may not be an all-encompassing Liberal Left because Left and Right identities are not always coherent and/or consistent. Some on the Liberal Left are committed to the values of only some of the social movements but not others. One can be a feminist but not an environmentalist or an indigenous-rights activist but not a republican. There are many possible combinations.
In a party in which the conservatives are dominant, it is also not easy to stick to your social Liberal beliefs. One reason is that it is hard to speak out when you are in a minority in your own party. You are a cultural minority.
Another is that you may be criticised for being disloyal to your leader when the party is in government and on a roll. The time seems never right to speak out. There is also the self-interest in promotion that may lead to a social Liberals not wanting to stand out like a sore thumb. The party membership is not likely to be much help either because most of them are probably conservative.
Nevertheless some of them must be grinding their teeth at the moment, given that the Liberal Party conventional wisdom allows free shots at the ideals of the social movements to who many Liberal members and supporters belong.
Tony Abbott recently praised foresters in Tasmania, not environmentalists, as the ultimate conservationists. Senator Michaela Cash has declined to describe herself as a feminist.
Senator George Brandis sneeringly describes members of the Sydney Bar opposed to a return to Queen's Counsel rather than Senior Counsel as just Keating-era republicans. Surely Malcolm Turnbull and Senator Marise Payne take offence at this, as might other Australian Republican Movement members such as Joe Hockey.
Social Liberals are found not just in the federal government but also in the new state governments. There are many who fit the centrist position on at least some policies and many who would identify with the values of at least some social movements. Included among them are several of the state premiers. Ideological position may be in the eye of the holder but the new Tasmanian Premier Will Hodgman looks a pretty small Liberal on many issues.
Steven Marshall, still in the running to become South Australian premier comes from the Christopher Pyne rather than the Cory Bernardi factional stable. While he has blotted his social Liberal credentials among the education community at national level, Pyne is still in the political centre. The same is true of Colin Barnett, the Western Australian Premier, on some issues.
Not that Abbott has severed ties altogether with social Liberal values. He has two important remaining links with social movements and several other possibilities. The latter still include relations with the welfare sector. But he has put this precious relationship in the conservative hands of Social Services Minister Kevin Andrews, who seems set to abandon the Australian charities and Not-For-Profits Commission against the wishes of most of the sector.
His generous paid-parental scheme has some supporters within the women's movement, though plenty of critics, too. If he gets it through the Parliament it will be one feminist memorial to him, despite his rejection of most of the rest of what the movement stands for, including advancement for women in government. But the recognition of indigenous Australians in the constitution would be the greatest achievement that would make social Liberals proud of Abbott. Standing shoulder to shoulder with great social Liberals, such as Fred Chaney, as well as colleagues such as Turnbull and Hockey, this would be an achievement to savour.
John Warhurst is an emeritus professor of political science at the Australian National University.
