This sort of contest is not unusual within the broad church that is the Liberals, and goes on within all parties as well. Philosophies, purpose, policies, and programs are all up for grabs as individuals and factions grapple for superiority.

But both the struggle and the uncertainty seem greater right now, despite the new federal leader, Peter Dutton, playing down any differences within the party. According to Dutton, the Liberals are neither moderate nor conservative, but a centre-right party. Yet he is the leading conservative, and other Liberal leaders, like Senator Simon Birmingham, are leading moderates.

The type of internal contest currently going on in the ACT Liberal Party due to the defeat of former senator Zed Seselja by independent David Pocock is clearly also happening around Australia. Defeat at the federal election exacerbated tensions because the conservative nature of the Morrison government on key issues generated the opposition which eventually led to the loss of six blue-ribbon seats to teal independents. These seats were held largely by avowedly moderate members of the party.

Discussion of the identity of the party is complicated by the fact that, at the federal level and in many states, the party is either in coalition with the conservative Nationals or is one party. Voters perceive the Liberal Party's identity as entangled with that of its conservative junior partner. It is fair, nevertheless, to consider the Liberals as a stand-alone party when discussing their identity.

One place to start when unpacking the issues is the opinion piece written in defence of Zed Seselja by the president of the ACT Young Liberals, Connor Andreatidis. Notably it is directed primarily to other Liberals, specifically moderate Liberals, rather than the general public. It is also not only about the ACT but other Liberal governments, such as the former Marshall government in South Australia, and broader issues, including mandates, interstate border controls and net zero emissions, which he claims have harmed the whole Liberal Party's brand. This is a shot at both state and federal Liberal/Coalition governments.

He claims, first, that modern Liberal or Coalition governments have become too moderate, and secondly that this moderation has not saved either these governments or individual MPs. Conservatism has not saved them either, of course, as Tony Abbott learnt in 2019.

The Marshall government was wracked, and ultimately hurt electorally, by factional and other internal conflicts, which have flared up further since the loss to Labor's Peter Malinauskas. There is no evidence, however, that Marshall, operating in a generally Labor state like South Australia, would have been saved by being more conservative or less committed to COVID border controls and mandates.

The major significance of this local statement by Andreatidis is not in re-examining the Senate campaign in the ACT. He is correct that both moderate and conservative Liberal MPs Australia-wide were defeated in the big swing against the government at the federal election, though the parallel between single-member electorates and a two-seat Senate electorate is faulty (Seselja needed only one-third, rather than half, of the vote). A more moderate Liberal senator may still have struggled - but there is no doubt that the independent opposition was galvanised not just by Seselja's general conservative values and identification with the conservative wing of his party, but by his failure to support the right of ACT citizens to debate the assisted dying issue in their own Legislative Assembly.

The Andreatidis piece's greater significance is that it tells us more about the competing values at work within the Liberal Party. This competition reflects the values not just of the party's representatives, including the lost class of 2022 (moderates and conservatives alike) but also the values of the general party membership. He claims as an insider that "Zed has faithfully served the values of the Canberra Liberal membership in federal politics".

READ MORE:

This local example gives some sense of the task faced by Dutton. As the leading conservative, he has three tasks. He must engage effectively with party moderates in a highly fraught internal party discussion; he must judge how to fashion policies which are not just in line with Liberal Party values but are electorally attractive; and he must satisfy the party membership, which is itself deeply, even passionately, divided between a moderate minority and a conservative majority.

There are models for how to go about this task. Dutton would be wise to look at what Dominic Perrottet's NSW Coalition government is currently doing as it prepares to face the electors in nine months. Perrottet, a conservative, has the leading moderate, Matt Kean, as his Treasurer. Together they are trying to save their government from defeat.

His reading of the federal election result clearly differs from that of Dutton, who is holding fast to his old ways. Perrottet, by contrast, is distancing himself from the Morrison government, not digging in. The lesson he has learnt seems to not just be the need for expansive government spending on social policies, but also to defend the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption, which he did before the federal election, and to make sure that his government is more friendly to women and the environment.

The NSW Coalition government, longer in office than the outgoing federal Coalition government, is the model which can best dampen the internal Liberal Party identity wars. But whether even Perrottet can save his government from Labor, the Greens, and the independents remains to be seen.