National Observer Home > No. 46 - Spring 2000 > Editorial Comment

The Future of the National Party

The National Party has recently suffered a number of serious electoral set-backs, and there is an increasing likelihood that many of its parliamentary representatives will not be returned in future elections.  The National Party is one of the principal Australian political parties, and historically it has represented predominantly rural interests.  It is desirable to consider the principal reasons for its decline.

National Party or National Country Party?

For many years rural interests were represented by the then-named Country Party.  The advantage of this name was that it was recognised by the rural communities as representing their interests.  When the name was changed to the National Party, a purpose was to attract city or urban voters.

A risk, however, in seeking to attract city or urban voters in this way was that rural voters - the core of the Party's support - would identify less with the Party and perceive it as not sufficiently concerned with their interests.  This in fact is what has occurred.  Many rural voters have ceased to identify with the National Party.  Conversely, save perhaps in Queensland, the adoption of the National Party name has not attracted the city and urban voters that were hoped for.

The consequent loss of rural support by the National Party has been identified also with its apparent submission to its Coalition partner, the Liberal Party.  There is a general perception in country areas that the National Party has too readily followed Liberal Party policies that do not favour rural interests, and this matter is discussed below.

But rural disenchantment (manifested for example in widespread support for the One Nation Party) has now reached a stage where the National Party must now reconsider whether it should continue under that name, or else adopt the title of National Country Party or alternatively return to its original title of Country Party.

Dominance of the National Party by the Liberal Party

The National Party is perceived to have allowed itself to be unduly dominated by the Liberal Party by reason of weakness of its leadership and its parliamentary representatives.  Quite simply, its leaders have not demonstrated the personal force or grasp of affairs necessary to assert independence on important issues.

Out of many possible examples, the first may be taken from the area of Aboriginal affairs.  Aboriginal claims are of particular concern to the rural electorate, but the Coalition government has adopted an unduly defensive and indeed supine position.  In particular, in the first place it has not acted to separate part-Aboriginals, who have entirely different attitudes and interests, from full Aboriginals, in terms of representation and treatment.  In the second place, there has not been a proper governmental presentation of the fact that Aboriginal communities commonly treated part-Aboriginal children harshly at best and cruelly at worst, involving frequently physical and sexual abuse and even murder.  The misleading stolen-generation claims that are widely supported by parties of the left and influential sections of the media have not been refuted publicly by the Liberal Party, and disturbingly this position has been acquiesced in by the National Party.

A second example may be taken from the area of taxation.  Liberal Party taxation policy has been put in the hands of Mr. Peter Costello, who has frequently acted in accordance with the views of Treasury officials and left-of-centre influences from the Australian Taxation Office.¹  Parts of these policies, which are misguidedly referred to as "reform", are designed to fall heavily on the small business and farming communities, such as the taxation of various capital payments by family companies as though they were income and the failure to exempt bona fide family trusts from proposed new provisions imposing new liabilities upon trustees.  In regard to these and various other taxation matters the National Party has not protected its constituency.  The apparent reason is that its leaders and its advisers have not sufficiently mastered fiscal policy issues.

The Future of the National Party

Weaknesses in policy formulation and assessment, both on the part of National Party leaders and representatives and on the part of their advisers, have led to a position in which the future of that Party is now subject to serious threat.  So the large numbers of Australians who supported the One Nation Party at its inception were in many cases people who might have been expected to support the National Party if its policies had been more responsive to important issues that arise today.

In particular, it appears that those voting for One Nation were generally disillusioned by the National Party's failure to address misleading Aboriginal propaganda and by the National Party's surrender to political correctness.  Rural communities suffering from adverse economic conditions are understandably resentful that literally billions of dollars are specially provided for Aboriginals each year, and that Aboriginals are enabled to ventilate misleading and abusive assertions, which are directed against other Australians, at the expense of those other Australians.

The political correctness to which the National Party has succumbed has double standards: Aboriginals, and especially part-Aboriginals with their special culture problems, are permitted to defame white Australians, and indeed are funded by other Australians to do so, but the Coalition government does not refute false claims and indeed inhibits other Australians from doing so.

Notably, the major causes of the National Party's loss of electoral support have been its weakness and lack of firm policies.  Until its leaders and representatives, and their advisers, are able to demonstrate that they will at last protect properly their constituency the National Party will continue to fade.

National Observer No. 46 - Spring 2000