Former Australian Prime Minister John Howard has emphasised the importance of preserving the centre-right Liberal-National Coalition, drawing on historical lessons to support his position.
In making the decision, Littleproud said the National Party wanted to discover its own identity.
He also pointed out that some of the policies the Nationals support do not align with the Liberal’s focus, including nuclear energy, supermarket divestiture laws, and a $20 billion regional Future Fund.
Nevertheless, the National leader said the party remained open to future cooperation and did not rule out the possibility of returning to the Coalition before the next election.
Nothing More Important than Preserving the Coalition: Howard
In an interview with the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), Howard, who served four terms from 1996 to 2007, said he was very concerned about the separation.“I would urge the leaders of both parties to work hard to put the Coalition together,” he said.
“It is my very strong opinion that policy differences are best resolved within the framework of a coalition.
“If the two parties remain separate for too long away from a coalition, then the differences in policy will harden, and it will be more difficult to resolve them.”
The former prime minister noted that while policy differences did exist during his time in office, they were resolved internally.
At the same time, he drew a lesson from the 1996 federal election, where the Liberals won enough seats to form its own government but still decided to maintain the coalition with the Nationals.
“There were some people who said to me, oh, you should dump the national party. I said, No, we worked together to win the election, and we’re going to honour that partnership,” he said.
“And my message to our National Party friends and to my liberal fellow members … [is that] you should work from tomorrow to put the Coalition back together. And having the Coalition back together is more important than anything else.”
Philosophical Divide Doesn’t Exist Within Coalition
The former prime minister also rejected the idea of a “philosophical divide” within the Coalition, calling it an exaggeration.“I’ve always taken what’s loosely called the broad church approach to the Liberal Party, and of course, on economic policy, which used to define years ago, the differences between the Country Party [National Party] and the Liberal Party now are far less relevant,” he said.
Moreover, Howard said it was important for the Nationals not to be carried away because they were in a better position than the Liberals in this election.
“I can understand the National Party thinking–we did better than the liberals. But can I make the point that that is often the case when you lose, but when you win, the boot is on the other foot,” he said.
Coalition Exists to Serve the National Interest: Former Deputy PM
Meanwhile, former Deputy Prime Minister John Anderson, who was the National Party leader between 1999 and 2005, said the two parties existed to serve the national interest rather than their own interests.“There’s no doubt in my mind that experience shows over the 80 years that the Coalition agreement has been in place that working together produces better government for the country, and Australia needs better government now more than ever,” he told Sky News Australia.
“We are in danger of permanently entering structural decline, and this is happening in the context of a very dangerous world. So I hope they can sort their differences out very, very quickly.”
Anderson also pointed out that the Coalition offered an advantage neither party had individually—the ability to share responsibility.
“One of the beauties of a Coalition is that you can break up responsibility for the portfolios that are very important for everybody, for each particular party,” he said.
“And that was one of the experiences that the National Party will now have to grapple with. Because in the past, when this has been tried, it just exhausted shadow ministers or people with shadow responsibility.”
