‘Might have some time apart': Newly elected Nationals deputy leader Kevin Hogan open to possible Coalition split
The newly elected deputy Nationals leader has left the door open to the possibility of a Coalition split after the Liberal Party was 'smashed' by Labor at the federal election.
Speaking to Sky News on Tuesday morning, hours before the Liberal partyrooom leadership ballot, Kevin Hogan said the Nationals will watch the voting 'very closely'.
Mr Hogan said the next step would be for Nationals leader David Littleproud and himself to approach the elected Liberal leadership with the intention to sign a Coalition agreement.
'But if that doesn't happen, so be it, but that will be our intention,' he told First Edition host Karl Stefanovic.
Mr Hogan said there was 'always a chance' a deal would not be signed.
'And I don't think that's necessarily unhealthy,' he said.
Mr Hogan said a discussion on shadow ministries, 'who gets what' and parameters around policy setting will take place before anything is signed.
'I think it's better when the Coalition is strong and we sign an agreement, but I think we always need to be open to the idea that, look, we might have some time apart as well,' he said.
The deputy Nationals leader said the Liberal Party had to 'obviously resolve some issues' after getting 'smashed' by Labor at the federal election.
The Coalition partnership dates back to 1946 after the Liberal Party was formed and has continued mostly uninterrupted ever since.
Nationals Senator Matt Canavan, who challenged Mr Littleproud for the party's leadership on Monday, told Sky News he was open to leaving the Coalition agreement.
'It's a business relationship between the Liberal and Nationals Party, we're not married, and like any business relationship there has to be gain for both parties,' he said.
Mr Canavan said he hoped the parties could come to an agreement but said he wouldn't accept a 'bad deal'.
Liberal Senator Dave Sharma struck a more balanced tone but acknowledged the fragility of the Coalition deal.
'The Coalition agreement is by its nature, a compromise agreement,' he told Sky News on Monday.
'The Liberals don't get everything we want. The Nationals don't get everything they want. But we recognise it's in our mutual interest to be working together.'
Vying for the Liberal leadership position are shadow treasurer Angus Taylor and deputy leader Sussan Ley.
Shadow energy minister Ted O'Brien and defected Nationals senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price have been put forward as potential deputy leaders.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
West Australian
3 hours ago
- West Australian
Opposition alliance parties only going to get closer says Zempilas following all or nothing Love comments
Basil Zempilas has denied the Opposition Alliance is close to splitting up despite comments by his Nationals counterpart Shane Love that the junior partner would break the agreement if it was not formalised. Speaking to media on Sunday, Mr Zempilas said he was surprised to see Mr Love's comments and thought the two parties were working well together. 'I'm not disappointed, but I was surprised only because the sense that perhaps was portrayed does not match the reality,' he said. 'The absolute sense is that from those inside both teams and those who have been observing the early weeks of this new parliament, we are working very well together as a cohesive, high-functioning, united Opposition Alliance.' The comments come after The Sunday Times reported comments from Mr Love saying the two parties should go it alone if a formal Coalition agreement could not be met. 'To be anything in the middle (of being fully separate or in a formal Coalition) has really not proven successful,' Mr Love said. 'For me, we either have an agreement where we are definitely working together, or we be separate.' The traditional Coalition partners have had a tense relationship in recent times. In late 2024, leading up to March's State election, the alliance was on the brink after Mr Love pledged not to form a Coalition government with the Liberals unless they agreed to rewrite Labor's firearm law reform. Mr Zempilas said he believed the two parties were stronger together but that a formal Coalition agreement took time to develop. 'I've got a very good vantage point, I'm well aware of how well we're working together, I'm very aware of how good the relationship between Shane Love as leader of the Nationals and my own relationship as leader of the Liberal Party is,' he said. 'We're working very, very well together. My sense is that we are nowhere near a walking away, in fact if anything, we are only going to get stronger and come closer together.' Mr Love clarified his comments on Sunday in a statement, saying if the parties were to win the 2029 State Election, they needed to do it together. 'The current Opposition alliance is functioning well, our parliamentary relationship is focused, co-operative, and firmly united in holding the Cook Labor Government to account,' he said. 'The Nationals WA recognise the pressing need for a longer-term Opposition agreement that provides clarity, stability, and strategic direction beyond the current short-term Alliance. 'While we await the Liberal Party's return to the negotiating table, the Opposition parliamentary teams will continue to work together effectively.' Deputy Premier Rita Saffioti slammed the disunity of the opposition. 'The Nationals and Liberal Party have been a mess for many, many years so this is of no surprise,' she said. 'My analysis is it's like watching an episode of The Big Brother house and they keep going into the diary room to complain about each other.'
Sydney Morning Herald
3 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
The Libs have been handed a golden opportunity. Now watch them stuff it up
One of the great entertainments of political commentary in Australia over the past decade and a bit has been speculating on what new and inventive way the Liberal Party will find to comprehensively bugger itself up. I can't help thinking this must have crossed Treasurer Jim Chalmers' mind as he fronted the National Press Club this week to announce that he will undertake a process to develop a new productivity agenda. Chalmers' speech was solid, but so it should be after so many have said the same things so often to so little avail. His words and aspirations have been written for him many times over, sometimes with hope, other times with emotions ranging from dull rage to despair. Sometimes even by the Coalition. We need productivity reform, politicians all know we need it, the media all know they know we need it, yet no-one ever does it. There's a simple reason for that: it's hard. The treasurer dwelt in his speech on why it's hard. Reforming an economic system requires trade-offs. Some choices will cost some people. They may or may not be recompensed in the rejig. Chalmers doesn't want the media to simplify economic reform by explaining it in terms of 'winners and losers', as they do after each budget, but there will be winners and losers in the short, medium or long term as a result of any new tax system. And, naturally, the opposition will do what the name says on the tin. It will oppose. Given the last years of Liberal shenanigans, the real question is how it chooses to do that. In one scenario, Sussan Ley leads a team which analyses and criticises the government's productivity proposals to ensure the best outcome for Australia and Australians. Should they choose this version of their own adventure, there will be plenty of material to tackle. The prime minister has already shown that he has no instinct for making business more efficient or even any understanding that a healthy economy relies on the private sector, creating new wealth instead of just shifting existing money around. In the first term of the Albanese government, the size of the public sector grew relative to the size of the private sector, so now each private employee is supporting more public sector salaries. Loading Then-employment minister Tony Burke passed through an industrial relations bill which makes it harder for businesses to scale up without locking themselves into costly arrangements. Meanwhile, the 'Future Made in Australia' slush fund has been 'picking winners' (code for government making decisions on industries it poorly understands) by investing in bringing in an overseas quantum technology firm rather than backing existing quantum technology firms – ahem – made in Australia. Labor is even trashing its own legacy by changing rules on the superannuation system it forced people to contribute to, undermining trust that the money you lock away for retirement is really yours for later. It's hard to see how a government which made policies of this sort a priority and prefers the public to the private sector will back a productivity agenda which turns Australia around. But one of the great paradoxes of politics is that sometimes you need the party which is seen to be the touchy-feely side to deliver hard-nosed decisions. Think Labour prime minister Tony Blair in the UK, Democrat president Bill Clinton in the USA, or chancellor Gerhard Schroeder in Germany, all of whom delivered welfare reform in the face of their countries' badly designed benefits systems which were creating disincentives to work.
Sky News AU
3 hours ago
- Sky News AU
'Biggest terrorist organisation in the world': Pro-Iran protester disrupts Andrew Hastie's press conference as Coalition backs US strikes on Iran
Andrew Hastie's press conference has been interrupted by a pro-Iran protester as he confirmed the Coalition's support for US military strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. Mr Hastie said on Sunday the world could never accept a nuclear Iran, describing the Islamic Republic as a "repressive, theocratic autocracy" and a "sponsor of terrorism". "From October 7, we've seen Iran support Hamas. We've seen Iran support Hezbollah. We've seen Iran support the Houthis, and we saw last year, Iran conduct missile strikes in April and October against Israeli citizens in Israel. This is a regime committed to the destruction of Israel and our allies, like the United States," he said. "It's also a highly repressive regime which has persecuted women, dissidents, religious minorities, and that is why we support the actions today - because we have no faith that the Iranian regime will negotiate in good faith. "The Coalition does not want war. We do not want war. But we believe this was a necessary action to take by the United States." But as shadow home affairs minister continued his comments, a pro-Iran protester could be heard booing in the background and claiming it is the United States, not Iran, that are the "biggest terrorists". "Boo man, come on," the protester yelled. "Oh come on, the USA is the biggest terrorist country in the world. Mr Hastie attempted to continue his comments, but the protesters was not finished. "Hello? The USA is the biggest terrorist organisation in the world," they said. After pausing for the interjection, Mr Hastie said, "It's a free country. She's allowed to say what she likes. Nonetheless, our position is unchanging." "We do support the United States, and the Albanese government should be supporting the United States as well." The shadow home affairs minister then began to speak about how Iran had breached its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. "We've seen 400 kilograms of 60 per cent enriched uranium stockpiled by Iran. Now, the IAEA caps enrichment at 20 per cent for military use, which is sort of reactor you have in a submarine," he said. To which the protester replied: "And the USA does exactly the same". Mr Hastie continued, adding that civil nuclear reactors only require 5 per cent enrichment. "So 60 per cent (shows they) were headed towards a nuclear weapon," he said. "And given that they sponsor terrorism, and that the Supreme Leader of Iran himself has said that he wants to wipe Israel off the map, I think it was the right call to make." "So does the US have nuclear weapons," the protester again yelled. "The US is a bigger terrorist organisation than Iran." The Coalition's position comes after the Albanese government continued to call for 'de-escalation, dialogue and diplomacy' following US airstrikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities in Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. In a statement responding to the US military action, a spokesperson reiterated the Albanese government's existing position. 'We have been clear that Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programme has been a threat to international peace and security," the spokesperson said. "We note the US President's statement that now is the time for peace. The security situation in the region is highly volatile. We continue to call for de-escalation, dialogue and diplomacy.'
