Interview with Peta Credlin, Sky News
4th July 2022
PETA CREDLIN
Joining me now is Senator Jane Hume, the Shadow Minister for Finance and a member of the two-person panel, that's reviewing why the Liberal Party lost the federal election, to be co-authored with former party official Brian Loughnane. Jane, thank you for your time. This is an issue that keeps coming back because the Liberal Party's female representation numbers, they ebb and flow, but at the moment you're at a bit of a low point, quotas versus targets. What's your view and why?
JANE HUME
Well, I think the most important thing is to, first of all, understand that an election loss always changes the dynamic within a parliament. The Liberal Party has come a long way, even in just the last few years had we held the seats that we lost in places like Pearce, Swan, Chisholm and Reid, those traditionals and marginals, we still would have maintained a decent number of women in parliament. Had we kept those seats that are traditionally safe, like Higgins and Curtin, well then we would have done even better. Had we won seats like Lyons, for instance, or Patterson, Shortland, Dunkley or Corangamite, you know, we actually would have improved the number of women in the liberal ranks, but an election loss like the one we've experienced does change things up. Now, we know that the conversation between quotas and targets has been going on for some time. Quotas is an interesting method. It certainly changes the numbers, but does it change the culture within the party? I think that targets are probably a better option. But they must be targets that are actually achievable and fulfillable, and they have to have some momentum behind them from leadership. In the Liberal Party, well let's face it, people tend to join the Liberal Party because they don't like being told what to do. You know, they don't like overbearing, large governments. They don't like having punitive taxes. They don't like red tape. That tends to be why people join the party in the first place. They don't take well to directives. They're okay with direction from leadership, that's really important, but not directives and quotas would be a directive. So I think...
CREDLIN
It divides the choice on gender lines. I'm opposed to the indigenous voice to the Parliament because I think it divides Australians on racial lines. I have the same dislike of dividing us in any way. But that catalogue of members that you talked about, and candidates, it'd be interesting to see if you judge the Liberal Party on what you took to the election, in terms of that gender split, you'd be probably in good shape. But clearly, when people went to fill out their ballot paper, they were not voting for women just because they were women. They were voting for policies. That's where I think you fell short.
HUME
No, I think you're right, we do need to reframe the debate that we're having. I saw a statistic recently that suggested that fewer than one in four Australian women between the ages of 18 and 35, voted liberal. Now, I think that speaks volumes because the Liberal Party if you're a liberal parliamentarian or a liberal party member, you know that the reason you are there is to improve the country for the next generation. But if women that are part of that next generation aren't seeing that message aren't hearing that message, or you know, they're not buying what it is that we're selling, well, then it is time for a re-think.
CREDLIN
That's an important point. There's a thing called the Australian electoral study. It's done by Professor McAllister at the ANU it's been going for now 35 years. The Liberal Party has never fallen below 40%. It was 40% under John Howard, who wasn't considered popular with women, it was 40% and above with Tony Abbott, again, who everyone said had a women's problem. It dropped under 40% with Malcolm Turnbull, and he was supposedly popular with women. I think there's a broader issue of why the votes moving away from women. Linda Reynolds again today when she did media was arguing that a lot of these TEALS should have been liberal women. Now let's have a listen.
LINDA REYNOLDS
That 14 of our 18 seats. So 14, as you said of our 18 seats, were won by women. And many of those women, particularly some of the TEALS should have been liberal candidates, but they were not.
CREDLIN
She makes the point that these TEALS should have been liberal candidates. I argue not when you look at the policies that they were putting out. Again, it's a substance of what you take to the election, not who's just pushing the message, surely?
HUME
Well, it is certainly but at the same time, we don't want to end up in the electoral wilderness for forever in a day. If we miss out on this large cohort of the Australian population, if what it is that we're selling, they're not buying, well then I think we have to rethink what it is that we're selling or how we are selling it.
CREDLIN
But don't you think that's the message, not the messenger?
HUME
It is both very much so and I do think who delivers that message is really important too.
CREDLIN
So why did Celia Hammond lose? Why did Fiona Martin lose, why do all these women lose? That's your message. You've got your female messenger, but you had a crap message.
HUME
Well, I don't necessarily think that it was the female messenger that those people were listening to it might have been a more leadership issue as opposed to the local issue. And, you know, people vote for very different reasons. The important issue now, though, is how to recreate an increasingly diverse Liberal Party, because we know that when there are more diverse voices around the table that better decisions get made. That's the wisdom of crowds theory. Also, how do we better reflect the people that we want to represent? Because really, that's how we maintain that electoral imperative to keep voting liberal, we know that more people vote Liberal than any other party, which is terrific.
CREDLIN
That is true, which is true even on the last result.
HUME
That's exactly right. We have to maintain our relevance, not just for those older generations, but for those younger generations coming through. Now, how do we do it? If I had that answer? I'd have million dollars.
CREDLIN
If I can be bold here, Jane, I think one of the problems you had you had a lot of senior women in the cabinet, our Prime Minister Morrison used to crow about the number of women in the cabinet. Most people out there in voter land couldn't pick you out in a lineup. You at least were out in the media fray, very often arguing the case against the Labor Party. But your senior women like Marise Payne and others, missing in action. So do you think now Sussan Ley, you're going to have a stronger female injection into the national debate?
HUME
I think Sussan Ley is fantastic. She's already beginning to demonstrate that she is stepping up to take that leadership role very, very seriously, not just on behalf of liberal women, but on behalf of all women and all liberals. Which I think is really important. She has been out there today making some really important points. She's also out there in policy as well. It's not just about women. What I think what upsets me most is a lot of the conversation about liberal women, is by liberal women. We need to have more liberals broadly, that make the case. You know, we are a grassroots organisation. For an authoritarian structure, quotas are fantastic, but when it's a grassroots structure, like the Liberal Party, we really needed to be that grass roots, groundswell that creates that change. If you want more women at the top, it has to come from the bottom. It's up to leaders like Sussan Ley, like myself, like the other women in Shadow Cabinet to help make the case for that change.
CREDLIN
Right. We'll see what happens. Jane Hume thank you.