Yesterday, the Nationals announced that they would not be renewing the coalition with the Liberal Party following the 2025 federal election. This is unlikely to be a permanent break, but rather the parties taking some time apart to re-assess their positions after a devastating election defeat.
The nature of these political parties is quite peculiar. Sometimes, the Coalition can best be analysed as a single entity – in contrast to Labor, who run in every seat across the country, no Coalition party runs everywhere. In other ways, they are two parties. That is more relevant to how they operate in Parliament (which, with no immediate federal election, is the most relevant to the current moment). And in other ways the Coalition consists of four parties, with singular parties existing in Queensland and the Northern Territory, with their members sitting with one of the two parties in Canberra. I analysed this peculiarity in detail in 2022.
As the parties now re-assess their position following the recent election, this peculiar relationship seems relevant, because both parties find themselves out of government, and quite a long way out of government. But only one of the two parties bears almost all of the burden of getting back into government.
Sometimes you will see people try to analyse the relative performance of the Liberal and National parties by looking at how well their “vote held up”, or how many seats each party has won.
But the problem with this sort of comparative analysis is that the parties rarely if ever contest seats against each other. Putting aside the Nationals parties in South Australia and Western Australia, which were effectively not a part of the Coalition, the parties only ran against each other in the seat of Bendigo.
The Nationals performed impressively in Bendigo, but that’s just one seat. Everywhere else on the east coast, voters just had one of the two parties to choose from. Indeed in Queensland, they appeared on the ballot as a single party, even though now those successful LNP candidates now have parted ways as either Liberals or Nationals.
While the Coalition as a whole has a vote that goes up or down in electoral competition with other political forces (be they Labor, the Greens, teals, One Nation or anyone else), and gains or loses seats, the relative strength of these two parties is entirely down to the shape of their coalition agreement, which in almost all cases biases the status quo: Liberal seats stay Liberal, and Nationals seats stay National.
The only exceptions are the rare cases where an open seat is challenged by the other party, which has seen seats like Farrer and Nicholls change hands. A defection in the NSW state seat of Port Macquarie also saw that seat move from Nationals to Liberal. The seat was then vacated earlier this year, leading to a fierce by-election contest won by the Liberal.
It seems to be even more difficult for a Queensland seat to move between the two parties after the Liberal National Party merger of 2008. Ian Macfarlane was a Liberal MP representing the seat of Groom, which mostly covers the city of Toowoomba in Queensland. In 2015, he was dropped from the ministry following the election of Malcolm Turnbull as Liberal leader and subsequently prime minister. Later that year, he announced his intention to sit as a National from then on. He had support from local LNP members, but the LNP state executive blocked the move. He ended up retiring at the 2016 election, and Groom remains a Liberal seat.
So the electoral success of the two separate parties is entirely dependent on how they perform in contests against other opponents: Labor, the Greens and independents.
What is particularly peculiar about the most recent iteration of the Coalition is that the Nationals has become a party that exists almost entirely in safe seats.
There are 91 seats where the Coalition was the runner-up on the two-candidate-preferred vote (likely to drop to 90 when the count finishes in Blaxland). The Nationals only made the 2CP in four of those seats – Calare, Bendigo and Richmond, as well as the presumed-National in Lingiari (although Jacinta Price’s defection makes me question that classification). The Nationals were the primary Coalition party in Hunter, where they came third to One Nation, but every other non-classic seat won by a non-Coalition party was one where the Liberals ran.
The former-and-presumably-future Coalition needs to win 33 seats to win the next election. The 33 most marginal seats where the Liberals or Nationals came second in 2025 include just two seats primarily contested by the Nationals: Bendigo and Calare.
While the Nationals could theoretically contest more of these seats, they wouldn’t be a contender in many. Just ten of those seats lie outside of a metropolitan area. This is another reminder that the path for the Coalition to regain power comes from through the cities, a task the Nationals cannot help with.
So almost every seat contested by the Nationals is already held by the Nationals, even after the Coalition suffered such heavy losses in 2025. The Nationals also hold safer seats now: the average Liberal margin is 5.5%, and the average Nationals margin is 11.9%. Of the 18 Liberal or Nationals seats held on margins of 6% or less, just one (Cowper) is a Nationals seat.
As a consequence of the Liberal Party’s domination of marginal seats, the Nationals are now largely immune to electoral fortunes, good or bad. The Nationals now hold exactly the same number of House seats as they did at the peak of the Coalition in 2013. Over that same time, the Liberal Party has lost 47 seats. The Nationals made up 1/6 of their numbers in 2013, but now have over one third.
This wasn’t always the case. Back in 2007, the Labor government won a number of former Nationals seats including Page, Dawson, Capricornia and the newly-created notional Nationals seat of Flynn. They had also won Richmond off the Nationals in 2004. So The Coalition’s defeat in 2007 hit both the Liberals and Nationals about equally, as a proportion of their strength. And they largely recovered proportionally in 2010 and 2013. But since 2013, the strength of the Liberal Party in cities has collapsed while in regional areas Liberal and Nationals MPs have become relatively safer.
The Nationals also had lost a number of rural seats to independents in the 2007-2013 period, but seats like New England and Lyne are now safe Nationals seats while the independent challenge is strongest in the cities or in regional Liberal seats.
Does this reflect the Nationals just being better at their jobs? I think the evidence is weak. In states where both the Liberals and Nationals had seats where they were in the 2CP (NSW, VIC, QLD and NT), swings in rural classic seats were a bit bigger in the Liberal seats (2.8% to Labor) compared to Nationals seats (1.1% to Labor). The Nationals on paper actually had a swing towards them in provincial seats, but if you exclude their big swing in Bendigo the two parties had almost identical 2.1% swings against them everywhere else.
Such an analysis is basically impossible, because we are not comparing like with like. The Nationals just run in places where Labor is less of a presence.
Now we have the Liberal and National parties separating. For now the space where this coalition breakdown will play out is in the parliamentary arena. It will give them a chance to consider their policy direction, and how it might differ, and eventually how they can make those possibly different directions work together.
The Liberal Party’s path back to government is almost entirely urban. This will be challenging enough with a party room consisting of very few urban MPs, but made even harder with the addition of the Nationals.
The Nationals are in a funny position now. They are in one sense now even more influential in terms of setting the direction of the parties of the once-and-future coalition, particularly considering the numbers of rural Liberals and the divided state of that party room. But that is unlikely to put them on track to returning to government. The Nationals’ influence over a government is entirely dependent on the Liberals finding more seats in the cities.
For now, the coalition’s breakdown is going to play out in the parliament. If it can’t be resolved before the next election, we may see the parties contest more seats against each other. That would also be fascinating, but it may not go the way the Nationals hope. There are numerous seats on the north coast of New South Wales which remain legacy Nationals seats, but now contain large populations of retirees from the capital cities who may be used to voting Liberal. The Liberal Party has already broken through in the state seat of Port Macquarie, and there have been Liberal breakthroughs on local councils in Tweed and Mid-Coast.
I saw a comment earlier today that said the Nationals would be well served by having a relationship with the Liberals more like the relationship the Greens have with Labor. They may not really enjoy such a relationship: it would give the Nationals a lot more freedom to express disagreement, but the electoral system does not do well for smaller parties. The Nationals have been able to keep these seats to themselves. I don’t think the Liberals would sweep them away if there was open competition, but I think it would be tougher on the smaller party. I also don’t see how such a relationship is possible as long as the parties are merged in Queensland, their strongest state.
My assumption at the moment is the parties will find a way to patch up their differences before 2028, but perhaps with such a large gap between their current position and a return to government, the parties may decide to take their chances on a more open electoral contest next time around.
Qld LNP MPs do not choose which party they sit with in the Coalition. It is laid down the merger agreement that formed the Qld LNP. Essentially If the seat was National at the time of the agreement the seat remains National and viceversa.
How will the Qld LNP contest the next federal election if the coalition is not restored? Will they campaign on the National’s policies, or Liberal’s? Or is a demerger the only way to cleanly contest a coalition-free environment?
I think it is in both parties best interest to stay seperate for the 2028 election.
The Nationals can focus on more of a tradional rural platform and run in Liberal held rural seats. Maybe pick up more seats which stay theirs when they rejoin.
The Liberals can run on a platform that appeals more to suburbs. Counting on the Nationals to take the fight to the ALP rurally.
As to QLD Josh, I believe each candidate will run more locally on the issues of the party they sit with.
id say once the libs find their footing and another leadership spill occurs they will find more common ground
@ Greg. Do you have a split number of what this now represents from the 2025 election? How many will now be nominally Nats and how many will be nominally Liberals.
Re: David May 21, 2025 at 11:25 am
The Nationals can focus on more of a tradional rural platform and run in Liberal held rural seats. Maybe pick up more seats which stay theirs when they rejoin.
You mean like Farrer? That might not go down so well
While I think both parties will kiss and make up before 2028, I think it opens up the possibility of a very early election if either party doesn’t get its act together within a reasonable time. Never let an opportunity pass you by and if both parties are so far apart or haven’t done the necessary policy work within 18 months, then Albo might engineer an early election to take advantage and seal in a third term.
While Littleproud sounded somewhat measured and convincing on 7.30 Report last night, I get the whiff that the Nats are now beholden to a major donor, who shall remain nameless and she wants certain policy outcomes that won’t go down well with city voters. While ever the Nats are prepared to take this gold coin, I think this may not go down so well in National heartland, as the realities of climate change start to bite harder with small to mid-size scale farmers and people living in rural townships.
As for expectations the Nats numbers will stay static, what’s to stop them air brushing their image, swapping their Blunnies & hats for workboots & hardhats & going for the same conservative urban demographic that Dutton was hoping to harvest (and before him back to Howard), targetting seats that are currently both Liberal and ALP. As a bonus, such a party would be a more natural ally for ON than the Liberals. Whilst even then they’d be very unlikely to get the numbers to form government, they could well be the major partner in a future coalition with a much reduced Liberal party.
@ Neil
QLD has 6 nominal nats and 10 libs. 2 each in the QLD senate.
For a total of 15 nats and 25 Libs unless counts change. For instance I think there is still a chance Tim Wilson loses, making it 24.
the nats seats are usually stagnant as unlike the greens they dont face any threats from the other conservative parties labor has to fight both the greens and libs whereas the libs only have to fight labor. and to a lesser extend inds but they are bceoming a threat to all sides now that they have begun targetting safe labor seats. thats why the nats could pour so many resources into bendigo because the 3 seats they controlled wrere safe fro any challenge
Seats like Eden Monaro will be liberal not national seats.. same for Monash and la trobe. Nats have no marginal seats versus Labor… so the chances of nats winning extra seats are remote.
There are 15 Nationals and 28 Liberals. Assuming they don’t win Bradfield.
@mick bendigo?
@ Mick
The state seat of Monaro has been Nationals held before so i think Nats have a right to put up a candidiate. Monash should have seen a Nationals candidate it is now a rural safe non Labor sea. La Trobe is a hybrid seat but as urbanisation and ethnic diversification continue the seat will likely improve for Labor and will be a longer term Labor target. This means Libs will be confined to peri-urban seats like Casey, Hume, Canning and the Gold Coast and Sunshine Coast while the Nats attempt to take out the Libs or enticing defections from Groom, Barker, O’Connor etc
lingiari as well. also Ullwinkel the 3cp they are awfully close and id imagine if they outpolled the liberals they may ahve won it. and after their success in bendigo i wouldn t be surprised if they give ballarat a tilt as well.
It’s near impossible for either to at least become a semi-competitive opposition without each other.
It’s possible that they will reunite before the next election.
They could possibly merge but it’s difficult right now given their ideological differences. The other ‘Five Eyes’ countries have a main centre-right to right party that caters for big-city and rural political interests. It may be trickier to emulate in Australia because of the vast distances between major cities and history of coalition agreements.
The concept of which seats each party could or should hold is a map idea. Will make that soon.
But for now, here’s my predictions for this period of Parliament:
* Multiple by-elections to be held (presumably at least one goes to the Coalition and another to Labor)
* The Coalition will be reunited in a few months
* Albo won’t be Prime Minister or Labor leader in 2028; the truth is leaders don’t have the capacity to serve more than six years anymore (hence why Mark McGowan resigned)
Also a random wildcard on the state/territory level for a similar reason to Albo: Andrew Barr resigns out of fatigue.
@ Votante
I think in UK the rural areas are not as remote as they are in Australia, Canada or US. Rural areas in UK are more like the Southern Highlands, Macedon Ranges, Scenic Rim etc often have good transport connections market towns etc. NZ is less densley populated but i think again due to smaller country geographically it is more like UK than the 3 other anglosphere countries so no need for a seperate rural party. In Canada, there is a 3 party system and the Canadian Liberals are more like the Teals so can win affluent seats which Labor is Australia cannot win as there is a working class NDP party to fill that void. In the US, Social values play a bigger role and Democrats can win very affluent seats which in Australia Labor cannot. Also population spread in the US means regional/rural voters have a bigger weighting.
There is inconsistency in which seats are contested by which party. There are urbanising seats with a growing non-agricultural demographic but have a Nationals candidate running. I’m talking Hunter and Richmond especially. There are regional electorates with Liberal MPs e.g Wannon, Farrer. Liberals and Nationals wouldn’t want to exhaust resources competing against each other.
The path for the Liberals would be to claw back outer suburban seats they just lost such as Hughes or Forde.
Bendigo was a close race because the Nats dumped a lot of resources into it and campaigned hard on state issues, or so I heard.
Votante, that is probably why instead of a Liberal/National split the divide should be moderate vs conservative which is the case for UK and Canada. Both countries feature a conservative party that wins both urban and rural seats, and also a centrist type of party (Liberal Democrats and Liberals respectively) that is typically the third force that slots in between Labor and the Conservatives (although Canada Liberals seem to be the main left party that tends to form government more often).
@ Votante
Nationals have never held Hunter. in fact Hunter has been Labor held since the famous 1910 election when Labor won its first majority government. The reason why Nats contest Hunter is that they are the only party with an overlapping state seat. Richmond is the only seat that Nats have lost in the last 30 years to Labor which they have nor recovered yet. The issue in Richmond is more than urbanisation that it contains an extreme left wing area in Byron Shire where i doubt even a moderate Liberal candidate wil make a difference.
Good point Nimalan about the federal seat of Hunter, historically it overlapped with the state seat of Upper Hunter (extending from Singleton up towards the New England region). However, with the abolition of Charlton in 2016, Hunter has now moved towards Newcastle and Lake Macquarie, losing most of the Upper Hunter region (only Singleton remains as of 2025, and if Parliament does not expand then Hunter may well become a predominantly Newcastle and Lake Macquarie area seat).
The problem for Littleproud is he supports NetZero and ost of his voters don’t. Canavan has been trying to exploit this, the problem is if they bail on NetZero, there goes their reasoning behind the need for Nuclear.
Only way out is to jettison Littleproud and dump Nuclear before Labor put it forward as an option.
Which they will have to, renewables won’t ever work in their current form, as Littleproud hasw more or less said.
Leichardt and Herbert are particular oddities – Leichardt was held by Warren Entsch as a Liberal and Phil Thompson holds the Townsville seat of Herbert. There’s an argument for both of these seats to be Nationals seats, given that Dawson and Capricornia are.
However the redistribution next year has the potential to shake up all of the coastal seats north of Noosa.
In terms of who sits where, the LNP occasionally dabbles with the the idea of joining the CLP to form their own party room. This discussion ebbs and flows with the proportion of Queensland representatives there are in Parliament.
@mrk yore qld is scheduled to be redistributed a month after parliament first sits
Serious question: what are the Nationals for, if they’re not prepared to do what they’re doing now? If the Coalition is a permanent fixture, the two parties are little more than branding.
I’d welcome the evolution of Australian democracy towards the continental European model where there there are several major parties, minority governments are common, and coalitions are on a term-by-term basis with no expectation of continuing in Opposition.
Of course that model has evolved primarily in countries with some for of PR or MMP. It’s harder here in Australia. But with Greens, Teals and other independents becoming a growing force, I think we’re seeing that single-member electorates may not need to mean two permanent blocs. And the type of consensus government that emerges from minority government and temporary alliances already has some precedent with several decades of governments not having majorities in the Senate.
But I think the biggest impediment a continuation of the trend is the ALP and it’s battle-tested factional system, which allows it to span a reasonably wide ideological spectrum. So far, the splintering or erosion of the previous blocs have largely been on the right, with the exception of the limited inroads by the Greens.
If the ALP continues to hold together against a more fractured right, they would be the one party that could offer the possibility of a single-party majority government with an easier path to deliver on their policy platform, versus an unwieldy coalition on the right that would need to reconcile different policies. So, the incentive for the right to re-consolidate would continue to exist.
@John The process starts 30 days after the first sitting of the new Parliament. It was due to start on 27 March 2025 but it was deferred because it was within a year of the due date for the election, so it all has to be wrapped up by May 2027.
On my count Queensland crossed into 30.5 quotas in February 2025, so there’s an extra seat that needs to be squeezed in. BUT we won’t know that officially, because the Electoral Act says “the Electoral Commissioner is required to use the latest official published statistics of the Commonwealth to ascertain the Australian population on the day after the one year anniversary of the first meeting of the House of Representatives”. So for the next year it’s mostly admin preparing for the Queensland redistribution. The actual call for submissions won’t come until 2026. The AEC will have a very good idea of the actual numbers so expect to see some media releases about the additional electorate so it doesn’t come as a complete surprise.
Probably on the Sunshine Coast, because that’s where the growth is. It may also mean that Noosa comes out of Wide Bay and back into a Sunny Coast seat. I will be arguing strongly for not chopping up Central and North Queensland cities.
@mark i id the math the other day and qld is currenty at 30.39 quotas.
if a new seat were to be added it would likelly consist of parts of blair (somerset), longman, fisher and fairfax
John, I agree partly with Mark. Even though current calculations might have Queensland below 30.5 quotas, it is close enough to the threshold that the commissioners would prefer to delay/postpone the redistribution again until the 2026 entitlement determination which will confirm whether or not an extra seat is gained.
Otherwise, it would be pointless if they start a 30-seat redistribution only for the new entitlement determination to show 31 seats are required. Then they have to start the whole process again from scratch.
they will be able to determine growth and if the growth is slow then they will be able to conclude wether or not it will tip over by next year
This does open up the chance for the Libs to run in Richmond, Page, Cowper and Lyne. Should the Libs win even one of those, the writing is on the wall for the Nats in NSW as the coastal wall will have broken.. The Nats have held Farrer before so they could be in with a chance there but Albury is a Liberal City as Wagga was before Daryl Maguire “shat the bed’. What the break up may do is pull the rug out from some “community’ independents running in regional areas as there will be a choice on the right. Where the Nats will come unstuck is that running separately they have next to no hope of winning Senate seats in NSW and Victoria. They will end up in the senate as a Qld rump.
@redistributed lib would have no chance in cowper and page. richmond they would probably make the 2pp because of the urbanisation lyne 50/50
they would obviously not be restricted to running just there. but in new england, parkes riverina and calare as well.
If the Qld Nats veer off toward One Nation, it is conceivable that one or both of Michael McCormack or Darren Chester would go to the Libs or just walk out. Would Andrew Gee join the Libs?
It is a pity that there aren’t more moderate Liberal MPs as some might say – “they left the building, they ain’t coming back” and the new agenda goes from there.
Redistributed, it appears that it’s only the Queensland Nationals that seem to be the aligning strongly to the socially conservative aspects similar to One Nation. The NSW and Victorian Nationals have most of their federal members (and also state MP’s) being considered more centrist in nature, at least being neutral/ambivalent about issues such as net zero and LGBT rights whilst still maintaining an emphasis on rural/regional development.
The paradox that the Nationals face is that they will never have as much influence over the Liberals as they do right now, in opposition after an enormous landslide defeat.
For the Nationals to sit on the government benches, the Liberals have to win seats, and plenty of then. The Nationals’ contribution towards winning government is minimal.
There have been just two instances of the Coalition directly winning government off Labor in an election in the past 50 years. In both those instances (1996 and 2013), the Nationals gained two seats.
I’m of the view that it might take a year or more to get the Coalition back together, but it is imperative towards putting up a respectable campaign in 2028.
Agree Real Talk, the problem is that the Nationals hold seats that Labor rarely wins so they are generally safe and uncompetitive. The only ‘swing’ seats that have been held by the Nationals this century are Page and Richmond in NSW, with Richmond now trending more towards a Labor leaning seat with the demographic change of Byron Shire and Page going in the other direction.
@ Yoh An
Agree, I think Central QLD Nat seats (Flynn, Dawson and Capricornia) are not likely to be won for sometime while the two North Coast seats may not be swing seats anymore. Once upon a time Calare was a seat Labor could win but not anymore
I think the Nats could be competitive in the NSW Senate in their own right. With 7.3% of the primary vote in the lower house, that’s about 0.5 quotas in the Senate.
Im not sure that QLD will get to 30.5 Quotas, the last 2 population updates (March 2024 and September 2024) had them at 30.39%
During those periods WA and Vic moved up and NSW, Sa and Tas moved down
The next release date is 19 June 2025 for the December period
However if the Senae was increased to 14 Senators per state QLD would pick up 5 or mabne 6 seats
The National party is not the party of agricultural interests. If it was its environmental credentials would be a lot better, as any broadacre cropper or grazier can tell you. It is the party of mining. It’s why the Nationals have made inroads into the ALP vote in Lithgow and the Upper Hunter. Mining drives much of the investment in non urban towns – a lot more than agriculture. Compare the economy of Mildura to Rockhampton; one an agricultural hub and one a mining hub. There’s a lot more going on in Wondal than Irymple. With One Nation becoming a respectable mainstream party there isn’t a lot of room for the rustic Canavanites, who aren’t taken seriously be the mining money sloshing around Australian politics. It’s not by accident that noted family man, Barnaby Joyce, has spent most of his public life as a gentleman cosplayer acting as Gina Rinehart’s messenger boy. It’s not as if the Nationals have put up any resistance to CSG, which is real problem when you rely on aquifers for stock and irrigation. It’s not that long ago that the Nationals in NSW barely beat back an insurrention of independents, narrowly defeating them in a number of seats in the state election before last. The National base is not as rusted on as it was even ten years ago. Structures collapse slowly at first, and then with a rush.
@captain I think it’s been proven here that nsw would get 8 vic 6 qld 5 wa 3 and SA 2
Given that onp poll well in the area between groom and maranoa an ex0ansion could see them win a lower house seat in between those seats if another seat existed there especially if it weren’t contested by a sitting mp
Bendigo was an aberration. Liberal non urban seats. Herbert Groom Farrer Wannon.. O’Connor’s Dutack Forrest. Barker and Grey…
My almost Fantasy is a near wipe out of the nats.labor polls very well and in seats were Labor cannot win…the libs do.
Assorted independents may be in the mix.
Ironically, the Nationals got more influence over the opposition post-election because their relative size is bigger than pre-election whilst the Liberals shrunk. Also, nearly all Liberals are either from the outer suburbs, provincial areas or the regions. I can’t think of a Liberal who holds a seat entirely or mostly within 25km of a capital city CBD other than Tim Wilson who just narrowly won Goldstein. I’m posting this before the Bradfield result is finalised.
With the Liberals and Nationals splitting, it could be possible that some members defect to the other side or become an independent.
Calare was based on 75% lithgow
Bathurst between 50 and 60% Labor
And approx 60% non Labor in Orange
But this does not happen any more.
If however Labor won Calare due to a split vote where Mr Gee lost then they would have a good chance of retaining
There is no plausible or hypothetical configuration of federal voters anywhere in Queensland that would result in an elected One Nation MP, save for the extinction of the LNP as we know it. Pockets of support, yes. Winning booths on 2CP? Sure. Is all this support concentrated in a congruent mass of land containing 1/30th or 1/31th of Queensland voters? No.
@ Lachlan Ridge
It would say Lithgow and the La Trobe Valley (VIC) is to do with the decline of Coal mining rather than Nats making inroads among Coal miners. The Decline stating happening Pre-Adani and started in the 2000s rather than in after Turnbull was ousted.