The Liberal Party had a critical opportunity to break free and rebuild its urban support base, but instead, it has chosen to return to a coalition with the Nationals, a move that analysts suggest will hinder its chances in city electorates. This decision comes despite the Nationals' long-term decline, masked by occasional electoral successes during anti-conservative swings.
The Illusion of National Party Strength
While the Nationals have held their ground in key elections such as 1972, 1983, 2007, 2022, and 2025, when the Liberals faced significant losses, this has created a misleading perception of a stable conservative bloc. In reality, the Nationals have experienced a steady, albeit subtle, decline over the decades. From holding 19 seats in a 123-seat House in 1949, they have dwindled to just 10 seats in a 150-seat House by 2025, representing a drop from 15.5 percent to 6.7 percent of total seats.
Demographic Shifts and Urbanisation
The primary reason for the Nationals' endangered status is the shrinking of their traditional base: older, white, rural voters with narrow-minded views. Australia has become increasingly urban and cosmopolitan, with 80 percent of the population now residing in cities of over 100,000 people. Migration trends further concentrate populations in major urban centres like Sydney and Melbourne, while young people from rural areas move to cities for employment opportunities.
This urbanisation favours centre-left politics, as city dwellers tend to support multiculturalism, climate action, renewable energy, and social diversity. Electoral redistributions will likely create new seats in urban areas at the expense of rural ones, making these seats ripe for Labor, Greens, and teal independents to capture.
The Cost of Coalition for Liberals
By rejoining the Coalition, the Liberals risk being dragged into policy positions that are anathema to urban voters. With many moderate Liberals lost to teals and Labor in recent elections, the National voice within the coalition has grown comparatively louder, alongside conservative Liberals who hold few city seats and represent older constituencies.
Key issues such as tax reform and intergenerational fairness, highlighted by Treasurer Jim Chalmers, could see the Nationals opposing changes that benefit younger voters. The Nationals hold five of the six electorates with the highest average age, making them resistant to reforms on capital gains, negative gearing, and franked dividends. This stance may alienate younger voters concerned about housing affordability and tax equity, pushing them toward Labor, Greens, or independents.
Senate Implications and Future Outlook
The Coalition also affects Senate dynamics, with Nationals like Senator Ross Cadell and Senator Bridget McKenzie likely to secure re-election in 2028 under the coalition banner, whereas they might fail on a split ticket. However, this arrangement forces the Liberals to surrender Senate seats to the Nationals, who garner minimal voter support, thus amplifying the right's voice at the centre's expense.
Former Coalition attorney-general George Brandis has suggested that Labor might expand Parliament to capitalise on demographic trends, a strategy that could further marginalise conservative parties. The electoral map shows vast rural areas painted in National and Liberal colours, covering over 90 percent of the land mass but representing less than 15 percent of the population, highlighting the urban-rural divide.
Conclusion: A Missed Opportunity
The Liberals' decision to re-enter the Coalition with the Nationals represents a significant misstep, likely making it nearly impossible to regain city seats. Instead of adapting to demographic shifts and urban voter preferences, the party risks retreating into echo chambers focused on irrelevant issues like nuclear power and identity politics. This move not only jeopardises their electoral prospects but also underscores a failure to read the demographic and policy trends shaping modern Australian politics.
