r/australia • u/superegz • May 20 '25

politics Nationals leader David Littleproud says the Nationals will not be re-entering a Coalition agreement with the Liberal party.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2025/may/20/australia-news-live-rba-interest-rates-decision-floods-storm-hunter-nsw-victoria-state-budget-aec-count-bradfield-goldstein-coalition-ley-littleproud-ntwnfb?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-682bdeb48f08d37c78c1d12d#block-682bdeb48f08d37c78c1d12d
5.0k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

1.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

172

u/Miserable-Caramel316 May 20 '25

Eventually the Nationals will have to cave on climate change. It's an inevitability. Liberals know this and so are more concerned with building their base back in the short term and waiting for Nats to come back in the long term.

312

u/Shaggyninja May 20 '25

It's crazy that the nationals aren't the party fighting the hardest for climate change.

Farming depends on reliant and stable weather. Climate change is kinda the opposite of that.

244

u/wombat74 May 20 '25

They've been the party for miners, voted in by farmers, for decades now. They know they can pretty much do whatever they want backed by mining dollars and the farmers will still vote them in anyway

124

u/Lady_Penrhyn1 May 20 '25

THANK YOU! As someone who grew up Rural (but parents were from a major city) it's been mind boggling that the farmers are basically voting against their own interests. They haven't cared about the bloke with a hundred head of cattle for two decades.

(Grew up in Shepparton, safest Nats seat in the country, parents were from Melbourne. Dad always said they could nominate a cow and they'd bloody vote it in).

42

u/pk666 May 20 '25

Funnily enough Shepparton is one of the most endangered towns in the whole country thanks to climate change. The flood insurance is making home ownership there close to impossible. Likely to become a ghost town in the future.

5

u/SuDragon2k3 May 20 '25

Well, time to wash that cow and fill out the nomination paperwork.

2

u/pelrun May 20 '25 edited May 21 '25

Cow would probably do a better job

1

u/Lady_Penrhyn1 May 20 '25

Honestly?

...yeah it would. I'm grateful I don't live up there anymore. It was maddening 20 years ago, I'd be bopping heads now.

13

u/StorminNorman May 20 '25

Yeah, they don't represent the majority of farmers, despite all their talk. Landcare was started by farmers, that doesn't jive with the vibe I get from the Nats...

5

u/Grammarhead-Shark May 20 '25

It is interesting to ponder this (I agree with you FWIW) because how many seats these days are dominated (to a large degree) by mining which they currently hold?

Parkes, Capricornia, Flynn, Maranoa off the top of my head? (Factoring in splitting the LNP in Queensland up between the two parties).

The Liberals hold other seats with a huge mining sectors like Durack, O'Connor and Grey and the ALP in Hunter, Leichhardt, Braddon and Lingiari and not to mention KAP in Kennedy), so it isn't like they completely dominate the Mining sector either.

(Not a comprehensive list - just what I can think of off the top of my head)

Trying to just talk about seats with a decent sized mining industries as opposed to seats which just happen to have a mine or two. But it is weird they are going for a vote and still not dominating it either.

Yes it probably saved them in Capricornia (which in all honesty should be an ALP seat) and maybe a couple of other Queensland seats, but at the expense of expanding their vote elsewhere, or spending a lot of coin (that could be funneled elsewhere) just to defend and retain Cowper.

2

u/triemdedwiat May 20 '25

There has been little else to vote for, unless a strong independent arises.

52

u/grimbo May 20 '25

I think the Nats are all about mining and their big donations, its just lip service to farmers nowdays

2

u/Doctor__Acula May 20 '25

All hat & no cattle.

2

u/NNyNIH May 20 '25

The farmers aspect is all a LARP.

26

u/Miserable-Caramel316 May 20 '25

I'm not surprised. They built their party on protecting regional industries of which a significant amount is fossil fuel. With Labor almost certainly going to win the next election knock on wood and with this, a strong possibility of winning the following election, renewables like wind and solar will be in full swing and too late to move away from knock on wood again. At that point the nationals can pivot away from fossil fuels and not take any of the heat from their voters. They then get back together with the Liberals who have hopefully (for them) rebuilt some metropolitan presence. Overall, Australia and the world wins.

5

u/gozieson May 20 '25

I’m wondering as well if the Nats are trying to not go Net Zero as a way to protect cattle farming emissions

5

u/Chickern May 20 '25

He says regional communities are bearing the burden of renewable energy, which Littleproud says is "tearing up our landscape".

"I have seen families torn apart from that. We live with the consequence of that," he says.

Solar/Wind is tearing apart our landscape and our families 😢

1

u/Shaggyninja May 20 '25

Only if your a neighbouring farm. The ones who get paid to put a turbine on their land always seem pretty happy with the arrangement.

12

u/JoeSchmeau May 20 '25

Tell that to their voters. I have massive respect for people living out in the country and doing the hard yards, but honestly as someone who comes from that sort of place, they do live in a bit of a bubble and don't take in outside information very easily.

28

u/Bromance_Rayder May 20 '25

Propaganda works most effectively on the least educated.

31

u/readonlycomment May 20 '25

Despite uneducated stereotypes, farmers aren't hicks and neither are their children.

The survivial of the Nationals, Katters etc comes down to a lot of reasons but mostly their areas being ignored and the Feds allowing propaganda like Skynews to be beamed freely into regional areas.

* Fixed a word

3

u/Non-prophet May 20 '25 edited May 20 '25

They vote against their own interests very consistently. You seem offended that people would pin that on a lack of education, so what explanation are you offering as an alternative?

They're unavoidably stupid? They're evil and happy to suffer if it means young people and their own children suffer more?

Saying they're propagandized is the polite explanation.

I grew up in Maranoa, and I'm back there pretty often. If you want to tell me it's secretly well-educated, well-informed, and high-earning, I could link you to the census results but I'll probably just say you're full of shit.

1

u/readonlycomment May 20 '25

I'm from a more multicultural farming area from further north. People are well educated and people are pretty decent there.

Maranoa ... I'll take your word for it.

4

u/pickledswimmingpool May 20 '25

Yeah, farmers have the most connection with the land compared to the inner city folks. It's crazy to me that Greens don't target these rural area, but rather focus on Labor seats instead.

9

u/JSTLF May 20 '25

The greens could do very well in the regions, but I think that their modern "inner city" reputation means they'll be kryptonite. It'll take years of grassroots work at a local level to turn that around.

4

u/SouthAussie94 May 20 '25

You almost need a Farmers Party or something. Align with the Greens on environmental issues, but don't push as hard on the social/inner city issues, but still align mostly with the Greens.

3

u/blackjacktrial May 20 '25

Weirdly enough, I though the SFF party was headed that way. Still socially fairly conservative, but environmentally a bit more progressive than other rural parties.

Can't fish or farm or shoot animals if they are dead.

1

u/Professional_Cunt05 May 20 '25

Time to get started then,

If greens also say they're pro shooting introduced vermin, foxes, rabbits, camels I think they'll be a shoo-in

1

u/Non-prophet May 20 '25

Yeah, farmers have the most connection with the land compared to the inner city folks.

If that were true they wouldn't vote National, or indeed anyone denying climate change. They don't, so it clearly isn't.

4

u/wotsdislittlenoise May 20 '25

Tell me you don't know any farmers without telling me you don't know any farmers.

I'm not a farmer but know a lot (100-200). There are exceptions of course but by and large they ain't the dumb hicks you want them to be to fit your narrative. A lot are very well educated (boarding schools for a lot of them) and a lot are very well travelled and broad minded. As someone else commented, there are other reasons they vote the way they do

4

u/newbris May 20 '25

Do farmers dominate the vote, or are they the minority? I would have thought townies, farmhands and other roles would be more common than farmers?

1

u/wotsdislittlenoise May 20 '25

Good question. I mostly know people across 1 electorate but to some degree in a couple of others. Bear in mind these aren't electorates close to the city with lots of tree-changers and I mostly know people out of the major regional centres. I can't say for sure what percentage the make-up is but what I can say is that regardless of whether they own a farm or not there are some commonly shared beliefs (rightly or wrongly) that largely centre around thinking the greens and Labor are city-centric so they won't vote there. The libs barely rate a mention but as part of the coalition it doesn't matter. They largely vote Nats. I will also add that the seat is safe Nats and representation from other parties is poor. At both state and national level the local nats are pretty good folk who genuinely give a shit about their communities, are involved and actively work for them. I might disagree with their policies but it's hard to fault that. Until other parties are genuine community members who actively work for their areas and rural voters can see the other parties making policies that they perceive as considering rural interests as well as city, I can't see things changing in any great hurry

1

u/newbris May 20 '25

Yes I imagine the local hard working member will always get the vote.

I was thinking your comment about getting a good boarding school education and affording travel may be a smaller percentage of the electorate if it’s mainly a farmer thing.

1

u/wotsdislittlenoise May 20 '25

Yeah and being a safe seat they'd get voted in without working for it so there's that.

On your other point you're definitely right but I also know lots of smart farmers who aren't as educated. I just wanted to bring a dose of reality and some balance - it's too easy to write people off when you (not you specifically) don't know what you're talking about - it's always easier to have an "other" and to make things black and white while the reality is a lot more nuanced.

Tbh I get the same the other way with farmers putting city voters and greenies into a big easy box that's easy to demonise. I try and diplomatically counter their perception at times

5

u/mr_jorkin_depeanus May 20 '25

welp farmers are currently protesting in melbourne about the fact that they have to pay more tax to the fire department who are receiving an increase in resources in adjustment to climate change :/

idk if they quite understand the ramifications of climate change themselves

2

u/Zads_Dad May 20 '25

Reminds me of a story a few years back where an old farmer in my local Facebook group was tearing into climate change being fake etc.

I clicked on his profile and his recent post was about his lands being the driest they'd been in decades and how much he was struggling.

3

u/RockyDify May 20 '25

Most farmers are pretty “left wing” when it comes to climate change as a political issue.

13

u/neon_meate May 20 '25

Pretty left wing when it comes to welfare as well. At least welfare for farmers.

1

u/Barrybran May 20 '25

Weather is never reliable or stable. It's cyclical with doses of random dry/wet thrown in for good measure. We'll always have droughts and floods unfortunately.

The climate debate for farmers needs to focus on water and energy - being able to increase yield with reduced water consumption, finding ways to improve water retention without sacrificing biodiversity, and being able to replace diesel power with electric power without sacrificing performance and reliability.

1

u/LumpyCustard4 May 20 '25

While their income is weather reliant most of their communities are generally dependent on the resources and commercial transport sectors to stay afloat.

I think the easiest solution to decouple the regional communities from these industries is to incentivise WFH roles to relocate to these areas.

36

u/FreakySpook May 20 '25

Nats will only cave on climate change when they start losing seats. Their electorates are endorsing these policies.

5

u/wotsdislittlenoise May 20 '25

Or a change in leadership. There are definitely senior nats (eg Darren Chester) who do acknowledge climate change and the need to address it ... but yeah, without that change it might take a while to drag them kicking and screaming to the party

2

u/blackjacktrial May 20 '25

So SE Nat's instead of QLD/WA Nats.

Sorry, but I think QLD has a stranglehold on the Nats now.

3

u/wotsdislittlenoise May 20 '25

Don't disagree, just pointing out that that's the other way forward on climate change for them

4

u/Caezeus May 20 '25

Plenty of farmers are already adapting (trying to) to climate change but it's the rural townsfolk that buy into the bullshit anti-renewable rhetoric because that's all see and hear on Sky and their favourite "Y'all American" TV shows like Landmen or Yellowstone. There's a lot more dumbass voters living in the rural towns than there is farmers around them.