Key Takeaways
- The Victorian Liberal Party is moving toward a default preference of Pauline Hanson’s One Nation ahead of Labor for the November 2026 state election, pending seat‑by‑seat decisions by its five‑person state strategy committee.
- The tactic is intended to consolidate the anti‑Labor vote but threatens to alienate Liberal supporters in Melbourne’s middle‑ and inner‑suburban seats where anti‑One Nation sentiment is strongest.
- Former premier Steve Bracks warns that preferencing One Nation legitimises a far‑right party and will accelerate the decline of Australia’s centre‑right, drawing parallels with the demise of France’s Republican Party.
- Early evidence from the Nepean byelection shows Liberals already placing One Nation third on how‑to‑vote cards ahead of local independent Tracee Hutchison, while One Nation reciprocates by preferencing the Liberal candidate.
- Internal party dissent is growing: long‑time members criticize the candidate selection process and express discomfort with preferencing One Nation, prompting advertisements urging voters to reject the endorsed Liberal nominee.
- Pollster Kos Samaras argues that the Liberal leadership faces a “vice”: preferencing One Nation energises the right flank but risks collapsing the small‑c conservative vote in urban Melbourne, where the party must win to secure government.
- The strategy mirrors recent setbacks for Liberal‑aligned parties in South Australia (where One Nation ate into the Liberal vote) and the federal byelection in Farrer, suggesting a broader national trend of centre‑right parties grappling with the rise of right‑wing populism.
Background on Liberal Party’s Preference Strategy
The Victorian Liberals have signaled that, unless a particularly objectionable One Nation candidate emerges or extraordinary circumstances apply, they will default to placing Pauline Hanson’s party ahead of the Australian Labor Party on how‑to‑vote cards for the November 28 state election. This approach was revealed by two sources familiar with the deliberations of the party’s five‑person state strategy committee, which will finalise preferences on a seat‑by‑seat basis after nominations close. The committee’s inclination reflects a calculated effort to harvest the anti‑Labor vote that has been drifting toward minor parties and independents, particularly in regions where Labor’s hold is weak.
Decision‑Making Process
Although no formal decision has been made, the Liberal Party spokesman emphasized that the strategy committee has not yet discussed One Nation preferences in any formal meeting. Nevertheless, the committee’s informal leaning indicates a preparedness to adopt One Nation as a “default” preference unless a seat‑specific factor—such as a scandal‑ridden One Nation candidate or a strong local independent—overrides it. This seat‑by‑seat flexibility allows the Liberals to tailor preferences to local conditions while maintaining an overarching bias toward One Nation over Labor.
Potential Impact on Labor
If the preference defaults hold, One Nation could siphon votes from Labor in electorates where the major parties traditionally compete. Seats such as Melton and Cranbourne, which have shown fluctuating margins and notable minor‑party support, are prime examples where a Liberal‑One Nation preference flow could tip the balance against Labor. By directing Liberal preferences to One Nation, the party hopes to amplify the cumulative effect of anti‑Labor sentiment, potentially turning marginal Labor seats into One Nation gains.
Risk to Liberal Urban Base
However, the same preference strategy risks a backlash among Liberal voters in Melbourne’s middle‑ and inner‑suburban heartland—areas that have historically formed the party’s core support. Seats like Malvern (contested by Amelia Hamer), Kew (Jess Wilson’s seat), and Hawthorn (John Pesutto’s seat) are identified as particularly vulnerable. In these electorates, voters tend to view One Nation as anathema to their values, and a perceived endorsement could drive them toward the teal independents or even Labor, eroding the Liberal Party’s urban base. The teal movement, which has already captured disaffected moderate voters, stands to gain further momentum if Liberals appear to legitimise a far‑right party.
Steve Bracks’ Critique
Former premier Steve Bracks has been vocal in condemning any preference deal with One Nation. Speaking at the Sorrento Writers’ Festival, he labelled the move “outrageous,” arguing that it would legitimise a party whose platform he views as extremist. Bracks warned that the Liberal Party’s drift to the right mirrors the fate of centre‑right parties elsewhere—citing the decline of France’s Republican Party—as a harbinger of the “beginning of the end of the centre‑right party in this country.” He contended that signaling support for One Nation tells voters that such a stance is acceptable, thereby undermining the Liberal Party’s broader electoral appeal.
Local Example: Nepean Byelection
The Nepean byelection offers a concrete illustration of the emerging preference pattern. Liberal candidate Anthony Marsh, a Mornington Peninsula Shire mayor on leave, is running against independent Tracee Hutchison, while One Nation’s Darren Hercus is also in the race. Despite the absence of a Labor candidate, the Liberals have placed One Nation third on their how‑to‑vote cards, ahead of Hutchison, while One Nation reciprocates by preferencing the Liberal candidate ahead of the independent. This arrangement suggests a mutual tactical alignment, though commentators note that if the Liberals and One Nation finish first and second on primary votes—as expected—preference flows will not alter the outcome.
Internal Liberal Discontent
Not all Liberal members agree with the committee’s direction. Richard Doery, an 83‑year‑old branch member, said he voted for Hutchison because he was uncomfortable with both Marsh’s candidacy—selected without a local member ballot—and the idea of preferencing One Nation. Doery’s sentiments echo those of estranged Liberals who funded a full‑page advertisement in the Southern Peninsula News urging voters to spurn Marsh. The ad criticized the pre‑selection process for sidelining grassroots members and highlighted a broader unease with the party’s rightward tilt, particularly the willingness to accommodate One Nation.
Broader Electoral Context
Victoria’s developing dynamic follows a pattern observed elsewhere. In the South Australian state election, One Nation’s rise coincided with a sharp drop in the Liberal Party’s primary vote, cutting its representation from 16 seats to just five. Similarly, in the federal byelection for Farrer, the Liberal and National parties are preferencing One Nation ahead of independent Michelle Milthorpe. These examples suggest that One Nation’s capacity to draw votes from traditional conservative bases is not isolated to Victoria but part of a national trend that is forcing centre‑right parties to reassess their strategic calculations.
Analysis from Pollster Kos Samaras
Pollster Kos Samaras highlighted the dilemma facing Opposition Leader Jess Wilson, who sits on the Liberal Party’s state strategy committee. Samaras noted that the Liberals cannot win the election without securing seats in middle‑ and inner‑urban Melbourne—areas where anti‑One Nation sentiment is strongest. If Wilson’s team refrains from preferencing One Nation, they risk energising the party’s right flank; if they do preference One Nation, they may collapse the small‑c conservative vote in those crucial urban seats. This “vice” leaves the Liberal leadership searching for a balance that satisfies both its base and its broader electoral aspirations.
Conclusion / Outlook
As the November 2026 election approaches, the Victorian Liberal Party’s preference calculus sits at a crossroads. The intent to harness anti‑Labor sentiment by aligning with One Nation could yield short‑term gains in certain regional seats but threatens to fracture the party’s urban coalition and accelerate its ideological shift toward the right. Prominent figures like Steve Bracks warn that such a shift risks legitimising a far‑right party and heralding the decline of Australia’s centre‑right tradition. Meanwhile, grassroots discontent—exemplified by the Nepean backlash—signals that internal party cohesion is already under strain. Whether the Liberals can navigate this precarious terrain without sacrificing their core support will likely determine not only the outcome of the upcoming state election but also the future relevance of the centre‑right in Australian politics.