The expulsion of Moira Deeming from the Victorian Liberal party requires one simple question to be answered: what is the guiding principle at work? Why was Ms Deeming dumped?

The Liberal party is supposed to operate to a higher, more principled standard than the Labor party. We all know that, in the famous formulation of Graham Richardson, when it comes to Labor party internal politics you do ‘whatever it takes’ to gain or retain power. Thus, when it comes, for instance, to disagreeing with your colleagues, that’s a no-no in the Labor party. The party line is everything.

But the Liberal party was supposed to be different. Disagreement within certain frameworks is tolerated and the principle of free speech supposedly supported.

Following her attendance at a ‘Let Women Speak’ rally, alongside firebrand women’s rights activist Posie Parker and another much-maligned female Liberal candidate from the last federal election, Speccie columnist Katherine Deves, a motion was moved to expel Ms Deeming from the Victorian Liberal party.

This was driven by the arrival of some twenty-odd supposed ‘Nazis’ at that same rally. The fact that these clowns (faces covered, performing idiotic Nazi salutes) appeared out of nowhere at a women’s rights rally should have given pause for thought to wiser heads, but such is the pernicious power of cancel culture and fear of the militant transgender lobby group that the mere sniff of any kind of proximity to or association between ‘Nazis’ and a Liberal party MP was enough to have the bedwetting Victorian Liberals rushing for the smelling salts and an expulsion notice.

The principle at stake with the first expulsion motion? There wasn’t one. Certainly not an identifiable or genuine one. This was simply a classic case of lily-livered Liberals panicking and playing straight into the hands of the authoritarian cancel culture mob. And of John Pesutto being played by Dan Andrews like a cheap fiddle.

At best there was a vague argument that a new, wet-behind-the-ears new MP should have known better than to allow herself to be photographed at a rally where a bunch of clownish ‘Nazis’ turned up, but that is pretty thin gruel. What experienced politician hasn’t got a couple of photos in the closet of themselves standing alongside some dubious character or other?

The result of that first motion – Ms Deeming being suspended for nine months but not expelled – was pathetic, a band-aid political solution dreamed up by spineless politicians unsure of their own principles but terrified of opposing the leader.

Then came the threats of defamation proceedings by Ms Deeming against Mr Pesutto. This matter should have been left entirely in the hands of lawyers. Either Mr Pesutto did defame Ms Deeming or he did not. That’s a legal question, not a political one. In terms of principles it is no different to, for instance, a sexual harassment complaint or a bullying complaint. But the bottom line is clear: Mr Pesutto appeared, if media reports are correct, to be inferring that Ms Deeming, whose uncle survived the Holocaust, was somehow sympathetic to Nazism. Maybe he was saying that, maybe he wasn’t, but the place to  determine that is solely in the law courts, not the party room. A settlement of that dispute would either be handled out of court or would involve a substantial awarding of costs to the losing party. These are not matters for work colleagues to get involved in – in any shape or form.

This is where the biggest mistakes were then made. By putting forward a fresh motion to expel Ms Deeming for ‘bringing the party into disrepute’ by threatening legal action against the party boss, party members were in essence being told to place the party boss above the law, or indeed, that due legal process should be denied Ms Deeming because of the power structure within the party. This is abhorrent and should have been rejected out of hand. For those Liberal party MPs who voted to expel Ms Deeming on these grounds not to understand the implications of their actions is worrying to say the least. The gloating response by one MP that ‘you can’t threaten to sue your boss’ was embarrassing in the extreme. Why can’t you? What, for example, would happen if a young, female MP were sexually harassed by a male MP within the upper echelons of the party and threatened legal action? Would the same rule apply? Would she be expelled for ‘bringing the party into disrepute’ and for ‘threatening to sue her boss’? And if not, why not? Why the double standard?

Ms Deeming may be young and naive and not have handled matters as well as she could have. Perhaps. But the only failure here is the failure of leadership at every stage and the failure for wiser heads to understand the fundamental principles at stake. No wonder Dan Andrews is running rings around this circus.

The only people who have brought the Victorian Liberal party into disrepute are those who put politics in front of principle. Maybe they should move a motion to expel themselves.