It is not unusual for parliamentarians to switch parties. During the last couple of months, we have witnessed Jacinta Nampijinpa Price leaving the National Party to join the Liberals, and Barnaby Joyce, a former Deputy Prime Minister of Australia and Leader of the Nationals, to join One Nation.

Of course, switching political parties has always been an indelible part of Australian politics. Even a cursory look at the history of Australian Prime Ministers will provide examples of politicians, who changed their political allegiances. For example, Billy Hughes, who served as Prime Minister from 1915-23, split from the Labor Party in 1916 because, unlike his party, he favoured conscription in the first world war. Another Prime Minister who switched sides was Joseph Lyons, who served as Prime Minister from 1932-39 for reasons which are unclear but probably because he failed to secure an appointment to the position of Treasurer under Prime Minister James Scullin.

Of course, this phenomenon is not limited to Australia. For example, in the United Kingdom, Robert Jenrick, who was once a candidate for leader of the Conservative Party, recently joined the UK Reform Party. His defection is but the latest in a long list of defections.

These defectors are invariably described in the media, or by the party they defected from, as traitors or opportunists. Interestingly, it is rarely recognised that their switch might genuinely stem from a desire to see true conservative principles and effective governance put into practice.

Hence, it becomes necessary to objectively look at this phenomenon and consider whether this practice might help in the nurturing of conservative politics, first, by stating a few facts, and then second, by drawing conclusions.

First, the Coalition seems unable to develop conservative policies in a timely manner. Party representatives argue it needs to undertake solid ‘research’ to ‘get it right’. However, considering how urgent action is needed, it is both unfortunate and ironic that the Party decided to undertake ‘research’ to come to conclusions which were already well known in society.

It is often said that politics is the art of the possible, and therefore accommodation of competing and incompatible views should be found. But this ‘art’ often leads to the adoption of half-baked policies which satisfy neither the moderates nor the conservatives in the Coalition. A good example is provided by the Coalition’s rejection of Labor’s Net Zero fantasy of eliminating emissions by 2050. The Coalition’s policy, however, is still supportive of a reduction in emissions, but not by setting an inflexible target, but by retaining its support for, and membership of, the Paris Agreement of 2015, which requires Net Zero emissions by 2050.  In any event, it should be noted that the setting of a target, even if it is flexible, is pointless if it does not need to be achieved.

Also, the Coalition’s inexplicable delay in the adoption of a sustainable immigration policy is bewildering. There is little doubt that its failure to strongly oppose Labor’s big Australia policy is hurting their electoral chances. Since Labor came to power in 2022, it has allowed 1.3 million new arrivals to settle in Australia, choking the big cities, causing a housing crisis, and requiring major work on existing infrastructure. As Matt Canavan, a principled member of the National Party, indicated:

The current government is facing significant criticism of its immigration policies that have allowed 1.3 million migrants in Australia in just three years. I have argued that we should not take so many people in from countries that have different cultures and customs than us so quickly. We must make sure people that do move here adopt our values and lifestyles. Taking in so many people so quickly overwhelms our ability to assimilate people while maintaining a harmonious country.

It is, however, the palpable fear of being branded ‘racist’ that prevents members of the Liberal Party from prosecuting this issue firmly and in a timely manner. There is but a hushed discussion of the origin of these new arrivals although it is certain that many of them come from countries, the values of which are clearly incompatible with Australian values. It is no wonder that commentators have linked Australia’s dysfunctional immigration policies to a rise in juvenile crime. ghettoisation and balkanisation.

This dysfunction has now reached a peak in the splitting of the Coalition following a rushed, late night sitting of Parliament to adopt Labor’s watered-down version of its hate speech and gun buyback scheme laws. The proximate cause of the split was the crossing of the floor by three National Party Senators who are members of the Shadow Ministry, thereby violating the rule of Cabinet solidarity. But the Liberals joined the government to adopt the new laws which, predictably, will have adverse consequences for the climate of free speech and are unlikely to be effective because they fail to deal with radical Islam as the cause of antisemitism in Australia. Even their support of the gun laws is an exercise in futility. Criminals will always be able to find weapons with which to murder people. And it is ludicrous to believe that they will hand in their guns to comply with the buy-back scheme.

Second, to say that the Coalition is in turmoil is an understatement. Indeed, it is not in the realm of fiction to suggest that more parliamentarians might be considering switching allegiances. One Nation is likely to be the main beneficiary of this switch. Support for One Nation is surging because an increasing number of conservative voters believe that the Coalition, especially the Liberals, have deserted them and are unsalvageable.

It is now widely acknowledged that during the Covid era, the Liberal governments, both federal and state, acted arbitrarily and unconstitutionally. They caused Australians to endure deeply traumatic situations, including home confinement, job losses, financial ruin, drug and alcohol problems, family breakdown, and a host of mental and physical illnesses.

Curiously, even before Covid, the Melbourne-based Institute of Public Affairs (IPA), in its 2019 Legal Rights Audit, revealed that, ‘The Coalition government is trashing fundamental legal rights of all Australians, creating unprecedented challenge to individual freedom and human dignity.’ So, the betrayal of the Australian people by the Liberal Party has been going on for a long time, and it does not really come as a surprise that such a party has voted together with Labor on legislation that obliterates democratic rights in Australia.

Interestingly, Sir Robert Menzies, the founder of the Liberal Party and our Prime Minister from 1939-41 and from 1949-66, at the end of his life was so disillusioned with the party he had created that, apparently, at least twice he went on to vote for another party, more specifically the Democratic Labor Party (DLP). Heather Henderson, the daughter of Menzies, speaking to ABC radio in Canberra, once stated that her father voted against the Liberal Party he founded 62 years ago. As reported, ‘B.A. Santamaria, the father figure of the Democratic Labor Party, which was formed in 1954 as a result of a division in the Labor Party, claimed Sir Robert confided to him that his disillusionment with the Liberals extended to him twice voting DLP.’

We can confidently assume that, were he still alive, Sir Robert Menzies, a statesman who strongly supported the rule of law and individual rights, would have probably resigned from the Liberal Party in profound disgust. Perhaps he would have joined another party that is more truly committed to the founding values of the party he had created, including personal freedom and equality before the law.

We conclude that switching parties, rather than being a treacherous or opportunistic strategy, is mostly about responding appropriately to the conservative electors of Australia. It is about the adoption of common-sense policies which, in the past, served Australia well. Indeed, in ultimate analysis, it is about a principled approach to politics, not knee-jerk reactions to unpalatable and shocking events.

Switching sides is about giving conservatives in this country a voice.

Moens & Zimmermann are the authors of The Battle for the Soul of Western Civilisation (Connor Court Publishing, 2026).