Does a win for local democracy mean the demise of the Liberal National Party (LNP)?

There has been significant discussion in the media regarding the failure of Peter Dutton to be parachuted into a safe seat following the Australian Electoral Commission’s redistribution of electoral boundaries. This failure raises some interesting points.

 First, local branches should and will pre-select the candidate whom they believe will represent them best and will take umbrage against the party leadership if it seeks to interfere. Michelle Grattan noted in her Twitter that, approximately twelve months ago, Dutton was quite outspoken on ‘the evils of seat hopping’. I have to agree, ‘what a difference a redistribution can make’.   

Second, Dutton’s defeat raises questions about the longevity of the Queensland LNP, particularly within the context of bickering between the federal Liberal and National parties over emissions trading. It might be recalled that the merger of the Queensland opposition parties has been seen by some as a National Party takeover of the Liberal Party. I read recently that a significant number of members from pre-merged parties failed to join the new party. There was indeed an attempt in some quarters not to put the merger to a vote of the membership. The failures of the Opposition in the Queensland Parliament in recent months might add to this conundrum.

 While the Queensland LNP is ahead of the Queensland ALP on TPP statistics (but Anna Bligh is by far the preferred Premier), the federal Opposition is trailing the federal ALP on a TPP basis. Rudd is leading Turnbull as preferred Prime Minister by a very significant margin. Do these results, combined with Turnbull’s failure to parachute Dutton into the Gold Coast as well as the rift over the emissions trading, point to the Opposition’s need to find ways to become more in touch with its constituencies?  Does the rift mean that the LNP will self-destruct?