Scott Morrison, the Nightwatchman, Remains

For the past eight months Australia’s answer to satirical newspaper The Onion – The Betoota Advocate – has referred to Prime Minister Scott Morrison as “The Nightwatchman.” This is a term used in cricket to describe a player of limited skill sent onto the field to prevent the loss of a more skilled player before the end of a day’s play in the sport’s five day format. The concept aptly described how most of the country seemed to feel about their prime minister.

Morrison was viewed as a seat warmer after the Liberal Party had an internal meltdown last August. He stumbled into the prime minister’s office after the party deposed Malcolm Turnbull, but decided it also didn’t want the man who challenged him, Peter Dutton. All Australian polls and commentators – both serious and unserious – had predicted that Morrison and the wider conservative coalition would lose May’s federal election. It was only a matter of how big the loss would be, the commentariat surmised.

Yet somehow the conservative bloc managed to eke out a small majority, and now Morrison will become a permanent fixture as Australia’s prime minister, likely for the next three years. Although his Liberal Party remains ideologically divided, having won a seemingly unwinnable election, Morrison’s power in the party has been consolidated. His fate will (most likely) not be the same as his two predecessors. But it nevertheless remains prudent to not make firm predictions about Australian politics, particularly when it comes to the longevity of prime ministers.

The win buys Morrison two important opportunities. First, the low-expectations that have surrounded him provide him the opportunity to stride into his new term knowing that each positive move he makes will always be greater than was assumed of him. His party’s platform at the election was almost nonexistent; expecting to lose, the Liberal Party simply focused its attention on the unpopularity of Labor Party leader, Bill Shorten. So with no real election promises, Morrison has the opportunity to build a new platform shaped directly by Australia’s requirements, not the requirements of getting elected.

The second great opportunity presented to Morrison from his unexpected win is the ability – should he have the gumption – to enact policies that may not be popular with his party and its base, but are necessary for Australia’s interests. In that vein, Morrison also has the great luck of being unburdened of his party’s most destabilizing force, as former Prime Minister Tony Abbott lost his seat in parliament to an independent candidate. This will make it easier for Morrison to negotiate the internal party landmines that will be subdued by his win, but remain conspicuous in the party.

Morrison’s most significant achievement in his first eight months was to consolidate Australia’s Pacific “step-up,” and in particular his restoration of Australia’s relationship with Fiji’s Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama, who had been estranged from Australia since his 2006 coup. However, Australia’s refusal to act on issues around climate change, and the vocal support of many politicians in the conservative coalition for the construction of a massive new coal mine in central Queensland, continue to hurt Canberra’s relations in the Pacific. Going against convention, Samoa’s prime minister, Tuilaepa Sailele, stated before the election that he hoped the coalition would not win.

It would be deeply confronting to Australian conservative circles for the coalition government to disendorse the coal mine project, but it may be the kind of necessary move that only a conservative politician could pull off. Such a reversal would follow in the footsteps of John Howard’s gun control legislation in the mid-1990s. This would be an extraordinary difficult task, given the deep strain of climate change denialism that runs through the conservative bloc, and that Queensland delivered Morrison his victory. This would be a true test of his new authority within the conservative movement.

Morrison’s style is far less cerebral than the man he replaced; he speaks in vague clichés, thick with Australianisms, and he is very much a product of suburban Sydney, taking every opportunity he can to discuss his beloved rugby team. (Turnbull, by contrast, was the quintessential “anywhere” man, illustrated by the amount of time he now spends in New York, where he owns an apartment.) Morrison places great importance on personal relationships, and has an ability to offer a genuine audience to everyone he meets and “give them a go,” as he would put it.  His ability to connect with Bainimarama was indicative of how his style could prove fruitful, although this may not work as well with world leaders less familiar with Australia’s cultural and linguistic peculiarities.

How he positions Australia with its important regional relationships like Indonesia and India, and especially with China, may be the biggest test of his skills. (U.S President Donald Trump already likes him.) Yet Morrison has already been severely underestimated once; it may not be wise to do so again.