18 November 2025

It must be close to Christmas, the killing season has arrived

| By Chris Johnson
Join the conversation
26
Leader of the Australian Liberal Party, Sussan Ley MP

Opposition Leader Sussan Ley wants to talk about anything but the security of her own job. Photo: Michelle Kroll.

It was the ABC’s brilliant 2015 documentary on the Rudd-Gillard years that helped to entrench a snide insider political phrase as part of the wider Australian lexicon – the term “the killing season”.

The compelling three-part television series of that same name analysed Labor’s turbulent years leading the country between 2007 and 2013 while struggling with gargantuan levels of internal party division.

In the series, political players revealed the term that refers to a specific time in the parliamentary calendar, one that can apply to both sides of politics.

As the Federal Parliament draws closer to either the mid-year or the Christmas recesses, political antics and clandestine manoeuvrings often ramp up.

There is one more full sitting week left for parliament this year – it’s next week.

The killing season is upon us.

Leaders don’t always get toppled in the lead-up to Christmas, but talk of challenges and coups invariably fire up at this time of year, especially when polling numbers aren’t being too favourable for a particular party.

It’s Liberal leader Sussan Ley who now finds herself the focus of much of that talk, trying to cling onto her job in the face of rising factional unrest, runaway egos, and a bolstered conservative push in her party.

And it’s really all the media wants to talk to her about right now.

The Opposition Leader is doing the rounds spruiking the Coalition’s new (old) energy policy and trying to explain why it can no longer support the net zero carbon emissions by 2050 target the party’s former leader, Scott Morrison, committed the country to while he was Prime Minister in 2021.

READ ALSO Libs’ net-zero move a political gift to everyone but themselves

She is also dangling the party’s incoming migration policy that promises to be as hardline an approach as the Coalition’s take on the environment.

Everything has to do with affordability – that’s the Opposition Leader’s key message.

But the main topic her interviewers want to discuss right now is the security of her leadership.

Take Monday (17 November) night’s 7.30 program for example, in which Sarah Ferguson (coincidentally the same interviewer from the ABC’s Killing Season documentary) kept bringing Ms Ley back to the question of her leadership.

“Are you prepared to admit the obvious, which is that Andrew Hastie is making a move on the leadership?” Ferguson asks Ley.

“The question is, is it a short-term move or a long-term move?”

The Opposition Leader tries to dismiss the talk as “speculation about the commentary and various opinions” while trying to drag the conversation back to, you guessed it, “affordability”.

But the interviewer is having none of it.

“I will come to that in a moment,” Ferguson interrupts.

“… can you guarantee to voters that the party will keep its first female leader until the next election?”

Ley answers: “Absolutely. I am the leader and was elected six months ago. We’ve been working on policy ever since.

“I’ve talked about several critical areas, including managing the budget responsibly, delivering personal income tax cuts, fixing up industrial relations, which is a huge drag on productivity in this country, keeping communities safe …”

The interviewer interrupts again: “Let me just come back to this. I asked you about what’s going on inside the party. We want to understand what it is that Andrew Hastie is doing,” she says.

“We want to understand the pictures that we saw of that large group of people opposed to you walking out of the party room previously.

“Do you really believe that voters don’t have a right to know what’s going on inside the party about the political rancour inside the Liberal Party that led to this radical change of policy?”

READ ALSO Coalition agrees on its energy policy, promising to do the same with migration

And so it went – the interviewer wanting to know about the threat to the Liberal Party leadership, and the interviewee trying desperately to talk about anything but.

It wasn’t just one media appearance where this was the case. It’s pretty much the only topic the media cares about right now.

Here’s another exchange from Monday, this one with Natarsha Belling on The Briefing podcast.

Interviewer: “How hard, though, is it to lead the Liberal Party right now? There is a lot of speculation, I’m going to be brutally honest here, that you’re being knifed in your own back from within your own party.

“We know this happened with the Labor Government. How does that feel? How can you possibly unite a divided party or put a fight up to the current government when you’re being knifed by your own colleagues?”

Later in the same interview: “Do you feel like you’re going to get pushed off a glass cliff?”

These are the questions Ms Ley can expect to be confronted with right up until parliament rises for the year or she is challenged for the leadership (whichever comes first).

It is evident that she is moving the Coalition further to the right than she might really want to, in order to appease the more conservative elements within the party.

That tactic didn’t work for Malcolm Turnbull. The right got rid of him anyway.

Yes, the killing season is here. Pass the popcorn.

Free Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? We package the most-read Canberra stories and send them to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.
Loading
By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.

Join the conversation

26
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

The ANZ bank CEO at a HoR economic committee meeting today re net zero:

“The medicine could kill the patient.”

Who woulda thunked.

We can rely on Penfold never to have thunked.

ANZ has been caught out greenwashing, sustaining loans to fossil fuels where the banks were supposed to be in orderly withdrawal. Having put itself in this position, ANZ wants to protect its commercial interests at a time its business lending is suffering competitively despite a small increase in total loans written. It appears the actual patient he has in mind is his own underperforming bank losing out from over-commitment to dying technologies.

Nuno Matos, CEO of ANZ, said before the Committee that the cheapest transition path should be pursued. As the IEA tells us, as well as every other indicator, renewables are cheaper and Penfold has never made a case otherwise, because no-one can bend the facts that far.

Oh well Axon, we’ll all just have to cope with those dastarly fossil fuels continuing to supply over 80% of the world’s energy. Don’t you just love the term “transition”. China now uses 55% of all global coal and the world has never burned more coal than in 2024. In fact fossil fuels have grown in demand every year in history except covid. Damn those facts.

https://www.iea.org/world/energy-mix

But how dare a bank support cheap, reliable and efficient energy. What are they thinking ? Is that what …. um …. “greenwashing” is ?

Meanwhile somewhere, somehow, in someone’s imagination, renewables are indeed cheaper. If you repeat it enough it must be true, right ?

Penfold never lets facts get in the way of his propaganda. his keenness to mislead and to avoid.

I observed that ANZ is being caught with an underperforming loan portfolio and risk of loss from over-commitment to dying technologies. Penfold 100% ignores those facts to make a false claim about energy costs and reliability,.

Coal plants, all due to close within the next decade, have shown increasing unreliability over the last decade. The LNP solution is to use taxpayer money to prop up these stranded assets, which the head of a bank hopes will help his bank with their sub-par investments. Why do the other major banks, without ANZ’s over-investment in fossils, not have ANZ’s problems? The question was answered right in the middle of that sentence. Penfold, with his proven lack of commercial or investment knowledge, will never fathom those facts while he still has a Sky/IPA/CIS falsehood to hide behind.

Practically all countries, especially China, are investing vastly more in renewables than fossil fuelled electricity. China already draws more than half its electricity from renewables and has plateaued emissions this year. Of course Penfold damns facts, because he cannot handle that reality.

Penfold also does not want to mention that coal currently accounts for only 35% of electricity production, a dramatic fall from years past, accelerating all the while as renewables take over. I just follow the evidence of commercial activity not to mention Penfold’s own choice of authority, the IEA, which says “Rapid rollout of clean technologies makes energy cheaper, not more costly”
https://www.iea.org/news/rapid-rollout-of-clean-technologies-makes-energy-cheaper-not-more-costly

Yes, renewables are indeed cheaper, as practically everybody knows and acts upon. We can rely on Penfold never to have thunked.

The topic Axon is how the medicine is more expensive than the cure.

Your wild deflections are noted.

“… are noted”
Ooh, propagandist Penfold is trying to sound serious! But his thunking is a clunker.

I spoke exactly to topic, both initial and Penfold’s subsequent attempt to wriggle out: ANZ CEO’s bank interests and the contributions of rapid electrification with renewables toward net zero, which happens also to mean lower energy costs compared with alternatives, as Penfold’s quoted source the IEA says and has also been modelled and agreed by Treasury and Ortec Finance to name a couple, and is being acted upon by industry.

Can Penfold deal with any of this other than running off with a feeble attempt at distraction?
No.
Again.

Your far right talking points are far from reality Penfold, as the world already shows.

Gregg Heldon11:06 am 19 Nov 25

Can we have a killing season for biased journalism?

Very funny Gregg. CJ does push a one-eyed view but not nearly as badly as a taxpayer funded source with a charter to be balanced.

But he should be careful what he wishes for, when moderate Sussan goes then the conservatives return and that means an electoral contest in 2028. Though many left-wing commentators haven’t worked that out just yet.

Lol penfold’s daily dose of copium. Reality check: it wasn’t moderate sussssan who led the party during the last election. It was that ultra conservative, pro nuclear bloke. Whatever his name was… Point being the party lost, badly, and that bloke even lost his seat.
And the moral of the story, boys and girls, is that the country rejected hard right then and given the dumpster fire the US has become they will continue to reject it.

Gregg Heldon4:58 pm 19 Nov 25

I agree. Moderate/centre right offers the alternative. No further right than that.

It seems moderates can’t survive in the Coalition.

HiddenDragon10:48 pm 18 Nov 25

Political “killing seasons” – which have always happened, but are becoming far more common – are a symptom of system in which the major parties are increasingly fighting over administering a status quo owned and controlled by others, and what’s left of the mainstream media amuses itself and some of its audience by obsessing about the political horse race.

The 7.30 interview of Ley earlier this week was essentially all of a piece with the interview with Kamala Harris late last month. Rather than taking the opportunity to explore the sort of policy agenda that a candidate Harris might stand on in the 2028 election – highly topical given what happened in NYC, New Jersey and Virginia the following week – much of the interview was wasted on a series of tediously off-putting gotcha-style questions about whether she had been sufficiently early and forthright in breaking with Joe Biden.

I think when the media focus is so heavy on the liberal leadership, they are somewhat speaking it into existence as much as they are picking up on a vibe.
As for the killing season, it makes a lot of sense to begin around this time. People thinking about the fresh start a new year brings, plus end of year social gatherings where MP’s can really talk with one another (usually with some alcoholic social lubricant).
So my question for 2026 LNP is are you “going full r****d” to capture poorline’s measly voter base or are you going to come to the table with something that might actually shift labor voters?

You’re correct Chris, December was the killing season for Turnbull in 2009. Though despite being resurrected and deposed again, his ghost remains. And hopefully you’re correct about Ley, she clearly hasn’t got the right stuff to prosecute the strong case against the government and especially its economy-belting climate policies.

But what you’ve failed to mention is that all the polling done recently shows Coalition losses are moving to One Nation. This strongly suggests that voters want Australia to move away from net zero (and immigration), with much polling indicating that while people support net zero in principle, they aren’t prepared to pay for it.

The same is happening across the world, with even the (Labour) British PM declaring recently that the global climate consensus that existed in 2025, is now dead.

With December the killing season, perhaps we’ll see an obituary for net zero soon. It’s certainly on its last legs. Pass the popcorn indeed.

My hypothesis is that the shifting towards one nation has less to do with libs, net zero or migration per se and more to do with the ever increasing polarisation of the chronically online. Who else would find themselves the most propagandised in one direction or the other, if it isn’t those that are the most plugged in to the algorithmic echo chambers of our oligarchy?

Are you suggesting One Nation supporters are more tech savvy than the rest of the populace ?

Fracturing of the right wing conservative vote is a sign that Australians support these policies, despite general polling showing reduced overall support?

LOL, the Pengold copium working overtime.

“…voters want Australia to move away from net zero” should read “Coalition voters…”. And not all of them are breaking to PHON, some are shifting to ALP (hence the loss of preferences to the Greens in the last election, but that’s another story).

As for “(Labour) British PM declaring recently that the global climate consensus that existed in 2025, is now dead” wasn’t he speaking specifically about the US under DT? Have you seen DT’s approval ratings in Australia, let alone the US?

Not necessarily more tech savvy, those people tend to have IT jobs and rational thought, and also it doesn’t take a genius to be able to scroll facebook. I’m saying those with a lot of free time and an internet connection tend to become one neuron or dreams (greens) supporters. From teens to grannies and anyone in between. People at home on the dole and people living off investment, both sitting on their couches stewing over the endless stream of data.

ricketyclik – the ALP primary in the last Newspoll two weeks ago was 36%, barely above the election’s 34.6%. The Coalition are down from 32% to 24%, One Nation up from 6% to 15%. So it’s reasonable to say most of the Coalition losses are ON gains. And ON’s policies are strongly anti-net zero and immigration. So it’s probably also fair to conclude those shifting are rejecting high energy prices as well as immigration.

The AFR found this week that climate ranks very low for most voters (basically the greens vote).

https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/one-nation-seen-as-party-best-suited-to-handle-immigration-poll-20251116-p5nfq4

As for the global consensus well just look at how little anyone’s interested in COP30 and how most global leaders have shunned the event. Compare that to Paris in 2015 when Obama and the Chinese were the headline attendees. The UN and climate lobby trying to frighten the planet just isn’t working anymore. 🦊

So your opening ambit claim that all voters are moving away is just hogwash, backed up by your own evidence Penfold?

Simply right wing loonies that used to vote LNP preferring ONP for whatever stupid reason.

Penfold appears to believe that the ALP vote continuing to rise, as it did from the 2022 election to the 2025, is good for the LNP whose vote has collapsed from an actual or near record low of 32% to 24%. Fairyland stuff.

Penfold claims also that climate ranks low for most voters, that immigration is more important. By his logic, the ALP is clearly seen as better able to manage immigration, both at the election and in current polls. Brilliantly argued, Penfold.

Penfold’s fellow-fantasist Capital Retro has today drawn out the fact that South Korea, recognised as the most efficient builder and exporter of nuclear power plants, is switching its investment to renewables. They plan to increase nuclear to about 29GWe by 2030, a 17% increase, while increasing renewables to near 100 GW, a 120% increase, while closing all coal plants by 2040. They announced this at COP.

Penfold’s denial is getting severe.

Capital Retro8:51 pm 18 Nov 25

Big share-market hemorrhage today and the CBA boss confirms there will be no interest rate cuts in 2026.

It’s all heading towards recession with stagflation and then we will have our own sub-prime mortgage crisis as Albo continues to shoe-horn renters into under-water mortgages.

Well JS9 if you think 2 out of 5 Australians are “right wing loonies” it doesn’t say much for your thoughts on your fellow Australians. Are they loonies because they want affordable housing and lower energy bills ? Are they loonies because they’re sick of their standards of living falling ?

Perhaps you’re reading too much ABC and not enough real world media. Maybe treat yourself to some popcorn 🍿

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Region Canberra stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.