NSW moderate Liberals accused of undermining Peter Dutton amid fallout over council nominations

Moderate power brokers in the New South Wales Liberal party have been accused of undermining Peter Dutton by voting for a four-person panel to administer the division, in what opponents have described as an attempt to “neutralise” federal intervention.
In an email to members after the NSW executive met on Tuesday, conservatives accused the state president, Don Harwin, and the NSW leader, Mark Speakman, of a “blatant challenge to the leadership of Peter Dutton and the federal executive”.
But a NSW executive member has rejected that claim as “utter rubbish”, as factional infighting looks set to continue, with the possibility that the federal executive could now overrule Speakman’s push for a four-person panel with gender balance.
The NSW division of the party was plunged into turmoil after it failed to nominate candidates for 140 council seats for the upcoming local government elections. That prompted federal intervention, with the federal executive giving the NSW executive a deadline of Thursday 12 September to appoint a three-person committee of management to replace its state executive for a period of 10 months.
Liberal sources told Guardian Australia in August that women in the party had been “shocked to see not a single woman” was proposed for the committee.
After former NSW planning minister, Rob Stokes, revealed he had not been asked to take a position on the committee and he was not available for the role, Speakman proposed to replace him with two women, Peta Seaton and former federal MP Fiona Scott, to create a panel of four.
Guardian Australia can reveal that Geoff Pearson, the country and regional vice-president, and six other executive members wrote to members expressing “deep concerns” at the plan.
In the email, the executive members accused Speakman of moving the proposal “without notice” and denigrating the other two proposed panel members – Victorians Alan Stockdale and Richard Alston – as being “elderly men” and “outsiders”.
They claimed Harwin shut down debate “and many members of state executive were not allowed to express their views”. Another executive member said this was “totally untrue” and the meeting was only ever scheduled to last an hour.
The email said that while Seaton “would be an excellent replacement” for Stokes, a four-person panel “would lead to gridlock and more dysfunction”. Scott would be conflicted as a member of both federal executive and the state committee, they argued.
A Liberal state executive member rejected the charge of gridlock, arguing the claim “makes assumptions” about how the four nominated members would vote that were “entirely unfair and inappropriate”.
The email said “the motion last night was passed on factional lines, again demonstrating the core problem with the NSW division”.
The email said the argument is not about “good administration”, “gender balance” or “what age someone can still serve the party or about where they live”.
“This is totally about factional control of the Liberal Party. This is about a small group of self-entitled, self-appointed ‘power brokers’ who care only about maintaining that power and control and ensuring the continuation of the benefits and patronage that flow from it.
“This is an attempt to neutralise the effect of the administration and resist any meaningful reform that is so desperately needed in the NSW division.”
The email argued it was “illogical and unacceptable” to water down the federal intervention, calling on the state council to reject the proposed “interference”.
But the Liberal state executive member rejected the charge of factional self-interest, stating that the “the main reason” state executive was happy to support Speakman’s motion was to achieve gender balance on the panel.
Another Liberal source close to the state executive responded: “They would say that wouldn’t they? Taking advice from the people who are clearly part of the problem in order to find the solution is never going to work.”
Attention now turns to Friday’s Liberal federal executive meeting, which could override Speakman and appoint a three-person panel.
A different Liberal source backed the Speakman plan, saying that “two 80-year-old blokes from Melbourne are not going to help us win teals seats in Sydney”.
Speakman welcomed the state executive “delegating its powers to a committee as requested” and “strengthening” it by “expanding it to four so we can include two talented and experienced NSW women”.
“The big picture here is collaborating to maximise our collective efforts to hold terrible Labor governments to account and to defeat them at elections,” he said in a statement. “We have to make sure our campaign capacity is in tip-top shape.”
The state director, Richard Shields, has already been sacked over the council nomination bungle, but conservatives have also pushed for Harwin to go.
Dutton, the federal leader, requested the federal executive consider intervening in the NSW branch, arguing that winning seats in the biggest state was vital for the federal election, due by May 2025.
Guardian Australia contacted Harwin for comment.