A reasonable query for Liberals at this point is: if Josh Frydenberg is the answer, what is the question?
There was a whiff of weariness in some corners of parliament this week, as the former treasurer and deputy Liberal leader happily stoked another round of “Josh for Canberra” speculation. With more rumoured comebacks than Oasis, Frydenberg’s latest foray into the national political arena saw him bouncing around TV, radio and podcast interviews to promote his new book, and pointedly refuse to rule out trying to rejoin the parliament.
His book – part family history, part treatise on antisemitism and social cohesion, part political manifesto – is titled A Grateful Son. But is he instead the prodigal son? The one who set out on his own but is destined to be welcomed back to the Liberal party family with joy and celebrations?
Frydenberg is young enough, bright enough and certainly energetic enough to still make a difference in public life. His addition to what is often a tired Coalition partyroom would certainly spice things up, and give a new weapon in their arsenal. The ideas in his book – a remix of the GST to fund income tax cuts, concerns about the future of his party, changes to the system of federalism, yet more calls for civic service for school leavers – are politically inconvenient for the federal Coalition as well as the Victorian Liberals headed for an election win, but are worth considering.
The talk around parliament is that Frydenberg is privately telling people he is unlikely to seek a return. But the fact he has pointedly refused to rule it out in a conga line of media interviews, saying only that he would make his mind up later, seems opportunistic. The spectre of a potential leadership alternative is hardly a help for Angus Taylor.
Labor sources have helpfully shared key quotes from Frydenberg’s book and media tour, pointing out his calls for changes to GST, the labour market, and criticisms of the Liberal trajectory – again, none helpful to the leader.
The problems facing the modern Liberal party, under Taylor’s leadership, are myriad. Its hostile right flank is barracking for Pauline Hanson and One Nation, its centre is still eyeing the teal independents, and Taylor – now eight months into the job – has a lower primary vote than when Sussan Ley was dumped. The Guardian Essential poll found the Coalition primary at a record low 22% in September, compared to 25% in January, a fortnight before Taylor rolled Ley.
These are all reasons for alarm for the centre right. It’s just not clear if Frydenberg is the answer to any of these problems. One question echoing around parliament this week was: would he do a better job than Taylor on anything substantive? In other words, is he yesterday’s man?
A return to the partyroom would give the Coalition a well-known face and a policy brain in a team which could benefit from both. Maybe Frydenberg would be content to return as a loyal soldier under Taylor, serving in an appropriately senior cabinet role. But maybe not. Few think he’d give up a well-paid job in banking to sit on the frontbench instead of the leader’s chair.
The loudest cheer Hanson got at last weekend’s Cpac conference was when she sledged Taylor, saying Australians didn’t want a “smarmy management consultant” replacing Anthony Albanese as prime minister. Would any of those voters more prefer the chairman of investment bank Goldman Sachs, the role Frydenberg currently holds? Taylor in recent times has tried throwing a bone to that fringe of the right-wing movement, producing more off-the-cuff videos with unpolished deliveries (and swearing) a la Hanson – would Frydenberg, at home in boardrooms and business lunches, be able to win back the voters furious at “politics as usual” and career politicians?
Maybe, then, Frydenberg could chart a course back to the middle for the Coalition: not chasing its right flank further to the fringe, but setting a mainstream course back toward the centre, where elections in Australia are won.
That would be a decent idea, if you forget how Frydenberg was ejected from parliament in the first place: bundled out in 2022 by Monique Ryan in the big community independents wave which swept half a dozen moderate-ish urban Liberals from their seats.
Ryan was supported by Climate 200. That group’s origin story may be relevant here: Simon Holmes à Court, a former donor to Frydenberg’s Kooyong 200 fundraising vehicle, was reportedly ejected from a supporter event and set up his own group in response. Climate 200 would hardly respond to Frydenberg’s comeback, or potential leadership, with party poppers and a “welcome back” card.
The teal wave which swept Frydenberg and several other moderate Liberals from office in 2022 hasn’t exactly swelled into a tsunami since then, and some could argue the conditions of four years ago are not there today – just ask Tim Wilson, who lost Goldstein to teal Zoe Daniel in 2022 but wrestled it back in 2025.
No Liberals we spoke to this week were jazzed about the prospect of Frydenberg’s return, or the distraction it provides.
But if there were any people happy about his potential return, they were on the government benches.
Albanese joked to Labor’s caucus meeting today that Frydenberg was now the “shadow opposition leader”, claiming “Josh Frydenberg’s priority has always been Josh Frydenberg”.
“I’m surprised Josh Frydenberg isn’t trying to bump me off this program,” the PM joked on the ABC on Tuesday.
Treasurer Jim Chalmers claimed his old sparring partner was “stalking” Taylor for the leadership, proclaiming. One senior Labor source cheekily joked that we should call it “the Fryre Festival”, a reference to the ill-fated and chaotic Fyre Festival in 2017, which had its own short-lived and catastrophic comeback in 2024.
Frydenberg’s media tour is likely to continue over coming days. The speculation over his potential comeback will linger even longer – Labor will make sure of it.
Disclaimer : This story is auto aggregated by a computer programme and has not been created or edited by DOWNTHENEWS. Publisher: theguardian.com
