Liberal frontbencher Jacinta Price has drawn criticism after making remarks about Indian migrants late last week and later publicly accusing a colleague of berating her staff, prompting renewed debate within the opposition about discipline, messaging and party unity.
Price described her original comments as a mistake but declined to issue a formal apology, and she used social media to allege that fellow frontbencher Alex Hawke had berated her staff. The public exchange has been highlighted by commentators as unhelpful to the opposition’s broader goal of rebuilding support in diverse outer suburban electorates.
In a column for the Daily Mail, commentator Peter van Onselen said Price’s approach — combining sharp, provocative communication with a readiness to litigate internal disputes in public — risks alienating colleagues and voters. Van Onselen wrote that while Price has “real talent” and “is a sharp communicator,” her recent actions amount to misdirected emphasis that shifts attention away from the government and onto her own errors.
Van Onselen noted Price’s profile after she was the face of the ‘No’ campaign in the Voice referendum and the promotion she received from former Liberal leader Peter Dutton. He argued that the dynamics of opposition work require discipline and teamwork, and that frontbenchers who ‘freelance’ on hot-button culture issues can face consequences if their remarks derail the party’s messaging. Van Onselen also criticised Price’s decision to take an internal staffing complaint into the media rather than using established internal channels.
The commentator said the party’s path back to government runs through multicultural suburbs where voters expect competence and respect, and that public rows of this nature undermine the outreach the Liberals need to recover seats. He wrote that if Price seeks higher office or another leadership tilt, her most effective route would be to demonstrate coalition-building and portfolio-focused competence rather than producing public controversies.
Price’s defenders have argued that her plain-speaking style helps reach voters the party has lost, and that provocative debate on immigration and culture can be legitimate political terrain. Van Onselen acknowledged Price’s political potential and her capacity to provoke debate, but said that ambition without discipline and teamwork can limit long-term prospects.
The public dispute follows internal tensions that have been reported within the Liberal frontbench. Van Onselen referenced a history between Hawke and Dutton, and said the public nature of the dispute over staff treatment was “deeply unhelpful” to the opposition’s cause and harmony on the frontbench. He urged that genuine workplace complaints be handled through appropriate internal channels.
The episode adds to ongoing discussion within the Liberal Party about how to balance bold messaging with the need to rebuild electoral support in diverse electorates. Commentators said the debate highlights the tensions in converting high-profile individual performances into sustained party-wide gains, particularly when public missteps and internecine disputes attract media attention.
Price did not immediately respond to requests for comment through the channels cited in the column. The Liberal Party has previously emphasised the importance of unified messaging in opposition while managing internal differences through established party processes.