The knives have come out for Sussan Ley. She is being attacked from both the left and the right. But, is all the criticism fair? Perhaps, as Andrew Bolt astutely notes, we should wait for her full policy platform before writing her off.

I’ll start by acknowledging that Sussan Ley was not my first pick for Liberal leader. I would have preferred Tim Wilson. But, that notwithstanding, I’m hopeful that she can perform well.

Let’s start with Sussan Ley’s major advantage. She comes across as a ‘happy warrior’.

She is the type of person that appears collaborative, caring, and interested. She does not come across as dictatorial, dogmatic, or controlling. She seems like a very pleasant person. Proverbially, she is the type of person you could get a beer with. This is extremely important for the Liberals. Scott Morrison ended up hated. Peter Dutton appeared dour and unlikeable, even if he reportedly was thoroughly pleasant in person. The Liberals lost partly because voters did not like the leader. Sussan Ley looks like she can carry a message and can do so without alienating voters.

Many ‘conservatives’ have argued that ‘we now have Labor in government and Labor in opposition’. Others have criticised her past comments on the eSafety Commissioner. Yet more have lambasted her support for gender quotas or comments decrying gender pay inequality. There are concerns that Sussan Ley has backflipped or is too indecisive.

The criticisms are worth considering. But, often they relate to years-old sentiments, about which she might now have a more nuanced view. I share some of these misgivings. But, with the Liberal party formulating its policy platform, she deserves a chance to show us what she stands for before we assume the worst.

Some ‘progressives’ have asserted that Sussan Ley now faces a ‘glass cliff’. This refers to a situation where a woman takes over from a man in a difficult situation and is set up to fail. However, an unspoken corollary is that the man had under-performed and the chosen woman was trusted to right the ship. Indeed, the Liberal party performed so poorly, that it would be difficult to not do better next election. Ironically, the assertion that she is merely a token women, elected to warm the seat for a man, actually undermines her chances of success.

Some people sneer at her foray into numerology. Sussan Ley added an ‘s’ to her name because of a numerological belief that it could change her personality. It is idiosyncratic. However, Sussan Ley did this decades ago, whereupon the change stuck. She reportedly can see some of the humour in it.

Others are concerned about Sussan Ley’s performance as deputy leader. This is entirely valid. The Liberals did badly. The entire leadership team bears responsibility. From the public’s perspective, all leaders under-performed. However, behind the scenes, it is challenging to know who was responsible for which bad decision and whether Peter Dutton remained impervious to feedback from his own party.

The foregoing criticisms share a common theme: they look backward at historical alleged failures and mistakes. Unspoken is the possibility that Sussan Ley has reflected on challenges and mistakes in the Liberal Party. Unspoken is the assumption that she necessarily will skew too far left. But, we do not know how Sussan Ley will frame her policies going forward. And, she is certainly better at articulating them than many of the alternatives! It seems that we should give Sussan Ley a chance before tearing her down.