Scott Morrison will forever be a paradoxical figure. Of the seven prime ministers to have served so far this century, he was the least substantial.

His sudden emergence as Malcolm Turnbull’s replacement in 2018 and his triumph at the 2019 election surprised because to so many who had observed him closely or worked with him, he did not have what it took to lead the country.

Illustration: Dionne Gain

A former party functionary who secured preselection in controversial circumstances, he was not regarded as a powerful thinker. A hail-fellow-well-met type, he was also quick to anger and regarded as secretive, and difficult to really know.

Morrison had various modes as a politician. There was the serious, uncompromising mode as minister for immigration and social services, and treasurer. This was how he won over the Liberal rank-and-file and some in the media, presenting himself as the tough, unyielding operator.

Then, when he appeared from nowhere to succeed Turnbull and needed to sell himself, he was the grinning, baseball-cap-wearing everyman. On TV, he was all fun and games on lifestyle programs but an instantly aggressive and defensive interview subject whenever a difficult question was posed. As a public figure, he was highly performative, rarely looked genuinely relaxed and always seemed to be searching for an angle.

When he took over as prime minister in 2018, Morrison wrote his own brief, with the support of the majority of his Liberal colleagues. The harsh right-wing prescriptions of Tony Abbott and the compromised moderate approach of Turnbull had variously proved troubling and problematic for many voters and for the party’s membership. Morrison’s job was not to embark on ideological adventures but to focus on politics and keeping the Labor Party out of office. It suited his personality and his skill set perfectly.

This is the heart of the Morrison paradox. Even an inadequate leader can come up with a penetrating insight and that’s what Morrison did in the lead-up to the 2019 election. He understood the mindset of a fracturing, distracted national electorate and what it meant for the political discourse.

With civic involvement, party memberships and mainstream media all in decline, persuading voters to support hard policy choices was becoming exponentially more difficult. And so, Australia’s most insubstantial prime minister delivered a truly substantial election victory that still resonates through the polity. It will continue to influence the direction of Australian politics for many electoral cycles to come.