OPEN LETTER TO THE HONOURABLE TONY ABBOT, Leader of the Opposition. SUBJECT: How to win the next Federal election

Dear Mr Abbot,

Presumptuousness, even audacity, may be words that spring to mind at the idea of someone in an exalted position such as yours receiving advice from out of the nebulous swirl constituting the general public. I however hasten to point out that, in what we are constantly reminded of as being the great Australian representative democracy, it should not be outside the bounds of decency for one who is represented to be communicating his views to one who represents.

At the risk of rekindling the perception of presumptuousness, if one has in fact arisen, I would like to suggest that from my vantage-point jostling in the crowd, I may be able to discern facts and factors possibly missed by your vantage-point which tends, by its very nature, to see over the heads of that same crowd. This necessary view by a leader tends to cause an unavoidable detachment from those being led. Conversely, it is just as unavoidable for one who is barely a blood-vessel in the body politic to be aware of certain collective moods and attitudes.

The value of my opinion, I like to think, is increased by an objectivity bred over years of disenchantment with the political system, nay, rather a bitter cynicism that culminated many years ago in refusing to take my, albeit infinitesimal, part in the political process by refusing to vote. Why, I reasoned, participate in what I recognised as nothing more than a sham and a farce designed to create the illusion of legitimacy for whichever indistinguishable gang whose turn it was to rule? When the choice we are given, particularly on the issues that really matter, are either cigarette-paper-thin or non existent it is fairly obvious to anyone not drugged with propaganda that we are ruled by a plutocracy acting as a duopoly pretending to be a democracy.

Now with the preliminaries out of the way, I would like to extend to you an invitation to at least alleviate my disillusionment and and convince me to go one step further than having my name marked off at the polling booth when your political baptism by fire takes place.

You can do this by taking a real stand on four key issues. They are climate change, illegal immigration, the double-bunger of legal immigration and multiculturalism, and, believe it or not, Japanese whaling. There is a fifth issue on which you have already declared your position and that is 'work choices'. This declaration needs to be made much more emphatically and unequivocally.

Climate Change
Since Kevin Rudd came slinking back from Copenhagen like a cur with its tail between its legs, you have in many peoples' eyes gained a critically important initiative. The task here is to husband this windfall you have gained in being vindicated by the world's wise refusal to follow Mister Rudd and Mister ... sorry, Mzzz Wong, into cloud cuckoo land. You've already made an excellent start on this by waving away interviewers' inquiries about your 'beliefs' on this subject and maintaining that you are only interested in facts. Hear, hear! Let the other side continue to be the belief mongers - which, because of a Northern winter cloaking Europe and North America in more ice and snow than has been seen since the last Ice Age, has suddenly become an exercise in pushing a very viscous, dark and pungent substance up an exceedingly steep hill.

You really don't need me to tell you what surgical delicacy is needed here in letting the facts speak for themselves to a public drenched in emotion-tearing propaganda but I'll take the liberty in reminding you anyway. Perhaps the best and easiest way to start would be to gently begin to rock the tomb-stone of suppression that has been placed on the huge body of science that, once set free, would argue vociferously against man-made global warming. Of course you should continue as you are in not actually coming straight out and admitting you see anthropogenic global warming as the greatest scam ever perpetrated on mankind. Simply allow the facts, with perhaps a little gentle nudging toward the light of day, to do the persuading.

You have already driven awareness of the great, big tax that would underpin an Emissions Trading Scheme like a stake into the heart of a vampire. Keep driving it; do not let this monster come back to life. Do not for one moment let the electorate forget that this cascade of money would be funding an exercise in utter futility given the piddling amount that we are adding to the fraction of one per cent of atmospheric CO2 compared to the belching smoke-stacks to our North.

But make no mistake, the Australian public wants real environmental protection. Let's call it environmental nationalism ... on second thought, it's probably better not to include the word nationalism in anything as it's become almost an expletive. Be that as it may, Australians would much prefer environmentalism, like charity, to begin at home. It's imperative that we begin to wean ourselves off the idea that it's up to us to save the entire planet. Here is an opportunity to show that your credentials are actually a brighter shade of green than the Labor Party's, and even those of the watermelon Greens (pink on the inside).

For at least a century a startling idea has bewitched the minds of men who can visualise titanic achievements: instead of continuing to allow the the millions of tons of fresh water that flow annually down the Eastern slopes of Queensland's section of the Great Dividing Range out into the sea, diverting it back through the mountains into the great inland river complex ready and waiting to accept and distribute it. The great, central deserts could be transformed into gardens of Eden. Of course there would be the nay sayers giving a myriad of reasons why this couldn't be done, but bear in mind their forerunners were giving very similar reasons why the Snowy Mountains Scheme couldn't be done. The possibility at least deserves a feasibility study. This of course would require a lead given by a man of true vision.

Illegal Immigration
If there were any Australians not embarrassed by the spectacle of an Australian ship tied up for weeks at an Indonesian port until its load of illegals deigned to disembark, then they are beyond embarrassment. This would have had to have been the absolute nadir of softness in 'combatting' this scourge. Any measure whatsoever would have to look like 'getting tough'. And getting tough is exactly what the Australian people want - real toughness and by this is meant that although the measures employed by Mr Howard went some way to halt the invasion of 'boat people', much more is required. The next time a politician gets hairy chested and states that 'we will decide who comes to Australia' he wants to be sure that he is not indulging in a charade sniggered at by more people than he dare to imagine.

The irony of the Indonesian debacle was that after the Sri Lankans hoping to cash in on the benefits of living in the West had finally been induced to leave the Oceanic Viking by promises we can only vaguely guess at, the Indonesians were unashamedly talking about towing future arrivals all the way back to Sri Lanka. Now that's tough.. Why is it that we wouldn't even dare contemplate something that Indonesia wouldn't bat an eyelid about? Could it be because of our paralyzing fear of the giant bogey man squatting in New York, created as the spearhead of world government: the United Nations? You can already hear the squeals and moans emanating from this nest of tinpot dictators if ever we reneged on any of the myriad of agreements and conventions we've signed in a perversion of our own constitution. So what? Spare a thought for the hundreds of UN resolutions ignored by Israel alone - evidently with complete impunity. Once again - why should we be the bunnies? What has the UN ever done for us - apart from siphon off our sovereignty? If the UN so strongly objected to our endeavouring to reclaim some of our sovereignty, then perhaps it might be in our best interest to hand in our resignation. But given that this would be received as such a startling, almost unthinkable notion, it may be best to keep this one from the electorate.

Take a look however at the rising groundswell in Europe where it is sinking in that if things are allowed to continue as they are for for a mere two generations longer there will not be a Europe. Standing on its dead carcass will be Islamic republics. Take a look especially at Italy's new found resolve in dealing with illegal immigrants. No doubt these rediscovered testicles have put a lot of liberal noses out of joint but the sky hasn't fallen in. Italy is exercising its sovereignty and surprise, surprise, isn't being invaded by a European Union army intent on inflicting punitive action for its outrageous behaviour. The United Nations has probably made the requisite splutters but all in all the New World Order has been made to look very much like a paper tiger. Oops, did I just say New World Order? Sorry. We all know that doesn't exist.

Immigration and Multiculturalism
Illegal immigration is the hot-button issue but of course those of us in the know are fully aware that this is just a grain of rice in a cooking bowl compared to the legal immigration invasion washing over us. One really doesn't need to know that we are currently experiencing a record high immigration level - recently estimated at half a million per year when all categories of visas allowing permanent and semi-permanent residency are included. One only has to look at the faces in our cities changing before our very eyes. Remember when we were told that Asian immigration would be kept at such an infinitesimal level that it would never have any effect on the racial make-up of the country? That was a good one!

Just about every poll ever conducted shows that an overwhelming majority of Australians want immigration reduced, if not discontinued altogether. When exactly was it that the meaning of 'democracy' was turned on its head to be interpreted as complete disregard of the will of the majority? Could this be considered an example of Orwellian 'doublethink'? If so, would it not be more honest to jettison the notion of democracy and replace it with something like 'The Republic of We Know What's Best For You'? Paradoxically, the ideal of democracy has become a shabby dirty thing even in the eyes of the elite who are constantly reminding us that it was something our forebears fought for. Any politician today who has the temerity to carry out the will of the people is contemptuously dismissed as a 'populist'. A populist would no doubt be defined as a cynical charlatan; ergo true democrat equals populist equals cynical charlatan.

It would probably be best not to irritate the hopelessly indoctrinated by coming straight out and saying that if elected you will be slashing immigration. It would be far better to couch it in terms of saying that should the economy unexpectedly seriously deteriorate, consideration would have to be given to reviewing the immigration level. This is perfectly reasonable given that during the depression of the thirties immigration was virtually eliminated.

The beauty of this tactic is that a trigger is set in place ready to be pulled at the appropriate time, and you and I both know that the appropriate time is rapidly approaching. Contrary to what the happy talking heads are chirping about in their mindless optimism, an economic storm is brewing which will make the Global Financial Crisis look like a sun-shower.
Here is what Craig Roberts has to say, quoted in an article entitled 'The Economic Pearl Harbor' published in Uncensored, December 2009 - March 2010: 'The worst part of the decline is yet to come. Bank failures and home foreclosures are yet to peak. The commercial real estate bust is yet to hit. The dollar crisis is building. When it hits, interest rates will rise dramatically as the US struggles to finance its massive budget and trade deficits while the rest of the world tries to escape a depreciating dollar.' (Italics mine) Having been an Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration, Roberts should know what he's talking about.

By the same token, it may be a little difficult in straitened economic times to justify the seven billion dollars per year spent on supporting the groaning structure of multiculturalism.
This is the figure given after painstaking analysis by in The Cost of Multiculturalism by Steven Rimmer, a senior economist in the Commonwealth public service. The figure, he hastens to add, includes only those costs appearing on the surface and not those that have been craftily hidden by sleight of hand.

A glance at today's newspaper reveals two multicultural 'success' stories on adjacent pages. One reports on riots at the Australian Open tennis tournament. Riots at a tennis match! This could not have even been envisaged in the time of Lew Hoad and Ken Rosewall when Australia in multicultural retrospect is seen as so unendurably boring. The other story concerns the surfeit of sexual attacks by taxi drivers on unsuspecting or intoxicated and trusting passengers, giving rise to the possibility that it may be safer for women to hitch hike home rather than risk coming into proximity with this filth. Strange. This would have been absolutely unheard of when Australian men were driving taxis. This is the 'enrichment' that just keeps on giving. It has to be worth every cent of seven billion.

Japanese Whaling
Like illegal immigrants this is another rolled-gold, hot-button issue. Because we live in an increasingly feminised society, the deaths of whales looms as a far greater threat than the dispossession of the Australian people. But that's OK because you can use this issue to great advantage. Whereas the Rudd government says it will do 'whatever it takes' to end Japanese whaling in our vicinity but does nothing - strong words becoming no more than a pathetic whimper - you should be spelling out exactly the kind of actions you will be taking to solve this problem. Because Japanese whalers are operating in the territorial waters lapping the Antarctic ice sheets staked out by Australia, we have every right to do really do whatever it takes. This could include putting the Oceanic Viking to far better use than rescuing refugees who begin sinking their own boats as soon as it is sighted. Underneath the ship's name is emblazoned the word 'Hobart', signifying that this is in fact its home port. How very conveniently located for action in the Antarctic. The action could involve close shadowing or blocking progress. If this fails to achieve the desired result, surely we have at least one spare warship which really doesn't have much better to do that could be dispatched to the area to foil the Japanese illegality. The very presence of an Australian warship should be more than enough to put out the 'no trespassing' sign. If pain persists, instead of seeing a doctor, what about a shot across the bow. This would be sure to get their attention.

Admittedly this would probably generate Japanese displeasure but this would be negated completely by cheering world opinion. We would be heroes - the one little boy who refused to see the Emperor's clothes of 'scientific research'. On the domestic front, a solid promise along these lines would be a tonic to a people who have become extremely tired of feeling like another little boy - the one who has his lunch money stolen every day. This would be win, win, win (except of course in Tokyo). The female vote would be gushing in cascades because of your vow to save the whales and you would also nail the male vote by your promised display of machismo.

Work Choices
Don't even think about it. Declaring a truce in class warfare would pay undreamt of dividends. Bob Hawke, I'm sure even you would agree, was an immensely successful politician. Building bridges between labour and capital was a principal key to his success. At least in this regard, it may pay to take a leaf out of his book.

If you could follow at least some of this advice I may seriously consider taking up voting again. If you don't won't or can't, that will be OK as well because I will be rewarded with the gratification of knowing I was right all along - that Australian politicians are simply puppets dancing on the end of strings pulled by giants in the shadows and that voting is really just political masturbating.