; 110601 Ad-Lib Winter.indd
Learning Center
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out
Your Federal Quarterly Tax Payments are due April 15th Get Help Now >>

110601 Ad-Lib Winter.indd


  • pg 1
    The Senate in dire straits
                                                    Coa:34 ALP:31 Ind:2   Grn:9

                               God save the Queen

           House of
           House of
        Representatives                                     Senate

- Federalism loses a defender in Canberra
- Exposing GetUp!
- ALP to stitch-up students
       State President’s Report
       Sam Duluk

       Federalism Loses A Defender In Canberra
       Hon. Stephen Wade, MLC

       My Government The Leviathan: Lessons From Hayek
       Dan Cregan

       Annual Tonkin Dinner 2011
       Heidi Black

       Photos From Tonkin Dinner & State Convention
       SAYLM Exec

       Exposing GetUp!
       Senator the Hon. Eric Abetz

       Hard Working Students The Ones To Lose Out
       Penny Nugent

       SA’s Sex Laws: Socially Regressive And In Need Of Reform?
       Chris Duluk

       Post Feminism
       Stephen Knoll

       Populism Is Not Leadership
       Josh Bell


    DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed herein belong solely to the respective authors and do not
    necessarily reflect the views of the South Australian Young Liberal Movement or the Liberal Party of

2                                          Ad-Lib - Winter 2011
                                       State President’s Report
                                                                                        Sam Duluk

Ladies and Gentlemen, welcome to the Winter edition of Ad-Lib. Once again congratulations to Travis
Munckton for this editorial efforts and thank you to those individuals who have made a contribution to Ad-

I would like to take this opportunity to provide an update on the Movement’s recent activities.

On the 21st May, the SAYLM held a special session of Young Liberal Council to discuss and vote on the most
comprehensive reforms ever presented in the Movements history.

The proposed reforms passed with overwhelming support from Council delegates.

The key reforms include measures to:

•   Enable better grass roots participation through the abolition of Young Liberal Branches;
•   Increase participation through the granting of voting rights to all eligible members of the Movement to
    Young Liberal Council;
•   Encourage only genuine membership participation through a minimum 12 months membership
    qualification period for AGM voting rights and electoral requirements;
•   Increase Movement activity through the formation of a Social Committee and a Campaign Committee.

These structural reforms of the Movement will increase participation and accountability of the both the
Young Liberal Executive and the Movement. These reforms will also bring the Movement in line with
Women’s Council and Rural and Regional Council and are aimed at reducing the negative influence of
factions within the Young Liberal Movement.

Reform, especially Constitutional Reform is never easy for any organisation, however, I believe the reforms
that the Young Liberal Council have passed will ensure that the Movement will remain a strong, active and
cohesive political organisation well into the 21st Century.

It has been a pleasure in seeing the above reforms pass the YLC and at times a real challenge. However I
would like to thank all those individuals who made submissions to the Review, to the Hon. Robert Lawson
QC, Hon. Caroline Schaefer and our State Director, Bev Barber for their constructive input into the Review
process and finally in conjunction with the Young Liberal State Executive, thank Stephan Knoll, Chris Browne
and Dan Cregan for their hard work and perseverance.

Also on the 21st May, the Young Liberal Movement held its annual State Conference. This year we were
lucky enough to have Greg Sheridan, Foreign Affairs Editor of The Australian as the conference key note
speaker. It was fantastic for the Movement to have someone of Greg’s calibre address the Movement. Other
key speakers at the Conference included; Senator Michaelia Cash, Kristy Wildy - Business Development
Manager at Anglicare and Senator Hon. Nick Minchin. I would like to thank Brendan Clark, SAYLM
Development Director for organizing one of the best State Conferences in many years.

Saturday 9th July is the date for this years Young Liberal Ball. As always, the Ball is one of the highlight
social events of the calendar year for the Movement, and this year’s Ball at the National Wine Centre will be
no exception. I hope to see you there.

                                          Ad-Lib - Winter 2011                                                3
                                              Federalism Loses A
                                            Defender In Canberra
                                                        Hon. Stephen Wade, MLC

When Senator Nick Minchin retires at the end of        While only 24 of the world's 193 countries have
June federalism loses a key defender in Canberra.      federal political systems, federations host 40
                                                       per cent of the world's population. The fact that
During the Howard years, former Treasury               eight of the 10 world's largest countries by area
Secretary, John Stone wrote “A friend of mine, a       are governed by federations, including Australia,
person high in Liberal Party circles, recently said    highlights the relevance of federal structures to
to me that he believed that the only member            geographically diverse nations.
of the Cabinet who had any genuine belief in
federalism was the Minister for Finance, Senator       Historically, it is true that most federations
the Honourable Nick Minchin”.                          developed where previously separate entities came
                                                       together to form a federal government; we think of
The Canberra disease of centralisation infects more    the United States colonies, the Swiss cantons and
than a few of our Party in spite of our Federal        the Australian colonies. The constituent entities
Platform assertion that “we believe … in a federal     normally keep some powers, but others are
system of government and the decentralisation of       transferred to the federal government. But more
power, with local decisions being made at the local    recently, we are seeing significant developments
level”.                                                in previously unitary countries which are adopting
                                                       federal structures. They often do so as a way to
Particularly through the aggressive expansion of its   maintain a common central government whilst also
taxation powers at the expense of the states, the      empowering regional self-determination; we think
Commonwealth has far greater fiscal resources,          of countries such as Spain, Belgium and South
which it has used extensively to distort the federal   Africa.
balance. We have seen in federal Labor's bungling
of service delivery programs, such as the Pink         Federalism allows the recognition of both diversity
Batts and school building programs, that the           and common interests, including geographic
Commonwealth is often not well-placed to deliver       diffusion. In fact, some of these countries,
services on the ground, particularly if they have a    although in relatively recent experiments, are
Labor government at the helm. Another example          progressing federal models more creative than the
we are seeing at the moment is gambling reform,        traditional federal model. I am thinking particularly
where a federal government is determined to raid       there of Belgium. It was founded as a centralised
state powers as part of a desperate attempt to         state, based on the French model, but in recent
hang on to power federally.                            decades (I understand, since the 1970s), they
                                                       have developed a federal state, however, more
These realities are a warning to the Party, the        recent developments see Belgium taking on
states and the community to remain active to           elements of confederation.
maintain a healthy federal balance.
                                                       Even Australia's mother country, the United
There is a bit of a view amongst the Canberra elite    Kingdom, one of the bastions of unitary
that federation is an anachronism.                     governments, is moving towards federation.
                                                       In recent years, national assemblies, such as those
Our path to federation was indeed through the          in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, have
union of a group of British colonies, but the facts    taken on significant governmental responsibilities.
of the world today show that federalism is not         Whilst one should not refer to an entity such
merely an historical accident.                         as the European Union as a federation (it is a

 4                                            Ad-Lib - Winter 2011
                       senator the honourable nick minchin
        fmr leader of the government in the senate & minister for finance & administration

supranational organisation), in terms of its political • Democratic participation - federalism takes
operations, some observers note that, after 50           government closer to local people, creating
years of institutional evolution, the European Union     higher levels of democratic participation
does possess some attributes of a federal state.         and government more closely reflecting the
                                                         people’s wishes and regional needs.
The Liberal Party was founded as a federalist party.
Our organisation reflects that character – so does      • Innovation - federalism allows for policy
our platform.                                            experiments, so that governments can learn
                                                         from each other’s successes and failures and
We do not see federations as merely a colonial           can compete with each other for citizens and
anachronism; they can be just as relevant to             business by offering the best possible policy
meeting the challenges of the modern world.              frameworks.

Our Federal Platform affirms three particular          While a significant minority may never be able to
aspects of federalism thus:                           muster a national majority to embrace a reform,
                                                      they may be able to carry the day in a state or
• Specialisation - while some tasks of                territory and the success in that jurisdiction may
  government are best performed nationally,           foster support beyond. Constant comparison and
  many responsibilities are better carried out by     benchmarking between states serves to drive
  other spheres of government. Liberals strongly      improvements.
  support federalism.
                                                      Australia is an evolving nation – our federation
Even when aspects of some governmental                has and will evolve. As Liberals, we should work
responsibilities need to be coordinated beyond the    to reform federalism and appropriate the benefits
State level it is too often assumed that that means   it offers rather than simplistically dismiss it as a
a Canberra-led response when cooperative action       vestige of a previous age.
between the States and Territories may be more
effective.                                            As we thank Nick Minchin for his illustrious
                                                      contribution to our federation and nation, I look
The development of intergovernmental                  forward to other Liberals stepping up to defend
decisionmaking bodes such as the Council of           federalism in the Federal Parliamentary Party.
Australian Government and ministerial councils so
often end up being vehicles of the creeping control
of the Commonwealth.

                                      Ad-Lib - Winter 2011                                                5
                                                     My Government
                                                      The Leviathan:
                                                Lessons From Hayek
                                                                                   Dan Cregan
We all know government can solve only the most         Keynes was, almost at once, Hayek's hero,
practical community problems: so why do we still       detractor and mentor. By the 1930s Heyak had a
ask it to do more?                                     sound reputation and was teaching at the London
                                                       School of Economics. He was not afraid to admit
In summer 1975 Margaret Thatcher attended the          that Keynes' critique of the harsh terms imposed
Conservative Research Institute conference.            on Germany by the peace settlement had inspired
She had been Opposition Leader for three months.       him as a student in Venice.
Interrupting a speaker she thumped a copy of
Friedrich Hayek's The Constitution of Liberty on the   Yet, shortly after the publication of Keynes'
table and said "this is what we believe."              Treatise on Money, Hayek responded with a
                                                       powerful critique. Flatly, though not without some
Learning of Thatcher's enthusiasm, Hayek must          respect, Hayek said Keynes had misunderstood
have been as surprised as conference delegates.        Knut Wicksell's economic precepts. Since Wicksell's
Despite even a Nobel Prize - which he modestly         precepts were published in German, it is almost
attributed to the Cold-War practice of balancing       certain Keynes did miss much of the subtlety. And
prizes between the left and right - Hayek was not      Hayek, in a straightforward and very Austrian way,
the frequent subject of political adoration.           set about correcting him.

And though by the time of Thatcher's outburst          Keynes took the criticism poorly. In a scholarly
he was well known, he would not himself have           review he described a separate book by Hayek as
comfortably taken to an English conference floor.       "scarcely a sound proposition." He added without
The truth was that, despite being a naturalised        charity "It is an extraordinary example of how,
British subject, his Austrian accent made him          starting with a mistake, a remorseless logician can
almost incomprehensible. But as Bruce Caldwell         end up in Bedlam." It wasn't the review Hayek
said of Hayek: "We are talking about academics         had been hoping for. Over dinner at Cambridge
here, and of course nothing impresses ... like [an     University, Keynes’ College fellows told him he had
academic] being mostly incomprehensible but            gone too far. One described the Keynes' review as
occasionally clear".                                   bodyline bowling.

Whatever his shortcomings, Hayek had over              It would not be long before Keynes had a chance
the course of his career been astute enough            at redemption. In the early days of the Blitz,
to know that participation in the popular press        Peterhouse College at Cambridge agreed to house
complemented permanent tenure and academic             the London School of Economics in buildings left
success (as did being on the right side of Nazism).    empty by students at war. Hayek found himself,
To that end, he often contributed to newspapers,       still a lecturer at the LSE, only a short walk from
sparred openly with Keynes and had the good            Keynes rooms at Kings College. Keynes, older,
fortune to tutor wealthy socialites like David         richer, tenured and influential, arranged rooms for
Rockefeller.                                           Hayek at Kings: living in each others pockets, at
                                                       least they could agree on the need for huge war
But it was his conflict with Keynes which first          spending.
brought him to the attention of anti-Labour
politicians like Margaret Thatcher.

 6                                          Ad-Lib - Winter 2011
The truth is Hayek was still a long way from being    But it was also Hayek's instinctive understanding
Thatcher's favourite capitalist, or anybody else’s    of the place of property rights in a free society
if it came to it (perhaps his wife's, but that ended  which Thatcher seized on. She wrote "… the rule
in divorce). Not until the publication of the The     of law still had a very English, or at least Anglo-
Road to Serfdom in 1944 did Hayek's reputation        Saxon, feel to it. It was later, through Hayek's
bloom. After the sale of 30,000 copies Hayek          masterpieces ‘The Constitution of Liberty and
had established himself as an anti-socialist, anti-   Law’ that I really came to think this principle
Keynsian icon.                                        as having wider application." Nothing inspires
                                                      a lawyer - Thatcher had read for the bar - like
Popular success was assured when Readers' Digest a good defence of property rights. And as John
published an abridged version of the Road to          Locke had emphasised many years before, liberty
Serfdom at the end of the War. Even then, English is inseparable from fixed property rights, perhaps
academics - who felt fascism was a capitalist         even dependent on it.
response to the Bolshevik Revolution - did not
make much room for Hayek in their philosophy          Thatcher's emphasis on Hayek's dedication of the
courses. Instead, he was promoted by clubs,           Road to Serfdom to the “socialist's of all parties”
societies even private industry (General Motors       is telling. It was a speech by a colleague on the
published a pamphlet explaining his ideas to their    'middle way' in British politics - that Thatcher saw
workers, such was their fear of Communism).           as obsequious and inclined only to assist the left -
                                                      that she interrupted at the Conservative Institute
Importantly for Thatcher, it would be a private       conference in 1975.
political club that brought her into contact with
young professionals who supported Hayek. Their        Thatcher's policies of lower personal taxation in
fervour legitimised for her the public appeal of      favour of wider indirect taxation, privatisation
Hayek’s philosophy. Put another way, it was then      of state monopolies and government spending
that she understood his ideas could be safely         limits were influenced by Hayek's dictum that the
promoted to the middle class.                         "more the state plans, the more difficult planning
                                                      becomes for the individual." And in Thatcher's
In 1993 Thatcher explained her early enthusiasm       reorganisation of English School Boards and
for Hayek: "Our inspiration was less Rab Butler's     the welfare state she closely embraced another
‘Industrial Charter’ than books like Colm Brogan's    of Hayek's immutable truths: “There is all the
anti-socialist satire, Our New Masters … and          difference in the world between treating people
Hayek's powerful Road to Serfdom, dedicated           equally and attempting to make them equal.”
to 'the socialists of all parties'". Such books she   David Cameron’s plan to radically curb the cost
said "gave us the feeling that the other side         of English government – by amongst other things
simply could not win in the end." Writing in 1995,    withdrawing universal welfare – is a contemporary
Thatcher added: "the most powerful critique of        example of a government attempting to resist
socialist planning ... which I read at this time, and waste and embrace Hayek. I will return to this in
to which I have returned so often since [is] FA       an Australian context.
Hayek's ‘The Road to Serfdom’."
                                                      But it is Keynes private letter to Hayek on the
                                                      publication of The Road to Serfdom that tells us
                                                      most about the power of Hayek’s neo-liberal ideas.
                                                      Keynes wrote "You will not expect me to accept
                                                      quite all the economic dicta in it. But morally and
                                                      philosophically I find myself in agreement with
                                                      virtually the whole of it; and not only in agreement
                                                      with it, but in a deeply moved agreement." To
                                                      deeply move our detractors to agreement is the
                                                      best any of us can hope for.

                  F.A. Hayek

                                       Ad-Lib - Winter 2011                                            7
Of course, because Hayek has been claimed as the        that existed in the market before government
favourite capitalist of conservatives like Thatcher     intervention did fail. They had been enticed to
and Reagan, even George Bush Snr. ("Hayek is            purchase large quantities of stock to service the
one of the great thinkers of our age") he is seldom     lucrative government market (yes, “the more the
identified for what he is: a true, hard, small-          state plans, the more difficult planning becomes
government Classical Liberal who understood             for the individual”).
that massive government spending was always
cruel, never kind. Instead, Hayek knew that the         The pink-bats scandal illustrates that governments
production of wealth and happiness is best served       which do not respect Hayek’s Classical-Liberal
by an efficient and limited government. And              principles swiftly encounter, then ignore, what
although this article could go further by untangling    Milton Friedman later termed the 'free lunch
all Thatcher's policies which are said to be inspired   problem'. He said:
by Hayek but were not, the point is that he was a
Classical Liberal. A kind of almost agnostic Liberal    "There are four ways in which you can spend
who is interested in the efficiency of liberty.          money. You can spend your own money on
                                                        yourself. When you do that, why then you really
Hayek knew that the efficiency of liberty meant          watch out what you’re doing, and you try to get
legislative coercion, even for an assumed               the most for your money. Then you can spend your
positive purpose, could rarely be justified. Worse,      own money on somebody else. For example, I buy
intervention and coercion always produced               a birthday present for someone. Well, then I’m not
unintended consequences, whatever the objective.        so careful about the content of the present, but
                                                        I’m very careful about the cost. Then, I can spend
There are many Australian examples of the               somebody else’s money on myself. And if I spend
unintended consequences of government coercion          somebody else’s money on myself, then I’m sure
and intervention. It was clear enough to any            going to have a good lunch! Finally, I can spend
Hayak/Milton Friedman reader that grossly               somebody else’s money on somebody else. And
distorting the home insulation market, as the           if I spend somebody else’s money on somebody
Federal Government did in 2009 by subsidising           else, I’m not concerned about how much it is,
home insulation, would lead only to government          and I’m not concerned about what I get. And
waste and business frustration - we all remember        that’s government. And that’s close to 40% of our
how an insulation scheme ‘industry’ of charlatan        national income."
installers flourished on easy tax money.
                                                        In Australia, even in the face of regular and
Insulation businesses alarmed by the abrupt             wholesale government waste we continue to
cancelation of the scheme acted rationally in           maintain that ordinary workers should give
their self interest - and demanded help from            one dollar in three to government. Having an
government (which was in part available                 effective 30% tax rate for most is the same as
through general welfare anyway). Of course,             saying we expect men and women to work for the
the government obliged. But good businesses             government until Wednesday morning – or four
                                                        months of the year.

 8                                            Ad-Lib - Winter 2011
The socialists of both parties have allowed              So what about whole of government reform? The
government to become a tax-spend machine. The            Department of Defence, of Education, Resources
machine rolls on of itself, collecting then spending,    and Tourism, Sustainability, Environment, Water,
uninformed by the true cost of its illusory and          Population and Communities, Innovation and
conflicting goals: ‘equality’ and ‘fairness’. Of course   Industry, Tax, Treasury, Justice – huge bureaucratic
Hayek knew a government machine of this type             edifices – all lunch buyers with somebody elses’
– attempting to make people equal through large-         money for somebody else (and in the case of
scale and inefficient wealth redistribution – meant       Defence and of Sustainability and Population, lunch
we would not all be equal before the law. He said        with somebody elses’ money for somebody else in
“Equality before the law and material equality are       the future – how unaccountable can you get?).
therefore not only different but are in conflict with
each other; and we can achieve either one or the         The truth if we admitted it might be that we are
other, but not both at the same time.” For example,      timid and inconsistent in the way we approach
progressive taxation explicitly asks the law to treat    reform of government: some policy areas are ‘safe’
people differently because it taxes some more than       for reform, such as welfare or health, whereas
others – you cannot treat people equally if what         others are not.
you really want is material equality. This is why
Liberals talk about equality of opportunity instead      By setting aside only some areas of government
of simple equality.                                      for reform, we engage in a type of small target
                                                         politics. It is the type of small target politics that
What we cannot do is pretend, as we did even             leads us to believe that cracking down on single
after many terms of the Howard government,               mothers – to keep my example – is actual reform.
that we live in a ‘fair’ or ‘free society’ when tax      Whereas real reform would instead be changing
rates look like theft and government remains the         the meaning of welfare and the role of government
size of a standing army. Don’t misunderstand             itself. In this way we lose sight of the fact that
me: wholesale income tax reform via the                  our values should always be small government,
GST, productivity gains on the waterfront and            not small-target-politics (which often is small
elsewhere, the privatisation of Telstra and the          mindedness anyway).
Future Fund were courageous Howard government
initiatives. But if anything, our taste for welfare      By forgetting the hidden recesses of government
and wealth redistribution only matured under             and its leviathan size, we tacitly admit that
Howard and Costello: family tax benefit Part A            government should be everything to us. In the
and B, baby bonuses, a continued reliance on             quietness of our hearts we all know government
negative gearing to produce personal wealth,             can solve only the most practical community
almost itself an admission of the absurdity of not       problems: it can protect us against foreign
giving people their own money to invest in the first      aggressors and criminals, educate our children,
place. In short, government remained a colossus,         build a road and provide adequate healthcare. But
answerable in terms of taxation only to itself.          as PJ O’Rourke quipped, it cannot make us richer,
                                                         smarter or more beautiful in the same way that it
The problem, as Hayek and Friedman remind us,            cannot train our children to be respectful, clothe
is that we rarely think of government as an entire       them, buy us a house and flatscreen TV, absolve
institution in need of reform. For example, we           us of the responsibility to save for our retirement
focus on ‘welfare cheats’ or ‘single mothers’ (and       or help buy and run our car. But that is exactly
after the last budget so does the Labor Party)           what we do ask of government (first home buyers
as if, in the context of the efficiency of liberty        grants, family tax benefits, payments for textbooks
and of government it truly matters overall. In           and uniforms through tax concessions, car
fact, it matters no more to the tax burden that          subsidies either directly or through trade policy).
single mothers are on welfare than it does that          This is not the place of government because it will
manufacturing workers are. Only we choose to             always administer peoples’ lives badly (‘the free
care about the cost of one ahead of the other.           lunch problem’)
And that is to say nothing of the waste caused by
corporate and industry welfare through tariffs and

                                       Ad-Lib - Winter 2011                                                 9
Given that we know government can only do some          In the end, what Hayek inspired in Thatcher, and
things well, we should not ask it to do things at       inspires in others today, is the realisation that the
which it will fail.                                     waste of government becomes the waste of the
                                                        talent of generations, generations not swaddled
So what should government do that it can also do        but taxed (from cradle) to grave.
well? And in what order? Government should do
only six things. First, provide adequate and free       At a drabber, much more English level - what
secondary education by, above all and everything        truly appealed to Thatcher’s conservatives was
else, providing well paid excellent teachers who        Hayak’s reflexive seething at the inefficiency of
themselves did well at school (look at the cut-off      government; the staggering hopelessness of
scores for teaching and you will know what I mean       government coal mines and municipal control
– the scores are inversely proportional to salary).     boards, the government egg board; his revolt
Second, provide first world healthcare. Third,           against the mentality of post-war rationing and
provide good quality infrastructure. Fourth, provide    controls that Thatcher's free market night-riders
a Defence Force. Fifth, arrange for police and          later tore down.
Courts. Sixth, provide a frugal and basic safety net.
                                                        But of course, Hayek was a philosopher, not a
A government that concentrates its resources            politician. While he had no need to compromise
on these six things is at once fairer – because         his principles he also had no need to hide them:
it takes less in tax. And by concentrating on           he was bashfully honest about political dogma:
education and health, at the expense of doing           "probably nothing has done so much harm to the
‘everything’ elsewhere, it provides actual equality     liberal cause as the wooden insistence of some
of opportunity                                          liberals on certain rules of thumb, above all of the
                                                        principle of laissez-faire capitalism.” This caveat
We must campaign for smaller, fitter government          was important and controversial: Hayek supported
not only because it is right but because we             public health, education and the regulation of the
know it is right. Nothing is more liberating than       equities market.
being a member of a party that campaigns for
what it actually believes. That is what Thatcher        Hayek's caveat on laissez-faire capitalism was
meant when she threw down The Constitution              considered by his critics so startling as to bring his
of Liberty and declared “this is what we believe”.      philosophy into disrepute – but we must keep in
And what we believe is that we need to change           mind the context of Hayek's experience.
our expectations of government. Of course this
means being prepared to confront the bi-partisan        In proposing his ‘laissez-faire’ caveat in the
orthodoxy that government will do everything.           Constitution of Liberty, Hayek knew that the
                                                        Great Depression coincided with a twig-snapping
But Hayek reminds us that comfortable orthodoxy         reduction in US money supply – this was a topic
always stands in the way of evidence based policy       that consumed a great deal of his attention.
development. It is perhaps for this reason that we      Herbert Hoover’s administration believed
continue to ask – against the face of all evidence      government needed to be as frugal as households
and at great cost – that government be our              in a recession and put all government money to
omnipresent, ever-ready benefactor.                     reducing debt. It was the economic orthodoxy of
                                                        the time.

****                                                    Hayek thought that the decision to reduce
                                                        money supply so quickly was driven not by
Since this is an article about Hayek as much as it is   an appreciation of the economic subtleties of
an article about the need for smaller government        government debt reduction or even the discipline
in Australia, I want to address Hayek’s legacy, his     of economics itself, but by devotion to a particular
contradictions and the importance of ‘evidence          policy calibration beyond all balance and against
based policy’ to Classical Liberalism.                  the face of evidence. He set out to take on that
                                                        orthodoxy in economics and elsewhere.

10                                           Ad-Lib - Winter 2011
                       Annual Tonkin Dinner 2011
                                                                                 Heidi Black

The Young Liberal Movement (SA Division) held the 3. Know your audience: your base, your swing
11th annual Tonkin Dinner on 14th April 2011 at         and those you will never persuade.
the Hackney Hotel.
                                                     4. To win those swingers, you need discipline – a
We had the opportunity to have as our guest             focused message, a clear strategy, a timeframe
speaker Lynton Crosby, AO. Mr Crosby is a former        and, above all, a determination not to be
Federal Director of the Liberal Party, Co-Founder of    distracted. Understand what truly motivates
Crosby/Textor and most importantly a Life Member        people.
of the Young Liberal Movement. This was an
incredible opportunity to hear Lynton speak about    5. Never stop campaigning. A campaigning
his past 30 years within Australian and European        approach emits energy, purpose, discipline,
politics.                                               focus and simplicity to any organisation.

We heard about Lynton’s extensive experience with    Amazing and invaluable advice for all those
successful Federal Campaigns and role as Federal     involved in Campaigns for the Liberal Party going
Director of the Liberal Party between 1997 and       forward.
2002, and as 2008 Campaign Manager for Boris
Johnson (Mayor of London). We were also told         We had over 100 people attend and it was a great
of some entertaining and sometimes confronting       night had by all. There was such a vast mix of
stories relating to other campaigns he has worked    people attending including: current and former
on Fiji, the European Union, Asia, Iraq and          politicians both Federal and State, current Young
Zimbabwe. It was a wonderful insight to Lynton’s     Liberals and a large contingent of Norwood Young
impressive career.                                   Liberals from the 70s. Some of these Norwood YLs
                                                     from the 70s were actively involved in Movement
Lynton provided us Young Liberals, as potential      with Lynton.
future candidates, with 5 wonderful points of
advice:                                              Congratulations to all on the executive for the
                                                     wonderful work they put in, especially to President
1. Stay simple, clear and relevant.                  Sam Duluk and Michael Healy.

2. Be true to yourself and play to your strengths.

                                      Ad-Lib - Winter 2011                                           11
     annual tonkin dinner

12           Ad-Lib - Winter 2011
State convention

 Greg Sheridan                      Sen Michaelia Cash

  Kristy Wildy                 Sen the Hon Nick Minchin

                 Ad-Lib - Winter 2011                     13
                                                          Exposing GetUp!
                                                      Senator the Hon. Eric Abetz

In emails to members, in statements on its             and Chair, Amanda Tattersall, has outlined how
website and in public, GetUp! states that it is        GetUp! was conceived in league with a Unions
“independent”. But it isn’t – far from it – and, so    NSW campaign, to interconnect individuals
long as it participates in election campaigns, it      committed to specific campaigns to a broader, anti-
should be prevented from claiming to be.               business, anti-Coalition purpose. Evan Thornley
                                                       diagrammatically illustrated GetUp!’s role as a
GetUp! is a union initiated front for the benefit of    “mass movement” designed to assist Labor win
Labor and the Greens. How do we know this?             elections by rebuilding its community links. Anne
                                                       Coombs has said how “GetUp! invested such
We know that unions have given GetUp! at least         extraordinary effort and passion into defeating the
$1.2m, maybe more. Kathy Mark in The Monthly           Coalition government…”
refers to GetUp! receiving “start-up funds from
trade unions”, while GetUp! board member, Anne         GetUp!’s occasional criticism of Labor – but never
Coombs, has said GetUp! was started with “some         the Greens – is part of its modus operandi and
union money”.                                          a means of attracting non-Labor people. Lately
                                                       GetUp! has been working at the margins to shore
We know too that GetUp! was founded and                up the Labor-Green alliance by backing the pet
“conceptualised” by Unions NSW official, Amanda         agendas of the independents, Rob Oakeshott and
Tattersall, together with Jeremy Heimans               Andrew Wilkie. At the NSW state election GetUp!
and David Madden whose company, Purpose                assisted the Greens by producing an ad telling
Campaigns, boasts that it works with “the              people not to waste their vote by failing to allocate
Australian and US labor movements”.                    preferences – thereby letting “extreme crazy cats”
                                                       gain the balance of power.
We also know that former GetUp! board member
Evan Thornley has stated that “by working closely      Presently GetUp! is campaigning to secure a
with the ACTU, the founders of GetUp! are              funding boost for mental health in the federal
ensuring similar capacity is built within the union    budget. The Coalition has just released an
movement itself.”                                      excellent mental health package. I challenge
                                                       GetUp! to acknowledge that the Coalition’s mental
GetUp! has so far escaped being deemed an              health policies are superior and that anyone
Associated Entity of Labor and the Greens by the       concerned about mental health should vote for the
Australian Electoral Commission, partly because its    Coalition at the next election.
issues-focussed operating model has been taken at
face value as not favouring particular parties.        In the final analysis, at elections, GetUp! never
                                                       advocates voting for the Coalition.
But GetUp! takes up issues in part to identify
concerned individuals and groom them to vote for       We have now twice seen GetUp!’s sneaky approach
Labor and the Greens. Its claims of independence       to federal electioneering.
mislead people who may join particular campaigns,
without realising the ulterior political goal.         In 2007 the AEC warned GetUp! that, unmodified,
                                                       its personalised how-to-vote card generator -
GetUp! board members have testified to GetUp!’s         www.HowShouldIVote.com.au - could breach
political agenda, to which its issues-based            the Electoral Act by misleadingly always placing
campaigns are subordinate. GetUp! founder              Coalition candidates last.

14                                            Ad-Lib - Winter 2011
In 2010 GetUp! campaigned on the issues of             In 2010 GetUp! ran 700 television ads and fielded
climate change, refugees and mental health. The        3,000 booth-workers. The scale of its operations
Coalition had an excellent mental health policy.       and focus on marginal seats has the potential to
In the last few days of the campaign, GetUp!           affect election outcomes.
distributed 1.1m “scoresheets”, purporting to rank
the parties on its issues of concern. But on this      The Electoral Act should be amended to prevent
scoresheet, GetUp!’s three campaign criteria had       Third Parties which incur electoral expenditure
miraculously expanded to fourteen. The Greens          from claiming to be independent, non-partisan,
got “the tick” on every issue, Labor more ticks than   impartial or not to back any particular party, or
crosses and the Coalition more crosses than ticks.     such like. This would not affect bona fides Third
                                                       Parties and would go some way towards limiting
The message was clear – vote for the Greens, or        the new phenomenon of ulterior campaigning
failing that, Labor.                                   by groups like GetUp! Indeed Third Parties are
                                                       generally understood to be representing sectional
Emailed to GetUp! members as an “independent           interest and don’t claim to be independent.
guide… from an independent, non-partisan
source,” this scoresheet was inserted in major         The only organisation involved in federal election
newspapers covering key marginals and handed           campaigns able to claim independence should be
out by GetUp! booth-workers who were heard             the AEC.
telling voters it provided an “independent”
assessment of the parties.                             (Synopsis of a submission to the Joint Standing
                                                       Committee on Electoral Matters’ inquiry into the
Such activity renders Labor and the Greens             2010 election, dealing with the activities of the left-
massive assistance by effectively advocating on        wing activist group GetUp! The full submission is
their behalf. At both 2007 and 2010 elections          at: http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/em/
GetUp! fielded 7,000 volunteer campaigners.             elect10/subs/Sub098.pdf )

      Grassroots group? More like astroturfers for the greens and alp!

             ED: For a good laugh have a look at The Chaser’s take on GetUp!
             http://www.youtube.com/ and use the KeyWords: GetUp Chaser

                                      Ad-Lib - Winter 2011                                                15
                                       Hard Working Students
                                        The Ones To Lose Out
                                                                                 Penny Nugent

Within the new budget, the Labor Government is           encouraged to go into large amounts of debt with
planning to cut the discount for students repaying       the perspective that it doesn’t matter until after
their HECS debt upfront by half. As it currently         graduation.
stands, the discount offers 20% off HECS fees to
students when paid prior to the University census        This attitude will inevitably result in less early
date. The changes will bring this down to just           payments and will succeed in restricting a source
10%. As a result of this, the incentive for students     of income for the government, with the added
to pay upfront is dramatically minimised.                drawback of more students joining the workforce
                                                         for the first time with thousands of dollars of debt.
In 2009, the government paid $2.8 billion in
HECS-HELP and FEE-HELP, and in 2008 it paid $2.4         Group of Eight Executive Director Michael Gallagher
billion for students1. The reduction of the discount     has come out against the discount cut stating “it
will act as a disincentive to students to help pay off   is inconsistent with reducing the budget deficit
the nation’s HECS debt.                                  because it denies a revenue flow to government
                                                         from those who can afford to pay.2” This cut is a
The Government are justifying the cut based              blatant display of the economic ignorance of the
on a view that only students from ‘affluent’              government, where due to the depreciation of the
backgrounds pay upfront, however this is not             dollar 80% paid back now is going to be worth
the case. Senator Mason has spoken out that a            more than 100% paid back in 20 years time, where
number of the students who pay the fees upfront          HECS debts accumulate the government no extra
are “students who study and work part time or            money in interest.
full time, making a tough decision to pay their
HECS debt upfront.”But this notion of ordinary but       Perhaps instead the government should be
hard-working students doesn’t sit as well with the       encouraging more students to be similarly as
concept of an increase of up to $1500 annually to        fiscally responsible of their future in taking
the Students who pay upfront.                            advantage of the discount in place, and rewarding
                                                         the ones who do pay their debt upfront.
The students who work part-time jobs during
semester or work full-time over the holidays to          However, that would not help to generate instant
save to pay the HECS upfront are the ones who            money to subsidise the government’s new spending
will be hurt by the discount cuts. While many            so much as chopping away parts of higher
students opt to spend their money saving for             education systems will.
overseas holidays or at the bar, some make the
tough decision to repay their debt early. Some           Despite Gillard stating “it will be a tight budget,”
chose to make sacrifices now, to be better off in         there have been numerous new spending measures
the future. It is these students, the hard-workers       announced such as the $200 million boost in
who will be disadvantaged in the new system.             funding for education of students with disabilities
They are not only being penalised for exercising         or special needs, and the $425 million program to
fiscal responsibility, but are at the same time being     reward successful teachers with pay rises.

16                                            Ad-Lib - Winter 2011
Not to be forgotten is the announcement of
extending the Family Tax Benefit part A to include
parents of students aged up to 19 years, provided
the child is studying or training. The Australian
public can’t help but be confused when glancing
between the increases in funding to schools while
at the same time cuts to the discount, leading to
the increase of up to $1500 annually for students.
This confused method is best described by Shadow What this means for students: you will no
Treasurer Joe Hockey as “penalising one part of    longer receive a notable discount for paying early.
education to pay for another.”                     So instead, don’t pay your debt now, go to the bar
                                                   with your savings and spend yourself into debt
National Union of students president, Jesse        now; it’s your future-self’s problem.
Marshall has been quoted as saying the Union
would support the measures such as cutting the
discount “as long as they resulted in improved
quality in other areas.” However, the Gillard-
Government Budget has not shown the savings
would be put back into the University system,
leaving a gap where the Students have lost.

             Want to be a part of Ad-Lib?

             contact our friendly
             editorial staff


                                    Ad-Lib - Winter 2011                                           17
                                                SA’s Sex Laws:
                                       Socially Regressive And
                                           In Need Of Reform?
                                                                                       Chris Duluk

State Labor MP Stephanie Key has renewed the              The debate regarding prostitution may not rate
call to reform the legislation governing prostitution     as a “priority” amongst economic or health
in South Australia. She has been backed by the            issues; however, it is disappointing when our MPs,
Sex Industry Network, whose manager Ari Reid              particularly some female MPs, fail to contribute to
described the current legislation as outdated             the debate on this crucial social issue, considering
saying "The laws governing sex work in this state         the overwhelming majority of workers affected by
haven't changed in more than 60 years."                   the sex industry in SA are women.

According to SA Police Commissioner Mal Hyde,             Ms Key’s proposed reforms to decriminalise
the current SA law (which makes the buying and            the sex trade would ensure prostitutes operate
selling of sex illegal) “…is really quite archaic... ”.   without fear of prosecution. However, in an
Highlighting the outdated nature of the current           industry so often characterised by exploitation,
legislation, Mr Hyde pointed to the fact that “it         substance abuse, sexual assault and trafficking,
was illegal to receive money in a brothel, but you        the decriminalisation or legalisation of prostitution
were able to pay with a credit card.” Commissioner        remains a vexed question.
Hyde supported reform but emphasised that “any
new laws must be workable, and must prevent the           In drafting legislative reform for South Australia,
exploitation of women.”                                   our MPs should consider the experiences of our
                                                          neighbouring state, Victoria.
Whilst Ms Key is pushing to decriminalise the
buying and selling of sex, few parliamentarians           In her analysis of the legislation governing
have publicly contributed to this critical social         prostitution in Victoria, Melbourne-based feminist
debate.                                                   Mary Sullivan, an activist at the Coalition Against
                                                          Trafficking in Women, Australia, states that
The silence of the Minister for the Status of             the Victorian Government’s rationale for the
Women, Gail Gago, on this issue has been                  legalisation of prostitution “…to contain the
particularly disappointing, as has been the               rampant growth of the highly visible brothel and
indifferent attitude from women of all major              street prostitution trade…”, has in fact, had the
political parties.                                        opposite effect.

18                                              Ad-Lib - Winter 2011
Rather than curbing the lucrative sex trade,           Given that the overwhelming majority of sex
Sullivan argues that legalisation in Victoria has      workers are women, legal regulation of “the trade”
“gifted” pimps with legal status as “respectable       (like in Victoria) would only further reinforce the
business entrepreneurs”, who subject women and         “status” of women in our society as sexual objects,
girls “to be treated as commodities to be bought       who can be purchased, consumed and disposed of
and sold like any other marketable product... ”.       by men.

Furthermore, Sullivan states that legalisation in      We must ask ourselves the question: is this just?
Victoria has seen the number of women involved
in the sex industry rise to over 4,500 “in the legal   In considering legislative reform of prostitution,
sector alone”, on top of the estimated thousands of    South Australian MPs should adopt the model
unregistered sex workers.                              successfully flagged in Sweden in 1999, which has
                                                       been adopted in neighbouring socially progressive
In What Happens When Prostitution Becomes              countries Norway and Iceland.
Work? Sullivan concludes that in legalising
prostitution, the Victorian Government “made           The rationale underpinning the “Swedish model”
it acceptable for Victorian men to purchase            sees all forms of prostitution as violence against
women for sexual gratification” and that legalised      women. Rather than targeting the supply
prostitution has normalised “…the violence and         (mostly vulnerable women) the “Swedish model”
sexual abuse” sex workers experience.                  targets the demand (mainly men) and sees the
                                                       government fund “exit programs” for sex workers.
Canberra-based women’s rights campaigner and
writer Melinda Tankard-Reist, echoes Sullivan’s        The selling of sex is decriminalised but the buying
views regarding the Victorian “experience” of a        of sex is a criminal offence.
legalised sex trade.
                                                       The “Swedish model” is consistent with Ms Key’s
Tankard-Reist argues that despite the Victorian        call to protect sex workers from prosecution.
Government’s claims that legalised prostitution        However, unlike what occurs in jurisdictions where
would solve the many problems associated with          prostitution is legalised, the “Swedish model”
the sex trade “such as drugs, crime and violence       avoids injustices, where the state gives legal
against women…”, in practice, the opposite has         sanction to and collects tax revenue from, the
occurred, with Ms Tankard-Reist stating:               trade and sexual objectification of humans. This is
                                                       also consistent with Commissioner Hyde’s plea that
“What did materialise…was millions of dollars of       reforms must stop exploitation.
profits for the (Victorian) state and the Australian
sex industry…the normalisation of prostitution…and Prostitution is a reality and as the oldest profession
social legitimacy of business activities that derive   (or oppression?) in the world, it won’t disappear
their profit from individual women being used for       anytime soon.
the sexual gratification of men... ”.
                                                       However, the “Swedish model” would address two
The issues which South Australian MPs must             crucial aspects which current SA legislation fails to
consider in legislative reform of prostitution are not do.
only those of workplace safety and rights, but also
of morality and justice.                               It would regulate the industry and protect
                                                       sex workers from prosecution, but far more
For the state to legalise or decriminalise             importantly, it would send a clear message to men
prostitution outright would be to give legal           that no dollar amount can ever be placed on the
sanction to the commoditisation and trade of           value of a woman.
human beings.

                                      Ad-Lib - Winter 2011                                              19
                                                                Post Feminism
                                                                               Stephan Knoll

Since the dawn of man (and woman) there has             The feminist movement followed this and sought
been an evolutionary process to how men and             to bring about true equality. This movement has
women interact and fulfil their gender roles. From       achieved much in a relatively short space of time:
hunter gathers, to the specialisation of labour,        Strong harassment laws, equal pay, more family
to World Wars that brought women into the               friendly work conditions, a greater emphasis on
workforce, to the feminist movement and now             female education and much more.
to the modern day there has always been (albeit
sometimes glacial) progress.                            With the great many advances achieved over
                                                        the past 40 years we now need to revaluate
The origins of inequality lie in our evolutionary       where society is at. At the centre of the feminist
past. Women were traditionally the gatherers and        movement was the idea that women need to beat
men were the hunters. This came from physical           men at their own game. A greater focus on careers
differences between the genders and best utilized       over family has led to a welcome confusing of
the different skill sets. The physical superiority of   gender roles over the past 20 years this has lead
men was used as a basis for the suppression of          to the creation of the modern woman as well as
women.                                                  the modern man. A man that tried to become the
                                                        house husband, the metro sexual and all manner
As we have evolved as a race, we have become            of other guises to try and understand his new
infinitely more specialised in our use of human          place.
labour and as such our gender roles have also
progressed. Moving from nomadic to settled              Women are equal but different from men. Many
cultures lead men to go out and forage, hunt and        immediate differences are physical in nature,
farm; leaving women to attend to chores in the          however many go deeper than that. The difference
home.                                                   in our hormone make up leads us to act differently
                                                        and from this gender generalisations evolve.
Further specialisation during the industrial            These differences are real and often consistent.
revolution changed things again with more and           This is not to say that all men and women fit into
more tasks being completed by machine instead           stereotypes and in fact there are a great many
of man (or woman). This advancement then                who defy this but they nevertheless exist. These
crashed into two world wars that took away many         differences should not form the basis for inequity
able-bodied men and brought women into the              or for restricting opportunity; they should be
workplace in a way that was not seen previously.        acknowledged and celebrated as bringing diversity
Not content to simply go back to the household          and richness to life.
after the war, women began to increasingly see
their worth as more than just a basic education,        Our modern economy is making these differences
getting married and living a contented home             more difficult to dissect. The economy is now
life, Women sought fulfilment in the joys and            made of service-based jobs and highly skilled and
satisfaction of paid work and the financial freedom      less laborious manufacturing jobs that can be done
that came with it.                                      equally by men or women. Modern technology has

20                                             Ad-Lib - Winter 2011
decreased the amount of time needed to maintain this to ensure that we create true freedom and
a household and that again has blurred the lines of not merely change the imaginary goalposts that
distinction.                                        feminism has set for all women.

In today’s society even though women still lag       We should as a society promote the role of
well behind men in terms of participation in the     parents. A strong family unit is one of the
workforce, women are seen in the vast majority       fundamental underpinnings of our economy
of cases as equal and as deserving of paid           and society and this should not be in anyway
employment as men.                                   diminished by the feminist movement.

This new female identity was meant to free women     The end game of the feminist movement is for
from the shackles of the housewife but has now,      women to have true choice without stigma within
in many cases, created an even more burdened         society. I see the difficult choices that the women
and stressed woman. The idea that women              in my life have made about the priorities that they
have to have it all, raise three kids and become     have. In modern society it is not the glass ceiling
the chairwoman of BHP at the same time is as         or promotions that are roadblocks but rather it is
restrictive now as being trapped in the house was    stigma attached to the role of women who choose
50 years ago.                                        to stay at home and care for their children. This
                                                     is seen by feminists as a betrayal of all that those
The feminist movement has failed because it tried    pioneering women who have come before have
to engineer the wrong outcome. Women should          fought for. We as a society should move past this
not try and beat men at their own game. The idea     and respect the roles that both women and men
that women need to become men ignores the            choose for themselves. The choice to stay at home
unique differences that each can bring to society.   and raise children should just as valid as women
Certainly the feminist and suffragette movements     choosing to focus on a successful career.
have helped to promote the cause of women.
Discrimination was real and a genuine inhibitor to   Women and men will only truly be at peace with
women being able to participate fully in society.    their roles within society when their choice is truly
But in the 21st century we need to look beyond       free and without stigma.

            The State Executive of the Young Liberal Movement of Australia (SA Division)
                              requests the pleasure of your company at the annual

                       Young Liberal Cocktail Ball
                                    Saturday, 9th July at 7:30pm
                      The Gallery, National Wine Centre, North Terrace, Adelaide

    Dress: Black Tie                                                    RSVP details attached

                                     Ad-Lib - Winter 2011                                              21
                                                              Populism Is Not
                                                                                            Josh Bell

Leadership has become a buzzword; an objective           accordance with these virtues. However, there
to which many aspire, and a virtue without               are two without which they simply cannot exist:
which human society would descend into chaos.            conviction and the courage to stand by those
Its intricacies continue to engage the pens of           convictions, come what may.
countless authors, and yet it is a quality which,
when possessed, is instantly recognisable.               Without conviction, a leader is akin to a
                                                         rudderless ship, travelling wherever the wind
We live in an age where leadership has become a          blows. Such vessels, and their passengers, are
commodity, but where true leaders are rare. Each         bound for disaster. We have a word for this type
year, conferences lure hundreds, if not thousands,       of rudderless political leadership – populism.
through their doors with the promise of revealing        Populist politics is nothing more than the betrayal
the art of leadership. Effective communication,          of principle for the sake of procuring votes. It is
confidence building and the art of engaging an            short-sighted and misguided. History demonstrates
audience with charisma; these take-away offerings        that leaders who act contrary to their convictions
are all for sale to the paying pundit, yet while         forgo all credibility, and are consequently not worth
certainly valuable assets in the arsenal of any          following.
successful leader, something is missing from the
messages espoused by these conferences and               Consider the former Prime Minster, Kevin Rudd.
bestsellers; something absolutely indispensable – a      Having claimed that climate change is the ‘greatest
focus on character.                                      moral challenge of our time’ and having repeatedly
                                                         stated that Australia must take action immediately,
Remarkable leadership- the kind worth believing in       his dumping of the CPRS for political expediency
and following- comes from strength of character,         cost him his credibility, and played a significant role
rather than the ability to make a memorable              in his demise.
speech. Think of the celebrated leaders in history.
They have one distinguishing feature in common:          On the other hand, Sir Winston Churchill was
character and the integrity to be true to it. True,      a remarkable leader precisely because he
they were master orators and could capture the           courageously stood by his convictions, no matter
attention and imagination of their audience, but         the cost. Early in his political career, he cut ties
words, no matter how well communicated, will             with his beloved Conservative Party because they
rapidly fade into oblivion if spoken by an empty         were pursuing a Protectionist policy when he
vessel. Remarkable leaders can capture, and hold,        ardently believed in the Free Trade cause. During
the faith of their followers precisely because they      World War II, his conviction that Britain never
offer a vision in which to believe, with the resolute    surrender to a tyrant meant that he was able
character – and therefore credibility - to back it up.   to inspire his countrymen to ward off the Nazi
What, then, is character? According to the
dictionary, character is ‘the aggregate of features      The point is simple: true leadership is about
and traits that form the individual nature of            making decisions based upon conviction and
some person or thing’. Intuitively we know that          principle, and having the courage to stand by
a good character is comprised of noble qualities         those convictions. It is this type of leadership that
and virtues, such as courage, honour, integrity,         will echo throughout the ages.
compassion, and self-discipline. Like everyone
else, remarkable leaders do not always live in

22                                            Ad-Lib - Winter 2011
                                                                                 Travis Munckton

“Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he
sacrifices it to your opinion.” said Edmund Burke to group of electors in Bristol in 1774. Burke’s words spoken over
200 years ago should be read to every parliamentarian as they take their seat.

The Member for Dennison, Andrew Wilkie, recently asked the government in particular to find their moral
compass. While no disciple of Mr Wilkie’s, he makes a valid point. What drives the members of the Labor minority
government? It’s hard to tell, but Senator Faulkner (a well regarded old hand of the left) gave us an insight when
he delivered the Neville Wran lecture last week, “[there is something] deeply wrong when we use polling to
determine our party's policies and even our values”.

I think the good Senator would agree that the point of view he proffered in his Wran lecture has been borne out
(ironically) in current polling. Indeed, Faulkner was also quoted as saying that the public value authenticity over
“the message” and the “appearance of harmony”.

Policies and causes that the Federal Labor leadership advocated prior to the Rudd era have been conveniently
ignored for political opportunism. Once upon a time we heard that mandatory detention is unworthy of Australia
and were given lines like, “another boat, another policy failure” from PM Gillard when she was opposition
spokesman for immigration. Now we have Admiral Gillard obfuscating on the issue by taking to the seas, with
marginal seat-holder David Bradbury no less, to inspect border protection immediately prior to the last election. I
had no idea that Bradbury’s seat of Lindsay had moved from Western Sydney to the Arafura Sea!

There are many other examples of where Labor has abandoned its principles, but that would take several pages.
More interesting is what they’re using to govern in the stead of their principles and values.

At the moment, the left field of politics has outsourced their political beliefs and convictions. They’ve taken their bat
and ball and gone home. Someone else has taken the field – professional astroturfing outfit, GetUp!

The ALP is very lucky indeed to have had the ACTU establish GetUp! to make up for their deficiency in conviction.
That such a pathetic impression already exists is even further reinforced when Labor backbenchers are giving press
conferences in the parliament’s courtyards with GetUp! banners behind them.

All too often Labor MPs that want to speak out on issues are quickly silenced. It seems that Labor NSW Senator
Dougie Cameron is justified in fearing that caucus could become a place for “lobotomised zombies”.

I look forward to Simon Sheik and the ACTU’s GetUp! delivering Labor their next narrative – heaven knows they’ll
need it.

It would be impossible not to acknowledge the support that Mr Chris Browne has given to this magazine. Chris’
expertise in the area of desktop publishing has been invaluable. I’d like to personally thank him for all the time he
has put in to assist with the design of this publication.

The editorial in the first edition of Ad-Lib this year predicted that Sam would lead the Movement to one of its
most dynamic and successful years yet. With the level of support shown by Young Liberal Council for the reforms
proposed by SAYLM executive (and later passed overwhelmingly by YL Council), we can see that the proof of the
pudding is in the eating. Reform is often a very testing task, but successes in those endeavours are the just rewards
– this case was no different. The SAYLM Executive has greatly benefited from Sam’s leadership as President and his
stewardship of the Movement as a whole is something he handled with great aplomb.

                                            Ad-Lib - Winter 2011                                                      23
Senator the Honourable Alan Ferguson            Senator the Honourable Nick Minchin
 fmr. President of the Australian Senate       fmr. Leader of the government in the Senate
 [Senator for South Australia 1992-2011]        & Minister for Finance and administration
                                                  [Senator for South Australia 1993-2011]

                               Thank you!
                               Authorised by
                               Mr Sam Duluk
     President of the Young Liberal Movement of Australia (SA Division)
                        Level 1, 23-25 Leigh Street, Adelaide SA 5000

To top