The only issue is the indelible green-left biases of the ABC

Let me come back to this Zaki business one last time because it does worry me that either the government doesn’t get the point, or doesn’t want to. I don’t care that they gave Zaki air time. In fact, the more they let him talk, the more he demonstrates what a danger he and others like him are. That was not the problem. The problem was that he was brought onto Q&A by the ABC specifically to ambush a government minister. It was the ABC’s intent that is so vile, not the particular means they chose on this occasion. What the program demonstrated, far better than anything else in recent times, is that the ABC is out to harm the government because the ABC, contrary to its charter, is pursuing a green-left agenda of its own. The entire organisation is now a billion dollar version of the Green-Left Review. That is the problem. That is what you must deal with.

My worry is that no one seems to get it. All the quotes that follow are from The Australia today. Each is one more example of missing the point. Here first is Julie Bishop:

The ABC’s action in allowing a former terror suspect to air his views runs counter to the government’s work in attempting to protect Australians from terrorism, Foreign Minister Julie Bishop says.

This is from Christopher Pyne discussing Mark Scott:

“He’s trying to pretend the government is trying to close free speech at the ABC. This is typical of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation; rather than ’fessing up to their mistake, which was to bring a convicted terrorist on to the audience of Q&A and give them a platform … (and) put at risk the people in the audience,” Mr Pyne told the Nine Network.

Then Peter Reith:

Peter Reith, a former Liberal cabinet minister, accused Mr Scott of reducing the ABC’s blunder to a question of audience security and not the “shocking and offensive” decision to give Mallah a platform.

“The ABC head was basically saying the real problem is that ‘we didn’t manage the security side of it’ as if, you know, if they’d got that right then having this guy on would be OK,” Mr Reith told Sky News.

Even Malcolm got into the act:

“This guy on social media not so long ago nominated two female journalists and said that they should be publicly raped,” Mr Turnbull said. “What if he had said that again in the Q&A live audience? Why would you ever put a person (like that) in a live audience? It’s incredible.”

The issue is neither terrorism nor free speech. The issue is the ABC. Nothing else. The issue is whether the government is going to take on the the fanatical leftist bias of the ABC, or is instead going to leave it alone until it conspires with the Greens and ALP to see it defeated at the polls. I would have thought that an instinct for self-preservation would have driven the government towards some such conclusion already.

I am in no doubt how difficult this task is. But I am also in no doubt that unless you identify the problem for what it is and then deal with the problem itself, you and we will never be rid of this deformed monstrosity of the far left. This is what you must do if you are to survive. You must set down a strategy for dealing with the indelible green-left political biases of the ABC and then do what you can to counter this malignant publicly-funded cancer in our social midst.

Sharing my anger and filling in the blanks

It’s all very well to have a turn the other cheek attitude when you are wronged personally but in politics this is an approach that has its limits.

I have just watched Tony Abbott on The Bolt Report and am afraid that I am dissatisfied with his response. Everything can be explained, and everything can be forgiven, but that is not what the other side is doing nor can ever be expected to do.

We over here want this government to succeed. But if the government does not share my anger with the things that make me angry or refuses to fill in the blanks about the details of policy so that we can see what is actually taking place, then they may feel very good about themselves internally but none of us out here will either feel very warm about what’s being done or have much in the way of arguments to defend what is going on.

Take Gonski, which is a policy I do not support so do not actually care one way or another about its fulfilment. But a promise was made during the election, Christopher Pyne has implied that the government was going to walk away from the full commitment, but the PM said today that what was promised will be delivered while also suggesting that what was promised may be different from what we think was promised. Very subtle, no doubt, but will not work as a political answer. The detail of why the Gonski commitment will be fulfilled as promised, and not in some casuistical way, has to be explained.

Even more so do I feel the anger with the ABC. It is not part of the free press. It has the stamp of government all over it and is 100% paid for by the government, that is, by us. What is said on Sky or in The Age people like myself might disagree with but no one argues they have no right to say what they say. With the ABC, it’s different. The ABC is supposed to be a reflection of Australia, and even if we know better here, they don’t know better in Indonesia.

This failure to take sides in political issues, to articulate and reflect the views of those who support this government, and therefore support good government, will end up with that support eroding. Perhaps we are looking at a new approach to politics that is more subtle than any we have seen before and that in the fullness of time will learn to appreciate its success. But in the meantime, people such as myself remain nervous and I must say a bit let down by the entire experience so far.

UPDATE: The transcript of the interview with Tony Abbott. It reads a lot better in print than it sounded when broadcast live.