Sign In
0 Items (
Search
Comments (41)
Dear Mr Abbott,
Prior to the election I was a fervent Malcolm Turnbull supporter. I cheered as he took the prime ministership, watched starry eyed as he waxed lyrical about technological disruption, and I volunteered for the first time to distribute Liberal Party paraphernalia on Election Day. However, I have come to realise he is not be the leader for our times. I am writing as a member of the silent majority and to call for your urgent return to the office of prime minister. The country needs you more than ever before, so we can preserve the things we constantly take for granted.
With the rise of One Nation, I think our country’s social fabric is fraying at the edges. I myself, being of Indian origin, find it uncomfortable to travel through the suburbs of Western Sydney, feeling as though I am a foreigner in my own country. These places are dotted with men who, from their appearance and attitudes, are clearly making no effort to integrate into either the Australian economy or society. This is the same sentiment driving people to support Donald Trump in the US and prompting ever-escalating tensions in Europe. However, the full outcome of One Nation is a country whose current social order is thrown into chaos as people of all ethnicities — people like me, who have successfully blended into Australia — lose their sense of security and certainty inherent in their expectations from life.
It is Mr Turnbull’s arrogance and aloofness that has delivered us to this place. In repeating the mantra of multiculturalism, innovation and an agile economy, he was talking only to those few of us who live in the inner city and work in a narrow range of professional services jobs. Meanwhile, he was alienating the majority of Australians in outer suburban and regional areas, people who are feeling ever more insecure in a rapidly changing world. We wouldn’t be in this current situation were it not for an ill-conceived and poorly fought double dissolution.
What we need now is leadership which brings constancy and certainty against the backdrop of constant cultural and social instability. True conservatism. Not economic liberalism, but a true Burkean conservatism, protecting the status quo, where all productive social classes can be being reassured that they can achieve to their stations in life.
In practical terms, in my opinion, this may mean curbing the growth in migration for some time, retaining some industry protection and sustaining the current level of welfare.
All of this I feel only you can provide. The fundamental disenchantment people had with your previous leadership was that your first budget grew from an economic reform agenda — deregulating university fees, Medicare and other changes — that was not taken to an election and came as a surprise. These were radical proposals being made before the community was ready to absorb them. The role of the conservative, now more than ever, is to protect the status quo and only concede change, economic or otherwise, when there is an overwhelming readiness in the community for it.
To say Pauline Hanson is not a welcome, as you did after being elected, only emboldens her support base, which will hear your words as proof that you really are an aloof silvertail uncomfortable with “little people”.
To combat Hanson we need real conservative leadership to take the ground from beneath her, much as John Howard did. Splintering from the Liberal Party, as some of your colleagues are muttering, would only reflect the uncertainty we are all feeling in the community, not addressing it through stable leadership.
The Liberal Party needs what we all need in this uncertain age, and what we need now like never before is is a strong dose of conservatism.
Please, Mr Abbott, when parliamentary colleagues come to you and suggest a challenge to Turnbull, listen to them and agree. It is nothing less than your duty.
J. C. Gopal is a Sydney economist
Dear Mr. Gopal,
I wanted to shirt-front Malcolm Turnbull because he didn’t break his promises on health and education like I did before the 2013 election. And he didn’t ask pensioners to help repair the budget deficit by paying to go to the doctor, either, without any warning. And, what is even more appalling, Turnbull didn’t nominate the Queen for a Knighthood. So, I’ve done my duty. Everybody thought it was so 1950s and, well, you’d have to agree.
Yours faithfully,
Tony Abbott
You’re stuck in denial Jody. Nominating the Queen for a knighthood? Where did that come from? You’re obsessed with your super, but keep ignoring old Turncoat and his attack on super. Also his poor showing, demonstrating yet again his poor judgment and lack of macro political skills. Turncoat is no saviour. Nor is he really popular, except amongst the media.
Dear Mr Gopal,
I wanted to tweak Mr Abbot’s shirt tail, but withdrew my hand, fearing a bloody nose from this Oxford boxing blue. I don’t know, the fellow has always intimidated me, despite my claims to have stood outside my Form I dormitory shouting ‘I can beat anyone at anything’. Actually I did say this but promptly ran away to the lavatory (as we used to call the dunny, in those days: I think it’s an English expression).
But, anyway, it’s been the bane of my life, thinking I’m the cleverest in the room. Actually, both Tony and I are Rhodes Scholars, though Tones tends to hide this with his big boofy bloke demeanour, which makes him such an intimidating presence.
Now, I need to apologise for not employing Tone’s attack-dog campaigning tactics in my own campaign and for preventing anyone of note appearing on Sky TV, simply because that awful Peta Credlin was there. I did my best to get her fired, but they just laughed at me (as did she).
I must apologise for not attacking Shorty’s Medicare Scare Campaign, and for rabbiting on about the economy, when I ought to have addressed grass roots concerns about not having a job at all.
I must apologise for not explaining my progressive tax reduction scheme for small business, followed by medium size businesses and finally the multinationals. I ought to have attacked Shorty’s ‘big end of town’ message again and again and again, by speaking clearly and with just a little less arrogance.
I find my cry “I can beat anyone at anything” is becoming a bit of a liability now”.
I’m sorry for saying ‘I’m sorry’ but they’ll boot me out if I don’t.
I’m sorry.
Malcolm Wormpill.
Pauline Hanson is very welcome in my books,I’m sick and tired of “professional” politicians.
Agreed. That good lady has now got some 20 years of experience being kicked around by ‘Professional’ Politicians and the ‘Media’. Everything I have heard from her so far indicates that she can give as good as she gets. Voted ALA but Pauline Hanson will do instead.
“The proposition is peace. Not peace through the medium of war, not peace to be hunted through the labyrinth of intricate and endless negotiations, not peace to arise out of universal discord… it is simple peace, sought in its natural course and in its ordinary haunts. It is peace sought in the spirit of peace, and laid in principles purely pacific.” Edmund Burke
Seems like a strategy for Islam. He was a bit soft on sodomy and pro free trade as well.
One Nations got 1.3% of the vote in the house. Can’t say I give a rat’s arse. The rise of far right racists gangs predated Turnbull by a century at least. It is marginally resurgent in the last decade and inflamed by such as Pauline Hanson. It cannot be assuaged by by moving the Liberal Party onto their ground. Nor is that the honourable path. It is better to deny her standing in the public discourse on the basis of such a minuscule vote.
Economic liberalism is the source of economic growth and the key to reducing debt and taxes. Growth is the means of implementing at the same time progressive policies on health, welfare, education and the environment. Moving to the middle ground gives far more elbow room and seems the more natural space for the Liberal Party.
I’m not convinced Pauline Hanson represents the ‘far right’ or ‘extreme right’. Used as a pejorative, these terms are to bring to mind ‘right wing nut job’, ‘redneck’, ‘racist’, and if they’re lucky – Nazi.
Since the entire political, academic and media elite have lurched further to the left, as evidenced by Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton, Jeremy Corbyn, David Cameron, Malcolm Turnbull, plus the rise of openly (proudly?) Socialist contenders in my electorate, anyone who remotely challenges this mass of seething rent-seeking and economy-controllers is seen as rabid right.
The concept of a centre has shifted to the left so much, to be a ‘centrist’ now gets painted as redneck.
Is what Trump says so ‘right wing’? Or could it be he’s just vocalising the opposite of the elite?
And Hanson is doing the same – perhaps not as eloquently, which makes her a target for ridicule. Unlike Sarah Hanson-Young’s idiocy, Hanson’s is a ‘legitimate elitist’ target : thanks you Adam Hills, their ABC’s ‘nice man of comedy’ who promoted hanging her.
Abbott caved to the elites by not pursuing 18C, by failing to prosecute his views of Islam, of failing with Climate Change cons.
We need a true Conservative (right wing!) group – Pauline may not be polished, and she certainly isn’t the Messiah, but she’s not going to launch an army of skin-heads to attack you.
Quite the contrary, the new elite will raise an army of the unwashed to attack her; viz any protest about Baird, Abbott etc.
Hanson is 1.3% on the far right of Australian politics. She got a 1.1% swing – from Liberal malcontents if this site is any indication. it is so not important despite the post hoc rationalisations.
BTW, it’s odd coming from you saying she should be “ignored” due to the “1.3%”. The LGBTI crowd amount to less than 4%, but the basic institutions of society have to be overthrown to appease them, or more accurately, a small minority of them.
So true gray. Pauline is no threat to decent folk but must be a nightmare for the rabid left. I mean they might have to confront the reality of a religion being anything but peaceful although some of its adherents are, of the scam that is global warming using dodgy data manipulation, of the billions being flung at aborigines for no discernible difference. The worst she can do is make a few elitists uncomfortable as their superiority of thought is shown to be a sham.
I believe it is 33 billion, unless I’m mistaken. It is called the ‘aborigine industry’.
I entirely agree. These terms are used to conjure up polarising, hateful feelings in those of ‘progressive’ inclination. ABC, SBS and the Fairfax Press frequently describe Pauline Hanson’s One Nation, Rise Up Australia and Australian Liberty Alliance as being far right, or ‘on the fringe’ of society. It’s a sort of ‘shut up debate’ tactic, designed to make those of Middle Australia, who hold conservative sentiments to retreat without so much as a whimper.
“He (invariably ‘he’) is an racist, an Islamophobe, a homophobe, so shut the flamingo up and go and hide in your unsavoury hole”.
If JC Gopal is from the worlds biggest democracy, believes in democracy, and he plays cricket, then he will fit into Australia well.
Pauline Hanson may be no Indira Gandhi, and that is a good thing for free enterprise, and she may not have the presence of a Margaret Thatcher, more the pity, but she represents good worthy Australians and so she should be entitled to full respect.
John Howard was to his credit tolerant of One Nation despite the bleating of the ‘ala sinistra’ but Tony Abbott besmirched his reputation by pursuing her by legal means so that she was gaoled until the sentence was overturned.
One day we may thank One Nation that Australia did not have to be partitioned so that one part is a large Musalmanns region, an unstable region that challenges the borders of the other prosperous part.
Worse, we could be become like Medieval Islamic Spain which was no Andalusian Paradise despite the contrary blinkered claims [See the current 9-10/07 Weekend Australian Review with Paul Monk reviewing the Dario Fernandez-Morera book with its unsettling disclosures].
The reconciliation between Tony Abbott and Pauline Hanson will be interesting notwithstanding the talent both have for telling the ground truth.
I look forward to see how that plays out. Tony is a good man and Pauline is principled and honest, but obviously not polished and articulate. She doesn’t know when to stop talking but she is voicing grass root concerns unlike most of the political class except ALA.
Gopal,
I guessed you were an ‘economist’ before I reached the end of your article as your Econospeak arguments are (as all economists arguments are) confused and ‘on the other hand’ contradictory.
You see the rise of Hanson as a threat to integrated you, yet you say: “With the rise of One Nation, I think our country’s social fabric is fraying at the edges. I myself, being of Indian origin, find it uncomfortable to travel through the suburbs of Western Sydney, feeling as though I am a foreigner in my own country. These places are dotted with men who, from their appearance and attitudes, are clearly making no effort to integrate into either the Australian economy or society.” Isn’t that the essence of Hanson, that our Left wing open doors politicians have imported a non to never-working, preying 5x a day underclass that you find threatening …? Que? You repeat Hanson’s concerns and condemn her for it. Indians, Chinese and culturally compatible civilised people of all ethnicities who are willing to integrate are welcome, you included.
Can you refer me to the Hanson policy that you fear when you say: “… the full outcome of One Nation is a country whose current social order is thrown into chaos as people of all ethnicities — people like me, who have successfully blended into Australia — lose their sense of security and certainty inherent in their expectations from life.” When did Hanson EVER reject all but the white, christian smurfs? Reference to that policy please? Actually, what you state is making you uncomfortable is the rise of a violent, dominant politico-fascist religious group that hates you for being alive.
You want safety from the psychopaths, but in your over-civilisation you find the actions that that would require distasteful so you condemn those who offer the very option you propose: “… in my opinion, this may mean curbing the growth in migration for some time, retaining some industry protection and sustaining the current level of welfare.” You quote the purest of Hanson with this statement.
I suggest that you read Kipling again about the rough men who protect you, and are condemned for doing so.
As your tutor I am afraid that I must fail you on logical argument, in these PC days when nobody fails I will give you a ‘D’ and a “Needs to try harder in constructing the logic to avoid contradictions in his arguments.”
See you at the next Hanson Party meeting as I am sure you will want to see the policies you propose implemented. Oh, and why do critics of these men who are ‘…clearly making no effort to integrate into either the Australian economy or society’ need police protection, but the islamo-fascists do not?
Good argument en passant.
As an Australian of Indian heritage, JC Gopal must be aware of the threat of Islam, and he should welcome Pauline Hanson’s moves to make us aware of this.
Tony Abbott is a dumb beast of the field. At one stage of his life he thought of joining the Labor Party and only the thought of putting up with the unions stopped him. Thus he came up with whacko socialist notions like getting the funding for his paid parental leave scheme by taxing companies that earned more than $5 million. The extra 58 F-35s he ordered are going to cripple our military. What propelled Abbott to the leadership was a chance remark in a hall in the far west of Victoria that global warming was crap, which is what the Liberal Party base believed then and still believe. But somehow we have still got the NGERA and the carbon tax came back on 1st July. We need someone who wants to get rid of the carbon tax from first principles – because the carbon tax is a very stupid thing to do.
Climate science is crap is hardly definitive – but the nonsense from the other side is equally exasperating.
https://watertechbyrie.com/2016/07/10/misguiding-children-on-the-greenhouse-effect/
The safeguard mechanism of the Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF) is however pointless green tape. It is meant to prevent emissions increasing above business as usual. An impossibility.
The ERF is fantastic for many reasons. Holistically managed grazing can take 200 billion tonnes of carbon per year from the atmosphere – the carbon in 714 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide. More than our entire carbon emissions.
It is being done. For no cost mostly – but quite recently 50 million tonnes at $10.23/tonne of CO2 mitigation in the latest ‘carbon auction’. This provides amongst things money to aboriginals to manage land in the way of their ancestors – as well as to farmers. This is very good for biodiversity, stopping sediment transport to rivers, ocean and the Great Barrier Reef, mitigating flood and drought and increasing agricultural productivity in a hungry world.
The question is how do we know the meat we eat has been holistically managed? The short answer is that we don’t.
https://www.facebook.com/Australian.Iriai/
Feel free to support farmers by clicking on the link and signing the petition.
Malcolm Turnbull also thought of joining the Labor Party but knew that as such he would never win a seat where he wanted to live.
John Howard once talked him out of retiring when he should have and Tony Abbott talked John Howard out of retiring when he should have to give Peter Costello a go.
The Australian newspaper to its shame backed Kevin Rudd against John Howard.
Democracy often does not get the best person, but neither do we get a dictator.
“The young person who is not a socialist has no heart – the old man who is a socialist has no brain.”
Malcolm Turnbull would have had a substantially AL majority in the Reps and a more easily manages Senate if he had simply said for policy that “Australia shall withdraw from all significant climate change related agreements and arrangements in favour of developing an original Australian approach that will be driven by the collective will of Australians.
Or words with similar effect.
So easy to say,vso rewarding an outcome that could have been.
Mssrs. Ellison and Sherrington, increased CO2 in the atmosphere is wholly beneficial, including the tiny increase in temperature involved – 0.1 degrees C per 100 ppm. There is no reason to restrict CO2 emissions at all. Our scientific establishment has been corrupted. Fire the lot of them. Get on to real problems, not this fake one.
It seems about 50/50 – anthropogenic or natural – in the broader population. Science says it is both. It suggests to me the political usefulness of a middle ground policy that is cheap and has multiple social, economic and environmental benefits.
In January 1859, John Tyndall began studying the radiative properties of gases. He constructed the first ratio spectrophotometer. The device uses a reference and an experimental heat source that passes radiant heat through a tube which was then filled with various gases. It was inspired by speculations of some of the leading minds of his time. The results were a bit of a scientific revelation – and the scientific origins of global warming.
The bearing of this experiment upon the action of planetary atmospheres is obvious … the atmosphere admits of the entrance of the solar heat, but checks its exit; and the result is a tendency to accumulate heat at the surface of the planet. John Tyndall.
On the other hand.
Natural, large-scale climate patterns like the PDO and El Niño-La Niña are superimposed on global warming caused by increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases and landscape changes like deforestation. According to Josh Willis, JPL oceanographer and climate scientist, “These natural climate phenomena can sometimes hide global warming caused by human activities. Or they can have the opposite effect of accentuating it.” NASA Earth Observatory
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=8703
Charles Keeling began monitoring carbon dioxide in Hawaii in the 1950’s. Just after both the emission of greenhouse gases commenced increasing dramatically as the post war boom took off – and the planet started cooling. Increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere should – all things being equal – result in warming. It is obvious that ‘internal climate variation’ played a role in recent warming. It is a change in cloud, ice, vegetation, wind, currents and biology that proceeds much faster than the trigger event. Some small change in the system – according to chaos theory – initiate sizeable changes as tremendous energies cascade through powerful sub-systems. Tipping points are a reality seen in climate data.
Recent scientific evidence shows that major and widespread climate changes have occurred with startling speed. For example, roughly half the north Atlantic warming since the last ice age was achieved in only a decade, and it was accompanied by significant climatic changes across most of the globe. Similar events, including local warmings as large as 16°C, occurred repeatedly during the slide into and climb out of the last ice age. Human civilizations arose after those extreme, global ice-age climate jumps. Severe droughts and other regional climate events during the current warm period have shown similar tendencies of abrupt onset and great persistence, often with adverse effects on societies.
The real risk of changing the climate system is that we really don’t know what will happen.
Getting on with real problems.
https://watertechbyrie.com/2016/07/01/vote-liberal-for-climate-action-and-environmental-conservation/
It seems about 50/50 – anthropogenic or natural – in the broader population. Science says it is both. It suggests to me the political usefulness of a middle ground policy that is cheap and has multiple social, economic and environmental benefits.
https://watertechbyrie.com/2016/07/01/vote-liberal-for-climate-action-and-environmental-conservation/
In January 1859, John Tyndall began studying the radiative properties of gases. He constructed the first ratio spectrophotometer. The device uses a reference and an experimental heat source that passes radiant heat through a tube which was then filled with various gases. It was inspired by speculations of some of the leading minds of his time. The results were a bit of a scientific revelation – and the scientific origins of global warming.
The bearing of this experiment upon the action of planetary atmospheres is obvious … the atmosphere admits of the entrance of the solar heat, but checks its exit; and the result is a tendency to accumulate heat at the surface of the planet. John Tyndall.
On the other hand.
Natural, large-scale climate patterns like the PDO and El Niño-La Niña are superimposed on global warming caused by increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases and landscape changes like deforestation. According to Josh Willis, JPL oceanographer and climate scientist, “These natural climate phenomena can sometimes hide global warming caused by human activities. Or they can have the opposite effect of accentuating it.” NASA Earth Observatory
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=8703
Charles Keeling began monitoring carbon dioxide in Hawaii in the 1950’s. Just after both the emission of greenhouse gases commenced increasing dramatically as the post war boom took off – and the planet started cooling. Increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere should – all things being equal – result in warming. It is obvious that ‘internal climate variation’ played a role in recent warming. It is a change in cloud, ice, vegetation, wind, currents and biology that proceeds much faster than the trigger event. Some small change in the system – according to chaos theory – initiate sizeable changes as tremendous energies cascade through powerful sub-systems. Tipping points are a reality seen in climate data.
Recent scientific evidence shows that major and widespread climate changes have occurred with startling speed. For example, roughly half the north Atlantic warming since the last ice age was achieved in only a decade, and it was accompanied by significant climatic changes across most of the globe. Similar events, including local warmings as large as 16°C, occurred repeatedly during the slide into and climb out of the last ice age. Human civilizations arose after those extreme, global ice-age climate jumps. Severe droughts and other regional climate events during the current warm period have shown similar tendencies of abrupt onset and great persistence, often with adverse effects on societies.
The real risk of changing the climate system is that we really don’t know what will happen.
> “The real risk of changing the climate system is that we really don’t know what will happen”
“Climate science”, per se, is really still a descriptive discipline. As you yourself have previously opined, predictions are impossible for a coupled, non-linear, dynamic system.
You, nor anyone else, cannot confidently quantify the effects of increasing a trace gas from 300 to 400ppm in such a system. 50/50 is a *guess*.
Or have you changed your opines ? And please, do not quote other guesses … waste of time.
Which part of we don’t know don’t you understand?
Climate is an ergodic, complex, dynamical system. Ergodic means that it operates within limits over a very long time. Complex means that there are many interacting parts. Dynamical means that the parts change and interact continuously. Dynamical complexity is the third great idea of 20th century physics – along with relativity and quantum mechanics. But that’s enough theory.
https://watertechbyrie.com/2016/02/29/climate-science-and-the-third-great-idea-in-20th-century-physics/
Just because you put something down in black and white doesn’t make it true. Those who have bothered to do the work know what is going to happen, which is severe cooling.
For what it’s worth – The job that Tony Abbott did on Pauline Hanson all those years ago made me believe he was / and still is rather more of a Turnbull-Lite than a Farage or a Boris Johnson. I believe that Abbott who, got rid of carbon tax but still financed the RET scheme, stopped the boats but upped the standard immigration, and refused to act on either the ABC or 18C, would have been abandoned by the “delcons” this election anyway.
Thank you Alistair. While Abbott was a much better PM option than Turnbull, he certainly did the true conservative cause no favours. His support for the persecution of Hanson was reprehensible, and to my mind his abject failure to prosecute or actually attempt to prosecute the removal of 18c was a major fail.
JC Gopal; my forebears emigrated to Australia mid-1800s; 3 perished in WW1 with another badly gassed, an uncle survived 3.5 years on the Burma railway; myself, siblings, nephews also ex-military.
At 79, I remember start of the Pacific War and its effects on life in Australia. Post-war, many of my school friends were children of immigrants from a shattered Europe. In subsequent years, I do not recall any of the disharmony emanating from then ‘new Australians’ that now emerges in this land since the advent of so-called ‘multiculturalism’.
Although coined by Al Grassby, that blight was propagated by Malcolm Fraser and since more vigorously by Amanda Vanstone and Kevin Andrews. The latter incidentally purportedly advantages negative gearing and CGT concessions via some 200 properties.
It is particularly galling for foreign-born entities to condemn the likes of Australian-born Pauline Hansen when she is presenting views that have been suppressed by the political realm and the mainstream media.
Respectfully JC; you and many others among the outspoken multicultural throng ought to be more accepting of the beliefs and feelings of native born Australians.
Formerly a mention of the National Party, I began voting informal in 1996 because I feared what John Howard would do to the nation and was alas justified – he wreaked great harm upon the nation and his influence is like a shroud on the Liberal Party.
I happened to be in Crimea when Tony Abbott belligerently berated the Russians who were offended by his inappropriate hairy-chested brashness. In multiple other respects, he was entirely unsuited for Prime Ministership.
Neither is Malcolm Turnbull the right guy; but for different reasons.
Fine. Now who would you suggest should become PM?
Both of the major political parties need purging as they are too locked into past beliefs and loyalties. The Howards (plural) have for too long exercised much influence in Liberal Party circles and Howardism is presently their big handicap in my view. Until he and his disciples move out of the way, talent that is presently kept suppressed will not have opportunity to emerge.
I agree the Liberal Party needs a bit of a shuffle, but the likelihood of Labor undergoing a purge is minimal, and, frankly, who cares about Labor or the Greens. Now, again, what do you mean by Howardism, who are his ‘disciples’? what problem did you have with Howard? and, just to remind you, who should become PM? You said earlier that neither Abbot nor Turnbull are suitable candidates for leadership, so who?
What about . Mathias Cormann, current minister for finance?
Bushranger, I am something of a Putin sympathiser. But, he clearly did provide the SAM system that shot down that Malaysian jetliner. Also I’d point out the reports in Crimea would hardly be neutral!
Warty; sound governance also necessitates a competent opposition to ensure accountability. It is just as important for the Labor Party to rebirth and for The Greens to become more realistic in their philosophies.
Regarding leadership of the Libs; there are just too many of the old brigade being continually recycled in Front Bench roles and their track records to not engender trust of Government by the people. It is glaringly obvious right across the nation that people expect more transparency from those elected and are alienated by privileged treatment of sectional interests.
The likes of Cory Bernardi and Andrew Hastie who are prepared to speak their minds will have far more public appeal than the apparatchiks who just parrot the party line. Christian Porter is perhaps one that might emerge to prominence sooner than later
There is some serious talent amongst the elected young/youngish Liberals.
Tim Wilson, James Paterson, Cory Bernardi and Andrew Hastie very much in that group.
Would it be too much to ask of PM Turnbull to make them more visible and utilise their talents?
Probably.
Hope I am mistaken.