Australian Family Party

Family Matters

Social policy

Never Again?

by

never-again“Every person who has participated in a pro-Palestinian march, every university campus, every politician who marched over the Sydney Harbour Bridge in lockstep with Islamist fanatics, every single media commentator who has echoed some kind of sympathy for the Islamist, pro-Palestinian cause has blood on their hands today.” – Rowan Dean

History is repeating itself before our eyes.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the Somali-born, Dutch American activist and former politician has spoken about how, “a story is also a moment when you are forced to make choices.

“I think we find ourselves today, right now, in a moment where we have to make a moral choice. I sit here today and say I support Israel. No ifs. No buts. Unequivocal.”

There is only one side to take in all this – the side of the Jewish people.

No ifs. No buts.

As we know, the easiest position in any conflict is to ‘both sides’ the problem – the moral equivalence game. Australia’s Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, plays this game all the time.

What we are now witnessing, in real time, is a clash of civilisations, a clash of cultures. A war between the civilised and the uncivilised, and only one can be allowed to win.

In Australia, the rupture was triggered by the October 7, 2023, massacre in Israel. Two days later, after the slaughter of over a thousand Jews, and before there was any response from the Israelis, hundreds gathered in front of the Sydney Opera House and chanted “gas the Jews”.

And the Albanese Government did nothing about it.

And off it went, like a wildfire.

Since October 7, the Albanese Government has condemned Israel, recognised Palestine, increased funding to the Hamas-controlled UN agencies in Gaza and imported thousands of Gazan ‘refugees’.

There’s no doubt whatsoever which side the Albanese Government is on.

Australia has joined the club – and should anyone doubt what comes next, we have only to look at Europe. This problem will continue to grow until it takes over our country.

Let me close this sad missive with a quotation from one of A.E. Housman’s poems in which he invokes a profound sense of loss for a bygone era:

‘Into my heart an air that kills
From yon far country blows
What are those blue remembered hills
What spires, what farms are those?
That is the land of lost content
I see it shining plain
The happy highways where I went
And cannot come again.’

 

 

Bounce Back Better

by

bounceIn a much-quoted exchange, a pollster once asked an Australian voter the following question: “Going into this election, and thinking about the average voter, what would you say is the biggest problem facing Australia today – ignorance or apathy?”

The voter replied, “I don’t know, and I don’t care”.

As we approach the South Australian State election, our key messages are crystal clear:

1. Competence & Care
Are you competent? And do you care?
Whether it’s your doctor, your mechanic or your child’s teacher, all you want to know about them is: ‘Are they competent?  And do they care?’
At the Australian Family Party, we stress the importance of appointing capable people.

2. Understanding the Times
In uncertain times, the choices we make shape our future.
At the Australian Family Party, we are focused on electing strong principled leaders — people who understand the times and know what needs to be done

3. Climate Change
If we wish to have a strong enough economy that can build a strong military to be able to defend ourselves against looming regional threats, then we are going to need to abandon our obsession with useless forms of energy generation, such as wind, solar and green hydrogen.
There is no climate emergency, there is no cause for panic.

4. Israel
In today’s uncertain world, the choices we make as a State and as a nation will determine our future. At the Australian Family Party, our support of Israel is what sets us apart.
Protecting our nation, strengthening our economy, and supporting our families is the foundation of a strong society. Australia – South Australia in particular, given its climate and topography – would benefit enormously from a closer relationship with Israel.

5. Let’s Make South Australia Great Again
Many South Australians can probably remember the time when more than a dozen of Australia’s top 100 listed companies had their head offices in Adelaide – News Ltd, Fauldings, Southcorp, Elders, Normandy Mining, Adelaide Bank, Adelaide Brighton, Standard Chartered Finance to name just a few. Today there’s just one – Santos (and even Santos is on borrowed time).

At the time of Federation, South Australia led the constitutional debates and had an influential hand in shaping the new Commonwealth of Australia.

For decades after, Adelaide was Australia’s Number 3 city – bigger and more prosperous than either Brisbane or Perth.

South Australia prospered when it supported people who made things, grew things, and built things.

Over recent years, some bad ideas have found their way into the South Australian Parliament resulting in some awful legislation being passed. These include: the ‘Urban Growth Boundary’ which gave us severe housing affordability problems; ‘Transforming Health’ which led to chronic hospital ramping; ‘Renewable Energy’ which resulted in SA having the most expensive power bills in the nation; ‘Anti-Life’ legislation that has given us those grotesque abortion-up-to-birth, assisted suicide and prostitution laws.

In addition, a conga-line of rent-seekers, bootleggers and carpetbaggers looking to exploit the public purse. These crony-capitalists, who base their business models on schmoozing politicians and convincing them that their particular goods or services are essential – and that the government should either pay for them or limit competition to providing them – have essentially created another layer of taxation.

This is important as South Australians already pay enormous amounts of tax in the form of GST, stamp duties, registrations, and numerous other levies and taxes hidden in water and power costs.

When state governments privatised SA’s water and power utilities, for example, they did deals with the purchasers permitting them to increase power and water charges in exchange for a higher purchase price of the utility – just taxation by another name. Consumers simply ended up paying more for their power and water. On top of that, utilities such as SA Water, then pay ‘dividends’ to the SA state government every year – ever more taxation under a different guise. SA Water has paid over $3bn in ‘dividends’ to the SA State Government over the past ten years. That $3bn should have been used to provide much-needed water infrastructure.

Yet in spite of all the revenue and dividends collected from SA taxpayers over the past ten years – up from $12bn in 2015 to $17bn in 2025 – the State Government’s reliance on subsidies from the other States to meet its spending commitments has also risen from $7bn in 2015 to $12bn in 2025, taking the SA State Government’s total spend from $19bn in 2015 to $29bn in 2025!

Why the other States continue to put up with South Australia’s flagrant spending habits is beyond me.

Likes and Dislikes

As you would have gathered, at the Australian Family Party:

We like …
South Australia, Australia, Farming, Mining, Small Business, Free Markets, Free Speech, Property Rights, Home Ownership, School Choice, Income Splitting, Traditional Family Values, Pro-life, Low Immigration, Australia’s Defence Forces, Israel.

And we dislike …
Big Government, Big Business, Big Unions, Rent Seekers, Wind Turbines, Solar Farms, Green Hydrogen, Net Zero, The Voice, Toxic Algae, Ambulance Ramping, Urban Growth Boundaries, $50bn State Govt Debt, Digital ID, High Immigration, High Crime Rates, Transgender Ideology, The UN, The WEF and The WHO.

bouncerStanding Guard
The key role of an independent or minor party member of parliament is that of a gatekeeper – ‘standing guard at the gate’ to prevent bad laws getting into the Parliament – someone who will ‘sound the alarm’ when dodgy legislation is presented to the parliament.

If Parliament House were a night club, they’d have a bouncer on the door only admitting those who would add value! Undesirables would be turned away.

As a former Senator, I know how to stand up to destructive policies and how to stop laws that drive up costs, disrupt society and make life harder for everyday Australians.

Walk …. Get Fit …. Go Letterboxing ….!

As we often say, it’s one thing to have an opinion – it’s a very different thing to support a cause.

With summer approaching, what better time to get fit, go for a walk …. and do some letterboxing!

Can you do some letterboxing in your area? As few or as many letterboxes as you like would be just fine.

Note: Political material is not junk mail. It is defined and protected by legislation as political communication.

If you would like to do some letterboxing, please let us know here (choosing ‘Admin’ as the recipient).

Thank you for your support.

The 44% Alarm Bell

by

democracyIt’s been said that ‘Optimists learn English, pessimists learn Chinese, and realists learn how to use an AK47.’

We’re probably not quite at that stage just yet but it is good to be reminded as to how and why we are not.

Above the Courts of Justice in London stands a statue of Jesus. It is there to signify the Common Law’s origins in Christianity.

When the King is presented with the Bible, these words are spoken: “To keep your Majesty ever mindful of the law and the Gospel of God, …. we present you with this Book, the most valuable thing this world affords. Here is wisdom; this is the royal law; these are the lively oracles of God”. Stephen Langton, Archbishop of Canterbury (1207-1228) helped write the Magna Carta, the world’s pre-eminent document on human rights which forms the basis of so many of our laws.

A recent Report (November 2025) published by Flinders University, Turning Away from Democracy? Democratic Antipathy and Support for Undemocratic Practices Among Young Australians, found that only 56 per cent of young Australians (18–29) believe democracy is the best form of government. That 44 per cent of young people do not believe it is the best form of government is alarming to say the least.

Some of its other findings are equally alarming. For example, 38 per cent of young Australians support ‘the use of force to prevent policies they disagree with from being enacted’; 39 per cent agree that ‘the government should be able to bend the law when required’; 36 per cent agree that ‘the Prime Minister should be able to ignore court decisions’; and 25 per cent support ‘committing voter fraud to prevent a party they dislike from winning’.

When our system of government is being questioned in this way, it is timely to consider some of the world’s alternatives. Writer Evan Thompson provides a useful summary:

  • Theocracy. A form of government in which a specific religious ideology determines the leadership, laws and customs of the country. Iran is the world’s largest theocracy in which the Ayatollahs — Shiite religious leaders — rule the country and implement Islamic Sharia law. Iran has immense influence on several neighbouring countries.
  • Military Dictatorships. Rule by a single authority with absolute power and no democratic process. Installed by the nation’s armed forces, military dictators dismiss due process, civil liberties, and political freedoms. Dissent or political opposition is banned by the ruling military junta. Examples include Myanmar, Sudan, Chad and Mali.
  • Monarchy. Not to be confused with Constitutional Monarchies such as our own, ruling monarchies have a person as head of state for life, a position passed down through a succession line related to one’s bloodline and birth order within a ruling royal family. Today’s monarchies include Saudi Arabia, Morocco and Oman.
  • Communism.  A centralized form of government headed by a single authoritarian political party. Total control of the economy and of production, labour, goods, property and natural resources. Communist countries include China, Cuba, Laos and Vietnam.
  • Totalitarianism. A form of government in which the ruling party sets no limitations whatsoever on its power. Its citizens are completely subservient to the state. A single figure often holds power and maintains authority through widespread surveillance, control of the media, intimidating demonstrations of military or police power, and suppression of protest, activism, or political opposition. North Korea is an example of a totalitarian state. Any criticism of the supreme leader is punishable by death.
  • Authoritarianism – a lesser form of totalitarianism in which an authoritarian government rejects political plurality and uses strong central power to preserve the status quo. Authoritarianism pays little regard to the rule of law, the separation of powers between parliament and the courts, or democratic voting. Much of Central and Eastern Europe, Africa, the Middle East, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean falls into this category.

Of the 193 countries in the world, 153 of them are governed by one of these non-democratic systems. Barely 40 countries in the world are functioning democracies. And of those 40, 36 have a Judeo-Christian heritage and the other four (India, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan) had strong Christian/Western influence that led them to democracy.

The link between Christianity and stable democracy is obvious and sometimes we need to remind ourselves of Christianity’s great contributions to the world.

The late Rabbi Jonathan Sacks said, “To defend a country you need an army. But to defend a free society you need families, schools and an educational system in which ideals are passed on from one generation to the next, and never lost, or despaired of, or obscured. It is not difficult to gain liberty, but to sustain it is the work of a hundred generations. Forget it and you lose it.”

Thank you for your support.

 

Courtroom Guinea Pigs

by

platypusFour incidents converged recently – two from Western Australia and two from South Australia.

The two from WA were about a group of prisoners who dined on guinea pigs they had sourced while out on work release, and a German backpacker, Carolina Wilga, who was miraculously rescued after being lost in the Western Australian bush.

That second incident reminded me of South Australian tourist Shane Taylor who, a number of years ago, found himself in similar circumstances to both Ms Wilga and the prisoners.

As Taylor’s vehicle, like Ms Wilga’s, had become bogged, he followed the golden rule of the outback – ‘Stay With Your Vehicle!’ After about a week, however, and no rescue in sight, he decided to try his luck and find his own way out.

Hungry and thirsty after many days of hiking through rugged scrub, Taylor came across a small stream.

After a quick drink, Taylor attempted to walk on a log which had fallen across the stream, however about halfway across, the log broke and to his dismay fell into the creek and hit a platypus!

It was the first time he’d seen a platypus in the wild, and being hungry, decided to build a fire and cook it. At which point a Park Ranger appeared – much to Taylor’s relief!

Until, that is, the Park Ranger promptly booked him for ‘eating a protected and endangered species’!

Appearing in court, the magistrate read out the charge – ‘Eating a protected and/or endangered species’ – and asked Taylor if he had anything to say for himself.

‘As a matter of fact, I do, Your Honour!’

‘There I was, stuck in the middle of nowhere, my 4-wheel drive bogged to the axles, I’m doing the right thing – ‘staying with my vehicle!’ – but after about a week, when no-one came, I thought blow this, I’m taking my chances.

‘Well, after about another week hacking my way through endless scrub, I came across this creek which I had a big drink from. I then tried to cross the creek on a log which had fallen but about halfway over, the log broke, and would you believe it, Your Honour, it hit a platypus – yes, a platypus! – and squashed it.

‘Naturally, I felt sorry for the animal, but it was now dead, I was hungry, so I decided to cook the thing.

‘And just as I was chewing on it, along came a Park Ranger – and I must say, Your Honour, I was very, very pleased to see him!

‘And that’s when he said I was breaking the law by eating a threatened or endangered species!’

‘Well, that does sound perfectly reasonable to me’, said the magistrate, ‘Case dismissed!’

‘Thank you, Your Honour’, Taylor responded, ‘Thank you.’

Just as Taylor was about to leave the courtroom, the magistrate called out to him and said, ‘Before you go, Mr Taylor, I’m intrigued, what does platypus taste like?

‘Well, Your Honour, it tastes like a cross between koala and dolphin’.   

Which brings us to the fourth incident about inconsistencies in the criminal justice system. Unlike the platypus story, this one is real.

The incident – and subsequent commentary on comparative justice in laws and sentencing – was brought to our attention by Adelaide journalist and broadcaster David Penberthy.

It concerned Mount Gambier MP Troy Bell who was sentenced last month to five years jail for stealing from a charitable fund, and a separate case in which a violent thug was permitted to walk free.

Penberthy wrote the following:

“Given the constant public outcry over soft sentences for people who commit serious crimes, it is worth reflecting on the thumping punishment meted out to former Mount Gambier MP Troy Bell.

“It is particularly worth reflecting on Mr Bell’s punishment in the context of the following letter to the editor written by hotelier Peter Hurley and published by The Advertiser:

‘I read with interest the article “Drunkard trashes and bashes” (The Advertiser, 2/10) detailing the sentencing of Samuel Ajal for wilful damage and assault following a violent rampage at the Arkaba Hotel.”

“Despite three hotel employees being assaulted – one of them bitten – and damage to gaming machines exceeding $80,000, Magistrate Davis offered Mr Ajal words of comfort, assuring him he was a “good person” who had done a stupid thing.

“We frequently hear of the right of workers to feel safe in their workplace. Yet in this case, those rights seem to have been disregarded.

“Mr Ajal received a suspended sentence, was placed on a good behaviour bond and is not required to compensate the Arkaba for the extensive damage he caused.

“This outcome falls well short of community expectations for such serious offences.

“The staff, the Arkaba Hotel and the wider public have been let down by a justice system that appears to prioritise the offender’s comfort over the victim’s wellbeing.

Peter Hurley AO, Fullarton’.

“Troy Bell set up a charity and then pilfered nearly half a million dollars for his own personal ends.

“His punishment? Five years jail, with a minimum two years and six months non-parole period.

“Bell remains well-liked in his community despite having done what he did. Lots of people have stories of how he helped them.

It begs the question, ‘Why was Troy Bell not described, as in the Arkaba case, as ‘a good person who did a stupid thing’?

As Penberthy points out, “Bell didn’t physically or emotionally hurt anyone. He didn’t hurt a child, and no-one will be permanently affected by his misconduct.

Perhaps the severity of the sentence was because Troy Bell was an MP?

Penberthy puts that notion to rest by comparing Bell’s crime with another disgraced political figure from the same region – former Labor MP Bernard Finnigan.

Finnigan was charged with 30 counts of having child pornography on his computer. Two of the charges eventually made it to court and he was found guilty of one of them.

Finnigan didn’t go to jail, receiving a 15-month suspended sentence and a $1,000 good behaviour bond.

Finnigan was propping up an industry which abused countless numbers of children.

As Penberthy points out, Troy Bell’s crime is not in the same league as Finnigan’s.

Peter Hurley said that during the attack on the Arkaba, Ajal screamed “You’re all going to die tonight.”

Such inconsistencies cannot be allowed to continue. If judges cannot, or will not, hand down appropriate sentences, then parliament must step in and write mandatory sentences into legislation.

If, however, judges are attempting to apply some kind of ‘social justice’ principles in their sentencing, they should note what the Bible tells us not once, but twice: “Do not favour the poor in court”.

Judges are to apply real justice, not ‘social justice’.

Favouring one group of citizens over another based on socio-economic or racial grounds is not only unjust, it also foolish. It always ends badly – especially for the favoured group.

Thank you for your support.

 

A Few Good Men

by

few-good-menIn that classic scene from the movie A Few Good Men, Lieutenant Daniel Kaffee, played by Tom Cruise is defending two Marines accused of murdering a fellow Marine based at Guantanamo Bay.

Kaffee believes the Marines were following a ‘Code Red’ – an illegal order for extrajudicial punishment – issued by Colonel Nathan Jessep, the base commander, played by Jack Nicholson.

Kaffee gets under the skin of Jessep who is a formidable, authoritative figure who sees himself as above reproach.

During a tense exchange, Kaffee asks Colonel Jessep, “Did you order a Code Red?”

The Court Martial Judge quickly interjects with, “You don’t have to answer that question.”

Jessep arrogantly responds, “I’ll answer his question”.

“You want answers?” Jessep sneers.

“I think I’m entitled”, replies Kaffee.

“You want answers?” Jessep shouts.

“I want the truth!” Kaffee shouts back.

Jessep then blurts out his famous line, “YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH!”

Kaffee once again demands to know, “DID YOU ORDER A CODE RED!”

Jessep erupts with, “Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns.

“Who’s gonna do that? You?

“I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom … and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives.

“You don’t want the truth because deep down you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall.

“We use words like honour, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something.

“You use them as a punchline.

“I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it.

“I would rather you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand a post”.

When this movie was released in 1992, Tom Cruise’s character Daniel Kaffee was, as you’d expect, the good guy, and Jack Nicholson, the baddie.

But the Utopian post-World War II, post-Soviet Union, ‘End of History’ world that gave rise to movies like A Few Good Men didn’t last.

The world never was, nor is it now, how we’d like or wish it to be. The cruel truth is that our desire for a just, kind, or ideal world inevitably clashes with the harsh, indifferent, and unpredictable nature of reality.

In 2022, in a military news outlet called Task & Purpose, retired US Marine 3-star General Gregory Newbold expounded on this theme in an attempt to remind the civilian population of what the military is and what it does.

“Many citizens – especially our most senior politicians and military leaders – seem to have developed a form of dementia when it comes to warfare. The result is confusion or denial about the essential ingredients of a competent military force. The condition is exacerbated and enabled when the most senior military leaders who ought to know better defer to the idealistic judgements of those whose credentials are either non-existent or formed entirely by ideology.

Newbold is referring to the Lt Kaffees of the world.

He continues: “The military has two main purposes – to deter our enemies from engaging us in warfare and if that fails, to defeat them in combat. Deterrence is only possible if the opposing force believes it will be defeated. Respect is not good enough; fear and certainty are required.

“The military cannot be a mirror-image of the society it serves. Values that are admirable in civilian society – sensitivity, individuality, compassion, tolerance for the less-capable – are often antithetical to the traits that deter a potential enemy and win wars that must be fought.

“There is only one over-riding standard for military capability – lethality – the ability to kill. And the officeholders who dilute this core truth with civil society’s often appropriate priorities undermine the military’s chances of success. Reduced chances of success mean more casualties which makes defeat more likely.

“Wars must be waged only with stone-cold pragmatism, not idealism. War is a means to an end, and the end is defeat of the enemy and the establishment of a peace, but not just any peace but a peace in your favour.

In an ominous warning of troubling times ahead, The Australian’s Paul Kelly reported recently:

“This week the dictators came together in Beijing – Xi Jinping, flanked by Russian President Vladimir Putin and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un – in a display of authoritarian power rarely matched since World War II.

“The vast military display featured nuclear-capable missiles, undersea vehicles, the latest drones, fighter jets, anti-ship missiles and long-range bombers reinforced by thousands of troops goose-stepping in almost perfect co-ordination.

“China intends to dominate in industrial, military and ideological domains.

“Xi’s message is that China’s military dominance of the Asian region will be irresistible.

“The world has just witnessed the most powerful symbolic display of China’s military aspirations with their intimidating logic for Australia.

“And what did our government have to say?

“Nothing – or nothing of any note.

“We cannot even find the language to address the events transforming the world that pose the most serious challenge for our country and people.”

I have never been anti-China.

Bob-Day-Xi-AbbottAs reported in my previous comments on China in Beijing to Damascus – A Road to Peace, China has a fascinating Judeo-Christian history.

I have also met Xi Jinping, albeit briefly, in 2014. We talked about housing and how Chinese investors viewed Australia’s property market very favourably.

But a lot that has happened since then disturbs me greatly.

We need options. Our total reliance on the United States is untenable. Its growing internal divisions could seriously impact its external commitments.

One alternative defence bloc could be a Japan–South Korea–Philippines alliance; however, these are all conventional military powers. They would be no match for a nuclear superpower such as China.

India is a friend and is a rising geo-political player. It is also a nuclear power.

But India looks after India, and being an avowed Hindu country, is also culturally very different from Australia.

As Kelly reports, in Beijing, leaders from China, Russia, Iran and North Korea met and did not hide their contempt for the West.

Which brings us once again to Israel.

Israel is currently fighting a war defending Western Civilization.

It is a military superpower.

We should develop a closer relationship.

The Israel-Gaza conflict will soon be over, but China’s military expansion will not.

Can we handle the truth?

Standing on the Promises

by

South-Australia-electionAt the Australian Family Party, we have always believed in building a stronger nation — through Defence, Economy, and Family.

What we do:
We stand to protect our nation, rebuild our economy, and support families as the foundation of a strong society.

How we do it:
We advocate for stronger defence and alliances, policies that promote growth through business and innovation, and values that protect and support families — honesty, respect, and responsibility.

Why it matters:
Because the Australia we know, love, and respect is worth safeguarding — for our children and grandchildren. In an uncertain world, we must unite, stand strong, and make sure our voices are heard.

Our last newsletter The Promised Land was very well received, and the momentum is building.

According to Roy Morgan, 17 per cent of Australians believe that the government should do more to support Israel.

A political party in South Australia needs just 4 per cent of the vote to be elected to the Upper House — and once in parliament, we will have the platform to make our case for stronger ties with Israel, and a stronger future for Australia.

To do this, we need good people — specifically, 50 candidates: 47 in the Lower House and 3 in the Upper House.

Being a candidate is not difficult — in fact, it is a great experience. There are no costs involved, and you can contribute as much or as little as you are able.

If standing yourself isn’t possible, perhaps you can encourage a young person who might be considering a political future. Mentorship is vital — without it, we risk leaving the future to career politicians with no conviction.

The good news is, Australians are ready for change. As The Australian recently reported, “Support for minor parties and independents has reached its highest level in at least four years.” The time is right.

Will you stand with us?
If you’re interested in becoming a candidate — or in supporting someone who might be — please get in touch today. Together, we can make sure that Australia remains safe, prosperous, and proud.

If you are interested in becoming a candidate, please contact us here (and choose ‘Federal Director’ as the recipient).

Thank you for your support.

On Wings of Eagles

by

abortionIn a recent Liberty Itch article on abortion, the clinching argument was that being pro-choice regarding the Covid vaccine made the pro-life position on abortion hypocritical. I disagree.

Although prioritising individual liberty, libertarians also recognise that there is a role for government in protecting individual rights and property. Abortion, which has impacts on the mother, father and unborn child, therefore falls well within the ambit of libertarian discussion.

The matter of vaccination is a largely personal one – doubly so when the vaccine has not undergone normal medical trials to establish safety and efficacy.

Governments chose to indemnify drug companies from any negative outcomes as a result of the use of their Covid vaccines, a move that was as irresponsible as it was outrageous. These decisions further strengthen the argument for personal choice and autonomy.

On the matter of abortion, women indeed have a choice. They can choose to abstain from sex, thus avoiding any pregnancy. Alternatively, they can use contraceptive measures to significantly reduce the likelihood of pregnancy. The argument that a woman’s right to kill her unborn child is ‘empowering’ equates to the use of abortion as a convenient post-conception contraceptive.

The utilitarian argument, using abortion to reduce poverty and suffering, is also unconvincing – summarised neatly in the statement that a woman “should have the right to remove it, just as someone has the right to remove a guest from their property”.

As any property owner knows, removing a squatter or tenant who refuses to pay rent is far from simple, as the law is at pains to protect those who may be vulnerable. Further, any owner who evicted a squatter, tenant or guest while knowing that eviction would lead to their immediate death would surely risk being charged with manslaughter, if not murder.

If the utilitarian position is a reasonable one, then throwing an unwanted pet out of a car in a snowstorm is also perfectly acceptable.

Unsurprisingly, and very fortunately, making anything a crime does attract government coercion. I may not agree with the law, but I do expect the government to enforce any law it passes. On the other hand, as we know all too well, banning something does not mean it does not occur.

The argument that “It is wrong to violate the bodily autonomy of one person to keep another alive” acknowledges that the unborn child is a person. The pro-choice position then seeks to justify the unborn child’s murder on the basis that it violated the ‘individual rights’ of the mother, whose rights outrank the unborn child’s life.

If we are to accept that the ‘rights’ of one individual trump the ‘rights’ or, more importantly, the life of another, then this suggests that a hierarchy of individuals can be established for all individuals in our society. It also means an unborn foetus has the same right to life as the woman in which it is located.

By the same logic, should we kill recidivists to supply life-saving organs to more worthy persons?

Pregnant women can, of course, avoid the impact and responsibility of raising a child by placing the baby up for adoption.

The pro-choice argument for bodily autonomy once the woman has become pregnant also doesn’t hold water.

Imagine a pilot who decides halfway through a flight that they no longer wish to be a pilot, or a surgeon who decides halfway through surgery that they no longer wish to operate.

As a society, we expect people charged with responsibilities to discharge those responsibilities with all due care. A pilot or surgeon is at liberty not to commence a flight or operation, and to cease performing those functions when it is safe to do so. In a similar vein, a pregnant woman is responsible for the safe care of her unborn child and should be obliged to fulfil those responsibilities until that child can be safely delivered to the care of others.

We can all agree that men and women should be able to choose whether or not to have a child, or whether or not to keep a child after birth. What I cannot agree with is ending a child’s life simply because it is convenient for the mother and/or father. Even if the child is conceived as a result of rape or incest, or due to contraceptive failure, convenience is not a sufficient reason.

In South Australia last year, a bill was introduced into the parliament requiring that women who choose to terminate a pregnancy after 28 weeks induce the child alive, not stillborn. After 28 weeks, with proper care, babies are viable outside the womb.

The bill did not prevent women from terminating their pregnancies, it only insisted that the baby be born alive, not euthanized and be born dead.

Presumably, as the woman was planning to abort the child, giving the child to a loving couple to adopt would not be opposed. This would have given rise to a significant number of new adoptions.

The bill was defeated 10 votes to 9 in South Australia’s Upper House.

As a woman’s ‘right to choose’ a termination was not being compromised, why anyone would oppose saving the life of the child when it was going to be aborted anyway is beyond me.

Our laws are distinctly uneven when it comes to the issue of abortion.

On the one hand, they allow mothers to decide the fate of the child without the father’s input. On the other, if the mother decides to continue with the pregnancy, despite the father wanting an abortion, then the father remains responsible for the provision of child support.

In this regard, the silence from pro-choice feminists is deafening.

Personally, I would argue that the entire pro-choice abortion argument is a hypocritical house of cards.

For example, in 2009, a bill called ‘Zoe’s Law’ was introduced into the NSW Parliament that aimed to recognize the death of an unborn child as a separate offence – particularly in cases where the loss of the foetus was caused by a criminal act against the mother.

Named after Zoe Donegan, an unborn child who died in 2009 after her mother, Brodie Donegan, was injured in a car accident caused by a reckless driver, the case sparked debate about whether the legal system adequately addressed the loss of an unborn child in such circumstances.

The bill was eventually watered down and became the ‘Crimes Legislation Amendment (Loss of Foetus) Act 2021’ and is now the operative law in New South Wales for addressing the loss of an unborn child due to criminal acts.

Finally, our society prosecutes people for damaging the eggs of endangered eagles or nesting sites while celebrating human abortions, all while human birth rates continue to fall below replacement rates.

Thank you for your support.

 

Life Lessons from Les Mis

by

les-misWhen the great French novelist Victor Hugo was in his 80s, he reflected on his life with the words, “I am like a forest that has been continuously cut down; yet each time I am cut down, the new growth has more life than ever”.

Hugo’s writings reflect his understanding of Biblical truth – that we are ‘continually and always being sanctified’ (Hebrews 10:14).

His epic novel, Les Miserables, embraces themes of crime and punishment, law and grace, sin and repentance, love and redemption.

As most will recall, the main character in the novel, Jean Valjean, is convicted of a petty crime and is imprisoned. He manages to escape before completing his sentence and begins to lead a bitter and resentful life. When he is treated kindly by a local bishop he repays the bishop’s kindness by stealing from him.

He is caught, but instead of pressing charges, the bishop vouches for him and invokes the words of Jesus, telling him to ‘go and sin no more’.

This is grace, unmerited favour, and it has a profound effect on him. His life, having been cut down, re-grows with love and ‘more life than ever’.

Valjean’s antagonist throughout the story is the ruthless and unforgiving policeman, Javert.

As US cleric Bishop Robert Barron puts it, ‘If Valjean represents grace, Javert is the embodiment of the law’ – harsh and unyielding.

Ultimately, Javert, being the proverbial Pharisee, cannot handle Valjean’s act of grace towards him and takes his own life.

This theme of law and grace permeates the Bible.

Jesus, for example, was crucified between two thieves.

These two thieves represent the two types of people in our fallen world: those who accept God, and those who reject Him.

As recorded in the gospels, both men speak to Jesus.

The first thief to speak represents those who reject God, “Aren’t you supposed to be the Christ? If you are, then save yourself … and us!”

No contrition, no remorse, no acceptance of responsibility for his crimes.

The second thief then rebukes his accomplice, “Don’t you fear God? We’re being justly punished for our crimes, but this man has done nothing wrong”.

The second thief takes responsibility. He doesn’t blame others. He admits he’s a sinner and is redeemed.

This is at the core of what has gone wrong with the world in which we now live.

As described in my last newsletter, Noughts and Crosses, sometimes we need to be reminded of what our Judeo-Christian heritage has brought to the world – the establishment of schools, universities, hospitals, aged care organisations and welfare agencies. The elevation of women, as well as the abolition of slavery, cannibalism, child sacrifice and widow burning.

The ‘equality of human beings’ is a Judeo-Christian idea which led to the abolition of slavery and international human rights.

All form the basis of Western civilisation which acknowledged original sin and the need for redemption.

We fail, we sin, we feel guilty. Acknowledging this is virtue.

In response, we confess, we repent, we accept forgiveness, and then we move forward with confidence. That is how we survive the vicissitudes of life.

I have proven this in my own life.

Marxists, leftists, and people from many other cultures, however, do not see it that way.

To them, admitting fault is seen as weakness. They do not accept responsibility for their situation. They blame others. To them, all is a zero-sum game.

And herein lies the problem.

By rejecting God’s system of confession, repentance and forgiveness, Westerners respond by looking elsewhere to placate their guilt – virtue-signalling being one of the main outlets.

As British-born American philosopher and scholar Kwame Anthony Appiah points out, watching King Charles acknowledge the unceded – or ‘stolen’ land – on which the Canadian parliament stands begs the question, ‘Then why do they continue to occupy it? And the obvious contradiction: acknowledging theft while benefiting from it is like apologising for eating someone’s lunch while still holding the sandwich!’

This is the West surrendering to the anti-God Left.

British journalist and political commentator Douglas Murray makes this point in his 2017 book, The Strange Death of Europe.

It is civilizational suicide.

Speaking of which, allow me to make an observation or two about the recent Federal election.

First, before too many claims are made about Labor getting a ‘strong mandate’, at the previous election (2022) Labor’s primary vote was 32.5%. In 2025, it was 34.5% – a 2% improvement.

As a percentage of registered voters, however – including informal votes and those who chose not to vote – Labor’s vote was just 29.5%

Seats won, however, paints a very different picture – from 77 seats in 2022 to 94 seats in 2025 – a 22% increase.

Winning 62% of the seats with 29% of the vote is starting to look like the UK or Europe!

Or compare Labor’s vote in 2016 (34.7%) 69 seats; 2019 (33.3%) 68 seats; 2022 (32.5%) 77 seats; and now 2025 (34.5%) 94 seats!

The disparity between votes and seats in 2025 is due to changes in preferences by the Liberal Party and minor parties.

In the past, the Liberal Party would typically put Labor last on its how-to-vote cards. This time it put the Greens last, resulting in what one might describe as the bright and silver lining on an otherwise dark and gloomy cloud – the ejection from parliament of Greens leader Adam Bandt!

In India it was said that people did not cast their vote but rather vote their caste. India’s caste system divided its society into hierarchical groups based on birth, occupation and ‘dharma’ – a cosmic order of law and moral principles that apply to all beings and things – and people voted accordingly.

That Labor’s vote does not change materially from election to election suggests that the old ‘Labor, right or wrong’ principle is alive and well.

Whether it’s education, immigration, net zero, energy or the environment – power bills going up $1,300 instead of coming down $275 – Israel and the Palestinians, international relationships (UN, WHO, WEF etc), the taxing of unrealised capital gains on our superannuation, abortion and euthanasia, the Albanese government is deeply entrenched in the Left of politics.

It will not end well.

Which is why we are readying ourselves.

Our merger plans with the DLP (and other like-minded parties) are progressing and we are looking forward to contesting the next election on the horizon – the South Australian State election in March next year.

Thank you for your support.

The Eyes Have It

by

WesleyThey say to be a successful traveller, you need a good sense of humour – and no sense of smell!

And for those who know anything about travelling around Europe – and know anything about Europeans in particular – they would understand the observation that heaven is not ‘up there’ and hell not ‘down there’, but rather that these places can be found in Europe.

‘Heaven’, they say, is where the Swiss are the administrators, the French are the cooks, the Germans are the mechanics, the Italians are the lovers, and the English are the policemen.

‘Hell’, on the other hand, is where the Italians are the administrators, the French are the mechanics, the Swiss are the lovers, the English are the cooks, and the Germans are the policemen!

Vive la différence!

Speaking of Europe, it was Oxford professor John Littlewood, who first published his theory on why he believed road accidents in Europe were substantially higher than those in Britain.

Littlewood suggested that it was all connected to the observation that a significant majority of people – seventy per cent in fact – have what he calls a ‘master right eye’.

In countries such as Britain that drive on the left, that first split-second view of approaching, overtaking or sudden change in traffic will be seen by the majority of drivers with their master right eye.

In countries that drive on the right, however, that split-second picture of traffic conditions is first seen by the left eye, which is the master eye in only thirty per cent of people.

Littlewood says that the same comparisons can be made with other countries which drive on the left – Japan, Australia, New Zealand – and comparable countries which drive on the right – the United States and Canada.

Littlewood says that the ancient Romans intuitively understood this and as a result drove on the left.

Driving on the right, he says, is Napoleonic – the result of the French Revolution – and like so many other things that derived from that great convulsion, they can be fatal.

On that score, much has been written about why England did not suffer the same catastrophic consequences that befell France in the late 1700s, when social conditions – Charles Dickens and all that – were very similar.

Why was there no English version of the French Revolution?

London and Paris – A Tale of Two Cities?

Many contend that it was the influence of the evangelist John Wesley (1703 – 1791), who was the principal leader of the revival movement known as Methodism.

For more than 50 years, Wesley travelled the length and breadth of England preaching the gospel and exhorting people to ‘… love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind, and love your neighbour as yourself’.

John Wesley did the preaching, and his brother Charles Wesley wrote the hymns:

‘O For A Thousand Tongues To Sing’ … ‘And Can It Be That I Should Gain’ …. and hundreds more beside.

Others, however, put the difference between the two countries down to that other great English religion – cricket!

Cricket?

Yes, cricket.

It’s been said that ‘If you understand cricket, you understand life’.

By the late 1700s cricket had become a well-established sport throughout England with villagers – rich and poor alike – playing on the many village greens across the land.

The rich and the poor knew each other!

In France, the rich lived in Versailles, the poor lived in Paris.

They didn’t know each other.

It’s a lot harder to execute someone you go to church with, sing hymns with, and play cricket with!

In France, there were no such inhibitions. The banality of evil ….

We don’t know whether John Wesley played cricket during his travels, but it would be a fair bet that he did.

In the English-style village in which I live in the Adelaide Hills – Houghton – this year marks the 150-year anniversary of the laying of the village church’s foundation stone. Throughout that time – including through two World Wars, the Great Depression, devastating bush fires and other cataclysmic events – Houghton Church and its members have been a source of comfort and care to the local residents. It has also been an important connection point for community events including its annual Christmas Carols on the Green and Pancake Tuesday, as well as being an active participant in Anzac Day and Remembrance Day services. And of course, weddings, Christenings and funerals held at the church provide a service to the community during life’s ever-present milestones.

Houghton Village once had a hotel called the Travellers Rest. It is no longer there, but the ground on which it once stood now forms part of the Village Green where community events take place and many a traveller stops and rests.

In the words of another great hymn:

‘His eye is on the sparrow,
And I know He watches me …’

The eyes have it.

Thank you for your support.

Christmas 2024

by

Christmas-2024It’s been said, ‘Our lives are not examined for medals, diplomas or degrees, but for battle scars’.

In our Newsletters this year we have covered subjects from nuclear power to the nuclear family; from Sherlock Holmes to the Sex Pistols; from the Palestinians to the Pearly Gates; from A.I. to Adoption; from Machiavelli to the Monkey’s Paw; from universities to euthanasia – and a whole lot more in between!

We’ve also discussed our Judeo/Christian heritage – Judaism focusing on what a person does, Christianity focusing on what a person believes. Or as one wag described the difference, ‘Jesus saves, but Moses invests!’

Which brings us to the turmoil in the Middle East.

Although not impacting upon Australia directly, the conflict has unexpectedly flushed out the proverbial sheep from the goats. And by goats, we mean those who are hostile to our only Western ally in the region, Israel.

Anthony Albanese and Penny Wong will be forever condemned for their betrayal of not only a strategic military ally, and a country that is our cultural and spiritual kin, but also for their betrayal of the entire Jewish community in Australia.

Israel will, of course, as it always does, emerge even stronger as a result of this attack on its people.

Israel is about to become the region’s superpower.

Decades of trying to be a good neighbour to those who wish to destroy it are over.

A new Israel-dominated Middle East, supported by the United States, will emerge.

Those Arab states that have embraced modernity – Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates, and others – will thrive and prosper.

Those that have not will become irrelevant.

The re-election of Donald Trump this year will change the world – from the Middle East to Europe to South-East Asia.

On the domestic front, we have covered two by-elections in South Australia – Dunstan and Black – caused by the resignations of two consecutive Liberal leaders in Steven Marshall and David Speirs.

In the Dunstan by-election, Labor candidate Cressida O’Hanlon defeated Liberal candidate Anna Finizio by just 360 votes. There was essentially no difference between Labor’s result and the Liberals’ result between the 2022 General Election and the 2024 by-election. Each dropped 3 per cent to the Greens who increased their vote by 6 per cent – from 13 per cent to 19 per cent.

Our candidate, Dr Nicole Hussey, held her own admirably amongst the field of five extremely capable women. Nicole’s speech at the Declaration of the Poll was particularly well-received.

The Black by-election was a different story entirely.

As previously reported, the much more conservative seat of Black switched quite spectacularly from the Liberal Party to Labor with a massive 13 per cent swing.

And while all the media attention was focused on the major parties, the Australian Family Party secured a very encouraging 5 per cent of the primary vote.

Our candidate, Jonathan Parkin, together with family, friends, Party members, and our new DLP partners, worked tirelessly during the by-election and the results speak for themselves.

As well as achieving a 5 per cent primary vote, we manned all the polling booths and covered all our expenses. Replicated State-wide, 5 per cent would be more than enough to secure a SA Upper House seat and be well on the way towards a Senate seat!

So, with so many highs and lows this year, how should we end the year?

I love the story of the Spanish patriot leader Navarez who, on his deathbed, was asked by the priest if he had forgiven his enemies.  “I don’t have any enemies”, said Navarez, “I shot them all.”

And Voltaire, who was asked on his deathbed if he wished to renounce the devil. To which Voltaire replied, “Now, now my good man, this is no time to be making enemies”.

They say that everything rises and falls on leadership. It is the greatest need in the world today.

Former Western Australian MP John Hyde used to say, “Any lightweight can lead kids into a lolly shop, but it takes real leadership to lead them out.”

Australia is very poorly led at the moment.

It is often observed in business that some people don’t have 20 years’ experience as they claim, but rather, have one year’s experience repeated 20 times.

Anthony Albanese has been in parliament for nearly 30 years and yet still acts like an immature university activist. One year’s experience repeated 30 times.

Former Labor leader Bob Hawke was a strong leader who appointed competent people to run the nation’s key portfolios – Peter Walsh as Finance Minister, John Button as Industry Minister, Bill Hayden as Foreign Minister and others.

Likewise, John Howard, who appointed people of the calibre of Peter Costello, Nick Minchin, John Anderson and Peter Reith.

Compare those Ministers with the likes of Chris Bowen, Jim Chalmers and Penny Wong!

That is not good for Australia.

All this and more lie ahead in 2025.

So, what about 2025?

I would like to keep churning out these Newsletters, as I think the topics we discuss are extremely important and very few are covering them.

In response, I trust you have enjoyed receiving them as much as I have enjoyed writing them – all of which are sent out and will continue to be sent out – free of charge. This enables anyone and everyone to access them and stay informed.

If, however, you are in a position to support this important mission, please click here.

As Christmas Day approaches, I will leave you with this wonderful insight from Max Lucado:

If our greatest need had been technology, God would have sent us a scientist.
If our greatest need had been finance, God would have sent us an economist.
If our greatest need had been pleasure, God would have sent us an entertainer.
But our greatest need was forgiveness, so He sent us a Saviour.

To all our members and supporters, have a wonderful Christmas and New Year, and thank you again for your support throughout 2024.