Coronavirus and the Country’s Future (13)

The Australian State of Queensland had an election on Saturday, 31st October, and the Labor government was returned. This was after eight months of utterly unnecessary social restrictions, including border restrictions, “social distancing,” and other constraints that have left many people out of work, and businesses bankrupted. And it continues.

What happened at the election?

The leader of the Liberal National Party, Debra Frecklington, was unwilling to distance herself from the Labor Party’s policies. She indicated she’d go along with the advice of her medical bureaucrats, continuing to restrict people at State borders, along with any other measures they considered to be in the best interests of Queenslanders’ health.

She avoided explaining how these policies were based on a sham argument, that Coronavirus is simply a variant of flu, and that these impositions have and will cost us tremendously, both economically and socially.

In my opinion, this was both unfortunate, and pathetic. This could have been an opportunity for an ostensibly conservative political leader to plainly offer conservative values and policies to the electorate, and to reverse the horrific policies of the Labor government, which have decimated Queensland small businesses, and put thousands out of work.

It also may well have led to a review of the shocking abortion laws that Queensland has, along with the opportunity to deal with Labor’s known policies of euthanasia, which have the potential for all manner of evil, down the track.

This provides a political lesson for anyone who wants to learn. If conservatives want to provide the electorate with a real political choice, apart from institutionalized humanism and all its awful implications, do a proper job of it, and don’t try to do it by halves. Don’t allow any association to be made in the mind of the electorate with awful, failed policies, that have simply been means of political abuse against the community.

Deb Freckington went missing in action. She was unwilling to really take it to the Labor Party ideologically, when there were plainly ideological issues at stake for this election. She could have claimed:

The Labor Party treats Queenslanders like slaves and convicts. Anyone would think we were back in the days of the First Fleet. We want to immediately restore the traditional liberties of the individuals, families, communities and churches, which many Australians historically, have died for!

All these social restrictions on people are utterly unnecessary, and must be removed, immediately. Let’s let Queenslanders get back to work, travel interstate, and do what they want to do, with no fear or intimidation from their government!

Then she could have emphasized the cost to the electorate of having hundreds of police deployed on the NSW border, the rapidly ballooning Qld debt, along with other details. This would have immediately won her points in the community, from the thousands of business people negatively affected by Labor’s abuse of power.

She would have attracted some flak for a bold and firm stand, but people won’t vote to change their government for a leader they perceive as spineless and lacking. Furthermore, the Labor Party was poorly led, and was in my opinion, vulnerable to a bold and confident assault that revealed Labor’s real values, which I think are destructive, abusive and authoritarian.

But you won’t put out a blazing fire with a wet lettuce, so now we may have to wait another three years to replace these scoundrels and evildoers. An opportunity lost.

As they say,No guts-no glory.