How a sexy plane upset the left

Meanwhile, Treasurer Jim Chalmers’ comments about Pauline Hanson and Rinehart appear to have had little effect on the polls.

‘Pauline Hanson is the wholly owned subsidiary of Gina Rinehart, and we know this because whenever Pauline Hanson is asked to vote in the interests of Australian workers, she instead votes in the interest of Gina Rinehart. Whether it’s in industrial relations, whether it’s in the cost-of-living relief, what we’ve seen again from One Nation is they typically vote the way that Gina Rinehart wants them to, rather than how the workers and battlers of this country need them to.’

Voters will have their opportunity to weigh-in on the Treasurer’s comments at the next federal election.

Broadly speaking, campaign support tends to suggest a shifting political market. In the UK, Reform switched from a protest party to a major concern for the Tories and Labour when investment from the private sector started to build.

One Nation’s announcement this week is not the first significant private investment for a party once side-lined as a ‘protest’.

The Coalition can no longer guarantee that political donations from right-leaning sectors of the private sector will automatically flow in their direction. At the end of last year, it was reported that other Liberal donors had shifted to One Nation.

It could also be a sign of confidence in One Nation and its policies, which are, on average, much firmer than the Coalition on key areas such as migration, mining, and tax reform. The Coalition has time to fix this, but it better get started.

Adam Giles, former First Minister of the Northern Territory, said: ‘Laughed at by some, ridiculed by others, the Australian people are realising One Nation is the only party that is truly standing up for Australia. Pauline has been a lone voice in the wilderness that has now become a chorus of millions.’

He added:

‘This aircraft is not for joyrides, this aircraft is for the battle of Australians. Let this plane be a symbol to every Australian that help is on its way, and the journey has only just begun.’

We might dare to add that it won’t be spotted on the tarmac near any climate conferences.

Finally, it is worth a nod to the double standards of comments left on some publications. Those who praise COP conferences and UN climate summits appear outraged by the tiny plane brandishing an orange sash.

They claim it is evidence we must raise mining taxes immediately. That this is proof ‘Make Australia Great Again’ politicians are in it for themselves. They criticise the ability to gift money to political parties (but say nothing about money from the union movement). They call it a ‘blight on democracy’.

Strange, when you consider the same criticism is not levelled at leftwing politicians and bureaucrats who rack up hundreds of thousands of dollars on travel expenses in a single year. Nor do they seem to care about the profits of other mining giants, so long as they nod and wink at Net Zero every now and then.

It’s hard to tell if this is jealousy, hypocrisy, or concern that the rebellion against leftwing dominance has entered the mainstream.

When the Left have rich friends, it is a sign of success. Proof, even, that their cause must be right because mining companies agree! But when the same thing happens on the Right, that money is rebranded as suspect.

While these voters are unlikely to examine the failure of logic embedded in their comments, it does provide evidence of an electoral landscape of reinforced castles rather than a porous voting crowd. The triumph of ideas and policies have literal walls to tear down and battlements to overrun.

One Nation MP Barnaby Joyce made an excellent point, ‘I’m always flummoxed how travelling on the taxpayer’s time is morally correct, but on a supporter’s dime covers for a maligned purpose.’