Athletes are usually finished by their forties. Blue collar workers look to management positions as they slow down in their fifties. White collar workers go to 67 or, in the case of judges, 75 or so. Writers don't tend to peak until they are in their thirties and they tend to keep their gift until the end. Barry Spurr still has much to offer. But Spurr's career, stellar, has been curtailed by an ancient curse. Not that he is conservative, but that he is seen as being one. And it highlights something that needs to be addressed. Australia is blessed with a tradition of free speech, but her institutions are being nobbled because the reality is Australia does not have free speech.

As Spurr pointed out recently at the Sydney Institute (Oct 6th), with an introduction by Miranda Devine, the issue of the denunciations of him based on the criminal publishing of personal emails, and their misrepresentation by the extreme left wing publisher, are not a new phenomena. One example Spurr gave was T S Eliot's denunciation as being an anti semitic bigot based on a few words in the 1920's. But Eliot's life and work doesn't suggest that. Others who were better candidates for the slur escape the label apparently because they were of the left wing tribe. It is not the fierce contest of ideas that is being debated at the moment, but tribal warfare. Only conservatives are still trying to fight with ideas. Because that battle is the only place where the war can be 'won.' The great debate, or Western Dialectic is some 2500 years old, and not going away soon. But we are being side tracked by a corruption of leftist idealism which seems successful, but leaves a wasteland in its' wake.

Australia does not have free speech, or a justice system, equal rights or much else because those are illusory ideals. Laws don't create them, but can impede them. One major impediment to free speech is the racial vilification code, section 18c. It is a badly written piece of legislation that undermines free speech. Rachel Ball, VP of Human Rights Law Commission asked who was more free: Andrew Bolt after his trial over 18c; or children in detention? Rachel clearly feels that any injustice Bolt feels is vastly outweighed by detainees. But Rachel's argument was misplaced. In fact, the trial of Bolt was an injustice. And the truth is, the elimination of 18c won't restore free speech. The appalling treatment of Spurr was not an 18c issue. But the appalling, cowardly, reaction of Sydney University administration was a symptom of how 18c has eroded the cultural asset of free speech imbued by Australia's majestic progress. Spurr has retired from being Australia's only professor of poetry. But we are blessed he isn't finished.

I suggest Red Gum ward vote for David Daniel Ball. And, after asking your local councillor about their views on Trump, Same Sex Marriage and Greyhounds, try and find out what it is they will do to make garbage collection cheaper and more efficient. Ask how they will make business more profitable. Ask what they will do to help address crime. Ask what they will do to improve public transport issues locally.