I was intrigued by shadow treasurer Angus Taylor’s speech in London a few weeks ago at a conference of the conservative Alliance for Responsible Citizenship. Taylor is one of the great hopes of the Liberal party and is often touted as a potential leader. It was that particular feature that galvanised my attention to his remarks. Well, he will have to do a lot better than his performance in London if he is to convince millions of us who have deserted the Liberal party since it became a mishmash of consensus and compromise.

His speech itself was fair enough, with lots of par-for-the-course nods to the energetic spirit of the man on the land and the powerhouse of free enterprise that are just waiting to be ignited to restore us to prosperity. But then he made a few remarks about the ill-fated referendum on the Aboriginal Voice. It was here that he started to go wrong. Not just wrong, but horribly wrong, so much so that he made me think that he must be very naive about politics in general and that he does not have the slightest idea of the political tactics the Liberal party will have to adopt to win the next election or, indeed, any subsequent one. He gave the Voice campaign and Albanese’s role in it a few sideswipes and, again, that was fair enough. He overlooked, of course, that the Voice virtually originated in the Liberal party. It was a dead duck until Frydenberg breathed new life into it by giving millions of dollars to its advocates for the creepily named ‘co-design’ of the Voice. But Taylor then gave an interview to the Sydney Morning Herald, one of those interviews where the SMH and the Age, in full pompous mode, refer to their newspaper as ‘this masthead’. His precise words were:

‘This referendum divided the country and that is not a good thing. I’m deeply concerned about the divisions that we saw in that referendum, they are divisions that we should all be worried about. Anthony Albanese brought forward this referendum and in the process, we saw deep divisions in our country.’

What a lot of nonsense. The referendum was defeated because it was divisive. Nor should Taylor be concerned or worried about the divisions that were generated; in fact, he should rejoice in them. It was, in fact, a good thing that the referendum divided the country because it was only with division that the lines were sharply drawn and people were able to see for the first time just what a fraud the whole thing was. It was only when a few of us started to expose the racism of the proposal, and the legal and political minefield it was about to unleash, that voters were able to see that the Voice would upend and come close to destroying our constitutional settlement. Yes, there was division; division between those who could see, when the divisive campaign got underway, that setting up an unelected, cripplingly expensive, unwanted rival parliament and bureaucracy would destabilise our democracy. If there had been no division, there would have been no campaign, and we would have ended up with another dreamy piece of left-wing social engineering foisted onto us by the elites. And in raw political terms, the campaign breathed new life into a moribund Liberal party and gave its supporters something for which to fight. Division, in fact, saved the day.

It must surely now be obvious that division might also provide a clarification for the Liberal party on a number of other issues and that, if division is needed, it should be pursued. Division means simply that the party’s case on any issue should be clearly analysed, understood, and then passionately argued for, with no holds barred.

Two of these potential issues and vote winners immediately come to mind. The first, of course, is the Republic, where Albanese has thrown in the towel by announcing that it is not on the government’s timetable during the current parliament. But the Liberal party should not let him off the hook so easily. It should demand that the Republic be dropped altogether as government and ALP policy for any foreseeable term of the parliament. It should also introduce a Bill to declare, as some of us did to preserve the national flag years ago, that the Republic is off the agenda forever. The ALP Left will helpfully go berserk, but as with the Voice, the lines will be drawn, there will be an issue, a cause, and something for which to fight. Quiet and cautious voters, who we now know are 60 per cent of the electorate, will vote to preserve the status quo, just as they did on the Voice. Division will have delivered another resounding victory.

The other issue that has real potential, but is still a sleeper waiting to be awakened, is the plan to give us the dubious benefit of more politicians. This is already government policy, judging from the cries of the ALP who want more politicians and bigger and more expensive governments to pass their so-called ‘reforms’ that take away more of our freedoms and tax us into oblivion. A bigger parliament means more snouts in the trough, ‘advisers’, endless committees, labyrinthine red tape, higher salaries, dodgy allowances, cars, and flights on Air Albo. When this new power grab is explained, the sensible 60 per cent will consign it to the dustbin. It is an issue made for division. And success.

And if the elites hurl abuse at Peter Dutton over these issues, as they will, the public will get behind him and make him even stronger. After all, his standing as a strong and effective leader was enhanced by arguing so passionately for one side of the divisive issue of the Voice. But if the high priests of the Liberal party are scared stiff of the division of opinion, like Taylor, they will vacate the field and lose the argument on these two and all other issues that arise.