The ABC certainly has a way with words. But it can also be woefully wide of the mark as it was with the first instalment of its political documentary Nemesis. Presumably it meant Tony Abbott’s nemesis, as it was little more than a lecture from the ABC on why Abbott deserved to be removed and how the moderate and urbane Malcolm Turnbull was so right in undermining him.

But if you get behind the veneer and the anti-Abbott bias, the program showed exactly the opposite. It showed how foolish the Liberal party was in knocking away the foundations of a government whose main sins were that it was tackling excessive government spending, abolishing the absurd carbon tax and stopping the real invasion days of Australia in the form of uncontrolled illegal migration. It showed that for once we had a leader of the Liberal party who actually believed in some decent principles and always put the interests of Australia and Australians first. And for me, it  showed that Abbott was a true conservative who practiced what he believed, namely that there was nothing to be gained and a lot to lose by throwing away established institutions and replacing them with the latest short-term fashion dreamed up by the political elite. One of the bit players in the drama, the former MP Wyatt Roy, unconsciously illustrated this when he claimed on the program that Abbott lacked ‘vision’. In reality, one of the greatest strengths of Abbott and his government was that they were not mesmerised by the deluded vision of ever-increasing government spending and the false dawn of abandoning the good in the hope that this might produce something better, which sober experience tells us rarely, if ever, happens.

The truth is that the program showed us that Abbott had qualities that are remarkable because they are so obviously absent in most leaders of Western governments today. First, he expressed himself succinctly and clearly and in terms that the man in the street could understand. What better way could there be to describe the policy of stopping the boats than to say ‘Stop the Boats’? What better way could there be than to express the policy of ending the carbon tax by saying, ‘No carbon tax’? Such clarity is, of course, anathema to the political class in the ABC and elsewhere, who maintain that politicians should talk in such labyrinthine gobbledegook about reform and vision that they are scarcely comprehensible and mean nothing. We should be grateful that at least for a short time we had a PM who spoke in clear language, in sharp contrast to the evasive waffle we get on a daily basis from most politicians.

Secondly, he showed a real commitment to reducing government spending. This could obviously have been expressed better and it could have been implemented by progressive and moderate reductions initially with a commitment to do more in the future. It was also tarnished by the spectacle of Joe Hockey and Mathias Cormann smoking celebratory cigars, the ultimate symbol of uncaring capitalism. But a PM can scarcely be blamed when two of his ministers go off on a frolic of their own. And the spirit and the intention to get government spending under control and restore personal responsibility were there and the Liberal party would have been much better off in the long run by riding out the criticism and sticking to Abbott’s plan.

Thirdly, he showed courage and conviction on all of the contentious issues of the time and it is worth recalling what they were. Warning against the threat of Islamic terrorism was not ‘over the top’ as Turnbull has now declared. It was a recognition that we really did face a threat, domestically and internationally, from that evil source and Abbott responded as he should have done. Moreover, the policy clearly worked and saved us from the excesses of terrorism inflicted on other countries. Abbott also took a necessarily and commendably belligerent stand against Vladimir Putin over the downing of Malaysian Flight MH17, an all-too-rare demonstration of  Australian nationalism. When it came to stopping illegal migration, we should remember that this was was not a popular policy while it was being implemented. And yet by persistence it was carried through and, thanks to Abbott, Australia became the only country that has actually stopped illegal migration. To denigrate Abbott for his ‘missionary’ approach to Aboriginal affairs, as the Aboriginal MP Ken Wyatt described it, is both unfair and not supported by the facts: there must be few if any Australian politicians who have shown the understanding of indigenous needs that were demonstrated by Abbott. He saw that indigenous health can only be improved by healthy living and behaviour; that incarceration can be lessened by not committing crimes; and education can only be achieved by going to school. If that is a missionary approach, we need more of it.

And what did Nemesis tell us about Turnbull? It appears now that there was a lot more to him than the elegant patrician motivated by the highest principles. The program showed he was forever scheming, undermining his leader, generating gossip, fomenting party discord and doing his utmost to bring the party to the only acceptable course open to it, according to his self-centred opinion, namely making him its leader. Indeed, for someone who criticises Abbott’s concise policy declarations as ‘slogans’, Turnbull has been revealed as someone who was pretty good at slogans himself. To describe tackling Islamic terrorism  as ‘over the top’ and ‘provocative’ shows a lamentable ignorance of the threat facing Australian and a degree of irresponsibility about the national interest that is seriously disturbing. And having recourse to personal abuse of Abbott was simply offensive and adds nothing to the national debate of serious issues.

The facts deserve a more balanced and favourable assessment of Abbott and his government than Nemesis has given us so far. Let us hope we will see it as the series unfolds.