John Singleton, Nation Review, December 9-15, 1976, p. 187.

Sometimes it takes an idiot reaction to an idiot occasion for us to realise just what idiots we allow to run our lives from Canberra.

Only a couple of weeks ago the advertising world was full of the proposition by some unknown wack called D. Cameron that all advertising in Australian TV programs for kids should be banned.

The poor stupid bastard wandered off with the usual predictable fatuous arguments about how kids are being made too materialistic. It isn’t fair to the kids sitting at home watching 20 inch colour TV who can’t afford the same toys as the kids next door watching their 24 inch colour TV. The kids programs are a lousy standard he tells us because all the stations care about is running shows that kids want to watch (shame stations, shame) to get even more advertising dollars.

By the simple banning of advertising, this poor dumb wack theorises, the stations will immediately run hour upon hour week upon month upon year of educational material which will thrill all the headmasters and D. Camerons while the children, strapped by leather to their viewing seats, will be force-fed the highest standard educational shit in the history of mankind, uninterrupted by any crass commercial suggestions that they would have a better time playing with trains, Spiderman or nuclear bombs.

Now at the time D. Cameron doesn’t even make me angry because I am so flat out being angry with the advertising industry journals — which faithfully reports all this spewing of horseshit without pointing out that it is not so much madness on the part of D. Cameron, but only a funny little reminder that no IQ tests are mandatory for our election representatives.

And naturally all the beloved supporters of the Liberal Party have to rationalise this lack of free enterprise integrity on behalf of one of their elected members because otherwise they will come to see that they have not one drop, line or ounce of free enterprise integrity (or any other integrity) between the lot of them.

All the airwaves are owned by the government. The few companies who are licensed by the government to transmit some programs through the airwaves do so only as long as they follow all the government’s rules as takes their fancy day to day: Eg; how many Australian programs, how much drama, how many ads per hour Monday to Saturday and naturally less on the Sabbath, less the Good Lord takes the airwaves away. And no advertising for fags under any circumstances nor for the dreaded grog on the Sabbath (see above) nor for anything else that the government decides is in the interest of the ordinary common man, woman or child.

And so it is not extraordinary that D. Cameron wants a new law. It is not surprising that he doesn’t realise that without revenue from advertising the stations can run nothing unless the government pays for it out of our money on the ABC.

It is not surprising that he doesn’t realise that without any government licensing and a system of ownership of airwaves, all airwaves, there would be sufficient competition for there to be stations dedicated even to fine educational pursuits — and other minority interests. It is not surprising that he doesn’t realise that any thinking parent has no wish whatsoever for the government, or the wacks within it, to have anything to do with the upbringing of their children.

I happen to believe that a child is a parent’s responsibility until the child can think and act for himself and then he is his own responsibility.

One of the reasons it is not surprising that D. Cameron says all this shit (apart from being a member of the Liberal Party which excuses almost anything) is that he is single in any event. There are many good reasons for being single and having no children, but among them is NOT the background it gives you for recommending the way that others should bring up their children. And D. Cameron’s background is hardly the kind that will inspire confidence in the average or even above or below average parent.

Before being election to Canberra in 1966 by the poor people of Griffith in Johburg he was at 26 the industrial officer for the Association of Employers of Waterside Workers. Now for Waterside Workers industrial relations have hardly been perfect before, during, after or since D. Cameron, but nevertheless we can see the inspired background this lad has to permit him to worry about our kids when he lobs in Canberra.

I mean he’s been there now for ten years. On the way he has even beaten one Clem Jones for his seat (Clem Jones, for those who don’t recall, is famous for mowing cricket lawns) and has done so well that he even at only 36 is Deputy Government Whip.

This title has nothing to do with education or even D notices and has instead to do with making sure that the boys come out of the bars when there are votes on and other important things in Canberra. He is sort of second in charge of roll calls, which is a fine job for well-intended idiots who the party want to reward but not so the lucky recipient can actually do anything. If only there were all Deputy Whips.

And so it is that I think upon D. Cameron quite kindly and said as I do about stray dogs and even flies when I spray the Mortein and then I get the shock horror of the year.

There it is on page one of all the papers: the very same D. Cameron who will look after our kids after school while we are at the pub, has thrown a party in our Parliament House for all the other wacks who fluked it in 1966.

I mean if you got a job out of the blue without any qualification and you still have it and a great wacking pay cheque and a fancy title and pay next to nothing to do wouldn’t you throw a party? But unfortunately something went wrong.

D. Cameron ordered a cake and a girl to come out of the cake to say “happy birthday” (can you imagine this boy in charge of TV programming for all our children?). And then to top it all off the girl hasn’t got a top on. She’s actually got tits and our actual election representatives actually see them.

Well you can imagine what a shock a poor single boy like D. Cameron gets when he sees the knockers right there in front of his very own Liberal Party eyes. Naturally he puts up a screen right away and naturally it is big news. And there is poor little D. Cameron on TV with a great big underlip and tongue trying to explain that it was all a big mistake and like that; the way little people do when they try and act all grown up.

Big bloody deal. I couldn’t care less if D. Cameron fucked dogs or even call girls as long as he leaves my kids alone.

But when a wack like that thinks he’s been given the right to tell us how to bring up our kids I get really worried. And when he says that the whole problem is that advertising “would encourage young viewers to pursue the unattainable through their lives”, I begin to understand.

And especially I understand when young single D. Cameron cops this girl jumping out of the cake with her tits all over the place and can’t even get to suck a nipple without the papers making a mountain out of a very ordinary pair of molehills.

No wonder he’s against advertising. No wonder he’s against tits. No wonder I wonder at the world when any opinion of D. Cameron is even uttered let alone reported.

If D. Cameron reckons kids will get hangups because of TV ads, how does he explain his own? Or perhaps he has really come to understand and solve the problem of unattainable dreams by which all progress is possible, by the banning and censoring of all dreams and the banning and censoring of the unattainable.

Isn’t there some nice girl out there who seeks a nice little politician with view to friendship and sharing the occasional cake? Isn’t there someone who can prove to D. Cameron that the unattainable can actually be attained? Even for money?

I thought not.