The far-right groups aiming for your vote on election day

FROM former rocker “Angry” Anderson to Pauline Hanson, they’re the far-right candidates hoping people’s fears will sway their vote.

Angry Anderson is a candidate for Australian Liberty Alliance. Picture: Adam Ward

OPINION

PAULINE Hanson, you are not alone as you rush in from the outer fringes of Australian politics to claim a front-row centre spot at the coming election.

There is a host of other far-right, opportunistic groups and individuals who have decided the electoral times suit them, too.

Ms Hanson, of course, is special. She has the advantage of a high profile, and a lot of election experience gained from the eight she has lost since 1998.

But she and the others have much in common, and it usually centres on a need to punish some group, and an almost total policy silence on matters which will decide the election, such as health costs.

Genuine policy is unnecessary. The driving force is a shared belief that many voters feel threatened economically and in national security areas and are desperate for a reassuring voice they are not hearing from the mainstream political parties.

“We live in deeply troubled times and there are those who oppose us at every step of the way. Belonging to a major party, I found, was not going to satisfy my political needs,” says Gary “Angry” Anderson, who has lost almost as many elections as Ms Hanson and is now trying the Australian Liberty Alliance.

Further, these insecure voters want those words of comfort to be in language they themselves use, because they believe speech is no longer free, and discussion of issues is deliberately made complicated to hide “the truth”.

One Nation's Pauline Hanson attends the Australian Electoral Commission's ballot draw for Queensland's Senate candidates in Brisbane, Friday, June 10, 2016. (AAP Image/Dan Peled) NO ARCHIVING

The same terms used to praise Donald Trump by voters in the US are used to celebrate Ms Hanson and others. They are honest, not afraid to say what they are thinking and — most important — do not accept what supporters see as the tyranny of political correctness.

In short, she and others say the things their backers would love to say but are too timid, or don’t have the platform. It doesn’t have to be much.

When Ms Hanson says she wants an Australia for all Australians she doesn’t have to elaborate. To many it is an empty phrase but her backers, convinced they are being done out of what is rightly theirs, know what she is referring to.

And take this statement from Daniel Nalliah of the Rise Up Australia Party last December on the anniversary of the Cronulla riots.

“There has been much speculation by the media and the socialist left regarding the 10th anniversary memorial in Cronulla NSW, calling it a racist rally,” he said.

“That is exactly why I as the national president of Rise Up Australia Party, agreed to speak at this rally, when I was approached by the organisers.”

Bernard Gaynor Lead senate candidate Queensland for the Australian Liberty Alliance. Australian Liberty Alliance formed last November and wants to ban Islamic migration from iIslamic countries. Photo Ric Frearson

The defiance free speech was a fizzer as far as the hopes of Rise Up was concerned, but maybe they will do better on Monday when they launch their national campaign in Melbourne, complete with a discussion of sharia law.

The Islamic State-inspired atrocities here and overseas have turned a significant number of voters against Muslims — any Muslims.

But there are other enemies. They include homosexuals.

Bernard Gaynor, head of the Australian Liberty Alliance, spends a lot of time worrying about others having sex. Mr Gaynor wants sodomy again made illegal and has some slippery-slope theories about other laws.

He backs, for example, the notion that “anti-discrimination laws will one day give paedophiles the same protections as homosexuals”.

Mr Gaynor might at least be reassured that, to his certain knowledge, homosexuals go to hell.

While these folk have much going for them in these political times, they also share problems.

Their best options are campaigns for the Senate, because the double dissolution means 12 senators will be elected in each state, halving the usual quota of votes needed for success.

Changes to Senate voting laws mean disciplined voters could direct their support straight at a minor party without having to deal with the big organisations.

But to get that discipline, the message would have to get out to supporters, in detail, on election day. That won’t be easy.

For example, Queensland has 24 federal electorates and if there were, say, five polling booths in each electorate a micro party would need enough supporters to hand out how-to-vote cards at 120 locations from 8am to 6pm on July 2 to be confident the message had been delivered.

That sort of mobilisation is only possible for major parties.

And there are rivals who occupy the same political territory but are better organised. In Queensland, again, veteran Bob Katter will take votes which otherwise might have gone to Ms Hanson.

But the potential rewards are great, including up to six years in Parliament.

And the power. Ms Hanson has already indicated she would allow the next Prime Minister to negotiate with her.