On the return of John Howard

James Burke writes: Re.”Rundle: the No campaign reveals its secret weapon” (Tuesday)

John Howard is welcome to participate in any political debate, however dishonestly. But his status as “respected elder statesman” is a travesty for which we can blame Labor. The minute it won government in 2007, the ALP began talking up Howard’s supposed brilliance, to compare him favourably to Brendan Nelson. For the next six years it refused to make Wormtongue account for his Iraq deceit. For all we know, this was a promise made to Rupert Murdoch in one of those secret conclaves Kevin and Julia refuse to discuss.

Howard taught Tony Abbott everything he knows. If Abbott had lasted, he could have stolen Howard’s crown as the most dishonest Prime Minister in Australian history, though it might have taken the full eleven years to catch up.

Niall Clugston writes: Re.”Rundle: the No campaign reveals its secret weapon” (Tuesday)

As Guy Rundle states, one of John Howard’s pivotal achievements was to sink the 1988 “Referendum on Rights and Freedoms” – including proposed protection for property owners, amazingly enough. Howard’s entry into this debate should worry the Yes men and women. The other referendum that Howard sank was, of course, the vote on the republic.

From my vantage point in Western Sydney, the Yes campaign has relied to heavily on celebrity endorsements and feelgood sloganeering, while the No campaign has unleashed barrage after barrage of scaremongering, red herring mongering, and other negative ploys. Is this going to be another Brexit, another Trump victory, or another Corbyn victory? I’m not saying that these four events are the same, or even similar, but around the world the peasants are revolting, and the Yes campaign should not be complacent.