If it were possible for something of value to come out of the hideous coronavirus plague, at least in Melbourne, it must be the cancelling the Formula One Grand Prix and one of the consequences that has just emerged. The race itself has long been a matter of controversy, partly because of the noise and general vulgarity of the whole thing, partly because it takes place in a public park that is being destroyed and also because of the secrecy that surrounds the commercial deal involved in staging the event every year. All financial details have been suppressed by governments of both political persuasions (showing that there is honour or at least consistency among thieves) and particularly what it costs the taxpayer for the dubious honour of holding the wretched thing here.

Some of us have long protested that we apparently pay a licence fee to the company that owns the rights to the Grand Prix, which is perverse in itself. I could respect the opposite situation where the company pays us for the privilege of using our facilities and we then allow it to make money from television rights, promotions and all the razzmatazz that goes with these events. But it is a giant rip-off that, instead of their paying us, we should have to pay them the licence fee so that they can have the exclusive privilege of ripping millions from the rest of the world. Rumours have abounded that the licence fee might be as high as $40 million a year, but the terms have been hidden because they are ‘commercial-in-confidence’, the last refuge of modern political scoundrels. But then the coronavirus reared its ugly head and struck down two mechanics working at the track. (One recovered, so he probably had only a half corona). The event has thus been cancelled, but the question has now arisen as to whether we still have to pay the extortionate licence fee and, if so, how much? This time, it has slipped out or been leaked, that the fee is $60 million! But surely it cannot be payable when it is not a frolic of our own that has led to the cancellation, but an international health crisis, what we call in the law a force majeure. Sorry to disillusion you, but it appears that we still have to pay the fee. Apparently we pay for the race taking place and also for its not taking place. This is not the first time the Labor party in Victoria has engaged in such shenanigans; its first act in coming to government was to break the contract to build the East West link and pay one and a half billion dollars for not building the road. But at least coronavirus has given us something that is useful to know. We now know that governments are so wasteful and so reckless that they would pay a licence fee to a foreign company for doing nothing. Is it any wonder that the gargantuan appetite of government can never be satisfied?

I have long been an admirer of Donald Trump and most of his works, but we have come to a parting of the ways. This has come about because the election is drawing closer and the battle lines are being drawn. Like other allies of the United States, we have such a stake in the outcome that we should be allowed to vote. But in the absence of that right, we are faced with the question: ‘Well, how would you vote?’ On most policy matters, I would like nothing more than to see The Donald re-elected. But the one issue where I disagree with him is so powerful that I would not vote for him. Why? The West is engaged in an existential fight and the main protagonist is Russia. I worry about China, too, but the Chinese are more interested in making money. Russia wants far more than that; it is on a messianic mission to rejuvenate its faded glory; to achieve a revival of Holy Russia led by a doctrinaire Orthodox Church and, the iron fist in the velvet glove, to create vast military power to enforce Russia’s policy and influence wherever it wants to project them. Nothing will be allowed to stand in its way. This is a Russia that cares nothing for national borders, shoots down civilian aircraft, stifles dissent and murders its opponents. Worst of all, it now has a foothold in the Middle East via Syria and has no qualms about slaughtering civilians. All of this has been allowed and encouraged by Trump who seems hell-bent on aiding Russia’s advance and on promoting a personal bond with Putin from which only Putin can benefit. This is an immense danger for the West and for our security. Until we find out what it is that allows such a perverse attitude to develop, we should be very suspicious that there is some ulterior motive. I am.

So, if Trump is not the answer, what sort of President would Joe Biden make? The criticism of him, of course, is that he would be a do-nothing president and succumb to his image of ‘Sleepy Joe’. That seems to me a good thing. All of our lives and economies have suffered from presidents and prime ministers who keep wanting to do things, always for their self-aggrandisement, increasing their power, weakening their countries and their currencies by excessive spending and weakening their citizens by discouraging their self-reliance. They would have done less harm by sleeping more. Biden would be a limited and mediocre president who would essentially do little but preserve the status quo; he seems a conservative who would nor start any weird social experiments. He would keep alliances alive and working and, when necessary, hurl the occasional missile around to maintain order. Otherwise he would leave things alone. There is a lot to be said for mediocrity. Biden sounds ideal.