Whether Bill Heffernan’s intervention in population policy — one ALP deputy leader at a time – will prove to be a dogwhistle or a final siren for the Coalition government remains to be seen. But do the Tories really want to establish the principle that childless, single people can have no role in the discussion or formation of our policies and attitudes to family, education, birth technologies etc etc?

Where would that leave some of their most prominent attack dogs? Independent columnist and only occasionally simultaneous Coalition speechwriter Christopher Pearson, for example, who has contrived to be single by singularly positioning himself at both ends of the spectrum – first on the radical left, and then as a Catholic conservative. Being about eight times removed from the pram in the hall has not inhibited him from writing a series of pieces whose purview can be gleaned from the titles: “welfare to work, wedlock” (09/09/2006), “Sold on misconceptions” (19/08/2006), “ethics and the embryo” (29/07/2006), “Risky drug [RU486] of pro-choice” (12/11/2005).

Meanwhile, Cardinal George Pell in the Sunday Telegraph has weighed in with “Tough durable marriage a bulwark of society” (08/10/2006), “Pill [RU486 again] defeat a wake up call for pro-life forces” (19/02/2006), “Fathering Hope for a more prosperous future” (22/01/2006), “More counselling needed on abortion risks” …and on it goes.

Do Australians want these barren figures advising them on the difficult matters of marriage, raising children, etc? Can they contemplate relationships advice from a childless man in a scarlet dress who calls himself ‘father’ without laughing? Would they trust someone who has gone from gay Maoism to ultramontane Catholicism in the space of one lifetime to even give them directions to the end of the street, much less life advice?

In the spirit of Blinky Bill, I think we should be told.