Peter Dutton should see Donald Trump before the election. Being an opposition leader in an election is no barrier. After all, Mr Trump recently met with the newly appointed Canadian Prime Minister, who is also involved in an election.

Donald Trump is clearly open to deals, especially from a conservative politician who is a successful businessman and a former policeman. Moreover, he is favourably disposed to Australia.

As the Australian’s Dennis Shanahan reveals, Australia and the UK were included in the tariff impositions only days before the announcement. This was on the insistence of the White House trade counsellor, Peter Navarro, that no exceptions be allowed.

Because Peter Dutton’s initiative would be a continuing front-page story, it would have the additional advantage of overcoming the bias of much of the non-Murdoch media against him and would expose Anthony Albanese as inconsequential.

As Sky News Australia’s Paul Murray explained recently, this bias is shown by either not reporting or under-reporting Peter Dutton. He cites his recent programme about Peter Dutton’s meeting with Brisbane constituents. He says the mainstream media were there only to film either a protest or a ‘stuff-up’ by Peter Dutton. As neither occurred, there was hardly any reporting of what was a highly newsworthy evening. Murray believes a large part of the media want Albanese to win.

Although the proposition that only free trade is acceptable is an opinion, it is widely reported as a fact and too often also under the increasing influence of what can best be described as ‘Trump Derangement Syndrome’.

Sharri Markson’s recent Sky News Australia programme demonstrated that it is possible to present a balanced assessment of the President’s approach to trade issues. She asked three questions, answering them fairly and calmly: why is Donald Trump doing this, what will be the impact be and should Anthony Albanese have been so angry in his reaction?

In my opinion, it would be useful to consider the Liberation Day announcement in the context of the following seven facts.

First, the United States saved Western civilisation in the second world war, supported by the only powers fighting from the beginning to the end, Great Britain and her Commonwealth.

Second, following the war, the US demonstrated exceptional and unprecedented generosity, especially to the defeated powers. She even showered them with enormous wealth, instead of doing what Donald Trump would have done, lending them the money to be repayable with interest on their recovery.

Third, the US is the only dominant power to tolerate others, especially defeated states, such as Japan and Germany, imposing tariffs and trade restrictions on her.

Fourth, before Donald Trump, no American president has so strongly insisted that in international trade, the US be treated by other powers no worse than the US treats them.

Fifth, Donald Trump has been remarkably consistent in implementing a solution he has long been calling for. In addition, he clearly enjoys a mandate to do this from a majority of American voters.

Sixth, America cannot continue as she has with politicians who see their role as running her into virtual bankruptcy while managing her ‘decline’, something clearly premature.

Seventh, without a strong America, the West will be doomed to lose to the axis of evil.

So, what should Australia do to not only remove the somewhat inconsequential 10 per cent tariff (our GST), but also whatever else is imposed?

Obviously, we should do as the President wants and make a deal. That will clearly not be suited to a career politician, someone who, as they say, has hardly ever had a real job. Mr Albanese is, unfortunately, the epitome of a career politician.

As George Bernard Shaw suggested of such politicians, they know nothing and think they know everything. The Australian version believes the solution to any problem will always be known to the Canberra elites.

This solution is to be applied uniformly throughout the nation, without regard to federal principles. It will typically involve, if not billions of taxpayers’ dollars, at least millions. The elites invariably try to hoodwink Australians by referring to their folly as an ‘investment’.

Where possible they do something which should be unconstitutional; they try to cover up what will be an eye-watering loss, money down the drain, by declaring it to be ‘off-budget’.

In contrast to Mr Albanese and many politicians, Mr Dutton is anything but a career politician. He was successful in two other careers, policing and business. As a politician, he was early recognised as having ministerial ability. He is by far the most widely experienced minister in the parliament, a fact that most of the mainstream media desperately try to hide. If anyone can extricate Australia from the mess Anthony Albanese has put the nation in, it is Peter Dutton.

Apart from further consolidation in relation to defence, a deal is possible not only on critical minerals but also on beef and pharmaceuticals. As for beef, a right to export to Australia will likely open other markets. That is because we only ban American beef to protect our herds from Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE), also known as Mad Cow Disease, which has never been found in Australia.

Australia fears, with justification, that US imports may include beef from Mexico and Canada, where BSE has been detected in the past. However, Canada is now assessed, like the US and Australia, as enjoying a ‘negligible risk status’. Mexico is ranked at the lower level, ‘controlled risk status’. A system can readily be established that accurately tracks the origin of all US beef imports

As for pharmaceuticals, our officials have hitherto been very successful in negotiating extremely favourable terms. It should be possible to maintain the low cost of pharmaceuticals to patients, while the government (i.e. taxpayers) absorbs the costs of introducing a more market-oriented system acceptable to the US. The cost would pale in comparison to the vast number of financial follies undertaken almost without stop by the Albanese government. Such a deal is attainable in the right hands.