The Opportunity Foundation was the line in the sand. Too many calls. Too many nights. With no landline, we get no calls. It’s been that simple.

My mum, 87, used her landline to call me when she was freaked out during the recent election campaign.

No, she hadn’t been Medi-Scared.

``I’ve just hung up on (Foreign Minister) Julie Bishop,’’ she said.

Apparently, my mum has a strategy for telephone canvassing. If, when she picks up the phone, it is silent, she assumes there is ``a moron’’ on the other end.

``Go away you moron,’’ mum said.

``Hello, this is Julie Bishop’’.

My mum, petrified, slammed down the phone and called me to see what she could do to appease Julie Bishop, who she really likes – particularly her earrings, hair and choice of work suits.

I explained how automated calling worked and mum felt less mean.

Two days later: ``Malcolm Turnbull called me last night ….’’

And so it went until her postal ballot paper arrived.

``It’s four feet long. It doesn’t fit on the table,’’ she said.

Once she had completed the form, she called me again.

``Do you want to me tell you how I voted in the Senate?’’

1.    Nick Xenophon, 2.    Pauline Hanson, 3.    Jackie Lambie, 4.    The Seniors Party, 5.    The Voluntary Euthanasia Party (``well, why not?’’), 6.    Bob Katter.

Which brings me to a post-election article by a NSW academic, Piero Moraro.

Professor Moraro believes a young person’s vote should be worth more than an old person’s vote

According to Professor Moraro younger voters are those aged under 60 (Phew).

As I understand, in a `plural vote’ system, a 30-year-old’s vote would be worth two for every one cast by a 60 year old.

``This new system doesn’t rest on the hollow idea that everyone deserves the same right to vote,’’ Professor Moraro said.

``The one person one vote system however, treats people who had their chances in life, and those who haven’t yet, identically. This is not fair, and plural voting would help redress this injustice’’.

Part of me believes that the good professor could just be the sort of person who has spent a lot of his time complaining that life isn’t fair?

``Her ice-cream is bigger than mine – it’s not fair.

``When she left, my wife took the Commodore, the Labrador and the Miele – it’s just not fair.’’

Or maybe he was running short for an attention-seeking column fodder and chose disenfranchising/discriminating or just plain ignoring the real meaning attached to a person’s vote.

The trouble with his theory is that it is based on the assumption that young people live  ``longer with the consequences of the electoral outcome’’. He should take a look at the road toll statistics.

Really, Professor  – (who is lecturer in justice studies at Charles Sturt University) - you just keep giving.

For the Professor a person’s vote is about issues,  ‘’how it affects me’’ and not the grandiose concept of freedom and universal equality.

``People under 60 have much more at stake than someone who is already retired’’, he said.

Knock me out and call me drunk, but here was I was thinking we Baby Boomers were the `me generation’?

If nothing else, he is predictable and at a guess, I’d say he’s 40 and angry.

Fortunately, at our recent election there was something for everyone – including my mum.