Pauline Hanson, Minister for Immigration in the Liberal-One Nation coalition, looks into the camera and says: "Australia is closed for asylum seekers coming by boat." After its second term as the junior partner in government, the future looks bright for the party she founded nearly three decades ago. It is the only party gaining new members and there are numerous young One Nation MPs capable of replacing Hanson when she steps down after a stellar political career.
If the history of the populist radical right in Australia had followed the same script as in Western Europe, the above would not be an exercise in alternate reality, but a plausible scenario. In Europe, radical right populists have gone from being seen as "flash-in-the-pan" protest parties to fixed points in the political landscape. 
Australians these days think of Hanson as a blip, but at the time she was a major threat to the mainstream. The reasons her party failed were many, but bad organisation was one. Another was the reaction of the Liberal Party that (after some hesitation) condemned the messenger while incorporating part of her message.
In Western Europe, it has been a very different story and the radical right has been one of the key political phenomena since the 1990s. These parties owe their fortunes not just to public frustrations about immigration, the economy, the European Union and the ideological convergence of mainstream centre-right and centre-left parties. Their durability is also thanks to capable leaders and well-developed party machines.
Their organisational skills have given European radical right parties staying power. They are usually more active at grassroots level than mainstream parties. And they are built to last. As a result, many have seen their iconic founder-leaders step down, but have not lost votes. The French Front National, the Italian Northern League, and Danish People's Party are all parties that are buoyant in the polls under new, younger leaders.
It is precisely the fact that these parties owe their success to long-term factors that makes it so irritating when commentators in countries like the US and Australia link a supposedly sudden rise of the radical right to the current refugee crisis or terrorist attacks in Europe.
This ignores the historical context of organisational and electoral progress achieved by these parties. It also ignores the fact that in the initial years of the past decade, several of them were in government or riding high in the polls.
There was no refugee crisis then and no Islamic terrorist attacks in the countries where radical right parties did well (the first major attack was in 2004 in Spain - one of the few places in Western Europe without a successful radical right party). In short: these parties are about much more than a single crisis or issue.
On the flip side, we should also remember that there are countries on the front line of the refugee crisis that have not experienced any such advance this year. The far-right Golden Dawn's vote in the Greece's recent general election rose by just 0.7 percentage points compared to the previous election in   January. This was despite Greece having seen more than half a million refugees and migrants arrive on its shores in 2015.
I understand why some right-wing commentators in North America and Australia push the line about Europe being on the edge of a precipice. It fuels the argument that their countries could face a similar fate. It helps justify why people should turn to candidates like those of the Tea Party. Or, in the case of Australia, the new radical right party, the Australian Liberty Alliance.
According to Fairfax Media columnist Paul Sheehan, the Australian Liberty Alliance is putting up "strong Senate candidates" and is much better equipped than Hanson's One Nation. This is unfair to Hanson, who had a range of issues to mobilise on and was once a formidable campaigner. The Australian Liberty Alliance, by contrast, looks like a single-issue party with uninspiring leaders.
Consider the three candidates it has announced: Deborah Robinson, president of the anti-Islam Q Society who in the past has shared a platform with Tommy Robinson (former leader of the anti-Muslim street movement, the English Defence League); Kiralee Smith, the anti-Halal certification campaigner; and Bernard Gaynor, whose Twitter feed suggests he is similarly fixated with Australian Muslims and Islam.
The Australian Liberty Alliance is all about stoking anti-Islam fears. But in a country like Australia where just 2 per cent of the population is Muslim, such scaremongering is unlikely - on its own - to bring votes. Certainly, it is very unlikely to produce anything like the success that the far more capable, well-organised and more widely appealing parties of the European radical right have enjoyed not just recently, but over several decades.
Duncan McDonnell is senior lecturer in the Department of Government and International Relations at Griffith University. His latest book, co-authored with Daniele Albertazzi, is Populists in Power.