Abbott is unlikely to be as successful in dealing with China as he has so effectively opposed to the ALP government since he became the opposition leader.
China is no Gillard or Rudd.
If Abbott hopes his hardlining tactics may work, the US would have China measured long ago, given that the US has been and is still much much more powerful than Australia and there have been many harks there who are at least as good as Abbott in global leadership and skills.
So yes, his stance on China has to evolve with time.
Just see how American presidents changed their attitudes towards China from their campaigns once they came to the White House and began to deal with China.
Rhetoric is one thing and reality is another totally different one all together.

I suspect, although we will have to wait and see, that Abbott's attitude to China will be the same as his attitude towards everything else. It is his way, or the highway. Tony Abbott, I feel will take the old fashioned, slightly racist, white supremisist attitude that he always does. The problem is that this approach may not sit too well with the Chinese communist elitists in Bejing, who are used to a little more respectful approach that Kevin Rudd showed them.
I am sorry to sound so negative, however, if Tony Abbott gets in, than Australian voters ill get what they deserve. They don't deserve sympathy

Abbott has done nothing to prove his managerial skills with these China pronouncements, other to take on board and reflect a fast growing public awareness in Australia of what China's aims really are.

It is quite evident these do not include a transition to democracy, nor do they embrace a move to free trade as we know it. Indeed, wishful thinking at best. Rather, theirs' is more to do with a: "be reasonable - do as we say", approach, and woe betide anyone who opposes strategies of their central government. To wit, their own internal security budget is a bigger spend than their armed forces just to 'harmonise' their own people, who perhaps given the chance would invite a more liberalised society in their door. Hong Kong might be a good example of this, where the recent massive public protests illustrate the 'made in China' brand of politics is not welcome there. Absolute power - yet they are now stuck in an ongoing battle with control freaks wanting to revise their liberal ways.

Yes it's true, Abbott was treated as a Prime Minister in waiting, simply because a drovers dog, let alone China's politburo, can easily see the Labor side of Federal politics here is doomed to a grisly end (finito) - but that doesn't mean Abbott will have had much of a hand in their downfall - as seems all too evident to most of the voting public who intuitively know that this Liberal fellow has risen to a station in life beyond his level of expertise(akin to our Prime Minister). Indeed, neither are held high in the public esteem . More to the point, Abbott echoed the opposition team's brand new stance, and that of whomever might lead his party when the time comes. This change of mindset has come about because of a growing public concern about how our incumbents in Canberra conduct their business - ie: They rely on revenue streams derived largely from asset sales, which in time will leave us as mere tenants in our own land. Food, and the food chain in particular, is now heading the same way as our mineral wealth, which is now 85% foreign owned. In the downstream food processing industries about 80% of Australia's corporations are out of our hands, thanks to Canberra and their quest for foreign cash, where anyone with deep pockets can buy any corporation or industry they choose. Now our prime rural land and its concomitant water rights are rapidly heading in the same direction, thanks to Wayne Swan's great initiative some years ago - where the trigger point for a single purchase now lies at $244m, and anything less than that is not subject to any sort of FIRB discussion - Consequently the FIRB have had no work to do for years, given that most rural properties of scale never get near that valuation. As a result Canberra have no idea of just what rural property now lies in foreign hands - at least that's according to Senator Bill Heffernan who has been tasked with an inquiry into these things. Yet the sad thing is, a variety of government bodies persist with a line that that they have a handle on foreign ownership, when clearly they do not. Lists, registers of new owners - they have never been kept. Ergo, our government have been shoveling smoke to mask their tracks

Simply because many of these entities involved in Australia's land grab(in effect colonisation) are state owned corporations, Abbott has raised this matter in the full knowledge that a revised policy it is well overdue. Indeed this practice of inviting colonists into Australia must end

Though the big kerfuffle at the moment is Canberra's drive to sell vast tracts of the Ord River farm land to a Chinese entity(government owned), and Bob Hawke has been payrolled by that entity to make it happen. Thus the bleating from Bob Carr, and lots of other friendly notables on that side of the political fence who are desperate for cash - Foreign cash - money that was never in Australia. Asset sales - yet Canberra call these capital inflows "investments" Colonisation, most would call it - Indeed, just buy Australia from mugs who are willing to sell it for some cash in the here and now, and let future generations battle it out with the new owners. Foreign governments are not to be blamed here, because their role is to act for their own population

Nevertheless, for the first time in his career Abbott has enunciated a position on foreign ownership - one especially aimed at State Owned corporations acting as if they were driven by free enterprise motives, when it is patently clear they are not. He wants us rid of this colonisation rubbish, Mr Abbott saying - ""That's because we don't support the nationalisation of businesses by the Australian government, let alone a foreign one."

Well, at least that's what he said. However, where was he and his Liberal party when the Sovereign State entity "Qatar" commenced their run to buy Australia through their wholly owned corporation "Hassad Australia". After years of buying, the Qatar government now own more prime rural land in Australia than the acreage of their own country. China with their vast purchases, well they have been nowhere as transparent, consequently their ownership ledgers will have to be determined. Much as happened in most of the Sth American countries who finally determined what was going on, though each have now addressed the problem in spades

Given some more time, comprehensive lists of these so-called 'investment" inflows will hit the public sphere. When that happens the government are gone, indeed the public outcry will demand blood, and lo behold any politician who fails to support a rigorous monitoring of those who would sell Australia short.

Thus Mr Abbott's stance in the here and now

If we examine China economy by comparing the "list of countries by tax revenue as percentage of GDP" [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_as_percentage_of_GDP ], you will find that China is a small government at 17%; whereas many so-called democracy and free markets are big government. For examples, Australia (30.8%); US (26.9%) and UK (39%).

The fact that China economy is growing at high speed with plenty of cash is itself a form of human rights achievement.

Abbott talks about Human rights, yeah I really see it as their core policy is the “slave & master” rule!

China has the money and growth and no matter what regime they have, it is their business, not ours and so trade needs to be open with them because they will be the power house soon.

Tony Abbott/LNP just spews out what the population wants to hear but can’t explain how they will achieve anything and that is in its self very dangerous for Australia.