Latest / The Bolt Report / The Bolt Report | 12 November

Transcript

The Bolt Report | 12 November · The Bolt Report

0:11
Speaker 1: Is the Gold Report.
0:14
Speaker 2: Tonight meet one of the traditional owners claiming land rights
0:18
Speaker 2: over all Melbourne. And that's the me too movement gone
0:21
Speaker 2: too far again. A footballer's career crippled by a lie
0:26
Speaker 2: about a rape, and Victoria's labor government panics and says
0:29
Speaker 2: kids will face adult sentences as youth crime explodes. But first,
0:36
Speaker 2: the fight in the Liberal Party over at zero. Well,
0:39
Speaker 2: this isn't just the critical battle for Australia's future, and
0:43
Speaker 2: I have some good news about that. This is also
0:46
Speaker 2: a war for the soul of the Liberal Party with
0:49
Speaker 2: no prisoners taken. And today you could see that simply
0:53
Speaker 2: by watching the extraordinary scenes in the corridors of Parliament House,
0:58
Speaker 2: which I'll show you. Liberal politicians were called to Parliament
1:01
Speaker 2: today for the first of four meetings in five days
1:05
Speaker 2: to finally decide whether their party should scrap it's disastrous
1:09
Speaker 2: net zero missions target for twenty fifty. Now, the ones
1:13
Speaker 2: who wanted the Liberals to keep the net zero target
1:17
Speaker 2: that's wrecking our economy, or even just wanted to keep
1:21
Speaker 2: the words net zero, they struggled into the meeting in
1:24
Speaker 2: dribs and drabs and Opposition leader sits in Lee she
1:28
Speaker 2: walked in with just one loyalist beside her, Richard Colbeck.
1:35
Speaker 2: But look now at the contrast in marched a posse,
1:38
Speaker 2: a brigade of liberals against net zero led by three women,
1:43
Speaker 2: which was a nice softening touch party favorite just in
1:46
Speaker 2: a Nampa jimp for price, just ahead of them all.
1:49
Speaker 2: And in the middle, look there, we'll play this footage
1:52
Speaker 2: again if you miss it the first time. In the
1:54
Speaker 2: middle the two main leadership contendersts to take over from Lee,
1:59
Speaker 2: Angus Taylor and Andrew Hasty, shoulder to shoulder, like a
2:04
Speaker 2: team or a joint ticket, opposed and at zero, but
2:08
Speaker 2: also opposed to the leadership of Lee. Now add also
2:13
Speaker 2: the liberals who were also against that zero but could
2:16
Speaker 2: not didn't want to be part of that choreographed march.
2:19
Speaker 2: And that's enough of them to deep six a zero
2:23
Speaker 2: and get rid of Susan Lee when the time is
2:25
Speaker 2: judged to be right to remove it, probably next year. Now,
2:30
Speaker 2: that image alone that you just saw is enough to
2:32
Speaker 2: make Lee the lamest of lame ducks, because everyone can
2:37
Speaker 2: see the power in the party is not with her.
2:42
Speaker 2: In fact, when the meeting wrapped up four and a
2:44
Speaker 2: half hours later, Lee left it to others to say
2:47
Speaker 2: what it had actually achieved really well, and.
2:50
Speaker 3: The shadow Edgy Minister will be making some remarks to
2:53
Speaker 3: all of you shortly, and the Shadow Ministry will convene
2:55
Speaker 3: tomorrow to resolve our final position.
2:58
Speaker 4: But it was an.
2:58
Speaker 3: Excellent meeting and to to hear from all of my
3:01
Speaker 3: Liberal Party colleagues.
3:04
Speaker 2: But what we do now know is that two thirds
3:07
Speaker 2: of the Liberals who spoke at that meeting we're against
3:10
Speaker 2: net zero, including Deputy Leader Ted O'Brien, But the opposition's
3:14
Speaker 2: Energy spokesman Dan Tine only hinted at that later, although
3:18
Speaker 2: it's now clear from the document he passed out after
3:21
Speaker 2: he spoke that net zero is going t and said
3:26
Speaker 2: the Liberals had agreed to two main principles to core
3:29
Speaker 2: principles which actually contradict each other.
3:32
Speaker 5: The foundation principles were very clear that energy affordability must
3:39
Speaker 5: come first and must be the focus.
3:42
Speaker 2: Along with reliability.
3:44
Speaker 5: And then the second second principle is that we have
3:46
Speaker 5: to be serious when it comes to addressing a missions reduction,
3:51
Speaker 5: because we want to be able to show very clearly
3:54
Speaker 5: that this is an issue the whole party room takes seriously.
3:58
Speaker 2: With many voters that will be as clear as mud.
4:01
Speaker 2: You can't slash emissions onily without raising prices. Still, in
4:06
Speaker 2: the document that he put out later, you can see
4:09
Speaker 2: eight further guiding principles. In the liberals today agree to
4:14
Speaker 2: no mention of net zero. It's effectively gone. Now. It's
4:18
Speaker 2: true the Liberals did agree to stay in the Paris
4:21
Speaker 2: Agreement that talks of net zero, but they also agreed
4:25
Speaker 2: not to legislate interim targets for Australia and not to
4:28
Speaker 2: cut emissions more than other countries do, which is the
4:31
Speaker 2: national's position. By the way, there's no to increasing pressure
4:38
Speaker 2: on companies to slash emissions, and no to the emission
4:42
Speaker 2: standards of the Abbadizi government is using to get us
4:45
Speaker 2: to buy electric cars instead, So that'll save that'll save
4:49
Speaker 2: you some money when you buy a car. Now. I know,
4:54
Speaker 2: confusing and often contradictory and far too much compromising, but
4:58
Speaker 2: net zero is going, and that just underlines something else
5:04
Speaker 2: about today. Those liberal politicians still trying to defend the
5:09
Speaker 2: net zero target are flogging the deadest of dead horses,
5:13
Speaker 2: so dead that you can smell it rotting. These guys
5:18
Speaker 2: don't realize they've actually already lost. I mean they lost
5:21
Speaker 2: months ago, Andrew Bragg, Maria Kovzik, Andrew McLachlan and Russen
5:27
Speaker 2: and the rest they have lost. In fact, the only
5:30
Speaker 2: thing they are now fighting for if they succeed, is
5:35
Speaker 2: to make the Liberals look like lying, hypocritical, shifty losers
5:39
Speaker 2: and phonies who drop the net zero talk in a
5:42
Speaker 2: second if the polls told them to. I mean, it's
5:46
Speaker 2: so common to hear some of these guys like you know,
5:49
Speaker 2: these holdouts like Malachlin who says, oh, look, if we
5:52
Speaker 2: retreat from achieving that zero, we will pay dearly in
5:55
Speaker 2: city electorates, or to hear saying the same.
6:01
Speaker 6: So when I'm talking to people in Bradfield, in Benelong,
6:04
Speaker 6: in Warringa, in Wentworth, in red in Hues, in Banks,
6:10
Speaker 6: they are telling me that they want to see credible
6:13
Speaker 6: action on climate.
6:16
Speaker 2: That's the only argument these people have. Oh my goodness,
6:20
Speaker 2: voters will hate us if we don't promise that zero.
6:24
Speaker 2: You know, this slogan that's actually forcing up your power bills,
6:26
Speaker 2: destroying heavy industry. But wakey, wakey, guys, the voters hate
6:30
Speaker 2: you already. They've already smashed you in two elections and
6:35
Speaker 2: booted you out of all those seats listed, and they
6:39
Speaker 2: did all that to you when you were promising that zero,
6:43
Speaker 2: when you were even boasting that you'd imposed that zero
6:47
Speaker 2: on all Australia, when you were in government.
6:50
Speaker 4: Our new official target.
6:54
Speaker 7: Of reaching net zero missions by twenty fifty.
6:58
Speaker 2: Look what happens to you after that when you had
7:01
Speaker 2: and did promise in it zero and worse is going
7:04
Speaker 2: to happen if you stick with still promising that dead
7:08
Speaker 2: cat because this time absolutely no one will believe you.
7:13
Speaker 2: Why would some voter who does believe in that zero
7:16
Speaker 2: pool of them, why would they then vote for the
7:19
Speaker 2: Liberals above Labor and the Greens when they've now heard
7:22
Speaker 2: half the Liberal politicians or more say, oh, well, actually
7:25
Speaker 2: net zero's disaster. And when the Liberals coalition partner the
7:29
Speaker 2: Nationals they are dead against it. And when state Liberal
7:32
Speaker 2: branches have voted to dump it, why would they choose
7:35
Speaker 2: the Liberals to deliver that zero when the best that
7:40
Speaker 2: even the Liberals net zero fans can say about this zero,
7:44
Speaker 2: oh it's popular. Well if they back net zero just
7:49
Speaker 2: because it's popular, what will they do when the Poles
7:52
Speaker 2: say it's not, they'd be out of there and a
7:55
Speaker 2: second in a heartbeat. And I think people know that,
8:00
Speaker 2: and already, in fact the polls aren't turning two thirds
8:02
Speaker 2: of voters. Well, we knew at the election. I'm not
8:07
Speaker 2: going to vote for the zero labor government, right that's
8:12
Speaker 2: given them this cost living crisis driven by electrictic prices
8:16
Speaker 2: that rocketed by more than twenty four percent in one year.
8:20
Speaker 2: Then are going to two people they say, we'll not
8:22
Speaker 2: give their first vote to labor. And this week's Resolve poll, Wow,
8:27
Speaker 2: that shows a third of voters now want net zero
8:29
Speaker 2: gone and just one quarter wanted to stay. Whatever the
8:35
Speaker 2: insane costs of the utter uselessness of it. This is
8:39
Speaker 2: nothing we will do will change the climate anyway by
8:41
Speaker 2: anything anyone can mention measure. So no, the penny is
8:45
Speaker 2: dropping with voters. The spending trillions on doing something that
8:49
Speaker 2: makes virtually no difference is insane. And all that even
8:55
Speaker 2: before the liberals change their zero policy and say you
8:58
Speaker 2: know that is actually all right, All that before the
9:02
Speaker 2: liberals finally dare to argue at last against net zero.
9:10
Speaker 2: That of course, is why labor is hysterical and defending it,
9:13
Speaker 2: because they're scared what a liberal party that finally argues
9:17
Speaker 2: back might actually do to this government, particularly if it's
9:22
Speaker 2: under a leader who has the guts and the passion
9:24
Speaker 2: for the fight. And as we saw today from that
9:29
Speaker 2: march down the corridor, there are now enough Liberals to
9:32
Speaker 2: make sure that there will be that fight and hopefully
9:36
Speaker 2: that leader joining mer Scyn his political editor Andrew Clenell.
9:45
Speaker 2: Andrew Clarinel, thank you so much for your time. That's
9:48
Speaker 2: amazing footage today from Parliament House, just from the corridors.
9:52
Speaker 2: I mean that kind of phalanx walking down together, tightly choreographed.
10:00
Speaker 2: That's something you normally don't see outside leadership challenges. How
10:04
Speaker 2: did you interpret all that?
10:06
Speaker 8: Yeah, well that's the front page photo I would think tomorrow,
10:10
Speaker 8: and let's really sort of analyze it, Edward. You've got
10:13
Speaker 8: Taylor and Hasty, the two protagonists, the two guys who
10:19
Speaker 8: want the leadership against each other, against Susan Lee, joining
10:23
Speaker 8: together as if to say, look, we both want the
10:26
Speaker 8: top job, but we want to get rid of zero
10:29
Speaker 8: more and maybe sometime down the track we can work together.
10:34
Speaker 8: Then you've got the fact that with them contemplating rolling
10:37
Speaker 8: a female leader, they put three women at the front,
10:42
Speaker 8: including jacint and Nama jim A Price, who of course
10:45
Speaker 8: is very popular out there in the community. So that's
10:48
Speaker 8: quite deliberate, as you say, in staged in choreographed as well.
10:51
Speaker 8: But it's my understanding the decision to enter the party
10:54
Speaker 8: room like this, and they're much more unified than the
10:57
Speaker 8: moderates or any supporters of Susan Lee or any anyone else,
11:01
Speaker 8: was made this morning in a blake called Henry Pike's
11:05
Speaker 8: office is the member for Bowmen in Brisbane out of
11:07
Speaker 8: suburban Brisbane, and he and Garth Hamilton are the ones
11:10
Speaker 8: who was said to be agitating for hasty and generational
11:13
Speaker 8: change in terms of leadership. That that was where the
11:16
Speaker 8: meeting of the Conservatives was held, and they came up
11:18
Speaker 8: with a decision to approach it this way. And even
11:21
Speaker 8: if Susan Lee's position, which I do believe it is,
11:25
Speaker 8: is at the moment dumping that zero, they're still in
11:29
Speaker 8: a fashion thumbing their nose at her, aren't they, because
11:32
Speaker 8: she knows they want her job, and they are arriving
11:36
Speaker 8: with their troops to go into this meeting where she's
11:40
Speaker 8: arriving with one colleague. So I think it is a
11:45
Speaker 8: big symbolic moment and I think it shows once again,
11:48
Speaker 8: as climate policy often is in a Liberal Party and
11:51
Speaker 8: has been a multiple occasion since Tony Abbott got the
11:53
Speaker 8: leadership in two thousand and nine, a proxy for a
11:57
Speaker 8: move on the leadership. It may take several months, I
12:00
Speaker 8: suspected will, but this is the beginning of it.
12:05
Speaker 2: Yeah. I thought it was such a thunderclap of a
12:10
Speaker 2: symbolic moment, so clearly arranged, so clearly intimidatory in a
12:17
Speaker 2: sense too, that it also had an effect of immediately
12:22
Speaker 2: advertising that Susan Lee is a lame duck. I mean,
12:26
Speaker 2: there's no power in her. That's going to hurt I think.
12:31
Speaker 8: Or what about the moderates They couldn't get their act together,
12:34
Speaker 8: or they don't even seem to have confidence in Susan
12:36
Speaker 8: Lea to stand behind her. And I think, I don't know.
12:40
Speaker 8: I mean, you obviously ideologically wouldn't agree with this, But
12:44
Speaker 8: would Susan Lee have been better off backing that zero
12:48
Speaker 8: and just going down, you know what I mean? At
12:50
Speaker 8: least be seen to stand for something, and at least
12:53
Speaker 8: stand for your supporters, because there were twenty of them
12:56
Speaker 8: in there. The moderates who back an zero target, perhaps
13:01
Speaker 8: they'd move off twenty fifty, but they back action on
13:03
Speaker 8: climate change.
13:05
Speaker 2: Twenty.
13:06
Speaker 8: They are twenty of her twenty nine votes, right, So
13:09
Speaker 8: she's kind of disowning or expected to disown at Shadow
13:14
Speaker 8: Ministry tomorrow twenty of her votes.
13:17
Speaker 2: Where are you?
13:17
Speaker 8: Then? You're in no woman's land. And again it just
13:22
Speaker 8: looks like you'll do whatever it takes to stay in
13:25
Speaker 8: the job.
13:25
Speaker 2: And what are you actually believe in?
13:28
Speaker 8: So sometimes even if you go down, I reckon you're
13:30
Speaker 8: better off just sticking to principle and to what your
13:33
Speaker 8: supporters want. And the evidence is she's not going to
13:36
Speaker 8: do that. She's just trying to save her leadership. And
13:40
Speaker 8: she would say, well, I've got to save the coalition,
13:42
Speaker 8: I've got to keep the Liberal Party together. But does
13:45
Speaker 8: it make her look strong? Does it make her look
13:47
Speaker 8: like a leader? Will she be up there advocating for
13:50
Speaker 8: something her supporters don't want? How does that work long term?
13:56
Speaker 7: Oh?
13:56
Speaker 2: Look, all those are excellent questions. But I really think
14:00
Speaker 2: think that sign of solidarity from the ones that want
14:05
Speaker 2: net zero gone suggests you cannot lead a United Party
14:09
Speaker 2: unless you go with them. But beyond that, you cannot
14:14
Speaker 2: be the leader of a party that says no to
14:17
Speaker 2: net zero unless you are passionately invested in that cause
14:23
Speaker 2: you have, that's my fingertips. You argue with conviction, and
14:28
Speaker 2: when you have did it for this long and you're
14:31
Speaker 2: seen to be dragged to that position yourself, you are
14:33
Speaker 2: not that leader.
14:36
Speaker 8: Well, I was reporting straight after the election when there
14:38
Speaker 8: was that initial coalition split for like two days. I
14:42
Speaker 8: said the coalition could split up in net zero because
14:44
Speaker 8: the Nationals are going to dump net zero. Now, if
14:46
Speaker 8: I knew that, there's a humble political journalist, Andrew, I'm
14:49
Speaker 8: pretty sure Susan Lee would have known that. So if
14:52
Speaker 8: that we're talking about a failure of leadership by Susan Lee,
14:55
Speaker 8: it's then it's right, then right. She could have seized
14:58
Speaker 8: the moment. She could have got Little Proud in her room.
15:01
Speaker 8: She could have got her opponents in the room. She
15:03
Speaker 8: could have got the moderates in a room, separate rooms
15:06
Speaker 8: initially and then together and behind the scenes, fashioned to policy.
15:10
Speaker 8: That's what a leader would do and say, look, you know,
15:14
Speaker 8: say to the moderates, say if she got them more
15:16
Speaker 8: on board instead today they're going to be speaking against
15:19
Speaker 8: her effectively. If she could convince them, look, we can
15:22
Speaker 8: still tackle emissions reduction, but power prices has to be
15:25
Speaker 8: the main game. I need you to support me. Then
15:29
Speaker 8: we would have had a pretty unified front. Today we didn't.
15:32
Speaker 8: We had a complete dog's breakfast. The division Colin Inch's
15:37
Speaker 8: will be written many tomorrow of the division in that party,
15:41
Speaker 8: and the TV pictures tonight, all that will tell people
15:46
Speaker 8: is these guys, if you can't govern yourself, you can't
15:48
Speaker 8: govern the country. So I think if there's a failure
15:51
Speaker 8: of leadership, it's at that initial point. Susan Lee. Instead
15:55
Speaker 8: of saying we're going to have a six month to
15:57
Speaker 8: one year review on this issue, which just open the
16:01
Speaker 8: door for division and opened the door for the Nationals
16:03
Speaker 8: to front run, she should have spent every waking moment
16:07
Speaker 8: at that time, at the beginning of a leadership, trying
16:09
Speaker 8: to sort this out and trying to get everyone on
16:11
Speaker 8: the same page. Instead, she's just opened up everyone gets
16:15
Speaker 8: to say, I know the charge, that's.
16:19
Speaker 2: Not possible to get everyone on the same page. But
16:22
Speaker 2: I would say that the pictures today suggests that the
16:25
Speaker 2: only way the Liberals can pretend to be united and
16:30
Speaker 2: disciplined and passionate about fighting on either side of the
16:35
Speaker 2: argument is if they go for against that zero, if
16:39
Speaker 2: they're against that zero, because only that side showed some
16:43
Speaker 2: sort of unity, and anything other than going that zero
16:47
Speaker 2: will show the world listen, most of those libs they're
16:51
Speaker 2: not for the policy they claim to be for. And
16:53
Speaker 2: I just think it's over. It was over before. It
16:56
Speaker 2: always should have been against zero. But Andrew, if they
17:01
Speaker 2: do decide to go net zero in any form, maybe
17:06
Speaker 2: yes to some seemingly sensible move to cut emissions, not
17:10
Speaker 2: that I can think of what that might be, maybe
17:12
Speaker 2: nuclear power at least. Do you think that would give
17:16
Speaker 2: labor any trouble?
17:18
Speaker 8: Yes, it will cause labor trouble, but only if they
17:21
Speaker 8: can prosecute the argument, and they haven't shown a capacity
17:24
Speaker 8: so far to prosecute the argument. Now, I think mackay
17:27
Speaker 8: Cash argue this in the party room today. We've got
17:29
Speaker 8: to make it like the voice that was the last
17:31
Speaker 8: time they had some success, really binary. And they're saying, well,
17:34
Speaker 8: we support the Paris Agreement. So how do you explain
17:37
Speaker 8: that that's going to be their position post that zero?
17:39
Speaker 8: This is one tipping and support the Paris Agreement when
17:42
Speaker 8: it lands tomorrow after Shadow Ministry. So is that a
17:47
Speaker 8: bit a confused message and hard to sell? I suspect,
17:50
Speaker 8: So you can still sell it you've just got to
17:53
Speaker 8: prosecute it really hard and just say, look, we're about
17:57
Speaker 8: emission's reduction, but we're about lower power bills and Lord
18:00
Speaker 8: Powe bills take precedents, and just hammer away at that,
18:05
Speaker 8: and just hammer away at the fact. Look when China
18:07
Speaker 8: we're moving the same as the OECD countries. You know
18:11
Speaker 8: that's what we should be doing. But if you keep
18:15
Speaker 8: it simple to those messages, then you've got a chance.
18:18
Speaker 8: But so far they just haven't been able to show
18:21
Speaker 8: themselves as able to prosecute.
18:22
Speaker 4: And look, I've got.
18:23
Speaker 8: To say that the three main tenders, Lee, Taylor and Hasty.
18:28
Speaker 8: You know, Lee and Taylor have some skin in the
18:30
Speaker 8: game in the sense that Taylor was the minister when
18:33
Speaker 8: they signed up to net zero, So if he was later,
18:36
Speaker 8: how do you reckon that would go in the Parliament
18:37
Speaker 8: or indeed in an election campaign. Hasty, he's had some
18:42
Speaker 8: blunders recently so he's put himself on the back foot.
18:45
Speaker 8: But he is someone who could genuinely say this is
18:49
Speaker 8: what I believe, this is my conviction, and perhaps down
18:53
Speaker 8: the track Andrew that gives him a little advantage over
18:56
Speaker 8: the other two when it comes to this debate and leading.
18:59
Speaker 2: Well maybe, but it to be nimbler on his feet
19:01
Speaker 2: in argument that has shown so far. But it's interesting
19:03
Speaker 2: to draw the parallel with the voice of course leading
19:07
Speaker 2: that and making a very binary was just inter Damper
19:10
Speaker 2: Jimper Price with passion and conviction. That kind of figure.
19:14
Speaker 2: I'm not saying her necessarily, but that kind of figure
19:17
Speaker 2: is the only person that can help the liberals now.
19:21
Speaker 2: Andrew Clenelle, thank you so much for your time.
19:23
Speaker 8: Thanks man.
19:27
Speaker 2: After the break we'll have more on the liberals meeting,
19:30
Speaker 2: but also some very odd business about new laws against
19:37
Speaker 2: neo Nazis for saying what too many on the left
19:40
Speaker 2: have also said but without punishment. Every time politicians want
19:49
Speaker 2: a new law, I wonder what's changed? Why do we
19:54
Speaker 2: need a law that we didn't before? News how of
19:58
Speaker 2: US Premier Chris smith Is wants tougher hate speech laws.
20:01
Speaker 2: The police protests, especially after a protest by loathsome neo
20:06
Speaker 2: Nazis in front of Parliament on the weekend bozos who
20:09
Speaker 2: chanted Nazi slogans and carried a banner abolish the Jewish Lobby.
20:16
Speaker 2: So what's changed? How can we need these proposed new
20:19
Speaker 2: laws against Nazi slogans? Now? Eighty years after we helped
20:23
Speaker 2: destroy Nazi Germany, How did we now breed these Nazis
20:28
Speaker 2: and this hate and why are we trying to ban
20:31
Speaker 2: a banner with a vile message, a message that we
20:35
Speaker 2: actually seem to have tolerated for a long time from
20:38
Speaker 2: extremes on the left and from some anti Israel Muslims. Now,
20:45
Speaker 2: former New South Wales Labor Premier Bob Carr is not
20:48
Speaker 2: a jew hater. He was once in a parliamentary Friends
20:50
Speaker 2: of Israel group. He himself hasn't said abolished the Jewish lobby,
20:57
Speaker 2: but he has attacked what he also does call the
21:01
Speaker 2: Jewish lobby, and attack it so aggressively that a Muslim
21:06
Speaker 2: group which interviewed him slapped the video of him on
21:09
Speaker 2: their website.
21:11
Speaker 4: Should Australians be concerned?
21:13
Speaker 1: I think Australian should be concerned. The Israel Jewish Lobby
21:16
Speaker 1: in Australia is a foreign influence operation. It's designed to
21:20
Speaker 1: put the interests of Israel above the interests of Australia.
21:26
Speaker 1: No one else organizes donations to attempt to elevate its
21:32
Speaker 1: influence in the way the Jewish Lobby does in Australia.
21:37
Speaker 2: Now, Bob Karras reportedly said that his criticism of the
21:41
Speaker 2: Israel Lobby was for and un quoting its unwavering support
21:46
Speaker 2: of a government in Israel pursuing what car calls a
21:50
Speaker 2: policy of genocide in Gaza and apartheid in the West Bank,
21:54
Speaker 2: as if that excuse for those foul and false claims
21:57
Speaker 2: makes it right. But it seems to me the left
22:00
Speaker 2: has licensed a hateful discussion that neo Nazis national socialists
22:06
Speaker 2: are now exploiting for their own purposes. Joining me and
22:10
Speaker 2: Michael Costa, former New South Wales Labor Treasurer, and Michael Danbi,
22:13
Speaker 2: former Federal Labor politician and Chairman of the Joint Standing
22:16
Speaker 2: Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defense and Trade. Michael Danby, do
22:20
Speaker 2: we have just a Nazi problem or a wider cultural
22:24
Speaker 2: one where extreme language from the left is now a
22:28
Speaker 2: river in which even neo Nazis can swim.
22:31
Speaker 4: Well, not just neo Nazis, Andrew.
22:33
Speaker 9: The Uranian Intelligence Service thinks the atmosphere is so vibrant
22:37
Speaker 9: in Australia that they can blow up synagogue's and burn
22:39
Speaker 9: down childcare centers.
22:41
Speaker 4: I don't I agree with you.
22:42
Speaker 9: I don't know why the New Southwest Police Commissioner told
22:45
Speaker 9: Sharry that the laws are insufficient.
22:47
Speaker 4: I have an alternative for him in a premier men's.
22:51
Speaker 9: Lead argue test the existing laws that you've got now,
22:56
Speaker 9: ever since gas the Jews at the Opera House, that
23:01
Speaker 9: the authorities have let things drift. And of course it's
23:04
Speaker 9: within this zeitgeist that the university is academia, particularly our ABC,
23:11
Speaker 9: and people like Bob Carr constantly making exaggerated comments about
23:18
Speaker 9: other Australians and what a khutzba coming from him. Beijing's
23:22
Speaker 9: biggest voice in Australia. What about the Beijing lobby? It's
23:26
Speaker 9: much more powerful than the Jewish lobby.
23:28
Speaker 4: I can tell you.
23:29
Speaker 2: That, Michael Costa, I'm just Michael said, why don't they
23:39
Speaker 2: Why don't they show leadership by arguing back, Well, why
23:43
Speaker 2: hasn't the New Southwest premier at least rebuked his predecessor,
23:47
Speaker 2: Bob Carr for what he said there.
23:50
Speaker 10: Well, look, I was a cabinet minister in the Car government,
23:54
Speaker 10: so I can tell you it's very sad to see
23:56
Speaker 10: where Bob Cars ended up politically. You know, trope about
24:00
Speaker 10: the Jewish lobby is one that's just so absurd that
24:04
Speaker 10: borders on an unhinged conspiracy theory. I mean, you just
24:07
Speaker 10: got to look at the numbers in this country, Andrew
24:09
Speaker 10: in the twenty one census. I mean, they're like half
24:12
Speaker 10: a percent of the population identified.
24:14
Speaker 4: As being Jews, and you know, in.
24:17
Speaker 10: Terms of Islam, you had nearly a million people, you know,
24:19
Speaker 10: three and a half percent of the population. I mean,
24:22
Speaker 10: if there's any lobby, and we've seen the influence of
24:25
Speaker 10: that lobby in terms of changing Alpeak policy in terms
24:29
Speaker 10: of Palestine, I'll be more concerned about the Palestinian lobby
24:32
Speaker 10: or the Muslim lobby than i would about any Jewish lobby,
24:35
Speaker 10: because they've been completely ineffectual, even if you believe.
24:37
Speaker 4: That one exists.
24:39
Speaker 10: And as Michael actually just said, yes, there is definitely
24:43
Speaker 10: a China lobby in this country.
24:45
Speaker 4: And you know the worst part about this.
24:46
Speaker 10: China lobby is, you know, we're rightly condemned Hitler, but
24:51
Speaker 10: Stalin and Mao killed more people than Hitler did, and
24:56
Speaker 10: Mao's regime still exists in China. Yet we have people
25:00
Speaker 10: out there trying to water down our opposition to you know,
25:04
Speaker 10: our China policy in the South China Sea and our
25:07
Speaker 10: alliance with the US.
25:08
Speaker 4: Well so speaking people eighty million people now killed. Yeah,
25:15
Speaker 4: I mean that's just whole thing.
25:18
Speaker 2: Now on the speech that I heard, and I just
25:22
Speaker 2: heard the former premier, I just heard former Prime Minister
25:27
Speaker 2: Paul Keating have a whack at the RSL outgoing RSL
25:32
Speaker 2: President and National President for yesterday saying at the National
25:36
Speaker 2: War Memorial that the Labor government here should increase defense
25:41
Speaker 2: spending by a lot to prevent war. And Keating said,
25:45
Speaker 2: how dare you consider China a threat? So yeah, well,
25:50
Speaker 2: I mean that's that.
25:52
Speaker 10: Is that just confirms the point of mate. But the
25:55
Speaker 10: point you make is the right one.
25:56
Speaker 4: Andrew.
25:57
Speaker 10: Look, the issue is the laws are there. And look
26:00
Speaker 10: I'm on Voltaire site on this. I just really worry
26:03
Speaker 10: about the slippery slope of stopping free speech. You know,
26:07
Speaker 10: I hate their speech, but I defend their right to
26:09
Speaker 10: say it. And I say that with a vested interest.
26:11
Speaker 10: Are we going to end up with blasphemy laws in
26:13
Speaker 10: this country like the UK was proposing if you criticize
26:17
Speaker 10: Islam some of their practices. Are we going to end
26:19
Speaker 10: up with laws that stop people criticizing trand procedures? And
26:24
Speaker 10: on one issue that you and I have always agreed about,
26:27
Speaker 10: climate change, are we going to have laws against climate
26:29
Speaker 10: change denial, and remember the Greens proposed that, So this
26:33
Speaker 10: is a real worry this. I think the issue for
26:36
Speaker 10: me is where they protest, not the protests itself. They
26:40
Speaker 10: shouldn't protest in front of religious institutions, do they, you know, churches,
26:45
Speaker 10: synagogues or moss So I agree with that, and I
26:47
Speaker 10: think that's what he should focus on.
26:50
Speaker 2: Well, I don't think they should protest in the street
26:53
Speaker 2: blocking traffic. They should protest in the park. Sure, sure,
26:56
Speaker 2: I think that's absolutely fundamental. Michael Danby, the Liberals seem
27:01
Speaker 2: to be inching to say no to net zero and
27:05
Speaker 2: looking at that statement they've just put out after four
27:07
Speaker 2: and a half hours of talks, but yes to the
27:11
Speaker 2: Paris agreement that says we should cut all the missions.
27:14
Speaker 2: I don't know. It seems to me a little bit
27:17
Speaker 2: of a muddled message. They don't dare let the yes
27:20
Speaker 2: be there.
27:21
Speaker 4: Yes, Well, the engineering is meeting the ideology.
27:25
Speaker 9: Andrew, I've learned so much from you and Chris Kenny
27:28
Speaker 9: and Jenny George about this.
27:30
Speaker 4: We need baseload power labor.
27:32
Speaker 9: People should be ashamed that we listened to Matt Canavan
27:35
Speaker 9: and he sounds more like a labor person than any
27:38
Speaker 9: of the people are in the current government when he's
27:40
Speaker 9: talking about cheaper power for pensioners and poor people, apart
27:44
Speaker 9: from our industry and workers who need the power cheaper
27:48
Speaker 9: so that they can continue to produce our aluminium and
27:51
Speaker 9: steel and other things that we used to produce so
27:53
Speaker 9: so well in Australia.
27:55
Speaker 4: I mean, I can't understand the Liberals.
28:00
Speaker 9: Will eventually go the way that Tony Blair has gone,
28:03
Speaker 9: the way that Donald Trump has gone. Matt Canavan and
28:06
Speaker 9: probably Hasty will lead them, and at least there will
28:09
Speaker 9: be some product differentiation between us and our don Quixote
28:14
Speaker 9: in the Labor Party, Chris Bowen with his green hydrogen
28:18
Speaker 9: schemes and other fantasies that are all funded and then
28:24
Speaker 9: come to nothing.
28:28
Speaker 2: Michael Cossa, what do you make of the Liberals trying
28:31
Speaker 2: to keep everyone in the tent by saying yes, the
28:34
Speaker 2: Paris nonet zero all that kind of stuff. How effective
28:39
Speaker 2: is what has come out.
28:42
Speaker 10: It's going to fail, Andrew, It's going to fail. Like
28:45
Speaker 10: I said this last week, I mean, unless they can
28:47
Speaker 10: come out with a package of practical measures that really
28:53
Speaker 10: influence the cost of power, it's going to fail. And
28:56
Speaker 10: I say this because what does Labour need to do
28:59
Speaker 10: in the short term to get around this. They've already
29:01
Speaker 10: announced what they're going to do. They're going to keep
29:03
Speaker 10: the rebates going. I mean, these people operate like the
29:06
Speaker 10: public purse is a bottomless pit to subsidize all of
29:09
Speaker 10: their green dreams. They're going to dig in and get
29:12
Speaker 10: more money and just keep subsidizing this to keep the
29:15
Speaker 10: pressure off enough for them to win the next election.
29:18
Speaker 10: The Liberals need to come up with a package of
29:21
Speaker 10: concrete measures, nothing wishy washy. I think nuclear has got
29:25
Speaker 10: to be in it. Not power stations, but nuclear, lifting
29:29
Speaker 10: the ban on nuclear and let the market decide. They
29:31
Speaker 10: also need to highlight the costs of this for their
29:35
Speaker 10: broader economy, which they're not doing.
29:36
Speaker 4: They need the business community.
29:38
Speaker 10: On site and other stakeholders to take the lead, and
29:41
Speaker 10: they're not doing it.
29:44
Speaker 2: Well. Nuclear is in, so that bit is good, but
29:48
Speaker 2: as it's going to coalesce into practical policies, as you
29:52
Speaker 2: rightly say, Michael Costs and Michael Danby, thank you to
29:55
Speaker 2: you both after the break. Why matters that this Muslim
29:59
Speaker 2: is a tradition owner now claiming land rights over Melbourne.
30:07
Speaker 2: I want to return to a story I covered a
30:08
Speaker 2: couple of days ago, because I've since come across a
30:11
Speaker 2: very surprising video that just adds to the mystery. Now,
30:16
Speaker 2: I told you that an Aboriginal tribe has just lodged
30:19
Speaker 2: a native title claim over public land in all Melbourne
30:23
Speaker 2: and its surrounding areas, claim that could affect water resources,
30:29
Speaker 2: how parks and reserves are managed, fire reduction burns are done.
30:33
Speaker 2: And this claim is by the Werungerie Warroung, who at
30:37
Speaker 2: most total fifteen hundred people claiming to be Aboriginal, a
30:42
Speaker 2: tribe once led by the famous Aboriginy William Barrack, but
30:45
Speaker 2: in this case and now represented by eleven claimants, of
30:48
Speaker 2: whom four that I've now seen quote in the media.
30:52
Speaker 2: They include Perry Wanden, a cultural Heritage officer, Aberageinal bureaucrat
30:57
Speaker 2: die Kerr who was inducted into the Victorian Aboriginal hon
31:01
Speaker 2: a roll and this young law graduate.
31:05
Speaker 11: It's important to us that we have a say in
31:08
Speaker 11: the lands and waters that we have been caring for
31:11
Speaker 11: for generations. And obviously this is incredibly proud moment for
31:17
Speaker 11: our mob. And yeah, it's about that recognition.
31:21
Speaker 2: And then there was a fourth fourth aboriginy a man
31:26
Speaker 2: I showed you before Andrew Gardner, a member of Victoria's
31:30
Speaker 2: First People's Assembly, except I've now found what I suspect
31:35
Speaker 2: is a more representative photograph of this traditional owner now
31:41
Speaker 2: better known as Hassan Gardener with his wife next to him.
31:46
Speaker 2: And if you think he's a Muslim, you'd be right.
31:50
Speaker 2: Here is Hassan Gardner doing a welcomes the country last
31:54
Speaker 2: year at Melbourne University's Iftar dinner.
31:58
Speaker 12: Andrew Gardner, Hassan is my inst name, a Warundari man
32:04
Speaker 12: of the war are people some an abitual was from
32:07
Speaker 12: Australian since nineteen ninety five.
32:10
Speaker 13: So I'm humbled to be here tonight to do the
32:12
Speaker 13: work in the country as we're under honored and also
32:15
Speaker 13: as an Also the similarities between Abergual spirituality and Islamic
32:20
Speaker 13: practice is as one creator spirit, there's separate men's and
32:26
Speaker 13: women's business, it's family traditions around country and marriage and ceremony,
32:32
Speaker 13: and there's respect for others as knowledge holders and cultural authority.
32:39
Speaker 2: Now be very clear, I'm not saying that he or
32:43
Speaker 2: any of the people I've mentioned who don't have some
32:46
Speaker 2: Aboriginal ancestry I'm not saying they have no right to
32:49
Speaker 2: call themselves aboriginal under present official definitions, but this video
32:55
Speaker 2: for me at least raises important questions like this is
33:00
Speaker 2: Islam much like aboriginal spirituality. Canadavout Muslim man also be
33:05
Speaker 2: a warunjury cultural authority possible? But more importantly, Gardner shows
33:13
Speaker 2: that people move on. Does Hassan Gardner maintain traditional cultural
33:20
Speaker 2: and spiritual bonds with the Arunjuri lands when Islam is
33:25
Speaker 2: now his faith? And what links does he still claim
33:30
Speaker 2: to have that really do now entitle him to a
33:34
Speaker 2: bigger say over Melbourne's public lands, a bigger say than
33:38
Speaker 2: more than five million. None were Unjuri people. The people
33:42
Speaker 2: who live there too have. Joining me is rowndin tour
33:47
Speaker 2: and chief of the Spectator Australia, host of Outsiders every
33:50
Speaker 2: Sunday at nine am and hosts of his own show
33:53
Speaker 2: on Fridays at seven pm. Rowan, an Aboriginal Muslim elder
33:59
Speaker 2: who has non aboriginal ancestry, may not be how some
34:03
Speaker 2: people would first picture a traditional owner of Melbourne who
34:07
Speaker 2: deserves more say over its public lands. Should all this matter?
34:13
Speaker 14: I'm glad he give me the easy questions Andrew should
34:17
Speaker 14: all this matter?
34:19
Speaker 4: Well, people have eyes in their head.
34:22
Speaker 14: All human beings have eyes in their head, and all
34:24
Speaker 14: human beings, all of us in the democracy, are free
34:27
Speaker 14: to make up our own mind what we see and
34:29
Speaker 14: what the information in front of our eyes tells us.
34:32
Speaker 14: The problem here stems back to as so many problems do.
34:36
Speaker 14: Gough Whitlam, I'm glad we're celebrating the fiftieth anniversary of
34:39
Speaker 14: his dismissal, and it's sad that he wasn't dismissed earlier
34:43
Speaker 14: before he did all the damage he'd done.
34:44
Speaker 4: But this is another one.
34:45
Speaker 14: I think it was GoF who put the dirt in
34:47
Speaker 14: the hand of Vincent Lingari and said, okay, set up
34:50
Speaker 14: the whole idea of land rights. Now at no point
34:55
Speaker 14: the entire land rights slash native title slash Marbo push
35:01
Speaker 14: activist push if you like, or concept had to end up.
35:05
Speaker 4: Where we are today. It had to.
35:07
Speaker 14: And those people back in the day who objected firstly
35:11
Speaker 14: to the whole concept of land rights and then objected
35:14
Speaker 14: to native title, objected to marbo, We're all dismissed as
35:17
Speaker 14: racists and all told you don't understand this is going
35:21
Speaker 14: to be fantastic it's not going to be a threat
35:23
Speaker 14: to anybody. All those people who in my view correctly
35:28
Speaker 14: warned about where this would end up have been justified.
35:33
Speaker 14: And what we've had is the goodwill of the non
35:36
Speaker 14: indigenous population of Australia yet again being abused. I don't
35:41
Speaker 14: mean by the traditional or the broader indigenous population. I
35:46
Speaker 14: mean by the activist class, by the activist class who
35:50
Speaker 14: are now claiming that the Melbourne Cricket Ground should be
35:53
Speaker 14: part of their traditional ownership or whatever. We've never defined
35:57
Speaker 14: what an aboriginy is or should mean. We've always avoided
36:01
Speaker 14: any technical definition. We've never really defined what traditional ownership means.
36:06
Speaker 14: We've never just something to define what custodianship means, and
36:09
Speaker 14: on and on and on. The entire edifice is built
36:13
Speaker 14: on goodwill, which is great, there's something wrong with that,
36:15
Speaker 14: but built on goodwill with the legal fraternity and politicians
36:20
Speaker 14: being afraid at every stage, both labor and liberal politicians,
36:24
Speaker 14: high court judges, a lot of them all the way
36:26
Speaker 14: down the line being being afraid and too cowardly to
36:30
Speaker 14: confront that actual meaning of what are we talking about?
36:34
Speaker 14: What sort of ownership are we talking about, and what
36:36
Speaker 14: sort of heritage or.
36:41
Speaker 4: DNA. Are we talking about that.
36:44
Speaker 2: Justifies periecial relationship? Whole thing is a mess, freaking to
36:47
Speaker 2: you know, you're probably freaking. We have lawyers having kittens
36:53
Speaker 2: about these discussions because our freedom to speak frankly about this,
36:58
Speaker 2: I think is really severely curtailed by ridiculous laws. But
37:05
Speaker 2: let me just say this, if you want. People are wondering,
37:08
Speaker 2: will you know someone who's Muslim with non Aboriginal ancestry
37:13
Speaker 2: as well? Really are they entitled? Tomorrow? We are going
37:16
Speaker 2: to see much more of this, Rohan, because these things
37:19
Speaker 2: are now being frozen in perpetuity rights through you know,
37:23
Speaker 2: public land, et cetera. And with the intermarriage rates and
37:27
Speaker 2: the way people move on and they go to new
37:30
Speaker 2: faiths and they go to new beliefs, and one hundred
37:33
Speaker 2: years from now, how unrepresentative will some people seem who
37:38
Speaker 2: claim to have this traditional ownership. This is the problem
37:42
Speaker 2: that I think we haven't faced, that people change over time,
37:46
Speaker 2: and what we now think of Aboriginal today will look
37:49
Speaker 2: very different one hundred years from now.
37:53
Speaker 14: Absolutely, And also you only have to go to places
37:55
Speaker 14: like Sicily where I love you as you know I
37:57
Speaker 14: love going to Sicily where you can see the layers
37:59
Speaker 14: of here, history of the different peoples and groups and tribes,
38:02
Speaker 14: whatever you want to call races, their ethnic groups, religions
38:05
Speaker 14: have lived and moved through a place, and you can
38:07
Speaker 14: see it in front of you sitting in a cafe.
38:09
Speaker 14: You can see the layers of what was once in Moresquats,
38:11
Speaker 14: what was once say a colosseum or a temple, what was.
38:15
Speaker 4: Once a church. The layers are there.
38:17
Speaker 14: But at no point do you have someone rocking up
38:20
Speaker 14: to a place in Sicily and going, you know what,
38:21
Speaker 14: where the traditional owner is.
38:23
Speaker 4: So we'd like some sort of slice of the pie.
38:25
Speaker 14: Legally and financially, Europe would not work like that, and
38:29
Speaker 14: most of the world cannot work like that. So we
38:31
Speaker 14: have to get a better stricter definition of what we're
38:34
Speaker 14: talking about in this country. If we're to pursue going
38:37
Speaker 14: down this route without all sorts of problems that lie ahead.
38:42
Speaker 2: Well, bang, there goes my native title claim, my claim
38:46
Speaker 2: against the Romans and what they did to the good
38:49
Speaker 2: people of free slums. I mean, seriously, you've really stuffed
38:52
Speaker 2: me up there, Rowin, thank you so much in DF
38:55
Speaker 2: your time, Rown Dean, really appreciate it. After the break
39:00
Speaker 2: the latest victim of a fake rape claim and it's
39:03
Speaker 2: paid a terrible price. Makes you wonder has the me
39:06
Speaker 2: too movement gone too far? Now? The me too movement
39:14
Speaker 2: it did do some good. Rape allegations were taken seriously,
39:18
Speaker 2: a lot of lectures were put on notice. It also
39:21
Speaker 2: did a lot of bad. Rape allegations weren't questioned or
39:25
Speaker 2: not nearly enough, and men were dragged ins a court
39:28
Speaker 2: and allegations were often thin, if not outright false, their
39:33
Speaker 2: lives destroyed or turned upside down. And the latest semi
39:37
Speaker 2: example was from the AFL. Geelongkat's midfielder Tanner Brun was
39:42
Speaker 2: forced by the AFL to sit out all the last
39:45
Speaker 2: season after he was accused of raping a woman, which
39:49
Speaker 2: he denied, and this week the case was dismissed after
39:54
Speaker 2: a key witness for police admitted not just that hid lied,
39:58
Speaker 2: but that the woman came to the victim had told
40:00
Speaker 2: them she'd lied as well and try to coach him
40:03
Speaker 2: to back her up. Here is the footballer's lawyer is
40:09
Speaker 2: thankful that.
40:10
Speaker 7: The court process has indicated him. He's understandably upset that
40:14
Speaker 7: he had to go through with the court process at all.
40:17
Speaker 3: And that it's taken here to get The.
40:20
Speaker 7: Tanner wants to see those responsible for making these false
40:24
Speaker 7: allegations held to account and which all hope that Victoria
40:28
Speaker 7: Place properly investigate what appears to be an attempt to
40:32
Speaker 7: pervert the course of justice by at least one if
40:35
Speaker 7: your two propecution witnesses.
40:38
Speaker 2: Well, yes, but what were the police doing? I wonder,
40:42
Speaker 2: because how did it even get to caught when so
40:44
Speaker 2: many aspects of the allegations seemed odd. The victim said
40:48
Speaker 2: she'd afterwards dropped the football and his friend at their home. Really,
40:53
Speaker 2: she said they added her on Snapchat and suggests that
40:55
Speaker 2: next time they could have sex, but neither of the
40:58
Speaker 2: men snapchat hand were associated with her account. She claimed
41:03
Speaker 2: to being grabbed by the neck and so hard that
41:05
Speaker 2: she struggled to breathe, but no visible injuries matched her story,
41:08
Speaker 2: and other witnesses a knew her, so she was manipulative.
41:12
Speaker 2: They told the court she had given them different stories
41:14
Speaker 2: about what had happened, and had even admitted that the
41:17
Speaker 2: sexual acts were consensual. Joining me is jem Tooniini, columnists
41:22
Speaker 2: and communications consultant in Carolina Russo, commentator and president of
41:26
Speaker 2: the West Australian Liberals This is far from the first
41:30
Speaker 2: example of clearly false or dubious rape claims being taken
41:34
Speaker 2: too seriously, the lies being destroyed. We've had people complain
41:38
Speaker 2: the embarrasses, complain about cases evolving their clients. But meanwhile,
41:44
Speaker 2: what do you make of all this?
41:47
Speaker 3: What do I make of all of this? Well, I,
41:49
Speaker 3: first of all, I'm very thankful for the young men
41:53
Speaker 3: who were falsely accused, who are not going to be
41:57
Speaker 3: subject to any further penalty is not even the right word.
42:01
Speaker 3: I'm listening to you, I'm listening to your editorial, andel
42:03
Speaker 3: and I'm thinking their lives could have been destroyed, forever,
42:08
Speaker 3: destroyed forever because somebody lied. And you take take a
42:14
Speaker 3: layer back and to all of the points that you
42:16
Speaker 3: rightly raised, Where is the preparation of this case? I mean,
42:20
Speaker 3: Caroline will be able to talk to the legal aspects
42:22
Speaker 3: having been a lawyer, but you sort of raise all
42:26
Speaker 3: of these really relevant issues like the onus of proof
42:29
Speaker 3: and to get the charges laid and brought it to
42:31
Speaker 3: trial in the first place. You know, there was there
42:35
Speaker 3: is this narrative sort of at the height of the
42:37
Speaker 3: me too movement, believe all women unequivo unequivocably. My response
42:41
Speaker 3: to that, Andrews, you don't believe anyone unequivocably man or woman. No,
42:45
Speaker 3: but men, men lie and women lie. Its human nature.
42:47
Speaker 3: People tell lies. So coming to the place of you know,
42:53
Speaker 3: you know, arbitrarily saying I'm not going to question anything,
42:56
Speaker 3: I'm just going to believe, that's just fraught with danger, whether.
42:59
Speaker 2: You're a man or a woman, that they're scared police
43:04
Speaker 2: and authorities are scared of not believing a woman and
43:07
Speaker 2: being seen to be heartless or sexist or whatever. Carolyn,
43:10
Speaker 2: what do you make of it?
43:14
Speaker 15: And then the figures have trotted out about how few
43:18
Speaker 15: of these matters actually make it to court, right, And
43:22
Speaker 15: of course this is generally an area of the law
43:26
Speaker 15: that is very difficult to prove. It is often, you know,
43:31
Speaker 15: the testimony of one person versus a testimony in the other.
43:34
Speaker 15: So it's very difficult to.
43:35
Speaker 14: Get to court.
43:36
Speaker 15: But you can't inflate those numbers just to make your
43:39
Speaker 15: numbers look better, and Andrew, this is why we have
43:42
Speaker 15: the presumption of innocence, right, It's really important that that
43:47
Speaker 15: golden thread is respected and given the primacy and priority
43:51
Speaker 15: that it ought to. And similarly, the other one that
43:54
Speaker 15: we often trot out, and the law is that the
43:57
Speaker 15: justice delayed is justice denied. And in this case, this
44:00
Speaker 15: kid has missed a full year of his season, and
44:03
Speaker 15: no doubt, while he won't have to suffer any more
44:06
Speaker 15: of the core process, you cannot tell me that he
44:10
Speaker 15: hasn't already suffered considerably, and no doubt we'll have some
44:15
Speaker 15: trauma coming out of this what can only be described
44:19
Speaker 15: as a horrific situation. So I understand that there is
44:26
Speaker 15: attention given to making sure that allegations of sexual assault
44:31
Speaker 15: and the like make it to court and are prosecuted,
44:34
Speaker 15: and that you know, women or men or whoever come
44:37
Speaker 15: forward with those allegations feel that it's safe to come
44:41
Speaker 15: forward and that they will be listened to. But like
44:43
Speaker 15: Jemma said, no cohort is beyond reproach that everything that
44:47
Speaker 15: they say ought to be believed. And that's why we
44:50
Speaker 15: have these really firm rules in the law, is to
44:53
Speaker 15: make sure that things like this don't happen.
44:57
Speaker 2: Yeah, but you say, you know, innocdental proof and guilty,
45:01
Speaker 2: which I believe too. But the AFL didn't seem to
45:04
Speaker 2: treat it us in that way, in that they made
45:06
Speaker 2: the Sky sit out a whole season on claim with
45:09
Speaker 2: a fraudulent me if I was assumed innocent.
45:13
Speaker 3: No, if I was him, I would be taking that
45:15
Speaker 3: up personally because I think that's outrageous. That's not reflective
45:19
Speaker 3: of a presumption of innocence at all. And I echo
45:22
Speaker 3: what Caroline said, it's not you know, as with many
45:26
Speaker 3: things in this country in recent years, we've lost the
45:29
Speaker 3: ability to hold two things intension.
45:31
Speaker 14: You know.
45:31
Speaker 3: It's not everyone, regardless of gender, who makes an allegation
45:37
Speaker 3: is automatically and without question believed, like the element that
45:42
Speaker 3: you raised, Andrew, the piece about the snapchat and the
45:45
Speaker 3: other pieces of evidence that clearly pointed to something not
45:48
Speaker 3: being right here. I mean, look, if anything, perhaps it's
45:53
Speaker 3: a lesson. I don't know. I think it's a fraud
45:56
Speaker 3: situation broadly. But we can't we can't have a justice
46:02
Speaker 3: system which is not robust. That's a mark of an
46:07
Speaker 3: evolved society, a robust justice system.
46:12
Speaker 2: Yeah, I know. But meanwhile, Caroline, talk about presumption of
46:16
Speaker 2: innocence is another attack on it. The Albanizi government is
46:19
Speaker 2: making easier now to w recommen's lives of false claims.
46:23
Speaker 2: It's got a new national Higher Education Code, and this
46:26
Speaker 2: tells universities that if they're going to hire someone perspective
46:30
Speaker 2: of employees, members of the governing body, they've got to
46:35
Speaker 2: make those people declare whether they've been investigated, just investigated
46:41
Speaker 2: for an allegation of gender based violence during the course
46:43
Speaker 2: of their previous employment or otherwise. Now never mind, if
46:47
Speaker 2: such claims have proven false, as false as this case
46:52
Speaker 2: that we just discussed, they still have to disclose it
46:55
Speaker 2: like this, you know, an allegation that was never proved
46:59
Speaker 2: then against them for the rest of their lives.
47:04
Speaker 15: And it creates a perception, creates a perception that that
47:09
Speaker 15: person has potentially done something wrong and maybe they just
47:13
Speaker 15: got away with it, or maybe there just wasn't quite
47:16
Speaker 15: enough evidence to prove it, or the one that people
47:18
Speaker 15: love is oh, they got off on a technicality or whatever.
47:21
Speaker 4: And it does.
47:21
Speaker 15: Create that perception, which I think, particularly if you're going
47:25
Speaker 15: into a new workplace, you obviously want to be given
47:28
Speaker 15: the benefit of the doubt to put your best foot forward, right.
47:31
Speaker 15: You don't want people to have all these presumptions about
47:34
Speaker 15: you before you've even made it through the door, because
47:37
Speaker 15: it is going to make your ability to succeed in
47:41
Speaker 15: that workplace all the more difficult. So it's something that
47:45
Speaker 15: I understand. There's duties of care and all those sorts
47:48
Speaker 15: of things. But like with all these things, it's a
47:50
Speaker 15: balancing act and we have to be very careful that
47:53
Speaker 15: we don't swing too much one way in one direction
47:56
Speaker 15: or the other, because you do then throw out and
48:00
Speaker 15: make difficult you know, something which you know in the
48:04
Speaker 15: ordinary course an employee employer relationship, something that they should
48:09
Speaker 15: be able to manage between themselves and not have the
48:12
Speaker 15: government imposing things on that particular relationship, which then the
48:16
Speaker 15: government never has to deal with the consequences of.
48:20
Speaker 2: Yeah, absolutely, Germonton, Nini, carolind Russo, thank you very much
48:25
Speaker 2: to you both. I said earlier in the show. You know,
48:29
Speaker 2: when politicians want more laws, we've got to ask. But
48:32
Speaker 2: changed that something we didn't need before, we do now
48:35
Speaker 2: now need now. And the Victorian government, now it's got
48:40
Speaker 2: record levels of chrime, decides that youth criminals in certain
48:43
Speaker 2: categories like aggravated burglaries should face adult court and adult sentences,
48:47
Speaker 2: even life sentences. Should we be asking where did these
48:52
Speaker 2: children come from? What have we got wrong in the
48:54
Speaker 2: raising of children today? That's the issue that's it from
48:58
Speaker 2: me coming up now, sharing my acon. Good Night
49:04
Speaker 10: Mmm,