Latest / The Bolt Report / The Bolt Report | 2 December

Transcript

The Bolt Report | 2 December · The Bolt Report

0:11
Speaker 1: Is the good report.
0:15
Speaker 2: Tonight, Karma cumming for labours, so called mean girls in
0:18
Speaker 2: the Britney Higgins scandal, and the latest Chris Bone Global
0:22
Speaker 2: Warming Fast giving one hundred and seventy one million dollars
0:25
Speaker 2: from his future Built in Australia fund to a company
0:29
Speaker 2: from China, plus a warning from our top intelligence bureaucrats,
0:34
Speaker 2: wake up. We could face war with China inside the
0:37
Speaker 2: next ten years and plenty more tonight to shock housing figures.
0:42
Speaker 2: Donald Trump fights off claims of a war crime after
0:45
Speaker 2: a boat is blown up twice but first. Even Canada
0:51
Speaker 2: has just shown it is less woke than Australia and
0:54
Speaker 2: more honest. More honest about race in Australia seems truth
1:00
Speaker 2: doesn't matter. For instance, I've made clear for years that
1:03
Speaker 2: Professor Bruce Pasco, the dark Emu author, is a fake Aborigine,
1:08
Speaker 2: no aborage of ancestors at all in his genealogy. In fact,
1:11
Speaker 2: this story about who is average ancestors might have been
1:15
Speaker 2: has changed over the years. First they were on his
1:18
Speaker 2: mother's side, then they were on his father's and he
1:22
Speaker 2: refuses to show any proof. Now, professional genealogists of the
1:26
Speaker 2: darkimuexposed dot org website say his ancestry is actually one
1:30
Speaker 2: hundred percent British, even many of his own family deny
1:34
Speaker 2: there are Aboriginal ancestors.
1:37
Speaker 3: Bruce, you wrote dark Emu, a best seller about Aboriginal
1:42
Speaker 3: society at the time of first contact. How do you identify?
1:47
Speaker 4: I identify as Ewan and Bonna Owen Kasmine.
1:51
Speaker 3: Do other members of your family agree you will have
1:54
Speaker 3: Aboriginal heritage?
1:56
Speaker 2: Some do, many don't. Pasco still won't admit is not aboriginal.
2:03
Speaker 2: Most extraordinary is that the ABC won't admit it either.
2:07
Speaker 2: The national broadcaster still promotes Pasco and his works in
2:11
Speaker 2: videos to schools and claims is aboriginal. The nine newspapers
2:15
Speaker 2: also don't admit he isn't, and the biggest journal in
2:18
Speaker 2: publishing just yesterday insisted Pasco is aboriginal. Even Melbourne University,
2:26
Speaker 2: which hired Pasco as an Aboriginal professor, won't publicly admit
2:30
Speaker 2: his not aboriginal over although it has now very quietly
2:35
Speaker 2: edited its website to delete references to pasco supposed aboriginality.
2:41
Speaker 2: What's going on there? But look overall this as if
2:45
Speaker 2: the truth simply can't be admitted when it comes to
2:49
Speaker 2: race fakes like Pasco, and look, there's more than a
2:54
Speaker 2: dozen other potential examples I've told you about on the show,
2:57
Speaker 2: like Professor Kerry Doyle, who claimed to be of a
3:00
Speaker 2: tribe that's actually unrecorded in history, the winning Ninny no
3:04
Speaker 2: aberage of ancessors in her genealogical records, say genealogists from
3:08
Speaker 2: the DARKIMU exposed dot org website, and no explanation from
3:12
Speaker 2: her to them or me when we've asked her why not.
3:17
Speaker 2: Or then there's South Australia's Deputy Premier who still came
3:20
Speaker 2: to be Aboriginal and won't tell me or the ABC
3:23
Speaker 2: why records suggests there's no aberage of ancessors are there
3:27
Speaker 2: and that's how it goes. There's no missions, no matter
3:30
Speaker 2: what proof you throw out, and no resignations. Certainly Pasco
3:36
Speaker 2: hasn't ever returned as New South Wales Premiers Prize for
3:40
Speaker 2: best Book by an aberage or writer. Sorry I'm not
3:43
Speaker 2: really Aboriginal, nor has any premier actually demanded he do so.
3:49
Speaker 2: Canada What a contrast, Now, Canada, a string of fake
3:55
Speaker 2: Indians have been exposed and denounced, including prize winning author
4:01
Speaker 2: Joseph Boyden and singer Buffy Saint Marie, going all the
4:06
Speaker 2: way back actually to the original fake Indian grow Owl,
4:11
Speaker 2: a conservationist eventually exposed as an Englishman, but only exposed
4:15
Speaker 2: after his death. And now there's another. Thomas King is
4:21
Speaker 2: the author of The Inconvenient Indian and many other best
4:25
Speaker 2: sellers with Indian themes, all the while claiming to be
4:28
Speaker 2: a Cherokee Indian himself. He taught Indigenous studies at university
4:33
Speaker 2: and one prize is meant for Aboriginal authors.
4:37
Speaker 5: Look out, Bob shoutz, there are Indians flying into the skyscrapers.
4:40
Speaker 6: Will foll on the sidewalk.
4:42
Speaker 2: Ah got a mohawk over here? No other elite love dem.
4:47
Speaker 2: King was made a Companion of the Order of Canada,
4:50
Speaker 2: given a National Aboriginal Achievement Award, but now has been
4:54
Speaker 2: confronted with his genealogical records and has admitted that at
4:58
Speaker 2: eight eighty to age eighty e he's not a Cherokee
5:01
Speaker 2: after all. He blames his mum for telling him his
5:04
Speaker 2: dad was, and he's returned his Aboriginal award. So why
5:12
Speaker 2: do fake Aborigines in Canada even lose their jobs when
5:15
Speaker 2: they're exposed Like Randy Wotsono, a left wing politician who
5:22
Speaker 2: had to resign as minister when he was exposed as
5:25
Speaker 2: a fake as well. So why do Canada's fake Indians
5:30
Speaker 2: lose their jobs, lose their prizes, but those apparently fake
5:35
Speaker 2: Aborigines in Australia keep them and not just keep them,
5:39
Speaker 2: they're even protected from criticism. How can truth in Australia
5:46
Speaker 2: matter so little?
5:52
Speaker 6: Now?
5:52
Speaker 2: Joining me and his author and journalist Tony Thomas, who
5:54
Speaker 2: has covered Bruce Pasco's career in detail and has now
5:58
Speaker 2: written about Canada's Bruce Pascoe as well. This Thomas King
6:02
Speaker 2: I mentioned in Quadrant Online. Tony, great to see you.
6:06
Speaker 2: Can you explain to me why Canada's Bruce Pascoe has
6:10
Speaker 2: the handbag and award, he has a theater canceling one
6:13
Speaker 2: of his works after this revelation, but Australia's Bruce Pascoe
6:17
Speaker 2: he gets defended.
6:20
Speaker 6: Well.
6:21
Speaker 7: The thing was that the Cherokee Nation in North Carolina
6:26
Speaker 7: did a big genealogy of Thomas King and had a
6:31
Speaker 7: zoom meeting and confronted him with it, and he just collapsed.
6:35
Speaker 7: He apparently was completely surprised that energy in the allergy
6:42
Speaker 7: had been done and that it showed that he was
6:45
Speaker 7: conclusively that he didn't have any ancestors. So at that
6:48
Speaker 7: point he collapsed, He groveled. He wrote a long piece
6:52
Speaker 7: in the Globe and Mail in Canada saying how sorry
6:57
Speaker 7: he was and how it had all been a mistake,
6:59
Speaker 7: but his whole life had been a lie and so on. Well,
7:03
Speaker 7: it's quite different with Pasco because Pasco continues to hang
7:06
Speaker 7: on to his aboriginal identity even though he's been unable
7:11
Speaker 7: to find that aboriginal ancestor. But what he says is
7:15
Speaker 7: that maybe that ancestor got concealed, or maybe it was
7:19
Speaker 7: lost in child removals or something like that. And so
7:23
Speaker 7: instead he relies on advice from his old relatives. Oh yes,
7:29
Speaker 7: old granddad, he was definitely had a bit of Aboriginal
7:32
Speaker 7: in him, because even Pasco says it's very remote. Well,
7:36
Speaker 7: some Aborigines accept that his aboriginal and others don't. And
7:41
Speaker 7: the elders. He's really gone aboriginal because he's allowed himself
7:45
Speaker 7: to be initiated by the local un tribe in a
7:50
Speaker 7: three day ceremony, he says, and maybe that helps him
7:54
Speaker 7: to become aboriginal. And he performs all these rituals like
7:59
Speaker 7: dancers to communicate with whales from the beach, and he
8:03
Speaker 7: talks to trees and animals and the sun and the moon.
8:07
Speaker 2: And so on.
8:07
Speaker 7: So he firmly believes that he's Aboriginal. But he hasn't
8:12
Speaker 7: just theorized about being Aboriginal and the older rituals like
8:16
Speaker 7: Thomas King and Canada did. He's actually set up this farm,
8:20
Speaker 7: a demonstration farm at Gypsy Point, to grow native seeds,
8:26
Speaker 7: turn them into flour and make the sort of bread
8:29
Speaker 7: that he says Aboriginals were pioneering about forty fifty thousand
8:33
Speaker 7: years ago, and his finances farm through his charity called
8:38
Speaker 7: Black Duck Foods, which in five years has raised two
8:42
Speaker 7: point six million dollars and spend it on running the farm.
8:47
Speaker 7: And of that halfs from the government one way or another,
8:50
Speaker 7: and the other half is from private donations. Well, as
8:55
Speaker 7: you said, the Australian education system, the arts, the ab SEE,
9:00
Speaker 7: they've all out promoted Bruce Pasco as Ewan, Bunerong and Tasmanian.
9:06
Speaker 7: Now if in like in Canada, Bruce is suddenly convinced
9:11
Speaker 7: by some new evidence that he's not Aboriginal and agrees
9:16
Speaker 7: with that it would just be a cultural earthquake in Australia.
9:22
Speaker 2: Yeah, but I don't get on get why it's a
9:25
Speaker 2: fatal admission in Canada. But when you're confronted here, I
9:28
Speaker 2: mean PASCO has also said is a bunner wrong? There's
9:32
Speaker 2: a bunner wrong organization that says no, you're not. He
9:35
Speaker 2: said is it's has mainly Aboriginal. You've got Michael Mansell
9:38
Speaker 2: and the Tasmanian average and legal sentence ain't no you're not.
9:42
Speaker 2: It doesn't matter. And I can understand why he might
9:45
Speaker 2: think it's in his interest. I mean, there was a
9:47
Speaker 2: Canberra Times reviewer decades ago that said, oh, this particular
9:52
Speaker 2: novel of his would have been better had it been
9:53
Speaker 2: written by an aborigine. And hey press though within a
9:57
Speaker 2: few years he is an Aboriginal. But why these organizations
10:02
Speaker 2: are so invested in saying it is as well when
10:05
Speaker 2: the evidence is out there.
10:07
Speaker 7: Well, it just seems to be part of the left
10:10
Speaker 7: wing culture. There's the religious impulse about repent because we
10:16
Speaker 7: whites have sinned. There's the green illusions about noble savages
10:20
Speaker 7: and community, romantic life and harmony, and plus the Aboriginals
10:27
Speaker 7: who go in for it, whether by design or accident
10:32
Speaker 7: wind up with a whole lot of privileges that basically
10:35
Speaker 7: aren't earned but are very welcome obviously, So you'd have
10:41
Speaker 7: to be a psychiatrist to work out why this has
10:45
Speaker 7: gone so deep into our culture.
10:52
Speaker 2: Well, I don't get it either. I mean, there's so
10:54
Speaker 2: many I could talk about with you tonight. You know
10:57
Speaker 2: where I've seen You've shown the genial records showing that
11:01
Speaker 2: they're not aboriginal. Two labor politicians have mentioned on this show.
11:05
Speaker 2: Two prominent novelists as well, including Colin Johnson. The famous
11:10
Speaker 2: aboriginal activist Bobby Sikes turned out to be part African.
11:14
Speaker 2: The aboriginal activists who sued me in the federal court
11:16
Speaker 2: successfully it turned out to be not Aboriginal either. One
11:20
Speaker 2: disent African ancestor and said, it's incredible, but it's a
11:25
Speaker 2: miracle that there's just no repercussions. Plus a whole lot
11:30
Speaker 2: of academics. Tony Thomas, thank you so much for your time.
11:35
Speaker 2: I don't get it either. Maybe a virtue now is
11:38
Speaker 2: expressed by what kind of falsehood you're prepared to accept.
11:42
Speaker 2: You must be really committed anyway, talking about that global warmists,
11:49
Speaker 2: they tell us listen to the experts. But what if
11:53
Speaker 2: those experts are wrong and again and again. Now it's
11:56
Speaker 2: not just that so many predictions of doomed turn out fake,
11:59
Speaker 2: like this one in two thousand and seven from Tim
12:01
Speaker 2: Flannery later our Climate Change Commissioner.
12:05
Speaker 4: Even the rain of falls isn't actually going to fill
12:08
Speaker 4: our dams and our river system.
12:11
Speaker 2: Four years ago, the Australian Energy Market Operator told us
12:16
Speaker 2: not to worry. It predicted stable supply of electricity despite
12:20
Speaker 2: all these closures of co power generators. Yet this week
12:25
Speaker 2: it warned oops in fact, New South Wales now faced
12:29
Speaker 2: blackouts if the giant Erraing Coulfard station closes planted twenty
12:34
Speaker 2: twenty seven. Honestly, it's like a giant game of make believe,
12:39
Speaker 2: you know, make believe we can get rid of two
12:40
Speaker 2: thirds of our power and no worries, and make believe
12:44
Speaker 2: that little Australia can thereby stop a global warming that
12:47
Speaker 2: we must make believes destroy us. I mean, it's a joke.
12:51
Speaker 2: But credit to Federal Labor Minister Tim Airs, who is
12:55
Speaker 2: now admitted, under questioning from National Senator Mcanavan. Okay, Australia
13:01
Speaker 2: can't actually change the climate.
13:05
Speaker 8: Does Australia have control or any significant control over the
13:09
Speaker 8: world's climate.
13:11
Speaker 5: Australia by itself, by itself does not determine the global climate.
13:18
Speaker 5: Australia by itself, if it's only about action in Australia,
13:24
Speaker 5: that doesn't work.
13:25
Speaker 2: But what they're still won't admit is that the rest
13:27
Speaker 2: of the world is joining us as slashing emissions either.
13:30
Speaker 2: I mean, just have a look out. The world's biggest
13:32
Speaker 2: amit of China has ramped up its submissions. India the same,
13:36
Speaker 2: African and Asia also increasing the little Australia pretends to
13:40
Speaker 2: save the planet, but wrecking our countryside. Like I said
13:43
Speaker 2: you last night, now bulldozing all these trees in this
13:47
Speaker 2: part of New South Wales to make way for big
13:51
Speaker 2: transmission towers for even bigger wind generators, meanwhile knocking dozens
13:56
Speaker 2: of young birds there out of their nests, leaving them
14:00
Speaker 2: to be now rescued by a mudgy vet. Joining me
14:04
Speaker 2: is regular Tuesday commentator National ZMP Matt Canavan, who you
14:07
Speaker 2: just saw in action, the former Resources minister. Matt. Well
14:11
Speaker 2: done with your questioning, but just going to that answer
14:15
Speaker 2: you got that Australia can't change the climate, and meanwhile
14:20
Speaker 2: of course you and I have noted so many times
14:23
Speaker 2: huge emitters like China and India. Sure, and even trying
14:26
Speaker 2: to what's your conclusion, then.
14:30
Speaker 8: Well, I think there's only two conclusions here, Andrew. Either
14:37
Speaker 8: Australia does do what the government says we can do
14:40
Speaker 8: and stop bushfires and cyclones and all these terrible things,
14:45
Speaker 8: or the government's just completely fibbing. The Labor Party is
14:49
Speaker 8: completely talking out of both sides of their mouth, and
14:51
Speaker 8: they're saying one thing to constituents, to voters in their advertisements,
14:56
Speaker 8: and they're saying it completely another thing when they get
14:59
Speaker 8: pressured on this. So that answer that Senator tim Eyres
15:04
Speaker 8: mentioned or responded to was a question of mine where
15:07
Speaker 8: I put to him a quote that a judge judge
15:12
Speaker 8: had made in a federal court case released in July.
15:16
Speaker 8: Judgment came down in July. That case involved a group
15:19
Speaker 8: of Torres Strait Islanders suing the Commonwealth Government for saying
15:23
Speaker 8: they didn't protect them against climate change. They had a
15:26
Speaker 8: duty of care, they said on climate change, and so
15:29
Speaker 8: the Commonalth Government had to respond to the court and
15:31
Speaker 8: the judge, Justice Wigney summarized the Common's position by saying
15:37
Speaker 8: that in the Commal's view, they had no control over
15:41
Speaker 8: the impacts of climate change on Torres Strait Islanders and
15:44
Speaker 8: therefore of course had no duty of care. So how
15:48
Speaker 8: is it that the government would tell fibbs to Torres
15:51
Speaker 8: Strait Islanders, suggesting that they can help them protect against
15:55
Speaker 8: climate change, but wassuing that zero by imposing carbon taxes,
15:58
Speaker 8: by making us all electric vehicles. You can understand where
16:01
Speaker 8: the trrestraia I'll assume them because the government been telling
16:04
Speaker 8: them all this stuff. But then when they actually take
16:06
Speaker 8: the action and go to courts, No, no, no, we were
16:08
Speaker 8: just joking. We were just joking. It wasn't our real position.
16:11
Speaker 8: And to me, Andrew, this just shows this whole thing,
16:15
Speaker 8: this whole net zero agenda, is not about changing the climate.
16:20
Speaker 8: It's about increasing the size of the state. It's about
16:23
Speaker 8: entrenching the Labor Party in government and in control ultimately
16:27
Speaker 8: of your lives. And to summarize it all, net zero
16:30
Speaker 8: is just a scam.
16:33
Speaker 2: Oh look, I would also say there's a religious impulse there, Matt.
16:37
Speaker 2: I think people generally genuinely think they're doing being good.
16:40
Speaker 2: There's you know, the Christian God is gone, so they
16:45
Speaker 2: were going for the green God as well, and I think,
16:48
Speaker 2: well that's a.
16:49
Speaker 8: Bit more cynical of the Labor Party Andrew. I've seen
16:52
Speaker 8: them up close, so I think they're issuing power power.
16:55
Speaker 8: I don't know if I Some are genuinely very concerned,
16:59
Speaker 8: but others I think.
17:03
Speaker 2: I'm not going to argue that. But I need to
17:06
Speaker 2: show you talk about another con related related the Aveniza
17:11
Speaker 2: government has promised to spend. I mean, I had to
17:15
Speaker 2: double check this today because I keep thinking my mind
17:18
Speaker 2: must be going misremembering twenty seven billion dollars on green
17:24
Speaker 2: energy schemes and what it calls is future made in Australia,
17:29
Speaker 2: Future Made an Australia scheme now today energy miss the
17:32
Speaker 2: cristpon and said he was giving one hundred and seventy
17:34
Speaker 2: one million dollars of particulably this future made and well
17:37
Speaker 2: it was this future made in Australia money to a
17:42
Speaker 2: company based in China, a company back by Chinese money
17:47
Speaker 2: and Japanese funds to build solar panels in the Hunter Valley.
17:51
Speaker 9: Here is a future made in Australia, A future made
17:55
Speaker 9: in the Hunter takes a big step forward today where
17:59
Speaker 9: we say today will be the Hunter Valley solar foundry.
18:03
Speaker 9: It will produce eight hundred thousand modules each year.
18:08
Speaker 2: Matt Canavan giving a Chinese company one hundred and seventy
18:12
Speaker 2: one million dollars to build solar panels here and calling
18:15
Speaker 2: it a future made in Australia. Is that a good
18:18
Speaker 2: use of our money? Now?
18:21
Speaker 8: It's not, Andrew. I'd like to support Australia manufacturing. It's
18:24
Speaker 8: just very depressing that basically all Australian manufacturing now requires
18:29
Speaker 8: a form of government assistance and handouts to survive because
18:33
Speaker 8: we've destroyed this nation's energy competitiveness. We used to have
18:37
Speaker 8: some of the lowest power prices in the world, and
18:39
Speaker 8: now they're well above average. Are much higher than our
18:42
Speaker 8: competitors in this region. Shouldn't be the case given our
18:45
Speaker 8: energy resources. But look, I would like to think this
18:49
Speaker 8: is going to lead to some kind of renaissance in
18:51
Speaker 8: Australia manufacturing. I don't think one hundred and seventy million
18:54
Speaker 8: dollars is going to cut it. Keep in mind, Andrew,
18:56
Speaker 8: the Chinese government spends over four hundred billion dollars a
18:59
Speaker 8: year supporting its industry. That's a figure from a labor
19:03
Speaker 8: thing tank called the mckel Institute, and we just don't
19:08
Speaker 8: seem to be doing anything to combat that, to combat
19:11
Speaker 8: that threat. This has all happened on a day when
19:14
Speaker 8: another Australian manufacturer's got out of business, a caravan manufacturer
19:19
Speaker 8: in Queensland. They've said that they can't with the caravan industry,
19:23
Speaker 8: so they can't compete against Chinese imports. The costs of
19:27
Speaker 8: doing things here in this country is way out of
19:30
Speaker 8: whack and it's going to continue like that unless we
19:32
Speaker 8: focus on bringing those costs down. So the solution to
19:35
Speaker 8: get manufacturing this country is not to hand out more
19:38
Speaker 8: taxpayer money. It is to focus first on lowering power prices.
19:43
Speaker 8: And that's why the Liberal and National parties have said
19:45
Speaker 8: we're going to dump the net zero objective so we
19:48
Speaker 8: can focus on an objective of lowering power prices. That
19:52
Speaker 8: should be the primary goal of how we run our
19:55
Speaker 8: energy system. But right now the Labor Party in league
19:58
Speaker 8: with the Greens, is unning an energy system to pursue
20:02
Speaker 8: net zero emissions, not lower power bills for Australian families
20:06
Speaker 8: and businesses.
20:07
Speaker 2: It's true, it's true, Matcanavan, thank you so much for
20:10
Speaker 2: your time. After the break, Donald Trump fights claims of
20:16
Speaker 2: a war crime after a boat is blown up twice,
20:20
Speaker 2: or has the media again jumped the shark. President Donald
20:28
Speaker 2: Trump is battling another scandal that's damaging the US as well,
20:33
Speaker 2: or is this another media beat up, this time is
20:36
Speaker 2: about a war crime. Trump ordered his military to blow
20:39
Speaker 2: up boats smuggling lethal drugs across the Caribbean from Venezuela.
20:44
Speaker 2: In particular, more than a dozen have been taken out,
20:47
Speaker 2: and they include this spine on September two, which was
20:50
Speaker 2: blown up with a missile, leaving two survivors reportedly clean
20:53
Speaker 2: to the sides of the burning wreck. But rather than say,
20:58
Speaker 2: you know, pick up those survivors, the US then fired
21:01
Speaker 2: a second missile to kill them as well, which does
21:05
Speaker 2: sound to me like a war crime if true. But
21:09
Speaker 2: I supposed scandal goes further. Newspaper reports claimed that second
21:14
Speaker 2: strike was ordered by Pete Hegseth, Trump's Secretary of War.
21:17
Speaker 2: As every were actually in the war room micromanaging the
21:22
Speaker 2: taking out of this boat, which does strike me as
21:24
Speaker 2: a bit odd, he reportedly said kill them all. Hegseth
21:28
Speaker 2: denied ordering that second strike, and Trump last weekend said
21:31
Speaker 2: he believed him.
21:33
Speaker 10: Pete said he did not want them. He didn't even
21:36
Speaker 10: know what people were talking about. So we'll look at
21:40
Speaker 10: we'll look into it. But no, I wouldn't have wanted
21:42
Speaker 10: that on a second strike.
21:45
Speaker 2: And Trump's White House spoke to me, yes that I
21:47
Speaker 2: confirmed that, Yes, there had been a second missile, but
21:50
Speaker 2: Pete Hegseth did not personally order it. But as is
21:54
Speaker 2: the way, does the administration deny that that second strike happened?
21:58
Speaker 2: Or did it happen? Administration denies that Secretary Hegsath GP
22:02
Speaker 2: or the latter is true.
22:04
Speaker 11: Secretary hag Seth authorized Admiral Bradley to conduct these kinetic strikes.
22:09
Speaker 11: Admiral Bradley worked well within his authority and the law
22:13
Speaker 11: directing the engagement to ensure the boat was destroyed and
22:16
Speaker 11: the threat to the United States of America was eliminated.
22:20
Speaker 2: But as is the way with reporters and Donald Trump,
22:24
Speaker 2: some media reports, including by our own ABC, reported what
22:29
Speaker 2: was said there as the White House confirming what it
22:32
Speaker 2: in fact, will we heard it denied it had denied
22:36
Speaker 2: that Hegseth ordered that second strike. Joining me is Donald
22:40
Speaker 2: Trump's first White House spokesman Sean Spiser. Good to see you. Look,
22:46
Speaker 2: you are a captain in the US Navy. Reserve. Now,
22:49
Speaker 2: how comfortable are you with Pete Hegseth, the U. S.
22:52
Speaker 2: Secretary of War ordering a second strike on survivors hanging
22:56
Speaker 2: on to a burning boat in the Caribbean.
23:01
Speaker 1: Well, first, I have to say any comments that I
23:03
Speaker 1: make are mind and mine alone and don't reflect those
23:06
Speaker 1: views of the Department of Defense, Department of War, or
23:09
Speaker 1: the Department in Navy. That being said, Andrew, I will
23:12
Speaker 1: tell you I've spoken some very high up folks about this.
23:15
Speaker 1: Those reports that were reported by the Washington Post are
23:20
Speaker 1: very questionable at best. And I say that because the
23:25
Speaker 1: mere circumstance of a Secretary of War or Secretary of
23:28
Speaker 1: Defense in the past being in a position like that
23:32
Speaker 1: is just not an accurate understanding of how a decision
23:36
Speaker 1: like that would get made. That's just not normal for
23:40
Speaker 1: a Secretary of War to be in that kind of
23:42
Speaker 1: position that they'd be talking about a second strike. There
23:45
Speaker 1: is some questions and some of the folks that I've
23:47
Speaker 1: talked to, if you actually parse what the Washington Post said,
23:50
Speaker 1: people are saying, well, they never actually accused the secretary
23:53
Speaker 1: of saying that, which is kind of the point. There
23:56
Speaker 1: is some question, I think, rather as to what someone
23:59
Speaker 1: may have interpreted his intent to be, but by every
24:03
Speaker 1: estimation of everyone I have talked to at fairly high levels,
24:07
Speaker 1: this is just not an accurate report from the Washington Post.
24:11
Speaker 2: That said it seems it was a second strike. I mean,
24:15
Speaker 2: the White House spokes was seemed to confirm it. Whoever
24:19
Speaker 2: ordered it, how do you feel about it?
24:22
Speaker 1: So that's the question, right And I say this because
24:25
Speaker 1: the nuance matters.
24:27
Speaker 6: So here's why that matters.
24:29
Speaker 1: If the person, the commander who ordered that second strike
24:32
Speaker 1: knew that there were, you know, unarmed civilians that had
24:39
Speaker 1: survived a strike, to fire on them specifically would be
24:42
Speaker 1: a problematic. However, if the commander was doing something more broader,
24:47
Speaker 1: taking out an existential second threat of which they were
24:50
Speaker 1: collateral damage, that is a very different scenario. So the
24:53
Speaker 1: context of which the second strike was ordered does matter.
24:57
Speaker 1: And like I said, right now, we're hearing all this
24:59
Speaker 1: through anonymous sources from the Washington Post. I think that
25:03
Speaker 1: what happened, who ordered it, why they ordered it, in
25:07
Speaker 1: the context will be critical to understanding whether or not
25:10
Speaker 1: this was some kind of you know, real issue, or
25:15
Speaker 1: whether this was collateral damage. But there's a lot more
25:17
Speaker 1: to this than what initially met the eye.
25:21
Speaker 2: Well, I agree that we need to know more details.
25:24
Speaker 2: But if the claim is correct, and it's a big if,
25:28
Speaker 2: as you're suggesting to survivors hanging off the side of
25:31
Speaker 2: a burning boat and they get hit again, that doesn't
25:34
Speaker 2: seem to me taking out someone who represents an existential thrip.
25:38
Speaker 6: Yeah.
25:39
Speaker 1: Look, I've been in the room with the President of
25:41
Speaker 1: the United States during a strike, right, I can't go
25:44
Speaker 1: into obvious specific details, but I'm just telling you the
25:47
Speaker 1: way the Washington Post portrayed this is not an actual
25:51
Speaker 1: representation of how a strike would go down in terms
25:54
Speaker 1: of the role of the secretary, And so I immediately
25:58
Speaker 1: questioned the accuracy of the The second question that you
26:02
Speaker 1: asked is really what needs to get further investigated. What
26:06
Speaker 1: caused a second strike, What was the intent of that
26:09
Speaker 1: second strike, what was the target of that second strike,
26:12
Speaker 1: and why was it ordered? But there's a big range
26:15
Speaker 1: in there that stem from a problematic answer that is, well,
26:19
Speaker 1: they were taking out survivors of the first strike. Two,
26:24
Speaker 1: there was collateral issues that needed to be addressed in
26:27
Speaker 1: a second strike, and they were just further damaged. Those
26:30
Speaker 1: are very very different scenarios that have a big different
26:33
Speaker 1: impact on how we view this situation. So, like I said,
26:38
Speaker 1: the mirror initial reporting from the Washington Post gave me pause.
26:43
Speaker 2: I think your correct to raise a red flag there?
26:45
Speaker 2: I mean, is a Secretary of War really standing by
26:48
Speaker 2: the shoulder of the person pushing the buttons saying no
26:52
Speaker 2: go again? I doubt that too. Donald Trump seems to
26:57
Speaker 2: be threatening war on Venezuela. Has got a Naval Force
27:01
Speaker 2: office coast. He's told airlines to consider the airspace of
27:05
Speaker 2: Venezuela closed, has reportedly told Venezuelana dictator Nicholas Maduro in
27:10
Speaker 2: a phone call to flee with his family, what is
27:13
Speaker 2: going on? And why?
27:17
Speaker 6: Well? I mean, there's a lot of questions there, right.
27:20
Speaker 10: Why?
27:21
Speaker 1: I mean, first of all, I look back at what
27:23
Speaker 1: Donald Trump has done specifically in Iran. Right, everybody had
27:26
Speaker 1: this view about what you could and could not do,
27:28
Speaker 1: And I think the way the President approached striking those
27:31
Speaker 1: Iran nuclear capabilities with something that wasn't one extreme or
27:35
Speaker 1: the other as everybody had predicted. Donald Trump found a
27:38
Speaker 1: third way, a way to achieve America's national interest without
27:43
Speaker 1: dragging us into something. So the question I ask now
27:45
Speaker 1: is is this part of a broader strategy make Maduro
27:49
Speaker 1: understand that the US is willing to take action if
27:52
Speaker 1: he doesn't flee.
27:53
Speaker 6: Right that he is a bad, bad guy.
27:56
Speaker 1: He is allowing drugs to flow freely into the United
27:58
Speaker 1: States and a lot of other places. And so if
28:00
Speaker 1: Donald Trump can find a way to triangulate a new
28:03
Speaker 1: strategy that rids the Venezuelan people of a bad, bad
28:07
Speaker 1: person and helps us stop the flow of illegal drugs
28:12
Speaker 1: into our country, then that's a good thing. So if
28:14
Speaker 1: Maduro believes that there's a possibility that he or his
28:17
Speaker 1: family could be attacked or that there could be regime change,
28:20
Speaker 1: and that causes him to take action, I'm all for it.
28:23
Speaker 2: Is it just about the drugs by Lenna said Jos
28:27
Speaker 2: I think you know what I mean, the drugs flowing
28:29
Speaker 2: into America or is there some wider geopolitical strategy of
28:34
Speaker 2: play here.
28:37
Speaker 6: That's actually a great question.
28:38
Speaker 1: I think the drugs are obviously a big problem, a
28:41
Speaker 1: big threat to the United States. But to your point,
28:43
Speaker 1: there's definitely a China and Russia influence in Venezuela, a struggle,
28:48
Speaker 1: if you will, to see who gets to dominate that area,
28:51
Speaker 1: and a foothole for those countries in sort of our
28:55
Speaker 1: our southern region. So I do think there is a
28:58
Speaker 1: much bigger geopolitical issue at stake, as you raise, because
29:02
Speaker 1: of concerns of the influence of China and Russia. And
29:05
Speaker 1: so if we can be very clear that we will
29:07
Speaker 1: protect our interests both in terms of the flow of
29:10
Speaker 1: drugs and our geopolitical interest that's obviously a big win
29:15
Speaker 1: for the United States.
29:16
Speaker 2: Sean Spice are always great to talk to you. Thank
29:19
Speaker 2: you so much, you bet Andrew. After the break and
29:23
Speaker 2: wake up to Australia, our top intelligence official warns that
29:27
Speaker 2: war with China could hit us within a decade. What
29:34
Speaker 2: scares me is not just that the world has become
29:37
Speaker 2: so dangerous and that even we could soon face war.
29:40
Speaker 2: What makes it worse is that the government, a lot
29:43
Speaker 2: of the publics seem to think, oh, that threat's not real,
29:46
Speaker 2: or they think, oh, it's okay to leave our military
29:49
Speaker 2: badly short of weapons and men. Yet right now communists
29:53
Speaker 2: China is threatening war to take over Taiwan, it's even
29:56
Speaker 2: practicing it, and it's threatened to cut the dirty neck
29:59
Speaker 2: of Japan's Prime minister for saying Japan my defendo I Now,
30:04
Speaker 2: last night the head of Australia's Office of National Intelligence,
30:07
Speaker 2: Andrew Sheerer, warned of possible war in our region within
30:11
Speaker 2: the next ten years.
30:13
Speaker 12: Most consequentially, should the Terrance break down, notwithstanding the efforts
30:19
Speaker 12: of our government and our allies, we would face a
30:23
Speaker 12: rising risk of major conflict in our region within the
30:26
Speaker 12: next decade.
30:28
Speaker 2: And this comes after the release of an Australia's Strategic
30:30
Speaker 2: Policy Institute report worrying about the same sort of thing,
30:34
Speaker 2: warning that China going to warn our region would be
30:36
Speaker 2: catastrophic for our economy and would cause the visions here.
30:40
Speaker 2: It warned that the Chinese language media, for a start
30:43
Speaker 2: right here, was heavily influenced by communists, China propaganda and control.
30:48
Speaker 2: Joining miss Peter Jennings, a former Deputy Secretary for Strategy
30:51
Speaker 2: in the Defense Department and now Director of Strategic Analysis Australia. Peter,
30:56
Speaker 2: great to see you again. Andrew Shearer warning last night
31:00
Speaker 2: that if the West failed to deter China, and the
31:03
Speaker 2: West right now, as you know, looks pretty weak, we
31:07
Speaker 2: would face the risk of a major conflict in this
31:10
Speaker 2: region within the next ten years. Is he right?
31:14
Speaker 4: Absolutely he is, And in fact there would be many
31:17
Speaker 4: people myself included that would say that it's likely to
31:20
Speaker 4: be on a much shorter time frame. She Jimping regularly
31:25
Speaker 4: tells his military to be ready for war by twenty
31:29
Speaker 4: twenty seven, andrews so, I don't think one can sort
31:33
Speaker 4: of set a date on this, But the risk of
31:36
Speaker 4: conflict really between now over the next term of Jimping
31:42
Speaker 4: being a Chinese paramount leader, I think is the critical
31:46
Speaker 4: time frame. I think it's very interesting that Andrew Sheer
31:49
Speaker 4: is doing this sitting next to Penny Wong and the
31:51
Speaker 4: Estimates Committee clip that you just showed. He's not doing
31:56
Speaker 4: this own motion. I think the government is clearly authorizing
32:02
Speaker 4: him to make these comments, even though the Prime Minister
32:05
Speaker 4: and Penny Wong wouldn't want to say those sorts of
32:08
Speaker 4: things themselves, So they're leaving it to a couple of
32:11
Speaker 4: our senior intelligence agency heads to make the more hawkish
32:17
Speaker 4: cases it were that everything is not right with China.
32:21
Speaker 4: But I completely agree with you if this is the
32:24
Speaker 4: future that we face, why is it that we are
32:27
Speaker 4: being so slow when it comes to lifting up defense spending.
32:31
Speaker 4: Why so many of our projects just seem to be,
32:34
Speaker 4: you know, half a decade and more away in terms
32:37
Speaker 4: of equipping the defense force. We've really got to get
32:40
Speaker 4: moving quickly if we're going to build to terrence, and
32:44
Speaker 4: that is to try and persuade China that this is
32:46
Speaker 4: not the right course of action and that they should
32:49
Speaker 4: avoid military action really.
32:50
Speaker 2: At all costs. I would have thought, like a protest
32:54
Speaker 2: that what they're I mean, for a Japanese diploma, for
32:57
Speaker 2: a Chinese diplomat to say, you know, the dirty neck
33:00
Speaker 2: of the Japanese Prime minister should be cut off, or
33:02
Speaker 2: even talking about defending Taiwan. I mean, we should be
33:05
Speaker 2: protesting there. You can't allow this rhetoric to go unchallenged.
33:10
Speaker 2: I'm just wondering how you think a war would actually happen.
33:14
Speaker 2: I mean, would it really be like an invasion or
33:16
Speaker 2: would it be in this gray area. I would imagine
33:20
Speaker 2: from the rehearsals I've seen that they would simply cut
33:23
Speaker 2: Taiwan off from sea transports and all the freight there
33:28
Speaker 2: they rely on.
33:30
Speaker 4: That's probably the start of it, a kind of a
33:32
Speaker 4: slow strangulation strategy which China regularly exercises every year by showing.
33:37
Speaker 2: How they can surround Taiwan as an island.
33:40
Speaker 4: The problem is that it won't be limited to Taiwan,
33:43
Speaker 4: it'll push south to the Philippines, it'll push north to Japan.
33:48
Speaker 4: The Japanese, I think, have got a pretty realistic appreciation
33:50
Speaker 4: that they can't sit this one out. It's going to
33:52
Speaker 4: be something that impacts on their security and it will
33:57
Speaker 4: certainly impact on ours. So we have to worry about
34:00
Speaker 4: China shutting down and straight in critical infrastructure, using cyber
34:05
Speaker 4: technology to do damage to grid, using espionage, to reduce
34:13
Speaker 4: our capability to respond effectively to Chinese military operations in
34:17
Speaker 4: the region. China has a comprehensive plan. Taiwan is part
34:22
Speaker 4: of it, but the broader plan is to become the
34:24
Speaker 4: dominant military player in this part of the world. And
34:27
Speaker 4: we can't appease our way out of that situation. Andrew,
34:32
Speaker 4: we have to be prepared to lift our own military
34:35
Speaker 4: strength and to push back against China attempting to coerce
34:39
Speaker 4: us and tell us to behave and shut up, which
34:41
Speaker 4: is really the effect of their diplomacy these days. So
34:44
Speaker 4: Australia needs to get stronger, and I think it frankly,
34:48
Speaker 4: it isn't good enough just leaving it to our intelligence
34:50
Speaker 4: agency heads to sound the warning. Government needs to show
34:54
Speaker 4: some leadership on this, and that means strong comments coming
34:56
Speaker 4: from the PM and the Foreign Minister, which really at
34:59
Speaker 4: the moment they would go to great lengths to avoid
35:01
Speaker 4: actually saying.
35:04
Speaker 2: Yeah. But without those comments, you can't make the case
35:06
Speaker 2: for the increase spending we need on defense, because spending,
35:10
Speaker 2: of course requires pain from voters. They miss out on goodies,
35:13
Speaker 2: they have to give spend on guns instead. You can't
35:17
Speaker 2: do that. But you know, Andrew Sheerram, a very nice guy,
35:20
Speaker 2: might be perfectly correct, but he doesn't make the case
35:23
Speaker 2: for that extra spending in the public debate. Now, what
35:27
Speaker 2: shape are we in to defend ourselves in any war
35:30
Speaker 2: or even just to keep the economy going? How come
35:33
Speaker 2: the government hasn't scene. Oh, Taiwan's just added sixty billion
35:37
Speaker 2: dollars of spending over the next several years to its defence.
35:41
Speaker 2: It's panicking. Japan has just announced record defense spending. Why
35:45
Speaker 2: shouldn't you know, maybe we should do something.
35:49
Speaker 4: Yes, Taiwan has said it's going to lift its defense
35:51
Speaker 4: spending to five percents of gross national product by twenty thirty.
35:54
Speaker 2: And we're a very very long.
35:56
Speaker 4: Way away from that sort of goal. I'm sorry to say,
36:00
Speaker 4: Andrew that I think our Defense Force is now less
36:02
Speaker 4: capable of deployed military operations than it was during most
36:06
Speaker 4: of my career in the department, when we were active
36:08
Speaker 4: in East moor And Iraq and Afghanistan and the Solomon
36:11
Speaker 4: Islands all at the same time. And the reason we're
36:14
Speaker 4: in this situation is because the spending on the current
36:17
Speaker 4: defense force is being squeezed in order to free money
36:21
Speaker 4: for investment into submarines, of which we won't actually see
36:25
Speaker 4: for the better part of a decade into the future.
36:28
Speaker 4: So there's a mismatch between where we're investing and when
36:32
Speaker 4: we expect to get that gear and the likely threat
36:35
Speaker 4: that we're facing, which the government doesn't want to address.
36:39
Speaker 2: And I think the only way I can really.
36:41
Speaker 4: Explain that is I think they've partly bought their own propaganda,
36:46
Speaker 4: which is somehow they've managed to stabilize that relationship with China.
36:51
Speaker 4: But just because China is trading with us doesn't mean
36:54
Speaker 4: to say that Sigemping has changed his strategic objective to
36:58
Speaker 4: become the dominant military power in the Indo Pacific. That's
37:02
Speaker 4: China's strategic goal and it's the one we're refusing to
37:06
Speaker 4: address because our government would much prefer to be short
37:09
Speaker 4: term in its thinking and maybe just think that they
37:13
Speaker 4: can set this one out, leave it to the United
37:15
Speaker 4: States and they won't be called upon to respond, which
37:18
Speaker 4: I can assure you was a mistake. That's not how
37:20
Speaker 4: the Americans think about the role that Australia should play.
37:24
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's also a mistaken that it'll be all hands
37:27
Speaker 2: on deck. It's not a fight America can probably win
37:31
Speaker 2: on its own. It will need allies, and strong allies
37:34
Speaker 2: at that. Peter Jennings, thank you so much for your time,
37:37
Speaker 2: really appreciate it. After the break, the net is closing
37:43
Speaker 2: in on two of Labour's so called mean girls as
37:46
Speaker 2: the truth comes out about their claims of a dirty
37:51
Speaker 2: Liberal cover up. The heat is finally going on to
37:58
Speaker 2: two of Labor's so called mean girls, Finance Minister Katie
38:02
Speaker 2: Gallagher on the left here and Foreign Missipenny Wong on
38:06
Speaker 2: the right.
38:07
Speaker 1: Now.
38:07
Speaker 2: These two women ran a vicious campaign against the Liberals
38:11
Speaker 2: and especially against then Defense Minister Linda Reynolds, so bad
38:15
Speaker 2: that she said she was forced into hospital to recover.
38:20
Speaker 2: And it was all based on what two judges now
38:22
Speaker 2: have both called out as a lie that the Morrison
38:26
Speaker 2: coalition government, especially Reynolds as its defense minister covered up
38:31
Speaker 2: the rape of Liberal staffer Britney Higgins, who had in
38:35
Speaker 2: fact lied about Reynolds not wanting to help her, not
38:38
Speaker 2: wanting her to go to the police, etc. Et cetera.
38:41
Speaker 2: Completely false, but Labor ran with it.
38:45
Speaker 13: Now.
38:45
Speaker 2: The albani's A government later gave Higgins compensation of two
38:48
Speaker 2: point four million dollars your money two point four million dollars,
38:53
Speaker 2: partly on the basis of that very lie of a
38:56
Speaker 2: cover up and bad treatment. Yet Minister A couple of
39:00
Speaker 2: weeks ago refused to admit that that cover up was
39:04
Speaker 2: a lie.
39:06
Speaker 6: Done not commenting on legal medice.
39:10
Speaker 2: Now. Katie Gallagher on the weekend also refused to even
39:13
Speaker 2: answer questions about it.
39:17
Speaker 5: Do you accept the finding of Justice Lee and Justice
39:20
Speaker 5: Toddle that there was no cover up in Agans matterup?
39:23
Speaker 6: And do you regret the accuvation that you made against
39:24
Speaker 6: and adrenalds.
39:25
Speaker 2: I'm not answering any further questions on this, and then
39:29
Speaker 2: yesterday and sened estimates. Penny Wong also wouldn't admit that
39:35
Speaker 2: the claims that she and other Labor members had pushed
39:39
Speaker 2: of a Liberal cover up of the raper, including by
39:42
Speaker 2: that Linda Reynolds, that was so false, even after having
39:48
Speaker 2: one judge's comments read out to.
39:50
Speaker 14: Her, I'll give you the quote. The allegation of a
39:54
Speaker 14: cover up had no foundation in fact, and the allegation
39:58
Speaker 14: of inadequate support was based on an incomplete and misleading
40:02
Speaker 14: account of the facts. Do you or the Prime Minister
40:10
Speaker 14: accept that judgment?
40:12
Speaker 15: Well, I'm here representing the Prime Minister, and as I said,
40:21
Speaker 15: shold check.
40:21
Speaker 14: Given the findings of the two superior Australian courts, will
40:27
Speaker 14: you now acknowledge that accusations by you and your government
40:31
Speaker 14: of a coverer were in fact unfounded.
40:36
Speaker 6: Well, I've already given that answer.
40:40
Speaker 2: On it went Linda Reynolds that former Defense Minister is
40:44
Speaker 2: now suing the government to clear a name and get
40:47
Speaker 2: some compensation for the enormous costure said to bear to
40:50
Speaker 2: clear it. So far, I hope she takes them to
40:54
Speaker 2: the cleaners, even though taxpayers will eventually have to pay.
40:58
Speaker 2: Joining me our SKA news Hostdanika to Georgia Amir Schliff
41:01
Speaker 2: of the Institute of Public Affairs, Danika, these labor women
41:07
Speaker 2: pushed the most nasty claims against the Liberals of having
41:12
Speaker 2: covered up a rape I mean, the claim against this
41:15
Speaker 2: is such a devastating claim, particularly against Linda Reynolds, a
41:19
Speaker 2: woman herself, and now they will not admit to what
41:24
Speaker 2: two judges have independently found there was no cover up.
41:28
Speaker 2: Their claims were based on her live Why wou't they
41:31
Speaker 2: admit to the truth and apologize.
41:33
Speaker 15: Oh, because Andrew, They're going to be left with egg
41:35
Speaker 15: on their face. I find it so curious that the
41:37
Speaker 15: Mean Girls had absolutely everything to say about the whole
41:40
Speaker 15: fiasco years ago, and suddenly they're very quiet about it.
41:43
Speaker 15: Let's not forget that the Mean Girls and Labor weaponize
41:47
Speaker 15: this claiming that there was a cover up. They also
41:49
Speaker 15: weaponized it claiming that the Morrison government had a problem
41:51
Speaker 15: with women because they had an election to win. Labor
41:54
Speaker 15: then went on to win the election and no doubt
41:56
Speaker 15: that this was a big part of the Morrison government loss.
42:00
Speaker 15: We find out from two judges that there was no
42:02
Speaker 15: cover up. Yet Linda Reynolds and also don't forget Chief
42:05
Speaker 15: of Staff Fiona Brown, their careers politically have gone up
42:09
Speaker 15: in flames and Katie Gallaher and Penny Wong have nothing
42:13
Speaker 15: to say about it, no apology. I also find it
42:15
Speaker 15: curious from Senator Gallagher. In that interview over the weekend,
42:19
Speaker 15: she was asked about that two point four million dollars
42:21
Speaker 15: in compensation. Again she was quite quiet. And all these
42:24
Speaker 15: years later, Andrew, we still have absolutely no idea why
42:27
Speaker 15: US taxpayers gave that money to Britney Higgins, or we
42:30
Speaker 15: know that some of it was for forty years of
42:33
Speaker 15: lost wages. Yet Britney Higgins has worked since then. So
42:37
Speaker 15: the mean girls can continue being quiet about this, but
42:39
Speaker 15: guess what, it's going to haunt them like a ghost.
42:42
Speaker 15: So now is the time, in my view, for an
42:44
Speaker 15: open and independent inquiry into what's gone on here.
42:50
Speaker 2: Me it really strikes me as appalling that those two
42:54
Speaker 2: labor women had so much to say in pushing what
42:58
Speaker 2: we know now was a lie. They might have known
43:01
Speaker 2: it was a lie, but it was a falsehood in
43:03
Speaker 2: any event, They spent so much time pushing a lie
43:07
Speaker 2: and now won't admit to the truth that it was
43:09
Speaker 2: a lie. What is going on?
43:14
Speaker 13: Well, it's absolutely appalling, Andrew, That's exactly right. And it
43:17
Speaker 13: wasn't just these two mean girls. Let's not forget it
43:20
Speaker 13: was not just them. The media in this scenario was
43:23
Speaker 13: absolutely complicit in driving some of these untruths forward and
43:27
Speaker 13: it was even found out in the case that you know,
43:29
Speaker 13: Brittany Higgins told about twenty over twenty misleading statements, and
43:33
Speaker 13: the media completely failed in their job to uncover that
43:36
Speaker 13: those statements were in fact misleading, and they've failed to
43:39
Speaker 13: report on it ever since. They've gone quiet on it,
43:41
Speaker 13: and I find that incredibly frustrating. There are so many
43:44
Speaker 13: people in this scenario who need to be held accountable
43:48
Speaker 13: and that's just not happening. And unfortunately, I think it's
43:51
Speaker 13: easy to put down to these two just being mean girls,
43:53
Speaker 13: but I do think it is far more sinister than that.
43:56
Speaker 13: As time's gone on, I think it's becoming far more
43:59
Speaker 13: apparent that Labor did weaponize this scenario for political purposes.
44:03
Speaker 13: And the more that Senator Wants continues to sit there
44:06
Speaker 13: giving these non answers is becoming more and more apparent.
44:11
Speaker 2: Oh and the superior smirk, I think really is infuriating
44:15
Speaker 2: in this circumstance. Exactly right. The lowest behavior Senator, the
44:19
Speaker 2: former Labour Senator Kimberly Kitchen now alas no longer with us,
44:24
Speaker 2: was sitting in my kitchen only a couple of days
44:27
Speaker 2: before she died. Calling out to me explaining what a
44:31
Speaker 2: fraud these allegations were. Labor knew I reckon, and they
44:36
Speaker 2: still pushed them. The immigration issue. Kimberly A Kimberly, sorry
44:42
Speaker 2: about that. She's on my mind. What a terrible loss
44:44
Speaker 2: for Labor, in fact for Australia. That was. No apologies,
44:50
Speaker 2: but the immigration issue is really going to take off, Danika.
44:55
Speaker 2: The Albanezi government says, don't worry. We're going to fix
44:58
Speaker 2: the shortage of houses that's now crippling, you know, the
45:01
Speaker 2: ability of the young to buy. They're going to fix
45:05
Speaker 2: it just by building more, a lot more of them,
45:08
Speaker 2: at one point two million homes in five years. But
45:14
Speaker 2: the latest figures for new home approvals that came out
45:17
Speaker 2: today show a huge drop instead of an increase in
45:21
Speaker 2: home approvals six point four percent fall in October, nearly
45:26
Speaker 2: two percent over the year fall with a press through
45:28
Speaker 2: in commemoration are now of eight point two So I
45:31
Speaker 2: don't know how you can afford to buy a house
45:32
Speaker 2: if you're young. I don't know if you can, Denika,
45:35
Speaker 2: what do you make of all this?
45:36
Speaker 15: Well, no, I mean this is a hot button issue, Andrew,
45:39
Speaker 15: amongst people my age, amongst my friends, that we are
45:41
Speaker 15: all facing the very real possibility of being renters for
45:44
Speaker 15: life and paying off somebody else's mortgage. And even if
45:46
Speaker 15: you are lucky enough to afford even a small one
45:49
Speaker 15: bedroom apartment in Sydney, you've got to go further out.
45:52
Speaker 6: And I can't even fathom.
45:54
Speaker 15: You know, my parents' generation, when they were in the
45:56
Speaker 15: early twenties, got married.
45:57
Speaker 6: Built their first home.
45:58
Speaker 15: Even the prospect of building a home is just foreign
46:01
Speaker 15: to me and people my age.
46:03
Speaker 6: Right now.
46:03
Speaker 15: The problem is Labour's led in one point two million
46:06
Speaker 15: migrants since it was elected, and yet it has not
46:09
Speaker 15: achieved not one of its housing targets. It's pledged to
46:12
Speaker 15: build one point two million homes by twenty twenty nine,
46:15
Speaker 15: yet it's twenty percent under its forecast. One hundred and
46:19
Speaker 15: eighty thousand homes were built this year, two hundred and
46:21
Speaker 15: forty thousand needed to have been built. And I think
46:24
Speaker 15: this is why the Coalition needs to really really seize
46:28
Speaker 15: the moment, seize on this issue and put a proper
46:30
Speaker 15: policy together to reduce migration.
46:32
Speaker 6: Come up with a figure.
46:33
Speaker 15: Susan Lee says that she won't have a figure in
46:36
Speaker 15: the short term. Well, then what's the point of having
46:38
Speaker 15: something if you're not going to put together a migrational
46:41
Speaker 15: figure for the year, but also policies that appeal to
46:43
Speaker 15: young people and prosecute them. I mean you recall, Andrew,
46:46
Speaker 15: the Coalition took a policy to the election whereby young
46:49
Speaker 15: people could use their super to buy their first home.
46:53
Speaker 15: But again these weren't prosecuted. So I think now is
46:56
Speaker 15: the time to seize on this because it is a problem.
47:00
Speaker 15: It's a concern.
47:03
Speaker 2: Yeah, but this is the thing, isn't it, Meir? They said,
47:05
Speaker 2: I know we can fix this by fixing supply more houses.
47:08
Speaker 2: How home approval is falling. They don't want to tackle demand,
47:13
Speaker 2: which includes obviously immigration. What do you make of that?
47:19
Speaker 13: Well, look, Andrew, I'm no economists, but even I can
47:22
Speaker 13: see one plus one equals two years. So you've got
47:25
Speaker 13: an issue with supply. The Albanezy government has absolutely failed
47:28
Speaker 13: to meet their promises and fixing supply shortage of homes
47:32
Speaker 13: in Australia. This isn't just a one off shortfall that
47:35
Speaker 13: they have that they've had here in this month. This
47:37
Speaker 13: is a consistent failure that they're having with the National
47:40
Speaker 13: Housing Accord target. Month after month they have completely failed
47:45
Speaker 13: to live up to their promise of fixing the supply
47:46
Speaker 13: issue here in Australia. So then you've got to start
47:49
Speaker 13: looking at demand. Now demand, we have this increasing influx
47:53
Speaker 13: of migrants into this country. Housing isn't keeping up, so
47:57
Speaker 13: of course housing and rental prices will so through the
48:00
Speaker 13: roof it is inevitable if the government can't fix apply,
48:04
Speaker 13: which it can't, it needs to recalibrate and start looking
48:08
Speaker 13: at the demand side of things.
48:11
Speaker 2: I would have thought that's pretty obvious, sir myself. There
48:15
Speaker 2: you go, Mia Schlift Aneka to Georgia. Thank you very
48:18
Speaker 2: much to you both talking about housing. The Greens very
48:25
Speaker 2: much into improving their own accommodation. They've had their party
48:28
Speaker 2: room in Parliament House renovated at an incredible cost of
48:32
Speaker 2: one point six million dollars. You could buy a couple
48:36
Speaker 2: of new homes or build ones anyway for that money.
48:39
Speaker 2: How do the Greens justify that? That's it from me,
48:42
Speaker 2: Sherry Maxon up next. Good Night,