Transcript

Credlin | 21 January · Credlin

0:02
Speaker 1: Peter Kremland live on Sky News Australia.
0:08
Speaker 2: Good evening, Welcome to the program. Look, I've got breaking
0:10
Speaker 2: news for you out of camera. There's an emergency meeting
0:13
Speaker 2: tonight of the National Party party room. I think the
0:17
Speaker 2: coalition is in grave trouble. I don't expect it to
0:21
Speaker 2: last the night. And this of course is on the
0:24
Speaker 2: back of resignations from the shadow cabinet. Today are three
0:27
Speaker 2: National Party frontbenchers who voted in line with their party
0:33
Speaker 2: but against Susan Lee on the hate speech legislation. I'll
0:37
Speaker 2: get into that in a moment on way Atitoril and
0:40
Speaker 2: explain some of the background. Will also cross live to
0:43
Speaker 2: camera for the latest in just a moment. Also, despite
0:47
Speaker 2: having his flight turned back today, Donald Trump is expected
0:50
Speaker 2: to get a pretty frosty reception at Davos when he
0:53
Speaker 2: eventually gets there. Tensions over Greenland escalating today. Is it
0:58
Speaker 2: a crazy idea of some European leaders will have you believe,
1:02
Speaker 2: or is it sensible on security term, We'll get into
1:05
Speaker 2: that with Group Sheridan as abandon lied to. That's a
1:08
Speaker 2: sentiment on the ground for volunteer firefighters as the Allen
1:11
Speaker 2: government persists with their claims that the CFA is well funded.
1:15
Speaker 2: I'll speak with a CFA captain. He's got forty years
1:18
Speaker 2: experience on the ground and he'll tell you what's really
1:21
Speaker 2: going on and does a P and C where stupid
1:24
Speaker 2: or not paying attention?
1:26
Speaker 3: This blatant lie.
1:27
Speaker 2: Just another one of his the day after trying to
1:31
Speaker 2: link Scott Morrison to the anti semitism crisis?
1:35
Speaker 4: Can mister Morrison really be blamed for a way of
1:38
Speaker 4: antisemitism that you presided it?
1:40
Speaker 5: I didn't mention him, did the Morrison government? Did the
1:43
Speaker 5: Morrison government appoint a special envoy to combat anti Semitism?
1:48
Speaker 1: No?
1:50
Speaker 2: But first I want to go back to that breaking
1:52
Speaker 2: news of utter chaos tonight inside the coalition, and it
1:55
Speaker 2: came after today where three National Party front benches resigned
1:58
Speaker 2: out of the fact that they voted against legislation that
2:02
Speaker 2: the National Party did not support. That is right, National
2:06
Speaker 2: Party andps lost their jobs because they were loyal to
2:10
Speaker 2: a party room decision, which shows just how bad things
2:14
Speaker 2: are being managed inside the opposition. Yesterday, the National Party
2:18
Speaker 2: leader David Little Proud issued this statement and in party reads,
2:23
Speaker 2: the National's party room today decided that the party cannot
2:26
Speaker 2: support the Albanezy government's Combating Antisemitism, hate an Extremism Legislation
2:32
Speaker 2: in its current form. Labour's legislation said, the statement has
2:37
Speaker 2: been a mess. They did not consult, they played politics,
2:41
Speaker 2: They overreacted. Now, after that statement, Shadow Cabinet decided it
2:46
Speaker 2: would support the bills, but with amendments. But the National
2:50
Speaker 2: Party Room decision it was not changed. It had not
2:54
Speaker 2: changed and it did not change, meaning there was no
2:58
Speaker 2: way these National Party MPs in shadow Cabinet were bound
3:03
Speaker 2: to any decision of the Shadow Cabinet room, where the
3:06
Speaker 2: majority of the room, of course is made up of
3:08
Speaker 2: Liberals and the National Party has a different view. Front
3:13
Speaker 2: benches are bound by decision of shadow Cabinet where that
3:17
Speaker 2: decision is also backed in by their own party room,
3:21
Speaker 2: be that the Liberal Party room or the National Party room,
3:26
Speaker 2: or both rooms sitting together as the joint party Room.
3:31
Speaker 2: But no decision of shadow cabinet is binding on anyone
3:34
Speaker 2: if that decision is not endorsed by the party room.
3:38
Speaker 2: That's important. In this case, they had separate meetings. In
3:44
Speaker 2: this case, the Libs supported the second draft of the
3:47
Speaker 2: hate speech laws, the National Party continued to reject them.
3:53
Speaker 2: Now what staggers me is that inside the coalition right now,
3:57
Speaker 2: inside the Officer Susan, no one appears to understand the
4:02
Speaker 2: rules or the long standing president on how you're supposed
4:06
Speaker 2: to deal with matters like this. If they did, no
4:11
Speaker 2: one would have made these three National Party frontbenches resigned today. Now,
4:16
Speaker 2: I don't just explain this from the advantage of a
4:18
Speaker 2: former leader's chief of staff. I was also the shadow
4:22
Speaker 2: cabinet secretary for the whole time the coalition was lasting opposition.
4:27
Speaker 2: I was the secretary in the room, taking the minutes,
4:31
Speaker 2: running the procedure. Let me tell you what I have
4:34
Speaker 2: just explained was the clear operating rules under all three
4:38
Speaker 2: Liberal leaders at the time, Brendan Nelson, Malcolm Turnbull and
4:43
Speaker 2: Tony Abbott. Earlier today, Senator Matt Canavan, former Minister of
4:47
Speaker 2: course now a National Party backbencher, pointed out that there
4:51
Speaker 2: was precedent for times like this where the two coalition
4:54
Speaker 2: partners hold differing views.
4:58
Speaker 4: I think there's any precedent to for shadow ministers to
5:02
Speaker 4: resign or leave the cabinet after a vote like this.
5:05
Speaker 4: The last time has happened in two thousand and eight
5:09
Speaker 4: over a disagreement of the marketing code. We had venerable
5:11
Speaker 4: members of the National's Party room like Warren Truss, Nigel Scullion,
5:15
Speaker 4: John Cobb all vote against the Liberal Party of the
5:18
Speaker 4: opposition policy on deregulating wheat, and they didn't leave their
5:22
Speaker 4: shadow minister's roles.
5:25
Speaker 2: As he said there it happened in two thousand and eight.
5:27
Speaker 2: It was over the issue of the single desk on wheat.
5:30
Speaker 2: It happened under doctor Brendan Nelson. I was working for
5:33
Speaker 2: him at the time.
5:34
Speaker 3: Back then they.
5:35
Speaker 2: Lived supported the abolition of the single desk of the
5:38
Speaker 2: week marketing scheme. The Nats didn't meaning National Party front benches,
5:43
Speaker 2: not just back benches, but front benches who voted differently
5:46
Speaker 2: to the Liberal Party colleagues in shadow cabinet kept their
5:50
Speaker 2: position in shadow cabinet. And that's because as important as
5:54
Speaker 2: shadow cabinet might be, it cannot displace the sovereignty of.
6:00
Speaker 3: The party room.
6:01
Speaker 2: Because any and all decisions of shadow cabinet, they're just
6:05
Speaker 2: recommendations to.
6:06
Speaker 3: The party room.
6:07
Speaker 2: They require the endorsement of the party room, either separately
6:11
Speaker 2: as Liberal or National Party party rooms, or as most
6:14
Speaker 2: of the time when they sit together as the joint
6:17
Speaker 2: party room. What precedent, says should have happened here where
6:22
Speaker 2: two coalition partners might disagree on something like these hate
6:25
Speaker 2: speech bills, as clearly they did, is one of two things.
6:30
Speaker 2: Either the Shadow Cabinet takes a guidance decision that it
6:33
Speaker 2: will support Labour's legislation but nopes it wants amendments, but
6:38
Speaker 2: the leader in this case, Susan Lee, says, I can't
6:41
Speaker 2: bind anybody to this, and I certainly can't bind National
6:44
Speaker 2: Party MPs given their party room has a different formal position.
6:50
Speaker 2: Or the Shadow Cabinet takes a decision to support the
6:54
Speaker 2: bills and then asks the National Party leader David Little
6:58
Speaker 2: Proud to date back the revised position to support the
7:02
Speaker 2: bills to his own party room in the hope that
7:06
Speaker 2: they changed their mind and reversed their role decision from
7:10
Speaker 2: opposing the legislation to supporting it. Now neither of these
7:14
Speaker 2: things happen, so it's therefore very wrong, wrong at every
7:18
Speaker 2: level to sack three National Party MPs from Shadow Cabinet
7:22
Speaker 2: who voted in line consisted with the formal decision of
7:28
Speaker 2: their own party room. Brendan Nelson didn't run it like this.
7:32
Speaker 2: Tony Abbatt didn't Malcolm Turble didn't. It's the artist's stupidity
7:36
Speaker 2: today on the part of Susan Lee. It is the
7:40
Speaker 2: iron lawyer of the Coalition that the sovereignty, the primacy
7:44
Speaker 2: of the party room by that Liberal or National Party
7:47
Speaker 2: Trump's shadow cabinet. Indeed, my any decision from shadow cabinet,
7:52
Speaker 2: as I said, is only a recommendation that must then
7:56
Speaker 2: be taken to the joint party room for final agreement.
7:59
Speaker 2: If it is not endorsed by the party room, it's
8:03
Speaker 2: not a decision now, this is a miss. This will
8:08
Speaker 2: be the final nail in Susan Lee's coffin mark my words,
8:13
Speaker 2: which despite a strong response to the Bondi massacre, has
8:17
Speaker 2: also been damaged by that record low News poll result
8:20
Speaker 2: this week. Now, I think, because I said tonight at
8:23
Speaker 2: the top of the show, this looks to me like
8:26
Speaker 2: it will have tonight resulted in a formal split of
8:31
Speaker 2: the Coalition, the second split under her leadership, and they
8:36
Speaker 2: can only add up to a spill of her leadership.
8:41
Speaker 2: God forbid, it's all of it at once. Look now
8:49
Speaker 2: to that weak man in the lodge yesterday. It was
8:52
Speaker 2: bad enough for Anthony even easy to blame his predecessor
8:55
Speaker 2: for the recent explosion in due hatred. But for him
8:59
Speaker 2: today to deny that's what he said yesterday on the
9:04
Speaker 2: record on camera, well that's simply shameless. I mean, what
9:08
Speaker 2: planet is he living on?
9:10
Speaker 3: Here?
9:11
Speaker 2: He was yesterday in question time trying to deflect from
9:13
Speaker 2: his own failures to tackle anti semitism on his watch.
9:19
Speaker 5: Did the Morrison government? Did the Morrison government appoint a
9:23
Speaker 5: special envoy to combat anti Semitism?
9:26
Speaker 1: No?
9:29
Speaker 3: You heard that.
9:31
Speaker 2: Now listen to him today denying that he was trying
9:34
Speaker 2: to blame Scott Morrison.
9:36
Speaker 4: Can mister Morrison really be blamed for a way of
9:39
Speaker 4: antisemitism that you presided it.
9:41
Speaker 5: I didn't mention him at all. What I did was
9:44
Speaker 5: I quoted. I quoted the ministers in Peace government at
9:51
Speaker 5: the time.
9:53
Speaker 2: Air can't lie straight in bed. He cannot lie straight
9:57
Speaker 2: in bed. The idea that anti Semitism somehow spiked under
10:01
Speaker 2: the former Coalition government, when in fact it has quadrupled
10:05
Speaker 2: after the October seventh atrocity on his watch, is delusional.
10:11
Speaker 2: Scott Morrison was well within his rights to take his
10:14
Speaker 2: success at to task, which he did hit back on
10:18
Speaker 2: social media. But this is just the latest example of
10:22
Speaker 2: one of our Prime Minister's chief character feigings, nothing is
10:26
Speaker 2: ever Elbow's fault, nothing is ever his fault, and his
10:31
Speaker 2: bizarre tendency to deny reality, like his stubborn refusal to
10:36
Speaker 2: hold a Royal commission into the Bondai massacre that it
10:40
Speaker 2: ends said he'd intended to.
10:42
Speaker 3: Do all the way along.
10:45
Speaker 5: Where role commissions are not as good is to consider
10:52
Speaker 5: things that are not agreed, where people have differences. The
10:56
Speaker 5: full suite of issues that have been asked to be
11:00
Speaker 5: examoned would delay by a number of years a number
11:06
Speaker 5: of years any outcome. We are following the advice that
11:13
Speaker 5: we receive from authorities who are in twoenty and twenty
11:18
Speaker 5: five dealing with this atrocity. We want to make sure
11:23
Speaker 5: as well that we do deal with this. That is
11:25
Speaker 5: what the Richardson Review will do. Today I announced that
11:30
Speaker 5: I will be recommending that a Royal Commission on any
11:33
Speaker 5: Semitism and Social Cohesion be established.
11:39
Speaker 2: No no, no, no no, and tell us yes. And
11:43
Speaker 2: what about is insistence that it's always other people who
11:46
Speaker 2: are playing politics. Well, in fact, that's all this Prime
11:49
Speaker 2: Minister has ever done, and that was exemplified by his
11:53
Speaker 2: attempt to try and wrap the whole response to Bondi,
11:58
Speaker 2: everything hate speech and the gun reform into one of legislation.
12:03
Speaker 2: Last night, the government's second Bondi bill passed through the Senate.
12:08
Speaker 2: The real tests will be now whether any of these
12:10
Speaker 2: new laws make a difference. How many hate preachers will
12:14
Speaker 2: be expelled, how many visas will be canceled, how many
12:17
Speaker 2: marches will be stopped, how many people will be arrested
12:21
Speaker 2: for rampant anti semitism. The old laws didn't make any difference.
12:26
Speaker 2: Will these make a difference, because this is a government
12:30
Speaker 2: that's against due hatred in theory, but almost never in practice.
12:40
Speaker 3: All right, let's go now to Camro.
12:42
Speaker 2: We've got our reporter, our man on the ground, Cam Reddan,
12:45
Speaker 2: who's about to join us now.
12:46
Speaker 3: With the National.
12:47
Speaker 2: Party party room meeting well underway, Cam, I've opened the
12:52
Speaker 2: show with I guess my intel from the people I've
12:55
Speaker 2: spoken to literally, and I apologize to my viewers right
12:58
Speaker 2: up until six o'clock.
13:00
Speaker 3: But what are you hearing on the ground.
13:03
Speaker 6: The same thing that you're hearing, Peter. This meeting now
13:05
Speaker 6: fifteen minutes in, and the expectation is that there will
13:08
Speaker 6: not only be a mass resignation from the shadow front
13:12
Speaker 6: bench of Nationals members, but by the end of tonight
13:15
Speaker 6: the coalition may well be split. That meeting is underway
13:18
Speaker 6: at the moment. It follows, as you mentioned at the
13:21
Speaker 6: top of the show, the resignation, but really they weren't
13:24
Speaker 6: given a whole lot of choice here of three members
13:27
Speaker 6: of that front bench after they crossed the floor last
13:29
Speaker 6: night didn't vote in lockstep with the rest of the Liberals,
13:32
Speaker 6: as though I'm as supposed to do so. Roscadell, Susan McDonald,
13:35
Speaker 6: Bridget McKenzie all off the front bench this afternoon. There
13:39
Speaker 6: are six other Nationals that have front bench positions as
13:42
Speaker 6: part of Susan Lee's shadow ministry. You add on to
13:45
Speaker 6: that David Little Proud and Kevin Hogan, the Leader and
13:48
Speaker 6: Deputy Leader.
13:49
Speaker 4: Have roles as well.
13:50
Speaker 6: If they are all to go, Peter, that is a
13:52
Speaker 6: lot of holes to plug, and you mentioned that that
13:55
Speaker 6: would likely cause really a cascading effect throughout the Liberal
13:59
Speaker 6: Party as well, because this would be a total reshaping
14:02
Speaker 6: of what the opposition would look like. The Nationals aren't
14:05
Speaker 6: strong in numbers in the Senate, but as a whole
14:08
Speaker 6: of the coalition, when you've only got forty two seats,
14:11
Speaker 6: there's not a lot to work with. And so if
14:13
Speaker 6: that is to play out now, as we expect over
14:16
Speaker 6: the course of the next hour or two, we can
14:18
Speaker 6: expect to see not only a mass resignation of the Nationals,
14:21
Speaker 6: but likely a split of the coalition again for the
14:24
Speaker 6: second time since the last election, well.
14:28
Speaker 2: The second time, as Susan Lee, as I made mention of.
14:30
Speaker 2: But can the issue there and I'll just go back
14:33
Speaker 2: to something you said there as they were supposed to,
14:35
Speaker 2: you say, abide by a shadow cabinet decision. Well, no
14:38
Speaker 2: they weren't actually, because that shadow cabinet decision to then
14:41
Speaker 2: later support Albert's in legislation was never endorsed.
14:45
Speaker 3: By the Joint party room.
14:47
Speaker 2: It's not and never was endorsed by the Nationals party room.
14:51
Speaker 2: And I can't get a straight answer on the Libs.
14:53
Speaker 2: It appears to me that they did not themselves have
14:57
Speaker 2: a Liberal Party room meeting, But that would I not
15:00
Speaker 2: have been binding anyway. If there was a Liberal Party
15:02
Speaker 2: meeting on the Nationals, it had to be a joint
15:04
Speaker 2: party room meeting, and I can confirm there was never
15:07
Speaker 2: one of those. So the three Nationals basically had no choice.
15:12
Speaker 2: Their hands were tied they had to vote to support
15:15
Speaker 2: the pre existing National Party position of their party room
15:20
Speaker 2: to oppose this legislation. The National Party room and the
15:25
Speaker 2: Liberal Party room and they sit together more often than not.
15:28
Speaker 2: As the joint party room is sovereign, it is more
15:32
Speaker 2: powerful and more determinant. It has primacy over the shadow cabinet.
15:37
Speaker 2: And I think what Susan Lee has done today in
15:40
Speaker 2: basically forcing the hand of these front benches who were
15:44
Speaker 2: loyal to their party, is a massive own goal. It
15:49
Speaker 2: means it decimates now her front bench if these resignations
15:52
Speaker 2: do occur, but breaking the coalition for the second time
15:57
Speaker 2: in under a year. As she's gone. If this happens,
16:01
Speaker 2: she is gone.
16:03
Speaker 6: Yeah, And she was warned that this was coming to Peter.
16:06
Speaker 6: My understanding is that David Little Prowd made it abundantly
16:08
Speaker 6: clear that if those three Nationals front benches were to
16:11
Speaker 6: resign or in other words, they were not to be
16:13
Speaker 6: on the front bench by this afternoon, then the rest
16:15
Speaker 6: of them would follow. So you've got the shadow cabinet
16:19
Speaker 6: solidarity effectively shattering for all the world to see, the
16:23
Speaker 6: national solidarity remaining strong. And as that meeting is ongoing,
16:27
Speaker 6: now it's what about twenty minutes in, fifteen minutes in.
16:30
Speaker 6: It's not going to be a long meeting, so we
16:32
Speaker 6: can probably expect to hear this all locked in by
16:34
Speaker 6: David Little Prowd, perhaps even before your show is over tonight, Peter.
16:38
Speaker 6: But this is now going to be a defining moment
16:41
Speaker 6: for Susan Lee. Does she cut the Nationals loose or
16:44
Speaker 6: does she try to bring this back together over the
16:46
Speaker 6: next few days, because that decision alone is going to
16:48
Speaker 6: be critical and what the Liberal shadow front bench could
16:52
Speaker 6: look like potentially. Then we know there's a few that
16:54
Speaker 6: have been knocking on the door for promotion. But this
16:57
Speaker 6: is an unmitigated disaster politically the coalition. There was some
17:01
Speaker 6: hope they might be back on track after the summer, Peter,
17:03
Speaker 6: but they're going to be splintering left and right. The
17:06
Speaker 6: votes had already split on the floor, the coalition itself
17:09
Speaker 6: might be known more by the morning, and suddenly all
17:12
Speaker 6: the pressure that they thought they were applying on the government, well,
17:15
Speaker 6: politically that's just going to really evaporate.
17:20
Speaker 3: One hundred percent.
17:21
Speaker 2: If you go back to Newspool on Monday and you
17:22
Speaker 2: look at those numbers, particularly the advance of one nation,
17:27
Speaker 2: this plays perfectly into one nation. They were once the
17:31
Speaker 2: party of you know, fringe issues and chaos. They are
17:35
Speaker 2: made streaming themselves in a massive way, and they look
17:38
Speaker 2: steady and sensible, and my old mob looked like they're
17:41
Speaker 2: lost at sea.
17:42
Speaker 3: We'll see what happens.
17:43
Speaker 2: Cam, We'll come back to you if we have a
17:45
Speaker 2: result within the hour. We'll stay across that one. Let's
17:48
Speaker 2: bring in my pad on, our senior reporter at a
17:50
Speaker 2: Sydney Caroln Marcus, a national affairs editor at the Data Telegraph,
17:53
Speaker 2: of course, host on Sky News, James Morrow. I'll go
17:57
Speaker 2: back to that point. We're just talking there, James Morrow,
17:59
Speaker 2: about solidarity shut a cabinet solidarity in this case, well,
18:02
Speaker 2: there is none, and they cannot be shadow cabin solidarity
18:06
Speaker 2: if you belong to a party that opposes the decision
18:10
Speaker 2: being forced on you by the Liberal leader. I mean,
18:14
Speaker 2: this is where it is a massive own goal. She
18:17
Speaker 2: can only make the room a bide by a decision
18:22
Speaker 2: if that's endorsed by both party rooms, and it wasn't,
18:26
Speaker 2: and it never was, and she has brought this unholy
18:29
Speaker 2: mess on herself tonight.
18:32
Speaker 1: Well, Peter, everything you said there is correct, except for
18:35
Speaker 1: the fact that I think that the trap that she
18:38
Speaker 1: walked into on this she set up a long time ago.
18:41
Speaker 1: You know, Susan Land, the coalition said we demand, we
18:44
Speaker 1: demand the parliament come back. We demand that we recall
18:48
Speaker 1: parliament and that we act urgently on some sort of legislation.
18:52
Speaker 1: She didn't see what that legislation was going to be.
18:54
Speaker 1: And so as Blake Bazilla flagged in the hearings, they
18:58
Speaker 1: dragged out every idea about, you know, repressing free speech,
19:02
Speaker 1: regulating speech, doing all of these things, stuffed it all
19:05
Speaker 1: into this horrendous bill and then said well, hey, you
19:08
Speaker 1: want to come back, now, you've got to vote for it.
19:10
Speaker 3: And then they.
19:11
Speaker 1: Said, well, no, we're not gonna do that, and then
19:14
Speaker 1: they split the bill. And now the coalition wasn't able
19:16
Speaker 1: to stay together on this and say no, we're not
19:19
Speaker 1: doing this until we have a proper debate on this
19:21
Speaker 1: legislation and you know, discuss all this property. Because Susan
19:25
Speaker 1: Lay walked into this. She walked into this whole trap
19:29
Speaker 1: very early on Alban Easy cannot believe his luck. You've
19:32
Speaker 1: got the coalition fracturing, and as Pam was saying, it
19:35
Speaker 1: maybe fractured by the end of this program, everybody I've
19:38
Speaker 1: been talking to all day long, has been saying Susan
19:42
Speaker 1: Lee's leadership is terminal. It is terminal, that there's no
19:46
Speaker 1: way that she gets through this. She will have seen
19:49
Speaker 1: the thing break twice on her own watch.
19:53
Speaker 2: It is over in Caroline mus Sanders here is I
19:56
Speaker 2: think she really took it up to the government over
19:58
Speaker 2: the BONDI response. I think she she shamed Albanesi along
20:02
Speaker 2: with many, many others in the public domain, to move
20:04
Speaker 2: on the Royal Commission.
20:06
Speaker 3: I think I saw.
20:07
Speaker 2: Leadership from her that I had not really seen as
20:11
Speaker 2: she responded to the devastation obviously that May election lost
20:14
Speaker 2: last year. She was sort of growing into the role
20:17
Speaker 2: and I thought Australians were looking at her with a
20:19
Speaker 2: different view. Yes, she's been in public life a long time.
20:23
Speaker 2: I think she really rose to the occasion. And here
20:26
Speaker 2: we are, after a massive backflip by the government on
20:30
Speaker 2: the Royal Commission, by the government having to dump its
20:33
Speaker 2: own legislation on Sunday, we ends a week with the
20:38
Speaker 2: Coalition being basically on death's door here. I don't think
20:42
Speaker 2: it'll survive the night, massive resignations on the front bench
20:47
Speaker 2: and Albanese yet again scoring the political goal.
20:50
Speaker 7: I know it is so sad that this is the
20:53
Speaker 7: outcome in a way, Peter, because I have never seen
20:57
Speaker 7: Susan Lee stronger than I did last week and when
20:59
Speaker 7: I was filling in for you over the summer period
21:03
Speaker 7: last week, I made the point that her address, the
21:05
Speaker 7: press conference, she gave about the hate speech laws and
21:09
Speaker 7: the religious carve outs and the points that she was making.
21:13
Speaker 3: You know, she.
21:13
Speaker 7: Didn't hold back saying that this didn't even address radical Islam,
21:18
Speaker 7: didn't mention radical Islam once. That was the strongest that
21:22
Speaker 7: I've ever seen Susan Lee. And finally I thought she
21:25
Speaker 7: was coming into her own in her response to this.
21:29
Speaker 7: They'd had the huge political win of getting the government
21:33
Speaker 7: to back down on the Royal Commission, I mean obviously
21:36
Speaker 7: with the help of sports people and business people, and
21:39
Speaker 7: now for it to turn to this, the wrong political
21:41
Speaker 7: leader is going to be losing their job. It should
21:44
Speaker 7: be Albin easy after what happened, but sadly it's an
21:47
Speaker 7: own goal so we're going to see the implosion of
21:51
Speaker 7: Susan Lee instead.
21:52
Speaker 3: I fear.
21:55
Speaker 2: I also think too, James, the back end is not
21:57
Speaker 2: working in the coalition as it should. You know, I
21:59
Speaker 2: don't think there was enough attention paid to the detail
22:02
Speaker 2: end that legislation. I spoke to shadow ministers throughout the
22:06
Speaker 2: last couple of days. I was picking up clauses and
22:09
Speaker 2: the bill, saying, surely you can't support this. Is this
22:11
Speaker 2: part of your amendments. I don't know what you're talking about.
22:14
Speaker 2: I'd read them something. They'd say, well, hang on, where's
22:16
Speaker 2: that in the bill? I'm thinking, God, you guys are
22:18
Speaker 2: about to vote on this thing, and you're not giving
22:20
Speaker 2: me confidence that you've gone through it hard. But also,
22:24
Speaker 2: you know, you demand someone comes back to parliament. You
22:26
Speaker 2: want these things addressed, you want legislation on hate speech,
22:30
Speaker 2: you better have your own version in your back pocket,
22:32
Speaker 2: as you mentioned. So when they got there and they
22:34
Speaker 2: didn't like what Albaneze you said, you can anticipate he's
22:38
Speaker 2: going to say, well, put up or shut up. Where's
22:40
Speaker 2: your alternative? They had summer to draft an alternative. So
22:46
Speaker 2: I think you know they walked into a trap. Yes,
22:49
Speaker 2: they got him to bring back the parliament, but they
22:52
Speaker 2: didn't think through plan A, plan B, and they didn't
22:55
Speaker 2: sort of play the chess game out, which I really
22:58
Speaker 2: think you have to do. I mean, Albanize is terrible.
23:00
Speaker 2: At running the country. But by god, he's brilliant at
23:03
Speaker 2: the politics and you have to be across the chess
23:06
Speaker 2: game because he's always stronger in the parliament. Government has
23:11
Speaker 2: a bigger megaphone than the opposition, and I think they
23:14
Speaker 2: came back to a gunfight with a knife.
23:18
Speaker 3: I mean, that's the coalition's problem.
23:20
Speaker 1: Well, you know, Peter just Frony. I wrote something earlier
23:22
Speaker 1: on the Daily Telegraph where I made the point that
23:25
Speaker 1: outside the laboratory conditions of a caucus room or the parliament,
23:29
Speaker 1: Ethne Albinizi is a disaster. But within those laboratory conditions
23:33
Speaker 1: he is a very very skillful politician. And I don't
23:37
Speaker 1: think the coalition really fully understands, you know, what that's
23:40
Speaker 1: all about. And part of the reason why they got
23:42
Speaker 1: into trouble, not only on this legislation, was because not
23:46
Speaker 1: only because they didn't have their own version and their
23:48
Speaker 1: own things that they wanted to see come out of it,
23:51
Speaker 1: they're also all at sea at the moment, particularly the
23:53
Speaker 1: Liberal Party. I'm afraid on the very first principles of
23:57
Speaker 1: whether or not free speech is a good thing, you know,
23:59
Speaker 1: or free speech too much of it? If so facto
24:02
Speaker 1: a danger to the community. And that's the basis that
24:05
Speaker 1: they need to be talking about these laws on. And
24:08
Speaker 1: I don't think they've gone back to first principles. I
24:10
Speaker 1: don't think the people there who have done, you know,
24:12
Speaker 1: the reading the philosophical thought to understand why they are liberals,
24:16
Speaker 1: why they are conservatives, and what that means and why
24:19
Speaker 1: you know, things like free speech matter. And that's why
24:21
Speaker 1: we saw the thing split. Alban easy knows that this
24:24
Speaker 1: split exists in the coalition. He wants to break the coalition.
24:28
Speaker 1: He wants to see the NATS and One Nation go
24:31
Speaker 1: off and form their own thing that he can then
24:33
Speaker 1: treat as this far right mob of dutters that will
24:37
Speaker 1: be what he will call them and try and you know,
24:39
Speaker 1: regain the center out of the fall apart of the coalition.
24:43
Speaker 1: And I just feel like Susan Lee, but everybody involved
24:46
Speaker 1: here really walked into this trap. As you say, they
24:49
Speaker 1: didn't have a plan for plan A, plan B. What
24:51
Speaker 1: comes next? Hey, we're all going to go to camera.
24:53
Speaker 1: What do we do next?
24:57
Speaker 2: I think he's endgame is he wants the conservative right,
25:02
Speaker 2: if I can call it that, which closes the National
25:04
Speaker 2: Party to split and go to war with one nation,
25:08
Speaker 2: and he wants the left leaning they like to call
25:11
Speaker 2: themselves as moderate part of the center right, which obviously
25:15
Speaker 2: is the moderate Liberals, to go to war with the Teals,
25:19
Speaker 2: and then they'll both be on the center right broadly speaking,
25:24
Speaker 2: fighting amongst themselves. And that gives a him cover for
25:28
Speaker 2: all the things that he's not doing that he should
25:29
Speaker 2: be doing when he's running the country. But also he
25:32
Speaker 2: will then be the Labor Party will then be the
25:34
Speaker 2: largest block of votes in the traditional sense.
25:38
Speaker 3: And that's the long game.
25:39
Speaker 2: I mean, he is four or five chess moves ahead
25:43
Speaker 2: of where anyone in the coalition is smartly thinking about
25:46
Speaker 2: this conundrum that they have. I know that he watches
25:48
Speaker 2: very closely what's happening in reform in the United Kingdom.
25:52
Speaker 2: It's not the same voting system as Australia, but it
25:54
Speaker 2: has a philosophical learning base.
25:59
Speaker 3: I think frustrating in politics.
26:01
Speaker 2: Just quickly, Carolina played two grabs there from the Prime
26:03
Speaker 2: Minister yesterday, basically trying to blame Scott Morrison for the
26:07
Speaker 2: anti Semitism that is rife on the streets, particularly particularly
26:12
Speaker 2: the fourfold increase since October seven on his watch, and
26:18
Speaker 2: then a grab for him today saying I never said that,
26:21
Speaker 2: I never even mentioned Scott Morrison and we all heard
26:24
Speaker 2: it with our own ears. I mean, does anyone buy
26:27
Speaker 2: the spin that this is Morrison's fault?
26:29
Speaker 3: First?
26:30
Speaker 2: But two, how the heck does he get away with
26:35
Speaker 2: lie after lie after lie? Is caught on tape, but
26:39
Speaker 2: he does it again and again and again.
26:40
Speaker 7: Well, the people vote him in. I mean one of
26:43
Speaker 7: his first lies was that our power bills were going
26:46
Speaker 7: to come down by two hundred and seventy five dollars.
26:47
Speaker 7: I think everyone's still waiting for that to happen. This
26:50
Speaker 7: guy seems to be able to get away with lying constantly,
26:54
Speaker 7: and we know he blames Scott Morrison, and Scott Morrison
26:57
Speaker 7: had a very good response. He tweeted, well, it wasn't
27:00
Speaker 7: my government that Hamas praised after October seven, it was
27:06
Speaker 7: it was Albanesi's because Alberizi has been so hostile to
27:10
Speaker 7: the Jewist state since the worst attack on it and
27:14
Speaker 7: on Jews since the Holocaust, recognizing a state of Palestine
27:18
Speaker 7: and rewarding terrorists for their behavior, and every step he
27:22
Speaker 7: has taken of the United Nations, on behalf of Australia
27:25
Speaker 7: and everything he has said publicly is just shameful, and
27:30
Speaker 7: of course that would lead to an uptick in anti semitism.
27:33
Speaker 7: And he's gone up by more than three hundred percent
27:35
Speaker 7: in twenty three and twenty twenty four, and no doubt
27:39
Speaker 7: figures will show that it's gone up. It's exploded even
27:42
Speaker 7: more after that and in the past year when they
27:45
Speaker 7: come out. So instead of taking responsibility, though it is
27:49
Speaker 7: his usual technique of deflecting, of getting aggressive, of lying
27:54
Speaker 7: in some cases, but the record clearly shows that he
27:58
Speaker 7: did try to shift the blame.
28:01
Speaker 2: Absolutely. I leave it there, thank you very much to
28:03
Speaker 2: you both. Let's go to a quick break. I will
28:06
Speaker 2: stay across what's at me in Campbell. We've got reporters
28:08
Speaker 2: there on stand by a National Party party room meeting
28:11
Speaker 2: as we speak. Resignations expected are split in the coalition,
28:16
Speaker 2: very much on the table. After break, though, I want
28:19
Speaker 2: to talk to Greg Sheridan Greenland. This fight about Greenland.
28:22
Speaker 2: Do you know what it's really about? We'll ask Greg
28:25
Speaker 2: in the moment. Thank you, okay, Bank, We'll get into
28:32
Speaker 2: grand Land at a moment. But I want to go
28:34
Speaker 2: to the government's claim now that the laws that have
28:36
Speaker 2: just passed the Parliament last night will give them the
28:39
Speaker 2: power to stanmdpower hate groups, particularly Hissberteria. Tony Burke has
28:44
Speaker 2: claimed that the group could be banned within a month.
28:46
Speaker 2: And it must be said, I've already scrubbed their online
28:50
Speaker 2: presence in Australia off the internet very quickly as the
28:55
Speaker 2: laws passed the Parliament. Want to be now to discuss
28:57
Speaker 2: this and more. National Affairs editor at The Australian Greek
29:00
Speaker 2: Sheridan Greeg welcome. I think we both can agree how
29:04
Speaker 2: important it is to ban his booteria. If we do this, though,
29:09
Speaker 2: what's the practical game we get here? I mean, is
29:12
Speaker 2: this going to root them out? Or will they just
29:15
Speaker 2: rebrand under another name or perhaps just go underground.
29:21
Speaker 8: But great to be with you and welcome back. It's
29:24
Speaker 8: great to have you back. Foreign editor. I am not
29:27
Speaker 8: national affairs editor. Look, I think it's a good thing
29:31
Speaker 8: to ban his book to rear. They were a radical
29:35
Speaker 8: breakaway from the Muslim brotherhood. A lot of our friends
29:38
Speaker 8: friendly nations have banned his book to rear. They may
29:42
Speaker 8: well just go underground and rebrand, but nonetheless it's a
29:47
Speaker 8: proper statement from official Australia that their philosophy of hatred
29:52
Speaker 8: and extremism is unacceptable in Australia. I don't mind banning
29:57
Speaker 8: Neo Nazis either, you know, I do think there's a
30:02
Speaker 8: trade off between the limits of freedom. This is the
30:05
Speaker 8: dilemma a liberal society faces in dealing with the most
30:09
Speaker 8: wickedly illiberal forces. You're forced to put some limits on
30:14
Speaker 8: your freedom. But I don't think it abolishes the hatred
30:17
Speaker 8: that has put career represents. But I think it's you know,
30:21
Speaker 8: it's a good move as far as it goes.
30:25
Speaker 2: Look, I agree with you on the constraints that we
30:28
Speaker 2: must have to defeat the evil that is now in
30:31
Speaker 2: our Western society and taking advantage of all of our
30:35
Speaker 2: Western human rights and philosophies and things. I guess one
30:40
Speaker 2: of the benefits of banning them is the ability to
30:43
Speaker 2: delegitimize funding sources. I've always had a concern and some
30:48
Speaker 2: of the money we pay to Muslim associations as an example,
30:53
Speaker 2: find their way back into bodies that are as much
30:56
Speaker 2: against us as they ever are. Support was the people
31:01
Speaker 2: in Australia.
31:04
Speaker 8: Yeah, I agree with that, and you know it used
31:07
Speaker 8: to be the case years ago when Alexander Downer was
31:09
Speaker 8: a Foreign Minister that Saudi Arabia could pour money into
31:12
Speaker 8: extremist mosques in Australia, but you couldn't take a Bible
31:16
Speaker 8: into Saudi Arabia. I always thought, well, look, surely we
31:19
Speaker 8: can have simple reciprocity and you know, control that. So
31:25
Speaker 8: I'm not convinced that we could not possibly have banned
31:28
Speaker 8: his book to Reer already. I think one of the
31:30
Speaker 8: arguments against the new laws is that part of the
31:34
Speaker 8: problem has been a failure to use existing laws with
31:38
Speaker 8: any purpose or strength against the extremists that we know
31:43
Speaker 8: are there already.
31:46
Speaker 2: Right, talk to me about Greenland before we get in
31:48
Speaker 2: the ins and outs of Donald Trump. How fair is
31:53
Speaker 2: it to say that it's an incredibly strategic property and
31:57
Speaker 2: we are, you know the way, broadly concerned about it
32:03
Speaker 2: not not being I guess allied clearly enough to a
32:11
Speaker 2: major power.
32:12
Speaker 3: Is that a worry?
32:15
Speaker 8: Well, No, it's a very important strategic territory. It's a
32:19
Speaker 8: huge piece of land almost entirely uninhabitable with a little
32:25
Speaker 8: bit of Arctic ice melting or whatever. There are increased
32:28
Speaker 8: sea routes to the north of Greenland, which both Russia
32:32
Speaker 8: and China are using increasingly. But I must say, Peter,
32:35
Speaker 8: in this case, Trump's position has not one schmick of
32:39
Speaker 8: a justification. Trump does a lot of good things, for
32:41
Speaker 8: which I praise him, But when he's bad, he's bloody awful,
32:44
Speaker 8: and he's unspeakable on this issue. Under an existing agreement,
32:48
Speaker 8: the United States has a military base in Greenland and
32:51
Speaker 8: could have as many military bases as it wanted to
32:54
Speaker 8: in Greenland. It used to have dozens of military bases
32:57
Speaker 8: in Greenland. So if the development of sea roots to
33:01
Speaker 8: the north of Greenland mean that it is potentially strategically
33:05
Speaker 8: vulnerable to Russia or China, you could certainly expect NATO nations,
33:10
Speaker 8: including Denmark, to place some more military resources there. But
33:15
Speaker 8: if the United States feels this is a priority, it
33:18
Speaker 8: can place all the resources there it wants to. Right now.
33:21
Speaker 8: It can do anything it likes for missile deface submarine warfare.
33:27
Speaker 3: So why the chess beating.
33:28
Speaker 2: Why does he say that they must buy it, they
33:31
Speaker 2: must own it, as if to say that the current
33:35
Speaker 2: arrangements are not sufficient.
33:37
Speaker 3: What's the argument there?
33:41
Speaker 8: Well, I think the benign interpretation is that it's just
33:44
Speaker 8: mad Trump bluster to give himself negotiating leverage before a
33:49
Speaker 8: negotiation with the Europeans. From which he will presumably want
33:54
Speaker 8: even better economic access. Although there's a very interesting piece
33:58
Speaker 8: in Foreign Affairs last week which outlined the way that
34:00
Speaker 8: the United States could get Greenland if they wanted to,
34:03
Speaker 8: just by a massive investment. They could do a Belton
34:05
Speaker 8: Rhodes thing with Greenland, the sort of thing that China does,
34:10
Speaker 8: and the Danes would cooperate with them in economic development
34:13
Speaker 8: and all the rest of it. But Peter, although I'm
34:15
Speaker 8: reluctant generally to get into psychobabble about Trump, I think
34:19
Speaker 8: this really emerges more out of two things. One is
34:23
Speaker 8: having a bit of trouble keeping his magabase together for
34:25
Speaker 8: all his international adventures. So this is an international adventure
34:29
Speaker 8: which MAGA will like because it increases US territory. And two,
34:34
Speaker 8: I think he has a psychological compulsion to be somebody
34:37
Speaker 8: like you know, Thomas Jefferson who did the Louisiana purchase,
34:43
Speaker 8: or was it Johnson who did the Alaska purchase? Or
34:46
Speaker 8: Teddy Roosevelt under whom the US acquired Puerto Rico and
34:50
Speaker 8: so on. Now you could do that. In the nineteenth century,
34:54
Speaker 8: as a result of the Spanish American War, the US
34:57
Speaker 8: took over Spanish colonies and so on. But there's absolutely
35:01
Speaker 8: no justification today for saying We're going to march into
35:04
Speaker 8: a democratic ally which has never done one single thing
35:07
Speaker 8: against us, and with whom we have a formal military alliance,
35:12
Speaker 8: and in whose territory we have a military base and
35:15
Speaker 8: take it over just because we decided to do that.
35:19
Speaker 8: I mean, a week ago I was praising Trump for
35:21
Speaker 8: his actions on Gaza, Iran and Venezuela. But I got
35:24
Speaker 8: to be honest with you this week. I think is
35:28
Speaker 8: peak bad Trump. This is madness, and I don't think
35:31
Speaker 8: I think in the end he won't do it. He
35:33
Speaker 8: says a lot of crazy things and then when they're
35:36
Speaker 8: obviously not working, he just moves on to something else.
35:39
Speaker 8: But you can't be sure. I mean that text he
35:42
Speaker 8: sent to the Norwegian Prime Minister. You know, dear Jonas,
35:46
Speaker 8: you didn't give me the Nobel peace Price, So now
35:48
Speaker 8: I don't.
35:48
Speaker 3: Have to worry about real.
35:50
Speaker 2: Yes, a quick it is devented. I agree with you
35:58
Speaker 2: on that one. I want a quick from you on Iran.
36:01
Speaker 2: Are we seeing regime change happening?
36:07
Speaker 8: It's possible. I think so far the regime has held
36:10
Speaker 8: together fairly well. The security agencies are still willing to
36:14
Speaker 8: keep killing their own citizens, and it's hard to turn
36:18
Speaker 8: over a dictator when they're willing to do that. But
36:21
Speaker 8: here's something Trump has done which is consequential. He's moved
36:24
Speaker 8: an aircraft carry a battlegroup to the Middle East. That
36:27
Speaker 8: gives him very powerful military options against Iran. I think,
36:32
Speaker 8: should the demonstrations break out again, or should there be
36:37
Speaker 8: a cause a cowsist ballet, the US could take action
36:40
Speaker 8: and that could be enough to topple the regime. I'm
36:43
Speaker 8: not saying it will happen, but it's possible.
36:46
Speaker 3: We'll watch this space Greek.
36:47
Speaker 2: Thank you all right after the break, the push today
36:50
Speaker 2: for women only pre selections within the New South Wales Liberals.
36:55
Speaker 2: I mean, seriously, it's not like we've got women only electorates.
37:00
Speaker 3: We'll get into that one in a moment.
37:01
Speaker 2: But why are an invasion Day protests being allowed to
37:05
Speaker 2: go ahead when every other march is banned in New
37:09
Speaker 2: South Wales?
37:15
Speaker 3: Coming up, of course, it's Wednesday.
37:16
Speaker 2: We're going to get cal He's got some good words
37:18
Speaker 2: this week, but we'll go down to my panel. And
37:21
Speaker 2: the bizarre news in the papers this morning that New
37:23
Speaker 2: South Wales Liberals have approved a proposal to introduce gender
37:28
Speaker 2: quotas and women only pre selections. It'll include penalties for
37:34
Speaker 2: non compliant branches in an effort, it says to live
37:37
Speaker 2: female representation. After the party's disaster's twenty twenty five federal
37:41
Speaker 2: election result, let's pull this apart. Skin is contributor and
37:45
Speaker 2: a candidate in that raised, Jamie Rodgers and New South
37:49
Speaker 2: Wales Senator for One Nation Sean Bell. Welcome to you both.
37:52
Speaker 2: As I said, Jamie, you're in the hot seat. You're
37:54
Speaker 2: in the campaign in May. What do you make of that?
37:58
Speaker 2: These aren't targets either. These are hard quotas, women's only
38:02
Speaker 2: pre selections as well. We don't have women's only electorates.
38:08
Speaker 2: I think this is krakens Peter.
38:11
Speaker 9: When I read that article this morning, I actually found
38:13
Speaker 9: it to be quite offensive and insulting towards females. When
38:18
Speaker 9: I look at the past election in twenty twenty five,
38:20
Speaker 9: the Liberal Party put forward the most outstanding female candidates,
38:25
Speaker 9: and they were there because they were outstanding individuals. It
38:29
Speaker 9: wasn't because they were women. And when I look at
38:31
Speaker 9: the stats the Liberals put forward out of all of
38:33
Speaker 9: their candidates, forty percent were women. In twenty twenty five
38:37
Speaker 9: compared to twenty twenty two when it was thirty six percent,
38:40
Speaker 9: and that's in New South Wales. I should clarify, but
38:42
Speaker 9: forty percent of candidates in New South Wales were women,
38:46
Speaker 9: and I think about had we had a decent federal
38:49
Speaker 9: campaign and actually had policies to sell, some of those
38:53
Speaker 9: candidates might have actually won their seat, and female MPs
38:57
Speaker 9: wouldn't have lost their seat. Had any of the those
39:00
Speaker 9: women won or not lost their seats, the entire narrative
39:03
Speaker 9: would have changed. We would have been talking about how
39:05
Speaker 9: many females the Liberal Party had. But because it didn't
39:08
Speaker 9: go the Liberal Party's way, we're now talking about the
39:11
Speaker 9: huge problem that we have now. Obviously there is an
39:14
Speaker 9: issue when it comes to voting, but internally, though Peter,
39:18
Speaker 9: we wouldn't have had these women if we had had
39:20
Speaker 9: these issues. And to be clear, you know, Giselle Capterarian
39:23
Speaker 9: went through a pre selection process where she was up
39:26
Speaker 9: against two very strong male candidates and she won that.
39:30
Speaker 9: There was Roanox in Wentworth, Katie Mullins in Paramatta, I
39:33
Speaker 9: was in Wringa. The Liberal Party had so many and
39:37
Speaker 9: I think when you go down a gender quota path,
39:40
Speaker 9: it becomes a really dangerous territory because you end up
39:43
Speaker 9: becoming just a box ticker. And I find that insulting.
39:46
Speaker 9: I have worked so hard my entire life to ensure
39:49
Speaker 9: that you're there on merit. You're not there because you're
39:52
Speaker 9: you're a female. That's why you've got that position. It
39:55
Speaker 9: should be who is the best person for the job,
39:58
Speaker 9: who was the best person to represent community, and that's
40:01
Speaker 9: who should be betting put forward. It doesn't matter what
40:03
Speaker 9: your gender is, because we also saw as well Peter
40:05
Speaker 9: in the last election, males beat females at the polling booth,
40:09
Speaker 9: and females beat males when it gets when Beetle go
40:13
Speaker 9: to the voting box, they're not necessarily voting just because
40:15
Speaker 9: you're a female. I think our constituents are smarter than that,
40:19
Speaker 9: and they go for who they think will represent them
40:21
Speaker 9: the best.
40:23
Speaker 2: Beautifully beautifully said, I mean, you're not on my shape
40:25
Speaker 2: because you're a female, and you're on my show because
40:28
Speaker 2: you're a strong political contributor. And the other point I'd
40:32
Speaker 2: make the only set that the Libs one was a
40:34
Speaker 2: seat one by Tim Wilson, a bloke against a female,
40:38
Speaker 2: and it insults the electraate. I think and sure, and
40:41
Speaker 2: I'll bring you in on this point. I think it's
40:43
Speaker 2: insulting to the electorate to say that we're only going
40:46
Speaker 2: to win this seat if we offer you up a woman,
40:48
Speaker 2: because you care more about the gender of the candidate
40:52
Speaker 2: than you clearly do about the.
40:54
Speaker 3: Issues before us.
40:55
Speaker 2: So we'll give you a woman, or in some cases
40:57
Speaker 2: we'll give you a man. It's got to be about
41:00
Speaker 2: the issues. And of course you are in a party
41:03
Speaker 2: that's for what twenty five thirty years, has been led
41:06
Speaker 2: by a woman.
41:10
Speaker 10: That's exactly right, Peter. And because one nation has a
41:13
Speaker 10: principal stance on this, we do not have gender quotas,
41:17
Speaker 10: we don't have diversity quotas. What we care about is
41:19
Speaker 10: what's up here, what's in here? And are you willing
41:22
Speaker 10: to do the hard work and fight for the people
41:24
Speaker 10: of your community? And case and point you'll send ittor Handsome.
41:28
Speaker 10: You know you wind up when when you focus on
41:30
Speaker 10: the American wind up with excellent candidates.
41:35
Speaker 2: I'm sorry to jump in there, buts be gonna say
41:37
Speaker 2: you're making a really good point, actually, Sean, because once
41:40
Speaker 2: you start nodding to the box ticking exercise about gender,
41:46
Speaker 2: then there'll be a box ticking exercise about ethnicity, about age,
41:51
Speaker 2: about all the other things that make us different, and
41:55
Speaker 2: it'll become, you know, a choosing or a ranking of
41:58
Speaker 2: people based on their identity as opposed to their sheer,
42:03
Speaker 2: talent and ability as a candidate.
42:10
Speaker 10: That's exactly right. One nation and all political parties should
42:14
Speaker 10: want people who are there to represent their communities and
42:18
Speaker 10: fight for the policies of the party, regardless of whether
42:21
Speaker 10: you're a woman or a man. Are you the right
42:23
Speaker 10: person to do the job. And you start doing that,
42:26
Speaker 10: and you'll start getting people who are there to do
42:28
Speaker 10: the job they're elected to do, and that is bring
42:30
Speaker 10: down power prices, fight mass migration, stand up for Australian values.
42:35
Speaker 10: Those should be the things that people care about. What
42:37
Speaker 10: are your policies, what are your positions, what are your principles?
42:39
Speaker 10: And are you the best person for the job. When
42:41
Speaker 10: you go down the path with things like gender quotas
42:44
Speaker 10: and diversity quotas, it's an ugly path and you wind
42:47
Speaker 10: up with a very sorry mob.
42:49
Speaker 3: And deed, you're not wrong.
42:52
Speaker 2: Jamie talked to me about the decision this week in
42:55
Speaker 2: your South Wales, where police have extended protest restrictions basically everyone,
43:01
Speaker 2: but they have lifted them to allow Invasion Day marches
43:06
Speaker 2: on Australian Day. Why are some marches allowed to go
43:09
Speaker 2: ahead but not others.
43:12
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's a very good question, Peter.
43:14
Speaker 9: I'm not quite sure what the point is of having
43:16
Speaker 9: these laws if you're going to bend the rules for
43:19
Speaker 9: certain groups. And the fact that there's going to be
43:21
Speaker 9: two protests on Monday. I know mal Lanyon has come
43:26
Speaker 9: out and said that the Invasion Day protest is a
43:29
Speaker 9: peaceful protest and that's why it is allowed to happen.
43:33
Speaker 9: I have heard though, Peter, that it is looking like
43:36
Speaker 9: that mal Lanyon potentially will start to move protests into
43:40
Speaker 9: one designated area where there it is somewhere like the Domain,
43:43
Speaker 9: which I know right now is not part of what
43:45
Speaker 9: the laws have formulated, but it makes sense because then
43:48
Speaker 9: at least people can still protest without disrupting Sydney and
43:53
Speaker 9: closing all of the roads and bridges and have people
43:56
Speaker 9: lowed and whatever they want to say in a confined space.
44:00
Speaker 9: Also then help our police resources so that they can
44:03
Speaker 9: also manage a contained space as well. So if that
44:06
Speaker 9: does happen, I think that's I think a good direction
44:09
Speaker 9: to go with these protests. But I'm with you, I
44:11
Speaker 9: just don't understand what's the point in putting in these
44:14
Speaker 9: laws if you're going to be bending it and allowing
44:16
Speaker 9: two to go ahead on Monday.
44:19
Speaker 2: Just quickly on Australia Sean, you know, there was an
44:21
Speaker 2: IPA poll out the other day and there's been a
44:23
Speaker 2: steady increase from the low sixty percent mark to seventy
44:27
Speaker 2: six percent, you know, very close to eighty percent there
44:30
Speaker 2: of Australians to say they want Australia Day celebrated, and
44:34
Speaker 2: they wanted on the twenty sixth of January. What do
44:37
Speaker 2: you think is happening out there in the community that
44:39
Speaker 2: was seeing this. I guess mass rejection of the invasion
44:44
Speaker 2: day narrative.
44:49
Speaker 10: I think Australian's a sick and tide of the division.
44:53
Speaker 10: And I think that one of the keystones of this
44:56
Speaker 10: was the Voice to Parliament debate. I think Australians really
44:59
Speaker 10: started listening and really started thinking about some of these arguments.
45:04
Speaker 10: They sort of feel good, they sound good, and yet
45:07
Speaker 10: when they really started thinking about it, they realized, no,
45:10
Speaker 10: this Australia is a great nation. We have a proud history,
45:15
Speaker 10: we are fair and decent, people, and we should celebrate
45:19
Speaker 10: it and that Australia Day is a good day to
45:21
Speaker 10: do that, and so and then you have these people
45:23
Speaker 10: protesting and marching. It's anything but peaceful. You see them
45:28
Speaker 10: burning Australian flags, calling for the destruction of this great nation.
45:33
Speaker 10: And I think that's probably the best advertisement for celebrating
45:39
Speaker 10: Australia Day that anyone could ask for, because on one
45:42
Speaker 10: side you've got people who love their country, who want
45:44
Speaker 10: to celebrate their country, and on the other you've got
45:48
Speaker 10: anger and division.
45:51
Speaker 2: Just quickly, Jamie, you're a former competitive open water swimm
45:55
Speaker 2: are you're the most credential person on the network anywhere
45:59
Speaker 2: this week to have a view of it. Culling sharks,
46:02
Speaker 2: I'm out of time, but do you support it or not?
46:05
Speaker 3: I don't actually think it works, Peter.
46:06
Speaker 9: We saw in Hawaii they culled close to five thousand
46:09
Speaker 9: sharks over seventeen years. That made no difference to shark bites.
46:13
Speaker 9: We need to be investing in modern technology like drones
46:16
Speaker 9: and drum lines and Shark Barrier, which is a new company.
46:19
Speaker 9: It's time to actually invest in new forms of technology
46:22
Speaker 9: to stop the shark attacks.
46:25
Speaker 3: Thank you to you both.
46:26
Speaker 2: Great tabular show Sean all right, quick Break after Break,
46:29
Speaker 2: the wonderful Kel. Let's bring in Kel Richards for the
46:36
Speaker 2: start of a twenty twenty six year which will be busy,
46:40
Speaker 2: as I'm sure it'll be busy. I want to start
46:42
Speaker 2: Kell if I can, with the word hate, because when
46:44
Speaker 2: I grew up, my mum always told me you don't
46:46
Speaker 2: hate anyone. You never used the word hate. It's sort
46:49
Speaker 2: of extreme. But now people say I hate Apricots, or
46:53
Speaker 2: I hate Taylor Swift, or I hate you know whatever.
46:56
Speaker 2: I wonder if the words are lost its meaning and
46:59
Speaker 2: now it's trying to apply it to something as evil
47:02
Speaker 2: as anti Semitism.
47:05
Speaker 3: Do you think people get it?
47:07
Speaker 11: Yes, I keep wondering about that. I think we've seen
47:09
Speaker 11: the degradation of our civilization. The word hate goes back
47:12
Speaker 11: well over a thousand years to the days of old English.
47:15
Speaker 11: Came from a Germanic source word. The interesting thing is
47:18
Speaker 11: its meaning then is the same of us as its
47:20
Speaker 11: meaning now in all the centuries in between, never changed.
47:23
Speaker 11: It means a feeling of intense or passionate dislike. Now
47:27
Speaker 11: that can happen. But it's really weird that we live
47:30
Speaker 11: in a society where unlike what your parents told you
47:33
Speaker 11: and my parents told me. You express that, I mean
47:36
Speaker 11: Trump said he hates his political enemies. This is bizarre.
47:40
Speaker 11: And then it has the complicating factor that it's about
47:44
Speaker 11: feeling or motivation, not about what's said. How do you
47:47
Speaker 11: know if someone is disagreeing or disputing because they feel
47:50
Speaker 11: hatred or because they've thought it through. It is a
47:54
Speaker 11: very complex issue and a bad thing to try to
47:57
Speaker 11: make laws about.
47:58
Speaker 8: I would have thought, all right.
48:01
Speaker 3: I'm gonna have to leave it there.
48:02
Speaker 2: I'm sorry, Kel, because I want to give people an
48:03
Speaker 2: update that there is no update in relation to the
48:06
Speaker 2: National Party Room. We have, of course, I have reporters
48:10
Speaker 2: there in camera on standby. I think you need to
48:12
Speaker 2: watch the show. Tonight's all the way through here on
48:15
Speaker 2: Sky News. We will bring you the result once the
48:18
Speaker 2: party room breaks Andrew bolts up next. Of course, it's
48:22
Speaker 2: stay tuned to Sky News.
48:23
Speaker 3: Thank you,