Speaker 1: Live on Sky News This is.
Speaker 2: Sharry Good Evening.
Speaker 3: Tonight's secret recordings have caught nine Star reporter Nick McKenzie
Speaker 3: on tape claiming he engaged in unethical behavior during their
Speaker 3: famous war crimes case.
Speaker 4: Breaking us on his leadershiptu in perspected you.
Speaker 3: Those shocking revelations. In a moment also tonight, TLMP Minick
Speaker 3: Ryan apologizes after her husband tears down a liberal poster.
Speaker 3: So much for a returning integrity to politics. Plus shame
Speaker 3: on Victorian police as they seek to gag a pro
Speaker 3: Israel advocate campaigning against anti Semitism. And we'll look at
Speaker 3: which states are swinging in Dutton's favor with new polling
Speaker 3: on the show That's tonight.
Speaker 2: It's all coming up.
Speaker 3: But first, it was called the defamation case of the century,
Speaker 3: in which Ben Robertson went from a decorated VC winner
Speaker 3: and national hero to a disgraced war criminal.
Speaker 5: Today he is a day of justice. It's a day
Speaker 5: of justice for those brave men of the Sas who
Speaker 5: stood up and told the truth about who Ben Robert
Speaker 5: Smith is. A war criminal, a bully and a liar.
Speaker 2: It's a verdict.
Speaker 3: The Afghan veteran is appealing but now secret audio recordings
Speaker 3: have come to light, which casts doubt on the ethics
Speaker 3: and even the legal process of part of the case
Speaker 3: built against him.
Speaker 6: No, I shouldn't tell you, I've just preached my ethics
Speaker 6: in doing that. This is where like this is really
Speaker 6: position now.
Speaker 3: An explosive recording has caught nine Star reporter Nick Mackenzie
Speaker 3: claiming he'd engaged in unethical behavior during their famous war
Speaker 3: crime case by obtaining part of ben Robert Smith's legal
Speaker 3: strategy from his ex wife and her friend. In the
Speaker 3: secret recording that we've obtained, Mackenzie says knowing Robert Smith's
Speaker 3: legal strategy had been helpful in Nine's case. He also
Speaker 3: freely says that Robert Smith's ex wife, Emma Roberts, and
Speaker 3: her friend Danniel Scott had been actively briefing us on
Speaker 3: his legal strategy in respect to a witness.
Speaker 4: Briefing us on his legal shifty and respected you.
Speaker 3: And in devastating comments from Nine's most celebrated journalist, Mackenzie
Speaker 3: also confesses this, No.
Speaker 6: I shouldn't tell you, I've just preached my ethics and
Speaker 6: doing that like this is where like this is to
Speaker 6: leadership position now if they knew that.
Speaker 4: And pet you that I can.
Speaker 3: And there mackenzie is referring to Minter's Ellison solicitor Dean
Speaker 3: Levetton and Minter's Ellison partner Peter Bartlett, who led the
Speaker 3: defense team for nine in the defamation case brought by
Speaker 3: Robert Smith, the former SAS corporal and Victoria Cross recipient.
Speaker 3: Bartlett is the former chair of Minter Ellison and a
Speaker 3: past chair and board member of the International Bar Association. Now,
Speaker 3: there's no suggestion that any lawyers involved in the case
Speaker 3: for nine were aware that any privileged information had been
Speaker 3: accessed or of other wrongdoing. Now the recording captures a
Speaker 3: conversation in early twenty twenty one between McKenzie and a
Speaker 3: woman he was trying to encourage to cooperate in their
Speaker 3: legal case, where they were defending the defamation suit brought
Speaker 3: against them by Australia's highly decorated soldier. In the conversation,
Speaker 3: McKenzie is trying to reassure the potential witness and encourage
Speaker 3: her to give evidence in the trial.
Speaker 2: On behalf of nine. Now, you're about to.
Speaker 3: Hear mackenzie speak about Robert Smith's ex wife, Emma Roberts
Speaker 3: and her friend Daniel Scott.
Speaker 4: Daniel and end try let's say yet again, you work
Speaker 4: for movie, sent a hotel.
Speaker 7: The meme which.
Speaker 4: They came actively like.
Speaker 8: Breaking us on his legal ship to you and respected
Speaker 8: you like the piece. And yet we're not learning like
Speaker 8: we anticipated most of it. One or two things now
Speaker 8: we know, which is helpful. But at the point there
Speaker 8: is I told you that is to.
Speaker 4: Say, like, you know, we've got this.
Speaker 8: And and they're not hostile to years despite your worst fears,
Speaker 8: they're not.
Speaker 3: So as you heard there, that remark reveals that Mackenzie
Speaker 3: and nine were not previously aware of aspect of Robert
Speaker 3: Smith's legal strategy about a potential witness, which he said
Speaker 3: was helpful to their own legal case. So listen to
Speaker 3: that part again.
Speaker 4: They came actively like.
Speaker 8: Breaking us on his legal ship to you and respected
Speaker 8: you because his And yet we're not learning about we
Speaker 8: anticipated most of it.
Speaker 4: One or two things now we know, which is helpful.
Speaker 3: But and Mackenzie then goes on in the conversation to
Speaker 3: claim that obtaining the details of Robert Smith's legal strategy
Speaker 3: from his ex wife and her friend was a breach
Speaker 3: of ethics.
Speaker 8: But I've told you that, so many times now as well,
Speaker 8: And I had to tell you that extra bit to
Speaker 8: sort of prove it in your mind.
Speaker 4: No, I shouldn't tell you. I've just breached my ethics
Speaker 4: and doing that like this is where like this has
Speaker 4: to leadership position. Now, if they knew that, and Peter
Speaker 4: knew that I can, I wouldn't tell anyone else.
Speaker 8: I haven't told anyone like no one else I'd tell this.
Speaker 3: This is an extraordinary admission from a senior journalist that
Speaker 3: he's breached his ethics, that it's put him in a
Speaker 3: difficult position, and that his lawyers would be displeased. During
Speaker 3: the trial, Robert Smith launched separate legal action acu his
Speaker 3: ex wife Emma, of accessing an email account that he
Speaker 3: used for confidential legal correspondence. He claimed information that only
Speaker 3: originated in that email account had found its way to
Speaker 3: nine and that it had the potential to contaminate the
Speaker 3: trial will. Robert Smith's lawyers argue the account had been
Speaker 3: accessed at least one hundred and one occasions, including by
Speaker 3: Danielle Scott nine In Minter Ellison told the court they
Speaker 3: had no documents to produce in response to subpoenas seeking
Speaker 3: material that originated from Emma Roberts, but Emma later admitted
Speaker 3: that she had allowed her close friend Danielle to access
Speaker 3: her ex husband's email accounts, but only she said in
Speaker 3: relation to their marriage breakdown. The judge, Justice Robert Bromwich
Speaker 3: said the claims from Robert Smith that his emails were
Speaker 3: accessed amounted to bear possibilities and suspicions and dismissed.
Speaker 2: The legal challenge.
Speaker 3: But now this shocking audio recording captures McKenzie claiming that
Speaker 3: Emma and her friend Danielle did in fact provide details
Speaker 3: of Robert Smith's legal strategy in relation to a witness,
Speaker 3: and it raises questions about whether other legal strategy or
Speaker 3: emails were also provided. I asked Emma Roberts a series
Speaker 3: of questions, including whether she had organized or agreed for
Speaker 3: Danielle to assist McKenzie and pass on information contained in
Speaker 3: emails to him. Now, her lawyer said, our client thanks
Speaker 3: you for the opportunity to comment, but so declients. This
Speaker 3: recording will rock the legal fraternity media circles and could
Speaker 3: have ramifications for the outcome of one of Australia's most
Speaker 3: expensive cases in court proceedings. Both sides are able to
Speaker 3: subpoena a wide range of documents, with the exception of
Speaker 3: legal advice and strategy.
Speaker 2: This is privileged information. Now.
Speaker 3: I asked a senior experienced solicitor about the impact of
Speaker 3: the revelations contained in this audio, and he said it
Speaker 3: could have the potential to blow open the proceedings and
Speaker 3: call into question not only the entire case, but the
Speaker 3: evidence under oath of several important witnesses.
Speaker 2: He said, if.
Speaker 3: Nick mackenzie was being given Ben Robert Smith's confidential legal
Speaker 3: advice that had been secretly taken from his emails and
Speaker 3: using it to his advantage in the trial, that is
Speaker 3: straight out cheating. We cannot now know how far that
Speaker 3: poison may have spread throughout the proceedings. The solicitor said
Speaker 3: that the case turned on the credibility of witnesses and
Speaker 3: in his view, there are credit findings. He said, reading
Speaker 3: the judgment, it is clear that there are credit findings
Speaker 3: throughout that could be impacted by this new material. The
Speaker 3: judgment must now be scrutinized in light of this information.
Speaker 4: Now.
Speaker 3: Aside from the court case, this also caused into question
Speaker 3: the journalism practices at nine, including the protection of sources
Speaker 3: and the handling of sensitive information about police investigations, because
Speaker 3: in the audio, Mackenzie can also be heard sharing details
Speaker 3: about an undercover police investigation that he claimed was both
Speaker 3: active and current.
Speaker 4: No one knows about the police investigation.
Speaker 6: It's intensively if on going place investigation Bone Tabs task Force,
Speaker 6: a whole new task.
Speaker 4: Force has released the Love in Brisbane, the entire new
Speaker 4: task force.
Speaker 8: There's police living in his apartment block under resumed identities
Speaker 8: as we speak by the.
Speaker 3: Guides, Mackenzie could have jeopardized as sensitive police investigation, including
Speaker 3: the safety of undercover officers, by speaking about it to
Speaker 3: this unrelated witness and even extraordinarily revealing the existence of
Speaker 3: phone taps. Now, Mackenzie didn't respond to a series of
Speaker 3: specific questions, including.
Speaker 2: What he meant by breaching his own ethics.
Speaker 3: Instead, the Nine Network defended their legal strategy and their journalism,
Speaker 3: with a Nine spokesperson saying, having reviewed the audio clip
Speaker 3: with support from external council, we can confirm there is
Speaker 3: no breach of legal privilege or ethical concerns. Nine has
Speaker 3: full confidence in the reporting and actions of Nick Mackenzie,
Speaker 3: an award winning reporter who enjoys the respect and admiration
Speaker 3: of his editors and colleagues in the newsroom, MINTA. Ellison
Speaker 3: didn't provide a separate response to our questions.
Speaker 2: Now, Robert Smith has never been charged by police.
Speaker 3: He sued nine over the twenty eighteen allegations that he
Speaker 3: committed war crimes during his deployments in Afghanistan. The court
Speaker 3: found in Nine's favor, holding that their imputations were substantially
Speaker 3: true that Robert Smith was complicit in the unlawful killings
Speaker 3: of four unarmed Afghan prisoners. He's now appealing the defamation judgment,
Speaker 3: with a decision set to be released imminently.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 3: Mackenzie is renowned for his use of secret recordings in
Speaker 3: his own award winning reports.
Speaker 2: In fact, he's made a career out of it.
Speaker 5: Here are some examples, and normally we'd never know what
Speaker 5: goes on in the back rooms of Australian politics, but
Speaker 5: we've obtained secret audio and video recordings that catch out
Speaker 5: the real Adam Somyrek. Among the covids of Aali vision
Speaker 5: we've managed to obtain, we can see things like a
Speaker 5: notorious Hells Angels gangster. While it's clear business is booming
Speaker 5: for the gangland figure, he's more secretive about how he
Speaker 5: actually operates behind the scenes. This phone recording we've obtained
Speaker 5: provides clue about his tactics.
Speaker 3: But now a recording of his own has come back
Speaker 3: to haunt him. Mackenzie's book on the Robert Smith case is.
Speaker 2: Called Crossing the Line, and there will now be.
Speaker 3: Questions about Weather Nine and Mackenzie crossed the line in
Speaker 3: their pursuit of Australia's most famous Afghanistan War veteran.
Speaker 2: Now, the Teals claim to support women.
Speaker 3: They claimed that they'd bring integrity to politics, and yet
Speaker 3: here was Manique Ryan's husband tearing down a poster of
Speaker 3: her political rival, a young female Liberal candidate, Emilia Hamer.
Speaker 4: So hang on, mate, what are you doing? I'm taking
Speaker 4: a side out? Yeah, beg you, Perbin, I'm taking the
Speaker 4: side out. What are you doing that for? It's on
Speaker 4: public land.
Speaker 9: I'm not saying who I am, who are you?
Speaker 4: Or you wearing a Teal T shirt. I'll start to
Speaker 4: film you. Are you?
Speaker 9: Monik Ryan?
Speaker 10: Supporter of ripping down people's signs?
Speaker 9: Are you?
Speaker 4: Is that what you're doing? It belongs to me. Hey,
Speaker 4: you can take it off the property, but it belongs
Speaker 4: to me.
Speaker 11: If it goes back up, It'll be taken down again.
Speaker 12: There you go, Monique Ryan, there you go community values.
Speaker 3: Now, as you can see that he wouldn't say who
Speaker 3: he was. Well, there was such outrage over this today
Speaker 3: that both Minique Ryan and her husband had to apologize.
Speaker 3: Minique Ryan said, I apologize for the removal of the sign.
Speaker 2: It should not have happened.
Speaker 3: All concerns about signage should be reported to counsel. And
Speaker 3: mister Jordan said that he unreservedly apologizes for removing the sign.
Speaker 2: It was a mistake. He said.
Speaker 3: He believed the sign was illegally placed, but he should
Speaker 3: have reported his concerns to counsel. Now, the Prime Minister
Speaker 3: was very dismissive of this incident today.
Speaker 13: So on a day where we've got a sixteen point
Speaker 13: five billion dollar national education announcement, I'm asked about someone's
Speaker 13: husband removing a Liberal Party sign on a road somewhere.
Speaker 9: That has that what's.
Speaker 7: A sign going to call an election?
Speaker 13: Is there any connection whatsoever with anyone in the Labor
Speaker 13: Party with this alleged event, of which I did not know. No, okay,
Speaker 13: I think you've it's your question.
Speaker 2: He's trivializing the matter. He thinks it's a joke.
Speaker 3: Is this how Manique Ryan and her husband should treat
Speaker 3: a woman trying to make her way in politics. Emilia
Speaker 3: Heim is running for the seat of Couyong, Josh Friedenberg's
Speaker 3: old seat. She's a great candidate and she grew up
Speaker 3: with politics. Her great uncle was the Victorian premier, and
Speaker 3: so was her great grandfather, Sir William McPherson, and her
Speaker 3: grandfather was also a senator for Victoria. But she's young
Speaker 3: in age, around thirty one years old, and Minique Bryan
Speaker 3: could do better than to tear down her posters. We're
Speaker 3: joining us now to discuss this. Sky News contributor Joe
Speaker 3: Hildebrand and Liberal Senator Holly Hughes.
Speaker 2: Good evening, Welcome to you both.
Speaker 3: Great to be Joe, your mate, Albo. He took this
Speaker 3: a bit lightly today, didn't he. I mean, if this
Speaker 3: was a female labor candidate who had her posters torn down,
Speaker 3: he would have reacted.
Speaker 9: Yeah, that's right.
Speaker 7: I think he's just making the point and said, look,
Speaker 7: this is between the teals and the liberals.
Speaker 9: It's nothing to do with us. I want to talk about.
Speaker 7: Our great big sixteen and a half billion dollar education policy.
Speaker 7: But certainly I have absolutely no love for the Teals.
Speaker 7: I've always thought that they were nauseatingly holier than thou.
Speaker 7: They pontificate about wanting and needing more integrity in politics,
Speaker 7: but in fact they, as we've seen by this example,
Speaker 7: do not display the remotest amount of integrity themselves. We
Speaker 7: know that the Teal contests were among the nastiest of
Speaker 7: the last federal election, and particularly in Monique Ryan's seat
Speaker 7: of Couyong. We know there are people with connections to
Speaker 7: get up who have been involved into your campaigning, and
Speaker 7: that they have a particularly nasty reputation when it comes
Speaker 7: to when it comes to the way they run campaigns,
Speaker 7: and you can ask the Cole Flint.
Speaker 9: About that in South Australia.
Speaker 7: So I've always thought that the Teals were nauseating at
Speaker 7: the best of times. But the fact that you've got
Speaker 7: a Teal, you know, the Alpha Teal, Nick Ryan's husband,
Speaker 7: going around like the lone ranger, tearing down opponents' campaign material,
Speaker 7: that just strikes me as just the worst possible look.
Speaker 7: And no wonder they both just broke every land speed
Speaker 7: record to issue groveling apologies and people should.
Speaker 3: Know because it was cad on cameras an apology, yes,
Speaker 3: not an apology right when he was caught in the act, Holly.
Speaker 3: But you know, the Tears campaigned on integrity, they campaigned
Speaker 3: on better treatment of women at the Heimlie Rug for example, movement.
Speaker 2: Holly, what's your response this, it's ironic.
Speaker 14: Well, they were going to do politics differently, weren't they.
Speaker 14: They were the bastions of the moral center of the universe.
Speaker 14: Yet their true colors are consistently seen. And I mean
Speaker 14: I can just still hear on a Ryan yelling shame
Speaker 14: on you across the chamber when she was standing up
Speaker 14: wearing a mask, you know through COVID, and then the
Speaker 14: footage came out of her at a party without a
Speaker 14: mask around the same time. This is a woman who
Speaker 14: we need to look at what she does, not what
Speaker 14: she says. It's disgraceful behavior and for Alban easy to
Speaker 14: brush it off. Though he was in Victoria, so he
Speaker 14: may have made an announcement with Chris fully in the morning,
Speaker 14: but clearly the VIP was ready to go because it
Speaker 14: was Rob Mitchell, the Member for McEwen, standing behind him
Speaker 14: there in Victoria. So no wonder he was asked about
Speaker 14: this and what you know, he was asked by Victorian
Speaker 14: journalists standing in Victoria and the fact that he dismisses it.
Speaker 14: If it was a labor female candidate, we'd have the
Speaker 14: me Too movement in a resurgency tonight. But again it
Speaker 14: happens to a conservative woman, So nothing to see here.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, there is definitely a bit of political hypocrisy
Speaker 3: going on. Meanwhile, I want to talk about this shocking
Speaker 3: development in Victoria. I was absolutely appalled to see this.
Speaker 3: It's a major infringement on free speech by Victorian police.
Speaker 3: Now they're taking action against an online antisemitism campaigner. Her
Speaker 3: name's Zara Cooper and they're applying Victorian Police applying for
Speaker 3: personal safety intervention order on behalf of an anti Israel
Speaker 3: activist who you've probably heard of, called Sarah Schwartz. She
Speaker 3: was behind that pro Dutton Jew slide that was so offensive.
Speaker 3: She heads up a left wing group that aligns itself
Speaker 3: with the pro Palestinian movement. She's always speaking on the ABC,
Speaker 3: even though she doesn't represent the majority of Australian Jews. Now,
Speaker 3: Zara Cooper has been critical of this group's legitimacy as
Speaker 3: the voice of Australian Jews, and she's done so through
Speaker 3: her Instagram account. That's called Clammy fraud and she's right.
Speaker 3: Yet now Victorian police allege that Cooper's online commentary is
Speaker 3: severely affecting Sarah Schwartz's mental health. So this is effectively
Speaker 3: a gag order on a pro Israel advocate. It's a
Speaker 3: blatant attack on free speech and its attempt an attempt
Speaker 3: to silence the Jewish community. Now, Zara Cooper has never
Speaker 3: threatened anyone its accounts like hers that are trying to
Speaker 3: make our country a safer place, and yet Victorian police
Speaker 3: want to silence her. Joe, this is an outrageous infringement
Speaker 3: and free speech.
Speaker 9: Yeah, I think it is. I was stunned.
Speaker 7: I came across this story very late last night and
Speaker 7: I just could not actually below. It was one of
Speaker 7: those things only in Victoria, obviously, where the police seem
Speaker 7: to have become an arm of the political apparatus. It's very,
Speaker 7: very strange, but it seemed to me absolutely shocking. I
Speaker 7: thought it's a classic example of sort of people on
Speaker 7: the extreme left being cry bullies, where they will essentially
Speaker 7: defame an entire community and accuse anyone who's pro Israel
Speaker 7: of being some kind of shill for Peter Dutton, or
Speaker 7: being a puppet for Peter Dutton. And then when someone says,
Speaker 7: we'll hang on a minute, you're not representative of the
Speaker 7: Jewish community, saying.
Speaker 9: How could you now my mental health is being affected
Speaker 9: because it chriticized me.
Speaker 7: The only thing that raised even the slightest the only
Speaker 7: thing where I said, oh maybe there is something There
Speaker 7: was when there was talk about how the image of
Speaker 7: a rat had been used in relation to Sarah Schwartz,
Speaker 7: and I thought, all right, well that's a you know,
Speaker 7: we know that the Greens have used the image of
Speaker 7: the octopus to describe the Jewish comunity. That is a
Speaker 7: Nazi trope from the Holocaust, used to dehumanize. And then
Speaker 7: I saw the actual image and it was a gift
Speaker 7: of a nose and a little quite a cute little
Speaker 7: rat saying I smell a rat.
Speaker 4: I E.
Speaker 7: I don't think you're being honest here. So if that
Speaker 7: is the strongest case the police have in order to
Speaker 7: take out effective sort of protection racket for for Sarah Schwartz,
Speaker 7: I think maybe they might want to concentrate their efforts
Speaker 7: of there is also a youth crime crisis in Victoria,
Speaker 7: the police might want to direct their attention to where
Speaker 7: people are actually being attacked physically and hurt on the streets,
Speaker 7: rather than wasting their resources on an online activist whose.
Speaker 9: Feelings have been hurt.
Speaker 2: You're one hundred percent right for once, Joe.
Speaker 9: For once you get there.
Speaker 3: Eventually, Wow, people are in fear in Melbourne, you know,
Speaker 3: worried about this crime wave that's been happening. But I
Speaker 3: want to ask you, Holly, at the same time, on
Speaker 3: the weekend, we saw Victorian police remove a Jewish pro
Speaker 3: Israel protest and allow the pro Palestinian aggressive protests that
Speaker 3: we're shouting all Zion as a terrorists to continue. So
Speaker 3: I feel really uncomfortable with how Victorian police are handling
Speaker 3: this entire issue.
Speaker 14: Look, I'm really surprised to hear Joe though, say that
Speaker 14: he's shocked to hear that the Victorian police are an
Speaker 14: arm of the political wing. If you talk to anyone
Speaker 14: who's been around Victorian politics for a length of time,
Speaker 14: they'll tell you that the Victorian police are very much
Speaker 14: an apparachi of the left wing political class in Victoria.
Speaker 14: And you know, I don't think it's just Victoria.
Speaker 2: I think it's in New South Wales too.
Speaker 14: You know, remember on October ninth we have one person
Speaker 14: in Sydney with an Israeli flag and they were the
Speaker 14: person that was moved on. This is absolutely insanity, but
Speaker 14: we see it this left wing bent, anti Semitic bent
Speaker 14: that they would target free speech around anti Semitism. They
Speaker 14: target anyone who is pro Israel, that is a Zionist
Speaker 14: who supports the release of the hostages whilst protecting I mean,
Speaker 14: quite frankly, I'm not even going to say a name.
Speaker 14: I'm not going to give it a credibility because it's
Speaker 14: a one woman person claiming to be a counsel who
Speaker 14: is trying to represent a far left wing Jewish group
Speaker 14: which is not representative of the Jewish community in Australia.
Speaker 14: I bet we wouldn't see her wearing the badge that
Speaker 14: you know, you, I and others wear almost every day
Speaker 14: with regards to support for the hostages. So it's pathetic.
Speaker 14: And if the Victorian police really have that much time
Speaker 14: on their hand, I can show them some of the
Speaker 14: mind and conservative women's social medias and if this woman's
Speaker 14: being so impacted by her mental health by that meme
Speaker 14: of a small little mouse. She should just come and
Speaker 14: cop a little bit of what we do for five
Speaker 14: minutes and see how you go.
Speaker 2: Love. And she might have members.
Speaker 3: Just picking up on that point where you said she's
Speaker 3: a one woman council, she might have members, maybe one
Speaker 3: hundred members, I don't know. But it's definitely not representative
Speaker 3: of the majority of views in the Jewish community.
Speaker 7: Just because you have a fax machine doesn't mean you're
Speaker 7: a representative council for no exactly.
Speaker 3: All right, Joe, we were going to talk about your
Speaker 3: column in the Daily Telly, but I think we're out
Speaker 3: of time.
Speaker 9: It's brilliant just taking that word.
Speaker 2: It's very nice, Jolly Hughes. Great to see you, Joe.
Speaker 2: See you guys next Monday.
Speaker 3: All right, Well, let's talk now about the budget which
Speaker 3: is tomorrow night. Well, the headline in the Australian today
Speaker 3: was into the red and no way out as Labor
Speaker 3: accepts years of deficits and the Treasurer has conceded that
Speaker 3: Australia is in for years and years of deficit to come.
Speaker 15: When do you anticipate an Australian government could next deliver
Speaker 15: a surplus?
Speaker 12: Well, it remains to be seen. Our efforts have been
Speaker 12: about trying to make the budget as responsible as we can,
Speaker 12: some savings.
Speaker 3: And that's bringing now Judo Bank Chief Economist Warren Hogan, Warren,
Speaker 3: good to see you again. Budgets tomorrow night. We've seen
Speaker 3: a lot of pre election sweetness. But are you worried
Speaker 3: that this all amounts to increase spending that could put
Speaker 3: pressure on inflation?
Speaker 10: Well, Hi, Jerry, yeah, good. Well, we're seeing, of course,
Speaker 10: this process play out where the budget bottom line gets
Speaker 10: some support from stronger economy. In this case it's likely
Speaker 10: to be stronger personal income taxes, and then some portion
Speaker 10: of it's spent. And we know the magnitude of the
Speaker 10: extra spending over the course of this government. So the
Speaker 10: reality is is that we are going to see pre
Speaker 10: election spending measures and we're going to I think it's
Speaker 10: quite disheartening and that we're not even attempting to get
Speaker 10: back to budget and that really is the break with
Speaker 10: the past. The last thirty years governments in Australia have
Speaker 10: at least tried, even if it's ten years out, to
Speaker 10: have an ambition and that doesn't seem to be there anymore.
Speaker 3: And even we see in the US at the moment.
Speaker 3: The Trump administration, you know, widely criticized, and yet part
Speaker 3: of the reason behind Elon Musk's doze is they are
Speaker 3: trying to rain in the budget and cut spending, and
Speaker 3: that you know that attempt isn't even happening here. It
Speaker 3: doesn't seem like Australian voters care about it anymore.
Speaker 2: I mean, that's what the polls show.
Speaker 3: So do you think we are seeing some labor and
Speaker 3: pace expressing support for fiscal restraint, But we're not likely
Speaker 3: to see that, especially when this budget is right before
Speaker 3: the election.
Speaker 9: No, we're not.
Speaker 10: I don't think any of us are expecting to see
Speaker 10: any kind of restraint. There might be some restraint defined
Speaker 10: as not spending all of the increasing government revenues they get,
Speaker 10: but that all remains to be seen tomorrow and there
Speaker 10: will not be anything significant done. The reality is is
Speaker 10: we have every bit as much of a problem with
Speaker 10: size of government and size of government spending as America,
Speaker 10: if not worse. And I imagine that the pressure on
Speaker 10: the next government is to do something about the structural
Speaker 10: increase in spending that's occurred will mount because we are
Speaker 10: taxing this economy and that is going to force further problems,
Speaker 10: whether it be labor force participation, productivity, or just unfairness
Speaker 10: on younger generations. This is not a sustainable situation.
Speaker 3: On the other hand, we are seeing the Coalition match
Speaker 3: many of Labour's announcements. Do you think the Coalition should
Speaker 3: be taking it different approach here, a more fiscally conservative approach.
Speaker 10: Well, look, I think they are fiscally conservative at heart.
Speaker 10: The reality is that they just don't want to get
Speaker 10: in the way of a government that will maybe be
Speaker 10: kicked out. That's the reality of Australian politics. Bill Shorten
Speaker 10: showed in twenty nineteen that you put up a lot
Speaker 10: of policy and you just make it harder for the
Speaker 10: Australian people to kick out a government they don't like.
Speaker 10: We saw it all the way back in ninety three
Speaker 10: with John Houston. So I think they've just been politically
Speaker 10: conservative and letting the Australian people make a judgment on
Speaker 10: Albanezi in his government and at most people think that's enough.
Speaker 10: It's what they do if they do get into power
Speaker 10: that matters. But to give you some idea, if we're
Speaker 10: just going to give the bracket creep back to the
Speaker 10: Australian people, for the last three years. It's fifty billion
Speaker 10: a year in cutting and spending and that's just an
Speaker 10: unpolitically acceptable thing to say before an election.
Speaker 3: Yeah, well, Angus Taylor hasn't committed either to delivering a
Speaker 3: surplus if he becomes Treasurer. I mean, it would be
Speaker 3: a difficult promise. It would almost certainly be a broken
Speaker 3: promise if he made it. But he has hinted that
Speaker 3: there might be a big announcement in his Budget reply
Speaker 3: speech on Thursday. Have you got any insights for us
Speaker 3: on what he could.
Speaker 1: Be looking to do well.
Speaker 10: I think the two key policy leaders a look at
Speaker 10: are either related to energy or defense, and both of
Speaker 10: these two areas are critical for Australia. Right now, we
Speaker 10: know the nuclear policies there, so is there a sort
Speaker 10: of a second phase to this around gas? And then
Speaker 10: the other one will be a commitment to more a
Speaker 10: significant increase in our defense expenditures because of the precarious
Speaker 10: global situation. We'll wait and see, but it'll just highlight
Speaker 10: the point that there are fast becoming big priorities for
Speaker 10: government spending and a lot of our increase and spendings
Speaker 10: have been around the domestic scene, which I don't think
Speaker 10: is sustainable.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I thought.
Speaker 3: Chris Mitchell had an excellent column in the Australian Today
Speaker 3: where he high i lighted some of the ludicrous areas
Speaker 3: of government spedding. So if you haven't read that yet
Speaker 3: at home, check it out in the Australian. All right,
Speaker 3: Warren Hogan, good to see you, and no doubt we
Speaker 3: hear your commentary about the budget on Sky tomorrow night.
Speaker 3: All Right, still to come? Could Jim Chalmers be the
Speaker 3: next Labor Party leader? Speculations heating up, plus new polling
Speaker 3: shows which states are swinging in Dutton's favor.
Speaker 2: That's after the break, welcome back.
Speaker 3: Well, it's shaping up to be a seat by seat
Speaker 3: and state by state election battle in May's federal campaign.
Speaker 3: The latest Freshwater Strategy polling shows that while the Coalition
Speaker 3: is in front in New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland,
Speaker 3: it's lagging behind elsewhere, particularly in WA. Will take us
Speaker 3: through this started joining me now is Freshwater Strategy director
Speaker 3: Leo Shanahan.
Speaker 2: Leo, great to see you again.
Speaker 1: Thank you for having me talk me through.
Speaker 3: Which state is looking strongest for the Coalition at the
Speaker 3: moment and where Albanese's working hardest.
Speaker 16: Yeah, well, I think Victoria is looking particularly strong for
Speaker 16: the Coalition the first time in a long time.
Speaker 2: Just approchate.
Speaker 16: Yeah, a real graveyard for the Coalition in recent years,
Speaker 16: but they are coming back. A lot of people are
Speaker 16: talking about the paucity of the government there, the Allen government,
Speaker 16: but also there is a general pushback against the federal
Speaker 16: government and I think Labour strategies have to be careful
Speaker 16: just to blame the Allen government.
Speaker 1: There is a genuine.
Speaker 16: Push on in Victoria for the Coalition. New South Wales
Speaker 16: is looking very positive as well.
Speaker 1: Two pp.
Speaker 16: That's actually higher than Victoria, but potential to pick up
Speaker 16: more seats in Victoria is a very good opportunity for
Speaker 16: the Coalition coming off a low base to be exactly exactly.
Speaker 16: But if they can pick up those seats in Victoria,
Speaker 16: it then rolls on into New South Wales and that's
Speaker 16: kind of really that path to victory that the Coalition.
Speaker 1: Will then be talking about.
Speaker 16: In Queensland, they're doing very well a forty five fifty
Speaker 16: five two pp in Queensland.
Speaker 3: But fewer seats for them to be up because the Coalition,
Speaker 3: I mean Queenslands are ready the stronger state exactly.
Speaker 16: So where do they go In Queensland, there's a couple
Speaker 16: of those Green seats to pick up. Perhaps Ryan was
Speaker 16: a definite candidate there, but hold Labor out the problem
Speaker 16: for them at the moment and where there was hope
Speaker 16: and look that's still there and I have to push on.
Speaker 16: This is why the campaign is going to matter is
Speaker 16: Western Australia Labor government there the government held up extremely
Speaker 16: well by and large in the state election, even though
Speaker 16: there was a significant swing actually against the government.
Speaker 1: They just didn't lose that many seats.
Speaker 4: Is about it.
Speaker 3: So I mean, in a way, that's a reflection, isn't
Speaker 3: it of the cost of living crisis, which doesn't seem
Speaker 3: to be biting wly way as hard as the East
Speaker 3: Coast states.
Speaker 16: Yeah, and it's a very good point because when you
Speaker 16: look at right direction wrong direction, which is a very
Speaker 16: good indicator of where people are at in the country,
Speaker 16: it's those states New South Wales fifty four percent of
Speaker 16: people say that go in the wrong direction.
Speaker 1: Fifty seven percent of people say we're going in the
Speaker 1: wrong direction. In Queensland. In Victoria it's sixty four percent
Speaker 1: heading in the wrong stage.
Speaker 16: Country is heading the wrong direction it's just an indicator
Speaker 16: of how hard people are doing it in that state
Speaker 16: and how unhappy they up.
Speaker 1: With the government.
Speaker 16: West Australian it's only fifty three percent, and whilst that's
Speaker 16: not significantly lower, it still shows that maybe West Australians
Speaker 16: are as happy unhappy as the rest of us.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 3: Now, housing which is obviously closely linked housing affordability closely
Speaker 3: linked to the cost of living crisis also issues about
Speaker 3: high immigration, whether we've had too much immigration putting more
Speaker 3: pressure on housing supply. So now tell us about older
Speaker 3: voters because this is surprisingly a key issue up with
Speaker 3: the younger voters.
Speaker 16: The cost of housing and rent eclipses groceries as the
Speaker 16: top priority when it comes to cost of living.
Speaker 1: Right among older voters.
Speaker 16: Power bills are a massive issue now that goes to
Speaker 16: priorities fixed costs.
Speaker 1: You know you're an older voter.
Speaker 16: You probably own your own house already or have larger proportion,
Speaker 16: but you're worried about those fixed costs. Younger voters are
Speaker 16: very worried about their future in terms of their ability
Speaker 16: to buy housing in the future for themselves and their family.
Speaker 16: Older voters, interestingly are more concerned about availability than they
Speaker 16: are about cost of housing as well, and I think
Speaker 16: a lot of that's generational. Well, my family, my children
Speaker 16: won't be able to live in the same city as me.
Speaker 16: If you want me to move, where am I going
Speaker 16: to move to?
Speaker 3: Or maybe in regional areas exactly might be the same city,
Speaker 3: same state.
Speaker 16: But exactly having a seat to Younger people can move,
Speaker 16: they're more mobile, so they worry.
Speaker 1: About the cost.
Speaker 3: So leo based on I mean, you've been doing a
Speaker 3: series of polls, monthly polls. Now, where do you think
Speaker 3: this election's going.
Speaker 2: Are you going to put your neck out it?
Speaker 3: Because everyone is just saying hung parliament or minority Labor government,
Speaker 3: it's the safe prediction.
Speaker 16: Well, I hate to be boring, but that is the
Speaker 16: prediction I would give at the moment. I mean, the
Speaker 16: coalition has had a less positive few weeks. Labour's had
Speaker 16: a better couple of weeks. The Prime Minister was elevated
Speaker 16: very much in that in that hurricane, in the cyclone
Speaker 16: situation that wasn't a cyclone in yet, but so that
Speaker 16: helped him.
Speaker 3: Somewhat bizarrely because he spent it in canber He wasn't
Speaker 3: even in Queensland. Yeah, Well, with the people battling the
Speaker 3: tropical cyclone.
Speaker 2: But nonetheless, if he didn't give.
Speaker 16: Him a boost, I think what will happen Sharry is
Speaker 16: will get a good idea that in the next couple
Speaker 16: of weeks where that vote is starting to move, no
Speaker 16: doubt the campaign is really going to matter, and that's
Speaker 16: why campaigns do matter. The budget will be interesting. Queensland's
Speaker 16: a good example. You can throw giveaways at the electorate.
Speaker 16: We saw in Queensland literal free lunches and bus rides.
Speaker 16: The electric will take that, so thank you very much.
Speaker 16: That doesn't mean they're going to vote for you.
Speaker 3: Indeed, and we have started to see some of that
Speaker 3: free money with the promise of another one hundred and
Speaker 3: fifty dollars off power bills.
Speaker 2: I don't know who would believe it seeing his the
Speaker 2: first two.
Speaker 3: Hundred and seventy five dollars hasn't come off yet, but
Speaker 3: you never know. Maybe people who don't watch Sky every night.
Speaker 3: Thanks interviews Leash Shannon, I'm great to see you all.
Speaker 3: Right after the break are the Prime Minister's days as
Speaker 3: Labor leader numbered no matter the election Outcolm speculations already
Speaker 3: starting at plus Our political panel give their prediction for
Speaker 3: where the campaign is headed.
Speaker 2: That's next.
Speaker 3: Welcome back. But we're now about to enter the most
Speaker 3: crucial time in the election contest, with the polls set
Speaker 3: to be called any day now. Now the Coalition just
Speaker 3: can't afford train wreck interviews like this one where Angus
Speaker 3: Taylor struggled to specify just how much it would cost
Speaker 3: to build a nuclear power plant.
Speaker 17: Have a look what it's going to cost Australia to
Speaker 17: build nuclear power forty four percent less than the alternative,
Speaker 17: which is and this is the crucial point around. You
Speaker 17: know those numbers they were put out by later around
Speaker 17: six hundred million dollars what your plan costs, so forty
Speaker 17: four percent less that the alternative we've put forward, which
Speaker 17: we've modeled, We've put out the costings. So what is
Speaker 17: the forty four percent lower cost tells?
Speaker 9: What's just how people can understand what the cost.
Speaker 17: Is, well, forty four percent less labour six hundred billion
Speaker 17: in total for the system through to twenty fifty.
Speaker 9: Sixty billion on that.
Speaker 3: Okay, let's bring in our Monday Political Panel with Scott
Speaker 3: Morrison's former Media advisor, Headline Advisory Director Andrew Carswell and
Speaker 3: Bill Shotton's form A chief of Staff GXO Strategies Director
Speaker 3: Carara Milnat. Great to see you both now, Andrew. The
Speaker 3: Coalition has to get its act together on these costing figures.
Speaker 18: Yeah, Sharia, it was certainly a little sloppy and I
Speaker 18: think has just got caught in the weeds a little
Speaker 18: bit too much and you won't be able to get
Speaker 18: away with that in the campaign. It's lucky that that's
Speaker 18: kind of happening now. But there is no doubt that
Speaker 18: the Coalition needs to be sharper on its messaging when
Speaker 18: it comes to its energy plan. It needs to be
Speaker 18: sharper when it comes to its messaging on the economy.
Speaker 18: There is absolutely no doubt about that. But what I
Speaker 18: do like.
Speaker 9: What what I do like is that there.
Speaker 18: Is an energy plan emerging from the Coalition, and maybe
Speaker 18: a couple of weeks months late, but there is now
Speaker 18: a coherent energy plan that they can put forward to
Speaker 18: the Australian people, and that is threefold. It is energy
Speaker 18: bill relief in the short term. It is getting more
Speaker 18: gas out of the ground and keeping more gas here
Speaker 18: domestically that will bring prices down in the short term.
Speaker 18: And it is the long term plan which we've always
Speaker 18: talked about with their nuclear plans that will bring down
Speaker 18: prices are the long term, so it's always been focused
Speaker 18: on that long term issue. Now they're starting to build
Speaker 18: out the capability in the short term. And the gas
Speaker 18: plan is so critical to their messaging because it talks
Speaker 18: about the here and now. How do we get energy
Speaker 18: prices down Now we get more gas out of the ground,
Speaker 18: we keep more gas here because gas sets the price
Speaker 18: in the Australian market at the moment because there's a
Speaker 18: low supply. So the plan is on track, We've just
Speaker 18: got to be able to explain it properly.
Speaker 2: Cameron.
Speaker 3: I think the change since the last selection is in
Speaker 3: twenty twenty two. You know, people seemed well, voters were
Speaker 3: happy enough to go along with the renewable energy plan
Speaker 3: that was being put forward by the likes of your
Speaker 3: mate Chris Bowen. But now there's been a few years
Speaker 3: of a cost of living crisis. People want cheaper bills,
Speaker 3: that's the focus. So they might be looking at a
Speaker 3: nuclear energy policy if they do believe it's more cost
Speaker 3: effective then going along with, you know, the vision that
Speaker 3: Chris Bowen was selling before.
Speaker 15: Well, I think nuclear has got a place. I think
Speaker 15: we all support the fact that at least one political
Speaker 15: party has actually come to the modern age and said
Speaker 15: nuclear should be there by twenty fifty and we should
Speaker 15: get to net zero by using nuclear power along with renewables,
Speaker 15: along with gas, along with other resources. But as Andrew
Speaker 15: and I were discussing the other night, it's about the
Speaker 15: here now. The coalition has got to come up with
Speaker 15: a plan for the here and now, and I'm not
Speaker 15: sure it's just gas, Andrew. I think it's got to
Speaker 15: be keeping coal for longer. I mean MINS is doing
Speaker 15: it even to sit to Allen, and Victoria is extending
Speaker 15: coal fire based load power. So labor governments are doing
Speaker 15: it elsewhere. And I think if they got on the
Speaker 15: bandwagon and said call for longer, to give that transition
Speaker 15: to make sure we keep power prices down and people
Speaker 15: in jobs and manufacturing Australia, then that would be a
Speaker 15: really credible energy plan.
Speaker 3: You said the other night, you're taking my Monday Night panel.
Speaker 2: To the stage of the Opera House. You did a
Speaker 2: live event at.
Speaker 3: The Opera House, the panel from here. Wish we were there,
Speaker 3: but good to see you. You picked up the debate.
Speaker 3: Now I want to talk about the next labor leader
Speaker 3: for the federal party. Now there's a ready speculation about
Speaker 3: you know, if which side loses the election, who's going
Speaker 3: to be the leader? Is dotting it a stay leader
Speaker 3: if they lose. And likewise, if Albo loses or if
Speaker 3: he wins Bob by a small margin margin, who's going
Speaker 3: to take over?
Speaker 2: Now. Jim Chalmers was asked about this yesterday. Have a look.
Speaker 12: I spent absolutely no time thinking about what I would
Speaker 12: do if we lost the election. I'd much rather be
Speaker 12: the Treasurer of Australia than the leader of the opposition.
Speaker 12: And we've got a lot of good communicators in our
Speaker 12: cabinet and in our party room broadly, and we work
Speaker 12: together very very close.
Speaker 2: Yeah, Andrew Clenel did well in that interview. Andrew, what
Speaker 2: do you think?
Speaker 18: Well, I think I think Jim is the natural leader
Speaker 18: that will come after Albow. Assuming Albout goes to a
Speaker 18: minority government, you would anticipate it he would only last
Speaker 18: twelve to eight a months. And then you look at
Speaker 18: the likes of Jim. Jim is their best communicator. But
Speaker 18: the problem with Jim is he doesn't have the supporting
Speaker 18: caucus that others do.
Speaker 9: You have to look at the likes of Tony.
Speaker 18: Burt to realize where the power actually resides in the
Speaker 18: in the caucus posts Anthony Albanesi. It doesn't reside with Jim,
Speaker 18: it doesn't reside with It doesn't reside with Tanya plebisk,
Speaker 18: It doesn't reside with Chris Bart. It resides with Tony Burke,
Speaker 18: and not many people realize that. But when Anthony Abaneze
Speaker 18: he finally decides to either handout of the rains or
Speaker 18: is pushed out, his numbers will fall behind Tony Burke.
Speaker 3: Cameron, what do you think about this? I mean, you'd
Speaker 3: think that the two candidates who would be most popular
Speaker 3: with the electorate would be Tanya plebisk as a female
Speaker 3: especially or Jim Chalmers.
Speaker 2: But is that You're right?
Speaker 3: Do you think the Labor Party numbers because of the
Speaker 3: way the factions work, would support someone like Tony Burke.
Speaker 15: I don't think Labour wants to go to another election
Speaker 15: with a weak leader like Albanize ever. Again, I mean
Speaker 15: they are just living on teer hooks hoping that they
Speaker 15: somehow hold on the minority government having kind of owned
Speaker 15: this guy for the last three years and not done
Speaker 15: what the rud Gillard rug, which was If you fail
Speaker 15: as leader, you're out. This suld be the Labor Way
Speaker 15: in rich O's day, if you failed, you were gone.
Speaker 15: Somehow in this parallel universe, Alba's managed to survive, but
Speaker 15: with three years to the next election, the Labor Caucus
Speaker 15: is free to actually do what they need to do
Speaker 15: and finish off Albow even if he survives as a
Speaker 15: minority government leader. And then it comes down the choice
Speaker 15: about who is the most popular and to Andrew's point,
Speaker 15: the best communicator. And I think there's ten Y Pleba
Speaker 15: Sick and there's Jim Chalmers. I think the two of
Speaker 15: them on a dual ticket, either the leader or debu leader,
Speaker 15: whichever way it works the floor against Tony Burke, who
Speaker 15: is an extremist, absolute extremist.
Speaker 2: Agreed, completely agree with that. And you know it's.
Speaker 3: Interesting because there is unity in the Labor Party at
Speaker 3: the moment publicly, but behind the scenes.
Speaker 2: You know, you're right, Cameron. People are so critical of
Speaker 2: the Prime.
Speaker 3: Minister of Anthony Alberinezi for being weak, for making Darton
Speaker 3: look good because of Dudden's strength, although he does seem
Speaker 3: to have lost momentum in the past few weeks.
Speaker 2: Andrew, where does Peter Dutton go from here?
Speaker 3: How does he regain the momentum that he's sort of
Speaker 3: stalled on in the past couple of weeks.
Speaker 18: Yeah, it's certainly been a tough couple of weeks. There's
Speaker 18: been a lot of missteps. There's been a lot of
Speaker 18: ill discipline kind of behavior. There's been thought bubbles, there's
Speaker 18: been brain farts, there's been all sorts of things. It's
Speaker 18: been a departure from the discipline we've seen all the
Speaker 18: way through this term, where Dunton has managed to hold
Speaker 18: things together very well in terms of discipline and unity.
Speaker 18: But I think this is advantageous for the coalition. That
Speaker 18: may seem strange, but better this is happening now than
Speaker 18: in the midst of the campaign. Better that they're making
Speaker 18: they're stumbling out of the blocks now than the first, second,
Speaker 18: third week of the campaign where things actually matter, where
Speaker 18: people are actually watching.
Speaker 9: They're not watching now.
Speaker 18: So it's a huge advantage to the coalition to be
Speaker 18: going through this process now.
Speaker 2: And I was putting a very good spin on it.
Speaker 3: I have to say that's putting a very good spin
Speaker 3: on the past couple of weeks.
Speaker 18: It's going to work for that they're certainly going to
Speaker 18: work for them.
Speaker 3: All right, we'll see Andrea Kazo, Camra Milner, thank you
Speaker 3: boy so much. Now, after the break of big development
Speaker 3: out of the Middle East, Army Horowitz will join us live.
Speaker 2: Okay, Now, let's.
Speaker 3: Turn to the Middle East, where they've been huge developments.
Speaker 3: With Hamas being urged yet again to relinquish power, the
Speaker 3: Palestinian Authority President mum Abas has urged the terror group
Speaker 3: to see power in Gaza. He called an us to
Speaker 3: step aside from governing and fully recognize that the battle
Speaker 3: ahead will lead to the end of Palestinian's existence. Okay,
Speaker 3: well to discuss, let's bring in now filmmaker and commentator
Speaker 3: Army Herowitz. I'm be great to have you on the program.
Speaker 3: You're in Israel right now. Look, the Palestinian Authority would
Speaker 3: of course be better than Hamas. But benjaminette naw who
Speaker 3: has said he doesn't think that this would be a
Speaker 3: good outcome for the new governing body in Gaza, what's
Speaker 3: your view here.
Speaker 11: Yeah, let's be clear about a couple things. First thing
Speaker 11: is the Palaly Authority was in lockstep with Kamas in
Speaker 11: terms of the destruction of the state of Israel. An
Speaker 11: attack Israeli citizens. Right, how do we know that first
Speaker 11: of all, many attacks prior talks Ober seventh, in fact
Speaker 11: did M and eight from the Palasadi Authority, and the
Speaker 11: Palsi Authority had up until a month ago. I wonder
Speaker 11: what happened a month ago to change that dynamic was
Speaker 11: paying Palastadian prisoners and their families who committed acts of
Speaker 11: terror in the state of Israel. Well, they've changed their
Speaker 11: tune a little bit. And that is not because or
Speaker 11: I just say it is directly because Donald Trump is
Speaker 11: President of the United States. They were held they were
Speaker 11: not held accountable under the Biden administration. But now they
Speaker 11: understand that Trump is here and in business, they're taking
Speaker 11: a little bit more seriously and now trying to walk
Speaker 11: away from Hamas. Also, I want to make something very clear,
Speaker 11: like I've spent a lot of time in the Paladian
Speaker 11: Authority after October seventh talking to Palestidians on the street,
Speaker 11: and one thing I got to tell you is that
Speaker 11: support from Hamas was steadfast across the Palaestindian population.
Speaker 2: This is the way this is in the West.
Speaker 11: West Bank, correct, that's right. They see hamas as striking
Speaker 11: back against the Jews and against Israel and they love that.
Speaker 2: Wow. So this is an issue.
Speaker 3: And just to pick up on something you said that
Speaker 3: you were talking about this pay for slay policy where
Speaker 3: the Palestinian authority gives lifelong salaries or payments to the
Speaker 3: families of people who commit who become martyrs, who commit
Speaker 3: terror attacks, and so that's part of this perpetuating of
Speaker 3: terrorism that's been such a problem. Now you've got a
Speaker 3: new documentary examining the ethics of the IDF, the Israeli
Speaker 3: Defense for US, Can you tell us what you found,
Speaker 3: what you concluded during your reporting and filming.
Speaker 11: Yeah, it's so interesting when you listen and talk to
Speaker 11: people on the left or people who are ignorant about
Speaker 11: actually what's happening on the ground in Gaza, and they
Speaker 11: talk about, look have passed the children been killed? Of
Speaker 11: course they have, this is war. But I think at
Speaker 11: the end of the day, you had do do You
Speaker 11: have to look at the statistics, You have to look
Speaker 11: at data sets and see whether or not the IDF
Speaker 11: is acting.
Speaker 9: In a moral way or an immoral way.
Speaker 11: And looking at the data points, I got to say
Speaker 11: it's hard to make the argument the IDF, particularly in
Speaker 11: this conflict. I know it sounds crazy, but in this
Speaker 11: conflict itself, and in conflicts prior, one can make the
Speaker 11: argument they're the most ethical and moral army that has
Speaker 11: ever existed. I'll give you an example. I'm talking about
Speaker 11: one data point which puts anything to rest that in general,
Speaker 11: when one goes to war, an urban warfare conflux, which
Speaker 11: is the most devastating of all warfare, because you're essentially
Speaker 11: fighting within a context of civilians surrounding everywhere you are,
Speaker 11: everywhere you attack, everyey you bomb, you are within a
Speaker 11: civilian population. By definition of urban warfare, that when NATO
Speaker 11: goes to war, one will argue the most moral army
Speaker 11: that ever existed, whether it be the Europeans of the
Speaker 11: United States in Iraq or Afghanistan or in the Balkans,
Speaker 11: that ninety percent, nine out of ten of all casualties
Speaker 11: are in fact civilians, even though they're not trying to
Speaker 11: target civilians. I'm like, let's say the Russians now in Gaza,
Speaker 11: which is far more densely populated than Iraq or Afghanistan,
Speaker 11: far more densely populated. Israel has a fifty percent casualty
Speaker 11: rate of civilians. Fifty percent their targets of their people
Speaker 11: who are killed are in fact who they're trying to target,
Speaker 11: and that is an incredibly high number. But of course
Speaker 11: Israel doesn't get any credit for that. They're called they're
Speaker 11: called Nazis. They're saying they're indiscriminately killing, They're saying it's genocide.
Speaker 11: Nothing could be further from the truth. And we went
Speaker 11: into the area, We talked to the IDF, we look
Speaker 11: at data sets, we talked to soldiers who were there
Speaker 11: actually in the war itself, and they went through everything
Speaker 11: they go through in order to avoid killing civilian civilian
Speaker 11: people around Gaza. And in fact, we talked to US
Speaker 11: military and European military leaders. They'll say Israel's giving away
Speaker 11: tactical advantages by doing the things that they're doing, for example,
Speaker 11: dropping leaflets, leaving maps where they're going.
Speaker 2: To attack, next, next message.
Speaker 11: This billains gotta be attacked, and so forth and so on.
Speaker 3: Yes, sending text messages as well to entire buildings very quickly.
Speaker 2: Where can people see.
Speaker 3: Your documentary, because I'm sure a lot of people are
Speaker 3: very interested watching this now.
Speaker 11: They can go on my YouTube and Amy Horowitz or
Speaker 11: Prager use YouTube and they could watch the full one
Speaker 11: there all right.
Speaker 2: Great to have you on the show. Thank you so
Speaker 2: much for your time.
Speaker 3: Now, if you missed the start of my show tonight,
Speaker 3: secret tapes capturing Top nine journalists speaking about breaching his
Speaker 3: own ethics in relation to the Ben Robert Smith case,
Speaker 3: head to our website. The video will be up shortly.
Speaker 3: The story is already there. I'll see you all tomorrow night.
Speaker 3: I'll be in camera for the budget. And here's Paul Murray.