Speaker 1: Life sharing, good evening well first tonight to the Albanezy
Speaker 1: government's humiliating back down in Parliament today.
Speaker 2: It was sparked by the Prime Minister.
Speaker 1: Allowing the most woke left wing government in the Western
Speaker 1: world to dictate his foreign policy. Remember when Jacinta Ardourn
Speaker 1: was applauded by the Canbra bubble for giving Scott Morrison
Speaker 1: a slapdown about his immigration policy.
Speaker 3: This is corrosive to our relationship.
Speaker 4: Scott Morrison, Cobbs and a dern Burn.
Speaker 2: Do not deport your people and your problems.
Speaker 4: Once you've done your time, we send you home.
Speaker 5: Well.
Speaker 1: The coalition's policy was that if there's a criminal migrant,
Speaker 1: say a murderer or a child rapist, and they're a
Speaker 1: citizen of another country, well then they should be deported.
Speaker 1: But desperate to appeal to drn a widely popular young female,
Speaker 1: Prime Minister Albanesi capitulated to her demand.
Speaker 2: Absurdly.
Speaker 1: He was proud of the fact he was weakening Australia's
Speaker 1: immigration policy and our national.
Speaker 2: Security approach to appease New Zealand.
Speaker 1: The changes meant that thousands of criminals who held New
Speaker 1: Zealand citizenship would now be able to stay in our
Speaker 1: country instead of being deported. It was an announcement Albanizi
Speaker 1: made to much fanfare when he became Prime Minister.
Speaker 6: A Minister Adurn has certainly not been backward in raising
Speaker 6: these issues. I can assure you from our very first meeting.
Speaker 6: Where you have a circumstance where someone has lived their
Speaker 6: entire life effectively in Australia with no connection whatsoever to
Speaker 6: New Zealand, then common sense should apply and we'll act
Speaker 6: as friends and we'll work through those issues in a
Speaker 6: common sense.
Speaker 3: What we've been seeking is common sense and the spirit
Speaker 3: of friendship, and that's what Prome Minus to Albinizi has
Speaker 3: spoken to today.
Speaker 1: An Immigration Minister Andrew Giles boasted to refugee advocates about
Speaker 1: the changes that he said would appease New Zealanders in
Speaker 1: this video obtained today by rhiannon Down at The Australian.
Speaker 7: One of the big issues that we have built with
Speaker 7: as a government is to have regard to the ministry
Speaker 7: or direction that operates in respect of cancelized region, and
Speaker 7: have had close regard, particularly on the basis that discussions
Speaker 7: with their friends in New Zealand about how this can
Speaker 7: operate in a way that better reflects our obligation to
Speaker 7: people who've spent the majority of their lives in Australia
Speaker 7: as opposed to another country.
Speaker 1: Well, when he said there, reflects our obligation he's speaking about,
Speaker 1: reflects our obligation to criminals, to criminals who don't have
Speaker 1: Australian citizenship and who should be deported. This from the
Speaker 1: Immigration Minister, whose job is meant to be to protect
Speaker 1: the safety of Australians. But this is what happens when
Speaker 1: you appoint a refugee lawyer to the position of Immigration minister.
Speaker 1: Even the ABC has acknowledged that and I quote the
Speaker 1: former refugee lawyer was never a natural fit for the
Speaker 1: immigration portfolio.
Speaker 2: The fact Albanese won't sack.
Speaker 1: Him after the litany of disasters that have seen Australians
Speaker 1: attacked by detainees shows a deep problem with the Prime
Speaker 1: Minister himself. As The Australian pointed out today, it's been
Speaker 1: zero days since Giles's last blunder. Well, you'd want a
Speaker 1: Prime minister to demand a high standard from his team,
Speaker 1: but what we're seeing is Albanese's willingness to accept not
Speaker 1: even mediocrity but poor performance. He's made a judgment that
Speaker 1: so called stability of his front bench is more important
Speaker 1: than competency, which in this case means community safety. Albanizi
Speaker 1: is choosing the political outcome that is best for himself
Speaker 1: and his political advantage and not putting the community first,
Speaker 1: and thus this ongoing saga reflects equally poorly on Alberzi
Speaker 1: himself as it does on his failure of an immigration minister.
Speaker 1: All right, well, Former Treasurer Josh Fredenberg has said that
Speaker 1: he's not going to run in Kouyong, his old seat.
Speaker 2: But this idea that he shouldn't.
Speaker 1: Be allowed to run because a woman has put up
Speaker 1: her hand is identity politics gone too far. Of course,
Speaker 1: we need more women in politics, and not just politics
Speaker 1: but public life. We need women at the top of
Speaker 1: companies boards and in all leadership positions.
Speaker 2: One thousand percent.
Speaker 1: And personally it's controversial, but I actually support gender quotas
Speaker 1: I think it does fast track change. But the idea
Speaker 1: that any woman should be chosen over any man, irrespective
Speaker 1: of his experience or merit or talent is nonsense.
Speaker 2: Yet that has been the suggestion.
Speaker 8: He can make it comeback if he wants. There's a
Speaker 8: number of seats that are still open for pre selection
Speaker 8: of Victoria, and he should absolutely consider going for one
Speaker 8: of those. But demanding that pre selections reopen in seats
Speaker 8: that have already closed, where we already have candidates in
Speaker 8: the field is quite frankly ludicrous. Amelia Hamer is a
Speaker 8: brilliant candidate.
Speaker 9: I think that there might be some Josh Friedenberg fans
Speaker 9: that's got a little bit of a rash of blood
Speaker 9: to the head when they saw these boundary changes. But
Speaker 9: you know, quite frankly, our focus as a party should
Speaker 9: be on keeping Higgins.
Speaker 1: Your editor and journalist Christopher Dare wrote a brilliant and
Speaker 1: cutting piece in The Nightly, and in it he said,
Speaker 1: the idea that Josh Fridenberg, a relatively young moderate deputy
Speaker 1: leader and successful former federal treasurer, should somehow cede to
Speaker 1: an inexperienced, hopeful, articulate and educated as she may be,
Speaker 1: simply because she is a woman is ridiculous, he said.
Speaker 1: To suggest moving aside the untested thirty one year old,
Speaker 1: albeit with a great liberal name, to make way for Freedenburg,
Speaker 1: would somehow be a liberal hate crime against women is absurd. Now,
Speaker 1: one of Fredenberg's personality traits is that he's loath to
Speaker 1: upset anyone.
Speaker 2: He's a decent human being.
Speaker 1: Yes, he wants to spend time with his family, and
Speaker 1: he is making a great contribution to Australian life from
Speaker 1: outside politics, as we saw with his documentary recently. But
Speaker 1: also presumably he wouldn't like to be criticized for asking
Speaker 1: a woman to step aside. But look at the bigger
Speaker 1: picture here. Peter Darton has a massive uphill battle to
Speaker 1: win the next election nineteen seats. He needs to form
Speaker 1: majority government and he admits that this task would go
Speaker 1: against the grain of history, even though.
Speaker 10: The first term government hasn't lost since nineteen thirty one,
Speaker 10: that the best outcome from a Labor Party perspective is
Speaker 10: that they could form a minority government which would include
Speaker 10: the Greens and the Tills and potentially, as you say,
Speaker 10: Muslim independent candidates from Western Sydney or perhaps elsewhere in
Speaker 10: Melbourne for example. The reality of that is that yes,
Speaker 10: they would be compromised even further in terms of their stance,
Speaker 10: and I think as we saw during the period of
Speaker 10: the Gillard government, where there was formal compact with the Greens,
Speaker 10: there was a drag to the left and I think
Speaker 10: that is at odds with where most Australians are. At
Speaker 10: Most Austraians, regardless of their religion or their location in
Speaker 10: the country, that they want a safe environment for themselves,
Speaker 10: for their kids, They want to work hard provide for
Speaker 10: their family. They want a good health system, a good
Speaker 10: public transport, good transport system, and they want to buy
Speaker 10: a good house and make sure that their kids and
Speaker 10: grandkids can enjoy more than what they've been able to enjoy.
Speaker 10: I don't think it gets much more complicated than that.
Speaker 1: And that was Peter Dutton on Sunday night. Well Tony
Speaker 1: Abbott won fourteen seats in the landslide of twenty thirteen
Speaker 1: after the Guillard Rudd era of leadership chaos. For Dutton
Speaker 1: to wear nineteen seats is a massive ask for him
Speaker 1: to even have a shot at wedding seats back not
Speaker 1: only from labor but also the till he needs the
Speaker 1: strongest possible candidate in every seat. Josh Fridenburg clearly has
Speaker 1: the best chance of winning Coujong from the disastrous Monique Ryan.
Speaker 1: The idea that Fridenburg wouldn't run or couldn't run simply
Speaker 1: because it would be ungentlemanly to ask a woman to
Speaker 1: step aside because of her gender, the idea that he
Speaker 1: wouldn't run because of identity politics, Well, this reason is
Speaker 1: clearly not in Australia's national interest now. Chris Daor in
Speaker 1: The Nightly urged Josh Fridenburg to have courage in politics
Speaker 1: because the path to the lodge is paved with the
Speaker 1: remains of those who tried and failed, all those who
Speaker 1: didn't try hard enough. Christo Vherdoor writes, Josh Fridenberg needs
Speaker 1: to look no further than the limp and lackluster leadership
Speaker 1: ambitions of Peter Costello, a fellow Melbourne Liberal with a
Speaker 1: lofty regard for his own talent, encumbered by destiny, incapacitated
Speaker 1: by debilitating.
Speaker 2: Desire, and at least one major personality flaw. He was
Speaker 2: gutless to the.
Speaker 1: Great amusement of John Howard. Costello never struck him down,
Speaker 1: didn't even try. Howard waited for the day it never came.
Speaker 1: Angry and entitled, Costello will never live that down, spooked
Speaker 1: by his own hapless brand of Hubris.
Speaker 5: Well.
Speaker 1: The comparison with Costello, though, does have its limits.
Speaker 2: Costello is now chair.
Speaker 1: Of nine and I would note the judging by Costello's
Speaker 1: leadership of nine during the sexual harassment crisis at the
Speaker 1: network doesn't seem like Australia missed out.
Speaker 2: And much by not having him as Prime Minister.
Speaker 11: Well.
Speaker 1: Also coming up on the show tonight, how Anthony Albanese's
Speaker 1: agency tasked with increasing the housing supply has spent thirty
Speaker 1: million dollars on executive and on consultants and executive salaries
Speaker 1: without building a single home. Thirty million dollars and not
Speaker 1: a single home built. This breaking news tonight. It's a farce,
Speaker 1: and Pettiwog refuses to rule out recognizing a Palestinian state
Speaker 1: even if Harmas still has a role governing Gaza. This
Speaker 1: is surely a confusing position for a feminist, given Hamas
Speaker 1: has raped girls, beheaded babies and slaughtered children in cold blood.
Speaker 1: Petty Wog is quickly developing a reputation as the worst
Speaker 1: foreign minister Australia has ever had. More on that with
Speaker 1: my panel later, plus drugs, alcohol and holidays, the ndis
Speaker 1: rots costing tax payers billions of dollars a year, and
Speaker 1: in an almost comical opening statement, Anthony Fauci denies trying
Speaker 1: to cover up the COVID publigue theory. We'll get to
Speaker 1: that with my panel in a minute. I'm a Speaker
Speaker 1: of the House. Bronwin Bishop, our National MP Keith Pitt
Speaker 1: joined me. Now, welcome to you both. Look, let's start
Speaker 1: now with what I spoke about at the start of
Speaker 1: the show. Immigration Minister Andrew Giles had to get up
Speaker 1: at the start of Parliament today and say that he's
Speaker 1: spoken to his New Zealand counterpart to tell him that
Speaker 1: he'd make changes, changes that ALBERNIZI was so proud of
Speaker 1: making in a press conference with Jacintha dern Keith, What
Speaker 1: did you make of this admission in Parliament today?
Speaker 12: How many more mistakes does this minister have to make? Firstly,
Speaker 12: it wasn't the fault of the change of director of
Speaker 12: ninety nine. Then it was the fault of direction ninety nine,
Speaker 12: and then it was the fault of the department, and
Speaker 12: then it was the failure of the dry and monitoring
Speaker 12: that didn't exist. And now we find that it's exactly
Speaker 12: what the opposition said. It looks like there was a
Speaker 12: deal done with New Zealand because they demanded it and
Speaker 12: the Australian government rolled over. Now, no matter what side
Speaker 12: of politics you come from. There is one fundamental role
Speaker 12: and that is to keep the nation and it's people safe,
Speaker 12: and they have failed miserably. And I think mister Giles
Speaker 12: his position is completely untenable.
Speaker 1: I mean, bron went, you know the whole idea in
Speaker 1: the first place. And this is part of the problem.
Speaker 1: This was Anthony Alberesi's decision to change the immigration policy
Speaker 1: to appease Jacinda r Dern, to keep more criminals in
Speaker 1: the country even though they're not Australian citizens. I mean,
Speaker 1: is it a surprise that incapitulating to the most woke
Speaker 1: government that we've got in the western world, it was
Speaker 1: going to end up like this.
Speaker 2: Of course not.
Speaker 13: But the problem for Albanesi is that is his problem.
Speaker 13: He did it and he used a Jiles to implement it.
Speaker 13: So if Giles goes, shouldn't Albanesi go also? That's his problem.
Speaker 13: But here here, and there's another problem in there, of course,
Speaker 13: and Keith, no doubt you started to see it or
Speaker 13: the Labor Party. Indians are starting to get restless. They
Speaker 13: are feeling the mess that they're in. There's no leadership,
Speaker 13: there's no direction, they're not achieving anything. For the nation,
Speaker 13: and as they look at the problems that are engulfing
Speaker 13: the government, they're starting to look at alternate leadership options.
Speaker 13: And who do you think leaked the story about a speech?
Speaker 13: Right for Bill Shorten? I mean it's going to be
Speaker 13: an internal hatchet job because he sees himself as being
Speaker 13: the leader that should have been elected Prime minister. But
Speaker 13: there are a lot of others in there who think
Speaker 13: they are too. So perhaps I use an unfortunate analogy
Speaker 13: in saying using the term I use to describe the
Speaker 13: backbench of the Labor Party, but restless they are and
Speaker 13: concerned for their own seats, and the redistribution won't be
Speaker 13: doing them all favors either.
Speaker 1: Well, Bill Shotton is dealing with some controver your topics
Speaker 1: at the moment. Of course, the speech writer three hundred
Speaker 1: and ten thousand dollars a year for two years. Also
Speaker 1: revelations at Senate Estimates last night that NDIS money is
Speaker 1: being used to fund things.
Speaker 2: Like drugs, alcohol and holidays.
Speaker 1: Here's what NDIS Head of Fraud and Integrity, John Datto
Speaker 1: said last night.
Speaker 11: And then you have participants where they've not understood what
Speaker 11: they can and can't agree to with a provider, so
Speaker 11: they're accepting things that they shouldn't be. Examples, just in
Speaker 11: the last week, a twenty thousand dollars holiday, at ten
Speaker 11: thousand dollars holiday, we had a participant that bought a
Speaker 11: car brand new seventy three thousand dollars. I have spoken
Speaker 11: to very recently a participant to would meet the provider
Speaker 11: at the ATM. The provider with withdraw cash and provide
Speaker 11: that cash to the participant for her to source of
Speaker 11: this at substances.
Speaker 1: I mean, these are extraordinary revelations, Keith. We know that
Speaker 1: there's a massive blowout of NDAs. I mean, it's on
Speaker 1: track to be the largest component of the federal budget.
Speaker 1: And yet then we hear revelations last night from the
Speaker 1: head of the Integrity Unit that money.
Speaker 2: Is being spent on holidays. What do you think about
Speaker 2: this shary.
Speaker 12: The trajectory for spending on indiis is just completely unsustainable.
Speaker 12: I mean, if we even thought about it or spoke
Speaker 12: about it briefly when we were in government, the Labor
Speaker 12: Party just tore us apart. Now what we see here
Speaker 12: is this money is being wasted on things which are
Speaker 12: just not necessary. Secondly, they appear to me to be illegal.
Speaker 12: And thirdly, guess who's missing out. It is those individuals
Speaker 12: who have the most desperate die need the ones that
Speaker 12: need the support because this money is being wasted on
Speaker 12: things like new cars for individuals that should be fined
Speaker 12: another way to pay for them. And this is Bill
Speaker 12: Shorton's issue. Not only has he got a really expensive
Speaker 12: speech writer, it appears that inside the NDIS there's some
Speaker 12: very expensive habits.
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, most people would support an NDIS scheme,
Speaker 1: but what we're seeing here is just a waste of
Speaker 1: taxpayer funds.
Speaker 2: Brinwin, Yes, it is.
Speaker 13: Look, the problem is that Bill Shorten designed it, and
Speaker 13: he has to fix it because what he left was
Speaker 13: really badly designed. Look, the sorts of problems that have
Speaker 13: to be looked at seriously are You will hear people
Speaker 13: who were not on before the NDIS existed were paying
Speaker 13: save for particular service, say one hundred and twenty dollars
Speaker 13: for that service. As soon as the NDIS came in,
Speaker 13: they will paying two hundred and fifty dollars for the
Speaker 13: same service. And that's happened right across the board. So
Speaker 13: there are a lot of people out there making a
Speaker 13: lot of money out of the NDIS, and they have
Speaker 13: to start to look at caps, they have to start
Speaker 13: to look at redesigning it altogether. Now Bill shortened it
Speaker 13: was his design. It's up to him to fix it.
Speaker 13: But equally I can say, I mean, I've worked all
Speaker 13: my life helping in various charities. And I have a
Speaker 13: particular friend who is very badly affected by cerebral palsy,
Speaker 13: but she's got a great brain, and she said that
Speaker 13: the NDIS has made dramatic change in her life, and
Speaker 13: I can see it in her. She can speak now
Speaker 13: more clearly. She has someone with her who's she's got
Speaker 13: a lot more. It's a lot of good, but when
Speaker 13: you hear the stories that we're hearing, it makes it
Speaker 13: hard on those people. It's unfair for those people for
Speaker 13: whom it was really to be desired. Plus, the states
Speaker 13: have now it totally pulled out of delivering disability services
Speaker 13: and said federal government, it's your problem.
Speaker 2: So it's a lot a lot of work there and
Speaker 2: to a very.
Speaker 13: Expensive speech writer, it's not going to fix it.
Speaker 2: No, that's true.
Speaker 1: I mean the coalition says it works out to something
Speaker 1: like twenty two thousand dollars speech.
Speaker 2: You hope that they are good speeches.
Speaker 1: Now Chris Bowen has declared that the next federal election
Speaker 1: will be a referendum on nuclear power. Well, it's going
Speaker 1: to be a referendum on cost of living, I'll tell
Speaker 1: you that. But nonetheless, Chris Bowen writes in The Australian
Speaker 1: that pro nuclear facts are being asserted with confidence that
Speaker 1: beaur little relationship to reality. Keith, this is your one
Speaker 1: of your areas of expertise.
Speaker 2: What's your response to Chris Bowen?
Speaker 12: Well, you should find Chris Balen's piece in the OS.
Speaker 12: I think from memory it was on the top right.
Speaker 12: Ignore it and move.
Speaker 4: To the bottom left.
Speaker 12: There's a piece there from Jerdah Sloan and it is
Speaker 12: absolutely on the money. It is a ridiculous proposition from labor.
Speaker 12: The idea that we can run this country on intermittent
Speaker 12: supply is just nonsense, and nuclear provides an option that works.
Speaker 12: It works around the world, it's used in other places.
Speaker 12: But Chris bon seems to have some sort of ideological
Speaker 12: opposition unless it's in a submarine. So how is it
Speaker 12: possible for labor to argue against nuclear on but for
Speaker 12: nuclear in submarines, against nuclear everywhere else? Because apparently you'll
Speaker 12: get three odd fish that you say on The Simpsons,
Speaker 12: but not in a nuclear submarine which will get every
Speaker 12: major port in the country. It's a ridiculous proposition, mister Bowd.
Speaker 12: He should just wake up to himself, to be honest.
Speaker 1: Well, it is going to be an issue at the election,
Speaker 1: but probably not in the top five, i'd say. Now,
Speaker 1: Dr Anthony Fauci, we've covered him a lot on this program.
Speaker 1: He faced quite a sensational grilling at Congress today. To
Speaker 1: hearing he denied allegations that he covered up the theory
Speaker 1: that COVID nineteen may have leaked from a laboratory in Wuhan.
Speaker 2: Have a look at how this unfolded.
Speaker 14: I don't think the concept of there being a lab
Speaker 14: leak is inherently a conspiracy theory. What is conspiracy is
Speaker 14: the kind of distortions of that particular subject, like it
Speaker 14: was a lab leak, and I was parachuted into the CIA,
Speaker 14: like Jason Bourne and told the CIA that they should
Speaker 14: really not be talking about a lable.
Speaker 2: Thank you now, Bronwin.
Speaker 1: It would be impossible in the space of time we
Speaker 1: have here to recap my investigative journalism that I've done
Speaker 1: in this area, but leedless to say, there were conversations
Speaker 1: and I've interviewed the other health official on camera that
Speaker 1: Anthony Fauci had the conversations with where they did decide
Speaker 1: to publicly downplay the lablique theory. There's also email evidence
Speaker 1: that points to this because they wanted cooperation from China.
Speaker 2: That's one reason.
Speaker 1: Another reason is that Anthony Fauchi's agency was actually funding
Speaker 1: the gain of function research in Wuhan. An emails show
Speaker 1: that he was worried he may have funded the research
Speaker 1: that led to the pandemic.
Speaker 13: Well, first, let's say your book was a very important
Speaker 13: part in opening up the lies that have been told
Speaker 13: during COVID, and any cold eyed view of what happened
Speaker 13: is clearly came out of the lab. And clearly when
Speaker 13: we say increasing the function, we're talking about making it
Speaker 13: more lethal. That's what That's what was happening. And then,
Speaker 13: for some reason, against all the preparations this country had made,
Speaker 13: we followed the Chinese model of lockdown, as has happened
Speaker 13: in so many other countries. So we desperately need his testimony.
Speaker 13: There adds to the conviction I have and many others have,
Speaker 13: that we need a proper royal commission here into what
Speaker 13: happened here, and the research that you did and made
Speaker 13: public made people understand that there was something rotten going
Speaker 13: on in this country.
Speaker 1: Now, my issue with those grillings, and I think it's
Speaker 1: excellent to be able to get Anthony Fauci in the
Speaker 1: stand and ask questions, but my issue with those grillings,
Speaker 1: and most of them are the same in the US Congress,
Speaker 1: is that it's all about the particular congress men or
Speaker 1: women you know, wanting to go viral on the internet.
Speaker 1: It's about their question rather than actually eliciting real answers
Speaker 1: from the person they're questioning. In this case Anthony Fauchier.
Speaker 1: Wish journalists would be able to.
Speaker 2: Do that instead.
Speaker 1: Roman Bishop Keith Pitt. Thank you both very much for
Speaker 1: joining me. Now, another big story today, Labor is planning
Speaker 1: to expand the eligibility criteria to allow foreign citizens to
Speaker 1: join our Defense FOSS. This is apparently to make up
Speaker 1: for a lack of recruits. No one wants to join
Speaker 1: the eightf anymore. New Zealanders would be the first foreigners
Speaker 1: to be able to join, and then there could be
Speaker 1: from January next year other countries as well. There's been
Speaker 1: mixed messaging from Labour today about exactly who will be
Speaker 1: eligible to join our defense.
Speaker 2: Foss have a look.
Speaker 15: As of the first of July, we will be enabling
Speaker 15: New Zealand citizens who have been permanent residents of our
Speaker 15: country for.
Speaker 10: At least a year.
Speaker 15: We will be allowing those people to join our defense.
Speaker 13: Folts.
Speaker 10: It goes well beyond New Zealand citizens, as you will know,
Speaker 10: and as broader application. Perhaps the Minister could provide us
Speaker 10: with the actual detail.
Speaker 15: What we learn, mister Speaker, from the question that has
Speaker 15: been asked by the Shadow Minister and from the interjection
Speaker 15: of the Leader of the Opposition now, is there are
Speaker 15: no bounds that they won't cross in order to run
Speaker 15: a scare campaign and blow any single whistle that they
Speaker 15: can find.
Speaker 5: Well.
Speaker 1: Shadow Defense Minister Andrew Hasty joins me. Now, Andrew, thank
Speaker 1: you for your time. This is a big story today,
Speaker 1: your Shadow Defense What are your concerns about Labour's policy, Charry?
Speaker 16: This is a half baked, ham fisted policy. It was
Speaker 16: all over the place today. You had three separate ministers
Speaker 16: giving different information. There was no clarity around it, and
Speaker 16: it wasn't until this afternoon where they started to give
Speaker 16: us some clarity, but even so there are huge questions
Speaker 16: about how this will operate. New Zealanders can become citizens
Speaker 16: through the ADF from July one, and then January one,
Speaker 16: permanent residents from any country can join our ADF and
Speaker 16: then within ninety days be given citizenship. This is the
Speaker 16: biggest change to defense recruiting since federation, and the Australian
Speaker 16: people deserve to know how this will be done, what
Speaker 16: security processes will be followed, what return of service obligations
Speaker 16: will be imposed on people, And we need to know
Speaker 16: because these are the people we are entrusting to defend us,
Speaker 16: the most difficult and sacred task.
Speaker 4: We can ask of people who serve in our uniform.
Speaker 1: Well, what are your specific concerns about having foreigners and
Speaker 1: they might be from five ised countries like minded nations,
Speaker 1: what are your concerns about foreigners joining the ADF.
Speaker 16: There's a number of reasons why we are concerned. The
Speaker 16: first is Director General of AS Mike Burgess has said
Speaker 16: numerous times over the last few years that espionage and
Speaker 16: foreign interference is at unprecedented levels in this country, exceeding
Speaker 16: that of the Cold War, and we are about to
Speaker 16: attract a lot more espionage and foreign interference because of
Speaker 16: what we're embarking on with Orcus. And so we need
Speaker 16: to know that the people joining our defense Force are
Speaker 16: people who believe in Australia, who uphold our values, and
Speaker 16: who are working in our best interests. And so this
Speaker 16: will impose a big cost in terms of security making
Speaker 16: sure that people who join the ADF are legitimate and
Speaker 16: it requires us to verify their backgrounds. And so this
Speaker 16: is why we need more than just a drop to
Speaker 16: the media this morning. We actually need a debate. We
Speaker 16: need a discussion, and they need to explain how they're
Speaker 16: going to roll this out. They've done none of that.
Speaker 16: They've absolutely done none of that, and it really is
Speaker 16: shameful the way they're just treating this as just another
Speaker 16: run in the mill policy poorly executed.
Speaker 1: There have been reports that you personally suggested perhaps have
Speaker 1: some of our allies join the ADF.
Speaker 2: Is this correct? And do you think you will reject
Speaker 2: Labour's policy?
Speaker 4: Sure?
Speaker 16: Yes, Look you know I've got an open mind about
Speaker 16: these things. And we have a recruiting and retention crisis, Sharry.
Speaker 16: We're five thousand people short in the ADF and we're
Speaker 16: going backwards because we're not hitting our recruiting targets every
Speaker 16: year and we're losing people every year. So I'm open
Speaker 16: minded about how we boost our ADF numbers.
Speaker 4: We already do lateral transfers.
Speaker 16: In twenty twenty one, Sharry I board a Collins class submarine.
Speaker 16: The captain of the boat was a Canadian officer who
Speaker 16: transferred from Canada. So we already do lateral transfers with
Speaker 16: five eysed nations, and I'm open minded about five eyed
Speaker 16: countries as well joining the ADF, as long as they
Speaker 16: meet all.
Speaker 4: The stringent security requirements.
Speaker 16: But the government has gone far beyond that, and they're
Speaker 16: suggesting that we'll take anyone from anywhere in this world,
Speaker 16: and I think that has a huge bit clear.
Speaker 1: You would support it if it was limited to five
Speaker 1: yes countries.
Speaker 16: Potentially. This is what we're going to explore tomorrow in estimates.
Speaker 16: This is what we're going to explore. We're going to
Speaker 16: ask questions of the government and find out exactly how
Speaker 16: they're going to roll this policy out.
Speaker 4: We're doing our due diligence. Chrry.
Speaker 16: You never rush into these things, and like I said,
Speaker 16: I've got an open mind but the way they've operated today,
Speaker 16: the way they've announced this, does not fill me with confidence.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Look, there's been a lot of criticism of defense leadership.
Speaker 1: You know, one very well known example the suggestion that
Speaker 1: metals should be returned even though the soldiers had nothing
Speaker 1: to do with any allegations of war crimes. Do you
Speaker 1: think that these sort of issues have had an impact
Speaker 1: on recruiting levels?
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 16: I think the ADF has had a huge morale problem
Speaker 16: for some years now, a political correctness, a sense of
Speaker 16: procedural fairness not being upheld. There's a range of reasons
Speaker 16: why morale is low. But under this lab government, under
Speaker 16: alb and Easy government, we've seen Army slashed in terms
Speaker 16: of funding and capability. And our diggers aren't stupid. They
Speaker 16: know when the government doesn't believe in the mission and
Speaker 16: they're seeing that with the cuts to capability. So there's
Speaker 16: a number of reasons why morale is low and our
Speaker 16: task is to get it back up and get our
Speaker 16: men and women believing in the mission.
Speaker 1: Andrew, there's also the fact that Prime Minister failed to
Speaker 1: stand up for our defense personnel when they've been injured
Speaker 1: or nearly injured in a couple of recent incidents with
Speaker 1: the Chinese. I mean, you know, on both occasions the
Speaker 1: Prime Minister said.
Speaker 2: He'd raised it at the highest levels.
Speaker 1: In the one instance he saw the Chinese president, she
Speaker 1: personally didn't raise it. The next there were no count
Speaker 1: There were no ministerial conversations at all. Again, do you
Speaker 1: think this where the Prime Minister can't defend even verbally,
Speaker 1: people who are literally putting their lives on the line
Speaker 1: for our country. Would this also act as a disincentive
Speaker 1: joining the ADF?
Speaker 4: Yeah? Absolutely.
Speaker 16: I think our national leadership has to be as tough
Speaker 16: as the men and women who take the risks on
Speaker 16: our behalf. And we saw our divers experience the sonar
Speaker 16: attack from the Chinese destroyer last year. We saw that
Speaker 16: Navy Seahawk have flares fired at it by a Chinese fighter.
Speaker 16: On both occasions, the Prime Minister did not pick up
Speaker 16: the phone and go into bat for those ADF personnel.
Speaker 16: And that sends a signal to every single person in
Speaker 16: uniform that our Prime minister isn't making that a priority.
Speaker 4: And I think that has to have an impact on morale.
Speaker 1: All right, Andrew Hasty, thank you very much for your
Speaker 1: time this evening. We've got a lot more coming up
Speaker 1: on the show tonight.
Speaker 2: We're going to look at.
Speaker 1: Pennywong's outrageous comments about Hamas, plus local companies say they're
Speaker 1: being hurt by labours Free for All class action laws.
Speaker 1: Senator Jane Hume would join me to discuss.
Speaker 2: Welcome back Well.
Speaker 1: Australian businesses are being targeted by international law firms with
Speaker 1: major class action lawsuits. In one example, a UK law
Speaker 1: firm Pogast Goodhead has started a seventy billion dollar class
Speaker 1: action against mining giant BHP after twenty fifteen dam burst
Speaker 1: causing a giant mud slide in southern in southeastern Brazil,
Speaker 1: killing nineteen people.
Speaker 2: The class action comes.
Speaker 1: As BHP spent more than eight billion dollars in an
Speaker 1: effort to rebuild affected communities. But it doesn't end with BHP.
Speaker 1: One of the founders of this fom, Thomas Goodhead, told
Speaker 1: the ABC that they would keep pursuing Australian companies for
Speaker 1: environmental crimes.
Speaker 17: Do you plan to launch new claims against Australian corporations?
Speaker 18: Yes, I mean it's something that we've been studying a
Speaker 18: number of cases. I mean we were contacted, I was
Speaker 18: contacted a couple of years back by communities in Papua
Speaker 18: New Guinea. Until these companies stop committing environmental crimes, then
Speaker 18: there's a role for firms such as mine to be
Speaker 18: seeking to hold them to account.
Speaker 1: And the Australian Financial Review talks about the firm's explicit
Speaker 1: intent to target local multinational companies by investing their time
Speaker 1: in high return class actions, which can be worth hundreds
Speaker 1: of millions of dollars. The coalition says the laws around
Speaker 1: class actions need to be tightened to protect Australian businesses
Speaker 1: or to discuss im Joined now by Shadow Finance Minister
Speaker 1: Jane Hume, Jane, welcome to the program.
Speaker 2: Look, we've seen that this law.
Speaker 1: Firm is currently going head to head with BHP. Do
Speaker 1: you think this is a case that shouldn't be pursued.
Speaker 9: This is a problem that's been going on for a
Speaker 9: while in Australia, Sherry, and it's been going on because
Speaker 9: of loose regulations, light to touch regulations around class actions.
Speaker 9: But I'll say this out on the outs said, I'm
Speaker 9: no lawyer. I've never worked in a law firm, but
Speaker 9: I have worked at a fund management at a fund manager,
Speaker 9: and I know that fund manager will always go to
Speaker 9: where the money is. So, of course, these large overseas firms,
Speaker 9: backed by large overseas fund managers are now coming to
Speaker 9: Australia having identified that there is money to be made
Speaker 9: here through waging warfare against the ASX. They are essentially
Speaker 9: profiting from other people's misery, using our justice system, clogging
Speaker 9: up our courts, delivering very little for those that are
Speaker 9: parties to the class action, and more importantly, sending that
Speaker 9: money offshore overseas to big law firms and big fund managers.
Speaker 2: And they're being quite explicit about it.
Speaker 9: They're even boasting about it on social media, and that
Speaker 9: is unacceptable.
Speaker 2: So how is this a political issue? You know, what
Speaker 2: laws do you think need to be tighted?
Speaker 9: Well, the number of class action lawsuits in Australia now
Speaker 9: is out of control. There were fifty three new class
Speaker 9: action lawsuits just last year alone. That's a two hundred
Speaker 9: percent rise on ten years ago. Now, of those new
Speaker 9: class action lawsuits, a large number were run by just
Speaker 9: one firm, just one firm, and that was Marics Blackburn.
Speaker 9: Now Morris Blackburn is also responsible for six members of
Speaker 9: the ALP, Stephen Jones, Mark Drefus, the Attorney General Murray Watt,
Speaker 9: and three others that are not on the front bench.
Speaker 9: So you can see how this one firm that what
Speaker 9: do you mean they're responsible?
Speaker 2: What do you mean they're responsible for those labor politicians.
Speaker 9: Well, those labor politicians have worked for Marris Blackburn and
Speaker 9: before they entered parliament. And indeed Marics Blackburn has now
Speaker 9: delivered two new Fair Work commissioners just in the last
Speaker 9: twelve months alone, so you can see why this is
Speaker 9: a favored firm of the Labor Party. The Labor Party
Speaker 9: has no incentive whatsoever to reform this space. Moreover, Marics
Speaker 9: Blackburn has been responsible for around one and a half
Speaker 9: I think many will be two and a half nearly
Speaker 9: two and a half million dollars worth of donations to
Speaker 9: the Labor Party since two thousand and nineteen, So you
Speaker 9: can see this very cozy relationship between class action lawyers
Speaker 9: in Australia and.
Speaker 2: The Labor Party.
Speaker 9: The worst part of this, though, sharing is that these firms,
Speaker 9: whether they be overseas firms or Australian firms, are clogging
Speaker 9: up our court system. They're grinding our businesses to hold,
Speaker 9: They're costing shareholders, they're costing tax payers and essentially they're
Speaker 9: profiting out of our justice system.
Speaker 2: That's despicable.
Speaker 1: Now, Jane, just before you go, you made some comments
Speaker 1: relating to Josh Friedenberg in the seat of coup Yong.
Speaker 1: I spoke about this issue at the start of the
Speaker 1: program and said that, you know, I'm all for I
Speaker 1: support gender quotas, but the idea that an untested thirty
Speaker 1: one year old can't be asked to stand aside for
Speaker 1: the former Treasurer of Australia should he decide to contest
Speaker 1: his seat again, that's absurd.
Speaker 9: Well, Sherry, I think you've missed the point here, which
Speaker 9: is that that's a decision for the Liberal Party in Victoria.
Speaker 9: We desperately wanted Josh to come back. We begged him
Speaker 9: to come back, and he chose not to contest that
Speaker 9: preselection Emilia Hamer, who is a highly qualified.
Speaker 2: Young but he's open to change his mind.
Speaker 1: The preselections could reopen if there is a redistribution. The
Speaker 1: idea that he's been shut down and told that he
Speaker 1: can't even consider this because there's a female standing, isn't
Speaker 1: this pure identity politics.
Speaker 9: I don't think that that's what he's been told. I
Speaker 9: think that he has if he has been told, and
Speaker 9: I haven't spoken to Josh, I'm not.
Speaker 2: Saying be told privately.
Speaker 1: I'm saying that is the message that's emerged publicly by
Speaker 1: you and some others.
Speaker 9: I don't think that that was the message that I delivered, Sharry.
Speaker 9: In fact, I'm pretty sure it wasn't. The message that
Speaker 9: I delivered was that you can't reopen a pre selection
Speaker 9: based on boundaries that are draft. Now, when those boundaries
Speaker 9: become confirmed, well then that's something for the party to consider.
Speaker 1: But you'd be open to reopening the pre selections. You'd
Speaker 1: be opening having an untested thirty one year old stand
Speaker 1: aside and having the former treasurer re enter Parliament again.
Speaker 9: It's a decision for the Liberal Party. It's not a
Speaker 9: decision for Jane Hume. What I would say, though, is
Speaker 9: that Emilia Hamer contested that pre selection against three other people,
Speaker 9: one of whom was akc, one of whom was a surgeon,
Speaker 9: the other with whom was a fund manager. It was
Speaker 9: a hard fought pre selection and she won it fair
Speaker 9: and square. The idea that you would then step aside
Speaker 9: is a big deal. She's been campaigning for very successfully
Speaker 9: for a number of months now. She's doing a great job.
Speaker 9: So I think that there is another side to the coin.
Speaker 9: We would love Josh to come back. We've been saying
Speaker 9: that for my but he chose not to. He chose
Speaker 9: not to. Now, if there is changes to the boundaries
Speaker 9: that would be significant enough to reopen those preselections, that's
Speaker 9: a decision for the Victorian Party, but not until the
Speaker 9: boundaries are confirmed. In the past, draft boundaries have changed
Speaker 9: quite significantly to the or final boundaries have changed quite
Speaker 9: significantly to final to draft boundaries.
Speaker 1: All right, and still an open question the seat of Higgins.
Speaker 2: So you're saying it's still an open question of Higgins.
Speaker 1: Depending on the final redistribution boundaries, you might still reopen.
Speaker 2: The pre selection process are change and that.
Speaker 9: May well be a chance. But I don't know when
Speaker 9: those draft boundaries will be confirmed. It could be as
Speaker 9: late as October, and we could be facing an election
Speaker 9: as soon as November. It could be as soon as August,
Speaker 9: and frankly, if the economic outlook is as bad as
Speaker 9: it seems to be is we've discovered in estimates, it
Speaker 9: may well be sooner rather than later.
Speaker 2: We're out of time. Jane Hume, thank you. Very much
Speaker 2: for joining us.
Speaker 1: The Prime Minister has made clear though that he does
Speaker 1: intend to serve the full term, which is until next year.
Speaker 2: All right, coming up.
Speaker 1: Pennywong refuses to rule out recognizing a Palestinian state even
Speaker 1: if her Musk still has a governing role in Gaza.
Speaker 1: Plus the eye watering amount housing Australia has spent on
Speaker 1: consultants without building a single poem.
Speaker 2: Stay tuned, welcome back well.
Speaker 1: In an alarming development, Foreign Minister Pennywong would not unequivocally
Speaker 1: rule out Australia's support for Palestinian state even if Hermas
Speaker 1: retained a governance role in Gaza. The Foreign Minister said
Speaker 1: this insenate estimates.
Speaker 3: So when you say there is no role for Hermas
Speaker 3: in a future Palestinian state, that's what I mean. So
Speaker 3: there will be no recognition by Australia if Hermas remains
Speaker 3: in any position of governance.
Speaker 4: I'm not going to be drawn into.
Speaker 17: Questions of detail around negotiations around which we are not
Speaker 17: Party two.
Speaker 1: She also refused to say whether the decision to support
Speaker 1: the UN motion to recognize the Palestinian State had been
Speaker 1: through cabinet.
Speaker 2: Well, there's a reason she couldn't say that.
Speaker 1: It's because, as I exclusively revealed at the time, it
Speaker 1: was a captain's call by Anthony Albanesi. The PM made
Speaker 1: the final decision on that it should hardly come as
Speaker 1: a surprise, seeing as he has been a pro Palestinian
Speaker 1: activist since his very early days in Parliament. Here was
Speaker 1: Anthony Alberesi yelling into a megaphone during the Second into
Speaker 1: Fada when there were suicide bombings killing bus loads of
Speaker 1: innocent civilians in Israel at the time.
Speaker 13: Israel tru.
Speaker 1: Ing well, he was an MP at the time. This
Speaker 1: is a morally corrupt government led by a Prime Minister
Speaker 1: who supported Palestinians during the Second into Fada and a
Speaker 1: foreign minister who may support recognition of a Palestinian state
Speaker 1: even if Hamas is still in control. Let's bring in
Speaker 1: tonight's panel, Sky News host Kayler Bond and Sky News
Speaker 1: contributor Sam Crosby. Cayleb Pennywong is the worst foreign minister
Speaker 1: Australia has ever had.
Speaker 2: What do you think I mean?
Speaker 5: This is so weak, isn't it?
Speaker 19: You?
Speaker 9: Head?
Speaker 5: Last week, the Prime Minister on Josh Frodenberg's documentary on
Speaker 5: anti Semitism, saying all the right things, and if you
Speaker 5: had not heard a word that had come out of
Speaker 5: his mouth till that point, and you hadn't heard a
Speaker 5: word that had come out of Penny Wong's mouth until
Speaker 5: that point, you might have come away from it thinking, Gee,
Speaker 5: where's this Prime minister's gang ho on all this anti
Speaker 5: semitism stuff. He agrees that it's a real problem and
Speaker 5: something should be done about it, but we know that
Speaker 5: this government has flipped on this issue more than a
Speaker 5: kid working on the burger line at McDonald's. One minute,
Speaker 5: they're sucking up and saying, yes, yes, anti Semitism is
Speaker 5: a problem. Next minute you have us over at the
Speaker 5: UN agreeing that there should be a road to statehood
Speaker 5: for Palestine, and then the Foreign Minister saying this week,
Speaker 5: sure you know that there may be a way that
Speaker 5: there could be a Palestinian state recognized by Australia with
Speaker 5: Hamas still in power. The statement she made there that
Speaker 5: you showed that, oh, I'm not going to get bogged
Speaker 5: down in the detail of negotiations to which we are
Speaker 5: not party. That wasn't the question. The question was whether
Speaker 5: Australia would give recognition to a Palestinian state. If Hamas
Speaker 5: still had a life of power. The answer to that
Speaker 5: should take abou zero point five of a second to
Speaker 5: come up with, and it's no. We're all committed if
Speaker 5: we believe it, We're all committed to getting rid of
Speaker 5: Hamas for a two state solution. There is no two
Speaker 5: state solution with Hamas still in.
Speaker 2: Power, Well said, Caleb Well said. Now.
Speaker 1: In a breaking news story on The Australian, Simon Benson,
Speaker 1: the Political editor, reports that Housing Australia has spent thirty
Speaker 1: million dollars on consultants and executive salaries without building a
Speaker 1: single home. He writes at the agency task with delivering
Speaker 1: Anthony Albanese's ten billion dollar affordable housing fund for low
Speaker 1: income families paid more than twenty four million to external
Speaker 1: consultants and six million in annual executive salaries last year
Speaker 1: despite not having yet delivered a single completed house under
Speaker 1: the scheme. Sam Crosby, you work with homeless people. There
Speaker 1: is a housing prices. This is an outrage.
Speaker 19: It's hard to defend, Shari, It's hard to defend. And
Speaker 19: I say that, yes, obviously I work at Buddy's and yes,
Speaker 19: obviously I'm the husband of the new South Wales Housing Minister.
Speaker 19: So I'm a little bit conflicted here, but I think
Speaker 19: it's hard for any federal government to defend setting up
Speaker 19: a thirty million dollar bureaucracy, the vast majority of which
Speaker 19: is spent with external consultants. You know, each of the
Speaker 19: states have their own housing bodies already set up, already
Speaker 19: ready to go, already delivering thousands of units and dwellings
Speaker 19: each year and homes each year. So I just don't
Speaker 19: know why you wouldn't have a very small team of
Speaker 19: economists dividing up the money according to whatever the formula
Speaker 19: is and getting the money out the door into the community.
Speaker 2: Sam.
Speaker 1: I went to the city in Sydney the other weekend
Speaker 1: and I saw a homeless man sitting on against a building.
Speaker 1: You had a little girl, maybe about six, sitting on
Speaker 1: his lap.
Speaker 2: It was absolutely devastating.
Speaker 1: How common is this that children are now out of housing?
Speaker 19: Look, thankfully, not that common at all. There are many,
Speaker 19: many programs that exist to ensure that no one has
Speaker 19: to be homeless for any time. There are phone numbers
Speaker 19: that you can call state government phone numbers. There are
Speaker 19: housing providers like Saint Vincentabule that will ensure anyone, especially children,
Speaker 19: especially children can get a house in a bed tonight.
Speaker 19: If you're out you can call you know and get
Speaker 19: seen too.
Speaker 2: Yeah, all right, Caleb. I'm sorry we only got to
Speaker 2: you once tonight.
Speaker 1: Your comment was worth its weight in gold, though, and
Speaker 1: Caleb will see you back at ten o'clock tonight. Sam
Speaker 1: Crosby Caleb on, thank you both very much for your time.
Speaker 1: Now after the break, Just Center will join me on
Speaker 1: why she says Australia needs major reform. Stay tuned, Just
Speaker 1: Enterprice Live, welcome back. Well, let's bring in now Shadow
Speaker 1: Indigenous Australians, miniesot Just Enterprise, who is leading call for.
Speaker 2: Reform of Native title. Great to see you. What needs
Speaker 2: to change here?
Speaker 17: Look in terms of Native title, while it was well
Speaker 17: intended and it's all very nice to be able to
Speaker 17: have access to your land as a traditional owner to
Speaker 17: fish and hunt, it was very narrow in terms of
Speaker 17: what else Indigenous Australians could do so ideas such as
Speaker 17: economic development, economic independence, the opportunity to generate wealth from
Speaker 17: one's own land, it was very limited scope to be
Speaker 17: able to do that to begin with, and I think
Speaker 17: it's why we have some of our most marginalized Indigenous
Speaker 17: Australians exist in you know, in remote places like the
Speaker 17: Northern Territory. So I truly believe when inform when it
Speaker 17: comes to Native title and in terms of the Northern Territory,
Speaker 17: the Land Rights Act is also is requiring reform as
Speaker 17: well to provide these opportunities that are really needed for
Speaker 17: many of our most marginalized.
Speaker 1: Have you started this conversation yet with Linda Bernie, your
Speaker 1: counterpart in the Albanezy government.
Speaker 17: Well, look, I've had these conversations certainly with my counterparts
Speaker 17: within the Senate, with Melanderry McCarthy. I've made it very
Speaker 17: known publicly that these are issues, of course that I
Speaker 17: think require reform. I've always said that traditional owners, you know,
Speaker 17: well the land rich and dirt poor and need to
Speaker 17: be able to be job creators in their own right
Speaker 17: on country instead of continually but being dependent on well
Speaker 17: found on government to go out and create supposed jobs
Speaker 17: out in communities, but you know, effectively land locked in
Speaker 17: how we can and cannot use our land.
Speaker 1: And do you think the government is open to having
Speaker 1: this conversation and looking at reforms working with you to
Speaker 1: do so.
Speaker 17: Look, I welcome the fact that the government has decided
Speaker 17: to put five hundred thousand dollars toward reviewing native title itself.
Speaker 17: I would happily work with the government toward that, and
Speaker 17: I would also encourage them to take a really good
Speaker 17: look at the Land Rights Act within the Northern Territory
Speaker 17: as well. I know that many traditional owners across the
Speaker 17: country feel it's time that we looked at how native
Speaker 17: title is or isn't working to its best, to its
Speaker 17: best for the opportunities for traditional owners.
Speaker 1: An important conversation to have Disne Enterprise. Always love having
Speaker 1: you on the show. Thank you for your time, and
Speaker 1: I reckon Arry would probably pick you as his Prime minister.
Speaker 2: And here's poor here's Paul Murray.
Speaker 4: Now m