Speaker 1: From Schwartz Media. I'm Daniel James. This is seven AM.
Speaker 1: When Donald Trump ordered strikes on Iranian nucleosides, the world
Speaker 1: watched for a response, but in Australia there was silence.
Speaker 1: It took a day before the Prime Minister or Foreign
Speaker 1: Minister addressed the media. When they did, they backed the
Speaker 1: US cautiously while calling for khm for Anthony Alberanezi wants
Speaker 1: a vocal opponent of the Iraq war. His position shows
Speaker 1: how far labor has shifted on foreign policy and how
Speaker 1: little pushed back there is within his own party. But
Speaker 1: while Labor falls in line, the coalition are thrashing their
Speaker 1: way to a new identity. Today calumnists for the Monthly
Speaker 1: and Inside Story Karen Middleton on war politics and the
Speaker 1: calculations driving both major parties. It's Friday, June twenty seven. Karen,
Speaker 1: thanks for joining us. On Sunday, Donald Trump announced that
Speaker 1: the US had bombed three nuclear sites in Iran. This
Speaker 1: was a significant moment, a dramatic escalation in the war
Speaker 1: in the Middle East, and yet we didn't actually hear
Speaker 1: directly from our government about this until the following day.
Speaker 2: What was that the world has long agreed that Iran
Speaker 2: cannot be allowed to get a nuclear weapon and we
Speaker 2: support action to prevent that.
Speaker 3: That is what this is. Well, it's hard to know
Speaker 3: exactly because the government isn't really willing to say, but
Speaker 3: what we have gleaned from what the government said on
Speaker 3: Monday was that it seems that they weren't alerted to
Speaker 3: this and that that may have been part of the
Speaker 3: reason that they didn't want to come out to definitively
Speaker 3: on the Sunday until they fully understood what was going on.
Speaker 3: Just a follow up, so.
Speaker 4: It was your government's leaved prior to the at table.
Speaker 2: This is unilateral action taken by the United States.
Speaker 1: PM Human Breath, This.
Speaker 2: Was unilateral action taken by the United States.
Speaker 3: They issued a written statement that was just attributed to
Speaker 3: a government spokesperson. So that was interesting in itself on
Speaker 3: the Sunday because they didn't even attribute it to a
Speaker 3: spokesperson for the Prime Minister or the Defense Minister, and
Speaker 3: that had noted that Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile program
Speaker 3: had been a threat to international peace and security, noted
Speaker 3: the US President's statement that now is the time for peace,
Speaker 3: called the security situation in the region highly volatile and
Speaker 3: called for de escalation, dialogue and diplomacy.
Speaker 2: Had Iran complied with the very reasonable requests that were made,
Speaker 2: including by the IAEA, then circumstances would have been different.
Speaker 3: It was seen very much as not being a specific
Speaker 3: endorsement of the app and I think the only answer
Speaker 3: I can give to that question is that they really
Speaker 3: weren't kept in the loop and they wanted to make
Speaker 3: sure they had all the information before they spoke out
Speaker 3: on Monday.
Speaker 1: There have been many in the security community who have
Speaker 1: alleged that Trump breaks the international law in ordering these
Speaker 1: strokes on Iran, and yet the governments decided to intensively
Speaker 1: support those strokes. If you put this in the context
Speaker 1: of Albany's's political history he stands on the Iraq War,
Speaker 1: for example, how do you think at all squares well?
Speaker 3: He certainly was a strong opponent of Australia's engagement in
Speaker 3: the war in Iraq.
Speaker 5: In two thousand and three.
Speaker 3: He gave a speech in the Parliament on the twentieth
Speaker 3: of March two thousand and three opposing that engagement.
Speaker 5: He called it an unjust war.
Speaker 3: He said we shouldn't be revisiting crusades, because that's how
Speaker 3: this war was being perceived in the international community, was
Speaker 3: worried about Australia's reputation, and he noted that it had
Speaker 3: the conflict of the invasion, had no UN backing. So
Speaker 3: it was a pretty strong speech at the time, and
Speaker 3: he particularly singled out the fact that there was a
Speaker 3: preemptive strike. He said, Iraq doesn't represent a threat to Australia.
Speaker 3: We are with this decision supporting a preemptive strike, which
Speaker 3: changes forever the way that international politics works, and he
Speaker 3: referred to it as an outrage that Australia should not
Speaker 3: be part of. So there was no mincing words back then.
Speaker 3: Now people change their views over time. He's now the
Speaker 3: Prime Minister, which puts him in a completely different position
Speaker 3: and this is a different conflict, some would argue, but
Speaker 3: there are parallels being drawn to that situation in Iraq
Speaker 3: in terms of the intelligence, whether in fact there was
Speaker 3: an imminent threat to Israel and whether it was justified
Speaker 3: onto international law on that basis.
Speaker 1: Are there people inside the Federal Labor Party who would
Speaker 1: be pushing back against Albani's he's approaching this moment.
Speaker 3: Well, yes, there are certainly people on the parties left,
Speaker 3: certainly outside the Parliamentary Party.
Speaker 5: That are pushing back.
Speaker 3: We've heard the lights of Doub Cameron, who's a former
Speaker 3: left wing Labor senator. He has been critical of the
Speaker 3: government's willingness to endorse the US stripe.
Speaker 5: And we've also heard from Ed Hughestt.
Speaker 3: He is well known as a prominent Muslim in the
Speaker 3: federal government and he has spoken out with concerns, particularly
Speaker 3: about Israel's strike against Iran and whether that was appropriate
Speaker 3: and justifiable, and then the subsequent role of.
Speaker 5: The United States.
Speaker 3: So there are voices both inside the government and inside
Speaker 3: the Labor Party more broadly that are starting to.
Speaker 5: Caution against this.
Speaker 3: But it's also important to remember that Anthony Albinezi, after
Speaker 3: that election victory in May, has got huge authority in
Speaker 3: the Labor Party now, so he is very much calling
Speaker 3: the shots in terms of policy positions.
Speaker 1: After the break Susan Lee's energy crisis.
Speaker 4: Today will be my first address as federal leader of
Speaker 4: the Liberal Party to the National Press Club, and it
Speaker 4: will not be my last.
Speaker 1: Karen. This week, the opposition leader Susan Lee gave her
Speaker 1: first address to the Press Club as leader of the coalition.
Speaker 1: What sort of tone did she strike?
Speaker 2: Well?
Speaker 3: She made it very clear that she's a different leader
Speaker 3: to Peter Dutton, and that was the underlying message of
Speaker 3: the whole speech.
Speaker 5: Really, I'm not Peter Dutton.
Speaker 3: This is a new Liberal leadership and I have different priorities.
Speaker 3: She for example, started with an acknowledgment of traditional owners
Speaker 3: when she spoke at the National Press Club, effectively making
Speaker 3: a statement that she doesn't agree with the position that
Speaker 3: was taken before.
Speaker 4: As leader of the federal Liberal Party, I will always
Speaker 4: be honest, upfront with the Australian people. So let's be
Speaker 4: honest and upfront about last month's election. We didn't just lose,
Speaker 4: we got smashed, totally smashed.
Speaker 3: She was very honest about what happened to the Liberal
Speaker 3: Party at the election.
Speaker 5: She talked about respect for the community.
Speaker 3: Reflecting it and representing it in a more modern way.
Speaker 4: What we as the Liberal Party presented to the Australian
Speaker 4: people was comprehensively rejected.
Speaker 3: And she particularly singled out women and the collision's failure
Speaker 3: to appeal to female voters.
Speaker 5: And she has advocated for a greater number.
Speaker 3: Of female Liberal candidates, particularly in winnable seats, even if
Speaker 3: that involves quotas. But she made the point that it's
Speaker 3: the state divisions in the Liberal Party, because of the
Speaker 3: way it is structured, that have the power to do that.
Speaker 4: The Liberal Party operates as a federated model, meaning that
Speaker 4: each state division determines its own pre selection rules. If
Speaker 4: some state divisions choose to implement quotas.
Speaker 5: That's fine.
Speaker 4: If others don't, that's also fine. But what is not
Speaker 4: fine is not having enough women.
Speaker 3: So she's putting the onus on the state divisions to
Speaker 3: make a choice about that. She also spoke about women
Speaker 3: and children in the context of family violence and violence
Speaker 3: against women.
Speaker 5: More broadly and interestingly, she.
Speaker 3: Raised the issue of coercive control, and she suggested she
Speaker 3: had some experience of that herself.
Speaker 4: I understand the pain that comes with coercion and control
Speaker 4: because I have felt that pain too. I understand what
Speaker 4: it's like when you blame yourself for the actions of others,
Speaker 4: because I have blamed myself too.
Speaker 3: But when she was actually asked about that during the
Speaker 3: question period at the press club, she didn't want to
Speaker 3: say any more about it, and she was introducing herself
Speaker 3: to the public as leader and her own personal history,
Speaker 3: her background, which is a very interesting background, and I
Speaker 3: think we'll hear a lot more about that, because people
Speaker 3: don't really know her very well.
Speaker 1: And her speech came ahead of the Liberal Party Room,
Speaker 1: Shadow Ministry and Shadow Cabinet meeting to discuss the party's
Speaker 1: reviews that have been established to try and grapple with
Speaker 1: the election loss. What do we know about the scope
Speaker 1: of these reviews and how the party is expecting to
Speaker 1: use them to shape their future direction.
Speaker 5: Well, we've got two reviews now.
Speaker 3: She had previously announced what is a standard procedure really
Speaker 3: after an election, which was a sort of rapid review
Speaker 3: of what happened, and that will be conducted by former
Speaker 3: Senator Nick Minshein and New South Wales Liberal minister and
Speaker 3: in fact journalist prue Gaward. So they will produce a
Speaker 3: report for the party in reasonably quick time, which she
Speaker 3: says will be made public about what happened and what
Speaker 3: needs to change.
Speaker 5: And then there'll be a second review which she's it's
Speaker 5: going to look.
Speaker 3: More deeply at some of the challenges facing the Liberal
Speaker 3: Party along the lines. I think of the kind of
Speaker 3: thing she was raising about the need to appeal to
Speaker 3: modern Australia, so its capabilities with technology, it's understanding of
Speaker 3: the needs and wants of sections of the community that
Speaker 3: perhaps if it's become disconnected from So that's a deeper
Speaker 3: and wider review and will that will take longer and
Speaker 3: we'll be interested to hear what that finds and what
Speaker 3: that means for the future direction of the Liberal Party.
Speaker 1: So perhaps the biggest sticking point though for the coalition
Speaker 1: as it tries to dust itself off, is the question
Speaker 1: of energy policy. We know nuclear policy hurt the Liberal
Speaker 1: Party at the last election in yet it was also
Speaker 1: a major issue in the recent dissolution of the coalition
Speaker 1: between the Nationals and the Liberals. So were they up
Speaker 1: to when it comes to resolving their approach to energy.
Speaker 3: Well, this is the really big challenge in a policy
Speaker 3: sense for the Liberal Party and the whole coalition. Obviously,
Speaker 3: through the election period they were advocating for nuclear energy
Speaker 3: and that policy had been devised really as a mechanism
Speaker 3: to get the Nationals to agree to a target of
Speaker 3: net zero emissions by twenty fifty. The Nationals were very
Speaker 3: reluctant to agree to that because of what they feared
Speaker 3: was the impact on the fossil fuel industry. They agreed,
Speaker 3: but they got their nuclear policy sort of in place,
Speaker 3: and that allowed the coalition to argue that it was
Speaker 3: going to extend the use of fossil fuels, but by
Speaker 3: twenty fifty or twenty forty nine they could have nuclear
Speaker 3: power in place and then emissions would immediately go to zero.
Speaker 3: Of course, that wasn't acknowledging that the net zero target
Speaker 3: is about the process. It's about phasing out fossil fuels
Speaker 3: starting now.
Speaker 5: So that is still a live debate.
Speaker 3: We know that there are some prominent people in the
Speaker 3: Nationals in particular, and a number in the Liberal Party
Speaker 3: who don't support.
Speaker 5: Net zero and want to jettison that policy.
Speaker 3: Susan Lee has set up a working group, which she
Speaker 3: spoke about at the Press Club. Interestingly, it's looking at
Speaker 3: what she described as energy and emissions reduction, So she
Speaker 3: is putting there on the table that emission's reduction has
Speaker 3: to be part of the policy discussion.
Speaker 5: They will report to herself.
Speaker 3: And to the National's leader, David little Proud, So that's
Speaker 3: the immediate mechanism she will use to start this difficult
Speaker 3: conversation in the party about where its policy should go
Speaker 3: and how to manage the challenge of climate change.
Speaker 1: A lazy question. The finished off with Karen, where do
Speaker 1: you think coalition will land on that issue?
Speaker 5: That is an excellent question.
Speaker 3: I think it depends really how much authority Susan Lee retains.
Speaker 3: We know she won the leadership very narrowly against Angus Taylor,
Speaker 3: who's a more conservative Liberal from New South Wales. She's
Speaker 3: lost a couple of her own votes in the party room.
Speaker 3: With the changeover of the Senate that occurs on July one,
Speaker 3: she's got not much of a majority. Now.
Speaker 5: Nobody is saying they want to revisit the.
Speaker 3: Leadership vote, but that is going to be in her
Speaker 3: mind as she deals with this thorny.
Speaker 5: Issue right up front.
Speaker 3: She clearly wants to embrace an energy policy that involves
Speaker 3: emissions reduction, but she needs to make sure she has
Speaker 3: the whole breadth of the party and indeed the Coalition
Speaker 3: behind her.
Speaker 5: It wasn't something that was easy to resolve in.
Speaker 3: The last parliament and I don't reckon it's going to
Speaker 3: be easy for her this time.
Speaker 5: So I wish her the very best of love.
Speaker 1: Karen, always great to speak with you. Thank you for
Speaker 1: your time.
Speaker 5: Thanks Daniel.
Speaker 1: Also in the news today, the mother of murdered Nunga
Speaker 1: yamage boy Cassius Turvey has told the Western Australian Supreme
Speaker 1: Court that the killing has torn at the fabric or society.
Speaker 1: Two men aged twenty four and twenty nine have been
Speaker 1: convicted of Cassius Turvey's murder, with a third found guilty
Speaker 1: of manslaughter after arming themselves with metal poles and heading
Speaker 1: out to go quote hunting for kids. During the two
Speaker 1: day sentencing, Michelle Turvey also said the community now lives
Speaker 1: in fear and uncertainty and that if anyone thinks their
Speaker 1: actions were not racially motivated, many Austrains would be left
Speaker 1: scratching their heads. And senior Liberal Front bencher Angus Taylor
Speaker 1: has declared he isn't in favor of gender quotas, saying
Speaker 1: he doesn't think they're necessary. It follows Opposition leader Susan Lee,
Speaker 1: who on Wednesday described herself as quote a xalat when
Speaker 1: it comes to recruiting women to the party, but agnostic
Speaker 1: when it came to quotas. Women make up less than
Speaker 1: thirty percent of the Liberal Party compared to fifty six
Speaker 1: percent of the Labor Party, who introduced a gender quota
Speaker 1: three decades ago. Seven AM's Daily show from Schwartz Media
Speaker 1: in the Saturday paper. Is made by Attigus Base, Shane Anderson,
Speaker 1: Chris Danngate, Eric Jensen, Ruby Jones, Sarah mcvee, Travis Evans,
Speaker 1: zoltanfet Joe and Me, Daniel James. Our theme music is
Speaker 1: by Ned Beckley and Josh Hogan of Envelope Audio. I's
Speaker 1: been seven AM for this week. Thanks for listening and
Speaker 1: have a great weekend.