Speaker 1: Live on Sky News.
Speaker 2: This is Sharry Good Evening. The Coalition doesn't rule out
Speaker 2: backing Labour's sup attacks. Deputy Liberal leader Ted O'Brian is
Speaker 2: on the show tonight. He also faces my questions about
Speaker 2: dumping or demoting for talented women. This is an exclusive
Speaker 2: interview and it's coming up. The Trump administration demands Australia
Speaker 2: lift its game on defense, but alban Easy says he won't.
Speaker 2: Joe Hudebrand and Steve Price shortly and to the horrific
Speaker 2: terror attack in America. This towards a peaceful demonstration of
Speaker 2: the hostages, supporting the hostages. This shows the reality of
Speaker 2: globalizing the interfighter. I've got more to say about that
Speaker 2: in a minute, and Ray Hadley joins me. He's going
Speaker 2: to fire up at Chris Bowen's latest ridiculous plan green tariffs,
Speaker 2: but first tonight, Albinizi is refusing to commit to boosting
Speaker 2: Australia's defense spending, despite an urgent call from American Defense
Speaker 2: Secretary Pete Hegseath. The Trump administration says Australia needs to
Speaker 2: spend an extra forty billion dollars a year on the military.
Speaker 2: This would take our defense spend to three and a
Speaker 2: half percent of GDP. Now Hegseth delivered this message to
Speaker 2: Defense Minister Richard Miles directly in Singapore over the weekend,
Speaker 2: and he gave these pointed remarks in his speech to
Speaker 2: the Shangri La Dialogue.
Speaker 3: NATO members are pledging to spend five percent of their
Speaker 3: GDP on defense, even Germany, so it doesn't make sense
Speaker 3: for countries in Europe to do that while key allies
Speaker 3: in Asia spend less on defense in the face of
Speaker 3: an even more formidable threat.
Speaker 2: Now Miles indicated he was willing to discuss this, but
Speaker 2: Albanezy has ruled it out.
Speaker 4: What we'll do is we'll determine now defense policy, and
Speaker 4: we've invested just across the forward to an additional ten
Speaker 4: billion dollars in defense. What we'll do is continue to
Speaker 4: provide for investing in our capability but also investing in
Speaker 4: our relationships in the region.
Speaker 2: And his position is despite other leaders globally increasing defense spending,
Speaker 2: Kirstarmer raised his military budget to two and a half
Speaker 2: percent of GDP while cutting back on foreign aid in
Speaker 2: order to do so, and that was before he met
Speaker 2: with Trump in February, and kirs Starmer says his ambition
Speaker 2: is to reach three percent in a second term. Now,
Speaker 2: as you'll recall, the Coalition had pledged an increase of
Speaker 2: defense spending to two and a half percent of GDP
Speaker 2: by the end of the decade, with an aspirational goal
Speaker 2: of three percent over ten years, and Labour's current spend
Speaker 2: is just two percent of GDP now. Even before the administration,
Speaker 2: former defense and national security officials including so Angus Houston,
Speaker 2: Dennis Richardson, Michael Pizzullo, and Kim Beasley, had all called
Speaker 2: for defense spending to increase to at least three percent
Speaker 2: of our GDP, and so Albanezi is now under pressure,
Speaker 2: not just from the Trump administration, over our investment in
Speaker 2: defense now. To be fair, an immediate jump to three
Speaker 2: and a half percent right away would be difficult, would
Speaker 2: be excessive, especially given our depleted budget position. We're heading
Speaker 2: towards a trillion dollars in debt thanks to Labour's reckless
Speaker 2: decision to pay hex debt in order to buy off
Speaker 2: younger voters. But it's not so much a question about
Speaker 2: the size of the spending, but what defense is spending
Speaker 2: the money on. That's an equally crucial issue now. Defense
Speaker 2: analyst Peter Jennings suggests that we need to grow the
Speaker 2: size of the army, the air Force, in the Navy.
Speaker 2: He says, we also need to buy a small fleet
Speaker 2: of conventionally powered submarines as an interim stop gap, and
Speaker 2: we have to secure our missile and air defense for
Speaker 2: our nation. And it's not only heg Seth and the
Speaker 2: Trump administration that's concerned about our military capabilities. You'll recall
Speaker 2: the Australian Strategic Policy Institute's report just last week expressed
Speaker 2: grave concerns about under investment our ability to keep pace
Speaker 2: with future challenges, and it spoke of insufficient munitions and
Speaker 2: missile and defense systems. It said we had an underdeveloped
Speaker 2: domestic weapons manufacturing system.
Speaker 5: We need to be looking at what we can produce locally.
Speaker 5: We need to be looking at what the rest of
Speaker 5: the world has been doing since Russia's war on Ukraine,
Speaker 5: particularly in the area of cheaper, mass produced capabilities like
Speaker 5: drones encounter drones. We have a number of companies in
Speaker 5: Australia that have the ability to produce these capabilities. They
Speaker 5: are cheaper, they can be mass produced, and they're able
Speaker 5: to be done more quickly.
Speaker 2: And ass to be highlighted that for the cost of
Speaker 2: a single Virginia class submarine, Australia could produce or could procure,
Speaker 2: over twenty four thousand Ukrainian made maritime strike drones and
Speaker 2: they have a range of over one thousand kilometers. It's
Speaker 2: precisely this sort of equipment that's so important for modern warfare.
Speaker 2: And you only have to look at what Ukraine was
Speaker 2: able to achieve with similar drone equipment overnight, those Ukrainian
Speaker 2: drones hitting more than forty Russian nuclear capable long range bombers.
Speaker 2: That single attack destroyed, it said, thirty four percent of
Speaker 2: Russia's fleet of air missile carriers. And the success of
Speaker 2: the attack came after Russia launched an air assault in
Speaker 2: Ukraine last week, and we know that it's preparing for
Speaker 2: a summer on slaught. Now that's the same sort of
Speaker 2: attack Israel should also be launching, by the way, on
Speaker 2: Iran's nuclear capabilities. Now, President Zelenski praised the strike. He
Speaker 2: said it was Ukraine's longest range operation so far, and
Speaker 2: let's hope we see more of it because Ukraine clearly
Speaker 2: can't rely on the United States to always come to
Speaker 2: its defense. And now to the devastating terror attack on
Speaker 2: a rally to free Israeli hostages in Colorado. This was
Speaker 2: a peaceful Sunday afternoon walk to show solidarity with the
Speaker 2: hostages and their families. And there are still fifty eight
Speaker 2: hostages held captive by Hamas a terror organization after more
Speaker 2: than six hundred days. Now that shouldn't be controversial, of course,
Speaker 2: and Israelis kidnapped need to be freed. Yet an activist
Speaker 2: yelling end Zionists and free Palestine launched what the FBI
Speaker 2: has described as a terror attack on this peaceful protest
Speaker 2: that included many elderly people. Here's how it unfolded. The
Speaker 2: man firebombed the crowd of innocent Americans using molotov cocktails
Speaker 2: and flamethrowers. People were set a light. It was mayhem he.
Speaker 6: On.
Speaker 2: Now. Six people were injured in this attack, but it's
Speaker 2: the ages that get me. They were sixty seven to
Speaker 2: eighty eight years old. The elderly eighty eight one is
Speaker 2: in a critical condition. It's also been reported that children,
Speaker 2: some children suffered burns. Again, these are Americans. Nine one
Speaker 2: one was flooded with emergency calls around one twenty six
Speaker 2: pm and the suspect is an activist, Mohammad Solomon. He's
Speaker 2: forty five. He was arrested by police at the scene.
Speaker 2: Now it's been reported, although not confirmed, that he was
Speaker 2: an illegal immigrant who entered the US from Egypt during
Speaker 2: the Biden administration. And Fox News says he overstayed his
Speaker 2: visa and we.
Speaker 7: Can break to our viewers now per three senior DHS
Speaker 7: and I sources to Fox according to our colleague Bill
Speaker 7: Malusian doing some great work, that he is an Egyptian
Speaker 7: national who is in the US illegally because of a
Speaker 7: visa overstay, who came during the Biden administration.
Speaker 2: Now, the FBI is taking this very seriously. They had
Speaker 2: this to say.
Speaker 8: This attack happened at a regularly scheduled weekly peaceful event.
Speaker 8: Witnesses are reporting that the subject used a makeshift flamethrower
Speaker 8: and threw an incendiary device into the crowd. The suspect
Speaker 8: was heard to yell free Palestine during the attack.
Speaker 2: An organizer of the event, Gene Unger, told The Wall
Speaker 2: Street Journal that several members in her group were injured,
Speaker 2: including one who's a Holocaust survivor. She said, the next
Speaker 2: thing I saw was big flames from behind me. There
Speaker 2: was a woman on fire and people rushing to try
Speaker 2: and help her, and other people had flames on their legs.
Speaker 2: And all this just a week and a half after
Speaker 2: Sarah Milgram and Uron Lashinsky were murdered in Washington by
Speaker 2: a man also yelling Free Palestine. And this is the
Speaker 2: face of the Free Palestine movement, vandalizing synagogues, murdering Jews
Speaker 2: outside a Holocaust museum, and burning the elderly during a
Speaker 2: peaceful walk. Jewish advocate Hen Mazi got it right when
Speaker 2: he said that this free Palestine movement is nothing more
Speaker 2: than a violent threat to Jews. He wrote on social media.
Speaker 2: You can't claim to be nonviolent and pursue the annihilation
Speaker 2: of an entire country and its people. You can't claim
Speaker 2: to be nonviolent and pursue ethnic cleansing of Jews. And
Speaker 2: you can't claim to be nonviolent and attack people around
Speaker 2: the world in the name of Palestine. And of course
Speaker 2: he's right. Enablers say the current anti Semitism is only
Speaker 2: because of Israel's actions over the past twenty months, but
Speaker 2: don't forget that this global mass protest movement began immediately
Speaker 2: after October seventh, before Israel had acted at all. It
Speaker 2: was kickstarted by a massacre of Jews, the barbaric murder
Speaker 2: of entire families as they begged for their lives in
Speaker 2: safe rooms wearing pajamas, and that massacre was endorsed by
Speaker 2: tens of thousands around the world who took to the
Speaker 2: streets week in, week out from day dot Now, in
Speaker 2: my view, this is the playbook that we're experiencing. Criticize
Speaker 2: Israel with false claims of war crimes, famine, and deliberately
Speaker 2: targeting civilians, turn Israel into the global oppressor, dehumanize Israeli's
Speaker 2: call for an uprising that begins as a protest movement
Speaker 2: and then morphs into a global into fada. Justify violence
Speaker 2: against those who support Israel, against Zionists, against all Jews.
Speaker 2: This is what we're experiencing now. This is the current
Speaker 2: wave of anti Semitism. It's inextricably tied with anti Zionism.
Speaker 2: AJACK executive director Colin Rubinstein said that Colorado and events
Speaker 2: like it show the inevitable link between hatefield rhetoric and
Speaker 2: hatefield violence erupting in our university's streets and media. The
Speaker 2: Colorado attacker wanted to kill Zionists. Here in Australia, hatefield
Speaker 2: rhetoric against Zionists is becoming normalized. And it's true that
Speaker 2: the terror attacks, the violence, even the murder of Jews
Speaker 2: in America and other Western countries are being excused by
Speaker 2: left wing activists. The Australian reported how the assassination of
Speaker 2: two Israeli diplomats outside a Jewish museum in Washington has
Speaker 2: been met with a torrent of celebratory and incendiary responses
Speaker 2: from high profile Australian pro Palestinian activists. Because this is
Speaker 2: the reality of globalizing the intero Fata, we're seeing violence
Speaker 2: against Jews excused. The world, I'm sorry to say, is
Speaker 2: in a dark place right now. The left is morally bankrupt.
Speaker 2: I'm heartbroken and angry about it. I'm trying not to
Speaker 2: feel despair for the future because the new wave of
Speaker 2: anti Semitism is excused as a political protest movement, as
Speaker 2: free speech, but it's no different. It's the same murder
Speaker 2: of Jews, the same violence towards Jews that we've seen
Speaker 2: in the past. The left can't pretend this is different.
Speaker 2: They can't turn violence into justifiable acts on account of
Speaker 2: it being anti Zionism and supposedly fashionable. This is anti
Speaker 2: Semitism and we can't let them get away with it.
Speaker 2: I'll come back to that topic a bit later with
Speaker 2: Ray Hadley, but now let's bring in our panel as
Speaker 2: always in a Monday Sky News host Steve Price and
Speaker 2: Joe Hildebrand. How are you to you both, Good to
Speaker 2: see you both. I want to get back to the
Speaker 2: defense spending issue. This is clearly emerging as a conflict
Speaker 2: between the Trump administration and the Albanezy government. Steve Richard
Speaker 2: Miles seemed to be open to the idea of increasing
Speaker 2: our defense spending, but the Prime Minister shut that down.
Speaker 2: Was he right to do so?
Speaker 9: Well, I think Richard Miles was in a very difficult position.
Speaker 9: He was in Singapore and he's looking Pete Hesketh I
Speaker 9: to eye and Heskeer says, look, the European countries are
Speaker 9: all going to five percent, as you pointed out, Shari,
Speaker 9: that's their ambition anyway, but Australia is sitting in at
Speaker 9: around two maybe get to two point three. Well, he's
Speaker 9: had to look at Hesketh and go, okay, well, you know,
Speaker 9: maybe we should will about it, and you know, we'll
Speaker 9: try and get there. I mean, it's very different when
Speaker 9: your eyeballing the person who is making the comments to you.
Speaker 9: And this is where it's going to be a really
Speaker 9: interesting test for Joe's made Anthony Albanisi when he's sitting
Speaker 9: face to face with Donald Trump and Donald Trump says,
Speaker 9: hang on, Pete Heskett told you you have to get
Speaker 9: to two point five or three point five whatever the
Speaker 9: figure might end up being. What is Anthony Albaniz he
Speaker 9: going to say to Donald Trump? Well, he's not going
Speaker 9: to say what he said publicly in Australia today, and he,
Speaker 9: rather foolishly, I think, believes that somehow Donald Trump won't
Speaker 9: find that out.
Speaker 2: No exactly. I mean we've all got the Internet, that's
Speaker 2: for sure. Donald Trump certainly has the Internet at his finger.
Speaker 10: It does. It's very proficient at it, Joe.
Speaker 2: The issue is that it's not only the size of
Speaker 2: the spending, because billions have been wasted on old submarine
Speaker 2: contracts and repaying the French, but it's also where we're
Speaker 2: directing us spent to and this needs to be better
Speaker 2: thought out, doesn't it.
Speaker 11: Yeah, I think the biggest problem with Australia's defense capability
Speaker 11: it's obviously built around submarines because we're an ireland nation,
Speaker 11: we're an island continent. And there's been basically three different
Speaker 11: positions on submarines in as many terms of office. So
Speaker 11: you had Tony Abbott going with Japanese submarines, then that
Speaker 11: got scraped, Malcolm Turnba went with French submarines that got scrapped,
Speaker 11: and then we had Scott Morrison going with aucust submarines,
Speaker 11: which I think are fantastic by the way, but it
Speaker 11: means every time you change horses, you're adding another you know,
Speaker 11: five ten whatever years to the actual time when it
Speaker 11: gets rolled out to the point where as you said,
Speaker 11: people are saying now we need indroim submarines while we
Speaker 11: wait for the real submarines to come. But the issue here,
Speaker 11: I think Anti Albaneze has said that Australia will determine
Speaker 11: how much it spends on defense, not America, and I.
Speaker 10: Think that is absolutely right. I think it is very unusual.
Speaker 11: I know Trump does things in very different ways and
Speaker 11: there's a new normal, but normally one country doesn't tell
Speaker 11: another country what to do. Normally, these are discussions you
Speaker 11: would have behind closed doors at events like the G
Speaker 11: seven that he is going to meet Trump at and
Speaker 11: of course they're going to talk about defense spending, and
Speaker 11: Alba will also be talking about Donald Trump jacking up
Speaker 11: tariffs on Australian steel at the same time, just.
Speaker 2: To point out, because I think that's a fair enough
Speaker 2: point that America can't make demands of Australian policy and spending,
Speaker 2: but Australia is relying on America to come to our
Speaker 2: aid in the event of some sort of military conflict.
Speaker 2: So you know, there is an argument for America to say, well,
Speaker 2: you guys have to pull your weight. You can't just
Speaker 2: rely on us, and the demands of the United States
Speaker 2: to step into foreign walls are increasing. Steve, Well, that's right.
Speaker 9: I mean, if you've got an ally and your best ally,
Speaker 9: and we've been in every conflict with the Americans from
Speaker 9: the beginning of time, you've got to pull your weight.
Speaker 9: And I think there's got to be a bigger discussion
Speaker 9: here about is the Defense Department itself, and I'm talking
Speaker 9: about the public servants and the generals that run that department.
Speaker 9: Do they actually know what they're doing? I mean, they
Speaker 9: don't seem to be out there vocally lobbying to get
Speaker 9: more money from the government. They might be doing it
Speaker 9: behind the scenes, but if the Americans say, hang on
Speaker 9: a minute, you're going to spend more otherwise, you know,
Speaker 9: our relationship might not be what it should be.
Speaker 10: But the problem for the.
Speaker 9: Left is the left of the Labor Party hate the
Speaker 9: fact that we rely on the Americans as allies in
Speaker 9: any conflict. They'd rather be like New Zealand than pretend
Speaker 9: no one ever wants to come here. Well, the difference
Speaker 9: between us and New Zealand is we're loaded with minerals
Speaker 9: that other people want. I mean, let's get real.
Speaker 2: And by the way, sorry to interrupt your while we're
Speaker 2: speaking about defense spending, as you just mentioned, Steve, I mean,
Speaker 2: what about all the wasted money, the money that defense
Speaker 2: are spending giving their personnel cosmetic surgery and boob jobs
Speaker 2: and all sorts of other ridiculous Yeah. I mean, obviously
Speaker 2: that tax pay shouldn't be funding.
Speaker 11: Obviously that looks pretty silly on the face of it.
Speaker 11: The difference is, of course, that when you are talking
Speaker 11: about actual defense material that you know, buying a nuclear submarine,
Speaker 11: the amounts are just so skyrocketingly eyewateringly huge. You could
Speaker 11: cancel all the boob jobs and sex changes in the world,
Speaker 11: and you wouldn't. You'd barely be able to buy a bullet.
Speaker 11: But I would just say Australia has proved its loyalty
Speaker 11: to the US more than any other ally, including its
Speaker 11: oldest ally France. We went to war with the US
Speaker 11: in Iraq when France refused to, including the special relationship
Speaker 11: it has with the UK. We went to Vietnam with
Speaker 11: America when the United Kingdom refused to.
Speaker 2: I don't think under the al we'd be doing this
Speaker 2: well Australia.
Speaker 11: What I'm saying is Australia has paid for its alliance.
Speaker 10: With the years.
Speaker 11: And I'm half American, my father's American. I support America
Speaker 11: one hundred percent. But Australia has paid for that alliance
Speaker 11: with their blood, with our soldier's blood in wars that
Speaker 11: other countries said has nothing to do with us. It's
Speaker 11: not our fight, it's not our region. We think it's misguided.
Speaker 11: He could have said the same thing very easily.
Speaker 10: We didn't.
Speaker 11: We stood up and we went over there and we
Speaker 11: paid with our lives. So we've been extremely good our lives.
Speaker 2: No, indeed we have. Indeed, now Barnaby Joys has called
Speaker 2: for Kevin rud to be removed as ambassador after Trump's
Speaker 2: latest plan to increase tariffs and steel and aluminium, which
Speaker 2: of course would hurt Australian industries.
Speaker 12: Have a look Kevin Rudd is. Look, he's a good guy,
Speaker 12: but he's he's not kicking a goal in the United States.
Speaker 12: There's a difference in the relationship between him and in
Speaker 12: the Trump administration. I believe the first thing you've got
Speaker 12: to do is give Kevin another job somewhere else.
Speaker 2: Steve, what do you think about this?
Speaker 9: Well, I've had my say about Kevin run over and
Speaker 9: over and over over many years. He and I don't
Speaker 9: get on. I think Kevin's in the wrong job. It
Speaker 9: was a captain's pick by Anthony alban Easy. It was
Speaker 9: when Joe Biden was still there and Labour was hoping
Speaker 9: Kamala Harris would win the residential election. He's a square
Speaker 9: peg in a round hole. Anthony Albanese should have the
Speaker 9: courage to move him on. Find him, as Barnaby said,
Speaker 9: find him another job somewhere where he's better suited, because
Speaker 9: he's obviously not kicking any goals at all in the
Speaker 9: relationship with the United States. I mean the best person
Speaker 9: we have over there and negotiate with Donald Trump's Greg Norman,
Speaker 9: which is ridiculous when we've got an ambassador living in Washington.
Speaker 9: So maybe Kevin's time is up. I think Barnaby's probably right.
Speaker 2: Yeah, indeed, And it's interesting to think had Kamala Harris won, well,
Speaker 2: Dutton might be in power now you know that it
Speaker 2: was such a big impact that Trump had on the
Speaker 2: election here.
Speaker 11: Yeah, absolutely, look at what's.
Speaker 2: Albaneze and Kevin's relationship like at the moment.
Speaker 10: Joe good very strong.
Speaker 11: Albaneze was one of the few lieutenants who remained completely
Speaker 11: more says Kevin Rudd throughout the whole fiasco. And my
Speaker 11: position was very much the same as Arbineza, which is whatever, Kevin.
Speaker 2: As long as you're on the page, Joe.
Speaker 11: No, no, no, But I mean I think the entire
Speaker 11: Labour Party has actually come to the same conclusion belatedly.
Speaker 11: It took a decade out of office to do it,
Speaker 11: but that whatever Kevin Rud's personal shortcomings were, he was
Speaker 11: the democratically elected Prime Minister of Australia.
Speaker 10: He had a mandate and he shouldn't have been.
Speaker 2: Removed in a first term coup.
Speaker 11: My understanding is that behind the scenes a lot is
Speaker 11: going on. I understanding he was instrumental in getting that
Speaker 11: phone call between the PM and Donald Trump in the
Speaker 11: twenty four hours after the tariffs deal were announced, that
Speaker 11: that was a pre arranging.
Speaker 2: Probably just waiting to see who would win the election
Speaker 2: before he organized the f No, well.
Speaker 11: I mean if Trump applied, I mean, if if Kevin
Speaker 11: rud is not doing his job as ambassador, then no
Speaker 11: other countries ambassadors doing their job either, because the same
Speaker 11: tariffs were announced to every single country.
Speaker 4: In the world.
Speaker 2: Sure, all right, Steve Price, Johoda Brandt. Great Now, As
Speaker 2: you know, one of Susan Lee's first moves as our
Speaker 2: position leader was dumping for talented women from shadow cabinet
Speaker 2: in favor of either inexperienced replacements or factional allies. And
Speaker 2: there are now fewer women in Susan Lee's shadow cabinet
Speaker 2: than there were under Peter Dutton, the same number as
Speaker 2: under Scott Morrison. This is despite her previous public demand
Speaker 2: for fifty to fifty quotas for men and women. Now
Speaker 2: I've interviewed Ted O'Brian. He's going to be on the
Speaker 2: show later tonight. But Here's part of what he had
Speaker 2: to say when I asked him about this issue. Isn't
Speaker 2: it a bad sign that you needed as deputy leader
Speaker 2: to make those calls on your second day after the
Speaker 2: shadow ministry was announced.
Speaker 1: Oh, Shari, I suppose partly, maybe as a deputy leader,
Speaker 1: But in truth, it's just about relationships and speaking to colleagues.
Speaker 2: That's about Tetobrian trying to clean up the mess by
Speaker 2: ringing around to calm the waters. Now among those dumped
Speaker 2: from Shadow Cabinet is Tasmanian Senator Claire Chandler. She was
Speaker 2: previously the Shadow Minister for the Arts, Government Services and
Speaker 2: Sciences and Claire joins me on the show. Now, Claire,
Speaker 2: thank you very much for your time. You achieved a
Speaker 2: lot during your time as in Shadow Cabinet. How disappointed
Speaker 2: have you been since you were told the news last week?
Speaker 8: Oh?
Speaker 13: Thank you first of all for having me on the show, Sharion. Look, sure,
Speaker 13: I was certainly disappointed on Wednesday when I received the
Speaker 13: news that I wouldn't be back around the Shadow Cabinet table.
Speaker 2: But look, politics is.
Speaker 13: A game of ups and downs. As I think a
Speaker 13: few of my colleagues have said over the last few
Speaker 13: days and I'm only thirty five. I've just been re
Speaker 13: elected to the Senate for another six years, and I'm
Speaker 13: very hopeful that I'll have the opportunity at some point
Speaker 13: again to serve around the shadow cabinet table. But for
Speaker 13: the next little while, I'm very much looking forward to
Speaker 13: having the freedom to speak my mind on the back
Speaker 13: bench about the issues that I care about and the
Speaker 13: issues that Tasmanians and Australians care about.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and I'm sure you will speak your mind here
Speaker 2: on Sky News as well to our audience. Now, I
Speaker 2: reported on the show on Thursday night that Susan Lee
Speaker 2: ghosted Jane Hume. She refused to take her phone calls
Speaker 2: or text messages. And I understand that you also contacted
Speaker 2: the new Liberal leader saying that you'd be happy to
Speaker 2: serve in shadow cabinet, but you didn't hear back. Is
Speaker 2: that right? Yes, that's right. Can you expand on that
Speaker 2: a bit more? What did you say when you approached
Speaker 2: us saying that you would be happy to serve.
Speaker 13: Well, look, particularly given I had previously been in a
Speaker 13: shadow cabinet role, like you said at the outset, with
Speaker 13: the Shadow Ministry responsibilities for government services and science and
Speaker 13: the arts, digital economy. I would have been very happy
Speaker 13: to continue at that level, and you know you can't.
Speaker 13: You don't always get things if you don't ask for them.
Speaker 13: So I thought it was appropriate to make sure that
Speaker 13: the new leader knew that I was still keen to
Speaker 13: continue in that capacity.
Speaker 2: But you never heard back.
Speaker 10: No.
Speaker 2: You voted for Angus Taylor in the leadership ballot, I understand,
Speaker 2: and you did go public as saying that you intended
Speaker 2: to vote for him. Do you think that had a
Speaker 2: role to day? Do you think that had a role
Speaker 2: to play in why you were demote it?
Speaker 13: Look, it may well have done Shari at the end
Speaker 13: of the day. That's probably a question for the opposition
Speaker 13: leader to answer rather than me. But look, like I say,
Speaker 13: politics is a nonlinear career path, and sometimes you experience
Speaker 13: disappointments and you pick yourself up and you dust yourself
Speaker 13: off and you get on with the task at hand.
Speaker 13: And there is no doubt that everyone in our liberal
Speaker 13: party room, where the you are in shadow cabinet, in
Speaker 13: the shadow ministry, or indeed on the back benches I
Speaker 13: now am, we have a huge task ahead of us
Speaker 13: to make sure that we are in the best possible
Speaker 13: position to win the election in three years time. There
Speaker 13: is a lot of policy work that needs to be
Speaker 13: done and I'm sure all of my colleagues and I
Speaker 13: will be putting our shoulder to the wheel to make
Speaker 13: sure that that happens.
Speaker 2: Well on that front, you know, what direction do you
Speaker 2: think the party needs to move in to appeal to
Speaker 2: more Australians. Well, look, I.
Speaker 13: Don't think it's a question of us going further to
Speaker 13: the left or further to the right, although I'll note
Speaker 13: that a few of my colleagues have had views on
Speaker 13: what direction we need to go in, and indeed a
Speaker 13: few in the media and in the political commentariat have
Speaker 13: had their views. At the end of the day, the
Speaker 13: values of the Liberal Party that Robert Menzies articulated are
Speaker 13: absolutely timeless. But here and now in twenty twenty five,
Speaker 13: we need to figure out a way to take those values,
Speaker 13: to apply them to the problems that Australians are having,
Speaker 13: and come up with real and tangible solutions in accordance
Speaker 13: with those values, and then explain what those solutions are
Speaker 13: to the Australian people. And I look back on our
Speaker 13: last or our last election result, I don't think we
Speaker 13: talked enough to Australians about the solutions that we were offering,
Speaker 13: and I think, frankly, particularly in some policy areas, we
Speaker 13: needed to be developing more and better solutions. And look,
Speaker 13: I think the Liberal Party has had a tough time
Speaker 13: in recent years. You look back to the pandemic and
Speaker 13: I know that was five years ago, but economically, the
Speaker 13: way that that challenged our very ethos as a party
Speaker 13: was massive. We were putting a great deal of public
Speaker 13: money out the door.
Speaker 2: We had to create big.
Speaker 13: Government by the necessity of the circumstances that we found
Speaker 13: ourselves in. Now is the time that we have to
Speaker 13: recenter ourselves and particularly I think recraft that economic narrative
Speaker 13: and talk to Australians about why small government is better
Speaker 13: for them and why big government is just going to
Speaker 13: get in the way, is going to make their lives harder,
Speaker 13: not make.
Speaker 2: Their lives easier.
Speaker 13: That's a really important message that I think we need
Speaker 13: to focus on for the next three years because I'm
Speaker 13: not sure that Australians necessarily understand the merits of those
Speaker 13: values now, because frankly, I don't think we've been good
Speaker 13: enough at talking about them.
Speaker 2: You're completely right and when you look at the budget
Speaker 2: position now, it's in such a horrific position and the
Speaker 2: spending is going out the door. The alban Easy government's
Speaker 2: approach is to increase taxes. They're going to look for
Speaker 2: other areas they can raise taxes. But the political challenge, Claire,
Speaker 2: is that when the coalition said well we need to
Speaker 2: embark on budget repair, we need a cut spending, that
Speaker 2: was weaponized against the coalition. So you know that's the difficulty,
Speaker 2: isn't it trying to sell the argument that there does
Speaker 2: need to be spending cuts.
Speaker 13: Oh, look, that's always going to be a challenge. But
Speaker 13: like I say, Shari, we have three years now where
Speaker 13: we have to get back to basics in terms of
Speaker 13: how we're communicating with Australians, what our values are, what
Speaker 13: the problems are that they're facing, and how we'll use
Speaker 13: those values to solve those problems. And there's a lot
Speaker 13: of work that we need to do to get back
Speaker 13: into a position where we can win elections. But like
Speaker 13: I say, I think.
Speaker 2: We can do it.
Speaker 13: It's going to be an awful lot of hard work
Speaker 13: and we have a very short time to do it.
Speaker 13: So frankly, I think it's almost to the point where
Speaker 13: we need to stop talking about what the problems are
Speaker 13: and start looking at some solutions. And I'm sure that
Speaker 13: that policy work is underway by all of my colleagues
Speaker 13: in the Shadow ministry.
Speaker 2: All right. Indeed, Claire Chanda, looking forward to having you
Speaker 2: still Unsky News, irrespective of whether Susan late Lee decided
Speaker 2: to keep you in the Shadow Cabinet or not. Thank
Speaker 2: you very much for joining us tonight. Now still to
Speaker 2: come deputy liberally to Tet O'Brien faces my questions about Dumpy.
Speaker 2: The four women, including Claire Chandler. That exclusive interview coming up,
Speaker 2: plus radio legend Ray Hadley back on the desk as
Speaker 2: Chris Bowen weighs up green tariffs as if our economy
Speaker 2: isn't suffering enough already raise after this quick break, welcome back. Well,
Speaker 2: Chris Bowen is back to fueling climate alarmism, not ruling
Speaker 2: out green tariffs and carbon intensive imports.
Speaker 14: I know you've been looking at the option of Australia
Speaker 14: imposing a carbon tariff or a carbon border adjustment mechanism
Speaker 14: as the Europeans are looking at is what's you thinking
Speaker 14: on that at the moment.
Speaker 5: Well, we've been again clear that we want to ensure
Speaker 5: Australian industry it's best place to compete in a decarbonizing world.
Speaker 2: And radio legend Ray Hadley is here and he's laughing.
Speaker 15: I think he wakes up every morning thinking what kind
Speaker 15: of did he get in the paper today?
Speaker 10: What's the headline I need to equate to.
Speaker 15: I mean everyone's been jumping up down about Donald Trump,
Speaker 15: including US and the tariffs.
Speaker 10: He says he's doing it to protect Donald Trump, that
Speaker 10: is the American industry.
Speaker 15: So if he puts on building products a tariff which
Speaker 15: we send the coal from Australia to Japan to their
Speaker 15: coali fied power station and their of course nuclear plants.
Speaker 15: They make the steel, they make the aluminium, we bring
Speaker 15: it back here, he wants to put a tariff on
Speaker 15: it because the Chinese aren't in accord with us the
Speaker 15: way climate change is thought of.
Speaker 10: So who's the end loser here?
Speaker 15: The builders, the developers and those people who are building
Speaker 15: homes or units.
Speaker 10: I mean, it's sheer madness.
Speaker 15: You can't have Anthony Albanizi saying well, hang on a
Speaker 15: sec this is silly.
Speaker 10: We can't do this. We simply can't do it.
Speaker 15: And then he comes out for an entirely different reason
Speaker 15: to meet the ridiculous quota that he wants to do
Speaker 15: on carbon.
Speaker 10: I mean, it's just but this.
Speaker 2: Is also what I'm worried about. Ray. There's going to
Speaker 2: be all these new tariffs and taxes that were never
Speaker 2: mentioned in the campaign will be sprung on us.
Speaker 15: Well, the green tariff was never mentioned because he was
Speaker 15: in witness protection, as I told you recently. I mean
Speaker 15: they hit him from view and then remarkably the people
Speaker 15: in his electorate gave him an even bigger majority.
Speaker 2: Bizarre. They need to watch the more Sky news.
Speaker 15: Perhaps we have to say more people out there to
Speaker 15: identify what Chris Bowen's all about.
Speaker 10: He's a deal.
Speaker 2: Now. I've been very critical of Susan Lee's shadow cabinet.
Speaker 2: I've heard, yes, what do you think about this and
Speaker 2: the people she's dumped and who she's promoted.
Speaker 15: Well, it's remarkable that she should say one thing before
Speaker 15: she was leader and they do exactly the opposite. Now,
Speaker 15: I heard you earlier talking to Clear about all of this,
Speaker 15: and I just don't understand how Peter Dutton was punished
Speaker 15: for being I guess anti women. That's how he was
Speaker 15: viewed by some in the electorate. There were more women
Speaker 15: in his cabinet there are, and Susan Lee shadow cabinet,
Speaker 15: who's been calling for a quota for goodness knows how
Speaker 15: long now the women that she has dumped just centerprice.
Speaker 15: I mean, that's the dumbest thing I can possibly think of.
Speaker 15: Clear Chandler thirty five years of age, brilliant. Yeah, and
Speaker 15: then Jane Hume and Sarah Henderson vastly experienced older than
Speaker 15: the other two women. One's thirty five, ones in the
Speaker 15: early forties, and they're talking about generational change. Well, here's
Speaker 15: a chance generational change and four very.
Speaker 10: Capable women exactly. I mean, I don't get it.
Speaker 2: I think it was a problem when Susan Lee said
Speaker 2: younger in terms of political experience. I mean, younger is
Speaker 2: a term that refers to age. So is she saying
Speaker 2: Sarah Henderson and Jane Humor too old because they're in
Speaker 2: their fifties and sixties, and that reinforces a really dangerous
Speaker 2: view that women lose their value as they get older.
Speaker 15: Well, let me say this, having worked in the media
Speaker 15: for over forty years, some of the best people I've
Speaker 15: worked with have been older people, men and women, and
Speaker 15: really young ones men and women.
Speaker 10: You can't just cast the and say she's too old.
Speaker 15: He's too old, she's too young, she's too inexperienced.
Speaker 10: Because they are on face value.
Speaker 15: You could hear it tonight on your program, Clear Chandel,
Speaker 15: she's a brilliant young woman. Brilliant I don't mean it'd
Speaker 15: be derogatory saying a young woman compared to me, I'm
Speaker 15: double her age. But when you call me young Raya,
Speaker 15: well that's because I'm more than double your age.
Speaker 10: But anyway, you are not.
Speaker 15: We wage it into ages, come on anyway, so you
Speaker 15: can't afford to do that.
Speaker 10: Just sits in there. But Jipper price for goodness sake.
Speaker 15: I know they all voted her cause for angers and
Speaker 15: that's the problem.
Speaker 2: That's the issue. They supported Angus Taylor, but yet there
Speaker 2: were men who supported Angus Taylor who Susan kept in
Speaker 2: shadow cabinet. So this is a problematic move and it's
Speaker 2: going to continue to be problematic. And it wasn't wise
Speaker 2: politically because now there are so many enemies and people
Speaker 2: who are upset over it.
Speaker 15: Well, I said to you that I don't think Susan
Speaker 15: will lead them to the next election. I think there'll
Speaker 15: be things happening in the meantime, and that I'm not
Speaker 15: denigrating her.
Speaker 10: She's also a very capable woman. By judgment. Her first
Speaker 10: few calls have been pretty ordinary.
Speaker 2: No indeed, all right, well, look I want to ask
Speaker 2: you about a couple of international things. Now. Greta Thunberg
Speaker 2: now wants to sail into Gaza on a diesel powered vessel.
Speaker 2: By the way, if we've got that clip of Greta
Speaker 2: Thunberg saying that she's ready to go into Gaza to
Speaker 2: save the day, here it is.
Speaker 6: Hello, I am currently standing on the Madeline, the ship
Speaker 6: that on Sunday, June first, will attempt to again sail
Speaker 6: towards Gaza and to try to break the siege and
Speaker 6: open up a humanitarian corridor by delivering aid like food
Speaker 6: and medical supplies.
Speaker 2: I mean, right, shouldn't Israel just give her official transport
Speaker 2: to Gaza. See how she goes dealing with the harmas terrorists.
Speaker 15: She wants to be a bit careful sailing into She's
Speaker 15: not sailing, she's motoring into Gaza, as Andrew Bolt pointed
Speaker 15: out in his.
Speaker 10: Column this morning.
Speaker 15: But the simple fact of the matter is she might
Speaker 15: be a bit worried about getting shot by Hamas because they,
Speaker 15: as you've reported, are shooting people as they go to
Speaker 15: get aid, which is sent to Gaza by the Israelis.
Speaker 10: And so you know people say wet their gunment, Well, I.
Speaker 15: Mean, who else runs around Gaza city with a submachine
Speaker 15: gun if you're not a member of a terrorist organization,
Speaker 15: which is, by the way, the July elected government and
Speaker 15: has been for seventeen years a mass So look, she
Speaker 15: used to drive me mad on climate change. Now she's
Speaker 15: driving me mad. She stuck head into what's happening in
Speaker 15: Gaza at the moment. And you know, I could care
Speaker 15: less orhether she goes there or doesn't go there. What
Speaker 15: you're going to take a jar of peanut butter in
Speaker 15: the Labe of Breda.
Speaker 2: And that footage you were just referring to, If we've
Speaker 2: got it that we can show it as overlay, we
Speaker 2: can bring it up on the screen. But you know
Speaker 2: Israel has been has set up. Know that the Israeli footage,
Speaker 2: this is drone footage We're going to show you here.
Speaker 2: It is where Israel set up and this is distressing content.
Speaker 2: Israel set up a new aid center and Palestinian masked terrorists.
Speaker 2: We don't know for sure if they're Hamas or another
Speaker 2: terrorist group have been shooting civilians who are going to
Speaker 2: get aid. Ray this is what you're referring to. Just
Speaker 2: a minute.
Speaker 15: Yeah, sorry to get ahead of you, but if you're
Speaker 15: framing a market, it's odds on, it's Hamas, it's odds on.
Speaker 15: You know, they're they're they're on the ground and they're
Speaker 15: killing the people from Garsa to take away the aid
Speaker 15: that's being trucked.
Speaker 10: In there by Israel.
Speaker 15: I mean, and the mainstream media tends to ignore this.
Speaker 15: It doesn't happen now. It's just one lunatic, like the
Speaker 15: lunatic in the United States of America, you know, doing
Speaker 15: something to another race of people in that part of
Speaker 15: the world.
Speaker 10: No, it's not.
Speaker 15: They're a terrorist organization, as disclosed by every government, including ours.
Speaker 15: They won't be decried by Penny Wong or Anthony al
Speaker 15: but easy. I mean, say it for what it is.
Speaker 15: They're democratically elected. They're a terrorist organization. We shouldn't be
Speaker 15: dealing with them, or even not thinking about dealing with them.
Speaker 2: No, indeed, democratically elected. Back in two thousand and seven,
Speaker 2: bat time for another election, I'd say Ray, thank you
Speaker 2: very much, thank Lod having me on the show. We'll
Speaker 2: see you next Monday.
Speaker 10: I'll be here, look forward to it.
Speaker 2: Thanks very much and still to come. TikTok bosses claim
Speaker 2: their app is educational for children. This is social media
Speaker 2: giants pushback against the under sixties Van plus. Teto brian
Speaker 2: doesn't rule out backing labors super tax My exclusive interview
Speaker 2: up next, welcome back. Well, let's return to the possible
Speaker 2: deal between the Liberal Party and Labor over the superannuation tax.
Speaker 6: Now.
Speaker 2: The Australian reports today that Deputy Liberal Leader and Shadow
Speaker 2: Treasurer Tet O'Brien is open to a deal on Labour's
Speaker 2: plan to tax super providing they abandoned the idea of
Speaker 2: taxing unrealized gains and index the threshol well I spoke
Speaker 2: to Ted and asked him about this a little earlier.
Speaker 2: Tet O'Brien, thank you so much for your time, your
Speaker 2: first interview since your new role is Shadow treasurer. Is
Speaker 2: it true you're open to doing a deal with Labor
Speaker 2: on the super tax and does this mean you're seriously
Speaker 2: considering supporting raising taxes on superannuation? No, Shahi.
Speaker 1: In fact, we think that Labour's super tax is super
Speaker 1: big and super bad. I can't think of one element
Speaker 1: of it I like candidly. And if though that Labor
Speaker 1: does want to speak to the Coalition, then they'll have
Speaker 1: to walk away from a lot of those aspects of
Speaker 1: what they put forward. There's no doubt in opposition. We
Speaker 1: will be constructive where we can, but critical where we must,
Speaker 1: And when it comes to this super tax, at the moment,
Speaker 1: I see no choice but to be absolutely critical.
Speaker 2: So to be clear, you will be opposing the super
Speaker 2: tax as well as the tax and unrealized capital gains.
Speaker 2: All elements of this you will be opposing, Sherry.
Speaker 1: I can't preempt the final decision that ultimately will come
Speaker 1: through the Party room, but what I can say is
Speaker 1: that there are aspects of this policy that Labor has
Speaker 1: put forward which are absolutely egregious. You mentioned a couple there,
Speaker 1: in particular the unrealized capital gains and secondly the lack
Speaker 1: of indexation. They are probably the most egregious of the lot.
Speaker 1: As for though where the party room eventually settles, they'll be.
Speaker 2: A matter for the party room.
Speaker 1: But I can be very clear that in speaking with colleagues,
Speaker 1: they like me see no goodness in this whatsoever.
Speaker 2: Because the Australian is reporting today that you would be
Speaker 2: open to doing a deal with Labor and supporting the
Speaker 2: tax superannuation if they lifted the unrealized capital gains tax?
Speaker 2: So is that reported in the Australian Today wrong?
Speaker 1: The report in the Australian Today was accurate. Where I
Speaker 1: made it clear that when it comes to all policies,
Speaker 1: including this one, the Coalition will always be open. However,
Speaker 1: that doesn't mean a blank check. If indeed Jim Chalmers
Speaker 1: wants to come and have a discussion with the Coalition
Speaker 1: about his supertax, well he would have to firstly walk
Speaker 1: away from the unrealized capital gains component. At least he
Speaker 1: should be compromising on indexation. Now, if he caves in
Speaker 1: on all of those things and wants to talk about
Speaker 1: super reform, chari let's have a chat about super.
Speaker 2: Reform, all right. We'll we go a bit to those
Speaker 2: discussions because we've had some conflicting positions here. So just
Speaker 2: to be clear, if he walked away from the unrealized
Speaker 2: capital gains component, then you would consider supporting the superannuation tax.
Speaker 1: If Jim Chalmers confirms he will walk away from the
Speaker 1: unrealized capital gains component and the indexation, then I think
Speaker 1: we can have a conversation. That does not mean that
Speaker 1: he will necessarily get support, but that's at least the
Speaker 1: basis for a conversation, because right now it is so unreasonable,
Speaker 1: this is such a bad policy that there is no
Speaker 1: possibility of any arrangement between the Coalition and Labor. But
Speaker 1: if Labor sees the light and walks away from a
Speaker 1: whole bunch of issues here, especially those I mentioned, then
Speaker 1: certainly we can have a discussion now whether they will
Speaker 1: or not, Shahi, your guess is as good as mine.
Speaker 2: But TED wouldn't supporting the supertax even if they walked
Speaker 2: away from unrealized capital gains, and even if they supported indexation.
Speaker 2: Wouldn't the coalition supporting the supertax indicate that the coalition
Speaker 2: does support higher taxes? And wasn't this one of the
Speaker 2: issues that the coalition had during the election campaign.
Speaker 1: Well, look, if Labor did walk away from the components
Speaker 1: of its current measure, Shari, it would depend on what
Speaker 1: they put on the table for discussion. But you're right,
Speaker 1: we had to learn some big lessons from the last election,
Speaker 1: and we have and we continue to learn those lessons.
Speaker 1: One of those lessons is we need to ensure that
Speaker 1: we are staying true for being the party for lower taxes.
Speaker 1: And as I said before, there's no part of what
Speaker 1: Labour's put forward here that I like at all. I
Speaker 1: mean the fact that taxes go up, you know, the
Speaker 1: capital gains component, the indexation, the lack of integrity in
Speaker 1: what they put forward where actually they want to see
Speaker 1: this past through the Parliament and then the Treasurer will
Speaker 1: decide the treatment of the Prime Minister. I mean, the
Speaker 1: whole thing is a dog. It really is so again,
Speaker 1: but if Labour wants to walk all of that back
Speaker 1: and engage in good faith talking about the possibility for
Speaker 1: super reform, of course will be constructive where we can
Speaker 1: and critical where we must look.
Speaker 2: I just want to ask you about a couple of
Speaker 2: the policies that you just admitted were a mistake during
Speaker 2: the election campaign. Do you agree that it was wrong
Speaker 2: that the Coalition opposed Labour's tax cuts.
Speaker 1: Yes, Shari, I do believe it was wrong. I think
Speaker 1: that was a mistake and I think that's a mistake
Speaker 1: we all have to own and we need to learn
Speaker 1: from that.
Speaker 2: I reported here on Thursday that you were making calls
Speaker 2: during the day to try and calm the waders after
Speaker 2: four women were demoted or dumped in the shadow ministry.
Speaker 2: I mean, isn't it a bad sign that you needed
Speaker 2: as deputy leader to make those calls on your second
Speaker 2: day after the shadow ministry was announced?
Speaker 1: Oh, Shari, I suppose partly maybe as a deputy leader,
Speaker 1: but in truth it's just about relationships and speaking to colleagues.
Speaker 1: I do that all the time. It was my approach
Speaker 1: in business for over twenty years. It's been my approaches
Speaker 1: I've been in Parliament and there's no doubt when shadow
Speaker 1: ministries are announced there are a lot of people there
Speaker 1: because we have such a depth and talent. Who could
Speaker 1: promis you with a phone call that decision to dump?
Speaker 2: Were you involved in that decision to dump or demote
Speaker 2: the file women for shadow Cabinet and did anyone stand
Speaker 2: up for those women?
Speaker 1: So, Shari, when it comes to the decisions on who
Speaker 1: serves in the shadow ministry, that's a matter only for
Speaker 1: the leader.
Speaker 2: So you didn't agree with the decision.
Speaker 1: Now, of course I agreed with Susan's decision. I have
Speaker 1: to say that I think It's probably one of the
Speaker 1: toughest gigs for any leader, especially when you do look
Speaker 1: at the depth of the talent in the Liberal Party
Speaker 1: to say, well, okay, I've got to form a shadow
Speaker 1: ministry out of this. That's tough because ultimately there are
Speaker 1: so many individual MPs and senators who absolutely have what
Speaker 1: it takes. But a decision does have to be made.
Speaker 1: I think Susan has put together.
Speaker 2: In hindsight, do you think of the wrong call to
Speaker 2: dump or demote far of the most senior and experienced
Speaker 2: women from shadow cabinet. I mean, you talk about these
Speaker 2: the most talented women.
Speaker 1: I do not question whatsoever the talent of all colleagues,
Speaker 1: including the ones to whom you refer by the way,
Speaker 1: But I think your question to me is do I
Speaker 1: believe ultimately that Susan has put together the right team? Yes,
Speaker 1: I do, my question and as you will, no, Shari.
Speaker 1: As you know Shari, you know politics like business, like
Speaker 1: other walks of life, there are ups and downs. I
Speaker 1: know from my own experience there have been times when
Speaker 1: things haven't gone as well as I'd like, which again
Speaker 1: is why relationships are important. Every single member of the
Speaker 1: party has a really important role to play and it's
Speaker 1: important they know that too.
Speaker 2: Shari, All right, tedt O Brain really appreciate you coming
Speaker 2: on tonight.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much, Thanks very much.
Speaker 2: Cheers and after the break. TikTok claims their app is
Speaker 2: educational for children as social media giants pushback against the
Speaker 2: Albanezi governments. Under sixteen's van that's next. But TikTok has
Speaker 2: taken out major sprawling advertisements in Australian newspapers. They've got
Speaker 2: four and a half pages in the finn Review to
Speaker 2: promote so called educational benefit of their app, an entirely
Speaker 2: questionable claim. And they've done this ahead of the Albanese
Speaker 2: government's law banning under sixteens from social media. Or we
Speaker 2: need to hope the coalition backs the laws so we
Speaker 2: can give our younger generation back their childhood. I'll see
Speaker 2: you at eight thirty tomorrow night after Chang Lai's doco.
Speaker 2: And here's Pomari