Danica De Giorgio | 27 June

The PM puts our relationship with the US at risk, by remaining pig-headed on defence spending. Plus, the Liberal Party split over gender quotas. 

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Live on Sky's Australia. This is d Nika di Georgio.

Speaker 2 (00:09):
Good evening.

Speaker 3 (00:09):
I'm Caroline Marcus filling in Fordnika di Georgio coming up tonight.
The PM puts our relationship with the US at risk
by remaining peak headed on defense spending. The Liberal Party
warned its on the brink of extinction thanks to its
women problem. Last weeak to two strong women, Shadow Resources

(00:30):
Minister Susan McDonald's an independent MP day Lee soon and
a Run's.

Speaker 2 (00:36):
Supreme leader declares victory.

Speaker 3 (00:38):
Over Israel and his first public comments since the ceasefire.
But first Anthony Albanezi continues to put our relationship with
the US and by extension, our national security at risk
by staying peak headed on defense spending. White House First
Secretary Caroline Levitt made it clear earlier today. US President

(01:02):
Donald Trump still had an expectation Australia would lift its game.

Speaker 4 (01:08):
He's made the same demands of Asia Pacific allies of
the United States, including Australia where I'm from. How does
the NATO result impact negotiations with Asia Pacific allies?

Speaker 3 (01:22):
Okay?

Speaker 5 (01:22):
If our allies in Europe and Ournino allies can do it,
I think our allies and our friends in the Asia
Pacific region can do it as well.

Speaker 3 (01:30):
Now we've seen what can happen if we don't come
to the table. Trump this week threatened to double the
tariffs on Spain after President Pedro Sanchez refuse to lift
his country's defense spending above two point one percent. Trump
is accusing him of free riding of America.

Speaker 1 (01:50):
So we'll make it up.

Speaker 2 (01:51):
You know what we're going to do. We're negotiating with
Spain on a trade deal.

Speaker 1 (01:55):
We're going to make them pay twice as much. And
I'm actually serious about that.

Speaker 3 (02:00):
You reckon, He's really going to let Australia off the
hook for a measly lift in defense spending to just
two point three percent of by GDP. It doesn't help
that the Albanesi government has been drifting further and further
away from the US on foreign policy, specifically with its
growing hostility towards Israel. Consider how it took Labor twenty

(02:23):
four hours to even voice what should have been immediate,
unequivocal support for our closest ally when the Americans executed
their strikes on Iran. Instead, the government was busy seeking
advice on the legality of stopping the regimes nuclear ambitions.
The fractures in our relationship with the US are now

(02:44):
glaringly obvious. Read between the lines of this other exchange
Caroline Levitt had with an Australian reporter.

Speaker 4 (02:53):
He missed out on a number of biolacteral meetings that
were scheduled with other world leaders, including the Prime Minister
of Australia. Are their plans afoot to make up for
those meetings with the world leaders that he missed out.

Speaker 5 (03:04):
Yeah, I think many of those world leaders understood the
situation happening in the Middle East. He has met up
a couple of those meetings, and he has had direct
phone calls with some of those leaders he was supposed
to meet with as.

Speaker 3 (03:15):
Well, so he has made up some of those meetings,
but not with US. Albanizi clearly isn't considered important or
friendly enough to prioritize a rescheduled meeting. In fact, Trump's
people didn't even bother to let Australian officials know their
meeting on the sidelines of the G seven was off,

(03:36):
Yet they somehow found the time to give a heads
up to other allies, like the Mexican leader now Alberanizi
today tried his best to make light of it all.

Speaker 6 (03:48):
I'm going to meet his novel from how would you
expect to avoid the same fate has seen.

Speaker 7 (03:54):
There's a big focus on Spain at this area of
of these hills here today.

Speaker 2 (04:02):
Look, we will will invest in whatever capability we need.

Speaker 3 (04:10):
He thinks he comes off as strong, But this dismissal
of our closest allies requests is shortsighted. You only need
to look at the incredible display of US military power
we've seen in Iran to know how much we need
America when not if the proverbial hits the fan, and

(04:30):
speaking of military might, the US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's
update late last night should silence critics of the operation
who seized on a leaked preliminary report from the Defense
Intelligence Authority. Focus on preliminary here to push the narratives
that these strikes really hadn't been all that successful at all.

Speaker 8 (04:54):
How about the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission. The devastating US
strikes on Fourdeaux destroyed the sa it's critical infrastructure and
rendered the enrichment facility inoperable.

Speaker 2 (05:05):
Have any of these quotes made their way.

Speaker 8 (05:06):
Into the New York Times or the Washington Post, MSNBC, CNN,
any of these quotes.

Speaker 9 (05:12):
How about this one.

Speaker 8 (05:13):
This is a new one from the UN, the United Nations.
No friend in the United States or certainly Israel. Often
here's the head of the UN Atomic Energy Agency this morning,
Raphael Grossi. US and Israeli strikes caused enormous damage to
Iran's nuclear sites.

Speaker 3 (05:32):
Hegseeth also spent time calling out the Trump derangement syndrome
that still plagues so much of the mainstream media here
in Australia too. It's an affliction that's so all encompassing
it needs to invent new ways to discredit the US
President when he's just helped to conduct what could be
the greatest peacemaking exercise of our time.

Speaker 8 (05:57):
Because you, and I mean specific you, the press, because
you cheer against Trump so hard. It's like in your
DNA and in your blood. Cheer against Trump because you
want him not to be successful so bad you have
to cheer against the efficacy of these strikes.

Speaker 3 (06:17):
Of course, I'm not suggesting that Donald Trump is above criticism.
No leader is, and to be frank, there's plenty to
call him out on. But this is a war between
good and evil, an evil regime on the cusp of
having nuclear bombs, and the Western nations trying to stop
it and save the rest of us. There's already been

(06:46):
a lot of airtime and Colin Inch's dedicated to the
decision in the Federal Court on Wednesday to award activist
journalist Antoinette Latouffe seventy thousand dollars for her on lawful
termination by the ABC midway through a five day fill
in shift on its Sydney radio program. But what I

(07:06):
found concerning and grossly misleading is how a judgment on
workplace rights has been hijacked and misrepresented by anti Israel activists,
including the twoth herself.

Speaker 2 (07:20):
Yes, just as Darryl Rangia did.

Speaker 3 (07:23):
Say the ABC had a legally sactor for her political
opinion at a time executives felt pressured by what he
called an orchestrated campaign from some pro Israel lawyers. But
the judge also made clear this ruling was not an
endorsement of the anti Israel post she'd made. She shared

(07:45):
a Human Rights Watch post with the caption HRW reporting
starvation as a tool of war in respect of Israel's
military action in Gaza.

Speaker 10 (07:57):
The HRW post was bound to be controversial. It was
Latouf's making of the HRW post was ill advised and
inconsiderate of her employer.

Speaker 3 (08:07):
Hear that it was bound to be controversial. He said,
it was ill advised. It was inconsiderate of the ABC,
who had already advised Latoufe it did not want her
posting about the war while she was on the taxpayer dime.
Yet this is how Latooth spun the decision outside court.

Speaker 11 (08:28):
Deliberately starving and killing children is a war crime. Today,
the court has found that punishing someone for sharing facts
about these war crimes is also illegal.

Speaker 3 (08:44):
Sacked for sharing facts, The court did not find you
were sacked for facts. In fact, the judge made no
finding of the veracity of your disputed claim from a
known anti Israel organization. It was a claim she repeated
when she shared her statement on social media to her

(09:06):
more than one hundred thousand followers. As a financial review
noted outside court, pro Palestinian activists waving placards and flags
sought to portray Rangia's ruling as if it were a
judgment on the morality of the Gaza conflict Rangia rule.
The primary reason Latoof was sacked was because of her

(09:28):
political opinion, whatever.

Speaker 2 (09:30):
It may be, and that was illegal.

Speaker 3 (09:32):
The content of Latoof's opinion was irrelevant. Now Latoof has
seized on the publicity this week to launch her new venture,
alongside fellow anti Israel ABC journalist Jan Fran, a new
independent website promising media literacy and critique that helps you
get the real story.

Speaker 2 (09:53):
But readers will clearly.

Speaker 3 (09:55):
Need to apply a fair amount of media literacy and
critique to any other the misrepresentations reported there. Some anti
Israel activists outside court were so emboldened by this false
narrative about the ruling being some kind of judgment on
Israel itself they harassed journalists they're reporting the case, including me,

(10:18):
accusing us of being complicit in genocide the Israel Gars
a conflict, many wearing Kafir scarfs, screaming about media censorship.

Speaker 2 (10:36):
Sorry, we'll just cut it there because that's just rude.

Speaker 3 (10:40):
Well, aside from that attempt to block me from just
doing my reporting, other activists there subjected me to sexualized
language and gestures.

Speaker 2 (10:50):
That day I wouldn't even be able to repeat here.

Speaker 3 (10:54):
Suffice to say, it appears only some female journalists. Those
that these activists considered to be on the right side
of their cause should be able to do their jobs
free from interference. Well, let's return to the Middle East now,

(11:14):
and Donald Trump is reportedly pressuring Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu to end the twenty month war with Hermas following
the twelve day conflict with Iran, according to several Israeli
media outlets. Joining me now to discuss this and other
stories is Joel Bernie from the Australia Israel and Jewish
Affairs Council.

Speaker 2 (11:33):
Joel, thanks for coming on. It's great to see you.

Speaker 3 (11:36):
Trump managed to get the Israelis to listen when it
came to maintaining the seasfire with Iran. That's despite the
violation from Iran firing those missiles after that ceasefire had
been announced. How do you think Trump will go convincing
nen Yahoo to end this war in Gaza?

Speaker 1 (11:57):
Well, thank you very much for having me on. Caroline.

Speaker 12 (11:59):
Well, that's a very question, and I think there's a
lot of optimism and given the momentum of the very
successful mission in Iran over the past two weeks, the
twelve day operation, and then if you look at it
within the context of everything that's transpired in the region
post October seven, we are seeing such a seismic shift
in the geostrategic outlook of the region, all ushered in

(12:23):
as a response to that massacre on the day of
October seven, we have a complete realignment of the region
which allows for certain things to happen. I would actually
say it's one of the largest geostrategic alignments since the
fall of the Soviet Union and the end of the
Cold War. So what this momentum will do with the
Trump administration and the Netsinaal government will hopefully translate into

(12:46):
some type of effective ceasefire in Gaza.

Speaker 1 (12:50):
Now, there's been quite a.

Speaker 12 (12:50):
Lot of chatter in the Israeli press over the past
twenty four hours, and the hope is is that the
momentum will force Hamas to essentially exile their ship, some
type of multinational Arab multinational force will be placed into
some type of temporary administrative power inside Gaza, and most importantly,

(13:11):
it will mean the return of the hostages.

Speaker 1 (13:13):
And ultimately the end of the war.

Speaker 12 (13:15):
So this has been a very long and protracted war regionally,
the successes are incredible, no less to the efforts of
the nets Nyahul government and the IDF as well. So
the hope is that there can be some type of
wind up in Gaza, which would mean that Hamasi's exiled
are no longer in power, and most importantly we have
the return of the hostages.

Speaker 3 (13:36):
That would be incredible. But I note that the Israel
press is also reporting that part of this plan to
end the war would mean new countries would join that
Abraham Accords, which is very positive, but that Israel would
also be required to commit to supporting a future Palestinian state. Now,
normalization with Israel obviously would be very welcome news, I

(13:58):
think to you, but what about this other condition to
commit to a Palestinian state. How realistic is it that
Benjamin Netanyahu and his government.

Speaker 2 (14:07):
Will do that?

Speaker 1 (14:09):
Well.

Speaker 12 (14:09):
Firstly, again following on from the momentum that's occurred from
the military action over the past twenty or twenty one months,
what we've seen here is the potential expansion of what
is the most remarkable Abram Accords, which ensures the safety
of the region. The idea that Saudi Aravia and potentially
Syria will be the first two countries to enter those

(14:32):
accords which have remained stable with those that signed up
to it during the first Trump administration. So the bedrock
of them is very strong, and this is what will
usher in economic and regional stability. Now on that part
of the two state solution, as we know, for the
Saudis to enter such an agreement, they need to have
some type of tangible steps or process towards a two

(14:54):
state solution.

Speaker 1 (14:54):
Now, all I can say is.

Speaker 12 (14:55):
This for obvious reasons, but mainly because of Palestinian which
rejectionism of previous offers, plus the bloody responses that come
through those offers, namely the second Interofata and obviously October seven,
the Israeli public has unfortunately been weaned off the idea
that there is a partner for peace. So the idea,

(15:16):
and has been reported over the past twenty four hours,
is the idea of somehow recognizing that the two state
solution is the ultimate aim. But the caveat is is
that it will require deep modification and the removal of
the corruption of the Palestinian authority. So without that deep
reform of the Palestinian authority, which I will remind your

(15:38):
viewers is currently paying the stipends of Kamas Terris, who
ended Israel in October seven.

Speaker 1 (15:43):
There is significant change.

Speaker 12 (15:45):
That is required within Palestinian political society as well as
as well as the Palestinian street. So I think there
will be some type of comment to say that we
aspire to some type of two state solution, but it
cannot happen without deep reform at the Palestinian authority.

Speaker 3 (15:59):
Yeah, I think for slay is what you're referring to.
They're very quickly, Joel, because we're almost out of time.
I just want to play these comments from a Run
Supreme leader Iotola alec HARMIONI to you, he's declared.

Speaker 2 (16:11):
Victory over Israel.

Speaker 3 (16:12):
Perhaps a little bit short of a divorce from reality here.

Speaker 2 (16:16):
Here they are.

Speaker 13 (16:18):
The US attacked our nuclear facilities, a matter that is
independently worth pursuing for prosecution in international courts, but they
failed to do anything significant. The President of America greatly
exaggerated what had happened. It became clear that he needed
this exaggeration, Joel.

Speaker 2 (16:38):
Your response just.

Speaker 1 (16:40):
Very quickly, Caroline.

Speaker 12 (16:41):
So you know, we've had control of the skies over
he Run for a period of two weeks. The complete
annihilation of their Air Force, the near complete and hopeful
annihilation of their ballistic missile arsenal, as well as the
knocking off of their top military brass from the IIGC,
the Army and also their nuclear scientists. I think it's
very fair to say that the majority of the planet

(17:02):
that's watched this knows exactly who the winner is and
indeed who.

Speaker 1 (17:05):
The loser is.

Speaker 3 (17:06):
Yes, and it's certainly not a round. Okay, thank you
dol Bernie so much for your time.

Speaker 1 (17:10):
Thank you, Eran.

Speaker 3 (17:12):
Now, the opposition is pushing labor to boost its defense
spending after NATO countries agreed to ramp up military spending
to five percent of GDP by twenty thirty five, but
the Albanese government is holding foam, considering an increase to
just two point three percent and resisting pressure from Donald
Trump to spend more.

Speaker 2 (17:33):
I'm joined now by Shadow.

Speaker 3 (17:35):
Resources Minister Susan McDonald as well as Independent MP Die Lee.
Thank you ladies both for your time. Susan, I'll start
with you. As I pointed out at the top of
the show, there seems to be a clear expectation from
Trump that if NATO countries can lift their defense spending,
Australia can to. Are you concerned that Albanese's stubbornness on

(17:57):
this issue will risk our relationship.

Speaker 14 (17:59):
With you one hundred percent.

Speaker 15 (18:02):
What we're seeing from Labor is of unwillingness to commit
to doing the necessary actions, whether it be in defense
spending or even where it is on critical minerals supply
the very materials that are so relevant to our allies
in their defense expenditure. So we are i think, jeopardizing

(18:24):
the relationship which we have with our most important Western
democratic ally, and we're threatening Australia's reputation as a reliable
ally and a dependable defense buddy.

Speaker 3 (18:38):
As a former child refugee of the Vietnam War, you
perhaps know better than most in Parliament what the impacts
of war are.

Speaker 2 (18:45):
Like in this region. What is your view on defense spending?

Speaker 9 (18:49):
Look, you're right there, a high sison that you're right there, Caroline.
The impact of war is really immeasurable, especially in families, women,
children and innocent lives are lost in these whole war games. Defense, though,
is actually important. I'm not going to go into the
debate whether you know how that is going to impact

(19:12):
our strategic relationship with the US, but one thing I
think we do need to look at and explore is
the defense spending in the ADF, you know, within our
human capabilities. My understanding is that you know, ADF forces,
you know, in the nineteen eighties were you know, was

(19:34):
more than what we have today in twenty twenty five.
So how do we build the capacity capabilities of human
you know, we have so much, so many people here
in Australia that we could train young people that we
could recruit into the defense force to build their capacity
in order to play that role in the future. And

(19:56):
I think that's very important to invest in the human
capabilities that we have. And of course technology and of
course look at how technology as we know technology in
AI is continuously changing so rapidly that how are we
making sure that we are on track to keep track
with what's happening the changes in technology in AI. So

(20:19):
that's very critical from that sense from my perspective in
terms of defense spending.

Speaker 2 (20:23):
Yeah, No, those are good points.

Speaker 3 (20:25):
I want to move on to what happened when the
US struck around. It's also been revealed that the Albanesi
government actually sought legal advice on whether the strikes were
in fact lawful Finance Minister Katie Gallagher spoke on this issue,
but she didn't say where the government stood on that matter.

Speaker 7 (20:46):
Has advice been sought as to whether these military actions
are legal under international law?

Speaker 16 (20:52):
Look, obviously advice has been sought by you know, I
mean in government.

Speaker 6 (20:56):
As we're working through some of these issues.

Speaker 17 (20:58):
We get a whole lot of advice across the government.

Speaker 3 (21:02):
A Susan, the government ultimately backed the strikes, but it
did take them twenty four hours to say anything.

Speaker 2 (21:08):
Was it necessary to wait for the advice here?

Speaker 9 (21:11):
Well?

Speaker 15 (21:11):
I think the second question is did they seek advice
after the Hamas attack on Israel? Did they seek advice
after the Chinese warships circled Australia without any communications. This
seems to me a government that's very willing to pick and.

Speaker 14 (21:29):
Choose its friends.

Speaker 15 (21:30):
And the point I made before about an important Western democracy.

Speaker 14 (21:35):
Ally like the US, the Albanesi governments.

Speaker 15 (21:38):
Willing to try and second guests and seek legal advice
on its actions on taking action against a country that
was developing enriched uranium working towards nuclear weapons outside of
the international framework. That's been a breed and for a
country that is very vocal in its determination to see

(22:02):
the end of a Western democracy.

Speaker 14 (22:05):
So you know, I.

Speaker 15 (22:06):
Think that it's intriguing to me that LABEL would choose
to get a legal advice on this matter, but has
still failed to properly call out some of those other
actions like the attack on Israel on the seventh of October,
or indeed the Chinese entering to circumnavigate Australia's waters. So

(22:31):
you know, this is very inconsistent and again undermines our
reputation as a dependable ally.

Speaker 2 (22:37):
Susan's right, isn't she?

Speaker 3 (22:38):
I mean, after October seven, with almost this immediate response
from Pennywong urging restraint from Israel, putting the ONUS almost
on Israel there, it was extraordinary. But I know you
don't want to enter the debate about our relationship with
the US. But surely twenty four hours is too long
for the government to respond here.

Speaker 9 (22:57):
Look, you know, I mean, I suppose all government to
take a legal advice one day and yeah, look it's
the government of the day the decision of when they
take that legal advice. But you know, I probably won't
enter into the debate of you know, did I take it,
you know, quickly enough or not They did take legal
advice at the end of the day. But I think

(23:20):
look from my perspective, I think all Australians have to
be very mindful and careful because we don't want, you know.

Speaker 17 (23:28):
Sending people off to wars.

Speaker 9 (23:31):
I just think that's something we have to be very
careful of as well.

Speaker 1 (23:36):
And now, speaking from.

Speaker 9 (23:38):
Live experience here, I think that and I'm sure Australians
have already been through the Vietnam War and the you know,
the lives, the innocent lives and the families that have
been impacted by those who went into Vietnam to fight.

Speaker 2 (23:53):
The war there. I don't think.

Speaker 3 (23:55):
I mean, I don't think in this case the question
was obviously whether to send troops or anything, just pressing
support for it.

Speaker 2 (24:01):
But I do take your point. I think this is.

Speaker 3 (24:03):
Something both of you will have a strong view on
moving onto the Liberal Party and it could be on
the brink of extinction because of its women problem. That's
at least according to outgoing Senator Linda Reynolds, who has
offered the party's gender review. The number of Liberal women
in Parliament has hit a thirty year low. Just twenty
eight Lower House and peas in the party are women. Susan,

(24:26):
you're obviously a woman. You're in the Liberal National Party.
Do you agree with this assessment? Is a party on
the brink of extinction?

Speaker 15 (24:34):
Oh, I think any reports of the Liberal Party's demise
are premature. I do think, though, that we should think
about what diversity looks like.

Speaker 14 (24:45):
I think it wears many faces.

Speaker 15 (24:48):
I'm fortunate to serve with somebody of Die's capacity, and
that is terrific. Die also brings other experiences that are
quite unique to the Parliament. Labour has embraced quotas for
female diversity, but that's also seen a flooding in the
Senate of lawyers and shop stewards. I think if Australians

(25:11):
could see the lack of diversity in discussion for by
the Labor Party, that that would concern them. You know,
gender is only one.

Speaker 1 (25:20):
Portion of it.

Speaker 3 (25:21):
Would you support Would you support gender quotas quickly?

Speaker 15 (25:24):
Susan, No, I don't because I'm very grateful to be
in a position that I know I have earned my
place as an accountant, as a butcher, as a mother,
as a woman, a whole bunch of things. And at
the last election, we took a charter boat operator.

Speaker 14 (25:40):
We took a paramedic.

Speaker 15 (25:42):
We took a farmer and a veteran to the election
just from North Queensland alone. I think that's the kind
of diversity that will prove us well, stand us in
good stead as we seek to full government the future.

Speaker 2 (25:54):
Yeah, that's it.

Speaker 3 (25:55):
And I'd love to forget your view because you're not
part of a party or an independent of course, and
you got there on your own strengths.

Speaker 2 (26:02):
What's your view on quotas.

Speaker 17 (26:03):
Look, I think we should set a target.

Speaker 9 (26:05):
I mean party shed set a target to achieve a
certain target, but I think quota can limit. It could
just be for me, it could be quite tokenistic. But
that's just my personal perspective. But I think what's important
that what we're missing here and what we're hear in
the media. I think what we need to see is
a strong opposition and I think people are distracted that.

Speaker 7 (26:30):
You know.

Speaker 9 (26:30):
Look, I think the Liberal Party probably it's about the
lack of policies putting forward to show Middle Australia what
they are, they stand for and what they've been fighting for.
And I think it's so important to drill down to
the policies that will support Middle Australians and because you know,
you can't just look after certain sections of the community

(26:53):
of the country and not the moms and dads and
the small business that are propping up our country. So
critical that I think, let's not you know, listen to
the media talking about women's issues. Yes, of course, you know,
women is part of the conversation. Diversity. Cultural diversity is

(27:14):
part of the conversation. Multi culture, a stress part of
the conversation. Small business is part of the conversation. Moms
and dads is part of the conversation. Middle Australi is
part of the conversation. So it's the real diverse, you know,
policies that I think I really urged the Liberal and
National Party to focus on and not get distracted by
just one single issue and take everybody into that because sorry, Susan,

(27:39):
you guys have to really not out some kind of
you know, we need a strong opposition and we've.

Speaker 2 (27:47):
Got to go to a break. But it's such a
good point.

Speaker 3 (27:49):
I think we do get destructed quite often with this
women's problem, whereas policy needs to be my game here, Susan,
sy thank you so much for your time tonight, really
appreciate it. Coming up after the break Tina McQueen and
Tanya Mahalek. I'll get their thoughts on the New Southwales
premier calling Mark Latham a bigot.

Speaker 2 (28:08):
That's next.

Speaker 9 (28:13):
Well.

Speaker 3 (28:13):
Joining me now is Sky News contributor Tina McQueen and
New Upwell's Independent MLC Tanya Mahalex.

Speaker 2 (28:19):
Welcome to you both.

Speaker 3 (28:20):
Break to see as always, I want to start with
an extraordinary outburst from New Southwales Premier Chrismins against.

Speaker 2 (28:28):
Upper House and p Mark Latham.

Speaker 3 (28:30):
It all came about during a debate on new hate
speech laws which would criminalize in citing racial hatred.

Speaker 7 (28:39):
It may not shock people in the gallery of this
Parliament that one of Australia's biggest bigots doesn't like hate
speech laws, but that doesn't mean they're not justified. Now
I'm reminded of that old adage, mister Speaker, never wrestle
with a pig, because you both get dirtier. Besides, the
pig loves it. But I have to say to you,
mister Speaker, at some point members of this Parliament and

(29:02):
the other House have to stand against this bigotry.

Speaker 3 (29:06):
Now, Kanye, you were a One Nation member until December
and he worked closely with Mark Lathan.

Speaker 2 (29:12):
What did you make of these comments?

Speaker 18 (29:14):
What can I just say, what you've just witnessed is
the art of deflection, because what Premier means is doing
there is trying to distract the ordinary punters from the
fact that three of his most senior political operatives from
his office had to front up to an inquiry today
in Parliament.

Speaker 2 (29:32):
It was five actually.

Speaker 18 (29:34):
Well two from the Police Minister's office as well, and
he did everything he could to avoid that. He himself
has refused to front up to the inquiry about the
dual caravan hoak scandal, which I think he has to answer,
and that is why he's angry. What you're seeing, that
whole spray, that whole rant, is the Premier frustrated that

(29:54):
he can't control the outcome legislative Council. There is a
very large cross bench there. A third of the parliament
in their Legiative Council are independent members and members of
different parties. He can't control the art of legislation. He
has a whole bunch of inquiries on foot in Parliament.
There are many, many orders of papers constantly, and the

(30:16):
reason there is is because none of us can get
a straight answer from this premier or.

Speaker 3 (30:21):
From the I disagree with you about the inquiry, about
being called in front of the inquiry because and I know.

Speaker 2 (30:27):
I've been called a hoax and a conjob.

Speaker 3 (30:29):
But at the end of the day, there was, you know,
eighteen months of anti Semitism.

Speaker 17 (30:33):
It's still ongoing.

Speaker 2 (30:34):
We see it all the time.

Speaker 3 (30:36):
Synagogues were feeding yeah Dayka centers via bomb. Whether or
not the caravan itself was part of some organized crime
plot doesn't change the.

Speaker 2 (30:45):
Terror for the community.

Speaker 3 (30:46):
But I think the point was, you know, Mark Latham
has made some disgusting comments absolutely about the Jewish lobby
and other members of Parliament.

Speaker 19 (30:56):
Appalling and it was a world deserved spray by Premier men.
I'm liking this guy more and more, the poor liberals.
Latham is a very smart guy. He knows exactly what
he's doing. He's fighting for relevance. He'll be out of
a job next election and it's absolutely disgraceful. He should
have been called in a lot more for his disgraceful
particularly routing the Jewish community. Absolute disgraces. I'm really really

(31:18):
disappointed in Markus has said he's a smart guy, but
he's absolutely reached the bottom of the govern now.

Speaker 3 (31:24):
And I got on well with Markel form a colleague
of mine at skyne Is.

Speaker 2 (31:28):
I mean, you worked with him in the party.

Speaker 18 (31:31):
I find that he tends to vote mostly on the
side of Israel.

Speaker 19 (31:34):
I have to say, I actually.

Speaker 18 (31:35):
Haven't seen him in my time in working with him
on one nation. He always made it clear to me
that that's where he stood, and they asked him on that,
We ask him his position on the Middle East.

Speaker 19 (31:46):
He's always pro been pro Israel.

Speaker 16 (31:48):
So I don't think that's what.

Speaker 3 (31:50):
I'm seeing, this sort of veering towards more that Tucker
Carlson fire Life, which needs so far left.

Speaker 2 (31:56):
On these issues.

Speaker 18 (31:58):
He's you know, here's one vote in that parliament.

Speaker 19 (32:03):
Yeah, but it's one boys, and the disgraceful remarksis made.
You know, you should be shut down.

Speaker 16 (32:09):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (32:09):
Well, look, I think when it's come the next six years.

Speaker 3 (32:11):
I mean, there are members of the Jewish community and
Jewish groups who are opposed to these hate speech laws
as well. But I think while action and prosecution isn't
happening on incitement to violence, we do need to strengthen
hate speech.

Speaker 2 (32:24):
That's at least my view.

Speaker 3 (32:25):
Now sky News has revealed the ABC has taken extraordinary
steps to ensure it's journalists hit woke diversity targets, altering
the structure of stories.

Speaker 2 (32:35):
Going to air.

Speaker 3 (32:36):
The target includes things like having the talent in any
story needing to be fifty percent women, fifteen percent people
of diverse cultural backgrounds, three point four percent Indigenous, and
eight percent disabled representation. Tanya, surely this is absurd.

Speaker 18 (32:53):
Yeah, look, it'd be a bureaucratic nightmare working at the
av SE. The idea that they're just so bobbed down
with diverse city targets.

Speaker 19 (33:01):
Spare a thought for the poor.

Speaker 18 (33:03):
Interns that are going there to learn about journalism, because
the last thing they're learning about is journalism. There's no
investigations anymore, there's no proper inquiries coming from the ABC.
They just seem to be entirely bogged down and obsessed
with this diversity dei madness.

Speaker 2 (33:18):
We're spending built the taxpayer for Italy.

Speaker 3 (33:21):
It is paying for it, and I know how difficult
it is to find a case study or a story
in the first place.

Speaker 2 (33:26):
And if all your time is taken.

Speaker 3 (33:28):
Up making sure it's this many Indigenous people and the
many disabled.

Speaker 19 (33:32):
Real focus more on truth in stories Otherwise so proud
in court so much, which is.

Speaker 2 (33:39):
Russell exactly exactly.

Speaker 3 (33:41):
Now moving on, as I discussed earlier in the show,
the Liberal Party is apparently in danger of extinction because
it has a women problem. That's according to Linda Reynolds,
who's behind this gender review into the party, with the
number of Liberal women in Parliament at its lowest point
for more than thirty years. Susan she's open to quotas, Tina,

(34:02):
I say, you won't agree with.

Speaker 19 (34:03):
That, No, absolutely not, And I couldn't believe Spekeman came
out and not supporting quotas either. So no, we cannot.
We cannot have quotas. That's just ridiculous. And I think
if Susan le continues down that line, she's not going
to get support from the membership.

Speaker 2 (34:16):
She needs you, a fan of quoteras.

Speaker 18 (34:18):
I know I'm not the layor party and I was
a member for twenty seven years. I was never benefited
at all from any quotas. But can I say that
Layer Party has had quotas for many decades and it
has a male Prime Minister and male Prime Minister and
every Labor Premier in Australia is male, so it's not
working for them either.

Speaker 3 (34:36):
We make the point that you know, Susan lisays she's
open to it, but she took out quite a few
strong yeen out of her shadow cabinet being and this.

Speaker 2 (34:47):
Is a woman's to get the vote.

Speaker 19 (34:49):
So she is a woman that's never places a pre selection,
so she's always made sure she's been the only candidate.
That's a whole nother story. But yeah, no no quotas
for us.

Speaker 3 (34:57):
Okay, well, look, it's interesting to light on the show
of four strong women in politics and none of them
have been for quotas.

Speaker 17 (35:04):
That make about what you will.

Speaker 3 (35:05):
Now parents are paying eye watering sums and more than
one thousand dollars in non refundable application fees to secure
a spot for their newborn babies at Sydney's most elite schools.

Speaker 2 (35:17):
It's because wait lists reportedly.

Speaker 3 (35:19):
Sore beyond twenty twenty eight ton you forget about newborn babies,
I can tell you in the East and someburbs of
Sydney you need to put your kids' names down while
they're still in the womb.

Speaker 18 (35:29):
Yes, it's a chakra and the fact that you have
to pay these exorbitant fees that they will never ever
see ever again and their parents, of course, that are
putting their names down at multiple schools. NESSA manages the
curriculum and the governance for private schools, but of course
they have no say when it comes to pricing. And
I do think this is a real concern when you

(35:50):
have parents who feel they have no option but to
put their names down at private schools because they're so
worried about some of the public schools out there and
the levels of indoctrination that happens. So you know, there
should be a bit of some thought I think done
by miss We's government of Minister fordications to why this
is happening. It's happening because people are worried that their
kids aren't going to get the best indication of public sectors,

(36:11):
so they're desperately putting their kids down in the private section.

Speaker 2 (36:15):
So true.

Speaker 3 (36:15):
I just want to get to this story very quickly, Tina,
because billionaires. If Jeff Bezos will tie the knot in
the next few days with his fiance Laurence Sanchez, and
the pictures coming out of Venice are amazing. There's been
a lot of speculation over the invite list and now
we've seen some of the celebrities there, Oprah Winfree, Leonardo DiCaprio,
Kim Kardashian, a banker Trump.

Speaker 2 (36:37):
It's completely over the top, but you're going to be
watching what.

Speaker 19 (36:40):
I'm going to be glued to it and counting the
number of private jets and seeing that it said no
presents make donations to these sustainable charities. Yeah, I mean
it does make it does make me laugh, but it'll
be great viewing and I'll be particularly interested.

Speaker 3 (36:54):
Now it's going to be a lot of fun. Tina Tanla,
thank you. You guys are also a lot of fun.
Now still to come, we'll aross to the UK as
residents are warned to prepare for global heating.

Speaker 2 (37:03):
That and more next Welcome back.

Speaker 3 (37:14):
Victorian Supreme Court judge has hit out in an attempt
by the Liberal Party members to block the one and
a half million dollar bailout of John Persuito, calling it
flawed and half baked. Now this application was adjourned in court,
meaning this saga will now drag on into next month,
and it was brought by some members of the party

(37:35):
after this loan was approved an extraordinary meeting. Joining me
now as Stephanie Bastian from Women's Forum Australia.

Speaker 2 (37:43):
Stephanie, Great to see you.

Speaker 3 (37:45):
I guess the Liberal Party executive was hoping that this
would end the whole ordeal. Clearly some members aren't happy
about the loan, but now it looks like we're still
going to be talking about this ugly.

Speaker 2 (37:57):
Affair for some time.

Speaker 3 (37:59):
In your view, was loaning John Persido the money ever
going to put a full stop.

Speaker 2 (38:05):
At the end of this topic.

Speaker 17 (38:09):
Well, good evening, Caroline, great to join you.

Speaker 16 (38:11):
I think there's a great deal of unrest about how
this is unfolded. There seems to be a lot of
information missing, even to members of.

Speaker 17 (38:19):
The Adminished Committee before the before the matter went to
a vote.

Speaker 16 (38:23):
There seems to be a lack of information about interest rates,
what happens if he defaults. So I really think that
Colen Harken is brave in the sense that she has
taken this to a step of going to court because
she wants to protect the.

Speaker 17 (38:39):
Liberal Party's money.

Speaker 16 (38:40):
This money has come from hard working volunteers that have
invested in the Liberal Party, and I think there's also
a great deal of concern about the fact that he
is being bowed out at some sort of forgiveness by the.

Speaker 17 (38:51):
Party because what he did was frankly disgraceful.

Speaker 16 (38:54):
This was not some error that made it to court.
This whole thing was contrived from the beginning. He tried
to sack his colleague to destroy her career based on
her views on women's sex based rights. Had he apologized
or settled the matter, or even if it had been
some other situation where he just simply got it wrong,
there'd be a lot more sympathy.

Speaker 17 (39:15):
But I think the way that this is a.

Speaker 16 (39:17):
Played out and be now this funding rammed through has
left a bad taste.

Speaker 17 (39:22):
In many Liberal Party members' mounths.

Speaker 3 (39:25):
Yeah, and it appears, I mean the loan apparently has
already been transferred into more Redeeming's account.

Speaker 2 (39:31):
So it's not really.

Speaker 3 (39:31):
Clear what the call will be able to do at
this stage. But do you think how do you think
it's going to impact the.

Speaker 2 (39:38):
Party more widely?

Speaker 3 (39:39):
Already we're hearing all these stories about a women's problem.
Surely this isn't going to help us talk about quotas
needed for the Liberal Party.

Speaker 2 (39:48):
I don't know what your view about quotas is.

Speaker 3 (39:50):
I've just spoken to four women in politics who don't
support them.

Speaker 16 (39:55):
Well, I don't support quotas either. I think the merit
based system works quite well. Quite frankly, I think this
whole quota's issue that seems to have taken off is
a distraction from the fact that the Liberal Party is
lacking in an understanding of its values and its policy base.

Speaker 17 (40:12):
Quotas, in my view, will not flip a single vote.

Speaker 16 (40:14):
There were many good female candidates running in seats like
Ku Yong and Wentworth that simply didn't get elected.

Speaker 17 (40:21):
I think the party can probably do better in.

Speaker 16 (40:23):
The way that it treats its women if they want
to deal with its women problem. I mean, you saw
the lead up to the election. They were too scared
to even say what a woman was. They ran away
from women's sex base rights. That would be a starting point.
Second to that, the way that they treat women who
are standing up for these issues is appalling. From cathieves
to obviously more a deeming So they've got a lot

(40:46):
of work to do internally. I feel like this whole
quota's issue has just become a distraction from the elephant
in the.

Speaker 17 (40:54):
Room that they have all these internal issues.

Speaker 16 (40:56):
They need to go back to their basics, they're founding
values and go from there.

Speaker 3 (41:03):
Such a good point, and I do know that the
BBC even had an anchor this week and is standing
by her for refusing to use the phrase pregnant people
and correcting it to women. Unfortunately we don't have more
time to talk about that, but really appreciate your thoughts,
Stephanie Bastian.

Speaker 2 (41:18):
Thank you for your time.

Speaker 3 (41:21):
Now, the UK Prime Minister Kiir Stahma is copying plenty
of flack over plans to reform welfare. He's looking to
restrict eligibility for the disability pension and save up to
ten billion Australian dollars per year, but he's had to
make concessions after a backlash by backbenches in his own party.

Speaker 10 (41:41):
I recognize there is a consensus across the House on
the urgent need for reform of our welfare system. All
colleagues want to get this right, and so do I.
We want to see reform implemented with labor values of fairness.
That conversation will continue in the coming days so it

(42:02):
can begin making change together. On Tuesday for.

Speaker 3 (42:06):
More on this, I'm joined by a Sky News contributor
and gb News host to Emily Carver.

Speaker 2 (42:11):
Emily, great to see you again.

Speaker 3 (42:13):
What's this reform all about and why the big backlash.

Speaker 6 (42:17):
Yeah, so this is now the biggest and most embarrassing
u turn for this prime minister. He won a landslide
majority less than one year ago. He's got a majority
of over two hundred MP's in the House of Commons.
Yet he now lacks the authority to even get through
some minor, minor welfare reforms that wouldn't even cut the
amount we spend on benefits. That amount would continue to rise.

(42:39):
It would just slow down the increase by five billion pounds.
So even if the cuts were to be fully implemented,
which they are now not going to be, the benefits
bill would still go up by eight billion pounds a year,
which is totally unsustainable. So the problem for Sekis Starmer
is that he is deeply unpopular within his own party
and of course the country. Over one hundred and twenty

(43:01):
of his own MPs are gearing up to vote. We're
gearing up to vote down his flagship bill in Parliament
this coming Tuesday. That would have been the biggest rebellion
of his premiership. Now there are of course many MPs
who don't mind that we're spending more on welfare than
defense in this country, and that the number of people
on disability benefits for mental health has skyrocketed in the

(43:23):
past few years. But but, but this is about more
than just that. Many of his own MPPs fear for
their own futures. They want regime change, they want kiss
Starmer out. And now he's being forced this morning to
water down his cuts massively and he's lost even more authority.
It's yet another U turn from our hopeless Prime Minister,
and he's even lost the support of the BBC. They're

(43:46):
calling out his hat trick of U turns and they're
saying this is the most awkward of the lot.

Speaker 2 (43:50):
And what's going on at the BBC.

Speaker 3 (43:51):
First they admit women are women, and now they're turning
against Kiir Starmer. Amazing. There's another climate change report during
the rounds. According to the uk IS Green Building Council, schools,
care homes and offices are not equipped for the effects
of global heating and face lengthy heat waves.

Speaker 1 (44:08):
Now.

Speaker 2 (44:08):
I've been over to your neck.

Speaker 3 (44:09):
Of the woods a few times, Emily, and I don't
think you really experienced wives over.

Speaker 6 (44:13):
There, certainly not in the same way Australia does. Although
I'm currently pregnant at the moment, so we have had
some sunny days. But yes, every time we see the
sun in this country, the eco zelots come out with
a new report telling us that we're all going to
die from I don't know, boiling in our own sweat,
or from dehydration or just overheating. I mean, it's totally depressing.

(44:36):
But yes, this report is talking about buildings, how they
need to be cooler for the.

Speaker 17 (44:41):
Future global warming.

Speaker 6 (44:42):
Okay, fine, fine, fine, fine, but they told us we
needed to make our buildings more energy efficient, and that's
why they're so blooming hot. That's why they're so blooming hot.
And of course these groups don't approve of air conditioning either.
Nour is that more energy and electricity and power. So
I'm not quite sure what their radical solution is, but
I'm sure it involves spending lots more money that we
didn't have.

Speaker 2 (45:02):
I'm sure it does.

Speaker 3 (45:03):
Now, you turn on that air con if you needed Emily,
take care of yourself. Congratulations again and thanks for your
time tonight. Now after the break, the winners and losers
of the week, including.

Speaker 2 (45:13):
Daddy Donald Trump.

Speaker 3 (45:20):
Now it's that time of the week where we saw
the winners from the losers and helping me to do
that is pro McSween from verb communications pro always great
to see you now. Your winner this week is Daddy Trump.
Here's the clip for anyone who hasn't seen it yet.

Speaker 1 (45:37):
They've got a big fight like two kids at a
school yeard. You know, they fight like hell, you can't
stop them. Let them fight for about two three minutes.
Then it's easier to staff up.

Speaker 3 (45:46):
And then they has sometimes do strong language, strong eye,
you have to use a certain word. And I got
to say I loved how the White House took that
and ran with it.

Speaker 20 (46:00):
He's what the world means, you know.

Speaker 21 (46:19):
This time is the prodigal president, you know where he's brave,
he's fearless, he doesn't give a you know what about
what people think. And we've got the world dominated by
you know, woke leaders who are too scared to do anything.
They run in a pack. And suddenly he's got them
all sorted. It was all about the deal. He got
what he wanted. And you know, it's just a shame.

(46:40):
We've got a whimpering coward here who is again bound
up in ideology and doesn't get what really is going on.

Speaker 3 (46:46):
Too right, No, one's going to call him daddy, you know,
handsome boy. Maybe that's about a leader said now my
winner is Melbourne street sweepers Shawn Turner, who won his
unfair dismissal case from Darrabin Council in Melbourne after objecting
to an acknowledgment of country.

Speaker 2 (47:03):
And how good on him.

Speaker 21 (47:04):
I know, you know, why are they doing that for
goodness sake? I think you know it's lost any merit
And he you know, we just don't it resonates all.

Speaker 2 (47:14):
It doesn't resonate.

Speaker 21 (47:15):
It actually makes you angry when you hear it these days.
So I think he's brave and fearless and great that
he did it well.

Speaker 3 (47:22):
I think he voiced what a lot of Australians are thinking,
that it's overdone, it's unnecessary.

Speaker 19 (47:27):
You know.

Speaker 3 (47:28):
He raised the point that it should be our servicemen
and women. Why aren't they being acknowledged at these council meetings?
Actly every council meeting to have it is over the top.
Now you'll lose over the week. As the e Safety Commissioner,
she wants to include YouTube and social media ban under sixteen.

Speaker 21 (47:42):
You know, and she's calling it a delay. Now it's
all semantics.

Speaker 2 (47:46):
We know.

Speaker 21 (47:47):
You know, if we were really that worried about our children,
we wouldn't send them to schools anymore.

Speaker 19 (47:51):
It's such a dangerous thing.

Speaker 2 (47:53):
They're getting brainwashed.

Speaker 21 (47:55):
Mental health is being affected because they're being told the
world's going to end. What does she want us to
wrap them all in cotton wool? It is an absurd thing.
What's it going to be a trojan horse to facial recognition?

Speaker 19 (48:07):
We don't know.

Speaker 3 (48:08):
I got to say I disagree with you on this one,
and I of course I love YouTube. A lot of
our content goes up on there, but I do fear
four kids on social media. Maybe it's having two little
kids myself. I'm really in the think of it.

Speaker 1 (48:20):
I'm worried.

Speaker 2 (48:21):
Yeah, but what.

Speaker 21 (48:22):
About parent parental responsibility exactly?

Speaker 3 (48:24):
They're not wanting to be parents, but I think were
The problem is some kids have it, some kids don't.

Speaker 2 (48:28):
It's really hard for parents.

Speaker 21 (48:29):
Why should all suffer? You know, I'm sick of the
nanny state stepping in?

Speaker 3 (48:33):
Yeah, Well, my loser of the week is the ABC
for hiring activist Antoinette Latube in the first place and
making her a martyr.

Speaker 2 (48:42):
You know, she shouldn't have been hired. That was the problem.

Speaker 3 (48:45):
They went about it the wrong way when they were complaints,
legitimate complaints about her being there, I think, And ultimately
they suffer. We suffer because we're going to have to
pay cough up millions of dollars to care.

Speaker 21 (48:56):
You know, they close due diligence. Why did they employer?
As you say, and you know they were offered a
deal and they didn't take it, you know, and with
Heston Russell, the same thing about.

Speaker 3 (49:08):
Have a lot to learn. Thank you so much, proser.
And that's it for me tonight. Janika Degeorgio returns next
week and Steve Price is up next