May 12, 2025 • 49 mins
The Prime Minister unveils his new-look cabinet, the ALP president warns of a looming membership crisis. Plus, a former Howard Government minister on the factional tensions within the Liberal Party.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
Peter Krandland live on Sky News Australia.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
Good evening, Welcome to the program. Big week ahead, convulsions
going on inside the parties. Used from the Prime Minister today,
it's all coming up to night on credline in that
vein the PM and veiling his new little cabinet today.
Factional fighting continues though to plague the Labor Party. Now
he's made some interesting choices. We'll discuss those. We'll have
a look at who's been demoted or cut all together
(00:28):
as well. This afternoon two the National Party had their elections.
They re elected David littlprowd Tomorrow the Liberals will meet.
The numbers are tight between Susan Lee and Angus Taylor
Key In all of this is the direction the Coalition
takes on big issues like nuclear energy. Chris Yilman with
more class sets, not all about Canberra. Farmers and fires
(00:51):
in Victoria making their voices heard over a new tax
at risks, sending regional communities bus They're suffering with the drought,
but this is huge. Big protests on Friday, more protests
set for tomorrow. I'll speak with one farmer tonight who
says enough is enough and in a very clear message
to some left leaning liberals. I think nuclear powers on
the policy shopping board, the Nationals declare they are not
(01:16):
for turning.
Speaker 3 (01:17):
We've had the courage on nuclear energy, something that our
party room has believed in for a very long time,
and all renewables approach won't work.
Speaker 2 (01:28):
Here here for the Nationals. With first the PM today
announcing his second term ministry, all individuals are remind everyone
chosen by the factions, with the PM left only to
allocate the portfolios over the weekend. Now I'll get to
that announcement in detail in a moment. But while he
was doing all of that, the coalition parties, well they've
(01:48):
been working the phones, making calls and taking calls as
they elect their new leadership teams. This afternoon, of course,
that was the Nationals who met at three pm in
Canberra to re elect David little Proud as leader. Kevin
Hogan elected as the new Deputy. I'll get into that
result a little later with my panel. But Little Brow's
(02:09):
reinstatement of his party's position on nuclear well it was unequivocal.
Speaker 3 (02:16):
We've had the courage on nuclear energy, something that our
party room has believed in for a very long time
and all renewables approach won't work. But it was our
party room, from many people before us that had the
courage to come forward, but it was us.
Speaker 1 (02:28):
It was our party room that delivered it.
Speaker 2 (02:32):
Now, that clear position on nuclear from the NATS is
important as to where the coalition goes now, and I'll
explain that in a moment. Tomorrow, of course, it'll be
the Liberals who meet to elect their new leadership team,
and unlike the Prime Minister, the new Liberal leader will
also choose their shadow ministry as well as allocate the portfolios.
But regardless of who wins tomorrow's Liberal leadership contest, the
(02:55):
real issue is whether the Liberal Party will be a
strong and clear alternative to the Albanezy government. That's why
the recent election was lost because on too many issues
the Liberals were not a clear alternative, and on those
issues where they were a clear alternative, they didn't put
up much of a fight. Like you, I cheered when
(03:17):
Peter Dutton committed the coalition to ending the band on
nuclear power, because if Australia really does have to get
to net zero, the only way to do so and
keep the lights on is via a missions free nuclear
power Sadly for our country. Having made that commitment, the
Coalition failed to win the argument. Indeed, it hardly even
(03:39):
prosecuted it. Peter Dutton never once did a media event
outside the Lucas Heights nuclear reactor that's been operating very
safely in Sydney's South for nearly seventy years. Nor did
he ever do a media event outside a medical diagnostic
facility when nuclear medicine is a vital part of detecting
and treating cancers for millions of Australians. Nor did he
(04:02):
push hard with the example of Ontario in Canada, which
gets some fifty percent of its power from nuclear energy,
and where power costs there are about half of what
Australians pay. Indeed, once the Coalition had made its nuclear announcement,
the only people talking about nuclear power with a Labor.
Speaker 4 (04:22):
Party this time they need to find six hundred billion
dollars to pay for their nuclear reactors and a six
hundred billion dollar nuclear plan.
Speaker 2 (04:34):
You say it's not you know it's not. You know,
I know it is now. That six hundred million dollar figure,
as I've said before, didn't come from a reputable expert.
It was cooked up by something called the Smart Energy Council,
a renewable industry lobby group stacked with ex labor insiders
and on the board at one time Climbate two hundred
(04:55):
founder the Teels puppet master Simon Holmes, a court if
Labour's lies about the costume nuclear power. Let's look at
the objective electoral facts from last week in because now
that the results are clear, what's evident is that the
seats where nuclear power stations might have been located will
(05:16):
showed there was no rejection of the coalition, indeed, far
from it. In most of these seats, the Coalition actually
improved its position despite going backwards. On a national scale.
Marina at the side of the Tawong power station, David
Little proud Well he got seventy one percent of the
two PP vote. In Flynn the side of the Khalid
(05:39):
power station, Colin Boyce Well, he got a six point
seven percent two party preferred swing in his favor. In Hunter,
the side of the Ladell power station. There was a
big swing to Labor, but none no greater there than
the national swing. In Claire the side of the Mountain
Piper Point a power station, the ex National Independent he held on,
(06:01):
but he did not campaign against nuclear power. In Gray
the side of the Port Augusta power station, there was
an antiliberal swing, but this was also two a range
of factors. There was the retirement there of the incumbent
long standing Liberal and also a strong Teal campaign. Despite that,
all though the Libs held the seat. In O'Connor the
(06:22):
side of the Collie power station, Rick Wilson got a
seven percent two party preferred swing in his favor, unlike
many other Liberals in WA. And finally in Gippsland's side
of the loy Yang power station, Darren chester Well he
got seventy percent of the two PP vote. Now, despite
the fact that the British Labor Party, the Democrats in
(06:43):
the United States, and the Canadian Liberals their equivalent of
our Labor Party here, so all of the Anglo spheares
leftist parties, despite the fact that all of them support
nuclear power. Here in Australia, the Labour Party remains fanatically opposed.
And then there's now this strong campaign to get the
Liberal Party to back Labour's energy policy, the policy that
(07:06):
finnels billions and billions of dollars of subsidies to anyone
in the renewable sector. Here's the website for Premier State,
the lobbying firm controlled by Liberal factional manipulator Michael Photius,
along with numerous green energy firms. Smart Energy Council is
a Premier State client and now a Photius supported Liberal
(07:29):
senator Maria Kovicheck is calling for the Liberals to drop
their support for nuclear energy.
Speaker 5 (07:36):
This is a policy that went to an election. The
election result was devastating, so the message from the community
is very very clear, and that's why I believe that
this nuclear policy has to go.
Speaker 2 (07:51):
Well, Phipps to her. I mean, the response from the
community is very much in favor of nuclear if you
look at the seats where the nuclear paur plants were
identified and would have been built if the coalition was elected. Plus,
there's been a high rotation ad campaign on this station
and others by something called Liberals against Nuclear, urging the
(08:15):
defeated party to adopt Labour's energy policy. And we can
be sure that Liberals against Nuclear are being funded by
big wind and big solar, people who will make millions
and millions out of more and more renewables. Make no mistake,
there will be massive pressure brought on the new leader
to drop support for nuclear power, especially if Susan Lee
(08:37):
is the leader, because her support comes from factional players
like Photius. Make no mistake who drives all of this.
It's a campaign by Cashta Renewables energy vested interest to
protect their subsidy harvesting business model. This is not about
helping the Liberal Party. It's about helping labor because it's
(08:59):
labour policy that's patting the profits of these greensillionaires. And
it also has the potential to split the coalition too,
given how strongly the national support nuclear power for coalition
has split. Well, that's goodbye to government for a generation.
This is what's driving the anti nuclear campaign. It's not
(09:22):
about cheaper power for you or industry. It's about nothing
more than the millions and millions in profit that all
of these players can make out of taxpayer subsidies. This
is why where to now for the Liberals matters as
much as it does. All right, let's go to Cavan
(09:45):
now for the headlines that Sky News political reporter cam Reddin.
Speaker 6 (09:49):
Good evening, the Prime Minister has unveiled his new lawk
ministry with senior colleagues handed new responsibilities.
Speaker 7 (09:56):
I've got people who are I think in the best positions.
Speaker 6 (10:00):
Tanya Plipasek has been moved to Social Services, with Murray
Watt taking over the Environment portfolio. Amanda Rishworth takes on employment,
while Annika Wells picks up communication and Tim Ayres replaces
the dumped Industry Minister Ed Husick.
Speaker 7 (10:15):
That's a system that it's one that Ed and others
have supported for a long period of time.
Speaker 6 (10:21):
Also sidelined Attorney General Mark Dreyfus, Michelle Roland will take
his place. Health Minister Mark Butler adds the NDIS, while
new Minister Sam Ray takes on aged care. National's leader
David little Proud has survived a challenge to his position
from Senator Matt Canavan.
Speaker 3 (10:38):
And there'll be some big questions that we'll have to
move forward on, but we'll do that in a calm,
methodical way.
Speaker 6 (10:43):
But internal pressure is mounting to revisit his commitment to
net zero by twenty fifty.
Speaker 3 (10:49):
I don't make Captain's calls. I draw on the experience
of those in that party room to be able to
determine the policies that we take forward.
Speaker 6 (10:56):
Cameron Reddin's Sky News Canberra.
Speaker 2 (11:00):
No, all right, still a few electrics tonight that remain
too close to call. We'll ten days on now from
the election. Let's get that update now with our chief
election analyst, Tom Connell.
Speaker 8 (11:13):
This is the state of the House where three seats
still undecided. You can see Labor on ninety three, the
Coalition forty two. The Greens will end up on one.
No more seats, they've gone from four to one, and
Climate two hundred backed independence the Teal color there are
on five. Remember they started off on six. So where
are the undecided seats and which way are they likely
to go? So it's Bradfield, Callwell and Longman. These two
(11:35):
tiny margins. Call Well explain why there's no margin.
Speaker 6 (11:38):
On there at all.
Speaker 8 (11:39):
When we take a look at the seat of Bradfield,
this has been a cliffhanger right now. If we look
at the margin crucially between Giesel cap Darian and Nicol
lit Buller, you can see that the margin is just
one hundred and eighty votes. Now, the current projections we
have on the rest of the absent vote is for
the Liberal Party to win this seat by about the
same margin one hundred and seventy to one hundred and
(11:59):
eighty votes. But if there is a change the way
some of that vote has flowed, and there was a
little bit of a change today in one type that
margin could close. Remember, under one hundred votes as well
does trigger a recount. So for now that remains too close.
You'd rather be in the Liberal Party shoes. They are
in the box seat considering the flow we have seen
of that remaining absent vote. The other seat, of course,
(12:21):
too close to call for now is the seat of Longman,
So this is a more straight up contest between the
L and P and the Labor Party.
Speaker 2 (12:29):
Again, this is a really small margin.
Speaker 8 (12:31):
Again, it's the L and P in the lead here,
as you can see at the moment by two hundred
and thirty six votes. Labor, though, is favored in the
remaining absent votes in the way they have been flowing
so far. Again, there was a slight slow down today
in the catch up for Labor.
Speaker 2 (12:46):
There's a chance the L.
Speaker 1 (12:47):
And P hang on.
Speaker 8 (12:48):
At the moment we have the margin at about one
hundred and fifty to Labor if the rest of the
vote flows as expected, But it's very tight. So again
that one is too close to call, and the final
one is call well, this will be too close to
call for the next couple of weeks at least. Why
is that it's the primary vote. It is totally unclear
who finishes second. At this point you can see very
low primaries, so we need preferences to be distributed right
(13:11):
all the way down to the bottom. You can see
a lot of different votes, some more independent, one nation,
and so on to see whether a liberal party finish
a second or another candidate, and then whether enough preferences
combined to have laborhead or another party.
Speaker 2 (13:24):
So for now that does mean.
Speaker 8 (13:25):
The State of the House has likely Labor on ninety
four or ninety five and the Coalition likely on forty three.
Speaker 2 (13:34):
Very interesting, isn't it. That's got out of the announced
with the PM's second term ministry this afternoon. So interesting
choices promoting Marray what into environment, shunting tan your pleba
sec out of environment into social services gig which is
a sort of going nowhere job unless reforms on the table.
Reforms not on the table. This is now just about
handing out welfare payments, not much else. So she's been
(13:56):
certainly sidelined. Interestingly, despite Labor criticizing and unwinding the Morrison
era changes to the Home Affairs portfolio. A whole lot
of them have been added back in aso the Federal Police.
All of those will now stay with Tony Burke. He
stays in that gig. Surprisingly to here the ndies, Well,
that'll move from the Social services area again gutting the
(14:18):
job that the Prime Minister has given pleversc and it'll
move over to health where it will grow to be
an even bigger portfolio under the current minister and would
be leader leadership asperent from the left Mark Butler on energy.
No hope here for the country because it will stay
with the hapless Chris Bowen, Jordan men now Sky and
is political contributor Chris Yulman, Chris a fair amount of
(14:41):
factional payback here. A number of MPs dumped by their faction.
And this wasn't the Prime Minister's doing. This was the faction.
In the case of Eve Husick, it's the right that
dumped him, but also some political squaring off and this
was under the pen of the Prime Minister. The way
in which he's really treated Tanya Pleversec it's a colder sack,
(15:04):
if I can call it, that Social services portfolio of
no reforms on the table. What did you make of today.
Speaker 9 (15:12):
Yeah, Well, Asides said, Husick was concerned it was a
fight between two parts of the right, the Victorian Right
in the New South Wales Right, and it was the
Victorian Right that won in the end. I was a
little surprised about the way that ed Husick dealt with that.
I didn't think that throwing all the toys out of
the cot, which he clearly did in days after that,
and his appearance on Insiders and getting the former Prime
Minister Paul Keating to write in his favor, and Paul
(15:34):
Keating saying in the midst of that there wasn't any
intellectual grunt in the Victorian Right. Well, I think that's
belied by some of the people who are coming in.
If ed Husick wanted to long stay in the party
and a top job in future, that I think he's
put his cause back with the way he's behaved. And
I think of all the people Peter who lost their
jobs and lost their jobs and lost their place in Parliament,
(15:57):
and all the people in this building at the moment
who are clearing out their desks. Ed Hughesy gets to stay,
he should probably look at the way that Keith wallerhan
dealt with the way that he left Parliament with real
dignity and grace, and I think that there are a
lot of people hurting at the moment. Losing your ministry
is not as bad as losing your job in parliament.
As far as Tanya Plip, your second's concerned us, no
(16:17):
secret at all. Of course, at the Prime Minister and
channel for the second beIN rivals for a long time.
She had to stay in cabinet. She has the talent
to do it, she's got the support inside the party.
Speaker 1 (16:25):
To do it.
Speaker 9 (16:26):
But yes, at the moment, under this Prime Minister, her
career is on a hold.
Speaker 2 (16:33):
You mentioned there're some bright young things, and I want
to mention a couple of those. Doctor Andrew Charlton. He's
now the new Cabinet secretary. That means he'll have a
role in policy development.
Speaker 6 (16:43):
Now.
Speaker 2 (16:43):
I think this is a really good thing. I had
a bit to do with him when he was in
Kevin Rudd's office as the Chief Economist, and a bit
later on outside the Parliament before he stood obviously for paramatter.
I think he's got a good brain, a big brain,
and I think that he will at least provide I
hope some contestability around the cabinet table to all the
usual dumb ideas that get thrown up by department and
(17:05):
that weak ministers then just regurgitate and try and get up.
You need someone to knock some of that out. Also
from Victoria Victorian right is Dan Melino, now hughsic saying
or keeping saying, there's not many smart people. This bloke
has got an economics PhD from Yale. I don't know him,
but I suspect that's pretty telling. That says he's pretty clever.
(17:28):
So I hope you're going to see some some intellectual
pressure here and some political pressure on people like Jim Chalmers,
because I think we've got some really difficult decisions coming forward,
not just an energy obviously, but in the broader economy.
Speaker 9 (17:43):
Well, Andrew Shelton's credential speak for themselves. I don't take
a claim to know him well. I knew him from
the time on you him when he was around the
right government. But then he went out and made an
absolute fortune for himself in the private sector, and good
luck to him on that front. He's well credentialed in
the economic area. Dan Molino I do know well, and
is a really decent man, a highly intelligent one. Bought
(18:05):
to write a book called Safety Net, which runs to
I think, you know, maybe a thousand pages. So I
promise him I will read it one day. So he's
an intellectual powerhouse, a really decent man. And can I say,
by the way he stood for a couple of weeks
on Prepole, he was subjected to the same abuse that
a lot of Labor right candidates were subjected to by
volunteers from the Socialist Alliance, Muslim Votes and the Greens.
Speaker 1 (18:29):
Although the Greens that I spoke to deny that they
were part of that.
Speaker 9 (18:32):
But there were some very ugly stuff that happened on
the campaign on those Prepole booths from the right and
the left.
Speaker 1 (18:39):
I do have to say, and I hope that in
future we don't see any more of that.
Speaker 2 (18:45):
Yeah, at any given time, I used to say this
obviously as a Liberal staffer, I'd say this to people
I work with. Our mob's going to be out. We're
going to be an opposition, so we want the best
possible labor party in there when they are governing. I
want them to gather well, I want them not to
waste down and all the usual things, because too often
the leaves have to come in and clean up the mess.
So I am pleased to see more people coming in
(19:07):
with what i'd give I'd call policy grunt smarts, and
not just demonstrated paper smart. It's not just a degree
or a PhD, but evidence that they care about where
the country is going, that they want to get into
the policy debate, that they're more about long generational solutions,
if I can call it Chris as opposed to a
(19:30):
hit in question Time or something to get on the
front page of the Telly tomorrow. That they want to
fix the problems our country's facing.
Speaker 9 (19:38):
Absolutely, And the other thing too, is that I got
to pick people. I picked policies, and the only thing
I would say, it's a labor party about the policies
it's got on energy.
Speaker 1 (19:45):
At the moment, they're entirely wrong.
Speaker 9 (19:47):
That's really my major beef with where this party is heading,
and that I believe that the economy is intimately tied,
in fact completely tied to energy in the way that
energy is produced, and if we continue on the path
that they put us on, then we're on the road
to poverty.
Speaker 1 (20:01):
It will be an absolute disaster.
Speaker 9 (20:02):
And the signs of that are already here, and they're
everywhere else where the similar policies have been pursued. So
that's my main beef. There are really good people on
all sides of politics. I think one of the problems
that we've had in recent years is that we too
often descend into personal abuse about people rather than just
looking at the policies that are on offer. I have
a big beef with a Labor Party's energy policy. I
(20:25):
have real concerns about its defense policy, and I have
some concerns about its economic policy.
Speaker 1 (20:31):
That's where my concerns lie.
Speaker 9 (20:32):
But as far as the people go, if you get
Dan Malino into Parliament and into a position of power
inside the Labor Party, then you've got a very, very
sensible person who's going to be arguing for the right
kinds of things for Australia.
Speaker 2 (20:44):
I think, Look, I agree, there's Assistant Treasure two. I
don't think I mentioned that before. I want to pick
up some comments. So David little Proud's been re elected
to the National Party leader. I want to pick up
some colleagues as some comments that my colleague Chris Kenny
got out of him a moment ago when he interviewed
him and they discussed net zero, have a listen.
Speaker 3 (21:07):
That's up to the party room. The leader doesn't make
the determination in our party room. We draw on the
collective of the wisdom of the entire party room. We'll
have that conversation and all our policies are up for review.
Speaker 2 (21:22):
So the point here Chris Yeoman is that the net
zero's up for grabs. He's not saying that that's now
the policy. He's saying that there'll be a wholesale review
of everything and it'll be a debate inside the party
room whether they continue with net zero or whether the
National Party drop it.
Speaker 1 (21:38):
Absolutely.
Speaker 9 (21:39):
And look, I think that there's an intellectual hegemony which
is happening in Australia at the moment when the Liberal
Party is going to perhaps be pushed into which is
that everyone should sign up to the policy of net zero.
But I would say read the room outside Australia, the
United States is not signed up to it, China is
not signed up to it, Russia is not signed up
to it, India is not signed up to it. That's
(21:59):
sixty percent of the world's emissions are not doing net zero.
So the answer to the question then has to be
what on Earth are we doing the policy that we've
signed up to, and we've only just seen the beginning
of it in the transition of the electricity system. The
harder part is yet to come, which is how do
we make concrete, how do we make.
Speaker 1 (22:18):
Steel, how do we make plastic?
Speaker 9 (22:20):
And how do we make ammonia which feeds half the
world's population. That stuff has yet to be settled in
any way that can be commercially applied. So to try
and get to net zero means that you will see
COVID level interference in people's lives from now on. Now,
I think there's a really good liberal argument that you
(22:40):
can make against that, which is that we don't want
to see that level of interference in our lives, and
we should let the market decide the kind of energy
that we need to use. And of course, if you
are determined to try and cut carbon emissions, there is
only one source of power apart from hydro so one
source of power that burns fuel that's capable of doing that,
that is nuclear energy. That's a perfectly reasonable argument.
Speaker 2 (23:05):
We will leave it there, beautifully, said Chris Human. As always,
all right, after the break, we're going to get into
some issues in relation to farmers and fire fighting. It's
a huge issue. Protests in Victoria Friday and again tomorrow,
plus the push to legalize cannabis. I'll speak with a
health expert about why this isn't it's as harmless as
some would have you believe. Welcome back to the come
(23:31):
the factional brawling inside the Liberal Party and why it
needs to stop as more members leave. But first is
growing outrage across Victoria's farming communities as we've seen a
sharp rise in the state's fire services property levy hitting
already struggling landowners. Farmers say they've bench forced a shoulder
the cost of a broken fire system, one which has
(23:53):
seen Victoria's once proud volunteer fire fighting force shrink to
record lows while the bill for paid staff continues to soar.
The problems first started with the forced merger of the
state's volunteer fire brigade, the Country Fire Authority the CFA,
with the Metropolitan Fibering Brigade the MFB, to form Fire
(24:14):
Services Victoria. And this was all part of deal done
between Daniel Andrews and the powerful Firefighters Union, the end
result being a very frustrated and demoralized force fractured trust
and now a fight back which is filled under the
steps of the Victorian Parliament. It's all about a new
and rebadged fire services levee that will force farmers to
(24:36):
pay millions and millions of dollars to cover the cost
of the state's merged entity. Now on Friday, farmers and
volunteer firefighters made their way to Spring Street and the
Premier's office in Bendigo, demanding a rethink of this new
firefighting levee before farmers are pushed over the edge. For
many farmers, the cost of this levee is in excess
(24:58):
of eighty thousand dollars each. They say they're paying more
for less and a calling for a return to the
volunteer led model that's always served the bush best. In
the Parliament, the Upper House is expected to vote on
the controversial new tax as soon as tomorrow, with another
rally set for the strips of Parliament to keep up
(25:18):
the pressure. Rob Armstrong he's a farmer from a rat
and he will be hit by this tax. He helped
organize Friday's rally and he joins me now, Rob, thank
you for your time. But you spoke at the rally
on Friday. You say you'll be back at the Parliament
House buildings tomorrow. I don't know. I'm calling it a levy,
(25:38):
that's what the government's calling it. But this is a tax.
Why are you paying this tax when we all know
the farmers are the ones who fight these fires in
regional communities anyway.
Speaker 10 (25:53):
Yes, it's a very horrible thing and the impact is
mash up massive financially mostly and morally for farmers. This
isn't a matter of a few hundred dollars. It's tens
of thousands of dollars. In my community just around the here.
Some people are facing bills at seventy thousand and up
(26:14):
to five hundred thousand. It's not it's just devastating. If
this tax gets through, it will destroy livelihoods. It will
rip millions out of our rural towns, our businesses, sports clubs,
local shops and services, and the knockron effect will be massive.
(26:36):
We love farming, it's in our blood. But to be
hit with one hundred and eighty nine percent increase on
this levy, well it just feels like extortion. It's just
bloody ol. Farmers are the first responders to nearly all.
Speaker 2 (26:51):
Sorry, no, I'm just going to make that point you're
about to make. I mean, farmers are the ones who
go out to fires and fight those fires off with
their own equipment in their local areas. How does the
government justify jacking up this levee by close to two
hundred percent.
Speaker 1 (27:09):
Well, that's a very good question.
Speaker 2 (27:11):
But like.
Speaker 10 (27:15):
Most of us all fight the fires, Like for example,
me and other fires and plenty of other farmers spend
Christmas Day on a fire truck. It's no funding, no fuss,
just doing what we had to get done for our community.
We miss out on a lot of things to be
on call twenty four to seven for our community. In
(27:36):
our region, for example, there's a million acres, it's got
nine mc f A trucks and over four hundred and
fifty private units. That means over ninety five percent of
fire units in our region are privately owned, paid for,
and maintained by the farmers. Without us, rural fires would
be so much more devastating.
Speaker 2 (28:02):
Is this all because of that merger? I mean, that's
what's been said to me, Rob, that the merger of
the CFA has broken the heart of the CFA volunteers,
that the new merger is not working. This is the
government in Victoria that's basically belly up bankrupt. It requires
increases to all of these levees and all to fund
(28:23):
fire services in the state.
Speaker 10 (28:24):
Now, yes, it appears that we're funding a lot of people,
doesn't it.
Speaker 2 (28:30):
But the.
Speaker 10 (28:33):
Problem is it's all been taken away from us yet
we are the first responders. But in your question about
the merger, I'm probably not the person who answered that question.
I'm not familiar enough with it.
Speaker 2 (28:51):
Right. I'm going to come back and talk to you
again after this rally. I wish you all the very best.
And just before we go, Rob, I know people out
your way are doing it very tough. I mean, it's
drought conditions. I don't know that we formally call it
a drought yet, but I know the rainfall has been
non existent. Can I get a sense of how it's
been for you, Well.
Speaker 10 (29:10):
If you look down a gravel road, that's exactly what
the whole farms look like in this area. It's well,
I've been a farmer for well sixty years and this
drought now is worse than nineteen sixty seven droud. It's
it's devastating how bad it is. Like I'm not sure
(29:30):
the farmers can't afford this tax in the first place
at all.
Speaker 11 (29:35):
But if we have another drought like last year, there's
going to be a lot of farmers aren't going to
be able to pay, probably even their rates bill. Littlelone
a farm Leavy that we shouldn't be paying in the
first place.
Speaker 10 (29:48):
It's going to take it, take it.
Speaker 1 (29:49):
I hate to leave it there, Sorry.
Speaker 2 (29:54):
Rob, I hate to leave it there. I'll move on
to other things, but I will promise you I'll come
back tomorrow night to get a wrap of how this
protest has gone. And I want to put some wood
on the opposition to get very clear from them their
position on this. Thank you for your time. I'll come
back to the issue of the drought as well, because
I'll tell you what, when Chris Bowen goes to those
next round of climate targets, what is absolutely front and
(30:16):
center is agriculture. That is that square the circle when
you look at what farmers are facing. Now let's go
to some other issues. As I said, they want to
legalize cannabis in Victoria. It's certainly a push to around
the country, but Victoria, like with so many things, is
ground zero. It's been something that the Greens have pushed
hard for in the parliament. Of course, we know the
(30:38):
Greens now federally are decimated, but legalize cannabis the party, well,
it's got plenty of influence and Victoria also is in
a very poor debt position. So one of the biggest backers,
as we know from Climate two hundred, the millionaire share
trader Rob Keldoulis well he bought a Tasmani in cannabis
(31:00):
farm in twenty twenty two, is also a high profile
backer of the legalized cannabis party. This is a preference
harvester in my view, and many of the to your races,
all of this is a big concern. Then you add
in the serious mental health worries that people have, particularly
in relation to young people and the use of cannabis.
(31:21):
Joining me now, Brain and Mind Center psychiatrist at the
University of Sydney and Professor Ian Hickey. Professor Hickey, you're
an expert on mental health. I'll ask you about that
in a moment, but I think from the outset, let's
be clear, there is a difference, isn't there between the
decriminalization of cannabis use or any drug and the legalization
(31:43):
of cannabis.
Speaker 7 (31:46):
Absolutely, and it's very important you make that distinction. Lots
of people want to see the criminal element removed and
not have people chased around by the police around minor
issues of drug use and the legalization, and what follows that,
which you've just highlighted, is the commercialization. And then you
get into the problems that now running in Canada and
the US of the commercialization, which itself creates all sorts
(32:06):
of other difficulties, often people seeking tax revenue, as you
point it out, but often there ends up being in
an illegal market in addition to the legal market, So
you don't actually solve the problem you set out to solve,
and most important, you expose a whole lot more people,
particularly young people, to the adverse effects, particularly the mental
health effects of excessive cannabis use.
Speaker 2 (32:27):
Yeah, Professor Igi. One of the arguments in favor of
legalization is that it will take the illegal trade off
the streets, it will create a regulation environment, it will
create a legal trade, and there'll be a clip of
the ticket for the tax payers. But that's not the
case or the experience overseas, is it. No.
Speaker 7 (32:46):
In fact, i'd suggest if anyone's been in New York
City recently, you'll see legal cannabis shops and outside you'll
see illegal cannabis being solved, and there's Sonibian criminal ailment
along with the legal element. It's just like we now
see in the tobacco trade around Australia the legal bit,
and because of price and competition, there's the illegal bit.
So the notion that legalization will entirely remove the criminal
(33:06):
element just basically isn't true. And the supply issue is
really the issue here. As you pointed out, there are
many people who've invested or want to invest in the
commercialization of cannabis because there will be a large market,
but there will also be inevitably large negative health effects,
particularly on mental health and particularly on the young people.
So the associations with psychosis with a motivational states, as
(33:28):
well as with accident injury due to intoxication are pretty
clear cut. And my colleagues INABA, in Canada and the
US states that have done this in particular have seen
exactly that increased presentations to emergency rooms increased rates of psychosis.
And this is one of the things we can control.
We don't have to make the problem worse.
Speaker 2 (33:47):
I've been told a lot of this impacts our young people,
particularly young men, and given how tough it's been for
so many of them coming out of COVID, given our
suicide rates in Australia, given that sort of the desocialization,
I think it's fair to say that the devices have
brought some young people, not all young people, but some
young people. If there was ever a time to do it,
(34:07):
it'd almost say this is not the time.
Speaker 7 (34:10):
I think that's a fair point. The worst thing mental
health in young people with recognized by most major parties
just before the election, were going to see new investments
in mental health services for young people. The last thing
we need at the moment is another element in society
which potentially increases the rate, and not just the rate,
but the rate of severe mental health problems which are
then enduring. And that seems pretty clear cut also in
(34:31):
the medical literature. Now it's not just that there's one
episode of problems that this often precipitates in the illness
which then persists and is life changing. So most people
in the mental health area, and I think the health
area in general, they favor decriminalization. As you pointed out,
they don't favor legalization and widespread commercialization, which has really
been behind a lot of the push in Australia, or
(34:53):
of the push behind meddictional cannabis and a lot of
the issues that have gone on where Australias had a
pretty liberal attitude to medicinal cannabis as well. He's really
driven by commercial interests. And you know we've had great
trouble with tobacco, alcohol, other substances. We don't need to
add this to the mix.
Speaker 2 (35:10):
You are a voice of reason, professor. He he had an
expert obviously, thank you for your time up the break
WHI a state factional brawl is causing thousands of Liberal
Party members to leave the party. Plus speaking of leadership,
it might not be smooth starting for the ALP, according
to one labor store ward today or of that in
a moment welcome back still to come. Why the ABC's
(35:34):
election campus review must include a reference to bias. We'll
see if that happens, won't we My next guesse now
is well acquainted with factional infarting and turmoil within the
New South Wales Liberal Party, having been appointed as a
special administrator last year to help the party get back
on track. So with the leadership contest playing out tomorrow
federally of course, and plenty of factional tensions on display,
(35:57):
it's timely to get some thoughts from former Howard government minister,
former Victorian Liberal Party president, I might add, and former
boss to Peter Kredline, which at Austin I might even say,
also a communications minister, I'll ask you about the ABC
and their election coverage in a moment, just just at
a top level, as someone who was a warrior effort
for the Howard government for so long, your reaction to
(36:17):
the thumping and the limps got in the election.
Speaker 1 (36:20):
Look, I think it's.
Speaker 12 (36:21):
A bit misleading. We went into the election in front
of the polls. Some people would say Trump comes along,
everyone goes for the dinner and and what to change?
You know, we'll stick with the devil. We know that's
part of the answer. But fundamentally it was a very
poor campaign. Clearly they hadn't done their homework on policy,
(36:44):
which should have been locked away months beforehand, and here
they were two days out, they did defense, three days
out they did an educationist How can you expect anyone
to take you seriously? So I think we should not
see this as a complete devastation it's obviously a setback
(37:05):
because of the margin. But most people thought that the
alban eazy government didn't expect doesn't deserve to be returned.
Speaker 2 (37:14):
That's true.
Speaker 12 (37:15):
So can you imagine them suddenly doing all the right things. No,
So I think next time around will be a very
good opportunity for us if we can get our actic.
Speaker 2 (37:25):
Pedicostella was critical because he said there was just no
economic agender. Is that fair? Yeah?
Speaker 12 (37:31):
I think so.
Speaker 1 (37:31):
Yeah.
Speaker 12 (37:32):
I mean you've got to have a couple of big policies.
You've got to you've got to understand economics. You can't
just sort of blow the budget out and spend endlessly.
It all comes back to haunt you. So yeah, I
think economics is key if you if you don't understand economics,
then you're probably not going to be a winner.
Speaker 2 (37:52):
What about this whole fight that it inevitably happens, you know, Oh,
they were too far to the left, the leaves to
not far an to the right. If you look around
at all the state oppositions. Every time we've had a
left wing agenda, we've tried to cuddle up to labor.
We're almost in permanent opposition. What do you make of
this carry on.
Speaker 12 (38:13):
It's a very lazy media line. Any fool can write
an article about someone wants to go left, some don't.
That's complete nonsense. I mean, the reality is people want
good policy. It's not a left or right thing. Some
people can deliver it, and I mean there are labor
premiers who can deliver it. So I just don't waste
(38:34):
my time thinking in terms of left and right anymore.
Speaker 2 (38:37):
What about the insights you've had now in your time
as a steward of the New South Wales Liberal Party.
I know you've had a history in the Victorian Liberal Party.
What are you finding in the statistics in New South Wales?
What has shocked you?
Speaker 12 (38:52):
Well, it's hard to believe actually, because there are six
hundred and eight people who have been refused membership of
the party. There have been four and a half thousand
people who have let their membership lapse in the last
few years. No new branches have been created since twenty sixteen.
It's just appalling, and it's because the factions collude. Factions
(39:16):
are okay, you're always going to have left and right, progressive,
moderate conservative whatever as how it said broad Church. But
when they get together and exclude people you know, mother
Teresa turns up says she's available. I'd say, sorry, you're
not in the right faction.
Speaker 2 (39:31):
And that's so people at home can follow. That's because
those there have already carved up the spoils and even
though they hate each other factionally, they know exactly where
they are. They've got the position to suit themselves. They
don't want talent, they don't want new numbers to come in.
They don't want people to come in that they can't control.
Speaker 12 (39:49):
They take it in turns. Actually that's what happens. You know,
you're not in my faction, but if you do the
right thing, we'll put you on the list. Someone complained
to us, you know she was supposed to factions that
she said, it's outrageous because I was next on the list.
So it's not about talent at all. It's about payoffs
and trading and it's very unhealthy. You can't possibly say
(40:13):
that New South Wales can get back in the sensible government.
I mean the catalyst was the local government fiasco when
almost one hundred and fifty candidates weren't selected, but that
was the last straw. This has been around for years
in New South Wales. That's why the federal executive unanimously
said on two occasions we must have interventions. And they
(40:33):
said to us, you must fix the problem, and that
involves writing a new constitution. And we're in the process
of doing that right now.
Speaker 2 (40:40):
And is that how you fix it? You have a
new constitution, surely you got to have a clean out
across the board. A factional willlords Well.
Speaker 12 (40:49):
Yeah, I wouldn't focus on the world, focus on giving
ordinary members access rights. So instead of being yes, well,
instead of being not back by the branch president who's
in on the deal to fix you, allow the application
to go through and then if people have a genuine objection,
(41:11):
they can lodge that with a panel. So that's a
much more sensible way of opening the party up. Clearly
people want to join the party, but they're not going
to until reform has been put in both well.
Speaker 2 (41:24):
It'd be something I know we're going to talk about
a lot, Richard, but if you can get it right
in New South Wales, maybe other states will follow.
Speaker 12 (41:30):
I don't think other states needed fundamentally, you know, they've
got to get things right, but they don't need reform
in the way that New South Wales. New South Wales
is rotten on the inside. I wouldn't say that about
any other states. I mean, wa, you know, I've only
got a handful. It's going to be very difficult to
make a comeback there. New South Australia is just as
(41:51):
bad as I think, but you know, you're up against
some competent people. But New South Wales is far and
away the biggest problem, and it's the biggest state.
Speaker 2 (42:02):
Ye thank you, Richard. Just a quick on ABC bias
reform and a review.
Speaker 12 (42:11):
I thought Kim Williams was going to do something serious
about this, but I don't see any sign of it really.
I mean, I knew him quite well. I think he's
capable of being sensible about these things. But it's just
too hard. You know, if he tries to do something
like this, they can all leak on him. The staff
appointed director goes mad, you know.
Speaker 2 (42:32):
So they just kept losing audience ship.
Speaker 12 (42:35):
The only way to do it is in terms of
the money. You have to attach conditions to the money
they get, and they have to then be forced to
fix themselves. The trouble is they're a monopoly, you see,
and monopolies get fat and lazy. They don't need to reform.
They don't need to cut, they don't need to win,
they don't need to raise money.
Speaker 1 (42:55):
How good is that?
Speaker 12 (42:57):
What would you want to go?
Speaker 2 (42:58):
Well, Scott newsed love to get a billion dollars every
year to run the show. We'll have to worry about ratings,
but we do, and we'll take a break so we
can get paid for our job. Richard Austin me, all right,
after the break, we'll get to a whole lot of
stuff about the Liberal leadership in a moment. Welcome back.
(43:18):
Has a lot of my viewers that reminded me to
Richard Austin was the last Liberal Minister for Communications that
took on the ABC and he certainly did that. All right,
let's get into the panel. Now, let's welcome my next
two guest Page Research Center chief Jared Holland and senior
fellow at the Men'sies Research Center, of course columns for
the Australia Nicator. Gents, welcome. I want to pick up
(43:40):
some comments. Well, we've all been navel gazing about the
Liberal Party, but I want to pick up some comments
from the ALP current president former Treasurer of Wayne Swann,
who's warn party supporters at the party's base is aging
that the membership is too small and that the most
focus on winning over working class voters, which says they've
lost them or they will risk further decline. This is
(44:04):
a very interesting comment here, Jared.
Speaker 13 (44:09):
Yeah, I mean, I think he's right just to put
Labour's win into context. If you look at the Hawk
or the Keyting or even Kevin Rudd's big win in
two thousand and seven, these were on primaries in the
mid forties. I think Keating reach as high as forty
eight or forty nine percent some of his high points.
Albanezy one with the primary of just thirty four percent.
So this wasn't a resounding recognition and celebration of what
(44:31):
Labour brought to the election. It was a rejection of
what the Coalition had on offer. And particularly if you
think about working class families, what do they have in
store over the next couple of years. Well, they're going
to get slapped with the utax that's another twenty five
percent or more on the family car or all the
people mover. They're going to see their energy bills continue
to spiral as that grid is out of control and
not going anywhere soon. They're going to see another one
(44:52):
or two million people come into the country, putting more
pressure on housing and cost of living, and so I
think they're going to be looking around saying, well, hang on,
who represents us? And it's this constituency that holds the key,
I think to either rebuilding for the coalition or Labor
actually cementing themselves back in their working class roots. And
this is the constituency that has been ignored and forgotten
(45:13):
for a good decade or so.
Speaker 2 (45:14):
Now, yeah, it's a good point to make because if
you look at the high looks like it might be
ninety four seats in the House. That's a thumping majority.
That's sort of what it is. It is if they
get to ninety four what John Howard had nic Cata
in nineteen ninety six. But if you look at Labour's
primary vote that's got them those ninety four seats, the
(45:35):
primary vote at this election under Alberan Easy is actually
lower than the primary vote that Bill shortened Goss in
twenty sixteen when he lost to Malcolm Turnbull. So that
puts it into some perspectives. So, yes, Labor have done
very very well, but more because the Liberals and others
did very very poorly. And also the preference flows and
(45:56):
the preference harvesting that happens on the left are making
it nine impossible for the conservative side of politics to survive.
Speaker 4 (46:05):
Yeah, I was interesting to see that bit of truth
telling from Wayne Swan. I think is onto something here.
I think, you know, it looks like a thumping win, right,
it could even be the biggest number of MP's Labor
have ever had in a parliament. But underneath there's clearly
the same problems in the Labor Party as there is
in the Liberal Party. Young people are not joining. Their
(46:28):
politics is conducted by other means on Facebook and Instagram
and all those sort of things. They're not tending to
go with the major parties. So you get this one third,
one third and then one third none of the above,
which is entrenched. Interestingly, I would point out on that
I think the solution to that where you just look
what happened in Canada. You'd be well aware of this
(46:49):
Peter that used to be this one third, one third,
one third right to the two major parties one third
each or roughly that, and then one third went to
the independence, the Block, kuberc and others. But this election
they've come back to the main parties, eighty four percent
I think, or eighty five percent voted for the major parties.
(47:09):
Why because both major parties were standing up for their
country for firm values thanks to Donald Trump, and that's
what brought people running back. So I don't think this
is terminal. I think both parties have got to work
on this, but it's not terminal.
Speaker 2 (47:25):
Jared, do you run a national party think tank or
I think tank connected to the National party and affiliations there?
Certainly there was an interesting moment today where there was
a debate about net zero and your new leader or
re elected leader, David Little prowd says, I'm not backing
it in. I mean, we've got to have a debate
about this. We're going to review the election and it's
on the table for the party room to debate. Now.
(47:49):
The Libs, I don't think we'll move away from net zero.
There's debate about whether they'll ever move away from nuclear power.
Your leader backed in nuclear power, but net zero is
something I think that will be discs asked, that's very
very interesting.
Speaker 13 (48:05):
Well, I think what's interesting about net zero is you
can only sort of allow it to make sense if
you think about it through the lens of a global movement.
But of course the US isn't committed to net zero. Now,
China isn't, India isn't. South Africa isn't. Russia isn't, Argentina isn't.
The Middle East aren't committed to it, and on and
on and on, and you're looking at over sixty percent
of the world now who are not even in Paris,
(48:26):
if not meaningfully working towards it. So the fact that Australia,
or the idea that Australia should go it alone when
we're one percent of the world's emissions, when we export
five hundred and ten teraworld hours of coal for other
people to burn, I just don't think that that really
holds water anymore. And I think as we're seeing these
cost pressures rise, Australians won't have the appetite to keep
stomaching this. And I think it's an issue that does
(48:47):
have to keep coming up, does have to keep being
looked at, because we aren't getting any closer to achieving it,
but we're getting ourselves into a whole lot of economic
and social unrest because of it.
Speaker 2 (49:00):
Nick just quickly the last time there was a debate
about quotas and targets and women inside the Liberal Party.
You were leading up the Liberal Parties think tank. Can
you write a very comprehensive review. What would you say
to this thing now?
Speaker 4 (49:13):
Well, I think quotas is absolutely ridiculous. That's not what
we argued in our report, and why because liberals believe
that everybody should have equal opportunity. I think the real
problem here, Peter is when you look at the members
of the party, there are very few women joining the party.
Interestingly fewer still, the most worst ratio is at young
(49:35):
Liberal level, and until we fix that, we're not going
to have any hope of getting people standing for parliament.
Speaker 2 (49:42):
You're not wrong there, but you have targets with teeth.
You don't go near quotas. Gents, I'll leave it there,
thank you very much, see you tomorrow night. Here's Andrew
Peter Krandland live on Sky News Australia.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
Good evening, Welcome to the program. Big week ahead, convulsions
going on inside the parties. Used from the Prime Minister today,
it's all coming up to night on credline in that
vein the PM and veiling his new little cabinet today.
Factional fighting continues though to plague the Labor Party. Now
he's made some interesting choices. We'll discuss those. We'll have
a look at who's been demoted or cut all together
(00:28):
as well. This afternoon two the National Party had their elections.
They re elected David littlprowd Tomorrow the Liberals will meet.
The numbers are tight between Susan Lee and Angus Taylor
Key In all of this is the direction the Coalition
takes on big issues like nuclear energy. Chris Yilman with
more class sets, not all about Canberra. Farmers and fires
(00:51):
in Victoria making their voices heard over a new tax
at risks, sending regional communities bus They're suffering with the drought,
but this is huge. Big protests on Friday, more protests
set for tomorrow. I'll speak with one farmer tonight who
says enough is enough and in a very clear message
to some left leaning liberals. I think nuclear powers on
the policy shopping board, the Nationals declare they are not
(01:16):
for turning.
Speaker 3 (01:17):
We've had the courage on nuclear energy, something that our
party room has believed in for a very long time,
and all renewables approach won't work.
Speaker 2 (01:28):
Here here for the Nationals. With first the PM today
announcing his second term ministry, all individuals are remind everyone
chosen by the factions, with the PM left only to
allocate the portfolios over the weekend. Now I'll get to
that announcement in detail in a moment. But while he
was doing all of that, the coalition parties, well they've
(01:48):
been working the phones, making calls and taking calls as
they elect their new leadership teams. This afternoon, of course,
that was the Nationals who met at three pm in
Canberra to re elect David little Proud as leader. Kevin
Hogan elected as the new Deputy. I'll get into that
result a little later with my panel. But Little Brow's
(02:09):
reinstatement of his party's position on nuclear well it was unequivocal.
Speaker 3 (02:16):
We've had the courage on nuclear energy, something that our
party room has believed in for a very long time
and all renewables approach won't work. But it was our
party room, from many people before us that had the
courage to come forward, but it was us.
Speaker 1 (02:28):
It was our party room that delivered it.
Speaker 2 (02:32):
Now, that clear position on nuclear from the NATS is
important as to where the coalition goes now, and I'll
explain that in a moment. Tomorrow, of course, it'll be
the Liberals who meet to elect their new leadership team,
and unlike the Prime Minister, the new Liberal leader will
also choose their shadow ministry as well as allocate the portfolios.
But regardless of who wins tomorrow's Liberal leadership contest, the
(02:55):
real issue is whether the Liberal Party will be a
strong and clear alternative to the Albanezy government. That's why
the recent election was lost because on too many issues
the Liberals were not a clear alternative, and on those
issues where they were a clear alternative, they didn't put
up much of a fight. Like you, I cheered when
(03:17):
Peter Dutton committed the coalition to ending the band on
nuclear power, because if Australia really does have to get
to net zero, the only way to do so and
keep the lights on is via a missions free nuclear
power Sadly for our country. Having made that commitment, the
Coalition failed to win the argument. Indeed, it hardly even
(03:39):
prosecuted it. Peter Dutton never once did a media event
outside the Lucas Heights nuclear reactor that's been operating very
safely in Sydney's South for nearly seventy years. Nor did
he ever do a media event outside a medical diagnostic
facility when nuclear medicine is a vital part of detecting
and treating cancers for millions of Australians. Nor did he
(04:02):
push hard with the example of Ontario in Canada, which
gets some fifty percent of its power from nuclear energy,
and where power costs there are about half of what
Australians pay. Indeed, once the Coalition had made its nuclear announcement,
the only people talking about nuclear power with a Labor.
Speaker 4 (04:22):
Party this time they need to find six hundred billion
dollars to pay for their nuclear reactors and a six
hundred billion dollar nuclear plan.
Speaker 2 (04:34):
You say it's not you know it's not. You know,
I know it is now. That six hundred million dollar figure,
as I've said before, didn't come from a reputable expert.
It was cooked up by something called the Smart Energy Council,
a renewable industry lobby group stacked with ex labor insiders
and on the board at one time Climbate two hundred
(04:55):
founder the Teels puppet master Simon Holmes, a court if
Labour's lies about the costume nuclear power. Let's look at
the objective electoral facts from last week in because now
that the results are clear, what's evident is that the
seats where nuclear power stations might have been located will
(05:16):
showed there was no rejection of the coalition, indeed, far
from it. In most of these seats, the Coalition actually
improved its position despite going backwards. On a national scale.
Marina at the side of the Tawong power station, David
Little proud Well he got seventy one percent of the
two PP vote. In Flynn the side of the Khalid
(05:39):
power station, Colin Boyce Well, he got a six point
seven percent two party preferred swing in his favor. In Hunter,
the side of the Ladell power station. There was a
big swing to Labor, but none no greater there than
the national swing. In Claire the side of the Mountain
Piper Point a power station, the ex National Independent he held on,
(06:01):
but he did not campaign against nuclear power. In Gray
the side of the Port Augusta power station, there was
an antiliberal swing, but this was also two a range
of factors. There was the retirement there of the incumbent
long standing Liberal and also a strong Teal campaign. Despite that,
all though the Libs held the seat. In O'Connor the
(06:22):
side of the Collie power station, Rick Wilson got a
seven percent two party preferred swing in his favor, unlike
many other Liberals in WA. And finally in Gippsland's side
of the loy Yang power station, Darren chester Well he
got seventy percent of the two PP vote. Now, despite
the fact that the British Labor Party, the Democrats in
(06:43):
the United States, and the Canadian Liberals their equivalent of
our Labor Party here, so all of the Anglo spheares
leftist parties, despite the fact that all of them support
nuclear power. Here in Australia, the Labour Party remains fanatically opposed.
And then there's now this strong campaign to get the
Liberal Party to back Labour's energy policy, the policy that
(07:06):
finnels billions and billions of dollars of subsidies to anyone
in the renewable sector. Here's the website for Premier State,
the lobbying firm controlled by Liberal factional manipulator Michael Photius,
along with numerous green energy firms. Smart Energy Council is
a Premier State client and now a Photius supported Liberal
(07:29):
senator Maria Kovicheck is calling for the Liberals to drop
their support for nuclear energy.
Speaker 5 (07:36):
This is a policy that went to an election. The
election result was devastating, so the message from the community
is very very clear, and that's why I believe that
this nuclear policy has to go.
Speaker 2 (07:51):
Well, Phipps to her. I mean, the response from the
community is very much in favor of nuclear if you
look at the seats where the nuclear paur plants were
identified and would have been built if the coalition was elected. Plus,
there's been a high rotation ad campaign on this station
and others by something called Liberals against Nuclear, urging the
(08:15):
defeated party to adopt Labour's energy policy. And we can
be sure that Liberals against Nuclear are being funded by
big wind and big solar, people who will make millions
and millions out of more and more renewables. Make no mistake,
there will be massive pressure brought on the new leader
to drop support for nuclear power, especially if Susan Lee
(08:37):
is the leader, because her support comes from factional players
like Photius. Make no mistake who drives all of this.
It's a campaign by Cashta Renewables energy vested interest to
protect their subsidy harvesting business model. This is not about
helping the Liberal Party. It's about helping labor because it's
(08:59):
labour policy that's patting the profits of these greensillionaires. And
it also has the potential to split the coalition too,
given how strongly the national support nuclear power for coalition
has split. Well, that's goodbye to government for a generation.
This is what's driving the anti nuclear campaign. It's not
(09:22):
about cheaper power for you or industry. It's about nothing
more than the millions and millions in profit that all
of these players can make out of taxpayer subsidies. This
is why where to now for the Liberals matters as
much as it does. All right, let's go to Cavan
(09:45):
now for the headlines that Sky News political reporter cam Reddin.
Speaker 6 (09:49):
Good evening, the Prime Minister has unveiled his new lawk
ministry with senior colleagues handed new responsibilities.
Speaker 7 (09:56):
I've got people who are I think in the best positions.
Speaker 6 (10:00):
Tanya Plipasek has been moved to Social Services, with Murray
Watt taking over the Environment portfolio. Amanda Rishworth takes on employment,
while Annika Wells picks up communication and Tim Ayres replaces
the dumped Industry Minister Ed Husick.
Speaker 7 (10:15):
That's a system that it's one that Ed and others
have supported for a long period of time.
Speaker 6 (10:21):
Also sidelined Attorney General Mark Dreyfus, Michelle Roland will take
his place. Health Minister Mark Butler adds the NDIS, while
new Minister Sam Ray takes on aged care. National's leader
David little Proud has survived a challenge to his position
from Senator Matt Canavan.
Speaker 3 (10:38):
And there'll be some big questions that we'll have to
move forward on, but we'll do that in a calm,
methodical way.
Speaker 6 (10:43):
But internal pressure is mounting to revisit his commitment to
net zero by twenty fifty.
Speaker 3 (10:49):
I don't make Captain's calls. I draw on the experience
of those in that party room to be able to
determine the policies that we take forward.
Speaker 6 (10:56):
Cameron Reddin's Sky News Canberra.
Speaker 2 (11:00):
No, all right, still a few electrics tonight that remain
too close to call. We'll ten days on now from
the election. Let's get that update now with our chief
election analyst, Tom Connell.
Speaker 8 (11:13):
This is the state of the House where three seats
still undecided. You can see Labor on ninety three, the
Coalition forty two. The Greens will end up on one.
No more seats, they've gone from four to one, and
Climate two hundred backed independence the Teal color there are
on five. Remember they started off on six. So where
are the undecided seats and which way are they likely
to go? So it's Bradfield, Callwell and Longman. These two
(11:35):
tiny margins. Call Well explain why there's no margin.
Speaker 6 (11:38):
On there at all.
Speaker 8 (11:39):
When we take a look at the seat of Bradfield,
this has been a cliffhanger right now. If we look
at the margin crucially between Giesel cap Darian and Nicol
lit Buller, you can see that the margin is just
one hundred and eighty votes. Now, the current projections we
have on the rest of the absent vote is for
the Liberal Party to win this seat by about the
same margin one hundred and seventy to one hundred and
(11:59):
eighty votes. But if there is a change the way
some of that vote has flowed, and there was a
little bit of a change today in one type that
margin could close. Remember, under one hundred votes as well
does trigger a recount. So for now that remains too close.
You'd rather be in the Liberal Party shoes. They are
in the box seat considering the flow we have seen
of that remaining absent vote. The other seat, of course,
(12:21):
too close to call for now is the seat of Longman,
So this is a more straight up contest between the
L and P and the Labor Party.
Speaker 2 (12:29):
Again, this is a really small margin.
Speaker 8 (12:31):
Again, it's the L and P in the lead here,
as you can see at the moment by two hundred
and thirty six votes. Labor, though, is favored in the
remaining absent votes in the way they have been flowing
so far. Again, there was a slight slow down today
in the catch up for Labor.
Speaker 2 (12:46):
There's a chance the L.
Speaker 1 (12:47):
And P hang on.
Speaker 8 (12:48):
At the moment we have the margin at about one
hundred and fifty to Labor if the rest of the
vote flows as expected, But it's very tight. So again
that one is too close to call, and the final
one is call well, this will be too close to
call for the next couple of weeks at least. Why
is that it's the primary vote. It is totally unclear
who finishes second. At this point you can see very
low primaries, so we need preferences to be distributed right
(13:11):
all the way down to the bottom. You can see
a lot of different votes, some more independent, one nation,
and so on to see whether a liberal party finish
a second or another candidate, and then whether enough preferences
combined to have laborhead or another party.
Speaker 2 (13:24):
So for now that does mean.
Speaker 8 (13:25):
The State of the House has likely Labor on ninety
four or ninety five and the Coalition likely on forty three.
Speaker 2 (13:34):
Very interesting, isn't it. That's got out of the announced
with the PM's second term ministry this afternoon. So interesting
choices promoting Marray what into environment, shunting tan your pleba
sec out of environment into social services gig which is
a sort of going nowhere job unless reforms on the table.
Reforms not on the table. This is now just about
handing out welfare payments, not much else. So she's been
(13:56):
certainly sidelined. Interestingly, despite Labor criticizing and unwinding the Morrison
era changes to the Home Affairs portfolio. A whole lot
of them have been added back in aso the Federal Police.
All of those will now stay with Tony Burke. He
stays in that gig. Surprisingly to here the ndies, Well,
that'll move from the Social services area again gutting the
(14:18):
job that the Prime Minister has given pleversc and it'll
move over to health where it will grow to be
an even bigger portfolio under the current minister and would
be leader leadership asperent from the left Mark Butler on energy.
No hope here for the country because it will stay
with the hapless Chris Bowen, Jordan men now Sky and
is political contributor Chris Yulman, Chris a fair amount of
(14:41):
factional payback here. A number of MPs dumped by their faction.
And this wasn't the Prime Minister's doing. This was the faction.
In the case of Eve Husick, it's the right that
dumped him, but also some political squaring off and this
was under the pen of the Prime Minister. The way
in which he's really treated Tanya Pleversec it's a colder sack,
(15:04):
if I can call it, that Social services portfolio of
no reforms on the table. What did you make of today.
Speaker 9 (15:12):
Yeah, Well, Asides said, Husick was concerned it was a
fight between two parts of the right, the Victorian Right
in the New South Wales Right, and it was the
Victorian Right that won in the end. I was a
little surprised about the way that ed Husick dealt with that.
I didn't think that throwing all the toys out of
the cot, which he clearly did in days after that,
and his appearance on Insiders and getting the former Prime
Minister Paul Keating to write in his favor, and Paul
(15:34):
Keating saying in the midst of that there wasn't any
intellectual grunt in the Victorian Right. Well, I think that's
belied by some of the people who are coming in.
If ed Husick wanted to long stay in the party
and a top job in future, that I think he's
put his cause back with the way he's behaved. And
I think of all the people Peter who lost their
jobs and lost their jobs and lost their place in Parliament,
(15:57):
and all the people in this building at the moment
who are clearing out their desks. Ed Hughesy gets to stay,
he should probably look at the way that Keith wallerhan
dealt with the way that he left Parliament with real
dignity and grace, and I think that there are a
lot of people hurting at the moment. Losing your ministry
is not as bad as losing your job in parliament.
As far as Tanya Plip, your second's concerned us, no
(16:17):
secret at all. Of course, at the Prime Minister and
channel for the second beIN rivals for a long time.
She had to stay in cabinet. She has the talent
to do it, she's got the support inside the party.
Speaker 1 (16:25):
To do it.
Speaker 9 (16:26):
But yes, at the moment, under this Prime Minister, her
career is on a hold.
Speaker 2 (16:33):
You mentioned there're some bright young things, and I want
to mention a couple of those. Doctor Andrew Charlton. He's
now the new Cabinet secretary. That means he'll have a
role in policy development.
Speaker 6 (16:43):
Now.
Speaker 2 (16:43):
I think this is a really good thing. I had
a bit to do with him when he was in
Kevin Rudd's office as the Chief Economist, and a bit
later on outside the Parliament before he stood obviously for paramatter.
I think he's got a good brain, a big brain,
and I think that he will at least provide I
hope some contestability around the cabinet table to all the
usual dumb ideas that get thrown up by department and
(17:05):
that weak ministers then just regurgitate and try and get up.
You need someone to knock some of that out. Also
from Victoria Victorian right is Dan Melino, now hughsic saying
or keeping saying, there's not many smart people. This bloke
has got an economics PhD from Yale. I don't know him,
but I suspect that's pretty telling. That says he's pretty clever.
(17:28):
So I hope you're going to see some some intellectual
pressure here and some political pressure on people like Jim Chalmers,
because I think we've got some really difficult decisions coming forward,
not just an energy obviously, but in the broader economy.
Speaker 9 (17:43):
Well, Andrew Shelton's credential speak for themselves. I don't take
a claim to know him well. I knew him from
the time on you him when he was around the
right government. But then he went out and made an
absolute fortune for himself in the private sector, and good
luck to him on that front. He's well credentialed in
the economic area. Dan Molino I do know well, and
is a really decent man, a highly intelligent one. Bought
(18:05):
to write a book called Safety Net, which runs to
I think, you know, maybe a thousand pages. So I
promise him I will read it one day. So he's
an intellectual powerhouse, a really decent man. And can I say,
by the way he stood for a couple of weeks
on Prepole, he was subjected to the same abuse that
a lot of Labor right candidates were subjected to by
volunteers from the Socialist Alliance, Muslim Votes and the Greens.
Speaker 1 (18:29):
Although the Greens that I spoke to deny that they
were part of that.
Speaker 9 (18:32):
But there were some very ugly stuff that happened on
the campaign on those Prepole booths from the right and
the left.
Speaker 1 (18:39):
I do have to say, and I hope that in
future we don't see any more of that.
Speaker 2 (18:45):
Yeah, at any given time, I used to say this
obviously as a Liberal staffer, I'd say this to people
I work with. Our mob's going to be out. We're
going to be an opposition, so we want the best
possible labor party in there when they are governing. I
want them to gather well, I want them not to
waste down and all the usual things, because too often
the leaves have to come in and clean up the mess.
So I am pleased to see more people coming in
(19:07):
with what i'd give I'd call policy grunt smarts, and
not just demonstrated paper smart. It's not just a degree
or a PhD, but evidence that they care about where
the country is going, that they want to get into
the policy debate, that they're more about long generational solutions,
if I can call it Chris as opposed to a
(19:30):
hit in question Time or something to get on the
front page of the Telly tomorrow. That they want to
fix the problems our country's facing.
Speaker 9 (19:38):
Absolutely, And the other thing too, is that I got
to pick people. I picked policies, and the only thing
I would say, it's a labor party about the policies
it's got on energy.
Speaker 1 (19:45):
At the moment, they're entirely wrong.
Speaker 9 (19:47):
That's really my major beef with where this party is heading,
and that I believe that the economy is intimately tied,
in fact completely tied to energy in the way that
energy is produced, and if we continue on the path
that they put us on, then we're on the road
to poverty.
Speaker 1 (20:01):
It will be an absolute disaster.
Speaker 9 (20:02):
And the signs of that are already here, and they're
everywhere else where the similar policies have been pursued. So
that's my main beef. There are really good people on
all sides of politics. I think one of the problems
that we've had in recent years is that we too
often descend into personal abuse about people rather than just
looking at the policies that are on offer. I have
a big beef with a Labor Party's energy policy. I
(20:25):
have real concerns about its defense policy, and I have
some concerns about its economic policy.
Speaker 1 (20:31):
That's where my concerns lie.
Speaker 9 (20:32):
But as far as the people go, if you get
Dan Malino into Parliament and into a position of power
inside the Labor Party, then you've got a very, very
sensible person who's going to be arguing for the right
kinds of things for Australia.
Speaker 2 (20:44):
I think, Look, I agree, there's Assistant Treasure two. I
don't think I mentioned that before. I want to pick
up some comments. So David little Proud's been re elected
to the National Party leader. I want to pick up
some colleagues as some comments that my colleague Chris Kenny
got out of him a moment ago when he interviewed
him and they discussed net zero, have a listen.
Speaker 3 (21:07):
That's up to the party room. The leader doesn't make
the determination in our party room. We draw on the
collective of the wisdom of the entire party room. We'll
have that conversation and all our policies are up for review.
Speaker 2 (21:22):
So the point here Chris Yeoman is that the net
zero's up for grabs. He's not saying that that's now
the policy. He's saying that there'll be a wholesale review
of everything and it'll be a debate inside the party
room whether they continue with net zero or whether the
National Party drop it.
Speaker 1 (21:38):
Absolutely.
Speaker 9 (21:39):
And look, I think that there's an intellectual hegemony which
is happening in Australia at the moment when the Liberal
Party is going to perhaps be pushed into which is
that everyone should sign up to the policy of net zero.
But I would say read the room outside Australia, the
United States is not signed up to it, China is
not signed up to it, Russia is not signed up
to it, India is not signed up to it. That's
(21:59):
sixty percent of the world's emissions are not doing net zero.
So the answer to the question then has to be
what on Earth are we doing the policy that we've
signed up to, and we've only just seen the beginning
of it in the transition of the electricity system. The
harder part is yet to come, which is how do
we make concrete, how do we make.
Speaker 1 (22:18):
Steel, how do we make plastic?
Speaker 9 (22:20):
And how do we make ammonia which feeds half the
world's population. That stuff has yet to be settled in
any way that can be commercially applied. So to try
and get to net zero means that you will see
COVID level interference in people's lives from now on. Now,
I think there's a really good liberal argument that you
(22:40):
can make against that, which is that we don't want
to see that level of interference in our lives, and
we should let the market decide the kind of energy
that we need to use. And of course, if you
are determined to try and cut carbon emissions, there is
only one source of power apart from hydro so one
source of power that burns fuel that's capable of doing that,
that is nuclear energy. That's a perfectly reasonable argument.
Speaker 2 (23:05):
We will leave it there, beautifully, said Chris Human. As always,
all right, after the break, we're going to get into
some issues in relation to farmers and fire fighting. It's
a huge issue. Protests in Victoria Friday and again tomorrow,
plus the push to legalize cannabis. I'll speak with a
health expert about why this isn't it's as harmless as
some would have you believe. Welcome back to the come
(23:31):
the factional brawling inside the Liberal Party and why it
needs to stop as more members leave. But first is
growing outrage across Victoria's farming communities as we've seen a
sharp rise in the state's fire services property levy hitting
already struggling landowners. Farmers say they've bench forced a shoulder
the cost of a broken fire system, one which has
(23:53):
seen Victoria's once proud volunteer fire fighting force shrink to
record lows while the bill for paid staff continues to soar.
The problems first started with the forced merger of the
state's volunteer fire brigade, the Country Fire Authority the CFA,
with the Metropolitan Fibering Brigade the MFB, to form Fire
(24:14):
Services Victoria. And this was all part of deal done
between Daniel Andrews and the powerful Firefighters Union, the end
result being a very frustrated and demoralized force fractured trust
and now a fight back which is filled under the
steps of the Victorian Parliament. It's all about a new
and rebadged fire services levee that will force farmers to
(24:36):
pay millions and millions of dollars to cover the cost
of the state's merged entity. Now on Friday, farmers and
volunteer firefighters made their way to Spring Street and the
Premier's office in Bendigo, demanding a rethink of this new
firefighting levee before farmers are pushed over the edge. For
many farmers, the cost of this levee is in excess
(24:58):
of eighty thousand dollars each. They say they're paying more
for less and a calling for a return to the
volunteer led model that's always served the bush best. In
the Parliament, the Upper House is expected to vote on
the controversial new tax as soon as tomorrow, with another
rally set for the strips of Parliament to keep up
(25:18):
the pressure. Rob Armstrong he's a farmer from a rat
and he will be hit by this tax. He helped
organize Friday's rally and he joins me now, Rob, thank
you for your time. But you spoke at the rally
on Friday. You say you'll be back at the Parliament
House buildings tomorrow. I don't know. I'm calling it a levy,
(25:38):
that's what the government's calling it. But this is a tax.
Why are you paying this tax when we all know
the farmers are the ones who fight these fires in
regional communities anyway.
Speaker 10 (25:53):
Yes, it's a very horrible thing and the impact is
mash up massive financially mostly and morally for farmers. This
isn't a matter of a few hundred dollars. It's tens
of thousands of dollars. In my community just around the here.
Some people are facing bills at seventy thousand and up
(26:14):
to five hundred thousand. It's not it's just devastating. If
this tax gets through, it will destroy livelihoods. It will
rip millions out of our rural towns, our businesses, sports clubs,
local shops and services, and the knockron effect will be massive.
(26:36):
We love farming, it's in our blood. But to be
hit with one hundred and eighty nine percent increase on
this levy, well it just feels like extortion. It's just
bloody ol. Farmers are the first responders to nearly all.
Speaker 2 (26:51):
Sorry, no, I'm just going to make that point you're
about to make. I mean, farmers are the ones who
go out to fires and fight those fires off with
their own equipment in their local areas. How does the
government justify jacking up this levee by close to two
hundred percent.
Speaker 1 (27:09):
Well, that's a very good question.
Speaker 2 (27:11):
But like.
Speaker 10 (27:15):
Most of us all fight the fires, Like for example,
me and other fires and plenty of other farmers spend
Christmas Day on a fire truck. It's no funding, no fuss,
just doing what we had to get done for our community.
We miss out on a lot of things to be
on call twenty four to seven for our community. In
(27:36):
our region, for example, there's a million acres, it's got
nine mc f A trucks and over four hundred and
fifty private units. That means over ninety five percent of
fire units in our region are privately owned, paid for,
and maintained by the farmers. Without us, rural fires would
be so much more devastating.
Speaker 2 (28:02):
Is this all because of that merger? I mean, that's
what's been said to me, Rob, that the merger of
the CFA has broken the heart of the CFA volunteers,
that the new merger is not working. This is the
government in Victoria that's basically belly up bankrupt. It requires
increases to all of these levees and all to fund
(28:23):
fire services in the state.
Speaker 10 (28:24):
Now, yes, it appears that we're funding a lot of people,
doesn't it.
Speaker 2 (28:30):
But the.
Speaker 10 (28:33):
Problem is it's all been taken away from us yet
we are the first responders. But in your question about
the merger, I'm probably not the person who answered that question.
I'm not familiar enough with it.
Speaker 2 (28:51):
Right. I'm going to come back and talk to you
again after this rally. I wish you all the very best.
And just before we go, Rob, I know people out
your way are doing it very tough. I mean, it's
drought conditions. I don't know that we formally call it
a drought yet, but I know the rainfall has been
non existent. Can I get a sense of how it's
been for you, Well.
Speaker 10 (29:10):
If you look down a gravel road, that's exactly what
the whole farms look like in this area. It's well,
I've been a farmer for well sixty years and this
drought now is worse than nineteen sixty seven droud. It's
it's devastating how bad it is. Like I'm not sure
(29:30):
the farmers can't afford this tax in the first place
at all.
Speaker 11 (29:35):
But if we have another drought like last year, there's
going to be a lot of farmers aren't going to
be able to pay, probably even their rates bill. Littlelone
a farm Leavy that we shouldn't be paying in the
first place.
Speaker 10 (29:48):
It's going to take it, take it.
Speaker 1 (29:49):
I hate to leave it there, Sorry.
Speaker 2 (29:54):
Rob, I hate to leave it there. I'll move on
to other things, but I will promise you I'll come
back tomorrow night to get a wrap of how this
protest has gone. And I want to put some wood
on the opposition to get very clear from them their
position on this. Thank you for your time. I'll come
back to the issue of the drought as well, because
I'll tell you what, when Chris Bowen goes to those
next round of climate targets, what is absolutely front and
(30:16):
center is agriculture. That is that square the circle when
you look at what farmers are facing. Now let's go
to some other issues. As I said, they want to
legalize cannabis in Victoria. It's certainly a push to around
the country, but Victoria, like with so many things, is
ground zero. It's been something that the Greens have pushed
hard for in the parliament. Of course, we know the
(30:38):
Greens now federally are decimated, but legalize cannabis the party, well,
it's got plenty of influence and Victoria also is in
a very poor debt position. So one of the biggest backers,
as we know from Climate two hundred, the millionaire share
trader Rob Keldoulis well he bought a Tasmani in cannabis
(31:00):
farm in twenty twenty two, is also a high profile
backer of the legalized cannabis party. This is a preference
harvester in my view, and many of the to your races,
all of this is a big concern. Then you add
in the serious mental health worries that people have, particularly
in relation to young people and the use of cannabis.
(31:21):
Joining me now, Brain and Mind Center psychiatrist at the
University of Sydney and Professor Ian Hickey. Professor Hickey, you're
an expert on mental health. I'll ask you about that
in a moment, but I think from the outset, let's
be clear, there is a difference, isn't there between the
decriminalization of cannabis use or any drug and the legalization
(31:43):
of cannabis.
Speaker 7 (31:46):
Absolutely, and it's very important you make that distinction. Lots
of people want to see the criminal element removed and
not have people chased around by the police around minor
issues of drug use and the legalization, and what follows that,
which you've just highlighted, is the commercialization. And then you
get into the problems that now running in Canada and
the US of the commercialization, which itself creates all sorts
(32:06):
of other difficulties, often people seeking tax revenue, as you
point it out, but often there ends up being in
an illegal market in addition to the legal market, So
you don't actually solve the problem you set out to solve,
and most important, you expose a whole lot more people,
particularly young people, to the adverse effects, particularly the mental
health effects of excessive cannabis use.
Speaker 2 (32:27):
Yeah, Professor Igi. One of the arguments in favor of
legalization is that it will take the illegal trade off
the streets, it will create a regulation environment, it will
create a legal trade, and there'll be a clip of
the ticket for the tax payers. But that's not the
case or the experience overseas, is it. No.
Speaker 7 (32:46):
In fact, i'd suggest if anyone's been in New York
City recently, you'll see legal cannabis shops and outside you'll
see illegal cannabis being solved, and there's Sonibian criminal ailment
along with the legal element. It's just like we now
see in the tobacco trade around Australia the legal bit,
and because of price and competition, there's the illegal bit.
So the notion that legalization will entirely remove the criminal
(33:06):
element just basically isn't true. And the supply issue is
really the issue here. As you pointed out, there are
many people who've invested or want to invest in the
commercialization of cannabis because there will be a large market,
but there will also be inevitably large negative health effects,
particularly on mental health and particularly on the young people.
So the associations with psychosis with a motivational states, as
(33:28):
well as with accident injury due to intoxication are pretty
clear cut. And my colleagues INABA, in Canada and the
US states that have done this in particular have seen
exactly that increased presentations to emergency rooms increased rates of psychosis.
And this is one of the things we can control.
We don't have to make the problem worse.
Speaker 2 (33:47):
I've been told a lot of this impacts our young people,
particularly young men, and given how tough it's been for
so many of them coming out of COVID, given our
suicide rates in Australia, given that sort of the desocialization,
I think it's fair to say that the devices have
brought some young people, not all young people, but some
young people. If there was ever a time to do it,
(34:07):
it'd almost say this is not the time.
Speaker 7 (34:10):
I think that's a fair point. The worst thing mental
health in young people with recognized by most major parties
just before the election, were going to see new investments
in mental health services for young people. The last thing
we need at the moment is another element in society
which potentially increases the rate, and not just the rate,
but the rate of severe mental health problems which are
then enduring. And that seems pretty clear cut also in
(34:31):
the medical literature. Now it's not just that there's one
episode of problems that this often precipitates in the illness
which then persists and is life changing. So most people
in the mental health area, and I think the health
area in general, they favor decriminalization. As you pointed out,
they don't favor legalization and widespread commercialization, which has really
been behind a lot of the push in Australia, or
(34:53):
of the push behind meddictional cannabis and a lot of
the issues that have gone on where Australias had a
pretty liberal attitude to medicinal cannabis as well. He's really
driven by commercial interests. And you know we've had great
trouble with tobacco, alcohol, other substances. We don't need to
add this to the mix.
Speaker 2 (35:10):
You are a voice of reason, professor. He he had an
expert obviously, thank you for your time up the break
WHI a state factional brawl is causing thousands of Liberal
Party members to leave the party. Plus speaking of leadership,
it might not be smooth starting for the ALP, according
to one labor store ward today or of that in
a moment welcome back still to come. Why the ABC's
(35:34):
election campus review must include a reference to bias. We'll
see if that happens, won't we My next guesse now
is well acquainted with factional infarting and turmoil within the
New South Wales Liberal Party, having been appointed as a
special administrator last year to help the party get back
on track. So with the leadership contest playing out tomorrow
federally of course, and plenty of factional tensions on display,
(35:57):
it's timely to get some thoughts from former Howard government minister,
former Victorian Liberal Party president, I might add, and former
boss to Peter Kredline, which at Austin I might even say,
also a communications minister, I'll ask you about the ABC
and their election coverage in a moment, just just at
a top level, as someone who was a warrior effort
for the Howard government for so long, your reaction to
(36:17):
the thumping and the limps got in the election.
Speaker 1 (36:20):
Look, I think it's.
Speaker 12 (36:21):
A bit misleading. We went into the election in front
of the polls. Some people would say Trump comes along,
everyone goes for the dinner and and what to change?
You know, we'll stick with the devil. We know that's
part of the answer. But fundamentally it was a very
poor campaign. Clearly they hadn't done their homework on policy,
(36:44):
which should have been locked away months beforehand, and here
they were two days out, they did defense, three days
out they did an educationist How can you expect anyone
to take you seriously? So I think we should not
see this as a complete devastation it's obviously a setback
(37:05):
because of the margin. But most people thought that the
alban eazy government didn't expect doesn't deserve to be returned.
Speaker 2 (37:14):
That's true.
Speaker 12 (37:15):
So can you imagine them suddenly doing all the right things. No,
So I think next time around will be a very
good opportunity for us if we can get our actic.
Speaker 2 (37:25):
Pedicostella was critical because he said there was just no
economic agender. Is that fair? Yeah?
Speaker 12 (37:31):
I think so.
Speaker 1 (37:31):
Yeah.
Speaker 12 (37:32):
I mean you've got to have a couple of big policies.
You've got to you've got to understand economics. You can't
just sort of blow the budget out and spend endlessly.
It all comes back to haunt you. So yeah, I
think economics is key if you if you don't understand economics,
then you're probably not going to be a winner.
Speaker 2 (37:52):
What about this whole fight that it inevitably happens, you know, Oh,
they were too far to the left, the leaves to
not far an to the right. If you look around
at all the state oppositions. Every time we've had a
left wing agenda, we've tried to cuddle up to labor.
We're almost in permanent opposition. What do you make of
this carry on.
Speaker 12 (38:13):
It's a very lazy media line. Any fool can write
an article about someone wants to go left, some don't.
That's complete nonsense. I mean, the reality is people want
good policy. It's not a left or right thing. Some
people can deliver it, and I mean there are labor
premiers who can deliver it. So I just don't waste
(38:34):
my time thinking in terms of left and right anymore.
Speaker 2 (38:37):
What about the insights you've had now in your time
as a steward of the New South Wales Liberal Party.
I know you've had a history in the Victorian Liberal Party.
What are you finding in the statistics in New South Wales?
What has shocked you?
Speaker 12 (38:52):
Well, it's hard to believe actually, because there are six
hundred and eight people who have been refused membership of
the party. There have been four and a half thousand
people who have let their membership lapse in the last
few years. No new branches have been created since twenty sixteen.
It's just appalling, and it's because the factions collude. Factions
(39:16):
are okay, you're always going to have left and right, progressive,
moderate conservative whatever as how it said broad Church. But
when they get together and exclude people you know, mother
Teresa turns up says she's available. I'd say, sorry, you're
not in the right faction.
Speaker 2 (39:31):
And that's so people at home can follow. That's because
those there have already carved up the spoils and even
though they hate each other factionally, they know exactly where
they are. They've got the position to suit themselves. They
don't want talent, they don't want new numbers to come in.
They don't want people to come in that they can't control.
Speaker 12 (39:49):
They take it in turns. Actually that's what happens. You know,
you're not in my faction, but if you do the
right thing, we'll put you on the list. Someone complained
to us, you know she was supposed to factions that
she said, it's outrageous because I was next on the list.
So it's not about talent at all. It's about payoffs
and trading and it's very unhealthy. You can't possibly say
(40:13):
that New South Wales can get back in the sensible government.
I mean the catalyst was the local government fiasco when
almost one hundred and fifty candidates weren't selected, but that
was the last straw. This has been around for years
in New South Wales. That's why the federal executive unanimously
said on two occasions we must have interventions. And they
(40:33):
said to us, you must fix the problem, and that
involves writing a new constitution. And we're in the process
of doing that right now.
Speaker 2 (40:40):
And is that how you fix it? You have a
new constitution, surely you got to have a clean out
across the board. A factional willlords Well.
Speaker 12 (40:49):
Yeah, I wouldn't focus on the world, focus on giving
ordinary members access rights. So instead of being yes, well,
instead of being not back by the branch president who's
in on the deal to fix you, allow the application
to go through and then if people have a genuine objection,
(41:11):
they can lodge that with a panel. So that's a
much more sensible way of opening the party up. Clearly
people want to join the party, but they're not going
to until reform has been put in both well.
Speaker 2 (41:24):
It'd be something I know we're going to talk about
a lot, Richard, but if you can get it right
in New South Wales, maybe other states will follow.
Speaker 12 (41:30):
I don't think other states needed fundamentally, you know, they've
got to get things right, but they don't need reform
in the way that New South Wales. New South Wales
is rotten on the inside. I wouldn't say that about
any other states. I mean, wa, you know, I've only
got a handful. It's going to be very difficult to
make a comeback there. New South Australia is just as
(41:51):
bad as I think, but you know, you're up against
some competent people. But New South Wales is far and
away the biggest problem, and it's the biggest state.
Speaker 2 (42:02):
Ye thank you, Richard. Just a quick on ABC bias
reform and a review.
Speaker 12 (42:11):
I thought Kim Williams was going to do something serious
about this, but I don't see any sign of it really.
I mean, I knew him quite well. I think he's
capable of being sensible about these things. But it's just
too hard. You know, if he tries to do something
like this, they can all leak on him. The staff
appointed director goes mad, you know.
Speaker 2 (42:32):
So they just kept losing audience ship.
Speaker 12 (42:35):
The only way to do it is in terms of
the money. You have to attach conditions to the money
they get, and they have to then be forced to
fix themselves. The trouble is they're a monopoly, you see,
and monopolies get fat and lazy. They don't need to reform.
They don't need to cut, they don't need to win,
they don't need to raise money.
Speaker 1 (42:55):
How good is that?
Speaker 12 (42:57):
What would you want to go?
Speaker 2 (42:58):
Well, Scott newsed love to get a billion dollars every
year to run the show. We'll have to worry about ratings,
but we do, and we'll take a break so we
can get paid for our job. Richard Austin me, all right,
after the break, we'll get to a whole lot of
stuff about the Liberal leadership in a moment. Welcome back.
(43:18):
Has a lot of my viewers that reminded me to
Richard Austin was the last Liberal Minister for Communications that
took on the ABC and he certainly did that. All right,
let's get into the panel. Now, let's welcome my next
two guest Page Research Center chief Jared Holland and senior
fellow at the Men'sies Research Center, of course columns for
the Australia Nicator. Gents, welcome. I want to pick up
(43:40):
some comments. Well, we've all been navel gazing about the
Liberal Party, but I want to pick up some comments
from the ALP current president former Treasurer of Wayne Swann,
who's warn party supporters at the party's base is aging
that the membership is too small and that the most
focus on winning over working class voters, which says they've
lost them or they will risk further decline. This is
(44:04):
a very interesting comment here, Jared.
Speaker 13 (44:09):
Yeah, I mean, I think he's right just to put
Labour's win into context. If you look at the Hawk
or the Keyting or even Kevin Rudd's big win in
two thousand and seven, these were on primaries in the
mid forties. I think Keating reach as high as forty
eight or forty nine percent some of his high points.
Albanezy one with the primary of just thirty four percent.
So this wasn't a resounding recognition and celebration of what
(44:31):
Labour brought to the election. It was a rejection of
what the Coalition had on offer. And particularly if you
think about working class families, what do they have in
store over the next couple of years. Well, they're going
to get slapped with the utax that's another twenty five
percent or more on the family car or all the
people mover. They're going to see their energy bills continue
to spiral as that grid is out of control and
not going anywhere soon. They're going to see another one
(44:52):
or two million people come into the country, putting more
pressure on housing and cost of living, and so I
think they're going to be looking around saying, well, hang on,
who represents us? And it's this constituency that holds the key,
I think to either rebuilding for the coalition or Labor
actually cementing themselves back in their working class roots. And
this is the constituency that has been ignored and forgotten
(45:13):
for a good decade or so.
Speaker 2 (45:14):
Now, yeah, it's a good point to make because if
you look at the high looks like it might be
ninety four seats in the House. That's a thumping majority.
That's sort of what it is. It is if they
get to ninety four what John Howard had nic Cata
in nineteen ninety six. But if you look at Labour's
primary vote that's got them those ninety four seats, the
(45:35):
primary vote at this election under Alberan Easy is actually
lower than the primary vote that Bill shortened Goss in
twenty sixteen when he lost to Malcolm Turnbull. So that
puts it into some perspectives. So, yes, Labor have done
very very well, but more because the Liberals and others
did very very poorly. And also the preference flows and
(45:56):
the preference harvesting that happens on the left are making
it nine impossible for the conservative side of politics to survive.
Speaker 4 (46:05):
Yeah, I was interesting to see that bit of truth
telling from Wayne Swan. I think is onto something here.
I think, you know, it looks like a thumping win, right,
it could even be the biggest number of MP's Labor
have ever had in a parliament. But underneath there's clearly
the same problems in the Labor Party as there is
in the Liberal Party. Young people are not joining. Their
(46:28):
politics is conducted by other means on Facebook and Instagram
and all those sort of things. They're not tending to
go with the major parties. So you get this one third,
one third and then one third none of the above,
which is entrenched. Interestingly, I would point out on that
I think the solution to that where you just look
what happened in Canada. You'd be well aware of this
(46:49):
Peter that used to be this one third, one third,
one third right to the two major parties one third
each or roughly that, and then one third went to
the independence, the Block, kuberc and others. But this election
they've come back to the main parties, eighty four percent
I think, or eighty five percent voted for the major parties.
(47:09):
Why because both major parties were standing up for their
country for firm values thanks to Donald Trump, and that's
what brought people running back. So I don't think this
is terminal. I think both parties have got to work
on this, but it's not terminal.
Speaker 2 (47:25):
Jared, do you run a national party think tank or
I think tank connected to the National party and affiliations there?
Certainly there was an interesting moment today where there was
a debate about net zero and your new leader or
re elected leader, David Little prowd says, I'm not backing
it in. I mean, we've got to have a debate
about this. We're going to review the election and it's
on the table for the party room to debate. Now.
(47:49):
The Libs, I don't think we'll move away from net zero.
There's debate about whether they'll ever move away from nuclear power.
Your leader backed in nuclear power, but net zero is
something I think that will be discs asked, that's very
very interesting.
Speaker 13 (48:05):
Well, I think what's interesting about net zero is you
can only sort of allow it to make sense if
you think about it through the lens of a global movement.
But of course the US isn't committed to net zero. Now,
China isn't, India isn't. South Africa isn't. Russia isn't, Argentina isn't.
The Middle East aren't committed to it, and on and
on and on, and you're looking at over sixty percent
of the world now who are not even in Paris,
(48:26):
if not meaningfully working towards it. So the fact that Australia,
or the idea that Australia should go it alone when
we're one percent of the world's emissions, when we export
five hundred and ten teraworld hours of coal for other
people to burn, I just don't think that that really
holds water anymore. And I think as we're seeing these
cost pressures rise, Australians won't have the appetite to keep
stomaching this. And I think it's an issue that does
(48:47):
have to keep coming up, does have to keep being
looked at, because we aren't getting any closer to achieving it,
but we're getting ourselves into a whole lot of economic
and social unrest because of it.
Speaker 2 (49:00):
Nick just quickly the last time there was a debate
about quotas and targets and women inside the Liberal Party.
You were leading up the Liberal Parties think tank. Can
you write a very comprehensive review. What would you say
to this thing now?
Speaker 4 (49:13):
Well, I think quotas is absolutely ridiculous. That's not what
we argued in our report, and why because liberals believe
that everybody should have equal opportunity. I think the real
problem here, Peter is when you look at the members
of the party, there are very few women joining the party.
Interestingly fewer still, the most worst ratio is at young
(49:35):
Liberal level, and until we fix that, we're not going
to have any hope of getting people standing for parliament.
Speaker 2 (49:42):
You're not wrong there, but you have targets with teeth.
You don't go near quotas. Gents, I'll leave it there,
thank you very much, see you tomorrow night. Here's Andrew
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies!
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!