Credlin | 17 April

The UK Supreme Court unanimously rules ‘woman’ refers to biological sex, and Labor refuses to brief the Coalition on Russia and Indonesia. Plus, Cameron Milner joins the program to break down week three of the campaign. 

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:01):
Peedo Krandland Live on Sky News Australia.

Speaker 2 (00:08):
Good evening, break to have your company. Let's get into it.
Lots to talk about tonight. Let's start with that massive
win for common sense in the UK overnight the Supreme Court.
They're ruling unanimously that a woman is defined by her
biological sex at birth. This will have wide raging ratifications there.
But what are we going to have the same sort
of common sense into our laws in Australia. Senator Claire

(00:31):
Chandler coming up. So to my good friend Moira Deeming.
She joins me tonight and we catch up with her
big announcement today. That's about all the confusion over what
exactly is going on between Russia and Indonesia. It's astounding
to find out that Labor's refusing to brief the coalition.
This is a clear violation of the caretaker conventions and

(00:51):
blatant evidence to me that Labour's playing politics with national security.
Plus my weekly campaign Raps, Week three of the campaign.
Lots to unpack, including the telling questions the Prime Minister
last night refused to answer in that ABC debate polls
two more poles and more poles are all over the shop.
It's not as cut and dry as some might think.

(01:13):
Labour's Milner joins me and another fiery day two on
the campaign trail, and didn't the PM get tetchy when
pushed on the Greens and negative gearing.

Speaker 3 (01:25):
I have responded to that lots of times, asked again, boy,
you can ask you again.

Speaker 2 (01:29):
You get the same answer, cranky pants. PM will stay
with that. Today was Labour's worst day on the campaign
and last night's efforts in the Leader's debate, well, that
was Peter Dutton's best. Is a coalition finally finding some
mojo with just two weeks to go now before polling day?
It certainly feels like that, doesn't it now? Will it

(01:51):
be enough though to see off Labor? We'll see. What's
clear is that with the unusually high soft vote, this
race is still anyone's, despite the Prime Minister thinking he's
already won, with reports today that he's already started talks
with the Independence women like Rebecca Sharky to potentially take

(02:12):
the Speaker's chair. I mean talk about Hubris. What made
the Dutton effort in last night's debate his best outing
so far as that he took the fight up to Labor.
If I had any criticism of his personal performance todate,
it's that the lips, well, they've not gone hard enough
the target. They've not taken Albanesi and his lies head

(02:35):
on and not landed. The body blows that you've gotta
land if you want to throw out a first term
government now key In. This was his line last night,
posing the question are you better off now than you
were three years ago? Because if the answers are asounding no,

(02:55):
and it's hard to see that it won't be no
for most voters than the Almanezy government should be shown
the door.

Speaker 4 (03:02):
As we go to the third of May. People need
to reflect on what's happened in our country, in your
lives over the course of the last three years. And
as I said in my opening remarks, can you answer
the question are you better off today than you were
three years ago? And for the vast majority of Austrains
the answer is no.

Speaker 2 (03:21):
Last night, also Albanies he found it harder to higher
than usual because my former sky On News Collie David
Spear is well. He simply didn't tolerate his empty spin.
Theables are the cheapest form of power. When will we
see our power bills come down.

Speaker 1 (03:36):
They are.

Speaker 3 (03:37):
Well, what we know is that renewables are the cheapest
form of power, not because of what we say, but
because of what the Australian Energy Market Operator says. Peter
Ray's gas gas is now thirteen dollars.

Speaker 2 (03:50):
It was thirty dollars and when we came cheaper, when.

Speaker 3 (03:53):
We came off, thirteen is cheaper than thirty.

Speaker 2 (03:56):
When do we see the bills come down?

Speaker 3 (03:58):
Well, what we need to do is to renewableoks.

Speaker 2 (04:03):
Also, last night's debate found the Prime Minister once more
being tricky with the truth. He denied that his government
had modeled the impact of changing negative gearing and the
capital gains tax discount, the very policies that built shortened
had taken to the twenty nineteen election, and that many
Labor MPs still support. Again, to remind you, here is

(04:27):
Albanesi last night.

Speaker 3 (04:29):
Under our public service we actually valued the public service
and we value them coming up with the ideas and
doing assessments.

Speaker 2 (04:38):
That's what's happened. I have been very clear.

Speaker 3 (04:41):
I have been very clear about what our position is
and why that is the case. Was it modeled, It
certainly wasn't commissioned by us to do so.

Speaker 4 (04:50):
It was morteled by the government.

Speaker 2 (04:51):
It was publicly, it's publicly you're what because that's not
what his own treasurer was forced to admit last year
is that has The Age newspaper reported on the twenty
fifth of September the Alminezy government and I quote was asked,
has asked Treasury for expert advice on possible changes to
negative gearing and the capital gains tax concessions. Now, when

(05:16):
asked about this a few hours later the same day
on Sydney Radio, Alban Eazy was like a rabbit in
the headlights.

Speaker 5 (05:24):
It's a fair question to ask you whether you or
your treasurer has requested this this study.

Speaker 1 (05:30):
Sure, and I've answered that you've asked.

Speaker 5 (05:32):
You've answered it for yourself, but not for the treasurer.

Speaker 3 (05:35):
Well, I'm not the treasurer.

Speaker 2 (05:38):
Now. They bled on it for about forty eight hours,
but then came the treasurer's back down. Jim Chalmers concedes
said the ABC headlines that he asked Treasury for negative
gearing modeling. This morning, the Coalitions campaign spokesman James Patterson
didn't miss.

Speaker 1 (05:58):
The Prime Minister says the government did not commission any
advice on negative gearing or capital gains tax changes. But
the Treasurer admitted last year that's exactly what he did.
If the Prime Minster will lie about this, what else
will he lie about?

Speaker 2 (06:13):
So out the PN Wednesday to try and mop up
his mess from last night, trying to claim his government
had never worked up options to dump negative gearing, when
his own treasurer admitted that last year, and in the
usual albanezy way, he made it worse.

Speaker 6 (06:31):
Do you rule out meeting the greens demands on negative gearing?

Speaker 3 (06:35):
I reill out negotiating with the Greens. That's even further
for you. I have responded to that lots of times. Again,
Well you can ask you again, you get the same answer.
We have our housing policy that we are taking forward
the Greens. I am not negotiating with the Greens. We
make it very clear.

Speaker 2 (06:58):
TETCHI I told you was tet She enter Peter Dutton.

Speaker 4 (07:03):
Now, at least Bill Shorten was honest with the Australian
people in relation to negative gearing. The Labour Party has
always harbored a desire to abolish negative gearing, and their
partners in crime, the Greens, are open about it as well.

Speaker 2 (07:17):
Now surely people's doubts about the Prime Minister's integrity must
be growing. I mean, this is the guy responsible for
claiming ninety something times before the last election that he
would cut your power bill by two hundred and seventy
five dollars per.

Speaker 3 (07:31):
Year, reducing power prices by two hundred and seventy five dollars.
Reducing power prices by two hundred and seventy five dollars.

Speaker 4 (07:38):
By twenty twenty five, two hundred and seventy five dollars
a year.

Speaker 3 (07:42):
One hundred and seventy five dollars a year will get.

Speaker 5 (07:45):
Power prices down by two hundred and seventy five dollars.

Speaker 3 (07:48):
A year, two hundred and seventy five dollars for the
average house lower in twenty twenty five than today.

Speaker 2 (07:56):
What a conger line of liars. Well, clearly that didn't happen.
The Prime Minister two is constant claiming that the Coalition
cut thirty billion from education at fifty billion from health.
Well look at the budget papers. That didn't happen either.
There's the endlessly repeated false thought about nuclear power costing
some six hundred billion. Well that's base. Look at my
stuff in the Australian today on a beat up from

(08:19):
a Labor Front organization. Then there was the fall from
the stage where we saw this. But the Prime Minister,
well he said this.

Speaker 3 (08:30):
He stepped back one step. I didn't fall up the stage,
just one leg went down.

Speaker 4 (08:36):
But I was sweet.

Speaker 2 (08:39):
Now. I know voters have become cynical about politicians, but
I still don't think they want to liar in the lodge.
And this is why the election is still very winnable
for the Coalition, especially if like last night, they get
into the ring. So what is a woman, Well, an

(09:04):
adult biological female. It shouldn't be that hard, and for
thousands and thousands of years it hasn't been hard until
the Marxist lefties infiltrated officialdom and we ended up with
this nonsense in the West that anyone can just self
identify and overnight, bingo, you are what you say you are.
In all of us have to defy reality to pretend

(09:26):
gender hasn't changed, when we know when gender has changed,
when we all know chromosomes haven't. Until last night, when
finally we've seen a etern of common sense, as the
full bench of the UK Supreme Court rejected the nonsense
that a man can be a woman as long as
he can hold up a piece of paper to say
he is. In the unanimous decision, all five judges of

(09:50):
Britain's top court declared that at law, a woman means
and I quote, a biological female.

Speaker 7 (09:58):
The unanimous decision of this court is that the terms
women and sex in the Equality Act two thousand and
ten refer to a biological woman and biological sex.

Speaker 2 (10:13):
So biological men who get a certificate saying they're female
are not legally women for the purposes of the British
Equality Act to allow their said, the judges would make
the law incoherent. Now, finally, an end to the nonsense
of chest feeding rather than breastfeeding, and an end to
offensive terms like person with a cervix instead of women,

(10:35):
or birth individual instead of mother, terms that render us
diminished as women. Now, as you know, this has been
something I've been rarely against for over seven years now,
ever since I started hosting this program, and long before
many others in the media were prepared to call out
the activists. Not all of them are on the left,

(10:55):
are they Just look at the now disgraced and remove
liberal party leadership in Victoria that expelled Moy Redeeming for
the crime of attending a rally to defend the biological
rights of women and girls. For almost two and a
bit years, I've stuck my neck out to defend Deeming
and she won big and a court action of her
own last year. As you know, she sends being reinstated

(11:18):
to the Liberal Party party room, and with the big
announcement today, I'll share that with you in a moment
when she joins me in the studio. But back to
last night's decision in the UK, this wasn't just a
win for women there. It was a big victory for
women like Moirato and all women around the world, as
our biological rights have now been upheld by one of

(11:39):
the world's most distinguished courts. On the back of this,
all similar self identification laws in Victoria, Queensland and elsewhere
must now be abolished. No man should be able to
self identify as a woman in this country and voters

(12:00):
must demand this of their politicians. Enough now is enough?
All right, let's get into the campaign. I'm going to
check you in the two camps. We'll start with Labor
joining me now. Political reporter Julia Bradley Well Julia, welcome
the Prime Minister in Brisbane today. Standing there of course

(12:21):
with Jim Chalmers, we had a bit of a feature
of you. You. You certainly got under his skin a
bit awkward some of those questions. He certainly got pretty
tetchy last night.

Speaker 8 (12:31):
Let's have another look, thank you after Albert retires.

Speaker 2 (12:53):
Well, Peter.

Speaker 6 (12:54):
Negative gearing and capital gains, tax concessions did really dominate
today on the campaign try for the privatist and also
the Treasurer who took the campaign to the sunshine state.
Queensland a bit of a psychological attack given that it
is the opposition leader's hometown. Queensland an interesting state for
the Labor Party though they only hold five out of

(13:16):
thirty seats, the Greens hold three, So today the Labor
Party very much on the attack. They were targeting seats
held by the Greens, but also the LMP, starting the
day off in Bonner that LMP seat within Brisbane.

Speaker 9 (13:29):
They did previously hold it, which is why it is
on the target list.

Speaker 6 (13:34):
But there was an interesting moment that I want to
bring you while campaigning in Brisbane this afternoon on this
whistle stop tour.

Speaker 9 (13:41):
Now, campaigns, as you.

Speaker 6 (13:42):
Know, are very highly controlled, but it was more of
an off the cuff moment that the Treasurer had with
a voter which stood out. He arrived at a pub
in Brisbane before an official media event to give an
update about unemployment figures when he had this candid moment
with a voter who said he wants Jim Chu to
succeed Anthony Albert Easy as prime minister.

Speaker 2 (14:03):
To take a look really for sure?

Speaker 5 (14:05):
Thank you noways, I hope you the next.

Speaker 2 (14:07):
Video that's my cue, good luck after Albert retires. Tous, Sorry, Jules,
I jumped the gun with that little yarn. Yes, it
is very interesting, all those unscripted moments on the campaign.
Thank you. We'll check it with you soon. Again, let's

(14:27):
go out of the opposition leader's movements, joining in our
senior political reporter treaty in Macintosh. Well, your bloke Peter
Dutton stayed pretty much in your South Wales today after
that debate last night, Truty. What was his focus?

Speaker 9 (14:41):
Yeah, on the offensive as well.

Speaker 10 (14:42):
Peter Dutton today initially targeting that seat of Patterson in
the Hanto.

Speaker 9 (14:45):
Speaking to liberal.

Speaker 10 (14:46):
Sources today, they're quite confident about their chances.

Speaker 9 (14:49):
The margin just around two percent.

Speaker 10 (14:51):
Merrill Swanson, the laboring cumbent, has held the seat since
twenty sixteen, but liberal sources I spoke to today say
that the local candidate they've selected this time, Lawrence un Cliff,
actually has a good ground game, and that they believe
that means I'll be able to flip this seat.

Speaker 9 (15:04):
I've heard that before. I'm sure you have too, Peterburn.
Let's see whether that translates.

Speaker 10 (15:08):
We drove further south before coming back here to Sydney
to stop at the seat of Doe Bell.

Speaker 9 (15:12):
It was a bit of a pre Easter visit for
mister Dutton alongside.

Speaker 10 (15:15):
His wife Curly, stopping in having a look at the
chocolate's there, speaking to a small business.

Speaker 9 (15:20):
That seat of Doe Bell more of a stretch goal.

Speaker 10 (15:22):
You'd imagine around six percent margin, but it was much
tighter before the twenty twenty two election.

Speaker 9 (15:27):
We saw that margin blow out.

Speaker 10 (15:29):
I think the interesting thing, Peter now is how does
the opposition leader trailing in the polls cut through what
is essentially going to be a week of voters tuning
out of politics every day when I speak to voters here.
We've been doing it tonight and this morning. The people
don't want to talk about politics, they either don't have
an opinion at all despite having to vote, or if
they do, they don't seem to have any awareness of
the policy.

Speaker 9 (15:49):
So that's actually a problem for mister Dutton, not being
the incumbent.

Speaker 10 (15:52):
How does he actually get some attention for himself in
what's likely to be over the next seven days a
pretty quiet zone for Australian's actually tuning in the details.

Speaker 2 (16:00):
Of this campaign. Look, you're not wrong, Treaty, and that's
exactly why the Prime Minister really wanted to run this
campaign and intersect both over Easter and Anzac Day. Will
catch sure you next week on the campaign trail. Have
lovely Easter. Let's go now to a whole lot of
other stories I want to get you across in joining
me the dynamic duo Senator for Tasmania Liberal Claire Chandlight

(16:23):
and Sky and news commentator Caroly Katsumbanos. Ladies welcome. Let's
start with negative gearing. You heard all of that there
from Trudy Peter Dutton today really made hay with the confusion,
but the PDM created last night perhaps even made worse
today on the whole issue of negative gearing. He pretended
last night, or claimed last night that they had not
been done any modeling via Treasury at the government's behest.

(16:47):
But that's something the Treasurer has already admitted. Tricky language
here with labor. Have a listen.

Speaker 11 (16:55):
So you're not doing them now, but you could do
them next year the year after. There is no form,
there is no intent there is, well, there is there
is no intention to make this a part of any
of our policies in relation to housing.

Speaker 2 (17:16):
No intention. Listen to this similar tricky language from the
Prime Minister not so long ago.

Speaker 12 (17:22):
Well, I have no plans to do it.

Speaker 3 (17:24):
It's not our policy. Well, we have no plans to
touch it or change negative gearing.

Speaker 2 (17:31):
Well, Caroly, no intentions, no plans until they do. I
saw that with the Stage three tax cuts. These are
weasel words that politicians love to use, aren't.

Speaker 13 (17:41):
They Look they sure I good evening, Peter and Claire
and to all the viewers. Look, the Prominence has got
form on this before he went to the last election,
saying he wasn't going to oppose the Stage three tax cuts,
as you said, and you know, as you said, the
power price is down by two hundred and seventy five dollars.

Speaker 14 (18:00):
It hasn't and may not have the intention at the moment.

Speaker 13 (18:03):
But should he win the election, we know that with
the Greens that is one of their key policies to
get rid of negative gearing. What's he going to do
when he says we will not negotiate with the Greens,
What's he going to do? Send Jim Chalmers into negotiate
or Tanya plivosec or.

Speaker 14 (18:17):
Something like that. He can't say that, but as you say,
they're very much weasel words as well.

Speaker 13 (18:22):
But more importantly we at least the Greens have said
what they stand for and what they are actually going
to do. But at the end of the day, it
spells incredibly bad news for all Australians that have worked
hard that have an investment property. But it is also
very bad news for people that are currently renting because
it will mean a shortage of supply. And as you say,

(18:42):
how on earth can he not be in negotiations with
the Greens should he indeed win the election.

Speaker 2 (18:50):
Yeah, Look, and I remind people the last time this
happened that negative gearing was scrapped, it happened on a
Paul Ketty. He's scrapped it there's a terrible impact on
rental properties, a supply d up, and he put it
back in again. So let's be very clear about that.
It's been tried, it's been failed. Labor learned the lesson.
But you know, truly, Claire, if he wasn't going to
do it, he would just rule it out. And today

(19:12):
he was pushed and pushed and pushed the Prime Minister
and he refused to rule it out.

Speaker 12 (19:20):
Well, that's that's exactly right, Peter, and I think we're
seeing a repeat performance from mister Albanezy in this campaign
to what we saw in the last where he promised
more than ninety times to reduce Australian's power bills by
two hundred and seventy five dollars and we're yet to
see that appear. So I think that this is just,
you know, the rerun of those broken promises from mister

(19:42):
Albanezi and the Labor government in this campaign, just the
same as we saw last campaign.

Speaker 2 (19:48):
All right, Caroly, square this circle for me. Despite the
majority of Australian's voting note of the voice, we've still
got all this division foisted us. First, there's the fact
that's reported in the Australian Today Aboriginal Corporation and representing
traditional owners in Perth have stalled some sixteen much needed projects. Secondly,
the taxpayer funded ABC has created a new role elder

(20:12):
in residence. Warren Mundines thinks it's rubbish, the ABC refusing
to tell us if this is a paid or part
or full time role. We rejected this to visive nonsense,
and yet we're forced to live with it anyway.

Speaker 13 (20:29):
We'll definitely well, I'll deal with the second second part. First,
do you think they'll have a conservative in residence at
the ABC? Because they can tell you whether it's full time,
part time or a paid role. That's exactly what they need.

Speaker 14 (20:41):
And we keep being you know, this is a billion.

Speaker 13 (20:43):
Dollar organization of your money, my money and the Australian
taxpayers money.

Speaker 14 (20:47):
That are funding.

Speaker 13 (20:48):
And all we seem to realize is that, you know,
we've had it come out this week that you know,
they are meant to be they were meant to have
done fake gunshots with the Heston Russell thing that we're
added in and now we've seen with you know, the
last post footage being added to that as well.

Speaker 14 (21:03):
And it's an organization that.

Speaker 13 (21:04):
Really does not serve yet does not serve the needs
of Australians.

Speaker 14 (21:08):
So where is the conservative voice.

Speaker 13 (21:10):
You've also got Warren Mundine, who is an Indigenous Aboriginal elder.

Speaker 14 (21:14):
And he's almost been silenced on this.

Speaker 13 (21:16):
He was very clear in saying that the woman who
has got the job is a friend of his, but
he doesn't think it's necessary and neither do I because
I do not think that the ABC is serving the
Australian public. Well, they're missing what they should be doing,
which is that there's no balance in their reports.

Speaker 14 (21:31):
It is a completely biased institution.

Speaker 13 (21:35):
As I said, no conservative commentators on there at all,
and all our money seems to do is fund these
endless legal challenges from their journalists that seem to do
tweets from their private accounts and expect the Australian taxpayer
to pick up the bill. Onto the other thing that
you said, I will tell you that in Perth almost
all new Aboriginal projects need the heritage permission to do it,
and this is just sad because it will just do

(21:56):
a log jam of things. Before the last state election
of a few weeks ago, their Aboriginal heritage laws was
so unpopular that the labor state government had to shelve them.

Speaker 14 (22:07):
But you can bet your bottom.

Speaker 13 (22:08):
Dollar that after May the third they will sort of
resurface and they'll be done again.

Speaker 14 (22:13):
Because these people do not give up.

Speaker 13 (22:15):
The activists do not give up in wanting to get
things that have been resoundly rejected by the Australian public through.

Speaker 2 (22:22):
In another way, let's swing down to your homestate, Tazzy Claire,
because the Seat of Lions pretty interesting. What's going on
down there? The retiring federal MP. This is a Labor MP,
Brian Mitchell. He's about to get a windfall gain of
one hundred and fifteen thousand dollars. It's more than the

(22:43):
average jurneys are over an entire year. And this is
money that's normally paid to someone who loses their seat
or loses their party pre selection. It's part of a
resettlement program. Now he reckons is inside the rules. Technically
he may be. Did lose his pre selection? Did he?
He willingly stepped aside. He supported Rebecca White, she's the

(23:05):
current candidate for Labor, So why is he eligible for
this money?

Speaker 12 (23:09):
Then, well, it's a pretty dodgy deal that's been fabricated
by the Labor Party. Here, Peter, like you say, towards
the end of last year, Brian Mitchell said that he
was more than happy to step aside and allow the
former Labor leader Rebecca White run as the Federal Member

(23:29):
for Lines and indeed, in her valedictory speech to the Parliament,
Miss White made many references to her friend Brian supporting
her candidacy. But what we now find out is that
a pre selection process has taken place by the Labor
National Executive which the Prime Minister Anthony Albanezi sits on,
and mister Mitchell apparently put his hand up for this

(23:50):
pre selection and it was competitive against Ms White. So
I think there are some serious questions to ask here
about what version of events is actually the truth.

Speaker 2 (24:00):
Was mister Mitchell's.

Speaker 12 (24:00):
Standing aside to allow Miss White to run or has
the Labor Party fabricated some kind of pre selection process
in consultation with the Prime Minister to enable mister Mitchell
to pocket this one hundred and fifteen thousand dollar tax
payer payout.

Speaker 2 (24:16):
Yeah, it's right to ask the question. Shut up, mate,
go quietly, will help you get your payout and you
make it easy for Rebecca to get into the seat. Hey,
just quickly clear, because you have been a warrior on
the issue of biological women's rights for such a long time,
you'll take on that landmark decision in the UK overnight.

Speaker 12 (24:36):
I think it is an incredible decision that we've seen
in the UK overnight, Peter, and this judgment has made
it abundantly clear that when anti discrimination legislation, when equality
legislation was being written decades ago, the intention was that
this legislation would protect the biological rights of women and girls.
That is what this court in the UK has affirmed.

(24:58):
And it's really only in the last decade that we've
seen so many activists trying to alter what the word
woman means, and that's what is fundamentally undermined women's.

Speaker 9 (25:08):
Sex based rights.

Speaker 14 (25:09):
So I think for all of us the world.

Speaker 12 (25:12):
Over, some really important lessons here to remember that when
these laws were originally drafted, the intention was rightly so
to protect the women, the rights of women and girls
and ensure that women and girls aren't discriminated against, not
any of this activist stuff that we've seen happening in
the last couple of years.

Speaker 2 (25:32):
Well, good night, ladies. I could say that tonight, can't
I we've had four women at the top of the show,
there's not a quota in sight. Have a lovely easter.
We'll catch up with you both next week. We'll go
to that issue. We'll go live for the UK after
the break, and we'll also talk to Morodmi. She's going
to join me live here in the desk with some
big news that's happened just as we speak. Welcome back,

(25:55):
still to come the big question the PAN refused to
answer in last night debating We do a campaign rap
to with Cameron Milner butt first. Jubilant scenes outside the
UK Supreme Court following the five ZIP unanimous ruling for
the legal definition of a woman refers to biological sex
and nothing else. The long running legal battle was sparked

(26:17):
by a twenty eighteen lawrence Scotland which aimed to boost
the percentage of female representation on public boards. The campaign
Group for Women Scotland challenge the legislation as it included
in the definition of women transgender women jointing to me
now to discuss this news Corps Europe correspondent Sophie Ellsworth. Well, Sophie,

(26:37):
this has literally gone around the world, as you know.
What's the reaction been like? In the UK.

Speaker 15 (26:45):
There was jubulence here outside the Supreme Court yesterday in London.
Every front page of the newspapers here in the UK
pretty much you're celebrating. This is a victory Peter for
women and it's been a seven year fight for the
women of Scotland fighting for gender based rights. So yesterday
we saw those scenes champagne popping, people celebrating in the

(27:09):
streets saying this is a massive victory for women and
this is a decision that Peter is going to result
in public bodies across the UK now furiously rushing to
rip up their documentation and rules around gender based rights
in things such as prisons, hospitals, also around sporting competitions,

(27:31):
who can enter sport. Now, this is a real protection
for women and it's dominating news here where women are saying,
finally we've got back our women only spaces as a
result of this unanimous decision by the five most senior
judges in the country.

Speaker 2 (27:50):
Yeah, there was no real room sof in that ruling
it could not have been clearer. Five zip basically rules
out any chimes of appeal. Although we are at the
highest court in the land, and as I heard the
ruling come down. Last night I remembered this ridiculous exchange
involving the now PM kir Starmer back in twenty twenty one.
Have a listen.

Speaker 5 (28:11):
Is it transphobic to say only women have a cervix?

Speaker 16 (28:15):
Well, it is something that shouldn't be said.

Speaker 2 (28:20):
It is not right. But I might add in Victoria, no,
I see signs on the barst in relation to cervical
cancer screening and it says women or people with a cervix.
So you know we are dumbed down in terms of
how we are treated. In Australia we don't yet have
a decision like this, but in the UK, surely our

(28:42):
Sophie self ID is dead.

Speaker 8 (28:48):
Well it appears that way, Peter.

Speaker 17 (28:50):
It is dead because they have said your biological birth
is who you are and that's who you identify as,
not if you change your gender later on in your
adulthood or childhood.

Speaker 15 (29:01):
So again, this is a massive victory for women. And
one don't forget that Keirstarma did say a few years
back that ninety nine point nine percent of women do
not have penises. He's now had to turn around and
say this is a victory for common sense. So he's
done a complete backflip, Peter, and this has been a
real dividing point for his party. But many would argue

(29:24):
this is now a victory for common sense. Women can
safely go back to their safe zones in hospitals, sporting
groups and so forth and have their rights back that
many felt were taken away.

Speaker 2 (29:40):
Al Elijah couldn't get better coming into EASTA thank you, Sophie.
Let's go now to my next guest, who's no stranger
to this issue. I'm interested in what it can mean
for Australia and her big us today joining me in
my good friend Victorian Livell Moiradimi, Well, I have to say,
and I said this at the top of the show.
You can't help but feel vindicated with a decision like that.

Speaker 18 (30:00):
Absolutely, And might I add that this was largely led
by women on the left. This is just a matter
of common sense and reality and I'm so proud of
all those women and my congratulations to them.

Speaker 2 (30:10):
Of course, in Victoria, in Queens Lay and other jurisdictions
in Australia, you can self identify as a woman being
a biological man literally overnight and get a piece of paper,
wave it around and have access to women's spaces. Surely
that's got to change.

Speaker 18 (30:27):
It does. It's worse in our country because you don't
even need a piece of paper, but any woman questioning
a man in their space now they can be prosecuted
under the law. So I'm very excited about this and
it absolutely has to change because it's just all about fairness.

Speaker 2 (30:43):
Well, you've got a new Liberal leader. You are back
in the party room. Where are the Liberals in Victoria
on this mora?

Speaker 18 (30:49):
Well, Brad's been consistent in this area. He has always
said that he, like all of us, doesn't have a
problem with people living their lives the way that.

Speaker 14 (30:58):
They want to.

Speaker 18 (30:59):
But there are only two sexes and that's the position, and.

Speaker 2 (31:02):
That will be a position. I presume that you'll lamplify
going into the election. Absolutely, Well, let's talk to you
to you about your big news. I think this is
a key sign that Batton is determined to be a
very different leader than we've seen the Liberal Party have
in Victoria. Not content to win the seats you've got
or hang on to the seats you've got, not content

(31:23):
to go to the sort of old Liberal Party middle
class hunting ground. You're leading up a new charge a
new beached basically into Western Melbourne and the soathnoon you
were named as the leader's representative for the Liberal Party
in Western Melbourne. Congratulations, what's this need?

Speaker 14 (31:43):
Thank you.

Speaker 18 (31:44):
Basically, it's a matter of respecting the people in the
West who have been exploited and taken for granted and
forgotten by Labor and unfortunately not just by Labor, but
they have been given.

Speaker 14 (31:55):
Up on by the Liberals as well.

Speaker 18 (31:57):
And Brad's different and i am so proud to have
this role and I'm so grateful for it because I
come from Labor and I come from the West, and
I know that these are common sense people and they
deserve to be fought for.

Speaker 14 (32:09):
And that's what I'm going to do.

Speaker 2 (32:10):
What are some of the areas of key focus, because
I know before you got into the Federal parliament State
Parliament you were a teacher, but you grew up in
that area and you were a local counselor too. Well.

Speaker 18 (32:22):
My husband grew up there longer, but I did live
over there. So basically it's just ordinary common sense issues.

Speaker 14 (32:28):
I was a teacher.

Speaker 18 (32:29):
Families are struggling, they are stuck on roads that are crumbling,
the crime is out of control, over there, we're not
getting a fair go. We don't.

Speaker 14 (32:37):
We pay so much in tax. There's not a reinvestment
in the West. Everything out there is underfunded.

Speaker 18 (32:43):
We get promised new schools, new roads, knew everything at
election time and then they never ever deliver.

Speaker 2 (32:49):
Just before we go, there's still media reports about your
case with John Puzzuto. Where's all that up to?

Speaker 18 (32:56):
From my perspective, I won my case, I was exonerated.
That secured my children's future and the rest of it. Honestly,
that's just up to the courts now.

Speaker 2 (33:04):
Okay, So don't comment from you, all right, worried demmy,
thank you, thank you, congratulations all right. After the break,
diverting the last night's Leaders debate, Peter Dutton back in
the game, Cambra Milner will see what he thinks. Plus
confusion to over the caretaker conventions that Labor is not honoring.
That's next, welcome back. A lot of the messages on

(33:29):
my phone from liberals who now feel the whole more
redeeming John Posto thing is behind them. The party can
unite and start taking the fight up at a state
level to Labour. So world on bread batons still to come.
How the activists are using the courts to avoid criminals
being deported. That is still going on. But joining me
now as he has every week of the campaign, and
getting inside the back room of it all. It's only

(33:50):
two long serving political operatives, as we both once were,
can do formative stuff to labor. Leader Bill Shorten now
director of Course of g XO Strategies, Cam Milner Cameron
welcome leaders debates. I've got to be honest. We hate
these debates, don't we. They chew up so much time.
They are a high wire act. I mean, one wrong

(34:13):
footed response can derail a whole day, as we saw
today with a PM. Those really loose comments on negative gearing.
If he's not going to contemplate changing the rules on
investment properties, why the slippery language, Why does he just
rule it out?

Speaker 19 (34:31):
Well, I mean you would have thought out for the
Albanese voice, the simplest word for him to know is
the word no.

Speaker 5 (34:36):
I mean, this is a guy who slips and slides
all over politics all the time. And that's the problem
I think voters have got. I mean, voters what these
things ruled out? They don't want for negative gearing, they
don't want some may the fourth plan that changes our
tax raising. They just want to know an honest answer.
That's why, as you and I both know it's chie
to start. These leaders debates are all downside risk. There

(34:56):
is no one who really wins these things, is only
someone who loses them. Albany's lost last night because he
opened up yet another avenue of attack on this sort
of slip sliding nature that we know that week Elbow
is up for because that's how he's governed.

Speaker 2 (35:09):
Peter, how can he plausibly say I won't do a
deal with the Greens. I won't negotiate with the Greens.
I mean Julia Gillard did that. She signed, of course,
a formal agreement. But I mean if he calls it
a deal this side of the election, but has to
have an alliance or a compact or a coalition, it'll

(35:30):
be something else on the other side, because if he
needs the Greens to hang on to the lodge, he'll
do a deal with the devil. Wa'n't he?

Speaker 19 (35:38):
That's right?

Speaker 5 (35:39):
And Peter, it's all about holding onto the lodge, isn't it.
It's not about what's best for the country or what
the Labour government needs. It's about Elbow staying PM, and
he'll pay the price of putting the Greens in power
just to stay PM.

Speaker 2 (35:53):
What about all that stuff that went backwards and forwards
last night with David Spears or the slippery language where
Spears he just sort of kept poking at is under
Valley about power prices. Why not do it, you know,
Peter Beatty and say we got it wrong. Yes, they're
much higher than we want them to be. I apologize
Australia and trust me and I will get them down.

(36:13):
Why not be straight?

Speaker 5 (36:16):
Well, because he's such a wing character. I mean, he
hasn't got the strength of purpose or strength of character
actually whenever he's been wrong Peter. And that's the problem
we've always had with Albow. So I'm not surprised at
Albert slips and slides and office skates and doesn't say
a straight word or a straight answer to voters or
to David Spears in a question like that because he
doesn't want to admit he's ever been wrong.

Speaker 19 (36:37):
And that's part of the problem of the Elbow character.
It's also how he unfortunately governs.

Speaker 2 (36:45):
Talk to me about the polls because they're coming thick
and fast. We've got, you know, one or two a day.
At the moment, both sides are course hurting when it
comes to their primary vote share. Labor though at record lows,
and this has been a trend for some time. With
the accretion of the Greens into your or base preference flows.
That's the only thing really here that's going to save labor.

(37:06):
There's a poll out today that's got us tracking towards
the minority government labor. Of course in the box seat
there fourteen seats, we're saying too close to call. Across
the country, there's also an AFI pole that's got the
coalition ahead on issues like immigration and defense. But let's
leave that one up there on the screen for a moment.
I want to make a point that one's got the
coalition ahead immigration, defense and crime, but labor leading on welfare,

(37:29):
health care, and education. But general worries me cam as
a strategist. Look at all the red, look at all
the blue, and how can we be three weeks into
a campaign where you've got something like thirty eight percent
of the public don't know, don't care, don't have an
opinion on something like industrial action, thirty one percent don't
know who's better on the economy, thirty five percent have

(37:50):
got no idea who's better on infrastructure welfare. Thirty percent
of the population out there have got no idea who's
better in terms of management of the issue of welfare.
It's a great undecided vote that would terrify me if
I was in a campaign team right now.

Speaker 5 (38:08):
Yeah, that's right, and Peter, you and I have never
seen poles like this, with so much soft vote, so
much undersided vote, only a few days before pre poles open,
and to your point, only three weeks before the poles
actually close on.

Speaker 19 (38:19):
The third of May.

Speaker 5 (38:20):
I think the thing here, though, is is both sides
of lost brand equity. No one rely knows what labor
stands for under Albanie and Dunton hasn't redefined what the
Liberals are. I mean, when I was doing Bill Shorten's
work and you were doing Tody Abbott's work, everyone knew
what the Liberal Party based the Labor Party base stood for.
It was a Fod versus Holden debate. I think now
it's just trashy politics. We're dealing with kind of elbows.

(38:42):
Everything must go one day sale versus Dunton's dollar dazzlers.
I mean, it's throwing money everywhere like confetti, but it's
all cheap. It won't last past the fourth of May.
There's no guarantee that you will work on the fifth
of May. So that's what we're dealing with. And that's
why voters I think are genuinely undecided and un president
underwhelmed by what they're seeing in the campaign. And that's

(39:03):
because they're dealing with weak elbow after three years and
they're not sure about Dunton. And that's I think a
real challenge for the Liberals going forward in the time
that's left to the campaign.

Speaker 2 (39:16):
When I started working on campaigns in ninety eight, you know,
you'd announce a policy and there would be a document.
We'd put one out, your team would put one out.
There'd be costings at the back. You could look at modeling,
you can interrogate it the third parties. It would all
come out with a view, you know, the AMA and
others was good, was it bad? That'd be a debate
about the policy parameters. Now it feels like we go

(39:39):
through the motions of the traveling Wilbury's heading around the country,
all these staged events to get a lineup for social media.
We're not even covering any of these things in depth.
The journals that are trying to cover it in depth
are not there on the road. The questions are not
being asked. I mean, I'm as frustrated right now as
I was in the Daniel Andrews era. We were treated

(40:00):
like mushrooms. But that's where we are tonight.

Speaker 5 (40:04):
And it goes back to most of the old Joe
days where journos were just like feeding the chucks, you know,
they were there to have the feed of the day
rather than ask any questions. But it goes to your
point that you wrote about this really well two weeks ago, Peter,
where parties and policy are not driving these leaders any
longer and actually doing the hard work of actually standing
up for something. It may not be immensely popular, it

(40:25):
may not be popular for ninety percent of people, but
for sixty percent of people who are going to vote
for you, it might be something they really want to see.

Speaker 19 (40:30):
So I think you're right. I mean, I think there's
a fear in generally around around.

Speaker 5 (40:35):
Politics and politicians actually being bold, being strong, standing up
for something and actually risking losing because some voters don't
want to see you get in, but lots of other
voters actually want to.

Speaker 19 (40:45):
Vote for something. So that's I think the dilemma we're
seeing Petter.

Speaker 2 (40:50):
Right next week, We're going to get into the tills
because I had evidence of push polling. I'm also aware
of robo calls. This is happening until Sea's right around
the cunt. We'll get to that, but I'll let you go.
Thanks very much, Cam, great tegular show. Let's go now
to Sonny Phillip Island, the local foota club no less,
the home of the Bulldogs. My good friend Liberal candidate
for Monash, Mary Aldred is joining me now. Thanks for

(41:13):
coming on the show. Mary. You're in the hot seat
down there. You are on the cusp of some of
the Australia's best energy country. It's the area that's delivered Victoria,
had delivered Victoria so much of its energy security and
wealth for such a long time. Traditionally a safe Liberal
seat margin, though has fallen down from about seven percent

(41:35):
to almost three percent at the last election. The current incumbent,
Russell Broadbent was a Lib. He's now defected to the
cross Bench after he lost pre selection to you. But
you're also fighting a teal who's been parachuted in and
has got a lot of money coming from Climate two
one hundred to take you on. And what I'm interested
to hear Mary is this is a real move by

(41:57):
the Teals Interregional Victoria. So talk to me about the
issues that are on the minds of people in Monash.

Speaker 20 (42:07):
Well, thanks for having me back, Peter, and I haven't
wasted one minute of the last five hundred and twenty
one days putting my best case forward about why I
deserve the trust and confidence of people right across the
Monash electorate. I'm a genuine local and I've got a
track record of rolling up my sleeves and getting things
done in our community and I'm determined to do that
if I've got the privilege of being elected as the

(42:28):
next federal representative here in sixteen days time. We have
had an unprecedented amount of money poured in from Climate
two hundred and other vested interests from Sydney and Melbourne,
nearly a million dollars here for the Climate two hundred
funded Teal campaign. But I think the community momentum is
on our side. People want someone with a direct voice

(42:52):
to Canberra. I'm going to be a strong voice that
delivers as part of a coalition team. Cost of living
is number one, two and three issues and I'm determined
to get on with things.

Speaker 2 (43:04):
You've got a lot of people down your way of
doing it tough, right, Traditionally You've also had a lot
of lower socioeconomic people. Well, i'd regard as working poor Mary,
people who don't want to hand out. They're not on welfare,
but they're really struggling on ordinary wages to make ends meet.
Is that a big issue in this campaign for you?
I suspect it would be. It's a huge issue, Peter.

Speaker 20 (43:25):
You know, I was outside Cole's and drew And just
a week ago when a lady came out and said, Mary,
I can't get my two bags of groceries for under
one hundred dollars these days. I've had other people come
up at farm World over the weekend, high fiving me
about the coalition's announcement to have the fuel exis for
twelve months, and they said, finally someone is listening to
our concerns about the cost of living, whether it's groceries,

(43:47):
fuel or energy. The price of things is just going
up and up, and people locally are really struggling to
keep their heads above water.

Speaker 2 (43:54):
At the moment. You're not wrong. And of course if
you're in a regional community, Mary, you live in your.

Speaker 9 (43:59):
Car, you do anywhere you need to go.

Speaker 20 (44:04):
And this is actually a point well made to me
by a number of parents when I chaired the Gippsland
United Basketball League. You sometimes have to drive hours to
get to a sporting game or to work. You can't
rely on the public transport networks that they've got in
Melbourne and Sydney and other areas. And so being able
to address things immediately, like the Coalition have said they
will crack on with from day one if we're elected

(44:26):
to government. By harving the fuel excise is really critical
to addressing that cost of living pressure.

Speaker 2 (44:34):
I know you're throwing everything out at Merykeip going. We'll
see where you land in a couple of weeks time.
At all the very best, I will say, I've known
her for twenty years and so we want good people
in parliament. We want people of cabinet material, Mary, Aldred.
This cabinet material all right, Indonesia, Russia, what the heck's
going on? We'll get to that after the break. Last
another foreign criminal fighting deportation to Neru. But you won't

(44:57):
believe why welcome back. Let's go to the controversy over
reports of an alleged pushed by Russia into Indonesia. Indonesia's
Foreign ministry has broken in silence today, saying that while
it will always allow foreign militaries on peaceful missions, it's
never granted permission for another country to quote, build and

(45:18):
possess a military base on its land. Meanwhile, though the
journalists who first reported the story has insisted his information's
accurate and the military publication Jane's and very reputable as
Jane's stands by it. Join our to discuss this more
and joining mean now our panel Sky is contributed Kosher
Garda and the past chair of Parliament's Foreign Affairs and

(45:40):
Defense Committee, Michael Danby. Well, Michael, what the heck's going
on here?

Speaker 16 (45:45):
Well, I was on the Intelligence Committee, and I think
it's your experience too that opposition should be given security briefings.

Speaker 2 (45:54):
That's about the caretaking conventions. We'll get to that. But
do you believe there's veras to this client by Russia.

Speaker 16 (46:02):
James is one of the most reputable outfits in the
defense space around, very technical and very non partisan, and
I don't want Russian bear aircraft visiting Indonesian basis, even
if it's for twenty minutes, it's a threat to Australia
because we don't have the resources. Now we've canceled the

(46:23):
fourth Squadron to match them.

Speaker 2 (46:26):
Kosha.

Speaker 21 (46:27):
I think there's a spectrum of possibilities because we can
never know the full truth. One is that Russia has
done this.

Speaker 2 (46:32):
There is truth to it.

Speaker 14 (46:33):
It is a reputable journal.

Speaker 21 (46:34):
There is precedent of them forming alliances with neutrals, so
called neutral countries in that region, like.

Speaker 14 (46:39):
Indian joying the bricks. It's a bricks comtry and.

Speaker 21 (46:42):
To exploit gaps in the sphere of influence between China
and the US. It could be that it could be
maybe over Zales reporting. These are very reputable sources, but
maybe they're exaggerating because of bad information that was deliberately
fed to them by any of these actors. And everybody
has motivations for planting things, all the actors involved, so
it could be something like that as well.

Speaker 2 (47:00):
Let's have a look on to the point of caretaking convention.
So the opposition, Peter Dutt has asked for a briefing
because there seems to be discrepancies in the information between
the Prime Minister and the Defense Minister Richard Miles, and
the timeline is not standing up to scrutiny. How long
have they known, did they know? Were they informed? Now,
listen to this from Richard Miles, when the Opposition has

(47:21):
been denied for the past forty eight hours a formal briefing. Oh,
we don't have that grab Basically Miles has said, there's
nothing to see here. That's why we're not going to
give you a briefing. Now, Michael, you and I know
caretaker conventions very well. I am staggered if the opposition
doesn't ask for a briefing, forget the politicians, but the
public service should step in and say we will honor

(47:43):
the convention. This stinks to me.

Speaker 16 (47:46):
Well, it's the wrong thing to do. It's not for
the incumbent government to decide in secure areas what briefings
they should get. And congratulations to Sky last night you
had that thug Russian ambassador in Indian Anesia sort of
spew it all out that it really is on and
attack Australia for saying that we have some pathetic amount

(48:08):
of see to wear missiles, you know, and that that's
why the Russians have to sort of muscle in on
the Indonesian's behalf come on. Half of this story is out.
Just be bipartisan. The opposition should behave responsiblely if they
do get secret information, but you've got to give it
to them.

Speaker 2 (48:25):
We'll come to our deportations at the moment. But what's
going on with the Trump administration and the deportations to
Ol Salvador of criminals.

Speaker 21 (48:34):
It's become a flashpoint issue. Where they famously did those
three planes. There was that judge who issued the injunction
to turn the planes around midair. Trump administration didn't comply.
It went all the way up to the Supreme Court
that favored the Trump administration and their contention that this
is executive power. That judge did not have jurisdiction. He
has now come out and said, be that as it may.
In that moment before it went up to the Supreme Court,

(48:56):
you were in violation or in contempt of court. So
he's brought contemptive court charges to them, and all of
this is just moving to that constitutional crisis freeze. It's
being thrown about because it's about the judiciary Article three
power versus Article two. The feeling and The view of
most is that the judiciary does not have standing to
tell the executive branch how to handle it.

Speaker 2 (49:15):
It's all like a deliberate move to have that manufactured chaos,
which hurts government incumbents.

Speaker 21 (49:22):
It absolutely does, But they're hurtling ahead, and I think
they're not going to come off the immigration issue, which
is a signatory shi of Trump, but they're also not
going to come off this conflict or collision course. I
would say that Article two an Article two.

Speaker 2 (49:33):
All right, let's go to ours because we've got an
end z YQ guy who should be deported to Naru
but says I will not be deported. Is fighting it
through the courts? Too hot to human?

Speaker 16 (49:41):
He says, unbelievable, Peter, I mean, does the Australian text
by have to fund these vexatious and silly claims. I
mean it's too hot. What about all the poor people
who live in the room.

Speaker 2 (49:52):
All right, let's get we're heard you there, but let's
get to this. You are going out and proud with
it's in the papers.

Speaker 21 (49:57):
Well.

Speaker 16 (49:58):
I believe that in McNamara people should, if they want
to vote labor, not give the Greens their preferences and
I've got a full out social media campaign McNamara Residence
against Extremism. Me and Tony Lupton are out there, loud
and proud. We're still saying vote labor, but don't give
your preferences to the Greens, give it to the Liberals ahead.

Speaker 2 (50:17):
Now on you, Michael Danby, there you go, if you're
in that seat, there's your writing instructions to avoid a
Green's catastrophe. That's it for me. Have a lovely, happy
and holy Easter. I'll see you on Monday at six.
I mean