May 7, 2025 • 50 mins
Peta reveals exclusive information showing the Teals are “owned” by the big climate money. Plus, the left and right factions fight for the Liberal leadership.
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. Here's what's coming up
tonight on Kredline, the five for the Liberal leadership. Now
forget that it's got anything to do with male or
female candidates. This is a battle between the parties left
and the right. We might also have a new name
in the mix tonight, the Seed of Goldstein, Tim Wilson,
declining to rule out a tilt. Wilson joins me later
(00:31):
in the show. Meanwhile, Labor two might be smiling, but
behind the scenes the right faction is feuding over who
loses the ministry position. Is that the new South Wales
Right or someone out of Victoria? Who's on the chopping block?
And what's this talk of a big un job in
the offing for Chris Bowen. Plus good news the first
(00:51):
Teal seat has gone to more tonight on an ipe age.
But I'll also have exclusive information that shows the Teals
are owned by big climate money and how that model
is now branching out. More on that in a moment.
And I just can't resist running this vision again, the
premature claiming a victory by the Gucci Green Teal Zoe
Daniel on Saturday night and today that's evaporate. It's been
(01:15):
a hard campaign, tinging set in Goldstein.
Speaker 3 (01:21):
Hope Winds genuinely very proud to say that we are
pleased to accept that we have won the seat of
Goldstein back for the Lobody.
Speaker 2 (01:34):
We'll stay with these issues because the election wash up's continuing.
I still belgning today though we may well have seen
peak Teal. And it's possible also that the Greens have
lost all of their Lower House seats thanks to Peter
Dutton's principal decision to put Labor a party of government
ahead of the extremists. Continueing counting has given back Goldstein
(01:55):
to the Limbs, and the man who has emerged the victor,
Tim Wilson, joins me here short in the Cydny seat
of Bradfield. It looks like the Liberals there have held
off the Teals too, despite their candidate from last time
having been funded as some sort of shadow member for
the past three years. And we may yet see the
end of the campaign. Karen Manik Ryan in Coujong as well.
(02:17):
So what does that tell you that well credentialed Liberal
candidates plenty of time to run strong local campaigns. Well,
they can win back tal seats even in an election
where the party went backwards because of a supposedly hard
ride leader without clear policy or a strong national campaign.
Now see how premature it is to write the Liberal
(02:40):
Party off or to panic at a bad outcome. Again,
as I said on Monday night when I went methodically
through the numbers and recent electoral history, perspective is everything,
and it's so important that you have perspective because when
you win, you need it so it doesn't go to
your head, and you need it when you lose, so
(03:01):
that you learn the lessons of what to change and
what to keep. So let's now be clear about the tiles.
They were never innocent, idealistic community independence. They're incredibly well
funded and a well drilled arm, a political arm of
the renewable energy industry. Renewable energy barons have organized and
(03:22):
funded them into the Parliament in order to protect their
subsidy harvesting business model. These tials are owned by the
big climate money that funds them, and that model is
branching out. Have a look at this. It's a label
from a box in the seat of wanted. It's a
box of pamphlets for the Legalized Cannabis Party. And who
(03:45):
paid for that, Well, it says on the box Climate
two hundred. Now that might sound like a bit of
a weird connection, but surely that's got something to do
with a purchase of cannabis farm by the top Climate
two hundred donor the million and their share trader Rob Kelldoulis.
He's a high profile backer of the Legalized Cannabis Party
(04:07):
and on the weekend it acted as a preference harvester
in many of the Teal races. Now there's very little
principal politics here. It's follow the money and self interest
at play, that's for sure. And here's another thing too
about the Teals. They have been bought into being solely
(04:27):
to keep the Liberal Party out of office until it
panders to the financial interests of the renewable sectors billion
down backers. This is why the Teals and many of
the moderate Liberals want to see off any talk of
nuclear power. They want it killed off as the Liberal
Party goes through its convulsions, because nuclear power completely up
(04:49):
ends the business model of renewable energy. It all started
with Malcolm Turnbull conspiring to remove the Liberal Prime Minister
Tony Abbott, who was most opposed to renewable industry rent seeking,
moving to acts the tax sign Abbot's death warrant with
moderates in his party room. Then, after Scott Morrison replaced
Turnbull and watered down the coalition and support for renewables,
(05:13):
the Tials emerged to keep what they called a climate
denying Liberal Party permanently in opposition. As Chris Jelman very
shrewdly said here on Monday Night, the Teals were established
to do to the Liberals what the DLP once did
to Labor, to keep them out of office forever unless
they fundamentally change and move to the left. Think of
(05:35):
them as the DLP.
Speaker 4 (05:36):
It's not like the Greens to the Labor Party. Those
preferences flow back. What the Teals do are They're a
political party that have been set up precisely to stop
the Liberal Party from ever regaining power again, and they're
doing that very effectively, very very shrewd.
Speaker 2 (05:54):
Now it's significant that a big donor to the Teals
is Turnbull's son, Alex has given twenty five thousand to
spend a campaign in Wentworth not once but twice, and
no one is more determined to style in the Liberal
Party than the man the party finally rejected after giving
in the leadership, not once but twice. Now see them
for what they are, amongst other things. The Teals are
(06:17):
partly termbules revenge, and the sooner they're all gone, the better.
But that's the Leaves and all those running around today
talking about some sort of existential crisis. Now, sure it's
been a bad loss, the politics hasn't changed. The way
to be a successful opposition is to be a clear
alternative to a bad government, not a week echo, not
labor light. That's why the panic merchants should calm down.
(06:41):
Like Senator Maria Kavachek, who today calls for the Leaves
to drop their pro nuclear position.
Speaker 5 (06:47):
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 (07:02):
Now she's a factional operative. It was parachuted into the
New South Wales Party presidency for all of five minutes,
and now she's been shoehorned into the Senate. Well, she's
been there about ten minutes. Presumably her announcement was carefully
timed to coincide with ads running here on Sky News
from something called Liberals Against Nuclear. Their website features anti
(07:22):
nuclear quotes from Waite for It liberal term cakes Matt
Kean and Malcolm Turnbull.
Speaker 6 (07:28):
Matt Kean, forming New South Wales Liberal Treasurer and Energy minister,
said nuclear is a distraction that doesn't stack up at
the moment on practically Crown.
Speaker 5 (07:37):
They need to cut the cost of living.
Speaker 6 (07:39):
He found the fields we need to go up by
six hundred and sixty five dollars. Who vote for a
six hundred and sixty five dollar electricity bill.
Speaker 5 (07:47):
Increase stupid size presumable.
Speaker 7 (07:49):
They need to crank your policy poison huh, carnal.
Speaker 2 (07:54):
Policy authorized by people teth the Liberals against Nuclear rezuil.
And they've updated those ads and they're now running them
to put pressure on the Liberal moderates to dump nuclear
now that they have lost the election. This looks like
a rerun to me of something called Liberals for Forests
but connived to defeat general Liberal candidates in WA a
(08:15):
few years back. It's like another outfit too, called the
north Shore Environmental Stewards. Now this was a Michael Photius
linked body, a body that tried to inject activists into
the Liberal Party to unseat Tony Abbott prior to the
twenty nineteen election. See these entities for what they are.
They are dummy groups set up to either defeat the
(08:37):
Liberal Party or forced to force it to stop being
the Liberal Party, doubtless funded by renewable energy lobbyists and
those set to make millions and millions from all the
tax payer handouts on offer. This is what it's all about.
It's always been about the money, never about the environment. Meanwhile,
the Liberal leadership campaign, well that's come into a head.
(09:00):
So called moderates a claiming it can't be Angers Taylor
because the shadow Treasurer was part of Dutton's inner circle.
But hang on, surely the Deputy Leader, Susan Lee was
equally part of the inner circle and deserves, like Angus Taylor,
her share of responsibility for defeat. Of course, the leadership
will be determined by the party room, but given how
(09:21):
consequential these decisions are, they really shouldn't be made on
any basis rather than who can best hold the government
to account, the person who was best able to represent
and articulate the party's core equities of sound economic management
and strong national security should get the leader's job. Fundamentally,
(09:44):
it must be made on merit. Today, re elected Tim
Wilson pointedly refused to rule out running for the leadership today.
Speaker 3 (09:53):
I had aspirations for one thing, and it was to
have the great privilege and service to be the member
for god Goldstein again. And of course we have lived
out that promise.
Speaker 2 (10:06):
I'll bet y'all be asking him that question again in
a moment. But a pointer to the party room. Picking
someone because he or she ticks some identity box is
not the liberal way. If the Liberal Party dumps the
merit principle, it's no longer a liberal party. It might
as well put itself into voluntary administration and let a
more principled outfit take over. You cannot trash your values
(10:29):
or lose perspective after a loss. Remember John Howard's landslide
win in two thousand and four. He won the House
and also that history making Senate majority. Well, at the
next election, his government was thrown out of office and
he lost his own seat. A smashing win does not
mean the Albanezer government is invincible, but only if there's
(10:53):
a strong, consistent and relentless opposition. All right, let's get
today's headlines with Ruben Spargo.
Speaker 8 (11:05):
The Greens are in disarray after their leader Adam Bant
lost the seat of Melbourne. Sky News chief election analyst
Tom Connell declared Labour's Sarah Witty will claim victory. Stephen
Bates was ousted from the seat of Brisbane, Max Chandler
Maiden lost the nearby seat of Griffith. Labor state factions
(11:25):
fighting over ministry positions ahead of the Prime Minister's decision.
The composition of the cabinet will be influenced by the
states and factions represented within the expanded caucus. There is
a looming fight between the Victorian Right and the New
South Wales Right. One of the five current cabinet ministers
from the New South Wales Right may have to step aside.
(11:46):
The Labor Caucus is preparing to meet on Friday. The
Liberal Party is tearing itself apart as members prepare to
decide their next leader. The fierce contest between Shadow Treasurer
Angus Taylor and Deputy Leader Susan Lee is turning nasty.
A Liberal source claims the deputy leader is undermining the
Shadow treasurer. Recent reports suggested Angus Taylor may drop out
(12:08):
of the leadership race after considering his family. His camp
has shared with Sky News a list of perceived failures
of Susan Lee. They claimed, despite having one of the
biggest staff allocations in opposition, she demonstrated a failure to
think strategically on policy. The final makeup of the Liberal
Party room remained subject to change.
Speaker 2 (12:31):
All right, still the number of seats tonight where the
counting continues. The results are getting closer, though. Let's get
our analysis update from Sky News election analyst on Connell Peter.
Speaker 9 (12:42):
One of the stories of election night was that the
Green's leader was in trouble. We didn't know enough about
this seat because the AEC initially thought it would be
a contest between the Greens and Liberal Party. Instead it
has been the Labor Party. Here's what it boils down
to on this primary, and we've had seventy percent counted.
Speaker 2 (12:57):
Adam Bount needs about.
Speaker 9 (12:58):
A third of the rest the vote from Liberal, Independent,
one nation another to be able to stay ahead or
level with Wabor. What's happening so far, We'll far from that.
He's getting more like twenty five percent of preferences and
that trend has continued today.
Speaker 2 (13:12):
It's lifted a little bit for him.
Speaker 9 (13:14):
But even if we go conservative and assuming his rate
of preferences improves, this lead of seventeen hundred votes at
the moment for the Labor Party will go up beyond
three thousand. Now in the remaining vote to come in
that we don't know about absent vote. Perhaps there's an
improvement for the Greens. There's no guarantee, but they'd need
sixty three percent plus and that won't happen. That's simply
(13:35):
too high. So the Greens will lose the seat of
Melbourne as we go to the Parliament. Remember they started
with four lower House seats initially the Greens at this
stage they're on zero.
Speaker 2 (13:44):
It is still likely.
Speaker 9 (13:45):
Highly luckily they get Ryan. I think they end up
in the final two there and win it, and they
would do so with Labor preferences. But it's going to
be close.
Speaker 2 (13:53):
So they'll be nervously watching on there.
Speaker 9 (13:55):
There are two other seats when it comes to Labor
Till contests, a Liberal Tiller contests.
Speaker 2 (14:00):
So I should say, which are going to be very tight.
Speaker 9 (14:02):
Going straight to the simple contest here, as we see
Liberal Party Gieselle capturing moving ahead here, but only by
two hundred votes. There's very little postal vote. This is
basically the lead she needs to defend from absent votes.
There's no guarantee they trend towards Nicolette Buller, but we
need to see a batch of them to see which
way they're going.
Speaker 2 (14:21):
Then we might have an idea in that seat.
Speaker 9 (14:22):
So that's one to watch. The other one, of course
is Couyong and that is a similar situation, but for
now we do see still Monique ran in the lead.
So here a little bit different, Manique Grin in the
lead by four hundred. The difference here is there are
still postal votes left. They're going to put Amelia Hamer
in the lead. The question is by how much, Because
they've been dropping off, as they often do. They were
(14:45):
initially running it more like sixty four percent. They've dropped
to the high fifties. So the overall rate at sixty one,
that means Amelia Hamer's lead might be three four hundred.
If she gets a pick up in the rate, maybe
there'll be more. So from that that's her lead to defend.
And again most absent votes, which will likely benefit Manique Grime,
but there are no guarantees this steep into account.
Speaker 2 (15:09):
All right, dust is starting to settle from Saturday, isn't it.
But the leadership batle inside the Liberal Party, well, it's
starting to get fierce now this stage. Reports are that
Susan Lee is the front runner. Now it's Lee as
in key people came that role all the time. Susan
Lee the front runner. However, privately Liberal MP's is starting
to point to her record and her share of responsibility
as Dalton's deputy for the loss. Joining me now to
(15:29):
discuss this and more. Senior reporter Karena Marcus and journalist
at Data Telegraph James Willis Well, James, Susan and Angus.
They're both in contention finger pointing yes at Angus, the
shadow treasurer, but also a lot of people saying to
me today that Susan Lee also must take responsibilities. She was,
after all, the deputy leader. So where to from here?
Speaker 10 (15:53):
Well, Peter, in my view, Susan Lee went missing, and
I'm sure she was campaigning, but in terms of the
media cut through and the impact that she has and
the response that she gets from the public and from
the media audience is not up to scratch. I don't
think she has enough cut through. I personally think if
you were looking at the Liberals that were campaigning Michaulia,
(16:14):
Cash and even Jane Hume get a lot more cut through.
They seem to do a lot more interviews. I'm sure
Susan would push back on that, but I just don't
think I'm convinced that she is leadership material. I know
she's a very good local MP, she was a minister
in former coalition governments. But for mine, I'd be looking
at a different direction. And look, I don't think Angus Taylor. Look,
(16:37):
I think Angus Taylor made a fair few mistakes and
one of the main criticisms and this may not just
be on him, but it could be on the overall campaign,
was that a lot of the economic policies were rolled
out far too late. But the wider issue Peter in
my view, and not just at federal level but at
state level, where the Liberal Party is in opposition by
a long way, is the infection and the act of
(17:00):
the moderate branch. And in my view, moderates cannot win
a government over and the more the party pushes to
the left, the far away they are from ever forming
a government in Australia again.
Speaker 2 (17:13):
And that's certainly what's happened at state level with the
state liberal oppositions, and some of them, like Victoria, have
been in opposition for almost twenty five years, but for
one term in parliament. Let's go to Susan Lee though Carolina,
and all these demands are calls that are coming that
the party must choose two women, not just a female leader,
but a female leader and a female deputy. Some are
saying that if they don't, they are quote morons. This
(17:35):
is not a debate about gender. That's a smoke screen
in my view. This is a factional fight between the
left and the right, really, isn't it.
Speaker 11 (17:44):
Well, you can't put aside the fact that Susan Lee
is a moderate and Angus Taylor is a senior conservative.
I mean, so obviously there's going to be a fight
between those two factions as to who those groups can
gain into the position of leader.
Speaker 2 (18:03):
I mean.
Speaker 11 (18:03):
People who are backing Susan Lee says say that Angus Taylor, well,
he's tarnished by how close he was to Peter Duddon,
that he couldn't prosecute the party's economic agenda well enough
to win help them win the election, and Susan Lee's
Susan Lee's detractors say, well, she didn't put forward a
(18:26):
policy enough policy in her portfolio despite having the larger
stuff allocation out of anyone in the opposition, and that
she was secretly and behind the scenes backgrounding against Peter
Dunnon and undermining him. So you've got these competing arguments
(18:46):
for both. But what I really reject, like you, Peter,
is this idea that in order for the Liberal Party
to win back voters they need to somehow get down
just put more women in leadershi rolls. I would love
to see more women there, but not because they are women,
but because they deserve the spot. I'm not saying that
(19:07):
Susan Lee doesn't deserve to be leader, but it shouldn't
be because she's a woman. It should be because I
agree you know what she's achieved. So I really hate
that reductive, demeaning argument for female voters.
Speaker 2 (19:22):
One hundred percent degree. Of course a Labour picked up
a lot of the female vote, but they have a
male leader and a male deputy leader. So just putting
a woman in there is no guarantee of success. If
your policies aren't right and all the other things I've
talked about. Let's go though to the factional rumblings inside
labor if we can. Richard Miles, of course, he's the
leader of the Victorian right faction. He is opposing a
(19:44):
move to strip the Victorians of a spot in cabinet.
They say they are owed a spot with the departure
of Bill Shorten. They think that the reduction in the
rights numbers should come out of New South Wales. But
of course that puts a whole lot of people, including
even Chris Bowen, Tiny Burk's there as well, puts them
in the hot seat.
Speaker 10 (20:05):
What do you think here, James, Well, I think the
five I mean to be honest, Of those five, the
easiest solution here would be to allow Chris Bowen to
step back and take this larger role as part of
the global UN climate movement, which is apparently not a
(20:26):
full time job and doesn't necessarily mean that he has
to step back, but it's certainly a lot of work,
and based on the details that I've seen with Australia
determined to take a stance here on the global stage
and host these major events, there could be an argument
for Chris Bowen to step back from his portfolio. I mean,
I think of all the labor ministers, he is the
(20:47):
one that does the party the most damage. I think
he's extremely unpopular with the media. I think he comes
across as very smug. So if he wants to take
this new role, the Prime Minister would be ideal to
pat him on the back and move him on. It
would be hard, certainly to see him, you know, demoting
Tony Burke or Ed Husick or Jason Clare or even
Michelle Rowland. And they need Michelle in terms of they're
(21:09):
desperate apparently to have that female in the cabinet. So look,
maybe it's a win win here, and Chris Bowen takes
the global role steps back and we don't have to
put up with him every day talking about net zero
and wind farms and electric vehicles and everything else.
Speaker 2 (21:25):
Yeah. I just like the UN on occasion, but I
don't know that I dis like them that much that
I've said Chris Bowen ay way, But anyway, what about
Tanya Plevsk She looks like she will be punished. She
was once a leadership rival. Of course Caroline two the PM,
and the talk is that she's going to move out
of the environment portfolio should be shunted off to the ndis.
Of course, that's where they sent Bill Shorten to bury
(21:47):
him politically. Is that the plan for tenure?
Speaker 11 (21:50):
Well, look, Alberaniezy was asked about this. He dismissed that
plan as nonsense.
Speaker 2 (21:55):
But who knows.
Speaker 11 (21:56):
His word isn't good for much, as we've found out lately.
But look, I wouldn't be surprised at all if next week,
when they make the cabinet announcements, apparently that she is
demoted to some lesser portfolio. I mean, the frosty relationship
between Tania Plebasik and Anthony Alberanzi has got to be
the worst cap secret in Canberra. We all saw when
(22:19):
she leant in for that hug from Anthony Alberanzi and
he gave her this very awkward handhold in return. It
was really a very public rebuff there, and then she
tried to cover up for him by saying we should
all be doing these silly COVID elbow taps instead. Ridiculous.
(22:41):
She was also conspicuously missing from key environment announcements made
during the election. Alberanzi would be there, but despite it
being something that was in her portfolio, she was missing
and I think those things are very telling indeed, But
we won't have to wait long. There's going to be
a coocass meat on Friday, and then an announcement about
(23:02):
the portfolios as early as next week.
Speaker 2 (23:07):
Just quickly before we go. I put up a picture
a little bit before there from the seat of Warner
and this is the one that Dan Teen retained in
Western Victoria, James. It shows there that this is a
dispatch label on a box of pamphlets for legalized cannabis
for the party paid for by Climate two hundred, and
(23:28):
we know the interplay with donors there. We also know
that the key donor for Climate two hundred has bought
himself a cannabis farm in Tasmania. This is all getting
murky and murky with the money that's moving around, and
particularly i'd say in relation to the Cannabis Party two
they were a preference harvester in many of these tight
(23:49):
till races.
Speaker 10 (23:50):
That's a concern, that's right, and if every vote counts
and if you can harvest preferences that way, and Climate
two hundred keeping in the last couple of weeks before
the vote via direct emails from founder Simon Holmes at
court was saying things are getting desperate. We really really
need your help to keep our MPs in their seats.
(24:12):
And we learned from the last election, Peter, that a
lot of the donations from Climate two hundred went to
a comedian. There was money transferred to the company that
sold the binstickers that was giving out for Scott Morrison.
And so if they're assisting the legalized cannabis party, well
we need to figure out how much money's involved here.
The problem is we won't know for twenty weeks after
(24:33):
the election campaign. But certainly, as you say, the wider
issue here is that it is without question that some
of the largest donors to Climate two hundred and their
MPs are the people that are making a lot of
money in the renewable energy game, which is now a
blank check and will continue in this term of government.
Speaker 2 (24:52):
Right, we will keep pursuing all of that. Thank you both. Now,
if ever, there was a case of putting the car
before the horse had happened on Saturday night, Zoey Daniel
premature claiming the seat of Goldstein. However, despite leading by
just around two thousand votes on Sunday morning, there then
was a massive surge in postals that have put Tim
Wilson in front. All the major media outlets, including our
(25:12):
Sky News analyst Tom Connell, have called it now for
Tim Wilson, and I'm pleased to say the returning Liberal
MP joins me right now here on the desk. Well, congratulations,
thanks Peter.
Speaker 3 (25:22):
It's great privilege.
Speaker 2 (25:23):
It's a huge win. When you think that you took
on an incumbent. Incumbents are not easy to beat. You
were an incumbent. You were beaten, though, but you were
up against the might of the Teal movement, the money
of the Teal movement. People said you couldn't know it,
How did you do it?
Speaker 3 (25:40):
Well, we need to face reality, which is we had
a negative redistribution against us. We had Climate two hundred
for the most money in any seat in the state
as well or the country, I should say, as well
as of course the state widewing. Fundamentally, we went back
to grassroots. We engaged directly with the community, We listened,
We built out a grassroots movement as a foundation for
our success. We brought together thousands of people. But more importantly,
(26:03):
rather than in defeat turning on each other, we looked
to each other for mutual support and there was no egos.
There was only one focus, which is the stakes of
what is required to win this seat back, and we
did it together as a team.
Speaker 2 (26:18):
I think what was telling too when Liberos don't always
get this right is they pre selected early. You got
the nod from the party early and you hit the
ground running for a considerable period of time.
Speaker 3 (26:28):
Well, we actually started the campaign well about twelve months
before even the pre selection. We started with fundraising, we
built out the campaign infrastructure. The pre selection actually followed
a lot of the hard work that we had already done.
But it was because we came together and we focused
on the core purpose together that we achieved the result
that we did, and we're immensely proud. But the other
thing we did we didn't hide. We were courageous in
(26:49):
standing up for what we believed in. While we were
trying to take the community and the country where there
are a lot of conversations a lot of people hid.
We stood up firmly, particularly on things like energy, about
the importance of the role of reindustrializing Australia and continuing
the conversation without any sense of timidity. We were bold,
we were confident, and we stood up and people really
(27:10):
resonated with it.
Speaker 12 (27:11):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (27:11):
John Roskeimer, i used to work with, said last night,
you didn't lurch to the left. People think that's how
you win these to your seats. You're stood on their
party values. I think that's a strong endorsement from John.
Speaker 3 (27:20):
It is a strong endorsement, but it's a reminder that
you can't hide in politics. You've got to stand up
and put a value proposition. There were people who walked
up to the booths and said to me, I'll vote
for you if you trash nuclear and I said, well,
I'm sorry, I'm not prepared to do that. I supported
it last I was in Parliament. I support it now
and I'm going to continue to support it into the future.
Speaker 2 (27:40):
And there's a reason.
Speaker 3 (27:41):
Because the foundation of how we're going to reindustrialize our country,
how we're going to create the jobs and economic opportunity
for your kids and grandkids, how they're going to be
able to go and save and be able to buy
their own homes. You've got to make the case and
you've got to persuade people. But you can't do that
when you're hiding, when you're just issuing a press release
and thinking that's enough. You've got to stand up. You've
got to be confident, and because if you don't believe it,
(28:01):
why would anybody else leadership your hand. I'm immensely privileged
to have been in the position that I've got to.
I've seen my name being bandied around, but I am
literally just focused on the task at this hand. I
haven't spoken to most colleagues at this point, but obviously
I'm having a conversation with lots of people about where
I fit within the parliamentary party. But I want to
(28:23):
make this clear. I didn't go back into Parliament just
to sit around. I got elected because I believe that
this country has a bold, ambitious liberal future ahead of it.
But we must make the case, and we must be
unapologetic in making that case.
Speaker 2 (28:38):
So but not ruling that out. I read that as
you have an open mind.
Speaker 3 (28:42):
Well, as I said, I'm making it very clear that I.
Speaker 2 (28:44):
Can't bullship me. You know, no, I can't try to
have an open mind.
Speaker 3 (28:48):
Yeah, I've got an open mind about these things, but
the reality is I am very much focused on how
I can play part of a role as a team
because what I want is a bold, confident liberal party.
Speaker 2 (28:59):
The project. It's an alternative.
Speaker 3 (29:01):
Liberal vision for this country that builds out the policy
stepping stones to get there, and that's what I'm looking
from all of the leadership candiates who are putting themselves forward.
Speaker 2 (29:10):
Do you think this is the last question? I mean,
given your success and how you did it, do you
think if that was rolled out more broadly we would
see peak peak teal.
Speaker 3 (29:20):
My hope is that we well and truly past peak
till but we're not going to get there by just
doing business as usual.
Speaker 2 (29:26):
We need to.
Speaker 3 (29:27):
Learn from the lessons of Goldstein. They'll be lessons Fromkujong
and I hope from Bradfield as well, because my objective
isn't to win back Goldsteine. It's to roll back all
of the Teals to go back forth into those seats
because the heartland of Australian liberalism isn't geographic. It is
sitting in the hearts and minds of Australians no matter
where they live. It's that spark that we must inflame
about their sense of aspiration, of hope and economic opportunity
(29:50):
for their future, for themselves, their children, their grandchildren. And
if not, if we're not bringing that alive, then we
are failing them and we're failing future generations of Australians, prowfully.
Speaker 2 (29:59):
Said to congratulations. Thank it's a line killer result. All right,
after the break, where did it go wrong for the
Greens and could we be seeing the end of these
hard left activists you heard him there on Pegg Teal.
We'll discuss that as well. But also big news about
a radical Greens plan in New South Wales has been
rallied tonight at the Parliament. I'll get you some exclusive
content after the break. Welcome back. Still the come Adam
(30:25):
Bant seat has now been called for labor. So what's
left for the Greens? But first, in a rally that's
just ended on the steps to the New South Wales Parliament,
leading advocates, politicians and healthcare workers have come together in
city tonight in an emotional and united call and Australians
to rally against a hugely controversial bill that's just been
tabled in the New South Wales Parliament by the Greens.
(30:48):
Former Prime Minister Tony Abbott was there and joins me, Now, Tony,
we were going to talk about the Liberal Party where
to now. I'll get to that in a moment, but
this was an abortion law reform bill currently before the
New South Wales Parliament. Explain exactly what's in the bill
and why it's caused such outrage tonight, Peter.
Speaker 12 (31:12):
It's trying to force health professionals with a conscientious objection
to abortion to facilitate, not just to refer, but to
actually facilitate people having abortions. Fundamentally, it's designed to force
Christian people out of the healthcare system. It's designed to
(31:32):
force Catholic and other Christian hospitals, other religious hospitals, out
of the healthcare system unless they are to sacrifice their principles.
It's really about canceling faith in our public life. If
this bill were to go forward, and the Labor Party
has agreed to give government time to ram this Greens
(31:55):
bill through the New South Wales Parliament, if this bill
becomes lawer will be another unhappy milestone in the driving
of Christianity into our private places, the banishing of Christianity
from our public life. It's a terrible milestone in the
(32:17):
decline of our society and it's a fundamental assault on
freedom of conscience.
Speaker 2 (32:25):
There were just a couple of things from me. I mean,
we've got a lot of our hospital healthcare services provided
by different faiths. Now, not all services like abortion are
provided in all hospitals. Hospitals can offer services based on
their religion and they do, that will then be something
that will be I guess ruled out with this legislation.
(32:46):
It could perhaps even send a signal that Catholic or
Christian hospitals have to offer euthanasia and that's against their beliefs,
of course, But I thought this was something that Chris
Mins as Premier said would never happen.
Speaker 12 (33:02):
There was previously a deal as I understand it, between
the New South Wales Labor government and the Greens to
bring this on and ram it through the parliament in March.
When words seeped out of this, the Labor Party promised
people in the lead up to the federal election that
it was never going to happen. Now that was a lie.
(33:23):
It was another one of Labour's campaign lies. And so
what this move now and it's supposed to be going
through the parliament, rammed through in government time next week.
What this shows is the depth of the alliance between
the Greens and the Labor Party. The Greens might be
on the verge of expulsion from the lower House of
(33:46):
the Federal Parliament thanks to Peter Dutton's principal stand. But
they're still alive and well and manipulating the Labor Party
in New South Wales.
Speaker 2 (33:58):
And I want to make a point too, in New
South Wales that you could have late term abortion right
up until your due dates. I think that's why there's
so much concern about this movie. It's essentially tony.
Speaker 12 (34:09):
It's essentially in fantaside, Peter, It's essentially in fantaside late
term abortions, particularly where the baby is born alive. It's
in fantaside. And this is so wrong, and yet there
is this Green Left push basically to promote what amounts
(34:29):
to in fantaside. And it's so wrong and it must
be fought.
Speaker 2 (34:35):
I've got to grab you though, before you head U,
because I know you've got an overseas flight just quickly.
You've been an opposition leader, you've taken the party back
into government from opposition. It was a very hard watch
for Liberals around the country on Saturday night. So where
to now for the party?
Speaker 12 (34:54):
Well, under no circumstances should the party become Labor Light.
It's not a question of being more progressive and more conservative.
It's a question of being more strongly liberal, and that
means being a strong alternative to a bad government, not
a week echo. Politics is a contest of ideas, and
(35:16):
particularly over the few months leading into the election, we
didn't provide that contest, and as I think I've said
before on this show, labor light liberals lose.
Speaker 2 (35:31):
Tony Abbat, thank you, Thank you for johinning us tonight.
Let's go now to my next guest, Greg Sheridan. Greg,
thank you. I'll bring you straight in because I want
to save some time with a long introduction. We want
to talk to you and I first about the Greens,
because the Greens look like tonight with the fall of
At and banned, if that's confirmed shortly, that they will
not have a lower House seat in this parliament. It
(35:54):
was a repudiation of the Greens brand across the board.
I asked Tim Wilson, have we've seen peaked till he
thinks we have? Have we seen peak Green?
Speaker 7 (36:03):
Greg Sheridan, Yeah, I think probably we have, Peter and
it's great to be with you. It's the only good
feature out of this whole election, which is very, very
bad result for Australia. The whole election ignored all of
our serious problems, but eliminating the Greens in the lower
House is a tremendous step forward for Australia. It also
(36:24):
exposes Labor because if Teals or more moderate Green style
candidates run in Labor seats, the Liberals will be able
to give them their preferences and Labor will be very vulnerable.
It's one of parliamentary near landslide on a tiny, tiny
popular vote, very lower vote than Julia Gill. I've gotten
(36:46):
twenty ten and the Greens I think have been exterminated
in the House of Representatives. I hope that metaphor is
not too harsh because they're so extreme. You know, if
I was in Germany, I wouldn't vote for the German Greens.
But they are a very re no, sensible, sane, moderate
party with the love of the environment, which I think
(37:06):
leads them into some poor policy. Our Greens are full
of hatred. Their policies are full of hatred and nehalism
and obsession with Gaza, and hatred of Israel and all
these other extravagant ideological hatred's hatred of Australia really and
the environment is a very favorable calling card. But the
(37:26):
Green's performance has trashed that brand. Now, whether they can
recover I don't know, but they will themselves in due
course be challenged, I think by other minor parties.
Speaker 2 (37:39):
Chris, youillman, You're a good student in political history. Chris
human may be observation on Monday that the Teals are
to the Liberal Party what the DLP was to Labor.
Particularly an issue of the Teals, the Teals were created
to keep the Liberal Party, they hope, out of power
for generations. What do you make of that observation?
Speaker 7 (38:00):
Chris is a brilliant journalist, and that observation is essentially correct.
It deserves some sort of pedantic qualification. The DLP, initially
the Democratic Labor Party, emerged from a split in the
Labor Party, and all of its vote came from the
Labor Party, so one hundred percent of its vote was
disillusioned labor moderates who wouldn't vote for the communist influenced
(38:21):
Labor Party of the fifties and the sixties. The Teals
get most of their vote from former Greens and former
Labor voters, but they take a slice of former Liberal votes,
and therefore they do to the Liberals what the DLP
did to Labor. They transfer some of the core liberal
vote to the other side of politics. And of course
(38:42):
the DLP didn't win lower House seats. It helped the
Liberal Party win seats through its preferences. But the essential
idea that the Teals roadblock the Liberals is right. I
was fascinated by Tim Wilson's powerful interview with you. The
Liberals can win these seats back, not by being merely
mouthed imitations of the Labor Party. There's Tim Wilson in
(39:05):
favor of lower taxes, nuclear energy, all the rest. He
wins a classic Teal seat. So there's no formula for
going left to beat the Teals. It's not a left
right issue. It's a conviction issue. It's do you really
court the voters? Do you get out there and sell
yourself to them? And these You know, if they lose
(39:25):
Goldstein and Couyong in an election where the Liberals did
so poorly overall, that shows how vulnerable the Teals really are.
Speaker 2 (39:36):
Greg amount of time, but I've got to get a
comment from you about that new South Wales parliamentary legislation
forced in tonight. It will go to a vote that
will force Christian institutions, Catholic church hospitals in particular, to
go against their conscience. I know you've written best seller
books about God and faith.
Speaker 7 (39:54):
What do you make of this, well, Peter, I think
this legislation is an abomination, fundamental attack on religious freedom
and freedom of conscience. It is a wicked, wicked piece
of legislation. The Greens, having been defeated in the Lower House,
their extremism, having been rejected by the Australian people, will
now live on in what is really their natural home,
(40:16):
which is the left wing of the Labor Party. This
is a wicked, vicious, anti Christian, anti human assault on
religious freedom and freedom of conscience, and people of goodwill,
whatever their political party, should oppose this bill and it's
a serious and very bad term for Australia to take.
Speaker 2 (40:37):
Grick, sure and thank you. I will be interested to
see if the very Catholic Prime Minister that we saw
over the election campaign picks up the phone here and
rings Chris Mins all right after Breggie Bolden. By their win,
the radical left of Labor they want even tougher ambitions targets,
and that pushed by some moderates in the Liberal Party
to dump nuclear power. Coverage is coming up at first
(41:01):
of my panel Senior fellow at the Mensies Research Center
Nick Cater and the head of the Page Research Center,
Jered Holland. Gents, welcome. We've just got some technical issues
with niic'll getting up in a moment. But today Labour's
environmental wings announced it's pushing the Prime Minister to adopt
a seventy percent emission's reduction target with twenty thirty five
and they want those nature positive laws passed by the
(41:23):
end of the year. Now. We should have had these
twenty thirty five targets in February, Jerro. They should have
been part of the campaign debate. But they're going to
push on hard here now.
Speaker 13 (41:36):
They will. Peter and I think it's really important that
your viewers realize what this will entails. And our modeling
suggests that this will increase power prices by at least
another sixty percent in real terms over the next ten years,
so you're not going to see any energy bill relief
anytime soon. It's also important to point out that decarbonizing
our energy grid, that's only thirty percent of our emissions
(41:57):
across our country. You also have to look at agriculture,
you have to look at our fuel, you have to
look at our manufacturing, our primary and second secondary industries.
The net Zero Steering Group estimates this could cost up
to seven trillion dollars to try and hit this target.
It is unachievable. It is astronomically expensive. And the real
question is how much pain is labor and the Greens
willing to put us through until finally enough is enough
(42:18):
and voters finally take back their country and say we
just aren't going to take it anymore. We can't take
the lies and we need a reliable, dispatchable and cheaper
system for the country.
Speaker 2 (42:30):
Of course, to do that, Nick, the Liberals have got
to keep nuclear on the table. And there's a push
from some moderates, not all, some moderates to say that
nuclears cause them to lose the election and nuclear has
got to go.
Speaker 1 (42:44):
It's an untenable suggestion that we should remove this. I
think when the dust settles and we look at Peter
Dutton's legacy and he undoubtedly leaves the legacy to the
Liberal Party, one of the big things you did was
to break the nuclear taboo. We have to stick with it.
We've done a lot of work on it. We can
see how it work for Australia, and to ditch it
(43:04):
now when during the election campaign hardly reported here because
we were focused on domestic issues, China authorized the building
of ten nuclear power stations. They have a massive building
program program in place. Now you've got to listen to
a country like China which is serious about energy and
(43:25):
see what they're doing. Plus, of course the other thing
that happened was the Spain and Portugal blacked out. I
think anybody who's arguing Peter that we should get rid
of nuclear should come up with the alternative, because I
can see only one alternative, and that's coal. And if
they don't want to go down the coal route, then
nuclear is the only way to power Australia.
Speaker 2 (43:46):
And of course the Chinese need nuclear nick because they've
got to build all the wind farms and the solar
panels to ship our way, keep their industries growing, you know,
improve their budget bottom line, and send us out the
back door. Of course, there is dropped from the coalition's agenda.
I think the coalition itself is at risk, kid Joe.
I don't think the NATS would take that line down
(44:07):
at all.
Speaker 13 (44:11):
Well, the NATS have already made it quite clear that
they want to back this in. It was in lots
of ways the National Party lead policy in the first place,
and Regional Australia overwhelmingly voted for nuclear energy in this country.
It's because it's their farmland, it's their national parks, it's
their mountain ranges that are being destroyed by these industrial
infrastructure and these industrial installations. To put it in perspective,
to power one hundred thousand homes, you need over three
(44:33):
thousand AFL fields worth of solar panels. And this is
assuming that the sun is shining. These aren't going into Banelong,
These aren't going into Wentworth, these aren't going into Griffiths.
These are going into country people's backyards. And this is
why they want an actually realistic and reliable and achievable
energy solution to power the country for the next hundred years.
Speaker 2 (44:55):
Nick, all these calls today and the leaking of Polster information,
they were worn supposedly the party strategist. Yes, I think
the freshwater strategy mob we've got to go, and I
think they're up to it in terms of polling. But
I'll tell you what if you have to be told
what you stand for, what your policies should be from
a polster, you might as well pack up and go home.
Speaker 1 (45:20):
I think that's right, Peter. And look, I don't want
to comment in too much detail on the campaign. I
wasn't part of it. I wasn't in the room, and
I know, as you'd know, it's a tremendously high pressure job.
But the point is this, if they were relying so
much on polling, and you get the sense, don't you,
that Peter Dutton was pulling his punches because they thought
they wanted to win over this seat and they needed
(45:40):
women voters and they were careful about that one. That
is not the way to run a campaign. The only
way to run a campaign from oppositions, I think, as
you pointed out, is to come out like Tony Abbott
did as a whirling dervish, going going and just not stopping,
or Scott Morrison did in twenty nineteen. Those are the
dven ways to win from opposition. Being cautious, being pole driven,
(46:04):
being focus group driven. That does not work. And I
hope we never tried.
Speaker 2 (46:09):
Again, and we saw it there. That's how Tim Wilson
told me tonight. He won back a seat from the
tears gents, I leave it there, thank you. After the
break words matter, with Kel Richards joining me as he
does every Wednesday, the wonderful Kel Richards. Kel. This one's
(46:30):
a special request from my old boss, Tony Abb. He
said the other day you need to ask Kel about
the phrase over the moon. So I am, where's this
one come from?
Speaker 14 (46:40):
Actually much older than I would have thought. Goes back
to seventeen eighteen, and according to the Oxford it comes
from the old expression of jumping for joy, and the
idea is that the person doing the jumping for joy
gets so excited and so carried away they jump right
over the moon for joy. In the nineteen seventies it
became a really popular expression in British football. When teams
(47:03):
won or lost, it was half off two expressions. If
they won they were over the moon, if they lost
they were sick as a parrot. So it was very
big in England at that particular time. And Michael quinnian
maid of mine, who's a great linguist runs the World
Wide Web, says the Worldwide Words says it probably in
the end goes back to hey Diddle, Diddle, in which
(47:25):
you will remember it was the car that jumped over
the moon.
Speaker 2 (47:28):
I remember, well, that's where I thought it might have
come from. And you're referencing the time there with Abbot
probably sort of meshed with the time he was at
Oxford to that makes sense, Hey, talk to me about
part and pastl John wants to know what's the origin
here and the meaning.
Speaker 14 (47:45):
Okay, the two words are virtually identical in meaning, so
it's a tortology. The word parcel came into English in
the thirteen hundreds, I think, a long time ago, and
it came from an Anglo French source word meaning a
package which was part of something. It's related to words
like part and particle and so on. So why are
two words so similarly meaning packaged together? Is a little couplet.
(48:08):
We can blame your lot, Peter, because the lawyers did
this to it. There was an ancient legal practice of
putting together a couple of very similar sounding words, similar
meaning words in order to cover every eventuality. So we
got expressions like aid in a bet fit and proper
all and sundry without countul and pdurance. Yes, exactly all
(48:28):
of those. And this is a legal expression from the
sixteen c. Fifteen hundreds.
Speaker 2 (48:35):
What about fly off the hand or VICKI wants to
know about that?
Speaker 14 (48:40):
One comes from the American Backwoods, recorded eighteen thirty four,
and it's about what happens when a loose axe head
flies off the axe handle. It is very dangerous. It
could cause injuries to people, and it's out of control.
So if someone flies off the handle, that's the image.
They're very dangerous, they're out of control and they might
injure someone.
Speaker 2 (49:02):
I thought it might have been something to do with
fry pans, but I got that one wrong. Hey, what
about Scott free? Charlie wants to know the origins of
the term scott free, as in, you know, like get
off scott free.
Speaker 14 (49:16):
Well, originally meant free from payment. Now can mean free
from anything, but it originally meant free from payment, and
it goes back to the days of old English a
thousand years ago, and a scott, originally pronounced shot was
a payment or a fee or a charge that had
to be made.
Speaker 8 (49:32):
And if the.
Speaker 14 (49:33):
Charge against you was canceled, then you got off shot
free or scott free. That's where it comes from.
Speaker 2 (49:42):
Next week and I get a lot of questions about this,
You know where does the term the liberal you know,
where does the Liberal Party's philosophy come from? Liberal versus conservative?
You know, Burke versus Meal. Let's do that next week
because that might be very telling about I guess understanding
that the fork in the row the party's got where
(50:03):
it goes from here in terms of rebuilding. Will do that,
but I'll leave it now. Kel. That's your homework. I'll
see you next week. That's it for me. Andrew's up next.
Peter Krandland live on Sky News Australia.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
Good evening, Welcome to the program. Here's what's coming up
tonight on Kredline, the five for the Liberal leadership. Now
forget that it's got anything to do with male or
female candidates. This is a battle between the parties left
and the right. We might also have a new name
in the mix tonight, the Seed of Goldstein, Tim Wilson,
declining to rule out a tilt. Wilson joins me later
(00:31):
in the show. Meanwhile, Labor two might be smiling, but
behind the scenes the right faction is feuding over who
loses the ministry position. Is that the new South Wales
Right or someone out of Victoria? Who's on the chopping block?
And what's this talk of a big un job in
the offing for Chris Bowen. Plus good news the first
(00:51):
Teal seat has gone to more tonight on an ipe age.
But I'll also have exclusive information that shows the Teals
are owned by big climate money and how that model
is now branching out. More on that in a moment.
And I just can't resist running this vision again, the
premature claiming a victory by the Gucci Green Teal Zoe
Daniel on Saturday night and today that's evaporate. It's been
(01:15):
a hard campaign, tinging set in Goldstein.
Speaker 3 (01:21):
Hope Winds genuinely very proud to say that we are
pleased to accept that we have won the seat of
Goldstein back for the Lobody.
Speaker 2 (01:34):
We'll stay with these issues because the election wash up's continuing.
I still belgning today though we may well have seen
peak Teal. And it's possible also that the Greens have
lost all of their Lower House seats thanks to Peter
Dutton's principal decision to put Labor a party of government
ahead of the extremists. Continueing counting has given back Goldstein
(01:55):
to the Limbs, and the man who has emerged the victor,
Tim Wilson, joins me here short in the Cydny seat
of Bradfield. It looks like the Liberals there have held
off the Teals too, despite their candidate from last time
having been funded as some sort of shadow member for
the past three years. And we may yet see the
end of the campaign. Karen Manik Ryan in Coujong as well.
(02:17):
So what does that tell you that well credentialed Liberal
candidates plenty of time to run strong local campaigns. Well,
they can win back tal seats even in an election
where the party went backwards because of a supposedly hard
ride leader without clear policy or a strong national campaign.
Now see how premature it is to write the Liberal
(02:40):
Party off or to panic at a bad outcome. Again,
as I said on Monday night when I went methodically
through the numbers and recent electoral history, perspective is everything,
and it's so important that you have perspective because when
you win, you need it so it doesn't go to
your head, and you need it when you lose, so
(03:01):
that you learn the lessons of what to change and
what to keep. So let's now be clear about the tiles.
They were never innocent, idealistic community independence. They're incredibly well
funded and a well drilled arm, a political arm of
the renewable energy industry. Renewable energy barons have organized and
(03:22):
funded them into the Parliament in order to protect their
subsidy harvesting business model. These tials are owned by the
big climate money that funds them, and that model is
branching out. Have a look at this. It's a label
from a box in the seat of wanted. It's a
box of pamphlets for the Legalized Cannabis Party. And who
(03:45):
paid for that, Well, it says on the box Climate
two hundred. Now that might sound like a bit of
a weird connection, but surely that's got something to do
with a purchase of cannabis farm by the top Climate
two hundred donor the million and their share trader Rob Kelldoulis.
He's a high profile backer of the Legalized Cannabis Party
(04:07):
and on the weekend it acted as a preference harvester
in many of the Teal races. Now there's very little
principal politics here. It's follow the money and self interest
at play, that's for sure. And here's another thing too
about the Teals. They have been bought into being solely
(04:27):
to keep the Liberal Party out of office until it
panders to the financial interests of the renewable sectors billion
down backers. This is why the Teals and many of
the moderate Liberals want to see off any talk of
nuclear power. They want it killed off as the Liberal
Party goes through its convulsions, because nuclear power completely up
(04:49):
ends the business model of renewable energy. It all started
with Malcolm Turnbull conspiring to remove the Liberal Prime Minister
Tony Abbott, who was most opposed to renewable industry rent seeking,
moving to acts the tax sign Abbot's death warrant with
moderates in his party room. Then, after Scott Morrison replaced
Turnbull and watered down the coalition and support for renewables,
(05:13):
the Tials emerged to keep what they called a climate
denying Liberal Party permanently in opposition. As Chris Jelman very
shrewdly said here on Monday Night, the Teals were established
to do to the Liberals what the DLP once did
to Labor, to keep them out of office forever unless
they fundamentally change and move to the left. Think of
(05:35):
them as the DLP.
Speaker 4 (05:36):
It's not like the Greens to the Labor Party. Those
preferences flow back. What the Teals do are They're a
political party that have been set up precisely to stop
the Liberal Party from ever regaining power again, and they're
doing that very effectively, very very shrewd.
Speaker 2 (05:54):
Now it's significant that a big donor to the Teals
is Turnbull's son, Alex has given twenty five thousand to
spend a campaign in Wentworth not once but twice, and
no one is more determined to style in the Liberal
Party than the man the party finally rejected after giving
in the leadership, not once but twice. Now see them
for what they are, amongst other things. The Teals are
(06:17):
partly termbules revenge, and the sooner they're all gone, the better.
But that's the Leaves and all those running around today
talking about some sort of existential crisis. Now, sure it's
been a bad loss, the politics hasn't changed. The way
to be a successful opposition is to be a clear
alternative to a bad government, not a week echo, not
labor light. That's why the panic merchants should calm down.
(06:41):
Like Senator Maria Kavachek, who today calls for the Leaves
to drop their pro nuclear position.
Speaker 5 (06:47):
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 (07:02):
Now she's a factional operative. It was parachuted into the
New South Wales Party presidency for all of five minutes,
and now she's been shoehorned into the Senate. Well, she's
been there about ten minutes. Presumably her announcement was carefully
timed to coincide with ads running here on Sky News
from something called Liberals Against Nuclear. Their website features anti
(07:22):
nuclear quotes from Waite for It liberal term cakes Matt
Kean and Malcolm Turnbull.
Speaker 6 (07:28):
Matt Kean, forming New South Wales Liberal Treasurer and Energy minister,
said nuclear is a distraction that doesn't stack up at
the moment on practically Crown.
Speaker 5 (07:37):
They need to cut the cost of living.
Speaker 6 (07:39):
He found the fields we need to go up by
six hundred and sixty five dollars. Who vote for a
six hundred and sixty five dollar electricity bill.
Speaker 5 (07:47):
Increase stupid size presumable.
Speaker 7 (07:49):
They need to crank your policy poison huh, carnal.
Speaker 2 (07:54):
Policy authorized by people teth the Liberals against Nuclear rezuil.
And they've updated those ads and they're now running them
to put pressure on the Liberal moderates to dump nuclear
now that they have lost the election. This looks like
a rerun to me of something called Liberals for Forests
but connived to defeat general Liberal candidates in WA a
(08:15):
few years back. It's like another outfit too, called the
north Shore Environmental Stewards. Now this was a Michael Photius
linked body, a body that tried to inject activists into
the Liberal Party to unseat Tony Abbott prior to the
twenty nineteen election. See these entities for what they are.
They are dummy groups set up to either defeat the
(08:37):
Liberal Party or forced to force it to stop being
the Liberal Party, doubtless funded by renewable energy lobbyists and
those set to make millions and millions from all the
tax payer handouts on offer. This is what it's all about.
It's always been about the money, never about the environment. Meanwhile,
the Liberal leadership campaign, well that's come into a head.
(09:00):
So called moderates a claiming it can't be Angers Taylor
because the shadow Treasurer was part of Dutton's inner circle.
But hang on, surely the Deputy Leader, Susan Lee was
equally part of the inner circle and deserves, like Angus Taylor,
her share of responsibility for defeat. Of course, the leadership
will be determined by the party room, but given how
(09:21):
consequential these decisions are, they really shouldn't be made on
any basis rather than who can best hold the government
to account, the person who was best able to represent
and articulate the party's core equities of sound economic management
and strong national security should get the leader's job. Fundamentally,
(09:44):
it must be made on merit. Today, re elected Tim
Wilson pointedly refused to rule out running for the leadership today.
Speaker 3 (09:53):
I had aspirations for one thing, and it was to
have the great privilege and service to be the member
for god Goldstein again. And of course we have lived
out that promise.
Speaker 2 (10:06):
I'll bet y'all be asking him that question again in
a moment. But a pointer to the party room. Picking
someone because he or she ticks some identity box is
not the liberal way. If the Liberal Party dumps the
merit principle, it's no longer a liberal party. It might
as well put itself into voluntary administration and let a
more principled outfit take over. You cannot trash your values
(10:29):
or lose perspective after a loss. Remember John Howard's landslide
win in two thousand and four. He won the House
and also that history making Senate majority. Well, at the
next election, his government was thrown out of office and
he lost his own seat. A smashing win does not
mean the Albanezer government is invincible, but only if there's
(10:53):
a strong, consistent and relentless opposition. All right, let's get
today's headlines with Ruben Spargo.
Speaker 8 (11:05):
The Greens are in disarray after their leader Adam Bant
lost the seat of Melbourne. Sky News chief election analyst
Tom Connell declared Labour's Sarah Witty will claim victory. Stephen
Bates was ousted from the seat of Brisbane, Max Chandler
Maiden lost the nearby seat of Griffith. Labor state factions
(11:25):
fighting over ministry positions ahead of the Prime Minister's decision.
The composition of the cabinet will be influenced by the
states and factions represented within the expanded caucus. There is
a looming fight between the Victorian Right and the New
South Wales Right. One of the five current cabinet ministers
from the New South Wales Right may have to step aside.
(11:46):
The Labor Caucus is preparing to meet on Friday. The
Liberal Party is tearing itself apart as members prepare to
decide their next leader. The fierce contest between Shadow Treasurer
Angus Taylor and Deputy Leader Susan Lee is turning nasty.
A Liberal source claims the deputy leader is undermining the
Shadow treasurer. Recent reports suggested Angus Taylor may drop out
(12:08):
of the leadership race after considering his family. His camp
has shared with Sky News a list of perceived failures
of Susan Lee. They claimed, despite having one of the
biggest staff allocations in opposition, she demonstrated a failure to
think strategically on policy. The final makeup of the Liberal
Party room remained subject to change.
Speaker 2 (12:31):
All right, still the number of seats tonight where the
counting continues. The results are getting closer, though. Let's get
our analysis update from Sky News election analyst on Connell Peter.
Speaker 9 (12:42):
One of the stories of election night was that the
Green's leader was in trouble. We didn't know enough about
this seat because the AEC initially thought it would be
a contest between the Greens and Liberal Party. Instead it
has been the Labor Party. Here's what it boils down
to on this primary, and we've had seventy percent counted.
Speaker 2 (12:57):
Adam Bount needs about.
Speaker 9 (12:58):
A third of the rest the vote from Liberal, Independent,
one nation another to be able to stay ahead or
level with Wabor. What's happening so far, We'll far from that.
He's getting more like twenty five percent of preferences and
that trend has continued today.
Speaker 2 (13:12):
It's lifted a little bit for him.
Speaker 9 (13:14):
But even if we go conservative and assuming his rate
of preferences improves, this lead of seventeen hundred votes at
the moment for the Labor Party will go up beyond
three thousand. Now in the remaining vote to come in
that we don't know about absent vote. Perhaps there's an
improvement for the Greens. There's no guarantee, but they'd need
sixty three percent plus and that won't happen. That's simply
(13:35):
too high. So the Greens will lose the seat of
Melbourne as we go to the Parliament. Remember they started
with four lower House seats initially the Greens at this
stage they're on zero.
Speaker 2 (13:44):
It is still likely.
Speaker 9 (13:45):
Highly luckily they get Ryan. I think they end up
in the final two there and win it, and they
would do so with Labor preferences. But it's going to
be close.
Speaker 2 (13:53):
So they'll be nervously watching on there.
Speaker 9 (13:55):
There are two other seats when it comes to Labor
Till contests, a Liberal Tiller contests.
Speaker 2 (14:00):
So I should say, which are going to be very tight.
Speaker 9 (14:02):
Going straight to the simple contest here, as we see
Liberal Party Gieselle capturing moving ahead here, but only by
two hundred votes. There's very little postal vote. This is
basically the lead she needs to defend from absent votes.
There's no guarantee they trend towards Nicolette Buller, but we
need to see a batch of them to see which
way they're going.
Speaker 2 (14:21):
Then we might have an idea in that seat.
Speaker 9 (14:22):
So that's one to watch. The other one, of course
is Couyong and that is a similar situation, but for
now we do see still Monique ran in the lead.
So here a little bit different, Manique Grin in the
lead by four hundred. The difference here is there are
still postal votes left. They're going to put Amelia Hamer
in the lead. The question is by how much, Because
they've been dropping off, as they often do. They were
(14:45):
initially running it more like sixty four percent. They've dropped
to the high fifties. So the overall rate at sixty one,
that means Amelia Hamer's lead might be three four hundred.
If she gets a pick up in the rate, maybe
there'll be more. So from that that's her lead to defend.
And again most absent votes, which will likely benefit Manique Grime,
but there are no guarantees this steep into account.
Speaker 2 (15:09):
All right, dust is starting to settle from Saturday, isn't it.
But the leadership batle inside the Liberal Party, well, it's
starting to get fierce now this stage. Reports are that
Susan Lee is the front runner. Now it's Lee as
in key people came that role all the time. Susan
Lee the front runner. However, privately Liberal MP's is starting
to point to her record and her share of responsibility
as Dalton's deputy for the loss. Joining me now to
(15:29):
discuss this and more. Senior reporter Karena Marcus and journalist
at Data Telegraph James Willis Well, James, Susan and Angus.
They're both in contention finger pointing yes at Angus, the
shadow treasurer, but also a lot of people saying to
me today that Susan Lee also must take responsibilities. She was,
after all, the deputy leader. So where to from here?
Speaker 10 (15:53):
Well, Peter, in my view, Susan Lee went missing, and
I'm sure she was campaigning, but in terms of the
media cut through and the impact that she has and
the response that she gets from the public and from
the media audience is not up to scratch. I don't
think she has enough cut through. I personally think if
you were looking at the Liberals that were campaigning Michaulia,
(16:14):
Cash and even Jane Hume get a lot more cut through.
They seem to do a lot more interviews. I'm sure
Susan would push back on that, but I just don't
think I'm convinced that she is leadership material. I know
she's a very good local MP, she was a minister
in former coalition governments. But for mine, I'd be looking
at a different direction. And look, I don't think Angus Taylor. Look,
(16:37):
I think Angus Taylor made a fair few mistakes and
one of the main criticisms and this may not just
be on him, but it could be on the overall campaign,
was that a lot of the economic policies were rolled
out far too late. But the wider issue Peter in
my view, and not just at federal level but at
state level, where the Liberal Party is in opposition by
a long way, is the infection and the act of
(17:00):
the moderate branch. And in my view, moderates cannot win
a government over and the more the party pushes to
the left, the far away they are from ever forming
a government in Australia again.
Speaker 2 (17:13):
And that's certainly what's happened at state level with the
state liberal oppositions, and some of them, like Victoria, have
been in opposition for almost twenty five years, but for
one term in parliament. Let's go to Susan Lee though Carolina,
and all these demands are calls that are coming that
the party must choose two women, not just a female leader,
but a female leader and a female deputy. Some are
saying that if they don't, they are quote morons. This
(17:35):
is not a debate about gender. That's a smoke screen
in my view. This is a factional fight between the
left and the right, really, isn't it.
Speaker 11 (17:44):
Well, you can't put aside the fact that Susan Lee
is a moderate and Angus Taylor is a senior conservative.
I mean, so obviously there's going to be a fight
between those two factions as to who those groups can
gain into the position of leader.
Speaker 2 (18:03):
I mean.
Speaker 11 (18:03):
People who are backing Susan Lee says say that Angus Taylor, well,
he's tarnished by how close he was to Peter Duddon,
that he couldn't prosecute the party's economic agenda well enough
to win help them win the election, and Susan Lee's
Susan Lee's detractors say, well, she didn't put forward a
(18:26):
policy enough policy in her portfolio despite having the larger
stuff allocation out of anyone in the opposition, and that
she was secretly and behind the scenes backgrounding against Peter
Dunnon and undermining him. So you've got these competing arguments
(18:46):
for both. But what I really reject, like you, Peter,
is this idea that in order for the Liberal Party
to win back voters they need to somehow get down
just put more women in leadershi rolls. I would love
to see more women there, but not because they are women,
but because they deserve the spot. I'm not saying that
(19:07):
Susan Lee doesn't deserve to be leader, but it shouldn't
be because she's a woman. It should be because I
agree you know what she's achieved. So I really hate
that reductive, demeaning argument for female voters.
Speaker 2 (19:22):
One hundred percent degree. Of course a Labour picked up
a lot of the female vote, but they have a
male leader and a male deputy leader. So just putting
a woman in there is no guarantee of success. If
your policies aren't right and all the other things I've
talked about. Let's go though to the factional rumblings inside
labor if we can. Richard Miles, of course, he's the
leader of the Victorian right faction. He is opposing a
(19:44):
move to strip the Victorians of a spot in cabinet.
They say they are owed a spot with the departure
of Bill Shorten. They think that the reduction in the
rights numbers should come out of New South Wales. But
of course that puts a whole lot of people, including
even Chris Bowen, Tiny Burk's there as well, puts them
in the hot seat.
Speaker 10 (20:05):
What do you think here, James, Well, I think the
five I mean to be honest, Of those five, the
easiest solution here would be to allow Chris Bowen to
step back and take this larger role as part of
the global UN climate movement, which is apparently not a
(20:26):
full time job and doesn't necessarily mean that he has
to step back, but it's certainly a lot of work,
and based on the details that I've seen with Australia
determined to take a stance here on the global stage
and host these major events, there could be an argument
for Chris Bowen to step back from his portfolio. I mean,
I think of all the labor ministers, he is the
(20:47):
one that does the party the most damage. I think
he's extremely unpopular with the media. I think he comes
across as very smug. So if he wants to take
this new role, the Prime Minister would be ideal to
pat him on the back and move him on. It
would be hard, certainly to see him, you know, demoting
Tony Burke or Ed Husick or Jason Clare or even
Michelle Rowland. And they need Michelle in terms of they're
(21:09):
desperate apparently to have that female in the cabinet. So look,
maybe it's a win win here, and Chris Bowen takes
the global role steps back and we don't have to
put up with him every day talking about net zero
and wind farms and electric vehicles and everything else.
Speaker 2 (21:25):
Yeah. I just like the UN on occasion, but I
don't know that I dis like them that much that
I've said Chris Bowen ay way, But anyway, what about
Tanya Plevsk She looks like she will be punished. She
was once a leadership rival. Of course Caroline two the PM,
and the talk is that she's going to move out
of the environment portfolio should be shunted off to the ndis.
Of course, that's where they sent Bill Shorten to bury
(21:47):
him politically. Is that the plan for tenure?
Speaker 11 (21:50):
Well, look, Alberaniezy was asked about this. He dismissed that
plan as nonsense.
Speaker 2 (21:55):
But who knows.
Speaker 11 (21:56):
His word isn't good for much, as we've found out lately.
But look, I wouldn't be surprised at all if next week,
when they make the cabinet announcements, apparently that she is
demoted to some lesser portfolio. I mean, the frosty relationship
between Tania Plebasik and Anthony Alberanzi has got to be
the worst cap secret in Canberra. We all saw when
(22:19):
she leant in for that hug from Anthony Alberanzi and
he gave her this very awkward handhold in return. It
was really a very public rebuff there, and then she
tried to cover up for him by saying we should
all be doing these silly COVID elbow taps instead. Ridiculous.
(22:41):
She was also conspicuously missing from key environment announcements made
during the election. Alberanzi would be there, but despite it
being something that was in her portfolio, she was missing
and I think those things are very telling indeed, But
we won't have to wait long. There's going to be
a coocass meat on Friday, and then an announcement about
(23:02):
the portfolios as early as next week.
Speaker 2 (23:07):
Just quickly before we go. I put up a picture
a little bit before there from the seat of Warner
and this is the one that Dan Teen retained in
Western Victoria, James. It shows there that this is a
dispatch label on a box of pamphlets for legalized cannabis
for the party paid for by Climate two hundred, and
(23:28):
we know the interplay with donors there. We also know
that the key donor for Climate two hundred has bought
himself a cannabis farm in Tasmania. This is all getting
murky and murky with the money that's moving around, and
particularly i'd say in relation to the Cannabis Party two
they were a preference harvester in many of these tight
(23:49):
till races.
Speaker 10 (23:50):
That's a concern, that's right, and if every vote counts
and if you can harvest preferences that way, and Climate
two hundred keeping in the last couple of weeks before
the vote via direct emails from founder Simon Holmes at
court was saying things are getting desperate. We really really
need your help to keep our MPs in their seats.
(24:12):
And we learned from the last election, Peter, that a
lot of the donations from Climate two hundred went to
a comedian. There was money transferred to the company that
sold the binstickers that was giving out for Scott Morrison.
And so if they're assisting the legalized cannabis party, well
we need to figure out how much money's involved here.
The problem is we won't know for twenty weeks after
(24:33):
the election campaign. But certainly, as you say, the wider
issue here is that it is without question that some
of the largest donors to Climate two hundred and their
MPs are the people that are making a lot of
money in the renewable energy game, which is now a
blank check and will continue in this term of government.
Speaker 2 (24:52):
Right, we will keep pursuing all of that. Thank you both. Now,
if ever, there was a case of putting the car
before the horse had happened on Saturday night, Zoey Daniel
premature claiming the seat of Goldstein. However, despite leading by
just around two thousand votes on Sunday morning, there then
was a massive surge in postals that have put Tim
Wilson in front. All the major media outlets, including our
(25:12):
Sky News analyst Tom Connell, have called it now for
Tim Wilson, and I'm pleased to say the returning Liberal
MP joins me right now here on the desk. Well, congratulations,
thanks Peter.
Speaker 3 (25:22):
It's great privilege.
Speaker 2 (25:23):
It's a huge win. When you think that you took
on an incumbent. Incumbents are not easy to beat. You
were an incumbent. You were beaten, though, but you were
up against the might of the Teal movement, the money
of the Teal movement. People said you couldn't know it,
How did you do it?
Speaker 3 (25:40):
Well, we need to face reality, which is we had
a negative redistribution against us. We had Climate two hundred
for the most money in any seat in the state
as well or the country, I should say, as well
as of course the state widewing. Fundamentally, we went back
to grassroots. We engaged directly with the community, We listened,
We built out a grassroots movement as a foundation for
our success. We brought together thousands of people. But more importantly,
(26:03):
rather than in defeat turning on each other, we looked
to each other for mutual support and there was no egos.
There was only one focus, which is the stakes of
what is required to win this seat back, and we
did it together as a team.
Speaker 2 (26:18):
I think what was telling too when Liberos don't always
get this right is they pre selected early. You got
the nod from the party early and you hit the
ground running for a considerable period of time.
Speaker 3 (26:28):
Well, we actually started the campaign well about twelve months
before even the pre selection. We started with fundraising, we
built out the campaign infrastructure. The pre selection actually followed
a lot of the hard work that we had already done.
But it was because we came together and we focused
on the core purpose together that we achieved the result
that we did, and we're immensely proud. But the other
thing we did we didn't hide. We were courageous in
(26:49):
standing up for what we believed in. While we were
trying to take the community and the country where there
are a lot of conversations a lot of people hid.
We stood up firmly, particularly on things like energy, about
the importance of the role of reindustrializing Australia and continuing
the conversation without any sense of timidity. We were bold,
we were confident, and we stood up and people really
(27:10):
resonated with it.
Speaker 12 (27:11):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (27:11):
John Roskeimer, i used to work with, said last night,
you didn't lurch to the left. People think that's how
you win these to your seats. You're stood on their
party values. I think that's a strong endorsement from John.
Speaker 3 (27:20):
It is a strong endorsement, but it's a reminder that
you can't hide in politics. You've got to stand up
and put a value proposition. There were people who walked
up to the booths and said to me, I'll vote
for you if you trash nuclear and I said, well,
I'm sorry, I'm not prepared to do that. I supported
it last I was in Parliament. I support it now
and I'm going to continue to support it into the future.
Speaker 2 (27:40):
And there's a reason.
Speaker 3 (27:41):
Because the foundation of how we're going to reindustrialize our country,
how we're going to create the jobs and economic opportunity
for your kids and grandkids, how they're going to be
able to go and save and be able to buy
their own homes. You've got to make the case and
you've got to persuade people. But you can't do that
when you're hiding, when you're just issuing a press release
and thinking that's enough. You've got to stand up. You've
got to be confident, and because if you don't believe it,
(28:01):
why would anybody else leadership your hand. I'm immensely privileged
to have been in the position that I've got to.
I've seen my name being bandied around, but I am
literally just focused on the task at this hand. I
haven't spoken to most colleagues at this point, but obviously
I'm having a conversation with lots of people about where
I fit within the parliamentary party. But I want to
(28:23):
make this clear. I didn't go back into Parliament just
to sit around. I got elected because I believe that
this country has a bold, ambitious liberal future ahead of it.
But we must make the case, and we must be
unapologetic in making that case.
Speaker 2 (28:38):
So but not ruling that out. I read that as
you have an open mind.
Speaker 3 (28:42):
Well, as I said, I'm making it very clear that I.
Speaker 2 (28:44):
Can't bullship me. You know, no, I can't try to
have an open mind.
Speaker 3 (28:48):
Yeah, I've got an open mind about these things, but
the reality is I am very much focused on how
I can play part of a role as a team
because what I want is a bold, confident liberal party.
Speaker 2 (28:59):
The project. It's an alternative.
Speaker 3 (29:01):
Liberal vision for this country that builds out the policy
stepping stones to get there, and that's what I'm looking
from all of the leadership candiates who are putting themselves forward.
Speaker 2 (29:10):
Do you think this is the last question? I mean,
given your success and how you did it, do you
think if that was rolled out more broadly we would
see peak peak teal.
Speaker 3 (29:20):
My hope is that we well and truly past peak
till but we're not going to get there by just
doing business as usual.
Speaker 2 (29:26):
We need to.
Speaker 3 (29:27):
Learn from the lessons of Goldstein. They'll be lessons Fromkujong
and I hope from Bradfield as well, because my objective
isn't to win back Goldsteine. It's to roll back all
of the Teals to go back forth into those seats
because the heartland of Australian liberalism isn't geographic. It is
sitting in the hearts and minds of Australians no matter
where they live. It's that spark that we must inflame
about their sense of aspiration, of hope and economic opportunity
(29:50):
for their future, for themselves, their children, their grandchildren. And
if not, if we're not bringing that alive, then we
are failing them and we're failing future generations of Australians, prowfully.
Speaker 2 (29:59):
Said to congratulations. Thank it's a line killer result. All right,
after the break, where did it go wrong for the
Greens and could we be seeing the end of these
hard left activists you heard him there on Pegg Teal.
We'll discuss that as well. But also big news about
a radical Greens plan in New South Wales has been
rallied tonight at the Parliament. I'll get you some exclusive
content after the break. Welcome back. Still the come Adam
(30:25):
Bant seat has now been called for labor. So what's
left for the Greens? But first, in a rally that's
just ended on the steps to the New South Wales Parliament,
leading advocates, politicians and healthcare workers have come together in
city tonight in an emotional and united call and Australians
to rally against a hugely controversial bill that's just been
tabled in the New South Wales Parliament by the Greens.
(30:48):
Former Prime Minister Tony Abbott was there and joins me, Now, Tony,
we were going to talk about the Liberal Party where
to now. I'll get to that in a moment, but
this was an abortion law reform bill currently before the
New South Wales Parliament. Explain exactly what's in the bill
and why it's caused such outrage tonight, Peter.
Speaker 12 (31:12):
It's trying to force health professionals with a conscientious objection
to abortion to facilitate, not just to refer, but to
actually facilitate people having abortions. Fundamentally, it's designed to force
Christian people out of the healthcare system. It's designed to
(31:32):
force Catholic and other Christian hospitals, other religious hospitals, out
of the healthcare system unless they are to sacrifice their principles.
It's really about canceling faith in our public life. If
this bill were to go forward, and the Labor Party
has agreed to give government time to ram this Greens
(31:55):
bill through the New South Wales Parliament, if this bill
becomes lawer will be another unhappy milestone in the driving
of Christianity into our private places, the banishing of Christianity
from our public life. It's a terrible milestone in the
(32:17):
decline of our society and it's a fundamental assault on
freedom of conscience.
Speaker 2 (32:25):
There were just a couple of things from me. I mean,
we've got a lot of our hospital healthcare services provided
by different faiths. Now, not all services like abortion are
provided in all hospitals. Hospitals can offer services based on
their religion and they do, that will then be something
that will be I guess ruled out with this legislation.
(32:46):
It could perhaps even send a signal that Catholic or
Christian hospitals have to offer euthanasia and that's against their beliefs,
of course, But I thought this was something that Chris
Mins as Premier said would never happen.
Speaker 12 (33:02):
There was previously a deal as I understand it, between
the New South Wales Labor government and the Greens to
bring this on and ram it through the parliament in March.
When words seeped out of this, the Labor Party promised
people in the lead up to the federal election that
it was never going to happen. Now that was a lie.
(33:23):
It was another one of Labour's campaign lies. And so
what this move now and it's supposed to be going
through the parliament, rammed through in government time next week.
What this shows is the depth of the alliance between
the Greens and the Labor Party. The Greens might be
on the verge of expulsion from the lower House of
(33:46):
the Federal Parliament thanks to Peter Dutton's principal stand. But
they're still alive and well and manipulating the Labor Party
in New South Wales.
Speaker 2 (33:58):
And I want to make a point too, in New
South Wales that you could have late term abortion right
up until your due dates. I think that's why there's
so much concern about this movie. It's essentially tony.
Speaker 12 (34:09):
It's essentially in fantaside, Peter, It's essentially in fantaside late
term abortions, particularly where the baby is born alive. It's
in fantaside. And this is so wrong, and yet there
is this Green Left push basically to promote what amounts
(34:29):
to in fantaside. And it's so wrong and it must
be fought.
Speaker 2 (34:35):
I've got to grab you though, before you head U,
because I know you've got an overseas flight just quickly.
You've been an opposition leader, you've taken the party back
into government from opposition. It was a very hard watch
for Liberals around the country on Saturday night. So where
to now for the party?
Speaker 12 (34:54):
Well, under no circumstances should the party become Labor Light.
It's not a question of being more progressive and more conservative.
It's a question of being more strongly liberal, and that
means being a strong alternative to a bad government, not
a week echo. Politics is a contest of ideas, and
(35:16):
particularly over the few months leading into the election, we
didn't provide that contest, and as I think I've said
before on this show, labor light liberals lose.
Speaker 2 (35:31):
Tony Abbat, thank you, Thank you for johinning us tonight.
Let's go now to my next guest, Greg Sheridan. Greg,
thank you. I'll bring you straight in because I want
to save some time with a long introduction. We want
to talk to you and I first about the Greens,
because the Greens look like tonight with the fall of
At and banned, if that's confirmed shortly, that they will
not have a lower House seat in this parliament. It
(35:54):
was a repudiation of the Greens brand across the board.
I asked Tim Wilson, have we've seen peaked till he
thinks we have? Have we seen peak Green?
Speaker 7 (36:03):
Greg Sheridan, Yeah, I think probably we have, Peter and
it's great to be with you. It's the only good
feature out of this whole election, which is very, very
bad result for Australia. The whole election ignored all of
our serious problems, but eliminating the Greens in the lower
House is a tremendous step forward for Australia. It also
(36:24):
exposes Labor because if Teals or more moderate Green style
candidates run in Labor seats, the Liberals will be able
to give them their preferences and Labor will be very vulnerable.
It's one of parliamentary near landslide on a tiny, tiny
popular vote, very lower vote than Julia Gill. I've gotten
(36:46):
twenty ten and the Greens I think have been exterminated
in the House of Representatives. I hope that metaphor is
not too harsh because they're so extreme. You know, if
I was in Germany, I wouldn't vote for the German Greens.
But they are a very re no, sensible, sane, moderate
party with the love of the environment, which I think
(37:06):
leads them into some poor policy. Our Greens are full
of hatred. Their policies are full of hatred and nehalism
and obsession with Gaza, and hatred of Israel and all
these other extravagant ideological hatred's hatred of Australia really and
the environment is a very favorable calling card. But the
(37:26):
Green's performance has trashed that brand. Now, whether they can
recover I don't know, but they will themselves in due
course be challenged, I think by other minor parties.
Speaker 2 (37:39):
Chris, youillman, You're a good student in political history. Chris
human may be observation on Monday that the Teals are
to the Liberal Party what the DLP was to Labor.
Particularly an issue of the Teals, the Teals were created
to keep the Liberal Party, they hope, out of power
for generations. What do you make of that observation?
Speaker 7 (38:00):
Chris is a brilliant journalist, and that observation is essentially correct.
It deserves some sort of pedantic qualification. The DLP, initially
the Democratic Labor Party, emerged from a split in the
Labor Party, and all of its vote came from the
Labor Party, so one hundred percent of its vote was
disillusioned labor moderates who wouldn't vote for the communist influenced
(38:21):
Labor Party of the fifties and the sixties. The Teals
get most of their vote from former Greens and former
Labor voters, but they take a slice of former Liberal votes,
and therefore they do to the Liberals what the DLP
did to Labor. They transfer some of the core liberal
vote to the other side of politics. And of course
(38:42):
the DLP didn't win lower House seats. It helped the
Liberal Party win seats through its preferences. But the essential
idea that the Teals roadblock the Liberals is right. I
was fascinated by Tim Wilson's powerful interview with you. The
Liberals can win these seats back, not by being merely
mouthed imitations of the Labor Party. There's Tim Wilson in
(39:05):
favor of lower taxes, nuclear energy, all the rest. He
wins a classic Teal seat. So there's no formula for
going left to beat the Teals. It's not a left
right issue. It's a conviction issue. It's do you really
court the voters? Do you get out there and sell
yourself to them? And these You know, if they lose
(39:25):
Goldstein and Couyong in an election where the Liberals did
so poorly overall, that shows how vulnerable the Teals really are.
Speaker 2 (39:36):
Greg amount of time, but I've got to get a
comment from you about that new South Wales parliamentary legislation
forced in tonight. It will go to a vote that
will force Christian institutions, Catholic church hospitals in particular, to
go against their conscience. I know you've written best seller
books about God and faith.
Speaker 7 (39:54):
What do you make of this, well, Peter, I think
this legislation is an abomination, fundamental attack on religious freedom
and freedom of conscience. It is a wicked, wicked piece
of legislation. The Greens, having been defeated in the Lower House,
their extremism, having been rejected by the Australian people, will
now live on in what is really their natural home,
(40:16):
which is the left wing of the Labor Party. This
is a wicked, vicious, anti Christian, anti human assault on
religious freedom and freedom of conscience, and people of goodwill,
whatever their political party, should oppose this bill and it's
a serious and very bad term for Australia to take.
Speaker 2 (40:37):
Grick, sure and thank you. I will be interested to
see if the very Catholic Prime Minister that we saw
over the election campaign picks up the phone here and
rings Chris Mins all right after Breggie Bolden. By their win,
the radical left of Labor they want even tougher ambitions targets,
and that pushed by some moderates in the Liberal Party
to dump nuclear power. Coverage is coming up at first
(41:01):
of my panel Senior fellow at the Mensies Research Center
Nick Cater and the head of the Page Research Center,
Jered Holland. Gents, welcome. We've just got some technical issues
with niic'll getting up in a moment. But today Labour's
environmental wings announced it's pushing the Prime Minister to adopt
a seventy percent emission's reduction target with twenty thirty five
and they want those nature positive laws passed by the
(41:23):
end of the year. Now. We should have had these
twenty thirty five targets in February, Jerro. They should have
been part of the campaign debate. But they're going to
push on hard here now.
Speaker 13 (41:36):
They will. Peter and I think it's really important that
your viewers realize what this will entails. And our modeling
suggests that this will increase power prices by at least
another sixty percent in real terms over the next ten years,
so you're not going to see any energy bill relief
anytime soon. It's also important to point out that decarbonizing
our energy grid, that's only thirty percent of our emissions
(41:57):
across our country. You also have to look at agriculture,
you have to look at our fuel, you have to
look at our manufacturing, our primary and second secondary industries.
The net Zero Steering Group estimates this could cost up
to seven trillion dollars to try and hit this target.
It is unachievable. It is astronomically expensive. And the real
question is how much pain is labor and the Greens
willing to put us through until finally enough is enough
(42:18):
and voters finally take back their country and say we
just aren't going to take it anymore. We can't take
the lies and we need a reliable, dispatchable and cheaper
system for the country.
Speaker 2 (42:30):
Of course, to do that, Nick, the Liberals have got
to keep nuclear on the table. And there's a push
from some moderates, not all, some moderates to say that
nuclears cause them to lose the election and nuclear has
got to go.
Speaker 1 (42:44):
It's an untenable suggestion that we should remove this. I
think when the dust settles and we look at Peter
Dutton's legacy and he undoubtedly leaves the legacy to the
Liberal Party, one of the big things you did was
to break the nuclear taboo. We have to stick with it.
We've done a lot of work on it. We can
see how it work for Australia, and to ditch it
(43:04):
now when during the election campaign hardly reported here because
we were focused on domestic issues, China authorized the building
of ten nuclear power stations. They have a massive building
program program in place. Now you've got to listen to
a country like China which is serious about energy and
(43:25):
see what they're doing. Plus, of course the other thing
that happened was the Spain and Portugal blacked out. I
think anybody who's arguing Peter that we should get rid
of nuclear should come up with the alternative, because I
can see only one alternative, and that's coal. And if
they don't want to go down the coal route, then
nuclear is the only way to power Australia.
Speaker 2 (43:46):
And of course the Chinese need nuclear nick because they've
got to build all the wind farms and the solar
panels to ship our way, keep their industries growing, you know,
improve their budget bottom line, and send us out the
back door. Of course, there is dropped from the coalition's agenda.
I think the coalition itself is at risk, kid Joe.
I don't think the NATS would take that line down
(44:07):
at all.
Speaker 13 (44:11):
Well, the NATS have already made it quite clear that
they want to back this in. It was in lots
of ways the National Party lead policy in the first place,
and Regional Australia overwhelmingly voted for nuclear energy in this country.
It's because it's their farmland, it's their national parks, it's
their mountain ranges that are being destroyed by these industrial
infrastructure and these industrial installations. To put it in perspective,
to power one hundred thousand homes, you need over three
(44:33):
thousand AFL fields worth of solar panels. And this is
assuming that the sun is shining. These aren't going into Banelong,
These aren't going into Wentworth, these aren't going into Griffiths.
These are going into country people's backyards. And this is
why they want an actually realistic and reliable and achievable
energy solution to power the country for the next hundred years.
Speaker 2 (44:55):
Nick, all these calls today and the leaking of Polster information,
they were worn supposedly the party strategist. Yes, I think
the freshwater strategy mob we've got to go, and I
think they're up to it in terms of polling. But
I'll tell you what if you have to be told
what you stand for, what your policies should be from
a polster, you might as well pack up and go home.
Speaker 1 (45:20):
I think that's right, Peter. And look, I don't want
to comment in too much detail on the campaign. I
wasn't part of it. I wasn't in the room, and
I know, as you'd know, it's a tremendously high pressure job.
But the point is this, if they were relying so
much on polling, and you get the sense, don't you,
that Peter Dutton was pulling his punches because they thought
they wanted to win over this seat and they needed
(45:40):
women voters and they were careful about that one. That
is not the way to run a campaign. The only
way to run a campaign from oppositions, I think, as
you pointed out, is to come out like Tony Abbott
did as a whirling dervish, going going and just not stopping,
or Scott Morrison did in twenty nineteen. Those are the
dven ways to win from opposition. Being cautious, being pole driven,
(46:04):
being focus group driven. That does not work. And I
hope we never tried.
Speaker 2 (46:09):
Again, and we saw it there. That's how Tim Wilson
told me tonight. He won back a seat from the
tears gents, I leave it there, thank you. After the
break words matter, with Kel Richards joining me as he
does every Wednesday, the wonderful Kel Richards. Kel. This one's
(46:30):
a special request from my old boss, Tony Abb. He
said the other day you need to ask Kel about
the phrase over the moon. So I am, where's this
one come from?
Speaker 14 (46:40):
Actually much older than I would have thought. Goes back
to seventeen eighteen, and according to the Oxford it comes
from the old expression of jumping for joy, and the
idea is that the person doing the jumping for joy
gets so excited and so carried away they jump right
over the moon for joy. In the nineteen seventies it
became a really popular expression in British football. When teams
(47:03):
won or lost, it was half off two expressions. If
they won they were over the moon, if they lost
they were sick as a parrot. So it was very
big in England at that particular time. And Michael quinnian
maid of mine, who's a great linguist runs the World
Wide Web, says the Worldwide Words says it probably in
the end goes back to hey Diddle, Diddle, in which
(47:25):
you will remember it was the car that jumped over
the moon.
Speaker 2 (47:28):
I remember, well, that's where I thought it might have
come from. And you're referencing the time there with Abbot
probably sort of meshed with the time he was at
Oxford to that makes sense, Hey, talk to me about
part and pastl John wants to know what's the origin
here and the meaning.
Speaker 14 (47:45):
Okay, the two words are virtually identical in meaning, so
it's a tortology. The word parcel came into English in
the thirteen hundreds, I think, a long time ago, and
it came from an Anglo French source word meaning a
package which was part of something. It's related to words
like part and particle and so on. So why are
two words so similarly meaning packaged together? Is a little couplet.
(48:08):
We can blame your lot, Peter, because the lawyers did
this to it. There was an ancient legal practice of
putting together a couple of very similar sounding words, similar
meaning words in order to cover every eventuality. So we
got expressions like aid in a bet fit and proper
all and sundry without countul and pdurance. Yes, exactly all
(48:28):
of those. And this is a legal expression from the
sixteen c. Fifteen hundreds.
Speaker 2 (48:35):
What about fly off the hand or VICKI wants to
know about that?
Speaker 14 (48:40):
One comes from the American Backwoods, recorded eighteen thirty four,
and it's about what happens when a loose axe head
flies off the axe handle. It is very dangerous. It
could cause injuries to people, and it's out of control.
So if someone flies off the handle, that's the image.
They're very dangerous, they're out of control and they might
injure someone.
Speaker 2 (49:02):
I thought it might have been something to do with
fry pans, but I got that one wrong. Hey, what
about Scott free? Charlie wants to know the origins of
the term scott free, as in, you know, like get
off scott free.
Speaker 14 (49:16):
Well, originally meant free from payment. Now can mean free
from anything, but it originally meant free from payment, and
it goes back to the days of old English a
thousand years ago, and a scott, originally pronounced shot was
a payment or a fee or a charge that had
to be made.
Speaker 8 (49:32):
And if the.
Speaker 14 (49:33):
Charge against you was canceled, then you got off shot
free or scott free. That's where it comes from.
Speaker 2 (49:42):
Next week and I get a lot of questions about this,
You know where does the term the liberal you know,
where does the Liberal Party's philosophy come from? Liberal versus conservative?
You know, Burke versus Meal. Let's do that next week
because that might be very telling about I guess understanding
that the fork in the row the party's got where
(50:03):
it goes from here in terms of rebuilding. Will do that,
but I'll leave it now. Kel. That's your homework. I'll
see you next week. That's it for me. Andrew's up next.
Popular Podcasts
Are You A Charlotte?
In 1997, actress Kristin Davis’ life was forever changed when she took on the role of Charlotte York in Sex and the City. As we watched Carrie, Samantha, Miranda and Charlotte navigate relationships in NYC, the show helped push once unacceptable conversation topics out of the shadows and altered the narrative around women and sex. We all saw ourselves in them as they searched for fulfillment in life, sex and friendships. Now, Kristin Davis wants to connect with you, the fans, and share untold stories and all the behind the scenes. Together, with Kristin and special guests, what will begin with Sex and the City will evolve into talks about themes that are still so relevant today. "Are you a Charlotte?" is much more than just rewatching this beloved show, it brings the past and the present together as we talk with heart, humor and of course some optimism.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com