Line Sharry Well, good evening. I'm James Macpherson filling in for Sharry Marks And Last week Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was asked about prices at a sausage sizzle in Sydney. Triple M radio host Mick malloy told the PM that Vivid Festival was charging Australian's eight dollars fifty for a sausage in bread, and he wondered what Albanese he thought.
The PM replied immediately that it was and I quote rubbish and UnAustralian. Absolutely have listened.
Eight dollars fifty for a sausage sizzle at Vivid.
Can you do something about that?
No, that's just rubbish, isn't it.
It's un Australian.
I'll tell you it is Australian absolutely, So there you go.
The PM can take a stand when he wants to. It's just a pity that he reserves his strongest condemnation for the price of a snag in bread. If only the Chinese premiere was a sausage. Whilst standing firm on the rights of Australians to access affordable sausage sizzles, the PM was rather less firm on the rights of Australian journalists to not be physically intimidated, harassed or blocked on
home soil by foreign agents. When asked today what he thought about the way in which Chinese officials had treated Australian journalists Chang Lay during a press conference in Canbury yesterday, the PM had only this to say, we.
Have different values in different political systems, and we saw some of that yesterday. I've got to say with the attempt that was pretty ham fisted to block Cheng Lay, the Australian journalists who were able to get brought home at the press conference, and there was a clumsy attempt really to just stand in between where the cameras were and Chang Lay.
Ham fisted and clumsy. It's an interesting choice of words to describe an attempt by Chinese officials to bully an Australian journalist. You might have expected our national leader to describe the behavior as unacceptable or wrong.
But you don't need to.
Ask the PM about a sausage sizzle to elicit that kind of moral clarity, or rather, you would need to ask him about a sausage sizzle to describe the treatment dished out to Chang lay as clumsy is to imply there wasn't anything inherently wrong with what the Chinese did. It was just the way in which the Chinese did it, those clumsy authoritarians. If only they exercised their totalitarian instincts on our people in a more graceful and skillful way.
The Prime Minister dismissed the incident as an example of and they quote different values and different political systems, Well, yeah, the Chinese premiere comes from a different political system. It's an authoritarian dictatorship in which political opponents are harassed, harangued, and in some cases jailed for long periods without trial.
In fact, that's exactly what happened to Chang Li, who has released less than a year ago after spending more than three years in a dank prison cell on trumped up chargers. For Chinese officials to treat any Australian journalists the way they did yesterday is unacceptable.
But to do it to a woman who'd been.
A pawn in Beijing's hostage diplomacy as recently as last October is not clumsy or ham fisted.
It's outrageous. Later in the day, the Prime Minister told ABC Radio.
Our officials have followed up with the Chinese embassy to express our concern.
Great so our people have told their people that their people ought to be less clumsy when harassing our people. Oh and we hope this doesn't mean we won't be getting our pandas. Describing the treatment of chang Lay as clumsy reminds me of Albanesi describing the treatment of our servicemen as unprofessional after a Chinese jet led off flares in front of one of our.
Helicopters last month.
What is unprofessional in those circumstances, even mean it was an amateurish attempt.
At endangering our forces.
Chinese are going to down one of our helicopters over the Yelloca, they should do it properly, you know, in a professional manner. Last November, when a Chinese warship used sonar to injure Australian Navy divers in International wars off the coast of Japan, Albanzi described the incident as regrettable,
which begs the question regrettable for whom? For the Chinese, hardly for the Australian Navy diver who was injured, undoubtedly for Anthony Albanesi well most certainly he seemed then as he does now to highly regret being put in a position where he has to defend Australians and Australian interests from the Chinese Commonist Party. Little wonder Beijing dubbed him their handsome boy. It's not the Chinese who are clumsy or unprofessional, and it's certainly not the Chinese who have regret.
They continue to push our buttons while boasting about how mature and respectful the relationship is. What's regrettable is that the Albanese government seems so intent on normalizing relations with China, prepared to normalize abuse from China. As my grandfather would say if he was still alive, Albanezi is one silly sausage.
Well.
Coming up on the program tonight, the government's early learning framework that's turning out toddlers into activists. I'll ask whether parents even know what's going on at their child's daycare. Interest rates are on whole, but inflation is here to stay. Plus the new South Wales budget continues a trend of
rising state debt. I'll have the latest analysis from leading economist Warren Hogan and from the rise of Nigel Faraja's Reform Party to the death of the Tories and the prospect of a man's summer calling slippery and unprincipled becoming PM. The UK election is shaking up. Will cross live to London for the latest, but first let's go to my panel former Speaker of the House Bromwin Bishop and National's.
MP Keith Pitt.
Welcome to you both, Thanks for joining me. I want to start with you, Bronwan. What's your reaction to Prime Minister Anthony Albernese's response to the way that Changli was treated Changli rather was treated yesterday.
Look, I think the Chinese would be very satisfied. I think the Chinese when the Prime Minister said different values and different ways, that's putting it mildly. We are a democracy there at totalitarian state. They see Australia as a vassal state to pay tribute and they would be very
satisfied with the way in which Albanesi responded. That means that the Chinese Communist Party have got Albanese in his government just where they want them, and that in turn raises the question of Communist Party of China interference in our coming election, whether or not those people who turned out to welcome the Premier. Are they going to be subject to getting how to vote information in the coming election? I think it is a very very series condition that
we have seen. The weakness of the Prime Minister is inability to stand up for Australia and showing that he will do anything to appeace Chinese approval. It just is a very worrying time.
Keith, what do you think, how should the Prime Minister have responded to the events of yesterday. I mean it was quite extraordinary that an Australian journalist will be treated in that fashion, but even more extraordinary for the Prime Minister to not come out immediately and condemn it.
Well, with apologies to the Simpsons. Here in Australia, we don't tolerate that sort of crap. That's the reality. And unfortunately we have a federal Labor government who appear very weak on this. They consider it to be reckless, awkward, uncomfortable. But here in Australia we support freedom of the press, freedom of expression, we support a democracy, a separation of powers and that is something that's been defended in this
nation for decades and willing to the future. I think it's an incredibly important thing that we must maintain.
One little slip, one little.
Opening, one little opportunity for communism, socialism to take an even greater hold in this country I think will be detrimental to.
All of us into the future.
And it starts with this sort of nonsense. And the Federal Labor government shouldn't have allowed it. Their response should have been stronger, and they've still got the opportunity to fix it.
Yeah.
Well, I think the reaction, which has been poor, to say the least, only in Bolden's China to continue to treat us in that fashion because they know there will be no consequences.
Let's move on.
In somewhat non shocking news, a Labour senator called for the immediate recognition of a Palestinian state. A Fatima Payman, well known for her history of anti Israel sentiment, wrote an opinion piece published in El Jazeera. She said quote by recognizing a Palestinian state, Australia would be affirming its commitment to this universal principle that's of peace and frustrate
Israel's bid to crush such aspirations of the Palestinians. This same Labor senator used the phrase from the River to the Sea, which Anthony Alberzi then had to come out and say was unacceptable to use that phrase.
It was a call for violence.
She pretty much ignored the Prime Minister and now she's continuing ignoring labor policy, calling for immediate recognition of Palestine. What should Anthony ALBERESI do about.
This senator, Well, they have to consider her position obviously next time she's up for reelection, that's for sure. But I think he has to take a much more positive stance that says you are there to represent the interests of Australia and to serve the people you are elected for your state that you come from, not to pursue this absolute falsehood of genocide being perpetrated by the Israelis.
Genocide means this. In nineteen thirty nine, there were sixteen million Jews in the world in nineteen In twenty twenty four, there are still sixteen million Jews in the world because six million were murdered. That is genocide, not a war where Gaza invader or Haas invaded Israel and slaughtered twelve hundred people and took hostages. I've not heard a word from this woman about hostages or about the mutilation of women. She comes from a country where she should really appreciate
the freedom that she has in this country. And when she calls for from the River to the Sea, that is calling for more genocide and the murder of Jews. There's no two ways about it. That's exactly what it means. And she has to be reprimanded by the Prime Minister, but of course he'll just show weakness again.
Well, Keith.
Both the Coalition and the Labor Government slammed the Greens the other week for stirring up hatred and creating social division. But here the Labor Party have got one of their own senators. I mean, in this article for El Jazeira, she praised the student activists who have set up encampments in universities across the country to the point where Jewish
students have been afraid to go to class. So it's a bit rich for the Labor Party to criticize the Greens while they've got their own senator effectively doing the same kinds of things.
Well, that's exactly right. I'm on a jointstanding committee with Fatimur. I got to tell you much. She's smart and articulate, and on this issue, I disagree with her.
Completely and wholeheartedly.
But in the Labor Party they don't reward disobedience.
Brody knows where I'm going here.
They will crack down on this like a ton of bricks have hit the poor senator from Western Australia because her comments today, she's effectively said that the Prime Minister is spineless, has not held and not continuing to hold a long held position that he had before he became Prime Minister, before Labor came into government. I mean, that's quite an extraordinary statement from a sitting senator in WA in the Labor Party, and I don't think the unions will let this continue. So I feel a bit sorry
for Fatima. Her comments are wrong. I disagree with them completely, but in terms of the politics, I know what's coming for and the Union basket will take her out.
I think that's the most likely outcome. Yeah, well, I'm not sure there'll be too for it at all. I thought you might say.
I think she needs to be where she needs to face the reckoning because what she's doing is just so wrong.
I mean, if anyone who analyzes the history of what has happened in the Middle East in this area will remember that in nineteen forty one, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem went to Hitler and said, please come and help us kill the Jews in Israel, and Hitler said he would do that food finished killing them in Europe because the Grand Rouffi of Jerusalem wanted to be the leader of a new Palestinian state.
Well, I mean, if you do what Fatima is calling for, if you recognize Palestine immediately effectively, you're recognizing a terrorist state because of course it's still run by Hamas. Let's move on to more local politics. Simonhomes of Courts Climate two hundred, group that bankrolled the Teal independent wave at the last election, now has set its sites on unseating
more Coalition MPs. The group has identified at least nine seats it will target at the next election, all of which were won by the Coalition in twenty twenty two. Bromwin the Liberal Party may be vulnerable, but of course last time the Teals won seats Scott Morrison was in office. This time with a labor government and the cost of living pressures etc. Will the Teals have quite the same appeal with their luxury beliefs.
Well, I think there are two points to make. First of all, I don't think the same amount of money is going to be available in the seat of mckella. The Teal spent one point two million dollars. There is already one of their biggest donors who gave half a million dollars last time won't be giving it this time. So I think it's a different ballgame. The second thing is they stood on a platform of integrity and climate change integrity. We've seen none on the climate change issue.
Where are the Teals campaigning about these monstrous proposals to put these huge windmills out into the sea and interrupt the whales transgression movements and so on.
Where is their integritcy?
You've got to destroy the environment to save it, don't you know that?
Well?
There, of course was the same argument with the Vietnam War. Wasn't that as destroy the village to save it?
So you don't think the Teals will be as successful next time?
I don't all right, Keith the Nationals leader David Little Proud, he's just gathing attack against voters in Teal seats, accusing them of being out of touch with the struggles of regional Australians have listened to what he.
Said, I just say to those viewers that are from till seats, just take a little visit out west and understand the burden you're asking us to bear. For you to put your head on a pillow at night and think that you've saved the world, you've actually destroyed much of the environment where I live.
Talk to me about the frustration that's being held being felt by people in regional areas. Obviously, David Little Proud, he seemed quite emotional actually speaking out about that today. Just how annoying is it for people in regional areas to I guess they feel carry the burden of the renewable project.
Well, every day Australians can't afford more teals. That's the reality that they can't afford to pay more for electricity, they can't afford to pay more for the car they kind of paid Ford to pay more for food and rent and housing. And this is the reality of Labour's policies which the Teals are supporting and.
Out in regional areas.
I mean, this is the practical, this is the front line, this is the common sense, and what labor is doing is millions of hectares of solar panels, for example, which need to be replaced every twenty years. Tens of thousands of wind turbines in regional areas, they don't want them. Just look at the blow up you've got now for or shore that's proposed for the south coast. Well, how about we put them in the harbor. I mean Sydney
Harbor's a great spot. It's pretty windy there. I'm sure bron would like to look out the window and see a whopping, great big wind turbine that's higher than the Harbor bridge. It'll attract tourisms for sure. I mean, I'm sure that the Japanese and the Chinese will fly from all over the world to come and see a harbor full of wind turbines.
Well either, Keith, I know you've been sarcastic, but I remember Anastasia Palage seriously proposing that a wind farm in Queensland would become a major tourist attraction. People get on buses and drive out to look at these turbines.
I remember seriously saying that, well they.
Might come and look at them when they're on fire. That would be something to see, which potentially can happen. But for the regions the numbers are just extraordinary, and I think there's a lot of there's challenges for us to try and get across to people just how big an area this is. I mean, we've seen reports for Gladston hydrogen, for example, needing two and a half thousand
square kilometers of solar panels just for Gladston hydrogen. It's really we're going to level two and a half thousand square kilometers and you really think you'll get an environmental approval for that, and you'll get it through an indigenous land use agreement and you'll pay royalties through native title and that'll be all tickety boo. I don't think so. So if we accept that this stuff's just not going to happen, well you need another solution, and nuclear is
that baseload net zero solution. It's got no emissions, it works one hundred percent of the time, and we just need people to actually have a conversation about it so that we can get some information to them that's factual and it's not just based on feelings, because the proposal from Labor is all about a feeling.
Keith, we're going to go to a break in a moment.
First want to ask you tomorrow morning there's a Coalition party room meeting to talk about the plans for nuclear What sort of announcement will we get from the Prime Minister tomorrow? Will we find out the locations of proposed reactors tomorrow?
Is that the plan?
Oh, I'd love to give you an insight, but A I don't know, and be if I did, I wouldn't tell you. Unfortunately, you're right out of luck. But I'd imagine that'll be plenty to say. There's lots going on tonight that I'm aware of, and you know you've obviously been informed a better potential meeting tomorrow. I would assume that would be the discussion. But we've got two weeks of parliamentary sittings coming up as well, and I'm sure colleagues will have plenty to say. It'll be a good discussion.
Well, the important thing is that there's a plan out there which is an alternate, and I think people will see it. As I said, the two spent an enormous amount of money, reportedly in mcallo one point two million. But the point is this, there is now a real argument going on which was absent in twenty twenty two. There was a real alternative to encompass all Astra content.
Well, indeed, there'll definitely be a contest at the next election, Keith, That's for sure, Bronwin, Bishop Keith Pitt.
Thanks so much to both of you.
We'll stick around because coming up we'll talk more about why the PM must stand up to China's bully boy tactics.
Plus rates on hold.
But the RBA isn't happy about big spending federal and state governments.
All of that in a moment.
Well I spoke at the top of the program about the disgraceful stunt pulled by Chinese officials at Parliament House yesterday, a stunt aimed at one of my Sky News colleagues, Chang Lai. Now, of course, after being questioned about it yesterday, the Prime Minister finally condemned the move today, saying Australia had lodged a complaint with the Chinese embassy over the incident. Just to remind you, here's the PM.
We have different values in different political systems and we saw some of that yesterday. I've got to say with the attempt that was pretty ham fisted to block Chang Lai. The Australian journalists who were able to get brought home at the press conference, and there was a clumsy attempt really to just stand in between where the cameras were and Chang Lai and the Australian officials did the right thing and intervened.
Opposition Lyder Peter Dutton says the PM's response is not good enough.
I do want to point out that the Prime Minister clearly misled the Australian people yesterday when he got up and did a press conference and said that he heard nothing of it. He didn't understand what the question was or didn't know anything about it. It's completely inconceivable and the Prime Minister needs to stand up today to explain the discrepancy, explain why he didn't tell the truth yesterday, and please grow a backbone, stand up for our country.
Strategic Analysis Australia Director Peter Jennings joins me. Now, Peter, thanks for your time. It's a pretty not just delayed, but weak response from the PM.
Yes it is, James, and good evening. Once again we get from Prime Minister Albanezier sort of a description of the event like he's a spectator at the scene. I don't think it's appropriate to call this a cultural difference.
What China.
Chinese officials were deliberately trying to do was to hide from the cameras a person who they had illegally jailed on fake spying charges for three years until she was finally released and brought to Australia. And so this is the behavior of the thugish Chinese Communist Party, not a cultural practice which was tolerated in the Parliament of Australia. And then the Prime Minister said that he knew nothing about it, and then the following day he talks about
a complaint being made. So it's nothing to do with him. You know, why didn't he take the opportunity James to.
Take it up with Premier Lee.
I thought it was a typically poor quality performance, a failure of leadership, and it creates this impression that he's all too willing to please the Chinese, whereas I think what most Australians want mister Albenezi to do is actually stand up for Australia's interests.
Yeah, I remember Anthony Alberanzi once saying I love fighting tories, but he really doesn't like speaking out against the Chinese. In fact, in that radio clip that we played just a moment ago. Anthony Albanese actually does a half laugh as he talks about this incident.
But as you say, it reaffirms the.
Complete incompatibility between Australia's political system and political culture and that of the Chinese. And it's no small difference. These are major ideological differences. So a failure to stand up for Chang Lay is really a failure to stand up for liberal democracy and for the freedoms that we all take for granted, is it not?
It is?
And you know, I think it's a pattern of behavior that we're seeing from this government too, that the emphasis on panda diplomacy being pro panda, all of these horribly poor quality jokes, the failure on several occasions now too publicly speak out in defense of Australian defense fools personnel coming under attack in a helicopter on board ship by
the Chinese People's Liberation Army. You know, I think from this visit, the Chinese Communist Party can conclude justly that they have Australia where they want us to be, which is quite in subservient doing their business, laughing at their jokes. I just think the Prime Minister has misread this situation and how Australians will react to it, and part of that is driven by sort of a very tribal view inside the government that or they've shown that they're better
than the previous coalition government at managing China relations. And I just don't think that's the case, James. They happen to, frankly, get lucky after COVID, when China decided that it's aggressive wolf warrior diplomacy wasn't helping it anywhere or in Europe or elsewhere, and so they quietened down, and that's what has enabled the resumption of contact.
But it's contact without substance.
If our Prime minister can never raise difficult issues, then all we have is photo opportunities to suit the interests of the Communist Party and nothing which really suits the interests of Australia.
Yeah.
Well, it's pretty easy to manage a relationship if you give the other party everything they want. The Prime Ministers said that he and the Chinese premier have agreed to establish a military communications line to avoid further what should we call them, regrettable incidents at sea and in the air, such as you described earlier. How believable is this idea of military communications between the two nations as a way of avoiding further mishaps.
Well, you know, tactically, communications happen all the time, and I've heard recordings of aircraft to aircraft discus Ushians or ship to ship discussions where our navy is telling the Chinese navy that they're sailing in international waters and the Chinese Navy replies, no, you're in Chinese sovereign territory.
Move away.
Those communications happen all the time. I don't know what it is that the Prime Minister claims to have heard from Premier Lee other than some sort of throwaway comment. Because here's the key point, James. Since twenty twenty one, there have been over two hundred of these incidents at sea involving US, the Americans, of Filipinos and other navies. This is not a failure on the part of China to communicate. It is them unrolling a strategy of intimidation.
That's what China is doing. They're trying to intimidate other navies and air forces to stay away from what they call sovereign territory. And so no amount of Australian discussion about better communications is going to change this issue the China. His military is doing exactly what it wants to do, and our PM shouldn't be so silly as to be sort of fobbed off by a passing comment from Premier Lee, who is not in the Chinese military chain of command
and has no authority over them. These discussions about communications will go nowhere.
Very interesting, Peter Jennings, I appreciate your insights tonight. Well, there was a reprieve of sorts for mortgage holders today. Well, rates didn't come down, at least, the RBA hasn't raised them yet. The cash rate has been left at four point three five percent, but don't hold your breath waiting for a reduction. Well, interest rates are on hold for now. Economists say the door has still been left open for an increase later in the year if inflation remains stubbornly high.
Judo Banks chief economic advisor Warren Hogan joins me. Now, Warren, thanks for your time. Is this the calm before the storm? Rates on hold?
But do you think they could go up in the near future?
Yeah, Hi, James, thanks for having me on the show. I think that's what the governor was sort of intimating, is that this inflation risk.
They're on high alert.
I don't know how you can read it any other way than that, you know, there's a real chance they might have to raise rates. They're showing extreme patients. They've got a very different strategy to what would traditionally be followed. That is, you really lean into inflation. And of course
this is what other central banks have got. The RBA's cash rate at four point three five, as you just showed, compared to to New Zealand at five and a half in the US and five and a half, we're actually taking a very different path and the course, if it doesn't work, and we're getting evidence this year that the economy is proving resilient and inflation is proving sticky, then the question is what's next. And of course I think with a message today was that we may see another rate hu.
You know, the governor was quite careful to say, you know, it could go this way, it could go that way. But of course everybody is listening for the the hidden messages. What's between the lines you say that could well go up. What were the things she said specifically that gave that impression and do you think she was deliberately trying to prepare people for a possible rate rise in the future.
I think she was trying to send that message without saying it, and it is quite perplexing. And of course we're learning about this governor. She's only been doing the job for a while. And of course we've got this sort of big overhaul happening at the RBA. Even though the legislation hasn't passed, she's actually getting on with sort of, you know, changing the way the place operates.
So we're still learning what she's sort of doing.
And today was a little bit confusing, I must I must admit I was sort of trying to really get to the bottom of it. Central bankers are always a little bit opaque. They don't want to say too much, and I think that's the key part of her strategy.
Is not to get put into a corner.
The biggest mistake they've made lately is that twenty twenty four guidance from the Pandemic with Phil Low. But I think the message coming through is we see what's happening in the economy, which is strong employment growth, inflation showing signs of stabilizing at four percent, way too much higher than their target, and they can't walk away from this because of course their credibility will be damaged if they're not seen to be on top of what's happening in
the economy. So look, we'll learn more about how she wants to play this, but they've made it quite clear that next quarterly inflation number, which comes out in late July, is absolutely critical. And if that comes in like it did in Q one, the number we got in late April as around one percent, I just don't think they can walk away from that, and I think they'll probably
have to high rates. And the issue actually is with all this sort of government spending, which they noted in their statement, is actually whether they're going to have to do multiple rate hikes because the economy actually is proving resilient and it's about to get a big injection of money from state and federal governments from one July.
Yeah, I was going to ask you about the fact that she did reference big spending in the federal budget, and of course we've just had a Queensland budget. I think they've handed out some like eleven billion dollars in incentives for people to vote for Steven Miles to win office. So it was interesting that the RBA governor did mention that as being a factor that may mean interest rates
stay high. Speaking of budgets, Labour's second budget was announced today in New South Wales and it certainly continues a trend of rising state debt. This is the New South Wales Labour's second deficit budget and they predict operating deficits for the next four years of the forward estimates, so that would make six deficits in a row. I wanted to ask you have state governments lost the ability to constrain debt and run surpluses. It seems like no one's able to do it anymore.
Yeah, there certainly isn't a lot of budget surpluces going around, and I think the thing that I'm worried about with the government sector is it's just getting very large. We can see from the National Accounts. The GDP figures that government consumption across all levels of government, and when they call it consumption that means they're operating spending is at a record proportion of the economy at around twenty two percent.
It's taken a big step up from really what it was averaging around eighteen nineteen percent all through the eighties.
Nineties and noughties last decade.
It's been happening for about ten years, but it's the biggest step up in government spending as a proportion of the economy since the early seventies, since the Lyndon Johnson Great Society, Whitlam all that stuff. So government's getting bigger, and of course the other side of that is the tax take is getting bigger, so income taxes that we're paying back to where they were when Howard and Costello
introduced the GST. So we've actually still got the GST, but income taxes back where it was when they brought it in. And of course this is a potential big shift in our economy. It's going to squeeze out the
private sect, particularly around finding staff. So yeah, the government today in New South Wales, I think it was an okay budget, but there was a big shift up in spending about five billion a year and of course they are going to be deficits for as far as I can see, and of course debt's going from about one hundred billion up to about one hundred and forty.
Gee, Warren, you've done nothing to encourage me at all this evening. Thanks a lot for that Warren Hogan. I really appreciate your time as always. Well, we're going to go to a break, but stick around because coming up from indigenous rights to sexuality, you don't believe some of the government programs being force fed to toddlers in childcare that's coming up shortly.
Welcome back well.
A new learning framework for Australia's childcare centers has been accused of turning toddlers into cultural activists. In analysis conducted by the Institute of Public Affairs, the government's Early Years Learning Framework was found to mention diversity, inclusion and equity one hundred and forty nine times, and the terms Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders and reconciliation ninety six times. Have I guessed how many times the terms mother or father
or parent were referenced? You guessed it, not even once. The framework also states that social justice in Early Years is an exciting opportunity to explore issues around gender, sexuality, race and culture.
God help us.
Joining me is my panel Sky News host Caleb Bond and News Corp columnist Angela Mollard.
Caleb, what does it tell you when you put.
Your kids into daycare and they're taught about diversity and equity and inclusion, but mom and dad and never ever reference well.
It tells you that we're happy little socialists, as bright as Brad can be. To paraphrase a good old Australian ad. Seriously, I mean, look, is anyone really surprised by this? We've known the long march through the institutions has been going on for some time. And if you really want to capture the kids and promulgate your ideology, you have to get them as young as possible. And of course we keep hearing about we need to get kids into early
learning earlier and earlier and earlier. I mean, you know, I think it's what two or three years old now. They want to get them into early learning. If they find a way to do it while they're still in the womb, they'll probably do that as well. But the earlier you capture them, the earlier you can get hold of their brains. It's as simple as that, and this lays it bear Angela.
The IPA said that most parents don't even realize these sorts of things are being taught in childcare. Do you agree that most parents just oblivious to this sort of thing.
I think they're oblivious to them because children can't come home, they can barely tell you who they've had lunch with, let alone the fact that they've learned some social justice theory that day. Look, I don't think parents are really aware.
I was shocked when I read this story. But as someone who's seen their children go through from early childhood right through now in university, the level of diversity, equality and inclusion learning and a communications degree, I'm worried my daughter is going to qualify without actually knowing anything about communications. But she knows a heck of a lot about diversity
and include I've read a couple of her essays. But look, my mum always said, and she was a teacher for fifty sixty years, that childhood is preparer is not preparation for life, it is life. We are not there to turn them into woke little puppets. We're there to read them the hungry caterpillar.
Well, I dare say our kids were happier and healthier and probably smarter before we started propagating all this DEI stuff. Another thing in this report, they found that it's recommended childcare start every day with an acknowledgment of country, so you can't tell me that's not deliberate in doctrination.
Of course it is.
The idea is just to make it as easy as possible. Once you normalize it, the kids just believe that that's part of the deal.
Well, then the kids think that Mum and dad, who may say I live unnecessary.
Yeah, they go around. We need to sell the house. We're living in a stolen house.
What are we going to do about it?
Which if we want to go down that track, I mean, the point of socialism is to separate children from the appearance and create enmity.
Let's move on.
In the desperate pursuit of net zero, our labor government is now considering get this greenhouse gases omitted by the transport sector when deciding what roads to build. The government's Transport and Infrastructure net zero roadmap includes a section that warns I couldn't believe it when.
I read this.
The building of roads could increase the emissions from light and heavy vehicles by enabling this transport mode. It goes on to say this needs to be taken into consideration when deciding what roads to build. So calib if I've got this right, The Transport Department have figured out that building roads enables cars to travel.
Strange, isn't it. Yeah, I didn't startling inside.
I know I say this all the time, but there's yet another government contract. I think I could probably snag pretty easily because I understand roads. Can you believe it? But I think there is potentially merit to this right because of course, if we're going to have population expansion, we will need more roads. You can't just have a train in and out of the new subject. There has
to be a road of some description. And one of the things that contributes to carbon emissions is cars stopping and starting all the time, which means you need a good flow of traffic, which means you don't need roundabouts and you don't need traffic lights. So if they can have no traffic lights and I can drive to work in the morning with no red lights, not only do I get places faster, it's better for the environments.
But the other thing, of.
Course, is that if you want a seriously environmentally friendly road in terms of emissions, it's got to go on a straight line. You can't go around.
Hills and past trees.
So we've just got to raise all the land because that'll be good for the environment. So we can have lower missions roads.
I like a perfect sent Peter Dutton could go to the next election, save the environment, create an autobahn.
I'm on board.
That's absolutely amazing, Angela.
Would they really decide not to build roads so that we have less cars?
Oh, what are we going to do? Go back and live in caves and burn wood And that obviously has a mission anyway. But there's a problem in your thing though. You build that big autobarn and then you've got your CO two emissions.
Right.
What I think we should be putting our energy into is thinking about and really working hard on that technology that looks at how we do manage to pull se COEO two out of the atmosphere, different ways of doing that. Instead of always looking at what we had before, how we can improve on the old, Let's look at the really dynamic, exciting new Let's put science in tech at the forefront of that. Let's make Australia that that we are.
And Scott Morrison.
Hinted at this a couple few years ago. He said, you know, let he he trusted that we would find the way to solve the emissions problem. So if we're constantly looking, yeah, look there are great ways to make better roads, better aggregates, that sort of thing. But I'm really pro tech.
I'm protech as well as long as I can still drive my forward Mustang, which I don't actually have. But Caleb says, my birthday's coming up soon, and I'll get Ah. The White House has come out in defense of Joe Biden, insisting the presidence.
Multiple gaffes and blunders fake news.
It tells you everything that we need to know about how desperate, how desperate Republicans are here.
Uh.
And instead of talking about the President's performance in office, and what I mean by that is his legislative wins, what he's been able to do for the American people across the country, we're seeing these deep fakes, Uh, these manipulated videos.
Well, I suppose if anyone is an expert on fake news, it's the Biden White House.
But if Biden's blunders are.
All fake news, gee, there's been a lot of fake news recently, We'll.
Never forget anyway. I just think that.
Lord a Small Business Winnerward Winner. It's all just fake news.
But of course they do say denial is the first stage of grief.
Is that what's happening to the mainstream media in the States.
Not just a river in Egypt, is it? And it's amazing to see the Biden camp now adopting the term fake news, because of course fake news was popularized by Donald Trump, and at the time, all the Democrats and all the anti Trump is like, oh, you know, when he says fake news, that really just means news he doesn't like. So why don't we just turn that back on the Democrats and say, well, if you're saying this
is fake news, let's live by your standards. It must just be news you don't like, because we can all see that Biden ain't all there try and claim that's fake news.
The irony is that the White House spokesperson was saying that these videos are deep fakes. Well, that's fake news because videos Angela. The Democrats surely are desperate if that's the best they've got.
These videos have all been edited to.
Show Biden as senile, when really he's fighting, fit and ready.
To go and look in same as within Normandy. Those those images from Normandy A just I think they're really shocking. Look, I think it's really interesting that debate. The first debate is next Thursday. That's a ninety minute debate. There's no props, there's no notes. I'm really interested to see how he goes there. There's a long time obviously, between the end
of June and November. I think the Democrats have made that early, so then I actually have a think about whether he is fit for presidents know what.
They do have Angela what rugs?
Rugs and they will find everyone.
Are they mostly sedatives? I can't if it was a good.
Joe, That's the last thing Joe Biden needs well. Sticking with America.
After mandating masks and threatening to hunt down people if they refuse to mask up, New York City officials are now proposing to ban masks in public places or let Mayor Eric Adams explain.
People have hid under the guise of wearing a mask for COVID to commit commit criminal action and bile. Actually nineteen now on the time to go back to the wear work pre COVID. You should not be able to wear a mask at protest in our subway systems and other police.
So help me, Caleb. It's hard to keep up with this. First you had to wear masks. Now you mustn't wear masks.
If it's not the consequences of your actions. Hey, I mean, who would have thought once upon a time if someone said that you had to wear a mask to go into a bank, you would have told them to go to the looney bin. It seemed that crazy, And then of course that's what happened. And now they've realized that. And it was when I was a court reporter during COVID.
All these people would go into court and then they come out of court with a hoodie on and a mask over their face, because of course they didn't want to have their photo taken to pop up in the paper. They worked out very quickly that it was the greatest way to not be detected and get away with it because you're doing a good thing for public health. I love when these things blow up in their faces.
Andrew, as Caleb said, it is to be expected.
Right.
Once you've got people wearing masks everywhere, criminal elements see it as a wonderful opportunity.
I think it's fantastic opportunism actually, but I'm really worried it. Like flu season, they're not going to have their masks on in New York, and if you're on the subway in New York during winter, you actually want people to have their masks and so yeah, look but great opportunism by these guys, fantastic.
It is very hard to keep up with government advice. Caleb Angela, thanks so much for joining me tonight.
Well, next over in the UK.
The rise of Nigel Faraga's reform UK Party is shaking up the election as the Conservative's head for an historic wipeout. I'll be catching up with Tom Slater in just a moment. Well, let's turn to the UK election. The Conservative Party is fully imploding and Labor by all accounts, is set for a landslide victory. What's not certain is the future of the opposition. With Rishi Sunek's Conservative Party set to be smashed at the polls, is Nigel Farage about to become
the main opposition? Farage is promising to ax net zero, introduce mandatory life sentences for drug dealers, freeze non essential integration, pulled the UK out of global's bodies like the World Health Organization and reject the influence of the World Economic Forum. Let's bring in Spiked Online editor Tom Slater. Tom, thanks for joining me. A fascinating time in UK politics. Just before we get to feras you've described the Tories as
a pointless husk, which is a bit full on. How is it the Tories have lost so much of the British population's confidence.
Well, I think that the Tories in the way of Brexit had a golden opportunity to kind of remake themselves. For a very long time, it wasn't clear what they were for who they were for. But because of Brexit in twenty nineteen and Boris Johnson, they suddenly had this new working class base that was the one chance for renewal, and then they completely blew it. They reverted to backstabbing type.
They let everyone and his dog have a go at being leader of the Conservative Party, leader of the country after they got rid of Boris Johnson, and they completely forgot the voters, those working class voters in the middlelands of.
The North who put them there.
So I do kind of think they deserve every thing they're getting at this point. And whilst I understand the concerns about what a huge labor landslide might mean for our civil liberties for our country, I think it's fair seven stories have brought this on themselves, including the Farage insurgency, which I'm sure we're going to come on to as well.
Well, let's talk about that.
I mean, you've pointed out how bad the Conservatives are, but obviously Farage is pretty good and winning favor amongst people. Some of the policies I mentioned in the introduction there is that what is sort of making headway as are those sorts of things resonating with your average britge or is something else going on for Farage?
Well, I think that the primary thing that he's tapped into is concerns about immigration, and this is something which obviously both of the two main parties, Conservatives and Labor, have terrible records on as far as votes as a concerned, and he's very much tried to frame this as the immigration election in a situation in which neither parties wanted to talk about it too much. That's been very effective.
I think also he's been a better fishtory of the fact that there is a very anti politics mood at the moment. It's something that has benefited the Labor Party. But I think a lot of twenty nineteen voters in particular, who were thinking of even not voting, sitting on their hands, maybe some of them would go back into the Labor column have now got something which more aligns with what it is they want to vote for. And I think, regardless of what you think of for I think sickly
for those of us whore having to cover this. Even his worst enemy would admit that he's live and things up. Up until this point we were faced with the most deathly dull kind of competition between Kiir Sarma and Rishie Sunak, who are essentially two competing flavors of Blemond. So I think, aside from anything else, it has stirred up a genuine debate about the future of the country, which would have been completely absent had he not thrown his hat into the ring so emphatically a week or two ago.
When you say that voters there are faced with two pretty bland options. I was watching the debates and I had to laugh when Rishie Sunek was asked tell us something about yourself that will make people like you again, which must have been incredibly humiliating. How we've only got a little bit of time left. But I wanted to quickly ask you about Kis Starmer, who obviously will likely
be the next UK Prime minister. You call him the slipperiest, most unprincipled politician the UK has seen in many years, and possibly the most slippery PM the UK will ever have had. In that thirty seconds, why do you say that? Tell us about him?
He is you turned on essentially everything every issue you could imagine. You could talk about Brexit, you could talk about women's rights, you can talk about the gender issue, you talk about the environment, any of these questions. He does just point which every way the wind is blowing. And I think that's a big problem in a democracy. When you voted a politician, you've hoped to know what they stand for. Even at this point we have no clue where Kis star More is.
Unfortunately well, we are all watching to see what happens. Tom Slader, appreciate your time. That's all I've got time for tonight, But don't go anywhere. Coming right up is Paul Murray Live.