Live on Sky News.
This is Sharry Good Evening. The Coalition doesn't rule out backing Labour's sup attacks. Deputy Liberal leader Ted O'Brian is on the show tonight. He also faces my questions about dumping or demoting for talented women. This is an exclusive interview and it's coming up. The Trump administration demands Australia lift its game on defense, but alban Easy says he won't. Joe Hudebrand and Steve Price shortly and to the horrific terror attack in America. This towards a peaceful demonstration of
the hostages, supporting the hostages. This shows the reality of globalizing the interfighter. I've got more to say about that in a minute, and Ray Hadley joins me. He's going to fire up at Chris Bowen's latest ridiculous plan green tariffs, but first tonight, Albinizi is refusing to commit to boosting Australia's defense spending, despite an urgent call from American Defense
Secretary Pete Hegseath. The Trump administration says Australia needs to spend an extra forty billion dollars a year on the military. This would take our defense spend to three and a half percent of GDP. Now Hegseth delivered this message to Defense Minister Richard Miles directly in Singapore over the weekend, and he gave these pointed remarks in his speech to the Shangri La Dialogue.
NATO members are pledging to spend five percent of their GDP on defense, even Germany, so it doesn't make sense for countries in Europe to do that while key allies in Asia spend less on defense in the face of an even more formidable threat.
Now Miles indicated he was willing to discuss this, but Albanezy has ruled it out.
What we'll do is we'll determine now defense policy, and we've invested just across the forward to an additional ten billion dollars in defense. What we'll do is continue to provide for investing in our capability but also investing in our relationships in the region.
And his position is despite other leaders globally increasing defense spending, Kirstarmer raised his military budget to two and a half percent of GDP while cutting back on foreign aid in order to do so, and that was before he met with Trump in February, and kirs Starmer says his ambition
is to reach three percent in a second term. Now, as you'll recall, the Coalition had pledged an increase of defense spending to two and a half percent of GDP by the end of the decade, with an aspirational goal of three percent over ten years, and Labour's current spend
is just two percent of GDP now. Even before the administration, former defense and national security officials including so Angus Houston, Dennis Richardson, Michael Pizzullo, and Kim Beasley, had all called for defense spending to increase to at least three percent of our GDP, and so Albanezi is now under pressure, not just from the Trump administration, over our investment in defense now. To be fair, an immediate jump to three and a half percent right away would be difficult, would
be excessive, especially given our depleted budget position. We're heading towards a trillion dollars in debt thanks to Labour's reckless decision to pay hex debt in order to buy off younger voters. But it's not so much a question about the size of the spending, but what defense is spending the money on. That's an equally crucial issue now. Defense analyst Peter Jennings suggests that we need to grow the size of the army, the air Force, in the Navy.
He says, we also need to buy a small fleet of conventionally powered submarines as an interim stop gap, and we have to secure our missile and air defense for our nation. And it's not only heg Seth and the Trump administration that's concerned about our military capabilities. You'll recall the Australian Strategic Policy Institute's report just last week expressed grave concerns about under investment our ability to keep pace with future challenges, and it spoke of insufficient munitions and
missile and defense systems. It said we had an underdeveloped domestic weapons manufacturing system.
We need to be looking at what we can produce locally. We need to be looking at what the rest of the world has been doing since Russia's war on Ukraine, particularly in the area of cheaper, mass produced capabilities like drones encounter drones. We have a number of companies in Australia that have the ability to produce these capabilities. They are cheaper, they can be mass produced, and they're able to be done more quickly.
And ass to be highlighted that for the cost of a single Virginia class submarine, Australia could produce or could procure, over twenty four thousand Ukrainian made maritime strike drones and they have a range of over one thousand kilometers. It's precisely this sort of equipment that's so important for modern warfare.
And you only have to look at what Ukraine was able to achieve with similar drone equipment overnight, those Ukrainian drones hitting more than forty Russian nuclear capable long range bombers. That single attack destroyed, it said, thirty four percent of Russia's fleet of air missile carriers. And the success of the attack came after Russia launched an air assault in Ukraine last week, and we know that it's preparing for
a summer on slaught. Now that's the same sort of attack Israel should also be launching, by the way, on Iran's nuclear capabilities. Now, President Zelenski praised the strike. He said it was Ukraine's longest range operation so far, and let's hope we see more of it because Ukraine clearly can't rely on the United States to always come to its defense. And now to the devastating terror attack on
a rally to free Israeli hostages in Colorado. This was a peaceful Sunday afternoon walk to show solidarity with the hostages and their families. And there are still fifty eight hostages held captive by Hamas a terror organization after more than six hundred days. Now that shouldn't be controversial, of course, and Israelis kidnapped need to be freed. Yet an activist yelling end Zionists and free Palestine launched what the FBI has described as a terror attack on this peaceful protest
that included many elderly people. Here's how it unfolded. The man firebombed the crowd of innocent Americans using molotov cocktails and flamethrowers. People were set a light. It was mayhem he.
On.
Now. Six people were injured in this attack, but it's the ages that get me. They were sixty seven to eighty eight years old. The elderly eighty eight one is in a critical condition. It's also been reported that children, some children suffered burns. Again, these are Americans. Nine one one was flooded with emergency calls around one twenty six pm and the suspect is an activist, Mohammad Solomon. He's forty five. He was arrested by police at the scene.
Now it's been reported, although not confirmed, that he was an illegal immigrant who entered the US from Egypt during the Biden administration. And Fox News says he overstayed his visa and we.
Can break to our viewers now per three senior DHS and I sources to Fox according to our colleague Bill Malusian doing some great work, that he is an Egyptian national who is in the US illegally because of a visa overstay, who came during the Biden administration.
Now, the FBI is taking this very seriously. They had this to say.
This attack happened at a regularly scheduled weekly peaceful event. Witnesses are reporting that the subject used a makeshift flamethrower and threw an incendiary device into the crowd. The suspect was heard to yell free Palestine during the attack.
An organizer of the event, Gene Unger, told The Wall Street Journal that several members in her group were injured, including one who's a Holocaust survivor. She said, the next thing I saw was big flames from behind me. There was a woman on fire and people rushing to try and help her, and other people had flames on their legs. And all this just a week and a half after Sarah Milgram and Uron Lashinsky were murdered in Washington by
a man also yelling Free Palestine. And this is the face of the Free Palestine movement, vandalizing synagogues, murdering Jews outside a Holocaust museum, and burning the elderly during a peaceful walk. Jewish advocate Hen Mazi got it right when he said that this free Palestine movement is nothing more than a violent threat to Jews. He wrote on social media. You can't claim to be nonviolent and pursue the annihilation of an entire country and its people. You can't claim
to be nonviolent and pursue ethnic cleansing of Jews. And you can't claim to be nonviolent and attack people around the world in the name of Palestine. And of course he's right. Enablers say the current anti Semitism is only because of Israel's actions over the past twenty months, but don't forget that this global mass protest movement began immediately
after October seventh, before Israel had acted at all. It was kickstarted by a massacre of Jews, the barbaric murder of entire families as they begged for their lives in safe rooms wearing pajamas, and that massacre was endorsed by tens of thousands around the world who took to the streets week in, week out from day dot Now, in
my view, this is the playbook that we're experiencing. Criticize Israel with false claims of war crimes, famine, and deliberately targeting civilians, turn Israel into the global oppressor, dehumanize Israeli's call for an uprising that begins as a protest movement and then morphs into a global into fada. Justify violence against those who support Israel, against Zionists, against all Jews. This is what we're experiencing now. This is the current
wave of anti Semitism. It's inextricably tied with anti Zionism. AJACK executive director Colin Rubinstein said that Colorado and events like it show the inevitable link between hatefield rhetoric and hatefield violence erupting in our university's streets and media. The Colorado attacker wanted to kill Zionists. Here in Australia, hatefield
rhetoric against Zionists is becoming normalized. And it's true that the terror attacks, the violence, even the murder of Jews in America and other Western countries are being excused by left wing activists. The Australian reported how the assassination of two Israeli diplomats outside a Jewish museum in Washington has been met with a torrent of celebratory and incendiary responses
from high profile Australian pro Palestinian activists. Because this is the reality of globalizing the intero Fata, we're seeing violence against Jews excused. The world, I'm sorry to say, is in a dark place right now. The left is morally bankrupt. I'm heartbroken and angry about it. I'm trying not to feel despair for the future because the new wave of anti Semitism is excused as a political protest movement, as
free speech, but it's no different. It's the same murder of Jews, the same violence towards Jews that we've seen in the past. The left can't pretend this is different. They can't turn violence into justifiable acts on account of it being anti Zionism and supposedly fashionable. This is anti Semitism and we can't let them get away with it. I'll come back to that topic a bit later with Ray Hadley, but now let's bring in our panel as always in a Monday Sky News host Steve Price and
Joe Hildebrand. How are you to you both, Good to see you both. I want to get back to the defense spending issue. This is clearly emerging as a conflict between the Trump administration and the Albanezy government. Steve Richard Miles seemed to be open to the idea of increasing our defense spending, but the Prime Minister shut that down. Was he right to do so?
Well, I think Richard Miles was in a very difficult position. He was in Singapore and he's looking Pete Hesketh I to eye and Heskeer says, look, the European countries are all going to five percent, as you pointed out, Shari, that's their ambition anyway, but Australia is sitting in at around two maybe get to two point three. Well, he's had to look at Hesketh and go, okay, well, you know, maybe we should will about it, and you know, we'll
try and get there. I mean, it's very different when your eyeballing the person who is making the comments to you. And this is where it's going to be a really interesting test for Joe's made Anthony Albanisi when he's sitting face to face with Donald Trump and Donald Trump says, hang on, Pete Heskett told you you have to get to two point five or three point five whatever the figure might end up being. What is Anthony Albaniz he
going to say to Donald Trump? Well, he's not going to say what he said publicly in Australia today, and he, rather foolishly, I think, believes that somehow Donald Trump won't find that out.
No exactly. I mean we've all got the Internet, that's for sure. Donald Trump certainly has the Internet at his finger.
It does. It's very proficient at it, Joe.
The issue is that it's not only the size of the spending, because billions have been wasted on old submarine contracts and repaying the French, but it's also where we're directing us spent to and this needs to be better thought out, doesn't it.
Yeah, I think the biggest problem with Australia's defense capability it's obviously built around submarines because we're an ireland nation, we're an island continent. And there's been basically three different
positions on submarines in as many terms of office. So you had Tony Abbott going with Japanese submarines, then that got scraped, Malcolm Turnba went with French submarines that got scrapped, and then we had Scott Morrison going with aucust submarines, which I think are fantastic by the way, but it means every time you change horses, you're adding another you know, five ten whatever years to the actual time when it gets rolled out to the point where as you said,
people are saying now we need indroim submarines while we wait for the real submarines to come. But the issue here, I think Anti Albaneze has said that Australia will determine how much it spends on defense, not America, and I.
Think that is absolutely right. I think it is very unusual.
I know Trump does things in very different ways and there's a new normal, but normally one country doesn't tell another country what to do. Normally, these are discussions you would have behind closed doors at events like the G seven that he is going to meet Trump at and of course they're going to talk about defense spending, and Alba will also be talking about Donald Trump jacking up tariffs on Australian steel at the same time, just.
To point out, because I think that's a fair enough point that America can't make demands of Australian policy and spending, but Australia is relying on America to come to our aid in the event of some sort of military conflict. So you know, there is an argument for America to say, well, you guys have to pull your weight. You can't just rely on us, and the demands of the United States to step into foreign walls are increasing. Steve, Well, that's right.
I mean, if you've got an ally and your best ally, and we've been in every conflict with the Americans from the beginning of time, you've got to pull your weight. And I think there's got to be a bigger discussion here about is the Defense Department itself, and I'm talking about the public servants and the generals that run that department. Do they actually know what they're doing? I mean, they don't seem to be out there vocally lobbying to get
more money from the government. They might be doing it behind the scenes, but if the Americans say, hang on a minute, you're going to spend more otherwise, you know, our relationship might not be what it should be.
But the problem for the.
Left is the left of the Labor Party hate the fact that we rely on the Americans as allies in any conflict. They'd rather be like New Zealand than pretend no one ever wants to come here. Well, the difference between us and New Zealand is we're loaded with minerals that other people want. I mean, let's get real.
And by the way, sorry to interrupt your while we're speaking about defense spending, as you just mentioned, Steve, I mean, what about all the wasted money, the money that defense are spending giving their personnel cosmetic surgery and boob jobs and all sorts of other ridiculous Yeah. I mean, obviously that tax pay shouldn't be funding.
Obviously that looks pretty silly on the face of it. The difference is, of course, that when you are talking about actual defense material that you know, buying a nuclear submarine, the amounts are just so skyrocketingly eyewateringly huge. You could cancel all the boob jobs and sex changes in the world, and you wouldn't. You'd barely be able to buy a bullet. But I would just say Australia has proved its loyalty to the US more than any other ally, including its
oldest ally France. We went to war with the US in Iraq when France refused to, including the special relationship it has with the UK. We went to Vietnam with America when the United Kingdom refused to.
I don't think under the al we'd be doing this well Australia.
What I'm saying is Australia has paid for its alliance.
With the years.
And I'm half American, my father's American. I support America one hundred percent. But Australia has paid for that alliance with their blood, with our soldier's blood in wars that other countries said has nothing to do with us. It's not our fight, it's not our region. We think it's misguided. He could have said the same thing very easily.
We didn't.
We stood up and we went over there and we paid with our lives. So we've been extremely good our lives.
No, indeed we have. Indeed, now Barnaby Joys has called for Kevin rud to be removed as ambassador after Trump's latest plan to increase tariffs and steel and aluminium, which of course would hurt Australian industries.
Have a look Kevin Rudd is. Look, he's a good guy, but he's he's not kicking a goal in the United States. There's a difference in the relationship between him and in the Trump administration. I believe the first thing you've got to do is give Kevin another job somewhere else.
Steve, what do you think about this?
Well, I've had my say about Kevin run over and over and over over many years. He and I don't get on. I think Kevin's in the wrong job. It was a captain's pick by Anthony alban Easy. It was when Joe Biden was still there and Labour was hoping Kamala Harris would win the residential election. He's a square peg in a round hole. Anthony Albanese should have the
courage to move him on. Find him, as Barnaby said, find him another job somewhere where he's better suited, because he's obviously not kicking any goals at all in the relationship with the United States. I mean the best person we have over there and negotiate with Donald Trump's Greg Norman, which is ridiculous when we've got an ambassador living in Washington. So maybe Kevin's time is up. I think Barnaby's probably right.
Yeah, indeed, And it's interesting to think had Kamala Harris won, well, Dutton might be in power now you know that it was such a big impact that Trump had on the election here.
Yeah, absolutely, look at what's.
Albaneze and Kevin's relationship like at the moment.
Joe good very strong.
Albaneze was one of the few lieutenants who remained completely more says Kevin Rudd throughout the whole fiasco. And my position was very much the same as Arbineza, which is whatever, Kevin.
As long as you're on the page, Joe.
No, no, no, But I mean I think the entire Labour Party has actually come to the same conclusion belatedly. It took a decade out of office to do it, but that whatever Kevin Rud's personal shortcomings were, he was the democratically elected Prime Minister of Australia.
He had a mandate and he shouldn't have been.
Removed in a first term coup.
My understanding is that behind the scenes a lot is going on. I understanding he was instrumental in getting that phone call between the PM and Donald Trump in the twenty four hours after the tariffs deal were announced, that that was a pre arranging.
Probably just waiting to see who would win the election before he organized the f No, well.
I mean if Trump applied, I mean, if if Kevin rud is not doing his job as ambassador, then no other countries ambassadors doing their job either, because the same tariffs were announced to every single country.
In the world.
Sure, all right, Steve Price, Johoda Brandt. Great Now, As you know, one of Susan Lee's first moves as our position leader was dumping for talented women from shadow cabinet in favor of either inexperienced replacements or factional allies. And there are now fewer women in Susan Lee's shadow cabinet than there were under Peter Dutton, the same number as under Scott Morrison. This is despite her previous public demand for fifty to fifty quotas for men and women. Now
I've interviewed Ted O'Brian. He's going to be on the show later tonight. But Here's part of what he had to say when I asked him about this issue. Isn't it a bad sign that you needed as deputy leader to make those calls on your second day after the shadow ministry was announced.
Oh, Shari, I suppose partly, maybe as a deputy leader, But in truth, it's just about relationships and speaking to colleagues.
That's about Tetobrian trying to clean up the mess by ringing around to calm the waters. Now among those dumped from Shadow Cabinet is Tasmanian Senator Claire Chandler. She was previously the Shadow Minister for the Arts, Government Services and Sciences and Claire joins me on the show. Now, Claire, thank you very much for your time. You achieved a lot during your time as in Shadow Cabinet. How disappointed have you been since you were told the news last week?
Oh?
Thank you first of all for having me on the show, Sharion. Look, sure, I was certainly disappointed on Wednesday when I received the news that I wouldn't be back around the Shadow Cabinet table.
But look, politics is.
A game of ups and downs. As I think a few of my colleagues have said over the last few days and I'm only thirty five. I've just been re elected to the Senate for another six years, and I'm very hopeful that I'll have the opportunity at some point
again to serve around the shadow cabinet table. But for the next little while, I'm very much looking forward to having the freedom to speak my mind on the back bench about the issues that I care about and the issues that Tasmanians and Australians care about.
Yeah, and I'm sure you will speak your mind here on Sky News as well to our audience. Now, I reported on the show on Thursday night that Susan Lee ghosted Jane Hume. She refused to take her phone calls or text messages. And I understand that you also contacted the new Liberal leader saying that you'd be happy to serve in shadow cabinet, but you didn't hear back. Is that right? Yes, that's right. Can you expand on that
a bit more? What did you say when you approached us saying that you would be happy to serve.
Well, look, particularly given I had previously been in a shadow cabinet role, like you said at the outset, with the Shadow Ministry responsibilities for government services and science and the arts, digital economy. I would have been very happy to continue at that level, and you know you can't. You don't always get things if you don't ask for them. So I thought it was appropriate to make sure that the new leader knew that I was still keen to continue in that capacity.
But you never heard back.
No.
You voted for Angus Taylor in the leadership ballot, I understand, and you did go public as saying that you intended to vote for him. Do you think that had a role to day? Do you think that had a role to play in why you were demote it?
Look, it may well have done Shari at the end of the day. That's probably a question for the opposition leader to answer rather than me. But look, like I say, politics is a nonlinear career path, and sometimes you experience disappointments and you pick yourself up and you dust yourself off and you get on with the task at hand.
And there is no doubt that everyone in our liberal party room, where the you are in shadow cabinet, in the shadow ministry, or indeed on the back benches I now am, we have a huge task ahead of us to make sure that we are in the best possible position to win the election in three years time. There is a lot of policy work that needs to be done and I'm sure all of my colleagues and I will be putting our shoulder to the wheel to make sure that that happens.
Well on that front, you know, what direction do you think the party needs to move in to appeal to more Australians. Well, look, I.
Don't think it's a question of us going further to the left or further to the right, although I'll note that a few of my colleagues have had views on what direction we need to go in, and indeed a few in the media and in the political commentariat have had their views. At the end of the day, the values of the Liberal Party that Robert Menzies articulated are
absolutely timeless. But here and now in twenty twenty five, we need to figure out a way to take those values, to apply them to the problems that Australians are having, and come up with real and tangible solutions in accordance with those values, and then explain what those solutions are
to the Australian people. And I look back on our last or our last election result, I don't think we talked enough to Australians about the solutions that we were offering, and I think, frankly, particularly in some policy areas, we needed to be developing more and better solutions. And look, I think the Liberal Party has had a tough time in recent years. You look back to the pandemic and I know that was five years ago, but economically, the way that that challenged our very ethos as a party
was massive. We were putting a great deal of public money out the door.
We had to create big.
Government by the necessity of the circumstances that we found ourselves in. Now is the time that we have to recenter ourselves and particularly I think recraft that economic narrative and talk to Australians about why small government is better for them and why big government is just going to get in the way, is going to make their lives harder, not make.
Their lives easier.
That's a really important message that I think we need to focus on for the next three years because I'm not sure that Australians necessarily understand the merits of those values now, because frankly, I don't think we've been good enough at talking about them.
You're completely right and when you look at the budget position now, it's in such a horrific position and the spending is going out the door. The alban Easy government's approach is to increase taxes. They're going to look for other areas they can raise taxes. But the political challenge, Claire, is that when the coalition said well we need to embark on budget repair, we need a cut spending, that
was weaponized against the coalition. So you know that's the difficulty, isn't it trying to sell the argument that there does need to be spending cuts.
Oh, look, that's always going to be a challenge. But like I say, Shari, we have three years now where we have to get back to basics in terms of how we're communicating with Australians, what our values are, what the problems are that they're facing, and how we'll use those values to solve those problems. And there's a lot of work that we need to do to get back into a position where we can win elections. But like I say, I think.
We can do it.
It's going to be an awful lot of hard work and we have a very short time to do it. So frankly, I think it's almost to the point where we need to stop talking about what the problems are and start looking at some solutions. And I'm sure that that policy work is underway by all of my colleagues in the Shadow ministry.
All right. Indeed, Claire Chanda, looking forward to having you still Unsky News, irrespective of whether Susan late Lee decided to keep you in the Shadow Cabinet or not. Thank you very much for joining us tonight. Now still to come deputy liberally to Tet O'Brien faces my questions about Dumpy. The four women, including Claire Chandler. That exclusive interview coming up, plus radio legend Ray Hadley back on the desk as Chris Bowen weighs up green tariffs as if our economy
isn't suffering enough already raise after this quick break, welcome back. Well, Chris Bowen is back to fueling climate alarmism, not ruling out green tariffs and carbon intensive imports.
I know you've been looking at the option of Australia imposing a carbon tariff or a carbon border adjustment mechanism as the Europeans are looking at is what's you thinking on that at the moment.
Well, we've been again clear that we want to ensure Australian industry it's best place to compete in a decarbonizing world.
And radio legend Ray Hadley is here and he's laughing.
I think he wakes up every morning thinking what kind of did he get in the paper today?
What's the headline I need to equate to.
I mean everyone's been jumping up down about Donald Trump, including US and the tariffs.
He says he's doing it to protect Donald Trump, that is the American industry.
So if he puts on building products a tariff which we send the coal from Australia to Japan to their coali fied power station and their of course nuclear plants. They make the steel, they make the aluminium, we bring it back here, he wants to put a tariff on it because the Chinese aren't in accord with us the way climate change is thought of.
So who's the end loser here?
The builders, the developers and those people who are building homes or units.
I mean, it's sheer madness.
You can't have Anthony Albanizi saying well, hang on a sec this is silly.
We can't do this. We simply can't do it.
And then he comes out for an entirely different reason to meet the ridiculous quota that he wants to do on carbon.
I mean, it's just but this.
Is also what I'm worried about. Ray. There's going to be all these new tariffs and taxes that were never mentioned in the campaign will be sprung on us.
Well, the green tariff was never mentioned because he was in witness protection, as I told you recently. I mean they hit him from view and then remarkably the people in his electorate gave him an even bigger majority.
Bizarre. They need to watch the more Sky news.
Perhaps we have to say more people out there to identify what Chris Bowen's all about.
He's a deal.
Now. I've been very critical of Susan Lee's shadow cabinet. I've heard, yes, what do you think about this and the people she's dumped and who she's promoted.
Well, it's remarkable that she should say one thing before she was leader and they do exactly the opposite. Now, I heard you earlier talking to Clear about all of this, and I just don't understand how Peter Dutton was punished for being I guess anti women. That's how he was viewed by some in the electorate. There were more women in his cabinet there are, and Susan Lee shadow cabinet, who's been calling for a quota for goodness knows how long now the women that she has dumped just centerprice.
I mean, that's the dumbest thing I can possibly think of. Clear Chandler thirty five years of age, brilliant. Yeah, and then Jane Hume and Sarah Henderson vastly experienced older than the other two women. One's thirty five, ones in the early forties, and they're talking about generational change. Well, here's a chance generational change and four very.
Capable women exactly. I mean, I don't get it.
I think it was a problem when Susan Lee said younger in terms of political experience. I mean, younger is a term that refers to age. So is she saying Sarah Henderson and Jane Humor too old because they're in their fifties and sixties, and that reinforces a really dangerous view that women lose their value as they get older.
Well, let me say this, having worked in the media for over forty years, some of the best people I've worked with have been older people, men and women, and really young ones men and women.
You can't just cast the and say she's too old.
He's too old, she's too young, she's too inexperienced.
Because they are on face value.
You could hear it tonight on your program, Clear Chandel, she's a brilliant young woman. Brilliant I don't mean it'd be derogatory saying a young woman compared to me, I'm double her age. But when you call me young Raya, well that's because I'm more than double your age.
But anyway, you are not.
We wage it into ages, come on anyway, so you can't afford to do that.
Just sits in there. But Jipper price for goodness sake.
I know they all voted her cause for angers and that's the problem.
That's the issue. They supported Angus Taylor, but yet there were men who supported Angus Taylor who Susan kept in shadow cabinet. So this is a problematic move and it's going to continue to be problematic. And it wasn't wise politically because now there are so many enemies and people who are upset over it.
Well, I said to you that I don't think Susan will lead them to the next election. I think there'll be things happening in the meantime, and that I'm not denigrating her.
She's also a very capable woman. By judgment. Her first few calls have been pretty ordinary.
No indeed, all right, well, look I want to ask you about a couple of international things. Now. Greta Thunberg now wants to sail into Gaza on a diesel powered vessel. By the way, if we've got that clip of Greta Thunberg saying that she's ready to go into Gaza to save the day, here it is.
Hello, I am currently standing on the Madeline, the ship that on Sunday, June first, will attempt to again sail towards Gaza and to try to break the siege and open up a humanitarian corridor by delivering aid like food and medical supplies.
I mean, right, shouldn't Israel just give her official transport to Gaza. See how she goes dealing with the harmas terrorists.
She wants to be a bit careful sailing into She's not sailing, she's motoring into Gaza, as Andrew Bolt pointed out in his.
Column this morning.
But the simple fact of the matter is she might be a bit worried about getting shot by Hamas because they, as you've reported, are shooting people as they go to get aid, which is sent to Gaza by the Israelis.
And so you know people say wet their gunment, Well, I.
Mean, who else runs around Gaza city with a submachine gun if you're not a member of a terrorist organization, which is, by the way, the July elected government and has been for seventeen years a mass So look, she used to drive me mad on climate change. Now she's driving me mad. She stuck head into what's happening in Gaza at the moment. And you know, I could care less orhether she goes there or doesn't go there. What you're going to take a jar of peanut butter in the Labe of Breda.
And that footage you were just referring to, If we've got it that we can show it as overlay, we can bring it up on the screen. But you know Israel has been has set up. Know that the Israeli footage, this is drone footage We're going to show you here. It is where Israel set up and this is distressing content. Israel set up a new aid center and Palestinian masked terrorists. We don't know for sure if they're Hamas or another terrorist group have been shooting civilians who are going to
get aid. Ray this is what you're referring to. Just a minute.
Yeah, sorry to get ahead of you, but if you're framing a market, it's odds on, it's Hamas, it's odds on. You know, they're they're they're on the ground and they're killing the people from Garsa to take away the aid that's being trucked.
In there by Israel.
I mean, and the mainstream media tends to ignore this. It doesn't happen now. It's just one lunatic, like the lunatic in the United States of America, you know, doing something to another race of people in that part of the world.
No, it's not.
They're a terrorist organization, as disclosed by every government, including ours. They won't be decried by Penny Wong or Anthony al but easy. I mean, say it for what it is. They're democratically elected. They're a terrorist organization. We shouldn't be dealing with them, or even not thinking about dealing with them.
No, indeed, democratically elected. Back in two thousand and seven, bat time for another election, I'd say Ray, thank you very much, thank Lod having me on the show. We'll see you next Monday.
I'll be here, look forward to it.
Thanks very much and still to come. TikTok bosses claim their app is educational for children. This is social media giants pushback against the under sixties Van plus. Teto brian doesn't rule out backing labors super tax My exclusive interview up next, welcome back. Well, let's return to the possible deal between the Liberal Party and Labor over the superannuation tax.
Now.
The Australian reports today that Deputy Liberal Leader and Shadow Treasurer Tet O'Brien is open to a deal on Labour's plan to tax super providing they abandoned the idea of taxing unrealized gains and index the threshol well I spoke to Ted and asked him about this a little earlier. Tet O'Brien, thank you so much for your time, your first interview since your new role is Shadow treasurer. Is it true you're open to doing a deal with Labor on the super tax and does this mean you're seriously
considering supporting raising taxes on superannuation? No, Shahi.
In fact, we think that Labour's super tax is super big and super bad. I can't think of one element of it I like candidly. And if though that Labor does want to speak to the Coalition, then they'll have to walk away from a lot of those aspects of what they put forward. There's no doubt in opposition. We will be constructive where we can, but critical where we must, And when it comes to this super tax, at the moment, I see no choice but to be absolutely critical.
So to be clear, you will be opposing the super tax as well as the tax and unrealized capital gains. All elements of this you will be opposing, Sherry.
I can't preempt the final decision that ultimately will come through the Party room, but what I can say is that there are aspects of this policy that Labor has put forward which are absolutely egregious. You mentioned a couple there, in particular the unrealized capital gains and secondly the lack of indexation. They are probably the most egregious of the lot. As for though where the party room eventually settles, they'll be.
A matter for the party room.
But I can be very clear that in speaking with colleagues, they like me see no goodness in this whatsoever.
Because the Australian is reporting today that you would be open to doing a deal with Labor and supporting the tax superannuation if they lifted the unrealized capital gains tax? So is that reported in the Australian Today wrong?
The report in the Australian Today was accurate. Where I made it clear that when it comes to all policies, including this one, the Coalition will always be open. However, that doesn't mean a blank check. If indeed Jim Chalmers wants to come and have a discussion with the Coalition about his supertax, well he would have to firstly walk away from the unrealized capital gains component. At least he
should be compromising on indexation. Now, if he caves in on all of those things and wants to talk about super reform, chari let's have a chat about super.
Reform, all right. We'll we go a bit to those discussions because we've had some conflicting positions here. So just to be clear, if he walked away from the unrealized capital gains component, then you would consider supporting the superannuation tax.
If Jim Chalmers confirms he will walk away from the unrealized capital gains component and the indexation, then I think we can have a conversation. That does not mean that he will necessarily get support, but that's at least the basis for a conversation, because right now it is so unreasonable, this is such a bad policy that there is no
possibility of any arrangement between the Coalition and Labor. But if Labor sees the light and walks away from a whole bunch of issues here, especially those I mentioned, then certainly we can have a discussion now whether they will or not, Shahi, your guess is as good as mine.
But TED wouldn't supporting the supertax even if they walked away from unrealized capital gains, and even if they supported indexation. Wouldn't the coalition supporting the supertax indicate that the coalition does support higher taxes? And wasn't this one of the issues that the coalition had during the election campaign.
Well, look, if Labor did walk away from the components of its current measure, Shari, it would depend on what they put on the table for discussion. But you're right, we had to learn some big lessons from the last election, and we have and we continue to learn those lessons. One of those lessons is we need to ensure that we are staying true for being the party for lower taxes. And as I said before, there's no part of what
Labour's put forward here that I like at all. I mean the fact that taxes go up, you know, the capital gains component, the indexation, the lack of integrity in what they put forward where actually they want to see this past through the Parliament and then the Treasurer will decide the treatment of the Prime Minister. I mean, the
whole thing is a dog. It really is so again, but if Labour wants to walk all of that back and engage in good faith talking about the possibility for super reform, of course will be constructive where we can and critical where we must look.
I just want to ask you about a couple of the policies that you just admitted were a mistake during the election campaign. Do you agree that it was wrong that the Coalition opposed Labour's tax cuts.
Yes, Shari, I do believe it was wrong. I think that was a mistake and I think that's a mistake we all have to own and we need to learn from that.
I reported here on Thursday that you were making calls during the day to try and calm the waders after four women were demoted or dumped in the shadow ministry. I mean, isn't it a bad sign that you needed as deputy leader to make those calls on your second day after the shadow ministry was announced?
Oh, Shari, I suppose partly maybe as a deputy leader, but in truth it's just about relationships and speaking to colleagues. I do that all the time. It was my approach in business for over twenty years. It's been my approaches I've been in Parliament and there's no doubt when shadow ministries are announced there are a lot of people there because we have such a depth and talent. Who could promis you with a phone call that decision to dump?
Were you involved in that decision to dump or demote the file women for shadow Cabinet and did anyone stand up for those women?
So, Shari, when it comes to the decisions on who serves in the shadow ministry, that's a matter only for the leader.
So you didn't agree with the decision.
Now, of course I agreed with Susan's decision. I have to say that I think It's probably one of the toughest gigs for any leader, especially when you do look at the depth of the talent in the Liberal Party to say, well, okay, I've got to form a shadow ministry out of this. That's tough because ultimately there are so many individual MPs and senators who absolutely have what it takes. But a decision does have to be made. I think Susan has put together.
In hindsight, do you think of the wrong call to dump or demote far of the most senior and experienced women from shadow cabinet. I mean, you talk about these the most talented women.
I do not question whatsoever the talent of all colleagues, including the ones to whom you refer by the way, But I think your question to me is do I believe ultimately that Susan has put together the right team? Yes, I do, my question and as you will, no, Shari. As you know Shari, you know politics like business, like other walks of life, there are ups and downs. I know from my own experience there have been times when things haven't gone as well as I'd like, which again
is why relationships are important. Every single member of the party has a really important role to play and it's important they know that too.
Shari, All right, tedt O Brain really appreciate you coming on tonight.
Thank you so much, Thanks very much.
Cheers and after the break. TikTok claims their app is educational for children as social media giants pushback against the Albanezi governments. Under sixteen's van that's next. But TikTok has taken out major sprawling advertisements in Australian newspapers. They've got four and a half pages in the finn Review to promote so called educational benefit of their app, an entirely questionable claim. And they've done this ahead of the Albanese
government's law banning under sixteens from social media. Or we need to hope the coalition backs the laws so we can give our younger generation back their childhood. I'll see you at eight thirty tomorrow night after Chang Lai's doco. And here's Pomari