Life Sharry.
Good Evening, We'll just sent to Ardern was a darling of the left and it was a big political story when she demanded that Scott Morrison stopped sending criminals at a Nes to New Zealand, even though they were technically Kiwi citizens. Ardurn gave Morrison, who was Prime Minister at the time, a public rebuke.
It was a move the media lapped up.
New Zealand Prime Minister j Cinda Adern has lashed out at Scott Morrison over his criminal deportation policy. She claims it's testing the friendship, but Scott Morrison won't back down, saying non citizens who break the law should return to their home country.
This is corrosive to our relationship.
Scott Morrison, cops and ur dern Burn.
Do not deport your people and your problems.
Once you've done your time, we send you home.
Well in to The Coalition at the time had sent twoy six hundred criminals back to New Zealand since twenty sixteen. The Coalition's policy was that if there's a criminal migrant, say a murderer or a child rapist, and there are a citizen of another country, well then they should be
deported to that country. Adurn argued that some of the criminals had lived in Australia all their life, they had ties to our country, and she used that excuse to say that she didn't want the hardened thugs back in New Zealand.
It was a clear point of friction.
May we look forward to better times a hit.
And those better times for New Zealand at least came with Albanesi. Albanesi, in his quest to appease the popular female Prime Minister, capitulated to her request. He did this even though it wasn't in Australia's national security interests and in fact it posed a detriment to public safety.
Prime Minister Adurn has certainly not been backward in raising these issues. I can assure you from our very first meeting. Where you have a circumstance where someone has lived their entire life effectively in Australia with no connection whatsoever to New Zealand, then common sense should apply and we'll act as friends and we'll work through those issues in a common sense way.
And this is exactly what we have asked of Australia. We acknowledge that Australia will continue to deport as New Zealand currently does have provision and does deport those who don't have long term connection to New Zealand. What we've been seeking is common sense and the spirit of friendship and that's what Prome Minus to Albin Easi's spoken to today.
Well, one person's common sense is another person's well, I won't say what. And so it is that Albert Easy weakened Australia's imigration policy to appease Jasciner. Ardern, the Prime Minister, is ultimately responsible for the flawed Ministerial Direction ninety nine and it's meant that murderers, child rapists, thugs and con artists who have ties to Australia would have been allowed to stay here instead of being deported as they should
have been because they're not Australian citizens. It has exposed the community to a serious risk of harm from criminals who aren't Australians and shouldn't be here if they're going to repeatedly break the law. The latest example of a savage attack was by a violent detainee and this was exposed by Mark Riley just last night.
Seven News can reveal that as mister Charles was defending himself. Yesterday, yet another violent foreign criminals visa was being reinstated by the Ministry of Appeals Tribunal in Melbourne, this time Indian born Gulprit Singh on parole after serving six years for what the judge called a ferocious and terrifying bashing in Geelong,
leaving his victim close to death. The AAT overturning the decision to pull his visa, finding under mister Giles, Direction ninety nine sings ties to Australia weighed strongly in his favor well.
As political editor Simon Benson wrote today, Ministerial Direction ninety nine was a disaster from the day of its ill conceived inception. He wrote that it goes to the heart of the ideological revision of immigration policy under Labor and
the poor decision making by cabinet ministers. Andrew Giles today, finally forced out of hiding to front the cameras, he obviously can't blame his boss, Albin Easy in these media interviews, so trying to hold onto his job, he shifted the blame to his department, claiming there were no red flags, no warnings that anything would be a miss with Direction ninety nine, but.
Just to clarify when the Department war gained with you Direction ninety nine, that it did not give you forewarning that some of these serious cases that you wanted to see individuals deported, that they would be overturned.
The intent of Ministeral Direction ninety nine and the work that was done in preparing it did not indicate that these sort of serious crimes would be affected.
But is this entirely accurate?
Were documents tabled in Senate estimates show that Giles was want that there would be a reduction in the number of counseled visas, so that means a reduction in the number of people deported. It says the Department anticipates around twenty eight hundred cases will need to be renotified. There will be a significant reduction in the number of cancelation, refine usal of revocation decisions finalized in the first few months of the commencement of the Ministerial Direction ninety nine.
So it seems Giles and did have a warning that people identified for deportation for serious reasons would now remain in our country. Where Albinizi has been forced into a humiliating backflip that he'll now have to reverse this direction ninety nine. Now, this is a massive admission that he was wrong to capitulate to justinter Arderne and.
The only effective way of ensuring that tribunal members are making better decisions is to issue a new revised direction, which the Minister will be doing.
Blaming the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. So it doesn't seem like Albinizi is going to take any responsibility himself for this incompetence, or he can't blame Andrew Giles because it was his own decision as Prime Minister in a bid to win the popularity of a left wing government in New Zealand that has put our country in this position. This is classic Albertezi, pushing ahead with ideologically motivated policies that undermine
national security and seriously impact on community safety. It's yet another example of a week leader not across the detail. Now coming up on the show tonight, Albertezi snubs former Labor Senator Nova Paris.
The footage of.
That moment I'll show you shortly. Also in Battled nine, chief executive Mike Sneesby hangs on to his job after a multi hour crisis meeting. Today, I'll have the Latest with media writer Sophie Ellsworth, plus the Sydney University professor caught on tape telling students that the sexual violence on October seven was a media hoax. Liberal MP Julian Lisa would join me a bit later, and he's still a free man for now. But will Donald Trump be the
first former president convicted of a crime. We'll speak to Annalise Nilsen in Washington later in the show, but first let's bring it now. Tonight's panel Perth mayor Basil Zempleis and Sky News host James Morrow.
Welcome to you both.
Look, James, this evening, this latest immigration scandal looks to have been the Prime.
Minister's own fault.
He can't blame anyone else for it. He can't sack Andrew Giles for his own poor decision here.
Well yeah, and it's starting to look like he, the Prime Minister, should have sacked Giles days ago, not weeks ago, when this all started to come out. But now you know, he's tied to it. He's tied to his feet and this problem just keeps getting worse. You know. The really interesting thing to be here too is the constant attempts
to deflect. You know, clearly the Immigration Minister and the Prime Minister staff have all been you know, furiously beavering away on aust Lee trying to find decisions where people were allowed to stay under the Dutton regime, and of course, you know when he was Immigration minister, and of course this is just distraction, just as it's distraction to say that, oh, well, it's the tribunal's fault, but of course it's the tribunal that's following the government's directions.
Here.
This all comes back to the government, and the government seems to be trying to evade responsibility for this every step of the way. Sharon, I know Albertiz he wants to be loyal to Giles, he wants to keep him around. He doesn't want to lose a minister during his first term. It's kind of a point of honor with him. But this is just you know, it's really the government is
bleeding very heavily on this. Border security is something that's such a key issue and the number of times we've seen labor government's come a cropper in the past because the field on borders. He should take the lesson.
No exactly and basil just the thought I mean, I'm sure a lot of people would be sitting at home saying, how can the Prime Minister no less jeopardize our entire national security for the sake of getting in the good books of just into Ardern.
Well, there's two good books that he's tried to climb into. He's trying to hang on to, or cling to the friendship with Andrew Giles. He has been overly generous and respectful of that friendship. He should have, at the first opportunity taken the tough decision that everyone in Australia would have accepted and understood, whether their mates or not.
Giles was responsible.
Now we learn, of course, because of that tough action not being taken that actually it was that friendship to just Cinder r durn or pandering to just cinder our Dern that's got us all in this fine mess in the first place. The Prime Minister is there to make tough decisions, not to try and be everybody's mate.
And if ever you need an example of what.
Leadership should look like as opposed to what leadership shouldn't look like.
This is the example of it.
This is a horrendous bungle and Direction ninety nine is all down to the Prime Minister and down to the Prime Minister, trying to be mates with people. That's not the way to lead.
Look, I think you're right, Basil, because it's this trying to be mates with everyone. That's why he gets accused of speaking out of both sides of his mouth, and then he ends up being mates with no one because he never has conviction.
He doesn't show leadership.
Just make the tough that we all know Jiles should have gone. Somebody held had to be held accountable, whether you're good mates or not.
We've seen lots of leaders over many years, in lots of different governments take this difficult decision because it releases the pressure on your team. He had the chance to do it. He knows he should have done it. Everyone excepts it should have happened, but he didn't do it.
And you use the word accountability and no, Remember Anthony Alberzi promised there'd be transparency, there'd be accountability. That's why he set up the Corruption Commission. He promised there'd be accountability. And yet what we're seeing here is you've got a grandmother in Perth who was bashed allegedly by one of these released detainees.
And there is no accountability.
He wants to protect the minister rather than actually say this has got to stop.
Now look at this.
Now a lot of people who watch this show love nov Paris. Well, this is quite bizarre because Anthony Alberzi appears to have snubbed her in Parliament today. Now she's a former Labor senator, she's an Olympian and you think he would have at least acknowledged her presence, but instead he turns the other way while Peter Dutton does acknowledge her.
Have a look, BEFO, I call the Honorable Member of just acknowledge in the gallery today is former Olympic gold midalist and almost editor from the Northern Territory. No, but Paris, oam welcome to Parliament.
I mean, James, look, unless there's some explanation that we don't know about here. And I have put in a question to the Prime Minister's office to say, is there a backstory? What happened? Did he know she was there? Did he see her at any other point? I haven't heard back from them yet, But you know, James, that did look like a pretty bad snub.
Well it did, and you know you have to when you see these sorts of things be a little bit forgiving, because of course politicians on both sides sometimes have things that don't look great on camera, you know, I mean, this is a sort of gotcha gabe that gets got played with Tony Abbot has been played with, you know,
liberal prime ministers throughout history. But it does not look good, especially because no Paris has been so forthright in calling out the anti Semitism problem of Labour's problem in that regard, and Albanizy, as you said in your previous statement, there, you know, he's not leading. He's being led by these different sort of groups, you know, the Left, the Greens,
and nobody really quite knows who's in charge. And you almost sort of worry was he afraid to just you know, give her a nod of acknowledgment because of her position, and that this would wind up causing him trouble with his left flank, which of course he has so much trouble with and which is increasingly being seen to be dictating the government's policy on Israel, the Middle East. Gaza Hamas look.
Unless he met her at another occasion in parliament to me, the Speaker says, let's welcome former Senator Nova Paris. Peter Dutton turns waves and Albenezi turns swivels his chair to look the other way. I mean, Basil, she's a highly respected Australian, a former Olympian.
Why not just be polite.
Well, yes, I accept everything that you've said, But for me, the tribunal that's sitting here in sufficient evidence to find the Prime Minister guilty on this one. Also for the record, for the speaker's benefit, it's not former Olympic gold medalist. Once an Olympic gold medalist, always an Olympic gold medalist.
Look, we don't know enough. I'll be interested to here.
What office says we need a correction in the correct.
The vision didn't the vision didn't look great.
However, I don't think we can hang the PM just on what we've seen. We don't know what took place around it. So not guilty for now.
You know what, We need to do more investigation to see if this was a genuine snub, and if it was, we will return to this topic next week and then we can hold the PM.
To account even sougher than we just had to read now Duras in the Donald Chuck trial.
We'll return to a New York court house for their second day of deliberations. They of course, failed to arrive at a verdict on Wednesday. James, you follow US politics very closely. You are the host of the US Report here on Sky News. How do you expect this will play out?
Well, you know, it's the longer that we wait to get a jury result here, the more likely we have a hung jury, you know, where they can't come to a decision. So it indicates to me the longer this goes on that there's at least one person in that jury roup who say, hang on a second.
Here.
This is a very tendentious case that's been brought, and it really does have all the hallmarks of a stitch up between the judge, the judge's instruction, the way the case has been managed, the very novel legal theory which has turned a misdemeanor bookkeeping error into thirty four election felonies, which is amazing given that you know, hush moneys have been paid, you know, all over the place by parties of both stripes in the past, and you know these
sorts of things are often dealt with in one way or another. This is a really ridiculous and tendentious case that they're bringing. I think that this will wind up being a hung jury. I don't think they're going to wind up getting the guilty simply because to get twelve people to vote to make Donald Trump a felon, which is what Democrats wants. They can hang that around his
neck for the wholecoming campaign. I don't think it's going to happen, and in fact, actually, to be honest, I don't think the Democrats should want it to happen, because it'll make them look really bad. These things will blow up in their faces tremendously.
Mark my word, Sherry, what do you think, Basil?
I mean, will be difficult for a jury to arrive at a verdict. I thought I saw some reporting saying that he might be able to be convicted even if it wasn't a unanimous decision.
Basil, what do you think is going to happen?
I obviously have not sat through all of the hearing and haven't heard all of the evidence presented, but I turn from what I've seen and read, I think that a guilty verdict is going to be a stretch. I also think, from what we've seen, even a guilty verdict, although that appears highly unlikely. It may well mobilize the base that he is very very keen to be able
to mobilize when it comes to election time. So it is a worry for him and what we've said, sorry, it is a worry for the Democrats and what we've seen time and time and time again from the other side of the world. It doesn't matter what Trump's done, what seems to have said, what he has been accused of doing, his standing with enough of the American people has never fallen away, and I wouldn't be surprised if
the same thing happens here again. I think he's going to get through this, as he seems to get through every one of these things that comes his way.
I mean, I think it's potentially that scandal is so closely associated with his image anyway, that it almost doesn't matter what revelation comes out about him, people just go, oh, yeah, another Donald Trump scandal.
What did we expect?
James Mara, We've heard all that language that he used just before last time's election, and somehow he still got through. So I'm not saying it's right, but we've seen a patent he can get past that, that's for sure.
Yeah, indeed, you know, it's almost the equivalent of Joe Biden. It doesn't matter how many gaffes he makes. It doesn't know no matter how many incoherent sentences that he utters.
People.
You know, they kind of know that he's old, they know that he struggles, and they've accepted it.
It's kind of maybe.
It's gonna be a great election.
Each other out all right, James Mara, buzzil Zemplers, thank you both so much. Now, coming up yet another disgraceful display of left bias from the ABC.
It tries to explain its way out of.
Its political editors comments on racism, and nine's chief executive Mike Sneezebey holds on to his job after crisis board meetings today.
Sophie Ellsworth will join me next.
Welcome back for nine Chief executive Mike Sneezebe has kept his job well for now, at least, after he survived a marathon crisis board meeting today. Emerging from the meeting, all nine staff will have to undertake refreshed sexual harassment prevention training over the next month. There'll also be a dedicated hotline to report inappropriate behavior, and this will be made available to all employees.
After the meeting that's said to have lasted.
For more than three hours, Mike sneezeby Peter Costello, the chair and HR chief Vanessa Morley reportedly told staff that the conversations we've had in recent days have made it clear that we need to accelerate the work we are doing to build a culture of respect and trust. Now it's been a long fortnite for nine. Entertainment company with US reported last Monday that Darren Wick, their former head
of news, had an alleged history of sexual harassment. Allegations against him including groping on air presenters while intoxicated, and along with the sexual harassment, there were also allegations of a toxic culture where women were frozen out, with darren Wick allegedly refusing to engage with them or return their cause. Meanwhile, there were senior executives like Victoria Buchan who had We reported they'd become aware of some of the allegations of
inappropriate behavior, and yet Darren Wick kept his job. We also reported that one high profile television presenter spoke to a current board director about the culture at nine, including damaging leaks designed to force talent into submission. During contract negotiations. Despite the presenter and her lawyer speaking with the director, it wasn't raised at the board level and not claimed.
It wasn't a bored matter.
Mike Sneezbey is under increased pressure amid the ongoing crisis. He was forced to fly home from an overseas trip celebrating his fiftieth to front the newsroom or to discuss this scandal and how it plays out, because it's not over. The Australians media writers Sophie Elsworth joins me now and Sophie, you're reporting on this has been excellent, so we're grateful for your time tonight. What do we know about what happened at today's board meeting?
Well, likewise to you too, Sharry, reporting on this whole saga that's in Gulf nine. Look as you said, it was a pretty lengthy board meeting. It appears that Peter Costello and Mike Sneezeby have appeased the nine board for now.
But Sharry, this could well be the calm before the storm.
Because Mike Sneezebey, he's got his very own newspapers writing incredibly critical articles that look like they are being planted against him, and this is a disaster that is not going away.
Now. They have announced they're doing an independent review.
They have said today that all staff will have to this is about four thousand stuff will have to undergo sexual harassment training in June. Sharry, this is not just going to result in this moving along. I mean, what about the executives are Victoria buck In, the head of communications has been under fire, as you have said in your reporting as well, so I think heads will roll over this.
I'm surprised that.
They haven't yet, but I can't imagine their shareholders will be overly thrilled with Nine making headlines day in day out for all the wrong reason, Sharry.
Well, I understand that nine chair Peter Costello has been blaming some of this crisis at his network on News Corp for our reporting exposing it. Yet his own, as you just said, The City Morning Herald, The Age, and The Financial Review have all run stories relating to this
on their front page. So he can't dismiss this as a NewsCorp driven scandal because it emerged from vulnerable women who've suffered for so long in the first place at his own network, and now his own publishing arm is reporting on this.
Well, not only his own publishing, Sharry, he's Radio arm. We've had Ray Hadley come out talking about this, Tom Elliet Elliott on Threa W in Melbourne, so it's across his different divisions of the business. And blaming other media is never a good thing. Just tries to, you know, put blame on someone else. But Peter Costello has not been speaking or has not spoken to date publicly on this. As you said, Mike sneezeby had to rush home. He
was celebrating his fiftieth overseas. He's come back to Sydney because they are in absolute damage control. Their governance issues are potentially at play here.
Who knew what when? As I said, Shari, this saga.
Is only beginning for nine and I think there will be heads that role and I expect that will be soon. But for now they're trying to calm the waters and look like they are handling this. But Sharry, internally, there's a lot of people extremely angry with how this whole saga has played out.
No, absolutely, and it is an interesting approach. I mean, both Peter Costello and Mike sneeze have been under pressure in the past week and a half. I mean nine is aware of stories that we've been investigating that we're still investigating. So it is an interesting approach to stand by the current executive team. But you know something that's
also fascinating. You know, the senior executives at the publishing arm, Well, how do they sit across from Mike Sneezebey in a couple of weeks at budget meetings when their own front pages have been reporting on him, you know, when their own journalists have been reporting on him on the front page. I mean, how do they sit across from him and deal with him when they're literally putting him on the
front page. You know, these relationships are going to be very difficult now, so if you quickly before you go. The ABC of costs face said it estimates today it's
trying to claim up, clean up this disaster. After Laura Tingle's comments that Australia is racist, the news director at the ABC, David Addison, defended their star political correspondent doesn't sound like her futures in any jeopardy and they're saying, well, we wouldn't accept those comments if they were on the ABC, but they weren't on the ABC, so apparently it's fine.
I mean, Charrie, this is a mess yet again that the ABC is mopping up covering for their high profile journalists. Laura Tingle said, these pretty crazy, outrageous statements, accusing Peter Dutton of you know, you know, whipping up people to abuse migrants that open home inspections.
I mean, this is conspiracy theory.
Sort of stuff.
But there you have David Anderson in front of Senate Estimates today saying she's a great reporter. Yes, he admitted that she did do the wrong thing. However he was trying to argue that she didn't do this on an ABC platform. Well, the ABC had plenty of articles and promos about the Sydney Writers Festival. She was there disclosing that she's an ABC journalist. She's on the board, for
heaven's sake. But as always at the ABC, you might get a little smack on the hand, but nothing really ever happens.
And I think they have a problem.
She's on the board, she's their most high profile staff member, and as Peter Dutton said today, she has damaged her credibility. She's you know, come out extremely partisan and.
I think this will continue to hurt her.
Yeah, I mean you have to question how she would report and politics on the ABC platform on the seven thirty report heading into the next election. And yet let's have a look at David Anderson defending her today.
Should Laura Tingle leave the ABC?
I don't believe so, Senator. So I don't believe that Laura Tingle should leave the ABC.
It looks like miss Tingle has got off Scott free, Senator.
I don't think she's got off Scott free at all.
Here.
I think mister Stevens's statement that went out yesterday would suggest that she has not got off Scott free.
So Miss Tingle's also a member of the ABC board. Is that tenable for her to continue in that role?
It is not up to me. It is up to the chair of the ABC to decide that whether or not any member of the board, including me and my position is tenable or not.
That is a disgraceful statement.
That was a mistake. I think it's a misstep. I'm not embarrassed by it. I wish it hadn't happened.
You don't want to be used to racism, don't peddle it or that actually hurt hurt the ABC.
I am generally sorry that that happened. I wish it hadn't have happened.
Are you sorry to mister Dutton as well?
Well?
Senator? I think when political leaders put things out for debate, I think the course that that takes I can't be sorry for.
I mean, Sophie.
This is one of the criticisms of the ABC that staff just run riot, that no one pulls them in. And when you look at a performance like that, well you can see why.
Well, Sharry, they're protected species at the ABC. They tried to say that, you know, it was the media coming after them.
Which was just absurd.
Also, I'd like to point out where is used director Justin Stevens Now. Mister Anderson said in his testimony today that he was working with Laura he saw her statement which was thirteen hundred words long before it was published.
He let her know.
David Edison believes what was coming in his statement nowhere to be seen today, completely out of the picture.
He should have been there answering the questions.
And where is Kim Williams who said if you're not in pasture.
Don't work at the ABC exactly a good point.
He made a big song of dance of saying that and then nothing to see here, Sophie Ellsworth, I tell you what. We look forward to your media section on Monday, especially this week. I'm sure you have more news on Mike.
Sneezebe and Channel nin and thanks for joining us.
Now.
A sociology professor was caught on tape telling her class that Western media pedaled fake news that hermas had used sexual violence on October seven.
Have a look this article that was written by The New York Times. Scream without words, screams without words, how her mus weaponize sexual violence on October seventh is one that time and again was proven wrong. That witnesses, they supposedly had said they never you know, that never.
Happened to them.
The sources were attracted all kinds of things to prove that, you know that this story was really you know, it was not a real story. That a lot of what was in this article was not true.
In fact, it's the words she's uttering that are untrue. The rape of women on October seven has been proved over and over again.
Now.
Full credit to Alexi Demitriadi for obtaining that amazing and shocking audio, and his reporting in this space has been exceptional.
And this comes just.
Days after the University rewarded pro Palestinian protesters on campus by inviting them to review their defense and security research ties. And if this goes ahead, it could mean a boycott of israel products of Israeli companies. Meanwhile, the young and ignorant on social media, and not just the young, but the old and ignorant on social media are all sharing all eyes on Rafa posts. They've reportedly been more than forty million shares. And this is somewhat depressing because where
were those forty million people on October seven? Where were the all eyes on Israel? Where have those forty million people been When it comes to our hostages were still being held by Hamas we're to discuss all of this, The liberal MP Julian Lisa joins me. Now, Julian, thank you very much for your time.
Thanks Erry.
Look, let's start with this social media trend that has been so upsetting because it's so one sided.
Absolutely, let me say to anybody who's put this tile up, if your eyes are on guars, a lookout for the hostages. If your eyes are on Rafa, look out for the hostages, because that's why this conflict is going on in the first place. We've got a situation now in the world where people whose knowledge of events is puddle deep want a virtue signal, so they'll post and repost tiles where they've got no real knowledge.
Of the events that have happened.
When the terrible terrorist attacks happened on the seventh of October, the largest murder of Jews in a single day since the Holocaust, dreadful rapes and dismemberment of bodies, the abductions and so on, where was the Jewish Lives Matter moment? Where was the Ride with Me movement? Where was the all eyes on Israel moment? There just seems to be online, particularly among people who want to sort of become coctivists, a complete bias against Israel and a bias against Jewish people.
Not only wasn't there a social media movement for Israel, but it was the opposite. People took to the streets against Israel. I still don't understand.
Well, that's right, and this is even before the operation in Gaza exactly.
I think the other thing is that people, including our foreign minister, keep putting pressure on Israel to have a humanitarian ceasefire. Why are there no calls for her muster surrender for her Musk to stop hiding using women and children as human shields, and no pressure on her Musk to return the hostages.
Well, they're absolutely right. This would all be over tomorrow if Hermas released the hostages, if they disabled their infrastructure, and if they surrendered, that's effectively what would bring this war to an end. And there's no pressure on them. In fact, Australia and other Western governments are giving them a sort of a free pass by doing things at the un which actually advantages the Hamas position, by improving the status of a Palestinian state at the United Nations.
And I think that's a terrible thing. I think it lacks the moral clarity that we're also desperately needing at this time.
Now, we just saw what amounts to a clear false narrative peddled by a professor at a university saying that a New York Times article that documented the October seven sexual violence against women and rapes.
Is fake news. I mean, this is appalling.
I'm disgusted that this is happening at a university in Australia. I'm disgusted because of the way in which it degrades and doesn't give respect to the women who went through that terrible ordeal. Har Mus wanted to know, wanted us to know exactly what they did. That's why they wore the body cameras while they committed their crimes. That's why we've seen this week the release of videos, or it may have been last week of hermas saying these are
the women that we're going to get pregnant. In other words, these are the women that we're going.
To pack rape.
We've all seen the images earlier in the piece of women come out with bloody pants and so on. I mean, this is just disgusting. I am concerned that ordinary Australians are going to Sydney University getting an education, trying to better themselves, and instead they're getting indoctrination by political activists masquerading as professors, which is all this woman seems to be.
You couldn't be more right.
That is spot on, and yet what we're seeing is Mark Scott. I mean, where is he on professors like this? Why doesn't he sack them? And instead he seems to be giving in to the encampment to pro Palestinian protesters by offering them this deal. But if they accept will mean that they don't do have ties with Israeli companies anymore.
I think the president that's being said at Sydney University is the more you bully, the more you misbehave, the more you'll get out of the administration. And they're like somebody who owns a property saying to a burglar, come on into my house, we'll show you the silver and then we can negotiat about how much you take. That's effectively what they're doing here. I think it's the weakest leadership I have seen at any university, or indeed at
any institution in our country. And that's why Shari I've been pushing for this judicial inquiry and antisemitism on campus because it's not just Sydney University, it's the whole sector.
We need an.
Inquiry, whether retired or serving judge, who can put Mark Scott on the witness stand, who can cross examine him, who can have a look at some of the course materials that students are being taught in lectures and the words that academics like this professor are saying, and look at the way in which universities are failing and have been failing for decades to or properly with antisemitism. The
time for pussy footing on this issue is over. It's time for all members of Parliament to show that they don't support antisemitism in our universities by supporting my bill.
Do you think Labor will support your bill?
Well, I'm in discussions with the Labor Party at the moment.
I have wide cross bench supporting relation to my bill, and I'm hoping that they will come that they will come on board because I think a judicial inquiry is in our interests, not just for Jewish students, but for all students who are going to university, because all students have the right to go to university free of harassment and intimidation, and also to learn the facts about things, not this distorted propaganda that seems to be taught at too many of our institutions. Eactly.
And I think one great thing that you have going for you in terms of getting bipartisan support for your judicial inquiries, that you do have good relationships on both sides for the Aisle, and you know at times like this you need to draw on those relationships to get Labor to back this in because we do need a judicial inquiry or royal commission something with teeth to examine what's happened.
Absolutely, the idea that we would send this off to the Human Rights Commission, which I have said as systemic racism against Jewish people. They said nothing about the events of October seven, four months They've had staff and contractors who've been engaged in doxing and the like.
One pretend of the Human Rights Commission even admitted in Josh's doco.
That they hadn't done enough.
So absolutely, Juliane Lisa, thank you so much for your strong thoughts on this. Thank you show now coming up after the break of bad news for homeowners as the chance of rate cuts this year diminishes, Stay tuned, welcome back. Well, let's bring in tonight's panel, the Australian National Affairs Editor Joe Kelly and Sky News commentator Jason Morrison. Great to see you both. Look, Joe, let's return to this immigration scandal.
I mean, Andrew Giles has been the scapegoat for the government for months now, yet now now we're seeing Albanesi being blamed himself for this mess because he tried to get Jacina Idern on site. Do you agree that this is an example of his own ideology impacting on National Security.
Arry.
What I think is that this is one of the most politically damaging decisions that the Albanese government has made, and I think that because it has a real shock factor. We knew that the government wanted to resolve this running saw in the relationship with New Zealand, that New Zealand had problems with undesirable people getting deported across the ditch.
I think people thought it was fair enough to do something there, But in the last couple of weeks, the level of shock about the broader consequences and implications of that decision has been revealed and laid bare, and it is shocking. I think there needs to be accountability and a reckoning for that, and I think the Coalition can smell blood in the water in relation to Andrew Giles's
scalp as Immigration Minister. But yes, I do think that the risk for ALBANIZI is that he elevated removing this obstacle from the New Zealand relationship over community safety, and that is a very damaging political narrative for him.
I mean, Jason, you look back on those clips with jacintha Ardurn and how she was having a go at Scott Morrison for sending New Zealand citizens back to New Zealand if they'd committed crimes. And it's just so hard to believe that Anthony Albernezi capitulated to her at our expense.
There was no need to appease her, absolutely none. It was done virtually as a gesture. It was done to show off and sort of looka's and there's a new sheriff in town. And of course what was not in the back of their minds at the time was the.
Protection of Australians.
That should be fundament italy at the front of their minds all the time. It's not in this And they did what they thought was good for her, not for us.
And by the way, what the hell was.
New Zealand going to do it always if we didn't reverse it. Really, i mean, let's get real about this. We've got an ongoing relation with these people. They're not going to say, well, that's it, Australia.
You're gone.
It was a moment of weakness and we're all paying for it.
No Australian voters in New Zealand, that's for sure. Now new data shows Australians are feeling the strain of the sharp increase in mortgage repayments in the past year. The number of people falling behind are falling more than thirty days behind on their home loans has increased in New South Wales, Western Australia and Victoria and Joe. We've also seen inflation climb to three point six percent in the
year to April. It's now possible that there's going to be a rate hike in August, whereas the government had been hoping that rates would fall by the end of the year.
Look, this is a really big challenge for the government. We had that surprise uptick, as you said, Cherry, in April, inflation up to three point six from three point five percent in March. I think the risk for the government is that it has handed down and in an expansionary budget, it's tried to buy a rate cut, but a lot of the economists say the Reserve Bank will look through that. We have the conventional wisdom from most economists saying that
rates will be higher from longer. That there are some hawks out there. Warren Hergan among them, saying that he thinks that you know, it's even chance that the Reserve Bank might be tempted to hike. Now, if that happens, it is a political catastrophe for Jim Chalmers and Labor and it shows that they brought down the wrong budget for the times and mischarged that inflation challenge.
What do you think about this, Jason?
Do you think the government's budget will be blamed if inflation continues to inch up and the RBA decides it has to raise rates.
Yeah.
I have a more broader view about it. I don't sit in blame and the budget. I blame government's involvement and interference in so many things that are naturally pushing prices up. I mean, we're about to go through a period where exercises will rise on everything, where tolls will go up in New South Wales and parts of Queensland as well because governments make stupid decisions and don't want
to act on it. And then at the same time you've got council rates on the rise being pushed up here, there and everywhere, and you know, electricity prices.
Did we mention that all of these things?
I think that government could actually have an impact on pushing down.
On but they choose to not.
Act or overact and we end up paying for it. So the budget to me, is a small part of the story. The real part of the story is everything else they just do automatically, and that's push up the price.
Yeah.
Now, just quickly before we go, there are reports today that the PM gave an ironclad guarantee to big business not to include a so called climate trigger in environment legislation that would stock new coal and gas mines being open and Joe. There are now calls for the PM to explain if he did give this commitment. But if he did, why the secrecy over it.
Well, I think that's exactly the point, Cherry. I think what everyone wants to know, including the business community, is what is the government's position. So Tanya Plitisak previously said this wasn't going to be included in the APBC, Anthony
Alberanzi seems to be mudding the waters somewhat. This is a Greens proposal and essentially it would add another layer of bureaucracy regulation for major projects going ahead based on their emissions footprint, and some of the projects which might not go ahead as a result of this would actually be those projects that are needed in the transition to
net zero. So you can understand why the business Council is concerned and I think instead of the confusing answer that the Prime Minister gave in question time today, he needs to be clear about what Labour's position is on many things.
Joe Kelly, Jason Morris, and thank you very much for your treasure. Now, after the break, we'll cross live to Washington for the latest from Donald Trump's hush money trial.
Annalise Nielsen would join me next.
Let's bring in now Sky News's Washington correspondent Analise Nielsen. Analise, thank you very much for joining us now. Donald Trump's hush money trial is massive news. The jury asked to see fresh evidence again yesterday. What other testimony did they want to re examine?
Yeah, Look, this is the really interesting bit because this is all we really have access to to gain an idea of what the jury is thinking while they're deliberating. Remember, in this case, like any criminal case, just one juror going against the rest of the group is enough to have a hung jury and then it's all over unless the prosecution and the courts decide that they want to do it again. And so they've asked again to see
the testimony. David Pecker, he's from the National Inquirer, and he gave all that evidence into the hush money catch and kill scheme work where the National Enquirer would pay people exclusively for their stories, but instead of running them,
would bury them to help the Trump campaign. They've also asked to see portions of testimony again from Michael Cohen, and this is really important because this entire case, as much as the prosecutions trying to draw the focus otherwise, does rest on the testimony of Michael Cohen, because he's the only one with direct evidence that Donald Trump knew that these transactions were being misrecorded, and that is the crime here, not that there's any allegation of the hush
money payments wrong, but if they want to prove that Donald Trump is guilty, they have to prove that he knew that these payments were being misrecorded, and that's the crux of this. But just to take a step back as well, it's very interesting in the context of a jury to be looking at something like this and a crime where there's no victim. There's been no victim giving testimony in all this, and so we're coming down to a big pile of paperwork for these juries.
That's really tricky.
For them to come to a conclusion when it's been so complicated, and the prosecutor took a very long time going through those closing arguments, No doubt there would have been a little lost as some portions after six hours.
Well, there's been mountains of analysis about which way the jury will go. But it does have to be a unanimous decision, doesn't it And what do you think the likelihood is.
Of that.
It does?
And of course this has been non stop news. The cable news channels have been running analysis and excerpts coming out of the courts all day every day for weeks, and so this is something that people have been watching very closely. But the issue is you never really know how jurors are going to go. Yes, this is a very democrat area in America. They do extensive vetting of jurors.
They fill out forms you know where they work. The judge gets to ask questions in wider process to find out if there's any bias that would make them unable to give a fair and impartial analysis. From what we know of the jurors, there's potentially one who'd be leaning more towards a pro Trump stunts. But at the end of the day, they're all supposed to put all those biases aside and just look at the evidence before them.
And so you just don't know how people are going to analyze all of that when it's in front of them.
And how is this all playing out politically in the presidential campaign.
Look if Donald Trump, I think six months ago, had sat down and tried to figure out what the best case scenario would be for his legal troubles, I think we're pretty much there. Every other case has fallen apart delayed until after the election.
And this is the only one going forward.
And it is complicated, it's rehashing all issues, and if anything, it's just driven everyone further into their own preconceived ideas of Donald Trump. And that's not me saying that, that's the poll saying that because no one's abandoning Donald Trump for support over this. If anything, he's had a bump in support because his supporters feel like he's been persecuted, that it's all politically driven. And then we've also got Biden not doing very well in the post because he's losing young voters.
Analie Nielsen, thank you so much for your time, and thanks everyone for your company. This week, here's Paul Murray