Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Disclaimer: The Parliamentary Library does not warrant the accuracy of closed captions. These are derived automatically from the broadcaster's signal.
Insiders -

View in ParlViewView other Segments

(generated from captions) The girls are sure working overtime. about the big day ahead.' They're pretty excited Ow. bring it home. 'That's right. Bring it home, boys, It's new cheese release day. The big day has finally arrived. Will Abner eat the cheese this year? mouse in Gloomsville. We know he's the most finicky Not sure if he likes it. He sniffs a bit. Oh, no, he's walking away.' (ALL SIGH) 'But wait, he's changed his mind. He likes the cheese! He really, really likes it. He likes it! Oh, he likes the cheese, everyone. There you have it, folks. Now, say cheese.' What a momentous occasion. (ALL) Cheese. Closed Captions by CSI * This Program is Captioned Live.

Good morning. A human rights group

claims the Libyan army has been

claims the Libyan army has been using

banned cluster bombs. The US-based

human rights watch says its

researchers reported the use of

cluster bomb munitions against the

rebel-held city of Misrata. The

weapons are banned

countries across the world.

countries across the world. The weapons are banned by more than 100

Syrian president says the country's

emergency rule will be abolished emergency rule will be

within a week. President Bashar

Assad made the announcement in a within a week. President Bashar al recor

recorded television broadcast.

Emergency rule has been in place for

almost 50 years and it's been one of

the triggers for recent

anti-government protests. The anti-government

president also

president also expressed sorrow over

the deaths of 200 people in the

unrest. Several aftershocks have

felt in parts unrest. Several aftershocks have been

shook the after a 5.2-magnitude earthquake felt in parts of north Queensland

struck 60 shook the region. The epicentre

struck 60 kilometres west of Bowen

yesterday afternoon, it's

yesterday afternoon, it's the struck 60 kilometres west of Bowen

quake to hit Queensland yesterday afternoon, it's the largest

Experts say there's a strong chance quake to hit Queensland since 1935.

aftershocks could continue into next

week. The Federal Government is

cracking down on welfare recipients

who gamble large sums of money. The Government says

Government says it's owed $9 million

dollars from gambling Centrelink

customers who've wrongly claimed

benefits. Minister for Human

Tanya Plibersek

many of pensioners and job-seekers Tanya Plibersek says she knows of Tanya Plibersek says she knows benefits. Minister for Human Services

who have gambled away hundreds of

thousands of dollars. Stay tuned now

for 'Insiders' with Barry Cassidy. This Program is Captioned

Live. Good morning. Welcome to 'Insiders'. Another week, more

debate on a carbon tax. We're

told by the Government that

off - yes, better off than you million of you will be

would have been without it.

How does that work, what are the design details and figures? They're coming apparently in

changed mid-year. The Government

changed the subject to welfare reform and the reform and the long-term

unemployed were told they too

will be better off when they

lose their benefits? The

details are elusive. We'll

have to wait for the May

budget. It was that kind of

week, information underload.

One, two, three. everybody right to go?

Today I want to take the

opportunity to explain the steps the Government is taking

to tackle climate change by

putting a price on carbon

pollution. We're going to have a tax. Millions of households

will be better off under the

carbon price and the assistance

will be permanent. I won't

tell you how much compensation

I'm going to give you. More

than 50% of the money raised

will go to assisting

households. What we have is a

Government that is continually

trying to talk about who's

going to be better off. A

Government which can't put any

figures on its carbon tax.

about that, so now they're We're not going

deliberately talking about everything but the carbon

price. The detailed design of

the carbon price mechanism is

well and truly, of course,

under way.

We will make further

announcements in the middle of

the year. Trust us, it will

all be okay. Tony Abbott all be okay. Tony Abbott is

presenting himself more as a mobile scare campaign mobile scare campaign than as

country. We're not running a an alternative leader of this

scare campaign. I think it's

the job of the Opposition to

stop bad policy. When

opposition to reform is based

solely on political opportunism

and self-interest and fuelled

by fear and misinformation, it must be met and must be

well. The Government makes defeated. Not working too

announcements having a very significant impact on people, but then it doesn't follow

through. Does it stop there,

no? In a reform like this,

it's important to play the long

game. So let's talk tonight

about the long view. Well, the

Gillard Government has been

working on a new strategy. know there is more we can do to

build participation and to make

work pay. This is a Government which keeps making vacuous

speeches that are full of worthy sentiment. Something

entirely new for Australian

politics. And I'm extending

that campaign of high expectations to welfare as

well. But there are no

proposals. It's called the big target strategy. I will not go

down a populous path pursuing

short-term politics lacking

serious policy convictions, whipping up

following the opinion cycle.

That's where you work out how

to alienate, annoy and irritate

every single part of Australian

society. In the face of this

culture of confrontation, I

will not accept a false choice

between listening to our people

This is just awful. My and persisting with reform.

approach is quite the contrary.

That big target strategy is

working. Any Government which

tries to fight an opposition on its own grounds of short-term

media pandering is doomed to

policy and political failure.

It will get them in the end if

they keep going. This morning

our program guest is the

barn National Party Senate leader

what the papers are saying

Suggestions of a whispering Suggestions around the country.

campaign within the defence department against the girl at the centre of the Duntroon scandal, Karen Middleton.

That's right, "cadets need sex

as an outlet", I don't know where to begin with that. The

suggestion in here there's an

unnamed federal MP saying that

he or she has been told this girl has

girl has been portrayed as promiscuous, she's been

portrayed as a wild child, the

suggestion being the girl who

made the allegations is the

problem. The person named in

this story is Neil James from association. He's quoted and

talks about her as a little bit

of a troubled lass. So I don't

know whether that's the sort of

thing that this federal MP is

talking about, but the suggestion being well, young

blokes at defence they're very

fit. I think he says the fitter you are, frisky is not

quite the right word, but

there's more pressure in there

for an outlet. Neil James talks

about the group dynamic. He

said because of the group

dynamic at Duntroon, it's probably better she be pulled

out for a semester. Rather than deal with the dynamic - It's not the group,

it's the woman involved, you

can't break up the group as

they sit around a computer term

national doing lord knows what,

watching people have sex in a

room down the hall. I think

that's a misreading. What if

we said things about Neil James

about his libido that he didn't

quite agree with, would he be in a position to complain

1234 This girl went to the

media because she felt like,

rightly or wrongly, this wasn't

being managed properly.

Defence says we went back to

the AFP, we said you've got to look at this handling it, she jumped the

gun. She felt that way. I'm

told within ADFA this is being discussed in the tone of this

is a re-enactment of a scene from the movie "American Pie".

In the film a young couple are

caught on a webcam in a bedroom

and it's broadcast to a number of people elsewhere. The

difference here, though, is I

don't think either of the

people in this case were aware

in the film that the camera was

on and it was the guy who ended

up being more humiliated than

the girl initially anyway. There's a difference here. The

difference is consent. This girl

on. She may have consented to

the sexual act, but the

question is is the issue of

consent affected if she didn't

con sent to it being broadcast. Maybe there's

whether she consented at all.

That's the thing they're

looking at legally. The Defence

Minister raised an interesting

new angle this morning on 'Meet

The Press'. There is a

distinct possibility, either in

individual cases or more generally, through the Department of Defence or

through the services there is a Commonwealth liability That's why I say we need to just proceed just proceed carefully. Michael

Stutchbury, that opens up a

whole new can of worms, doesn't

it? I think this issue is really spiralling a bit out of

hand in all sorts of different

ways. You have an incident at the Australian Defence Force

Academy sort of unsafory

incident including in a female

cadet and a number of male

cadets, suddenly we have major confrontation between the

Government, the Defence we have reviews going on all

over the place. Six of them.

We have sudden ly to the

question of females being in the Special Air Services the front line troops, and so

forth, and you're not sure how

these two are linked. I'm not

quite sure whether this is the

issue that the Government

should be bringing it on with defence. Clearly, there's a

lot of problems between - historically between defence and various Governments over

all sorts of issues. I'm not

sure this is the one they want to have the big stoush

over. This morning he didn't

rule out a royal commission. What's the royal commission

going to be into? Into a

decade of alleged decade of alleged abuse, apparently. I don't know.

Barrie, there doesn't seem to

be a linkage between this and

the big confrontation that's

going on. But this issue was a

detonating issue that set off

years and years of tension between the political leadership of uniformed leadership over a

number of issues. Something

had to set it off eventually and this is the issue. Michael,

it goes all the way back to

1983 in fact and now the

whistleblower Andrew Wilkie has

had the whistle blown on him of

course. The guy who blue the

whistle has spoken this morning

to the Sunday Tasmanian. All

these stories are bizarrely

linked. This is the pokies

story, linked, because the anti pokers campaigner, Andrew

Wilkie, a fellow Wilkie, a fellow cadet Brendan

Etchers from Duntroon almost 30

years ago has come out in the Sunday Tasmanian and he's the

fellow who says that nearly 30

years ago Andrew years ago Andrew Wilkie made

the young cadets salute to

Adolf Hitler. Andrew Wilkie

apologises, he was a larrikin,

he can't remember the particular

particular episode. Etchers

says in the Sunday Tasmanian

that Andrew Wilkie back in

those days was a very scary,

nasty guy who revelled in it all and he's Wilkie possibly tomorrow and he

says he wants three things from

Wilkie: he wants to hear

Andrew Wilkie apologise for this. Wilkie says "I can't

remember this actual episode,

the Hitler episode."

Secondly, etchers wants Wilkie

to make this bastardisation, if

you like, issues part of

Wilkie's agenda, much like

pokies, and third he wants

Wilkie to formally accept that

Echers coming out has nothing

to do with the pokies campaign.

Wilkie has linked the allegations

allegations to the clubs and

the pokies. Echers says it's

ridiculous, "I'm with Andrew

Wilkie on pokie s, I can't bear

them" This is what Andrew Wilkie said on 'Meet The Press' this morning I'm looking

forward to meeting Brendan and

to talk about his concerns. I

would make the point again that I genuinely have no memory of

the incident he's alleging, but

that's not some sort of politician's copout. I won't

be able to apologise to him for

an incident I have no memory

of. I have already apologised to him and everyone and the same again when I see him this week to anyone who this week to anyone who feels

in any way aggrieved by

anything I've said or done in

my life or in my time my life or in my time at

Duntroon. It's a bit difficult for me to apologise for a

particular incident that I have

no memory of. There you go. So he apologised for anything and

everything that he can recall.

Malcolm, there's a political

link to everything these days.

Shirley McLean's new book, it's

under the headline X files, she went looking for UFOs with Andrew Peacock. people interested in serious

news will ignore, which is why

I'm going to leap in and do

several laps. It's so

interesting. Maiden reports Shirley

Shirley McLean in her new

become "I'm over all that and

other confessions" reprises the

fact when she was a Moorish

peasant girl she had sex with

emperor sharl main. More pertinent are the details of

her affair with Andrew Peacock,

which was around the she adds nyts she was

two-timing him with olive

Palmer at one stage, which

mightn't be good for the

Peacock ego had he known at the time.

time. What's interesting she infers that Mr Peacock shared

her interest and belief in

certain extra ter he is tree al

activities, they want on a date

to a Mexican mountain, where

they thought they saw a UFO and

Mr Peacock nearly, "climbed the sky". I don't know if that's

the same as the earth moving, but what's really interesting

is the way she phrases that.

There's an instance she said "Whenever I discussed my

spiritual and met fiscal ideas

with him, he listened, nodded

and more or less said it could

be, who knows. I think he was smiling, are there any sharp

implements in this room, how do

I get out very quickly if

necessary?" It's a fascinating

read and shows what an exotic life Mr

though he never did get to go to bed with sharl main. Okay,

that's the Sunday papers.

We'll go to the program guest. This morning it's the National Party Senate leader Barnaby

Joyce, shadow minister on

regional and local issues. He

joins us this morning. Good

morning, Barrie, good morning

everybody also, Karen, Malcolm,

Michael. We'll start with the

poker machine debate. Given

the extent of problem gambling

in this country, why has it

taken so long to have a

national debate? I invented poker machines to today, we wouldn't have them,

they would be banned. But

they're there and a lot of

places rely on them, a lot of places rely on them for income streams, especially in regional

towns, where they're instrumental

instrumental in delivering a

whole heap of services, such as

sporting fields, venues, to the

town. But no-one likes the

mess of someone who sits in the

corner and puts the family's savings or the family's income

down the slot, and I think

everybody acknowledges that. There's a parliamentary inquiry

that's going to come out about

this and we'll hope that the

parliamentary inquiry will be

acted on. I think there's general

has to be, at the very least, a

voluntary capacity for people

to put a limit on how much they

can bet. You know, the debate

is at foot and let's see where the parliamentary inquiry

goes. What about the idea,

though, that you set a limit

before they bet and they're forced to stay within that

limit. What's wrong with that

idea? I suppose it's a case of how is it going to work? I'm

not fully across the details of

how exactly that would work.

What I do know is that a lot of

people have paid a lot of money

for poker machines. If you start removing the capacity for

them to earn money from a

federal sphere, I suppose the Federal

Federal Government, will have

to compensate those clubs for

it. There's a whole heap of

aspects to this debate na have

to be considered. Now, the

State Governments have been out

there making literally hundreds

of million uns, billions of dollars of revenue out things. Everybody has their

hands on the sticky paper on

this one. There's a general feeling something has to be

done, we have to start at least

kishing the excesses of who've done their dough through

clubs and pubs. Everybody

likes them who makes money out

of them, but everybody who sees

them has an unerring feeling

there's something not quite

right going on there. Do you

think you can kerb the excesses

without really having a major impact on the clubs and pubs

that employ so many people? Well, if what they say there's only a small proportion of

people who are the problem, I

suppose it's not going to be an issue. It's a self-defeating

argument for them if they say

the people causing the problem and people who have a miedgeor

problem are the one who

generate most of the money for

them. If that's the case, it's

a moral question for all of us.

They have to argue that the

vast majority of people don't

have a problem and the vast

majority of people it's money

that they can afford to spend

and that's where the majority

of the funds come from, but if

we see that the majority of the

funds are coming from people who who have who have an addiction, then

that's almost an immoral form

of income stream, isn't it sdm The Productivity Commission figures say that 4% of the population use

15% are problem gamblers, but

of that 15%, they make up 40%

of the total gambling on poker

machines. If you made a really

serious impact on the problem

gambler, it's going to eat into

their revenue. Yeah. Well,

there comes the question to

those people who've bought the machines, they'll certainly be sticking up their "we bought the machines, we

expect to be compensated".

Regional towns will say "how do

we actually provide the

services which the Government has

has absconded from providing

and now this form of gambling provides it for us" and the Federal Government will have to answer the question if we

remove this, we'll have to

compensate. So these are a

number of issues for the

parliamentary inquiry to

discuss, and I, like everybody

else, will be very interested in what they come up with. As

you travel around the bush, is this as big an issue as the

carbon tax? No, the carbon tax leaves

tax is just infuriate ing people. It's like thorrant

teenager who won't listen to

the word "no no. the person saying I'm going to

set fire to your house, don't

worry, I'll call the fire truck

to put it out for you. Why set

it on fire in the first place?

Everybody goes back to this

basic fundamental principle,

this tax is going to do nothing

to the climate. The climate,

whether getting warmer, colder,

staying the same, whether

there's global warming osht,

whatever your views are,

tax is going to do nothing to

the climate, it will definitely

mean that people lose their jobs and I think that Mr Combet

and Ms Gillard should and Ms Gillard should listen to

their coalition colleague

Senator Dr Bob Brown, from the

Greens, who says jobs will be

lost. They might try the

whyzle words we'll replace them

with green jobs, but I don't

think anybody will be wanting

to be sweeping parks, when

formerly they were a fitter and

turner in a steel works. I

don't think any person in

regional or urban Australia anything but furious we are going down this path of the

nauseating debate, we're being

moralised to, made feel guilty

and made to swallow a tax by reason of a Government that

broke its word. It's just not going to work. The more the

Labor Government pursues this

issue, the more they are

peeling off their own people.

I say to Mr Paul Howes, he's

had a dramatic turn of fortune

lately, he seems to be

listening to his own membership, jobs are going to

be lost. It would be insane to

suggest jobs won't be lost.

You can't put up the major driver of an of power, to make us less

competitive than our overseas

countser parts in South-East

Asia or in Europe and not expect there to be some ramifications in

loss. They're going to be your

jobs that are lost, Paul. Paul

Howes sounds like he might be

signing up to Tony Abbott's

revolution, you might find

yourself marching alongside his

trade union members. You know,

I looked on the CFMEU website

the other day, Barrie, they

don't want the carbon tax. I hardly see the underground movement for the

National Party. It's just a

wide consensus across the

community. The other day when

we had Labor Party people

parading out the front of parliament calling parliament calling people dungeons and dragons fant

cysts, odd balls, that other

audience, red necks, well, you

saw the result in the NSW State

election. People will not be

spoken to from sort of the

pulpit of morality from the

Labor Party that this tax is

somehow good for them when it's never going to do anything to

the climate, it will definitely put jobs at risk and, most

importantly, there are people,

Barrie, who are already doing

it tough who can't afford power

as it is or fuel as it is, struggling with the everyday

fundamentals of life as they

are and they just go into

hieber space when you suggest a

new tax. You say there's consensus across the community.

It wasn't so long your party,

the National Party, was the

only party opposed to an ETS.

The Liberals now, are they

permanent converts? Well, I

can't help it if we're forefront of philosophical

change, Barrie.

change, Barrie. It's part of

the National Party's dictum.

What I can say is people at the

start were made to feel guilty.

They were made to - it was a statement made to them "You

must accept this or you are

somehow of a moral lesser

character than everybody else."

Over a period of time, Barrie,

they've looked into the details

of this and asked some

fundamental questions, what

exactly are they intending to

do, who is going to administer

this, is this going to be the same people administering this insulation and school hall

debacle and it has us 198.2

billion in gross debt. Are

they the people who apparently

are going to cool the planet? How does this affect my life?

If you have a power point in

your house, if you use power,

if you use concrete, if you use

steel, if you have a job in a

mission intensive industry, you

will be affected. Australia

has an innate pride we want to

be a country that makes and

grows things, a country that

can't make things or grow

things becomes a country that

world. What this tax takes us

to a position where we become nobodies. We don't like that. Do we also want to lead

the world in creating a dirty

environment. That's what the

figures suggest. Barrie, this

is absurd to think that

somehow, from Australia, we are the pendulum of political

thinking. It's ridiculous. If

we want to go on a unilateral

crusade, why don't we go on one

to have regime in North Korea.

Then we can remove Robert

Mugabe and

the world of malaria. They're merely gestures, you know you

can't do them. Might I say

they may be far more easy to achieve than single-handedly cooling the planet from a room

in Canberra. I want to ask you about State politics in

Queensland. Are you relaxed about the Campbell Newman

rather unorthodox push to be

Premier? Well, Queensland is

known for being unorthodox. I

suppose I'm a representation of

that lack of deliberation that

sometimes comes into things.

What we have is something that's the Queensland community. They see Campbell as a person who's

got proven political acumen.

They realise, and I hope my colleagues realise, that this is a ship and

launched and if you think you

have a better future in the sea

with the sharks, good luck.

The people of Queensland will

be furious if this does not

come to its fruition and I

think that Campbell, you know,

has an extremely good chance,

not a perfect chance but an

extremely good chance, of

showing to Queensland an which they haven't had for basically a quarter of a

century, except for two years

under Rob borrow bdge and James

Sheldon. They were very

tenuous. People in general

will be furious if this does not

not become fulfilled. They

want that change. Some of your

colleagues, though, in the

National Party at the State level have spoken about the

impact on parliamentary

democracy, the principle of it,

that it gives unelected party officials control over elected

MPs. Does that concern you?

No, it doesn't, Barrie. Let's go through it. what's so vitally different

about this, or fundamentally

different about this, is that

Campbell Newman has to receive

the endorsement of the people

of Ashgrove, they can knock it

on the head straightaway if

they really wanted to.

Likewise it has to be the endorsement of the people of Queensland at a State election.

There has to be the endorsement

of his colleagues within the

party room. Now, this is an

entirely different proposition

to what Julia Gillard did when

she brought in a carbon tax,

she said one thing, delivered a

different outcome after the

election. Wither' telling the people intend to do prior to the

election and it is their right

to make a decision or otherwise

at the election. A couple of

quick issues. This whole

concepts of women in combat roles, it seems that that's

going to go ahead. Well, you

know, I see this obviously what

happened with that lady at ADFA

was abhorrent, but let's not confuse that when you're in the

military, you're not working

for KPMG, it is the military,

it is not sievy street, as they

say. In the military they're

training people unfortunately

to kill people and when you're given an F 88 with a 5.56 or

5.36mm round, these things are

designed to put you in a very

peculiar position in life in that you are that you are designed and

trained and expected to kill

and maim other people. But that

doesn't in any way justify what

happened to her, though, does

it? In no way, shape or form

does it justify it, but I think

that sometimes there's an

overlapping desire to make the military like sievy street and it's not like sievy street, it

is the military. I suppose the first question that needs to be

asked as well finds justice, as she's

entitled to, is I'm sure when I had a brief involvement with

the military, there was a thing

about fratnisation between the

sexes in the ranks and that's

not supposed to happen. So these are some of that happen when that

does. What about the question

women in combat roles? Well, I

can only look at this

personally. I just couldn't

get my head around shooting a

woman. Maybe that makes me

old-fashioned and I imagine

other people get themselves in

the same position. Nor would I

like to see a lady shot so me personally it makes me slightly uncomfortable with it.

I'm happy to go to a position

of bio mechanics, that if

anything you've got to realise

that no-one is that no-one is - fighter jets

don't get parking tickets and

guns and rifles are designed to

shoot people and it's all about

the bio mechanics, the horrible

stark reality of the

battlefield that if you're on

it, you'd better be able to do everything asked of you and more, otherwise you're putting

yourself and all those around

you at risk. Just finally, the Government

Government has confirmed with Bob

up an inquiry to establish permanent rules for debates in

federal elections. Bob Brown,

a good chance he'll be on the

panel next time around. How would would the nationals feel about that? Delighted as long as

we're there with them. The

reality is we have just as many

senators as Bob Brown. At the last State election the

National Party stood in 20

seats, won 18. Bob Brown by

the way is on 42.5% more money

than me, he seems to sneak

around that one, You've done

the figures Of course I have. I bet I bet you you know what you're

getting paid. Bob Brown, if he

has a right to the podium, to

express the views of the Greens, certainly the National

Party has a right to the same

podium and I'm sure the Australian people would want us

there. We have been leading

debate on such things as ETS:

They made a public statement about making sure about making sure the Singaporean Stock Exchange did

not merge with the Australian

one, I know Michael doesn't

agree with me. But we have

quite a few things to say and

deserve exactly the same rights

as Bob to say them. Except that

you are with the Liberals, the Greens

are not in a formal coalition

with Labor. Come on, Barrie,

you don't believe that. You

tell me how many times Adam

Bandt has voted

Government. I remember the

happy smile y photo of Bob

Brown and the Greens signing

the book with Julia Gillard. I

remember the media announcement

with, you know, Bob and Julia

and Rob Oakeshott and Tony

Windsor all standing out the

front. It's the Green Labor

Party independent Government,

the glee club. They are the Government, we're the try 20 change them. Thanks for

your time this morning. You're

welcome. Australia's pubs and

clubs have launched a

multimillion dollar advertising

campaign to try to head off

legislated limits on poker machine gambling. This licence

to play the pokies the Feds are

talking about, that's a bit of

a worry. What? This licence

to punt will pubs broke and put Australians

out of a job. It's un-Australian. The Federal

Government says the card-based scheme will force pokie

to set their own betting limits

before they play. Most

Australians would say that it's

not right for businesses to profit from other people's

misery. It's being portrayed as a silver bullet to fix problem gambling. It won't do

that. It's about keeping a

bloke in Tasmania happy,

because if he doesn't get his

way on poker machines, then he

will send us back to the polls.

I'm not any clubs, I'm not any

pub, I'm just anti-problem

gambling. It's a political

fix. It's the right thing to

do, to have an appropriate

package to tackle problem

gambling. I address problem gambling in

ways which build up the social

fabric, don't damage it. The

hotels and clubs campaign has been fundamentally been fundamentally misleading.

This week I've also had a

death threat, which the Federal

Police are investigating. Police are investigating. I

think it's disgraceful that

someone could lob that hand

grenade in. Who knows what

some rogue elements would do. Like I'm some sort of criminal. underhanded about our campaign.

No way. I don't think it is

wise for politicians every time

they're criticised to start revealing whether they've had

death threats or threats. That's That's why I'm asking for him

to apologise. I would ask the

journalist why he sought this week

week to publish a story which, by his

by his own admission, he sat on

for 28 years. Have you ever

received any suggestions of

blackmail or should back off,

we've got photos of you,

anything like that? No compromising

might be a full-length DVD on

the net, though. It's just one

goat. Who would have thought that maybe the poker machine

debate was going to be at the

heart of the future of the Government? I guess it was part of the agreement at the

time, but were we paying enough

attention? This is part of attention? This is part of the problem the Government now

faces. Gender is not only

littered with things it wants

to do, it's littered with the

things people who put it in

Government want to do. It's something the Government would

have chosen to act on, but forced to by an independent,

its existence is at

stake. Here's Andrew Wilkie on 'Meet The Press' this morning.

This most recent threat was

different. It came on the day

that the poker machine industry

launched its $20 million

campaign against me and the Government. The day that I also received an email

threatening me with threatening me with so-called compromising photos, the day

that the media started to trawl

over my Duntroon past. There

was clearly, or is clearly, a

campaign being waged against me. if you want to overturn poker

machine reform, you run an

advertising campaign, you lobby

politicians and try to destroy

Andrew Wilkie. So he thinks it's a pretty rough fight. it's all about him. Look, it

is a rough fight, but there is

absolutely no evidence that poker machine industry clubs

and pubs were involved in

bringing up Andrew Wilkie's

past. A couple of things - one

is every time you hear someone

say something is un-Australian, I immediately think they've run out of real argument, they're

just tossing that up. much better ways of circulating

$4 to $5 billion, whatever the

figure is, throughout local

communities than putting it

through poker machines first.

Spend it in the through small business, better

for the community than being

processed through clubs.

Politically, though, the

Government is in for a huge

fight with western Sydney and similar environs where these

big clubs, Penrith Panthers,

rooty Hill RSL, are extremely

important and do a very job for local communities, for entertainment, social

gatherings, et cetera.

Secondly, it's a view that

Julia Gillard will be doing, not because it's good policy,

but because she's been told to

by a single in the upper House, one in the

lower House. That reflects

badly on the Government if that

comes up. She has to win it. I

think, Barrie, this shows what

happens when you have weak and unstable minority Government.

You don't get to set all the agenda, it comes out of left

field from some independent in

Hobart. As well, because

you've had these fights and you've

the big mining tax, you've

caved in, and you're weak and

unstable Government almost by

definition minority, all the

vested interest group bes know

out there that you out there that you can be done

over. So the get yourself into

a dynamic where you're not even

setting the agenda and have setting the agenda and have to

fight other people's fights

just to stay in Government.

The poker issue itself, as the

Productivity Commission has

done a thorough report on all

this, there is an area of

problem gambling. Clubs and

hotels have always had sort of

this special regulatory and tax concessions.

to keep the ability to be able

to make money off problem

gambling. The Wilkie idea of a pre-commitment to gamble seems

like a reasonable idea. There's There's a parliamentary committee. What they should

do, I think, is have a trial

somewhere, let's get evidence-based policy, evidence-based policy, let's

see if it works. As an idea, it

may be a good one. I think the

difficulty is the cost. If you

needed to insert the technology

into these machines, it could

be as high as $3 billion. That's

That's what they say. Let's

have a trial somewhere in a smaller

issues to do with having a

trial. Where there's only one

club - Sure, it's got to be

careful about how you set it

up. Then you can get the costs

and see if it does do something to problem gambling. It might

get the Government through the

next election. I think most

Australians would think you have to do something about

problem gambling, but the clubs

are obviously extremely

powerful, I think the issue is

that gambling is now financing

all sorts of quasi communities-type activities all through,

through, say, the western

suburbs of Sydney. That may be

the political reality. Are we

under estimating, though, the

backlash. Graham Richardson

talks about every pub and club in the region could become a campaign office of the

opposition. Precisely. We've seen how effective Tony Abbott

can be on just about any issue the Government has attempted,

going around and stirring up

doubts and concerns. Can you

imagine him popping into the

Penrith RSL, where he went

during the election campaign,

friends there, and just

happening to talk about poker machines? really try, just have to turn

up. They're already pitching

that campaign at the people who

don't have a problem as

gamblers who like to gamble occasionally

occasionally and don't like the

idea of having a restriction put on what they spend at any

given time, I only spend $100 a

few months, what's my problem,

with the ad with the licence to

gamble and punt. They're

trying to divide the community

and raise angst about this

whole idea. It's just another argument with another section

of the community, but of course

the one we referred to earlier

was the Stephen Smith the defence department, or the

military brass. Some people have forgotten the core principle, civilians run the

show. Here's Hugh White. We

expect the Treasurer to charge of the Treasury, the

minister for foreign affairs to be in charge of Foreign Affairs Department, but somehow for

quite a long time now we've

accepted that the defence

minister is a customer of the defence organisation instead of

the leader of it. He's not. the leader of it. He's not. In

fact he can run operational

matters if he wants to. He

can. There's an inherent tension here between an organisation Cosgrove says, involves people

who train to kill people, that

makes the Defence Force an

unusual organisation, and the

people who are its political masters. masters. In the end, every decision about going to war is

a political decision, so there

is an inherent tension there

between those two things. We

have got to a pretty bad stage with the relationship between

the Government and the defence

department at the moment. I'm

told it's extremely tense still. I think this is quite

historical, it goes back to a

whole lot of other things. I agree with before, this issue has

detonated other tensions over

money and management of assets, the way projects have been managed. Part of the problem

is that under the Howard Government defence got a

greater run. They got a lot

more mub, got a lot more free

rein to do what they wanted.

The defence ministers, five in

the Howard era, five different

ministers and the Prime

Minister ran the show and the

Prime Minister was very

sympathetic to defence. Under the Labor Government that has stranged, three ministers already under Labor. The been a shock to defence to have

a minister try to exercise

that. How do you think Stephen

Smith has handled himself? I

think there is an issue of accountability of the Defence Force over Force over alsorts of issues. We saw with the Queensland

floods the defence really - the

armed services, the Navy,

wasn't quite up to speed with

dealing with the floods. It

couldn't - Questions need to

be answered about that. The

Defence Minister is right to

really raise serious questions about the operation, efficient

operation, accountability of

the defence department. issue really is whether this

particular issue, of which we

don't really know all the whole

circumstances of happening on - really really an education facility of the defence department

involving a young woman and

cadets who have obviously -

everyone has done the wrong

thing, as barn bi-Joyce said,

frat earnisation is not alowed,

as to whether the Defence Minister has enough of the information that's the right

thing for him to get involved

in micro management of these sort of disciplinary the Defence Force, in defence

education - It's open to him

to do it if he wants to. It

is, but is this the one he wants to pull on the big fight

about accountability of the Defence Force? I have Defence Force? I have to say

I'm a little uncomfortable with

how far he went in terms of

directly intervening in a military disciplinary matter

and saying that charges on

other things should be quashed

and looked at again. You have

to be careful when a minister

getting involved in that kind

of level of the running of the

Defence Force. I'm not sure

that that was a smart move to

go that far publicly. And that is the issue. That issue and

his comments directly about the

commandant are what have really

inflamed this situation. I'm told the Chief of the Defence

Force made it very clear that

he was prepared to go, I don't

think he said it directly, but

I understand it was very clear

to everyone that he would go if

this issue was really going to

be pushed any further. He

goes in July anyway. He goes in July anyway. He does, yes. Then of course this other

issue was thrown into the mix

about women in combat roles. Here's Julia Gillard.

years ago I heard Peter

Cosgrove say that men and women

should have an equal right to

fight and die for their country. I think he's right

about that and I think it's a good turn of phrase. good turn of phrase. It puts

the choice very starkly, if a

woman has the physical capability and intellectual

capability to do a particular

job, then I do not believe it

should be denied her on the basis

basis of gender. I can't

imagine why they'd march in the

streets for the right to die in

a war. As I recall it, I

thought there was a bit of innuendo innuendo there in the original

comment by General Cosgrove

woman maybe wouldn't want to do

that. Where did it come from,

was it just a distraction?

It's been accelerated. It's been around in defence for a

long time, the idea that they

should open up all the last 7%

of positions, but it's been accelerated at the Government's

instigation to link it to this.

I think they did it to have

something else to talk about,

to turn attention to something

else. The problem is, though,

you've got a sort of emotional

inflamed situation young men and young women in ADFA and whole issues of sexism

and all sorts of things, to

throw this in the mix, it ties

that to this whole debate now,

it ties it to suggestions women aren't being respected

and you end up having a kind of

murky, messy debate that maybe

you wouldn't have if you

introduced it in a clearer atmosphere. atmosphere. The Prime Minister

put it in terms of rights

agenda, women have the right to

do things. I think you ask

yourself does this make the

military a more effective

fighting force? Now, they say

now that women are open to - can get into 93% of roles in the military. No doubt that

has improved the military.

Having an all-male military

wouldn't be as good as having

women in there. Whether it is necessarily improving our

fighting capacity to have women as paratroopers or right in

hand-to-hand combat, it's a

question that has to be asked.

Do women have an entitlement

to be a candidate for combat positions, not they have positions, not they have an

entitlement to be in the

positions. I'm a man, there

are several hundred I should never be seen anywhere

near the SAS blokes wondering around Uruzghan Province. I

would not cut it, no way in the world. Maybe some women or most women, or all

not cut it either. But I have

a right to be a candidate, I

can go to the recruitment

office tomorrow. I I heard one

digger saying during the week I wouldn't want women in a fox

hole, I'd feel like I had to have sex with them. It shouldn't be about - Barnaby Joyce couldn't kill one. With the greatest it should be about women, men can control their hormones, I

agree, about whether women are

intellectually, physically and psychologically capable of

doing the doing the work. Talking about

the trials and tribulations of minority Governments before,

Julia Gillard - I think there

are a couple of issues here.

It goes to not only the vulnerability of governments,

but also the media is bigger these days. Julia Gillard

talks about how issues are

overhyped. No matter what they

are, issue youse come along and

they're overhyped. She talks about this long-term performances. Fair

comment in a democracy serves

our people well, but I'm increasing ly sceptical exaggerated and overdetermined

claims about politics and

public opinion from any

quarter. Remember when the NBN

was going to break us, or the

flood levy or health reforms.

Each of these overhyped claims,

each overcome by perseverance

and patience. As with

governing progress, so public opinion, the measure is

in the years. Okay. So she

says - gives three examples where

where she's overcome the hype, marched on, put populism to one

side, opinion polls to one

side. I think she's right in a

basic sense that the modern debate with 24-hour news cycle

is very hyped and often

shallow. I think it's a

problem with modern politics.

But I think the issue she

raises, they've overcome the

problems of the NBN, good

grief, the NBN is in trouble.

They can't get somebody to dig

the ditches and to lay the

fibre-optic cable for anywhere

near the price they've

budgeted. It's a ridiculous

project to be running at the

peek of a mining

have a shortage of labour to be

putting in Australia's

biggest-ever infrastructure

program. She hasn't overcome

that. They had to make that. They had to make a promise and now they have to

deliver on it. Not so long ago the

the criticism was she didn't

have an agenda at all. All of

a sudden she's fighting on a

lot of fronts. It's interesting what Graham

Richardson has been about the big target strategy

and having so many fights going

on. It is a problem for a

government. I see the comment we saw from Julia Gillard,

she's trying to draw this

together in some fashion and I know we love talking about

narratives and things like that, but as a Government you

need to have a story to tell

and people will forgive you

some things if they can figure

out why you're doing it. If

they think you know why you're

doing it and think you have a

big plan for doing these things, people will accept some

of it. But I don't see the big

plan yet. I don't think a lot

of people see it. Maybe it's

we'll see the grand vision. At

the moment you have fights

everywhere and it looks like a mess. There's nothing wrong

with taking on fights with

people, but it has to be part

of a co hyrnts plan and a

policy approach to governing.

I think the problem with the

Government that it doesn't have

it. If you don't have the

fights, don't take people on,

you saw what happened in NSW.

Basically they fumbled and made a mess of electricity privatisation and privatisation and transport infrastructure. They didn't

push that policy through and we

saw the biggest defeat of any Labor Government in history. They need need to have them as part of a

co hyrntsz, overall plan. It's difficult

difficult to do, though, when

in a minority Government

subject to the whims of some independents and one person falls over and you're

Government. How much tougher is

it now that Paul Howes and AWU

and other unions might be

walking away from the carbon

tax idea. Here's Paul Howes.

We believe it's in the

interests of our members in the

long term to take action on

climate change. We also

believe it's in the interests

of our members to have a job.

Is there any policy that ought

to be prevented on the basis

that it might affect one job? It's silly. It's economic illiteracy by Paul Howes. Now,

it seemed a ridiculous

benchmark to set, lose one job,

walking away from the whole idea. You

forced to do this. Two factors

here. One is all credit to

Tony Abbott for his on the

ground campaign. He's been

going to every butcher, baker,

steel maker in the country and

saying of course this is going

to cost you jobs. Given that there's no counter argument

from the government, the people on the shop floor are believing

this. And of course they are

aaert lerting their union

perhaps hitting with a nudge

and wink he might not be

elected again. Might have been

more than a nudge and a wink.

It might have been It might have been a bald statement. Tony Abbott is using

using this opportunity very

skilfully and making inroads on

the Government. Point 2 is the

Government doesn't respond

because it has nothing to

respond to. It has set up nine

consultative and briefing

groups, department ylal and

special interest

carbon pricing. And on a number of them, they've number of them, they've had meetings, executives from

organisations have flocked to

them, fighting for chairs.

They've sat there for two hours and been told

They've gone away thinking this Government doesn't know what

it's doing and Greg Combet

tended to confirm that at the

Press Club this week. I was

going to say the same thing,

they have Greg Combet at the

Press Club, trying to confect

momentum around this again and

take back the agenda on this,

but they don't have the information. Whenever they get

asked a direct question, sorry,

we haven't haven't worked out everything,

we can't tell you the precise

answers. Of course there's confusion about how much it is

going to impact on the steel industry,

industry, will it be 2.80 a

tonne, $5 a tonne, tonne, $5 a tonne, $8 a tonne? We need information and they

can't generate the momentum

they want and explain it properly until they have it. I

think it's more than just not

the information being out there, I think it's not unreasonable to have the

principles of the scheme and

then to get the information

later. It makes you

politically vulnerable,

however. What you are seeing

now I think is incredibly significant. Paul

faced a revolt from his

members. He represents steel members, BlueScope Steel, Port

Kembla. The steel industry now is under intense because of the two-speed economy pressures you're seeing

in the economy. The very high

dollar is putting immense

pressure on the steel industry.

Now then you're proposing to

put a carbon tax on top, which

will further increase pressure

on the steel industry. All of

manufacturing is now under

pressure. You saw some job losses

losses in Melbourne in the car

industry quite recently, and because Howes of course,

Australian Workers Union, Wayne

Swan's union, it's the union

that basically installed Julia

Gillard in power. If he says not one job can be lost, he

means he wants the steel

industry totally exempts, then

he'll want the alminimum exempt

and LNG exempt. It's a

difficult position for the

Government. Very quickly, I

want to hear what Wayne Swan

had to say in the US yesterday

about the projected growthing

figure. Here he is. Growth will probably lose up to three-quarters of a consequence of the floods,

cyclones and of course the

events in Japan. That of

course will have an impact on budget revenues. the short term, we're

absolutely determined that the

impact of these events will not

actually stop us from returning

to surplus in 2012/13. Three-quarters of one

percent. What does that mean

in revenue terms It's unclear

what it means in revenue. It's a big problem for the Government. They'll have to

have a tough budget. The economy economy is supposed to go 3.25%

this year. Swan is saying no, that's three-quarters af

percentage off that, 2.5. The

reports yesterday in the

Fairfax prest it's two and a quarter, because of the

Queensland floods, Japanese

disaster. You start lowering

growth in the short term, you

hit your budget deficit. This

year it's supposed to be 41

billion. That means it will

blow out most likely by several

billion dollars, so the

Government is having a budget

deficit blowout on the way to deficit blowout on the way to a

surplus in only two years. When it. More with the panel shortly,

shortly, with Karen Middleton, Michael Stutchbury. Now here's

Mike Bowers and Talking Pictures. I'm Mike talking pictures this morning with cartoonist for 'Daily

Telegraph' Warren Brown.

Welcome to the program. Great

to be here on the hour of Bowers, always good for a

Sunday morning. Yes, it's not

quite an hour, but we're

working on it. The sex scandal

add ADFA has everyone up in

arms. Absolutely, most

extraordinary thing. It's been

great for cartooning all week. There's a touch of the 24th regiment afoot here. Can't you see there's

spear points gleaming. All

that sort of thing. And stream into this battlefield. No

wonder it's the hour of Bowers.

It's one of those things, it

seems to be that the defence -

the whole defence mechanism, it

seems to be under siege. I like the idea of this pile of

mealy bags, some sentry with mealy bags, some sentry with

Henry, public scrutiny Henry, public scrutiny close

rank, first rank fire, second rank fire, that kind of thing.

Over here ADFA on fire and this

woman being harassed by fairly

evil-looking people. Everyone

is fed up with this behaviour.

Well, I am. That makes us

zulus. Zul David Pope sees zulus. Zul David Pope sees it

as defence Stan, the first woman to sign to a combat

role Like many on their first

tour, you may find it difficult

to tell the difference between

insurgents and coalition partners. And the dead Defence Ministers, Fitzgibbon,

Faulkner. And Mark Knight puts

Julia on the front line, get

over it Kevin, it's just a bit

of friendly fire, you Princess. It is Kevin Rudd with a great

big hole right through the

middle. Get over it, Kevin,

it's just a bit of friendly

fire, that kind of

thing. Wasn't it great to see Pauline to go overseas and got within

this close - So close. So

close. I was sitting there thinking please get into the

upper house. Just from a cartooning perspective, that's

all. It's a pity, never mind. Shaun Leah, the

independence party, liar liar

pants on fire. Spot the true

statement, A, if I don't win

this NSW seat I'm