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.
Lateline -

View in ParlViewView other Segments

(generated from captions) some like Arnold Schwarzenegger. Arnold

Schwarzenegger is not, as far

as I know, going home at night

and saying into the mirror

"another day's evil done".

Well, he might, but what novel ist is here to do is

remind us that everybody is the

hero of his or her own story.

Part of what we're here to do

is to promote the emp thy that

is inevitable from somebody who

reads enough fiction to go

deeply enough into the lives of

other people, which renders

that reader, I like to think,

much less likely to think it's

a good idea to bomb

other country. It is

inherently moral that way. I'll

bring Howard in first. There

was a tweet that just came up

to saying art has responsibility

to itself, that's it. Well, that's a

that's a nice phrase, but art

has more of a responsibility

than that. Michael has said it all beautifully, I agree with

all that. Art has a

responsibility to more than

itself, but that doesn't mean

it has a responsibility to make

society more healthy. Actually I don't believe in the health

of society. I don't think we

are very healthy beings. The

beings would only work if we

believed in God, and I don't

know how many of us do anymore,

we were built in a particular

way and we fell away from his

high idea from us. We got here

by all sorts of accidents.

It's not surprising to me that

we are in our relations between

our mind and our head and our

hearts and our sexuality in hearts and our sexuality in a

mess, and we'll always be in a

mess, and as a writer what I

think I do is to describe that

inside mess as I know it from the

inside of that jungle I have

called my head and from the

inside of the jungle of other heads which I about and observed. I've got

some horrible men, I have nice

men in my novels and I have

horrible men in my novels.

knows about men to women. This They are a gift from a man who

is what men look like. This is

what a man looks like. This is

what - if I knew someone like

Schwarzenegger, it would be

interesting to write about it.

That's what it is like to be

him, he moves from moment to

moment from being this kind of

a man to that kind of a man.

All we can do imaginatively is

idea we may one day live in a

healthy society. It's not

possible. I was thinking about in terms of character s

Dominique Strauss-Kahn, gone

from being head of IMF to a

rutting chimp. It's a sad

sight. You can perfectly well

see that he just feels that he,

like Schwarzenegger - well, the

case isn't proved yet, but what

it looks like is a man will do

what a man can get away with

doing. I just finished writing

a novel called the book of

Rachel. One of the things I

got asked to do was give a talk. It was whether or not essentially my

obligation as a feminist was to

positive write only women who are

positive role models. When I

thautz about that even for a

split second, I thought that is

the books that made an so wrong. When I look back at

impression on me when I was

young, it was the failed people

as much, the scared people, the

weak people, the vulnerable

people, the mean people, the

vicious people, characters in

those stories meant as much as

the not so good characters. I

actually think I disagree a

little, but maybe that's the

to get out. I think there's ethicist in me

something that should be slightly inspirational about

fiction, but the irony is you

don't do that by creating role

models, you do that by populating the world with

characters that are real and

have every kind of vice and

virtue in them, and then somehow trying to inspire

people to love and want to

emulate the characters who are

to avoid the miserable, the brilliant ones and to want

cowardly, vicious ones. But

also to have sympathy for them. Schwarzenegger, the chalg eng Any writer who

would be to make him sympathetic. Why? Because

he's a human being, another

person. He's an adulter

screws women and uses power, I

don't think we should be

sympathetic towards him at all.

Fellow is a wife murderer,

shake spear said here's a man,

this is what it's like to be

him, isn't it terrible, to be

him. Your imagination is -

that doesn't mean you forgive

him, let him off, but your

imagination is expanded in the acts of like to be somebody else. I

agree with that. I'm sorry, I'm

sorry, I'm sorry to the people

who have their hands up. It's

very fascinating conversation.

That is all we have time for. That is all we

Please thank the Sydney Writers Festival and the panel, Michael

Cunningham, Gail Dines, Brendan Cowell, Howard Jacobson and

Leslie Cannold. Okay. Next

week on 'Q&A' the House of

Representatives will be back in

Joining the panel Shadow focus to mainstream politics. session and we'll shift the

Attorney-General, Parliamentary Secretary for immigration, Kate

Lundy, former Howard Government Minister Jacky Kelly, political

satirist and commentator Guy

Rundle. Go to our website and

register for the audience or send us your questions. See

you next Monday. Until then,

good night. Closed Captions by CSI

Tonight - expert advice on emissions. This Climate

Commission work is a very good

report, confirming climate

change is real and the time to

act by pricing carbon is this

year, so carbon can be priced

from the middle of next year.

But there's no But there's no meeting of minds

on a response. Under a carbon

tax you won't clean up the environment but you will clean

out people's wallets. This Program Is Captioned

Live.

Good evening. Welcome to

'Lateline'. I'm Ali Moore.

Barack Obama is now in Ireland,

the Middle East that's still but it's his

exercising the minds of many,

with more questions than

answers about how the US

President sees the immediate

future of Israeli/Palestinian peace future of the

process. Twin speeches both

referring to the borders before

the 1967 Arab Israeli war have

sparked debate about whether

peace is now more elusive than

ever. But with unrest across

Middle East an elections due soon in Egypt, question time is of the

essential. Tonight we hear the

views of Martin Indyk and we

talk to journalist Andrew

Jennings about the latest corruption allegations

threatening to engulf FIFA. Our

other headlines - mixed

reactions on both sides to

Barack Obama's call for a

resumption of peace talks

between Israel and the

Palestinians. And after a

15-year struggle to gain refugee status, and his family face

deportation. The climate change commission delivered its

report today quickly followed

by claims from both the government and the opposition

that it endorsed their climate change policies despite their

sharp differences on the issue.

The report warns the scientific

evidence of the effects of climate change have already

begun is getting stronger. Two leaders on very paths. Julia Gillard and Tony

Abbott agree on the

destination, lower carbon

emissions, but not on the route

to get there. Julia Gillard's hoping people will join her

battle for a carbon tax like these university students.

Tony Abbott's trying to spark

support on factory floors

through his opposition to the

tax. I hate to be political.

But ... A lot of work done by all. The government's climate change commission is backing up a long string of scientific warnings on climate change. For

Australia we're seeing the

impacts more clearly. We're seeing the sea level rise that

was predicted. We're seeing the

decline in rainfall continue particularly in the south west of Western Australia. The

report's authors are trying to

remain even handed when it

comes to the political debate. It's important that these these scientific understandings and principles in foreign policy development, no matter

what side of If you look at the carbon

cycle, it's clear that

offsetting emissions in the

land sector will not solve the problem. The government says

it's proof the coalition's

direct action climate change

plan won't work. The report's

findings make it clear that

direct action measures

so-called which rely almost

entirely on tree planting and

soil carbon are not a credible way

way to tackle climate change. But Tony welcomes the report. What we've

seen from the Climate

Commission is actually a tick

of approval for direct action

as of a rapid way of getting

our emissions down. But others

in the coalition were less

forgive on a cold and rainy Canberra morning. Today we're

going to hear from a person and

good to him who is being paid

$180,000 a year to tell us that

(a) the world is getting

warmered and (b) it's getting

drier and the evidence is there for all of us to you with your beanie on. A lot

of scientists say that the

medieval warm period was warmer

than now. Certainly the Roman

and Minoan warm periods were warmer than those. Those

statements led to an inevitable

confrontation in Parliament. Mr

Speaker, it is not a threat

understood by any of them over

there. The government also

stepped onto the offensive on

the asylum seeker issue when the opposition pushed for

an inquiry into recent riots,

suicides and overcrowding at detention centres. If there's to be an inquiry the Prime

Minister wants it to look Minister wants it to look back at the Howard Government's

record. The break-out, we

remember that, the look at the

incarceration of an Australian

Cornelia Rau, do we remember

that? It could even traverse

the children overboard affair

and its deliberate misleading of the Australian people at an election. The opposition has

been asking the government for

details of a people swapping

deal it's announced with Malaysia but is yet to finalise. The finalise. The government hasn't been forthcoming but even

before the deal has been inked

it's allowing it to get off the defensive. I understand that

the opposition is devastated

that the government has reached

an international agreement to break the people smugglers' business but at the same time

is increasing our humanitarian intake. sensitivity but they will be

disappointed as we continue to

implement this innovative and bold arrangement. Bold

arrangement, for a government slowly growing bolder.

A tornado has killed at

least nine people in the US

town of Joplin in Missouri. The

powerful twister struck the

town of 50,000 residents this morning, leaving thousands of

homes in ruins A local hospital

was among the buildings hardest

hit by the storm. A state of emergency has the Missouri National Guard has

been called in to help

survivors. Officials say the

death toll is expected to raise. US President Barack

Obama has sought to ease

tensions over his comments last

week that a future border

between Israel and a

Palestinian State should follow

the pre-1967 lines. In a speech

to a powerful Jewish lobby in America, President Obama said that border should be the

subject of discussions and

agreement between parties. While the distinction was warmly received in

Washington it hasn't changed

many opinions in either Israel or Palestinian Territories. Not surprisingly, the diplomatic

punch-up between the US

President and the Prime Minister of Israel has been dominating the news in this

region. When Binyamin Netanyahu

bluntly rejected the idea bluntly rejected the idea of

starting peace talks on the

basis of the 1967 borders, it

was regarded as a serious snub

to Barack Obama. American President hit back,

speaking directly to the major

pro-Israel lobby. He reiterated

his point firmly saying he was only making public what's been

said in private for years. I

said that the United States believes that negotiations

should result in two states, with permanent Palestinian

borders with Israel, Jordan and Egypt and permanent Israeli

borders with Palestine. The

borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed

swaps so that security and recognised borders recognised borders are

established for both States.

The President got loud applause

when he effectively promised to

block any attempt by the

Palestinians to have the United

Nations recognise their state without the agreement of

Israel. Barack Obama's speech

pushed hard on both sides he has found a middle

ground. Obama has adopted a

strategy the US has used in the

past, taking some of the

principles favourable to one

side and several principles

favourable to the other side.

The problem with this strategy

is that the sides look only at those principles which are unfavourable to them and

therefore reject the whole package. In the West Bank, for

example, the President's stern

tone towards Israel on borders means who lives surrounded by Jewish

settlers. All that Obama said

is in favour of Israel. He

started off sad and sorry for

an Israeli boy who lost his foot foot because of a Palestinian rocket but he didn't have rocket but he didn't have any

feeling towards the 1,500 martyrs who were cut to pieces in

in Gaza two years ago. All that

he is concerned with is the

security and the interest of

Israel. But that's not how some

Israelis heard the speech. To

them, Barack Obama's tough warning to the Palestinians

against going to the UN and Hamas were not the main story.

Already, there have been protests against the American

demand that the negotiations

start from the 1967 start from the 1967 border lines. We deserve a secure

peace. We don't deserve a peace we can't defend. Don't

send Israel to its death by

supporting policies that are

popular but wrong. It's hard to

know straightaway just how this

speech has been received in general in Israel. There are

moderate voices both sides but newspapers are sounding dire

warnings about everything from

diplomatic isolation that's

happened to port hide South

Africa to all out war if an em bodened Arab people on Israel's

borders try to invade in

greater numbers than they did

last weekend. It was a scene that terrified many Israelis

and it was something that

Barack Obama himself alluded to

in his speech. A new generation

of Arabs is reshaping the region. A just and lasting

peace can no longer be forged with one or two Arab leaders.

Going forward, millions of Arab

citizens have to see that peace

is possible for that peace to be sustained. The American

President has made his point

clearly and moved on. To

Ireland, where he plans to visit his family's ancestral

village. It's also a place that

shows it's possible for two

blood enemies who share the

same patch of land to

eventually come to terms. However unlikely Now to discuss the prospects for the resumption of Middle

East peace talks I'm joined from

from Washington by Martin

Indyk, the Vice-President for foreign policy at Institution and a Institution and a former US Ambassador to Israel. Welcome

to the program. Thank you. Why

has the President chosen now to

put the focus on the Israeli/Palestinian peace

process a time when really

process a time when really very few people see any prospect of progress? That's correct. You

notice he didn't announce he

was dispatching the Secretary

of State for a renewed effort

or even replacing his special

Middle East envoy George

Mitchell resigned. He doesn't

think there is much prospect at

the moment. The timing has more

to do with the revolutions

going on in the Arab world and

the need for the President to

frame America's apromp and

people seem to forget that the

speech on Thursday that was really three quarters about

that and only the residual part was dealing with the

Israeli/Palestinian issue. Israeli/Palestinian issue. But

with the Prime Minister of

Israel coming to town the next

day and his extraordinary

upbraiding of the President in

the Oval Office, this became a

drama that everybody was

focused on and it's not over

yet. We've only seen the second

act, the third act will take place today when Binyamin

Netanyahu addresses APEC and

then the fourth then the fourth act will be on Tuesday when the Israeli Prime

Minister addresses a joint

session of Congress for which

he will in both cases get

resounding applause, a resounding applause, a long standing ovation. What's most

interesting to me is that the President basically put down

some bitter medicine in his

Thursday speech by saying that

Israel and the Palestinians

would need to negotiate a

border between them base on the

67 lines with agreed swaps. sugar coated that medicine

yesterday at APEC. And it's

been swallowed and the Prime

Minister came out last night

and said that he welcomed the

President's remarks. So I

suspect that at the end of the

day, with all of the drama

going on, nevertheless, the

President will have established

the basic point that

negotiations when they do

resume will have to be based on

the 67 lines with agreed swaps and that actually will not be

bad for a day's work. Now

significant is it that that has

been said by the President, has he gone further than previous Presidents? Because of Presidents? Because of course that very phrase was used by

Hillary Clinton for example

just a couple of years ago. Is

this a significant part of this

the fact that it came from the fact that it came from the President? Yes, indeed and it wasn't used by Hillary Clinton

in that way, if you go back and

look at her statement she was

talking about the need to reconcile that which was at

that moment a Palestinian

demand with Israeli

requirements on other issues.

All the way back to 69 when the

then Secretary of State Bill

Rogers first talked about the

need for settlement, that would

require minor border

rectifications on the 67 lines.

But he didn't specify the 67

lines at that time. Bill

Clinton at the end of his

administration put down the Clinton parameters. He didn't say

the State would have to be

established in 94 to 97% of the

West Bank which means 67 lines

minus 3 to 5%, 3 to 4% for

swaps. Also President Bush said

it needs to be based on the 49 lines which is the same as the

67 lines and he also referred

to swaps. But no President of

the United States has come out

clearly with this as the

starting point for the negotiations. negotiations. It's been a long

time Palestinian demand and

it's something that the Likud

government of Binyamin Netanyahu has resisted mightily

up to now but I suspect at the

end of the day, indeed when

negotiations start, it will be

on this basis. The speeches,

they also have held challenges

for the Palestinians, didn't

they? I mean, he criticised the

recent agreement between Fatah

and Hamas, and the President

also reiterated the request that that the Palestinians drop

their appeal for recognition at

United Nations? Yes. And that

was the sugar coating on the

pill. He said some strong

things about preventing that

unilateral action at the United Nations. I think this is the

key to understanding what his

strategy is at the moment. It's

not to relaunch negotiations

but it's to head off that UN

General Assembly move. If 160 nations then support Palestinian State, that will

then move very quickly to the

Security Council. He's vowed to veto it in the Security

Council. But if

Council. But if the United States

will of the vast majority of

the international community,

then he will be on the wrong

side of the Arab street which

is what he was trying to get on

the right side of in Thursday's

speech. He has a real dilemma

coming down the track. He wants

to avoid that, head it off by on his way to Europe putting down negotiations based on the 67

line and then saying to the European leaders that he will

be meeting with in the next

four day, come on board with me, let's work together to try to get negotiations going, and

thereby peel them off from

support for the UN General

Assembly resolution. If he

succeeds in doing that, I think

Abu Morrison will think twice about alienating both the United States and the Europeans by aim is not to restart

negotiations and as you say

it's aimed more at the UN

resolution, is there also not

an issue of time being of the

essence? You have elections

coming up in Egypt. How crucial

is that regional picture to

this call for a restarting of

peace talks, whenever that may

happen? I think that's a very

good point. The elections in

Egypt will take place in

September about the same time

as this resolution is going to

be pushed by the Palestinians

into the General Egyptian Parliament is likely

to be much more responsive to

popular demands and popular

mood and we can already see

some Egyptian politicians

demagoguing the issue of Israel

to gain votes. Then we won't

know what's going to happen in

the meantime through the long

hot summer. In the Palestinian arena. We Palestinians unarmed coming

across the Israeli borders,

Lebanon and Syria. That may

well be stepped up. And well be stepped up. And then we may see large-scale peaceful

demonstrations by unarmed Palestinian demonstrators in the West Bank. How the Israeli

Army is going to respond to all

of this is a very big of this is a very big question mark but they're not equipped

for crowd control. And so if

there's large scale casualties

an Egyptian Parliament

hot to trot and the vast

majority of international

community support ing at the United Nations and declaring Israel an occupation, you have a worst case you have a worst case scenario. Not only from Israel's point of

view but the point of view of

the United States. That's what

I think President Obama is

focused on. Who's driving

Middle East policy at White

House right now? Of course

George Mitchell who was the adviser, he's

area has been in turmoil in

recent weeks. Who is in the driving seat? President Obama.

He is very much his own foreign

policy adviser. There has been

a contentious debate within the administration

administration for the last five months

five months about whether to

give a speech, when to give a speech, when to give the

speech, what to put in the

speech. And that debate went on

right up until the last moment

when the President decided to

put the 67 lines in there.

There is lot of There is lot of attention being focused on the peace partner

colleague Dennis Ross, but I

think that's much exaggerated

in the game of trying to point

fingers. But in reality,

there's a real argument about

what's the best way to move

forward. Is it with Israel,

with the President's arm around

Israel, or is it best to beat

Israel over the head? And if would take an initiative and

that's mainly been the quiet game that's been going on for

the last five months, then the

President would get behind that initiative. But Netanyahu's

reluctance up to now to take an initiative, of course he has

good reason, the real region

around him is in turmoil, Fatah

just joined with Hamas, Hamas

doesn't want a two-state solution, it wants to destroy

Israel not make peace with it.

He is hesitating, he's not prepared to move. The President

is saying to him listen the

house is on together to put it out and

here's what we need to do. And

the first reaction from the

Prime Minister was he is

bellowing as if he was a cow being taken to the

slaughterhouse. But I think

now, he's having used it to

generate support on his right

wing he is calming down. I think he understands the

reality, too, that you can't

stop something with nothing.

And it's much better for the

United States and Israel to working together to try to find

a way hard into meaningful negotiations with the

Palestinians than to and let the house burn

down. Finally and briefly, I

take it from what you're saying

as we see this third and fourth

act play out over coming days,

is it fair to say you're

optimistic there may be some

trigger for these talks to

restart? Well, optimistic would

be pushing it a little bit too

difficult as I've described it

on the ground. You don't have

leaders on the Palestinian or

Israeli side that seem

to take courageous risks and be

statesmanlike in the

circumstances. But the

President's need to make

something happen is providing a

sense of urgency which I think

he may squeed in imparting to

the other two leaders and then

we'll have to will. Thanks for talking to 'Lateline' tonight. Thanks for

having me. Pakistani troops have

retaken a military base in

Karachi after a marathon gun

fight with militants. The two

sides fought each other for more

more than 12 hours after

Taliban militants stormed the

base. The insurgents killed 12

soldiers, destroyed a plane and

took some Chinese military personnel hostage. The

Pakistani military sent in reinforcements kill or capture operation. Pakistan is

suffering, Pakistan is a victim, and we have the

courage, we have the resolve to

fight and we'll keep on fight

ing until these terrorists are

gone. The attack is in

retaliation for the killing of

Osama bin Laden. A spokesman

for the Taliban has rejected

claims Taliban leader Mullah

Omar has been killed. Earlier today Afghan today Afghan reported Mullah

Omar had been killed. He helped

create a strict Islamist state

in Afghanistan during the 90s and is believed to have sheltered Osama bin Laden after the September 11 attacks.

Officials in Afghanistan are

unsure about the accuracy of

the reports. We don't know so

far whether this report is true

or not.

order to get a bit more credibility. Mullah Omar is

one of the world's most wanted

man, and has continued man, and has continued to inspire fighters in inspire fighters in the 10-year war against foreign forces in Afghanistan. The United States

is offering a $10 million

reward for his capture. An

Indonesian Christian's 15-year

struggle to gain refugee status

in Australia has come to an

end. Now, Dicky Susanto his

wife and 7-year-old son face imminent deportation.

Department has handled the case

badly because his brother was

granted residency in identical

circumstances. The psychiatrist

is concerned about the health of the family and

particularly their 7-year-old

son, who spent his entire life

in Australia. After a decade

and a half, these could be the

last few days at home for this

Sydney family. I feel this my

home already, you know. I know.

But why they want But why they want me to go home? Dicky Susanto, his wife

and their 7-year-old son Gavin

have been negotiating the immigration bureaucracy,

for a new life in Australia. Mr

Susanto's fight began when he

and his brother fled Indonesia

in 1996. The two Chinese

Christians claim they were the victims of racial and religious

vilification and abuse in the dying days Suharto's regime. Mr Susanto

says the final straw came when their grocery business in Jakarta was

shop, it got burnt, you know.

It happened, and at that time I

run away here. Both brothers

applied for refugee status in

Australia. Both were turned

down and both appealed to the

Refugee Review Tribunal. His

brother was successful and was

granted refugee Dicky Susanto's appeal was turned

turned down. When we come here,

and we got sent down, same story, we come on the same day,

on the same flight. So when I

got reject, my brother got -

they grant a visa for my

brother. And I feel like not

fair for me. That was 13 years ago. Since then, Australia, at times on bridging visas, sometimes illegally.

He's also spent time He's also spent time in Sydney's Villawood detention centre. And then I start to

apply again for minister

intervention, but all the time

I got rejected. Now in a last

throw of the dice, the family

has appealed to the Immigration

Minister Chris Bowen. They've asked him to consider the

welfare of their son Gavin,

who's lived his who's lived his entire life in

Australia. I know how to work

hard, to make money, you know.

Maybe one day I gonna become

success, I gonna success, I gonna hire people. But I'm not promised like a big

thing, you know. I can't

promise. At least I will grow my

my family here, build a family,

give good education to my boy,

become better than us of

course. This psychiatrist has been helping the

family. They're in a state of

acute anxiety. They're not

sleeping. They are not - they're having difficulty holding

holding things together for

their child. And he's having

significant emotional and

behavioural problems as well. They're quite worryingly

depressed. The pastor of the family's has written to the Immigration

Minister supporting ministerial

intervention. And included a

petition signed by more than

300 people. What I want the

minister to do is to reconsider

this case on the humanitarian

background. So I can see there

is a miscarriage of the

justice, because Australia as a

nation protect the elder

brother but try to kick out the

younger brother from this

nation. But argument hasn't been

persuasive. I will do the

talking for you. Thank you,

we scared already. I know. The

family are joined by another

supporter for a meeting at

Immigration Department's Sydney

offices. But inside, they've heard the news they were

dreading. I just got the letter

from the minister that said -

we put a letter to the minister. We have to go back.

4th of June. A spokesman for. Immigration Minister has told 'Lateline' the 'Lateline' the minister has reviewed reviewed the family's case and

wouldn't be intervening. He

said if any new compelling

information came to light the department would consider it. The The right to host the 2018 and 2022 World Cup soccer

finals was decided in a secret

ballot by FIFA in December last year. And there were more than

a few eyebrows raised when

Qatar won the right to host the

tournament in 2022. In

Australia there was shock at

how poorly this country's bid

had fared garnering just one

vote in the first round and

concerns have been raised about

how the $45 million of

taxpayers' money was spent.

Australia is not the only country now eye over the process. A British

parliamentary committee has been examining claims executive

members of FIFA wanted money

for support. Andrew Jennings is preparing a report to air tonight

tonight on the BBC's 'Panorama'

program and he joins us now

from London. Welcome to

'Lateline'. Hello Ali. One third of FIFA either been found guilty or been accused of impropriety.

After your latest research, and

in your view, how corrupt in your view, how corrupt is

FIFA? I think FIFA is institutionally corrupt. It

should be closed down following a conference of intergovernmental Sports

Ministers, they similar to the

meetings which changed the International Olympic Committee

in 1999, we shouldn't be taking

any more nonsense from Sepp Blatter. He runs a corrupt organisation. This is the

fourth major documentary I have

made for British television.

Still I hear people saying he

has said he will get rid of the

devils and reform it. Was Mr

Capone going to close down the

Mafia in Chicago? Can we get

real about this? Do you have

hard proof? It raises the

question if you've reported

this before, if there is hard

proof, why has nothing being

done? Of course I have hard

proof. I'm proof. I'm an investigative

reporter. I go for documents.

In the last BBC 'Panorama' sgi

in November just of before that vote I revealed a showing 100 million US dollars

worth of bribes to FIFA

official, some of them they did

through blas plate companies,

some by names. We made the

point as we've been ik making

on BBC television since 2006

that Blatter actually handled

one of sue us, he doesn't talk about

it, it's in my book about FIFA.

Unfortunately, you see you have

a cut-off between sports

reporters who don't reporters who don't do

sessions, they listen to spin doctors like Peter

doctors like Peter Hargeter, they don't go and get the

doctors. We've got them. We're

not sued. It's there and slowly

the temperature is going up. At

last it's going up in England

over the way these people have made fools of us and fools of

you as well. There are two executive committee members who have already I said earlier there is another 6 who are being investigated.

Does the evidence that you have

go past that eight? We've been

naming them. I mean, if naming them. I mean, if you can

get access to the BBC program,

go on my web site and you will

see the - in two parts the last

program I made, FIFA's dirty

secret, where we named Nicholas

Laos from Paraguay for getting

$730,000 US. He is the one now

accused of asking for

I'm quite sure he did. Jack

Warner, so corrupt you don't

know where to start, a racist kleptomaniac and

safe by the way, he is the one

you will see on television, always always spitting at me or

hitting me. That's a nice

advertisement for football. We

have another documented story.

We have evidence of him trading

in tickets in 2006 and we did

some of them last year in 2010

but FIFA will never investigate. How can Blatter or

the challenger investigate Jack

Warner who runs the Caribbean

region and 35 boats with discipline than Pyongyang in

North Korea? It stinks. It's

disgusting. It raises the question what does happen next

and what needs to happen, next

as you just indicated the FIFA presidential election is being

held on 1 June. Sepp Blatter is

up against the Qatari. Is it

likely that Blatter will get

back in and if so, it seems

that he will be able to do the

job of investigation and restoration? No interest in

doing it. No interest at

Why should he? These are people

who keep him in power. Sadly

Mohammed bin Haman who I know

quite well is quite clear when

I talk to him, I talk to him in tonight's film, he doesn't

accept there is any corruption

at FIFA. We have the documents.

There can be no change. So what it is to be done? We've started

to move very slowly, very late

in the day. But at least in the

British Parliament, things are

now happening and we have - are now as a public putting

pressure on the dimwits at the

English Football Association.

They've now agreed they're

going to abstain in this

election. The next thing they

should do is call for should do is call for the

Sports Minister to speak unto

Sports Minister. They're

furious in America. You guys

are furious. You got totally

ripped offer

Australia. The Dutch are also

angry. You start having an interdepartmental,

intergovernmental Congress and

FIFA will collapse, because sponsors will say "No" as they

said to the international

community and clean-up time

will come. Your Sports Minister

should be on the phone tomorrow

to the British Sports Minister

Robertson, I don't know who does the job in Washington but

there will be somebody or

somebody in the Senate. You start ringing around and saying we've had enough of these bums.

That way sponsors would

instantly withdraw support.

They've already talking about

it. A representative said last

year we're not sponsors of

FIFA, we're sponsors of the

football World Cup. Will you help news Australia, please,

get rid of these bums and by the

the way, why aren't the coppers

round, why aren't Squad round FFA headquarters and looking at the money that

went to Hargetay and went to Hargetay and the dubious people he brought in to

Australia? Let me ask you,

there is two, Peter Hargetay

and Mr Radman who Australia

hired to help with their bid.

It looks like they could've

been paid in the millions. Tell

us about them. It's more. Look, England

England only got one thing

wrong, one thing right I'm

sorry. 'Cause I do label both

countries sports officials in

this sense as being stupid. England arrived at English FA

to find the buffoons there had

fallen for Hargetay's glib

talk. "I talk. "I know President Blatter". Oh yes, will you work

for us? Treisman fired him. The buffoons from buffoons from Australia listened to this and Les Murray

joined in, it's the 1956

Hungarian nexus I'm afraid

which is oh well, Peter Hargetay is a wonderful person, lucky to get him. Lucky? How

much did it cost? You're

looking at millions of dollars.

Don't just look at the fees

that went to him and Radman.

Don't just Don't just look at their first-class travel around the

world, the way most Australians

will never travel. Look also at

the dirty - I mean there's something very dirty at the

heart of your bid and you ought

to know go --

know about it. If you had hard

evidence ... We have masses of

hard evidence! You guys don't listen. Why do you think we've

done four major programs for

BBC television. Our blue ribbon

current affairs show. Still sports reporters sports reporters go well I think President Blatter wants

to reform. And you just think

what are they smoking? It does seem extraordinary looking seem extraordinary looking at

the evidence that is on your

web site and that you have

regarding Hargetay and Radman,

how do you explain that someone

like Frank Lowy who heads FFA, also runs a multibillion

dollar business, clearly no

fool, what happened? Not appropriate due

diligence? Look, I can only

guess with Frank Lowy. I think

he has been he has been very busy with Westfield's problems in America fighting off the recession.

That's a lot of work for him

and his family. Massive amount

of work. He hasn't had the time

that maybe he should've had to

look at the A leaning and

look at the A leaning and its problems and he had a Chief Executive

Executive who is not fit to clean our shoes, just a

buffoon. At the heart of it you

that happened. Hargetay turned

up glibly selling his dubious

wares, right. Buckley fell for

it, backed up by Les Murray

talking gibberish at SBS. Why

Lowy fell for it I don't know.

I can only think he was too

busy, OK. What happened? One of

the employees in your

federation office, a woman, spotted what Hargetay was.

She'd read the international happening in Germany. What I had written about him

unchallenged in Britain. Hargetay said to Buckley, fire

that woman. Fire that person.

Get her out. And big brave

ballsy Ben Buckley said "Yes,

Peter." Imagine, 6 foot 4,

rules player, tough has they

come, should've booted Hargetay

into the harbour, fired this 5

foot 5 inch high smart good

decent Australian employee who

has never worked since. You got conned out

now you're still running now you're still running this crap that somehow Australia nearly got it. America would've

got it if certain things which

we'll not say because there is lot of lot of lawyers watching what's

being said at the moment about

Qatar. Let's say we were very,

very, very, very surprised that

Qatar got it, America should've

got it, Australia never had a

hope, and it's not your fault.

You're not bad people. I'm a

friend! Andrew Jennings, thank you very much. I know there is

a lot more to come out of this.

If you're right sponsors starting to talk about

removing their sponsorship then

maybe there will be some

progress. Many thanks for

talking to 'Lateline' tonight. Thank you.

That's all from us. If you want to look back at tonight's interviews with Martin Indyk

and Andrew Jennings or review any

any of our stories transcripts, visit our web site

and also follow us on Facebook

and Twitter. I will see you

again tomorrow. Goodnight. Closed Captions by CSI This Program Is Captioned

Live.

Good evening. Welcome to

Lateline Business. Fullerton. Tonight - howcome it's the Indian and it's the Indian and Singapore exchanges pushing ahead with

ways to profit from volatile

iron ore prices? We look at the new markets that Australia is

not a part of. If they can get this market going, it will be a

value add to the industry as a

whole. 10 years after it failed the prospect the prospect of a closure of

sorts for the staff

as the administrators complete

its liquidation. People just

thought, well, this is a thought, well, this is a joke.

How can we be going bad? How can we be going bad? Then

one deign they just locked the

doors. With the AGM in danger

of total irrelevance to all but

the biggest investors we look

at how to make businesses more

accountable to their

shareholders. If we started

today with a blank piece of

paper and we were trying to

design a mechanism for shareholder engagement for discussion, debate and decision

making we probably wouldn't come one the markets, where worries over

Europe and US growth have

lingered.

The record high iron ore

prices that have fuelled

Australia's resources boom are

looking shaky. And the local

bourse is set to miss out on a

potential opportunity to cash

in. The Mercantile Exchange in

Singapore will soon follow India and launch an iron ore

futures contract. Australia is one of the

iron ore, the ASX has not moved

to set up a similar product

here. The futures trade will

offer a degree of transparency

and certainty to the iron ore trade. At a time when Chinese

steelmakers are warning of a

looming massive oversupply and subsequent price crash. Often

referred to as red gold, iron

ore is a very profitable

commodity traded by a select few. It has for many years and

I better be careful what I say

been a bit of a pricing atmosphere. The big

miners on this side and the big

users on this side and everyone

else has to fit around them.

Commodities analyst Dave Lennox

from Fat Prophets says for 40

years pricing has been done an

annual basis, giving buyers an

sellers a good degree of