The Friday Political Panel

0:00We're allowing those struggling Australians to be able to access their super and use now for a period of up to three years. This will end superannuation and as we know, we would expect you as the Treasury spokesman for that party to be a cross-experient. I prefer to spokesman, not Jesus Christ. My feet, my way. Australians are clamoring for more choice over what they see in their fears. It's too long with us parents and children to somehow outsmart some of the most sophisticated technology companies in the world. We don't trust this government and so we have raised very, very serious concerns. The Centre for Public Integrity found three-quarters of an invitation only $560 million programme was directed to Labour-held seats. The public in Australia would be driven to the conclusion that this is the misuse of public money at a serious level. I make no apologies for my electorate being serviced by me as a good local member. I'm not going to delete the cartoon for price sake, but it would be a choice.

1:03It was post-photos the beetroot. Did he jump up and down about it? So stop making a mountain out of Mold Hill. I gave the opportunity to either own her words publicly or to take it down, she chose neither. So I think we've seen what Pauline Hanson ultimately is about. She's not fit to govern this country. That woman is nothing less than a bloody coward. She wouldn't last one day in that goddamn uniform. Leave our veterans alone Hanson. That's independent Tasmanian Senator Jackie Lamby rounding out some of the sounds of the political week. Well, I'm joined this morning by our Friday political panel. Anna Henderson is Chief Political Correspondent at SPS. Anna, welcome back. Thank you. James Mussola, Chief Political Commentator for nine newspapers. James, good to have you back in the studio. Yeah, thanks. And Tom Crowley, our very own Tom. Hello. Hello. Let's start with One Nation, James and Superannuation. One nation proposing this radical change to the super system that would allow Australians who rent or pay a mortgage to divert a portion of their super payments as salary for up to

2:05three years. What did it tell us about the level of policy development in One Nation right now? Look, I think it was interesting sell because this was not a policy that the old, inverted commas One Nation would have released. Like it was more carefully constructed. It was for a limited period of time, three years that people were going to access. About three percent of the 12 percent super payment that goes into our, you know, a superannuation accounts every week or every month. It was sort of carefully constructed and been thought about some economists think it's a shock of an idea. Something that's quite good. But it said, I think, that they had thought this through. And then what happened after that, I thought in contra distinction was bizarre because rather than taking the opportunity to talk seriously about the policy and why it would work and why it was carefully calibrated, those sorts of things, Barnaby Joyce in particular, the Treasury spokesman kind of blew his lines and ran out of patience. I think it was on air with you and again with Sarah Ferguson on 730 and basically kind of treated it all like a game because it didn't like some of the questions he was getting.

3:09He couldn't sort of stepped people through the policy detail. And instead he sort of flipped the switch to combative, didn't really explain what it would do. And it almost gave us the impression that this was really a policy about the vibe rather than about the details. What did you think of the level of preparation and was there a depth of detail and modelling since a significant economic policy? It is, it is. And I guess you didn't see what we, I suppose, in the press gallery would expect from a major party in terms of just the detail behind it, not that we always get it. Sometimes we get it after the press conference. All parties withhold information. It did feel like vibes. It felt like one nation wanted a headline that says one nation is giving you back money. And that was kind of the point of it. And then I think one nation often thinks that if they get combative in the aftermath, it gives more days of headlines that one nation is giving you money. But at the same time, there was also a sense that this was a more thought through and careful

4:11policy than it could have been. It wasn't about giving you back everything. As James said, it was time-limited. Some people kind of liked it. We weren't in 98 anymore, right? It was a proper policy. But I think the thing that many economists and people who have studied what happened in the pandemic in particular know in the situation slightly different, but there is a reality here that if people have the choice themselves, Barnaby Joyce is relying on the fact that most people will keep it in their superannuation account for his argument. But the reality is that a lot of people who feel hard done by it the moment may not feel that way about their own money and what to spend it on. I don't think one nation would really mind about that because in the short term, it doesn't matter to the budget. But in the long term, we know it would matter to the budgetary situation that a future government would find itself in. So I thought it was interesting. And I know the Liberal Party was interested in going down the same path. And I got a lot of claps in the public when we sent out a journalist in Sydney and

5:11Chatswood speaking to a range of people, all ages, even those who said I'd never vote for one nation said this isn't a terrible idea. In their view. Tom, yesterday in the studio, Andrew Hastie, a Liberal front bench, Shadow Front Bench was here. His target was Pauline Hanson. This is regarding the One Nation cartoons which have referred to Andrew Hastie as a traitor. What do you think about the way all of this has played out? Is Barnaby Joyce trying to kind of cool things here? Well, I don't know that Barnaby Joyce quite knows the answer to that question and I'll bring it back to Super on that issue as well because he's kind of caught between two roles. There is the Barnaby Joyce who has come to One Nation as the kind of the experienced government operator. He's been a deputy prime minister. He talks when it comes to Super about the fact that he was going to do all this modeling. The month he's been saying this, I'm working on the modeling. We're working with some really smart people to come up with some serious policies and don't worry about the policy statements on our website that essentially Malcolm Roberts

6:14has written in the past. On Andrew Hastie as well, it was so clear that he had not really any interest in calling Andrew Hastie a traitor seemed pretty clearly to be a little bit uncomfortable with the fact that the party was having to defend this cartoon that he didn't really want anything to do with. But then also quite happy to flick the switch to Vorderville, play the trump card if I can put it that way and go bombastic on the policy when it gets questions he doesn't like. Go bombastic on Hastie as well and both Joyce and Hanson accusing him of making a storm in a teacup. Paul and Hanson's been mocking Jackie Lamby online for sort of saying, we've all got to take a chill pill. There was this photo that she's posted on social media of Lamby getting worked up in the Senate while Hanson sort of looks over and rolls her eyes. So this kind of question of his is Joyce the operator who's trying to make one nation into a party that more resembles a mainstream party that might be able to govern or is he embracing the Hanson bombastic style, which has been his at times. He seems to be caught between the two.

7:14And what were your observations of Jackie Lamby yesterday? The country pretty much heard what she had to say with her communication style. Is there some cut through there that others may be noticing? So I heard it live and I think it was one of the first moments since Paul and Hanson has really come into the polling numbers she's got now where I've seen another politician approach her in a way that felt like they were on the same level that they were talking directly to each other because Jackie's also a bit of an outsider. Senator Lamby is someone who likes to ensure that when she's outraged people are aware of it. And she really took Paul and Hanson directly to task and on a playing field that was about something to do with better fears where one person has served the other has not. And you know, Jackie Lamby's been on medical leave for a while. She's been a bit out of the circulation. So I feel like she's been waiting to get back and to engage.

8:16I thought it was very powerful. James? I thought it was a devastating attack and much like Andrew Hastie's was as well. We're now seeing one nation at that elevated status, you know, riding high or relatively high in the polls and the scrutiny is starting to come. And I thought these were the two of the most effective critiques I've heard of one nation and it's later really since sort of last September when they started to rise in the polls. It's all about cut through at the moment isn't it? And both Hastie and Lamby have that. They can sound like normal people who are saying what they think when so many of the other politicians get tongue tied talking about Pauline. Another issue which emerged this week was a grants program directed primarily at Labour seats, election promises being delivered after the election. The Prime Minister got tangled up in this or surrounding the Merrickville Golf Club. How have you observed all of this Tom? I've observed, I mean we talk about mountains and mole hills and storms and teacups that the Prime Minister just seems to have a habit of things that could easily go away if he

9:19responded in one way, but that he seemed either incapable or unwilling. So he obviously took issue with elements of the story. He obviously thought it was a beat up just to be frank about it. But that doesn't necessarily mean as the Prime Minister that you've got to stand up and say that even if that's what you might want to do. And it was his anger and his stubbornness. Now you never expect him to apologise for being a forceful local member and he loves being parochial about Merrickville and Graindler, okay. But the temper, once again, and just the tone, was what turned this from what might have been a one day story into a whole week story coming after the whole Melon Gate saga. The picture starts to accumulate of a Prime Minister who gets to grumpy and bristles at criticism. Do you agree, Jon? Yeah, I think he's the word just a moment ago. The PM is stubborn. He doesn't like to take a backward step in under any circumstances and we've seen that arguably throughout his career. Certainly while he's been in the nation's top political office, that he only gives ground

10:21when he absolutely has to. Now, putting aside the issue of Graindler, I thought it was a terrific story by J. Kevon, she's a colleague, oh, a series of stories I should say this week. But I'm sorry, and I say that because it highlighted this grey zone cells. So if you're a government and you set up a grants program for swimming pools or town halls or local parks to improve infrastructure facilities during the course of your term, then that is subject to all of the kind of scrutiny you get from the National Audit Office and those sorts of things. If you make a promise during an election campaign at the moment, it's effectively open season. And this is the government has relied upon. Well, it's an election commitment. It falls outside those guidelines. You know, we're just delivering what we promised. And I think that stinks sell and the rules need to change. And it also, okay, so the Prime Minister got up in Parliament and said, you know, the reason that we gave this money is because there was a stormwater issue and raw sewage was going into the Cooks River.

11:21If you go to the Golf Club's own website, it breaks down that, you know, one sixth of the money was going to stormwater. The vast majority was going to make over for the clubhouse. Like why even go down the path of trying to argue something which is demonstrably, you know, kind of taking the mickey really about what the money was being used for, just be up front and also be up front about the name of the program. Call it the election campaign funds being met program. I could think of a couple of other names. I have to say. At least that was very polite of you. Okay. Yeah, I do think that he, yeah, the Prime Minister kicked it along more than he needed to with his commentary. I have one other thing to add before you wrap up. Anna. Do we have time? Okay. Anton Enes has been on our screens for 27 years in Australia. He is an absolute gentleman journalist. He is last bulletin for SBS News is tonight. And I just wanted to pay tribute to him because he hid someone who has really been just,

12:23you know, he's there for so many journalists both at SBS and more broadly. But what's the significant illness as well? Injuent significant illness is a delightful man and one day Antoné will beat you at tennis. Anna Henderson, Chief Political Crossbowner for SBS, thank you for coming in this morning. James Missola is Chief Political Commentator for the nine papers, James. Thanks. And Tom Crowley, Radio National Breakfast Political Crossbowner, thank you all. Thanks, Sally.