Peter Kranblad live on Sky News Australia.

Good evening, welcome to show, Thanks for your company.

Thank you to Steve Price.

My mum had a terrible fall over the weekend.

She's broken her hip, so I'm very grateful that he was able standing for me and all sending her love right now, Willie or won't he that's the question lingering around Barnaby Joyce says yet again he becomes a center of attention after last night's take dinner with Pauline Hansen.

He says he'll make a decision by the end of the week, but it's looking like he'll walk, says his National Party mates.

In politics, a label can stick, and already Chris Bones become known as the part time Minister.

It was the focal point of question time again today, the coalition asking some very valid questions about how they'll do both roles, rolls and how much is going to cost taxpayers.

Plus so much for the Prime Minister's claim that everything's rosy with China.

Farman's in effect going into cybersecurity lockdown as China's number three three and his delegation visited today.

More on that in a moment and yes, it might have been a stunt, but Senator Hanson's push to have a debate about the burker is not only legitimate, but one the rest of the world is already having.

I'll stand my ground and what I believe in I will continue to do.

So we will stay with that issue because the over the top criticism that Pauline Hanson's coped for wearing a burker into the Senate after the Senate voted not to allow her to table a bill banning the full face covery is more.

Than a little unfair.

So to the rand hypocrisy from MPs like Penny Wong and the Greens leader Larissa Waters that religious faith must be both respected and protected.

Well that deserves to be called out, given that under them and their parties, the faith of Jews and Christians had never faced a tax as ferocious as they are facing now.

It's not religious freedom they were defending yesterday, but one religion in particular, and in the uproar, the Senate lost two hours of business yesterday and more again today as it formally censured Senator Hansen, when it would have been far better to have just allowed her to table the bill and then have the debate after all this, In this what parliaments are for, to debate important issues in a mature and temperate way, rather than to shut down difficult issues and end up driving the debate underground.

Because, believe me, ridiculing Hanson will not and does not make this issue go away.

It was only last months that the Parliament of Portugal showed more maturity than ours did yesterday and had the debate about full face coverings, with the end result that legislation was passed through the Portuguese Parliament to ban them.

Portugal's not alone.

It's banned either in full or in certain settings in a huge growing list of countries in France, Austria, Denmark, Belgium, Bulgaria, Luxembourg, Switzerland, the Deadlands, Norway and parts of Germany and parts of China.

In African countries like Cameroon, the Republic of Congo, Gabon, in the Muslim majority nations of Chad, Algeria, Tunisia, Tarjekistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Kurgistan, all of them too majority Muslim nations.

So how is it that this diverse list of countries have banned or limited the wearing of the burker or the nikub, and yet here in Australia we are incapable of even debating the pros and cons of allowing a full face covering, which I believe dehumanizes women.

I mean quite apart from the security issues of allowing people to hide their identities behind a full body mask for one a better term.

This is why we have to have the debate.

This was also why in New South Wales District Court Judge Audrey Balla banned the wife of Australia's worst terrorist recruiter, with Tia El Zahad, from giving evidence in court unless she removed her full face covering.

But before going further, let's get a couple of things clear.

First, banning the burker or the nickub is not about banning the head coverings that Muslim women often wear.

We're not talking about the headscarf or the hudjib here.

But this is a hudjib.

A lot of religious women wear one, and women of other faiths too, Jews, even some old style Catholics, or they've covered their heads for centuries, whether they're praying or out in public.

Now I've no issue with a headscarf as long as the woman's face is visible, she stays a part of the society in which she leaves.

She moves amongst us as a human being with the ability to freely see, to speak, and to show expression on her face.

This is not what the debate about burker's is about.

It's about this.

This is a.

Burker, we're not even a woman's eyes are shown to the outside world.

And here's the related garment.

This one's also banned in a number of Muslim majority countries.

This is a nicker sometimes that goes right down to the ground.

But here, at least, unlike the burker, the eyes are visible to the outside world.

Now suspending Hansen because she wanted a debate on this issue on whether we should allow women in Australia to be isolated from the community with garments like this, that we shut them off from all other citizens and obscure their identity.

To shut down that sort of debate is madness.

If senators don't agree with Hanson, then fine debate her, challenge her, and shut it down.

Any other countries agree with Hansen's view, as I said, many of them majority Muslim nations.

So this is a relevant and a legitimate conversation to have, and the best place to have it surely is in the rooms in camera that make our laws.

Remember, Hanson's beef is against the way the burker erases the individuals, specifically girls and women.

No Muslim man's dehumanized by shutting himself off from the world in a dense bit of fabric that covers in from head to foot like these women are.

But what amazed me yesterday was how so quickly some wanted to conflate Hanson's opposition to the burker with this inference that you're somehow trying to bear the headscarf the hudjib as well.

That's false and it's dishonest.

So too was the false faith outrage.

This is the middle finger to people of faith.

And we represent in our states people of every faith, of every face.

But racism should not be the choice of the Senate.

This is a racist Senator.

If this is about the dress code, she is disrespecting of faith.

Batting the burka is not an attack on Islam, as I said, a raft of Muslim majority nations banned after all, And that's because wearing the burka is not required under Islamic Lord.

It's not a religious law.

No less than Egypt's leading.

Muslim cleric, Muhammad Tantwani two thousand and nine issued a religious edict or a fatoir, saying that wearing a religious via was not an obligation for women under Islam, as I said, it's because Islam does not require women to cover their faces, just to dress modestly, and even in the most conservative Islamic countries, all that's usually required is the headscarf a had.

Jim Hanson made the obvious point that the Senate would not entertain a motion to ban the burkering public, but they did it anyway by suspending her and throwing her out of the room because she had a burker on.

They thus banned the burker.

In the Senate chamber anyway.

Rand hypocrisy, said Hanson, And yes, yes, going back to her office and.

Putting an on it was.

Yes, it was a stunt, So too was bringing dead fish into the chambers.

Green Senator Hans Sarah Hanson Young did or or wearing a kafa during the Governor General's address, as fellow Green marine Ferruki did earlier this year in July.

Now, I don't luck stunts in the parliament at all.

Never have I want to see those we elect to take seriously the big job they have to debate the issues confronting our country.

But the pieline over what Hansen wore over the top and it obscures the fact that she wasn't even allowed to debate an issue like this that I can tell you many Australians would have been debating life last night as those headlines went to were Now, if other parliaments can debate the burker, so can we.

And the fact that the government is willing to see women degraded and dehumanized rather than upset the sensitivities of hardline Muslim men, that's part of a worrying trend under modern labor.

We can't have an adult conversation about this in our parliament and honestly we're in more trouble than I thought.

Right as I said another busy sitting day in Parliament in the final week.

Joining me now Skynese political reporter cam Redden Cam We'll start if we can with those nature laws.

I've never seen something like this in a negotiation where in this case Labor obviously the government is saying to the Greens, well you can have this with these specific changes.

The coalition, you can have this with these specific changes.

But whether they go this way or that way, the bill looks radically different.

Either way.

It's like they haven't decided what they want and they're just trying to ram something through.

Offering I think wildly conflicted concession.

So what's the latest.

Yeah, they are very different offers on the table, Peter.

We're kind of seeing how the sausage is made.

But they're two very different production lines for two very different sausages.

So what Murray WA's done is essentially come up with two offices put on the table, one to the Greens, one.

To the Coalition.

The coalition offer essentially would see some areas of the bill amended.

It would see changes to penalties, for example, streamlined pathways, and also look at constraining some of the power that the head of this environment protection agency would have.

The key hold up for the Coalition though, is that what's on the table now doesn't address its key concerns, which involve definitions about what would be unacceptable impact for a project to have on the environment.

It would also look at the definition of what would need to be a net gain or how would you get to that threshold of a project having a net gain on the environment.

A few concerns around a mission's reporting requirements too.

The Greens bill, though you're right, would look very different.

If the government went down this path.

It would essentially restrict the fast tracking of coal and gas.

It would limit the ability for those projects to be approved under the National interest Test, which is a part of this bill.

There'd be some tweets to the way that states and federal bodies, essentially environmental bodies would deal with one another.

So that's a lot of detailed PETA.

But the long and the short of it is these would be two very different bills, and there all the sides are still a fair way apart with the government.

Yeah.

Absolutely, they would be two very different bills, depending which way Murray what goes.

And we heard from Susan Lee on Sky News today speaking with Kieran Gilbert.

She's not satisfied with what's there.

There's still no agreement and the clock is running out because Murray Watt has set his own test.

He says he will get this done this week.

These are totally insufficient, Karen, the Minister hasn't met us halfway on half our concerns and has clearly mismanaged this entire process.

You've now got Murray Wat's standing with two separate amendments, one in each hand, saying I don't mind who I do this deal with.

They're clear what we want.

It was the bill that we passed through the House of Representatives.

But if you've got the Coalition constantly coming to us asking for changing amendments, and they want this and then they want that, it makes it a little bit hard to reach an agreement.

I'll put you on the spot.

Do you think you'll get it through?

Well?

Far been for me to disagree with Andrew Clenell's crystal ball.

He said it wouldn't get through this week.

My gut tells me, Peter that we might be headed for a summer of negotiations.

But the Greens, I think, are closer to a deal than the Coalition.

There seems to be more willingness from the Greens to get a deal done.

I would say, though that's probably not the preference of the government, given that business is pressuring the Coalition to get a deal, and if you do one that way, it kind of neutralizes it politically, because both the major parties will then have agreed on the laws.

It's going to be tough.

It'll go right to the deadline.

I suspect we might even be here on Friday still trying to sort it out.

I suspect part of MAHI to so unpalatable to business, with those key concessions on projects to the Grand is about using business to get the coalition into the table.

See if that works.

I'll leave that there.

Thanks Camp.

Joining in our Sky's political editor Andrew Cleanell.

Let's start with Chris Bowen's absence from the Parliament yesterday.

Back in the parliament today, but it was still the key focus point of question time and to have a listen.

How many days of parliament will the part time minister miss in twenty twenty six, how many days of parliament will the minister the part time minister miss next year?

And what will be the cost to Australian tax payers and.

How much taxpayer money will be spent in funding the full time presidential duties of the part time minister.

And it's square this circle for me.

I mean, how does the PM say that this new cop role when he's got to fly across the equator at the drop of a hat.

How on Earth.

Is his compatible with doing his job as a minister in Australia.

Well, he's sticking with that position at the moment.

I know there's been this speculation about Andrew Charlton taking up the job, but I'm told that's off beam at the moment anyway.

So whether there's a change next year, I don't know.

But he, I guess with that victory behind him, he thinks he can do whatever he wants, right, And I guess the point that Albanezi would make is if we got cop in Adelaide, he'd still be COP president, the actual president, not just President of Negotiations, which he is now, and he'd still be minister.

So they seem pretty stubborn on this one of the opposition's point of view.

The more people see Chris bow and the better they reckon pretty unpopular and sort of polarizing figure in large sections of the community.

And of course power prices are going up and they're going to continue to go up, and that's the expectation as the trans occurs.

So if you can lock that together with the fact this guy's eyes off the ball, if you say, his eyes off the ball, because he's worried about the rest of the world, not Australia.

Works pretty well for you politically.

I know if viewer down here, you'd be all over at Peter.

I agree with you.

I think it's ideal for the opposition.

I think that's why the Prime Minister is going to have to cut him loose at some time.

I think they'll come back.

Maybe in the new year, and say, look, it's rammed up, it's so important.

He's got to go and do this because polsters say to me on the left and.

The right that he is deeply unpopular.

And I also think that the issues now here with the greed will get to your interview with Matt Keen in the moment.

But all the sort of the system wise failures, the transition is installing, the targets are not being met, He's having a lot of difficulty with the gas roll out.

I think all of those things are combining and I just don't think he's got the intellectual grunt to resolve these issues and be a good advocate for the government.

I think this is where Charlton's name obviously is being thrown around.

But you put Matt Kean on the spot today, former Liberal now obviously handmaiden for the Governor on climate.

He was pretty cagey about prices.

Let's have a listen, good prices continue to increase for ten years before that transition is completed.

Well, that's not what the Australian Energy Market Commission says.

They say, get on with the job of rolling out renewables.

And quite frankly, we should be listening to the independent experts.

When do they stop going out when we get across the job.

When when we get on with the job of rolling out renewables at scar we know it's the cheapest form of electricity and the propriety years in the grid, it's not enough.

Andrew, Well, how many years that job?

Andrew?

Well, it will take the coordinated.

Rollout we didn't miss.

Andrew, Well, we.

Can't tell us, Kenny, and that there was that report the other day from an unnamed CEO power company saying it will go up for a decade and the government needs to be honest.

Just to roll out the poles and wist of for the renewables transition costs a lot.

And you know Chris Balin's hoping the wholesale price has changed so that the main price will change next year but at the end of the day, the rollout still occurring and it's expensive.

But yeah, he couldn't answer, and that tells you everything you need to know.

They're not promising.

Where the problem is.

The price will stabilize, and this is a massive issue.

This is a big issue for the government.

They're going to unveil this gas reservation policy, but I'm not convinced that's a big fix.

They're going to have to take the rebates off or cost the budget.

The budget's under stress.

That's going to push up inflation again.

We get an inflation figure tomorrow, it's expected to be high because state energy rebates have come off.

Yeah, they got some real problems.

And finally the opposition has an opportunity I guess, rather than just fighting themselves.

Exactly right now that the collation has a point of difference, it can actually go on the front foot and be aggressive on this issue.

Otherwise they're joined at the hit with the government.

They couldn't make mileage out of it, and punters at home and think anyone.

Was in their corner.

Now the Coalition can absolutely be in the corner of voters speculation about Susan Lee.

Let's go there because Obviously there was no issues today in the party room meetings.

She sailed through.

Everyone I speak to is not saying she's the long term proposition.

They're just saying not yet for a change.

We saw that pole obviously on Sunday, Andrew Hasty hot on her heels as preferred leader.

And because Taylor's in the mix, there are plenty of others as well.

I don't know about Tim Wilson, don't think he's in the mix right now.

It might be in his own mind, but I don't think out there with punters.

But you know, she is going to be basically on death watch in political terms with every poll, and those poles won't go away.

They'll be comparing her to her colleagues.

Can she survive?

Like, do you see a scenario where she will be there at the next election?

Very unlikely, But if the poll's improve and they can't coalesce on the right candidate to take her on, I guess it's possible.

Because they're pretty divided on that, the between Taylor and Hasty.

Yeah, I think they're all decided they don't want her, but they haven't decided who they want.

Hen She stays, what about Pauline.

Hansen, and it's all about posts.

The wagu steak cooked on a sandwich press.

I like the Wago.

I don't know about the sandwich press.

That wouldn't get it very hot at all.

But she turned it off.

There she is, and she made a potato bake.

I suspect that was pretty good.

But he's a chief daty.

That's all it takes for him to leave the party that he once led and was the deputy Prime Minister of and a point in our history.

Do you think he'll go?

He says he's going to say announce the decision by the end of the week.

What do you think, Andrew?

Yeah, yeah, I think you'll run for the Senate for one nation.

I think it's a big personal strategic mistake.

I think he's crying out for wouldn't come on with me after our last discussion with him.

By the way, after our last discussion, he said he wouldn't come on with me today because he didn't want to talk about himself.

He agrees with both of us.

That was the text message said to me in jest, tongue in cheek.

I agree with you and Peter.

I should stop talking about myself all the time.

So I won't come on, but I think he will announce his kind of one Nation.

But I just look at how that worked for Mark Latham.

You know, just respect your legacy in your career with the National Party, is what would be my personal advice to Barnaby Joyce, and don't trash it.

And I think he's a really wisk of doing that.

Well.

He's clearly given up any chance of coming up back into a senior role within the Coalition because jumping ship to one Nation means, you know, he'll rather be sort of a big fish in a small pond than come back with the Coalition in any sort of way, shape or form.

It'll make him persona on grata with a lot of Coalition supporters.

I know he has a following, absolutely he does, but I think I think it's a bad move.

Yeah.

I mean, he might get some popularity and some votes initially, but we're still a fair way from the next election.

There's a lot of you know, he's a divisive and polarizing character.

A lot of female voters don't like him.

Love's welcome, she's seventy.

One, sure, But I've been on the hustings with him out in regional Australia and I've seen women, young women and others, you know, not just a crusty old farmers with bow legs come up to me in the street.

And he does have a following in the market set that generally you'll find an increase in a Conservative vote.

He's a rock star.

Well there you go.

But I don't think you're run for New England.

I think he wants the Senate and potentially the One Nation leadership eventually, no matter what they say, no matter what Pauline says about wanting a daughter lead to get it.

So I think that's the name of the game and attention and being relevant again and he's crying out for relevance.

But you know, I still think it's a bad move.

I mean, if you've been Deputy Prime Minister twice, you've had a pretty good career revenue.

No going to get that down.

He came into the Senate two thousand and five, I think it was he came in at the time at Howard if you remember, after the four election won the Senate first time in twenty something years, had the Senate majority, and Barnaby was there and he was.

You know, hard to lassue.

Let's say that in terms of negotiations.

I was working for the Senate leader, and it looks like he'll go out.

He'll go out from the Senate as he arrived in the Senate.

We'll see.

He's very welcome to come on with both of us anytime, very welcome to be here on a Tuesday night.

Honey, absolutely, Barnaby, come on, come on all without us, long term, not just not today.

So we'll see how we get.

All right, Okay, we'll leave it there, thanks Andrew.

All right after the break.

How much will Chris of Bowen's COP Pacific plan cost Australia.

Those numbers are starting to come in.

Plus Juda Ryan Hants nets a broadside at mining giants BHP and Rio Tinto.

She goes into bat for shareholders, welcome back.

Well, how could the Prime Minister to say we're on friendly terms with China if Parliament basically has to go into a cyber lockdown whenever a Chinese delegation now visits.

This is extraordinary, never happened in my day.

I want to know what's going on.

We'll talk to a guest about that in a moment.

First, the COP thirty UN Climate Summit has wrapped up in Brazil, so attentions down.

Turning to next year's summer this is.

COP thirty one, which will be hosted by Turkey after the Ominezy government's bid to host it here in Adelaide was rejected.

Never want to miss an opportunity to waste your money and to pontificate.

Climate Minister Chris Bowen couldn't bank a saving from his loss of faith on next year's n Janboree.

He's got to let them have a go anyway at hosting what he's calling the pre COP conference out here in the Pacific, as well as he got them to hand in the puffed up title of president for negotiations.

Honestly, you cannot make this stuff up.

Joining me now, The Australian's Environment editor Graham Lloyd, Well, we got pensioners in this country.

It can't afford to turn the heaters on a winter because our energy system has been completely bo andized.

And now he is planning on taking his ability to stuck things up to a whole new global stage.

I mean, I bet we're going to end up spending almost as much on the lead up talk fest as we would have spent in Adelaide.

What can you tell us.

Well, good evening, Peter.

I think the bottom line is there is nothing cheap about climate diplomacy, and unfortunately for taxpayers, having a COP in the Pacific, or focus on the Pacific, has been the foreign policy objective of the Albanisi government from day one.

They were hoping to do it through a COP that was held in Australia.

They're not able to do that, so they're going to take the roadshow to the Pacific.

What you can.

Guarantee is that Australia will be footing a large part of the bill.

The invitation is going out to other country is to pledge to a Pacific Resilience fund.

But at the end of the day, this is something that's going to land on Australia's lap.

And it gets worse because the key demand of the Pacific Islands is that the world and Australia get out of the fossil fuel business and this is exactly what Chris Bowen has signed Australia up to and that will be the focus of his presidency in negotiations in Turkey.

So there's a big risk in this process and it's very expensive.

Well let's just go to the point about the Pacific Islands, because even as recently as about a week ago, the Prime Minister was using the example of Tavalu and saying that they're basically underwater.

But I go to the ABC fact checker, you know, hardly a right wing conspiracy source, and they say that, in fact, the land mass in Tavalu has increased, like with a lot of these other Pacific island nations.

So we'll pay for the event, will pay for the film varying people around, will pay for Bowen in the entourage from the Department to go backwards and forwards around the world organizing this pre cop meeting, and will also I bet you be the anchor payments into that fund.

I mean, do we have any sense of the quantum here?

Is there a number on this stuff yet?

Well, there's certainly no numbers been put on it yet.

But I think it's instructive to know that the more we talked about the possibility of holding one in Adelaide, the higher the numbers got.

At the end, we were talking between one billion and two billion dollars to have the meeting.

I would suggest that that is going to be the starting price.

If you look at the other adventures we've embarked on in the Pacific football from Papua New Guinea, great idea six hundred million dollars.

So you don't get a lot of bang for your bark, and the need is pretty much insatiable.

So I think the challenge is going to be bringing some common and send some reason to it.

All right, let's go to the nuts and bolts of how he makes both jobs work.

Because it's not as if we're humming along here that the government's met its commitments to bring down our power prices.

It's not like the transition's going well, is behind on every target in relation to twenty thirty.

It's not like businesses are loving this green transition either.

They're going out the back door and fast, and he's putting billions of dollars of taxpayers money into businesses to shore them up.

And as not as if even the renewals roll at is going well, because we've got whole sectors of the community now one hundred and fifty community sites across the country where they are being resisted, These solar farms and wind farms are being resisted graat.

You know, So how does he do both jobs if you can't do the one here, well, oh.

We might have lost him.

Am to keep going.

Yeah, it's to put some space between itself and the ambitions of mister Varne.

I think he will be arguing things as COP president that will be quite hostile to Australia's best financial interests, and.

In effect, I think the Prime Minister needs a mister fix It to get on top of the issue of power prices and to give him some cover from whatever happens at the COP meeting itself.

Yeah, this is what I comment on May just before to Andrew Cleanw.

I do think they're going to find this as a way to have him elegantly dismount the job in moving moment.

I think he's toxic in the electorate.

I don't think is that smart is not sort of intellectually capable of fixing the mess labor of God.

And they have to do something on power prices because they'll bleed on the next election.

But also now there's a real point of difference with the coalition.

That's right, there is a point of difference, and that contest is going to become more intense, and I think Chris Bone is going to make it more difficult, not easier for the government.

Look just one before I lose you, I worried about your line.

But there's sbestos links with these Chinese wind farms.

How serious is.

This Well, I think the serious element to it is that these things have been imported and installed without the proper checks on what's going into them.

It's been found that there's some break linings on the wind turbines that contains asbestos.

It's probably not something that has a big impact on the broader community, but it goes to the issue of importing these things from China, the proper supervision on what they entail, and of course a big question what else don't we know?

And of course if you're a farmer in the vicinity and they use those brakes and it's windy, of course that asbestos.

Has spread over quite a huge area.

We'll leave it there, Graham, thanks for you time after break serious cyber concerns his time around the Chinese delegation that visited the Parliament.

PM says they're our good friends, so why they locked down?

Plus rank hypocrisy from the Greens and Tills as they make out rageous demands at the former Senator.

Linda Reynolds, welcome back to the calm.

Why Pauline Hansen's absolutely right, we need a debate on the burker in this country.

The first this morning in China's number three leader, Jo Lugie, along with a delegation, visited Prime Minister at Parliament House, and that was after an official dinner last night.

Now granted the government's keen to keep up diplomatic relations with China, but this trip has sparked security warnings from a number of experts.

His staffers in Parliament House were told to turn off their phones and Internet connected devices during the time that this man was inside the building.

In a member of parliamentary employees, the Department of Parliament Entry Services, their security division, we said, quote where devices must be used?

Goodness me and Parliament House.

You're always on a device.

Please ensure phones and iPads, they said, are updated with the latest software version and placed in lockdown mode, and laptops should have Wi Fi and Bluetooth switched off.

Joining me now to discuss this.

Shadow Minister for Cybersecurity, Claire Chandler Claire welcome.

We'll talk more broadly about the relationship, but I'll tell you what every single time I used to go to China when I work for the Prime Minister.

You know, you take a burn a phone, you don't take any devices.

You clean everything that you take in or you throw it away.

That's when you go to them.

I've never heard of a circumstance where a Chinese delegation comes to Australia and our most secure environment of Parliament House, all of you and all the staff are told to shut down, turn off.

We can't trust them.

If that the case, well.

I think there are some serious questions that need to be answered here, Peter.

And partly those will be questions for the Department of Parliamentary Services, and partly I suspect they will be questions for other government agencies like the Department of Foreign.

Affairs, like AZO.

We were given this advice from the Department of Parliamentary Services at about eight point thirty on Monday morning, when everyone had shown up to Parliament House in Canberra ready for the last sitting week of the year.

And apart from being told the specifics that you've just outlined of turning phones off if you're in certain areas of the building or putting them down into lockdown mode, there was no further detail around exactly what the security risks might have been, why this decision had been made, and indeed why the Department had waited until seemingly the last minute to communicate to staff more broadly and parliamentarians as well about what was required of them.

So it has been quite a puzzling couple of days, and again I think there are some questions that will need to be pursued before we can fully get to the bottom of exactly why we had to go to.

These extreme lengths here in the Parliament this week.

Yeah, as I said, you know, I've never heard of this occurring.

So what has changed?

What are the efficiencies Claire with the Australian parliament houses network?

Now, clearly it's a vulnerable network if they've had to do this, And you know, in my time President g himself came into the Chamber, into the House of Representatives and spoke to the Parliament and none of this was required then, So what is different and it to the reason why they didn't give you much notice is that they didn't want to be just you know, discussing it like we are.

Now on air.

Have you sawt a briefing?

Have they given you a briefing.

Look, I haven't been offered any briefing yet at this point.

I won't speak on behalf of other colleagues that whose responsibilities might touch on these areas.

But yeah, I think that's a very valid point and that there are questions that need to be answered and it should be explained to all occupants of this building and parliamentarians why this sort of advice has come about.

I mean, like you say, previously there have been delegations by China to the Federal Parliament and these sorts of rules haven't been put in place.

Indeed, we would get a parliamentary delegation from another nation I don't know, probably every sitting week, if not every second sitting week.

In my six years in the Parliament.

I've never once been told that you have to switch your phone off or that the Wi Fi might have moments of being a little bit patchy throughout the building for the duration of a parliamentary delegation visit.

It's just quite a fuddlength not workable.

It's not workable.

I'm also surprised, you know, if you listen to the Prime Minister, they're supposed to be our great friends.

Again, this is not how great friends treat each other.

If we're so vulnerable that you basically are turning off your phones and back to carrier pigeons on a busy sitting day.

Well that's exactly right.

But we have to remember that the Chinese Communist Party has taken a very aggressive approach towards our democracy previously, when one of its state aligned cyber hacking groups attempted to hack parliamentarians including myself back in twenty twenty one, purely because we were members of the Interparliamentary Alliance on China and seemingly the CCP wanted to send us a message or find out more about our views on the Chinese Communist Party.

So this is a pattern of behavior and all Australians need to be very clear eyed about the cybersecurity threats from foreign actors, including China, and particularly all parliamentarians need to be aware of those risks as well.

Let's go to some comments made by the Greens leader Larissa Waters.

She is now demanding that Linda Reynolds and are former chief of Staff and the Brown She's demanding they donate any compensation they may receive from their court battles with the Commonwealth over the Brittany Higgins matter.

Now, I don't remember the Greens saying that Britney Higgins needs to donate her two point four million dollar payment.

Why should Senator Reynolds.

She's one, fair and square in court.

She's unlikely to see anything from Higgins.

She is said to be about to declare bankruptcy.

Her husband has declared bankruptcy, so why can't she keep any money she gets.

It's once again rank hypocrisy on behalf of the Greens party Kredlin, Peter Rathera, and sadly we've become used to it.

I mean, they claim to be the party that defends women, but it's only a certain kind of woman that they want to defend.

And I think this, more broadly, just shows how much disregard this political movement has for our legal system.

I mean, when damages are awarded in a court of law, they are awarded for a very good reason to restore some sort of lafe, which may be the case in these two examples we're talking about here.

So the Greens are saying, oh, well, you know that that loss is less important, ergo, you should have to donate the proceeds to a sort of charity.

I do think it's a bit baffling.

Well over there, thank you, sir, to Childler.

I quick break after the break.

As I said, Senata Hanson was on the side of right when she said we need a debate on the burker in Australia.

Last a humiliating back down from Labor, but a big win for veterans more than shortly.

Okay, back well, as you've seen, Pauline Hanson was suspended for the Senate seven sitting days following her burke is done yesterday, but she's not backing down.

I'm censured.

Does it really worry me?

No, it doesn't for seven days, not at all.

I'll stand my ground and what I believe in I will continue to do so.

All right, let's bring in my panel on our former liberal and Pinicole Flint, an author at The Spectator, Terry Barnes.

Welcome to you both, Nicole, I said at the top of the program.

Absolutely, yes, it was a stunt, but there's plenty of stunts in the Senate.

She's not alone.

Surely though, a debate about a burker in Australia is legitimate.

And I went through a whole list of European, African, Asian and did a lot of Muslim countries that ban the burker, banned the nicab When I'm talk about the headscarf here, it's about face covering as women that wear them obviously as you know, and not men, and it's not an article of Islamic faith, it's not required.

Surely that debate in Australia is as legitimate here as it was in Portugal last month.

It is completely outrageous that this debate would shut down in the Senate.

And can you believe that two weeks ago today on your show, pointed out three ways that the left operate and one of the key things the left do is silence their opponents and shut down debate if they don't like the topic, and that is precisely what has happened in the Senate.

It is completely outrageous there is this we have to have this debate and it is I think, Peter, as you have pointed out, a debate about women's rights.

But of course Labor don't want to debate women's rights on any level whatsoever, because it is the Federal Labor Party who erased the very definition of women and the Sex Discrimination Act under the Gillar government in twenty thirteen and everything has gone downhill for Australian women since.

So no wonder they shut down this debate because they do not want to discuss women's rights at any level.

The funny thing is, to Carle, you and I both are out there in the real world.

Everyone last night would have been saying around the kitchen table, or at the pub or you know, at the cricket training or wherever.

Oh jeez, what do we think about that?

I mean, do we think it should be banned?

As you know, surehands and probably should have put it on and got into the chamber.

But yeah, fair point.

I mean why can't we talk about it?

I think that's the conversation that labor is missing.

Absolutely it is, Peter, and you know this is let's bring it on, have the debate.

If you are confident in your position, as labor apparently are, then have the debate.

What are they hiding from?

Peter?

And I think all reasonable Australians A want to see this debate And b do you want to see the burker band like so many countries around the world, as you have pointed out, countries like France, who I think banded in twenty eleven Denmark, all of the progressive Scandinavian countries.

It's about time we banned it here.

But hey, first of all, let's just have the debate for goodness sake.

I know, let's leave it there, Let's go down to Victoria.

The Order to General Terry has warned that the Allen government's sure term focus is leaving the state at financial risk.

We know debts very high there, but the projection is even shocked.

Maybe two hundred and thirty six billion dollars by twenty eight twenty nine.

This is massive.

They're spending sixty one million dollars per annum on ministerial staff.

You've written a crack of a piece for the Spectator.

This is about Jess Wilson and who she should appoint in your view as a new shadow treasurer.

You reckon Richard Welsh is the man.

Give us the pitch for Welsh.

Tell us why he should get the job over anyone else.

Well, first, I don't want to put the mockers on the poor man Peter, but certainly I saw him in action at the HR Nichols Society conference last Friday, and he's the coalition's I asked spokes from in Victoria, He look, he just impressed me.

And why did he impress me?

One, he was clearly economically literate.

He could think on his feet, he could communicate, he could actually win over an audience.

But beyond that, he's an MBA.

He's been a in financial services, merchant banking.

He's been an entrepreneur.

He's started up a business from scratch.

He's built of factories and employed people in India and other countries.

Why he wanted to come to a dysfunctional opposition Victoria, I do not know.

But you need people with that type of.

Track record, people who actually understand economics, people who understand what it is to employ people, people who understand where the state needs to do some pretty tough things.

We're talking about a huge job of budget repair.

You need the best people on the paddock.

You need people who know what they're talking about.

I can see him as a shadow treasure He is an upper house MP, but so is the current treasurer.

So what's the problem.

Oh and besides his father.

I was going to say, he's got good sound, conservative values and what's not to like?

So estually does im put him in?

If she puts in a factional hack and two former shadow treasures I filed lamatably James Newberry wants the job.

Brad Roswell wants the job.

If she went back to a factional hack like that, another moderate, what does it say about her chances of winning the election?

Well, I said it last week.

I think if she chooses James Newberry, the former Shadow Treasurer, as a as the once and future of Shadow treasure or in an economic portfolio, I think all bets are off.

I think she needs to come to talent.

She needs the best people on the paddic, regardless of their factional personal allegiances.

And certainly you don't want people who simply play the game to actually be in the engine room in such a crucial role.

Because they need budget repair.

They need to show they have an economic plan to get them anywhere near the line next November.

Let alone over it all.

Right, Let's go to the veteran's metal fiasco.

I mean, this is embarrassing for the government.

I'm worry they won't get the approbrium out there in the public domain that they should for what they tried to pull on here in Nicole.

Peter.

I think this is just sheer arrogance on Labour's behalf.

Now they've got such a big majority, they think they can do whatever they like.

But erasing the democratic rights of servicemen and women and veterans from appealing decisions or being able to mount a challenge is completely disgraceful, and Peter, I hope that we will continue to monitor this bill very very closely and keep calling it out if they attempt to reintroduce it, because it is an absolute and utter disgrace.

And just with a similar vein here that the arrogance that you know the ninety three seat majority means that you know cocker hoop and the opposition is still scratching around and fighting amongst itself.

This also plays out into the FOI push Terry, you know canceling.

And you've worked in a ministerial job.

Canceling the Foy laws and the way that they operate, the transparency that they operate.

I work for a number of ministers and all of them said to me, no good government should fear Foy.

So the fact that Labor what's to make it less transparent?

When the PM was it a pains against Scott Morrison to promise transparency, well this should concern us.

All, well, that's right, and certainly since nineteen eighty two, the Food Freedom of Information Act has been a guaranteur of well public awareness and transparency when it comes to the operations of government.

And as you say, a good government should always be open to scrutiny and transparency.

And certainly the fact that the Albanezy government is coming up with all these sorts of really spurious justifications, including chatbots or I'm sorry whatever they call them, you know those bot things that trail through data and ask questions.

I mean, as long as a human being is making the application, they've got an absolute right to have have it considered.

They might try and refine the request to make it manageable, but the bottom line is that we as citizens are entitled or ask questions about government.

We pay the bills.

You're absolutely right, let's go to AI.

There's a survey out here, Nicole at the moment that says seventy percent of finance sector workers think AI poses a threat to their job security.

This is finance workers.

And I remember that case that was just a sided the other day in relation to WESTPACAM.

I wanted to work from home for the entire week.

Wouldn't go back into the office.

I reckon working from home.

Such a good idea if you're worried about AI.

Absolutely this might.

This might change a few attitudes, Peter and get people back into the office where they should be for most of the time.

And you know, I spoke a few weeks ago.

About wanting to have the cop conference in Adelaide.

It was to support all of our businesses, especially in the CBD, all every single CBD around the nation, all of those small businesses.

The rest trumps and cafes are still doing it really tough because people aren't in the office like they used to be.

So maybe this might encourage a few people back into the cities, back into their offices, and back into supporting our wonderful small businesses.

Well said, got to leave it there.

Thank you both for your company Tonight.

That's it for me.

I'll see you tomorrow night.

Delighted to be back with you.

Is agible