In this interview Daniel Wild appeared on The Rita Panahi Show – Sky News Australia to discuss the IPA’s research on Australia’s national defence.
All media appearances posted onto the IPA website are directly related to the promotion and dissemination of IPA research.
Below is a transcript of the interview.
Rita Panahi:
Joining me now for more on this is Deputy Executive Director of the Institute of Public Affairs, Daniel Wild. Dan, just take a look at what’s happening with the NATO countries. They have increased their spending as Trump asked them to do, demanded that they do. Can Australia really afford to be this reckless and recalcitrant?
Daniel Wild:
Well, I think it’s fair enough for the Prime Minister to say that we’ll decide what our own defence policy is based on our own circumstances. But the case for Australia to increase our defence spending is not predicated necessarily in what the US is asking us to do, but because we need to do it anyway. And we should have been doing this a long time ago. Our spending has been too low for too long, and the money that we have allocated towards defence and our national security has not been spent in an effective manner. We are hopelessly unprepared for the challenges that we face in our region and around the world. And this is only set to get worse unless there is a dramatic and urgent change to how we approach our defence policy. Obviously closely related to this reader is not just our national defence, but also our energy security.
And for as long as we are committed to policies like Net Zero, our capacity to have our own sovereign manufacturing capabilities is going to be undermined. So this is caused not just to increase our defence spending, but to have a complete rethink about our energy policy as well.
Rita Panahi:
And it’s all good and well for the Prime Minister to talk tough about sovereignty, but where was that tough talk, Dan, when Chinese warships were doing their little exercises unannounced close to the Australian border? I just find it very inconsistent from the Prime Minister to talk tough when close an ally wants us to increase our defence spending, but he goes missing when the aggressive attitude is coming from China.
Daniel Wild:
Well, that’s exactly right. And it’s not just issues pertaining to China as you rightly identified. But also the number of international agreements which we are signed up to or are due to sign up to. For example, in relation to future pandemics, I haven’t heard the Prime Minister talk about our national sovereignty in relation to the World Health Organisation, nor have I heard him talk about national sovereignty as it relates to climate change commitments. For example, the Paris Climate Agreement is handing over a massive amount of power to unelected international bureaucrats. So you’re quite right to point out that the Prime Minister is being very selective when he discusses issues relating to our political and national sovereignty.
Rita Panahi:
Now, Western Australian Senator Dorinda Cox, who was elected as a member of the Greens not too long ago, has made a shock defection to the Labor Party making this announcement alongside the Prime Minister just yesterday.
Dorinda Cox:
Today I am resigning from the Australian Greens to join the Labor Party, to sit as a Labor senator as part of the Albanese government. It is not a decision I’ve taken lightly.
Rita Panahi:
Now, this is a member of Parliament who was hit with workplace misconduct and bullying allegations back in October last year with 20 of her staff reportedly quitting their jobs in a period of about three years. But I’ve got to ask you, Dan, put aside the personalities here. She was elected as a Greens member. People voted for the Greens, and she was there to represent them. Is it okay for her to be defecting within a matter of weeks or should she be standing down and the Greens select someone else who represent them?
Daniel Wild:
Yeah, I think so, Rita. I think Australians are pretty sick and tired of this. I haven’t looked at what her personal vote was, how many below the line votes she got in the Senate, but I can’t imagine it was anywhere near enough to get her own quota to get in. So you’re right that she was elected as a Greens member, not as a member of the Labor Party. And to do this so soon after the election, I think suggests that perhaps something was in play beforehand. I don’t know, but it seems that it’s unlikely that this kind of transition will take place in such a short space of time. The other point that I would make, I watched Anthony Albanese’s press conference today in Perth, and it was interesting in revealing what he said. He said that if you are serious about social change in Australia, then you need to support the Labor Party.
Now, what this suggests to me, is that Labor’s social values are the social values of the Greens. They’re the social values of treaty, of truth telling, of reparations payments. I believe that they’ll proceed with a voice to Parliament as Penny Wong said they would do prior to the last federal election. And I think it’s time for Labor, just to be honest with the Australian people and have a formal coalition agreement with the Greens. If they’re just going to adopt Greens members as a part of their party, then they should do it in an open and transparent manner.
Rita Panahi:
Well, they’re in a coalition with the Greens, let’s be honest. The Greens and Labor depend on each other, and Labor wouldn’t be where they are without the Greens support. So whether it’s an official coalition agreement as the Libs and Nats have, or an unofficial one like the Labor and Greens. It works pretty much in the same way. Now, let’s talk about Victoria former Premier Jeff Kennett has made another, some would say, desperate attempt to try to save John Pesutto, the former opposition leader. He penned a letter to the Victorian Liberal party’s administrative committee begging them to pay the entire 2.3 million debt that Mr. Pesutto now owes liberal MP Moira Deeming. If he doesn’t come across with his money, if he doesn’t find it someway, Dan, he faces bankruptcy which means it will step down from Parliament. Jeff Kennett argues, “Not supporting the Pesutto family now denies the fundamental values the party was founded upon.
It is wrong to ask him to foot the bills, to bankrupt him and his family, wrong to ask him to borrow money from the capital funds we might have at our disposal. I implore you to act decisively. We must put the issue to bed quickly. Remember, money can always be replaced, a change of government cannot.” I’ve got a lot of thoughts on this one, Dan, but I’m interested in yours. My first thought though is, has Jeff forgotten who the victim here is? It’s Moira Deeming. It is not John Pesutto.
Daniel Wild:
Yeah, look, I have a lot of respect for Jeff Kennett and everything he’s done for Victoria, but I’m not sure this is quite the right way to go. Moira Deeming is entitled to seek compensation as per the court order. She’s well within her rights to do that. And also the liberal party was founded on the value of freedom of speech, which is what Moira was exercising. And she was really the victim of what happened to her and went through that legal process. So this has been a disaster for the Victorian liberal party from the very beginning. And I think it really shows what happens when firstly, you lose sight of what your values are. And secondly, when you become intimidated by your political opponents. It was very clear from the court documents that one of the reasons why the decision was taken to go after Moira Deeming was because of concerns that Daniel Andrews was going to exploit it for political purposes, as of course he would being a very effective political operator. But look what’s happened now. This all happened because they didn’t stand up to Daniel Andrews and the Labor government.
So look, they just need to draw a line under this and try to get clean air as they head to the next election in November of next year.
Rita Panahi:
They showed such poor political judgement in this case. It was actually an opportunity for them to lay a glove on Dan Andrews, and that’s fairly rare during Dan Andrews political career that the Libs would hurt him any way, but they had an opportunity there. This is an 80 20 issue, and they decided to side with the 20% along with Labor and the Greens. Just idiotic in the extreme. I want to ask you about former Australian of the Year Grace Tames. She’s come under fire for her anti-Israel social media content, which has now put her partnership with Nike at risk. The mega sports brand has said via a spokeswoman, “Nike does not stand for any form of discrimination, including anti-Semitism. We take this matter very seriously and are in touch with Grace’s team to understand the matter further.” Now, the Australian has done some great reports on this story.
They reported that Tame reposted a statement from Palestinian writer Mohammed el-Kurd, in which he appeared to condone the murder of two Israeli embassy officials in Washington and angrily attacked journalists who reported that the slayings were an act of anti-Semitism. Yes, the former Australian of the Year endorsement of el-Kurd and the message he published last week is deeply troubling. He wrote, “The media class is scrambling to reframe the shooting that targeted to Israeli state officials as a random anti-Semitic attack.” Tame reposted this to her 260,000 followers, even though it was undeniably and by the alleged shooter’s own admission, a response to the ongoing Israeli assault on Gaza, which killed 107 Palestinians in the last 24 hours alone. Dan, it’s astonishing to me that she would endorse, share this in any way, back a position that is so extreme.
Daniel Wild:
Yeah. Well, the first thing is good on Nike for doing this. Quite often we rightly call out big businesses for dividing us and doing the wrong thing. Well, Nike is at least standing up and is asking for an explanation from Grace Tame, and that’s the right thing for them to do. I think it’s a shame for Grace Tame because she has rightly been acknowledged for the work that she’s done in advocating for and raising the profile of victims of domestic violence and abuse. And that’s a very important cause. But for her to go down the road of political activism, I think has really let down the important work that she did. Of course, she famously wore the F. Murdoch T-shirt when she was meeting with the Prime Minister some time ago and has a history of political activism.
Now, if she wants to do that, that’s up to her. It’s entirely up to Grace Tame if she wants to go down that road, but I don’t think you can at one time be an advocate for a very important cause. And at the same time, also see yourself as a political advocate for what are very divisive cultural issues as well.
Rita Panahi:
Yes, indeed. And I think as Australian of the Year, she’s not in that role anymore. But I think you have to be apolitical. You have to be a unifying figure. You can’t be a divisive activist. And we’ve too often given that honour to divisive activists, it started well before Grace Tame. Dan Wild, thank you so much for your time today.
This transcript of Daniel Wild speaking on The Rita Panahi Show – Sky News Australia from 3 June 2025 has been edited for clarity.
