Paul Murray:
The thing at the IPA, the Institute of Public Affairs. Lads, hello.
So, Iranian soccer team, a female soccer team here for the Asian Cup, Australia’s hosting said event. We know the likelihood of the pleasantries upon the return of these women is going to be unpleasant firstly because the status of women in Iran. Secondly, because they were silent when the national anthem was being sung and it’s been whipped up back in Iran that they somehow were treasonous for this. So, I think there’s a case if they want to come and stay here, then great. They can stay here, then bring their families over.
But what about the idea here, David, that when we sign up to these big international sporting events here, particularly things like an Olympics or Commonwealth Games, and I’d assume the same with Asian Cup, you agree not to offer asylum to people who come from other countries? Why? Because they want to have the safety of knowing they can turn up and take the people home.
David Limbrick:
Well, it’s a bit of an infringement. I mean, I tend to agree with you that if they’re asking us for help, we should try and figure out how we can help them. But I think agreeing to that sort of contract… Like, if someone’s going to be in danger and they’re asking for help and we say, “Oh no, no, we can’t help you because we’ve signed some agreement,” and then they go home and something awful happens? I just think that’s a terrible, terrible situation. And if they’ve asked us for help, then we should be helping these people because if something happens, it’s going to make Australia just look so terrible.
Paul Murray:
Well, again, it was something that I remember quite specifically, Daniel, which was the Commonwealth Games on the Gold Coast when there was a whole bunch of people who literally had left the athletes’ village and it was the Queensland government, the Queensland police, that went off and tried to find them, eventually found them, didn’t take them to a safe haven, instead returns them back to the team. Do you think there is a case here or the reality is that they’re so heavily chaperoned that they can’t even blink twice to tell us that they’d like to stay here?
Daniel Wild:
Yeah. Look, I think if there’s a case, then they should be able to stay here. But the only concern I really have is I don’t want to see a situation where we’re creating a bit of a two-tiered system or special treatment for people because they’re in a sporting team. There’s plenty of people that are needy that want to come to our great nation for a variety of reasons. So, like I say, the concern I would have is if you’re saying, “Well, if you’re on a sporting team, you can stay. But if you’re some other person who’s trapped in a war zone, you can’t get over here because you don’t have all of the press and all the lights on you, as well.”
So, I just think whatever’s done, it needs to be done through the proper process and the proper system not to set up, I guess, an incentive for people to take advantage of it, which I’m not suggesting they’re doing here. But you just got to be careful with how you go about these things.
Paul Murray:
Now, interestingly, we know that, as always after every election, they try to look under the bonnet and work out how to make things better and rig the system for themselves. But of course, of course, of course, they’re all about defending democracy, right? And we know that this government is currently looking at expanding the number of politicians, more in the Senate and more in the lower House because they’re defending democracy. Yeah, of course, not just creating more people to be snouts in the trough.
But there is an interesting chat, which is that apparently at the ’25 election, there was some new level of abuse that was happening while people were going into polling stations. We’re talking about the pre-poll as well as on the day. And apparently the Labour Party wants stronger rules around polling booths after reports of aggressive and intimidating behaviour towards volunteers and voters during that election. The party says that the current six-metre exclusion zone isn’t enough because intimidation and obstruction often happens outside of that boundary. Labour wants a new campaigning zone.
I like this idea, but I’m going to go even one further here, Daniel. I think there should only be two representatives of every candidate at a polling booth. That’s it, right? And a hundred metres that way and a hundred metres that way, no third party groups. So, you can’t have the unions who count as third party groups. You can’t have masked Teal volunteers because reality is, if you want to get to how to vote, great, you walk up and get it. Other than that, you can inform yourself and you can go on a website and you can print one off. What do you think?
Daniel Wild:
Well, I’ve got to say, as I was a liberal candidate who ran in a dead red seat and there were union volunteers everywhere, your idea actually sounds very enticing to someone like me, Paul. I’ve got to say I’d be very appreciative of that.
Paul Murray:
Level the field, man.
Daniel Wild:
That’s right. But look, I do have a bit of a different perspective on this.
I can say that 99.9% of interactions I had as a candidate were positive or neutral. I’m sure there’s abuse that occurs. It’s very few and far between. And usually, it’s those lefty types, the most progressives, who preach love but practise hate. That was my experience. And the abuse that I copped was very little, but it was from those more far left wing type people. So, I think most people do the right thing.
I am a fan of people getting involved in democracy, I have to say. And I think more people who want to get out there, I know it’s annoying. I know when you’re trying to get to the booth and you’re trying to vote, you just want to get past the annoying people that are trying to put something into your hand, but that is a part of democracy in my view. So, I think that if Labour goes down this path, they are trying to basically cement an advantage that they have with the incumbency and the numbers that they’ve got.
So, I’m always very hesitant to support anything that’s going to limit the ability of people to involve themselves in an election. It’s a no from me on this one.
Paul Murray:
Yeah. But obviously, David, from the perspective of the minor party, right, you obviously don’t have the same manpower. Person power, let’s be inclusive. People power to be able to man the booth. This is part of my issue about early voting, right? Is that I think that certainly the restrictions should be like one person per organisation for those two weeks earlier, because just that the endless running of the gauntlet and sort of trying to make it seem like one candidate has more support when the reality is that those volunteers could be coming from another state.
David Limbrick:
Well, this is true. Minor parties are definitely at a disadvantage during pre-poll because it’s during working hours and most people in minor parties are volunteers. So, we’re at a disadvantage. But I tend to agree with Daniel that I don’t want to limit people’s ability to participate in democracy and I think that’s a problem.
There’s one big difference between federal elections and Victorian elections. And maybe they should think about this in federal elections. In Victorian elections, the number of signs per candidate are limited. And I think that works really well so that you don’t end up with ridiculous numbers of signs everywhere getting in everyone’s way. You still have enough to do the job. Maybe they should think about that.
But I agree with Daniel as well that most of my interactions I’ve had with people have been peaceful and totally fine. You get the odd interaction, which is bad, but mostly it’s good.
Paul Murray:
Let’s check in on the hate laws, which are currently making their way through the Victorian Parliament. I noticed you on socials, David Limbrick, being very strong here about what the government is trying to do. What’s the latest? Because previously the Libs were going to try to fight it, meaning there was some sort of mathematical chance of slowing it up, but have they folded under a new leader?
David Limbrick:
Well, it’s a really wild story what’s happened here. So, for years, the Greens have been pushing for these anti-vilification laws. And about this time last year, they actually got to parliament and then the Greens all of a sudden got cold feet because they started to realise that their supporters are going to be the first victims of these laws. And so what they did, they did a deal with the government to make it more difficult to use the laws that they had to go through the Director of Public Prosecutions.
Now, fast-forward to last week in parliament, the government, they do a Darth Vader on them and say, “No, the deal’s changed. We’re going to change it to make it easier to use these laws.” And the crazy thing is, when the laws went through last time, the Libertarians, One Nation, and the Coalition all opposed it. And now this time last week, the Coalition and One Nation supported this amendment to make the laws easier to use that they opposed in the first place and the Greens were really upset about it. So, it’s sort of a weird situation where the Coalition and One Nation sided with the government to make it easier to use laws that they opposed. I just thought it was a wild situation.
And you haven’t seen much in the media about it because the Greens don’t want to talk about it. The Coalition and One Nation don’t want to talk about it either. So, no one’s really talking about it except for me.
Paul Murray:
Well, and we put that spotlight upon you. I very much appreciate it. Make sure you follow. This is again, why you’ve got to follow people like David in the Upper House on their socials, right? Because again, you get to see all of this little skullduggery that goes on.
Daniel, I want to talk about South Australia, the election there, March the 22nd. Looking forward to heading to SA to be there on election night. Look, we’ll all find out together whether it’s going to be a better night for One Nation than the polls, whether it’s worse. But it does look like it’s going to be a pretty shocking night for the Libs because even in the two horse race of red v. blue, the Libs are in a world of trouble. What’s your sense about how and where the Libs stay in the fight?
Daniel Wild:
Well, it’s clearly going to be tough. Every single poll that you look at suggests the same thing, which is it’s going to be the worst election outcome for the South Australian Liberal Party in the history of the party in South Australia. That would come on the back, of course, the worst federal performance of the Liberal Party. And you also look at WA as another example where they’re at an historic low, as well.
So look, this is the culmination of a few things. Changing leaders is one such example. But I think, yes, there’s a popular premier who’s pretty well liked and who sits across the political spectrum. It’s quite interesting to watch actually because you’ve sort of got one archetype, which is Daniel Andrews, Jacinta Allen, and Victoria, who are very much socialist left. And then you’ve got another archetype, which is Peter Malanaskas and Chris Mintz, who are sort of notionally of the right, but they do a lot of left wing things and they get away with it.
So, here in South Australia, we’ve actually got a Voice to Parliament, the Aboriginal-only Voice to Parliament, even though that two thirds of South Australians voted against it. They’ve got something like $3 million in the last budget for a treaty process. You reckon South Australians want a piece of that action? Absolutely not. But they get away with it because they have a notionally sort of centrist Labour leader. So, they’re actually getting away with a lot of pretty left wing things here in South Australia. And I don’t know whether the Liberal Party has been able to make that case as strongly as what would otherwise be the case.
So, yeah, I mean, I think come election day, it’s going to be a very tough night for Blue Team.
Paul Murray:
All right. We’ll all find out together. Looking forward to talking about it. The joy of this joint, national politics, but I love getting right down into what’s happening in all of the states.
Won’t talk about burst water mains. I’ll save that for the 6 PM news in Melbourne, the prominence and importance of that issue, as it may be. Enjoy your long weekend, David, Daniel. We’ll talk to you again very soon.
This transcript of Daniel WIld on Paul Murray Live Sky News Australia from 8 March 2026 has been edited for clarity.
