Chris Smith:
But right now, let’s get to Senior Fellow and Chief Economist with the Institute of Public Affairs, for the first time in 2026, Adam Creighton. Happy new year. Welcome back.
Adam Creighton:
Thanks very much, Chris. Great to be here.
Chris Smith:
How was your break?
Adam Creighton:
Good, thank you. Yeah, good. But yeah, certainly lots of news to discuss already, and we’re not even at Australia Day.
Chris Smith:
Yeah, you’re not wrong. Usually it’s only after Australia Day things start to hot up.
Adam Creighton:
Exactly.
Chris Smith:
Gun and hate laws in two days; it seems to me that the opposition, according to what Sussan Ley has just said in that press conference, they think it’s unsalvageable, so they’ll vote against it. The Greens want all sorts of additional controls. But two days to get something like this through? This is too fast, too dangerous.
Adam Creighton:
No, certainly that’s true. I mean, the bill should be split. I mean, guns and free speech are completely different issues. So I certainly agree with Sussan Ley there. But the speech laws in particular are extremely worrying. They’d have a profoundly bad effect, I think, on Australian society by criminalising so much conduct that doesn’t even cause fear or harm. So I think we should wait and consider this much, much longer than the government is allowing. I mean, I think it’s outrageous that they’re using the understandable emotion of Bondi to ram through an incredibly complicated 144-page bill without adequate assessment of what it’s really going to do to Australia.
So I mean, do your listeners know that as the bill is currently written, it actually says it is immaterial whether or not a person actually feels intimidated or fears harassment or violence or fears for their safety? So it’s actually immaterial. So it’s only a hypothetical person might feel intimidated by a particular statement. That’s the test. So you can imagine all the comments on the internet, or Facebook pages, or tweets, or t-shirts even, that could potentially upset a hypothetical person.
Chris Smith:
And someone therefore has to judge what the truth of that is.
Adam Creighton:
Yes, that’s exactly right. So I mean, I think this is going to smash standard ordinary political debate in Australia. People will be too scared to say things because they could be charged. And of course, such a law which is written so broadly will be arbitrarily enforced and probably enforced, let’s face it, against people on the right of politics. There’s no mention of radical Islam in the law. And indeed, religious texts are a loophole to get out of it.
Chris Smith:
Yeah. So hateful, deadly lines that you can find in the Quran and some texts in the Old Testament will be protected by law. It’s a ridiculous major loophole.
Adam Creighton:
Yeah. No, look, it’s a huge loophole. I mean, if you are going to do this, and I say if, and I’m extremely opposed to it, of course, but that’s a loophole that shouldn’t be there. And indeed, it’s the hateful preaching, the hateful Islamic preaching that is arguably behind this extraordinary violence. I mean, it’s worth pointing out that last year, the federal government and the states, they toughened their hate speech laws very significantly. And of course, that did not prevent the tragedy of Bondi.
So no one has made the case of how this law would’ve prevented that atrocity. And I think they haven’t made the case because you can’t. I mean, it’s not going to stop atrocities like that. This is just going to criminalise swathes of behaviour, and it’s extremely worrying. And the sad thing is that we’re relying on the Greens, of all people, to save us from this law, because of course the Labour Party has a huge majority in the Lower House. It’s got 29 seats. I think in the Senate, it needs 10 more votes in the Senate. So even if the coalition opposes it and all the others oppose it, if the Greens back it, then it’s going to get through. So let’s just hope that the Greens perform their wrecking function and that they somehow wreck this as well by insisting on too much.
Chris Smith:
Well, they are insisting on too much after a meeting between Anthony Albanese and Larissa Waters yesterday morning. What shocking opportunists. Adam?
Adam Creighton:
Yes. Well, it’s true. And I hope that they do insist that this horrible law is extended even further and that that proves even too much for the Labour government, and it collapses. And I hope that the Prime Minister uses that as an excuse to wait a bit longer. I mean, we’re just having a Royal Commission, which is fair enough. Well, why not wait until the conclusions of that Royal Commission before we pass this extraordinarily profound law?
Chris Smith:
Yeah. And in the meantime, we then focus our attention on funding our counterterrorism agencies, how we track down hate preachers, where the garage prayer halls are, instead of taking gun licences off farmers-
Adam Creighton:
Yeah, exactly.
Chris Smith:
… and trying to protect those who are gay in the community and cop a little bit from other members.
Adam Creighton:
Yeah. Yeah. Look, yeah, it’s certainly true. I think the intelligence agencies have not been scrutinised enough. I mean, I think you can make the case that they failed more than anything else in the Bondi atrocity because they had the names of these guys and they should have known where they were going, where they were travelling. And obviously they failed. They do get a lot of money. They get hundreds of millions of dollars a year from the taxpayers, and they’re obviously not spending it well. So I think there needs to be a lot more scrutiny there, but instead we’re going to crush civil discourse in society and potentially even extend this from race and ethnicity to LGBT and disability; and basically, who knows, probably attacking climate change will be considered hate speech. I mean, it wouldn’t surprise me down the [inaudible 00:05:44]. Well, that’s what the Greens would like anyway, of course.
Chris Smith:
All it would’ve taken is for someone to get all the news footage of that protest at the Sydney Opera House straight after October 7 in 2023, identify who those were who were outrageously saying, “Kill the Jews,” et cetera, et cetera, identify who they are and then surveil them, irrespective of whether they’ve been surveilled before or not, and Bondi wouldn’t have happened, Adam.
Adam Creighton:
Yes, yes. No, look, that’s quite possible. And you’ve focused on the point there that we already have very strong laws against inciting violence, and they’re just not enforced. We have federal laws, we have state laws, and it is already illegal to incite violence. And the definition of inciting is fairly broad. So those things you just mentioned would definitely have been covered. And yet we don’t enforce those laws.
Chris Smith:
Yeah, we go soft.
Adam Creighton:
And now we’re going to introduce these other laws. So this is just an emotional response to a tragedy. And as a general principle, laws that are written based on emotion are going to be extremely bad laws.
Chris Smith:
I can’t believe what a dog’s breakfast they are, not just based on what we’ve discussed, but in other aspects, as was articulated by Sussan Ley about 15 minutes ago. I can’t believe it. But when you think about it, no one was sitting down writing hate laws in the week after Bondi Beach and the attack. And then we had Christmas, so no one was working in Canberra. So we’ve had two weeks to put together 500 pages? Someone has been cutting and pasting, mate.
Adam Creighton:
Yeah. Look, I think so too. I mean, I think you’re getting to the point, the Labour Party would’ve liked to have passed this, or at least elements of it would’ve liked to have passed this law before Bondi. So all their Christmases have come at once. They’re using a tragedy to massively extend the power of the state over speech. And not just in this area, but they’re doing it, of course, with the ban on social media for under-16s. I mean, this is not the only example. There’s a full-frontal assault by government on what we can read and see and say.
And if these laws pass, I think Australia would have the strongest hate speech laws in the world. I mean, at some point you cease being a democracy when you can’t speak your mind. I mean, that’s a fundamental part of a democracy. Indeed, every individual needs to be able to say what they think, even if it upsets others. I mean, of course, as we said, incitement to violence is already illegal, but this just goes way too far.
And just another section of the bill here I’m just reading, it says, “The Minister for the Federal Police is not required to observe any requirements of procedural fairness.” So basically the minister, he or she can choose any group he wants in Australia completely arbitrarily, and outlaw it. And anyone who’s a member of that group goes to prison for five years without any procedural fairness. So that’s a fundamental basis of English law.
Chris Smith:
Common law.
Adam Creighton:
And so that’s just out the door. So this was rushed, as you say, extremely rushed. And quite rightly, who wrote this so quickly? I mean, 144 pages of law and there it is, bang. And as you suggest, it’s probably your cut and paste from other ideas that have been floating around.
Chris Smith:
I think that’s true. Now, what do you make, very briefly, of what’s happening in Tehran?
Adam Creighton:
Well, look, I think the best outcome here would be that that awful regime is toppled internally by the Iranian people. Of course, it’s a tragedy, these thousands of deaths. I mean, it’s extraordinary. I think over two and a half thousand people have been killed now. I think tens of thousands have been arrested. I mean, these are major, major protests. The US has threatened strikes. Well, I think in the last 12 hours, Donald Trump’s backed away from that, because apparently he’s been assured that there’ll be no executions, that the killing of protestors is going to stop. I mean, who knows whether that’s true or not. It’s going to be hard to prove.
But look, I mean, I think the regime seems to be on its last legs. And I think that’s a very good thing for the world because they are sponsors of terrorism, not only in their own country, but all around the world. So let’s just pray and hope that it does collapse and it turns into a normal democracy. That’s what we would really like, a proper democracy. I mean, I know there’s a lot of talk of bringing back the Shah. I don’t think that would fly very well domestically. That wasn’t necessarily a great regime. But it certainly needs to be a normal democracy, and let’s hope that is the trajectory here. But certainly there’s a lot of hate on the ground, given the size of these protests, against the government. And ultimately, no government can stay in power when it’s hated by such a large proportion of its citizenry. So let’s hope that’s what’s going to happen here.
Chris Smith:
I started the programme talking about the Teals, because they’re very upset, mate. They can’t seem to hack the cut and thrust of election campaigning. They’re whinging to the parliament about receiving very strong handshakes and even being snubbed over their lollies. Have a listen.
AI Voice:
After approximately an hour of handing out, during which I witnessed that person’s lovely, friendly disposition with the voters who passed by, I went to share some lollies. She retracted her hand and reminded me that, “I am here to do a job. I am not interested in speaking with you.”
Chris Smith:
Thank you to AI for that particular voice. The poor petals, Adam.
Adam Creighton:
Well, yeah, look, I mean, politics is a contest. It’s a rough game. Of course, there should not be violence, but I mean, complaining about things like that seems a bit silly. And I think it just makes them look weak. I mean, and actually, it’s worth bringing up, Monique Ryan’s husband, remember, was out there ripping down signs of the other parties. So that’s pretty rough. And I’d say it’s worse behaviour than a hard handshake, even if that happened. I mean, there’s no real proof of this. This is just someone saying something. So look [inaudible 00:11:27]-
Chris Smith:
They can dish it out, but they can’t take it.
Adam Creighton:
Yeah, that’s exactly right, so anyway.
Chris Smith:
Good to have you on the programme, mate. Thank you very much for your time.
Adam Creighton:
Yeah, thanks, Chris. Thank you [inaudible 00:11:36].
Chris Smith:
Good on you. Senior Fellow and Chief Economist with the Institute of Public Affairs, columnist with the Australian newspaper, and their former Washington correspondent, Adam Creighton.
This transcript with Adam Creighton talking on Mornings with Chris Smith – 2SM from 15 January 2026 has been edited for clarity.
