Download Subtitles for Pauline Hanson vs Fatima Payman Iran Debate

Let's go to Pauline Hanson now, the One Nation founder and leader. She joins us from Queensland. Thanks for joining us again, Pauline. Um I just want to go to this issue, actually, of dangerous ignorance. And uh first up, uh your colleague in the Senate, that is Fatima Payman, the former Labor senator from Western Australia, now a an independent. And have a look at what she has said about her former home of Iran. credible place that Iran is, um allowing for women to participate in the workforce, to ensure that they have a voice and their voices are heard, they're involved in the democratic process. Um reality that we're not privy to living here and listening to the propaganda that we receive from very single-sided organizations with a specific agenda. How could she be so ignorant, especially someone who came here as a refugee, Pauline? And just how dangerous are these views? I think she is very ignorant in what she's actually saying here. Um she has come out from Afghanistan, my understanding, Chris, because I questioned about her citizenship and whether she should be a member of parliament, which they just um ignored and no investigation into it at all. My understanding of Iran is that it came under this totalitarian Islamic regime in about 1979. Before then, it was basically more freedom, democracy. But since being taken over by this regime, it actually suppresses women. My understanding of it is not what Fatima Payman is saying. It was about in 2022 that one woman who didn't wear the the hijab, which is just a She uncovered her head. She was taken by the police. She was in uh loaded into the back of the truck and she was beaten. And witnesses say that her injuries and reports from it were from the beating that she received from the police. You don't see if tourists going there lining up to go to Iran. I can't imagine Western um women wanting to go there or lie beside a pool with a bikini on. It just wouldn't happen. Women are suppressed. And when Fatima Payman is talks on the floor of parliament about domestic violence and how women are treated and all the rest of it, and yet she makes a statement about women in Iran, I'm sorry, domestic violence, women in Iran are controlled by the men. They cannot be accompanied unless there's a change, but my understanding was women cannot walk around by themselves without being covered up. They have to be accompanied by a male, usually, you know, if it's child, the child has to be of teenage years. And they lose all control over the children once the children are actually five or six. So, it's all given control to the men and they suppress the women, control the women. It is not democratic for women at all. So, I don't know where she's getting this from. Yeah, you're right. I mean, it is just uh you're right, sorry to correct me, she was from Afghanistan. Her family came out here as refugees from Afghanistan. But what she's saying about Iran is just so wrong and so dangerous. Women are being arbitrarily arrested on the streets and thrown into prison if they're not wearing their hijab properly and we've had them die in custody. It's just a shocking situation for women in Iran. And to pretend otherwise is deeply, deeply dangerous and very disappointing to hear that coming from one of our senators. I want to go back to domestic politics there very quickly, Pauline. And uh this spend-a-thon we're seeing from Labor, and when it comes to Medicare, at least, and some of the other issues so far, it's being matched by the coalition. We haven't got this money. We can't afford this, but in an election campaign, everybody's just throwing money out the door. It's the same old rhetoric, Chris, isn't it, before every election? Throw money here, throw money there, buying votes and all the rest of it. At the end of the day, future generations and this generation is going to have to pay this back. A trillion dollar in debt, that's what we are. And next year, it's expected we will we will be paying 50 billion a year just in interest alone. How many hospitals can we build for that? At least 10 hospitals. How many how many schools? Um it's just got to ridiculous. Medicare, Chris, we actually uh defrauded of about 3 billion dollars a year. I'd actually clean up the fraud. Then if you save yourself 3 billion a year, then you can actually reinvest it into giving people higher rebates through the Medicare levy. But don't actually then um throw more money at it. Clean up the bloody mess that we're in at the moment. And you can't keep, you know, um funding these things all the time because where's money coming from? Both governments need to pull their heads in, get the country back on track, get industry manufacturing jobs going, productivity, get the GDP, you know, um in a in a position where where we can pay for the things. And we've got to pay down debt. [clears throat] Right, let's get into this, because what we've just heard covers a mix of international issues, domestic politics, and a fair bit of controversy. And it's exactly the kind of discussion that's shaping political debate in Australia right now. So, first up, the comments around Iran, particularly from Fatima Payman, and the reaction from Pauline Hanson. This is where things get quite serious, because we're not just talking about political opinions, we're talking about how a country is being portrayed on the global stage. Now, the claim that Iran is some sort of place where women are empowered and fully participating in society, that's obviously going to raise eyebrows. Because when most Australians think about Iran, they think about strict laws, especially around women's rights, dress codes like the hijab, and well-documented cases of women being punished for not complying with those rules. So, when a sitting Australian senator appears to paint a more positive picture, it creates a disconnect. People start asking, is this accurate or is it misleading? And more importantly, what impact does that kind of statement have? From Hanson's perspective, it's not just inaccurate, she's framing it as dangerous. And that word, dangerous, is important, because it suggests that these kinds of statements could influence how Australians understand global issues, particularly when it comes from someone in a position of authority. Now, whether you agree with Hanson or not, there's a broader point here about responsibility. Politicians aren't just speaking for themselves, they're shaping public perception. And when it comes to international issues, especially ones involving human rights, accuracy matters. At the same time, it's also worth recognizing that discussions about countries like Iran are often highly politicized. Different people will have very different interpretations depending on their background, their experiences, and the sources they rely on. But again, that's why clarity is key, because when there's confusion or contradiction, it doesn't just create debate, it creates mistrust. Now, moving on from international issues to domestic politics, this is where the conversation shifts into something that affects every Australian directly: government spending, debt, and the economy. Hanson's criticism here is pretty straightforward. She's essentially saying that both major parties, Labor and the coalition, fall into the same pattern during election cycles. Big promises, big spending, and not a lot of discussion about how it's all going to be paid for. And to be fair, that's a criticism that's been around for a long time in Australian politics. When elections come around, there's a tendency for governments to announce new funding, new programs, and new benefits. It's about winning support, plain and simple. But the flip side is the long-term cost. Australia's national debt has been a growing concern, and the idea of paying tens of billions of dollars a year just in interest, that's something that gets people's attention. Because that's money that could be going into hospitals, schools, infrastructure, things that people actually see and use. Instead, it's going towards servicing debt. And that's where the frustration comes in, because for many Australians, it feels like there's a disconnect between political promises and economic reality. Now, Hanson brings up Medicare as a specific example. Instead of simply pouring more money into the system, she's arguing for cleaning up inefficiencies, particularly fraud. The figure she mentions, billions lost each year, highlights a broader issue within government systems. It's not just about how much money is spent, it's about how effectively it's used. And that's a point that resonates with a lot of voters. People don't necessarily mind paying taxes if they feel the system is working, but if they believe money is being wasted or mismanaged, that's when trust starts to break down. Then there's the bigger economic picture: productivity, industry, and growth. Hanson's argument is that Australia needs to focus more on building its economic base. Manufacturing, jobs, GDP growth, these are the fundamentals that support everything else. Because without a strong economy, it becomes very difficult to sustain social programs, health care, and infrastructure in the long term. And again, this ties back to the idea of sustainability. Short-term spending might win votes, but long-term economic stability is what actually keeps the country running. Now, one interesting thing about this whole discussion is how it reflects a broader shift in Australian politics. There's a growing frustration with the major parties, and more attention being given to alternative voices like One Nation. Whether people agree with their policies or not, the reason they're gaining attention is because they're tapping into that frustration, the feeling that the system isn't working as well as it should. And that's something both major parties are going to have to address moving forward. Because at the end of the day, voters aren't just looking for promises, they're looking for credibility. They want to know that the policies being proposed are not only appealing, but also realistic. They want transparency about costs, about trade-offs, and about long-term impacts. And that's where a lot of the current political debate is falling short. Instead of clear, detailed discussions, what we often get is back-and-forth criticism, point scoring, and competing narratives. Now, that might make for good television, but it doesn't always help voters make informed decisions. So, when you step back and look at everything we've just discussed, from international commentary to domestic spending, there's a common thread running through it all. And that's trust. Trust in politicians to provide accurate information. Trust in governments to manage money responsibly. And trust in the system to actually deliver outcomes that improve people's lives. Right now, that trust is being tested. And that's why debates like this, even when they're heated or controversial, are important. Because they highlight the issues that people care about, even if they don't always provide clear answers. So, moving forward, the challenge for Australia isn't just about choosing policies. It's about rebuilding confidence in the way those policies are developed, communicated, and implemented. Because without that confidence, even the best ideas are going to struggle to gain support.