‘They don't listen': Victoria's Voice proposal proof of Labor's ‘arrogance'
'This is just the arrogance of Labor, they don't listen to people,' Mr Ashby told Sky News host Paul Murray.
'It's hard to believe that this is a state that just completely ignores the wishes of the people of Victoria.
'It's so divisive.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
40 minutes ago
- ABC News
Macquarie Point AFL stadium issue a vote changer, YouSay polling reveals ahead of Tasmanian state election
For Tasmanians, the proposed Macquarie Point stadium is likely to play at least some role in who they vote for at the upcoming state election. According to ABC YourSay data, the stadium remains the hot-button issue. And of more than 1,000 respondents across the first two weeks of the campaign, the vast majority referenced the stadium as a key issue — or at least something they are thinking about ahead of polling day. So, what are Tasmanians telling the ABC when it comes to the stadium? And could the stadium act as a vote changer for Tasmanians? First-time state Greens candidate Vanessa Bleyer, who is running in the north-west seat of Braddon, believes so. "Nine out of ten people in Braddon are raising the stadium to me very quickly as a core issue to them in their state election," she said. "At least half of the people I've spoken to who are opposed to funding a billion-dollar stadium in Hobart are changing their vote to oppose that funding." Ms Bleyer's experience has been reflected in a number of YourSay responses. Leanne in Devonport said she could flip her vote. Beatrice in Shearwater voted Labor at the May federal election, but could also swing to the Greens because of the stadium. "I would like to vote Labor as I'm pleased with federal Labor, but I can't if they're going ahead with the stadium. So, it's the Greens for me this time," she said. Ms Bleyer said she'd spoken to both Labor and Liberal voters who planned on changing their vote to oppose the stadium. Independent candidate Craig Garland, who is seeking re-election in Braddon, said he was being delivered a clear message by his constituents. "The amount of people emailing and stopping me in the street and telling me 'if you support the stadium, you haven't got my vote', it's quite clear it's the number one issue for them," he said. Among those in attendance at north-west football grounds, opinions were split. "I don't think it should be a cut-throat deal, no stadium no team," Melissa Bishop said, referring to the AFL's stipulation that without the roofed stadium at Macquarie Point, Tasmania does not get to enter a team into the national competition. But she said it wouldn't influence her vote. "It's definitely not at the top of my priorities," she said. "It'd be better off in Launceston. It'd be fairer for the rest of the state," Doug Rowlings from Devonport told the ABC. "People in Smithton aren't going to travel all the way to Hobart for a game of football, then travel home," he said. While not eligible to vote, Circular Head junior footballer Harvey Vanderlaan, aged 13, said he would like to see the stadium. Liberal candidate for Bass Rob Fairs, whose electorate takes in the northern city of Launceston, said the Devils AFL team was coming up regularly while he was doorknocking. "While people are taking the opportunity to hear about the benefits a stadium will bring them in the north, they know what's at stake and they are telling me they'll vote to save the dream," he said. Hamish in West Launceston told YourSay it was "critical" that a Jeremy Rockliff-led Liberal government was re-elected so that the stadium could be built. While David in Whitemark on Flinders Island said his vote would change. "At the next election, I will be voting for the Liberal party for the first time ever," he told YourSay. Lesley in Newstead, also in Bass, said they would be voting informally because of the stadium. "I cannot place a valid vote. Independent candidate for the southern seat of Franklin, David O'Byrne, who is also the president of the Southern Football League, believed the stadium would be a vote changer, but mostly for people who supported the proposal. "The people who are against the stadium are predominantly staying where they are, in my view," he said. He also said he believed it would mobilise the southern football community, given the timing of the election. "The election is in the middle of football season, and the biggest issue for a lot of sporting communities is the Devils and the stadium and what that brings. It's clear that without the stadium, you can't deliver a team and football clubs know that," he said. A number of Franklin voters said the stadium issue would force their vote to change. "I have voted Labor for almost 50 years but will not be voting for the Labor party this election," Chris in Howrah told YourSay. While Bernard, also of Howrah, could also swing towards the pro-stadium Liberals. "It's vitally important that the stadium goes ahead to the extent that I'm considering voting Liberal for the first time in my life," he said. A swing away from the Labor party, based on their pro-stadium stance, was a theme amongst YourSay respondents. Labor candidate for Clark Luke Martin, who has been doorknocking Hobart's northern suburbs, said the stadium was not a prominent issue among his potential constituents. "While a few people have raised the stadium, with a range of views, it's clear that most are focused on issues that affect their day-to-day lives, like health, housing, the cost of living and growing concerns about crime in Glenorchy." Older Tasmanians have so far been far more likely to respond to the survey, with about three-quarters of respondents between the ages of 60 and 69 years old. The stadium was a strong theme amongst this cohort, with 66 per cent of them specifically referencing the stadium as a key election issue. Of the 22 respondents who gave their age as being between 15 and 29, the stadium rated as only a lukewarm topic. Lachlan of Moonah wanted less focus on the stadium and more focus on "the Liberal government's lack of financial responsibility". James of New Norfolk said the state election wasn't a "stadium referendum" and health and housing should be the main focus for voters. Art student Dan did not want to see the stadium built, while other young people were more concerned about the closure of Ashley detention centre, public transport and a greater focus on LGBTIQ+ issues.
Sydney Morning Herald
an hour ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Mehreen Faruqi keeping mum after offloading landholding in Lahore
Much to the delight of Labor hacks, the Greens party room contains more than a few landlords, with their number only strengthened after voters purged the rabid renter Max Chandler-Mather from parliament. Now comes the news that NSW senator and deputy leader Mehreen Faruqi, once owner of four properties, appears to be whittling down her portfolio. CBD brought word last year that Faruqi had sold a four bedder in Port Macquarie for $920,000, taking home a tidy profit after nixing plans to bulldoze native trees and build two townhouses on the land. Now, according to parliamentary disclosures, Faruqi appears to be parting with a parcel of land in her home city of Lahore, Pakistan, where she grew up before migrating to Australia in the 1990s. The senator has held the 500-square-metre land holding since before she entered federal parliament back in 2018, after a five-year stint in the NSW upper house. And the reason for the sale? The good senator and her team didn't enlighten us. But Faruqi's Pakistani roots have long made her a target for all manner of nasty commentary. Last year, the Federal Court ruled that One Nation leader Pauline Hanson had racially vilified Faruqi in a tweet telling her senate colleague to 'go back to Pakistan'. No doubt such nastiness would've escalated had Faruqi replaced Adam Bandt as Greens leader. Instead, Larissa Waters ran unopposed, and in the race to be deputy, Faruqi beat Dorinda Cox, who promptly defected to Labor. Waters, for what it's worth, owns just one residential property in Brisbane. What Zoe did next As the political flotsam and jetsam continues to wash up following federal election '25, and long-standing staffers bail out of Canberra, the nation's former MPs have been contemplating their futures.
Sky News AU
an hour ago
- Sky News AU
Strong fears held for children's entertainment over 'misguided' attempts from eSafety commissioner to have YouTube included in social media ban for kids
As Australia awaits the Labor government's decision as to whether or not children will be banned from YouTube, a prominent content creator has explained why following the eSafety Commissioner's "misguided" advice would be a big mistake. eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant recently argued that children should be banned from the video streaming platform in her speech to the National Press Club. Ms Inman Grant claimed she had written to Communications Minister Anika Wells encouraging children be banned from YouTube because of the evidence. 'I don't make determinations or write recommendations to the minister based on whether I keep the public onside, I follow the evidence,' she said last Tuesday. If the Albanese government decides to heed the advice of the commissioner, YouTube will be restricted by sweeping new legislative changes without having an opportunity to provide a counter argument. A decision by Labor is imminent, but the creator of the mega-popular Bounce Patrol channel for children on YouTube says she feels like the process is being rushed through with minimal consultation with stakeholders. Shannon Jones, the creator and executive producer of the Australian channel which has more than 33 million subscribers globally, said YouTube was exempted from the social media bans last year after consultation but that the government wording and decision-making appears to have changed, indicating a potential backflip is on the cards. "I reached out to them last year when they were first considering it and had some conversations then... and then this time around I've sent communications to the minister but haven't heard back because everything is just being done so fast, like it's all being considered and decided in the space of a week it feels like," she told "...Because it's getting so rushed through, all of the consultation that was done with stakeholders last year is not getting repeated and it seems like there hasn't been much conversation with stakeholders this time to learn all those nuances so that's been really disappointing as well. "And it seems like they've got a position that they're interested in pursuing." Australia's social media ban for children aged under 16 is set to come into effect in December 2025. The ban is set to apply to a number of popular platforms including the likes of Facebook, X, Instagram, TikTok and Snapchat. There is confusion though as to why YouTube has been suggested to be lumped under the ban, given it's not considered a form of social media and doesn't include any typical features of social media platforms that may be considered dangerous for children such as messaging, or exchanging images. YouTube also has safeguards in place to protect children online, such as restricted mode which filters out mature content, parental controls and age-restricted content. Research conducted by the Australian government found 85 per cent of kids and 68.5 per cent of parents said YouTube is appropriate for under-16s, whereas parents felt less comfortable about their children using social media platforms such as TikTok or Instagram. Ms Jones is baffled why the video platform has been recommended to also be banned, stating the advice is "misguided" to "lump it in with social media". "I just think that this is a really misguided way to approach it, designed by people who don't really have a great understanding of how YouTube works and how all of the experiences are built for kids and how the safety guard rails are built and the sort of nuance of the way the platform works," she said. "From our perspective YouTube is not social media like kids aren't messaging each other, they're not posting selfies on made-for-kids content. You can't post comments at all. In supervised experiences, depending on the settings that the parents have set, you can't communicate or leave comments." The creator also believes the decision to include YouTube in the ban would do more harm than good for children as it would force them to use the app logged out, where the same safeguards are not in place. There is also no clarity over whether YouTube Kids would be included under the framework of a ban. "The Safety Commissioner's advice was that kids should use it logged out but the problem with that is YouTube has spent many years designing experiences for kids that put a lot of safety guard rails in place and then one of the few tech platforms that have really invested in that over the last 10 years like YouTube Kids are celebrating its 10th anniversary this year. "That's how long they've been working on these experiences and... (there's) no idea whether that would be allowed under this new framework for instance. "Even for older kids, the 13-17-year-olds for instance, YouTube's built the supervised experiences which have all these protections in place so it's things like there's no personalised ads, there's take a break reminders, there's limitations on certain harmful content. "These tools that exist the parents can create these supervised accounts would no longer be allowed to be used and kids would be forced to use it logged out instead according to the Safety Commissioner's suggestions and that experiences has got no guard rails in place so that's where you have no limitations on what you can see, what path it goes down." Bounce Patrol has more subscribers than other Australian creator on YouTube, highlighting the demand for children's content Down Under. If a ban were to affect YouTube, it would mean that along with other creators, it would no longer thrive to the same extent. It would also provide a huge roadblock to young entrepreneurs with a dream to pursuing a career as a creator at a young age. For example, the likes of 13-year-old Ryan Kaji's channel Ryan's World with more than 38.3 million subscribers, would essentially become obsolete if it was run from Australia. If a ban was in place in the United States more than 15 years ago, Justin Bieber may have taken several more years to be discovered before becoming the pop star he remains to be. Ms Jones said a ban would also isolate Australia in becoming a country to introduce such a draconian measure for children, saying the platform is "not banned anywhere else" and that it demonstrates a lack of understanding as to how YouTube works. "It says that we don't really understand what YouTube is which is a library of high-quality video content," she said. "Most of the families who watch Bounce Patrol content in Australia watch it as a shared experience in the lounge room together "And what that tells you is YouTube is more like Netflix than it is like Instagram and lumping it in and saying this is not a video service, this is a social media service is just really misguided in terms of understanding how people actually use the platform." These fears are also held by 'The Mik Maks', the creators of a channel with 8.5 million subscribers and 7.9 billion views. "As former classroom teachers," they told Sky News, "we've seen firsthand the value of using YouTube videos in early years education. If parents and educators are forced to access made-for-kids content without signing in, children will be more likely to encounter lower-quality or unvetted videos. Our videos have been shared over one million times because they are trusted by parents and teachers. A one-size-fits all ban doesn't make any sense'.
