Pollies told to listen as podcasters muscle mass media
Content creators were able to reach a large audience that wasn't typically engaged with traditional media, Cheek Media CEO and host of the Big Small Talk podcast Hannah Ferguson said.
Labor had utilised podcasters and influencers to reach young people, including women who are the largest growing audience, Ms Ferguson told AAP.
"The Liberal Party's refusal to engage eliminated them, largely, from speaking to women," she said.
Criticisms from Liberals about the campaign included not having a coherent communication strategy and failing to sell their message early enough, with few major policies in the field before the election was called.
Labor spent consistently on advertising throughout the campaign while the coalition saved its large spend for the final weeks, according to video tracking company Adgile.
Labor spent more than $3 million on Facebook election ads while the Liberals spent $1.4 million, according to Meta's ad library.
Clive Palmer's Trumpet of Patriots party, known for its blanket advertising campaigns, spent about $1.5 million in comparison.
TV ads still made up the bulk of the federal election video spend with more than $54 million spent - $24.1 million by Trumpet of Patriots, $24 million by Labor and $21 million for the coalition, according to Adgile.
The scale of Labor's social media spend was surprising, political communication expert Andrew Hughes said.
Labor was more effective in its digital media strategy while the coalition was severely lacking, Dr Hughes said.
"I was surprised the coalition didn't utilise it more," he said.
There was also a significant surge in spending on YouTube where minor parties focused their ad spend as commercial TV can fail to reach the same volume of viewers or target the right demographics.
The Liberals needed to spread their focus and "engage where voters are", Liberal senator Maria Kovacic said.
"It's unrealistic to expect they'll come to where we are," she told AAP.
Finance Minister Katy Gallagher has been an early adopter of using podcasters and content creators to sell the government's message, especially in her women's portfolio.
Influencers were invited to the federal budget lockup at Parliament House for the first time in 2025.
This helped the government get its message out to people who otherwise wouldn't have paid attention, Senator Gallagher told AAP.
"I think we'll never go back to the way it was before," she said.
"It's really clear that new media are going to feature in politics ... and they have a legitimate place at the table."
The influence of influencers is being combed over after an election fought as much online as in person, with politicians looking for fresh ways to reach younger voters.
Content creators were able to reach a large audience that wasn't typically engaged with traditional media, Cheek Media CEO and host of the Big Small Talk podcast Hannah Ferguson said.
Labor had utilised podcasters and influencers to reach young people, including women who are the largest growing audience, Ms Ferguson told AAP.
"The Liberal Party's refusal to engage eliminated them, largely, from speaking to women," she said.
Criticisms from Liberals about the campaign included not having a coherent communication strategy and failing to sell their message early enough, with few major policies in the field before the election was called.
Labor spent consistently on advertising throughout the campaign while the coalition saved its large spend for the final weeks, according to video tracking company Adgile.
Labor spent more than $3 million on Facebook election ads while the Liberals spent $1.4 million, according to Meta's ad library.
Clive Palmer's Trumpet of Patriots party, known for its blanket advertising campaigns, spent about $1.5 million in comparison.
TV ads still made up the bulk of the federal election video spend with more than $54 million spent - $24.1 million by Trumpet of Patriots, $24 million by Labor and $21 million for the coalition, according to Adgile.
The scale of Labor's social media spend was surprising, political communication expert Andrew Hughes said.
Labor was more effective in its digital media strategy while the coalition was severely lacking, Dr Hughes said.
"I was surprised the coalition didn't utilise it more," he said.
There was also a significant surge in spending on YouTube where minor parties focused their ad spend as commercial TV can fail to reach the same volume of viewers or target the right demographics.
The Liberals needed to spread their focus and "engage where voters are", Liberal senator Maria Kovacic said.
"It's unrealistic to expect they'll come to where we are," she told AAP.
Finance Minister Katy Gallagher has been an early adopter of using podcasters and content creators to sell the government's message, especially in her women's portfolio.
Influencers were invited to the federal budget lockup at Parliament House for the first time in 2025.
This helped the government get its message out to people who otherwise wouldn't have paid attention, Senator Gallagher told AAP.
"I think we'll never go back to the way it was before," she said.
"It's really clear that new media are going to feature in politics ... and they have a legitimate place at the table."
The influence of influencers is being combed over after an election fought as much online as in person, with politicians looking for fresh ways to reach younger voters.
Content creators were able to reach a large audience that wasn't typically engaged with traditional media, Cheek Media CEO and host of the Big Small Talk podcast Hannah Ferguson said.
Labor had utilised podcasters and influencers to reach young people, including women who are the largest growing audience, Ms Ferguson told AAP.
"The Liberal Party's refusal to engage eliminated them, largely, from speaking to women," she said.
Criticisms from Liberals about the campaign included not having a coherent communication strategy and failing to sell their message early enough, with few major policies in the field before the election was called.
Labor spent consistently on advertising throughout the campaign while the coalition saved its large spend for the final weeks, according to video tracking company Adgile.
Labor spent more than $3 million on Facebook election ads while the Liberals spent $1.4 million, according to Meta's ad library.
Clive Palmer's Trumpet of Patriots party, known for its blanket advertising campaigns, spent about $1.5 million in comparison.
TV ads still made up the bulk of the federal election video spend with more than $54 million spent - $24.1 million by Trumpet of Patriots, $24 million by Labor and $21 million for the coalition, according to Adgile.
The scale of Labor's social media spend was surprising, political communication expert Andrew Hughes said.
Labor was more effective in its digital media strategy while the coalition was severely lacking, Dr Hughes said.
"I was surprised the coalition didn't utilise it more," he said.
There was also a significant surge in spending on YouTube where minor parties focused their ad spend as commercial TV can fail to reach the same volume of viewers or target the right demographics.
The Liberals needed to spread their focus and "engage where voters are", Liberal senator Maria Kovacic said.
"It's unrealistic to expect they'll come to where we are," she told AAP.
Finance Minister Katy Gallagher has been an early adopter of using podcasters and content creators to sell the government's message, especially in her women's portfolio.
Influencers were invited to the federal budget lockup at Parliament House for the first time in 2025.
This helped the government get its message out to people who otherwise wouldn't have paid attention, Senator Gallagher told AAP.
"I think we'll never go back to the way it was before," she said.
"It's really clear that new media are going to feature in politics ... and they have a legitimate place at the table."
The influence of influencers is being combed over after an election fought as much online as in person, with politicians looking for fresh ways to reach younger voters.
Content creators were able to reach a large audience that wasn't typically engaged with traditional media, Cheek Media CEO and host of the Big Small Talk podcast Hannah Ferguson said.
Labor had utilised podcasters and influencers to reach young people, including women who are the largest growing audience, Ms Ferguson told AAP.
"The Liberal Party's refusal to engage eliminated them, largely, from speaking to women," she said.
Criticisms from Liberals about the campaign included not having a coherent communication strategy and failing to sell their message early enough, with few major policies in the field before the election was called.
Labor spent consistently on advertising throughout the campaign while the coalition saved its large spend for the final weeks, according to video tracking company Adgile.
Labor spent more than $3 million on Facebook election ads while the Liberals spent $1.4 million, according to Meta's ad library.
Clive Palmer's Trumpet of Patriots party, known for its blanket advertising campaigns, spent about $1.5 million in comparison.
TV ads still made up the bulk of the federal election video spend with more than $54 million spent - $24.1 million by Trumpet of Patriots, $24 million by Labor and $21 million for the coalition, according to Adgile.
The scale of Labor's social media spend was surprising, political communication expert Andrew Hughes said.
Labor was more effective in its digital media strategy while the coalition was severely lacking, Dr Hughes said.
"I was surprised the coalition didn't utilise it more," he said.
There was also a significant surge in spending on YouTube where minor parties focused their ad spend as commercial TV can fail to reach the same volume of viewers or target the right demographics.
The Liberals needed to spread their focus and "engage where voters are", Liberal senator Maria Kovacic said.
"It's unrealistic to expect they'll come to where we are," she told AAP.
Finance Minister Katy Gallagher has been an early adopter of using podcasters and content creators to sell the government's message, especially in her women's portfolio.
Influencers were invited to the federal budget lockup at Parliament House for the first time in 2025.
This helped the government get its message out to people who otherwise wouldn't have paid attention, Senator Gallagher told AAP.
"I think we'll never go back to the way it was before," she said.
"It's really clear that new media are going to feature in politics ... and they have a legitimate place at the table."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Advertiser
5 minutes ago
- The Advertiser
Red tape on chopping block in bid to build homes faster
The need to simplify the regulation of housing and environmental approvals has received widespread support at a major economic reform summit. But the devil, as always, is in the detail and divisions remain over the specifics. Treasurer Jim Chalmers promised "win-wins" on Wednesday morning at day two of his economic reform roundtable and unions and business found one in a plan to simplify the National Construction Code. Housing Minister Clare O'Neil garnered broad support over the need for a pause to the National Construction Code for the life of the housing accord, which runs until mid-2029 and sets a target for 1.2 million new homes. Changes to the code that deal with safety issues such as fireproofing would be exempt from a pause. But a broader rewrite was also possible. Master Builders Australia has been pushing for a review into "non-essential" changes, including EV charging requirements, which they argue increase the cost and complexity of building new homes. Australian Council of Trade Unions president Michele O'Neil said it was important to keep improving energy efficiency of new homes but acknowledged the nearly-3000 page document was "clunky", and called for more support for modular housing. Not all were on board with the pause. Australian Council of Social Service chief executive Cassandra Goldie was concerned about it leading to poorer housing quality, while outspoken Labor backbencher Ed Husic told the ABC it would mean "repeating the bad mistakes of the coalition". The opposition took a 10-year pause of the code to the last election, a policy which was not supported by Labor at the time, but Treasury advised pausing changes to the code in a document leaked ahead of the roundtable. The ACTU's Ms O'Neil agreed with business groups and the superannuation industry that there was need to reform the super performance test, which disincentivised long-term investments in housing and clean energy. There was also support for reforming the Howard-era Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation rules. Unions, employer groups and environmentalists all agreed the act was no longer fit for purpose. They want a new act that provides faster decisions for projects from mining to housing. Shadow treasurer Ted O'Brien said he would be as constructive as he could but would hold fire on supporting either of the proposals until he saw more details from Labor. Australian Conservation Foundation chief executive Kelly O'Shanassy said there was consensus for the creation of a national environment protection agency, but the "devil is in the detail". While business groups want the EPA to only deal with compliance and not project approvals, Ms O'Shanassy said you needed an independent regulator that is held to account for the speed and quality of its decisions. "So I would put to the folks who don't like the idea of a national EPA making decisions: what's your plan to get better, faster, more predictable decisions for your company and better outcomes for nature?" she said. NSW Treasurer Daniel Mookhey, who is representing all the states and territories at the roundtable, said he wanted the federal government's $900 million productivity fund increased, calling it an "excellent start". Increasing the fund could help other states and territories follow NSW's lead in adopting artificial intelligence to speed up planning approvals, he said. Regulation of AI has been a major dividing line between employers and unions heading into the roundtable, with the ACTU calling for the government to force employers to consult with staff before introducing AI tools to the workplace. But Australian Industry Group chief executive Innes Willox said there was little conflict with the peak union body in discussions about AI on Wednesday afternoon. The need to simplify the regulation of housing and environmental approvals has received widespread support at a major economic reform summit. But the devil, as always, is in the detail and divisions remain over the specifics. Treasurer Jim Chalmers promised "win-wins" on Wednesday morning at day two of his economic reform roundtable and unions and business found one in a plan to simplify the National Construction Code. Housing Minister Clare O'Neil garnered broad support over the need for a pause to the National Construction Code for the life of the housing accord, which runs until mid-2029 and sets a target for 1.2 million new homes. Changes to the code that deal with safety issues such as fireproofing would be exempt from a pause. But a broader rewrite was also possible. Master Builders Australia has been pushing for a review into "non-essential" changes, including EV charging requirements, which they argue increase the cost and complexity of building new homes. Australian Council of Trade Unions president Michele O'Neil said it was important to keep improving energy efficiency of new homes but acknowledged the nearly-3000 page document was "clunky", and called for more support for modular housing. Not all were on board with the pause. Australian Council of Social Service chief executive Cassandra Goldie was concerned about it leading to poorer housing quality, while outspoken Labor backbencher Ed Husic told the ABC it would mean "repeating the bad mistakes of the coalition". The opposition took a 10-year pause of the code to the last election, a policy which was not supported by Labor at the time, but Treasury advised pausing changes to the code in a document leaked ahead of the roundtable. The ACTU's Ms O'Neil agreed with business groups and the superannuation industry that there was need to reform the super performance test, which disincentivised long-term investments in housing and clean energy. There was also support for reforming the Howard-era Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation rules. Unions, employer groups and environmentalists all agreed the act was no longer fit for purpose. They want a new act that provides faster decisions for projects from mining to housing. Shadow treasurer Ted O'Brien said he would be as constructive as he could but would hold fire on supporting either of the proposals until he saw more details from Labor. Australian Conservation Foundation chief executive Kelly O'Shanassy said there was consensus for the creation of a national environment protection agency, but the "devil is in the detail". While business groups want the EPA to only deal with compliance and not project approvals, Ms O'Shanassy said you needed an independent regulator that is held to account for the speed and quality of its decisions. "So I would put to the folks who don't like the idea of a national EPA making decisions: what's your plan to get better, faster, more predictable decisions for your company and better outcomes for nature?" she said. NSW Treasurer Daniel Mookhey, who is representing all the states and territories at the roundtable, said he wanted the federal government's $900 million productivity fund increased, calling it an "excellent start". Increasing the fund could help other states and territories follow NSW's lead in adopting artificial intelligence to speed up planning approvals, he said. Regulation of AI has been a major dividing line between employers and unions heading into the roundtable, with the ACTU calling for the government to force employers to consult with staff before introducing AI tools to the workplace. But Australian Industry Group chief executive Innes Willox said there was little conflict with the peak union body in discussions about AI on Wednesday afternoon. The need to simplify the regulation of housing and environmental approvals has received widespread support at a major economic reform summit. But the devil, as always, is in the detail and divisions remain over the specifics. Treasurer Jim Chalmers promised "win-wins" on Wednesday morning at day two of his economic reform roundtable and unions and business found one in a plan to simplify the National Construction Code. Housing Minister Clare O'Neil garnered broad support over the need for a pause to the National Construction Code for the life of the housing accord, which runs until mid-2029 and sets a target for 1.2 million new homes. Changes to the code that deal with safety issues such as fireproofing would be exempt from a pause. But a broader rewrite was also possible. Master Builders Australia has been pushing for a review into "non-essential" changes, including EV charging requirements, which they argue increase the cost and complexity of building new homes. Australian Council of Trade Unions president Michele O'Neil said it was important to keep improving energy efficiency of new homes but acknowledged the nearly-3000 page document was "clunky", and called for more support for modular housing. Not all were on board with the pause. Australian Council of Social Service chief executive Cassandra Goldie was concerned about it leading to poorer housing quality, while outspoken Labor backbencher Ed Husic told the ABC it would mean "repeating the bad mistakes of the coalition". The opposition took a 10-year pause of the code to the last election, a policy which was not supported by Labor at the time, but Treasury advised pausing changes to the code in a document leaked ahead of the roundtable. The ACTU's Ms O'Neil agreed with business groups and the superannuation industry that there was need to reform the super performance test, which disincentivised long-term investments in housing and clean energy. There was also support for reforming the Howard-era Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation rules. Unions, employer groups and environmentalists all agreed the act was no longer fit for purpose. They want a new act that provides faster decisions for projects from mining to housing. Shadow treasurer Ted O'Brien said he would be as constructive as he could but would hold fire on supporting either of the proposals until he saw more details from Labor. Australian Conservation Foundation chief executive Kelly O'Shanassy said there was consensus for the creation of a national environment protection agency, but the "devil is in the detail". While business groups want the EPA to only deal with compliance and not project approvals, Ms O'Shanassy said you needed an independent regulator that is held to account for the speed and quality of its decisions. "So I would put to the folks who don't like the idea of a national EPA making decisions: what's your plan to get better, faster, more predictable decisions for your company and better outcomes for nature?" she said. NSW Treasurer Daniel Mookhey, who is representing all the states and territories at the roundtable, said he wanted the federal government's $900 million productivity fund increased, calling it an "excellent start". Increasing the fund could help other states and territories follow NSW's lead in adopting artificial intelligence to speed up planning approvals, he said. Regulation of AI has been a major dividing line between employers and unions heading into the roundtable, with the ACTU calling for the government to force employers to consult with staff before introducing AI tools to the workplace. But Australian Industry Group chief executive Innes Willox said there was little conflict with the peak union body in discussions about AI on Wednesday afternoon. The need to simplify the regulation of housing and environmental approvals has received widespread support at a major economic reform summit. But the devil, as always, is in the detail and divisions remain over the specifics. Treasurer Jim Chalmers promised "win-wins" on Wednesday morning at day two of his economic reform roundtable and unions and business found one in a plan to simplify the National Construction Code. Housing Minister Clare O'Neil garnered broad support over the need for a pause to the National Construction Code for the life of the housing accord, which runs until mid-2029 and sets a target for 1.2 million new homes. Changes to the code that deal with safety issues such as fireproofing would be exempt from a pause. But a broader rewrite was also possible. Master Builders Australia has been pushing for a review into "non-essential" changes, including EV charging requirements, which they argue increase the cost and complexity of building new homes. Australian Council of Trade Unions president Michele O'Neil said it was important to keep improving energy efficiency of new homes but acknowledged the nearly-3000 page document was "clunky", and called for more support for modular housing. Not all were on board with the pause. Australian Council of Social Service chief executive Cassandra Goldie was concerned about it leading to poorer housing quality, while outspoken Labor backbencher Ed Husic told the ABC it would mean "repeating the bad mistakes of the coalition". The opposition took a 10-year pause of the code to the last election, a policy which was not supported by Labor at the time, but Treasury advised pausing changes to the code in a document leaked ahead of the roundtable. The ACTU's Ms O'Neil agreed with business groups and the superannuation industry that there was need to reform the super performance test, which disincentivised long-term investments in housing and clean energy. There was also support for reforming the Howard-era Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation rules. Unions, employer groups and environmentalists all agreed the act was no longer fit for purpose. They want a new act that provides faster decisions for projects from mining to housing. Shadow treasurer Ted O'Brien said he would be as constructive as he could but would hold fire on supporting either of the proposals until he saw more details from Labor. Australian Conservation Foundation chief executive Kelly O'Shanassy said there was consensus for the creation of a national environment protection agency, but the "devil is in the detail". While business groups want the EPA to only deal with compliance and not project approvals, Ms O'Shanassy said you needed an independent regulator that is held to account for the speed and quality of its decisions. "So I would put to the folks who don't like the idea of a national EPA making decisions: what's your plan to get better, faster, more predictable decisions for your company and better outcomes for nature?" she said. NSW Treasurer Daniel Mookhey, who is representing all the states and territories at the roundtable, said he wanted the federal government's $900 million productivity fund increased, calling it an "excellent start". Increasing the fund could help other states and territories follow NSW's lead in adopting artificial intelligence to speed up planning approvals, he said. Regulation of AI has been a major dividing line between employers and unions heading into the roundtable, with the ACTU calling for the government to force employers to consult with staff before introducing AI tools to the workplace. But Australian Industry Group chief executive Innes Willox said there was little conflict with the peak union body in discussions about AI on Wednesday afternoon.
The Advertiser
34 minutes ago
- The Advertiser
Aussie anxiety fuelling AUKUS submarine social licence
Global volatility reflected in the mood of the nation is giving the federal government the necessary social licence to push on with the AUKUS submarine project, the defence minister says. Public trust has been achieved in communities across the nation but it's an ongoing job that requires "constant nurturing", Richard Marles told the Submarine Institute of Australia conference in Perth on Wednesday. "People's heads are in the right place," he said. "People do have a sense of anxiety that the world is a pretty complex and volatile place. "That is how I would describe the mood of the nation, and that does give a basis upon which you can then provide a narrative about why we would be spending a very considerable amount of money on this particular platform." Mr Marles said Australia was providing submissions for the US AUKUS review and was "fully across" its process and timing. The review should "pull no punches" about areas where improvement could be achieved, he said. "Obviously there are areas where we would like to be going faster than we are," he said. "It would be extraordinary to be standing up here and saying everything is tickety-boo. "Things are pretty good, like I really think the glass is more than half full, but there is absolutely room for improvement." Australia continues to take significant, groundbreaking steps in preparation to receive, build and operate nuclear submarines, but the timeline was tight, he said. "I'm acutely aware that a milestone missed now cascades into other milestones becoming much further delayed down the track," Mr Marles said. "So there's a relentless focus right now to make sure we are not letting any milestones slip." The trilateral security pact between Australia, the UK and the US to supply nuclear submarines at an estimated cost of $368 billion has been slammed since it was announced in March 2023. Former prime ministers Malcolm Turnbull and Paul Keating and former Labor foreign minister Gareth Evans are among those who have criticised the deal amid ongoing protest across the nation. The Australian Greens also oppose the pact, along with the members of the Australian Anti-AUKUS Coalition, which is made up of peace, community, environment, social justice, independence, faith and socialist organisations and unions. Global volatility reflected in the mood of the nation is giving the federal government the necessary social licence to push on with the AUKUS submarine project, the defence minister says. Public trust has been achieved in communities across the nation but it's an ongoing job that requires "constant nurturing", Richard Marles told the Submarine Institute of Australia conference in Perth on Wednesday. "People's heads are in the right place," he said. "People do have a sense of anxiety that the world is a pretty complex and volatile place. "That is how I would describe the mood of the nation, and that does give a basis upon which you can then provide a narrative about why we would be spending a very considerable amount of money on this particular platform." Mr Marles said Australia was providing submissions for the US AUKUS review and was "fully across" its process and timing. The review should "pull no punches" about areas where improvement could be achieved, he said. "Obviously there are areas where we would like to be going faster than we are," he said. "It would be extraordinary to be standing up here and saying everything is tickety-boo. "Things are pretty good, like I really think the glass is more than half full, but there is absolutely room for improvement." Australia continues to take significant, groundbreaking steps in preparation to receive, build and operate nuclear submarines, but the timeline was tight, he said. "I'm acutely aware that a milestone missed now cascades into other milestones becoming much further delayed down the track," Mr Marles said. "So there's a relentless focus right now to make sure we are not letting any milestones slip." The trilateral security pact between Australia, the UK and the US to supply nuclear submarines at an estimated cost of $368 billion has been slammed since it was announced in March 2023. Former prime ministers Malcolm Turnbull and Paul Keating and former Labor foreign minister Gareth Evans are among those who have criticised the deal amid ongoing protest across the nation. The Australian Greens also oppose the pact, along with the members of the Australian Anti-AUKUS Coalition, which is made up of peace, community, environment, social justice, independence, faith and socialist organisations and unions. Global volatility reflected in the mood of the nation is giving the federal government the necessary social licence to push on with the AUKUS submarine project, the defence minister says. Public trust has been achieved in communities across the nation but it's an ongoing job that requires "constant nurturing", Richard Marles told the Submarine Institute of Australia conference in Perth on Wednesday. "People's heads are in the right place," he said. "People do have a sense of anxiety that the world is a pretty complex and volatile place. "That is how I would describe the mood of the nation, and that does give a basis upon which you can then provide a narrative about why we would be spending a very considerable amount of money on this particular platform." Mr Marles said Australia was providing submissions for the US AUKUS review and was "fully across" its process and timing. The review should "pull no punches" about areas where improvement could be achieved, he said. "Obviously there are areas where we would like to be going faster than we are," he said. "It would be extraordinary to be standing up here and saying everything is tickety-boo. "Things are pretty good, like I really think the glass is more than half full, but there is absolutely room for improvement." Australia continues to take significant, groundbreaking steps in preparation to receive, build and operate nuclear submarines, but the timeline was tight, he said. "I'm acutely aware that a milestone missed now cascades into other milestones becoming much further delayed down the track," Mr Marles said. "So there's a relentless focus right now to make sure we are not letting any milestones slip." The trilateral security pact between Australia, the UK and the US to supply nuclear submarines at an estimated cost of $368 billion has been slammed since it was announced in March 2023. Former prime ministers Malcolm Turnbull and Paul Keating and former Labor foreign minister Gareth Evans are among those who have criticised the deal amid ongoing protest across the nation. The Australian Greens also oppose the pact, along with the members of the Australian Anti-AUKUS Coalition, which is made up of peace, community, environment, social justice, independence, faith and socialist organisations and unions. Global volatility reflected in the mood of the nation is giving the federal government the necessary social licence to push on with the AUKUS submarine project, the defence minister says. Public trust has been achieved in communities across the nation but it's an ongoing job that requires "constant nurturing", Richard Marles told the Submarine Institute of Australia conference in Perth on Wednesday. "People's heads are in the right place," he said. "People do have a sense of anxiety that the world is a pretty complex and volatile place. "That is how I would describe the mood of the nation, and that does give a basis upon which you can then provide a narrative about why we would be spending a very considerable amount of money on this particular platform." Mr Marles said Australia was providing submissions for the US AUKUS review and was "fully across" its process and timing. The review should "pull no punches" about areas where improvement could be achieved, he said. "Obviously there are areas where we would like to be going faster than we are," he said. "It would be extraordinary to be standing up here and saying everything is tickety-boo. "Things are pretty good, like I really think the glass is more than half full, but there is absolutely room for improvement." Australia continues to take significant, groundbreaking steps in preparation to receive, build and operate nuclear submarines, but the timeline was tight, he said. "I'm acutely aware that a milestone missed now cascades into other milestones becoming much further delayed down the track," Mr Marles said. "So there's a relentless focus right now to make sure we are not letting any milestones slip." The trilateral security pact between Australia, the UK and the US to supply nuclear submarines at an estimated cost of $368 billion has been slammed since it was announced in March 2023. Former prime ministers Malcolm Turnbull and Paul Keating and former Labor foreign minister Gareth Evans are among those who have criticised the deal amid ongoing protest across the nation. The Australian Greens also oppose the pact, along with the members of the Australian Anti-AUKUS Coalition, which is made up of peace, community, environment, social justice, independence, faith and socialist organisations and unions.
The Advertiser
34 minutes ago
- The Advertiser
Lehrmann called 'national joke' on return to lion's den
Bruce Lehrmann has challenged damning findings from a landmark defamation case, arguing not all rape is violent as his tattered reputation takes another beating. The former federal political staffer is appealing his loss to Network Ten and journalist Lisa Wilkinson, whom he sued over an interview they conducted with his former colleague Brittany Higgins on The Project in 2021. In his ruling on the defamation case in April 2024, Federal Court Justice Michael Lee found Ms Higgins' claims she had been raped by Lehrmann in parliament house in 2019 were proven on the balance of probabilities. In his headline-grabbing decision, the judge quipped: "Having escaped the lions' den, Mr Lehrmann made the mistake of going back for his hat" in reference to his doomed defamation bid. Lehrmann's lawyer Zali Burrows told the appeal court on Wednesday Justice Lee's ruling, on the heels of an abandoned criminal trial, meant Lehrmann has become probably "the most damaged man in Australia". Media attention, aggravated by commentary from Channel Ten and Wilkinson, led to a flood of hateful social media comments aimed at Lehrmann, she said. "He's pretty much become a national joke," Ms Burrows told the court. She argued Lehrmann, 30, was denied procedural fairness because the facts found by Justice Lee were "starkly different" from the case run by Ten. The ex-Liberal staffer had been "taken by surprise" the judge had adopted a "softer" sequence of events that had not been put to Lehrmann in cross-examination, Ms Burrows said. She claimed Lehrmann had been accused of committing a violent rape but Justice Lee had found it was a "non-violent rape", prompting Justice Craig Colvin to say he wasn't sure he understood that concept. Ten's barrister Matt Collins KC contended the judge had found Ms Higgins' rape was violent, and indeed: "All rape is violent". Lehrmann argued the judge was not satisfied about a number of the violent elements argued by Ten, including he had held open Ms Higgins' legs. "The sting of the (defamatory) imputation resides in the act of intercourse without consent, not in any detail of it," Dr Collins said. He rejected Lehrmann's suggestions he should be awarded damages of more than $20,000 if successful on appeal. Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins when he knew she was seriously intoxicated, continued raping her when she became aware, and left her in a state of undress, Dr Collins said. "That is not a man with any reputation in respect of sexual morality that would warrant compensation," he said. He took issue with Justice Lee's finding Lehrmann had been reckless as to whether Ms Higgins was consenting and urged the appeal court to instead find he knew she did not consent. Ms Wilkinson's lawyer agreed Lehrmann's "level of indifference" could not be inadvertent and instead amounted to a definition of "intentional rape" as understood by an ordinary person. "A young man who knows that a woman is very drunk knows that she cannot consent," Sue Chrysanthou SC said. "This is not a legal question, this is a question that is considered on the standards of the community." Lehrmann not only knew Ms Higgins was very intoxicated but encouraged her to drink, she said. Both lawyers argued Lehrmann had been confronted with the main facts of the case as found by Justice Lee: that sex took place, Ms Higgins did not consent and Lehrmann had been reckless as to her consent. Lehrmann maintains he did not sexually assault Ms Higgins and a 2022 criminal case against him was abandoned without any findings against him. Earlier in the day, Ms Burrows apologised Lehrmann was not represented by a silk, telling the panel of judges he "really wanted" Guy Reynolds SC but "couldn't afford" to engage him. The defamation case and related appeal are among a host of court actions spawned by Ms Higgins' allegation of sexual assault. The Western Australian Supreme Court will next Wednesday rule on former Liberal senator Linda Reynolds' high-profile defamation case against Ms Higgins, her former employee. 1800 RESPECT (1800 737 732) National Sexual Abuse and Redress Support Service 1800 211 028 Bruce Lehrmann has challenged damning findings from a landmark defamation case, arguing not all rape is violent as his tattered reputation takes another beating. The former federal political staffer is appealing his loss to Network Ten and journalist Lisa Wilkinson, whom he sued over an interview they conducted with his former colleague Brittany Higgins on The Project in 2021. In his ruling on the defamation case in April 2024, Federal Court Justice Michael Lee found Ms Higgins' claims she had been raped by Lehrmann in parliament house in 2019 were proven on the balance of probabilities. In his headline-grabbing decision, the judge quipped: "Having escaped the lions' den, Mr Lehrmann made the mistake of going back for his hat" in reference to his doomed defamation bid. Lehrmann's lawyer Zali Burrows told the appeal court on Wednesday Justice Lee's ruling, on the heels of an abandoned criminal trial, meant Lehrmann has become probably "the most damaged man in Australia". Media attention, aggravated by commentary from Channel Ten and Wilkinson, led to a flood of hateful social media comments aimed at Lehrmann, she said. "He's pretty much become a national joke," Ms Burrows told the court. She argued Lehrmann, 30, was denied procedural fairness because the facts found by Justice Lee were "starkly different" from the case run by Ten. The ex-Liberal staffer had been "taken by surprise" the judge had adopted a "softer" sequence of events that had not been put to Lehrmann in cross-examination, Ms Burrows said. She claimed Lehrmann had been accused of committing a violent rape but Justice Lee had found it was a "non-violent rape", prompting Justice Craig Colvin to say he wasn't sure he understood that concept. Ten's barrister Matt Collins KC contended the judge had found Ms Higgins' rape was violent, and indeed: "All rape is violent". Lehrmann argued the judge was not satisfied about a number of the violent elements argued by Ten, including he had held open Ms Higgins' legs. "The sting of the (defamatory) imputation resides in the act of intercourse without consent, not in any detail of it," Dr Collins said. He rejected Lehrmann's suggestions he should be awarded damages of more than $20,000 if successful on appeal. Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins when he knew she was seriously intoxicated, continued raping her when she became aware, and left her in a state of undress, Dr Collins said. "That is not a man with any reputation in respect of sexual morality that would warrant compensation," he said. He took issue with Justice Lee's finding Lehrmann had been reckless as to whether Ms Higgins was consenting and urged the appeal court to instead find he knew she did not consent. Ms Wilkinson's lawyer agreed Lehrmann's "level of indifference" could not be inadvertent and instead amounted to a definition of "intentional rape" as understood by an ordinary person. "A young man who knows that a woman is very drunk knows that she cannot consent," Sue Chrysanthou SC said. "This is not a legal question, this is a question that is considered on the standards of the community." Lehrmann not only knew Ms Higgins was very intoxicated but encouraged her to drink, she said. Both lawyers argued Lehrmann had been confronted with the main facts of the case as found by Justice Lee: that sex took place, Ms Higgins did not consent and Lehrmann had been reckless as to her consent. Lehrmann maintains he did not sexually assault Ms Higgins and a 2022 criminal case against him was abandoned without any findings against him. Earlier in the day, Ms Burrows apologised Lehrmann was not represented by a silk, telling the panel of judges he "really wanted" Guy Reynolds SC but "couldn't afford" to engage him. The defamation case and related appeal are among a host of court actions spawned by Ms Higgins' allegation of sexual assault. The Western Australian Supreme Court will next Wednesday rule on former Liberal senator Linda Reynolds' high-profile defamation case against Ms Higgins, her former employee. 1800 RESPECT (1800 737 732) National Sexual Abuse and Redress Support Service 1800 211 028 Bruce Lehrmann has challenged damning findings from a landmark defamation case, arguing not all rape is violent as his tattered reputation takes another beating. The former federal political staffer is appealing his loss to Network Ten and journalist Lisa Wilkinson, whom he sued over an interview they conducted with his former colleague Brittany Higgins on The Project in 2021. In his ruling on the defamation case in April 2024, Federal Court Justice Michael Lee found Ms Higgins' claims she had been raped by Lehrmann in parliament house in 2019 were proven on the balance of probabilities. In his headline-grabbing decision, the judge quipped: "Having escaped the lions' den, Mr Lehrmann made the mistake of going back for his hat" in reference to his doomed defamation bid. Lehrmann's lawyer Zali Burrows told the appeal court on Wednesday Justice Lee's ruling, on the heels of an abandoned criminal trial, meant Lehrmann has become probably "the most damaged man in Australia". Media attention, aggravated by commentary from Channel Ten and Wilkinson, led to a flood of hateful social media comments aimed at Lehrmann, she said. "He's pretty much become a national joke," Ms Burrows told the court. She argued Lehrmann, 30, was denied procedural fairness because the facts found by Justice Lee were "starkly different" from the case run by Ten. The ex-Liberal staffer had been "taken by surprise" the judge had adopted a "softer" sequence of events that had not been put to Lehrmann in cross-examination, Ms Burrows said. She claimed Lehrmann had been accused of committing a violent rape but Justice Lee had found it was a "non-violent rape", prompting Justice Craig Colvin to say he wasn't sure he understood that concept. Ten's barrister Matt Collins KC contended the judge had found Ms Higgins' rape was violent, and indeed: "All rape is violent". Lehrmann argued the judge was not satisfied about a number of the violent elements argued by Ten, including he had held open Ms Higgins' legs. "The sting of the (defamatory) imputation resides in the act of intercourse without consent, not in any detail of it," Dr Collins said. He rejected Lehrmann's suggestions he should be awarded damages of more than $20,000 if successful on appeal. Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins when he knew she was seriously intoxicated, continued raping her when she became aware, and left her in a state of undress, Dr Collins said. "That is not a man with any reputation in respect of sexual morality that would warrant compensation," he said. He took issue with Justice Lee's finding Lehrmann had been reckless as to whether Ms Higgins was consenting and urged the appeal court to instead find he knew she did not consent. Ms Wilkinson's lawyer agreed Lehrmann's "level of indifference" could not be inadvertent and instead amounted to a definition of "intentional rape" as understood by an ordinary person. "A young man who knows that a woman is very drunk knows that she cannot consent," Sue Chrysanthou SC said. "This is not a legal question, this is a question that is considered on the standards of the community." Lehrmann not only knew Ms Higgins was very intoxicated but encouraged her to drink, she said. Both lawyers argued Lehrmann had been confronted with the main facts of the case as found by Justice Lee: that sex took place, Ms Higgins did not consent and Lehrmann had been reckless as to her consent. Lehrmann maintains he did not sexually assault Ms Higgins and a 2022 criminal case against him was abandoned without any findings against him. Earlier in the day, Ms Burrows apologised Lehrmann was not represented by a silk, telling the panel of judges he "really wanted" Guy Reynolds SC but "couldn't afford" to engage him. The defamation case and related appeal are among a host of court actions spawned by Ms Higgins' allegation of sexual assault. The Western Australian Supreme Court will next Wednesday rule on former Liberal senator Linda Reynolds' high-profile defamation case against Ms Higgins, her former employee. 1800 RESPECT (1800 737 732) National Sexual Abuse and Redress Support Service 1800 211 028 Bruce Lehrmann has challenged damning findings from a landmark defamation case, arguing not all rape is violent as his tattered reputation takes another beating. The former federal political staffer is appealing his loss to Network Ten and journalist Lisa Wilkinson, whom he sued over an interview they conducted with his former colleague Brittany Higgins on The Project in 2021. In his ruling on the defamation case in April 2024, Federal Court Justice Michael Lee found Ms Higgins' claims she had been raped by Lehrmann in parliament house in 2019 were proven on the balance of probabilities. In his headline-grabbing decision, the judge quipped: "Having escaped the lions' den, Mr Lehrmann made the mistake of going back for his hat" in reference to his doomed defamation bid. Lehrmann's lawyer Zali Burrows told the appeal court on Wednesday Justice Lee's ruling, on the heels of an abandoned criminal trial, meant Lehrmann has become probably "the most damaged man in Australia". Media attention, aggravated by commentary from Channel Ten and Wilkinson, led to a flood of hateful social media comments aimed at Lehrmann, she said. "He's pretty much become a national joke," Ms Burrows told the court. She argued Lehrmann, 30, was denied procedural fairness because the facts found by Justice Lee were "starkly different" from the case run by Ten. The ex-Liberal staffer had been "taken by surprise" the judge had adopted a "softer" sequence of events that had not been put to Lehrmann in cross-examination, Ms Burrows said. She claimed Lehrmann had been accused of committing a violent rape but Justice Lee had found it was a "non-violent rape", prompting Justice Craig Colvin to say he wasn't sure he understood that concept. Ten's barrister Matt Collins KC contended the judge had found Ms Higgins' rape was violent, and indeed: "All rape is violent". Lehrmann argued the judge was not satisfied about a number of the violent elements argued by Ten, including he had held open Ms Higgins' legs. "The sting of the (defamatory) imputation resides in the act of intercourse without consent, not in any detail of it," Dr Collins said. He rejected Lehrmann's suggestions he should be awarded damages of more than $20,000 if successful on appeal. Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins when he knew she was seriously intoxicated, continued raping her when she became aware, and left her in a state of undress, Dr Collins said. "That is not a man with any reputation in respect of sexual morality that would warrant compensation," he said. He took issue with Justice Lee's finding Lehrmann had been reckless as to whether Ms Higgins was consenting and urged the appeal court to instead find he knew she did not consent. Ms Wilkinson's lawyer agreed Lehrmann's "level of indifference" could not be inadvertent and instead amounted to a definition of "intentional rape" as understood by an ordinary person. "A young man who knows that a woman is very drunk knows that she cannot consent," Sue Chrysanthou SC said. "This is not a legal question, this is a question that is considered on the standards of the community." Lehrmann not only knew Ms Higgins was very intoxicated but encouraged her to drink, she said. Both lawyers argued Lehrmann had been confronted with the main facts of the case as found by Justice Lee: that sex took place, Ms Higgins did not consent and Lehrmann had been reckless as to her consent. Lehrmann maintains he did not sexually assault Ms Higgins and a 2022 criminal case against him was abandoned without any findings against him. Earlier in the day, Ms Burrows apologised Lehrmann was not represented by a silk, telling the panel of judges he "really wanted" Guy Reynolds SC but "couldn't afford" to engage him. The defamation case and related appeal are among a host of court actions spawned by Ms Higgins' allegation of sexual assault. The Western Australian Supreme Court will next Wednesday rule on former Liberal senator Linda Reynolds' high-profile defamation case against Ms Higgins, her former employee. 1800 RESPECT (1800 737 732) National Sexual Abuse and Redress Support Service 1800 211 028
