Colleen Harkin on The Rita Panahi Show Sky News Australia – 28 April 2026

Rita Panahi:

Joining me now is News Corp Senior Writer, Patrick Carlyon, and Institute of Public Affairs Research Fellow, Colleen Harkin. Colleen, I don’t need to be welcomed to my own country by anybody, let alone someone that callous, that ideological, a hard left loser welcoming me to my own country on Anzac Day of all days.

Colleen Harkin:

It’s a day for solemn recognition of the service of our war people, people who have died, people are still in service now. It’s not a day to give a platform to an activist. It’s entirely objectionable. I think also the component of the booing is … I don’t think the booing is acceptable. However, ignoring the reason that it happens is also not acceptable. And to ignore why it’s happening is just willful blindness. We had a referendum. We gave a very clear decision on how we wanted to see the country go. We don’t want the division. We were told that if the referendum was a no vote, that we would get no more welcome to country.

Rita Panahi:

Well, Marcia Langton did say that, the indigenous academic and activist, but yet she was writing in The Guardian in the last couple of days, Patrick, that she wants anyone who boos to be banned from future Anzac Day ceremonies. So we’re talking about potential veterans here-

Patrick Carlyon:

That’s right.

Rita Panahi:

… who she wants to see banned for objecting to this ceremony. I mean, they shove this culture war, this racial division down everyone’s throats, and they have the goal to be irate when people object. Now, I’m not for booing. We’ve all made that clear, but I can very much understand the sentiment.

Patrick Carlyon:

Look, Anzac Day is not about activism, as Colleen said. And as you wrote in a very good column today in the News Corp papers, I don’t like booing. No one wants to see booing. But a lot of Australians feel like Anzac Day has been hijacked by activism.

As you said in your column, these welcome the country seem to be more bitter, they seem to be more protracted. And they do actually take away from the service people who we’re trying to recognise and commemorate. And look, indigenous service people have a cherished place in the Anzac culture. And I don’t think anybody has an issue with that, but to sort of hijack … Well, to be seen to hijack the event with activism, it’s just wrong.

Rita Panahi:

Even the notion that we need to have a welcome to country or acknowledgement of country to pay tribute to indigenous servicemen and indigenous veterans, that to me also, Colleen, doesn’t ring true because they served Australia. So the Anzac Day ceremony is for them. It’s not for everyone except indigenous veterans. And I don’t care what your ethnic background is, whether you’re Greek, Italian, whether you migrated here, whether you’re born here, whether you have indigenous heritage, you serve this country, you put your life on the line for this country, you deserve to be honoured. And I don’t think we should reserve special honours for people based on their ethnicity.

Colleen Harkin:

I totally agree with you. And in World War I, 20% of the soldiers who fought were not Australian-born people. So why are we creating this division between those people of one ethnic background and those of another? It is time to solemnly remember all of those people who have served for the security of our country, for the freedoms that we now enjoy, regardless of skin colour or background.

Rita Panahi:

Now, let’s touch on something a little bit lighter. Tasmanian Labour senator, Helen Polley, who was forced to delete her post about Anzac Day because it featured this song.

MUSIC:

*lyrics*

Rita Panahi:

Hard to think of a worse song to attach to a post about Anzac Day. Patrick, let’s just have a look at some of these lyrics. Most of them we can’t actually say on air, but, “Put your ass in the air and high heels are tricking. Pay your high bills, long hair all the way to her fat ass. Come to me so I can hire you.” You can imagine what that song is about, and it’s not about honouring veterans, is it?

Patrick Carlyon:

No, it’s not.

Rita Panahi:

No. Unless the veterans … No, I won’t even say that.

Patrick Carlyon:

Let’s not go there. We talk about middle-aged politicians and older politicians doing social media things where they’re trying to appeal to young people. They’re trying to pretend that they’re young. They’ve got to act their age. This is just a really bad example of what we see all the time, isn’t it? Where they’re not young. No one thinks they’re young. No one wants them to be young. Act your age.

Rita Panahi:

Act your age. And I think Donald Trump showed that. You can actually appeal to that younger demographic. You can appeal to them via social media and new forms of media, but you don’t do it by pretending to be a teenager and sharing lyrics, Colleen, like, “Grab her by the hair, lead her to the dance floor and put your ass in the air.” I mean, it all rhymes. I can’t doubt that. The poetry of it is profound.

Colleen Harkin:

I mean, it beggars belief really, but I’m not convinced that it was actually the MP that did it, that was some junior in the office.

Rita Panahi:

It will be some staffer, but the question is-

Colleen Harkin:

It goes to the point the staffer doesn’t understand what Anzac Day is about, right?

Rita Panahi:

Or do they? Or do they? And they don’t like the day, and this was their little way of perhaps mocking the day by attaching such an inappropriate song, or was it just ineptness? So it’s one of the two things. It’s either anonymous.

Colleen Harkin:

Neither of those are okay.

Patrick Carlyon:

No, that’s right.

Rita Panahi:

Absolutely. Now, the debate about ISIS brides continues, and senior labour ministers have warned that any returning ISIS brides could be arrested if they resettle in Australia. There are conflicting reports as to whether the group has actually obtained any tickets to come back. Social Services Minister, Tanya Plibersek, said, “Given the group were Australian citizens, the government was required to issue them passports.” And watch as she tries to absolve herself and the government of any responsibility, but Barnaby Joyce wasn’t having it.

Tanya Plibersek:

We follow the law and we follow the advice of our security agencies. Does Barnaby suggest that we shouldn’t be going on the basis of the advice of our security agencies? Is that what he’s saying now?

Natalie Barr:

Okay. Barnaby can you answer that? The security is saying that’s what we do. Do you want to go against that?

Barnaby Joyce:

I can answer that.

Natalie Barr:

Okay.

Barnaby Joyce:

Just like we have a law that apparently Tanya says has to let them back. Actually, our jobs, we make laws, right? That’s what we do. We go down there and we go into this room and we vote and it changes laws. So we should vote to change these laws. If there is a problem that says that they’re going to come back. Now, we have issued a temporary exclusion order for one. They were all over there helping their hobbies murder and rape people.

Natalie Barr:

Yep. Okay. You know what?

Barnaby Joyce:

So let’s keep them all out.

Rita Panahi:

Colleen, Barnaby Joyce makes a good point there. If the laws aren’t serving us, then change the laws. If we’re signed up to international agreements that are not serving us, well, change that. That’s what they’re supposed to do. They’re in parliament.

Colleen Harkin:

Yeah. I think sometimes we forget that MPs only have one job and that is legislation. I mean, we see lots of pictures of them around doing social media, but that’s not their job. Their job is legislation and national security should be the utmost priority. So I’m 100% behind Barnaby on this scenario. I just don’t think we’re doing enough in terms of our national security.

In England, for example, their ISIS brides have been treated differently. One has, for example, been given a temporary exclusion order and not able to go back to the citizen of England. I mean, we kept our own citizens out of our country during COVID. It is possible to do if we have the will. We just don’t seem to have the will behind actually dealing with this properly.

Rita Panahi:

Colleen makes a good point there. We’ve almost memory hold much of COVID because it was traumatic, but I remember our government not allowing back Australian citizens who were wanting to have their child in this country, pregnant women who wanted to come back here and we wouldn’t allow it. And now, we’ve got to go and allow these ISIS brides who chose to go to the caliphate to join some head chopping, brutal, Stone Age cult. Explain it to me.

Patrick Carlyon:

Look, I think Barnaby’s onto two big questions here. The first one is, why wasn’t their citizenship renounced when they made this choice all those years ago? And the second question is, why are they enjoying the privileges of being an Australian citizen now after having made that choice? It makes no sense. The Australian public safety is the paramount issue here. And you’ve had this festering store for the Albanese government since October last year. We don’t know whether they’re coming back. They might be coming back. They might have some privileges or citizenship. It doesn’t make a lot of sense.

Rita Panahi:

Well, we also don’t have a great deal of transparency, Colleen, on if they’ve come back, where they’ve been settled, how many more are to come. There just seems to be a great deal of secrecy about what’s happening in that area and what assistance they’re getting from their Albanese government.

Colleen Harkin:

Yeah. And they sort of seem to speak one thing out of one side of their mouth and something slightly different on the other side. As you say, there is no transparency about it. On the one hand, they say they’re not giving any assistance, but then all of a sudden they have passports and you can’t get a passport without assistance.

Rita Panahi:

Yeah. So they don’t just drop them via helicopter out of the sky. Or maybe they do. Who knows how they’re getting them to them in some refugee camp in Syria, wherever they are. Let’s have a little light relief. Have a look at some young voters in Tasmania who are asked about which party they support, who they voted for at the last election. And have a look at some of our youngest and brightest.

Man 1:

Who do you vote for and why?

Woman 1:

I voted for the Greens. I don’t know anything about the Greens.

Man 1:

Yeah. Just we like the colour green.

Alex:

I’m Alex and I’m a mechanic.

Man 1:

Who did you vote for this year, mate?

Alex:

I didn’t vote this year.

Man 1:

Who did you vote for and why?

Man 2:

I voted for Labour, because I needed to vote for someone.

Woman 2:

I actually didn’t vote.

Man 1:

It’s looking bright. It’s looking bright. Who did you vote for?

Woman 3:

Labour, I think.

Man 1:

Yeah. You think?

Woman 3:

Maybe. Maybe Greens.

Man 1:

Okay.

Woman 3:

No, I voted-

Man 1:

No, it’s going to be one of them surely. And why did you vote for them?

Woman 3:

For the animals.

Man 1:

That’s why?

Woman 3:

I’m doing animal science at uni.

Rita Panahi:

Patrick, Labour is counting on that very demographic to get them reelected. They know they lean heavily left and they’re going to be using terms like intergenerational inequity to appeal to them, the politics of envy. How do you think that’s going to go?

Patrick Carlyon:

Look, we’ve heard that term more and more in the last few weeks. It basically gives a green light to young people to blame boomers for all their troubles in life. They can’t get into the housing market, it’s the boomer’s fault. And we’re going to hear this more and more, because voters are getting younger and younger in Australia and ALP, fairly brazenly, I would argue, you sort of saying we’re actually going to give you a ticket to say that it’s old people’s fault.

Rita Panahi:

That’s it.

Patrick Carlyon:

Yeah.

Rita Panahi:

And that gives a green light to all sorts of policies, not just changes to negative gearing. Colleen, you could talk about inheritance tax, you can talk about all sorts of new taxes, and you can say it’s all about equity.

Colleen Harkin:

Well, I’m sort of in principle a supporter of compulsory voting, but the fact that it might lead … You could convince me otherwise when I see things like that. It is the case of there’s this narrative that’s being run that everything is everybody else’s fault, and it’s also really negative and discouraging of young people. And I don’t think that’s the right way to go about encouraging them to get out and have a go, because there is great opportunity. It was never easy for anybody to get into the housing market, and that’s what I think we’re always at the moment.

Rita Panahi:

And they forget that the generation that, yes, it was more affordable to buy a house. It didn’t take so many multiples of your salary to enter the market. But those people also weren’t having overseas holidays. They weren’t spending two weeks in Coachella. They weren’t having breakfast out three days a week and having six lattes a day and all those sorts of expenses that we just take for granted these days. Patrick Carlyon, Colleen Harkin, thank you so much for your time.

Colleen Harkin:

You’re welcome.

This transcript of Colleen Harkin on The Rita Panahi Show Sky News Australia 28 April 2026 been edited for clarity.