Colleen Harkin on The Rita Panahi Show Sky News Australia – 31 March 2026

Rita Panahi:

Joining me now is Institute of Public Affairs Research Fellow Colleen Harkin, and Sky News contributor Prue MacSween. Colleen, is the Albanese government doing enough to respond to this crisis?

Colleen Harkin:

The short answer to that is no. This sort of excise offer is, obviously, a bit of a sugar hit. It will be popular. People will be more than happy to take what’s on the table, but there’s no clear long-term strategy to this. There is no vision of, “What actually are we going to do?” This is not going to be solved in the next few days. There’s been two or three weeks notice of stress, distress and supply chain problems. And yet the national cabinet only met yesterday.

So, this has been known this was coming for a couple of weeks. People have been warning about empty fuel tanks. It’s not like we didn’t know that this was coming, and it’s only 24 hours ago that they’ve even started to sit down and talk about what to do.

And the what to do has got problems as well. You know that you’ve got problems when people in your own team are querying whether it’s the right decision.

Rita Panahi:

Well, yes. When you’ve got MPs perplexed, Prue, by the decisions you’re announcing, it suggests that they’re just making policy on the run here.

Prue MacSween:

Well, this is the drowning man. Sadly, this prime minister has no plan. He has an energy minister that lies to us. You couldn’t believe a word coming out of Bowen’s mouth. And it’s all policy on the run driven by the polls.

And they have no idea what to do. They’re, like, they’re drowning. And so, here we have a situation where they’re politically making a nice sugar hit as Colleen said, but in the end the whole idea is to offset it. If we’re worried about inflation, which, of course, we all need to be, and are, the opposition I think had a good idea to stop the EV subsidy, and the green hydrogen, and also the home battery business.

There are plenty of ways where the government’s largess to just go down the renewable track, and foster that could actually offset this sugar hit. But, basically, we all know that the government is all at sea. They have no idea how to handle this crisis. Meanwhile, we’re going to run out. And we’ll get to the stage where we will be rationing.

Rita Panahi:

Interesting that you mention rationing, Prue, because this isn’t the first time Australians have had the threat of fuel rationing imposed on them. The Herald Sun reports today, “The threat of fuel rationing has been around from World War II to the Iranian Revolution in 1979.” The government has imposed restrictions before, but I’ve got to say I don’t know how receptive Australians are going to be to further restrictions after everything we endured during COVID. How do you see it, Colleen? Do you think we will accept it?

Colleen Harkin:

We may not have a choice. I think that’s the first issue. I don’t think people will be very happy about it at all, but there may not be a choice. And it might have to be alternate days, or something like that, because we do have a supply problem. I don’t care what the government keeps pretending that it’s a panic buying problem. There is a significant issue that’s still not being addressed.

I think the average Australian is looking at this, and going, “How did we let ourselves become a nation that is so vulnerable when we have so many natural resources. We used to have the cheapest energy supplier. We were …” And an abundance of opportunity, and we’ve squandered it all, and we’ve shut it all down. I think that’s what will make people really angry, that we’ve come to this place where we are rationing our fuel.

Rita Panahi:

I fear, given what we saw during COVID, that Australians are going to be all too ready to accept any sort of restriction-

Colleen Harkin:

Oh, really? Okay.

Rita Panahi:

… no matter how reasonable or unreasonable, because we saw during COVID the enthusiasm with which people embrace restrictions, and even the most irrational restrictions. We had bans on fishing and playing golf, and playground bans, and all-

Colleen Harkin:

Taking [inaudible 00:04:13] acquiescence don’t help.

Rita Panahi:

I think we’ve got that sort of population, sadly. One man, who is not ready to accept rationing, lockdowns, or any other COVID-style restrictions is Sooshi Mango comic Carlo Salanitri.

Carlo Salanitri:

Why don’t we just drill for our own fuel? We’ve got (bleep) here. Why do we have to ask other countries? Why don’t we just drill for our own shit? Put a big (bleep) right around Australia, and start drilling.

Why do we have to ask everyone for (bleep)? We’ve got our own (bleep) here. It’s just in the ground. Dig it. Start digging. Dig it out.

Rita Panahi:

Well, the message there is, “Drill, baby. Drill.” Prue, it’s what I’ve been saying for years now, and it’s a message that’s increasingly resonating with the public. What do you think? Do you think this is going to see a change of course for this country and the energy policies that we’ve embraced?

Prue MacSween:

I hope so. I think that anthropologists will look back at this period in our life, and think, “This is zombie net-zero thinking of lemmings.” It was the fashion trend of the day where everybody had to demonise fossil fuels, and politicians driven by, I guess, these generation alphabets who were so socially aware and had no responsibility, all care and no responsibility, have driven this infatuation and this ridiculous situation where our energy suppliers are demonised.

So, let’s hope that there’s some … What’s going to happen now, I think we’re going to go through a lot more pain. Sadly, I think there will be limited food from our agricultural sector. I think that people are going to do it so tough that they may have a wake-up call. And it’s about time that we all understood that he was right, a comedian was right. We need to start drilling like crazy.

Rita Panahi:

Now the RBA has announced today that surcharges on credit card and debit cards will be banned from October. This ban is expected to save Australians around $1.6 billion a year in fees. Colleen, this is a big development. The RBA will also reduce the cap on credit card interchange fees. That’s what’s paid by merchants to the bank. That’s going to be reduced from 0.8% to 0.3%. Are you a fan of these changes?

Colleen Harkin:

Actually I’m not really, because it obscures the cost of things. And so, at the moment, you can actually clearly see what the surcharge is. When this is all piled in together, you won’t have that transparency.

It will also mean that people who are using cash are paying for those who are using credit cards, because it will all be included in the cost of the item.

Rita Panahi:

Oh, yes.

Colleen Harkin:

And so, if I’m using cash, I’m still paying for that surcharge that’s been built in.

Rita Panahi:

Good point.

Colleen Harkin:

And I would encourage people to use cash whenever they can. So, I’m not really a fan of it, because I think it’s obscuring transparency, and transparency is always a good thing.

Rita Panahi:

Prue. Yeah. We think we’re going to be saving collectively $1.6 billion, but if the consumer is just going to be ending up paying that through higher prices, then where is the saving coming in? And Colleen makes an excellent point about if you are paying cash, then you’re subsidising those who opt for credit.

Prue MacSween:

That’s right. And it’s absolutely right that they’re in business to make money. They’re going to pass that cost on in the price of everything we buy. So, it is ludicrous. Again, it’s a scam. Whether it’s the RBA who is feeling really so anxious that they’re going to be having to do another few interest rate rises, maybe they’ve decided to chuck a few lollies, and hope that we don’t understand that we’ll be paying it at the cashier. Ridiculous.

Rita Panahi:

That said, yeah. It could be just a little bit of a sugar hit to distract us from, yeah, what the end result is going to look like. Now the hits keep coming for ARN as news comes through this morning that Jackie O she’s joining Kyle Sandilands in taking her employer to court after their $200 million contract was torn up. Jackie Henderson is seeking more than $82 million in compensation. Now Jackie O claims she was unfairly dismissed after an honest bat with co-host Kyle Sandilands. Prue, I’m not a lawyer, but she looks to have an excellent case to me. This all looks very opportunistic by ARN management. Those two have a history, decades long, of having honest bats, having robust discussions, and fights. To suddenly decide that’s misconduct deserving of a sacking, to me, seems incredible.

Prue MacSween:

Me too. I don’t think they have a very good case at all. The bad thing is that they succumbed to the demands of these two, and now they realise that they’ve paid way over the odds. They even had, in fact, on their licence that a censor had to be in the channel with them listening to the show. So, isn’t it on the censor and on ARN? So, if there was behaviour that was objectionable, then I just don’t see how they’re going to win this case. And just shows you how stupid they were signing contracts like that with these two.

Rita Panahi:

Colleen, they knew what they were getting, though, when they did this deal. And they only did this deal a couple of years ago. So, we’re two years into a 10 year deal, $100 million each for Kyle Sandilands and Jackie O. And two years in, they’ve decided the very content that they used to promote to highlight this programme is now suddenly so offensive that it deserves termination.

Colleen Harkin:

Yeah. And, look, I am pleased to say I’ve never listened to them, but I have read a lot about what they do, and what they say. And they’ve made a brand out of being offensive and objectionable, and ridiculing people, and being mean and nasty. That’s been my understanding-

Rita Panahi:

That was more Kyle’s shtick. Jackie was the nice one.

Colleen Harkin:

[inaudible 00:10:46].

Rita Panahi:

They had that balance. I’ve got to say, I haven’t heard a great deal either, but I’ve heard segments of the programme. And it’s interesting, because in Melbourne they have struggled to find an audience, but in Sydney, the last ratings results they were the most popular breakfast programme on FM again.

Colleen Harkin:

But if you’ve done that for a number of years, and you’ve just resigned a contract for $100 million, I’m, clearly, in the wrong job, by the way, but if you’ve signed a contract for that kind of money and you’ve been doing the job with the same partner for … What is it? 20 years or something.

Rita Panahi:

Oh, more than 20 years.

Colleen Harkin:

You know what you’re getting yourself in for. So, I think that you’ve got a contract for that. So, legally, I’m sure her case sounds pretty sound. But from an integrity point of view, I’m not quite sure why she resigned.

Rita Panahi:

Well, I would have resigned for-

Colleen Harkin:

Well, I would too.

Rita Panahi:

… $100 million. I wouldn’t think about it. And you know what? They had a fantastic on air chemistry. They changed radio stations, and the station they left pretty much lost all their advertisers. So, they’ve got proven commercial history there.

Now let’s go to the UK where former Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair has come out and said what I’ve been saying for over a decade. He has said that the left’s unholy alliance with Islamists must end. Writing in The Free Press Blog, Tony Blair wrote, “The problem is that under pressure from party activists and parts of the Muslim community, many progressive politicians who do sincerely reject anti-Semitism are not making these arguments, and failing to take head-on this literally “unholy alliance” between parts of the left and Islamists in our own societies, whose ideology leads inexorably to anti-Semitism.”

Colleen, as I said, I’ve been writing about this for so long, and anti-Semitism is not the only consequence of this unholy alliance. There are so many other things that are happening in western societies. What do you make of Tony Blair, of all people, now making that argument?

Colleen Harkin:

Well, in some ways, it’s not surprising, because we often find that people when they’re in politics have a certain view, and then a few years later when they’re out of it they change their tune.

That’s not an uncommon thing. And so, I never know whether to be pleased or disappointed when they do that. And his position changed quite a lot after 7/7-

Rita Panahi:

Yeah.

Colleen Harkin:

… those bombs in London. So, whether it’s a position that he’s taken in hindsight, or whether it’s a new insight, I don’t know. But it’s welcome. I think we have to have the same hard conversations here about how our country is running, who’s actually standing up and speaking against these things, how are we actually going to get our country back together on track as well as it could be. So, I’m not surprised when a politician changes their tune after they’re out of government.

Rita Panahi:

Well, I think it carries a lot less weight. It’s all well and good to be brave-

Colleen Harkin:

After the event.

Rita Panahi:

… after the event, but when he had the power it’s been pointed out on social media and elsewhere, well, he was a part of the left’s unholy alliance with Islamists. Jonathan Wong is amongst those pointing out that Tony Blair founded the first Muslim primary school that was publicly funded, he gave a million pounds to Islamic studies and imam training at universities in 2007, and notes the Tony Blair Faith Foundation had advisors with links to the Muslim Brotherhood. Ladies, we’ve run out of time. Prue MacSween, Colleen, thank you so much for your time.

Colleen Harkin:

Pleasure-

This transcript of Colleen Harkin on The Rita Panahi Show Sky News Australia from 31 March 2026 has been edited for clarity.