Jodi Lee: Hello, dear listeners, and welcome to Covered, a podcast that helps you figure out what's going on in the news and how you feel about it.

Annie Pullar: Here to guide you through the biggest stories of the week, we are your hosts, journalists, Annie Puller and Jodie Lee.

Jodi Lee: On this week's episode, we dive into

Annie Pullar: Australia's childcare system under fire yet again after a Sydney worker was charged with hundreds of abuse allegations.

Jodi Lee: Cricket Australia's been dragged into a national anthem scandal that wasn't really a scandal, and opposition leader Angus Taylor tried desperately to capitalise on it.

Annie Pullar: And the very political succession battle over the next Dalai Lama, why China wants to hand pick him, or her, we should probably say. But first let's go to our honorable mentions. These are the stories that don't quite warrant a deep dive, but are worth getting your head across this week.

Jodi Lee: Yes, and the very first one is that football fever has swept the world. if you weren't interested in soccer, well, you definitely have been the last few weeks, no doubt. And the semi-final was won by Argentina. They came from behind to beat England 2-1. It was a nail biter, and it means that we've secured ourselves an all-Spanish-speaking grand final. It's now Spain versus Argentina. There were so many narratives and stories tied up in this. ⁓ but Lionel Messi was kind of the big hero of it all. Obviously he's coming towards retirement and it was really kind of his last chance at World Cup glory. Of course Argentina, his team are the reigning champions, so can they do it again in the grand final? We'll all have to wait and see.

Annie Pullar: Poor England, their hearts have been crushed. Anyway, moving on to our next honourable mention. Anthony Albanese has unveiled a new plan for AI this week. He's billing it as the Office of AI, which will be set up and run out of his own department. It's meant to be sort of set around the ground rules for how big tech will operate here in Australia, things like how data centers use power, energy, and water, and what protections will be in place, particularly around the creative industries. Artists and journalists who actually use their work to build and mold these AI models. The pitch is kind of getting ahead of the technology instead of reacting to it. But of course, it's drawn criticism very swiftly. Angus Taylor's calling it more bureaucracy, and even some experts are questioning Albanese's claim that this is a world first, given the EU set up its own AI office just two years ago. So pretty light on detail, but we'll wait and see.

Jodi Lee: Yeah, and ⁓ finally some really sad news that we wish we didn't have to report, but actor Sam Neil has died and his management company this week confirmed that his cause of death was in fact pneumonia. It's particularly cruel given the seventy-eight year old had announced in April that he was cancer free after a battle with a rare blood cancer. Really tragic. His family has asked for privacy at this time. They obviously live in New Zealand where he comes from. there are reports that there won't be any kind of big public memorial or funeral, just a private service on his property. He's obviously best known for projects like Jurassic Park and Peaky Blinders, his career spanning ⁓ than five decades. ⁓ but most excitingly, Sam Neal had been really busy at work in the lead up to his death. He actually filmed four new projects over the last few months. ⁓ ⁓ fans do have something to look forward to.

Annie Pullar: Yeah, there have been so many beautiful tributes. I do just have to mention one. There's this ABC journalist called Charlie Pickering who interviewed Sam Neil. It was literally a 30-minute interview. Anyway, he later found out that Sam Neil named one of his many animals Charlie Pickering. Because he basically chooses to name his animals after people he likes. Anyway, just a beautiful man. and I'm sure he'll get the send-off that he deserves. But let's move to our first story now, which ⁓ I feel like has been impossible to ignore this week, and it really shouldn't be ignored. And that is the Sydney childcare worker who has been unmasked as Hamish Tate. He's facing 329 charges of sexual abuse offences, I should say, connected to more than 130 children. And police ⁓ right now kind of trying to backtrack and try.

Jodi Lee: Yeah. Police have actually been investigating him for over a year, since June of twenty twenty five. It wasn't a parent tip-off though of any of these young students that he's alleged to have abused, and it wasn't even one of his own colleagues who ⁓ went to the police. It was in fact the National Centre for Missing and Exploited Children. They notified the Australian Federal Police after seeing alleged child abuse material uploaded online, and that's how they're they're said to have found Hamish Tate. Now For a year since they began investigating him, he applied through the courts to have his name suppressed. And so it's that's the reason why it's only now in July of twenty twenty six that we are able to say his name.

Annie Pullar: Yeah, and the ⁓ AFP boss actually came out this week and said in that time officers have essentially been, to the victims' families and and delivering this awful news, which is a parent's worst nightmare. ⁓ the details are sort of still coming to light, but the allegations are that he moved through about 62 different childcare centres across Sydney over a 16-year period, tracing back to 2009. So ⁓ we're not talking about someone who was just hiding in plain sight here. ⁓ that his behaviour went undetected and unnoticed for a very long time period. And I think it's it's a pretty staggering hole in a system that is clearly broken where seemingly nobody's job is to notice a pattern across employers if you look at the history here.

Jodi Lee: Yes, so that sixty-two centres that he worked at, but these alleged offences apparently only took place at four or five centers. So on one hand, you want to be reassured by that. On the other hand, it's just equally alarming that somebody can move through that many workplaces, as you've said, allegedly offended at least four or five of them, but then just continue to move and be hired and work.

Annie Pullar: No right. I think instantly when I when I saw this break, it it took me back to other cases that we've heard over the last 12 to 18 months. It's very clear that while, you know, these crimes aren't linked, this isn't an isolated case. All you have to do is look up remember what happened in Queensland back in 2024? There was a guy called Ashley Griffith, and he was found guilty of more than 300 offences spanning more than two decades. So more than 20 years. ⁓ ⁓ that related to sixty five victims and they were aged between one and nine. It's it's honestly sickening and he apparently filmed these young children, you know, and used his position of power at work and nobody ever questioned what he was doing. So it it

Jodi Lee: But not just sorry, you go.

Annie Pullar: No, I was just saying like he's now facing further charges in Sydney, so it's a case that started in Queensland that we're now seeing extend to yet another state. And you just worry that, you know, we're looking at a f at a new case now and it seems that its tentacles are also expanding beyond New South Wales. There's just a pattern here.

Jodi Lee: Well, not just Queensland and it's not just New South Wales. It happened in Victoria. We saw Joshua Brown arrested over alleged child sexual offences in in daycare centres in Melbourne and the surrounds. ⁓ He 70 charges, and there were 1,200 ⁓ small who had to be tested for sexually transmitted diseases. ⁓ There actually a national investigation that was undertaken a couple of years ago, and it found almost 150 childcare workers. ⁓ Had been convicted, charged, or accused right across Australia, and most of them have actually been in the last 10 years. But that's right across the country.

Annie Pullar: Yeah. I mean, if you look at that Four Corners investigation as well, they have practically described childcare centers across the country as a hunting ground that manifests on a dark web where many pedophiles essentially are communicating with each other and almost wearing it as a badge of honor that they can seemingly get away with all of this. ⁓ And ⁓ it's pretty ⁓ simple on the surface. Predators go to where there's easy trust, low supervision, where they can fly under the radar. It's the same reason, and I hate to compare. ⁓ a a child to this, but the analogy is the same. It's the same reason a fisherman goes where the fish are. They know that they can be caught and it's an awful thing to say, but That's the reality here. And there's also a structural answer too, which we were speaking about, ⁓ Jody, as well, which has been interesting to sort of look at the evolution of this landscape. Because if you look back at the 1960s when the childcare industry sort of first came to be in Australia, it was very much sort of a philanthropic endeavour. It was run by community services and churches, and it and the governments essentially funded these services. Then we saw this major shift in the 1980s when Labour sort of reorientated the entire system. That was under the Hawke and then later the Keating governments, which treated childcare kind of less like welfare and more as an economic policy to help parents, because you have to remember at that time women were really coming into the workforce. So it was a way that women could go to work and choose where their child went. Does that make sense? Like

Jodi Lee: It does make sense. And I touched on that national investigation. What that national investigation found after highlighting that there had been 150 childcare workers ⁓ investigated or charged with child abuse charges, they found that they were disproportionately weighted toward for-profit centres. And that makes sense if you think about it. So what happened was initially the government was funding these childcare centers across Australia, and then they moved to a for-profit system. So A large amount of childcare centres in Australia are owned ⁓ by private ⁓ So what see there is a real focus on the bottom line. ⁓ And what is when they're prioritizing, you know, cost cutting and potentially high turnover of stuff, ⁓ or you've got a workforce on casual casual contracts and shifts ⁓ moving between really regularly, ⁓ it's no that there is an environment where misbehaviour goes unchecked.

Annie Pullar: Yeah, it's it's become a profit-making machine. ⁓ I think we have to pause and sort of ask ourselves what's being done or what's already been done. you know, the federal education minister Jason Clare often points to these large reforms that sort of were announced and came into effect from May, which includes changes like adopting this National Worker Registra, so people can actually track banned or suspended ⁓ you know, early educators, ⁓ that have already been flagged. So Good in theory. Then there's also been mandatory training that's been listed: a CCTV trial, power to pull funding from centres that don't meet the standard. But this these reforms are barely two months old. You already have the coalition coming out saying that it needs to move faster, and no one's actually been able to explain yet, particularly in the wake of this Hamish Tate case, whether the register would have even picked up someone like him. Because I don't think the register actually identifies anyone.

Jodi Lee: Yeah, I mean the other qu like you touch on the issues of funding of the centres and how they're privatized and that in itself is a problem. But then I also anecdotally hear from many friends who are parents also about how the subsidy system is broken. So it feels like ⁓ economically was the Australia is failing on both parts. And I think to understand like to break down the subsidy system.

Annie Pullar: ⁓

Jodi Lee: For people who don't quite understand, it almost childcare almost works like a voucher system. ⁓ But it's built around the parent or the family, not around the childcare provider. So essentially the government says, we look at how much a family makes, it's your combined income if you're a two-parent household. ⁓ And if you earn under $88,500 collectively, the government will fund or subsidize 90% of your childcare costs. But for every ⁓ let me get this right, for every extra $5,000 you earn above $88,500, the subsidy drops by 1%. So if as a couple you earn more than I think it's $538,000, if as a couple, now that doesn't have that doesn't have to mean that you both equally split you split that equally. If one partner earns 300 grand,

Annie Pullar: Mm.

Jodi Lee: And the other partner earns 238, you don't get any subsidy at all. ⁓ and the average, yeah, correct. And you have to think that the average full-time salary in Australia is around $110,000. We're not, I mean, I I understand it sounds like a very healthy family income, but if you think about the cost of living in Australia, like the average home costs over a million dollars. So ⁓ if you earn collectively, the two of you.

Annie Pullar: Which is crazy 'cause

Jodi Lee: more than, you know, five hundred and thirty eight thousand dollars a year, you don't get you get squat from the government. And the other thing it doesn't take into consideration is families with inconsistent income. So if you are like you work on short term contracts or you freelance, ⁓ it doesn't sort of make that any easier for you either.

Annie Pullar: But it's just the the whole subsidy scheme is flawed as a principle as well. you know, and I I absolutely think ⁓ vulnerable people be subsidized, but also if you're a woman and you're taking time out of the workplace Why shouldn't you be entitled to this subsidy? Why isn't it an equal playing field? Like it it really doesn't make sense to me. The other thing about this is which I found interesting is you could be, a low-income ⁓ earner in, ⁓ ⁓ affluent area and you're sending your kid to a school in that area, so the fees are higher. Like what happens then? You know, I'd ⁓

Jodi Lee: Yeah. And that's why the sub that's another argument that's made against the subsidy. Because as I said earlier, the subsidy pays the family or the parent. The subsidy doesn't pay the institution. And so basically what it means is that the government has no say over the quality of the early childhood education, the locations where these centers are set up, or the price that they charge for parents. As you say, if you live in a really expensive suburb, you might be slogged a hell of a lot more.

Annie Pullar: I would Rise.

Jodi Lee: Conversely, if you live in a low s lower socioeconomic area, it might be cheaper. But the government has no control over that because the government's just investing in kids, not in early childhood centres. And that's why there's kind of this big call, if you will, for a nationalisation of childcare in Australia. People are saying that the system is broken, and a much better alternative would be for the government to nationalise the entire system.

Annie Pullar: I mean, ⁓ that sort of ⁓ put on the table by a financial journalist and commentator who works at ABC and and I understand the reasoning, but I think in principle or in practice this would be really hard to enforce. Like The if you look at what happened has happened, you know, abroad in Canada, for example, they've moved to a very similar model and it's actually been quite disastrous because childcare has obviously become cheaper, which means more more people are wanting to send their kids to childcare, and demand has completely outstripped supply. So they're in a position where the infrastructure isn't keeping up. So I don't know if you're damned if you do, damned if you don't. I feel like the the privatised system is necessary, but how How we how we ensure that it's safe is just I freaking can't even begin to to answer that question. There's no silver bullet solution, but we need to find one very quickly.

Jodi Lee: Absolutely. On that note, I feel like let's move to our second story for this week, which is somewhat political, but also moves in the sporting realm. I we always like in Australia to try and keep sport and politics separate, but on this occasion, opposition leader Angus Taylor hasn't done such a great job.

Annie Pullar: Mm-hmm. No, no, he's really put his foot in it. but this has sort of been building for a while. If you look at ⁓ Cricket Australia, it it's been ⁓ criticized over the last five years because in 2021 you might remember they dropped the words Australia Day from the Big Bash marketing altogether. It was an incredibly controversial move. A lot of people were very angry about it. Then in both 2025 and 2026, there was no Big Bash crickets. scheduled on the 26th at all. So they essentially boycotted the games on Australia Day. It disappeared off the calendar. Now we're back flipping for 2027. It seems the Big Bash final is back on Australia Day, but there's been a whole other drama around our national anthem.

Jodi Lee: Yeah, so that's really the flash point here. We're talking about whether or not the national anthem should be sung at the Big Bash final, is being held on January 26th, which is still currently Australia Day. ⁓ ⁓ it all started with Big Bash boss Alistair Dobson. ⁓ he told media that the anthem probably, and the keyword is probably, wouldn't be played on January 26th at the final because of cultural sensitivities around the day. Now, Indigenous Affairs advocate Warren Mundeen then weighed in. He was among the first people to criticize that. He said it's a day that should bring people together and not divide us. Enter.

Annie Pullar: Hmm.

Jodi Lee: Angus Taylor, the man who is throwing everything he's got as his role at his role of opposition leader. Bless him, he's giving it everything. ⁓ He just saw this as yeah, a brilliant opportunity to get one over the left, if you will. He piled on and he called what he said was a decision not to sing the anthem. He called it tone deaf woke moralizing on Twitter.

Annie Pullar: He just couldn't wait to get to be a part of this. He needed to be a part of the conversation.

Jodi Lee: And it was quite a lengthy tweet. I gotta tell you, it's couple of paragraphs long. He said that the country's achievements outweigh its wrongdoings.

Annie Pullar: I just I just find this quite hilarious. Talk about a storm in a teacup. And and you could see, you know, the reasoning behind why he wanted to weigh in when you have, you know, one nation rising in the polls. He's struggling to assert any sign of confidence over his party. So he's gone, yep, perfect. I'm in. I'm taking ownership of this. And it spread really fast. It was like wildfire. Fox News in the US actually ran an online article with the headline: I'll read it to you. Cricket Australia pulls ridiculous national anthem move that shows how less. left wing the country has become. It even got frickin' airtime in the UK on the breakfast show. No one managed to check with Cricket Australia.

Jodi Lee: Yeah. Yeah, so this is the thing. The catch is that the national anthem is actually never played at the big bash final. Ever. Because it's a domestic competition. This is the best part. So for people who aren't all up on like their cricket, it's T20 and their local capital city team. So like the Sydney Sixers. So it's a bit like the AFL. Every team in the league is Australian. Same as so we don't

Annie Pullar: Yes. Right.

Jodi Lee: play the national anthem at games. ⁓ So that was the big thing. It's not technically played at this grand final.

Annie Pullar: But what has Cricket Australia actually come out and said? Like have they defended any of this or

Jodi Lee: Yeah, so basically Cricket Australia, obviously, it's sort of got a life of its own, and so Cricket Australia did have to come in on the back of Angus Taylor's comments and just set the record straight. ⁓ its response was pretty damn blunt, if I'm gonna be honest. ⁓ it reiterated that Taylor had been inaccurate, and it clarified that the anthem wasn't ever being excluded because it's not traditionally sung at Big the Big Bash final. Obviously the question of whether or not the anthem would be played was only because it was Australia Day. And Cricket Australia said it would be up to the two teams that ultimately make the final. They then run the on-field ceremonies and presentations at their own games, because that's just the way cricket works. And so Cricket Australia said it would actually be up to the two game to the two teams to decide whether or not they played the anthem on the day.

Annie Pullar: So shall we just rewrite this headline? to any time.

Jodi Lee: No decision has been made over whether the anthem will be played at the grand final in seven months time.

Annie Pullar: I mean you can't ⁓ be forgiven for thinking that this a possibility when you consider the history of what Cricket Australia has done with the Big Bash League, ⁓ which is why I want you cast your mind back to 2024. I don't know if you remember it, but it popped in my memory as we were drafting this story. Ben Fordham, a very awkward interaction with the former CEO of Cricket Australia, Nick Hockley. He basically drilled down on him and forced him to sort of explain why he wouldn't say Australia Day out loud. It is a really cringe moment. just I just I just want to get to the heart of what's happening on on Friday, if you don't mind, just because you you I you know, as interesting as that might be to you, ⁓ the wonderful people sitting on your committee, people wanna know what's actually happening on Friday. So ⁓ will the words Australia Day come over the loudspeaker on ⁓ The Come on straight answer. Yeah, no, ⁓ they they won't. We've and we've taken a consistent approach over the past Yeah, well hang on, is that a no? I didn't hear it. Is it no? We look the main as I said then, we are No no no. I want a yes or a no, Nick. Is Australia Day going to be mentioned over the loudspeaker on Friday? Yes or no? I don't believe so, no. You don't believe so? We got there in the end.

Jodi Lee: That is so cringe. Obviously a sign, poor Nick, who forgot about his media training. But also you can just tell that he's had this realization that reg whatever answer he gives won't go down too well. I think at one point in that interview, now if I remember correctly, Ben Fordham said it was like celebrating Christmas without mention of Santa.

Annie Pullar: Yes. No, he wasn't he wasn't winning in that moment. Like this this was literally a train wreck. Like if you're putting your crisis comms hat on right now, you are going, I don't really know how to salvage any of this. ⁓

Jodi Lee: So Yeah. But if I take my crisis comms hat off and I put on my Australian voter hat, this is all and actually, you know what, it is partially a crisis comms hat because there is just a there's it's just gross indecision on the part of Australia when it comes to January 26th. I'm not saying whether or not I believe that we should change the date. I'm not even going to go into that argument, but we need to decide either way. And until we do.

Annie Pullar: ⁓ yeah. Mm.

Jodi Lee: The Nick Ho the poor Nick Hockley's of the world are gonna have to answer questions like this. Angus Taylor's gonna come out swinging. Warren Mundine's gonna have a different perspective. Like, can we stop approaching everything that happens on January twenty sixth and just w with caution and fear and you know, indecision? Like, can we actually just take it to a plebiscite and make a decision?

Annie Pullar: Yeah, I mean, and I know this was essentially fake news, but I think there is substance in this because look at how quickly it spread. Look at how quickly people wanted to pile on. The f the fact that this anthem has even been up for debate is completely moronic to me. ⁓ you know, we speak about values a lot on this podcast. I think the last episode we did was when Pauline Hansen decided that, her vision was for Australia was being a monoculture and pretty much eliminating multi-race. But You know, we're a country now finding ways to potentially boycott our own national anthem, whether it happened or whether it didn't, what precedent is this setting? Like we need to get our shit together. We're hosting an Olympics in six years. Are we gonna be too scared to sing our anthem on the biggest stage in the world? Like, at what point do we take ownership of who we wanna be and what image we're putting out there to the rest of the world? And I think that that image can coexist with respecting our history, respecting Respecting our past, respecting our indigenous culture, and also respecting the fact that we are frickin' Australian.

Jodi Lee: I mean, put it to the people, like that's what democracy is about. Democracy is about majority rules. So put it to the people like we've done on several other things. Let let the people of Australia decide whether or not January twenty sixth is the right day to do all those things you've just mentioned. And if it's not, we'll find another date. And if it is, let's stop talking about it, please.

Annie Pullar: There you go. We've had our say. Should we move to our last story? This is one that Jody has been completely fixated on. I had to have a little bit of convincing to get this over the line, but I'm actually so glad that you get to hear all about it.

Jodi Lee: That I bullied you into doing a story about Buddhism and the Dalai Lama. ⁓ basically, this is a story about a succession battle that has been ⁓ going on for decades, but it's not a monarchy, it's not a royal family, it's not ⁓ a company even, if you will. It is, of course, the Dalai Lama.

Annie Pullar: My God, the Dalai Lama, he's just so peaceful and this is so political.

Jodi Lee: He's so cute. So he turned 91 this last month, and he underwent a knee reconstruction or a knee replacement, I should say. So he's obviously aging, as we all do. I shouldn't say he's aging though, because Buddhists believe that just the vessel, that is, his physical body, is aging, not his spirit. But it's obviously begged the question both within Buddhism and within the broader global community of what happens next. Who will come after this current Dalai?

Annie Pullar: Yeah. Okay. Yeah, I think it's important to set the scene for anyone who isn't across Buddhism. I've kind of been obsessed with Buddhism ever since I went to Bhutan and kind of ⁓ immersed myself in it. ⁓ ⁓ think the main things to take away is that it's not sort of built around a creator god. It's more of a philosophy, ⁓ practice of life around ethics and mindfulness, ending suffering. ⁓ it's part of ⁓ it's become so popular and it's spread so far. Into Western culture and beyond Asia because you don't actually have to be religious to adopt any of this these practices. I mean, look at the rise of meditation, mindfulness. That really goes to the core of what Buddhism is all about. You know, self-care and inner peace, we're all aiming for it.

Jodi Lee: And we have his excellency, the Dalai Lama, to thank for that. So he's obviously the most senior figure in one branch of that tradition, which is Tibetan Buddhism. ⁓ the belief that his community has is that he is a reincarnation of a bodhisattva, which is a compassionate being who keeps Yeah, I hope I didn't butcher that. So they obviously believe in this concept of reincarnation and that there is

Annie Pullar: Come again?

Jodi Lee: This compassionate being who keeps choosing to be reborn so that he can or he or she can help others rather than exit that cycle. So he chooses to come back generation after generation to help the community. ⁓ and there have been 14 Dalai Lamas since the 1300s. I'm obsessed with this.

Annie Pullar: There is something so beautiful about this process though, that the spirit is always living on, that they're never really dying. Anyway, what I found really fascinating is how a successor usually gets chosen, because this is quite meticulous if we can call it that. So traditionally senior monks who sort of act for the Dalai Lama they look for lots of different signs after a Dalai Lama dies. And that could be, ⁓ know, seeing visions, it could be unnatural, signs that come to them. Sometimes there's a specific direction that they feel or that they're taken to. ⁓ And so they basically, know, really listen to these signs and then they track down ⁓ At children and test them. often put different artifacts in front of a toddler that belong to a previous Dalai Lama. And if the toddler picks out that artifact, well, you know, it's shaping up to be the chosen one. And what's really interesting is that's actually how the current Dalai Lama was found at the age of two. ⁓ This went to his family ⁓ village seeing a sign, ⁓ and the current Dalai Lama said to him at the age of two, You're holding my rosemary beads and those rosemary beads belong to the predecessor so it's insane.

Jodi Lee: Okay, so that's obviously the Dalai Lama, and we've discussed the succession planning for the Dalai Lama. Let's park that for a moment and look at Tibet because obviously he's the spiritual leader of Tibetan Buddhism, and Tibet is really central to how China comes into all of this. So China invaded Tibet in 1950 and crushed a Tibetan uprising in 1959. The Dalai Lama, as a result of China's invasion of Tibet, has actually been living in exile in India for years and years and years. ⁓ And the Dalai Lama from India has been running a kind of like Tibetan government in exile. So, yes, so inside Tibet itself, which is now governed as a kind of Chinese territory. ⁓ they have very little autonomy, they're under very heavy surveillance, and it's sort of like this ongoing repression, if you will, of like an ethnic and religious minority. So the Dalai Lama is not only a symbol of peace and of like spiritual guidance, but he's also kind of this figure of independence and their quote unquote leader who isn't actually able to lead from Tibet itself.

Annie Pullar: That's insane. So he's just been doing this from India the entire time.

Jodi Lee: Yeah, since nineteen fifty-nine. Beijing's statement on all of this, because obviously China's never going to outright say we're looking to conquer Tibet. you know, if you look at the Chinese Communist Party, they'll say that Tibet has never been freer or more prosperous, ⁓ that living standards have risen in Tibet, that religious rights have been respected, ⁓ but what rights groups obviously document in Tibet is that monasteries have been turned into sites of political education.

Annie Pullar: Well. Yeah.

Jodi Lee: Apparently monks are being tested on Communist Party ideology, ⁓ and allegedly there's up to a million Tibetan children that are really being moved into state boarding schools and taught mostly in Mandarin, not in their own traditional language.

Annie Pullar: Right. And I was also reading that China has apparently been demolishing buildings in this small province within Tibet, which is apparently one of the world's largest centres of Buddhist learning, and they're trying to halve the number of residents there. Because of overcrowding. So it's quite clear what Beijing's intentions are here. I think I want to sort of come back to why Beijing does want control of the next Dalai Lama. Because we're talking about a communist party here, an atheist party. Like, why do they want anything to do with this? but I think it's really because whoever controls that role. controls enormous religious authority right around the world. We've just spoken about how popular Buddhism has become over, you know, roughly half a billion Buddhists are sitting worldwide. It's become a really powerful symbol for Tibetans to rally around and ⁓ they love the Lama. This is this is their faith. He's he's the chosen one. Like how do you ⁓ You don't want mess with that. Like ⁓

Jodi Lee: Who's that guy? I think Yes, you've sort of touched on the point is that the Dalai Lama and Tibetan Buddhists are themselves looking for the successor to the who they're looking for the next Dalai Lama. But the Chinese Communist Party, Beijing, has said, no no no, it is going to select the next Dalai Lama. so this is their preferred method. Beijing said

Annie Pullar: Mm. ⁓ amor.

Jodi Lee: That they're going to take a gold urn, it's going to be this kind of ritual, and candidate names are going to be drawn to look procedurally legitimate. But Tibetan scholars obviously say that it's just theatre, that it's just a ruse, if you like, from a government that basically rejects religion entirely, like they're communists. And suddenly the same government wants to anoint a spiritual leader. It doesn't make sense, and analysts say that really.

Annie Pullar: Mm.

Jodi Lee: They're using the Dalai Lama as a pawn in a game of chess, the game of chess being that they're trying to conquer today.

Annie Pullar: Yeah. Yeah, I think this is really about controlling, you know, and finishing the job of bringing Tibet fully under Chinese control. There was an interesting precedent that a lot of people point to, ⁓ and it was back in 1995 that the Dalai Lama actually named a six-year-old as a reincarnation of one of the second highest figures. China apparently took the boy into custody and installed its own candidate. And no one knows where that little boy and his family are. Like, he's disappeared off the face of the earth. So

Jodi Lee: I know I know.

Annie Pullar: Let's let's hope it doesn't get to that. But if you listen, I will say, if you listen to the Dalai Lama, he says that he's gonna live to 110 years old, which won't make the Chinese Communist Party very happy. And he's built his own plan. Like he says that he'll be re doesn't he say that he'll be reborn in a free country and his successor couldn't even be female. So I don't know. Sad, it's too late for us.

Jodi Lee: Do it. Yeah. I'm a little bit too old. It's too late for both of us. The best hope I have is being is you naming one of your pets after me, Alice Landing, let alone being called the Dalai Lama. But ⁓ he's also said that the trust, so he set up a trust, obviously. ⁓ and he said that trust has the authority to authority to recognize his reincarnation and that no outside political authority, i.e. Beijing,

Annie Pullar: Ha ha ha.

Jodi Lee: Has any legitimacy to interfere. So watch this space. Analysts are realistically saying that we could end up in a situation where we have two Dalai Lamas, one appointed by Tibetan Buddhism and this trust, and the other appointed by the Chinese Communist Party.

Annie Pullar: That just it just ruins everything. Like sh I it the the feng shui, the juju is just so off. We can't have that happening.

Jodi Lee: But you know what I would like to see? Like the Pope at the moment is American, so maybe the next Dalai Lama could be Australian or something.

Annie Pullar: Mm. have you considered that your your future child could be the chosen one?

Jodi Lee: I'm actually thinking about my name.

Annie Pullar: Shall we put some artifacts in front of her? Shall we should we dress up as a monk?

Jodi Lee: Definitely food shall happen later. All right. Well I think that's all we have time for on this week's episode of Covered. ⁓ thank you so much for joining us and we look forward to bringing you up to speed with the week's biggest news next week.