It was once agenda-setting, appointment viewing. What went wrong for Q+A?
'When management moved Q+A to Thursdays [in 2021], before shifting it back to Mondays, it disrupted what's meant to be a habit-based show,' says one high-profile ABC presenter. 'Cutting the number of episodes and putting the show on hiatus in the middle of the year only made things worse. It's hard enough to attract viewers as it is, without expecting them to chase you across different time slots or come back to you after a mid-year break that makes no sense.'
One producer notes that Q+A led the way in terms of social media innovation, running a live feed of Twitter comments from viewers before archiving its account on the platform, now called X.
'Before Twitter became a sewer, it was a huge asset to the show,' the producer says. 'But by 2020, when Hamish [Macdonald] took over as host, it became so bad that he had to leave the platform. Stan Grant [who was appointed Q+A host in 2022] copped the most horrible, racist abuse, and you can imagine all the vile comments directed at the female presenters.'
Peter Meakin – who spent five decades leading news and current affairs coverage at the Seven, Nine and Ten networks – suspects social media made some politicians more cautious (and therefore, more likely to bore viewers).
Loading
'It used to be a sport for them to go on air and spar with each other,' Meakin says. 'You might get a few letters saying, 'That was disgraceful', but not the instant groundswell of hatred you get now. They're more scared of putting a foot wrong.'
In a statement, ABC news director Justin Stevens said, 'Discontinuing the program at this point is no reflection on anyone on the show. We always need to keep innovating and renewing.'
Stevens said the ABC would produce more news documentaries, and would make its Your Say election initiative – which allows audiences to suggest questions for politicians – a permanent feature.
ABC managing director Hugh Marks later announced around 40 redundancies and 10 contract positions that would end early. He also flagged changes to the audio division, separating the sport and capital city network teams into a simpler structure. The ABC's content division will be renamed ABC Screen, led by content director Jennifer Collins.
But McEvoy insists the national broadcaster must do more to fill the void created by Q+A's cancellation.
'The ABC always needs to be trying new things, but I don't think an online survey can really give Australian citizens the chance to question decision-makers and politicians – or hold them to account,' he says. 'Engaging Australian citizens in a moderated but open discussion on national issues is a core part of the ABC's obligations as a public service broadcaster … the toxicity of platforms like X that encourage outrage makes the role of a moderated forum like Q+A even more important.'
Former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull, who was once a frequent guest on the program, believes Q+A was at its most compelling when it resembled a dinner party.
'It was all about having the right mixture of guests,' he says. 'In its heyday, if you were interested in Australian politics and you didn't watch it, you were concerned you might miss out on something.'
Loading
Since Jones left Q+A in 2019, the program has had several hosts including Macdonald, David Speers, Virginia Trioli, Stan Grant and Karvelas.
'All formats, after a time, start to feel a little tired,' says Trioli, who now hosts the ABC's Creative Types arts program. 'But I'm a huge fan of the Q+A format. It was a mighty program and one of the most important in terms of news, current affairs and public discussion in this country.
'People say they want accountability and they like to feel that issues are being put directly to politicians, but I think sometimes the audience can struggle with the reality of that,' she adds. 'You will get arguments, or politicians spinning their wheels and avoiding the question, while the host is trying to get them to answer – and that can make things awkward, uncomfortable or combative. It's a crapshoot every time, but the producers worked their guts out to do an amazing job.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Perth Now
21 minutes ago
- Perth Now
Australia, Indonesia urged to deepen ties amid threats
Australia and Indonesia should deepen their defence ties to jointly tackle threats such as cyber attacks and economic coercion, a think tank says. The Australian Strategic Policy Institute's report, released on Tuesday, calls for a framework between the two nations to focus on co-ordinated harmful activities, with the potential to expand regionally. It found hybrid threats, a combination of military and non-military actions, had become more frequent and sophisticated across the Indo-Pacific. These tactics extended to disinformation campaigns and exploited societal vulnerabilities, challenging the sovereignty of even well‑governed states, the report says. The signing of a defence co-operation agreement last August between Canberra and Jakarta marked a "major step forward," but its long-term success depended on managing strategic differences in addition to "building trust that can withstand both political shocks and geopolitical shifts". The report says the current dynamic of Australia placing greater strategic value on the relationship with Indonesia than vice versa, would likely remain in place. "Optimism and ambition will still be needed to achieve a more balanced partnership, but it's also crucial that Australian policymakers ground their expectations in this reality," it reads. "Politicians, in particular, should guard against optimism bias. "Seeing Indonesia as it is, rather than as what Canberra would like it to be, will be essential to realise the (defence co-operation agreement's) limited but important potential." Through co-ordinated responses and trilateral maritime frameworks involving the Philippines, Australia and Indonesia can build a more purpose-driven security partnership, the report says. Following his landslide election victory in May, Anthony Albanese made his first overseas trip of his second term in office to Indonesia. Sitting down with Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto in Jakarta, the prime minister pushed for boosted defence and investment ties during high-level talks. Reports emerged during the federal election campaign that Russia had requested to operate long-range military aircraft from an Indonesian base, alarmed Australia's leaders who came out strongly against the proposal. Indonesian authorities were quick to reassure their Australian counterparts the push from Moscow would not go ahead.
Sky News AU
21 minutes ago
- Sky News AU
Woolworths, McDonald's and Coles say they will not stock US beef despite relaxed biosecurity measures
Several major Australian companies have confirmed they are planning to stick with domestic beef suppliers despite the Albanese government's move to loosen import controls on meat products from the United States. In June, Agriculture Minister Julie Collins said Australia would be removing biosecurity restrictions on beef produced in the US, Canada and Mexico. The move sparked concern from farmers, who warned it could introduce mad cow disease into Australia and threaten the livelihood of domestic producers. However, McDonald's Australia and the nation's major supermarkets told they would continue to use Australian suppliers despite the government's move. In a statement, a Woolworths spokesperson said they had longstanding relationships with many domestic suppliers and had 'no plans' to source beef elsewhere. 'We apply an Australia-first approach and 100 per cent of our fresh red meat is sourced directly from Australian farmers,' they said. 'We have no plans to change that approach.' Meanwhile, a spokesperson for Coles said: 'At Coles, we continue to partner with top beef producers across Australia to bring our customers the high-quality, 100 per cent Australian-sourced Coles brand fresh beef that they enjoy today'. McDonald's Australia also said they would continue to purchase from Australian farmers. 'We'll continue to source 100 per cent Aussie beef for our menu and provide our customers with the great taste, quality, and value they know and love,' a spokesperson told Meat and Livestock Australia managing director Michael Crowley welcomed the decisions from Coles, Woolworth and McDonald's, as he sought to calm fears about the impact of the government's changes. 'The potential for US beef to be imported into Australia in large volumes is minimal,' he told Mr Crowley cited the high demand for Australian beef in the US, the low US cattle herd and the strength of the Australian dollar. "More than 99 per cent of beef available in Australian supermarkets, pubs and restaurants is Australian beef,' he said. "Australia produces approximately three times more beef than needed to feed our population. Around 70 per cent of our production is exported to global markets. "The impact of US and Canadian beef entering Australia is expected to be minimal. It is unlikely there will be an adverse effect on Australian cattle producers." The decision to loosen biosecurity rules comes as Australia attempts to navigate unpredictable trade policy from the Trump administration, including the threat of tariffs on a range of exports. Trade Minister Don Farrell has refused to be drawn on whether opening the Australian market to US beef was part of an effort to avoid any potential trade restrictions.
Sky News AU
21 minutes ago
- Sky News AU
Near 60 per cent jump in price of offshore wind in the UK a cautionary tale for Chris Bowen and his unprecedented new renewables remit
UN climate chief Simon Stiell has warned that megaâ€'droughts could one day make fresh fruit and vegetables a 'onceâ€'aâ€'year treat' in Australia, alongside a forecasted $6.8 trillion GDP loss by 2050 unless emissions targets are dramatically ramped up. It would be funny if it weren't being parroted so earnestly. An unelected Grenadian bureaucrat, clocking up air miles on long-haul jets, presuming to tell Australian taxpayers what their priorities should be, as though it's his divine right. Another climate hypocrite in the conga line of green evangelists, shrieking about catastrophe while living comfortably above the sacrifices they demand of everyone else. Next month, the Albanese government is expected to lock in its 2035 emissions target once the Climate Change Authority, chaired by former NSW Liberal premier Matt Kean, hands down its advice. The figure will likely fall between 65 and 75 per cent cuts compared to 2005 levels, dwarfing the already ambitious 43 per cent reduction due by 2030. This is less a public mandate than a frantic bid to impress international delegates ahead of Australia's COP31 hosting bid. Yet no one seems to have asked Australians whether bankrupting their country for climate kudos is a good idea. Or if they're prepared to see food and energy become luxuries in the name of 'ambition'. Meanwhile, households and businesses are already paying for this grand experiment. Between 2023 and midâ€'2025, energy bills have soared around 40 per cent nationwide. From July, default market offers climbed up to 10 per cent across NSW, Queensland, Victoria and South Australia; slugging families with an extra $280 a year. That's hardly pocket change for people who already turn the heating off to keep costs down. Small businesses are on life support. A family-run grocer in Wagga Wagga expects a $24,000 annual hike despite rooftop solar. Across the country, policy shifts have added roughly $4 billion to energy costs, squeezing margins, fuelling inflation and driving up food prices. Electricity costs rose 8.1 per cent in the past year alone, feeding directly into the 4.3 per cent spike in grocery bills and 4.5 per cent rent increases. The same policymakers who promise to save the planet are making it harder for ordinary people to afford dinner. And here's the kicker: Australia is one of the most resource-rich nations on earth. It has the largest coal deposits in the world, vast gas reserves, uranium for nuclear energy and critical minerals that the green transition itself depends on. Yet these assets are increasingly politically off-limits. Billions are poured into renewables while the grid can't cope with intermittent supply, new transmission lines face fierce local opposition, and large-scale storage remains a fantasy. The government wants 82 per cent renewables by 2030, yet warns of looming blackouts. The numbers don't add up, but the ideology marches on. Simon Stiell's sermon about fruit scarcity and GDP losses comes with theatrical hand-waving but little mention of the obvious: China, which builds coal-fired plants with impunity, emits more in a fortnight than Australia does all year and faces no comparable scolding. If Australia disappeared tomorrow, global emissions would barely flinch. Yet our leaders are desperate for pats on the back from unelected bureaucrats, ready to sacrifice competitiveness and affordability for a headline moment on the world stage. We've reached a point where even questioning the policy orthodoxy (what the UN frames as ambition) is treated as blasphemy. If you ask why the West should commit economic self-harm while other nations refuse to play ball, you're a denier. Nigel Farage found his bank account closed in part for being climate-sceptical. A climate priesthood is emerging, intolerant of dissent, allergic to scrutiny, and intoxicated by its own rhetoric. Britain's experience should be a cautionary tale. Successive governments have thrown billions at offshore wind, locking consumers into spiralling costs. The latest strike prices in Contracts for Difference auctions are around £60 per megawatt hour, nearly 60 per cent higher than two years ago. With wholesale electricity averaging £70–75/MWh, taxpayers are effectively underwriting inflated returns for developers while grid bottlenecks and storage delays mean intermittency remains unsolved. The supposed 'cheap wind revolution' has never materialised on consumer bills. Instead, households face higher costs and dwindling energy security- all for climate milestones that look impressive on a spreadsheet but feel punishing in reality. This hyperbolic messaging is deliberate. Andrew Neil exposed it live on the BBC when an Extinction Rebellion spokesperson admitted that exaggerated claims about climate-related deaths were used because 'alarmism works'. UN Secretary-General António Guterres took it further in 2023, declaring that 'the era of global boiling has arrived', that 'the air is unbreathable, the is heat unbearable'. Apocalyptic wordplay wins headlines, but it breeds despair, not action. A 2021 University of Bath survey found 56 per cent of young people worldwide believe humanity is doomed. If you think the end is guaranteed, why invest, innovate or adapt? Why train as an engineer or put capital into clean tech when the message from leaders is that it's already too late? In Canberra, politics has devolved into theatre. Labor governs with a majority but faces a Senate pulled between Greens and Teal independents demanding even harsher cuts, and a Coalition that only half-heartedly argues for gas and a slower transition. The tug-of-war has left no space for serious debate about cost, reliability or trade-offs. Real people pay real bills, industries consider offshoring, and taxpayers fund green gambles that threaten jobs and prosperity. Yet politicians fall over themselves to show 'ambition' to the UN, treating pain at home as proof of virtue abroad. There is a saner path. We can slash emissions without strangling growth or making families choose between heating and eating. With Australia's vast natural resources, it should be using cleaner coal, advanced gas technology, nuclear power where viable, and investing properly in energy storage and transmission to make renewables work. Innovation, not ideology, will get us to lower emissions faster than bureaucratic diktats and theatrical targets. But for now, the West seems intent on policy masochism, applauded by the same unelected officials who never pay the price. If climate leadership now means empty wallets, unreliable grids and strawberries rationed like wartime luxuries, we've gone badly wrong. We're not decarbonising the planet. We're decarbonising prosperity. It's time to bring common sense back to the table before the only thing we power reliably is fear. Esther Krakue is a British commentator who has regularly appeared on Sky News Australia programs, as well as on TalkTV and GB News in the UK. She launched her career with Turning Point UK, with whom she hosted a show featuring guests including Douglas Murray and Peter Hitchens
