The Mark Pirotta Show

Mark Pirotta
  • 0.0 (0)
  • Politics
  • Updated Weekly

The Mark Pirotta Show is long-form Australian commentary on politics, culture, faith, family, and the ideas shaping our nation in 2026. Unfiltered. No-compromise. Grounded in a Christian Conservative ethos. From Sydney, Australia — husband, father, and everyday Australian who believes our country deserves better than uni-party, woke policies, energy chaos, housing privilege, and attacks on free speech and faith. Every week we unpack the real stories the mainstream media won’t touch and try to apply logic to an emotional world. Stress test the modern political landscape with me on the show!

  1. 2d ago ·  Bonus

    Edward Schuller: What Are They Teaching Your Kids at School?

    Edward Schuller returns to The Mark Pirotta Show for a wide-ranging conversation about education, parental authority, Christianity, culture and the future of Australia. Edward is the founder of Protect Our Kids and works with Red Union, where he has recently been involved in the campaign against Victorian legislation affecting alternative unions. https://www.protectourkids.com.au/ Do you know a teacher, nurse, or any frontline worker that needs an affordable and contactable union? Find your Red Union here: https://www.redunion.com.au/ Teachers, join the TPAA here: https://tpaa.org.au/ Nurses, join the NPAA here: https://rushsignup.com.au/ Follow Edward on X: https://x.com/edwardschuller0?s=21 Follow Edward on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/edward_schuller Follow Edward on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/share/1D6wzbkX6F/?mibextid=wwXIfr But the centre of this conversation is what is happening inside Australian schools. Protect Our Kids argues that government-funded third-party organisations are entering schools to deliver increasingly explicit relationships and sexuality education, often without parents being shown the exact material beforehand. Edward walks through what his campaign has uncovered, why he believes parental transparency has collapsed, and the three changes Protect Our Kids is demanding: - Remove sexually explicit material and the organisations supplying it from schools - Restore genuine parental authority and informed consent - Review and end government funding for organisations delivering this material From there, the conversation goes much deeper. We discuss: - Respectful Relationships and sexuality education - What parents are actually consenting to - Government-funded third-party education providers - The Protect Our Kids campaign - Red Union's fight in Victoria - Ben Carroll and organised labour - Government influence over private and religious schools - Sexual Reproductive Health Australia and Family Planning - The historical roots of Australia's family-planning movement - James Howe and the modern consent debate - Consent versus chastity - Pornography and sexual liberation - Whether politics is downstream of culture—or spirituality - Christianity and Australia's moral foundations - The role of churches in rebuilding communities - Objective morality - Christians in politics - Multiculturalism and national identity - Assimilation versus integration - Australia's Anglo-Celtic heritage - Immigration and social cohesion - What Australian citizenship should actually mean - Australia's collapsing birth rate - And whether Australia can recover a culture worth passing on to our children One of Edward's strongest arguments in this conversation is that politics isn't ultimately the beginning of the problem. Culture is downstream of spirituality. If Australians want to change their schools, their politics and their country, Edward argues that the deeper task is rebuilding families, churches and communities around something greater than politics itself. Whether you agree with every conclusion or not, this is an important conversation about who has responsibility for forming children: Parents? Schools? Government? Or organisations most parents have never heard of? Protect Our Kids: https://protectourkids.com.au/ Support The Mark Pirotta Show: https://patreon.com/TheMarkPirottaShow https://linktr.ee/mark.pirotta #auspol #children #ideology #lgbt #australia

  2. 4d ago

    Labor is Almost $100 Billion Over Budget. Guess Who is Footing the Bill? - EP123

    Labor wants Australians to believe the federal budget is under control. Look at the raw numbers and the picture becomes much harder to sell. In the final Coalition Budget before the 2022 election, federal payments for 2025–26 were projected at roughly $687 billion. Today, spending for the same financial year is around $788 billion. That's roughly $100 BILLION more. Now, not every dollar of that difference is a new Labor policy. Inflation, population growth, indexation and existing programs all matter. But that's exactly why this episode digs deeper. Where is the extra money coming from? Who is actually paying for Australia's enormous expansion in government? And why, after adding more than a million workers to the labour force, does the average Australian still feel like they're going backwards? In this episode of The Mark Pirotta Show: - Labor's enormous increase in federal spending - The Coalition's original 2025–26 spending projections - Why spending never returned to its pre-COVID trajectory - Australia's rapidly expanding workforce - Population growth and migration - How much additional tax new workers contribute - My estimate of the extra burden falling on the existing Australian worker - Personal income tax versus company tax - Superannuation taxation - GST and bracket creep - Why inflation is effectively helping government revenue - The roughly $30 billion fiscal gap I wanted to understand - Australia's AAA credit rating - Why a AAA rating doesn't mean households are doing well - Government debt versus household finances - Why the middle class is uniquely difficult to protect from higher taxation - The difference between creating more wealth and simply taxing existing wealth - Labor's transformation from a workers' movement into the party of larger government - The Eureka Stockade and the original fight against government regulation - Why Australia's fiscal position is becoming increasingly fragile - Government spending, inflation and the next interest-rate fight - And why One Nation's rise makes considerably more sense when you look at Australians' wallets This isn't really an episode about one deficit number. It's about scale. Australia has millions more people, more workers and significantly more tax revenue than it did only a few years ago. And government spending has expanded even faster. The average Australian doesn't experience the federal budget as an accounting document. You experience it when your pay hits your account. You experience it at the supermarket. You experience it at the petrol station. You experience it in your mortgage. And you experience it when government takes a larger slice before you've even had a chance to spend it. When politicians tell you they're being fiscally responsible, don't stop at the headline number. Dig into the budget. Support the show: https://patreon.com/TheMarkPirottaShow https://linktr.ee/mark.pirotta

  3. 6d ago

    Jim Chalmers and DV Have Something in Common: An Inconvenient Truth - EP122

    Jim Chalmers says Australia's budget position has improved by $6 billion. Technically, he's right. But there's a much less flattering number sitting underneath the announcement: Australia still recorded a $22.3 billion deficit—more than double last year's $10 billion deficit. So what exactly are we celebrating? In this episode of The Mark Pirotta Show, I compare Chalmers' budget spin with the tactic that landed Coles in trouble over its "Down Down" pricing. Raise the benchmark. Beat the benchmark. Then advertise the improvement. The government's May Budget forecast a $28.3 billion deficit for 2025–26. The final result came in at $22.3 billion. That's the $6 billion "improvement". But compared with the ACTUAL result from the previous financial year, the deficit has deteriorated by roughly $12.3 billion. And government payments have jumped dramatically as well. We get into: - Jim Chalmers' $6 billion budget announcement - The difference between beating a forecast and actually improving year-on-year - Australia's $22.3 billion final deficit - Last year's roughly $10 billion deficit - Why higher-than-expected tax receipts helped the bottom line - Why lower-than-forecast spending only contributed a relatively small amount - The Coles "Down Down" pricing controversy - How statistical framing can completely change a political story - Joanna Howe and the fight over consent - Whether consent education actually tackles sexual offending - The Sydney Swans controversy - Why AFL players earn dramatically more than netball players - Viewership, revenue and player salaries - Government funding of women's sport - Domestic violence statistics and political messaging - Men's suicide and men's spaces - Lydia Thorpe and the Aboriginal origins of Australian Rules - Multicultural grants flowing disproportionately into Labor electorates - And why Australians should always compare political claims with the underlying numbers The final budget outcome is genuinely $6 billion better than the May forecast. But that isn't the same thing as saying Australia's finances improved by $6 billion compared with last year. They didn't. The previous year's deficit was about $10 billion. This year's is $22.3 billion. That's why context matters. When Coles advertised a lower price after temporarily increasing the comparison price, the Federal Court found its presentation misleading on most of the sample tickets considered. Politicians aren't supermarkets. But Australians should apply exactly the same instinct: Always check the original price. Support the show: https://patreon.com/TheMarkPirottaShow https://linktr.ee/mark.pirotta

  4. Sep 25

    Albo Wants to Decide What's True. There's Just One Problem. - EP121

    Anthony Albanese wants his government to play a much bigger role in deciding what Australians see online, what platforms are required to suppress, and how misinformation and disinformation are handled. There's just one problem. He can't seem to keep his own position straight. After standing at the United Nations and directly linking misinformation and disinformation to Australia's digital agenda, Albanese was challenged by the media about that connection. Suddenly, the position changed. In this episode of The Mark Pirotta Show, we look at the contradiction, the government's Digital Duty of Care agenda, Australia's under-16 social media restrictions, the emerging attack on AI and what all of this means for free speech. We get into: - Anthony Albanese at the United Nations - Misinformation and disinformation - The Digital Duty of Care - Albanese changing his position when questioned - Why definitions of "harm" matter - Australia's under-16 social media ban - Whether the ban has actually achieved what Australians were promised - Why most under-16s are still using social media - Government pressure on social media platforms - X and the battle over algorithmic information - The Medicare AI incident - Whether it was really the sophisticated "hack" being portrayed - Australia's cybersecurity weaknesses - Why artificial intelligence changes the balance of power - How ordinary Australians can now analyse budgets, policy and government data - Why AI may become the next major regulatory battleground - Following feeds versus algorithmic feeds - The Fabian method - And why gradual government control over information should concern everyone We also begin with voluntary assisted dying and Canada's MAID system, asking a much deeper moral question about what happens when governments move from preserving life to facilitating death. But the central question of this episode is simple: Who decides what is true? Because if government gets to define misinformation, disinformation and harm, then the people writing those definitions become enormously powerful. And when the same politicians asking for that power can change their own position within 24 hours, Australians should be paying very close attention. Support the show: https://patreon.com/TheMarkPirottaShow https://linktr.ee/mark.pirotta

  5. Sep 23

    EP120 - Trump Just Put Australia on Notice. We Should Be Worried.

    Donald Trump just went on a rampage at the United Nations—and Australia should be paying very close attention. While Anthony Albanese is in New York collecting awards and shaking hands, the United States has directly challenged one of his government's major online safety proposals, warning that Australia's Digital Duty of Care could facilitate censorship of protected political speech. And that's only part of the story. Trump is putting America's interests first on energy, Iran, international institutions and trade. That's exactly what an American President is supposed to do. The question is whether Australia is prepared for what happens next. In this episode of The Mark Pirotta Show: - Donald Trump's extraordinary appearance at the United Nations - Why Trump's America First agenda matters for Australia - The US Government's warning over Australia's Digital Duty of Care - Why vague definitions of "harm" create serious free-speech questions - Independent journalists and algorithmic censorship - Anthony Albanese's response to the US intervention - Tony Burke and changes to working holiday visas - Why regional Australia relies heavily on working holidaymakers - Australia's migration system and national security - Australia's courts, deportation and serious criminal offending - Albanese and questions of federal responsibility - Trump's confrontation with Iran - The possibility of further escalation in the Middle East - America's energy security versus Australia's vulnerability - Why Australia's fuel security matters - Trump's attack on the United Nations and global institutions - Western civilisation, energy and economic prosperity - Australia's enormous natural-resource advantage - Nuclear power, domestic industry and national resilience - Why Australia has the ingredients to become considerably more powerful - Why our political leaders need to start making difficult long-term decisions The US Government's intervention in Australia's Digital Duty of Care debate is particularly significant. Washington has warned that vague definitions of "harm" could incentivise platforms to suppress lawful speech and reduce the reach of independent journalists and controversial political voices. At the same time, Trump is reminding the world of something Australia seems increasingly reluctant to acknowledge: Countries ultimately have to look after their own interests. America will protect America. The question is whether Australia is willing to protect Australia. We have the resources. We have the energy. We have the people. We have the geography. But none of that matters if we refuse to make difficult decisions today for the Australia we want in 10, 20 or 40 years. Australia doesn't have to accept managed decline. It's time to clean ourselves up. Support the show: https://patreon.com/TheMarkPirottaShow https://linktr.ee/mark.pirotta

  6. Sep 22

    EP119 - They Can't Beat Pauline Hanson. So They're Trying This.

    Pauline Hanson and One Nation keep rising—and the response from Australia's political and media establishment is becoming increasingly desperate. A Nine News report has now dragged an American KKK figure into the Australian immigration debate, attempting to connect his support for Pauline Hanson with One Nation's growing political movement. But there's a much bigger story here. Millions of Australians want immigration reduced. One Nation has released a policy proposing a major reduction in Australia's temporary migrant population, and immigration has become one of the defining political issues in the country. So what happens when calling everyone "racist" stops working? In this episode of The Mark Pirotta Show, we get into: - Nine News, the KKK and Pauline Hanson - Why extremist endorsements don't define an entire political movement - The media's coverage of One Nation - Karl Stefanovic, Tommy Robinson and Channel Nine - Why anti-high-immigration politics isn't automatically racial politics - Pauline Hanson's immigration policy - Tony Burke and Labor's immigration response - Backpackers, international students and skilled migration - Jess Wilson's attempt to win multicultural communities in Victoria - The Liberal Party's long relationship with mass migration - David Shoebridge and the push to restrict political content - Julian Hill and the government's online safety agenda - Whether governments should decide which political opinions are "harmful" - Why free speech matters most when the opinion is unpopular - Sydney's new Deputy Lord Mayor - Anthony Albanese and Australia's international ambitions - Jim Chalmers and the Intergenerational Report - Australia's ageing population and collapsing birth rate - Managed economic decline - Why Pauline Hanson is cutting through - And why the political establishment appears increasingly unable to stop One Nation's momentum The central question isn't whether everyone should agree with Pauline Hanson. It's whether Australians who want lower immigration can simply be dismissed as racist, extremist or somehow adjacent to Nazism—or whether governments and the media now have to actually confront the reasons those views are becoming more popular. And if those labels stop working, what comes next? Support the show: https://patreon.com/TheMarkPirottaShow https://linktr.ee/mark.pirotta

  7. Sep 21

    EP118 - Labor Hates Your Kids, Migrants are Cheaper.

    Why does Australia's answer to an ageing population always seem to be more immigration rather than making it easier for Australians to have families? In this episode of The Mark Pirotta Show, I respond to South Australian Premier Peter Malinauskas's argument for immigration and ask what it reveals about the way modern governments view their own citizens. Malinauskas argues migrants make an enormous fiscal contribution, fill jobs Australians aren't doing and help sustain the university system through international students. But there's a much bigger question underneath all of this: Why have we built a system where raising Australian children is treated as an enormous government cost while importing already-trained workers is presented as an economic benefit? We get into: - Peter Malinauskas's case for immigration - The claim that migrants contribute more to government finances than Australian-born citizens - Why children and pensioners distort fiscal comparisons - Immigration and Australia's ageing population - Housing costs and population growth - Whether Australia should prioritise increasing its birth rate - Migrants filling jobs Australians supposedly won't do - Wages, families and the cost of raising children - International students and Australia's universities - Whether universities have become dependent on migration - Anthony Albanese receiving an international "global citizen" award - Australia's push for a UN Security Council seat - Albanese's political identity and public-housing story - The wider question of whether government exists to serve citizens—or increasingly sees citizens as economic units - The value Australia places on children - Media reporting on mothers accused of killing their children - Domestic violence and different standards in public discussion - Abortion, euthanasia and the Christian understanding of human life - Why I believe a society's treatment of children reveals its underlying moral order The economic argument for immigration can sound incredibly compelling when people are reduced to a balance sheet. Bring in someone during their productive working years and government avoids much of the cost of their childhood education and upbringing while immediately collecting taxes. But should that actually be the objective? A country isn't a corporation. Its citizens aren't employees. And children aren't liabilities. If Australia's economic model requires Australians to have fewer children while continuously importing working-age taxpayers to keep the system operating, perhaps immigration isn't solving the underlying problem. Perhaps it's postponing it. Support the show: https://patreon.com/TheMarkPirottaShow https://linktr.ee/mark.pirotta

  8. Sep 14

    EP117 - Albo Wants You Talking About His Mum. Here's Why.

    Anthony Albanese recognised the State of Palestine. Now, I argue, he's borrowed the political tactic of the human shield. In this episode of The Mark Pirotta Show, we look at the sudden revival of Pauline Hanson's months-old comments about Albanese's upbringing and his mother—and why the story has exploded at exactly the moment Labor is facing scrutiny over the distribution of government grants. Pauline Hanson mocked Albanese's repeated references to growing up in public housing and argued that social housing should provide people with a temporary leg-up rather than becoming permanent accommodation. Labor responded furiously. But is this really about defending Albanese's mother—or is an emotional political fight helping divert attention from a much more consequential argument about government spending? We get into: - Pauline Hanson's comments about Albanese and public housing - Anthony Albanese's response - Tanya Plibersek versus Barnaby Joyce - What social housing should actually be for - Albanese's repeated use of his upbringing in his political story - Scrutiny over federal grants and Labor electorates - Marrickville Golf Club - Pork-barrelling allegations and political favouritism - How much power the federal government should have over local spending - One Nation's newly released immigration policy - The proposed 750,000 reduction in the temporary migrant population - International student and graduate visas - Visa hopping and overstayers - Dependants of temporary migrants - Employer-sponsored and genuine skilled migration - Seasonal workers and working holiday visas - Doctors, nurses, engineers and high-skilled migration - Why One Nation is moving from immigration slogans to detailed policy - The political pressure now facing Labor and the Liberals - And why Joel Jamal running for One Nation would break the media The bigger question is whether we're watching a genuine political controversy—or a convenient distraction from scrutiny that matters considerably more to the way government operates. And while Labor fights Pauline Hanson over a months-old clip, One Nation is putting detailed immigration policy on the table. Game recognise game. Support the show: https://patreon.com/TheMarkPirottaShow https://linktr.ee/mark.pirotta Links & Support: • Subscribe & hit the bell → https://www.youtube.com/@TheMarkPirottaShow • Follow on X → https://twitter.com/MarkPirotta • Instagram → https://instagram.com/markpirotta • All links & support → https://linktr.ee/mark.pirotta • Support the show on Patreon → https://www.patreon.com/markpirotta (early episodes, Q&A, exclusive content) The Mark Pirotta Show delivers unfiltered conversations on the ideas shaping Australia in 2026 — accountability, faith, family, and freedom. #AustralianPolitics #CatholicAustralia #MarkPirottaShow #ConservativeCommentary #Australia2026 #FaithAndCulture What do YOU think? Drop your thoughts below 👇

See All (127)

Trailer

About

The Mark Pirotta Show is long-form Australian commentary on politics, culture, faith, family, and the ideas shaping our nation in 2026. Unfiltered. No-compromise. Grounded in a Christian Conservative ethos. From Sydney, Australia — husband, father, and everyday Australian who believes our country deserves better than uni-party, woke policies, energy chaos, housing privilege, and attacks on free speech and faith. Every week we unpack the real stories the mainstream media won’t touch and try to apply logic to an emotional world. Stress test the modern political landscape with me on the show!

Information

  • Creator
    Mark Pirotta
  • Years Active
    2025 - 2026
  • Episodes
    127
  • Rating
    Clean
  • Copyright
    © Mark Pirotta
  • Show Website
    The Mark Pirotta Show