Kerri-Anne Kennerley says Extinction Rebellion protesters should be used as speed bumps and jailed
Kerri-Anne Kennerley says climate protesters should be used as speed bumps and jailed | WATCH
Kerri-Anne Kennerley has some sage advice to Extinction Rebellion protesters: just stay on the road.
The outspoken Studio 10 morning host has applied her characteristic analysis to the climate activists who have caused traffic chaos in Australian capital cities this week, suggesting they be used as a “speed bump” and “put in jail’’. She went on to urge prison authorities to “forget to feed them.”
“Personally, I would leave them all super glued to wherever they do it,” she told panellists on the Network Ten morning show.
Kennerley suggested that protesters hanging on the Story Bridge in Brisbane should be left where they are and ignored by emergency services.
“The guy hanging from the Story Bridge. Why send emergency services to look after or get a moron down?’’ she said. “Leave him there until he gets himself out.
“No emergency services should help them, nobody should do anything, and you just put little witches hats around them, or use them as a speed bump.”
When fellow panellist Sarah Harris suggested the punishment of jail time perhaps did not fit the crime, she replied that jail was a perfectly acceptable punishment combined with starvation. “No put them in jail and forget to feed them.”
Kennerley has recently been cleared by Australian Communications and Media Authority following complaints into comments she made on Studio 10 about protesters demanding Australia Day be moved from January 26.
The long-time television host and personality told the program they should get over the events of a couple of hundred years ago. “Get over it. Let’s just move on,” she said. Kennerley also suggested that protesters weren’t showing concern for the rape and abuse of aboriginal children and their mothers in outback Australia.
Despite a social media storm following her comments, ACMA, which received two complaints about Kennerley’s comments, found that “broadcasting views that may be offensive or controversial does not, in and of itself, constitute a breach of the relevant Code provisions.”