Transcript

Sharri | 7 July · Sharri

0:01
Speaker 1: Live on Sky News.
0:04
Speaker 2: This is Shari.
0:06
Speaker 3: Well, good evening and thanks for joining me. I'm James
0:08
Speaker 3: Macpherson filling in for Sharry Marks and this week, can
0:11
Speaker 3: you believe the Chinese? They testified a nuclear capable ballistic
0:16
Speaker 3: missile into our region yesterday with barely any notice. I mean,
0:20
Speaker 3: as Defense Industry Minister Pat Conroy told the ABC this morning,
0:24
Speaker 3: that's against the rules.
0:26
Speaker 4: It's not consistent with the Hay Convention on Ballistic Missile Testing,
0:31
Speaker 4: which would require more notice and greater information provided to
0:36
Speaker 4: our countries.
0:38
Speaker 3: Not only is firing a strategic missile into the South
0:41
Speaker 3: Pacific with almost no warning against the rules, Well, it's
0:45
Speaker 3: not best practice either.
0:48
Speaker 4: Well we don't think it's.
0:49
Speaker 5: Well's best practice.
0:50
Speaker 4: Best practice is to fire. The hag Convention, which has
0:54
Speaker 4: longer notice, also provides information about a probable flight path
0:59
Speaker 4: where missiles expected to land. Things like that that actually
1:03
Speaker 4: provide a lot more transparency.
1:06
Speaker 3: So let's go through that best practice checklist one by one,
1:09
Speaker 3: shall we? Nations are supposed to provide forty eight hours
1:12
Speaker 3: notice before conducting that kind of missile test.
1:15
Speaker 1: We got two.
1:17
Speaker 3: Nations are supposed to provide information about probable flight paths.
1:20
Speaker 3: We got nothing. Here's a good one. Nations launching missiles
1:24
Speaker 3: are supposed to provide information about where the missile is
1:27
Speaker 3: expected to land.
1:29
Speaker 1: So where was the missile.
1:30
Speaker 3: Fired from a nuclear powered Chinese submarine expected to land?
1:34
Speaker 3: And more importantly, did it pose a risk to anyone?
1:39
Speaker 5: Oh, that's a.
1:40
Speaker 4: Question for them. I don't have information on that, sally,
1:42
Speaker 4: but it's certainly not a world's best practice.
1:46
Speaker 3: Well, it certainly doesn't seem to be world's best practice, now.
1:50
Speaker 1: You'll forgive me.
1:51
Speaker 3: I just find it amusing in a dark kind of
1:53
Speaker 3: way that our politicians talk as if genuinely taken aback
1:57
Speaker 3: that the Chinese Commonist Party isn't abiding by world's best practice,
2:02
Speaker 3: you know, like they do when it comes to honoring
2:04
Speaker 3: copyright law, trade agreements, health regulations, and human rights commitments.
2:09
Speaker 1: So what do we do?
2:12
Speaker 4: So we would continue to call in China to abide
2:15
Speaker 4: by the Hague Convention, which provides sort of instructions of
2:19
Speaker 4: guidance on how to do these sorts of tests.
2:22
Speaker 3: Okay, Pat Conroyd genuinely made me laugh when I heard
2:25
Speaker 3: him say that on the ABC radio this morning. We're
2:28
Speaker 3: going to remind the Chinese to abide by world's best
2:31
Speaker 3: practice when it comes to firing missiles at us. And
2:34
Speaker 3: if they need help with that, well, we're going to
2:36
Speaker 3: point them to the Hague Convention, which provides instructions and
2:39
Speaker 3: guidance on how to conduct.
2:41
Speaker 1: These sorts of tests in ways.
2:43
Speaker 3: That are non provocative and non threatening, which would be
2:46
Speaker 3: brilliant if the entire point of the Chinese launch was
2:49
Speaker 3: other than to be provocative and threatening. Foreign Mister Penny
2:53
Speaker 3: Wong had this stern warning for the Chinese.
2:56
Speaker 6: We do not believe this test is consistent with the
3:00
Speaker 6: the Pacific leaders have very clearly experienced.
3:03
Speaker 5: That this the Pacific should be an ocean of peace.
3:06
Speaker 3: Will take that Pacific leaders have very clearly expressed that
3:10
Speaker 3: this region should be an ocean of peace. Don't the
3:13
Speaker 3: Chinese know their warheads splashing down into the ocean of
3:17
Speaker 3: peace kind of ruins the vibe. If oceans of peace
3:21
Speaker 3: doesn't soften the heart of Xijingping. Perhaps the Prime Minister's
3:24
Speaker 3: favorite catchphrase, will We.
3:26
Speaker 7: Have said consistently that we want to cooperate with China
3:32
Speaker 7: where we can, we'll disagree where we must, and we'll
3:36
Speaker 7: engage in a national interest.
3:40
Speaker 3: It's true, we've consistently said that, and China has consistently
3:44
Speaker 3: ignored that, which I suppose must be what the Prime
3:47
Speaker 3: Minister means when he says he's stabilized the relationship. Like
3:51
Speaker 3: his defense industry minister, the PM was hoping that pointing
3:54
Speaker 3: to a rule book would constitute some sort of national defense.
3:58
Speaker 7: It is standard procedure for tests such as this for
4:05
Speaker 7: there to be given forty eight hours notice.
4:08
Speaker 3: This was not done on this occasion.
4:10
Speaker 1: Well, I'll tell you what.
4:11
Speaker 3: If the Hague Convention, best practice and standard procedures were
4:14
Speaker 3: actual defenses, would be a world's superpower the way our
4:18
Speaker 3: politicians expertly wield them in the face of aggression. Sadly,
4:22
Speaker 3: they're just pieces of paper. Speaking of paper, Chinese state
4:26
Speaker 3: paper The Global Time said in an editorial this morning
4:29
Speaker 3: that Australia and our Ocean of Peace partners should and
4:32
Speaker 3: I quote accept and get used to Chinese nuclear program.
4:38
Speaker 3: But wait, what about the Hague. Well, they're evidently a
4:41
Speaker 3: bit vague on the Hague. Writing in the editorial, Chinese
4:46
Speaker 3: actions were reasonable and lawful, fully demonstrating its sense of
4:50
Speaker 3: responsibility as a major power. Well, I think they did
4:54
Speaker 3: demonstrate that they are a major power, that's for sure.
4:57
Speaker 3: And I think we all know that's the point. And
5:00
Speaker 3: you're a major power, you're not too bothered by world's
5:02
Speaker 3: best practice or by standard operating procedure. I mean, sure
5:06
Speaker 3: you pay lip service to those things when it's convenient,
5:09
Speaker 3: but when those niceties get in the way of no
5:12
Speaker 3: military expansion, you leave them to people like Pat Conroy
5:15
Speaker 3: and podcasters like Anthony Albanezi, speaking of which I'm pretty
5:20
Speaker 3: sure if you asked Jujinping whether he'd rather shag, marry
5:23
Speaker 3: or date the Hay Convention, he'd say none of the above.
5:27
Speaker 3: Someone needs to tell the PM's office they'd understand that
5:31
Speaker 3: this line from the Global Times was telling. The editorial
5:34
Speaker 3: went on to say the current complaints mostly amount to
5:37
Speaker 3: grumbling from operational level authorities.
5:42
Speaker 1: That's life, isn't it.
5:42
Speaker 3: One day you're a handsome boy, next minute you're a
5:45
Speaker 3: grumbling operational level authority. The Chinese missile reportedly landed between
5:50
Speaker 3: Naaru and Tavalu, just one hundred or so kilometers from
5:54
Speaker 3: where the Australian Prime Minister was today, and we know
5:57
Speaker 3: that because the splash, and that's the problem. Next time,
6:02
Speaker 3: do we know the impact location due to the boom?
6:05
Speaker 3: Pat Conroy dismissed the suggestion that the missile launch was
6:08
Speaker 3: retaliation for the PM's security treaty signed yesterday with Fiji.
6:13
Speaker 4: This has been planned for longer than that, to be honest,
6:16
Speaker 4: Sally's We've been monitoring a Chinese Navy task force group
6:21
Speaker 4: that was involved in tracking the launch, and that's been
6:24
Speaker 4: a movement for quite some time. So I think it's
6:26
Speaker 4: more likely to be coincident rather than linked. But obviously
6:31
Speaker 4: that's ultimately a question for the Chinese government.
6:34
Speaker 3: A question for the Chinese government what they're going to
6:38
Speaker 3: tell us, Like, honestly, isn't that a question that urgently
6:41
Speaker 3: needs to be answered by the Australian government, As former
6:45
Speaker 3: Home Affairs Secretary Mike Pizzulo said, there's the possibility, however remote,
6:49
Speaker 3: that details of the Australia fig Alliance and Elbow's trip
6:52
Speaker 3: to Suva were leaked.
6:55
Speaker 1: There's also the question of how it was that we've.
6:57
Speaker 3: Been monitoring a Chinese Navy task for group involved in
7:00
Speaker 3: tracking long range ballistic missile testing, but never realized it
7:05
Speaker 3: was a Navy task force group about to track a
7:08
Speaker 3: long range ballistic missile test. If only a Virgin Airline
7:11
Speaker 3: pilot had been in the region. Our intel might have
7:13
Speaker 3: been better. They've supported those things before. Liberal MP Andrew
7:17
Speaker 3: Hasty summed up the whole situation pretty well.
7:20
Speaker 1: I thought weakness is provocative.
7:25
Speaker 3: Sorry, hang on a second, he was talking about one nation.
7:27
Speaker 3: Here is Angus Taylor the.
7:29
Speaker 8: Most provocative thing of all his weakness.
7:33
Speaker 1: To righter this.
7:34
Speaker 3: The Albanezy government deserves praise for what it's doing to
7:37
Speaker 3: unify South Pacific nations against the growing threat from China,
7:40
Speaker 3: but we need a lot more than that. One more thing,
7:44
Speaker 3: Remember how just last week Pat Conroy stood in the
7:47
Speaker 3: National Press Club and accused Sir Robert Menzies of being
7:50
Speaker 3: a Nazi appeaser. We'll have a listen to this from
7:53
Speaker 3: Pat Conroy. Less than twenty four hours after communists fired
7:58
Speaker 3: a nuclear capable ballistic missile into our region with barely
8:02
Speaker 3: two hours notice.
8:04
Speaker 4: They obviously informed a the Australian government about the test
8:09
Speaker 4: before they did it with insufficient notice to be honest,
8:12
Speaker 4: But they did provide that notice.
8:16
Speaker 3: When they're supposed to give forty eight hours notice and
8:18
Speaker 3: they gave barely two.
8:20
Speaker 1: You don't give them credit.
8:25
Speaker 2: All right?
8:25
Speaker 3: Well, now I want to turn our attention now to
8:27
Speaker 3: one of the great intellectual mysteries of the twenty first century.
8:31
Speaker 1: Can a woman have a penis? Now?
8:34
Speaker 3: Most of humanity settled that question somewhere around the invention
8:37
Speaker 3: of language. But Britain's Health minister, well, he's only just
8:40
Speaker 3: caught up. Until very recently, James Murray insisted that trans
8:44
Speaker 3: women are women, and by implication that penises can literally
8:48
Speaker 3: turn up anywhere. Not anymore. Here was the senior labor
8:52
Speaker 3: member on national television at the weekend.
8:55
Speaker 9: I mean, do you think a woman can have a penis?
8:57
Speaker 5: Because you did previously. It's an important question for a
8:59
Speaker 5: healthy to answer.
9:01
Speaker 9: No, I don't. So you've changed your mind?
9:03
Speaker 1: Yes, Well, hang on a second.
9:05
Speaker 3: You can't just say that yesterday you believe women could
9:08
Speaker 3: have a penis, but today you've decided they can't. It's
9:11
Speaker 3: not like changing your mind on whether a holiday in
9:13
Speaker 3: Europe or the US. This isn't a revised opinion about
9:16
Speaker 3: pineapple and pizza. It's basic biology.
9:20
Speaker 1: So what happened?
9:21
Speaker 3: How did the man responsible for Britain's national health service
9:25
Speaker 3: suddenly discover something every maternity ward has been quietly observing
9:29
Speaker 3: for centuries.
9:31
Speaker 9: Well, I think a lot of us have been thinking
9:32
Speaker 9: about this issue over recent years, and you know, I
9:36
Speaker 9: wouldn't now say that, for instance, trans women are women.
9:40
Speaker 9: I think that biological sex is an important.
9:44
Speaker 3: Well a lot of us have been thinking about this.
9:47
Speaker 3: Imagine saying that with a straight face. Are we supposed
9:50
Speaker 3: to be impressed that he finally came to the right
9:53
Speaker 3: answer or should we be dismayed that it took a
9:56
Speaker 3: group of Britain's brightest considering and contemplate and consulting over
10:01
Speaker 3: years to figure out that women can't have a penis.
10:05
Speaker 3: I mean, this guy went to an exclusive school growing up.
10:08
Speaker 3: He's university educated. Maybe that's the problem. He's in charge
10:13
Speaker 3: of UK health services, for goodness sake, So how on
10:17
Speaker 3: earth could he have been so confused and become so
10:21
Speaker 3: helplessly befuddled by something primary school kids find pretty easy
10:25
Speaker 3: to understand. Well, his explanation is short, but important to hear.
10:31
Speaker 9: I hope people would see that I've always been respectful
10:34
Speaker 9: of different views on this topic.
10:38
Speaker 3: In other words, he was so open minded there for
10:40
Speaker 3: a while his brain fell out. He became so determined
10:44
Speaker 3: not to offend anyone that he temporarily lost the ability
10:47
Speaker 3: to describe reality. It's one of the peculiar moral confusions
10:51
Speaker 3: of our age. Isn't it professing to be respectful? We
10:55
Speaker 3: become complete fools always being respectful of different views. Very
11:00
Speaker 3: modern boast that comes from our culture's obsession with tolerance. Tolerance,
11:05
Speaker 3: we're told is always good and intolerance is always bad.
11:10
Speaker 3: But neither statement is actually true. Tolerance and intolerance are
11:14
Speaker 3: both required for a functioning society. The trick is directing
11:19
Speaker 3: them at the right target. Tolerance is for people, never
11:22
Speaker 3: for bad ideas, and intolerance that's for bad ideas, never
11:27
Speaker 3: for people.
11:28
Speaker 1: Be meek with the erring, violent with the error.
11:32
Speaker 3: What I'm trying to say is you can be respectful
11:34
Speaker 3: to people suffering from gender dysphoria whilst at the same
11:38
Speaker 3: time rejecting nonsense ideas that are plainly wrong. Those two
11:42
Speaker 3: things are not incompatible, but politicians often struggle with that
11:46
Speaker 3: distinction because they're less interested in what's true.
11:49
Speaker 1: Than in what's fashionable.
11:51
Speaker 3: Which brings us to the Minister's explanation for his extraordinary epiphany.
11:57
Speaker 9: Well, I think a lot of us have been thinking
11:58
Speaker 9: about this issue over rests and years, and on this
12:01
Speaker 9: issue in particular, I listened to people, I listened to
12:03
Speaker 9: constituents of mine. I've have different opinions, by the way,
12:07
Speaker 9: quite arrange of opinions. I've listened to other people in politics,
12:11
Speaker 9: I've listened to other people working in public services, in
12:14
Speaker 9: policy and so on, and yes, my position now was
12:18
Speaker 9: different than it was a few years ago.
12:21
Speaker 3: Ah, so that's how we discovered that only men have
12:24
Speaker 3: penis as years of listening personally, I'd have suggested looking
12:29
Speaker 3: it would have been a lot quicker. And while politicians
12:32
Speaker 3: were busy listening, well, what happened to the women who
12:35
Speaker 3: knew the answer all along? Many were smeared as bigots,
12:38
Speaker 3: Some lost jobs, others were hounded out of public life
12:41
Speaker 3: for refusing to deny what every biology textbook had previously
12:45
Speaker 3: regarded as obvious and settled science. What about children encouraged
12:50
Speaker 3: to go down pathways of experimental medical treatment while leaders
12:54
Speaker 3: insisted reality was negotiable, Those consequences weren't theoretical, they were
12:59
Speaker 3: paidaningfully real.
13:00
Speaker 1: And yet now the same political.
13:02
Speaker 3: Class quietly changes its mind and expects applause for finally
13:07
Speaker 3: arriving where ordinary people started.
13:10
Speaker 1: The minister concluded with.
13:12
Speaker 9: This, but I think it's right that as politicians, you know,
13:15
Speaker 9: if we think things through and we come to a
13:17
Speaker 9: different position. We say that and make that clear.
13:21
Speaker 3: Well, fair enough, changing your mind when the evidence changes,
13:24
Speaker 3: that's admirable, But changing your mind after years of denying
13:28
Speaker 3: the bleeding obvious it's less impressive, especially when so many
13:33
Speaker 3: other people paid a very high price while you are
13:36
Speaker 3: still thinking it through. Well, Labor Party officials are busy
13:43
Speaker 3: polishing the policies they'll unveil at the ALP national Conference
13:47
Speaker 3: in a few weeks time. One of those policies concerns
13:51
Speaker 3: the conflict in the Middle East, and you won't believe
13:53
Speaker 3: what will be proposed.
13:55
Speaker 1: Actually, maybe you will believe it.
13:57
Speaker 3: After Anthony Albaneze had said that Hamas must disarm, a
14:02
Speaker 3: position reflected in the material for the ALP conference when
14:05
Speaker 3: it was first drafted in April, well, the new draft
14:08
Speaker 3: makes no mention of Hamas giving up their weapons. The
14:12
Speaker 3: previous policy platform, circulated in April said this Hamas must
14:17
Speaker 3: disarm and can have no role in the state of Palestine.
14:21
Speaker 3: But the latest draft, as reported today in The Australian,
14:24
Speaker 3: is very very different. It says Labour condemns terrorism and
14:28
Speaker 3: violent extremism included as perpetuated by Hamas and other extremists.
14:34
Speaker 1: Now that's the only.
14:35
Speaker 3: Mention of Hamas, who murdered more than a thousand people
14:38
Speaker 3: in the October seven invasion of Israel. There's no call
14:41
Speaker 3: for Hamas to disarm, and there's no stipulation that Hamas
14:45
Speaker 3: can't be involved in a future two state solution. The
14:48
Speaker 3: draft Labor Policy only says Hamas just can't do terroristy things.
14:53
Speaker 3: It's a remarkably low bar, Isn't it almost like telling
14:57
Speaker 3: an arsonist you can keep the flamethrower, just promised to
15:00
Speaker 3: be more reasonable with it. The timing of this I
15:03
Speaker 3: find interesting. Hamas today announced they would relinquish power in
15:07
Speaker 3: Gaza so a committee could administer the region.
15:10
Speaker 1: Now that seems like a.
15:11
Speaker 3: Big shift for the terrorist group who've ruled Gaza for
15:14
Speaker 3: twenty years after being voted into power by Palestinians back
15:18
Speaker 3: in two thousand and seven. But while signaling their willingness
15:21
Speaker 3: to step aside from the day to day governance of Gaza,
15:24
Speaker 3: they continue to refuse disarmament. Imagine if Albanesi insisted on
15:29
Speaker 3: a gun buyback scheme here after the bond By massacre,
15:34
Speaker 3: but Labor Policy insisted on no such thing for Hamas
15:38
Speaker 3: in Gaza after October seven. Now, most commentators don't take
15:42
Speaker 3: the Hama's decision seriously. They say Hamas is only saying
15:46
Speaker 3: they will relinquish power. So Israel we pressured to pull out,
15:50
Speaker 3: leaving Hamas right next door still armed to the teeth. Meanwhile,
15:54
Speaker 3: back in Australia, the latest ALP draft policy is quietly
15:58
Speaker 3: dispensed with. Most of the conditions Albanesi and Wong told
16:02
Speaker 3: us would be necessary before our government recognized a Palestinian state.
16:07
Speaker 3: Gone are calls for the Palestinian Authority, for instance, to
16:10
Speaker 3: hold democratic elections, gone as the requirement that the Palestinian
16:14
Speaker 3: authority renounce calls for Israel's destruction gone, and demands for
16:18
Speaker 3: financial reform gone. Our expectations that the Palestinian authority would
16:23
Speaker 3: clean up their education system, long criticized for encouraging hatred
16:27
Speaker 3: and violence rather than peace. These were all conditions Anthony
16:31
Speaker 3: Albenzi himself previously attached to recognizing a Palestinian state, but
16:37
Speaker 3: now well now all the prerequisites for Palestinian state would
16:41
Speaker 3: have gone the way of our promised two hundred and
16:43
Speaker 3: seventy five dollars power price reduction. The only mention of
16:47
Speaker 3: the Palestinian Authority in the policy draft is that under
16:51
Speaker 3: Australia and Labor well they'd work with the Palestinian authority
16:56
Speaker 3: to achieve a two state solution.
16:58
Speaker 1: That's it.
17:00
Speaker 3: Of course, a Labor government can always depart from official policy,
17:03
Speaker 3: but party platforms do tell you something important. They reveal
17:07
Speaker 3: where the movements instincts lie and if Labor instincts no
17:11
Speaker 3: longer include demanding one of the world's worst and most
17:14
Speaker 3: notorious terrorist organization's disarm before being folded into the future
17:20
Speaker 3: political settlement. We'll let you concern everybody while we're talking
17:25
Speaker 3: about Labour's position on Israel, and just before I bring
17:28
Speaker 3: in my panel, have a look at this from Spain. Now,
17:32
Speaker 3: in Spain, they began their annual festival today, famous for
17:35
Speaker 3: the running of the bulls, huge crowds, all celebrating, dressed
17:39
Speaker 3: in red, having a great time. Have a look at
17:42
Speaker 3: this and see if you notice anything unexpected. Maybe I
17:58
Speaker 3: shouldn't have asked if you saw anything unexcis expected. Calls
18:01
Speaker 3: for Israel's erasure becoming becoming standard fair in Western countries.
18:06
Speaker 3: Now it's not quite the ALP national conference, but when
18:09
Speaker 3: you're rooting for Hamas and an unreformed Palestinian authority, it's
18:13
Speaker 3: not that far off.
18:18
Speaker 1: For more on all of.
18:19
Speaker 3: That, I'm joined now by former Labor MP Michael Danby
18:22
Speaker 3: and Sky News host Caleb Bond.
18:24
Speaker 1: Welcome to you both. Michael, I'll start with you.
18:28
Speaker 3: What do you think of the changes to the Labor
18:30
Speaker 3: Party policy platform.
18:32
Speaker 10: I thought it was very funny that you pointed out, James,
18:35
Speaker 10: that Harmas has decided to abolish itself before the Socialist
18:39
Speaker 10: Left ALP conferences is going to so as usual, these people,
18:45
Speaker 10: they don't follow what's going on. Crass prime ministers interested
18:49
Speaker 10: in doing stupid media stunts with people talking about the
18:54
Speaker 10: Japanese prime ministers melons. Why don't you get serious, elbow
18:58
Speaker 10: and at least man to the policy that's going into
19:01
Speaker 10: to the national conference. You promise people that when you
19:05
Speaker 10: recognize Palestine, you'd force the Palestinian authority to have elections
19:12
Speaker 10: after being in office for twenty years of their four
19:15
Speaker 10: year term. We'd forced them to stop paying terrorists salaries.
19:20
Speaker 10: Of course you've dropped all of that. It's pathetic. It's
19:24
Speaker 10: not a serious government, not a serious evaluation of Middle
19:27
Speaker 10: East policy. And it's so funny James that you point
19:32
Speaker 10: out that Hamas is more moderate than the alp policy.
19:35
Speaker 3: It's interesting, calib we're in the middle of a Royal
19:38
Speaker 3: commission into anti Semitism. Antie Albanese has tried to emphasize
19:42
Speaker 3: and he supports the Jewish community. This is a bit
19:45
Speaker 3: of a stab in the back, is it not?
19:47
Speaker 11: Well when you mentioned rooting for Hamas, I thought we're
19:49
Speaker 11: going to get back onto the Karlie Minogue business there second, James,
19:52
Speaker 11: but you know, this is the issue with recognizing Palestine,
19:58
Speaker 11: because of course the well knew when they did that,
20:01
Speaker 11: as they are now admitting that you can't achieve any
20:03
Speaker 11: of these things that they said they would do in
20:06
Speaker 11: order to get it through. A two state solution has
20:08
Speaker 11: long been seen by many in the Middle East and
20:10
Speaker 11: broadly across the world as the answer to being able
20:14
Speaker 11: to have an area where people who call themselves Palestinian
20:17
Speaker 11: can live and also having an Israel and the two
20:19
Speaker 11: should coexist. But it's impossible to have a two state solution,
20:23
Speaker 11: which is what the whole idea of recognizing Palestine is
20:26
Speaker 11: predicated upon, unless you have people running Palestine who also
20:31
Speaker 11: believe in a two state solution, and we don't have that.
20:34
Speaker 11: So you can say, until the cows come home we'll
20:38
Speaker 11: get rid of the PLA and Hamas can't run the
20:40
Speaker 11: joint But until you have a framework to make that happen,
20:44
Speaker 11: recognizing Palestine is only giving legitimacy to the PLA and
20:48
Speaker 11: to Hamas.
20:49
Speaker 3: Yeah, very very good point. I agree with you, Michael,
20:52
Speaker 3: that's well said. Do you reckon we can get a
20:54
Speaker 3: two state solution with a Victorian Liberal Party?
20:57
Speaker 1: I don't know more.
20:58
Speaker 3: Redeeming has released a new v to her supporters on
21:01
Speaker 3: social media early this evening.
21:03
Speaker 1: Have a look.
21:04
Speaker 12: I think it's time that I addressed the fact that
21:10
Speaker 12: there have been so many distractions, so many huge distractions
21:16
Speaker 12: that have taken away from the work that you, as
21:21
Speaker 12: my constituents and Victorians, really needed to be done. And
21:25
Speaker 12: I am genuinely, so so sorry that all of these
21:29
Speaker 12: things over the past three and a half years have happened.
21:34
Speaker 1: Michael, what do you make of that?
21:36
Speaker 10: Sorry, Maria, They work so hard to get you back,
21:39
Speaker 10: and then you caused a big distraction by saying some
21:42
Speaker 10: bloke put you in a headlock, who you'd had a
21:45
Speaker 10: friendly picture with just a few minutes beforehand. The real
21:48
Speaker 10: problem is, James, is that the Liberal Party seems divided
21:53
Speaker 10: on the edge of a state election. They are lucky
21:57
Speaker 10: that they have an invisible one Nations Sir Andrew Bolt
22:01
Speaker 10: calls him a ghost party with no candidates, no leader,
22:04
Speaker 10: no policies. You would think that the Liberals would be
22:08
Speaker 10: able to lead the recharge here in Victoria. And I
22:12
Speaker 10: hope Brian Locknain, if he's in the interest of the
22:14
Speaker 10: Liberal Party, acts very strongly to get rid of this
22:17
Speaker 10: More Redeeming problem, because voters want to have a choice
22:22
Speaker 10: in November. They don't want to be saddled with our
22:26
Speaker 10: same old socialist left government again and no other alternative.
22:29
Speaker 3: Watching that video, caliber I wonder if more Redeeming fears
22:34
Speaker 3: that she might have lost support because of the latest troubles. Ironically,
22:40
Speaker 3: she apologizes saying, you know, we're right on the cusp
22:42
Speaker 3: of taking government in Victoria, so I don't want any
22:45
Speaker 3: of this to.
22:46
Speaker 1: Be a distraction. Do you feel sympathy or as a
22:49
Speaker 1: little rich.
22:51
Speaker 11: I don't think she has to fear that she's lost support.
22:53
Speaker 11: She has lost support, and she's lost support from some
22:57
Speaker 11: of the people who gave her her great his support
23:01
Speaker 11: when she was unfairly targeted by John Pursuto and you know,
23:05
Speaker 11: wrongly labeled as though she was associated with neo Nazis,
23:09
Speaker 11: all of that was rubbish, right, and so she received
23:12
Speaker 11: a great deal of support from people including me on
23:15
Speaker 11: air and others involved in the Liberal Party, and she's
23:18
Speaker 11: blown all of that up over. You know, we've also
23:21
Speaker 11: in the footage, I don't think any of us think
23:24
Speaker 11: that was a headlock. To then claim that she didn't
23:27
Speaker 11: actually understand what a headlock was, I mean, that's real,
23:30
Speaker 11: roll your eyes, Territory. The one thing that Matthew Guy
23:34
Speaker 11: fairly asked for and that Jess Wilson also asked of
23:37
Speaker 11: her was an apology.
23:38
Speaker 1: Right, That's all they wanted.
23:40
Speaker 11: And she refused to give that. And now she puts
23:43
Speaker 11: up a video saying, well, I apologize for the distractions
23:46
Speaker 11: that have happened over the last few years, by which
23:49
Speaker 11: she's then linking it all back to the John Pursudo thing. Now, yes,
23:53
Speaker 11: it's true that we probably wouldn't end up in this
23:54
Speaker 11: position if it weren't for what John Pursudo stupidly did
23:57
Speaker 11: all those years ago, but that's not really what this
24:00
Speaker 11: is about. It's that John Moira Deeming made a complaint
24:05
Speaker 11: to police that was not upheld. She should have just
24:07
Speaker 11: apologized and we all could have moved on, but that's
24:10
Speaker 11: not happened. She's now run off to the court to
24:13
Speaker 11: try and stop the state executive from running emotion to
24:16
Speaker 11: potentially have her expelled, and so we've got to wait
24:19
Speaker 11: another two weeks to get an answer on that. So
24:21
Speaker 11: it just drags out longer and longer and longer. It
24:23
Speaker 11: feels like she knows her time in the Liberal Party
24:26
Speaker 11: is up, and she's just kind of dragging them along
24:29
Speaker 11: with her.
24:29
Speaker 3: I'm going to say, Caleb, you're making a lot of
24:31
Speaker 3: sense tonight. You might be worth watching at ten pm
24:33
Speaker 3: on the Left de Bay.
24:34
Speaker 11: I think that's a good idea, and five pm on
24:36
Speaker 11: Fridays too.
24:37
Speaker 1: I will indeed the Bond Report. It's a great program.
24:39
Speaker 1: My word is my bond? All right?
24:41
Speaker 3: Quickly before I let you, gentlemen go or Caleb takes
24:43
Speaker 3: over the program. John Howard has delivered a brutal verdict
24:47
Speaker 3: on the Liberal Party's lost decade. He calls it saying
24:50
Speaker 3: Tony Abbott, Malcolm Turnbull and Scott Morrison all failed the
24:54
Speaker 3: leadership test. The comments are part of Paul Kelly's new book,
24:57
Speaker 3: The Twilight of Exceptionalism, which argues coalition underperformed in government
25:02
Speaker 3: and lost its psychological grip on the nation. Quoting from
25:06
Speaker 3: the book here says, in the end, you can't succeed
25:08
Speaker 3: this is John Howard unless you're in good unless you're
25:12
Speaker 3: a good leader in government. That's the test and it's
25:14
Speaker 3: where all three fell down.
25:16
Speaker 1: He says.
25:16
Speaker 3: The Liberal Party is more of a leadership party than Labor.
25:19
Speaker 3: It expects a lot of its leader and responds more
25:21
Speaker 3: to the personality of its leader than does Labor. Let
25:25
Speaker 3: me ask you quickly, Caleb, did Abbott's removal from the
25:28
Speaker 3: Liberal Party? Did that begin the rot for the Conservative movement?
25:32
Speaker 1: Yes?
25:32
Speaker 11: It did, absolutely it did. And I suppose you could
25:34
Speaker 11: say before that that some of the rot began with
25:37
Speaker 11: that first budget. Now, I mean I happened to think
25:39
Speaker 11: that first budget that he and Hockey handed down was
25:42
Speaker 11: the budget that was needed at the time, but of
25:44
Speaker 11: course it was very different to what they promised when
25:46
Speaker 11: they came into government. That started that slide into thirty
25:50
Speaker 11: news polls in a row, which Turnbull the news, and
25:53
Speaker 11: then the standard was set and it was all downhill
25:56
Speaker 11: from there. And then of course we know what to
25:57
Speaker 11: Turnbull did in terms of changing culture in the party
26:00
Speaker 11: and it was pretty hard to come back from there, unfortunately.
26:03
Speaker 1: Michael just quickly.
26:03
Speaker 3: I'm interested in John Howard's assertion that leadership is more
26:08
Speaker 3: important in the Liberal Party because the personality of the
26:11
Speaker 3: leader counts more, whereas the Labor Party tends to be
26:14
Speaker 3: more about the movement than the leader.
26:17
Speaker 1: Do you concur with that assessment.
26:19
Speaker 10: Well, it's true to some extent. You can see that
26:21
Speaker 10: with these socialist left motions on the Middle East. I mean,
26:24
Speaker 10: clearly Elbow and Wong are showing no leadership. But I
26:27
Speaker 10: thought Kelly's got a very good point. Those were exceptional
26:31
Speaker 10: years the Hawk Keating economic reforms followed by the Howard
26:35
Speaker 10: Costello getting rid of our total budget deficit. What an achievement.
26:42
Speaker 10: And then we had these disappointing years of a Turnbull
26:46
Speaker 10: with his forty two billion dollar battery in the snowy mountains.
26:54
Speaker 10: Poor old prime ministers after him. But I have to
26:59
Speaker 10: say the Party have been just as bad. You couldn't
27:02
Speaker 10: compare this all. I think they are a disastrous Labor
27:06
Speaker 10: Party government under Elbow to the giants like Bob Hawk,
27:14
Speaker 10: Paul Keating or Peter.
27:15
Speaker 1: Walsh League, no doubt about that.
27:18
Speaker 3: Michael Danby calib Bond. Thanks so much for your time
27:21
Speaker 3: and we'll see you at ten pm on the Late Debate.
27:22
Speaker 11: Caay, dig I can't believe you're not joining us tonight.
27:25
Speaker 1: Jay, I'll be watching at home. Caleb. Well, I eat
27:27
Speaker 1: my dinner and a glass of red I assumed. Thanks
27:29
Speaker 1: to both of you.
27:30
Speaker 2: All right.
27:30
Speaker 3: One Nation surge is about to get its first real
27:33
Speaker 3: test in Western Australia, with Labor Minister Paul Papalia quitting
27:37
Speaker 3: and triggering a by election in Secret Harbor, a seat
27:40
Speaker 3: Labor once held with a massive margin. Internal Labor polling
27:44
Speaker 3: reportedly has One Nation neck and neck with Labour in
27:46
Speaker 3: the mid thirties. The Liberals, meanwhile, are stuck in the
27:49
Speaker 3: high teens. But here's where it gets interesting. The West
27:53
Speaker 3: Australian seat where this by election will be held overlaps
27:56
Speaker 3: with Andrew Hasty's federal electorate of Canning. Joining me now
28:00
Speaker 3: is One Nation MP Barnaby, Joyce Barnaby, thanks for coming
28:05
Speaker 3: on the program. Labor sources are saying One Nation could
28:07
Speaker 3: win Secret Harbor.
28:09
Speaker 1: Are they right to be panicking?
28:12
Speaker 5: Well? Obviously, One Nation shows clarity, unity, strength.
28:15
Speaker 6: People see that there's a dynamic new movement in Australia.
28:19
Speaker 6: What we have to do is show the strength to be
28:22
Speaker 6: able to stand up against the zeitgeist of climate departments
28:27
Speaker 6: in a minute power a change to the social fabric
28:31
Speaker 6: in such a form as it changes our nation in
28:35
Speaker 6: a way we don't want to get behind real assets
28:38
Speaker 6: that really drive our nation, our economy forwards, such as
28:41
Speaker 6: coal fire power, having the capacity to actually say things
28:44
Speaker 6: that mean something, that have people like you and dislike you,
28:48
Speaker 6: rather than live in this sort of opaque, kind of
28:51
Speaker 6: jello of you know, wanting to be all sorts of
28:55
Speaker 6: shapes and forms and never really being anything at all.
28:57
Speaker 5: But the people to fight other Labor Party.
29:01
Speaker 6: I've got no interest in fighting Andrew Hasty or fighting
29:05
Speaker 6: the Liberal Party. The Labor Party have been disastrous for
29:08
Speaker 6: our nation. They've been disastrous for our debt, They've been
29:11
Speaker 6: disastrous for the social cohesion of our nation and a strong.
29:17
Speaker 5: Statement needs to be made about them.
29:19
Speaker 3: What's funny you say you've got no interest in fighting
29:21
Speaker 3: the Liberal Party because of course Andrew Hasty seems very
29:24
Speaker 3: fixated on one nation. What do you say'd rather be
29:27
Speaker 3: taken out in a box than bend the knee to
29:29
Speaker 3: Pauline Hanson's one nation. He certainly seems to think it's personal.
29:34
Speaker 5: Well it's not. I mean my enemy, our enemy is
29:38
Speaker 5: not political enemy. We don't have any real enemies.
29:41
Speaker 6: Our political foe is not the Liberal Party, it's not
29:44
Speaker 6: Andrew Hasty, it's the Labor Party. I mean, that's what
29:46
Speaker 6: we're focused on, and other people focused on. Ask this
29:49
Speaker 6: for them to explain. But I just don't get this.
29:53
Speaker 6: In a day where China has logged an intercontinental ballistic
29:59
Speaker 6: missile in the Pacific and we, as I've been saying
30:02
Speaker 6: for so long, should be becoming as powerful as possible,
30:05
Speaker 6: as quickly as possible in that environment, I've got no
30:09
Speaker 6: interest in having some sort of debate with the Liberal Party.
30:14
Speaker 6: I have themes I might believe about the Liberal Party,
30:16
Speaker 6: but they have no use to the Australian people. What
30:20
Speaker 6: I'm focused on is how the Australian people are putting
30:23
Speaker 6: a stronger position, stronger economic position, a stronger financial position,
30:27
Speaker 6: a stronger military position for the sake of our children.
30:30
Speaker 5: The advanship.
30:31
Speaker 3: See the way you're talking now is I think how
30:34
Speaker 3: most people would like the Liberal Party to be talking
30:37
Speaker 3: just about this horrible Albanesi government.
30:40
Speaker 1: Let's just make them the enemy.
30:41
Speaker 3: And focus all of our efforts on removing them. So
30:46
Speaker 3: on that point, Anthony Albanesi used in New South Wales
30:49
Speaker 3: labor conference to lash the Liberals Nationals in One Nation,
30:54
Speaker 3: branding them all together as an axis of grievance.
30:57
Speaker 1: Right, so you'd be aware of that.
31:00
Speaker 3: Talked about this on the program last night with Liberal
31:03
Speaker 3: MP Julian Lisa and put these two simple questions to him.
31:07
Speaker 1: Have a look, and then I want to get your
31:08
Speaker 1: response the.
31:10
Speaker 3: Liberal National Coalition Are they a party of grievance?
31:14
Speaker 6: Yes?
31:14
Speaker 1: Or no?
31:15
Speaker 10: No, We're a party of government.
31:17
Speaker 1: And one nation. Are they a party of grievance?
31:21
Speaker 2: Yes they are?
31:24
Speaker 3: So how do you react to that when you're saying, hey,
31:27
Speaker 3: we just want to attack the government, not the coalition
31:30
Speaker 3: And then you get that from Julian Lisa on the
31:32
Speaker 3: program last night.
31:34
Speaker 5: Last night.
31:34
Speaker 6: I've got no interest in taking on Julian Lisa. Julian
31:38
Speaker 6: Lisa's entitled to his views and be focused on the
31:41
Speaker 6: Labor Party.
31:42
Speaker 5: I know that for the.
31:43
Speaker 6: People in our area, the socialist policies that have basically
31:49
Speaker 6: put cavids on over our lands, socialize our land, taken
31:52
Speaker 6: away our rights of private ownership. What is happening to
31:56
Speaker 6: the poor people in our region by reason of this
31:58
Speaker 6: indemenent power swindle of so called renewables, renewables, but they're
32:03
Speaker 6: now Can I shut down the New Zealand Highway for
32:05
Speaker 6: six days out of say it's incredible. These are the
32:09
Speaker 6: policies that make people's lives harder, and they are the
32:13
Speaker 6: policies that make our nation weaker. And every time I
32:17
Speaker 6: stopped to engage with mister Lisa, mister Hasty, is a
32:22
Speaker 6: minute I've wasted engaging against Alberan Easy and Jim Charmers
32:27
Speaker 6: and the diabolical position that they've put our nation in
32:31
Speaker 6: in circumstances where we've never had more pressure and more threat.
32:35
Speaker 5: Ever against us.
32:36
Speaker 6: You know, I do not have time to engage in a
32:39
Speaker 6: Liberal party.
32:40
Speaker 5: There is too much on the plate.
32:42
Speaker 1: Barnaby Joyce, I reckon.
32:43
Speaker 3: We should take this video, give it to the Liberal
32:46
Speaker 3: Party and they should disperse it amongst all their MPs
32:49
Speaker 3: and show them how easy it is when someone in
32:51
Speaker 3: the media is trying to bait them to take on
32:54
Speaker 3: one nation, to simply pivot and make it about the
32:57
Speaker 3: Albanzy government.
32:58
Speaker 1: You did it brilliantly.
32:59
Speaker 3: You didn't buy for me at all the Liberal Party
33:02
Speaker 3: could follow your example. Thanks for joining me tonight. I
33:05
Speaker 3: appreciate you boys all right. Coming up after the break
33:08
Speaker 3: out of fence expert Peter Jennings will give us his
33:11
Speaker 3: analysis on Chinese missiles, Trump's goals at the NATO summit,
33:15
Speaker 3: and the intentions of terror Group Hamas, all of that
33:18
Speaker 3: coming up after the break.
33:24
Speaker 1: Well.
33:24
Speaker 3: As you're aware, China filed a long range missile from
33:27
Speaker 3: a nuclear powered submarine into the South Pacific yesterday, just
33:30
Speaker 3: hours after Anthony Albanezi signed a landmark mutual defense treaty
33:34
Speaker 3: with Fiji.
33:35
Speaker 1: Beijing says it.
33:36
Speaker 3: Was routine, but the timing he looks anything but, especially
33:40
Speaker 3: with other Pacific nations now being encouraged to join Australia's
33:43
Speaker 3: security network. Joining me now is Sky News defense analyst
33:46
Speaker 3: Peter Jennings. Peter, thanks so much for coming on the program.
33:50
Speaker 3: Was this China sending a direct warning to Fiji, Australia
33:54
Speaker 3: and other South Pacific nations.
33:57
Speaker 8: I think their key focus was the United States. It's
34:00
Speaker 8: in fact, I reckon you could say that this launch
34:03
Speaker 8: was a slightly late two hundred and fiftieth Birthday present
34:08
Speaker 8: to the United States from China, saying to them understand
34:12
Speaker 8: that we are now you're equal in terms of nuclear
34:15
Speaker 8: weapons capability. We can fire at you from land based weapons,
34:19
Speaker 8: which they did in September of twenty twenty five, and
34:21
Speaker 8: we can now do the same with submarines. That's the
34:24
Speaker 8: key message. And really the message to the South Pacific
34:28
Speaker 8: and Australia is well, we really don't care what you
34:31
Speaker 8: think about what we do. It's just not important to us.
34:35
Speaker 8: The South Pacific is a useful weapons training range. We
34:38
Speaker 8: like to be able to fire missiles over water and
34:41
Speaker 8: you're handy for that, and we're really not that bothered
34:44
Speaker 8: if you are unhappy about that as a hard power reality.
34:49
Speaker 8: So I think they were the messages that were on broadcast.
34:52
Speaker 3: And how serious would that message be for the US?
34:56
Speaker 3: I mean, a nuclear capable missile test the South Pacific
35:00
Speaker 3: demonstrating that kind of range from a submarine. What does
35:05
Speaker 3: that mean for the balance of power?
35:08
Speaker 8: It is serious for the US because their nuclear weapons
35:12
Speaker 8: design has been built to create a stable balance with
35:16
Speaker 8: the former Soviet Union now Russia. Now the United States
35:20
Speaker 8: has to manage an equal balance with China, which is
35:23
Speaker 8: rapidly growing its nuclear weapons. The other thing to say,
35:26
Speaker 8: James is that China's weapons are more modern the Americans
35:31
Speaker 8: have to go through a process of modernizing their nuclear arsenal.
35:34
Speaker 8: This is something that a number of successive American presidents
35:38
Speaker 8: up until Trump have been reluctant to agree should happen.
35:43
Speaker 8: So they're not really in the strongest position that we
35:46
Speaker 8: would want them to be. And I think it's also
35:49
Speaker 8: a reminder to Australia that there is no alternative for US.
35:53
Speaker 8: We utterly rely on the United States for its extended
35:56
Speaker 8: nuclear deterrence. That is a stabilizing fact, like it or
36:00
Speaker 8: not in the Asia Pacific, and you know, we need
36:04
Speaker 8: to recognize that reality at a time when China is
36:07
Speaker 8: increasingly challenging American power.
36:10
Speaker 3: I want to turn our attention to the NATO summit
36:13
Speaker 3: in Turkey, where leaders from thirty two member Alliance meeting
36:16
Speaker 3: this week with Donald Trump.
36:18
Speaker 1: Zelenski is also there.
36:20
Speaker 3: They'll both be pretty large in the talks, defense, spending,
36:25
Speaker 3: support for Ukraine, tensions between the US and Europe, all
36:28
Speaker 3: of those things on the agenda. What's the main thing
36:31
Speaker 3: to watch out of the summit this week?
36:34
Speaker 8: I guess, you know, the most constructive thing from Trump
36:38
Speaker 8: would be to continue to pressure the Europeans to lift
36:41
Speaker 8: their defense spending and to make sure that NATO isn't
36:44
Speaker 8: counting fake things like pensions as some NATO countries do
36:49
Speaker 8: in their defense budget. That I think would be the
36:52
Speaker 8: best use of Trump's time. The problem is, James, we
36:56
Speaker 8: know that President Trump doesn't like these big multilateral meetings,
37:00
Speaker 8: and I fear that one risk is that he's going
37:03
Speaker 8: to go hard at the Europeans. You didn't support me
37:06
Speaker 8: in our military operation in Iran, even though frankly the
37:09
Speaker 8: Americans didn't seek that support before they started that attack
37:13
Speaker 8: at the end of February this year, So you know,
37:16
Speaker 8: the worst outcome is more fighting between America and its allies.
37:21
Speaker 8: The best outcome would be if the Americans can pressure
37:24
Speaker 8: the Europeans to spend more on defense, and we'll probably
37:28
Speaker 8: get a mix of the two.
37:29
Speaker 3: And just quickly before I let you go, as you
37:31
Speaker 3: would have heard me say earlier, Hamas is claiming it
37:33
Speaker 3: will dissolve the governing body that's run Gaza for nearly
37:37
Speaker 3: two decades in hand administration to a committee based in Cairo.
37:41
Speaker 3: The key point, though, they're not agreeing to disarm, which
37:45
Speaker 3: makes this look more like a tactical retreat.
37:47
Speaker 1: Than a surrender.
37:50
Speaker 8: They still have the weapons and they've got the security
37:52
Speaker 8: of people on the ground thugging the Palestinian population. I
37:57
Speaker 8: think what they're testing is is the Cairo authority. This
38:01
Speaker 8: is the Trump peace plan idea. Are they actually prepared
38:05
Speaker 8: to come into Garza? And will they bring money with them?
38:09
Speaker 8: That's what I think Commerce is looking for. But make
38:12
Speaker 8: no mistake, James, they control the weapons, the police, the security.
38:17
Speaker 8: They're the guys still in power, and I'm sure that
38:19
Speaker 8: they are determined to remain in that position.
38:22
Speaker 3: Peter Jennings, appreciate you joining me, Thanks so much. We'll
38:25
Speaker 3: still to come. Deloitte has downgraded our economic outlook. They
38:28
Speaker 3: say things haven't been this gloomy since the nineteen nineties recession.
38:33
Speaker 3: Economist Shane Oliver is on to explain all of that next.
38:40
Speaker 1: Well.
38:41
Speaker 3: Deloitte has issued one of its bleakest warnings in years,
38:44
Speaker 3: which is never the sort of thing you want to
38:45
Speaker 3: hear from a company whose job is quite literally counting
38:48
Speaker 3: the money. They're tipping growth of just one point three
38:51
Speaker 3: percent this financial year, inflation above four percent, another rate
38:56
Speaker 3: hike in August, and unemployment hitting five percent. Jim Chalmers
39:01
Speaker 3: is blaming the Middle East, But Deloitte says years of
39:03
Speaker 3: weak productivity, poor investment and governments spending catching up with Australia.
39:08
Speaker 3: In other words, the economic chickens haven't just come home
39:11
Speaker 3: to roost. They've arrived with calculator spreadsheets and a demand
39:15
Speaker 3: for payment AMP. Chief economist Shane Oliver joins me. Now, Shane,
39:19
Speaker 3: how much of this is Labour's homegrown economic mess?
39:24
Speaker 2: Well, a significant part of it is.
39:26
Speaker 13: Unfortunately, it's part of the productivity malays that we've seen.
39:31
Speaker 13: Now for the last decade, we've seen productivity stagnates pretty much.
39:35
Speaker 13: Over the last decades, we've seen a step down in
39:38
Speaker 13: GDP growth. Even in the nineteen nineties we had a
39:41
Speaker 13: very severe recession.
39:42
Speaker 1: At the start of.
39:43
Speaker 13: The decade, average growth was around three point three percent.
39:46
Speaker 13: In the two thousands it stepped down to three point
39:48
Speaker 13: two percent, but.
39:50
Speaker 1: Still a pretty good story.
39:51
Speaker 13: Then when we went into last decade, it slowed for
39:53
Speaker 13: around two and a half percent. So far this decade
39:56
Speaker 13: it's been just north of two percent, only just above
40:00
Speaker 13: and that includes of course the volatility associated with the pandemic.
40:04
Speaker 13: But the bottom line is that that slow down in
40:07
Speaker 13: productivity is.
40:09
Speaker 5: Really catching up to us.
40:11
Speaker 13: It means lower growth in living standards, and of course
40:14
Speaker 13: it's meaning this subpar, sub two percent sort of economic
40:17
Speaker 13: growth that Deloitte is referring to. And of course bear
40:21
Speaker 13: in mind, yes, the last financial year was probably just
40:24
Speaker 13: above two percent as you saw on that table there,
40:26
Speaker 13: but the previous two years were below two percent. So
40:30
Speaker 13: it looks like we're sliding back into that malaise that
40:33
Speaker 13: we've seen in pretty much the post pandemic period. So
40:37
Speaker 13: it's not a good story. And unfortunately, the retightening of
40:41
Speaker 13: labor markets, the increasing and taxes that Australians are being
40:46
Speaker 13: asked to pay, the expansion of government sector employment, all
40:51
Speaker 13: of these things are taking their toll on productivity growth.
40:55
Speaker 3: So Deloitte say that strong migration has masked weak productivity.
41:00
Speaker 3: Many Australians are getting poor a per person. Do you
41:03
Speaker 3: agree with that assessment?
41:05
Speaker 13: Oh, look, I think it's hard to argue with that.
41:09
Speaker 13: We have seen very strong, very strong population growth in
41:13
Speaker 13: recent times, but of course what ultimately accounts for the
41:16
Speaker 13: individual is growth in their living standards or what you
41:19
Speaker 13: call per capita GDP if you want to measure it
41:22
Speaker 13: in GDP terms, and that has been performing very poorly.
41:26
Speaker 13: We saw a very long slide in per capita GDP.
41:29
Speaker 13: It fell about one and a half percent over nine
41:31
Speaker 13: quarters and to the start of twenty twenty five. We've
41:34
Speaker 13: sent a bit of a pickup lace lately, but now
41:36
Speaker 13: we're going back it seems into a per capita recession.
41:40
Speaker 13: And so the key I think is, yes, we need
41:43
Speaker 13: decent levels of immigration, but they have been too high,
41:46
Speaker 13: and when they get too high, that causes other problems
41:49
Speaker 13: in the economy, like the situation we've got in housing.
41:52
Speaker 13: But it can give us economic growth, but it's not
41:55
Speaker 13: the sort of per person economic growth that you really
41:58
Speaker 13: want to see to drive living standards.
42:00
Speaker 3: Well, just before we finish you mentioned housing, HSBC is
42:03
Speaker 3: warning the housing downturn is only just beginning, with national
42:06
Speaker 3: prices now tipped to four by up to eight percent
42:09
Speaker 3: by the end of twenty twenty seven. Is that a
42:13
Speaker 3: bigger downturn do you think than labor expected.
42:16
Speaker 13: I don't know what they were forecasting. I know the
42:18
Speaker 13: Treasury analysis said that the tax changes now in the
42:22
Speaker 13: budget could knock about two percent off home prices, but
42:25
Speaker 13: they haven't put out a precise forecast, but I would
42:27
Speaker 13: suspect that would be more severe than what they're expecting.
42:31
Speaker 13: We are expecting a seven percent top to bottom fall.
42:34
Speaker 13: So we've already come down about one percent over the
42:36
Speaker 13: last couple of months. We're looking for another six percent
42:39
Speaker 13: or so over the next financial year over the current
42:42
Speaker 13: financial year, so more pain certainly to come. I guess
42:47
Speaker 13: in an historical context, you could say that's only the
42:50
Speaker 13: low end of the housing downturn range we've seen over
42:53
Speaker 13: the last forty years, so it's not disastrous. But nevertheless
42:56
Speaker 13: it will act as a drag on spending in the
42:59
Speaker 13: economy because people will feel somewhat poorer as they hear
43:02
Speaker 13: that their value of their home has gone down, and
43:04
Speaker 13: that leads to less spending in the economy, so that
43:06
Speaker 13: will be another drag on economic growth.
43:09
Speaker 3: There you go, Shane Oliver. I appreciate you joining me tonight.
43:12
Speaker 3: Thanks so much for coming on.
43:13
Speaker 2: Thank you.
43:14
Speaker 1: All right, Well, don't go anywhere yet.
43:16
Speaker 3: America's out of the World Cup and not even a
43:19
Speaker 3: Trump card can save them. Now maybe the King can
43:21
Speaker 3: save Harry.
43:22
Speaker 1: I don't know.
43:22
Speaker 3: Tom Slater will join us and explain all of that
43:25
Speaker 3: after the break. Now, we wouldn't normally cover soccer on
43:33
Speaker 3: this program, not because we've got anything against it. It's
43:35
Speaker 3: just that watching grown outs collapse theatrically after the smallest
43:38
Speaker 3: amount of pressure usually belongs in question time. But when
43:42
Speaker 3: the President of the United States starts moonlighting as a
43:44
Speaker 3: World Cup referee, politics and religion, sorry, football become impossible
43:49
Speaker 3: to separate. The saga began when America's star player received
43:53
Speaker 3: a red card and a one match suspension for this.
43:57
Speaker 14: But instead, if you've been able to delve deep into
43:59
Speaker 14: their protocol to activate Article twenty seven to be able
44:03
Speaker 14: to decide, actually the suspension is put on hold for
44:05
Speaker 14: a and years are free to play.
44:09
Speaker 2: Well.
44:09
Speaker 3: Trump was watching the game, and Trump knows soccer, just
44:12
Speaker 3: to ask him.
44:13
Speaker 15: So I saw the play, and I'm a person that
44:17
Speaker 15: loves sports and was a good athlete, and I understand
44:21
Speaker 15: sports really well, really well, and that wasn't a foul.
44:30
Speaker 3: So as Trump watched from the White House, what began
44:32
Speaker 3: is mild annoyance soon evolved into a full constitutional crisis.
44:38
Speaker 15: He didn't do anything wrong, and he's our best player,
44:41
Speaker 15: or one of our best players, a very right any
44:43
Speaker 15: game of red card. I didn't know what that meant.
44:45
Speaker 15: I didn't think it meant much. Then I started hearing
44:48
Speaker 15: that that means you can't play in the next game.
44:51
Speaker 15: That's very unfair. That's you know, it's one thing to
44:54
Speaker 15: pedalize somebody for the game, but how do you penalize
44:58
Speaker 15: him for a game that hasn't been played yet. It's
45:00
Speaker 15: very unfair.
45:00
Speaker 1: You can't do that.
45:02
Speaker 3: Trump became convinced it wasn't just one of those bad
45:05
Speaker 3: calls that get made from time to time in Congress.
45:07
Speaker 3: This was more akin to a Russian hoax, but involving.
45:10
Speaker 1: A ref with a whistle.
45:12
Speaker 15: This referee who is a little bit suspect if you
45:18
Speaker 15: check his if you check his past. I don't want
45:21
Speaker 15: to say that, because they don't like to create controversy,
45:24
Speaker 15: but very suspect. If you'd like, I'll provide you with
45:29
Speaker 15: the past. He made a call that nobody could believe.
45:35
Speaker 3: So in the end, Trump did what any American would
45:37
Speaker 3: do when democracy itself hangs in the balance.
45:41
Speaker 15: Yes, I asked for a review by Fever. They spoke
45:45
Speaker 15: to a man who's highly respected.
45:48
Speaker 1: Well you know the story.
45:49
Speaker 3: The one match band was overturned and Trump's sorry, America's
45:53
Speaker 3: star player took the field against Belgium this morning. Turns
45:56
Speaker 3: out no one can bend it like Trump. In fact,
45:59
Speaker 3: we've got an exclusive picture here of Trump watching the
46:02
Speaker 3: game this morning. Sadly, even from his seat in the
46:05
Speaker 3: video referees bunker. There are limits to executive power. Trump
46:09
Speaker 3: was powerless to overturn Belgium's four to one victory tarifs. However,
46:14
Speaker 3: well they're still on the table. Meanwhile, the Belgians celebrated
46:17
Speaker 3: in the only way that made sense by doing the
46:20
Speaker 3: Trump dance.
46:22
Speaker 1: That all score by Belgium, but in a sense.
46:25
Speaker 3: Created by the United States of America. Joining me now
46:30
Speaker 3: is Spiked Online editor at our football correspondent, Tom Slater. Tom,
46:35
Speaker 3: I'm curious as to how Europeans have reacted to Trump's
46:39
Speaker 3: intervention in the World Cup, because, as I said, this
46:42
Speaker 3: is religion.
46:45
Speaker 16: No absolutely, I mean, many people have amused by the
46:47
Speaker 16: fact that this world conquering football tournament's beheld in America.
46:51
Speaker 2: Once again, it's not particularly a football in nation.
46:54
Speaker 16: Pologies, I can't say soccer with the straight face, but
46:57
Speaker 16: I mean it was again with midst some kind of
46:58
Speaker 16: shock and amusement. Of course, Trump would attempt to do this,
47:01
Speaker 16: the fact that it seems like maybe had some sway
47:04
Speaker 16: despite the protestations from the head of FIFA that they
47:06
Speaker 16: were just following the clear cut legal process.
47:10
Speaker 2: I suppose we've come to expect this kind of thing
47:12
Speaker 2: from Trump.
47:13
Speaker 16: What was so shocking was that it actually potentially led
47:16
Speaker 16: to an overturning of that decision. It's opened up a
47:18
Speaker 16: whole Pandora's boxed with other red cards being potentially appealed
47:23
Speaker 16: by various different footballing associations nationally.
47:27
Speaker 2: And I just.
47:28
Speaker 16: Can't think that in a sense it ended in a
47:30
Speaker 16: perfect way, which then despite all of this controversy getting
47:33
Speaker 16: battered by Belgium for one, So maybe there was some
47:35
Speaker 16: kind of poetic justice in the end. But a really
47:38
Speaker 16: shocking moment, even if it's one that we might have
47:40
Speaker 16: come to expect.
47:41
Speaker 2: And you know, in Europe we've been furious about var
47:44
Speaker 2: for a long time.
47:44
Speaker 16: The fact that we now have to contest with par
47:47
Speaker 16: and form of Trump assisted refereeing is not a great development.
47:51
Speaker 1: I like that all right.
47:53
Speaker 3: Prince Harry has arrived in the UK, minus his wife
47:56
Speaker 3: and kids and unable to stay at Buckingham.
48:00
Speaker 1: So let's start with his accommodation. Why isn't Harry staying
48:03
Speaker 1: at the Palace?
48:06
Speaker 16: Well, this is as Harry reccdd story of lots and
48:11
Speaker 16: county claims on either side.
48:12
Speaker 2: But he was offered a royal residence for this trip.
48:16
Speaker 16: He originally turned it down, then at last minute asked
48:18
Speaker 16: to stay at Buckingham Palace. The grounds on which it's
48:21
Speaker 16: been rejected is because of the fact that he's in
48:23
Speaker 16: the midst of this legal action against a series of
48:26
Speaker 16: national newspapers.
48:27
Speaker 2: And because of the king's constitutional role.
48:28
Speaker 16: He doesn't want to appear to be sort of taking
48:31
Speaker 16: sides in any meaningsful sense. But I suppose this will
48:33
Speaker 16: just continue to be gris to Harry's milt of how
48:35
Speaker 16: he's being overlooked poorly treated by the palace, even though
48:40
Speaker 16: from the off he's handled this not particularly well. And
48:43
Speaker 16: this is an extra added problem if you've got again
48:47
Speaker 16: someone who is still part of the line of succession,
48:48
Speaker 16: still part of the royal family formerly, who is taking
48:52
Speaker 16: newspapers to court, for the King to be seen to
48:54
Speaker 16: be taking any kind of side in that is not
48:56
Speaker 16: going to be a good look, given historically that was
48:59
Speaker 16: a big battleground being able to report on the royals
49:01
Speaker 16: and being able to say whatever we like about them.
49:03
Speaker 2: So it's another twist in the tale.
49:05
Speaker 16: It twas ever, thus, but I suppose this is just
49:07
Speaker 16: going to be more fuel to Harry's narrative that he's
49:10
Speaker 16: been poorly treated. It's not just by the national press
49:12
Speaker 16: in this country, but also by his own family in
49:14
Speaker 16: the Palace.
49:15
Speaker 3: Yeah, well, I think you're probably right. I mean, there's
49:17
Speaker 3: probably a book deal in it, or maybe a Netflix series.
49:20
Speaker 3: So you've always got to look at the glass as
49:22
Speaker 3: being half full if you're Harry, don't you. Meghan and
49:25
Speaker 3: the kids remained in the United States because of security concerns.
49:29
Speaker 3: Quickly two questions, are the security concerns valid? And how
49:33
Speaker 3: does this affect their relationship with grandfather the King, who
49:37
Speaker 3: they've not seen for quite some time.
49:40
Speaker 16: So on the first point, I do actually have some
49:42
Speaker 16: sympathy with them, as far as they are a pretty
49:44
Speaker 16: prime target, not at least because of how indiscreet Prince
49:47
Speaker 16: Harry was in his own book about the number of
49:49
Speaker 16: Taliban that he might have kilt during his time in Afghanistan.
49:53
Speaker 16: At the same time, of course, it's completely politically toxic
49:56
Speaker 16: for there to be any direct or indirect state.
49:59
Speaker 2: Support for their security.
50:02
Speaker 16: It will given the fact that they've completely trashed the country,
50:04
Speaker 16: marched out of it, and said because they couldn't live
50:06
Speaker 16: here because we were so racist. On the front of
50:09
Speaker 16: the family story in the midst of this, that is
50:11
Speaker 16: really good, I suppose, of an actual tragedy. The King
50:13
Speaker 16: has not seen his grandchildren in person since I believe
50:16
Speaker 16: twenty twenty one or thereabouts, and so that is really,
50:19
Speaker 16: I suppose, the core, but a human story in the
50:22
Speaker 16: midst of all this. But as ever, that's just been
50:24
Speaker 16: made so much more difficult by the theatrics of Harry
50:26
Speaker 16: and Meghan and the fact that essentially, when it comes
50:28
Speaker 16: down to it, the Palace can't trust them to be
50:30
Speaker 16: discreet in any of their dealings with them because they're
50:32
Speaker 16: worried exactly as you say, it's another Netflix deal or
50:34
Speaker 16: a book deal telling all of.
50:36
Speaker 1: It's all very very sad, isn't it. Anyway?
50:39
Speaker 3: Tom said, I always enjoy our conversations. Thanks for joining
50:42
Speaker 3: me tonight. That's all I've got time for us. See
50:44
Speaker 3: you tomorrow night at eight o'clock. But right now he's
50:46
Speaker 3: Paul Murray