Transcript

Credlin | 3 December · Credlin

0:02
Speaker 1: Peter Krandland live on Skyings Australia.
0:07
Speaker 2: Good Eve, being welcome to the program, break to have
0:09
Speaker 2: your company. It's what's coming up tonight. Warnings from Japan's
0:12
Speaker 2: former envoy and significant criticism from one of our closest
0:16
Speaker 2: strategic partners that the Ognezy government isn't standing up to
0:20
Speaker 2: China's bullying tactics. Meanwhile, it's been revealed China's among at
0:24
Speaker 2: least five foreign governments cashing in on Australian renewable projects,
0:29
Speaker 2: backed of course by Chris Bowen's capacity investment scheme. Now
0:33
Speaker 2: I've been saying this for months. Not only is large
0:36
Speaker 2: scale solar and wind in this country majority foreign owned,
0:40
Speaker 2: a now proof that the profits are heading offshore and
0:43
Speaker 2: this racket with the scheme internal liberal reports starting to leak.
0:48
Speaker 2: They say that the Dutton loss on claim today at
0:51
Speaker 2: least that it was all the fault of Donald Trump,
0:54
Speaker 2: plus warnings from the OECD, the ballooning federal, state and
0:57
Speaker 2: local government dish spending under labor risks, fueling inflation and
1:04
Speaker 2: debt is rising. So what chances are there that Jim
1:06
Speaker 2: Chalmers will quit spending?
1:09
Speaker 3: So I see this commentary about public spending I see
1:13
Speaker 3: this commentary about public demand, but what the numbers tell
1:15
Speaker 3: us today is the growth is coming from the private
1:19
Speaker 3: sector in ways that we've been planning for, preparing for,
1:22
Speaker 3: and frankly hoping for the first.
1:25
Speaker 2: Whether it's claiming that wind and sol is the cheapest
1:27
Speaker 2: form of power, or claiming that there's nothing to see
1:30
Speaker 2: in the government's two point four million dollar payoff to
1:32
Speaker 2: Britney Higgins, or claiming that Australia's relationship with China is
1:36
Speaker 2: very strong, the Obinizi government is consistently into reality denial.
1:42
Speaker 2: Communist China is indeed our largest trading partner, with two
1:46
Speaker 2: way trade exceeding two hundred billion a year. That doesn't
1:50
Speaker 2: mean that Beijing's our friend. No true friend would imposed
1:54
Speaker 2: twenty billion dollars worth of trade boycotts on Australia, as
1:58
Speaker 2: Beijing did for several years after we had the temerity
2:01
Speaker 2: to seek a full international inquiry into the origins of
2:05
Speaker 2: the Wuhan virus. No true friend would have sailed naval
2:09
Speaker 2: flotilla around Australia. All conducted live fire exercises were at
2:14
Speaker 2: any prior notice to the Australian government, something that former
2:18
Speaker 2: Army boss Ian Langford last night on the show was
2:20
Speaker 2: quick to call.
2:21
Speaker 4: Out, you know, their ambition around modernizing their nuclear deterrence,
2:26
Speaker 4: their ambition around reclaiming and controlling the South China Sea
2:30
Speaker 4: as sovereign waters to gain the disagreement of the international community,
2:35
Speaker 4: and the presence of what the DG. Evasio talks about.
2:39
Speaker 4: Foreign espionage activities that include up to sabotage on complex
2:44
Speaker 4: critical systems and key infrastructure are all evidence of what's
2:48
Speaker 4: happening around us.
2:50
Speaker 2: Nor would any true friend of this country shoot off
2:52
Speaker 2: flares and risk the lives of Air Force pilots flying
2:55
Speaker 2: surveillance planes in international airspace over the South China Sea,
3:00
Speaker 2: or have its naval ships used sonar to injure Australian
3:03
Speaker 2: Navy divers again operating in international waters. A no true
3:09
Speaker 2: friend would be mounting routine cyber attacks on Australian government
3:12
Speaker 2: systems and critical infrastructure. As the AZO head has recently specified,
3:19
Speaker 2: almost every organ of Australia's national security and defense apparatus
3:23
Speaker 2: has called out China for repeated acts of aggression against Australia,
3:28
Speaker 2: while our Prime Minister and his front bench power in
3:31
Speaker 2: silence fear of upsetting their mates in Beijing. Indeed, I
3:36
Speaker 2: can't think of any occasion where the Albanezer government has
3:40
Speaker 2: specifically criticized any conduct of China, even though there's been
3:44
Speaker 2: any number of direct attacks on our trade, our communications,
3:48
Speaker 2: our freedom of movement and our personnel. Indeed, the Prime
3:52
Speaker 2: Minister himself has gone out of his way to avoid
3:55
Speaker 2: making any public criticism of Beijing, most recently refusing to
4:00
Speaker 2: issue a readout from his meeting last week with China's
4:04
Speaker 2: number three, the chairman of the National People's Congress, who'd
4:08
Speaker 2: said in his public statement that they had discussed China's
4:11
Speaker 2: quote sovereignty over Taiwan. Now to not give our media
4:17
Speaker 2: a briefing of the meeting with a senior Chinese leader
4:21
Speaker 2: held in Canberra, well, that's unheard of, particularly given the
4:25
Speaker 2: visit was accompanied with that warning from parliamentary security officials
4:30
Speaker 2: that MP's and staff were told to turn off their
4:33
Speaker 2: phones and avoid the Wi Fi system for the whole
4:36
Speaker 2: time the Beijing delegation was in the Parliament House building.
4:41
Speaker 2: But don't think Albanese's cowardice has gone unnoticed internationally. Today,
4:49
Speaker 2: the former Japanese Ambassador to Australia, Shino Yamagami, called out
4:54
Speaker 2: Australia for its silence in the face of Beijing's latest
4:57
Speaker 2: bit of wolf warrior diplomacy. Yeah, Magami's son, the former
5:02
Speaker 2: diplomat well known for speaking up about China and Western
5:05
Speaker 2: cowardice with very un Japanese like frankness, was particularly focused
5:11
Speaker 2: on recent verbal attacks by Beijing on Japan's new Prime minister,
5:16
Speaker 2: now Sene Takeyachi, the first woman to lead Japan. Well,
5:20
Speaker 2: she's a conservative and she's taken a tough stand against
5:24
Speaker 2: China's aggression from day one. A week ago, she declared
5:28
Speaker 2: that a Chinese attack on Taiwan might trigger a military
5:32
Speaker 2: response from Japan, because she said, and I quote, it
5:35
Speaker 2: could constitute a survival threatening situation. Well, the rbuke from
5:41
Speaker 2: Beijing against her was quick and it was personal. In response,
5:47
Speaker 2: China's consul general, who's based in the Japanese city of Osaka,
5:51
Speaker 2: said an I quote, if you stick that filthy neck
5:55
Speaker 2: where it doesn't belong, it's going to get sliced off.
6:00
Speaker 2: Yet not a peep from alban easy to defend his
6:02
Speaker 2: Japanese counterpart against this extraordinary verbal assault. As Yamagami said today,
6:09
Speaker 2: imagine if a Chinese official quote demanded that the Prime
6:12
Speaker 2: Minister of Australia retract remarks made in our parliament, while
6:17
Speaker 2: the Consul General in Sydney posted his willingness to decapitate
6:22
Speaker 2: the PM on social media. Even Penny Wang, for all
6:26
Speaker 2: the talk of supporting women leaders, well, she declined to
6:28
Speaker 2: defend Prime Minister Takeyachi. But why should she be surprised?
6:34
Speaker 2: Yet another speech from Wong highlighted the government's double standards.
6:38
Speaker 2: Here after acknowledging Chinese, Russian, Iranian and North Korean cyber
6:43
Speaker 2: attechs on Australia, Wong said that Moscow, Tehran and Pyongyang
6:48
Speaker 2: would continue to sabotage and destabilize. She left Beijing out
6:54
Speaker 2: of that list because she said they would merely quote
6:57
Speaker 2: continue to try and reshape the region according to their
7:01
Speaker 2: own interests. So all the other cybertacks get caught out
7:05
Speaker 2: for what they are, But it's kid gloves that her
7:08
Speaker 2: communist mates. Still at least some officials are prepared to
7:12
Speaker 2: be honest about what we face in terms of challenges
7:15
Speaker 2: from China. Earlier this week, the outgoing head of the
7:19
Speaker 2: Office of National Assessment, so the Peak National Security Assessment
7:24
Speaker 2: Body if you like, in Australia. His name is Andrew Shearer.
7:28
Speaker 2: He warned that Australia quote must be prepared for what
7:32
Speaker 2: may be coming.
7:33
Speaker 5: Most consequentially, should the Terrance break down, notwithstanding the efforts
7:39
Speaker 5: of our government and our allies, we would face a
7:43
Speaker 5: rising risk of major conflict in our region within the
7:46
Speaker 5: next decade. We have to act now if we are
7:49
Speaker 5: to be prepared for what may be coming.
7:53
Speaker 2: Now that Bloke's got a seat at the National Security
7:56
Speaker 2: Committee of Cabinet, thank god for a bit of truth
7:59
Speaker 2: telling to all of us, all voters for a change.
8:03
Speaker 2: Retired Brigadier in Langford.
8:05
Speaker 4: Again, part of the challenge here is to have an
8:08
Speaker 4: honest and frank assessment about how we manage our economic
8:11
Speaker 4: and our security relationship with China in an age where
8:15
Speaker 4: they're in competition with the US to be the single
8:18
Speaker 4: significant power in eastern North Asia. And this will define
8:22
Speaker 4: very much Australia's future over the next fifteen to twenty years.
8:25
Speaker 4: So listening to Andrew Shearer, making sober and frank assessments
8:29
Speaker 4: in terms of what are our interests and how we
8:31
Speaker 4: secure them in the context of a changing world is
8:35
Speaker 4: the number one role of the government. I think right now.
8:37
Speaker 2: The great pity is that's now left to the officials
8:39
Speaker 2: and the army veterans like former Brigadier Langford to tell
8:44
Speaker 2: us the grim truth about what's really going on with China,
8:47
Speaker 2: and not the Prime Minister or the Foreign Minister, who,
8:50
Speaker 2: at a minimum I Australians a whole lot more honesty
8:55
Speaker 2: for once. All right, let's get the headlines down. Skyny's
9:02
Speaker 2: political reporter Rubn Spargo.
9:05
Speaker 6: The Communications Minister, is defending the six figure price tag
9:09
Speaker 6: of her recent trip to New York. Anika Wells and
9:12
Speaker 6: two staff traveled to the U and General Assembly in
9:14
Speaker 6: September to promote Australia's world first social media ban for
9:18
Speaker 6: under sixteen's. According to the government, airfares alone came to
9:22
Speaker 6: ninety four point eight thousand Australian dollars. Accommodation was just
9:26
Speaker 6: under eighteen thousand, and ground transport cost a further six thousand.
9:31
Speaker 6: How do you justify spending this amount of taxpayers dollars?
9:36
Speaker 7: Well, the reason you know all those things is because
9:37
Speaker 7: we're transparent about them.
9:39
Speaker 6: You don't think that was expensive for airfares over ninety
9:42
Speaker 6: four thousand dollars.
9:44
Speaker 2: I've answered your question.
9:45
Speaker 6: The scrutiny is cutting into the government's messaging ahead of
9:48
Speaker 6: the band's rollout in seven days. Once it begins, social
9:52
Speaker 6: media companies will have one day to report how many
9:55
Speaker 6: under sixteen accounts they've removed, followed by regular updates for
9:59
Speaker 6: at least least six months.
10:01
Speaker 7: With one law, we can protect Generation Alpha from being
10:05
Speaker 7: sucked into purgatory.
10:07
Speaker 6: Google, the parent company of YouTube, says the legislation will
10:11
Speaker 6: make Australian kids less safe on its platform. The Reserve
10:15
Speaker 6: Bank is willing to raise rates in the new year
10:18
Speaker 6: if inflation refuses to go down. The latest GDP figures
10:23
Speaker 6: came in lower than expected, showing growth of zero point
10:26
Speaker 6: four percent in the September quarter and two point one
10:29
Speaker 6: percent for the year.
10:30
Speaker 3: Private investment has come back really strongly over the course
10:34
Speaker 3: of this year.
10:35
Speaker 6: Economists worn government spending could result in more mortgage pain
10:38
Speaker 6: for households.
10:41
Speaker 2: All right, planning to get through Let's get into it now,
10:43
Speaker 2: joining me Sky News host James Morrow and journalist at
10:47
Speaker 2: the Data Telegraph James Willis. Gents, welcome, Let's start with
10:50
Speaker 2: the growing concerns about asbestos in wind turbines. The Queensland
10:55
Speaker 2: Government's now ordered and ordered of all wind farms in
10:57
Speaker 2: the state after Andrew Forrest Clark Creek wind Farm became
11:02
Speaker 2: the third in the nation to detect asbestos in and
11:05
Speaker 2: around the turbines. Now, surely the rest of the country
11:09
Speaker 2: must follow this audit. I'd like to see James that
11:14
Speaker 2: they are all shut down pending a clear bill of health.
11:18
Speaker 2: And I have to say, you know where all the
11:21
Speaker 2: labor sort of class action law firms here, None of
11:25
Speaker 2: them are speaking out and we're talking about asbestos now
11:29
Speaker 2: in multiple locations.
11:31
Speaker 8: Yea.
11:32
Speaker 9: Indeed, Peter and I think that the real problem with
11:35
Speaker 9: all these renewable energy projects that we're seeing right across
11:38
Speaker 9: the country is that once they're up and running, the
11:41
Speaker 9: checks and balances.
11:43
Speaker 1: Basically go away.
11:44
Speaker 9: And that's obviously where farmers have been left worried about
11:47
Speaker 9: what happens with decommissioning when they have to come down
11:49
Speaker 9: in ten twenty years from now. But I think this
11:52
Speaker 9: is deeply alarming. Now the New South Wales opposition has
11:55
Speaker 9: this afternoon told us that they're calling for an immediate
11:59
Speaker 9: audit of all the hundreds of turbines. I think there's
12:02
Speaker 9: nine hundred New South Wales alone that are up and running,
12:05
Speaker 9: and you think it'd be a pretty basic check now,
12:07
Speaker 9: all these projects in theory have at least a handful
12:10
Speaker 9: of workers that are there for maintenance, well safe work
12:13
Speaker 9: sort of go in. They've got to go into all
12:14
Speaker 9: these sites and make sure that they are guaranteed. I
12:17
Speaker 9: mean labor governments don't take second chances with this and
12:20
Speaker 9: all they should when it comes to the protection of workers,
12:23
Speaker 9: and they make a big fuss about showing that they
12:25
Speaker 9: are about workers safety. Well, if there are parts of
12:28
Speaker 9: wind turbines that have been detected with asbestos, and there
12:31
Speaker 9: are concerns about other sites, out of an abundance of caution,
12:34
Speaker 9: we should be checking all of them. And if it
12:36
Speaker 9: doesn't happen, it's another clear example of where these guys
12:40
Speaker 9: are just blinded by trying to get to net zero
12:43
Speaker 9: and nothing else really matters, and the checks and balances
12:45
Speaker 9: that would go into any government project at any time
12:48
Speaker 9: are not happening here in the name of net zero, which.
12:51
Speaker 2: Is just a joke. If it is the case, it'll
12:54
Speaker 2: be very interesting because a lot of the states, as
12:56
Speaker 2: you know, have industrial manslaughter laws, and it could be
13:00
Speaker 2: government departments and officials who this time are on the hook.
13:04
Speaker 2: Let's go to comments from the climates are Labour's climates are,
13:08
Speaker 2: I might add Matt Kean, he's taken aim at the
13:11
Speaker 2: Liberal Party and a piece for Crikee today, arguing that
13:14
Speaker 2: they deserve to keep losing. He says until they decide
13:18
Speaker 2: to change course and get back to net zero by
13:21
Speaker 2: twenty fifty. James Morrow, I mean this is an extraordinary
13:25
Speaker 2: broadside the former New South Wales Liberal Deputy leader. There,
13:30
Speaker 2: of course, former treasurer, the bloke who wanted to shut
13:33
Speaker 2: down the coal five power station that Labor had to
13:36
Speaker 2: keep going to get the lights on in your state.
13:39
Speaker 2: He's still well, he still thinks he's got factional control.
13:43
Speaker 2: You'll tell me if he does or he doesn't. But
13:45
Speaker 2: I mean this is extraordinary what he's done today.
13:47
Speaker 1: Well yeah, I mean, look, he's put it out through
13:50
Speaker 1: and cuaky, so I don't know how much impact the
13:52
Speaker 1: thing is actually going to have. It is funny though,
13:53
Speaker 1: I mean Mat Keen, as you see not only everything
13:56
Speaker 1: you've mentioned, but he's saddled New South Wales with his
13:59
Speaker 1: renewable energy zones, which are costing an absolute fortunate or
14:02
Speaker 1: tearing apart bush communities from one end of the state
14:05
Speaker 1: to the other, as farmers are seeing their land degraded
14:08
Speaker 1: for solar farms and wind turbines and transmission lines and
14:11
Speaker 1: all that sort of thing. But you know, I read
14:14
Speaker 1: this piece, Peta, and the thing that thought that came
14:17
Speaker 1: to my mind, the thought that came from my mind
14:19
Speaker 1: is well, you know he would say this, wouldn't he.
14:21
Speaker 1: You know, he's the head of the Climate Change Authority.
14:23
Speaker 1: He's also a director of a renewable energy investment fund,
14:27
Speaker 1: so you know, this is what he does. But this
14:31
Speaker 1: whole idea that he puts forward in the piece, that
14:34
Speaker 1: there's this kind of historic inevitability the arc of history
14:39
Speaker 1: bends towards climate change, as Barack Obaba might have put it, Well,
14:43
Speaker 1: it's a nonsense. You know. He's acting like the Liberals
14:46
Speaker 1: are the ones who.
14:47
Speaker 2: Are to be an independent.
14:48
Speaker 1: Shit, he's supposed to be independent. But you know, he's
14:51
Speaker 1: acting like this is some inevitability when he's ignored, and
14:54
Speaker 1: that the liberals are being left behind. But he's the
14:57
Speaker 1: one Peter being left behind here because the rest of
15:01
Speaker 1: the world is looking at this whole idea of net
15:03
Speaker 1: zero by twenty fifty, realizing its disaster changing policy as
15:07
Speaker 1: much as they can in Europe. Elsewhere around the world,
15:10
Speaker 1: the idea that Australia, that Libra, that Matt Kean is
15:13
Speaker 1: still wedded to this idea of net zero by twenty fifty,
15:17
Speaker 1: like it's physically or economically possible without it being an
15:20
Speaker 1: economic disaster. Here's the one who is going to wind
15:24
Speaker 1: up looking like the dinosaur.
15:27
Speaker 2: Let's stay with this issue, James. Go to revelations in
15:30
Speaker 2: your newspaper, The Daily Telegraph today that at least five
15:33
Speaker 2: foreign governments have got their noses in the trough of
15:37
Speaker 2: taxpayer money. This is in Chris Bowen's capacity investment scheme.
15:42
Speaker 2: So it's a fun to back in renewable projects. We
15:46
Speaker 2: were told at some stage that they're all about backing
15:48
Speaker 2: Australian jobs in renewables. I don't believe that you've uncovered
15:52
Speaker 2: that a subsidiary of EDP Global has received backing for
15:56
Speaker 2: two projects under this Bowen scheme. Ording to the Daily Telegraph,
16:01
Speaker 2: the largest shareholder in an EEDP Global is China three gorges.
16:08
Speaker 2: It's a company that's controlled by the Chinese Communist Party. James,
16:13
Speaker 2: what more can you tell us?
16:15
Speaker 9: Well, and to be honest, Peter, this is built and
16:17
Speaker 9: road by stealth, one way or another, and these are
16:19
Speaker 9: not the only projects that we've uncovered that have links
16:22
Speaker 9: to companies that are owned by the Chinese government. And
16:26
Speaker 9: for people that don't understand or national security experts say
16:29
Speaker 9: that if a company is owned by the Chinese government,
16:32
Speaker 9: it can be controlled by the Chinese government. And so
16:36
Speaker 9: what China has done very strategically here, keeping in mind
16:39
Speaker 9: everything you said in your editorial off the top, is
16:42
Speaker 9: basically circumnavigate any of the normal checks. And there's companies
16:47
Speaker 9: that are set up in Australia or they're overseas companies.
16:50
Speaker 9: China invests them in them directly, or they provide them loans,
16:54
Speaker 9: or they provide them equipment for these large scale projects,
16:57
Speaker 9: and they've managed to get their way onto the capacity
16:59
Speaker 9: investment scheme, as has a company owned by the Malaysian government,
17:03
Speaker 9: as have international superannuation funds. And what tax payers are
17:07
Speaker 9: funding is sixty of these projects right across the country
17:11
Speaker 9: where the government or you and I will basically underwrite
17:15
Speaker 9: them for at least fifteen years. And what happens is
17:17
Speaker 9: if they lose money, we will underwrite part of the cost.
17:21
Speaker 9: If they earn money above and agreed revenue ceiling, they'll
17:25
Speaker 9: have to pay some of that back. But it's the
17:26
Speaker 9: deal of the century. It applies to sixty projects. International
17:30
Speaker 9: governments and companies have realized this, and they've all hitched
17:33
Speaker 9: their wag into Cris Bowen's scheme. And the worst part
17:36
Speaker 9: about it is it only applies to green energy. Now,
17:39
Speaker 9: as we both know we desperately need more gas in
17:42
Speaker 9: this country. There'd be an argument to put gas onto
17:45
Speaker 9: this as well. Doesn't apply. It's green energy, wind, solar,
17:49
Speaker 9: battery only. And if you're good enough to get involved,
17:51
Speaker 9: they'll tell you what, Peter, It's going to be the
17:53
Speaker 9: deal of a lifetime for the next fifteen years or more.
17:57
Speaker 2: It's like that horrible pink that scheme of the rud
18:00
Speaker 2: Gillard era on steroids. I mean, we're talking about billions
18:04
Speaker 2: of dollars here.
18:07
Speaker 1: And we don't know, we don't know how much.
18:09
Speaker 9: It's all commercial and confidence.
18:11
Speaker 2: That that is exactly right. You were right to make
18:13
Speaker 2: that point. We know it's billions, we don't know how
18:15
Speaker 2: many billions because Chris Bowen, like everything, is not giving
18:18
Speaker 2: us the financial detail. I'll go back to those left
18:21
Speaker 2: wing liberals I like to call themselves moderates, James, let's
18:23
Speaker 2: call them what they are. They've now said they're going
18:26
Speaker 2: to go to war over migration. Right Andrew Bragg you
18:29
Speaker 2: remember said if net zero happens, I'm going to quit.
18:32
Speaker 2: Well he hasn't quit. Unfortunately for four old liberal supporters.
18:35
Speaker 2: He's still there. Now he's saying a new red line
18:38
Speaker 2: in the sand. If they go down the path of
18:40
Speaker 2: migration cutting overseas migration, you know that'll be held to
18:44
Speaker 2: pay over my dead body. Well, today you've got to
18:47
Speaker 2: report out from the Institute of Public Affairs warning that
18:49
Speaker 2: mass migration is driving a huge decline in our per
18:54
Speaker 2: capita economic growth. So Brag's a clown. He's threatened to
18:59
Speaker 2: quit before, didn't he still there? I'd love to say
19:01
Speaker 2: him go anyway. But what do you make of a
19:03
Speaker 2: new red line?
19:05
Speaker 1: Well, I just think it's ridiculous here, you know, I mean,
19:09
Speaker 1: there's so many problems with his position, the first of
19:12
Speaker 1: all being you know, moderates say, oh, well, you know,
19:14
Speaker 1: we have to meet the voters where they are to
19:17
Speaker 1: change our position, to meet the voters where they are.
19:19
Speaker 1: Well on this, voters across the political spectrum think migration
19:24
Speaker 1: is too high. They want cuts. If the Liberals wanted
19:28
Speaker 1: an issue, that would be really popular and start to
19:31
Speaker 1: win them back voters. This would be it, and it
19:34
Speaker 1: would be something that would win them voters in the
19:36
Speaker 1: inner cities and in the suburbs where people are really
19:39
Speaker 1: concerned about their ability to buy a house or pay
19:43
Speaker 1: the rent, and they're about their kids ability to buy
19:45
Speaker 1: a house or pay the rent. Because there is no
19:48
Speaker 1: getting around the fact that the massive migration intake under
19:52
Speaker 1: this government here has absolutely pumped up the housing market.
19:57
Speaker 1: Everybody says that, particularly in rents. You know today we
20:01
Speaker 1: had the ABS release their figures too about the economy.
20:04
Speaker 1: Well they said, oh, well, you know, the economy has
20:06
Speaker 1: grown a bit to GDP, but per capita GDP has
20:10
Speaker 1: not grown one bit. Because the ABS said this because
20:14
Speaker 1: of population growth ie migration. This is the key number
20:18
Speaker 1: one issue right now because we are seeing the economy
20:20
Speaker 1: being shallowed out, capacity being shallowed out by this massive
20:24
Speaker 1: influx of people. Only I think about twelve percent of
20:26
Speaker 1: them are actually skilled. A lot of them are here
20:29
Speaker 1: on sort of these sort of dodgy training college, sort
20:32
Speaker 1: of migration agency sort of bridging visas. But this is
20:35
Speaker 1: a massive, massive issue for the Liberals not to jump
20:39
Speaker 1: on this. And yet we hear not only Andrew Bragg.
20:41
Speaker 1: But other moderates Peta, they're saying in the party, oh,
20:44
Speaker 1: we don't want to use the phrase even mass migration
20:48
Speaker 1: because that might be demonized. Well that's what it is, though,
20:51
Speaker 1: and you need to call things what they are. And
20:53
Speaker 1: I'm afraid, you know, the moderate they really feel like
20:56
Speaker 1: they don't want to actually win.
20:59
Speaker 2: I got a call what they are. That's why they'reut
21:01
Speaker 2: left wing liberals. James believe it. They're James Squared. Tonight,
21:05
Speaker 2: Thank you, gentlemen. Let's go to a break up of
21:08
Speaker 2: the break though. We'll do a preview of an exclusive
21:10
Speaker 2: story involving a controversial push for a genderless bathroom at
21:14
Speaker 2: a Melbourne primary school, plus those warnings from Japan's former
21:19
Speaker 2: envoy over Albany'si's failure to stand up to Beijing. We'll
21:28
Speaker 2: go back to that issue of the taxpayer billions heading
21:31
Speaker 2: up to China to pay for renewables, all the while
21:33
Speaker 2: pensions here can't afford to keep the lights on. The
21:36
Speaker 2: first joining me now with an exclusive story, a preview
21:39
Speaker 2: of her story on the push for genderless bathrooms at
21:42
Speaker 2: a Melbourne primary school. Senior reporter Carolyn Marcus, this is
21:47
Speaker 2: staggering doesn't surprise me though. It's Victoria. But what can
21:50
Speaker 2: you tell us, Caro? It is staggering.
21:53
Speaker 10: A primary school, a public one in Inner Melbourne called
21:57
Speaker 10: Campbellwell Primary School. They received close to ten million dollars
22:01
Speaker 10: in the state budget of twenty twenty four to twenty
22:05
Speaker 10: five and they've decided to use that to upgrade their
22:08
Speaker 10: main building and toilet block and have only all the
22:13
Speaker 10: eight toilets in there will be genderless.
22:16
Speaker 1: Now.
22:16
Speaker 10: A number of parents have arked up about this, including
22:21
Speaker 10: the school's former Parents Association president, Christina Woods. She quit
22:27
Speaker 10: as president and her position on the school council up
22:31
Speaker 10: after they refuse to budge on this issue. They're not
22:34
Speaker 10: against having some gender neutral toilets, but these parents just
22:39
Speaker 10: want a choice of their kids to have a choice
22:43
Speaker 10: of whether they want to use single sex toilets girls
22:47
Speaker 10: and boys. Here's Christina Woods on why she thinks this
22:50
Speaker 10: is a risky move from the school.
22:53
Speaker 11: They're going to get sued, Something's going to happen and
22:56
Speaker 11: I really don't want to see that, and no parent
22:58
Speaker 11: wants to see that institution are completely ideologically captured. And
23:03
Speaker 11: I moved to the wokest city on Earth.
23:05
Speaker 2: I truly did. I mean, the reality is too you know,
23:10
Speaker 2: girls and boys are going into puberty earlier, Carolyn, and
23:13
Speaker 2: you know it might have been the case that that
23:15
Speaker 2: didn't hit them till they're in high school. But if
23:17
Speaker 2: it hits them at primary school, the risk is that
23:20
Speaker 2: they could be embarrassed or vulnerable. And they're going through
23:24
Speaker 2: that having to share bathrooms with other little boys. I
23:28
Speaker 2: think that's a bit rough.
23:30
Speaker 10: There's so many reasons that this group of up to
23:33
Speaker 10: forty parents are opposing this. I mean, one is the
23:37
Speaker 10: privacy and dignity concerns, as you say, girls have different needs,
23:42
Speaker 10: But there's also the safety risk. This mom says, you know,
23:46
Speaker 10: a girl could be pushed into one.
23:47
Speaker 2: Of these stalls, and that could be a risk.
23:50
Speaker 10: It could happen to a boy as well. She thinks
23:53
Speaker 10: that this is a heightened risk. But also we're talking
23:56
Speaker 10: about a block that is for grades two.
23:59
Speaker 2: To four the school.
24:00
Speaker 10: It does have some single sex toilets on other part
24:02
Speaker 10: of the campus. The kids would have to walk quite
24:04
Speaker 10: far in the senior block to use that. But kids
24:07
Speaker 10: as young as six, why do they need a gender
24:10
Speaker 10: neutral toilet in the first place.
24:11
Speaker 2: And as my exclusive.
24:13
Speaker 10: Report tomorrow will show, the principle here has been given
24:17
Speaker 10: what giving what some parents say is misleading justifications for this.
24:21
Speaker 10: She's said that the government state government has a mandate
24:24
Speaker 10: for genderists toilets and that it complies it's to meet
24:27
Speaker 10: obligations with anti discrimination legislation.
24:30
Speaker 2: I've confirmed neither of that is true.
24:32
Speaker 10: It is not required under the law and there is
24:35
Speaker 10: no such government mandate. So there's a lot of questions
24:38
Speaker 10: here and calls for the Education Minister and Victoria to intervene.
24:46
Speaker 2: Where are the Liberals on this position? Do we have
24:48
Speaker 2: something from Jess Wilson? I note for those in Melbourne
24:51
Speaker 2: Campwell obviously it's close to her electorate area of Q.
24:56
Speaker 2: They're not very in the past, they've not been strong
24:59
Speaker 2: on some of these ses in community outrage, but the
25:02
Speaker 2: Liberal Party has not often had a position. Do we
25:04
Speaker 2: know where they stand?
25:05
Speaker 10: We do and it will be in my report tomorrow. Peter,
25:08
Speaker 10: the new Education Minister, Brad Roswell, I've spoken to him.
25:13
Speaker 10: He thinks there could be an economic mismanagement issue with
25:16
Speaker 10: the state, that schools might not have enough money, but
25:18
Speaker 10: he also says it is as simple as that needs
25:21
Speaker 10: to be facilities for boys and girls and he's called
25:25
Speaker 10: on the minister to do better because the Education Minister
25:29
Speaker 10: had been contacted over this and he said this is
25:32
Speaker 10: an issue for the school and he's wiped his hands
25:34
Speaker 10: of it. His liberal counterpart says he needs to come
25:38
Speaker 10: and explain to parents why there is so much confusion
25:42
Speaker 10: and obfiscation here by the school and the education department.
25:48
Speaker 2: Let's go to the other issue to that. You were
25:50
Speaker 2: at the Federal Court Bruce lehn And lost his appeal
25:53
Speaker 2: to overturn the outcome of his defamation case against Network
25:56
Speaker 2: ten and the journalist Lisa Wilkinson. How do things play out?
26:01
Speaker 10: Well, It's probably played out as expected. After hearing some
26:06
Speaker 10: of the submissions from the two day appeal hearing back
26:09
Speaker 10: in August, the full bench of the Federal Court upheld
26:14
Speaker 10: a decision of finding last year that Bruce Lehman, on
26:17
Speaker 10: the balance of probabilities, did rape Britney Higgins, and they
26:21
Speaker 10: have dismissed his appeal. Now. He had tried to argue
26:25
Speaker 10: that the primary judge, Justice Michael Lee, had heard in
26:29
Speaker 10: his finding and had denied him procedural fairness because he
26:35
Speaker 10: had made a finding that was different about the rape
26:39
Speaker 10: that he had committed. To the one that was put
26:41
Speaker 10: to him on trial ospair going into too much details
26:45
Speaker 10: about that, but we did hear that the judge that
26:50
Speaker 10: the full court judges said that they believed that it
26:54
Speaker 10: was open to Justice Lead to make his finding. Now
26:57
Speaker 10: you might remember that now classical line from Justice Lee
27:01
Speaker 10: back then that having had his criminal trial a bordered
27:05
Speaker 10: due to during misconduct, Bruce Lherman made the mistake of
27:09
Speaker 10: going back into the lionstand to.
27:10
Speaker 2: Get his hat.
27:11
Speaker 10: Well, today he found out it was a mistake to
27:14
Speaker 10: go back again because this Full Court has only confirmed
27:18
Speaker 10: that rape finding against him outside court. Though his lawyer,
27:22
Speaker 10: Zali Burrows, remained defiant, she said that mister Lehman plans
27:26
Speaker 10: to take this matter to the High Court.
27:30
Speaker 12: Everyone should reflect, even the shameless politicians who have used
27:34
Speaker 12: him for an agenda and everyone else, that Bruce's life
27:38
Speaker 12: is being destroyed. Just like to say that hope Bruce
27:42
Speaker 12: is seen as an inspiration to those who say they've
27:45
Speaker 12: been wrongly accused, because he will be seeking advice to
27:48
Speaker 12: specially and it's not the end of it in respect
27:51
Speaker 12: of his pursuit for justice.
27:55
Speaker 2: Just Carol, I want to finish up and go. Greg
27:57
Speaker 2: Sheridan but can I take it from her comments there?
27:59
Speaker 2: Outside of that, he will now try and proceed to
28:02
Speaker 2: the High Court with special leave application. Is that what's happing?
28:06
Speaker 2: That seems to be.
28:07
Speaker 10: But we pressed her further on this outside court. She
28:10
Speaker 10: didn't get more details, including how he would fund a
28:12
Speaker 10: possible appeal, because that is very costly. He's already up
28:15
Speaker 10: for two million dollars from the first trial, now possibly
28:17
Speaker 10: half a million dollars because he's been ordered to pay
28:20
Speaker 10: the cost for the appeal. However, she did say that
28:23
Speaker 10: he plans to seek leave to appeal. It will be
28:25
Speaker 10: up to a court to see whether they would grant
28:28
Speaker 10: him leave to do that, but that is his intention
28:31
Speaker 10: at least at this point.
28:33
Speaker 2: All Right, we'll leave it there. Let's go to those
28:36
Speaker 2: other issues from the former ambassador to Australia, the Japanese ambassador,
28:40
Speaker 2: she'd go Yamagami tough comments about the Albanezy government's failure
28:46
Speaker 2: to ever tackle China in international forums. He says, when
28:51
Speaker 2: Australia came under tremendous pressure from China and was subject
28:55
Speaker 2: to similar economic coercion, Japan stated out loud that Australia
28:59
Speaker 2: was not walking alone. Is it too much to expect
29:02
Speaker 2: the same from ours inmates in times of need here
29:06
Speaker 2: to discuss this issue and more. Foreign editor at The Australian,
29:09
Speaker 2: Greg Sheridan. They come in the contest context, Greg, obviously
29:14
Speaker 2: of the new Japanese Prime Minister being taken to task
29:19
Speaker 2: by China's consul general based in the Osaka city of Japan,
29:23
Speaker 2: in the city of Osaka in Japan, and basically very
29:27
Speaker 2: little commentary from Australia when we're in the position of
29:31
Speaker 2: being targeted by China. Japan was in our corner and
29:34
Speaker 2: Shingo is rightly saying, well, why aren't you in ours anymore?
29:40
Speaker 13: Yeah, great to be with you, Peter. Look, the ambassador's
29:44
Speaker 13: comments are absolutely right. This is another disgraceful episode from
29:49
Speaker 13: the Oubbuldenesi government which indicates its cowardice and its fatuousness
29:54
Speaker 13: and its vacuousness. So Australia called for an inquiry into
29:58
Speaker 13: the origins of COVID. The Chinese didn't like that and
30:01
Speaker 13: they slapped all kinds of trade bans on us, and
30:04
Speaker 13: Japan stood with us in solidarity. The Japanese Prime Minister,
30:08
Speaker 13: in response to aggressive, relentless questioning in parliament said if
30:13
Speaker 13: the Chinese imposed a blockade on Taiwan, and the Americans
30:18
Speaker 13: were trying to relieve Taiwan. This would be a matter
30:22
Speaker 13: in which Japan could possibly consider deploying its armed forces.
30:26
Speaker 13: The Chinese response was intimidty, vicious, foul over the top.
30:32
Speaker 13: The Osaka consul general said that the Prime Minister's dirty
30:36
Speaker 13: neck would be cut off and they should look forward
30:40
Speaker 13: to that event. And the Japanese, showing grate forbearance, have
30:45
Speaker 13: not expelled him, but they've asked the Chinese to recall
30:47
Speaker 13: him of their own accord in a face saving gesture.
30:50
Speaker 13: At the same time, the Chinese have imposed economic sanctions
30:54
Speaker 13: on Japan, telling their tourists not to go there and
30:57
Speaker 13: imposing other economic restrictions. And what have we heard from
31:01
Speaker 13: the Albanesi government, which loves to proclaim it's solidarity and
31:04
Speaker 13: closeness with Japan, which is in fact our closest and
31:08
Speaker 13: most important partner in Asia. We've heard absolutely nothing. Because
31:12
Speaker 13: these guys are cowards. They do nothing, they stand for nothing,
31:17
Speaker 13: They've got no backbone. And I tell you what, if
31:21
Speaker 13: you were dependent on the carriage of the Albanesi government
31:23
Speaker 13: to stand between you and death, you'd want to make
31:26
Speaker 13: sure your will was in good order.
31:29
Speaker 2: Let's go to those comments. So I was just discussing
31:32
Speaker 2: a little earlier with James and willis the sort of
31:35
Speaker 2: the roll out renewable to detail about the capacity investment
31:40
Speaker 2: scheme is about seventy one billion dollars of our money
31:44
Speaker 2: on the table for people to come and build particular
31:47
Speaker 2: types of renewable energy in Australia. It's not allowed to
31:51
Speaker 2: be spent in fossil fuels like gas, which we desperately need.
31:54
Speaker 2: But the concern, I guess it relates to your area
31:57
Speaker 2: of expertise, is the fact that there is now confirmation
32:02
Speaker 2: are really serious money flows going back to entities that
32:07
Speaker 2: are owned in part by the Chinese government. We know
32:09
Speaker 2: obviously under law in China, if you are a Chinese company,
32:14
Speaker 2: you're basically a weapon if needed for the Chinese government.
32:18
Speaker 2: So how concerned are you given these money flows and
32:22
Speaker 2: also given the ownership structure. So going forward, as we
32:25
Speaker 2: get more and more renewables in the system, they will
32:28
Speaker 2: have the capacity to interfere with our energy supply in
32:33
Speaker 2: this country should they so wish.
32:37
Speaker 13: Well, that's absolutely right, Peter. I mean, the whole thing
32:40
Speaker 13: is just absurd, I wrote a column on Monday pointing
32:42
Speaker 13: out that we have, through the purchase of Russian oil
32:46
Speaker 13: refined in India, given much more money to Russia than
32:50
Speaker 13: we've given to Ukraine over the course of the Ukraine War.
32:54
Speaker 13: And that is a pattern of helping our enemies and
32:57
Speaker 13: hurting our friends. Now as we won't at a single
33:01
Speaker 13: word in solidarity with our strategic partner Japan. At the
33:05
Speaker 13: same time, we are spending billions of dollars to subsidize
33:09
Speaker 13: Chinese energy conglomerates, so the whole thing is mired in illogicality. Anyway,
33:16
Speaker 13: we desperately need gas as part of even a renewables
33:20
Speaker 13: lead rollout, so why isn't gas part of this scheme?
33:23
Speaker 13: Then we find, you know, the government's always telling us
33:26
Speaker 13: renewables are the cheapest form of energy, so why do
33:29
Speaker 13: we need to pay massive subsidies? And everything it seems
33:33
Speaker 13: which are left of center government does is designed to
33:36
Speaker 13: take money from poor people and give it to rich people.
33:39
Speaker 13: So we're taxing ordinary Australians at punitive rates to pay
33:45
Speaker 13: subsidies to Chinese state influenced energy companies pursuing strategic domination
33:52
Speaker 13: of the renewable energy sector. I mean this is kind
33:56
Speaker 13: of madness. The government says it's trying to diversify trade
33:59
Speaker 13: away from China, but everything it does increases our dependence
34:03
Speaker 13: on China. And anybody who thinks that Chinese supplied infrastructure
34:07
Speaker 13: won't have back doors which allow the Chinese government to
34:10
Speaker 13: control it in a crisis is just ignoring all the
34:14
Speaker 13: security evidence. I just think the situation is mad. I mean,
34:17
Speaker 13: it's incomprehensible. It's a sign of how deranged our politics is.
34:23
Speaker 2: Let's go to the Defense Department restructure. My viewers will
34:28
Speaker 2: have heard my views on this for a couple of days,
34:30
Speaker 2: so I'm interested in yours. But very quickly the Sydney
34:34
Speaker 2: Morning Herald and the Age was crowing it was the
34:37
Speaker 2: biggest defense overhaul in fifty years. It looks like a
34:42
Speaker 2: title change for a few people that are all keeping
34:45
Speaker 2: their jobs over greg and some shuffling out and combination
34:48
Speaker 2: of departments.
34:50
Speaker 13: What's your view, well, Peter, this is really a kind
34:56
Speaker 13: of folderole and much ado about nothing. I mean, this
34:59
Speaker 13: recreates structure we had ten or fifteen years ago under
35:02
Speaker 13: the Defense Material Organization. I've been following defense as a
35:06
Speaker 13: journalist for nearly fifty years, and one season there's a
35:10
Speaker 13: reform to centralize all the agencies. That doesn't work very well,
35:14
Speaker 13: so the next season there's a reform to decentralize the agencies.
35:18
Speaker 13: So even a few years ago, all these agencies which
35:21
Speaker 13: are being merged were in one agency and they were
35:25
Speaker 13: spun out the Naval Shipbuilding and the Guided Weapons Enterprise
35:29
Speaker 13: to give them greater focus on their missions. Now they're
35:32
Speaker 13: being spun back in. But Richard Marles assures us everyone
35:35
Speaker 13: currently doing the job under the old agencies will be
35:39
Speaker 13: doing the same job under the new agencies. And the
35:41
Speaker 13: whole thing isn't implemented until the second half of twenty
35:45
Speaker 13: twenty seven, so by that time it will have taken
35:49
Speaker 13: the Albanese government nearly as long as World War Two
35:52
Speaker 13: ran to reform defense procurement, and the reform is meaningless anyway. Meanwhile,
35:58
Speaker 13: we're not doing anything about a acquiring the capabilities that
36:02
Speaker 13: we need. And most important of all in this respect,
36:05
Speaker 13: nobody in defense bears any responsibility. Nobody gets the sad.
36:09
Speaker 13: I mean, if a company performed as badly as our
36:12
Speaker 13: defense establishment did, you wouldn't say, well, the CEOs a
36:15
Speaker 13: nice guys that are going to make him the chairman
36:17
Speaker 13: now you'd say, sorry, fellas. You might be nice guys,
36:19
Speaker 13: but you're out now and we've got a new leadership
36:21
Speaker 13: in well, nothing like that ever happens in defense. I mean,
36:24
Speaker 13: twenty of them earn more than the Defense Minister. And
36:28
Speaker 13: on it goes. And the final point I'd make is
36:31
Speaker 13: they claim this is the biggest change in fifty years,
36:34
Speaker 13: So where are the supporting documents? A one and a
36:37
Speaker 13: half page press release, a meandering press conference in which
36:41
Speaker 13: the Defense Minister struggled with any question about detail, and
36:45
Speaker 13: that's it. And what is shocking is how much of
36:49
Speaker 13: the media treats these absurd government announcements with utter credulity,
36:55
Speaker 13: just says, oh, yes, isn't this exciting, the biggest change
36:57
Speaker 13: in fifty years. It's beyond It's beyond any sat eye
37:01
Speaker 13: you could imagine.
37:02
Speaker 2: Really, thank God for the Australian Thank God for Sky
37:06
Speaker 2: and years the tea. What Greg, where would we be
37:08
Speaker 2: without someone at least prepared to speak truth to government.
37:12
Speaker 2: We'll leave it there up the break. Warnings from the
37:14
Speaker 2: OECD for Australia to ragining government spending, But show me
37:18
Speaker 2: your labor government, it doesn't love to waste your money.
37:21
Speaker 2: That's just how much is the Albanezer government forking out
37:25
Speaker 2: defund its war against the former Senator Linda Reynolds. Wednesday
37:28
Speaker 2: Night panel up next, welcome back. We've got words coming up.
37:34
Speaker 2: Of course it's Wednesday with Kel Richards. We'll get to
37:36
Speaker 2: that in a moment, but first, the OCD has worn
37:40
Speaker 2: the ballooning federal, state and local government spending under labor
37:44
Speaker 2: in Australia is fueling inflation risks and rising debt, urging
37:48
Speaker 2: Australia to restore fiscal discipline as public outlays surge while
37:53
Speaker 2: the private sector isn't rebounding. Now those prizes here, let's
37:57
Speaker 2: dig a little deeper into the mess. Joining me now
38:00
Speaker 2: the panel Skynys contributor Jamie Rodgers and the Deputy executive
38:04
Speaker 2: director at the Institute of Public Affairs, Daniel Wild Well, Dan,
38:08
Speaker 2: you know this is a serious warning. It's come from
38:11
Speaker 2: the OACD. How long can Jim Charmers keep up ignoring them.
38:20
Speaker 8: Well, that's the question, Peter, and he's going to try
38:22
Speaker 8: for as long as he possibly can. But you know,
38:23
Speaker 8: this is further evidence that our economy is going backwards.
38:26
Speaker 8: We saw the data out just today from the Australian
38:29
Speaker 8: Bureau of Statistics that yet again the per capita economic
38:33
Speaker 8: growth is going backwards. That means that ten out of
38:36
Speaker 8: thirteen quarters of this government we've had negative per capita growth.
38:41
Speaker 8: So they're spending like we've never spent before, but our
38:44
Speaker 8: economy is going backwards. And of course on top of that,
38:46
Speaker 8: we've got this mass migration program. So the economy is
38:50
Speaker 8: getting bigger, as Jim Chalmers likes to talk about, but
38:53
Speaker 8: the slice of the pie that Australians are getting is
38:56
Speaker 8: getting smaller. So we've seen this surge in government spending
39:00
Speaker 8: and what's phenomenal to me is if you look at
39:02
Speaker 8: the government's own budgetary documents, what it shows is that
39:05
Speaker 8: they're expecting government spending to grow at one third faster
39:10
Speaker 8: than the rate of the entire economy. Now, if you're
39:13
Speaker 8: pumping more money into a moribund economy where productivity growth
39:18
Speaker 8: is stagnant, you know, again the data today shows that
39:21
Speaker 8: we're still where we were in twenty twenty two. You're
39:23
Speaker 8: going to get higher prices and unfortunately, unless this government
39:28
Speaker 8: reigns in spending, there's going to be more pain for
39:31
Speaker 8: households on the way.
39:33
Speaker 2: Let's go to the confirmation at a Senate estimates that
39:37
Speaker 2: Labor is spending huge amounts on barristers, including one silk
39:41
Speaker 2: that we know is in excess of five thousand a day.
39:45
Speaker 2: It could be as high as twenty five thousand. We
39:47
Speaker 2: just know it breaches the threshold where you have to
39:50
Speaker 2: get special permission from the Attorney General to go above
39:53
Speaker 2: five thousand a day. And this is all done to
39:56
Speaker 2: fight legal actions being brought by Linda Reynolds and Fota
39:58
Speaker 2: Brown for compensate after Wong Gallagher and others claimed there
40:04
Speaker 2: was some sort of cover up by them in the
40:08
Speaker 2: Morrison era over the rape allegations and Britney Higgins. Now
40:12
Speaker 2: what's interesting here that was speculated Jabie, As I say,
40:16
Speaker 2: we know it's now confirmed this money is being spent,
40:20
Speaker 2: and it's in sharp contrast, isn't it to how quickly
40:23
Speaker 2: they fast tracked the two and a half million dollar
40:26
Speaker 2: payout to Britney Higgins. I eventually they're hoping now that
40:30
Speaker 2: will slide into the Christmas break and this lord disappear.
40:34
Speaker 2: I hope it doesn't your spot on about that, Peter.
40:38
Speaker 7: It's going to be a situation where it's nothing to
40:41
Speaker 7: see here, just swipe it under the rug and try
40:43
Speaker 7: and stay quiet. But I do think that Senator Anne
40:46
Speaker 7: Rustin has been very good during Senate Estimates when she's
40:49
Speaker 7: been prosecuting the case with Penny Wong and Katie Gallaher
40:53
Speaker 7: and asking them the really hard questions. So I have
40:56
Speaker 7: no doubt that Senator Rustin will continue with that interioration
41:00
Speaker 7: of this situation coming into the new year, so that
41:03
Speaker 7: we won't just move on and pretend like nothing has happened.
41:06
Speaker 7: Because this is really serious, Peter. These women in Linda
41:09
Speaker 7: Reynolds and Fiona Brown, their entire lives have been ruined,
41:12
Speaker 7: their careers are in tatters, and their reputations are gone
41:16
Speaker 7: as well. So these women have every right to be
41:18
Speaker 7: fighting to clear their names. Why the Labor government is
41:22
Speaker 7: continuing to fight against them with the top barristers.
41:25
Speaker 2: I do think that.
41:25
Speaker 7: Michelle Roland and the Labor government need to be transparent
41:29
Speaker 7: and be very clear with tax pays just how much
41:31
Speaker 7: this is going to cost. We've spoken about this previously
41:34
Speaker 7: with one of those silks could be charging up to
41:35
Speaker 7: twenty five thousand dollars a day and for a court
41:39
Speaker 7: case I could go for four weeks. This will be
41:40
Speaker 7: in excess of hundreds of thousands of dollars. So I
41:43
Speaker 7: think if Albanezy government doesn't have anything to hide elbows
41:47
Speaker 7: always the one that's talking about being very transparent, then
41:50
Speaker 7: let's open this all up, have a proper conversation and
41:54
Speaker 7: own the situation so that we can move on and
41:56
Speaker 7: these women can get the compensation that they sold deserve
42:00
Speaker 7: off the back of two court cases of finding that
42:02
Speaker 7: there was no political cover up. So their lives have
42:04
Speaker 7: been ruined and they deserve to be compensated for what's
42:07
Speaker 7: happened to them.
42:08
Speaker 2: And I must say, in relating to Linda Reynolds, you're right,
42:11
Speaker 2: two court cases have cleared her name. Stop playing politics.
42:14
Speaker 2: She's a former brigadier Army brigadier. You can see they're
42:18
Speaker 2: in her postnominals on the strap there at her hearing.
42:21
Speaker 2: She is conspicuous Service cross holder. That is a something
42:28
Speaker 2: that's been awarded to her by the Governor General because
42:30
Speaker 2: of her service to the military. And when doing this
42:33
Speaker 2: to a veteran, when the courts have cleared her name,
42:35
Speaker 2: will spend millions of dollars to fight her in the
42:38
Speaker 2: courts when she should be looked after. Now and a
42:40
Speaker 2: few sorries. Few apologies to come from the government. Let's
42:43
Speaker 2: go to the story in the City Morning Herald today
42:46
Speaker 2: the leagues have started to come down about all the
42:48
Speaker 2: various reviews into the coalition's loss. The real reason isn't
42:53
Speaker 2: Peter Dutton, isn't a bad campaign, isn't bad policy, but
42:56
Speaker 2: apparently Donald Trump.
43:02
Speaker 8: Yeah, look, there's going to be a lot of spin
43:04
Speaker 8: coming out of this. But you know what's interesting to
43:06
Speaker 8: me is a couple of things. Firstly, the Coalition performed
43:10
Speaker 8: badly at the election because of lack of policies and
43:12
Speaker 8: a lack of conviction that failed to be communicated to
43:15
Speaker 8: the community. Now, I was a candidate at the election,
43:18
Speaker 8: so I was Jamie and you know there was a
43:20
Speaker 8: lot of people that worked hard on the ground. But
43:21
Speaker 8: when the national campaign doesn't work well, then it drags
43:24
Speaker 8: everything down. I also in the other issue was a
43:26
Speaker 8: luck of ambition. You know, on behalf of the coalition,
43:29
Speaker 8: they sort of wanted to have one foot in, one
43:31
Speaker 8: foot out do the hokey pokey, which.
43:34
Speaker 2: You can't do.
43:34
Speaker 8: You cannot stand in the middle of the road. Whether
43:36
Speaker 8: it was you know, net zero, you know, they said,
43:39
Speaker 8: oh well, we're not going to dump net zero. We're
43:41
Speaker 8: going to do nuclear, but people were confused, are you
43:43
Speaker 8: doing nuclear because you want low prices or because you
43:45
Speaker 8: want lower missions? Because you can't have both.
43:47
Speaker 2: You know you can't have low.
43:48
Speaker 8: Prices and lower missions.
43:49
Speaker 2: We know that.
43:50
Speaker 8: Same with immigration. Yes, they said we're going to cut immigration,
43:53
Speaker 8: but it was only by something like twenty percent, and
43:55
Speaker 8: the number they used anyway was the wrong number to
43:57
Speaker 8: begin with, and then they were too embarrassed to talk
43:59
Speaker 8: about at it. So you've actually got to pick your
44:01
Speaker 8: target and create a contest. That's why the coalition performed badly. Now,
44:06
Speaker 8: I'm sure that Trump did play a role. We've seen
44:09
Speaker 8: across the Western world center right political leaders have struggled
44:13
Speaker 8: because the left have been able to tag Trump to them.
44:16
Speaker 8: We saw that in Canada, which was a very obvious
44:19
Speaker 8: manifestation of that. But I certainly don't think it was
44:22
Speaker 8: the number one cause.
44:26
Speaker 2: And it was that easy. It was that easy. We'll
44:29
Speaker 2: leave it there, thank you both. After the break, we'll
44:31
Speaker 2: get into the words with Kell season. Welcome back, joining
44:38
Speaker 2: here as he does every Wednesday, our dear friend, the
44:40
Speaker 2: broadcaster and some wordsmith extraordinaire, Kel Richards. Let's get straight
44:45
Speaker 2: into we got some good ones, a lot of these.
44:48
Speaker 2: I actually use a fairbey. Pamela wants to know about
44:51
Speaker 2: the expression hat trick. Where does that come from? Kel Ah?
44:56
Speaker 14: In English county cricket in eighteen fifty eight bowler named
45:00
Speaker 14: AJH Stevenson who took three wickets of three consecutive balls.
45:05
Speaker 14: The fans were so excited they took up a collection
45:08
Speaker 14: and what they bought him with the money they raised
45:10
Speaker 14: was a hats. Yes, can I just add one more
45:14
Speaker 14: small detail? They bought him the wrong sword of hat.
45:17
Speaker 14: They bought him a hat called affairs, you know, one
45:19
Speaker 14: of those conical things with the tasseina on the top.
45:21
Speaker 14: And they should have bought him a bowler Boom boom
45:26
Speaker 14: boom boll.
45:26
Speaker 2: Sorry, yes, absolutely so. I'm sure they put the hat
45:29
Speaker 2: around to get the money to pay for the hat
45:32
Speaker 2: as well. Hey, I use this one. It's a bit
45:34
Speaker 2: of a family favorite. Lickety split. Andrew wants to know
45:37
Speaker 2: where lickety split comes from.
45:40
Speaker 14: First record at eighteen eighteen. In the early eighteen hundreds,
45:42
Speaker 14: lickarty was being combined with other words to create adverbial phrases.
45:47
Speaker 14: There was lickety smash, lickety cut, lickety wallop, and this
45:51
Speaker 14: one lickety split, apparently just on the basis that licking
45:55
Speaker 14: was seen as being a rapid action, so anything that
45:58
Speaker 14: was lickety was going to be very far. The other
46:01
Speaker 14: sort of odd combinations died out, lickety split survived. The
46:05
Speaker 14: verb to split was seen as being identical with to cut,
46:08
Speaker 14: and cutting was seen as a rapid action. Lickety rapid action,
46:12
Speaker 14: cutting rapid action, so lickety split meant something very fast,
46:16
Speaker 14: very rapid, and that's how it evolved.
46:20
Speaker 2: All right. What about dark horse? We often say someone's
46:23
Speaker 2: a bit of a dark horse. Jeremy says, can you
46:26
Speaker 2: explain this one? For us?
46:28
Speaker 14: Light often means among the whole range of things. Often
46:31
Speaker 14: means revelation, knowledge, knowing what's going on. So you can
46:37
Speaker 14: walk into a rude dark room, turn on the light,
46:39
Speaker 14: you can see where everything is. So it's that kind
46:41
Speaker 14: of light is information, light as knowledge, and dark is
46:44
Speaker 14: the opposite. I mean, will say, with someone you know,
46:46
Speaker 14: he's seen the light. In other words, he understands. We'll
46:49
Speaker 14: say someone's keeping their motives dark for doing this, it
46:52
Speaker 14: means they're being hidden. So dark always has meant hidden,
46:56
Speaker 14: and in English, horse racing about eighteen twenty one, they
47:00
Speaker 14: adopted this for a competitor about which nothing was known.
47:04
Speaker 14: They'd look at the field and say, we don't know
47:06
Speaker 14: anything about this horse's track history, what he's won, what
47:10
Speaker 14: he's lost, what he's run in, So he's a dark horse.
47:14
Speaker 14: So it turned out of horse racing eighten twenty one,
47:16
Speaker 14: few years later was used by Benjamin Disraeli in one
47:19
Speaker 14: of his novels. Then it became a general sort of
47:21
Speaker 14: metaphor for anything which is unknown. The Americans used it
47:24
Speaker 14: in primary elections. They started using it as a political metaphor.
47:29
Speaker 14: So if there was a candidate who wasn't thought to
47:32
Speaker 14: stand a chance, but he got the nomination after all,
47:35
Speaker 14: then he was called a dark horse, just like the
47:38
Speaker 14: horse racing expression.
47:40
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's a bit like if you haven't got exposed
47:43
Speaker 2: form for someone, So someone pops up politically, you don't
47:46
Speaker 2: know much about them not so they're not going to
47:49
Speaker 2: give them a chance, and you're not sure if they're
47:51
Speaker 2: going to win. You just don't know enough to put
47:54
Speaker 2: them in the rankings, and they come through its role
47:57
Speaker 2: that's always interesting. Joe. Joe says, what about the origins
48:01
Speaker 2: of humble Pie and he asks a question, does it
48:04
Speaker 2: come from eating deer?
48:07
Speaker 14: Yes, it does. It comes from here, from the sixteen hundreds.
48:11
Speaker 14: And that's because it was originally umbil pie umb ale
48:15
Speaker 14: without an h. The umbels are the innerds or the
48:18
Speaker 14: offal of the deer. So while the nobility ate roast
48:21
Speaker 14: venison at the top of the table, the servants in
48:24
Speaker 14: the castle ate the deer's offal in a pie. They
48:29
Speaker 14: had umbul pie. Literally, that's where the expression comes from.
48:33
Speaker 14: It's nice, isn't it.
48:35
Speaker 1: And then in the.
48:36
Speaker 2: Next week, next week, we're going to run through all
48:39
Speaker 2: the various dictionaries in others that all got their words.
48:43
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, we'll go through those. Kel look forward to it.
48:46
Speaker 1: We'll do it.
48:47
Speaker 2: That's it tomorrow night. Here's Andrew