Speaker 1: From the Skying Center. This is Paul Murray Live, Happy Wednesday.
Speaker 1: Lots to get to.
Speaker 2: Yes, obviously we'll talk about the major gamble or big
Speaker 2: idea that Peter Duddon had today, Robin Bishop, Stephen Conroy,
Speaker 2: they'll fight it out in a second. I'll tell you, well,
Speaker 2: there seems to be more censoring of what people see
Speaker 2: in Australia via Chinese social media sites. Now you saw
Speaker 2: the protests in Canberra. That's not what some people were seeing.
Speaker 1: On we chat.
Speaker 2: And obviously we'll talk about Biden staring off into space
Speaker 2: and how apparently your eyes are lying when you see
Speaker 2: that dude looking a little weird. But first, yeah, of
Speaker 2: course it's winter, which means it's cold, but it is
Speaker 2: a feels like single digits in Sydney, Melbourne and bruce
Speaker 2: Ban as we speak now. Sub zero temperatures actually were
Speaker 2: there in parts of country Queensland, and the expectation is
Speaker 2: for the same tomorrow morning, and one of the coldest mornings,
Speaker 2: if not the coldest morning of the year, was experienced
Speaker 2: by Sydney and Melbourne. So I just wonder before we
Speaker 2: get into anything else, to try to explain why is
Speaker 2: this bit of winter particularly cold, and even the great
Speaker 2: people of Queensland are feeling kind of like they live
Speaker 2: in Melbourne.
Speaker 3: Why is it so cold now? A cold outbreak is
Speaker 3: really impacting much of New South Wales, parts of Victoria
Speaker 3: and Queensland this week and it has been aided by
Speaker 3: very clear sky so that allows the best conditions for
Speaker 3: frost reform, as we saw in the New South Wales
Speaker 3: Blue Mountains this morning. And it also makes for quite
Speaker 3: sunny afternoons, which means daytime temperatures have actually been quite
Speaker 3: close to, if not a touch above average this week,
Speaker 3: despite the very cold starts for millions.
Speaker 2: Thank you Allison for more information over on the Weather Channel.
Speaker 2: Check it out in between the stuff you normally watch
Speaker 2: on the main channel here on Sky News via Foxtel,
Speaker 2: Frederware or of course Flash or even the Sky News app,
Speaker 2: which you can get right now for just five month
Speaker 2: go to sky ONews dot com dot au.
Speaker 1: Now let's get to it.
Speaker 2: How many times have you heard people say I wish
Speaker 2: our politicians would come up with some idea that was
Speaker 2: bigger than just getting elected at the next election, an
Speaker 2: idea that wasn't just for the next budget or the
Speaker 2: next year. Well, presumably that's part of the thinking behind
Speaker 2: Peter Dutton going all in on nuclear as the ultimate
Speaker 2: form of being able to guarantee our electricity supply. Now,
Speaker 2: as you know, previously that has been coal, gas and renewables. Well,
Speaker 2: as the opposition was saying today, there's still going to
Speaker 2: be renewables. No one's suggesting that we're going to stop
Speaker 2: building every single project, but certainly the speed with which
Speaker 2: they're being rolled out and cutting through the landscape. Well,
Speaker 2: obviously that would change if the government does later this
Speaker 2: year or early next year. Well, gas would also be
Speaker 2: used as firming technology for about the next ten years
Speaker 2: before we could get to the scenario of nuclear reactors. Now,
Speaker 2: as you know, there have been multiple so which have
Speaker 2: been announced. Now these sites are a little more specific,
Speaker 2: but generally what we have always known, which is that
Speaker 2: where there is an existing coal fire power station, most
Speaker 2: of the plans in most of the states and most
Speaker 2: of the private companies who own those sites, was to
Speaker 2: turn the existing coal fire power station into generally speaking
Speaker 2: a battery so that it would be able to hold
Speaker 2: the energy which is being made by a grid made
Speaker 2: up of renewables. But as you can see, the expectation
Speaker 2: here is that all of those sites would be able
Speaker 2: to service the national grid without having to rewire the
Speaker 2: national grid. Now, let me explain as basically as I can,
Speaker 2: but one of the problems with renewable energy is that
Speaker 2: the wires don't quite work the same way as they
Speaker 2: do when it comes to coal fire power. Essentially, a
Speaker 2: one way stream of traffic is the only way that
Speaker 2: that system works. One of the reasons they have to
Speaker 2: rewire the nation is because the intermittent nature of the power,
Speaker 2: the storing plus the firming plus the renewables means that
Speaker 2: you need different types of wires at certain parts in
Speaker 2: the network. That in and of itself adds hundreds of
Speaker 2: billions of dollars to the overall transition from one system
Speaker 2: to another. Now, as you know, there is immediate pushback
Speaker 2: on this idea, but something that you have not heard
Speaker 2: on all of the other shows that quite rightly have
Speaker 2: been leading with it and talking about it tonight. Obviously
Speaker 2: the premiers will they say no. And obviously they're not
Speaker 2: unimportant here because most of the energy system, either the polls,
Speaker 2: the wires or the generation has been sold off or
Speaker 2: least they're private companies. This is not federal Land. Now,
Speaker 2: obviously Peter Dutton may know something that the premiers don't.
Speaker 2: Otherwise why make the announcement but the premiers will They
Speaker 2: all say no, including potential premiers like David Crucifoli and Queensland.
Speaker 4: We're not supporting nuclear power. I think our state laws
Speaker 4: are pretty clear when it comes to PA. But whether
Speaker 4: there's some overriding constitutional question that he can pursue, I
Speaker 4: think that's a matter for Himm and he's the one
Speaker 4: who's proposing the policy. But look how band stays in place.
Speaker 4: We're not repealing it.
Speaker 5: Nuclear energy is toxic, it's risky, it's more expensive, and
Speaker 5: it is decades and decades are why I am fine
Speaker 5: with nuclear power as long as it doesn't make electricity
Speaker 5: bills more expensive.
Speaker 6: And what we know from.
Speaker 5: Report after report is that in the Australian context it
Speaker 5: will make power more expensive.
Speaker 2: The South Australia question is particularly interesting because remember the
Speaker 2: former Labor Premier Jay Weatherall Well, he was all in
Speaker 2: on some form of venucular industry coming out of South Australia.
Speaker 2: If all of these sites don't happen, maybe South Australia
Speaker 2: is one that's already done the work and you hear
Speaker 2: the premier not as ardent as other premiers. For his part,
Speaker 2: Repeter dun't explains why these are the places. These are
Speaker 2: the locations where the future of our energy grid can
Speaker 2: come from. The sites that we're looking at are only
Speaker 2: those sites where there's an end of life coal fire POWERstation. Importantly,
Speaker 2: one of the main reasons is that people in those
Speaker 2: communities know that their jobs are going when coal goes,
Speaker 2: and we have the ability to sustain heavy industry. Now,
Speaker 2: like many, I understand the ballsy nature of this politically,
Speaker 2: because the assumption is that the Australian people are somewhere
Speaker 2: completely other than where Peter Dutton is. Except that's not
Speaker 2: the actual evidence. If you trust the polls at all,
Speaker 2: I'll go through them in a moment to give you
Speaker 2: a wide swathe of opinion that all seems to be
Speaker 2: pointing in Peter Dutton's direction. But interestingly, all but one
Speaker 2: of the locations that are being suggested are all National
Speaker 2: Party or Liberal seats. This is not a plan to
Speaker 2: put these things inside hardcore labor seats.
Speaker 6: No.
Speaker 2: In fact, in Queensland, both of the sites are LNP
Speaker 2: one in the Hunter Valley of New South Wales, that
Speaker 2: is a labor seat. The one in Lithgow is currently
Speaker 2: an independent but formerly a National Party seat. The one
Speaker 2: in Gippsland is in a Liberal National seat, sorry, a
Speaker 2: National Party seat. Port Agusta again in the Blue and
Speaker 2: Green column, and over in Western Australia again in a
Speaker 2: seat that he already owns. So there must be some evidence,
Speaker 2: some polling, some greater thinking that's happening here, because of
Speaker 2: course you need to add to your seats at the
Speaker 2: next election, not lose seats. And if you're willing to
Speaker 2: come up with a policy like this and you haven't
Speaker 2: listed a whole collection of labor seats but instead your
Speaker 2: own seats with populations that, let's be honest, have all
Speaker 2: had power generation around them for generations. And as the
Speaker 2: models have been put in front of us, this concept
Speaker 2: of some super scary piece of technology going in, well
Speaker 2: it doesn't quite match up with firstly, how the rest
Speaker 2: of the.
Speaker 1: World largely gets its power.
Speaker 2: Certainly, one of the reasons why Europe is able to
Speaker 2: have so many nations that turn around and say things
Speaker 2: like renewable energy here, there and everywhere is because there
Speaker 2: are other countries that are totally nuclear and they end
Speaker 2: up being able to throw the extension cord over into
Speaker 2: those countries. Places like the UK have an existing nuclear
Speaker 2: industry and are in fact planning to extend it. Let's
Speaker 2: not even start about the conversations that are happening in
Speaker 2: Asia or the reality of what is of course taking
Speaker 2: place with coal fire power right now in China. But again,
Speaker 2: Peter Dutton making his case, the start of a case
Speaker 2: that he thinks he's been making for a long time,
Speaker 2: and certainly the Liberal Party has been flirting with for
Speaker 2: a long time.
Speaker 1: But now it's all in again.
Speaker 2: How many times have we heard in politics why owned
Speaker 2: politicians come up with an idea that's bigger than just
Speaker 2: one term. Well, this is an idea that as well
Speaker 2: and truly bigger than one term. This is a fork
Speaker 2: in the road. Now we can go the way that
Speaker 2: the current government's doing things, or we can go the
Speaker 2: way that Peter Dutton is advocating today. Have a look,
Speaker 2: if we want to set our country up for the future,
Speaker 2: if we're going to bring those electricity prices down, if
Speaker 2: we want to make a stable economy, and if we
Speaker 2: want to grow that economy, and if we want to
Speaker 2: grow jobs for generations to come our country must seize
Speaker 2: this opportunity now now again. For the people who openly
Speaker 2: think that this is political suicide, remember they were the
Speaker 2: same people who thought exactly the same thing when it
Speaker 2: came to Peter Dutton coming out against the Voice. That
Speaker 2: was a time when public opinion was sixty forty against
Speaker 2: his position. It ended up being sixty forty in favor
Speaker 2: of his position. The scare campaign from the Labor Party
Speaker 2: has begun, including from MPs in the Act that were
Speaker 2: already pushing around not just the idea of the three
Speaker 2: eyed fish from the Simpsons, but no, the three eyed
Speaker 2: koala is apparently what is on its way towards Australia.
Speaker 2: This is about us silly, low brow, underhanded but the
Speaker 2: issue they think is going to work in their way.
Speaker 2: The caption on this, by the way, from Andrew Lee
Speaker 2: is this what Peter Dutton wants Blinky Bill to look
Speaker 2: like in fifty years.
Speaker 1: So the idea is to live.
Speaker 2: Near these things means apparently radiation and you end up
Speaker 2: growing the second head. As for the Prime Minister, he thinks,
Speaker 2: thank goodness, he's now been bailed out of all of
Speaker 2: his own problems because this idea is just that bad.
Speaker 7: It's fifteen years off, it's the most expensive form of
Speaker 7: new energy, and they're saying that.
Speaker 6: Taxpayers will fund it.
Speaker 7: Well, we'll wait and see the details of the announcement today,
Speaker 7: but this makes no economic sense as well as leaving
Speaker 7: us in a position of energy insecurity because of the
Speaker 7: time that it will take to roll out a nuclear reactor.
Speaker 2: Well, of course, if the nuclear actor was the only
Speaker 2: thing in the power grid, then they would have a point,
Speaker 2: but it's not the renewables that currently exist. Some that
Speaker 2: of course will continue to be built, but not at
Speaker 2: the same scale, and then gas being used as a
Speaker 2: mutual technology between the Labor Party and the Liberal Party
Speaker 2: as the way to eventually get to the place that
Speaker 2: will firm up either one hundred percent renewables by the
Speaker 2: time they're built or the nuclear power plants. But again,
Speaker 2: the conventional wisdom amongst the political class, and you may
Speaker 2: will have heard a tinge of this today, is that
Speaker 2: again this is some sort of political suicide. Peter Dutton
Speaker 2: is not only ruining his chances to win seats, but
Speaker 2: he may well end up blowing up half a dozen
Speaker 2: seats that he already owns. The problem is that all
Speaker 2: works on a false assumption, a false assumption that the
Speaker 2: Australian populace.
Speaker 1: Hates the idea.
Speaker 2: So let's go through a journey of the polls, all
Speaker 2: of them dated this year. This pole came from the
Speaker 2: Institute of Public Affairs. It says that fifty three percent
Speaker 2: of people agree. Well, hang on, Paul, that's the Institute
Speaker 2: of Public Affairs, two right wing. Have you got another one? Yes,
Speaker 2: I do the Lowe Institute one where supposedly this is
Speaker 2: down the middle, and there you get the best part
Speaker 2: of sixty plus percent of people who either strongly or
Speaker 2: somewhat support Well, hang on, that's not professional polling.
Speaker 1: That's just the thing that happens every now and then.
Speaker 2: Okay, what about the gold standard that we have got
Speaker 2: rid of prime ministers on. That'd be the news pole,
Speaker 2: And the News pole there says fifty five percent of
Speaker 2: Australians support the concept of small modular nuclear reactors. Well,
Speaker 2: of course that's just News Corp. They'd just be pushing
Speaker 2: the Liberal party line. Well, okay, what about the essential
Speaker 2: pole published in The Guardian. It can show you that
Speaker 2: the opinion has changed from twenty nineteen, where just thirty
Speaker 2: nine percent of people were in favor. That's the blue
Speaker 2: line at the top. Forty four percent of people oppose
Speaker 2: that's the red line in the middle. But as you
Speaker 2: can see, the trend changed, and in fact things have
Speaker 2: now warmed so much so that a clear majority fifty
Speaker 2: two percent of people, even in the lefty pole published
Speaker 2: in The Guardian, answered positively to the question to what
Speaker 2: extent do you support or repose developing nuclear power plans
Speaker 2: for generation of electricity? The blue is the positive, the
Speaker 2: red is the no. Obviously, the don't know factor, which
Speaker 2: even if one hundred percent of that made its way
Speaker 2: over to the no column, and we all know when
Speaker 2: it came to any result, you don't get one hundred
Speaker 2: percent of unsure people moving over. Well, let's imagine if
Speaker 2: it was half. Obviously yes starts to win by an
Speaker 2: even bigger margin. But even if every single undersided person
Speaker 2: sides with where the government is, where the establishment media
Speaker 2: is today, there would still be a majority of Australians
Speaker 2: that would support it. Well, hang on, pautially, there's just
Speaker 2: you know, you're hiding some details here.
Speaker 1: Okay, let's have a look. Let's find the most anti of.
Speaker 2: This policy news organization, that being the Turnbull Times and
Speaker 2: we'll get the ghost writing for them today. But as
Speaker 2: you can see, fifty three percent of people eighteen to
Speaker 2: thirty four support the idea of nuclear reactors for electricity
Speaker 2: in Australia. People over the age of fifty five, again,
Speaker 2: fifty five percent of people supporting the area that is
Speaker 2: under fifty percent, and only just the people between the
Speaker 2: ages of thirty five to fifty four. Now, these people matter,
Speaker 2: and certainly women thirty five to fifty four. They swing elections.
Speaker 2: They certainly swung the elections the way of the Teals.
Speaker 2: Would this policy further harden the Teal position? Most probably?
Speaker 2: So that's the evidence about the paths to political victory here. Now,
Speaker 2: Peter Dunton must know something that some of these polls
Speaker 2: don't or aren't telling us up front, because if he's
Speaker 2: willing to bet half a dozen of his own electorates
Speaker 2: on it, he knows that. From the right wing think
Speaker 2: tank to the Guardian, every opinion poll that has been
Speaker 2: published in major news outlets shows that Australians have changed
Speaker 2: their view and Australians are now on board. Oh yeah,
Speaker 2: one last thing, by the way, in case you think
Speaker 2: that it's only one particular part of the country that's
Speaker 2: backing it in the people who support it are the
Speaker 2: people who live in the city, so presumably that might
Speaker 2: unlock some of that Teal vote, because of course it's
Speaker 2: those inner city electorates in Sydney and Melbourne that are
Speaker 2: currently Teal seats, and their margins aren't massive. By the way,
Speaker 2: the suburbs is the least impressed, but that's forty nine
Speaker 2: percent of people who support the peri urban or provincial areas.
Speaker 2: That of course way over fifty percent and even higher
Speaker 2: in rural areas. Yet you can see the worldview that
Speaker 2: comes immediately from the same people who were absolutely certain
Speaker 2: that sixty forty yes in the referendum was the only
Speaker 2: result that was ever going to happen, and anyone else
Speaker 2: who thought it was pedaling misinformation or didn't understand. But remember,
Speaker 2: the Australian people didn't care what the establishment, what the
Speaker 2: big money, what the lobby groups had to say when
Speaker 2: it came to that policy. Does that automatically mean that
Speaker 2: nuclear energy ends up getting support. No, of course not,
Speaker 2: but it's the obvious analogy during this particular political turn.
Speaker 1: But you will see plenty of this.
Speaker 2: In the coverage of those who automatically think this is
Speaker 2: the dumbest idea they've ever heard in Australian politics, despite
Speaker 2: it now having majority support of the Australian people. This
Speaker 2: was one of the immediate smart ass cartoons that popped
Speaker 2: up in the Sydney Morning Herald the age where now
Speaker 2: he's Homer Simpson, which of course links us back to
Speaker 2: the other image, which was what the Labour Party image
Speaker 2: that looked like blinky Bill in front of the Springfield
Speaker 2: Nuclear power plant. It's almost like they have just one
Speaker 2: brain on the left, one form of reference, and they
Speaker 2: think the only way to scare people about nuclear energy
Speaker 2: is to mention the Simpsons will debate this big hot heart,
Speaker 2: big idea for the future or gambling away his own
Speaker 2: political future. Cannot wait to get to this with Stephen Conroy.
Speaker 2: Bromin Bishop, You've got the best seat in the house.
Speaker 2: Turn up the TV and lean in because this one's
Speaker 2: going to be fun. As you know, this week the
Speaker 2: Reserve Bank made its decision to hold on to interest rates. Thankfully,
Speaker 2: interest rates are not going up as somebody who is
Speaker 2: trying to pay for a mortgage, like a solid third
Speaker 2: of the country, or I would say two thirds of
Speaker 2: the country if they're trying to pay off the investment
Speaker 2: property as well.
Speaker 1: The squeeze is so tight at.
Speaker 2: The moment that, let's be honest, we actually feel like
Speaker 2: we are and I say it every time right being
Speaker 2: a purple So there is no relief. It is just
Speaker 2: the same squeeze, the same python for yet another month,
Speaker 2: a python that has got twelve times tighter under the
Speaker 2: Albaneze government. And as you can see, they didn't even
Speaker 2: discuss a rate drop yesterday.
Speaker 1: They actually considered a rate hike.
Speaker 6: Now.
Speaker 2: This is despite the fact that there are plenty more
Speaker 2: indications that, as we know, we're in a per capita
Speaker 2: recession right now. But there are equally painful financial situations
Speaker 2: that exist for many people around the country, people who
Speaker 2: would not be able to afford any further increases. But
Speaker 2: of course none of those people are the people who
Speaker 2: run our country. As we first told you on Monday night,
Speaker 2: it made big news yesterday, but seems to repete it
Speaker 2: out today because how could anyone focus on one thing
Speaker 2: for longer than twenty four hours when there's the Simpsons
Speaker 2: nuclear reactor thing and the Mister Burns and all of
Speaker 2: that that's still needed to be done it's so easy.
Speaker 1: Everyone's seen the show, right, Well, of course they have.
Speaker 1: We love it.
Speaker 2: Because of course our own prime minister, our own prime minister,
Speaker 2: his own ministers, the opposition as well, and every backbencher
Speaker 2: and every senator. They of course don't care about any
Speaker 2: of this, and it doesn't matter whether their interest rates
Speaker 2: go up. Why because of course they are getting their
Speaker 2: third pay rise, third pay rise since this government came
Speaker 2: to power.
Speaker 1: Oh but it's all completely independent.
Speaker 2: Well, of course they could do what the deusei whals
Speaker 2: labor government did, which is to say no, we're not
Speaker 2: interested wage freese, We're not going to accept these rises.
Speaker 2: They could do what the previous government did in twenty
Speaker 2: one and say no, we're not.
Speaker 1: Going to accept these rises.
Speaker 2: But a little fact came out today, ironically from a
Speaker 2: place that is supposedly pro labor. As we know, the
Speaker 2: Prime Minister will be yet again jumping in the plane.
Speaker 2: I think this might be one of the final runs
Speaker 2: of the old jets before he gets to the new jets.
Speaker 2: Oh sorry, he didn't order them. Morrison did, but he
Speaker 2: didn't cancel them. So sorry, Yeah, he ordered the jets.
Speaker 2: He's okay with not one but two brand new planes.
Speaker 2: He will be off to the White House again, this
Speaker 2: time to go and celebrate NATO. But guess what our
Speaker 2: prime minister will be paid more than the President of
Speaker 2: the United States after this pay rise. The US president
Speaker 2: earns less money than the Australian Prime minister. The source
Speaker 2: of that information, by the way, is a website that
Speaker 2: is paid for with union superannuation money. With friends like
Speaker 2: these right now again, I would have expected that when
Speaker 2: the Prime Minister was speaking to the media on Monday
Speaker 2: they would have brought it up, but of course they didn't.
Speaker 2: On Tuesday, No they didn't. And today again in multiple
Speaker 2: radio interviews with lots of friendly people, guess what question
Speaker 2: he was not asked?
Speaker 1: So about that pay rise? Are you going to take it?
Speaker 2: Or will you like the new Soupwel's Premier or Prime
Speaker 2: Minister's before you say no thanks, we've already had too
Speaker 2: this term.
Speaker 1: And of course the reason.
Speaker 2: This question didn't come up because there was more important
Speaker 2: stuff to ask the Prime minister.
Speaker 1: Apparently today rock clubsters has been on the agenda.
Speaker 7: It hasn't It was on the menu, yes, of course
Speaker 7: it was at lunch, just as a subtle layer of
Speaker 7: pitching up for the impediments that are there for the
Speaker 7: great rock lobsters that come from here in wa.
Speaker 2: It is amazing to me that politicians pay is always
Speaker 2: something that you know, the public cares about. Yeah, when
Speaker 2: the blokes sitting directly opposite you is getting his third pay.
Speaker 1: Rise since he became the prime minister, just forget about it. Now.
Speaker 2: We'll eventually get a moment where the Prime Minister will
Speaker 2: have to do a press conference. And let's hope that
Speaker 2: someone anyone who's watching right now in the camp and
Speaker 2: press gallery, perhaps throwing things at the camera like they
Speaker 2: often do but hate watching, well.
Speaker 1: They will know.
Speaker 2: That this broken clock is right twice a day. And
Speaker 2: when it comes to this situation, it's time to ask
Speaker 2: the Prime minister, will he accept or will he put
Speaker 2: off his third pay a rise since becoming prime minister?
Speaker 1: Why? Because you know, cost of living all of that,
Speaker 1: because they really care about.
Speaker 6: That right.
Speaker 1: Now.
Speaker 2: Of course, Chang Lai, we all know what happened when
Speaker 2: the Chinese officials were in our own country. When they
Speaker 2: were there right in the middle of course, of our
Speaker 2: own parliament and they're standing in front of her, they're
Speaker 2: blocking her off. But we had to see this nonsense.
Speaker 2: Where the Prime Minister knows what's happening. He certainly would
Speaker 2: have been informed by one of the eleven people who
Speaker 2: work for him.
Speaker 1: In private media circles.
Speaker 2: But because we couldn't possibly upset the Chinese, this was
Speaker 2: the rubbish that he served up on Monday.
Speaker 1: Well, I didn't see that. I saw.
Speaker 7: Chang Lay and we smiled at each other.
Speaker 2: Then on Tuesday, when he had an opportunity to grow
Speaker 2: a spine, grow a pair and say sorry, this stuff
Speaker 2: is not on, he of course said this because the
Speaker 2: Chinese were still in the country and might not return
Speaker 2: his phone calls.
Speaker 8: We have different values in different political systems, and we
Speaker 8: saw some of that yesterday. I've got to say with
Speaker 8: the attempt that was pretty ham fisted to block Chang Lay.
Speaker 8: The Australian journalists who were able to get brought home
Speaker 8: at the press conference, and there was a clumsy attempt
Speaker 8: really to just stand in between where the cameras were
Speaker 8: and Chang Lay and the Australian officials did the right
Speaker 8: thing and intervened. Yeah, but you know that showed I
Speaker 8: think that they're the different systems that are there.
Speaker 2: That they were practicing in our parliament House well, of course,
Speaker 2: the Chinese premier has now left the country. So guess
Speaker 2: what magically happened today? Once the Chinese had left, the
Speaker 2: Prime Minister, who saw what was happening with his own eyes,
Speaker 2: who then denied it with his own words, decided to well,
Speaker 2: not quite grow a pair, but maybe a couple of indents.
Speaker 8: And it was entirely inappropriate, and it was rude what occurred.
Speaker 1: On Monday? I no, no, nothing on Tuesday? Clumsy? Have
Speaker 1: they gone? Oh that was so rude.
Speaker 2: This is the same bloke who, remember, pretended that he
Speaker 2: was engaging with China and every level of government had
Speaker 2: contacted every other level of government when they tried to
Speaker 2: blow one of our helicopters out of the sky. The
Speaker 2: reality was no minister had called anyone that came out
Speaker 2: in cented estimates. And part of what was included in
Speaker 2: the representations of Australia the Chinese government was the Prime
Speaker 2: Minister speaking at Beefweek.
Speaker 1: So again they think you're stupid. They know that much of.
Speaker 2: The media will move on from any sort of disquiet
Speaker 2: about the greatest prime minister of all time, and now
Speaker 2: the obsession will be Peter Dupman is in the worst
Speaker 2: possible place, just like they said he was for a
Speaker 2: whole year last year before of course he was in
Speaker 2: the place where sixty percent of Australians ended up being.
Speaker 2: But of course the political reality for the Prime Minister
Speaker 2: is it doesn't really matter what you and I think
Speaker 2: about what happened, because, as has been written by taxpayer
Speaker 2: funded journalists in taxpayer funded media, wouldn't dare call it
Speaker 2: state media because that of course annoys them most so greatly.
Speaker 1: Public broadcasting.
Speaker 2: Well, they referred to a big gift pack being given
Speaker 2: to the Prime minister and what does this mean specifically
Speaker 2: going into the federal election. Why because one of the
Speaker 2: little things that did take place, and one of the
Speaker 2: little announcements from the Chinese was that there like when
Speaker 2: you go to America and you know, you don't have
Speaker 2: to actually fill out of visa, you just get that
Speaker 2: est thing and you can come and go as many
Speaker 2: times you want in a couple of years. Well, that
Speaker 2: is exactly the system that the Chinese will be offering
Speaker 2: to Australians wanting to go back and forth to China.
Speaker 2: But there was also another little detail for those who
Speaker 2: speak the language who noticed there was a little faux
Speaker 2: pas from the greatest diplomat since Richard Nixon opening up China.
Speaker 2: Despite a minor diplomatic faux pa where Albinezi mistakenly referred
Speaker 2: to Lee as his deceased predecessor, the overall turn of
Speaker 2: the visit was overwhelmingly positive. Terms like renew, revitalize, get
Speaker 2: back on track, blah blah blah was constantly being said. Now,
Speaker 2: as I say, interestingly, this announcement about people who live
Speaker 2: in Australia who may will have family back in China
Speaker 2: will now have an easier path to being able to
Speaker 2: go to and from China as a result of this visit,
Speaker 2: and the perception of the reporter from the ABC is
Speaker 2: that this helps politically when it comes to Anthony Abernezi
Speaker 2: and as we know, the one point four million Australians
Speaker 2: of Chinese descent who live here and guess what vote.
Speaker 2: This initiative surprised many and was seen as a significant
Speaker 2: diplomatic gesture, particularly to the hearts.
Speaker 1: Of the one point four million Chinese Australians.
Speaker 2: A bloke from a university says, it's a big gift
Speaker 2: fact from labor at the upcoming election. Beijing knows how
Speaker 2: important the Chinese votes are and how crucially they went
Speaker 2: for Albanesi towards victory in twenty twenty two. Now, of
Speaker 2: course remember the set of Chisholm in Melbourne, the seat
Speaker 2: of Benelong and read in Sydney. That would of course
Speaker 2: be the entire majority of this government, which extends us
Speaker 2: to the types of information that Beijing senses. For the
Speaker 2: people who live in Australia who use Chinese based social
Speaker 2: media platforms now we Chat, it's not just a social
Speaker 2: media platform, it's sort of dare I say so, We're
Speaker 2: between WhatsApp, Instagram and.
Speaker 1: A wallet as well.
Speaker 2: So it's a significant part of the way that the
Speaker 2: community works. But as you know, this is a place
Speaker 2: that magically, when you are out of favor with the
Speaker 2: Chinese government, things like well the Prime minister's we Chat account,
Speaker 2: which was his way of trying to speak to the
Speaker 2: one point four million Chinese voters in the country who
Speaker 2: had voted for him in twenty nineteen, had voted for
Speaker 2: the Ghost in sixteen, had voted for Abbot in thirteen
Speaker 2: and ten, but then magically he was unable to communicate
Speaker 2: with during the twenty twenty two election. This was big news,
Speaker 2: so much so that the New York Times, you know,
Speaker 2: that far right wing bright Bart esque thing, started to
Speaker 2: notice about how China yes was fiddling in part with
Speaker 2: our election. Now, the result wouldn't have changed because the
Speaker 2: government was on the nose. People had made their decision,
Speaker 2: but those three key seats that had constantly voted liberal
Speaker 2: magically started to vote labor. Well on the we chat platform,
Speaker 2: what you saw with your own eyes out the front
Speaker 2: of our parliament was protests anti China, protests for the Wigas,
Speaker 2: for the Tibetans, for the slave labor, for the intimidation Well.
Speaker 1: On the Financial Review today, a great story. It says we.
Speaker 2: Chat has censored posts mentioning the clashes between the Chinese
Speaker 2: Australians over the Chinese premier's visit to Australia, hiding calls
Speaker 2: for cybersecurity experts for the social media platform to be banned. Now,
Speaker 2: of course, if they're censoring it, then some sort of
Speaker 2: warning should be there. But Australian politicians, particularly Labour ones,
Speaker 2: they won't do anything about this because they're happy for
Speaker 2: the message to get polished by Beijing. Coming back into
Speaker 2: the mix of information here in Australia, we Chat Australia
Speaker 2: on Tuesday sense that a Mandallrin language post by a
Speaker 2: relatively unknown account which mentioned the clashes in Canberra.
Speaker 1: So surprise, surprise.
Speaker 2: You could see it on the news here, but you
Speaker 2: couldn't find it on the Chinese social media apps. The
Speaker 2: post was titled Australia and Chinese leaders whole talks in Canberra.
Speaker 2: Chinese Australians who support the premiere clash with protesters. Will
Speaker 2: Australia still have pandas in the future. That, of course
Speaker 2: was censored in the native tongue, meaning it's not just
Speaker 2: the Chinese surveillance app of TikTok that. Remember, you're not
Speaker 2: allowed to use on an official government phone, you're not
Speaker 2: allowed to use on an official government computer, you're not
Speaker 2: allowed to use in your parliamentary office. But plenty of
Speaker 2: labor MPs to this day use burner phones because it's
Speaker 2: a way of talking to the young people. Nothing to
Speaker 2: see here, just an entire system being totally, constantly daily
Speaker 2: interfered with by a foreign country. Nothing to see you,
Speaker 2: nothing whatsoever. Now we're talking about the Simpsons before, what
Speaker 2: about Star Wars? Now is our cultural reference to some
Speaker 2: of the politics happening in the world. Now, those who
Speaker 2: know and love their saga from a long, long time
Speaker 2: ago in a galaxy far far away. Know that the
Speaker 2: Jedies that's a bloke on the left, have the ability
Speaker 2: to to change weaker minds. First used on film in
Speaker 2: nineteen seventy seven when Alec Guinness was playing the Great
Speaker 2: Obi Wan Kenobi.
Speaker 6: Let me see your identification.
Speaker 1: You don't need to see his identification.
Speaker 6: We don't need to see his identification.
Speaker 1: These aren't the droids you're looking for.
Speaker 6: He's the droids we're looking for.
Speaker 1: He can go about his business.
Speaker 6: You can go about your business.
Speaker 9: Move alone.
Speaker 6: Ah aw.
Speaker 2: Well, did you know the Jedi Knights walk amongst us
Speaker 2: in the real world and do so at the White
Speaker 2: House in twenty twenty four? You see, you may well
Speaker 2: have seen images like this of the President of the
Speaker 2: United States looking limber and with it and energetic and
Speaker 2: focused and at the absolute prime of his mental and
Speaker 2: physical life. Well, his spokesperson and Jedi not at the
Speaker 2: White House say this is not what you think it is.
Speaker 9: It tells you everything that we need to know about
Speaker 9: how desperate, how desperate Republicans are here. And instead of
Speaker 9: talking about the President's performance in office and what I
Speaker 9: mean by that is his legislative wins, what he's been
Speaker 9: able to do for the American people across the country.
Speaker 9: We're seeing these deep fakes, these manipulated videos.
Speaker 2: Hey, sorry, manipulated date fikes, as in, somebody made this
Speaker 2: all up at none of that ever happened, and that
Speaker 2: wasn't actual real footage. Well, of course this became an
Speaker 2: instant talking point for the parrots at MSNBAC.
Speaker 10: There's a growing and insidious trend in right wing media broadcasts,
Speaker 10: print and social media. It is to take highly misleading
Speaker 10: and selectively edited videos of President Biden directly from publican
Speaker 10: National Committee social media accounts, and then use those videos
Speaker 10: to spread messages virally to cast out on President Biden's
Speaker 10: fitness for office. The articles are based on chip fakes
Speaker 10: videos of real events that are intentionally manipulated to fool viewers.
Speaker 2: Sorry, that would make sense if you took a second
Speaker 2: from here and a second from there and went like
Speaker 2: that and pretended there was nothing in between. But when
Speaker 2: you've got five seconds, ten seconds, and you can see
Speaker 2: your own eyes, what you can see? What are they
Speaker 2: talking about?
Speaker 6: Now?
Speaker 2: Of course, the left thought they were onto a winner
Speaker 2: because Howie kurtz Is, the media critic for Fox News,
Speaker 2: sort of called out some of this stuff being used,
Speaker 2: that it wasn't the full context, but he's now calling
Speaker 2: bs on the Jedi mind trick.
Speaker 11: Despite a couple of misleading headlines, Fox News has not
Speaker 11: shown any distorted video of Joe Biden, though some of
Speaker 11: its commentators.
Speaker 12: Who will paid for their opinions, have talked about what.
Speaker 11: They see as amental decline, different kind of conflation going
Speaker 11: on here, that anything that you see now is manipulated
Speaker 11: by the media, is false, as fake, as focus and
Speaker 11: that's flat out untrue.
Speaker 2: So let's see whether the Jedi mind trick works on you,
Speaker 2: because it works on me. And all I can see
Speaker 2: is the greatest president of all time.
Speaker 5: I uh anyway.
Speaker 12: And I don't want to. I don't want to. I
Speaker 12: maybe choose my words.
Speaker 2: And uh yeah.
Speaker 13: Go ahead, Los Angeles and uh and uh uh, I'm
Speaker 13: I doing Harriet from the h.
Speaker 1: The power of Lefty. Always be with you, Always stay
Speaker 1: on target.
Speaker 2: That's exactly what we'll be doing right after the break,
Speaker 2: looking forward to doing so with Brober Bishop Stephen Conroy.
Speaker 1: Nuclear nuculear nucular I can't pronounce him. We'll debate it next.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much for watching here.
Speaker 2: In conversation with the one of A Bromin Buoship and
Speaker 2: Stephen Conroy, you know their history. Let's get to the future.
Speaker 2: So we know that Peter Dunton has gone all in.
Speaker 2: Let's go best case scenario or glass half full. Majority
Speaker 2: of people are now on his side. As I said,
Speaker 2: everything from the IPA through the Guardian in terms of
Speaker 2: the public polling that is around. Also, how many times
Speaker 2: have we all heard why won't somebody come up with
Speaker 2: an idea that's longer than the next election. That's clearly
Speaker 2: the case in terms of gambling with a political future.
Speaker 1: Five of the six seats.
Speaker 2: Are all on his turf anyway, So Bromwin, obviously Stephen
Speaker 2: will tell us that the glasses three quarters done, even
Speaker 2: though the whole thing is going to be funded the
Speaker 2: same way the NBN was, but anyway off budget.
Speaker 1: What do you think, Well, I.
Speaker 14: Think this There is now an option on the table
Speaker 14: that people want, and that is you can reach twenty
Speaker 14: and fifty and net zero by another means, and the
Speaker 14: means that doesn't destroy the countryside, the forest, the birds,
Speaker 14: the sea and everything else. The crazy we knewables only
Speaker 14: policy does, and that it is feasible, It is practical
Speaker 14: and affordable, and that's the proposition that dupn't put today.
Speaker 2: Now obviously steve it in terms of the political risk,
Speaker 2: I'm going to get to it in a second right,
Speaker 2: But as somebody who has previously suggested a piece of
Speaker 2: infrastructure that some of us at the time when it
Speaker 2: was suggested said, oh it's too expensive and where's it
Speaker 2: ever going to go? But basically the same policy in
Speaker 2: terms of how to fund it. Well, if nothing else,
Speaker 2: you must like the idea that we're going to have,
Speaker 2: just like we are with the Daniel Andrews of course
Speaker 2: and just cinder Allen. They wanted a taxpayer funded way
Speaker 2: of getting any and that'd be the renewables. Well under
Speaker 2: this one, it'll again be taxpayer funded and therefore not
Speaker 2: available to be fiddled with by the Mike Kennon Brooks
Speaker 2: of the world.
Speaker 12: Yeah.
Speaker 13: Look, I mean there's no question that Dutton has made
Speaker 13: a big call double down. I think you described it
Speaker 13: as I think unfortunately when I announced our national broadband network,
Speaker 13: I at least was prepared to put a number on
Speaker 13: it the day I announced it, and whether late the
Speaker 13: number or not and said it was too big or not.
Speaker 13: I at least did the policy work and put a
Speaker 13: number on it. So I think the biggest hole of
Speaker 13: credibility that Petted Dutton got tonight is not having a
Speaker 13: costing around it. Then the second biggest hole is he's
Speaker 13: got to find a way to explain which technology is
Speaker 13: going to use.
Speaker 12: I mean, they.
Speaker 13: Spent twelve o eight months talking about small modulate nuclear reactors,
Speaker 13: you know, in the submarine type thing, and people.
Speaker 12: Could sort of conceptually get that.
Speaker 13: The problem was they couldn't find anywhere in the world
Speaker 13: commercially that they've got any of them up on working,
Speaker 13: and the first available one wasn't likely to be twenty thirty,
Speaker 13: which mean by the time we adapted it and put
Speaker 13: it in place, it will be closer to twenty forty.
Speaker 13: So they sort of put that up to the side
Speaker 13: a little while ago and they said, right, we're just
Speaker 13: going for their big traditional nuclear reactors big nuclear power stations,
Speaker 13: rather than the much smaller small modulate reactors. And so
Speaker 13: suddenly the small modulors are back. Suddenly the small modular
Speaker 13: ones are back in the mix, just to hide them
Speaker 13: place with the single biggest problem now they actually put
Speaker 13: them aside from me, no, they didn't. So where their
Speaker 13: problem is is that to get even the small nuclear
Speaker 13: modular ones in place, it's twenty forty so you've got
Speaker 13: a circumstance where they're promising cheaper energy in twenty forty.
Speaker 1: So I think that's the fact that it's.
Speaker 12: Taking so long to come.
Speaker 13: The bottom line is, could you just just pipe down
Speaker 13: from it and let me finished.
Speaker 12: I'm nearly finished, okay.
Speaker 13: So the two big problems are the cost and the
Speaker 13: timing of it.
Speaker 12: Well, if you're starth interrupting, I'd be finished quicker.
Speaker 13: So the timing to get it into the system is
Speaker 13: they're two big problems.
Speaker 2: Yeah, now, okay, brow, I'm just going to devil's advocate
Speaker 2: on the argument here, right, which is, Okay, let's imagine
Speaker 2: wins an election. This is the policy, clearly, this is
Speaker 2: the federal you know, clearly there's and there's a way
Speaker 2: to get a ban removed in the center all the
Speaker 2: rest of it. How are you able to achieve the
Speaker 2: sites if the local state governments that presumably have some
Speaker 2: say because this is instrumentality that is formally stayed, are
Speaker 2: now private. Is it a public domain thing? We're in
Speaker 2: the same way that governments turn around and say we're
Speaker 2: taking this bit of land because we need to build
Speaker 2: a highway. Is that the type of process that a
Speaker 2: federal government would be able to do well.
Speaker 14: That's what he was talking about today when he talked
Speaker 14: about the power that's given under the Constitution to compulsorily
Speaker 14: acquire land with just and fair terms being paid. And
Speaker 14: also there's good old section one hundred and nine the
Speaker 14: Constitution where laws differ.
Speaker 2: So it's great that these premiums all play their games,
Speaker 2: but there is a way to make it happen.
Speaker 14: There is a way to make it happen. But the
Speaker 14: most important thing is this. The cost, the basic cost
Speaker 14: of renewables only requires the government and the taxpad to
Speaker 14: find one point three to one point five.
Speaker 1: Trillion correct correct trillion correct.
Speaker 14: Because you cannot take the wind and the sunshine and
Speaker 14: put it in your house or this studio. It has
Speaker 14: to have a huge construction cost. Now, the beauty about
Speaker 14: the proposition that mister Ducklin's put up is that the
Speaker 14: actual amount of land that is taken to deliver this
Speaker 14: cheaper energy is very small. It's the existing side of
Speaker 14: qualifire pass stations, and the existing water for cooling, and
Speaker 14: the existing grid poles and wires continue to be used.
Speaker 14: You don't have to destroy forest, you don't have to
Speaker 14: destroy farmland, you don't have to find this huge volume
Speaker 14: of money which quite frankly, we can't afford.
Speaker 1: So Stephen to the scare campaign. Right now.
Speaker 2: We saw Andrew Lee for one of many I'm sure
Speaker 2: who's turned around and done. The three eyed Blinky Bill
Speaker 2: and the City Morning Heroes already off to the races
Speaker 2: with the Homo Simpson, all of this stuff. But what
Speaker 2: I did say at the start of the show, now
Speaker 2: I understand the prevailing logic instantly going hang on, well,
Speaker 2: how does.
Speaker 1: This affect politically?
Speaker 2: Right, the majority of the country, from the IPA to
Speaker 2: the Guardian in terms of public polling, has changed their
Speaker 2: view on this. So we're not starting from a position
Speaker 2: that maybe, yes, five ten years ago you were arguing
Speaker 2: from the thirty percent position and you're trying to push
Speaker 2: up and over the top. Now we saw when it
Speaker 2: came to the Voice, which again I understand that they're
Speaker 2: not the same thing. But again everyone's collective opinion was
Speaker 2: in one area and there's only one result that's definitely
Speaker 2: going to happen here. But should Labor be cautious in
Speaker 2: their assumption that the majority of Australia is against an
Speaker 2: idea that apparently the majority of Australia theoretically when it's
Speaker 2: not their backyard, when it's not their money, when it's
Speaker 2: a few years away, but still they are four right.
Speaker 13: Now, Look when it comes to the polling, and you've
Speaker 13: correctly identified it's a range of polings. I don't think
Speaker 13: it represents anybody's perspective being pushed. But the meat of
Speaker 13: the detail hasn't been included in those questions. I mean
Speaker 13: it's like saying, do you believe in world peace? I
Speaker 13: mean everyone's going to sign up to it for actually
Speaker 13: among the people have been hurting, yeah, or action on
Speaker 13: climate change agreed, So people will generally tick yes in
Speaker 13: that box. Now, what Labor has to do is deemon
Speaker 13: strait that they are enormous flaws in Dunn's proposal. I
Speaker 13: don't think that they could just say, naturally, assume there
Speaker 13: is opposition. People are hurting and they are tempted by
Speaker 13: this idea that there is cheaper electricity prices from this
Speaker 13: source and it is renewable. When they understand that those
Speaker 13: cheaper prices can't possibly kick in until twenty forty because
Speaker 13: that's the first time one of them pretty much is
Speaker 13: going to get switched on. Then they might begin to think, well,
Speaker 13: just a minute, you know, we're going down this path renewaballs,
Speaker 13: and we're going to be able to build enough renewaballs.
Speaker 13: People will argue about that, but buildenough renewables to supply
Speaker 13: the grid, or we could wait to twenty forty and
Speaker 13: keep doing not that much about you know, coal fire
Speaker 13: power stations which are mostly closing down. So I think
Speaker 13: labor can't just lazily think everyone's opposed to this. I
Speaker 13: don't think that will work for them. I think they've
Speaker 13: got to do the hard assessments and demonstrate why this
Speaker 13: plan has so many holes. And the problem initially is
Speaker 13: that there's not enough detail, or there's not even close
Speaker 13: to enough detail to be able to make those arguments.
Speaker 13: So there'll be a bit of skir mashine backwards and forwards.
Speaker 13: But it's incumbent on Dutton to say how much, say
Speaker 13: what technology, and answer a whole bunch of other questions,
Speaker 13: and then the polling will have a more substantive meaning
Speaker 13: because there'll be some meat meat of the monument rather
Speaker 13: than the slogan yeah, than the slogan's backwards and forward.
Speaker 1: So bromwin again.
Speaker 2: I'm not going to sit here and pretend that I
Speaker 2: knew it would be sixty forty No, when it was
Speaker 2: sixty forty years I just didn't know how much flexibility
Speaker 2: there was.
Speaker 1: But you were certain. So how do they win the early.
Speaker 2: Stages of this conversation, because again, most of the media
Speaker 2: is going to come out and go he's doing what.
Speaker 14: Well on that basis if it's all so bad this
Speaker 14: nuclear concept, we don't think we should send any Olympians
Speaker 14: to the Paris Games because it's that all the electricity
Speaker 14: is going to come from New care POA, so we
Speaker 14: should ban sending Olympians to Paris. And the argumenty is
Speaker 14: so stupid. The rest of the world can cope with it.
Speaker 14: And that's what Australians are seeing. And the thing is
Speaker 14: that people in Australia are saying, yes, we do want
Speaker 14: something done about climate change, but no, we don't want
Speaker 14: to pay the big bucks which are sending us broke,
Speaker 14: are sending people manufacturing out of business. What they are
Speaker 14: seeing now from mister Ducklin, who was clear eyed and
Speaker 14: quite straightforward, and everything he had to say today is
Speaker 14: there is another option, and this one will serve the
Speaker 14: country better and it's in the national interests.
Speaker 1: All right, good stuff. I have a feeling we'll talk
Speaker 1: about it a lot in the next few years.
Speaker 2: Quick break back with more here on Formurray life. All right,
Speaker 2: speedround now before we get off to the late debate,
Speaker 2: and none other than from the Bishop Stephen Conry both
Speaker 2: here the paras Olympic thing very good, very clever, and
Speaker 2: we feel I'm going to be using that in arguments
Speaker 2: within my family in the next couple of weeks. All right,
Speaker 2: let's talk about the Chinese visit, the Prime minister who
Speaker 2: didn't see anything and then it was ham fisted and
Speaker 2: have they gone, oh it was very rude bromwhen well,
Speaker 2: it kind of got there eventually, but wow, you having
Speaker 2: to wait till the bully leaves the country.
Speaker 14: I don't think you got there at all. No, I
Speaker 14: think the whole visit was an absolute sham. But it
Speaker 14: served the Chinese Communist Party's interests because they have seen
Speaker 14: that they now have got the Albanese government just where
Speaker 14: they want them, right that they are on the way
Speaker 14: to being the vassal state. We are on the way
Speaker 14: to being the vassal state if Albernesi's government stays there.
Speaker 14: The really really alarming parties is that they will now
Speaker 14: try and intervene in the next to try and influence
Speaker 14: the people who might change their vote, because the message
Speaker 14: comes from the Communist Party of China via their Chinese
Speaker 14: media to vote in a particular way, and that's why
Speaker 14: it's a huge success for them.
Speaker 2: Well and again remain three seats the entire majority of
Speaker 2: the existing government, right and those three seats right now
Speaker 2: in terms of the demographic where that population is particularly
Speaker 2: based Benelong Read and Chisholm Stephen thinking about it from
Speaker 2: that perspective, right, the ABC analysis basically giant gift to
Speaker 2: Albo because this open visa system would be one that
Speaker 2: obviously appeal to people who'd like to be able to
Speaker 2: go back pop up home. Do you read anything into
Speaker 2: that that that's the secret source that helps you hold
Speaker 2: onto three?
Speaker 13: Look, I don't think I don't agree with that assessment
Speaker 13: at all. I think if you look at today's media,
Speaker 13: you have Penny Wong Pack, Conroyal, Richard Miles, Claire O'Neill
Speaker 13: all in Papua New Guinea or there to counter the
Speaker 13: Chinese expansionism, coercion and bullying in the Pacific.
Speaker 12: So Labor is being clear out about this. Well talk, we'll.
Speaker 13: Have conversations, we'll say, we'll disagree, but on the ground
Speaker 13: we've been engaged in activity across the South China Sea
Speaker 13: where they've been trying to interfere with our Maritian planes.
Speaker 13: And we are actually on the ground where the Maurice
Speaker 13: Pain and the gang from the last mob friends of
Speaker 13: Bromwin's all failed miserably.
Speaker 14: Labor is on the ground and Solomon Islands, which you should.
Speaker 1: Have done quite right.
Speaker 14: There's been no success in the in changing the attitude
Speaker 14: since then.
Speaker 2: I've literally got sixty seconds, so I need bumper stickers
Speaker 2: from both of you. A bit of fan fiction in
Speaker 2: the Daily Mail that apparently if the debate doesn't go well,
Speaker 2: there'll be a group of Democrats that go to Joe
Speaker 2: and say it's time to get out Browin. Can you
Speaker 2: imagine that scenario happening, or the debates so rigged that
Speaker 2: he'll look like a winning no matter what happens.
Speaker 14: Well, A, the votes rigged, but B I think people
Speaker 14: are talking about change him, but whether or not they
Speaker 14: tempt to put Hillary Clinton in as the vice president
Speaker 14: so that if he carks and she goes in, anything's possible.
Speaker 1: With Stephen Stephen, they're cutting the microphones.
Speaker 2: There will be no cutaways, and no one's walking to
Speaker 2: the patio one candidate.
Speaker 12: Yeah, correct.
Speaker 13: Putting Hillary Clinton on the ticket would rarely help Donald
Speaker 13: Trump gett a lendin.
Speaker 12: I can't see that happening at all.
Speaker 2: All right, thank you Gang to appreciate it. So thank
Speaker 2: you for the brevity and time meaning we've done for
Speaker 2: the day. Thank you very much to appreciate it. Thank
Speaker 2: you very much for watching wherever you happen to be.
Speaker 2: Look forward to seeing you again tomorrow night. Don't forget
Speaker 2: here Sunday to Thursday each and every week. You can
Speaker 2: get the highlights at skynews dot com dot au.
Speaker 1: Will see you. Then he comes the late debate