Speaker 1: From the Skying Center. This is Paul Murray Live. Thank you, Sharry,
Speaker 1: Congratulations to Jenna, and to Chris and all your parents
Speaker 1: that are watching us this evening. You've got quite a
Speaker 1: right in front of you. Lots to get to tonight.
Speaker 1: But first I'm not breaking any news to you, of course,
Speaker 1: that this Prime Minister loves to have it both ways.
Speaker 1: In fact, we've even gone to the We spent a
Speaker 1: year's production budget on this graphic each way outbow because
Speaker 1: he'll say one thing and that'll do another. And sometimes
Speaker 1: it'll be, you know, one day and then another day.
Speaker 1: Sometimes it'll be a week and another week. This one
Speaker 1: a little bit different. As you know, the new Governor
Speaker 1: General is apparently so amazing, is such a great friend
Speaker 1: of the Prime Minister that she's going to get an
Speaker 1: extra two hundred thousand dollars when she eventually takes over
Speaker 1: the role in just a few days time. Now, as
Speaker 1: we know, this is the ultimate captain's pick to decide
Speaker 1: who is the person with the power to the government.
Speaker 1: After all, that is one of the key roles of
Speaker 1: the Governor General, and the more they like you, the
Speaker 1: less likely that's going to happen. Regardless of what happens
Speaker 1: in the Senate, regardless of whether you are in a
Speaker 1: minority government position. But of course this governor General, as
Speaker 1: everyone knows by now, is going to get paid and
Speaker 1: absolute bodza. Now she's or the current governor general earns
Speaker 1: less than the Prime minister. The new governor General will
Speaker 1: earn more than the prime minister. The prime minister now
Speaker 1: is at about five hundred and something. He goes up
Speaker 1: to six hundred, which means, let's bump it up. There's
Speaker 1: a lot of ribbons to to cut. Well, why do
Speaker 1: I mention each way albow, because apparently this is all great,
Speaker 1: all above board, all good, all with the times, all
Speaker 1: you know, yeah, with the sisterhood. The problem is, it's
Speaker 1: not always been the position of old mate Anthony Arbernezi
Speaker 1: that the highest office in the land, even more significant
Speaker 1: than the prime ministers, should receive major bump ups in money.
Speaker 1: Now we are talking today about a governor General that
Speaker 1: he has appointed will end up gearning two hundred thousand
Speaker 1: dollars more than their previous governor general. Well, let's go
Speaker 1: back to two thousand and three. David Hurley was the
Speaker 1: man who had become our Governor General and there was
Speaker 1: a conversation about how much that person will end up
Speaker 1: being paid. Now the hike was about fifty thousand dollars,
Speaker 1: and guess it was blowing up and going off like
Speaker 1: a tubob watch because the pay rise was fifty thousand
Speaker 1: dollars as opposed to when he's in charge and it's
Speaker 1: two hundred thousand dollars. Well done to whoever dug this up.
Speaker 2: Today the governor general will receive a fifty five thousand
Speaker 2: dollars pay rise, or more than one thousand dollars a week.
Speaker 1: There's a big.
Speaker 2: Contrast, mister speaker with average austraints, and average austraints will
Speaker 2: be concerned about a bill increasing salary of fifty five
Speaker 2: thousand dollars in one hit, because in contrast, one point
Speaker 2: seven million low paid workers were awarded a pay rise
Speaker 2: of fifteen dollar dollars to seventeen dollars a week in
Speaker 2: the latest Industrial Relations Commissioned Safety Net wage case.
Speaker 1: So he was either wrong then or he's wrong now,
Speaker 1: or he was believing it then and he's lying now,
Speaker 1: or he was lying then and he's believing it now,
Speaker 1: or he was lying then and he's lying now. Either
Speaker 1: way each way, Albo two hundred thousand dollars is fine
Speaker 1: as an uptick in the Governor General's pay fifty thousand dollars. Well,
Speaker 1: it's an absolute offense, isn't that. I'll work on the voice. Now,
Speaker 1: a little more about the big change that is coming
Speaker 1: when it comes to vapes. Now, of course Australians have
Speaker 1: given up, generally speaking on smoking, but there are those
Speaker 1: of us that are still stupid enough to do it.
Speaker 1: But the big fear about vaping is that it is
Speaker 1: a brand new generation of people that are learning how
Speaker 1: to put something in their system that's terrible, that's not natural,
Speaker 1: and therefore it must be banned.
Speaker 3: We have legislation before the Parliament today which will be
Speaker 3: debated in the Senate when we go back to Canberra
Speaker 3: in a couple of weeks, that seeks to ban the
Speaker 3: sale and the supply of these products.
Speaker 1: But then they decided not to ban the sale of
Speaker 1: these products because it was a way of getting something
Speaker 1: that the Greens wanted. Now, of course, the Greens they
Speaker 1: don't want to disappoint the young people, especially the ones
Speaker 1: that love a good old vape. That can you do
Speaker 1: the double dragon and the smoke rolls and all the
Speaker 1: rest of it. No, the young people, and they vote green,
Speaker 1: so they wanted it to be still having some action.
Speaker 1: Sure not, you know, lovely apple and cinnamon scrolls and
Speaker 1: whatever the other flavors are that some bloc will set
Speaker 1: you underneath the counter. So of course you are now
Speaker 1: going to be available to get your vapes.
Speaker 4: This is a significant amendment that we will be proposing
Speaker 4: to the Senate, but one that very much keeps faith
Speaker 4: with the original intention of our reforms, which are to
Speaker 4: wipe out the recreational vaping market, to wipe this out
Speaker 4: from retail settings, and to return this product to its
Speaker 4: original intention.
Speaker 1: We're just making it up as we go. This is
Speaker 1: a really good thing to do. This is a really
Speaker 1: good thing to do. Fifty thousand dollars terrible, two hundred
Speaker 1: thousand dollars great, good luck keeping up with any of this.
Speaker 1: Of course, the expectation is that you don't think you know,
Speaker 1: you're just walking around, counting down to the next big
Speaker 1: footy game, distracted by whatever song you've just heard flashing
Speaker 1: out of a fast fashion shop. But for the rest
Speaker 1: of us who've got something between our ears, you've got
Speaker 1: more than I do. We know, mine's mostly cholesterol. But
Speaker 1: you are able to see and able to remember that
Speaker 1: they said something completely different. But that's not the real
Speaker 1: thing that I want to focus on, because, as you know,
Speaker 1: we're going from the vape shops which basically will be
Speaker 1: being shut down as soon as the first of July,
Speaker 1: and the place where you will be able to get
Speaker 1: a wide array of flavors. It'll be nicotine, mint or
Speaker 1: menthol and that place will be your friendly chemist. Yes,
Speaker 1: the thing that kind of works like a cigarette, but
Speaker 1: because it's not a cigarette, it's now a way of
Speaker 1: getting off cigarettes. But it's still got nicotine and it
Speaker 1: still produces smoke, which means technically the person sitting next
Speaker 1: to you wouldn't really like it as much as if
Speaker 1: I was sitting there with a caheba. Anyway, follow along
Speaker 1: as you will. Now we put some calls in today
Speaker 1: to the Health Minister's office and jeez, weren't they happy
Speaker 1: that it was us calling? Now we don't know whether
Speaker 1: code names were used, and whether this program was announced
Speaker 1: to whether they had to go. It's someone from scott News.
Speaker 1: Can we just ask a quick question? Who knows? But
Speaker 1: we did get something out of them, which is okay,
Speaker 1: how does this system work because under the new system
Speaker 1: after October of this year, you won't need a prescription anymore.
Speaker 1: You just go to You just present yourself as if
Speaker 1: you're buying the the cold and flu tablets, and you go, oh,
Speaker 1: where's me, I've got me, I think there is, there's me,
Speaker 1: there's me, driver's license. Yeah, two packs thing. I'm feeling
Speaker 1: a bit so apparently, So how does this work? Now?
Speaker 1: When it comes to the vapes. Let's say we called
Speaker 1: the Health Minister's office and this is the best that
Speaker 1: we can work out. You can buy a month's worth
Speaker 1: of vapes at any one time. But here's the fun bit.
Speaker 1: How do you work out how much is a month's
Speaker 1: worth of vapes that you'll be able to get from
Speaker 1: your local chemist. Well, of course that's all in the
Speaker 1: eye of the beholder, you see. Apparently, the way that
Speaker 1: this is going to work is that you customer will
Speaker 1: go to the chemist and you will tell the chemist
Speaker 1: how much you would normally smoke if it was a
Speaker 1: cigarette or a cigar or pouch tobacco or all the
Speaker 1: rest of it. Right, that's the plan. In fact, the
Speaker 1: actual quote we have from the Health as a spokesperson
Speaker 1: was this is limited to a one month supply dependent
Speaker 1: on the person and their current nicotine intake. It's a
Speaker 1: limit on the nicotine concentration and also the quantity. So okay, now,
Speaker 1: smoking bad, right, smoking bad, smoking terrible? Advocating it on
Speaker 1: television really naughty? Right. Health department got in touch with
Speaker 1: us and said that, you know, posters, get rid of it. Okay,
Speaker 1: I am not advertising smoking, So I let's just pluck
Speaker 1: a number. Right. Let's say I have a cigar a day,
Speaker 1: all right, So a cigar a day, thirty days, thirty
Speaker 1: one days equals one vape, two vapes because the hit
Speaker 1: of the tobacco is a little different than somebody who
Speaker 1: might be having a pack of a cigarette, or somebody
Speaker 1: who's having a pack of cigarettes a day or two
Speaker 1: a week, or a cart in a month. I don't know,
Speaker 1: but obviously they'll be, you know, three vapes for you.
Speaker 1: This is how the system will work. Now, there's no
Speaker 1: way you will have to prove that you are somebody
Speaker 1: who is a carton a week or a packet a day,
Speaker 1: or a thirty cigars a month person, and you will
Speaker 1: end up with the vapes. And do you know an
Speaker 1: extra thing that's amazing on top of this system, you
Speaker 1: don't have to pay any tax. So if you purchase
Speaker 1: any of those existing tobacco products, of course you pay tax.
Speaker 1: It'll be going up again, I think Versse to September
Speaker 1: a couple three times a year. They put it up.
Speaker 1: Why because they want to make you give up because
Speaker 1: it's too expensive. It's called a price disincentive, you see,
Speaker 1: which is why they keep putting the tax up. So
Speaker 1: eventually you go, look, I really like one, but Jesus expensive.
Speaker 1: All right, give it up. But now you can go
Speaker 1: to the chemist telling them that you're a pack a day,
Speaker 1: a carton a fortnite, make up a number. You don't
Speaker 1: have to prove it. There's no way to prove it,
Speaker 1: and you will end up getting x amount of vapes,
Speaker 1: and you can have your selection whether it's going to
Speaker 1: taste like tobacco or it's going to taste like mental menthole,
Speaker 1: their choice. All of these, of course have to be
Speaker 1: stored somewhere, which means someone may start to target your
Speaker 1: local chemist when they've currently been targeting your local tobacconists.
Speaker 1: But who knows. This is the Greens idea. This is
Speaker 1: the great idea about how to deal with this system
Speaker 1: and there's no tax. So even if you're somebody who
Speaker 1: absolutely loathes tobacco like ninety percent of the country that
Speaker 1: doesn't smoke and gets the Harry hits, when someone like
Speaker 1: May will light up somewhere and you well, of course,
Speaker 1: the taxation that comes through each and every year is
Speaker 1: the best part of what ten eleven, twelve, fourteen billion
Speaker 1: dollars that exclusively comes out of the taxes that people
Speaker 1: pay who smoke tobacco. Now, of course, that means that
Speaker 1: money goes back in and you end up with a
Speaker 1: federal budget surplus, which is what they currently have. Or
Speaker 1: I might dangerously say you are well and truly paying
Speaker 1: for your and four other people's eventual interaction with the
Speaker 1: health system. But under this amazing new idea, no tax,
Speaker 1: no limit, no proof, just ask, and you could end
Speaker 1: up with enough vapes to get you through the month
Speaker 1: and maybe a few spare that I will predict some
Speaker 1: dodgy people will end up selling on a new black
Speaker 1: market equally, so just questions. I don't know and nobody
Speaker 1: won Why have any details about this? Are we picking
Speaker 1: one company that makes these things? Now? If so, we'd
Speaker 1: like to know so we can all buy the shares, right,
Speaker 1: I'd love to know if is it two or three
Speaker 1: companies or are we basically handing the Australian non tobacco
Speaker 1: smoking market to one company and if so, which company?
Speaker 1: And how was this negotiated? And has this been decided
Speaker 1: or will this just be decided and one day we'll
Speaker 1: read about it four months after it's happened. Now again,
Speaker 1: I think there is a sensible solution here, which is
Speaker 1: the use of vapes. But I believe that they should
Speaker 1: be regulated like tobacco is, and it should be taxed
Speaker 1: like tobacco is. It could be sold in the same
Speaker 1: places and obviously in the same way that the law
Speaker 1: currently exists that no one under the age of eighteen
Speaker 1: can purchase them. But yes, are there time Yes, of
Speaker 1: course there's times where it happens, but you need to
Speaker 1: have massive penalties and massive enforcement. But instead, under the
Speaker 1: labor policy which has gone from full banning to make
Speaker 1: up how much nicotine you normally smoke and the chemist
Speaker 1: has to give you a month's work and you declare
Speaker 1: how much the month is worth a nicotine. Nothing to
Speaker 1: see here, nothing at all.
Speaker 3: Now.
Speaker 1: Of course, for the Greens, they think it's all about
Speaker 1: harm minimization.
Speaker 5: Using vapes won't be criminalized. That will help keep it
Speaker 5: out of the police and court system. Make it a
Speaker 5: health issue. You'll be able to buy vapes via a
Speaker 5: pharmacist after having a conversation with a pharmacist.
Speaker 1: But then, ironically, one of the people who's going to
Speaker 1: be voting for the legalization or this sort of permission
Speaker 1: system and the makeup the numbers as you go along,
Speaker 1: will of course be Senator Hansoon Young, who we know
Speaker 1: hates vaping for a perhaps different reason than the people
Speaker 1: who used to hate va vaping.
Speaker 6: We know there's a lot of pollution because of vaping.
Speaker 1: Wow, and she gets six years in the Senate every
Speaker 1: time she gets re elected. What a hateful and mythogenistic
Speaker 1: thing for him to say. Or sometimes we just can
Speaker 1: laugh with you, always with you, Senator. Now, one of
Speaker 1: the things that I think makes the Labor Party a
Speaker 1: successful political organization is that, regardless of weather you like
Speaker 1: what they're doing, if you're part of the team, you
Speaker 1: have to pretend you agree with everything that they're doing.
Speaker 1: Why Because the Labor Party has a thing called a caucus.
Speaker 1: This means every single member of the party gets to
Speaker 1: go behind closed doors, and one says let's go this way,
Speaker 1: and one says that let's go that way. And then
Speaker 1: they have a vote and they decide they're going to
Speaker 1: go this way, which is not the way you wanted
Speaker 1: to go. But as soon as you walk outside, you've
Speaker 1: got to say, I completely agree. We should have always
Speaker 1: gone that way. Perfect example of this was Penny Wong.
Speaker 1: Remember the absurdity when Julia Gillard says, yeah, not to
Speaker 1: same sex marriage for whatever reason, that would be too
Speaker 1: big a shock. When she was the Prime minister. We
Speaker 1: had to believe that this openly gay woman was completely
Speaker 1: cool with the idea that her government was going to
Speaker 1: go against same sex marriage. In fact, here's the receipt
Speaker 1: that we have way back from twenty ten. And of
Speaker 1: course we know it was all bs at the time,
Speaker 1: because of course, this was her reaction when same sex
Speaker 1: marriage was legalized under a liberal government. Oh that's right,
Speaker 1: it happened under a liberal government. Wow, a couple of
Speaker 1: years later. But that's the way it works. Stick together.
Speaker 1: No one has a go at the system. Nobody complains.
Speaker 1: Anyone who complains, the system turns on them. Conversy, the
Speaker 1: Liberal Party much more fair and they're able to say.
Speaker 1: People can cross the floor and disagree, and that's all fine,
Speaker 1: but in terms of message discipline, it means that generally
Speaker 1: speaking with the Liberal Party, think about it as a
Speaker 1: third of bedweatherers, third of right wingers and a third
Speaker 1: of left wingers, depending how that turned out on your screen,
Speaker 1: and at any one time the bed wedders choosed to
Speaker 1: go to the left or to the right, and whichever
Speaker 1: third are left out of the two thirds, they're the
Speaker 1: ones that you see on TV always generally are peddling
Speaker 1: from a great height on whatever the idea is that
Speaker 1: the Liberal Party is doing. When it comes to the left,
Speaker 1: that was about they're not doing enough on climate change
Speaker 1: or where is all the same sex marriage stuff? And
Speaker 1: all of those MPs, of course were returned to parliament
Speaker 1: by Center, that's right. They were all wiped out by
Speaker 1: the Teals anyway. So the Liberal Party then ends up
Speaker 1: in this situation where people can sort of openly question
Speaker 1: and openly have a go, and that's good for the system,
Speaker 1: but it's very bad when you're trying to have a
Speaker 1: bit of message discipline. You end up looking like you're
Speaker 1: fighting amongst yourself. But in actual fact, the Labor Party
Speaker 1: also fights amongst itself. They just do it behind a
Speaker 1: closed door. As you may have heard by now, Labour
Speaker 1: senator from Western Australia elected to the Parliament at the
Speaker 1: last election, she's there for six years. In a vote
Speaker 1: today which was about recognizing Palestine as a country and
Speaker 1: if you would like a two state solution, probably at
Speaker 1: some point going to have to recognize both of the states.
Speaker 1: When and how that's a debate for another time, and
Speaker 1: let's not do it now. So of course she turns
Speaker 1: around and she says, I'm voting against my party. Now.
Speaker 1: The technical term in Camper they all love is across
Speaker 1: the floor. Across the floor, she voted against her own government.
Speaker 1: To give you an idea of how rare this is.
Speaker 1: According to the ABC, it's the first time a Labor
Speaker 1: politician has crossed the floor while Labor's in government since
Speaker 1: nineteen eighty six. Since nineteen eighty six, Yet this Prime
Speaker 1: Minister desperate not to offend Islamic voters, who, as we
Speaker 1: have shown you before, are raging up at a campaign
Speaker 1: right now, suggesting that Arab and Muslim voters, according to WESBS,
Speaker 1: are starting to get the Harry hits with Labour because
Speaker 1: they're not come out against Israel enough and they're out
Speaker 1: there saying Muslim vote matters, and we could decide twenty
Speaker 1: seats if we go this way and we go that way,
Speaker 1: and even the left. He's over at the Saturday Paper. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I don't worry if you haven't heard of it the
Speaker 1: Saturday Paper. It's sort of really the Saturday papers. But yeah, anyway,
Speaker 1: don't worry about it. So, of course, will this person
Speaker 1: be punished for doing the first thing against her own
Speaker 1: government since nine eighty six? Of course not. Why because
Speaker 1: this is a pis week Prime Minister. Oh sorry, what's
Speaker 1: the proper ternal supposed to use? We can rattle Prime Minister.
Speaker 1: I apologize a week and rattle Prime Minister. So the
Speaker 1: first time since nineteen eighty six a Labor person has
Speaker 1: voted against their own government for whatever reason. But it
Speaker 1: ain't the way the system works. Penny Wong had to
Speaker 1: pretend she was against same sex marriage. This senator from
Speaker 1: Western Australia creates Labor Party history because she does because
Speaker 1: the Labor Party does not want to throw the Muslim
Speaker 1: vote away, and certainly does not want to throw them
Speaker 1: into the arms of the Greens who are the ones
Speaker 1: pushing the votes for the recognition of Palestine. In order
Speaker 1: to get two countries recognized for the two state solution,
Speaker 1: the Labor Party will take no action, none not suspended,
Speaker 1: no inquiry, no expulsion. So I would now like to
Speaker 1: appeal to all of the other Labor MPs who would
Speaker 1: like to cross the floor when they know they're doing
Speaker 1: the wrong thing for example, nuclear ban, climate change, vape policy,
Speaker 1: because clearly there's no consequences or does that rule only
Speaker 1: apply to this senator and this issue. It's a bit
Speaker 1: like every time they fight the Greens, they're not actually
Speaker 1: fighting the Greens. Now, I gave a challenge to my friends,
Speaker 1: my mates, my buddies, my soulmates, my pals in the
Speaker 1: wider Press gallery in Canberra. Now, look, you know, I
Speaker 1: love the sky on news people. I love a couple
Speaker 1: of people outside of it. But generally speaking, the feelings
Speaker 1: are mutual and they're all about you know, if they
Speaker 1: wanted to, they could get all Canbra Colombo and remember
Speaker 1: who knew what and where and all of that stuff
Speaker 1: we got for a couple of years about a senator's
Speaker 1: office and who went where and who knew and what
Speaker 1: and there to lift up the cup. All the details
Speaker 1: were there to be followed, and I threw out the
Speaker 1: challenge to them, can you help us answer a couple
Speaker 1: of questions. A couple of questions about Matt Kean joining
Speaker 1: Albo's team while heading up the Climate authority that will,
Speaker 1: among other things, set the target for twenty thirty five,
Speaker 1: which is expected to be anywhere between sixty five and
Speaker 1: seventy five percent reduction of one percent of the world's
Speaker 1: global emissions. China, of course, will continue to do whatever
Speaker 1: it wants. We're thirty percent of global emissions until twenty
Speaker 1: thirty but Matt Kean will be in charge of the
Speaker 1: organization that will decide what those targets are. And then
Speaker 1: the government says, oh, it's not our choice. It's not
Speaker 1: our choice. It was an independent organization of taps what
Speaker 1: to do, even though you've just seen they've handpicked the guy. Well,
Speaker 1: as you remember, Matt Kean last Tuesday was still a
Speaker 1: member of the News of Oils parliament. Actually technically still
Speaker 1: a member of the News of OL's parliament because the
Speaker 1: resignation hasn't come into effect yet. But whatever one week
Speaker 1: ago is when Matt Kean decided that he was done
Speaker 1: with politics, he was moving on to a different role,
Speaker 1: and we had five questions that one week later, if
Speaker 1: he turned up now working for the Albanese government, that
Speaker 1: maybe there's a few what do they used to say?
Speaker 1: Questions to answer? Wasn't that the one that Katie Gallaha
Speaker 1: and the mean girls always used to ask during the
Speaker 1: stuff from a couple of years ago, The Prime ministers
Speaker 1: questions to answer, Well, here's a few questions to answer.
Speaker 1: When did the government know the current chair of the
Speaker 1: Climate Authority was going to go? Did the government interview
Speaker 1: any other candidates to replace this person? Did the government
Speaker 1: approach Matt Kean or did he approached them? If the
Speaker 1: government approached, when did they approach And failing all of that,
Speaker 1: uka if we send this thing off to the National
Speaker 1: Integrity and Corruption Commission to have a look at well.
Speaker 1: I predicted last night that we were going to get
Speaker 1: a couple of answers to these questions via friendly media,
Speaker 1: which is why there was this story which popped up
Speaker 1: in the Channel nine news services over the past few hours,
Speaker 1: which has told us exactly the behind the scenes about
Speaker 1: who and when and how many of those questions they
Speaker 1: can or can't can't answer now to give you an
Speaker 1: idea of the poetry that was built around this beautiful
Speaker 1: meeting of a liberal renegade and a labor prime minister
Speaker 1: at the top of his game, I would like to
Speaker 1: invoke an impersonation or dare I say, channel the spirit
Speaker 1: of one of the greatest performance Australian radio has ever had.
Speaker 1: Do you remember Richard Mercer, otherwise known as the Love God.
Speaker 1: The Love God who appeared, of course on many stations
Speaker 1: around the country, most famously Mixed one to six point
Speaker 1: five in Sydney and many versions of it around the
Speaker 1: Australian Radio network a few years ago. Well you may
Speaker 1: well remember that he would read out love letters and
Speaker 1: all the rest of it, and they'd be sexy music
Speaker 1: underneath it. Well, cue the sexy music, because I got
Speaker 1: a story to tell you.
Speaker 7: Hello, everyone, are you enjoying yourself this Tuesday night? Unscins
Speaker 7: Matt King was heading home on the train one Friday
Speaker 7: afternoon five weeks ago when his mobile phone lit up
Speaker 7: with an unexpected call from the federal Climate Change and
Speaker 7: Energy Minister Chris Bowen. Keen, the former Liberal New South
Speaker 7: Wales Treasurer and Energy Minister, was in a crowded carriage
Speaker 7: on Sydney's north shore line and unprepared for what Bowen
Speaker 7: was about to suggest. A new job at the peak
Speaker 7: agency setting climate change targets for the country. Bowen had
Speaker 7: to wait for King to hop off the train at
Speaker 7: the next stop and find some privacy at the far
Speaker 7: end of the chatsword station before they could talk undisturbed
Speaker 7: about a role that would outrage federal liberals and Nationals
Speaker 7: who believe one of their own has just joined the enemy.
Speaker 1: Okay, that's enough music, thank you. Now. You may recall
Speaker 1: that Matt Kean also turned around and told us just
Speaker 1: one week ago that he'd been thinking about it for
Speaker 1: some time. Yes, that's true, but he was leaving New
Speaker 1: South Wales politics for a job in the PA pa
Speaker 1: Papa private sector, Rod Tape. I won't be running for
Speaker 1: federal parliament.
Speaker 4: I intend on pursuing a career in the private sector.
Speaker 1: The private sector. Well, hang on, hadn't five weeks earlier
Speaker 1: you started a conversation with the climate change Minister about
Speaker 1: getting a job in the government sector and ending up
Speaker 1: switching from an apparent liberal loyalist to now the left
Speaker 1: hand man helping set the climate targets that your own
Speaker 1: party presumably will argue against to the next state election.
Speaker 1: So we now have a couple of very clear answers
Speaker 1: to our five questions. And there's a reason that the
Speaker 1: five questions matter. The first one, well, it remains sadly unanswered,
Speaker 1: which is when did the government know that the current
Speaker 1: chair was leaving. Also unanswered is the question of did
Speaker 1: the government interview any other candidates. We now know that
Speaker 1: Bowen spoke first to Keane because I'm pretty sure Chris
Speaker 1: Bowen's people weren't informing the City Morning Heral today about
Speaker 1: where they were on Chatswood Station one lonely and cold afternoon.
Speaker 1: The job was discussed not in the past five days,
Speaker 1: but act in the past five weeks. And I stand
Speaker 1: by my idea that this thing should go off to
Speaker 1: the Federal Corruption Commission. Why because let me explain in
Speaker 1: New South Wales that it is a crime in New
Speaker 1: South Wales to induce somebody to leave the parliament is
Speaker 1: with a position in the public service. Now, whether it
Speaker 1: was the public service of the same state the person
Speaker 1: was a politician in or not, that's up for debate.
Speaker 1: I am not playing a lawyer on television but I
Speaker 1: do remember that a knew so vast premier had to
Speaker 1: resign because of this exact type of thing that a
Speaker 1: member of parliament ended up coming out of the parliament.
Speaker 1: This is something that I think is going to be
Speaker 1: before if not one, perhaps two corruption organizations. They may,
Speaker 1: of course dot all their ey's cross all their tase,
Speaker 1: be more perfect than blokes who walk on water. But
Speaker 1: here's the reality. Today. In the press we learned that
Speaker 1: five weeks ago there was a conversation. Five weeks ago
Speaker 1: the job was being suggested by someone that seems to
Speaker 1: have been the major choice in why somebody left the parliament.
Speaker 1: This is going to get bigger if anyone has the
Speaker 1: balls to pick up the magnifying glass and get involved
Speaker 1: in a bit of Canberra Colombo. Don't write the Mills
Speaker 1: and Burne version of two star crossed politicians forbidden by
Speaker 1: their montague and capulate like political parties until they eventually
Speaker 1: found each other in their own eyes. Did someone help
Speaker 1: Matt Kean make a decision that he wasn't already beginning
Speaker 1: to make? Matt Kean says, I was thinking about it
Speaker 1: for some time, but he said one week ago not
Speaker 1: that he was leaving for the government sector, but that
Speaker 1: he was leaving for the private sector. He gets a
Speaker 1: new job within one week in the government sector. Now,
Speaker 1: we were supposed to believe that all of this was
Speaker 1: happening really quickly, and it's been happening for five weeks.
Speaker 1: If anyone's got the guts or the balls in the
Speaker 1: canber Press gallery after you, what do we only really
Speaker 1: care about things when they hurt the other side of politics?
Speaker 1: There's something in this. Just got a feeling there's something
Speaker 1: in this and I want somebody serious to investigate it
Speaker 1: so they can tell us whether there's nothing to see
Speaker 1: here or there was always something plenty to see here.
Speaker 1: Now and a second, we're going to get to a
Speaker 1: debate with Holly Hughes and with Stephen Conroy. But first
Speaker 1: I want to talk of course about Trump debate and
Speaker 1: the countdown to it. All Friday Now, coverage starts all
Speaker 1: the way through the morning. I'm going to pop up
Speaker 1: with Laura Jays about ten thirty Sidney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Canberra time.
Speaker 1: Then the event kicks off at eleven am. It goes
Speaker 1: for about ninety minutes, and then I will be watching
Speaker 1: the debate with the wonderful read of Panney and highlights
Speaker 1: of our piss take of it all will be up
Speaker 1: at sky news dot com. That are you in the afternoon,
Speaker 1: so online, on air, in your phone, on app, Free
Speaker 1: to wear, Foxtell Flash, wherever you watch us. However you
Speaker 1: here is fire Eye, hot Radio or anything else. Sorry,
Speaker 1: the another player I should say now now if you
Speaker 1: would like to be part of it, make sure you
Speaker 1: play Attention all week in long. But anyway there could
Speaker 1: be a chance to see may not happen? Why because
Speaker 1: this happened today on CNN.
Speaker 8: Well, first of all, it's it takes someone five minutes
Speaker 8: to google Jake Tapper Donald Trump to see that Jake
Speaker 8: Tapper has ma'am.
Speaker 1: Can stop for his interview.
Speaker 8: If you're going to present my colleade'll filter, ma'am. I'm
Speaker 8: going to style and if I'm stating to attack my colleagues,
Speaker 8: I would like to talk about jo Biden and Donald Trump,
Speaker 8: who you work for? Yes, if you are here to
Speaker 8: speak on his behalf and I will have this conversation.
Speaker 8: I am stating facts that your colleagues have stated in
Speaker 8: the past. Now I'm sorry, We're going to come back
Speaker 8: to Caroline.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much for your time.
Speaker 8: You are welcome to come back.
Speaker 7: Now.
Speaker 1: That was like a Bill I Riley thing. Remember Connie's Mike,
Speaker 1: Toddy's Mike, and that was terrible. But this, of course
Speaker 1: was somebody who is the spokesperson for one of the
Speaker 1: two people who is going to be debating.
Speaker 7: Now.
Speaker 1: Of course that person is answering every question with it's
Speaker 1: Rigg's Riggid's rigged, It's rig But still that's what they're saying.
Speaker 1: What do I say that there's a chance this thing
Speaker 1: may not happen, because there are two ways to really
Speaker 1: stay across what's happening in American politics. One is to
Speaker 1: have a check out what's happening on MSNBC. The other
Speaker 1: is to try to find out what Megamedia is talking about.
Speaker 1: And the aid of Magamedia is a guy called Steve Bannon.
Speaker 1: He's about to go to jail himself, but he'll be
Speaker 1: out in time to vote for the president, but he
Speaker 1: won't be able to speak on his behalf. He has
Speaker 1: got one hell of a pulpit via the War Room
Speaker 1: and Real America's Voice, where for multiple hours a day
Speaker 1: he kind of telegraphs the play of where MEGA is
Speaker 1: going to end up, and he says, because CNN did
Speaker 1: that to a representative of Trump, they clearly won't be
Speaker 1: good enough to Trump. So Trump should pull.
Speaker 9: Out Cassie Hunt Ojun apology, CNN o Jun apology today,
Speaker 9: and we don't get that apology to Caroline Lovett and
Speaker 9: to the Trump campaign to MAGA today. President Trump should
Speaker 9: cancel this. It's not three on one. They have the
Speaker 9: entire news apparatus because she had a producer. You know, Caroline,
Speaker 9: you've done so much TV. She had a producer in
Speaker 9: her ear saying, you know, cut her off, cut her off.
Speaker 1: There is no indication that that is going to happen,
Speaker 1: but often what Bannon says ends up being what MAGA
Speaker 1: calls for. And we of course know there is no
Speaker 1: Trump without MAGA, and there is no MAGA without Trump.
Speaker 1: Quick break back with more looking forward to this, Holly
Speaker 1: Hughes and Stephen Conery. I think I've drunk some of
Speaker 1: what Biden's going to be taking before the debate and
Speaker 1: it won't wear off till at least the end of
Speaker 1: the show. So I'm glad you're watching. Thank you very
Speaker 1: much for watching, and thank you for those who decided
Speaker 1: to check in with me. We're having a great note tonight,
Speaker 1: none of them. The great Stephen Connry is here, and
Speaker 1: the wonderful Holly uses as well. Now, do you want
Speaker 1: to do something fun? Do you want to do some fun?
Speaker 1: Something fun together? All right, let's all watch Stephen say
Speaker 1: exactly the opposite of what he probably actually thinks as
Speaker 1: he shows pompous discipline, which clearly was not shown by
Speaker 1: the senator who crossed the floor against Labor Party today.
Speaker 1: So Steven, serious question. No penalty for the person who
Speaker 1: voted against the government for the first time since nine
Speaker 1: eighty six.
Speaker 10: Well, look, Paul, I've watched no first Day'm under more
Speaker 10: pressure than normal tonight for probably the first time. My
Speaker 10: daughter's watching, so I've really got to be on my game.
Speaker 10: So look, I don't think anyone said no punishments. I
Speaker 10: haven't heard anyone saying to be no punishment. What I've
Speaker 10: seen people suggested that might not be expulsion, which wouldn't
Speaker 10: be an unusual circumstance. Caucus discipline is the most fundamental
Speaker 10: principle of the party. I mean, when you join the
Speaker 10: Labor Party, you sign on your ticket that you agree
Speaker 10: to abide by the majority in the room. That's what
Speaker 10: on the first day you joined the Labor Party, you
Speaker 10: signed so you know from that moment going forward you
Speaker 10: will accept the majority.
Speaker 1: So what's the thing where you turn around and you say, look, okay,
Speaker 1: everyone gets one one one maybe, so okay, a little
Speaker 1: bit of a sanction goes to that side for a
Speaker 1: couple of weeks. But you and I both know that
Speaker 1: the Greens I have another vote on this. They could
Speaker 1: do it as early as tomorrow.
Speaker 10: So look there the issue is whether or not any individual,
Speaker 10: So not singling out the count circles that any individual
Speaker 10: is a recidivist, whether they repeatedly attack Labor Party policy publicly,
Speaker 10: whether they repeatedly attack the Prime Minister and key ministers publicly,
Speaker 10: whether they speak in Parliament against the party's positions. And
Speaker 10: at this stage she's probably at the softer end of that.
Speaker 10: If she was to keep going, I think the case
Speaker 10: would begin to build to ultimately expel her. It wouldn't
Speaker 10: surprise me if she was given maybe a three month
Speaker 10: suspension from caucus and you know, down with Penny and
Speaker 10: the leadership and just work their way through the issues.
Speaker 10: But instant expulsion on a first offense is an unusual situation.
Speaker 10: I mean, Joe Chamberlain used to run the party in
Speaker 10: Victoria a long time ago, like that, and Bill Hartley
Speaker 10: people like that. That was how they treated it. We're
Speaker 10: a little bit more mature in numance nowadays, so I
Speaker 10: don't I wouldn't expect expulsion in this instance unless you
Speaker 10: became a repeat offender.
Speaker 1: And that's the thing, hollye Where look, the Greens, let's
Speaker 1: talk about this bigger than just the individual right. The
Speaker 1: Greens see the opportunity to wedge the Labor Party into
Speaker 1: essentially sort of Israeli Palesteinstel position. There is no goldilocks
Speaker 1: place in any of this when you're trying to deal
Speaker 1: with the most activist of groups. But the reality here
Speaker 1: is that for the Labor Party, there are these Muslim
Speaker 1: vote matters people all the rest of it. They're not
Speaker 1: going to run candidates, but they could run a bit
Speaker 1: of pressure here, there and everywhere. If the Labor Party
Speaker 1: expelled an Islamic woman for standing up for the state
Speaker 1: of Palestine, well then the Greens would say, darling, come
Speaker 1: and join our number, and everyone who's peedoff come and
Speaker 1: vote with us. Now, admittedly it all ends Upstill's preferences
Speaker 1: for the Labor Party. But that's the game the Greens
Speaker 1: want to play here. They want her to become the
Speaker 1: political martyr in this moment.
Speaker 11: Look absolutely, and you know, Comrade Conroy, I appreciate what
Speaker 11: you were saying, is for River loyal, I've made a
Speaker 11: hill he is, and God bless his soul for it.
Speaker 11: But you know, I've been around in the Senate tonight,
Speaker 11: around Parliament House at a few different events that have
Speaker 11: been going on, talking to people, and overwhelmingly members of
Speaker 11: the Labor right, including women from the Labor right, have said,
Speaker 11: if we had strayed this far from the path, we
Speaker 11: would have been gone months ago. It is absolutely incorrect
Speaker 11: for Stephen to say this is her first foray we
Speaker 11: saw from the River, to see her deliberate press.
Speaker 6: Conference she gave. She's now writing for our Jazira.
Speaker 11: I mean, you know, a Katari based organization known for
Speaker 11: funding him us and she's writing articles for them. She
Speaker 11: is absolutely this is not her first offense and it
Speaker 11: is really Look, you know, I don't envy the Labor
Speaker 11: Party for this, because, as Comrade Conray says, you know,
Speaker 11: it is all about the majority rule and if she
Speaker 11: is allowed to slip through just because she's a woman
Speaker 11: in a hyge ab, then you know it's going to
Speaker 11: throw the doors open to everybody else who wants to say, well, actually,
Speaker 11: as a member of the labor right, I'm not going
Speaker 11: to chase down this complete left wing warren that the
Speaker 11: Prime Minister is taking us down.
Speaker 6: But he's going to be.
Speaker 11: Finding himself on much shakier grounds next time a labor
Speaker 11: right person wants to do something, if he gives a
Speaker 11: leaf pass to a labor left woman, and I don't
Speaker 11: care who she is. You know, when you have party rules,
Speaker 11: you know, if I wanted to cross the floor.
Speaker 6: I would have to resigned from my shadow ministries. That's
Speaker 6: the way it goes.
Speaker 11: I have the right across the floor without leaving the party,
Speaker 11: but I have to resign from shadow ministries. Labor Caucus
Speaker 11: has a different set of rules. Is you do not
Speaker 11: cross the floor at any from the Therefore, if she's allowed, God,
Speaker 11: if she is allowed going, let me not a first
Speaker 11: offense with regards to against Sorry, no, no, no, I
Speaker 11: just had to listen to you doing a weird speech
Speaker 11: thing down.
Speaker 1: The love the love God. I think that was just
Speaker 1: slightly across.
Speaker 11: I walked into the studio and said to the poor
Speaker 11: guy here responsible mic up going, what the hell.
Speaker 6: Are you listening?
Speaker 1: You? Relax everyone, the reviews are in play enjoyed by all. Okay,
Speaker 1: play enjoyed by all. All right, So now let's flip
Speaker 1: it a little here where Holly, you have been as
Speaker 1: somebody who's been more than willing to have the conversation
Speaker 1: about vapes in the country. But I kind of want
Speaker 1: to take you through where they've landed. It feels to
Speaker 1: me like this kind of remember that TV show was
Speaker 1: around for about three weeks, but still remember the TV
Speaker 1: show was called Hole in the Wall, where you had
Speaker 1: to turn your body into the shape of the hole
Speaker 1: in the wall otherwise the war would knock you into
Speaker 1: the pool. It was on Channel nine. It's on YouTube right.
Speaker 1: It was a Japanese game show before that. But it
Speaker 1: feels like we've got this weird contortion position, which is,
Speaker 1: we wanted to ban vapes because vapes bad, but now
Speaker 1: vapes available but only in chemists. And as we found
Speaker 1: out from behind the scenes with the Health minister today,
Speaker 1: it's up to you to tell them how much a
Speaker 1: month's worth of nicotine that you need. Now this feels
Speaker 1: like to me the recipes of the beginning of another
Speaker 1: little black market. This feels a weird way to go
Speaker 1: about this when essentially it's the honor system for your
Speaker 1: access to something that currently is a commercial product.
Speaker 6: Look, I have been out there for years.
Speaker 11: I shared an inquiry into this issue years ago. You know,
Speaker 11: back then, I really didn't even know what vaping was
Speaker 11: or you know, how it worked and all of this
Speaker 11: sort of stuff. But what I did learn was that
Speaker 11: it helped people quit smoking, including me, and have been
Speaker 11: through a lot of investigation in this issue, and years
Speaker 11: ago recommended that this should be something that is a
Speaker 11: regulated product in the same way tobacco and alcohol is
Speaker 11: that it's not available to children, that it's sold in
Speaker 11: specific stores, that it is required to have ID and
Speaker 11: that was knocked back. And this prescription model, which is
Speaker 11: the only prescription model in the world, was introduced, and
Speaker 11: it has been an abject failure from day one. It
Speaker 11: has opened the door to the black market. You know,
Speaker 11: where I live in Sydney, within you know, a three
Speaker 11: minute walk, I can hear it's seventeen tobacconist stores. They're
Speaker 11: selling illegal tobacco, They're selling what is technically illegal vapes.
Speaker 11: It's never been legal to buy a vape over the
Speaker 11: counter with nicotine in it in Australia. It is an
Speaker 11: absolute face that Mark Butler has doubled down on this
Speaker 11: fail policy, but then to make it worse, he's now
Speaker 11: entered into this weird agreement with the Greens that it's
Speaker 11: all illegal from July one, but from three months after that,
Speaker 11: So in winter you can't buy them without a prescription,
Speaker 11: but by summer your spring you'll be able to buy
Speaker 11: one over the counter and a pharmacist. Now, the concerns
Speaker 11: are not only did pharmacists come out about this saying
Speaker 11: we don't want a bar of it, but we are
Speaker 11: seeing and particularly in Victoria, there's been a number of
Speaker 11: fire bombings of stores, tobacconist stores and the vapes because
Speaker 11: they are by being run by the black market. So
Speaker 11: what risk are we putting pharmacists at by pushing them.
Speaker 6: Into this space now?
Speaker 11: And it's not going to kill the black market, it's
Speaker 11: just insanity. But I am pleased today that the Liberal
Speaker 11: Party and the Coalition has come out with a policy
Speaker 11: which does announce a regulated model for vapes to actually
Speaker 11: keep them out of the kids hands, but also allow
Speaker 11: revenue to be generated when it's a pharmacy, under pay
Speaker 11: for it. When they're sold in a pharmacy under a
Speaker 11: therapeutic good, you can't put a GST on them.
Speaker 6: You can't put any tax on them.
Speaker 11: So if you sell them as a consumer regulated products,
Speaker 11: you can put an excise, you can tax them they're GST.
Speaker 11: You can actually use the revenue to do youth education programs,
Speaker 11: to have better border security, to do.
Speaker 6: Better enforcement programs.
Speaker 11: But yet Butler is done a deal with the Greens
Speaker 11: for this weird thing. The pharmacists throw up in arms
Speaker 11: about it. It's just bizarre.
Speaker 1: All right, Well, Steven, you're taking a moment. It's not
Speaker 1: going to work because I've got to take a quick
Speaker 1: break here. We'll be back in my mine, not two
Speaker 1: his time here, Paul Murray life, thank you so much
Speaker 1: watching this Wednesday night. Stephen's daughter included moreno sec here. Now,
Speaker 1: Stephen Conroy, I could ask you about vapes, but I
Speaker 1: got to get to Matt Kean. We're here, of course,
Speaker 1: so with Holy Hughes, I think he wants to desperately
Speaker 1: talk about vapes here now, So Stephen, so again right now,
Speaker 1: imagine now, now let's go benefit of the doubt version,
Speaker 1: which is all Ies, crow Teas all the rest of
Speaker 1: are all above board. Then someone told the paper they've
Speaker 1: been talking about it for five weeks, which of course
Speaker 1: would be many weeks prior to him leaving the Parliament
Speaker 1: where his publicly stated reason was to go into the
Speaker 1: private sector. Someone's got to have a look at this,
Speaker 1: don't they to make sure that there's above board, because
Speaker 1: does anyone remember a premier nineties New South Wales having
Speaker 1: to resign for well know your history. People.
Speaker 10: Well, look, I'm not quite a much of a conspiracy
Speaker 10: theorist on this as you are, Paul. Firstly, it is,
Speaker 10: from my understanding, a part time job. It's not a
Speaker 10: full time job, so I would expect he would also
Speaker 10: pick up some work in the private sector as well,
Speaker 10: So I think that one may not be ready to
Speaker 10: be announced.
Speaker 1: Right. So wait, you are in. You are. The form
Speaker 1: tonight is unbelievable. Look, this is you know, virtuoso performance.
Speaker 1: This is magnificent. You know this. I mean, look, he's
Speaker 1: going to the private sector. We just haven't heard about
Speaker 1: it yet. And then suddenly everything is retrofitted. That is
Speaker 1: one of the best I've ever heard from you. So
Speaker 1: topic done. So let's get to holy. Really interesting today
Speaker 1: it's stick and notes the trial eleven. No, it's going
Speaker 1: to respond. Just watched the Great Man. He's holding on
Speaker 1: as tight as he possibly can. But we are a
Speaker 1: here and he's delivering the life. Yeah, go for it, Steven.
Speaker 11: You need to go on counsel fatima payment because.
Speaker 1: You may can hold a party line. He's helping out
Speaker 1: saying this is a fair a start. He's holding the
Speaker 1: need to bring you in, mate.
Speaker 6: They need to bring you in.
Speaker 11: You know, maybe like Bill Shortens six hundred and some
Speaker 11: thousand discipline speech writer to teach the caucus how to hold.
Speaker 6: The line, because you, mate, are a champion.
Speaker 1: Just well done.
Speaker 6: Credit to you.
Speaker 1: I love him. He's one of my favorite people. He
Speaker 1: really hits in real life as well as on the telly.
Speaker 1: Now let's get this here, which to say, so, okay,
Speaker 1: holy seriously serious for a moment here, which is you
Speaker 1: know how people buy those buy those little sort of
Speaker 1: tracking things they put into their bags and all the
Speaker 1: rest of it. Right, Well, apparently there's some significant number,
Speaker 1: according to a surveyor in New South walest with this
Speaker 1: stuff's being used to frankly track people right to go
Speaker 1: on to harass them people who want to harass their partners. Now, okay,
Speaker 1: all of us think that's terrible. This technology is not
Speaker 1: going to disappear. So what are we supposed to do here?
Speaker 1: Because obviously we don't want to make it easier for
Speaker 1: creeps to go after people. But conversely, we can't pretend
Speaker 1: that things like GPS doesn't exist anymore.
Speaker 11: No, And honestly, Paul, I wish I could sit here
Speaker 11: tonight and say here's an answer for you. Yeah, big horrific.
Speaker 11: It is absolutely horrific. And you know, for and I,
Speaker 11: you know, the people like you, Stephen and I are
Speaker 11: sitting here. This is not something that will cross our
Speaker 11: minds of something to do. And I think it's really
Speaker 11: hard for people who don't act in these absolutely despicable
Speaker 11: ways to actually comprehend what would what would someone ever
Speaker 11: think that this is an appropriate way to behave And
Speaker 11: the fact that they're putting air tags on their former
Speaker 11: partners cars, and I mean, this is just I wish
Speaker 11: I could sit here and say to you we need
Speaker 11: to do this or this is what needs to be done.
Speaker 6: But it is just abhorrent.
Speaker 11: And I think you know the thing that upsets me
Speaker 11: when particularly murders of domestic violence happen, it's never oh
Speaker 11: we didn't know about it. It's always known to police.
Speaker 11: And maybe this is where it needs to be that
Speaker 11: when they have digital devices, any of those things, perhaps
Speaker 11: if they are known to police is as a domestic
Speaker 11: violence offender, because obviously these things attract on mobile phones,
Speaker 11: that perhaps there is some sort of review of the
Speaker 11: devices they have.
Speaker 6: But honestly, it is just awful.
Speaker 1: Well it's it's the thing when people use mobile phones
Speaker 1: to intimidate people, all telephonic devices, all the rest of it.
Speaker 1: This should become part of that offense, all right, absolutely,
Speaker 1: last one here and Stephen, because you are not a
Speaker 1: member of the Democratical Republican Party, you are free to
Speaker 1: speak your actual heart. Do you think that debate will
Speaker 1: actually happen on Thursday because Bannon says, don't do it. Yeah.
Speaker 10: Look, I think Trump has more to lose by pulling out.
Speaker 10: Trump needs to reach out beyond just his pure marker base.
Speaker 10: I mean, we saw in the last election four years ago.
Speaker 10: You know, he got a record vote, but he's still
Speaker 10: lost by a significant margin in the overall vote and
Speaker 10: in key states. And if you look at the Fox
Speaker 10: News poll recently, it said that he's in the Independence,
Speaker 10: which is probably the group he needs to split, even
Speaker 10: Independence moving away from him. So I think he needs
Speaker 10: to try and be in the debate and try and
Speaker 10: win the debate or perform well in the debate so
Speaker 10: that he can quarterize a few of the Independence and
Speaker 10: swing voters that have been moving away from him. So
Speaker 10: I think the risk for him to spit the dummy
Speaker 10: over a trivial argument there was nothing to do with
Speaker 10: him directly, would play a little worse for him than
Speaker 10: having a crack.
Speaker 1: I completely agree. Guys, we're well and truly out of time,
Speaker 1: but that's probably the best show we've done this year
Speaker 1: or many years. Thank you so much, appreciate it. We'll
Speaker 1: see you all again tomorrow and night Bugger the footy,
Speaker 1: come and watch us. We'll see you then.
Speaker 6: Da