Speaker 1: From the Skyinging Center. This is Paul Murray Live. Thank you, Sherry,
Speaker 1: thanks for watching this Tuesday night. So much to get
Speaker 1: to I need four hours. Let's try and do it
Speaker 1: in one tonight. A story you may will not have
Speaker 1: heard of. It's top of the tree right now. It's
Speaker 1: skyonies dot com that an the disgraceful behavior of a
Speaker 1: Greens senator going about as low as you could possibly
Speaker 1: go in defense of unions. Wait till you see this.
Speaker 1: Biden was shoved out the side door at the convention
Speaker 1: that was supposed to lock him in for another election
Speaker 1: in four years as president. And the great Nigel fars
Speaker 1: Joints is because tonight is no sooks, no lefties. You'll
Speaker 1: love it, love every second of it. But first, huge
Speaker 1: news today in and around aged care. Now, the Agecare
Speaker 1: Minister Anika Wells has been playing games with the future
Speaker 1: of many people that are watching this show right now,
Speaker 1: the people that are on the verge of age care
Speaker 1: or their kids who will inevitably end up at some
Speaker 1: point in their lives having to deal with aged care. Now,
Speaker 1: December last year we told you that there was a
Speaker 1: plan that the Labor Party was seriously considering which was
Speaker 1: to increase the amount of user pay in the age
Speaker 1: care system where so called wealthy people and of course
Speaker 1: that's defined by not how much money you have in
Speaker 1: the bank, but say the value of your house. That
Speaker 1: this would end up being a major factor in how
Speaker 1: much you would have to pay for aged care. This
Speaker 1: was December. We were supposed to get the report at
Speaker 1: the very start of the new year, but the Dunkly
Speaker 1: by election meant that it was pushed way past that
Speaker 1: by election because the reality of what they were planning
Speaker 1: to do may well have affected that by election. Well,
Speaker 1: we now know that as a result of the Greens
Speaker 1: who are hunting specifically Anneka Wells and her seat of Lily,
Speaker 1: the former Wayne Swan seat in Brisbane, we are about
Speaker 1: to get a hard turn to the left when it
Speaker 1: comes to how people will be charged for aged care.
Speaker 1: This is the reporting that happens this afternoon. Boomers facing
Speaker 1: user pay aged care as labor give grounds in secret talks. Now,
Speaker 1: remember these negotiations are exactly like most other things that
Speaker 1: take place, which is non disclosure agreements. Everyone has to
Speaker 1: shut up. Everyone does shut up because they don't want
Speaker 1: to annoy a government, a government that has the capacity
Speaker 1: to give them extra funding, to cut their funding, to
Speaker 1: increase their regulation or drop their regulation. Now, again, this
Speaker 1: is a huge story because of its consequences. And I
Speaker 1: don't care what they said last week, last month, or
Speaker 1: last year. Something is changing behind closed doors in order
Speaker 1: for this thing to pass through the Parliament, either with
Speaker 1: Greens or potentially even with Coalition support. Now, if that
Speaker 1: means that more people are going to have more money
Speaker 1: taken out of what is left over after the sale
Speaker 1: of a home, or they're being sent higher bills because
Speaker 1: of the value of their home, a home they may
Speaker 1: well have lived in for decades and you have not
Speaker 1: seen a cent of that worth. It's all money on paper,
Speaker 1: but that paper will count into how much you will
Speaker 1: have to pay for the care in the final years
Speaker 1: of your life. This is huge. Again, I read from
Speaker 1: this story Labour has given ground in hard fought talks
Speaker 1: with the Coalition to overhaul age care services for hundreds
Speaker 1: of thousands of older Australians, clearing a key obstacle towards
Speaker 1: a new regime that asks wealthier people to pay for
Speaker 1: more of their care. Now, as you notice here, the
Speaker 1: negotiation seems to be happening between Team read and Team Blue. Now,
Speaker 1: if Team Blue is going to create a scenario where
Speaker 1: they are going to increase the user pays system, well
Speaker 1: we're going to have our problems and we'll haul all
Speaker 1: of the relevant people over the coals. But of course
Speaker 1: the other path here, if they don't get the coalition
Speaker 1: is to go to the Greens. They of course will
Speaker 1: reset this even higher, because remember, they believe in estate taxes,
Speaker 1: They believe in taxation on what you leave to your
Speaker 1: family members after you are gone. They believe in a
Speaker 1: war on intergenerational wealth. And they are hunting this minister.
Speaker 1: They want her seat, so she is going to try
Speaker 1: to cut them off at the pass again. Hopefully I'm
Speaker 1: told everything's wrong by this time tomorrow night. But this
Speaker 1: was the government that told us they were going to
Speaker 1: tell us at the start of the year. They didn't.
Speaker 1: This was the government that said the family home wasn't
Speaker 1: part of it. We'll guess what's now back into the conversation.
Speaker 1: The worth of your home now also inside these negotiations
Speaker 1: is a disgraceful backflip on one of the few ideas
Speaker 1: that were good ideas when they came into office. Now,
Speaker 1: I shouted the roof down a few months ago when
Speaker 1: we learned that one in four people in age care
Speaker 1: are malnourished. That number climbs way higher once people start
Speaker 1: to have things like dementia. But my apologies, four in ten,
Speaker 1: forty percent, four in ten of people in age care
Speaker 1: are malnourished. It's six out of ten for people who
Speaker 1: may well be dementia patients. Now, one of the ways
Speaker 1: that this government was going to try to shock anyone
Speaker 1: involved in age care into delivering a better quality of care,
Speaker 1: which includes better food, was for the people who run
Speaker 1: those age care companies to be held criminally responsible if
Speaker 1: the care falls and the organization is declared to be negligent.
Speaker 1: But guess what that now is off the table. Two.
Speaker 1: Back to the Herald article, the federal government has backed
Speaker 1: away from its plan to impose criminal penalties on nursing
Speaker 1: home directors who fail essential standards after age care providers
Speaker 1: and the Coalition warned that the sanctions went too far. Well,
Speaker 1: I think when four out of ten people are malnourished,
Speaker 1: six out of ten people are malnourished if they have
Speaker 1: something like dementia, well, that is a huge failure of
Speaker 1: the organizations that get billions of dollars in revenue. Some
Speaker 1: then end up running at a profit, some end up
Speaker 1: running at a loss. But the reality is, if you
Speaker 1: scrape and save your whole life to buy a house,
Speaker 1: you do everything you can, like taking care of the gardens,
Speaker 1: adding on a roof, improving it so that when you
Speaker 1: sell it it's worth more than when you bought it,
Speaker 1: and the majority of that money then goes to essentially
Speaker 1: private companies. For you to have a four in ten
Speaker 1: chance of not having good enough food, well that is
Speaker 1: a system that must change. If the way to shock
Speaker 1: them into it is serious penalties, well then I'm all
Speaker 1: for it, and I'm all fine with it. We will
Speaker 1: find out where this goes and the next day or so.
Speaker 1: I understand that right now the function is in and
Speaker 1: around visas, and I'll talk about that in some detail tonight.
Speaker 1: But can someone somewhere ask a question of the role
Speaker 1: of the family home in a changed, greater user pay
Speaker 1: system when it comes to age care. I'll certainly ask
Speaker 1: behind the scenes, and we'll ask as many as we
Speaker 1: can to do it in front of the cameras. We'll
Speaker 1: report back tomorrow night for you on exactly what's going
Speaker 1: to take place. There now. As you know, last night
Speaker 1: we had some fun with the idea that when Barnaby
Speaker 1: Joyce says that somebody's asook, he had to apologize. Prime
Speaker 1: Minister has the court withdrawn reporter to assist the House.
Speaker 1: I'm going to invite the thank you the member. I
Speaker 1: knew it withdraw. But when labor say it, nobody asks
Speaker 1: for it to be withdrawn.
Speaker 2: And the leader of the Opposition has moved this motion
Speaker 2: today because the man is irresponsible and a sook.
Speaker 1: I'm moved that the debate be adjourned. The question is
Speaker 1: the debate be adjourned? I'll put the question those opinions
Speaker 1: say I now again, I don't care about the use
Speaker 1: of the words sook. I've used it here tonight. No
Speaker 1: sook's no lefties. It does not hurt my glass jaw
Speaker 1: or feeble little feelings. I don't have a problem with
Speaker 1: the word sook. Okay for obvious reasons. But it's yet
Speaker 1: again an example about one rule for them and one
Speaker 1: rule for everyone else. One of the great things brom
Speaker 1: and Bishop has said over the years. It's absolutely true. Well,
Speaker 1: another example of it flows around about some of the
Speaker 1: stuff that's pushing around Canber right now, and of course
Speaker 1: we see it in question Time and each and every
Speaker 1: day that this government is well and truly on the
Speaker 1: back foot when it comes to the visa situation. Spectacular
Speaker 1: reporting by the way from Sharing Markson about the lack
Speaker 1: of vetting that is taking place in some scenarios and
Speaker 1: the use of tourist visas as opposed to humanitarian or
Speaker 1: refugee visas is again disgraceful, and we'll get to that
Speaker 1: a little later in the night. But of course the
Speaker 1: government is running around and telling everyone it can in
Speaker 1: the media that somehow there's a problem with Peter Dutton
Speaker 1: because as we know last week he said hard ban
Speaker 1: on anyone from Gaza. Then of course he's now walked
Speaker 1: it back. In fact, he even brought an opinion piece
Speaker 1: to that very point to make it nice and clear
Speaker 1: what the position of the government, of the potential government is,
Speaker 1: which is, yeah, okay, some people from Gaza, but not
Speaker 1: everyone from Gaza, and there's got to be extensive vetting.
Speaker 1: No one would have a problem with that. Oh, but
Speaker 1: apparently it's flip flopping and it's a disgrace when it's
Speaker 1: Peter Dutton. But of course it's another example of the
Speaker 1: one rule for them, one rule for everyone else. Well,
Speaker 1: let's go back to when Albo was helping out his
Speaker 1: mate Alan Joyce when it came to their position that
Speaker 1: the Qatar Airlines should not be landing more flights in Australia.
Speaker 1: Why because we mean fewer people would potentially be flying
Speaker 1: to Europe on among other airlines, principally Quantus. Remember way
Speaker 1: back when when the Labor Party actually admitted that they
Speaker 1: blocked this in order to protect Quantus's profit. It was
Speaker 1: one of those issues where they had a different story
Speaker 1: every day. Stephen Jones, significant minister in that government, said
Speaker 1: we can drive prices down, but if we drive them
Speaker 1: down to a level where it's actually unsustainable to run
Speaker 1: an airline instead of having two carriers, we will design
Speaker 1: our markets in ways which will make it unsustainable for
Speaker 1: the existing Australian based carrier code. We're doing it to
Speaker 1: save Quantus's bottom line. We see, because of course he's
Speaker 1: in the Labor Party, so he gets a redo, but
Speaker 1: it doesn't not allowed to redo. The Labor Party allowed
Speaker 1: to redo. National Party can't say sook, but the Labor
Speaker 1: Party can say sook. He came here on the air
Speaker 1: of Sky News to try to clean up the quotes
Speaker 1: where he said that he'd been misconstrued by his very
Speaker 1: own words. One rule for them, So if they can
Speaker 1: change their story halfway through, Dutton can two.
Speaker 3: Come And I made a couple of days ago has
Speaker 3: been completely misconstrued by some. I've made the uncontroversial comment
Speaker 3: that we need all of our airline in all of
Speaker 3: our airline operators to be viable and profitable.
Speaker 1: But just as I said last night, the idea that
Speaker 1: the Labor Party is fine for the visa conversation to
Speaker 1: go for another week. They are getting smashed up by
Speaker 1: the minute. Here was question after question after question of
Speaker 1: which they had four fifths of bugger or answers to
Speaker 1: by Minister.
Speaker 4: How many of the two nine hundred visas from Gaza
Speaker 4: have been canceled? How many of the two nine hundred
Speaker 4: visas from Gaza have been canced? How many of the
Speaker 4: two nine hundred visas of people on shore from Gaza
Speaker 4: have been canceled? Mister Speaker, I seek your ruling whether
Speaker 4: the Prime Minister is relevant to the question he was asked.
Speaker 1: But the best thing that happened in Parliament today Bob Catter,
Speaker 1: great question about how much money may well be going
Speaker 1: towards the twenty thirty two Olympics. But my particularly favorite
Speaker 1: detail is watch the short haired, gray haired green behind
Speaker 1: Bob Catter completely freaked out that he's defending Christians.
Speaker 5: Doesn't federal government backing of Brisbane's Olympics confiscate thirty billion
Speaker 5: off North and Central Queensland's coal and copper miners, Canaan
Speaker 5: cattle farmers, giving it to the IOC, whose Paris opening
Speaker 5: ceremony was I quote an augiastic pagan ritual denigrating Christianity treasurer.
Speaker 5: Didn't Christians abolish slavery, create from a brutal imperium pax
Speaker 5: romana from the dark ages there naissance didn't Communism murder.
Speaker 1: Seventy eight million people.
Speaker 2: Didn't Christian Gorbachev the Pope the Charlie Wilson's Christians abolished Communists?
Speaker 2: Didn't pagan rituals sacrifice children to the tree and crocodile gods?
Speaker 1: Do such rituals still live on? I love you, Bob,
Speaker 1: look for deving on the show very very soon and
Speaker 1: of course full support to Robbie catterap katters Australian Party
Speaker 1: in the Far North in the upcome in Queensland election.
Speaker 1: Will have a chat to him before that polling day
Speaker 1: comes around as well. Now, remember when interest rates went
Speaker 1: up in May twenty twenty two, the then Shadow Treasurer
Speaker 1: said the sky was falling in and it was all
Speaker 1: Scott Morrison's fault.
Speaker 6: This is a full blome cost of living crisis on
Speaker 6: Scott Morrison's watch. When things are going well in the economy,
Speaker 6: he takes all of the credit, and when times are
Speaker 6: tough in the economy, he takes none of the responsibility.
Speaker 1: Of course, Jim Chalmers has come to resemble that exact quote,
Speaker 1: which he may well have been repeating about himself in
Speaker 1: the Mirror, because while there was one under the previous government,
Speaker 1: there have been twelve under this government. And if it
Speaker 1: was true the first time, it is true this time
Speaker 1: in June in twenty twenty two, this time in July
Speaker 1: that same year, it's just as true. In August it's
Speaker 1: just as true. In September it's just as true. In
Speaker 1: October it's just as true. In November it's just as true.
Speaker 1: In December. It's just as true in February of last year,
Speaker 1: in March of last year, of May, in last year
Speaker 1: of June of last year. In November of last year,
Speaker 1: there have been a dozen rate rises under this government,
Speaker 1: the government that promised to do something about cost of living.
Speaker 1: Twelve times it has gone up yet the political conventional
Speaker 1: wisdom is if it goes up the thirteenth time, that
Speaker 1: will be when Australians will have had enough of the
Speaker 1: economic management of the bloke who gave us a preview
Speaker 1: of his attitudes towards being the Treasurer before he was
Speaker 1: the Treasurer. In fact, let's play it again, Jim Charmers
Speaker 1: when interest rates went up once under the previous government,
Speaker 1: and now is this Jim Charmers really telling us what
Speaker 1: he truly thinks about his own government? They've gone up
Speaker 1: twelve times.
Speaker 6: This is a full blome cost of living crisis on
Speaker 6: Scott Morrison's watch. When things are going well in the economy,
Speaker 6: he takes all of the credit, and when times are
Speaker 6: tough in the economy, he takes none of the responsibility.
Speaker 1: Now, the reason I mentioned all of this yet again
Speaker 1: is because of the reality of what people are sitting
Speaker 1: in right now. I talk about the inflation python they
Speaker 1: claim credit because it's not getting any worse. Well, it
Speaker 1: is already turning people Rybina purple, and it has been
Speaker 1: for a couple of years now. Well, the Reserve Bank,
Speaker 1: we got to see some of the minutes inside just
Speaker 1: how close the thirteenth was, Just how close we came
Speaker 1: to the thirteenth one, the one that would apparently pop
Speaker 1: the blood vessels of Australians when it comes to this government.
Speaker 1: The Reserve Bank and Michelle Bullock have also made it
Speaker 1: clear no rate cut this none. So you may well
Speaker 1: hear ramp and speculation here, there and everywhere. Well again
Speaker 1: according to the minutes of the Reserve Bank, that is
Speaker 1: of course a governor handpicked by this government, that is
Speaker 1: holding on for grim life before it gets swept away
Speaker 1: replaced by people more friendly, including the unions, towards what
Speaker 1: the government wants to do. The reality is this close
Speaker 1: is how we came to yet another interest rate rise.
Speaker 1: Let me read from the stories about this today in
Speaker 1: the Australian, which include extracts of the minutes. The Reserve
Speaker 1: Bank seriously considered an immediate increase to the cash rate
Speaker 1: in August and how a rate cup before the end
Speaker 1: of the year would actually keep inflation above the target
Speaker 1: until twenty twenty seven. This ain't I of anytime soon. Kids.
Speaker 1: They said it was time to get rid of the
Speaker 1: last mob. After one interest rate rise. Twelve later, the
Speaker 1: case is twelve times as clear about the economic mismanagement
Speaker 1: of this government. Minutes from the Central Bank's August meeting
Speaker 1: reaffirmed that the RBA's Governor Michelle Bullock's view that rate
Speaker 1: relief is unlikely to be delivered until twenty twenty five
Speaker 1: and shed new light on how close they came to
Speaker 1: hiking it. Quote given members that being every one of
Speaker 1: the Reserve Bank who makes the decision around this is
Speaker 1: not just the Reserve Bank governor. They agreed to the
Speaker 1: commitment to prioritize returning inflation to target that is between
Speaker 1: two and three percent. Remember we had a month where
Speaker 1: it was over four percent. We had a quarter where
Speaker 1: it was closer to four percent than it was to
Speaker 1: three percent. Now all of those things would justify an
Speaker 1: immediate increase in the cash rate. This matters because the
Speaker 1: people who are just holding on. Anyone who is just
Speaker 1: holding on to the side of the cliff eventually loses
Speaker 1: the strength to do so. A third of Australians have
Speaker 1: paid off their own house. Well done to you you
Speaker 1: worked hard. A third of Australians are paying off a
Speaker 1: house right now and they are frightened. A third are renting,
Speaker 1: presumably in properties that are either outright owned by somebody
Speaker 1: who's already worked hard to pay it off, or are
Speaker 1: being paid off by somebody who most likely has another mortgage.
Speaker 1: That means that under elbows rate rises five hundred thousand
Speaker 1: dollars loan, that's the average loan in Australia. Fourteen and
Speaker 1: a half thousand dollars is what you have had to
Speaker 1: find since May of last year May of twenty twenty two.
Speaker 1: A seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars loan you've had
Speaker 1: to find, twenty one thousand dollars, a million dollars you've
Speaker 1: had to find thirty thousand dollars you didn't have behind
Speaker 1: the couch. Now you've found it because you haven't had
Speaker 1: to sell your house yet, but you've had to go without.
Speaker 1: And what may well have been very comfortable from the
Speaker 1: fifteenth of the month, the fifteenth of the month becomes
Speaker 1: a little bit uncomfortable in week four, and then a
Speaker 1: little bit uncomfortable in week three, and for many people
Speaker 1: very uncomfortable. Even a few days after they are paid.
Speaker 1: It is why two little too late tax cuts don't
Speaker 1: touch the sides. It's why pretending the twenty five dollars
Speaker 1: for every mansion or one bedroom unit when it comes
Speaker 1: to its power bills does not touch the sides because
Speaker 1: the increases from the government that was supposed to bring
Speaker 1: them down is way higher than those numbers. It's all
Speaker 1: just so they have billions of dollars that have been
Speaker 1: pittled up against the wall. So they have a slogan
Speaker 1: for an election, don't buy it, don't forget. When this
Speaker 1: python was squeezing, they took the fifteen hundred dollars off
Speaker 1: ten million taxpayers. They rerouted that to a biden Esque
Speaker 1: scheme of forgiving student debt. I'll give you the tip.
Speaker 1: They were already voting for you, Albo and Jim. We
Speaker 1: also learn that one of the consequences of the squeeze,
Speaker 1: you've heard a big light, A big squeeze that has
Speaker 1: been going on for too long, a couple of years,
Speaker 1: and a chance as the RBA is now talking about,
Speaker 1: not just of twenty twenty four, twenty five, twenty six,
Speaker 1: but maybe twenty twenty seven. So that is literally two
Speaker 1: elections away, one due next year and then potentially, yes,
Speaker 1: you could have another one in twenty twenty seven. This
Speaker 1: is madness that we are in right now. And I'll
Speaker 1: tell you why the people in Canberra couldn't give a
Speaker 1: tuppence razu. And it's not just because they're swimming around
Speaker 1: in money, but it's because the people around them are
Speaker 1: swimming in money as well. Today we learn yet again
Speaker 1: from the organizations who do not receive the same sort
Speaker 1: of government support because allegedly there's no votes in it
Speaker 1: as businesses that are going to greenify the future or
Speaker 1: make things like solar panels in austral all the rest
Speaker 1: of it. Right, four million used to be three point
Speaker 1: seven four million people are having trouble putting food on
Speaker 1: the table. Wake up, Wake up Canberra. This is so
Speaker 1: front and center, and we are the frogs in the
Speaker 1: pot that Okay, if it was boiling like this, we
Speaker 1: wouldn't go anywhere near it from a couple of years ago.
Speaker 1: Well it's boiling, baby, and we're the ones that are
Speaker 1: suffering right now. Are staggering. Three point seven million Australian
Speaker 1: households have reported struggling to put food on the table
Speaker 1: in the last twelve months, and we told you a
Speaker 1: version of this number when it came from the good
Speaker 1: people of Food Me. This time it's a new organization
Speaker 1: called at Work Australia. It also noticed that between August
Speaker 1: twenty twenty two February twenty three, inflation was at a
Speaker 1: thirty three year high, fifty three percent of Australian struggle
Speaker 1: to afford basic needs like food and shelter. Why is
Speaker 1: this not the first question in question time? Why is
Speaker 1: this not the thing that they hammer a prime minister
Speaker 1: about in a press conference? Why is this something that
Speaker 1: is not the talk of the halls of the building
Speaker 1: that allegedly is filled with the people who represent us. Well,
Speaker 1: of course, the Prime Minister has paid six hundred thousand dollars.
Speaker 1: He's got not one, but two brand new jets that
Speaker 1: are coming his way. Yes, ordered by the previous government,
Speaker 1: but not canceled by him. The cost of that four
Speaker 1: hundred and fifty million dollars the Voice referendum, four hundred
Speaker 1: and fifty million dollars so he could buy a place
Speaker 1: in history. Of course, politicians have got not one, not two,
Speaker 1: but three pay rises. Public servants have received the largest
Speaker 1: pay increases in a decade. So unsurprisingly, many of the people,
Speaker 1: and I know they are good public servants who often
Speaker 1: watch this show and go Paul, not all of us,
Speaker 1: but you get my point. When we're speaking about many
Speaker 1: of your cop leagues, why are they not worrying about
Speaker 1: any of this because they get a pay rise. It's
Speaker 1: the biggest in a decade. Just let the MPs get one.
Speaker 1: And now today the people who work at Parliament as well,
Speaker 1: the parliamentary staffers team Red, team Blue, team Yellow, team Green,
Speaker 1: what are all of them? Massive pay rises and cultural
Speaker 1: leave on top of everything else, domestic violence leave which
Speaker 1: I support in the obvious, mental health days, personal all
Speaker 1: of that stuff right the federal government. Apparently this is
Speaker 1: the maximum pay rise that is allowed under the rules.
Speaker 1: According to the ABC. They also get travel allowances. The
Speaker 1: proposed Enterprise Agreement, which was put to a vote on Monday,
Speaker 1: so presumably it has been supported, but will double check,
Speaker 1: is widely expected to be approved. It will give approximately
Speaker 1: two thousand political so MP, ministerial and electorate staff a
Speaker 1: pay rise of eleven point two percent over the next
Speaker 1: three years. Four percent in the first year, almost four
Speaker 1: percent in the second year, three and a half percent
Speaker 1: in the two years retrospectively, so they're going to pay
Speaker 1: rise backwards as well. There will also be three days
Speaker 1: of leave for any staff to attend significant religious or
Speaker 1: cultural obligations associated with a particular faith or culture. Now
Speaker 1: I'm fascinated by this one because we already have a
Speaker 1: scenario where while you can pick and choose your public holidays,
Speaker 1: certainly you know January twenty sixth, If you don't want
Speaker 1: to do that, you can take that at another time. Now,
Speaker 1: obviously there were people who already have the gazetted public holidays,
Speaker 1: generally speaking in and around things like the Christian public holidays.
Speaker 1: And again I don't have a problem with people taking
Speaker 1: one of those days off, like if you don't observe
Speaker 1: Good Friday, then you can take it off for what
Speaker 1: is the more appropriate day for your faith. But on
Speaker 1: top of all of the public holidays that exist, generally
Speaker 1: speaking in and around the Christian calendar, we're going to
Speaker 1: whack another three days on top of that for your
Speaker 1: faith or culture. It keeps going. First Nation staff will
Speaker 1: also receive an extra day a year off for nadock activities,
Speaker 1: and up to six days or two years of full
Speaker 1: ceremonial obligations. What now again, are we getting to a
Speaker 1: system here? And again, It'll be a long time before
Speaker 1: it's there. And to merely suggest that on television means
Speaker 1: apparently I'm setting the hair on fire. The gazetted public
Speaker 1: holidays are of course based in and around, generally speaking,
Speaker 1: the Christian calendar. Are we going to have options about
Speaker 1: those particular days or do you have those days? And
Speaker 1: everyone who is outside of the faith, will they get
Speaker 1: all the extras as well as now? Wonder these people,
Speaker 1: honestly no wonder. These people got no idea that the
Speaker 1: economy is not just numbers. The reality of the economy
Speaker 1: is not what you can massage out of treasury. The
Speaker 1: reality of people's lived experience right now today is a
Speaker 1: world of pain. Pay roseyse, pay rise for the politician,
Speaker 1: pay rise for the staffers, pay rise for the public
Speaker 1: servants for us idiots. Just pay more tax, Shut up
Speaker 1: and be grateful because we gave everyone a tax cart.
Speaker 1: Come off. Bank has made some interesting statements in the
Speaker 1: past couple of days, including about how much money it
Speaker 1: apparently costs them to keep cash in an ATM or
Speaker 1: cash in a branch in its annual report. The bank
Speaker 1: described providing cash is a challengeing commercial model, and it
Speaker 1: revealed spending about four hundred and ten million dollars on
Speaker 1: cash services in the year just gone. Of this amount,
Speaker 1: about three hundred and fifty million was used to keep
Speaker 1: cash available at branches and ATMs. Presumably the rest of
Speaker 1: it to four hundred and ten is literally moving it around.
Speaker 1: Don't spare you know, don't shad too many tears. Though
Speaker 1: the bank did still make a profit of nine point
Speaker 1: eight billion dollars. So, yes, cash is legal tender, and
Speaker 1: we should be able to get it from a bank,
Speaker 1: and we should be able to get it from an ATM.
Speaker 1: And it's not like you don't charge fees for people
Speaker 1: to access their own money. Please, Now, what about the
Speaker 1: Victorian lockdowns? Let's get back to those for a moment
Speaker 1: or two here Now, of course, we learned that the
Speaker 1: credit rating agencies which are downgrading constantly the Victorian economy
Speaker 1: because of how much debt that they currently have. Well,
Speaker 1: apparently one of the reasons why the debt is becoming
Speaker 1: is being downgraded, and thus the cost of tax payers
Speaker 1: is further and further up and through the roof is
Speaker 1: because of the world record lockdowns, but of course nothing
Speaker 1: to see here. Daniel Andrews, of course, among other things,
Speaker 1: got a little gold medal for his efforts. Remember, because
Speaker 1: he nailed COVID. You have to pay for it. And
Speaker 1: all those people who died by themselves, they'll never be
Speaker 1: a royal commission in TV news today. If you like me,
Speaker 1: spend well some period of time at home pretending to
Speaker 1: be or actually sick when it came to going to school,
Speaker 1: maybe you were just lucky enough to be home in
Speaker 1: the middle of the day. Phill Donna Hue legendary talk
Speaker 1: show hosts. I think it was here on Channel ten
Speaker 1: for years and years. Weill sadly's passed away. He did
Speaker 1: so aged eighty eight. His television show was on air
Speaker 1: between nineteen sixty seven nine ninety six. He won twenty
Speaker 1: different Emmy Awards. Now, I know it's bad to say
Speaker 1: this in the day when somebody passes away, but there's
Speaker 1: some very funny impersonations. Phil Hartman on SNL did a
Speaker 1: particularly good job. Still in the United States. Yeah, let's
Speaker 1: get to it. The Democratic National Convention one of four
Speaker 1: days where they're gonna pretend everything is fine, everything is okay,
Speaker 1: the person who was the co pilot as the plane
Speaker 1: started to head towards the mountain is the same person
Speaker 1: who'll be able to save you from the same mountain. Well,
Speaker 1: this is all, of course a vibey and very vague campaign.
Speaker 1: And even when lefty comedians are in the same town
Speaker 1: as you to celebrate you joke about how vague you are,
Speaker 1: you might have a problem.
Speaker 7: But of course Democrats are excited because this is a
Speaker 7: chance for them to lay out their specific vision each night.
Speaker 8: And let's hear what you got new this morning? We
Speaker 8: are learning how each night of the convention will highlight
Speaker 8: her vision for the country. Tomorrow's opening night's theme for
Speaker 8: the people, Tuesday will outline democrats bold vision for America's future.
Speaker 8: Wednesday they're calling a fight for our freedoms, and Thursday
Speaker 8: a message for.
Speaker 7: Our future, a bold policy moved by the Democrats. Tuesday
Speaker 7: is for the future, and Thursday is also for the future.
Speaker 7: How do you have themes that are so vague and
Speaker 7: then still run of ideas by Thursday?
Speaker 1: Now, of course we will have to celebrate a bomber
Speaker 1: in a pants suit. Well, Obomba will begin that process
Speaker 1: in the next couple of days. Along with Bill Clinton,
Speaker 1: who apparently is not canceled for the Epstein theme anyway,
Speaker 1: Lalita Express, I'm sure it was a completely convenient way
Speaker 1: of getting from well Adebate anyway. Well, of course I
Speaker 1: had the small problem of trying to push Joe not
Speaker 1: just off the stage, but I have to have the party,
Speaker 1: but they have to make sure that he turns up
Speaker 1: when no one's really what. So they shoved in about
Speaker 1: a thousand people to speak, So he started giving a
Speaker 1: one hour long how good am I? At eleven thirty
Speaker 1: at night. So the plan was, of course for no
Speaker 1: one really to see it, apart from the clips which
Speaker 1: are all turning up on breakfast television in the US today.
Speaker 1: But can I just call BS on this one thing
Speaker 1: that everyone says over and over and over again.
Speaker 9: Tonight is the first sliding doors moment for President Joe Biden,
Speaker 9: who had planned to speak Thursday night at his convention's close,
Speaker 9: but instead opened the week as the man who passed
Speaker 9: the torch to his dynamic and loyal number two.
Speaker 4: An important day to start, and that handing of the
Speaker 4: torch over to Kamala Harrison.
Speaker 1: Here in Chicago. The phrase passing the torch is getting used.
Speaker 7: A lie, punctuited sources tel NBC News by a past
Speaker 7: the torch moment where President Biden and Harris are expected
Speaker 7: to share the stage.
Speaker 1: Past the torch, past the torch pastors. A torch in
Speaker 1: this fashion was not part. They held him down, and
Speaker 1: they yanked it out of his almost cold, dead hand.
Speaker 1: Now it is just a month since that took place,
Speaker 1: but remember the month before that, when the passing of
Speaker 1: the torch was not his plan at all.
Speaker 10: We're not going anywhere. I am not going anywhere. I
Speaker 10: wouldn't be running if I didn't absolutely believe that I
Speaker 10: am the best candidate to beat down someone in twenty
Speaker 10: twenty four. I'm determined on running, but I think it's
Speaker 10: important that I REALI lay fears I've seen.
Speaker 1: Let them see me out there passing the torch. His decision, brave,
Speaker 1: See this was the play. Here's your choice, Joe. If
Speaker 1: you give up, we'll make you a hero. If you
Speaker 1: don't give up, we'll use the twenty fifth Amendment and
Speaker 1: we will push you out the door. Either way, you're
Speaker 1: done now. Of course, history will most likely remember this
Speaker 1: version of events because they're the ones who make the
Speaker 1: move and write the books. For those of us who
Speaker 1: lived this time, we remember what it was like a
Speaker 1: little bit like the people who actually lived through the
Speaker 1: Whitlam years. You see, kids basically only learn that the
Speaker 1: evil Liberal Party got together with some drunk governor general
Speaker 1: and they pushed the greatest prime minister off the history books.
Speaker 1: What they forget to write in the history books is
Speaker 1: that he lost the next two elections, meaning they did
Speaker 1: the right thing. But of course that would be just factual,
Speaker 1: and eventually those of us that remember it will just
Speaker 1: all simply go away and pay more for the privilege
Speaker 1: of age care. Between now and then quick break back,
Speaker 1: we're more plenty to talk about. Nosooks, no lefties. Nigel
Speaker 1: Faraj is going to be He cannot wait to talk
Speaker 1: to him in a moment or two time. Also looking
Speaker 1: forward to a conversation about the Greens and how low
Speaker 1: can they go when it comes to making a point
Speaker 1: in Parliament. This bloke, ruh, he is as low as
Speaker 1: the limbo go Niger Fras Marble or two's time, No books,
Speaker 1: no left he Senator Holly Hugheses here and the wonderful
Speaker 1: James Morrow as well. You can see him on the
Speaker 1: US Report Outsiders and read him in the Daily Telegraph.
Speaker 1: Hello everyone, So Nick McKim as you know right now,
Speaker 1: legislation debates happening right now about whether or not to
Speaker 1: put the CFMEU into administration, and most likely will happen,
Speaker 1: as I understand, some sort of deal has been done
Speaker 1: between government and opposition. Well, he decided to jump on
Speaker 1: the twitters and make a point that I think is
Speaker 1: a rather low way to go. And let's have a
Speaker 1: look at what he had to say here, which was,
Speaker 1: of course, they came for the refugees and only the
Speaker 1: Greens fought for them. Then they came for the climate protesters,
Speaker 1: the forest defenders, and only the Greens fought for them.
Speaker 1: Now they've come for the trade unions and only the
Speaker 1: Greens fought for them. Who will they come for next?
Speaker 1: Anyone who knows their history knows that this is a
Speaker 1: pretty obvious reference to World War Two and the Jews
Speaker 1: and the Holocaust. James too far?
Speaker 11: Well, I mean like there's two ways to come at this, Paul.
Speaker 11: You could either get very sort of serious and say,
Speaker 11: you know this is you know, an absolute new low
Speaker 11: for the Greens taking you know, this piece of Holocaust history,
Speaker 11: and you know this I think Neebor was the was
Speaker 11: the poet who wrote that is reverend Or you could
Speaker 11: just laugh. And I think the Greens are actually so
Speaker 11: laughable that they would come. They're actually at the point
Speaker 11: now where they're literally parodying themselves. I mean, and then
Speaker 11: don't want spoke up for the climate activists, you know.
Speaker 11: I mean, this is like there was a great joke
Speaker 11: in the great Chris Buckley book, thank you for smoking
Speaker 11: about this climate movement? Who speaks for the krill?
Speaker 1: You know.
Speaker 11: I mean it's like it's like, this is just how
Speaker 11: ridiculous these people are.
Speaker 1: So again, I mean, you know, Holly, you get to
Speaker 1: share a office with these people in the big red
Speaker 1: the big red building. Again, you're lucky, you. I mean,
Speaker 1: there's nothing they want use as a rhetorical device. And
Speaker 1: the same people who of course have been accused of
Speaker 1: going wrought up, if not over the line since October
Speaker 1: and now the ones pretending that defense of the CFMEU
Speaker 1: is something akin to the poetry of in and around
Speaker 1: the Holocaust.
Speaker 12: The whole thing has been extraordinary, And James, I understand
Speaker 12: what you're saying. And I'm sorry boys that I'm not
Speaker 12: there with you tonight. That would have been a fun.
Speaker 13: Night in the man Cave.
Speaker 12: Here I am in Canberra listening to these guys with
Speaker 12: their complete hypocrisy that.
Speaker 13: Knows no bounds.
Speaker 12: We have them this week on the CFMEU and we
Speaker 12: know it's all about donations for them, and they are
Speaker 12: very very sensitive when it comes to them getting a
Speaker 12: serve about that.
Speaker 13: And in fact, they tried to suggest.
Speaker 12: Today that the Liberals supported this legislation against SEF to
Speaker 12: put this CFMU into administration even though we had received
Speaker 12: donations from them. I can assure you we have never
Speaker 12: received any hash from the CFMEU. I mean, these guys
Speaker 12: are deluded, but to use.
Speaker 13: Something from the Holocaust.
Speaker 12: And I understand James's point that they're a parody and
Speaker 12: that you've got to laugh at them. But the reality
Speaker 12: is we have to listen to these guys in the Senate.
Speaker 12: The majority of them are in the Senate, go on
Speaker 12: day after day making calls, interrupting Senate proceedings around ridiculous
Speaker 12: motions on Gaza.
Speaker 13: Yet they are never.
Speaker 12: To acknowledge what occurred on October seven. When they talk
Speaker 12: about children in Gaza, they refuse to acknowledge the hostages
Speaker 12: the young children that are still being.
Speaker 13: Held that we have no idea if they are dead
Speaker 13: or alive.
Speaker 12: By Hamas, I mean they are just the most despicable party.
Speaker 12: They are the lowest of the low and I mean
Speaker 12: the Australian people need to wake up to what these
Speaker 12: people are really like. They're not about warm, fuzzy hugging Koalas.
Speaker 12: They are absolutely disruptive and disgraceful and.
Speaker 1: They see an absolute opportunity politics to sidle up to
Speaker 1: what they would see as a lovely source of cash
Speaker 1: and a lovely source of booth volunteers. All right, a
Speaker 1: number of people in the Labor Party, well, they are
Speaker 1: finding it rather hard James to come out and say
Speaker 1: Peter Dutan's not a racist, right all? After the Zari
Speaker 1: stack on nonsense of the past few days. They're not
Speaker 1: going to come out and say this. They're more than
Speaker 1: happy for the label just to swing in the air.
Speaker 1: What I find unbelievable is that they think they're winning
Speaker 1: right now. Question They are being smashed in question Topha,
Speaker 1: and on this issue of vetting and otherwise they again
Speaker 1: are getting smashed. This is all in an area where
Speaker 1: they booted the ministers because their previous problems when they
Speaker 1: were smashed in this area.
Speaker 11: Well, and you know, we're really seeing again this same
Speaker 11: sort of rhetorical technique that labor always always does. They
Speaker 11: do something really divisive that people disagree with, that the mainstream,
Speaker 11: normal parts of Australia think, hang on a second, I'm
Speaker 11: not sure this is a great idea. And in this
Speaker 11: case it's let's take in thousands of people from Gaza,
Speaker 11: a place where we know an awful lot of them
Speaker 11: support more than just with rhetoric, but even with rhetoric,
Speaker 11: it's a bad thing. Hamas who are an atrocious terrorist group.
Speaker 11: And then as soon as somebody calls them out, what
Speaker 11: are they go? Oh, look look at Peter Dunn here,
Speaker 11: he's being divisive. You know, well, they're the ones who
Speaker 11: are dividing the community. This is the same thing that
Speaker 11: they're doing with this. They do it with climate and energy,
Speaker 11: you know, they push through the renewables nonsense and all
Speaker 11: the costs. And then somebody calls them about say, hey,
Speaker 11: why are you being so negative about our plan? This
Speaker 11: is what they're doing.
Speaker 1: Yeah it look the guy is so obvious. And again
Speaker 1: because the little bubble is telling them, they're amizing in
Speaker 1: all the poll clutching and all the rest of it. Right,
Speaker 1: Pete Hutton's cleaned up what the position needs. It's all
Speaker 1: about Vadi and they carry on what they currently do now, Senator,
Speaker 1: I know we could talk about that, but I want
Speaker 1: to talk about your mates in the New Sobs Liberal
Speaker 1: Party because they they can't fill out the paperwork. You know,
Speaker 1: in my view they have a strange preselection process where
Speaker 1: they go in the wrong direction. But that's just me.
Speaker 1: When it comes to the Senate here, I'm with you.
Speaker 1: So we have this scenario where they were going to challenge.
Speaker 1: Now they're not going to challenge. They've got rid of
Speaker 1: all of that. What's your position on the accountability and
Speaker 1: whether or not that unit of the Liberal Party needs
Speaker 1: to sort of be put out of its misery and
Speaker 1: the Feds takeover. Yeah.
Speaker 12: Look, I served on the State Executive the Liberal Party
Speaker 12: for fourteen years. But when I was on it, it
Speaker 12: was actually a workable size and it was people who
Speaker 12: were actually reasonably capable of working as a united group together,
Speaker 12: particularly for the greater cause of winning elections. What we've
Speaker 12: seen over the past I don't know, five six years
Speaker 12: we had this big reform process, all of a sudden,
Speaker 12: there was twenty nine people the state executive and we've
Speaker 12: seen election after election after election, complete dysfunction and self
Speaker 12: interest being.
Speaker 13: Pushed to the fore.
Speaker 12: And I acknowledge, you know, they didn't treat me particularly well.
Speaker 13: So you know, people will say I've got an axe
Speaker 13: to grind. Not true.
Speaker 12: I got twenty something years experience in this party, both
Speaker 12: on the state and the federal executive. I've seen when
Speaker 12: it works well and it is not working well at
Speaker 12: the moment.
Speaker 13: I think Brian Locknain going in to do a review
Speaker 13: is a really great first step.
Speaker 12: I do think that at some point a federal intervention
Speaker 12: should occur.
Speaker 13: Definitely may be required.
Speaker 12: That would probably see the entire state executive disbanded. For
Speaker 12: someone who's been around this party over twenty years, and
Speaker 12: I don't even know who most of them are, I
Speaker 12: never heard of them before, would probably indicative of the
Speaker 12: who is actually serving on the board of the party
Speaker 12: at the moment. But if I was a candidate in
Speaker 12: the upcoming federal election in a federal seat, House said
Speaker 12: in New South Wales, some of them who have been
Speaker 12: redistributed so have new areas that now have zero council representation.
Speaker 12: I wouldn't be putting my faith in this division of
Speaker 12: being able to run a federal campaign. And you know
Speaker 12: I'm in the business of winning elections. I'm not here
Speaker 12: to make you feel warm and fuzzy about yourself. I
Speaker 12: want to make sure we've got the best team and
Speaker 12: we're winning elections and getting rid of.
Speaker 13: This absolutely dreadful government. I mean, Albinezy is ruining this country.
Speaker 12: Whether it is immigration and the Gazans coming through, whether
Speaker 12: it is the economy, what's happening with the cost of living.
Speaker 12: This government has got to go and I think the
Speaker 12: New South Wales Division has shown probably we could say
Speaker 12: yet again, it's not up to the task of getting
Speaker 12: rid of this government. It's too important a job for
Speaker 12: the people of Australia, and I think the Federal Party
Speaker 12: should step in.
Speaker 1: Well, I'm with you here, important for you to say it.
Speaker 1: Thank you for doing so. Here your thoughts on this one, James.
Speaker 11: All look very quickly, Paula, just think that you know
Speaker 11: more needs to be done.
Speaker 1: Right now.
Speaker 11: They could be looking at an election in November. It's August. Now,
Speaker 11: that's not a long time away. Great to have Brian
Speaker 11: laughed and come and do a review. But people like
Speaker 11: Dan Harowin have allgarthri blown out of this dotted.
Speaker 1: Goodbye flash tatah, thank you very much guys, to appreciable
Speaker 1: so you can very very soon. The Great Nigel Farrag
Speaker 1: no sooks, no lefties, keeping our promise, He's going to
Speaker 1: talk about some of the nonsense happening when it comes
Speaker 1: to Democrats shoving Biden out the door after midnight more
Speaker 1: than a second nozoks, no lefties tonight. Chief amongst them
Speaker 1: the Great Nigel Ferrage, of course, MP for the Reclaim,
Speaker 1: Sorry for the Reform Party, reclaim my apologies the Reform
Speaker 1: Party in the UK, and he joins us now from
Speaker 1: Mary Old England. Now, great man, let's talk about the
Speaker 1: DNC yet again. A final insult to Joe Biden, who
Speaker 1: you and I of course don't hold any waterfall whatsoever.
Speaker 1: But they shove in so many other speakers that he
Speaker 1: eventually starts speaking at eleven thirty at night and keeps
Speaker 1: going until a full hour later. Millions of Americans had
Speaker 1: tuned out and gone to bid What a final if
Speaker 1: you to the bloke who just what two months ago
Speaker 1: was as sharp as attack and was ready to take
Speaker 1: on the world.
Speaker 14: Yes, I mean that's been the great lie, hasn't it
Speaker 14: from the Democrats, and indeed from CNN and the New
Speaker 14: York Times and many others that know our guys there. Good,
Speaker 14: he's great when clearly he'd been unfit to be president
Speaker 14: right from the election back in twenty twenty. He was
Speaker 14: a duffer then and he's even worse now. Yeah, I
Speaker 14: mean meet me after midnight. They knew that if they
Speaker 14: put him on earlier in the evening, huge numbers of
Speaker 14: people would see it and would simply switch off. So
Speaker 14: but let's forget about Joe Biden. And by the way,
Speaker 14: Donald Trump needs to forget about Joe Biden. I'll come
Speaker 14: back to that if I may. As for Kamala Harris,
Speaker 14: I mean, I mean, this is all just placitudinous nonsense.
Speaker 14: We're going to saved America. We're going to save democracy.
Speaker 14: It's a complete policy free zone. She doesn't do a media,
Speaker 14: doesn't present, just goes on stage and gets cheered because
Speaker 14: she's new and she's different. I can't wait for September
Speaker 14: the tenth. You know, we've known ever since Nixon v.
Speaker 14: Kennedy that in America, these presidential debates decide elections, right,
Speaker 14: but this one on September the tenth, I think really
Speaker 14: could decide who wins. Yeah, of course she's got you know,
Speaker 14: huge media support. You know, she's not Donald Trump. But
Speaker 14: what does she actually stand for? Is it the very
Speaker 14: leftist platform that she ran on back in twenty nineteen
Speaker 14: when she went for the nomination and got almost nowhere.
Speaker 14: That to me is what this is now really all about.
Speaker 14: And I expect to see nothing over the next couple
Speaker 14: of days from Chicago.
Speaker 1: That enlightens us in any way at all.
Speaker 14: But if I may, I've been one of the most
Speaker 14: open public and was one of the first people on
Speaker 14: the international stage to support Donald Trump. I'm going way
Speaker 14: back now, way before you know he was there as president,
Speaker 14: and he's obviously become fixated. He was ready to fight
Speaker 14: against Biden, and he keeps mentioning Biden, and I just
Speaker 14: feel Trump needs to change gear. He needs to get
Speaker 14: away from talking about Joe Biden, maybe even talk about
Speaker 14: Harris a bit less. Where Trump wins is on policy.
Speaker 14: Where Trump wins is on conviction. Where Trump wins is
Speaker 14: not having the courage to take on things that others bury.
Speaker 14: And I think we need to see that from the
Speaker 14: Republican candidate.
Speaker 1: See, I share your concern, and I appreciate the strength
Speaker 1: of you being willing to say publicly what no doubt
Speaker 1: has been said privately for a while. Right now, I
Speaker 1: don't want Harris to You absolutely want Trump to get there.
Speaker 1: But we all know that if we have these, you know,
Speaker 1: we being he not twenty minute ramble sessions at rallies.
Speaker 1: If we have these anything but direct hits and trying
Speaker 1: to come up with the new rhyming slang and nicknames
Speaker 1: and all the rest of it. You're right. The reality
Speaker 1: is every poll, including all of the ones that may
Speaker 1: show a little advantage for her here or there, they
Speaker 1: say the economy is number one. People when asked about it,
Speaker 1: then say they trust Trump on it. About immigration issue
Speaker 1: number two, they trust Trump on it. That means he's
Speaker 1: got the issues, and the public are saying, we are
Speaker 1: ready to give the ball back to you. He has
Speaker 1: to be. He has to clasp it though doesn't.
Speaker 14: He Yes, he does. And it's all about good, simple
Speaker 14: direct messaging. You know, you say rambles a minute. A
Speaker 14: Trump rally is as much about entertainment and an evening out.
Speaker 1: As it is anything else.
Speaker 14: So you know, when he goes off on his time,
Speaker 14: when he goes off on his tangents, Let's be honest,
Speaker 14: it's often extremely amusing and if you're there, it's quite something.
Speaker 1: I love the washing machines. There needs to be a
Speaker 1: much I mean all of it.
Speaker 14: Wonderful stories he tells, you know, he tells him in private,
Speaker 14: and he tells him in public, and that's part of
Speaker 14: who he is. But no, the simple, direct and memorable messaging,
Speaker 14: that's the point. Memorable messaging on energy bills, on filling
Speaker 14: up the car with gas, the term that he is
Speaker 14: in America, you know, memorable messaging on the border and
Speaker 14: what he's actually going to do, and on crime in
Speaker 14: American cities. This is where Trump wins. You know, people
Speaker 14: see him as a strong leader, but he just needs
Speaker 14: to He needs to reconnect with the American public with
Speaker 14: this messaging and it needs to happen before the tenth
Speaker 14: of September and then on that evening we need to
Speaker 14: see that on policy he's thought stuff through. And frankly,
Speaker 14: unless I'm wrong, I don't think she knows what she
Speaker 14: stands for.
Speaker 1: Adall we can I show you this. This is from
Speaker 1: a couple of days ago. She came up with all
Speaker 1: the gimmicks and garbine allegedly an economic policy on Friday.
Speaker 1: It was rubbish. Literally the New York Times what she
Speaker 1: did posts you know, Fox Business, you name the spectrum.
Speaker 1: They were like, okay, not okay. She was asked to explain, so,
Speaker 1: how are you going to pay for all of this stuff? Like,
Speaker 1: it's trillions of dollars worth of spending on top of
Speaker 1: the trillion, and she's already voted for. Have her listened
Speaker 1: to her? Try to explain how this will pay for itself.
Speaker 15: I think it's a mistake for any person who talks
Speaker 15: about public policy to not critically evaluate how you measure
Speaker 15: the return. I think that when you are strengthening neighborhoods,
Speaker 15: strengthening communities, and in particular the economy of those communities,
Speaker 15: and investing in a broadbeast economy, everybody benefits and it
Speaker 15: pays for itself in that way.
Speaker 1: Take away the teller prompt. She's terrible. Yeah, that's right.
Speaker 14: I mean, clearly this is somebody who was about image
Speaker 14: and not about you know, a clearly thought through ideology
Speaker 14: of any kind at all, other than the sort of
Speaker 14: let's be kind, let's be lovely, let's be great, let's
Speaker 14: be sort of soft socialist. No, look, she hasn't got
Speaker 14: a clue. Get her as you say, get her off
Speaker 14: that tele of prompter. She can't answer it. Economics, I
Speaker 14: thought about running America's economy. She couldn't run a family
Speaker 14: budget with that sort of thinking. So no, September tenth
Speaker 14: is a really really big night.
Speaker 1: So good to talk to you. Make We'll look forward
Speaker 1: to doing so again next week. Everyone too chick at
Speaker 1: the show on Janus, of course, called funny enough for us.
Speaker 1: We'll see you again tomorrow night when meging killes a
Speaker 1: special guest