Speaker 1: Peter Kredlin live on Sky News Australia.
Speaker 2: Good evening and welcome to the show. I'm Jamie Rogers
Speaker 2: filling in for Peter Kredlin. Here's what's coming up tonight.
Speaker 2: Australians hit by a network blackout that left Telstra uses
Speaker 2: stranded and the government in damage control. The Industry Watchdog
Speaker 2: is set to investigate. But what insurances do we have
Speaker 2: that it won't happen again? The global artificial intelligence giant
Speaker 2: eyeing off more space in Australian data centers, but warnings
Speaker 2: tonight from the RBA that it could come at a
Speaker 2: cost to Ossie livelihoods. Plus, we'll head live to London
Speaker 2: with Nigel Farage setting up a people versus the Establishment
Speaker 2: by election. So could this chess move boost his popularity
Speaker 2: or destroy it? We'll find out more. And the Middle
Speaker 2: East is under fresh pressure tonight after the US launched
Speaker 2: strikes against Iran. What does this mean for peace negotiations?
Speaker 2: But first, when your phone says SOS, Thousands of Australians
Speaker 2: woke up to those three letters, unable to access mobile
Speaker 2: data and in some cases unable to contact emergency services
Speaker 2: for hours. Australia's largest telecommunication network stopped working. One Nation's
Speaker 2: Barnaby Joyce has called for a full investigation.
Speaker 3: Don't want to be paranoid or conspiracy theorist, but we
Speaker 3: know there is the capacity for people.
Speaker 4: To affect, for Chiya to effect.
Speaker 3: That sort of software and that sort of network, and
Speaker 3: I hope that that's investigated.
Speaker 2: And Communications Minister Anika Wells, who returned from leave, slammed
Speaker 2: Barnaby's comments.
Speaker 5: As a general principle, I think when it comes to
Speaker 5: matters of national security, you shouldn't make stuff up. You've
Speaker 5: heard from in Telstra acting CEO that there is currently
Speaker 5: no evidence to suggest that those things are the case,
Speaker 5: so I think it's irresponsible.
Speaker 2: Now, within the last half an hour, Telstra provided another update.
Speaker 2: Thankfully all remaining services are back online, but questions still remain.
Speaker 3: Still conducting our investigation into the root cause, but we
Speaker 3: are confident we have identified a software defect. We've been
Speaker 3: able to isolate it. We'll provide further technical details of
Speaker 3: this once that once we complete the investigation. I want
Speaker 3: to be clear this was not the result of a
Speaker 3: cyber incident.
Speaker 2: Now, at a press conference earlier today, mister Acklan went
Speaker 2: to say they must maintain trust in the provider.
Speaker 3: I believe Australia can absolutely have faith in its biggest
Speaker 3: in its biggest health go and that is Celsterro. We
Speaker 3: take these outages very very seriously. Our investment in resilience
Speaker 3: and cybersecurity and redundancy in our network is significant. But
Speaker 3: it is a big and complex network and from time
Speaker 3: to time issues do occur.
Speaker 2: But here's the bigger question today expose just how dependent
Speaker 2: Australia is on a handful of critical systems without enough
Speaker 2: backup when they fail. Our phones, payment services for business,
Speaker 2: emergency services, transport networks, frontline workers, all of them rely
Speaker 2: on communications that work and when they don't, questions are immediate.
Speaker 6: Warrants the government fronting up and getting clear to Australians
Speaker 6: about what's going on here. And you know, there's many
Speaker 6: questions Australians that are asking. We saw a provocative, an
Speaker 6: unwelcome missile launch from the PLA yesterday and I can
Speaker 6: understand why Australians are drawing that connection.
Speaker 4: Now.
Speaker 6: I don't know whether there's any connection or lot. I
Speaker 6: have an idea, but it's no wonder Australians are starting
Speaker 6: to questions like Daddy.
Speaker 2: Shadow Communications Minister Sarah Henderson says the outedge shows just
Speaker 2: how far reaching a failure like this can be.
Speaker 7: We've even had reports of people being trapped in trains
Speaker 7: on the network in Victoria. Of course, when our communications fail,
Speaker 7: the whole economy crashes.
Speaker 2: And she's right, communications are critical infrastructure. So why aren't
Speaker 2: we treating him that way? Where are the independent backup systems?
Speaker 2: Today's outage shouldn't just be another headline, it should be
Speaker 2: a warning because if one technical fault can bring parts
Speaker 2: of Australia to a standstill, imagine what a deliberate attack
Speaker 2: could do. The Opposition leader raised that today this.
Speaker 6: Is how you defend the nation. Now, it's true. The
Speaker 6: one part of defending the nation is making sure we
Speaker 6: have the drones and the missile capability and the defense
Speaker 6: force we need. But in a modern era, cyber attack
Speaker 6: is real, whatever source might it might come from. So
Speaker 6: we need to know the answers to these questions and
Speaker 6: we need them, we need them fast, and that's the point.
Speaker 2: Defending Australia is not just artillery. It's about making sure
Speaker 2: the systems we rely on every hour of every day
Speaker 2: can resist a hit. Because in the modern world, a
Speaker 2: nation that cannot communicate, cannot defend itself feeling poorer, that's
Speaker 2: because you are. Australians are working harder, paying more tax
Speaker 2: and according to the OECD, we have suffered one of
Speaker 2: the biggest falls in living standards anywhere in the developed
Speaker 2: world since the pandemic. Real wages have fallen by more
Speaker 2: than five percent since twenty twenty one, and the warns
Speaker 2: they're expected to fall again this year. Deputy Liberal Leader
Speaker 2: Jane Hume said labor is to blame.
Speaker 8: People are getting poorer under a labor government. It actually
Speaker 8: said that our real wages have gone backwards by five
Speaker 8: point one percent since Labor came to office, But the
Speaker 8: average OEEDC nation have seen their wages go up by
Speaker 8: five percent, so that's more than a ten point difference.
Speaker 8: No wonder Australians are feeling the pinch. This cannot be
Speaker 8: blamed on anybody else, and yet that seems to be
Speaker 8: what labor is best at doings.
Speaker 2: Australia is one of the wealthiest countries on Earth, yet
Speaker 2: Australians are becoming poorer in real terms. So how did
Speaker 2: we get here? Part of the answer is inflation. Australia
Speaker 2: now has the second highest across all advanced economies independent
Speaker 2: economists Judith Sloan, So the government needs to rain in
Speaker 2: spending to bring inflation down.
Speaker 9: That they really need to do is try and get
Speaker 9: on top of spending. You know, they're just spending like
Speaker 9: drunken salesce, which is probably an insult the drunken salesce
Speaker 9: because of course drunk and saless spend their own money.
Speaker 7: They spend it however they like good on you.
Speaker 9: Go, yes, But because that is adding to the inflationary pressures.
Speaker 9: I mean, basically, I don't think you have to have
Speaker 9: done economics to understand this. If you're allowed to demand
Speaker 9: to grow faster than supply, prices will rise. And a
Speaker 9: lot of that is to do with excessive government spending.
Speaker 2: But high inflation is only part of the story. The
Speaker 2: other part is tax. Australians pay some of the highest
Speaker 2: taxes in the developed world. Our top income tax rates
Speaker 2: sits at forty seven percent, including the Medicare levy, higher
Speaker 2: than countries like the United States, the UK and France,
Speaker 2: and after Labour's recent changes to capital gains tax, Australia
Speaker 2: now have one of the highest CGT rates in the world.
Speaker 2: According to the Australian Shareholders Association. The changes will make
Speaker 2: it harder for young people to build wealth through shares
Speaker 2: and ETFs compared to countries like Singapore, New Zealand and
Speaker 2: the US. So think about the message that this sends.
Speaker 2: We're taxing the very behavior we should be encouraging, and
Speaker 2: it's happening at a time when living standards are falling.
Speaker 2: Then there's productivity. For years, we've relied on population growth
Speaker 2: to make the economy look bigger, but a bigger economy
Speaker 2: doesn't mean Australians are better off. In fact, Deloitte says
Speaker 2: Australia is now facing its longest stretch of weak economic
Speaker 2: growth since the recession of the early nineteen nineties. Treasurer
Speaker 2: Jim Chalmers said the Deloitte report was a reminder of
Speaker 2: the lingering costs of the Iran War. He further said
Speaker 2: under Labor Australia has the lowest average unemployment of any
Speaker 2: government in half a century, smaller deficits and less debt
Speaker 2: than what the Coalition left us, booming business investment with
Speaker 2: tax cuts and higher wages that the right wing parties oppose.
Speaker 2: But Chalma's talking point has a problem that so called
Speaker 2: investment boom is heavily concentrated in data centers, and much
Speaker 2: of that equipment is imported. So in other words, it
Speaker 2: looks better in the press release than it actually feels
Speaker 2: in the economy.
Speaker 9: But then if you go and sort of dig down
Speaker 9: and have a look under the bonnet, you'll find that
Speaker 9: it's pretty much all this investment in data centers. Now
Speaker 9: they're controversial, right, So they're controversial for a number of reasons.
Speaker 9: All the comparatory is imported, right Okay, So okay, the
Speaker 9: workers might be local, but everything else is imported. But secondly,
Speaker 9: they're really really big users of energy, water, and they
Speaker 9: make a lot of noise. We want business in men
Speaker 9: in a whole lot of sect it's not just in
Speaker 9: data centers, and that is a concern at the moment.
Speaker 2: And that's why tonight's OECD report matters. It confirms what
Speaker 2: millions of Australians have been feeling for years. They're falling
Speaker 2: behind and no government should ever be comfortable with that. Well,
Speaker 2: that's said to canber Now for tonight's Political Headlines with
Speaker 2: Sky News political reporter Reuben Spargo.
Speaker 10: The Prime Minister is bringing his specific counterparts together in
Speaker 10: Brisbane to strengthen regional security. The leaders of Papa, New Guinea,
Speaker 10: Samoa and Tonga a meeting after Australia signed a landmark
Speaker 10: security pact with FIGI.
Speaker 11: What we want to do with Samoa and Tonga.
Speaker 12: Lets continue to have engagement about how we can improve
Speaker 12: the relations.
Speaker 10: The government is also turning to sport diplomacy. A quarter
Speaker 10: of a billion dollars will fund a new primary and
Speaker 10: high school rugby competitions across the Pacific.
Speaker 12: Will just empower parents, it will empower leaders of communities.
Speaker 10: The leaders will cup off the day at tonight's State
Speaker 10: of Origin Decider.
Speaker 2: All right, plenty of news to get through today, so
Speaker 2: let's make a start with our Wednesday panel. Senior fellow
Speaker 2: at the Menzies Research Institute, Nick Cata, an adolescent psychologist
Speaker 2: and Sky News contributor Clairo, Welcome to you both. Let's
Speaker 2: start with this Telstra outage this morning. Not many parts
Speaker 2: of Australia were left unaffected, and it's moments like this
Speaker 2: that really exposes our vulnerability and our dependency on telco's Nick,
Speaker 2: we saw the damage that was done when the Optus
Speaker 2: network went down. Lives were lost. What does the government
Speaker 2: need to do to ensure that it can stay ahead
Speaker 2: of outages like this.
Speaker 12: Well, first the government needs to ensure there's lots of
Speaker 12: competition in the mind because that is actually the best
Speaker 12: thing we have at the moment, thanks really going back
Speaker 12: to the Howard governments telco reforms. We have three independent networks,
Speaker 12: so that gives us a really strong resilient system with
Speaker 12: plenty of redundancy. Where the government needs to step in
Speaker 12: is in emergencies like this, when one network goes down
Speaker 12: for reasons which are far too complicated for me to understand.
Speaker 12: But at that point of course we do face problems,
Speaker 12: particularly with emergency calls, also with businesses. At that point
Speaker 12: of course, the government should really step in and make
Speaker 12: the companies enforce a roaming agreement so that Telstra's calls
Speaker 12: can be rooted through Vodaphone or optov OPTAs. That's very technically,
Speaker 12: it's very easy to do. But because companies don't like
Speaker 12: covering covering taking other phone companies' business if they can
Speaker 12: help it, but in an emergency situation, of course it's
Speaker 12: vital that they do. And that I understand is happened
Speaker 12: in Canada, it's happening in other parts of the world.
Speaker 12: I think the removes oft to do it here, but
Speaker 12: they clearly need to move on that bit very very
Speaker 12: quickly and make sure that that happens without any delay,
Speaker 12: because I really can't see any reason why that shouldn't
Speaker 12: be happening already.
Speaker 2: No, I completely agree, Claire. I want to take a
Speaker 2: look now at this report that I was just talking
Speaker 2: about in my editorial revealing that Australia has experienced one
Speaker 2: of the sharpest declines in living standards in the developed world,
Speaker 2: and this is since the pandemic. So this was from
Speaker 2: the OECD, and they have warned that real wages are
Speaker 2: set to fall even further this year and that's DUDO
Speaker 2: inflation eroding workers' incomes. But how can any hard working
Speaker 2: Australia see this and just think who can we look
Speaker 2: to for some help here? Because labor they seem to
Speaker 2: disblame everybody other than themselves.
Speaker 13: Yeah, and I expect that they will try and do that.
Speaker 13: Some of these pressures have been global inflation effect almost
Speaker 13: every developed country after COVID. But this report, I think
Speaker 13: quantify hasn't tells us that Australia has performed particularly poorly
Speaker 13: compared to our peers and Australians don't need a report
Speaker 13: to tell them how they've been feeling. I think it
Speaker 13: really comes down to that promise of the Australian dream,
Speaker 13: that social contract that we've had, which is that you
Speaker 13: work hard, you save up, you buy a home, and
Speaker 13: you hope will know that your children are going to
Speaker 13: have a better laugh than you are. That's what's being
Speaker 13: eroded away. And with that, you know, optimism and hope.
Speaker 13: I don't think they've all necessarily become unhappy because they've
Speaker 13: got less money in the moment. They've become disillusioned when
Speaker 13: their effort is no longer seems connected to a reward,
Speaker 13: and of course that's been compounded recently after this budget,
Speaker 13: and that's of course when voters will take risks on
Speaker 13: political outsiders when they feel that the traditional system is
Speaker 13: not delivering anymore. One thing that we've said Australia has
Speaker 13: been missing now for a very long time and it
Speaker 13: looks like it's nowhere near on the horizon is a
Speaker 13: talk about in a conversation about aspiration.
Speaker 14: I think all this can put up for tough.
Speaker 13: Economic periods if they think that things are going to
Speaker 13: get better. But I think Australians at the moment. What
Speaker 13: they're fearful of is that this is the new normal
Speaker 13: and potentially getting worse.
Speaker 2: Nick, I'm interested in your response to this report that
Speaker 2: Labor has amended its draft national platform to commit Anthony
Speaker 2: Albernezi to developing an anti racism strategy, but the party
Speaker 2: is also going to use its fiftieth national Conference to
Speaker 2: formalize their support for welcome to Country ceremonies and backing
Speaker 2: in the principles of the ULARU statement from the heart.
Speaker 2: What are your thoughts about that, because for me, it
Speaker 2: seems like the country doesn't want this sort of stuff,
Speaker 2: but Labor just continues pushing it, hoping that which our minds.
Speaker 12: Yeah, a pretty interesting piece of product differentiation I think
Speaker 12: they're going in for, which I think is what they're doing.
Speaker 12: They're saying, because we've got two parties on the center right,
Speaker 12: they'll take the left ground and they'll take it even
Speaker 12: more solidly, so push out further the left. Interesting policy
Speaker 12: on this particular question of welcome to country. You don't
Speaker 12: really need to do an opinion poll on this because
Speaker 12: we had a very good referendum just a couple of
Speaker 12: years ago, as you remember, a result sixty forty and
Speaker 12: I think that would pretty much be the result, if
Speaker 12: not more, on this welcome to country question. So Labour
Speaker 12: seems to me rather arrogantly, I think banking on the
Speaker 12: fact that forty percent of the vote is going to
Speaker 12: be enough for them or less than that, on the
Speaker 12: basis that the center right won't be able to get
Speaker 12: its act together this side of the next election. They
Speaker 12: may be right on that, but it's a pretty cynical
Speaker 12: ploy because we know where most of the country are
Speaker 12: on this. There's no argument about.
Speaker 2: That and Claire loved get your thoughts on this. So,
Speaker 2: despite denying its plans for a name change, the James
Speaker 2: Cook University's governing council has backed advice on how it
Speaker 2: should rebrannd. Now this is going to cost twelve million
Speaker 2: dollars to do this. Why a university is so intent
Speaker 2: on a raising Australia's history.
Speaker 13: Oh, look, I don't know. Maybe it's a growing belief
Speaker 13: that the way to deal with parts of history that
Speaker 13: one doesn't like is to remove it or at least
Speaker 13: edit it. Perhaps psychologically that's you know, appealing. You feel
Speaker 13: like maybe you've got an illusion that you've solved part
Speaker 13: of the problem. But that is a very frightening of course,
Speaker 13: or Welliam overtone to it. And the irony is that
Speaker 13: university is supposed to be places where complexity is explored,
Speaker 13: you know, not removed. I think it's utterly maddening and sad.
Speaker 13: I mean, James Cooke didn't established the colony of New
Speaker 13: South Wales. He was a brilliant explorer navigator. When I
Speaker 13: went to school, he was certainly revered and celebrated. And
Speaker 13: to your point, I mean, twelve million dollar if you
Speaker 13: really want to change some lives and have some social cohesion,
Speaker 13: I mean, imagine what that could fund rather than changing
Speaker 13: the name on the front gate, you know, scholarships and
Speaker 13: indigenous education programs and regional outreach. So you know, when
Speaker 13: we start looking at renaming the past instead of educating
Speaker 13: students for the future, I think we've really lost our
Speaker 13: way on what universities are actually meant to be.
Speaker 2: Yeah, Nick, what do you make of the name change
Speaker 2: or the proposed name change and going down this path
Speaker 2: of spending excessive amounts of money to do that.
Speaker 12: I think they're crazy. James Cook University's got the best
Speaker 12: brand and one of the best brands in the country.
Speaker 12: James Cook was a man of the enlightenment. He was
Speaker 12: a first and foremost a scientist, an innovative navigator. You know,
Speaker 12: he achieved so much in that field. And you know,
Speaker 12: it's just the sort of person you'd want to name
Speaker 12: your university after, Isn't it why they get rid of it.
Speaker 12: I think they're getting rid of it because they've got
Speaker 12: some miss misshape and idea about his role in history,
Speaker 12: you know. And he was not the colonizer, by the way,
Speaker 12: as they like to call him. The colony happened some
Speaker 12: time afterwards. But yeah, I mean, he's a great man.
Speaker 12: He needs to be celebrated, not derided.
Speaker 2: And I really.
Speaker 12: Think that this is just shows how small minded and
Speaker 12: of low intelligence universities have become that they don't even
Speaker 12: recognize the great name that they have that their university
Speaker 12: is named afterwards after.
Speaker 2: I do want to have a look now at in
Speaker 2: battled Victorian MP more redeeming. She has come out on
Speaker 2: social media and apologized for this later scandal that has
Speaker 2: engulfed the liberals. Let's take a listen.
Speaker 15: I think it's time that I addressed the fact that
Speaker 15: there have been so many distractions, so many huge distractions
Speaker 15: that have taken away from the work that you, as
Speaker 15: my constituents and Victorians, really needed to be done. And
Speaker 15: I am genuinely, so so sorry that all of these
Speaker 15: things over the past three and a half years have happened.
Speaker 2: So Claire. She has apologized to her constituents, yet to
Speaker 2: apologize to Matthew Guy. But Moira wants four members of
Speaker 2: the party state executive ban from any discussions over her
Speaker 2: political future. What do you think is the best outcome here?
Speaker 9: Oh?
Speaker 13: Look, I don't think there's any other outcome other than
Speaker 13: Maura's got to go. But Maura's got to go quickly
Speaker 13: and quietly, and that doesn't seem to be happening with
Speaker 13: the court case that she's now launched against the Liberal Party,
Speaker 13: and the Liberal Party can't actually disendorse her. They've said
Speaker 13: that they'll wait pending that court case, but that never,
Speaker 13: you know, is a quick process, and with the election
Speaker 13: looming in November, I mean, I just see this. What
Speaker 13: is remarkable about this saga? I mean more a Deeming
Speaker 13: had already won she had one years ago after that
Speaker 13: defamation case, and many people, including people who didn't necessarily
Speaker 13: agree with all of her views, said that she had
Speaker 13: been treated unfairly. You know, she had sympathy I think
Speaker 13: from a lot of people. She had momentum, she had
Speaker 13: the opportunity, I think, to be a very significant voice
Speaker 13: within the Victorian Liberal Party. But somewhere along that line,
Speaker 13: that way will very quickly recently that that political capital
Speaker 13: has absolutely been squandered away now and I think that, Look,
Speaker 13: politicians make mistakes, and I think that the public can
Speaker 13: forgive mistakes, but the first step to that admitting you
Speaker 13: made a mistake. And she's doubled out and refusing to
Speaker 13: do that. So you know, I think when they struggle
Speaker 13: to do that, that's going to be a very hard
Speaker 13: path to come back from and very messy. Now that
Speaker 13: where it's all pending a court's decision.
Speaker 2: Well, Nick and Claire, I will leave it there. After
Speaker 2: the break, the already strained DRAN ceasefire could be officially
Speaker 2: over with fresh strikes. So could we see the straight
Speaker 2: completely shut down yet again? Welcome back. It is great
Speaker 2: to have your company coming up. Warnings from the RBA
Speaker 2: that AI data center investment could undermine Australian businesses and
Speaker 2: its workforce. But now the fragile ceasefire in the middle
Speaker 2: East is under fresh pressure tonight. The United States has
Speaker 2: launched fresh strikes against a run following attacks on ships
Speaker 2: in a straight of hom Moves, raising fears the conflict
Speaker 2: could once again escalate. And just moments ago, Donald Trump
Speaker 2: told reporters that he thinks the ceasefire is over and quote,
Speaker 2: I don't like them and they're evil people. Joining me
Speaker 2: now is Sky News defense analyst Peter Jennings. Peter, it's
Speaker 2: great to see you start now with the Middle East
Speaker 2: and off the back of the US launching strikes against Iran.
Speaker 2: And that does follow the attack on ships in the
Speaker 2: Straight of Horn Moves, and then Donald Trump now making
Speaker 2: the comment that looks like the ceasefire. P still everything's
Speaker 2: off the table. How significant is this escalation?
Speaker 14: Well, the escalation was significant. The Americans hit somewhere between
Speaker 14: eighty and ninety targets. That's a far bigger military operation
Speaker 14: than we've seen for quite a few months now. And
Speaker 14: all of those targets were in and around the northern
Speaker 14: end of the Strait of Hall Moves, after the Iranians
Speaker 14: had attacked three commercial ships. And I'm struggling to sort
Speaker 14: of interpret Trump's comments as to whether or not he
Speaker 14: now intends to go back to a much broader war.
Speaker 14: I think what's more likely, Jamie, is that the Americans
Speaker 14: are going to assert that the Iranians will not be
Speaker 14: allowed to run a protection racket, effectively charging shipping companies
Speaker 14: to let their vessels go through unmolested. And if that's
Speaker 14: the American intent, I think we probably will see more
Speaker 14: operations of the type that have happened over the last
Speaker 14: twenty four hours, and they'll be doing things like hitting
Speaker 14: the fast patrol boats which the Iranians use to go
Speaker 14: out and hit the ships with limpid mines. They'll be
Speaker 14: attacking Revolutionary Guard maritime capability at the north end of
Speaker 14: the Strait, and you know, expect more of that. I
Speaker 14: think that's what we'll probably have for the next week
Speaker 14: or so, until if and until the Iranians then decide
Speaker 14: that they're going to stop attempting to enforce a protection
Speaker 14: racket which is putting money into the hands of the
Speaker 14: Revolutionary Guards.
Speaker 2: And Peter, we do have that grab now where Donald
Speaker 2: Trump was speaking just moments ago in and kra let's
Speaker 2: take a listen to me.
Speaker 16: I think it's over. I don't want to deal with
Speaker 16: them in with this scum. You know, it's there's gum,
Speaker 16: there's sick people. They're led by sick people, and they're vicious,
Speaker 16: violent people, and if they had a nuclear weapon, they'd
Speaker 16: use it.
Speaker 2: As far as I'm concerned, it's over Gpeter. Those are
Speaker 2: some strong words, scum, sick people, and violent. Surely Iran's
Speaker 2: not going to be copying this and they'll be retaliating.
Speaker 2: But I would imagine they're quite Their arsenal is significantly depleted, but.
Speaker 14: They're reconstituting it very fast. Jamie. I've now seen reports
Speaker 14: which say that in fact, they've got about fifty percent
Speaker 14: of the missile capability they have before the start of
Speaker 14: the war in February. So they're rebuilding fast because that's
Speaker 14: their priority. That's what they're putting money into. They're being
Speaker 14: assisted by the Chinese in that development as well. I mean,
Speaker 14: I think Trump's judgment is right, but the problem he's
Speaker 14: got is that he can try and negotiate a piece
Speaker 14: or he's back into military conflict, and we know he
Speaker 14: doesn't want to do that. So what does he end
Speaker 14: up doing Right now? The signals are it's going to
Speaker 14: be a more limited military operation around the passage of
Speaker 14: those ships through the Strait of Worms. I don't think
Speaker 14: the President is going to want to go back into
Speaker 14: fuller scale military operations, but it's kind of in the
Speaker 14: hands of the Revolutionary Guard, and what they're showing is
Speaker 14: a high level of defiance. They're trying to make the
Speaker 14: case that they're stronger now than they were back in February.
Speaker 14: That's not necessarily so, but they're rebuilding fast and so
Speaker 14: the prospect for more conflicts is definitely there. And one
Speaker 14: can sense the frustration on Donald Trump's part. He's not
Speaker 14: been able to negotiate the outcome he wants, and so
Speaker 14: that pushes him back into the direction of more military force.
Speaker 2: And definitely something that I don't think he'll be wanting
Speaker 2: to do in the lead up to the midterm elections.
Speaker 2: But Peter, I saw some comments made today that I
Speaker 2: wanted to get your thoughts on, and this was the
Speaker 2: finish president. He said Ukraine has won the war against Russia,
Speaker 2: but he said it around more so they preserve their
Speaker 2: independence and sovereignty for more than four years. What do
Speaker 2: you make of those comments?
Speaker 14: Strictly speaking, I think we're still in a stalemate, but
Speaker 14: I guess a Russian the absence of a Russian victory
Speaker 14: is a kind of Ukrainian success. Certainly, so far this year,
Speaker 14: the Ukrainians have been beating the Russians comprehensively. They've been
Speaker 14: killing large numbers of Russians on the battlefield, about thirty
Speaker 14: five thousand a month, which is sort of First World
Speaker 14: War levels of military fatalities. And they've been pursuing an
Speaker 14: extended campaign of military strikes inside Russia, sometimes quite deep
Speaker 14: inside Russia, to attack their oil and energy infrastructure. And
Speaker 14: I think the issue is how long can the Russians
Speaker 14: actually go on doing this. On the other hand, Russia
Speaker 14: still occupies somewhere between twenty twenty five percent of Ukraine territory.
Speaker 14: That's where we are, Jomie. It's a hard fort stylemate
Speaker 14: where the Ukrainians I think starting to have the upper hand.
Speaker 14: But the war is far from over. And really the
Speaker 14: key factor here is apparently the determination on the part
Speaker 14: of Vladimir Putin to keep fighting, even though this is
Speaker 14: doing immense damage to the Russian economy and killing Russians
Speaker 14: on an industrial scale, which must be beginning to have
Speaker 14: some sort of domestic impact on Putin standing inside his
Speaker 14: own country.
Speaker 2: And there's an incredible vision where you see eighteen hour
Speaker 2: queues of cars trying to get petrol. Now, the Finish
Speaker 2: President made those comments as NATO allies were all meeting
Speaker 2: in Turkey, and it was just interesting because they're meeting
Speaker 2: to look at Ukraine's future, but also how they can
Speaker 2: reduce their reliance on the US. How can you see
Speaker 2: that happening, especially when you look at how much money
Speaker 2: the US contributes. They're the largest funder in the defense
Speaker 2: budget of NATO, yes.
Speaker 14: By a long way. And you know, fundamentally, the answer
Speaker 14: is the European countries cannot reduce that dependence on the
Speaker 14: United States, even with a difficult president. The United States
Speaker 14: is the essential strategic stabilizing factor in all parts of
Speaker 14: the world, certainly in Europe. And unless NATO countries want to,
Speaker 14: you know, double and even more than that increase their
Speaker 14: defense spending, which they don't, that relationship with the United
Speaker 14: States remains absolutely crucial. We are now starting to see
Speaker 14: some European countries spend more, invest more and rebuilding defense infrastructure,
Speaker 14: but they've got a long way to go. And really
Speaker 14: America is still i think the critical factor in European security,
Speaker 14: just as it is in Asia specific security in our
Speaker 14: part of the world.
Speaker 2: And just quickly off the back of that before I
Speaker 2: let you go, do you think because of how significant
Speaker 2: the US is to NATO's defense and security, they should
Speaker 2: have played a bigger role in supporting the US when
Speaker 2: it came to the conflict in Iran.
Speaker 14: It's an interesting question. America could have done a better
Speaker 14: job of bringing key NATO partners in from the start,
Speaker 14: which would have involved a bit of discussion about war
Speaker 14: aims that didn't happen. But fundamentally, it is in Europe's
Speaker 14: interests to see the straightup Wolmers open because they're the
Speaker 14: customers for a lot of the oil, and it's also
Speaker 14: in their interests that Irun doesn't acquire a nuclear weapons.
Speaker 14: So yes, they should have done a better job. But equally,
Speaker 14: the Americans should have done a better job negotiating with
Speaker 14: the Europeans before the war actually started.
Speaker 2: Peter, I always appreciate your insights. Thanks for your time tonight.
Speaker 2: Now to the push by a tech giant, Anthropic, which
Speaker 2: is making moves to buy up more of Australia's data
Speaker 2: center capacity against the backdrop of concerns today from the
Speaker 2: RBA that data center investment could undermine Australian businesses and
Speaker 2: its workforce. Here to discuss it further is chief scientists
Speaker 2: at the University of New South Wales' AI Institute, Professor
Speaker 2: Toby Walsh, Professor Welcome Andthropic is the AI company that's
Speaker 2: behind Claude and so for any of us that don't
Speaker 2: know who what that is, it's an AI platform that's
Speaker 2: sort of similar to chat GPT, which has exploded in popularity.
Speaker 2: Now it stands ready to swoop on any available data
Speaker 2: center space in Australia that it can pretty much get
Speaker 2: because they believe that we're a good fit for its
Speaker 2: expanding business model. But there appear to be two issues
Speaker 2: here the investment push into the Australian market, but then
Speaker 2: also ongoing concerns about unregulated harms. What are your big
Speaker 2: issues around what Anthropic are trying to do?
Speaker 17: We write there's a significant opportunity for Australia here. There's
Speaker 17: an insatiable appetite for compute. Anthropic have signed a deal
Speaker 17: to spend a billion dollars a month on the data
Speaker 17: center in the US, so they're looking elsewhere and Australia
Speaker 17: is a fantastic place to build building data centers. We've
Speaker 17: got the second biggest pipeline, and we've got plentiful renewables
Speaker 17: to run those data centers. We've got plentiful land, and
Speaker 17: we're a very stable economy, so there's a lot of
Speaker 17: attractions to build them there.
Speaker 4: But we and it's it's helping to keep our economy going.
Speaker 17: The last rb A ABS figures showed our quarterly GDP
Speaker 17: was being kept afloat by the spend on building data centers.
Speaker 17: In fact, we would have be gone into recession if
Speaker 17: they hadn't been spending so much building new data centers.
Speaker 17: So there's a great opportunity for us there. But equally,
Speaker 17: as the RBA is warning, we need to be concerned.
Speaker 17: But you know, maybe it's going to be driving inflation.
Speaker 17: All those people being employed to build those data centers.
Speaker 17: Maybe they're not building houses. We need to build lots
Speaker 17: more houses, and maybe there aren't enough trades to go around,
Speaker 17: and that's pushing up wages of traders and that's going
Speaker 17: to cause inflation and cause us to have to put
Speaker 17: inflation interest rates up again. So we need to walk
Speaker 17: a very narrow line here to make sure that we
Speaker 17: get the benefit without some of the some of the risks.
Speaker 2: One thing that I thought was interesting is Labor have
Speaker 2: dumped its AI advisory panel, which you were a part of.
Speaker 2: Do you think we're at risk now of repeating the
Speaker 2: mistakes of social media where we start to see young
Speaker 2: people having AI companions and AI therapists.
Speaker 17: Yes, sadly, I think that's something that we should be regulating.
Speaker 17: We decided after the event that young people should be
Speaker 17: kept off social media there was rather harmful. Well, we
Speaker 17: got to do the same there with artificial intelligence that
Speaker 17: a large number of teens are using AI companions and
Speaker 17: AI therapists and speaking to these chatbots like Claude, the
Speaker 17: Anthropic Make and probably I think we should probably decide
Speaker 17: they should be an age limit for these tools, just
Speaker 17: like the riginal social media.
Speaker 2: And you've seen some wild things overseas where people marry
Speaker 2: their chatbot and become very close friends with it. So
Speaker 2: there's that out of it as well. But in terms
Speaker 2: of our our VA's concerns when it comes to jobs,
Speaker 2: do you think we should be in a position where
Speaker 2: we reframe it and retrain and reskill our workforce in
Speaker 2: an AI environment instead of trying to push back and
Speaker 2: stop it coming into our officers.
Speaker 4: Well, AI is coming. I think that's very, very true.
Speaker 17: We can't put our heads in the sand and expect
Speaker 17: AI not to be transforming our workforce, but so we
Speaker 17: will be looking to reskill and retrain people. We need
Speaker 17: to support people through that. Good news and governance figures
Speaker 17: out this morning show that the impact of archip intelligence
Speaker 17: has been rather than modest so far, but there are
Speaker 17: growing signs. There are sides in those numbers that AI
Speaker 17: is starting to have some impact on the most exposed jobs.
Speaker 17: So we are going to have to deal with that,
Speaker 17: and it takes time for people to reskill. Young people
Speaker 17: today choosing careers, we need to help them make good choices.
Speaker 4: Think about what are the jobs of the future.
Speaker 2: Well, exactly on that point, looking at the job of
Speaker 2: the future, what are you saying to kids now at
Speaker 2: university who are studying degrees that are potentially going to
Speaker 2: be worthless in four or five years, how do we
Speaker 2: counter that?
Speaker 17: Well, I hope none of the degrees are going to
Speaker 17: be completely worth us. I hope there are many things
Speaker 17: you pick up on a degree that beyond just the
Speaker 17: subject of the degree itself. The communication skills, the critical
Speaker 17: thinking skills, those human facing skills.
Speaker 4: Emotional intelligent, social intelligence, grit.
Speaker 17: All of those things I think are going to be
Speaker 17: ever more important in an AI enabled world. Those are
Speaker 17: the things that are going to distinguish humans from the machines.
Speaker 17: Those are the things I think the employers are going
Speaker 17: to be looking for. Those are the things that will
Speaker 17: be valuable and get you a job in the future.
Speaker 2: Well, professor, it's a very interesting world that we're all
Speaker 2: going to have to get used to navigate, because it's
Speaker 2: certainly not going anywhere. Thank you for your time. After
Speaker 2: the break, we crossed to London for the latest on
Speaker 2: the dramatic decision by Reform leader Nigel Farage to quit
Speaker 2: his seat for a by election. Could this be the
Speaker 2: chess move that could set him up as the next
Speaker 2: British leader. Welcome back coming out Words of the Week
Speaker 2: with kel Richards. But now to that traumatic announcement overnight
Speaker 2: from Reform UK leader Nigel Farage, who resigned as a
Speaker 2: member of Parliament calling a by election amid concerns about
Speaker 2: party funding and his associations with a convicted criminal.
Speaker 1: Now I've decided that the people of Clapton should be
Speaker 1: the judges of my actions. This will be a people
Speaker 1: versus the establishment by election. It's a chance to stick
Speaker 1: two fingers up to the entire establishment, to frankly tell
Speaker 1: them where to go. And that is why I will
Speaker 1: be putting my name forward to stand in this by election.
Speaker 1: I will fight to win. I will fight to continue
Speaker 1: the political revolution that Reform has started.
Speaker 2: We're here to discuss this further. The editor of Spiked Online,
Speaker 2: Tom Slater, Tom, welcome well. Labor and the Tories have
Speaker 2: said they're not going to be standing in this by election,
Speaker 2: which is pretty much going to leave the Reform leader
Speaker 2: alone on a ballot against just some novelty candidates. What
Speaker 2: do you make about this? It seems like a little
Speaker 2: bit of a face or is this a stroke of brilliance?
Speaker 18: Well, I think the refusal of the other parties to
Speaker 18: stand just shows that deep down and they would have
Speaker 18: a cat telling chance of winning. I mean, Nigel Farage
Speaker 18: won in that seat in Clacton in Essex with a
Speaker 18: higher margin than any of his other Reform colleagues at
Speaker 18: the last election. And I think what they're responding to
Speaker 18: is the fact that this is a pretty risky but
Speaker 18: pretty audation's political gambit, and it's something which has allowed
Speaker 18: Nigel Farage to retake the initiative to fight a by
Speaker 18: election on his terms rather than have one voised upon
Speaker 18: him after this very kind of got up standards process
Speaker 18: which has been sparked into him and donations that were
Speaker 18: made to him before he was elected. And I think
Speaker 18: it's very effectively in that address that you've already shown
Speaker 18: a clip from from Reform HQ frame this as putting
Speaker 18: it back to the voters, saying that it doesn't fall
Speaker 18: to a scandal mongering media or to ethics committees or
Speaker 18: filled with opposition MPs to decide who represents voters. And
Speaker 18: I think that message is certainly going to resonate in Clacton,
Speaker 18: and I dare say amongst other sections of the country
Speaker 18: as well, who are as furious with the establishment as
Speaker 18: Nigel Parrock's clearly yes.
Speaker 2: And this is what's going to be interesting, isn't it, Tom,
Speaker 2: Because critics have been coming for Nigel for a long time.
Speaker 2: But are we looking at a tactical maneuver or it
Speaker 2: just continues to frame his fight as you just mentioned
Speaker 2: about the establishment, where it's the people versus the establishment,
Speaker 2: and this is going to be what potentially makes his
Speaker 2: rise grow even more as people move away from the
Speaker 2: bigger parties.
Speaker 18: I mean, time will tell, but I think with that
Speaker 18: very strong address that he gave yesterday, he reminded the
Speaker 18: establishment and the public of two things, one of which
Speaker 18: is that he is the key anti establishment candidate in
Speaker 18: this country. That he is someone who's been in politics
Speaker 18: for a very long time, very consistent, and there's a
Speaker 18: reason that so many people in the media and within
Speaker 18: the kind of establishment political circles are gunning for him.
Speaker 18: And the other thing that he reminded everyone of is
Speaker 18: that ultimately it comes down to the voses to decide.
Speaker 18: That's almost a kind of quaint notion for some people
Speaker 18: in politics these days. That really is the people who
Speaker 18: get to decide who represent them. But he's put that
Speaker 18: firmly back on the table. So who knows if this
Speaker 18: will this will actually pan out, whether or not the
Speaker 18: refusal of other parties sam will blunt the impact of
Speaker 18: this particular by election, But I think he's put down
Speaker 18: a marker with this and reminded people that he is
Speaker 18: the figure sets the political weather in this country. Everyone
Speaker 18: is sort of responding to what himself and the reform
Speaker 18: are doing, and that's certainly been the case of of course,
Speaker 18: of the past twelve.
Speaker 4: Hours or so.
Speaker 2: Before I move on to the other big story that
Speaker 2: happened overnight, I do just want to get your thoughts
Speaker 2: on Andy Burnham. You did just have a slight chuckle about,
Speaker 2: you know, when people actually vote someone in. And Andy
Speaker 2: Burnham is potentially going to be the next Prime minister
Speaker 2: not having been voted in. What are your thoughts on
Speaker 2: his potential leadership and whether or not he's going to
Speaker 2: move the UK further to the left and the response
Speaker 2: on the ground of what people think of him.
Speaker 18: I think there's sort of two plausible cases with Andy
Speaker 18: burn and one of which is that he turns out
Speaker 18: to be essentially just Keir Starmer and a pair of genes.
Speaker 18: This is someone who has committed himself to the twenty
Speaker 18: twenty four Manifesto, who signed himself up to the fiscal
Speaker 18: rules that were set by Keir Starmer's government, that is
Speaker 18: going to be quite terrified of kind of spooking the
Speaker 18: horses in the direction, or he reverts back to his
Speaker 18: kind of happy place, which is a more soft left
Speaker 18: dish kind of perspective, which, frankly, given all of that
Speaker 18: would mean for the economy, socially, immigration or whatever would
Speaker 18: prove to be even more disastrous than Kirstarmer. So the
Speaker 18: best case scenario is that it's more of the same.
Speaker 18: And given how terrible more of the same looks at
Speaker 18: the moment, I dare say that whatever glow there is
Speaker 18: around him at the moment will.
Speaker 4: Come very quickly.
Speaker 9: All right.
Speaker 2: I do want to turn our attention now to that
Speaker 2: story around the Duke of Sussex, Prince Harry. He has
Speaker 2: lost his long running sixty five million dollar privacy invasion
Speaker 2: case against the London tabloids, the Daily Mail and The
Speaker 2: Mail on Sunday. Just talk us through this here, Tom,
Speaker 2: But also what is there any sort of for that?
Speaker 2: Do you think here? For Harry?
Speaker 18: Oh, this is a total humiliation for him. In a
Speaker 18: very good day for the freedom of the press. This
Speaker 18: case that was brought like just by Prince Harry, but
Speaker 18: by kind of coterie of other celebrities and members of
Speaker 18: the great and good was totally thrown out. The judgement
Speaker 18: clear that in relation to the stories that you were
Speaker 18: taking issue with, it was entirely plausible that they'd been
Speaker 18: produced by legitimate sources. And I think it's reminded everyone
Speaker 18: what we knew already, which is that when it comes
Speaker 18: to Prince Harry and Megan Markll, they don't care about privacy.
Speaker 18: Their own privacy is they did, they wouldn't braide themselves
Speaker 18: in front of the Netflix cameras if they did. Prince
Speaker 18: Harry wouldn't have written such excruciating, stomach turning detail about
Speaker 18: his own genitals his autobiography. This is about controlling the press.
Speaker 18: This is about Prince Hary doing what many of us
Speaker 18: thought there is in the Royal Family seek to do
Speaker 18: over centuries, which is to tame the media for having
Speaker 18: the temerity to report on what they get up to,
Speaker 18: and to mock them, as has happened many times with
Speaker 18: Prince Harry. So I think this is this is a
Speaker 18: real blow to what has basically been a crusade against
Speaker 18: the free press by Prince Harry, and we can only
Speaker 18: hope that this draws are close to it.
Speaker 2: And before I let you go, what can you tell
Speaker 2: us about some reports that Meghan Mikkel has now vowed
Speaker 2: to never see the Royal family again.
Speaker 18: Well, I dare say that might be quite welcome news
Speaker 18: from much of the Royal family, who was still really
Speaker 18: from being accused of racism left right center by Meghan Markel.
Speaker 18: I mean, of course, there was a very sad family
Speaker 18: human story in the midst of all of this. I
Speaker 18: believe Prince Harry and Megan Mark's children haven't seen their
Speaker 18: grandfather since twenty twenty two. That is something that's always
Speaker 18: worth bearing your mind. But once again, you know, despite
Speaker 18: all of the media hype, despite the way in which
Speaker 18: has been interrupted in some courts, certainly in America, this
Speaker 18: is a mess, very much of the Sussex is making.
Speaker 4: Whatever else you.
Speaker 14: Might conclude about it.
Speaker 2: Well, Tom Slater, great to see you, Thanks for coming on.
Speaker 2: Well after the break, plenty of words to get through
Speaker 2: with Kel Richards. That's next, welcome back. Well let's get
Speaker 2: straight into it with wordsmith and broadcaster Kel Richards. Kel welcome.
Speaker 2: I'll tell you what. You've got some really interesting words
Speaker 2: on this list tonight, and I saw a lot of them, thought, oh,
Speaker 2: what really good ideas to talk about now. The first
Speaker 2: one spitting chips, which I think all of us have
Speaker 2: used at some point, and you actually threw it out
Speaker 2: to Credline viewers for help with this one to say, okay,
Speaker 2: we all hear it, we all know what it means.
Speaker 2: But where does it come from?
Speaker 11: Yep, and it's an Australian coinage was coined here in
Speaker 11: Perth eighteen ninety nine and first first have been the
Speaker 11: person newspaper called the Sunday Times. But nobody knows what
Speaker 11: sort of chips will be spat out. And I actually
Speaker 11: call some of the einguish s I know, some of
Speaker 11: the clever people who work on dictionaries. They didn't know
Speaker 11: the answer. So I asked the viewers and I got
Speaker 11: more than two hundred emails. All One bloke at a
Speaker 11: very creative idea. He said, it's from the footy. When
Speaker 11: you're at the footy and you're eating chips and the
Speaker 11: ref makes a stupid decision and you yell at at him.
Speaker 11: You're spedding chips. Now, that's a lovely idea. It doesn't
Speaker 11: have a lot of credence, but it's a nice idea.
Speaker 2: I like that one.
Speaker 11: Nearly everyone said has to do with wood. If you're
Speaker 11: cutting wood with a good sharps or what it spits
Speaker 11: out is fine sawdust. But if it's a bit blunt
Speaker 11: or some of the some of the teeth are a
Speaker 11: bit crooked, it rips into the wood and spits out chips,
Speaker 11: and the idea is that's probably the image behind someone
Speaker 11: spitting out angry words. Spitting out angry words is a
Speaker 11: bit like what the sword does when it hacks into
Speaker 11: a So viewers are the team of us collectively. I
Speaker 11: think have solved this one. Well done.
Speaker 2: Oh I like it now. This is another one. I
Speaker 2: think that we all often use quite a lot. Blood
Speaker 2: is thicker than water. But Don wrote in to say
Speaker 2: that blood is thicker than water does not mean family
Speaker 2: bonds at the closest bonds, as we always assume. So
Speaker 2: can you please set the record straight?
Speaker 11: Yes, non, you're wrong. It's very old. It goes back
Speaker 11: to the twelfth century. Was originally in German. It was
Speaker 11: in German for a long time before it was in
Speaker 11: English in the eleven hundreds, and then it turned up
Speaker 11: in English in fourteen twelve, somewhere like that and the tomb.
Speaker 11: There are two myths, not one myth, but two myths.
Speaker 11: One myth says blood is stronger than water, actually is
Speaker 11: referring to soldiers in battle. Nothing bonds brothers in battle
Speaker 11: together than like bathing in the blood of the enemy,
Speaker 11: which may well be true, but it's not what it's about.
Speaker 11: It's not what it ever said. It's the proverb never
Speaker 11: meant that, not in the original German, not in English.
Speaker 11: The other one is that this is a shortened version
Speaker 11: of a longer proverb that says the blood of the
Speaker 11: covenant is stronger than the water of the womb, which
Speaker 11: means though people who trust in the blood of Jesus
Speaker 11: are bonded closer than family members, which may be the case,
Speaker 11: but that's not what it said. If that were true,
Speaker 11: there would be written evidence for that. It's not, in fact,
Speaker 11: what all the myths are untrue. They're all urban myths.
Speaker 11: So non. Sorry, it was a clever idea, but you're
Speaker 11: on the wrong track. It really means what we thought.
Speaker 11: It means family bonds are the strongest bonds.
Speaker 2: Dog's Breakfast Karl wants to know the meaning and origin
Speaker 2: of a dog's breakfast, first.
Speaker 11: Record of the late eighteen hundreds, and it just comes
Speaker 11: from the idea of being missing and in fact it's
Speaker 11: another insult to our canine friends. It's pretending they're messing eaters,
Speaker 11: and so it's fairly straight in that sense. It's straightforward.
Speaker 11: What is interesting about it from a linguistic point of
Speaker 11: view is we like dogs. We all like dogs. Dogs
Speaker 11: are our best friends. But nearly every expression in English
Speaker 11: about dogs is negative. Dogs breakfast dog with its til
Speaker 11: between its legs, can't teach an old dog new tricks.
Speaker 11: Down with dogs, get up with fleas.
Speaker 14: Everything we say.
Speaker 11: We love dogs, but everything we say about dogs in
Speaker 11: English is negative. And when I discovered that that pattern,
Speaker 11: I thought, that's really interesting, that's worth drawing attention to.
Speaker 2: And then immigrant versus migrant, what's the difference between the two.
Speaker 11: Yes, Now, the bloke who asked me about this said
Speaker 11: he's been puzzled for you is very intelligent, very well
Speaker 11: informed man, but he just said, it's really puzzling. Why
Speaker 11: do we say immigrant migrant? The answer is they are
Speaker 11: exact synonyms. They mean the same thing. Both come from Latin.
Speaker 11: Migrant comes from an old Latin word meaning you've shifted
Speaker 11: your residence, so it means exactly what we think it means.
Speaker 11: And then sometime later the Latin prefix m was added.
Speaker 11: All that means is action has been taken. So although
Speaker 11: they look like their different words, they are identical words
Speaker 11: with exactly the same meaning. And the person who asked me,
Speaker 11: don't be bothered. About the muse either.
Speaker 2: Now, Cal we've got twenty seconds for you to explain
Speaker 2: the word nilist.
Speaker 11: Yes, this is a Credlin view of very clever Credlin
Speaker 11: viewers who said in the World Cup there should be
Speaker 11: an award for the nillist team, because we all know
Speaker 11: soccer is a low scoring game. There are a lot
Speaker 11: of nils scores, and some teams must score a lot
Speaker 11: of nils and they should get a special award as
Speaker 11: the nilis team. Nillis once was a word in Old English.
Speaker 11: It was the opposite of will if you will do
Speaker 11: something or your nilist do something, and it survives in
Speaker 11: the willy nilly expression will be nilli.
Speaker 2: Love it kel and thank you Robert. We'll all have
Speaker 2: to start using that. It is now time for the
Speaker 2: Bolt Report.