Speaker 1: From the skying In Center.
Speaker 2: This is Paul Murray Live.
Speaker 3: Thank you, Shari, one impactful and important hour of television.
Speaker 2: Now, I won't lie.
Speaker 3: Many Australians in the past twelve months, there are many
Speaker 3: moments where you just want to look away. You want
Speaker 3: to say it's somebody else's fight, you want to say
Speaker 3: it's the other side of the world. You understand all
Speaker 3: of the complexities, but we are reminded today about why
Speaker 3: things are the way that they are. The questions that
Speaker 3: Charry just showed in the past hour were a wonderful
Speaker 3: reminder about the humanity. That people who were innocents were murdered,
Speaker 3: no question on this day that Israel had to respond.
Speaker 3: Equally important was the conversation that Charry had with a
Speaker 3: person who may well end up one day the Prime
Speaker 3: Minister of Israel, who talks about the failure of the
Speaker 3: Israeli government on this day twelve months ago, it took
Speaker 3: six hours for the ADF to make it too many
Speaker 3: of the places that have been worse affected. There must
Speaker 3: be an inquiry into that. There must be an inquiry
Speaker 3: into the intelligence failures, about who knew what and when,
Speaker 3: and about why the lack of response was what it was.
Speaker 3: October seventh is the day that we mourn those who
Speaker 3: died in the terrorist attack. You can have your thoughts
Speaker 3: about the response to it, the proportionality and all the
Speaker 3: rest of it.
Speaker 2: We'll talk about that later.
Speaker 3: But today will forever be marked as the day that
Speaker 3: the world remembers when innocent people were murdered.
Speaker 2: No question.
Speaker 3: In the past hour, while Sharry has been bringing you
Speaker 3: her program from Israel, there's been some inspiring and deflating
Speaker 3: events that have happened here in Australia this evening. There
Speaker 3: have been thousands of people that have gathered in Sydney
Speaker 3: and in Melbourne principally, but yes in other parts of
Speaker 3: Australia to mourn the dead, to demand that those that
Speaker 3: are still behind enemy lines as hostages are to be
Speaker 3: returned home. Significant leaders, including Peter Dutton, who was given
Speaker 3: a standing ovation by the Jewish community in Sydney when
Speaker 3: he appeared today along with the premiere in New South
Speaker 3: Wales and others have spoken about the importance of this
Speaker 3: day and just like September eleven, it will be forever
Speaker 3: remembered as the day when innocence died.
Speaker 4: We need to make it clear that the killing of
Speaker 4: innocent people on October the seventh Bayhamas is a great crime.
Speaker 5: If we don't take a strong stance now, we risk
Speaker 5: repeating the mistakes of the nineteen thirties. And that is
Speaker 5: why Australians should be inspired by the bravery of generations
Speaker 5: past to stand up for our values today and into
Speaker 5: the future.
Speaker 6: Since October seven, each one of us is on a mission.
Speaker 6: Each one of us has a purpose. You have a
Speaker 6: role in the recovery. We are coming back stronger and
Speaker 6: more united. But Jachad together the.
Speaker 2: Prime Minister, was in Melbourne.
Speaker 3: We don't have tape of his comments, but he was
Speaker 3: walking with Jewish leaders in Melbourne as they were commemorating
Speaker 3: this particular day. I will save my criticism of this
Speaker 3: Prime Minister, who I think has failed on many fronts
Speaker 3: on this particular issue over the past twelve months for
Speaker 3: another day. But that is the message that he is
Speaker 3: sending this evening, And sadly, there is another story to
Speaker 3: tell you, and it principally comes out of Sydney. Hundreds
Speaker 3: of people decided to choose this day to go to
Speaker 3: the Leukember Mosque. They chose this day to celebrate the
Speaker 3: events of twelve months ago. The front page of the
Speaker 3: Daily telegraphed this evening says that it is a day
Speaker 3: of celebration. These were some of the remarks that have
Speaker 3: taken place at that particular event.
Speaker 2: My belief is.
Speaker 3: That, as I have said, there is much nuance and
Speaker 3: complication and difficulty in all of this conversation, and that
Speaker 3: there are thousands of examples of innocence that have died
Speaker 3: in the retaliation of what took place here on October
Speaker 3: the seventh. But very obviously, when your country has been
Speaker 3: attacked in the fashion that it was attacked, any country,
Speaker 3: including our own, would respond. I will not get into
Speaker 3: the complications about the depth and breadth of the response,
Speaker 3: but I stand in absolute unity with those who are
Speaker 3: disgusted that a day like today, the actual anniversary of
Speaker 3: when innocence were killed, is a day to say things
Speaker 3: like this, the seventh of October.
Speaker 7: What it is is an act of resistance, and Francesca
Speaker 7: Albanezi said that the seventh of October does not remove
Speaker 7: the Palestinia right to defend ourself.
Speaker 8: I ask of you to continue all the actions that
Speaker 8: you have started one year ago, and do not stop
Speaker 8: until we see the crumbling of Zionism until we see
Speaker 8: the end of the occupying Israeli forces.
Speaker 3: Many of those speakers, they may well share a rage,
Speaker 3: but it is misplaced on this day. This day forever
Speaker 3: in history is about what happened on October seventh. It
Speaker 3: is not an act of resistance. Again, there are complications,
Speaker 3: there are difficulties. There is no perfect place to have
Speaker 3: this conversation, because if you move a little bit too
Speaker 3: much this way and a little bit too much that way,
Speaker 3: you get screened out by all quarters. I seek not
Speaker 3: to be the person who's going to solve the question
Speaker 3: of the Middle East on a television show in Australia,
Speaker 3: but I am going to speak very clearly about Australia.
Speaker 3: Australia is a place where you can come from anywhere
Speaker 3: in the world. You can have any belief in the world.
Speaker 3: But on a day like today, if you cannot recognize
Speaker 3: that another and fellow Australian is hurting because of what
Speaker 3: happened historically on this day, then you are not living
Speaker 3: up to the opportunities of this country. We've seen protests
Speaker 3: in the past couple of days when people have been
Speaker 3: waving flags that do not explicitly show support for Hesbala,
Speaker 3: but they show the colors, they show words that are
Speaker 3: very similar.
Speaker 2: It's very clever.
Speaker 3: Change by one percent, ten percent, twenty percent to make
Speaker 3: sure that the message is clear, but the messenger won't
Speaker 3: end up with any sort of legal ramifications now tomorrow.
Speaker 3: The Palestinian community, in my view, has every right to
Speaker 3: mourn its innocence. But anyone who wants to use those
Speaker 3: innocence on this day to rub the Jewish community and
Speaker 3: their nose in the death of their innocence is not
Speaker 3: someone who has the best interests of any population at heart.
Speaker 3: I will not stand for a country like Australia being
Speaker 3: divided into countries within countries where certain suburbs lean this
Speaker 3: way and certain suburbs lean that way. Every suburb should
Speaker 3: have maximum empathy for any community and its historic, significant
Speaker 3: or important days. Let's see what happens in the next
Speaker 3: twenty four hours about whose response to what is said,
Speaker 3: Whether the focus is on those that are the innocence
Speaker 3: of October the seventh, or those who choose to use
Speaker 3: this day to claim that they are speaking in support
Speaker 3: and love of them innocence, but the reality is that
Speaker 3: they are showing some of the worst possible traits. We'll
Speaker 3: talk about that in a whole lot more. Charry will
Speaker 3: be in Israel all week. We will talk about what
Speaker 3: matters in this country and when it is protests, and
Speaker 3: when it is matters on the other side of the world.
Speaker 3: We will move those to the top of the tree.
Speaker 3: In the meantime, there was some interesting polling in and
Speaker 3: around all of this where Hezbala today, as you will
Speaker 3: have seen, supported and praised some of the behavior that
Speaker 3: has been happening on our streets in the past few days.
Speaker 3: But interestingly, there was a poll that I want to
Speaker 3: take you back to, which was from June of this year,
Speaker 3: which is what Australians believe about legitimate and illegitimate protest.
Speaker 3: Fifty three percent of people say it's okay to hold
Speaker 3: a rally outside of Parliament. I would think there is
Speaker 3: no problem with this. Forty one percent of people or
Speaker 3: they believe that marching in the streets is okay. Now
Speaker 3: you would have to infer that either the majority of
Speaker 3: people disagree or don't care. But certainly once these start
Speaker 3: to come clearer, I think it becomes clearer that the
Speaker 3: minority number is the support and the vast majority number
Speaker 3: is against this stuff, the carrying out and occupying of universities.
Speaker 3: Just fourteen percent of people accept that behavior as a
Speaker 3: legitimate form of protest. Ten percent believe that it's okay
Speaker 3: to block an MP's intrans to their office, nine percent
Speaker 3: say it's okay to go to someone's house to protest,
Speaker 3: seven percent say blockading a port or rail infrastructure is okay,
Speaker 3: four percent of people say that it's okay to damage property,
Speaker 3: and none of these or undecided is sixteen percent. Well,
Speaker 3: we have some update to that polling which comes today
Speaker 3: via the channel our newspapers. It shows that voters reject
Speaker 3: protests as Gaza war ignites the domestic route.
Speaker 2: You see.
Speaker 3: I believe the extreme majority of Australians are like us.
Speaker 3: Specifically in this case, I'm going to say like me,
Speaker 3: which is, we have maximum empathy and understanding for what's
Speaker 3: happening on other sides of the world, what has happened
Speaker 3: in the past twelve months, the twelve years, the past
Speaker 3: many decades before that. We understand the complexity. But the
Speaker 3: joy of this country is that we do not have
Speaker 3: to live with that complexity. We do not have to
Speaker 3: live with that hatred. People were asked today if they
Speaker 3: agree or disagree with the statement the conflict in the
Speaker 3: Middle East has made Australia a less safe place. It
Speaker 3: has moved from thirty six percent this time last year
Speaker 3: to now forty six percent who believe that this country
Speaker 3: is now less safe. Principally, I would suggest, because of
Speaker 3: what they have seen tonight, that there is a group
Speaker 3: of people amongst us who pretend to speak on the
Speaker 3: behalf of others, but truly speak on the behalf of
Speaker 3: their own dark heart, which is to not pull back,
Speaker 3: to not stop, to not pause, but instead to just
Speaker 3: keep pushing in the direction of which they choose to
Speaker 3: keep animosities going.
Speaker 2: Long question here, but you need to see it.
Speaker 3: Last year of conflict bloke out between Hamas and ga
Speaker 3: in Israel and the Middle East. They started Hamas fighters
Speaker 3: when they cross the border into Gaza.
Speaker 2: To kill and kidnap civilians.
Speaker 3: Israel than retaliated with strikes and in targets in Gaza,
Speaker 3: followed by ground incursion. The conflict is ongoing. Please tell
Speaker 3: us what Australia should do. Should they allow marchers and
Speaker 3: protests by Australian supporters, Well fifty nine percent of people
Speaker 3: say no, it's not to be played out here. Fifty
Speaker 3: percent of people say that Australia should voice in principal
Speaker 3: support for neither, but if forced to choose, a bigger
Speaker 3: number say Israel over Gaza. Fifteen percent say neither and
Speaker 3: be prepared to accept refugees. Eleven percent say they can
Speaker 3: come from Israel, thirteen percent say from Palestine, twenty four
Speaker 3: percent say both or either. Fifty two percent say no,
Speaker 3: I don't bring this fight here. Second question, political parties
Speaker 3: and leaders have responded in different ways to the Middle
Speaker 3: East conflict it affects Australia and how it affects Australia.
Speaker 3: Of the largest parties, who do you think has responded best?
Speaker 3: Fifty five percent say unsure or none. When support of
Speaker 3: Peter Dutton for Israel or Anthony Albernezi in his position,
Speaker 3: people choose Peter Dutton. You can see the permutations there
Speaker 3: amongst other political groups. The message remains the same twelve
Speaker 3: months on. We know what happened there, we know what
Speaker 3: happened after, and we know what has happened before.
Speaker 2: But when you are here, you.
Speaker 3: Do not bring the endless hatred, the endless Yeah, but
Speaker 3: then this and then that and what about this, and
Speaker 3: what about that. You can have those views, but you
Speaker 3: do not disturb the peace that is in Australia in
Speaker 3: order to have those views registered with violent language or
Speaker 3: outright violence, as we have seen in the past twelve months. Again,
Speaker 3: I finished this bit with where I started. I, like
Speaker 3: most Australians on many days, look the other way, not
Speaker 3: because they don't care, not because they don't understand, but
Speaker 3: for obvious reasons. My focus is always this country first,
Speaker 3: is always making sure that this country doesn't turn into
Speaker 3: other countries, that we maintain absolute stability and absolute steadfast
Speaker 3: sense of values. No matter where you come from or
Speaker 3: what you believe, the fundamental value must be that we
Speaker 3: live in a peaceful and harmonious society that can disagree,
Speaker 3: that can disagree without resorting to violence, verbal threats or intimidation.
Speaker 3: Now that position may not be pure enough for some,
Speaker 3: it may not be angry enough for others, but I
Speaker 3: believe it's where the majority of Australians are. We are
Speaker 3: not ignorant of what is happening, We are not shrugging
Speaker 3: our shoulders, we are not ignoring what is happening, but
Speaker 3: we are focused on making sure sure that none.
Speaker 2: Of that crap happens here.
Speaker 3: Now to the rest of the day and things away
Speaker 3: from other parts of the world. Let's get back to
Speaker 3: what's happening here. Don Farrell is the Special Minister of
Speaker 3: State in this country. Now, if you don't know who,
Speaker 3: Don Farrell is also the Trade Minister, and as the
Speaker 3: Trade Minister, just a little refresher here, he had the
Speaker 3: opportunity to hire somebody to be a trade end boy
Speaker 3: for Australia in San Francisco. He could have chosen the
Speaker 3: woman who had applied for the job. No, no, Instead
Speaker 3: he chose a mate of his from the union movement
Speaker 3: who had to be trained by the person who applied
Speaker 3: for the job because he got the job despite the
Speaker 3: fact that he didn't apply for the job. He of
Speaker 3: course was a friendly one term Labor Senator, which meant
Speaker 3: he got the job, not, as I say, the lady
Speaker 3: who actually was qualified for it.
Speaker 2: So that's a bit of an insight into.
Speaker 3: Some of the decision making in and around this hardcore
Speaker 3: partisan on the behalf of the Labor Party. But Don
Speaker 3: Farrell's job as the Special Minister of State is to
Speaker 3: shepherd through the Parliament the rules of our life actions.
Speaker 3: Now this goes to everything from how we vote, to
Speaker 3: how how to votes are handed out, to who can donate,
Speaker 3: what we know about the donation process.
Speaker 2: And there are things that need to be fixed and
Speaker 2: there are other things that don't need to be changed.
Speaker 3: Now, one thing that apparently a committee of politicians delivering
Speaker 3: the finding that mister Farrell wanted was to cut back
Speaker 3: on things other than political parties being able to spend
Speaker 3: significant amounts of money at a federal election. This would
Speaker 3: mean that the Teals will not be able to have
Speaker 3: the same sorts of money to back in the organization
Speaker 3: for them to be able to finish frankly third in
Speaker 3: many areas, but then with preferences they make their way
Speaker 3: to second and then eventually they end up defeating Liberal
Speaker 3: Party MPs. The reason they claim that we need to
Speaker 3: change it is largely because of the spending of Clive
Speaker 3: Palmer the United Australian Party adds of tens of millions
Speaker 3: of dollars that did not result in him getting members
Speaker 3: to the Lower House. It did result in a Senator
Speaker 3: Ralph Bebbott making his way into the Federal Parliament, and
Speaker 3: the spending of Clyve Palmer and all of those ads
Speaker 3: is used as the giant excuse as to why we
Speaker 3: absolutely have to change the way the rules of elections work,
Speaker 3: which is why, as I say, there was a parliamentary
Speaker 3: committee with a Labor majority that decided that we need
Speaker 3: to introduce caps on the amount of donations that people
Speaker 3: can hand over. We also need to make sure that
Speaker 3: there's a greater transparency about who gives money and when.
Speaker 3: I don't have a problem with that, but as has
Speaker 3: played out in places like Queensland in this election right now,
Speaker 3: where a political party would be able to spend x
Speaker 3: amount in one seat, but a third party organization would
Speaker 3: also be able to spend the same amount.
Speaker 2: So in the case of the unions.
Speaker 3: Despite the fact that in their constitution of the Labour
Speaker 3: Party they are fifty percent of the say they are
Speaker 3: part of the Labour Party under all of these rules
Speaker 3: that play out in places like Victoria and Queensland right now,
Speaker 3: they are independent entities. So if you have ten unions
Speaker 3: or more than ten that are in Queensland, it means
Speaker 3: Labour spends this much one Union, two union, three union.
Speaker 3: You get the point, they can ten times outspend anyone
Speaker 3: else on the ballot. This is a problem but this
Speaker 3: is what Don Farrell is trying to achieve through the parliament. Now,
Speaker 3: if he's able to get this through the Parliament, it
Speaker 3: will only happen because it's the Greens plus minor Party
Speaker 3: people like Jockie Lamby so called independence like people like
Speaker 3: Dormat Dave Pocock. And the expectation was that the funding
Speaker 3: system which has kept the Teals alive would not be
Speaker 3: snuffed out at this upcoming election incided to be twelve
Speaker 3: months after that. Well, the reporting today is that with
Speaker 3: limited numbers of days left for the Senate to sit
Speaker 3: this year and then presumably in an election year, the
Speaker 3: time is running out for them to put that system
Speaker 3: in place. And this may well be very much by design.
Speaker 3: You see, the government is headed towards minority and they
Speaker 3: would not want a bunch of peedoff teals, perhaps a
Speaker 3: reduced number of teals because of those spending changes to
Speaker 3: actually be what ends up happening. So this thing may
Speaker 3: well end up getting delayed.
Speaker 2: Now that's good.
Speaker 3: Because the assumption is that Clyde Palmer will be running
Speaker 3: ads if he chooses too hard against this government as
Speaker 3: opposed to previous stances like in twenty twenty two when
Speaker 3: he ran sort of put them all last. But remember
Speaker 3: back in twenty nineteen when he was running hard against
Speaker 3: Shorten that helped Morrison win. Special Minister of State Don
Speaker 3: Farrell isn't due to introduce the package, which includes real
Speaker 3: time disclosure of donations at more than a thousand dollars,
Speaker 3: until November. A majority of Cross benches demand the legislation
Speaker 3: will be properly scrutinized. That means it goes off to
Speaker 3: a committee, meaning a vote may will be delayed. And
Speaker 3: a couple of people who are speaking about this, includer
Speaker 3: old mate Lydia Thorpe.
Speaker 2: Hopefully our netball injuries are okay.
Speaker 3: Labour has left this vote too late, so it looks
Speaker 3: unlikely that these reforms will pass at the election. I
Speaker 3: remember Lydia Thorpe, despite the fact she was elected as
Speaker 3: a Green, becomes an independent very early in this term.
Speaker 3: She will be around for any three years unless there
Speaker 3: is a double dissolution, so I'm sad to say that's
Speaker 3: the case. She says, it's not clear when the election
Speaker 3: will be called, but an important bill like this notes
Speaker 3: to go through a committee process. At the moment, it's
Speaker 3: impossible to run a successful campaign against the Majors without
Speaker 3: huge spending. But interestingly, perhaps the most telling quote today
Speaker 3: about why the planned changes may well not end up
Speaker 3: happening to keep the Teals happy is MANIEK Ryan, the
Speaker 3: lady who, of course, due in court proceedings we ended
Speaker 3: up finding out to thought of herself as a potential
Speaker 3: prime minister one day. No reform is better than bad reform,
Speaker 3: you see, she would like the current system to go
Speaker 3: on just as long as the rules apply to everyone else,
Speaker 3: not the Teals. Does that say she's confident about winning
Speaker 3: her seat if she had to do it under the
Speaker 3: same rules as everyone else.
Speaker 2: Who knows.
Speaker 3: But we'll all find out together. But I thought you
Speaker 3: should know. They are trying to rewrite the rules of
Speaker 3: how elections work, and the reality is that money is
Speaker 3: part of that picture. On the one hand, it seems
Speaker 3: very logical that everyone's only able to spend the same
Speaker 3: amount of money. But once you throw in the third
Speaker 3: party groups like I say, a Climate two hundred, who
Speaker 3: might be able to simultaneously fund a candidate and then
Speaker 3: set themselves up as being completely independent, well, they of
Speaker 3: course are able to spend two times more than anyone
Speaker 3: else who's on the ballot. Now there are some right
Speaker 3: leaning groups like Advance Australia, but they won't end up
Speaker 3: having the same financial supports something like Climate two hundred,
Speaker 3: let alone the Union advantage.
Speaker 2: So watch this space. It is always the prerogative of.
Speaker 3: Any government to use its numbers in the Senate, but
Speaker 3: in this case, if minor parties are willing to sign
Speaker 3: away their capacity to be able to fight fairly, then
Speaker 3: we have to look deeper inside the deal. Remember when
Speaker 3: this took place in Victoria, there was financial compensation that
Speaker 3: was handed to the minor parties at that time. Now,
Speaker 3: if it was a liberal party who was making taxpayer
Speaker 3: deals to help a bill go through the Parliament, it
Speaker 3: would be an outrage. But if it's labor and it's
Speaker 3: to the advantage of the left, nothing to see here, Well,
Speaker 3: there is plenty to see here and I will keep
Speaker 3: watching cost of living years that number one issue in
Speaker 3: the country, no matter how tragic the days are on
Speaker 3: other parts of the world. Right now, And there's a
Speaker 3: bit of information I want to show you today, which
Speaker 3: was a survey that showed a fifth of Australians and
Speaker 3: our stressed about money every day, one in five.
Speaker 2: This works in two parts.
Speaker 3: It found that forty six percent of people are dealing
Speaker 3: with financial worries at least once a week. One in
Speaker 3: five people said that their savings were now going backwards
Speaker 3: fifteen percent, so that they are now in debt and
Speaker 3: seeing an existing debt grow. Now, of course, the Prime
Speaker 3: Minister would like you to think that it's all about
Speaker 3: the supermarkets, and the supermarkets are the only thing to
Speaker 3: talk about here. Well, again further information from the same survey,
Speaker 3: Australians are now spending a third more on their groceries
Speaker 3: than they were not two years ago when this government
Speaker 3: came to power, but just six months ago, when this
Speaker 3: government says that it was focused on cost of living.
Speaker 3: The media and grocery spend was two hundred bucks in August.
Speaker 3: It was one hundred and fifty in January. When it
Speaker 3: comes to power bills, the media and Electricity bill has
Speaker 3: gone from three hundred to three hundred and fifty, not
Speaker 3: in two years, but in just six months.
Speaker 2: Meantime.
Speaker 3: The Prime Minister and Grim Jim Chalmers, they think that
Speaker 3: by going after shrink flation and pretending that it's the
Speaker 3: supermarkets and every dollar that you spend in the supermarket
Speaker 3: goes to the mustache twirling CEOs.
Speaker 2: Of those companies.
Speaker 3: The reality is again new polling which has come out
Speaker 3: tonight under the cover of everything that is happening in
Speaker 3: and around the recognition and commemoration in and around October seventh.
Speaker 3: But this will make big news tomorrow when Parliament is back.
Speaker 3: Albanizi is in voter sites over the cost of living.
Speaker 3: Let's have a look here. Who do you hold responsible
Speaker 3: for rising costs of living? Thirty six percent of people
Speaker 3: say the federal government. The next biggest number there would
Speaker 3: be that they are unsure. The next biggest number under
Speaker 3: that would be global factors or business. But the government
Speaker 3: is the main focus. Perhaps even more concerning for the
Speaker 3: government inflation can I have many causes and remedies. Who
Speaker 3: do you think has the greatest responsibility in care inflation down?
Speaker 3: Nine percent of people say the Reserve Bank fifty A
Speaker 3: majority of Australians are correct. It is the federal government
Speaker 3: who have such responsibilities. But as always, they want to
Speaker 3: change the subject. They want to pretend that the solutions
Speaker 3: are bashing big business because they're the real problems, bashing
Speaker 3: the Reserve Bank because they're the real problem. No, it's
Speaker 3: the federal government, the very federal government. The promised, of course,
Speaker 3: to bring cost of living down, remember that was their
Speaker 3: central promise.
Speaker 2: They have failed to do it.
Speaker 3: It got worse in twenty two, much worse in twenty three,
Speaker 3: and it continues to be much worse in twenty four.
Speaker 3: What about this suggestion that comes via taxpayer media today
Speaker 3: as a solution to the long lines of rental properties
Speaker 3: around the country. Now, as I showed you last week,
Speaker 3: the number of new dwellings that are being approved is
Speaker 3: just as smigan compared to the midion people that have
Speaker 3: been brought into the country in the past couple of
Speaker 3: years by this government under immigration, because it makes.
Speaker 2: The federal budget looks good.
Speaker 3: So the ABC's solution, older Australians could rent out spare
Speaker 3: room to help ease the housing crisis. New research suggests
Speaker 3: like continue where you can shove that research and it's
Speaker 3: right where it came from, the idea that you, because
Speaker 3: your kids have moved out, should think about renting out
Speaker 3: their old bedroom to help solve the housing crisis. Please,
Speaker 3: the government should stop importing as many people as it
Speaker 3: currently does. The government should be approving more dwellings to
Speaker 3: be purchased. The government should not be talking about changes
Speaker 3: to negative gearing changes which means people who buy those
Speaker 3: properties for somebody to be able to rent would be
Speaker 3: disincentivized from doing so. The idea that you are the solution,
Speaker 3: therefore the problem, because you choose to live in the
Speaker 3: same house that you brought your kids up in, you know,
Speaker 3: the one that you worked your backside off to pay,
Speaker 3: that you have renovated, that you have cleaned, that you
Speaker 3: have toiled in the garden for decades. What world did
Speaker 3: these people live in, because it is at ours. One
Speaker 3: of the endless frustrations that we have had this year
Speaker 3: was to see a gold medal being given to Dan
Speaker 3: Andrews in part because of his response to public health.
Speaker 2: That was a joke.
Speaker 3: Yet, because of course he's part of the club, and
Speaker 3: the club always finds a way to reward the club,
Speaker 3: he ends up topping the King's Birthday honors just a
Speaker 3: few weeks ago. Of course, it is completely unforgivable his
Speaker 3: decisions in hotel quarantine, which resulted in, as we've told
Speaker 3: you before, more than seven hundred people dying.
Speaker 2: Yet he gets a gold medal.
Speaker 3: The lockdowns, they were punitive, they were too long, you know,
Speaker 3: that and even the Channel one newspapers recognized it last week.
Speaker 2: But of course he won.
Speaker 3: And because he won after locking down the state after
Speaker 3: thirty three people died because the ambulance system didn't work,
Speaker 3: then he's the winner forever and everyone else who's shut
Speaker 3: up well. One of the ways that he was able
Speaker 3: to win was because taxpayer money was being spent on polling,
Speaker 3: the best type of polling, the most expensive type of polling.
Speaker 3: It was to the benefit of the Labor Party, but
Speaker 3: the Victorian government.
Speaker 2: Was using it to advise itself.
Speaker 3: Now, of course the Labour Party and the Victorian government
Speaker 3: are indivisible, as the Corruption Commission has shown. Gray corruption
Speaker 3: means that often the public service is indivisible from people
Speaker 3: who are loyal to the government and the.
Speaker 2: Party of the day.
Speaker 3: Will today via the Australian who is not giving up
Speaker 3: on this, and good on them for not giving up
Speaker 3: on this. Will they give some details about the taxpayer
Speaker 3: funded polling that men Andrews was making decisions to make
Speaker 3: sure that he would win an election rather than the decisions.
Speaker 2: That were right for Victoria.
Speaker 3: In a significant victory for the public's right to know
Speaker 3: Victoria's information. What dog has dismissed attempts by the Department
Speaker 3: of Premier and Cabinet to keep documents secret about work
Speaker 3: that was done by a research company. The newly released
Speaker 3: documents reveal that they were conducting voter focus groups for
Speaker 3: the government, not the Labour Party, the government on health, education,
Speaker 3: roads and transport all the way through twenty twenty two.
Speaker 3: The last of it was done just before the caretaker
Speaker 3: period kicked in just a month before the then state election.
Speaker 3: The Department was keen on testing how emerging cost of
Speaker 3: living crisis was starting to impact on voters, with questions
Speaker 3: like are you aware of prompted or unprompted the state
Speaker 3: government initiatives like two hundred and fifty dollars of power
Speaker 3: saving bonuses, free kindo sick pay guarantees, So basically questions
Speaker 3: that were about politics. It goes on to say that
Speaker 3: on the issue of health, the focus groups with the
Speaker 3: guide the Department was keen on grilling voters about the
Speaker 3: performance of ambulances, hospitals and elective surgery waiting lists. What's
Speaker 3: your sense of ambulance response times at the moment? Now,
Speaker 3: this was because thirty three people had died as a
Speaker 3: result of the collapse in the TRIPLEO system. The polling,
Speaker 3: which was paid for by the taxpayer, was overtly political.
Speaker 3: But because there is no firewall between the public service
Speaker 3: of Victoria and the politics of Victoria, what is referred
Speaker 3: to again as the Great corruption by their Corruption Commission.
Speaker 2: This is what they're talking about now.
Speaker 3: For some reason, of course, we continue on with this
Speaker 3: conversation about the voice, despite the fact that more than
Speaker 3: a year ago Australia made its decision and it was
Speaker 3: hell no, sixty forty hell no.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 3: I don't know why this keeps popping up in newspapers,
Speaker 3: particularly on weekends. They keep sort of doing feature pieces
Speaker 3: about the Yes side and how it's licking its wounds
Speaker 3: or why we were all wrong to make the decisions
Speaker 3: that we did.
Speaker 2: One of these was.
Speaker 3: Meghan Davis who popped up and earn a story in
Speaker 3: the Financial Review. Well she says that disinformation and overheated
Speaker 3: partisanship fuelled the defeat. Who cares Australians made a decision.
Speaker 3: They had all of the information and they made the decision.
Speaker 3: If I was in government and I had been elected,
Speaker 3: and I had polling suggesting the referreendum wasn't going to win.
Speaker 2: I would have pulled up stumps.
Speaker 3: She says, I don't think anyone was prepared for how
Speaker 3: devisive and nasty that no campaign would be. No one apparently, please.
Speaker 3: People in the democracy have a right to say no.
Speaker 3: They have a right to say, you know what, we've
Speaker 3: heard your argument and we disagree. It's not disinformation, misinformation
Speaker 3: or lies.
Speaker 2: They just disagreed. Now, I'm sorry to say it.
Speaker 3: For twelve months on why are they still writing about it.
Speaker 3: It wasn't fifty forty nine point nine, it was sixty forty.
Speaker 2: Even Lefty Victoria said no.
Speaker 3: What an insight into how people make their decisions in
Speaker 3: and around the wider media. I don't know why this
Speaker 3: keeps getting run but it does. Let's get to America
Speaker 3: where I think right now, this week, a month out.
Speaker 3: Who knows what happens in the end, but I think
Speaker 3: Trump is leading. I explained in some detail to you
Speaker 3: last night about why I think Trump is leading.
Speaker 2: Well, I can show you one of the data points here.
Speaker 3: The bookies, now again they can be inexact, and they're
Speaker 3: not suggesting there's a runaway right now, but they say
Speaker 3: there's a fifty and a bit chance of Trump winning That,
Speaker 3: of course, is a majority compared to Harris, who has
Speaker 3: been going down over the.
Speaker 2: Past few days.
Speaker 3: The key reason because they believe that Trump is now
Speaker 3: a fifty five percent chance of winning the state of Pennsylvania, where,
Speaker 3: of course he had the rally yesterday, where months earlier
Speaker 3: somebody tried to kill him if the polls were frozen
Speaker 3: in time and turned into an election. According to Real
Speaker 3: Clear Politics, the suggestion is that Trump would win. He
Speaker 3: needs two to seventy at two eighty one versus Harrison
Speaker 3: Waltz at two fifty seven. So how are the left
Speaker 3: he's taking it. Let's first check in with MSNBC.
Speaker 9: What I'm hearing from Democratic and Republican business people and
Speaker 9: a lot of men. And she's got such a big
Speaker 9: problem with man. I think there's an under account of
Speaker 9: the Trump vote. I think that there's a missed misagenation
Speaker 9: in all of this black and white man.
Speaker 3: Oh, of course, when they don't vote for who you
Speaker 3: want to, it has to be racist and more sexist
Speaker 3: and more misogyny.
Speaker 2: Or all three.
Speaker 3: In this case, again, she could win, She could secretly
Speaker 3: be winning, and she could be winning by an even
Speaker 3: bigger margin than oba they know she isn't, which means
Speaker 3: Q more lifty ts and wild claims about what might
Speaker 3: will happen for man who's been president and didn't do
Speaker 3: any of this stuff when he was.
Speaker 10: We are not at a point right now to be
Speaker 10: talking about policy difference. This is not about economic difference,
Speaker 10: because we are not running against a normal human being,
Speaker 10: right We are running against Donald Trump, who is an
Speaker 10: existential threat to humanity.
Speaker 11: And I mean the words that came to mind when
Speaker 11: I've read about this controversy today is the gross luga
Speaker 11: who was a phrase coined by Adolf Hitler in mindcomf
Speaker 11: in nineteen twenty five for a propaganda technique by which
Speaker 11: you tell as big a lie as possible so that
Speaker 11: people will believe bigger.
Speaker 2: I think.
Speaker 11: But Donald Trump does that as a matter of course.
Speaker 11: He's a pathological liar and a sociopath.
Speaker 12: And when he turns around and says jen to you know,
Speaker 12: like the head of this network or other people who
Speaker 12: are critics, that he intends to use sealed team sex
Speaker 12: or the military within which to round up his critics
Speaker 12: or his opponents, he intends.
Speaker 1: To do it.
Speaker 12: And I see that with firsthand experience.
Speaker 3: The best thing if Trump wins will be watching their
Speaker 3: reaction in real time, which, of course they will turn
Speaker 3: into scandal for four years, but at least will be
Speaker 3: fun to watch on election not or maybe it'll be
Speaker 3: us that are crying. We'll all find out together. Quick
Speaker 3: break back with more lots to talk about. No sooks,
Speaker 3: no lefties. Looking forward to this in the moment or
Speaker 3: two's time here on Paul Murray Live.
Speaker 2: Thank you so much.
Speaker 3: I'm sorry to sell you a Papa said, no sooks,
Speaker 3: no lefties. He's not a full on lefty, but he's
Speaker 3: kinder by our standards. I'm wearing the red jacket, he's
Speaker 3: wearing the blue.
Speaker 13: Who knows what's going on? That incredible.
Speaker 3: God love the good people of rem Brand. They are
Speaker 3: wonderful and Elias in particular. God love rem Brand. All right,
Speaker 3: see there we go, get another and the wonderful make
Speaker 3: an event right now as well, of course, because Parliament
Speaker 3: is heading back into full play tomorrow. Matt, I want
Speaker 3: to get your response to what is taking place tonight.
Speaker 3: Where for obvious reasons, there are sacred days for certain communities.
Speaker 3: Now they may not be the days they're automatically jumped
Speaker 3: to people who aren't.
Speaker 2: In those communities.
Speaker 3: But it's pretty obvious what October the seventh is, all right,
Speaker 3: It's pretty obvious that that is a day when Australian
Speaker 3: Jews mourn what took place in Israel. But some of
Speaker 3: the stuff that is being said, and if we can
Speaker 3: bring it back from the editorial guys, the stuff that's
Speaker 3: being said on the steps of the lakember Mosque tonight
Speaker 3: is in my view, intentionally inflammatory. It is intentionally insensitive,
Speaker 3: It is intentionally basically a giant f You now, remember
Speaker 3: when the attacks took place on the streets of same
Speaker 3: said sober people were out and about and saying it
Speaker 3: was a day of victory. Twelve months on, no change
Speaker 3: in the rhetoric roll the.
Speaker 7: Tape the seventh of October, what it is is an
Speaker 7: act of resistance, and Francesca Albanezi said that the seventh
Speaker 7: of October does not remove the Palestinia right to defend herself.
Speaker 8: I ask of you to continue all the actions that
Speaker 8: you have started one year ago, and do not stop
Speaker 8: until we see the crumbling of Zionism, until we see
Speaker 8: the end of the occupying as radioforces.
Speaker 2: Matt, what do you think, Look.
Speaker 4: I wish we could just focus on the heartache, the loss,
Speaker 4: the solemn feelings that many Australians are feeling tonight. Many
Speaker 4: Australians losts, lost loved ones, family members, friends, some still
Speaker 4: know people in captivity twelve months on from a shocking event,
Speaker 4: And yeah, you would wish, you wish, especially just a
Speaker 4: year on, just twelve months on, that the focus would
Speaker 4: be on that. So I I'm sort of reluctant to
Speaker 4: want to speak about and iment on those people. I
Speaker 4: don't think they deserve airtime.
Speaker 1: But look, I.
Speaker 4: Don't think they do themselves any favors to their cause.
Speaker 4: I've certainly got sympathy for the plight of innocent Palestinians
Speaker 4: and what's happened since October seven.
Speaker 1: It's hurt a lot of people.
Speaker 4: But they don't help their cause to pre palace time
Speaker 4: whatever their cause is, by producing the heartache of other Australians.
Speaker 4: But I just wish we could come together on days
Speaker 4: like that today. I suppose it's a forlorn wish. There's
Speaker 4: enough to vision the world, why do we need to
Speaker 4: repeat it here in the streets of Australia.
Speaker 3: And also, just like the people who were changing the
Speaker 3: symbols on the flag, so there was a very strategic decision.
Speaker 3: If you do it on the steps of the Moss,
Speaker 3: then it can sort of be interpreted as some sort
Speaker 3: of faux religious ceremony. Therefore, police weren't going to crack
Speaker 3: down more. But let's step out to the other protests
Speaker 3: that have been around where sam two recent examples. Now,
Speaker 3: again I'm not carrying water for molo Unopolis, but he
Speaker 3: was controversial figure who was able to do a speaking
Speaker 3: to her in Sydney Millon in Melbourne, they booked a room,
Speaker 3: they sold tickets, people turned up to protest, yet the
Speaker 3: promoters were sent the bill for the protesters turning up. Now,
Speaker 3: they didn't do anything wrong, so why do they have
Speaker 3: to pay for the protesters. Nigel Faras does the same
Speaker 3: thing in Sydney. He books a venue, sells tickets, but
Speaker 3: the people who turn up to protest his team gets
Speaker 3: sent a bill.
Speaker 2: From the police.
Speaker 3: Why doesn't a bill get sent to the people who
Speaker 3: are running the protests on the very days when the
Speaker 3: police say this is not a good day for a protest.
Speaker 13: Look, it's an absolutely fair question, Paul. I think the
Speaker 13: issue is that no one should be sent the bills
Speaker 13: for the protests. You know, I think in this country,
Speaker 13: whether you agree or disagree with the issue, or want
Speaker 13: to see the protests or not, I think we all
Speaker 13: recommend and recognize that there is a right of everyone
Speaker 13: to get out there and have a protest. Now you agree,
Speaker 13: none for Milo or none for no one, or in
Speaker 13: my view, if it's good enough, then it's good enough
Speaker 13: for ever.
Speaker 2: Well, no, because we're going to end up in the
Speaker 2: same s. I agree.
Speaker 13: You can't have a subjective view where you're billing one
Speaker 13: person and not the other, because then who's going to decide,
Speaker 13: you know. I think in the same way, Matt has
Speaker 13: a right to organize a protest about you know, carbon taxes,
Speaker 13: I have a right to organize an industrial rights you know,
Speaker 13: your rights at work protests, and I think that's fine.
Speaker 13: And the police should be there to keep everyone safe
Speaker 13: and make sure it's an orderly protest and no bills,
Speaker 13: no bills, All right, Now, I've got you go, Matt.
Speaker 1: Well, I've got.
Speaker 4: A quicker turn of I agree with Sam, although I
Speaker 4: think what we should do is start raising more money
Speaker 4: from those protesters they break the law. So some of
Speaker 4: them do actually break the law and stopping people going
Speaker 4: about their business or commit commit vandalism.
Speaker 13: I'd agree with that charge there more money.
Speaker 1: And then you can then that helps offset the cost
Speaker 1: of police.
Speaker 13: And certainly the people that vandalize things and you know
Speaker 13: the climate nutters who you know park in the middle
Speaker 13: of tunnels. Sure, sure those people find them.
Speaker 3: Those costs of disruption flow, but not the cost of
Speaker 3: the policing. Okay, Now Hillary Clinton may well have accidentally surprise, surprise,
Speaker 3: said the quiet bit out loud. Now, as we know,
Speaker 3: this government here in Australia is trying to censor the
Speaker 3: Internet because of misinformation, despite the fact there are many
Speaker 3: other laws about libel and defamation and all the rest
Speaker 3: of it. Well, she said this about why we need
Speaker 3: to crack down more on what he said on social media.
Speaker 3: And now remember, unlike the United States, the United States
Speaker 3: actually has written into their Bill of Rights the freedom
Speaker 3: of speech.
Speaker 14: That if the platforms, whether it's Facebook or Twitter, x
Speaker 14: or Instagram or TikTok, whatever they are, if they don't
Speaker 14: moderate and monitor the content, we lose total control. And
Speaker 14: it's not just the social and psychological effects, it's real harm.
Speaker 2: We lose total control. Matt, what does that mean?
Speaker 4: Yeah, I really want to know what the word we
Speaker 4: means in that sentence with a way, I'm not sure
Speaker 4: they are all the American people. It's very concerning, and
Speaker 4: there's an explicit strategy from some agencies with the US
Speaker 4: to try and circumvent their First Amendment by imposing free
Speaker 4: speech restrictions in other countries, which would potentially also then
Speaker 4: bhind the American social media companies for America too.
Speaker 1: Obviously, that's happening here in Australia.
Speaker 4: With our Misinformation and Disinformation Bill so called misinformation. It's
Speaker 4: also happening in Europe as well. I think it's very
Speaker 4: concerning times. I think Australians to serve to speak freely
Speaker 4: about political issues. And a point that's not made very
Speaker 4: often but is almost equally important Paul, is that I
Speaker 4: have the right to also listen to my fellow Australians,
Speaker 4: because every time you silence someone from speaking, you're also
Speaker 4: restricting the rights of someone else to hear those views.
Speaker 4: I also want to hear from people I disagree with.
Speaker 4: For example, X recently canceled Istraian Conservation Foundation over nuclear energy.
Speaker 1: I didn't agree with that. They're my political opponents.
Speaker 4: I didn't like what they had to say, but I
Speaker 4: have every right to hear what they have to say.
Speaker 4: That is the test of a free, healthy, and functioning
Speaker 4: democratic society. And this move to reintroduce a modern former
Speaker 4: blasphemy and starts censoring particular political views is incredibly retrograde
Speaker 4: and it needs to be stopped in its tracks.
Speaker 2: As a man who'd like Harris to win, Gee's Hillary
Speaker 2: is always helpful, isn't she.
Speaker 3: Yeah, so it's always so helpful. And it's not like
Speaker 3: a person who runs one of these social media companies
Speaker 3: hasn't already said that he's pro the other guy in
Speaker 3: the race.
Speaker 13: It's a level of spectacular introspection or lack thereof, that
Speaker 13: makes this person launch her book in the maelstrom of
Speaker 13: a election campaign against the person that beat her what
Speaker 13: eight years ago? It is just the idea, because that's
Speaker 13: what the interview was. It was her advertised for a
Speaker 13: new book, and you know, find write your book, another autobiography.
Speaker 13: I think we're up to about fourth or fifth autobiography.
Speaker 13: I mean Kevin only had two. But you know, write
Speaker 13: your book, good, good, you know, get it out there.
Speaker 13: But do you have to do it now? At the
Speaker 13: point that Democrats are doing their best to get people
Speaker 13: interested and enthused about Kamala Harris and disliking Donald Trump.
Speaker 13: Do you want to remind people that will actually you know,
Speaker 13: this was the last time they ran someone that Trump
Speaker 13: ran again.
Speaker 2: But also perhaps I have a strange view on this, right.
Speaker 3: I think the way to push back against what they
Speaker 3: believe to be conspiracy theories.
Speaker 2: Whatever whatever is maximum transparency. Right.
Speaker 3: But gone are the days when you only had to
Speaker 3: have mates at four TV stations and a couple of
Speaker 3: newspapers to be able to make sure I come on,
Speaker 3: knock this out. The reality is we have technology now
Speaker 3: that means we can all as adults be able to handle.
Speaker 2: Information in real time.
Speaker 3: The hilaries of this world, you know who simultaneously want
Speaker 3: to press the reset button with Russia while pretending they're
Speaker 3: fiddling with Americans.
Speaker 13: So he's not the one I trust with it. This
Speaker 13: is in an area that I know a huge amount about.
Speaker 13: I'll freely that doesn't saw anyone on this shot no
Speaker 13: fair point. I just don't know why we can't have
Speaker 13: more verification of who you are when you go online.
Speaker 13: When we go on this eg free work exactly right,
Speaker 13: when we go on this show, we're all responsible for
Speaker 13: what we say. And if we call someone a name,
Speaker 13: we're able to be sit you go online and you
Speaker 13: can say whatever you want, like there is a reason
Speaker 13: that LinkedIn is a frankly harmonious, responsible place because people
Speaker 13: are boring by Well, yeah, sure it's boring.
Speaker 3: I'm not aware of LinkedIn. I'm happy with my job
Speaker 3: and I don't need to go hunting anytime soon. Break
Speaker 3: Quick Break Mac with more here on Pall Murray Live.
Speaker 3: Sam's happy with his, by the way, Matt's happy with his.
Speaker 1: Just help me out quit.
Speaker 2: Break one and a second.
Speaker 3: Thank you very much for watching our next Our town
Speaker 3: locations up in a couple of weeks and it's going
Speaker 3: to be beautiful lon set than in Tasmania. I can't
Speaker 3: wait to get there, even written down for you Sunday,
Speaker 3: the twentieth of October, a couple of weeks time, the
Speaker 3: weekend before the Queen's Land election, get rid of Stephen Mars,
Speaker 3: two weekends before the American election. Fight fight fight, But
Speaker 3: we will be there our town sky news dot com
Speaker 3: dot are you if you are in lon Cesston, if
Speaker 3: you can get to northern Tasmania, look forward to seeing
Speaker 3: you there. Got so many friends there and I look
Speaker 3: forward to see you. So let's fill the room right
Speaker 3: now ourtown at skyes dot com. That are you, Lonnie
Speaker 3: in a couple of weeks. Time cannot wait. In the meantime,
Speaker 3: I'm hanging out with my mates, Mat Canavan and of
Speaker 3: course Sam Crosby.
Speaker 2: Now let's get into American politics here.
Speaker 1: Now.
Speaker 3: I have shown a little bit of data before about
Speaker 3: why I think Trump is in the lead. Last night
Speaker 3: I got into some granular detail that won't surprise anyone
Speaker 3: about the polling areas of twenty twenty that basically said,
Speaker 3: you know, Biden was winning by this much when he
Speaker 3: actually ended up winning by this much. So when they're
Speaker 3: showing ties, then presumably that's going to be good for Trump.
Speaker 2: Right, But who knows.
Speaker 3: So I'm going to ask you this question every week
Speaker 3: for the next month or so, which is, Matt, why
Speaker 3: do you think Trump is winning? Is there a piece
Speaker 3: of data or just your good old gut that's telling
Speaker 3: you na, he's fine?
Speaker 1: Well, a lot of it is my gun. I've said
Speaker 1: this program many times.
Speaker 4: I just I think he is a much better match
Speaker 4: for the states that are in play that are important
Speaker 4: in the Midwest and in Arizona and Nevada, it just
Speaker 4: Carmla Harris being a pretty left wing liberal senator from
Speaker 4: San Francisco. It's a hard cell. The other SpecTec just
Speaker 4: more quantitative data. In the last couple of days, The
Speaker 4: New York Times, a very very respected poll, had some
Speaker 4: interesting analysis that when they will if they waited their
Speaker 4: polling based on asking the question who did you vote
Speaker 4: for in the last twenty twenty election, they end up
Speaker 4: with very large margins of victory in the key states
Speaker 4: for Donald Trump, much larger than they're predicting currently. So look,
Speaker 4: I think the main takeaway from all that is you
Speaker 4: can't put much weight in the polls.
Speaker 1: As you've said and described last.
Speaker 4: Night, They've been out by a long margin in recent elections,
Speaker 4: so why would we put too much weight on them today.
Speaker 4: I don't think there's any evidence that have necessarily corrected those
Speaker 4: mistakes this time round.
Speaker 3: And I've got to say, if you want to walk
Speaker 3: away from the polls and you start looking at the
Speaker 3: aggregators or the model makers. Now some of them have
Speaker 3: good pictures for Harris, some of them say that it's
Speaker 3: a little bit closer again in the betting market. So
Speaker 3: I can show you one betting market this way and
Speaker 3: that way. I've chosen polybeit because it's the one we're
Speaker 3: followed all the way through when things are way up
Speaker 3: all way down. Sam is a man who'd like Harris
Speaker 3: to go there. Is there a bit of data that's
Speaker 3: telling you that she's there? Or is it because she's
Speaker 3: going on Howard Stern this week?
Speaker 13: Look similar to Matt, I have such a reservation when
Speaker 13: it comes to data. When you think about how any
Speaker 13: pole is.
Speaker 2: You live twenty nineteen in Australia. No, no, sorry to
Speaker 2: trigger us.
Speaker 13: That's a load blow.
Speaker 2: That was a load blow.
Speaker 13: But when you think about how the data is actually
Speaker 13: collected and how it involves someone picking up the phone.
Speaker 13: Best case scenario, someone picking up a phone calling someone
Speaker 13: again and again and again. It's got a ninety something
Speaker 13: percent rejection rate. You factor that into who the people
Speaker 13: that are actually answering generally old people. So the way
Speaker 13: that pulses get around that it's stay weight people disproportionately.
Speaker 13: So if you get eighteen or twenty year old or
Speaker 13: under thirty year old, you know you might get one
Speaker 13: of those. Your sample might need you'll need a hundred
Speaker 13: of those, so you'll just wait them to a factor
Speaker 13: of twenty is how they skew that out. And they've
Speaker 13: been doing this for years. And when you think the
Speaker 13: number of poles that come in here that are bombarding
Speaker 13: some pensioner in Scranton, Pennsylvania, imagine if you lived in right,
Speaker 13: if you live in one of those tickets. There are
Speaker 13: literally thousands of campaigns, polling companies all calling you to
Speaker 13: ask you what you're doing. You're going to hang up.
Speaker 13: And that's why I don't look.
Speaker 2: At poles, Well, what's given you? What's giving you? Look?
Speaker 13: There are a number of sort of you know, large
Speaker 13: METSA questions. There's a there's a thirteen keys question that
Speaker 13: sort of looks at you know, all right, And he
Speaker 13: said yeah, yeah, and which says Harris by a very
Speaker 13: small number.
Speaker 1: I don't know.
Speaker 13: My heart says Harris.
Speaker 1: My gut.
Speaker 13: Freaking out.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 3: Now, Matt, I want to ask a question which you
Speaker 3: can very well give me. Politicians answer and go somewhere else.
Speaker 3: But you're not a politician who's like that.
Speaker 2: Political parties do.
Speaker 3: They have a bit of insight than the public polling,
Speaker 3: So say like there'll be a news poll that's out
Speaker 3: every month, or there'll be a resolve that's out every.
Speaker 2: Month when it's election time.
Speaker 3: Do political parties have weekly data that we don't see,
Speaker 3: daily data that we don't see.
Speaker 4: Typically have overnight data. I don't know what they do.
Speaker 4: In America, they'd probably do much more and more and
Speaker 4: more than us have a lot more money. But here
Speaker 4: in AUSTRALIAA typically we'll do what's called a track and
Speaker 4: the people are polled every night in typically the key
Speaker 4: seats that you're tracking, and that will be aggregated into
Speaker 4: a track number, and then more irregularly you'll look at
Speaker 4: individual seats on a seat by seat base as are
Speaker 4: very difficult now. I've never found those to be particularly accurate,
Speaker 4: the seat by seat ones, but the track usually gives
Speaker 4: you a pretty good indication.
Speaker 2: Yeah, this is the same inside labor world.
Speaker 1: Exactly right.
Speaker 13: That's right, the seat by seat the sample sizes so
Speaker 13: small that you're dealing with is generally a hundred people,
Speaker 13: you know, don't You don't get much of a read
Speaker 13: off that, but that's right. If you're looking at the
Speaker 13: general trend of the long run, the track, yeah, it
Speaker 13: gets it gets pretty close.
Speaker 3: Fascinating to see, all right, lads, I do appreciate it,
Speaker 3: Thank you very much. We'll see you again next week
Speaker 3: where I'll ask you a different version of the same question.
Speaker 3: When it comes to the United States. Now a reminder
Speaker 3: we're going to be in lawn System. We will be
Speaker 3: there on October the twentieth. It's a couple of Sundays
Speaker 3: away before of course we then turn our teasue to
Speaker 3: queenslande we get back to the United States. But as always,
Speaker 3: the focus is here in Australia. That's what our focus
Speaker 3: is each and every night. When there are bigger stories
Speaker 3: than that, yeah we'll talk about.
Speaker 2: It, we'll focus on it.
Speaker 3: But as always, this show is about trying to be
Speaker 3: where you are. If you would like to join us
Speaker 3: in lon Sestem a couple of weeks time, you know
Speaker 3: the email it is our town. It's GOINGEWS dot com
Speaker 3: dot Au. Ourtown, It's Goingews dot com dot Au. Also
Speaker 3: a reminder that all of the videos, podcasts and other
Speaker 3: highlights of everything we do, not just on this show,
Speaker 3: but everything here in primetime is that it's Goingnews dot
Speaker 3: com dot Au. Or join the millions of people who
Speaker 3: watch us on YouTube, stamor