Speaker 1: From the skying In Center.
Speaker 2: This is Paul Murray, Life, love Sharing, Okay, Stockholm. I'm
Speaker 2: going to Parks on Sunday. I'm really pumped about that.
Speaker 2: We're going to be there. If you want to send
Speaker 2: us an email out tam at skuyews dot com dot au.
Speaker 2: Great mood tonight and lots to get to, including something
Speaker 2: you probably haven't heard about thus far. Now as you know,
Speaker 2: Australia sixty forty hell no to change in the constitution
Speaker 2: and having the voice. Now, the result of this was
Speaker 2: that people believed, okay, the way things are is the
Speaker 2: way things should be. But of course there are many
Speaker 2: state governments that have already started a process of entering
Speaker 2: into formal legal treaties with indigenous peoples. Now this process
Speaker 2: has been effectively put to one side in Queensland, but
Speaker 2: it is happening in the Northern Territory. It's well and
Speaker 2: truly taking place right now in Victoria. Now, the wokest
Speaker 2: state in the Commonwealth, is committed to find the words
Speaker 2: that somehow put the past behind us, swile making sure
Speaker 2: that the future is the best one possible for Indigenous people.
Speaker 2: At least that's the idea. Now we've shown you about
Speaker 2: some of the things that are being put on the
Speaker 2: table as potential ideas for this treaty. Remember Auntie Jill, Well,
Speaker 2: Auntie Jill, she had ten separate suggestions that she believed
Speaker 2: should actually be there, and among other things, it was
Speaker 2: local cultural learning places for language and culture. But then
Speaker 2: we get into the more controversial that Indigenous people should
Speaker 2: not pay land tax, they should not pay counsel rates,
Speaker 2: they should not pay stamp duty, they should get no
Speaker 2: interest loans if they want to buy a house. They
Speaker 2: should have completely free university education, and there should be
Speaker 2: greater infrastructure and guaranteed seats on, among other things, local councils.
Speaker 2: In part this is why Auntie Jill says this is needed.
Speaker 2: But when I.
Speaker 3: Went to school, I learnt about the ancient Greeks, and
Speaker 3: I learned about the Egyptians, who their mummies are two
Speaker 3: thousand years old.
Speaker 2: Hello, what do we see at Tullamarine?
Speaker 3: And I don't mean a flag or a few paintings.
Speaker 3: I'm talking about proper culture in the landscape. We are invisible,
Speaker 3: and we are invisible in our own country.
Speaker 2: I disagree strongly, but that was her speech to the
Speaker 2: First Nation's Assembly, who in part will be negotiating this treaty.
Speaker 2: But today even more information about what is on and
Speaker 2: off the table, and put simply, everything is on the
Speaker 2: table from the perspective of the Victorian government. Now all
Speaker 2: of us understand the histories that we have all lived,
Speaker 2: and the histories that certainly Indigenous people have lived, and
Speaker 2: yes there needs to be some formal recognition of what
Speaker 2: has happened. Also, we need to understand that the future
Speaker 2: of our country is blank pages. And it's regardless of
Speaker 2: how long you've been here, how long your ancestors have
Speaker 2: been here, that you are connected to that future. Well,
Speaker 2: the Ollen government has said today that nothing is off
Speaker 2: the table, even the compulsory acquisition of private property. Now,
Speaker 2: how many times have we had this conversation from marlbo
Speaker 2: and Wick and the voice that this would not be
Speaker 2: part of the conversation. Well, the Ollen government has refused
Speaker 2: to rule out giving compulsory acquired private property to Indigenous
Speaker 2: groups and establishing seats designated for Indigenous members in the
Speaker 2: Victorian Parliament. Now, the minister who is taking care of
Speaker 2: the treaty process and has plenty to say about First
Speaker 2: Nations people as their relevant minister is a lady named
Speaker 2: Natalie Hutchins, and this is what she said when she
Speaker 2: was asked by people in a parliamentary committee today in Victoria. Okay,
Speaker 2: what's too far? Quote? After two hundred years of colonization,
Speaker 2: where this state took lands away in the settlement, murdered
Speaker 2: people and took away culture and language, we are not
Speaker 2: going to be ruling anything in or out as we
Speaker 2: go into the negotiation table in regards to a treaty. Now,
Speaker 2: even if you are the most generous of heart and
Speaker 2: believe that a treaty is a necessary step in reconciliation
Speaker 2: or the very least putting our past behind us, at
Speaker 2: some point in time, don't we have to know what
Speaker 2: is the line that is too far? Now? Auntie Jill,
Speaker 2: when we pointed this out a few months ago, said
Speaker 2: that's not the plan, that's just her suggestions. The government
Speaker 2: today say that there is no suggestion whatsoever about the
Speaker 2: acquisition of private property. So why not rule it out.
Speaker 2: Why not say we are going to come up with
Speaker 2: a treaty. It is going to be generous, there is
Speaker 2: going to be a level of compensation. But rule out
Speaker 2: to the people of Victoria, ardless of their histories, what
Speaker 2: is or isn't on the table. There has to be
Speaker 2: a line that is too far surely right. Otherwise, when
Speaker 2: none of this stuff is voted on by the people
Speaker 2: of Victoria, the government of Victoria will end up negotiating
Speaker 2: on their behalf and may well negotiate on things that
Speaker 2: the people of Victoria don't want. Now, there are other
Speaker 2: places in the world that have got specific seats in
Speaker 2: their federal parliament for the indigenous peoples of those countries.
Speaker 2: But let's imagine if that was to take place here.
Speaker 2: How would that work? Who would appoint them? Would there
Speaker 2: be labor candidates and liberal candidates, Green's candidates, independent candidates.
Speaker 2: Would they simply be appointed by the first people's assemblies
Speaker 2: or the voices that exist in some of these more
Speaker 2: woke states. I don't know, but at this stage it
Speaker 2: seems like we're in a treaty process where as soon
Speaker 2: as the demands start to be seen, everyone pretends they're
Speaker 2: not making demands, and the people who will be accepting
Speaker 2: most likely all of the demands are not setting any
Speaker 2: limits on the negotiation. Put a pin in it. Victoria
Speaker 2: voted no. Even woke Victoria voted no. There is a limit. Well,
Speaker 2: all I have to learn about what it's going to
Speaker 2: be together, and hopefully not after it's already been signed off.
Speaker 2: On our happy anniversary to the greatest prime Minister of
Speaker 2: all time. Two years in the job as prime Minister
Speaker 2: after winning the federal election in twenty twenty one, and
Speaker 2: I mean, the country's never been better, right, I mean
Speaker 2: every single promise that was made has come true. I mean,
Speaker 2: this is the most transparent government ever. This is the
Speaker 2: government that remember it promised to lower the cost of living.
Speaker 2: Oh that's right. None of all of those things have
Speaker 2: actually taken place. In fact, many of it has got worse.
Speaker 2: And it's not just our hunch. The latest opinion polls,
Speaker 2: even coming from the sources that would be most sympathetic
Speaker 2: to this government, are telling us where the majority of
Speaker 2: people are. And it's not a slim majority. According to
Speaker 2: the Essential Polls, which pops up in the Turnbal Times
Speaker 2: otherwise known as The Guardian, sixty eight percent of people
Speaker 2: say that inflation has increased in the past twelve months,
Speaker 2: sixty five percent of people say that their interest rates
Speaker 2: have increased in the past twelve months, and fifty five
Speaker 2: percent of people have said that government debt has increased
Speaker 2: and all of those things are facts. I'm not entirely
Speaker 2: sure why it's not one hundred percent, but still seventy
Speaker 2: percent of people feel that inflation is worse in the
Speaker 2: second year of this government, even worse than the massive
Speaker 2: increase in the first year, let alone the interest rate
Speaker 2: pain and squeeze which is taking place as we speak.
Speaker 2: But just one week ago tonight, the federal budget was
Speaker 2: handed down by Jim Chalmers. The theatrics were that every
Speaker 2: labor mp was giving a standing of ocean. This is amazing,
Speaker 2: where fixed everything with too little, too late? Tax cuts
Speaker 2: and twenty five bucks a month that you won't see
Speaker 2: on your power bill. So again, is just this cynical,
Speaker 2: jaded mind of a bearded bloke on Sky News that
Speaker 2: cannot see the genius of this budget? Well, no, same pole,
Speaker 2: same people. Just twenty seven percent of people believe that
Speaker 2: this budget will have a meaningful impact on cost of living.
Speaker 2: Seven out of ten don't because seven out of ten
Speaker 2: no that thirty six dollars a week when it comes
Speaker 2: to tax cuts, it doesn't even begin to touch the
Speaker 2: middle let alone the sides and seventy five dollars a
Speaker 2: quarter or twenty five bucks a month is hardly going
Speaker 2: to actually change the world when it comes to power bills.
Speaker 2: And remember, straight after the speech took place, one of
Speaker 2: the first things to come out of my mouth and
Speaker 2: the five things that I noticed about the budget which
Speaker 2: feels like a long time ago, but it was one
Speaker 2: week agode tonight. One week ago was in service of
Speaker 2: the slogan of every household power and every worker tax cut.
Speaker 2: The reality was, when it comes to the tax cut,
Speaker 2: it's not going to be enough. It's a little too late.
Speaker 2: And when it comes to the power bills, every household
Speaker 2: includes mansions, the mansions in the capital cities or some
Speaker 2: of the most cashed up people amongst us. The argument
Speaker 2: of the time apparently was that means testing was unnecessary
Speaker 2: because everyone on the income spectrum is feeling issues when
Speaker 2: it comes to cost of living. Then it came out
Speaker 2: two days later the reality was it was too expensive
Speaker 2: to means tested. Well, guess what again. The vast majority
Speaker 2: of Australians think about the budget, which is just one
Speaker 2: week old tonight, and the idea that the power bills
Speaker 2: in mansions are being treated the same as people in
Speaker 2: housing Commission. Sixty percent say the policy is wrong and
Speaker 2: it should be redirected specifically to low and middle income homes. These,
Speaker 2: by the way, the low and middle income homes the
Speaker 2: same people who twelve months ago in the budget had
Speaker 2: fifteen hundred dollars torn out of their hot little hands
Speaker 2: as an automatic tax return. So this government is not
Speaker 2: focusing on what they say it does two years in
Speaker 2: the gaping chasm between their promises and an election, let
Speaker 2: alone their rhetoric as a government. And can I commend
Speaker 2: strongly commend Chris Kenny for going chapter and verse through
Speaker 2: all the lies, all of the obfuscation of the past
Speaker 2: two years. I'll be posting that up on our socials,
Speaker 2: but otherwise go look for it at skynews dot com
Speaker 2: dot au Sensational Editorial. All the others were great as well,
Speaker 2: but chris is on this particular topic really stood out
Speaker 2: to me. Now, of course, when it comes to interest rates,
Speaker 2: remember that was all the Reserve Bank's fault, and that's
Speaker 2: only that evil Philip Lowe who's been sacked a long
Speaker 2: time ago, only be to replace by his deputy who
Speaker 2: actually increased rates as well. But all of the reason
Speaker 2: that interest rates are going up has nothing to do
Speaker 2: with domestic affairs. It's all to do with Ukraine or Gaza. Well,
Speaker 2: guess what. Even in the Sydney Morning Herald, the Age
Speaker 2: and the Brisbane Times, fifty two percent of people say
Speaker 2: that interest rates are mainly about domestic factors. In Australia,
Speaker 2: sixty six percent of Coalition voters know it, more than
Speaker 2: half of other voters, and even thirty six percent of
Speaker 2: labor people know that government isn't telling the truth about
Speaker 2: why interest rates keep going up. Oh, it's international factors,
Speaker 2: it's here, and who's in charge of the economy here?
Speaker 2: Old made albo with his alboonmics, which means bugger all
Speaker 2: tax cut for you, but a brand new private plane
Speaker 2: for him and another one for his ministers four hundred
Speaker 2: million dollars on private jets. Oh and of course people
Speaker 2: living in the ritziest suburbs of all they can get
Speaker 2: a power bill cut that they won't notice now. Of course,
Speaker 2: in reply, Peter Dutton, I think was able to change
Speaker 2: the subject very quickly, just two days after the budget. Again,
Speaker 2: this is all just last week. I know it all
Speaker 2: feels like a month ago, but it was one week ago.
Speaker 2: And Peter Dutton made it very clear about what he
Speaker 2: believed to be some of the great problems of the country. Well,
Speaker 2: guess what the ABC and its fact checkers were sent
Speaker 2: out with a job, and that was to prove that
Speaker 2: Peter Dutton was lying that the Aussie version of Donald
Speaker 2: Trump was race vaiting, and their so called fact check
Speaker 2: organization was sent off to run the rule of the
Speaker 2: statements like this.
Speaker 4: More than sixteen thousand businesses around the country have gone
Speaker 4: insolvent since the first of July twenty twenty two. Behind
Speaker 4: each of those as a family who may have lost
Speaker 4: their home but certainly have lost their savings.
Speaker 2: And they found that he was telling the truth. At
Speaker 2: the time, in solvency figures were released by the Australian
Speaker 2: Bureau by the Australian Securities and Investment Commission, they showed
Speaker 2: that there was indeed a three god increase in the
Speaker 2: number of manufacturing insolvencies in the first six months. Well, then,
Speaker 2: of course Peter Dutton talked about health. He was a
Speaker 2: former Health minister and he talked about some of the
Speaker 2: great problems happening there as well.
Speaker 5: People's health and wellbeing are suffering.
Speaker 4: Indeed, when I became Health Minister in twenty thirteen, we
Speaker 4: inherited a bulk billing rate from Labour of seventy three
Speaker 4: percent and increased it to eighty four percent. When we
Speaker 4: left government, bulk billing was eighty eight point five percent.
Speaker 4: What Labour tried to hide in its budget and a
Speaker 4: figure that wasn't mentioned by the Treasurer is that bolk
Speaker 4: billing has decreased under Labour to seventy seven percent and
Speaker 4: eleven percent drop. Always look at what Labor does, not
Speaker 4: what they say they will do.
Speaker 2: Well, knock me down with a feather. The leader of
Speaker 2: the opposition, the alternative Prime Minister, was telling a dirty,
Speaker 2: great big truth. Fact checking again from the ABC. The
Speaker 2: lattert start I released this week last week shows that
Speaker 2: in the year of March twenty twenty four, seventy seven
Speaker 2: percent of GPS these were bolk billing. It was eighty
Speaker 2: five percent when Labour became the government two years ago. Tonight,
Speaker 2: and what about inflation?
Speaker 5: In comparative inflation, Australia is worse than the US, Singapore, Germany, Spain, Japan,
Speaker 5: the Netherlands, Italy, South Korea, Canada, France and the entire
Speaker 5: euro Area.
Speaker 2: You can imagine the streamers that were going off when
Speaker 2: the fact checkers were able to find it was yet
Speaker 2: again the truth in quarterly data for March twenty and
Speaker 2: twenty four shows Australia's headline inflation raised three point six
Speaker 2: percent over the preceding twelve months. It is indeed above
Speaker 2: that of the OECD economies that mister Dunton mentioned. Oh,
Speaker 2: I'm not finished. And then when it came to.
Speaker 4: Power bills, electricity bills haven't gone down by two hundred
Speaker 4: and seventy five dollars as was pledged on ninety seven occasions,
Speaker 4: they've skyrockets.
Speaker 2: Now, you and I know this to be the absolute fact.
Speaker 2: You and I know this to be the truth. However,
Speaker 2: the fact checkers say they can't rule on this one
Speaker 2: because the pledge from labor is about twenty twenty five,
Speaker 2: and it's not twenty twenty five yet. But even then,
Speaker 2: remember the Treasurer has already openly said the two to
Speaker 2: seventy five promise, which by the way, would be the
Speaker 2: permanent change to your bills, not just sugarheit of the
Speaker 2: three hundred dollars which they're going to pump out between
Speaker 2: now and the next federal election. Oh, in massive seventy
Speaker 2: five dollars a quarter, or twenty five dollars a month increments.
Speaker 2: I mean, thank goodness. The Treasurer of course has turned
Speaker 2: around and said, ah, yeah, that promise doesn't really count.
Speaker 6: The number you're referring to is a forecast in twenty
Speaker 6: one about an outcome in twenty five. We're providing energy
Speaker 6: bill relief in the here and now. We did in
Speaker 6: the last budget. We are again in the next budget,
Speaker 6: but there'll be more relief for more people in this budget.
Speaker 2: Extraordinary, truly extraordinary. Was one week ago. One week ago
Speaker 2: feels like three weeks and maybe even longer. That's why
Speaker 2: it's worth actually following what the people end up saying,
Speaker 2: what the pundits end up saying, and even what the
Speaker 2: fact checkers have been able to see here. Notice they
Speaker 2: didn't do that for the budget though, I wonder why.
Speaker 2: Meantime on social media and the excellent campaign which is
Speaker 2: being waged by an awful lot of people around the
Speaker 2: country right now, including Fitzi and Whipper on Nova in Sydney,
Speaker 2: all the way through to the Telegraph, The Herald's Son,
Speaker 2: the Corea Male, the Adelaide Advertiser, the Hobart Mercury, which
Speaker 2: is to get our kids off social media and try
Speaker 2: to limit it once they become teenagers. Now, surprise, surprise,
Speaker 2: the Prime Minister. Well, he said plenty to say today,
Speaker 2: But where was he a couple of weeks ago when
Speaker 2: it was Peter Malanowska saying that we should introduce age
Speaker 2: limits to access it, or Chris Min's in New South
Speaker 2: Wales who was saying it as late as yes, well,
Speaker 2: prime minister spotting that the bandwagon is moving, the bandwagon
Speaker 2: is moving. He now officially cares about what he has
Speaker 2: never shown an interest in until other people came up
Speaker 2: with the idea.
Speaker 7: We put in the budget money for a trial essentially
Speaker 7: of how we can restrict age restrictions, how it can
Speaker 7: be effective that will take place. We want to make
Speaker 7: sure that any changes that are made actually work. The
Speaker 7: internet is difficult. I don't look at the comments on
Speaker 7: my social media because if I did, I'd find it
Speaker 7: difficult to leave the house in the morning.
Speaker 2: Didn'ts He was fine, of course when the Internet was
Speaker 2: piling on the person he was trying to get rid
Speaker 2: of a couple of years ago. But you know whatever,
Speaker 2: that was all personal and now everything's cyclical. That was
Speaker 2: some very weasily words. The Prime Minister says, Oh, in
Speaker 2: the budget, we put some money aside to check age verification.
Speaker 2: That's not for social media. Remember that's one of the
Speaker 2: very few things that came out of a national Cabinet
Speaker 2: meeting about domestic violence, and that was about age, a
Speaker 2: trial on age limiting access to pornography. So he's trying
Speaker 2: to pretend that a policy that has nothing to do
Speaker 2: with social media is one that he's already funded because
Speaker 2: he expects that you're not going to be able to
Speaker 2: follow the bouncing ball or people that were driving around
Speaker 2: listening to FM radio this morning. I mean, that's the
Speaker 2: slipperiness of this blow. Now, this guy has shared many
Speaker 2: a national Cabinet meeting where all of the states and
Speaker 2: all of the territories can get together. He's had a
Speaker 2: national cabinet meeting since Peter Malinowskis made the suggestion about
Speaker 2: age verification and access to social media. Yet was it
Speaker 2: discussed when all of the territory and state leaders were
Speaker 2: in the room. No, when they were all in the room,
Speaker 2: did he say, just like John Howard did after port Arthur,
Speaker 2: let's all pass the same piece of paper that says
Speaker 2: that if somebody has formed as a domestic violence perpetrator.
Speaker 2: There is no option for bail noe. He just thinks
Speaker 2: that he can slide money that's really about this and
Speaker 2: pretend that it's about that. He comes out and says
Speaker 2: there's a press conference for five thousand dollars for emergency
Speaker 2: payments to people that are domestic violence victims. You know
Speaker 2: that doesn't kick in until the first of July, not
Speaker 2: this year, next year. And again, as Chris pointed out
Speaker 2: on his show today and many hosts have over the
Speaker 2: past two years, this bloke who claimed he would be
Speaker 2: totally responsible for every decision that has made, has endlessly lied,
Speaker 2: changed the subject, or just straight out gas lit people.
Speaker 2: That was a disgrace what he did on the radio today.
Speaker 2: But at least he's starting to say the policy is
Speaker 2: a good idea, but he's not putting any money behind it.
Speaker 2: Now we know one of the favorite words of the
Speaker 2: left when they lose an argument is that apparently people
Speaker 2: fall for a swear word starting in M.
Speaker 7: Misinformation, misinformation, misinformation, the misinformation which is there some misinformation.
Speaker 2: So they're now trying to censor the internet where anyone,
Speaker 2: including the minister can say what they see on the
Speaker 2: Internet is not the official line, so therefore it's adjudicated
Speaker 2: by a bunch of bureaucrats who will decide if it
Speaker 2: is or isn't misinformation, you know, government's version of the truth,
Speaker 2: and then they'll turn around and put a fine on
Speaker 2: a social media company if the post stays up after
Speaker 2: the complaint has been lodged with them. The idea here
Speaker 2: is not to stop fake news, it's to stop inconvenient truths,
Speaker 2: because you see after a while social media companies, if
Speaker 2: they keep getting complaints about certain websites, they just won't
Speaker 2: host those. Certain websites could even well be YouTube videos
Speaker 2: of people who will push back against the government narrative
Speaker 2: and do what we do here each and every night,
Speaker 2: which is use the data to prove that they are
Speaker 2: laying well. There's a new participant in the want to
Speaker 2: sense of the Internet, and it is, in my view,
Speaker 2: a concerning one. It's the Australian Electoral Commission. Now, Australia
Speaker 2: has an electoral system that we trust, and I think
Speaker 2: in part of the reason why we trust it is
Speaker 2: because we do not know the political affiliations or even
Speaker 2: complaints about wider society from the people who take care
Speaker 2: of our elections. Now, the AAC is not perfect, but
Speaker 2: there's certainly no need for people to have an attitude
Speaker 2: about the Australian electoral process that some people have had
Speaker 2: about other countries' processes in recent elections. Now, the misinformation
Speaker 2: conversation was brought up today, as you saw by the
Speaker 2: Boss of the Electoral Commission, who was giving evidence today
Speaker 2: to a parliamentary inquiry. Let's read along here. In an
Speaker 2: appearance before the Committee into adopting artificial intelligence on Monday,
Speaker 2: Australian Electoral Commission boss said that there had been a
Speaker 2: trend among some among social media organizations to moderate misinformation
Speaker 2: in the public square rather than remove it from their
Speaker 2: platforms entirely. Remember, a lie or defamation is one thing.
Speaker 2: Misinformation is just simply what the government doesn't approve of.
Speaker 2: We've noticed less willingness from the social media companies to
Speaker 2: remove content that we think, in some cases may breach
Speaker 2: our own standards or is indeed harmful to our staff. Now,
Speaker 2: anyone who's making threats against the Electoral Commission, obviously that
Speaker 2: should be dealt within the same way that any threat
Speaker 2: against any public official. I have no problem with that.
Speaker 2: He says that we've seen issues where threats online that
Speaker 2: previously would have been removed were less likely to be removed. Now,
Speaker 2: that's interesting, and nobody's going to stand up for a
Speaker 2: system that allows people to be intimidated. That are the
Speaker 2: people that put themselves forward to administer our elections. But
Speaker 2: forgive me if the person who is using the misinformation
Speaker 2: word in tacit support of greater attempts to censor the
Speaker 2: Internet is the same organization that was fine with this
Speaker 2: lie being shown night after night, hour after hour on television.
Speaker 2: Forgive me if I don't exactly scream to their cause
Speaker 2: when they say misinformation is destroying our democracy.
Speaker 7: Everybody knows you don't set up a Medicare Privatization task
Speaker 7: Force unless you aim to privatize Medicare.
Speaker 2: Great man, but that was a wicked lie, an absolutely
Speaker 2: wicked lie. Now, for the past couple of summers, as
Speaker 2: we get ready for them, the Bureau of Meteorology has
Speaker 2: been out and about telling us the summers are going
Speaker 2: to be hotter and hotter than ever before, and more
Speaker 2: bushfires and climate change, climate change. You know you've heard
Speaker 2: it all before. But of course the past couple of summers,
Speaker 2: it's rain, cats and dogs certainly that's the case. Two
Speaker 2: summers ago, the last summer, even the Guardian was reporting
Speaker 2: that Melbourne's weathers without a hot day in January was
Speaker 2: the longest stretch since the nineteen eighties. But get ready,
Speaker 2: because yet another warning is telling us that the most
Speaker 2: likely the heat of the summer will result in power blackouts.
Speaker 2: Why because if we actually have a proper Australian summer,
Speaker 2: then people are going to really want to turn on
Speaker 2: their air conditioners. But of course, because we have made
Speaker 2: the dumb decisions to move from the system that yes
Speaker 2: pollutes but still works to the new one that doesn't
Speaker 2: pollute as much. But certainly the construction of it is
Speaker 2: quite the issue. That doesn't produce as much power as
Speaker 2: the old system that pollutes. We're in a bit of
Speaker 2: a spot of bother, you see. We've been blowing up
Speaker 2: the stuff that worked, replacing it with not enough of
Speaker 2: the stuff that apparently will work. But the cost of
Speaker 2: that transition is at least a trillion dollars. So we
Speaker 2: are warned yet again that as we move into the
Speaker 2: extremes of summer, and to be honest, I think we
Speaker 2: should be focused on the extremes of winter as it
Speaker 2: gets cold and people turn on their eaters. But still
Speaker 2: while new generation and storage campassage continues to increase, project
Speaker 2: development and commissioning delays are impacting reliability throughout the horizon.
Speaker 2: So put simply, we have gone from a sturdy, old
Speaker 2: car that yes at times is inefficient. Yes at times
Speaker 2: has been polluting, no question, but that car can still race.
Speaker 2: But instead we have been told that so Australia can
Speaker 2: do its bit about one percent one percent of global emissions,
Speaker 2: while China can continue to pollute until twenty thirty and
Speaker 2: it's more than thirty times. What we do, we must
Speaker 2: transition to the car that's only got three and it'll
Speaker 2: still win. Baptist and if you say it won't. Misinformation
Speaker 2: And what about Chris Bowen again, just like the Prime Minister,
Speaker 2: he's twisting and turning the facts to make it seem
Speaker 2: like you can ignore those people who say we're going
Speaker 2: to have blackouts because as he says, for the past
Speaker 2: two summers we haven't had blackouts, but also blackout Bowen,
Speaker 2: that would be because we haven't had hot days. But
Speaker 2: don't let that get in the way. You spin.
Speaker 8: Lots of people say they're going to be blackouts.
Speaker 1: This last summer A Peter.
Speaker 9: Dutton and Ted O'Brian wandered around saying there are going
Speaker 9: to be lights going out and causing all sorts of
Speaker 9: fear in the community.
Speaker 10: There were no blackouts caused by a lack of electricity.
Speaker 4: We had issues with cyclones and transmission towers falling over.
Speaker 1: That can happen to anyone, don't you love it?
Speaker 2: Again? Their play is to the people that are kind
Speaker 2: of not even paying attention. They've got other stuff from them.
Speaker 2: If you are paying attention like you do every single night,
Speaker 2: these people are infuriating two years of this stuff. We'll
Speaker 2: see what happens whenever there's an election, whether it becomes
Speaker 2: a majority government which will get even worse than its
Speaker 2: second term, a minority government which will be pushed even
Speaker 2: further to left in its second term, or we'll see
Speaker 2: what happens. But it's going to be a cluster. Seriously,
Speaker 2: now again, remember the reason that there haven't been the
Speaker 2: blackouts is because the summers haven't been hot enough. They
Speaker 2: haven't been the regular run of the high thirties at times,
Speaker 2: low forties days. None of those things pleasant instead replaced
Speaker 2: with the past two summers rain as far as the
Speaker 2: eye could see. Oh and speaking of great green ideas
Speaker 2: which won't cost that much money but will have incredible results.
Speaker 2: Remember when the ghost was all about snowy two point zero,
Speaker 2: and the ghost was saying that the new version of
Speaker 2: the Snowy Mountain scheme, it'll change the world. Well, today
Speaker 2: Australia has spent billions on snowy two point zero, but
Speaker 2: an energy expert has come forward to say that the
Speaker 2: massive project may never actually produce one wad of power.
Speaker 2: Another energy expert was on Telly with us this afternoon
Speaker 2: explaining that the process, which is behind time and way
Speaker 2: over budget, could well be even further in both because
Speaker 2: guess what, the tunnel boring machines still are breaking down Florence.
Speaker 11: Of course, the tunnel boring machine, now legendary, is stuck again.
Speaker 11: So we're up to eight and a half billion dollars.
Speaker 11: When the project was announced it was not to cost
Speaker 11: the taxpayer anything at all, as a two billion dollar
Speaker 11: project to be completed.
Speaker 2: In four years. You would think these people when they
Speaker 2: are this wrong kind of turtle away. Instead, I know
Speaker 2: what I'm doing and PS, thank you for the three
Speaker 2: hundred dollars off my power bill from Open Cars. Now,
Speaker 2: I want to take a couple of minutes to week
Speaker 2: blamed to you what has been happening in the past
Speaker 2: couple of days with the Donald Trump trial in the
Speaker 2: United States. Now, as you know, it is all about
Speaker 2: not the porn star, not the six, not even the
Speaker 2: non disclosure agreement. It is about how all of that
Speaker 2: was accounted for in the books. So this trial that
Speaker 2: really shouldn't have gone as long as it has has
Speaker 2: gone for the best part of a month. One person
Speaker 2: was served up by the prosecution to be the one
Speaker 2: who proved that Donald Trump knew how the books were
Speaker 2: being kept. Now, the bookkeeper from the Trump organization has
Speaker 2: not been called as a witness because the expectation is
Speaker 2: that he may well end up siding with Donald Trump.
Speaker 2: So we are left with the former fixer, Michael Carhen. Now,
Speaker 2: this bloke went from super Trump loyalist to Trump hater.
Speaker 2: He lied, he spent time in jail, you know the
Speaker 2: story in and around this blow. But he is the
Speaker 2: guy because he has close proximity to Trump that the
Speaker 2: guy who Alvin Bragg, the prosecutor, believes seals the deal
Speaker 2: that he will be able to join the dots that
Speaker 2: they have so desperately tried to push together for years,
Speaker 2: in years and years. Well, the key moment of the
Speaker 2: evidence that Trump knew how it was all being accounted
Speaker 2: for was when Michael Cohen said that he called Donald
Speaker 2: Trump at a specific time on a specific day. But
Speaker 2: then it turns out that he's not telling the truth.
Speaker 2: Last week we learned the text messages showed that he
Speaker 2: was texting the bodyguard for Donald Trump, and within seconds
Speaker 2: of those text messages he rang the bodyguard for Donald Trump.
Speaker 2: But the text messages weren't about Donald Trump.
Speaker 12: Thence Attorney Todd Blanche zeroed in on a phone call
Speaker 12: in October twenty sixteen, days before the election. Cohen previously
Speaker 12: testified he called Trump's bodyguard, Keith Schiller, to get Trump
Speaker 12: on the line, and then he and Trump finalized the
Speaker 12: plan for Cohen to pay off Daniels, but Blent said
Speaker 12: that wasn't the real reason for the call, producing text
Speaker 12: messages suggesting Cohen was actually calling Trump's bodyguard to complain
Speaker 12: he was getting prank calls from a fourteen year old.
Speaker 12: Blent insisted Cohen misled the jury when he testified the
Speaker 12: call was about the hush money.
Speaker 2: So he's going to jile for line before he's lied
Speaker 2: to this court because the prosecution left out the reason
Speaker 2: that he rang the president's bodyguard, and how long did
Speaker 2: he end up speaking to the president's bodyguard ninety seconds.
Speaker 12: Trump's defense pointed out the call in question was ninety
Speaker 12: six seconds, but Cohen stuck to his story, insisting it
Speaker 12: covered both the prank phone calls he received and the
Speaker 12: hush money scheme.
Speaker 2: Short, dude, because anyone who's seen Michael Cohen answer a
Speaker 2: question on television or on the internet notes he's very
Speaker 2: economical with his language. You don't think he was taking
Speaker 2: the bulk of the ninety seconds if not, in reality,
Speaker 2: the entire ninety seconds to bitch and moan about the
Speaker 2: fourteen year old that was prank, calling him smoking gun
Speaker 2: one gone Smoking Gun two. Was that Michael Cohen was
Speaker 2: a man who was loyal to Trump. While he was
Speaker 2: working for him, he did everything Trump wanted him to do,
Speaker 2: except it has come out that while working for Donald Trump,
Speaker 2: he stole tens of thousands of dollars from Donald Trump,
Speaker 2: skimming off the top of part of the money that
Speaker 2: was supposedly part of the whole stormy Daniels thing. Now,
Speaker 2: let me show you why it is important that you
Speaker 2: watch lots of different places for your news and why
Speaker 2: I often talk about news, I e. What happened today
Speaker 2: versus narrative good guy, bad guy, like you saw the
Speaker 2: Trump lawyer or evil face because you know everything Trump's
Speaker 2: terrible his How Fox News reacted to Michael Cohen admitting
Speaker 2: to stealing from Donald Trump when he worked for him.
Speaker 13: Yeah, to show that he actually stole from the Trump
Speaker 13: organization even as they were structuring a deal to pay
Speaker 13: him thirty five thousand dollars a month is an enormous
Speaker 13: big deal.
Speaker 2: And let's move to the left. CNN couldn't hide that
Speaker 2: this was a big part of the trial.
Speaker 9: The fact that he was ever charged with larcening is
Speaker 9: important because stealing sixty thousand dollars through fraud, which will
Speaker 9: be larceny in New York State, is more serious of
Speaker 9: a crime than falsifying business.
Speaker 2: But right out there to the left, mild yep, you
Speaker 2: get them right out there MSNBC, where they only interview
Speaker 2: prosecutors or people who used to work for prosecutors who
Speaker 2: think every single thing about this trial proves that Donald
Speaker 2: Trump is guilty Now, remember the trial is the bookkeeping
Speaker 2: and the intention of the bookkeeping. They won't call the bookkeeper,
Speaker 2: so they found the bloke who would say anything and
Speaker 2: literally literally lies and then if he's not long, he's
Speaker 2: admitting to stealing money. Is this style witness on MSNBC.
Speaker 2: This is how they explain Cohen stealing from Trump has
Speaker 2: nothing to see.
Speaker 14: He asked about the fifty thousand dollars. That's irrelevant to
Speaker 14: the one hundred and thirty thousand dollars.
Speaker 2: And that's where he.
Speaker 14: Very effectively got Michael Cohen to say to agree that yes,
Speaker 14: he stole thirty thousand dollars. Later, when Cohen was asked
Speaker 14: about that on redirect by the prosecution, it didn't really
Speaker 14: sound like stealing thirty thousand dollars. It sounded a lot
Speaker 14: like Michael Cohen doing the little that he could within
Speaker 14: that calculation to rebalance the bonus he fought he deserved,
Speaker 14: and it still came out as less than the bonus
Speaker 14: he thought he deserved and the bonus he'd gotten the
Speaker 14: year before.
Speaker 2: I didn't steal, he just rebalanced. That's narrative, that's not news.
Speaker 2: Quick break back with a great discussion this evening and
Speaker 2: Nigel Faras will join us to talk about this case
Speaker 2: and a whole lot more. Thanks for watching us tonight
Speaker 2: here on Paul Murray Life. Oh, I've been looking forward
Speaker 2: to this all week none other than the current wonderful senator,
Speaker 2: that is, the delightful Holly Hughes, who should be in
Speaker 2: the Parliament for as long as she wants. She's an
Speaker 2: excellent advocate for all people in her sturity South Wales.
Speaker 2: Good thank you Darling right and Stephen Connory, who if
Speaker 2: at any time he wants to get back in the Parliament,
Speaker 2: please a little bit of sense, a little bit of
Speaker 2: sense back there for Labor in the meantime doing.
Speaker 1: It bat one Holly. That's about one, Holly, is all
Speaker 1: I have to.
Speaker 15: Say to even bring you back to the Senate. You
Speaker 15: double the IQ of the Labor Senate straightway.
Speaker 2: Exactly all right. So I just want to go slightly
Speaker 2: left field here by talking about what the AEC was
Speaker 2: talking about today and again this sort of concept of
Speaker 2: misinformation and AI and all the rest of it here, Holly,
Speaker 2: I think and I know that the AC claims that
Speaker 2: there's been a little bit of a sort of stop
Speaker 2: the steel style thing that's been popping up on the
Speaker 2: Internet on the absolute fringes about our electoral system. No
Speaker 2: serious person would think there is anything but a great
Speaker 2: working system. But I think one of the reasons why
Speaker 2: we trust our system is because the people that are
Speaker 2: in charge of it don't really get involved in sort
Speaker 2: of topic dajure like misinformation.
Speaker 15: Absolutely, I mean we still vote in that very sensible
Speaker 15: way of a piece of paper with a pencil and
Speaker 15: we stick it in the box ourselves. There's no computers,
Speaker 15: there's no hanging chads, there's no different systems across the
Speaker 15: different states. It's all very very uniform with a pencil
Speaker 15: and a piece of paper. I noticed in your editorial
Speaker 15: you did refer to medi Scare the greatest piece of
Speaker 15: misinformation that's ever been put out. I think it's one
Speaker 15: of Stephen's best personal Well, it's actually not a serious
Speaker 15: policy note. It's actually set back reform of any medicare
Speaker 15: that anyone will ever be able to undertake. Basically this
Speaker 15: generation because this media get many scare and it was
Speaker 15: let run by the AEC. So it seems to me
Speaker 15: they're very worried about misinformation when it damages the Labor Party,
Speaker 15: not so worried when it's the Labor Party lying about
Speaker 15: the Liberal Party.
Speaker 2: So Stephen again, you know, the integrity of the system matters.
Speaker 2: The AAC is not perfect, the Western Australian revote anyone,
Speaker 2: but we absolutely stand by the system and the integrities
Speaker 2: of it. I just get a little nervous when the
Speaker 2: sort of what should be faceless like people running it,
Speaker 2: start to get into the stuff like balls and strikes
Speaker 2: on misinformation.
Speaker 10: Look, I think you may need to just put the
Speaker 10: tin foil hat back into the draw for a minute,
Speaker 10: because there's three different things, Paul, that you're referring to. Okay,
Speaker 10: one of them. I think you've got a legitimate issue
Speaker 10: with two of them. I think you're conflating in with
Speaker 10: the third, which leads you to this.
Speaker 1: So first, the public.
Speaker 10: Seven times nuanceds you and I and Holly at the
Speaker 10: way they use language, which okay. So the two issues
Speaker 10: that I think are fair for the Electoral Commission to
Speaker 10: have a concern about is as they do today in
Speaker 10: the i'll call it the physical world. If you put
Speaker 10: an add in a newspaper and you don't authorize it.
Speaker 1: If you.
Speaker 10: Direct people to vote informal by misleading them with information,
Speaker 10: the Electoral Commission deal with that today in the real
Speaker 10: physical world. Yes, So I don't have a problem with
Speaker 10: the AEC wanting to make sure that you got your
Speaker 10: hiding behind a false name on the internet.
Speaker 1: You get to mislead Australian.
Speaker 10: Voters about how to vote, how to participate, and how
Speaker 10: to vote formally. Okay, So I think there's a bucket
Speaker 10: that I think it's fair. Now he is probably, in
Speaker 10: my view, referring to some of those things misinformation. Then
Speaker 10: there's a second bucket, which you will see more of
Speaker 10: a gray, and I don't see it as a gray,
Speaker 10: And that is the sort of disinformation which has started
Speaker 10: to appear in American elections where third party state actors
Speaker 10: say a China, say a North Korea, say a Russia.
Speaker 2: Sure, but he didn't talk about.
Speaker 1: Start to want to mislead.
Speaker 10: No, But we are, unfortunately, we're beginning to see the
Speaker 10: same sort of interference in online propaganda. And I'd actually
Speaker 10: just say the word propaganda rather than misinformation. But I'm
Speaker 10: being a little bit more colorful.
Speaker 15: Okay, So the sort of problem might send everyone to
Speaker 15: sleep Stone talking.
Speaker 2: Exactly.
Speaker 10: But Paul is making a good point because it's important
Speaker 10: to understand his language, and so that sort of propaganda
Speaker 10: misinformation is seriously eroding confidence in democracies around the world.
Speaker 15: Imagine people have to show their driver's license when they vote.
Speaker 2: Appropriate identity, understand how the elector we're having to program
Speaker 2: this name is off on every booth. But look the
Speaker 2: reason I wanted to mention that.
Speaker 10: Evidence behind your suggestion we have such two evidence.
Speaker 1: And I've been on the committee that's examined elections.
Speaker 2: How you probably have last time?
Speaker 1: You know you yeah, almost none, So just stop company.
Speaker 10: There's actual inquiries every after every and some inquiry into
Speaker 10: these sort of claims. Not one of them over thirty
Speaker 10: years in my time in politics, ever found anything of something.
Speaker 2: So look the reason I wanted to talk about it.
Speaker 2: Wanted to change study. No, no, of course, I'm just trying
Speaker 2: to again rather than this stuff and you learn about
Speaker 2: it the wrong way. I wanted to talk about it
Speaker 2: head on here this evening. We could go one night.
Speaker 2: We've only got a couple of minutes here to do this.
Speaker 2: The ICC has dropped the hammer about the process leading
Speaker 2: towards the potential walk Rhymes trial for the Prime Minister
Speaker 2: of Israel and the leadership of Hamas. Now everyone's heard
Speaker 2: that all night. But what you need to know is
Speaker 2: Israel doesn't recognize the ICC. Katar doesn't recognize the ICC.
Speaker 2: So even if they make those suggestions, no one's going
Speaker 2: to be dragged before the ICC. But the response to
Speaker 2: it is what is worth talking about here. Holly, Prime
Speaker 2: Minister today says, oh, I can't talk about it because
Speaker 2: it's a court case, as if he was affecting a jury.
Speaker 15: Sung please, I know, like even sleepy Joe Biden managed
Speaker 15: to come out and say a couple of coherent sentences.
Speaker 15: I mean, you know, miracles do happen. I think there
Speaker 15: was two miracles today. The first one is Joe Biden
Speaker 15: managed full sentence. But disgrace was Albin Easy and the
Speaker 15: way that he was incapable of actually taking a position. Obviously,
Speaker 15: Peter Dutton came out very strongly in support of Joe Biden.
Speaker 15: I mean, it is abhorrent to put Hamas and Benjamin
Speaker 15: Natanyahu on the same playing field. That is putting President
Speaker 15: Bush and Bin Laden, that is putting Hitler and Churchill
Speaker 15: in the same sort of framework. It's absolutely disgraceful. And
Speaker 15: the ICC it just I mean, they have no incrediblit
Speaker 15: that he left after this and Australia should withdraw its membership.
Speaker 2: Yeah, so Stephen to that in right, this process is
Speaker 2: obviously going to keep going for a little while. I
Speaker 2: do find it amazing that as serious as all of
Speaker 2: this topic was, much of the media was talking about
Speaker 2: George Clooney's wife. Okay, guys, could we focus on it
Speaker 2: for two hours before we start to move on. What
Speaker 2: did you think today?
Speaker 10: Yeah? No, Look, I think it's an absolute disgrace. I
Speaker 10: think I have a lot of sympathy for what Netna
Speaker 10: who said today about the heinous attack. The heenous attack
Speaker 10: committed by Hamas unequivocally needs to be condemned.
Speaker 1: But Israel's right to self.
Speaker 10: Defense cannot be put at risk by this ruling. It
Speaker 10: is very simple.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 10: Having said that, I have repeatedly said I think Netnau
Speaker 10: should resign.
Speaker 1: He's got his own.
Speaker 10: Cabinet ministers saying pretty much the same thing, and he's
Speaker 10: got mass demonstrations against him. But that's a proper process,
Speaker 10: that's a proper legitimate debate. It is a disgrace what
Speaker 10: happened today, and they should have I'm not hoping that
Speaker 10: the court just dismisses the actual hearing because it is
Speaker 10: unacceptable for Hamas to be put in a bucket with
Speaker 10: Net and Yahoo.
Speaker 2: All right, thank you guys to appreciate it. Vote one,
Speaker 2: Holly Hughes and vote twice for Stephen Conory because that's
Speaker 2: a good labor thing to do. All right, Thank you guys,
Speaker 2: do appreciate it.
Speaker 16: Quick break back when Moore here, Nigel fars Joints is
Speaker 16: next here to talk about that Trump trial, and we're
Speaker 16: going to talk about the judge. We're really going to
Speaker 16: talk about the judge because Trump's right he is Alala.
Speaker 2: I have been waiting waiting to talk to Nigel Faraj
Speaker 2: and he's, funnily enough, exactly where we need him right
Speaker 2: now to do so, none other than the great gb
Speaker 2: News host, the freedom fighter, the lovely man that is
Speaker 2: there for us in London now, Nigel. The Trump trial
Speaker 2: plays out in the middle of the night here, so
Speaker 2: I'm not getting a lot of sleep at the moment
Speaker 2: because I'm watching every little increment of it. Earlier in
Speaker 2: the show, I went into great chapter and verse about
Speaker 2: the Cohen stuff. But can we talk about this judge
Speaker 2: because when the defense got a chance to call its
Speaker 2: first witness, he brings the hammer down and starts carrying
Speaker 2: on about them. He has extended the end of the
Speaker 2: trial till potentially next week. This guy is putting the
Speaker 2: finger on the scale in an incredible like you just
Speaker 2: have to watch one day to see it.
Speaker 8: Well, absolutely, and I mean look at the Stormy Daniels testimony.
Speaker 8: You know, this case wasn't about what may or may
Speaker 8: not have happened. But of course he allowed her to
Speaker 8: go on and on and on because cause she's obviously
Speaker 8: making money off the back of these salacious stories. So
Speaker 8: now the judge is awful, and a judge is openly political,
Speaker 8: and a judge has been in the past very verbally
Speaker 8: anti Trump. But it just shows you, you know, great
Speaker 8: country that America is, its judicial system is now politicized
Speaker 8: and rotten to the core. And Judge gender On absolutely
Speaker 8: shows all of that. And who knows where this goes
Speaker 8: because I don't think that any du in its right mind,
Speaker 8: having listened to the key witness, that scumbag Cohen, can
Speaker 8: possibly find a guilty verdict. But if they did, you know,
Speaker 8: with the judge sending the prison I didn't think it's
Speaker 8: going to happen. But given the hatred, given the bias,
Speaker 8: given the Trump derangement syndrome, anything's possible.
Speaker 2: Yeah, look, even if it's a thirty day thing, we'll
Speaker 2: all see what happens. But also about Cohen, So this guy,
Speaker 2: you know, they were able to very effectively say that
Speaker 2: this guy was saying, oh, when I was working for Trump,
Speaker 2: I was super loyal to Trump, you were stealing from Trump.
Speaker 2: And then afterwards the misremembering of the telephone conversation. Yet
Speaker 2: still you turn on lifting media. They think that they
Speaker 2: think that that's still a smoking gun. The texts prove
Speaker 2: that within seconds of the bodyguard saying call me, he
Speaker 2: did about a fourteen year old prankster.
Speaker 8: Yeah, I mean, look, you know he's a cheat, he's
Speaker 8: a liar, and he's a thief. I mean, unreliable witness
Speaker 8: would be the gentlest way one could possibly put this.
Speaker 8: No jury can possibly take him seriously. As you say,
Speaker 8: the texts disprove everything he said. Honestly, the more people
Speaker 8: in America that see this, the better this trial is coming.
Speaker 2: Out for Trump.
Speaker 8: I mean, who would have believed that Trump is actually
Speaker 8: picking up support, He's going up in the polls. His
Speaker 8: price with the bookmakers is shortening. No, this is all
Speaker 8: working in Trump's favor. And I feel sorry for my
Speaker 8: friend because he's got to sit through weeks and weeks
Speaker 8: of this agony when he should be out there campaigning.
Speaker 8: But it's all coming together. I'm feeling more bullish now
Speaker 8: about a Trump victory on November the fifth that I
Speaker 8: have at any point in the last couple of years.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and I mean relentlessly. The state by state polling
Speaker 2: it's showing the change where it's more like sixteen than
Speaker 2: it's going to be like twenty. Now use cops it
Speaker 2: from every possible angle in the UK because you push back, right,
Speaker 2: because you question the narrative, because you offer the alternative voice, right,
Speaker 2: And some of the most despicable things have been said
Speaker 2: by the elite there. You know, the ecosystem of the
Speaker 2: media has been disrupted by how dare they but ofcom
Speaker 2: the people who regulate the process, any opportunity to put
Speaker 2: the hammer down on you guys.
Speaker 8: They do, yes, but they've got this one wrong. So
Speaker 8: we had Richie sunac with a debate with the public,
Speaker 8: an audience with richieac with the public. We hired a
Speaker 8: firm to find an independent, neutral audience of undecideds. They
Speaker 8: got to ask their questions of the Prime Minister. We
Speaker 8: did an intervene. It was literally Sunak debating with the public.
Speaker 8: But that apparently breaches off Colm rules because of course
Speaker 8: the industry want one of their own to be the
Speaker 8: star of the show, not what we did to provide
Speaker 8: a format for the great British public. And they've come
Speaker 8: after us. They've said within sixty days there'll be a sanction.
Speaker 8: And you know what, We're offering this to Kirstarmer. We're
Speaker 8: offering this format to every other party leader. Tony Blair
Speaker 8: did one of these on the BBC in two thousand
Speaker 8: and five, exactly the same. There was no problem then,
Speaker 8: but there is now. And what this is about, it's
Speaker 8: about an established industry who do not like an upstart,
Speaker 8: who do not like a newcomer. And what they particularly
Speaker 8: hate is that we put the public at the very top.
Speaker 2: The public were the stars of that.
Speaker 8: Show, not somebody who's worked in the TV industry for
Speaker 8: the last thirty years. So I tell you what, if
Speaker 8: they trum fine us or sanction us on this, it
Speaker 8: will backfire on them very very badly.
Speaker 2: Indeed, it is extraordinary. I mean, we've done a version
Speaker 2: of the pub Tists or the People's Forum here for
Speaker 2: the BISBAT what fifteen twenty years exact same model being
Speaker 2: repeated there and it breaches the rules because there's not
Speaker 2: a gatekeeper fednikin. Watch GBN News on the flash app,
Speaker 2: or find all of the highlights of the wonderful Nigel
Speaker 2: Farrage online as well. Thank you Mate'll see again next week.
Speaker 2: Thank you, the great man joining us from London, quick
Speaker 2: break back with more about four minutes away from the
Speaker 2: Late Debate, and I'll tell you what Liz Storer wound
Speaker 2: up tonight. Alright, undone, the wonderful Meigan Chilly joins us
Speaker 2: tomorrow night, and here they are the Late Debate