Speaker 1: From the Skyinging Center. This is Paul Murray live. Albow's
Speaker 1: in a world of pain. It's all of his own making.
Speaker 1: With an addiction to the front end of the plane.
Speaker 1: No giant surprise there. There's a document I want to
Speaker 1: show you that makes it very clear that he's on
Speaker 1: the wrong side of the issue. But as this conversation
Speaker 1: has been taking place and the Prime Minister's trying to
Speaker 1: blame as always anyone but himself, a new nickname has
Speaker 1: been born. Airbus Albow. Can take a pause to our
Speaker 1: new one, upgrade Albow. That's the best way to describe
Speaker 1: the bloke at the moment, the bloke who doesn't mind
Speaker 1: not just flying on your dollar, but whether it's his dollar.
Speaker 1: He thinks an economy ticket should equal first class upgrade Albow.
Speaker 1: That in a second. But to distract from this upgrade
Speaker 1: Elbow story that is going to get out of the
Speaker 1: Prime Minister's control much sooner before this thing is going
Speaker 1: to be over, the government today decided to distract Now.
Speaker 1: It largely worked because if you judge the impact of
Speaker 1: news off the six pm news, most of the six
Speaker 1: pm news was distracted by the release of a report
Speaker 1: today that we weren't expecting today, which would make me
Speaker 1: think it was about changing the subject.
Speaker 2: Poorly prepared, badly executed, and unnecessarily expensive.
Speaker 3: That's the finding of an inquiry into Australia's handling of
Speaker 3: COVID nineteen.
Speaker 1: A major review into the COVID pandemic, says Australia, like
Speaker 1: the rest of the world, was ill prepared.
Speaker 4: Australia's COVID nineteen response eroded public trust so deeply people
Speaker 4: might not accept restrictions like lockdowns during any further crisis.
Speaker 1: All right, the report, well, of course it is a
Speaker 1: snow job. It's not a proper royal commission. It was
Speaker 1: intentionally set up by two of the three people being
Speaker 1: pro much of the system that was put in place.
Speaker 1: The entire point and reason of this was one last
Speaker 1: shot in the locker of blame Morrison. Blame Morrison. Now
Speaker 1: there's a couple of things in this, and I'm not
Speaker 1: going to get too deep into all of it, but
Speaker 1: I do want to have respect for people who, of
Speaker 1: course were affected by other people getting sick, people dying,
Speaker 1: or the millions of us who had to go through
Speaker 1: hell for a couple of years there. Well, they got
Speaker 1: the headlines that they wanted out of it, which was
Speaker 1: that inquiry founds the stroll out ie the slow rollout
Speaker 1: of the vaccine cost lives. It also suggested that a
Speaker 1: significant amount of money had been well in their view,
Speaker 1: wasted or lost through all of this. But I want
Speaker 1: to deal with a couple of things here and put
Speaker 1: them back into context. Now we're supposed to believe that
Speaker 1: the nature of the vaccine rollout ended up costing lives
Speaker 1: and therefore blame the government. Well, of course, since twenty
Speaker 1: twenty one, the extreme majority of Australians are vaccinated. But
Speaker 1: have a look at the actual number of deaths that
Speaker 1: have taken place during the height of the pandemic and
Speaker 1: what I credited as deaths from or with COVID nine
Speaker 1: nineteen in someone's system when the vaccine didn't exist three
Speaker 1: hundred and ninety sixty four, twenty one thousand, almost twenty
Speaker 1: two thousand since Now, this does not mean in any way,
Speaker 1: shape or form that I am commenting on the vaccine.
Speaker 1: What I am commenting on is if the headline is
Speaker 1: the federal government response led to deaths twenty three hundred,
Speaker 1: well what do we say about now? A couple of
Speaker 1: years on from that process, when we have now got
Speaker 1: so used to so many people dying with or from
Speaker 1: that it doesn't matter anymore. And by that I mean
Speaker 1: no cause for lockdown all the rest of it. Twenty
Speaker 1: one almost twenty two thousand people that have died in
Speaker 1: the years when the vaccine has been in existence. The
Speaker 1: Treasurer also today tried to do his bid to pretend
Speaker 1: that the COVID pandemic and the overspending by the Morrison
Speaker 1: government and Josh Friedenberg was the reason why inflation went
Speaker 1: nuts in the country. Is the hole that it's in
Speaker 1: right now.
Speaker 5: Big decisions were taken and big mistakes were made. Those
Speaker 5: mistakes were costly and they were inflationary.
Speaker 1: Well, guess what we've got the tape from the time
Speaker 1: when he was the Shadow Treasurer where not only did
Speaker 1: he agree with every dollar that had been spent, but
Speaker 1: also demanded some eighty billion dollars more be spent. Remember
Speaker 1: he even suggested that the Australian taxpayer should bail out
Speaker 1: or straight up by Virgin Airlines. That when Job Keeper
Speaker 1: officially ended and they voted the Labour Party by the
Speaker 1: way for it officially end, that they believed that it
Speaker 1: should have gone longer, and while it was in existence,
Speaker 1: it should have been available to more people and been
Speaker 1: worth more money. So forgive me if I just laugh
Speaker 1: in the face of the Treasurer today pretending that the
Speaker 1: big mistakes weren't ones that he wanted to be bigger?
Speaker 6: Should the scolt Morrison admits stration have rescued Virgin Australia,
Speaker 6: thereby protecting Australian jobs.
Speaker 5: Well, in short, yes, as it stands, if you've got
Speaker 5: a couple of hundred thousand dollars lying around for a
Speaker 5: home renovation, you'll be sweet. But if you're a Donata
Speaker 5: worker or a Virgin Australia worker, then Scott Morrison will
Speaker 5: leave you out and leave you behind. If the Treasurer
Speaker 5: was doing everything he can to prevent job losses, he
Speaker 5: wouldn't be ignoring the plight of something like fifteen thousand
Speaker 5: workers at Virgin Airlines.
Speaker 1: I mean, seriously, this is them desperately trying to change
Speaker 1: the story from the story that is going to cause
Speaker 1: massive problems for the Prime Minister, that being the upgrade
Speaker 1: elbow story. Okay, so thanks for the report. Should have
Speaker 1: been a Royal commission. Of course, it didn't really deal
Speaker 1: with lockdowns. Apart from the idea that people don't like them. Oh,
Speaker 1: I could tell you that there was very little in
Speaker 1: the report that the absolute default position under all circumstances,
Speaker 1: at all times should be that kids go to school.
Speaker 1: Nothing in and around that. And of course the reason
Speaker 1: why I believe that the victims of COVID nineteen deserve
Speaker 1: to be represented at a proper royal commission. As best
Speaker 1: as I could see, no reference whatsoever to the people
Speaker 1: who died alone, stories that we told you at the time,
Speaker 1: stories that we have told you every year since, these
Speaker 1: stories over and over and over again. And as always
Speaker 1: a shout out to my mate Mark Jessep, who of
Speaker 1: course was brave enough to talk about the situation involving
Speaker 1: his father and his father and many others being put
Speaker 1: into a position or incredible loneliness was a significant part
Speaker 1: of their final days on this planet. Unforgivable stuff. But
Speaker 1: all of that the distraction from the big one today,
Speaker 1: upgrade elbow. This bloke is in a world of trouble. Okay,
Speaker 1: Now we're going to see whether he's going to try
Speaker 1: to find a way out of it. But I think
Speaker 1: think that his attempts thus far are only digging him deeper.
Speaker 1: You know the story. But for those that are half
Speaker 1: paying attention, the story is pretty clear. Here is that
Speaker 1: he was too close to the former CEO of Cornus,
Speaker 1: Alan Joyce, that he was buying personal tickets to go
Speaker 1: on personal flights when at times he was the transport
Speaker 1: minister of the country. Yet he was being upgraded now
Speaker 1: upgraded by the way to business and potentially even first
Speaker 1: class in some situations. All right, now, you and I
Speaker 1: wouldn't get that opportunity of pay economy, fly business, the
Speaker 1: idea that Albanize he got it because at the time
Speaker 1: he was the transport minister. Well as other people have said,
Speaker 1: it's like a finance minister asking a financial institution for
Speaker 1: fifty thousand dollars because remember, by giving the seat away,
Speaker 1: that is money that the company has chosen not to
Speaker 1: make a decision that very obviously hyper profit focused companies
Speaker 1: like Quantas do not make. Lightly amazingly, labor party people
Speaker 1: were sent out there today to try to tell us
Speaker 1: the Jedi mind trick. Nothing to see here. In fact,
Speaker 1: Elbow's the victim.
Speaker 7: Yeah.
Speaker 8: I think this has been a complete pylon on the
Speaker 8: Prime minister. I mean it's been he's publicly declared very
Speaker 8: very clearly what he has been gifted, as has other MPs,
Speaker 8: and I think the pylon from the Coalition really shows that.
Speaker 8: I think that's something too. If you are in a glasshouse,
Speaker 8: don't throw stones. We've seen many other MPs declare upgrades,
Speaker 8: and rightly so they need to declare them. But Peter
Speaker 8: Dunn's taken up grades. Bridget McKenzie's taken upgrades. You know
Speaker 8: this is needs to be declared on the public bridge.
Speaker 1: No no, no, no, no, no, no no, don't let them
Speaker 1: spin out of this one. Just remember, and I'm going
Speaker 1: to say this one hundred times so it gets into
Speaker 1: every single person right in the back row as well. Okay,
Speaker 1: this story isn't necessarily about upgrades. It's definitely about upgrades
Speaker 1: for somebody who is the minister responsible for the area
Speaker 1: of government that quantus deals with, that being the Transport Minister.
Speaker 1: And it's not about the ones that he may well
Speaker 1: have been automatically given. It is about whether he asked
Speaker 1: for them or not. The Prime Minister did his best
Speaker 1: today to try to push this thing away. He's only
Speaker 1: made it worse.
Speaker 9: The person who is trying to sell a book, and
Speaker 9: fair enough, I don't see decorations. He's a former Liberal
Speaker 9: Party staffer for a number of senior members of the
Speaker 9: Liberal Party, including Joe Hockey and Bruce Baird. I don't
Speaker 9: see decorations. He as a former Quanas employee. I don't
Speaker 9: see decorations. In June, just a few months ago, he
Speaker 9: was a guest him and John Howard, a Liberal Party
Speaker 9: fundraiser in the electorate of Wentworth.
Speaker 1: Okay, let's be serious. We all know that the book
Speaker 1: is about quantus. Part of the Counts story is how
Speaker 1: it was able to use soft power, which is a
Speaker 1: very polite way of saying access to a lounge where
Speaker 1: members of the public are not allowed in, or upgrades
Speaker 1: that mean you fly a little better than you were
Speaker 1: willing to pay, including for members of your family, and
Speaker 1: how that has seen that the people who are supposed
Speaker 1: to be keeping an eye on this company have in
Speaker 1: some ways been either doing its beating or looking the
Speaker 1: other way when very obviously there were issues in this
Speaker 1: company that we have all heard about, dealt with, and
Speaker 1: anyone who's phone recently live with. So let's get back
Speaker 1: to the heart of all of this, right, and by
Speaker 1: the way, if anyone thinks of the author is some
Speaker 1: sort of Peter Dutton acolyte. Read anything he's ever read written, right,
Speaker 1: this bloke is not going to be pro dutt't But
Speaker 1: anyway it's clearly also not pro us, definitely not pro me.
Speaker 1: Now that said, an extract of his book was available
Speaker 1: in the Channel nine newspapers over the weekend. He works
Speaker 1: for the Financial Review. They got part of it. The
Speaker 1: Sydney Morning Herald, The Age and the Brisbane Times got
Speaker 1: the better bit. Now let's be very clear what is
Speaker 1: this story about. The Prime Minister wants to make it
Speaker 1: seem like, well, I declared everything and everything's the same. Remember,
Speaker 1: if you are a minister and you ask for a favor,
Speaker 1: which in this case is thousands of dollars worth of upgrades,
Speaker 1: it's as red hot as it gets. Three extracts from
Speaker 1: the book. In July two thousand and nine, when he
Speaker 1: Albanezi was the Transport Minister in the rud government but
Speaker 1: traveling in a private capacity, he received an upgrade to
Speaker 1: business class from Corners from Sydney to Los Angeles return flights.
Speaker 1: One April twenty ten, he and his son received a
Speaker 1: ticket upgrade from Sydney to Rome on return flights via
Speaker 1: the corners partner Emirates. No classes of travel was specified,
Speaker 1: making it impossible to know the precise monetary value of
Speaker 1: this gift. But it wouldn't have been sorry, but it
Speaker 1: would have been in the vicinity of ten thousand dollars.
Speaker 1: Now again, imagine the Finance Services minister ends up getting
Speaker 1: a gift of ten thousand dollars from a bank. What
Speaker 1: would people think again? July two thousand and eleven, third trip,
Speaker 1: Still Transport Minister Albanizi accepted upgrades from Emirates, traveling unofficially
Speaker 1: to and from Europe three flights, not as the minister
Speaker 1: but as the citizen. Yet he gets tens of thousands
Speaker 1: of dollars worth of gifts from Quantus. Doesn't matter if
Speaker 1: they are declared or not. It's about whether they were
Speaker 1: requested on a personal trip to Hawaii. Here we go.
Speaker 1: We now are in our fourth trip. De seven, twenty nine,
Speaker 1: twenty twelve, he was upgraded to business class by Quotas
Speaker 1: from Honolulu to Sydney and again March twenty thirteen. We're
Speaker 1: now at five trips. Albanzi traveled with Joyce as Quantas
Speaker 1: as an inaugural flight to Dubai as part of its
Speaker 1: partnership with Emirates. Cave in earnest Prime Minister tries to
Speaker 1: pretend that that last flight doesn't count because well, he
Speaker 1: was just along for the ride, as was the media.
Speaker 1: Here's where it gets interesting. All of my colleagues have
Speaker 1: made reference to this tonight. I want to actually show
Speaker 1: you the text. There is a thing called the Ministerial
Speaker 1: Code of Ethics. These are put simply the rules under
Speaker 1: which many question time scandals are prosecuted, and put simply,
Speaker 1: if you are on the wrong side of these things,
Speaker 1: then you end up in a world of trouble. Things
Speaker 1: like the conduct for ministers or their Code of Ethics
Speaker 1: is things that Anthony Abernezi, as Opposition leader, was more
Speaker 1: than happy to use as the folkroom to get rid
Speaker 1: of what he believed to be examples of the Liberal
Speaker 1: Party breaking the rules.
Speaker 10: An ad man with no plan, a showman covering up
Speaker 10: a scam, shouty, belligerent, stubborns He believes different standards should
Speaker 10: apply to him don't apply to other Australians.
Speaker 9: But he is becoming tarnished by his.
Speaker 10: Own hubris, his own arrogance.
Speaker 1: Writ large this week for all to see. Now, every
Speaker 1: Prime minister has the opportunity to rewrite, amend or start
Speaker 1: over when it comes to their own Code of Conduct
Speaker 1: for Ministers. The text that I am about to read
Speaker 1: you is the Code of Conduct for Ministers that Anthony
Speaker 1: Abernezi put in place himself upon becoming Prime Minister in
Speaker 1: twenty twenty two. It has not changed since it is
Speaker 1: available tonight on the Prime Minister and Cabinets website. The
Speaker 1: section that we're going to talk about here, and apparently
Speaker 1: it is no different than previous governments, certainly the Rudd
Speaker 1: and Gillard governments of which he was the Transport Minister
Speaker 1: and was asking or still getting the tens of thousands
Speaker 1: of dollars worth of gifts out of Quantus, the single
Speaker 1: biggest company in the area that as Transport Minister he
Speaker 1: was regulating. All right, we'll start here with the overall
Speaker 1: section which deals with gifts. Don't worry. You don't have
Speaker 1: to squint or squint for you Section three point one
Speaker 1: point eight. Ministers in their official capacity may therefore accept
Speaker 1: customary official gifts, hospitality, tokens of appreciation and similar formal
Speaker 1: gestures in accordance with the relevant guidelines, but must not seek, repeat,
Speaker 1: but must not seek or encourage any form of gift
Speaker 1: in their personal capacity. Of the five flights that we
Speaker 1: have talked about when he was the Transport Minister, when
Speaker 1: he was flying personally with his family on holidays overseas,
Speaker 1: did he get them or did he ask for them? Definitely,
Speaker 1: if he asked for them, he's in breach. That would
Speaker 1: mean that a Prime Minister of the day should have
Speaker 1: sacked him for doing so. The second section also very
Speaker 1: clear to me that he is on the wrong side
Speaker 1: of this and he is not going to be able
Speaker 1: to find a way out of it, and it will
Speaker 1: be the focus of the rest of this week and
Speaker 1: Parliament next week. Section three point two one Ministers must
Speaker 1: not seek or accept any kind of benefit or other
Speaker 1: valuable consideration, either for themselves or for others, in connection
Speaker 1: with performing or not performing any element of their ministerial duties.
Speaker 1: So if he asked quantus, he's in breach of the
Speaker 1: first section. If he received even with out asking, he's
Speaker 1: in breach of the second. This would result in the
Speaker 1: termination of a ministry. Now the Prime Minister is trying
Speaker 1: to kick up as much dust as possible to make
Speaker 1: the conversation about did he or did he not text
Speaker 1: or call or meet Alan Joyce. That's not the point.
Speaker 1: He could have asked the cleaner. He could have asked
Speaker 1: his cleaner to ask a quantus cleaner on his behalf.
Speaker 1: But if he approached anyone anywhere in quantas, he's in
Speaker 1: breach by receiving those gifts. Even if not asked, he
Speaker 1: is in breach. He as Opposition leader, would demand the
Speaker 1: sacking of the relevant minister. He himself should have been
Speaker 1: sacked by previous prime ministers. This document is from his
Speaker 1: own website and this is the standard under which presumably
Speaker 1: he sack his own Transport minister. As for the Prime Minister,
Speaker 1: pay very close attention to how he answers a very
Speaker 1: direct question, because while he's already in trouble for the accepting,
Speaker 1: he's trying to get into the gray area about who
Speaker 1: was asked, not the company being asked.
Speaker 6: Did you call Alan Joyce personally for these upgrades?
Speaker 9: Look, the idea quanas have a number in terms of
Speaker 9: bookings that are private bookings and in terms of the
Speaker 9: only discussions that I can recall with Alan Joyce. Certainly
Speaker 9: we discussed not through calls. We discussed the first flight
Speaker 9: from Australia to Dubai on an A three eighty.
Speaker 1: Okkk. See he wants this to be about. Did I
Speaker 1: call Alan Joyce? Did I text Alan Joyce? No? No, no, no,
Speaker 1: no no. The second of the examples that he was
Speaker 1: in breach of five times. According to the book reads,
Speaker 1: ministers must not seek or accept okay, So if he
Speaker 1: asked for it, he's in a world of trouble. If
Speaker 1: he took it, which we know he did, he's in
Speaker 1: a world of trouble. Now he might want to play
Speaker 1: word games here. It's a simple thing. Was there an
Speaker 1: upgrade or not? Five have been proven. Did he ask
Speaker 1: for it or not? Well, that decides whether he breaks
Speaker 1: one rule or whether he breaks two rules. Rules that
Speaker 1: would get any other minister sacked that every opposition, labor
Speaker 1: or liberal would go after. Again, if this is tens
Speaker 1: of thousands of dollars worth of benefit, imagine it was
Speaker 1: the Financial Services Minister asking a bank for something that
Speaker 1: resulted in tens of thousands of dollars changing hands. Yes,
Speaker 1: it is that serious. Now the Prime Minister will ultimately
Speaker 1: believe that he can survive all of this, because of
Speaker 1: course it is the Prime Minister who decides whether there
Speaker 1: has been a breach of the code of conduct. The
Speaker 1: Prime Minister, if he lets himself off the hook, will
Speaker 1: have openly chosen not to apply the same standard to
Speaker 1: himself that another prime minister would be expected to apply
Speaker 1: to all other ministers. Petter Dutton can smell that this
Speaker 1: one is not ending, despite the fact that the Prime
Speaker 1: Minister is blaming all in sundry and surprise, surprise, is
Speaker 1: not taking responsibility for himself.
Speaker 2: Australians now are starting to question the integrity and the
Speaker 2: truthfulness of their prime minister. They know that they can't
Speaker 2: get the economy right and now they're seeing a prime
Speaker 2: minister who can't lie straight in bed.
Speaker 1: I'm telling you upgrade, albow ain't going away. The hope
Speaker 1: might be that we're going to start talking about the
Speaker 1: Melbourne Cup, and the hope might be that we're going
Speaker 1: to start getting distracted by the United States. There are
Speaker 1: a couple of stages this thing goes, and I think
Speaker 1: it's going to be a slow Burn Parliament next week.
Speaker 1: First question, Prime Minister, yes or no? Do you believe
Speaker 1: that a minister should abide by the Minister's Code of conduct? Yes?
Speaker 7: Or no.
Speaker 1: Second question, do you believe that a minister, if proven
Speaker 1: to be in breach should lose their job? Yes or no?
Speaker 1: Those two questions well pretty obvious what the yes is.
Speaker 1: The no becomes evasive, It becomes obviously trying to set
Speaker 1: up a double standard. And we know that this bloke
Speaker 1: may have said that he was from somewhere else, but
Speaker 1: where he is right now, it's a bloody good view
Speaker 1: and a very comfortable seat and some free champagne on
Speaker 1: the way. Pete van Onsalin, writing tonight in the Daily Mail,
Speaker 1: says the Prime Minister is in a scenario now where
Speaker 1: he should sack himself. Yes, this story is that significant?
Speaker 1: Right quickly does some other stuff? Got a great debate
Speaker 1: coming up in a moment of twos time, look for
Speaker 1: to Joe Hildebrand trying to explain how all of this
Speaker 1: doesn't matter again black and white in my view, five
Speaker 1: breaches of two sections of the ministerial we'll get to
Speaker 1: that no moment of two's time. Also. Nigel Ferraj on
Speaker 1: the Show This Morning tonight, Stephen Miles is adjusting to
Speaker 1: his new life as the incoming opposition leader, and it's
Speaker 1: very different than any experience he's ever had. In fact,
Speaker 1: all current members of the Labor Party have never been
Speaker 1: in opposition, so they are very used to a very
Speaker 1: comfortable life. People like his chief of staff, who's seen
Speaker 1: on Saturday night was celebrating the LMP potentially not making
Speaker 1: it into majority. Well now they are well and truly
Speaker 1: a majority, so she will be working with a much
Speaker 1: smaller team this time around. In fact, let's go back
Speaker 1: to just under the Labor Party's watch, how many people
Speaker 1: will work for each and every minister personally in their
Speaker 1: personal office. These numbers pretty extraordinary. About some of the
Speaker 1: blowout that took place under the Miles government. The Premier
Speaker 1: thirty seven personal staff, the Minister for Resources ten. Overall
Speaker 1: two hundred and sixty four personal staff for all of
Speaker 1: the different ministers. Again, don't worry about squinting bottom of
Speaker 1: the page, two hundred and sixty four. That is how
Speaker 1: many they had as personal staff. Now, these were the
Speaker 1: people who were largely paid by the taxpayer. And we
Speaker 1: know when it comes to the premiere the very very
Speaker 1: thin line between party activity and political activity was essentially
Speaker 1: rubbed out over much of the past ten years. Well,
Speaker 1: here's a bit of a shock for these people that
Speaker 1: have never been in opposition. Because many of the ex
Speaker 1: ministers face a pay up to two hundred thousand dollars,
Speaker 1: the two hundred and ninety four staff is about to
Speaker 1: become twenty three, not just for the leader, that's twenty
Speaker 1: three for the entire opposition. Well that one hundred labor
Speaker 1: staffers who work across eighteen ministerial portfolios will face the acts,
Speaker 1: including personal drivers, media managers and policy writers. All surviving ministers,
Speaker 1: including the opposition leader and his deputy, will be left
Speaker 1: with a twenty three employees combined. That is why it
Speaker 1: is so hard to take on the Queensland Labor government.
Speaker 1: That is why the achievement of the LNP being able
Speaker 1: to with just twenty three staff slay the dragon and
Speaker 1: get a majority that with counting still going on, could
Speaker 1: be as big as Palichets after the pandemic of twenty twenty.
Speaker 1: Lots of people wrote about this today on the core
Speaker 1: of Mars website the comments that they decided to publish.
Speaker 1: Miles will have to cut his sandwiches and pack his
Speaker 1: own lunch, says Alan, Well done. Steve says, OMG, how
Speaker 1: are they going to cope? Still overpaid by the sounds
Speaker 1: of it. No private jets to birthday parties, says Andrew.
Speaker 1: Remember there was a ten minute private jet that Stephen
Speaker 1: Miles took so we could go to a birthday party
Speaker 1: for one of his MPs. It made my day. It's
Speaker 1: been a great few days, the thought of labor people
Speaker 1: losing the perose of office. So good to Tazzy where
Speaker 1: I again want to talk here about beautiful Tasmani, where
Speaker 1: we only were just a couple of weeks ago. Now
Speaker 1: they have just a few federal electorates Bass, Bradden, Lions,
Speaker 1: Franklin and Clark. Now the seat of Bass on the
Speaker 1: far left held by the Liberals, the seat of Bradden
Speaker 1: held on the far right by the Labor Party. The
Speaker 1: seat of Lions, which is the bulk of Tasmania, but
Speaker 1: he's not a heavily populated part of Tasmani, which is
Speaker 1: why it's physically bigger, is currently held by the Labor Party,
Speaker 1: but the Libs probably should have won it in the past,
Speaker 1: but candidate issues have been one of the reasons why
Speaker 1: Labor are able to hold onto the seat. And the
Speaker 1: assumption is that Dutton, should he be getting close to government,
Speaker 1: has to win, not just Bass but he has to
Speaker 1: win something else in Tasmania, hopefully Bradden, but theoretically Lions
Speaker 1: is up for grabs. The any problem is Lions currently
Speaker 1: has a Labor MP that doesn't plan on going anywhere
Speaker 1: until today, where the person who has been the Tasmanian
Speaker 1: Labor Party leader for two elections and lost twice of
Speaker 1: those elections twice in pretty spectacular circumstances. Rebecca White considered
Speaker 1: such a star that, despite the fact that she was
Speaker 1: rejected not once but twice by the people of Tasmania,
Speaker 1: that she should end up taking over as the potential
Speaker 1: candidate going into the next election. Now she is from
Speaker 1: this part of the electorate and this part of Tasmania.
Speaker 1: But you should have a look here at the numbers.
Speaker 1: The Labour Party's primary vote the last in this seat
Speaker 1: was twenty nine percent, just twenty nine percent. The Libs
Speaker 1: were at thirty seven. That was at an election where
Speaker 1: the government was being swept from office. Presumably Labour's vote
Speaker 1: goes down, Presumably the Liberal vote goes up. And I
Speaker 1: wouldn't be betting it all on Rebecca White because the
Speaker 1: primary vote in the seat of Lions at the state election,
Speaker 1: her personal vote was in the twenties the overall party
Speaker 1: was beaten by the best part of five points. So
Speaker 1: I don't know what it is about certain people in
Speaker 1: the Labor Party who they just keep getting the opportunity
Speaker 1: to fail upwards. But it looks like Rebecca White is
Speaker 1: about to become the Christina Kanneely of Tasmanian politics. Lose, lose, lose, lose,
Speaker 1: lose you they try to find a way to keep
Speaker 1: forcing you on the electorate or pushing you up the
Speaker 1: slippery pole. Speaking of elections, local government at once have
Speaker 1: taken place in Victoria. Most notably for us is to
Speaker 1: see how I make Nicholas reesis doing as the Lord
Speaker 1: Mayor of Melbourne. Great to see him when we're in
Speaker 1: our town just a few weeks ago in Springvale. Nicholas,
Speaker 1: of course was the deputy mayor for many years. He
Speaker 1: has now become the mayor, and we're very proud of
Speaker 1: our friend. No matter how often we disagree on Telly,
Speaker 1: he's a very good and decent man and I believe
Speaker 1: that he should continue in the position. But let's have
Speaker 1: a look what the people who actually voted think. Well
Speaker 1: on primary votes, Nicholas Rees is well and truly leading.
Speaker 1: The Liberals have dropped out today saying they don't have
Speaker 1: enough vote. Also, people like Aaron Wood are now out
Speaker 1: of play. So the assumption is that while he's in
Speaker 1: the lead right now, he's going to have to get
Speaker 1: a whole bunch of preferences. You've got to imagine that
Speaker 1: the Greens might go to Nick unless they've done a
Speaker 1: deal to go to Labor and then if that many
Speaker 1: end up going to Anthony Koda Fides, who may will
Speaker 1: have finished third on primary vote, but he's the not
Speaker 1: Nick Reese candidate, that there might be a preference game
Speaker 1: playing there. So pay attention. Lot's happening, state, federal, and
Speaker 1: even local politics. And I've got all of our fingers
Speaker 1: in all of those pies, which perhaps is why Paul
Speaker 1: is such a portly boy. Now let's turn our attention
Speaker 1: to America. We will be there at the end of
Speaker 1: the week. I'm very excited. You know how much I've
Speaker 1: been talking about this election. We all know what its
Speaker 1: consequences are, we all know how high the stakes are.
Speaker 1: And as I mentioned to you last night, when Donald
Speaker 1: Trump had his rally at Madison Square Garden, that in
Speaker 1: and of itself was an amazing story. But of course
Speaker 1: the media desperate to try to either make this out
Speaker 1: to be some sort of Hitler rally, which of course
Speaker 1: it was not. Well, they focused on the comments of
Speaker 1: a comedian, a shock comedian who always goes too far
Speaker 1: while you invite that person to a political event. I
Speaker 1: don't know, but he decided to turn a story about
Speaker 1: garbage in Puerto Rico into a joke that Puerto Rico
Speaker 1: is garbage.
Speaker 11: I don't know if you guys know this, but there's
Speaker 11: literally a floating island of garbage in the middle of
Speaker 11: the ocean right now. Yeah, I think it's called Puerto Rico.
Speaker 1: Trump campaign. Straight away, they knew what the lefties would
Speaker 1: do with all of this, the liberal media would do
Speaker 1: with this, so they automatically said, look, thanks for the endorsement.
Speaker 1: We don't associate ourselves with the comments. And while Puerto
Speaker 1: Rico is not a state but a territory of the
Speaker 1: United States, it has a very small population. There are
Speaker 1: plenty of people of Puerto Rican descent who are right
Speaker 1: across the United States, including three hundred thousand of them
Speaker 1: that are in Pennsylvania. And we all know Pennsylvania is
Speaker 1: one of the key swing states hence why the joke
Speaker 1: is being weaponized, and hence why the Trump campaign is
Speaker 1: doing everything they can to try to take the blast
Speaker 1: out of the grenade. For his part, the comedian Tony
Speaker 1: Hinchcliffe retweeted something on X Today which was that he's
Speaker 1: really the modern version of the previous insult comic Don Rickles,
Speaker 1: who performed this at the inauguration of Ronald Reagan all
Speaker 1: those years ago. First black kid I ever said it
Speaker 1: will definitely never play basketball. You were standing here with
Speaker 1: the band with the same Kakami music.
Speaker 4: That's what they're doing Florida. The old Jewish folks hold
Speaker 4: the elevator.
Speaker 1: Does I think we can all agree that tastes have changed?
Speaker 1: And obviously you've got to be vigilant because we don't
Speaker 1: know where the how the media is going to interpret this,
Speaker 1: just like they did.
Speaker 12: There is fresh backlash against Trump's rally in New York
Speaker 12: City on Sunday, including from many top Republicans who are
Speaker 12: distancing themselves from the vile, racist and sexist comments that
Speaker 12: were made.
Speaker 7: The stuff last night was so over the top, is
Speaker 7: un believing. We known't how many Puerto Rican voters there
Speaker 7: are in Pennsylvania. Two hundred and seventy three thousand. This
Speaker 7: is going to cost This is going to cost your vocus.
Speaker 3: It's worth noting that while we showed you that joke
Speaker 3: about the pile of garbage that comedian made, he also
Speaker 3: said something else about Latino voters that I can't play
Speaker 3: because I know a lot of you are probably at
Speaker 3: the breakfast table with your little kids, and if we
Speaker 3: played it, you'd have to shut us off.
Speaker 1: Dunt you lock call this? Oh we cut you have pills,
Speaker 1: We cut you out pills. But it's really important that
Speaker 1: Kamala Harris goes and talks to Howard Stern peak a line, right.
Speaker 1: I mean some super puritanical and offended by everything, or
Speaker 1: were super offended by some things because they reflect back
Speaker 1: on Donald Trump. Now, for what it's worth, I completely
Speaker 1: agree with Megan Kelly that for all of the upside
Speaker 1: of the rally New York sellout crowd, lots of energy,
Speaker 1: it was probably over the top.
Speaker 13: It was too grotastic. Okay, it was you're trying to
Speaker 13: win an election in which you're hamorrhaging female voters. Maybe
Speaker 13: when you present in front of hundreds of thousands, at
Speaker 13: least at Madison Square, garden. You clean up the bro
Speaker 13: talk just a little so you don't alienate women in
Speaker 13: the middle of America who are already on the fence
Speaker 13: about Republicans. Do they have no women advising their campaign.
Speaker 1: She's completely correct, completely correct, And all of this matters
Speaker 1: because if we believe all of the data, this thing
Speaker 1: is raise a thin and there basically is the majority
Speaker 1: of women voting for Harris, the majority of blokes VNY
Speaker 1: for Trump. Have a look at the latest poll from
Speaker 1: the New York Times that explains that in very clear detail. Now,
Speaker 1: while it's forty eight forty eight when it comes to men,
Speaker 1: Trump leads fifty five to forty one. When it's women,
Speaker 1: it is Harris fifty four to Trump's forty two, Which
Speaker 1: brings me to another part of this race we should
Speaker 1: talk about. It's weil and truly good enough for you
Speaker 1: to bring your team out, but you need, of course
Speaker 1: voters either from the other team or the team in
Speaker 1: the middle. As we know, there's the Democratic Party, here's
Speaker 1: their party at the Democratic National Convention, the Republican National Convention.
Speaker 1: Of course, was Donald Trump at his convention the DNC.
Speaker 1: If we can roll that two guys, of course, there
Speaker 1: are both sides of the aisle here, but there is
Speaker 1: a third group of people, and these are independents. See
Speaker 1: in America, you don't just register to vote, you' also
Speaker 1: register who. Generally you align yourself with Team Red, Team Blue,
Speaker 1: or the team in the middle Independence and the New
Speaker 1: York Times poll where Independence were backing Harris by five points,
Speaker 1: that would make you think or so, if more women
Speaker 1: vote than men and she's leading with Independence, then maybe
Speaker 1: Trump's in more trouble than we think. But of course
Speaker 1: it plays out state by state. Seven swing states that
Speaker 1: we've spoken about before. Let's go around them like a
Speaker 1: clock what are called the blue wall traditional places where
Speaker 1: the Democrats would win of Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania places the
Speaker 1: Red team normally wins North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona, and then
Speaker 1: heavily unionized city via Las Vegas in Nevada. According to this,
Speaker 1: in Arizona, Harris is winning the Independence fifty five to
Speaker 1: forty five. In Nevada, Trump is winning them forty six
Speaker 1: to thirty nine. In Wisconsin, Trump is winning them forty
Speaker 1: nine to forty six. In Michigan, Harris is winning them
Speaker 1: forty six to forty four. In Pennsylvania, all important Pennsylvania
Speaker 1: where three hundred thousand Puerto Ricans and who knows how
Speaker 1: they react to the joke and how the media spins
Speaker 1: the joke. Forty six percent to forty one or five
Speaker 1: point lead for Donald Trump. Donald Trump is smashing by
Speaker 1: eleven points of independence in North Carolina, where Harris is
Speaker 1: winning in Georgia. So all of that matters, okay. And
Speaker 1: that's why a little bit of her vote disappearing, a
Speaker 1: little bit of his vote disappearing, means independence matter more.
Speaker 1: It's why you've got to overperform, overperform, and then try
Speaker 1: and take the majority of what's left in the middle.
Speaker 1: And I'm not talking about undecided. I'm talking about literally
Speaker 1: millions of people who identify themselves as not red or
Speaker 1: not blue. Quick break back with more plenty to talk about.
Speaker 1: All right, Joe, let's talk about upgrade albow Joe Hildebrand next.
Speaker 1: I won't say I've been looking forward to this, but
Speaker 1: I've been looking forward to this. Freer Leitch of course
Speaker 1: from the Vins. His research center is here, no disrespect,
Speaker 1: but Joe Hildebrand is here as well. Now that Joe
Speaker 1: is the elbow whisperer, all right, give me the defense
Speaker 1: for upgrade albow.
Speaker 6: Well, I do have an idea for a new reality
Speaker 6: TV show where politicians just got doing the most outrageous
Speaker 6: things that you can possibly imagine, and then you give
Speaker 6: it to a spin doctor.
Speaker 1: And say, defend this. So tell us why there's nothing
Speaker 1: to see here. Quite the fact that I in black
Speaker 1: and white have said five times he's broken.
Speaker 6: There's obviously plenty to see here. The best you can
Speaker 6: say about it is that it happened a long time ago.
Speaker 6: To argue semantics, and again, this is the letter rather
Speaker 6: than the spirit of the law of the MINISTERI or
Speaker 6: code of conduct. The bit that you cite says, yes,
Speaker 6: you're not meant to accept that.
Speaker 1: Then it goes on to.
Speaker 6: Say if this related in any way to you performing
Speaker 6: or not performing duties as minister, now you can of
Speaker 6: course say, we'll hang on a minute. Does this mean
Speaker 6: that you know Catherine King, his Transport minister, was under
Speaker 6: a direction by him to not let Qatar Airways in
Speaker 6: on these roots.
Speaker 1: I don't know. I don't think that's a smoking gun
Speaker 1: that I think he's experiencing the product that you are regulating.
Speaker 1: It's pretty much where we're beyond great and that's where
Speaker 1: he is.
Speaker 6: I think, look, it's obviously, certainly it's certainly not a
Speaker 6: good look for the politically charge for coming to be
Speaker 6: accepting rituities from that guy.
Speaker 1: He's going to have to sack himself. He's not going
Speaker 1: to say, well, we all know this, but he's going
Speaker 1: to be exposed in the next week as been clearly
Speaker 1: on the wrong size.
Speaker 6: Except and it's already starting to happen. And again this
Speaker 6: is just yea cynical analysis of the obvious is that
Speaker 6: they're all in on it, every politician. And you could say, okay,
Speaker 6: not everyone has solicited them direct from Allen Joyce, so
Speaker 6: that happened whatever. I totally get that. But already you're
Speaker 6: seeing labours people throwing out stuff about Darton accepting our grades.
Speaker 6: I think Bridget McKenzie suddenly found one where she said
Speaker 6: she'd never done it. And if you look at what
Speaker 6: happened every time travel roots come up, and it always
Speaker 6: ends up, it starts with this big sort of furor
Speaker 6: and then it becomes self extinguishing because it comes pretty
Speaker 6: clear pretty quickly that everyone's actually in on it. And
Speaker 6: you look at the last big travel roughts scandal in
Speaker 6: the first term of the Howard government and that obviously
Speaker 6: had some really heavy consequences. But again so I don't think.
Speaker 6: I'm sure the media and the Telly's done some great
Speaker 6: work on earthing more upgrades and they'll do a great job.
Speaker 6: But in terms of the ferocity of the opposition going
Speaker 6: after him, it's going to be muted because it's going
Speaker 6: to come about straight back up.
Speaker 1: Yeah, look, they'll say you took one, you took one,
Speaker 1: you took one. But of those examples, Barnaby, Joyce and
Speaker 1: Bridget McKenzie were former transport ministers. Okay, it doesn't matter
Speaker 1: about Peter Dutton because he wasn't somebody who had ministerial responsibility. Again,
Speaker 1: ultimately here don't expect the National Corruption Commission to get
Speaker 1: involved because they don't police the ministerial standards. It's the
Speaker 1: Prime Minister of the day. And the point is that
Speaker 1: it's up to the opposition now for to prove that
Speaker 1: he's going to let himself off.
Speaker 4: The hook, and I think that's right to be honest.
Speaker 4: The travel wrought issue is kind of a secondary issue.
Speaker 4: The core problem here is the fact that there seems
Speaker 4: to be an inappropriate relationship between Anthony Albanesi and Alan
Speaker 4: Joyce as good friend. Yeah sure, sure, and that that
Speaker 4: has actually cost average Australians potentially because of that relationship.
Speaker 4: Katar Airways was blocked from doubling its services to Australia
Speaker 4: and fairness.
Speaker 1: And service to the lawyers. Obviously the Prime Minister was
Speaker 1: suggesting nothing of the sort.
Speaker 4: Obviously exactly, but there does seem to be a meeting.
Speaker 1: Get the point you're making.
Speaker 5: It's just.
Speaker 1: A couple of I am. I just don't want the
Speaker 1: meeting tomorrow. I get it.
Speaker 4: So I think the real question at the heart of
Speaker 4: this is whether there is an inappropriate relationship between Alan
Speaker 4: Joyce and Anthony Albanesi and what that has cost taxpayers
Speaker 4: in terms of flow on decision.
Speaker 1: But also I think that the Prime Minister wants to
Speaker 1: get it into the relationship between the CEO and the Minister,
Speaker 1: the Minister or cod of conduct. As I said his cleaner.
Speaker 1: Prime ministers or minister could have asked the quantus cleaner, hey,
Speaker 1: can you put in a good The whole point is
Speaker 1: the entity, all right, So once we're going to try it,
Speaker 1: so the promises are going to try to make it
Speaker 1: about this personal. As I said next week. They hope
Speaker 1: for the Melbourne Cup next week, they hope for the
Speaker 1: distraction when it comes to Trump. There are other things,
Speaker 1: so I'll quickly get to it here. Let's talk about
Speaker 1: the COVID inquiry. There should be a proper royal commission.
Speaker 1: We've all screamed about why that should be the case.
Speaker 1: They obviously put it out as a way to change
Speaker 1: the subject. If you think that Australians only pay attention
Speaker 1: to the first story on the news, not the second
Speaker 1: and third, then they got what they wanted today. But
Speaker 1: what were you most disappointed about today?
Speaker 4: I mean, I think the fact that none of the
Speaker 4: state premiers have really been held to account over the
Speaker 4: handling of COVID. I mean, I've spoken to seeing former
Speaker 4: senior staffers who are in the Prime Minister's office when
Speaker 4: these decisions were being made. And the two groups of
Speaker 4: people that were driving the most draconian, senseless restrictions were one,
Speaker 4: the public servants who really had no idea what they
Speaker 4: were talking about because we were all operating on limited information.
Speaker 4: But they were driving this hard line anti freedom, pro
Speaker 4: lockdown mentality really on very little evidence bace. And then
Speaker 4: two it was the state premiers, and there was chess
Speaker 4: beating to see who could be the most draconian, the
Speaker 4: most pro lockdown premier. And then the fact that one
Speaker 4: Australian supported this and two none of these premiers or
Speaker 4: public servants have really been held to account is truly remarkable.
Speaker 1: In fact, that Daniel Andrews gets a little gold medal
Speaker 1: for services in part to the public health. It's offensive,
Speaker 1: but it's this thing, though, Joe, where those of us
Speaker 1: who had this clear eyed understanding were of course drowned
Speaker 1: out at the time, but also sort of this some
Speaker 1: vague thing in the report Australians won't cop lockdowns. Well
Speaker 1: they did, That's the thing is they did, and they
Speaker 1: rewarded the governments that were doing it while they were
Speaker 1: doing it. So while today we feel like we're in
Speaker 1: the majority, I would suggest if there was a lockdown
Speaker 1: again anytime in the future for new reason, I don't
Speaker 1: place the full bet the majority of people would punish.
Speaker 6: I think maybe having gone through it, it might be a.
Speaker 1: Bit different, hope.
Speaker 6: And one of the one of the sort of comforting things,
Speaker 6: if there is one of this official government inquiry, is
Speaker 6: that it deliberately put the terms of reference, put that
Speaker 6: state responses that outside the terms of reference, because it's
Speaker 6: already knew that it would be so damning that it
Speaker 6: would be damaging to.
Speaker 1: And also this was the last shot in the locker
Speaker 1: of the it's all Morrison's fault. But as I said,
Speaker 1: the numbers are literally ten times worse in terms of
Speaker 1: debts post vaccine, not from the vaccine but our willingness
Speaker 1: for people to be able to be exposed.
Speaker 6: But that's why I'm going The real insidious thing about
Speaker 6: this is that this was something. This was a stampede
Speaker 6: of fear that was started. It started with, for example,
Speaker 6: parents pulling their kids out of privates, and then kids
Speaker 6: with parents with kids in public surces hanging on they're
Speaker 6: taking all their kids out. They mustn't be saying, we've
Speaker 6: got to take them out. And then then that turned
Speaker 6: into state governments. Instead of saying no, no, no, they are
Speaker 6: actually saying, oh, yes, we're going to pretend your imaginary
Speaker 6: few years are all true and we're going.
Speaker 1: To shut all school. Guys've got to take a break
Speaker 1: because NAGE Fras is next and the satellite time comes
Speaker 1: out of my pace, So love to both of you,
Speaker 1: will see you all again next week Nagefarraj. Next we'll
Speaker 1: talk about a week to go to the US election
Speaker 1: and a lot of weird stuff happening in the UK.
Speaker 1: Were the fort to our chats with Nigel Farrage each
Speaker 1: and every week. It's the only place you'll se him
Speaker 1: on as Etilly. He's in London. I'm here in the
Speaker 1: man Cave, Great Man. A week to go. Finally, it's
Speaker 1: almost over. The signs are that Trump is almost over
Speaker 1: the line. But that's what Hillary thought just eight years ago.
Speaker 11: Yeah, the big M is with the Donald and that's
Speaker 11: what matters. And the big M is hundreds of thousands,
Speaker 11: millions of simultaneous conversations that take place at the breakfast table,
Speaker 11: take place in the local bar, take place in the office,
Speaker 11: and you can see and feel that it's going Trump's way.
Speaker 11: He's got onto the key issues, the cost of living
Speaker 11: and the criminal gangs coming over the border, and he's
Speaker 11: not deviating. We've heard no recent talk of eating cats
Speaker 11: and dogs or things like that. And he's home. I mean,
Speaker 11: it's funny, but it doesn't help in a way. The
Speaker 11: Madison Square Gardens rally look totally extraordinary. I'm going to
Speaker 11: be there in Scramson for his last rally, I honestly,
Speaker 11: hand on heart believe I'm ninety percent certain he will win.
Speaker 1: So let's talk about the closing here, right, Harris has
Speaker 1: gone from vibes to he's a Nazi? All right? I
Speaker 1: like that Trump has gone from dogs and cats to
Speaker 1: she broke it. I'll fix it. It needs to be
Speaker 1: that clear. But the X factor around all of this is,
Speaker 1: of course, that extraordinary Joe Rogan interview between YouTube and
Speaker 1: available now on Twitter. Forty two and a half million
Speaker 1: people have watched it. So if you want to get
Speaker 1: an insight into how does he talk, how does he
Speaker 1: think make your decision whether you like it or not.
Speaker 1: That is an extraordinary amount of people to get to
Speaker 1: in a weekend. And that's I mean, this only came
Speaker 1: out on Friday.
Speaker 11: Yeah, extraordinary, and I've listened to all of it. What's
Speaker 11: good about it is it's not just about the front
Speaker 11: lines of politics and the political punch ups. It's about
Speaker 11: who he is. It's about what he loves. I mean,
Speaker 11: listen to him on boxing, listen to him on UFC.
Speaker 11: I mean, these are real passions for Donald. He loves
Speaker 11: this stuff and I think he comes across during that
Speaker 11: interview as a very considered, actually quite thoughtful human being
Speaker 11: who clearly loves his family. Now, look, I think the
Speaker 11: Joe Rogan interview probably is the thing above all that
Speaker 11: seals the deal.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean look, and also Harris her plan. I
Speaker 1: think in the next twenty four hours go back to
Speaker 1: the same spot that Donald Trump made the speech in
Speaker 1: and around January sixth, I've seen left wing groups come
Speaker 1: out in left wing media and say, please shut up
Speaker 1: about the Nazi stuff, the Hitler stuff. It actually turned
Speaker 1: people off.
Speaker 11: Yeah, and I mean MSNBC, I mean quite extraordinary that
Speaker 11: they interspersed coverage Madison Square Gardens with scenes from Nuremberg
Speaker 11: in the nineteen thirties. I mean, when the level of
Speaker 11: attack sinks to that depth, you know that the liberal
Speaker 11: left are losing and none of this is going to
Speaker 11: win them a single vote. In fact, it reminds me
Speaker 11: of Hillary back in sixteen when she called Donald's supporters deplorables.
Speaker 11: Do you remember that, You know, people suddenly had badges
Speaker 11: made up. I'm a deplorable.
Speaker 10: No.
Speaker 11: I think everything's going the right way. Trump just needs
Speaker 11: to stay completely focused, stay on track, and above all,
Speaker 11: he's got to keep smiling. And I thought, you know,
Speaker 11: the speech he gave in New York the other week,
Speaker 11: many of the other things he's done, the McDonald stunt.
Speaker 11: I think when you see the happy side of Trump,
Speaker 11: the really human side of Trump, I think that makes
Speaker 11: him a lot more attractive.
Speaker 8: Now.
Speaker 1: Of course, in the UK you don't have state governments,
Speaker 1: but you have a local government and an awful lot
Speaker 1: of people Party ID, Labor or Tory. You've made an
Speaker 1: offer to all of those Tory councilors and there'd be
Speaker 1: hundreds of them around the UK to come and join Reform.
Speaker 1: How many do you reckon, will.
Speaker 11: Well, I've just warned, you know, over oney and three
Speaker 11: hundred of them that next year we have the elections
Speaker 11: for the English counties that we as and you know
Speaker 11: a new some would stay upstart past run and are
Speaker 11: polling well up, and you know we are going to
Speaker 11: fight those seats. We're going to win a lot of
Speaker 11: those seats. And some of these people have been good
Speaker 11: local councilors for decades. They have got huge experience of
Speaker 11: local government. So I'm saying, guys, we're coming to get you.
Speaker 11: But if you want to come and join the party,
Speaker 11: please do so let's see over the next couple of
Speaker 11: weeks what happens. But I'm certain already I can see.
Speaker 1: That some will. Yeah. I mean also, the reality is,
Speaker 1: as we've talked about before, you can have millions of votes,
Speaker 1: but because of the system that they have, nobody can
Speaker 1: give you preferences, which means you don't win as many
Speaker 1: seats as your representation across the country. But once you
Speaker 1: start to get down to the county level, those millions
Speaker 1: of votes become the majority vote in all of those areas,
Speaker 1: which is why you can see, here's your choice, Tories.
Speaker 1: You can get steamrolled or join the club. Yeah.
Speaker 11: Absolutely, and I'm in frankly, you know, we're six months
Speaker 11: away from there were seven months away from this set
Speaker 11: of elections. I think reforms prospects are great. And the
Speaker 11: labor guy, you know, Keir Starmer's personal approval on the
Speaker 11: day he became Prime Minister was plus eleven. In this
Speaker 11: morning's poll it's minus thirty eight. Wow, So you've got
Speaker 11: labor collapsing. The tour is all over the place and
Speaker 11: there's a great big gap there and I intend to
Speaker 11: drive straight through it.
Speaker 1: Well, we'll be cheering you on all the best mate,
Speaker 1: we'll see you again well. From the United States. Thank
Speaker 1: you make Niger Faraj there in the UK.