Speaker 1: From the Skyinging Center. This is Paul Murray Live. What
Speaker 1: a show we have for you tonight. Thank you to
Speaker 1: everyone who turned up in McGregor in Brisbane yesterday and
Speaker 1: support us on outsound all the time again. Ow thanks
Speaker 1: to the wonderful people of Party Norman. All right now tonight,
Speaker 1: obviously we will talk about the democratic delusion that Joe
Speaker 1: Biden has still got a shot. You know the evidence,
Speaker 1: you know the rest. But there's a whole lot of
Speaker 1: new reporting which is happening tonight at the start of
Speaker 1: Monday in the United States. I'll get to that in
Speaker 1: a second. The Senate as we speak is voting about
Speaker 1: what's going to happen with a live sheep trade. This
Speaker 1: is massive in Western Australia and we'll get to this
Speaker 1: in a moment or twesday time. And plenty to say
Speaker 1: about July one, and supposedly the day where costin living
Speaker 1: ends because the government is here to help a reality
Speaker 1: check for all of them in a moment. But first,
Speaker 1: it's not really breaking news that it's cold during winter,
Speaker 1: but the expectation is is that these will be the
Speaker 1: coldest days of winter thus far and may end up
Speaker 1: being the coldest of the entire season. The low's tonight
Speaker 1: expected in the three kind of cold places. Forgive me, Taszy,
Speaker 1: I didn't double check with you, but it's seven degrees.
Speaker 1: But the feels like is going to be much lower
Speaker 1: than all of these numbers. Seven in Sydney, four in
Speaker 1: Melbourne and minus one for everyone in Canberra. Now again,
Speaker 1: Skytie's weather is always across this stuff. There is a
Speaker 1: reason I am mentioning this, by the way, apart from
Speaker 1: just telling you what the weather is like. I'm not
Speaker 1: going to do that thing where you can just look
Speaker 1: out the window or you just feel it yourself. There's
Speaker 1: a reason I'm mentioning this again, Scotty's weather across all
Speaker 1: of it and putting out the detail about why it
Speaker 1: is so cold at this moment in this winter.
Speaker 2: See the forecast for frost into Tuesday morning even more
Speaker 2: widespread than Monday morning in Victoria and South Australia, and
Speaker 2: Wednesday looks the coldest of them all, where the widespread
Speaker 2: frost from Central Australia down to the southeast and even
Speaker 2: for the southwest Land.
Speaker 1: Division of Wa as well.
Speaker 2: There'll be some frost in some spots.
Speaker 1: The reason I mention this is because sadly, there are
Speaker 1: people who die in house fires each and every winter.
Speaker 1: In fact, on average, when you have a look at
Speaker 1: the number of people who die as a result of
Speaker 1: house fires in winter in Australia every year, it is
Speaker 1: very close or depending on your data, even higher than
Speaker 1: the number that we lose during bush fires. Now, of course,
Speaker 1: the reason all of this takes place, and this is
Speaker 1: an example of a most recent house fire where apparently
Speaker 1: the office chairs were too close to an electric heater.
Speaker 1: It caught fire, and that's how you got the blaze
Speaker 1: that they did. I know that we all want to
Speaker 1: stay warm from the most obvious of reasons, but please, please, please,
Speaker 1: please please make sure that the heater that is in
Speaker 1: your house right now is nowhere near your blankets or
Speaker 1: your curtains, that the washing is not drying in front
Speaker 1: of it, because all of those things are the things
Speaker 1: that end up leading to house fires. Yes, people falling
Speaker 1: asleep with cigarettes all the rest of it, but and
Speaker 1: the heat pad stuff. I know it's cold, take care
Speaker 1: of yourself because obviously all of those people who last
Speaker 1: winter and the winter before and the winter before and
Speaker 1: the winter before and the winter before who ended up
Speaker 1: dying or being very seriously injured in house fires. Obviously
Speaker 1: didn't expect that to be the case. So keep your
Speaker 1: wits about you, particularly if you've got one of those
Speaker 1: really old school kind of bar heaters, which I know
Speaker 1: lots of people have. Just make sure it is nothing
Speaker 1: is near at anywhere near the room, because I want
Speaker 1: you here each and every night, and I wanted to
Speaker 1: be the one reminding everyone to be vigilant because it's
Speaker 1: not just about staying warm, it is about staying alive.
Speaker 1: Now also, before I get to politics, and there's a
Speaker 1: lot of it today, but there's some other stuff that's
Speaker 1: just been running around in my head. Remember when Optus
Speaker 1: had its outage and people freaked out, rightly so, because
Speaker 1: everything from your mobile phone to maybe the FPOs machine
Speaker 1: that we're using the home internet was cut off. And
Speaker 1: in modern world, we don't react well to not being
Speaker 1: able to communicate with the rest of the world.
Speaker 3: It is that horrible sense of wow, we've listed. Really
Speaker 3: it's a really bad day.
Speaker 1: At the end of the day, I saw the past
Speaker 1: of my service. I'm not going to just come on
Speaker 1: top of it.
Speaker 2: It never reached to us.
Speaker 4: They never send any message saying what's the reason.
Speaker 1: It's just not good enough? And because the public was
Speaker 1: outraged and the media followed the outrage, the government wanted
Speaker 1: to get on the right side of the public, so
Speaker 1: they shared the outrage that in the modern era, this
Speaker 1: is the way we communicate, we do business, we talk
Speaker 1: to each other, and to go without it is never acceptable.
Speaker 3: Australians expect that there will be follow up, that there will.
Speaker 5: Be lessons learned.
Speaker 4: It's important to understand how this can be certainly avoided
Speaker 4: in future.
Speaker 6: They're going to have to come to the table and
Speaker 6: do something big, in my view, to keep their customer base.
Speaker 4: Optors needs to front up in a public hearing, take
Speaker 4: questions and give an explanation.
Speaker 1: Which we all know is a lot of performance here,
Speaker 1: but still the expectation is of an uninterrupted service. Now,
Speaker 1: things will always go wrong and that's the case, but
Speaker 1: the system really should be built that when you have
Speaker 1: no other offering that automatically there are serious discounts. Maybe
Speaker 1: this month's bill is free instead. What Optics turned around
Speaker 1: and did remember was, among other things, offer huge amounts
Speaker 1: of free data to people who wouldn't normally use that
Speaker 1: amount of data anyway. It was a way of managing
Speaker 1: the headlines. It didn't work. They ultimately had to get
Speaker 1: rid of the CEO. But there is something perhaps even
Speaker 1: more important than our ability to access the internet, and
Speaker 1: that is your ability to access your own money. For
Speaker 1: the most obvious of reasons, people these days they don't
Speaker 1: carry much cash anymore, so most people will pay their
Speaker 1: bills online. Most people will send money between themselves that way.
Speaker 1: Most people will pay for their pizza that particular way. Well,
Speaker 1: today Australia Bank was the latest of the major banks
Speaker 1: to have a major outage, huge problems with the app
Speaker 1: where it put simply was down. This meant that anyone
Speaker 1: who was a customer or of course businesses all the
Speaker 1: rest of it huge interruptions. Now, can you always pay
Speaker 1: a bill another day, sure, but there are lots of
Speaker 1: things that are always do on that day, a huge
Speaker 1: amount of money that needed to move around, people settling
Speaker 1: on ourss. There are consequences when this stuff doesn't work.
Speaker 1: And again they got a little bit of a mention
Speaker 1: today but of course, well it's only if your customers
Speaker 1: have nabbed that was a story for everyone else. It
Speaker 1: doesn't matter. The messages were pretty clear on their website
Speaker 1: pretty clear about their app as well. But the response
Speaker 1: from the government when the system broke and people couldn't
Speaker 1: get access to their money or to pay for things,
Speaker 1: or to move things around, or to do basically all
Speaker 1: of the things that were a problem with optis, we
Speaker 1: heard nothing today Tumbleweeds. This was not considered as big
Speaker 1: or as significant. But of course if you needed your money,
Speaker 1: if you needed to it, if you needed to pay it,
Speaker 1: if you needed to transfer it, you needed this. But
Speaker 1: it's not just the National Australia Bank. We've also seen
Speaker 1: this when it comes to the A and Z Bank,
Speaker 1: where they too had problems with a major outage that
Speaker 1: was striking A and Z online banking and their app.
Speaker 1: The same with the Commonwealth Bank, where the Commonwealth Bank
Speaker 1: is trying to win back its furious customers why because
Speaker 1: they had no access to their money. All of this
Speaker 1: staff has been happening in the past few months. It
Speaker 1: will happen again in the next few months. The same
Speaker 1: with Westpac where Westpac banking services resume after customers were
Speaker 1: hit with an outage. Now again, big complicated systems break,
Speaker 1: that's the reality. But what's the penalty. What's the penalty?
Speaker 1: What is the pressure on these companies to offer something
Speaker 1: back to their customers. How do they make sure, let's
Speaker 1: say the tap and go fees that you'd have to
Speaker 1: pay for the rest of the month, you wouldn't have
Speaker 1: to pay. Why use there not some sort of financial
Speaker 1: disincentive for major organizations not to be spending all their
Speaker 1: energy and all their time making sure that our interface
Speaker 1: with our own money flows like the water from the tap,
Speaker 1: the electricity to your house, or the internet to your
Speaker 1: home or business. I found it quite strange today. Now again,
Speaker 1: the government doesn't run these banks, thankfully they don't own
Speaker 1: a bank anymore. But the consequences of people not being
Speaker 1: able to have access to their money, well, it's obvious
Speaker 1: you may well have felt this frustration at certain points
Speaker 1: in time. My question is, when it's a telco, it's
Speaker 1: the lead story and the CEO ends up losing their job.
Speaker 1: When it's a bank, it's just an adage and you
Speaker 1: have to suck it up. Why the double standard? Now,
Speaker 1: before again, I get to the politics, and there's all
Speaker 1: the obvious stuff. Yeah, the Senator and Biden and all
Speaker 1: that stuff. I'll get to it right plenty some but
Speaker 1: you will have heard by now there was a ridiculous
Speaker 1: act of vandalism that was supposedly in the name of
Speaker 1: compassion for the Palestinians of Gaza. But why do we
Speaker 1: leave our memorials unguarded either with cameras and I'm not
Speaker 1: suggesting twenty four to seven security guards. But of course
Speaker 1: in Canberra there is that entire stretch of different war
Speaker 1: memorials that represent different conflicts, different people that goes from
Speaker 1: Lake Burley Griffin all the way up to the War Memorial.
Speaker 1: Why have we not seen footage of the people who
Speaker 1: were doing this? Why is the consequence of this something
Speaker 1: where we're all going to feel an outrage, But at
Speaker 1: this moment in time, there is no one who has
Speaker 1: been charged. Why don't we have greater ability to track
Speaker 1: down these people? We have a world of motion senses
Speaker 1: that we all put around our houses. Why not when
Speaker 1: the sun goes down around significant monuments. And just in
Speaker 1: the same way that there are local councils that have
Speaker 1: got all sorts of cameras everywhere to pick up illegal dumping,
Speaker 1: you can hide these cameras and lots of places where
Speaker 1: nobody knows exactly where they are. Now. Of course, like you,
Speaker 1: I was disgusted to see, surprise, surprise, the Greens not
Speaker 1: even having the brain, the heart, or the balls to
Speaker 1: be able to pass emotion in condemnation of this behavior.
Speaker 1: And again, if we can roll that footage again, some
Speaker 1: of the symbols there, yes, are about what is happening
Speaker 1: in Gaza, but some of it is just about outright anarchy.
Speaker 1: Some of it is, of course, part of this historical
Speaker 1: view that everything post seventeen seventy is a problem, any
Speaker 1: and anyone who does anything other than leave that view
Speaker 1: of history somehow as a problem. Those are the anarchist symbols,
Speaker 1: by the way, But there are two other examples that
Speaker 1: I would like to share with you that I think
Speaker 1: are just as outrageous, just as outrageous. And while on
Speaker 1: this show we often go out of our way to
Speaker 1: celebrate good, amazing, normal people, there are really some sickos
Speaker 1: out there, not just the ones that want to do
Speaker 1: that political sort of garbage, but the people who just
Speaker 1: do nasty things, truly nasty things. I'm not talking about
Speaker 1: people who commit crimes of a soultal murder. I'm talking
Speaker 1: about a nastiness in the crimes that they do. Molly
Speaker 1: Ticehurst as you know, was murdered. Her partner is currently
Speaker 1: going through the court process, and the people of Forbes,
Speaker 1: which is not too far from Parks, have taken this
Speaker 1: crime into their heart because she was the most normal
Speaker 1: example of somebody who lives in that beuatiful part of
Speaker 1: regional New South Wales. Now this story is a couple
Speaker 1: of days old, but I wanted to bring you to
Speaker 1: the heart of this that Molly Tyshurst's family, according to
Speaker 1: The Guardian, have been robbed of some of the possessions
Speaker 1: of their now lost daughter. Now, among the items that
Speaker 1: were taken from the Forbes property where Molly twenty eight
Speaker 1: lived with her six year old was a gold nugget
Speaker 1: pendant that was given to her by her father, Tony,
Speaker 1: who we have seen speaking on behalf of the family
Speaker 1: about the heartbreak and rage that any family would feel
Speaker 1: that have gone through this. He picked the piece because
Speaker 1: it looked like a woman that was holding a child.
Speaker 1: This is that very gold nugget pendant. It was stolen
Speaker 1: from a murder victim's house after she was murdered. Now,
Speaker 1: I say this on teav right now because if there
Speaker 1: is anyone around Forbes or Parks or anywhere around that
Speaker 1: region of New South Wales. Who has seen that pendant,
Speaker 1: been offered it to buy it, somebody's tried to porn it.
Speaker 1: Clearly somebody stole this because they thought that there was
Speaker 1: a financial value to it, but the emotional value is
Speaker 1: of course completely irreplaceable. Can we show it again because
Speaker 1: I want everyone to see it, and everyone who's watching
Speaker 1: us right now on Foxdelle free to wear flash Orskynews
Speaker 1: dot com dot you listening to us right now online
Speaker 1: or watching this video tomorrow. If you see anything like this,
Speaker 1: or you're offered anything like this, or you see it
Speaker 1: in a shop or a garage, anything, please please contact
Speaker 1: the police and they will obviously connect it back with
Speaker 1: the family. And then this is the one that really
Speaker 1: got me today. I want to show you a beautiful
Speaker 1: little girl, this beautiful little lady, Brittany. She was three
Speaker 1: and she's no longer here. She accidentally swallowed a toxic
Speaker 1: battery and she died. Her family as a way of
Speaker 1: honoring her at her grave site, put her tiara, a
Speaker 1: little tiara that was with them when they were in hospital.
Speaker 1: And I think you know what I'm about to show you.
Speaker 1: Some bastard has stolen it some bastard has gone to
Speaker 1: her grave which is the Mudurrabar Cemetery, pride and open
Speaker 1: and taken a tiara from a girl's grave. Now again
Speaker 1: I mention all of this because if you see these
Speaker 1: things being offered, if you see them online, please contact
Speaker 1: the police. One hundred triple three triple zero is the
Speaker 1: crime stoppers number local police. These families need these things
Speaker 1: because when you don't have your little girl, be at
Speaker 1: a three year old or even one in their late twenties,
Speaker 1: the things that they touched, the things that they loved,
Speaker 1: the things that represent them are all you have left. Now,
Speaker 1: I hope that there is someone somewhere who will see
Speaker 1: these things, report and return again. Ninety nine point nine
Speaker 1: nine percent of people are decent, but there are low
Speaker 1: lives amongst us, and there's a little low life network
Speaker 1: the things. They can make a few dollars out of this,
Speaker 1: for whatever reason that they want those few dollars, but
Speaker 1: for goodness sake, find this stuff and give it back.
Speaker 1: Remember the central promise which has been the single greatest
Speaker 1: broken promise of the Albanezy labor government was that they
Speaker 1: were promising in May of twenty twenty two and many
Speaker 1: months before that the Labor government would lower the cost
Speaker 1: of living. You know the reality that since that promise
Speaker 1: was made and since this government came to being, there
Speaker 1: has been twelve interest rate rises and inflation is now
Speaker 1: heading back up after coming slightly down. But still everything
Speaker 1: has cost more every day of every week of every
Speaker 1: month of every year since this government came to power.
Speaker 1: But this Prime minister spent an entire year and half
Speaker 1: a billion dollars campaigning for a question that went from
Speaker 1: sixty forty yes to sixty forty no. And he did
Speaker 1: not care no matter what he says. Remember, at the
Speaker 1: height of this time in the budget, not this one,
Speaker 1: but the one before, at the time when he was
Speaker 1: spending this money and out and about on this campaign,
Speaker 1: his government took fifteen hundred dollars of ten million work,
Speaker 1: the same workers that of course, now they're trying to
Speaker 1: turn around and pretend that they're helping out with a
Speaker 1: whole series of things which kicking today. Well, of course,
Speaker 1: the Prime minister's first kick in the backside was the
Speaker 1: Australian public saying, no, colossal waste the money, We don't
Speaker 1: agree with your IDEA second kick in the backside was
Speaker 1: that Australians were focused that this government, who had promised action,
Speaker 1: had failed. Remember the polling that was around at the
Speaker 1: very end of last year that about eighty percent of
Speaker 1: Australian said the government has not done enough at all
Speaker 1: to deal with cost of living. So of course we
Speaker 1: had the nonsense of the rejigging of tax cuts, which
Speaker 1: essentially means that the government has made decisions that will
Speaker 1: cost them apparently billions of dollars, and those billions of
Speaker 1: dollars come back to workers. But of course it's not
Speaker 1: billions of dollars if you are the worker. I have
Speaker 1: for months said that when the problems are as big
Speaker 1: as they currently are, this is all too little, too late.
Speaker 1: The numbers I have shown you almost every couple of
Speaker 1: days for a really long period of time now. But
Speaker 1: it still remains the case that if you earn forty
Speaker 1: five thousand dollars, this government wants a pat on the
Speaker 1: back for letting you keep fifteen dollars of your own
Speaker 1: money twenty two thirty two forty one dollars of your
Speaker 1: own money. And I have long predicted that this money
Speaker 1: doesn't touch the sides, and this money doesn't actually change
Speaker 1: anyone's life. Yet the government gets to say we're helping.
Speaker 1: What of course they are doing is throwing a thimble
Speaker 1: of water out of fire, but they want credit for
Speaker 1: the thimble of water because we could have chosen not
Speaker 1: to throw the thimble of water. Well, I've got plenty
Speaker 1: of proof today that my instincts were correct about how
Speaker 1: people will actually consider, consume, or not even notice these
Speaker 1: tax cuts because they are too little and they are
Speaker 1: too late. Channel nine newspapers hardly unfriendly territory for the government. Well,
Speaker 1: they decided to interview a bunch of people about what
Speaker 1: they are going to be doing with the two little
Speaker 1: too late tax cuts, and guess what their own words
Speaker 1: will prove it is too little too late. First a
Speaker 1: lady called Ever. She says, it's not going to be
Speaker 1: something that substantially changes or balances out the increasing costs
Speaker 1: that everyone is facing. We've got a mortgage, so obviously
Speaker 1: with the interest rate rises, which remember, there's most likely
Speaker 1: to be another one because this government has failed to
Speaker 1: deal with inflation properly and it's not going to change
Speaker 1: much of their world. Then there's the lady who's a nurse.
Speaker 1: These are supposedly the absolute sweet spot. Politically, women like Belinda.
Speaker 1: It might cover my compulsory parking fee at the hospital,
Speaker 1: but that's about it. I'm choosing between do we go
Speaker 1: out with our friends or do we pay that bill?
Speaker 1: Do I choose between taking my daughter to the movies
Speaker 1: or paying that big dental bill. Another example, two young
Speaker 1: women they apparently live I think in the same house.
Speaker 1: Asked this is the Eloise who's the one on the left.
Speaker 1: Asked if she thought that the money in people's pockets
Speaker 1: could go to add to inflation. Grant says, I guess
Speaker 1: you can only assume so, but I think with everything
Speaker 1: going on, it's very helpful. Okay, nice comment. Well, her
Speaker 1: mate Charlie is on the right. She says she wanted
Speaker 1: to save the bulk of her tax cut, adding if
Speaker 1: I was planning on spending it, it would just go
Speaker 1: to essentials due to inflation. She also said that rent
Speaker 1: was a major expense. So they're the happy ones. By
Speaker 1: their own admission, too little, too late. The idea that
Speaker 1: you would be able to save fifteen dollars a week
Speaker 1: on forty five thousand, when, of course all of those
Speaker 1: things keep going up, it all gets gobbled up. It's
Speaker 1: already been gobbled up from when it was announced back
Speaker 1: in January. How do we know, because the inflation figures
Speaker 1: tell us in the month of May, this is the
Speaker 1: margin by which everything went up compared to the before
Speaker 1: Tobacco thirteen percent, petrol nine percent, insurance and financial services, rents, alcohol, electricity, health, housing, education,
Speaker 1: new housing that people would move into, transport, and fruit
Speaker 1: and vegetables. So even if you were somebody who was
Speaker 1: a supposed beneficiary of the tax cuts, it's all eaten up.
Speaker 1: But there's one lady who I want you to see
Speaker 1: because she is the embodiment of my entire obsession with
Speaker 1: why this is too little, why this is too late,
Speaker 1: why they don't deserve credit, and why they are liars.
Speaker 1: This lady was on a current affair tonight. She's holding
Speaker 1: a kid, and her and her partner are working collectively
Speaker 1: the best part of ninety hours a week. I want
Speaker 1: you to see this for a full sixty seconds, because
Speaker 1: this is why Prime Minister, it is too little, too late.
Speaker 1: This is why my press gallery friends, you are in
Speaker 1: the wrong spot and you do not understand how the
Speaker 1: politics does not connect to the real world. Have a
Speaker 1: look how much.
Speaker 4: Of a difference will today's tax cuts make for you, guys?
Speaker 5: Pretty much nothing. We do everything we can to cut
Speaker 5: where we can, just to survive.
Speaker 4: You're saying you are living week to week.
Speaker 5: That's correct. Yeah, week to week's heartbreaking.
Speaker 2: It really is.
Speaker 5: It's hard, you know, just trying to survive with my
Speaker 5: little family. I'm thankful, but I do have my parents
Speaker 5: because if I didn't have them and they didn't have
Speaker 5: their house, I would essentially be homeless. You know, my
Speaker 5: partner works like forty five fifty hours a week. I'm
Speaker 5: forty hours a week and it's still essentially not enough.
Speaker 5: Every single day I wake up and I go, what
Speaker 5: she is going to happen this week? What's going to
Speaker 5: increase today?
Speaker 1: Can governments solve all of Emma's problems?
Speaker 7: No?
Speaker 1: Are her parents doing everything they can to make sure
Speaker 1: that she and her partner and their little Barbara being
Speaker 1: taken care of. Yes, that's real life. But what really
Speaker 1: annoys me is that the government pretends that they are
Speaker 1: helping Emma. In election campaigns, they pretend they care about Emma.
Speaker 1: In advertising that you pay for, they pretend they are
Speaker 1: helping Emma. Emma is working full time, her partner is
Speaker 1: working full time, but they can't get the ends to
Speaker 1: meet because everything costs more than it did before. Yet
Speaker 1: this government turns around and Prance is about in question
Speaker 1: time like they somehow have cured cancer. This is not help,
Speaker 1: This is political messaging. This is some crumbs off the
Speaker 1: table that have been given out by people who have
Speaker 1: received their third pay rise since they came to government
Speaker 1: on the promise of making Emma's life easier. That's why
Speaker 1: I cannot stand these people. It's why I hope that
Speaker 1: if karma exists, they feel a level of political discomfort
Speaker 1: from their lives. But as you know, you can waste
Speaker 1: an awful lot of time waiting for karma to kick in,
Speaker 1: But it will kick in at some point somewhere. I
Speaker 1: hope it's sooner rather than later, so they realize how
Speaker 1: too late their efforts are for people like Emma, her
Speaker 1: husband and that little bubba. Now, also, when we talk
Speaker 1: about government, we know that there's so much data around
Speaker 1: that says that government is taking more tax than ever before.
Speaker 1: It doesn't matter if we're talking about payroll company, stamp duty,
Speaker 1: whether we're talking about the GST. Government is absolutely swimming
Speaker 1: in it. Hundreds of billions of dollars each and every year,
Speaker 1: which is higher than the last year, higher than the
Speaker 1: year before that, and often it's growing at a faster
Speaker 1: rate than the population is. And that's saying something considering
Speaker 1: how many people this government is bringing in to try
Speaker 1: to prop things up. So then we have the spectacle
Speaker 1: of the federal treasurer and the state colleagues again pretending, oh,
Speaker 1: we're fixing everything and we're helping out emma, and aren't
Speaker 1: we amazing, But of course what they're really doing is
Speaker 1: just dusting their own jackets so they've got an announcement
Speaker 1: so they can save their backside, so they can all
Speaker 1: just stay in power. Well, today I want to talk
Speaker 1: about the reality of all of this money, all of
Speaker 1: this spending, and and how it doesn't actually connect in
Speaker 1: the world of education. Now, of the billions of dollars
Speaker 1: billions of dollars state in federal, could somebody please explain
Speaker 1: to me how the school system in twenty twenty four
Speaker 1: that is apparently getting more money than it's ever got
Speaker 1: before from governments which are getting more money than ever before,
Speaker 1: has a scenario where as the Courier Mail has reported
Speaker 1: in the past couple of days, teachers reaching their own
Speaker 1: pocket to spay, to spend almost one thousand dollars a
Speaker 1: year on things like clothing, stationery, food. How do we
Speaker 1: live in a world where they take so much tax,
Speaker 1: they get so much press out of their care of education,
Speaker 1: yet still at the end of the day parents have
Speaker 1: got to fork out more, including Emma when her child
Speaker 1: eventually will end up going to school and then teaches themselves.
Speaker 1: Are the ones plugging the gaps? Another example, which is
Speaker 1: a school that is focused on indigenous students in the
Speaker 1: far north of Queensland. The Guardian has this story about
Speaker 1: moldy bathrooms, broken air con, hole in the wall. This
Speaker 1: is the photos that they have been able to put
Speaker 1: together of one of these particular schools. How is this acceptable?
Speaker 1: How is this happening? It's actually a wider survey which
Speaker 1: has been done i think by one of the unions,
Speaker 1: But the twenty twenty four State of Our School Survey,
Speaker 1: which canvas more than thirteen thousand educators teachers around Australia,
Speaker 1: found that nineteen percent of principles said they didn't have
Speaker 1: enough classrooms at their schools and forty percent said that
Speaker 1: they didn't have sufficient space to meet enrollments. In the
Speaker 1: next three to five years. Again, my rage and indignation
Speaker 1: is that these politicians waste our time gas lighters, lie
Speaker 1: to us, demand that we should be thankful when the
Speaker 1: result of the education system is the lowest performance in
Speaker 1: generations in terms of educational results. Teachers and parents have
Speaker 1: to end up spending extra money that they don't have
Speaker 1: because of the failures inside their own system. But they've
Speaker 1: got money for the Olympic Games. They've got money to
Speaker 1: pay multi billion dollar corporations like the UFC to come
Speaker 1: and stage a few fights. The Western Australian government is
Speaker 1: paying the WWE to put a show on at Opta Stadium.
Speaker 1: They did it earlier this year, they'll do it again
Speaker 1: next year. In fact, our state governments spend the best
Speaker 1: part of about seven hundred million dollars on events. Now,
Speaker 1: these are all the bread and circuses to distract you
Speaker 1: from the reality that the people who are taking more
Speaker 1: tax than ever before, who claim to be spending more
Speaker 1: money than ever before, or keep leaving you out in
Speaker 1: the cold. All you can ever do is, when you
Speaker 1: get the opportunity once every three years federally four years
Speaker 1: in most states, is tell them to bugger off. Don't
Speaker 1: believe them, don't fall for it, follow the data, believe
Speaker 1: your own eyes, remember your own experience. Because these people,
Speaker 1: they care about themselves. The media is all about having
Speaker 1: access to those people, so they never want to call
Speaker 1: them out on the reality. And that's not something that
Speaker 1: is about the left wing or the right wing. It
Speaker 1: is about accountability. I'm sick of the idea that compassion
Speaker 1: is just something for the left. It can happen on
Speaker 1: the right too, the same as strength works in both directions.
Speaker 1: Hold these people accountable and do it with your vote.
Speaker 1: Do it when you talk to a polster, tell them
Speaker 1: this is not acceptable, Do not fall for their garbage.
Speaker 1: Demand more because when it's their backside in a sling.
Speaker 1: Funnily enough, they find the money. Now to the United States,
Speaker 1: and let's move on from talking exclusively about the debate
Speaker 1: and get to the is Joe Biden going to stand
Speaker 1: the race? As you know past twenty four hours, he
Speaker 1: spent it with his family at Camp David. Now the
Speaker 1: family unsurprisingly turned around and told him you've got to
Speaker 1: stay in Joe. They also did a photo shoot with
Speaker 1: Annie Liberwitz, so they have no interest in jumping out. Instead, amazingly,
Speaker 1: they are blaming not Joe Biden, not themselves for exposing
Speaker 1: Joe Biden, but the people around Joe Biden. They are
Speaker 1: and I quote privately trashing his top campaign advisors, blaming
Speaker 1: them for the president's flop on Thursday. What about them
Speaker 1: blaming themselves for exposing the weakness of their husband, father
Speaker 1: or if the kids are old enough, grandfather. They're also
Speaker 1: cracking into the sea and and moderators. Remember the c
Speaker 1: and N debate in the studio with the mi'x cutoff
Speaker 1: in June was the Biden campaign's idea. Additionally, Biden's campaign
Speaker 1: staff are getting angry at CNN about how the debate
Speaker 1: was run. According to several people familiar with the conversations,
Speaker 1: their complaints were lengthy, including that the moderators should have
Speaker 1: fact checked Trump more often, that Biden was not told
Speaker 1: which camera he'd be on when not speaking, and that
Speaker 1: the makeup staff appeared to make him too pale. This
Speaker 1: is pathological gas lighting, and all of his problems will
Speaker 1: not get better. He will only get older. He will
Speaker 1: only get weaker, because that happens to all of us.
Speaker 1: You have seen people in the prime of their life
Speaker 1: go in with jet black hair and after four or
Speaker 1: eight years of the presidency. It's gray. So imagine what
Speaker 1: it does to a bloke who will be beyond his
Speaker 1: mid eighties should he get another four years in the job.
Speaker 1: But unbelievable, all of the people who are afraid of
Speaker 1: upsetting the Biden family are all coming out now publicly
Speaker 1: and saying nothing to see here. Don't believe your lying eyes.
Speaker 1: He wasn't sick, he wasn't frail. The makeup was the problem.
Speaker 1: There are, of course, many members of the media who
Speaker 1: often think of themselves too much as participants rather than commentators.
Speaker 1: But still a broken clock can be right twice a day.
Speaker 7: You know, Democrats want a lecture Republicans for not for
Speaker 7: putting party over country and how they've been enabling of
Speaker 7: Donald Trump. Can Democrats really sit there and say, you know,
Speaker 7: this is not about whether you think Biden can win
Speaker 7: the election. He might be able to win the election.
Speaker 7: It's not because he's Joe Biden. It's because he's not
Speaker 7: Donald Trump. The real issue is is he telling the
Speaker 7: true truth about whether he can serve a full four years?
Speaker 1: And again part of the nonsense is, oh, the polls.
Speaker 1: You know, our internal polls are much better than everything
Speaker 1: else that's being said publicly. Well, as you know, follow
Speaker 1: the data. More than seventy percent of people say that
Speaker 1: he should not drop out of the race. Why because
Speaker 1: they watched what eighty million people watched the other day.
Speaker 1: Seventy two percent of people, basically a full ten point increase,
Speaker 1: say he should jump out of the race. His family,
Speaker 1: whose entire business model is of course selling access to Dad.
Speaker 1: The entire Democratic establishment, who just thinks because he's not
Speaker 1: Donald Trump he'll win, is willing to continue their lie
Speaker 1: and prop up this bloke. Whether it works or not,
Speaker 1: we'll all find out together, but it is pretty ridiculous. Meantime,
Speaker 1: in a couple of hours time, the Supreme Court in
Speaker 1: the United States will have a very big decision to make.
Speaker 1: It will announce whether or not Donald Trump has got
Speaker 1: total presidential immunity. Put simply, that would mean most of
Speaker 1: the cases that are against him at the federal level
Speaker 1: would melt away. It's a very big night in American politics.
Speaker 1: We'll find out what happens by tomorrow morning. Where Pete
Speaker 1: Stefanovick fills you in with first edition quick break back
Speaker 1: with more plenty to talk about here as we jump
Speaker 1: into the debate, and we'll talk about the weakness of
Speaker 1: the Prime Minister when it comes to the two little
Speaker 1: too late tax cuts, when it comes to dealing with
Speaker 1: that Senator who will inevitably end up leaving them, and
Speaker 1: a whole lot more morna second, thank you so much
Speaker 1: for watching. Holly Hughes joining us from Canberra where there
Speaker 1: is so much going on, including that live experts vote.
Speaker 1: We'll get to that in the moment or two this time.
Speaker 1: Love you to see you, my friend here in the
Speaker 1: man Cave, none of them, the great Sam Crosby, love
Speaker 1: to see you well, sir. I'm sorry about the car
Speaker 1: and the Sunday showdown and the drama. It was incredible.
Speaker 1: Potholes anyway is here. So I want to ask a
Speaker 1: question that's not in the news to surprise you both.
Speaker 1: First year. I'll start with you first, Senator, which is
Speaker 1: we had a national freak out and rightly so when
Speaker 1: Optus went down for a day. Yet every couple of
Speaker 1: weeks the banking apps don't work. Every couple of weeks
Speaker 1: there will be one of the different ones where the
Speaker 1: website won't work or the app doesn't work. Now your
Speaker 1: access to your money. I would suggest is just if
Speaker 1: not more vital than your access to the internet. Now again,
Speaker 1: will systems break down? Sure? Right? Should they be punished
Speaker 1: and fined with seven trillion? No? Right? But why don't
Speaker 1: we have a system that demands that when access to
Speaker 1: your money is unavailable, that the same company can't keep
Speaker 1: charging you for the rest of the month when you
Speaker 1: access your money via tap and go.
Speaker 3: Holly, Look, I mean absolutely, And I don't know whether
Speaker 3: the impact today was also felt by businesses, which we
Speaker 3: know is what happened when Optis went out. I mean,
Speaker 3: businesses couldn't even use their point of sale payment systems
Speaker 3: when Optis went out. And I don't know whether or
Speaker 3: not businesses were impacted. I haven't seen any coverage of that,
Speaker 3: but I'm sure you know. This is why people want
Speaker 3: to insist that there's still cash available. It's why people
Speaker 3: still do use cash because, as you can say, and
Speaker 3: this is the risk behind cyber attacks, and you know,
Speaker 3: all by having everything online and I'm guilty of it,
Speaker 3: I mean most of us are, but it is you know,
Speaker 3: there's a real issue there that you if you cannot
Speaker 3: access your money, there's got to be some consequences for this.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's again it's like now again, there's a mistake here, right,
Speaker 1: So it's not like that turned around and they're fraudulently
Speaker 1: offering a service that I understand. But this is one
Speaker 1: of those perfect examples about how our regulatory framework has
Speaker 1: not moved with the times, where obviously if you can't
Speaker 1: walk into the branch here, then you go over to
Speaker 1: the branch a couple of suburbs, but of course they
Speaker 1: don't exist anymore.
Speaker 6: It is well known that you will change your spouse.
Speaker 6: On average, you will change your spouse more than you
Speaker 6: will change your bank.
Speaker 1: On average.
Speaker 6: You will change your spouse or you will change your bank.
Speaker 6: And they know that there is nothing built into the
Speaker 6: system that says, oh, I'm going to shop around, AB
Speaker 6: has better performance, so I'll go to Come one hundred
Speaker 6: n They know they've got you for life. So where's
Speaker 6: the intended in twenty ten? The if you think back
Speaker 6: before twenty ten, you remember how you used to get
Speaker 6: those breakdowns at the ports where you'd get the trucks
Speaker 6: queuing for days. It seemed well, in twenty ten we
Speaker 6: changed it and we said if the lands, if the
Speaker 6: port botany operator, so you know P and O or
Speaker 6: Patrick's if they kept the truck drivers waiting longer than
Speaker 6: thirty minutes, then they owed the truck driver money. The
Speaker 6: other way around was always in.
Speaker 1: Finally, guess what fun enough?
Speaker 6: What has never happened since twenty ten?
Speaker 1: We brought that in.
Speaker 6: Every single time a crane's gone down, they fixed it.
Speaker 6: They figured out a way to fix it. So similarly,
Speaker 6: if you put the market mechanism in place, to say,
Speaker 6: for airlines, think about that.
Speaker 1: If you're for your plane, you miss your plane too bad,
Speaker 1: you get a penalty. But if quantas is running, you know,
Speaker 1: two three hours later they caunce you flight well, too
Speaker 1: bad for you well, and don't forget you know, during
Speaker 1: GFC all the rest of it. We've underwritten these banks,
Speaker 1: We've turned around and guaranteed deposits, all the rest of it. Right,
Speaker 1: So again, I just think, you know, perhaps you know,
Speaker 1: if there's anyone with access to a parliament, just you know,
Speaker 1: you know a one a for her which says, you know,
Speaker 1: if you fail to do it, then you can't charge
Speaker 1: a tap and go for thirty days, Jess, they would see,
Speaker 1: they would see some things change. All right, Let's talk
Speaker 1: about the weakness that was exposed by the Senator who
Speaker 1: is determined to break the rules that she agreed to.
Speaker 1: Perfect millennial behavior join an organization only to pretend that
Speaker 1: you don't have to play by the rules of everyone
Speaker 1: else because you're special and the cause is special. Now again,
Speaker 1: it has been a little bit hilarious watching people on
Speaker 1: TV pretending that, oh, the Labor Party rules are being
Speaker 1: fractional goodness for me, like normal people who cares? Like
Speaker 1: who cares? Because we know that she will inevitably end
Speaker 1: up breaking away from the Labor Party, but she'll keep
Speaker 1: voting with the Labor Party. Do you want to see
Speaker 1: think that Fatima is going to end up backing in
Speaker 1: one Nation or the United Australian Party or the Liberal
Speaker 1: Party when they have motions about Senate inquiries into COVID.
Speaker 1: I don't think so. You of course work in the
Speaker 1: same building, in the same place. So again we can
Speaker 1: talk about the Prime minister weakness and all the rest
Speaker 1: of you. But Senator, Okay, if she breaks off, her
Speaker 1: political career will go as long as we one and
Speaker 1: a bit terms, then it'll evaporate. She'll vote with Labor
Speaker 1: all the way. So are we putting too much into this?
Speaker 1: And it's a little bubble within a bubble sort of chat.
Speaker 3: Look at is I mean, I guess it is a
Speaker 3: bit inside the Beltway. But even tonight, you know, we're
Speaker 3: still in the building. The debate over live exports going
Speaker 3: to be guillotined at ten pm, which means no one
Speaker 3: gets to talk about it anymore. There's no committee stage.
Speaker 3: We just go and vote on it and Senator Payment
Speaker 3: will not be voting, so there is actually a loss
Speaker 3: of a vote for the government there. So there you know,
Speaker 3: there are issues for them now that they need to
Speaker 3: deal with. But she's certainly cozied more up to the Greens,
Speaker 3: so I certainly can't say her if she jumps she
Speaker 3: looking to do anything on the conservative side of politics,
Speaker 3: she would be cozying up to the Greens, moving more
Speaker 3: to the left and behaving as pathetically and appalling as
Speaker 3: they do every day.
Speaker 1: Well, but also she's going to end up on this
Speaker 1: particular issue and the things around it as Thorpe is
Speaker 1: when it comes to her issues and when it comes
Speaker 1: away from the Greens. But Sam, I've got to say,
Speaker 1: I use the term gas lighting. A lot of people
Speaker 1: know what that means.
Speaker 6: Now.
Speaker 1: It's basically been completely like to right. The PM today
Speaker 1: said he didn't punish her because she was going to
Speaker 1: cross the floor, but because she was distracting from the
Speaker 1: tax cuts. I didn't hear that.
Speaker 6: I mean, look, but no, no, no, At the end of
Speaker 6: the day, her position was untenable. Yeah, right, it was untenable.
Speaker 1: Why can't he just say she's breaking the rules, that's
Speaker 1: why we're booting her up the backside, and you're not
Speaker 1: going to lose all these Western Sydney seats. The concept
Speaker 1: that all Islamic people all believe the same.
Speaker 6: Thing, and it's rubbish, you know, I genuinely don't think
Speaker 6: it has anything at all to do with the issue.
Speaker 6: She's free to go into the party room and argue
Speaker 6: whatever the issue is. And I dare say, I know
Speaker 6: for a fact that a number of Labor senators and
Speaker 6: members agree one million percent with her on the issue.
Speaker 6: But the whole point of being in a party is
Speaker 6: that the party will vote with the majority. And that's
Speaker 6: the end of it what I would say on this.
Speaker 6: And because I don't want to join a pylon here
Speaker 6: and I am, I'm a little bit torn on this one,
Speaker 6: because DOMI wrong. I think her position is untenable. She
Speaker 6: should absolutely be removed.
Speaker 1: For its resilience on tap chat after.
Speaker 6: Two sure, sure, just hear me out for one second.
Speaker 6: At some point you've got to step back and say, Okay,
Speaker 6: she's twenty nine years old and she's been in the
Speaker 6: parliament for two years. Now, any other job, you get
Speaker 6: a twenty nine year old in there, who's been in
Speaker 6: the job for two years, you put all sorts of
Speaker 6: supports around them, training and mentorships and blah blah blah.
Speaker 6: I don't think, I don't think, I know for a fact,
Speaker 6: we don't do that in any party, in any parliament
Speaker 6: in the country. That she was genuinely, I think surprised
Speaker 6: at when what being removed from the party room meant,
Speaker 6: which does mean, yes, you cut off the WhatsApp, you
Speaker 6: cut off the whips list, you cut off I think
Speaker 6: she just knew that she is so right and true
Speaker 6: that I've got a whole bunch of ways to fight
Speaker 6: back when I get criticized for doing what to do.
Speaker 6: But again, that's look again, the numbers don't change in
Speaker 6: the Senate, even if she's not going to be part
Speaker 6: of the Labor Party, that the left wing block stays
Speaker 6: in place. Right, so the governmentill continue to do what
Speaker 6: it does. Also, just quickly, I want to talk about
Speaker 6: the live sheep export thing, right because again this vote
Speaker 6: comes up in about fifteen minutes time, most likely Green
Speaker 6: to pocock.
Speaker 1: All the rest of it. They turn around and end
Speaker 1: up putting the sword to the industry. But can I
Speaker 1: just quickly talk about Kate Chaney. She's the teal from
Speaker 1: Western Australia in the seat that I think Juli Buership
Speaker 1: had at one point in time in the Lower House.
Speaker 1: She's all gung ho about, you know, killing it off
Speaker 1: because that's you know, what the love's wanted. Then she
Speaker 1: turns around and pretends she's changed her mind.
Speaker 4: That's on the evidence I've seen. In the last year,
Speaker 4: I laid out the arguments for and against and said
Speaker 4: on balance I would support the ban. Since then, I've
Speaker 4: changed my mind, And the last few days I've heard
Speaker 4: so many stories from constituents and other Western Australians about
Speaker 4: the very real impacts of ban would have on them
Speaker 4: on their livelihoods, their mental health, their families and their communities.
Speaker 4: If the industry were to continue. I would want to
Speaker 4: see strong oversight and better measures of sheep welfare than
Speaker 4: just mortality.
Speaker 1: But you see, of course, the reason that she's been
Speaker 1: able to change her mind is because she knows that
Speaker 1: she's going to get what she really wants when the
Speaker 1: Senate votes, which is pretty pea week right, quick break
Speaker 1: back with moorn here in a moment on pulmriray line.
Speaker 1: Pleenty to talk about, including should Joe stay or go?
Speaker 1: Looking forward to it next? All right, I've held it
Speaker 1: off for long enough. Let's talk about Joe Biden, Sam
Speaker 1: Crosby looking forward to four more years of the greatest
Speaker 1: presidents all time, a vibrant candidacy, and of course Holly Hughes,
Speaker 1: who's standing by in the Senate in Canberra, who's just
Speaker 1: enjoying the fun that's happening right now. So let's say
Speaker 1: not muck around saying.
Speaker 6: The state of American democracy is not strong, is it not?
Speaker 6: You know, yes, we've all seen the clips of Joe
Speaker 6: stumbling and bubbling through the debate, the image of two
Speaker 6: of them arguing about who's got the better golf game.
Speaker 6: It was genuinely bizarre, genuinely strange, and you think this
Speaker 6: is you know, what would Vladimir Putin or presidency be
Speaker 6: thinking watching this, saying one of these guys is the
Speaker 6: next president?
Speaker 1: What the presidents for life in both scenarios. Sure, okay,
Speaker 1: so what we're watching now, family blame everyone else. They're
Speaker 1: the ones who decided to keep him out there, right,
Speaker 1: Staff blaming the makeup art and the makeup artists, all
Speaker 1: the makeup artists. We don't know. We're not in the family,
Speaker 1: all the rest of it. But it feels like the
Speaker 1: media freak out publicly is louder than the machine freakout,
Speaker 1: which is apparently quite loud behind the scenes. So does
Speaker 1: he get another chance? Do you think it's a sooner
Speaker 1: rather than later, or this is a long burn? If
Speaker 1: there is to be a.
Speaker 6: Chair, I think he's sneaked himself. And I think he
Speaker 6: was snooked as soon as he put Carmela Harris in
Speaker 6: the ticket four or five years ago. Correct, So if
Speaker 6: he were to pull out at any stage, I genuinely
Speaker 6: and I see these people with their flights of fancy
Speaker 6: saying I'm Michelle Obama or this purpose, it's not going
Speaker 6: to happen. If he pulls out, it'll be Karmela Harris
Speaker 6: almost certainly correct. And if that happens, I think that's
Speaker 6: a worse outcome. For them than Joe, even in his
Speaker 6: diminished state.
Speaker 1: So Holly again, right, Like we look at the data,
Speaker 1: we talk about it all the time. It's not about
Speaker 1: fifty states. It's not about a two horse race. It's
Speaker 1: a five horse race basically in five or six states.
Speaker 1: We've also seen in America that in Pennsylvania in their
Speaker 1: Senate election there's a guy called John Fetterman, he had
Speaker 1: a stroke. It literally was a meat puppet versus a
Speaker 1: TV doctor. Everyone just goes to their corners. Yes, independence,
Speaker 1: they all saw what they saw, right, and I think
Speaker 1: on lore of averages they're going to go Trump's way
Speaker 1: right now. But what does it tell you about the
Speaker 1: sort of institutional way that kind of people who talk
Speaker 1: about politics for a living freak out on TV. But
Speaker 1: then the people who should be saying the Emperor has
Speaker 1: no clothes all go out on TV and say it
Speaker 1: just was one bad night.
Speaker 3: Well, it was a pretty bad night. And I don't
Speaker 3: know if you watched the whole thing where when I
Speaker 3: was in an inquiry, so I didn't get to watch
Speaker 3: it all, but I did over the weekend, and I've
Speaker 3: got to tell you it took me quite a way
Speaker 3: to get through it. Because it was just so painful
Speaker 3: to watch and it get paused and I go back
Speaker 3: because I mean, it was just incredible to watch the performance.
Speaker 3: And I think, to Sam's point, the golf swing and
Speaker 3: the handicap was I think a phenomenal part of it.
Speaker 3: Just very very strange. But the blame now that's being
Speaker 3: cast around on why he had such a night is
Speaker 3: quite frankly ridiculous. I mean, he's a professional, He's been
Speaker 3: doing this for four decades. There's no way you don't
Speaker 3: know which camera is on you to look down at
Speaker 3: that point in time. It's just it's just it's fascical.
Speaker 3: But to the point about Kamala Harris, they've the Democrats
Speaker 3: have been out over the past couple of days since
Speaker 3: the debate, raising millions and millions of dollars and under
Speaker 3: campaign finance law that cannot be used for any other
Speaker 3: candidate other than Joe.
Speaker 1: Biden or great points. So you know, all of this.
Speaker 3: Money that they've been raising, if they're going to make
Speaker 3: a change, they're going to have to make it sooner
Speaker 3: rather than later, because that war chest is going to
Speaker 3: be very very empty if they wait until August, you know,
Speaker 3: and they're going to have all this money that they
Speaker 3: can't use put aside for Biden.
Speaker 1: That is such a brilliant point because again, basically we're
Speaker 1: in a scenario where he's doing any and everything he
Speaker 1: can to fortify himself when the debate was it, when
Speaker 1: the convention is, be it who the vice president is
Speaker 1: be it via the money. And also he knows that
Speaker 1: when push comes to shove, all the people who want
Speaker 1: to take over in four years time are all going
Speaker 1: to have to back him now for the hope that
Speaker 1: should he win or even should he lose, that he
Speaker 1: gets to put his machine behind them. It's fascinating to watch.
Speaker 1: But again, the big news tonight two hours from now,
Speaker 1: at Supreme Court comes out and makes this decision about
Speaker 1: whether presidential immunity means anything you do while you're the
Speaker 1: president you can never be held legally responsible for, or
Speaker 1: whether there's some sort of midpoint and the charges would
Speaker 1: stay in things like say a January sixth. That'll be fascinating.
Speaker 1: You'll see the details in the middle of the night,
Speaker 1: if like me, you'll be doing an all nighter, or
Speaker 1: you'll see it tomorrow morning with Pete Stefanovic. Thank you
Speaker 1: very much, Senator, Future Senator, we will see you again
Speaker 1: tomorrow night. Get ready for the late debate here on
Speaker 1: Sky NEWSTUDA