Speaker 1: From the Skying Center. This is Paul Murray, Live.
Speaker 2: Good.
Speaker 1: I'm Paul Murray. Welcome to an opinion show where mine
Speaker 1: is the opinion, but we follow the data, we follow
Speaker 1: the details, and what an extraordinary piece of television you
Speaker 1: have just watched. Congratulations to Chris Yulman all of the
Speaker 1: team behind the scenes who put that together. Because for
Speaker 1: many of us, the reality is that we know that
Speaker 1: there are many forks in the road when it comes
Speaker 1: to our energy system. But to see it all in
Speaker 1: one place at one time, explaining what some of the
Speaker 1: financial or environmental consequences are when we choose one path
Speaker 1: over another, when other parts which are being reused in
Speaker 1: other parts of the world but ignored here is a
Speaker 1: perfect way of looking at things. In many ways, I
Speaker 1: believe that the past hour that you've just seen here
Speaker 1: on Sky News should of course be seen by as
Speaker 1: many Australians as possible. That is why the documentary that
Speaker 1: you have just seen is up now at sky News
Speaker 1: dot Au, skynews dot com dot Au, the lead story,
Speaker 1: the top spread that documentary as far as you possibly can.
Speaker 1: Chris Yulman, as a reporter, is right up there. This
Speaker 1: is something that he has been desperate to tell as
Speaker 1: a story for a long time, to have the time
Speaker 1: to tell the story, because it can be complicated. But
Speaker 1: because of his skill and the skill of the people
Speaker 1: who just put together the hour of television that you
Speaker 1: just watched, you're able to see it in bite sized chunks,
Speaker 1: You're able to see it as a full piece of work,
Speaker 1: and you're able to see things explained, including I just
Speaker 1: want to go back over a couple of points. They're
Speaker 1: going to sit with me when I look forward to
Speaker 1: sharing this documentary with the people in my life. It's
Speaker 1: not about trying to push people towards one form of
Speaker 1: technology or the other. It's about the reality that the
Speaker 1: cost of transition has always been the central question question
Speaker 1: that we have never really been asked. We've been asked
Speaker 1: about whether we should transition, but to be truly aware
Speaker 1: of what the cost of it really matters. Now again,
Speaker 1: the national energy greed is complicated. My apologies to the
Speaker 1: people in Western Australia who have their own system and
Speaker 1: are not befuddled by what is taking place on the
Speaker 1: East Coast of Australia as well as South Australia. But
Speaker 1: Chris explains that one of the central things that we
Speaker 1: constantly are told, which is renewables is the cheapest form
Speaker 1: of electricity. The problem is if they were the only
Speaker 1: form of electricity, well then maybe that ends up being true,
Speaker 1: but that's after the billions have been spent, in fact,
Speaker 1: close to a trillion dollars to build all of it
Speaker 1: and to have the batteries that back it up till
Speaker 1: then there has to be stuff that works at night,
Speaker 1: or stuff that works when the weather does not assist
Speaker 1: other forms of renewable energy. Thankfully, through the power of
Speaker 1: television graphics, he was able to explain how this works,
Speaker 1: where every part of our electricity grid helps define what
Speaker 1: every other part of it costs. I'll let him explain
Speaker 1: better than I just did.
Speaker 3: In this high stakes game, the lowest cost generator bids
Speaker 3: first to meet demand. Other generators follow in cost order
Speaker 3: as the stack feels. But if the last megawatt needed
Speaker 3: for supply to match demand is three hundred dollars, then
Speaker 3: that's what every single player in this game gets paid.
Speaker 3: Let's underline this fact. It's the highest cost of generation
Speaker 3: that sets the price of power, which is why this
Speaker 3: slogan is so deeply misleading.
Speaker 4: Renewable energy is incredibly cheap because its fuel is free
Speaker 4: because it's the sunshine and the wind.
Speaker 3: But plugging the generation gaps they leave to build a
Speaker 3: reliable electricity system is proving remand akably expensive.
Speaker 1: That is the cost of transition. All those that are
Speaker 1: for a long time said this is the only option,
Speaker 1: it's the only option that we need to do to
Speaker 1: save the planet. Firstly, Australia is one percent of global emissions,
Speaker 1: China thirty three percent. To move from the system that
Speaker 1: they want to move away from, mainly coal, to the
Speaker 1: full renewable system, well, of course it's going to cost
Speaker 1: hundreds of billions of dollars. It also requires huge swathes
Speaker 1: of regional Australia to be changed forever. Another perfect example
Speaker 1: excellently explained.
Speaker 2: In the documentary The endgame here is to achieve net zero.
Speaker 2: Push and roads and clearing forests and fragmenting forests is
Speaker 2: an oxymoron towards that goal of trying to achieve net zero,
Speaker 2: because the first thing we need to be doing is
Speaker 2: keeping trees in the ground.
Speaker 3: Stephen has used his training as a cartographer to map
Speaker 3: the number of wind and solar farms that will need
Speaker 3: to be built on the national electricity market to hit
Speaker 3: the government targets stretching from far North Queensland, through New
Speaker 3: South Wales, Victoria west to Port Lincoln in South Australia
Speaker 3: and across the Bass Strait to Tasmania.
Speaker 1: Now, every time I've made this point in the past,
Speaker 1: it's thrown into some sort of being of climate denialism
Speaker 1: for those that are half paying attention, or maybe watching
Speaker 1: us for the first time, or maybe checking backing with
Speaker 1: me for the first time in a while. I am
Speaker 1: in no denial that seven billion people on the planet,
Speaker 1: multiple industrial revolutions, is going to do something quite substantial
Speaker 1: to the natural environment. There's no question about it. More
Speaker 1: people who need to be fed than ever before, house
Speaker 1: than ever before, kept warm or cool than ever before,
Speaker 1: no question. But Australia is one percent of the world's problem. China,
Speaker 1: under the Paris Agreement, is able to continue to pollute
Speaker 1: at an increased level until whatever they want until twenty third,
Speaker 1: meaning the chances of them polluting even more between now
Speaker 1: and twenty thirty is almost certain. While between now and
Speaker 1: twenty thirty is when we're going to be cutting down
Speaker 1: trees to replace them with wind farms. As a way
Speaker 1: of finding a different way of electrifying our grid. We're
Speaker 1: going to need more power than even what the current
Speaker 1: amount of power produced by things like coal and gas
Speaker 1: will actually do. Why because we want to electrify everything.
Speaker 1: You may have heard conversations about kitchen stoves, the push
Speaker 1: towards electric vehicles. Well, all of those things, of course
Speaker 1: need to be powered, meaning the current grid is not
Speaker 1: big enough. In fact, we'd have to grow it by
Speaker 1: up to four times to potentially have one big enough
Speaker 1: and good enough and reliable enough to actually keep the
Speaker 1: lights on, keep the cars charged, and to keep the
Speaker 1: water boiling. Another quick little one here too, which is
Speaker 1: when Chris Human explains about solar arms. Now again, I
Speaker 1: am not against any of this technology, but the reality
Speaker 1: is you need so much of it in a continent
Speaker 1: the size of Australia, as opposed to a postage stamp
Speaker 1: in a part of Europe that can throw the extension
Speaker 1: cord over to another country, or a state in the
Speaker 1: United States that can throw an extension cord over to
Speaker 1: the next state in the United States, which has, among
Speaker 1: other things, nuclear power as a key part of the technology.
Speaker 1: So Australia is trying to swing for the fences, but
Speaker 1: it's going to have to end up building a fence
Speaker 1: that's four times higher than it currently is in order
Speaker 1: to actually have the amount of electricity required for a
Speaker 1: population that of course will exponentially grow. Remember the expectations
Speaker 1: are that this country could get to fifty million people
Speaker 1: by the year of twenty sixty. So not only do
Speaker 1: you have to replace what was, you need to build
Speaker 1: what is, and you need to prepare for what will be.
Speaker 1: Again Chris Human explaining about solifi arms and why when
Speaker 1: they work, they're very good, but when they don't, it
Speaker 1: is a big hole in the market.
Speaker 3: This solar farm sits on fifty hectares, It has eighty
Speaker 3: two thousand solar panels, and at peak generation will deliver
Speaker 3: twenty four megawats, and that would be on a day
Speaker 3: like today, a bright sunny day in the middle of
Speaker 3: the day. But tonight the sun will go down and.
Speaker 5: It will deliver zero And across the course of a
Speaker 5: year you'll get thirty percent of its plated capacity, or
Speaker 5: a little over seven megawatts.
Speaker 3: And that's the issue with this kind of generation. By
Speaker 3: its nature, it is off or often than it's on.
Speaker 1: It's the point, now I get why when people who
Speaker 1: don't have to live with the consequences of either they're
Speaker 1: parts of Australia changing. You don't see many parks or
Speaker 1: doggie parks in built up areas of the cities being changed.
Speaker 1: In fact, if you wanted to put one win anywhere
Speaker 1: near a teal electric you know what the response would be.
Speaker 1: So it's all pushed out into regional Australia, largely punished
Speaker 1: because they don't vote green or labor. But more importantly,
Speaker 1: as you hear the reality is that the mere size
Speaker 1: of some of these things, but they don't work twenty
Speaker 1: four to seven. And remember everything that gets produced by
Speaker 1: renewable energy has to be stored somewhere, meaning batteries, and
Speaker 1: they have not developed the batteries that would be able
Speaker 1: to store enough of the energy for long enough for
Speaker 1: you to be able to use things through the night. Instead,
Speaker 1: you have to have lots and lots and lots and
Speaker 1: lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and
Speaker 1: lots of batteries. Perhaps if the government wants to be
Speaker 1: honest and say, look, what we'd really love is you
Speaker 1: to be totally self sufficient. Something on your roof, something
Speaker 1: in your garage, and that's it. You're not part of
Speaker 1: the grid. Okay, But what about for manufacturing. But of course,
Speaker 1: the central concern that I have had, no matter what
Speaker 1: names I have been called or what fingers have been
Speaker 1: pointed as people see to dismiss the conversation of the
Speaker 1: true cost of net zero or the cost of transition,
Speaker 1: has been the people who suffer because their bills have
Speaker 1: gone up. Their bills have gone up because there is
Speaker 1: all of this stuff that needs to be built. It
Speaker 1: will either be paid for by the government or it
Speaker 1: will be paid for by the private companies. The private companies,
Speaker 1: of course, will just pass it on to the customer.
Speaker 1: And when you're a customer who's on the pension, this
Speaker 1: is what happens.
Speaker 6: This is what I call a payday killer. It's come
Speaker 6: in at one thousand and seventy three dollars and thirty
Speaker 6: one cents.
Speaker 7: My pay, which is the pay of.
Speaker 6: Most age pensioners, is around one thousand, one hundred and
Speaker 6: forty four dollars. This leaves me after I pay this bill,
Speaker 6: seventy one dollars and nine cents.
Speaker 1: It was a spectacular piece of journalism. It was an
Speaker 1: important video for you to see and again congratulations to
Speaker 1: Chris Woman and everyone who put it together. It is
Speaker 1: up now. It's skynews dot com dot AU. If you
Speaker 1: haven't already, there's a way to subscribe. It'll cost you
Speaker 1: just five dollars. Skynews dot com dot A U spread
Speaker 1: the word and spread that dot go. It was sensational
Speaker 1: to the rest of the day's news. Now, and of
Speaker 1: course this is an opinion show, as you will have
Speaker 1: known by now. I have a strong opinion. I just
Speaker 1: don't want to shock people thinking we've gone from the
Speaker 1: straight documentary right into the deep end. But here we are,
Speaker 1: so let's get on with this. There is a plan
Speaker 1: for the federal government to censor the Internet. Sure, they
Speaker 1: talk about misinformation, but the plan is to censor the Internet.
Speaker 1: The government to decide what is and is not true,
Speaker 1: what you can and cannot post.
Speaker 8: Now.
Speaker 1: Of course they won't go after you. They will just
Speaker 1: make it effectively impossible for a social media company to
Speaker 1: keep posting from places where the government does not like. Essentially,
Speaker 1: think of this as a sort of toddler pester power
Speaker 1: idea to affect your capacity to read, see, and hear
Speaker 1: things that the government does not approve. And remember there
Speaker 1: is a certain side of politics which has used the
Speaker 1: word misinformation when they are winging when Australians don't vote
Speaker 1: the way that they want to. For example, when they
Speaker 1: went from sixty forty yes to sixty to forty no.
Speaker 1: In the voice.
Speaker 3: Misinformation, misinformation, misinformation, the.
Speaker 9: Misinformation which is there so misinformation.
Speaker 1: So last year they came up with a complicated piece
Speaker 1: of legislation. It was opposed by everyone from the major
Speaker 1: television networks through to the ABC, from the Human Rights
Speaker 1: Commission through to the churches. This thing is very hard
Speaker 1: to find a friend anywhere because most people, in their
Speaker 1: analysis of this, believe the definition of truth is one
Speaker 1: that shouldn't be held by government. It should be one
Speaker 1: that is openly contested, not versions of the truth, not
Speaker 1: lies that people pretend are the truth. But as we know,
Speaker 1: there are those who used to say certain things about
Speaker 1: the planet, certain things about geography. But of course only
Speaker 1: once you're able to go and find where of the
Speaker 1: information are you able to actually learn new truths. Now,
Speaker 1: the federal government last year tried to put this in place.
Speaker 1: They weren't able to get the votes, so they pulled
Speaker 1: the bill. They came back this year and This week
Speaker 1: in the Senate is when the matters will be decided.
Speaker 1: If not this week, then definitely next week. Well, we
Speaker 1: have been following the mats and I am pleased to
Speaker 1: tell you that at this moment, if everyone holds the line,
Speaker 1: there will be no ability for the Government and the
Speaker 1: Greens to get together to censor the Internet. David van
Speaker 1: is a former Liberal Party senator. We know that through
Speaker 1: scandal he made his way towards the cross bench, which
Speaker 1: now means he's free to vote whichever way he wishes.
Speaker 1: But on this one it will be no.
Speaker 2: This bill as it currently stands has significant flaws that
Speaker 2: I will not be supporting.
Speaker 1: Now, what does this matter, because the maths is all
Speaker 1: that ever matters in politics. How many seats that you
Speaker 1: win by what margin does not matter. It's just how
Speaker 1: many seats that you win, and in the case of
Speaker 1: the Senate, how many seats that you have. You need
Speaker 1: thirty nine seats to get a majority, ie to get
Speaker 1: something past. If it's thirty eight each, then the President
Speaker 1: of the Senate, which comes from the governing party, would
Speaker 1: make a casting vote. So for thirty nine votes, that
Speaker 1: is what Labor and the Greens together want However, they
Speaker 1: only get to thirty six. There's a total of ten
Speaker 1: people who sit on the cross bench, ranging from Ralph
Speaker 1: Babbott as the United Australian Party, One Nation, Jackie Lamby,
Speaker 1: the former Jackie lamby a multiplicity of people who have
Speaker 1: left the parties for which they were elected. Tonight, the
Speaker 1: number of cross benches who are going to be voting
Speaker 1: no is nine, meaning that there is no way right
Speaker 1: now that they are going to get to thirty nine.
Speaker 1: Will they have a final vote to determine no and
Speaker 1: put this bad idea to bed, or will they pull
Speaker 1: the bill for a second time. I'm talking about it
Speaker 1: every night because it matters. Free. An open society that
Speaker 1: is able to get its information from as many sources
Speaker 1: as possible, including sources that are willing to truly challenge power,
Speaker 1: is the sign of a free society. Government telling you
Speaker 1: an adult what you can and can't see, but more importantly,
Speaker 1: what you can and can't post, is not a free society.
Speaker 1: So thank you David Van and many others on the
Speaker 1: cross bench who are holding the line. The one person
Speaker 1: we have not heard from yet Lydia Thorpe. But even
Speaker 1: if she supports it, there still won't be enough votes
Speaker 1: fingers crossed, the vote takes place, the bill dies, and
Speaker 1: the idea of censoring the Internet is put in the bid.
Speaker 1: When it comes to lots of different issues, there is
Speaker 1: one thing that they all have in common. Every state
Speaker 1: in the country, regardless whether you have a new government,
Speaker 1: an old government, a liberal government, or a labor government,
Speaker 1: ramping is a massive issue. It means that when you
Speaker 1: call triple O, you may or may not get an
Speaker 1: ambulance on time. Why because they may or may not
Speaker 1: be waiting in a Quean hospital. Why because there may
Speaker 1: or may not be a bed for the person who's
Speaker 1: in the back of the ambulance, Meaning that when you
Speaker 1: call trip below sometimes it can be a deadly scenario
Speaker 1: where one is not turning up. For families, the number
Speaker 1: of people they have to compete with to hold on
Speaker 1: to a rental property is more than ever before, firstly
Speaker 1: because there's more people here than ever before. Secondly because
Speaker 1: there's fewer rental properties around than ever before, which means
Speaker 1: of course that many people are starting now to live
Speaker 1: on the fringes. And despite the fact that they earn money,
Speaker 1: despite the fact that they should be in a home,
Speaker 1: they are not the place they call home is a
Speaker 1: tent and as I've spoken about almost every night for
Speaker 1: the past couple of years, but we speak about it
Speaker 1: with regularity because I know you care about it. No
Speaker 1: matter what the rest of the media thinks. Is the
Speaker 1: story of the day. It is the question of immigration
Speaker 1: now for those who are again maybe joining us for
Speaker 1: the first time because of the documentary. When I talk
Speaker 1: about it immigration, I do not care from whence people come.
Speaker 1: I do not care from what language they speak, and
Speaker 1: I do not care what God they believe in. I
Speaker 1: believe that, regardless of where you come from in the world,
Speaker 1: that you should unite around sensible principles and central principles
Speaker 1: of this country. One where there is a freedom of expression,
Speaker 1: one where there is a fundamental respect for all genders,
Speaker 1: where there is the capacity for people to marry a
Speaker 1: person of their same sex, for someone to be able
Speaker 1: to follow a religion or not have a religion at all,
Speaker 1: and most importantly, for the law of the land to
Speaker 1: be the ultimate authority of behavior. But that's not what
Speaker 1: I talk about when I talk about immigration on this program.
Speaker 1: It's not about the cultural mix or the cultural changes.
Speaker 1: Others can talk about that. The point is that Australia
Speaker 1: has twenty seven million people right now, but we do
Speaker 1: not have the infrastructure that can handle twenty seven million people.
Speaker 1: For example, is there places to live or there are
Speaker 1: enough ambulances, let alone places in schools and all the
Speaker 1: rest of it. Well, new report confirms what we have
Speaker 1: known all along. The majority of Australians think that this
Speaker 1: government has brought too many people into the country too quickly.
Speaker 1: In fact, according to this report, almost half of Australians
Speaker 1: believe that migration is too high. Of the more than
Speaker 1: eight thousand people who were surveyed, forty nine percent believed
Speaker 1: that immigration levels were too high. Now, this is a
Speaker 1: major change from just last year when thirty three people
Speaker 1: agreed with the view that there was too much immigration.
Speaker 1: To give you an idea of how this has changed
Speaker 1: over time, have a look at this now again from
Speaker 1: this group that did the survey. The blue line is
Speaker 1: the number of people who think that migration is too high.
Speaker 1: The last time that more people thought that it was
Speaker 1: too high than about right, you have to go back
Speaker 1: to two thousand and eighteen. You can see the changes
Speaker 1: post pandemic at twenty four percent thirty three percent in
Speaker 1: twenty twenty three and now forty nine percent. Fifty one
Speaker 1: percent of people last year thought that we were about right. Now,
Speaker 1: after more than a million people have come in under
Speaker 1: the Albenze government's watch, the about right number has fallen
Speaker 1: to forty twenty two percent of people two years ago
Speaker 1: said that we had too few people come into the country.
Speaker 1: That is now just nine percent. But despite the fact
Speaker 1: that the majority of Australians, while completely understanding that we
Speaker 1: are a country of migrants, want to pump the brakes
Speaker 1: about the number of people who are being brought in
Speaker 1: to add to a multiplicity of problems that this government
Speaker 1: is not willing to fix. What do you think the
Speaker 1: government asked itself today in question time? Well, nothing about that,
Speaker 1: of course.
Speaker 7: My question is to the minister representing the Minister for Women.
Speaker 7: How are the Albanesi Labour Government's policies and reforms helping
Speaker 7: to close the gender pay gap and supporting women's economic
Speaker 7: security and equality.
Speaker 9: My question is to the Minister for Industry and Science.
Speaker 9: Why is today's announcement of the first investments for the
Speaker 9: National Reconstruction Fund for Australian manufacturing and Australian jobs so important?
Speaker 9: And what risks are there to the future of these jobs.
Speaker 8: My question is to the Treasurer why is decent pay
Speaker 8: such an important part of the alban Easy Labor government's
Speaker 8: efforts to help ease cost of living pressures. How does
Speaker 8: this approach differ from what has failed in the past.
Speaker 10: My question is to the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry,
Speaker 10: how is the alban Ezi labor government strengthening our international
Speaker 10: trade relationships to benefit Australian farmers.
Speaker 1: Not to mention, of course, in fact that as we
Speaker 1: told you last night, three million people, three million people
Speaker 1: are close to homelessness. The Reserve Bank today has turned
Speaker 1: around and said that you can forget about the idea
Speaker 1: of an early interest rate cut. Most likely the first
Speaker 1: one will be in May, right on top of the
Speaker 1: federal election. My view is that even one reduction interustrates
Speaker 1: is not going to make people forget the twelve increases
Speaker 1: that have happened under this government, which is why the
Speaker 1: Prime Minister needs to get back here. I get it.
Speaker 1: He's a global leader and it's very important to hold
Speaker 1: hands with a lame duck president or Justin Trudeau on
Speaker 1: his way out the door. As the Canadian Prime Minister.
Speaker 1: But of course he was there holding hands with the
Speaker 1: Chinese today, the handsome boy and the puppet master, saying
Speaker 1: that Australia was a perfect example of the way that
Speaker 1: nations should deal with China, which of course in the
Speaker 1: Albanese lang, which just means sit back and take it.
Speaker 1: But of course, something that's been hurting the Prime Minister
Speaker 1: has been this attitude and this idea that basically life's
Speaker 1: pretty good for this bloke, so much so that he
Speaker 1: even asks for upgrades when he's flying family trips. Upgrade
Speaker 1: albow is starting to hurt him. I say this because
Speaker 1: there was an opinion poll where the headline was all
Speaker 1: about Quantis, all about Quantus and Quantus getting preferential treatment,
Speaker 1: hence the upgrades, but the real detail followed deeper into
Speaker 1: the article. The red Bridge research puts the Labor and
Speaker 1: Coalition at fifty to fifty on a two party election.
Speaker 1: Inflation and the rising cost of living, as well as
Speaker 1: other grievances, are pushing the federal government into a place
Speaker 1: where they could lose the election. The polling found that
Speaker 1: fifty six percent of people who are planning to vote
Speaker 1: for Labor are not fully committed. It puts simply is
Speaker 1: a soft vote potentially up for grabs by an opposing party,
Speaker 1: compared to just thirty one percent of people planning to
Speaker 1: vote for the Coalition or half of the people who
Speaker 1: are planning to vote for the Greens. So more people,
Speaker 1: if they say they're going to vote Coalition, are more
Speaker 1: committed to voting Coalition rather than Labor or the Greens.
Speaker 1: The research also found that fifty one percent of voters
Speaker 1: believed that their future living standards would be worse or
Speaker 1: much worse in five years. This is compared to the
Speaker 1: period before the twenty twenty pandemic. All is not well
Speaker 1: in Australia, and we have a government that is telling
Speaker 1: you things are way better than they actually are. I repeat,
Speaker 1: you have just seen tonight and been educated if you
Speaker 1: weren't already across the detail about the fantasy when it
Speaker 1: comes to changing from one sort of an electricity grid
Speaker 1: to another, that that actually costs a lot more money
Speaker 1: than anyone was ever willing to tell you. And the
Speaker 1: reality is that it costs hundreds of billions of dollars
Speaker 1: to actually build this stuff, meaning that you end up
Speaker 1: having to pay ultimately as a customer We're in a
Speaker 1: scenario now where this government took away from ten million
Speaker 1: workers in the twenty twenty three budget an automatic fifteen
Speaker 1: hundred dollar tax return. You would imagine that people like
Speaker 1: the age pensioner and ten million other people would much
Speaker 1: prefer fifteen hundred dollars than just pats on the back.
Speaker 1: Coming from Canberra. Meantime, I want to talk about Bunnings,
Speaker 1: the international institution that apparently the outgoing American ambassador is
Speaker 1: quite the fan of. Despite the fact that big box
Speaker 1: stores are something that is no stranger to anyone who's
Speaker 1: been seen or knows anything about the United States. We
Speaker 1: love Bunnings. The fact that I'm not totally sure they're
Speaker 1: the greatest fan of mine, that's another story for another day.
Speaker 1: But amazingly, you may all have seen this story today
Speaker 1: that Bunnings using facial recognition cameras to stop people that
Speaker 1: don't want coming into the store coming into the store
Speaker 1: has breached a series of privacy laws. Here is the
Speaker 1: private EC commissioner explaining better than me.
Speaker 4: There was no consent asked for or given. There was
Speaker 4: also no notice given. There was no signs notifying.
Speaker 2: People that facial recognition technology was in play.
Speaker 1: In response, Bunnings have said, well, the reason that we're
Speaker 1: using this technology is because some of the crazy stuff
Speaker 1: that people are doing inside our stores. If it is
Speaker 1: not at times people who are assaulting staff, assaulting other people,
Speaker 1: or other sort of mad stuff that you can see
Speaker 1: here on the screen, that is Bunning's reason as to
Speaker 1: why they are watching. So forget Big Brother, it is
Speaker 1: now apparently Big Bunnings, which is keeping an eye on
Speaker 1: us all only. Something that I hate the most about
Speaker 1: the media, and yes, I understand that I'm in the media,
Speaker 1: but one of the things that I hate about many
Speaker 1: of the people in the media is that they forget
Speaker 1: that the whole purpose of this job is to talk
Speaker 1: to you. Instead, they like to talk to each other.
Speaker 1: They like to have competitions about how close to power
Speaker 1: they are, and you get to watch on this is
Speaker 1: most of the shows which allegedly talk about news right
Speaker 1: across the dial many and most of the things that
Speaker 1: you may well read in the opinion section of left
Speaker 1: wing newspapers. But there's an example of this that playing
Speaker 1: out in the United States that I've just got to
Speaker 1: call out Morning Joe MASNBC their breakfast show. Now the
Speaker 1: way the show's put together with the bloke with the
Speaker 1: great hair and the glasses, a former Republican, the lady
Speaker 1: who is now his wife after both of them decided
Speaker 1: to ditch their previous husbands and wives. Okay, she's the
Speaker 1: journalist and Willie Geist is along for the ride to
Speaker 1: agree with them every day. It's must watch TV for lefties.
Speaker 1: But this is a group of people, particularly the now
Speaker 1: husband and wife, who love showing off how close to
Speaker 1: power they are. You see, the closer they are to power,
Speaker 1: the more important they are. It's perfect example of why
Speaker 1: many people can't stand not even the mainstream, but the
Speaker 1: access media. This is what I talk about with the
Speaker 1: access media. Now, these were people who were more than
Speaker 1: happy to ride the wave of Donald Trump in the
Speaker 1: lead up to twenty sixteen. And you know it's my.
Speaker 11: Well I do because I tugged on at once.
Speaker 4: What you mean pretty good?
Speaker 12: You know you loved it?
Speaker 4: Wow Trump during ninety.
Speaker 1: And then they knew that there was money to be
Speaker 1: made in opposing him. This is what they were saying
Speaker 1: in the lead up to the election as they were
Speaker 1: part of the full breakfast with Trump derangement syndrome.
Speaker 11: Who they are running against a dark, dismal, fascist and
Speaker 11: increasingly obviously fascist person. He's getting through the moment as
Speaker 11: an aging bit artist.
Speaker 4: Yeah, there's always a.
Speaker 11: Tinge of racism and everything he says. Oh, if you
Speaker 11: can't believe it, and this is your choice, you're lying
Speaker 11: to yourself and you're going to ruin this country. Hateful, racist, bigoted, tired,
Speaker 11: aging branding, I wouldn't say genius branding, obsessed narcissism.
Speaker 1: He will in prison, he will execute whoever he's allowed
Speaker 1: to imprison execute. But then Trump doesn't just win, he wins, bak.
Speaker 1: He's also having a cultural moment when everyone from fought
Speaker 1: is in the UFC to European soccer pliers and plenty
Speaker 1: of people in the NFL are doing the Trump dance
Speaker 1: and singing the YMCI. So guess what these people need?
Speaker 1: After calling him hitler, they win and socked up to
Speaker 1: him at his house in Florida. Why he accepted them,
Speaker 1: I don't know, but clearly Trump is a bigger man
Speaker 1: than he.
Speaker 11: Joe and I went to mar A Lago to meet
Speaker 11: personally with President elect Trump. It was the first time
Speaker 11: we have seen him in seven years. What we did
Speaker 11: agree on was to restart communications In this meeting, President
Speaker 11: Trump was tearful, he was upbeat, He seemed interested in
Speaker 11: finding common ground with Democrats on some of the most
Speaker 11: divisive issues. And for those asking why we would go
Speaker 11: speak to the president elect during such fraught times, especially
Speaker 11: between US, I guess I would ask back, why wouldn't we?
Speaker 11: Joe and I realized it's time to do something different,
Speaker 11: and that starts with not only talking about Donald Trump,
Speaker 11: but also talking with him.
Speaker 1: What they don't negotiation, middle aged pace they played on television.
Speaker 1: Who thought they could sidle up to Joe Biden and
Speaker 1: pretend that this is the smartest version of Joe Biden
Speaker 1: EVA until, of course, the day bait and all the
Speaker 1: way during the election campaign Trump Hitler, Trump hit Trumps
Speaker 1: Hitler or hang on Trump's one, mister Presidents, all of
Speaker 1: those edits weren't done by us. They were done by
Speaker 1: the Meghan Kelly Show. Meghan Kelly, of course, appears on
Speaker 1: this program each and every week, and I stand by
Speaker 1: every word of her reaction.
Speaker 13: I searched for a way to respond appropriately, and I
Speaker 13: called on my ten years as a litigator in addition
Speaker 13: to my now twenty as a journalist, and I think
Speaker 13: I found the perfect phrase, go yourselves, Go yourselves, you
Speaker 13: dishonest jokes of faux journalists.
Speaker 1: Chief's kiss to the Lady, to morning Joe gets stuffed,
Speaker 1: Quick break back with more here on Paul Murray Live
Speaker 1: Debate for the rest of the night. Can you know
Speaker 1: what you think? And a reminder that excellent documentary spread
Speaker 1: it around. Go to Skytnews dot com dot au sign
Speaker 1: up and get it tonight. Thank you so much for watching.
Speaker 1: Let's get straight into it now, Holly Hughes, who is
Speaker 1: fresh from another day breathing in the joy of the greens,
Speaker 1: and Joe hild Awen. Of course you can find his
Speaker 1: podcast on the Nova player. Let's get into this right now.
Speaker 1: The documentary that we just saw tonight and about cost
Speaker 1: of transition. Holly, this has always been the central issue,
Speaker 1: all right now? Are there some people who say climate
Speaker 1: change doesn't exist and therefore it as a reason for
Speaker 1: anything is not a reason to be dealt with. I
Speaker 1: on one of those people, and to those people, good
Speaker 1: luck to you. However, we have been sold apop for
Speaker 1: as long as we have been told we need to
Speaker 1: change the way that our energy system works. Our energy
Speaker 1: is more expensive than anywhere else around the world, in
Speaker 1: part because we are moving from the car that could
Speaker 1: win Bathist and we're being told that the three wheel
Speaker 1: car might win Bathist. But quick get into it now.
Speaker 1: The reality is CSIO says half a trillion dollars, Green
Speaker 1: groups say are trillion dollars. All of that gets paid
Speaker 1: for by the customer.
Speaker 12: Absolutely now, and I'm going to have to put a
Speaker 12: hand up. I've actually been at a dinner tonight, so
Speaker 12: I didn't get to watch most of the documentary. I
Speaker 12: did grab probably the last ten minutes of it, and
Speaker 12: I've read some of the articles around it and seen
Speaker 12: the previews today, so.
Speaker 4: I apologize for that.
Speaker 12: But the parliamentary work was not yet complete, so was
Speaker 12: not able to just sit down in front of.
Speaker 4: The telly with a glass of wine.
Speaker 12: But let me tell you everything that I heard Chris
Speaker 12: Yuleman say was completely and utterly spot on. And it's
Speaker 12: what we've been talking about for a really long time.
Speaker 12: It's the deception of not only the government but all
Speaker 12: the agencies behind it, and those reports and reviews that
Speaker 12: they have been relying on when they talk about the
Speaker 12: cheapest form of energy. What they don't talk about is
Speaker 12: the transmission lines and this is something that we have
Speaker 12: been talking about for a really long time. The extra
Speaker 12: ten thousand kilometers of transmission lines required as we build
Speaker 12: an entire new grid for this renewable wind sole of
Speaker 12: Fantasy Course distribution transmission is a very big chunk of
Speaker 12: your power bill, But no one wants to talk about that.
Speaker 12: The other thing is, you know, I know we're probably
Speaker 12: going to talk about it later, or I know Joe
Speaker 12: and I talked about it last night Albinsi's relationship with China.
Speaker 4: Alben Easy is not President g.
Speaker 12: He does not determined that a new power line will
Speaker 12: go through in this direction, and anything that's in its
Speaker 12: way gets out of its way.
Speaker 4: In Australia, we have lots.
Speaker 12: Of councils, we have lots of community groups, and we
Speaker 12: have lots of things that mean that we're putting kinks
Speaker 12: into these transmission lines. And every single kink we put
Speaker 12: in costs an extra million dollars. So if we've got
Speaker 12: to go round a property, we've got to go round
Speaker 12: a bridge, around a river, whatever, we're going to do
Speaker 12: a million dollars.
Speaker 4: So it's an absolute furfey.
Speaker 12: I hope that people do watch it because it's important
Speaker 12: they understand that they are being sold a pop and
Speaker 12: they are going to pay more and more and more.
Speaker 1: And with skoney stack com dot you the place to
Speaker 1: find it. Joe. Again, we've sat here and had the
Speaker 1: conversations about you know, what is needed? What is all
Speaker 1: you know that I've said here for ten years, talked
Speaker 1: about cost of transition, right, and Bill Shorten couldn't answer it.
Speaker 1: So he turned around and said, oh, well, the cost
Speaker 1: of not doing it equals. The reality is every time
Speaker 1: I've debated it with Nicholas recently, when it was like okay, cool,
Speaker 1: be honest about the cost, this government has never turned
Speaker 1: around and said, look for us to move from this
Speaker 1: system to that system in order to save this much
Speaker 1: when it comes to greenhouse gases will be x one
Speaker 1: hundred billion dollars. Instead, they turn around and say, well,
Speaker 1: once it's built, everything's cheaper. That's one hell of a
Speaker 1: pole volt trick that they are trying to pull off.
Speaker 1: And I think what Chris was able to excellently show
Speaker 1: tonight was just how big a leap there is before
Speaker 1: we get to Neverland. Yeah, I think that's true.
Speaker 14: I think it was a fantastic documentary and just so cleared.
Speaker 1: I love Chris the Ullman.
Speaker 14: I think he's someone much like myself for people sort
Speaker 14: of struggled to sort of pigeono. I'm not half the
Speaker 14: journalist he is, but he's one of those people who
Speaker 14: has seen I think very much as an appursulate from
Speaker 14: people on the the left. I said, oh, he's ABC,
Speaker 14: he must be a green left socialist. And then when
Speaker 14: he applies a bit of skepticism to Dan Andrews and
Speaker 14: the COVID lockdowns and restrictions, that's right, Oh my god,
Speaker 14: you know we have to take him out the back
Speaker 14: and shoot him.
Speaker 1: So I love him.
Speaker 14: I was actually speaking to him about this a few
Speaker 14: weeks ago, and he has put so much effort into this.
Speaker 14: He was he talked, came on the podcast and talked
Speaker 14: about a little bit of it and and basically made
Speaker 14: me feel very very grateful because he was just neck
Speaker 14: deep in this stuff. And I think the results speak
Speaker 14: for themselves. Having stuck my head in it with the
Speaker 14: Mission zero series that we ran for the News Corp
Speaker 14: that I kind of led this, there's a couple of
Speaker 14: things that are really clear here and really problematic. First
Speaker 14: is a sort of lack of honesty and a lack
Speaker 14: of transparency, if you like, because the people who have
Speaker 14: ideological carriage of this basically want to control both the
Speaker 14: energy sources and the debate around it from an ideological
Speaker 14: point of view. Now that has meant that that nuclear
Speaker 14: has not been allowed into the debate, and it has
Speaker 14: meant that means that gas has been demonized.
Speaker 1: As much as cole.
Speaker 14: Now that is that that is absolutely outrageous from any
Speaker 14: rational point of view. And this is where ideologues make
Speaker 14: the perfect the enemy of the good. The truth about
Speaker 14: what the cost will be is we don't know. Anyone
Speaker 14: who tells you what the exact cost that they know
Speaker 14: what the exact cost of transition is going to be
Speaker 14: is lying that.
Speaker 1: Anyone who says you can't worry about it, there's five hundred, No,
Speaker 1: that's right to it.
Speaker 14: Even the huge discrepancy between you know, the cost that
Speaker 14: labor first put on it and then this modeling by
Speaker 14: Frontier I think it was it was I think commissioned
Speaker 14: by the Collis.
Speaker 1: I'm not sure.
Speaker 14: But again, you can commission any type of modeling you
Speaker 14: want and you can get basically the numbers you want,
Speaker 14: and depending on how you slice and dice it, it
Speaker 14: will be huge and unaffordable, or it'll be just fine, mate.
Speaker 14: The truth is we should be honest and say we
Speaker 14: actually don't yet have the technologies that will get us
Speaker 14: to net zero. If we get there, we don't know
Speaker 14: if hydrogen is going to be viable, we don't know
Speaker 14: if we are going to perhaps have to rely on
Speaker 14: nuclear and absolutely, and again, there have been people who
Speaker 14: have been saying this all along, and you know people
Speaker 14: I love who on the left who are just saying, no,
Speaker 14: we absolutely cannot countenance nuclear, and we can't countenance gas.
Speaker 14: The refusal to embrace gas as a medium term energy
Speaker 14: supply is insane, and that is actually forcing more CO
Speaker 14: two into the atmosphere because the absence of gas generators
Speaker 14: means that coal fired generators are filling that gap. Now,
Speaker 14: that is something that should keep every single die hard,
Speaker 14: one eyed greenie up at night, but they're too effing
Speaker 14: stupid to even realize that that's what they're doing. So again,
Speaker 14: we have to be pragmatic, not ideological.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but also holly. One of the things where where
Speaker 1: the left has simultaneously won and lost in this conversation, right,
Speaker 1: which is that they've been able to you know, deny
Speaker 1: funding to the projects that they don't like, you know,
Speaker 1: puts on anyone who pushes back with information like what
Speaker 1: we saw tonight. But the reality is that it's always
Speaker 1: been the case, which is that people believe we should
Speaker 1: do something. You take care of the planet, you bet
Speaker 1: you are you willing to pay for it? Hell no?
Speaker 1: All right? And we're now at that juncture where in
Speaker 1: the United States they had a government that is big
Speaker 1: enough to actually do something to significantly affect the way
Speaker 1: the world works, and three percent of people had it
Speaker 1: as a top three issue in terms of climate change.
Speaker 1: The cost of things meant that people said, I don't care,
Speaker 1: We're done, and they basically have gone back to a
Speaker 1: pre position even before the Paris Accord. I think that's
Speaker 1: what's happening in Australia. I think that when times were okay,
Speaker 1: there was this conversation about whether we should or whether
Speaker 1: we shouldn't, and whether it was urgent. But then when
Speaker 1: the reality is that there's that lady who's in the
Speaker 1: documentary as a pension who's only got seventy one bucks
Speaker 1: left after she's paid a power bill, they don't care,
Speaker 1: not because they don't care about the planet. But they
Speaker 1: also know China is way dirtier than we will ever be.
Speaker 12: We are one point three percent of global emissions. We
Speaker 12: could shut this show down tonight. Everything else it's generating power,
Speaker 12: all go live in trees and sit by the campfire,
Speaker 12: like we saw Chris Hialman at the end of the documentary,
Speaker 12: and we would make zero difference to the world. And
Speaker 12: what is also not understood by these green and left
Speaker 12: idea logues is things.
Speaker 4: Are still going to be manufactured.
Speaker 12: Things are still going to be made, and the difference
Speaker 12: is it can either be made in countries where there
Speaker 12: are environmental protections, where there are restrictions on different things,
Speaker 12: where there are sort of epas and monitors of emissions
Speaker 12: and those sorts of programs that are in place, that
Speaker 12: will be manufactured at a higher quality most likely, but
Speaker 12: also at a standard where the emissions will be less.
Speaker 12: Or they can get shipped off shore where there's no
Speaker 12: environmental oversights, where there's no regulation.
Speaker 4: And they'll be you know, and then you've.
Speaker 12: Got the dual cost of getting the product over and
Speaker 12: the product back, the raw materials over and the product
Speaker 12: back in the shipping costs.
Speaker 4: It's insanity.
Speaker 12: The whole thing is madness, yes, But the cost about
Speaker 12: transmission lines, the cost about distribution is something people don't
Speaker 12: understand when Joe talks about fudging the books or the
Speaker 12: accounting with the modeling getting the numbers you want.
Speaker 4: The way labor got the numbers they wanted was they.
Speaker 12: Had the entire cost of the build of the new grid,
Speaker 12: the new transmission lines as sunk costs. They actually just
Speaker 12: ignored them. They just pretended they just had already been done.
Speaker 12: We didn't need to count that amount up. So it
Speaker 12: was based on a lie. It's still based on a
Speaker 12: lie everything that they're saying. And the thing about nuclear
Speaker 12: that you know, this is a really complex area, but
Speaker 12: I always sort of use the analogy because I used
Speaker 12: to be Assistant Minister with Climate Change and Energy in
Speaker 12: the shadow portfolio.
Speaker 4: Nuclear is a bit like you know, think of it
Speaker 4: this way.
Speaker 12: You unplug the coal fire power station and you can
Speaker 12: plug in the nuclear power station.
Speaker 4: You don't need a whole new grid.
Speaker 12: So with nuclear you can remove all of those costs
Speaker 12: of building new transmission lines and new grid because you
Speaker 12: just don't need it and it's zero emissions. I don't
Speaker 12: understand their ideological objection when it is all.
Speaker 4: Around the world.
Speaker 1: Yep, littleone the uranium issues here, let's talk about some
Speaker 1: other things. Censoring the Internet fingers cross looks like it's
Speaker 1: going to go. Hopefully they will have the definitive vote.
Speaker 1: Otherwise they're just going to pull it again and it'll
Speaker 1: sit there as a specter. I doubt anything's going to
Speaker 1: change in twelve months time. Thankfully, the numbers they are
Speaker 1: well and truly short. Now, however, access to social media
Speaker 1: and kids, the issue of YouTube is one that I'll
Speaker 1: be honest, I hadn't even thought about until all the
Speaker 1: people had started to say, well, hang on, is this
Speaker 1: going to be a technology that's going to be included
Speaker 1: in the band? Now we know about Instagram or Twitter
Speaker 1: or Snapchat. I'll be honest, I don't think that there's
Speaker 1: a person who's got a kid under the age of
Speaker 1: ten right now who doesn't know that the main way
Speaker 1: they interact with video is YouTube. Yeah.
Speaker 14: I've got to say I'm with you on this one.
Speaker 1: I watch TV, they watch YouTube.
Speaker 14: Yeah, that's exactly right. That's what my kids watch all
Speaker 14: the time. Their heroes, their sports starf of yesteryear are
Speaker 14: YouTube stars, even the soccer players they love.
Speaker 1: It's YouTube. Are they going to ban it or are
Speaker 1: they going to How is the YouTube kids right for kids?
Speaker 14: I would hope not. I know that. I was like,
Speaker 14: hang on a minute, that banning YouTube as well YouTube
Speaker 14: is counted as social media. I said that to my
Speaker 14: wife and she just turned around and said, good, because
Speaker 14: it's killing them. It's destroying them resticted to it. And
Speaker 14: you know, I don't know. I know that obviously, you know,
Speaker 14: screen addiction is a problem, but that I don't think
Speaker 14: should necessarily be the primary purpose of the social media band.
Speaker 14: The primary purpose of the social media band is causing
Speaker 14: kids mental health issues, causing them to be bullied, causing
Speaker 14: them to have completely unrealistic expectations of how they should be,
Speaker 14: and the spike in suicides that we've had in terms
Speaker 14: of online bullying and that sort of stuff. So I
Speaker 14: think that is the primary concern, not just trying to
Speaker 14: arrest screen time, which is a problem, but it's a
Speaker 14: separate problem and not as immediate.
Speaker 1: But also to me, one of the issues in hermand
Speaker 1: that the social media band right is the capacity of
Speaker 1: your kid to be left alone with something and to
Speaker 1: be messaged by other people. That's all right. YouTube does
Speaker 1: not have that facility, and again there is this particular
Speaker 1: sort of world of YouTube kids, if you want it.
Speaker 1: But Holly, how did we get to the stage where
Speaker 1: this is still a maybe you would have thought the
Speaker 1: government by now would have said no, no, it's about the
Speaker 1: individual messaging apps as opposed to their capacity to watch
Speaker 1: their favorite singer dance around.
Speaker 4: Well, we still don't have the legislation. We don't know
Speaker 4: what's in, we don't know what's out at.
Speaker 12: But I do find it extraordinary that Snapchat, which we
Speaker 12: know has been used to bullying, bullying, it's used to
Speaker 12: send pornographic material to people because we know it's got
Speaker 12: that disappearing message function.
Speaker 8: Loo.
Speaker 4: I've never had it, but I.
Speaker 12: Understand that's how it operates, and you get a notification
Speaker 12: off someone's screenshots what they've sent you. But it's those
Speaker 12: sorts of platforms that we know that teenagers in particular
Speaker 12: are being bullied on, and that are being used for.
Speaker 4: Those sorts of purposes. YouTube.
Speaker 12: I mean, if I could just tell you a funny story,
Speaker 12: I asked, you know, I've got a son with autism.
Speaker 4: He's fifteen.
Speaker 12: I asked him he loves YouTube, and I asked him
Speaker 12: what he wanted for Christmas, and he said, Mom, I
Speaker 12: think I need a new laptop. I'm going to develop
Speaker 12: my own cryptocurrency. Why has he been watching videos on
Speaker 12: YouTube about cryptocurrency and he said it'll be really easy.
Speaker 4: But you know, particularly for.
Speaker 12: Kids with autism and stuff that have special niche interests,
Speaker 12: it's amazing the videos and information they can find. Thank god,
Speaker 12: he's got a lot of beard going on at fifteen,
Speaker 12: nearly sixteen.
Speaker 4: I can probably get him through the face. Ide da
Speaker 4: let him keep going, because I'm not sure i'd want
Speaker 4: to take him off YouTube.
Speaker 12: But yeah, it's the teenage girls, the bullying that's not
Speaker 12: happening on YouTube. It's Instagram, it's Snapchat, it's the messenger
Speaker 12: apps that the messenger apps at this stage are excluded.
Speaker 12: So I think the government hasn't really done the work
Speaker 12: on these about how it's best to manage it.
Speaker 1: Well. Also, look, you know in Phinis, I know that
Speaker 1: Communications Minister is downstairs. There's plenty of abilities. I'd like
Speaker 1: to see more questions on this specific decisions that are
Speaker 1: being made in and around question time. Again, there's always
Speaker 1: a million things to have a look at. But start
Speaker 1: to push the governor on the lack of knowledge they
Speaker 1: have here Joe favorite topic of yours and I, which
Speaker 1: is not media talking about media, but a little bit here.
Speaker 1: You and I twenty something years ago became very fast
Speaker 1: friends when you were just the junior of junior burgers
Speaker 1: in a political world.
Speaker 14: You were the funniest guy in the New South Wales
Speaker 14: press coaler.
Speaker 1: Whoa, whoa, That's the title they were all fighting for.
Speaker 1: But the point is right, We've seen plenty of people,
Speaker 1: and we've seen how people grow and change in this business. Right,
Speaker 1: we see how there's always so this gravitational pool of awards,
Speaker 1: which means there's a series of self policing. But then
Speaker 1: there's also this factor that I think is the most
Speaker 1: corrosive factor in all forms of reporting anywhere, and it's access. Right.
Speaker 1: It's when you want to be too close to the
Speaker 1: people in charge, meaning you'll either pull a punch or
Speaker 1: you'll shoot a punch for them. I have spoken in
Speaker 1: the times where I look back at my own career
Speaker 1: and I've gone, maybe I was too close to this
Speaker 1: person and the rest. So you had that idea, But
Speaker 1: this morning, Joe thing, these people who okay, twenty sixteen,
Speaker 1: they liked him twenty twenty they hated him. Twenty twenty
Speaker 1: four he was hitler for them to turn around and
Speaker 1: now go to kiss the ring. Now I get it.
Speaker 1: Trump's going to love it because there's always that New
Speaker 1: York part of him that wants to be loved by
Speaker 1: that sort of establishment. But that's sort of those figures
Speaker 1: in journalism, and they exist here in Australia. Are the
Speaker 1: worst possible people in the business because they don't give
Speaker 1: a Harry Yes, that's right about anyone watching this show.
Speaker 14: I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever, and I've said it
Speaker 14: a thousand times that the Morning Joe people and the
Speaker 14: MSNBC people, c A. Mpeper, these are all part of
Speaker 14: the reason why Donald Trump is the next president of
Speaker 14: the United States. I think the upper middle class left,
Speaker 14: the elite left do not understand how credibly nauseating and
Speaker 14: repulsive they look to ordinary working people as they get
Speaker 14: on their little high horses. Having said that, I'm going
Speaker 14: to take a glass half full approach to this, I
Speaker 14: genuinely think these people are so smug and so up
Speaker 14: their own asses that they were genuinely and you could
Speaker 14: see it in their reactions. They were genuinely, absolutely shocked
Speaker 14: when Trump just swept the entire lot because of course
Speaker 14: they you know, all the people they have dinner parties
Speaker 14: with no one they knew.
Speaker 1: Of voting for them. So I think they're going for
Speaker 1: a bit of.
Speaker 14: An existential process, and they are, and they genuinely want to.
Speaker 1: Find They're going to find themselves without a home in
Speaker 1: either direction. Right, the lefties won't love them, and I.
Speaker 14: Think they're just what actually happened, what went wrong?
Speaker 4: The lefties were attacking them. Well, I just can I
Speaker 4: just say.
Speaker 12: I think the fact that all those lefties lost their
Speaker 12: mind and attacked them for giving anything or recognizing Trump
Speaker 12: even existed. You know, we're here that there's this new
Speaker 12: four b where all of these women are not going
Speaker 12: to date men, not going to have sex, not going
Speaker 12: to have babies. Well, I just live in hope that
Speaker 12: there is no procreation from these people that are going
Speaker 12: hashysterical because you know, a morning show went and spoke
Speaker 12: to the President elect.
Speaker 4: There may be hope for the next generation.
Speaker 1: Yet if that God love you, Thank you guys, We'll
Speaker 1: see you again very very soon. Remind that that doco
Speaker 1: is up at scot News dot com dot au. It's
Speaker 1: well worth a look. The late debate is next Cinamore