Speaker 1: From the Skying Center. This is Paul Murray Live well, yes,
Speaker 1: Caleb if you want to, but it does have my
Speaker 1: name on it, So if you want to somehow refill
Speaker 1: it and bring it back, good luck. But otherwise the
Speaker 1: joy your week off, Thank you made all right. There
Speaker 1: is some breaking news that is happening right now and
Speaker 1: it is to do with the entire Donald Trump agenda
Speaker 1: making its way through the United States Congress their version
Speaker 1: of parliament. Now as we speak, we have this bloke speaking,
Speaker 1: one more speaker being the House of Representatives speaker, and
Speaker 1: then there will be a vote. Now, as you know,
Speaker 1: Republicans in order to get the big beautiful bill through
Speaker 1: the parliament, they can only lose three of their own
Speaker 1: because the numbers are so tight. But the bit that
Speaker 1: is the breaking news is this guy. Now, this guy's
Speaker 1: name is Hakeem Jeffries. My apologies. He's a Congressman from
Speaker 1: New York. He replaced Nancy Pelosi as the leader of
Speaker 1: the Democrats. He has been speaking already for more than
Speaker 1: two hours now. He is literally listing every problem that
Speaker 1: he has with the bill. He's reading as many emails
Speaker 1: as possible, and as you can see, he's got a
Speaker 1: lot more notes, So I might make a bold prediction here,
Speaker 1: and I hope I'm wrong. I think he might be
Speaker 1: trying to go for the record. Now I check this
Speaker 1: just before we came on air. The record for the
Speaker 1: longest speech in the history of the lower house of
Speaker 1: the American Parliament, the Congress is five hours. So if
Speaker 1: he's been going for two, does he go into the
Speaker 1: no man's land of three or four? Or is he
Speaker 1: going to try to run a marathon? Because right now
Speaker 1: it is seven am in Washington, which means at seven
Speaker 1: am in New York, and that means the vast bulk
Speaker 1: of people watching breakfast television every time they are crossing
Speaker 1: back every fifteen minutes like a breakfast TV show would
Speaker 1: it is showing this speech. So this bloke is essentially
Speaker 1: starting the mid term campaign, which is November next year.
Speaker 1: He's the one who wants to be the next speaker.
Speaker 1: He's the Democrat leader who who wants to remember, if
Speaker 1: the Democrats take over, they can do everything from slow
Speaker 1: the whole process down to beginning an impeachment process that
Speaker 1: of course they've done twice before, and they'd find a
Speaker 1: way easily to do it three, four or five times
Speaker 1: before the twenty twenty eight American election. So the story
Speaker 1: right now is a bloke who is seemingly trying to
Speaker 1: take every moment he can to speak for as long
Speaker 1: as possible to get as many eyeballs on his opposition
Speaker 1: and his party's opposition to the Big Beautiful Bill. They've
Speaker 1: been debating it all the way through the night. In fact,
Speaker 1: Congress has essentially been voting either in the lower upper
Speaker 1: House for days and days and days. We are now
Speaker 1: down to this final moment. Now, I'm going to take
Speaker 1: fifteen seconds of what he's speaking about now so he
Speaker 1: can get a little bit of a tempo. And anyone
Speaker 1: who's ever written an essay and is trying to pad
Speaker 1: it out, you can tell when somebody's trying to pad
Speaker 1: it out. You tell me, is this blow coming to
Speaker 1: the end of his speech or do you think he's
Speaker 1: going to go for the five hour record, which was
Speaker 1: set I think in the early nineteen hundreds. Again, fifteen seconds.
Speaker 1: We won't wallow in all of this, won't keep kicking
Speaker 1: back all night with the Big Beautiful Bill, which probably
Speaker 1: will pass and only just but this bloke is going
Speaker 1: to go for history. Currently two and a bit hours
Speaker 1: on his way to five. I think.
Speaker 2: A budget surplus from President Bill Clinton and immediately turned
Speaker 2: around and took that budget surplus and turned it into
Speaker 2: a deficit. Okay, that's explode it.
Speaker 1: So you can see he is, in my view, full
Speaker 1: padding mode. If he makes it into our three, well,
Speaker 1: here you go, standing ovations. Go back to this. Let's
Speaker 1: see what he's doing. Is he finishing up? I don't
Speaker 1: think so.
Speaker 3: Let's to speak of Republicans are not the party of
Speaker 3: fiscal responsibility. You're the party of fiscal irresponsibility, over and
Speaker 3: over and over again. And now with this bill, you've
Speaker 3: taken it to a whole other level.
Speaker 1: All right, that's enough, As I say, we will not
Speaker 1: wallow in American politics and the byzantine world of their parliament.
Speaker 1: But there you go a bit of history, perhaps in
Speaker 1: the making, where by the time we're off the air,
Speaker 1: he will be into his third hour, and the history
Speaker 1: as he goes for a drigger water is five hours.
Speaker 1: Lots of other stuff we've got to do tonight on
Speaker 1: Palma Rey Live, including Crana Winner or Loser of the Week.
Speaker 1: Wait till you hear about a court decision which came
Speaker 1: out of South Australia today. You would have thought that
Speaker 1: a crime as bad as the one being discussed would
Speaker 1: result in the maximum amount of time somebody being spent
Speaker 1: in jail. Not the case. We'll get to that, and
Speaker 1: if you like me low Formula one and big News,
Speaker 1: that's happening there as well. We're across everything up, down
Speaker 1: and in between. There is an awful lot to get
Speaker 1: to tonight, including a lot of politics. But I also
Speaker 1: just want to start out with this. If, like many people,
Speaker 1: before you fall asleep, you will end up scrolling through
Speaker 1: your phone and you're not feeling the best. You're often
Speaker 1: start feeling worse because it feels like everyone else on
Speaker 1: social media is having a fantastic time, a fantastic life.
Speaker 1: They're nailing everything, the photos are amazing, they're traveling here,
Speaker 1: there and everywhere, because in many ways, social media is
Speaker 1: a performance. It's a performance about how happy people are,
Speaker 1: have connected, they are, how sad they are out whatever.
Speaker 1: But it is a performance. In the olden days we
Speaker 1: used to say it was keeping up with the Joneses,
Speaker 1: where you buy a new carcass the person down the
Speaker 1: street bought a new car. Well, this is the digital version.
Speaker 1: And if you feel that everyone in the world's having
Speaker 1: a better life than you. Sometimes just sometimes your bad
Speaker 1: day gets worse as a result of that perfect example.
Speaker 1: There is an Australian sporting legend who has been able
Speaker 1: to build quite a successful comedia, a career in the media,
Speaker 1: and it's Leesel Jones. Leesel Jones, of course, is a
Speaker 1: world champion swimmer, multiple Olympic gold medalist, multiple Commonwealth Games medalist,
Speaker 1: and she has had some real struggles when it comes
Speaker 1: to mental health in the many years since she moved
Speaker 1: from her swimming career to now where she is now.
Speaker 1: You can listen to her on the radio on Triple
Speaker 1: M on the Gold Coast, her and Spider and the
Speaker 1: rest of the team Great Breakfast Show. I hope you
Speaker 1: listen to them. But she decided to post something that
Speaker 1: was not a happy picture on social media in the
Speaker 1: past couple of days. This was her having a photo
Speaker 1: from the day before, a day that, by her own admission,
Speaker 1: was one of the worst that she'd had and could
Speaker 1: well have been her last amongst us. Let me read
Speaker 1: from what she posted, Stay until tomorrow. It's one of
Speaker 1: my favorite sayings. Yesterday was one of my worst days,
Speaker 1: and I wanted to end it all. I think I've
Speaker 1: been battling high functioning depression for a little while now,
Speaker 1: and I've just gone back to work with my sich.
Speaker 1: In the dark moments, I promised myself just to stay
Speaker 1: until tomorrow. And it's amazing what the next day can bring.
Speaker 1: Because the day after the photo that I showed you before,
Speaker 1: she said, was spectacular. I had some free time after
Speaker 1: work and I went for an hour long walk along
Speaker 1: the beach, no goals, no plans, just enjoying the sunshine
Speaker 1: and the view. Missing my walking buddy, but walking by
Speaker 1: myself was enough. It changed my whole perspective on things.
Speaker 1: So if life has felt like it kicks you in
Speaker 1: the lately, promise me you'll stay until tomorrow. This is
Speaker 1: such a special and important message because somebody as successful,
Speaker 1: as powerful, as strong as Lisal Jones is willing to
Speaker 1: be that vulnerable about how tough some of her days
Speaker 1: can be, and on the behalf of everyone who has
Speaker 1: never met her but has admired her work both in
Speaker 1: the media and in the pool. We offer her nothing
Speaker 1: but strength and love. But it's an opportunity for me
Speaker 1: to also to try to reach through the screen here
Speaker 1: that if you are somebody who is feeling as she
Speaker 1: has in the past few days, that message to stay
Speaker 1: until tomorrow is vital. It's really important. And I know
Speaker 1: that there is someone somewhere that is watching us who
Speaker 1: is feeling lonelier than they have ever felt, that it's
Speaker 1: feeling lower than they have ever felt, who is feeling
Speaker 1: like they will not see the sun come up tomorrow. Well,
Speaker 1: I want to make a promise to that person, wherever
Speaker 1: you are, that the sun does come up tomorrow, and
Speaker 1: that as tough as it is to put one foot
Speaker 1: in front of the other, even if it is just
Speaker 1: a millimeter, then that itself is a massive achievement. I
Speaker 1: promise that you are loved. I promise that the world
Speaker 1: needs you. I promise that your family and friends are
Speaker 1: better off for you being here. Now. We have days
Speaker 1: like are you Okay Day, and we often talk about
Speaker 1: the importance of reaching out to things like the Kid's
Speaker 1: Help Line or lifeline, and obviously you should. But if
Speaker 1: there is anyone who is feeling what Liesel Jones felt
Speaker 1: this week tonight, may we collectively that being me on
Speaker 1: the Telly and everyone else who is watching right now,
Speaker 1: we're here to offer our hand to pull you through
Speaker 1: to the next day, because the sunrise will be worth it,
Speaker 1: the walk will be worth it. If you're a person
Speaker 1: who does get into these moments, and it may only
Speaker 1: be just a small moment in your life, find a
Speaker 1: song on the radio, find your favorite music from YouTube,
Speaker 1: Go and watch some old comedy from way back when,
Speaker 1: because these are the little choices that mean you make
Speaker 1: it to tomorrow. If you make it to tomorrow, then
Speaker 1: you've had a massive win. So again, if you are
Speaker 1: anyone who is as lonely, strength and love. I promise,
Speaker 1: even from a stranger, we love you and we need
Speaker 1: you around. Thank you to Liesel Jones for the bravery
Speaker 1: of which she showed today. That helpline is the lifeline
Speaker 1: number of thirteen eleven fourteen. That's somebody who might be
Speaker 1: able to help you to night, even if you've never
Speaker 1: called that number before. Just ring it, have a chat.
Speaker 1: If you're worried about someone in your life right now,
Speaker 1: call them. Don't wait till tomorrow. If you know somebody
Speaker 1: is just a little bit off, ring them right now.
Speaker 1: Who cares if they're asleep, Because together we pull each
Speaker 1: other through. Together, we step forward. Because this is a
Speaker 1: wonderful life to live, even when sometimes it feels as
Speaker 1: tough as it can be. But strength and love, leth
Speaker 1: and strength and love to any and everyone else who
Speaker 1: needs that message, I love you, I honestly do. Let's
Speaker 1: turn to the politics of today, though, what we do
Speaker 1: best here, which is, of course, when we talk about
Speaker 1: public servants. We often think about places like Canberra and
Speaker 1: why wouldn't we heavily populated with them, government departments up
Speaker 1: the yin Yang, here, there and everywhere. They of course
Speaker 1: are our moral best the people, of course, recognized by
Speaker 1: the Warman Royal well and truly, but the people in
Speaker 1: and around other government sites sometimes can be a little
Speaker 1: bit frustrating. Well. As I told you on Sunday, Australia
Speaker 1: has now got one million public servants. Now we're not
Speaker 1: talking about a million people in the defense force, a
Speaker 1: million people who are at the front end of things.
Speaker 1: We're talking about a million people who are basically involved
Speaker 1: in the pen pushing the stuff that doesn't really make
Speaker 1: our country a better place, but they go on with it.
Speaker 1: And I'm pleased to say there's been some great reporting
Speaker 1: about this in the past few days. Shane Wright in
Speaker 1: the Channel nine newspapers, and in the Australian newspaper they
Speaker 1: have been focused on via the reporting of Jeff Chambers
Speaker 1: sixteen million bucks. That's how much all of the upper
Speaker 1: echelons of the people around Albo are. And they started
Speaker 1: to jump in here and have a look at the
Speaker 1: numbers of people who are in that ever growing public service.
Speaker 1: And I know there was an election where there was
Speaker 1: some conversation about this, but that doesn't matter. A point
Speaker 1: still stands here, which is since the Australian public service
Speaker 1: levels hit a fourteen year low of one hundred and
Speaker 1: forty four thousand employees at the end of twenty nineteen,
Speaker 1: there has been an explosion in federal bureaucracy under the
Speaker 1: Albanese government, who's now taken from one hundred and forty
Speaker 1: four thousand to two hundred and thirteen thousand staff going
Speaker 1: into the financial year of this year and next year.
Speaker 1: This nice little chart again from the Australian newspaper shows
Speaker 1: you exactly where that stuff has been. Now they say
Speaker 1: every single person when it comes to an increase in
Speaker 1: the public service, they are there to help. Okay, thirty
Speaker 1: nine thousand of them may well have been there to
Speaker 1: help of extras, But what about the football stadium of
Speaker 1: people in administration seventeen thousand since twenty nineteen have been
Speaker 1: added sixteen thousand in compliance and regulation, portfolio, program and
Speaker 1: project management fifteen almost sixteen thousand, strategic policy fourteen thousand,
Speaker 1: Communications and marketing up eighty nine percent since twenty nineteen
Speaker 1: to now three thousand fully paid for all time employees
Speaker 1: of the Australian Public Service. And yes, while there was
Speaker 1: some conversation about Canberra based public servants, and again that
Speaker 1: nuance was lost and any suggestion that this is anything
Speaker 1: but a good thing for our country is met with
Speaker 1: fear and doom about any and everyone who works for
Speaker 1: the Australian government in any and every possible way. Well
Speaker 1: we know how that played out at the federal election.
Speaker 1: But the truth is that Australia's public service is spread out.
Speaker 1: Again a from the Australian newspaper. Yes, majority is in Canberra,
Speaker 1: but a football stadium of thirty four thousand are in Victoria,
Speaker 1: In New South Welst thirty two thousand, in Queensland twenty
Speaker 1: five thousand, South Australia thirteen thousand, and even in Western
Speaker 1: Australia there are close to ten thousand public servants working
Speaker 1: for the federal government, and of course they vote. These
Speaker 1: are the top ten electorates that have the most number
Speaker 1: of Commonwealth public servants that live in them. I think
Speaker 1: you can see pretty obviously here that the extreme majority
Speaker 1: of them are represented by the Labor Party, Canberra being
Speaker 1: Fenna Eden, Manero, Adelaide, Franklin, Sturt Wills, Brisbane, Melbourne, Griffith. Sorry,
Speaker 1: this is the top twenty boothby Marabanon, Lily Hein, marsh
Speaker 1: Macon and Perth. The Coalition only represents two of these seats,
Speaker 1: being Herbert and Riverina and clark In In Tasmania is
Speaker 1: represented by an independent Andrew Wilkie. And as the public
Speaker 1: service grows and any conversation about how efficient that is,
Speaker 1: how relevant that is, how expensive that is, how effective
Speaker 1: that is, well it is of course met with fear
Speaker 1: and doom from the political party of which such a
Speaker 1: huge percentage of these people end up voting for. And
Speaker 1: that speaks at the absolute at heart to something that
Speaker 1: I have been drawing on your screens metaphorically for years now,
Speaker 1: which is what I believe to be a triangle of
Speaker 1: dependence that put simply if you are somebody who relies
Speaker 1: upon the government for welfare, you have to keep voting
Speaker 1: for the same party to be in the government. If
Speaker 1: you work for the government, then you keep voting for
Speaker 1: the political party that is the government. So no one
Speaker 1: rocks the boat. And if you're in private industry, if
Speaker 1: the government is your biggest client or customer, you don't
Speaker 1: rock the boat. So once you put together hundreds of
Speaker 1: thousands of public servants spread out all across the country,
Speaker 1: once you put the millions of people when it comes
Speaker 1: to welfare, not entitlement, welfare and all of those businesses,
Speaker 1: you end up with in part results like we have
Speaker 1: got of recent elections. This is how you build a
Speaker 1: permanent one party rule. It has been widely successful for
Speaker 1: the Labor Party. Why would they change. But as somebody
Speaker 1: who lives outside of that system, like I know many
Speaker 1: of you do, seeing how big it grows and questioning
Speaker 1: whether its growth is always a good thing is something
Speaker 1: that's still a free society should be able to do.
Speaker 1: But if it all comes at essentially it keeps growing,
Speaker 1: the blob keeps growing, regardless of how much it costs,
Speaker 1: regardless of what it does, then no one rocks the boat.
Speaker 1: Which means one party stays in power forever, like Victoria,
Speaker 1: with the exception of one term of the Libs. They've
Speaker 1: been around for about thirty years, with the exception of
Speaker 1: one term a few years ago, and now in Queensland
Speaker 1: again thirty year run of the Labor Party in places
Speaker 1: like Queensland. In a second, i'll show you about how
Speaker 1: they are trying to create permanent one party rule in
Speaker 1: other parts of the country. But that triangle of dependence,
Speaker 1: it is something that is absolutely the goal of the
Speaker 1: modern center left, which is that the Labor Party is
Speaker 1: the government, and you love the government, and the government
Speaker 1: will take care of you, regardless of whether it's a
Speaker 1: one to two or three trillion dollar deficit, regardless of
Speaker 1: whether there are too many people fighting for too few things,
Speaker 1: because we have to keep things like mass immigration going
Speaker 1: on and on and on as long as that triangle works.
Speaker 1: And we know triangles some of the strongest shapes you
Speaker 1: can possibly have. Why because it all reinforces itself to
Speaker 1: law and order, specifically the court in South Australia. Now,
Speaker 1: I'm one of these crazy people who believes that when
Speaker 1: someone commits a crime, they should be punished for the
Speaker 1: crime yes, slowly, but surely because not everyone gets life
Speaker 1: towards the end of it. That's when rehabilitation and your
Speaker 1: ability to move back into the real world, well, okay,
Speaker 1: that starts to kick in. But there are certain crimes
Speaker 1: where the sentences have to be so large to send
Speaker 1: a message to the commuit unity. Firstly, you don't want
Speaker 1: to do this because you're going to spend an awful
Speaker 1: long time in jar but secondly it's also because it's
Speaker 1: a statement of national values that this does not happen here.
Speaker 1: And you saw the Court of Appeal in South Australia
Speaker 1: because they have made it curious in my view decision
Speaker 1: in the past couple of days, but it is one
Speaker 1: that gives us an idea about a legal system, not
Speaker 1: a justice system, as Darren Hinch said so many years
Speaker 1: on the air, and when of course his party was
Speaker 1: focused in and around these issues and was quite successful
Speaker 1: in Victoria for quite a few years. I want to
Speaker 1: go back a couple of years where there was a
Speaker 1: young woman who was stabbed and she was stabbed by
Speaker 1: her father. The reason I'll get to in a second.
Speaker 1: The image is one from CCTV footage that was released
Speaker 1: by the Supreme Court of South Australia of a man
Speaker 1: with a knife. The police investigating the scene because the
Speaker 1: stab happened in broad daylight in a shopping center. Well,
Speaker 1: multiple members of the family ended up going before the courts,
Speaker 1: but the specific focus is the man the father. Have
Speaker 1: a look here I read now from the ABC and
Speaker 1: their accounting of what has happened in the past couple
Speaker 1: of days, members of an Adelaide Honor stabbing victim family
Speaker 1: members rather of Adelaide Honor stabbing victim have had their
Speaker 1: sentences reduced. The trio and other family members were charged
Speaker 1: after a twenty one year old woman was held down
Speaker 1: and stabbed outside the Sefton Plaza shopping center in Adelaide's
Speaker 1: North in November two thy and twenty one. She was
Speaker 1: repeatedly stabbed in the abdomen with a large kitchen knife
Speaker 1: before being driven to the family home and put into
Speaker 1: a shower. The woman suffered significant internal injuries in the incident.
Speaker 1: There is more to this story and as the headline
Speaker 1: has told you why the stabbing took place again, we
Speaker 1: continue to read from the story from the ABC released
Speaker 1: today on their website. The court had previously heard that
Speaker 1: the traditional Pashtun Muslim family disapproved of her relationship with
Speaker 1: a Christian man and worked together to track her down.
Speaker 1: In the lead up to the stabbing, The crime had
Speaker 1: previously been described in court as an attempted honor killing.
Speaker 1: In written reasons. The court also noted that the victim
Speaker 1: of the offending had now provided a sworn Affi David
Speaker 1: earlier this year, stating that quote she forgives the appellance
Speaker 1: and expresses favorable views as to the appellan's remorse and
Speaker 1: therefore a desirability of a non custodial sentence. But let's
Speaker 1: be very clear what happened here. The father pled guilty
Speaker 1: to the charges of false imprisonment and aggravated korus in
Speaker 1: serious with intent as originally judged for fourteen years and
Speaker 1: three months. Remember what are the beginnings of what they
Speaker 1: believe to be a planned honor killing. Why because of
Speaker 1: her relationship with a Christian man, his total sentence has
Speaker 1: been reduced by almost four years from fourteen to now
Speaker 1: ten and a half, with a non parole period of
Speaker 1: seven years and six months. Now this is the perfect
Speaker 1: example of the legal system, not the justice system, and
Speaker 1: whatever relationship that victim has to the person responsible for
Speaker 1: it is one thing, but how can any court anywhere
Speaker 1: in the country do anything but send the loudest, loudest,
Speaker 1: loudest message. That's that a woman being stabbed, threatened, kidnapped
Speaker 1: or maybe even killed because of the faith of the
Speaker 1: people that she chooses to mix with. No way. Now again,
Speaker 1: I know the way the system works. You get fourteen years,
Speaker 1: but the victim's able to say, hey, I forgive, which
Speaker 1: means the justice system stands aside in terms of punishment,
Speaker 1: and we get the legal system, which means the time
Speaker 1: goes down, the person remains in jalen will for some time.
Speaker 1: But am I the only person in Australia who thinks
Speaker 1: that the original decision is right and should not have
Speaker 1: been changed? Tell me your thoughts, paul a skynews dot
Speaker 1: com dot au. What I was mentioning before about the
Speaker 1: permanent rule of one particular political party. I want to
Speaker 1: turn now again to South Australia. Stick with South Australia,
Speaker 1: but now turned to their state parliament because they've made
Speaker 1: some interesting decisions in the past couple of days. In fact,
Speaker 1: the law passed last year, but it's all come to
Speaker 1: effect on July the first. The South Australian Premier, Peter
Speaker 1: malanowskis a bloke who remains incredibly popular and as Iltia
Speaker 1: in a second, looks like you can to absolutely cake
Speaker 1: walk it in at the next state election. The Liberal
Speaker 1: Party being reduced to well even less than a Torrago
Speaker 1: most likely. Well, they made a decision, which is a
Speaker 1: good one and one that I support, which is no
Speaker 1: longer will there be cor flutes, those ugly posters that
Speaker 1: go up on power polls all over the place, meaning
Speaker 1: people can deface them like that. But you know, during
Speaker 1: the last federal election there was too many of them.
Speaker 1: They annoy me. I know for some people they think
Speaker 1: it's a good way to get the message out, but
Speaker 1: to me, I'm just tired of seeing them. It's a
Speaker 1: sort of nineteen eighties way of campaigning. In twenty and
Speaker 1: twenty five, well, the law in South Australia is that
Speaker 1: there are no such posters except for ones in private property,
Speaker 1: which you can have on your house, but you can't
Speaker 1: have them outside of your house, which means a little
Speaker 1: less visual pollution. The state government has passed a law
Speaker 1: saying during a federal election campaign there will be no
Speaker 1: posters either good. Yeah. But back to the triangle of dependence.
Speaker 1: The media has been quite impressed by the South Australian
Speaker 1: government making a decision to ban all political donations from
Speaker 1: the political system. Again on this idea that a million
Speaker 1: dollars in equals decisions coming out, I'll let our reporter
Speaker 1: from Adelaide explain how the system works practically.
Speaker 4: As of July one, political parties, sitting MPs and candidates
Speaker 4: are banned from accepting money from external organizations in South Australia,
Speaker 4: including businesses, unions and lobbyists.
Speaker 1: There's also going to be rules about just how much
Speaker 1: a political campaign can spend during an election.
Speaker 4: All parties will now abide by a funding cap, but
Speaker 4: tax payers will have to chip in more in lieu
Speaker 4: of donations in the order of three million dollars. Unions
Speaker 4: and businesses will also be able to run their own
Speaker 4: separate advertising campaigns, but their spending will also be capped
Speaker 4: at four hundred and fifty thousand dollars.
Speaker 1: Now put simply, if there is a maximum amount that
Speaker 1: everyone can spend, then essentially there is a level playing field.
Speaker 1: That is the point being made by the Premier. There's
Speaker 1: a reason I'm making this point tonight though here is
Speaker 1: the premier.
Speaker 5: We have now guaranteed that the Liberal Party and the
Speaker 5: Labor Party have the exact same level of resources at
Speaker 5: the next state election.
Speaker 1: But one thing that every single state has as rules
Speaker 1: is the political parties or any candidate who gets more
Speaker 1: than four percent of the vote gets a certain amount
Speaker 1: of money per vote per seat. So yes, the largest
Speaker 1: amount of money will go to the people who end
Speaker 1: up winning the seats. The smallest will be any single
Speaker 1: candidate over four percent. There are different ways this can
Speaker 1: get calculated, and are not going to get into the
Speaker 1: overall numbers here, but where the system, in my view,
Speaker 1: goes from a level playing field going into the next
Speaker 1: state election, because everyone's hemmed into the same box. If
Speaker 1: you are the receiver of money because of how well
Speaker 1: you do at an election, if you're going to absolutely
Speaker 1: smash it, I'm going to end up with more money
Speaker 1: in the kiddy than your opposition. And that's where I
Speaker 1: think you start to get back to that triangle of
Speaker 1: one political party having more money. And yes, they may
Speaker 1: not be able to spend all of that money at
Speaker 1: a state election, but of course that money may well
Speaker 1: be able to be sent to other state divisions or
Speaker 1: even to the federal party. You see the latest opinion
Speaker 1: polls out of South Australia, seeing that the Malinowskars government
Speaker 1: is going to be re elected and handsomely in fact
Speaker 1: on the two party preferred it's currently sixty seven to
Speaker 1: thirty three. So they are going to absolutely smash the
Speaker 1: next election and theoretically end up with more money per votes. Now.
Speaker 1: I have tried to research this as hard as I
Speaker 1: can today and I will again report back to you
Speaker 1: next week about exactly how much money could be a
Speaker 1: play here, but to give you an idea of how
Speaker 1: dominant the Labor Party is in South Australia right now
Speaker 1: and how they could be a serious financial beneficiary of
Speaker 1: the new system when it comes to the preferred premier.
Speaker 1: Right now in South Australia, Peter Malanowska's has seventy two
Speaker 1: percent of the vote. Will he end up with an
Speaker 1: awful lot of money? Again? We will all find out together.
Speaker 1: So news out of Europe that I want to get to,
Speaker 1: specifically out of Spain is some breaking news in and
Speaker 1: around a footballer for the Liverpool Football Club in the EPL,
Speaker 1: and also a man who was played football for his
Speaker 1: nation of Portugal. This was the breaking news a couple
Speaker 1: of hours ago.
Speaker 6: I want to bring you a line of breaking news
Speaker 6: that's coming into us from FA in Spain. They are
Speaker 6: reporting that's the Liverpool and the Portugal forward Diego Jotter,
Speaker 6: has died after a car crash in the northwest of
Speaker 6: the country. Diego Jotter, who has been playing for Liverpool
Speaker 6: since he signed from Wolverhampton Wanderers in September of twenty twenty,
Speaker 6: said to have died in that currents and it's not
Speaker 6: clear at this point whether or not he was the
Speaker 6: only individual in the car. The only detail we have
Speaker 6: is that he has died in that crash in the
Speaker 6: northwest of Spain.
Speaker 1: After the breaking news, it has now been confirmed that
Speaker 1: his brother has also died in this accident. This is
Speaker 1: them as younger men, and both, of course, like all brothers,
Speaker 1: looking forward to an incredible life in front of them.
Speaker 1: The reason I mentioned this story, apart from that the
Speaker 1: football world is morning one of its stars, is because
Speaker 1: it is a reminder about how fast the world can change.
Speaker 1: Because here he was just two weeks ago getting married.
Speaker 1: As he leaves this world, a little girl two boys
Speaker 1: and his beautiful bride. The UK Prime Minister has had
Speaker 1: a bit to say about this tragedy today.
Speaker 7: This is devastating news and I'm sure I speak for
Speaker 7: everyone in saying our first thoughts are going to be
Speaker 7: with his family and his friends. In particular, there are
Speaker 7: millions of Liverpool fans, but also football fans are non fans.
Speaker 1: Who will also be shocked by this. More news is
Speaker 1: up right now on the sky Neiwess website sky News
Speaker 1: dot com dot A. You a new face to the
Speaker 1: Paulmiray Life team as well as an old favorite in
Speaker 1: a moment or two is time And by the way,
Speaker 1: I've just checked that bloke in the US is now
Speaker 1: up to two and a half hours of speaking at
Speaker 1: the halfway mark to maybe a five hour speech to
Speaker 1: try to stop or at least delay the big beautiful
Speaker 1: bill ha Keen Jeffries is hit halftime. Can he make
Speaker 1: five hours in history? We'll all be asleep and we'll
Speaker 1: all find out tomorrow more than a second thank you
Speaker 1: so much for watching. Done forget before we're done, a
Speaker 1: winner or loser of the week, jump onto all of
Speaker 1: our socials. In the meantime, looking forward to the people
Speaker 1: who will help me do it and remember it's legally binding.
Speaker 1: Christiy McSweeney is from the pr Council. We always love
Speaker 1: you to see her wonderful face and her new faces
Speaker 1: whilst which is Ed Kavanagh and Ed is with the
Speaker 1: mckel Institute. We got team Red and team Blue no
Speaker 1: matter what ties they wear, Lady Jen Tlloe and love
Speaker 1: you to see you both, Ed, Welcome to the show.
Speaker 1: Now today the charted accountants, you know that sexy group
Speaker 1: of people. God love you for an accountant, but still
Speaker 1: you get the point. They've come forward and said, look,
Speaker 1: if everything's on the table when it comes to the
Speaker 1: productivity discussions the Treasure will be having in August. Maybe
Speaker 1: one of the things we should be talking about is
Speaker 1: upping the GST. But it's not just about the money
Speaker 1: grab of upping the GST. Theoretically you'd be able to
Speaker 1: push down the amount of tax that is being paid
Speaker 1: for by individuals. Only problem with all of this logic,
Speaker 1: by the way, is remember in terms of what you
Speaker 1: and I as pay as you go, people actually end
Speaker 1: up giving. I think the federal government gets close to
Speaker 1: four hundred billion dollars out of income tax and only
Speaker 1: about one hundred billion out of the GST. So there's
Speaker 1: going to have to be some little wobble here, but
Speaker 1: we'll see what happens. All right, ed, new face, do
Speaker 1: you get to go first? Will they ever change the GST?
Speaker 8: Well, look, I think the answer to that, very briefly
Speaker 8: is no.
Speaker 9: I think the Treasure has been pretty clear that in
Speaker 9: this new round.
Speaker 8: Of tax reform of productivity debate, but the GST is
Speaker 8: effectively off the table. This is an old proposal, though
Speaker 8: we've seen this for the last couple of decades. People
Speaker 8: have been talking about eventually we are going to have
Speaker 8: to ramp up the GST. I think if you're going
Speaker 8: to raise that as a new area of reform, what
Speaker 8: you need to be incredibly explicit about from the outset
Speaker 8: is what that compensation is actually going to look like.
Speaker 8: And I noted in this proposal, effectively what we saw
Speaker 8: was a vague idea that we'd see lower income taxes,
Speaker 8: we'd see lower business taxes. You know, I want to
Speaker 8: see that conversation start with if we are ever going
Speaker 8: to raise the GST. First, what we're going to do
Speaker 8: is guarantee that we will see everyone who is earning
Speaker 8: much say below fifty thousand dollars a year or so,
Speaker 8: pay dramatically less income tax and be a bit explicit
Speaker 8: about that, because otherwise we're just going to end up
Speaker 8: raising the GST and punish those potentially that can't afford it.
Speaker 9: So I think in this conversation.
Speaker 8: Around tax reform, around productivity reform, we shouldn't really be
Speaker 8: starting with what taxes we should be raising. I think
Speaker 8: we should be looking at who should be have a
Speaker 8: less of a load of on the income tax burden,
Speaker 8: and that's certainly people on fifty sixty thousand dollars in below.
Speaker 1: Well again, Christy, Essentially all GST moneys end up going
Speaker 1: back to the States, and we all know that the
Speaker 1: states are all in a world of debt, They're all
Speaker 1: in a world of deficits. Structurally, the federal budget, each
Speaker 1: generational report says that there's going to be deficits there
Speaker 1: for the next forty years. So money is going to
Speaker 1: have to come from somewhere. But what's your thoughts on
Speaker 1: this being the way to somehow achieve it.
Speaker 5: Well, first of all, Australia's proportion of revenue is nearing
Speaker 5: fifty percent from income tax, and that does not offset
Speaker 5: the spending commitments that seem to be forever ever increase.
Speaker 5: And I'll just mentioned in contrast to what Ed would say,
Speaker 5: there is the low Income Tax OFFSEET for people making
Speaker 5: under I think it's thirty seven thousand, and of course
Speaker 5: if raising that to fifties is part of the conversation,
Speaker 5: well then that's another spending commitment that the government needs
Speaker 5: to offset Somewhere. How is raising the GST. I'll make
Speaker 5: the point that I'm old enough and I've done politics
Speaker 5: a long enough time to remember when we used to
Speaker 5: do it without twenty four hour media, without twenty four
Speaker 5: hours social media, or twenty four hour political teav Tell
Speaker 5: me for our political.
Speaker 1: Tell me about this this mysterious place of which we
Speaker 1: never discussed anymore.
Speaker 5: I know I'm showing my age here, but that has
Speaker 5: the twenty four hour news cycle and social media has
Speaker 5: changed what reform or what we call reform in Australia. Now,
Speaker 5: reform isn't done because you go to party room or
Speaker 5: you go to caucus and you raise an idea of
Speaker 5: reform such as raising the GST, and before that party
Speaker 5: room or caucus meeting is over, within about half an hour,
Speaker 5: word has been texted out the news outlets have got
Speaker 5: to poll up in your top six marginal seats showing
Speaker 5: that people won't support raising taxes, surprise, surprise. So it's
Speaker 5: a very brave politician who then wants to prosecute that argument,
Speaker 5: and that applies to so many dearly needed reforms that
Speaker 5: Australia is now coming to an end of that twenty
Speaker 5: year cycle of when we last had reform, and you
Speaker 5: could even argue that the hawk Keating government was probably
Speaker 5: the last government to do it in a great number
Speaker 5: and then how it came with the GST and gun
Speaker 5: reform and they've been tinking around the edges, but we
Speaker 5: don't do it when it costs people money. It's very
Speaker 5: difficult to sell in a twenty four hour media cycle environment.
Speaker 5: When was the last time anybody saw a white paper?
Speaker 5: The Ken Henry Tax Review might have been the last
Speaker 5: thing that could be considered a white paper, and no
Speaker 5: government ever since has wanted to implement many of the
Speaker 5: recommendations that would count a significant tax reform.
Speaker 1: Yeah. I mean, the reality of politics, right is if
Speaker 1: team Red comes up with an idea, Team Blue is
Speaker 1: probably going to be against it, and vice versa, and
Speaker 1: wherever you draw the line right wherever you draw the line,
Speaker 1: that is officially the line, and the one person who's
Speaker 1: got half a ton nail over it, look at the victims,
Speaker 1: look at it. We all know, right, they've all done it,
Speaker 1: they've all done it for a while. But can we
Speaker 1: actually look at it?
Speaker 9: Absolutely, I just want to jump.
Speaker 8: Well, I think we can, and I think part of
Speaker 8: the problem with this particular one is it's not a
Speaker 8: big idea. You know, this is an old idea. Everyone
Speaker 8: said for the last twenty years, basically the level of
Speaker 8: ges is inadequate, let's ramp it up. But no one's
Speaker 8: actually done the work in saying here's who's going to
Speaker 8: be compensated, here's how they're going to be compensated. We
Speaker 8: clearly have a problem with working people in the country
Speaker 8: paying way too much income tax. If you pay fifty
Speaker 8: or sixty thousand dollars, you're paying sort of seven or
Speaker 8: ten thousand dollars a year in income tax.
Speaker 9: That is a pretty significant burden for low income households.
Speaker 8: The reform debate that we have to have going forward
Speaker 8: in this productivity agenda that the government has put on
Speaker 8: the table, it is how we lower that burden and
Speaker 8: how we replace it with basically a more efficient way
Speaker 8: to tax capital and unearned wealth. And I think that's
Speaker 8: the direction that this conversation should shift. It shouldn't just
Speaker 8: be let's figure out another way to squeeze everyday people
Speaker 8: when they go into the grocery store.
Speaker 1: All right. Now, Melissa Macintosh is a shadow minister. She's
Speaker 1: also the Member for Lindsay. Now, it used to be
Speaker 1: political orthodoxy that you cannot win government without winning Western Sydney,
Speaker 1: particularly Penrith. It's a place where in many bellweather ways,
Speaker 1: essentially it always went the way of elections. But of
Speaker 1: course she's been able to hold on regardless of the
Speaker 1: fact that the Liberal Party lost government in twenty two
Speaker 1: and got ask in twenty five. But she's standing up
Speaker 1: pretty aggressively about the need for reform in and amand
Speaker 1: iss used to do with gender. Now, Christy, we've talked
Speaker 1: about this and quite correctly, because there's nothing that ever
Speaker 1: seems to change for a long time. It does seem
Speaker 1: that there are plenty of voices that are at getting
Speaker 1: greater as seniority recognizing that there's a serious need. And
Speaker 1: her conversation is much deeper and goes beyond things like
Speaker 1: quotas and I support as I said the day after
Speaker 1: the election as a person who wanted the Libs to
Speaker 1: be the government, is that when they lost and lost
Speaker 1: by the margin that they did, you don't just need
Speaker 1: to learn a lesson, you need to be seen to
Speaker 1: be learning a lesson. And also, there's a whole bunch
Speaker 1: of people in corporate Australia who can help organizations modernize
Speaker 1: to change, to deal with these issues. And am pleased
Speaker 1: to see that Melissa is suggesting that bringing in some
Speaker 1: outside help people who know change for a living might
Speaker 1: be the way to do it.
Speaker 5: Thoughts Well, there's a whole lot of people within the
Speaker 5: Liberal Party that can actually help them to Paul. I
Speaker 5: think some outstanding issues there is that those people might
Speaker 5: not have been listened to, perhaps around issues to do
Speaker 5: with gender and policies that might appeal to women and
Speaker 5: how to engage women in the Liberal Party. I want
Speaker 5: to make two points on this. Melissa Macintosh is an
Speaker 5: underrated hero of the Liberal Party in such difficult environments
Speaker 5: where seats that once were considered a safe seats now
Speaker 5: five percent. She has continued to win that seat in
Speaker 5: Western Sydney time and time and time again. And the
Speaker 5: other underrated hero is Jason wood Out in Latrobe, who
Speaker 5: has held that seat since two thousand and four, only
Speaker 5: losing it in two thousand and seven the rud Slide election,
Speaker 5: where his multicultural community or multicultural percentage is around thirty
Speaker 5: forty percent of migrants who've chosen to call Australia home
Speaker 5: and they vote for him. Large Indian community in particular,
Speaker 5: underrated heroes, both of them, and we don't give them
Speaker 5: enough credit for what they do. Melissa can I say,
Speaker 5: I'm really pleased to hear her use her voice because
Speaker 5: she used someone who, despite increasing her margin consistently, has
Speaker 5: been very much under attack by factions within the Liberal
Speaker 5: Party who wanted to see her rolled at her pre selection.
Speaker 5: So if we're talking about gender issues, we have to
Speaker 5: talk about factional issues. And despite the fact that you
Speaker 5: increase your vote consistently in this really difficult environment, people
Speaker 5: still want to throw you over for a man, I
Speaker 5: must say, But that's irrelevant of who they wanted to
Speaker 5: replace her with. But that speaks to a number of
Speaker 5: structural issues within the party. I'm for quoters. I think
Speaker 5: it's time Labour's got fifty percent parody in their party room.
Speaker 5: We've lagged at twenty percent for over the last two decades.
Speaker 5: It doesn't matter how we do it, but we need
Speaker 5: to find a way because two consecutive elections, the women
Speaker 5: of Australia have just said that's it. You're not speaking
Speaker 5: to me well enough, and there's a public perception issue
Speaker 5: out there that they don't want to vote for the
Speaker 5: Liberal Party.
Speaker 1: I'm with you. Send your hate email because I often
Speaker 1: get it on this issue, Paul. Let's go news dot
Speaker 1: com dot au and you can respond on other issues.
Speaker 1: In a moment or two time. How's a marathon man
Speaker 1: going in Washington? By the way, two hours forty three.
Speaker 1: He's gone for the record, he's gone for the Big five?
Speaker 1: Can he get there? We'll all find out together. It's
Speaker 1: so exciting. He's just talking and talking and talking. That's
Speaker 1: talking and talk. Thanks very much for watching a winner
Speaker 1: or loser of the week in a moment or two time.
Speaker 1: Ed Kavanah is with the mckel Institute, the left wing
Speaker 1: think tank or center lift think tank. Can they prefer
Speaker 1: to say or mainstream as they'd also like to say,
Speaker 1: none other than the pr Council is where you can
Speaker 1: find the wonderful Christy McSweeney, help you with everything from
Speaker 1: a crisis to long term planning. We're here. Remember we're
Speaker 1: not Channel two. We're here to push a book, right.
Speaker 1: I'm happy to help people out with what they do
Speaker 1: all day, every day.
Speaker 9: All right.
Speaker 1: So let's get to the story around Rachel Reeves. Now,
Speaker 1: she is the Chancellor, the Treasurer of the United Kingdom general,
Speaker 1: a lot of pressure because of a whole bunch of
Speaker 1: decisions they were going to make they had to walk
Speaker 1: back on. There's a lot of pressure that's been on
Speaker 1: her and when, of course they feel there's blood in
Speaker 1: the water, they go all the way like every political
Speaker 1: person does. And she was very obviously crying in the
Speaker 1: Parliament today. Now, there might be something personal going on.
Speaker 1: If there is, obviously we'll mention that if we learn
Speaker 1: of it. But there's clearly a lot of pressure on
Speaker 1: this person right now. So let's get to pressure in public.
Speaker 1: It's not that she is female, and certainly I noticed
Speaker 1: that a lot of people talking about this, We're thinking,
Speaker 1: do you even bring this issue up. I'm not going
Speaker 1: into the gender of things, but about how we deal
Speaker 1: with pressure. And look, as somebody who's hit harder than
Speaker 1: most for longer than most. You do need to constantly
Speaker 1: remind ourselves these are normal people. And yes, while their
Speaker 1: job may be coming to an end, or their failures
Speaker 1: may be coming to an end. When you see somebody's hurting,
Speaker 1: I don't think that's the moment to just go all
Speaker 1: the way. She may still lose a job, but you
Speaker 1: need to pull back every so slightly too. Am I
Speaker 1: too soft for these hard times?
Speaker 4: Ed?
Speaker 1: No, I.
Speaker 8: Think you're absolutely right. Look, this is these are people
Speaker 8: at the end of the day, you know, I agree.
Speaker 8: I mean to an extent, this is a brutal blood sport,
Speaker 8: particularly UK Parliament.
Speaker 9: I mean they're sitting six feet away from each other.
Speaker 8: They you know, it's one of the most brutal possible
Speaker 8: environments you can be in in politics. So you know,
Speaker 8: people do have to have a bit of a spine
Speaker 8: in that situation. But you know, Rachel Reeves has been
Speaker 8: under extraordinary pressure. I mean I speak to my friends
Speaker 8: and colleagues over in the UK and they have certainly
Speaker 8: made a huge number of mistakes and you know, Kisama
Speaker 8: has really had to navigate through that as well, and
Speaker 8: it's been a really difficult time for the UK government
Speaker 8: over there and she's obviously feeling that pressure. So you know,
Speaker 8: it doesn't surprise me that coming about not you know,
Speaker 8: went in for the juggular in that instance. It is
Speaker 8: difficult to watch, but you know, this is a kind
Speaker 8: of a blood.
Speaker 9: Sport at the end of the day. In UK parliamentary politics.
Speaker 1: I'm trying to think about, you know, the pressures that
Speaker 1: were in and around our mate Nicole Flint when she
Speaker 1: was a member of Parliament and they were coming very
Speaker 1: hard at her, and how personal things were. I also
Speaker 1: think fairly obvious amount of personal abuse in the last
Speaker 1: federal election Christy. But again, if you're sitting opposite someone,
Speaker 1: let's imagine you're in that scenario, what do you do.
Speaker 1: Do you pull back because clearly this person is on
Speaker 1: the edge or the nature of the battle is sorry,
Speaker 1: you know, I get it, but we're not going to stop.
Speaker 5: The nature of the battle is one that never pays
Speaker 5: regard for humanity and politics, and I don't think that
Speaker 5: the media politicians themselves when they attack each other, and
Speaker 5: even within the same party. Most of your emotional distress
Speaker 5: comes from within your own party. And I'm sure Ed
Speaker 5: will agree with me. Some of the hardened, most damaging
Speaker 5: personally nasty attacks on politicians from their own side on
Speaker 5: the other side, but the public as well doesn't take
Speaker 5: heed to humanity. We have a narrative of you're paid
Speaker 5: by the taxpayer, we own you. And again I'll return
Speaker 5: to the twenty four hour social media where people are
Speaker 5: keyboard warriors and hide behind screens to lodge these really
Speaker 5: nasty personal attacks because they don't look at politicians as
Speaker 5: humans because they've been fed this narrative of you owe us,
Speaker 5: you're paid by our taxes, and that is true, but
Speaker 5: that doesn't mean we should disregard humanity in people who
Speaker 5: are doing a job which is a very, very very
Speaker 5: hard job. But I will say, you know that it's
Speaker 5: a very hard job.
Speaker 7: You know what it's like.
Speaker 5: You wouldn't go there if you weren't preferred to.
Speaker 1: So we also have to.
Speaker 5: Have a absolutely we also have to have a discussion
Speaker 5: around the mental health toll on politics, which is when
Speaker 5: these types of really personal things happen and they buckle
Speaker 5: under pressure, because that's a really real concern. We haven't
Speaker 5: talked about that since many many years ago. When you know,
Speaker 5: there was a member of the Labor Party who came
Speaker 5: to some significant mental health harm. And I won't name
Speaker 5: that person to give that issue oxygen, but it was
Speaker 5: two decades ago. Now we haven't talked about it since.
Speaker 1: Let's talk ed about a smelter and potentially a smelter
Speaker 1: closing and the pressures that are on this particular industry.
Speaker 1: What is it that concerns you about the particular nature
Speaker 1: of this one.
Speaker 8: Well, look, I'm speaking to you tonight from South Australia.
Speaker 8: I am, you know, very proud South Australian. We just
Speaker 8: saw the Whala intervention a few months ago to great effects.
Speaker 8: We're seeing really significant pressures on the Near Star smelter
Speaker 8: up import period, but also the smelting industry more broadly
Speaker 8: around the whole country. Basically our capacity as a nation
Speaker 8: to refine metals and to value add to the resource
Speaker 8: that we have here, and we're seeing news story after
Speaker 8: news story every other day now some of these refineries
Speaker 8: coming under acute pressure and potentially having to seek some
Speaker 8: sort of government assistance. And what's really happening here, which
Speaker 8: I think hasn't been called out clearly enough by our government,
Speaker 8: but certainly just in the community at large, is that
Speaker 8: you know, we hear about some of the pressures in
Speaker 8: this sector being purely energy based, energy related within our
Speaker 8: domestic energy sector. What we're actually seeing though is state
Speaker 8: intervention from the Chinese, from others, huge amounts of industrial
Speaker 8: policy happening all around the world that is effectively artificially
Speaker 8: lowering the prices of so many of these commodities and
Speaker 8: really making it more unviable, really quickly for some of
Speaker 8: these smelters to be operational in Australia. So we've got
Speaker 8: to call that out, and I do think the government
Speaker 8: really needs to. The federal government needs to think about
Speaker 8: some sort of cohesive national strategy in this sector. Otherwise
Speaker 8: we are going to see you know, thousands of jobs go,
Speaker 8: but also our sovereign capability as a country to manufacture
Speaker 8: and to value add or these essential commodities potentially potentially
Speaker 8: be lost off.
Speaker 1: Sure, I agree, thankfully. South Australian election will steady the
Speaker 1: mind as well. Thank you to appreciate it. You can
Speaker 1: come back anytime you want, ed Christy, you know you're
Speaker 1: always welcome here. Thank you. Guys. Have a wonderful weekend.
Speaker 1: All right, quick break back with more big news in
Speaker 1: the world of Formula one and the Marathon Man. Well,
Speaker 1: we'll welcome him into his third hour of speaking in
Speaker 1: the US. You have no I love my supercars and
Speaker 1: speaking of happy birthday to the wonderful Bathist winning champion
Speaker 1: driver that is David Reynolds, who is having his special
Speaker 1: birthday today. Well done mate, all the best of you
Speaker 1: and the family. But of course Formula one the global
Speaker 1: sensation and we of course love Oscar Piastre and all
Speaker 1: of that. We hope that he is going to be
Speaker 1: able to make his way towards win Silverston this weekend
Speaker 1: and maybe go on to a world title. But of
Speaker 1: course the bloke who has had many of recent years
Speaker 1: is Max Vashtappen, and Max is not having a great
Speaker 1: year all right. Basically it is pastre versus Norris, both
Speaker 1: playing for the same team, and Max is not out
Speaker 1: of it yet, but he's sort of on his way.
Speaker 1: Certainly the team that he races for, though, that being
Speaker 1: Red Bull Racing, is having a garbage year. So there
Speaker 1: is now conversation that after Lewis Hamilton left Mercedes Benz
Speaker 1: to go to Ferrari this year, that none other than
Speaker 1: Max Verstappen could make his way towards Mercedes. A man
Speaker 1: who knows much more about this than any of us
Speaker 1: is none other than Martin Brundle, and he said this
Speaker 1: today on Sky News F one.
Speaker 10: For him to be hanging there still without clarity as
Speaker 10: we head into the halfway point of the British Grand
Speaker 10: Prix as unusual and nobody is absolutely categorically denying that
Speaker 10: Max with Stappen is talking to Mercedes beins. That's Mercedes
Speaker 10: or team for Stappen.
Speaker 9: So something's up.
Speaker 1: Now. Apparently for all of this to happen, there'd be
Speaker 1: something like one hundred million dollars to move away from
Speaker 1: the team, and apparently Mercedes is willing to pay it.
Speaker 1: Very exciting and I look forward to watching practice, qualifying
Speaker 1: and all the rest of it, and then looking forward
Speaker 1: of course to the supercars in Townsville in the meantime.
Speaker 1: Have a wonderful weekend wherever you happen to be. Keep
Speaker 1: the emails coming, Pau. Let's go and News dot com
Speaker 1: dot aug Tigers Go Yankees, thanks for watching, and here
Speaker 1: is the late debate