Speaker 1: Live on Sky News. This is Sharry Good Evening Tonight.
Speaker 2: A decade of deficits, a trillion dollar debt and a
Speaker 2: tax cut worth less than a coffee. The political fight
Speaker 2: over the federal budget heats up. Michael Kroger and Judith
Speaker 2: Sloan will give their verdict. Also in the show, Ben
Speaker 2: Roberts Smith on the verge of taking legal action after
Speaker 2: our revelations that nine journalists Nick mackenzie claim to have
Speaker 2: obtained his legal strategy in secret recordings where he also
Speaker 2: said he'd breached his ethics.
Speaker 1: How exclusive coming.
Speaker 2: Up, Plus the extraordinary uprising against Hermus on the streets
Speaker 2: of Gaza as Palestinians brave Palestinians voice their anger with
Speaker 2: the terror regime.
Speaker 1: We will the.
Speaker 2: Hypocrites in the West finally wake up and realize that
Speaker 2: Hermus are not freedom fighters. And the shocking verbal assault
Speaker 2: of a liberal politician on breakfast television Jackie Lamby Owes
Speaker 2: Jane Hume an apology but first tonight, Jim Chalmers tax
Speaker 2: cuts today have been widely condemned across the board as small,
Speaker 2: insignificant and according to the Coalition.
Speaker 1: A hoax and a bribe. Well if a five.
Speaker 2: Dollars a week tax cut was slammed as two small
Speaker 2: twenty two years ago.
Speaker 1: Then it was even less welcome.
Speaker 2: Today we're in a cost of living crisis where this
Speaker 2: meager amount will be eroded by bracket creep within two
Speaker 2: years now. We spoke last night about how Costello announced
Speaker 2: a five dollars a week tax cut in two thousand
Speaker 2: and three and at the time his colleague Amanda Anstone
Speaker 2: admitted that it would barely afford a sandwich and a milkshake. Well,
Speaker 2: here were those comments, but.
Speaker 3: The government's sales campaign was not helped by the Family
Speaker 3: and Community Services minister was making a point on welfare payments.
Speaker 4: Of course, you want to give them five dollars more
Speaker 4: five dollars Hell, what will it buy you?
Speaker 5: A sandwich and a milkshake if you're.
Speaker 2: Lucky, a sandwich and a milkshake if you're lucky.
Speaker 1: And that was twenty two years ago.
Speaker 2: Well, since two thousand and three, the cost of food
Speaker 2: and other goods has, of course increased a multitude of times.
Speaker 2: It's my newspapers today described the tax cut as gym
Speaker 2: pickings and Jim's coffee shot and over at the nightly
Speaker 2: five bucks a week Asterix next year. Sometime the Adelaide
Speaker 2: Advertiser went with McHappy Meal Jim, where they said that
Speaker 2: the tax cut was not enough for a macer's meal,
Speaker 2: while they said Pandas at the Zoo got fourteen thousand
Speaker 2: dollars a week. Well, this was a theme that Opposition
Speaker 2: leader Peter Dutton picked up on today.
Speaker 6: Seventy cents a day. I'll, by the way, it's just
Speaker 6: a rounding era for family. Who I think is the
Speaker 6: Adelaide Advertiser point out you can buy a macappy meal.
Speaker 6: I made of mindus texted me and said, you know,
Speaker 6: you paid fourteen dollars I think for two cups of
Speaker 6: coffee yesterday. So look, let's be realistic. This is a
Speaker 6: it's a hoax. It's about the next five weeks, not
Speaker 6: the next five years. And for seventy cents a day,
Speaker 6: it's not going to help families in Labour's cost living crisis.
Speaker 2: But this is all about politics. Labor introduced these tax
Speaker 2: cuts to the Parliament today so that they can then
Speaker 2: claim during the election that the Coalition voted against tax cuts.
Speaker 1: Now, of course this is.
Speaker 2: A political gimmicker trick because the Coalition is likely to
Speaker 2: announce their own tax cuts tomorrow night.
Speaker 1: During the budget lock, I've been camber yesterday.
Speaker 2: I spoke to the Treasurer and I put to him
Speaker 2: that this budget was all about the campaign.
Speaker 1: Treasure thank you so much. Great to see you today.
Speaker 7: Thanks, Sherry, you too.
Speaker 2: This is a highly political pre election budget, isn't it.
Speaker 8: Now.
Speaker 7: This is a budget which recognizes the economic pressures that
Speaker 7: people are facing, cost of living pressures and global economic uncertainty.
Speaker 7: Topping up the tax cuts is an important way that
Speaker 7: we recognize and respond to those cost of living pressures
Speaker 7: in a way that builds people's take home pay over time.
Speaker 2: So he caught it topping up the tax cuts, and
Speaker 2: he did acknowledge that it was immodest. That was his word,
Speaker 2: modest tax cut. He said this was responsible. But then
Speaker 2: he also tried to frame the tax cuts today is
Speaker 2: being worth around fifty dollars.
Speaker 7: The average annual tax cut after this year and next
Speaker 7: years is two five hundred and forty eight dollars, or
Speaker 7: about fifty dollars a week. Well, it's more than that, Sarah.
Speaker 7: That's the first point. If you combine the three tax
Speaker 7: cuts that labor is providing, it's around fifty dollars a week.
Speaker 7: There are two rounds of additional tax cuts, and together
Speaker 7: with the tax cuts which are flowing now, the average
Speaker 7: is about fifty dollars a week.
Speaker 2: Of course, the Coalition today hit back at this. They
Speaker 2: claim that it under them, under the Coalition, that the
Speaker 2: Stage three tax cuts were first announced. Now, my colleague
Speaker 2: Andrew Clenell called the treasure out out on this figure
Speaker 2: during the budget lock up yesterday.
Speaker 7: And so these tax cuts in isolation are relatively modest.
Speaker 9: Found modest, there worth about that much a week.
Speaker 7: In combination, in combination with the tax cuts that we're
Speaker 7: already delivering, the average tax cuts about fifty bucks a week.
Speaker 7: So pineapple, you don't get a pineapple this time. You're
Speaker 7: just you're giving people a cup of coffee a week,
Speaker 7: can't you. Well, this is about topping up the text
Speaker 7: cuts which are flowing already now.
Speaker 2: The other theme that we've all been speaking about is
Speaker 2: the size of the spending in the budget now. As
Speaker 2: Matthew Cranston reported in the Australian newspaper today, Jim Chalmers
Speaker 2: has presided over the biggest deterioration in the country's underlying
Speaker 2: cash balance outside COVID and the global financial crisis, with
Speaker 2: a forty three billion dollar plunge into the red from
Speaker 2: a surplar last year, and the thought of how the
Speaker 2: record winfall from the mining industry, the high commodity prices
Speaker 2: and the record level of tax receipts have been squandered
Speaker 2: is quite concerning. The size of our nation's debt is astonishing.
Speaker 2: It will hit, as you know now, one trillion dollars
Speaker 2: for the first time in Australia's history next financial year,
Speaker 2: one trillion dollars in debt, as I said on Sky
Speaker 2: last night, this is a shocking figure, especially when there's
Speaker 2: no vision or no nation building project to show for it.
Speaker 2: And then you look at why labor is racking up
Speaker 2: this level of debt. Well, one of the most reckless
Speaker 2: wastes of money is to cut twenty percent of all
Speaker 2: student loan debts. This is nineteen billion dollars in debt
Speaker 2: for three million Australians. This is about buying the young vote,
Speaker 2: which has moved away from Labor and towards independent tier
Speaker 2: candidates or minor parties, including the Greens.
Speaker 1: So Albanizy claims he wants to help young.
Speaker 2: Voters, but instead he's saddling our future generations with an
Speaker 2: unprecedented bill to pay. Then there's the thirty three billion
Speaker 2: dollars for a housing fund that still hasn't built a
Speaker 2: single home, And I ask the Treasurer how anyone could
Speaker 2: believe that a house would be built.
Speaker 1: When it hasn't so far.
Speaker 2: On your thirty three billion dollars to deliver one point
Speaker 2: two million dollars one point two million new homes within
Speaker 2: five years by the end of the decade. Doesn't that
Speaker 2: stretch credibility when the existing Future Fund hasn't delivered a
Speaker 2: single house, The existing Housing Australia Fund hasn't delivered a
Speaker 2: single new house.
Speaker 7: It's an ambitious goal, but it's achievable if everybody does
Speaker 7: their bit. And what the budget shows is that we're
Speaker 7: prepared to do our bit. Thirty three billion dollars an investment,
Speaker 7: including some initiatives budget for the first time in this budget.
Speaker 2: We need one point two million homes in five years.
Speaker 7: Well, we're only at the start of that five year
Speaker 7: period and we will do everything we can to hit
Speaker 7: that target because we want to make sure that there
Speaker 7: are more homes for Australians to rent and buy.
Speaker 2: And that's the motivation for Aerfit Now that's outside of
Speaker 2: his control. But the Housing ministers have a lot to
Speaker 2: answer for here, so does the Prime Minister. And there's
Speaker 2: been criticism today across the board that there hasn't been
Speaker 2: any serious attempt to rein in spending or tackle the
Speaker 2: sustainability of bloated schemes that are blowing out. The NDIS
Speaker 2: is the most obvious example.
Speaker 1: Now.
Speaker 2: Spending in the budget runs to fifty billion dollars more
Speaker 2: per year than the country is collecting in tax and
Speaker 2: it seems like the Albaneze government has given up on
Speaker 2: a balanced budget at least for the time being, at
Speaker 2: least to.
Speaker 1: Win this election.
Speaker 2: But what is the plan if there's an economic downturn
Speaker 2: or international shock with this current level of borrowing and
Speaker 2: the Treasurer has warned about global volatility and as others
Speaker 2: have pointed out, debt is so high that we'll be paying.
Speaker 1: Forty eight billion dollars in.
Speaker 2: Interest in four years time, the seventh highest item in
Speaker 2: spending into the budget, and it's been reported that it's
Speaker 2: set to soon eclipse Medicare outgoings. Now Peter Dutton hasn't
Speaker 2: made this very clear as yet, we might see it
Speaker 2: tomorrow night, but he appears to be promising a more
Speaker 2: fiscally conservative approach.
Speaker 6: This is the Treasurer now who will deliver a trillion
Speaker 6: dollars worth of debt to the istral and public, which
Speaker 6: is a terrible legacy, but an expected one from Labor government.
Speaker 2: So we'll need to see tomorrow night exactly what the
Speaker 2: figures are under the coalition's proposed plan. Now, Jim Chalmers
Speaker 2: is right that he didn't spend the higher than expected
Speaker 2: revenue from commodity prices and tax receipts. But then Peter
Speaker 2: Darton made the point that Labour's first two surplaces were
Speaker 2: delivered partly because the Coalition had done some of the
Speaker 2: hard work, and that is to Josh Fridenberg's credit.
Speaker 1: But the Coalition can't go to an.
Speaker 2: Election opposing tax cuts. That is electoral suicide. Now, they've
Speaker 2: long signaled that they are going to bring tax relief
Speaker 2: and it will now need to be more substantial than
Speaker 2: Labour's modest five dollars a week cuts, but the Coalition
Speaker 2: needs to pay for it. So the Coalition claims to
Speaker 2: be the party of better and more responsible economic management,
Speaker 2: So if they're going to offer more generous tax cuts,
Speaker 2: they will need to balance the books and show how
Speaker 2: they'll pay for it. They've criticized Labor for announcing some
Speaker 2: sixty seven billion dollars in new spending measures over the
Speaker 2: past three months alone, but much of these promises they've matched.
Speaker 2: So the danger for the coalition will be in wanting
Speaker 2: to match these popular measures dollar for dollar. Labour has
Speaker 2: now used the budget as the start of their election campaign.
Speaker 2: This is the basis they'll use to argue for a
Speaker 2: second term in office. But there's no vision for Australia
Speaker 2: or for our future. It's all about buying the election.
Speaker 2: Okay for more budget reaction. Now, let's bring in the
Speaker 2: former President to the Victorian Liberal Party, Michael Kroeger and
Speaker 2: former Labor Minister Gray and Richardson.
Speaker 1: Welcome to you both.
Speaker 2: Michael, I just want to get your reaction to the budget,
Speaker 2: the debt, the.
Speaker 1: Deficits, the spending. What is it that concerns you the most?
Speaker 2: Or maybe the lack of vision for the nation's future,
Speaker 2: the fact that Albaneze is going to this election without
Speaker 2: any plan for the future, without any vision for how
Speaker 2: he wants our nation to become.
Speaker 3: Well, we've only got an hour. Shari so you know,
Speaker 3: I'll have to be I'll have to be brief. But
Speaker 3: what you've got is Jim Chalmers, who's just a fantasist.
Speaker 3: I mean, he believes in the tooth fairy. This bloke,
Speaker 3: he's Andrew Boths just mentioned this. He said on Radio
Speaker 3: National this morning that gross said is one hundred and
Speaker 3: seventy seven billion dollars lower than when he came to office.
Speaker 3: The truth matter is, if you have look at the
Speaker 3: budget papers, the budgety Aggar, it's page fifty eight, Appendix A,
Speaker 3: it's fifty one billion dollars higher than when he came
Speaker 3: to office, nine forty as opposed to eight eighty nine.
Speaker 3: He's out by two hundred and twenty eight billion. This bloke.
Speaker 3: Just if you listen to his interviews, he throws in
Speaker 3: these fantastic figures, platitudes that political journalists still mainly doing
Speaker 3: the interviewing, can't pick him up on, and he just
Speaker 3: moves on to the next thing without being fact checked.
Speaker 3: He just makes these figures up. He's not across the detail.
Speaker 3: He's a good salesman because he's very clever, but he's
Speaker 3: a fantasist. And what worries me the most unconstrained debt
Speaker 3: from a treasurer who has exploded public spending, who is
Speaker 3: out of his depth, who doesn't have the intellectual capacity
Speaker 3: to properly run a budget, and he criticizes Angus Taylor.
Speaker 3: I think Angus is a Rhodes scholar ym I don't
Speaker 3: think I'd be criticizing him.
Speaker 2: Mate, Well, rich O, what do you think about how
Speaker 2: this from a political perspective, how this budget will be received?
Speaker 10: I think their budget will be received all right. I
Speaker 10: think that the kind of arguments that Michael's running aren't
Speaker 10: running in the ordinary Australians, as they said around the
Speaker 10: dinner table. So I just think people have great, healthy
Speaker 10: disrespect for politicians in some respects, and they'll just maintain that.
Speaker 10: They'll sit back and they'll say, well, these are politicians.
Speaker 10: What do you expect they say the same if the
Speaker 10: Liberals were in power. And I don't blame them. I mean,
Speaker 10: if you have a look at the record, you can
Speaker 10: understand Australian is getting a little bit tired of hearing
Speaker 10: the same old line from either side when the reality
Speaker 10: is they know it's not going to happen.
Speaker 2: I just want to I meant to pick up something
Speaker 2: you said there before, Michael, about the level of debt.
Speaker 2: So I suppose what the treasure is saying is that
Speaker 2: the level of debt now that's nine hundred and nine
Speaker 2: hundred and forty billion dollars this year is lower than
Speaker 2: what was forecast a few years ago. I heard Chris
Speaker 2: cann you go through this earlier tonight as well.
Speaker 3: But reaching one, that's that's not what he said. That's
Speaker 3: not what he said. He said quite his exact words.
Speaker 3: He said, gross debt when we came to office this
Speaker 3: year is one hundred and seventy seven billion dollars lower
Speaker 3: than when we came to office.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, that's insane point.
Speaker 2: Chris Kenny went through these figures earlier tonight. He's saying
Speaker 2: that the debt level they have is one hundred and
Speaker 2: seventy seven billion dollars less than what was forecast in
Speaker 2: the budget papers at the time. But my point is
Speaker 2: it's kind of irrelevant because Australia will hit a trillion
Speaker 2: dollars in debt for the first time ever next year, presuming.
Speaker 1: Those forecasts are accurate, which.
Speaker 2: Is extremely concerning because it doesn't seem like there's any
Speaker 2: concern for budget repair.
Speaker 1: It's all about winning the election.
Speaker 2: Here was Pete Stefanovic speaking about this with the Prime
Speaker 2: Minister earlier today.
Speaker 1: Are you making things harder for the next generation? For
Speaker 1: this short term ism?
Speaker 11: Pete, there's nothing other than long term objective. By turning
Speaker 11: a seventy eight billion dollar deficit into a surplus, which
Speaker 11: is what we did, delivering another surplus, which is what
Speaker 11: we did.
Speaker 1: You don't have those anymore.
Speaker 11: Now we're about to deficit almost. We are almost. We
Speaker 11: have almost halved the deficit that we inherited, that was
Speaker 11: predicted and foreshadowed in the twenty twenty two budget.
Speaker 2: And so let's now have a look at some of
Speaker 2: the reactions for how people responded to what is now
Speaker 2: being called a five dollars a week tax cut.
Speaker 1: Have a look.
Speaker 2: Have we got these comments coming? Maybe we'll come back
Speaker 2: to them. Okay, let's have a look.
Speaker 1: Now.
Speaker 6: Five dollars is nothing.
Speaker 4: Would it sway you at all to vote for labor on.
Speaker 1: Top of everything else?
Speaker 6: Probably not.
Speaker 7: It might be a cappuccino or something like that though
Speaker 7: I could save on, but in general probably not.
Speaker 5: Not.
Speaker 6: Really five dollars a week, would it, I guess, convince
Speaker 6: you to vote for labor?
Speaker 1: Not really, Michael.
Speaker 2: I think the trick that Labor played today where they
Speaker 2: put this to the Parliament knowing the Coalition was going
Speaker 2: to vote against the tax cuts. They'll now go during
Speaker 2: the election campaign and say, well, the coalition voted against
Speaker 2: tax cuts.
Speaker 1: That'll be their line, won't it.
Speaker 3: Well, unless Peter Dutton announces bigger task cuts tomorrow night.
Speaker 3: But to do that, of course he's got to find
Speaker 3: saving elsewhere. But Charri, this is this is we're going
Speaker 3: down a well worn path here in Australian politics, which
Speaker 3: has been happening most of my political life. Labour can't
Speaker 3: control this spending. They explode the budget, they plunge the
Speaker 3: state or federal governments into debt crisis. The Liberal Party
Speaker 3: then said has to come and clean up the mess
Speaker 3: left by Labor, and Labor say, you've got all these
Speaker 3: secret cuts, the secrets cuts coming. No one likes cuts,
Speaker 3: everyone likes handouts from governments. And so this cycle continues,
Speaker 3: and and you know it's it's hard to win an
Speaker 3: election politically when you're trying to make savings, when people
Speaker 3: are used to government large s and people think, oh,
Speaker 3: the budget death is nothing to do with me. Someone
Speaker 3: else round it up, not me. So Labor have been
Speaker 3: very clever in the last few decades creating this view
Speaker 3: that you know, increased debt doesn't matter. Well as you say,
Speaker 3: we're heading to a trillion dollars. You know, he talks
Speaker 3: to Swarny about surpluses. There's one hundred and fifty billion
Speaker 3: dollars plus of deficits coming in the next four years.
Speaker 3: I mean, seriously, I mean, this is we're in a
Speaker 3: budget crisis now. But fantasist Jim thinks we're living in
Speaker 3: the land of milk and honey.
Speaker 5: Rich O.
Speaker 2: You know, clearly labor's trying to buy the young vote
Speaker 2: with the promise to pay off everyone's.
Speaker 1: Hex debt, all student hex debt, twenty percent of it.
Speaker 2: But you know, when I think older generations, when they
Speaker 2: look at the prospect of more than a trillion dollars
Speaker 2: in debt, and how they saddle the future generations like that.
Speaker 1: We don't know what's coming to our country. Who knows.
Speaker 2: Trump might demand that there's an increase in defense spending
Speaker 2: in return for the orchesteal. There might be a proposition
Speaker 2: like that which requires more money. So it is, you know, fine,
Speaker 2: they're trying to buy the young vote. But then what
Speaker 2: about the rest of Australians who hate this level of debt?
Speaker 10: Yeah, look when you say they hate this level of debt,
Speaker 10: I'm just not sure you're right. I don't walk around
Speaker 10: the place and hear conversations about Australia's debt. I just don't.
Speaker 10: I think we've become accustomed to high debt. I think
Speaker 10: we're inured to it now. I think we just get
Speaker 10: used to it. Lie back and think of England. That's
Speaker 10: basically what we're doing. And I just don't think ordinary
Speaker 10: Australians are as worried as you are.
Speaker 1: Well, I am worried about it. Michael.
Speaker 2: What do you think do you think Australians care about
Speaker 2: a trillion dollars in debt?
Speaker 1: Well, more and more they do.
Speaker 3: When you see that more than thirty billion dollars a
Speaker 3: year is now going to be used in interest payments.
Speaker 3: I mean, the budget deficit is unsustainable. Massively increasing debt
Speaker 3: every year is unsustainable. Sooner or later there has to
Speaker 3: be a day of reckoning. And the problem is that
Speaker 3: it'll be our kids and their kids who are saddled
Speaker 3: with these you know, more than a billion dollars. It's
Speaker 3: one point two trillion in the next decade and more
Speaker 3: so you mestionally increase, you know, debt repayments. Of course
Speaker 3: people get worried about it. Labour says, Oh, I don't
Speaker 3: worry about it. No, I don't worry about it because compared
Speaker 3: to other countries internationally, now WECD, we've got nothing to
Speaker 3: worry about. Well, that's all our answer to everything, which
Speaker 3: it's extremely economically dishonest or it's intellectually dishonest. Don't worry
Speaker 3: about us because the others are worse.
Speaker 11: You know.
Speaker 3: This is their political trick in order to get re elected,
Speaker 3: and it's disgraceful, I.
Speaker 9: Mean, keating.
Speaker 12: You know.
Speaker 3: I read in the paper that he doesn't speak to
Speaker 3: charmers anymore, you know, because anytime Paul talks to Jim,
Speaker 3: it's time Paul won't get back.
Speaker 1: Yeah. I don't know if that. I don't know anything
Speaker 1: about that story, if it's true or not.
Speaker 2: But I read it in Margin Call as well, by
Speaker 2: Yonnie Bashan, who was telling.
Speaker 1: Me about it last night.
Speaker 2: Actually, now I want to turn to this interaction between
Speaker 2: Jackie Lamby and Jane Hume this morning because I was
Speaker 2: genuinely appalled by it.
Speaker 1: Jackie Lamby unleashed a.
Speaker 2: Shocking verbal assault on Liberal Senator Jane Hume. This was
Speaker 2: on Sunrise, completely disgusting behavior from Jackie Lamby. She was
Speaker 2: meant to be speaking about last night's budget, but instead
Speaker 2: turned the whole conversation into an attack on Jane Hume.
Speaker 1: Have a look, are you going.
Speaker 13: To cut the cuts into contract that out again? I
Speaker 13: know what she's talking about, and ask you about your
Speaker 13: public good ideas cuts.
Speaker 14: I have a very good idea what she's talking about,
Speaker 14: because the cold one of the coalition's policies seems to
Speaker 14: be to cut public servants by tens of thousands there
Speaker 14: in Queensland and Victoria regional centers.
Speaker 2: She even defended the teals on the basis that they
Speaker 2: were female while she was attacking a woman, and you know,
Speaker 2: it just really looked to me like Jane Hume was
Speaker 2: being attacked from both sides. Have a look at another clip, Jackie.
Speaker 13: You don't have a plan of attack, Jane. All I've
Speaker 13: heard out of you with this budget is negative, negative, negative,
Speaker 13: But you have no answers.
Speaker 14: What is the coal issue to state the future of
Speaker 14: this country maybe in the hands of independence. Who are
Speaker 14: you swaying towards Heaven help us.
Speaker 1: You know what it is, and that's really rude Joane.
Speaker 13: And those independents, those toils standing are actually really performs
Speaker 13: if they're boning in, So give them a go, Michael.
Speaker 1: Look, clearly Jane Whome was.
Speaker 2: Upset by that treatment. I would have been if I
Speaker 2: were hurt. It was uncalled for.
Speaker 1: Wasn't balanced.
Speaker 2: It was just an inexplicable attack from Jackie Lamby.
Speaker 1: Nothing to do with last night's budget.
Speaker 3: Well, there's only two things you can say about that.
Speaker 3: One is not that anyone was in any doubt. But
Speaker 3: Jane Hum is just an absolute class act and you
Speaker 3: saw that this morning. And secondly, Jackie Lamby up for election,
Speaker 3: so she needs publicity. She needs to create coverage, outrage.
Speaker 3: She's not going to get much coverage if she gives
Speaker 3: a plane dull, boring interview, so she's got to create
Speaker 3: some kind of sense of theater in order to get publicity.
Speaker 3: This will get massive publicity in Tasmania if she's up
Speaker 3: for election. That's what this is all about. But Jane
Speaker 3: Him is typical of Jane Him, dealt with in the
Speaker 3: typical classy way and just battered it away and good
Speaker 3: Honor Richard, what did you think?
Speaker 10: Well, I think Jackie shows occasionally that she is the
Speaker 10: only one in the Parliament has ever been on the doll.
Speaker 10: I understand her passion, she just sometimes goes over the
Speaker 10: top and this was one of those times.
Speaker 1: Is that right? Just into her now, bajimper Price. We'll
Speaker 1: have to check that. Whether she ever had public support,
Speaker 1: We'll have a check.
Speaker 2: She definitely had a tough upbringing. But you know, I
Speaker 2: don't think that's got anything to do with her behavior.
Speaker 2: Her bullying of a woman as we saw today really
Speaker 2: uncalled for. All Right, Michael Kroger, Graham Richardson, appreciate your time.
Speaker 2: All right, let's return to our budget coverage now, and
Speaker 2: let's bring in The Australian's commentator and economist Judith Sloan.
Speaker 1: Judith, great to have you with us. Are you there
Speaker 1: is Judith with us? Judith, great to see you. Look.
Speaker 1: Give us your reaction to this budget.
Speaker 2: It's been criticized for overspending further decade of deficits for
Speaker 2: the ballooning debt. Do you think this budget has any
Speaker 2: attempt to tackle productivity reform or vision for the nation.
Speaker 4: Well, no, and I think you know The reaction was
Speaker 4: quite interesting. You know, I get up early and you
Speaker 4: know read all the commentators, and you know the commentators
Speaker 4: go from you know, conservative to progressive. But it actually
Speaker 4: was a very very negative assessment of this budget. And
Speaker 4: I'm absolutely with Michael Kroger. I mean, it's it's just
Speaker 4: outright lies going on saying that they'd reduced the government debt,
Speaker 4: for example.
Speaker 1: That is simply not true.
Speaker 4: They're taking this sort of contrivance of the PIFO, the
Speaker 4: pre election Economic and Fiscal Outlook, which was brought down
Speaker 4: in April twenty twenty two. Things were very uncertain, and
Speaker 4: they're comparing with what's happened to the PIFA. Who cares
Speaker 4: about the PIFO. I just go and look at the tables,
Speaker 4: and we know that government debt's gone up by nearly
Speaker 4: one hundred billion dollars since they've been in office and
Speaker 4: is heading towards.
Speaker 1: That trillion dollar mark.
Speaker 4: And you'll probably remember, I'm Shari when Charmers used to
Speaker 4: give Josh Friedenburg such a hard time for the prospect
Speaker 4: of government debt reaching a trillion dollars. Well, good on
Speaker 4: your Jim, because he's going to reach that figure next year.
Speaker 2: The Treasurer argued repeatedly yesterday during the budget locker that
Speaker 2: he had successfully navigated Australia on this narrow path, that
Speaker 2: the country was going to have a soft landing and
Speaker 2: had managed not to go into recession and avoid a
Speaker 2: hard landing where it needed a recovery.
Speaker 1: What's your response to this analysis.
Speaker 4: Well, we haven't gone into a recession for two principal reasons.
Speaker 4: One is that they've allowed the population to grow so
Speaker 4: strongly through excessive migration, so that inflates the gross economy.
Speaker 4: We've had the capita income to plants per capita GDP clients,
Speaker 4: but the absolute size of the economy has gone down.
Speaker 4: And then in terms of what's happened in the labor market,
Speaker 4: over eighty percent of the jobs created are what we
Speaker 4: call non market jobs, so they're basically government funded jobs.
Speaker 4: Now they're not all government jobs, but their jobs like
Speaker 4: in age care, childcare, the NDI is where they're basically
Speaker 4: funded by the government. And you know, there does come
Speaker 4: a day of reckoning with that, and of course it's
Speaker 4: we've had the most appalling productivity record, to the point
Speaker 4: that the current level of productivity is actually back where
Speaker 4: it was in twenty sixteen, so that is contributing to
Speaker 4: the decline and living standards which we see in the
Speaker 4: per capita declines and GDP.
Speaker 2: As a budget document, we know this was hastily pulled together.
Speaker 2: We know there were no plans for a budget. Often
Speaker 2: we're usually in budget lockups, you get dozens of press
Speaker 2: releases with various announcements. We didn't have that yesterday. There
Speaker 2: weren't many new announcements. From your analysis of these budget papers,
Speaker 2: you know, did it look to you like it was
Speaker 2: quite thin?
Speaker 4: Well, there was clearly stuff in the locker. I mean,
Speaker 4: you know, I think the treasure at that level is
Speaker 4: quite a professional outfit. So the preparation of a budget
Speaker 4: is you know, a very disciplined time path arrangement. And
Speaker 4: basically they bung in certain things at the very end,
Speaker 4: but this was with the expectation of their not being
Speaker 4: a budget. That process at the end was very rushed
Speaker 4: and you could tell really and there's some clearly silly
Speaker 4: things in this. I mean, for example, there was all
Speaker 4: this this sort of discussion about you know, uncertain global
Speaker 4: outlook and the dangers and China growth.
Speaker 1: Falling and stuff.
Speaker 4: But then when you went and looked at the GDP
Speaker 4: growth economy economic growth, it seemed to be extraordinarily optimistic,
Speaker 4: you know, two and three quarter percent. That would be
Speaker 4: amazing if we achieved that. So there was I think
Speaker 4: some inevitable inconsistencies.
Speaker 1: But you know, really my.
Speaker 4: Major criticism was that this was a budget for labor
Speaker 4: and not a budget for Australia, and it absolutely shone
Speaker 4: through that aspect.
Speaker 1: Ye think you're right.
Speaker 2: I think it was definitely not just a political document
Speaker 2: but a bit of a reflection perhaps of the Treasurer
Speaker 2: himself labor values, something for marginal MPs to sell during
Speaker 2: the campaign. I just want to return to the question
Speaker 2: of this trillion dollar debt and in the conversation I
Speaker 2: had before with rich Oden and if you heard it,
Speaker 2: but he said Australians don't care about the level of debt,
Speaker 2: as if this means the Treasurer shouldn't care either. But
Speaker 2: in your column today you're saying this isn't just an
Speaker 2: economic issue. You're saying debt isn't just an economic.
Speaker 1: Issue, it's a moral issue. Can you expand on this?
Speaker 4: Well, you know, basically you're spending today and seeing the
Speaker 4: bill to future generation. So there clearly is a moral
Speaker 4: issue to that. I mean, do you think you know
Speaker 4: your young children and my grandchildren, you.
Speaker 1: Know, when they're in their thirty so.
Speaker 4: They're going to be thinking, gosh, I'm glad Jim Chalmers
Speaker 4: gave my parents a text cut and some electricity price relief.
Speaker 1: I don't think so.
Speaker 4: So, you know, perhaps if some of the spending were
Speaker 4: what you might call productivity enhancing or real investment, it
Speaker 4: might be different. But a lot of this is essentially
Speaker 4: going on what you might think of as the grocery bill.
Speaker 4: So I think this is a really big issue.
Speaker 1: Now.
Speaker 4: I don't entirely agree with Richer because you know, I
Speaker 4: come from Victoria and the state of public finances in
Speaker 4: Victoria are absolutely shocked, and it is beginning to affect
Speaker 4: public opinion.
Speaker 1: You know, people, you know, when they tell.
Speaker 4: Me that, you know, the new Sunshine station is going
Speaker 4: to cost six billion dollars, you think, really, you know?
Speaker 4: And I think, as I understand that Michael Krogan knows
Speaker 4: this much better than I do, that labor is traveling
Speaker 4: very badly in Victoria, and one of the reasons is
Speaker 4: that people have begun to feel very uncertain about the
Speaker 4: the well the state of the public finances of Victoria,
Speaker 4: and that then, I think you know, will eventually filter
Speaker 4: into concerns about the state of public finances in Australia.
Speaker 1: M Judith.
Speaker 2: I think that was such a good point you made though,
Speaker 2: when you said that a lot of this debt is
Speaker 2: being accumulated because the spending is going on effectively grocery
Speaker 2: bills or the cost of living crisis rather than productivity
Speaker 2: enhancing or nation building reforms. I think that is just
Speaker 2: an excellent point. Jud To Sloane, thank you very much
Speaker 2: for your insights.
Speaker 1: Now still to come.
Speaker 2: Ben Robert Smith set to take action after a Top
Speaker 2: nine journalist was caught on audio claiming he breached his
Speaker 2: ethics during the case. But first that national security breach
Speaker 2: rocking the White House. Well, how did a journalist end
Speaker 2: up in a group chat where Pete Hegsith spoke about
Speaker 2: an imminent strike?
Speaker 1: Talk about that after this quick break, welcome back.
Speaker 2: Well, our exclusive on Ben Robert Smith case is still
Speaker 2: coming out. But first, the Trump administration is scrambling to
Speaker 2: deal with the fallout of a shocking security breach where
Speaker 2: top US officials accidentally included a journalist on a group
Speaker 2: chat about plans to bomb hooty rebels in Yemen.
Speaker 1: Now.
Speaker 2: In the messages they were on the encrypted app signal,
Speaker 2: Jdi Vance, the Vice President, says he hates the idea
Speaker 2: of bailing Europe out again, to which the Defense Secretary
Speaker 2: Pete Hegseth says, I fully share your loathing of European freeloading.
Speaker 2: It's pathetic. But he says, we are the only ones
Speaker 2: on the planet who can do this. So he is
Speaker 2: standing up for the idea that the United States needs
Speaker 2: to be the leader of the free world, needs to
Speaker 2: take responsibility here. Mike Walls and Pete Hegseth said America
Speaker 2: has to do this, has to defend freedom of navigation exercises.
Speaker 2: They are important. Yet you had the Vice President Jadie
Speaker 2: Vance with this isolationist view that I've been speaking about
Speaker 2: that I've been so concerned about pushing back in this
Speaker 2: internal chat, saying why should America do this?
Speaker 1: Let Europe do this. This is the view I've been
Speaker 1: worried about.
Speaker 2: Thank goodness, Pete Hegseth, the Defense Secretary, and Mike Waltz,
Speaker 2: the National Security head, came in and said, no, America
Speaker 2: has to do this. We are the only ones who
Speaker 2: can do this now. The President responded to this odd,
Speaker 2: it's been a massive story. He downplayed the controversy, and
Speaker 2: he even rebuked the journalist who.
Speaker 1: Was just accidentally brought into this chat. He called him
Speaker 1: a slee's ball.
Speaker 9: But sometimes somebody can get onto those things. That's one
Speaker 9: of the prices you paid when you're not sitting in
Speaker 9: the situation room with no phones on it. Certainly, we'll
Speaker 9: look at this, but the main thing was nothing happened.
Speaker 9: The attack was totally successful. It was I guess from
Speaker 9: what I understand, took place during and it wasn't classified information.
Speaker 9: So this was not lassified now, but it's classified information,
Speaker 9: it's probably a little bit different. I always say you
Speaker 9: have to learn from every experience. I think it was
Speaker 9: very unfair the way they attacked Michael.
Speaker 2: All right, let's bring in now to discuss Guyanese contributed
Speaker 2: Koshagata Kosher. This is truly shocking, and in my view,
Speaker 2: Trump was wrong to trash the journalist. He might be
Speaker 2: a bad journalist, but it was his own officials who
Speaker 2: breached national security by bringing this journalist into their signals conversation.
Speaker 5: Yes, you know this is not good, Shari.
Speaker 8: There's absolutely no way to sugarcoat it, and it has
Speaker 8: consumed the newswag, certainly for the last twenty four hours.
Speaker 8: I think attacking the journalists, especially this journalist, Jeffrey Goldberg,
Speaker 8: is a longtime foe of Trump, and he was a
Speaker 8: central figure in the Russia collusion hoax and other different
Speaker 8: issues that Trump has been very adversarial about.
Speaker 5: So that's his stock in trade.
Speaker 8: I think going after adversarial left leaning media as he
Speaker 8: does when all else fails, you know, definitely go go
Speaker 8: with that because it's like red meat for his base,
Speaker 8: and that's something that they punch very well in. I
Speaker 8: think it' where it goes from here is there's three things.
Speaker 8: So one is how did this happen? As you say,
Speaker 8: And there's a spectrum anywhere from just sloppiness and gross
Speaker 8: and competence for something very serious all the way to
Speaker 8: even something more nefarious. We may never know, but there's
Speaker 8: all sorts of theories going out there about was it sabotage,
Speaker 8: was it infiltration?
Speaker 5: Who knows?
Speaker 8: So those kinds of theories are going to fill the
Speaker 8: void if we never find out, and we may never.
Speaker 8: The other thing is the substance of it, and you're
Speaker 8: right that it did reveal where Jade Vance stands and
Speaker 8: where the other people in the administration stands. But I
Speaker 8: would say the big takeaway by and large is that
Speaker 8: they're a thoughtful group and they generally are pretty consistent
Speaker 8: with what they say publicly versus privately, and I think
Speaker 8: many people find that refreshing in politics.
Speaker 5: And then the third thing is what should they do
Speaker 5: from here?
Speaker 8: So one is get to the bottom of it, shore
Speaker 8: up the communication channels and all of that. But then
Speaker 8: as a political matter, you should they punch back? Should
Speaker 8: they fire the person involved potentially that led to this breach?
Speaker 8: Should they remind people that actually their leaks happening all
Speaker 8: the time in the US government. This is not the
Speaker 8: first time, and none of those people been held accountable.
Speaker 8: So that's going to be very interesting to see what
Speaker 8: the administration does in the next forty eight to seventy
Speaker 8: two hours.
Speaker 2: And it is already sparking heated debate.
Speaker 1: There was a Senate hearing. Let's have a look at
Speaker 1: some of that.
Speaker 5: Was there any mention of a target in Yemen?
Speaker 1: I don't remember mention of specific targets. How about anything
Speaker 1: about timing. I don't recall specific timing. There was a
Speaker 1: significant amount of planning.
Speaker 6: My communications, to be clear in a signal message group
Speaker 6: were entirely permissible and lawful and did not include classified information.
Speaker 5: If it's not classified, share the text with the committee.
Speaker 5: You can't have it both ways.
Speaker 2: A lot more to go on that, but as I said,
Speaker 2: my overall takeout is that more concern about JD.
Speaker 1: Vance.
Speaker 2: I definitely do not think he should be running for
Speaker 2: president next time around. But great that figures John Ratcliff
Speaker 2: would have been among them. Pete Hegseth certainly, and Mike Waltz,
Speaker 2: who defended America's place as the leader of the free
Speaker 2: world as it should be kosher data.
Speaker 1: Really appreciate your time and your insights on that. Thank
Speaker 1: you so much. Now still to come.
Speaker 2: Ben Robert Smith reacts to our revelations about nine journalist
Speaker 2: Nick McKenzie, claiming he'd obtained his legal strategy in the
Speaker 2: high profile case. Plus later on Green Senator Sarah Hanson Young,
Speaker 2: desperate for publicity, interrupts question time with a dead fish.
Speaker 2: That's all coming up, Welcome back, well. Afghanistan war veteran
Speaker 2: Ben Robert Smith is now urgently considering his legal options
Speaker 2: after explosive revelations that part of his legal strategy was
Speaker 2: obtained by nine journalist Nick McKenzie. We reported on Monday
Speaker 2: Nights program that mackenzie was captured in an audio recording
Speaker 2: claiming that he breached his ethics by telling a witness
Speaker 2: that Robert Smith's ex wife, Emma Roberts and her friend
Speaker 2: Danny L. Scott had provided him with part of Robert
Speaker 2: Smith's confidential legal strategy. He also said on the recording
Speaker 2: that knowing part of this legal strategy was helpful to
Speaker 2: Nine's case. Well, here he was in that record in
Speaker 2: making that shocking claim, the.
Speaker 12: Actively breaking us on his legal shifty, who respected you
Speaker 12: like this and yet we're not learning.
Speaker 15: About we anticipated most of it. One or two things
Speaker 15: now we know which is helpful.
Speaker 2: But one or two things now we know which is
Speaker 2: helpful Mackenzie's own words. Well, in the secret recording, mackenzie
Speaker 2: also says that he knew it was wrong, and he
Speaker 2: claimed that.
Speaker 1: He behaved unethically. Have a listen, No, I shouldn't tell you.
Speaker 12: I've just preached my ethics and doing that like this
Speaker 12: is where like this is to leadership position. Now if
Speaker 12: they knew that.
Speaker 2: And feting you that, now there's been silence from nine
Speaker 2: ever since their first response to us on Monday. Nick
Speaker 2: mackenzie has not spoken out to explain his words either,
Speaker 2: and nine Independent Always have not reported on this development
Speaker 2: in any way. Well, I've now confirmed that Ben Roberts
Speaker 2: Smith and his legal team are currently urgently examining their
Speaker 2: legal options, a source close to Robert Smith told me,
Speaker 2: and I'm quoting in light of this recording, mister Robert
Speaker 2: Smith is urgently considering the most appropriate next step. The
Speaker 2: recording confirmed what he has known.
Speaker 1: What he has long known, that.
Speaker 2: His privileged legal strategy was being accessed by Miss Roberts
Speaker 2: and Miss Scott and passed to Nick mackenzie. This was
Speaker 2: apparent at the time of his application before Brummige on
Speaker 2: the eve of the trial in June twenty twenty one.
Speaker 2: At the time of his judgment, Justice Brummage did not
Speaker 2: have the benefit of Roberts oral testimony before Justice Forsanco,
Speaker 2: in which she confirmed his suspicions. Now the recording is
Speaker 2: a conversation between Nick McKenzie and a potential witness who
Speaker 2: he was trying to convince to give the evidence on
Speaker 2: behalf of nine. The audio recording also captured McKenzie sharing
Speaker 2: details with this unrelated third party about an undercover police
Speaker 2: investigation that he claimed was active and currently underway.
Speaker 12: No one knows about the police investigation.
Speaker 16: It's intensively if I'm going place investigation Bone Tabs task Force,
Speaker 16: a whole new task force has been still up in Brisbane.
Speaker 12: The entire new task force.
Speaker 15: There's police living in his apartment block under resumed identities.
Speaker 12: As we speak by you, the.
Speaker 2: Guys now sharing details of an undercover a covert police operation.
Speaker 1: Could have put it in jeopardy.
Speaker 2: But the source close to Robert Smith also told me
Speaker 2: that the source was concerned, highly concerned that McKenzie claimed
Speaker 2: to have knowledge of such an investigation. They said separately,
Speaker 2: questions need to be asked of the AFP and OSI
Speaker 2: as to how McKenzie knew what he told this individual
Speaker 2: in April twenty twenty one. Now, this is an ongoing
Speaker 2: story and I will have more developments on this tomorrow
Speaker 2: night on the show, So make sure you tune in
Speaker 2: tomorrow at eight pm. Well after the break, finally, brave
Speaker 2: Palestinians tell the West what Hamas is really like.
Speaker 1: We'll get to that after this quick break. Welcome back.
Speaker 2: We'll Afghanistan war veteran Ben Roberts. Smith is now urgently
Speaker 2: considering his legal options after explosive revelations that part of
Speaker 2: his legal strategy was obtained by Nine journalist Nick McKenzie.
Speaker 2: We reported on Monday Night's program that mackenzie was captured
Speaker 2: in an audio recording claiming that he breached his ethics
Speaker 2: by telling a witness that Robert Smith's ex wife, Emma
Speaker 2: Roberts and her friend Danny L. Scott had provided him
Speaker 2: with part of Robert Smith's confidential legal strategy. He also
Speaker 2: said on the recording that knowing part of this legal
Speaker 2: strategy was helpful to Nine's case. Well, here he was
Speaker 2: in that record, in making that shocking claim.
Speaker 12: Actively breading us on his legal shifty who respected you
Speaker 12: like his?
Speaker 15: And yet we're not learning about we anticipated most of it.
Speaker 15: One or two things now we know which is helpful.
Speaker 2: But one or two things now we know which is
Speaker 2: helpful Mackenzie's own words. Well, in the secret recording, mackenzie
Speaker 2: also says that he knew it was wrong, and he
Speaker 2: claimed that he behaved unethically. Have a listen, No, I
Speaker 2: shouldn't tell you.
Speaker 12: I've just breached my ethics. And doing that like this
Speaker 12: is where like this is to leadership position. Now if
Speaker 12: they knew that and peat to you that, I.
Speaker 2: Now there's been silence from nine ever since their first
Speaker 2: response to us on Monday. Nick mackenzie has not spoken
Speaker 2: out to explain his words either, and nine Independent Always
Speaker 2: have not reported on this development in any way. Well,
Speaker 2: I've now confirmed that Ben Roberts Smith and his legal
Speaker 2: team are currently urgently examining their legal options, a source
Speaker 2: close to Robert Smith told me, and I'm quoting in
Speaker 2: light of this recording, mister Robert Smith is urgently considering
Speaker 2: the most appropriate next step. The recording confirmed what he
Speaker 2: has known, what he has long known, that his privileged
Speaker 2: legal strategy was being accessed by Miss Roberts and Miss
Speaker 2: Scott and passed to Nick mackenzie. This was apparent at
Speaker 2: the time of his application before Brummich on the eve
Speaker 2: of the trial in June twenty twenty one. At the
Speaker 2: time of his judgment, Justice Image did not have the
Speaker 2: benefit of Robert's oral testimony before Justice Forsanco, in which
Speaker 2: she confirmed his suspicions. Now, the recording is a conversation
Speaker 2: between Nick McKenzie and a potential witness who he was
Speaker 2: trying to convince to give the evidence on behalf of nine.
Speaker 2: The audio recording also captured McKenzie sharing details with this
Speaker 2: unrelated third party about an undercover police investigation that he
Speaker 2: claimed was active and currently underway.
Speaker 12: No one knows about the police investigation.
Speaker 16: It's extensively if I'm going place investigation, phone tabs task force,
Speaker 16: A whole new task force has been still love in Brisbane.
Speaker 12: The entire new task force.
Speaker 15: There's police living in his apartment block under resumed Ladensities
Speaker 15: as we speak, like you the.
Speaker 2: Guys now sharing details of an undercover a covert police operation.
Speaker 1: Could have put it in jeopardy.
Speaker 2: But the source close to Robert Smith also told me
Speaker 2: that the source was concerned, highly concerned that McKenzie claimed
Speaker 2: to have knowledge of such an investigation. They said separately,
Speaker 2: questions need to be asked of the AFP and OSI
Speaker 2: as to how McKenzie knew what he told this individual
Speaker 2: in April twenty twenty one. Now, this is an ongoing
Speaker 2: story and I will have more developments on this tomorrow
Speaker 2: night on the show, So make sure you tune in
Speaker 2: tomorrow at eight pm, well after the break. Finally, Brave
Speaker 2: Palestinians tell the West what Hamas is really like.
Speaker 1: We'll get to that after this quick break