Speaker 1: Lately the gentleman.
Speaker 2: Welcome to the late debate.
Speaker 1: And welcome not only to the late deboat, but to
Speaker 1: twenty twenty five, the very first late de boat for
Speaker 1: twenty twenty five. I'm Kel Richard's nice to have your company,
Speaker 1: thanks for joining us, and with me on the desk
Speaker 1: we have fox as Sky News contributor Evelyn Ray and
Speaker 1: the host of the fire at Will podcast, Will Kingston. Guys,
Speaker 1: welcome to the program. Let me ask you this question.
Speaker 1: Is it possible for a Minister of the crown to
Speaker 1: hold a media conference without all the right flags in
Speaker 1: the background? Apparently not? And will twenty twenty five be
Speaker 1: the year in which China finally fulfills its threat to
Speaker 1: invade Taiwan? Those stories coming up a bit later. But
Speaker 1: firstly we begin as every news bullet you watch today
Speaker 1: began with those big fireworks. I mean, it's great television,
Speaker 1: isn't it. And everyone raves about the Australia, the Sydney
Speaker 1: fireworks and how brilliant they are every year, how brilliant
Speaker 1: they were this year. But were they watching the nine
Speaker 1: o'clock fire works on ABC television? Your answer might have
Speaker 1: been I have some reservations because Before we were allowed
Speaker 1: to see any bangers making big bangs and sparks, we
Speaker 1: had to listen to a welcome to country. Have a
Speaker 1: look at this.
Speaker 3: Hello everyone, and welcome to Sydney's fabulous New Year's Eve
Speaker 3: celebrations here on Gaddigl and nearby lands.
Speaker 2: Welcome to Gatigol country. This always was, always will be
Speaker 2: Aboriginal land.
Speaker 1: So apparently the fireworks don't happen on our land. The
Speaker 1: fireworks happen on someone else's land, and we have to
Speaker 1: be reminded.
Speaker 4: Will I think I'm breaking the fourth wall with the
Speaker 4: audience here. There are some stories you can rinse and
Speaker 4: repeat every year, and the woke fireworks as a January
Speaker 4: one go to and we will get it next year
Speaker 4: and the year after that. We know the ABCS can
Speaker 4: always do this stuff. But what I would like to say,
Speaker 4: and I think this will be a theme for OS
Speaker 4: show tonight, is for everyone else, for everyone else who.
Speaker 2: Is in the ABC. And I'm going to be indulgent.
Speaker 2: I'm going to go go direct a camera for this.
Speaker 4: If you're a CEO, if you're a celebrity, if you
Speaker 4: anyone who doesn't work in the ABC, you're free.
Speaker 2: You don't have to do this stuff anymore. People are
Speaker 2: sick of it.
Speaker 4: People are over it in terms of the Indigenous Digitus
Speaker 4: affairs stuff. They actually care about, real things that matter
Speaker 4: to people. They don't care about this symbolic nonsense. Guys,
Speaker 4: I'm so sick of this, but I think everyone else
Speaker 4: is as well.
Speaker 2: What do you think?
Speaker 1: I think it's bizarre, Evelyn at a firework show, we
Speaker 1: have to have a welcome to country just lesliem strange
Speaker 1: to you.
Speaker 5: Well, considering all the other places we've had to have
Speaker 5: a welcome to country, I don't think it's that's up.
Speaker 6: I can't even open.
Speaker 5: A can of soft drink without needing a welcome to country.
Speaker 1: You know.
Speaker 5: I have some friends of mine who were telling me
Speaker 5: that they had to go to.
Speaker 6: Their kids end of year school assembly.
Speaker 5: And I'm sure parents at home are feeling PTSD just
Speaker 5: mentioning that because they are very long, very protracted. But
Speaker 5: my friend was telling me that every single speech that
Speaker 5: a teacher or someone of authority within the school had
Speaker 5: to give, a separate welcome to country had to happen.
Speaker 5: So I'm talking dozens of welcome to countries within one
Speaker 5: school assembly. And this is the level of stupidity that
Speaker 5: we have allowed, Like you said, will like, no one's
Speaker 5: holding a gun to our heads. We don't have to
Speaker 5: do this sort of stuff, and I think it's about
Speaker 5: time we stop caring when.
Speaker 6: They call us that ugly our word racist, No, because
Speaker 6: it's not. You know, Australians are not racist. And I'm sure.
Speaker 5: There might be a few bad apples there, but it
Speaker 5: doesn't mean the whole bunch is bad.
Speaker 6: But as a country, are.
Speaker 1: People's head the gun being held to our heads? Is
Speaker 1: you either acknowledge you are national people, you're not a
Speaker 1: nice person.
Speaker 4: No, I don't think that's the case anymore. I think
Speaker 4: the gun is well and truly back in the whole style.
Speaker 4: I think now, apart from a few loonies at the
Speaker 4: ABC and some of the really woke, ideologically corrupted institutions,
Speaker 4: I think we're past this. I think I think, at
Speaker 4: least in respect to this particular sympo gesture, will you
Speaker 4: both think past it?
Speaker 1: But it is still happy. It's still happening last night.
Speaker 4: But it's how people are responding to it that is changing.
Speaker 4: Back in twenty twenty twenty twenty one, in that peak
Speaker 4: madness period.
Speaker 2: People were being quiet, people were.
Speaker 4: Too scared to say anything, whereas now I think people
Speaker 4: are going, well, you know what, this is a bit
Speaker 4: of a nonsense.
Speaker 5: I think that the Voice referendum was a really good
Speaker 5: thing to boost people's confidence and it allowed people, you know,
Speaker 5: regular Australians who normally would probably remain quiet on these
Speaker 5: matters and go, you know, I'm not going to get
Speaker 5: involved in politics. I'm going to enjoy my football, my
Speaker 5: beers and et cetera. I think having majority of Australians
Speaker 5: overwhelmingly say no, it wasn't just no to the referendum,
Speaker 5: It was no to these woke ideologies.
Speaker 1: It wasn't necessarily heard because what we actually saw last
Speaker 1: night was at the nine o'clock displayed something called calling Country,
Speaker 1: and it was full of these kinds of messages. Have
Speaker 1: a look, I'm glad.
Speaker 7: To see last president. Future whoever you are listening to
Speaker 7: gap up, change ways, the change, change ways.
Speaker 5: Change.
Speaker 7: Change the future.
Speaker 1: So if you listen to the words all the way
Speaker 1: through the fireworks, we were being well, I think the
Speaker 1: word is lectured. Weren't we being lectured?
Speaker 2: Yeah, we were being lectured.
Speaker 4: But again the ABC is, as the ABC does, who
Speaker 4: cares that the bigger issue I think is that people
Speaker 4: now are calling this stuff out. I was flying in
Speaker 4: from Heathrow to Sydney and Quantas still does this nonsense.
Speaker 4: And when they did the welcome to country as we
Speaker 4: were landing in Sydney, which should be a really great
Speaker 4: time for returning Aussie, you get that welcome to country
Speaker 4: and there was an audible groan that went across the economy.
Speaker 6: And that encouraging an audible.
Speaker 2: It really was, it really was.
Speaker 6: It gives you a hope for the future, wasn't.
Speaker 2: That is a sign of how this is changing.
Speaker 1: But I flew on a domestic flight. I mean, why
Speaker 1: would they have to do it on domestic flights Melbourne
Speaker 1: to Sydney. We've got to welcome the country arriving. We
Speaker 1: were still in Australia folktionally, we hadn't left Australia and
Speaker 1: we were being welcome to Sydney and there wasn't have grown.
Speaker 1: I think people have just got used to it, their
Speaker 1: blas about it, they just ignore it.
Speaker 4: Well, maybe the difference is that I was coming from
Speaker 4: an international flight where people haven't just been given this
Speaker 4: every two seconds, and then when they heard it, they're going,
Speaker 4: this is just silly, it's not on.
Speaker 2: But I think something is changing.
Speaker 4: I think maybe I'm just hopeful at twenty twenty five
Speaker 4: something is changing.
Speaker 5: Yeah, I definitely do think something is changing, and I
Speaker 5: think that you know, it is encouraging when you see
Speaker 5: things like that.
Speaker 6: But I think the.
Speaker 5: Problem that we're having, unfortunately, is that even though majority
Speaker 5: of Australians behind the scenes are saying no, one, we're
Speaker 5: seeing things in the plane like you did, these things
Speaker 5: are on mainstream news and they're indoctrinating our.
Speaker 6: Children, and children are very vulnerable.
Speaker 5: Children are very impressionable, and that's where if you win
Speaker 5: the hearts of your children, you've won the future.
Speaker 6: And so I think even though behind the scenes.
Speaker 5: We're all sort of collectively saying no, it's important to
Speaker 5: win it from the front because what the children are
Speaker 5: seeing is so important and the message that we're sending
Speaker 5: them because they're our future, and that's what matters.
Speaker 1: You see signs that this is changing in the community.
Speaker 6: Oh absolutely.
Speaker 5: I mean I'd love to bring up a story about
Speaker 5: Woolworst actually for example. So I think it's all under
Speaker 5: the same umbrella of that insatiable beast, which is this
Speaker 5: woke you know, identity politics, and I think it was
Speaker 5: a little while ago Woolworst actually came out and said,
Speaker 5: you know what, we're going to actually ditch all of
Speaker 5: the Australian Day merchandise. And there was actually like a
Speaker 5: really large collective backlash from that, you know, the power
Speaker 5: of the people. And because of that, Woolwors have actually
Speaker 5: now reversed their decision to ditch selling it. And a
Speaker 5: Woolworst spokesperson actually came out, I think it was only
Speaker 5: a couple of days ago, and they said, we will
Speaker 5: be celebrating Australia Day as a team and with our customers.
Speaker 6: Isn't this wonderful? I mean, this is great news.
Speaker 5: Isn't it like that we're actually seeing power of the people.
Speaker 5: We're seeing people make a public you know, cry out
Speaker 5: that we're sick of this, and then a corporation turn
Speaker 5: around and change it. But I guess the question that
Speaker 5: I have with all of this is is it enough?
Speaker 2: Kel?
Speaker 5: And do you think that Woolworst or big corporations like this,
Speaker 5: do you think they've learn't from their mistakes?
Speaker 1: Well, they lost their CEO last year and one of
Speaker 1: the reasons that he went was because of the outcry
Speaker 1: over their decision last year not to carry Australian Day
Speaker 1: merchandise if they thought there wasn't a profit in it,
Speaker 1: there's not a problem with that. They just put it
Speaker 1: in one quarter and whoever wants to buy I can
Speaker 1: buy it. Instead of which they announced they were not
Speaker 1: carrying Australian Day merchandise. That's a kind of moral posturing.
Speaker 1: It's saying, aren't we good people. We're nicer than the
Speaker 1: rest of you because we know Australia Day is a
Speaker 1: really bad idea. We think it's probably actually an invasion day,
Speaker 1: and it's really divisive, So we're on the right side.
Speaker 1: That's what they're trying to say.
Speaker 4: Yeah, but I think with these corporate stories, it's worth
Speaker 4: thinking about where this is actually being driven from in
Speaker 4: the organization. So if you think about three layers of
Speaker 4: a business, and you've got the kind of sea suite,
Speaker 4: you've got the front line, and then you've got middle management.
Speaker 4: It's not the sea suite who's driving this stuff. All
Speaker 4: of them are old white guys who've never heard of
Speaker 4: work politics, and it's not the front line. They want
Speaker 4: to work hard and then get home to their families.
Speaker 4: It is this middle management layer that have generally jobs
Speaker 4: that don't matter, that are trying to make themselves more important,
Speaker 4: like the marketing managers, like the HR managers, and they're
Speaker 4: the ones who are now suddenly being called out because
Speaker 4: when you see this wooly stuff, when you see this
Speaker 4: stuff with Jaguar, for example, where it's not resonating with customers,
Speaker 4: they're suddenly being told, hey, guys, I know that you
Speaker 4: want to make your job more significant, You've also got
Speaker 4: to make money at the same time. And I think
Speaker 4: that's the area that we need to hone in on
Speaker 4: when we're looking at these work corporates.
Speaker 5: I think that in America they've done a really good
Speaker 5: job with their marketing with certain businesses.
Speaker 6: I look at bud Light.
Speaker 5: I'm not sure if people at home are aware of this,
Speaker 5: but they used certain marketing techniques for bud Light, and
Speaker 5: majority of Americans said no, and they almost sent this
Speaker 5: company broke.
Speaker 6: You know, the people. What's the power what people can
Speaker 6: do with these sorts of corporations.
Speaker 5: But you know, with this Woolworth story and the Australia
Speaker 5: Day story, I think it's really important for us to
Speaker 5: remember that it's not just about you know, business is
Speaker 5: doing things I think the whole Australia Day debate is
Speaker 5: a really important one to have because we can see
Speaker 5: its evolution over time. We can see how it began
Speaker 5: as changing the date to abolishing the date, to now
Speaker 5: you're ashamed if you want to be Australian, and.
Speaker 6: It's sort of like this, like I mentioned before, this.
Speaker 5: Insatiable beast that's always hungry, always thirsty, always out for blood,
Speaker 5: never satisfied, always wanting more and more and more.
Speaker 6: So I guess my question is.
Speaker 5: If we continue to push back like this, do you
Speaker 5: think that we can finally put this insatiable beast to bed?
Speaker 5: Do you think that there's a point where Australians can
Speaker 5: be loud enough that we can end this, or do
Speaker 5: you think that we've just sort of begun the process
Speaker 5: of undoing all of it.
Speaker 1: I don't think we've even come close to losing Australia
Speaker 1: To Day. You can't rewrite history, you can't pretend the
Speaker 1: things that happened didn't happen. It actually was the fact
Speaker 1: that the flag run up on the twenty sixth of
Speaker 1: January seventeen eighty eight. By eighteen eighteen, the day was
Speaker 1: being celebrated as anniversary Day, but later in the eighteen
Speaker 1: hundreds it will celebrated as Foundation Day. From nine to
Speaker 1: oh one it was celebrated as Australia Day. It always
Speaker 1: was the day when Western civilization arrived in this country.
Speaker 1: Not the birthday of Sydney, it's not the birthday of
Speaker 1: New South Wales. It is the birthday of modern Australia,
Speaker 1: which incorporates everyone. It incorporates the Aboriginal heritage that here,
Speaker 1: it incorporates our migrant character, it incorporates our British foundation.
Speaker 1: All of that is bound up in Australia Day. So
Speaker 1: it's real, it's genuine, and sooner or later, people who
Speaker 1: are running these kinds of ideologies get bitten in the
Speaker 1: bum by reality, don't they.
Speaker 2: Yeah, they do, unfortunately for our audience.
Speaker 4: So I think they're going to be subjected to this
Speaker 4: awful Australia Day debate for most of January, so I
Speaker 4: will spare them more of that.
Speaker 2: But I think there's a broader question that we're getting to.
Speaker 4: Here, and that is is the whole woke movement past
Speaker 4: its peak? And I was reading as a cracking article
Speaker 4: from my friend and spectator colleague Linel Schreiver in the
Speaker 4: Times from the UK Overnight where she was positing the
Speaker 4: question is the woke movement over now? She said, in
Speaker 4: one respect, there are really positive science. You can see
Speaker 4: the corporate depart DEI departments are shrinking. You can see
Speaker 4: that the podcast bros are now speaking out for common sense.
Speaker 4: You can see that three preferred pronouns are dropping out
Speaker 4: of emails.
Speaker 2: All that sort of stuff.
Speaker 4: At the other at the same time, when you can
Speaker 4: see that quote on the screen, we yearned to put
Speaker 4: this rank idiocy behind us. So I worry about jumping
Speaker 4: the gun because it is so entrenched in the institutions.
Speaker 4: My question team, and I'll go to you first, kel E.
Speaker 4: Are we past peak woke or is this a battle
Speaker 4: we're going to be fighting for some time.
Speaker 1: We've actually been saying we're past peak work for a
Speaker 1: while and it's going to be hard to tell and
Speaker 1: only the stories in the future will be able to
Speaker 1: tell us. But the shines are looking good. I mean,
Speaker 1: I think in Australia we had a vote on identity
Speaker 1: politics when we voted on the Voice referendum, and it
Speaker 1: was do you want to divide Australia boteity? Do you
Speaker 1: want people to be separated into different groups based on
Speaker 1: their family tree, or don't you And we said really
Speaker 1: firmly and clearly, sixty one percent to thirty nine percent, no,
Speaker 1: we reject identity politics. That's a fairly strong rejection of woke.
Speaker 1: So I think there is a tide running. I'm not
Speaker 1: sure that it's gone far enough yet, but I think
Speaker 1: there's a tide running.
Speaker 4: Evelyn said something earlier when we were talking when we
Speaker 4: were talking about Australia Day, and she said that it
Speaker 4: comes back to the kids.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 4: My concern is that you look at the curriculums in
Speaker 4: Australia at the moment, you look at the university sector
Speaker 4: and they are absolutely ideologically corrupted. And the thing that
Speaker 4: really frustrates me is whenever the left gets into power,
Speaker 4: they do their darndas to basically recalibrate the curriculums to
Speaker 4: promote a black arm bound view of history, to putting
Speaker 4: in a particular view of the world. Whenever the right
Speaker 4: gets in, it's a lais a fair, she'll be right
Speaker 4: made approach.
Speaker 2: That's why I'm.
Speaker 4: Worried that we're going to be fighting this battle for
Speaker 4: some time, because I no matter how well adjusted you
Speaker 4: are as a kid. If you go through twelve years
Speaker 4: of this stuff, it's going to be pretty hard to
Speaker 4: come out and not have that world view.
Speaker 5: There's a reason why if you have a look at
Speaker 5: all of these woke ideologies, all of the evil, all
Speaker 5: of the really depraved things that are going on in
Speaker 5: the world, there's a reason why they always go for
Speaker 5: the kids. And the reason is because one, they are vulnerable,
Speaker 5: they are impressionable, and if you win the hearts of children,
Speaker 5: you can basically win votes in the future. And there
Speaker 5: was this amazing study that was done on mainstream media.
Speaker 6: I think it was Channel ten maybe, but I could
Speaker 6: be wrong.
Speaker 5: But they it was psychologists looking at children and they
Speaker 5: threw them in a room and they were watching the
Speaker 5: behaviors of these children over a period of.
Speaker 6: Time, and.
Speaker 5: Psychologists and whatnot found that by the age of five,
Speaker 5: children form loyalties outside of mum and dad. And if
Speaker 5: mum and dad haven't won the hearts of their children
Speaker 5: by the time of five, once they hit school years,
Speaker 5: they start forming loyalties with peers, with teachers, and with ideas,
Speaker 5: and that's a really scary thing. So essentially, the results
Speaker 5: of these studies were that you've got five years to
Speaker 5: win the loyalty of your kid or whoever you're outsourcing
Speaker 5: your p parenting to, whether that be a school, whether
Speaker 5: that be you know, daycare, whatever you're outsourcing parenting too.
Speaker 5: If you haven't won the loyalty of your kids, be
Speaker 5: prepared that. You know your kids are going to get
Speaker 5: loyalties to these things. And you're right, curriculums are plagued
Speaker 5: with horrible ideologies.
Speaker 2: You know.
Speaker 5: It's filled with Marxism, as filled with the climate stuff.
Speaker 1: You know.
Speaker 5: I'm a huge advocate for homeschooling. I think homeschooling in
Speaker 5: Australia is becoming a lot more mainstream and there's a
Speaker 5: lot more resources out there, and I think it's fantastic
Speaker 5: because sometimes it's the only safe option.
Speaker 4: I pick you up on that because I understand about
Speaker 4: the whole work curriculum stuff. But how do you then
Speaker 4: mitigate against the fact that schools still do provide a
Speaker 4: social education for kids.
Speaker 5: There are so many studies that show that kids who
Speaker 5: at homes would have absolutely no disadvantage with socialization.
Speaker 6: If you actually look at the.
Speaker 5: Studies, they do more better in employment and are more
Speaker 5: successful with having a.
Speaker 3: Relationships alternative, and that is a lot of grandparents now
Speaker 3: stepping up to the plate and saying, yes, we're worried
Speaker 3: about what's happening in stage schools arms us.
Speaker 1: We don't want that to happen to our grandchildren. We
Speaker 1: the grandparents, will pay the fees so they can go
Speaker 1: to a private school. Some of them are smaller, community
Speaker 1: based Christian schools, some of them are the long established
Speaker 1: and far more expensive school. That depends on the grandparents.
Speaker 1: I can see right now there are grandparents watching who
Speaker 1: are nodding their heads saying, yes, that's our role as grandparents.
Speaker 1: We pay the fees so the kids get to go
Speaker 1: to school where there is a more traditional quality education
Speaker 1: without this kind of ideological component. That's an option.
Speaker 2: It is an option.
Speaker 4: And I think the lovely thing about that is that
Speaker 4: there's also a crisis of loneliness amongst many older early
Speaker 4: people in this country. And if you can get that
Speaker 4: sort of connection between younger people and older people, you're
Speaker 4: killing two birds in on Stone.
Speaker 2: I'm all for it.
Speaker 6: You should see how good homeschooling.
Speaker 1: Is for that. Well, just say, grandparents are in fact
Speaker 1: playing a different role in society than they used to play.
Speaker 1: I wasn't all that close to my grandparents, but grandparents
Speaker 1: in our generation, the baby boomers, we are now spending
Speaker 1: a lot of time with our grandchildren and very involved
Speaker 1: in their lives, and a good thing. It is too now.
Speaker 1: Annika Wells is the Minister for Age Care in the
Speaker 1: Albanese government and she had to give a media conference today.
Speaker 1: Fairly straightforward, you would think, no problem with that. But
Speaker 1: she started and then suddenly discovered three important flags were
Speaker 1: not there. Behind her mad panic, she had to stop.
Speaker 1: The flags had to be put up and start again.
Speaker 1: Take a look, sorry, the flags and contrastsos.
Speaker 6: Even what I supposed to do?
Speaker 3: Well, look, it's just.
Speaker 2: You can't see the toys straight islander.
Speaker 4: Just bring it into the left to bed and bring
Speaker 4: the Australian one a time it closer to you.
Speaker 1: Thank you, prefect.
Speaker 3: Yep, okay, all right, right?
Speaker 1: Doesn't that make you feel better? The Aboriginal flag goes
Speaker 1: in the middle, and then the Torres straight island flag
Speaker 1: is put up, and finally the one national flag, which
Speaker 1: is legally the flag of the name, goes up at
Speaker 1: the end. Why do we need will why do we
Speaker 1: need three flags?
Speaker 4: When you see it done like that, it is actually
Speaker 4: really funny. Initially that annoyed me that story until I
Speaker 4: saw the clip and it's just fascicle when you look at.
Speaker 5: Like it looks like Michael Scott from the Office, like
Speaker 5: a scene from that are they're walking around.
Speaker 4: The thing is that is really irritating is that it's
Speaker 4: not the Australian flag in the middle. It's the I
Speaker 4: think it's the indigenous flag in the middle, and it's
Speaker 4: almost like the Australian flag is an afterthought. And again
Speaker 4: this is symbolic stuff. This is not bread and butter issues.
Speaker 4: But I think Darton has been very clever in selectively
Speaker 4: picking up on some of these issues because the vast
Speaker 4: majority of people in Australia now it irritates them. Is
Speaker 4: it going to change their votes or is it a
Speaker 4: vote deciding issue? Probably not, But like the whole Trump thing,
Speaker 4: it adds to the vibe. It adds to the vibe
Speaker 4: that this is stuff that people aren't tolerating anymore.
Speaker 2: And I think he's been very clever.
Speaker 1: And in fact, there was an attempt by the Albanuzi
Speaker 1: government to say this is appalling. I mean, Peter Dutt
Speaker 1: not prepared to stand in front of all the fas
Speaker 1: and then they did a bit of public opinion polling
Speaker 1: and discovered the vast majority of US reliance thought it
Speaker 1: was a wonderful idea to just have the flag that
Speaker 1: our Amsacs, our diggers fought under that behind the Prime
Speaker 1: Minister and nothing else. It is the right move for damake,
Speaker 1: isn't it.
Speaker 6: It certainly is. It's the right move for all Australians.
Speaker 5: I mean, one flag, one group of people, one nation.
Speaker 5: And the problem when you have multiple flags is I mean,
Speaker 5: I can't stand under the Aboriginal or Torres Straight Islander
Speaker 5: flags because.
Speaker 6: I'm not of those people.
Speaker 5: But what can an Aboriginal, a Torres Straight Islander and
Speaker 5: an Australian like myself stand under. We can stand under
Speaker 5: the Australian flag all together, united as one.
Speaker 6: And that's the beauty of our flag.
Speaker 5: And when you have these different factions within one nation,
Speaker 5: it is incredibly divided. And as one of the oldest playbooks,
Speaker 5: you know that, you know if you wanted to divide
Speaker 5: a nation and then you can conquer them, and that's
Speaker 5: exactly what they're doing. They're sending out messages that we
Speaker 5: are all different, we are not the same.
Speaker 2: I agree with that. With one nuance.
Speaker 4: If an indigenous athlete wants to run around the track
Speaker 4: with an indigenous flag over their shoulders, fine, that's your decision,
Speaker 4: Go for your life. But it's when the government or
Speaker 4: the opposition is actually making this part of state policy
Speaker 4: that's where it becomes problematic. And that's why again I
Speaker 4: think Dun's been clever to say as a country, this
Speaker 4: is not on.
Speaker 1: To understand how bad it would be. Imagine this. Imagine
Speaker 1: at an American official government event, anything other than the
Speaker 1: American flag, the stars and stripes, was out the front.
Speaker 1: You can't imagine it, can you. They would never allow
Speaker 1: it. It wouldn't happen, So we shouldn't allow it to happen either.
Speaker 1: And I know most people are on side with that
Speaker 1: when it comes, certainly, I'm sure you are. They just
Speaker 1: go overseas now because China has never militarily been stronger
Speaker 1: than it is right now. And we keep hearing that
Speaker 1: this might be the year that finally Xixinping fulfills the
Speaker 1: promise he's been making to his people four years now
Speaker 1: that he will take back Taiwan, an independent nation of
Speaker 1: twenty five million people. President Jijinping says no one can
Speaker 1: stop China's reunification. He said, the people on both sides
Speaker 1: of the Taiwan Strait are one family. No one can
Speaker 1: sever our family bonds now. No one, he said, can
Speaker 1: stop the historical trend of national reunification. Now. Whether he's
Speaker 1: got his history right or not is a questionable thing.
Speaker 1: Taiwan was the island of foremost off the off the
Speaker 1: coast of China and never was part of mainline China.
Speaker 1: So it is an independent nation, has been for a
Speaker 1: long time now, and for it's been a democracy for
Speaker 1: a long time now. And there is a commitment by
Speaker 1: the Americans to defend Taiwan if Taiwan is attacked where
Speaker 1: in the Anzas Treaty. So if America decides to respond
Speaker 1: militarily if Taiwan is attacked, then does that commit Australia
Speaker 1: sending whatever forces, whatever support we can do. Does that
Speaker 1: mean our relations with China end up in an appalling
Speaker 1: mess because China decides to take military action. Could twenty
Speaker 1: twenty five be that kind of dangerous year? Will it?
Speaker 2: Could?
Speaker 4: I think this is something which the West has there
Speaker 4: head in the sand about. Je has said this is
Speaker 4: going to happen. He's told his military generals that he
Speaker 4: wants to be ready by twenty twenty seven. I think
Speaker 4: that sort of timeframe is more likely, but I don't
Speaker 4: think we're taking this threat seriously. The one nuance I
Speaker 4: would say about this whole thing is I don't think
Speaker 4: this is necessarily a boots on the ground invasion. I
Speaker 4: think it's something closer to an economic blockade, and I
Speaker 4: don't think the response is necessarily a military response. It
Speaker 4: will probably be the Trump style economic tariff, economic warfare
Speaker 4: or cyber warfare that he's been floating. But the fact
Speaker 4: remains this is probably the most serious threat that not
Speaker 4: enough people are talking about.
Speaker 1: Yes, we're not talking about we're not thinking about it,
Speaker 1: and yet we keep We've see him during last year,
Speaker 1: we saw incursions into Taiwanese airspace repeatedly by Chinese military aircraft.
Speaker 1: I mean, are we likely to actually see a war
Speaker 1: in our region that Australia becomes involved in twenty twenty five.
Speaker 5: I really hope that we're not, And I think the
Speaker 5: reason why we're perhaps not talking about it more it
Speaker 5: is because there's wars going everywhere in the world at
Speaker 5: the moment and people are sick of war. I'm sick
Speaker 5: of war. I'm sick of, you know, wanting to be.
Speaker 6: Involved in wars, particularly as a nation.
Speaker 5: I think what makes things like this really difficult is
Speaker 5: the fact that we're allies with different people. And I
Speaker 5: mean you only have to look at World War One
Speaker 5: and World War Two to see how alliances are literally
Speaker 5: shaped like so much, particularly a.
Speaker 6: World War Two.
Speaker 5: And I just think, to be honest that the US
Speaker 5: and Australia, like, we're not the whole monitors of the world.
Speaker 5: And I do think to a degree we have to
Speaker 5: be very careful. And I'll just finish this point. I
Speaker 5: know you want to look very desperate to say something
Speaker 5: will but I just want to make this point. Our
Speaker 5: number one alliance should be America. We've been in a
Speaker 5: military alliance with them since the fifties. Without them, we
Speaker 5: have no hope against China. So that's a very important
Speaker 5: relationship that we need to hold on to. But I
Speaker 5: will say this, whilst China is a communist nation, not
Speaker 5: a democratic nation, and whilst China, you know, is, I
Speaker 5: wouldn't say our friend or so I think we need
Speaker 5: to be very careful because China have built concrete islands
Speaker 5: just north of the Philippines if they wanted to, they
Speaker 5: could go there and send bombs that would hit our
Speaker 5: shores over here.
Speaker 6: Not only that, I think that we would tread very
Speaker 6: carefully due to our trade agreements with it.
Speaker 5: I don't agree with any of these, by the way,
Speaker 5: mind you, but stupidly, our politicians have set our country
Speaker 5: up so we're not self sufficient, so we rely on
Speaker 5: these stupid things like this. So I just think we
Speaker 5: need to be really careful to not warmonger, to not
Speaker 5: try and get involved in wars like this, and perhaps
Speaker 5: wait in our wisdom as a nation to see what happens.
Speaker 5: I hope that when Trump comes into power.
Speaker 1: Our treaties won't always let us wait. If a treaty is.
Speaker 5: Activated, well, maybe we need to reassess our treaties.
Speaker 1: Well, if we've signed a treaty, we're committed to it,
Speaker 1: and when the treaty is activated, it's activated. It's a
Speaker 1: bit too late then to say, oh, well, we weren't
Speaker 1: too sure when we signed it.
Speaker 5: We didn't really know all the times changed, Like you
Speaker 5: can't like if you have one treaty like I think
Speaker 5: his history shows that this isn't the point.
Speaker 2: This isn't the point. There are two things we need
Speaker 2: to consider.
Speaker 4: Number One, there are just wars, and there are wrong wars,
Speaker 4: and going into the Middle East in the early two
Speaker 4: thousands was a waste of time, and that was obviously.
Speaker 2: The wrong decision.
Speaker 4: This is the right war in the area of the
Speaker 4: world where there is a small democratic nation that is
Speaker 4: being bullied by a dictatorial, authoritarian, awful regime. The Chinese
Speaker 4: are not our friends. They are our greatest geopolitical foes.
Speaker 4: Make no mistake. They are an awful, ugly master us.
Speaker 2: Well, no they're not.
Speaker 1: No.
Speaker 6: A lot of people are saying, well, that's not what
Speaker 6: I'm saying.
Speaker 4: That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is they
Speaker 4: are greatest geopolitical foes. Even if you don't agree with
Speaker 4: me on principle, the practical side is we cannot.
Speaker 2: Afford to let them invade Taiwan, and there's there's war.
Speaker 4: And there's one very simple reason for that, and that
Speaker 4: is that Taiwan has ninety percent of the world's semiconductors
Speaker 4: manufactured in that country.
Speaker 2: If China takes.
Speaker 4: Control of that, then your iPhones won't be available by
Speaker 4: the time that is over. Maybe every single the world
Speaker 4: would be glad come on, sorry, but the modern world
Speaker 4: runs off those semiconductors and unfortunately were about five or
Speaker 4: six years behind being able to manufacture those in the West.
Speaker 4: If that happens, that is catastrophic for the Western So
Speaker 4: this is.
Speaker 6: A real big problem for Australia.
Speaker 1: Involved who are living in a democracy twenty five million,
Speaker 1: roughly the size of Australia. They have a democracy, they
Speaker 1: have freedom. We saw what happened in Hong Kong. China
Speaker 1: came in with the end of the agreement with the
Speaker 1: United Kingdom and they took over Hong Kong and they
Speaker 1: signed the thing called the Basic Law and they said
Speaker 1: there will be to one country, two systems. They just
Speaker 1: broke the law. They ignore that there is no freedom
Speaker 1: in Hong Kong now and people who were campaigning for
Speaker 1: freedom and campaigning for liberties were people who are now
Speaker 1: in prison these days in Hong Kong. The same thing
Speaker 1: would happen to Taiwan. And we need to decide whether
Speaker 1: we as a country are prepared to sit back and
Speaker 1: do that. But Trump is a bit of a dove
Speaker 1: rather than a hawk. Would he get involved.
Speaker 4: Well, the short answer is I think he would. But
Speaker 4: whether that is a military intervention is an interesting question.
Speaker 6: Do you think He's mere presence is an I think.
Speaker 2: Much more so than Biden.
Speaker 4: Absolutely right, and I think we were talking about this
Speaker 4: earlier in the week. The concept of strength of deterrence
Speaker 4: through strength is really important to look.
Speaker 5: To what happened with Russia and Ukraine as soon as
Speaker 5: Trump came in exactly.
Speaker 4: So I'm much more comfortable that the Chinese will not
Speaker 4: intervene in Taiwan with a Trump presidency compared to a
Speaker 4: Harris presidency, and I hope.
Speaker 5: That happens so that we in Australia don't really have
Speaker 5: to get involved, because, to be honest, I think for
Speaker 5: a really.
Speaker 6: Long time, like a lot of the Shans.
Speaker 5: Particularly like political parties like One Nation, have been saying
Speaker 5: we need to stop relying on countries like Taiwan for
Speaker 5: making conductors so that when something like this happens, we're
Speaker 5: in a better position to put Australia first.
Speaker 4: But I would tell Paul enhancement is not easy to
Speaker 4: make semi conductors. We're not going to be able to
Speaker 4: do it in Broken Hill anytimes.
Speaker 5: We have an incredible country with a lot of people,
Speaker 5: with a lot of resources, a lot of space, like
Speaker 5: we have so many capabilities.
Speaker 1: In the short term. In the short term, when it
Speaker 1: comes to twenty twenty five, we need to decide, I know.
Speaker 5: But we we can have to talk about it now
Speaker 5: so this doesn't happen again.
Speaker 4: You can't do it in the long term either. I
Speaker 4: know that the world is getting more isolationist. I know
Speaker 4: that we need to put Australia first, But we can't
Speaker 4: completely ditch the idea of trade.
Speaker 2: We can't completely ditch that.
Speaker 5: It should be limited and it should be used with discernment.
Speaker 4: Sure, I agree, but I just don't think we say
Speaker 4: let's do everything in Australia and she'll be right.
Speaker 5: It's logic though, like we could potentially get into war
Speaker 5: with like so many different nations across the world because
Speaker 5: we go, oh, well, we need this, Like at some
Speaker 5: point in time we have to go, yes, that's really
Speaker 5: horrible that the poor, you know, people in Hong Kong
Speaker 5: have had to suffer. That that's awful.
Speaker 6: But you know, my family and my kids come first.
Speaker 4: I agree, I agree, But if there is one war
Speaker 4: in the next decade that we think is the right
Speaker 4: water to fight, then this is the one.
Speaker 1: Well it could sound a bit bleak and you can
Speaker 1: feel it's a little bit bleak. You shouldn't, because I
Speaker 1: think we agree that the fact that Trump will be
Speaker 1: in the White House is more likely to make other
Speaker 1: people nervous. Other people think again, now, looking ahead to
Speaker 1: twenty twenty five, how much does life go to cost
Speaker 1: you in twenty twenty five. We'll talk about that right
Speaker 1: after the break and welcome back to the late to boat.
Speaker 1: Now all of us care about our local GPS, our
Speaker 1: family doctors. They matter a lot to us. Is there
Speaker 1: a risk that there won't be enough of them to
Speaker 1: go around, that we will run out of GPS. We'll
Speaker 1: take a look at that in just a moment. But firstly,
Speaker 1: the economy. Now it's interesting I say the word economy
Speaker 1: and almost instantly and see your eyes glaze over. The economy.
Speaker 1: We're not interested, but it's actually about how we live.
Speaker 1: There was a headline that I saw that said about
Speaker 1: what twenty twenty five holds for the Australian economy. The
Speaker 1: headline said what twenty twenty five holds for the Australian
Speaker 1: economy in terms of property prices, rents and the cost
Speaker 1: of living, and all three of those things matter to
Speaker 1: us now I'm going to try to explain something that
Speaker 1: I would normally not do on isaiad Ross Greenwood beside
Speaker 1: me to explain the hard words. But the Australian Bureau
Speaker 1: of Statistics has just released figures saying that the Australian
Speaker 1: economy grew by zero point eight percent in the twelve
Speaker 1: months up until September. Now, that is the slowest and
Speaker 1: lowest rate of growth since the nineteen nineties. In other words,
Speaker 1: our economy is growing very slowly. But at the same time,
Speaker 1: our headline rate of inflation is two point eight percent,
Speaker 1: and what's called the underlying rate of inflation. I think
Speaker 1: Ross calls that the trimmed mean because he uses big
Speaker 1: words like that. Our rate of inflation is three point
Speaker 1: five percent. That's inflation up here, that's the growth of
Speaker 1: our economy down here. That means things are going to
Speaker 1: be difficult for those of us who live in this country.
Speaker 1: Things will become more expensive, harder to access, and more
Speaker 1: people will be struggling. Will what's the as you look
Speaker 1: a here, I mean you've got an economics degree. When
Speaker 1: you look ahead at twenty twenty five, it'll be a
Speaker 1: tough year, won't it.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it will be tough yere as I said. I
Speaker 2: never said I was a good economist, but I think
Speaker 2: before we.
Speaker 4: Look at what the year ahead will be like, I
Speaker 4: just want to say, how did we get here?
Speaker 1: Yes?
Speaker 4: And the thing that really annoys me is that so
Speaker 4: many of these problems are entirely self inflicted.
Speaker 2: The growth issue.
Speaker 4: We've had the opportunities for serious economic reforms in this
Speaker 4: country for over twenty years, and no politicians have had
Speaker 4: the courage to do it. Not since how it's gsts
Speaker 4: anything seriously being done. We keep cheating growth by importing
Speaker 4: more and more people, because that's a great way to
Speaker 4: get top line GDP growth without really making the economy
Speaker 4: more productive. You add on something like net zero, which
Speaker 4: is just an easy way to hamstring your economy and
Speaker 4: particularly raise energy prices, and it makes you wonder are
Speaker 4: the politicians genuinely interested in the well being of our
Speaker 4: people or are they interested in potentially something else same thing.
Speaker 4: By the way, it's happening in the UK, it's happening
Speaker 4: in all of Europe. This isn't just an Australia problem.
Speaker 4: And it really just makes me a bit depressed that
Speaker 4: when you will see Trump come in this year and
Speaker 4: we'll see the handbrake go off that economy.
Speaker 2: It's going to be very stark. The difference between the.
Speaker 5: Question either of you about this, do you think that
Speaker 5: COVID was the final nail in the coffin or do
Speaker 5: you think that how our governments across the West Europe, Australia,
Speaker 5: New Zealand do you think the way that they handled
Speaker 5: COVID has played a huge part in why we are
Speaker 5: suffering so bad now?
Speaker 1: Like what came first, Well, COVID made them spend more money.
Speaker 1: And when government spending rises, that creates a problem in
Speaker 1: the economy, doesn't it, Well, yeah it does.
Speaker 4: But also COVID got us comfortable with the government solving
Speaker 4: all of our problems.
Speaker 2: You know, in the past, the government.
Speaker 4: We provide limited services to the people, they collect tax
Speaker 4: and then that would be basically the remit of the government.
Speaker 4: But then in COVID we got comfortable with the government
Speaker 4: then becoming the income with actually giving us money.
Speaker 5: It was easier to stay host the governments to pay
Speaker 5: you than work.
Speaker 2: It was easy.
Speaker 4: And I don't think and in fairness to our politicians,
Speaker 4: I don't think we.
Speaker 2: Have got our heads out of that headspace.
Speaker 4: We need to say, you know what, the government isn't
Speaker 4: there to provide money. The government is there to in
Speaker 4: a very limited capacity, which means over the next five years,
Speaker 4: if we're going to be serious about our economy, we
Speaker 4: need to cut back spending. You know, Abbat tried to
Speaker 4: do it briefly, and you know what, yone in Australia revolted.
Speaker 4: And so maybe I wonder do we need to have
Speaker 4: an economic catastrophe before people take this seriously.
Speaker 2: Maybe we do.
Speaker 1: Maybe it will be as bad as that. But let's
Speaker 1: have a look at what the politicians are the same.
Speaker 1: Because our treasurer is doctor Jim Chalmers, and he's talking
Speaker 1: about what he's doing in his budget in order to
Speaker 1: make things better for you this year. Take a look
Speaker 1: at his budget boosters. He says, these are the things
Speaker 1: which have kicked in on the first of January, a
Speaker 1: huge tranch of things that he's brought in. A fifty
Speaker 1: percent wage increase for age care workers, youth allowance as
Speaker 1: our study increases, the pharmaceutic got benefits scheme co payment
Speaker 1: has been frozen. It won't go up there. We could
Speaker 1: go on. They're a list of about a dozen things,
Speaker 1: all of them involve the government spending money, and that
Speaker 1: means there's more money in the economy chasing the same
Speaker 1: amount of goods and services, and that means that inflation
Speaker 1: continues to rise. Where we are constantly told by the RBA,
Speaker 1: by the International Monetary Fund that it's government spending that's
Speaker 1: causing the problem. Where at the moment we're in a
Speaker 1: kind of a rut that is stopping us from getting ahead,
Speaker 1: aren't we?
Speaker 6: I think so?
Speaker 5: And I mean to be honest, I think every day
Speaker 5: Australians at this point in time just want to know, Okay,
Speaker 5: we're in a rut. One, how do we fix this?
Speaker 5: And two who's going to fix it? Because at the
Speaker 5: moment we just got so many empty words from politicians.
Speaker 6: We have the Treasurer.
Speaker 5: Saying, you know, we've got better days ahead, you know,
Speaker 5: while he's got sweat, you know, cascading down the side
Speaker 5: of his temple. You know, people do not believe the
Speaker 5: lies that we're being spun. And I guess the question
Speaker 5: as well is are people going to be gullible when
Speaker 5: it comes time to election?
Speaker 6: And I think we've.
Speaker 5: Got to stop voting, you know, based off like this
Speaker 5: loyalty to one party, like who's got the best holicies, who's.
Speaker 6: Going to get us out of this rut.
Speaker 4: I don't think it's necessarily gullible as much as politicians
Speaker 4: with courage and persuasive ability. So I was speaking to
Speaker 4: John Anson, former Deputy Prime Minister of Australia under the
Speaker 4: Howard government, the other day. He was telling me, you know,
Speaker 4: on this topic, do you think the Howard government had
Speaker 4: a mandate for debt reduction? Do you think that was
Speaker 4: something that was necessary popular? Cutting back spending, actually doing
Speaker 4: that hard budgery work. Of course it wasn't. It's not
Speaker 4: popular when you're taking money away from people.
Speaker 2: He had to.
Speaker 4: They had to make the case, Howard, Costello Anderson. They
Speaker 4: hit the trail and they said, this is going to
Speaker 4: be painful, but we need to do it for these reasons.
Speaker 2: It will be better for the country.
Speaker 4: And it's that sort of political leadership that sadly has
Speaker 4: been lacking for the last fifteen years, and that is
Speaker 4: why we find ourselves in this position now.
Speaker 1: James Carvill famously wrote all line for Bill Clinton during
Speaker 1: his first election campaign, and the line that he wrote
Speaker 1: that Bill Clinton used when he was competing against George
Speaker 1: Bush Senior was it's the economy stupid. Will that be
Speaker 1: our federal election in twenty twenty five, Will it wud
Speaker 1: be a fort and one on the economy?
Speaker 4: Yeah, the short answer is yes, because it's always fort
Speaker 4: and one on the economy.
Speaker 2: Carvill was right.
Speaker 4: You know, you saw this in the US recently where
Speaker 4: all of the abortion stuff, all of the identity politics
Speaker 4: staff got a lot of media attention, but really it
Speaker 4: came down to inflation in the first two years of
Speaker 4: the Biden government, and it came down to people feeling
Speaker 4: like they'll pay more for goods and services than what
Speaker 4: they once did. That's what Trump wanted. Money speaks, and
Speaker 4: these Brillians are feeling the same way. Now.
Speaker 2: The interesting thing, and I know we.
Speaker 4: Discussed this earlier in the week, but Australias are feeling
Speaker 4: like the economy is in a bad position. But we
Speaker 4: also traditionally have not punted out first term governments.
Speaker 2: So it's a question of.
Speaker 4: Whether or not that traditional trend will endure or whether
Speaker 4: the old maxim that it's the economy stupid will endure.
Speaker 1: There are people we've trusted in the past, so just
Speaker 1: John Howard and Peter Costello, who were economic reformers and
Speaker 1: who ran a very successful economy and handed over a
Speaker 1: budget which was not in deficit, it was in surplus.
Speaker 1: Now they came out today and they were in the newspaper.
Speaker 1: There was a headline saying that John Howard and Peter
Speaker 1: Costello have lashed Anthony Alberizi and Jim Charmer's budget mismanagement. Basically,
Speaker 1: they're saying that they described Jim Charmer's budget as being
Speaker 1: out of control. So is this going to be the
Speaker 1: issue on which people decide who they choose as their
Speaker 1: next perime.
Speaker 6: I think it will be.
Speaker 5: And like I think at this point in time, people
Speaker 5: just want to be able to feed their families. People
Speaker 5: want to be able to you know, put a roof
Speaker 5: over their families' heads and have nice things, like you know,
Speaker 5: we are our first world nation, and this is a
Speaker 5: huge thing because it's quite terrifying to think to have
Speaker 5: another four years of this, you know, like we have
Speaker 5: for such a long period of time lived. I guess
Speaker 5: by necessity we're not really prosperous like we once were,
Speaker 5: Like you know, we've sort of spent you know the
Speaker 5: last part of our you know, few years of life
Speaker 5: just trying to make ends meet.
Speaker 4: My question is this is like the sporting team that's
Speaker 4: relying on the thirty eight year old five eight to
Speaker 4: just kind of guide them around the field. Why have
Speaker 4: we still got Howard and Costello trying to make these arguments.
Speaker 4: I haven't heard Dart and I even Angus Taylor making
Speaker 4: any really coherent conservative right wing economic arguments lately.
Speaker 2: Why do we still have the.
Speaker 4: Kind of the greats making these making these making these arguments.
Speaker 1: Actually, I think Angus Tayler has been dealing really well
Speaker 1: with the stupments put it by Jim and for the
Speaker 1: last six months has been making a case quite strongly.
Speaker 1: So I do think he's cutting through. Yeah, I think
Speaker 1: he is. And what we need from people like Peter
Speaker 1: Dutton and Angus Taylor is something concrete that we can believe.
Speaker 1: I mean, if they said we're going to knock off
Speaker 1: the fuel text because that will make life a bit
Speaker 1: cheaper for you, we would understand that, and we'd say, Okay,
Speaker 1: that's a good thing. That's a good reason for now.
Speaker 1: We need to hear something like that, Surely we.
Speaker 4: Do, and it needs to be messaged in a compelling way.
Speaker 4: So you said yourself when we were going to this topic.
Speaker 4: Kell that people's eyes glaze over when we talk economics.
Speaker 4: That's why you need Without a doubt, the greatest modern
Speaker 4: communicator in Australian politics was Tony Abbott with short stop
Speaker 4: the boat style messaging. We need to hear that. And
Speaker 4: that's my concern with someone like an Angus Taylor is
Speaker 4: I haven't heard him cut through with that type of messaging.
Speaker 1: Okay, well we'll see if he can do it. One
Speaker 1: of the issues that is playing into this is immigration.
Speaker 1: We've got a huge problem with cost of housing. Whether
Speaker 1: you're trying to buy a house, whether you're trying to
Speaker 1: rent property, there's just not enough to go and that's
Speaker 1: because there are more people than there are houses. Because
Speaker 1: the immigration rate has been under the Alberanese government for
Speaker 1: the last three years just extraordinarily high. They did promise
Speaker 1: in the last budget to cut it back, but they
Speaker 1: haven't got back to the lower numbers they claim they
Speaker 1: would get back to. Now Peter Dutton is saying he
Speaker 1: will cut back immigration rates. Peter Dutton's pledged to slash
Speaker 1: immigration as the best way to these the pressure on
Speaker 1: housing and suggesting that this is the issue that could
Speaker 1: in the end decide the outcome of the election in
Speaker 1: twenty twenty five, if he can come up with a
Speaker 1: good argument saying I'm going to cut back enough immigration
Speaker 1: so that the housing will become available for you. For
Speaker 1: the Australians living here who are looking for housing. We
Speaker 1: worry about our children, We worry about our grandchildren. How
Speaker 1: will they ever afford a home? Is this the issue
Speaker 1: that matters the size of immigration that's coming in.
Speaker 5: I think that immigration across all western nations is the
Speaker 5: hot topic at the moment. I think it's relevant to America,
Speaker 5: it's relevant to all of Europe, to the UK, and
Speaker 5: to Australia. And you know, you've got to ask the question,
Speaker 5: like everybody seems to be flocking to us, you know,
Speaker 5: and at some point in time we have to say no,
Speaker 5: and we have to put our kids, and we have
Speaker 5: to put our family and our nation first. And I
Speaker 5: think that this is such a pivotal moment. I think
Speaker 5: this was a huge part of Trump's win in America
Speaker 5: because he basically said he's you know, all of the
Speaker 5: illegal immigrants that came in, you know, via the border
Speaker 5: when Biden was in was out of this world, like
Speaker 5: it was out of this world, and that was a
Speaker 5: huge thing that he leaned on.
Speaker 6: And as soon as he was, you know.
Speaker 5: Was elected, one of the first people that he employed
Speaker 5: in his you know, defense and things, came out and
Speaker 5: gave this amazing speech about how he said he's.
Speaker 6: Going to clean up and deport and get them all back.
Speaker 5: And that was a huge thing, and I think a
Speaker 5: lot of people were like, why can't somebody do that
Speaker 5: for our country. Everybody was looking on and going, we
Speaker 5: need that for us because I want I don't want
Speaker 5: my kids, and I'm sure people at home don't want
Speaker 5: their kids having to compete.
Speaker 6: With the globe, you know, for for a house or
Speaker 6: for a job. It's that simple.
Speaker 1: But we're not talking about quite the situation that Trump
Speaker 1: faced because we're not talking about illegal immigration. These people
Speaker 1: are coming he illegally by the Alberica government.
Speaker 4: Yeah, well, thank god for the Howard and Abbott governments
Speaker 4: where they actually got illegal immigration under control.
Speaker 2: You can see how.
Speaker 5: Were in island. That's the only reason we have an
Speaker 5: under correct government is so weak. If we were like America, sure.
Speaker 2: Sure, But the bigger issue again for us is legal
Speaker 2: just the size. But the thing is the size. It
Speaker 2: is the sheer size.
Speaker 4: Look, immigration is the central issue that will define politics
Speaker 4: for the next decade around the world.
Speaker 2: I put up a post a poll on.
Speaker 4: Twitter the other day and I said, what is the
Speaker 4: greatest threat to the future of Western civilization? Is it debt,
Speaker 4: is it identity politics? Is it uncontrolled mass migration?
Speaker 2: Or is it war?
Speaker 4: And I think out of three thy five hundred responsors
Speaker 4: it came through at about eighty percent for migration. This
Speaker 4: is something that people are really feeling. But it's not
Speaker 4: just the economics. It is the cultural cohesion thing exactly
Speaker 4: that I think is something and if to be honest,
Speaker 4: having come from the UK, it is the UK is
Speaker 4: considerably worse at the moment, but Australia is trailing and
Speaker 4: I think I'm worried particularly, and the elephant in the
Speaker 4: room is immigration from fundamentalist Islamic countries. We saw what
Speaker 4: happened after October seven. This is not the type of
Speaker 4: immigration that we saw in the sixties and seventies. This
Speaker 4: is a very different world we're living in and I
Speaker 4: think that's the thing we need to actually have the
Speaker 4: courage stub to walk well.
Speaker 5: In your poll that you mentioned, you mentioned a few
Speaker 5: like economics, you mentioned war, and you mentioned these I
Speaker 5: would hazard a guess, and I would say my opinion
Speaker 5: would be that unchecked mass immigration would actually be the
Speaker 5: catalyst for those.
Speaker 6: Other problems within a nation.
Speaker 5: If you get that under control, I think you have
Speaker 5: a far better chance of getting those other things under control.
Speaker 6: There would be less war, there would be less conflict,
Speaker 6: the culture will be cohesive.
Speaker 5: I think it comes down to a question of what
Speaker 5: is a nation. What defines a nation. Is a nation
Speaker 5: an idea or is a nation something else? And I
Speaker 5: believe a nation is something else than just an idea.
Speaker 2: And JD.
Speaker 5: Vance, the vice president elect in America, actually gave a
Speaker 5: speech about this, and he's on the same page as
Speaker 5: I would be in that you.
Speaker 6: Know, a nation is a nation. It's not an idea.
Speaker 5: It's a group of people all living under one culture,
Speaker 5: one sort of idea, and that America is not an idea,
Speaker 5: and that it should be taken more seriously. And I
Speaker 5: think that we in the West need to take on
Speaker 5: that attitude that.
Speaker 1: Needs to become an issue in the election. We need
Speaker 1: politicians who can give us persuasive accounts of what they're
Speaker 1: going to do, what they would actually do. Once they're
Speaker 1: in office. Let's turn to that issue that I raised
Speaker 1: earlier of our family doctor, our local GP. There's express
Speaker 1: there's concern being expressed, fears that Australia may in fact
Speaker 1: have a GP shortage. And the reason is a lot
Speaker 1: of the doctors around now are getting older. Australia may
Speaker 1: face a GP Shortage's figures reveals almost ten percent of
Speaker 1: doctors are now aged over seventy. But that's not the
Speaker 1: end of it. The National Regulator now wants to introduce
Speaker 1: health checks for doctors who are aged seventy and over,
Speaker 1: so some of those people who are older doctors, they
Speaker 1: may be knocked out of practicing. And this, according to
Speaker 1: the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners, would be another
Speaker 1: regulatory burden unnecessarily imposed on the general practice profession without
Speaker 1: evidence of supporting effectiveness. And I have to say, I
Speaker 1: think will that's a nonsense idea. People are healthier longer.
Speaker 1: Doctors know if they're healthy or not, if they want
Speaker 1: to practice as doctors, let them practice as doctors.
Speaker 7: Sure.
Speaker 4: The real question is why aren't there enough young people
Speaker 4: coming through to actually become doctors. And here's my I
Speaker 4: guess instinct it's always been a very, very appealing profession.
Speaker 4: I think it is because our education system is no
Speaker 4: longer fit for purpose and there are less kids who
Speaker 4: a smart enough to actually be doctors. And as a
Speaker 4: result of that, there are less capable people coming through
Speaker 4: a lot of people who.
Speaker 5: Fifteen year course and kids don't have attention spans for
Speaker 5: that sort of thing.
Speaker 4: The potentially potentially, But I think it's always been a
Speaker 4: very appealing job.
Speaker 2: It's always been a very prestigious job.
Speaker 4: I think unfortunately see education, basic literacy and numeracy is
Speaker 4: going backwards. I think that comes out in how you're
Speaker 4: seeing April Bank doctors.
Speaker 5: I know three doctors and some of them go to
Speaker 5: church with me, all GPS who were laid off because
Speaker 5: they chose not to get the vaccine. There's three more
Speaker 5: gps for you, you know, if you're that worried.
Speaker 1: Yes, So we actually need to get rid of the
Speaker 1: nonsense of compulsory vaccines now coming up in just a moment.
Speaker 1: We need to take a look at what's going to
Speaker 1: happen in the future. I want to have a look
Speaker 1: at the predictions for twenty twenty five and work out
Speaker 1: what advice we would give Anthony Alberzi, if you've had
Speaker 1: an opportunity to sit down and say one quick piece
Speaker 1: of advice, mister Prime Minister. Here it is, what would
Speaker 1: it be? Think about that? Back after the break? Welcome
Speaker 1: back advice for Anthony Albernizi from US three in just
Speaker 1: a moment. But firstly, since nineteen seventy six, the Lake
Speaker 1: Superior State University has been putting out each year a
Speaker 1: list of banished words, words that have been abused, misused, overused,
Speaker 1: or just a plane irritating. And just a few hours
Speaker 1: ago they released their twenty twenty five list of banished words.
Speaker 1: Here are the words they want banished from everyone's vocabulary.
Speaker 1: Cringe as it makes me cringe. The whole world seems
Speaker 1: to make someone cringe these days. Game changer? How often
Speaker 1: can you change the game without everything changing? Era the
Speaker 1: Taylor Swift word dropped. Movies and books are not released
Speaker 1: these days, they're dropped. That dreadful iyk y if you
Speaker 1: know you know, which apparently is another one of those
Speaker 1: texting bits of shorthand that they use. Sorry not sorry
Speaker 1: is a sort of half hearted apology where people pretend
Speaker 1: to apologize but then take it back. Skibberty is a
Speaker 1: totally meaningless word used as a kind of noise of
Speaker 1: approval by young people who don't know any better. One
Speaker 1: hundred percent is being used instead of people saying absolutely.
Speaker 1: They expressed agreement in the past saying absolutely. Now they're
Speaker 1: saying one hundred percent. We don't use anything anymore. We
Speaker 1: utilize it and period. Because it's an American list, we
Speaker 1: would say full stop. It's an irritating word at the
Speaker 1: end of a sentence, so stop using it full stop.
Speaker 1: So what words would we choose? What would we pick
Speaker 1: us as a word or phrase that you would like
Speaker 1: to ban from the English language at least for the
Speaker 1: next year.
Speaker 5: Very easy, d e I Diversity, equity, inclusion done, finished
Speaker 5: in the bin.
Speaker 1: Okay, that's gone.
Speaker 4: Well, we'll go from an initialism to an a acronym
Speaker 4: and I'll give you GOAT. I'm so sick of whenever
Speaker 4: a half decent performance is put in from a sportsman,
Speaker 4: like a jasperate boomram, they're suddenly called the ghost or
Speaker 4: the greatst had that last night, I lie saying.
Speaker 2: And it's come.
Speaker 4: And that's why I'm saying we need to banish it,
Speaker 4: because now we've ended my vocabulary.
Speaker 1: It's wrong trender young Will has actually put the kaibo shop.
Speaker 4: Although I actually think John Howard is the goat of
Speaker 4: Australian politics, I will back that up.
Speaker 1: And what I'd like to pick is not a single word,
Speaker 1: but a phrase doing it tough. I've had enough of
Speaker 1: hearing Jim Chalmers as our treasurer at telling is we're
Speaker 1: doing it tough. We know we're doing it tough. We're
Speaker 1: the ones doing it tough. Okay, We're going to sit
Speaker 1: down and spend a minute with Anthony Albanezia, Prime Minister,
Speaker 1: and we're going to say, mister Prime Minister, we have
Speaker 1: a very quick, one sentence bit of advice for you,
Speaker 1: and it is please.
Speaker 5: Evelyn repent and say christ Is King. That's the only
Speaker 5: hope you have.
Speaker 1: What's yours world?
Speaker 4: B bold, have some guts and put one bold reform
Speaker 4: out there. Don't just kind of like wander into this
Speaker 4: mediocre defeat.
Speaker 2: I probably agree with it, but be bold.
Speaker 4: Give us something to actually really engage within this country.
Speaker 1: The word you're looking for as leadership, give us here.
Speaker 2: You're here.
Speaker 1: And the one word that I want to talk to
Speaker 1: the Prime Minister about is the word important. Now can
Speaker 1: you please pronounce it properly, Prime Minister. It's got a
Speaker 1: T in the middle, not a D. It's not pronounced important.
Speaker 1: But every time you say it, you say important, you
Speaker 1: do a glotti stop in the medial tea and can
Speaker 1: I tell you it's irritating a whole lot of people,
Speaker 1: so you're tell them to get practice it important after
Speaker 1: me Important. It's not hard. You can do it, so
Speaker 1: give it a try, Prime Minister. There you are a
Speaker 1: bit of guidance for twenty twenty five. And thank you
Speaker 1: for being sharing our company on this the first edition
Speaker 1: of the Late Debate for twenty twenty five. Thanks to
Speaker 1: Evelyn and to Will and to you, and we'll see
Speaker 1: you tomorrow night.