Speaker 1: Petero Kredlin live on Sky News Australia.
Speaker 2: Good evening and welcome to the show. Here's what's coming
Speaker 2: up on Credline. The Prime Minister has outlined the national
Speaker 2: approach to AI. What will they mean for Australian businesses, jobs,
Speaker 2: and the future of the industry. Labor is back in
Speaker 2: the lead, according to the latest Sky News Pulse. So
Speaker 2: has the coalition's attack on one nation paid off or
Speaker 2: is labor reaping the benefits. A new report from the
Speaker 2: CSIROW and the Australian Energy Market Operator projects the cost
Speaker 2: of electricity will increase after twenty thirty as coal fired
Speaker 2: power stations are replaced and university chiefs grilled out the
Speaker 2: Royal Commission into Anti Semitism. But is it a little
Speaker 2: too late when it comes to the safety of Jewish students.
Speaker 3: I can see that our Jewish students and staff paid.
Speaker 4: Price for that as the encampment dragged on, and I
Speaker 4: am im.
Speaker 3: Sorry to them that it took so long.
Speaker 5: For us to get it done well.
Speaker 2: AI will change our economy more than the Internet. The
Speaker 2: question isn't whether it's coming, but instead will Australia lead
Speaker 2: it or regulate it until the investment goes somewhere else.
Speaker 6: We want more Australian companies and global firms developing AI
Speaker 6: here to boost our sovereign capability, to strengthen our national
Speaker 6: security and build our economic resilience.
Speaker 2: But today's answer appears to be exactly what governments always
Speaker 2: reach for, another office, more bureaucracy, and the Albernezi wants
Speaker 2: an office of AI in the Prime Minister's department.
Speaker 4: His reactions should be to say, how do we help
Speaker 4: small businesses to grow, to invest, to employ more people,
Speaker 4: to drive up incomes and wages. That should be his reaction,
Speaker 4: But his first year reaction is always to increase the
Speaker 4: bureaucracy in Canberra.
Speaker 3: That's not the answer.
Speaker 2: In data center investment last year. And Anthropic wants to
Speaker 2: spend another twenty one billion dollars here if they can
Speaker 2: get policy certainty. And one of those sticking points is
Speaker 2: copyright laws. The Prime Minister said today that creatives must
Speaker 2: have control over how their product is used.
Speaker 6: But let me make this crystal clear. Not everything produced
Speaker 6: in Australia is up for grabs, not at all. Australian writers, musicians,
Speaker 6: artists and journalists must retain ownership.
Speaker 7: And control of their work.
Speaker 6: Our laws will spell that out plane as day. An
Speaker 6: artist creative endeavor is their work and their property. No
Speaker 6: company should use Australian books, music, art or news to
Speaker 6: build or train AI without the artist's control, and that
Speaker 6: includes the artist's control of the price and value of
Speaker 6: their work. Anything less is theft.
Speaker 2: Mister Albinizi also outlined rules around the locations of data
Speaker 2: centers and the energy that they use.
Speaker 6: Will create a legal obligation for the next generation of
Speaker 6: large scale data centers to underwrite new power supply, to
Speaker 6: pay their full share of grid connection so no costs
Speaker 6: are passed on to homes or businesses, and to put
Speaker 6: at least as much energy into our grid as they
Speaker 6: take out of it. Australia is the sunniest continent on Earth,
Speaker 6: but we're also the drift, which is why our rules
Speaker 6: will require data centers to minimize their water use, to
Speaker 6: maximize the energy efficiency and pay for any additional water
Speaker 6: infrastructure that is required.
Speaker 2: Well. AI is the biggest economic opportunity of this generation.
Speaker 2: Liberal Deputy Leader Jane Hume said the concern is labor
Speaker 2: will get stuck with union demands.
Speaker 8: But my concern is more about whether labor stifles that
Speaker 8: innovation that comes with AI rather than allowing it to flourish.
Speaker 8: One of the things that we have heard one of
Speaker 8: the great inconsistencies that has come from labor in this
Speaker 8: is whether unions should have a rite of veto over
Speaker 8: whether private sector companies can adopt AI.
Speaker 2: And this isn't a theatrical risk. There are already examples
Speaker 2: of unions demanding a say in how AI is implemented
Speaker 2: in the workplace to ensure jobs aren't lost. Now call
Speaker 2: me a cynic, but is the latest reform just another
Speaker 2: way for alban easy to protect union jobs. Don't underestimate
Speaker 2: the extent unions are going to try to control the
Speaker 2: implementation of AI on top of their usual pay and
Speaker 2: working hour demands. The countries that embrace AI will create jobs,
Speaker 2: build the companies. Australia should absolutely have safeguards, but safeguards
Speaker 2: should give investors confidence, not give them reasons to invest
Speaker 2: somewhere else. If we spend the next decade regulating AI
Speaker 2: while the rest of the world is building it, we
Speaker 2: won't just lose this race. We'll be watching it from
Speaker 2: the sidelines. The backbone of Australia's economy is breaking small
Speaker 2: businesses are closing their doors at an alarming rate. Last
Speaker 2: financial year, more than fourteen thousand went under. That's nearly
Speaker 2: thirty businesses every single day. Since Labor came to office
Speaker 2: in twenty twenty two, insolvencies have soared by two hundred percent,
Speaker 2: with more than forty seven thousand businesses going under. The
Speaker 2: hardest hit the construction industry. For four straight years, about
Speaker 2: one quarter of all corporate insolvencies have occurred in the
Speaker 2: construction sector. The accommodation and hospitality sectors are next on
Speaker 2: the list. Businesses are being hit with higher costs, more regulation,
Speaker 2: and even the prospect of higher taxes. Here was one
Speaker 2: caller today on two GB's Mike Levy program, speaking from
Speaker 2: the ground.
Speaker 9: We just lost another trains will cut in Litgo.
Speaker 10: Now.
Speaker 9: I can't cam in on why they shut shot because
Speaker 9: I don't know any of the details. But what I
Speaker 9: can come in on he employed some may between ten
Speaker 9: and twenty people. That's ten to twenty jobs. People have
Speaker 9: got to go and find another one or just jobs gone.
Speaker 9: Small business is really struggling and has been marked for
Speaker 9: a long time.
Speaker 2: Mate, this is the opportunity for the Coalition to seize
Speaker 2: and back small businesses. Opposition leader Angus Taylor wrote in
Speaker 2: Today's Daily Telegraph. The reality is simple. It is not
Speaker 2: the government that creates prosperity. It's the entrepreneurs, workers, farmers,
Speaker 2: manufacturers and small businesses who take risks, invest, employ Australians
Speaker 2: and build our economy and generate the prosperity that lifts
Speaker 2: us all. Angus Taylor has said that a government he
Speaker 2: leads will focus on small business.
Speaker 4: We talk today with these small business people here about
Speaker 4: the way out, and there is a way out, and
Speaker 4: that means acting Labour's toxic taxes and Labour's excessive red
Speaker 4: tape that it's wrapping around every small business in this country,
Speaker 4: making it harder for them to invest, to grow, to
Speaker 4: create jobs that take risks. And that's what we need
Speaker 4: them to do. More of scrapping net zero and making
Speaker 4: sure we have the affordable, abundant any we need in
Speaker 4: this country.
Speaker 2: Now one thing is becoming increasingly important, and that is
Speaker 2: economic and real world experience. Just look at the coalition's
Speaker 2: leadership team. Angus Taylor was a Rhodes Scholar in economics
Speaker 2: at Oxford before a career in the private sector. Deputy
Speaker 2: Liberal leader Jane Hume spent years in financial services and
Speaker 2: investment across multiple banks. National's leader Macanavan worked as an
Speaker 2: economist with the Productivity Commission and KPMG. Deputy Nationals Leader
Speaker 2: Darren Chester ran his own small business. Now, let's compare
Speaker 2: that with labor. Before entering Parliament in nineteen ninety six,
Speaker 2: Anthony Alberizi was a Labor machine man and staffer. He
Speaker 2: has been on the board of South Sydney Rabbitdos and
Speaker 2: the board of a Labor Party owned radio station. Treasurer
Speaker 2: Jim Chalmers well, his PhD isn't in economics, it's in
Speaker 2: Paul Keating. Before entering Parlamman in twenty thirteen, he worked
Speaker 2: in the ALP National office, Wayne Swan's office and briefly
Speaker 2: ran the Chiefly Research Center the Labor Parties Think Tank. Now,
Speaker 2: at a time when businesses are closing at a rate
Speaker 2: of almost thirty a day, Australians have every right to
Speaker 2: ask who is better equipped to understand what it takes
Speaker 2: to build a business, create jobs and grow the economy.
Speaker 2: Because right now businesses need a government that understands what
Speaker 2: it's like to sign the front of a paycheck, not
Speaker 2: just the back of one because if small business fails,
Speaker 2: Australia fails. Well, let's head to Canbra Now. For tonight's
Speaker 2: political headlines, we're Sky News political reporter cam Redden.
Speaker 10: Having led the world with a social media ban, the
Speaker 10: Prime Minister wants to do the same for artificial intelligence.
Speaker 6: We can set a standard the chain years, the way
Speaker 6: the world looks at an issue and deals with it.
Speaker 10: His government will develop a national regulatory framework alongside states
Speaker 10: and territories, with a view to legislate it early next year.
Speaker 10: New rules of engagement would safeguard land for housing, with
Speaker 10: greater community consultation, and strict energy requirements on data center
Speaker 10: projects to.
Speaker 6: Pay their full share of grid connection so no costs
Speaker 6: are passed on to homes or businesses, and to put
Speaker 6: at least as much energy into our grid as they
Speaker 6: take out of it.
Speaker 10: Australian creatives will be explicitly protected by banning the free
Speaker 10: for all use of their work in the training of
Speaker 10: AI models.
Speaker 6: Australian writers, musicians, artists and journalists must retain ownership and.
Speaker 7: Control of their work.
Speaker 6: Our laws will spell that out plane as day, and
Speaker 6: that includes the artist's control of the price and value
Speaker 6: of their work. Anything less is.
Speaker 10: Theft News Corp Executive chair Michael Miller says the government
Speaker 10: must now turn this framework into action to move fast
Speaker 10: and deliver for the nation. The Prime Minister's vision would
Speaker 10: be world leading, but as with all regulation in this area,
Speaker 10: the hard part is to enforce it. Amidst all the
Speaker 10: apocalyptic predictions about AI's impact on jobs, the environment and
Speaker 10: the world, Anthony Alberaneesi is choosing to look on the
Speaker 10: bright side now.
Speaker 6: We should not treat AI as a threat to good jobs.
Speaker 6: We must use it as an instrument to help create.
Speaker 10: Them, taking personal ownership. A new office of AI will
Speaker 10: be set up in the Prime Minister's department.
Speaker 4: What he's announced is an office in an office inside
Speaker 4: his own office. He's going to have another office.
Speaker 10: A world leading attempt to fence in a world changing technology.
Speaker 10: Cameron Redden's Sky News Canberra.
Speaker 2: All right more Now on the latest results from the
Speaker 2: Sky News Pulse UGOV poll. Let's bring in chief political
Speaker 2: analyst Tom Connell, who has done all the number crunching
Speaker 2: for us. Tom welcome labor has clawed back that lead.
Speaker 2: What do you think this is the result of.
Speaker 7: Well first and foremost When you look at the primary vault. Yes,
Speaker 7: Labor is back in the lead. It's a three party
Speaker 7: race really now, isn't it rather than a two party race?
Speaker 2: But how's it done?
Speaker 8: It?
Speaker 7: It's one percentage point down. So what's really happened here
Speaker 7: is the One Nation vote coming down from thirty to
Speaker 7: twenty six now in one survey. That's a significant downward trend.
Speaker 7: It doesn't mean this is down down down for One Nation.
Speaker 7: Last survey we did two weeks ago, they went up,
Speaker 7: so this is not a set trend as yet, but
Speaker 7: that's the main shift here. The One Nation party down
Speaker 7: Coalition is well up now. Previously when we've seen One
Speaker 7: Nation lose vote, it's mainly gone to Labor, so that
Speaker 7: will cheer coalition hearts some. The gap between the Coalition
Speaker 7: and One Nation was thirteen percent only last survey, and
Speaker 7: this time at six now that is better. It's still
Speaker 7: worth mentioning One Nation is a headed at coalition by
Speaker 7: six percent. That's something we never thought we'd say even
Speaker 7: a few months ago. But nonetheless there is that tightening
Speaker 7: you can see as well, six percent there and the
Speaker 7: Greens slightly down. We did also poll this new Community
Speaker 7: Strong Party, which two teals have joined and they've started
Speaker 7: on two percent, so no surprise, it's only two seats
Speaker 7: they're in. But we'll just start that as a marker
Speaker 7: is to see whether they go up or down that
Speaker 7: Zalie Stegal and a Legra spender so far in that party.
Speaker 2: Tom What I find interesting about the results is that
Speaker 2: more than half said the country has become weaker and
Speaker 2: poorer since the election last year, and yet it just
Speaker 2: amazes me that Labor still leads in the polls. That
Speaker 2: they don't seem to have had any impact to the
Speaker 2: budget or people feeling poorer. They continue to lead, I
Speaker 2: know close, but they're still leading. Yeap.
Speaker 7: Labour's primary vote here twenty eight percent.
Speaker 2: Let's remember at.
Speaker 7: The last election they were thirty four point five percent.
Speaker 7: That's a big amount of vote to lose to go
Speaker 7: from thirty four point five. So the duel story is
Speaker 7: Labor is undeniably less popular than it was a little
Speaker 7: bit more than a year ago. The issue has been
Speaker 7: the mix of vote there and how that turns into
Speaker 7: two party preferred, which right now has Labor leading fifty
Speaker 7: three against the coalition in fifty six against one nation.
Speaker 7: But really that's theoretical, Jamie, because it would just be
Speaker 7: a seat by seat battle. I think we have as
Speaker 7: well the stronger questions which will bring up for our
Speaker 7: viewers the information on that. So this is asking people
Speaker 7: thinking about where the country was a year ago compared
Speaker 7: to now. Is a stronger Is Australia a stronger place
Speaker 7: and more prosperous? So you can see they're fifteen percent.
Speaker 7: That's a small number, isn't it? Weaker and poorer? Fifty
Speaker 7: one percent unchanged thirty four So clearly things have deteriorated. Now,
Speaker 7: how on earth would a government not be outrageously unpopular
Speaker 7: from this? Well, if you look at part of the
Speaker 7: reason why we're poorer, clearly there's a factor from.
Speaker 2: The Iran war there.
Speaker 7: So voters might say, oh, we're poorer, not necessarily that
Speaker 7: the government's fault.
Speaker 2: That's what some people would be saying.
Speaker 7: Now others would say interest rates were already on the
Speaker 7: way up. Will blame a mix of the RBA, the government,
Speaker 7: whatever it might be. Clearly this if this doesn't improve
Speaker 7: and through three years people feel as though the country
Speaker 7: is largely weaker and poorer, well enough blame is going
Speaker 7: to go to labor. But so far, given the impact
Speaker 7: of the Iran war. It's a significant external fact to say, well,
Speaker 7: this has happened. Many or a decent number might say
Speaker 7: it's not Labour's fault.
Speaker 2: And Tom tell us about the Prime minister's popularity that
Speaker 2: he has gone up in terms of support for males,
Speaker 2: especially off the back of that podcast, but then he's
Speaker 2: gone down a little bit in terms of the eyes
Speaker 2: of women.
Speaker 7: Yeah, and it's been shifting about in terms of that
Speaker 7: support for Anthony Albanezi. One of the things on gender
Speaker 7: that came up a lot as well for the coalition
Speaker 7: was initially that the female vote was down and then
Speaker 7: after a bit while it was just both votes. I
Speaker 7: think we've got as well Anthony Albanesi and a comparison
Speaker 7: here with Pauline Hansen, which is a question we asked
Speaker 7: for the first time only a few months ago. Again
Speaker 7: something that would have been unthinkable preferred PM Anthony Albanesi
Speaker 7: versus Pauline Hanson. Now, Anthony Alberanzi started.
Speaker 2: With a huge lead.
Speaker 7: Last survey it was down to just nine percent, so
Speaker 7: he was ahead of Pauline Hanson only nine percent, which
Speaker 7: considering she's in the Upper House, yes she can.
Speaker 2: Be Prime minister.
Speaker 7: It's a pretty difficult mechanism, Jamie, that that was pretty close.
Speaker 7: In one survey you see Pauline Hanson going down by
Speaker 7: five percent and Anthony Albanesi up, So the gap goes
Speaker 7: from nine to nineteen. So we have seen one nation
Speaker 7: overall lose support and Pauline Hanson lose personal support as well.
Speaker 7: As I've said last survey, only last survey there were
Speaker 7: improvements for one nation. We're not calling it a trend yet,
Speaker 7: but given the size of the drop, it's definitely a
Speaker 7: watch for the next couple of poles.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we'll certainly be keeping our eye very closely on
Speaker 2: at Tom Connell. Thank you. Well, it's time to bring
Speaker 2: in the panel now. Mensi's Research Center Executive Director Nick Kaida,
Speaker 2: and there's Samuel Griffith Society Executive director Mia Schlickt. Welcome
Speaker 2: to you both. Nick, I do want to start with
Speaker 2: you Australian Defense Force troops who are training Ukrainians in Poland.
Speaker 2: They've been warning that they're facing a serious shortage of
Speaker 2: critical equipment and express quite a lot of frustration that
Speaker 2: there's a lot of excess or old stock back home
Speaker 2: in Australia which could make an immediate difference if it
Speaker 2: was sent over to Ukraine. But despite these challenges, Ukraine
Speaker 2: has reportedly carried out the world's first robotic amphibious assault,
Speaker 2: deploying a robot from an uncruded boat, and the footage
Speaker 2: of this is incredible. How significant in your mind is
Speaker 2: this when it comes to modern warfare?
Speaker 1: I think that this wararticularly the way Ukraine has adapted
Speaker 1: to this war, has changed the nature of warfare quite considerably.
Speaker 1: We can see that they've had tremendous success in using
Speaker 1: drones as far as Moscow, which is just incredible, and
Speaker 1: this too robotic technology of this sort. It worries me
Speaker 1: and mentally though, that Australian troops are complaining that they're
Speaker 1: not able to support the Ukrainians as best they can. One,
Speaker 1: of course, because we should be given Ukraine every assistance
Speaker 1: we can. But two, what does it say about the
Speaker 1: state of our own readiness, Jamie? I mean, if we
Speaker 1: were in a wartime situation, how ready would we be
Speaker 1: to compete? I don't think nearly as ready as the Ukrainians,
Speaker 1: quite frankly, but so we really need to get up
Speaker 1: to scratch. And I think much of this is not
Speaker 1: so much money. Although that's important. But administration and management, well, Nick.
Speaker 2: We've already provided one point seven billion dollars in support
Speaker 2: to Ukraine, and yet we're not providing something that could
Speaker 2: be of immediate effect. So what does that say about
Speaker 2: our spend? We must be sending and using it in
Speaker 2: the wrong areas if they're still crying out for needing
Speaker 2: just some of our old warfare.
Speaker 1: It's the old thing, isn't it. You know, we announced
Speaker 1: big sums of money that we're going to send, were
Speaker 1: going to apply to this problem or that problem. Money
Speaker 1: so often is not The issue is spending it well.
Speaker 1: And I think anybody who's had any contact with our
Speaker 1: defense department and would be concerned, to say the least
Speaker 1: about their ability to respond in an efficient and agile
Speaker 1: manner in the way that you expect a defense forced
Speaker 1: to respond in wartime. I'd really like more assurance that
Speaker 1: they are on top of this.
Speaker 2: Mia. I'd love to get your thoughts on this new
Speaker 2: report from the CIRO and the Australian Energy Market Operator.
Speaker 2: They're projecting that the cost of electricity generation is going
Speaker 2: to increase after twenty thirty as coal fired power stations
Speaker 2: are replaced. What did you make of the report. Well, Jamie, the.
Speaker 11: Numbers are concerning. Of course, it's a difficult reality for
Speaker 11: Australians to have to realize, but unfortunately it's not shocking.
Speaker 11: This is what energy experts and serious economic advisors have
Speaker 11: been telling us for a number of years now. This
Speaker 11: is the reality of what happens when we shift our
Speaker 11: alliance away from baseload power like cold fire power stations
Speaker 11: and to shift towards an energy grid that is run
Speaker 11: by renewables. And unfortunately, moral grand standing has driven government
Speaker 11: policy for a number of years now, but this is
Speaker 11: the economic reality and it is mainstream Australians who are
Speaker 11: going to have to pay the price for that. There
Speaker 11: is a net zero economy, of course, which benefits a
Speaker 11: number of insiders who would like us to continue down
Speaker 11: this path of renewables. But if we do so, it
Speaker 11: is electricity prices that we'll saw and unfortunately it will
Speaker 11: be Australians who have to choose between heating and eating
Speaker 11: and they'll be the ones most affected.
Speaker 2: Well, let's turn our attention now to a piece that
Speaker 2: was in the Daily Telegraph today and it was written
Speaker 2: by former New South Wales Police minister David Elliott and
Speaker 2: he's calling on the Prime Minister to crack down on
Speaker 2: alict at tobacco, and he has said that this is
Speaker 2: his great political regret that he failed to take action
Speaker 2: when he was warned, and he also made this observation
Speaker 2: on my show on Sunday Take a listen.
Speaker 12: I'm embarrassed on this matter because as counter terrorism Minister
Speaker 12: six years ago, the tobacco companies came to me and
Speaker 12: predicted exactly what's happened, and I ignored it. And I'm
Speaker 12: absolutely giving myself uppercuts. They said, this money is going
Speaker 12: to be used in money launering, it's going to be
Speaker 12: used by criminal gangs, is going to be used to
Speaker 12: fund terrorism, and I suspect that's exactly what's happened.
Speaker 2: Nick. They were some pretty strong comments by David Elliott.
Speaker 2: What do you think.
Speaker 1: I was definitely getting through the Sunday Telegraph Probably nearly twenty,
Speaker 1: no more than twenty years ago, we were writing stories
Speaker 1: about the illegal tobacco which was openly on sale in
Speaker 1: parts of Sydney. It's much much worse, of course now,
Speaker 1: and we learn from the ABS statistics so that the
Speaker 1: consumption nicotine has gone up forty percent because these things
Speaker 1: are available for a little more than ten dollars a
Speaker 1: packet and openly on sale. Number one. I just don't
Speaker 1: know why our police forces can't get on top of this.
Speaker 1: I know it's resources that they could use elsewhere, but
Speaker 1: this is a major problem. There's a lot of gang
Speaker 1: related behavior going on. We've had, you know, tobacconists going
Speaker 1: up in smoke as it were. But you know, number two,
Speaker 1: you know, the federal government just needs to look at
Speaker 1: the revenue issue. They've imposed a ridiculously huge tax on cigarettes.
Speaker 1: It's driving people to the illegal market and actually increasing
Speaker 1: the amount of cigarettes that are smoked. I just don't
Speaker 1: get it. You know, it's completely countroductive, conductive policy that's
Speaker 1: producing less and less money for the revenue for the
Speaker 1: treasury every year. We've surely got to look at that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, something that the government needs to really be focusing
Speaker 2: on heading into both the next elections. But mia there's
Speaker 2: fresh debate has erupted over whether avoiding the use of
Speaker 2: gender stereotypes is actually helpful for children.
Speaker 9: Now.
Speaker 2: This comes after some viral comments by a British YouTuber
Speaker 2: and disability and LGBTQI advocate. Her name's Jessica kelgrin Fozard.
Speaker 2: Take a look at what she said.
Speaker 5: I think one of the most useful shifts we can
Speaker 5: make is, rather than focusing on identity and trying to
Speaker 5: win them an eat, gender move to a cultivating character instead.
Speaker 2: You're so sweet, soul. That was a very thoughtful thing
Speaker 2: to do.
Speaker 13: Sweat good girl, ful.
Speaker 2: You worked really hard.
Speaker 5: You should feel proud of yourself.
Speaker 2: What a brave boy.
Speaker 5: I saw how nervous you were, but you kept going
Speaker 5: even though it was difficult. One describes who the child is,
Speaker 5: the other notices what they choose to do.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, I gotta say, I always refer to my
Speaker 2: children as good boys and well done guys, and that,
Speaker 2: according to this woman, is a complete no no. Why
Speaker 2: can't we just speak to genders of what they are? Oh, look,
Speaker 2: I that granting.
Speaker 11: Most parents have had enough of this. Just let parents
Speaker 11: parent and let kids be kid. The thing I cannot
Speaker 11: stand about these gender activists is that it doesn't make
Speaker 11: sense because in one breath they'll talk about how important,
Speaker 11: how important nuances, and that how much can affect a child.
Speaker 11: As to whether you call someone a good girl or
Speaker 11: whether you say that action was a good one, they'll
Speaker 11: emphasize that those small changes can really affect a child's development.
Speaker 11: But then in the other breath, they'll sit there and
Speaker 11: they'll advocate for extremely age inappropriate content to be taught
Speaker 11: to our children in schools as young as five years old,
Speaker 11: being taught things about gender ideology and the fact they
Speaker 11: might have been born in the wrong body and the
Speaker 11: fact there's no such thing as two genders.
Speaker 2: They think that.
Speaker 11: That's appropriate to teach child childre They won't acknowledge that
Speaker 11: teaching children difficult concepts like that might affect their development. Well,
Speaker 11: those two realities just can't be true. This movement is
Speaker 11: completely hypocritical.
Speaker 2: It's just nuts, Nick. Before I let you go, one
Speaker 2: thing though, that is common sense, and I am very
Speaker 2: very happy to see that it's been announced Cricket Australia.
Speaker 2: They're going to sing the national anthem on Australia Day
Speaker 2: when the Big Bash Final is on. I've got to say,
Speaker 2: well done, Cricket Australia. Common sense has prevailed.
Speaker 1: Well done Cricket Australia. I mean, we can all unite
Speaker 1: around the national anthem and the flag. Surely I only
Speaker 1: give this one cheer, though, Jamie, because I still think
Speaker 1: I'm an old fashioned guy. I still think that Australia
Speaker 1: Day is the day for the Adelaide Test. It should
Speaker 1: never have been taken away from Australia Day. And you know,
Speaker 1: Big Bash is all very well, but I think I
Speaker 1: prefer cricket.
Speaker 2: You know what, it's the Big Bash final. Nick. We
Speaker 2: can't have everything. At least you be able to watch
Speaker 2: cricket on Australia Day and sing the national anthem, Nick
Speaker 2: and miya. I will leave it there after the brig
Speaker 2: will cross to the UK where Glasgow is one week
Speaker 2: away from hosting the Commonwealth Games. The event Dan Andrews says,
Speaker 2: Victoria couldn't afford welcome back. It's great to have your
Speaker 2: company coming up the Prime Minister's promise to get on
Speaker 2: the front foot when it comes to AI. But now
Speaker 2: let's head across to the UK where Glasgow is gearing
Speaker 2: up for the Commonwealth Games that should have been hosted
Speaker 2: by Victoria until the Andrews Labor government dramatically pulled the pin.
Speaker 2: Here to discuss it and plenty more is Sky News
Speaker 2: contributor and News Corp Australia's European correspondent, Sophie Ellsworth Sophie,
Speaker 2: it's great to see you. We will get to the
Speaker 2: Glasgow Games in a moment, but I do want to
Speaker 2: get an update on this long farewell for Serkis starmer.
Speaker 2: Andy Burnham looks set to secure the leadership, so how
Speaker 2: long do you think this transition is going to take?
Speaker 14: Great to be with you, Jamie. Yes, we are looking
Speaker 14: to have our next Prime minister here in the UK
Speaker 14: put into the plumb role on Monday without any contest
Speaker 14: at all. Parliament also is due for a six week break,
Speaker 14: which means that Andy Burnham goes into ten Downing Street
Speaker 14: without giving the country really any idea what he stands for,
Speaker 14: and he won't be standing up in the House of
Speaker 14: Commons before he is appointed to this role. Now he's
Speaker 14: got the backing of about three hundred and fifty MPs.
Speaker 14: He's rolling into Downing Street uncontested and he just needs
Speaker 14: a backing of three labor affiliated groups or unions, which
Speaker 14: should occur. So we're looking to have a new prime
Speaker 14: minister with little idea of what he will deliver the
Speaker 14: country and then they go on this long recess. So
Speaker 14: it's definitely an interesting time here in the UK having
Speaker 14: a new leader without knowing a lot about what he
Speaker 14: actually stands for.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and especially fact that there's no contest around that either.
Speaker 2: For such a big role, I would have thought there
Speaker 2: would have been other people put in the hand up,
Speaker 2: but obviously not. But let's move on now to Andrew
Speaker 2: mount Baton Windsor. It's back in the saddle. He's been
Speaker 2: spotted riding for the first time since he was exiled
Speaker 2: by the royal family. What can you tell us about this? Well,
Speaker 2: that's right.
Speaker 14: Overnight there's been images that have emerged of the format
Speaker 14: Prince Andrew Andrew mount Baton Windsor riding on horseback around
Speaker 14: marsh farming is Sandringham estate. Now we know in February
Speaker 14: he was banned from riding horses. This is one of
Speaker 14: the things he really does enjoy, given he hasn't got
Speaker 14: a lot of enjoyment in his life because he's really
Speaker 14: persona on grada up there at Sandringham. But he has
Speaker 14: now been spotted riding horses which are up there for
Speaker 14: a short period. There's been a lot of criticism obviously
Speaker 14: and controversy surrounding out Andrew mount Baton Windsor. We know
Speaker 14: he was arrested on his birth Dane February. He remains
Speaker 14: under investigation by Metropolitan Police across the UK and the
Speaker 14: investigations are ongoing into his role as former trade end
Speaker 14: boy in the UK. So no charges for Andrew mount
Speaker 14: Batten Windsor. He's always denied any wrongdoing in any regard.
Speaker 14: But this story will not go away.
Speaker 2: Now the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow are just a week away.
Speaker 2: You're up there. I'm very jealous. Is the city ready?
Speaker 14: Well, Jamie, it's really interesting walking around Glasgow because we're
Speaker 14: a week out. There's not a lot of signage up
Speaker 14: here in Glasgow yet there doesn't seem to be a
Speaker 14: lot of enthusiasm. Now, look, this may all change in
Speaker 14: this space of a week because it's due to start
Speaker 14: here in Glasgow next Thursday. We know that Victorian taxpayers
Speaker 14: have handed over about two hundred million dollars because debt.
Speaker 2: We have lost Sophie Ellsworth there. We will move on
Speaker 2: now to our next guest in Toby Walsh, and this
Speaker 2: will be following on from the speech today from the
Speaker 2: Prime Minister focusing on AI and its impact in Australia. Now,
Speaker 2: there were some big promises and a bit of retrick
Speaker 2: and an opposition leader who says the government risks stifling
Speaker 2: business opportunity. So let's now get the take on the
Speaker 2: Prime Minister's proposals from the man who lost his gig
Speaker 2: as a member of the government scrapped AI Advisory Body,
Speaker 2: Chief Scientists at the Unswai Institute, Toby Walsh, Professor. Welcome.
Speaker 2: I'd love to get your initial response to this speech
Speaker 2: when he heard it today, it did seem like there
Speaker 2: were a lot of big statements about embracing AI, but
Speaker 2: very little in the way of concrete action. Did you
Speaker 2: hear anything that you thought will actually make a difference.
Speaker 3: You're right, it was a good speech. Addressed the issues
Speaker 3: troubling Australians, justifiably traveling Australians, the data centers being built
Speaker 3: in our backyards, the impact that AI is starting to
Speaker 3: have on people's jobs, the impact it's having on our
Speaker 3: creative industry, the impact is having on our kids. So
Speaker 3: he touched all of those significant concerns. It's great it's
Speaker 3: the Prime Minister. It's got to the top of government now,
Speaker 3: and it's great that they've decided to put the decision
Speaker 3: making all together in an office for AI in the
Speaker 3: Department of Prime misteric company. You don't get any higher
Speaker 3: than that. So it's getting his attention. But as you say,
Speaker 3: little short on details, short in investment. The great ambitions,
Speaker 3: but are they're going to put the money behind to
Speaker 3: succeed with these ambitions.
Speaker 2: And he did just make a good point that he
Speaker 2: is now creating the AI Office within the Prime Minister's
Speaker 2: wider department. The opposition have said this is now just
Speaker 2: going to be more bureaucracy. What do you think about that?
Speaker 3: It's a good idea. In fact, back in twenty nineteen,
Speaker 3: I was asked to write a report for the Cabinet
Speaker 3: made that very suggest this is a whole of economy
Speaker 3: transition that we're going through. You need a whole of
Speaker 3: government focus on all the different aspects. AI is going
Speaker 3: to change, changes in our laws, changes in our employment,
Speaker 3: changes in our education. You need to think about this
Speaker 3: in a big way. It's great it's got the Prime
Speaker 3: Minister on the case.
Speaker 2: Well, he is looking to legislate Australian standards and really
Speaker 2: clear rules for data centers. Now, I don't know if
Speaker 2: I'm being cynical, but this doesn't seem very groundbreaking. But
Speaker 2: he did offer some hope with stronger copyright protection for
Speaker 2: Australian artists and the media. Do you think that that's
Speaker 2: a good step forward.
Speaker 3: It is a good step toward. It was very pleased
Speaker 3: to him reaffirming his commitment that he wasn't going to
Speaker 3: weaken copyright laws. We should be we should be very
Speaker 3: outraged that the tech companies have stolen all of that
Speaker 3: intellectual property, have undermined perhaps the livelihood of our creatives,
Speaker 3: not just because of the economic value that they've stolen,
Speaker 3: but also for the cultural value that we value. Our
Speaker 3: culture greatly value Australian authors, filmmakers and musicians and we
Speaker 3: need to protect them. We don't need to sell them
Speaker 3: out for big tech investment.
Speaker 2: But how can you see that working, because this is
Speaker 2: a big beast that we need to tackle when it
Speaker 2: comes to AI training their bots using artists material or journalists' work.
Speaker 2: How do you see that actually in the long run
Speaker 2: facilitating with the Claude being happy with the copyright laws.
Speaker 3: You've got to realize that we're in a strong bargaining position.
Speaker 3: We have the second largest pipeline of data centers to
Speaker 3: being built here in Australia in the world. We're only
Speaker 3: the twelfth largest economy, so there are ten much larger
Speaker 3: economies which are less attractive in which to build data centers.
Speaker 3: So we've got plentiful reasons we want to build data
Speaker 3: centers here. Very stable politics, very stable economy, plentiful land,
Speaker 3: plentiful renewables, good submarine connections to the rest of the world.
Speaker 3: So there's no shortage of people wanting to build data
Speaker 3: centers here. And it's not like that they can't actually
Speaker 3: license the content and pay for the content. They've actually
Speaker 3: done some big licensing deals already with nine Media with
Speaker 3: the New York Times, so they can actually pay for
Speaker 3: the content. You have to understand the reason they're arguing
Speaker 3: so hard here in Australia is because they know that
Speaker 3: we're going to set an important precedent for the rest
Speaker 3: of the word. It's not because Australia matters so much
Speaker 3: to them, but because they know that Australia leads the way.
Speaker 3: We had the first social media age band in the world.
Speaker 3: Fifteen countries now have got one. Even the European units
Speaker 3: are discussing having a social media age bet, so they
Speaker 3: know what we decide here is going to set a
Speaker 3: standard for the rest of the world. That's why they're
Speaker 3: playing such hardball.
Speaker 2: Professor, I have to ask you about something that you
Speaker 2: just said in your answer that Australia has the renewables
Speaker 2: that would be able to power these data centers. Do
Speaker 2: you actually think that renewables is the solution to the
Speaker 2: amount of energy that's going to be required by these centers.
Speaker 2: Should something like I know nuclear is no longer got
Speaker 2: the moratorium on it, but should we be investing in
Speaker 2: something like the small modular reactors to be able to
Speaker 2: ensure that we have that reliable base load power or
Speaker 2: do you think that renewables is enough to be able
Speaker 2: to power these enormous centers.
Speaker 3: Yeah, great question. You've got to understand the size of
Speaker 3: these data centers. The largest one that's being built at
Speaker 3: the moment in Western Sydney, is going to be built
Speaker 3: in Western Sydney. It's going to use five percent of
Speaker 3: Australia's electricity. It's going to use more electricity than Adelaide.
Speaker 3: These are ginormous, great demands that we're looking at, and
Speaker 3: you're right, renewables is not going to provide that in
Speaker 3: the short term. I'm confident that we could build the
Speaker 3: renewables in the long term to be able to do that,
Speaker 3: but not in the short term, not at the speed
Speaker 3: with which they want these data centers to be built.
Speaker 3: That's the challenge we face here. It takes longer to
Speaker 3: build renewables than it does to build data centers. That's
Speaker 3: a difficult problem, and I've never seen you know, the
Speaker 3: Prime Minister didn't have a good answer for how are
Speaker 3: we going to square that circle.
Speaker 2: I know that's going to be a very interesting one
Speaker 2: as we see the amount of energy use and water
Speaker 2: use because we're not building any more dams. But before
Speaker 2: I let you go, you know, technology is always going
Speaker 2: to be faster than the regulation. What do you think
Speaker 2: is the answer here to ensure that we keep up
Speaker 2: but we don't impact opportunity at the same time.
Speaker 3: Well, in fact, I think if we don't regulate ospit intelligence, well,
Speaker 3: we will stifle innovation and we will repeat the mistakes
Speaker 3: of social media. So I'm pleased to see that we're
Speaker 3: a little more in front of the game here this
Speaker 3: time with social media, that we won't necessarily have to
Speaker 3: sacrifice the generation of young people to the harms that
Speaker 3: otherwise might come if we use it without any guard railers,
Speaker 3: without any regulation. So I'm pleased that we're having these
Speaker 3: conversations now, but we do have to be mindful that
Speaker 3: the tech companies have demonstrated frequently and as we put
Speaker 3: rules in the place that they will behave in ways
Speaker 3: that are harmful, harmful to young people, harmful to our society.
Speaker 3: So we have to put those rules in place and
Speaker 3: that will allow us to have the innovation that will
Speaker 3: actually grow our economy.
Speaker 2: Well, Professor Toby Walsh, I appreciate your insights. After the break,
Speaker 2: more the outcomes from the Royal Commission into anti Semitism,
Speaker 2: with university chiefs grilled over the lack of action on encampments.
Speaker 2: That's next, welcome back. We still have words with Kel
Speaker 2: to come up, so stay tuned. But now to the
Speaker 2: antisemitism Royal Commission, which in the last two days has
Speaker 2: heard confronting evidence of Jewish students and academics being harassed, assaulted,
Speaker 2: and intimidated on university campuses, raising fresh questions about whether
Speaker 2: universities have done enough to protect students and uphold free speech.
Speaker 2: Julian Lisa is the Shadow Minister for Education and joins
Speaker 2: me now. Julian, thank you for coming on Ha's Australia's
Speaker 2: university sector fundamentally failed Jewish students.
Speaker 15: Yes, Jamie, they've not only failed Jewish students, they've failed
Speaker 15: all Australian students because they've effectively taught Australian students a lesson,
Speaker 15: basically said to Australian students by their actions and lack
Speaker 15: of actions, that when someone's being intimidated and harassed, don't
Speaker 15: stand up for them, just let it go on. When
Speaker 15: there's a group of people who you want to get
Speaker 15: off your campus, don't stand up to them and be
Speaker 15: strong roll over to them, especially if they're a hate
Speaker 15: group that wants to run their ruler over all.
Speaker 3: Your defense contracts.
Speaker 15: And when your academic colleagues are being harassed by masked
Speaker 15: people coming into their room, by people urinating on their desks,
Speaker 15: downplay the significance. I think they've taught Australians a terrible lesson.
Speaker 15: It's why I've called our university leaders weaken, spineless, and
Speaker 15: why I've been calling since the end of twenty twenty
Speaker 15: three for some sort of royal commission, some sort of
Speaker 15: judicial inquiry into the anti Semitism that's been on our campuses.
Speaker 15: Long before October seven.
Speaker 2: Julian, I'm about to play you a grab from the
Speaker 2: University of Sydney Vice Chancellor Mark Scott. But just on
Speaker 2: all of those incidents that you just labeled as what's
Speaker 2: been going on in universities, can't help but think these
Speaker 2: are our future leaders and this is what they have
Speaker 2: been allowing to happen. And if we say that that's okay,
Speaker 2: I just hate to think what our future is going
Speaker 2: to look like with these sort of people getting away
Speaker 2: with this sort of behavior.
Speaker 3: That's exactly the point, Jamie.
Speaker 15: I mean, I think universities are life changing experiences at
Speaker 15: their best, they're the place that the next generation of
Speaker 15: leaders go to be formed. But the example that's been
Speaker 15: given to the next generation by the conduct of university
Speaker 15: leaders about how we treat our fellow Australians is a
Speaker 15: very dark one indeed, and sets us up for a
Speaker 15: country where some people get stood up for and other
Speaker 15: people are just othered. And that's not something I want
Speaker 15: to see my children or anyone's children learn. That's not
Speaker 15: a positive future for this country.
Speaker 2: So Mark Scott is the University of Sydney vice chancellor.
Speaker 2: Now this is what he said at the Royal Commission
Speaker 2: about the Pro Palestine student encampment.
Speaker 3: Will believe the pursuit of the peaceable.
Speaker 4: Resolution of the encampment was very important and to the
Speaker 4: long term benefit of the university.
Speaker 3: But I can see that our.
Speaker 12: Jewish students and staff paid a price for that as
Speaker 12: the encampment.
Speaker 5: Dragged on, and I am I am.
Speaker 12: Sorry to them that it took so long for us
Speaker 12: to get it done, and I'm.
Speaker 6: Sorry we did not keep them more closely engaged.
Speaker 2: Julian, when you hear that, what's your response to those comments?
Speaker 15: Well, look, it's good to hear that Mark Scott has
Speaker 15: owned up to the failures of his own university, as
Speaker 15: to some extent did Glenn Davis, the Vice Chancellor of
Speaker 15: the University of Melbourne today. But it's one thing when
Speaker 15: you've got half a dozen of Australia's top silks glaring
Speaker 15: at you and you're sitting before a retired High Court
Speaker 15: judge to be contricte. The real test for university vice
Speaker 15: chancellors now is will they properly adopt the University definition,
Speaker 15: the International Cost Remembrance Alliance definition that I wrote to
Speaker 15: them about back in twenty twenty two alongside Labor MP
Speaker 15: Josh Burns and tiarmp Alegraspender and five universities said.
Speaker 3: They'd adopted it.
Speaker 15: But as I've talked to vice chancellors as the shadow
Speaker 15: Education Minister, too many of them say, oh, we don't
Speaker 15: have a problem, why would we adopt it. Others say
Speaker 15: we don't want to adopt it, just legislate it. We
Speaker 15: can't take the fight, and others pretend they've adopted it
Speaker 15: but really haven't done anything at all. And there's a
Speaker 15: scathing report by one of their own, Greg Craven, a
Speaker 15: former vice chancellor, who finds not one single university in
Speaker 15: this country has properly adopted a definition, even a definition
Speaker 15: they themselves came up with eighteen months ago. So the
Speaker 15: time for mucking around is well and truly over fifteen
Speaker 15: people are dead at Bondi. They must adopt the International
Speaker 15: Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition in full, and it must be
Speaker 15: adopted without without any further delay.
Speaker 2: It does seem, though, Julian, is that enough to adopt
Speaker 2: these definitions? Should there also be things like financial consequences
Speaker 2: for universities that fail to protect students. It just seems
Speaker 2: like we need something a lot more serious as a
Speaker 2: consequence for what's been happening.
Speaker 15: I couldn't agree more Jamie. But at the very first point,
Speaker 15: if you can't define what antisemitism is, you can't ever
Speaker 15: deal with it promptly. But I agree with you in
Speaker 15: relation to penalties for universities. It's why in December last year,
Speaker 15: the recommendation of the Special Endvy on Antisemitism, we put
Speaker 15: forward a proposal to basically make it a provider condition
Speaker 15: for a university to call itself a university that it
Speaker 15: properly deals with antisemitism.
Speaker 3: We'd look at the end that the.
Speaker 15: Special Invoice proposals to remove funding from academics who engaged
Speaker 15: anti Semitism and universities who continued to condain antisemitism. There
Speaker 15: do need to be financial penalties. And I make no
Speaker 15: apology for taking a tough stand and being prepared to
Speaker 15: exercise powers to bring the universities to heal on this issue.
Speaker 2: And Julian, just quickly before I let you go, you
Speaker 2: were with Opposition leader Angus Taylor today talking with small businesses.
Speaker 2: What are some of the things that you're hearing in
Speaker 2: your community.
Speaker 15: Well, we had Angus Taylor and Jane Hume visit for
Speaker 15: a special small business roundtable in my electric this morning,
Speaker 15: over one hundred and fifty small business people talking about
Speaker 15: the adverse effect of Labour's toxic taxes, taxes that the
Speaker 15: Prime Minister promised fifty times you wouldn't bring in taxes
Speaker 15: Labour took to the election in twenty nineteen and were
Speaker 15: roundly defeated on We've heard about the effect of those
Speaker 15: taxes on businesses in my electorate. We've heard about the
Speaker 15: burgeoning red tape burden across all sectors of the economy
Speaker 15: on businesses in the electorate. And we've also heard particular
Speaker 15: concerns about the coming taxes on trusts and the effect
Speaker 15: that that will have on small businesses even being prepared
Speaker 15: to have a go in the first place.
Speaker 2: Well, Julian, I think this is an opportunity for the
Speaker 2: Coalition to really show that you've got the backs of
Speaker 2: small business, says thank you for your time tonight. After
Speaker 2: the break Words Matter with Kel Richards, welcome back and
Speaker 2: joining the program as he always does on a Wednesday,
Speaker 2: is wordsmith and broadcaster Kel Richards and Kell, You've got
Speaker 2: some great words tonight. Let's start with offside. So this
Speaker 2: has come from Daryl who's asked for the origin of
Speaker 2: offside and onside in sport, I.
Speaker 13: Suspect he's been watching much too much of the World Cup.
Speaker 13: Offside is recorded eighteen thirty three, and it comes from
Speaker 13: rugby football as played at Rugby School, where they invented
Speaker 13: it and where the name comes from. And the original
Speaker 13: version of the expression was off your side, meaning out
Speaker 13: of the place where you're meant to be, and that
Speaker 13: full expression off your side is found in Tom Brown's
Speaker 13: school days, which is said in Rugby Rugby school. Then
Speaker 13: it got shorten to just offside. The one thing I
Speaker 13: can't give you is a precise definite, because it's different
Speaker 13: in every sport being offside and net ball is different
Speaker 13: from being offside in soccer. But it was originally just
Speaker 13: out of your place, off your side, offside.
Speaker 2: What about this one from Donner? The meaning of bald
Speaker 2: as a badger.
Speaker 13: This is fascinating. It means totally really hairless. But badgers
Speaker 13: are not more right, they're covered in fur. I've come
Speaker 13: across two theories, both of which I think are rubbish.
Speaker 13: The first one says the bald in that statement is
Speaker 13: a contraction of piebald, which is a very old word
Speaker 13: meaning multicolored, and badgers are mainly dark gray, but they've
Speaker 13: got the big white streak from their nose to their neck.
Speaker 13: But somehow that's not very convincing and it doesn't seem
Speaker 13: to fit in time wise. The other theory turned up
Speaker 13: in the eighteen hundreds, and it was because barbers used
Speaker 13: shaving brushes made out of badger fur. Now I can't
Speaker 13: see that generating bald as a badger either, So I'm sorry.
Speaker 2: I think both of you if you could, because you
Speaker 2: would put the shaving cream on the head and.
Speaker 13: Shave that large you don't shave your head.
Speaker 2: I do people shave their head?
Speaker 13: They do, Yeah, they do these days, I'm not sure.
Speaker 13: In the hundreds they did a lot. Look my best
Speaker 13: guess is I think it was actually coined and it
Speaker 13: caught on because of the alliteration between the two bees
Speaker 13: in balden badger. That works in the English language. And
Speaker 13: it would be interesting if it was more profound and
Speaker 13: there was a good story, But I think that's it.
Speaker 2: What about from Angela? Every dog has his day?
Speaker 13: This is a really nice one. It means everyone has
Speaker 13: an opportunity just because acceeded sometimes And this one was
Speaker 13: coined by Shakespeare, and he coined it in Hamlet at five,
Speaker 13: Scene one, and the English language is packed full of
Speaker 13: bits from Hamlet. There are lots of bits of I
Speaker 13: shuffle off this mortal coil. There are more things in
Speaker 13: heaven and Earth than a dreamt of in your philosophy.
Speaker 13: Things are rotten in the state of Denmark. For some reason.
Speaker 13: Hamlet is packedful of these expressions which have caught on
Speaker 13: and have become part of the language. Someone complained, the
Speaker 13: problem with Hamlet is it's full of quotations.
Speaker 2: I love it. Now there's two more that both I
Speaker 2: think are ones that I've always used and never actually
Speaker 2: thought too much into rhyme or reason. So this one's
Speaker 2: come from John, just asking what does the rhyme part
Speaker 2: refer to?
Speaker 13: It originally did refer to poetry. Rhyme or reason just
Speaker 13: means when you say there's no rhyme or reason, you're
Speaker 13: just saying it means nothing. It's it's rubbish. Comes into
Speaker 13: English about fourteen sixty. If you trace it back through
Speaker 13: the levels from where it came, it seems to go
Speaker 13: back to an old Latin expression. A single statement in
Speaker 13: Latin which I won't quote because I can't remember it
Speaker 13: which said poetry should have rhyme and meter or modulation,
Speaker 13: which in Latin was called reason. So it was originally
Speaker 13: identifying rubbish poetry, and then in English the expression gradually
Speaker 13: broadened to identify any utterance which was complete rubbish, So
Speaker 13: the rhyme was originally poetry.
Speaker 2: Now, Cay, we've got thirty seconds. Touch wood? What's its origin?
Speaker 13: Very old superstition that said trees were inhabited by spirits
Speaker 13: back a long way for the ancient Greeks. I think
Speaker 13: they call them diads living in trees, and every different
Speaker 13: mythology had its own name for them. Touching the wood
Speaker 13: was getting the support of the spirit in the tree
Speaker 13: to look after you.
Speaker 2: Oh, I love it because I touch wood all the time,
Speaker 2: so I don't jinx myself. Does it work?
Speaker 13: Does it work?
Speaker 8: Ah?
Speaker 2: I think so. Cal thank you and thank you for
Speaker 2: your company. Tonight. You'll see me again tomorrow night at
Speaker 2: six o'clock. The Bolt report is next.