WEBVTT - Paul Murray Live | 13 September 0:00:02.640 --> 0:00:07.800 This is Paul Murray Live. Hello, Moat. Hey, for you. 0:00:07.830 --> 0:00:09.690 You've had a wonderful weekend. I certainly have. Lots of 0:00:09.730 --> 0:00:12.070 time with the family. And is there anything better than that? 0:00:12.190 --> 0:00:13.610 There's so much to get to tonight here in the 0:00:13.650 --> 0:00:15.250 Man Cave. Thank you very much for being here. Start 0:00:15.270 --> 0:00:17.950 of a big and busy week with Parliament again on 0:00:17.989 --> 0:00:19.669 and plenty to talk about. Now, forgive me if I 0:00:19.690 --> 0:00:22.930 do not clutch my pearls about the Prime Minister, because, 0:00:22.980 --> 0:00:25.599 of course, the Prime Minister is a special Australian, a 0:00:25.620 --> 0:00:28.220 person who's kind of above all of us, somewhere between 0:00:28.340 --> 0:00:29.800 us and sainthood, right? 0:00:31.910 --> 0:00:33.510 My word is my bond. 0:00:34.990 --> 0:00:38.959 Except for when it wasn't. Can you rule out any 0:00:39.020 --> 0:00:42.040 changes to negative gearing and capital gains tax? 0:00:42.060 --> 0:00:42.160 Yes. 0:00:42.780 --> 0:00:46.400 How hard is it for the 50th time? And then 0:00:47.080 --> 0:00:49.839 they did it anyway. But we've all moved on, right? 0:00:49.979 --> 0:00:52.640 Who cares about what happens in May? Like, the stuff 0:00:52.659 --> 0:00:55.280 that's good for your side of politics, everyone remembers forever. 0:00:55.540 --> 0:00:58.840 And all the bad stuff, they just forget about quickly, right? 0:00:59.940 --> 0:01:06.459 Or wrong. Why? Because people kind of remain focused on 0:01:06.840 --> 0:01:10.270 who let them down. Now, regardless of whether you like 0:01:10.330 --> 0:01:12.690 or dislike the ultimate decisions when it came to the budget, 0:01:13.430 --> 0:01:16.569 most of this stuff is supposed to be venerated through election. 0:01:17.110 --> 0:01:19.369 Why am I still talking about it in September? Because 0:01:19.810 --> 0:01:25.520 brand-new opinion poll has just dropped via the nine newspapers. 23% 0:01:25.819 --> 0:01:29.899 of Australians have lost trust in Albanese since the broken promise. 0:01:29.940 --> 0:01:33.360 That's the black... The red is I did not trust 0:01:33.440 --> 0:01:38.900 Albanese before the broken promise. 26%, that's the purple, say, 0:01:39.200 --> 0:01:43.720 I still trust Albanese despite the broken promise. 23% of 0:01:43.780 --> 0:01:48.010 all Australians have changed their view. One quarter of the electorate. 0:01:48.370 --> 0:01:49.770 How does that work when you have a look at 0:01:49.990 --> 0:01:54.169 all the parties and everyone everywhere? Now, we would expect 0:01:54.250 --> 0:01:58.820 that 31% of One Nation voters, 22% of Coalition voters, 0:01:58.860 --> 0:02:02.110 I'm just focusing on all the black... Indicators here, because 0:02:02.130 --> 0:02:04.190 that's what that represents in the graph, that I have 0:02:04.520 --> 0:02:09.900 lost trust and support in Albanese. Since the broken promise, 27% 0:02:09.900 --> 0:02:13.960 of Green voters, 16% are Labor voters. Now, why is 0:02:14.000 --> 0:02:18.510 this interesting? Why does this matter? Because remember, the whole 0:02:18.570 --> 0:02:24.530 battle between one nation being the protest party, the opposition, 0:02:24.910 --> 0:02:30.060 or maybe something else, or... One Nation being the protest party, 0:02:30.280 --> 0:02:32.540 the Liberal Party being able to grow a little bit 0:02:32.700 --> 0:02:36.720 further and somehow to collectively be able to beat the 0:02:36.760 --> 0:02:40.440 Labor Party. Well, all of it is predicated on two things. 0:02:41.710 --> 0:02:44.910 The right side of vote has to grow by at 0:02:44.950 --> 0:02:46.889 least about 5%. Remember, last election, 55-45. Labor's has to 0:02:46.910 --> 0:02:48.190 fall 5%. So there has to be about 10 points 0:02:48.210 --> 0:03:00.710 of movement there. 16% of Labor voters say they don't 0:03:00.750 --> 0:03:01.690 trust the Prime Minister. 0:03:01.730 --> 0:03:01.929 Why? 0:03:01.990 --> 0:03:05.970 Because of this broken promise. Now, some will automatically say, well, yeah, well, 0:03:05.990 --> 0:03:10.570 that's the boomers, the investor class. Well, they're allowed to 0:03:10.630 --> 0:03:12.830 remain peed off, and according to this poll, they are. 0:03:13.310 --> 0:03:17.240 They have changed their mind. They have broken what is 0:03:17.280 --> 0:03:20.140 supposedly the most fundamental thing that a politician likes to 0:03:20.160 --> 0:03:24.150 put in place, and that is trust. Also, inside this poll, 0:03:24.210 --> 0:03:26.310 the headlines, by the way, they're all pretty much the same. 0:03:26.510 --> 0:03:29.530 Labor just in front of One Nation, in front some 0:03:29.560 --> 0:03:31.740 distance from the coalition. So I'm not going to show 0:03:31.750 --> 0:03:36.140 you all the primaries, right? But it's a question about debt. Australia, 0:03:36.160 --> 0:03:42.060 of course, is already in $ 1T4 trillion debt. $ 1T4 trillion debt. 0:03:43.120 --> 0:03:46.840 So how would you deal with that $ 1T4 trillion debt? 0:03:48.220 --> 0:03:52.180 According to this, again, resolve poll, red means cut spending. 0:03:53.690 --> 0:04:00.050 Dark teal? Aqua? It means raise taxes and 42% of 0:04:00.250 --> 0:04:02.510 people say, oh, come on, can't we kind of do both? 0:04:02.970 --> 0:04:04.790 Cut a little bit of spending, increase a little bit 0:04:04.830 --> 0:04:08.690 of taxes? Not on me. How does that play out 0:04:08.750 --> 0:04:14.369 in terms of, again, party identification? Unsurprisingly, Labor voters, they 0:04:14.410 --> 0:04:17.090 sit in the, oh, a little bit for everyone, thanks. 0:04:18.190 --> 0:04:21.310 The coalition voters, that's the red there that you can see, 0:04:21.450 --> 0:04:25.419 third disc along, they say 51% cut spending. Green voters, 0:04:25.460 --> 0:04:30.320 they say, let's have Goldilocks, 40%. And 61% of One 0:04:30.360 --> 0:04:35.490 Nation voters say cut the spending. Right? These are all 0:04:35.510 --> 0:04:38.370 the polls that are just dropping this evening. Fascinating to know. 0:04:39.830 --> 0:04:42.010 The polls, they are coming thick and fast. The polls 0:04:42.050 --> 0:04:43.570 was last week, which means you get a week off 0:04:43.600 --> 0:04:46.450 from it. Before we're back into it next week here 0:04:46.589 --> 0:04:48.750 at News 24, a news poll again at the end 0:04:48.770 --> 0:04:52.640 of the month, Redbridge as well. So, interestingly, headline numbers 0:04:52.839 --> 0:04:55.760 either Labor is sort of beginning to bottom out, but 0:04:55.880 --> 0:05:00.020 once you start to dig in, the trust factor. So, yes, 0:05:00.060 --> 0:05:01.810 there's a lot of people with a lot of opinions 0:05:01.870 --> 0:05:04.969 about the Prime Minister's feelings tonight. Well, what about the 0:05:05.010 --> 0:05:09.390 people who remain hurt from his failure to keep his 0:05:09.410 --> 0:05:13.350 promise from May of last year? that, of course, was 0:05:13.410 --> 0:05:17.490 turned into the budget that turned the lies into law. 0:05:17.850 --> 0:05:20.850 And unsurprisingly, when the value of your house starts going down, 0:05:20.890 --> 0:05:23.620 people will notice, regardless of whom they voted for at 0:05:23.680 --> 0:05:26.800 the last election. But, you know, nothing to see here. 0:05:26.839 --> 0:05:28.720 There was a podcast in February. 0:05:29.839 --> 0:05:30.159 Please. 0:05:31.520 --> 0:05:33.380 As for our old mate, Annika Wells. Now, of course, 0:05:33.420 --> 0:05:35.960 Annika Wells will one day be the Prime Minister of Australia. Why? 0:05:36.260 --> 0:05:38.880 Because to predict anything else will only lead to disappointment. 0:05:39.200 --> 0:05:42.440 People like her, they only fail up, right? She's not 0:05:42.460 --> 0:05:45.120 the first mediocre person to fail their way to leadership. Oh, 0:05:45.160 --> 0:05:48.770 but she'll get there. And, of course, she's the communications minister, 0:05:48.790 --> 0:05:52.250 the sports minister and the minister for freebies. This is 0:05:52.310 --> 0:05:54.690 from her own Instagram feed. This is not some sort 0:05:54.730 --> 0:05:58.330 of cheeky little side photo. This hasn't been papped. She 0:05:58.380 --> 0:06:05.360 posted it of her celebrating because Brisbane won and I'm Queensland. 0:06:05.380 --> 0:06:06.920 Okay. 0:06:08.260 --> 0:06:08.360 Well. 0:06:08.880 --> 0:06:11.560 As you know, she is currently involved in yet another 0:06:11.620 --> 0:06:15.270 attempt to do something about the evils of the internet. Now, 0:06:15.610 --> 0:06:18.150 as you know, I don't really have a problem with 0:06:18.170 --> 0:06:21.990 the overall idea of these social media laws if it 0:06:22.050 --> 0:06:25.140 is simply to create a scenario where if you want 0:06:25.160 --> 0:06:27.320 to press a button and the only stuff you can 0:06:27.360 --> 0:06:29.220 see on your social media feed are the people you 0:06:29.320 --> 0:06:32.280 follow or you don't press the button and it looks 0:06:32.360 --> 0:06:37.010 exactly the way it currently does, which is the algorithm... Fine, cool. 0:06:37.390 --> 0:06:40.370 It's a selection. Now, you should know that on some 0:06:40.410 --> 0:06:42.360 of these social media platforms, you can kind of already 0:06:42.420 --> 0:06:44.700 do that, but you've got to go right into the 0:06:44.740 --> 0:06:46.320 back and know how they all work. So I don't 0:06:46.380 --> 0:06:49.620 really have a major problem with that. But I do 0:06:49.660 --> 0:06:51.960 have a problem with the government who tried to make 0:06:52.020 --> 0:06:55.020 it harder for people to know information about the government. 0:06:55.400 --> 0:06:57.979 That never got through the parliament. Or the people who 0:06:58.000 --> 0:07:02.280 wanted to introduce misinformation laws also just suddenly finding this 0:07:02.480 --> 0:07:04.979 as the ultimate way of taking on the evils of 0:07:05.220 --> 0:07:09.330 the internet. Again, here is their advocacy for it. It's 0:07:09.390 --> 0:07:13.550 not about censorship. It's about giving people control. This is 0:07:13.970 --> 0:07:16.010 not about giving government control. 0:07:16.270 --> 0:07:18.070 That does sound like censorship, doesn't it? 0:07:18.330 --> 0:07:19.730 Well, I don't understand how that. 0:07:19.650 --> 0:07:23.610 Would be the case. Because potentially you're going to cut 0:07:23.650 --> 0:07:25.800 people off from being able to see something other than 0:07:25.880 --> 0:07:29.570 what has either been government approved or is already being followed. Now, 0:07:29.860 --> 0:07:31.980 one group of people that I'm genuinely surprised you have 0:07:32.020 --> 0:07:35.540 not heard more from is anyone who is a digital creator, left, 0:07:35.620 --> 0:07:39.940 right or centre, politics, sport, fashion, whatever the heck it is, 0:07:40.300 --> 0:07:42.360 because the only way they're able to grow their following 0:07:42.420 --> 0:07:44.320 is to be seen outside of the people who've already 0:07:44.380 --> 0:07:49.810 liked or already subscribed. That's what the algorithm is for. But, yes, 0:07:49.900 --> 0:07:53.530 does the algorithm also start to say, oh, you're a boy, 0:07:53.650 --> 0:07:55.330 are you? Well, then there's a whole bunch of other 0:07:55.350 --> 0:07:57.210 stuff that you won't want to admit to anyone but 0:07:57.230 --> 0:08:01.870 will start to show you, right? And the younger you are, 0:08:02.110 --> 0:08:04.730 the tougher that stuff can get. So I'm aware of 0:08:04.770 --> 0:08:07.930 the need to create a level of control. But this 0:08:07.970 --> 0:08:09.490 government's been turning around and telling us the reason they 0:08:09.510 --> 0:08:10.950 have to do it is to protect our kids, protect 0:08:11.030 --> 0:08:13.780 our kids. But hang on, haven't they already banned the 0:08:13.820 --> 0:08:16.340 kids from being able to get access to the social 0:08:16.380 --> 0:08:19.980 media platform? Quick, look over here, look over here. So 0:08:20.040 --> 0:08:21.920 is there a chance that all of this, and again, 0:08:21.940 --> 0:08:25.280 I've been trying, trying as the hardest marker of their 0:08:25.300 --> 0:08:27.260 homework to give them a level of benefit of the 0:08:27.280 --> 0:08:30.520 doubt here, to go, okay, sometimes are there just kicks 0:08:30.580 --> 0:08:33.790 from right in front, and I shouldn't worry about who 0:08:33.850 --> 0:08:35.510 it is, even if it's a person like Annika Wells, 0:08:35.550 --> 0:08:37.910 who I'm not a massive fan of, right? Is there 0:08:37.929 --> 0:08:40.370 just something so obvious that needs to be dealt with here? 0:08:41.090 --> 0:08:43.590 So again, not getting all behind it, but just giving 0:08:43.610 --> 0:08:46.870 it a bit of the benefit of the doubt, right? Well, 0:08:47.870 --> 0:08:51.270 considered the benefit of the doubt to start to fall away. 0:08:52.620 --> 0:08:55.120 Not because I didn't see what they said last week. 0:08:55.380 --> 0:08:57.800 Not because I haven't known what they've done in the past. 0:08:58.230 --> 0:09:00.809 but because Annika Wells appeared on the ultimate home game 0:09:00.929 --> 0:09:04.069 that was the ABC today. Now, you would have thought 0:09:04.570 --> 0:09:07.760 that she would have absolutely slam-dunked this one because this isn't, 0:09:07.780 --> 0:09:11.520 you know, Evil News 24 with that horrible lady, Laura. 0:09:12.280 --> 0:09:14.100 Asked her a whole bunch of questions like, does this 0:09:14.120 --> 0:09:20.630 stuff affect news? I don't know, maybe. Instead, she was 0:09:20.730 --> 0:09:24.130 asked this question a few times.... 0:09:25.940 --> 0:09:28.840 Look, you've also been raising concerns lately about misinformation and 0:09:28.900 --> 0:09:32.620 disinformation online that is making the job of government more difficult. 0:09:32.780 --> 0:09:35.770 Does this bill have anything to do with those concerns? 0:09:36.150 --> 0:09:38.230 But can you see why some people are concerned that 0:09:38.250 --> 0:09:40.569 this is what you're trying to do? The government in 0:09:40.610 --> 0:09:45.040 its last term tried to tackle mis- and disinformation and 0:09:45.059 --> 0:09:48.000 then abandoned the bill. And now you're still talking about 0:09:48.010 --> 0:09:50.980 your concerns around mis- and disinformation. Can you see why 0:09:51.020 --> 0:09:53.620 some might fear that that's what you're trying to do 0:09:53.660 --> 0:09:55.500 through this bill? So, just to be clear, you won't 0:09:55.950 --> 0:09:56.550 return to. 0:09:56.570 --> 0:09:57.170 That's right. 0:09:57.230 --> 0:10:00.010 to mis- and disinformation? You won't return to trying to... 0:10:00.080 --> 0:10:02.780 stop mis- and disinformation online? Will you return, though, to 0:10:02.820 --> 0:10:05.559 trying to tackle that separate issue of mis- and disinformation? 0:10:05.840 --> 0:10:08.439 You might come back to mis- and disinformation in the future? 0:10:09.720 --> 0:10:12.500 So, we all know Spears here, right? We all know 0:10:12.520 --> 0:10:15.120 David Spears. We all know that if the question gets 0:10:15.179 --> 0:10:16.959 asked again and again and again and again and again, 0:10:17.559 --> 0:10:19.320 it's because you haven't answered it. Proof? 0:10:21.010 --> 0:10:22.309 No, I think we can walk and chew gum at 0:10:22.350 --> 0:10:23.270 the same time. 0:10:23.070 --> 0:10:23.770 Here, David. 0:10:23.790 --> 0:10:25.990 The heart of the digital duty of care is putting 0:10:26.030 --> 0:10:29.830 the onus on big tech platforms to take responsibility for 0:10:29.850 --> 0:10:32.690 the harm they are doing. I view that policy question 0:10:32.730 --> 0:10:35.480 that is before all of us as something entirely separate 0:10:35.500 --> 0:10:38.260 to the digital duty of care. At the moment, I 0:10:38.360 --> 0:10:41.700 am highly focused on introducing the digital duty of care 0:10:41.740 --> 0:10:44.440 to the parliament. It's not part of the agenda that 0:10:44.480 --> 0:10:45.720 I need to deliver this term. 0:10:47.480 --> 0:10:50.330 Simple no. David, I understand what your question is. Can 0:10:50.350 --> 0:10:52.270 I be very clear to any and everyone who's watching 0:10:52.290 --> 0:10:55.080 here that all this is is trying to make sure 0:10:55.100 --> 0:10:56.760 that if you want a version of the internet where 0:10:56.780 --> 0:10:58.679 the only stuff you see is the stuff you follow, 0:10:58.700 --> 0:11:02.560 we're going to try to make that come about? Instead, 0:11:02.580 --> 0:11:05.179 that's not how they're selling it. They're selling it to 0:11:05.230 --> 0:11:11.110 the people like it's about misinformation, disinformation, stopping evil comments, 0:11:12.720 --> 0:11:16.080 And that's not the simplicity of, rather than everything being 0:11:16.140 --> 0:11:18.450 on the internet at once, only the stuff you follow 0:11:18.570 --> 0:11:22.110 is what will be presented to you. They can't make 0:11:22.190 --> 0:11:26.850 that point. Now, I think that strategically, the opposition is 0:11:26.890 --> 0:11:29.390 in the wrong place with how hard they have gone 0:11:29.690 --> 0:11:34.510 with their no early. Why? Because again, despite my heavy 0:11:34.570 --> 0:11:39.890 scepticism of this mob, despite my Very deep suspicion in 0:11:39.910 --> 0:11:42.970 and around just how slippery a fish the communications minister 0:11:43.010 --> 0:11:47.490 can and often is being. Is this one of those 0:11:47.530 --> 0:11:51.590 things that the kick is right in front and you 0:11:51.630 --> 0:11:54.929 don't want to be the person who unnecessarily made it 0:11:54.980 --> 0:11:58.199 too hard to take the obvious kick in front? Here 0:11:58.240 --> 0:12:01.140 was Angus Taylor with the beginning of his no last week. 0:12:02.140 --> 0:12:06.059 To hand a blank cheque to the government, to this minister... 0:12:06.350 --> 0:12:11.250 on political censorship is absolutely unacceptable, and we cannot support 0:12:11.290 --> 0:12:15.570 it in that form. Now, I've heard the point about censorship. 0:12:15.750 --> 0:12:18.979 I fear the same thing about censorship. But what is 0:12:19.000 --> 0:12:23.199 the example of it? With misinformation, it was clear what 0:12:23.240 --> 0:12:26.360 it would be, that essentially the government would go and 0:12:26.600 --> 0:12:30.839 farm out to a third-party group to decide whether a 0:12:30.880 --> 0:12:38.329 post on social media was information, i.e. government-approved, misinformation or disinformation, 0:12:38.350 --> 0:12:41.720 stuff the government didn't approve of. That was all very 0:12:41.840 --> 0:12:44.420 clear what that was. So that was censorship front up 0:12:44.800 --> 0:12:48.900 and centre. The government... is of course pretending there's nothing 0:12:48.940 --> 0:12:51.329 to see here. The opposition to some degree has turned 0:12:51.370 --> 0:12:53.350 around and said, well, you know what sort of snuck 0:12:53.410 --> 0:12:56.150 up the back of this bill? It's too much power 0:12:56.490 --> 0:12:59.550 for the minister. But they hadn't really explained that, which 0:12:59.640 --> 0:13:04.020 meant in terms of normal people paying half attention, they 0:13:04.080 --> 0:13:06.520 saw this from the minister for freebies. 0:13:07.660 --> 0:13:11.619 And the coalition haven't just said no, they have voted no. 0:13:11.640 --> 0:13:14.300 They voted against the bill to improve. 0:13:13.800 --> 0:13:17.670 Australia's social media minimum age laws just hours ago. The 0:13:17.710 --> 0:13:21.729 opposition had the opportunity to improve our social media minimum 0:13:21.790 --> 0:13:25.710 age laws. The opposition have chosen instead to fling their 0:13:25.850 --> 0:13:28.230 arms around One Nation and the platforms. 0:13:28.830 --> 0:13:31.050 They should be ashamed of themselves. 0:13:31.950 --> 0:13:35.590 Snappy snappy snappy oh she's gonna be such a great 0:13:35.610 --> 0:13:37.870 prime minister like i reckon there's a chance we're gonna 0:13:37.970 --> 0:13:40.730 rename a day of the week right it'll just be 0:13:40.990 --> 0:13:44.650 wells day that's how amazing she's gonna be when she's 0:13:44.690 --> 0:13:47.300 the prime minister like eventually jim can be first for 0:13:47.300 --> 0:13:50.880 10 years then i don't know somebody else maybe 20 0:13:50.880 --> 0:13:53.800 she'll be prime minister oh it'll be incredible just incredible 0:13:55.730 --> 0:13:58.350 But the government, the opposition had already said no, meaning 0:13:58.470 --> 0:14:00.910 who knows what the Greens want, right? The Greens essentially 0:14:00.929 --> 0:14:04.270 will want literally sign-off on every single account. You're talking 0:14:04.290 --> 0:14:08.180 about censorship. Imagine Sarah Hansen-Young getting involved. What do they 0:14:08.200 --> 0:14:08.860 think of me? 0:14:09.880 --> 0:14:10.120 Tick. 0:14:10.540 --> 0:14:12.500 What do they think of me? Cross. What do they 0:14:12.520 --> 0:14:17.500 think of me? Let alone Charlotte Walker. So there is 0:14:17.540 --> 0:14:20.400 an attempt being made by the government to engage with 0:14:20.420 --> 0:14:25.160 this idea about ministerial power. Now, should the minister be 0:14:25.260 --> 0:14:28.710 able to specifically nuke things on the internet? I would 0:14:28.750 --> 0:14:33.670 say no, simply because if Alika Wells is the politician 0:14:33.690 --> 0:14:35.970 you like, which means you're probably not watching this show, 0:14:36.970 --> 0:14:39.710 or is the politician you don't like, at some point 0:14:39.750 --> 0:14:41.930 the exact opposite will be the person who sits as 0:14:41.950 --> 0:14:46.170 the communications minister. Do you want to hand that potential 0:14:46.220 --> 0:14:49.940 power to the person who is the exact opposite of 0:14:49.980 --> 0:14:54.240 what you currently believe in Australian politics? No. Should there 0:14:54.260 --> 0:14:56.520 be a committee? Should there be an organisation? Well, then 0:14:56.560 --> 0:14:58.920 it's a conversation. But one person with the power to 0:14:58.960 --> 0:15:02.380 nuke stuff on the internet who, of course, is simultaneously 0:15:02.480 --> 0:15:06.300 involved in spreading garbage via crap social media videos while 0:15:06.360 --> 0:15:10.160 trying to play whack-a-mole as misinformation with anything that they 0:15:10.220 --> 0:15:13.760 disagree with. But Libs have already said no to all 0:15:13.780 --> 0:15:17.010 of this. The strategic error, in my view, is they 0:15:17.050 --> 0:15:18.990 should have just let it through in the House and 0:15:19.090 --> 0:15:21.490 deal with it in the Senate because the Senate, of course, 0:15:21.530 --> 0:15:23.650 is incredibly powerful. I'll get to that in a second 0:15:23.670 --> 0:15:26.650 when it comes to veterans. But clearly there's a deal 0:15:26.690 --> 0:15:30.860 to be done with someone, hopefully not the Greens. But 0:15:30.900 --> 0:15:32.960 if this is the central problem of the bill, then 0:15:33.080 --> 0:15:35.220 the Coalition should do everything they can to kill this 0:15:35.300 --> 0:15:38.810 part of the bill, this part of the bill. before 0:15:38.850 --> 0:15:41.510 we can get into everything else and explain. Show to us, 0:15:41.770 --> 0:15:46.370 page 7.4. That's my biggest concern with this bill. Okay? 0:15:46.650 --> 0:15:50.090 We can handle the detail. So the Minister for Freebies, 0:15:50.290 --> 0:15:51.970 the woman who's had so many free tickets, she's got 0:15:51.990 --> 0:15:54.690 tickets on herself, the greatest future Prime Minister of all time, 0:15:54.910 --> 0:15:58.410 is now starting to suggest that there's room for negotiation here. 0:15:59.670 --> 0:16:03.180 This ministerial power, would you be willing to make a 0:16:03.200 --> 0:16:07.400 concession here and say Parliament will decide on any new 0:16:07.480 --> 0:16:10.130 areas of harm rather than the Minister alone? 0:16:12.270 --> 0:16:14.950 I'd be pleased to consider any constructive ways we can 0:16:14.990 --> 0:16:17.989 meet the intent around dealing with urgency around new and 0:16:18.030 --> 0:16:19.050 emerging serious harms. 0:16:19.090 --> 0:16:20.530 And would that be a constructive way? And I welcome. 0:16:20.830 --> 0:16:22.310 Would that be a change you're willing to make? 0:16:24.330 --> 0:16:26.870 Yes. Do you like how the set-up behind is meant 0:16:26.910 --> 0:16:30.850 to look like a doctor's office place? Minister for Communications. 0:16:30.870 --> 0:16:35.380 Very interesting. She's also the Minister for Sport. And, of course, 0:16:35.820 --> 0:16:37.980 she's never done anything wrong. I mean, certainly there was 0:16:38.000 --> 0:16:39.740 an awful lot of travel, including an awful lot of 0:16:39.760 --> 0:16:43.260 travel to New York, including an awful lot of travel because, 0:16:43.600 --> 0:16:46.120 I'm Brisbane, I'm Brisbane, I'm Queensland, I'm Queensland. 0:16:46.300 --> 0:16:48.220 Yay, I'm more Queensland than your Queensland. 0:16:49.140 --> 0:16:52.950 Not performative at all, at all. Oh, she's passionate about sport, 0:16:52.970 --> 0:16:57.790 just loves it. And remember she said this about travel roads. 0:16:59.470 --> 0:17:00.770 I've abided by the rules the whole time I've been here. 0:17:00.790 --> 0:17:01.650 I've followed the rules. 0:17:01.690 --> 0:17:03.390 I've abided by the rules the whole time I've been here. 0:17:03.410 --> 0:17:04.510 Follow the rules is to follow the rules. 0:17:04.530 --> 0:17:06.570 Always continue to follow the rules. I have followed the rules. 0:17:06.609 --> 0:17:08.570 Followed the guidelines so far. 0:17:08.650 --> 0:17:11.260 By the way, just I can imagine the sexist things 0:17:11.280 --> 0:17:14.139 that man said on television, doing funny voices. Have you 0:17:14.180 --> 0:17:17.399 watched the show before? I've done them about plenty of people. 0:17:18.770 --> 0:17:20.990 We're near blokes we've ripped into as well. So nice try. 0:17:21.270 --> 0:17:25.030 I'm just pre-butting the inevitable outrage. It's just one of 0:17:25.070 --> 0:17:28.240 those politicians who is, you know, she's just got a 0:17:28.340 --> 0:17:30.179 bright future in front of her. And I just want 0:17:30.200 --> 0:17:34.040 to cheer her on. Well, one of the great things 0:17:34.080 --> 0:17:37.220 that Australia has had to do without for too long 0:17:37.240 --> 0:17:40.410 is the sports minister being able to go to sport. Because, 0:17:40.430 --> 0:17:42.450 of course, despite the fact that she could go to 0:17:42.490 --> 0:17:45.530 that sport in Brisbane, because, you know, Queensland... No, she 0:17:45.570 --> 0:17:49.190 likes to travel to the sport, especially when it's outside Queensland, 0:17:49.210 --> 0:17:52.030 because I'm the minister for everything, which means you have 0:17:52.050 --> 0:17:54.130 to pay for it. And I'm very pleased to say 0:17:54.170 --> 0:17:57.070 that she will be using that power to be able 0:17:57.109 --> 0:17:59.010 to go and sit in the grand final. I mean, 0:17:59.050 --> 0:18:03.670 good on... Good on her! Now, fingers crossed whether Brisbane 0:18:03.690 --> 0:18:07.920 gets there or not, but, you know... And a reminder... 0:18:07.970 --> 0:18:11.590 This was not paparazzi. This was the photo she posted 0:18:12.050 --> 0:18:15.359 on her social media, the very social media, that if 0:18:15.580 --> 0:18:17.240 she has her way, you would be able to never 0:18:17.280 --> 0:18:19.560 see a photo like that because you're not following her, 0:18:20.560 --> 0:18:23.200 along with most of the rest of Australia. Or will 0:18:23.220 --> 0:18:26.280 there be an exemption for politicians? Another detail I'd like 0:18:26.300 --> 0:18:31.119 to focus on. As you know, we have been laser 0:18:31.240 --> 0:18:34.620 focused in the conversation around the scrapping of the cap. 0:18:34.619 --> 0:18:38.500 $ 5, 000 for allied health. This ridiculous line in the sand 0:18:38.520 --> 0:18:40.780 that was invented in the same budget that was so 0:18:40.820 --> 0:18:41.580 full of lies. 0:18:41.940 --> 0:18:42.260 Why? 0:18:42.600 --> 0:18:46.360 Because every department has to save money somewhere. Oh, so 0:18:46.420 --> 0:18:49.100 apparently the Department of Veterans Affairs is the one that 0:18:49.140 --> 0:18:52.720 has the line in the sand that only $ 5, 000 per soldier, 0:18:52.780 --> 0:18:56.980 about 25,000 former members of the ADF, who might need 0:18:57.070 --> 0:19:00.250 allied health. And allied health can be basically everything bar 0:19:00.290 --> 0:19:04.850 the life and death. We've spoken, you've seen the interviews, 0:19:04.890 --> 0:19:07.070 you know the case. You know that the Prime Minister 0:19:07.210 --> 0:19:10.370 has met with these people. No change. You know that 0:19:10.390 --> 0:19:15.940 the Minister has met with these people. No change. Well, 0:19:16.080 --> 0:19:19.119 well done to everyone but the government in the Senate, 0:19:19.140 --> 0:19:22.660 and I'm talking about everyone from the Greens to One Nation, 0:19:23.720 --> 0:19:29.460 because collectively they got together and they voted... to make 0:19:29.500 --> 0:19:33.850 it clear that the cap had to go. Now, of course, 0:19:33.930 --> 0:19:37.010 legislation has to bounce through both houses, so there will 0:19:37.050 --> 0:19:39.560 be a moment where the government has the numbers to 0:19:39.600 --> 0:19:42.419 kill this thing, or we're all going to see the 0:19:42.440 --> 0:19:47.670 video of them voting to kill this thing. This happened 0:19:48.109 --> 0:19:48.869 on Thursday. 0:19:57.310 --> 0:19:59.899 The Coalition struck a deal with the Greens, One Nation 0:20:00.100 --> 0:20:04.280 and independent veteran Senator Jackie Lambie to block the government's bid. 0:20:04.760 --> 0:20:07.840 The Senate voted 35 to 20 against those proposed changes. 0:20:08.260 --> 0:20:10.439 The bill will now go to the House of Representatives 0:20:10.500 --> 0:20:13.310 next week when Labor gets another chance to vote against 0:20:13.700 --> 0:20:16.110 the amendment to scrap the cap. 0:20:17.170 --> 0:20:20.290 And I wanted to show that when they deserve it, 0:20:20.350 --> 0:20:24.260 they will get the credit. All but the government were 0:20:24.359 --> 0:20:27.260 united because this is a disgrace. 0:20:28.760 --> 0:20:30.580 We have not seen a government that is willing to 0:20:30.619 --> 0:20:35.199 listen to veterans, to listen to experts, to say, yeah, 0:20:35.260 --> 0:20:35.920 we got this wrong. 0:20:36.320 --> 0:20:43.090 It's not about fraud. It is about $ 748 million coming 0:20:43.210 --> 0:20:44.970 away from veterans who need it the most. 0:20:45.410 --> 0:20:49.720 Australia made a promise to our veterans. If you stand 0:20:49.800 --> 0:20:54.260 up for your country, your country will stand by you. 0:20:54.280 --> 0:20:59.160 And that promise, we know, that promise does not expire 0:20:59.840 --> 0:21:01.520 when the uniform comes off. 0:21:01.760 --> 0:21:04.260 Labor needs to wake up to needs of veterans. These 0:21:04.300 --> 0:21:06.770 men and women put on a uniform so the rest 0:21:06.810 --> 0:21:07.740 of us don't have to. 0:21:08.010 --> 0:21:12.030 Stay calm, veterans. Apart from the Labor Party, you have 0:21:12.050 --> 0:21:15.230 the rest of us on your side. So you're better 0:21:15.250 --> 0:21:17.970 than just having a crack at Pauline. All on the 0:21:17.990 --> 0:21:20.119 same day, but anyway. And believe it or not, are 0:21:20.130 --> 0:21:23.460 you sitting down? Are you sitting down? Because I'm about 0:21:23.500 --> 0:21:28.080 to show you a grab of the Greens saying something sensible. 0:21:29.260 --> 0:21:31.520 And, you know, when you're talking about this kind of 0:21:31.560 --> 0:21:34.100 system to help veterans, you want to have a really 0:21:34.140 --> 0:21:38.150 low entrance way into getting treatment. And you're going to 0:21:38.190 --> 0:21:40.390 err on the side of providing treatment rather than putting 0:21:40.430 --> 0:21:42.190 veterans through endless bloody hoops. 0:21:43.710 --> 0:21:46.340 While they can wait months and months or years for 0:21:46.380 --> 0:21:47.260 basic treatment. 0:21:48.260 --> 0:21:52.439 Endless bloody hoops. Good. Everyone but the government can see this. 0:21:53.119 --> 0:21:54.980 It is such an easy win. And in the same 0:21:55.020 --> 0:21:57.400 way I was talking before about the social media stuff, 0:21:57.420 --> 0:22:00.570 that sometimes, sometimes, sometimes, sometimes, to use the AFL parlance, right? 0:22:00.590 --> 0:22:01.899