From the Skying Center. This is Paul Murray Live. Hi, my friend. Now, yes, of course I'm going to talk about what percent of one percent of global emissions we should be dealing with before twenty thirty. Yes, of course I'll talk about the ludicrousness of the everything must go closing down sale of the Queensland budget. And yes, I'll even find a way to have a little chat about Joe Biden celebrating June teenth and proving that yeah, it's true about rhythm. Perhaps about first, may I start with
something a little dangerous. It's called a laugh. Now, I've got to say that I didn't think that Trump could be funnier on the campaign trail than when he was running for reelection and he was talking about taps and toilets. Try going and buying the new faucet. You turn it on, nor water comes out.
Right.
We won't talk about toilets, but you know that's a deep But how about the shower. You go into a shower and I have this beautiful head of hair, I need a lot of water, and you go into the shower, right, you turn on the water. Drip, drip, drip. I called the games something wrong with this? No sir, it's just a restrictor.
So you're in there five times longer than you're supposed to be.
It goes on a lot longer. But it was funny, right, every now and then, just guess, everything is incredibly serious and the world's all very serious, but every now and then there's a bit of funny. And there was a bit of funny that came out of Trump's most recent rally in the state of Nevada. Now this is, of course the state home to Las Vegas, where currently it's bloody hot. But for the first time in a long time, a Republican Trump looks like he could win the state.
If he wins the state, then he's a massive chance of being returned as the president. But I've got to say, there was one little bit inside a speech that was yes, talking about all the very serious issues, but I couldn't help but think, thanks for the loft, Donald, this is probably the next president of the United States.
I went to a boat company in South Carolina the boat I said, how is it? He said, it's a problem, sir. They want us to make all electric boats. So I said, let me ask you a question, and he said, nobody ever asked this question, and it must.
Because of Mit.
My relationship to Mit. Very smart. He goes, I say, what would happen if the boat sank from its weight and you're in the boat and you have this tremendously powerful battery and the battery is now underwater and there's a shark that's approximately ten yards over there?
Went out of shark attacks lately, did not said a lot.
Of shok Do I get electrocuted? If the boat is sinking? Water goes over the battery, the boat is sinking. Do I stay on top of the boat and get electrocuted? Or do I jump over by the shark and not get electrocuted? Because I will tell you he didn't know. They said, you know, nobody's ever asked me that question.
I said, I think it's a good question.
I think there's a lot of electric current coming through that water.
But you know what I'd do if there was a shark or you.
Get electrocuted, I'll take electrocution every single time.
Who knew this was a dilemma when you woke up today? Did you think you'd have to choose between the electrified boat falling into the water versus the shark? Which would you choose again. Just something silly that said in the middle of a long election campaign that's still got months and months ago, right, And for some people it's not serious enough. I don't have a problem with it. You don't have a problem with it. It's just silly, right. But this is how it's interpreted the next day on
lefty TV in the United States. This is like Karen in four k.
Some would call that completely unfit to deal with the challenges as the leader the free world.
Just completely unfed.
M Look, as I said, the world's a tough place, war, cost of living, poverty, whatever's going on in our own lives. People getting sick, people that we love getting sick, maybe us getting sick every now and then. Can we just giggle at the shee's silliness of it? This is the most perfect, eloquent thing that a presidential candidate has ever said. No, but it's a laugh. Who cares? Does anyone really think that this is a deep psychological insight into the failures
of the future leader of the third Right? Look, come on, you can hate them on all the policies, you can, yes, even roll your eyes if you want. But if you don't find the dilemma ridiculous, Then maybe you do take yourself now before again, I get to what percent of one percent of global emission should we do reduce in Australia by twenty thirty and then twenty fifty, I'll get to it, right. I know that's what the rest of
everyone's on about. But there was a story that was rather noticeable today that I'm surprised wasn't a little bit louder. And it's a story about water. Now. I love my wife, but she's a bottle water kind of person, right, She's never really been a tap water kind of person. She likes this. We buy it by the box every week. That's what she likes. I good old fashioned tap water that doesn't bother me. I'll even occasionally do the Bogan thing of drinking out of the tap myself. No need
for the glass. Yes, the uncouthness that comes in the form of this presenter each and every night. However, there was a interesting story today which was about potential contamination of our drinking water supply. Now, there was a report which seems to be a bit of an extrapolation of
something that's happened out of America. But the suggestion is that the drinking water of like two million people Sydney Melbourne in particular may will be contaminated by atmospheric issues that end up landing in the water and if you end up consuming an awful lot of it, well it's not good for you. As the Sydney Morning Herald led today, and this was their big exclusive, which again seemed to be slight repurposing of some data out of the United
States and some interpretation that's come out of activist groups. Here, the mast Head has analyzed publicly available data which indicates the chemicals that are found in drinking water of up to one point eight million Australians since twenty ten. So headline screams the water's going to give you cancer, but the actual numbers think about that, that's over fourteen year. Okay, the numbers start to slow a little here, but let's turn the machine up to eleven and scare the people
that they did in the media today. What's the type of chemicals We're talking about.
Two pre fas contaminants p FOSS and PFI And what they found is that there is likely linked to a number of cancer endpoints, so tarticular and breast cancer, Kinney cancer and other health effects.
As well just one second, probably not if that's the case right. But interestingly, questions that followed up around all of this today was okay, so how much do you need to drink and how much exposure before any of those things actually kick off in your body? The answer, even from the people that were trying to freak us out today was we don't know. So it Does it mean it's not a story? No, not quite. Does it mean that we're all going to die because of the
drinking water that we have in our country? No? Now, I know that our opinions of the chief Health officers is a little dodgy at the moment in Australia after they got it so right during COVID, But everyone who's in charge of the machine and in charge of the system says nothing to see here would actually encourage people to drink water.
We are very blessed with very safe water, so I have no concerns about the safety and quality.
Laterst data should be very reassuring.
In fact, I'd be very comfortable to drink water from anywhere in Australia at the current level.
Okay, doctor Kerry Chand I don't quite trust her do trust Nick Codsworth, because of course he was one of the same people who came out drink COVID going okay, kids can still go to school, and the stuff that Daniel Andrews and Martin McGowan got a gold medal for. So this was a weird story. Today the headlines would have you believe that all tap order is terrible and you must get a filter because if you're exposed to
too much of it, you'll end up getting cancer. But then if the public health officials are being very direct and telling us no, that's not the case, well, then who's the one being irresponsible here? I can't tend because I don't know. I'm not the scientist. Obviously, is it the people that are exposing the problem or is it the public health officials that aren't taking it seriously enough?
But interestingly, you would have thought that someone trying to get stories around today that claim the evidence is that there might be a problem with the drinking water supply for a certain period of people over a certain period of time would be bigger news. Or did other people just realize maybe this isn't what it seems. Either way, there's either a huge story. No one's talking about here, or a story we shouldn't be talking about because it
isn't a story at all. On second thoughts, just drink up. It's all going to make us sick, isn't it eventually, I assume? But take health advice from me, the morbidly a B smoker. Anyway. Now, the thing that they were all obsessed about today in Canberra had plenty of questions and fingers ready to poke towards a person in power, was what percent of one percent of global emissions should Australia be committing to in twenty thirty. Now this is
a helpful graph. I made sure that we updated it from the other one that we've shown you, which shows from the Union of Concerned Scientists. It shows that of all of the countries that are producing CO two and problems, China would be thirty three percent, India would be the best part of ten percent, the United States fourteen percent, Russia five point eight percent, Indonesia, Little Old Indonesia, Well, little old Indonesia's two hundred and fifty million people, isn't
it five and a bit percent? The twenty seven countries in the EU four point nine percent, then South Korea and then others is thirteen. Now I had to break it to you, but Australia is lumped in with others. Why because, as I've said, where one percent of the world's problem. Now, does that mean we should do nothing? Because who cares nine to nine problems and the atmosphere ain't one. No, of course we should be doing something.
But the question is should we be doing things that end up costing too much money, hurting our economy, making things too difficult for people, or, in the case of the rapid expansion of renewable energy, should be literally destroying the earth in order to save the atmosphere. Now, of course, those that demand absolute urgent climate action suggest that the figures I have just presented to you are myth leading myth information, because on per capita amounts, Australia is one
of the biggest polluters in the world. The problem is you don't actually measure it that way. If the problem is how much CO two has been put into the atmosphere by humans, the result is just how much is up and about, and the direct correlation is how much each country is throwing up, not how many people are throwing it up. Again, can we go back to the map thirty three percent of the problem thirty three times worse than anything Australia could do right now is China,
Yet under the Paris Agreement thirty one percent. I apologize. Under the Paris Agreement, of course, we have this nonsense where the western country is chiefly places like Canada, New Zealand, Australia, the United States, Well, they all have to measure their crap. They're thrown into the atmosphere from two thousand and five. But China, which is currently thirty times more than countries like Australia, they can continue to do whatever they want
until twenty thirty. That's why I think the Paris Agreement is not quite worth the paper that it's written on. Not because we shouldn't do anything about climate change. It's just isn't the issue that the person who's actually got thirty bonfires in their backyard versus your one bonfire in your backyard probably should put out a few of their bonfires before we have to completely snuff out our bonfire from which we get our heat and are able to
cook our food. Well, today the Prime Minister thinks that he has found a way to change his slump in the Poles, which was not saved by saving Andrew Giles, the hopeless Immigration Minister, from a few weeks of failures in the Parliament. It was not to be saved by too little, too late in the budget. Instead, he thinks, let's go back and let's pretend the Liberals are all auger booger on climate change and China means nothing. Here's what he said today.
No twenty thirty target means walking out of the Paris Agreement. Now they have a number of policies over recent days, but it's very clear that they can't be taken seriously on an issue that is important to Australians today.
And here is what Peter Dunton actually had to say, which by the way, is not there will be no target for twenty thirty. It's just you know what, you're forty three percent, which we didn't agree to at the last election, we won't agree to at the next election. I know Shakhara breaking news roll the tape of the alternative Prime Minister.
We know that with the energy policy which is a complete train wreck. The renewable is only energy policy of the government. It's driving prices up. At the next election it will be about who do you trust to bring your electricity prices down. It will be about who do you trust to manage the economy and to deal with the cost of living crisis.
That Labour's created.
It will be about who do you trust to deal with the housing crisis that labor has created in our country.
So the election is soon next year, but either way it feels like we get into that stage where we're having the proxy election. And because it's up to the Prime Minister whether it happens in August, which is the earliest opportunity, or all the way through main Dune of next year, which is the longest opportunity, we're going to be in this cycle for some time. But how did
the media interpret all of this today? Did they lay it out the same way that I have for the past few days that they're not really pulling out of the Paris Agreement, they're just not agreeing with what they didn't vote for in the Parliament, which is forty three percent. Well, of course, here's the man who called Tony Abbott the most divisive political leader of his generation.
On Channel nine, Peter Dutton says he remains committed to net zero emissions by twenty fifty, but today he effectively abandoned Astraita's legislated short term target electorally risky, especially in inner city electorates.
Yes, the opposition that didn't support the forty three percent emissions cut when they were the government, and as the opposition that did not vote for that target are promising not to follow what they have opposed should they become elected. Mind blown. Right, they never agreed with the policy of forty three they never voted for it, and they won't
abide by it should they become the government. But of course the sky is falling and this will just be such a problem, and all those teal seats and they'll never get to seventy seventy six seats, you know, all of that. Right again, all of this, in honesty is the Labor Party trying to change the subject. Because in politics, when you're on the defense, I eat, the story is always about you, and you have to defend yourself for whatever reason. Then generally speaking, you are losing the day.
The government has been on the backfoot since how long in the last year on cost of living, and then it was the tax cuts, and then it was the immigration stuff. They've been on the back foot for months and now it's fifty to fifty in the polls. So as I showed you in chapter and verse in great detail on Sunday night, Monday night, and again tonight, Petty Dutton did not say we're yanking ourselves out of the
Paris Agreement. Instead, their position is we'll have a target if we have to for twenty thirty, but it's going to be lower than the one that you currently have, the one that currently is forcing people to make certain choices about cars and making the ones you want to buy more expensive than the ones you don't want to buy. Changing from an electricity grid that has worked to one
that hopefully fingers crossed that. A couple of years ago the CSIO toldas was going to be a trillion dollars worth of transition, but now magically it's only five hundred billion dollars worth of transition. But nuclear is unacceptable because it will cost billions of dollars for transition. You are forgiven if you are a little dumb struck at times by how this debate works. Well, guess what actually happened today.
There was an opinion poll, which we would think would inform some of the media coverage about whether people had changed their attitudes from where they were. Yes, just back in twenty twenty two, what is the likelihood that the Urbanese government will meet its aggressive emissions target of forty three percent by twenty thirty Sixty nine percent of people say unlikely or very likely. And then here's the question,
should Australia elevate energy reliability and affordability above sustainability. That's now clicked in at fifty one to forty three with six percent of people still making their mind up. It was true in two thousand and seven, ten, thirteen, sixteen, nineteen and twenty two that Australians are always in favor of action on climate change, but I don't want to pay for it. When the government is not doing enough on climate change, the poles say, we demand the government
does more. When the government decides to do more, but it ends up costing you more through things like power bills, the Australian population always flips back to say, I'm sorry, this is costing me too much money. And that's not because they don't understand the problem of climate change. It's not because they don't want to do something about climate change. It's because I think in all of our little heart
of hearts. We know that Australia is one percent of the world's problem, China is thirty percent, India is ten percent. Russia is six times more than us. So yes, should we do something. But if we did everything, which would shut everything down, change everything in our lives, everyone getting around on penny farthings like the Greens would like it to be, we won't actually change the climate. Misinformation from
Scarni is the primetime. No, that's the reality. If everyone was moving at the same place as Australia, then yeah, probably could probably break the problems back. But until China, who was producing the most, starts having to play by the same rules as everyone else, then nothing is really going to happen. Because I hate to break it to people, and while I am not a scientist, I think I can work this out. The pollution that is produced by
one country goes on to affair other countries. For US, yep one percent of the problem, but China thirty percent. So even if the Green's got their way, we'd still have bushfires, We'll still have flooding events, and will still have cyclones. None of that means we do nothing. It's just about the pace in which we do it. That's
the debate. But for the people who have replaced the religion with a God and holy texts, the thing they believe in with the same fervor as those who believe in the burning bush, is that climate change is the existential problem. If we don't do every and anything about it, then we're all going to die. We're all going to be sent to hell metaphorically. Well, I can tell you
a form of hell exists right now. And it's an inconvenient truth to people on the extreme left who demand greater action on climate change because they can afford to pay it. There are people amongst us who can't afford the cost of the transit. These will be the same people who will always be unable to afford the cost
of transition. But what's really happening. They're getting the same financial relief from this government as the people who live in mansions inteel electorates of twenty five dollars a month. This is a specific example out of New South Wales. Figures provided the Sunday Telegraph show the number of applications for assistance emergency assistance when it comes to power bills is two hundred and fifty a day back during the in bits of the pandemic to now three hundred and
thirty a day in the past six months. Last year, the combined number of government and charity issued vouchers for power was just over seventy thousand one state, which is just over sixty thousand and sixty two thousand in the COVID lockdown years. Yet, because the people who are on the left of politics want to make the decisions about changing our power grid by moving to exclusively or renewables at least what eighty something percent in the next few
years and eventually one hundred percent. Now, this will make them all feel good when they go to climate conferences, and after you've paid it off from being built. Maybe there is a financial change, but the cost of transition, the same cost of transition that I've talked about for ten years, can't be ignored. The question is whether the politics is going to be with Peter Dutton that okay, the transition that he prefers the money to be spent
on his nuclear versus the money being spent currently on renewables. Now, remember, for people who live in densely populated parts of Australia, they're probably pro renewables because it's never been built in their backyards. See what would happen if someone suggested a wind farm go into one of the doggy parks of a Teal electorate. You reckon they'd back it in. I don't think so either. Meantime, another issue about the real world that is worth reminding people about right now, which
is of course the economy with relentless focus. We talk about it because there are too many people that are being not just forgotten, but I think deliberately ignored. It's not acceptable in a country where I'm more than happy that I am lucky enough to be able to be in a position where there's an awful lot of tax which goes back, but that tax goes back with the expectation of Medicare and welfare and taking care of people who are in the world of trouble. I don't mind
that about our system. It's when it's peed up against the wall on things like government advertising or the Prime Minister gets new planes that I have my issues. Now, the Treasurer will tell you everything's fine with the economy.
These national accounts so we got the budget settings right. They justify our approach to fighting inflation. And repairing the budget without smashing the economy.
So that guy is getting excited and trying to tell everyone I deserve a gold star because there was that much growth in the Australian economy zero point one percent in three months. Everything is awesome, Everything is great per capita. We're in a recession. The real world is in a recession and one of the things that is hurting people in terms of their ability to pay basic bills is things like paying off their houses. For millions of Australians,
it's the biggest investment they'll ever make. And regardless of whether you bought it at the height of the pandemic or you did it five years ago or ten years ago, interest rates matter. And the latest expectation from the A and Z Bank is the Reserve Bank will not even touch them until next year. So if there's an election this year, good luck to Albo. And even in February of next year, good luck to Albo. Remember since he came to power, they've gone up twelve times thirteen in
all since May of twenty twenty two. Adam Boyton, who is one of the economists at the A and zib says that he does not expect inflation to start to deal with anything by November. He says that it's not monetary policy that isn't working, it is it's the economy that's clearly slow, particularly across private final demand. For this reason, we need a rate hike. Sorry, we think that ay
rate hike remains unlikely. So reality for Australians right now, pick your loan anywhere between five hundred thousand dollars or over a million bucks. You've had to find an extra fourteen twenty one or twenty nine thousand dollars are year on top of everything else you have to pay for that's got more under this government now. Of course, the people that are truly struggling, they continue to struggle. The people that are struggling, of course, are not these people.
These people, of course got their highest pay rise in a decade. It's not this bloke because he also got the pay rise. But he's also getting not one but two new private planes. Oh sorry, media watch. Yes, technically they were ordered by the Morrison government, but they've been in power for two years and didn't cancel it. So yeah, Elbow's ordering the planes. But the reality of our economy and the people that are getting squeezed by it. Normal people.
Even the Channel nine newspapers they talk about this about how the inflation dragon. People writing to them say that it's the people who need the most that are getting hurt the most. And then there's this story which goes back to a subject that we've talked about a lot on the show because I really fit in, can care about it, that middle class Victorians make up the face of hunger amid the cost of living crisis. Well, the Prime Minister is playing the games that he plays. Here's
a reality. You know, food Bank, that great charity I talk about all the time. Well, they put out some new details which should shame the federal government who supposedly care because they're more compassionate than evil Augebuger Liberal Party Peter Dutton, Australia's Trump. Food Bank Australia Who's latest snapshot of need shows three point seven million households struggle to put food on the table last year. They now say that many households with mums and dads working at least
one job are now in food stress. Is this okay Australia. The alarming trend comes as new research shows a quarter of Australians are anxious about putting enough food on the table. Do you think that they are thankful to a government that's giving them twenty five bucks a month on power, the same amount they're giving to millionaires. This bloke who's the CEO of Food Bank in Victoria, David McNamara, he says that sixty five thousand meals are being distributed by
them every day. The middle class, what we all aspire to be, are the ones that are feeling this impact. We've got mums and dads working two jobs to put families first and to put food on the table, and unfortunately they're putting themselves to bed without food. They're sending to their kids to bed without food, and that's not our society. This is an uncomfortable conversation to have, but there are too many of us going hungry. That's not the country. We're supposed to be a hungry country. We're
supposed to be the lucky country. So forgive me if I am not singing from the same song sheet as the rest of the people who talk about politics all day every day, who think that the single most important thing in our nation right now is what percent of one percent of global emissions we should be cutting by twenty thirty.
I care.
About sixty thousand people in one state alone a day that are getting some sort of a meal. Sixty thousand meals a day coming from food meating that people who are not homeless and destitute and maybe not even applying for centlink are the focus of this. No, No, it's people who've got jobs. It's people who send their kids
to bed hungry or send themselves to bed hungry. So if the Prime Minister or the opposition leader would like to make a very strong statement about what people actually care about at the moment, can we find some more money for the charities that are actually helping the people out now while the political conversation in Cambury is so often not about these people now, sometimes it can be repetitive for you to watch at times, and no doubt at times even a little boring. There he goes again
with the food being thing. But we're lucky, We're okay. You pay your tax, you work hard, you have worked hard, and you have paide attacks. But a government that wants to tell you that you should kiss their boots because they're managing the economy when the rate in the growth in the past three months is zero point one percent. It's all just fantasyland rubbish. Where's their announcement about more money for charities. That's when I know they truly care
about the little people. So I hope that the little people remember that the people in charge the Labor Party, the Prime Minister from Housing Commission, with the dog and all the rest of it, couldn't care less about you and your food on the table tonight. Who could not care less about a footy stadium of people who have to apply for help to keep the freaking lights on. So don't reward him with your vote because you always have because he doesn't care. He just assumes you'll vote
for him. He assumes he will forever be the Prime Minister because as long as the teals are in place and they care about climate chain more than anything else, that the Liberal Party will never get to seventy sixties. So I'll just rule forever. But what sort of a country is it when they take more tax than ever before, yet more people than ever before are lining up for
free food from a charity. All about this and a whole lot more in a moment's time here on Paul Murray Life lots to get to Holly Hughes Sam Crosby in the man Cave. I had a lot of other stuff, but I think I made my point. Thank you so much for watching in the man Cave. Let's lock it down. This will be fun. It's pen and no pen at one pace. It's got so wonderful Holly Hughes, the equally lovely Sam Crosby left and right. You get him here,
So charity point well made. Sam, of course does a lot of work within his no doubt agree and Holly, we've talked about it before, so I recognize what we've said to this point in the show. But let's talk about the important issue, which is what percent of one percent of global emissions we must set the target out
for six years from now now. When I first saw on Saturday Lives planning to pull out of Paris Agreement, the political nerd in me goes, really, what seat are they going to win in the like this is bad? And then actually read the interview and they didn't say it. It had just been sort of whipped up and turned out, yeah, like, let's change the subject, right, But we've now got to
the place Peter Dutton says, well, surprise, surprise. The policy we took to the last election, which is we don't agree with forty three percent, will be our position after the next election. Yet the Prime Minister, desperate to change the subject from many months of failure, is trying to pretend that the climate nasties are back inside the Liberal Party. Isn't the reality that Australias on this discussion right, which
the left is called climate wars, which god bankers. But it's always fifty to fifty, right, when if whatever one you choose, eventually the public turns around and says you should have chosen the other path. Right, More action equals higher cost, lower cost equals less action. Well, surprise, surprise, and cost of living. I know which one they're going to.
Picklo cost absolutely, And the reality is, and this is where Peter Dutton's leadership is so strong in this area, and he's continuing to really show himself as the alternate Prime Minister because he's being honest with the Australian people. And I know, I know this might seem outrageous to some people, but the reality is is we are under getting nowhere near the targets, and we are chasing an
ideology under Bowen and Albanezi. Not only are the renewable projects not on target, and again these are all going into rural and regional areas. They're not going into the Teal seat. In fact, the Teal seats when they had the opportunity to put a battery in Waverley and North City, let me guess they rejected it. They rejected a battery
side of a storage you know, shipping container. But they want rule and regional Australians to wear solar farms over arable farming land as well as having new transmission lines bulldoze through their communities. But so the transmission lines are way behind schedule, the renewable projects and way behind schedule. And to say no coal, no gas, no nuclear, there's
no way we're keeping the lights on. And what you know Peter Darton is saying is we need an honest approach, We need a real discussion and we are not going to do anything to our economy that removes productivity and any advantage that we have. And to make sure that families can pay their power bill.
I mean that's a novel idea, correct. But the issue, of course, Sam is that there are certain people who, as I said, in this religious light thing. There is a number that must be achieved, and the numbers should be bigger than any number we've previously had in the past, because if Australia doesn't do our bid, then we're client or all of that right, But equally the pushback surely to what Holly's just said is okay, cool, But none of the kofire power stations just magically regrow. They've all
been blown up. Right, We've made a choice, We've gone on a path. The Dunton position is well cool. We can pull back and there's another path over here, but either of these parts are going to be very expensive. That said, we've got the Prime Minister pretending that he's still running against Scott Morrison, that he's running against the guy who hasn't signed zero twenty fifty, that isn't going to Glasgow. All of this scrap And I just wish Albow would work out that he's got an opportunity to
lead a conversation. But if he wants to just keep fighting the twenty twenty two election, he's going to get a kick in the bum at some time.
Sure, But what's Peter Dutton's policy, what's the number Okay, so we're.
Poured thirty four was there one of the last federal elections. He hasn't said that, But he hasn't said that matter.
Honestly, what does that matter?
If you agree on the destination, what's the point of the journey.
What does it matter what the number is. Let's be honest with the Australian people. Eighty two percent renewables by twenty thirty ever going to happen, and the costs are continuing to increase. What the number is is you know we're still committed to net zero in twenty five.
It matters because of what you said at the very start of this, which was Peter Dutton's honest Peter Dutton wants to have a credible conversation. Now that may well be the case, but honesty to me says he's got to go to the Australian people and say, is my planry it's behind I'm sorry. It's a policy setting that then informs a whole range of different investment decisions all the way down the line.
And so if you're for a whole lot of investment opportunity.
Okay, well, but let's talk about let's talk about nuclear Why won't he say here's the policy, here's where it's going to go, here's how much is going to cost. If he were to say, yes, he's twenty billion dollars and we've allocated that in the forward estimates, and it's going to go in these.
Two electors of politics, you don't come out you know it's all moder election, yet you don't come out with your suite of policies way through a term.
Or you are not voting.
It is not going to come out this side of the election.
And say that, and you will. That's what looks this in gaming game. Slowly you will.
I don't think he's hiding that he's interested in you let me.
Let me in. In answered part of the question in his budget and reply speech, he already signaled the locations which was existing. Its right existing. So therefore, if you've had a call fire POWERstation, the plan under the lefties is that the power station is replaced with a battery. Under the liberals, it would be that that would be one of the nuclear power stations. They ain't coming to suburban streets anytime under that plan, right, So that that's the first one. So I feel like we can build
up what the location is, whatever the cost. I would put the same pressure on Peter Dutton that I put on elbow about the cost. But albou was allowed to lie about five hundred thousand jobs and two hundred and seventy five dollars off. But that was the modeling based off three years ago, and now we don't have to apply to what. Sorry sir.
It's one thing to give modeling and for that modeling to become wrong, right, and to get that number wrong in a couple of years.
So he can make up whatever modeling he wants to the next give.
Us the modeling and then give the government the chance to pull it apart, in the same way that Albanzi when he was Opposition leader gave Peter Dutton. But so gave Scott Morrison the chance to do that.
But I won't look. I don't have the forensic mind to know exactly when that announcement came out. But that announcement did not come out too far out from them. I remember it was pretty late in the cycle. At the National Pressure Club. If somebody can go and find it and work out done at it.
We heard over one hundred short times two hundred and seventy five dollars.
But by the same point Albanize wasn't proposing to build nuclear power. He was so much a colle dollart complain around the station is an enormous investment. It's a huge turn of if you're going to if you're going to propose that, then it is incumbent on you to say how you are.
Don't you?
I don't disagree with you. But what I'm saying is what I'm saying is that I think that there is a political class conversation which is about which is about targets and international importance and all the rest of it. Right, does that is completely irrelevant conversation of which you should never answer the questions none. But the question that I think is playing out for Australians is the one that existed in polling in twenty twenty two and many years prior, right,
which was the choice between action versus cost. All right, at this cycle, cost is all well and good if your interest rates are close to zero, But when your interest rates are gone up twelve times, cost becomes a different issue. So either the Labor government turns around says well, okay, we're just going to slow down, try and hold off the cost, which they won't do. Instead, he thinks he can win the next election by finding an even higher number,
and there might be some backfight on that. But we've got a couple of lines out of both both of them today which pretty much seemed to be the preview of what they think is the attack going into the next election. Dutton said that Albow was weak and rattled and Albo said divisive. Now, whichever one of those ends
up getting into your perceptions. If it's weak and rattled, what it means is that every time the government makes an announcement it looks like they're making it out of desperation, like Queensland or Divisive is well by opposing everything that we do, then they don't have any plan for the future.
Obviously you can both argue your corners on that. But we're starting to see these hits that are sort of election level hits at a point in time when we're being told election is next year, but it could be as early as August. What does it say to you that they've honed the hits now so that when people argue at the barbecue, they can say we can rattle, and then somebody says divisive, we can rattle divisive and then somebody says, come, we all just get along and
have a better politics. They are the tales tell them to go, oh god, yeah done as political animals. What does it say to you?
I think, look, I think we're probably headed to an election at the end of this year. Is looking increasingly more likely. I think that's for a whole raft of reasons, including it doesn't look like we're going to get into a straight cut this year and we may not get one to the middle of next year, so they're very unlikely to get one before going to the election, and
so why not go early. I don't think they'll go August because I think they're going to let Queensland get their cricket bats out for the state government before they go federal because they don't want to bear the brunt of So.
That's late October.
That means November, November, get first of December. So I look, you know, but it's all speculation with we just go to the new South Wales redistribution to come out on Friday. So there's still lots and lots of moving pieces.
Here and those numbers need the reagibusion needs to be finalized before the elections called for fear that.
They take on the old boundary.
Well, they take the two seats that are most under quota, which is Warringa and Wentworth, and they smash them together.
Yes, and which to work across the harbor.
Well, that's right, because they technically have a border, which is the definition the aec uses.
But of course there's a lot of water in between, a lot of out there Sydney. But ye okay, so this is interesting anyway, It's just it's worth watching again one of the joints of the show.
Jets, keys or something across the harbor from one sided the election.
Correct, Perhaps they could just use you know, I won't say that.
Can you imagine just sorry, two deals having their seats smashed together, the allegro.
Twals that want a job share in Melbourne. Maybe they could job.
Share their seed got abolished, I was deacon, sorry Higgins?
Yes, correct, So they can still keep going it all right, quick breakpack the more pleasy to talk about high low, lots of fights and all the rest in between, lots of talk about here and Pulmurray life. I like these
longer chats. It feels like the old school show, you know, went on for six hours, of course, but still we were able to have these very long chats and unpleased that were able to do so as well as had the big opinion at the start of the show, of course he was Sam Crosby and with Holly Hughes always welcome in the man cave. Send me an email, Paulitscardews dot com dot Au, play that back and if you play it back at minus the speed, I'll have a
normal voice rather than a race call of speed. I apologies, I apologize. So Queensland today looked like and a few people have had this hot take, which is that it looks like the closing down everything must go person drug sale approach to a budget which is one thousand for this and fifty for that all the rest of it, right, which is very obvious about the Queensland election seeming like the queens and Labor Party is where the Poles say,
headed for complete smashings, right, not going to be close. However, is there a chance it could work? I just want to always ask the impossible question, because nothing is inevitable.
Sam, of course, it's yeah, of course that can win in every election. Anyone that goes into it saying no, no, no, this side can never win it. You know, I think Anastasia and Campbell Newman think Trump. I think whatever, of course it can happen, So the two horse races, of course it can happen. I am a little bit empathetic to the poor old Queenslanders. I mean, either it's a cost of living budget or they're out of touch.
You know, if my help or not enough, right, welcome to the gods.
Pom respond to it, then they're going to be out of touch. And if they did, then they're going to be accused of trying to god loss issue there is, what's it to do?
Yeah, yeah, yeah, But again I mean for their part, the Ell and Pece turnerunds and I will agree with all of this stuff well, which I think is just intellectually a little wobbly, right, because again I understand small target strategy, and I understand that this is a party that has been like really psychologically smacked about by a labor party that you know, as a government didn't deserve
the last term, but COVID gave them another term. They're used to the dematic and ads that come out, or they're used to the the you know, people up at a Mount Couther and all those TV stations eventually on a promise of working for them, so they're used to their mistakes becoming cataclysmic. But I don't think they have to agree to everything all the time because I think people want to get rid of them, which means some of their ideas are crap and we don't want to back them in.
Yeah.
So look, I actually made a few phone calls today to Queensland MPs senators and a candidate up there and to get bit of a sense of what you know and what Chris Folly was talking about when he said, you know, he talked about agreeing with certain things, and what he was basically saying was if there are commitments to infrastructure, if there's funding given to a community group, where there is funding given somewhere that you know.
A thousand dollars six months, you know we're not We're.
Not going to stand in the way of that. To Sam's point, you know, can they win it? I think what's interesting is the Labor Party cannot get candidates to run in some seats that should be in play. That's how on the nose they are. But I think what no one has raised and what was announced today was the Labor Party has announced in this budget that they are giving every single MP an extra electorate staff really and so what that smells like to me is they're
padding their own nest in expectation for a loss. So they've got a few more staffers on board to help them along, and that seems to have slipped through to the keeper. So I think those sorts of things are indicative that they know they're in trouble. They know that this is the slide four months to the election. And you know, Sam, you're right, there's too much cost of living, not enough cost of living. But the debt in a state that is so mining heavy yet is got a
massive deficet. What are they doing with the mining royalties, what are they doing with the resources, with their resources and mental.
One hospitals, youth crime, all of those issues that again, good times have been there plenty of times, and the structural advantage of having so much mining in their in their state means yeah again, but we'll a wait and see, all right, a couple before we go, Joe Biden, so let us polls. Another one comes out today, This was CBSU gov. It shows that yes, headline, it's like fifty forty nine swing states. It's allegedly in Biden's favor. But
then let's start to get into the issues. Once you actually get into the issues, something like eighty percent of Americans say they expect their financial circumstances under a re elected Biden government to be the same or worse, which means depleted or worse. James Carvill, who we all know have an affection for the great Democrat strategist, has said, oh, well, you know, I didn't want him to run, but he's running,
and that's the way it is. Who knows whether something magical happens in the ether and there is a different change to you. But let's imagine it was would a different Democrat be able to beat Trump because it would just be a ruler line under it move on to the next generation thing or structurally it's bad and they want the guy who it wasn't as bad under.
I would have said, yes, a couple of months ago, you're just getting the runways getting shorter and shorter and shorter.
Yeah.
You know the problem with all of those polls is that it's essentially asking a proxy for name recognition, and any governor, senator, you're never going to compare to President. Right, everyone knows the president. No one knows their governor or their senator or their congressman or whatever.
You know.
I think there there governors like Gretchen Whitmer who could absolutely have taken the fight to Trump and I think won it. But there's no runway for it. So even if you know the last minute change in Biden, how does.
That it almost looks like now because you're right, the runway has got so short that the only way they could do a switch is if Biden stepped down and Kamala Harris stepshart.
Is why he has.
Trump is going to wipe the floor, which is why he's running.
Yeah, you know, and I mean that's why.
The footage today of him dancing standing like a weird cryogenic statue.
I mean, how is that the.
Leader of the free world.
It is becoming beyond a Joe correct. Well, but that look that said again fifty to fifty races issues have said before abortional. We'll see what happens, but at the moment, the numbers are all heading in one direction and the poles probably not going to be that wrong. Thank you guys to appreciate it. The late debate is next. CENMA