From the Sky News Center. This is Paul Murray Live.
Well, good evening, James Borrow here tonight filling in for Paul Murray on Paul Murray Live and all through the week. And you know it's Monday Night, so you know what that means. That's right, it's Monday Night. Fights with our friends Senator Matt Canavan and Nicholas Reese coming up in a little bit. So these are the rules. No sooks, one lefty, no killer, all filler tonight on Paul Murray Live.
All right, let's get straight into it, and I want to start with a little story about the Canberra bubble, the Canberra of bureaucracy, and a little oopsie, or, as they say in politics, a gaff. Yes, that's right, a gaff, which is a term which has been famously defined as when someone in politics accidentally tells you the truth. Well, this, this accidental truth telling, is an abstinute classic in terms of telling us stuff we didn't already know, but which
it is already pretty nice to have confirmed. So here's what happened. Well, it seems that an ABC Business reporter put in a freedom of information request to the Department of the Treasury asking for the briefings that Treasury prepared for the incoming government at the last federal election. Now, these are briefings that they do and they give to whoever wins, whether they the incumbent, whether the challenger, whether
they're labor or liberal. It's basically a big booklet that says, here's the state of play with each department, that goes to the new ministers.
And guess what happened here.
Well, Treasury accidentally came through with the goods and they gave our friend at the ABC a version of the briefing that was not properly redacted.
II.
It did not have all the juicy bits that they didn't want people to know crossed out, and it.
Contains some pretty interesting truths.
Truth like, well, you know that that one point two million dollar home building target that the government has been promising that they were going to meet, Well, according to the briefing, that's impossible. And all that being spending the government's been doing well. According to the Treasury, it's going to require higher taxes and if we weren't taxed enough already. Also, they said they're going to need to cut spending as well if they're ever going to get the budget back
into some sort of good health. Now we knew all of this already, but this made for some fun moments. At a press conference today with the Treasurer.
The Incoming Government's break makes an assessment of the government's policies, your election commitments, and then gives advice to that implementation. But this one says that the house and type would not be met.
What gives it?
It seems like the challenges in the sector are too great for the government's policy.
Yeah.
I mean, first of all, you're responding to a subheading in a document, a partial. You know, you're referring to a Well, governments don't release the Incoming Government Brief. It's been released in error, and that's you know, these things happen from time to time. As I said before, I'm pretty relaxed about it.
Yeah.
Did he look pretty relaxed about it to you anyway? Sure you are a treasure now. The treasure also went the full word salad after being asked this question.
You've always spoken about the importance and value of independent advice. Treasury says you can't fix the budget without raising taxes or slashing spending.
So are you open to this advice?
Straightforward question. But what do you reckon? Do you think the treasure gave a straightforward answer.
Well, a couple of things about that. I mean, first of all, you're responding to some headings in the advice that we've got in the incoming government brief. What's happened here is a Treasury official has sent those documents in error. That sort of thing happens from time to time. We've already made it really clear that we will need to
do more to meet our housing targets. So the priorities which are being reported today are not you know, those other sorts of things that I have mentioned before, including at the National Press Club, I gave a whole speech on how we need to do more to meet our housing targets. We do need to do more to make our budget more sustainable and our economy more productive.
Listen, Treasurer, the first rule of halls is when you're in one, stop digging. I mean, that was some real bart Simpson giving a book report there on a bookie he didn't read kind of stuff now. Of course, hilariously, the Treasury tried to quash the story and when they released the data in error, they asked the ABC reported to delete the e delete the incorrectly redacted brief, and I gotta say good on the reporter, he said, fat chance.
But you know what, this all gets to a bigger problem here, and that is the nature of truth and government and what we the people, you and I are allowed to know rather.
Than just assume.
Because you know, what's the funny thing here is that what's been revealed here is the way the Canberra game works. It's like an episode of Yes Minister or Utopia. Hide the facts, hope we don't figure it out, redact the things they don't want us to know, and let everyone keep on doing what they're doing, ad infinitum. Now, this issue, you know, the stuff that was in that report, not going to beat the housing targets, spending too much money.
These aren't secrets, This is not These are not the sort of things here that are.
Like issues of national security.
You know, we're not talking about a document that accidentally got released with the specifications of like our over the horizon radar or what are we looking at acquiring in the way of underwater drones? Or hell what face cream? The Prime Minister uses to say, looking so youthful. No, this stuff is the real basic bread and butter stuff of government. Our tax money houses bread and butter stuff. As I say, and I'm sorry, I mean this government,
the Albanezy labor government. Let's not forget they came to power in twenty twenty two on the basis of saying, Hey, we're gonna be transparent, we're gonna be open, we're gonna be honest, we're not gonna hide stuff from you. And also, by the way, we trust the advice of public servants. Well, how about guys, I don't know, maybe putting this stuff into practice that could be nice. And there's one more thing too. You know, all of this is play out today.
The Treasurer had that Crimsworthy press conference, and one question kept ringing in my head. Where or where is the opposition in all of this?
Do we even have an opposition these days? I mean this kind of issue.
We've got this big release in the incoming government briefing that tells us the actual truth about the state of things, not what Chalber's in Albaneze. He want us to think. Well, I don't know, I mean, call me crazy, but it seems like the sort of thing that Susan Lay might have hopped on as an issue, or maybe the shadow treasure ted O'Brien, Well, look he did to in his defense. He set out a media release late in the morning
around eleven fourteen. But as far as I can tell, and I watched the news all day, that was pretty much all we heard from the opposition. I have to wonder why wasn't everyone in shadow cabinet out hopping on this issue, saying typical La, they're addicted to spending and taxing you more. This is politics one oh one, and I gotta say this opposition needs to spend less time talking about itself and start coming up with solutions for in Australia that, as that leaked briefing reveals, is going
badly off track. Anyway, enough of that, let's move on to China. This is the big story of the day, and you know, in some senses this may be the defining story of the century.
Now.
After landing in Beijing earlier, this evening tomorrow is, by the way, the big day. Anthony albines, he gets to see Jijin Ping again. And you gotta feel bad for the Prime Minister because this was all supposed to be such a big and special event. Yes, the Prime Minister was supposed to go to sleep tonight and is absolutely not bugged hotel suite with visions of being called a handsome boy dancing in his head. But Albanize's apparent pivot to China could be knocked off balance by some very
recent history and his own doing. What to remind you of this little moment from the last federal election campaign, remember this when the Prime Minister barged onto ABC Talk radio in Darwin at four to twelve pm in the afternoon or because he was trying to beat Peter Dutt into the punch about an announcement about the Port of Darwin.
Could you write the headline for me on this announcement today.
Australia needs to own the Port of Darwin.
So are you buying back the lease of the Port of Darwin or not.
Well, what we're doing is trying to get to say if there's a private buyer through particularly superannuaction tons that we've had discussions with.
Three years Prime Minister to deal with the port lace. What would you say to local voters who might say this is an election stunt.
That is something that we have had a consistent view on.
Well, they had a consistent view on it, not that they did anything about it for the first three years that they were in government, and it somehow only became an issue in the minutes, the literal minutes before Peter Dutton, the then opposition leader, was supposed to announce the coalition's own policy on the Port of Darwin. You got to ask why didn't they do something about it before? But hey, you know what they say, no time like the present.
Now this seemed like a clever bit of campaigning. But now this has come back to bite Albinizi. The whole thing seems to be putting a little bit of a damper.
That's right.
On his trip, there was a little warning of the Chinese social media from a Chinese social media influencer today who you bet cleared this post with head office. There's a guy called Lou wen Jing, and he used to edit a Chinese propaganda rag called Voice of the Strait, and he put it out there on Chinese social media that any attempt to retake the port could provoke countermeasures.
His words, he has written, quote, if the Australian side insists on tearing up the lease agreement, the Chinese side may take countermeasures such as restricting Australian companies market access in China or tightening imports of key resources such as iron ore unquote. Well, you know, we've seen this movie before and we all remember how that all played out
under the Morrison government. But it seems like now that poor Anthony Albanezi's in the chair all this foreign policy stuff, it's really hard and he can't seem to catch a break because guess what, He's been copying it for being too soft on the Chinese. Now he's copying it from China for being too tough on him.
You can't win.
The Prime Minister was asked about this in a press conference in Shanghai today.
Can I ask you, are you concerned about that kind of blowback if you go through with your election commitment.
The answer to that is no. We had a very clear position that we want the port to go into Australian ownership. We're being clear about it, we're going orderly about it, and we will go through that process.
The whole press conference here in Shanghai was absolutely fascinating because the Prime Minister was flanked by business leader leaders like Twiggy Forrest, all eager to do more business in China. But the big elephant in the room, the fact that China is a totalitarian state with aims to dominate the Pacific, if not the globe. Well that could be ignored. And I have to say credit to this journalist in the press pack who asked this question picking up on the
theme that we talked about last night. That is just what and are not the actions of a friend?
Well, is your message about the circumnavigation of Australia by the Chinese flotilla, live fire drills and suspected surveillance ships, no watching talents, mandsaber?
Is this an actual friend?
Well? With regard to the second question, that would be nothing unusual that has happened in the past, And I'll continue to assert Australia's national interest as I do.
Nothing unusual that has happened in the past. Well, okay, I mean, look, lots of things have happened in the past. Pearl Harbor happened in the past, the Black Death happened in the past. Past Steel Day which the French celebrate today, that happened in the past. But that doesn't mean we
just brush these things aside. I mean this answer here that the Prime Minister gave here is disgraceful and it is part of this incredible pattern that he seems to have of any time China does anything that is offensive to Australian interests, to Western interests, to the interests of liberal democracies, he says, ah, well, you know, stuff kind of happens. You know, ships surfcum navigate Australia all the time, ship's fire off missiles all the time. These sorts of
things happen. But of course when it's the West, when it's the United States, when it's Donald Trump, who will talk about in a moment, well that that is not the action of a friend anyway. I don't know if the Sky News app by the way, download it if you haven't already, because it is absolutely great. I don't know if that app works in China. But the traveling press pack also noticed another thing we talked about last night, and that is the subtle poss of labor towards China
and away from the US. Though whether that's now going to happen with Darwin on the table, we'll see.
Just to go back to what you were saying before about stability with China, chooting ping president, she seems to be positioning China as a more stable alternative? Is that an assessment that you share, and that's an alternative to the US to.
Kind of I don't draw alternatives. What I do is I want to see a stable and secure region. I think that's in the interest of everyone in the Indo Pacific. But that's an approach I take to global politics as well.
Stable, that's prime Minister. Do you understand what is going on here?
All right?
Stability is not good if that means that China winds up dominating the Pacific, because you know what, that's not good for us here in Australia. Stability is actually quite bad if it means that China's strength and power winds up growing in the Pacific. What's necessary here, I think, is to understand the fact that sometimes in life you need to pick your friends, stick with them and push back.
That doesn't necessarily mean you're going to fight a war, but it does mean you're going to stand up for Australian interests. Australian interests which are closely tied to not only the United States but of liberal democracies around the world, and included in that has to be the country of Taiwan, which is of course under constant threat from the People's Republic of China. Now this is a thing, This is not Prime Minister.
I hope you're.
Watching a both sides issue. You cannot both sides this question. And I want to bring this in here because earlier today I had a chat to John Lee. Now he's a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and he is, among other things, was the Foreign ad Minister's lead advisor on the twenty seventeen Foreign policy white Paper. Now I talked to him for the Daily Telegraph newspaper and you can read more about this in tomorrow's paper. But this line he told me struck me and I wanted to share it with you.
Now.
John Lee told me quote, it is one thing to assert Australian diplomatic independence China, not Trump's America. Is the dangerous and more serious structural disruption to regional and global peace and stability that Anthony Albinizi seems more comfortable with Chinese policy rather than US policy is something he needs to explain to the Australian electorate. And moreover, John Lee
said there was a bipartisan mindset. Only a few years ago that Australia needed to diversify its economic interests away from China for the national resilience and as a hedge against Chinese economic coercion which will occur again in the future. Anthony Albanisi, he said, seems to have abandoned that position. Well, how true that is it? I mean, seriously, don't you remember when COVID happened. And I don't want to talk about COVID, but when that happened, that was the big
thing that we talked about. We said, universities, get off the drip of Chinese students, diversify yourself, everybody's supply chains, don't get everything from China. The risk is just to be everything coming from China. Well, we know the position that puts you into it. That was the position that we were put in a week one. As a result of that, we said, as a nation, we're not going to do that anymore. But apparently here we are, and without any consultation or taking it to the election or
having a you know, national conversation. To use one of my least favorite expressions, we are going all in on China. More trade with China, not less. Okay, Well, let's give the Prime Minister for a moment the benefit of the doubt on this, because he does seem to be stock in this old mindset that says if the West, if Australia just has enough free trade with China, China will become a freer and more peaceful nation. Well, this is
a mistake that has driven decades of China policy. Through allowing Beijing to join the WTO, through the aftermath the TMN Square disaster, to the great cover up around COVID and everything else from influenced buying scandals to the theft of intellectual property and so much more. We know that this whole idea that if we just expose the totalitarian Chinese communist government to Western liberal democracy and trade with them and the people get rich, whether they're going to
become or liberal, that hasn't worked. It has been just the opposite. This was a fantasy that we would and in fact what has happened, honestly, if you think about it, is we've become a bit more like China than China has become like us. And you don't need to go very far to see examples of that. You know, we saw that start during COVID. We see it today with the increasing realms of Internet surveillance and the e Safety Commissioner and the Great Australian Firewall that's coming our way.
Although this is a sort of a fantasy, though we've seen this fantasy for decades.
It has been.
Espoused for decades by the likes of academics such as Hugh White, and this notion was on full display today when Anthony Albanizi addressed the Shanghai business launch. Cameras weren't allowed in apparently, but he said, quote, this is Albanesi speaking. He said, quote, there is no fixed model for a stabilized relationship. There's that word stable again. Our job is to make sure that we manage our relationship so that
we can contribute to regional and global peace and prosperity. Yet, I ask you what is missing from that statement, which weirdly sounds like it could have been written by the CCP, by ggpings Comm's people. Tell you what's missing? Any talk of what it means for us to be a liberal democracy, upholding liberal values, the sort of thing we are supposed
to do in the Pacific and around the globe. It's what our alliance with the US is supposed to be not just a security arrangement, but an alliance of people and nations with shared values. Now, yeah, I know that Donald Trump tests all of this a bit. I'm not going to argue that now. But again, Australia, we have to ask ourselves what are the alternatives. Alliances are not a one white way street. An alliance has a much deeper philosophical and strategic meaning. It is a mutual commitment
to the defense of our shared values. And as we know, and this has been going on since before Trump, the world is dividing into totalitarian and free states. Again, this has been happening for a long time now, since the end of the Cold War. And Australia and the Albanese government cannot walk both sides of the fence any longer. We will as a country have to make a choice. We will have to ask ourselves what happens if Taiwan is invaded and the US has a right to ask
us as an alliance partner for support. Remember, if China dominates specific it is uniformly bad for US. This is not a good outcome. Anthony ALBANESEI talks about Australian values, but he does not seem to know what they are anymore, and he certainly can articulate them. This is why this Labor Prime Minister ironically seems so focused on the market and free trade in his talks with China, because I
guess that's easier. But Labor also, of course, has a long tradition of anti Americanism and isolationism that is coming to the fore. We saw this the other day with Albanisius John Kurtin lecture, and now we are seeing it repeat again at a very dangerous time. Jijinping has us just where he wants us, and he must be laughing as he sees the fault lines appear in an alliance officially founded by Robert Menzies back in nineteen fifty one.
I just cannot.
Believe that Albo is falling for all the false flattery. Now, Matt Canavan and Nikree is gonna be coming with me after the break.
Don't go anywhere, did my guys pull marihi Aunt, Gambia in South Australia is the next location for a town Sunday, the twenty seventh of July, and I'd love you to join me in the audience ourtown at skynews dot com. Do I use the white I said this an email. It is one of the great hidden treasures of Australia. Halfway between Melbourne and Adelaide and Bang on the Pliswagonna Bay Sunday the twenty seventh. Mount Gambia a town at skottews dot com dot Au.
Now back to James, thank you, Paulie, and yeah, Mount Gambier is fantastic. Hatch ass to go there a couple of years ago. It is amazing. Now we're going to bring a panel in in just a second, but also first before that, I've got some really exciting news for you. I'm thrilled to bring a little news here to you for our many thousands of regional viewers who rely on Sky for all the hard news and opinion that they
can't get elsewhere. Today here we at Sky News Australia have entered into a new multi year agreement with Network ten so that we can continue broadcasting our free to air Sky News regional channel into regional markets across New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland. Great news for everybody out there. So if you're sitting at home in the regions right now on the couch. That hello, and we can't wait to keep bringing you more of our leading political coverage,
breaking news, sport and opinion. All right, let's get into it now with the panel National Center Llen p Senator Matt Canavan and Lord Mayor of Melbourne Nick Reese. And you know what, I have a feeling we're gonna have a bit of a fiery evening here tonight here, because there's so much to talk about.
Gentlemen.
Thank you so much for joining me here. Let's kick off here. I just had a big, long rant. I guess you can call it about China and the Prime Minister's speech time in China here, and one thing I want to talk to both of you about here, and Matt, maybe i'll start with you here. Alexander Downer, the former Foreign Minister, has written a brilliant piece in the Australian newspaper today and he said that Australia is retreating. We are coming critical commentators and not contributors to the security
of free peoples. And this week the Prime Minister is rushing to catch up with China's unelected dictator Jijinping before he's even met the President of the United States. The symbolism is stark. Matt Canavan. Even if we take Donald Trump out of the equation, I do find the way that Labor is treating this trip as entirely a trade mission and in ignoring basically all of the national security and geopolitical implications of this are really kind of disturbing.
And I feel like he is breaking us away ever so slightly from the United States, and Beijing must be looking at this and laughing.
Yeah, look, there's some of that. I agree with James. I'm not quite as idealistic as some of the commentators in the newspaper. I mean, I'm not so sure it's our job to spread democracy around the world, and even if we wanted to, couldn't. And it's not even our job to necessarily secure the borders of every country in the world. Again, we just can't do that, and there are many conflicts in the world we do not get involved in. I squarely believe that we must conduct our
foreign policy according to what's in the best interests of Australia. Now, it isn't the best interests of our country to countries that show aggression. Aggression or seek to pressure and bully other countries are not allowed to get away with it. So that's something we do need to combat and something that I think is being completely missed here in as I say, this flowery, idilistic language about democracy and freedom.
It's that right now, as we stand right now, the tactics, the industrial tactics of the Chinese Communist Party have put one thousands of Australians out of work in the last year and there are thousands more on the chopping block if their practices continue, and there's almost zero commentary on this.
It was because of the aggressive Chinese financed qulified powerstations Indonesia that ten thousand Australians in the nickel industry lost their jobs last year and now they're pretty much every smelter in the country, from copper to aluminium to lead and zinc is un a threat because China is aggressively
seeking to dominate those industrial supply chains. They're doing someone a way that is clearly inconsistent with international trade rules, and there's not anyone raising this issue or the government
raising it with China. And as I say, look, democracy would be great, but as I say, it's not our job to spread democracy to the building of buddiest of China, but it is our job to protect our own jobs, and our own interests, and our own industry, our own manufacturing capability, and hardly anyone is taking up that fight right now.
Well, no, look bad, I agree with you.
You know, this isn't some idea that we need to idealistically turn China into some sort of liberal democracy. But I think what we want to do is make sure that they're not dominating the specific And you know, Nick Rees, I want to take this over to either because the Senator makes a really good point here about all those jobs in critical minerals industries, in call and all of
these things. Part of the reason, of course, is because of China's really sharp and you know, unethical and really an awful lot of times illegal according to various trade courts practices. But part of that too is because this country, in the Albanezi government, has insisted so much on net zero and other environmental regulations that has meant we also
simply cannot compete. So it's sort of funny that we are, on the one hand saying we want to do more business with China, but at the same time we're tying one hand behind our back on this.
Book James, I thought your editorial earlier was very entertaining and thank you, thank you. I read Alexander Danna's face in The Australian today, which look if it was entertaining as well.
I'm fortunately on both scores.
I think you've got it wrong though, and unfortunately, you know, the conservative side of politics in Australia has got a long history of getting it badly wrong when it comes to dealing with China. I mean, probably most famously there was GoF Whitlam's trip to China in nineteen seventy one, which you know, Billy McMahon wasn the Liberal Prime Minister, and the Conservatives all piled in and criticized.
Weekends for beating China.
Of course, shortly thereafter, Richard Nixon visited China, opened up relations with the West and it was one of Nixon's finest moments as presidents. So, you know, more recent times you've got like Scott Morrison who thought, you know, beating up on China and criticizing Australians of Chinese background was somehow a pathway to elections.
Completely we're going to pull until here were on that history. Sorry, long history getting sorry, Nicholas Ris. We have to put pull you up on that here, and I think I think that wants to hop in on this too. But you know we're not talking about this is what Leverol is does. They always say, if you criticize the CCP,
you're criticizing Chinese people. Nothing could be further from the truth that Scott Morrison, I think, did it add little job of asking a very simple question which the world deserves an answer to, which is where did COVID come from?
Open the books?
Well, it was clearly part of you asked that question and.
Question and it was something that has been the subject of many investigations, academic studies, and of course it's the right question. But along enough, that's not what it was about. It was about Scott Morrison trying to muscle up against China's ridiculous Franklin ways to try and win an election.
It was disasterus on both fronts. Happened.
Morrison wanted to let's let let's let that talk. Did let that talk?
Well, what actually happened was James absolutely right. It wasn't actually even Scott Morrison. It was the foreign mister Mary's pain asked a reasonable question about a need for an investigation to the origins of COVID, and in response to that, the Chinese governments issued fourteen demands through the Australian media. May I say not to Australian of the Australian gup to change our laws on a bunch of things and all else. But and I think any self respecting gub
and hopefully this guver would do the same. They're about to be tested potentially on this, but hopefully any Istralian government would tell another foreign comment, No, we don't just respond to bullying and threats like China tried to do
to us. And so they did. They did. They did ban our coal, they banned our wheat, they ban a bali and guess what, we didn't miss a beat, despite the Labor Party saying the sky was going to fall, and I remember Murray Whattt in the Senate saying, oh, the Australian coal industry is going to be devastated because Matt Canavan is not toning up with China. Well it didn't happen because we saw our colder elsewhere. China was hurt by not buying our coal and they eventually had
to back down. So it's a massive victory for Australia by doing that. And second title, Labor Party not standing up for our country on that, because you're about to be tested as well now because China has just said that if you go through, if Anthony Ebanizi goes through his election commitment to take back the Port of Darwin, they are going to place trade sanctions on us. So
what is the Labor Party going to do? I hope, I hope they deliver on their election commitment and they stand to such threats and buildings, because there's no way any self respecting country should let other nations dictate terms to it like China has tried to done the last couple of years. And thank god for Scott Morrison for not kneeling over, not backing down on what is our sovereign nation and independence.
And I mean this is this is the thing that Nicholas rees. Let's just you know, if you look across specific the Chinese Communist Party, the CCP government led by Ji Jinping, I want to be very clear about what we're talking about, has used all sorts of aggressive tactics, built islands where they're not supposed to build islands up, you know, intimidated the Philippines intimidated, Vietnam intimidated, all sorts of other countries with navies, with coastguard fleets. They're doing
similar things here. At some point, you know, free countries have to simply say enough, don't.
We Well, let's hope we don't, Actually, James, let's hope that China continues to be a rational, self interested because Australia has got very rich, become very prosperous off the back of the economic rise of China.
I mean, after that.
Whitlam visit, we've seen five decades of phenomenal economic growth of China and Australia has been one of the world's biggest beneficiaries of that. We enjoy incredibly good, prosperous lives in this country thanks in no small part to the rise of China economically. And so what you see in any I been easy traveling as Prime Minister to China is a very pragmatic, self interested, independently minded prime minister,
putting Australia's interests first. We've done very well out of China problem, and.
Let's we continue to do so.
We continue to do so.
Let's let's let's let's let that be the last word, Matt, I think I got a lot to say on this, and I do too, and I think the viewers at host.
I'm just going to say that the problem I've got is I've always and I was a resources minister wanted to see a good relation of China. That wouldn't let me visit. This was long before the COVID issue, but they wouldn't even let the streaming to go there. So remember, the original threats happened because we had the temerity to pass a foreign interference law.
Nick.
That's that's when the that's when the threats and bullings from China started, a law that the Labor Party supported. Uh And so again we've got to stand up to this sort of bullying. But the issue we've got now is we're far too dependent on China. So I don't understand why the primise for spending his longest visit in China and not visiting India or Vietnam or Indonesia and other countries, because we clearly need to again exactly let's.
Look, hang on, hang on a second, let's not forget mad but China. China is bigger than Australia's next five trade parts.
That's because the.
Risk we have business is that big.
Don't we stop this car?
No no, no, no, no no no no no no no. Risk management.
It is not risk management. It is diversification. We need a diverse And I want to talk we need to resky our questions here.
And I want to.
Talk about two because this is also a great story here, this story about the ABC puts it an FOI request to the Treasury and they find out guess what, oh yeah, no, no, no, sorry, we are spending too much money. Oh yeah, we are going to need to raise taxes. Oh yeah, that one point two billion house target, I don't know who's going to build those houses isn't going to happen. But Matt Canavan, let me start with you here. Why is the government
so secretive? They were acting like this is a matter of national security that we can't know what Treasury thinks about the forecast for Australians. This seems, you know, to be against the idea of a very transparent government.
Senator, Well, look, I'm not going to be hypocritically James. I mean all governments don't like to reveal advice from their department's agencies. We would be the same. I think that's particularly the major issue here. The sad thing I think for our country is that we have a premier economic advisory body who has given up, given up on
spending restraint and just telling the government raised taxes. I mean, I've said on this show before that pre COVID, your government, the Australian government spent to four hundred and seventy seven billion dollars a year four and seventy eight four and seventy eight billion dollars a year. So and now seven years later, in the last budget, this financial year, you're set to spend seven hundred and seventy seven billion dollars three hundred billion dollars a year more on an average basis.
Now they are only about ten million households in Australia, so that's an extra thirty thousand dollars per household. So every house watching this show tonight, your government is spending thirty thousand dollars a year more. That's not the total spending.
They're spending that more compared to COVID. Now are we getting thirty thousand dollars a year more extra services and need Treasury saying hey, maybe it's a few items we could cut back on here we could have some efficiencies and so that we don't place such a burden on the Austraian taxpay because at least there's one bit of honesty advice is if we keep going with the spending we've got, taxes are going to have to go up.
We can't keep borrowing like this as we are, and I don't think Austraine people have been prepared for that, and the government hasn't been honest about that. And we need to have some ideas here that are not just about raising taxes but actually get about government spending within their means.
Yeah, I mean, Nicholas Real. So that makes an awful lot of good points there, you know, putting aside the secrecy of it. We're not in a great position if we are going to have to raise taxes and we can't get all these houses built and all these promises that you know, we've had a great economic management and so the housing phrases well, you know, according to at least as treasury bureaucrat, and I think probably a lot of people out there just with their own eyes think that ain't going to happen.
Look, I actually could it. It was a good thing for Australian that this advice has become public. I think we should be able to openly and transparently see the
advice that you know ministers are receiving. On most issues, I totally accept there would be exceptions to that, you know, on sensitive defense matters commercial dealings where the government would be prejudiced if the information was disclosed, But on so many things I think we're better off as a democracy if the advice is out there in the public.
Doesn't mean that the.
Government we elect needs to follow the advice all the time. In fact, you know, we elect them to be our democratically democratic leaders, not just to follow the bureaucratic advices on but actually putting that advice out there is a good thing.
I continue.
The City of Melbourne, we've got a council meeting tomorrow night. It was the number of things we're voting on to make decisions on the advice of the public servants at the City of Melbourne is actually publicly available for people to see on the website. They put a report and a recommendation to counsel. Tomorrow night we vote on whether we follow those recommendations, not follow it, or do a variation on the advice with God. But it's all out in the open and it's a really good system.
Look, I can see the larger of that. Gentlemen, stick around, don't go to where it'll come back more Monday Night Fights here on Palmer Live. Now, you don't go anywhere either, because we're gonna have a lot more fired up debate after the break. Welcome back to the program. James Borrow here hosting Monday Night Fights on Paul Murray Live. We've got Nicholas Reese and Senator Matt Canavan here. We've had a lot of fired up debate before the break. We're
gonna have some fired up debate in this segment too. Hey, let's just move back Jents real quick because I just want to talk and get one more little China topic knocked over here because Matt. This one here, I think is also important. Port of Darwin, the Prime Minister said right before the election. He said, I want to take that back and it was sort of throwaway thing to Gazump Peter Dutton, very clever. It doesn't seem so clever now because it seems to be interfering with his trip.
But frankly, the port of Darwin getting that back in our hands. That can't be a bad idea Canada.
Well, look I write that before James. If nothing else the problem Minister did Mike a promise to the Australian people at the election that he would do this, take that back into Australian hands. I think it's something that the Australian people have long wanted to see. It's an extremely important and vital port for our nation's interests. We have a large naval base there. I should stress that the Chinese owned or Chinese least part of the port is not where a defense assets are. But be that
as it may, it's still very sensitive location. It's right next door, and really it makes sense I think for that to be in Australian hands now. As I said earlier, I don't think we should in any way here. It's a bit of a test the newly elected Albanezi government. We certainly shouldn't see our government's reneg on a promise the Australian people based on a demand from another country. And I also think if it is true that China wants to be a friendly nation to us, that this
makes perfect common sense. I mean, can you imagine if an Australian infrastructure company, say Mcquarie Bank sought to take a lease over the Tjin port near Beijing. I mean, let's it's just not.
I can't see that. I can't see that happen.
What's good for the ghost should be good for the Ganda, and it's in our national interest and that should be respected from out the country and should like no one is talking about taking it back.
No, of course, not something like that.
We don't.
It's just outing.
But we should pursue our national interests.
Correct, correct, And just on that national interest question there, you know, Nicholas Rees, you say, and you made an eloquent case that really trade with China is the thing that makes us all rich and everybody be happy.
And that's the.
Alb and easy line here. But what about this idea about critical infrastructure, Because there are controversies in a lot of countries, the United States here as well, and people are passing legislation in some places, say foreign governments, particularly hostile governments and governments that are totalitary and decartorships like China cannot own critical infrastructure because they have the ability to cut us off or make trouble for us in times of would you be supportive of you and as
you support all of this trade with Beijing, also say you know there needs to be limits on what they can know in terms of infrastructure, far land resources here in Australia as a matter of our sovereignty, not as a matter of trade, but a sovereignty.
Short answer is yes, James, I do support those measures. I mean, I think the Port of Darwin is a strategically important asset for our country and it's not surprising that our Prime Minister and then Opposition leader Peteton both made promises to see that asset return to Australian ownership after the election and Prime Minister One Anthony Alberti and
now he's going to move to do that. And look, I'm sure something that will come up in discussions in Beijing, and I'm confident that the Prime Minister will explain very calmly and rationally the reasons for doing so. And as I think that has quite eloqantly said, China will do the same thing for their nationally strategically important asset. And so look, the port's one good example of something that fits in that category. And yes, I do think there
are other assets that fit in that category. As well, and so again, what's what's you need to have a framework that you used to apply to make these decisions, and so that includes things like things that are important to preserving our sovereignty and things that ultimately serve our national interest to remain in Australian hands.
Absolutely right, Hey, that's pretty well said there. You say that's eloquent. But hey, let's just end on a fun note here, because there has been the FIFA Club World Cup Final and it was visited by none other than your favorite President Donald J. Trump, and he had this thought about whether we should call it soccer or football. Have a look at this.
Johnny's a friend of mine.
He's done such a great job with the league and with soccer or if they would call it football.
But I guess we call it soccer.
I'm not sure that change could be made very easily.
What if we make an executive order we can only say football from now on.
I think we could do that, and I think I could do that.
Quick responses from both of you, Matt Canavan, soccer or football?
What should be called?
Well, Matt, I've got a ten year old son who's mad about football and that's what he demands. It to be called. So I'll have to back that one. How about Donald Trump on the on the celebration stage with the team. It's not like it. Trump's just all about getting there and making that.
It was an iconic shot. I don't know if we've got it. We've got it there on the screen for you. There this guy.
You know when everything was politics, you could churn out the images, say it and down. Nicholas reaes very quickly. Soccer or football? What are we calling it?
Oh?
Look, if I'm at a soccer function, I of course call it football. If I'm at an Aussie rules or rugby function, I call the round ball game soccer. So you know you used to write names for the writer audiences. Is how I Very diplomatic, gentlemen.
We're gonna have to leave with here, Nicholas Rees, Matt Canavan, thanks so much for joining me tonight on Paulbury Live. Now after the break, I'm gonna show you a funny video from the United States that you're not.
Gonna want to miss. Stick around.
Hey thereon James Borrow here for Paulbury Live. Gosh, it's been great to be here tonight with Nick Reese and Matt canavan. We've had a lot of fun. Well the fun ain't orient. We've got a little news item I want to share with you before we go. It's from the United States. You know, I always love to share news from the US with you. Check this out here. According to our friends at the New York Post, there's a mountain lion on the loose in upstate New York,
specifically in the city of Rochester. And this man here, yep, he says he encountered this mountain lion on his street. And I'm gonna tell you what. He gave one of the best play by play interactions of a of an interaction with a mountain lion.
I think I've ever.
Heard, not that I've heard a lot of them, but I think this one has to be number one. Here's what this gentleman told his local news station about the encounter.
Heard, I heard, Rau. I felt I felt down, RAU. I know to keeping pushing, I know that.
Curtis Jones says he was walking near Robber Street late Wednesday when he saw people running from what appeared to be a large wild cat.
I thought, I see the people.
I'll just see some big just walking just right over here.
Right everybody, but way right over here, I swear, I promised him right over there.
They just it's a row.
I'll just I'll just cut walk.
I've seen it, seen me see it, so in my head, I'm like, no, I gotta go, man, I'm about like this bit.
It was it was it was it was just walking Slytherin like it was. I don't know, man, it.
Was just walking and slithering. I got my base bat. Never seen anything like that. But I haven't hed a mountain lion in upstate New York either, But you know, who knows what else is out there? And thank you so much to the New York Post and our friends in the local news environment for that. You never know what you're going to wind up getting when you pick up the local news in the.
New York Post.
Anyway, stay safe out there, watch out for mountain lions, and if you do see a mountain lion, get your baseball bat and say ur ah, I'm gonna say or are because guess what the late debate is coming up right now