From the Skying Center. This is Paul Murray, Live.
Good.
I'm Paul Murray. Welcome to an opinion show where mine is the opinion, but we follow the data, we follow the details, and what an extraordinary piece of television you have just watched. Congratulations to Chris Yulman all of the team behind the scenes who put that together. Because for many of us, the reality is that we know that there are many forks in the road when it comes
to our energy system. But to see it all in one place at one time, explaining what some of the financial or environmental consequences are when we choose one path over another, when other parts which are being reused in other parts of the world but ignored here is a perfect way of looking at things. In many ways, I believe that the past hour that you've just seen here on Sky News should of course be seen by as
many Australians as possible. That is why the documentary that you have just seen is up now at sky News dot Au, skynews dot com dot Au, the lead story, the top spread that documentary as far as you possibly can. Chris Yulman, as a reporter, is right up there. This is something that he has been desperate to tell as a story for a long time, to have the time
to tell the story, because it can be complicated. But because of his skill and the skill of the people who just put together the hour of television that you just watched, you're able to see it in bite sized chunks, You're able to see it as a full piece of work, and you're able to see things explained, including I just want to go back over a couple of points. They're going to sit with me when I look forward to
sharing this documentary with the people in my life. It's not about trying to push people towards one form of technology or the other. It's about the reality that the cost of transition has always been the central question question that we have never really been asked. We've been asked about whether we should transition, but to be truly aware of what the cost of it really matters. Now again,
the national energy greed is complicated. My apologies to the people in Western Australia who have their own system and are not befuddled by what is taking place on the East Coast of Australia as well as South Australia. But Chris explains that one of the central things that we constantly are told, which is renewables is the cheapest form
of electricity. The problem is if they were the only form of electricity, well then maybe that ends up being true, but that's after the billions have been spent, in fact, close to a trillion dollars to build all of it and to have the batteries that back it up till then there has to be stuff that works at night, or stuff that works when the weather does not assist
other forms of renewable energy. Thankfully, through the power of television graphics, he was able to explain how this works, where every part of our electricity grid helps define what every other part of it costs. I'll let him explain better than I just did.
In this high stakes game, the lowest cost generator bids first to meet demand. Other generators follow in cost order as the stack feels. But if the last megawatt needed for supply to match demand is three hundred dollars, then that's what every single player in this game gets paid. Let's underline this fact. It's the highest cost of generation that sets the price of power, which is why this slogan is so deeply misleading.
Renewable energy is incredibly cheap because its fuel is free because it's the sunshine and the wind.
But plugging the generation gaps they leave to build a reliable electricity system is proving remand akably expensive.
That is the cost of transition. All those that are for a long time said this is the only option, it's the only option that we need to do to save the planet. Firstly, Australia is one percent of global emissions, China thirty three percent. To move from the system that they want to move away from, mainly coal, to the full renewable system, well, of course it's going to cost hundreds of billions of dollars. It also requires huge swathes
of regional Australia to be changed forever. Another perfect example excellently explained.
In the documentary The endgame here is to achieve net zero. Push and roads and clearing forests and fragmenting forests is an oxymoron towards that goal of trying to achieve net zero, because the first thing we need to be doing is keeping trees in the ground.
Stephen has used his training as a cartographer to map the number of wind and solar farms that will need to be built on the national electricity market to hit the government targets stretching from far North Queensland, through New South Wales, Victoria west to Port Lincoln in South Australia and across the Bass Strait to Tasmania.
Now, every time I've made this point in the past, it's thrown into some sort of being of climate denialism for those that are half paying attention, or maybe watching us for the first time, or maybe checking backing with me for the first time in a while. I am in no denial that seven billion people on the planet, multiple industrial revolutions, is going to do something quite substantial
to the natural environment. There's no question about it. More people who need to be fed than ever before, house than ever before, kept warm or cool than ever before, no question. But Australia is one percent of the world's problem. China, under the Paris Agreement, is able to continue to pollute at an increased level until whatever they want until twenty third, meaning the chances of them polluting even more between now
and twenty thirty is almost certain. While between now and twenty thirty is when we're going to be cutting down trees to replace them with wind farms. As a way of finding a different way of electrifying our grid. We're going to need more power than even what the current amount of power produced by things like coal and gas will actually do. Why because we want to electrify everything. You may have heard conversations about kitchen stoves, the push
towards electric vehicles. Well, all of those things, of course need to be powered, meaning the current grid is not big enough. In fact, we'd have to grow it by up to four times to potentially have one big enough and good enough and reliable enough to actually keep the lights on, keep the cars charged, and to keep the water boiling. Another quick little one here too, which is
when Chris Human explains about solar arms. Now again, I am not against any of this technology, but the reality is you need so much of it in a continent the size of Australia, as opposed to a postage stamp in a part of Europe that can throw the extension cord over to another country, or a state in the United States that can throw an extension cord over to the next state in the United States, which has, among other things, nuclear power as a key part of the technology.
So Australia is trying to swing for the fences, but it's going to have to end up building a fence that's four times higher than it currently is in order to actually have the amount of electricity required for a population that of course will exponentially grow. Remember the expectations are that this country could get to fifty million people by the year of twenty sixty. So not only do you have to replace what was, you need to build what is, and you need to prepare for what will be.
Again Chris Human explaining about solifi arms and why when they work, they're very good, but when they don't, it is a big hole in the market.
This solar farm sits on fifty hectares, It has eighty two thousand solar panels, and at peak generation will deliver twenty four megawats, and that would be on a day like today, a bright sunny day in the middle of the day. But tonight the sun will go down and.
It will deliver zero And across the course of a year you'll get thirty percent of its plated capacity, or a little over seven megawatts.
And that's the issue with this kind of generation. By its nature, it is off or often than it's on.
It's the point, now I get why when people who don't have to live with the consequences of either they're parts of Australia changing. You don't see many parks or doggie parks in built up areas of the cities being changed. In fact, if you wanted to put one win anywhere near a teal electric you know what the response would be. So it's all pushed out into regional Australia, largely punished
because they don't vote green or labor. But more importantly, as you hear the reality is that the mere size of some of these things, but they don't work twenty four to seven. And remember everything that gets produced by renewable energy has to be stored somewhere, meaning batteries, and they have not developed the batteries that would be able to store enough of the energy for long enough for
you to be able to use things through the night. Instead, you have to have lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots of batteries. Perhaps if the government wants to be honest and say, look, what we'd really love is you to be totally self sufficient. Something on your roof, something in your garage, and that's it. You're not part of
the grid. Okay, But what about for manufacturing. But of course, the central concern that I have had, no matter what names I have been called or what fingers have been pointed as people see to dismiss the conversation of the true cost of net zero or the cost of transition, has been the people who suffer because their bills have gone up. Their bills have gone up because there is all of this stuff that needs to be built. It will either be paid for by the government or it
will be paid for by the private companies. The private companies, of course, will just pass it on to the customer. And when you're a customer who's on the pension, this is what happens.
This is what I call a payday killer. It's come in at one thousand and seventy three dollars and thirty one cents.
My pay, which is the pay of.
Most age pensioners, is around one thousand, one hundred and forty four dollars. This leaves me after I pay this bill, seventy one dollars and nine cents.
It was a spectacular piece of journalism. It was an important video for you to see and again congratulations to Chris Woman and everyone who put it together. It is up now. It's skynews dot com dot AU. If you haven't already, there's a way to subscribe. It'll cost you just five dollars. Skynews dot com dot A U spread the word and spread that dot go. It was sensational to the rest of the day's news. Now, and of course this is an opinion show, as you will have
known by now. I have a strong opinion. I just don't want to shock people thinking we've gone from the straight documentary right into the deep end. But here we are, so let's get on with this. There is a plan for the federal government to censor the Internet. Sure, they talk about misinformation, but the plan is to censor the Internet. The government to decide what is and is not true, what you can and cannot post.
Now.
Of course they won't go after you. They will just make it effectively impossible for a social media company to keep posting from places where the government does not like. Essentially, think of this as a sort of toddler pester power idea to affect your capacity to read, see, and hear things that the government does not approve. And remember there is a certain side of politics which has used the word misinformation when they are winging when Australians don't vote
the way that they want to. For example, when they went from sixty forty yes to sixty to forty no. In the voice.
Misinformation, misinformation, misinformation, the.
Misinformation which is there so misinformation.
So last year they came up with a complicated piece of legislation. It was opposed by everyone from the major television networks through to the ABC, from the Human Rights Commission through to the churches. This thing is very hard to find a friend anywhere because most people, in their analysis of this, believe the definition of truth is one that shouldn't be held by government. It should be one that is openly contested, not versions of the truth, not
lies that people pretend are the truth. But as we know, there are those who used to say certain things about the planet, certain things about geography. But of course only once you're able to go and find where of the information are you able to actually learn new truths. Now, the federal government last year tried to put this in place. They weren't able to get the votes, so they pulled the bill. They came back this year and This week in the Senate is when the matters will be decided.
If not this week, then definitely next week. Well, we have been following the mats and I am pleased to tell you that at this moment, if everyone holds the line, there will be no ability for the Government and the Greens to get together to censor the Internet. David van is a former Liberal Party senator. We know that through scandal he made his way towards the cross bench, which now means he's free to vote whichever way he wishes. But on this one it will be no.
This bill as it currently stands has significant flaws that I will not be supporting.
Now, what does this matter, because the maths is all that ever matters in politics. How many seats that you win by what margin does not matter. It's just how many seats that you win, and in the case of the Senate, how many seats that you have. You need thirty nine seats to get a majority, ie to get something past. If it's thirty eight each, then the President of the Senate, which comes from the governing party, would
make a casting vote. So for thirty nine votes, that is what Labor and the Greens together want However, they only get to thirty six. There's a total of ten people who sit on the cross bench, ranging from Ralph Babbott as the United Australian Party, One Nation, Jackie Lamby, the former Jackie lamby a multiplicity of people who have
left the parties for which they were elected. Tonight, the number of cross benches who are going to be voting no is nine, meaning that there is no way right now that they are going to get to thirty nine. Will they have a final vote to determine no and put this bad idea to bed, or will they pull the bill for a second time. I'm talking about it
every night because it matters. Free. An open society that is able to get its information from as many sources as possible, including sources that are willing to truly challenge power, is the sign of a free society. Government telling you an adult what you can and can't see, but more importantly, what you can and can't post, is not a free society. So thank you David Van and many others on the cross bench who are holding the line. The one person
we have not heard from yet Lydia Thorpe. But even if she supports it, there still won't be enough votes fingers crossed, the vote takes place, the bill dies, and the idea of censoring the Internet is put in the bid. When it comes to lots of different issues, there is one thing that they all have in common. Every state in the country, regardless whether you have a new government, an old government, a liberal government, or a labor government,
ramping is a massive issue. It means that when you call triple O, you may or may not get an ambulance on time. Why because they may or may not be waiting in a Quean hospital. Why because there may or may not be a bed for the person who's in the back of the ambulance, Meaning that when you call trip below sometimes it can be a deadly scenario where one is not turning up. For families, the number of people they have to compete with to hold on to a rental property is more than ever before, firstly
because there's more people here than ever before. Secondly because there's fewer rental properties around than ever before, which means of course that many people are starting now to live on the fringes. And despite the fact that they earn money, despite the fact that they should be in a home, they are not the place they call home is a tent and as I've spoken about almost every night for the past couple of years, but we speak about it with regularity because I know you care about it. No
matter what the rest of the media thinks. Is the story of the day. It is the question of immigration now for those who are again maybe joining us for the first time because of the documentary. When I talk about it immigration, I do not care from whence people come. I do not care from what language they speak, and I do not care what God they believe in. I believe that, regardless of where you come from in the world, that you should unite around sensible principles and central principles
of this country. One where there is a freedom of expression, one where there is a fundamental respect for all genders, where there is the capacity for people to marry a person of their same sex, for someone to be able to follow a religion or not have a religion at all, and most importantly, for the law of the land to be the ultimate authority of behavior. But that's not what I talk about when I talk about immigration on this program. It's not about the cultural mix or the cultural changes.
Others can talk about that. The point is that Australia has twenty seven million people right now, but we do not have the infrastructure that can handle twenty seven million people. For example, is there places to live or there are enough ambulances, let alone places in schools and all the rest of it. Well, new report confirms what we have known all along. The majority of Australians think that this government has brought too many people into the country too quickly.
In fact, according to this report, almost half of Australians believe that migration is too high. Of the more than eight thousand people who were surveyed, forty nine percent believed that immigration levels were too high. Now, this is a major change from just last year when thirty three people agreed with the view that there was too much immigration. To give you an idea of how this has changed over time, have a look at this now again from
this group that did the survey. The blue line is the number of people who think that migration is too high. The last time that more people thought that it was too high than about right, you have to go back to two thousand and eighteen. You can see the changes post pandemic at twenty four percent thirty three percent in twenty twenty three and now forty nine percent. Fifty one
percent of people last year thought that we were about right. Now, after more than a million people have come in under the Albenze government's watch, the about right number has fallen to forty twenty two percent of people two years ago said that we had too few people come into the country.
That is now just nine percent. But despite the fact that the majority of Australians, while completely understanding that we are a country of migrants, want to pump the brakes about the number of people who are being brought in to add to a multiplicity of problems that this government is not willing to fix. What do you think the government asked itself today in question time? Well, nothing about that, of course.
My question is to the minister representing the Minister for Women. How are the Albanesi Labour Government's policies and reforms helping to close the gender pay gap and supporting women's economic security and equality.
My question is to the Minister for Industry and Science. Why is today's announcement of the first investments for the National Reconstruction Fund for Australian manufacturing and Australian jobs so important? And what risks are there to the future of these jobs.
My question is to the Treasurer why is decent pay such an important part of the alban Easy Labor government's efforts to help ease cost of living pressures. How does this approach differ from what has failed in the past.
My question is to the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, how is the alban Ezi labor government strengthening our international trade relationships to benefit Australian farmers.
Not to mention, of course, in fact that as we told you last night, three million people, three million people are close to homelessness. The Reserve Bank today has turned around and said that you can forget about the idea of an early interest rate cut. Most likely the first one will be in May, right on top of the federal election. My view is that even one reduction interustrates is not going to make people forget the twelve increases that have happened under this government, which is why the
Prime Minister needs to get back here. I get it. He's a global leader and it's very important to hold hands with a lame duck president or Justin Trudeau on his way out the door. As the Canadian Prime Minister. But of course he was there holding hands with the Chinese today, the handsome boy and the puppet master, saying that Australia was a perfect example of the way that nations should deal with China, which of course in the Albanese lang, which just means sit back and take it.
But of course, something that's been hurting the Prime Minister has been this attitude and this idea that basically life's pretty good for this bloke, so much so that he even asks for upgrades when he's flying family trips. Upgrade albow is starting to hurt him. I say this because there was an opinion poll where the headline was all about Quantis, all about Quantus and Quantus getting preferential treatment, hence the upgrades, but the real detail followed deeper into
the article. The red Bridge research puts the Labor and Coalition at fifty to fifty on a two party election. Inflation and the rising cost of living, as well as other grievances, are pushing the federal government into a place where they could lose the election. The polling found that fifty six percent of people who are planning to vote
for Labor are not fully committed. It puts simply is a soft vote potentially up for grabs by an opposing party, compared to just thirty one percent of people planning to vote for the Coalition or half of the people who are planning to vote for the Greens. So more people, if they say they're going to vote Coalition, are more committed to voting Coalition rather than Labor or the Greens.
The research also found that fifty one percent of voters believed that their future living standards would be worse or much worse in five years. This is compared to the period before the twenty twenty pandemic. All is not well in Australia, and we have a government that is telling
you things are way better than they actually are. I repeat, you have just seen tonight and been educated if you weren't already across the detail about the fantasy when it comes to changing from one sort of an electricity grid to another, that that actually costs a lot more money
than anyone was ever willing to tell you. And the reality is that it costs hundreds of billions of dollars to actually build this stuff, meaning that you end up having to pay ultimately as a customer We're in a scenario now where this government took away from ten million workers in the twenty twenty three budget an automatic fifteen
hundred dollar tax return. You would imagine that people like the age pensioner and ten million other people would much prefer fifteen hundred dollars than just pats on the back. Coming from Canberra. Meantime, I want to talk about Bunnings, the international institution that apparently the outgoing American ambassador is quite the fan of. Despite the fact that big box stores are something that is no stranger to anyone who's been seen or knows anything about the United States. We
love Bunnings. The fact that I'm not totally sure they're the greatest fan of mine, that's another story for another day. But amazingly, you may all have seen this story today that Bunnings using facial recognition cameras to stop people that don't want coming into the store coming into the store has breached a series of privacy laws. Here is the private EC commissioner explaining better than me.
There was no consent asked for or given. There was also no notice given. There was no signs notifying.
People that facial recognition technology was in play.
In response, Bunnings have said, well, the reason that we're using this technology is because some of the crazy stuff that people are doing inside our stores. If it is not at times people who are assaulting staff, assaulting other people, or other sort of mad stuff that you can see here on the screen, that is Bunning's reason as to why they are watching. So forget Big Brother, it is now apparently Big Bunnings, which is keeping an eye on
us all only. Something that I hate the most about the media, and yes, I understand that I'm in the media, but one of the things that I hate about many of the people in the media is that they forget that the whole purpose of this job is to talk to you. Instead, they like to talk to each other.
They like to have competitions about how close to power they are, and you get to watch on this is most of the shows which allegedly talk about news right across the dial many and most of the things that you may well read in the opinion section of left wing newspapers. But there's an example of this that playing out in the United States that I've just got to
call out Morning Joe MASNBC their breakfast show. Now the way the show's put together with the bloke with the great hair and the glasses, a former Republican, the lady who is now his wife after both of them decided to ditch their previous husbands and wives. Okay, she's the journalist and Willie Geist is along for the ride to agree with them every day. It's must watch TV for lefties. But this is a group of people, particularly the now husband and wife, who love showing off how close to
power they are. You see, the closer they are to power, the more important they are. It's perfect example of why many people can't stand not even the mainstream, but the access media. This is what I talk about with the access media. Now, these were people who were more than happy to ride the wave of Donald Trump in the lead up to twenty sixteen. And you know it's my.
Well I do because I tugged on at once.
What you mean pretty good?
You know you loved it?
Wow Trump during ninety.
And then they knew that there was money to be made in opposing him. This is what they were saying in the lead up to the election as they were part of the full breakfast with Trump derangement syndrome.
Who they are running against a dark, dismal, fascist and increasingly obviously fascist person. He's getting through the moment as an aging bit artist.
Yeah, there's always a.
Tinge of racism and everything he says. Oh, if you can't believe it, and this is your choice, you're lying to yourself and you're going to ruin this country. Hateful, racist, bigoted, tired, aging branding, I wouldn't say genius branding, obsessed narcissism.
He will in prison, he will execute whoever he's allowed to imprison execute. But then Trump doesn't just win, he wins, bak. He's also having a cultural moment when everyone from fought is in the UFC to European soccer pliers and plenty of people in the NFL are doing the Trump dance and singing the YMCI. So guess what these people need? After calling him hitler, they win and socked up to him at his house in Florida. Why he accepted them, I don't know, but clearly Trump is a bigger man than he.
Joe and I went to mar A Lago to meet personally with President elect Trump. It was the first time we have seen him in seven years. What we did agree on was to restart communications In this meeting, President Trump was tearful, he was upbeat, He seemed interested in finding common ground with Democrats on some of the most divisive issues. And for those asking why we would go speak to the president elect during such fraught times, especially between US, I guess I would ask back, why wouldn't we?
Joe and I realized it's time to do something different, and that starts with not only talking about Donald Trump, but also talking with him.
What they don't negotiation, middle aged pace they played on television. Who thought they could sidle up to Joe Biden and pretend that this is the smartest version of Joe Biden EVA until, of course, the day bait and all the way during the election campaign Trump Hitler, Trump hit Trumps Hitler or hang on Trump's one, mister Presidents, all of those edits weren't done by us. They were done by
the Meghan Kelly Show. Meghan Kelly, of course, appears on this program each and every week, and I stand by every word of her reaction.
I searched for a way to respond appropriately, and I called on my ten years as a litigator in addition to my now twenty as a journalist, and I think I found the perfect phrase, go yourselves, Go yourselves, you dishonest jokes of faux journalists.
Chief's kiss to the Lady, to morning Joe gets stuffed, Quick break back with more here on Paul Murray Live Debate for the rest of the night. Can you know what you think? And a reminder that excellent documentary spread it around. Go to Skytnews dot com dot au sign up and get it tonight. Thank you so much for watching. Let's get straight into it now, Holly Hughes, who is fresh from another day breathing in the joy of the greens, and Joe hild Awen. Of course you can find his
podcast on the Nova player. Let's get into this right now. The documentary that we just saw tonight and about cost of transition. Holly, this has always been the central issue, all right now? Are there some people who say climate change doesn't exist and therefore it as a reason for anything is not a reason to be dealt with. I on one of those people, and to those people, good luck to you. However, we have been sold apop for as long as we have been told we need to
change the way that our energy system works. Our energy is more expensive than anywhere else around the world, in part because we are moving from the car that could win Bathist and we're being told that the three wheel car might win Bathist. But quick get into it now. The reality is CSIO says half a trillion dollars, Green groups say are trillion dollars. All of that gets paid for by the customer.
Absolutely now, and I'm going to have to put a hand up. I've actually been at a dinner tonight, so I didn't get to watch most of the documentary. I did grab probably the last ten minutes of it, and I've read some of the articles around it and seen the previews today, so.
I apologize for that.
But the parliamentary work was not yet complete, so was not able to just sit down in front of.
The telly with a glass of wine.
But let me tell you everything that I heard Chris Yuleman say was completely and utterly spot on. And it's what we've been talking about for a really long time. It's the deception of not only the government but all the agencies behind it, and those reports and reviews that they have been relying on when they talk about the cheapest form of energy. What they don't talk about is the transmission lines and this is something that we have
been talking about for a really long time. The extra ten thousand kilometers of transmission lines required as we build an entire new grid for this renewable wind sole of Fantasy Course distribution transmission is a very big chunk of your power bill, But no one wants to talk about that. The other thing is, you know, I know we're probably going to talk about it later, or I know Joe and I talked about it last night Albinsi's relationship with China.
Alben Easy is not President g.
He does not determined that a new power line will go through in this direction, and anything that's in its way gets out of its way.
In Australia, we have lots.
Of councils, we have lots of community groups, and we have lots of things that mean that we're putting kinks into these transmission lines. And every single kink we put in costs an extra million dollars. So if we've got to go round a property, we've got to go round a bridge, around a river, whatever, we're going to do a million dollars.
So it's an absolute furfey.
I hope that people do watch it because it's important they understand that they are being sold a pop and they are going to pay more and more and more.
And with skoney stack com dot you the place to find it. Joe. Again, we've sat here and had the conversations about you know, what is needed? What is all you know that I've said here for ten years, talked about cost of transition, right, and Bill Shorten couldn't answer it. So he turned around and said, oh, well, the cost
of not doing it equals. The reality is every time I've debated it with Nicholas recently, when it was like okay, cool, be honest about the cost, this government has never turned around and said, look for us to move from this system to that system in order to save this much when it comes to greenhouse gases will be x one hundred billion dollars. Instead, they turn around and say, well, once it's built, everything's cheaper. That's one hell of a pole volt trick that they are trying to pull off.
And I think what Chris was able to excellently show tonight was just how big a leap there is before we get to Neverland. Yeah, I think that's true.
I think it was a fantastic documentary and just so cleared.
I love Chris the Ullman.
I think he's someone much like myself for people sort of struggled to sort of pigeono. I'm not half the journalist he is, but he's one of those people who has seen I think very much as an appursulate from people on the the left. I said, oh, he's ABC, he must be a green left socialist. And then when he applies a bit of skepticism to Dan Andrews and the COVID lockdowns and restrictions, that's right, Oh my god, you know we have to take him out the back and shoot him.
So I love him.
I was actually speaking to him about this a few weeks ago, and he has put so much effort into this. He was he talked, came on the podcast and talked about a little bit of it and and basically made me feel very very grateful because he was just neck deep in this stuff. And I think the results speak for themselves. Having stuck my head in it with the Mission zero series that we ran for the News Corp that I kind of led this, there's a couple of
things that are really clear here and really problematic. First is a sort of lack of honesty and a lack of transparency, if you like, because the people who have ideological carriage of this basically want to control both the energy sources and the debate around it from an ideological point of view. Now that has meant that that nuclear has not been allowed into the debate, and it has meant that means that gas has been demonized.
As much as cole.
Now that is that that is absolutely outrageous from any rational point of view. And this is where ideologues make the perfect the enemy of the good. The truth about what the cost will be is we don't know. Anyone who tells you what the exact cost that they know what the exact cost of transition is going to be is lying that.
Anyone who says you can't worry about it, there's five hundred, No, that's right to it.
Even the huge discrepancy between you know, the cost that labor first put on it and then this modeling by Frontier I think it was it was I think commissioned by the Collis.
I'm not sure.
But again, you can commission any type of modeling you want and you can get basically the numbers you want, and depending on how you slice and dice it, it will be huge and unaffordable, or it'll be just fine, mate. The truth is we should be honest and say we actually don't yet have the technologies that will get us
to net zero. If we get there, we don't know if hydrogen is going to be viable, we don't know if we are going to perhaps have to rely on nuclear and absolutely, and again, there have been people who have been saying this all along, and you know people I love who on the left who are just saying, no, we absolutely cannot countenance nuclear, and we can't countenance gas.
The refusal to embrace gas as a medium term energy supply is insane, and that is actually forcing more CO two into the atmosphere because the absence of gas generators means that coal fired generators are filling that gap. Now, that is something that should keep every single die hard, one eyed greenie up at night, but they're too effing stupid to even realize that that's what they're doing. So again, we have to be pragmatic, not ideological.
Yeah, but also holly. One of the things where where the left has simultaneously won and lost in this conversation, right, which is that they've been able to you know, deny funding to the projects that they don't like, you know, puts on anyone who pushes back with information like what we saw tonight. But the reality is that it's always been the case, which is that people believe we should do something. You take care of the planet, you bet you are you willing to pay for it? Hell no?
All right? And we're now at that juncture where in the United States they had a government that is big enough to actually do something to significantly affect the way the world works, and three percent of people had it as a top three issue in terms of climate change. The cost of things meant that people said, I don't care, We're done, and they basically have gone back to a pre position even before the Paris Accord. I think that's
what's happening in Australia. I think that when times were okay, there was this conversation about whether we should or whether we shouldn't, and whether it was urgent. But then when the reality is that there's that lady who's in the documentary as a pension who's only got seventy one bucks left after she's paid a power bill, they don't care, not because they don't care about the planet. But they also know China is way dirtier than we will ever be.
We are one point three percent of global emissions. We could shut this show down tonight. Everything else it's generating power, all go live in trees and sit by the campfire, like we saw Chris Hialman at the end of the documentary, and we would make zero difference to the world. And what is also not understood by these green and left idea logues is things.
Are still going to be manufactured.
Things are still going to be made, and the difference is it can either be made in countries where there are environmental protections, where there are restrictions on different things, where there are sort of epas and monitors of emissions and those sorts of programs that are in place, that will be manufactured at a higher quality most likely, but also at a standard where the emissions will be less.
Or they can get shipped off shore where there's no environmental oversights, where there's no regulation.
And they'll be you know, and then you've.
Got the dual cost of getting the product over and the product back, the raw materials over and the product back in the shipping costs.
It's insanity.
The whole thing is madness, yes, But the cost about transmission lines, the cost about distribution is something people don't understand when Joe talks about fudging the books or the accounting with the modeling getting the numbers you want.
The way labor got the numbers they wanted was they.
Had the entire cost of the build of the new grid, the new transmission lines as sunk costs. They actually just ignored them. They just pretended they just had already been done. We didn't need to count that amount up. So it was based on a lie. It's still based on a
lie everything that they're saying. And the thing about nuclear that you know, this is a really complex area, but I always sort of use the analogy because I used to be Assistant Minister with Climate Change and Energy in the shadow portfolio.
Nuclear is a bit like you know, think of it this way.
You unplug the coal fire power station and you can plug in the nuclear power station.
You don't need a whole new grid.
So with nuclear you can remove all of those costs of building new transmission lines and new grid because you just don't need it and it's zero emissions. I don't understand their ideological objection when it is all.
Around the world.
Yep, littleone the uranium issues here, let's talk about some other things. Censoring the Internet fingers cross looks like it's going to go. Hopefully they will have the definitive vote. Otherwise they're just going to pull it again and it'll sit there as a specter. I doubt anything's going to change in twelve months time. Thankfully, the numbers they are
well and truly short. Now, however, access to social media and kids, the issue of YouTube is one that I'll be honest, I hadn't even thought about until all the people had started to say, well, hang on, is this going to be a technology that's going to be included in the band? Now we know about Instagram or Twitter or Snapchat. I'll be honest, I don't think that there's a person who's got a kid under the age of ten right now who doesn't know that the main way
they interact with video is YouTube. Yeah.
I've got to say I'm with you on this one.
I watch TV, they watch YouTube.
Yeah, that's exactly right. That's what my kids watch all the time. Their heroes, their sports starf of yesteryear are YouTube stars, even the soccer players they love.
It's YouTube. Are they going to ban it or are they going to How is the YouTube kids right for kids?
I would hope not. I know that. I was like, hang on a minute, that banning YouTube as well YouTube is counted as social media. I said that to my wife and she just turned around and said, good, because it's killing them. It's destroying them resticted to it. And you know, I don't know. I know that obviously, you know, screen addiction is a problem, but that I don't think should necessarily be the primary purpose of the social media band.
The primary purpose of the social media band is causing kids mental health issues, causing them to be bullied, causing them to have completely unrealistic expectations of how they should be, and the spike in suicides that we've had in terms of online bullying and that sort of stuff. So I think that is the primary concern, not just trying to arrest screen time, which is a problem, but it's a separate problem and not as immediate.
But also to me, one of the issues in hermand that the social media band right is the capacity of your kid to be left alone with something and to be messaged by other people. That's all right. YouTube does not have that facility, and again there is this particular sort of world of YouTube kids, if you want it.
But Holly, how did we get to the stage where this is still a maybe you would have thought the government by now would have said no, no, it's about the individual messaging apps as opposed to their capacity to watch their favorite singer dance around.
Well, we still don't have the legislation. We don't know what's in, we don't know what's out at.
But I do find it extraordinary that Snapchat, which we know has been used to bullying, bullying, it's used to send pornographic material to people because we know it's got that disappearing message function.
Loo.
I've never had it, but I.
Understand that's how it operates, and you get a notification off someone's screenshots what they've sent you. But it's those sorts of platforms that we know that teenagers in particular are being bullied on, and that are being used for.
Those sorts of purposes. YouTube.
I mean, if I could just tell you a funny story, I asked, you know, I've got a son with autism.
He's fifteen.
I asked him he loves YouTube, and I asked him what he wanted for Christmas, and he said, Mom, I think I need a new laptop. I'm going to develop my own cryptocurrency. Why has he been watching videos on YouTube about cryptocurrency and he said it'll be really easy.
But you know, particularly for.
Kids with autism and stuff that have special niche interests, it's amazing the videos and information they can find. Thank god, he's got a lot of beard going on at fifteen, nearly sixteen.
I can probably get him through the face. Ide da let him keep going, because I'm not sure i'd want to take him off YouTube.
But yeah, it's the teenage girls, the bullying that's not happening on YouTube. It's Instagram, it's Snapchat, it's the messenger apps that the messenger apps at this stage are excluded. So I think the government hasn't really done the work on these about how it's best to manage it.
Well. Also, look, you know in Phinis, I know that Communications Minister is downstairs. There's plenty of abilities. I'd like to see more questions on this specific decisions that are being made in and around question time. Again, there's always a million things to have a look at. But start to push the governor on the lack of knowledge they have here Joe favorite topic of yours and I, which is not media talking about media, but a little bit here.
You and I twenty something years ago became very fast friends when you were just the junior of junior burgers in a political world.
You were the funniest guy in the New South Wales press coaler.
Whoa, whoa, That's the title they were all fighting for. But the point is right, We've seen plenty of people, and we've seen how people grow and change in this business. Right, we see how there's always so this gravitational pool of awards, which means there's a series of self policing. But then there's also this factor that I think is the most corrosive factor in all forms of reporting anywhere, and it's access. Right.
It's when you want to be too close to the people in charge, meaning you'll either pull a punch or you'll shoot a punch for them. I have spoken in the times where I look back at my own career and I've gone, maybe I was too close to this person and the rest. So you had that idea, But this morning, Joe thing, these people who okay, twenty sixteen, they liked him twenty twenty they hated him. Twenty twenty four he was hitler for them to turn around and now go to kiss the ring. Now I get it.
Trump's going to love it because there's always that New York part of him that wants to be loved by that sort of establishment. But that's sort of those figures in journalism, and they exist here in Australia. Are the worst possible people in the business because they don't give a Harry Yes, that's right about anyone watching this show.
I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever, and I've said it a thousand times that the Morning Joe people and the MSNBC people, c A. Mpeper, these are all part of the reason why Donald Trump is the next president of the United States. I think the upper middle class left, the elite left do not understand how credibly nauseating and repulsive they look to ordinary working people as they get
on their little high horses. Having said that, I'm going to take a glass half full approach to this, I genuinely think these people are so smug and so up their own asses that they were genuinely and you could see it in their reactions. They were genuinely, absolutely shocked when Trump just swept the entire lot because of course they you know, all the people they have dinner parties with no one they knew.
Of voting for them. So I think they're going for a bit of.
An existential process, and they are, and they genuinely want to.
Find They're going to find themselves without a home in either direction. Right, the lefties won't love them, and I.
Think they're just what actually happened, what went wrong?
The lefties were attacking them. Well, I just can I just say.
I think the fact that all those lefties lost their mind and attacked them for giving anything or recognizing Trump even existed. You know, we're here that there's this new four b where all of these women are not going to date men, not going to have sex, not going to have babies. Well, I just live in hope that there is no procreation from these people that are going hashysterical because you know, a morning show went and spoke to the President elect.
There may be hope for the next generation.
Yet if that God love you, Thank you guys, We'll see you again very very soon. Remind that that doco is up at scot News dot com dot au. It's well worth a look. The late debate is next Cinamore