From the skying seenter. This is Paul Murray live forgive me Sharry, distracting you all the way down here in the man cave. But I absolutely agree. Now, First, the apologies to anyone who saw a big fat blow pushing a car up a hill tonight. It was me in a pair of trackies because I'd run out of petrol. If only there was a little thing that told you when you ran out of petrol four days ago. Sorry anyway, Now, as you know, when it comes to Australia and this government,
one song sums it up. Everything is as going now Now. Of course, the Australian public from time to time may disagree with the everything is awesome chant. For example, in the polling which appeared today in the Turnbull Times, where the blue line says forty nine percent of Australians to believe the country is headed in the wrong direction, a massive one point down from the fifty percent who said
it last month. So celebration in lefty Land. They're now back into forty nine percent of the country believing that we are in the wrong direction. But of course it doesn't matter if people think we're in the wrong direction. It doesn't matter if people think that the budget was too little, too late when it comes to cost of living, because we know what the plan is when it comes to the Labor Party mention one name, over and over again. Put up the spooky music and Australia will hand this
government another majority. Peter Dutton.
Peter Dutton, Peter Dutton, Peter Dutton, Peter Dutton, Peter Dutton.
Well again, we turn to the commentary of today's essential poll in The Guardian otherwise known as the Turmbul Times, which reads as follows. Peter Dutton slipped back into negative territory with forty two percent of respondents disapproving of the job that he is doing. Albanizi is steady with forty seven percent. Hang on, what so cold? We just compare this to here, Peter Dutton, the un actable opposition leader.
The problem of all, the font of all problems for the government is five points in a better position in terms of disapproval than the current Prime minister. Now, let's be honest, less than a year out from the last election, Anthony Abernezi in the same poll was running third. That don't know, so does this number mean something right now?
No?
But it does remind us that what the government may think is an impossibility of anything other than the majority of the next election is most likely going to be the fight between majority and minority. Now I have said this since day dot. I've said it in lots of different ways, trying to be funny sometimes and failing sometimes,
saying it loudly, always saying it consistently. The most likely the next election is about a minority government for the Labor Party because of the big block of Teal seats. But every now and then there's a little bits of data that suggests things maybe even closer than I or anyone else's been thinking. For example, again essential poll, when we're looking at the primary vote of the political parties, now Labour sitting at thirty two. This is all compared
to last month. Labor sitting at thirty two is basically where it was at the last election, when of course it only just fell over the line. Literally two thirds of the country didn't vote for them, but they had enough of support thanks to the Greens to get them into a place. And obviously Labor Greens you get to forty five percent. So the preferences of people like One Nation United Australia Party and independence matter. If you send
them back to Labor, they're going to win. But if you send them a way the coalition, this thing gets close to fifty to fifty on primary they're at thirty six percent. Remember they've got to be at about forty to be in a truly competitive place. But again, everything is awesome. Everything is amazing. The budget was fantastic. Everything we do in question time is amazing. We never admitted
a problem whatsoever. Again, turnmbule times. When it comes to two party preferred, it's dead level forty eight, forty eight and four perut of Australia. Four percent of Australians voting are going to make the key decision about whether it ends up as a fifty two forty eight scenario, whether it ends up as fifty one to forty nine or of course fifty to fifty who knows. But interestingly, there is a gender divide here when it comes to the
two party preferred. Men clearly back the Liberal Party when it comes to women are backing the Labor Party. But then again, every now and then we focus on the poles, focus on the data, so we can show you the data, show you the receipts. Then have an opinion on top of it. That's the way we try to do it, no matter anyway, I won't say that now. Obviously, immigration is an issue that we're not supposed to talk about. We're not supposed to talk about busy streets. We're not
supposed to talk about the hospital ramping. We're not supposed to talk about the cues for rental places. We're not supposed to talk about adding hundreds of thousands of people to already squeezy couple of major cities. You can't possibly talk about it. But guess what voters are and we are exactly where we think the majority of Australians are, and that this is an issue that increases that they are caring about. Press gallery all not allowed to talk
about it. As I went into chapter and verse last night, the high Priestesses of the Camera Bubble say this is racist, Dutton terrible. But Dunton has less people disapproving than albnize. Whatever sush or shush get back to get done. According to the Financial Review today, and Philip Courriy, the excellent member of the press Gallery, who I always a couple of people I always exclude from this press gallery. Rant
I had most knights. They know who they are. Immigration has searched as an issue of concern among voters, while the government's perceived handling of the issue is continuing to decline. A far right wing thing tank otherwise known as the Opinion Poll in the Financial Review says so in the latest True Issue survey by JWS Research, it shows that immigration and border security are our top five issue of concern with almost a quarter of voters. This is up
from fifteen percent twolve months ago. So remember two months ago we were in a scenario where the government was bringing in a record number of people into the country and that's when the issue was fifteen percent, when people started to see what the results of those extra people being brought into the country. Well, of course immigration rose is an issue. Let alone Andrew Giles, Clare O'Neil, all of that business which has been going on for too long. But have a look at the issues that are the
number one for Australian voters. Surprise, surprise. One we talk about all the time cost of living. Eighty percent of people say that that is a very significant issue to them, followed by healthcare, housing, the economy in general. When you look at that with cost of living. It's pretty much a very significant number the environment, employment, energy, education, immigration and public services. So anyone who wants to say that any discussion about it is racist are not actually paying
attention to what Australian's attitudes are. Now. I know that their view in the media is that what they talk about will lead the polls. My view is that we should try to be where the people are as a poster, pretending that we have any magical powers through television, radio or online think peethers to lead people. That number, by the way, when it comes to cost of living at eighty percent, is up five points since last year. Now
what does that tell you? It tells you that two little too late tax cuts are not going to change the perception of cost of living and the help that this government is offering at a time when, of course every opportunity they can to put up taxes, including petrol. Have you seen the price of petrol today? I mentioned it twice. It's extraordinary, way over two dollars in most parts of the country. But of course when it was a dollar eighty five. Anthony Abernez he said it's time
to change the government. But remember they have no responsibility whatsoever, despite the fact that I, of course increase the amount of tax per liter to now forty nine cents. They could have done something about that in the budget, but no, no, no, they wanted a surplus, and that surplus is built off exclusively drivers, smokers, drinkers, because excise tax vice taxes are the only way this government stayed anywhere near a surplus.
Now let's talk about our old mate, Bill Short and this has been bubbling for a couple of days, but you may all have heard the story by now that someone in the department of which he manages as the Minister, decided to hire somebody to write speeches for Services Australia. They were paid three hundred thousand dollars a year. It's a two year contract. We are now talking about six
hundred thousand dollars. The question only came to light after some questioning from the Liberal Senator Linda Reynolds in Senate estimates.
Services Australia OZ tender contract here for temporary personnel services contract value of six hundred and twenty thousand dollars for a two year contract period for a Julianne Stewart from Cremorn to write speeches for Bill Shorton? Is that correct?
Extraordinary? Six hundred thousand dollars? Now, remember the Prime Ministry has paid five hundred thousand dollars a year backbenture in the Parliament above two hundred, minister above three hundred. Does anyone believe that a speech writer for a government department should be paid three hundred thousand dollars? Now? Literally, they could be the finest words in the world. But let's
be honest, three hundred thousand dollars. That's ridiculous. But it's a symptom of something bigger that isn't necessarily anything to do with Bill Shortan. But I'll get back to that in a second. Of course, as this story was starting to build, he appeared on a Current Affair because they had an amazing story about the abuse of the ndies. But they got into this conversation. What happened?
If you're referring today as some sort of cheap liberal tactic in the Parliament, do you think you're to.
Spend that amount of money on a speech writer?
Is the one more question I'm asking.
First of all, I think that service, the hiring of a speech writer was done by Service Australia. I had no idea what the payment was. So if you're trying to link me to that, good luck. The point about it is the person involved as the speech writer, it does a very good job. I'm not responsible for negotiating a contract.
But the question for shortened here is to say I didn't do this deal, but I agree with you. The deal's not going to be repeated. It's too rich. But instead we get to have it both ways because in this government there's never a mistake. They never admit wrong on anything, no matter what obvious evidence. So I can put in front of you and how many times have we done that for you? Almost every day since this
mob came to power, multiple times a day. The longer that they go and the more mistakes that they make. But I don't know. We didn't make any here. Well, the reviews were rather obvious to Gibet today referred to the appearance of the minister on this particular subject as arrogant as hell. And then we started to come up with new excuses because of course this government can do no wrong, and everyone else will make excuses for everyone else.
Tony Burke went on the radio today on Taxpayer Radio, and he decided to use worker shortages as a reason why somebody has to be paid six hundred thousand dollars for two years worth of work to write speeches for a government department.
Time of labor shortage. You keep ending up with situations, You keep ending up with situations where people where some various professions are getting more money than would otherwise be paid when there's labor shortage. Like the departments made that decision, The Minister hasn't made that decision. Would that job ordinarily be paid that amount? Absolutely not, for the exact reasons that I've explained. That's why it landed in the place that it did.
I'm sorry. What this is not a doctor being paid extra money to work in regional Australia because there's not enough doctors in regional Australia. This is a person from the north Shore of Sydney being paid over the odds by a government department. What She's the only person who can write a speech in all of Australia. There's no one anywhere inside the entire labor phalanx, inside the machine who could do the job. There's no one who if you advertised the job for two hundred thousand dollars and
even then it'd be too much. But still, if you advertised it for two hundred thousand dollars or one hundred thousand dollars a year, that wouldn't put their hand up and take the job. Now, I'm not talking about a completely unqualified personnel doesn't know what they're doing. But seriously, how many so called starving artists are there in the world who would be able to put two and two sentences together six hundred thousand dollars because of worker shortages
pull the other one. But again, this is the habit of this government because they assume that everything that comes out of the Liberal Party will die an instant death as soon as it becomes public because the media will not want to do anything to disturb their chosen government. For whatever reason, they think they can just stand here and just speak into the wind, and when we show it to you, they think your student and won't be
able to notice the silliness of their games. Now again, Bill Shorlden did not hire this person, and I believe in that someone in his department did. But it's very simple as the bloke who is trying to get on top of the costs and failing in many ways of the National Disability Insurance scheme. Don't you turn around and when you learn about this, and let's imagine he learns about this this week, you say that is ridiculous. Okay, we're stuck to the contract now, but when we were
near the contract, that won't be happening again. You would think that would be what happened. But no, what about in question time today? Now? Again, this is the tactic of this government over and over again. Now they think they're as good as Daniel Andrews, and they think that they are as charming as the Howard government. So they think if they just straight bat everything, then all their problems will go away. But again, normal people see this stuff and go hang on, weren't you supposed to be
better than everyone else? Here was the question asked about this issue to Bill Shorten about the department he is in charge of, with.
Shocking revelations out of budget estimates last night that ilicted drugs such as heroin, cocaine's speed and icer being trafficked through the NDIS, with THEA officials admitting, I quote you name it, it's on the list. Why has the minister allowed illegal drugs to be trafficked to Australia's most vulnerable and paid for by taxpayers under the scheme that you design.
So he's asked pretty directly, right, he's asked directly about again the failures of the system. But watch him literally not answer the question.
The NDIS is changing lives, and I actually think that most members of the House are very committed to seeing the NDIS deliver the outcomes that it was designed to deliver for people with disability. But the NDIS needs to be got back on track. And the member goes to one of the questions about the future of the scheme, which is making sure that every dollar gets through to the participants from him it's designed.
Somebody pops up and says, sorry, that's not an answer. The question speaker says he.
Wasn't asked about alternative approaches. He wasn't asked about the opposition. He was asked a specific question regarding estimates and issues raised through the estimates process. I'm going to make sure he's remaining directly relevant to the question.
So he might be looking at the opposition, but he's actually sending a message, Okay, mate, you've had your turn. Now answered the question. Watch him not answer the question.
INDOS is a good idea, but under the Coalition was badly managed and one of the naive mistakes they made is that whilst they paid out money to participants and service providers, they failed to do anything about the system into which they were paying it.
So for the second time, can you please answer the question? And the speaker pretty much tells him, Bill, answer the question. Minister will pause.
He's had two minutes, and I gave an instruction before about referring. I can understand his just bringing some history into this issue, but it wasn't about the history of what he's talking about. It was about a specific matter raised in the estimates. So he's going to have to address that otherwise he'll be resuming his seat.
So he's been warned a couple of times. But what is Bill shouldn't do exactly what every labor minister does. Ignore Ignore, Ignore.
We have got about five hundred plus investigations of compliance matters under investigation. We have two hundred and twenty two investigations underway, We have twenty prosecutions in the court. We have another twelve matters currently with a DPAPA to consider. And clearly, anyone claiming items which are not allowed under the scheme.
It is illegal.
The one difference between us and those people opposite is we're doing something about fixing up the scheme.
You did nothing right. So that story and the question he's being asked about was about waste inside the next disability insurance game. Brisbane Times put the headlines up suggesting drugs, alcohol, rent, holidays and cars. Integrity Chief reveals dodgy NDIS spending. He has no answer about it, his decision to pretend that he has no responsibility over the very department that hires a speechwriter for six hundred thousand dollars. And then there's
the third part of this. Last Night on a Current Affair, an excellent report about somebody claiming to take care of people on the Nisiwal Central Coast but apparently and allegedly doing quite the opposite.
Denise clissold sold herself as a trusted NDIS provider, an angel to our most vulnerable. Instead, clients like Michelle and Kyle found themselves homeless and broke. Millions of dollars have gone missing. A police investigation is underway, yet she still hasn't been banned.
It was allocated an NDIS plan of three hundred and fifty seven thousand dollars in June last week year to cover twelve months of supports, which was controlled by Denise's business.
She would send me money through my own personal bank account, which I thought was very weird.
Now that story gets pretty complicated, we go and check it out on the Current Affair website or otherwise I'll post it up on our socials. But it was a perfect example about just how missy the system is. Of course, the woman the center of it all denies everything, but still these are the problems with a very big system, a very big system that all of us hope works better. We'll talk about it with the Shadow Minister for the ndis the Great Holy Hughes. So we'll also be talking
about her political future. Why because the Liberal Party essentially has taken it away from her. I'll explain all when she's in the man Cave in a couple of moments time. How many people does it take to change a light global I don't know quite what the version of this is, but how many people does it take to build a house?
According to again, send it estimates and more information that we are getting the Prime Minister who apparently wants to spend more money than ever before on housing and social housing, and a treasurer who claims I we can get a million houses built in the next ten minutes. Well none of that is happening. Instead, Simon Benson with a great story tonight in the Australian newspaper. Howse about this is
another example of other people's money. The Agency, which has been tasked with delivering Anthony I beneath his ten billion dollar affordable housing fund to low income families, has paid more than twenty four million dollars in external consultants at six million dollars in executive salaries last year, despite not having built a single home. The documents that they've been able to have a look at and are on the front page of The Australian's website right now, no doubt
the paper tomorrow. The documents reveal that nineteen staff are employed by the agency on salary of more than three hundred thousand dollars. They haven't built one house, five people and more than four hundred thousand dollars. The top executive has paid five hundred and fifty seven thousand dollars, which is higher than what the Prime Minister is currently paid and so on and so on and so on, an extraordinary amount of money, and not one house has been built.
But most importantly, we've got the most important people there, and that's the bureaucrats. The bureaucrats who are paid way above. Now remember when they used to say that the public service has to pay their people more because they have to be competitive with the private sector. Well now it's
the other way around. The private sector because of the public sector, because it's so awash with cash, because it has a government that doesn't care about how much it spends, is hiring people at increasingly stupid numbers, like the bloke to administer the Prime minister's housing scheme is paid more than the Prime minister. Why should all these people be
paid fifty grand a year? Of course not, but honestly, and this is where I talk about one of the projects of the far left of the Labor Party, but increasingly the entire Labor Party is to again follow the play of Daniel Andrews in Victoria and Anastasia Paloshet and Queensland. Why because it's worked electorally now it's wrong, but it has worked on multiples because the expectation is that you either get permanent people voting for you because they work
for the government. Like all of those people, you get people voting for you because you are dependent on the government when it comes to welfare, and any change to that is a cut cut cut cut, cut cut cut. Or if you're in business, your biggest client is government. That way, they can lock up about seventy percent of the electorate and everyone else can stay in their house when there's a pandemic, which is exactly what happened to
everyone in small business. But of course to the people who were working on the unionized buildings, they got to go to work. Nothing to see. Now again, there's an area of government that is closest to all of us, and it is local government. And while it frustrates me deeply, it is the most intimate form of government, and certainly as I've traveled around the country, local government when we go to our towns is basically government because canber is a long way away from places like mounta iSER or
Burke or Long Says or Kangaroo Island. But equally in the cities, our local councils are the ones responsible for all sorts of things that we take for granted as the basic public amenities. But I always think about this, which is you always have politicians standing up of all stripes of all governments basically saying the same thing. Billionare million there, billionaire, million.
There, spending millions of dollars, tens or hundreds of millions of.
Dollars, hundreds of millions of dollars, billions of dollars, tens of billions of dollars. But the reason all of these numbers kind of wash offers is because none of us really believe that the money is being spent properly. Because wherever you drive there's a pothole. If you go for a walk every day, well you know how bad the
footpads are around the place. Well what about this? For an example, Northern Beaches Council in Sydney, they are hot to trot at the moment because, according to the Citney Morning Herald, are thousand dollars a meter to build footparts. Is how much they are spending. The council claiming that they need to spend this money and they too were in the middle of the cost of living stuff. But let me read you some of this stuff. A council who's out of control spending includes a million dollars a
kilometer on foot paths. A million dollars a kilometer on footpaths was among those appearing before a parliamentary committee on Monday, why they want more abilities to increase taxes rates. Northern Beaches councilors nearly rejected their entire budget. Why because of a plan to borrow for and a bit million dollars to, among other things, take care of manaval cemetery. Under questioning, an independent councilor confirmed that footpaths in the municipality reestimated
to cost just over one million dollars per kilometer. Now I get it, people just take the proverbial when it's government that's paying. But a million dollars a kilometer cost affixed local roads has bloooned to seven point one million dollars for four point eight kilometers and so on and so on. But before you start thinking, Northern Beaches Council has every right to bitch and because it is out
of money. Like always, they go on the website of these councils and I have a look at the positions vacant. There are I think about twenty positions currently vacant on the Northern Beaches council website. One of them is for a cashier or a customer service assistant. The pay for this job let me put my glasses onto double checking. The actual number for this is sixty one thousand to seventy one thousand dollars. This is to work at the
aquatic center. This is to be the cashier at the aquatic center that the local ratepayers of the Northern Beaches have to pay between sixty one and seventy one thousand dollars for the person who is charging you the entry fee or maybe occasionally having to reach back and grab a paddle pop. Seriously one thousand dollars a week for that job. I wonder if that the council's concept of
spending might be slightly out of control. We'll talk about this and a whole lot of other local council issues, because there is a legitimate need for counsels to have more money to spend on infrastructure with our dear friend Linda Scott, who represents local council of course at the federal cabinet, but fed inkom, how can you be crying poor when you're paying seventy one thousand dollars for the
cashier at the freaking pool. Honestly, now, fair amount of stuff I want to get to overseas, and there is quite a bit of it around tonight, including Hunter Biden. Hunter Biden is in a world of trouble. He is currently involved in a criminal case right now. Jury has just been selected, and he is in a world of trouble. Exactly what trouble is in he a Ken Doll, American news reporter, Please read it to me.
Hunter Biden facing three felony charges after prosecutors say he lied on a federal full form indicating he wasn't using drugs when he bought a Revolver handgun in twenty eighteen, during a period where he admits that he was addicted to crack. The charites carry a maximum sentence of twenty five years in prison if he's convicted now.
Last night, I said something that a few people thought was too creepy to be true. Sadly it is true, and it is also creepy, but it ain't too creepy. A lady by the name of Hailey Biden was married to Hunter's brother Bo. Bo of course died of brain cancer and grief apparently brought them together, and then his brother hooked up with his brother's widow and they were
in a relationship for some period of time. Now, supposedly, Haley Biden is going to be one of the people that is going to be giving evidence for the prosecution in the gun case. Yeah, you've got that right. He hooked up with his dead brother's wife, Classy Feller. Anyway, Hailey Biden, now fifty, was dating Hunter Biden in twenty eighteen when she found the gun in his outside our home. According to federal prosecutors, Haley Biden then drove to when
he by grocery store tossed it into the bin. Prosecutors are expected to include testimony from Hailey as well as Hunter's other ex wife, who is going to be talking about, among other things, some of the business dealings. Hunter and Hailey Biden started dating several months after his wife filed for divorce and after her husband Bo his brother Bo died. For his part, Joe Biden says nothing.
He says as the president, I don't and won't comment on pending federal cases, but as a dad, I have boundless love for my son, confidence in him, and respect for his strength. Our family has been through a lot together and Jill and I are going to continue to be there for Hunter and our family with our love and support.
Now, generally speaking, I'm a you do you kind of person. Yep, brothers, we do your husband's brother. Weird anyway, In the UK, huge news. Our dear friend Nigel Farage, known to be the only place you can see him on Australian TV, is here and we are waiting for our chance to be able to talk to him. But he's been a little bit busy in the past couple of days. Why because he is running for parliament. He is not only running for parliament, but he plans to lead the Reform
Party for the next five years. In his announcement that he is running for parliament, he said this, so frankly, we're.
In a situation I think when nobody believes a word that they say, No one's listening. People are zoned out and right at the minute, none of the above is top of the polls by a country mile.
His clarity of messaging is always amazing. Now I know that there is in Britain increasingly becomes a lefty country, but the parts of the country that are conservative sort of Boris Johnson Conservatives, well they hate what the Tory Party has become. So his plan here is to try to turn those from Tory seats in to Reform seats and from there they make their way from a few seats in the House to maybe the opposition, and then in a few cycles may be on their way to government.
That's the idea. But when asked by people in the UK media, all right, you said you weren't going to run, but then you decided to run. Why the election's over?
I mean another poll out tonight at five o'clock an MRP poll on Sky and Nears, which Puts once again says fourteen cabinet ministers will lose their seats.
It's over labor of one.
This is now about who forms the voice of opposition in an ex parliament and in the country, and it won't be the Conservatives. They'll be in opposition, but they won't be the opposition. They're split down the middle. They agree on nothing, They have no purpose. They don't stand for a blooming thing. Whereas what we stand forth perfectly clear and people know that.
Strength to his arm. Not am busy to join us eachin every week, but we will be talking to him before now and the election good luck to Nigel Farage trying to take them all on, and he will take on all comers in the English election. And just finally before we start a debate with Nicole Flynn and Linda Scott in a moment or two time, Welcome to the World. Billy. Billy is a beautiful little girl who is now welcome
to the world by her parents, Tom and Olivia. She's two point four kilos, she's happy, healthy, and she's going to have a wonderful life with the parents that she gets in a jackpot. But there's something really special about Billy. Billy is the first ever baby to be produced by this television show. What Tom was a former executive producer of mine and is an absolute rock star. I love him with all my heart. And there was this beautiful, beautiful woman by the name of Olivia who was working here.
They eventually started to work on the same show. They eventually fell in love, they got married, and now there is an official Poor Murray Live baby. I don't know what that means for Billy's future, but it certainly means she's got an uncle in me who will protect her twice as much as anyone else in the world. Congratulations to Tom and Olivia, beautiful people. Billy, you hit the jackpot with Mum and Dad. More in a secure on pormote.
So much to talk about with Loving Nicole Flint, who was of course the little candidate for the seat of Boothby vote vote, vote, vote, vote, vote early, just even before there's even a ballot paper vote for the lady. And none other than Linda Scott has of course running for reelection on the City of Sydney Council. Vote early, vote now, now, now, now, now right, just walk up knock on the townel So how do I vote for her? All right, let's start with this welcome to country thing
that was apparently performed in the Attorney General's Department in Queensland. Now, Nicole, we get it, well, welcome to country, in my view, a little too much of it. But there's sort of this bizarre little bit of extra that was thrown in there where everyone was told to take their shoes off so they could wiggle their toes along with the welcome to country to feel at one with the earth. Now, again,
this thing is overused. It does have its place, but I think we all could agree we're in the wrong place when everyone's being told to whip their shoes off for it.
And I think we could all agree that this is not an appropriate use of the eloyees' time, who are funded by the taxpayers of Australia. Pol So, whether it's taking your shoes off and wiggling your toes or whether it's multiple acknowledgments of country and welcomes to country, these people who are employed by government departments are paid by taxpayers. So I think this is ultimately a productivity issue, leaving aside all of the questions about what value that is
actually providing. But come on, how much time are we now are bureaucrats wasting with multiple welcomed countries and doing things like taking their shoes off as well, Let's just all get on with serving the people of Australia who are paying their salaries.
We'll take anyone who's even been to a school speech day, like every single speaker now, now again, Linda, I understand the respect of previous traditions, the respected previous customers, get all. I understand the concept, right, But the idea that please wh whip you shoes off and have a little wiggle, how does that improve anyone? How does that build a deeper connection.
I think nobody would want me to take my shoes off anywhere. Mate clear about that, but I do think that every time we do a welcome to country, it reminds us that the land was indigenous land, and in many cases that land has not given back it was stolen.
It in the two hours last in the country.
I know I've learned so much through in the city of Sydney, Gaddigle elders. Every time they do a welcome to country teach me a little bit more about some local history. I find it interesting, I find it useful. I talk to my community about it, and I think it's a really important tradition to recognize history, learn more about our beautiful nation, but also recognize the past injustices and commit ourselves to doing a little bit more to redress them into the future. I don't think that's too
much to ask. To celebrate the oldest continuing culture in the world, and that is our Aboriginal culture. Should be celebrating and talking about that. And if people who work in the service of the public are doing that at the start of a significant event like an opening of a building, I'm not sure the circumstances of this welcome to country.
Well, I think there's a lot of times it ain't that significantly the start of a job interview, or as I say, the fourth person making a speech on any one day. Again, I get what the purpose of it is, whether it's overused or not. Kind of think we're on the little overused site. All right, let's talk about this
local council thing that I was mentioning. And there is an overall issue with and I've got to say, and it's being an unpopular view, is that I do think that there needs to be a bit more money given to local councils to actually perform some of the basic functions. I think some local councils don't do themselves a favor by, say, seventy one thousand dollars for the cashier at the local pool, or a whole bunch of other things they choose to spend their money on. But Nicole, how have we got
to a point where, yes, it's a counsel in Sydney. Yes, it's probably some faction all this, that and the other where somebody's having a go at somebody else. It's a thousand dollars a meter or a million dollars a kilometer to put foot pads down.
I know, and private businesses would go out of business if these were the sorts of costs they were paying to get things done. Paul, I mean goodness me, what have they gold plated the footpath? You've really got to ask questions about how this council is running its basic infrastructure. And also I would be asking questions about what else are they wasting money on if they can't get the
basics like this? Right, great, payers in this particular council should be asking some hard questions of the people that they have elected if this is how they are ministering basic local infrastructure.
Correct alas that Tech Council has gone deep teal super teal, so they perhaps wouldn't ever respond, but we'll try and find it something, Linda, I want to get. It's very tempting to have a ten minute conversation about whether or not the person who's the cashier the PEO will deserve seventy one thousand dollars but whatever. But the overall issue though, right, and I've always been very sympathetic to this, and we've always talked about it that I understand that everything, everything,
costs more. But what do we need to do to make sure that counsels literally don't go broke providing the things that we come to expect. And conversely, how do we make sure that just because it's the government pain, that this doesn't get wildly out of hand, because I think this is wildly out of hand.
Well, of course, local governments are public bodies. They have a very important responsibility to be responsible with all public money, to be transparent about their procurement processes, you know, to do the right thing, and to ensure that they're doing the best job for the public at the cheapest price, and they're being transparent and responsible with public money. So
of course there's no argument about that. I think what is important to recognize, however, is that across as straight as five hundred and thirty seven local governments, most of
them are really under very significant financial pressure. I've got counselors in you know, the remotest parts of Central Australia that are earning, many of them under fifteen thousand dollars a year to be a counselor, to go to meetings, to manage all the decisions, and their staff are getting paid more than them as they should, but they're getting very little to do a really important job, basically to be the government of the area, because let's face it,
there's no state, territory or federal government presence in these areas, and more generally, local governments are under pressure, we know, you know, more than ever before. They're much more reliant on federal government funding. Under the Keyping government, they were getting about one percent of commonwealth taxation revenue. That's now down to half that for federal assistance grants. Local governments run about a third of the nation's infrastructure on four
percent of the nation's tax take. So let's just talk about what local governments are doing with that money. We're very efficient when you look at the big numbers, and we're not doing a lot with a little.
More from the state, more from the Feds rather than the rate pay themselves. So that's one sympathetic to it. It's not just because Linda's me mate, It's because, I mean, if you do think about it, and as if you travel as widely as we do for the show. Local government is the most obvious form of government. But if you're in this financial scenario, if you're in a place that doesn't have a lot of money, it ends up. But can I stuck in that?
Can I also just say it's not going to surprise you to say I'm not across every budget line item for the Northern Beaches Council or the five hundred and thirty six other local governments. But you know, here's how a council budget works. They've got a line item for footpaths, that includes cycle ways, that includes paving in marine areas. You know, that includes detailed engineering work that has to
be done. I'm sure or somebody in Parliament somewhere has taken an estimate and blown this up and it's a great story, but in reality, the Council's got to do complex works in this marine environment with really significant erosion and a lot of you know, weather events that are causing very expensive public works to be needed. It's a great headline, but when you look into the details, there's a lot more to it.
Okay, but Nicole, give me thirty seconds here. Sorry, I'm going to do it again, just because I just was reading here about the Northern Beaches Concil thing. It's a part time role. It's only twenty nine hours per week and you can earn up to seventy one thousand dollars
to be a cashier at the local pool. Look, there's a chance I've been locked in the media bubble for too long and about how much the media earns and what people earn and what people But have you ever heard of seventy one thousand dollars for the person who's handing out the paddle pops and giving out the tokens of the local pool?
No, I haven't, Paul, And the only other person I can think that's paid as generously as this is Bill Short and Speech, Right, let's get to do it. Three hundred thousand dollars a year. Clearly, Clearly I am applying for the wrong type of job when I'm putting my hand up to be a member of Federal Parliament again, responsible to one hundred and twenty five thousand voters. Because three hundred thousand a year is way more than a
backbencher and way more than a junior minister. So I can only imagine they having to pay somebody that much money to try and spin Labour's way out of the ndis mess, because it is such a mess, and there's a lot that Labor must be trying to hide to get themselves out of this debacle.
Yeah, we'll talk about it, Holly Hughes and a second in Manko. But again Nicole Bill Shelden could have responded to said, look, obviously I didn't hire this person. Obviously I wouldn't renew this contract because it's too much money. But instead it's part of the wider pattern of this government which is we make no mistakes and even when
we're caught or and we didn't make a mistake. And even Tony Burke on Taxpayer Radio this morning saying it was about worker shortages, as if there's no other person in the entire Ohi continent of Australia that could write a speech.
Totally and quite frankly, if you are a senior government cabinet Minister of Bill short and length of service to the Australian people as an MP, and you can't get up and give a speech and or write your own speech, and or use your staff who you employ within your office to write a speech, then there's something wrong with it.
Nicole.
Let's look at who else is costing tax pays more than three hundred thousand dollars a year. Malcolm Turnbull four hundred and ten thousand dollars last year, John Howard three hundred and ninety five thousand dollars on flights and staff for his office, Tony Abbott three hundred and forty eight thousand dollars. These are just Australia about.
I'm sorry, Kevin, you have you spendiship and break.
It is not all there Liberals, it is it is they're all over three hundred thousand and the laborsters.
And you're saying, Kevin right and Julia Gillard, you have a look Nicole ambassador.
My point is a lot of people are on the public dollar here and we've got three liberal prime ministers in the most recently.
Sorry dollars and.
They're getting paid on the public dollar in Nicole for staff, for travel, for drivers.
I mean, so you're saying from now on all all former prime ministers, that's it nothing zero gone.
I'm definitely not saying.
What I'm saying.
Definitely, and careful, be careful, be careful.
Okay, all right, love you all all right?
No, no, no, no, no, no, I'm quickick.
No no no.
They served our nation in the highest stress most public job that is incomparable to a nameless, spaceless departmental staffer who is right speeches three hundred thousand is outrageously play that person.
A year forgive me. I promise more fighting at the start of the segment, not at the end of the segment. Bad host, Bad host, Bad host. Thank you guys. Quick break, Holly Hughes joins us to talk about this, but more importantly, her political future. She should be looking forward to another six years in the Senate, but because of the Liberal Party ups and downs, she ain't more In a second now, I love Holly Hughes's a person. I love her as a professional and I love her as a guest here
on the show. I think she has a great future in Australian politics, but factional people inside the Liberal Party seem not to agree. Because you see every single time there's an election in the Senate there are six senators in New South Wales. Generally it'll be two Libs and a NAT that will get up, as well as a
two Labor and Agreeing that will get up. Due to factional nonsense inside the party, Holly has gone from the position which she should be, which is top of the ticket, into a place where she's unlikely to get one of those two Liberal spots. She's in the man cave now again, Holly. I respect you as a person, I love you as a professional. How do you feel because you've put in the hard yards and then they came for you.
Well, this has been my life for twenty plus years that I've given to the Liberal Party, So you know it to be a liied to say I'm not disappointed devastated, you know, but the support that I've had has been extraordinary and I think what's been most telling is the fact that people are so shocked.
And horrifying by this.
Overwhelmingly, the people that've reached out to me, people that I know, people that watched on this show and from all across Australia have said, what has the Liberal Party done? And I think, you know, what is the New South Wales Liberal Party done here? And I mean, you know, having a look and really thinking about it over the last couple of weeks, it does look like being good at your job as a woman in the New South Wales division is not a good thing.
And it's not just me, you know.
Melissa Macintosh got a swing to her in Limdsay in a marginal seat at the last election, and of course she was challenged for pre selection and Peter Dubban's basically had to step in there to.
Make sure she wasn't challenged.
We saw it as Natt Ward, who's now the Deputy leader, wanted to move to the Lower House so that she could have made a greater impact and perhaps be leader one day, and of course that was blocked as well. Thankfully Matt still in the Upper House. But there does seem to be a bit of a pattern. So, but I'm a liberal. I've been a liberal for a really
long time. I love this country. I was the only senator who stood up for the No campaign because I believe we should have a quality of opportunity, regardless of your background, regardless of how long you've been here.
And you know I'm going to stand by those values.
So John Howard talked about how factionalism was ruining that. He said, well, I was Liberal party. I completely agree with him, because we have this scenario where the internal fight seems to be more important than what the external result ends up being. How does that ever get fixed because it seems like everyone on the outside of grees, but everyone on the inside keeps fighting like no one's watching.
Yeah, and look there's been sort of talk, you know, but they've replaced a woman with a woman. But if you actually go back and want the campaign was a lot of the people that were sort of running this campaign were basically saying, oh, no, Holly's fine, Holly's already there. I'm actually running against Andrew Bragg. And I kept saying to people, will no, how can I already be there where it's all?
And you only vote once?
Yes, So the people were shocked.
People were horrified.
So I think if they'd been a rerun of the vote straight away, it might have been different when people realized what had happened.
But we'll never know. We'll never know.
But you know, I'm still there until June thirty next year. So I'm still there till the next election, and I am determined.
You know, Peter gave me and diis.
Peter gave me mental health and suicide prevention to look after, and I planned to keep working really hard in those areas. I want to get rid of this Albanezer government. They're destroying our country and I plan to support Peter Dutton in doing that.
Because that's the important thing for people to note right now and again, and we've only texted briefly in and around this time, and you've heard everything I've had to say publicly and it's no different and what I've said privately, which is you are at pains to say you don't want to cause a problem for Peter Dutton. There's an issue in New South Wales that needs to be dealt with. So tell us about the plan between now and June.
Is that do you want to be the happy warrior for Dutton or do you pull back because New South Wales didn't know really the right thing.
I Thigiven portfolios that I'm very focused on, and I mean there's been a lot of talk today at the NDIS. I can tell you on Saturday because I was in Sydney, I went with my son to and All Abilities, you know, my son on the NDIS All Abilities Jim program. And I looked at the twelve kids that were there and every single one of those kids is going to need support for the rest of their lives.
I mean, they are hilarious.
They're all big now, so it's not cute when they do their flapping and they're screeching and you know all of the things that goes with having significantly special need children and whatever it was.
They're not all autistic. There was a whole range of things.
But all of those parents that I spoke to where all they're trying to do the best for our kids. We're trying to set them up with opportunity. It is for them when they're ready to leave school that they will have some sort of future. But they will need support forever. And I know the NBIS for it needs reform and I want to be part of that. There's too many people on it. Absolutely, the price guide is a massive problem. There are massive roughts occurring, but it's
not everyone. And we need to stop tarring people and clamp down where we can. They know where the problems are. There are a lot of excesses. I mean some of the plans for people that what is their permanent lifelong disability?
Perhaps we could start by defining that.
Well, that's the look. You'll be passionate about that way beyond June thirty. This she to do. It's my whole life, Paul, whether.
I like it or not.
And you always welcome here. And I admire the way in which you've You've dealt with this, no doubt a significant kick in the backside, but If there's one woman who can push back, it is you.
Hey, my whole career has been kicks in the backside.
I can tell you.
I got pushed off the ticket in a double dissolution. The High Court ruled me out at one point.
So maybe this is just Hurtle number three.
Good, great, Thank you Onick, Thanks Bell. We're always welcome here, all right, that's our shof at night. We'll see again tomorrow and right here on Paul Murray Life, he comes a late to bath