full

Episode 316 - NSW + 1 Hour but - 40 years

Topics:

  • NSW Leadership Thoughts
  • Gladys Excused and ICAC Vilified
  • Federal ICAC
  • New leader Dominic Perrottet
  • From Crikey
  • From The Spectator
  • Is Religious Belief Relevant?
  • The Perfect Example- Perrottet and Cemeteries
  • Perrotte’s Neo-Liberalism is the biggest worry
  • NSW VAD Update
  • Dan Andrews is The Man
  • Banknote artwork
  • Goodbye Facebook
  • 'Missing' man joins search party looking for himself
  • Jessica Rowe and Pauline Hanson
  • Uproar as all-boys netball team beats girls to win state title
  • Understanding Class in Australia
  • Larrikins, bogans and bullshit artists
  • Blue-collar blokes are deserting the left. The future is female
  • Climate Change Acceptance
  • Energy
  • Keith Pitt wants to lend Coal Companies $250 billion
  • Nuclear by Newspoll
  • Nuclear by Essential Report
  • Nuclear by The Spectator
  • Nuclear by Bob Carr

To financially support the Podcast you can make:

We Livestream every Monday night at 7:30 pm Brisbane time. Follow us on Facebook or YouTube. Watch us live and join the discussion in the chat room.

We have a website. www.ironfistvelvetglove.com.au

You can email us. The address is trevor@ironfistvelvetglove.com.au



Transcript
Speaker:

Suburban Eastern Australia, an environment that has, over time,

Speaker:

evolved some extraordinarily unique groups of homosapiens.

Speaker:

Despite the reputation of their homeland, some are remarkably thin

Speaker:

skinned, some seem to have multiple lifespans, a few were once thought to be

Speaker:

extinct in the region, others have been observed being sacrificed by their own.

Speaker:

But today We observe a small tribe akin to a group of meerkats that gather together

Speaker:

atop a small mound to watch, question, and discuss the current events of their city,

Speaker:

their country, and their world at large.

Speaker:

Let's listen keenly and observe this group fondly known as the

Speaker:

Iron Fist and the Velvet Glove.

Speaker:

Hello dear listener, this is the Iron Fist and the Velvet Glove podcast.

Speaker:

Where we talk about news and politics and sex and religion.

Speaker:

It's been a couple of weeks since we last spoke to you.

Speaker:

So we've got a few things to talk about, a few things have happened.

Speaker:

And, uh, well, we'll get right into it after the introductions with me.

Speaker:

Nearly as always, when she's not swanning around in Western Australia

Speaker:

on some junket of some sort.

Speaker:

On the Swan River.

Speaker:

Yes, swanning around on the Swan River.

Speaker:

Shay, the subversive, how are you, Shay?

Speaker:

Good evening, I'm very well, thanks for having me.

Speaker:

And Joe, the tech guy.

Speaker:

Evening all.

Speaker:

So Shay, wonderful time in Western Australia, sampled some wines, did you?

Speaker:

Yeah, that's what I'd planned.

Speaker:

I'd planned to go to the AFL Grand Final or at least the bar afterwards,

Speaker:

but unfortunately police had other ideas, so I got quarantined for 14 days.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

So, anyway, Qantas sent you there to work and then it turns out you couldn't work

Speaker:

and you spent the two weeks studying.

Speaker:

That's right.

Speaker:

Cooped up.

Speaker:

That's right.

Speaker:

Okay.

Speaker:

So, anyway, it's just going to take a bit longer to keep everyone safe and get

Speaker:

this border stuff sorted and yeah, then we'll have people moving around again.

Speaker:

Well, I guess it wouldn't have been entirely surprising.

Speaker:

You would have not have counted your chickens until you

Speaker:

actually got to the airport.

Speaker:

Absolutely.

Speaker:

The whole time I was just like, There's no way they're going to let me in.

Speaker:

There's no way.

Speaker:

That proved to be the case.

Speaker:

In fact, they let you in.

Speaker:

In fact, I almost, I was like over the moon, yeah.

Speaker:

So the police said, yeah, come on in.

Speaker:

Yep, just get tested day 11.

Speaker:

And then, um, yeah, missed a phone call from them to say, actually no.

Speaker:

You didn't get past the luggage carousel.

Speaker:

No.

Speaker:

They started phoning you.

Speaker:

I might have made it, but I was in my uniform and I was changing

Speaker:

in the bathroom to go to the pub.

Speaker:

Yep.

Speaker:

Yep.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

So if I'd left the airport in my uniform, I might have made an escape, but no.

Speaker:

So anyway, no pub, no adventures.

Speaker:

Yep.

Speaker:

Sat in a room.

Speaker:

Very good.

Speaker:

Well, you're refreshed.

Speaker:

Now last week, didn't do a podcast.

Speaker:

I just, I'm going to do a book review and I just didn't, it's a really

Speaker:

important book and I didn't feel that I'd studied it enough and was able to give

Speaker:

it a good enough sort of explanation.

Speaker:

So Less is More by Jason Hickel.

Speaker:

That will be next week.

Speaker:

And it's very interesting because, uh, it gives a nice little history of capitalism.

Speaker:

Basically, when we're looking at renewables and the climate change, he's

Speaker:

really saying, um, we've got an obsession with growth in the West and that Even if

Speaker:

we get all these things sorted the just continual growth that capitalism demands

Speaker:

means that jobs and growth Well, yes that we're gonna have problems so it gives

Speaker:

a really interesting explanation of how capitalism is addicted to growth and that

Speaker:

if we continue to just grow then We'll still have problems with our climate etc.

Speaker:

So that will be next week.

Speaker:

Hello in the chat room Dire Straits and Brommen Uh, Brollman,

Speaker:

you're still in quarantine.

Speaker:

Fingers crossed not too much longer, so.

Speaker:

Um, also, uh, in other news, so you might remember last year we had our,

Speaker:

our Black Mass for the Noosa Temple of Satan, which was held at the J,

Speaker:

uh, Noosa sort of community hall.

Speaker:

And, tried to rebook it this year, and they said no, because of the

Speaker:

abuse that we receive from Christians.

Speaker:

From loving Christians.

Speaker:

They called our staff all sorts of names and threatened them with all sorts of

Speaker:

things, so because of their actions We're not allowing you to book the room again.

Speaker:

So, the only response to that is to protest in the streets.

Speaker:

So, the plan is that we will be getting a permit for a street march, where we will

Speaker:

be marching up and down Hastings Street.

Speaker:

Uh, Saturday night, the 30th of October, and people will be dressed up.

Speaker:

Not just a street march, it's a Halloween celebration.

Speaker:

Well, it's a protest about what's happened, and we'll incorporate

Speaker:

parts of the Black Mass ceremony as part of a protest, and then we'll

Speaker:

all de camp to a pub afterwards, so that will be interesting.

Speaker:

If you're in the Noosa area at all, uh, Saturday the 30th,

Speaker:

it will be quite an event.

Speaker:

I'll be there.

Speaker:

Got my outfit worked out.

Speaker:

Can't tell you what it is, but it's pretty good.

Speaker:

I think it's going to be pretty good.

Speaker:

Alright, so, um, so there we go.

Speaker:

Uh, alright, well, what's happened around Australia?

Speaker:

Of course we had the whole, uh, Gladys Berejiklian with her sudden resignation

Speaker:

and basically following the New South Wales ICAC coming out and saying,

Speaker:

Hmm, all that stuff that was going on with her and her ex boyfriend.

Speaker:

Worthy of further investigation.

Speaker:

And so she resigned as, um, premier and said, I'm out of it

Speaker:

and completely not even going to hang around and wait and see.

Speaker:

So I'm out of here.

Speaker:

And really the reaction to that was very measured.

Speaker:

The reaction by, by journalists, some journalists, by the

Speaker:

community, I can't really.

Speaker:

Worrying, depressing.

Speaker:

It's kind of part of the reason why I didn't even do a podcast last week.

Speaker:

I found it all quite depressing actually.

Speaker:

Because here was somebody who was being, uh, investigated for corruption.

Speaker:

And with some evidence there that deemed it worthy.

Speaker:

And the sympathy that she got from different sectors.

Speaker:

Was quite astounding, I thought, and you really had to say to these people, hang

Speaker:

on a minute She is the one who is being investigated for corruption and it's her

Speaker:

decision to reside and not hang around and So the shovel had put out a piece of the

Speaker:

puzzle Almost immediately saying, looking forward to Andrew Boltz, you can't even

Speaker:

be corrupt anymore, think peace, tomorrow.

Speaker:

And then they did one subsequently saying, well it wasn't just Andrew

Speaker:

Boltz, but it was basically half the journalists in Australia, and he's right.

Speaker:

So, of course, the Murdoch papers excused Gladys.

Speaker:

And, I guess, no surprise.

Speaker:

I guess.

Speaker:

Um, a typical example was Janet, Paul Brookson, in The Australian,

Speaker:

who said, Other leaders stand small in Berejiklian shadow.

Speaker:

Gladys Berejiklian can leave with her head held high, knowing she

Speaker:

led not just New South Wales, but the country, into a pandemic.

Speaker:

That's right.

Speaker:

The gaslighting.

Speaker:

That these people shamelessly do to try and say that New South Wales, even now,

Speaker:

this perite, is saying, well, we're showing Australia, we're leading the

Speaker:

rest of Australia out of the wilderness.

Speaker:

Guys, we, we haven't been in lockdown in Queensland or Western Australia.

Speaker:

People are going to the pubs, enjoying themselves.

Speaker:

That's right.

Speaker:

It's you guys who actually screwed it up more than anybody.

Speaker:

And you want to gaslight us and paint this picture?

Speaker:

Well, no, no, so New South Wales didn't go into a lockdown until six

Speaker:

months after the virus had escaped.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

It was a stay at home order.

Speaker:

Yeah, yeah.

Speaker:

Remember?

Speaker:

Oh, yeah, that's right, yes.

Speaker:

She couldn't even say the words.

Speaker:

Yeah, yeah.

Speaker:

So, you know, shortly after her resignation, maybe it was the

Speaker:

next day, was the Sunday Mail.

Speaker:

Um, and the, the front page of the headline, of the Sunday Mail, was bagging.

Speaker:

Anastasia Palisade, um, saying something about, um, her handling of the pandemic.

Speaker:

And then a few pages in was an article by Peter Credlin, opinion piece, saying

Speaker:

the wrong leader lost their job and saying it should have been Dan Andrews.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

It bears no relationship to the facts and they're just completely shameless.

Speaker:

Um, uh, so another example was, um, from Shari Markson, who said, Lynch

Speaker:

Mob takes down yet another leader.

Speaker:

ICAC has left NSW rudderless and has robbed the people of a popular Premier

Speaker:

at a time of crisis and uncertainty.

Speaker:

A lore unto themselves, ICAC is addicted to the power and publicity

Speaker:

of the bombshell political scalp.

Speaker:

Yeah, they've got a few scalps over the years but that's because over

Speaker:

the years people have been corrupt.

Speaker:

Even Berejiklian was saying Words to the effect, I was very rude

Speaker:

of them to do this at this time.

Speaker:

Like, couldn't they have waited?

Speaker:

To what?

Speaker:

Because this is such an important time for New South Wales.

Speaker:

Well, it's kind of like the Trump impeachment.

Speaker:

Mm hmm.

Speaker:

They couldn't impeach him whilst he was in power because, you know,

Speaker:

he was a busy run of the country.

Speaker:

Mm hmm.

Speaker:

And after he had left power, they wouldn't have been able to impeach him

Speaker:

because he was no longer president.

Speaker:

Yes, exactly.

Speaker:

But even, um, My wife's got a couple of friends who shall remain nameless.

Speaker:

Educated women, and they were like really sympathetic to Glaris

Speaker:

Berejiklian, one even put a coat on her front fence in support.

Speaker:

Wow.

Speaker:

Yeah, that's what people were doing, was putting a coat on their front fence.

Speaker:

Do they live in New South Wales?

Speaker:

No.

Speaker:

They live here?

Speaker:

Yes, one of them does, yes.

Speaker:

And they're very sympathetic to her.

Speaker:

And another woman brought low by a dastardly man.

Speaker:

Well, is there a bit of this sisterly sympathy?

Speaker:

Yes, there is.

Speaker:

Where they have not Looked at this rationally and coldly and and calmly and

Speaker:

have applied a different standard to a sister Is is that what's happening here?

Speaker:

It's it's not so much She is being held accountable for her these allegations.

Speaker:

It's that so many men aren't right So that might be where the sympathy is stems from

Speaker:

Where she's actually been, you know, has to resign, doesn't have to resign, but

Speaker:

chose to resign, chose to, you know, face the consequences more or less, depending

Speaker:

on how you, that's just how it was framed.

Speaker:

Certainly, but even as I'm saying it, I'm like, well, I

Speaker:

don't know, this is balanced.

Speaker:

I can hear my own bias, but I can't help it.

Speaker:

But in New South Wales, they've caught men and men have resigned.

Speaker:

Like, who's the guy with the wine bottle?

Speaker:

I can't even remember his name, but there's different.

Speaker:

Basically men.

Speaker:

She's probably the first woman.

Speaker:

I don't know the exact history of New South Wales corrupt and corrupt politics.

Speaker:

So, but there's certainly been enough men that it's not a

Speaker:

picking on women issue here.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

In ICAC's, um, what they've done.

Speaker:

So, I mean, ICAC's not perfect and there have been cases where some

Speaker:

people have been investigated by ICAC and had their, subsequently, so

Speaker:

all ICAC And then they'd recommend that the police should prosecute.

Speaker:

So there's been some people who've been investigated and then

Speaker:

a recommendation that they be prosecuted and then the re and the

Speaker:

prosecutions failed quite miserably.

Speaker:

And, um, that.

Speaker:

There's going to be no perfect system.

Speaker:

There, that's a pretty good segue though, because as part of my white

Speaker:

collar crime and corruption unit, I came across this reading that was,

Speaker:

uh, it's 2016, but here are some good suggestions to kind of hone and finesse.

Speaker:

ICAC.

Speaker:

So, one of them is, uh, the Commonwealth should appoint, this is for federal

Speaker:

level, but they could be applied anywhere, the Commonwealth should appoint an

Speaker:

independent parliamentary ethics officer.

Speaker:

The Commonwealth should appoint an An ethics officer, so somebody you can

Speaker:

go to, to talk in confidence about certain situations or particular

Speaker:

potential conflicts of interest.

Speaker:

Instead of an ICAC?

Speaker:

No, as well as.

Speaker:

So imagine Gladys has found herself in love, right?

Speaker:

She's also looking at, seriously looking at giving Wagga Wagga five million

Speaker:

dollars for Whatever the camp was, and she actually has somewhere to go to hash

Speaker:

this out where it won't be used against her later, and she can actually discuss

Speaker:

the ethics and what she should do, and the ethics guy or girl might say, you

Speaker:

should disclose that straight away, and you should absolutely step away from this.

Speaker:

That makes sense.

Speaker:

That makes sense, right?

Speaker:

So if you actually are serious about the injustice Gladys has faced, then these

Speaker:

are the types of things you put in place.

Speaker:

You have structures because what we're finding is that politicians

Speaker:

aren't necessarily exemplary humans.

Speaker:

They are just humans.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

So the other suggestions were a handbook for not just public servants,

Speaker:

but for the general public, which I think would be important too.

Speaker:

Because I think that part of all of this media stuff is they're

Speaker:

actually mirroring public sentiment, which they're seeing on Twitter.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Right?

Speaker:

And that's partly because a lot of the general public aren't paying a high

Speaker:

level of interest into the goings on.

Speaker:

So then they're all shocked and surprised that Gladys has to go.

Speaker:

Do you know what I mean?

Speaker:

Some training.

Speaker:

I like this.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

And then finally, All of the existing major integrity institutions

Speaker:

must be given budgetary security.

Speaker:

So you know how we discussed that, uh, Gladys started taking

Speaker:

the funding ah, from icac?

Speaker:

Yes, yes.

Speaker:

So, um, we've used the example here of defunding, defunding of the

Speaker:

office of the Australian Information Commissioner after the Senate refused

Speaker:

to pass legislation abolishing it.

Speaker:

So they just cut the funding instead of pass legislation.

Speaker:

So what we should put in place is they're given budgetary security

Speaker:

and only the appropriations can be adjusted by parliament.

Speaker:

So it'd be three structures we could put in place to make the system fairer.

Speaker:

Yes, that's good.

Speaker:

So that was, that came out of your course as a, as what,

Speaker:

who came up with these ideas?

Speaker:

I'd say, um, The Mandarin's free daily newsletter.

Speaker:

I'm a bit concerned of the source, but.

Speaker:

Now I like the idea of training and I like the idea of somebody you can go to.

Speaker:

Like, for example, with the law society, they said, you know, if

Speaker:

you have an ethical issue, we have someone you can talk to and, um,

Speaker:

just bounce an idea off or whatever, and it won't be held against you.

Speaker:

A little bit like the seal of the confessional operating in this case.

Speaker:

Like.

Speaker:

You know, you can confide in somebody and say, um, I better not say this in

Speaker:

the Sydney Morning Herald, but Yes, yes.

Speaker:

I can remember one.

Speaker:

They gave an example of this solicitor who was about to enter into a romantic

Speaker:

relationship with a client, and he was seeking Advice and and they joked

Speaker:

that by the tone and and urgency in his voice It seemed like it was a very

Speaker:

urgent response that he was requiring

Speaker:

He was on a promise

Speaker:

That's right Yes, that makes sense.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Yeah, so I I like that.

Speaker:

Um, let's see if they take it up.

Speaker:

So the comparisons though with um Berjiklian and Scott Morrison

Speaker:

is we don't have a federal ICAC.

Speaker:

Indeed.

Speaker:

Yes You know why we don't.

Speaker:

Yes, because they don't want to pass it.

Speaker:

They're scared of what they'll find.

Speaker:

Well, well, according to this tweet from Aaron Dodd, it was because

Speaker:

Scott Morrison, um, He said, you know, I talked to Jenny about this.

Speaker:

She has a way of really clarifying things and she said, Why would

Speaker:

you create a federal ICAC?

Speaker:

I don't want to be a prison wife.

Speaker:

So that might be why, you know, against Jen's recommendation.

Speaker:

So even someone like Tanya Plibersek said, Thanks, Gladys,

Speaker:

for your hard work managing COVID and thank you for your service.

Speaker:

We don't need a Labor opposition.

Speaker:

That can only be what I said about them just gleaning public sentiment

Speaker:

and just cowering underneath it.

Speaker:

So, um, so anyway, um, what else did we have?

Speaker:

Well, I think you missed the shovel.

Speaker:

Oh, did I miss the shovel one?

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Oh yeah, so just been catching up on the latest analysis in the media

Speaker:

and got to tell you, This person who forced Gladys Berejiklian to have a

Speaker:

relationship with a corrupt politician, hide it from the public, give out dodgy

Speaker:

government grants, and then resign sounds like a nasty piece of work.

Speaker:

Honestly, the Shovel Batuta Advocate sum up these issues that we face.

Speaker:

In 10 to 20 words, so well, so often, compared to major media outlets.

Speaker:

Yeah, yeah.

Speaker:

Mm hmm.

Speaker:

Yeah, yeah.

Speaker:

So, um, what do we have here, um, uh, The Spectator, for example,

Speaker:

said, Friday's taking down of Gladys Berejiklian by the New South Wales.

Speaker:

ICAC is a political hit job.

Speaker:

Not your typical party political hit, but a deliberate calculated decapitation

Speaker:

of the New South Wales government by an unelected body determined to prove

Speaker:

it's bigger than any mere politician.

Speaker:

In moving against an elected Premier, doing her damnedest to steer her state

Speaker:

through its biggest crisis since the war, ICAC decided its narrow agenda,

Speaker:

fighting corruption, and it's outweighed profound state and national interests.

Speaker:

All said with a straight face.

Speaker:

Yeah, so, um, um, Essential Poll came out with some stuff today and it said,

Speaker:

um, to what extent would you support or oppose the establishment of a,

Speaker:

sort of, basically a federal ICAC?

Speaker:

And total support, 78%.

Speaker:

Total oppose, 11%.

Speaker:

And that's been consistent for a number of years that they've done the poll.

Speaker:

Um, in terms of age groups and sex, um, uh, it's a large majority of all

Speaker:

demographics would support a federal ICAC.

Speaker:

Um, stronger support amongst those aged over 55 and Greens voters, and no

Speaker:

surprise that Coalition voters were the most likely to oppose a federal ICAC.

Speaker:

So even amongst the, let's see, the Coalition supporters, It was still 77

Speaker:

percent in favour and 13 percent against.

Speaker:

It's extremely high, so, um Must be hard showing your face at the moment

Speaker:

being a Liberal supporter, surely.

Speaker:

Surely even they must be thinking, it is time to clean this up.

Speaker:

Oh, I was just saying, Labor's just as bad.

Speaker:

Seriously, that's what that's saying.

Speaker:

It's true, they are.

Speaker:

It's the 9 percent of Greens voters who oppose it I'm wondering about.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Thinking about Gladys Berejiklian's resignation, which is closer to your view?

Speaker:

The first is it's maybe more supportive of a federal ICAC.

Speaker:

And the other one is it's made me less supportive of a federal ICAC.

Speaker:

And, um, 47 percent say that the treatment of GLADIS makes them

Speaker:

more supportive of a federal ICAC.

Speaker:

And 21 percent say the treatment of GLADIS makes them less

Speaker:

supportive of a federal ICAC.

Speaker:

Meaning, She was so hard done by, they feel that they don't want that

Speaker:

to happen in the federal sphere?

Speaker:

Come on!

Speaker:

One other, uh, possible explanation is the optics.

Speaker:

So, I mean, she normally is not unkempt, and the day she came out and announced

Speaker:

it, she did look very like a victim.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

You know, whereas a man might have faced it with some, you know, stoicism Could

Speaker:

be some gender socialization at play.

Speaker:

She was pretty stoic though.

Speaker:

Drunken?

Speaker:

Yeah, yeah.

Speaker:

She didn't Holding back tears?

Speaker:

No, she didn't look They didn't look Her eyes didn't look moist to me.

Speaker:

She's a hard nut, I reckon.

Speaker:

Anyway, that might be a possible explanation for the Yeah, the

Speaker:

telling thing in that last one actually is the unsure 32%.

Speaker:

That just means a lot of people have no idea about any of it.

Speaker:

What's interesting is that 54 percent of men More supportive,

Speaker:

but only 40 percent of women.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

So they obviously feel that she's hard done by, I think.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

That's right.

Speaker:

So, this resignation of Gladys, correct, made women not as strong

Speaker:

in their support of a federal ICAC.

Speaker:

There we go.

Speaker:

Right, um, so, our new leader, well, the new leader for New South Wales.

Speaker:

The good news for New South Wales.

Speaker:

Rub your hands together, you've got a brand new Premier.

Speaker:

And doesn't he look good?

Speaker:

Dominic Perretier.

Speaker:

All of our Premiers are Palaszczuk, Perretier.

Speaker:

When you've got an awkward name, just add an A at the end of it.

Speaker:

Shay?

Speaker:

I was going to say, old owner's name doesn't spell Shay.

Speaker:

Ray.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

So, there was a photo of him, because of the, uh, sort of acceleration of the

Speaker:

Freedom Day that he brought forward, um, him and a few of his colleagues

Speaker:

standing in a bar having a beer.

Speaker:

And, uh, it's a very blokey photo.

Speaker:

scene and if you convert it to black and white it looks very 1950s and

Speaker:

you know, state of the art sailings just come in and so I think New South

Speaker:

Wales have moved their clocks forward an hour and backwards 40 years.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

That's the way it looks to me.

Speaker:

So I mean people joke about Queensland being full of hicks and all the rest

Speaker:

of it and And, New South Wales, when I look at this photo and your leader.

Speaker:

Hey, we got VAD before New South Wales.

Speaker:

Yes, indeed.

Speaker:

So, uh, not a good look, New South Wales.

Speaker:

No.

Speaker:

Pull your fingers up.

Speaker:

Pull your fingers out.

Speaker:

Pull your socks up.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

So, what we've got, um, poor New South Wales, they've got a

Speaker:

Pentecostal Prime Minister and a hardline right wing Catholic Premier.

Speaker:

But not Opus D.

Speaker:

Well, not openly and not admitting to it, but he was brought up in a

Speaker:

school which was Which was Opus Dei.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

And he would have had a lot of spiritual teaching from Opus Dei ministers.

Speaker:

And, uh, so, so no, he's not, you couldn't say he's Opus Dei, but

Speaker:

they're a very secretive bunch.

Speaker:

They are.

Speaker:

and It's one of those ones where, of course, you're going to deny you're

Speaker:

over stoked, because that's the whole point of being over stoked.

Speaker:

So what we're saying is he's not a universally Unitarian.

Speaker:

He's not what?

Speaker:

Universally Unitarian.

Speaker:

Um.

Speaker:

So in America, when you're an atheist, but you can't be an

Speaker:

atheist, you have to go to a church.

Speaker:

Ah, okay.

Speaker:

It's the church you go to.

Speaker:

Oh, right.

Speaker:

Okay.

Speaker:

Yep.

Speaker:

So who knows, but he's got some views which we'll come to, which, Um, are quite

Speaker:

conservative in terms of social things.

Speaker:

And he's also got some economic views that are just so neoliberal.

Speaker:

It's probably the most worrying thing about this guy.

Speaker:

So, let's talk about, um He's willing to sacrifice a few New South Wales

Speaker:

people on the altar of, um Pubs.

Speaker:

Yeah, yes.

Speaker:

Of the economy.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Indeed.

Speaker:

Yep.

Speaker:

So, um, let's have a look at some of the things that he has said, so,

Speaker:

so he's definitely a member of the conservative right wing faction of

Speaker:

the Liberal Party, uh, he opposed the marriage equality, uh, bills.

Speaker:

He opposed A bill requiring priests to disclose child sexual abuse.

Speaker:

He voted against the introduction of safe exclusion zones outside abortion clinics.

Speaker:

He voted against abortion decriminalization.

Speaker:

Wants to stop welfare payments to women fleeing domestic violence, as this

Speaker:

allegedly contributes to rising divorce rates in single parents families.

Speaker:

He did a shoddy job managing the iCare programs, which

Speaker:

cost NSW 3 billion, left it.

Speaker:

Workers without compensation.

Speaker:

He blames the welfare system for declining birth rates and family

Speaker:

breakdown because, uh, if you've got a welfare system, you don't need kids

Speaker:

to look after you in your old age.

Speaker:

Quite literally, that's the thinking there.

Speaker:

Uh, yeah, there's no incentive.

Speaker:

Stated, quote, there's no incentive to have children if the state will

Speaker:

take care of you in your old age.

Speaker:

He, of course, has six kids and he's one of them.

Speaker:

Um, well, with any luck, they'll desert him in his old age.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

That's right.

Speaker:

You need to rely on the welfare state.

Speaker:

And he praised Donald Trump's election saying it was a victory of people who

Speaker:

have been taken for granted by the elites.

Speaker:

None of that looks good.

Speaker:

No.

Speaker:

Taken for granted by the elites like Donald Trump?

Speaker:

Mm hmm.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

New South Wales, how did you vote this guy in?

Speaker:

Oh wait, you didn't.

Speaker:

It just happens, doesn't it?

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Ah.

Speaker:

Roman says, I'm wondering whether the assisted dying legislation in New

Speaker:

South Wales has any chance of getting through with the new leadership.

Speaker:

Apparently he has said it's going to be a conscience vote.

Speaker:

Who knows?

Speaker:

Some people have suggested he's Is that like the conscience vote that

Speaker:

we had on abortion up in Queensland?

Speaker:

Yes, I wonder where if he Actually did exercise that vote

Speaker:

according to your conscience.

Speaker:

You'll get kicked out of the party.

Speaker:

Yes, who knows?

Speaker:

Yeah, who knows how that will go.

Speaker:

Interesting one.

Speaker:

Didn't he need an independent support to form government?

Speaker:

And that's why he's even I don't know.

Speaker:

I think they're running a minority government there.

Speaker:

I'm not sure.

Speaker:

But, um, some things I've read, people have said, look,

Speaker:

he's toned down the social.

Speaker:

Moral issues a little bit in recent times, they felt.

Speaker:

Um, but I also heard that Gladys fell on her own sword so that, um, effectively

Speaker:

the Nationals wouldn't take over.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

Because if she was standing aside Ah, then the Deputy Barilaro Right.

Speaker:

Would be Premier.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Whereas if she resigned, a Liberal got to take.

Speaker:

Premier the, yeah, the premier shape.

Speaker:

Oh, okay.

Speaker:

Hmm.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Okay.

Speaker:

So, so it was a smart, a political move rather than, right.

Speaker:

Okay.

Speaker:

Um, yeah.

Speaker:

Maybe we've got it wrong.

Speaker:

I mean, maybe it's not so bad after all.

Speaker:

Rowan Dean in the Spectator says it's not often these days that somebody

Speaker:

who is a conservative, a Christian and a contributor to this magazine.

Speaker:

Ends up as one of the most powerful leaders in the country.

Speaker:

So the news that Dominic Perrottet is now Premier of Australia's Premier State is

Speaker:

to be warmly welcomed by all who value traditionalism, reason and freedom.

Speaker:

Pop out the bubbly, and if it's Dom Perignon, so much the better.

Speaker:

Dom Perignon for Dom Perrottet.

Speaker:

Yes, so clever.

Speaker:

Yeah, so lots of people, of course, have been talking about his Catholic faith.

Speaker:

End.

Speaker:

what that means to the decisions he'll make as Premier.

Speaker:

And he's obviously picked up a lot of moral ideas from his Catholic faith,

Speaker:

one would have thought, and he's going to be making decisions, one would have

Speaker:

thought, based on his Catholic faith.

Speaker:

Catholic faith.

Speaker:

Some people in the religious groups are appalled that people are questioning and

Speaker:

are concerned about this man's faith as if it's got nothing to do with his job.

Speaker:

He's premier of a state.

Speaker:

He's, he is the guy who runs the ship in terms of lawmaking, laws that are

Speaker:

basically about morals quite often.

Speaker:

He's not just a car park attendant, in which case you're right, if he

Speaker:

was, then his religion would be irrelevant, but given the decisions

Speaker:

he's having to make, it's entirely relevant to know what his religion is,

Speaker:

because you get an idea of how he'll make his decisions based on that.

Speaker:

So, so is religious belief relevant?

Speaker:

And there was a really interesting article by Chris Stephenson Who is a sort

Speaker:

of a pro secular writer in Queensland.

Speaker:

I've never met her.

Speaker:

I hope to meet her at some stage.

Speaker:

Have you ever met her, Kristen?

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

So, um, she tells an interesting story which sort of exhibits why this is

Speaker:

important, uh, religious belief in terms of people who are not just decision

Speaker:

makers, but also just commentators.

Speaker:

So there's a Melbourne emergency doctor, Stephen Parnas, who has

Speaker:

become something of a social media celebrity during the COVID 19 pandemic.

Speaker:

So he's been tweeting about his direct experience with COVID patients and

Speaker:

encouraging people to get vaccinated.

Speaker:

So he's an emergency doctor, Stephen Parnas.

Speaker:

And this week, uh, our symbolic hero of the pandemic, Was told he was just

Speaker:

plain wrong about the subject of faith and power, and he spat the dummy.

Speaker:

So, uh, this guy, Dr.

Speaker:

Parnas, um, Vented his frustration that people were making an issue of

Speaker:

peritaze devout Catholicism, and Parnas tweeted, I can't believe we're back here!

Speaker:

Assess any MP on their politics and policies rather than

Speaker:

in their religious beliefs.

Speaker:

So, there's a, uh, researcher, Ronnie Salt, was quick to respond and say, Oh,

Speaker:

dear listener, swear words coming up, keep the kids out of this, on this episode.

Speaker:

Um, so Ronnie Salt says, How fucking dare you?

Speaker:

How dare you sit up there on your privileged hill of male

Speaker:

superiority and tell women not to discuss powerful men's religion?

Speaker:

How fucking dare you?

Speaker:

Powerful religious men use their religion to undermine

Speaker:

the rights of women every day.

Speaker:

Good point.

Speaker:

Parnas dug in.

Speaker:

He said, uh, it was an ad hominem attack.

Speaker:

He referred to the tsunami of responses he'd got from women,

Speaker:

and then in a fit of pique, he announced his departure from Twitter.

Speaker:

Time to leave this cesspit behind for a while.

Speaker:

So And the classic response to that is, this is not an airport, you don't

Speaker:

need to announce your departure.

Speaker:

That's it.

Speaker:

That's it.

Speaker:

Don't let the door hit you on the bum as you leave.

Speaker:

So, Chris Stevenson says, Parnas no doubt was also upset by my

Speaker:

contribution to the discussion, because she had Tweeted to him, it seems.

Speaker:

Why didn't you disclose the fact you were arguing as a fellow committed Catholic?

Speaker:

Why don't you disclose this when you're arguing against Voluntary Assisted Dying?

Speaker:

It matters because truth is, no matter what safeguards were in

Speaker:

place, nor how effective, you'd still oppose it because of your faith.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

So, because you have hardline faith, it's coloured your thinking on this issue.

Speaker:

You should have disclosed.

Speaker:

Your Catholicism, Mr Parnas, about these issues.

Speaker:

I don't see people commenting on Dan Andrews faith.

Speaker:

I comment on that all the time, and I say Sorry, but you are the rare outlier.

Speaker:

Because to most people, they don't care what his faith is because it

Speaker:

doesn't seem to impact his decisions.

Speaker:

His decisions are made for the good of the people of Victoria, not the

Speaker:

good of his follow faith believers.

Speaker:

So his decisions are actually often contrary to the interests of his faith.

Speaker:

Correct.

Speaker:

So, that's okay, because you go, clearly he wasn't influenced by

Speaker:

his faith, uh, in a way that was contrary to the ultimate decision.

Speaker:

But where people make a decision in alignment with their faith's

Speaker:

requirements, then you have a problem.

Speaker:

As we'll get onto With Perrottet, there's a situation with the running of

Speaker:

cemeteries in Sydney, where independent public service groups have said, we

Speaker:

need to amalgamate all these cemeteries and have them run by one organization.

Speaker:

Guess what?

Speaker:

The Catholics don't like that.

Speaker:

Because they lose power and money.

Speaker:

And also where would they hide the funds when they're being sued by sex abuse

Speaker:

victims if it isn't in the cemeteries?

Speaker:

Indeed.

Speaker:

So, Perrottet has come out very clearly and told his department

Speaker:

very clearly we want to support the Catholics position when it

Speaker:

comes to the running of cemeteries.

Speaker:

So he's making a decision that will favour the Catholic Church.

Speaker:

So, it's important we know, um, what's guiding their decision making.

Speaker:

Exactly.

Speaker:

Dan Andrews in that case, according to his track record, is actually

Speaker:

going, well, stuff you Catholic Church, you don't get to run the

Speaker:

cerem the cemeteries and you miss out.

Speaker:

And so, um, Uh, his Catholic faith doesn't really come up except to say, gosh,

Speaker:

he made a decision that was contrary.

Speaker:

Who's Dan Catholic?

Speaker:

Uh, no, he's, uh, I don't know what he is.

Speaker:

He's Christian.

Speaker:

He's Christian, yeah.

Speaker:

I don't know that he's Catholic.

Speaker:

But your, your faith, um, didn't, um, stop you from making a decision contrary

Speaker:

to the interests of your faith group.

Speaker:

Well, um, a good example of that was, um, 80 percent of, People support Voluntary

Speaker:

Assisted Dying, uh, and I would find it hard to believe that he would vote.

Speaker:

In favor of his electorate rather than in line with his faith.

Speaker:

Mm-Hmm.

Speaker:

And yes, and therefore, there is a deciding influence that I think

Speaker:

the public needs to know about.

Speaker:

Indeed.

Speaker:

It's entirely relevant.

Speaker:

So, um, because it's relevant to the job, because he's making decisions that affect

Speaker:

the, the church that he's a part of.

Speaker:

So, um, so anyway, um.

Speaker:

Let me just get on with this article by Chris Stevenson.

Speaker:

So, um, so yeah, he had also made comments about Voluntary Assisted Dying.

Speaker:

So, uh, Chris Stevenson goes on, before Dr.

Speaker:

Parnas became a Twitter hero, I knew him as a passionate advocate

Speaker:

against Voluntary Assisted Dying.

Speaker:

And because I know that most people who oppose Voluntary

Speaker:

Assisted Dying do so for religious reasons, I had done some research.

Speaker:

Dr.

Speaker:

Parnas works at St.

Speaker:

Vincent's Hospital, a Catholic institution devoted to bringing

Speaker:

God's love to those in need through the healing ministry of Jesus.

Speaker:

In 2018, Dr.

Speaker:

Parnas and his associate, uh, Dr.

Speaker:

Michael, delivered the rerun Navarium Oration at the

Speaker:

Australian Catholic University.

Speaker:

The oration was titled, Widening the Door of Hope, a response to the

Speaker:

Victorian assisted dying legislation.

Speaker:

A cradle Catholic, Dr.

Speaker:

Parnas was educated by Jesuits.

Speaker:

He remains an active supporter of his alma mater, even sitting

Speaker:

on the school's foundation board.

Speaker:

And he's also active in his local Catholic Church.

Speaker:

So, Chris Stevenson said, I had to go looking for that information.

Speaker:

When Dr Parnas appears in newspapers, on radio, or in parliamentary briefings,

Speaker:

or rails against a voluntary assisted dying, he relies on his credibility

Speaker:

as a doctor, never disclosing that the fundamental reason for his

Speaker:

opposition is his deep Catholic faith.

Speaker:

Just so.

Speaker:

When he suggested that Premier Perrottet should not be judged on

Speaker:

his religious beliefs, he failed to disclose that he was speaking as a

Speaker:

fellow Catholic and political activist.

Speaker:

So, people need to know that.

Speaker:

Good point, Chris.

Speaker:

Very good.

Speaker:

Um, uh, she goes on and I think there's other examples that she

Speaker:

gave in relation to somebody else who was talking about, um, um.

Speaker:

Marriage equality and claimed to be a person of no particular faith, but

Speaker:

she smelled a rat investigated, and sure enough, they were religious.

Speaker:

So good article on why we need to know.

Speaker:

And I think, um, hard to argue, um, and yeah, I've got a link to the article

Speaker:

about the cemeteries and well, you know, I, I think, um, Uh, we don't need to know

Speaker:

about um, what businesses politicians are involved in, because obviously

Speaker:

that's their own personal business and why is it any concern of ours?

Speaker:

You'd never say that, would you?

Speaker:

No.

Speaker:

Yeah, indeed.

Speaker:

And let's face it, these groups are businesses.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

These church groups are running businesses, and so, you know, He may

Speaker:

not be a shareholder, because they don't have shares, but he's as good

Speaker:

as a shareholder in these groups.

Speaker:

And, um, you remember the dual nationality case with the Catholic Church?

Speaker:

Mm hmm.

Speaker:

With a member of dual nationality with the Catholic Church back in the fifties.

Speaker:

I think it was.

Speaker:

So do you remember the scandal a couple of years ago about the section of 44

Speaker:

and whether you are a member of the.

Speaker:

And so it went to the high court because they said being a member of the Catholic

Speaker:

faith effectively their allegiance is to a foreign country, which is the Vatican.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

So, back then it was recognised that an allegiance to the Vatican

Speaker:

was a conflict of interest.

Speaker:

Did the High Court actually say that?

Speaker:

It didn't say that, I think, but certainly there was It was worthy

Speaker:

of going to the High Court about it.

Speaker:

It was worthy to go, yeah.

Speaker:

It was raised as a concern back then.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

So, um, so no, we need to look at his faith and, you know, let's

Speaker:

see what he does in that regard.

Speaker:

Now, more worrying, I think, is, um, uh, yep, Alison, we've just done that,

Speaker:

I'll just leave the comments, keep commenting in there, so Perrottet, uh,

Speaker:

his, incredibly, I think his neoliberalism is going to be more of a worry than New

Speaker:

South Wales and his religion, I think.

Speaker:

Um, so this was from an article on the Saturday paper by Mike second, and, uh,

Speaker:

Pite is the whole neoliberal package.

Speaker:

So Green's MP or MLC David s Shoebridge ticks off some of

Speaker:

the manifestations of this.

Speaker:

So, according to David s Shoebridge, um, as treasurer ate was completely

Speaker:

committed to a privatization agenda.

Speaker:

Albeit rebadged as Asset Recycling, rather than Privatization, Asset Recycling.

Speaker:

So, Perrottet oversaw the sale of the government's 49 percent stake in the

Speaker:

WestConnex motorway for 11 billion.

Speaker:

Uh, prior to that we've seen the sale of electricity distribution and generators.

Speaker:

Uh, sold the land titles registry, actually Queensland did that as well.

Speaker:

He's had a highly developed plan to sell off all the state's plantation forests.

Speaker:

In a billion dollar one off deal, but the terrible Black Summer fires did so

Speaker:

much damage to the estate it took buyers out of the market, otherwise you would

Speaker:

have sold the state's plantation forests.

Speaker:

We don't have enough appreciation of the commons, and that the commons

Speaker:

belongs to multiple generations.

Speaker:

You convert the commons into money.

Speaker:

And blow it on something, you've just robbed future generations.

Speaker:

Yes, but it gets you elected next time around.

Speaker:

Who cares about 20 years down the line?

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

It's just a, this pillaging of future generations by the current

Speaker:

generation is not recognized by people.

Speaker:

And also, I think there's a fairly good argument that privatization

Speaker:

hasn't shown the benefits that were argued back in the eighties.

Speaker:

Uh, never does.

Speaker:

So the whole thing with that, um, disaster with.

Speaker:

Because they've got to make a profit.

Speaker:

They have to do everything that the public service would have done

Speaker:

in terms of provide service, but then make profit on top of that.

Speaker:

You've got to do more with less.

Speaker:

Obviously, standards of service deteriorate.

Speaker:

Well, the argument is that civil service is so inefficient that

Speaker:

the profit is made from making the thing run more efficiently.

Speaker:

Yeah, particularly when it comes to monopoly type stuff.

Speaker:

Electricity, water, these are not things that you put in the hands of private

Speaker:

enterprise who can then screw you over.

Speaker:

These things, as a society, we need.

Speaker:

Right, um, so according to Shoebridge, he's a very aggressive privatiser.

Speaker:

The only real constraint is that so much has already been sold off

Speaker:

by labour and liberal governments.

Speaker:

There's not much left to sell.

Speaker:

So, um, so yeah, with the public insurer iCare, he got it to operate along more

Speaker:

private sector market based lines, and he developed a two billion dollar whole.

Speaker:

During his watch, which saw thousands of injured workers

Speaker:

inappropriately lose their benefits.

Speaker:

So, um, so yeah, if there's something to sell off, he will.

Speaker:

Now, what he also did was, uh, he got the Treasury, the New South Wales

Speaker:

Treasury, to, um, borrow 10 billion at very low interest rates that

Speaker:

he just invested in high yielding stocks and other financial assets.

Speaker:

Which is basically just gambling with taxpayers money.

Speaker:

Ten billion dollar loan, a cheap interest, and then went and

Speaker:

bought a few investments with it.

Speaker:

So Saul Aislake is not impressed.

Speaker:

I really like Saul Aislake.

Speaker:

And that's alright.

Speaker:

Treasury did it, so it's Wow.

Speaker:

So, um, I really like Saul Eslark.

Speaker:

He is a good, uh, neutral, uh, economist, I reckon.

Speaker:

I saw him speak live once at a lunch, and I just came away from it thinking,

Speaker:

Wow, is that guy in charge of his brief?

Speaker:

Like, he He is a smart guy, Saul Eslake.

Speaker:

When's the last time you had that experience when you

Speaker:

watched a politician talk?

Speaker:

Oh, Saul Eslake's not a politician.

Speaker:

I know.

Speaker:

We have so many great people in Australia, hardly any of them seem to be in politics.

Speaker:

The last time I was impressed by a politician for just being

Speaker:

super bright on something.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

You know, sometimes Malcolm Turnbull said things.

Speaker:

But he never put it into action, really.

Speaker:

But after Tony Abbott, when Malcolm Turnbull came in, it was like,

Speaker:

Oh, finally, we've got somebody in charge here who's not embarrassed.

Speaker:

He's not embarrassing.

Speaker:

And he spoke and you thought that all makes perfect sense.

Speaker:

But of course, what subsequently happened in action didn't.

Speaker:

Neat.

Speaker:

The promises.

Speaker:

I remember thinking that, um, the best Republican, um, president

Speaker:

the US has had in years, Right.

Speaker:

Um, was Obama.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

He was all words.

Speaker:

Very eloquent.

Speaker:

He was incredibly eloquent.

Speaker:

It's true.

Speaker:

But he was a right wing politician.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Indeed.

Speaker:

Indeed.

Speaker:

So in terms of one in power who who's impressed as being totally over their

Speaker:

brief Let me think about that one.

Speaker:

Okay, can you think of one?

Speaker:

Not lately.

Speaker:

No Penny Wang.

Speaker:

I don't know about yeah, Penny Wang.

Speaker:

Maybe that seemed to be across her Portfolio, I don't know about impressed.

Speaker:

Mmm, but certainly Um, so what else has, uh, Saul Eslake Peritei?

Speaker:

Um, he says that's a risky thing to do.

Speaker:

Although one thing he's looking at doing is, um, What'd you go like Iceland then?

Speaker:

Uh, what about Iceland?

Speaker:

Oh, they put all their money in No, sorry, it was the UK.

Speaker:

Councils that have put all their money into the Icelandic banks that went, right,

Speaker:

collapsed during the financial crisis.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

But the Icelandic people actually were the only ones on the planet who really took

Speaker:

on the managers in charge of those banks.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

And, and punished them.

Speaker:

Really said we're not gonna let that happen again.

Speaker:

So, yeah.

Speaker:

But, but it was, you know, government's gambling with money.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Anyway, uh, so Saul Eslake says that's dangerous, although, um, Perrottet

Speaker:

wants to change the GST formula.

Speaker:

He says Western Australia is grossly overpaid, and Saul Eslake says,

Speaker:

fair enough, they are, and that's a good point by Perrottet, so, um, so

Speaker:

he says, yep, that's a good point.

Speaker:

Also, um, what else does Perrottet want to do is, uh, currently, there's

Speaker:

a lot of stamp duty on land transfers.

Speaker:

And he's saying we should get rid of the stamp duty on land transfers and instead

Speaker:

put an annual land tax on everybody, including dwellings that you own.

Speaker:

So rather than collecting tax on the transfer of property, just

Speaker:

collect it on owning property.

Speaker:

Makes sense?

Speaker:

Yeah, apparently.

Speaker:

Um, like rates, but a government rather than a, a state government bill

Speaker:

rather than a local government bill.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Land tax.

Speaker:

There's currently land tax in Queensland and other states, but you have to have

Speaker:

a significant amount of property that is not principal place of residence

Speaker:

when you start getting a land tax bill.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

Happy days when you can get a land tax bill, because you,

Speaker:

because you're doing all right.

Speaker:

Unless you're the federal government.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

So, um, Because they don't get any of that.

Speaker:

No, no, other way around, um, a friend of mine is up near the new army base,

Speaker:

or the extension of the army base up in Rockhampton, and apparently there's a

Speaker:

whole load of farms have been resumed.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

To extend the army base.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

And the local shire has lost two million dollars of rates a year.

Speaker:

Of course.

Speaker:

Because it's now owned by the federal government who won't pay rates.

Speaker:

Yes, that's it.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

There we go.

Speaker:

So it was a huge hole in the budget.

Speaker:

Mm hmm.

Speaker:

Interesting.

Speaker:

Um, Also, um, so yeah, Salt Lake says nearly all economists

Speaker:

agree that's a good idea.

Speaker:

Get rid of the transactional stamp duty, putting in a annual land tax.

Speaker:

I thought there was a talk of putting in, um, stamp duty on possibly share trading

Speaker:

to try and stop speculative trading.

Speaker:

Oh, lots of people put it up as a good idea, but I've never

Speaker:

heard any government actually.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

But I mean, was there a reason that land You have stamped easy

Speaker:

on land was for a similar reason.

Speaker:

I don't know how it came about, it was just easier.

Speaker:

I don't know the historic, the history of it.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

Yeah, yeah, I don't know.

Speaker:

Shares probably did have some sort of transfer tax at some point, but not sure.

Speaker:

And of course the other reason not to is Because stamp duty is

Speaker:

paid when you have cash in hand.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Whereas a land tax, you may actually be asset rich and cash poor.

Speaker:

Yes, that's right.

Speaker:

It's a risky bold move if he does it.

Speaker:

So, but he seems to be a bit of a risk taker.

Speaker:

I mean, he's happy to take a risk with the state's finances on that loan, so.

Speaker:

Uh, Interesting character.

Speaker:

Not his money.

Speaker:

So, yeah.

Speaker:

Well, this is the thing, isn't it?

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Okay.

Speaker:

Um, so, voluntary assisted dying.

Speaker:

There's an independent Alex Greenwich.

Speaker:

Greenwich?

Speaker:

Greenwich?

Speaker:

Greenwich.

Speaker:

Greenwich.

Speaker:

He's going to put up a bill and Parataya said it's going to be a conscience vote.

Speaker:

So that will be interesting to see how that all pans out.

Speaker:

By the way, uh, voluntary assisted dying in Victoria.

Speaker:

How's it been going?

Speaker:

And Um, it's been in effect for more than three years in Victoria, and there's a

Speaker:

report from Victoria's Voluntary Assisted Dying Review Board, and it says during

Speaker:

that time, 836 people have been assessed as eligible for Voluntary Assisted Dying,

Speaker:

uh, 674 permit applications were made.

Speaker:

Um, 597 permits were issued.

Speaker:

Not sure what the difference is there.

Speaker:

Uh, the big important number is 331 people have died from taking the

Speaker:

prescribed medications in Victoria.

Speaker:

Not a huge number, but kind of what you'd expect really.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

One every three days.

Speaker:

So, um, so, there we go.

Speaker:

Um, Dan Andrews is going to bring in secular qualified mental

Speaker:

health practitioners in every government secondary school as

Speaker:

opposed to chaplains who have to be from a religious organization.

Speaker:

Good on you, Dan Andrews.

Speaker:

Um, did you see the story about the, um, the artist, um, Jens Harning,

Speaker:

um, so he's a Danish artist.

Speaker:

Just a little light change of pace here, dear listener, from

Speaker:

all this depressing stuff.

Speaker:

This is somebody fighting back the system.

Speaker:

So, um, so Harning created, uh, two artworks in 2007 and 2011, where he

Speaker:

affixed bank notes onto a canvas as a commentary on the average incomes in

Speaker:

Denmark and Austria respectively in the Konsten Museum of Modern Art loved them.

Speaker:

And I offered them in the equivalent.

Speaker:

Uh, of 3, 900 to remake both of those, um, uh, canvases.

Speaker:

So they provided him with 115, 000 worth of cash to put on the

Speaker:

canvas, and they were going to pay him basically 3, 900 for his fee.

Speaker:

And when they unwrapped the canvases, they were met with two completely blank

Speaker:

canvases titled, Take the Money and Run.

Speaker:

So the, uh, the art gallery or whatever it is, um, Museum of Modern Art, uh, they're

Speaker:

suing him now, but he doesn't care.

Speaker:

He's not paying it back.

Speaker:

He said, The work is that I have, I have taken their money.

Speaker:

Or the word is.

Speaker:

I encourage other people who've been working conditions as

Speaker:

miserable as mine to do the same.

Speaker:

If they're sitting in some shitty job and not getting paid.

Speaker:

And, uh, actually being asked to pay money to go to work, uh,

Speaker:

grab what you can and beat it, so That would be tough as an artist.

Speaker:

It's like, man, you're only paying me 3, 900, I've got to do all this stuff,

Speaker:

blah, blah, blah, like you Meanwhile, you're happy to give me 115, 000.

Speaker:

The dollars to stick on the bloody canvas.

Speaker:

You would actually have the money in your hand and look at the

Speaker:

canvas and go, what am I doing?

Speaker:

New idea.

Speaker:

Take the money and run.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

And you keep an eye on the messages for me, Joe.

Speaker:

Um, if you can, Alison and Bronwyn are having a good chat in there.

Speaker:

So, um, uh, oh, Alison says, I don't think Dan Andrews announcement

Speaker:

about secular professionals will affect chaplaincy at all.

Speaker:

I'm sure it's a totally separate thing.

Speaker:

Um, Roman thinks it's being offered as an alternative.

Speaker:

Anyway, we'll get further details on that as they come to hand.

Speaker:

Um, lots of different people saying goodbye to Facebook.

Speaker:

So Reason Australia was, did an article about Fiona Patton, who

Speaker:

basically said, there's just too much nasty commentary that it totally

Speaker:

spoils the page, and too hard to deal with, and so we're just out of here.

Speaker:

No point having a Facebook page.

Speaker:

Nope.

Speaker:

Find some other way of dealing with it.

Speaker:

Yep.

Speaker:

That's not surprising.

Speaker:

No, it does seem to be getting pretty ugly.

Speaker:

There's been no resolution yet of the whole thing with people making defamatory

Speaker:

comments that the owner of a page Facebook took themselves down for a while, so

Speaker:

Facebook took themselves down, right, yes.

Speaker:

Solved that problem.

Speaker:

Yes, um, but the government does recognize that it's up to them to change the law

Speaker:

on that one, so they're trying to get the state To agree to something on that.

Speaker:

So, uh, that's going to be a legislative solution to that one.

Speaker:

Um, here's stories of people going missing and searchers

Speaker:

are sent out looking for them.

Speaker:

So, um, there was this guy in Turkey who went missing.

Speaker:

I've heard about that, yeah.

Speaker:

And, um, uh, He'd been drinking with some friends and he wandered into a

Speaker:

forest and when he failed to return, uh, Well, he's out in the forest

Speaker:

and he's going, Jesus, I'm lost.

Speaker:

He sees this group of people walking along and he says, I'll just, I'll

Speaker:

just tag along with these guys and eventually I'll be led to, you

Speaker:

know, out of this goddamn forest.

Speaker:

And he's walking along with them for about half an hour or so.

Speaker:

Then they start calling out his name.

Speaker:

He says, I'm here.

Speaker:

What?

Speaker:

And they were a search party looking for him.

Speaker:

I actually have a similar story.

Speaker:

Really?

Speaker:

Yeah, yeah, we went to a beach on Jersey, which was down the side of a cliff.

Speaker:

And we came back and we picked up the car in the car park on the main beach.

Speaker:

Towards the end of the afternoon and we saw the lifeboat go out and we went

Speaker:

down to have a chat with them and they said, Oh, yeah, apparently there's a

Speaker:

family stuck in the cove around there and the tides coming in and we're

Speaker:

really worried about them and we go.

Speaker:

That was us.

Speaker:

We climbed up the side of the glove.

Speaker:

There's a footpath up the side of the glove.

Speaker:

At least you didn't join the search party in a boat.

Speaker:

I wept with laughter when I saw that.

Speaker:

And then you're in the boat.

Speaker:

Joe!

Speaker:

What?

Speaker:

Oh, it's me you're looking for.

Speaker:

Ah, that would have been funny.

Speaker:

Um, Jessica Rowe.

Speaker:

So.

Speaker:

She has a podcast.

Speaker:

I think it was a podcast.

Speaker:

I mean, who doesn't have a podcast it!

Speaker:

That's right.

Speaker:

When you tell people you're on a podcast, they go, Eh, everyone is.

Speaker:

Well, I'm lucky.

Speaker:

I seem to be an age demographic where it's still pretty rare.

Speaker:

So yeah, people are impressed because you hang out with old people, old white men.

Speaker:

I usually leave that part out.

Speaker:

Anyway, she had a podcast and she had, um, well, she's obviously tried to appeal

Speaker:

to a left ish type of audience, I think.

Speaker:

And she made the mistake of inviting Pauline Hanson onto the show and

Speaker:

doing a bit of a soft interview, I think, because Pauline talks of love,

Speaker:

raising kids and why she keeps going.

Speaker:

But a lot of people tweeted back at her saying, what the hell are you doing

Speaker:

giving this woman a platform, essentially?

Speaker:

And she then contacted, uh, her bosses and said, can we drop

Speaker:

that podcast and delete it?

Speaker:

Cause I've felt the heat from all this.

Speaker:

So what do you reckon, Shay?

Speaker:

Is that?

Speaker:

Is that, uh, cancelling or is it anything to be concerned about or do you have

Speaker:

any thoughts on, on her succumbing to the backlash from the community?

Speaker:

No, I just think, um, Grace Tame lands her communication with a real clang.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

And I just think she's super, super powerful.

Speaker:

And I don't remember the exact quote.

Speaker:

But it came out almost immediately after Rose and it was just like, sometimes when

Speaker:

Grace talks it, even for me, who I seem to like, think I'm pretty up to date,

Speaker:

it's like being slapped across the face.

Speaker:

It's so obviously, you know, impactful that Jessica Rowe was doing this.

Speaker:

So I think Jessica Rowe bowed to pressure, fine.

Speaker:

She should have maybe prepared for some backlash.

Speaker:

You're gonna have Pauline Hanson.

Speaker:

Like, Pauline Hanson's made a career out of being controversial.

Speaker:

It was never just gonna slide through, was it?

Speaker:

I think it's important not to see people with opposing political views.

Speaker:

As monsters, which is what happens when you isolate them when you don't hear them.

Speaker:

And in some ways, it is important to realize that these are real people

Speaker:

who might be misguided, um, but still think they are doing the right thing.

Speaker:

Um, I, I think it becomes a lot easier to come to bipartisan agreement.

Speaker:

And the problem is we are too divided.

Speaker:

We see the other side as the other.

Speaker:

Mm hmm.

Speaker:

And we don't sit down and talk to them.

Speaker:

Mm hmm I guess the counter to that would be that Pauline Hanson

Speaker:

has plenty of opportunity to Demonstrate to people her humanity.

Speaker:

So if she hasn't managed to do that in the forums that are offered to her

Speaker:

already Why take up space on a forum?

Speaker:

Because if she's showing it in a forum, it's not necessarily going to

Speaker:

be a right wing forum that the left leaning people aren't going to hear.

Speaker:

Okay.

Speaker:

This to me is a little bit like, um, George W.

Speaker:

Bush.

Speaker:

Mm hmm.

Speaker:

Has been on a lot of programs post his presidency where they've gone soft on him.

Speaker:

And there's been almost a rehabilitation of George W.

Speaker:

And, uh, he's a nice guy, he's an ex president, and we'll

Speaker:

forget all that stuff about him.

Speaker:

The Middle East, and, and just, uh, going soft on him,

Speaker:

I, I, I sort of think why he's had his chance to put his views out there.

Speaker:

Um, Grace Tain, let's see what she said.

Speaker:

She said, This is how discrimination and hate is suddenly enabled and normalized.

Speaker:

Everyone's entitled to their own view, but not all views should be

Speaker:

valorized by promoting their source.

Speaker:

Falling doesn't need to be heard, but those who's oppressing, she's

Speaker:

both driven and reinforced, do.

Speaker:

So, that was, um, that was Tame.

Speaker:

What's her first name?

Speaker:

I've got her first name, so.

Speaker:

Isn't it Grace Tame?

Speaker:

Grace Tame.

Speaker:

So,

Speaker:

uh, from Sean McAuliffe, he says, Isn't this a story about

Speaker:

the triumph of free speech?

Speaker:

Ro asks the questions she wants, Hanson gives the answers she wants, people get

Speaker:

to rail against it, being a podcast, Ro gets to change her mind and we

Speaker:

get to express our opinion about it.

Speaker:

I suppose.

Speaker:

It's working!

Speaker:

Yeah!

Speaker:

Like, at the end of the day, uh, Ro's free to make a decision and she's also

Speaker:

free to decide, shit, that didn't work with my audience, I'm gonna pull it.

Speaker:

The audience is free to say, that's a really shitty interview, and if you want

Speaker:

us to listen to your interviews in future, don't put this shitty interview stuff on,

Speaker:

and, uh, Pauline gets to say, Goddamnit.

Speaker:

Was it her audience, or was it a wider public?

Speaker:

Well Or political commentators?

Speaker:

Who will know?

Speaker:

I guess she saw the comments from people she perceived as her audience.

Speaker:

Was she clear about the aim of having her on?

Speaker:

What's the aim of Jessica Rowe's podcast?

Speaker:

Have constructive conversations?

Speaker:

Or talk about cooking or?

Speaker:

I don't know exactly.

Speaker:

But maybe she doesn't either.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Um, uh, well, in her tweet, telling people about her interview with Pauline

Speaker:

Hanson, she says, um, um, let's see.

Speaker:

So didn't talk anything about her life in politics, but delving into

Speaker:

her life outside of parliament.

Speaker:

And she talks, love raising kids and why she keeps going.

Speaker:

So, it's basically saying, a look at the human side rather than the

Speaker:

political side of Pauline Hanson.

Speaker:

I mean, I think it's as important as the book, The Banality of Evil.

Speaker:

Which is literally a history of the guy who ran the train lines.

Speaker:

In the Second World War.

Speaker:

Was it Hess or something like that?

Speaker:

No, no, no.

Speaker:

It was some civil servant who just ran the trains.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

The problem was the trains were full of Jews going to the concentration camp.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

And it was how banal this job was.

Speaker:

And yet this man literally transported or was, yeah, involved in transporting

Speaker:

millions of people to their deaths.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

Was that when he was in the dock at the Hague or whatever it was?

Speaker:

I thought that was what the banality of evil was about, was about that one of

Speaker:

the key, Goring or Hess or somebody No, no, no, I Was such an ordinary looking

Speaker:

character, banal, and was so evil.

Speaker:

Just looking at the man in the witness box, he just looked like Some dull

Speaker:

accountant, and it seemed incongruous that, um, he was something else.

Speaker:

So, yeah.

Speaker:

Anyway, Anyone in the chat room have an opinion on that one?

Speaker:

Let us know.

Speaker:

I kind of agree with Sean McCarth on this one.

Speaker:

Free speech, people can say stuff, people can complain about what people

Speaker:

say, and people can make decisions, and um, I really personally think

Speaker:

Pauline Hanson gets enough chance to,

Speaker:

Show her softer side on any number of times soon.

Speaker:

Um, Netball.

Speaker:

I don't think we've spoken about netball much on this podcast over the years.

Speaker:

Netball, here's my theory on netball.

Speaker:

If you were to invent netball today, you'd never get off first base.

Speaker:

Because creating a sport played on a hard ground, where people have to stop within

Speaker:

one step, is just It's just destined to create knee and ankle issues for

Speaker:

people, like it's, um, not a good idea.

Speaker:

So, anyway, Netball Queensland has been accused of turning, uh, its

Speaker:

own championships into a farce.

Speaker:

You want to tell me about Penalty of Evil?

Speaker:

No, uh, no.

Speaker:

Oh yeah, sorry, it's saying it's Eichmann in Jerusalem.

Speaker:

Oh right, okay.

Speaker:

So it was a Jewish, uh, reporter.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

Who covered the trials.

Speaker:

Yeah, yep.

Speaker:

And essentially he was like an accountant and seemed quite ordinary.

Speaker:

Well, and saying the fact that he couldn't even string a sentence together.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

And couldn't believe that this was the evil architect of destruction.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Well, there's a lot, you know, Pauline Hanson can hardly

Speaker:

string a sentence together.

Speaker:

The analogy's starting to work.

Speaker:

I'm starting to see the analogy here, Joe.

Speaker:

I'm starting to see it.

Speaker:

Okay, back to the netball.

Speaker:

So, um, Netball Queensland accused of turning its own

Speaker:

championships into a farce.

Speaker:

Essentially, they allowed an under 17 all boys team to compete.

Speaker:

In the Under 18s Championship, and the boys essentially thrashed them,

Speaker:

and the crowd got quite irate watching it, and nasty comments made from the

Speaker:

side, and, um, They don't have a state championship for boys due to player

Speaker:

numbers, so they won their seven games by an average of 29 goals, and the closest

Speaker:

contest came in the semifinals when they beat the opposition by 23 goals.

Speaker:

So, yeah.

Speaker:

Shay, any thoughts as a representative of women's netball?

Speaker:

Yeah, well, uh, I've been this height, which for the listeners is 172 centimeters

Speaker:

since I was about 13, and I've got very broad shoulders, so My parents had hoped

Speaker:

I'd be a swimmer, but I wasn't a swimmer.

Speaker:

So netball it was, so I was goal attack for like many years

Speaker:

representative and absolutely my knees and ankles are kaput as a result.

Speaker:

And um, I think the obvious solution is mixed netball.

Speaker:

There was a boys team played against my daughter, um, under 14s, I think.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

A couple of years ago.

Speaker:

Same age, signed to 14 boys against 7.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Um, and they play an incredibly different game.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

They, uh, it's just watching them, having watched girls play time and

Speaker:

time again, to watch an all boys team on the court was so different.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Um, they, Over a third, those types of rules, they, they, they were just, I

Speaker:

don't know, they, they were more physical.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

And, and not pushing each other because it's a no contact, but, um,

Speaker:

they, they were more aggressive in the way that they went for the ball.

Speaker:

Um, they just played a very different game.

Speaker:

Mm.

Speaker:

And it is, I don't know what the answer is because obviously they have to

Speaker:

be able and maybe as you say, mixed.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Yeah, well certainly, uh, I always played with girls until I was 17

Speaker:

or 18 and then did Mixnet Ball.

Speaker:

And that was a hoot, you know, and it did actually sort of balance

Speaker:

the kind of physicality versus the, you know, um, practice technique

Speaker:

of women who'd played for years.

Speaker:

It seems like the obvious thing, having one boys team play against the girls.

Speaker:

I'm not sure that that is, you know, striving for equality.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

I, I think solutions could be.

Speaker:

Well, at least the girls team who made the final should have been declared the

Speaker:

netball champions for that year, like, should have got the trophy, perhaps.

Speaker:

Or, what they should do is maybe say to boys, You know, drop down three years.

Speaker:

Like you have to be under 15 boys against under 18 girls or something,

Speaker:

or whatever level you need to go down to make it a fairer contest.

Speaker:

Obviously didn't do that in this case.

Speaker:

Um, and really, or let the boys compete, but say, well, you don't

Speaker:

get to go into the final cause you can compete in this, but.

Speaker:

Um, uh, but you don't get to go into the finals, I don't know, but, um, maybe

Speaker:

just make him young enough so that it evens it up, but that was just crazy.

Speaker:

That's just crazy.

Speaker:

Do you think it'd still be appealing to boys with all

Speaker:

those extra limitations though?

Speaker:

Well, if, if, if it's only, well, it's, it's hardly appealing

Speaker:

if you're flogging people.

Speaker:

That must be a bit tough.

Speaker:

It's not, it's actually no fun in sport to be.

Speaker:

You know, I've played competitive squash for years, and if you're in

Speaker:

the wrong grade and you're killing everybody, there's no fun in that either.

Speaker:

So you want, and that's what they should learn.

Speaker:

So, um.

Speaker:

Yeah, I know that the professional teams play against men in their training.

Speaker:

Ah.

Speaker:

So the Firebirds and that will play against some men's

Speaker:

teams in their training.

Speaker:

Hmm.

Speaker:

Hmm.

Speaker:

So, there we go.

Speaker:

We learn something every day.

Speaker:

I didn't know that you were a netballer.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

And I'm happy that my theory on knees and ankles stood up.

Speaker:

It's perfect.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

I've also got a theory about netball referees.

Speaker:

Are they called referees or umpires?

Speaker:

Either is fine.

Speaker:

They're really wannabe Nazis.

Speaker:

Yeah, I never made a good umpire.

Speaker:

I never played I was all like, ah, let it go.

Speaker:

Oh, was it a step?

Speaker:

Yeah, and particularly you see netball.

Speaker:

I've never played mixed netball, but I did, I've watched a little bit with my

Speaker:

kids at different times, so this is cool.

Speaker:

Where there's guys who have obviously never played netball before, and they're

Speaker:

in a mixed team, and they've got that ungainliness about them, the umpire

Speaker:

will pull them up on a stepping core that just isn't there, because they just

Speaker:

don't like the look of this ungainly guy.

Speaker:

And they just love blowing that whistle.

Speaker:

They're shockers.

Speaker:

They love blowing the whistle.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

I think they take it upon themselves to be fair, like, especially for

Speaker:

the taller, leaner ones, because even though they are standing 1.

Speaker:

5 metres or whatever, 3 feet.

Speaker:

They look like they're up nice and close, so just, yeah, they'll take

Speaker:

it upon themselves to take their job very seriously as umpires.

Speaker:

Yeah, if I had a son who was looking to start a relationship with a

Speaker:

netball umpire, I'd be very worried.

Speaker:

I'd be warning him against it.

Speaker:

Um, in terms of the knees and ankles, hmm.

Speaker:

I believe it's the sudden stop.

Speaker:

It's the no, no traveling rule.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Um, that I heard from a physiologist is actually very, very hard.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

And in fact, in professional netball, they have to learn how

Speaker:

to stop correctly so that they can stop without doing the damage.

Speaker:

Um, and it's the kids long term if they don't get that training

Speaker:

end up with major damage.

Speaker:

So I've played a bit of Frisbee, so Ultimate Disc Frisbee, and when you're

Speaker:

running and you catch the Frisbee, you are allowed to take three or four

Speaker:

minor steps, like just to pull up.

Speaker:

You don't have to do it.

Speaker:

Within two steps.

Speaker:

Like if you're running flat out in a certain direction, you catch the Frisbee.

Speaker:

You, uh, there's no rule about a precise number of steps

Speaker:

that you have to pull up in.

Speaker:

Um, it's just, you try and do it in what is a reasonable amount of pull ups time.

Speaker:

So.

Speaker:

I haven't seen that game.

Speaker:

There you go.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

So you'll have to look that one up.

Speaker:

I will.

Speaker:

So you have to run.

Speaker:

It's, it's Parallel to each other or kind of like a field.

Speaker:

It's, it's like, um, how would you describe, people are spread out.

Speaker:

Yep.

Speaker:

And so there's no offside, so you can throw the frisbee way forward, um, and

Speaker:

when somebody catches it, they then throw the frisbee to somebody else way

Speaker:

forward, and you, and you score like a touchdown in an end zone is how you score.

Speaker:

Cool.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

This is a really good game.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Hmm.

Speaker:

So, um, you catch the frisbee and take three or four or whatever necessary steps

Speaker:

depending on how fast you've been running.

Speaker:

Mm hmm.

Speaker:

Right, um, There was an article, uh, in the Quarterly Essay by Lech Blaine,

Speaker:

and, um, I've got a bit of an edited extract here, so, um, Uh, it was

Speaker:

titled The Larrikin Myth, Class and Power, and he says, Scott Morrison, a

Speaker:

Pentecostal rugby union fan from the eastern suburbs of Sydney, plagiarised

Speaker:

the identity of men like my father.

Speaker:

The career politician reinvented himself as ScoMo, a rugby league loving

Speaker:

everyman from the Sutherland Shire.

Speaker:

Why would a white collar toff camouflage as working class?

Speaker:

For power, Australia is divided between cosmopolitans and parochials.

Speaker:

The cosmopolitans, well educated and affluent, are concentrated in

Speaker:

Sydney, Canberra and Melbourne.

Speaker:

Parochials are located on the fringes of cities and in the regions, and are far

Speaker:

less likely to have a university degree.

Speaker:

Professor Megan Davis says class is the last taboo.

Speaker:

Clever progressives buy into so many negative tropes about

Speaker:

poor and uneducated people.

Speaker:

And they would do it to no other group of marginalised people.

Speaker:

And this writer says, My brother John comes from the underclass.

Speaker:

In 1985, his biological parents were sent to Boggo Road Jail for kidnapping.

Speaker:

John was placed into foster care with my publican parents in Rosedale,

Speaker:

on the outskirts of Bundaberg.

Speaker:

University was never for him, he became an unskilled labourer

Speaker:

before working as a bartender.

Speaker:

John beat all the obstacles in life to become a successful car

Speaker:

salesman and a loving father.

Speaker:

Nobody in his social circle attended university.

Speaker:

Unlike our dad's generation of Labor voting larrikins,

Speaker:

John's vivid lived experience

Speaker:

John Howard deployed the symbols, values and vernacular of working class

Speaker:

culture to attract jilted battlers from Labor's blue collar base.

Speaker:

Scott Morrison won the 2019 election by pretending to be a Howard battler.

Speaker:

And his brother John says, every human being just wants to be respected, so when

Speaker:

you come across someone who doesn't judge how you look or talk and who doesn't

Speaker:

care if you have a university degree.

Speaker:

It's dead set one of the nicest feelings in the world and, um, says

Speaker:

here the contempty feels emanating from progressives isn't an anecdotal anomaly.

Speaker:

At the 2019 election, Labor attracted an average swing of 3.

Speaker:

78 percent in the 20 seats with the highest percentage

Speaker:

of university graduates.

Speaker:

So that was 3.

Speaker:

78 percent where there's the high percentage of university graduates.

Speaker:

In the 20 seats with the lowest percentage of university graduates,

Speaker:

Labor softened an average of 4.

Speaker:

2 swing against it.

Speaker:

I've never heard that statistic before.

Speaker:

No.

Speaker:

It's a really interesting one.

Speaker:

Mmm.

Speaker:

Really interesting.

Speaker:

I've heard similar coming from the UK.

Speaker:

Mmm.

Speaker:

That Labor has become a party of Social justice, um, and not the

Speaker:

working person, the working man.

Speaker:

So we've talked about this a lot over the years, but I'd never heard that statistic

Speaker:

for Australia, about, um, about that.

Speaker:

Um, there we go.

Speaker:

The 20 seats were the lowest percentage of university graduates and Labor

Speaker:

suffered a swing against it, 4.

Speaker:

2%.

Speaker:

Interesting.

Speaker:

That's really what Labor suffered.

Speaker:

They need to be very aware of that if they're going to win.

Speaker:

So um, he says here in this quarterly essay, Australia, a

Speaker:

nation of self proclaimed straight shooters has been hijacked by a

Speaker:

pack of fabricated lar larrikins and bona fide o bullshit artists.

Speaker:

I reckon that's right.

Speaker:

Um, uh, for a quarter of a century, Australia's conservative establishment

Speaker:

has profited from pitting working class battlers against the inner city elite.

Speaker:

Coal mines are a threat.

Speaker:

against universities, larrikins against feminists and gays, patriots against

Speaker:

aboriginals, muslims and asylum seekers.

Speaker:

So Howard and Morrison have successfully offered the coalition as the natural

Speaker:

home for parochials who want to cast a protest vote against the snobbery

Speaker:

of cosmopolitans and the question is what do progressives do next?

Speaker:

So lots of food for thought there, no disagreement from me and What

Speaker:

if they just abandoned workers?

Speaker:

Well, they did.

Speaker:

But, like But, I mean, have they?

Speaker:

I mean, frankly, you can probably, um, thank the unions for these six figure pay

Speaker:

salaries that the working people or, as this article goes on Historically These

Speaker:

people that do FIFOs and stuff, yeah?

Speaker:

Mm.

Speaker:

And that's been gradually being eroded by this casual contract

Speaker:

style thing instead of secure work.

Speaker:

So, if they're really, if they're really clear that they want to vote Liberal, and

Speaker:

Dominic Perrotais obviously and his, uh, and the federal government of Liberal,

Speaker:

are not appealing to the women's vote.

Speaker:

Then maybe that's what Labor does.

Speaker:

Wouldn't it be great if we had a party that was obviously

Speaker:

appealing to women's votes?

Speaker:

Yes, it would be great.

Speaker:

And aren't we 52 percent of the Australian population?

Speaker:

So, because Isn't, isn't it a fair, wouldn't it be a gamble?

Speaker:

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Speaker:

So, so what you're getting on to is the second part of this article from Crikey.

Speaker:

I'll talk about this and then we'll recycle back to where we are.

Speaker:

So, the second part from Crikey, so I looked at this article.

Speaker:

In the quarterly essay and said that, um, the structure of blue

Speaker:

collar workforce itself has changed with tradies at the vanguard.

Speaker:

So, over the past 30 years, many tradies have grown increasingly wealthy, likely

Speaker:

to operate small businesses, likely to own their investment properties.

Speaker:

So their interests no longer neatly align with collective labour as their

Speaker:

economic power rivals and sometimes exceeds that of white collar workers.

Speaker:

So, um, in this Crikey article it says, So should the left

Speaker:

give up on blue collar blokes?

Speaker:

Of course not.

Speaker:

Um, uh, many remain poorly paid, vulnerable to injury,

Speaker:

dependent on dodgy bosses.

Speaker:

Um, and winning over some of this cohort is an electoral necessity.

Speaker:

So, um, so Labor needs to win them over.

Speaker:

But in 2021, the average union member is a tertiary educated female teacher or nurse.

Speaker:

And the most economically disadvantaged group in Australian society is

Speaker:

single moms on welfare thinking.

Speaker:

The nostalgically to the hard hat and steel-cut boots wearing working man of

Speaker:

the 20th century warps one sense of who is now the most deserving of political favor.

Speaker:

So, uh, that sort of catches up with what you were saying.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

So, um, well just.

Speaker:

That Perrette picture, with him in the bar, drinking the beer, trying

Speaker:

to do the scamo, I'm a man of the people, I go to the pub, drinking beer.

Speaker:

Wouldn't surprise me if it's the first time he's ever been in the pub.

Speaker:

Like, with six kids, hardline Catholic, workaholic, no doubt, all the rest of it.

Speaker:

Like, that guy would be Workaholic, because he doesn't want to

Speaker:

be at home with the six kids.

Speaker:

Well Uh, so he's looked at that image, like these politicians trying to build

Speaker:

themselves up as the working man, but, um, it's an interesting conundrum, isn't it?

Speaker:

That there's this shift where, uh, if you were to look at a well educated

Speaker:

white collar in a city's suburban, you, you, who's, who's not particularly

Speaker:

wealthy, you know, yet, you know, then they're probably going to vote Labor.

Speaker:

Um, once they've accumulated wealth, they'll then swap to the Liberals.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Um, and, but yeah, if you look at a roughest guts guy in a fluoro vest, uh,

Speaker:

You don't know what he's gonna vote, because he could be driving a 150, 000

Speaker:

Land Cruiser with a boat and a shed and a whole bunch of other things, like, he

Speaker:

could be doing really well for himself and considers himself a small businessman

Speaker:

and And the Liberal Party is his home.

Speaker:

Um, and I don't think Labor's worked out any of this stuff yet.

Speaker:

The Liberals have worked it out to some extent.

Speaker:

They've stopped late.

Speaker:

Give John Howard something.

Speaker:

Howard stole that.

Speaker:

Those Howard battlers.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Howard grabbed them.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

And Labor's been trying to counter that ever since.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

And given that statistic on the last election, Labor's certainly failed to

Speaker:

connect with that group of I thought, yeah, um, last election, uh, Work Choices

Speaker:

was the last major win I think they had.

Speaker:

Yes, yes.

Speaker:

So, um, so yeah, so that was that.

Speaker:

Um, so we can't just abandon them.

Speaker:

We'd need the numbers.

Speaker:

You've gotta tell a story that resonates with these people.

Speaker:

So, um, uh, I think the biggest,

Speaker:

the biggest driver at the moment, the biggest hole that I see.

Speaker:

is the coalition have a story of mining jobs and Labour and the Greens just do

Speaker:

not, there's a lot of scaremongering about the loss of, uh, rural jobs.

Speaker:

And so Labour and the Greens need to come up with a, this is our

Speaker:

plan for, uh, regional Australia.

Speaker:

This is what we're going to replace mining with.

Speaker:

This is the future.

Speaker:

Jump on board, get on with us, and we will create a new economy that's

Speaker:

not based on digging shit out of the ground, that is the future.

Speaker:

Yeah, but people could look at past experience with the auto workers and

Speaker:

whatever else that we had with, when we had manufacturing or, and And,

Speaker:

well, we're not going to support the car industry, but there'll be

Speaker:

other work for you, don't worry.

Speaker:

And then, there really wasn't the work there.

Speaker:

But rather than making a promise of, there'll be other work for you,

Speaker:

don't worry, is This is the work.

Speaker:

We are going to fund it.

Speaker:

This is the infrastructure we're going to put in place.

Speaker:

Because people would be rightfully distrustful and say, you

Speaker:

abandoned us for globalization.

Speaker:

Essentially, that's what the Tony Blair, the Third Way, you know, and the Left

Speaker:

jumped onto globalization and said, Well, we'll re-skill our low-skill people

Speaker:

and find them other jobs to do coding software and making computer games.

Speaker:

Mm-Hmm.

Speaker:

And none of that happened.

Speaker:

So people are going, well, I want hang on for dear life to this coal job because

Speaker:

I don't believe you, I don't Yeah.

Speaker:

Believe you for a second that you're gonna find me an

Speaker:

alternative solar farm to work on.

Speaker:

Like, so they, and, and so there's the, I don't trust you about the alternative job.

Speaker:

And there's also.

Speaker:

We've mentioned before about, uh, Hillary and the deplorables, where there's this

Speaker:

looking down the nose of people who are uneducated and have these very provoked,

Speaker:

uh, parochial views or whatever, and considering them deplorables, so.

Speaker:

But the same with Brexit, you know, if you're worried about immigration, if

Speaker:

you're worried about people coming in and stealing your job, then you're a racist.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Rather than, I understand your fears, they're misplaced and this is why,

Speaker:

but not just treating people as social pariahs because they are afraid.

Speaker:

And are we doing that here?

Speaker:

Um, good point.

Speaker:

So nobody's come out from the Labor side and said, You guys

Speaker:

are a bunch of deplorables.

Speaker:

Oh, I don't know.

Speaker:

I I got the feeling the greens with their trip up north of the last election.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

That's, was was a big up yours to the, to the mining communities.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

And certainly, so I wouldn't say a leader of the Labor Party has referred to the

Speaker:

uneducated class as deplorables, but maybe there's enough rub off of other people

Speaker:

saying, who are educated and saying, well, if you don't believe in climate

Speaker:

change by now, you're a frigging idiot.

Speaker:

Like, like it would be enough.

Speaker:

Of just that class, which is what the quarterly essay says, is that the educated

Speaker:

left would never diss a black person, a gay person, um, a disabled person,

Speaker:

but a dumb hick from the regions who doesn't believe in climate change, well,

Speaker:

they're a dumb hick from the regions who don't believe in climate change, they'd

Speaker:

be a much more readily disliked class.

Speaker:

Willing to insult them.

Speaker:

Mm-Hmm.

Speaker:

. So, eh, um, I dunno.

Speaker:

Mm-Hmm.

Speaker:

I saw a, a thing from UQ talking about biodiesel.

Speaker:

Mm-Hmm.

Speaker:

. And said we could grow our diesel on shore.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

We could do this in the regions.

Speaker:

We could literally turn the coal mining areas into large farms of biodiesel.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

Which would imply all these workers.

Speaker:

It's an engineering job.

Speaker:

It's a similar skill set.

Speaker:

It's not a direct replacement, but effectively we're still creating fuel.

Speaker:

We're still, yeah, it's very much the same.

Speaker:

It's a primary industry.

Speaker:

Yeah, I think there are the jobs there to swap those coal miners over into, but I

Speaker:

fully understand that they don't trust And I think we need to put our money where our

Speaker:

mouths are and say, this is the future.

Speaker:

We are going to invest heavily in it.

Speaker:

This is not just a, there will be jobs, a vague promise, but some serious, right.

Speaker:

This is what we see as our strategy.

Speaker:

This is the investment we're going to make.

Speaker:

Uh, these are the commitments.

Speaker:

Now the question is, is it a core commitment or a non core commitment?

Speaker:

And you know, the problem is, if, uh, if all the renewables is being

Speaker:

done by private enterprise, then it's hard for government to guarantee

Speaker:

where any of this is going to happen.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

So I think they've got to grab guys like Twiggy Forrest with

Speaker:

his hydrogen thing of plant or whatever and say to some district,

Speaker:

well, it's going to be right here.

Speaker:

That's where it's going.

Speaker:

You move off there, you come into here.

Speaker:

So yeah, people need to see some specifics because they rightfully don't trust

Speaker:

this magical job that's going to appear.

Speaker:

Mm hmm.

Speaker:

And if we get in correctly at the base level.

Speaker:

We can tax it so that all the profits aren't going to

Speaker:

a big multinational offshore.

Speaker:

And then I just need to say to people, Scomo is a bullshit artist.

Speaker:

He is not one of you.

Speaker:

He is actually screwing you over.

Speaker:

He's taking money from you.

Speaker:

And, and your tribe, and he's given it to those arseholes, um,

Speaker:

in the finance world and wherever.

Speaker:

So don't believe what he's saying.

Speaker:

He's not on your side.

Speaker:

Not only is he university educated, but it was a free university education.

Speaker:

Was it for him, yes.

Speaker:

Almost certainly.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Um, so yeah, people need to understand you can't trust him.

Speaker:

He's not one of you.

Speaker:

He's just a bullshitter.

Speaker:

Don't fall for it.

Speaker:

Here's what he's done.

Speaker:

Um, Yeah, but he doesn't hold the hose.

Speaker:

No, exactly.

Speaker:

That's right.

Speaker:

But Lotus just doesn't want to try and sell a story.

Speaker:

It's all small target.

Speaker:

As much as you say about the Mad Monk and the Budgie Smugglers,

Speaker:

at least he did hold the hose.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Let's see in the chat room.

Speaker:

Um, uh,

Speaker:

Oh, it's too hard for me to read them in, but good on you Bronwyn

Speaker:

and everyone in there who's going for all of those commentary.

Speaker:

So yeah, that's still, we've mentioned it before, we've talked about the deplorables

Speaker:

a lot and it's obviously still a Labor problem based on those statistics on

Speaker:

the 20 seats at the bottom end and top end of, of university education and the

Speaker:

way they went for and against Labor.

Speaker:

That's a real concern, but it happened.

Speaker:

With the pandemic, there's a small chance that there's been more division again.

Speaker:

Um, One of my uncles, who shall remain nameless, has been a One

Speaker:

Nation voter for many years.

Speaker:

Uh, but he also, um, loves the rabbitos and it seems like a

Speaker:

long bow, but hang in there.

Speaker:

I'm with you here.

Speaker:

So he lives in Greenway and he got to see, he got to see his beloved

Speaker:

rabbitos obviously lose, but play a grand final here in Brisbane.

Speaker:

And I will be looking forward to my next interaction with

Speaker:

him to basically find out.

Speaker:

If with all this COVID pe Cause he's quite a sensible man apart

Speaker:

from his normal political leanings.

Speaker:

And all this COVID stuff, he probably would have got the shits with it.

Speaker:

And then, with that extra, like, um, So here's what I'm trying to say.

Speaker:

There's a, uh, theme of xenophobia around one of my uncles, which I think might've

Speaker:

translated around the border controls.

Speaker:

So keeping us safe, keeping the people out and then getting to watch the rabidos.

Speaker:

He might now be a Labor voter.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

Because Palaszczuk was a pretty xenophobic about southerners.

Speaker:

She was keeping our borders safe.

Speaker:

I just think might, that's labor, just needs might be labor just

Speaker:

needs to be more xenophobic.

Speaker:

Well, wasn't, I just think there might be a little bit more, um, a little bit more

Speaker:

division and it's not, not, may, maybe not as simple as this anymore, right.

Speaker:

Maybe.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

I'm an optimist.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Well, hang on.

Speaker:

Wasn't it labor fed?

Speaker:

The Pacific solution Labor has been.

Speaker:

Fair, not, not quite, but almost as bad as the liberals in terms of border control.

Speaker:

Uh, in what, what's labor said about border control?

Speaker:

Oh, historically.

Speaker:

Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Speaker:

In terms of, um, both people and stuff.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Not a, yeah, not, not a piece of paper between them.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Very.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

'cause they weren't prepared to argue.

Speaker:

Maybe they just believed it as well, but like with all issues, it just

Speaker:

seems to be a small target where they didn't want to, well, I think it was,

Speaker:

they couldn't sell it, so they didn't want to fight it very, uh, yeah.

Speaker:

It was a gut reaction for a lot of people.

Speaker:

Stopping the immigrants, stopping the boat people.

Speaker:

Mm-Hmm.

Speaker:

. Yep.

Speaker:

It, it wasn't a thought out.

Speaker:

And I'm sure Labor went, you know what, we're not going to be able

Speaker:

to persuade people on this one.

Speaker:

Let's just roll over because we're just going to lose votes and

Speaker:

we're not going to pick any up.

Speaker:

So it's, it's a vote loser.

Speaker:

So we're out of here when it comes to this argument.

Speaker:

Yep.

Speaker:

Essentially.

Speaker:

Hmm.

Speaker:

Um, tough times for Labor ahead, um, but if they could just

Speaker:

sell a story, it would be easy.

Speaker:

Okay.

Speaker:

Just, uh.

Speaker:

Sorry, go ahead.

Speaker:

I was just going to say, there's one really great thing about

Speaker:

Western Australia and that's the, Rupert doesn't own the paper there.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

And they really love Mark.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

And they're, yeah, so I think, um, Labor could do well there.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

Okay.

Speaker:

Labor could do well there.

Speaker:

They could do well enough there that the rest of the country doesn't matter.

Speaker:

That would be refreshing, a newspaper not run by Yes.

Speaker:

When you get it, you're like.

Speaker:

I'm reading the news.

Speaker:

That's why it's such a stark contrast.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

It's just like, yeah.

Speaker:

I mean, I've been subscribed to the Career Mail and The Australian.

Speaker:

I read The Guardian.

Speaker:

I read ABC News.

Speaker:

You almost burst out laughing reading the Murdoch stuff.

Speaker:

Just look at the headlines.

Speaker:

I read Spectator as well.

Speaker:

And.

Speaker:

New York Times, like, but honestly, you nearly burst out laughing, just, uh, you

Speaker:

know, there's a disaster in New South Wales with, with, um, Gladys, and we just

Speaker:

get a headline trying to poke something at Palaszczuk because she announced

Speaker:

herself as the Olympics minister or something simple, like, they're just so

Speaker:

detached from the reality, it is a joke.

Speaker:

But conversely, did you hear about the Mega battery fire in New South Wales.

Speaker:

No.

Speaker:

So there's a You remember the South Australia battery?

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

There's another one being built in New South Wales and one of the

Speaker:

battery packs caught fire Right.

Speaker:

Major fire.

Speaker:

None of the national papers.

Speaker:

Never saw anything about it.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

No.

Speaker:

It's like How?

Speaker:

Yeah, exactly You'd think that the murder press would have

Speaker:

picked up and run with that.

Speaker:

Hmm No, I didn't see it.

Speaker:

No, I was shocked.

Speaker:

So what's also happened with Murdoch is they've done a 180 on climate change.

Speaker:

It's such an astounding 180.

Speaker:

The Courier Mail and all Murdoch papers during the week had this sort of six

Speaker:

page lift out wraparound of the normal paper, which was essentially Well, of

Speaker:

course climate change is real and it's man made and we need to do stuff about

Speaker:

it and, you know, zero emissions by 2050, of course, and, and But did they say

Speaker:

how they were getting to zero emissions?

Speaker:

Well, I think from memory they really liked the Twiggy Forest hydrogen

Speaker:

thing, so I think that was one of them.

Speaker:

So, two things I heard.

Speaker:

One is carbon capture and storage, and the other one is hydrogen is great, but

Speaker:

it's blue hydrogen not green hydrogen.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

What's that mean?

Speaker:

And the difference is, green hydrogen is you take your renewable

Speaker:

energy when you're not using it.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

So when the sun is shining, but people aren't using their air conditioners or

Speaker:

when the wind is blowing, but nobody's got their TVs on or whatever and you

Speaker:

crack water, you split water into hydrogen and oxygen and that's how you

Speaker:

get your hydrogen, blue hydrogen, you take fossil fuels, gas and you put it

Speaker:

through a chemical reaction with more fossil fuels powering that reaction

Speaker:

and at the end of it you get hydrogen that's been created by fossil fuels.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

So you can create the hydrogen either with renewable energy or fossil fuel energy.

Speaker:

And at the moment, blue hydrogen is cheaper than green hydrogen.

Speaker:

Right, yep.

Speaker:

So So anyway, I think, who knows what's going on with Murdoch and who knows

Speaker:

where it will end up, but there's just this amazing 180 where essentially

Speaker:

it seems to me that the rest of the world is really saying to Australia,

Speaker:

we're going to stop dealing with you, like, when it comes to trade agreements

Speaker:

with the EU, until you guys get your emissions targets where we want them,

Speaker:

you're becoming a bit of a pariah state.

Speaker:

So I think.

Speaker:

From that point of view, they've come to the party, we have to do something, and,

Speaker:

um, I think that's part of, it's a little bit like South Africa with sanctions and

Speaker:

apartheid, like eventually the rest of the world shamed them into it to some extent.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

I think we've almost reached that point where business leaders are now saying,

Speaker:

okay, I guess we have to do it because if we want to sell our shit to the EU and

Speaker:

places like that, and the noises Biden's making, it's time for us to come on board.

Speaker:

Seems to be.

Speaker:

My understanding is it's just one stat.

Speaker:

Yeah, and it's all talk and it's obviously going to be very

Speaker:

favourable of large, um, ventures.

Speaker:

The sort of thing that Twiggy Forest and others would want to

Speaker:

do, large centralised ventures.

Speaker:

So, um.

Speaker:

Yeah, well, don't trust him for a minute as being genuine in it, and he could be

Speaker:

trying to obscure things to bring about a blue, um, hydrogen rather than a green

Speaker:

one, wouldn't surprise him the least.

Speaker:

But in any event, still a turnaround just to acknowledge Uh, actually,

Speaker:

yeah, it is man made, and yeah, we need zero emissions, and there

Speaker:

were nowhere near that before.

Speaker:

But, but I think this is just, this is the game plan.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Is, is fight every step.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

In your rearward action.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Until you've sweated all your assets as much as you can.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

You've dug as much coal out of the ground as you possibly can, and, and

Speaker:

fight every step of the way back.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

So, um, so just, how much time we got?

Speaker:

We got just a little bit longer?

Speaker:

Yeah, you're okay?

Speaker:

You're all good?

Speaker:

While we're still on that sort of climate change thing, so

Speaker:

just climate change acceptance.

Speaker:

So the essential report came out today, so you wouldn't have seen this before,

Speaker:

but the question was of Australians Um, Do you believe there is fairly conclusive

Speaker:

evidence that climate change is happening and is caused by human activity, or do

Speaker:

you believe that the evidence is still not in and we may just be witnessing

Speaker:

a normal fluctuation in the Earth's climate, which happens from time to time?

Speaker:

So, dear listener, uh, climate change is happening and is

Speaker:

caused by human activity, 59%?

Speaker:

As opposed to we are just witnessing a normal fluctuation

Speaker:

in the Earth's climate, 30%?

Speaker:

That's not good.

Speaker:

No.

Speaker:

Don't know is 11%.

Speaker:

That's a, yep.

Speaker:

That's not good.

Speaker:

But you know what, like, I ran through it in our climate change episode and none of

Speaker:

that stuff you will read in newspapers.

Speaker:

No.

Speaker:

Or magazines.

Speaker:

You have to buy a book.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Or listen to a podcast.

Speaker:

You actually have to read a proper book or a podcast.

Speaker:

Or some long form podcast to get that information.

Speaker:

You don't get it in a newspaper or a magazine article.

Speaker:

So, um, so once you see it, it's obvious.

Speaker:

I think all you need to do is read the, um, the Exxon papers from the early 80s.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

So it was the Exxon scientists or the Shell, one of the huge oil companies,

Speaker:

that were going climate change is real, we need to do something about this.

Speaker:

And by the time we got to the executives, they decided what they were going

Speaker:

to do about it, which was deny it.

Speaker:

And pretend that it didn't happen.

Speaker:

And then cook the books.

Speaker:

And then cook the books.

Speaker:

And take Arthur Anderson down with them.

Speaker:

Yeah, but it was the whole, uh, you know.

Speaker:

The scientists themselves working for the oil companies.

Speaker:

So it's not that science isn't settled.

Speaker:

The scientists working for these companies 30, 40 years ago

Speaker:

knew that this was happening.

Speaker:

This is just muddying the waters.

Speaker:

But, you know, what I presented in that podcast, I mean, you've

Speaker:

heard every newspaper I access.

Speaker:

None of that was in there.

Speaker:

I had to go and buy a book and read about it.

Speaker:

So, or a long form podcast of some sort would probably do it UQ did, uh, what's

Speaker:

called Denial101x, which is a short, free course run by the university,

Speaker:

uh, which is, uh, how do we know that the Earth's climate is changing?

Speaker:

How do we know that humans are causing it?

Speaker:

And why do people deny that it's true?

Speaker:

And it's, as well, it's the psychology.

Speaker:

So it does talk about how we know that it's changing and how we know it's us.

Speaker:

But what's really interesting is the political reasoning behind,

Speaker:

the psychological reasoning behind.

Speaker:

Tribal allegiances.

Speaker:

Absolutely.

Speaker:

Speaking of tribal allegiances, just in the breakdown of that, uh, That 30 percent

Speaker:

who said we're just watching normal fluctuations, um, the older you are,

Speaker:

the more likely you are to think that.

Speaker:

And also, if you're a coalition voter, the more likely you are to think that.

Speaker:

So 39 percent of coalition voters think that it's just normal,

Speaker:

cyclical warming of the earth.

Speaker:

Only 23 percent of Labor, only 15 percent of Greens.

Speaker:

15 percent of Greens think that.

Speaker:

Wow, that's a worry, isn't it?

Speaker:

I got a great phone call while I was in quarantine.

Speaker:

Um, my friend's mum rang me.

Speaker:

She's just like, Had enough of, of little action.

Speaker:

All right.

Speaker:

So, and her, um, she lives in, um, for your listeners, she lives in the

Speaker:

neighboring suburb of Barton, which is a really beauty, beautiful, leafy suburb.

Speaker:

So on Thursday we're meeting for coffee and we're going to start an interest

Speaker:

group and then we're just going to try, I don't know, plant trees.

Speaker:

We don't actually know what we're going to do yet, but we're just

Speaker:

going to start doing something.

Speaker:

And then.

Speaker:

Hopefully build, build momentum.

Speaker:

Very good.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

There might be a trade group already.

Speaker:

I, it would, you would think so.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

It might be even just, I've, I've Googled it, but I haven't found

Speaker:

anyone specifically for Barden, but maybe in neighboring areas.

Speaker:

There is for the Gap.

Speaker:

Is there?

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

If she wants to go to Taylor Range tomorrow, Wednesday night at 7.

Speaker:

30, there's a meeting of sort of Gap people for doing that sort of stuff.

Speaker:

Cool.

Speaker:

There you go.

Speaker:

It's close enough.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

And I live in the Gap, so if you plant some more trees and make it beautiful.

Speaker:

Exactly.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Or there'll be people who know about stuff in Barden, so.

Speaker:

Exactly.

Speaker:

Perfect.

Speaker:

Thanks.

Speaker:

There you go.

Speaker:

That's good.

Speaker:

Um, addressing climate change.

Speaker:

Are we doing enough?

Speaker:

Are we doing too much or not doing enough?

Speaker:

Um, do you think Australia is doing enough, not enough or too much?

Speaker:

Or just climate change?

Speaker:

Not doing enough, 42%, doing enough, 31%, doing too much, 15%.

Speaker:

So either doing enough or doing too much.

Speaker:

How can doing fuck all be doing too much?

Speaker:

I mean, seriously, so either doing enough or doing too much is 46 percent

Speaker:

as opposed to not doing enough 42%.

Speaker:

More people think we're doing either enough or too much, but not enough.

Speaker:

Who is the more, uh, male and female is fairly even.

Speaker:

Obviously, young people are saying not doing enough, I think.

Speaker:

Well, but they're also saying doing too much, uh.

Speaker:

Younger people, 18 to 34 group, doing too much is 19%, whereas the 55 year age

Speaker:

group is saying doing too much is only 9%.

Speaker:

That's weird.

Speaker:

So the younger you are, the more likely you are to say doing too much.

Speaker:

Hmm.

Speaker:

And of course, uh, oh, now it's getting just bizarre.

Speaker:

Green.

Speaker:

Greens.

Speaker:

Green voters.

Speaker:

Doing too much, 18%.

Speaker:

And doing enough, 17%.

Speaker:

So if Greens vote it's 35 percent either doing enough or not.

Speaker:

I reckon some of these people are just trolling themselves with Greens voters.

Speaker:

They're just pulling their leg now.

Speaker:

I apologise to you, listener, for presenting this, this surely

Speaker:

bullshit study from the Central Poll, because that's just wacky.

Speaker:

I'd hate not to.

Speaker:

That's just, that's just wacky.

Speaker:

Speaking of wacky, Keith Pitt, Resources Minister.

Speaker:

He wants Australia, the government, to provide a 250 billion loan

Speaker:

facility for the mining sector in return for a commitment to net zero.

Speaker:

A 250 billion loan.

Speaker:

So, um For where they couldn't get a private loan because those

Speaker:

political advocate, uh, activists are forcing banks not to lend money.

Speaker:

Correct.

Speaker:

Banks are not lending to fossil fuel companies anymore.

Speaker:

It's nothing to do with the fact that fossil fuel is actually

Speaker:

not economically viable.

Speaker:

And the investors are worried they won't get their money back.

Speaker:

It's all those political activists.

Speaker:

And the free market capitalists of the coalition want to tell,

Speaker:

um, the market what to do.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

So, 250 billion is about one eighth of Australia's GDP.

Speaker:

Um, Pitt's office was unable to tell Crikey how it came up with the 250

Speaker:

billion figure, and we asked Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce to explain.

Speaker:

But he said it's a matter for Pitt.

Speaker:

That's a mistake.

Speaker:

Is that Pitt the Younger?

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Um, I had a friend who commented on the, um, I can't remember which particular

Speaker:

scandal it was, but, um, he said he was Unimpressed by the way it worked

Speaker:

and I said it worked perfectly because the LNP's aim is to transfer public

Speaker:

funds into the pockets of their rich mates, their party donors, and in

Speaker:

that case it worked perfectly well.

Speaker:

It did what it was supposed to do.

Speaker:

Yeah, they're the greatest socialists.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Nationals.

Speaker:

Yep.

Speaker:

So, um, so David Littleproud has demanded the banking system be destabilised

Speaker:

by withdrawing deposit guarantees for banks that refuse to fund coal projects.

Speaker:

And Matt Canavan wants every Australian mortgage holder to pay what would

Speaker:

be in effect a coal tax by locking out banks that refuse to invest in

Speaker:

coal, thus driving up interest rates.

Speaker:

These guys are completely nuts.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Um, there you go.

Speaker:

That's part of that deplorables thing where we talk about

Speaker:

guilty, but they are nuts.

Speaker:

What can you do when they are?

Speaker:

They are.

Speaker:

And how come, like, that's not going to suit mortgage holders at all?

Speaker:

Coal workers, is it?

Speaker:

Surely not!

Speaker:

Crazy thought bubbles from some maniacs who we've actually got in charge of stuff.

Speaker:

This is Resources Minister, Keith Pitt.

Speaker:

I'm really frightening.

Speaker:

It's Agricultural Minister, David Littleproud.

Speaker:

These are ministers!

Speaker:

It's, it's the politicians who are so keen to prop up a single

Speaker:

industry in their electorates.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

Rather than working on diversity.

Speaker:

Yes.

Speaker:

So that 250 billion, um, according to the Reserve Bank in, uh, from

Speaker:

three years ago, the current level of replacement capital expenditure, that

Speaker:

is, how much investment is needed to continue to dig up the same amount that

Speaker:

is currently being produced, is around 10 billion for a five year period.

Speaker:

So Pitt's quarter trillion facility would guarantee 125

Speaker:

years of replacement investment.

Speaker:

In both coal and iron ore on current spending levels.

Speaker:

125 years of replacement investment.

Speaker:

It's just completely nuts that these guys are in charge.

Speaker:

Goodness me.

Speaker:

So, um Is this Matt appearing in some photographs with some coal dust sprinkled

Speaker:

on my face so I look like a miner?

Speaker:

Yes, that's it.

Speaker:

With the fluoro vest on.

Speaker:

That's it, yep.

Speaker:

Uh, just quickly, while we're still on energy, uh, and climate stuff, nuclear.

Speaker:

So, a couple of polls have come out.

Speaker:

Truly minucular.

Speaker:

Nuclear.

Speaker:

Nuclear.

Speaker:

Nuclear?

Speaker:

Question, um, from News Poll.

Speaker:

The US or UK will supply the nuclear propulsion system to power the

Speaker:

submarines, and Australia has not committed to developing a homegrown

Speaker:

nuclear industry in the future, do you think Australia should develop its

Speaker:

own domestic civil nuclear industry, including new nuclear power stations

Speaker:

in Australia to generate electricity?

Speaker:

Um, definitely 25% should consider 36%, no, 27% don't know.

Speaker:

12.

Speaker:

So either definitely or should consider was.

Speaker:

61%.

Speaker:

That's a lot of people in favour of nuclear.

Speaker:

There was another poll out by Essential, who I now don't trust at all based

Speaker:

on what we were talking about before.

Speaker:

Uh, To what extent do you support or oppose Australia's developing

Speaker:

nuclear power plants for the generation of electricity?

Speaker:

And total support was 50%.

Speaker:

Opposition was 32%.

Speaker:

Unsure, 18%.

Speaker:

So still quite supportive of nuclear.

Speaker:

Energy.

Speaker:

Um, it'd be great to put some of these people to a test as

Speaker:

to their actual knowledge.

Speaker:

Article from the Spectator I'll put in the show notes, which I'm actually only

Speaker:

just providing to the Patreons these days, so if you want the full show

Speaker:

notes, you have to become a Patreon.

Speaker:

So, um, article from the Spectator saying we need to have nuclear, but I came

Speaker:

across a very interesting article by Bob Carr, former New South Wales Premier

Speaker:

and former Federal Foreign Minister.

Speaker:

So, talking about nuclear, this is good.

Speaker:

Um, the industry, the nuclear industry, lacks a single example in a western

Speaker:

country of a new power plant being built remotely on time and budget.

Speaker:

According to World Nuclear Industry Status Report, 94 plants were

Speaker:

to come online across the next decade, but 98 get decommissioned.

Speaker:

Yet 48 of those to be built are to be in China.

Speaker:

Remove them and that leaves 46 coming online.

Speaker:

With the stubborn fact that 98 are being decommissioned in the rest of the world.

Speaker:

So excluding China, 46 coming, 98 going.

Speaker:

In 2019, for the first time, renewable sources excluding hydro

Speaker:

generated more power than nuclear.

Speaker:

In Australia, nuclear attracts not the remotest investor interest.

Speaker:

If nuclear were an option, a merchant bank or superannuation fund might

Speaker:

be maneuvering to own the space.

Speaker:

They might have formed a consortium with a miner and a construction company or

Speaker:

two with a brace of lobbyists at work.

Speaker:

It's not happening.

Speaker:

The contrast with the surge to renewables is stark.

Speaker:

Andrew Forrest and Mike Cannon Brooks are prepared to put their own

Speaker:

funds into a vast solar farm in the Northern Territory and Forrest to

Speaker:

make a huge commitment to hydrogen.

Speaker:

There is no single investor with a comparable zeal for nuclear

Speaker:

power, either high net worth or Individual or institution.

Speaker:

So he says, I argued for a pro nuclear case within the Labor Party

Speaker:

and scorned what I saw as the left's phobia against the nuclear option.

Speaker:

And this is Bob Carr saying, I thought coal more destructive and nuclear the

Speaker:

bridge to the era of new renewables.

Speaker:

But now it's clear that nuclear is lumbering, subject to breakdowns

Speaker:

and is crippling expensive.

Speaker:

New renewable sources such as wind and solar increased by 184 gigawatts.

Speaker:

Nuclear only grew by 2.

Speaker:

4.

Speaker:

Number of reactors has barely changed since the 80s.

Speaker:

Um, France was the poster child.

Speaker:

Here's an interesting bit.

Speaker:

Poor reliability plagues the fleet.

Speaker:

This is a fleet of nuclear reactors.

Speaker:

On any day, at least four plants are at zero output because of technical failures.

Speaker:

The average per plant is a month per year at zero production.

Speaker:

So one of the great arguments for nuclear is it's reliable,

Speaker:

consistent baseload energy.

Speaker:

But in France, the average per plant is a month per year at zero production.

Speaker:

Yeah, but there is one constant he hasn't factored in.

Speaker:

Uh, Uranium for nuclear weapons.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

That's the main reason for running nuclear power stations.

Speaker:

Ah, to generate the uranium for Yeah.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

Ah, good point.

Speaker:

That, that's, that's Is that where you get, that's where you get it from?

Speaker:

That's the major reason for running, um, nuclear power plants.

Speaker:

Is that right?

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

As a waste material from the nuclear power, from the No, other way.

Speaker:

So the material, once it's gone through the reactor core, um, Is

Speaker:

then perfect as a nuclear weapon.

Speaker:

Is more suitable to be put into weapons.

Speaker:

There you go.

Speaker:

Not even a Scandinavian deficiency can provide a happy pro nuclear narrative.

Speaker:

Finland became the first country in Western Europe to order a new

Speaker:

nuclear reactor since 1988, but it's running 13 years late, plagued with

Speaker:

management and quality control issues, bankruptcies and investor withdrawals.

Speaker:

Who could have the faintest confidence that Australia could

Speaker:

throw up a nuclear reactor with more panache, um, than the Finns?

Speaker:

Um, doing big complex projects is hardly an Australian competitive edge.

Speaker:

Think of the submarines contract.

Speaker:

So there we go.

Speaker:

I didn't know that about the unreliability of nuclear.

Speaker:

I knew it's high cost and whatnot, but there you go.

Speaker:

Yeah, so it's, it's, my understanding is it doesn't financially work.

Speaker:

And the real reason for building and keeping the power plants running is

Speaker:

most of the countries with a nuclear reactor also have nuclear weapons.

Speaker:

There you go.

Speaker:

Right.

Speaker:

Well, we will and truly kept you out of the Shark Tank, Shane, for another week.

Speaker:

I'll be on my own next week.

Speaker:

I'm going to talk about Less is More by Jason Hickle.

Speaker:

How degrowth will save the world.

Speaker:

Excellent history of capitalism and economics.

Speaker:

Really, part of understanding the world is understanding political systems,

Speaker:

power, and economics, and climate, and he's got a lot of it all wrapped up

Speaker:

into a neat little theory and package.

Speaker:

So, so that's the plan for next week.

Speaker:

And then the panel, Still waiting to hear on the court case.

Speaker:

Um, don't know, haven't had a decision yet.

Speaker:

Fingers crossed.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

Uh, if you're anywhere, you've got any chance of being in Noosa

Speaker:

on the 30th, um, think about that as an interesting experience.

Speaker:

Um, we've got to apply for a protest permit.

Speaker:

So, hopefully that Is smooth sailing?

Speaker:

I mean, who wouldn't want a bunch of satanic protesters in Hastings Street?

Speaker:

On a Sunday night, is it bring your own goat?

Speaker:

So I dunno that we'll be having goats.

Speaker:

Um, could bless a goat I suppose.

Speaker:

But, um, yeah.

Speaker:

So anyway, keep that in mind.

Speaker:

Let us know if you're gonna go.

Speaker:

Alright, well until then, um, talk to you next week.

Speaker:

Bye for now.

Speaker:

Thanks.

Speaker:

Good night and has a good night from him.

Speaker:

Well, you probably wonder what our politicians do on Christmas Eve.

Speaker:

Well, when it's drought, they eat cattle.

Speaker:

Now, you don't have to convince me that the climate's not changing.

Speaker:

It is changing.

Speaker:

And my problem has always been whether you believe a new tax

Speaker:

is going to change it back.

Speaker:

Look, I just don't want the government anymore in my life.

Speaker:

I'm sick of the government being in my life.

Speaker:

Yeah.

Speaker:

And the other thing is, I think we've got to acknowledge is, you know, there's

Speaker:

a higher authority that's beyond our comprehension and right up there in

Speaker:

the sky, unless we understand, uh, that that's got to be respected, then we're

Speaker:

just fools and we're going to get nailed.

Next Episode All Episodes Previous Episode

About the Podcast

Show artwork for The Iron Fist and the Velvet Glove
The Iron Fist and the Velvet Glove
News, political events, culture, ethics and the transformations taking place in our society.

Listen for free

One Off Tips

If you don't like Patreon, Paypal or Bitcoin then here is another donation option. The currency is US dollars.
Donate via credit card.
d
dave slatyer $200
general thanks especially tiananmen episode , plenty to reconsider and the Episode 440 - Venezuela's Election
C
Colin J Ely $10
Keep up the good work