September 14, 2025 • 49 mins
Charlie Kirk’s assassination sends shockwaves across the globe, thousands protest under heavy police watch across Australia. Plus, Democrat donors turn their backs on Biden’s presidential library.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:04):
Like now freyer fires up.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
Welcome to the program. We have a packed show for
you tonight. How did the left get radicalized and what
does Charlie Kirk's murder mean for the conservative movement? The
head of Turning Point Australia will share his reflections. Former
TWOGV broadcaster Chris o'keef will join me for a debate
on renewables and net zero. And my guest in the
UK was at Tommy Robinson's London rally. Was it really
(00:32):
a bunch of far right nat chomps? She's going to
fire out up, but first let's get into the three
things that are firing me up tonight. Firstly, the radicalization
of the left, Charlie Kirk's beautiful wife, Erica Kirk, and
the immigration rallies we've seen around the country. First, on Thursday,
(00:52):
Charlie Kirk was assassinated at Utah Valley University. He wasn't
a politician or an elected leader. He was an activist,
an influencer. Yet based on the scale of grief around
the world, you would think he was the president of
the United States. There have been vigils around the world
and social media is flooded with young people sharing how
(01:14):
Charlie changed their lives. Why has his death had such
a significant impact, Well, I think it's because it captures
the battle for our soul in America and around the
Western world. Our civilization has been the most prosperous in
human history because we don't resort to violence to express
(01:34):
our opinion. But now we see a tidal wave of
political violence rising in the United States. From the assassination
of Charlie Kirk to the attempted shooting of President Trump twice,
from the murder of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson to
the slaying of two Israeli embassy staffers. Assassination culture is
(01:55):
growing steadily. A YUGA poll conducted last week found at
eleven percent of Democrats said it was always or usually
acceptable to celebrate the death of a public figure they oppose,
compared to six percent of Republicans. Among left leaning Americans,
fifty six percent of people said you could at least
(02:15):
partly justify the murder of Donald Trump. Charlie Kirk tweeted
about left wing political violence back in April. He said
this culture is the natural outgrowth of left wing protest culture,
tolerating violence and mayhem for years on end, the cowardice
(02:36):
of local prosecutors and school officials have turned the left.
Speaker 3 (02:40):
Into a ticking time bomb.
Speaker 2 (02:43):
Those were prophetic words, but how did we get here?
The key problem is that many people now see anyone
who disagrees with them as an enemy. If they voice
ideas they disagree with, that's actually a form of violence,
and that justifies resistance. We've heard this language from the
(03:04):
left since October seven with Chance, like resistance is justified
and globalize the interfata. Even in Australia. Teel politician Zali
Stegel liked a post from the PM's favorite lefty podcaster,
Hannah Ferguson, saying that violence is sometimes justified. Now, eventually
(03:25):
this spills over from the online world or the bubble
of left wing protest chance into real life. Just watch
how this lefty reacted to Kirk's death.
Speaker 4 (03:37):
If you're gonna spread hateful and you're gonna incite, you're
going to target marginalized groups of people, don't be all,
oh my god.
Speaker 5 (03:45):
I've been shot. I won't get shot because I don't
do that.
Speaker 6 (03:48):
I don't have to worry about that.
Speaker 3 (03:49):
I don't feel bad for him.
Speaker 7 (03:50):
I don't feel bad for his wife.
Speaker 3 (03:51):
I feel bad for his daughter. What happens to freedom
of speech? Now?
Speaker 2 (03:56):
Yes, we are mourning an incredible leader, but it also
feels like something deeper, something seismic, has changed. We've seen
the true evil that lies just below the surface of
so many on the radical left, and if we don't
address it, the whole project of Western civilization will be
washed away in a wave of violence. But I do
(04:21):
have hope. Watching Charlie Kirk's wife, Erica, respond to this
tragedy has restored my faith in humanity.
Speaker 8 (04:30):
They killed Charlie because he preached a message of patriotism, faith,
and of God's merciful love.
Speaker 9 (04:41):
They should all know this.
Speaker 8 (04:44):
If you thought that my husband's mission was powerful before,
you have no idea. You have no idea what you
just have unleashed across this entire country, in this world.
You have no idea. You have no idea the fire
(05:06):
that you have ignited within this wife. The cries of
this widow will echo around the world like a battle cry.
Speaker 2 (05:18):
No hate, no revenge, just strength and faith and a
bold message that she will never surrender. She's vowed to
my turning point, USA, Bigger and better than ever.
Speaker 8 (05:34):
It will become stronger, bolder, louder, and greater than ever.
If you thought that my husband's mission was powerful before,
you have no idea. You have no idea what you
just have unleashed across this entire country, in this world.
(05:58):
You have no idea.
Speaker 3 (06:01):
She is a warrior. Now.
Speaker 2 (06:03):
So many people online are calling for vengeance, and I
feel your anger, but look to Erica, Charlie's widow as
the perfect example of how we should respond. Never surrender,
never back down, but do it all in love.
Speaker 3 (06:22):
Charlie was first and.
Speaker 2 (06:23):
Foremost a follower of Jesus Christ, who taught us to
love all people, including our enemies. Charlie loved young people
and wanted only what was best for them. Look at
how Charlie engages with this young transgender person.
Speaker 3 (06:39):
He tells the truth, but he does it with love.
Speaker 2 (06:43):
Because I've heard so many different opinions about from so
many different people, so I just want to get like
your side.
Speaker 6 (06:49):
Well Firstaul, thank you so much for that man. So
I'm going to have an opinion that very few people
will ever tell you, and I want you to think
about it and pray about it, which is I want
you to be very cautious putting drugs into your system
in the pursuit of changing your body. I instead encourage
you to work on what's going on in your brain first.
Speaker 2 (07:11):
Charlie's only crime was to tell the truth, and his
martyrdom has only increased his message. They may have killed
Charlie Kirk, but they've created thousands more. Turning Point has
already received eighteen thousand requests for new chapters, doubling the
movement overnight. Since he was murdered, Charlie has gained ten
(07:33):
million more followers on Instagram and millions more across other
platforms like YouTube, TikTok, and x Now, the question for
each of us is what are we willing to sacrifice
for our nation? Charlie showed up and put himself in
front of thousands of people, campus after campus, week after week,
knowing there was a risk to his life. In the end,
(07:57):
he paid the ultimate price for defending faith, family, and
his nation.
Speaker 3 (08:03):
What are you willing to sacrifice?
Speaker 7 (08:07):
Now?
Speaker 2 (08:08):
Yesterday there will protests around the country, and many of
the anti immigration, anti government protests were written off as
fringe and far right by the mainstream media. So I
decided to check them out for myself. So why are
you here at the march today or.
Speaker 4 (08:25):
I believe in the cause. I believe. I'm not against immigration,
but I think we have too much of it currently
and I think in Australia we do need to slow down.
And I don't believe that the government's doing the right
thing by Australians and our country.
Speaker 3 (08:39):
What's your one message to Anthony Albanezi?
Speaker 9 (08:43):
Retire?
Speaker 3 (08:45):
Retire to copa Kavana.
Speaker 10 (08:47):
Yeah, that's great, thank you, Particularly now in light of
what happened to Charlie Kirk.
Speaker 7 (08:53):
I think it's time for everyone cook to come together.
Speaker 3 (08:56):
No more division.
Speaker 11 (08:57):
It's gone too far now and it's time for aus
all to work together to move forward.
Speaker 1 (09:03):
Our government is not looking out for us. Doesn't matter
what party you come from.
Speaker 9 (09:07):
The Prime minister's job should be to.
Speaker 12 (09:08):
Look out for their own people and our own interests
are not being looked after.
Speaker 3 (09:12):
And what do you think is going wrong right now?
What isn't going wrong?
Speaker 1 (09:15):
Starts exact clown at the top.
Speaker 9 (09:17):
He's a dead sound but sorry, there's no.
Speaker 1 (09:20):
Better way to find it.
Speaker 3 (09:21):
That's good And why are you here today?
Speaker 13 (09:23):
I'm just going to show support for the country.
Speaker 4 (09:25):
I'm not saying stop all immigration it's just it's got
to be controlled.
Speaker 1 (09:29):
You know, it can't be really here.
Speaker 3 (09:32):
Why are you here today?
Speaker 5 (09:34):
Because we understand that for Australia we need to be
united on the one flag. And you know we're seeing
now through the massive immigration they're coming in, but they're
not respecting the flag.
Speaker 9 (09:49):
We're not trying to build a nation.
Speaker 1 (09:50):
Well, we're trying to sustain one.
Speaker 4 (09:52):
And we cannot do it when you are influxing the
country with masses of metal people who will not do,
not want to assimilate.
Speaker 2 (10:00):
The march was great and I met so many awesome
Sky News viewers. I spoke to people for nearly two hours,
and no one said anything racist or hateful that I saw.
Even migrants marched because they recognized that this country can
only be great if immigration is sustainable.
Speaker 14 (10:20):
I wear my Aboriginal t shirt because this land was, is,
and always will be an Aboriginal land. But this country
was developed by predominantly Christian convicts. So this is a
Christian country. Though I am a Buddhist, I always celebrate
Christmas and I believe I came to Christian country.
Speaker 2 (10:39):
And you cannot call these guys far right or extreme,
while you call the other side peaceful. I didn't see
any terrorist flags. I didn't hear any chance for genocide.
But apparently in Australia it's waiving the national flag.
Speaker 3 (10:54):
That makes you an extremist.
Speaker 2 (10:56):
In the UK, hundreds of thousands or potentially even millions
marched in the streets for British values as well. It
really does feel like the world is waking up. The
mainstream media keeps trying to paint these people as far
right or racist or xenophobic, but I really don't think
that's the case. They love their country and their culture
(11:19):
and they want to preserve it. What's so controversial about
that our ancestors paid in blood for the freedoms we
enjoy today. What price will we be willing to pay
to preserve them for our children and our grandchildren. Getting
out and waving your flag is a small act that
sends a big message when not giving up on our country.
(11:47):
Let's bring in tonight's panel, executive director of the Page
Research Center Jared Holland and commentator Josh Dabilestein.
Speaker 3 (11:55):
Jared, let's start with you. What's your reaction to Charlie
Kirk's assassin?
Speaker 9 (12:02):
Thanks for having me, Fray, I knew when you asked
me on that this was.
Speaker 12 (12:05):
Going to come up, and I've actually been quite surprised
at my own emotional reaction to this. Charlie was thirty,
like thirty one, he had two kids like I did,
a two year old and a baby, and he was
killed for engaging in debate, for listening to people, for
arguing his case, for believing in things that I believe in,
(12:30):
for articulating those things that I believe in. And in
the wake of his death, we've seen this incredible outpouring
of support, but we've also seen the hate from the
extreme left. We've seen the condoning of political violence from
Hannah Ferguson. We have seen MP Sally Stegele liking these posts.
(12:50):
We have seen this huge wave of aggression and cause
that he deserved it from our own Australian community. And
I think what's challenged me is what does that mean
for or me and my place in Australie debay, What
does this mean for Euphraira? And I've seen some of
the vitriol that you get on some of your comments,
for standing up for the truth, for defending what you
believe in, for choosing not to be cowed or to
(13:13):
bend the need to get up and have that fight.
I feel angry, I feel sad, I feel devastated for
his wife and for his kids, and I feel fired up.
And I think you said in your piece earlier that
this will create one thousand, Charlie Kirkson, I know I
feel more in bold than to speak up to get
more public that I will not be scared.
Speaker 9 (13:33):
I will not be terrified.
Speaker 12 (13:34):
And I have seen thousands upon thousands and millions reaching
out across the Internet who've made it very clear they
will not be intimidated by left despinance.
Speaker 9 (13:42):
We will not be intimidated by left despondance.
Speaker 12 (13:44):
And if you thought Charlie was bad, if you just
wait until you have this avalanche of people who care
about their families, who care about their communities, who care
about their country, who care about their faith, that they
are going to stand up and be bold and proclaim
that in the public square. And I think that's what's
called from all of us, is to be brave, to
be courageous, to stand side by side, to.
Speaker 9 (14:02):
Invest in our families.
Speaker 12 (14:05):
And yeah, I think that's what Charlie's legacy was as
someone who championed that, who lived the life that he
preached announced out having.
Speaker 9 (14:11):
To do the same.
Speaker 2 (14:12):
So true, and it feels like we're at the beginning
of some kind of a revival, just the thousands and
thousands of people online that are sharing how their lives
have been transformed by Charlie Kirk.
Speaker 3 (14:26):
Now, Josh, you're further to the left than Jared or I.
What do you make of the reaction.
Speaker 2 (14:32):
We've seen to the assassination, particularly from many people on
the left.
Speaker 15 (14:38):
I mean, what I make of it is it's mostly
an emotional reaction. Really, it's intense disappointment. And you know,
you invoked October senth, so October seventh earlier, and it's
emotional thinking about it. But something happened, maybe not on
October seventh, maybe it was October eighth. There's something that
(15:00):
happened to those of us on the left who saw
a moral fracturing around us that we knew we couldn't
put up with. And what's been really disturbing is that
I personally don't see anything about this type of reaction
that speaks to somebody being left wing. This is not political.
(15:22):
There's nothing political. There's nothing left wing at all about
this kind of.
Speaker 1 (15:29):
This is a moral problem.
Speaker 3 (15:31):
This is a moral problem.
Speaker 15 (15:32):
And I think that this carrying this identity of being
left wing. I identify as being left wing, and therefore
I can be as angry and as disturbed and as
vitriolic and as vile as I want, because I have
a moral righteousness guiding me against some type of power structure, whatever.
Speaker 3 (15:52):
It is today.
Speaker 15 (15:54):
That's not left wing. That's just people who are really
really angry. I empathize with people's anger a lot, but
I do think it's up to the adults on the room,
the adults on the left, to put our foots up,
to put our feet down, and say this is not
this is not how we behave this's not how we.
Speaker 3 (16:10):
Treat each other.
Speaker 2 (16:10):
And we should be seeing Anthony Albanezi condemning Zali Segel
for liking that post by Hannah Ferguson saying violence is justified.
But of course we haven't seen that at all. And
I think you pick up on something really important there, Josh,
where we've crossed the line from left versus right. It
really feels like this is about good versus evil. It
shouldn't be political, but not being able to condemn a
(16:33):
father and a husband's murder that is just plain evil.
But Jared three days later and the left wing media
are still writing articles like this one from The Guardian
questions Linger about alleged shooter's motivation.
Speaker 3 (16:47):
For killing Charlie Kirk.
Speaker 2 (16:49):
I mean, seriously, there were anti fascist messages on the
bullet casings. Plus he lived with a transgender roommate. It
is documented he had left wing political views. Why will
they not admit that this is an example of radical
left wing terrorism.
Speaker 12 (17:08):
Well, while don't they admit it, I mean, you've got
you know, there is a whole machinery behind PR firms
and marketing agencies and influencers, and their entire job is
to spin this, to make that side the sympathetic side
and this.
Speaker 9 (17:20):
But I think something bigger has happened here.
Speaker 12 (17:22):
And actually Josh just touched on that band about what
are we doing to our moral framework and our fabric
as a society. And I think what we've actually seen
is this acceleration between polaration polarization, sorry, between the two extremes,
and a lot of that's been driven by online platforms,
and a lot of it's been driven on campuses, not
even necessarily through the teachers, but through student union groups.
And self organizing collectives that really do want to see
(17:45):
a revolution on our streage. They do hate everything that
our country is. They do hate our history, they hate
our settlement. And it's not just in our nation, it's
in the US, it's in the UK. I agree as
well that it's not just about left and right. This
is about some quite really radical fringe that has actually
captured quite a significant percentage of our population. You see
that in the kind of support that Hannah Ferguson has
(18:06):
had on the post calling for political violence. You see
that in the outburst of support of this horrific killer.
And you see this in the way that we are
becoming more divided as a society. You're seeing march after march,
protest after protests, and it really just feel like the
center can't hold at the moment, and I'm quite nervous
and anxious about what this might mean for our future.
Speaker 2 (18:25):
Especially well, picking up on that thought that Jerry and
you talked about March after March this weekend, we did
see march after March from across the political spectrum. What
do you think that says about where we are as
a country that you have such polar opposites taking to
the streets now all the time, it feels like where
(18:47):
are we headed?
Speaker 9 (18:49):
I think we're heading for something new.
Speaker 12 (18:51):
You know, there's a phrase that history doesn't repeat itself,
but it does right, And I think the sort of
the post Second War and post Cold War settlement of
liberal democracy and liberalism and free markets and everyone being
brought into that system, I think that's pulling away. You're
seeing that fall away on the right, particular in the US,
with the lurch towards protectionism, kind of neo mercantilism between
(19:11):
the US and China. And you're seeing that on the
left with this kind of post liberal politics that is
very much baked into identity. It's very much baked into
collectivizing for culture, ethnic, sexual interests. And I think we
are heading to a period now that really is uncharted territory.
You add the acceleration of technology in here, algorithmically driven
(19:32):
content that does polarize people further, that promotes the extremes.
It gets that really outraged kind of emotion in US,
and I think this is really dangerous for our state
and federal governments and how they handle this, how they
use the state and without taking our freedoms, but make
sure they don't tolerate this kind of extreme spilence on
the fringes.
Speaker 2 (19:50):
Well, Jared Holland and Josh Davelstein, thank you so much
for joining me. Guys, joining me now is social media phenomenon.
Model and commentator Warwick from The Warwick Report, Jade, what's
your reaction to the assassination of Charlie Kirk?
Speaker 10 (20:07):
Well, thank you so much for having me. Freya. I
have been absolutely disgusted by the far left response. You're
seeing everything from memes to TikTok dances of them celebrating it,
and it's like, how much humanity have we lost through this?
It's just mocking and inhumane and callous.
Speaker 3 (20:31):
Totally.
Speaker 2 (20:32):
Well, you were in London for Tommy Robinson's protest. The
media is trying to portray it as far right and racist.
Speaker 3 (20:40):
Full of loonies. What was it really like?
Speaker 10 (20:44):
It was actually so much fun. There were people from
all different walks of life and background there. They were
coming up to the stage they were like, we're so
excited that you guys are doing this. Look, people are
no longer afraid of being called racist. They just want
to save their countries. And for too long, the Act
has pushed people to censor themselves and follow a rhetoric
(21:06):
that we don't agree with, and now people have had enough.
Speaker 3 (21:10):
Yeah, well, I mean that's exactly right.
Speaker 2 (21:11):
I get a sense here in Australia that a lot
of the stuff that we on the right have been
warning about for a long time, radical Islamism, radical leftism,
the impact of the ideology of multiculturalism, it's actually starting
to become mainstream.
Speaker 3 (21:29):
Do you think these protests, given their huge scale, mark
the start of something bigger?
Speaker 10 (21:38):
Oh, one hundred percent. I mean, the West is not
compatible with Shria law and extreme Islam. I feel as
if people are seeing the effect of it firsthand. I
know a number of women who have been essayed by
certain groups and they just want someone to speak up
for them.
Speaker 3 (21:58):
This is a huge change.
Speaker 10 (21:59):
We had been on this pendulum swung so far to that,
and now, given everything that's happened, the crime statistics, it's
swinging to the right, and I think the universe is
balancing itself out.
Speaker 2 (22:11):
I totally agree, and I'm glad it's finally happening. Look,
let's move to the US now. Kamala Harris's memoir is
coming out soon and she's admitted that it was reckless
to run Biden again. Now, the lefty ladies at the
View had a revelation that maybe it would have all
worked out if the Democrats had just kept quiet about
(22:33):
Biden's condition.
Speaker 11 (22:35):
The divisive for me is if the Democrats had kept
their mouths shut and looked like, hold on here what
I'm saying. If they had kept their mouths shut and
took care of this in house, as opposed to making
it a public spectacle, I think people would have had
(22:59):
a better.
Speaker 1 (22:59):
Fee all about it.
Speaker 3 (23:02):
Dade.
Speaker 2 (23:03):
They made him a public spectacle when they let him
do the first presidential debate. Just to jug your memory,
this is what we had to endure up making.
Speaker 7 (23:13):
Sure that we're able to make every single solitary person
eligible for what I've been able to do with the
with the COVID I s could be with dealing with
everything we have to do with.
Speaker 11 (23:28):
Look, if we finally beat Medicare, Are they delusional?
Speaker 3 (23:38):
Yeah?
Speaker 10 (23:38):
I don't think it was the left exposing him. We
have eyes and ears. We could see everything for ourselves,
Thank you very much.
Speaker 9 (23:45):
The women of the View.
Speaker 10 (23:47):
Yeah, I mean Biden was falling downstairs, falling off bicycles,
slurring his speech. You know, we're not idiots. They think
we're idiots. They genuinely think we are stupid, and we're.
Speaker 3 (23:59):
Not exactly well.
Speaker 2 (24:01):
Look, in the US, every president tends to get a
library when they leave offers. But the trick is they
have to fundraise about sixty percent of the cost of construction,
which depending on the building, could mean tens of millions
of dollars.
Speaker 3 (24:17):
Now Democrats are.
Speaker 2 (24:18):
Refusing to give money to Biden's library, So there's really
a question mark. Could he be one of the few
presidents in history to not have a presidential library? I mean,
what does this make you think about what the long
term legacy of Biden will be?
Speaker 10 (24:36):
You know, it's very interesting, it's a great question. Actually,
some of the ex donors who had donated insane amounts
of money in the past have claimed that they don't
want to become a target of the Trump administration if
they donate to Biden's library, which simply isn't true. I'm
calling bs on that. I think that. Unfortunately, the truth
(24:58):
is what did he accomplish? You know, donors want to
donate to something meaningful, and you know, someone a lot
smarter than me will make that decision, but it's rather telling.
And yeah, if the people who are in charge of
the finances are saying what should we donate to?
Speaker 9 (25:13):
Like, what did he do?
Speaker 3 (25:15):
Tells me everything, Jade.
Speaker 2 (25:17):
I want to get a bit more personal with you here.
Tell us about your rise on social media and how
you ended up with a huge platform in a relatively
short amount of time.
Speaker 1 (25:30):
Uh.
Speaker 10 (25:30):
Yeah, it's been a weird ride in the last seven months.
I've I think I've got one hundred and thirty thousand
followers on Instagram. Long story short, I worked in the
film industry. I was a model producer as well, and
everything was just very woke and it was compelled speech,
and that does have a negative side effect to you.
(25:53):
And I decided I have to be myself. I can't lie.
I don't want to pretend to be someone I'm not.
So I started speaking out, gave my opinion on the news,
and then made a couple of videos about the lgbtq
HDTV group and all their amazed new flags, and that
(26:14):
went viral. And then I made another video where I
called Sharia law gay and that one went viral. So
I don't know, It's just things that happen in my
head now are on Instagram.
Speaker 2 (26:25):
Unfortunately, that's how I discovered you on Instagram. Actually you
calling Sharia law gay? That was that was very interesting.
But what's the reception been like? Obviously you come from
this really left wing background in film and the arts.
Have you been ostracized? What's the reaction been?
Speaker 10 (26:48):
Yes, I mean I've lost most of my clients, but
that was to be expected. However, you know, given the
Sydney Sweeney Levi's and now Jimmy Too Commercial, I think
maybe the fashion industry is going to be a bit
more accepting to right wingers. Maybe not just yet, but
I do get some and a living threats often. But
you know, some things I say are just a joke.
(27:10):
Some things are actually factual. So if you don't like it,
and you think that violence is the answer, and you
know death threats are the answer, then you are a
terrorist and you're proving my point.
Speaker 2 (27:21):
And when you see the lengths that the extreme left
will go to in the assassination of Charlie Kirk, you're
putting yourself out there in a public position. Do you
worry for your own safety at all?
Speaker 10 (27:35):
Of course I do, but I also believe that things
happen for a reason. And if my purpose is to
speak common sense and call that hypocrisy and you know,
protect women and children, and something happens to me, then
it is what it is.
Speaker 2 (27:51):
Well, we certainly appreciate it, and I'm sure you've gained
a fair few more fans tonight. So keep it up.
Thank you so much, Jade go anywhere because coming up
after the break, our debate on net zero with former
two GB presenter Chris O'Keeffe.
Speaker 3 (28:17):
Welcome back.
Speaker 2 (28:18):
Each week on this show we have a great debate
to reach across the aisle and have some robust discussion.
This week we've certainly got a debate for you. You
might remember this wild community town hall about a proposed
wind farm near Yas for the.
Speaker 16 (28:34):
Trans mission lines you've driven players, Come on this is
it really is?
Speaker 17 (28:48):
Well?
Speaker 2 (28:49):
That controversial wind farm has been indefinitely delayed. A UK
owned company, wind Prospect, wanted to build ninety turbines. Each
would be about two hundred and sixty five meters tall,
which is almost as tall as the Crown in Barangaroo.
But almost every week it feels like we're seeing a
renewable energy project being canceled or delayed. Now this presents
(29:12):
a challenge for our country because labor wants our grid
to be eighty two percent renewable by twenty thirty and
ultimately net zero by twenty fifty.
Speaker 3 (29:22):
Is this even possible? What are the trade offs?
Speaker 2 (29:25):
And will be hundreds of billions of dollars we have
to spend really make a difference to global emissions.
Speaker 3 (29:31):
Well, joining me.
Speaker 2 (29:32):
Now to debate these issues is Jude Blick, senior Energy
analyst at the CIS, and Chris O'Keeffe, former TWOGB presenter
and now spokesman for the Clean Energy Council. Chris, thanks
so much for joining us. Let's start with you, do
you think net zero is actually achievable?
Speaker 17 (29:51):
It is achievable, and firstly, it's twenty five years away.
That's a very long period of time between twenty twenty
five and twenty fifty. To put it into perspective, Tube
was in a very embryonic stage all the way back
in two thousand and five, The iPhone, Twitter, all of
it was sort of some weird technological development that may
(30:12):
or may not be sort of mainstream.
Speaker 1 (30:14):
And we're in a situation now where in.
Speaker 17 (30:17):
Twenty five years time, the path that we're setting on
now in terms of decarbonizing, the grid is the path
that we should be setting on, and it's the path
that we've certainly gone in place, and technology will change,
and I think it's pretty clear that the world is
on a path to net zero, and it's plenty of
capital behind it, plenty of will behind it, and plenty
(30:38):
of political will behind it too, and I think we'll.
Speaker 1 (30:41):
Certainly get there.
Speaker 3 (30:43):
Jude, what are your thoughts? Is net zero possible?
Speaker 1 (30:46):
Absolutely not know.
Speaker 18 (30:48):
This technological optimism for the next twenty five years is
not paying off so far and it won't. Noting that
even in twenty nineteen, Kin Thornton, the previous Chief executive
of the Clean Energy Council, said that renewables didn't need
any subsidies anymore as the technology had gotten good enough
and cheap enough to make that the case. And so
that's six years ago. They still need subsidies. There are
(31:09):
virtually no new wind and solar projects going ahead without subsidies.
And look, net zero relies on cheap electricity. There's three
major sectors of our society to decarbonized. We've got to
get the electricity grid, then we've got to get all
the petrol and diesel use decarbonized, and then there's the
hard to abate stuff that we think we're going to
use hydrogen for. And look, electrification and hydrogenification requires cheap electricity,
(31:33):
and that is now abundantly clear that wind and solar
do not produce cheap electricity. We've already slipped in the
ranks in the OECD Cheapest Power rankings from seventh place
out of the thirty six, so front of the pack,
down to twenty eighth place out of thirty six, right
at the back of the pack in terms of cheapest power.
So I think that's becoming even more clear as we go.
Speaker 2 (31:52):
Chris, what do you make of Jude's comments and how
much do you think net zero will cost us?
Speaker 1 (32:00):
Well, what's the alternative? Is Jue got an alternative for us?
Speaker 17 (32:03):
Because we're in a situation where ninety percent of the
East Coast's.
Speaker 1 (32:08):
Coal fired power stations cold fight power.
Speaker 17 (32:10):
Stations have done a wonderful job for Australia over a
really long period of time, but we've got to change
the kit. They're getting old. Just look at your lawn,
right your lawn in Victoria. They had a pretty significant
outage last year and it wasn't just one outage, four
thousand hours of outages.
Speaker 1 (32:29):
You know what that means?
Speaker 17 (32:30):
Your lawn cold fire POWERstation is not feeding electricity into
the grid and what do you think that does to
your power brills?
Speaker 3 (32:36):
Up?
Speaker 1 (32:37):
It goes.
Speaker 17 (32:37):
So we need to replace the kit and what are
we going to replace it with? And I think it's
a little bit tried of people like Jude and those
on the anti net zero train to effectively just stand
on the sidelines and poke holes in what is a
transition that the entire country is behind, the entire world
(32:58):
is behind without our offering a feasible alternative, what is
it We're going to build new coal fired power stations?
Speaker 1 (33:05):
We tried that. There was a feasibility study.
Speaker 17 (33:07):
In Collinsville for Far North Queens and that was five
million dollars that Scott Morrison as Prime Minister put towards
a feasibility study when they knew full well it was
not feasible to build new coal fired power stations in Australia.
We went down the nuclear path. Ninety four seats in
the House of Representatives Australia said no to nuclear power.
And even if they did say yes to nuclear power,
(33:29):
it'll still be fifteen twenty years away.
Speaker 1 (33:31):
So what is the answer.
Speaker 17 (33:33):
To replace the coal fired electricity that is retiring because the.
Speaker 1 (33:38):
Kit is old, What are we going to replace it with?
Speaker 17 (33:42):
The only thing that we can replace it with is
the technology that it exists now, and that is solar,
that is wind, that is big batteries, and that is
pumped hydro and a bit of gas at the end
to firm it all up. Now, that's the electricity system
we're building. Seventy odd percent last week of the national
electricity market was powered by renewable energy.
Speaker 1 (34:02):
We're on the path here.
Speaker 17 (34:04):
We can try to record as much as we want
in poke holes at it, as much as we want,
But the end of the day, this is what we're doing.
And realistically, unless you can provide an alternative, all you're
doing is.
Speaker 1 (34:16):
Just being a critic.
Speaker 3 (34:19):
Jude, what do you say to that?
Speaker 18 (34:21):
Well, our first note that the whole world is not
on board with this energy transition. Some of the world's
largest emitters China, India, the US not decarbonizing at anyone
near the rate that we are trying to and not
on board with.
Speaker 1 (34:33):
That at all.
Speaker 18 (34:34):
And Australia represents less than one percent of the world's emissions,
so it doesn't make sense for us to try it.
So you're saying, well, I'm open to the argument that
we should we should reduce emissions in line with what
some of the bigger emitters are doing. But if we're
less than one percent of the world's emissions, and we're
sacrificing our industrial capability and our cheap power advantage in
our way of life on the altar of this net
(34:57):
zero fanatical goal, I don't think that's worthwhile. If Australia
dropped off the map tomorrow, we would not have an
impact on the climate.
Speaker 1 (35:04):
And so I'm open to that argument.
Speaker 18 (35:05):
But you've mentioned that the coal fleet is aging and
what the alternative would be, and it goes back to
that argument that, look, we've been told that we've got
to decarbonize at any cost, because you know, if we don't,
the world's going to end or something like that, and
I just I reject that argument. You can't say we
don't have any other firepower. Yeah, I think more cold
fired power. And look, kof you've picked an example of
(35:27):
your lawn, which is one of the oldest power stations,
and there's no denying that the coal fleet is aging,
but Queensland's power generation is some of the youngest in
the country. Some three power stations are less than twenty
five years old. The CEO of Delta Electricity has recently
stated publicly that he's upgrading his equipment with ten plus
year lifetime upgrades because he knows that coal is going
(35:49):
to be around for longer than what the system planners
have planned for the decrease in cold usage. And so yeah,
I think either refurbishment, serious refurbishment, or new coal fired
power stations until we can get to something like nuclear
to provide that base load power is the right path here,
and it's the most sensible.
Speaker 2 (36:05):
But Chris, is coal really the most expensive or are
people not investing in it because they've been told repeatedly
over and over by the government the coal is being
phased out. There's no place for new coal is Isn't
that the real reason why at the moment it might
look like coal is not feasible.
Speaker 17 (36:23):
Well, there's no law against building a new coal fired POWERstation,
or proposing one, or putting one through an approval process.
Speaker 1 (36:29):
Nothing. There's nothing stopping the private sector.
Speaker 17 (36:32):
And last time I checked, it's a capitalist society and
free markets are important, and guess what, the free markets
have been pretty clear that coal fire power stations are
one not financially viable and two are not of the
interests of these private companies and private capital to build them. So,
you know, either we believe in free markets.
Speaker 1 (36:53):
Or we don't. And it's kind of a curious.
Speaker 17 (36:56):
Part of Peter Dutton's Peter Dutton's point, and I'll just
raise your talk about China. Well, in April, China built
as much solar capacity in one month in April as
Australia has done and in its entire history in one month.
Do you think the Chinese Communist Party is doing it
so it can sit around the table at the UN
(37:16):
and seeing Kumbaya or are they doing it because it's
extraordinarily cheap and it's a nationally important thing to do.
This is what the Chinese government is doing, and what
we're sitting here go, oh, you know, maybe not. The
world is moving on and either Australia gets on board
or it doesn't. And we certainly have again, seventy of
(37:39):
Australia's energy generation last week was from renewable energy. This
stuff works, it works, It's working right now. Every time
you flick the switch on, every time you turn your
computer on, every time you turn your.
Speaker 1 (37:50):
Telly onto what Freier League on Sky News. It's being generated.
Speaker 17 (37:55):
It's being lit up by electrons that are powered by
renewable energy.
Speaker 1 (38:01):
And that is not a bad thing.
Speaker 17 (38:03):
And we're in a situation now where Australia is moving
that way, the world is moving.
Speaker 1 (38:08):
That way, and we talk about China and all the
rest of it.
Speaker 17 (38:12):
Make the Chinese some of the world leaders in building
renewable energy capacity. Again, they're doing it because it is
really cheap for them, and they realize that if they're
not importing fuels across the Strait, then it gives them
a major national security advantage.
Speaker 1 (38:32):
And also guess what it works.
Speaker 17 (38:35):
It powers their economy and it reduces a major amount
of pollution in their capital cities.
Speaker 18 (38:41):
Personally, Yeah, the first thing I'd say is that the
Chinese investment might be large, but they don't have the
net zero goal that we do. And look, the complicated
thing about renewables is that they do work at small
percentages of the grid, while you have the base load
dispatchable power capacity that can actually back them up because
they only solo only produces power twenty five percent of
the time and win only roughly thirty percent of the time,
(39:03):
and so they work up to roughly twenty percent of
the grid, which is what China is kind of getting to.
But once you get beyond that, every country around the
world which has tried to go a renewables penetration percentage
greater than thirty percent, it ended up with higher power.
Speaker 9 (39:19):
That's not true.
Speaker 17 (39:20):
Uruguay has got ninety eight percent of their greed. Uruguay's
got ninety percent of their greed reealables. Every mentioned Uruguay.
Speaker 18 (39:28):
You mentioned free markets, and look, my only comment on
free markets is if the free market was working here,
we wouldn't have any need for subsidies. But even with
a major subsidies, the capacity Investment Scheme just being rolled out,
we're seeing uptake of these projects at less than one
third of the pace. That's a Clean Energy Council report,
less than one third of the pace that we require
(39:49):
to meet that eighty two percent by twenty thirty. So
if you believe in free markets, why the subsidies.
Speaker 2 (39:55):
Thank you so much, guys. Unfortunately, that's all the time
we have. We could extend this to a twelve hour
debate and it would still be awesome. Chris o'keith and
ju Blick, thank you so much for coming on.
Speaker 3 (40:05):
Well.
Speaker 2 (40:05):
Coming up after the break, the head of Turning Point Australia,
Joel Jamal, will join us to share his reflections.
Speaker 3 (40:11):
On Charlie Kirk. Welcome back to the program.
Speaker 2 (40:17):
Joining me now is Joel Jamal, the head of Turning
Point Australia. Joel, thanks so much for coming on, not
at all. What was your reaction when you saw the assassination?
What was that like for you?
Speaker 19 (40:30):
It probably took me a whole day, like a whole day,
and I was just a mess, an absolute mess. I
woke up first thing in the morning, seven am. Charlie's
been shot. Charlie's dead. And Charlie gave both me and
Turning Point UK so much and he inspired me five
(40:51):
years to go to start my show the arc before
I had the Turning Point Australia brand, and the impact
he had on my life.
Speaker 1 (41:01):
I just I'm so regretful.
Speaker 19 (41:03):
I never got to really tell him exactly what he
meant to me. And this is why I'm going to
the US. I'm going to the funeral. I'm going to
do what I can to share what a lot of
ousies are feeling. He was a really good guy and
he inspired tens of millions, hundreds of millions of people
around the world.
Speaker 2 (41:23):
And that's a story that we keep hearing come up
again and again. And I've been just blown away by
the amount of people I've seen, even on TikTok, talking
about how Charlie Kirk changed their lives and now saying
I'm done being scared, I'm done hiding my beliefs. What
do you think Charlie Kirk's legacy will.
Speaker 19 (41:45):
Be Well, I think in a big way, this has
solidified his legacy as someone that was just he loved
the battle of the ideas.
Speaker 1 (41:53):
It was all.
Speaker 19 (41:54):
About winning on the facts, winning on the arguments, and
the opponents that he faced that disagreed with him are
in tears right now.
Speaker 1 (42:04):
They miss him.
Speaker 19 (42:05):
And I think that legacy of breathing your values into politics,
which is exactly what Western nations need right now, is
exactly what people are going to take from this.
Speaker 2 (42:16):
When you talk about actually engaging in the battle of ideas.
Speaker 3 (42:19):
Unfortunately, we've seen a.
Speaker 2 (42:22):
Lot of people on the left, more than I expected,
celebrating his murder, and that is not how you react
to someone, you engage in the battle of ideas, but
fundamentally you have a respect for your opponent, even if
you disagree with them. Have you been I mean, I
have been flabbergasted by the level of evil and vitriol
(42:45):
we've seen directed towards Charlie hours, even hours after he
was assassinated.
Speaker 3 (42:51):
What do you make of that reaction? Why are they
so full of hate?
Speaker 19 (42:55):
Freya The idea that our debating opponents in the SPS
debate Hannah Ferguson Abby Chatfield.
Speaker 2 (43:03):
For context, Joel and I hit a debate on the
SBS before the last federal election where we went up
against Hannah Ferguson and Abby Chatfield, so we're very used
to dealing with these people.
Speaker 19 (43:14):
The idea that we could have a civil debate, and
then a few months later they're essentially, I don't want
to say, cheering on Charlie's death, but they're not sad.
Speaker 1 (43:24):
They're not sad.
Speaker 19 (43:25):
And the other thing is our other debating opponent, Punter's
politics Conrad not a single post at least friendly. Geordie
is whatever you disagree with him on, at least he
had the decency. Maybe it's because he had an attack
on his house, but at least he had the decency
to say, what is wrong America? Why is violence at
part of your political discourse? This is not something we
(43:47):
want to see in Australia. We're all shocked by it
and it's really strange for only you would really understand
they were our debating opponents in that SBS debate. It's
actually quite shocking if you think about it.
Speaker 2 (43:58):
And then the idea that would support the killing of
Charlie Kirk, or at least not outright condemn it if
it were one of us that were in that situation,
what would their response be? And once you get to
that point, how can you sustain a democracy? How can
you sustain Western civilization which was built off the fact
I talked about this in my editorial, that we don't
(44:20):
need violence to express our views now. Zali Segel the
TLMP liked Hannah Ferguson's post where she said violence is
sometimes justified. To see a mainstream Australian politician endorsing those views,
are you despairing where we are as a country?
Speaker 19 (44:39):
Look, I think there's a lot of people that are
showing us who they truly are, and I think it
was Charlie who said you can tell a lot from
a person by how they react when someone dies, and
I think, look Zally, it was just the like on
a post. It's a different It's stratispheric when it comes
to Abbi Chautfield talking about why hasn't anyone done it?
(45:00):
It alluding to going after Trump like the idea it
does despair, make you despair a little bit being people
that enjoy the battle of the ideas. But at the
same time, this should be a wake up call for people.
If you don't engage in democracy, you see the ground
to these psychos that are out there that are in
our parliaments. So please engage in democracy, join a political party,
(45:22):
join a church, and we've got to get back to
the values that made Australia great in the first place.
Speaker 3 (45:27):
Exactly, Well, where is turning point USA headed? Next?
Speaker 2 (45:30):
We saw defined Erica Kirk make an address to the
Globe forty eight hours after her husband was murdered. Now,
I personally think we could see Erica running for president
and I would totally support that. Finally we will get
a Kirk presidency. But where do you think the movement
is headed?
Speaker 3 (45:48):
Now?
Speaker 19 (45:48):
Look too soon to say about Erica. I think that
you know, and I mean I think everyone feels this,
including yourself, like we are so sorry for her losing
a beautiful husband and the lovely children they have. I mean,
what do you tell the children? I think moving ahead,
Turning Point USA has solidified exactly what it's going to
be doing. It is an organization that is dedicated helping
(46:12):
people understand how the democracy works, breathe their values into politics.
Their conservative, they're Christian, and they're about making our countries go.
Speaker 1 (46:20):
Back to our roots. And that's what I do.
Speaker 19 (46:22):
That's what the Turning Point UK guys do as well,
and that's what's needed. And so I think that they're
just getting started. Charlie's Instagram numbers just went from one
point seven million to eleven point seven million people in
the last three days. Our Facebook page is doubled from
one hundred thousand to two hundred thousand in two days.
There is very clearly something going on, and Charlie Kirk's
(46:44):
death clearly was a turning point.
Speaker 15 (46:45):
For the world.
Speaker 3 (46:46):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (46:46):
Well, I think we saw the true face of evil
that lies just below the surface of so many people,
and now hopefully the revival begins Joel Jamal.
Speaker 3 (46:55):
Thank you so much all. Thanks for your tom Thank
you well. This week's fru keg is is it?
Speaker 2 (47:00):
An elect of the Oxford Union, the world's leading debating society.
His name is George Abaronner. He debated against Charlie Kirk
back in May.
Speaker 6 (47:12):
So of course you have the agency to do that.
With all due respect. Have you been to London last
ten years? Men can do whatever they want.
Speaker 9 (47:17):
I'm living.
Speaker 1 (47:18):
Are they happier?
Speaker 6 (47:19):
Men can dress how they want, men can act how
they want and go to any club.
Speaker 1 (47:23):
Has it worked?
Speaker 13 (47:24):
Yeah? But also we've had austerity. There are other factors
outside of simply.
Speaker 1 (47:29):
You're doing respectfully.
Speaker 6 (47:31):
You're scrambling for an excuse to get away from the
truth that's right in front of you. I mean, maybe
men should get married and have children. Okay, I think
because it's worries for two thousand years.
Speaker 2 (47:40):
I just think it's a very discon But after Charlie
Kirk's murder, he sent to a group chat let effing go,
Charlie Kirk got shot.
Speaker 3 (47:51):
Lol.
Speaker 2 (47:52):
Imagine that celebrating the death of someone you once looked
in the eyes of and debated. Charlie Kirk represented the
spirit of free speech the Oxford Union was founded to uphold.
For the president elect to be celebrating his death is
nothing short of disgraceful and it exposes the deeper rout
(48:15):
that has infected our universities. Here's George arguing that some
institutions should be destroyed by any means necessary, and.
Speaker 13 (48:26):
This is a view I wholeheartedly agree with, the view
that sub institutions are too broken, too aggressive, too oppressive.
Speaker 1 (48:34):
To be reformed.
Speaker 13 (48:35):
Like cancers of our society, they must and they should
be taken down by any means necessary.
Speaker 2 (48:42):
The fact that he was ever elected as president is
a stain on the Union's reputation, but I guess it
proves going to a fancy UNI doesn't make you wise.
But there is a silver lining. At least two hundred
Life members have already pledged their support for a motion
of no confidence, so let's hope they can rest or
sanity at the Oxford Union.
Speaker 3 (49:02):
Well that's all the time I have for tonight.
Speaker 2 (49:05):
Stay tuned because up next is Deneka and James
Like now freyer fires up.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
Welcome to the program. We have a packed show for
you tonight. How did the left get radicalized and what
does Charlie Kirk's murder mean for the conservative movement? The
head of Turning Point Australia will share his reflections. Former
TWOGV broadcaster Chris o'keef will join me for a debate
on renewables and net zero. And my guest in the
UK was at Tommy Robinson's London rally. Was it really
(00:32):
a bunch of far right nat chomps? She's going to
fire out up, but first let's get into the three
things that are firing me up tonight. Firstly, the radicalization
of the left, Charlie Kirk's beautiful wife, Erica Kirk, and
the immigration rallies we've seen around the country. First, on Thursday,
(00:52):
Charlie Kirk was assassinated at Utah Valley University. He wasn't
a politician or an elected leader. He was an activist,
an influencer. Yet based on the scale of grief around
the world, you would think he was the president of
the United States. There have been vigils around the world
and social media is flooded with young people sharing how
(01:14):
Charlie changed their lives. Why has his death had such
a significant impact, Well, I think it's because it captures
the battle for our soul in America and around the
Western world. Our civilization has been the most prosperous in
human history because we don't resort to violence to express
(01:34):
our opinion. But now we see a tidal wave of
political violence rising in the United States. From the assassination
of Charlie Kirk to the attempted shooting of President Trump twice,
from the murder of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson to
the slaying of two Israeli embassy staffers. Assassination culture is
(01:55):
growing steadily. A YUGA poll conducted last week found at
eleven percent of Democrats said it was always or usually
acceptable to celebrate the death of a public figure they oppose,
compared to six percent of Republicans. Among left leaning Americans,
fifty six percent of people said you could at least
(02:15):
partly justify the murder of Donald Trump. Charlie Kirk tweeted
about left wing political violence back in April. He said
this culture is the natural outgrowth of left wing protest culture,
tolerating violence and mayhem for years on end, the cowardice
(02:36):
of local prosecutors and school officials have turned the left.
Speaker 3 (02:40):
Into a ticking time bomb.
Speaker 2 (02:43):
Those were prophetic words, but how did we get here?
The key problem is that many people now see anyone
who disagrees with them as an enemy. If they voice
ideas they disagree with, that's actually a form of violence,
and that justifies resistance. We've heard this language from the
(03:04):
left since October seven with Chance, like resistance is justified
and globalize the interfata. Even in Australia. Teel politician Zali
Stegel liked a post from the PM's favorite lefty podcaster,
Hannah Ferguson, saying that violence is sometimes justified. Now, eventually
(03:25):
this spills over from the online world or the bubble
of left wing protest chance into real life. Just watch
how this lefty reacted to Kirk's death.
Speaker 4 (03:37):
If you're gonna spread hateful and you're gonna incite, you're
going to target marginalized groups of people, don't be all,
oh my god.
Speaker 5 (03:45):
I've been shot. I won't get shot because I don't
do that.
Speaker 6 (03:48):
I don't have to worry about that.
Speaker 3 (03:49):
I don't feel bad for him.
Speaker 7 (03:50):
I don't feel bad for his wife.
Speaker 3 (03:51):
I feel bad for his daughter. What happens to freedom
of speech? Now?
Speaker 2 (03:56):
Yes, we are mourning an incredible leader, but it also
feels like something deeper, something seismic, has changed. We've seen
the true evil that lies just below the surface of
so many on the radical left, and if we don't
address it, the whole project of Western civilization will be
washed away in a wave of violence. But I do
(04:21):
have hope. Watching Charlie Kirk's wife, Erica, respond to this
tragedy has restored my faith in humanity.
Speaker 8 (04:30):
They killed Charlie because he preached a message of patriotism, faith,
and of God's merciful love.
Speaker 9 (04:41):
They should all know this.
Speaker 8 (04:44):
If you thought that my husband's mission was powerful before,
you have no idea. You have no idea what you
just have unleashed across this entire country, in this world.
You have no idea. You have no idea the fire
(05:06):
that you have ignited within this wife. The cries of
this widow will echo around the world like a battle cry.
Speaker 2 (05:18):
No hate, no revenge, just strength and faith and a
bold message that she will never surrender. She's vowed to
my turning point, USA, Bigger and better than ever.
Speaker 8 (05:34):
It will become stronger, bolder, louder, and greater than ever.
If you thought that my husband's mission was powerful before,
you have no idea. You have no idea what you
just have unleashed across this entire country, in this world.
(05:58):
You have no idea.
Speaker 3 (06:01):
She is a warrior. Now.
Speaker 2 (06:03):
So many people online are calling for vengeance, and I
feel your anger, but look to Erica, Charlie's widow as
the perfect example of how we should respond. Never surrender,
never back down, but do it all in love.
Speaker 3 (06:22):
Charlie was first and.
Speaker 2 (06:23):
Foremost a follower of Jesus Christ, who taught us to
love all people, including our enemies. Charlie loved young people
and wanted only what was best for them. Look at
how Charlie engages with this young transgender person.
Speaker 3 (06:39):
He tells the truth, but he does it with love.
Speaker 2 (06:43):
Because I've heard so many different opinions about from so
many different people, so I just want to get like
your side.
Speaker 6 (06:49):
Well Firstaul, thank you so much for that man. So
I'm going to have an opinion that very few people
will ever tell you, and I want you to think
about it and pray about it, which is I want
you to be very cautious putting drugs into your system
in the pursuit of changing your body. I instead encourage
you to work on what's going on in your brain first.
Speaker 2 (07:11):
Charlie's only crime was to tell the truth, and his
martyrdom has only increased his message. They may have killed
Charlie Kirk, but they've created thousands more. Turning Point has
already received eighteen thousand requests for new chapters, doubling the
movement overnight. Since he was murdered, Charlie has gained ten
(07:33):
million more followers on Instagram and millions more across other
platforms like YouTube, TikTok, and x Now, the question for
each of us is what are we willing to sacrifice
for our nation? Charlie showed up and put himself in
front of thousands of people, campus after campus, week after week,
knowing there was a risk to his life. In the end,
(07:57):
he paid the ultimate price for defending faith, family, and
his nation.
Speaker 3 (08:03):
What are you willing to sacrifice?
Speaker 7 (08:07):
Now?
Speaker 2 (08:08):
Yesterday there will protests around the country, and many of
the anti immigration, anti government protests were written off as
fringe and far right by the mainstream media. So I
decided to check them out for myself. So why are
you here at the march today or.
Speaker 4 (08:25):
I believe in the cause. I believe. I'm not against immigration,
but I think we have too much of it currently
and I think in Australia we do need to slow down.
And I don't believe that the government's doing the right
thing by Australians and our country.
Speaker 3 (08:39):
What's your one message to Anthony Albanezi?
Speaker 9 (08:43):
Retire?
Speaker 3 (08:45):
Retire to copa Kavana.
Speaker 10 (08:47):
Yeah, that's great, thank you, Particularly now in light of
what happened to Charlie Kirk.
Speaker 7 (08:53):
I think it's time for everyone cook to come together.
Speaker 3 (08:56):
No more division.
Speaker 11 (08:57):
It's gone too far now and it's time for aus
all to work together to move forward.
Speaker 1 (09:03):
Our government is not looking out for us. Doesn't matter
what party you come from.
Speaker 9 (09:07):
The Prime minister's job should be to.
Speaker 12 (09:08):
Look out for their own people and our own interests
are not being looked after.
Speaker 3 (09:12):
And what do you think is going wrong right now?
What isn't going wrong?
Speaker 1 (09:15):
Starts exact clown at the top.
Speaker 9 (09:17):
He's a dead sound but sorry, there's no.
Speaker 1 (09:20):
Better way to find it.
Speaker 3 (09:21):
That's good And why are you here today?
Speaker 13 (09:23):
I'm just going to show support for the country.
Speaker 4 (09:25):
I'm not saying stop all immigration it's just it's got
to be controlled.
Speaker 1 (09:29):
You know, it can't be really here.
Speaker 3 (09:32):
Why are you here today?
Speaker 5 (09:34):
Because we understand that for Australia we need to be
united on the one flag. And you know we're seeing
now through the massive immigration they're coming in, but they're
not respecting the flag.
Speaker 9 (09:49):
We're not trying to build a nation.
Speaker 1 (09:50):
Well, we're trying to sustain one.
Speaker 4 (09:52):
And we cannot do it when you are influxing the
country with masses of metal people who will not do,
not want to assimilate.
Speaker 2 (10:00):
The march was great and I met so many awesome
Sky News viewers. I spoke to people for nearly two hours,
and no one said anything racist or hateful that I saw.
Even migrants marched because they recognized that this country can
only be great if immigration is sustainable.
Speaker 14 (10:20):
I wear my Aboriginal t shirt because this land was, is,
and always will be an Aboriginal land. But this country
was developed by predominantly Christian convicts. So this is a
Christian country. Though I am a Buddhist, I always celebrate
Christmas and I believe I came to Christian country.
Speaker 2 (10:39):
And you cannot call these guys far right or extreme,
while you call the other side peaceful. I didn't see
any terrorist flags. I didn't hear any chance for genocide.
But apparently in Australia it's waiving the national flag.
Speaker 3 (10:54):
That makes you an extremist.
Speaker 2 (10:56):
In the UK, hundreds of thousands or potentially even millions
marched in the streets for British values as well. It
really does feel like the world is waking up. The
mainstream media keeps trying to paint these people as far
right or racist or xenophobic, but I really don't think
that's the case. They love their country and their culture
(11:19):
and they want to preserve it. What's so controversial about
that our ancestors paid in blood for the freedoms we
enjoy today. What price will we be willing to pay
to preserve them for our children and our grandchildren. Getting
out and waving your flag is a small act that
sends a big message when not giving up on our country.
(11:47):
Let's bring in tonight's panel, executive director of the Page
Research Center Jared Holland and commentator Josh Dabilestein.
Speaker 3 (11:55):
Jared, let's start with you. What's your reaction to Charlie
Kirk's assassin?
Speaker 9 (12:02):
Thanks for having me, Fray, I knew when you asked
me on that this was.
Speaker 12 (12:05):
Going to come up, and I've actually been quite surprised
at my own emotional reaction to this. Charlie was thirty,
like thirty one, he had two kids like I did,
a two year old and a baby, and he was
killed for engaging in debate, for listening to people, for
arguing his case, for believing in things that I believe in,
(12:30):
for articulating those things that I believe in. And in
the wake of his death, we've seen this incredible outpouring
of support, but we've also seen the hate from the
extreme left. We've seen the condoning of political violence from
Hannah Ferguson. We have seen MP Sally Stegele liking these posts.
(12:50):
We have seen this huge wave of aggression and cause
that he deserved it from our own Australian community. And
I think what's challenged me is what does that mean
for or me and my place in Australie debay, What
does this mean for Euphraira? And I've seen some of
the vitriol that you get on some of your comments,
for standing up for the truth, for defending what you
believe in, for choosing not to be cowed or to
(13:13):
bend the need to get up and have that fight.
I feel angry, I feel sad, I feel devastated for
his wife and for his kids, and I feel fired up.
And I think you said in your piece earlier that
this will create one thousand, Charlie Kirkson, I know I
feel more in bold than to speak up to get
more public that I will not be scared.
Speaker 9 (13:33):
I will not be terrified.
Speaker 12 (13:34):
And I have seen thousands upon thousands and millions reaching
out across the Internet who've made it very clear they
will not be intimidated by left despinance.
Speaker 9 (13:42):
We will not be intimidated by left despondance.
Speaker 12 (13:44):
And if you thought Charlie was bad, if you just
wait until you have this avalanche of people who care
about their families, who care about their communities, who care
about their country, who care about their faith, that they
are going to stand up and be bold and proclaim
that in the public square. And I think that's what's
called from all of us, is to be brave, to
be courageous, to stand side by side, to.
Speaker 9 (14:02):
Invest in our families.
Speaker 12 (14:05):
And yeah, I think that's what Charlie's legacy was as
someone who championed that, who lived the life that he
preached announced out having.
Speaker 9 (14:11):
To do the same.
Speaker 2 (14:12):
So true, and it feels like we're at the beginning
of some kind of a revival, just the thousands and
thousands of people online that are sharing how their lives
have been transformed by Charlie Kirk.
Speaker 3 (14:26):
Now, Josh, you're further to the left than Jared or I.
What do you make of the reaction.
Speaker 2 (14:32):
We've seen to the assassination, particularly from many people on
the left.
Speaker 15 (14:38):
I mean, what I make of it is it's mostly
an emotional reaction. Really, it's intense disappointment. And you know,
you invoked October senth, so October seventh earlier, and it's
emotional thinking about it. But something happened, maybe not on
October seventh, maybe it was October eighth. There's something that
(15:00):
happened to those of us on the left who saw
a moral fracturing around us that we knew we couldn't
put up with. And what's been really disturbing is that
I personally don't see anything about this type of reaction
that speaks to somebody being left wing. This is not political.
(15:22):
There's nothing political. There's nothing left wing at all about
this kind of.
Speaker 1 (15:29):
This is a moral problem.
Speaker 3 (15:31):
This is a moral problem.
Speaker 15 (15:32):
And I think that this carrying this identity of being
left wing. I identify as being left wing, and therefore
I can be as angry and as disturbed and as
vitriolic and as vile as I want, because I have
a moral righteousness guiding me against some type of power structure, whatever.
Speaker 3 (15:52):
It is today.
Speaker 15 (15:54):
That's not left wing. That's just people who are really
really angry. I empathize with people's anger a lot, but
I do think it's up to the adults on the room,
the adults on the left, to put our foots up,
to put our feet down, and say this is not
this is not how we behave this's not how we.
Speaker 3 (16:10):
Treat each other.
Speaker 2 (16:10):
And we should be seeing Anthony Albanezi condemning Zali Segel
for liking that post by Hannah Ferguson saying violence is justified.
But of course we haven't seen that at all. And
I think you pick up on something really important there, Josh,
where we've crossed the line from left versus right. It
really feels like this is about good versus evil. It
shouldn't be political, but not being able to condemn a
(16:33):
father and a husband's murder that is just plain evil.
But Jared three days later and the left wing media
are still writing articles like this one from The Guardian
questions Linger about alleged shooter's motivation.
Speaker 3 (16:47):
For killing Charlie Kirk.
Speaker 2 (16:49):
I mean, seriously, there were anti fascist messages on the
bullet casings. Plus he lived with a transgender roommate. It
is documented he had left wing political views. Why will
they not admit that this is an example of radical
left wing terrorism.
Speaker 12 (17:08):
Well, while don't they admit it, I mean, you've got
you know, there is a whole machinery behind PR firms
and marketing agencies and influencers, and their entire job is
to spin this, to make that side the sympathetic side
and this.
Speaker 9 (17:20):
But I think something bigger has happened here.
Speaker 12 (17:22):
And actually Josh just touched on that band about what
are we doing to our moral framework and our fabric
as a society. And I think what we've actually seen
is this acceleration between polaration polarization, sorry, between the two extremes,
and a lot of that's been driven by online platforms,
and a lot of it's been driven on campuses, not
even necessarily through the teachers, but through student union groups.
And self organizing collectives that really do want to see
(17:45):
a revolution on our streage. They do hate everything that
our country is. They do hate our history, they hate
our settlement. And it's not just in our nation, it's
in the US, it's in the UK. I agree as
well that it's not just about left and right. This
is about some quite really radical fringe that has actually
captured quite a significant percentage of our population. You see
that in the kind of support that Hannah Ferguson has
(18:06):
had on the post calling for political violence. You see
that in the outburst of support of this horrific killer.
And you see this in the way that we are
becoming more divided as a society. You're seeing march after march,
protest after protests, and it really just feel like the
center can't hold at the moment, and I'm quite nervous
and anxious about what this might mean for our future.
Speaker 2 (18:25):
Especially well, picking up on that thought that Jerry and
you talked about March after March this weekend, we did
see march after March from across the political spectrum. What
do you think that says about where we are as
a country that you have such polar opposites taking to
the streets now all the time, it feels like where
(18:47):
are we headed?
Speaker 9 (18:49):
I think we're heading for something new.
Speaker 12 (18:51):
You know, there's a phrase that history doesn't repeat itself,
but it does right, And I think the sort of
the post Second War and post Cold War settlement of
liberal democracy and liberalism and free markets and everyone being
brought into that system, I think that's pulling away. You're
seeing that fall away on the right, particular in the US,
with the lurch towards protectionism, kind of neo mercantilism between
(19:11):
the US and China. And you're seeing that on the
left with this kind of post liberal politics that is
very much baked into identity. It's very much baked into
collectivizing for culture, ethnic, sexual interests. And I think we
are heading to a period now that really is uncharted territory.
You add the acceleration of technology in here, algorithmically driven
(19:32):
content that does polarize people further, that promotes the extremes.
It gets that really outraged kind of emotion in US,
and I think this is really dangerous for our state
and federal governments and how they handle this, how they
use the state and without taking our freedoms, but make
sure they don't tolerate this kind of extreme spilence on
the fringes.
Speaker 2 (19:50):
Well, Jared Holland and Josh Davelstein, thank you so much
for joining me. Guys, joining me now is social media phenomenon.
Model and commentator Warwick from The Warwick Report, Jade, what's
your reaction to the assassination of Charlie Kirk?
Speaker 10 (20:07):
Well, thank you so much for having me. Freya. I
have been absolutely disgusted by the far left response. You're
seeing everything from memes to TikTok dances of them celebrating it,
and it's like, how much humanity have we lost through this?
It's just mocking and inhumane and callous.
Speaker 3 (20:31):
Totally.
Speaker 2 (20:32):
Well, you were in London for Tommy Robinson's protest. The
media is trying to portray it as far right and racist.
Speaker 3 (20:40):
Full of loonies. What was it really like?
Speaker 10 (20:44):
It was actually so much fun. There were people from
all different walks of life and background there. They were
coming up to the stage they were like, we're so
excited that you guys are doing this. Look, people are
no longer afraid of being called racist. They just want
to save their countries. And for too long, the Act
has pushed people to censor themselves and follow a rhetoric
(21:06):
that we don't agree with, and now people have had enough.
Speaker 3 (21:10):
Yeah, well, I mean that's exactly right.
Speaker 2 (21:11):
I get a sense here in Australia that a lot
of the stuff that we on the right have been
warning about for a long time, radical Islamism, radical leftism,
the impact of the ideology of multiculturalism, it's actually starting
to become mainstream.
Speaker 3 (21:29):
Do you think these protests, given their huge scale, mark
the start of something bigger?
Speaker 10 (21:38):
Oh, one hundred percent. I mean, the West is not
compatible with Shria law and extreme Islam. I feel as
if people are seeing the effect of it firsthand. I
know a number of women who have been essayed by
certain groups and they just want someone to speak up
for them.
Speaker 3 (21:58):
This is a huge change.
Speaker 10 (21:59):
We had been on this pendulum swung so far to that,
and now, given everything that's happened, the crime statistics, it's
swinging to the right, and I think the universe is
balancing itself out.
Speaker 2 (22:11):
I totally agree, and I'm glad it's finally happening. Look,
let's move to the US now. Kamala Harris's memoir is
coming out soon and she's admitted that it was reckless
to run Biden again. Now, the lefty ladies at the
View had a revelation that maybe it would have all
worked out if the Democrats had just kept quiet about
(22:33):
Biden's condition.
Speaker 11 (22:35):
The divisive for me is if the Democrats had kept
their mouths shut and looked like, hold on here what
I'm saying. If they had kept their mouths shut and
took care of this in house, as opposed to making
it a public spectacle, I think people would have had
(22:59):
a better.
Speaker 1 (22:59):
Fee all about it.
Speaker 3 (23:02):
Dade.
Speaker 2 (23:03):
They made him a public spectacle when they let him
do the first presidential debate. Just to jug your memory,
this is what we had to endure up making.
Speaker 7 (23:13):
Sure that we're able to make every single solitary person
eligible for what I've been able to do with the
with the COVID I s could be with dealing with
everything we have to do with.
Speaker 11 (23:28):
Look, if we finally beat Medicare, Are they delusional?
Speaker 3 (23:38):
Yeah?
Speaker 10 (23:38):
I don't think it was the left exposing him. We
have eyes and ears. We could see everything for ourselves,
Thank you very much.
Speaker 9 (23:45):
The women of the View.
Speaker 10 (23:47):
Yeah, I mean Biden was falling downstairs, falling off bicycles,
slurring his speech. You know, we're not idiots. They think
we're idiots. They genuinely think we are stupid, and we're.
Speaker 3 (23:59):
Not exactly well.
Speaker 2 (24:01):
Look, in the US, every president tends to get a
library when they leave offers. But the trick is they
have to fundraise about sixty percent of the cost of construction,
which depending on the building, could mean tens of millions
of dollars.
Speaker 3 (24:17):
Now Democrats are.
Speaker 2 (24:18):
Refusing to give money to Biden's library, So there's really
a question mark. Could he be one of the few
presidents in history to not have a presidential library? I mean,
what does this make you think about what the long
term legacy of Biden will be?
Speaker 10 (24:36):
You know, it's very interesting, it's a great question. Actually,
some of the ex donors who had donated insane amounts
of money in the past have claimed that they don't
want to become a target of the Trump administration if
they donate to Biden's library, which simply isn't true. I'm
calling bs on that. I think that. Unfortunately, the truth
(24:58):
is what did he accomplish? You know, donors want to
donate to something meaningful, and you know, someone a lot
smarter than me will make that decision, but it's rather telling.
And yeah, if the people who are in charge of
the finances are saying what should we donate to?
Speaker 9 (25:13):
Like, what did he do?
Speaker 3 (25:15):
Tells me everything, Jade.
Speaker 2 (25:17):
I want to get a bit more personal with you here.
Tell us about your rise on social media and how
you ended up with a huge platform in a relatively
short amount of time.
Speaker 1 (25:30):
Uh.
Speaker 10 (25:30):
Yeah, it's been a weird ride in the last seven months.
I've I think I've got one hundred and thirty thousand
followers on Instagram. Long story short, I worked in the
film industry. I was a model producer as well, and
everything was just very woke and it was compelled speech,
and that does have a negative side effect to you.
(25:53):
And I decided I have to be myself. I can't lie.
I don't want to pretend to be someone I'm not.
So I started speaking out, gave my opinion on the news,
and then made a couple of videos about the lgbtq
HDTV group and all their amazed new flags, and that
(26:14):
went viral. And then I made another video where I
called Sharia law gay and that one went viral. So
I don't know, It's just things that happen in my
head now are on Instagram.
Speaker 2 (26:25):
Unfortunately, that's how I discovered you on Instagram. Actually you
calling Sharia law gay? That was that was very interesting.
But what's the reception been like? Obviously you come from
this really left wing background in film and the arts.
Have you been ostracized? What's the reaction been?
Speaker 10 (26:48):
Yes, I mean I've lost most of my clients, but
that was to be expected. However, you know, given the
Sydney Sweeney Levi's and now Jimmy Too Commercial, I think
maybe the fashion industry is going to be a bit
more accepting to right wingers. Maybe not just yet, but
I do get some and a living threats often. But
you know, some things I say are just a joke.
(27:10):
Some things are actually factual. So if you don't like it,
and you think that violence is the answer, and you
know death threats are the answer, then you are a
terrorist and you're proving my point.
Speaker 2 (27:21):
And when you see the lengths that the extreme left
will go to in the assassination of Charlie Kirk, you're
putting yourself out there in a public position. Do you
worry for your own safety at all?
Speaker 10 (27:35):
Of course I do, but I also believe that things
happen for a reason. And if my purpose is to
speak common sense and call that hypocrisy and you know,
protect women and children, and something happens to me, then
it is what it is.
Speaker 2 (27:51):
Well, we certainly appreciate it, and I'm sure you've gained
a fair few more fans tonight. So keep it up.
Thank you so much, Jade go anywhere because coming up
after the break, our debate on net zero with former
two GB presenter Chris O'Keeffe.
Speaker 3 (28:17):
Welcome back.
Speaker 2 (28:18):
Each week on this show we have a great debate
to reach across the aisle and have some robust discussion.
This week we've certainly got a debate for you. You
might remember this wild community town hall about a proposed
wind farm near Yas for the.
Speaker 16 (28:34):
Trans mission lines you've driven players, Come on this is
it really is?
Speaker 17 (28:48):
Well?
Speaker 2 (28:49):
That controversial wind farm has been indefinitely delayed. A UK
owned company, wind Prospect, wanted to build ninety turbines. Each
would be about two hundred and sixty five meters tall,
which is almost as tall as the Crown in Barangaroo.
But almost every week it feels like we're seeing a
renewable energy project being canceled or delayed. Now this presents
(29:12):
a challenge for our country because labor wants our grid
to be eighty two percent renewable by twenty thirty and
ultimately net zero by twenty fifty.
Speaker 3 (29:22):
Is this even possible? What are the trade offs?
Speaker 2 (29:25):
And will be hundreds of billions of dollars we have
to spend really make a difference to global emissions.
Speaker 3 (29:31):
Well, joining me.
Speaker 2 (29:32):
Now to debate these issues is Jude Blick, senior Energy
analyst at the CIS, and Chris O'Keeffe, former TWOGB presenter
and now spokesman for the Clean Energy Council. Chris, thanks
so much for joining us. Let's start with you, do
you think net zero is actually achievable?
Speaker 17 (29:51):
It is achievable, and firstly, it's twenty five years away.
That's a very long period of time between twenty twenty
five and twenty fifty. To put it into perspective, Tube
was in a very embryonic stage all the way back
in two thousand and five, The iPhone, Twitter, all of
it was sort of some weird technological development that may
(30:12):
or may not be sort of mainstream.
Speaker 1 (30:14):
And we're in a situation now where in.
Speaker 17 (30:17):
Twenty five years time, the path that we're setting on
now in terms of decarbonizing, the grid is the path
that we should be setting on, and it's the path
that we've certainly gone in place, and technology will change,
and I think it's pretty clear that the world is
on a path to net zero, and it's plenty of
capital behind it, plenty of will behind it, and plenty
(30:38):
of political will behind it too, and I think we'll.
Speaker 1 (30:41):
Certainly get there.
Speaker 3 (30:43):
Jude, what are your thoughts? Is net zero possible?
Speaker 1 (30:46):
Absolutely not know.
Speaker 18 (30:48):
This technological optimism for the next twenty five years is
not paying off so far and it won't. Noting that
even in twenty nineteen, Kin Thornton, the previous Chief executive
of the Clean Energy Council, said that renewables didn't need
any subsidies anymore as the technology had gotten good enough
and cheap enough to make that the case. And so
that's six years ago. They still need subsidies. There are
(31:09):
virtually no new wind and solar projects going ahead without subsidies.
And look, net zero relies on cheap electricity. There's three
major sectors of our society to decarbonized. We've got to
get the electricity grid, then we've got to get all
the petrol and diesel use decarbonized, and then there's the
hard to abate stuff that we think we're going to
use hydrogen for. And look, electrification and hydrogenification requires cheap electricity,
(31:33):
and that is now abundantly clear that wind and solar
do not produce cheap electricity. We've already slipped in the
ranks in the OECD Cheapest Power rankings from seventh place
out of the thirty six, so front of the pack,
down to twenty eighth place out of thirty six, right
at the back of the pack in terms of cheapest power.
So I think that's becoming even more clear as we go.
Speaker 2 (31:52):
Chris, what do you make of Jude's comments and how
much do you think net zero will cost us?
Speaker 1 (32:00):
Well, what's the alternative? Is Jue got an alternative for us?
Speaker 17 (32:03):
Because we're in a situation where ninety percent of the
East Coast's.
Speaker 1 (32:08):
Coal fired power stations cold fight power.
Speaker 17 (32:10):
Stations have done a wonderful job for Australia over a
really long period of time, but we've got to change
the kit. They're getting old. Just look at your lawn,
right your lawn in Victoria. They had a pretty significant
outage last year and it wasn't just one outage, four
thousand hours of outages.
Speaker 1 (32:29):
You know what that means?
Speaker 17 (32:30):
Your lawn cold fire POWERstation is not feeding electricity into
the grid and what do you think that does to
your power brills?
Speaker 3 (32:36):
Up?
Speaker 1 (32:37):
It goes.
Speaker 17 (32:37):
So we need to replace the kit and what are
we going to replace it with? And I think it's
a little bit tried of people like Jude and those
on the anti net zero train to effectively just stand
on the sidelines and poke holes in what is a
transition that the entire country is behind, the entire world
(32:58):
is behind without our offering a feasible alternative, what is
it We're going to build new coal fired power stations?
Speaker 1 (33:05):
We tried that. There was a feasibility study.
Speaker 17 (33:07):
In Collinsville for Far North Queens and that was five
million dollars that Scott Morrison as Prime Minister put towards
a feasibility study when they knew full well it was
not feasible to build new coal fired power stations in Australia.
We went down the nuclear path. Ninety four seats in
the House of Representatives Australia said no to nuclear power.
And even if they did say yes to nuclear power,
(33:29):
it'll still be fifteen twenty years away.
Speaker 1 (33:31):
So what is the answer.
Speaker 17 (33:33):
To replace the coal fired electricity that is retiring because the.
Speaker 1 (33:38):
Kit is old, What are we going to replace it with?
Speaker 17 (33:42):
The only thing that we can replace it with is
the technology that it exists now, and that is solar,
that is wind, that is big batteries, and that is
pumped hydro and a bit of gas at the end
to firm it all up. Now, that's the electricity system
we're building. Seventy odd percent last week of the national
electricity market was powered by renewable energy.
Speaker 1 (34:02):
We're on the path here.
Speaker 17 (34:04):
We can try to record as much as we want
in poke holes at it, as much as we want,
But the end of the day, this is what we're doing.
And realistically, unless you can provide an alternative, all you're
doing is.
Speaker 1 (34:16):
Just being a critic.
Speaker 3 (34:19):
Jude, what do you say to that?
Speaker 18 (34:21):
Well, our first note that the whole world is not
on board with this energy transition. Some of the world's
largest emitters China, India, the US not decarbonizing at anyone
near the rate that we are trying to and not
on board with.
Speaker 1 (34:33):
That at all.
Speaker 18 (34:34):
And Australia represents less than one percent of the world's emissions,
so it doesn't make sense for us to try it.
So you're saying, well, I'm open to the argument that
we should we should reduce emissions in line with what
some of the bigger emitters are doing. But if we're
less than one percent of the world's emissions, and we're
sacrificing our industrial capability and our cheap power advantage in
our way of life on the altar of this net
(34:57):
zero fanatical goal, I don't think that's worthwhile. If Australia
dropped off the map tomorrow, we would not have an
impact on the climate.
Speaker 1 (35:04):
And so I'm open to that argument.
Speaker 18 (35:05):
But you've mentioned that the coal fleet is aging and
what the alternative would be, and it goes back to
that argument that, look, we've been told that we've got
to decarbonize at any cost, because you know, if we don't,
the world's going to end or something like that, and
I just I reject that argument. You can't say we
don't have any other firepower. Yeah, I think more cold
fired power. And look, kof you've picked an example of
(35:27):
your lawn, which is one of the oldest power stations,
and there's no denying that the coal fleet is aging,
but Queensland's power generation is some of the youngest in
the country. Some three power stations are less than twenty
five years old. The CEO of Delta Electricity has recently
stated publicly that he's upgrading his equipment with ten plus
year lifetime upgrades because he knows that coal is going
(35:49):
to be around for longer than what the system planners
have planned for the decrease in cold usage. And so yeah,
I think either refurbishment, serious refurbishment, or new coal fired
power stations until we can get to something like nuclear
to provide that base load power is the right path here,
and it's the most sensible.
Speaker 2 (36:05):
But Chris, is coal really the most expensive or are
people not investing in it because they've been told repeatedly
over and over by the government the coal is being
phased out. There's no place for new coal is Isn't
that the real reason why at the moment it might
look like coal is not feasible.
Speaker 17 (36:23):
Well, there's no law against building a new coal fired POWERstation,
or proposing one, or putting one through an approval process.
Speaker 1 (36:29):
Nothing. There's nothing stopping the private sector.
Speaker 17 (36:32):
And last time I checked, it's a capitalist society and
free markets are important, and guess what, the free markets
have been pretty clear that coal fire power stations are
one not financially viable and two are not of the
interests of these private companies and private capital to build them. So,
you know, either we believe in free markets.
Speaker 1 (36:53):
Or we don't. And it's kind of a curious.
Speaker 17 (36:56):
Part of Peter Dutton's Peter Dutton's point, and I'll just
raise your talk about China. Well, in April, China built
as much solar capacity in one month in April as
Australia has done and in its entire history in one month.
Do you think the Chinese Communist Party is doing it
so it can sit around the table at the UN
(37:16):
and seeing Kumbaya or are they doing it because it's
extraordinarily cheap and it's a nationally important thing to do.
This is what the Chinese government is doing, and what
we're sitting here go, oh, you know, maybe not. The
world is moving on and either Australia gets on board
or it doesn't. And we certainly have again, seventy of
(37:39):
Australia's energy generation last week was from renewable energy. This
stuff works, it works, It's working right now. Every time
you flick the switch on, every time you turn your
computer on, every time you turn your.
Speaker 1 (37:50):
Telly onto what Freier League on Sky News. It's being generated.
Speaker 17 (37:55):
It's being lit up by electrons that are powered by
renewable energy.
Speaker 1 (38:01):
And that is not a bad thing.
Speaker 17 (38:03):
And we're in a situation now where Australia is moving
that way, the world is moving.
Speaker 1 (38:08):
That way, and we talk about China and all the
rest of it.
Speaker 17 (38:12):
Make the Chinese some of the world leaders in building
renewable energy capacity. Again, they're doing it because it is
really cheap for them, and they realize that if they're
not importing fuels across the Strait, then it gives them
a major national security advantage.
Speaker 1 (38:32):
And also guess what it works.
Speaker 17 (38:35):
It powers their economy and it reduces a major amount
of pollution in their capital cities.
Speaker 18 (38:41):
Personally, Yeah, the first thing I'd say is that the
Chinese investment might be large, but they don't have the
net zero goal that we do. And look, the complicated
thing about renewables is that they do work at small
percentages of the grid, while you have the base load
dispatchable power capacity that can actually back them up because
they only solo only produces power twenty five percent of
the time and win only roughly thirty percent of the time,
(39:03):
and so they work up to roughly twenty percent of
the grid, which is what China is kind of getting to.
But once you get beyond that, every country around the
world which has tried to go a renewables penetration percentage
greater than thirty percent, it ended up with higher power.
Speaker 9 (39:19):
That's not true.
Speaker 17 (39:20):
Uruguay has got ninety eight percent of their greed. Uruguay's
got ninety percent of their greed reealables. Every mentioned Uruguay.
Speaker 18 (39:28):
You mentioned free markets, and look, my only comment on
free markets is if the free market was working here,
we wouldn't have any need for subsidies. But even with
a major subsidies, the capacity Investment Scheme just being rolled out,
we're seeing uptake of these projects at less than one
third of the pace. That's a Clean Energy Council report,
less than one third of the pace that we require
(39:49):
to meet that eighty two percent by twenty thirty. So
if you believe in free markets, why the subsidies.
Speaker 2 (39:55):
Thank you so much, guys. Unfortunately, that's all the time
we have. We could extend this to a twelve hour
debate and it would still be awesome. Chris o'keith and
ju Blick, thank you so much for coming on.
Speaker 3 (40:05):
Well.
Speaker 2 (40:05):
Coming up after the break, the head of Turning Point Australia,
Joel Jamal, will join us to share his reflections.
Speaker 3 (40:11):
On Charlie Kirk. Welcome back to the program.
Speaker 2 (40:17):
Joining me now is Joel Jamal, the head of Turning
Point Australia. Joel, thanks so much for coming on, not
at all. What was your reaction when you saw the assassination?
What was that like for you?
Speaker 19 (40:30):
It probably took me a whole day, like a whole day,
and I was just a mess, an absolute mess. I
woke up first thing in the morning, seven am. Charlie's
been shot. Charlie's dead. And Charlie gave both me and
Turning Point UK so much and he inspired me five
(40:51):
years to go to start my show the arc before
I had the Turning Point Australia brand, and the impact
he had on my life.
Speaker 1 (41:01):
I just I'm so regretful.
Speaker 19 (41:03):
I never got to really tell him exactly what he
meant to me. And this is why I'm going to
the US. I'm going to the funeral. I'm going to
do what I can to share what a lot of
ousies are feeling. He was a really good guy and
he inspired tens of millions, hundreds of millions of people
around the world.
Speaker 2 (41:23):
And that's a story that we keep hearing come up
again and again. And I've been just blown away by
the amount of people I've seen, even on TikTok, talking
about how Charlie Kirk changed their lives and now saying
I'm done being scared, I'm done hiding my beliefs. What
do you think Charlie Kirk's legacy will.
Speaker 19 (41:45):
Be Well, I think in a big way, this has
solidified his legacy as someone that was just he loved
the battle of the ideas.
Speaker 1 (41:53):
It was all.
Speaker 19 (41:54):
About winning on the facts, winning on the arguments, and
the opponents that he faced that disagreed with him are
in tears right now.
Speaker 1 (42:04):
They miss him.
Speaker 19 (42:05):
And I think that legacy of breathing your values into politics,
which is exactly what Western nations need right now, is
exactly what people are going to take from this.
Speaker 2 (42:16):
When you talk about actually engaging in the battle of ideas.
Speaker 3 (42:19):
Unfortunately, we've seen a.
Speaker 2 (42:22):
Lot of people on the left, more than I expected,
celebrating his murder, and that is not how you react
to someone, you engage in the battle of ideas, but
fundamentally you have a respect for your opponent, even if
you disagree with them. Have you been I mean, I
have been flabbergasted by the level of evil and vitriol
(42:45):
we've seen directed towards Charlie hours, even hours after he
was assassinated.
Speaker 3 (42:51):
What do you make of that reaction? Why are they
so full of hate?
Speaker 19 (42:55):
Freya The idea that our debating opponents in the SPS
debate Hannah Ferguson Abby Chatfield.
Speaker 2 (43:03):
For context, Joel and I hit a debate on the
SBS before the last federal election where we went up
against Hannah Ferguson and Abby Chatfield, so we're very used
to dealing with these people.
Speaker 19 (43:14):
The idea that we could have a civil debate, and
then a few months later they're essentially, I don't want
to say, cheering on Charlie's death, but they're not sad.
Speaker 1 (43:24):
They're not sad.
Speaker 19 (43:25):
And the other thing is our other debating opponent, Punter's
politics Conrad not a single post at least friendly. Geordie
is whatever you disagree with him on, at least he
had the decency. Maybe it's because he had an attack
on his house, but at least he had the decency
to say, what is wrong America? Why is violence at
part of your political discourse? This is not something we
(43:47):
want to see in Australia. We're all shocked by it
and it's really strange for only you would really understand
they were our debating opponents in that SBS debate. It's
actually quite shocking if you think about it.
Speaker 2 (43:58):
And then the idea that would support the killing of
Charlie Kirk, or at least not outright condemn it if
it were one of us that were in that situation,
what would their response be? And once you get to
that point, how can you sustain a democracy? How can
you sustain Western civilization which was built off the fact
I talked about this in my editorial, that we don't
(44:20):
need violence to express our views now. Zali Segel the
TLMP liked Hannah Ferguson's post where she said violence is
sometimes justified. To see a mainstream Australian politician endorsing those views,
are you despairing where we are as a country?
Speaker 19 (44:39):
Look, I think there's a lot of people that are
showing us who they truly are, and I think it
was Charlie who said you can tell a lot from
a person by how they react when someone dies, and
I think, look Zally, it was just the like on
a post. It's a different It's stratispheric when it comes
to Abbi Chautfield talking about why hasn't anyone done it?
(45:00):
It alluding to going after Trump like the idea it
does despair, make you despair a little bit being people
that enjoy the battle of the ideas. But at the
same time, this should be a wake up call for people.
If you don't engage in democracy, you see the ground
to these psychos that are out there that are in
our parliaments. So please engage in democracy, join a political party,
(45:22):
join a church, and we've got to get back to
the values that made Australia great in the first place.
Speaker 3 (45:27):
Exactly, Well, where is turning point USA headed? Next?
Speaker 2 (45:30):
We saw defined Erica Kirk make an address to the
Globe forty eight hours after her husband was murdered. Now,
I personally think we could see Erica running for president
and I would totally support that. Finally we will get
a Kirk presidency. But where do you think the movement
is headed?
Speaker 3 (45:48):
Now?
Speaker 19 (45:48):
Look too soon to say about Erica. I think that
you know, and I mean I think everyone feels this,
including yourself, like we are so sorry for her losing
a beautiful husband and the lovely children they have. I mean,
what do you tell the children? I think moving ahead,
Turning Point USA has solidified exactly what it's going to
be doing. It is an organization that is dedicated helping
(46:12):
people understand how the democracy works, breathe their values into politics.
Their conservative, they're Christian, and they're about making our countries go.
Speaker 1 (46:20):
Back to our roots. And that's what I do.
Speaker 19 (46:22):
That's what the Turning Point UK guys do as well,
and that's what's needed. And so I think that they're
just getting started. Charlie's Instagram numbers just went from one
point seven million to eleven point seven million people in
the last three days. Our Facebook page is doubled from
one hundred thousand to two hundred thousand in two days.
There is very clearly something going on, and Charlie Kirk's
(46:44):
death clearly was a turning point.
Speaker 15 (46:45):
For the world.
Speaker 3 (46:46):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (46:46):
Well, I think we saw the true face of evil
that lies just below the surface of so many people,
and now hopefully the revival begins Joel Jamal.
Speaker 3 (46:55):
Thank you so much all. Thanks for your tom Thank
you well. This week's fru keg is is it?
Speaker 2 (47:00):
An elect of the Oxford Union, the world's leading debating society.
His name is George Abaronner. He debated against Charlie Kirk
back in May.
Speaker 6 (47:12):
So of course you have the agency to do that.
With all due respect. Have you been to London last
ten years? Men can do whatever they want.
Speaker 9 (47:17):
I'm living.
Speaker 1 (47:18):
Are they happier?
Speaker 6 (47:19):
Men can dress how they want, men can act how
they want and go to any club.
Speaker 1 (47:23):
Has it worked?
Speaker 13 (47:24):
Yeah? But also we've had austerity. There are other factors
outside of simply.
Speaker 1 (47:29):
You're doing respectfully.
Speaker 6 (47:31):
You're scrambling for an excuse to get away from the
truth that's right in front of you. I mean, maybe
men should get married and have children. Okay, I think
because it's worries for two thousand years.
Speaker 2 (47:40):
I just think it's a very discon But after Charlie
Kirk's murder, he sent to a group chat let effing go,
Charlie Kirk got shot.
Speaker 3 (47:51):
Lol.
Speaker 2 (47:52):
Imagine that celebrating the death of someone you once looked
in the eyes of and debated. Charlie Kirk represented the
spirit of free speech the Oxford Union was founded to uphold.
For the president elect to be celebrating his death is
nothing short of disgraceful and it exposes the deeper rout
(48:15):
that has infected our universities. Here's George arguing that some
institutions should be destroyed by any means necessary, and.
Speaker 13 (48:26):
This is a view I wholeheartedly agree with, the view
that sub institutions are too broken, too aggressive, too oppressive.
Speaker 1 (48:34):
To be reformed.
Speaker 13 (48:35):
Like cancers of our society, they must and they should
be taken down by any means necessary.
Speaker 2 (48:42):
The fact that he was ever elected as president is
a stain on the Union's reputation, but I guess it
proves going to a fancy UNI doesn't make you wise.
But there is a silver lining. At least two hundred
Life members have already pledged their support for a motion
of no confidence, so let's hope they can rest or
sanity at the Oxford Union.
Speaker 3 (49:02):
Well that's all the time I have for tonight.
Speaker 2 (49:05):
Stay tuned because up next is Deneka and James
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.