Mornings with Graeme Goodings - 18 August 2025

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Seven past nine, five double A on this Monday, the
eighteenth day of August. Hope you had a great weekend,
particularly if you're a Crows fan, you'd be pretty happy
about what happened on Saturday night. The wash up of
the game hasn't been so good though, and put a
bit of a dampener on the whole matter. No doubt.
To stay on five double A and you will get
all the details as they come to hand. As they say,

(00:21):
well a big show today, including your calls on the
issues that you find significant. Eight double two to three
double oh is the number Labour's lead following the election
remains strong in new polling. The Economic Roundtable kicks off tomorrow.
We'll speak with nine Radio politics reporter Zack de Silver
about what he expects to come out of the Economic Roundtable.

(00:43):
On politics, Frank Pangallo has changed his spots. He's running
for the seat of Weight as a Liberal at the
twenty twenty six state election. We'll speak with five double
a's owned Stacy Lee about what she thinks of Frank's change.
Will he make an impact, will he win the election?
What are the possibilities and is he what the Liberal
Party needs to get back in the running the Essay

(01:05):
Variety Club Bash. We talked to Mark McGill last week
on the final stages of the bash. Well, it's all
over now, let's find out what the total money raised
is and what that will go towards. Imputed rent. We
talked about it last week. Imputed rent as a way
of valuing the benefit of homeowners by get the value
that you get out of your own home. The suggestion

(01:29):
is that you get a benefit by living in your
own home without having to pay rent. It's like saying,
if you had to rent your home from someone else,
how much would you pay? And that amount is called
imputed rent and it's seen as a kind of income
even though no money changes hands. Well, there are a
couple of economists who say, hmm, maybe you should be
paying tax on that. It's not being suggested by the

(01:50):
government or anyone else at this stage, but will it
be considered at the Economic Roundtable. We'll find out more
about imputed rent tax from the deputy director of them
An Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, Professor Roger Wilkins.
What's been the wash up of the Trump putin Alaska meeting?
Who won? Did anyone win. It would appear that Ukraine

(02:12):
certainly hasn't won, but it's not the end of the matter,
and we will take a look at that and speak
with an expert in the field, the Director of Strategic
Analysis Australia, Michael Schubridge, about that. And is the population
growth that we have at the moment ruining the living
standards for young Australians and an Australian South Australia icon

(02:35):
is about to return to our screens. Who isn't and why?
We'll find out about that well as Australia prepares for
this week's economic reform roundtable in Cabra. There's no shortage
of lofty rhetoric about building prosperity, but behind the political
theater lies more than one uncomfortable truth that we can
no longer ignore. Economist at Leith van Onsualen, with experience

(02:59):
at Treasury and Gold and SAX, has sounded a very
loud alarm. Australia has the potential to be the richest
country in the world, he says, yet our promise of
a better life for each generation is slipping further and
further away. At the heart of his critique is our
decades long obsession with population growth. Vanonsalin argues that our
immigration intake over a million during the Albanese government's first

(03:21):
term is skewed towards low skilled workers and the result
of that well GDP might rise, but productivity and per
capital wealth declines. We're experiencing capital shallowing, where infrastructure, housing
and resources fail to keep pace with rapid population growth.
He says migration must be capped below one hundred and

(03:41):
fifty thousand annually, with a focus on skilled workers and
a rethink of costly parental visas. It's a bold stance
and one that dares to tackle the elephant in the
room most politicians avoid. Vanonsalen is equally critical of our
energy and savings and tax settings. Australia's net zero path,
he argues, lacks logic. Even we emit just one percent

(04:01):
of global carbon, yet we willingly sacrifice reliable energy, under
mining manufacturing and failing to harness our tax or tax
our abundant resources. That's unlike nations such as Norway and Katar.
Our income tax heavy system also needs an overhaul, shifting
toward resource and consumption based taxes. Opposition MP Tim Wilson

(04:23):
says if the government was serious about productivity, it would
have invited the mining sector to the Economic Roundtable, one
of our largest wealth creators. Instead, mining and industrial rebations
are treated as taboo. The round Table is an opportunity,
but unless we address the real barriers to prosperity, it
will be a talk fest, not a turning point. We'll
talk with Leith van Onsalin a little bit later on

(04:45):
this morning, like to know your thoughts on it. Eight
double two three double double oh is the number to ring.
Also on the show today, I want to hear from
you about what is happening in your part of the world,
your neck of the woods, the closer to home. It
is a burst. War order mine in Sydney doesn't make
much difference, but here in Adelaide it couldn't have some
sort of impact. So let's hear if there's a burst,

(05:07):
water main lights are out in your area, fuel prices,
all those sorts of things. You are the eyes and
ears of the audience and we'd love to hear from you.
Eight double two three double O double A is the
numbert a ring. We'll be back shortly.

Speaker 2 (05:19):
Five double A Mornings with Graham Goodings.

Speaker 1 (05:23):
Sixteen past nine five double A on this delightful Monday morning.
Hope we find you well well. As Australia gears up
for the Canberra starting of the nation's economic summit, Economic
Future is under the spotlight. Led by a Treasurer Jim Chalmers.
The high Level Summer aims to forge consensus on productivity,

(05:43):
economic resilience and budget sustainability, and it brings together leaders
from business, unions, government and academia, joining us now as
nine Radio Zaca Silver Zack, Good morning.

Speaker 3 (05:53):
To you, Good morning Graham, good to be with you.

Speaker 1 (05:56):
You too. What are you expecting out of this economic roundtable?

Speaker 3 (06:00):
Yeah, it's been quite interesting hearing Jim Charmers this morning
the Treasurers trying to set expectations to this round table,
saying he has realistic expectations about it, but is still
optimistic that there can be some big reform. I think
the challenge is going to be getting everyone in the
room on the same page, businesses and unions and also

(06:24):
the States and trying to get everyone to agree on
something is going to be quite challenging. It sounds like
what's going to come out of this, At least initially,
Jim Chalmers is framing this as three days to inform
the next three budgets. So there's clearly going to be
a long term reform aspect to this as well. But
I think what we'll see immediately is probably some of

(06:45):
the low hanging fruit things around that. There's been a
lot of talk around regulation, around trying to cut some
regulations because often they're multi layered. You know, you'll have
similar regulations that are states in a federal and a
local level, and businesses saying well, that's actually making life
really hard for us. So I think the government will
be looking at ways to potentially streamline some of that regulation.

(07:08):
That's the kind of thing we may see immediately afterwards.
The other thing that the government's flagging is a conversation
about artificial intelligence, and there are a different perspectives about
between the government, unions, and businesses about how much artificial
intelligence should be regulated and how much we should just
let it rip. So potentially there may be some consensus

(07:29):
there or by I suspect that'll be another hotly contested
area of debate.

Speaker 1 (07:33):
Sick. What are we to make of the leak Treasury
advice that was prepared ahead of the talkfest? I mean
it would suggest that you know, no matter what comes
out of the talk, they've already made up their minds.

Speaker 3 (07:44):
I think what we can take from that is the
government trying to soften people up for and you know,
soften people up is probably a cynical way of putting it.
A different way of putting it would be, you know,
signposting what is likely to come out of this round table.

(08:04):
I think the leaked Treasury advice we saw was not
really that surprising. It kind of flagged that the obvious
things that you would expect out of the round table,
things around regulation, things around housing. One of the big
focuses was construction regulations, trying to speed up the building

(08:26):
of new houses. That's something when the government was asked
about it, they went, yeah, we were looking at doing that.
So I think I think the point of that list
of outcomes that we would expect to see from the
round table was really to some extent, yes, I think
you're probably right to say, well, the government already has

(08:47):
some things in mind that it's looking at. But equally,
you talk to people in the government and they say, well,
we've been talking to a lot of people about this.
We've been talking to the unions, to businesses, to all
kinds of lobby groups and these are some of the
things have been flagging already.

Speaker 1 (09:01):
Now, tax reform is always a hot topic. What proposals,
particularly those from the AC to you on negative gearing
on high income taxes, are likely to spark any sort
of debate.

Speaker 3 (09:12):
Yeah, the tax point is interesting. The government's trying to
do its best to walk away from any contentious tax
changes at this summit, while still leaving the door open
down the track. GM Charmers was asked just earlier this
hour whether he could rule out any new taxes, and
he said, well, you know, our economic agenda at the

(09:33):
moment is about cutting taxes, and you know the flagging
that the government looking at things like a road user
charge for electric vehicles, which would technically be a new tax.
So he can't say there won't be any new taxes
because he's already looking at that one. The ACTU and
others have for a while been calling for changes around
negative gearing. The government says that it doesn't have any

(09:55):
plans to do that at this stage. But I think
it's putting its worth putting in context that the government
said the same thing about its changes to the Stage
three tax cuts in the last term of parliament. It's
a very similar language where there were no plans to
change the Stage three tax cuts until all of a
sudden there were planned. So look, I suspect negative gearing.

(10:18):
It sounds like it would be a contentious reform, that's
for sure, and I think if the government were to
do something like that, they would likely want to seek
a mandate for it. They'd likely want to go to
an election saying look, we're going to wind back some
of these tax concessions for property investors and then seek
a mandate from the Australian people on it. When you

(10:40):
ask Jim Chalmers and others about tax at the moment,
they go, well, you know, we're focused on the tax
reforms that we already have a.

Speaker 2 (10:47):
Mandate for now.

Speaker 1 (10:49):
Housing affordability, the great Australian dream of owning your own
home on your quarter acre block seems to be getting
further and further into the distance. Are there concrete measures
likely to be discussed at the Economic Roundtable?

Speaker 3 (11:04):
Well, we were talking earlier about that leaked Treasury advice
and one of the big things that that covered was
construction regulation. So at the moment the governments can sit
looking at changes to the National Construction Code, which I
think if you talk to construction to people in the
building industry, they'd say, this is probably going to be

(11:24):
more red tape. Treasury is recommending pausing those changes, and
that was actually something the Coalition took to the last election,
the idea being that if you make it easier for
people to build homes, you'll get more homes built. It
seems like an obvious suggestion. And the more homes you

(11:45):
have built, really, you know supply and demand, you'd think
you would have lower property prices. That's a very oversimplified
way of putting it. But you talk to people in
the construction industry and they talk about how the approval
time for new housing projects have blown out because of
layer after layer after layer of regulation. Now the construction

(12:07):
industry doesn't like those regulations for obvious reasons. It's an
administrative burden for them. Environmentalists and others argue those regulations
are very important to make sure that we're not damaging
endangered habitats and those kinds of things. So there are
two sides to this, but I suspect housing regulations could
well be an area that we see some immediate reform

(12:30):
to come out of this round table because it's probably
you know, I was talking earlier about low hanging fruit.
That seems like one of those pieces of low hanging
fruit that the government could probably look at and go, yeah,
A reasonable person would look at this and say, you know,
we probably don't need three layers of regulation here, we
can just make do with one.

Speaker 1 (12:49):
When it comes to the economic situation facing Australia, particularly
on an international level, the US chopping and changing with tariffs,
is that lady to come up the discussion.

Speaker 3 (13:00):
It's a great question.

Speaker 4 (13:01):
I'm not sure.

Speaker 3 (13:01):
To be honest, I don't think it would. The government
is very much framing this as you know, what can
we change now? I think most people in that room
will look at tariff's and go, yes, they're concerning particularly
the businesses in that room, who are some of whom
are being affected by these tariffs. But I think at

(13:22):
the end of the day, as a group of business
leaders and economists, really, what can you do right like that?
That's a foreign policy issue. I might be wrong, This
might be something that comes up afterwards, but at the moment,
I don't think tariffs are probably going to be a
huge focus other than the businesses and others saying yes,

(13:43):
these are a concern. These are making life harder for us.
You know, businesses have said, business lobbyists have said to
me previously, Yeah, the tariffs are an impact, are having
an impact, and so the government should be doing all
it can to make life easier for us. I think
that's probably the angle that will be taken on tariff Also.

Speaker 1 (14:00):
The opposition of this economic roundtable. I mean, will Ted
O'Brien be heard listen to would they act on anything?
He said, yeah, Well.

Speaker 3 (14:07):
Tell O'Brien's there. He presumably has as much riot as
anyone else who's been invited to the round table. The
Shadow Treasurer to have a say. Jim Chalmers points out
that Ted O'Brien's the only person who's been invited that
hasn't put any policies forward. The opposition has been quite

(14:27):
critical of this roundtable, saying the outcomes are preordained, particularly
after that leak of the Treasury advice. They're saying, well,
the government's already preparing for things to come out of
this before it's even had a chance to discuss it.
You know, this is just a talk fest to validate
what the government already wants to do. I think Ted
O'Brien is as much there as an observer. He's there

(14:49):
so that partly for political reasons, partly so the government
can't be accused of sidelining the opposition and it gives it.
I think in some sense it's probably a bit more
credibility having the opposition there as well, having someone who's
going to take a very different position to Jim Chalmers
on these issues having him also in the room. So

(15:10):
it will be interesting to see how much of us,
say the opposition, does end up having, given they haven't
really put that many policy ideas forward in the lead
up to this, and I guess only time will tell
on that. But yeah, at the moment, I would say
Ted O'Brien is probably there more as an observer than
anything else.

Speaker 1 (15:30):
Macro Business Chief economist Leath Van Nonsalan has written an
article saying our population growth fedi ishn poorly designed energy
and tax policies need to be addressed. Is that likely
to come across the roundtable?

Speaker 5 (15:42):
Look?

Speaker 3 (15:43):
I think energy policy is definitely something that business groups
have been pushing for change on for a while, A
particularly heavy industry, you know, the government has been working
hard to try and decarbonize the economy and shift to
renewable energy, but there are certain industries that still rely

(16:04):
on gas that are looking at really high gas prices
with great concern. So I suspect this will be something
that business group will be pushing for. There are certain
parts of the business community that would like more gas
extraction to happen faster, with smaller approval times to try

(16:29):
and get more gas into the system. The government they
approved a major gas project, the Northwest Shelf off the
coast of Wa. I think that was earlier this year,
just after the election, so that the government has shown
some appetite to move on that. Whether they want to
move any more than that, I'm not sure. I think

(16:51):
they will say, well, we've done our bits for now
that there's probably a broader conversation to be had again
about regulations and about how these kinds of things attacked
and that kind of thing, But I'm not sure if
any of that will come out of this round table
over the next few days.

Speaker 1 (17:08):
Zack Desilver, thanks for your setting up the roundtable. Orus
The nine Radio politics reporter at Zach de Silva. On
the upcoming roundtable, this is what Treasurer Jim Chalmers had
to say about it this morning.

Speaker 6 (17:20):
Timing for this roundtable couldn't be better, and the responsibility
on all of us couldn't be bigger. Our economy is
finally balanced between the progress that we've made on wages
and inflation and living standards and the productivity that we
desperately need to sustain that progress in the years and

(17:41):
decades ahead. Living standards, higher living standards are the holy grail,
and that makes productivity the primary focus. Productivity has been
elusive over the last couple of decades, but it will
be absolutely essential to the couple of decades ahead. And
that's really what motivates and drives us in this economic

(18:02):
reform round table.

Speaker 1 (18:05):
That's Federal Treasurer Jim Chalmers. We will take a break
for news headlines. Then Frank Pangalo changing his spots. He's
joining the Liberal Party five Double A Mornings with Graham
Goodings twenty eight to ten, five Double A. On this
Monday morning, Liberal State politics has taken on a new

(18:25):
look with the recruitment of an old face Uphouse member.
Frank Pangalo is changing his stripes.

Speaker 7 (18:31):
A lot of my colleagues in the Upper House before
I made this decision. We're talking to me about what
I would be doing at the next election, and even
suggesting that I actually had a good chance of sneering
an independent seat in the Upper House. It's very difficult
for an independent, particularly one that doesn't have the enormous

(18:56):
funding that others now had, because of the con job
that the Premier has put on South Australia with his
political donations, that people will not realize the implications of
that until after the next election.

Speaker 8 (19:10):
No, and look after I've been doing.

Speaker 7 (19:13):
I like my job and I like representing the people
of South Australia, so nothing's going to change about me.

Speaker 1 (19:20):
Frank Pangatto speaking on the five double A Breakfast this
morning about the change in his political career. The former
journalist began in politics in twenty eighteen. He's now going
to contest the Southern Suburbs seat of Wait for Liberals.
What are we to make of this latest political incantation
five Double as owned Stacy Lee joins me. Now, Stacy,
good morning to you, Alli Graham. How are you look.

(19:42):
I'm very well. Thanks. Does this shock you at all?

Speaker 9 (19:47):
I was surprised when I saw the news, and then
I thought about it a bit more and I wasn't
surprised when I saw the news. I think Frank would
have had a tough time getting re elected in the
Upper House, as he just alluded to their because he
was with Essay Best under the Nick Xenophon banner when
he got elected seven years ago, and so he doesn't

(20:08):
have the support of a party, the financial support or
the backing of a big name like Nick Xenophon this
time round. And it's a pretty crowded field of independence
in the Upper House now after Tammy Franks left the Greens,
if she decides to run again, you might have Connie
Binaries from Essay Best running again. There's also Jingle who
left a Liberal party who will be running again. You
don't know who else is putting their hand up. Stephen Polaris,

(20:30):
former DPP has put his hand up to run as
an independence. So it's a pretty crowded field. And usually
when it's a crowded field of independence who don't have
a whole lot of funding behind them, you know, they
sort of drown each other out and it's unlikely that
all of them or many of them will get elected.
So I think he would have struggled on his own.

(20:50):
I think it would help having the Liberal Party brand
behind him, and I actually think it would help the
Liberal Party to have Frank on board. I'm just not
sure Weight is the seat to do it in. I
know he lives there and has lived there for you know,
almost his whole life for I think more than thirty years,
he said. But I'm just not sure the electors are
in wait, want or need someone like Frank Pangelo. It's

(21:13):
a pretty it was a safe Liberal seat. However, when
Sam deluc former Liberal, quit the party, he was an independent,
and then at the last election it went to the
Labor Party. It's on a pretty small margin, about four percent,
and I think after the redistribution from the Electoral Distributions Committee,

(21:33):
it'll be one of Labour's most marginal seats on just
over three percent.

Speaker 1 (21:38):
And so look, it is.

Speaker 9 (21:40):
A marginal one for Labor, but I'm not sure Frank's
the guide to win it back from Labor.

Speaker 1 (21:45):
To be honest, the Cynic would suggest that Frank is
just trying to prolong his political career. Would that be unfair?

Speaker 2 (21:53):
Oh yeah, I think it.

Speaker 9 (21:54):
Would be unfair. I think a lot of people want
to prolong their career. No, matter what career they're in,
no matter what indus they're in. If you're asking me
about whether or not he's the future of the Liberal Party, though,
I don't think so. I mean, Graham, you and I
have spoken about this before, and about the Liberal Party's
election loss just this year in the federal election and
the voters that the Liberal Party abandoned, namely women, migrants,

(22:18):
young people, And I mean this is no offense to Frank.
I get along really well with him. I worked with
him for a number of years at Channel seven. The
Liberal Party has been criticized by myself and many other
commentators for being a bit pale, male and stale. Is
Frank the guy to reinvigorate the state Liberal Party? I
don't think so. And he's up against a pretty popular, young,

(22:42):
younger labor woman and Catherine Hutchison, So I'm not too
sure that the voters in Wait will support Frank and
his style of politics. He came out yesterday when he
announced he was running and with the nickname the Watchdog.
Now I was questioning that, do you think he gave
himself that nickname?

Speaker 1 (23:00):
Look knowing Frank, Yes, yes, I think Frank might have
thought it might be a good name. Look, did you
see the vision of the launch last night? Yeah, weird
with Vincent Tarsia. And three times Vincent Tarzia tried to
shake Frank's hand. And I don't know who was deliberate
or just accidental, or just one of these things, but

(23:21):
each time Frank turned the other way, he shook someone
else's hand, and Vincent Tarzi was standing there looking very
embarrassed by it. It was a very, very awkward situation.

Speaker 9 (23:32):
It was it was very or Look, he was on
the Brecky Show this morning as you just played one
of his grubs. He said it was a beat up,
and you know he wasn't avoiding the leader or ignoring
the leader. I know when I saw it, I thought
the same thing. I thought, well, this is strange. Why
isn't he shaking Tarzi's hand. If he wins the seat,
Tarsi will be his boss. And I think one of

(23:53):
the big questions at the press conference are you going
to be let off the leash or will you have
to change your politics and your style of politics. There
was another awkward interaction where Frank sort of turned around
to Vincent said well what do you think? And then
he turned back around and almost before Vincent Tazi had
a chance to answer area he said, no, I'll be
let loose. I'm pretty free and.

Speaker 2 (24:12):
I thought, oh this.

Speaker 9 (24:13):
I don't know how this will play out in the
party room and in the electorate. I don't know if
the people of Weight, As I say, it's a pretty
safe Liberal seat. It's also very a lot of the
voters there have a focus on environmental factors because it's
in the foothills. They have a huge uptake of solar
We know the Mitcham Council and Heather Holmes Ross the mayor,

(24:34):
who she actually ran as an independent in the last
state election. They've got a big focus on environmental issues
and the people of Weight seem to really respond to
that well, most of them anyway, the way they voted
at the last election and on council. And so I
don't know if Frank's the guy to win the seat back.

(24:54):
We also will have to consider who else might run,
because as I say it was, it was a pretty
hotly contested seat at the last election. Labour won it,
but there was Sam Delok who ran as an independent.
There was Alex Hyde who ran for the Liberal Party,
Headerholmes Ross the current mayor of mitcham Ran as an independent,
so it might be a crowded field again. The Greens

(25:15):
think they have a chance at winning it because it's
one of those foothills seats that they're targeting, like Heysen
and Morial to soon.

Speaker 1 (25:22):
Be in Melbourne Cupfield. Yeah, exactly.

Speaker 9 (25:24):
And when that happens, I think that benefits the Labor Party.
If there's too many independents and too many people running,
a lot of those preferences from the Greens and potential
independence will flow through to Labor and I think that
they'll they'll win it again if that does happen. But
you know, stranger things have happened.

Speaker 1 (25:40):
One thing that has to be said about Frank Pangalo.
He's always outspoken, he speaks his mind. What's his history
with either voting with or against the Liberals? Yeah, that was.

Speaker 9 (25:51):
Really interesting because I've heard his speeches, I've read the
handsart of his speeches in Parliament, and I think I
thought he was a pretty fair independent. I thought he
had a go at both sides of politics, particularly in
the earlier years of him in Parliament, the earlier years
of his eight year term. More recently he's voted with
the Liberals a little bit more on the UNI merger.

(26:14):
And I know he's been very outspoken about the livgolf
legislation and obviously he had the split from his former
essay best colleague Connie Banaris and Connie Bararis has voted
with the Labor Party on a few of those high
profile matters that he's voted with the Liberal Party on,
so that's why they had a difference of opinion there.

Speaker 2 (26:33):
But he's been.

Speaker 9 (26:34):
Critical of the Liberal Party. He's been critical of Vincent Tazia.
So I wouldn't have if you had asked me maybe
three months ago, which side of politics do you think
Frank sits on? I would have said he's probably sitting
exactly where he should be on the cross bench, because
he seems to be quite in the middle, quite fair,
and you know, gives it to whatever party he thinks
he deserves it. But now, yeah, he won't be doing

(26:56):
that anymore.

Speaker 1 (26:57):
Does this highlight more where the Liberal Party is that
it appears to be raddless at the moment, a little directionless.
It was a strong opposition. Do you think there'd be
a place for Frank Pangalo.

Speaker 9 (27:09):
I think you're totally right Graham. I think they do
need a bulldog. They do need someone who's going to
come in and criticize the Labor Party because that used
to be Vincent Tasia. But you can't have the leader
being that person. So they do need someone who's going
to be strong and outspoken and be able to give
it to the government. But yeah, like I said, I

(27:30):
don't think this is the future of the party, and
I think you're right. I think it does tell a
lot about the leadership of the party at a party level.
This is both state and federal that they're pre selecting
people like Frank in these seats because they aren't attracting
younger people to their party. They can't get these fresh voices,

(27:51):
fresh opinions. The average age of someone in Waight is
forty three. That was the last ABS data. And I'm
just not sure that style of politics resonates with that
demographic of people who are you know, probably having kids,
maybe just got into the property market, maybe trying to
get into the property market, paying off houses, working professionals.
I don't know if the bulldog style of politics resonates

(28:14):
with people in that electorate.

Speaker 1 (28:15):
So yeah, we'll probably know it about nine months time.
At the state of the e exactly Now, Stacey, wh
I've got you, what are you making of the Premier's
handling or the algol crisis at the moment, Because if
there are any chinks in his armor, it's ramping And
this algal bloom has caused a lot of unrest in
the community.

Speaker 9 (28:35):
Yeah, it absolutely has, and rightly so. I saw a
US expert was calling it one of the worst algol
blooms from across the world. So it's not just a
national issue anymore. Look, I think you and I can
both agree. We were talking about the algol bloom long
before we heard the Premier talk about the algoo bloom.
So he was really slow to get onto this. You

(28:58):
can tell he's trying to make up for it now.
It's like when one of those runners starts the race
really slow and then they trying, okay quick, I've got
to give it all the energy I can for the
finish line, and they still don't cross the finish line
in the top three. And I don't think i'd rate
the Premiere in the top three. In his response to this,
he started off, well, non existent. We didn't hear from him,
We couldn't hear from the government. We didn't couldn't hear

(29:19):
from anyone in Sadi or Persa. The only person I
could get on my show a few months ago was
someone from Essay Health to talk about potential health implications.
So I have to give them credit. They were the
only ones who would stump up and talk to us
from a government department. So I think this is really
going to have a big impact for the Premiere and

(29:40):
the Labor Party at the next election. But as you say,
there's still nine months ago. A lot can happen between
between now and then.

Speaker 1 (29:46):
Yeah. I mean one point that I've been making is
that I think we would have heard a lot more
from the Premier attacking the approach for Canberra, but because
they're on the same party. If it had been a
coalition government in Canberra, I think there would have been
screaming from North Terrace that would have been heard in Canberra,
loud and long. But he was muted and basically until
the middle of last month that was the first time

(30:07):
he approached Canbra.

Speaker 9 (30:09):
Absolutely and interestingly you mentioned the other big issue for
the state Labor Party is ramping. It's a similar story
we've got. I think it's still more than two hundred
people waiting for aged care places in South Australian hospitals,
which is contributing to the ramping crisis. But we're not
really hearing a whole lot about that from the state
government because it's a federal labor exactly. Yeah, if it

(30:33):
was a federal liberal government, we'd be hearing a lot
from Peter Malanowskis about how this needs to be handled
and quickly.

Speaker 1 (30:39):
It's interesting times ahead. Look, Stacy, thank you for giving
us your time because we know you're on maternity leave
at the moment. How's young Molly going.

Speaker 9 (30:47):
Oh, she's great, Graham. I can hear her waking up
in the room from her nap as we speak, but
she's going very well. She moved into her own room
last night actually, so we had a couple extra hours,
which was love. I feel like I have half a
brain to be able to talk to you, Todavi. Butd No,
she's doing really well. She's she's almost at two months
and she's smiling and interacting a bit more and she's

(31:10):
a very happy, healthy girl, which is yet beautiful.

Speaker 1 (31:14):
Well, Stacey, it's lovely to speak with you. Enjoy the
rest of your attorney to leave and we can't wait
for here to get back. On five double A.

Speaker 9 (31:19):
Thanks GG took to soon.

Speaker 1 (31:21):
We certainly will. Stacey Lee, well known for her political acumen,
commenting on a number of things there, including Frank Pangalo.
Is he trying to prolong his political career? Do you
think you in the electorate of Wait, would you vote
for Frank Pangalo? Would you think about voting for Frank?
Let's know you're thinking eight double two to three double o,
doublo the number to ring back shortly.

Speaker 2 (31:43):
Five double A. Mornings with Graham Goodings.

Speaker 1 (31:46):
At twelve to ten on five double A. From the
text line, Rex says Graham, why doesn't Stacy believe that
Vincent Tazia as leader cannot continue to be an attack dog?
Paul Keating continued in that role as PM, and he
was a great leader. Yeah, fairpoint, Rex. But most leaders,
you know, it's good cop, bad cop, isn't it. You'll
usually find the attack dog, Like in the current state

(32:07):
government it's Tom Cutson turnus and that way the premier
can take the smooth run. And that has happened at
federal and state level. But I don't think it's a
bad thing if Frank did get in. Regardless of his politics,
he will be very outspoken on what he likes and
doesn't like about the government. Julia says, so good to
hear Stacey, wasn't it Julia, Yeah, it's fantastic to hear her.

(32:30):
She's enjoying maternity leave and she'll be back on five
double A later in the year. Fred says, Frank Pangado
could be the best thing for the Liberal Party is
dogmatic attitude will give the Liberals a big lift and
keep labor honest. Let's say it called Chris, good.

Speaker 4 (32:45):
Morning, Good morning petrol Northeast Road. YEP, A couple of
them are going up to two oh four and the
others arean met dollar fifty three fifty.

Speaker 1 (32:56):
Four right, so that the trend could be up, would.

Speaker 4 (32:58):
You think, Yeah, capital of them are good on you.

Speaker 1 (33:01):
Chris, Thanks for letting us know that we appreciate it.
If you've got an insight onto the fuel prices around
town and let us know we'd like to hear them.
Mark McGill, we spoke to last week out on the
road with the Charity Club Variety Club Bash and guess
what it's all over for another year and let's find
out as the dust settle. How it all went? Mark,

(33:22):
good morning to you.

Speaker 10 (33:23):
Good morning Graham.

Speaker 1 (33:24):
How am I well recovered? I'm well? Are you recovered
since the big event?

Speaker 11 (33:29):
I wouldn't say I recovered recovered. Your point about dust
is probably is probably the thing that we experienced a bit.
But I'm certainly boyd and super enthusiastic about what a
wonderful result and all the great impact that will be
as a consequence it will be created from that.

Speaker 1 (33:51):
So just how successful has the bash been?

Speaker 12 (33:54):
Oh?

Speaker 11 (33:54):
Look, start with a financial aspect. The two twenty twenty
five Broody Bash set a new financial record of two
point seven million dollars. Wow, that was an incredible and
it was that's fifth. It's a reward for fifteen months

(34:16):
of very hard work by our chair, our committee, our
event team here at the office, and of course our
entrance volunteers, and it will out support stakeholders.

Speaker 1 (34:30):
Concluded, Look, that is marvelous. Mark, that is just marvelous.
And it's just so where will that money go to?

Speaker 11 (34:37):
Oh, Gramy, it's the And we spoke last week about
the increase in our grant application. So in the last
twelve months we had three hundred and thirty two grants
made in the last year already we've supported. That was
a record, and we've now surpassed that. We'll make over

(34:58):
four hundred grants to individual children, families, to other children's charities,
to community groups along the way. So the need that
that record financial result is required just to maintain the
level of demand.

Speaker 1 (35:17):
Yeah, I mean, and that is the sad aspect. It's
wonderful that you've been able to raise that money, but
the demand grows on a yearly basis, absolutely and.

Speaker 11 (35:26):
Often many agencies amongst our peers, food security, domestic violence,
youth at risk, all the the agencies that we support
to provide expanded services. There metrics are all showing an
increase in the need. So it's not you know, we'd
love to say that that these social issues, if you like,

(35:49):
for children are going south, and unfortunately the increases coming
is increasing.

Speaker 1 (35:55):
So you've got to admire the businesses and individuals that
have donated because the the pressures just on day to
day living are growing and people are finding that at
the end of the week there are not the dollars
in their pocket that they were even a year ago.

Speaker 11 (36:09):
It's a really good point you make and That's why
this result speaks volumes about the not only the generosity,
but the passionate and enthusiasm that our entrants have, their supporters,
our sponsors, our partners. They really believe in the work
that we do. They believe in the efficiency how we

(36:32):
create efficiencies with our great volunteer network. We've got over
thirteen committees that maximize our eleven full time staff, so
we can I think that confidence and that we've got
great credibility in particularly in South Australia and Graham. It
may or may not surprise listeners that South Australia on

(36:55):
a population basis, within variety is probably number one or
number two in the world.

Speaker 1 (37:01):
Fantastic generosity.

Speaker 11 (37:03):
So it's a fantastic We're enormously grateful and we can't
do the work that we do on a daily, weekly,
annual basis without that support.

Speaker 1 (37:14):
It's all about supporting the state's most vulnerable children. Can
you put a number on that? How many how many
kids need your help?

Speaker 11 (37:22):
Well, it varies from year to a year, depended upon
the grant making. In terms of you know, we've made
a grant up at Laura for a playground and that
was that was two hundred and twenty one thousand dollars
now for that community that will that will be an

(37:42):
enormous game changer. That's been they've been working on that
for five years, a volunteer Mums group. But that's one example.
In the last twelve months over forty three thousand children
were impacted by a variety. In the last three years
alone within South Australia, over two hundred thousand children have
been impacted. So it's that that need and if you

(38:06):
can only imagine that if Variety wasn't be here tomorrow,
those children simply would not have that financial support.

Speaker 1 (38:18):
Now you do some sensational work, there's no doubt about it.
And as we mentioned last week, planning for next year
is well hunderway already.

Speaker 11 (38:25):
Yes, the chair, the BASH chair was very cagy Saturday.
He said he go away one clue that will finish
near a big river, so he wasn't giving too much
away of it. There was a great line from that
I'll steal from the Port Agusta mayor on Friday night

(38:49):
that you don't have to be serious to create serious
outcomes and that probably speaks to the Bash as a.

Speaker 1 (38:58):
As an entity in the almost the philosophy of.

Speaker 11 (39:01):
The that sh Yeah, you know, they have great fun.
They really enjoy each other's company. You know, it's a
great observation that you see there was a table of
six on Friday night, six individuals from six different cars,
just sharing dinner, and that it's not that they genuinely

(39:22):
love catching up with each other. They enjoy each other's
company and they, as I said the other day, they
all share the same DNA in terms of their care
and compassion for these children that need across South Australia.

Speaker 1 (39:35):
Look, we really appreciate everyone that's been involved. And Mark,
remind us that figure again that you've raised this year.

Speaker 11 (39:41):
Two it was a two million, seven hundred thousand and.

Speaker 1 (39:46):
Thirty That is so brilliant, wonderful and it goes to
a great, great cause. Mark, thanks for your time today. Congratulations,
Please pass on our appreciation to everyone involved.

Speaker 11 (39:56):
Certainly will grow and again, sincere, thanks for your support.
It means a lot.

Speaker 1 (40:01):
That's Mark McGill, CEO of Variety essay on the outcome
of the twenty twenty five Variety Club Bash. Two point
seven million dollars raised fantastic. It's sad that that money
is needed, but thankfully, thank God that it is needed
or is raised to support all those children under threat
and in need. Eight double two to three double oh.

(40:23):
From the text line Frank for the Lower House weight,
I look forward to it. He has my vote, a
voice who is not afraid to talk and talk sense.
Great morning. When the people of a Commonwealth vote in
a referendum, the result is constitutional law. If we indicated
public referendums, we could change the direction and policies of
the Australian government. Thank you for that, Dean. On the

(40:46):
subject of Frank Pangalo, no matter what you think of
Frank or his political leanings, he is by nature an
attack dog. He's going to be at a watchdog. The liberals,
I guess they think that turns it down a bit.
If you want to hold a government to account, you
have to ask the questions and be asked them fearlessly,

(41:06):
without favor, and Frank has always done that. He has
always done that, and he will stand up on the
House and pose the questions that need to be asked.
As I say, you might not agree with his politics,
but you cannot dismiss his passion. Eight double two three
double double oh. Morning Graham. Regarding Stacy's comment about Frank Pangolo. Yes,

(41:27):
he's an older male, but he's an Italian background. Thank
you for that, REATA don't quite know the relevance. Yes,
Frank Pangolo for the Liberal Party finding someone with a
bit of knowledge and charisma. Thank you very much for that.
Eight double two to three double O, double O. We're
going to take a break for news. Then after that
imputed rent. Do you own your own home? How would

(41:49):
you feel about paying imputed rent tax? We'll talk about that.

Speaker 2 (41:53):
Five double A Mornings with Graham Goodings.

Speaker 1 (41:56):
Seven past ten on a Monday. Good morning to you
if you've just joined us, well as I'll stray the
gears up for tomorrow's economic summit. Two leading economists have
thrown a fresh idea into the national debate, and it's
likely to send shock waves among many homeowners. They think
it's time to rethink how we tax people who own
their own homes. Peter Siminski the University of Technology in

(42:18):
Sydney and Roger Wilkins Melbourne University say the current system
unfairly advantages homeowners over renters. Their main target imputed rent.
So what is imputed rent? I can hear you asking? Well,
joining Yao is Deputy Director of the Melbourne Institute of
Applied Economic and Social Research. Professor Roger Wilkins, Professor, Good
morning to you. Thanks for time today, Good morning, You're welcome.

(42:41):
Can we start with what actually is imputed rent?

Speaker 10 (42:45):
Yeah, it's a funny old thing. It's basically, you know,
when you own your own home, you get housing services
from owning your home. And so what well you say,
is that the value of those housing services you get
is is what we call imputed rent, So the rent

(43:05):
you'd have to pay if you didn't own the home.
So it's not an actual That's the reason for the
term imputed is it's not there's not there's no actual
flow of cash. But it's a pretty widely accepted concept.
For example, it's it's in our national accounts, our GDP
and Gross National Income measure included as part as part

(43:30):
of our national income. So it's a real thing. But
but it is a bit a bit of an abstract concept.

Speaker 1 (43:36):
So the talk of an imputed rent tax, how would
that work?

Speaker 10 (43:41):
Yeah, look to be I mean it has worked in fact,
even in back way back in nineteen fifteen, Australia even
had a tax on imputed rent. You'd need to work out,
you know, you'd need some way. It would probably be
based on the value of the property, So would end
up looking a bit like a property tax to be
on a store, a land tax or something like that,

(44:04):
you know, would I yeah, so in that sense, I'm
sort of you know, it's almost equivalent to say, well,
perhaps we should be looking at moving more in the
direction of some sort of land tax or something of
that kind which would effectively pick up this imputed rent

(44:28):
and make it effectively taxable.

Speaker 1 (44:32):
How would such a tax affect wealth inequality between renters
and homeowners, particularly older astrainens.

Speaker 10 (44:38):
Yeah, so I mean it would reduce it. So, I mean,
basically we have it's a form of effective income that's
not taxed as his capital gains on the family home.
And yeah, and I understand there's a lot of concern
or alarm even that might come from such a proposal
because it just sounds like another tax grab. And you know,

(45:01):
I think it's important to note that, you know, it
really would need to be part of a package where
there's offsetting decreases in other taxes, things like income tax,
stamp duty, those sorts of things, so that you know,
we're not. We don't want to, you know, we wouldn't
want to be certainly, well, personally, I wouldn't want to

(45:23):
be increasing the size of the total tax take, but
I think the way it's distributed could be a bit
more equitable. So, you know, so for example, if we
had lower income tax rates, that would you know, relatively
help renters and particularly you know, and younger workers in general,
you would be relatively advantaged by that, you know, where

(45:45):
they're currently based quite high taxes on their incomes. And
you know, and and I'm sure you know many of
the listeners would know that young working age people, particularly
particularly feeling the pinch these days, with a lot of
demands on their household budgets and including from the tax man.

Speaker 1 (46:04):
Well you can also imagine, you know, low income retirees
who own their own homes are comfortably off in that respect,
if they were hit by an added tax burden, you
could really make a bad impact.

Speaker 10 (46:17):
Yes, and that has to be very carefully managed. This
is one of the changes we have seen is that
twenty five years ago, most retirees were essentially living in poverty.
And we've really made good progress in terms of increasing
the ecomic well being of retirees. It's both through the
growth and the age pension. That's the way the family

(46:40):
home is exempted from the tension test and some taxation.
They're also the superannuation system. But it's about getting the
balance right. And I think one of the problems you
might have with a lot of retirees is that they
might be asset rich. They have a very valuable home,
but they can come poor and so they don't have
the the the income to service an annual tax liability.

(47:06):
But there are ways of, you know, of handling that.
For example, you can simply defer the tax step until
the house is sold or you or the until you
pass away, and then it just becomes a liability taken
out of the estate. So there are certainly ways of
managing that no one, no one likes to pay tax,

(47:28):
and you know, and and you know, I certainly don't.
And and I should also disclose that I am a homeowner,
so I am sort of a bit conscious of arguing
against my own interests. But but yeah, I think we
need to try and make it as given. We have
to pay text, we want the government services that those
taxes fund, and we have to think hard about doing

(47:51):
as the most equitable and efficient way possible. And I
think this is a bit of a you know, a
bit of a yeah, a problem with the existing system.

Speaker 1 (48:03):
Have other countries successfully implemented this imputed rent tax?

Speaker 10 (48:09):
Yes, there are other countries, you know. I think there's
some scandinatin countries across that wouldn't I think, to tax everything.
But but but certainly, yeah, it's not without precedent. So
so it's it's it's yeah, it's it's not for uh,

(48:31):
the fact that it's not viable or practical that you know,
we don't do it. I think that, you know that
a lot of the hesitation comes in the fact that
we're taxing something that is there's no actual sort of
flow of money to observe. And that's why I think
it's possibly better packages as part of a proper some
sort of property tax as a way of you know,

(48:51):
people understanding what it is and and and not seeming too.

Speaker 11 (48:59):
Esoteric.

Speaker 1 (49:01):
We have the round table starting tomorrow. Do you think
the matter would be discussed or would it be too
politically toxic?

Speaker 10 (49:07):
I think the latter, Yes, I think yeah, Look, I mean,
I maybe I'm being too pessimistic, but yeah, the family
home is sacristant, you know, and rightfully so in Australia,
but that means that it sometimes precludes sensible debate, sensible

(49:28):
discussion of appropriate policy settings in regards to housing. I
think there is coming back to the point I kept repeating. Now,
I think that you know, if it was packaged, is
more part of a move away from to these transactions
duties on property moving more towards annual land taxes, a

(49:52):
bit like what the ACC is currently doing. That probably
has more prospective I succeeding politically, but even now it's
still recline.

Speaker 1 (50:07):
Professor, thanks so much for insight. Today. That's the deputy
director of the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research,
Professor Roger Wilkins, explaining the imputed rent tax, the impact
it would have on homeowners. Will it be discussed at
the roundtable? We don't know for a fact, but as
I suggested, it would probably be politically toxic. It would
have to be in the package of other taxes where

(50:29):
that would set this imputed rent tax. What are your
thoughts like to hear them?

Speaker 2 (50:33):
Mate?

Speaker 1 (50:33):
Double two three, double double oh back shortly.

Speaker 2 (50:36):
Five double A Mornings with Graham Goodings.

Speaker 1 (50:39):
I think past ten five double a Murray, I believe
you want to talk a moman. This imputed rent tax?

Speaker 13 (50:46):
Yeah, this rent tax. Well, they want to put taxes
on everything. When Howard bought the GST, it was ten
percent and we were supposed to lose all our other taxes.
Why do they want to put another tax and like
when they want to put fifteen percent for GST when
forty one billion dollars has been scammed out plus more

(51:08):
out of the GST. I've even got a bit of
paper here in front of me where a billion dollars
was the shocking cost taxpayers of South Australian health corruption.
There's so much corruption that we're losing so much money
and yet us the people have to pay. What's wrong

(51:29):
with the governments? Are they sick?

Speaker 12 (51:32):
It's like.

Speaker 13 (51:34):
Frank was saying last night, our dear premier flies around
in his jet. You know, why are we paying more taxes?
Or they want us to pay more taxes for their corruption?

Speaker 1 (51:49):
Okay, Murray, thank you very much for your input there.
We've got a few calls on the line if you'd
like to ring up, do it now eight double two
three double o double Oh Dan, good morning.

Speaker 14 (51:57):
Hi, I got one guire think taking a call. Uh yeah,
I think we're going to be pretty careful the way
this is handled with the rank and case. Yeah, you know,
I think the best Well, I don't mind the four
to five weeks penalty. That's that's quite fine. But I
think that should be served from say March next year

(52:21):
or when they start the season next year, because it
affects the Grand Final. There's millions, thousands of millions of
dollars betting on the on the Grand Final and the
different things, and it's a lot of ramifications involved there.

(52:41):
It's something smaller from this. It may it may be nothing,
but what do you think yourself?

Speaker 1 (52:48):
Yeah, look, thanks to your input, Dean. Obviously, as a
director of the Odaid Football Club, I have to be
careful when I say I can say that the club
that lad Football Club has been in discussions with Collingwood
and THEFL Integrity Unit alleged crimes of homophobic comments against
Isaac Rangan. Nothing has been proved or asserted at this

(53:09):
stage regarding the suspension that will play out in due course,
whether it should be served this year or next year.
Usually history would show that the AFL wants suspensions served
as and when they occur and when the offense occurs.
So that would suggest that it would be imposed immediately.

(53:31):
As for taking into account the millions of dollars bet
on football, I don't think the AFL should ever take
into account betting. If you want to bet on any sport,
you take your chances. And I think that the day
the AFL bows down and says, oh well, we know
lots of people bet money on the outcome and if
players are not available, we'll change that. So let's leave

(53:53):
betting out of this. But there is a lot to
play out on this issue, No doubt you'll hear it
first on five Double A Mark, Good morning, Good morning.

Speaker 12 (54:01):
How are you Graham? Graham? I was ringing about what
Stacey said about Frank Pangello running in Mitcham. Wait, sorry,
Mitchell was a suburb, isn't it? The electorate there is,
I agree with her. It's a rather strange electorate. But

(54:23):
if you look back in yours in my lifetime, they've
elected Robin Millhouse, Stephen Baker, Martin Hamilton Smith, Sam Dullock
and now the young lady who's currently their member. So
while are sort of tinged green in many many ways,
they don't seem to vote for a Green candidate or

(54:45):
even at the last election, the local mayor. So I'm
not sure that she's wrong. Actually I'm not sure that
Frank's the right bit, but I'm not sure that he
is so far from the mark. But the other thing,
I think, the important thing which Stacy missed is, unlike
the Labor Party is a Liberal party allows every member

(55:07):
of Parliament a free vote on every matter, so long
as they inform the party room that they dissent from
its decision. So Frank, it's not a matter of whether
Frank can be let off the leash. There is no
leash in the Liberal Party other than the lease you
put on yourself, which you need to put on yourself

(55:28):
because if you're playing for a team, you know you
can't always take the individual approach. So it's not a
matter of Frank being let off the lease. Frank can
be Frank. It's a matter of how much he can
play the team game being Frank.

Speaker 1 (55:44):
Now, Mark, you have a long political history in this town.
What show would you think Frank would have of winning
the seat of Wade.

Speaker 12 (55:53):
I think, and look, this is a gut feeling a
bit like Stacy. I don't think he's really the right fit.
And I don't know why. Maybe a little bit too old,
maybe a little bit too conservative. But having put on
the liberal, the liberal brand, I think that enhances his charge.

Speaker 15 (56:17):
I wouldn't.

Speaker 12 (56:18):
I wouldn't by any means write him off. But if
you're picking Graham the ideal candidate for the gold LOGI
I don't know that you'd pick Frank for that seat.

Speaker 1 (56:31):
Good on you, Mark, thanks for your daddied input. Let's
go to Andrey Hill Ross. Good morning, Well Graham.

Speaker 5 (56:37):
Just changing the subject. It's regarding our health system. I
can't give away any names, and I won't, but my
wife is a carer for a ninety one year old
lady who's then in and out of the public hospitals
with ulcerated legs, and then she fell over and broke

(56:58):
her hip or something like that. Now what they've done
is she's still in the hospital, mind you, and she
receives this letter. This lady, we are writing to inform
you that from the twenty ninth of August twenty five,
you will be classified as a long stay patient having
reached a day thirty six. If you're a mission, you

(57:18):
were required to pay a daily bed fee charge of
seventy eight dollars ninety five. This fee is a patient
contribution and accordings with Commonwealth government legislation.

Speaker 16 (57:29):
And this charge for both.

Speaker 5 (57:30):
Public a driver patient not covered by health insurance. Now
that that works out five hundred and sixty dollars a
week two two hundred and forty dollars a month out
of their pocket. Then it says, and I love this
bit from the government, should you be required to pay
the daily bedfee charge? Finance can arrange payment plans, but

(57:53):
they're even going to set up a payment plan if
you're in hospital longer than is this thirty six days.

Speaker 1 (58:00):
So you get thirty six days and then you start paying.

Speaker 5 (58:03):
Well, yeah, the only thing there is if we're treating
doctor says that you still need a cute medical care,
you're not going to charge it. But with this lady,
she's going to need to still be in there because
she's ninety one, she's got no one else at home,
so she's going to need ongoing fish in therapy, etcetera, etcetera,

(58:23):
et cetera. She is going to have to pay after
thirty six days. What do I say? It was seventy
eight ninety five per day, subject to a twice yearly increase.
And as I worked it out, I had five hundred
and sixty dollars a week, two two hundred and forty
dollars a month, and I'm not going to cover it,

(58:46):
and your private health won't cover it, Medicare won't cover it.
It's a contribut it's a patient contribution in accordance with
commonwealk government legislation and its charge for both public and
private patients. Now, but your private health insurance won't cover it.
And but they are because I say, we'll shut up

(59:07):
a payment plan for you.

Speaker 1 (59:09):
Very considered, isn't it? Look Ross will look further into that.
Thanks for sharing your story with as Kyle. Good morning,
Oh good home here you go. Good. Thanks.

Speaker 17 (59:19):
I don't know too much about about in depth of this,
but you know how the government wants to tax all
the people and all the all the people homeowners and all.

Speaker 14 (59:28):
Sorts of stuff.

Speaker 17 (59:30):
Why are they taxed our co exports and our gas exports,
because I don't think they do that.

Speaker 1 (59:35):
You are so right, You're so right.

Speaker 17 (59:38):
Surely it would bring down our power bills. For one,
and number two, the amount of money you would make
off that tax exporting our natural resources.

Speaker 1 (59:47):
About twenty billion dollars. I've heard an estimate we're missing
out on revenue twenty billion.

Speaker 17 (59:52):
What's going on here? What's going on? I have to
do it, surely.

Speaker 1 (59:57):
Successive governments have turned a blind eye. They've on everything
they can to attract the big miners to us, and
they've virtually let them, you know, use Australia as a
quarry and they don't pay for it. They export everything
for nothing exactly.

Speaker 17 (01:00:10):
Then they taxed the Australian fever. We shouldn't have to
deal with that.

Speaker 18 (01:00:13):
Now.

Speaker 1 (01:00:14):
You're dead right there, Kyle, You're dead right and we
have to shout loud and long. And in lieu of
that comes the news today that the Labor government has
increased its lead the popularity. Whatever you think of the
state of the nation and how it's being run, Alberneese's
popularity continues to soar. It's the levels reach its highest
in two years. The resolve of Political Monitor shows Labour's

(01:00:37):
primary vote climbing to thirty seven percent, up two points
since last month. The Coalition has remained steady. They haven't lost,
but they're still on twenty nine percent. The Greens remain
at twelve percent. One Nation's rises to nine on a
two party preferred basis, Labour's lead widens to fifty nine
to forty one. So there it is, folks. If you're
happy with the state of play, and they're all saying Goes,

(01:00:59):
you voted for him.

Speaker 2 (01:01:00):
Five Double A Mornings with Graham Goodings.

Speaker 1 (01:01:04):
At twenty seven to eleven. Andrew was our eyes and
he is on the road at the moment. He's sent
it a text. Just south of the Brickworks market on Southrow,
there's an accident where a fire engine is in attendance.
He says. While I was sitting at the lights on
the road going south or north, there was a car
accident behind me. So now both lanes are down north
and south down to one lane each way. Expect really

(01:01:26):
heavy delays. Thank you for that. That's just near the brickworks, Andrew,
thank you very much for passing that on to us.
If you see anything out there on the road that
would be a benefit to our listeners and motorists. A
double two three, double O DOUBLEOW is the number to
ring well. It was as built as a vital step
towards peace in Ukraine. The meeting between US President Donald
Trump US President Trump and met with the Russian President

(01:01:50):
Vladimir Putin, but with no ceasefire, the meeting has yielded
more questions than answers. Someone who might be able to
provide some answers for US is the founder and director
of Strategic Allies Oustrata, Michael Tumbridge. Michael, good morning to you.

Speaker 19 (01:02:03):
Hey Graham, good to talk with you.

Speaker 1 (01:02:05):
What do you make of the outcome of the summit meeting?

Speaker 19 (01:02:09):
Well, it could have been worse because Trump could have
come out of it calling on Ukraine to end the
war on Putin's terms, but it was a failure. Putin
came out of it with what he wanted, which is
international profile, meeting the US president on US soil although

(01:02:30):
he's an international war criminal. And also no sanctions. So
Trump was meant to put big secondary sanctions on the
Russian economy and he's now not doing that. And Trump
came out of it with nothing.

Speaker 1 (01:02:46):
Yeah, he failed to secure even a modest agreement.

Speaker 19 (01:02:50):
Yes, and in fact he's come out of it using
Putin's language again. So instead of talking about a ceasefire,
which all the Europeans and the Ukrainian a President Zelenski
wand he's talking about some peace agreement in due course,
which is code for Putin continuing the war now.

Speaker 1 (01:03:10):
Before the summer, Putin said that before any deal could
be reached, the world needed to address the roots of
Russia's concerns. What does that.

Speaker 19 (01:03:17):
Mean, Well, this is snakes and letters from Putin. This
is all about. The reason I invaded Ukraine is I
want to overturn the government. I want to demilitarize them,
and I want to control great chunks, if not all,
of the territory. So he even apparently spoke at the
meeting with Trump about getting the Russian Orthodox Church back

(01:03:41):
in to Ukraine, which has been used by Russian intelligence
as an arm of the state.

Speaker 1 (01:03:48):
Was the sidelining of Zelensky an oversight deliberate or would
it have led to any more positive outcome?

Speaker 19 (01:03:57):
Well, I think if there's to be any real peace negotiations,
Ukraine has to be there. I think Trump continues to
believe his own propaganda that he's an incredible deal maker,
but he's been comprehensively outmaneuvered by Putin every time he's
meet him. It's starting to get embarrassing.

Speaker 1 (01:04:19):
Now there is a meeting coming up with the presidents
and Zelenski, and I believe that's within the next twenty
four hours. What do you see as the likely outcome?

Speaker 19 (01:04:30):
Well, I think President Zelenski has been very keen not
to give Trump another opportunity to do what he did
back in February, if you remember that abusive meeting that
Trump jd. Vance had. So the German Chancellor Mertz is going,
so is Francis President mccron, Ursula vonder Leiden from the EU,

(01:04:52):
and Georgia Maloney who is a bit of a Trump
whisperer from Italy, and the NATO chiefs. So it's going
to be one meeting that Trump hates, a multilateral meeting,
and that's because the Europeans want to show solidarity with
Ukraine and stop Trump trying to sell Ukraine down the river.

Speaker 1 (01:05:11):
If Donald Trump didn't want the sort of meeting, couldn't
he have just lead it?

Speaker 19 (01:05:16):
I think he's now sufficiently embarrassed and aware that he
can't get the magical peace deal with Putin, and he
knows he's at least got to show that he's listening
to Ukraine and Europe.

Speaker 1 (01:05:31):
How are allies interpreting this meeting between Putin and Trump.

Speaker 19 (01:05:36):
I think very like I've described, that it could have
been worse. I think is their bottom line. So they're
relieved that it wasn't worse, but they know that this
talk about no ceasefire but a peace agreement is probably
just an illusion, and they know that Putin pretty much

(01:05:56):
told Trump talk to the hand. I'm continuing the war.

Speaker 1 (01:06:00):
Does this send any message to China?

Speaker 19 (01:06:03):
Yes it does. Trump looked quite strong and decisive in
his moves around Iran and their nuclear program, and when
he was talking about heavy secondary sanctions on the Russian economy.
That's what brought Putin to the table. But all that
has melted away. So if you're sitting in Beijing, you're thinking,

(01:06:24):
my lesson is to stay strong.

Speaker 1 (01:06:27):
It would appear that Putin has always had the upper
hand over Trump, despite Trump saying otherwise.

Speaker 19 (01:06:35):
It's a very strange phenomenon. I think that line that
Trump came out with about Ukraine is a small country,
Russia is a big country is his whole mindset. He
sees Putin as a big man, and at some level
he finds that intimidating.

Speaker 1 (01:06:54):
Do you see under any circumstance that Zelensky would be
happy to give up territory in Ukraine.

Speaker 19 (01:07:00):
Well, I don't think he can give up the great
chunk of Donetsk that Putin wants, because that's a fortified
belt that's held the Russians back and if they hand
that over, they're vulnerable. It's also got a big chunk
of their defense industry there, so that would be an
enormous strategic military gift to Putin. I think if there

(01:07:23):
were actual security guarantees and not just Trump giving a
sort of wink in a nod, some territorial concessions would
be possible to end the war, but they'd have to
be wrapped up with incredibly strong, practical security guarantees like
European forces present in Ukraine.

Speaker 1 (01:07:45):
Do you think the ongoing meetings that Trump has had
with Putin have weakened the US and the eyes of
the world.

Speaker 19 (01:07:53):
I think so. It just looks like Trump folds every
time he's in Putin's presence, and the only person that
has shifted him on Putin has been his wife who's
been watching television. It is truly a bizarre phenomenon.

Speaker 1 (01:08:10):
Yeah, interesting insight, and I guess we'll learn more after
this meeting in the White House. In the next twenty
four hours. Michael, thanks so much of your time, and
you're inside, says Michael Schubridge, Director of Strategic Analysis Australia
on the Trump Putin Summit meeting. Eight double two three
double o double is the number to ring regarding we

(01:08:30):
were talking before this core is correct. When I reached
the five month mark of a stay at Hampstead, I
had to sign a form saying that I would have
to pay. I was thirty eight and it was two
weeks before Christmas. Pardner obviously couldn't work, so we couldn't
have paid. Luckily I got out a week early. Let's
take a call Peter, good morning, Good morning Graham.

Speaker 15 (01:08:52):
There are all these extra tectors we're being asked to pay,
and so I bought. Regarding I'm an age pensioner and
I've own my own home. Along with a lot of
other people in a similar position to me, we don't
have the opportunity to work for a wage anymore. So

(01:09:12):
when you're on the age pension, you just have to
absorb all these extra costs, which has been pretty difficult
over the last couple of years particularly. But what gets
me is all these things are targeting people like me.
All these suggestions of a home home own attacks and
all that. We pay rates now and every area our

(01:09:34):
rates go up sizably, so we're all being already being packed.
They used to call it a rich tax, you know,
the more expensive the house. So I don't know why
they don't why they don't target more people. Like the
bloke said before about we give away gas and a
lot of our natural resources, we don't see anything for

(01:09:58):
them ourselves. Government get more, get something, but the average
person doesn't benefit. And then just recently in the last
few days, the tax on spirits, and we know that
for a bottle of spirits you're paying thirty to forty
dollars straight.

Speaker 1 (01:10:14):
For the government in tax. Yep, that's right.

Speaker 15 (01:10:17):
Yeah, and it's going to be like cigarette. The more
you put put that tax on things like that, people
are going to start doing distilling their own.

Speaker 14 (01:10:30):
I know, I know blokes that.

Speaker 20 (01:10:31):
Already do it.

Speaker 1 (01:10:33):
Yeah. Well people, I don't know anyone telling it, but
there's no question that people, if they're taxed out of existence,
they will look to other ways. I mean, look at
tobacco and vaping and the illicit market there. The illegal
trade in those now is.

Speaker 15 (01:10:47):
Massive, you know it is I can see the same
thing's going to happen with spirits. That'll be the next one.

Speaker 1 (01:10:56):
Yeah Na.

Speaker 15 (01:10:57):
And the only The other thing too is everyone get
so excited when Reserve Bank's about to meet and they
keep pushing for reduced interest rates. Well, that doesn't benefit us.
We think we get no benefit out of lower interest rates.
So low where they go, the less interest we make
on any money that we've got in the bank.

Speaker 1 (01:11:16):
Exactly. It's only people who have borrowed money off their
homes and so forth that gain when the interest rates
come down. Good on your Peter. Thanks, thanks for your
input today. A reminder here that this imputed rent tax
is only being mooted and suggested by a couple of
legal a couple of economic gurus who come out of universities,

(01:11:37):
and often things that come out of universities should stay
in universities. But anyway, this imputed rent tax is not
coming into being. It is being talked about. Whether it
is being talked about in Canberra circles, we don't know,
but it is something that could be considered in the future.
It should come as a cocktail of taxes, so if

(01:11:59):
they brought in this tax, they would lower taxes in
another area. I mean, that is the theory, but how
often do they lower and remove taxes or change taxes?
Years and years ago Europe gave and gave to a
man his name was Hitler, who ended up starting World
War Two. Thank you for that, Mike Graham. Thank goodness.
Some European leaders are attending the meeting of Trump and

(01:12:19):
his vice president, another disgraceful bullying of President Zelenski. It
will again be seen by us all for what it is.
Thank you, John. I have little doubt that part of
the reason the EU European leaders are going with Zelenski
is to give him support, and it will be interesting
to see what approach the President has to Zelenski at
this particular meeting. Eight double two to three double O,

(01:12:41):
double oh, back in a moment, five double.

Speaker 2 (01:12:44):
A Mornings with Graham, Goodings.

Speaker 1 (01:12:46):
Eleven to eleven five double A. There's no question that
concussion in contact sports is an issue that's not going
away anytime soon, and it can have life lasting impacts well.
New concussion research concerns over current return to play timelines
for athletes. A Swinburne University study found while symptoms usually
clear within twelve days, neurological test show the brain may

(01:13:10):
not fully recover until much later. Lead researchers Professor Allan Pierce,
who joins us now professor, good morning to you, Good
morning Graham. This is an issue that will be with
us as long as there are a contact sport. I
guess tell us about these more recent findings.

Speaker 21 (01:13:27):
Yeah, it's certainly something that we need to keep addressing.
In particular with this study. We've had some concerns now
for nearly a decade, but after a concussion, there's an
increased risk of an injury like an ankle or a knee,
or a hamstring or shoulder, which is maybe almost threefold
after a concussion. So one of the things that we

(01:13:50):
need to try and understand is whether symptoms that are
recovered is really a true reflection of an athlete having
fully recovered. So the idea was to actually test that
by comparing the timeline of symptoms after a concussion and
how long they take to recover versus the brain's physiology

(01:14:10):
or biology, and how long does the brain actually take
to recover back to its baseline levels compared to symptoms.

Speaker 1 (01:14:19):
There's obviously so little it's still known about concussion. You
can see a violent head on clash between two players
clash heads and one gets up shaking his head and
is okay, and the other one is visibly cancust almost
knocked out. So individuals react differently.

Speaker 21 (01:14:35):
Oh, absolutely, And this is one of the things that
we're trying to understand with the research, is that you
can we find a more individualized way to let a
player know that not only they can cust but also
how long to recover. And so for us, what we
were seeing is that with symptoms recovering within about twelve
ish days, but the brain taking nearly twenty six days

(01:14:58):
to recover, means that we need to have better ways,
more objective ways to be able to tell a player
that they've recovered from a more individual perspective.

Speaker 1 (01:15:08):
With a concussion, obviously, players being what they are, they
want to get on with it, so you can't really
consider their personal feelings and you know, so that that's
why the testing has been introduced.

Speaker 21 (01:15:21):
Absolutely, that's the issue that we have is that you know,
sometimes we do need athletes to yeah, we need to
protect athletes from themselves, and so by having some objective
data and one of the I guess the things that
came from the research, which you know, we couldn't put
in the publication for the journal. But when players actually
saw the objective data on their recovery, so the waveforms

(01:15:45):
that I was able to show them, they actually engaged
with it a lot better and said, oh, my brain
hasn't recovered. I'm actually I think I need to have
an extra few days off, for a week off and
retest me. They engage with it better rather than thinking, oh,
I've got to get back on the field because my
coach will be upset me, or I'll let my teammates down.
So it's some way of trying to get athletes to

(01:16:06):
becoming more responsible to themselves as well.

Speaker 1 (01:16:10):
Is it so that if someone has been concussed, they're
more likely to be concussed in the future.

Speaker 21 (01:16:16):
Yes, yes, there is recent evidence now showing that again
it's about threefold risk of another concussion. And so the
concern that we have is those athletes with multiple concussions,
so you know, not just two or three, but maybe
five or even ten. And it's not uncommon for players,
particularly at the community level, to say, well, you know,

(01:16:36):
I have fifteen concussions over my career, and so that's
something that we are trying to address as well. From
a long term brain health perspective.

Speaker 1 (01:16:45):
There's no doubt there's concern. You know, at the higher
levels of sport, you know, there's a doctorate and tendency
the test can be done at a sophisticated level, but
when it gets down to grassroots level, that is an
area that it's very hard to control.

Speaker 21 (01:16:59):
Yeah, that's right. So this is one of the reasons
why the Australian Sports Commission brought in a twenty one
day recovery period, even though it's arbitrary. It's a twenty
one day recovery to try and get players to rest
for a little bit longer, at least another week or two,
because what we know is that if a player can
rest that a little longer than their risk of injury reduces,

(01:17:22):
but also it might allow their career to extend by
five or six years. We've seen too many athletes, both
at the professional and community levels, retiring prematurely at twenty
twenty one years of age because they can no longer
tolerate another concussion.

Speaker 1 (01:17:40):
Yeah. I mean the common practice now at AFL level,
and I guess in other sports too, is that symptoms
usually clear within twelve days. Your research is now showing
that the brain may not fully recover for until twenty
six days. What do you do with that information?

Speaker 21 (01:17:59):
Well, I hope that we can, I guess, use it
for educational purposes, to doctors to you know, not be
too quick to sign off players back to return to
play just because the player says, well, I don't have
a headache anymore. I'm hoping that we can start to
incorporate more objective measures into the return to play decision,
both at the professional and community level. You know, concussion clinics,

(01:18:22):
physioclinics can now start to maybe incorporate some of these
emerging technologies as well. So I guess it's a progress,
you know, another step towards improving the rehabilitation and return
to play protocols because you know, obviously athlete health is
what we're aiming for at all levels.

Speaker 1 (01:18:41):
Now, before I let you go, doctor, we always anytime
we talk about concussion, we will get people that say, well,
just why don't they wear helmets? What impact would wearing
a helmet have on the field.

Speaker 21 (01:18:54):
It has no impact whatsoever. So there's been probably thirty
years of research in both hard shell helmets of NFL
players and the soft shell helmets that we see in
rugby league and Australian football, and there is no protective
mechanism for the brain. So what helmets do is they
protect the skull from fractures and lacerations, but they cannot

(01:19:17):
stop the brain tissue from moving inside the skull tissue
inside the skull bone, i should say. And so it's
that movement of the stretching and what we call shearing
or tearing of the brain cells that leads to a concussion.
And because our brain sits in the sack of fluid,
it's very difficult to stop that from happening. And so

(01:19:38):
anytime we see helmets sort of being advertised of reducing
concussion risk, they're in labs and the lab testing is
not really real world and so we unfortunately we still
see concussions with players who get who are wearing helmets.

Speaker 1 (01:19:53):
Doctor Pierce, thanks so much for your inside. Appreciate it,
my pleasure.

Speaker 21 (01:19:56):
Thanks for having me on.

Speaker 1 (01:19:57):
Doctor Allen Piers, lead research professor at the Swinburne University.
Research showing that while symptoms of concussion usually clear within
twelve days, neurological tests show the brain may not fully
recover until the twenty six day mark. What impact will
that have for at senior sports levels? I guess we
will have to wait and see eight double two to
three double double? Oh is the number to ring? Well?

(01:20:19):
I forgot to mention earlier. We know the Royal shows
coming up. We have double passes all week to give
away to the Royal Adelaide show for the best call
of the morning, it could be you and you can
book your tickets at the show to the show the
show dot com dot au and of course you can
pick them up to at Drake's Supermarkets. From the text line,

(01:20:39):
the argument for an imputed rent tax is that homeowners
are unfairly advantaged by the tax system compared to renters.
If it wasn't for homeowners, there would be very few
properties available for rent. John says high Gg Labour's Economic
Productivity roundtable will probably focus on increasing a federal public
service again, this time by one hundred one thousand. The

(01:21:01):
last decade saw this sector increase by forty eight percent
to three hundred and forty eight thousand. Eight in ten
new jobs in this period were public servants. There are
thirty five thousand Green staff doing their best to stifle
mining and agriculture, no talk of manufacturing anything. Thank you
for that, John, Yeah, it is scary when you work
out that more than I think it is, more than

(01:21:23):
fifty percent of jobs in Australia are directly linked to
public service, more than fifty percent of jobs. Most of
the new jobs created over the past two years have
been in the public service, Graham. Given the level of
alcohol taxation, can we expect an outbreak of illicit liquor
shops around the suburbs just out of interest? How much

(01:21:45):
would a bottle of scotch cost? Just joking? I think
can only John, Well, we suggested that before. I mean,
if you keep pricing it to the degree that you
are that every bottle of scotch or liquor is twenty
eight thirty dollars or more goes straight to the government,
then the smart money will move elsewhere, as it has

(01:22:06):
with cigarettes solicit tobacco. People are buying elicit tobacco because
they can get it for a quarter of the price.
Eight double two three double oh is the numbered ring? Hi, Graham?
Thank goodness. Some European leaders are attaining the meeting of
Trump and his vice president attempt another disgraceful bulling of
President Zelenski. It will again be seen by us all
for what it is. Thank you for that. We've got

(01:22:27):
to take a break for news. And then after the news,
is the population growth in Australia ruining standards of living
for young Australians.

Speaker 2 (01:22:35):
Your thoughts five Double A Mornings with Graham Goodings.

Speaker 1 (01:22:40):
Had a good morning to you as we enter the
final hour of the show today. Well, Australia could be
the richest country in the world, but its promise of
a better life for each new generation is in danger.
They're the words of Macro Business chief economist Leif van Onsalin.
He says our population growth, fetish and poorly designed energy
and tax policies need to be addressed, and it should

(01:23:00):
happen ahead of this week's economic reform roundtable leaf and
Onslin joins me, Leath, good morning to you.

Speaker 20 (01:23:06):
Okay, Graham House these good.

Speaker 1 (01:23:07):
Thanks, strong words. Do you think they're required at this stage?

Speaker 16 (01:23:11):
Oh?

Speaker 20 (01:23:12):
Absolutely, they're require. Look, I'll just know from the outset
that obviously we're going into this productivity round table this
week and I find it amazing that the Productivity Commission
has released five discussion papers in the lead up to
this roundtable, and not a single one of those discussion
papers has bothered to mention the term immigration and the
impact that Australia's Big Australia High immigration program is having

(01:23:37):
a bad effect on Australia's productivity. So I've argued repeatedly
that a major reason for the decline in Australia's productivity
and living standards is because Australia has grown as population
rapidly via very high levels of immigration this century. So
the population of the nation's grown by about azo point
seven million so far this century, which is an increase

(01:23:58):
of around forty six percent, the highest growth in the
advanced world. But we haven't built We haven't provided all
the millions of extra workers with extra tools, machinery, technology,
we haven't built enough homes for the millions of extra
families that have arrived, and we haven't provided enough infrastructure
for obviously the eight point seven million population increase. And
as a result, everyone's standard of living has gone down,

(01:24:20):
not up, and Australia's proctivity has been harmed because the
amount of capital investment per person has actually shrunk. So
we've effectively had the worst of both worlds grown, We've
had recessory levels of business investment and infrastructure investment across
the nation, but we've also diluted that investment by sensitively
high population growth by immigration. And we're not alone in this.

(01:24:43):
Canada has experienced exactly the same outcome of plummeting productivity
and living standards because it's run an excessive immigration program
that has overrun all its own which is massively overrun
its private investment. So as a result, it too is
experiencing exactly the same result as Australia. And then you
can also add on top of that, we're committing energy
policy suicide. Despite the fact that we export seven times

(01:25:06):
more coal for the rest of the world that are used,
and four times more gas, we've decided to give ourselves
uber expensive energy prices, both gas and electricity, which is
obviously driven up our cost base across all areas of
supply chain. It's obviously increased household power bills, and that's
also making us less productive because we're now all our
manufacturing industries are shutting down, they're moving offshore because they

(01:25:28):
can't compete any mongst the high energy costs, and that's
also destroying our prodctivity living standards and unfortunately Graham South
Australia is a glimpse into our future because at South Australia,
you shut down your last coal fire generator in twenty sixteen.
Your state now generates roughly three quarters three quarters of

(01:25:48):
its electricity from wind and solar, but you also have
the most expensive power costs in the country.

Speaker 1 (01:25:53):
And don't we know.

Speaker 20 (01:25:54):
Yeah, and the reason for that grame is very simple.
So the cost of building all the transmission line and
everything to your wind and solar is enormous and that's
been capitalized into your power bills. But also because you
shut down your coal fire power, you're now very reliant
on uber expensive gas batteries and diesel and as a result,
your power bills are now the most expensive in the country.

(01:26:15):
And this is going to be replicated across Australia. And
here's the other thing. South Australia would probably experience regular
blackouts if it wasn't for the interconnected to Victorian brown coal.
But Victoria also wants to shut down its coal fire generation.
All the other states across the East Coast plan to
shut down the coal fire generation, so the whole of
the country could end up like South Australia, paying uber

(01:26:36):
expensive energy costs and being highly relying on intermittent wind
and solar power, which ultimately ends up being far more
expensive because you've got to pay for all the transmission costs,
which gets capitalized in your power bills, and then you
have to pay for all the backup and everything else.
And unfortunately, gas, gas, batteries, hydro, et cetera is very
expensive electricity sources. So we're just committing energy suicide as well.

Speaker 1 (01:27:01):
But Chris Bowen keeps telling us going the way of renewables,
we will get cheaper power.

Speaker 20 (01:27:05):
Well, he's lyne, he's bald faith line. Because the factor
matter is, as South Australia tests, you have the most
expensive power bills in the country and you are the
furthest down this road in the country. And not just
South Australia, California has gone on the same route. They
pay roughly three times high power prices in the rest
of America. The fact of matter is, if you look
across the world, the higher share of wind and solar,

(01:27:26):
the more expensive.

Speaker 1 (01:27:27):
The power bills.

Speaker 20 (01:27:28):
And it's very obvious why it's intimatetent source of power.
It provides you with energy when you don't need it,
and what you have to do then you have to
pay for the massive transmission costs because you've got to
basically gather this energy all around the country. It's you know,
thousands of kilometers of transmission lines and all this other
stuff which is ober expensive that gets capitalizing your bill.
You then need to spend billions upon billions on storage

(01:27:50):
systems like Snowy hydro, which is going to end up
costing probably twenty billion dollars once you factor in the
transmission lines as well, all are batteries, etc. This all
adds up to the and you don't need to spend
those costs if you have base load power which can
operate independent of the weather, and we have that with coal.

Speaker 1 (01:28:07):
Yeah, and this is Chris Bowen's ultimate dream of reaching
that zero and saving the world.

Speaker 20 (01:28:14):
Yeah and yeah, that's right. And Australia is one percent
of the world's carbon emissions grown. So no matter what
we do, the climate is going to do work, the
climb is going to do but we are committed energy
suicide and unfortunately we keep going down this road. We're
going to effectively de industrialize and Australia already has the
smallest manufacturing share in the OECD, it's about five percent.
Last year we lost our last major plastics manufacturer because

(01:28:37):
of high gas prices. We lost our last last architectural
glass maker this year Iceentic Glass because of high energy prices.
We've lost fertilizer makers. We're losing industry left, hit, right,
and center because manufacturing is energy intensive and if you
make that energy expensive, so I'm talking gas and electricity here,
it ends up shutting down and going offshore. And the
only manufacturing that Australia is going to be left with

(01:29:00):
this stuff that you can't impourt like bricks, but you're
going to just go up in price because it's going
to be more expensive expensive to make them, as well
as subsidized manufacturing. So you know Chris Bowen and Anthony
Albani's want to creator this future made in Australia, Well,
the fact of the matter is the industries that they've
highlighted will only exist because of heavy taxpayer subsidies, when

(01:29:21):
really what we should be doing is running having the
cheapest energy possible. We are an energy superpower. We have
the world's biggest co well some of the world's biggest
coal reserve, gas reserves, uranium, etc. We could have uber
cheap electricity if we want it, and gas, but we
choose not to. And if we had cheaper cheap energy,
we'd also have a competitive manufacturing industry.

Speaker 1 (01:29:40):
Will any of this be discussed at the roundtable? Oh?

Speaker 20 (01:29:43):
Absolutely or not so? As I said, the five discussion
papers from the Protivity Commission didn't mention immigration, which, as
I said, is one of the reasons why all infrastructure
and business investment isn't keeping up with population growth, and
that's destroying living standards and liability. And also its discussions
around just about getting to net zero rather than maybe

(01:30:04):
we should abandoned that zero. And the fact matter is,
as I said, we export seven times more coal for
the rest of the world than we use four times
more gas. Maybe we should export a little bit less,
use more of it ourselves, and give ourselves cheap and
reliable gas and electricity. It sounds too obviously, absolutely Unfortunately,
you know, we have been overtaken by idea logues rather

(01:30:26):
than practical people who who consider practical solutions well.

Speaker 1 (01:30:32):
And the hypocrisy is just overwhelming when we try and
cut back as much as we can and yet we're
all too happy to give away our coal. And I'm
saying giveaway because largely we do give away our gas
and coal record exports overseas, and that's burned by China
and India and other countries, so they're polluting the atmosphere,
but we pout ourselves on the back zone. We're doing

(01:30:53):
a good job.

Speaker 20 (01:30:54):
That's right, well, well sixty seven similar increase in the
world's carbon emissions since two thousands come from China. China
eggs up ten times more coal than we do. They
burned themselves, so their coal mining capacities ten times what
ours is. They also import they're also the biggest import
or coal. Last year about thirty percent of exports of
coal went to China to burn. China is expanding its

(01:31:15):
coal mines, so it has about one point two million
tons of coal mines that come on board, which is
more than Australia producers in a single year. They're also
expanding their coal fire electricity generation every single year, so
China is about I think eleven hundred and fifty coal
fire generators. We have eighteen to the country. They're expanding
those every single year. They are not going in net

(01:31:37):
zero India is not going to net zero. America is
a band in that zero. Even our friends across the
pond New Zealand are perfectively banned in the zero. But
we at one percent of the world's carbonitions things that
we can change the world, and we're going to hamstering
ourselves in the process. It just doesn't make any sense.

Speaker 2 (01:31:50):
Lee.

Speaker 1 (01:31:50):
Finally, if we go back to migration once again, there
is a bit of a double edged sword with migration
is because all of a sudden our natural birth rateers.
We're below replacement level. So there is a concern or
justification by the government that we've got to import people
from overseas because we're not procreating.

Speaker 20 (01:32:10):
Yeah, I mean obviously falling birth rates are an issue
across the world that unfortunately, running a high immgration program
does it really address your aging profile significantly. So it
can give you a short term kick, but ultimately all
the migrants that we import end up growing on.

Speaker 1 (01:32:29):
I think we've lost you. Sorry, Leith, you just dropped
out there. Yes, you were saying all migrants are growing old,
and there's also the case then you've made the point
that it's low skill migration too. We're not attracting the
people that we really need.

Speaker 12 (01:32:43):
Yeah.

Speaker 20 (01:32:43):
Absolutely. So it's interesting that we've been running this high
immigration experiment for twenty years effectively, yet our skill shortages
are worse than ever. So how has migration solved our
skills shortages? As I said, we've had the most aggressive
population growth in the advanced world forty six percent this century,

(01:33:03):
and yet we continually have skills shortages. So how is
it that other countries that run significally lower migration systems
don't suffer the same skill shortages as us, or certainly
no worse skill shortages. It just shows you that we're
not importing the right skills. And often when you try
and solve one problem by migration, you create another. So
for example, you know, if we imported one million builders

(01:33:25):
tomorrow to build homes, well, then that will create shortages
elsewhere because those builders that we import will require health,
they'll require education and acquire all this other stuff. So
you solve one problem, then you create others.

Speaker 1 (01:33:36):
Lots of questions, not many answers, Leith, thanks so much for.

Speaker 20 (01:33:38):
Your time today, Yeah, chance, great, anytime.

Speaker 1 (01:33:41):
Leith and Onsolan, chief economist and co founder of an
organization that called macro business, giving us insight into the
fact that they made the point a straight could be
the richest country in the world. Just think about that
for a second. We could be the richest country in
the world. Way with successive governments of all persuasions have

(01:34:03):
cocked up the way we use our and utilize our
resources is a national disgrace. So what do we do
to rectify the situation? We bump up taxes? Where do
we begin?

Speaker 2 (01:34:15):
Five double A Mornings with Graham Goodings.

Speaker 1 (01:34:18):
Twenty one past eleven, five double A GG. Leith talks
too much sense. Sadly no one is listening. Leith talks facts,
not ideology, so refreshing. Thank you for that, Steve. Great
commentary from Leith, chief economists from the company he represents.
He makes a huge amount of sense. He should be
Prime Minister of Australia. We need a smart guy like him,
not the ones that do This is exactly what I've

(01:34:41):
been complaining about for three years GG. And that's why
two thirds of Australians are dumb, says Jeff All. This
high immigration is also causing a degradation of the Australian culture.
Many come to Australia for the bonuses we have to offer,
but they do not want to assimilate to our culture
and way of living. You enjoy that, I tell you,
if your Crows fan, you would have enjoyed Saturday night.

(01:35:02):
What an amazing game that was. One in five footy
fans believe attending AFL matches is a worse experience this year,
and they've called out loud music, costs and americanization as
their biggest gripes with the game. Are you happy with
the game, the game experience, the game day experience. The
national survey of fans found more than twenty percent who
regularly attend live action believe a trip to the footy

(01:35:25):
was better last year. And this is the response from
AFL Fans Association chief Roniesscoe twenty.

Speaker 16 (01:35:31):
Two percent, just over one five of saying it's worse
and going to the footy last year. And what fans
are actually telling us is the music, the bright lights
after every goal actually takes away from the footy football
experience and the atmosphere of the ground.

Speaker 1 (01:35:46):
Preliminary findings real music and bright lights blared after goals,
match time and tickets, food and membership costs among the
biggest issues front of mine for footy faithful. Now do
you like the jazzing up of the entertainment? Do you
like the music after a goal of us?

Speaker 22 (01:36:03):
So?

Speaker 1 (01:36:03):
I do some of the players songs, I'm a bit questionable,
but others are great. They really are good, and the
more you hear them, the more you get to like them.
That means we're kicking more goals. But I like the
fact that on the lights that it spells out the
world's goal when we kick a goal. But a lot
of people obviously don't like the Razmataz. What are your thoughts?

(01:36:24):
AFL Fans survey out now. I think it still goes
until Wednesdays. If you want to contribute, go to the
AFL Fans Association website. Huye, good morning to you.

Speaker 22 (01:36:34):
Yeah, good morning, Graham. The three different topics I'll touch
on quickly, Besidsac ranking situation. It takes action for a
reaction when people make statements or Allergay baking statements. But
the thing is what led up to Isaac responding at
the allegation of the moment is the other player may
have made some statement or the issue that responded with

(01:36:57):
Isaac making some sort of statement. If if that was
a statement, so it's all left at the stage and
while at it, the grounds were packed getting out. If
there was a fire and earthquake and the patriot has
been four of fifty three one thousand people, they need
to cater the exit much better. What has happened on
the night of the match this last weekend. They need

(01:37:19):
to look at it seriously because if there's an incident
of a fire or alive or something goes wrong, which
was seen obviously the soccer grounds in they need to
fine tuners and get it better.

Speaker 23 (01:37:31):
Now.

Speaker 22 (01:37:31):
On the meeting with the Trump and Vadimere made a
statement of Trump at the meeting, he said, why you're
looking well and alive and alive at Trump's been through
to bis fires to him. So that's one thing with
this gas to Japan. We're building ships in Japan at
the mine which destroyer. Fore what don't they use the

(01:37:55):
charge of a government to start charging these tyrants that
supply the game to Japan, who actually we're nice for nothing?
Pro charge or not take do that? The mount off
the cost of the ships, of the defense, cost of
sense places. Don't that good on you here?

Speaker 1 (01:38:13):
You've covered a whole range of topics there eight double
two three double double. If you would like to comment
on any of the things that here we said, or
maybe some of your own gig financial roundtable will just
be another talk fest. Labor does not have the courage
to make the bold decisions. They will fluff around for
another three years, putting us further in debt. After six
years in power, Label will have no choice but to

(01:38:34):
tackle the financial crisis we're heading for. The situation is
they're more popular than ever. They are more popular than ever,
according to two separate polls. In fact, the support for
Labor is stronger and the support for Anthony Albanesi is
stronger than it was pre election. GG, what do you
think of Australia's financial outlook within three years? State debt

(01:38:57):
Victoria one hundred and ninety four billion, Queensland two hundred
and five billion, New South Wales two hundred and thirty
six billion, say forty eight billion, Tasmania thirteen billion. Federal
debt over one trillion dollars. What a disgrace. Thank you
for that, Steve. Yeah, I think we know where we're
headed with that. Our grandkids and their kids and their
grandkids will be paying off the money that's owed for

(01:39:19):
a long, long, long time council rates service charges pay
for our properties. Input another way to fleece money from
hard workers who have gone without to own their own home.
Don't forget we paid seventy percent interest with Keating's recession.
We had to have cheers, John, how are you doing?

Speaker 3 (01:39:37):
Yeah?

Speaker 8 (01:39:37):
Good, thanks run And I just just wanted to make
a comment about and I have filled out survey and
very nice. Listen, we'll look at the right time. But
that's of a noise, I think, says and all of
them other side, so that only.

Speaker 16 (01:39:59):
True.

Speaker 8 (01:40:00):
It's not talk to the followers. And you know, we
stand by the scoreboard a lot.

Speaker 19 (01:40:05):
Of this fight.

Speaker 8 (01:40:07):
It's at about the last quarter. And I don't know
what that's to do with sponsorship to get from that over.
Why should have to scream as our simbi about this
rubbish that's going on on the oval but we really
don't care about I don't understand why we're going to

(01:40:28):
have it. I think it must be to do with sponsorship.

Speaker 1 (01:40:33):
There is sponsorship, there's no question about that.

Speaker 8 (01:40:36):
There the caravan guy I forgotten his name at the moment,
that sponsors something to do with a good thing that's
going on. But yeah, for the average pundle that goes
along with a friend or two, they want to talk
about the game and it's literally impossible to have a conversation.
Well that's just rubbish.

Speaker 1 (01:40:58):
Well believe it there, Johnny. Thanks for your comment. Your
line is pretty shaky, but I think we get the
feeling that you're not happy with that. So I'd like
to know the general feeling that would appear one to
five supporters and not happy with the match day experience.
I must say that I do like the songs when
it player kicks a goal and we celebrate, and if
it's a song, we know people sing along with it
and it really catches on. But wall to wall noise,

(01:41:22):
are you're not happy with it? Let's know eight double
two three double o double the number of the ring.
Don't forget. We have a double pass to give away
to the Royal Adelaide Show for the best caller of
the morning. We'll announce that within the next half hour.
You can book your tickets at the show, dot com,
dot au and Drake's Supermarkets. Five Double A Mornings with
Graham Goodings. Dear it is that bring back memories for you?

(01:41:45):
That's for my producer Sam. He's nodding his head backwards
and forwards. There obviously a big Humphrey Bear fan. Well,
iconic Humphreybeebar is making a comeback after many, many years
in hibernation. Australia's most beloved Bear will grace our TV
screens once again. How, Why, Where? And when Andrew Cozy
Costello joins us? Cozy good money to you.

Speaker 18 (01:42:05):
It is nothing short of an honor to be talking
to you, my friend.

Speaker 2 (01:42:08):
Now.

Speaker 1 (01:42:09):
Humphrey Bear is a legend of all legends. There's no
question other than An Will's probably Anne Wills might fight
him for the biggest name in television and South Australian history,
but Humphrey is certainly right up there. So what about
the revival? What's this all on that?

Speaker 18 (01:42:23):
Yeah, you're spot on there. And should Anne Wills and
Humphrey be Bear ever hook Cup, that would be a
true power couple, wouldn't It'd be amazing. Well, you know,
it's sixty years old this year, Humphrey be Bear is
and he hasn't been on Telly for about sixteen seventeen years,
and I reckon that's a little bit of a shame
because he really is an icon and he's very very
loved across the whole state. So we've just been talking
to the people that own Humphrey beebear for some time

(01:42:45):
to see whether it be possible to get the rights
to use Humphrey in and have him involved with South
osbry Cozy and luckily they said yes and it's all
the goers. So Sunday Night last night was his first
night back on TV in many years and it's just
good to see him back.

Speaker 1 (01:43:00):
So what ongoing role can we see for Humphrey.

Speaker 18 (01:43:03):
Basically, Humphrey is going to be putting the free into
Humphrey and basically heading around South Australia just doing good
deeds and handing out free stuff. Pretty much. That's his gig.
His job basically is just to make people happy. And
I was trying to put my finger on it the
other day and I was trying to think, what is
it about Humphrey Because when you just started playing that song,
then you know it just makes you feel good. And

(01:43:25):
when you see Humphrey on TV, or if you're lucky
enough to see him in real life, or you're even
more lucky enough to give him a big cuddle, it's
something about him that just makes people happy. And in
a time when cost of living's sky high and there's
so much doom and gloom around the place, I just
think it's wonderful to be able to put something like
Humphrey out there so people can actually just have a

(01:43:45):
smile and have a little bit of fun.

Speaker 1 (01:43:47):
I mean, we're talking of heavy days a Humphrey, Bee
Bear and fat Cat and friends. You know, we look
back very fondly at those times. I think we miss him.

Speaker 18 (01:43:56):
Yeah, absolutely mate. And do you know what's a shame,
And you've been in the industry a lot longer than
I have. I'm sitting at Channel seven right now, and
in those years gone by, all of those shows were
made right here in Adelaide, Australia, you know, shows like
Wheel of Fortune, and a lot of people don't sort
of have an understanding that Humphrey is a South Australian
icon because he was created here and the show was

(01:44:16):
made here. But Humphrey was played as a national TV
show for decades and even worldwide.

Speaker 1 (01:44:21):
So yeah, I believe I've got worldwide exposure there for
quite some years.

Speaker 18 (01:44:25):
Yeah, and it's just a shame, you know that times
have changed and there's not that much local TV that's
made anymore, especially kids TV. In fact, I don't think
there's any now in South Australia. Hasn't been for a while,
so it's quite sad. So it is great to be
able to just reincarnate him into a form where he
can fit into South I was he with cousin and
you do a segment every couple of months and just
do some activities out.

Speaker 20 (01:44:46):
In the public.

Speaker 18 (01:44:46):
It's been really good. The first time wek him, took
him down the mall and it was like insane, like
he got proper mob. It was like I said that,
I said to someone the other day, I was like
having Justin b Bieber walking up and down the mall.
People were stopping everywhere. Insane.

Speaker 1 (01:45:01):
I'm just wondering, will he go on tours around the
state with you?

Speaker 24 (01:45:04):
Oh?

Speaker 18 (01:45:04):
Yeah, has to, doesn't he? I mean if I don't,
if I don't take him to the regions of South Australia,
I'll be they'll be coming from They'll be coming from
the regions with pitchforpes and fire. So yeah, Humphrey will
definitely definitely travel. He's done some wonderful things already. He
took a bunch of families out for a free night
of bowling. And then he also there's an exclusive basketball
program at spring Bank which is just exceptional. It is

(01:45:25):
about about one hundred people that play in that and
he went down there and he played basketball with him
and hands it out some you know, cars and stuff
and like, yeah, he's just so so well well receives
and well loved. I mean, the thing we bringing Humphrey back,
you know, people say, oh, you know, what's what's the
story with bringing Humphy back ball. He's not going to
fix the Augur Bloomer. He's not going to help the
Crows win a flag. But he'll have a bit of fun,

(01:45:45):
for sure.

Speaker 1 (01:45:46):
You put a smile on the faces of us all
I reckon, you.

Speaker 18 (01:45:48):
Bet, you bet mate, I mean, got crikey. So he's
sixty years sixty years old. When did you start in
the media? Gram what what you would have been?

Speaker 1 (01:45:56):
I started in the media the sixty six something like that.

Speaker 18 (01:46:03):
Yeah, see Humphrey, Humphrey, you would have been You would
have been in the media at the time when Humphrey
was at the top of his game, you know, like
and all those shows.

Speaker 1 (01:46:10):
Oh yeah, oh yeah, sad to say, I was at
my mind. You Humphrey looks a lot younger than I
do at this stage. He's eternally right.

Speaker 20 (01:46:19):
He's held up really really good.

Speaker 18 (01:46:22):
He's absolutely amazing and like, honestly, that first time we
took him down the mall, just to see him bounding
around the malls, balls and stuff and just it was
just incredible. And I'm just so delighted and also honored that,
you know that I'm allowed to be someone that has
has been able to make that happen, to bring him
back to South Australia. And it's wonderful because there's a kid,
and you'd know this as well, like you never you

(01:46:43):
never grow up thinking you're going to be in the
media one day. So as a kid, I watched and
love Humphrey be Better like everyone did. And then to
think now that you know, I call Humphrey one of
my friends and we spend time together and we do
all these cool things, and you know, it's pretty amazing
to think that that that's happened, and I'm very, very
very honored. Don't take things like that for granted.

Speaker 1 (01:47:01):
Well, congratulations for bringing Humphrey be Bear back and we'll
look out very closely for South Aussie with Cozzy, good
on your cozy.

Speaker 18 (01:47:08):
Yeah, thanks Graham.

Speaker 1 (01:47:09):
Love to talk to you mate.

Speaker 18 (01:47:10):
Look after yourself.

Speaker 1 (01:47:11):
Humphrey is back, Humphrey be bear any memories of Humphrey
bee Bear. Do you go along to the Channel Line
studios and intenseten at any time and catch up with Humphrey.
There are stories about people that wore the Humphrey suit.
Hope no children are listening. We don't want to spoil
the illusion. There are some classic stories that I've related
on this station at times for different people over the

(01:47:32):
years who wore the Humphrey suit and the interesting clashes
they had with children at times. Story for another day. Nancy,
good morning, Ah, good morning.

Speaker 25 (01:47:41):
I don't know if it's a really good morning. I'm
going to have a real rant this morning about this
government with their renewables and all this rubbish. I've just
got my gas bill and I'm so peeved off, absolutely
peeved off. You know, I go to bed early, so
I don't use a lot of gas gas heating, so
I go to bed earlier, and I try to be

(01:48:05):
very economical. I'm a single pensioner widow, and you know,
it's just unbelievable. My gas pull is over seven hundred dollars. Wow,
well do they expect pensioners to pay these when we
get a lousy three dollar rise after? Yeah, so that's
my big rant, you.

Speaker 1 (01:48:24):
Know, the seven hundred dollars for the quarter? So is
that way above what it's been?

Speaker 17 (01:48:29):
Was?

Speaker 1 (01:48:29):
It been gradually creeping up long last year?

Speaker 25 (01:48:32):
And then when my husband was alarve, it was a
lot more because he was not well and he wanted
the heater on all the time. So from eight hundred
last year it was like seven twenty four. So this
year I really cut down and it's just still seven
hundred and two? How much more can you cut down?
Can I go to better six o'clock every night?

Speaker 2 (01:48:49):
Dear not to use it.

Speaker 25 (01:48:50):
I don't turn it on to about six, turn it
off at eight couple of hours, so.

Speaker 1 (01:48:55):
You know, it's still seven hundred.

Speaker 25 (01:48:57):
The country's just going to the dogs. The gas is
certainly incredible, And talking to other people, they're all the same.
Everyone's looking at six hundred dollars. If you use your gas,
if you haven't s pitched off completely, well then it's
a different story, you know.

Speaker 16 (01:49:11):
Yeah, Yeah, that was my rank in the morning.

Speaker 1 (01:49:13):
I thought, Nancy, we can't help you with it. But
I hope it makes you feel a little bit better
that you've have shared your story. So if you'd like
to call him with your power bill, gas bill. The
charges they only head in one direction, don't they Kerry,
good morning.

Speaker 11 (01:49:26):
Good morning?

Speaker 24 (01:49:27):
There are you good?

Speaker 1 (01:49:28):
Thanks?

Speaker 26 (01:49:28):
Yeah, Look, it's just a quick one.

Speaker 23 (01:49:31):
There's a march on the thirty first of August nationwide.
I suppose to thak all about it to do with immigration.
Oh yes, yes, so peaceful, I will say, we want
it to be a peaceful demo got of a demonstration
putting it to the government. So we we've had enough
of immigration. We don't have enough place for people to

(01:49:53):
live and all what sort of things do So we
haven't got the date to set up to ship. But
if if you look, you look at it maybe whether
you want to promote it or you don't want to fight.

Speaker 4 (01:50:02):
But I went out and.

Speaker 23 (01:50:04):
Bought the biggest Australian flag if I could possibly fine
a part of my yard. I'm patriotic and so I'll be.
I'll be marching with a few people at the end.
How any problem is who else is going to be
in the march?

Speaker 1 (01:50:18):
You know?

Speaker 23 (01:50:18):
Are they going to be people? Really really, what ring
right when they're going to cause problems?

Speaker 1 (01:50:23):
Well, you'd hope not. I mean, were you demonstration? That's
everyone's right. Everyone has a right to protest and express
their viewpoint as long as it's within the laws of
the land and peaceable. So when about on the thirty
first of August? Where does the march set off? From
John Kerry?

Speaker 23 (01:50:40):
We don't have we don't have the information. We don't
have that information, just ship. But they'll be coming soon.

Speaker 1 (01:50:47):
Yep, We're happy to pass it on. Thanks for letting
us know that a march for migration or against migration?
What are your thoughts? Would you take part in such
a march or not? Eight double two three double oh,
double oh is the number from the text line. David says,
if solar wind power production is so inferior, then why
does China have the world's largest solar power generation system

(01:51:09):
despite Donald Trump saying otherwise, and the USA have masses
of wind farms that produce significant power supply and five
double a regularly advertised solar companies. David nobody's condemning solar power.
Nobody is saying solar is not good, but solar cannot
sustain on its own. Even with wind, it cannot sustain
on its own. So I think the perfect blend from

(01:51:31):
my point of view would be solar wind power nuclear
Nuclear would be my chosen source of power, but you
cannot just rely on renewables. China does have the world's
largest solar power generation system. They also have thousands of
coal fower stations coal fired power stations, so they're not

(01:51:54):
relying on renewables. John Glay, I've.

Speaker 26 (01:52:01):
Got the perfect A bit noisy at it, I've got
the perfect solution to the round table federal politician. I
think the population of Australia should actually hold their own roundtable.
And what we should do is we should tax every.

Speaker 24 (01:52:21):
Single government worker half their wage one hundred percent tax
and the other one that can just do the normal taxation.
That way, there the people that work for the government
can actually give back because we've been given them hundreds
of thousands of dollars in taxation. So it's about time
when the country needs the money that they should actually

(01:52:44):
start paying it back. Because you know yourself that are
working for the government's money for jam So I'm in
construction right and I've worked across the road from the
taxation department. I was doing a job there and I
had a bloke that used to park the car where
we parked it, so he paid the guy that owned

(01:53:05):
the property. He used to walk across the road. I
was on level five. I could see straight through the window.
And that's because we were there for about three odd months.
After a while, you get to see this bloke doing
the same dul.

Speaker 26 (01:53:16):
Trip every day.

Speaker 24 (01:53:17):
He was walking there, stand there for an hour, taking
his jacket, I put on the chair. He'd walk across
the road and then obviously go home because he went
somewhere for the whole day. He'd come back at about
three o'clock wander around the office again.

Speaker 11 (01:53:30):
Because he never's never like I was.

Speaker 24 (01:53:32):
Like I said, I was there for about three odd
months and I'd barely seen him. So I said to
the boys that look at this blow right. He were
paying his wages and he does he's not doing anything
for it. This is a taxation department. So there's a
lot of people in this country that are working for
this for the government, who are actually doing almost i'd say, right,

(01:53:53):
because I don't know, I'd say very little, very little,
as little as they possibly can.

Speaker 1 (01:53:58):
You've seen one good on your John yet thanks for
sharing that story. I have heard apocryphal stories. There are
public servants working not only in Canbrid but around this
town who actually do very little. There are a lot
of public servants that work hard and congratulations and well
done to you, but there are some in jobs for
which there is no work.

Speaker 18 (01:54:17):
Well.

Speaker 1 (01:54:18):
Darcy Foggerty Champion crows Ford is fronting the media at
Westlakes at the moment and he was asked about the
alleged comments by Isaac Raangan and this is what he
had to say.

Speaker 27 (01:54:32):
Yeah, yeah, it's definitely not ideal, is it. But yeah,
we'll work through stuff, and yeah we've got a game
this week, so we'll focus on that. Yeah, we're not
really going to get into too many details about that.

Speaker 1 (01:54:45):
When I thought Darcy Foggetty put on the spot. No
doubt the club will have more to say on that,
if not today, by tomorrow. But a lot of talks
are going on behind the scenes. I know that the
football club have been in discussions with Collingwood and with
the AFL Integrity Unit. Peter, good morning, good morning, Ryan.

Speaker 28 (01:55:04):
We just want to retry with that and maybe call
us said about the gas bills it's expensive. We we too,
moved into a home a few years ago and it
was quite excited because it's got central gas heating and
the rapid cooling. I thought this is gonna be economical,
such the gas heating, and we used to actually quite
economically the very first year, and we nearly got a

(01:55:25):
heart attack. We've got a gas bill. And then I
rang up a few people and I said, no, no,
no central gas heating. That you're very expensive and sort
of we pay around about thousand bucks a quarter in
winter and just use you know, sort of like gas heating.
We also got hot water and.

Speaker 24 (01:55:44):
Sort of the cooking.

Speaker 28 (01:55:45):
But I have gas built to winters around the thousand
dollars and was quite the sort of especially with that heating,
sort of put it on around about you know when
we get home about five six, and for about ten
eleven at night, you know, turn it off and and
it's just ridiculous. We're actually considering maybe even looking at
putting some of a reverse cycle maybe, you know maybe,
which is a huge expense. They try to cut the

(01:56:06):
cost down, but it really disappoints because I hear that
the gas gets exported extremely cheap, and yet the domestic market.
It just seems to slug us extra normal price for gas.
It's not economical like it used to be.

Speaker 2 (01:56:21):
Gas.

Speaker 1 (01:56:22):
That's all I know now. Wells most of the gas
we're sending off shore and we're getting nothing in return
for it. In fact, Japan takes a lot of our
gas and is on selling it to other countries. They're
probably going to end up on selling it back to
us because we haven't got enough domestically for ourselves.

Speaker 28 (01:56:37):
Yeah, it's not the old gas used to be then.

Speaker 21 (01:56:39):
That for sure.

Speaker 28 (01:56:40):
Gas used to be quite economical. Now these days it's ridicuous.

Speaker 1 (01:56:43):
No, it is a very form expensive form of power.
Thank you very much for that. Peter back shorty five Double.

Speaker 2 (01:56:49):
A Mornings with Graham Goodings.

Speaker 1 (01:56:51):
Well, I see Quantas has been hit with a ninety
million dollar fine by the federal court for the illegal
outsourcing of around eighteen hundred groundworkers during the pandemic. The fine,
around seventy five percent of the maximum penalty of one
hundred and twenty one million dollars, was imposed by just
As Michael Lee. Fifty million of this will be paid
to the Transport Workers Union, with a further hearing to
determine how the remaining forty million dollars should be distributed.

(01:57:14):
This is what Michael Caine from the TWU had to
say this morning.

Speaker 29 (01:57:18):
It's wrong to say that we're happy today, but it
is right to say that our union, and that means
sixty thousand members of our union, which took on this risk,
which took on a fight, a battle five years ago
which no one said we could win, feels vindicated. Five
years ago people said, you've got to be kidding. This

(01:57:38):
is a massive long shot. It's audacious.

Speaker 18 (01:57:42):
You know.

Speaker 29 (01:57:42):
They didn't give us a snowflake's chance. In hell, the
Fair Work Combatsman nowhere to be seen. The only ones
willing to take quantus on were us. Were these workers here.
When I say us, I mean sixty workers in the
Transport Workers Union, truckies, gig workers, flight attendants, pilots, buses,

(01:58:07):
waste workers. They all resourced up this case. They had
to quanus we knew had deep pockets. But more importantly,
this was an egregious wrong that had to be righted,
and our people knew right across our union. And unless
we challenge this decision, we're effectively providing a permission slip

(01:58:28):
for this to occur in the future.

Speaker 1 (01:58:31):
And they are the words of Michael Kaine, tw National Secretary,
on the news that Quantus has been hit with a
ninety million dollar fine by the federal court or illegal
outsourcing around eighteen hundred ground workers during COVID. It's nine
minutes to midday. After one o'clock this afternoon, Leith foris Dayleen,
Good morning, Graham. What do you think of the AFL

(01:58:52):
match day experience?

Speaker 30 (01:58:54):
Well, we're going to continue that chat with the president
of the fan Association after one o'clock. I tend to agree,
which is weird for someone who likes American sport as
much as I do. I don't like it in our sport.
What part don't you like all of it? I hate
all of it?

Speaker 1 (01:59:09):
Really? Oh yeah, I love after a goal, you know.
Oh I know. I hate your own. So that's great.

Speaker 30 (01:59:14):
But what if it's a horrible song, which they quite
often are.

Speaker 1 (01:59:17):
Some of them are? Some of them are.

Speaker 30 (01:59:19):
I'll tell you what I like. I like Matt the saxophonist.
Oh that's brilliant, excellent, a real winner. Then stop no more.
I hate the microphones. I hate the just the constant,
incessant talking between quarter time and halftime and the ground
announcers yelling and screaming at us. For both Port and Crows,
I think they're both guilty of that. I hate the

(01:59:39):
music after a goal. I don't mind the lights, and
that's all fine.

Speaker 1 (01:59:44):
The lights are good. I like them. I think I'm
a bit old school. Brisbane do it best with the
music with the players because they picked the songs Country Roads, and.

Speaker 30 (01:59:52):
I think people like that. I think one song or
two songs might work. It's a bit like the baseball
will do Take Me out to the ballgame, or Sweet
Caroline at the end of an innings. But I think
when all of a sudden, you're just hearing you know,
Joe Danaher picked the song from Frozen because he thought
he'd want the kids to have a song to enjoy it,
and so all of a sudden you're hearing elsa single
let it go six times a game.

Speaker 1 (02:00:13):
It's just I like to hear it if someone's If
I hear it six times, that's mean somebody's kick seat goals,
and I'm happy with that.

Speaker 30 (02:00:19):
Unless they're the opposition, then you're like, oh, we just
stop playing this song.

Speaker 1 (02:00:23):
But they for the opposition, that is true anyway, you're
not here just to talk about the footage.

Speaker 30 (02:00:28):
No, we'll discuss that. It's interesting though, because people are
very you know, I'm a bit old. I like the
days when you and I would have gone as younger men,
and you sat there with your budget and you wrote
down bits and pieces and you had a conversation and
you're able to converse a quarter time and halftime and
do all of those things. So I get it. And
you didn't have to play with the credit card. But no,
he actually spoke to a person and gave you real money.

(02:00:50):
I don't mind if they do that at the basketball
which is half sport, half disco, but it's creeping into
the AFL more and more, which I'm not a huge
fan of. So we'll talk about that. We're going to
talk about long COVID on the show today too, So
essay Health are after people that suffer from long COVID.
There's now blood tests that they can do, check bits
and pieces and try and get you some assistance. There's
a lot of people, myself included, who've had horrible issues

(02:01:12):
for years, and so hopefully there might be some kind
of medical breakthrough if we can all be put in
the same group together and find some solution.

Speaker 1 (02:01:20):
Hopefully early on people long COVID everyone go oh yeah, right, okay,
because you know you've had it and that's gone. But no,
the long lasting people lost their sense of smell. Yeah.

Speaker 30 (02:01:32):
Since I got sick about a month ago, six weeks ago,
my brain fog has been terrible. So we'll hopefully get
on top of that. And also kangaro Island is the
most exciting South Australian film coming out of recent times.
We'll speak to the director and the screenwriter today.

Speaker 1 (02:01:46):
Now, just before you go leaf, the Francis is on
the line. Francis, good morning.

Speaker 31 (02:01:51):
Good morning.

Speaker 20 (02:01:52):
I'd like to have the last say.

Speaker 31 (02:01:54):
Music at the football.

Speaker 17 (02:01:55):
Yeah, we got to Potwall for.

Speaker 31 (02:01:57):
Two reasons, to support as to and for the atmosphere
that you do not get in your living room where
you can talk to the first sitting next to you.
And the music, the lights, the commentary, Matt sin tax Tide.
It'll add up to the atmosphere that everybody wants. It's
why we break our next to go to Grand Finals
and Game two fifty four thousand and adelaide over.

Speaker 1 (02:02:20):
So you like the razmotas Francis.

Speaker 31 (02:02:23):
I absolutely do.

Speaker 10 (02:02:24):
I love it.

Speaker 1 (02:02:25):
Brilliant, good on your thanks for you call. So they
are leave.

Speaker 30 (02:02:27):
They don't play the songs to the Grand Final.

Speaker 1 (02:02:29):
No they don't. That is dead right because it's an
AFL things job.

Speaker 30 (02:02:33):
That's right, which is fine, that's the beauty. You can
have your own opinion on this. But I think there's
something to be do we need the announcers telling us
a quart a time, make some noise. We're going to
make noise. We're at the foomble to enjoy. We don't
need to be raped did all the time, and that
is very Americanized and so forth. It's I just please
a quarter time in halftime, let us let us talk

(02:02:54):
to the person next to us and how great was
that goal and how great was that mark and what
a defensive effort by this person. Let's make some nooy,
just non stop Graham, week after week after week. Not
every club, does it.

Speaker 1 (02:03:07):
Mind you? Does your club come?

Speaker 4 (02:03:10):
No?

Speaker 30 (02:03:11):
No songs for the Carbon boys. We don't kick enough goals. Unfortunately,
see it from one.

Speaker 1 (02:03:17):
There's always next season. One game to go. The endiot
speaking of COVID, as Leif mentioned, COVID lockdown Capital of
the World. Melbourne is reminding us that Victoria truly is
the nanny state. Lord Mayor Nick Reese says pedesta and
etiquette in Melbourne has officially gone rogue. He says, on

(02:03:38):
any given street, you'll encounter the chaos, speed demons weaving
through the crowds, dawdlers lost in thought, diagonal drifters going
from one side of the footpath or the other, phone
zombies completely unaware that they're in the city. So now
he has a solution, he says. When it comes to
actual footpaths, he says, there's finally time to make keep
left the law of the land. He says Melbourne needs

(02:03:59):
to restore footpath order and a keep left law might
just restore sanity. He wants hefty fines for lawbreakers. So
there it is, folks, be careful when you're next to
go to Melbourne. You could be fined for walking on
the wrong side of the footpath. Now I think it's
a good thing keep to the left, but really making

(02:04:20):
it a law making you fine for that. Maybe they
should have a designated lane for people with their smartphone,
because they're the annoying ones that dawdle along stop for
a second to check their phone. So yeah, there's a thought,
should we be paying to walk on the footpath on
the wrong side. That's it for today, Thank you so
much for your company back tomorrow to do it again.