Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Disclaimer: The Parliamentary Library does not warrant the accuracy of closed captions. These are derived automatically from the broadcaster's signal.
Sky News On The Hour 4pm -

View in ParlView

(generated from captions) This program will be live

captioned by Ai-Media

Leading this bulletin, the Government battles to secure

support for the carbon tax as

the climate change committee meeting wraps up.

Friends and family farewell

Sapper row Rochester at his

funeral in northern New South Wales.

And reports that vetteran TV

icon, Bert Newton, is

seriously ill with pneumonia.

It's 4 o'clock in Sydney and

6 o'clock in Auckland. Good

afternoon. Thanks for your

company here on News Day,

this Friday, 17 June. Also

this hour, pictures of the

Christchurch red zone emerge

following the most recent destructive earthquakes.

And in sport, Scott Hen

leads the charge at the US

open for the Aussies.

The national forecast:

The multi party climate

change commission meeting has

wrapped up today in what's

been a tens round of

negotiations. Sky News

understands the Government

has put forward its preferred

plan for the carbon tax. But

the Greens have dismissed it as unacceptable.

independent has indicated But at least one key

that negotiations are moving

in the right direction. Another day, another round

of talks for the multi party

committee. It's the Greens

versus the Government with

sources telling sky News they

are at odds over compensation

and the pricing structure of

the carbon tax. One key independent says it's all

negotiations. part and parcel of

This is the pointy end of

the arrangement. It's an enormously complex issue that

we are dealing with, both in

a domestic sense, a political

sense and a hung parliament

sense. and very much so in a global

Tony Windsor is satisfied

with the process and seems to

the deal. be swaying towards supporting

I will be basing my vote on

the structure. Pointless

supporting something if it

doesn't do anything about the substantive issue. If it

does, count me in.

The independent will wait to

see the details before

declaring his hand, but he

says that even if the multi

party committee reaches a stalemate, a deal could still

support. be reached with Coalition

There are people in the

concerned about the liberal party that are very

substantive issue. It's not

all that long ago that there

was a consensual arrangement

between both sides. Well,

all of those peoples' brains

meantime. haven't evaporated in the

The Government has set a

deadline in July to finalise

the details but $12 million

has already been set aside to

advertise the carbon tax.

The opposition says it's just another example of the

Government breaking

preelection promises.

Julia Gillard called tax

payer advertising an abuse,

that's what she said, she

said before the election that

it was an abuse, tax payer funded advertising.

Obviously two key independent

agree with her preelection

view. Let's hope that if it

comes to the parliament next

week, those independents

maintain their rage. The multi party committee is

certainly getting down to the

heated end of negotiations.

Sky News understands the deal

on the table mirrors that of

the CPRS. This has drawn the

ire of the Greens who argue a

$20 to $25 starting price is

too low and billions of

compensation in energy

intensive industry is far too againerous. The Greens and

the Government are refusing

to comment publically on

specifics but say the detail

will be released soon.

I don't think it is that

many more weeks away but the

consultation is real. We are

working through the detail

with business and that is the

right thing to do.

Kevin Rudd denies he is plotting a return as Prime Minister saying speculation

he wants his old job back is

unfounded. But the

opposition has seized on

claims of leadership tensions

saying the relationship

between Julia Gillard and her

Foreign Minister is dysfunctional.

Kevin Rudd was knifed by his

colleagues almost a year ago

and it appears that there is

still no love lost between

him and Julia Gillard.

It's extremely toxic. They

can't stand each other. I

change. don't think that will ever

Labor sources acknowledge

the relationship between the

former PM and his successor

is a tense one. The

opposition says this picture

of the pair seeming to avoid

eye contact after a private

meeting, says it all.

Whether Kevin Rudd was

Government and Julia Gillard offering to help the

was saying "No, we don't need

your help", whether there was

some other issue internal to

the cork kus, I just don't

them to explain. know, and I will leave it to

How could it be that when

the Prime Minister and the

Foreign Minister have a one

on one meeting, it's front

page news? It is because the

relationship between two of

the most important people in

the country is so bad, so

flawed, that it's a

significant moment when they

talk to each other.

Rumours of screaming matches

between the two are circling

Canberra but Mr Rudd insists Julia Gillard has his

support, saying he is happy

as Foreign Minister. His

colleagues say that is the

way things will stay.

Julia is the Prime Minister, and she stays the prime minister. The leadership speculation that is referred

to there, nothing in it.

Kevin says there is nothing

in it too. Although Kevin Rudd denies trying to undermine Julia Gillard, speculation about

his future is only going to

intensify with the one year

anniversary of the end of his

term as Prime Minister,

coming up next week.

Protestors have stormed a

Sydney university threater

where Immigration Minister

Chris Bowen was delivering a speech on the refugee

program. About 50 protestors

techled Mr Bowen as he

attempted to assure people at

the conference that assylum seekers sent to Malaysia

would not be prosecuted as illegal immigrants.

Police and security guards

ejected the demonstrators who continued their chants

outside. Mr Bowen told the

audience the Government was

putting protections in place

for the transferred assylum seekers.

Mourners at the funeral

service for Sapper row

Rochester have heard the 23-year-old combat engineer

has lived his life to the

full. He was killed during a

small arms engagement in

southern Afghanistan 11 days

ago. Tom Connell has more.

After being honoured with

the ramp ceremony in

Afghanistan and then again in

Queensland, today was the

final fair we'll for Sapper

Robinson. It was a full

military service with the

coffin draped with the

Australian flag and three

shots fired into the air.

Inside there were more than

600 mourners and standing

room only. Amongst them,

friends, family and the Prime

Minister and the lopgs. They

had heard about a dedicated

and professional soldier, a

combat engineer, who had the

task of clearing IUDs. But

they also heard about a man

who was the life of a party

and always wore a large

smile. Rowan Robinson died

on 6 June after his patrol

came under heavy fire. It

has been a tough time for The

Australian Army. This is

their 27th fatality at the

Afghanistan war and he was

the fourth digger to die in a period of just over four

weeks. His body has been cre

mated and he will be

remembered as a wake lolly.

There are reports that

veteran TV icon Bert Newton

is seriously ill in hospital.

There are reports that much

loved entertainer Bert Newton

is being treated for

pneumonia in a Melbourne

hospital. It's believed hospital. It's begh tim the p days ago but 's cloud. He grandoud. He is be ash nd-dau He is being treated in is saurne where treatition Melbourne whe his fous buare and his familyut as nd everyone his ious b are and everyone will be hod will be hop he windersthoping that h will rstanding that he c will be hop he isat he can

make a ceivin make a full ng thery. mand refull recovery. make a feivingcovery. Theeds. ho has The ma. Thehas taken The man wThe il taken over Ths respon that ty for meanssibility for s had ia

meannsibility foras hadria plice says poull ouays he

plice says he puice says he is pulle says he is of apphedulefor the top apchedul for the top applying fperfor top job full-tal wicActing full-cal wi Acting chief mll-time. Act whichief pmmissioner Ken commiing inr Ken lay wi be hormous the ma wh full he sacked Th overland.as I've neveering d . My day My focus is will w over rol Quick nths.

. .

Hello and welcome to the

Contrarians. I'm Peter Van

Onselen. This is the only

show where we involve you,

the viewer, and give you the

chance to not only tweet and

view us, but spit the dummy

and join us on the show. public has such a low regard

of them and the entire

political process. One word.

Hypocrisy. It is sides. Look at Government at the moment. For years, they were saying

that the problem with Nauru

was the fact athis they had

not signed or radfied the UN Conventions relating to

refugees. Well, today we

find out that Nauru has

signed the convention. Will

Labor see it as an option for dealing with assylum seekers.

You bet it won't. Not a

chance for political reasons.

But it doesn't stop there for

the Labor Party. We have now

got the tobacco situation

with nicka rockson

prosecuting the case for

plain packaging and so forth and nanny State continues at

the same time as writing to

tobacco companies, receiving donations down through the

years. If that is not

enough, what about Government

advertising? . The Labor Party railing against the

Labor Party during the Howard

years. They are about to

embark on a carbon tax where

we don't even know the price

yet, much less have the

legislation before the

parliament. But if Tony

Abbott is watching, and I

doubt it, he should be doing

other things hopefully,

campaigning, but he is no

better because we have got paid apparental leave which

he said there is no way he

would ever embrace it, yet now, of course, he is

embracing it. We have got climate change which he

described as absolute crap.

All of a sudden he says he

believes in it. Then there

is the carbon tax which he

said would be a simple way to

go as an option for dealing

with climate change yet now

he tells us that it could be

the end of the world as we know it if Labor gets its

carbon tax of which the price

of it he doesn't even know.

No wonder the public thinks politicians are crap. Let's

see what the panel think

about that. Are politicians

crap? No.

Troy Brampson, former

advisor to Kevin Rudd and Dr

Phillip Senior, author of how wards end thanks for your

company. What do you think?

Those examples were some

pretty strong and obvious

examples of hi pocscy. Why

does that not lead the public

to have a dim view?

I think the public does have

a dim view of our politicians

at the moment. It is the one that you didn't mention is

Julia Gillard saying there will be no carbon tax under a Government I lead.

Or John Howard saying there

will never ever be a GST.

That's what the Coalition has been calling on Julia

Gillard to do. I think the

public has a low tolerance

but they have got a lower tolerance for...

Are you talking about me there?

If the cap fits. No, I was particularly thinking of

Nicola Roxson, you wouldn't

give up your sources, I

shouldn't give up mine, but I

think that people were really

quite worried about the level

of sankmony that she came to

that whole debate and then to

find out that even after the

Labor Party had decided they

wouldn't accept any more

donations, there she was with the begging bowl. People

resent that sort of

resent that sort of thing. Come on, really. This is

from the party of big

tobacco. This is the party

that British American tobacco

is a global party and where

do they go, they go to the

Liberal Party so we can talk

about sanctomioniuos. They

take the money more than any political party in the world.

That doesn't affect the way

that they think here because

they are supporting the

Government's plain packaging

legislation.

They are supporting that

finally after the public

outrage was so strong.

There is no evidence that it

works. There is a very real

risk that it infringses on

trademarks. You are a

lawyer, you would know that

as well as anyone. Why are they supporting it?

I think there's a

combination on two levels. I

think broading speaking they

would support initiatives

that would go in the

direction that would reduce smoking the political sides of things which at the which at the end of the day do they really want to spend

their political capital

having a fight where rightly

or wrongly people like Troy

and other people spinning for the Government can paint them

as being the party for big tobacco.

Is that the way that it

works for the Coalition?

Their allies down through the

year, big tobacco, who donate

to the party, they get cut

and drifted if it doesn't

work for the Coalition? Is

that the way that your side

of politics treats your friends?

I wouldn't buy that characterisation at all.

What it demonstrates is that

there is no cash for policy

in the Liberal Party. That's

important. I think the

tobacco companies are fine. Is there cash for influence?

Tony Abbott has got a pretty

open door policy. I don't see how you could influence

through making a political

donation at all but one of

the great tragedies of Australia is that electric

aren't more companies and

more individuals that doneit

money to parties of all stripes.

I can think of a lot greater tragedies in this country

than the fact that political

parties don't get more money.

You have a lot of business

people having a whinge about

the quality of our

politicians and yet they

don't do anything to support

them, they don't do anything

to be part of the process. Political parties need money...

Troy, help me hang Julian

out to dry here. Last night

we had the CEO sleep-out.

That's a tragedy I can see being worth more money going

into it, dealing with homelessness. Julian thinks

it's a tragedy that they

don't get more millions of

dollars to add. What is your

view?

Look, I support, you know, a

system of public funding in

this country. I think that

there should be limits put on

political donations, which

there are, and there have

been a rake of reforms State

and federally. I don't think

it's a problem with people

contributing to the political

process. I don't think that

you make a political donation

to necessarily get an outcome

but you may make a donation

to make linkages meet people

and discuss issues. It is

reportable, it's accountable

but it's not a great tragedy

of Australian politics that

my friend, Julian, thinks it is.

We have had a tweet come in.

Political parties are always

taking a risk when they take

money or associate with

companies of a poor moral stature.

But I think the thing that is important to bear in mind

when we are talking about

political parties receiving money from companies is don't

judge them by the fact that

there is money received,

judge them by the policy outcomes that were delivered.

That way you can see whether

they are up for sale. Now,

take the example of the

Liberal Party. As you

pointed out, nicka has been

smearing the Liberal Party

with this for the last few

weeks but conveniently

ignores the fact that the

largest reduction in smoking

occurred on Howard's watch

but occurred as a result of

moves they made, the Howard

Government made to put the

graphic images all over boxes.

That can happen when you're

in power for an eternity.

But it doesn't happen at the

behest of big tobacco. So it

undermines the idea that the policy outcomes ...

We had a treat that came in

Troy, there you go, the

moment you opened your mouth,

it is a tire aide genges the

opposition. -- tyriad

against the opposition.

I'm not here to defend the

Government. I have worked in

politics, in Government, like

all of us on this panel have.

That is not the issue. I respect what you are saying

but I think the issue is

about companies engaging in the political process to influence outcomes through

advertising. We saw at the

last campaign, we saw the big mining companies running ads against the Government

because they didn't want to

pay their fair share of taxi,

we saw it in the 2007

election -- tax, we saw it in

the 2007 election running a disgusting campaign on industrial relations.

And we saw a totally dishonest campaign in 2005 about a legislation that

didn't even exist at the time

they started running their campaign.

It was a broad community

based campaign.

It wasn't a business putting

their money into ads. No, it was the union

movement.

Attacking the wages and

conditions of ordinary

working people.

It was the union movement

telling lies about a proposed

reform in order to scare the

living details out of teem

people.

I have had a tweet come in

saying we are concerned about

the quament of our

journalists. -- quality of our journalists.

I agree with Phil. I think

that Troy can be a bit

sanctomonius. Thankfully

businesses, unions, all have

a right to have their say in

the political process. I've

got no problem with that.

You'd hope people erred on

the side of truth a bit more

often but in relation to the

tobacco issue, which is what

we started talking about

here, I think there is no problem with accepting donations.

Is it the fact you worry -

you would like people to err on the side of truth more

often. Is that what

stimulates your interest in

one of the greatest issues

and problems that needs

addressing being more political donations for parties?

I think it's a big problem because our democracy

struggles if we don't have

strong political parties.

Do you think there's a

democracy at the moment? We won't have strong Reserve

Bank boards...

Then why did you guys take

away super because I think

super is an important

mechanism to people getting

themselves prepared to know

that they have got certainty

at the end of an uncertain career path.

You still see people putting

their hands up for preelections.

You would agree the quality

is not what it once was.

You would have to go back 30

years to talk about the

people you are alluding to Peter. Hold that thought. We are

going to take a break. When

we come back we are going to

be joined by one of our

viewers who has decided to

spit the dummy. He is not

too happy with one of our

panelists. We will find out

who when we come back.

Welcome back. You are

watching the Contrarians.

When we come back in a

moment, we will be spitting a dummy with a viewer but first

let's take a look at today's

news headlines. The multi party.climate

change commission meeting has

wrapped up today in what's

been a tense round of

negotiations. Sky News

understands the Government

has put forward its preferred

plan for the carbon tax but

the Greens have dismissed it as unacceptable. But at

least one key independent has indicated negotiations are

moving in the right

direction.

Mourners at the funeral

service for Sapper Rowan

Robinson has heard the 23-year-old combat engineer

has lived his life to the

full. He was killed 11 days

ago. He was part of an

Afghan national police and

special operations task group

patrol when they uncovered

one of the largest insurge

rents caches this year.

There are reports Bert Newton is seriously ill with

pneumonia. It is believed

the 73-year-old is in a

serious condition in hospital

after contracting the ilgness

from his grand daurmt. He

had been performing in the

musical "Wicked" in Adelaide

when he fell ill. He will

now miss performances in Perth later this week.

The first pictures of been

shot this morning of the red

zone in central Christchurch

since the latest string of damaging earthquakes.

Cameras have only just been allowed into the area since

the strong quakes hit at the

start of this week. Speaking

to Sky News bob parker has

ruled out any suggestions of

moving the CBD entirely.

The man who has taken over responsibility for Victoria

police says he is considering

applying for the job

full-time. Acting chief

commissioner Ken Lay inherited the position after

Simon over land quit

yesterday.

In sport, Scott Hen is in

the lead. Rory McIlroy leads

the way at 6 under the card.

well last week on the

program Julia was doing what

he always does acting in a

slightly climate change

denial way. One of our

viewers took that view. We

will give them a chance to

fight it out. Our viewer,

Steve, joins us out of the

Sydney studio and he is ready

to spit the dummy. Take me

through. I have to say I

would love to spit the dummy

at what Julian has got to say

on a weekly basis so what are

you able to find among the

myriad of options available to you?

I think it is the fact that

he wants us not to move non-parole climate change

because the rest of the world

isn't. I think that's a

defeatus attitude and we have

to change our economy because

we are carbon intensive. Well, nuclear power is not

going to be an option any

more due to recent events so

cutting down emissions,

weaning ourselves off coal is

the only way forward.

How do you respond?

I've got no problem with

looking at reducing carbon over the long-term. It's

just where we do it, given

our national interest. And

we are responsible for one --

1.5% of global emission's and

it is foolhardy for us to introduce a carbon tax when other nations, particularly

or competitors and the larger emitting nations aren't doing

this sort of thing.

It's not an economy wide

carbon tax. It's not going

to be on petrol otherwise

that would be political death

for the for the Government. We don't know what it is

going to be.

It is economy wide. We don't know what it's not

going to be on, I should say.

As far as the tacks that's

been designed, it is being

designed to -- tacks that's

been designed, it is going to

affect the economy. Electricity affects the entire economy because

everyone needs electricity to

run their businesses and that

means that the cost from increased electricity prices...

All right, this is Steve

spitting the dummy. How do

you respond?

No-one is saying that it is not going to hurt people,

let's attack. It is meant to

hurt people. It's about

political leadership for them

to come up and take a hard

stance to try and change

something that the majority of the scientific community

agrees with.

I agree with you, it is

going to hurt people. I

think that is the best point

that you have made today.

Frankly, I think we need to

watch what the big emitters

are doing, we need to watch

what our competitors are doing before we do anything in this space. I think Tony Abbott has done the right

thing by opposing the carbon

tax. I think it will be ...

It still sounds like a campaign advertisement. Hissing climate change

spokesman wrote a thesis on

how a market based mechanism

was the best way forward to

tackle climate change. He

said it himself in 2009 on

this channel that the tacks

was the best option.

It's about the -- tax was the best option.

I think what you have done

there is grossly unfair. What Tony Abbott was doing at

the time was saying there are

a range of different options for how you could particularly address the issue of climate change. But

the best option, the option

that will hurt people least is the direction...

Steve, let me give you a

hand here. I'm going to get

my producers to put a 60

second gag order on Julian

and we will give you a chance

to have your final say on

this issue. Go for it.

Well, the situation is that,

yes, Tony Abbott did say that

he thought that tax was the best mechanism. Climate

change spokesman wrote a

thesis on it that the best

option for us to move

forward, as a coal intensive

society, is to put a price on

carbon and to say that there

is no detail out there, is

outrage. Kevin Rudd was

dumped because he didn't give

out any detail on the mining

tax. Now they are going

through through a political

process of detail to get the

right outcomes and the right

is now bagging them out for

that. You can't win and it's

just hypocacy like Peter said

in his opening comment.

Thanks Steve. Thanks for joining us on the Contrarians. Appreciate it.

Thanks.

All right, I will

reintroduce the panel. We

are joined by Julian who

continues to pine that the

parties need more money.

Troy who pines for a return

of Kevin Rudd and Dr Phillip

Senior not pining. Sdmoo

Julian, you are back, part of

the conversation. We

received an email saying give

Troy a break. It is about

time you had two Labor

supporters on rather than two

libs. Well, to Peter and

Julie, watch every week.

Last week we had two Labor

supporters on. We are

varying things up a bit. This climate change committee, we have the news

that there are some issues

going on there. It looblgses

like some negotiations are

breaking down. From a Labor ebb perspective, if Julia

Gillard can't get the

legislation through on the

back of support amongst this

sort of varied cobbled together Coalition that she

has got, if she has to go to

the election, it becomes more

worrying when an election

might be two years away.

I don't think there will be

an early election. I

described in the past that

the committee is like a

sausage making machine. You

don't want to see what goes

on but you will enjoy the outcome. I think that what

we are seeing here is, look,

there is actually pressure on

everybody here. There is

pressure on Oakeshott and

Windsor who said they want to

see action on climate change.

There is pressure on the

Greens in particular, most of

all because they skutled the

last chance this country had

to put in an emissions

trading scheme. The pressure

is on them to back their convictions on environmentalism and there is pressure on Julia Gillard to deliver an outcome as well

because she promised that she

would. So look, everyone is

under pressure and when you

put all of those things under

pressure, they will come up

with a package that will work

and it will go through the

parliament. That's what I expect will happen.

Are you as confident that

that will happen?

I agree that it will get through and largely because

of the imperatives that he

pointed to. I think we could

end up with the worst of all

worlds. If you look at the

text that's going on, Julia

Gillard has an incentive to

get a carbon price in that is

very low. The Greens want

the opposite. They want a

high price and they want as

little compensation as

possible. The only way Julia

Gillard will be able to get

around that and buy them off

will be these complimentary measures. Have money thrown

at, keep the renewable energy

target, have energy ferktcy

targets. All the things that

the productivity commission

in its report last week

indicated the highest cost

worst ways to go about

tackling this problem. So we

will end up with a carbon tax

plus all of these real

inefficient schemes.

One of our twitters has said

we need a Greens supporter if

anything. Shane, firstly I

would welcome you on the show

if you want to spit the dummy

and make a complaint about

that, get in contact with us

and we will get you into one

of our studios, but secondly,

I promise you Greens get 10%

of the vote, we will get the

than Greens on our programs. 10% of the panel.

We don't have a large enough panel for that. It's a

third, third, third.

They can't come on. That is unfortunate.

Maybe we may as well take a

vote whether we should allow

a Green on the panel and I'm

sure there will be no Green

on the panel.

Julian, just moving to the tensions, there's been a lot

of talk about tensions

between Gillard and Rudd

during the course of the day

but there is also a lot of

tensions between the current President of the Liberal

Party and the man that wants

his job, former minister in

the Howard Government. Which

one do you support? I stay out of this.

Come on, you must have an opinion?

This is a matter that the

federal counsel will ultimately determine.

What would your view be?

I'm not going to speculate

on that.

Is that because you don't

want to put one side off side than the other?

The federal President is a

member exofishio of the menzy

research centre board and

it's not appropriate that I,

as an employee of the menzy

research centre, make comment

on these matters. I think we

are lucky and we are spoilt

for choice that we have two excellent candidates that

have been great political

Warriors.

Julian is a big supporter of

Alan stock dail who is the

current President. -- Stockdale.

When you have two power

candidates, there are people

in the media saying they are

for one, for the other, there

is a perfect opportunity for

a third candidate to rise up through the middle and that

candidate is right here candidate is right here on

the panel today. He is oo

the board. He is professional. He is articulate.

Did you two have a

conversation about this when

we were off air?

Troy has killed any chance

that I might have for running

for any office in the Liberal

Party.

Look to the new generation.

Double gag order I think we

need to throw on both Troy

and Julian for helping us

lose three minutes of our life that we will never get

back. Let's have a serious discussion for a minute while

those two are out of the

picture. Government

advertising. It is

understandable at one level

that the Government wants to

do a certain amount of

advertising. That is fair

enough. The amount of money, $12 million for the carbon

tax advertising campaign,

presumably will become a lot

higher but it's a low lower than the Keating Government

and Howard Government. What

is your view about Government

advertising? Should they be

allowed to do it before

policies are legislated or

only once legislation and no

longer part of the immediate preparliamentary debate?

My view is someone that believes in smaller Government is that we should

be getting rid of as much unnecessary Government

spending as possible and I

would put almost all Government advertising into

that category. The small

category that you would seep

is things that require

genuine information, whether

it is for safety reasons or

whether it is a particular policy that actually affects peoples day-to-day lifes that

they actually need to know

how things have changed, so

it is genuine information... So you wouldn't have it around things that are generally contested areas?

No, I think that is

ridiculous. Having said

that, these days, I'm not

even sure it gives you much political advantage at all. You can see what happens. Every time a Government says

"We are going to support this

policy with $15 million of

advertising spend", they get

bucketed from all sides for

wasting tax payers money. Any perceived benefit that

they might be able to get

down the track from the advertising is counter acted

from the fact that they get bucketed up-front when they

announce it.

We are going to take a

commercial break. Shane got

back to us on twitter, he has

taken up the offer, he is

intending to come on the

show. He wrote us a tweet

but hopefully if we get him

in one of the studios, he

makes more sense. You are

watching the Contrarians. We

will be back in a moment.

Right of reply, that's the opportunity where we give a public figure a chance to

shoot back if they don't like something that we have said

about them. We still haven't

had a taker, despite having a

few goes at a few politics.

Jamie brigs, he is head of

the waste committee, you

would think if there is ever

a liberal that would get

their head on the news making

news, it wob the head of the

waste committee who is

supposed to be attacking

them. Although he is almost

vanishing from view. He

should be out there more. The only thing I remember

seeing him out there on is

industrial relations, even

though I agree with his

policy perspective, he is

doing his party harm because

that is not what Tony Abbott

needs, that is not what Tony

Abbott is going to do and

that's about the only thing

that Labor has up its sleeve where it could possibly create a situation where it

could win the next election.

So Jamie Briggs you are a

dis-Grace. Let's see if you

have got the guts to come on

this show next week.

He appears regularly on this network.

We will see if he comes on

the show next week.

You have put out a good

challenge there. I think it he can handle himself about all of those charges.

I think he will too. I

actually rang him earlier to

see if he can come on the

show next week. We will see

you next week. Thanks mate.

Fill senior - actually, no,

first, Julian, there was a

view whoer doesn't like my interrupting Julian. How

rude. Producers, can we

please put a gag order for

Julian right now.

Fill senior, you were

wanting to talk about -- Phil

senior, you were wanting to

talk about US primaries when

we were outside. No-one

thought it was that

interesting but then we spent

20 minutes discussing it.

You have got a view that the

republicans can actually beat President Barack Obama at the

next election.

I don't think it is any means a certainty. History

suggests that it is very hard to defeat an um coment

President. The reason I

think the republicans have a far better chance than most

people think, and certainly a

very realistic chance of

defeating Obama is the

situation with US economy.

It's now a situation where

there are roughly 2 million

more unemployed people than

when Obama came to office.

Despite the fact that they

put nearly a billion stimulus package in place,

unemployment numbers have

continued to climb despite

the fact this they promised

and the stimulus package was

supposed to be designed to

keep unemployment under 8%,

it is stubbornly still over

9%. At the end of the day,

the economy is just not

moving. Whether that is fair

or not, people can debate whether all that blame should

be shooted open to Obama, but

at the end of the day, in the

elections, they wear the

blame for the economy and

that will mean that as long

as the rep pub kans have aa

candidate, they will be in

with a good chance. Troy, what are your thoughts

on this primary issue?

I think that he will be

reelected next year. He just

captured Osama bin Laden. He

has delivered health care.

That's a bit contentious and

financial management reform

as well. I think as Phil

said, we were talking about

this outside, the reality is

that every US President since

the early 1930s, bar two,

have been reelected. And I

think that Obama is a great

campaigner. He has got a great grass roots organisation. The

republicans don't have a

candidate. The field is

evenly divided. I think by

now, the republican should

have started a colis behind

somebody and they shunt and

for those reasons I think he

-- shouldn't and I think he

will get there.

It has only happened twice

but let's look at the two

that happened. It was jimmy

Carter and then it was George

Bush and what both of those

had in common is that they

were running with an economy

in the doll dums. The

comparison that is the

fairest is to those two. The

other point I would make, it

is not right to say that the

republicans haven't begun to

coless -- coalese around the

polls. It is already up to

30% of the polling. So it is not overwhelming but he is

beginning to emerge as a clear favourite.

One final question. You

have been a long time fan of

Sarah Palan. Do you think

she is a chance?

I think Sarah probably does

have a good chance at the

republican nomination. I'm

not a Sarah supporter. I'm a

skep tick as well. Ron was a republican governor and he

was trying to run his

campaign as a religious

conservative. I think you

have got to be who you are in

American politics. I don't

think the republicans have a

credible challenger despite the points about the American economy at the moment.

You would be for Donald

Trump, wouldn't you.

He is even less reputable. Look, I think Look, I think that...

He said that the Rudd was

the fellow that he thought

was another world leader that

most reminded him of himself

if I remember what Obama's words were.

I think what that tweet does is highlight his challenge

that he was a terrific

candidate, that's why he won

and won easily, but he was

not an incumbent, he wasn't

running on his record, he was

running on what he wanted to

do, the hope that he wanted

to bring to this country.

However he chooses to run, he

will be running on his record.

Tweet said get a running man

on the panel, we have got 99%

of the men on this panel. If

you want to get on thp panel,

get non-parole contact with

us, assuming that you have got a particular issue that

you have got a problem with.

Let's come back to domestic

politics in the few minutes

that we have got left. I

sort of alluded to the Rudd

Gillard tensions that were

being talked about before discussing the Liberal Party

with Julian. This is an

issue, isn't it it? You'd

have to acknowledge that

Rudd's mere presence on the

front presence continues to be destabilising,

particularly when we come up

to the one year anniversary

when he got knifed in the

back by Gillard.

He didn't want to leave the

Prime Ministership and Julia

Gillard took the job off of

him, that is the reality of

it. But I don't think he is

organising for a change.

That is not my point. The

point is even if he is not,

you would have to agree that

his mere presence there is

destabilising, or at the very least, uncomfortable for

Julia Gillard and some of her colleagues.

There is always going to be

this constant media speculation about it and

public speculation because

they had a very public

falling out and someone took the job off the other person.

Let's not forget that in the

past we had Peter Costello

and John Howard, he had given

press conferences where he

had see he had gone to see

Howard saying "Give up the

job" and he stayed on anyway.

Hawks and Keating had a whole

heap of spats. He said

Australia doesn't have a

great leader. This has

always happened. Andrew

Peacock calls for Malcolm

Fraser to step down. This

happens in politics. There is leadership tensions but

that doesn't mean that you

can't form a good Government.

I would say on balance that

the Howard Government was

able to operate effectively

even though Peter Costello

had a burning ambition that

he didn't realise, I think

they will be able to function

in a Government sense around a cabinet table. I don't

believe that they are not

functioning properly as a

Government in the mechanical sense.

Let me ask all threep

panelists this. A year ago,

almost a year ago today,

Julia Gillard declared that

the Government had lost its

way and implicit in that

obviously was her reason for

challenging Kevin Rudd and

knocking him off as Prime

Minister. Can anyone here

seriously say that you think

a year on, that the

Government has found its way

from where it was one year ago?

I don't think you can. If

you look at the three issues that sheep labelled when she

said that, it was the mine --

she labelled, when she said

that, it was the mining tax,

the assylum seekers. Now the

Labor Party is split

internally over that issue, leaving aside the problem

with the policy. Mining tax,

we saw a week ago the debacle

with that. It throws the

whole federal budget into

disruption. We know what climate change is still a mess for them. I agree with Phil entirely

there. The Government has

got worse, not better. It's

continued to lose its way.

It hasn't found its way home

at all. I think the

Government is worse off under

Julia Gillard's leadership

than it was under Kevin Rudd.

You happy, he is finished.

Troy? Last word on this?

You said before that you do

not - you are not a sporeks person for the Labor Party so

serious answer to this quep.

They lost their aim a year

ago, have they found their

way?

The Government is? Strife.

These are mid term blues

So no?

No, the Government is rock

on bottom in the opinion polls.

So they haven't found their way?

But the alternative universe

to this question is Kevin

Rudd staying on and there is

a lot of people inside the

Labor Party based on polling

and analysis of the

situation, the Government

would have been defeated. I appreciate the Frank

answer. So a year on, have

they lost their way, yes or

no? Have they found their way, I should say?

I think there is two years to go.

So not yet?

Not yet but it's not over

yet.

That's true. It's not over

yet. We will see how the

multi party committee goes on

climate change. We are out

of time. Appreciate your

company once more on the

Contrarians. Make sure,

thank you for your company,

tune in for Australian agenda

this Sunday. We are joined

by three power brokers from

the Labor Party. Doug

Cameron from the left, Sam,

the State secretary in New

South Wales. Plus of course mental health expert Patrick

joins us later in the slow to

discuss that key policy

issues. Thanks for your

kilometre. -- kilometre.

Live Captioning by Ai-Media www.ai-media.tv