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 The Friday Show -

View in ParlView

(generated from captions) This program is live captioned by Ericsson Access Services

by Ericsson Access Services
Hello, welcome to The Friday Show. Yes, we're back! And would you believe some of us fresh from Cleveland. OK, I missed the big speech. We'll be covering all the latest on Donald Trump, that incredible speech from Cleveland today but I'll be giving you lots of other background from earlier in the week including I will be showing you the best of the Trump souvenirs and just a teaser as they call it - the Trump condom. I'm huge, it says. We'll show you why that is not quite so funny as it sounds. Seriously, though, we have the head of the US Studies Centre and leading US political expert Professor Simon Jackman as well as Bernard Keane from crikey. We'll talk all things Trump but it's been a big week in the US. Joe Biden, Vice President was here earlier in the week. So much to talk about and we'll bring you up-to-date with things like the latest shadow cabinet announcements. We don't know who - well, we know who, but not what they're doing. I could talk all day and I'm going to. Sit back, relax and we'll have a fun-filled dynamic two hours but first the news with Jacinta Tynan. Thank you. Hello, welcome back. US political history has been made this afternoon with Donald Trump officially accepting the Republican Party's presidential nomination. He addressed the party's convention a short time ago, celebrating the successful end of a 13-month controversy filled primary campaign.Friends. Delegates, and fellow Americans, I humbly and gratefully accept your nomination for the presidency of the United States. (CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

(CHANTING) USA, USA! USA, USA. We are a team -- we as team have received almost 14 million votes, the most in the history of the Republican Party. Together we will lead our party back to the White House. And we will lead our country back to safety, prosperity and peace. (APPLAUSE) Bill Shorten has expanded his labour frontbench by two to head off a damaging factional row over veteran Senator Kim Carr. The new shadow ministers -- ministry will have five new faces - Carol Brown, Linda Burney, Ed Husic, Clare O'Neil and Sam Dastyari. As it expands to 32 positions. Kim Carr kept his spot on the bench after a caucus meeting this afternoon. The frontbench will go from 30 to 32 positions but two shadow ministers will be paid as backbenchers. Bill Shorten will now now allocate port folios. More information has come to hand butt the identity of the man who set himself alight and crashed into a security door at Merrylands police station last night. Peter Zhurawell is recovering in hospital after have you evering -- suffering serious burns to the front of his body. CCTV footage has captured the moment he set himself on fire and rammed his car into Merrylands police station in Sydney's west. Watch the light hatchback in the driveway. Inside a man is opening a gas bottle. He's surrounded by containers of petrol. An explosion and four officers raced to the scene, risking their lives to save his. The snraming car lurches forward and rams a security gate. Our officers are brave, they're committed. They get on with the job, they put themselves last and they put those that they're serving first.Very calm, very swift, very clear about the safety of other people before themselves. What you can't see is the officers breaking the window and pulling the 61-year-old free. He's been badly burnt.I don't know what leads someone to do what he did last night. I really don't know. The suspect, Peter Zhurawell, was due to face a Fairfield court today. Instead he's under police court in the burns unit of Royal North Shore Hospital. The man has a history of mental illness and was said to be overwhelmed with a looming legal battle with his brother. Police raided his home this morning seizing several items. The security gate is being repaired but footage from last night reveals just how close it was. People can be seen walking along this footpath just seconds before the explosion. Police say it's a myrrhible no-one was hurt. Gsh -- miracle no-one was hurt. A Victorian man who stabbed his neighbour to death and gunned down the victim's elderly mother and husband has been jailed for life but may be eligible for parole when he's 95. 65-year-old Ian Jameson had never committed a violent crime before October 22, 2014, when he went to the country Victorian home of Greg Home armed with a hunting knife and murdered the 48-year-old, then shot his mother, Mary, and her husband Peter lock heart. Victorian Supreme Court justice Elizabeth Hollingworth said it was highly likely the man would die in prison because of his i palling deeds but he was entitled to a 30-year non-parole period because he need are pleaded guilty to his crimes. Saturday's weather around the country, cold and windy over the south-east with showers. Sunny and snow. Warm and sunny over eastern Queensland. Over to you. Thank you very much. And now, as we do at this time, time to head to Canberra, the nation's capital, to speak with Sky News political editor on what is happening there. David Speers, hello, David.Hello, very good afternoon. Things are happening there. We have a shadow cabinet. We know who is in and who is out but not what they're doing.Yes. The way the Labor Party except for a brief period when Kevin Rudd took full control, it's the party faction leaders who decide who is on the frontbench. The leader allocates the portfolios. Bill Shorten is working that out, he's a -- he'll announce the allocations dorm. Today was the final caucus meeting to rubber stamp the selections of the frontbench. The winners and losers. There are five new faces, Carol Brown from Tasmania, Linda Burney is straight into the frontbench after being in the NSW Parliament as the deputy Labor leader there, first Indigenous MP in the lower house. Clare O'Neil from Victoria. Sam Dastyari and Ed Husic go up from being parliamentary secretaries into the shadow Ministry. Your mate Ed Husic a shadow minister. A couple of losers have been dropped out. David Feeney, he didn't have a good campaign, right faction have dropped him. Same with shar Ron -- Sharon Bird who makes way for Ed Husic. They're out. The other thing -- interesting thing here, the overall shadow Ministry goes from 30 to 32. Only 30 can be made and paid so two aren't being paid as shadow ministers, that's Sam Dastyari, no change for his salary but he's a shadow minister. The other is Andrew Lee. He lose has out about $40,000 in his pay packet. Doing the same work as a shadow minute but -- minister but this is part of the deal done. Andrew is not left or right, so he's bit of a loser in terms of the income but stays on the shadow Ministry. This is expand the numbers so Kim Carr can stay on the frontbench, he's from the left. The left can't want him there. He's broken away from the left with a few others that were the socialist left. Bill Shorten wanted him to stay. It gets complicated but I'm told things were fairly civil in the end in today's caucus meeting and an expanded frontbench, not the first time that's happened and it does mean Bill Shorten keeps his ally in Kim Carr there. Not sure if Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Aboriginal and others in the left will be -- Albanese will be happy because there's been a formal split and four at least have gone in a different direction. You've got to love it, the Labor Party -- Labor Party, if you can't get up on your own faction you start your own one and poor Andrew, who didn't have a faction, so he -- he doesn't have a faction, and gets punished. He does a great job, an economist.I agree.Why should he do the same job and get $40,000 less when some factional hacks could have got turfed - I'm sorry, it reflects what's wrong with the Labor Party.He's done more than some shadow ministers but he's not' lined - not the left or right, so he doesn't have a group behind him pushing his case. The others, Ed Husic works damn hard.Yeah, deserves to be there, absolutely. To be frank, being a woman I can say there, but how does Burney jump over everyone? Is it because she's Indigenous, a woman? She's never served in Federal Parliament.No, but I think it's largely because she's been a minister at the state level, deputy leader of the Labor Party in the NSW, the next biggest Parliament. For those reasons she's deserving to be there as well. But Labor keep the quota for the number of women in the frontbench and they've kept that with the promotions of Linda Burney and Clare O'Neil and Carol Brown. The Kim Carr issue, there was a bit of a feeling it was time for generational change, that Kim does represent way back I guess with the push for protectionism with Nick Xenophon. We might need Labor-style back to the 1980s stuff.Yeah. The argument for keeping him is he appeals to the industrial left, if you like, and the protectionism is one word for it. Labor does need to appeal to that. The generational argument would work against him. There's a number of new faces in the Labor caucus who want to be getting their foot on the rungs, getting some promotion. Yeah, he's kept - Bill Shorten wanted him there. With Kim Carr, he was from the left but importantly backed Bill Shorten three years ago for the leadership not Anthony Albanese. That angered others in the left. At the party conference last year he backed in Bill Shorten on the boat turn-backs issue as well that. Upset some in the left in a way that some of the things he said at the time. He is a Bill Shorten ally, and down the track, Bill Shorten's rider high now but if there were any problems around the leadership it would be important for him to have Kim Carr and the four votes in that block that are there on Bill Shorten's side. I'm sure there's no tears for Fein Fein. Let's GoPro it. I'm sure you don't feel any guilt about your interview and him having a shocker of a cam fanl. -- campaign.Don't blame me. Now, we know who's in and out but now we have to allocate portfolios. Does Bill Shorten get a say in those? Is that where he stamps his authority? Do you expect many surprises in this shuffle, who has performed badly in certain portfolios or well before?In theory, yes, the leader has control over this but I'm sure it's done, it usually in, with the deputy. Tanya Plibersek will be interesting. She gets to choose which job she wants and she's chosen foreign affairs in the last determine. Shh he stay there or will she choose a domestic portfolio. There There's pressure for her to do health.Yes. Do you think she will? It's not as glamorous. No, but it's more of a front line role in the parliament, no doubt about that and it was a big issue in the campaign. But Katherine King has done a good job as shadow Health Minister the last few years. I don't think she deserves to be punted out of that role. That's difficult - do you put Tanya Plibersek in education and move Kate elless -- Ellis else wrr of do they create a new role for her? These things can happen. You've got an opportunity here, bovrt. They don't come along off to reshape the frontbench. He's emboldened by a good election performance, better than was expected. Does think take -- he take the opportunity to put more of his tamp on things, put people where he wants them. I tip Jim and Tony Bourke potentially to go into education or one of those other front line service delivery roles. I think jrm -- think Jim Clive Palmerers will step a big step up. Apart from that I'm not and -- not sure and neither are others. The calls haven't been made to those shadow ministers yet as to what job they're going to have have. It takes the pressure off the government and their new look Ministry. Given it's been three or four days, any problems or anything happening there? Very quiet on the government side, disturbingly, at the moment isn't it?Yeah. I think - no-one's fallen over yet in terms of the new Ministry. The dust settling on it. I don't think anyone's spotted too many glaring problems with the changes that have been made. I think the interesting thing for the government this week has been the pressure that's been coming from the backbench on the superannuation. George threatening to cross the floor, Eric Abetz rise and raising Liz concerns but health from the AMA. I think the difference has been it's been encouraging to see Scott Morrison saying, no, not completely ruling out change but making it clear if there is to be change it has to be off set. He has to -- they have to keep the budget repair job on track. I think that's been encouraging but I thought it was interesting yesterday, the AMA were in town, it's President and the Health Minister met with him. They brought in the cameras, they wanted everyone to see they're sitting down talk -- talking with the AMA, listening total feedback from the doctors, wanting to something to take the heat out of this Medicare and health issue. What they'll do we'll see. But they have to off set it elsewhere. We heard this from Turnbull, budget repair has to be the priority in this term. I agree. I was glad to hear Scott Morrison say it and see Malcolm Turnbull back it up by saying, superannuation, no major changes. He has let the door a little ajar to have a look at things. I'm not sure how you say we're not backing down, no changes, but we'll look at it. It seems he'll try and walk that tightrope.Yeah, tweaking it's been put to me. I think there is a cap on $500,000 cap. How much you can pour in. Whether it's because of a divorce, one partner might not have much super in a divobs settle m. You can see the argument for doing -- divorce settlement. You can see the argument for doing that. It costs. How they'll juggle it we'll see. Apparently they'll have it in draft form before Parliament comes back. OK. Anything exciting happening next week?We have the Labor announcement tomorrow on the portfolios, that's tomorrow morning. Next week is - so far away I haven't turned my mind to it yet. But I'm sure ministers are still getting their briefs. Ministers I've been talking to in new roles or getting their briefings not really doing much yet, wanting to get across the detail before they get down to business. That's fine. I lict when it's quiet for a while. We can turn to Philadelphia and Mrs Clint rather than Donald Trump. Let off the pressure off -- Clinton rather than clump. Let the pressure off you. Yes, you, too. He won't get much of a weekend - he'll watch tomorrow to see who gets what in the shadow Ministry. We'll take a break. When we get back -- back, our fabulous The Friday Show panel.


Welcome back. Time to introduce our fabulous Friday panel, though I admit it's only half the panel because one is running slightly late. Let me start with Mr Bernard Keane from Is there an au on the end? I always forget. There is isn't there?There is, never forget the AU. -- au, that's critical.OK. Welcome back to the show.It's -- It's a big week.Thank you. Meef Professor Simon Jackman joining in a minute. Having spent two weeks in the USA, let us go to the big story. I didn't think much could trump Australian politics but Trump does. Let's have a look. I'm - have you been clued this week to the convention? Or watchling it -- watching it?I haven't been glued but definitely some adhesion on my part, and the part of anyone who's, you know, cares about the planet I think. That's how I feel.You're got to have watched what happened this week in Cleveland and thought, "Oh, my God, where are we going?" It does not look good. I have to say to people I gave up smoking a couple of weeks ago but after being in Cleveland I decided what's the point, who wants to prolong your life if this... Exactly. Might want to enjoy it. Guy has been doing great stuff from Cleveland for creek creek, very colourful. You've got -- from Crikey, very colourful. You've got great stuff. Let's call satellites fresh off the dish I think we call it. Here's some highlights of Donald Trump a few hours ago accepting the Republican nomination. Yes, it's happened.I a message for all of you that the crime and violence that today afflicts our nation will soon, and I mean very soon, come to an end. (APPLAUSE) Beginning on January 20, of 2017, safety will be restored. We must work with all of our allies who share our goal of destroying ISIS and stamping out Islamic terrorism and doing it now, doing it quickly. We're going to win, we're going to win fast! (APPLAUSE) We are going to build a great water wall to stop illegal immigration! To stop the gangs. And the violence and to stop the drugs from pouring into our communities! (APPLAUSE) You get the general idea. It was bit of a best of. Build a wall, interesting, didn't say Mexico will pay for it. But his people said of course they'll pay for it. Crime and violence, law and order being the theme of the week. Summing-up -- summing-up, there was a lot of talk about how dark and negative it was. Usually acceptance speeches this was, as you say, the apocalypse is coming unless you vote Trump.Oh absolutely, wu -- but even - I think the reason you want to vote Trump after this is because you're -- you think you're living in a dystopia that's a nightmare to be in and this guy will wake you up into a much more pleasant really -- reality. The word fascist has been bandied about Trump for so long, I have been reluctant to use it. I think you've got to set a pretty high bar for that sort of description but this is as close as I think we're going to see to contemporary fascism in the west. I mean, this is all about scapegoating of immigrants. This is, you know, generic, vague populist assertions. There was no detail about how he's going to establish any of this, particularly on the economic stuff, and, you know, it was a combination of scapegoating and demonising and, you know, vague promises of restoration of past glories which is - you know, kind of the - straight from the fascist toolkit. And I think it's keeply disturbing. You don't want to bandy about words like fascism but it makes me think of the commentator who looking at one of those said it founded better in the original German.The last time we have seen this sort of stuff was -- was in the 1920s and 1930s in the U -- United States and we've seen it more recently elsewhere. There's the line - Lincoln has the line about appealing to the better angels of our nature and Trump is about appealing to the darkest angels of the American psyche. Just taking that away, though, just trying to - trying to - sort of look at it dispassionately, which is very hard, but as an acceptance speech, it obviously - played to the base. There was a lot riding on the speef. We might find it negative from outside but given the appeal and the votes he's been winning so far you would argue he didn't screw up. The commentators who will criticise will criticise anyway. But was there much there that would disappoint the fans?No. If you think about - if he's got a strategy to win this election and I'm not entirely sure he does, gu if he's got one it's to appeal to -- but if he's got one it's to appeal to working class white voters and try to get them to turn out in enough numbers to deliver him the kind of victories he needs in big states. Now I don't think that's actually a particularly viable strategy but it seems to be the strategy he's going for. This was really a speech designed to troo and achieve that strategy. So it was full of scapegoating of brown people. It was deeply protectionist, like, you know - in a way that we haven't seen in America for a very long time. We know Trump has been a protectionist throughout his campaign but this is the Republican nominee, officially embracing protectionism and a retreat from free trade. You know, all based on the idea that I'm going to restore the jobs -- jobs that worker class white Americans have lost, manufacturing jobs in particular. So this was - and putting safety as the number one issue, making the streets safe again. Crime rates in America are... Just say having been there, having lived there many times including a few years and -- years ago and travelling there every year, compared to the 1980s or even the early 1990s I wouldn't say it was that unsafe and the statistics prove it is a lot safer. But before that, still waiting on Professor Simon Jackman, who will be here I presume at some point. I want to ask you something. There was one piece in the preliminary people who got up that I'm sure you will find interesting. It was Peter Thiel, however he pronounces it.Peter Thiel, yep. Silicon Valley entrepreneur, billionaire I suppose, they're all billionaires but the man who tried to stop freedom of speech by suing gore ka for outing him as gay, who got up and said, proudly, he was gay and here's a quote from him. When Donald Trump asked us to make great again, he's not suggesting a return to the past. He's running to lead us back to the bright future. Tonight I urge all of my fellow Americans to stand up and vote for Donald Trump. Now, this has been noted - this is interesting, firstly because most of Silicon Valley has come out against Donald Trump. Secondly, because here you have someone who has used his money to virtually Americans close down a media organisation that he didn't like which goes very much to Trump's anti-media Peter
platform. What did you think of Peter Thiel being there?Well, Peter Thiel got booed anyway by attendees who don't like the fact that he's openly gay even though he supports Donald Trump. So he copped boos, not obviously on the scale of Ted Cruz. Ted Cruz got, you know, the universal raspberry from the attendees. But Peter Thiel is like - you know, another version of Trump. This is a guy who has a lot of money and who owes Nat ashamed to use it to achieve his own personal goals quite party from his business goals. This is a bloke who's, you know, cut from the same cloth as Donald Trump. He's just not as boisterous or brazen not as New York but nonetheless he's the same kind of threat. And it was interesting you mentioned the fact that he's gay because it was interesting Donald Trump in that speech said that he was -- he was going to protect - he mentioned Orlando and the fact that terrorists targeted LGBT people, he said he'd make LGBT people safe from foreign terrorists which had some gays pointing out - the domestic policy, platform of the Republicans actually went back to trying to use therapy and try and turn people away from being gay. So extraordinary stuff. We are now joined by Professor Simon Jackman head of the US Studies Centre. From Sydney university.Sorry to keep you waiting.Quickly I'll ask you. We'll be asking Bernard his views of it. No doubt you couldn't drag yourself away from the all-night coverage. What did you make of the Trump speechI think the law and order headline is going to dominate a lot of media coverage but under the surface I was really struck by what is going on here and the electoral strategy is becoming clear, and that is to pull away white working class voters, white middle class voters from Hillary Clinton. Trump hasn't given up on trying to win the votes of African-Americans and Latinos but I think those are strong headways and the appeal, they're linking America's economic woes to physical security, to liberal internationalism, they are all one of the same cloth and Hillary Clinton, the Democratic candidate, she has sold out American works, is complicit in this liberals international cabal. And that argument is so radical from a Republican candidate. If he pulls this off he will not only have remade the Republican Party, he will have upended the traditional configuration of American politics as we know it. Do you think he would win? It is incredibly negative and we know he appeals to angry white men but it's how much. Now it's down to the wire. He is doubling down on the fear and loathing. But as I was just saying, anybody - you've just lived in the US at -- US. At Stanford nor many years. California is a different state but crime statistics show it's safer.Yes. Is the lack of substance in inventing this going to work in the end? There's a real sense, prance not in California, that has done very well out of internationalism.New York used to be the capital, Washington used to be the capital of crime. They're safer now.But the heartland feels so spooked by not just the physical security issues but free trade. Donald Trump is the first Republican leader to come out and say, "Hey, this medicine you've been sold for the last 20 years, and Ross Peret had the same message, free trade is bad for American jobs." Ross is 92, 96, and here we are 24 years later. Trump is making a not dissimilar argument, an identical argument and one that is at the heart not on the outside of American politics, that is the nominee of a major American political party turning his back and that of his party for the time being at least on free trade that habitat heart of American politics for a long time. We'll talk about free trade later and talk about the Joe Biden visit and Bernard you wrote a piece about protectionism and prosperity, whatever. Let's go back to the actual politics you're talking about of what Trump, who he appealed to today. Here's one bit I found absolutely fascinating. As usual it was one of his children, his daughter Ivanka who introduced him. Surprisingly she said she really likes her dad and she'd vote for him, he's terrific, surprise surprise but here is one quote I thought was fascinating.Like many of -- many of my fellow millennials I do not consider myself categorically Republican or democrat. More than party affiliation I vote based on what I believe is right for my family and for my country. Sometimes it's a tough choice. That is not the case this time. Right. Just keep that in mind. "I vote for what I believe is right." Let me compare this to some comments made by somebody giving a speech the night before.Vote your conscience, vote for candidates up and down the ticket who you trust to defend our freedom. Now, is it just me, Simon, or Senator Cruz got attacked for saying to vote your conscience. I thought it was extraordinary. We know the Trump children didn't bother to register for the primaries but to say you're not Republican or drem -- democrat. Yeah, it's a little unusual at the Republican convention. To echo what I was saying it's an appeal to Democrats who you know what he's saying is right. You know that Hillary Clinton, it's just going to be more of the same. You know the country needs change. Whatever it is we're doing it ain't working thachl's what that's about. You may be a Democrat but you may want to vote for my dad. That's what that's about. Bernard do you find it's the ultimate hypocrisy to say -- Cruze for saying vote your conscience when Trump ice daughter says the same thing?Trump soft pedalled the Cruz thing to the extent Donald Trump is able to soft pedal anything. He down played that. Look I think what - it comes back to what ta strategy is. The strategy is to in a way make a virtue of the fact that -- Donald Trump isn't by any stretch of the imagination a traditional Republican. He's offering a radical different approach to politics compared to any candidate we've seen four -- seen for a very long time in terms of internationalism, in terms of trade, even sometimes - he didn't cover this in the speech but some of the things he said about the economy on other issues than manufacturing. You know, it's designed to try and sort of chisel off a fairly significant slab of the vote that is traditionally going to go to the Democrats. As the party of American workers and try to say, "We're the real party of America." It's an attempt to outflank Hillary Clinton on the left and Clintons... But it is extraordinary to have this billionaire getting up talking about, "I'm just one of you guys, I'm not elite." It's beyond unbelievable.Also, if you look for what he actually said in terms of his economic agenda, he said virtually nothing but he did talk about a combination - obviously the trade stuff but he also talked about what sounded to me traditional trickle down economics. He said, "I'm gonna putt cut taxes and it means jobs will flow back to America." He didn't say what taxes they're going to cut - probably not taxes on the rich. He's on record as saying he wants to increase taxes on the rich but it sounded very much like a traditional Republican economic NOS trum to say, "I'm going to cut taxes and that will lead immediately to a cascade of jobs into the economy." As Bernard said earlier, it was very short on actual policy.Yep. In fact Donald Trump is. We have all done - you've obviously been to conventions before. This is - you know, this is normal.Yeah. Lots of hype, the balloons were there, it's great. As I was saying to Bernard, we might mock from here or outside, but he didn't screw up. He played to his base. Having been in Cleveland - I went earlier this week - the one thing that I got and talking to people and continuing to talk to them, the journalists there, it wasn't actually as inspiring there. There were a lot of empty seats. It was a bit lacklustre, it wasn't as fabulous as it was made out to be and the only thing I noted was they seemed less united for Trump than against Hillary Clinton. That was the only thing. They're obsessed about their hatred of Hillary.Absolutely. We shouldn't get carried away with the thufrp for Trump should we?No, not there, at all. I thought the arena looked deliberately packed. It looked like - there were many bigger spaces they could have been in. They weren't using all the space. An old trick when staging political events, whatever you do make it look full but that didn't look like a tonne of people. Take your back room for Obama's acceptance speech in 2008 they had to go to mile high stadium because there's 85,000 people. They're not going to put 85,000 people in a stadium for Donald Trump I don't think, or at least they didn't try. He couldn't inspire the protesters. There was hardly any of them there. I think they were being kept so far away it was perhaps all rather pointless for them in the end. But kudos to the Cleveland police.Will he get a bump on this?Pardon.Will he get a bump?I think that's the big question and the thing I'm looking for over the next couple of days. Coming out of a convention, you unify your party, a big cheer leading e moment and you see a bump in the polls, three to four points. I wonder if we'll see that. It will be telling if he's tut cut through, law and order, throwing much at Clinton, not just she's corrupt. No, she should be in jail and then should be shot, lined up and shot one of his officials said.Amazing load he shot over the Clintons about - and the other thing is we'll see how Clinton responds next week. It will be great. I thek conshe comes back at him guns blazing particularly on gender. I'm with Simon because all attention turns to Philadelphia for the Democratic convention, which is unusual. You usually have bit of a gap between them. That takes away from the bump. I think Hillary Clinton will hit him with a vice presidential candidate nomination to get limb. But on this issue of what Simon was talking about, I'm with him that I think Hillary should throw the kitchen sink at him. The last thing she needs to do is be a Malcolm Turnbull, be above the fray and not go so negative. But I worry she's been so lacklustre in her campaigning so far, what do you think we'll see? Is there a lesson from Australia she should learn from?This has been the problem Hillary Clinton has had for so long. There's always been a gap between what people privately say is this very effective communicator and the public political persona she's got, which is this sort of very almost bland kind of candidate. It was a problem in 2008. It's been a problem sometimes in this campaign as well. She's got bit of a - she's got the chance to unite her party but she'll be able to do it much more effectively. She's already got Bernie Sanders' endorsement and the numbers suggest a huge proportion of his voters will switch over to her. I don't think she's got challenge of a -- too much of a challenge, not a challenge of Trump proportions to bring together her party. She can - the ideal thing for Clinton is that Trump has presented himself as this - such a monster that I don't think she's gonna have too much difficulty in bringing her party together. Even a lot of Independents, and we're already seeing Republicans endorsing her, Independents endorsing her, to really - to define herself in - as the ain't Trump, way similar to Trump spending so much time defining himself against her today and making that the core issue of the campaign.We've got to go to a break but very quickly, Simon, as our political professor expert from Stanford University or formally -- formerly.Yes. After watching this week, you talked about the gafrp and bump, is he any closer to winninger -- winnering or is it a long shot? I think he's closer. I think the speech helped him. Oh! On that bright note we're going to go to a break and we'll be back to actually talk about the current Vice President's visit to the US. You've forgotten about that. Simon Jackman was there. We will be back in just a minute.

Welcome back. Let me introduce you to our final Friday panel. Professor Simon Jackman, head of the US Studies Centre at the University of Sydney and former political professor at Stanford University until recently, expert on US politics and another expert on politics, Australian, is the political editor of Bernard Keane in our Canberra studio. We were just talking about obviously all the events in the US on the election but in the midst of all that we had a visitor from the actual, the current sitting, US Vice President Joe Biden who made a snap visit to Australia to open a cancer centre in Melbourne but he was also in Sydney at a joint event with the US study centre and Lowy Institute. He spoke at the Paddington down hall. Here's a height.Don't worry about our election. The better angels in America will prevail. When reactionary politicians seek to erode the values our nation hold most clear - tolerance, equality for all - we have to remember who we are as Australians and Americans and reflect our best selves back to the world. I noticed the bloke standing over his right shoulder.Yeah, who was he. You looked like you were looking for your better angels, and you're not convinced they're out there given your last comments.Of course channelling Abraham Lincoln's line there. That's clearly a reference to what political leaders can do. They can play to the darker elements of public opinion or they can play to their more enlightened elements.And Joe Biden is definitely more uplifting.He really was. What he was doing and Vice Presidents, anyone at that level, have to be very careful what they say when away from the United States not to get into part son ran core like that one too much, but he was clearly trying to offer reasurances -- reassurance to the Australian public to how they thought the American election would work out and that's Hillary Clinton would prevail and in turn there would be a lot of continuity in American foreign policy and in particular as it result -- relates to Australia.Bernard, what did you think of the Vice President's visit? There's a time that would have been a huge thing, but I suppose these days it was still covered but overcovered by things happening in the USAnd here. We've just come out of our own election. I guess it reflects the fact that Obama and Biden presidency is nearly at an end. They're almost in another mode rather than active-active - active players in the political sphere. I thought it was interesting in terms of - for me the most interesting foreign policy issue we're dealing with at the moment, and it's one the government and Labor will have to keep on grappling with, is China and the South China Sea. I'm very interested in the fact there isn't a difference of emphasis between Labor, who have a much more bellicose approach to what Australia should be doing in the South China Sea compared to what the Australian government says. I imagine if the -- if Labor and Coalition roles were reversed and Labor were in government I think the bellicose nature would be changed to reflect that. I think if you're in government you're a little more wary about the position you take. But it's clear the Americans want us to be providing pretty strong support in terms of freedom and navigation in terms of the South China Sea. That's the view of the ADF as well. It's only the government that at this moment is kind of being a bit more patient, shall we say, a bit more reluctant to kind of be very publicly committed to really booking the US strongly. But for me as I said that's the most important foreign policy issue we're dealing with at the moment. And it is - it's a crucial issue for Australia, that we need to play very carefully but I don't think we have too much choice. I think in the end we'll have to really stick close to the Americans and actually exercise our rights of freedom and navigation in a way that is going to upset the Chinese -- Chinese even more but then the Chinese have pretty hair triggered tempers on this whole issue and unless you fall into line with them absolutely perfectly you'll get a scolding from them as Julie Bishop got this week. So I think Biden's subtle comments on that were subtle but pretty clear about where they expect oust Australia to be. Simon, what did you pick up on that? Do you agree with Bernard on the that one?Yeah, I pretty much agree with Bernard's analysis. Interesting line in the speech reminding us that 60% of US naval arrests -- assets will be in the Pacific. As part of the pivot.Yes, that the US is all in, echoing Barack Obama with respect to the Asia-Pacific, and it's not what the US will do for Australia or Australia will do for the US. It's what what the countries do together, really putting us shoulder to shoulder there in the rhetoric. That was the message wasn't it? It's about the strength of the alliance and at the same time he was here I was in in Washington with the Australian American leadership dialogue which is all about promoting that alliance, and the message we got was again how strong it was, despite the South China Sea, despite the subtleties of it it was certainly on defence and security.Yep. And it's interesting over that in the climate of Donald Trump this week telling NATO, "We don't care who invades, you have to pull your weight." Where does that leave Australia?I don't think is the answer. I don't think Donald Trump knows the US has an alliance with Australia. I wonder if you bailed him up tonight how he'd answer that question. I think Australia brings a very strong set of cards to the table. Our record of being all in, if you like, with the Americans from World War II onwards, number one. And number two, Australia is stepping up with defence expenditures, and making purchases that are sort of aligned with its regional strategy, and what the Americans see as our contribution to regional security. So I think - and Australian special forces in Iraq and stpan, tremendous force multiplier. You talk to anyone in American uniform about the effectiveness of the ADF or who they prefer working with, and Australia routinely comes out top. Australia has a great set of cards to play if Trump wants to get argy-bargy on the value of the alliance. Quickly, before the break, on that issue we're talking about the feeling from Canberra even though the government in power obviously has to play both sides. At the end of the day I suppose with the election no matter whoops we're going to have to keep up that strength with tuchlt US as you say aren't we and I gather the Chinese weren't happy Joe Biden was even here talking but stuff. -- tough. Well, this is the thing, the Australian government had for a long time and will henceforth for decades to come is going to have to be playing this balancing act of understanding we've got this important economic relationship with China but we have a critical strategic relationship with the US and we are always - however much the Chinese carry on, we are going to come down on the side - when we've got to balance the two, that we're going to come down on the latter. And there's going to be plenty more instance where is the Australian Foreign Minister, whether it's Julie Bishop or whoever it is in the decades to come, will be getting scolded by Beijing. But for all that the - the Hugh Whites of Australian foreign policy would like us to detach ourselves and, you know, move into a different orbit, that's where - that's the reality of Australian politics on both sides. That's not going to change. We're not in any change and danger of either side being taken over by a figure like Trump who is ready to turn their back of decades and decades of highly effective security policy. Yeah. I would think NATO probably has more to worry about us -- than us, as you say. Professor Simon Jackman, with 60% in the Pacific, hopefully we'll be safe but you never know. Speaking of Donald Trump, that's that hour wrapped up. We're going to come back. We have more serious stuff to talk about but I will be showing you my ceive nears from Cleveland.Really? I'm showing you. It's the Donald Trump condom. "I'm huge" It says. That's the beginning of it. The fun segment is later. So stick with us for the next hour. Captions by Ericsson Access Services.