Topics: Inflation; Anthony Fauci; Malcolm Roberts/One Nation
E&OE.......................
SHARRI MARKSON: And joining me now, Liberal Senator Dave Sharma and former Labor MP Michael Danby. Great to have you both.
Dave, inflation is still high. That's the reality, reality of it. Sure, it came off 0.2%, but inflation is still high. The cost of goods is still rising.
DAVE SHARMA: It is. Look, inflation is still 3.8%. That's well outside the RBA's target band of 2 to 3%. And in fact, over the past 36 months, 3 years, the inflation in has been always above the RBA's target. And that's an unsustainable position. And I'd point out that it's also higher than any other— well, nearly all other advanced economies.
You know, in UK, in the eurozone, it's 2.8. In Canada, it's 2.6. In Japan, it's 1.8. So Australia is an outlier here and it shows that we are not on top of the inflation problem yet because the truth is, as the RBA has pointed out, government spending Excessive government spending keeps adding to inflationary pressures in Australia.
SHARRI MARKSON: Yeah, I mean, it's excessive government spending that meant our inflation was higher originally. Also, low productivity is a major issue as well Michael.
MICHAEL DANBY: We need to get Peter Walsh or Paul Keating back into this current government because a government competing with the private sector for money is what's causing this inflation. I'm less sanguine. Than your
banking advisor. I expect there to be a couple of raises, but that's because I expect there to be more
power put into it by the energy rises caused by events in the Middle East. So if I was Jim Chalmers, I'd be praying to— looking around to see if someone like Peter Walsh was around to help me cut expenditure.
SHARRI MARKSON: Yeah, I've actually got Adam Creighton on the show much later and he's going to have a look at some of those comparisons with other countries. Know, just how much higher our inflation is, as you pointed out, Dave. I want to return to what I spoke about at the start of the show, uh, Anthony Fauci and his diary entries and how they've just revealed his obsession with his own fame, with publicity.
Dave, from what you've read, I mean, would you agree he just seems like a complete narcissist, more worried about his own— about being loved than the death toll around the world.
DAVE SHARMA: Look, I have— I haven't read all the diary entries themselves, but I've read some of the reporting on them. And yes, he does seem to have an unhealthy interest in his level of fame or his level of media coverage or his level of popularity, which is, you know, perhaps you might expect that from an elected official or a celebrity, but not someone who's effectively the chief scientist in the middle of a global pandemic.
Now, obviously, he's appearing before one of the Senate committees in the United States tomorrow, and I'll be following that with interest because obviously the focus of their investigation is— was what he was telling the public at the time that the pandemic broke out. What he was also— what were his views in private? Were they consistent with one another?
SHARRI MARKSON: Yeah, we already know, you know, from extensive reporting on this topic that there was a gap there, that the private emails of the scientists, including Fauci, you know, they were keeping open the possibility of a lab leak. But that's not what they told the public from the very first days. Michael…
MICHAEL DANBY: Sharri thank heavens for you. I mean, that book and that investigation and the fact that he bagged you, which I hadn't heard before your program earlier, is to your eternal credit.
SHARRI MARKSON: Thank you, Michael.
MICHAEL DANBY: He remember — the evil thing you have to remember about Mr. Celebrity is he subverted, he defied President Obama's directive that there be no research into gain-of-function research.
And for your viewers who don't know what that technical term means, it means what Obama understood it to mean. Germ warfare. He allowed the germ warfare lab to be established in Wuhan and for it to spread all over the world because of his indolence and his anxiety to be doing this kind of research without the federal US government knowing about it. Eternal shame. He'll be eviscerated tomorrow.
SHARRI MARKSON: Yeah, thank you, Michael, and I expect he will be. I mean, and you're right, you know, the gain-of-function research on coronaviruses was banned in the US. In 2018, and then the money started flowing to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
Now I want to turn to One Nation's Malcolm Roberts. This is one issue that's kind of impacting on Pauline Hanson. Now Malcolm Roberts has written a piece defending himself in The Spectator. This is in response to publication of some of his hateful and offensive comments. He writes that after a week of targeted headlines, erroneous and they may malicious be, at least I have brand recognition.
I mean, Dave, look, on this show last night, James Paterson said that there should be consequences within One Nation, for Malcolm Roberts' comments, and, and Paterson criticized Pauline Hanson for not taking action. What do you think? And if you've read this article, do you think that's good enough?
DAVE SHARMA: Well, I haven't read his attempt at exoneration, but I certainly agree with James Paterson that his comment, he needs to be held accountable and One Nation should be held accountable for their comments. I mean, this was someone who would not— who did not disagree with the proposition that the Bondi terrorist attack, the worst Australian terrorist attack in our history, was staged or a false flag operation or something of that nature.
I mean, I think that's abominable amongst any elected representative. I don't think I've heard anyone, even the Greens members of Parliament, allege something like that. And I think, you know, he's flirtation, you like, with some of these wilder theories that are out there, think are deeply irresponsible for someone who holds elected office.
I don't think it's, you know, he can't just brush this off. I haven't read his piece, but so at least I've got brand recognition now. mean, these are pretty serious things he’s adding weight and credibility to.
MICHAEL DANBY: It’s narcissistic again.
DAVE SHARMA: Exactly. He's added weight and credibility to it by putting the voice of an elected representative behind them. He should be held accountable for what he's said and dog-whistled at.
SHARRI MARKSON: I mean, Michael, it kind of makes you worry about all the other candidates waiting in the wings and how thorough the vetting has been.
MICHAEL DANBY: Well, in Victoria we've got a ghost party, One Nation, Shari. There's— there are no candidates or leaders there. I believe they're operating out of a cardboard carton down in Mornington, on the Mornington Peninsula. It's bizarre. I suppose we're meant to vote for all of these people in 4 months' time without knowing who they are.
Look, I think One Nation is going to have to keep a very, very close eye on their candidates in federal parliament. I'm particularly worried where they may compete with Dave Sharma in the Senate. That's where I expect at the next federal election One Nation to have its biggest impact.
So the quality and that selection of the One Nation Senate candidates is important for all Australians. And they have to be very bloody careful on the basis of who they've chosen in the past.
SHARRI MARKSON: Yeah, because people will be voting for the party based on Pauline Hanson, not based on the, you know, the candidates. It almost doesn't matter who they put up, you know, people are drawn to Pauline herself. So, you know, if the vetting process isn't thorough, that will be a big concern.
Anyway, Dave Sharma, great to see you. You too, Michael Danby, thank you so much. [ENDS]