.png)
The Mastering Podcast
In a world obsessed with instant gratification and overnight success, Mastering… offers a refreshing antidote. We go beyond the surface-level stories and delve into the nitty-gritty of what it truly takes to master a craft.
Mastering is a podcast that delves into the secrets of mastery by interviewing experts at the top of their game. Each episode features an in-depth conversation with a master from a different field, from artists and athletes to entrepreneurs and scientists. We'll explore their journeys, their mindsets, and the unique skills and strategies they've developed to achieve excellence.
The Mastering Podcast
Mastering Politics | Part Two with Michael Johnson and Phil DiBella | Beyond Election Day: The System We Deserve
Dive into the second part of this raw, unfiltered analysis of Australia's political landscape ahead of a crucial federal election. Former MP Michael Johnson and coffee entrepreneur Philip de Bella pull back the curtain on why our political system consistently delivers mediocrity—and why it's ultimately our fault as voters.
This episode addresses the painful truth that we have created a political environment where character assassination trumps vision, short-term popularity overrides long-term planning, and accountability is virtually nonexistent. As DiBella points out, "If a CEO failed to deliver what they promised after three years, they wouldn't even get an interview for another job"—yet politicians routinely break promises without facing consequences.
We explore how Australia's leadership challenges reflect deeper systemic issues: the rise of career politicians with limited real-world experience, parliamentary privilege that shields politicians from defamation consequences, and election cycles that incentivise band-aid solutions over structural reform. The housing affordability crisis serves as a prime example, representing a simple supply-demand equation complicated by political unwillingness to tell voters uncomfortable truths.
Perhaps most concerning is the revelation that talented young Australians are increasingly looking overseas to build businesses and careers, deterred by Australia's tax structure and policy instability. "My kids tell me they're not starting businesses in this country," shares de Bella, highlighting the generational consequences of our political failures.
Whether you're politically engaged or completely disillusioned, this conversation offers valuable context for making your vote count. As Johnson urges, "Vote for Australia, not necessarily for yourself." The message is clear: until Australians demand better by holding their leaders accountable, we'll continue to get the political system we deserve.
Want more? Find us on You Tube, Instagram, X, and TikTok where we share bonus content and engage with our listeners.
Don’t forget to subscribe, share, and leave a review! Your support helps us bring more inspiring stories to life. ❤️
That person looks scary. You know Peter Dutton being you know a scary guy, which is just pathetic because we're not voting for Mr Popular.
Don:That's exactly right.
Phil:I mean this might be a bit of a strong point to make, but I think it's an indictment on the Australian people that we're like that, that we don't actually necessarily think really long and hard about substance and policy. Who cares what Peter Dutton looks like or Anthony Albanese or whoever? We're a country of contradiction policy. Who cares what Peter Dunn looks like or Anthony Albanese or whoever? We're a country of contradiction. We are a country of hypocrisy when it comes to that system, because what the governments have done well is to play the me versus you.
Lucas:Welcome to the Mastering Podcast. We're joined by two powerhouses who have had the privilege of knowing for more than 10 years here in Brisbane Michael Johnson and Philip de Bella. Michael Johnson is a barrister, former member of parliament in Australia and the founder of the most elite networking group here in Brisbane or southeast Queensland, or even Australia, arguably Australia East Coast Forum. Philip de Bella is one of the most Australian successful entrepreneurs, scaling and exiting a premium coffee brand, de Bella Coffee, and now has built an incredible coffee community where we are actually recording here today the Coffee Commune and also a part of Queensland's Small Business Roundtable. And I love Philip Dabella's post All Things Politics in the last month. It's been epic.
Lucas:I'm also joined by Don Senker, co-host of the Mastering Podcast. He's a master's athlete, entrepreneur, advisor, investor and absolute powerhouse in the education sector. So today we're going to explore all things mastering politics. So what's really going on in the US, how it's affecting globally and here in Australia, key issues shaping Australia's upcoming federal election and the intersection of business policy and leadership in today's business uncertain times. Let's get into it, guys, looking forward to it. Federal election and the intersection of business policy and leadership in today's business uncertain times. Let's get into it, guys. Looking forward to it.
Lucas:Today we get the pleasure to re-dive into the amazing conversation that's happening in politics all around Australia, and we're so close to the election, so I can't wait to dive into this. I had the privilege of voting yesterday here in Brisbane and I just have to start.
Phil:What is your model? It's just like it's a cat fight out there.
Lucas:That would have been an experience. It was definitely an experience. What I'm noticing in the environment is just once again we mentioned this the last time it's just people shouting at each other. They're just putting each other down. There's no direction, there's no strategic vision, there's no vision for the country. Why? Is that Like why are we seeing this and why can't we just get some honest answers? Wow.
Phil:Michael, would you like to go first Age before beauty, or or folly before wisdom? Oh yeah, Phil, I'll have a crack at that. Lucas Don, thank you again for having me Very delighted and honored to share some thoughts. This is my observation you get what the people kind of frame and at the moment the people frame these threads ignorance, naivety, disinterest, disconnection.
Phil:So, therefore, that's mirrored, that's reflected in the political class and you get a bunch of people candidates, parties, politicians that really can get away with so much political murder, political lies, that really can get away with so much political murder, political lies, policy lightweightness and just really taking all of us for fools and moats. And you know what we largely are we are largely deserving of what we get and, as I said, when we first had a chat.
Phil:I think that is an indictment on the public that our standards are pretty mediocre, and I think that's why we have a larger group of people that are the workers of the country rather than the investors of the country.
Phil:We have a larger group of people that are the leaners, rather than a smaller group of lifters, and I think we need more lifters. We need more people to be employers, we need more field developers. We need more people to employ people, we need more people to invest, we need more people to be the creators of businesses, because there's a heck of a lot of people out there who can be the workers, and I think that ultimately, bit by bit, bit by bit, it just comes down and that's what happens. It comes down to an election result that delivers mediocrity. So, in short, I blame the people. I blame the people, I really do, and I blame the people I blame, the people I really do.
Phil:And they might be provocative might be contestable, but that is my position and I've observed that, being in parliament where I see very few thinkers, I mean I really didn't get challenged very much. When I was a federal MP for 10 years I got challenged by the likes of Phil DiBella that complained about bad policy, but he's in a minority. He's in a very small minority and I just encourage and urge our great Australian public to be more proactive, to even make that phone call.
Michael:Not many people actually make phone calls to their local MPs. I can tell you.
Phil:Look, and you can see why Michael and I get on so well, right, Because I mean he's set the platform up beautifully. There's two things that happen. One is education. The Australian public are not educated on the system. They, the Australian public, are not educated on the system. They're not educated on how politics works. They're not educated on how they should be looking at the political system at a state and federal level. They get. You know, it's a bit of the magician.
Don:It's superficial. Look over here. Look over here Totally totally.
Phil:And then that leads me to the second point is change the system, and I touched on it in the last episode. Owners are accountable every day for what they do. Politicians are not accountable at all and they run on three and four year cycles, depending on where they sit. But they're not accountable, and we saw that right.
Don:So when I've been asked a million times and not a million, but let's say I've been asked at least 5,000 times in the last three months.
Phil:How will I vote? And I answer this way. They expect me to say liberal labor, independent. This, that I don't say any of that, I'll be voting for accountability. Well, in this case, I'll be voting against accountability and that is, if I was hiring a.
Phil:CEO and I said this again and the CEO said I'm going to do these three things in your business and I loved it in your business and I loved it. I employ that CEO and their remuneration. Their contract comes up in three years' time and that CEO did nothing of what he or she said they were going to do. Then they would not get a contract, they wouldn't even get a seat at the table, they wouldn't even get an interview with a business owner, let alone believe and possibly get another job. And so let me clarify that you have two and a half million local, state and federal people employed by politics Two and a half million. You have just under 10 million 10 million people employed by micro, small and medium businesses.
Phil:And, as I said, michael set it up beautifully 10 million people over 70% of Australia's workforce are employed by a micro, small or medium business. Yet we have a government and you see I'm refraining from business. Yet we have a government and you see I'm refraining from brands. You have a current government who brought out a budget that had not one strategy. So therefore, I want your listeners because I try and always, every time I get interviewed, try and change things up using different examples. So that'd be like having a restaurant that 70% of my audience are vegetarians, yet I am heavy on the beef. Everything on the menu is beef, but 70% of my customers that are going to come to me are actually vegetarian, but I have nothing for them, and that's what the current prime minister has done. That's a very good example, phil. So you have three out of your ten dishes for the wrong audience. That's exactly right, like zero.
Don:So when people say who are you going to vote for?
Phil:And this is why I went back to Scott Morrison, and there was a recent 4BC article interview with Gary Hargraves, who used to be a politician, and I know that Michael knows him well and I've never met Gary personally, but I've followed his staff. I loved him when he was there. It was supposed to be a three-minute segment. It went for 16 minutes and he said his quote to me was you blew up our switchboard and I was talking stuff like this. I wasn't talking about Liberal, labor, independent. I said there's a lot more than two parties.
Phil:So what I want to bring it back to is that's where the system is flawed. We will only get to choose one of two people to be the Prime Minister. Why so? The system is flawed, which brings it down to the next. How do they get elected? Well, they need 75 seats at this election to win and Michael knows the system better than me but this year it's 75 seats to win. It looks like neither of them are going to get 75 seats in their own outright, which means they've got to start doing deals.
Phil:Now what we do see as the public and this comes back to the education we see who they form government with, michael, and you know this better, but what we don't see is what deals they had to do to get those seats. So if the intention of Anthony Albanese at the last election was to lower energy prices, and let's give it to him that he yep, that's what he was going to do, but he only got 65 seats and needs 10 seats from the Greens, and the Greens go. I'm only going to give you my 10 seats If you do A, b, c and D, which is how the politics system works, and no one has to declare what deal was done behind the doors. Well, good intentions get lost in execution because people don't understand how it works, and that's my biggest concern for Saturday's election.
Don:Forget for one minute who wins?
Don:If you're going to look at policy right, we can't always blame the people. We've got the two biggest businesses in Australia running for now. Michael, you said it's not a popularity contest, but it is right. Predominantly, all elections are popularity contests, right. So why are they running such bad marketing campaigns? Why isn't the message clear, like it seems like from the last episode, if anyone hasn't watched, there was some really good learnings. I went back and watched it a couple of times because you guys were spot on in a lot of the things that you said, but none of those messages are coming clear. If one party is doing it or promising a better Australia, I'm not getting it.
Phil:Don. I'm going to ask the question that will give Michael the opportunity to answer that who are the people that build the strategy for the politicians? Because Michael's been there at the forefront. This is not an opinion, michael. When you're in government, when you're in federal politics and you've got chiefs of staffs and EAs and strategists, the question to you is who's advising? What qualifications do they have and what's the calibre of these people, michael? Well, most members of parliament in the political party will never have met them. They're the kind of the faceless strategists and data people that sit in head office and they work on the polling. They'll engage Lucas and Don polling company. Go out there and tell us what all the field developers of.
Phil:Brisbane think Do they want 50 cents bus fares or do they want GST to be increased to 15%? Do they want cheaper flights? Can we subsidize holidays lunches for our school kids? Should we pay for school kids' lunches? Is that what the field developers and the mums of Brisbane think? And then they'll just punch their little computers. It'll spit out what Michael Johnson should say, and then I'll rock up to a community event and I'll say guess what? My party's offering free lunches for your son, phil.
Don:How good is that? Vote for me. That's why I love this guy.
Phil:If you vote for the guy, your kid doesn't get a lunch. He doesn't get a free lunch and sadly it's the here and now. And we've got to change the dial on that. We've got to stop thinking it's the here and now, because the policies that much closer to buying a property, to getting a job, to getting the quality of education that I want him to have.
Don:I'll go back to the restaurant analogy you made, Phil, right. If I don't know if there's a dish on there, how do I even pick that dish? The problem we're having is no one is communicating their messages.
Phil:That's a system. Well, Don, that's a system. Michael explained it better.
Don:What would you do differently, let's say, if you were running this campaign?
Phil:Yeah, yeah, totally. So you put a charter in place, right? No?
Don:different.
Phil:You treat it like a private business. Treat it like a public company. I've made that comment in the past years. Treat politics like a public company. If you say one thing and you do another, you're booted out, if not put in jail, depending on the severity of it. Right. So accountability is the thing. The simple answer to that question, don, is run politics like a public company. Make people accountable for their actions. Make them accountable for their decisions. Make them accountable for what they do. Make them accountable for what they don't do. We said that we're going to put GST in and get rid of stamp duty and ready for this stamp duty and payroll tax. We've still got stamp duty, we've still got payroll tax, but nobody's accountable.
Lucas:Some of the people that were part of that are still in politics.
Phil:If you did that in a public company, you would not have a job, You'd be in jail or you'd be thrown out of government right. I think Phil goes back to the standards that we accept.
Phil:So if I am happy to re-elect that same politician, or that same government again and again and again, even though they said they were going to get rid of payroll tax. But 20 years later we still see payroll tax, whatever that policy is I mean Don Lucas, I mean Phil's right, it's that accountability, I guess sort of the practical question is what does that look and feel? Like Lucas, you went and voted. If you said to the guy hey, I'm going to vote for you, bill, but can you be an accountable politician? If you're successful, he'll say Lucas brother, you've got my accountability. Here it is.
Lucas:Before accountability, though, Michael. I actually wanted vision. That's what happens. There's no vision. How can someone be held accountable if I couldn't?
Don:even find a vision in the first place.
Phil:And that's a great one because it segues to one of my bugbears of this campaign and I think we should all get together with maybe even Gary and a few others after this, because then I really want to open up and put my superpowers of strategy, marketing and branding right, aligned then to data analysis and strategy, and I don't want to open up on that right now.
Phil:It's two days out from an election for many reasons, but honing in on that right and and saying, well, what do we do different? How does it look why anthony albinezi has spent 80? This is not my words, this is the status, this is the um, the statistics. He spent 80 of this campaign character assassinating peter dutton. That's not my interpretation that's not my opinion.
Phil:These are the facts right, this is what they put out there. They've analyzed it all. He spent 80 of his time of his budget, of his focus, character assassinating there's an article that came out today in the australian about it and what they what are they? Getting. What are they? Well, this is what they said what did Liberal get wrong? Yeah, but it is working. But it comes back to Michael's point it's the people that are the problem because they're not.
Don:Yeah, but Phil.
Phil:I don't want to pay. I don't want my taxes to go towards a $600 billion nuclear, you know, but China's building how many of them?
Don:But China's building how many for $10 billion.
Phil:It's easy for me to see that $600 billion figure and latch onto it and say, oh my God, that's a lot of money and not actually live with it. People don't understand $200 billion is what it'll cost, rather than $600. Well, it's less because China just came out and said they're building I don't know how many, they're building for $10 billion. So somebody said, well, hang on. But why Labor are able to say so?
Don:this comes down to another one, Don and Lucas, and I really want to hone in on this when we do a post-mortem of the election whichever way it goes, and that is that politicians are indemnified when it comes to defamation, they can say all the bullshit in the world.
Phil:There's one level of accountability. I can call Peter Dutton Mr Potato Head. I can call with no reformifications. You certainly can't do that in business, right? If you just called me Mr Potato Head and I can prove that it damaged my business, I can sue your ass right. In politics that doesn't happen, and vice versa. Peter Dutton's team can call you know, albanese?
Don:you know, the Prime Minister, whatever names they want, without any repercussion. Now, that is wrong.
Phil:That is wrong on all levels, for all governments, for all parties. They can mock Pauline Hanson, they can mock Clive Palmer, and nobody is held accountable because they're completely indemnified when it comes to defamation, right and that is wrong.
Lucas:That's a system change Now.
Phil:We're a country of hypocrisy, and at this point I can go for hours but we're a country of hypocrisy. But it comes back to Michael's point, and I said this during COVID and they adopted it and it's been refreshed, but they were my words, I was the first one to say it. The standard you walk past is the standard you accept.
Don:And it became the front page of the Courier Mail right, because I know Jason Scott well and he used those words and he asked me if he could, no worries. And it's been regurgitated many times.
Phil:But I said those words. When they said why are you fighting the COVID vaccine? I said I'm not fighting the vaccine, I'm a son of migrants. I've seen discrimination in action. Forget that. And then let alone the traditional custodians. But we're a country that has moved so far in changing the dial in discrimination, whether that's ethics, traditional owners, women in business, blah, blah, blah, blah. We've done an amazing job moving the dial from here to here in that area, and now you want me to discriminate because of a virus.
Phil:Sorry, the standard you walk past is the standard you accept, and that's not what I will accept. I have the same philosophy in politics right which I'm not willing to walk past the standard because my number one trait is accountability.
Lucas:So of course I'm going to vote that way Now. It doesn't mean everyone has to vote that way.
Phil:But I have an issue with accountability. When people are not accountable, I tell my team you burn coffee? Tell us I don't care, you didn't show up to burn coffee.
Don:But if you burn it and you don't tell us we've got a problem, Right? So it really comes back to what culture is in a business?
Phil:I'll ask you a question, Michael, off the back of that.
Lucas:What was accountability like when you were in the role that you were in within the political system? Was there accountability?
Phil:There's layers of it as an MP and you know, I guess, to your party, to your leader, to your colleagues, to the community. And that's at a theoretical level. Right At the practical level, what does that look like? I mean, if you're a reasonably junior member of parliament, it's fully the government, it's the prime minister and you've just got to go with the flow.
Don:I had lots of experiences as a federal MP in my electorate where the government brought in policies and ideas that were really damaging to my backyard to my electorate.
Phil:And I had to go out there and kind of sell that policy and say I supported it, when I probably didn't, because of course the news story would be that if I broke with that I become the story. Division becomes the story, disunity becomes the story and defeat becomes the story.
Don:So you kind of just bite your tongue and go with the flow, and that is the downside, michael can I say kudos to you for sharing that the listeners might not really understand the power of having someone like. Michael, who's been there and done that, and we've got a podcast because of that reason, I don't want to hear from people that have got no fucking idea. I want to hear from people like Michael.
Phil:He's been there, he's done that. I want to hear from people that have got no fucking idea. I want to hear from people like Michael he's been there, he's done that, he's seen it. So, mate, can I just really acknowledge your honesty and your articulation, because that's what people don't know and don't see right, exactly what Michael just said there. And we need more Michaels in the world to tell people, because that would solve the problem that I talk about, that would solve education, accountability and we might get a system change, because Michael's just really nailed that with what he just said there.
Phil:Yeah, I think people understand this.
Don:Why don't politicians talk this honestly when they're in politics? And that's one of the biggest issues. It's like you listen to politicians who's left the system and they're very honest and they're very forthright, but why don't they do that while you're in the system?
Phil:Well, I think, because it gives rise to vulnerability. It gives rise to that potential perception that you're the odd man out or the odd MP out in a party that's going in this direction.
Don:I mean, just give me a simple example of nuclear policy, right?
Phil:So let's just say that I was a current MP and I'm part of Peter Dutton's team and he wants to go down a nuclear Australia pathway. So let's just say that I really vigorously ideologically disagreed with that. In the middle of an election campaign, do you think I'm going to come out and actually say this is a crazy policy, this is a really bad idea. So it just comes down to survival and that's the system and Phil's right. We do need systemic change. In Australia the Liberal Party is far more flexible than the Labor Party.
Don:You get thrown out of the Labor Party if you disagree publicly In the Liberal Party you get really scolded, but you probably don't get thrown out. But no one does it, because it affects your chances of promotion.
Phil:It affects your chances of opportunity, and so you know you've got to play the team game. And the team game is just to go with the flow.
Lucas:So why would?
Phil:you come out and raise your head against your leader, against your policy and, potentially, lose the opportunity of promotion.
Don:More than one systemic problem. Right At the end of the day, we need better marketers, we need better policymakers. You can't blame the people if they can't really understand what's being put in front of them. There may be an education problem, but if the message is like, if you look at this election, there's no clear message from anyone, it's just a salad of just short hits just being put in front of you.
Phil:No, I don't Don, I don't completely agree with that and I'll show you what. And again, I don't talk opinions, the budget, so I represent micro, small and medium business day to day with the coffee commune.
Don:Right, that's my passion project.
Phil:People go why are you involved in politics? Well, I can assure you I don't care which government gets it. If I was looking at it through the lens of myself, I don't care which government gets in. I've got plenty to have. I'm not the richest man in the world. I'm not the poorest man in the world. I've got enough to have the life that I want, and I've even set my kids up to be in the top 5% of the country already.
Don:I'm not showboating.
Phil:I'm just showing that I'm going to do what I are very talented and their words to me are Papa, we're going to start a business that won't be in Australia Now.
Don:I'm a first-generation migrant, so I want the listeners to really understand this, not go. Oh, this guy thinks he's a hot shot because you can think whatever you want.
Phil:No, I'm a first-generation migrant. My brother and sister were born in Sicily. My dad came here to give us a better life. I've got my kids second generation going. I'm not starting a business here. There's payroll tax, there's land tax, there's capital gains tax. The government can promise things and not deliver.
Lucas:They can do this.
Phil:They want to put the taxings on unrealized earnings of superannuation.
Phil:But your listeners might not know this, but their superannuation is exempt from it. I'm not going to be building any sort of business in this country Now. Who loses? The country loses because you've got two talented people and these kids are talented and there's millions of talented kids out there that are simply not going to stay in Australia because the system works against them. There's no inspiration, there's no accountability, there's no. Let's look at it. So Michael said this to you guys before. It would be your kids and your grandkids.
Phil:Well, I can tell you, I turned 50 this year, my daughter's 17, my boy's 15, and they're not talking about opening businesses in this country. They're talking about they can tell you Dubai.
Don:That's what I'm asking. Who's actually communicating that message? Who's giving us the vision for our kids, our grandkids?
Phil:Nobody because they just care about their own. Three-year term, four-year term.
Don:Exactly because they just care about their own. Three-year term, four-year term, exactly that's what I was trying to say before.
Phil:It is a bit of a vicious cycle. I mean, unlike the past, I think politics today is not really seen as a noble cause of service to go into. It's not a vocation.
Don:It's almost a career path in itself.
Phil:It is a job, it is a profession as opposed to as opposed to in the 20th century. You went into politics After perhaps 30 years in business. You became successful. Whether you are the great Sir Robert Menzies who was the founder of the Liberal Party, he had been a successful barrister in the Labour Party, the likes of John Curtin, one of Labour's great prime ministers just a regular guy. He didn't start working in the political realm at 15, at 20.
Phil:And so you have this different character of people in both sides of politics, in both political parties, and actually that shapes how you think, and I think that's the problem. It's not. There isn't a diversity of quality people with quality experience that are potential leaders of our country. I'm happy to be candid and say if I ran for parliament today, I would be a better MP than I was when I ran in 2000.
Don:Maybe we need to bring some of these older politicians back.
Phil:It's not just an age thing, it's the breadth of your, I mean we all know people that are 50, 60 years old and have not lived life, and we know people that are 25 and have lived a full and rich and amazing life. So it's not a number, it's what have you done with the years that you've lived. So you know, in my case now you know, having been in business and advised a few big defense companies, I would be a better MP now. But you know, when I went into 31, I still thought I had a very enriching life great education, international travel, international study. The son of small business parents spoke Chinese, studied overseas in China. I thought I had a profile and a skill set that could contribute to our country.
Don:I thought I had a profile and a skill set that could contribute to our country and you know we kind of need more people.
Phil:I think across the community whether they're entrepreneurs like Phil nurses, doctors, engineers, you name it but just the technology people. We need more diverse people to be in Parliament. I think yeah, amazing.
Lucas:Well said, I've got a burning question that's come from the audience and I guess this will be great for the listeners out there. I think you've already answered it tremendously, but let's see how we go. What practical steps are they ie any politician taking to address the number one issue that we currently face in this country, which is the housing crisis and the cost of living crisis? Let's call it throughout the entire country?
Phil:Look, I'll come at it from a business owner's point of view. If I was running it like a business, which is why I'm not in politics, because you can't um.
Lucas:It's a supply and demand issue. This is not.
Phil:You know, I'm never the smartest person in the room. This is a supply and demand. If you've, if you've got 150 people looking for a house and you've only got 100, well then you've got to work out. I either build more houses or how do I get the 150 down to 100? So the immigration policy is one, but it doesn't mean you're anti-immigration. It means that you work on the immigration policy that enables to temporarily cut down the demand because the supply can't meet it. Or on the other side, you go how do I put policy in place, which I call policy strategy, because in business, we call it strategy in politics I call it policy.
Don:That sometimes never gets done.
Phil:If I was building a strategy, it's going to be either limit the supply, the demand. And how can you do that? Well, immigration is one of them. Allow people to have more people live in one venue as another, build smaller apartments as another one. Or I go to the other side and I go let's lift the demand. Well, the demand is well if you build in a city, that's, you've got the same infrastructure charges.
Phil:But if you go and build 50 kilometers from the middle of town which is what they did in sydney and one of my developer friends built over 500, 600, I think it is houses out that way because the government said we will give you incentives if you go and build affordable accommodation further out, right. So you then attack the demand. So, to bring it back in, you either have a supply strategy that limits supply right, sorry, that increases supply, or you have a demand strategy which drops the demand. That's the only way you get to that perfect level. Now, it doesn't mean that if you choose to tackle immigration, that you are anti-immigration or that you are a racist. It means we can't bring in 150 people when we've only got 100 houses or on the other side it's we've only got 100 houses.
Phil:How can, what can we do to help you get to 150 houses very quickly?
Don:can I ask a question? To make housing affordable, the prices have to drop. If the prices do drop, then no one's going to be happy with that. So I get what you're saying, phil. We build houses further away. Then we have an entitlement issue. Every second person you talk to, they want to live 10 kilometers kilometers within the city but then we have an attitude problem we do have an attitude problem because in sydney.
Phil:In sydney, they're happy to live.
Don:They're happy to live further out right yeah, but I'm going to change the scenery because I'm going to plug in.
Phil:But this is the thing I can't drink champagne. If I earn 200 a week, I might be able to drink sparkling wine. This is. I did a yesterday which was very, very intriguing with a customer service expert and we talked about customer service and why it's bad, and this will help you answer that question. And he said in life, one of the best things that has happened is evolution. He goes.
Phil:When I bought my first car 25 years ago, I wound up my own windows. I winded down my own windows. I had to drive it with no power steering. I had to do this. As the years have progressed. Every year we've got evolution, which has been an amazing thing. Fast forward to today I drive a Tesla. It drives itself.
Phil:He goes, but what? At what cost? The cost of that is that it's dumbified society. It's made me now want convenience. It's lifted my expectations. And that's exactly coming back to answering your question, don. And I'll give it to you, and I can't tell you who it is, but it's a very predominant Australian person who said this. Maybe Australia just has not heard enough yet, because they're used to the hundred dollar states, the expensive wine and what you just said wanting, and used to living 10 kilometers from the city. Well, I can tell you, as a son of migrants everyone's cup of tea or cup of coffee, use whatever frame you want, but I'm telling you the way it is. I'm a son of migrants.
Phil:My dad owed $450 a week and he brought up a family of five, three kids, and there was no brand new car. Yet his house paid off within 10 years. But the house had one toilet, three bedrooms, which means I shared with my brother. It had a kitchen the size now that people would probably build, not even an en suite toilet on right. But we had a big, beautiful yard and we had rib fillet on the table. I didn't go to a private school. We didn't own brand-new cars. I bought my dad twice a brand-new car. That's the first time he owned it in his 70s. Now you start to see the picture. He did not have champagne taste on a beer budget. He said what matters to me is accommodation, so I pay my house off. What matters next is food on the table. So I make sure that I buy rib fillet and fruit and veggies and stuff that my family needs to eat. But I can't afford to go. He's never left the country. Can't afford to go on holidays, never been on a plane to go overseas and he certainly never drove a brand new car until I bought it for him.
Phil:Now, I know it's a long-winded answer, but bring it back down to people's expectations. Evolution is like a scalpel. A surgeon uses a scalpel for good. Give the scalpel to somebody who wants to break into your house and they use it for bad. And unfortunately, the byproduct of evolution which is great is that people's expectations have gone above and beyond what they should be. Long-winded answer, but that's the short part of it. Yeah, I mean that goes to the cultural challenge at the heart of this country. It's that disconnect between entitlement and means, and I think I mean I'll just use this example Lucas and Don will love this because they're tech heads, but I've just converted from typewriter to computer.
Phil:I love my typewriter because I couldn't afford a computer. And Lucas is telling me you've got to get a computer. I said, mate, I can't afford it, I've got to stick to my typewriter. It does my functions well. But it is true, it is spot on. But you know, Phil, it's politically incorrect to say that.
Phil:It's absolutely political suicide for a politician or a political leader to go and say you know what? You can't have an apartment yet because you haven't saved money. You can't have an apartment until you're 30 because you haven't saved money. You've got to work longer, you've got to save, you've got to sacrifice. And one of the words I use in my family and my son, who's 18 and about to invest in his first property with the help of a bank mom and dad.
Phil:but I keep on saying to him, I said, mate, never forget this word when I'm long gone, and that is trade-off. Life is about trade-offs. You've got to make the trade-offs If you want to go and have a party or, like you, just came back from skiing in Austria. Well, you know, okay, well fine, but you've got to save money for that.
Phil:It means that you can't go out and party and have steaks every day with your girlfriend for six months, and my sense is is that our country and our community and our nation, Michael at the same time, 25 odd years ago, when I was first buying a house, I was earning $60,000 and my first house cost me $140,000, right, so I think it used to be.
Don:Don't quote me. It used to be. Two to three years worth of your annual income was what a house was worth affordability. Right now, you know that's blown up to five to 10. How do we fix that problem? That's it, that's what I said. Well, this is the problem.
Phil:Yeah, it's a great point, you don't fix it. People are expecting overnight fixes. We did not wake up and be in the problem we are today. And this is one thing. I get jacked off these Muppets on social media. I think they're experts and they wouldn't even know how to spell the word politics right, and they've certainly done it.
Phil:Michael knows, I've been in the room with some of the best of this country and I'm in the room where it's one-on-one or one-on-two and one-on-three, where you're getting the real deal and you're talking real bullshit. You're talking real things. None of this is what you see on TV, right, because it's a different scene. We, because it's a different scene. We did not wake up and inherit this problem. And so when people go, even with the current Prime Minister no, I don't attack him on the previous, he inherited a basket case, but Scott Morrison inherited a basket case and then it goes back from there, and I don't mean a basket case, it's just crescendoed because the system right now I'm going to use this, I'm going to quantify it with this, and people don't think about this enough, and I'm going to do it by doing this. People have asked me if I was to go into politics, what level would I go?
Don:on. I said well, firstly, I've got no interest in politics because I like 20 weeks a year off right.
Phil:I came from doing 100-hour weeks and promised my family that I will take all school holidays off and I take 20 weeks a year off and I'm proud of that because I went nowhere for 15 years. I made the sacrifices, I paid a lot of tax $33 million in tax so far and climbing right, so I've contributed my bit to this country.
Phil:Now I say it like this I'd go into the Brisbane City Council or Gold Coast City Council and they said why would you do that? I said because I could run as an independent and it wouldn't matter if it was the Greens, the Liberals, the Labor or the LNP or whoever it is that got in in council. You, the Labor or the LNP, or whoever it is that got in in council, you know what my mantra would be I work with whoever deserves to be elected by their community right Now. Why should you vote for me? Because these are the five things that I'm going to deliver to you as the Lord.
Phil:Mayor right, and it doesn't matter what party I'm in and it doesn't matter what you know so what you get and what you have had over the years in Brisbane, in Gold Coast, in most South Seas, and now it's like City of Moreton Bay is doing amazing stuff. You have had progressive evolution. You know, you've had the progressive councils, which means the residents look at what the Gold Coast has done, look at what Brisbane City Council has done. I can only remember as far back as Sally Ann Atkinson right, because I'm 50. It doesn't matter if it's been male or female, it doesn't matter if it's being male or female, it doesn't matter if it's being Labor, liberal or Labor, LNP or Independent. We've had progressive councils. Why? Because you get two votes.
Don:You vote for the Lord Mayor, he or she.
Phil:You vote for your councillor and therefore your councillor has to step up and tell you and be part of the community and do what they want. And your Lord Mayor, he or she, has to step up and do what they're going to do and again, this is not an opinion and not enough people know about that they don't know the system, and we talked about the people accountable, right?
Lucas:I either. Yeah, you don't like?
Phil:you know, and I worked with campbell newman and he was you look at him right in the system of local council. He was a hero. He became the premier and he and everyone hated him. He what?
Don:He didn't change as a person, the system changed. Like him or love him, it doesn't matter. What did he do?
Phil:Well, he did a lot for the city of Brisbane and he did a lot for Queensland. That people won't understand at all because of the stuff that Michael. Again, thank you, michael, sharing of what happens behind the scenes. He didn't sack 14,000. And I'm not a Campbell lover, I can assure you. But he the scenes right. He didn't set sack 14,000 and I'm not a Campbell lover, I can assure you. But he didn't sack 14,000 people. That was the narrative. You can't sack government workers. That's technical. Michael will tell you that. No one in government gets sacked, right. You get you. Either contract doesn't get renewed because you're not productive, or you get paid. That's right. So no one got sacked. But what?
Phil:was the narrative so you combine what Michael said and you combine what I said about no accountability and identification of defamation and you end up with somebody who took a debt from $88 billion down to $80 billion, doing things like getting rid of half a million dollars a year, was in plants on the top floor of the Premier's office and he said, well, we're spending this money to get rid of them. It doesn't matter whether you like them or not. And this is the problem Michael said it before it becomes a likability thing, not a what is your policy? So if you break it down, don you keep asking.
Don:But the answer is the same.
Phil:It's a systemic problem. It's a systemic problem we have.
Don:It is. That's what I'm trying to get at. It's just like doesn't matter what the if the policies are not built for another 10-15 years, do we have to break a few things to make it better? Yeah, absolutely, I said let me, let me jump in there because,
Lucas:I'm quite passionate about so I touched on this in our first conversation so whatever you want to identify as the problems of today, like lucas, you mentioned housing affordability so right now we have a housing issue not enough people in homes.
Phil:Did that come from last week, last month, last year?
Don:No, way back.
Phil:So let me throw this out. So just think about what might be the problems that Brisbane or Queensland or Australia have in the year 2060, 2070, 30, 40 years out.
Phil:Now are those problems going to have landed on the door of the then Prime Minister, the future Prime Minister of that day, the future Premier of that day, the future Lord Mayor of that day, a year out from that time, two years out. Those problems are starting now and we either know what they are going to be and we don't want to do anything about it, or we know what they are going to be and we're going to say you know what we need to start thinking about this.
Phil:We need to start thinking about what are the problems in the next 30, 40 years?
Don:I mean, take something that we all know about that is happening in Brisbane in 2032, the Olympic Games.
Phil:Okay. So if we start thinking about building infrastructure or whatever in the year 2030, we're probably going to be humiliated. So we've got to start doing that now. 10 years out, we know that's a problem in 10 years' time if we don't do it now.
Don:That's three elections away, so that's a problem right Three years.
Phil:Right, but the difference with that is.
Don:What can you do in three years?
Phil:It's a physical thing, right, it's a year in the timeline so we kind of all can see it. But if I ask you what is the problem? Don right, you know.
Don:Energy. What are we going to do now? I'll tell you.
Phil:It's going to be things like water and Michael's point I'll cement it here.
Lucas:I'll bring it closer to home.
Phil:So our last Prime Minister just to show that it's not a Liberal, or Labor thing with me but our last Prime Minister, mr Scott Morrison.
Phil:He goes. I'm going to invest how many billion is it, michael? In submarines. Now, by the time those freaking and I won't use the other word submarines are built COVID just proved it I'll tell you what two things are going to attack any country around the world in the future, whether it's 10, 20, 30 or 40 years. It ain't going to be something that a submarine is going to fix. It won't even be a drone. It's going to be. Phil's just identified a possible problem for us in 2055. It might be a disease or a virus. So what are we doing today to have that virus or that vaccine available to our children or our grandchildren or our great-grandchildren in 30, 40 years' time, where they'll say thank God, you know, our grandparents 40, 50 years ago thought about this. Is it national security? Are we afraid of our freedoms being curtailed by a system of government that enslaves our liberties? And we don't want that. So, therefore, we want to create a national security landscape.
Don:That full site comes from private enterprise, right? That's always been the thing. Private enterprise always looks that far ahead because politicians can only see for three, four, whatever the term is.
Lucas:No, exactly we do it because we have to, but that's because it's the system. That's Phil's favourite word.
Phil:It's the system If you don't think about IKEA. Ikea always talks about the system. I think we're all agreeing.
Don:It's the same thing. The private enterprise has to make up for the gaps the government's creating. And if the government those gaps are, they created by the terms that we have created. So do we need to have longer terms?
Phil:I mean, do you guys know what a federal MP's salary is? I don't see the prime minister, but just you know I think the prime minister is on 320 or something.
Don:What's that?
Phil:Yeah, so 200 plus grand, right, yeah, 200 plus grand. A society that largely remunerates on the kind of big job that one has, the skill set, the difficulty. If we're there the metrics of how we pay people, then is $200,000 kind of a reasonable salary for someone doing that job. I mean, why would the best brains in our country, why would the smartest people go into politics for that kind of money? Now someone might say to me wow, that's a lot of money, 200 grand.
Lucas:But are they?
Phil:saying that that's a lot of money because they're on an income of 90 grand. They're unqualified, they haven't thought of a way to create a business, they haven't become a field developer, and so 90 grand is a lot of money.
Don:But Michael, that probably phil's what phil brought up last week. We don't have qualified people in politics. That could be the reason we're not paying them enough. I don't agree. 200 000 is nowhere enough. If someone's running the budgets that they're running.
Phil:If anyone knows about singapore's political system, they pay more than a million dollars us for for their politicians and they're the best in the country. Being in the Singapore government or in parliament or in the cabinet is as prestigious and as illustrious and as exclusive a job title that you can get in Singapore. That exists because they're seen to be doing profoundly important things for the greater good for the country.
Don:Here.
Phil:If you're a politician, well you know you'd be lucky not to get a tomato thrown at you or an egg over your head.
Don:You've got to change that kind of that sort of dial as well and say you know what? Wow, you're an MP.
Phil:I admire you, I respect you. You've traded off, you've sacrificed your family's putting up with stuff. Your family didn't marry Baltics, you did.
Lucas:But it's also a sexy job to go towards, and money follows that same conversation, right? And if it's not seen internally, not seen externally, not seen by the public, then why would you do? It is the point.
Phil:It is chicken and the egg. I mean there are very few of Australia's smartest people putting their hand up to run for parliament, but look at what's happening in the US.
Don:Is that what we need, then? That's sort of taken that other turn. But talking about that, I want to shift this a bit. I said we will talk about taxes and foreign policy. I'd love to get your thoughts on how both parties have been working on the foreign policy. I think there's been a bit of luck on the Labor side. Trump finally returned his phone call. Let me give you the entrepreneur's vision. It's very simple.
Phil:I don't drink the same wine I used to 20 years ago. I don't drive the same car I did 20 years ago. I don't live in the same house I did 20 years ago. That's evolution 20 years ago we said we need to be under the queen. We're longer, you'll get the gist of it. Don't worry about the years. We need to be under a monarchy. Great, that worked for us.
Phil:X amount of years ago and this is not a republic or a monarchy. This is a very practical example, so stay with me on this and indulge me. So X amount of years it was all about the UK and the monarchy, and that's where we put a lot of our efforts and our work into. Then we went oh, we have to, for safety reasons, align with the US because they're going to protect us right Now.
Don:these are not opinions, these are facts.
Phil:Now you can work out the timelines. I don't know them exactly, but we went from being UK-centric to rely on to then US-centric to rely on, and this I do know about 12 years ago to 15 years ago we went well, china's going to be a big player.
Phil:We need to play in the southeast. So now we have to be in, make sure we have great relationships and we work with China and this goes on your back of what you said foreign policy. Now I look at foreign policy as foreign strategy, which makes up everything economics, trading, tourism, international, students, defence. When was the last time you heard anything about the UK? But I'd hate to see how much.
Phil:We still give the monarchy and I'm not calling for a republic and I'm not calling for a monarchy, but I'm saying we still pay taxpayers' money off to the UK to align with them. I can't remember the last time that the UK did something for us. I could be wrong. We are working with the US to be our safety net, even though by the time the US get here, china would have blown us up five times. So then we've hedged our bets with China and you start to see what sits all underneath that. Well, we're still giving money to the UK that we could be giving to the homeless here and reducing our own costs. We're working with USA because we want them for our safety, but yet we're hedging our bets with China because we want to trade with them and we want the international students and I've sat on boards in the past. We want their international students, we want their investment. We went all this.
Don:How about we do this?
Phil:How about we forget all that for a moment and we go let's look after Australia first Now?
Don:I'm not using Trump's word and all the rest of it, but let's look after times have evolved.
Phil:We're now a more grown-up nation. How about we look after Australia first? How about we put Australia's primary needs and focus first, before we worry about giving money to other people overseas because they had a tsunami and that?
Phil:And I'm not saying don't look after them, but don't give them $1 billion. Give them $50 million because we've got to look after them, but don't give them $1 billion. Give them $50 million Because we've got to look after Australia first. As a policy, when somebody takes money out of this country and I put this forward to the current opposition leader and he was very receptive, didn't make a commitment why don't we tax 2% of every dollar that leaves this country? Because the money's coming out of this country, so why isn't there a tax? That goes on?
Phil:that, and that includes me, because when I sold my company and did well and said I want to build a house in Queenstown, I took $5 million of my money that had already been taxed on in Australia.
Don:But I took $5 million and I sent it over to New Zealand's economy, but I didn't get taxed any money to send that money over and I went hang on if I was running Australia, I and I went hang on
Phil:if I was running Australia I would have taxed me 2% to take my money out of this country Now these are all strategies, but you've already paid your tax, Phil. Yeah, it doesn't matter but stay with me, don, these are strategies. The ideology, the focus is not UK, usa. You've got to have great diplomatic relationships.
Don:And one thing I love out of all this with the USA is that Kevin Rudd?
Phil:he's never had to work so hard. He took a cushy job and it was cushy for a long time, but he's working his fricking ass off right now. Good right, and I hope he's hearing this?
Lucas:I hope he's hearing it.
Don:No, he's the man that never sleeps.
Phil:Yeah, well, he's going to be. He's working his ass off now, I can assure you right with the diplomatic relationships. But what I'm saying is he's probably a good mate of mine.
Lucas:Greg's a different. He's a different kettle of fish right. I haven't seen Greg for a long time. Can I respond to I?
Phil:think.
Don:Phil is that fair.
Phil:Look after Australia first, because we've evolved. Yeah, I mean, that's why someone like you should be in politics, because it should be a place where the ideas are contested. Where the ideas are, you know, come out, they're contested. I mean, any time the word tax gets thrown out, I kind of, you know, shrivel up because I'm sort of an anti-high tax man, but I like the way that you think. I guess one of the points that makes what you're talking about is somewhat difficult is, at the end of the day, we're a pretty small country, you know, we're only 25 million people, and it's that capacity, it's that capacity, it's that capacity to build we don't have the skills.
Don:We literally don't have the skills to do a lot of that stuff to manufacture. I mean, if I threw out a trillion dollars to to do something in australia manufacture like we just don't have the people.
Phil:I mean these six submarines that we're going to get in 300 years I'm gonna have to come to you at coffee commune to steal your staff and train them, because we don't have the submarine sailors, the submariners, to do that. We've got two, I think, or three Royal Australian Navy submariners training and learning how to be future captains of our submarines in the US now.
Phil:And I guess that's a bit of you know, that's going deep, diving into the details. But the big problem for what you're saying, Phil, I think, is that capacity. We don't have the capacity to do a lot of these things. But I'm not saying shut the world down the thing the threat is spot on is uh, and you said this last time. Like you know, you look after your wife and kids first, um, and then you're gonna look after me as your neighbor, um you know in in that you know in the room next door this is what I'm talking about.
Don:I haven't seen any clear policy on skills, migration and and foreign policy. Again, going back to the first thing I said if you guys have, then please enlighten me, because I haven't seen that message come across to me.
Phil:Yeah, but what Lucas raised earlier, Don, it's what Lucas raised earlier is that they're not really kind of the headline voting signpost Right now it's supposedly like cost of housing, cost of living. So they're the two or three.
Don:But, as you guys have pointed out, the only way to fix those problems are the underlying issues, like everything we just mentioned.
Phil:No, but you're coming at that as a thinking Australian voter. Most people don't. And remember also to be fair to politicians, because I was one of them is that there is only a bandwidth of so much. At the end of the day, there is still only 24 hours in a day, there is still only 24, 12 months in a year and you can only do so much.
Don:And a budget and I've got a budget.
Phil:Going back to sort of the rhetorical question I proposed, or you know, 20, 30, 40, 50 years for those problems that we face now and for the Australians of that time, what are?
Phil:we going to do about that now, and what I'd like to do if I had the magic wand is to ask Australians, to invite Australians to think about the structure of our government, our federation, our constitution. We need to revisit that with the smartest people in our country and say is this constitution a 19th century document? Is this fit for Australia of the 22nd century in how it's crafted, how it deals with the problems and the challenges of the times? Should we have a system where 10 people, 10 eminent Australians, put their hand up and say yes, I want to be prime minister and when I'm elected I will choose a cabinet of 20, 30 people, and those 20 or 30 people will be that countable to the Australian public and we will put forward legislation to the Parliament of Australia, and that Parliament will be elected by the people of.
Don:Australia.
Phil:So yes, it is a radical change of our system, somewhat like the congressional system in the US, somewhat in that kind of model. But what it does do is that it makes the leader, the prime minister of the day, completely accountable. He is the one person that all of us voted for, and we vote for him, as we do in Brisbane, as Phil's alluded to by name. We vote for the Lord Mayor of Brisbane by name, and so we can make him accountable, and I'm just throwing that out there as an idea.
Lucas:But we've got to start thinking about the system and the structures of government that that really shape our future I'll dive into a practical example here and it might be very controversial in this uh live conversation, but I've seen it real hand and that's why I'm so much towards the whole doge uh scenario that's happening in amer right.
Lucas:I think we definitely need it here in Australia, and the reason being is because I've seen inside some of these departments and when we're talking about technology official intelligence automation systems then the mandate that we're given and many people in the industry are given, you can do whatever you want in the department to make it more efficient as long as you don't replace any roles or need to disperse any roles anywhere.
Don:So if you have 80 staff in a department, it still has 80 staff when you finish the project. If you have 5,000 staff in a department.
Lucas:the department still needs to have 5,000 staff, and where my mind goes towards.
Don:This is like the 50 cent fare. It seems to be the only conversation like what's happening right about this whole 50 cent fare and public transport.
Lucas:There's so many ways you can make it $0 to get a better outcome by removing the process, removing all the inefficiencies that exist, the systems that exist behind the scenes, that are super old school and run completely inefficient.
Don:The people that run all those systems, the people that operate all the terminals there's just so much money that doesn't even need to be spent. So it shouldn't be a 50 cent compensation.
Lucas:It should be. Well, let's get free public transport and let's remove all the actual costs that it takes to actually run that in the first place.
Phil:That's entrepreneurial thinking, mate, you're not going to do yourself out of a job if you're one of the people that designs that system that leads to that inefficiency and I wouldn't myself, you know if I'm on half a million dollar salary as one of those people that designed the system to be inefficient.
Don:I'm not going to do myself out of that check. They're just living in an anthem, right? You don't criticize me.
Phil:I won't criticize you. It really comes down to a lot of things, but one of the key things is that forward vision strategy.
Phil:I've done a lot of work with politicians, I've worked with the current Lord Mayor and one thing, and Adrian will tell you that he calls me brother, not Philip and I say to him, I said to him 15 years ago if you get an opportunity one day to become the Lord Mayor or the Deputy and then he became the Deputy have a 10-year outlook. You know or have a 10-year outlook. You know or have a 12-year outlook. Don't look at the next term, the current term, next term. Look at the one beyond, which is a 12. And if you start to, if you go back to what Adrian used to do, he used to say when he he had four kids under the age of six and he said now they're a lot, now they're older. But his words back then were I want to build the Brisbane that my kids are proud to live in.
Don:Very simple. Now, that's a vision. That's what Michael was talking about. That was a vision, that wasn't 30 or 40 years but it was 12 years.
Phil:And then, when he got pushed on, what's that vision? He said well, it's the right balance of development with the right balance of public space. It's the right level of activation with the right level of accessibility. Right, it's about being inclusive, it's about being collaborative. These are all the words he's used over the years. Right, because that was his vision was taught All of a sudden he made it emotionally engaging and tangible. Twelve year and the Brisbane that my kids, four kids under the age of six, will be proud to live in. Now, when was the last time? Now, david Crisafulli and I'm not liberal labour and all this David Crispoly and I'm not liberal labour, and all this David Crispoly is the last politician I've heard say that where he's talking about the future, he's talking about the kids. He's talking about that.
Phil:I love the fact that he got on the TV the other day and he said well, are those punks that want to test me when it comes to, you know, the adult crime, adult time? Go ahead, he goes, goes. The fact that you're talking about it already tells me that you're worried. Right, I love that. That shows conviction, right, that says right, I'm set a vision here. I'm going to make sure that people of queensland feel safer.
Phil:But he also said we've got a long way to go you know, just because the numbers are down six percent or eight percent or whatever they are, this didn't happen overnight and we won't fix it overnight.
Lucas:That, to me, is a future politician.
Phil:That is a person that's going. We didn't create this problem wasn't created overnight and we won't fix it overnight. That, to me, is a future politician. That is a person that's going. This problem wasn't created overnight and it won't be fixed overnight, but we're trending in the right direction and we've got a long way to go. So you look at what they say.
Phil:There's a sign in my office that says do more because we get too much of this. And I've got a boardroom in my office and I get a lot of people in a lot of meetings and one of my go-tos straightaway is always when people start talking too much, you can talk as much as you want, but I put it to the sign and say do more. Now, that's for my own staff and team, that's for me and that's for anyone that comes and meets with me. But I mean that is the key and that sort of brings together what we've all said If you don't have a long-term vision right, you won't create long-term strategies. And then you've got to bring it back to the today and you've got to do what Michael talked about. You've got to navigate the internal politics, You've got to navigate the system, You've got to navigate the balance of you, can't you know this? Saying, Michael, you can't govern from opposition, yeah, spot on. So the system, you can't govern from opposition.
Don:But if I was the Lord Mayor, I'd tell you what I'd be doing.
Phil:And trust me, Adrian, I've got no interest, as you know.
Don:But I tell you it's simple. I turn around and go.
Phil:These are my five things that I'm doing. And guess what? Councillors, I don't care where you come from, male or female, I don't care what age you are, and I don't give two shits of what party you represent. I'll work with you if your people want you.
Phil:But one thing I will do is, I'm going to hold you accountable and I'm going to remind the people in your electorate that if you did a great job, vote for you again, and if they didn't do a great job, vote you out. And that goes for me. If I've done the five things I said I'm going to do, vote me back in. If I don't do them, vote me out. You know and.
Lucas:I might not get elected, but I certainly deserve some shit. If we can spread this conversation far and wide, do you think in Australia we have the opportunity that people can make this happen and force the government to change?
Phil:Great question. Well, I'm only going to say one thing. I raised this with Tony Abbott. I've said I've worked with politicians and been in closed rooms, and there was four of us in this room and Tony looked at me and he said Philip, you're a very smart man and you're very, very strategic, but you're too pragmatic. And I said why is that? Tony and he was the Prime Minister at the time and he says because what you're asking for, is a republic.
Phil:And I'm going. Well, how does that line up with a republic? That's how we vote in Brisbane and he goes, well, in order to change that system. It's a public discussion. Now I don't know, because I never knew Tony that well, even though I spent a few times in a room with him about strategy and branding and the rest of it.
Don:But, michael, maybe you can elaborate.
Phil:I've got a saying in my company, in my family, in myself it's not no because it's yes. If Think about that. I don't want anyone's disposition, including myself or my children or any of my team members, to come to me with no because it's yes. If this is possible, if and maybe that's the short answer we operate on a no because you put something forward and everyone wants to tell you why you can't do it, instead of you put something forward and people tell you what do I need for this to happen? Michael can elaborate better. He knows the system much better than I do.
Don:No, it's a mindset, but I think Lucas and Donovan, you guys are entrepreneurs.
Phil:I think this is one of the defining characteristics of those who become successful entrepreneurs and they look to problem solve. They don't look at the problem and say, well, because of the problem, we can't continue, we can't be successful, we can't go forward, we can't be successful, we can't go forward. They look at the problem and say this is how we will probably fix it, this is how we can fix it. They fix it and they become successful. And you know, I don't really see too many politicians thinking like that, because they don't really have that entrepreneurial DNA.
Phil:So it goes back again to that collective group who become politicians. Are they the business people? Are they the business owners? Are they the innovators? Are they the business people? Are they the business owners? Are they the innovators? Are they the likes of you guys that are creating businesses? Are they the likes of you guys that are investors in businesses and business opportunities? Because you think about how you will solve the problem, because if you don't solve the problem, your investment goes down the toilet. If you don't solve the problem, you don't create a business. If you don't solve the problem, you lose your staff and your reputation. So I think you know that's just one of the features that is part of this landscape, this democratic landscape that we live in.
Don:There's a lot of wisdom in that, Michael, what you just said. I think we're going to need to wrap this up, but I'd love to come back in a couple of weeks after the results have come out. Then we can really unleash the real out.
Phil:Then we can really unleash the real, then we can really unleash. I mean, there's so much I could say, but can't say right now because it's just not fair to anybody.
Phil:But yeah, I think we should be doing a post-mortem, that's when the listeners, if they're not listening to this, they should listen to episode one, listen to this and then get ready for the postmortem, because, regardless of who wins, I don't think. Here we go. How about? I'm not telling you how to wrap this show up, but you know, born entrepreneur, you know? No, no, no, the wrap up. How do we think it's going to go down on Saturday? I mean, that's a question to all of you guys.
Lucas:Well, I just want to go back to Michael's point before, and then we'll do that.
Lucas:Sorry to take over the show Before you, your point before Michael, and I guess, on this conversation today, it actually makes me really sad that I feel like that we're never going to have, let's call it, the smart people in the room making decisions for the country. I feel like my gut feeling is based on this conversation, the previous one and what's happening in society right now. We're not going to have that in the next 10, 15, 20 years because we're not seeing it.
Lucas:We're not seeing it come from anyone, which means that we're going to be having this exact same conversation we're having today in 10 years from now in 20 years from now, and it actually makes me quite sad thinking about that out loud, as we dive into this so let's start into your wrap-up conversation, Philip, and let's continue that on the next.
Don:I agree with you, lucas. It's unfortunate, but I think that's the honest truth. To answer your question, phil, I'll go first and let the smarter people go after me, but I think it's a foregone conclusion. From what I'm seeing, not Labour Anthony Albanese. It looks like he will be prime minister post the weekend, but it's going to be. At. What cost is going to be the really interesting thing to look at. I don't think he's going to have a majority and, yeah, that's going to be pretty sad. Who he makes the deals with.
Lucas:He's not making any deals. Did you not see the conversation? Did we not call this at?
Don:the start Lucas.
Phil:He can say whatever he wants. He can say whatever he wants. He can say whatever he wants, Lucas what do you think?
Lucas:Every business owner and entrepreneur that I speak to everyone's voting LNP. My experience yesterday going to the booth and knowing there's 20 other parties that we have never heard of or ever hear in the media is like we have to choose those people.
Don:It's ridiculous. I just don't understand that entire process. It makes it super sad. I don't know where my preferences votes are going, no idea where the people I chose yesterday, no idea where my preferences are going, which is super frustrating for myself personally.
Lucas:Yeah, labor's got it in the bag. Like everything you hear the media, the word on the street, the way that polls have gone.
Don:I don't think Labor's got it in the bag. I think Albanese's got it in the bag to become Prime.
Phil:Minister.
Don:Labor doesn't have it in the bag.
Phil:Albanese let's say Michael, what's your prediction? Well, I'll just make this observation. For those who are left, who have not voted yet, like myself, can I just say I hope you vote for Australia Just vote for the country, not necessarily for yourself.
Phil:Yeah, and it's a good point. And my point is simple, a bit long-winded, but I'll give you the synopsis because I've been very close to it. I think that it will be exactly like Don said. It will be a Prime Minister Albanese. At what cost? I don't think he will win the 75 seats he needs. He will need to do a deal. If it is Prime Minister Albanese, let it be with the most majority possible and with the less Greens as possible, because they're purely destructive and I'm predicting that Greens will lose 10% to 17% of their primary vote. There you go, because people have really understand. And I'm trying to really trip carefully here, because I said I promised the juicy bits for the post-mortem but people have woken up in certain areas that they have not delivered what they said they were going to deliver. Like in my area, the person who came third actually won because of the preferential and nobody saw him until six months ago and they're fed up with that. So I'm pretty sure that it won't be the same person again. So the prediction is the.
Phil:Greens will drop and that. However, there's two other parts to this. There is still hope for Peter Dutton, because of the One Nation. So if One Nation get a massive swing and pick up a lot of seats, there is still hope.
Don:And then the third part, because you've got to remember the LNP have got less people to form government with right, the less parties that will actually side with them.
Phil:But the big disruptor in this, who is very intelligent and got far too much money but is a complete nutter especially the way he's been carrying on is the trumpet.
Lucas:Yeah.
Phil:I'm calling the trumpet because that's how the techs come up to everybody. The trumpet which comes up on my phone three times a day and you can't block them.
Lucas:The trumpet is the biggest disruptor because I'll give you this prediction and some prediction.
Phil:If the Trump, who is a very smart man and has so much money, people have no freaking idea he is more liquidable than Elon Musk. There you go. Liquidable means access to cash. Elon Musk, if he actually put those resources to use. Coming back to Michael's point, forget the party.
Phil:He can influence people to vote for Australia but he uses those resources in the most stupid way and I met with some of his team and the team is lovely, mind you. Again, I can't talk out of school yet he uses those resources in the most stupid ways. Everyone's getting those texts that mean nothing, that we just have a disruption.
Phil:So I know it's long-winded, but you know, mate, lucas and Don, I just want to. When people listen to podcasts, when people listen to shows like this, to me it's always what can I share that people wouldn't know, or what can I talk about that is behind the scenes, that they can't find or present it in a way and analyse it in a way for them to understand, and that's one of them.
Lucas:He could actually actually make a difference with his money and his smarts, because he's a highly intelligent man, I went to the king's square yesterday to vote and I just saw yellow everywhere, everywhere, and I was like what is this marketing campaign? What is this advertising campaign? I?
Don:had no idea what it was.
Lucas:I had no idea what this yellow, just swarms of yellow everywhere. I had no idea what it was and I knew I was getting those trumpet text messages. I was like, oh, what's this spam message? I had no idea what it was and I knew I was getting those Trumpet text messages. I was like, oh, what's this spam message? I had no idea what it was and I was like and it wasn't until after I voted I was like what is this Trumpet thing?
Phil:And then I dove into it and did more research. I was like what the hell? I had no idea. He was going to spend over $100 million of his own money On the campaign last one.
Don:I know the person who ran this.
Phil:I know the person that did his advertise that he embarked was 120 million palas. He spent last time in advertising. I don't know It'll be north of 100 this time as well.
Lucas:Sounds like he needs strategies, Philip. Well mate it's not even that.
Phil:I love Michael's point.
Lucas:Vote for Australia, if I was running with politics.
Don:Forget the brands, forget the names. That's what I keep saying on my posts. Vote for accountability. Vote for the future. My whole thing and I'm being very vocal is vote for accountability. Accountability, accountability, accountability, accountability you say something, make them do it. If they don't do, it get rid of them. If Peter Dutton was happening to get in, and he doesn't do what he said he was going to do get rid of him too.
Phil:Next said he was going to do get rid of him too. Next one, next, next, next, and we might actually start to get to a position where people value authenticity.
Lucas:I actually think that's probably a really good way to sum this up right if take it, take the next 20 years and let's sum it down to the next, say five years. Get rid of as many shit people as possible as quickly as we can do, we find a gem that will actually take us to the next 20 years.
Don:Thanks, guys, appreciate the time that was another enlightening discussion.
Phil:Thanks for having us.
Lucas:Thank you, looking forward to the post-mortem Phil's already called it.
Phil:That's what we're calling the next episode, we should bring some others. We should bring some other people to the table.
Don:Definitely. Yes, I think we've got the capacity to get some more people in. Thanks guys.
Phil:Thank, I think we've got the capacity to get some more people in. Thanks, guys, have a good one, thank you Cheers.
Lucas:Thanks very much, guys, really appreciate it. Back to Australia on Saturday. Hope you enjoyed this exciting episode of the Mastering Podcast. If you got value from today's conversation, hit that subscribe button now and share this episode with a friend. Until next time.