Speaker 1: General Man, Welcome to the late play.
Speaker 2: Well good evening, Thanks for joining us.
Speaker 3: I'm James Macpherson, with Liz Storra and Caleb Bond coming
Speaker 3: up tonight.
Speaker 2: The Dublin Zoo have a unique.
Speaker 3: Strategy to teach an orangutang how to care for its young.
Speaker 2: We'll talk about that later.
Speaker 3: Plus when we look at the papers, the latest nap
Speaker 3: plan results are out bad news for parents and even
Speaker 3: worse news for students. Plus the Victorian government, Renegg's on
Speaker 3: a plan to raise the age of criminal responsibility. We
Speaker 3: get to all of that when we look at tomorrow's papers.
Speaker 3: But first, the government unveiled a new digital ID today
Speaker 3: that no one is asking for and that promises to
Speaker 3: help us do what we're already doing without government interference.
Speaker 3: The government is calling it the Trust Exchange, which sounds
Speaker 3: a little or wellyan when the government asks you to
Speaker 3: trust them and wheels out bill shorten of all people
Speaker 3: to do the asking, well, that should be a big red.
Speaker 4: Text is something brand new and world leading. It is
Speaker 4: not a wallet, nor an app nor ID, but rather
Speaker 4: it is a secure means by which to exchange with
Speaker 4: a third party who you are, your identity and what
Speaker 4: you can do your Credentials Service. Australia is partnering with
Speaker 4: other government systems to develop texts to give Australians the
Speaker 4: ability to verify their identity and credentials based on official
Speaker 4: information already held by the Australian government.
Speaker 3: So the idea is you go to a club or
Speaker 3: a hotel and scan a QR code that connects your
Speaker 3: information on you GOV with the third party's computer system
Speaker 3: verifying your ID, or you could just you know, pull
Speaker 3: out your driver's license. The government's spending eleven point four
Speaker 3: million dollars and collaborating with that trusted partner Google because
Speaker 3: we know they're trustworthy to develop the Trust Exchange. Now
Speaker 3: this comes as lab prepares to officially launch its digital
Speaker 3: ID on Decet first, with Katie Gallagher today assuring Australians
Speaker 3: were still bloodied and bruised by what governments did to
Speaker 3: them during the pandemic, that we can trust the government.
Speaker 5: We have been very clear.
Speaker 6: It is a voluntary system, it is a safe system,
Speaker 6: it is a secure system, and it's simply a means
Speaker 6: of verifying yourself in a way that gives you control
Speaker 6: of your own documentation.
Speaker 3: Voluntary, safe and secure lizid trust the government with all
Speaker 3: of your information.
Speaker 5: Never.
Speaker 7: I mean, this is truly a backflip from the usual
Speaker 7: motors upperande of the government.
Speaker 5: Right. So normally with.
Speaker 7: Every policy, with every new law that they come up with,
Speaker 7: the strategy is first, we've got to make the people
Speaker 7: want it, right, so we talk about whatever the case
Speaker 7: may be, so that the people are crying out for
Speaker 7: a solution, and then we the government say, oh, that's
Speaker 7: so terrific. Is a solution that I prepared earlier and
Speaker 7: always wanted to roll out. But now that the government
Speaker 7: and the media has done a number on you, the public,
Speaker 7: and you're crying out for it, now we look like
Speaker 7: the saviors. Every single time you have a measure like
Speaker 7: this which increases people's reliance on the government while increasing
Speaker 7: the government's power over the people.
Speaker 5: That right there is the access of evil. That is
Speaker 5: where you go no bad policy.
Speaker 7: We do not want it. And as much as they
Speaker 7: keep saying, oh, it's totally opt in, if you don't
Speaker 7: want it, you.
Speaker 5: Know, vote with your feet, I hope we do Australia.
Speaker 7: I hope this ends up being an absolute burning dumpster
Speaker 7: fire of an idea. I hope they waste every single
Speaker 7: million that they spend on it because the takeup is
Speaker 7: so low. But the plan seems to be here that
Speaker 7: the corporates will then take this on.
Speaker 5: So Bill Shorten.
Speaker 7: Talked about at the press conference today. Telstra and Google
Speaker 7: have welcomed the opportunity. Tell you know the one that
Speaker 7: got hacked just like five minutes ago, and hundreds, hundreds
Speaker 7: and hundreds it was thousands and thousands actually of their
Speaker 7: customers had their data. It was a massive breach and
Speaker 7: everyone was up and arms about it.
Speaker 5: So again to.
Speaker 7: Us the experts, I'm sure it'll go don't find this time.
Speaker 7: But they're trying to convince us now that oh it's
Speaker 7: so onerous producing your license, isn't it. Don't you hate
Speaker 7: traveling with a passport? What a peski passport?
Speaker 5: These things aren't onerous. Nobody has asked the government for this.
Speaker 7: So instead of convincing the people like they normally do,
Speaker 7: all there's a massive problem and we need to fix it,
Speaker 7: and the people cry out for it, and then.
Speaker 5: They say, oh, oh, here we go, they're.
Speaker 7: Instead just introducing this measure and everyone's sat there going,
Speaker 7: hang on a minute, we don't want this. We already
Speaker 7: know that if the government wanted to access a lot
Speaker 7: of information on us, they can at the click of
Speaker 7: a button. They've got your passport, they've got your driver's license,
Speaker 7: they've got you jaywalking three years ago.
Speaker 5: At the intersection of this and that. But what this
Speaker 5: is going to do is.
Speaker 7: Usher in an autocratic, technocratic type government. Where As we've
Speaker 7: heard Edward Snowden and so many other whistleblowers over the
Speaker 7: years talk about this is talking about getting all your
Speaker 7: information in one spot them, or you use that digital ID,
Speaker 7: They've got everything on you with just using whatever number
Speaker 7: you're given as a digital ID.
Speaker 5: And this is truly.
Speaker 7: Nefarious at a time when we're seeing people in the
Speaker 7: UK or a three thousand of them just last year
Speaker 7: arrested for a post that they've made on Facebook. So
Speaker 7: keep in mind their capacity now to store your data,
Speaker 7: collect everything on you, how you're spending your money, what
Speaker 7: you're spending your money on, your life location, when you're
Speaker 7: spending that money. Therefore, you've got your values already spelled out.
Speaker 7: The power this gives them to control you as an
Speaker 7: individual is unprecedented.
Speaker 5: No government should have this much control.
Speaker 8: I want to say when Shorten was talking about we're
Speaker 8: going to develop techs. My first thought was, well, the
Speaker 8: Adelaide Crow's great Taylor Walker has already scored six hundred
Speaker 8: and thirty nine goals for the Crows. We don't need
Speaker 8: to develop him at all. You've woken up finally shortened.
Speaker 8: He's a Melbourne man. I'm sure he understands he's AFL.
Speaker 8: But it's interesting here because it does potentially fix one problem.
Speaker 8: And that one problem is that if you go to
Speaker 8: a club or something right and you have to give
Speaker 8: your license over in order to enter it, you've got
Speaker 8: private companies that you know, we don't know what sort
Speaker 8: of rules and regulations they have around collecting that personal information,
Speaker 8: so that there's a problem in the system where that
Speaker 8: could be hacked, stolen, et cetera. And so what they're
Speaker 8: saying is this is a if you are code that
Speaker 8: you'll be able to use that verifies your identity without
Speaker 8: necessarily giving your identity to that business, et cetera. Fine,
Speaker 8: I understand that, but what that means is then centralizing
Speaker 8: all of that data in one place with the government.
Speaker 8: So sure, you might be concerned that the club that
Speaker 8: you've given a copy of your license to could be
Speaker 8: hacked or someone at that club could go through that
Speaker 8: data and steal it and use it for a nefarious purpose.
Speaker 8: But you then set up a system that basically says
Speaker 8: to anyone, well, if you want shed loads of data
Speaker 8: and personal information, this is the one place to go
Speaker 8: and steal it from. And it opens up the possibility
Speaker 8: that the government is then tracking where you are going,
Speaker 8: because if you are using a government system to prove
Speaker 8: your identity at a club or a pub, or an airport.
Speaker 1: Or whatever it might be.
Speaker 8: If you're going for a rental and you need to
Speaker 8: prove your identity to a real estate agency, etc. The
Speaker 8: government could then potentially track every place where.
Speaker 1: You have used that.
Speaker 8: So we go back to COVID, where we had QR
Speaker 8: codes that we were cemant to use I use the
Speaker 8: word meant advisedly there to check into certain venues because
Speaker 8: they were doing contact tracing, et cetera. And we were told,
Speaker 8: don't worry, that's all water tight, that data is not
Speaker 8: going to be used by police or anything. But we
Speaker 8: saw in WA that that check in data was accessed
Speaker 8: by police in some cases for criminal cases that were
Speaker 8: as minor as you know, a scuffle on a party
Speaker 8: strip on a Saturday Night. Like, we're not talking about
Speaker 8: murder and rape. We're talking about.
Speaker 1: Pretty low level crimes.
Speaker 8: That the Western Australian Police were accessing that data to
Speaker 8: make their job easier. And so if you're handing it, yeah,
Speaker 8: so if you're using that government system, it opens up
Speaker 8: the possibility that those cookies are being kept and that
Speaker 8: a law enforcement agency or another government agency may want
Speaker 8: to use that for its owner at another time. So, yes,
Speaker 8: you plug the one hole of the danger of personal
Speaker 8: information being stolen by a third party. But you've then
Speaker 8: concentrated even more personal data with an even bigger.
Speaker 1: Entity, the entity that rules your entire life.
Speaker 8: And we're say, yes, that's going to solve the problems
Speaker 8: of personal privacy. I don't think so.
Speaker 3: And of course you've got the development of a digital
Speaker 3: idea at the same time that they're working on a
Speaker 3: central bank digital currency.
Speaker 2: A blind Freddie can see.
Speaker 3: You put those two things together and you get a
Speaker 3: situation where literally you are at the mercy of a
Speaker 3: bureaucratic whim who can cut you off immediately from all
Speaker 3: sorts of things, including your ability to spend or to
Speaker 3: use carbon. And we've already seen in justin Trudeau's Canada
Speaker 3: that they just shut down or froze people's bank accounts
Speaker 3: because they protested against government policies. So it's inch by inch,
Speaker 3: little by little, but there's enough people ringing alarm bells,
Speaker 3: and yet the government just keep pushing through.
Speaker 2: And the original.
Speaker 3: Legislation for the digital ID was rushed through the Senate
Speaker 3: with barely an opportunity for anyone to even speak to it,
Speaker 3: which should be another red flag that when the government
Speaker 3: won't allow any debate on an issue, they know that
Speaker 3: it's something that should raise objection.
Speaker 1: And it's the same as last week we're talking about
Speaker 1: a story.
Speaker 8: It was the International Airport at Abu Dhabi where they're
Speaker 8: going to introduce facial recognition that means you can move
Speaker 8: through the entire airport, through security, through your gate, etc.
Speaker 8: Without ever having to produce your passport or your visa documents, etc.
Speaker 8: Because all of that will already be collated and they'll
Speaker 8: be able to tell who you are by using a
Speaker 8: camera that scans your face and then suddenly has all
Speaker 8: of this information in front of you. And on the
Speaker 8: face of it, a lot of people will go that
Speaker 8: makes my life easier, and so they buy into that
Speaker 8: because it feels like it's a more convenient system. But
Speaker 8: every time you sell off a little bit of convenience,
Speaker 8: you're selling someone else your data. And as we always say,
Speaker 8: if the product is free, you are the product. You
Speaker 8: are the thing they are tracking because your data is
Speaker 8: so damn valuable. And while we're talking about craziness from government,
Speaker 8: let's go to local government.
Speaker 1: In Queensland. The Mayor Tom.
Speaker 8: Tate, the Mayor of the Gold Coast, that is Tom Tate,
Speaker 8: has been investigated by the Office of the Independent Assessor,
Speaker 8: which is sort of a governing body that looks over
Speaker 8: and assesses misbehavior within councils in Queensland, and has found
Speaker 8: that mister Tate committed misconduct. He was discriminatory by describing
Speaker 8: a new counselor as a ranger.
Speaker 1: Can you believe it?
Speaker 8: It's you can't call someone a ranger anymore. Now. All
Speaker 8: of this started from a post that was put online
Speaker 8: by John Paul Langbrook, who is an MP on the
Speaker 8: Sunshine Coast. He's a mate of this new councilor, Joe Wilkinson,
Speaker 8: and he was just pointing out that another ranger has
Speaker 8: been elected to the Gold Coast Council because he replaced
Speaker 8: another ranger who was the former councilor for that board,
Speaker 8: and then Tom Tait, the mayor, jumped on board and said,
Speaker 8: oh yeah, another ranger, so.
Speaker 1: And so so.
Speaker 8: He was then questioned about this at a press conference,
Speaker 8: where he again used the offending word ranger.
Speaker 9: Oh I don't know as a wranger, so what can
Speaker 9: I say? It doesn't matter diversity. Bob Lacastro ran. Bob
Speaker 9: Lacaster's opposition ran on diversity. In Bob's words, he was
Speaker 9: on stage, he goes diversity. I don't know if anyone
Speaker 9: noticed that he is black. So we've got diversity.
Speaker 10: Here, you know.
Speaker 9: I think Owen Jones, retired counselor, he was a ranger.
Speaker 9: You lose one rang again another ranger? What the hell?
Speaker 9: That's what the Gold Coast all about.
Speaker 8: Seriously, who could take issue with that? Lose one ranger,
Speaker 8: get another ranger.
Speaker 1: I thought it was fine.
Speaker 8: And by the way, Tom Tator's evasion descends himself, so
Speaker 8: surely he has a free bass to say whatever the
Speaker 8: hell he likes about anyone. He certainly would have faced
Speaker 8: a lot more discrimination and racism in his life, particularly
Speaker 8: as a child growing up in Australia. You can imagine
Speaker 8: the slurs that would have been thrown at him. But
Speaker 8: he calls someone a ranger and the Office of the
Speaker 8: Independent Assessor has gone after him. They've now referred it
Speaker 8: to the Council and suggested that they discipline him. He
Speaker 8: has said that he will fight any action they try
Speaker 8: to take. And it's worth noting that the councilor Joe
Speaker 8: Wilkinson himself has said that he is a quote unquote
Speaker 8: proud ranger. He was never contacted by the Office of
Speaker 8: the Independent Assessor about this complaint. It was an anonymous
Speaker 8: complaint that someone else put in saying that the use
Speaker 8: of ranger is comparing redheaded people to a ranger. Tang's
Speaker 8: And we know the situation where a pub investigatory body
Speaker 8: in Queensland has spent public money looking into a mayor
Speaker 8: because he called someone a ranger and the ranger in
Speaker 8: question wasn't even offended.
Speaker 5: Do me a favor. This is the culture now.
Speaker 7: The person who's supposed to be offended doesn't even need
Speaker 7: to be offended. In fact, he wasn't even asked about it.
Speaker 7: But somebody else is up in arms about it, and
Speaker 7: once their day in court and we're now.
Speaker 5: Honestly, if I was a rate payer in the Gold Coast,
Speaker 5: I would be up in arms about this too.
Speaker 7: What kind of nonsense are you spending our dollars on?
Speaker 7: Thank you very much during acrost of living crisis. No less,
Speaker 7: we're supposed to be concerned about this.
Speaker 5: I'd love to.
Speaker 7: Hear from a coalition of rangers say, is this offensive?
Speaker 7: Do you find this offensive? I personally adore rangers. I
Speaker 7: literally cannot see a natural ranger in public without walking
Speaker 7: up to them and being like, you are a god
Speaker 7: among men. Sixteen year old finishing his slurpy at Machers
Speaker 7: with his mates being like thanks.
Speaker 5: Because I just think it's incredible.
Speaker 8: You're red headed mail and your fancy Liz storer.
Speaker 7: See this brilliant color of hair, and they're just like
Speaker 7: represent you can't miss them. I would be proud as
Speaker 7: heck to be a ranger. And that's exactly what the
Speaker 7: counselor in question has said.
Speaker 3: The big question for me on this story is are
Speaker 3: you still haing to call people like a copper top?
Speaker 2: Is that okay?
Speaker 8: Wellinger?
Speaker 3: The Office of Independent Assessor found that they found four things.
Speaker 3: Number One, ranger means a ranger team, so effectively, you're
Speaker 3: calling someone a monkey.
Speaker 7: I literally never put that together until tonight.
Speaker 3: Thank god we have the Office of Independent Assessor to
Speaker 3: make such decisions. Second, they found that the term ranger
Speaker 3: is associated with discriminatory feelings, so now they're ruling on
Speaker 3: the feelings of an anonymous person.
Speaker 2: Who we don't even know. If they were present when
Speaker 2: this was made, they certainly weren't offended.
Speaker 3: Third, they found that the use of the word in
Speaker 3: this context was not funny. So now the Independent Assessor
Speaker 3: are ruling on what is funny and what is not
Speaker 3: without even asking the person who was the subject of
Speaker 3: the word. So the other funny thing about this is
Speaker 3: the Independent Assessor found that in twenty twenty one. So
Speaker 3: they went back three years and found Tom Tait has
Speaker 3: previous form because three years ago he made a joke
Speaker 3: about Chinese people, saying you wouldn't want a cat near
Speaker 3: them because Chinese people might cats. He apologized for that,
Speaker 3: said it was inappropriate, but the Office of Independent Assessor said, ah,
Speaker 3: you've got form. You've been saying naughty things previously got through.
Speaker 8: His Asian man who made an Asian joke.
Speaker 3: But the fact that you said something three years ago
Speaker 3: or not influenced the independent assessor's decision.
Speaker 7: He doesn't even have a digital ida yet, and they're
Speaker 7: able to be like, there's that thing that he posted
Speaker 7: three years ago.
Speaker 5: I mean, this is just utterly this is the laughing stock.
Speaker 7: This is absolutely everyone in government at every level, state, local,
Speaker 7: and federal, should just be like, can you not do
Speaker 7: these things? Because it just makes us look more of
Speaker 7: a joke than we already do.
Speaker 3: The person who made the complaint should be charged with
Speaker 3: being a public nuisance and you should not be allowed
Speaker 3: to make anonymous complaints, especially like that about public officials,
Speaker 3: because essentially you put them through I don't know how
Speaker 3: many well, this complaint was made in April the press conference,
Speaker 3: so presumably it's been months that Tom Tait, who's supposed
Speaker 3: to be running one of the largest cities in the country,
Speaker 3: our tourist capital, he's been dealing with this rubbish. God
Speaker 3: knows how much money's been spent on it. Find the
Speaker 3: anonymous complainte and send them the invoice.
Speaker 8: You can't even call a ranger a ranger anymore. I mean, look,
Speaker 8: this is you're if you're the complainant and you're watching
Speaker 8: something for your ranger Ranger, Ranger, Ranger, Ranger, Ranger, right
Speaker 8: the way.
Speaker 7: There's no way the complainant watches sky. Let's be honest,
Speaker 7: if they were a skywatcher, they'd have far better things
Speaker 7: to do with their time.
Speaker 5: To the US now, where Elon Musk has.
Speaker 7: Had an interview with Donald Trump on his platform X.
Speaker 7: This was literally a live phone conversation that everybody in
Speaker 7: the world got to listen into.
Speaker 5: But it was a bit late going to air on.
Speaker 7: X because they had a massive cyber attack against their servers.
Speaker 7: Someone didn't want this conversation going live. Here's Elon Musk
Speaker 7: explaining at the very beginning of the call why it
Speaker 7: was a bit late.
Speaker 11: Sorry, guys, We unfortunately had a massive distributed nail service
Speaker 11: attack against our servers and saturated all of our deadlines.
Speaker 11: As this massive attack illustrates a lot of opposition to
Speaker 11: people just hearing what President Trump has to say.
Speaker 7: The combined views and subsequent conversations following that phone conversation
Speaker 7: that everyone could listen into already has over one billion
Speaker 7: impressions on X, far reaching reach that obviously someone didn't
Speaker 7: want these guys to have. Here's a reporter prior to
Speaker 7: this conversation asking out the White House Press secretary.
Speaker 5: This conversation's going to take place.
Speaker 7: We're worried about misinformation, disinformation by two of the most
Speaker 7: powerful men on earth.
Speaker 5: What are you guys going to do about it? Are
Speaker 5: you going to go? Are you going to do anything
Speaker 5: about this?
Speaker 12: Elon Musk is slated to interview Donald Trump tomorrow tonight
Speaker 12: on X. I don't know if the President's going today.
Speaker 12: Feel free to say if he is or not. But
Speaker 12: I think that misinformation on Twitter is not just a
Speaker 12: campaign issue, It's an America issue. What role does the
Speaker 12: White House or the President have and sort of stopping that,
Speaker 12: or stopping the spread of that, or sort of intervening
Speaker 12: in that.
Speaker 13: You've heard us talk about this many times from here
Speaker 13: about the responsibilities that social media platforms have.
Speaker 7: How scared are these people of a simple conversation between
Speaker 7: two men that we can all listen into. I mean,
Speaker 7: do me a favor. European Commissioner Terry Bretton literally took
Speaker 7: to X prior to the conversation to warn everyone. He said,
Speaker 7: with great audience comes greater responsibility, as there is a
Speaker 7: risk of amplification of potentially harmful content in connection with
Speaker 7: events with a major audience around the world. I sent
Speaker 7: this letter to Elon Musk and there was this letter
Speaker 7: the size of a Gutenberg Bible, expressing his concerns over
Speaker 7: what may or may not be discussed during this conversation.
Speaker 7: Elon Musk quickly treated this meme from Tropic Thunder. He said,
Speaker 7: this is what I really wanted to say. Back to
Speaker 7: Terry Breton. You can read that for yourself. So Elon
Speaker 7: Musk obviously is not taking any of this nonsense, and
Speaker 7: thank goodness, these conversations are taking place. The reason why
Speaker 7: Elon Musk wanted to have this conversation is he said,
Speaker 7: you know, in all these interviews that people see with Trump,
Speaker 7: and they're normally quite hostile interviews, you're not seeing the
Speaker 7: real person. And given to me, he's a real person
Speaker 7: that I have conversations with, not every day, but by the bye,
Speaker 7: I want them to see that kind of Trump. And
Speaker 7: how just talking for a couple of hours, which they did,
Speaker 7: you see a different side of someone. And they talked
Speaker 7: about a plethora of different of issues plaguing not just
Speaker 7: America but the world. It was incredibly entertaining. Who wouldn't
Speaker 7: want to be across that? And yet somebody, a great
Speaker 7: many somebodies really wanted to shut this down because dialogue
Speaker 7: is the enemy.
Speaker 5: If you're a lefty, you don't want dialogue.
Speaker 7: That's why deplatforming and cancel culture is their motto, because
Speaker 7: they just can't stand for people to actually come across
Speaker 7: as all actually quite reasonable.
Speaker 3: The crazy thing about this is we've been repeatedly told
Speaker 3: now for years that Donald Trump is the threat to democracy,
Speaker 3: and you've got White House reporters saying, is the Biden
Speaker 3: administration going to shut down the Republican nominee so that
Speaker 3: nobody can hear him? And yet Trump, of course is
Speaker 3: the danger to democracy? And what about election interference when
Speaker 3: you've got the European Commissioner warning Elon Musk, We're going
Speaker 3: to be listening to what the Republican nominee says and
Speaker 3: will take action against you if you don't stop him
Speaker 3: from spreading disinformation.
Speaker 2: But I agree with you. It was nice to sit.
Speaker 3: And just hear a long conversation. And it was a
Speaker 3: I guess, a soft ball interview. It was a bit
Speaker 3: of a mutual admiration society a conversation.
Speaker 8: It was an interview.
Speaker 5: They were chatting.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and the other thing it highlighted is that while
Speaker 3: Kamala Harris hides away from the media and won't do
Speaker 3: any interviews, Donald Trump's willing to sit there in front
Speaker 3: of the entire world for two hours and free lance
Speaker 3: on whatever they want to talk about. My favorite part
Speaker 3: was at the beginning Caleb, where Elon Musk is having
Speaker 3: a major fanboy moment and he's talking about how he
Speaker 3: decided to endorse Donald Trump after he saw his courage
Speaker 3: at the assassination attempt where Trump, having been shot in
Speaker 3: the air, stood to his feet and raised his fist,
Speaker 3: and Elon Musk is saying, I.
Speaker 2: Was so inspired. How was it for you? And Donald
Speaker 2: Trump goes, well, it wasn't pleasant.
Speaker 8: And this is what they're really worried about, is humanizing
Speaker 8: Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: And we've played some clips.
Speaker 8: Recently of a pro golfer who went out and played
Speaker 8: around with him, and they filmed some clips of him
Speaker 8: on the golf course. And it's seeing Trump away from
Speaker 8: the rallies and away from the political campaigning and being
Speaker 8: himself that they are scared of because people might look
Speaker 8: and go, oh, actually, Donald Trump's not that bad of
Speaker 8: a guy after all, And.
Speaker 1: Certainly here in Australia.
Speaker 8: I don't know whether it's the same case in the US,
Speaker 8: but certainly here in Australia we have a tendency to
Speaker 8: look up to leaders who we can find relatable in
Speaker 8: some sort of way.
Speaker 1: It's why Bob.
Speaker 8: Hawke was so successful, because you could see a bit
Speaker 8: of yourself in him. And what they're worried is that
Speaker 8: people will look at Trump and go, actually, he's not
Speaker 8: the megalomaniac that we've been told that he is. He's relatable,
Speaker 8: he's a human at he can have a good conversation
Speaker 8: and a laugh on whatever, and that they'll go, well, actually,
Speaker 8: maybe I am willing to give him a go. Find
Speaker 8: it so absurd that we talk about misinformation or disinformation
Speaker 8: being spreading. For heaven's sake, if they're going to start
Speaker 8: going after politicians for spreading misinformation or disinformation, there won't
Speaker 8: be a single politician.
Speaker 1: Left in the world.
Speaker 8: But they will stop at nothing to try and to
Speaker 8: stop Trump from having these opportunities. And this is what
Speaker 8: they have been doing for the better part of a year,
Speaker 8: all those stupid law fare cases, the trumped up stuff
Speaker 8: about the hash money trial, on and on it goes, right,
Speaker 8: and I don't know why they keep doing this kind
Speaker 8: of stuff in this case and alleged de dos attack
Speaker 8: to try and stop the interview from going ahead. Why
Speaker 8: they keep doing this stuff because every time someone tries
Speaker 8: to stop Donald Trump from either running or having his say,
Speaker 8: it works in his favor because people look at it
Speaker 8: and go, well, if they don't want me to hear
Speaker 8: from him, then why don't they want.
Speaker 1: Me to hear from him.
Speaker 8: They keep shooting themselves in the foot with this kind
Speaker 8: of attack.
Speaker 1: It makes no sense.
Speaker 3: My other favorite part of the interview where he's talking
Speaker 3: about meeting with Vladimir Putin and Trump warns Putin he
Speaker 3: must not invade a Ukraine and or else Trump will
Speaker 3: you know Rick Havoc? And Putin says no way, and
Speaker 3: Trump says way way, which is a high level diplomacy
Speaker 3: right there. Trump also spoke about a channel to the
Speaker 3: bit of Ronald Reagan, actually promising that if he's reelected,
Speaker 3: he will create an iron dome for the USA.
Speaker 4: One of the things we're going to do is we're
Speaker 4: going to build an iron dome over us.
Speaker 9: You know, Israel has it.
Speaker 1: We're going to have the best iron dome in the world.
Speaker 8: We need it, and we're going to make it all
Speaker 8: in the United States.
Speaker 3: What's interesting about that is that it was in nineteen
Speaker 3: eighty three that Ronald Reagan promised that he would build
Speaker 3: They called it star Wars. We will shoot incoming missiles
Speaker 3: down from out of space. Everybody mocked it, interestingly, including
Speaker 3: Joe Biden at the time, said it was a stupid idea.
Speaker 3: Thank god, the Israelis didn't listen to Joe Biden. They
Speaker 3: actually successfully built an iron dome. It's worked well for them,
Speaker 3: and so it's interesting that Trump brings that idea back
Speaker 3: with everything that's happening in the world right now. Biden Israel,
Speaker 3: it's an interesting idea and one that I think people
Speaker 3: should support.
Speaker 7: Why wouldn't you, Well, Israel has a land mass of
Speaker 7: just over twenty two thousand square kilometers. The US has
Speaker 7: a land mass of over nine point eight million square kilometers.
Speaker 7: I would love to And also the operation costs. The
Speaker 7: building costs are huge, but the operation costs of the
Speaker 7: iron dome, which obviously in Israel's case, is worth every
Speaker 7: cent and then some are extortionate. For a single battery
Speaker 7: that powers the iron dome, you're talking about one hundred
Speaker 7: million dollars just in manufacturing costs, and for every missile
Speaker 7: that they fire, it's tens of thousands of dollars for
Speaker 7: all those incoming barrages that they get that the iron
Speaker 7: dome then fires up and kills them in mid air.
Speaker 5: I love it.
Speaker 7: It's the most sophisticated piece of this missile weaponry on
Speaker 7: the face of the earth.
Speaker 5: Tats off to the Israelis. Who else could pull that off?
Speaker 7: But I'm just not sure that this is fully ecosted
Speaker 7: or fully.
Speaker 5: What are those things that Trump comes out with and
Speaker 5: you're just like, buddy, really, I'm not sure.
Speaker 2: Well, Reagan came out with it.
Speaker 3: You've got two TV stars who became presidents who both
Speaker 3: championing this idea.
Speaker 5: I reckon it's interesting, it is fantastical.
Speaker 8: Well, you know, good luck to him, is all I
Speaker 8: can say.
Speaker 1: You should call it a nation building project. If you
Speaker 1: call something a nation.
Speaker 8: Building project, then you can get away with basically anything right.
Speaker 8: Sticking in the US, Time magazine went to Kamala Harrison
Speaker 8: asked her for an interview for an upcoming profile, and
Speaker 8: Kamala Harris said no, which he said to basically anyone
Speaker 8: who's asked her for an interview. And I've been a
Speaker 8: journalist for most of my working life, and generally the
Speaker 8: rule has been that if if you ask someone for
Speaker 8: an interview and they say no, you blackball them because
Speaker 8: they have something to hide. If you don't want to
Speaker 8: play the game with me, then why would I do
Speaker 8: anything to support you. But Time magazine nevertheless has come
Speaker 8: out with a gushing front page.
Speaker 1: Take a look at this.
Speaker 8: This is what they are putting out about Kamala even
Speaker 8: though she won't even cooperate with them as being described.
Speaker 8: And you can say, look at that image. They're oh,
Speaker 8: she looks like Barack Obama. She's about to sweep in
Speaker 8: and take over the US. I think the headline on
Speaker 8: the front of the magazines is it's her time. I mean,
Speaker 8: for Heaven's sake, you could not be more gushing, could you.
Speaker 8: And it's worth noting as well the comparison between Trump
Speaker 8: and Harris when they have put both of them on
Speaker 8: the front page. Take a look at this side by
Speaker 8: side in you can see there what they are getting at.
Speaker 8: And this has been round criticized. As you can imagine,
Speaker 8: David Hogg, who's a gun control activist in the US,
Speaker 8: is no elections come down to vibes, and Carmala has
Speaker 8: got the vibes right now. And this is the point,
Speaker 8: this is what they are driving towards. We talked before
Speaker 8: about humanizing Donald Trump. What they are trying to do
Speaker 8: here is humanize Kamala Harris in a certain way and
Speaker 8: lord her because anyone who's actually watched her recognizes that
Speaker 8: she's a bit loco.
Speaker 1: But you know, if we build her up enough, if we.
Speaker 8: Build her up, surely she'll be able to get over
Speaker 8: the line.
Speaker 1: Others have carried on.
Speaker 8: Joey Mannarino on Twitter said, here's the new cover of
Speaker 8: Time magazine. They worship a woman, as I said before,
Speaker 8: who refuses to even talk to them. Absolutely ridiculous and absurd.
Speaker 1: And this is the thing.
Speaker 8: I cannot think of any other politician, candidate, etc. Who
Speaker 8: could so roundly ignore the media and yet still get
Speaker 8: the complete support of the media. Generally, if you go
Speaker 8: for an interview with someone and they refuse, like it's
Speaker 8: full court press against them, You've given them the opportunity
Speaker 8: to have their say. They've refused to have their say, Well,
Speaker 8: we're coming for you now, but instead for Kamala it's
Speaker 8: a protection racket.
Speaker 3: I remember many years ago, someone gave me a twelve
Speaker 3: month subscription to Time magazine, and I was so excited.
Speaker 3: These days you could not pay me to read Time Magazine,
Speaker 3: although because we were talking about it tonight, I.
Speaker 2: Guess I was paid to read it, and I did.
Speaker 3: So you don't have to a three thousand word essay
Speaker 3: which could basically be summarized as vibe, TikTok, and vibe.
Speaker 3: They described Kamala Harris's a cross between Beyonce and Obama,
Speaker 3: and they said, and I quote, she's pulled off the
Speaker 3: swiftest vibe shift in modern political history, because politics is
Speaker 3: all about vibe shifts. They said, she's dominated TikTok and
Speaker 3: she's campaigning in a fight for the future, without describing
Speaker 3: what that meant. But they did say also, she was
Speaker 3: a quote Jedi master who's been underestimated. But when people
Speaker 3: underestimated her, they didn't count.
Speaker 2: On get this Liz.
Speaker 3: Her ability to create viral memes and to eye roll
Speaker 3: at Republican weirdows.
Speaker 14: Wow.
Speaker 2: They said.
Speaker 3: She's been endorsed by celebrities such as Charlie XCX Who's that?
Speaker 2: And Megan the Stallion.
Speaker 3: I had to ask my nineteen year old boys who
Speaker 3: are these people? They also said a union leader has
Speaker 3: called her, quote a bad ass woman, which raging endorsement.
Speaker 8: I didn't know. John Secret endorsed to Kamala has Let me.
Speaker 2: Give you a few more highlights.
Speaker 3: They said, elections come down to vibes, and Kamala has
Speaker 3: got the vibes right now.
Speaker 2: And the Time magazine three thousand words.
Speaker 3: It finished with a thirty nine year old woman interviewed
Speaker 3: to make the final comic. This is where they land
Speaker 3: right and they interview this woman, which is they found her.
Speaker 3: She was wearing a childless cat Ladies for Harris t
Speaker 3: shirt which qualifies her to speak, and she said, quote,
Speaker 3: the whole vibe has just shifted political I read it.
Speaker 7: I think political analyst Rob Smith put it well when
Speaker 7: he said, in three weeks, the US regime propaganda media
Speaker 7: transformed Kamala Harris from a national embarrassment to an iconic
Speaker 7: and transformational politician while not even pretending to know or
Speaker 7: care what she believes.
Speaker 5: Absolutely incredible.
Speaker 7: The White House Press Secretary asked by a reporter to
Speaker 7: just name some of Kamala Harris's achievements.
Speaker 5: Do you think the Press secretary could do it?
Speaker 7: What does the President see as the vice president's biggest.
Speaker 15: Achievement during their time in pat office together.
Speaker 13: So look, because they've been partners, those achievements have been done. Certainly,
Speaker 13: those historic unpresident achievement have been done together. I'll say this,
Speaker 13: the President believes in the vice president leadership, her temperament,
Speaker 13: her experience, and he is and he has said this himself.
Speaker 13: One of the proudest decisions that he made in twenty
Speaker 13: twenty was selecting her as vice because he believed that
Speaker 13: she can go on day one and you've seen that.
Speaker 13: You've seen them do that together on day one of
Speaker 13: this administration. That doesn't change. I'm not going to parse
Speaker 13: out anything from here.
Speaker 7: Of course, she couldn't name any good yea because there
Speaker 7: are none. Kamala Harris has been touted as the most
Speaker 7: useless VP in the world in the history of American politics.
Speaker 5: She's wildly unpopular. But it just goes to show.
Speaker 7: Once the media machine kicks in, everyone just gets on board.
Speaker 5: That's what they do best.
Speaker 7: And haven't they done a number on a lot of
Speaker 7: people in America. But to a very unusual staous We've
Speaker 7: now got our former Prime Minister Paul Keating in a
Speaker 7: stoush with Speaker of the House Nancy.
Speaker 5: Polosi over what you ask. Well, he had this to.
Speaker 7: Say regarding Taiwan the other day, the A B. C.
Speaker 7: You can probably pick up on where he put a
Speaker 7: foot wrong.
Speaker 1: What this is.
Speaker 15: All about is the Chinese laying claim to Taiwan, and
Speaker 15: the Americans are going to say, no, no, we're going
Speaker 15: to keep these taib when these people are protected even
Speaker 15: though they've got they're sitting on Chinese real estate. The
Speaker 15: Chinese real estate is part.
Speaker 5: Of China, is part of Chinese.
Speaker 7: Say so, Taiwan is not a democracy standing alone. No, No, Well,
Speaker 7: Nancy Pelosi wasn't taking a.
Speaker 5: Bit of it.
Speaker 14: That's ridiculous. It is not Chinese real estate, and he
Speaker 14: should know that Taiwan is Taiwan and it's of the
Speaker 14: people of Taiwan who have a democracy there. I think
Speaker 14: that was a stupid statement with or I have no
Speaker 14: idea about Keating, but I think it was a stupid
Speaker 14: statement to make. And I don't know what his connection
Speaker 14: is to China that he would say such a thing,
Speaker 14: but it is really not in the security interest of
Speaker 14: the Asian Pacific region. For people to talk that.
Speaker 7: Way must be a very cold day in Hell.
Speaker 5: We're agreeing with Nancy Pelosi.
Speaker 7: Somebody helped me out, but Paul Keating wasn't taking her
Speaker 7: rebuke sitting down. He then puts out a statement saying.
Speaker 16: This from the former leader of the US House of Representatives,
Speaker 16: who went in a regulously indulgent visit to Taiwan in
Speaker 16: twenty two, very nearly brought the United States and China
Speaker 16: to a military confrontation for the first time since the
Speaker 16: Second World War.
Speaker 7: Both our countries believe it is in no one's interest
Speaker 7: for Taiwan to be subject of some sort of violent takeover.
Speaker 5: That said, I make this clear in public comment.
Speaker 7: I represent the national interests of Australia, not the national
Speaker 7: interests of the US, nor indeed the interests of Taiwan.
Speaker 5: Are you sure you're not talking.
Speaker 7: About representing the national interests of China?
Speaker 8: Wells statements, Sir Pelosi says the you know, I don't
Speaker 8: know what connection that Keating might have to China that
Speaker 8: would lead him to make these comments. He's he's spent
Speaker 8: thirteen years on the China Development Bank, which is wholly
Speaker 8: owned by the CCP, so you know, maybe he did
Speaker 8: have a connection to China that would lead him to
Speaker 8: make these comments, and the fact that he continues to
Speaker 8: make these comments even he's not on the payroll anymore,
Speaker 8: but he continues to shill for China. He says, it's
Speaker 8: in the interests of Australia. Mate, have you not realized
Speaker 8: that we're in the Pacific region and that if China
Speaker 8: advances on Taiwan, we are going to be dragged into
Speaker 8: war and it emboldens China to come for other Pacific
Speaker 8: nations that surround us. The bloke's gone mad.
Speaker 3: I just thought in a fight between Paul Keating and
Speaker 3: Nancy Pelosi, it's a shame that there has to be
Speaker 3: a winner.
Speaker 2: So we're going to go to a break.
Speaker 3: When we come back, we look at what's making news
Speaker 3: in tomorrow's papers, including bad news for parents the nap
Speaker 3: Plan results.
Speaker 2: Talk about that in the moment. Welcome back.
Speaker 3: Let's take a look at what's making news in tomorrow's papers.
Speaker 3: Will start with the latest nap Plan results that are
Speaker 3: being reported across most of tomorrow's papers. The Adelaide Advertiser
Speaker 3: has a great headline nap Plan fail upper case commas
Speaker 3: bamboos or kids can't use grammar reads The headline students
Speaker 3: reading skills have gone backwards, with Napplan testing showing they
Speaker 3: are also struggling with basic grammar such as the proper
Speaker 3: use of commas and capital letters. The results don't make
Speaker 3: for good reading. Four hundred thousand children, according to the
Speaker 3: latest results in grades three, five, seven, and nine need
Speaker 3: catch up tutoring, with a third of them classified as developing,
Speaker 3: which is a nice way of saying they haven't yet
Speaker 3: reached minimum standards, So a third of children in grades three, five, seven,
Speaker 3: and nine. The results find that boys are twice as
Speaker 3: likely as girls to start high school with being functionally illiterate,
Speaker 3: and ninety percent of Indigenous kids. Here's the key living
Speaker 3: in remote communities. So it's not ninety percent of indigenous kids,
Speaker 3: but those in remote communities failed to reach minimum standards.
Speaker 3: So Jason Clair, the Education Minister, is going to use
Speaker 3: this as a stick to demand that schools, in return
Speaker 3: for funding, get back to teaching phonics, get back to
Speaker 3: having regular tests for maths, which might be a good idea,
Speaker 3: and what they're calling results based education making idea is revelatory.
Speaker 7: This reminded me of part of the conversation that Donald
Speaker 7: Trump had with Elon Musk was regarding education, and he
Speaker 7: was laying into the fact that they're ranked.
Speaker 5: Thirty ninth in the world.
Speaker 7: This is the United States of America, ranked thirty ninth
Speaker 7: in the world, and they spend more per student than
Speaker 7: any country in the world. And I think we have
Speaker 7: a similar situation and here in Australia, because we've never
Speaker 7: spent more on education than we do today. We have
Speaker 7: thrown more and more money on it year in year
Speaker 7: out because the results just.
Speaker 5: Keep getting worse and worse.
Speaker 7: We've talked about the fact that kids leaving year twelve
Speaker 7: have not got proper sweat, spelling or grammar. They're still
Speaker 7: all thumbs when it comes to the basics. We keep
Speaker 7: throwing more money at it. Nothing seems to be changing.
Speaker 7: And Trump was talking about the fact that he wants
Speaker 7: to give education back to the States, so then it
Speaker 7: would create more of a competition between the states who's
Speaker 7: educating their children better.
Speaker 5: When we talk about this stuff, we are.
Speaker 7: Literally talking about the future of our country. These kids
Speaker 7: are our future leaders and they're not being educated properly.
Speaker 7: And I think it's not just simple things like going
Speaker 7: back to phonetics.
Speaker 5: Yes, thank you very much.
Speaker 7: That is very necessary, but education across the board has
Speaker 7: gone downhill year in and year out. Aren't being educated properly.
Speaker 7: Parents are putting their trust in the state, and the
Speaker 7: state just keeps failing.
Speaker 8: There's no funding issue. There is a curriculum and mechanics issue,
Speaker 8: a teaching issue, at content issue, and for years and years,
Speaker 8: at the behest of the AEU, the Teachers' Union, we've
Speaker 8: thrown more and more money at it, and all you
Speaker 8: end up with is a more expensive, failing system.
Speaker 1: It's the same system we had before.
Speaker 8: It just costs a lot more than it used to cost.
Speaker 8: And I mean, you've got kids now at school, young
Speaker 8: kids who can't read and write, but they can tell
Speaker 8: you what a welcome to country is and that they
Speaker 8: live on stolen land, like they're learning this stuff before
Speaker 8: they learn the basics of reading and write and adding
Speaker 8: up and multiplication, etc. And all of this business about
Speaker 8: them not knowing how to use correct grammar and they
Speaker 8: don't get capital letters and apostrophes, etc. It's because of.
Speaker 1: This online trend.
Speaker 8: And I don't know some of you may have seen
Speaker 8: it online. I don't know why it started or where
Speaker 8: it came from, but it's a real thing. Online now
Speaker 8: to not use capital letters at the beginning of a sentence.
Speaker 8: There are no proper nouns. You don't use apostrophes, commas, etc.
Speaker 8: It's all just sort of some blomonge of language. Which
Speaker 8: is the greatest argument. Get your kids off the internet,
Speaker 8: take the devices away, put a book in front of them,
Speaker 8: send them out to play with their friends and their
Speaker 8: brothers and sisters and learn things in real life instead
Speaker 8: of relying on online all the time. It is poisoning
Speaker 8: the minds of these children. And by the way, if
Speaker 8: you try to teach your kid to read and write
Speaker 8: before they go to school and they rock up to
Speaker 8: school with some ability, the teachers get shirty about it
Speaker 8: because they've got kids that can't that they then need
Speaker 8: to teach, and they also have to deal with these
Speaker 8: kids that also have ability already. The whole thing is obsud.
Speaker 5: That was the issue that we had.
Speaker 7: We were homeschooled for three years because we were living
Speaker 7: in country Victoria, a little town called Kayabram shout Out.
Speaker 7: And when my mum decided we moved to Perth and
Speaker 7: mom decided I'll send them back to school. The school
Speaker 7: didn't know what to do with us because we were
Speaker 7: leagues ahead of the kids in our age group, especially
Speaker 7: when it came to English, not so much algebra.
Speaker 5: That was on suit. But yeah, that's that's a real issue.
Speaker 7: So you do the right things by your kids, say,
Speaker 7: you do have them reading books and so they learn
Speaker 7: where apostrophes go because books are well written, so they
Speaker 7: understand apostrophes here, commas there, this is what starts with
Speaker 7: a capital. And then they go to school and the
Speaker 7: teachers are like, well, don't have any time for you, guys,
Speaker 7: because I've got to spend it all on the ones.
Speaker 5: That are way behind.
Speaker 7: It's an unfair system. To the front page of.
Speaker 5: The CANS Post.
Speaker 7: Now team CANS thirty thousand dollars retreat councilors bond at
Speaker 7: luxury beaches resort. Get this, rape payers, rate payers have
Speaker 7: forked out thirty thousand dollars for CANS counselors to attend
Speaker 7: a two a team building event at a five star
Speaker 7: resort on the Northern Beaches where they developed a quote
Speaker 7: refreshed vision end quote.
Speaker 5: For the region. Are you kidding me? I was a
Speaker 5: city counselor.
Speaker 16: We never went on retreats, much less at five star resorts.
Speaker 7: But maybe they would argue that they need to be
Speaker 7: refreshed in order to come up with a refreshed vision.
Speaker 2: I thought the.
Speaker 3: Election campaign, you give your vision, what do you need
Speaker 3: to then go.
Speaker 2: Away at a taxpayer or rate payer expense.
Speaker 3: There's nine councilors in can so at thirty grand. If
Speaker 3: my naplan tests served me well, it's about three three
Speaker 3: hundred dollars per counselor for a two day.
Speaker 7: Retreat to be jolly refreshed, drifreshed. We're expecting an incredible
Speaker 7: vision for cans.
Speaker 8: I dare say at that cost they were well refreshed
Speaker 8: because they consumed quite a few refreshments during that retreat.
Speaker 8: We must be up to reason seven, four hundred and
Speaker 8: eighty nine now to abolish councils. They keep mounting. Let's
Speaker 8: go to the Canberra Times. Where can you believe they're
Speaker 8: looking for Canberra's next top model. A modeling agency is
Speaker 8: searching for Andrew Barr lookalikes. He's the Chief Minister of
Speaker 8: the Act for what are assumed to be Liberal Party
Speaker 8: attack ads before the Act election. The Chief Minister called
Speaker 8: the search weird and creepy. The modeling agency says we're
Speaker 8: doing an open casting for Andrew bar lookalike for a
Speaker 8: political ad campaign. If you know someone who looks similar,
Speaker 8: please have them email. Clear images, no sunglasses or hats
Speaker 8: to be worn now, James, I reckon, if you go
Speaker 8: to macas every day for the next five weeks, you
Speaker 8: may actually be able to size up for this job.
Speaker 8: If you just sort of beef up in the face
Speaker 8: a bit. You've got the stubble, you've got the sort
Speaker 8: of thin hair on top. I reckon you could be
Speaker 8: perfect for this. I'm just trying to talk you up, Jane.
Speaker 3: Next you be calling me a ranger and I'll be
Speaker 3: making an anonymous complaint to HR about you. What made
Speaker 3: me laugh about this is they've described the search as
Speaker 3: weird and creepy, channeling a little bit of the Kamala
Speaker 3: Harris campaign there into the actam have.
Speaker 5: These guys not heard of? AI? You can get it
Speaker 5: for free. You can make Andrew ba say whatever you like.
Speaker 5: Just get a nap. It's on your phone.
Speaker 2: Come on, all right, we're going to go to a break.
Speaker 2: When we come back.
Speaker 3: The Dublin Zoo teaching its orangutang to look after its young,
Speaker 3: employing thirty women to help in the process.
Speaker 2: We'll talk about that in a month. Welcome back, all right.
Speaker 3: The Dublin Zoo lives they had a problem with their
Speaker 3: orangutang and came up with a unique way to solve
Speaker 3: the point.
Speaker 5: They did so.
Speaker 7: This particular orangutang had given birth to a baby in
Speaker 7: twenty nineteen and twenty twenty two, but both those infant
Speaker 7: orangutangs had died because she seemed to have a problem
Speaker 7: with her maternal instincts. So Dublin Zoo came up with
Speaker 7: a roster of thirty women thirty mothers to take turns
Speaker 7: coming into the zoo and showing this rangutang how to breastfeed.
Speaker 5: Check it out.
Speaker 2: Wep, No, we.
Speaker 5: Don't have any footage of that.
Speaker 7: Maybe it was a bit too you know, to late
Speaker 7: night TV to show you.
Speaker 5: That steman from the zoo, said Madure, who is.
Speaker 7: The orangutang was extremely interested in watching the women feed
Speaker 7: their babies through the glass, even mirroring some of their actions.
Speaker 7: Lizzie Reeves, who was a lactation specialist who got involved
Speaker 7: with this, was quoted as saying, a lot of women said, look,
Speaker 7: and orangutang doesn't wear a T shirt, So they whipped
Speaker 7: off their t shirts and their bras, so Madure could.
Speaker 5: Literally see everything.
Speaker 7: Norah Murphy, who was a first time mother taking part
Speaker 7: in this training exercise with Madure, said, you are going
Speaker 7: from being a mother yourself to trying to help a
Speaker 7: mother to be. You would be talking to her saying, look,
Speaker 7: this is what you are meant to do.
Speaker 5: What our heartwarming.
Speaker 7: Trying to show madere look when your baby rides, this
Speaker 7: is how it's done.
Speaker 8: The bit of the story you left out, though, Liz,
Speaker 8: was that this orangutang was refusing to breastfeed because someone
Speaker 8: had called it a ranger and so it had made
Speaker 8: it to the public contempt. But before we leave you tonight,
Speaker 8: you might have heard that the Federal government's religious discrimination
Speaker 8: bill is dead, and that I say good. But the
Speaker 8: reason for it, apparently is social cohesion.
Speaker 2: We provided.
Speaker 10: Legislation to the coalition a long time ago, now months ago.
Speaker 10: One of the things I've spoken about is the need
Speaker 10: for greater social cohesion. And the last thing that Australia
Speaker 10: needs is any devisive debate relating to religion and people's faith.
Speaker 10: Agreement hasn't been able to be reached because there's been
Speaker 10: no suggestions from the Coalition of amendments.
Speaker 8: And we know the Prime Minister does not like divisive
Speaker 8: debate because of course the Voice succeeded.
Speaker 1: Didn't it.
Speaker 3: Well, the last thing we need is a fight to
Speaker 3: protect the rights of Christians.
Speaker 2: Gee, that would be a terrible debate.
Speaker 7: By definition is divisive because you need to have two
Speaker 7: opinions like in order to That's the whole idea of
Speaker 7: the public square.
Speaker 2: Exactly. That's it from us, stick around. Coming right up
Speaker 2: is the Reade pendenty Show.