Speaker 1: Late General, Welcome, Late Base, thanks for your company. I'm
Speaker 1: James Macpherson with Caleb Bond and filling in for this
Speaker 1: store at Danika de Giorgio.
Speaker 2: Coming up tonight.
Speaker 1: Katie Perry returns to Earth from her space odyssey, but
Speaker 1: her head is still very much up in the clouds.
Speaker 2: Will show you why a little later.
Speaker 1: Plus, when we get to what's making news tomorrow, the
Speaker 1: Reserve Bank says another rate cut isn't needed because apparently
Speaker 1: mortgage holders are doing just fine. And the Australian newspaper
Speaker 1: reporting doctors slamming Anthony Albanese's flagship health policy. All of
Speaker 1: that when we look at tomorrow's newspapers. But first, the
Speaker 1: SICKI is a great Australian tradition, right, call in sick
Speaker 1: on a Friday and give yourself an early mark. Of course,
Speaker 1: if you're going to do this, you probably shouldn't post
Speaker 1: photos of yourself enjoying a long weekend on social media.
Speaker 1: But that's exactly what a Melbourne solicitor did, and when
Speaker 1: he got sacked, he blamed stigma around mental health days.
Speaker 1: Commercial lawyer Mitchell Fuller claimed to be sick last year
Speaker 1: when he was actually on an interstate footy trip. Enjoying
Speaker 1: the AFL's gather around with mates. He told the Fair
Speaker 1: Work Commission he was entitled to the SICKI because he
Speaker 1: needed a mental health day, and besides, he'd run out
Speaker 1: of his ADHD medication. He said, quote, I could barely
Speaker 1: hold a conversation, let alone focus on legal drafting. The
Speaker 1: existing situation in the office became almost unbearable. I was
Speaker 1: burning out on fast forward. I realized I desperately needed
Speaker 1: a circuit breaker with close friends that care about me.
Speaker 1: I had plenty of personal leave, and I decided to
Speaker 1: take the Friday off. So he went to Adelaide, watched
Speaker 1: the AFL, went to the beach, and hung out in
Speaker 1: pubs with his mates. When the Commission found he'd lied
Speaker 1: to his employer and deserved to be sacked, well, Mitchell
Speaker 1: Fuller transformed himself into a mental health advocate. He told
Speaker 1: journalists and I quote, as a society at large, we
Speaker 1: need to quit sniggering at the idea of mental health
Speaker 1: days and start writing them explicitly into workplace laws. Caleb,
Speaker 1: you're a big fan of the AFL. Do you agree
Speaker 1: with him? Mental health day would be about in order
Speaker 1: for you?
Speaker 3: Well look, I will say that I would never do
Speaker 3: anything like this, and I have never done anything like this.
Speaker 4: I have been renowned in all.
Speaker 3: Of my workplaces for avoiding sick days at all costs,
Speaker 3: which is great because when you finally want to pull
Speaker 3: a SICKI no one questions at whatsoever. And I'm so
Speaker 3: dedicated to this channel here, scar News and my employment
Speaker 3: that I will be working on Good Friday and Anzac
Speaker 3: Day this year because you know, I just want to
Speaker 3: be here all the time to serve you the viewer.
Speaker 3: That being said, the man has a point.
Speaker 4: You know.
Speaker 3: He wanted to go to Adelaide, the greatest city in
Speaker 3: the country, and for that I do not blame him.
Speaker 3: The therapeutic qualities of that city I'm sure would help
Speaker 3: fix him, and the therapeutic qualities of Ossie rules football.
Speaker 4: Cannot be denied either.
Speaker 3: I can't think of a better way to get your
Speaker 3: head back in shape than to go to Adelaide and
Speaker 3: watch eight or nine games of footy in the one
Speaker 3: place on one weekend and have a few beers with your.
Speaker 4: Mates at the pub.
Speaker 3: I'm going down a warning ball in a few weeks
Speaker 3: time for the races down there. They call it schoolies
Speaker 3: for middle aged men. I don't quite qualify as a
Speaker 3: middle aged man, i'd like to think.
Speaker 4: But we know what.
Speaker 5: I go away for that week.
Speaker 3: And I come back feeling fantastic because I've gone and
Speaker 3: drunk shed loads of wine and watched some Mortses race
Speaker 3: and hung out with some mates, and I feel brilliant
Speaker 3: when I so, I can see his argument he should.
Speaker 1: Have told his employer that he just said he was
Speaker 1: sick and didn't give any specific reason.
Speaker 5: Well, I've won a few things. First.
Speaker 6: I love how Caleb started off his little preamble thereby,
Speaker 6: you know, basically sucking up to.
Speaker 5: His employer on his employment.
Speaker 6: The channel here like this, Now, look, who hasn't taken
Speaker 6: a sick day?
Speaker 5: Come on, if you haven't taken.
Speaker 3: A set, I've only ever had legitimate sick days. I've
Speaker 3: never thrown a sicky.
Speaker 6: You've never thrown a sick Well, I mean, Caleb, you
Speaker 6: are a star employee.
Speaker 5: Congratulates employee.
Speaker 2: You have taken sickis.
Speaker 5: I've I've had taken a SICKI before.
Speaker 4: Go on, you know what the most recent onnder there, oh.
Speaker 5: Like maybe six seven years ago, wasn't anything?
Speaker 7: All?
Speaker 5: Come? Yeah, mu's come on.
Speaker 6: I mean, you know, look, we don't do it all
Speaker 6: the time, but yes, I think that the majority of
Speaker 6: people out there would say that they have indeed taken
Speaker 6: a SICKI.
Speaker 5: Here and there, and that's fine.
Speaker 6: I don't have a problem with that. But a couple
Speaker 6: of things with this story. At firstly, the mental health
Speaker 6: excuse really irks me actually from the very very beginning.
Speaker 5: I'm not going to go into people's own mental health problems.
Speaker 6: However, he wants to put mental health leave into laws
Speaker 6: That really bothers me from a business perspective, from an
Speaker 6: employer perspective, to then have that clause in somebody's contract
Speaker 6: as well, that they're allowed to take several days off
Speaker 6: here and they're willing nearly whenever they feel like it
Speaker 6: to take mental health days.
Speaker 5: I do actually think it is.
Speaker 6: In a police officer's contract that they are allowed to
Speaker 6: take mental health days. Fair and that I think is
Speaker 6: completely fair enough that I that I understand, but really
Speaker 6: that's just more burden on the employer. Now, second thing
Speaker 6: I would point out, if you are indeed going to
Speaker 6: take a sicky for goodness sake, rule number one, amateur,
Speaker 6: this is and this is this is real amateur hour
Speaker 6: from this bloke. Okay, do not post it on yes
Speaker 6: social media, go into hiding. Go into hiding, pretend like
Speaker 6: you're not, pretend that you are indeed sick.
Speaker 5: Do not post it on your social media. That is
Speaker 5: the problem.
Speaker 6: But with this case, the Fair Work Commission actually threw
Speaker 6: it out, so you just got to wonder what's going
Speaker 6: on really.
Speaker 1: With his point, you know he wants this inscribed in law.
Speaker 1: We should point out he is a former Green's candidate,
Speaker 1: so well figure my point with this, and you know
Speaker 1: he wanted a mental health day. Fair enough, AFL, But
Speaker 1: I'm a North Melbourne supporter, Caleb Helbn game any.
Speaker 2: Health today to recover from my mental health day.
Speaker 5: It's a very fair point.
Speaker 3: But but I mean, you know he took two sickies
Speaker 3: and the law firm found out four months later when
Speaker 3: they looked at his Instagram and then decided to sack him.
Speaker 3: I mean, if this is the standard that they're now
Speaker 3: going to set up in the Fair Work Commission, that
Speaker 3: you can be sacked for bumming two sickis and your
Speaker 3: employer finds out four months later, so clearly that you
Speaker 3: know that not much had happened in that time. That
Speaker 3: caused them to go and try and sack him. Like,
Speaker 3: if that's now the standard for getting sacked, there are
Speaker 3: a lot of people in this country who are going
Speaker 3: to be in serious trouble. I mean, remember when Bob
Speaker 3: ll said anyone, any employer who sacked someone for not
Speaker 3: turning up to work tomorrow is a bum. Of course,
Speaker 3: when we won the America's Cup, I mean, going by
Speaker 3: the Fair Work Commission, now it would sound like everyone
Speaker 3: can be sacked for chuck and a Sicki's much dangerous.
Speaker 5: I think it's too extreme, to be honest.
Speaker 6: I can understand if you were an employer you've got.
Speaker 5: A staff member who's chuck.
Speaker 6: To SICKI has gone on a holiday, gone on a vacation,
Speaker 6: gone to the gather around, done something like that. You
Speaker 6: might you would definitely think of them as a less
Speaker 6: favorable employee.
Speaker 2: You would.
Speaker 6: They probably would miss out, maybe on key roles in
Speaker 6: the company. I understand perhaps I would get less work.
Speaker 6: I completely understand that, but I'm not really sure if
Speaker 6: it's grounds for dismissalm.
Speaker 5: Come on, I don't know.
Speaker 1: I think there may have been some.
Speaker 3: I just want to know who his footy team isn't
Speaker 3: and whether in fact that's why he had the second sicky,
Speaker 3: because he might have been in the same position as you, James.
Speaker 3: Now you might have seen over the last couple of
Speaker 3: days Peter Dutton's son Harry has been with him on
Speaker 3: the campaign trail. He popped up yesterday, took questions from
Speaker 3: the media, spoke to the media about the fact that
Speaker 3: he wants to be able to buy a house for himself,
Speaker 3: but it's very expensive to do so he's a little
Speaker 3: reminder if you didn't see it yesterday.
Speaker 8: I am saving up for a house, and so as
Speaker 8: my sister back and a lot of my mates. But
Speaker 8: as you've probably heard, it's almost impossible to get in
Speaker 8: in the current states. So I mean my saving like mad,
Speaker 8: but it doesn't look like we'll get there in the
Speaker 8: near future. But we'd love that to change.
Speaker 3: And soon after the lefty journalists and proponents of Albanomics
Speaker 3: were saying, well, why doesn't your father just pay for
Speaker 3: you to buy a house? As though lefties have now
Speaker 3: decided that it's a good thing to use intergenerational wealth
Speaker 3: to get into the property market. I thought they would
Speaker 3: have been on board with the idea of everyone able
Speaker 3: being able to afford things for themselves without having to
Speaker 3: lean on the wealth of their parents to do it.
Speaker 3: But no, when it comes to Peter dutton son saying
Speaker 3: he'd like to be able to do it under his
Speaker 3: own steam, Well, why aren't you doing it for him,
Speaker 3: mister Dutton. Now I don't quite get the reasoning here,
Speaker 3: But Peter Dudden yesterday wouldn't actually answer the question. He
Speaker 3: waited until today to say, yes, he would help out
Speaker 3: his son. Will you help them if their saving for
Speaker 3: a deposit and proving to be a good financial, financially
Speaker 3: responsible kids.
Speaker 9: And I think our households are no different to many
Speaker 9: households where want our kids to work hard to say,
Speaker 9: and will help them with a deposit at some stage.
Speaker 3: But now he could have just said that yesterday and
Speaker 3: put it all to bed. But as far as I'm concerned,
Speaker 3: it's a moronic line of questioning because what Datlan is
Speaker 3: trying to say here, and what his son Harry is
Speaker 3: trying to say, is that he shouldn't matter whether your
Speaker 3: parents have any money to decide whether you can get
Speaker 3: into the housing market.
Speaker 4: Surely we shouldn't be in.
Speaker 3: A position where you have to rely on your parents
Speaker 3: or your grandparents in order to be able to get
Speaker 3: into the housing market.
Speaker 4: For a lot of people.
Speaker 3: That's not how it used to be, but it is
Speaker 3: now for most people the way it is. If you
Speaker 3: want to get into the market, you've either got to
Speaker 3: rely on mom and dad to dip into the bank
Speaker 3: now to help you to secure your loan or to
Speaker 3: give you some extra money for a deposit, or you
Speaker 3: have to wait for them to drop off the perch
Speaker 3: and inherit their home in order to own property. This
Speaker 3: is not a great situation, is it. Because of course,
Speaker 3: if you believe in conservative politics, you need to understand
Speaker 3: that people have to own something, They need something to
Speaker 3: conserve if they're going to continue thinking that way. So
Speaker 3: Dutton saying, look, we want people to be able to
Speaker 3: buy houses under their own steam, and for some reason
Speaker 3: or another, the left doesn't think that's a good thing.
Speaker 3: So it's interesting to see how this has played out.
Speaker 3: And of course today Harry was back out with mister
Speaker 3: Dutton on the campaign trailer. He posted a photo on
Speaker 3: x this morning saying how happy and proud he was
Speaker 3: to have his son out on the hustings with him. Look,
Speaker 3: it may have blown up a little bit in his
Speaker 3: face yesterday. I wonder why it's taken this long to
Speaker 3: get the family out there.
Speaker 4: I know they were on.
Speaker 3: The sixty minutes interview that they did with Karl Stefanovic,
Speaker 3: but do you know what, Harry seems like an intelligent,
Speaker 3: upstanding young fella who was trying to make a legitimate
Speaker 3: argument about how he wants to be able to buy
Speaker 3: a home on his own without having to rely on
Speaker 3: his dad to bankroll him. Why do they get a
Speaker 3: bit more of this out there.
Speaker 4: The coalition and that they could give anything a go
Speaker 4: at this point.
Speaker 5: I agree.
Speaker 6: I think that Harry is a secret weapon that the
Speaker 6: Liberals should have rolled out from the very beginning of
Speaker 6: this campaign, because don't forget, Harry is twenty years old.
Speaker 6: He actually represents a cohort that the Liberals are desperately
Speaker 6: trying to target through these housing policies, through this first
Speaker 6: home biased scheme that they have announced as well, because
Speaker 6: they need to win over that cohort because we know
Speaker 6: that a lot of young voters, a lot of millennials
Speaker 6: for example, a lot of gen Z, they're actually turning
Speaker 6: to the minor parties and that's where the Greens could
Speaker 6: potentially pick up a lot of seats from these younger voters.
Speaker 6: But you know, Harry, I guess represents as well Peter
Speaker 6: Dutton's family life. And Peter Dutton has been painted, as
Speaker 6: we know, as this hard man, this you know, tough, tough, strong,
Speaker 6: strong politician. Well when we see this softer side, people
Speaker 6: actually warmed.
Speaker 5: To him and warm to his family.
Speaker 6: And I know when Peter Kredlin did that sit down
Speaker 6: podcast interview you remember with Peter Dutton, he actually spoke
Speaker 6: a lot there about his family.
Speaker 5: And it's a side we didn't.
Speaker 6: See, whereas Alvo he's always trotting out lines about Jodi
Speaker 6: when when they're going to get married and Toto the dog.
Speaker 3: For goodness sake, don't forget his mum who brought him
Speaker 3: up in housing and please.
Speaker 6: We can't forget about the social housing comments, and don't.
Speaker 1: Forget his son who got conscious lounge to access, and
Speaker 1: we can't forget that.
Speaker 5: Family point, that family point as well.
Speaker 6: But I just thought that the media question though about
Speaker 6: whether or not Peter Dutton would help his son out
Speaker 6: was absolutely appalling, because what parents, if they had the
Speaker 6: means to do so, wouldn't actually want to help out
Speaker 6: their children get into the market.
Speaker 1: But this is the funny side of it, right, So
Speaker 1: so you say Harry is there to emphasize Peter Dutton's
Speaker 1: softer side, but it took him fully a day and
Speaker 1: a bit to decide whether or not he'd help his
Speaker 1: son out.
Speaker 5: No, I agree should the very beginning.
Speaker 6: But I just think it was a stupid question to
Speaker 6: begin with, because what parent out there if you had
Speaker 6: the means to do so.
Speaker 5: You've got two sons.
Speaker 6: You've got two sons, James, if you had the means
Speaker 6: to do so to help your kids get into the
Speaker 6: into the market, you would do exactly after I pay
Speaker 6: to go together out and after you've taken a sicky
Speaker 6: as well at the same time. But the point is,
Speaker 6: it's like this gotcha moment, We've got him.
Speaker 1: I wrote with this, But stupid than the question was
Speaker 1: whoever's advising Peter Dutton they should prepare for these things.
Speaker 1: That they allowed that to become the issue rather than
Speaker 1: the difficulty for young people.
Speaker 2: Getting into the housing market.
Speaker 1: That's a damnation on the Liberal Party policy advisors, not
Speaker 1: on the media. What's interesting to me is whether they
Speaker 1: brought Harry into this discussion, as you say, to connect
Speaker 1: with younger people regarding this very important issue of housing,
Speaker 1: or whether it was not really about housing at all,
Speaker 1: it was about as you've also alluded to, trying to
Speaker 1: soften Peter Dutton's image in that sixty Minutes interview back
Speaker 1: in February, I think it was Dutton's wife, Curly said
Speaker 1: that her husband had been traditionally given tougher jobs in
Speaker 1: politics and that had created a certain persona which was
Speaker 1: not conducive to winning over voters.
Speaker 2: But she said, I hope you can see him.
Speaker 1: As another person if he does become the next Prime minister. Well,
Speaker 1: I would argue people have got to see him as
Speaker 1: another person, not when he becomes Prime minister, but before
Speaker 1: the election in order for him to ever have a
Speaker 1: chance of becoming Prime minister. Hence Harry appeared talking about
Speaker 1: housing the last day or two. Now he's back on
Speaker 1: the hustings again, not about housing, but just with his dad.
Speaker 4: But again, it's all just too late.
Speaker 3: I just feel like everything in this coalition campaign has
Speaker 3: come too late. Policies have come out too late, They've
Speaker 3: trodded out the family too late, and then when things
Speaker 3: don't go quite as they should, they just sing to them.
Speaker 3: Jumper price saying make Australia great again, or yesterday when
Speaker 3: they're trying to carry on a doubt and about how
Speaker 3: he should help out his son, they wait too long
Speaker 3: to respond to that. They don't seem to have anticipated it,
Speaker 3: like they just seem so far on the back foot.
Speaker 6: They definitely are on the back foot. But I think
Speaker 6: that they're hoping because it is actually proven that young
Speaker 6: people do vote for the Coalition, but they're more likely
Speaker 6: to be swayed by the party that they believe is
Speaker 6: going to help set them up for the future.
Speaker 5: And this is where the Coalition I think has been
Speaker 5: a bit slow. And of course one of those parties
Speaker 5: is the Greens and Boyo boy.
Speaker 6: But once again the Greens have proven to us that
Speaker 6: they are the most UnAustralian party in our history because
Speaker 6: their latest target amid every other day or every other
Speaker 6: issue they try to socially hijacked, well, they are now
Speaker 6: targeting Anzac Day. You heard that, correct, one of the
Speaker 6: most important days on our calendar, because they want to
Speaker 6: host what they're calling a party party.
Speaker 5: A rave. It sounds like a rave to me. Here
Speaker 5: it is.
Speaker 6: Here is the flyer the Greens party party. Now this
Speaker 6: is from the WA branch of the Greens. It was
Speaker 6: promoted as a ticketed fundraiser to help boast of their
Speaker 6: bolts of their fundraising efforts to campaign for candidates over
Speaker 6: in the West. It was set to be a five
Speaker 6: hour event with a DJ, tickets ranging from thirty dollars
Speaker 6: to one thousand.
Speaker 5: But here is what the invite read. I'm going to
Speaker 5: read it off.
Speaker 6: It says, the federal election is right around the corner.
Speaker 6: Join us for a night when the dance floor becomes
Speaker 6: a platform for radical change. Your moves matter on the
Speaker 6: floor and on the polls.
Speaker 5: How is that? Now? Look couple of issues dancing? Oh okay,
Speaker 5: well your mind went there. I didn't it did, kayla.
Speaker 6: But look a couple of issues of course at play here. Firstly,
Speaker 6: Anzac Day is obviously a day that we as a
Speaker 6: nation pause to reflect and remember those who not only
Speaker 6: fought for us and did so so bravely, but also continue.
Speaker 5: To do so.
Speaker 6: And it's not just a day that we fob off
Speaker 6: as just your average public holiday. And yet what bothers
Speaker 6: me about this is that the Green sort to take
Speaker 6: advantage of this, take advantage of our freedoms that we
Speaker 6: are so grateful for thanks to everybody who has fought
Speaker 6: for us and continue to do so. To throw a
Speaker 6: campaign fundraiser, now, obviously I'm aware that pubs are packed
Speaker 6: on Anzac Day with two up people enjoy the public holiday.
Speaker 6: I'm not saying that. I'm not saying you can't have
Speaker 6: a party. I'm not saying you can't enjoy yourselves. But
Speaker 6: the point is a campaign fundraiser on a day like
Speaker 6: Anzac Day is an absolute disgrace.
Speaker 2: Exactly.
Speaker 1: That was the issue. No one's saying you can't have
Speaker 1: fun on Anzac Day. We should enjoy the freedoms that
Speaker 1: our souls sacrifice themselves for. The point is this is
Speaker 1: political and it's generally agreed we don't politicize.
Speaker 2: Anzac Day in any way.
Speaker 1: Campaign will stop on the twenty fifth as our politicians
Speaker 1: give honor to our serviceman.
Speaker 2: Here's Peter Dutton making just that point.
Speaker 9: I think it's completely inappropriate and I think it reflects
Speaker 9: the poor values that the Greens stand for. And I
Speaker 9: just say to every young Australian who's proud of their
Speaker 9: grandfather who fought in the war, proud of a cousin
Speaker 9: who's serving in the Australian Defense Force. Now understand that
Speaker 9: the Greens have complete contempt for our Defense Force personnel.
Speaker 9: The Greens, of course would be the partners in government
Speaker 9: with Anthony Albanezi, and mister Albanezi should condemn these actions.
Speaker 2: This is typical of the Greens.
Speaker 1: They talk about the importance of empathy and love and
Speaker 1: tolerance and inclusion and then fail to understand Anzac Days
Speaker 1: a day that should be reserved for honoring those who
Speaker 1: have sacrificed their lives. But I think in order to
Speaker 1: be a Green, the prerequisite is that you don't think.
Speaker 1: For instance, you know, billionaires will pay for everything until
Speaker 1: we have no billionaires left. Stop oil and gas now.
Speaker 1: But of course society would break down if we did that.
Speaker 1: Defund private schools. Of course public schools would be overwhelmed.
Speaker 2: If we did that.
Speaker 1: It's typical of Green thinking on the run. Thought bubbles
Speaker 1: that are immediately burst the moment, and he thought is applied.
Speaker 2: And Adam Bandt failed to condemn this.
Speaker 1: Now he claimed he didn't know about it, but he
Speaker 1: should have said, look, if this is true, it's not
Speaker 1: on then again it's true to form for the Greens
Speaker 1: because not that long ago Senator Jordan steel John. This
Speaker 1: fundraiser was in part to raise money for him. It
Speaker 1: wasn't that long ago. He refused to support a motion
Speaker 1: condemning vandalism at the Australian War Memorial and Adam Bant
Speaker 1: supported him in that refusal to support that motion condemning vandalism.
Speaker 1: So the way the Greens feel about this country, as
Speaker 1: you said, Danika, is pretty clear for anybody.
Speaker 2: Who's been paying even a mediocrem of attention.
Speaker 4: But I think that's the point.
Speaker 3: I think you give them too much credit in saying
Speaker 3: that this was a thought bubble that just didn't stand
Speaker 3: up to any actual thought.
Speaker 4: When they came to it, they knew exactly what they
Speaker 4: were doing. They know it's an Zac Day.
Speaker 3: They just want to take advantage of the public holiday
Speaker 3: because they don't particularly care about Anzac Day. Because of
Speaker 3: course Anzac Day means soldiers who've gone off to defend
Speaker 3: the colony and all the other terrible, wicked things that
Speaker 3: have gone on in the West, as far as they're
Speaker 3: concern to the Australian military, is a symbol of colonialism
Speaker 3: and imperialism and us trying to spread our will upon
Speaker 3: the rest of the world. They couldn't give two hoots
Speaker 3: about Anzac Day. And it's quite obvious so that they've
Speaker 3: canceled this thing, or they've rescheduled it, they've seen it.
Speaker 4: Some other time, whenever that may be.
Speaker 3: But if you look at the one line statement that
Speaker 3: they put out today, because of course it's not until
Speaker 3: people start complaining that they actually go, oh, you know,
Speaker 3: I suppose we were to do something about this, but
Speaker 3: it came through it about midday today.
Speaker 4: This was all the statement said.
Speaker 3: The event originally scheduled for twenty five April, has been rescheduled.
Speaker 3: Sophie Greer, she's the candidate for Perth, will attend an
Speaker 3: Anzac Day service on that day and she was always intending.
Speaker 4: To do so.
Speaker 3: That is all that the Greens in Wa had to
Speaker 3: say about the fact that they'd been called out that
Speaker 3: they were going to take advantage of what is a
Speaker 3: sacred day in Australia to raise money for political purposes.
Speaker 4: I think that says it all.
Speaker 3: They don't care about Anzac Day. There's no apology in there.
Speaker 3: There was sorry, we didn't read the room, or or
Speaker 3: you're right, we shouldn't have done it on Anzac Day
Speaker 3: because it's a sacred day to one of those who've
Speaker 3: served our country and given their lives, etc.
Speaker 4: None of that in there because they don't believe it.
Speaker 4: That's the point.
Speaker 6: And also to pick up on Peter Dutton's point there,
Speaker 6: this is actually a worry in the event of a
Speaker 6: minority government because if you have Labor and the Greens,
Speaker 6: you're going to hear more ridiculous ideas when the Greens
Speaker 6: try and hijack every day that's important to us, or
Speaker 6: every cause or anything that represents our values in this country. Well,
Speaker 6: here is your proof that this is exactly what's going
Speaker 6: to happen.
Speaker 1: Well, if you're wondering what's gone wrong with the Greens,
Speaker 1: why do they seem to be so mad, maybe it's
Speaker 1: all due to climate change. Check out this headline from
Speaker 1: our own ABC. They're reporting, quote, rising temperatures could cause
Speaker 1: a surge in mental health disorders, with young Australians most
Speaker 1: at risk. And this article is based on a study
Speaker 1: by the University of Adelaide which predicts mental disorders in
Speaker 1: this country could increase by fifty percent over the next
Speaker 1: two decades as temperatures rise due to man induced climate change.
Speaker 1: They're predicting everything from mild distress to can you believe it?
Speaker 1: Schizophrenia will be on the increase because days will be hotter.
Speaker 1: Here's one young person who gives evidence to the fact
Speaker 1: that it's not higher temperatures that are causing mental health issues.
Speaker 1: It's the constant fear of climate change that is doing it.
Speaker 1: The ab are more responsible, I would suggest than rising temperatures.
Speaker 2: Have I listened to this girl.
Speaker 7: I have experienced eco anxiety since I have been fifteen.
Speaker 7: I am worried that my future will be full of
Speaker 7: increased floods, fires, famine, and drought. And I know that
Speaker 7: the number one driver of that is the continued approval
Speaker 7: of new coal and gas projects.
Speaker 2: So clearly, this girl, Caleb, is quite troubled.
Speaker 1: But what's troubling her is not that the temperature's risen
Speaker 1: by a couple of degrees. She's troubled by reports like
Speaker 1: this in the ABC.
Speaker 3: She was the one that went bunter at Anthony Albernizi's
Speaker 3: press conference last week when he was announcing more funding
Speaker 3: for mental health, and her argument was, well, you know,
Speaker 3: it's because a climate change and mental health's going down
Speaker 3: the toilet.
Speaker 4: But you're quite right, kids are having their heads.
Speaker 3: Filled with this nonsense in school that the world's going
Speaker 3: to end tomorrow and you're all going to be burned
Speaker 3: and you'll burn alive, and there'll be no world for
Speaker 3: you to have kids in, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
Speaker 3: No wonder this thing called they call eco anxiety exists
Speaker 3: because if you're telling children of primary school age these
Speaker 3: massive concepts about the world into the future and what
Speaker 3: they're going to have to live in. I mean, you know,
Speaker 3: it's like telling a kid, ah, well, mummy and daddy
Speaker 3: have lost their jobs and you'll be homeless.
Speaker 4: Now.
Speaker 3: I mean you can imagine what a nine year old
Speaker 3: is going to think and how they're going to react
Speaker 3: to that.
Speaker 4: They're going to need a change of underwear.
Speaker 3: And that's essentially what is happening in schools every day
Speaker 3: at the moment.
Speaker 4: So, no wonder it leads to.
Speaker 3: Increases in bad mental health.
Speaker 4: But this study is buncome.
Speaker 3: I mean, please, what they have done here is committed
Speaker 3: the sin of thinking that correlation equals causation, because the
Speaker 3: way they've done it is to look at the burden
Speaker 3: of mental health in different locations around the country, and
Speaker 3: by their methodology, burden is how bad mental health issues
Speaker 3: are and what that means to the health system, etc.
Speaker 3: And they have found that in places that have generally
Speaker 3: hotter temperatures like arn and Adelaide and Melbourne, et cetera,
Speaker 3: where they have hot, dry summers, of course they have
Speaker 3: higher burdens of mental health. And so they've decided that
Speaker 3: that somehow means that higher temperatures are what cause ill
Speaker 3: mental health, and so it will continue into the future.
Speaker 3: I mean, it's got to be one of the worst
Speaker 3: pieces of academic work I've seen in a long term.
Speaker 5: It truly is a shocker. But I agree with you.
Speaker 6: I think it is absolutely indoctrination from a younger age,
Speaker 6: but also the young people these days, these kids, they're
Speaker 6: being brainwashed by people like Greta Thunberg. And you see
Speaker 6: all the Rising Tide protesters like the one we just saw,
Speaker 6: the ones over in the UK or the US, you know,
Speaker 6: and they chain themselves to things, and these kids go, Wow,
Speaker 6: what a fantastic cause this is. But then on the
Speaker 6: other hand, you know, the other problem here we've got
Speaker 6: is if you try to say go about your day,
Speaker 6: go about your business, We'll get this. You're going to
Speaker 6: go to the hairdresser. You ask for a cut, a
Speaker 6: blow dry, you ask for whatever, and guess what you
Speaker 6: could be served up with a slice of climate change?
Speaker 5: Right, slice of climate change? Because now a brush with.
Speaker 6: Climate this is what it's called. It is a movement
Speaker 6: that started here in Sydney of Australia where a salon
Speaker 6: owner basically gives you a little bit of a lecture,
Speaker 6: a bit of history into climate change while cutting your hair,
Speaker 6: while shampooing your hair. I guess guide you through it
Speaker 6: and give you the key details about what you need
Speaker 6: to know about climate change, just in case you're really
Speaker 6: interested while you're sitting there.
Speaker 5: I mean, please, seriously, this.
Speaker 6: Is just another joke when people try and butt themselves
Speaker 6: into your issues.
Speaker 5: I don't know about yout. I don't know how long
Speaker 5: you two spend it the hairdresser.
Speaker 6: Bite a while, I think, But listen, if my hairdresser
Speaker 6: started lecturing me about climate change while blow drying my hair,
Speaker 6: I would grab that blow dry, blow it in their
Speaker 6: face and say this is what a hot summer's day
Speaker 6: in Sydney feels life.
Speaker 5: So please leave me alone.
Speaker 1: No disrespect to hairdressers, but do you really regard your
Speaker 1: hairdresser as the Authority on climate change and all of
Speaker 1: that sort of issue that the Irish Department of Education
Speaker 1: is spending one hundred and twelve thousand dollars on grants
Speaker 1: to train hairdressers not to cut your hair, but to
Speaker 1: talk to you about how best to reduce your emissions
Speaker 1: in a bid to save the planet. It's a good
Speaker 1: reason to I reckon grow your hair out, Caleb.
Speaker 3: Well, well, good luck to you, James on that instead.
Speaker 3: I mean, look, you know, and I've got a serious
Speaker 3: bloody bit of hair on top of my head. Times
Speaker 3: you go to the hairdresser quite frequently. She's never once
Speaker 3: tried to talk to me about climate change.
Speaker 10: Things she wouldn't want to exactly, But you know, I
Speaker 10: go to my hairdresser to talk about trivial things like
Speaker 10: married at first sight, or to get the gossip.
Speaker 3: I mean, hairdresses are great people to get gossip out
Speaker 3: of it. It's like taxi drivers because they see that
Speaker 3: many people in the day who spill the gats about
Speaker 3: all sorts of things. You learned some serious things when
Speaker 3: you talk to a hairdresser, but climate change probably isn't
Speaker 3: on my list. And you might even be going to
Speaker 3: the hair dress and they'll start telling you how bad
Speaker 3: your dog is too. Because another study again out of Australia.
Speaker 3: What is it with all of these things emanating out
Speaker 3: of Australia at the studies about how mental ill mental
Speaker 3: health is caused by climate change, all this business about
Speaker 3: being told by the person the salon that climate change
Speaker 3: is bad. Now there's a study out of Australia saying
Speaker 3: that dogs are bad for the environment. Because of course
Speaker 3: they've been saying this about cats for a long time,
Speaker 3: and you know, they go out and kill native animals
Speaker 3: and all this sort of thing. My two little fellas
Speaker 3: don't do that because they're hold.
Speaker 4: Up in an apartment.
Speaker 3: I'm not sure if that's good for their mental health actually,
Speaker 3: but we'll come to that later. But they've done a
Speaker 3: study now here in Australia. This was in the Pacific
Speaker 3: Conservation Biology Journal, and I'm sure you're all reading that
Speaker 3: at home by bed light before you go to sleep
Speaker 3: after you've watched the Late Debate every night. But they
Speaker 3: say that dogs are indeed bad for the environment on
Speaker 3: basically every metric, including the production of pet food. Apparently
Speaker 3: the dry pet food industry has an environmental footprint of
Speaker 3: a tree double the size of.
Speaker 4: The United Kingdom.
Speaker 3: So you know, if you've got a perch at home,
Speaker 3: you are destroying the environment. And I'm wondering how all
Speaker 3: the lefties are going to come to terms with this,
Speaker 3: because of course a lot of young lefties in particular
Speaker 3: now who won't have kids because they're worried about the climate,
Speaker 3: they have dogs instead, and they call them their fur babies,
Speaker 3: and yeah, fuss over them as though they were children.
Speaker 4: All of these people are now going to go and
Speaker 4: have to take their dogs to the pound.
Speaker 6: Well, you know, firstly, I think it's worth pointing out
Speaker 6: and I think this tells you everything you need to
Speaker 6: know actually about this research. It was actually according to
Speaker 6: an Australian review of other environmental reviews, so it's just
Speaker 6: this being giant environmental review tells you everything you need
Speaker 6: to know. I would would say, though, probably the only thing,
Speaker 6: the one little thing I would agree with from this review.
Speaker 5: It says that one of the advices make sure you
Speaker 5: pick up your dogs well, and I would agree with that.
Speaker 6: I would absolutely agree with that. But the other thing
Speaker 6: that the reviews said was that lacks uninformed dog owners
Speaker 6: are to blame as well for the environmental crisis facing dogs,
Speaker 6: and a simple way to mitigate against the worst impacts
Speaker 6: was to keep dogs leased in areas where restrictions do apply.
Speaker 5: Look, I actually think yeah, but I think that's fair enough.
Speaker 6: I hate seeing dogs off leads in places where they
Speaker 6: should be on a leads, so I would.
Speaker 5: Agree with that. But the rest of it.
Speaker 6: Once again, the left just trying to be a kill
Speaker 6: joy and now.
Speaker 5: Trying to steal man's best friend as well. You hate everything.
Speaker 3: This is peakcat lady journalism as long as they leave
Speaker 3: greyhound racing alone.
Speaker 2: It was publishing the Mother Jones Journal.
Speaker 1: Whatever you think of dogs, they're smart enough not to
Speaker 1: read Mother Jones. Let's go to New South Wales where
Speaker 1: earlier this month the New South Wales labor government introduced
Speaker 1: anti conversion laws that make it a criminal offense to
Speaker 1: try to change or suppress someone's sexuality, even through prayer
Speaker 1: or counseling that that person has requested. The Antidiscrimination Commission
Speaker 1: here in New South Wales says praying with a person
Speaker 1: with the intent to change or suppress their sexuality or
Speaker 1: gender identity is now a criminal offense and could lead
Speaker 1: to prosecution. Now a number of church ministers in the
Speaker 1: state have written an open letter to the government saying,
Speaker 1: in our churches we seek to honor God by welcoming
Speaker 1: and serving people from all backgrounds, including those who experienced
Speaker 1: same sex attraction or gender dysphoria. We always aim to
Speaker 1: do so with love, gentleness, and respect, and we utterly
Speaker 1: reject the use of any form of coercion or control.
Speaker 1: The open letter goes on to say that these ministers
Speaker 1: and members of Christian churches want to obey the government,
Speaker 1: want to be good citizens, but cannot and will not
Speaker 1: comply with this law.
Speaker 2: Now, the issue here at Denika.
Speaker 1: Whatever you think about sexuality and gen put those things
Speaker 1: just to the side for a moment. Does the government
Speaker 1: have the right to tell you what you can and
Speaker 1: cannot pray for? That's the issue here. It's not an
Speaker 1: issue about sexuality or gender. It's really an issue about
Speaker 1: where does the line between what the government can mandate
Speaker 1: regarding how.
Speaker 2: You live your life.
Speaker 1: This goes way beyond that to what you can even
Speaker 1: think in your private thoughts and how you even speak
Speaker 1: to God himself.
Speaker 5: Well, how do you police that?
Speaker 6: This is the problem here, because my concern is obviously,
Speaker 6: as you said, freedom of religion.
Speaker 5: But also freedom of conscience.
Speaker 6: Because you don't know what goes and goes on in
Speaker 6: people's heads. And then what happens then you go to
Speaker 6: say a pastor or you go to a minister and
Speaker 6: you say, you know, I'm having all these thoughts, what
Speaker 6: should I do?
Speaker 5: And then that religious figure gives you advice?
Speaker 6: And then what under these laws? Then are they going
Speaker 6: to be thrown into jail? Could they be fine?
Speaker 5: They should? They have a conviction. And that's the problem here.
Speaker 6: If you're a parent and you've got a child who's
Speaker 6: confused and you don't know where to go, and you
Speaker 6: naturally turn to religion, then what happens there? Look, I
Speaker 6: will say this, I think conversion therapy is you know,
Speaker 6: going back, particularly thirty decades ago, it was.
Speaker 5: Really really horrific, and I don't think that we should
Speaker 5: take that lightly.
Speaker 6: And I'm not saying that at all, and you know,
Speaker 6: I don't support it, but I worry about how far
Speaker 6: this legislation actually goes. And then the other issue is
Speaker 6: is gender affirming care here. I mean, this is such
Speaker 6: a big issue right now here in this country. We
Speaker 6: should be actually looking at banning that.
Speaker 5: But what happens there? Then?
Speaker 1: What this legislation, does Caleb, Is it replaces Christian teaching
Speaker 1: with a new state based religion.
Speaker 2: Does it not?
Speaker 1: Because essentially we're dealing now with belief. Some people believe
Speaker 1: certain things and lifestyles are perfectly fine and normal. Other
Speaker 1: people have a different view. Is that the government's role
Speaker 1: to tell you what you can and cannot believe?
Speaker 4: But of course not, I mean, and you can't change it.
Speaker 1: The Catholic New South Wales premier has supported this legislation.
Speaker 3: You can't change what people believe, and you know, to
Speaker 3: make a conflation with sexuality, you know, I thought we
Speaker 3: were all a gung ho on consent these days.
Speaker 4: But it's illegal if.
Speaker 3: Someone comes to you and you've been a pastor, so
Speaker 3: if one of your parishioners came to you and said,
Speaker 3: you know, I think i'm gay and I'm struggling with
Speaker 3: my sexuality and I don't want to be gay, and
Speaker 3: I want you to pray for me, it is illegal
Speaker 3: for you to do so. Someone has asked you to
Speaker 3: do it, and that is.
Speaker 4: Illegal under this law.
Speaker 3: One of the examples that is given by the Equality Commissioner,
Speaker 3: Anti Discrimination Commissioner whatever they called in New South Wales
Speaker 3: is that advising a gay person to be celibate would
Speaker 3: be a contravention of this law. I thought it was
Speaker 3: a pretty well known thing in most areas of Christianity
Speaker 3: that you're celibate until you're married anyway, so you can't
Speaker 3: now go around talking about what is pretty clear Christian doctrine.
Speaker 3: And the one that worries me the most is the
Speaker 3: business around gender ideology or gender identity, because there are
Speaker 3: carve outs in these laws that allow healthcare professionals to
Speaker 3: talk to people who have issues with gender identity, but
Speaker 3: when you read what they're talking about, it doesn't actually
Speaker 3: give them a way to talk about, well, I don't
Speaker 3: think you are actually having a problem with your gender identity.
Speaker 3: It says that you can advise people of the dangers
Speaker 3: of going down the road of gender affirming care and
Speaker 3: the side effects of having a sex change surgery or
Speaker 3: puberty blockers or whatever it is, But there doesn't appear
Speaker 3: to be a carve out anywhere that allows someone to say,
Speaker 3: I think this is not an issue of gender dysphoria.
Speaker 3: I think this is an issue of other mental health
Speaker 3: disorders that are now leading you.
Speaker 4: To feel this way.
Speaker 3: If a healthcare professional psychologist or a psychiatrist can no
Speaker 3: longer legally have those conversations with someone in New South
Speaker 3: Wales sitting up a situation where gender affirming care is
Speaker 3: now compulsory by law, and that is dangerous and insane.
Speaker 6: But also it actually opens up young people and teenagers
Speaker 6: to more and more mental health problems and more confusion
Speaker 6: at that, and it actually opens a real can of worms.
Speaker 6: And I'm just really concerned that we've seen it with
Speaker 6: hate speech laws as well. It's just this constant blocking
Speaker 6: of the freedoms that I think we enjoy we when
Speaker 6: to be enjoying in this country, and it's blocking freedom
Speaker 6: of speech essentially.
Speaker 1: Before we get this is not a religious issue, it's
Speaker 1: than that.
Speaker 2: A sexuality issue.
Speaker 1: It's an issue of are people free to speak as
Speaker 1: they feel, believe as they are directed by their own conscience,
Speaker 1: rather than being told by the government what they can
Speaker 1: and cannot believe and say about essential aspects of human life.
Speaker 3: Absolutely, very quickly, before we get to a break, these
Speaker 3: money grubbing counsels, they are added again, this time in Sydney.
Speaker 3: Two seaside councils, the Mossman and Northern Beaches Councils, are
Speaker 3: cutting crook because the state government has told them that
Speaker 3: they should give free parking to renters by the beach. Currently,
Speaker 3: these councils only give free parking at the beach to
Speaker 3: people who pay the rates. But the state government says, well,
Speaker 3: the renters are living in your suburbs as well and
Speaker 3: supporting the local businesses and all this kind of thing,
Speaker 3: and they're giving the money to the people who pay
Speaker 3: the rates so they can pay the rate, So why shouldn't.
Speaker 4: They have free parking as well? Well?
Speaker 3: Can you imagine the councils don't like the sound of
Speaker 3: that because it might deprive them of some revenue.
Speaker 4: This is in the Daily Telegraph today.
Speaker 3: They say Mossman Council, which rakes in three million dollars
Speaker 3: in annual parking revenue, claims the changes could upset the
Speaker 3: quote delicate and accepted balance achieved around parking in high
Speaker 3: demand locations. I mean, for goodness sake, they reckon they're
Speaker 3: going to lose five hundred k if they let the
Speaker 3: renters park there for free. If you live there, why
Speaker 3: shouldn't you be able to park for free?
Speaker 5: Yeah? I completely agree with you, I absolutely agree.
Speaker 6: And the problem the worry about this though is it
Speaker 6: could go to the actual owners of the property. The
Speaker 6: owners don't even live in there. The owners don't live there,
Speaker 6: the landlords. It needs to make sure it goes to
Speaker 6: the renters.
Speaker 5: If that's the.
Speaker 1: Case, does that then make the parking permit an asset
Speaker 1: that potentially you would sell on it.
Speaker 3: It already is that people are selling on Facebook marketplace,
Speaker 3: like the slips that you can put in your window
Speaker 3: to get the free packing.
Speaker 4: It already is an asset.
Speaker 3: So if that's their argument, that that one's already gone
Speaker 3: out the window, I mean, for goodness sake, either charge
Speaker 3: everyone or no one. As far as I'm going to
Speaker 3: make all the parking free, Agraham, I don't want them
Speaker 3: to have any.
Speaker 1: Imagine the council wanting to do things that actually made
Speaker 1: residents lifess here and who would have thought an amazing
Speaker 1: thing that would be. We're going to go to a break.
Speaker 1: When we come back, we look at what's making news tomorrow,
Speaker 1: including the reserve back saying another rate cut is not
Speaker 1: needed right now because if you've got a mortgage, well
Speaker 1: you're doing absolutely fine.
Speaker 2: Talk about that. Welcome back. Let's take a look at
Speaker 2: what's making news tomorrow.
Speaker 1: We'll start with the Daily Telegraph and a story that's
Speaker 1: been fairly big throughout the day Putin on a blitz
Speaker 1: in our backyard question mark reads the headline. Indonesia has
Speaker 1: assured Australia that reports Russia is planning to base long
Speaker 1: range aircraft at one of their military facilities just fourteen
Speaker 1: hundred kilometers from Darwin are incorrect. Last night, Defense Minister
Speaker 1: Richard Males said the reports of the prospect of Russian
Speaker 1: aircraft operating from Indonesia are simply not true. However, mister
Speaker 1: Miles has so far not ruled out whether or not
Speaker 1: the Russian government had made an approach to the Indonesians. Obviously,
Speaker 1: if this story reported in a military journal was true,
Speaker 1: it would be a massive concern for Australia and a
Speaker 1: massive problem for the Labor government, already perceived as weak
Speaker 1: on national security just three weeks out from an election.
Speaker 1: The claim is not without some support that would make
Speaker 1: it plausible. Indonesia recently conducted military exercises in Indonesian waters
Speaker 1: with Russian warships, and of course they're president after being elected,
Speaker 1: within a couple of months went to visit Vladimir Putin,
Speaker 1: and another visit is planned for June. The other issue
Speaker 1: here is, Okay, let's imagine there will be no base
Speaker 1: in Indonesia for Russian aircraft. Is that to say there
Speaker 1: won't be increased access for Russian military assets much as
Speaker 1: Australia allows access to US vessels, for instance, that would
Speaker 1: be just as much a concern. So even though Indonesia
Speaker 1: have said, look, it's not happening, I think it's still
Speaker 1: a live issue for Australia because clearly Indonesia and Russia
Speaker 1: are cozying up more than they have done ever before.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 6: Absolutely, and I think this is the first time we've
Speaker 6: really heard perhaps the extent to which Indonesia is indeed
Speaker 6: CosIng up.
Speaker 5: More than ever before.
Speaker 6: But what I think at once again highlights is are
Speaker 6: we ready and are we prepared in this country? Is
Speaker 6: defense ready in the event that, for example, something like
Speaker 6: this does indeed happen.
Speaker 5: It was only a couple of weeks ago.
Speaker 6: You remember that the Chinese were conducting those live fire
Speaker 6: drills off the coast of Australia. Labor didn't know anything
Speaker 6: about it, Labor Miles, you know, nobody knew anything that
Speaker 6: was going on. Virgin Virgin well except sorry, the Virgin
Speaker 6: airline pilots, Thank goodness for them, they knew.
Speaker 5: But it's another example.
Speaker 6: This is another example of what's going on very potentially
Speaker 6: close in our backyard, and are we prepared in this
Speaker 6: country for the event if possible.
Speaker 3: Well, well, the obvious answer is we're not. And I'll
Speaker 3: take Indonesia at face value that they're not going to
Speaker 3: allow this to happen. But I do think we need
Speaker 3: to get to the bottom of the question of whether
Speaker 3: Russia made those overtures. I'm glad Indonesia sees that it
Speaker 3: won't be happening, but if indeed Russia has made that
Speaker 3: request and it's been knocked back, I think that ought
Speaker 3: to become a large part of the negotiations to try
Speaker 3: to end the war in Ukraine because it puts another
Speaker 3: perspective on the way Rassia is operating, because that's far
Speaker 3: that of course, has been a war and a military
Speaker 3: task that's going on on the other side of the world.
Speaker 4: But when you've got Russia.
Speaker 3: Potentially saying that they want to start muscling in on
Speaker 3: territory much closer to us down here in Australia, that
Speaker 3: has just become part of the discussion because if they
Speaker 3: want to move beyond the borders of the old Soviet Union.
Speaker 4: That's a very different Say.
Speaker 5: Where does that leave Donald Trump? And what would Donald
Speaker 5: Trump say about that?
Speaker 1: Well, the other thing with this is Australian need to
Speaker 1: face the fact if you are going to leave your
Speaker 1: country pretty much defenseless, really be surprised when major powers
Speaker 1: start to move into the region.
Speaker 3: No.
Speaker 5: Correct, And that goes to the point earlier. Are we
Speaker 5: really prepared.
Speaker 6: Let's move on now to the Australian. A couple of
Speaker 6: stories on the front page tomorrow. We'll start with the
Speaker 6: first one, doctors versus PM three for every GP visit
Speaker 6: a fantasy Labour's fly bag ship eight point six billion
Speaker 6: dollar election policy promising Australians won't need a credit card
Speaker 6: to see the doctor has sparked a growing backlash from
Speaker 6: GPS and medical leaders, who insist many doctors won't make
Speaker 6: the switch and not all patients.
Speaker 5: Will be bulk billed. Now, look, this.
Speaker 6: Is fascinating to me, guys, because Anthony Albernizi has made.
Speaker 5: His entire election pitch solely on.
Speaker 6: The fact that he grabs his Medicare card. Waves it
Speaker 6: about so flippantly here and there. But this story actually
Speaker 6: contradicts that they're saying no, Hang on a second, that
Speaker 6: whole lie of a policy. We cannot support it. And
Speaker 6: we knew that this was going to be the case.
Speaker 6: There was never going to be any cuts to medicare
Speaker 6: as they keep peddling.
Speaker 5: But clearly it is indeed a fantasy.
Speaker 1: The PM says, free doctors appointments. Doctors say no, it's
Speaker 1: not happening. So I guess voters will have to work
Speaker 1: out who do they believe.
Speaker 4: Bulk billing rates have plummeted under this government? Why would
Speaker 4: they turn around overnight? Pretty straightforward.
Speaker 5: Yeah, absolutely. Let's look at the other one. On the
Speaker 5: front page.
Speaker 6: Native Title Failed puts big projects on hold. It says
Speaker 6: that Per's new airport, runway and developments on the holiday
Speaker 6: island of Rottenest are among billions of dollars worth of
Speaker 6: projects and government works facing delays after the Aboriginal corporation,
Speaker 6: recognized for its cultural heritage work across the metropolitan area imploded.
Speaker 5: This is the Wajak Aboriginal Corporation.
Speaker 6: The representative has been cut off from the money that
Speaker 6: flows from Australia's biggest Native title sediment following months of turmoil.
Speaker 6: Well well, here we go again. Now now Rottenest right
Speaker 6: nest one of the beautiful places of a proud West Australia.
Speaker 5: Myself, love Rotto, Here we go again.
Speaker 3: They really need to take a good look at these
Speaker 3: Aboriginal land corporations because they operate under completely different corporate
Speaker 3: structure to the rest.
Speaker 4: Of corporate Australia.
Speaker 3: And if you've ever tried to read the annual reports
Speaker 3: of these outfits, and I have, they are very murky.
Speaker 3: It's quite unclear where all of this money actually goes.
Speaker 3: It just seems like a great, big Ponzi scheme and
Speaker 3: sothing needs to.
Speaker 4: Be done about it.
Speaker 1: Major infrastructure cannot go ahead until corporations does this give
Speaker 1: the go ahead. You've got a runway waiting to be
Speaker 1: built in Perth being held up because of arguments over
Speaker 1: finances and who is the chair of the Aboriginal corporation.
Speaker 1: Until that gets sorted, Perth commuters have to live without
Speaker 1: that needed runway exactly.
Speaker 6: And finally, Climate donors Slave labor Links, a labor link
Speaker 6: to climate charity has been receiving thousands of dollars from
Speaker 6: clean energy firm backed listed in the United States over
Speaker 6: concerns they use slave labor with the Greens Lobby Group
Speaker 6: and it's senior advisor Simon Holmes a court having visited
Speaker 6: a Chinese company accused of forced labor practices.
Speaker 5: Well, I mean this is this is hell not a
Speaker 5: good look.
Speaker 1: You would think if you're going to destroy the environment
Speaker 1: with solar farms and wind turbines, what's a bit.
Speaker 2: Of child slave it's all for.
Speaker 5: It's all a bit of fun and games.
Speaker 3: Let's go to the front of the courier mail to borrow.
Speaker 3: We're speaking of not so cheap products. It's his rate
Speaker 3: cuts off because Reserve banks is you're all doing fine,
Speaker 3: as young mister Grace to saying are you being served?
Speaker 3: You're all doing very well, Thank you Reserve Bank, because
Speaker 3: it says here the Reserve Bank has put off any
Speaker 3: more interest rate relief because it's his homeowners are managing
Speaker 3: to find ways to meet their extra repayments. According to
Speaker 3: the latest release of the RBA's Minutes of Monetary Policy,
Speaker 3: a rate cut was not even discussed at its last meeting,
Speaker 3: chaired by Governor Michelle Bullock. They think that household budgets
Speaker 3: are actually in good shape thanks to lower taxas, higher
Speaker 3: wages and falling inflation, and of course the cut we
Speaker 3: got in February. That may well be the case on paper,
Speaker 3: but I suspect people are having to meet their increased
Speaker 3: repayments because whether if you want a roof over your head,
Speaker 3: what the hell else you're going to do.
Speaker 6: Yeah, this is from the same RBA governor who only
Speaker 6: a couple of months ago that says that people will
Speaker 6: really be struggling.
Speaker 5: In the near future.
Speaker 6: We'll have to start digging into their savings accounts. So yeah,
Speaker 6: I do not believe this one at all.
Speaker 5: I mean, there is an election around the corner. That's
Speaker 5: all I can say there is.
Speaker 1: We're going to go to a break when we come back.
Speaker 1: Katy Perry returns to Earth from Space Odyssey. They'll tell
Speaker 1: you what when you listen to her, her head is
Speaker 1: still very much in the clouds.
Speaker 2: It's coming up.
Speaker 1: Some welcome back. Well, Danika, Katy Perry has returned to Earth.
Speaker 2: Or has she?
Speaker 5: Oh she has a baby. You're a firework, she says.
Speaker 5: I tried to.
Speaker 6: Get into Katy Perry round, Thank you, thank you. But look, basically,
Speaker 6: as you can see here, there was a crew that
Speaker 6: went up for an eleven minute trip to space on
Speaker 6: Jeffrey Bezos's Blue Origin spaceship. One of them was Katie Perry,
Speaker 6: also his girlfriend Laurence Sanchez. But this moment from Katie Perry, well,
Speaker 6: look here we go.
Speaker 5: Please, let's play it. Where are my babies over?
Speaker 6: Here?
Speaker 5: Go here? I left? Go there? Okay, Jadie who.
Speaker 6: Now, as a woman, I certainly do not feel inspired
Speaker 6: nor empowered looking at that vision.
Speaker 1: Not just say that's me every time I get off
Speaker 1: a Jetstar flight.
Speaker 6: That is you actually waste of the time, to be honest, James.
Speaker 6: But so they've landed, they've done this performance theater you
Speaker 6: just got. You just wonder how you actually okay? But
Speaker 6: Katy Perry, look is she okay?
Speaker 5: How do you feel?
Speaker 11: I feel super connected to love, so connected to love.
Speaker 11: I think this experience has shown me you never know
Speaker 11: how much love is inside of you. Dass are common flowers,
Speaker 11: but they grow through any condition. They go through cements,
Speaker 11: they go through cracks.
Speaker 5: They go through walls.
Speaker 11: They are resilient.
Speaker 6: Yeah, that eleven minute space trip has gone to her head.
Speaker 1: Clearly, say Katie Perry is a space cadect.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I didn't know they did love bottom he's up there,
Speaker 3: But I'd say she didn't go out with a row.
Speaker 4: That's another We've been out with a whimper in this case.
Speaker 3: Now, you know I love to complain about councils. We
Speaker 3: did a council story earlier in the show, but we're
Speaker 3: going to end the show on a council story tonight,
Speaker 3: except this one's not in Australia. If you thought your
Speaker 3: council was bad here in Australia, spirit thought for the
Speaker 3: people of Birmingham where the rubbish men have gone on strike.
Speaker 3: They've been on strike for six weeks or so now,
Speaker 3: or just over a month. They went on strike on
Speaker 3: the eleventh of March and the rubbish is now just
Speaker 3: piling up on the streets of Birmingham.
Speaker 4: No one has picked this stuff up since.
Speaker 3: The eleventh of March, and it is so bad that
Speaker 3: they've now called in the military. Now, Unfortunately, you're not
Speaker 3: going to see any soldiers rocking up to take the
Speaker 3: rubbish away. They've somehow managed the government to get a
Speaker 3: small number of office based planners to provide logistical support
Speaker 3: for a short time.
Speaker 2: They're going to head out masks.
Speaker 3: What the hell can't just get a working beat and
Speaker 3: get people to go and send this stuff somewhere like
Speaker 3: Heaven's like, how hard can it be? Imagine a smell
Speaker 3: I know, and the fact that they've let it happen
Speaker 3: for all this time.
Speaker 1: I should say, our producers a britt he reckons it's
Speaker 1: even worse than those images portrayed.
Speaker 2: That's it from us.
Speaker 1: Stick Around coming up because they read a penny show,
Speaker 1: good Night,