Speaker 1: Lately. Welcome the late base. Thanks for joining us. I'm
Speaker 1: James Macpherson with Caleb Bond and Liz Storer coming up
Speaker 1: driving instructors praying during lessons and learner drivers not happy
Speaker 1: about it. Every parent will understand. We'll talk about that later.
Speaker 1: Plus when we get to the papers, the Greens announce
Speaker 1: their price for supporting labor in the event of a
Speaker 1: hung parliament and former Queensland Premier Anastasia Palage does she
Speaker 1: support Steven Miles or not? No one's really sure. The
Speaker 1: Career Mail have got that story. Will get to all
Speaker 1: of that soon. But first, universities are crying poor over
Speaker 1: the government's decision to cap international student numbers. But you
Speaker 1: wouldn't know universities were short of a dollar judging by
Speaker 1: the University of Queensland Union's budget. Students were left outraged
Speaker 1: after discovering when the budget was leaked online that a
Speaker 1: portion of their fee this had been paying for exclusive parties,
Speaker 1: for lamas to walk around on campus and to fund
Speaker 1: gender transitions. The Career Mail reported that the twenty twenty
Speaker 1: four student union budget included twelve and a half thousand
Speaker 1: dollars for a Clubs and Society's executive celebration, fifteen thousand
Speaker 1: dollars for a party boat again for Union and Clubs
Speaker 1: Society executives, four thousand dollars for gender affirmation bursaries, six thousand,
Speaker 1: eight hundred dollars for an ice cream and lama event
Speaker 1: that was held in May, and one hundred and sixty
Speaker 1: five thousand dollars for a toga party which was canceled
Speaker 1: due to wet weather. One of the students quoted in
Speaker 1: the Career Mail told the paper it honestly felt like
Speaker 1: a huge betrayal. The food the union serve at the
Speaker 1: moment on campus is pretty terrible. Meanwhile, they're dumping fifteen
Speaker 1: grand into a boat party for themselves while we're all
Speaker 1: struggling to put food on the table. Now. Not all
Speaker 1: of the student union counselors agreed with the budget. One
Speaker 1: of the objectors, Barclay McGain he told the Career Mail,
Speaker 1: it just seems like they've got their priorities all wrong.
Speaker 1: There's four thousand dollars spent on gender affirmation bursaries in
Speaker 1: the budget, and this is essentially to fund students to
Speaker 1: transition their gender, he said. For a lot of students,
Speaker 1: that actually goes against their religious beliefs and their faith,
Speaker 1: and I just think it's so wrong they're being forced
Speaker 1: to fund that. He said, We'll show you the advertisement
Speaker 1: for the ice cream and Lama party that was held
Speaker 1: on campus. There you go it advertisers, lamas and ice cream.
Speaker 1: The union spent six eight hundred dollars on that, and Liz,
Speaker 1: when they were asked to justify it, they said, and
Speaker 1: I quote, it was to help students' mental health. I've
Speaker 1: always found that hanging out with lamas while eating ice
Speaker 1: cream just helps to calm one down before exams. How
Speaker 1: can they justify this kind of expenditure. And for students,
Speaker 1: I mean at least a small portion of their fees
Speaker 1: goes towards this Rubbis.
Speaker 2: I just love that students are up in arms about this,
Speaker 2: and I'd like to extend my congratulations to the UQ
Speaker 2: Union for making them conservative.
Speaker 3: Young.
Speaker 4: Keep up the good work, kids.
Speaker 2: Wait until you find out how the government spends your taxes,
Speaker 2: because that too, just like your UNI club fees a
Speaker 2: mandatory straight out of UNI, you'll politely find yourself in
Speaker 2: the forty five k too one thirty five K bracket
Speaker 2: when thirty percent of your hard earned dollars will be
Speaker 2: spent by the government on the most unimaginably useless crap
Speaker 2: you can possibly imagine.
Speaker 4: You're upset now.
Speaker 2: That you're funding the lifestyle of the elite. They're splurging
Speaker 2: fifteen thousand dollars of your money on their own little
Speaker 2: private boat party for those who are higher up the
Speaker 2: food chain, Wait until just give it a few years,
Speaker 2: Give it a few years and dial into how the
Speaker 2: government lives on our dollar. They're upset now about the
Speaker 2: fact that off people are being forced to fund things
Speaker 2: that go against their religious beliefs. Again, wait until you're
Speaker 2: fine where your taxpayer dollar goes and wake up and
Speaker 2: realize that your own federal government have such animosity. I
Speaker 2: would call it for the religious in this country. They
Speaker 2: literally tried to get up a religious freedom's bill that
Speaker 2: was going to do nothing but gut religious freedoms in
Speaker 2: this country.
Speaker 4: I love this.
Speaker 2: Its awareness raising. The kids are learning young uq unions
Speaker 2: pumping out the conservatives while they're still teenagers.
Speaker 3: Well, I think we've also got to give them credit
Speaker 3: for putting every psychiatrist and psychologist in the country out
Speaker 3: of business because they worked out how to fix mental
Speaker 3: health crisis. It's lamers. Just get the larmers in there
Speaker 3: and everyone will be fine. And in the spirit of
Speaker 3: the Lamas, I would say I would spit on this budget. Now.
Speaker 3: Now the bit that I find the most extraordinary beyond
Speaker 3: the four thousand dollars for gender affirmation. What's four thousand
Speaker 3: dollars going to do? Is that for every student? Imagine
Speaker 3: if every student of the university decided they wanted a
Speaker 3: piece of the four thousand dollars, well, they're going to
Speaker 3: go very far.
Speaker 1: It wouldn't be for surgery. It would be for like
Speaker 1: a new wardrobe. Oh, we're very good gender affirmation, right,
Speaker 1: just to affirm whatever identity you have chosen.
Speaker 3: But God knows what that's meant to do. But one
Speaker 3: hundred and sixty five thousand dollars for a toga party
Speaker 3: right now, this is the best bit of rain I
Speaker 3: have ever seen in my entire life that managed to
Speaker 3: stop this party.
Speaker 2: For one hundred and.
Speaker 3: Sixty five thousand dollars, What sort of party are you getting?
Speaker 3: I mean, I've been to some ripper parties with the
Speaker 3: shed load of grog, and I don't think they cost
Speaker 3: anywhere near one hundred and sixty five thousand dollars. It
Speaker 3: sounds to me like another one of these government contracts
Speaker 3: that I want to get my hands on, because if
Speaker 3: I can put a party on for one hundred and
Speaker 3: sixty five grand, You're going to get a hell of
Speaker 3: a party, and I'm going to have a hell of
Speaker 3: a lot of money left over at the end.
Speaker 2: I reckon it would be nothing but a pile of.
Speaker 3: Grod Oh it would have to be and and toguns,
Speaker 3: of course. But it just once again proves, as you
Speaker 3: noted at the top, James, the unis are crying poor today.
Speaker 3: You know, woe is me. They're going to lower the
Speaker 3: number of international entrants into the universities, which is something
Speaker 3: I actually have to give credit to the Albanezy government
Speaker 3: for finally for working out that the whole thing is
Speaker 3: a wrought because the universities take every cent they can
Speaker 3: out of everyone without a care as to whether there's
Speaker 3: any academic aptitude or whatever. That's why they favor the
Speaker 3: international students, because they pay full tote odds. And when
Speaker 3: you see how the money is spent, money that ought
Speaker 3: to be spent on educating the next generation of workers.
Speaker 3: I mean, I know people a friend of mine who
Speaker 3: worked in South Africa and when he was a young
Speaker 3: man as a university lecturer, and he now says, if
Speaker 3: a kid asked me what I should do with my life,
Speaker 3: I would say to him, do not go to university.
Speaker 3: People who've worked in the system now acknowledge that it
Speaker 3: is a total rought. It's a joke. You're not being
Speaker 3: taught anything of any value. That is pumping you full
Speaker 3: of Marxist nonsense, that the long march through the institutions,
Speaker 3: and they'd much rather spend one hundred and sixty five
Speaker 3: grand on a toga party and fifteen grand on an
Speaker 3: exclusive boat ride. You deserve to be up in arms
Speaker 3: about this, and we should all be outraged because it's
Speaker 3: not just the students. It is the taxpayers who put
Speaker 3: lots of money into universities. And that fifteen grand that yes,
Speaker 3: it does come from fees that students are paying, but
Speaker 3: that's fifteen grand or one hundred and sixty five grand
Speaker 3: in the case of the Toga party, that could be
Speaker 3: spent elsewhere. That's money the taxpayer, the government doesn't have
Speaker 3: to give to universities. Why are they allowed to get
Speaker 3: away with this?
Speaker 1: Well, as my son is at Maccrory, university studying sports medicine.
Speaker 4: What's his union doing for him?
Speaker 1: Well, you know, I don't know what the union is doing,
Speaker 1: but these clubs and societies that the union support, he said,
Speaker 1: I can't get from the front of the Uni to
Speaker 1: my lecture without being constantly harassed by pro Palestinian supporters
Speaker 1: trying to sign me up for things. And he literally
Speaker 1: says they chase after him as he's trying to get
Speaker 1: to lectures. So his experience at university, Caleb has not
Speaker 1: been that great.
Speaker 3: If only they offered him a toga party about for
Speaker 3: a alama alama, That's what he's holding out for. But
Speaker 3: as it.
Speaker 2: Stands, they're nothing but very expensive, says Pools of indoctrination.
Speaker 2: Speaking of indoctrination, an incredible letter was delivered to Congress
Speaker 2: last night by none other than not CEO of Facebook,
Speaker 2: Mark Zuckerberg. He says he regrets working with the government
Speaker 2: of the day to censor Americans regarding COVID nineteen and
Speaker 2: regarding the Biden family's dealings with Ukrainian from Burisma. You
Speaker 2: may recall that Biden's laptop Hunter Biden's laptop showed that
Speaker 2: he had in fact pocketed over eleven million dollars from
Speaker 2: said firm during his tenure with them, something that the
Speaker 2: family had denied. What an absolute gold knucket that laptop was.
Speaker 2: But remember we were told a nauseum it's all Russian disinformation.
Speaker 2: Well no longer, it's come to light, and finally Zuckerberg
Speaker 2: is admitting the part that he played in it. But
Speaker 2: of course we did already know that part about the laptop,
Speaker 2: didn't we because he admitted it two years ago on
Speaker 2: the most listened to podcast in the world, the Joe
Speaker 2: Rogan Podcast.
Speaker 5: Basically, the background here is the FBI, I think basically
Speaker 5: came to us some folks on our team. It was like, hey,
Speaker 5: just so you know, like you should be on high alert.
Speaker 5: There was we thought that there was a lot of
Speaker 5: Russian propaganda in the twenty sixteen election. We have at
Speaker 5: our notice that basically there's about to be some kind
Speaker 5: of dump of that's similar to that, So just be vigilant.
Speaker 5: And for the I think it was five or seven
Speaker 5: days when it was basically being being determined whether it
Speaker 5: was false. The distribution on Facebook was decreased, but people
Speaker 5: were still allowed to share it.
Speaker 2: If you're anything like me, whenever you see this kind
Speaker 2: of stuff.
Speaker 4: You go, hmm, that's nice. What else aren't you admitting to?
Speaker 2: Well, last night, in this letter to Congress, we found
Speaker 2: out a little bit more. To quote Zuckerberg himself, he said,
Speaker 2: we regularly hear from governments around the world and others
Speaker 2: with various concerns around public discourse and public safety.
Speaker 4: Oh that's good to know. You work with these.
Speaker 2: Guys a lot, do you, zuck In twenty twenty one,
Speaker 2: senior officials from the Biden administration, including the White House,
Speaker 2: repeatedly pressured our teams months to censor certain COVID nineteen content,
Speaker 2: including humor and satire, and express a lot of frustrations
Speaker 2: with our teams when we didn't agree. I believe the
Speaker 2: government pressure was wrong, and I regret that we were
Speaker 2: not more outspoken about it. In a separate situation, the
Speaker 2: FBI warned us about a potential Russian disinformation operation about
Speaker 2: the Biden family and Burisma and the lead up to
Speaker 2: the twenty twenty election. It's since been made clear that
Speaker 2: the reporting was not Russian disinformation, and in retrospect, we
Speaker 2: shouldn't have demoted the story. So you're telling us that
Speaker 2: by playing censorship, Patsy to the government. You actually ended
Speaker 2: up censoring truth. And this is why I am a
Speaker 2: free speech absolutist. I don't think any of these guys
Speaker 2: should be censoring anything unless indeed.
Speaker 4: It breaks the law. Like in the case of child pornography.
Speaker 2: People do run child sex trafficking rings via certain channels.
Speaker 2: But his own platform, Caleb is well known for this
Speaker 2: kind of very unsavory behavior.
Speaker 4: And what has Zuckerberg done about it? When has he
Speaker 4: ever been punished for it?
Speaker 2: And is this because is this why he hasn't been
Speaker 2: in the past, because he plays ball with the governments?
Speaker 3: Yeah, well, they certainly haven't gone after Zuckerberg in the
Speaker 3: same way they have Elon Musk with X for instance.
Speaker 3: And you look at our own well.
Speaker 2: Kavel Durov, the founder of Telegram Telegram who.
Speaker 4: Is now in a French jail, talked.
Speaker 3: About last night. And you look at our own Safety commissioner,
Speaker 3: he and Julieanmngrad, who was vociferously gone after Elon Musk
Speaker 3: and X for you know, daring to allow footage of
Speaker 3: I don't know, for instance, the stabbing of a bishop
Speaker 3: here in Australia, because that was damaging. We can't possibly
Speaker 3: have that Meanwhile, you have on social media, including on
Speaker 3: Meta's platform, dex and Instagram, a widespread dissemination of child
Speaker 3: pornography and grooming of children. We know this, We've known
Speaker 3: it for ages. This is a television package from the
Speaker 3: US last year talking about exactly this, and yet have
Speaker 3: we heard a word done to Meta and Zackerberg about it.
Speaker 6: New Mexico Attorney General Raoul Torres says his investigation into
Speaker 6: Meta found that Facebook and Instagram's algorithms created a marketplace
Speaker 6: for the sexual exploitation of children. The civil lawsuit alleges
Speaker 6: Meta enabled adults to find message and groom miners, soliciting
Speaker 6: them to sell pictures or participate in pornographic videos. Law
Speaker 6: enforcements set up an undercover operation using test accounts like
Speaker 6: this one showing AI generated photos of a fictional thirteen
Speaker 6: year old girl from Albuquerque. The complaints as the followers
Speaker 6: flooded the account with unsolicited messages filled with pictures and
Speaker 6: videos of Genitalia, which you received at least three to
Speaker 6: four times per week.
Speaker 3: Now, look, I'm glad he's finally admitted that they did
Speaker 3: actually engage in censorship at the behest of the government,
Speaker 3: whether it come to COVID or it come to Hunter
Speaker 3: Biden as you suggested, Liz, you'd like to know how
Speaker 3: many other occasions this has happened with what other governments
Speaker 3: around the world. We know that to the Australian government
Speaker 3: during COVID as well, was also making requests to social
Speaker 3: media platforms to take memes down and things like this.
Speaker 3: In media in general, if the government comes to you
Speaker 3: and tells you not to publish something, it's usually a
Speaker 3: green light to publish at one hundred miles an hour,
Speaker 3: because it's like, hang on, if they don't want people
Speaker 3: to know about this, then this is something we're definitely
Speaker 3: going to publish because people are going to love it.
Speaker 3: And again I'll make the argument that I've made many
Speaker 3: times before that if Facebook or any other social media
Speaker 3: platform wants to go down the road of making editorial
Speaker 3: decisions about the stuff that is published on its platform,
Speaker 3: then it should be treated as a publisher just like
Speaker 3: the rest of the media is just like us here
Speaker 3: it's guy News and the newspapers, etc. Where there are
Speaker 3: codes of conduct and whatever over you. The laws of defamation, etc.
Speaker 3: Apply to you when you publish content, and Facebook and
Speaker 3: everyone else is operated in this murky territory for a
Speaker 3: long time, where they say we're the public square, so
Speaker 3: we allow members of the public to post what they like,
Speaker 3: and therefore we are not responsible for what they post online.
Speaker 3: Certainly not legally responsible for what they post online. But
Speaker 3: seemingly they've been very happy when the government comes knocking
Speaker 3: to censor things that the government doesn't want. They've made
Speaker 3: editorial decisions. If you want to play in the same
Speaker 3: sampit as the rest of us, you're more than welcome to.
Speaker 3: But I don't think you're going to like it. You
Speaker 3: can't have it both ways.
Speaker 1: This letter from Mark Zuckerberg just demonstrates how much the
Speaker 1: public have been gas lit in the last few years.
Speaker 1: I mean, we're continually told Donald Trump is a threat
Speaker 1: to democracy, right, but it's the Democrats who were suppressing
Speaker 1: news stories. We're told the government needs to crack down
Speaker 1: on misinformation and disinformation, but it's the government who are
Speaker 1: putting out misinformation and disinformation. We're told Elon Musk is
Speaker 1: a threat to free speech, but at Zuckerberg who is
Speaker 1: manipulating the news. We're told Democrats are all about joy,
Speaker 1: but they're censoring humor on the internet. But I want
Speaker 1: to ask you, what do you make of Zuckerberg's statement
Speaker 1: where he says we're ready to push back if something
Speaker 1: like this ever happens again. The New York Post reckoned
Speaker 1: that seventy nine percent of Americans believed the twenty twenty
Speaker 1: election result would have been different had Zuckerberg not suppressed
Speaker 1: the laptop's story. But now Zuckerberg says, all, but we've
Speaker 1: learned our lesson. If it ever happened again, we'd behave differently.
Speaker 4: Why should we ever believe you?
Speaker 2: This is a guy who has already caved to their
Speaker 2: censorship demands in the past, and we know he's given
Speaker 2: government's backdoor access to.
Speaker 4: Use the data. I mean, that's just on the record.
Speaker 4: That too has.
Speaker 2: Come out in congression hearings. That's something he's admitted to.
Speaker 2: So unlike Elon Musk, who is massive free speech hero,
Speaker 2: Unlike Pavel Durov, the founder of Telegram.
Speaker 4: Unlike Chris what's his name.
Speaker 2: Who heads up Rumble, these guys are the defenders of
Speaker 2: free speech. These guys are the ones who refuse to
Speaker 2: play ball with government. And that is why those are
Speaker 2: the guys that.
Speaker 4: We bring a story.
Speaker 2: I'd say at least once a fortnight of ways in
Speaker 2: which governments, Western governments, this isn't Russia, this isn't China.
Speaker 2: Western governments are trying to put the screws in them
Speaker 2: because if they can't control the narrative, they can't control
Speaker 2: the people.
Speaker 4: And so you can't have these platforms.
Speaker 2: Where you and I and everybody else in the world
Speaker 2: can freely exchange information about anything. And so they tell
Speaker 2: us that that's unsafe, and so that they have to
Speaker 2: be involved in order to make it safe. And by
Speaker 2: safe they just mean we keep everyone on the same page,
Speaker 2: and that is our pay.
Speaker 3: While we're on the topic of censorship, the ABC last
Speaker 3: night allowed something a little bit naughty to go to air. Now,
Speaker 3: you wouldn't have been watching it the Q and A.
Speaker 3: That is, I'm assuming you gave up watching Q and
Speaker 3: A years ago like I did. You were watching us
Speaker 3: instead here at Sky News. But they allowed a woman
Speaker 3: by the name of Jenny Carroll so go on Q
Speaker 3: and A last night and question whether or not multiculturalism
Speaker 3: was a good thing.
Speaker 7: My children, now almost thirty and thirty four, went to
Speaker 7: the local state public school and were dictated to that
Speaker 7: multi culturalism is a great thing. I don't believe it
Speaker 7: is as I feel that the culture of the original
Speaker 7: British slash Irish majority has been demonized constantly for the
Speaker 7: last three decades, case in point, frequent vandalism of memorials
Speaker 7: to Captain Cook. How does this? How does democracy fit
Speaker 7: into this atmosphere of beat up the white guy?
Speaker 3: How did that one slip through through the senses? And predictably,
Speaker 3: the ABC viewers were outraged online. They couldn't believe it.
Speaker 3: How did the ABC allow such an incendiary question to
Speaker 3: go to air? Of course, she didn't say anything racist whatsoever.
Speaker 3: She didn't say that anyone should not be allowed in
Speaker 3: the country. She simply questioned the validity of multiculturalism, the
Speaker 3: idea of multiculturalism, of course, there being multiple cultures, as
Speaker 3: opposed to what John Howard once described as what he
Speaker 3: wanted to be a multi ethnic society, but a monocultural society.
Speaker 3: We come from many lands, but we share one central
Speaker 3: set of values and a culture. Of course, ABC viewers,
Speaker 3: unlike the rest of us, seem to think that the
Speaker 3: ABC is to right wing. They can't see how left
Speaker 3: wing it is, especially when you know real people are
Speaker 3: allowed to ask real questions on the ABC. So they
Speaker 3: set the internet next and whatever are like. Last night,
Speaker 3: Labor Minister and Ali was also on the program. This
Speaker 3: was her response.
Speaker 4: I think multiculturalism isn't a thing.
Speaker 3: It's what we are.
Speaker 4: It's the character of our nation.
Speaker 2: And it's not a policy that was foisted on anyone.
Speaker 2: Take a look around you.
Speaker 3: We are multicultural.
Speaker 2: It is who we are.
Speaker 1: Now.
Speaker 3: I think you made the point to us earlier, Liz,
Speaker 3: that it's amazing that this is even a story in
Speaker 3: the first place. I proved what a crazy position we
Speaker 3: are in that it is like a point of public outrage,
Speaker 3: at least amongst some people, that someone was allowed to
Speaker 3: ask a question on the national broadcast about You know,
Speaker 3: maybe the multiculturalism stuff has just gone a little too
Speaker 3: far in terms of skewing against the dominant culture, which
Speaker 3: is the culture that people came to this country in
Speaker 3: the first place.
Speaker 2: Too In well, are we even still the dominant culture?
Speaker 2: We know that only one in three of us was
Speaker 2: even born.
Speaker 4: In this incredible country.
Speaker 2: I've said it a thousand times and I'll say it
Speaker 2: thousand times. Mah, I've never believed in multiculturalism, and history
Speaker 2: bears this out. Preceding the fall of nearly every empire.
Speaker 3: They grasp hold of what.
Speaker 2: We would now call DEI and diversity.
Speaker 4: As our strength. How is it our strength?
Speaker 2: Can someone walk me through that in like practical, real terms,
Speaker 2: Because John Howard was quite right and saying we can
Speaker 2: do a multi ethnic society, but that is a cohesive
Speaker 2: society that adheres to rules at his's.
Speaker 4: To the same values.
Speaker 2: What we have now is a melting pot of several
Speaker 2: different cultures, some of them completely at odds with each
Speaker 2: other on things that you and I would agree are
Speaker 2: absolutely crucial. And we've got a government who's trying to
Speaker 2: pander to that because they know that, well, we've got
Speaker 2: more than one culture here now that we've got a
Speaker 2: panda to in order to get votes.
Speaker 4: It doesn't work. Look at history. It has never worked.
Speaker 4: And where I love.
Speaker 2: Her name's Jenny Carroll, the lady who asked that question.
Speaker 2: You are based Jenny, and I'm with you all the way.
Speaker 2: And the fact that ABC viewers could not bear that
Speaker 2: she would even raise the question of, hang on, how
Speaker 2: we benefiting from this? And there seems to be a
Speaker 2: lot of bash up the white guy under the guise
Speaker 2: of multiculturalism. Can we talk about this? Well, apparently no,
Speaker 2: we can't.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I wasn't sure if it was Jenny Carroll q
Speaker 1: and A or Daniel in a lion's den. She's a
Speaker 1: brave lady. She asked a perfectly sensible question, and the
Speaker 1: response she got from Anne Aarli was frankly nonsensical. She said,
Speaker 1: multiculturalism is not a thing, it's who we are. I
Speaker 1: suppose if you asked her what a woman is, she'd say, well,
Speaker 1: a woman is not a thing, it's who we are.
Speaker 1: And yet the government's own website contains a policy on
Speaker 1: multiculturalism which says multiculturalism is a thing. It was introduced
Speaker 1: in the seventies. It's a policy quote unquote that's shaped
Speaker 1: our identity. It's been subject to much debate and government
Speaker 1: has been committed to it for the past thirty years.
Speaker 1: That's on the government's own website. The other thing that
Speaker 1: ann Ali went on to say was that democracy is
Speaker 1: more resilient and it's better when you've got a diversity
Speaker 1: of ideas and faiths and cultural backgrounds. And it's as
Speaker 1: if it's this magical formula that if you say diversity,
Speaker 1: it's inherently good all the time, and it's the laziest
Speaker 1: trope I think in our culture right now, people just revert. Well,
Speaker 1: there's two tropes. One is if I don't agree with you,
Speaker 1: racist and I think Jenny Carroll proves the point that
Speaker 1: we're all over being called racists now we're not scared
Speaker 1: by it. It's thrown around like CONFERTI. No one's intimidated
Speaker 1: or put off by that anymore. And the other trope is, well,
Speaker 1: if you say diversity instantly, whatever you say after that
Speaker 1: must make sense. I was in an uber the other
Speaker 1: night and I had an Indian Muslim who was driving,
Speaker 1: really lovely guy. We got talking. I said, where do
Speaker 1: you leave? You says, I live in Lakemba. I said,
Speaker 1: I've never been to Lakemba. I said it's a great place.
Speaker 1: I said, what makes so great? And this is what
Speaker 1: he said to me, a Muslim Indian man who'd been
Speaker 1: in Australia for a few years now. He said, everything
Speaker 1: we had in India is imported and we've all got
Speaker 1: local stores. He said, you don't have to get anything
Speaker 1: from India, you just walk up the street and buy it.
Speaker 1: And I said to him, what sounds like you're still
Speaker 1: living in India. He says, it's exactly that, except it's safer.
Speaker 1: And so this is the problem with multiculturalism. This man
Speaker 1: who was a very nice man, a good driver, but
Speaker 1: clearly he's got no intention of trying to be Australian.
Speaker 1: He's living his Muslim Indian culture in this country, enjoying
Speaker 1: all the benefits that have been created by generations. And
Speaker 1: is there any wonder People like Jenny Carroll get a
Speaker 1: little confused and say, is this really good for our
Speaker 1: country or is something else going on here? And her
Speaker 1: reward for asking a perfectly sensible question is to be
Speaker 1: smeared racist and to be questioned as to whether she
Speaker 1: had any right to speak at all.
Speaker 2: And it bears mentioning that governments of the past, when
Speaker 2: they were imported from Italy, when they were importing poems
Speaker 2: when they're I mean, we are a country built on immigration.
Speaker 2: But you arrived in this country and you had to
Speaker 2: attend these.
Speaker 4: Like welcome to Australia type lessons.
Speaker 2: They made sure that you knew English, and they even
Speaker 2: had like dance parties because they wanted, you know, the
Speaker 2: Italiano from nice Australian.
Speaker 4: Girls and vice versa. Like they made a.
Speaker 2: Concerted effort to be like you are Australian. Now you
Speaker 2: are in Australia and people used to consider it's such
Speaker 2: a privilege to be here and assimilate, rather than well
Speaker 2: I'll just find my clickout in Lakember and enjoy. This
Speaker 2: is a way better country than India. I've been to India.
Speaker 4: I love it.
Speaker 2: But obviously where's Superia are over here, which is why
Speaker 2: everyone loves to come here. And yet we're stuck with
Speaker 2: a government now who will celebrate every culture but ours,
Speaker 2: every religion but that which this country was founded on,
Speaker 2: and the list goes on.
Speaker 4: It's time.
Speaker 1: Well, I thank god the British have got the answer
Speaker 1: to social cohesion. They've had weeks of rioting over there
Speaker 1: because Brits are upset about high numbers of immigrants that
Speaker 1: are basically making Britain unrecognizable in their opinion. So the
Speaker 1: British education system have come up with a way to
Speaker 1: create social cohesion. All we've got to do is get
Speaker 1: rid of whiteness and then everything will just be honky dory.
Speaker 1: Can you believe this? The headline reads, teachers across Britain
Speaker 1: will be taught to challenge whiteness in schools. Remember the
Speaker 1: first Minister of Scotland. Who got up and gave what speech?
Speaker 1: And he said everyone's weight, as if being whites was
Speaker 1: a bad thing in Scotland. In Scotland, yes, So here's
Speaker 1: what's happening in the UK. According to a best practice document,
Speaker 1: educators will be instructed on how to disrupt the centrality
Speaker 1: of whiteness in schools. The aim of this is to
Speaker 1: ensure that future teachers are anti racist and be prepared
Speaker 1: to implement this in the classroom read propaganda. The documents
Speaker 1: also state that white student teachers should be helped to
Speaker 1: develop and project a positive white racial identity. Now this
Speaker 1: has been endorsed by the National Education Union and universities
Speaker 1: offering teacher training. It goes on to talk about how
Speaker 1: people need to be freed from these are white people
Speaker 1: need to be freed from false notions of superiority, and
Speaker 1: society has to be made free from the negative impact
Speaker 1: of whiteness. You'd think the people putting this together have
Speaker 1: never traveled because the way they talk racism only occurs
Speaker 1: in western countries and it's only propagated by white people.
Speaker 1: But anyone who's traveled, whether to China or India or
Speaker 1: African I've got African kids. I love my African kids.
Speaker 1: I love Africa. But one of my most memorable taxi
Speaker 1: rides was in a South African taxi with a black
Speaker 1: South African guy. Brilliant guy, very funny.
Speaker 4: Now I'll take this story.
Speaker 1: I said to him, tell me about different African nations.
Speaker 1: My son's are Ethiopians. What do you think about Ethiopians?
Speaker 1: He said, Oh, Ethiopians, they're so up themselves. They're so proud, arrogant,
Speaker 1: they think they're fantastic. I start laughing right because I've
Speaker 1: been told the only racists are white people. I said,
Speaker 1: tell me about Nigerians, when you should have heard what
Speaker 1: he said about Nigerians. Tell me about Zimbabweans. And we
Speaker 1: went right through Africa and he hated them all. And
Speaker 1: I'm sitting there thinking this can't be right, because I'm
Speaker 1: from a western country where I've been told continually the
Speaker 1: problem is white people. If white people stop being racist,
Speaker 1: racism wouldn't exist. It's just a fiction.
Speaker 3: I really wish you'd asked him about Swaziland. I wanted
Speaker 3: to hear his response to I don't think it's called
Speaker 3: Swaziland anymore in the middle of South Africa. Just before
Speaker 3: I actually make a serious point. Can I go back
Speaker 3: to you said honky dory before? And I was wondering,
Speaker 3: was that the honky bit? Was that a joke about
Speaker 3: white people? Because of course the saying is honky jury,
Speaker 3: but honky is like a quote unquote offensive term for
Speaker 3: a white man.
Speaker 1: I thought he might have been said, and you guys
Speaker 1: were silent, and I thought, well, that was wasted pearls
Speaker 1: before swelling on this program there, but you were sitting
Speaker 1: on it. You could have acknowledged it when I said, well,
Speaker 1: I just.
Speaker 3: Didn't know whether it was like, you know, John Law's
Speaker 3: deliberate mistake, or you actually meant it to be a
Speaker 3: job that be that as it may when you read
Speaker 3: further into this document dis edict about going to be
Speaker 3: anti race unless you are like a racist person who
Speaker 3: isn't anti racist, like unless you are racist who actually
Speaker 3: likes racism. I think we're all anti racist as a
Speaker 3: general base point, are we not? And what they go
Speaker 3: on to say in this document is about colonialism. There's
Speaker 3: going to be references to colonialism when we're teaching. Now,
Speaker 3: what they actually mean is it's got nothing to do
Speaker 3: with being white. It's got nothing to do with race.
Speaker 3: What it's actually about is colonialism and culture. The things
Speaker 3: that they are saying that we believe are superior is
Speaker 3: not that we are white. I don't think, and I
Speaker 3: suppose most people don't think that they are superior to
Speaker 3: anyone else on the basis that they are white or black,
Speaker 3: et cetera. They think something is superior based on the
Speaker 3: country they live in and the culture of that country,
Speaker 3: and the people who enjoy and are part of that
Speaker 3: culture come from many different ethnic backgrounds. They're not or white.
Speaker 3: It is the culture that is ultimately under attack. And
Speaker 3: the further again you read into it, it goes on
Speaker 3: about we have to challenge meritocracy and objectivity and individualism.
Speaker 3: This isn't really about racism. It's about pulling apart the
Speaker 3: culture that has made Britain so great and replacing it
Speaker 3: with Marxism. And they will use any means necessary, be
Speaker 3: it race or anything else, to ultimately pull apart the
Speaker 3: culture so they can replace it with something else.
Speaker 1: Gus ask a question, how do you challenge objectivity without
Speaker 1: claiming that everything is superior? If James are able to
Speaker 1: objectively assess the situation, everything is suggestive, so arrogant. The
Speaker 1: other thing that is us is that every problem in
Speaker 1: the world is a result. So this is the irony. Right,
Speaker 1: you hate on white people, but at the same time
Speaker 1: you place white people at the center of the universe
Speaker 1: because you imagine all the world's problems are because of
Speaker 1: white people, as if nothing else ever existed. Slavery is
Speaker 1: a classic point. Whenever we talk about slavery, it's always
Speaker 1: what white people were the instigators of the slave trade,
Speaker 1: and also about.
Speaker 2: White slaves, of which there have been millions throughout his career.
Speaker 1: Correct, and the other thing institutional racism, But it's now
Speaker 1: the institutions that are trying to get rid of whiteness.
Speaker 1: The very fact the institutions are propagating this is proof
Speaker 1: that racism is not institutionalized in Western societies. Well, well
Speaker 1: it is.
Speaker 2: They're doing the reves, they're doing their darandast and for
Speaker 2: a minority. I mean, these guys always bang on about
Speaker 2: how we've got to help minorities and be good to minorities.
Speaker 2: White people are less than ten percent of the world's population.
Speaker 2: I'd say that makes us a minority. Why aren't we
Speaker 2: being protected by these paper Tell you.
Speaker 4: What where this is not working on? Whatsoever?
Speaker 2: Is in America where a kid from Edmund.
Speaker 1: Isn't it Edmund's School, Edmund North High School Edmund.
Speaker 2: North High School has roped up to school sporting an
Speaker 2: American flag. This story may sound familiar because it's this
Speaker 2: isn't the first time it's happened in the States.
Speaker 4: And because he was disciplined.
Speaker 2: For it, they said, no, you can't fly the flag here.
Speaker 2: Why the heck not? He decided, well, I'm not standing
Speaker 2: for this. I'm flying my country's flag. And then his
Speaker 2: mate started to fly the country's flag at their school
Speaker 2: as well.
Speaker 4: We'll check it out.
Speaker 3: I've been find it for quite a while.
Speaker 8: Caleb Portster is a senior at Edmund North High School.
Speaker 8: He says, Wednesday afternoon he was told he can't have
Speaker 8: this an American flag flying from his truck.
Speaker 3: I've never really had a problem with it before, and
Speaker 3: it's our first Amendment, so it's kind of hard for
Speaker 3: them to dis infringe upon our race, you know.
Speaker 8: Now, his friends say they're backing him, and they're right
Speaker 8: of expression, lining their trucks in the parking lot with
Speaker 8: the American flag flying high.
Speaker 3: And I got a brother in military, so it kind
Speaker 3: of head home to me because I was like, he's
Speaker 3: fighting for that flag, so we should be allowed to
Speaker 3: fly it.
Speaker 2: It'd be different if we were trying to make a
Speaker 2: political statement, but there's nothing political about it.
Speaker 4: Good on the kids.
Speaker 2: There's still some patriots left in the US, even though
Speaker 2: their school system is trying to do the exact same
Speaker 2: thing that we just talked about in the UK. And
Speaker 2: if you think it's not happening here in Australia, I
Speaker 2: don't know what.
Speaker 4: To tell you.
Speaker 2: I love it when you get these heartwarming stories of
Speaker 2: kids being like this as my first amendment, right, so
Speaker 2: stuff you.
Speaker 3: Well, you know his name's cayleb so of course he's
Speaker 3: a solid, solid gentleman. O. Good on you, mister Caleb Horse.
Speaker 3: But I mean, you know what could be more American
Speaker 3: than rocking up to school in your big bagger of
Speaker 3: pickup truck with an American flag on the back of it,
Speaker 3: and then the school somehow thinks it has the right
Speaker 3: to tell you that you can't have the national flag. Now,
Speaker 3: pretty much every school in this country has a flag
Speaker 3: pole with the Australian flag on it. That's not controversial whatsoever.
Speaker 3: And we generally think of the US as a country
Speaker 3: that has this sort of uber patriotism, whether the flag
Speaker 3: is absolutely bloody everywhere, and every morning at school the
Speaker 3: kids sing the national anthem and God and Country and
Speaker 3: all this sort of thing. What on earth is going
Speaker 3: on in the US when a school board is telling
Speaker 3: students what they can and cannot have on their own cars, Like,
Speaker 3: you know, sure you can make a decision about what
Speaker 3: is in the school on the school grounds permanently, but
Speaker 3: how can you tell a kid but they or cannot
Speaker 3: fly off the side of their car. For heaven, say, well.
Speaker 1: That's what they're doing. But fortunately the kids aren't listening,
Speaker 1: so good on them. Hey, listen, we need to talk
Speaker 1: about the upcoming US debate between Trump and Kamala Harris,
Speaker 1: which is much anticipated. It's only a couple of weeks away,
Speaker 1: but now it might not happen. It seems Kamala Harris
Speaker 1: wants to change the arrangements of the debate agreed when
Speaker 1: Trump debated Joe Biden that microphones would be muted while
Speaker 1: the other person was speaking. That actually helped Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: and maybe that's why Kamala Harris wants microphones turned on
Speaker 1: for the entirety of her debate. But it was Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: who was accused of wanting to change the rules, have listened.
Speaker 1: Would you want the microphone muted in the debate whenever
Speaker 1: you're out speaking.
Speaker 3: We agree to the same rules.
Speaker 1: I don't know. It doesn't matter to me. I'd rather
Speaker 1: have it probably on.
Speaker 3: But the agreement was that it would be the same
Speaker 3: as it was last time.
Speaker 7: In that case, it was muted.
Speaker 3: I didn't like it the last time, but it worked
Speaker 3: out fine, and asked Biden.
Speaker 9: How it worked out.
Speaker 2: It was fine, And I think it should be the same.
Speaker 3: We agreed to the same rules, same rules as.
Speaker 2: Same specifications, and I think that's probably what it should be.
Speaker 1: But they're trying to change it.
Speaker 3: The truth is they're trying to get out of it
Speaker 3: because she doesn't want a debate. She's not a good debater,
Speaker 3: she's not a smart person.
Speaker 1: She doesn't want debate. I love the way Donald Trump
Speaker 1: straight faced control people, including Joe Biden. I mean, it
Speaker 1: worked perfectly fine with Joe Biden. Ask him how he
Speaker 1: liked the debate. It was a disaster for Joe Biden.
Speaker 1: But Liz, clearly, I think Kamala at well, this is
Speaker 1: my view, she's not trying to get out of the debate.
Speaker 1: But if microphones are turned on, she's betting on the
Speaker 1: fact Trump won't be able to contain himself when she
Speaker 1: says dumb things. He'll interject and then she can play
Speaker 1: the only card she's got, which is you're a bully,
Speaker 1: you're a misogynist such and that's the only way she's
Speaker 1: got a chance of defeating Trump in a debate one
Speaker 1: hundred percent.
Speaker 2: I don't think it's going to work this time though,
Speaker 2: because they will stick with the original wolves, I believe,
Speaker 2: and then it's on her to keep accepting the invitation
Speaker 2: or not. I don't think she's going to back out.
Speaker 2: We will see this debate. We must see this debate because,
Speaker 2: of course, this woman running for the most powerful position
Speaker 2: in the entire Western world still hasn't done a proper interview.
Speaker 4: She hasn't faced a press pack.
Speaker 2: Why because we all know she'd be absolutelythetic at it.
Speaker 2: Get this Hollywood director Quentin Tarantino. You've probably watched a
Speaker 2: lot of his films, whether you know it or not,
Speaker 2: He has begged Kamala, keep not talking to the press,
Speaker 2: don't do any interviews, just keep doing what you're doing,
Speaker 2: because you will ruin it here. He is talking to
Speaker 2: talk show host Bill Mayer and excuse the expletives, but
Speaker 2: Quentin has a way of getting his point across.
Speaker 9: This is about winning. What what? Most people don't give
Speaker 9: the Democrats enough credit for, all right, but we give
Speaker 9: the Republicans credit for. It's like, no, sometimes it's just
Speaker 9: about winning. And it doesn't matter how we look at
Speaker 9: this moment. It's about winning. This is about winning.
Speaker 7: Yep, no, it is.
Speaker 9: It's about mad Dash and she is running and she's
Speaker 9: not stopping to film stumble and you know what, nothing
Speaker 9: longer stopping that I'm gonna vote for anyway, no matter
Speaker 9: what she says in a stupid interview exact, don't up.
Speaker 2: Quentin says he will vote Kamala Harris twenty twenty four
Speaker 2: no matter what she says.
Speaker 4: And yet there he is begging her to shut up.
Speaker 1: You think he said all I heard was beat.
Speaker 3: Do you think it's about winning? Is it about winning?
Speaker 4: I think he'd had a few sherbets.
Speaker 1: We're going to go to a break. When we come back,
Speaker 1: we'll look at what's making news in tomorrow's papers, including
Speaker 1: the Greens name their price for supporting a labor government
Speaker 1: in the event of a hung Parliament. That's coming up
Speaker 1: next to Welcome Back. Let's take a look at what's
Speaker 1: making front page headlines tomorrow. We'll start with the Courier Mail.
Speaker 3: Caleb indeed a ripper yard on the front of the
Speaker 3: Courier Mail tomorrow. Miles from approval, it says. Anastasia Palichet
Speaker 3: says she course backs Stephen Miles, her successor as Premier,
Speaker 3: despite yesterday responding to an invitation to give him her
Speaker 3: endorsement by saying, look, thanks for coming along today. I've
Speaker 3: got to keep going now. She'd given a speech to
Speaker 3: the Smart Energy Council, which was her first major speech
Speaker 3: since she finished up as Premier of Queensland, and a
Speaker 3: reporter from the Courier Male following her speech asked her
Speaker 3: if she would like to endorse Sir Stephen Miles to
Speaker 3: be Premier again in October, and that was her response,
Speaker 3: Got to keep going, couldn't possibly stop and you know,
Speaker 3: utter three words like yes, I do so. The Courier
Speaker 3: Mail wrote this up as you would expect them to
Speaker 3: do so, and she then sent a text to the
Speaker 3: reporter to say no, no, no, sorry, I did actually mean,
Speaker 3: of couse, I endorse him for premier, So why didn't
Speaker 3: you just say it in the first place. It's the
Speaker 3: easiest of all the questions that Anastasia Palichet has ever
Speaker 3: been asked in her life. Surely that's the easiest one. Like,
Speaker 3: you know, being asked, would you prefer chocolate or strawberry
Speaker 3: ice cream is a harder question to ask, surely than
Speaker 3: whether you endorse your successor as premier.
Speaker 2: Now she's seen the polls, she doesn't a back as
Speaker 2: I did, pretty straightforward at this point.
Speaker 1: There's a little saying in the Bible, out of the
Speaker 1: abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks, and when she
Speaker 1: was asked in person, that was out of the abundance
Speaker 1: of the heart. I'm too busy to endorse anybody. I'm
Speaker 1: going An hour later, that wasn't her heart. That was
Speaker 1: someone in her ear saying, hey, you need to fix
Speaker 1: up this mess because we're only weeks out for an election.
Speaker 1: He needs all the help he can get. The truth
Speaker 1: was the first answer, not the text message. Let's go
Speaker 1: to the front page of tomorrow's Herald's Son. They've got
Speaker 1: an exclusive front page story, which I got to say
Speaker 1: is quite disturbing. Specialist ambulance crew dispatched inside hospital to
Speaker 1: save a woman because emergency department overrun. In never seen
Speaker 1: before crisis shock New health Flow, reads the headline. An
Speaker 1: intensive care ambulance crew had to be sent into a
Speaker 1: Melbourne hospital to treat an urgent cardiac patient waiting in
Speaker 1: a corridor because the emergency department had refused the woman entry. Now,
Speaker 1: as we go to air tonight, unfortunately we haven't got
Speaker 1: the rest of this story, but based on what they've
Speaker 1: got on the front page, it sounds as if there
Speaker 1: was just too many people in the emergency department. It
Speaker 1: was overrun, according to the front page, and so you've
Speaker 1: got ambos having to go into the hospital to give
Speaker 1: care to someone who is suffering a heart attack in
Speaker 1: a corridor. Now bear in mind this is while the
Speaker 1: Victorian state government are issuing budget cuts to hospitals right
Speaker 1: across the state, but still have the ability to send
Speaker 1: government officials to Washington to lobby for the Gay Games.
Speaker 2: Yet another reason to get the hack out of Melvin. Victorians.
Speaker 4: Just leave, as thousands of you already have.
Speaker 2: To the front page at the ODS now Greens girl
Speaker 2: Robin Hood in five hundred and fourteen billion dollar big
Speaker 2: business tax threat to Labor Adam Band will demand five
Speaker 2: hundred and fourteen billion tax hit on big business in
Speaker 2: return for the Green supporting lead were in a hung
Speaker 2: parliament under what the party trumpets as robin Hood reforms
Speaker 2: targeting miners, call and gas companies, banks, telcos and retailers.
Speaker 2: Now we know that the Labor Party has said ad nauseum,
Speaker 2: if it's between us getting into government having agreed to
Speaker 2: be bedfellows with the Greens and us not being in government,
Speaker 2: we just won't be in government. We're not doing a
Speaker 2: deal with the Grains. We all know that they absolutely
Speaker 2: would if it came down to that. But how's this
Speaker 2: talk about tall orders. If you need us in the
Speaker 2: case of a hung parliament, you're going to have the
Speaker 2: tax big business. And of course it's just you know,
Speaker 2: what keeps the country running miners, coal gas companies, banks, telco's,
Speaker 2: real tailers.
Speaker 4: I mean, they're not asking for much.
Speaker 3: And in all likelihood they will require that the support
Speaker 3: of the Greens if it's I'm convinced it will be
Speaker 3: a hung parliament. Whether or not that then means that
Speaker 3: they seek the support of the Teals or the Greens.
Speaker 3: We don't yet know, but you know, it is a
Speaker 3: very real possibility that the Greens will be the mob
Speaker 3: that are required to get them over the line. And
Speaker 3: what they are asking for is a forty percent tax
Speaker 3: on what they call excessive profits. And they've made up
Speaker 3: a list of companies they're ready to go. These are
Speaker 3: the companies if you want to save a forty percent
Speaker 3: tax on. They say they want to do it to
Speaker 3: the big four banks. As you said before, Where's Farmers, Telstra, Woolies, Coals, JB,
Speaker 3: Hi Fi and Pole. I mean, what they're suggesting is
Speaker 3: a two tiered tax system here where they go after
Speaker 3: particular companies that they do not like the look of
Speaker 3: what exactly is excessive profit. These are all publicly listed
Speaker 3: companies that they talk about, and if a publicly listed
Speaker 3: company returns a good profit, it flows back to the
Speaker 3: investors as a dividend. And of course the major investors
Speaker 3: in all of these companies is superannuation funds now who
Speaker 3: set up the superannuation funds, the Labor Party who has
Speaker 3: control of all of the superannuation funds, the Union movement,
Speaker 3: so they will be fighting tooth and nail to stop
Speaker 3: this if it comes to it. But the Greens are
Speaker 3: going to have a very good argument to get it
Speaker 3: over the line, because labor is probably going to need them.
Speaker 3: And the other thing they want to bring back is
Speaker 3: the mining tax that went really well last time.
Speaker 1: Julia Gillard still has nightmares about that. But of course
Speaker 1: this will never happen because Anthony Albanezi will be a
Speaker 1: man of his word. He is his bond, He's told
Speaker 1: us many times. He's also a man of principle. And
Speaker 1: if not, double Mike give horns. I see if they
Speaker 1: destroy social cohesion, there's no way lives that he will
Speaker 1: ever do a deal with them.
Speaker 2: Oh well, I wouldn't put money on it, but yes,
Speaker 2: well he's a very trustworthy man and we should believe
Speaker 2: everything that he says. I know, I got my two
Speaker 2: hundred and seventy five dollars off.
Speaker 4: My power bills.
Speaker 2: Second splash on the front of the oars unis Senate
Speaker 2: plea to be bullied. Jason Clair has flagged on the
Speaker 2: run reforms to his contentious cuts to international student numbers.
Speaker 2: After a backlash from business and a plea from universities
Speaker 2: for the Senate not to be bullied into waving through
Speaker 2: the changes, the Alwinezi government has buckled the voter concerned
Speaker 2: over high immigration by capping the foreign student intake to
Speaker 2: two hundred and seventy thousand next year, and of course
Speaker 2: the universities are desperate not to.
Speaker 4: See this happen.
Speaker 2: How is this possible when apparently Australia is to host
Speaker 2: well over seven hundred thousand international students according to the
Speaker 2: latest government figures from early twenty twenty four.
Speaker 4: I don't I mean, that's more than a cull.
Speaker 2: That's a decimation if they actually follow through.
Speaker 1: But I mean, the other amazing thing is this was
Speaker 1: only sort of announced properly today and Jason clare is
Speaker 1: already saying, well, we're open to changes on the run.
Speaker 1: Typical of this government. I know.
Speaker 3: Indeed, let's just hope they actually push it through because
Speaker 3: it's some decent policy from this government for once. Speaking
Speaker 3: of the government getting things wrong, though, on the front
Speaker 3: of the Daily Telegraph tomorrow it says if Daniel bibbersec
Speaker 3: thinks she can block the Blainey goldmine, the locals have
Speaker 3: just one message teller, she's dream And of course SECAs
Speaker 3: refuse to go and face the locals and explain why
Speaker 3: she knocked back this gold mine. But interestingly, the Prime
Speaker 3: Minister today said don't worry about it. There's other ways
Speaker 3: we can get this thing through. I don't know whether
Speaker 3: he's been talking to his environment minister or not, but
Speaker 3: they're a bit all over the place at the moment.
Speaker 1: All right, So all of that in tomorrow's papers stick around.
Speaker 1: I'm going to take a break. But when we come back,
Speaker 1: learn a drivers complaining that driving instructors are saying prayers
Speaker 1: during their lessons. Every parent will relate. It's coming up
Speaker 1: in a moment. Welcome back. I want to ask Caleb
Speaker 1: what would make the perfect news story if you could
Speaker 1: combine crime crisis with AFL football. Would that not be
Speaker 1: the perfect yarn?
Speaker 3: It certainly would be for Melbourne and you may have
Speaker 3: seen it on the front of the Herald's son before.
Speaker 3: Michael Voss, the coach of Carlton. He's just snuck into
Speaker 3: the finals on the weekend despite being rolled by some
Speaker 3: Kilda in the dying seconds of that match. He's a
Speaker 3: good gips Land boy. He's a great of the Brisbane
Speaker 3: Football Club and now he's a citizen Copper. He was
Speaker 3: at a cafe in Richmond this morning when a car
Speaker 3: believed to be stolen tipped over. Two teenagers emerged from
Speaker 3: the car and well, have a listen to what he.
Speaker 10: Did meters from a busy school crossing witness turned citizen
Speaker 10: cop Michael Voss racing to the scene to help, but
Speaker 10: the teens behind the wheel of the stolen Mercedes took off.
Speaker 3: It was a little bit of Actually, I was sort
Speaker 3: of hoping to be on a cople of day's break.
Speaker 3: But no, that's all good.
Speaker 2: The next thing to you, kids jumped out the car
Speaker 2: ran up the street.
Speaker 10: Voss and a nearby cafe owner chasing them on foot.
Speaker 10: They've chased the teams around the back of the apartment
Speaker 10: building here over to the fence. Michael Voss is trying
Speaker 10: to grab one by the leg, but he's just made
Speaker 10: it over. That's when he turned to the other and
Speaker 10: got him in a bear hug, pushing him to the
Speaker 10: ground in a citizen's arrest. But he says that's when
Speaker 10: that team turned to him and asked to call his mum.
Speaker 3: I'm sure he did ask to call his mom because
Speaker 3: he's just been tackled by bossy. For heaven's sake, now,
Speaker 3: I said Richmond before that. The cafe is actually in
Speaker 3: Hawthorne Barton Cafe, go along support at the bloke who
Speaker 3: joined him, James Laski from the cafe tackled another kid
Speaker 3: as well, and after all of this, Fossy went back
Speaker 3: to the cafe and got two coffees. Apparently goes there
Speaker 3: every morning. He skulls one and then he SIPs the
Speaker 3: other on his way out.
Speaker 2: So allegit this classified as Carlton's first win all year.
Speaker 3: Oh that's a low blow Major Finals.
Speaker 1: Hey, listen, those teenagers who rolled that vehicle, the only
Speaker 1: thing they need is driving lessons, then they'll be fine.
Speaker 1: Not in Ireland, though, because the Irish Road Safety Authority
Speaker 1: is getting numerous complaints from young people going for driving instruction.
Speaker 1: Check out this headline learn a driver complain about instructor
Speaker 1: who prayed in passenger seat. Hey, we've all been with
Speaker 1: that learner driver. If you're a parent, you've ever taught
Speaker 1: your kids to drive, don't do it. It's not worth
Speaker 1: the relationship breakdown. Outsource it to the professionals. Let them
Speaker 1: pray in the passenger seat while your kid negotiates traffic.
Speaker 1: That's all from us. Stick around. Coming up is the
Speaker 1: Reta Penney Show