Speaker 1: Late Welcome to the Late Debate.
Speaker 2: And welcome to the Late Debate. I'm Lizsara, and I'm
Speaker 2: so glad you're here.
Speaker 1: Joining me tonight are twoman who really need no introduction,
Speaker 1: but we'll do one anyway, mister kel Richards.
Speaker 2: And Joe Hilda Brand.
Speaker 3: I'm glad, thank you, Joe.
Speaker 2: That's very reassuring.
Speaker 1: Coming up tonight in the papers, both Victoria and New
Speaker 1: South Wales are insisting they are going to be the
Speaker 1: big deciding state at next year's federal election.
Speaker 2: We'll walk you through the polls.
Speaker 1: And try and figure out who's telling the truth. Gold
Speaker 1: Coast Mayor Tom Tait has been called an Australian for
Speaker 1: simply telling a counsel that to sit down.
Speaker 2: I would have thought that was.
Speaker 1: Pretty Australian and Labor's self inflicted tas mayan salmon saga
Speaker 1: continues as they desperately try.
Speaker 2: To save face.
Speaker 1: But first tonight to Queensland, where the Health Department is
Speaker 1: in a heck of a lot of trouble as it's
Speaker 1: been discovered that their budget has blown out by six
Speaker 1: point four billion dollars. That's a lot of shaggy ladies
Speaker 1: and gentlemen people have pointed out, that's enough to build
Speaker 1: a second cross river rail.
Speaker 2: Now this happened after.
Speaker 1: Well a lot of things contributed to this, but it
Speaker 1: was discovered that crucial services like birthing suites and mortuaries
Speaker 1: were left off the blue plants for new infrastructure, which begs.
Speaker 2: The question, who the heck is doing up these plans.
Speaker 1: Babies are born every day, people die every day. These
Speaker 1: are essential services and you managed to leave them off.
Speaker 2: A perfect example of a project.
Speaker 1: That nearly doubled, actually over doubled in size in terms
Speaker 1: of its cost, without the assistance of any extra add
Speaker 1: ons is the Hervey Bay Hospital. It was supposed to
Speaker 1: cost forty million dollars. It ended up costing ninety four
Speaker 1: million dollars.
Speaker 2: So what does the government do.
Speaker 1: It's got air all over its face.
Speaker 2: How do they handle this pr disaster?
Speaker 1: They spend one point two million dollars calling in a
Speaker 1: contractor consultant to help them out.
Speaker 2: To try and convey what's happened to the public.
Speaker 1: We read in the Courier Mail the battled Infrastructure division
Speaker 1: of Queensland Health spent one point two million dollars calling
Speaker 1: in consultants to write a public relations strategy for its
Speaker 1: severely blown out construction pipeline health infrastructure. Queensland, which has
Speaker 1: control of more than fourteen billion dollar pipeline projects, then
Speaker 1: move to start its own breakaway unit of media spinners
Speaker 1: with tasks that included effectively identifying and minimizing emergent media risks.
Speaker 1: So not only now do we have the consultants who
Speaker 1: have already snaffled up one point two million dollars to
Speaker 1: fix this pr crisis, now we've got Queensland Health itself
Speaker 1: saying well we'll.
Speaker 2: Have our own in house spin doctors.
Speaker 1: On top of that, Hell Joe like, we don't pay
Speaker 1: these people enough to do their jobs and provide services
Speaker 1: as essential as health, then we have to fork out
Speaker 1: covering up.
Speaker 2: They're absolute ineptity.
Speaker 4: You don't fix the debt, you just change the way
Speaker 4: people think about it. It seems to me if this
Speaker 4: happened in a household, if we'd overspent our money, then
Speaker 4: we try to save money. We look at where we
Speaker 4: could save money. But if the really important thing is
Speaker 4: what people think, then what you do is when the
Speaker 4: bowlers come and carry out the sofa in the dining
Speaker 4: room table, you just sit all the neighbors know, we're
Speaker 4: going Swedish minimalist. You see, that's what they're doing. They
Speaker 4: just try to control what people think. Not actually they
Speaker 4: over the big budget is fourteen billion dollars. They have
Speaker 4: overspent by six billion dollars and they don't want to
Speaker 4: save any money. They just want to change what you
Speaker 4: think about it.
Speaker 1: I mean, they don't want to save money, they just
Speaker 1: want to save face.
Speaker 2: So what amazing?
Speaker 5: So this is the Melissa Cadox school of politics. This
Speaker 5: is instead of actually just earning money honestly and paying
Speaker 5: off all your debts, you just rack up as much
Speaker 5: as you possibly can, and then when someone comes a calling.
Speaker 5: So oh, I just think I might pop out for
Speaker 5: a quick morning jogs. See your ladder, everybody, and next
Speaker 5: thing you.
Speaker 3: Know, you're foot foot out on the beach.
Speaker 5: Look, I think you guys as usual, you're just being
Speaker 5: terribly unfair, terribly unfair. The man by the government, man
Speaker 5: Steven Miles, well like that. I just I can't tell
Speaker 5: you how much I love the Queensland Side less Left.
Speaker 5: But look, this is yet again another example of shining
Speaker 5: bureaucratic efficiency because by simply wishing away a six point
Speaker 5: four billion dollar cost blowout with a one point two
Speaker 5: million dollar media unit. They have actually produced the same
Speaker 5: result for let me just check my notes. One six
Speaker 5: thousands of the price not an amazing return on investment.
Speaker 2: They should have hired you.
Speaker 5: I can actually I'm such a good spin doctor. I
Speaker 5: can actually spin the spin. So when the spin doctors
Speaker 5: get caught out, I'm the one they turn.
Speaker 2: To, right, even to help out the spin doctors. Well.
Speaker 1: Health Minister Tom Nichols has asked the department to please
Speaker 1: justify this expenditure, and the new Treasurer, David Janetski has
Speaker 1: vowed to cut back on the state relying on such
Speaker 1: contractors and consultants. He's vowed to back to the tune
Speaker 1: of six point eight billion dollars over the next four years.
Speaker 1: So these guys are in for a rude awakening, Kell,
Speaker 1: because if this is what the LMP government of the
Speaker 1: next four years is going to look like, You've got
Speaker 1: to say a lot of government contractors are feeling pretty nervous,
Speaker 1: right Well.
Speaker 4: I would think the first thing you do when you
Speaker 4: look at the budget where the money is going, you
Speaker 4: discover most of it is going on salaries. So what
Speaker 4: do you do with all the bureaucrats who've wasted all
Speaker 4: the money. You start sacking a few. I mean, I
Speaker 4: feel very sorry for the christ of Fula government. They've
Speaker 4: inherited a terrible mess. It is a real, real disaster
Speaker 4: because not only did labor mismanage, and I do say
Speaker 4: the labor left out of different staff Joe, there.
Speaker 5: Was a labor rights fault that we lost Queensland to
Speaker 5: the labor left.
Speaker 4: But still yes, anyway, so in deference to Joe, we'll
Speaker 4: admit it was the labor left. But they did a
Speaker 4: really bad job of managing the budget, and then they
Speaker 4: saw a looming election and they decided the only thing
Speaker 4: to do was to spend, spend, spend promises that the
Speaker 4: man Chris has inherited all of this. They've had.
Speaker 5: Fundations at one point, wasn't it going to be state
Speaker 5: run servey?
Speaker 3: Oh?
Speaker 4: Yes, But they've increased the public service by tens of thousands.
Speaker 4: So they're going to have to be a lot of
Speaker 4: public servants who go for Chris Afooley to achieve this.
Speaker 1: And whenever they talk about that, everyone invokes the name
Speaker 1: of Camble Newman.
Speaker 2: That's what Camball Newman did, and look what we did
Speaker 2: to him.
Speaker 1: Because we've won all our well paid government jobs, and
Speaker 1: when they're parting with.
Speaker 5: Them, speak of all those poor bureaucrats working twenty four
Speaker 5: hours a day just helping people fill up their cars
Speaker 5: with fuel.
Speaker 4: But they're working, they're way from home, so it's.
Speaker 2: Okay, the eat of the tax.
Speaker 4: It could be worse if they were in America, because
Speaker 4: in the United States there's every risk that if you're
Speaker 4: a senior public servant and you've served the Joe Biden
Speaker 4: government really well, you may be charged with serious crimes
Speaker 4: fairly soon or at least what That's what they're starting
Speaker 4: to worry about in America. We know that Hunter Biden
Speaker 4: has been given by his father this unconditional pardon going
Speaker 4: back to twenty fourteen and covering absolutely everything he did
Speaker 4: has been charged with, found guilty of, or might have
Speaker 4: done that hasn't been discovered yet. Well, now, the suggestion
Speaker 4: is that there should be preemptive pardons issued for people
Speaker 4: who haven't been charged with anything yet and claiming they
Speaker 4: haven't committed any crimes. Great, they should be issued even
Speaker 4: before that comes in order to protect them. Let's go
Speaker 4: to MSNBC part of the looney Left in America and
Speaker 4: see what they have to say about the idea of
Speaker 4: preemptive pardons.
Speaker 6: I hope that President Biden will also issue preemptive pardons
Speaker 6: to all of those people threatened by the unjustice of
Speaker 6: what will become the Department of Justice in the Trump administration.
Speaker 6: That of course includes Jack Smith and all of his staff,
Speaker 6: many Department of Justice lawyers. It includes President Biden himself.
Speaker 6: Although we don't know that anyone can legally pardon themselves,
Speaker 6: he will need a pardon because he is going to
Speaker 6: be harassed and charged for no crimes whatsoever.
Speaker 3: Donald Trump has promised that.
Speaker 4: And so you think it's only just some linear MSNBC
Speaker 4: it doesn't matter. But we're told in the White House
Speaker 4: already senior aids to the Biden administration are discussing this
Speaker 4: amongst themselves. Should there be pre emptive partns and who
Speaker 4: should get the fault He should get a preemptive partner
Speaker 4: or Jack Smith, he might give him a preemptive pardon. Now, basically,
Speaker 4: what they're doing is reinforcing what President Biden has already said.
Speaker 4: He has said his own DOJ Department of Justice is rigged.
Speaker 4: That's how Hunter got charged with things. It was only
Speaker 4: because the system's rigged. No, I think someone named Trump
Speaker 4: has been saying for a long time now. So since
Speaker 4: the system is rigged, therefore we have to give preemptive
Speaker 4: pardons to people who haven't actually done anything and are
Speaker 4: not guilty of anything. It's a wonderful idea, isn't It's.
Speaker 5: A brilliant I can't believe we've been going around like
Speaker 5: chumps this old time, just pardoning people for crimes they've
Speaker 5: actually committed.
Speaker 3: We need to get in there. I can't imagine.
Speaker 5: Every husband in the world go, oh, this is fantastic, honey.
Speaker 5: I'd like to apologize for whatever it is you may
Speaker 5: find out that I've done over the last ten years.
Speaker 5: I'm terribly, terribly sorry. But look, here's my pardon.
Speaker 4: Turning up with flowers for your wife, didn't She says,
Speaker 4: what have you done? And you say nothing? Now but
Speaker 4: next Thursday.
Speaker 3: I'm not sure that's right, that's right? But this, but
Speaker 3: this is absolutely amazing.
Speaker 5: Firstly, the howlkel, I'm sure you would have picked up
Speaker 5: on it. MSNBC has labeled it the Department of Unjustice in.
Speaker 3: Justice not injus.
Speaker 5: It's like, that's a crappy enough pun as it is
Speaker 5: it's like is your news limited? That was Guy rund
Speaker 5: Along Q and a by the way, hi guy, how
Speaker 5: are you?
Speaker 3: How's a new career going? Anyway?
Speaker 5: But the but the idea that you would actually think that, Okay,
Speaker 5: the Department of Justice, which we are saying is and
Speaker 5: correct me if I've got the lodge wrong here. The
Speaker 5: Department of Justice, which we say is so precious and
Speaker 5: pure that we cannot risk it being corrupted by Donald Trump. However,
Speaker 5: is also corrupted enough in its current form to not
Speaker 5: be able to guarantee a fair prosecution and trial of
Speaker 5: Hunter Biden, which is why I therefore have to pardon him.
Speaker 5: But I also have to pardon all the other people
Speaker 5: in the future who the Department of Justice, which is
Speaker 5: now the Department of Unjustice as a department as opposed
Speaker 5: to the Department of Injustice. So the Department of grammatical
Speaker 5: Injustice is now bad er than it was. So now
Speaker 5: what is he to just pardon everybody? Just everybody?
Speaker 7: I think that's what.
Speaker 3: They're That's what they're like. You get a parton, and
Speaker 3: you get a parton, and you get a party, and
Speaker 3: you get a parton. Look on your seat.
Speaker 1: But it's a part of The hilarious part about this
Speaker 1: is it's an outright admission of guilt.
Speaker 2: Why do you need all.
Speaker 1: These pardons if nobody's done anything wrong, What are you
Speaker 1: afraid of? Even if does prosecute certain figures, which he
Speaker 1: has threatened to do, if they're.
Speaker 2: Innocent, what do you care at all time?
Speaker 5: Because of the process, the Department I'mjustice targets the just.
Speaker 5: That's it's going to be the opposite stay. It's like
Speaker 5: bizarro world. If you're say it's so bad, the Department
Speaker 5: I'm Justice is suddenly going to become evil. It's going
Speaker 5: to go, Oh, I've got to find all the people.
Speaker 3: Who have followed the law over the past four years.
Speaker 1: Stration I always say when it comes to the Department
Speaker 1: of Justice, the joke is in the name. I mean this,
Speaker 1: this blanket pardon which excuses Hunter Biden from anything he's
Speaker 1: done since January two thousand.
Speaker 3: Michael Jackson's son is also going.
Speaker 1: To part interesting year that that is the year that
Speaker 1: the Ukrainian government was overthrown while Joe Biden was VP
Speaker 1: and in charge of Ukrainian relations. Then Hunter in twenty
Speaker 1: fourteen was mysteriously put on the board of Burisma, a
Speaker 1: Ukrainian energy company, despite Hunter having absolutely no relevant skills.
Speaker 1: He then set up meat and greets between that energy
Speaker 1: company and people working for a biolab They're in Ukraine,
Speaker 1: which was started under the Obama administration. The point of
Speaker 1: the story is a lot of Ukrainian dollars to the
Speaker 1: tune of millions were pocketed by the Biden family during
Speaker 1: this time. Hunter Biden was merely the bad boy for Daddy,
Speaker 1: and by giving Hunter this pardon, Joe Biden.
Speaker 2: Has let himself off the hook.
Speaker 1: Remember Trump was actually impeached for trying to uncover the
Speaker 1: Biden crime family, the very crimes that they were very
Speaker 1: worried about. Trump uncovering was the very thing he was
Speaker 1: impeached for.
Speaker 2: And now Joe Biden's.
Speaker 1: Just gone, I'm not putting up with that again. I'm
Speaker 1: just giving this blanket pardon. My family is now in
Speaker 1: the clear. But this has been spoken about, these blanket
Speaker 1: pardons for all and sundry for quite a while. Now
Speaker 1: check out this guy, Ed Markey. He's a US Senator,
Speaker 1: a Democrat. Of course, he said last month. If it's
Speaker 1: clear by January nineteenth that revenge is his Trump's intention,
Speaker 1: then I would recommend to President Biden that he provides
Speaker 1: those preemptive pardons to people, because that's really what our
Speaker 1: country is.
Speaker 2: Going to kneed next year.
Speaker 1: He emphasized the healing potential of a presidential pardon. Quote
Speaker 1: Nick Nixon's pardon allowed our country to just close that
Speaker 1: chapter and just move on to a new era.
Speaker 2: I think that.
Speaker 1: Joe Biden would be very well be in the same situation,
Speaker 1: and people will look back and say, that's what our
Speaker 1: country wants.
Speaker 2: So the beacon no justice.
Speaker 5: I'm enjoying this so much so so I'd have to
Speaker 5: make sure I'm just.
Speaker 3: On the right page here.
Speaker 5: So the moral beacon of the current Democratic Party is
Speaker 5: Richard Nixon, post.
Speaker 3: Watergates the irony, Like, not before we knew he did it,
Speaker 3: but after he went out and was like pardoning everyone.
Speaker 5: Of the LA that's your guy. You know, we need
Speaker 5: to turn back. You know, it's like there Ben Shiffley,
Speaker 5: the Light on the Hill. We need to look back
Speaker 5: at the heroes of Democratic past, but.
Speaker 3: See what they were doing. What did Richard Nixon do?
Speaker 3: After all?
Speaker 4: Right, but the people who are wanting these pre empty
Speaker 4: pardons are the same people who were so ready to
Speaker 4: rush in and defend the fact that Joe has given Hunter,
Speaker 4: so many Democratic leaders have rushed in decided it was
Speaker 4: wonderful that Joe gave Hunter a pardon? Or did they?
Speaker 4: Chuck Schumer is the leader of the Democrats in the Senate.
Speaker 4: Here's how strongly he came to the defense of Joe
Speaker 4: and Hunter.
Speaker 8: Agree with some of your Democratic College sy that President
Speaker 8: Biden's parted a Hunter Biden and his wrong or unwise
Speaker 8: puts personal interest.
Speaker 3: Ahead of duty. I got nothing for you on that.
Speaker 9: Can I pull up on that?
Speaker 2: Concerned black transparency, lack of honesty.
Speaker 5: Around my institute.
Speaker 3: As I said, I got nothing for you on that noe.
Speaker 8: Parting anyone on the way out of office, Stanley members
Speaker 8: set support.
Speaker 3: President, Thank you. I've got nothing for you on that.
Speaker 10: But the question is they talked about January sixth, parties.
Speaker 10: This is a playbook for incoming President Trump. Isn't this
Speaker 10: a problem? Did he not establish a bad precedent for partners?
Speaker 3: I got nothing for you on that. I want any
Speaker 3: other subjects.
Speaker 4: It is wonderful, I've got nothing for you on that.
Speaker 4: I love that he's not prepared to defend the hunt
Speaker 4: of Biden pardon once quite would like one himself, just
Speaker 4: in case to be covered. It's not the only thing
Speaker 4: the Biden government is doing. They got money.
Speaker 1: Very concerned with pardons because Trump has elected very very
Speaker 1: strong characters, absolute bulldogs, to head up his do O
Speaker 1: J to head up advisory of the FBI, etc.
Speaker 2: And so on.
Speaker 1: So it's the good reason that these people want their pardons.
Speaker 2: They know what's coming.
Speaker 1: But something else the Democrats are very scared about will
Speaker 1: be ruined by the Trump administration is the billions of
Speaker 1: dollars they have been funneling into little agency here, little
Speaker 1: nonprofit there, to the tune of one hundred billion dollars
Speaker 1: throughout the Biden administration to solve the climate crisis. Of course,
Speaker 1: so today we learn that fifty four Democratic lawmakers have
Speaker 1: penned a letter asking Biden to quickly distribute the climate
Speaker 1: funds before he leaves office, before Trump.
Speaker 2: Can ruin it all.
Speaker 1: We read in Politico today, fifty four Democratic members of
Speaker 1: Congress has signed on to a letter asking President Joe
Speaker 1: Biden to lock in future climate change initiatives by dispersing
Speaker 1: the promised funds before he leaves office. The letter urges
Speaker 1: the move to quote ad future politicization or manipulation of
Speaker 1: climate programs end quote before President elect Donald Trump and
Speaker 1: a Republican led Congress take over.
Speaker 2: In twenty twenty five.
Speaker 1: Now, this letter came out the same day as the
Speaker 1: Biden administration proudly announced that it had sponsored over twenty
Speaker 1: three thousand agencies using funds that they were allowed to
Speaker 1: use via their House This for an ironically named bill.
Speaker 2: The Inflation Reduction Act.
Speaker 1: They've literally reached the threshold of the expenditure, which was
Speaker 1: one hundred billion dollars, and.
Speaker 2: They're still pressing for more.
Speaker 1: Well, our mates at Project Veritas, you might remember these guys.
Speaker 1: They love doing these undercover interviews with a person sitting
Speaker 1: down on the other side of the table has absolutely
Speaker 1: no idea they're talking to a reporter from Project Veritas.
Speaker 2: They went undercover to to someone from the.
Speaker 1: EPA who, unbeknownst to him, just gave them the mother
Speaker 1: load of what they're up to behind the scenes in
Speaker 1: the Biden administration.
Speaker 8: So an EPA so a lot of times amazing.
Speaker 3: So I do you know.
Speaker 8: The PLAT production back cool?
Speaker 2: Yes?
Speaker 8: Okay, Biden's timate long, yes, yeah, So I do hire impremutations.
Speaker 8: I work with like Biden appointees, somebody that.
Speaker 2: We've given out.
Speaker 3: We've given out.
Speaker 8: Like tens of billions.
Speaker 2: Of dollars like I had last year.
Speaker 8: I'll hid we given out like fifty million dollars. Fifty
Speaker 8: million dollars billion, Billy would be fifty billion dollars now
Speaker 8: just having to get the money out is half as
Speaker 8: possible before they come in, like top really basically after
Speaker 8: it all is now, I mean now would always like
Speaker 8: it truly feels like run at work, throwing like the
Speaker 8: part off the top when they come in, we haven't
Speaker 8: gotten out the door and.
Speaker 2: They get stopped in.
Speaker 3: Yeah, like two months.
Speaker 8: No, I think they gave them the money because it
Speaker 8: was harder if it was a government run program they
Speaker 8: could get the money your way one, because it was
Speaker 8: it was an experience politic and comboining for like these
Speaker 8: are basically like non profit intitutionis that morning covering the
Speaker 8: entire country. They could have been a coy agency, but
Speaker 8: because they aren't a sper from the publican decision and
Speaker 8: these guys are like saving the world literally.
Speaker 1: An insurance policy in case those Trumpers get in. Well,
Speaker 1: they're on the way now, kel and I'm sure that
Speaker 1: they will be in this nonsense act asap.
Speaker 4: One of these guys described it as throwing gold bars
Speaker 4: off the Titanic, which is That's not the only thing
Speaker 4: happening in the United States at the moment. There's an
Speaker 4: important case currently before the U. S. Supreme Court Tennessee
Speaker 4: pastor law making it illegal to give transgender or gendersphoric
Speaker 4: children of the kind of chemical treatment, the kind of
Speaker 4: chemical castration, or puberty blockers, or any sort of medical
Speaker 4: treatment while they are still children. That's now illegal in Tennessee,
Speaker 4: not just in Tennessee, in about half of the American states,
Speaker 4: about twenty six American states. So the Supreme Court justices have,
Speaker 4: according to The Daily Mail, have hinted where they stand
Speaker 4: on this transgender medicine. They've they're hearing an appeal from
Speaker 4: the Biden government saying we want the Tennessee law canceled.
Speaker 4: If it's canceled, of course, it will be canceled in
Speaker 4: all the other twenty five states that have got it.
Speaker 4: And the kind of arguments that have been put up,
Speaker 4: some of them are interesting, some of them are quite strange.
Speaker 4: For example, Justice Jackson, an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court,
Speaker 4: is saying banning this sort of transgender treatment for children. Well,
Speaker 4: it's like banning into racial marriage.
Speaker 11: The question was whether it was discriminatory because it applied
Speaker 11: to both races, and it wasn't necessarily invidious or whatever.
Speaker 11: But I read the statute here, excuse me the case here.
Speaker 11: You know, the court starts off by saying that Virginia
Speaker 11: is now one of sixteen states which prohibit and punished
Speaker 11: marriages on the basis of racial classifications. And when you
Speaker 11: look at the structure of that law, it looks in
Speaker 11: terms of incontinuing you can't do something that is inconsistent
Speaker 11: with your own characteristics. It's sort of the same thing.
Speaker 4: As far as I could follow her reasoning, she's now
Speaker 4: saying child is now a race and has to be
Speaker 4: treated as a race. No, children are people who don't
Speaker 4: understand consequences. There are reasons why children cannot choose on
Speaker 4: their own to make decisions which will alter them for
Speaker 4: the rest of their lives, because they're not good about
Speaker 4: thinking about how things are going to be the Wednesday
Speaker 4: after next. Children can't understand consequences. And there are a
Speaker 4: lot of risks in this disputed surgery. And this came
Speaker 4: up in an exchange between Donald Trump's prosecutor is Solicitor
Speaker 4: General and Judge Alito.
Speaker 7: After the filing of your petition, of course, we saw
Speaker 7: the release of the Cast Report in the United Kingdom
Speaker 7: which found a complete lack of high quality evidence showing
Speaker 7: that the benefits of the treatments in question here outweigh
Speaker 7: the risks. I wonder if you would like to stand
Speaker 7: by the statement that you made in your petition.
Speaker 12: I of course acknowledged Justice Alito that there is a
Speaker 12: lot of debate happening here and abroad about the proper
Speaker 12: model of delivery of this care and exactly when adolescents
Speaker 12: should receive it, and how to identify the adolescence for
Speaker 12: whom it would be helpful. But I stand by that
Speaker 12: there is a consensus that these treatments can be medically
Speaker 12: necessary for some adolescents.
Speaker 4: And she says that after the Tavistock Clinic in Britain
Speaker 4: was closed down because of what it was doing to
Speaker 4: young children. The report that was referred to, the Cash Report,
Speaker 4: was done by doctor Hillary Cash. Baron is Cash, who
Speaker 4: is an expert in pediatrics. There's there's a huge debate
Speaker 4: in the community, and it looks like what is happening
Speaker 4: in the so called gender affirming treatment. That is, you
Speaker 4: take children who have gender dysphoria, who were confused about
Speaker 4: gender and you affirm their confusion. That's what gender affirming
Speaker 4: sort of treatment is. It's being practiced in Australia by
Speaker 4: gender affirming clinics, and we are worse off than they are, Liz,
Speaker 4: because we're not discussing it directly.
Speaker 3: Don't think we don't allow operation.
Speaker 4: Four or five times we've had this proposals as something
Speaker 4: the Senate should look at, and we're just not looking
Speaker 4: at it. We're not thinking about it, we're not discussing it,
Speaker 4: we're not debating it. And so little children are having
Speaker 4: their bodies changed, but.
Speaker 5: They're not dark how they're not don't we don't allow.
Speaker 5: It's against the law in Australia for any surgical procedures
Speaker 5: against minors transit.
Speaker 4: The medical procedures of puberting blockers damage them for life.
Speaker 1: And there have been cases Joe like double missectomies.
Speaker 3: Not for underta.
Speaker 1: And get certain yes it was approved for a certain
Speaker 1: fifteen year old, but certainly where Senator pull Into Hanson
Speaker 1: has tried five times now to get upper movement in
Speaker 1: the Senate, which simply says, let's have an inquiry into this.
Speaker 1: The UK have banned it. It is no longer happening
Speaker 1: in the UK. The CAST report was so comprehensive they
Speaker 1: came out and said, we are not transitioning children any more.
Speaker 2: No more cross sex hormones, no more gender blockers. Sorry,
Speaker 2: what am I looking for?
Speaker 1: The Tabubany book huby blockers, thank you very much, which
Speaker 1: have been shown to affect your fertility for the rest
Speaker 1: of your life, as well as bone density and any number.
Speaker 2: Of other issues.
Speaker 1: We've had child psychiatrists and pediatricians here in Australia even
Speaker 1: stood down from their jobs because they refuse to go
Speaker 1: along the narrative of gender affirming care.
Speaker 2: They said, I can't do it. It goes against my morals.
Speaker 2: This is completely wrong.
Speaker 1: But we seem to be, like you say, kel behind
Speaker 1: the rest of the world here because several Western countries
Speaker 1: now have banned the practice all together, and as you say,
Speaker 1: we're not even looking into it.
Speaker 5: Well, I think that the thing that happens is going
Speaker 5: to happen in the US, I believe, and I think
Speaker 5: that was what the rather strange argument being made by
Speaker 5: Justice Jackson was comparing to interracial marriage is very strong because, well,
Speaker 5: I think, but I don't think the Supreme Court, and
Speaker 5: I might be wrong, but I don't think the Supreme
Speaker 5: Court can tell a state that has jurisdiction over a
Speaker 5: matter that it can and can't do something because it's
Speaker 5: harmful to children, or because it's this and that, or
Speaker 5: because you.
Speaker 3: Know this argument. You know the Cast Review in the
Speaker 3: UK said this or that.
Speaker 5: All the Supreme Court can do is decide whether or
Speaker 5: not what the state is doing is unconstitutional. If it
Speaker 5: violates the US Constitution, then they can say, sorry, you
Speaker 5: can't do this, because our job is to uphold the
Speaker 5: US Constitution. And I think what the Justice would have
Speaker 5: been saying is that.
Speaker 3: It's hard to sort of get.
Speaker 5: An idea, but the Constitution says you're not allowed to
Speaker 5: treat people differently based on race. She said with Tennessee
Speaker 5: before tried to say, well, we're banning into racial marriage.
Speaker 5: We're not treating people differently based on race. The ban
Speaker 5: applies both to both equally, and that would be what
Speaker 5: the state is saying here that it applies to everybody,
Speaker 5: so it's not actually unconstitutional. Whereas the whereas the Supreme
Speaker 5: Court could potentially find that anything that has some laws
Speaker 5: for some people, say for example women and roe versus
Speaker 5: Wade or versus men, and not for other people, that
Speaker 5: could be unconstitual.
Speaker 3: I think that's the arguments she's trying to make, but
Speaker 3: it's a weird.
Speaker 2: One in a very nonsensical way.
Speaker 1: I don't see how that is very relevant at all,
Speaker 1: Justice Jackson. But of course we know the Supreme Court
Speaker 1: does have a majority of conservatives on it, so I'm
Speaker 1: sure I'm pretty confident we can.
Speaker 2: Be confident of a good ruling in this case.
Speaker 1: Back to Australia now, where Daniel Molino Labor MP has
Speaker 1: called Australia Day contraversal.
Speaker 2: Here he was last night talking to Shari.
Speaker 13: Australia Day has evolved further and it is fair to
Speaker 13: say that it has become somewhat controversial in parts of
Speaker 13: our community, and I think we're in an interesting transition
Speaker 13: at the moment with Australia Day. I think as a
Speaker 13: country we are going through a process where different parts
Speaker 13: of our community are wanting to treat Australia Day differently.
Speaker 13: I don't know what the endpoint is going to be.
Speaker 13: What I'd say is there's no single rule here.
Speaker 2: What are you talking about, mate?
Speaker 1: The polls all say, the balls all say the vast
Speaker 1: majority of Australians one to Australia Day left alone, one
Speaker 1: to celebrate our national day and the glorious nation that
Speaker 1: we live in. It seems to me this entire narrative
Speaker 1: is around telling us that we can only be ashamed.
Speaker 2: Of what the settlers did when they.
Speaker 1: Came here, and we can't be proud of what they
Speaker 1: actually achieved.
Speaker 2: This makes absolutely no sense.
Speaker 1: And like I keep saying, Joe, you can't change the
Speaker 1: date of a birthday, and we all know even if
Speaker 1: he did change the date, everyone would still have the
Speaker 1: same issue with the new date because you are essentially
Speaker 1: still celebrating the exact same thing.
Speaker 3: Well, there are lots of sort of bvides can do this,
Speaker 3: I mean.
Speaker 5: The first thing to say is that Danie Moleno was
Speaker 5: just the epitome of a person, a politician who is
Speaker 5: trying to say absolutely nothing while keeping the words coming
Speaker 5: from his mouth so it didn't look like it was
Speaker 5: absolutely nothing, while at the same time having a panic attack,
Speaker 5: while at the same time trying to realize the exact
Speaker 5: composition of his electorate of Fraser but I think. I
Speaker 5: think firstly, there will be obviously politicians who represent the
Speaker 5: lefier and leftier, more affluent in the suburbs, who are
Speaker 5: worried about a backlash against them from all the activists
Speaker 5: who don't like Australia or whatever and are trying to
Speaker 5: get seats back from the Greens in the case of
Speaker 5: the Labor Party.
Speaker 1: And so that's just he doesn't actually believe that he's
Speaker 1: shilling for votes.
Speaker 5: Well, what's he actually saying. He's saying, he's not saying anything.
Speaker 5: He's not even staking a position on it. He wants
Speaker 5: to be seen quite evidently, quite evidently, it is controversial.
Speaker 5: There are protests against it all the time. Point he's
Speaker 5: not going into swing. He's not going to swing in
Speaker 5: for it, and he's not going to swing in against it.
Speaker 5: He's just saying absolutely nothing. I, however, have the perfect
Speaker 5: solution for everybody. Do you tell This week marks the
Speaker 5: I think one hundred and seventieth anniversary of the Eureka
Speaker 5: Stockade Rebellion, when the Mighty Miners under Peter Lalor rose
Speaker 5: up against the injustice and tyranny of a government. And
Speaker 5: it's got absolutely everything you want in a national Day. Firstly,
Speaker 5: the Eureka flag is an awesome flag.
Speaker 3: It looks really good.
Speaker 5: It's been it's been co opted by the far right
Speaker 5: and the far left. You could bring it back to
Speaker 5: the mainstream and say no, you guys don't get to
Speaker 5: take it.
Speaker 3: Sorry cfm AU.
Speaker 5: Sorry is the white supremacist neo Nazis we're taking It's
Speaker 5: going to be our flag now.
Speaker 3: It looks really good, looks better.
Speaker 5: It wouldn't be controversial at all than any of the
Speaker 5: other flags that have been put forward as a suggestion
Speaker 5: to replace the current standard that we have.
Speaker 3: This is a moment that appeals you're talking.
Speaker 1: About replacing the flag as well as Australia Day.
Speaker 3: Everything, because you've got firstly, you've got what a moment,
Speaker 3: what a moment of national unity?
Speaker 5: Right, This is Australia's answer to This is Australia's answer
Speaker 5: to the Boston Tea Party, because these are miners rising
Speaker 5: up and say no taxation without representation. But it's also
Speaker 5: workers rising up for their rights, and so again it
Speaker 5: appeals to both the right and the friends of liberty
Speaker 5: and no taxation without representation, and it also appeals to
Speaker 5: the left because of course it's all about defending workers'
Speaker 5: rights in the face of an exploitative colonialist government, and
Speaker 5: just to even just put this perfect little cherry on
Speaker 5: the top. It is also a great celebration of multiculturalism
Speaker 5: because far from being the sort of all white Anglo
Speaker 5: Irish miners who were rising up and everything, the first
Speaker 5: death at Areka Stockade, I think it was the first
Speaker 5: person hanged after they were all rounded up, or whether
Speaker 5: the were gone, the spot was actually a black African American.
Speaker 4: One of the first. The history was written by Raphael Carboni,
Speaker 4: so yes, it was a multi ethnic thing. I'm glad
Speaker 4: you're catching up because about ten years ago, I think
Speaker 4: twelve years ago, I suggested this to John Howard. We
Speaker 4: talked about the one and it became obviously ten years.
Speaker 1: Ago, Kell you were talking about changing the date of Australia.
Speaker 4: It occurred to me anyway, hang on, hang on, I've
Speaker 4: worked through this. I know what's wrong. It's a bad idea,
Speaker 4: and it's a bad idea because in fact it's not
Speaker 4: a big national significant event. It's not big enough. It
Speaker 4: didn't start the country in the way the American Revolution
Speaker 4: did and their independence day July the fourth did for them.
Speaker 4: You can't change a birthday. You were born on the
Speaker 4: twenty third of June. We can't pretend you weren't. You
Speaker 4: were modern Australia began on the twenty sixth of January.
Speaker 4: We can't pretend otherwise. And nailed it because when she said,
Speaker 4: we have got to stop being ashamed of settlement, because
Speaker 4: that's what everyone wants. If we changed it to would
Speaker 4: say we're ashamed of settlement. We're not ashamed of settlement.
Speaker 4: We've got to say people came here who had a
Speaker 4: developed civilization which they shared in the end with the
Speaker 4: people who were Do you know what happened when Australia
Speaker 4: was claimed for a Britain. Every person living here, every
Speaker 4: human being, whether they were indigenous or they were convictors,
Speaker 4: became a British citizen under the British law. They and
Speaker 4: they got all these gifts such are settlers. They got engineering,
Speaker 4: they got the wheel, which they hadn't better, They got
Speaker 4: a written language, they got trial by jewy, they got
Speaker 4: presumption of innocent. Huge amounts of things arrived. Settlement was good.
Speaker 4: We must stop being ashamed of settlement.
Speaker 5: I think first thing first, just to create the historical
Speaker 5: record before it comes in There was no Australia in
Speaker 5: seventeen eighty eight, and there was no Australia until nineteen
Speaker 5: oh one New Year's Day. That was when the nation
Speaker 5: of Australia was born. What happened on what happened on
Speaker 5: seventeen eighty eight was that Arthur Philip raised the flags
Speaker 5: except the win Jackson except I thought it was a
Speaker 5: birthday and there was no way you could change birthday.
Speaker 3: Well, it was ready raised the flags. No one.
Speaker 4: Subjects, not citization day.
Speaker 3: It's been yeah, but not the foundation of Australia.
Speaker 5: That was the foundation of the Colony of New South
Speaker 5: Wales CULP, which is the rit Australia.
Speaker 1: All the same rights, all the same privileges.
Speaker 3: Et cetera, all the same diseases.
Speaker 1: I genuinely think the settlers always get such a bad
Speaker 1: end of the straw because throughout Western history they're like, oh,
Speaker 1: these white people came to our country, and wasn't it terrible. Really,
Speaker 1: they were visiting ancient tribes who hadn't.
Speaker 2: Figured out how to make.
Speaker 1: A will, yet they bought with them medicine, the idea
Speaker 1: of government, how to run a cohesive society, lay.
Speaker 3: Roads or probably didn't have the medicine that.
Speaker 2: We brought, all the better for nobody.
Speaker 5: Know we didn't have We didn't bring the many medicine
Speaker 5: when the diseases were killing you. We didn't have the
Speaker 5: medicine for the diseasion, and you were allowed to beach
Speaker 5: of free country. We had not ashamed of settlement.
Speaker 3: You just have to acknowledge the history. You just have
Speaker 3: to get the history right.
Speaker 2: We can acknowledge the history, but.
Speaker 3: None of it. The history that's completely wrong.
Speaker 9: The killer they said at the top of the topic,
Speaker 9: we are being told to be ashamed of that which happened,
Speaker 9: which we all know about, which was shameful, without being
Speaker 9: allowed to then be.
Speaker 5: It's the same if you want to say, as you
Speaker 5: would say, we came here with the best of intentions.
Speaker 3: There was a from King George. It said, please treat.
Speaker 5: The native populations with the utmost friendliness and care, and
Speaker 5: Arthur Philip did try to do that, and then there
Speaker 5: was some violence and things escalated, but both sides. That's yeah,
Speaker 5: that's that's what I'm saying. There was violence between both
Speaker 5: of them, So there was initially some of the For
Speaker 5: the first few weeks of the colony, everyone lived together
Speaker 5: really well, and then there was I think there was
Speaker 5: some Arthur Phillip said anyone who harms the native will
Speaker 5: be hung or hanged, sorry.
Speaker 3: Hung, and they were hung.
Speaker 5: And then there and then there was some black violence
Speaker 5: against white and so those people were inscald.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's right.
Speaker 5: That's why I'm explaining it to you. But you could say,
Speaker 5: and you can actually say, and what you should say
Speaker 5: is that we brought all manner of disease that which
Speaker 5: was by far the biggest killer of them. We didn't
Speaker 5: have any medicine for it. All we had was a
Speaker 5: natural immunity that they did not. It wiped out half
Speaker 5: their population. But we didn't do it on purpose. It
Speaker 5: wasn't done with malice. It wasn't a state orchestrated genocide
Speaker 5: as has happened in other countries. There was settler violence
Speaker 5: on the frontiers down the track. But that's how you
Speaker 5: tell the story. You tell it proper, you don't wrap
Speaker 5: it up in a little pink bo and say, wasn't.
Speaker 4: It all We want to.
Speaker 5: Keep us citizens Australia and we didn't have any medicines.
Speaker 3: So's just we've got to.
Speaker 2: Go to a break now.
Speaker 1: But stay tuned, will bring you tomorrow's news tonight.
Speaker 2: In a bit welcome back.
Speaker 1: This is the part where we bring you tomorrow's news tonight.
Speaker 2: Kel you've got the Australian.
Speaker 4: I have got the Batchee Daily and the big splash
Speaker 4: headline on the front page says b B two pm,
Speaker 4: you are inviting terrorism. So it's the Prime Minister of Israel,
Speaker 4: Benjamin Netanya who writing to our Prime minister. The story says,
Speaker 4: quote the office of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netnia, who
Speaker 4: has strongly criticized the Albanezi government over its retreating support
Speaker 4: for Israel and promotion of Palestinian statehood at the United Nations.
Speaker 4: In comments provided exclusively to The Australian, the office of
Speaker 4: mister Niah who said, quote the disappointing change in position
Speaker 4: of the United Nations would undoubtedly quote invite more terrorism
Speaker 4: and more anti Semitic riots on Western campuses and city centers,
Speaker 4: including they say Australia. I find it really bizarre. I
Speaker 4: don't understand why Penny Wong and Anthony Albanesi are taking
Speaker 4: the position they have for a long time. It was
Speaker 4: a bipartisan position by all the major parties. We will
Speaker 4: support the state of Israel, it's the ancestral homeland of
Speaker 4: the Jewish people. It's a democratic notion in the Middle East.
Speaker 4: They our allies. Bob Hawk certainly took this line, and
Speaker 4: for some reason, Pennywong and Anthony Alberanesi have taken the
Speaker 4: line of no, no, no. Our traditional support for Israel
Speaker 4: is gone, and we're going to support the Palestinians. They
Speaker 4: don't seem to understand they're even out of step with
Speaker 4: the Palestinians. They keep talking about a two state solution.
Speaker 4: The official Palestinian line is a one state solution that
Speaker 4: runs from the Mediterranean seat of the jaw Ord River,
Speaker 4: with no Israel in between. So I simply I cannot
Speaker 4: grasp what they think they're achieving, except perhaps propping up
Speaker 4: the votes of Muslim voters in some Australian electrics. Surely, Joe,
Speaker 4: they wouldn't be as calible.
Speaker 3: The true state solution thing hasn't changed.
Speaker 5: That's exactly the same as it was under Bob Hawk,
Speaker 5: as it is under Anti Albanesi. I think the difference
Speaker 5: has been that they have been more forthright in advancing
Speaker 5: the case for the establishment and recognition of Palestine as
Speaker 5: a sovereign state. So back in the old days, think
Speaker 5: the whole thing was just in the too hard baskets. Oh, yes,
Speaker 5: we believe in a true state solution, okay, everybody.
Speaker 4: Yeah, there is no Palestine at the moment, so there's
Speaker 4: no workable two state solution. What they're trying to do
Speaker 4: is to go ahead of the facts and pretend there
Speaker 4: is such a thing as a Palestine.
Speaker 5: Well, they're trying to fast track that and that's what
Speaker 5: this resolution is about, and that's what the previous resolution
Speaker 5: they support.
Speaker 3: It was about.
Speaker 5: So they have become more assertive in pursuing the two
Speaker 5: state solution.
Speaker 3: The objective, not more assertive.
Speaker 4: They've actually changed their support from the two state solution
Speaker 4: to pushing something which doesn't exist at the moment and
Speaker 4: is controlled by terrorists wherever it. Let's stay with the
Speaker 4: Australian with the National broad treat because it's such a
Speaker 4: good newspaper. Also on the front page on the top
Speaker 4: right hand side, there's a story about the salmon Battle,
Speaker 4: the battle between different aspects of the Labor Party, the
Speaker 4: bits that Joe agrees with and the bits he doesn't
Speaker 4: agree with. The salmon fishing and salmon fishing industry on
Speaker 4: the West coast of Tasmania is enormous. This story, says
Speaker 4: Anthony Albanezi has floated a radical solution to the Tasmanian
Speaker 4: salmon standoff, granting fish farms in Macquarie Harbor as national
Speaker 4: interest exemptions from federal environmental laws. The federal environmental laws
Speaker 4: that could it a few are those being proposed by
Speaker 4: Taniel Pleppersek, which would say, there is a fish called
Speaker 4: the mcgean skate, if I'm pronouncing that correctly, and the
Speaker 4: mcgean skate might actually become extinct because so much of
Speaker 4: the oxygen is being taken out of the water by
Speaker 4: these huge fish farms. And if five thousand people lose
Speaker 4: their jobs, well, as long as the little skate survives,
Speaker 4: that's perfectly all right, according to Tanya Blubisik, and lose.
Speaker 1: Out on millions hundreds of millions of dollars that salmon
Speaker 1: brings into the Tasmanian ecmpomy. On top of that, what
Speaker 1: I can't get about this, Joe, is this has already
Speaker 1: been hanging over the salmon industry in Tasmanian's heads.
Speaker 2: For twelve months. Yeah, what theyck is happening.
Speaker 1: And now the Albanezi government has turned around and said, oh,
Speaker 1: we're just going to wait till after.
Speaker 2: The election to make a call.
Speaker 1: So you've already lost those votes, because then you've got
Speaker 1: Dutton who's come out and said, you guys are safe
Speaker 1: with us.
Speaker 2: Even if they.
Speaker 1: Do pass something that will trash the industry in Tasmania,
Speaker 1: we will.
Speaker 2: Get rid of it, we will repeel it.
Speaker 1: So if you're in the salmon industry in Tasmania, you're
Speaker 1: already voting liberal.
Speaker 2: Why is he now just.
Speaker 1: Further confusing it, being like, oh, new idea two seconds
Speaker 1: to midnight. And again everybody knows because they've already.
Speaker 2: Said so they're actually not going.
Speaker 1: To make a call before Tasmanians go to the polic.
Speaker 5: Well, I suppose they're trying to what they's so you're
Speaker 5: absolutely right, this is a ridiculous thing. And this the
Speaker 5: Maugian skate is this weird sort of ray fish. It's
Speaker 5: very ugly, only lives, it's very ugly. Apparently it's related
Speaker 5: to the dinosaurs, which I thought the birds were. It
Speaker 5: only lives in Macquarie Harbor, which is where all the
Speaker 5: salmon farms are, and so of course all the inner
Speaker 5: city environmentalists on the mainland, well we have to save
Speaker 5: this thing.
Speaker 3: It's on the verge of extinction.
Speaker 5: There are three marginal seats, plus another the seat of Franklin,
Speaker 5: which I think is the seat of the actual Agriculture
Speaker 5: and Fisheries Minister. And a nice little twist and she
Speaker 5: is all over that joint.
Speaker 3: She has just on.
Speaker 5: She's on the red eye every night back and from
Speaker 5: from Tasmania, and half the cabinet's been down there as well.
Speaker 5: They will definitely intervene to stop this ban or suspension
Speaker 5: or pause on salmon farming going ahead. I guarantee they
Speaker 5: will absolutely do that. The question is how they do it.
Speaker 5: So the Environment Minister Taniel Peters has the power in
Speaker 5: her hands to say right boink not, you can't do
Speaker 5: the salmon farming and you.
Speaker 3: Can't do it for no. He wants to stop her
Speaker 3: from doing that. He wants to stop her from pausing.
Speaker 3: That is exactly what he's doing.
Speaker 4: That's why, that's why he's the Prime minister. If he's
Speaker 4: got any leadership, he pulls.
Speaker 3: His That's that's right, and that's what he's doing. But
Speaker 3: that is what he's doing.
Speaker 4: As her into his offices. I'm the Prime and ill
Speaker 4: you to.
Speaker 5: Be surprised in the Western system of government. That's not
Speaker 5: as easy as it looks. That's slightly more Europe and
Speaker 5: South America. No, he has developed a mechanism by which
Speaker 5: he can protect this harbor, this industry from anything tany
Speaker 5: p does.
Speaker 3: Do it, all right, that's what he's done.
Speaker 4: Okay, Joe tomorrows for him. Do tomorrow's newspapers tell us
Speaker 4: it's likely to work for well.
Speaker 3: No, that's a this is what he's saying. He's saying.
Speaker 5: No matter if if Tanniel plup sect does decide to
Speaker 5: do this, I can carve.
Speaker 4: Out interesting Tomorrow's newspaper.
Speaker 5: Tomorrow's newspapers say nothing about this whatsoever. Tomorrow's newspaper in fact,
Speaker 5: and this is one of the greatest things I just
Speaker 5: love about the news industry, and especially my beloved Daily Telegraphs.
Speaker 3: So let's go to look at that. First of all.
Speaker 5: No, it's not the fact that Sam Arntige is single again,
Speaker 5: but that's lovely to know as well. But it is
Speaker 5: the fact that James Campbell has an exclusive yarn PM's
Speaker 5: hometown will decide the election new poll Backyard Blitz. Five
Speaker 5: labor seats in New South Wales are poised to swinging
Speaker 5: to the Coalition and Peter Utton and next to his
Speaker 5: federal election. Exclusive new polling shows setting up a fierce
Speaker 5: battle in Anthony Albanese's own backyard. Love it great yarn
Speaker 5: you know Crack and reporter Crack and research Costamaris and
Speaker 5: Redbridge again who the PM says. I don't think they
Speaker 5: like me very much because they all their polling seems
Speaker 5: to be a bit negative.
Speaker 2: On porld Albo not just accurate.
Speaker 5: Then I was interested to see in the Herald Sun
Speaker 5: the other great News Corp masthead the exact same yeah,
Speaker 5: by the exact same reporter James Campbell, but this time.
Speaker 3: It's battlevound battleground Victoria.
Speaker 5: Exclusive shock poll reveals Coalition on course to pick up
Speaker 5: at least one labor seat in our state, with four
Speaker 5: more in balance in mid Angrave Costs a living crisis
Speaker 5: James Campbell and George Georgie title as well. Shot view
Speaker 5: polling shows the Coalition is likely to pick up one
Speaker 5: seat in Victoria, with another four labor held electorates now
Speaker 5: in the balance as our state emerges as the key
Speaker 5: battleground in next year is Freder election, which this news
Speaker 5: reportage at its fighters talk about the local angle, exact
Speaker 5: same data, the exact same story, and New South Wales
Speaker 5: and Victoria.
Speaker 3: Have both got no. No, it's our state. It's our state.
Speaker 3: That's better. I can fortunately settle this. The Daily Telegraph
Speaker 3: is always right. Of course, that.
Speaker 2: Was too predictable.
Speaker 1: Just quickly before we go to another break, the NT
Speaker 1: News has a cracker Tracy, you bitch, symbol of defiance.
Speaker 1: It became one of the defining images of the destruction
Speaker 1: wrought by Cyclone Tracy. Now fifty years on, a Darwin
Speaker 1: Locals crumpled holden tarana has been recreated for the reopening
Speaker 1: of the Northern Territories Museum and Art Gallery Cyclone Tracy Exhibition.
Speaker 1: And if you want to know more about that, we
Speaker 1: did a doco just last week on it, which you
Speaker 1: can still watch online.
Speaker 5: We've got to go to a break, just very quickly,
Speaker 5: Can we just pull up that image for just one second,
Speaker 5: because I want to say something very telling. If you
Speaker 5: look at the back of the tarana, they've spelt Tracy wrong,
Speaker 5: which I think is the most boguan Australian thing ever.
Speaker 5: Go Territory do it spelt wrong as well?
Speaker 3: It's just amazing. I love it so much.
Speaker 2: We've got to go to a break. We'll see you
Speaker 2: in a few minutes. Don't go away, welcome back. Well.
Speaker 1: While his team are talking about preemptive pardons for themselves
Speaker 1: and the corrupt government that has been where is Biden,
Speaker 1: you might ask, Well, he's pulling his signature move during
Speaker 1: a climate meeting in Africa US.
Speaker 14: In support of the development of the Orbito Corrido. Tanzania
Speaker 14: have used the Orbito Corrido as an integral quetro broad
Speaker 14: strategy connectivity in Africa.
Speaker 3: Also the factor that.
Speaker 2: He's turned out, I mean, are you going to watch?
Speaker 2: Are you going to miss the sleep in the last.
Speaker 5: Four years, I been to one of those conferences, but
Speaker 5: I can promise you catching a few z's is the
Speaker 5: smartest possible course of action that shows a man in
Speaker 5: the prime of his faculties.
Speaker 4: Except that he's caught on camera, which is not wonderful.
Speaker 4: I've got to say last Christmas, my little grandson's going
Speaker 4: to be a pair of socks. One sock said, Grandpa
Speaker 4: is not asleep. The other sock said, he is just
Speaker 4: resting his eyes. Basically, that's what dear old Joe actually needs.
Speaker 4: I am I'm just resting my eyes on his shirt.
Speaker 5: I'm not asleep. I'm just preemptively pardoning everyone I know.
Speaker 2: Before we leave you. Tonight, the UK has.
Speaker 1: Unveiled their new top model and it is groundbreaking.
Speaker 2: It is history making.
Speaker 1: The headline reads, in a historic victory, Alex Consani his
Speaker 1: crown Model of the Year at the twenty twenty four
Speaker 1: Fashion Awards.
Speaker 2: Why is this historic.
Speaker 1: Well because Alex is a man now. Previous winners are
Speaker 1: famous supermodels that our household names, the likes of Naomi Campbell,
Speaker 1: Beautiful Woman, Kara Delavine, Kate Moss, who has graced the
Speaker 1: front pages of every glossy magazine for decades. But of course,
Speaker 1: would it really be a groundbreaking historic appointment if we
Speaker 1: didn't include a biological man.
Speaker 3: So I didn't even know cifil model.
Speaker 5: If I had have known it was opened to biological men,
Speaker 5: I would have entered myself. Wouldn't have been fair on
Speaker 5: the other competitors taken.
Speaker 2: It home, But well that's it from us. Coming up
Speaker 2: now is the Rita panahe shot