Speaker 1: Late General, Welcome to the Late Pays.
Speaker 2: Well, thanks for joining us. I'm James Macpherson with Liz
Speaker 2: Staer and Caleb Bond. Coming up a Sydney house where
Speaker 2: foreign nationals eighteen of them have racked up more than
Speaker 2: one thousand, five hundred traffic demerit points in just twelve months,
Speaker 2: more than three hundred dollars worth of fines.
Speaker 3: We'll talk about that later.
Speaker 2: Plus when we get to the papers, an incredible story
Speaker 2: from Adelaide where the South Australian Police Academy's gun range
Speaker 2: has been closed after they found out.
Speaker 3: The walls were bulletproof.
Speaker 2: Plus in New South Wales, massive transmission lines going straight
Speaker 2: through a koala habitat. And how many Greenies do you
Speaker 2: reckon a chaining themselves to the trees. None because it's
Speaker 2: for renewables. All of that in the papers a little later.
Speaker 2: But first, Queensland may have a health crisis with bed
Speaker 2: shortages and chronic ambulance ramping, but not everybody is suffering.
Speaker 2: It's been revealed the former boss of the Department of
Speaker 2: Queensland Health resigned his job voluntarily in July last year
Speaker 2: and received a three hundred and fifty thousand dollars payout.
Speaker 2: Not a bad golden handshake. But wait, it gets even better.
Speaker 2: Just three weeks later, he took up a role with
Speaker 2: Gold Coast Hospital Health Service on a salary of four
Speaker 2: hundred and ninety nine thousand dollars. Now the two entities
Speaker 2: are separate, but both of them come under the umbrella
Speaker 2: of Queensland Health. The Health Minister Shannon Fenterman was asked
Speaker 2: what she thought about this, and she very helpfully replied,
Speaker 2: and I quote, I think for anyone, that's a lot
Speaker 2: of money. She can't tell you what a woman is,
Speaker 2: but she sure knows a lot of money when she
Speaker 2: sees it. She went on to say, But politicians not
Speaker 2: involved in individual public service employment contracts, nor should they be. Now,
Speaker 2: there's no suggestion that this was improper. Dr David Rosengren
Speaker 2: was in titled to the payout under his public service contract.
Speaker 2: But see that's the rub. How can bureaucrats justify such
Speaker 2: outrageous contracts when the rest of the community are doing
Speaker 2: it tough, and especially Caleb, when we all know we've
Speaker 2: got a massive hospital crisis.
Speaker 4: You would have thought, and maybe this is the first
Speaker 4: time that this has ever happened in public Service history.
Speaker 4: But you would have thought that they would write something
Speaker 4: into the contract that says if you leave one government
Speaker 4: department to go to another government entity, ie, you remain
Speaker 4: in the public service, then you don't get the payout
Speaker 4: because it's not like you're leaving the business entirely. You're
Speaker 4: simply to moving from one division of the state government
Speaker 4: to another division of the state government.
Speaker 1: You would have thought they would.
Speaker 4: Have written that in there, but clearly they haven't. So
Speaker 4: he is entitled to every single ccent of the three
Speaker 4: hundred odd grand that he collected. All I can say
Speaker 4: for him is well done. Good on you, because right time,
Speaker 4: right play him, I'd be changing job every three months,
Speaker 4: so just you know, hopping from the Gold Coast to
Speaker 4: Public Health Service, off to the Sunshine Coast and then
Speaker 4: why I go up to Townsville and Cans and god
Speaker 4: knows where else, just go do around the whole state
Speaker 4: and collect three hundred grand along the way.
Speaker 1: Good luck to him. He did it within the rules.
Speaker 1: But how have they never thought about this stuff? We
Speaker 1: always talk about the bureaucrats.
Speaker 4: Oh, the bureaucrats they can't work in and the air well,
Speaker 4: they couldn't possibly work out that someone might want to
Speaker 4: move from one part of the public service to another
Speaker 4: at some point.
Speaker 5: Where is the bureaucrats fill in that stopgap when they're
Speaker 5: the ones.
Speaker 6: Benefiting from it.
Speaker 5: Can you imagine how many bureaucrats are reading this story
Speaker 5: in the news today being like, yeah, no, what I
Speaker 5: fancy a move for myself?
Speaker 6: This is utterly ridiculous.
Speaker 5: This guy got just shy of a million dollars in
Speaker 5: the year in the financial year from twenty twenty three
Speaker 5: to twenty twenty four.
Speaker 6: I mean, who the heck is worth that much?
Speaker 5: Not even the Prime Minister gets paid that kind of will.
Speaker 5: This guy's laughing all the way to the bank. And
Speaker 5: unless they do write some sort of condition into contracts
Speaker 5: in the future, what's to stop this from happening again?
Speaker 5: Because if I was a government bureaucrat and I was
Speaker 5: reading this article, I'd be rereading my contract as we speak.
Speaker 6: Just to see if this would apply to me.
Speaker 5: Because these people have no conscience when it comes to
Speaker 5: the taxpayer dollar. They simply do not care. To them,
Speaker 5: it is free money.
Speaker 6: It is not hard earned dollars earned by the sweat
Speaker 6: of millions of.
Speaker 5: People's brows, which are poured into state coffers to be
Speaker 5: squandered in such a disgusting way.
Speaker 6: We can laugh about it or we like, but it.
Speaker 5: Goes to show yet again the extent to which this
Speaker 5: utter disregard government has for taxpayer money.
Speaker 2: Well, just last night we were talking about the fact
Speaker 2: that about one hundred and forty thousand Australians are dipping
Speaker 2: into their superannuation so they can afford medical expenses. So
Speaker 2: then to wake up the next morning read this in
Speaker 2: the paper and how unimpressive is the health minister's response
Speaker 2: or that does seem like a lot of money.
Speaker 3: But I was not involved. You're the health.
Speaker 2: Minister, so sure you didn't make the decision. But Caleb's
Speaker 2: suggestion that maybe this should not be allowed to happen,
Speaker 2: we should look at the way we drop these contracts.
Speaker 2: Maybe the Health Minister should be on the front foot
Speaker 2: and say, you know what, we need to look into that.
Speaker 2: But of course it's a labor health minister, and as
Speaker 2: you've pointed out, labor are spending money, especially in Queensland,
Speaker 2: like it's confetti, and so I don't know that they're
Speaker 2: really that bothered.
Speaker 4: Well no, I mean the health minister could say I'm
Speaker 4: going to do something about it.
Speaker 1: Not it's my problem.
Speaker 4: I mean, you are the minister, You're ultimately in charge
Speaker 4: of the department. You can call the shops, to the
Speaker 4: CEO and the secretary and say how you want things
Speaker 4: to go. They would not My problem couldn't possibly have
Speaker 4: anything to do with me. I know that Shannon Vintiman
Speaker 4: didn't run the contract, but for Heaven's sake, can we stop.
Speaker 7: These things from happening?
Speaker 4: Now? I know that you watch Sky News twenty four
Speaker 4: hours a day.
Speaker 7: You've got it on in your sleep.
Speaker 4: You watch from Chris Kenny at five o'clock right through
Speaker 4: to US at ten, and then you watch Rider at eleven,
Speaker 4: and then you watch newsnight after that.
Speaker 1: I know how dedicated you are.
Speaker 4: But if you're going to rip yourself away from Sky
Speaker 4: News for an hour or two, may I recommend you
Speaker 4: watch a new documentary by Matt Walsh, who is a
Speaker 4: political commentator in the US. You may will have seen
Speaker 4: his stuff before, called Am I Racist? This has been
Speaker 4: a blockbuster at.
Speaker 1: The box office. Would you believe this is from Walsh himself?
Speaker 4: He says, Now after our second weekend, am I Racist?
Speaker 4: Remains in the box office top ten. It's the top
Speaker 4: grossing documentary of the year, top five political doco in
Speaker 4: the last decade, in three times it's a production budget.
Speaker 4: The total gross moves it up into the top forty
Speaker 4: for all docos of all time and counting. Now what
Speaker 4: mash What Matt Walsh sorry wanted to do was go
Speaker 4: around and ingratiate himself with the liberals of the world,
Speaker 4: as they call all them in the US, the leftists,
Speaker 4: to see exactly how they think about racism, because we
Speaker 4: know that they think that every white person is racist
Speaker 4: and we must atone for colonialism, etc.
Speaker 1: So he took it.
Speaker 4: Upon himself to dress up like one of these lefties
Speaker 4: and snuck into their spaces in proper borat style.
Speaker 7: Take a look at the trailer.
Speaker 8: Am I racist?
Speaker 6: I would really appreciate it if you laugh.
Speaker 9: I'm trying to learn them on this journey.
Speaker 1: Do you please leave.
Speaker 8: I'm going to sort this out. I need to go
Speaker 8: deeper undercover, so I want to be an ally. I
Speaker 8: need to look like one.
Speaker 1: What is racism?
Speaker 10: God Luiser King said not to judge people by you
Speaker 10: that The King said a lot of stuff with America
Speaker 10: inherently racist.
Speaker 4: What the hell is that?
Speaker 6: The word inherent is challenging there. America is racist to
Speaker 6: expones all of the inherently.
Speaker 11: Yeah, the entire system has to burn. And I'm not
Speaker 11: going to even use save this country. This country is
Speaker 11: not worth saving. This country is a piece of shit.
Speaker 7: Oh sorry.
Speaker 4: Now you see at the end of that trailer, that
Speaker 4: very funny scene where he drops all those plates in
Speaker 4: a dinner being hosted by a bunch of quote unquote
Speaker 4: anti racist women. He's a bit more of him pushing
Speaker 4: the boundaries. And I don't know how they didn't tell
Speaker 4: that he was a g up, but here he is
Speaker 4: at that dinner.
Speaker 10: We're all acting all the time in our lives, and
Speaker 10: I think that that's part of the problem. You know,
Speaker 10: It's like we're all trying to play a part rather
Speaker 10: than just being real and having these uncomfortable conversations. And
Speaker 10: that's what I'm always trying to tell people, especially you know,
Speaker 10: white women, no offense, no, but.
Speaker 11: See it, like you're a white dude, there's power positions,
Speaker 11: and you know it's pointing white people pointing fingers at
Speaker 11: each other is not helpful.
Speaker 10: You know, I've been on this journey for so long
Speaker 10: and just to see you guys at the table having
Speaker 10: this conversation has been really enlightening for me. Anyway, I
Speaker 10: got the certification.
Speaker 3: And I'm just on the journey.
Speaker 1: How good.
Speaker 4: Not even he could believe how much he got away with.
Speaker 5: We're you surprised by quite how far people allowed you
Speaker 5: to go before they build out or kicked you out.
Speaker 10: To answer your last question, yes, I was surprised by that.
Speaker 6: I didn't think that.
Speaker 10: I didn't know how. I thought probably after the first
Speaker 10: time I interrupted, they would kick me out, but they didn't.
Speaker 10: And it turns out that people are.
Speaker 3: You know, it's something about human psychology.
Speaker 10: People don't want to they don't they want to be
Speaker 10: the first person to speak up and say so.
Speaker 3: We kind of exploited that a little bit, I guess.
Speaker 4: But now this has only been at the cinema in
Speaker 4: the US for two weekends so.
Speaker 1: Far, and it's already done nine million.
Speaker 4: US dollars at the box office, so about eighteen million
Speaker 4: Australian dollars so far, which for a documentary is pretty
Speaker 4: much unheard of. And how interesting that the docoe that
Speaker 4: is doing so well that has propelled itself up into
Speaker 4: the top five political docum entries at the box office
Speaker 4: in the past decade is one taking the piece out
Speaker 4: of dei.
Speaker 1: Because people are waking up.
Speaker 4: It was topic d jure for the last decade, but
Speaker 4: people have woken up and they're starting to push back now,
Speaker 4: and we can see it in the numbers and the.
Speaker 2: Dollars, and that nine million dollars is not bad when
Speaker 2: it cost them three million dollars to make it.
Speaker 3: And that's just in two weeks.
Speaker 2: I read a great quote from Robin DiAngelo, who was
Speaker 2: the author of White Fragility, and of course she's featured
Speaker 2: in the movie.
Speaker 3: She's a strong anti racist and she's been.
Speaker 2: Very critical of the movie list She said, this movie
Speaker 2: was designed to humiliate and discredit anti racist educators and activists. Yes,
Speaker 2: it was designed by giving them a voice and allowing
Speaker 2: them to speak, and of course they humiliated themselves. But
Speaker 2: to Caleb's point, doesn't this demonstrate just how out of
Speaker 2: touch Hollywood is, Because for the last number of years,
Speaker 2: Hollywood have been churning out movies that nobody wants to see.
Speaker 2: There's that old adage, you know, the audience is always right.
Speaker 2: Hollywood have flipped that on its head and Hollywood act
Speaker 2: like we are always right and we're not making movies
Speaker 2: for audiences. We're making movies for audiences that we want
Speaker 2: rather than what the audiences want. These people have tapped
Speaker 2: into the common man's thoughts, the common man's ideas, and
Speaker 2: people are rushing to the cinemas to see it.
Speaker 5: Well, I'd say Hollywood's motives are far more insidious than that.
Speaker 5: When we talk about film, we are talking one of
Speaker 5: the most powerful mediums in the world today.
Speaker 6: You watch TV all the time.
Speaker 5: Tell you what, young people are glued to it, Netflix, Stan, Binge,
Speaker 5: you name it.
Speaker 6: They are constantly watching movies.
Speaker 5: Did you know the Pentagon has an entire department devoted
Speaker 5: to Hollywood, devoted to film. They dabble in it too.
Speaker 5: They help put things together, little subliminal scripts, messaging, social
Speaker 5: conditioning into these movies.
Speaker 6: If you don't believe me, google it. It's on the
Speaker 6: Pentagon website.
Speaker 5: So these conservatives starting to make films because the Daily Wire,
Speaker 5: who have made this one, also made What Is a Woman,
Speaker 5: which is famously now just a hilarious, hilarious mockumentary. Matt
Speaker 5: Walsh's same guy traveling to countries all around the world
Speaker 5: asking them.
Speaker 6: What is a woman to you?
Speaker 5: And all these countries non Western countries laughing at him, saying.
Speaker 6: What are you talking about? What do you mean? What
Speaker 6: is a woman?
Speaker 5: And giving accurate answers. But of course we in the
Speaker 5: West were so progressive. You can't say what a woman
Speaker 5: is anymore. These guys are harnessing what people actually want.
Speaker 5: They want wholesome, they want comedy, they want humor, And
Speaker 5: just like what was true centuries ago, was the court
Speaker 5: jester who could get away with speaking truth to power
Speaker 5: and keeping their lives.
Speaker 6: Nobody else could get away.
Speaker 5: With that in any court, but the jest could because
Speaker 5: he made people laugh. He always cloaked it in satire
Speaker 5: and hence lay his power. The same is still true today.
Speaker 5: These guys are speaking truth to power. They're connecting with
Speaker 5: audiences around the world who.
Speaker 6: Are sick of dei.
Speaker 5: They are sick of this what is a woman nonsense
Speaker 5: and people are voting with their feet. We saw this
Speaker 5: last year when Angel Studios released The Sound of Freedom.
Speaker 6: Which was an awesome movie.
Speaker 5: They'd produce to the tune of fourteen point five million dollars.
Speaker 6: They got two hundred and fifty.
Speaker 5: Million dollars at the box office. How's that for what
Speaker 5: you've forked out to make? It and what you're grossed
Speaker 5: at the box office. These are the movies that people
Speaker 5: want to see. Healthy, educational, wholesome, powerful movies that speak
Speaker 5: to you the betterment of people. Do speak about what's
Speaker 5: really going on in our world, whether it's a mockumentary
Speaker 5: or a documentary. And if we just had enough money,
Speaker 5: if conservatives had enough money, do you have our own Hollywood?
Speaker 5: I dare say it would change the world. It would
Speaker 5: literally change the world. We've got millions of eyes on it.
Speaker 2: The other great thing Matt Walsh has done is he
Speaker 2: showed the power, as you said, of satire and of ridicule,
Speaker 2: which is why politicians.
Speaker 3: Are so keen to ban memes.
Speaker 2: And Gavin Newsom the other day banned ai being used
Speaker 2: to manipulate videos to make them funny, because nothing exposes
Speaker 2: the power of exposes bad ideas rather like laughing at
Speaker 2: them and mocking them.
Speaker 3: And when you've got people.
Speaker 2: Laughing at ideas, that the preferred narrative these days and
Speaker 2: the culture, you just cannot have audiences laugh at that.
Speaker 2: It's like the Ayatola once said, he said, there's no
Speaker 2: jokes in Islam. You can't afford to have people laugh
Speaker 2: otherwise the whole thing collapses, right, which is why politicians
Speaker 2: hate movies like this and why those featured on it
Speaker 2: are particularly angry about it, because the ridicule exposes the
Speaker 2: stupidity of their ideas.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and it's good.
Speaker 4: To see high production value comedy coming from the right
Speaker 4: as well, because you know, the comedy scene, much like
Speaker 4: the rest of entertainment, is generally dominated by the left,
Speaker 4: and apart from a few dissidents in the last couple
Speaker 4: of years who've pushed the boundaries, you know, Ricky Gervais
Speaker 4: as in mind going to transgender territory, et cetera, you
Speaker 4: don't get a lot of comedy that touches on those things.
Speaker 4: And Matt Walsh has said, bagger it. There is a
Speaker 4: market here. The rest of the industry might not want
Speaker 4: to touch it, but there is a market here and
Speaker 4: the numbers approving it, and how.
Speaker 1: Good is that.
Speaker 4: Let's hope it spurs more of this kind of product
Speaker 4: because it's exactly what we need right exactly.
Speaker 5: Here to the US now, where Trump's latest would be Assassin.
Speaker 6: Turns out he left.
Speaker 5: A note in the case that he was unsuccessful, and
Speaker 5: he was. He put a note in a box and
Speaker 5: left it at a friend's house. The FEDS have found
Speaker 5: this note, and they've decided to make it known to
Speaker 5: the world. There's plenty of cases in which the manifestos
Speaker 5: of mass shooters have not been made public for obvious reasons.
Speaker 5: Authorities say they're worried about the inspiring copycat attacks, but
Speaker 5: in the case of Trump, we all know they're probably
Speaker 5: secretly begging for something to happen to him. Ryan Roth's
Speaker 5: note reads, Dear world, this was an assassination attempt on
Speaker 5: Donald Trump, but I failed you.
Speaker 6: I tried my best, and I gave it all the
Speaker 6: gumption I could muster.
Speaker 5: It is up to you now to finish the job,
Speaker 5: and I will offer one hundred and fifty thousand dollars
Speaker 5: to whomever can complete the job.
Speaker 6: So let's get this straight.
Speaker 5: Mass shooters don't often have their manifestos released to the
Speaker 5: public for the reasons that I just detailed.
Speaker 6: But within a week of.
Speaker 5: Someone trying to take Trump's life, the authorities say, nah,
Speaker 5: we can release this.
Speaker 6: One to the audience of the world.
Speaker 5: What is essentially a bounty letter on Trump. That's perfectly fine.
Speaker 5: It's not like it's going to appeal to other crackpots.
Speaker 5: Out there who share Ryan Roth's crazy sentiments and are
Speaker 5: high on the narrative given the Democrats are waterboarding people
Speaker 5: with this narrative of Trump being the biggest danger to
Speaker 5: democracy since nine to eleven, and etc. Just whatever ridiculous
Speaker 5: rhetoric you want to put in there, insert it.
Speaker 6: It's accurate.
Speaker 5: So these guys have decided no, no, let's platform this,
Speaker 5: not even America wide, but worldwide. This guy has said,
Speaker 5: I'm so sorry I failed.
Speaker 6: Now it's up to you to finish the job.
Speaker 5: And the fans who find the letter go, let's make
Speaker 5: this known to all and sundry.
Speaker 3: It's almost like incitement, isn't it.
Speaker 2: It is, But I think the DOJ thought it's probably
Speaker 2: safe to do it because the letter was handwritten in cursive,
Speaker 2: and no one reads cursive.
Speaker 1: Anymore, so going good.
Speaker 3: I think that was probably why they did it.
Speaker 2: The other thing about this letter, of course, is that
Speaker 2: you know, he wasn't a very good assassin. He was
Speaker 2: caught before even firing a shot, and he doesn't really
Speaker 2: have any original ideas. The letter pretty much apes the
Speaker 2: language of the Democrats. In twenty twenty, Joe Biden described
Speaker 2: Donald Trump as a danger to the moral fabric of America,
Speaker 2: and wouldn't you know it? In Ryan Ruth's letter, he
Speaker 2: describes how Donald Trump is torn apart the moral fabric
Speaker 2: of America. And the more you read this letter, the
Speaker 2: more you can hear Kamala Harris, you can hear Joe Biden,
Speaker 2: you can hear Nancy Pelosi. And so for them to
Speaker 2: release it is really an indictment on themselves because it's
Speaker 2: proof in the would be assassin's own handwriting that he
Speaker 2: has been inspired by Democrat talking points.
Speaker 1: Of course he has.
Speaker 4: I don't think the release of the letter necessarily inspires
Speaker 4: further attacks because, of course the bloke is currently held
Speaker 4: in jail, so they're not going to get the one
Speaker 4: hundred and fifty thousand dollars anyway. And we know that
Speaker 4: there are other people who already want to kill Donald Trump.
Speaker 4: And when we talked last night about the Matt Gates
Speaker 4: saying that there are at least five known groups who
Speaker 4: already want to go after Trump. So you know, the
Speaker 4: leaders probably neither he nor they're in terms of that.
Speaker 4: As for him saying that he gave it all the
Speaker 4: gumption he could muster, I mean, he mastered all the
Speaker 4: gumption of a dead cat in Springfield, Ohio, for heaven saying,
Speaker 4: all the gumption of.
Speaker 7: A letter sleep.
Speaker 4: He couldn't even fire a shot before where he was found.
Speaker 4: So please don't give me that they don't both for.
Speaker 5: Marriage, the fact that he did a terrible job, well
Speaker 5: he did, very grateful he.
Speaker 6: Did a terrible job.
Speaker 2: Greats in Ohio are mustering a fair bit of gumption
Speaker 2: right now.
Speaker 1: Do Apparently they're being eaten, so they can't be mustering now.
Speaker 6: They're amoring up.
Speaker 4: But it just goes to drive home the point that
Speaker 4: the danger to Trump, and as I said earlier on
Speaker 4: Cherry's program, like I would be really surprised if between
Speaker 4: now and November we don't see another attempt on Donald
Speaker 4: Trump's life, right because even if they're not going to
Speaker 4: get one hundred and fifty grand out of him, people
Speaker 4: are going to give it a go anyway. As I
Speaker 4: said before, five groups are already working on it right now.
Speaker 4: If we don't see another attempt on Trump's life or
Speaker 4: the bloke's not dead within the next four years, I'll
Speaker 4: be thoroughly surprised. And it means that he should have
Speaker 4: more protection. I mean, if you've got this letter here,
Speaker 4: saying one hundred and fifty grand on offer to anyone
Speaker 4: who can kill the president. They should be giving him
Speaker 4: more protection right now.
Speaker 1: Protection's not coming, is what.
Speaker 6: They didn't mention enough, though.
Speaker 5: Was this guy Ryan Roth offering one hundred and fifty
Speaker 5: thousand dollars to whoever successfully takes Trump's life.
Speaker 6: He admitted in.
Speaker 5: Court just last week he doesn't have any assets. He
Speaker 5: doesn't even have a bank account. According to him, he
Speaker 5: has two trucks totaling an asset portfolio of a thousand bucks.
Speaker 1: So I don't know.
Speaker 6: Where he thinks he's going to get this one hundred
Speaker 6: and fifty k from.
Speaker 1: I've found it. I've found it.
Speaker 4: This is a.
Speaker 1: Two hundred and fifty k. That's what you get if
Speaker 1: you come in and save the other flakes like that.
Speaker 2: No, no, but that's what I was going to say.
Speaker 2: He's not a nutter. If you read the letter, he's
Speaker 2: not a.
Speaker 1: Mad he is He's as clearly that.
Speaker 2: Letter is not the letter of a mad guy. That's
Speaker 2: a letter of someone who's been listening to talking points
Speaker 2: and taking them seriously.
Speaker 5: But he's so that is the definition of a mad
Speaker 5: man listening to talking But in any party, any politician.
Speaker 5: If you are listening to them and taking their word
Speaker 5: as gospel, you have to have the mental atuity of
Speaker 5: a three year old.
Speaker 2: I've been to the psych ward and he is not
Speaker 2: personally not speaking like a na He's speaking like someone
Speaker 2: who has been influenced and honestly believes he is trying to.
Speaker 3: Save the world.
Speaker 2: Democrats have encouraged people to do speaking of the Democrats
Speaker 2: trying to help the election along a little.
Speaker 3: Bit they've been accused of using.
Speaker 2: Would you believe that the Ukrainian President Zelenski to do
Speaker 2: a little bit of campaigning for them on American soil,
Speaker 2: which I suppose would be foreign interference. Zelenski's in the
Speaker 2: United States for a United Nations address. I think that
Speaker 2: happens tomorrow and as well as that he will meet
Speaker 2: with President Biden to outline his plan to defeat Russia
Speaker 2: in the war. But while he's in the United States,
Speaker 2: the Democrats have flown him to Pennsylvania.
Speaker 3: Now, remember Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania.
Speaker 2: Pennsylvania is one of the five or six battleground seats that.
Speaker 3: Both parties must win.
Speaker 2: It's very tight there and so it's kind of helpful
Speaker 2: having Zelensky there talking about how helpful the Biden administration
Speaker 2: has been and how unhelpful a Trump presidency would be.
Speaker 2: Zelensky told New Yorker magazine that Trump doesn't understand the
Speaker 2: war in Ukraine and that his running mate jd Vance
Speaker 2: is a radical who would force Ukraine to give up
Speaker 2: land to the Russians. Dan Caldwell tweeted what many people
Speaker 2: are thinking, it's worth noting. He said that Zelenski was
Speaker 2: flown to Pennsylvania on a US Air Force C seventeen.
Speaker 2: The Biden Harris administration is using military assets to fly
Speaker 2: a foreign leader into a battleground state in order to
Speaker 2: undermine their political opponents. Now, he was there to sign
Speaker 2: a deal with Democrat Governor Josh Shapiro between Ukraine and Pennsylvania.
Speaker 3: But it's not a good look.
Speaker 6: Not a good look. This is precedented.
Speaker 5: That means American taxpayers have fit the bill for a
Speaker 5: foreign leader to fly to their country and essentially campaign
Speaker 5: for the Harris team on American soil. I mean, at
Speaker 5: the very least, just don't put him in US Air
Speaker 5: Force C seventeen Like that is something that should be
Speaker 5: curling American's hair, and it very much is, as you
Speaker 5: can now see across the Twitter.
Speaker 6: Sphere and elsewhere.
Speaker 5: But of course mainstream media isn't touching this story with
Speaker 5: a ten foot pole for obvious reasons. But I suspect
Speaker 5: it is going to greatly fly back in their faces
Speaker 5: here because this is not a very popular war with
Speaker 5: a lot of Americans. They know that over one hundred
Speaker 5: and seventy five billion American dollars taxpayer dollars have been
Speaker 5: sent to the Ukrainian war. That's enough to house all
Speaker 5: the homeless in America twice over.
Speaker 6: With some change.
Speaker 5: They're looking at the extortionate costs. They're saying, hey, why
Speaker 5: are we the one's fitting the bill here?
Speaker 6: We're sick of this.
Speaker 5: A lot of conservatives, especially Republicans, are saying enough with this,
Speaker 5: we don't want this anymore. Hence Zelenski is attacking Trump
Speaker 5: and Vance because Trump had said even before I'm inaugurated,
Speaker 5: if I am elected, I am going to end this
Speaker 5: war within twenty four hours. I'm going to pick up
Speaker 5: the phone to putin and it's all going to be over.
Speaker 6: And JD.
Speaker 5: Vance has come out literally saying, why do we have
Speaker 5: a government that seems to care more about Ukrainians than
Speaker 5: people like my Mom, people just average middle class Americans
Speaker 5: who are doing it really tough right now?
Speaker 6: Why are we sending this much money overseas?
Speaker 5: So I wouldn't be surprised if what the Dems think
Speaker 5: is just this master stroke to get Pennsylvania and others
Speaker 5: across the line is just going to completely fail them
Speaker 5: and have the opposite effect than That's CID.
Speaker 1: That the problem is not in being there. Is well
Speaker 1: entitled to be there.
Speaker 4: But of course you know when you're being flown around
Speaker 4: in USA, and I tried to find any other leader's
Speaker 4: been thrown around the US aircraft and I couldn't.
Speaker 7: That is the problem.
Speaker 1: Coming back home.
Speaker 4: We've been talking this week about the First Nation's ambassador,
Speaker 4: who was of course appointed by the Albanzi government. So
Speaker 4: this bloke we found out during the week had travel
Speaker 4: approved up to three hundred and fifty thousand dollars via
Speaker 4: the government doing exactly what. We're not really sure, but
Speaker 4: he spent more than one hundred thousand dollars on business
Speaker 4: class flights going overseas, I don't know, spooking Aboriginal people
Speaker 4: or something. Peter Dutton said that he would abolish this
Speaker 4: role if and when he becomes Prime Minister. We found
Speaker 4: out today exactly how much money the First Nation's Ambassador,
Speaker 4: Justin Muhammad is on.
Speaker 12: Now.
Speaker 4: You thought it was pretty good when we talked about
Speaker 4: the bloke from Queensland earlier who got his three hundred
Speaker 4: kpay out on the way out. This fell is not
Speaker 4: far off three hundred and twenty six thousand dollars a
Speaker 4: year to be the First Nation's ambassador.
Speaker 1: He's not an.
Speaker 4: Ambassador for an actual Country's an ambassador for a racial
Speaker 4: group in this country who gets business class flights to
Speaker 4: go overseas.
Speaker 1: How lucky is he?
Speaker 4: I mentioned before Peter Dutton saying he would get rid
Speaker 4: of this role.
Speaker 7: Here he is talking about it on radio.
Speaker 12: If it is the case that we win the next election,
Speaker 12: that position will be abolished on day one and that
Speaker 12: money will be spent to help Australian so of struggling
Speaker 12: at the moment to keep a roof over their head
Speaker 12: or to pay their electricity bill. We've got high priorities
Speaker 12: at the moment.
Speaker 4: I mean three hundred and twenty six thousand dollars a
Speaker 4: why right, There are people and I know we crap
Speaker 4: all over the bureaucrats, but there are people in the
Speaker 4: public service who are actually slogging their guts out doing
Speaker 4: a genuine job every day, and they're not on anywhere
Speaker 4: near three hundred and twenty six thousand dollars a year. Nurses,
Speaker 4: police officers, fires, whatever. You know, we talk about public servants,
Speaker 4: they are public servants in the true sense of the term.
Speaker 4: And this blow three hundred and twenty a plaza one
Speaker 4: hundred grandy business class flights to represent what three odd
Speaker 4: percent of the population.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, there's more Chinese Australians than there are Aboriginal Australians,
Speaker 2: and yet we don't have a Chinese Australian ambassador. And
Speaker 2: how many Aboriginal kids in Ola springs direct and have
Speaker 2: been helped by the First Nations ambassador. How many women
Speaker 2: in domestic vance relationships have been helped by the domestic
Speaker 2: by the First Nations Minister. Pennywong did say why we've
Speaker 2: got him? She said he is rebuilding relationships with the
Speaker 2: Pacific family, which I thought was Penny Wong's job.
Speaker 5: But it does be diffust about if this is delegating.
Speaker 2: If the First Nations Minister is repairing relationships with the
Speaker 2: Pacific family very important, why is he doing it in Switzerland, Dubai,
Speaker 2: New York, San Francisco, Kansas. Why is he flying all
Speaker 2: over the world if the key role is relating to
Speaker 2: our Pacific there're way.
Speaker 6: More fun destinations. Why wouldn't evidently all those blazes?
Speaker 5: If I were him, I too would find very serious
Speaker 5: business in London, Milan, You, David.
Speaker 6: This is a world first role?
Speaker 5: How many of these do we have to be responsible
Speaker 5: for here in Australia? The E Safety Commissioner comes to
Speaker 5: mind before we realize they're a world first because it's
Speaker 5: a terrible idea. It doesn't make any sense, it's extremely expensive,
Speaker 5: and it's not backed by the people. It is a
Speaker 5: thought bubble that was just had by these people in power,
Speaker 5: by the federal government on both accounts, that Australians learn
Speaker 5: about after the fact and go, what.
Speaker 6: The heck were you thinking?
Speaker 5: I can't remember how much the E Safety Commission is on,
Speaker 5: but it's a heck of a pay packet. And here
Speaker 5: we are again going, hang on a minute, we just
Speaker 5: found out about this. They're on a really good wicket.
Speaker 5: None of us believe that this is worth the investment.
Speaker 5: Shall we say, do us a favor and just stop
Speaker 5: doing these world first roles. Please, Australian government actually makes
Speaker 5: us the laughing stock, not leaders in an any way,
Speaker 5: shape or form.
Speaker 4: Liz, you didn't read the ULARU statement from the heart
Speaker 4: It said voice, treaty truth, Ambassador.
Speaker 1: Didn't you read that?
Speaker 7: Beak?
Speaker 1: There was my bad, all my bad.
Speaker 5: But if it's step four and we haven't got past
Speaker 5: the first few hurdles, we've really shot through, haven't we.
Speaker 2: Well you can imagine if we had a voice in
Speaker 2: canber you would have an ambassador, you'd have a spokesman
Speaker 2: for this, a spokesperson for that, and of course they
Speaker 2: would need to travel all around the world relate to
Speaker 2: you absolutely their.
Speaker 3: Counterparts in other nations.
Speaker 2: Indeed, we dodged a bullet by only having one of
Speaker 2: these positions in our country, I reckon.
Speaker 5: Indeed, well, one small win for Australians if you're living
Speaker 5: in the only council. They've decided to reverse their decision
Speaker 5: to scrap celebrating Australia Day on Australia Day hard pill
Speaker 5: to swallow, I know, lefties, but that will always be
Speaker 5: Australia Day, January sixth. You can't change a birthday. So
Speaker 5: these guys decided, no, we're scrapping it. We're not celebrat
Speaker 5: dating Australia Day on the twenty sixth of January, Animoor.
Speaker 6: Its way too divisive.
Speaker 5: They passed all the necessary movements and Lardie Dardi da.
Speaker 5: Then they decided, actually, let's put it to the people
Speaker 5: because they heard from so many people saying, hey, we're
Speaker 5: disgusted by this. I didn't get to say, you're not
Speaker 5: representing me. In Over sixty percent of the people of
Speaker 5: Anley said we want to celebrate Australia Day on January
Speaker 5: twenty six So they took it back to the council
Speaker 5: who overturned their original decision and they will now once
Speaker 5: again celebrate Australia Day on Australia Day. But a bears
Speaker 5: mentioning they only got this up by two votes. The
Speaker 5: vote was seventy five, so clearly five councilors were still
Speaker 5: just like stuff you people who voted me in, I'm
Speaker 5: not representing you, I'm representing my own lefty interests. Here's
Speaker 5: Counselor Rebecca Rodgers who put up the motions. She says,
Speaker 5: we cannot ask our community for their opinion and then
Speaker 5: not listen to the result tonight's vote.
Speaker 6: This was on Monday night. Is on a consultation process.
Speaker 5: The community wanted to say, and we gave them a
Speaker 5: say more of this, please, I mean this is revelatory,
Speaker 5: a council actually asking the people that they're representing what
Speaker 5: they would like and then acting accordingly.
Speaker 6: More of this please.
Speaker 4: I agree we should have more of this, But this
Speaker 4: is Counselor Jack Gaffey from only explaining how all of
Speaker 4: this came to be.
Speaker 9: There was a decision on counsel that we should act
Speaker 9: and we should lead, and so a decision was made
Speaker 9: by different councilors that we should do this without consultation.
Speaker 9: The only problem was that after we'd made that decision,
Speaker 9: there was a huge number of emails. I had a
Speaker 9: number of them from residents who felt like they hadn't
Speaker 9: been heard about this Ralia Day celebrations.
Speaker 3: Ordinary people who go to.
Speaker 9: Work, look after their families, and they just expect counselors
Speaker 9: to do by them. This was the first they actually
Speaker 9: knew about it, and let me tell you, they're pretty upset.
Speaker 4: So the Council, of its own volition decided that it
Speaker 4: would move the celebrations from January twenty six to January
Speaker 4: twenty five, now, I mean you could move into any
Speaker 4: date January twenty five, let's be a bit more inventive here,
Speaker 4: But they moved it from January twenty sixth to January
Speaker 4: twenty five. Then the residents found out about it and
Speaker 4: complained to the council and it was at that point
Speaker 4: that the council said, maybe we should run some community
Speaker 4: consultation on this matter. And then the consultation came back
Speaker 4: and said what we all knew it would send, would
Speaker 4: say sorry that we don't want you to move Australia Day,
Speaker 4: and then they reverse their decision.
Speaker 1: I thoroughly agree.
Speaker 4: That we should have more community consultation, of which councils
Speaker 4: take note. But there's something wrong when they make a
Speaker 4: decision then have sort of posthumous community consultation. Oh sorry,
Speaker 4: we got it wrong. Well you wouldn't have got it
Speaker 4: wrong in the first place if AA weren't meddling in
Speaker 4: our National Day, which ate the B business of councils
Speaker 4: and B you just asked the regions what they thought
Speaker 4: in the first.
Speaker 6: It is the business of councils. That's what the federal government.
Speaker 5: Decided because it was like, well the voice failed, so
Speaker 5: just by a sneaky little twist of the knife.
Speaker 6: We're going to leave this up to individual councils.
Speaker 5: Now, World War three is broken out because this council
Speaker 5: is arbitrarily decided and this I mean, it's over twenty
Speaker 5: councils now last I checked, it is probably leaned way
Speaker 5: more now and none of them have community consulted.
Speaker 6: They've just gone this is the woke thing to do.
Speaker 6: And because so many.
Speaker 5: Of the councils are full of Greens and Labor members,
Speaker 5: none of them give it a second thought.
Speaker 2: Victoria's more than forty councils that have now changed their
Speaker 2: Australia Day celebrations, and Councilor Don Palmer he actually made
Speaker 2: the point in the media that it was Anthony Albanezi
Speaker 2: who changed the little legislation so that this decision was
Speaker 2: in the hands of local councils, and he said, and
Speaker 2: I quote Elbanize should take responsibility and stop handballing decisions
Speaker 2: to local government that the federal government should be responsible for.
Speaker 2: And it was one of those decisions where you know
Speaker 2: what Elbow wanted, but he didn't want to have blood
Speaker 2: on his hands, so he just palmed it off to councils.
Speaker 2: Knowing they would do the dirty work for him. Speaking
Speaker 2: of the importance of consultation, Caleb, I had to laugh
Speaker 2: when I read the comments of Indigenous Elder Major Muggie
Speaker 2: sumna Am.
Speaker 3: He was very.
Speaker 2: Upset that the Council will go back to celebrating Australia
Speaker 2: Day on January twenty six. He said, and I quote,
Speaker 2: why change it back to rub salt into a wound
Speaker 2: or to say, well, we're going to have to We're
Speaker 2: going to have it whether you like it or not.
Speaker 2: So I thought the point was listening to the majority
Speaker 2: of people, sixty percent of whom said this is what
Speaker 2: we want.
Speaker 3: So the Council have done that.
Speaker 2: But now he's claiming because he didn't get what he wanted, Well,
Speaker 2: he's not being listened to.
Speaker 4: He should go and talk to the Aboriginal Ambassador, shouldn't he.
Speaker 2: He clearly doesn't understand the democratic process a year and
Speaker 2: might be able to fix that one up.
Speaker 4: Just while we're on a bit of council bashing. One
Speaker 4: of my favorite things to do in the world, beyond
Speaker 4: drinking read wine and backing.
Speaker 7: Horses that usually lose.
Speaker 4: You might have heard and we talked about it on
Speaker 4: this program recently that the men's government in New South
Speaker 4: Wales has decided to ban paperless parking fines because councils
Speaker 4: were going around and slapping you with a parking fine
Speaker 4: without telling you that they've given you a parking fine
Speaker 4: to turn up in the mail a week or two later,
Speaker 4: and of course by that point you can't collect any
Speaker 4: evidence to challenge that fine. The state government in New
Speaker 4: South Wales said, no, sir, you can't do that anymore.
Speaker 7: Well, would you believe it?
Speaker 4: The Local Government Association has come back in New South
Speaker 4: Wales and said, who is us? This is going to
Speaker 4: cause harm quote unquote to.
Speaker 1: The sticker liquors.
Speaker 4: Yes, unless we can pinue in a way that makes
Speaker 4: it impossible for you to be able to challenge your
Speaker 4: parking fines.
Speaker 7: We are going to put the sticker liquors.
Speaker 1: In grave danger. I mean please.
Speaker 4: The chief executive of North Sydney Council, which was one
Speaker 4: of the major users of this ticketless parking fine system
Speaker 4: last year, issued ninety two parking fines on paper. Ninety
Speaker 4: two went under the windscreen wiper and they made nine
Speaker 4: and a half million dollars. That's because the rest were paperless,
Speaker 4: and of course no one could challenge.
Speaker 3: Them fifty four thousand, the CEO should.
Speaker 4: I strongly doubt the reintroduction of paper fines will result
Speaker 4: in more people following the rules and less fines being issued.
Speaker 4: I'm hopeful the new South Wales government considers the impact
Speaker 4: to workers when determining a path forward. Look, it may
Speaker 4: well not resign in fewer fines being issued, but it
Speaker 4: will result in fewer fines being upheld. That's what they're
Speaker 4: really worried about here. They're not worried about the safety
Speaker 4: of the workers. They're worried about the bottom line when
Speaker 4: it comes to the budget.
Speaker 6: What about our revenue raising? We don't have enough money.
Speaker 6: We want to screw people even harder.
Speaker 5: Please let us it's disgusting.
Speaker 2: I can't stand they're not going to be able to
Speaker 2: do it much longer.
Speaker 3: As you said, Chris Min's doing good men South Wales.
Speaker 3: He's changed the law. Good for him. We're going to
Speaker 3: go to a break when we come back.
Speaker 2: The South Australian Police Academy firing range shut down after
Speaker 2: they've discovered the walls bulletproof. That's in the papers. We'll
Speaker 2: have a look at the moment. Okay, let's take a
Speaker 2: look at what we'll be making news tomorrow. And this
Speaker 2: will start with the Northern Territory paper, which has an
Speaker 2: incredible photo on the front page.
Speaker 6: That stuff of nightmares.
Speaker 5: Check out this absolute monster that's been reeled in off
Speaker 5: the coast of the Northern Territory.
Speaker 6: What the heck is that?
Speaker 5: Teewee Sea Monster Fish shows have gone viral after reeling
Speaker 5: in this creepy catch.
Speaker 6: Off the coast.
Speaker 5: This is known as an owe fish or a doomsday fish.
Speaker 5: You can see why. I mean, that thing looks like
Speaker 5: it's straight out of hell. It is so remarkable looking.
Speaker 5: How is this the first time I've ever heard of
Speaker 5: an owe fish?
Speaker 2: Well, it generally swims about one thousand meters below the
Speaker 2: surface of the water, so they're not very often seen.
Speaker 2: But most people online thought it was a fake or
Speaker 2: some sort of aition.
Speaker 3: No one believed it was real.
Speaker 1: Biggest eye believe, the eyes are huge.
Speaker 7: Look.
Speaker 4: All I can say is I hope it stays a
Speaker 4: kilometer underwater.
Speaker 6: All this one probably didn't. That's how I got it.
Speaker 4: I just don't want to encounter one of those things.
Speaker 4: I do wonder now that they've caught it, though, what
Speaker 4: it tastes like like is it a good eating fish?
Speaker 1: Like, don't let the thing go to wa?
Speaker 3: Do you frame it? I mean.
Speaker 1: Goods?
Speaker 6: Nobody believe you. You'd be like I caught this, I'd
Speaker 6: be like a photo.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, I was out fishing and I just reeled
Speaker 1: in this.
Speaker 7: He was like six meters.
Speaker 5: You're just out there for a catch, and all of
Speaker 5: a sudden you're spotting this thing as you're really it
Speaker 5: in going to you.
Speaker 6: God, what on the earth?
Speaker 5: You'd think twice before actually bringing it into the boat.
Speaker 6: But these guys clearly weren't too nervous.
Speaker 4: It'd be one hell of a bit of bait if
Speaker 4: you don't get something else. Let's go to the advertised
Speaker 4: and now where it says tomorrow Police Academy floor.
Speaker 7: You can say that again.
Speaker 4: This is an exclusive from Andrew half gooda Hafi if
Speaker 4: you're watching. In a catastrophic safety failure at the Fort
Speaker 4: Lags Essay Police Academy, bullets sliced through concrete walls, which
Speaker 4: was supposedly bulletproof. The range used to train rookie cops
Speaker 4: was shot for almost five months, only reopening in March
Speaker 4: after temporary bulletproof material was brought in from Victoria.
Speaker 1: You had one job. You are designing a shooting.
Speaker 4: Range for people to learn how to use guns as cops,
Speaker 4: and you can't even make the walls bulletproof. And then
Speaker 4: they had to shut it for five months before they
Speaker 4: could get some material from Victoria that would make it bulletproof.
Speaker 1: I was this real.
Speaker 2: No, wheer they can't find recruits for the police force
Speaker 2: who would want to be part of this, We're just
Speaker 2: going to take you down to the firing range.
Speaker 4: No no, no, please please just beit on the other
Speaker 4: side of that wall and checkov it's bulletproof for.
Speaker 7: Me, will you please?
Speaker 3: I just believing.
Speaker 4: If that's how the coppers are operating, then God help
Speaker 4: us all. Now the story on the front of the
Speaker 4: Advertiser tomorrow abortion law change set to fail, a conservative
Speaker 4: Liberal front bench's bid to force mothers who want to
Speaker 4: terminate their pregnancies after twenty seven weeks to be legally
Speaker 4: bound to deliver their babies alive, mis falling short of
Speaker 4: securing support in the Upper House. Now we thought this
Speaker 4: was probably going to happen. The Billies put up basically
Speaker 4: says because in South Australia now they have legal late
Speaker 4: term abortion. And what he said was look, look, we're
Speaker 4: not going to force a woman under his bill to
Speaker 4: keep a baby, but if she wants to terminate her pregnancy,
Speaker 4: then at twenty seven weeks we would induce the birth
Speaker 4: and then that child could be put up for adoption,
Speaker 4: effectively terminating the pregnancy without terminating the life of the child. Now, interestingly,
Speaker 4: Peter Malinowskis, the Labor Premier in South Australia, has said
Speaker 4: he will allow a conscience vote on this matter, and
Speaker 4: of course conscience votes are quite uncommon in the Labor
Speaker 4: Party needs it's eleven votes to get this through the
Speaker 4: Upper House. He's got eight so far. It seems unlikely
Speaker 4: he'll be able to get it over the line. But
Speaker 4: it just raises the issue again, I suppose, which is
Speaker 4: probably what he wanted to achieve.
Speaker 2: Can I ask you a question as a former newspaper
Speaker 2: chief of staff. When we printed out the newspapers before
Speaker 2: we went on air, so the headline is abortion law
Speaker 2: chain set to fail. But just before we came on,
Speaker 2: I checked online and they've changed the headline to on
Speaker 2: brink of.
Speaker 3: Upper House support. Why would they have done that?
Speaker 2: Have they heard some whispers that some people may be
Speaker 2: voting in favor that they thought, well.
Speaker 4: Quite probably. I mean, you know, the paper goes to
Speaker 4: deadline at eight pm. Of course you can change the
Speaker 4: online copy at any time.
Speaker 1: So yes, it is quite possible.
Speaker 4: That in the last couple of hours there's been some
Speaker 4: more people come down the wire saying that they will
Speaker 4: give it to them.
Speaker 6: Brave God.
Speaker 1: You would expect though, when it goes.
Speaker 7: To the Lower House that it would be knocked on
Speaker 7: the head.
Speaker 4: But with the Labor Party giving a conscience vote, which
Speaker 4: is highly unusual, you just never know in these matters.
Speaker 5: Good don't Alan Alskis for doing that, because this is
Speaker 5: this would be a world first of a bill, by
Speaker 5: the way, and it's a win win. It's pro women
Speaker 5: and it's pro baby. It simply means that after twenty
Speaker 5: seven weeks, baby will not be killed by a brutal
Speaker 5: and very painful injection of potassium chloride. It means that
Speaker 5: baby will be born alive and given to a loving
Speaker 5: family who would give anything to welcome a child into
Speaker 5: their home. I mean, how is this not utterly brilliant.
Speaker 5: Whichever way you look at it, you don't want your baby,
Speaker 5: somebody else does. Let's get baby to that person. I
Speaker 5: mean it's marvelous and.
Speaker 2: Even if the bill fails, it keeps the conversation going
Speaker 2: and keeps it in the public consciousness, which cannot be
Speaker 2: a bad thing. Let's got the front page of tomorrow's
Speaker 2: daily Telegraph, Grid and Bear. It is the headline Koala's
Speaker 2: collateral damage in Green Dream, massive transmission lines transporting energy
Speaker 2: from wind and solar farms will be built through huge
Speaker 2: swathes of the state's most significant Kohala habitat.
Speaker 3: Two new reports have found.
Speaker 2: So this will start these transmission lines in a town
Speaker 2: just close to Tamworth. They're clearing about a one hundred
Speaker 2: and forty meter wide corridor for the transmission lines, and
Speaker 2: two reports have found there's at least thirty koalas now.
Speaker 2: Apparently if you move koalas, it's very stressful for them.
Speaker 2: That can endanger their health and indeed they can even die.
Speaker 2: And so the government's got a problem here right. They're
Speaker 2: trying to use renewables to save the environment while destroying koalas,
Speaker 2: who are very important part of the environment. The thing
Speaker 2: that makes me curious is you would have thought the
Speaker 2: greens or the teals, they would be down there chaining
Speaker 2: themselves to trees protesting because they hate seeing Kohala habitats destroyed.
Speaker 2: But if it's for a solar farm or for wind turbine.
Speaker 6: And it's for the greater good, that's different. It's for
Speaker 6: the greater good.
Speaker 5: Meanwhile, if it's a mining project or anything involved evolving
Speaker 5: fossil flow fuels, you find an extinct toad and it's
Speaker 5: all over. Just goes to show what hypocrites they are.
Speaker 4: Can I just say, though, if and we saw this
Speaker 4: going with native forest logging right where the activists would
Speaker 4: injunct these matters all the time through the court. If
Speaker 4: a single environmental group in New South Wales goes to
Speaker 4: court and seeks an injunction against this project to stop
Speaker 4: it from happening, lock it up in the court because
Speaker 4: it's bad for the environment. I will take you out
Speaker 4: for lunch. That's a promise.
Speaker 3: If you make an incentive.
Speaker 5: If you cajun I mean overestimating people, you're a lunch with.
Speaker 4: You, well, it will be a lunch with wine at
Speaker 4: a nice restaurant. But if you can make it happen,
Speaker 4: I will take you out to lunch.
Speaker 7: That is my promise.
Speaker 3: Absolutely no one was inspired.
Speaker 6: Do we have time for the Koreia Mail. Remember after
Speaker 6: that long interjection.
Speaker 5: LMP vow's youth crime consequences tell us more judges and
Speaker 5: magistrates will well the first time consider every offender's full
Speaker 5: criminal history as a juvenile. If the LMP wins the
Speaker 5: October twenty six election. In a move discussed by Premier
Speaker 5: Stephen Miles's trump esque because he didn't think of it
Speaker 5: and now he's jealous, Christoph Fooley is saying that quote
Speaker 5: what's happening at the moment is a young offender can
Speaker 5: have a rap sheet a mile long and then the
Speaker 5: clock starts again when they turn eighteen. There must be
Speaker 5: consequences for actions end quote. So basically, if you get
Speaker 5: a Chris A. Fooley government, he's going to put a
Speaker 5: stop to this. And if there are youth offenders, which
Speaker 5: we know there are many and it's very prolific in Queensland,
Speaker 5: that's just going to be on your record forever, for
Speaker 5: as long as you live till.
Speaker 6: The day you die.
Speaker 5: That has got to be something that certainly families of
Speaker 5: victims would massive thumbs up from them because to think
Speaker 5: that this person as soon as they turn eighteen, it's
Speaker 5: just like it never happened. The robberies, the thefts, the
Speaker 5: bashings that in some cases people have lost their lives. Now,
Speaker 5: this is just a common sense move.
Speaker 2: For Stephen Miles to describe it as trump esque when
Speaker 2: crime is such a massive issue in that election is
Speaker 2: just quite juvenile.
Speaker 3: We're going to go to a break when we come back.
Speaker 2: The house in Sydney housing lots of foreign nationals who
Speaker 2: are racking up massive traffic to merit points.
Speaker 3: It's coming up in just a moment.
Speaker 2: Well, climate catastrophsts keep coming up with sillier and sillier
Speaker 2: ways of trying to lower global temperatures. This is one
Speaker 2: of the silliest ones I've heard. A group of scientists
Speaker 2: at the University of Cambridge have said we can lower
Speaker 2: global temperatures if we just get planes to fly slower.
Speaker 3: Check out this headline from the UK Times.
Speaker 2: Slower aeroplanes could cut fuel waste and thereby lower emissions.
Speaker 2: The report said that if aircraft flew fifteen percent slower,
Speaker 2: fuel burn would reduce by five to seven percent, and
Speaker 2: that would add fifty minutes to a flight from London
Speaker 2: to New York presently seven hours, but it would help
Speaker 2: to lower emissions. Next Liz, They'll be suggesting that aircraft
Speaker 2: just glide from London to New York, or maybe just
Speaker 2: take a sail boat.
Speaker 3: I don't know.
Speaker 2: I can't believe anyone in the general public is going
Speaker 2: to support let's spend longer sitting in economy for absolutely
Speaker 2: no difference to global temperatures. But somebody at Cambridge University
Speaker 2: feels very very virtuous and.
Speaker 3: Very very smart.
Speaker 5: I can't see any airlines running with this logic. But
Speaker 5: before we leave you tonight at townhouse in southern Sydney
Speaker 5: has been spotted as being at the very center of
Speaker 5: a pile of French Nationals dodging demerit points. Yes, you
Speaker 5: heard it here first, and don't get any ideas because
Speaker 5: they've only been able to get away with it because
Speaker 5: they are French nationalists. The New South Wales Road Minister
Speaker 5: John Graham says a tiny fraction out there are intentionally
Speaker 5: flouting our speed limits, traffic lights and other road rules
Speaker 5: before attempting to stay one step ahead of the demerit
Speaker 5: points system. In some cases they then leave the country
Speaker 5: with a au revoir, never having paid a fine or
Speaker 5: spent time off the road for their laundry list of
Speaker 5: traffic offenses. Apparently eighteen drivers listed this particular address, having
Speaker 5: wracked up fifteen hundred and eighty demerit points, but none
Speaker 5: of them have suffered the consequences of their action. Here's
Speaker 5: a Daily Mail journal who went to set address to
Speaker 5: see sorry Daily Telegraph Journal to see if he could
Speaker 5: bust them.
Speaker 1: Ah, you live here? Do you live here?
Speaker 5: No, it's just oh your friends.
Speaker 13: There's thirty people that have their driver's license listened in
Speaker 13: this house. Have you been speeding on your motorcycle? Bidding
Speaker 13: here and controversial?
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, no me not go.
Speaker 6: You can tell he's saying, I don't know what you're
Speaker 6: talking about. Thirty people here, No.
Speaker 4: Twenty one hundred points in total, three hundred and twenty
Speaker 4: two thousand dollars in unpaid fines, and then they just
Speaker 4: flee the country.
Speaker 1: How good I'm going to do that?
Speaker 2: Absolutely amazing. That's it from us stick around. Coming up
Speaker 2: in just a moment is the reader pen Hisha