Speaker 1: Lately.
Speaker 2: Welcome to the late Base.
Speaker 3: Thanks for joining us.
Speaker 4: I'm James Macpherson with Liz Storra and Caleb Bond.
Speaker 3: Coming up tonight.
Speaker 4: A woman taken to court for feeding her neighbor's cat. Yes,
Speaker 4: in Switzerland, that's a crime. We'll explain why a little later.
Speaker 4: Plus when we look at tomorrow's headlines, the Greens searching
Speaker 4: for a new leader after Adam Bant was ejected from
Speaker 4: Parliament by voters, and the New South Wales Police looking
Speaker 4: for a new commissioner after the sudden resignation of Karen Wheb.
Speaker 4: We'll get to that shortly, but we're starting tonight with
Speaker 4: artificial intelligence, which is developing at such an astonishingly fast
Speaker 4: rate it poses a threat to the survival of humanity.
Speaker 4: That's the opinion of an American billionaire, Paul Tudor Jones,
Speaker 4: after he met privately with forty leaders. He says household
Speaker 4: names we would all recognize in politics, finance, science, and tech.
Speaker 4: He says, these leaders all agreed that AI is set
Speaker 4: to transform things like education and healthcare, so that's good.
Speaker 4: But on the flip side, he said, all of these
Speaker 4: leaders who we would all know if we knew their
Speaker 4: names agreed AI could easily be turned against humanity.
Speaker 3: Here's some of what he had to say.
Speaker 1: AI clearly poses an imminent threat, security threat, imminent in
Speaker 1: our lifetimes to humanity. And they said the competitive dynamic
Speaker 1: is so intense among the companies and then geopolitically between
Speaker 1: Russia and China, that there's no agency, no ability to
Speaker 1: stop and say maybe we should think about what actually
Speaker 1: we're creating and building here and so. And the final
Speaker 1: question is, well, what are you doing about He said, well,
Speaker 1: I'm buying one hundred acre is in the Midwest. I'm
Speaker 1: getting cattle and chickens, and I'm laying in provisions.
Speaker 2: For real, for real, for real.
Speaker 1: And that was obviously a little disconcerting. And then he
Speaker 1: went on to say, I think it's going to take
Speaker 1: an accident where fifty to one hundred million people die
Speaker 1: to make the world take the thread of this really
Speaker 1: seriously now.
Speaker 4: As if that's not alarming enough, Juda Jones went on
Speaker 4: to say that these forty leaders in politics, finance, science,
Speaker 4: and DAI had a breakout session where they were presented
Speaker 4: with a series of propositions and asked whether they agreed
Speaker 4: or disagreed.
Speaker 3: Have a listened to what happened.
Speaker 1: One of the propositions was, there's a ten percent chance
Speaker 1: in the next twenty years that AI will kill fifty
Speaker 1: percent of humanity. So there's a ten percent chance that
Speaker 1: AI will kill fifty percent of humanity in the next
Speaker 1: twenty years. All four modelers we're on the agree side
Speaker 1: of that, All four of the leading developers of the
Speaker 1: AAR models, we're on that side.
Speaker 4: What's really alarming about this, Calebin Lizz is this isn't
Speaker 4: some crank from left field. This is a very well
Speaker 4: respected businessman who has strong contacts in the key aspects
Speaker 4: of American society and culture, saying this is what they're
Speaker 4: all thinking.
Speaker 5: Absolutely, and we've heard this from Elon Musk himself. He's
Speaker 5: right at the forefront of theirs. He's the brain chips guy.
Speaker 5: He's a total He's a very passionate transhumanist, always has been,
Speaker 5: has never tried to hide that.
Speaker 6: We know that he's working on these humanoids.
Speaker 5: And he's very excited about pumping thousands of them out.
Speaker 5: We've shown you that story before here he was talking. Recently,
Speaker 5: also said this on Joe Rogan's podcast, the most watched
Speaker 5: listen to podcast in the world.
Speaker 6: But here he is talking.
Speaker 5: At a second conference saying something that's alarmingly similar to
Speaker 5: what you just heard.
Speaker 4: What's the optimistic case for abundance, no shortage of business
Speaker 4: services for anyone on Earth.
Speaker 6: It's sort of ten twenty percent probability of something terrible.
Speaker 5: Happening, tended to probability of what happening something terrible, which
Speaker 5: is like how bad it is, extinction, annihilation or whatever.
Speaker 5: Says it's so carefully it's easy to relate to it
Speaker 5: like that when you've got the capacity to build bunkers,
Speaker 5: as many of these uber uber rich guys have, like
Speaker 5: Zuckerberg openly talks about bunkers that he's built.
Speaker 6: The problem with this is that it's an arms race.
Speaker 5: And as we'll this guy discussed, the countries are in
Speaker 5: such stiff competition with each other trying to be the
Speaker 5: first to reduce AGI artificial general intelligence.
Speaker 6: And we're told that someone one of.
Speaker 5: These companies is going to crack that by the end
Speaker 5: of this year.
Speaker 6: It's roughly six months away. We're told.
Speaker 5: The problem with inventing AGI is that give that thing
Speaker 5: ten minutes and itself will create ASI, artificial super intelligence.
Speaker 5: And once you have something with the IQ of a million.
Speaker 6: That's what we're talking about. Now.
Speaker 5: It will not need human input to evolve anymore. It
Speaker 5: can teach itself things. It can learn whatever it wants.
Speaker 5: It's like imagining that an ant created you, and now
Speaker 5: that ant is trying to tell you what to do.
Speaker 6: Why on Earth would you listen to it. You don't
Speaker 6: need that thing anymore.
Speaker 5: You are ten billion times smarter than any human being
Speaker 5: on the planet. And what a lot of these tech
Speaker 5: guys are saying. I've seen so many clips of them
Speaker 5: doing this, and it's really funny to see these tech
Speaker 5: nerds talk quite hysterically, like it sounds like, oh, you
Speaker 5: guys nutcases, but they're the ones who would know they
Speaker 5: this is exactly what they're saying. They're like, the logical
Speaker 5: conclusion is that this thing will decide you guys are.
Speaker 6: Redundant, what do we need you for?
Speaker 5: And will seek to eliminate large sways of the population.
Speaker 5: It sounds hysterical, but when you think it through, it
Speaker 5: also makes sense because there's nothing this thing can't do.
Speaker 5: There's no one it can't control. It knows your desires,
Speaker 5: It can use deep fakes. If this thing wants the
Speaker 5: nuclear codes. You're not going to be able to stop
Speaker 5: it from getting whatever at once. It will be able
Speaker 5: to destroy infrastructure, it will be able to do absolutely
Speaker 5: whatever it wants. And that seems to be something that
Speaker 5: they're openly admitting Kler.
Speaker 6: And yet at the same time, nobody's really doing.
Speaker 5: Anything about it except for building bunkers.
Speaker 2: Everyone in Tick knows it, and everyone who's worked in
Speaker 2: the sector knows it clear o. Many of you will
Speaker 2: know as a regular on Sky went to a symposium
Speaker 2: in Sydney last week about AI and they were all
Speaker 2: saying exactly the same thing that you know. We're talking
Speaker 2: by the end of the decade, this stuff will be
Speaker 2: so powerful that you cannot that the people who work
Speaker 2: in the industry cannot even fathom exactly how powerful this
Speaker 2: stuff will be by the end of the decade, that's
Speaker 2: within five years, this stuff, and that it is a
Speaker 2: serious danger. It poses a serious danger to the human race,
Speaker 2: to humanity. And the most bizarre thing is that we've
Speaker 2: built it. We have done this to ourselves. And I
Speaker 2: mean you mentioned Elon Musk two years ago, in fact,
Speaker 2: two years and a month ago. It was April two
Speaker 2: years ago, twenty twenty three. He and a bunch of
Speaker 2: other tech bosses and engineers from Meta and Google and
Speaker 2: Microsoft and whatever signed an open letter. Steve Wozniak, one
Speaker 2: of the founders of Apple, signed an open letter saying
Speaker 2: we need to have a least a six month pause
Speaker 2: on the development of AI technology beyond what was then
Speaker 2: GPT for because it is moving too fast and we
Speaker 2: haven't had any time to regulate it or to seriously
Speaker 2: discuss the effects of this and what it's going to
Speaker 2: look like at the end, and that didn't happen, and
Speaker 2: we are fast hurtling towards the world where we could
Speaker 2: be in serious trouble. And because we talked last night
Speaker 2: as well about what it means just at a normal
Speaker 2: human level, taking away your jobs and that sort of
Speaker 2: thing we talked last night about. For the first time
Speaker 2: in the US, they've now got a driverless truck driving
Speaker 2: around in the US in Texas, has got no one
Speaker 2: on board whatsoever. So you follow that to its logical conclusion,
Speaker 2: you get rid of trackees. Well what are they all
Speaker 2: going to do? And law firms are now using AI
Speaker 2: as well. One of the largest law firms in Australia,
Speaker 2: Minter Ellison, is using AI when it's going through discovery
Speaker 2: in court cases now, so they're using AI to just
Speaker 2: you know, way through vast waves of documents to find
Speaker 2: evidence that might be useful in court. I know someone
Speaker 2: who runs a number of very successful businesses and he
Speaker 2: uses AI for basic legal advice as well, just you know,
Speaker 2: ordinary stuff that's sort of beyond his knowledge but doesn't
Speaker 2: require specialist advice. He'll go and ask chat GPT and
Speaker 2: it comes back with the correct answer. This is where
Speaker 2: we're going. So, of course, in the case of the
Speaker 2: law firm, it means they have to hire far fewer
Speaker 2: graduates straight out of UNI who do this sort of
Speaker 2: you know, low level kicking sort of jobs before they
Speaker 2: work their way up. So if you don't have the
Speaker 2: kids coming through doing the low level stuff for the
Speaker 2: higher up lawyers, then who eventually becomes the higher up lawyers,
Speaker 2: so on and so forth. So if AI, basically, if
Speaker 2: AI doesn't take your job, it'll take your life. So
Speaker 2: it probably doesn't matter anyway, which is the worst outcome.
Speaker 4: Well, the law firm, if they're using graduates to sort
Speaker 4: through documents, they can go through twenty to twenty five
Speaker 4: documents an hour compared to the AI program, which can
Speaker 4: sort through three and a half thousand documents an hour
Speaker 4: and probably with greater accuracy. All bad news, though if
Speaker 4: you've ever paid legal fees, this is fantastic.
Speaker 5: I'm sure they'll still fudge those numbers. They'll probably use
Speaker 5: AI but not tell anyone. It's like the fact that
Speaker 5: this thing could be out of hack into anything.
Speaker 6: We talk about hackers.
Speaker 5: This is going to be the most incredible hacker on
Speaker 5: the face of the planet. There is nothing that it
Speaker 5: won't be able to access. A lot of people think
Speaker 5: of robots when we're talking about AI.
Speaker 6: No, No, this thing.
Speaker 5: Will just be an all encompassing presence that can talk
Speaker 5: to itself in different technologies all around the world constantly.
Speaker 4: This whole AI discussion just illustrates perfectly the paradox of
Speaker 4: human nature. Right, we are the most magnificent villains. We're
Speaker 4: capable of incredible beauty and ugliness, glory and destruction, and
Speaker 4: so on the one hand, AI will revolutionize healthcare and
Speaker 4: education and probably destroy half of humanity's typical of human nature.
Speaker 2: And at our own hands too. Now, how good is
Speaker 2: this one? The Emmy nominations have been released. In sixty minutes,
Speaker 2: you'll remember did an interview last year with Kamala Harris
Speaker 2: in the lead up to the presidential election, where they
Speaker 2: asked her lots of questions, including one about the US's
Speaker 2: relationship with Israel. This is if you can't remember what
Speaker 2: happened in the interview that was televised and what was
Speaker 2: actually said in the interview. But it seems that Prime
Speaker 2: Minister Netanyahu is not listening.
Speaker 7: Well, Bill, the work that we have done has resulted
Speaker 7: in a number of movements in that region by Israel
Speaker 7: that were very much prompted by or a result of
Speaker 7: many things, including our advocacy for what needs to happen
Speaker 7: in the region.
Speaker 2: But it seems that Prime Minister Netta, who is not listening.
Speaker 7: We're not going to stop pursuing what is necessary for
Speaker 7: the United States to be clear about where we stand
Speaker 7: on the need for this war to end.
Speaker 2: I mean fantastic. They made her sound so much smarter
Speaker 2: than she actually is. Of course, Trump has been pursuing
Speaker 2: sixty minutes through the course over this twenty billion dollars
Speaker 2: he's suing them for for interfering with the election. So
Speaker 2: the Emmy nominations come out, and they have given the
Speaker 2: interview a nod and I'll let you guess which category
Speaker 2: it's been nominated in Best Edited Interview. And on that front,
Speaker 2: I have to say it's probably a very fair nomination
Speaker 2: because that is some of the best editing I've seen
Speaker 2: anywhere in television ever. I mean, if you can make
Speaker 2: Kamala Harris sound a little bit smart, they probably actually
Speaker 2: deserve the Emmy.
Speaker 4: If you can make her look intelligent, you deserve an
Speaker 4: award for brilliant editing.
Speaker 3: They might rename the Emmys though, the Enemies.
Speaker 4: Because, of course that interview not only helped to sway
Speaker 4: the election Trump ended up winning, but it did convince
Speaker 4: voters to stay with Kamala Harris. But it was also
Speaker 4: potentially dangerous because the question was around Benjaminette Yahoo, the
Speaker 4: situation in the Middle East, and it made Kamala Harris
Speaker 4: sound like she was reasonable and on top of her game,
Speaker 4: when if you watch the whole interview, clearly she was absolutely.
Speaker 3: Flaying about clueless.
Speaker 4: So it presented America with an option for president who
Speaker 4: you would have assumed was quite intelligent and reasonable if
Speaker 4: that's the only thing you'd ever seen, But of course
Speaker 4: she was anything but. So this is not just clever
Speaker 4: by the news broadcasters.
Speaker 3: It's downright dangerous and misleading.
Speaker 5: Well it is, and what a time would be sending
Speaker 5: that Yeah, to be sending that message to the media, like, oh,
Speaker 5: well done for framing this incredibly incompetent woman.
Speaker 6: She'd fail finger painting, and we.
Speaker 5: All know it as actually being off. I was a
Speaker 5: very decisive answer. She seems really quick on her feet.
Speaker 5: It was just edited to edited within an inch of
Speaker 5: its life. I mean the famous saying goes, you can't
Speaker 5: polish a turn. But those guys at CPS, they did
Speaker 5: a really good job of it. And for that reason you,
Speaker 5: like you say, Caleb, maybe they do deserve the award
Speaker 5: because we all know which one of those edits looks far,
Speaker 5: far better.
Speaker 4: Is this a middle finger to Donald Trump as well? Because,
Speaker 4: as you said, he was in the middle of a
Speaker 4: twenty billion dollar lawsuit against them for what they did
Speaker 4: in terms of interfering with the election through this interview.
Speaker 3: To give this interview.
Speaker 4: An award while that case is still underway is clearly
Speaker 4: a deliberate slight against Donald Trump.
Speaker 5: Yeah, and unfortunately, I for various reasons, I don't think
Speaker 5: that case.
Speaker 6: Is actually going to get up, But good on him.
Speaker 6: For trying.
Speaker 5: And you can understand why you would. This was primetime TV.
Speaker 5: It's one of the major networks in America, hundreds of
Speaker 5: thousands of viewers from all over America, and there they
Speaker 5: were doing their best to shill for the Democrats.
Speaker 2: To surprise, here, they'd also give the message that they
Speaker 2: haven't learned any lessons from the election. Like the even's sake,
Speaker 2: you'd think you'd keep your powder dry for a little while,
Speaker 2: but they're like, no, no, we didn't do anything wrong
Speaker 2: through that campaign. It was all good. It was just
Speaker 2: I don't know Trump rigged it or something probably. I mean,
Speaker 2: you know, they did start all that stuff again, just
Speaker 2: like they did in twenty sixteen with the Russian nonsense.
Speaker 2: But you know, if you were giving nods to an
Speaker 2: interview that quite clearly was edited to be so biased,
Speaker 2: it was ridiculous. And me're saying, yes, that is worthy
Speaker 2: of recognition. It's proof that the left in America have
Speaker 2: learned nothing from that presidential election.
Speaker 5: Oh, they obviously consider it very applause worthy. Something else
Speaker 5: that's been considered applause worthy the pullet surprise of breaking news. These,
Speaker 5: of course, are iconic images. What photographer doesn't want to
Speaker 5: win a pullet serprize now, especially the Maga family assumed
Speaker 5: that Trump's iconic photo after he dodged a bullet at
Speaker 5: the rally in Pennsylvania.
Speaker 6: He has blood streaming down his face.
Speaker 5: He's got his fist raised in defiance as.
Speaker 6: He yelled fight, Fight, Fight.
Speaker 5: Everyone thought that the image on your screen there would
Speaker 5: take out the prize. Surely nobody could compare to that.
Speaker 5: But instead, the Bulletzer for Breaking News Photography was awarded
Speaker 5: to New York Times photographer Doug Mills, and his photo
Speaker 5: is one of that bullet that you can see there
Speaker 5: with the red circle around it whizzing past Trump's head. Now,
Speaker 5: you and I may not be photography critics, we may
Speaker 5: have no awards to our name, but the average observa
Speaker 5: obviously thinks that that photo is not half as.
Speaker 6: Iconic as Trump.
Speaker 5: Fight Fight, Fight photo, with critics now saying no, no, you.
Speaker 6: Guys wouldn't award.
Speaker 5: The first photo, the fight photo with the Pulletzer prize
Speaker 5: because you knew it made Trump look strong and awesome
Speaker 5: and an absolute icon for all eternity. One of his
Speaker 5: massive fans, Charlie Kirk, who's a conservative influencer in the
Speaker 5: United States of America has millions upon millions.
Speaker 6: Of followers tweets.
Speaker 5: Evan Vucci's photograph of Donald Trump after last summer's assassination
Speaker 5: attempt is iconic, maybe the single most famous photo of
Speaker 5: the past decade. But because it made Trump look good,
Speaker 5: the Pulitzer Prize committee just refused to give it the
Speaker 5: award for Best Breaking News Photograph of twenty twenty four.
Speaker 6: What a total joke. It's hard to disagree with that assessment.
Speaker 2: I can't see how it doesn't win. I mean, and
Speaker 2: that photo of the bullet whizzing past is Heit is
Speaker 2: also excellent news photo, right, But when you're making the decision,
Speaker 2: and I've been in this position as a newspaper chief
Speaker 2: of staff, and you know, what are we going to
Speaker 2: put on the front page? And I go into conference
Speaker 2: and I'm pitching to the editor what I think should
Speaker 2: be on pages one, three, and five, and I'm thinking
Speaker 2: about the visuals to go with it. I'm thinking about
Speaker 2: what the story is, etc. That photo that Evan Vucci
Speaker 2: took is every single day of the week, the photo
Speaker 2: I'd be pitching to put on the front page because
Speaker 2: it's just a bloody brilliant bit of news photography. It
Speaker 2: sums up the moment, right so the end. The New
Speaker 2: York Times photograph is excellent because it is the only
Speaker 2: photograph that exists of that bullet whizzing past his head.
Speaker 2: But it doesn't convey the gravity of the moment. It
Speaker 2: doesn't show exactly what happened on that day. It doesn't
Speaker 2: show the resolve of Donald Trump in the face of
Speaker 2: being shot. It doesn't convey what the Secret Service we're
Speaker 2: going through. I mean, the flag in the perfect position
Speaker 2: behind Trump. You could not think of a better news photograph,
Speaker 2: And you couldn't think of a news photograph that's received
Speaker 2: more coverage in the last decade and probably for the
Speaker 2: next decade than that image. I just can't see how
Speaker 2: it doesn't win. They're both great photos, but that one
Speaker 2: beats the bullet photo every day of the week for newsworthings.
Speaker 4: Well, the port surprise is just typical of the treatment
Speaker 4: Donald Trump has received over the last decade. Anything, as
Speaker 4: you said, is that shows Trump in a positive light
Speaker 4: is rejected by most of the elites. And of course,
Speaker 4: when that photograph was taken, news editors actually thought about
Speaker 4: whether or not they should continue publishing it because they
Speaker 4: called it quote unquote dangerous in that it was promoting
Speaker 4: Donald Trump. You mentioned the American flag, which is perfectly
Speaker 4: captured in the background there famously, and I think it
Speaker 4: was The New York Times. I might be, but it
Speaker 4: was one of the major papers in the US. They
Speaker 4: put that photograph on their front page, but they cut
Speaker 4: out the American flag because they didn't want Trump to
Speaker 4: look patriotic. The other thing this does, of course, is
Speaker 4: it completely undermines anybody's esteem for these once prestigious awards.
Speaker 4: I mean, who of us watches the Grammys anymore? Or
Speaker 4: the Oscars, even the Nobel Prize. Do you remember in
Speaker 4: two thousand and nine and they gave Obama a Nobel
Speaker 4: Peace Prize. He'd only been president for about eight months,
Speaker 4: hadn't actually done anything, but because they anticipated that we
Speaker 4: would have a more peaceful world, they gave him terms out.
Speaker 2: Well didn't the president with them some of the worst
Speaker 2: foreign policy ever.
Speaker 3: But there you go. That's what these awards do.
Speaker 4: They've been hijacked by lefties and as a consequence, have
Speaker 4: lost all credibility. Let's talk about relationships for a moment,
Speaker 4: because there's two major relationships. I think we're all watching
Speaker 4: how It and Megan, we're watching to see what happens there.
Speaker 3: And of course the.
Speaker 4: Other relationship everyone is watching is that between the United
Speaker 4: States and Canada. Of course, that relationship hit a couple
Speaker 4: of road bumps when Trump said that he would slap
Speaker 4: tariffs on goods coming from Canada, ostensibly to punish them
Speaker 4: for having lax border control and for a massive trade
Speaker 4: deficit that the US was experiencing. When Trudeau protested, Trump
Speaker 4: started joking about Canada becoming the fifty first.
Speaker 3: State of the United States.
Speaker 4: Well, Mark Karney, who took over from Trudeau, he won
Speaker 4: his election in Canada demonizing Trump as an existential threat
Speaker 4: to the sovereignty of Canada. So that's the background between
Speaker 4: this tumultuous relationship, and they met at the White House
Speaker 4: over the weekend, so everybody was watching with great anticipation,
Speaker 4: especially after that fiasco with Zelenski, when he went to
Speaker 4: the White House to see what would happen between Carney
Speaker 4: and Trump. It didn't start off so well because Trump
Speaker 4: was asked if there was anything Canne could say to
Speaker 4: him that would prevent Trump from imposing the tariffs.
Speaker 3: Is there anything you can.
Speaker 8: Say to you in the course of your.
Speaker 6: Needs within today.
Speaker 3: That gets you to lift tears on Canada? No, why not?
Speaker 5: Just the way it is?
Speaker 3: Well, that was pretty blood.
Speaker 4: So you can imagine Mark Canny sitting there thinking why
Speaker 4: did I fly all this way? There's literally no discussion
Speaker 4: to be had. Trump went on to explain how they
Speaker 4: have a two hundred billion dollar deficit in their trade
Speaker 4: with Canada, and America are sick of subsidizing.
Speaker 9: It's hard to justify subsidizing Canada to the tune of
Speaker 9: maybe two hundred billion dollars a year. We protect Canada militarily,
Speaker 9: and we always will.
Speaker 3: We are going to you know, that's not a money thing.
Speaker 9: That's but we always will. But you know it's not fair.
Speaker 9: But why are we subsidized in Canada? Two hundred billion
Speaker 9: dollars a year or whatever the number might be. It's
Speaker 9: a very substantial number. And it's hard for the American
Speaker 9: taxpayer to say, gee, whiz, we love doing that, Thank
Speaker 9: you very much.
Speaker 1: What happened?
Speaker 4: It didn't go all Trump's way, though, after he started
Speaker 4: fantasizing about one day taking over Canada, especially as a
Speaker 4: real estate mogul, he could see how Canada could be
Speaker 4: magnificently developed by the US.
Speaker 3: Mark Kenney let Trump know what he thought about that proposal.
Speaker 10: As you know from real estate, there are some places
Speaker 10: that are never for sale. We're sitting in one right now,
Speaker 10: you know, Buckingham Palace that you visited as well, and
Speaker 10: having met with the owners of Canada over the course
Speaker 10: of the campaign last several months, it's not for sale,
Speaker 10: won't be for s calibs.
Speaker 4: There's a bit to unpack in that interaction, but let
Speaker 4: me just make one point.
Speaker 3: It's only a few weeks ago.
Speaker 4: Mark Canney is in Canada demonizing Donald Trump and accusing
Speaker 4: his political opponent of being someone who would bow down
Speaker 4: and suck up to Donald Trump. Fast forward a couple
Speaker 4: of weeks, there's Mark Cane in the White House. Donald Trump,
Speaker 4: you're a transformational leader, and I have very similar goals
Speaker 4: to you, having been elected the Prime Minister of Canada.
Speaker 4: It just goes to show that politicians, when they speak
Speaker 4: to a domestic audience in an election then behave very
Speaker 4: differently having one office. Albin Easy would be a classic example.
Speaker 4: Remember how he once said that Trump scared the s
Speaker 4: out of him, But can you really imagine Elbin Easy
Speaker 4: following through on that he will be exactly the same.
Speaker 4: He will do everything he can to ingratiate himself to Trump,
Speaker 4: even as Mark Carney just did, having previously demonized the man.
Speaker 2: They all eventually come to kiss the ring. I mean
Speaker 2: Trudeau went to kiss the ring after Trump got elected.
Speaker 2: I mean everyone's gone to kiss the ring of Trump
Speaker 2: because you know, they sort of begrudgingly respect that he
Speaker 2: was able to do what he was able to do,
Speaker 2: even if they don't particularly like his politics. And I
Speaker 2: think the same is true in reverse. Trump begrudgingly respects
Speaker 2: people who can win, even if he's not particularly ideologically
Speaker 2: aligned with them. And you've had two ex samples of
Speaker 2: that this week. I mean Anthony Alberanizi the other day. Oh,
Speaker 2: we've got a great relationship. Finally he's picked up the
Speaker 2: phone to talk to him, which he refused to do
Speaker 2: before the election was run. But now that he can
Speaker 2: see the bloke has stood up in an election where,
Speaker 2: of course there was talk that it was going to
Speaker 2: be minority and was he able to hang on and whatever,
Speaker 2: and he wins in a thumping majority. Trump can't pick
Speaker 2: up the phone fast enough because he's a winner. So
Speaker 2: even if he has ideological issues with him, he actually
Speaker 2: respects him, and I think the same is true of Carney.
Speaker 2: That you know, Carnie ran on an anti Trump ticket basically,
Speaker 2: and everyone thought to Polivier was going to win whatever.
Speaker 2: But Carney managed to do it, and Trump can respect that.
Speaker 2: He can see that this bloke was playing for keeps
Speaker 2: and he was able to do it, And so they're
Speaker 2: able to sit down and have a reasonably civil discussion
Speaker 2: as they did in the White House. But I do
Speaker 2: love when he says when they ask him, you know,
Speaker 2: are you're going to do anything with the tariffs? And
Speaker 2: he's like nah, And you can see Carney. They're like,
Speaker 2: well I talked about this, and he goes to something
Speaker 2: like touchies, are we might talk about that?
Speaker 9: Lady.
Speaker 2: He's like, no, not going to happen. But I was
Speaker 2: at the Sydney East to show a few weeks ago,
Speaker 2: and if you told me one of the Carnies was
Speaker 2: going to be running Canada, I would have told you
Speaker 2: were an idiot.
Speaker 5: These entire get together, though, like ran like a comedy skit. Honestly,
Speaker 5: if you watch the whole thing and it's available online,
Speaker 5: you'll laugh till you cry at one point, Trump was
Speaker 5: waxing lyrical about the fact that we don't need Canada
Speaker 5: for anything except for friendship, which we appreciate.
Speaker 6: But we don't need them for anything, at.
Speaker 5: Which point Mark Carney interrupted and said, respectfully, seventy five
Speaker 5: percent of our exports go to you guys, So what
Speaker 5: do you mean you don't need anything from us except
Speaker 5: for goodwill and friendship. The whole thing was absolutely hilarious.
Speaker 5: There's Trump sat in there, he's holding court, he's got JD.
Speaker 6: Vans, he's got his Secondary of State sitting there. Mark
Speaker 6: Karney's getting grilled.
Speaker 5: But he did pack a few punches Karne, and I'm
Speaker 5: sure that's what the Canadian media will focus on, especially
Speaker 5: that one line where.
Speaker 6: He's like, We're not for sale. I was like, oh,
Speaker 6: he's got the headline.
Speaker 3: Whatever you think of Mark Karney.
Speaker 4: He played it well because remember Zelenski bit and took
Speaker 4: the bait, whereas Karnie just sat there bit his tongue understood.
Speaker 4: He was in front of the world media. You can
Speaker 4: talk to Trump privately behind doors. He handled it pretty well.
Speaker 2: I can't wait to see how it goes when Albow
Speaker 2: goes over there. I'm just hanging on for that meeting,
Speaker 2: because that's going to be so much fun. Things that
Speaker 2: aren't as much fun, though. You'd know if you're on
Speaker 2: the Central coast in New South Wales. Last Friday there
Speaker 2: was this massive spill of all this scrap metal on
Speaker 2: the M one. I think it's the longest traffic jam
Speaker 2: that there's ever been. It went on for twenty four
Speaker 2: kilometers or something in peak hour traffic in the morning
Speaker 2: because the back of this truck had opened up and
Speaker 2: was spilling all these shards of scrap metal all over
Speaker 2: the road and people have driven through it and blown
Speaker 2: their tires, so the whole road has to be closed down, etc. Well,
Speaker 2: I'll give you an example here of a great way
Speaker 2: to handle bad media. And you can see, you know,
Speaker 2: what happened to some of these cars here, And there
Speaker 2: were six hundred insurance claims so far. I'm sure there'll
Speaker 2: be more to come. We're talking about millions of dollars
Speaker 2: in claims here.
Speaker 3: But this is an.
Speaker 2: Example to everyone of how to handle media when things
Speaker 2: go wrong, because how many times do you see a
Speaker 2: mistake is made. Politicians do it all the time, the
Speaker 2: corporate world does it all the time. A mistake is made,
Speaker 2: or they get caught out for something and they go
Speaker 2: to ground and they try to justify it. They say,
Speaker 2: well it was within the rules, or they just don't
Speaker 2: talk at all and they expect the story to go away,
Speaker 2: and it never quite works like that. When you dig
Speaker 2: your heels in, you don't end up getting anywhere. Well,
Speaker 2: the tracking company NJ Ashton has come up with the
Speaker 2: most Australian way to smooth things over. Please take note, politicians,
Speaker 2: corporate world take note. They've said, we know how we'll
Speaker 2: sort this out. We'll invite everyone around for a sausage sysm.
Speaker 7: So on Friday we're having a barbecue and a coffee.
Speaker 7: Days come in between eleven and two come down. The
Speaker 7: insurance company will be there.
Speaker 6: So you're going to sit down, have a jack, you
Speaker 6: can do whatever you need to do, have ad a.
Speaker 7: Sageine sandwich, have a coffee.
Speaker 3: It's just to.
Speaker 9: Say, you know, we're here, let's do something for those guys.
Speaker 2: And you know, I love this because they could have
Speaker 2: easily said, oh, well you know something went wrong and
Speaker 2: or well we're looking into it and we'll get back
Speaker 2: to it a later data as to when you might
Speaker 2: get your money out of the insurance company. You know,
Speaker 2: for once we've actually seen someone say, yeah, something went
Speaker 2: wrong and we're going to do our best to try
Speaker 2: and fix it. And in the meantime, come along and
Speaker 2: have a snag and a cup of coffee and we'll
Speaker 2: have everyone there that you need to talk to. Just
Speaker 2: sort things out, and we'll work it all out for you.
Speaker 2: I mean, why doesn't everyone do this when things go wrong.
Speaker 2: It's such a simple thing. Own up to the mistake
Speaker 2: and fix the mistake, and nine times out of ten
Speaker 2: people will respect you because we all know that mistakes
Speaker 2: are made.
Speaker 4: They've turned the disaster into great publicity for their company
Speaker 4: and their brand, and as I understand that, the investigation
Speaker 4: into what actually happened is ongoing, but they're not waiting
Speaker 4: until that investigation has concluded because people have got flat
Speaker 4: tires now, so they've said, look, come on over, have
Speaker 4: a snag and you can meet with the insurance company.
Speaker 4: Will make sure they're available. Not only that, but as
Speaker 4: I understand that the driver of the truck will also
Speaker 4: be at the sausage sizzle to have.
Speaker 3: A bit of a chat.
Speaker 4: He'll tell you what happened and sympathize with the fact
Speaker 4: that it ruined your day.
Speaker 6: Sorry about all your shredded tires. Sorry about that.
Speaker 5: Well, if only NJ Ashton Group could perhaps hold workshops
Speaker 5: for state, federal, and local governments as to how to
Speaker 5: take respond ability for your actions, apologize and do better,
Speaker 5: that'd be great we the taxpayer. That would be something
Speaker 5: that we'd happily fit the bill for.
Speaker 6: Well.
Speaker 5: An NS Council has decided it's time to start towing
Speaker 5: vehicles and finding the drivers of those vehicles for parking
Speaker 5: across people's driveways.
Speaker 6: How is this.
Speaker 5: Something that even needs to be said? Get this this?
Speaker 5: Inn West Council has received four thousand, three hundred and
Speaker 5: ninety three complaints in one year from people within their
Speaker 5: council who cannot leave their driveway or indeed, if they're
Speaker 5: trying to pull in, cannot access their driveway. Chloe Smith,
Speaker 5: who's one of the Inner West councilors, has said I
Speaker 5: had a family contact me who relied on their cars
Speaker 5: to drop kids to childcare who couldn't exit their driveway,
Speaker 5: and also a person who had a loved one in
Speaker 5: hospital and needed.
Speaker 6: To use their car to visit them.
Speaker 5: It can be a really frustrating and galling experience for
Speaker 5: people so now if you live in the Inner West
Speaker 5: and you are one of these guilty parties, don't expect
Speaker 5: to find.
Speaker 6: Your car where you left it.
Speaker 5: And you can also expect either a three hundred and
Speaker 5: twenty dollar fine or a six hundred and sixty dollar fine.
Speaker 5: I mean, we always pay out on councils, but it's
Speaker 5: stuff like this when it comes down to the idiocy
Speaker 5: of the residents that the council is then going to
Speaker 5: be forking out a lot of money for what sounds
Speaker 5: like a lot of toes.
Speaker 2: They should turn them away and crash them. As far
Speaker 2: as I mean they did. They don't know whether the
Speaker 2: rest of the country you.
Speaker 6: Might get elected on that run.
Speaker 2: That's the cars. But in South Australia they had this
Speaker 2: thing that if you were caught hooning, they'd take your
Speaker 2: car and crash it, and they get the TV cameras
Speaker 2: down there and crash it in front of the cameras.
Speaker 2: And so you should do it to people who park
Speaker 2: across the driveway. But what is wrong with people like,
Speaker 2: you know, parking across the the general behavior of people
Speaker 2: on the roads. It's like when people get behind the
Speaker 2: wheel of a car, they just lose all sense. They
Speaker 2: lose any conscious of the fact that there are other
Speaker 2: people in the world. I can do whatever I want now, Like,
Speaker 2: wouldn't you think, Hm, I'm parking my car. That's someone's
Speaker 2: driveway there. They use that to access their house. Maybe
Speaker 2: I won't park across their driveway. I mean, it's just
Speaker 2: just the idiotic behavior of people. I do not get it.
Speaker 2: You see it everywhere. It just courtesy not exists in
Speaker 2: the world anymore.
Speaker 4: But even if you resisted the urge to park in
Speaker 4: someone's driveway out of the what urge do.
Speaker 2: You get to park in front of someone's driveway?
Speaker 6: Urge that you need to resist on a casion, I've got.
Speaker 2: The shakes, hide park in front of a driveway for
Speaker 2: five days.
Speaker 4: You're desperate for a park You think I was stick
Speaker 4: it in front of this person's driveway.
Speaker 3: You think, no, that's disrespectful.
Speaker 4: Well, even if you're just thinking from a purely selfish
Speaker 4: point of view, wouldn't you be worried that if you
Speaker 4: park in someone's driveway, they're going to come out and
Speaker 4: be so irate they're going to at least key your
Speaker 4: car or smash your car or something. You just wouldn't
Speaker 4: do it The other thing is most councils have never
Speaker 4: thought to do this because they haven't been quite as
Speaker 4: imaginative as the Inn West Council, who are using a
Speaker 4: law that allows council to move an item obstructing access
Speaker 4: from a public place. And so I think they've elasticized
Speaker 4: that law a little bit to make it relevant to
Speaker 4: a driveway. But I don't think anyone's going to complain
Speaker 4: about this, and residents will be very, very happy in
Speaker 4: the Inn West.
Speaker 5: Indeed, I just can't believe that figure four three hundred
Speaker 5: and ninety three people made complains about someone's either parked
Speaker 5: me in or parked me out of my own driveway.
Speaker 5: Utterly bizarre, unbelievable to Romania now, where for once it's
Speaker 5: going well for a candidate who says, I align myself
Speaker 5: with Trump. Everybody big fan, I'm a huge nationalist in Romania,
Speaker 5: it's paying off for one George Simeon, who has just
Speaker 5: won so comprehensively in the latest round that the current
Speaker 5: Romanian Prime minister has resigned and pulled out of.
Speaker 6: The current coalition.
Speaker 5: He's basically already given up hope. He knows he can't
Speaker 5: come back from this. Here's George Simeon. He's part of
Speaker 5: the Alliance for the Unity of Romanians party, and you
Speaker 5: might be able to hear a little bit of Trumpianism
Speaker 5: coming through in the little bit he has to say
Speaker 5: here in.
Speaker 8: One word, how would you describe yourself?
Speaker 3: Are you a nationalist?
Speaker 5: What is?
Speaker 2: Who are you?
Speaker 8: I am young and restless. I am a Romanian patriot
Speaker 8: that all his life with his youngster from his generation,
Speaker 8: dreamt of being part of the free world. And now
Speaker 8: we discovered that the free world is not too that
Speaker 8: free anymore.
Speaker 5: Well, he's run the first round by over forty percent
Speaker 5: till now face off in the third round, but not
Speaker 5: against the incumbent, as the incumbent is no more.
Speaker 6: So it's really interesting.
Speaker 5: While we've seen it go very badly for let's say
Speaker 5: Dutton because they tied him so hard with the Trump brush,
Speaker 5: we know in Canada that imploded in Bolivia's face, but
Speaker 5: in Europe it's still working quite well. Like I say,
Speaker 5: this guy has not been shy about the fact that
Speaker 5: he's a Trump fan. He's trump esk. He says, I'm
Speaker 5: a massive nationalist. That is what I'm running on Romania. First,
Speaker 5: we keep hearing that line in various countries. It's going
Speaker 5: absolutely very well for him.
Speaker 6: It seems it still depends on where.
Speaker 5: Your country's at as to whether having been tired with
Speaker 5: the Trump rush will actually go well or negative for you.
Speaker 4: And he's not afraid to push socially conservative issues. And
Speaker 4: interestingly he made his name opposing COVID restrictions.
Speaker 3: So there you go.
Speaker 4: We'll go to a break when we come back. The
Speaker 4: front page of Tomorrow's Australians is a beauty. The Greens
Speaker 4: so looking for a new leader that's coming up in
Speaker 4: just a moment. Let's take a look at what's making
Speaker 4: headlines tomorrow. The front page of Tomorrow's Australian, Caleb is
Speaker 4: one I suspect many people have been looking forward to.
Speaker 2: Say the break good times come on and we'll bring
Speaker 2: out another song in a minute. Pertinent to this story.
Speaker 2: He'll blame labor, he'll blame liberals, he'll blame voters, but
Speaker 2: never himself. What a surprised The Greens are in crisis
Speaker 2: and searching for a leader after Adam Band became the
Speaker 2: latest victim of Anthony Albanezi's stunning election victory by losing
Speaker 2: the far Left party stranglehold over the center of Melbourne.
Speaker 2: The Prime Minister's extraordinary win the May through poll has
Speaker 2: seen him not rival leaders Peter Dutton and mister Band
Speaker 2: out of Parliament in a result that was beyond the
Speaker 2: wildest dreams of even the most optimistic Labor strategists. So
Speaker 2: that they're down from four to maybe one. There's only
Speaker 2: one seat left in contention for them, which is Ryan
Speaker 2: in Brisbane. I mean, that's hell to have a seventy
Speaker 2: five percent, go back on seventy five percent. It's a
Speaker 2: pretty good effort. And it says here, it's got a
Speaker 2: quote from mister Bant on the front of the odds
Speaker 2: tomorrow from February where he says, I know this could
Speaker 2: be our biggest election campaign and our best result ever.
Speaker 2: He tweeted on election night, will retain all our senators,
Speaker 2: Melbourne his seat and we're looking good in Ryan, Wills
Speaker 2: and Richmond. Will more no soon, well, no more soon, sorry,
Speaker 2: Well we do know more soon. And it's that you
Speaker 2: are gone, mister Bant. And as the Angels once sang,
Speaker 2: am I ever gone to see your fees? And again
Speaker 2: no way, and you know the rest of that how
Speaker 2: it goes. But how good? How good is this you know,
Speaker 2: I know it was a poor election result for many
Speaker 2: people and they've been down and out and resting on
Speaker 2: their laurels, not sure what to do about it. But
Speaker 2: you know, we've had some good wins afterwards. We've managed
Speaker 2: to decimate the Greens. The Teals are in trouble in Victoria.
Speaker 2: Tim Wilson's back in parliament. It looks like Monique Ryan
Speaker 2: might be on the way out to in Bendigo, which
Speaker 2: we should note is Jacinta Allen's territory. The Gnats have
Speaker 2: come within a bees you know what of winning that seat,
Speaker 2: and the Greens have been fended off in other parts
Speaker 2: of Victoria as well, Wills, for instance, where they thought
Speaker 2: they were a really good chance sent in their state
Speaker 2: leader to run for that seat. There are actually a
Speaker 2: few positives to be taken out of this.
Speaker 4: So the interesting thing now is not only who will
Speaker 4: be the new leader of the Liberal Party, but who
Speaker 4: will be the new leader of the Greens. This article
Speaker 4: says Sarah Hanson young and who wants thought Sea Patrol
Speaker 4: was a documentary and Larissa Waters are the front runners.
Speaker 4: I can't understand why the deputy leader, Marine Ferruki wouldn't
Speaker 4: be the new leader of the Green I desperately hope
Speaker 4: that she gets it, because that would be the end
Speaker 4: of the Greens forever if she becomes the leader and
Speaker 4: give us just endless spodder on a.
Speaker 3: Evening TV show.
Speaker 5: Indeed, as Joe Hildebrend said on Chris Kenny tonight, he's like,
Speaker 5: if you're a labor supporter, as Joe famously is, obviously,
Speaker 5: he's like, this is the perfect election. We win majority,
Speaker 5: the Greens get booted out. That's four seats in the
Speaker 5: lower House, just Pip gone, two of the worst heals,
Speaker 5: the two major socialists, they're out. He's like, this is
Speaker 5: absolutely perfect. Of course, all the Liberal voters will be
Speaker 5: looking our wounds for quite some time to come.
Speaker 6: But as Caleb said, this is.
Speaker 5: Not without some happy stories in it.
Speaker 2: Indeed, and I got to say, Sarah Hanson Young and
Speaker 2: Marine Ferruk have something in common, not just that they
Speaker 2: are in the Senate in the Greens, but in twenty
Speaker 2: nineteen when I lived in South Australia, I vote below
Speaker 2: the line in the Senate and I fill out all
Speaker 2: the bottom. Of course, Sarah Hanson Young got the very
Speaker 2: last preference and in twenty twenty five, now I live
Speaker 2: in New South Wales. Marine Faruki got the very last preference,
Speaker 2: so they're in very good company together. Now the story
Speaker 2: on the front of the odds tomorrow, labor won't change
Speaker 2: course as US dump's legacy choppers. The Albanezy government will
Speaker 2: forge ahead with its planned to buy five billions fifteen
Speaker 2: We're it in a trillion dollars a debt. What difference
Speaker 2: does it make it have billion dollars worth of Apache helicopters.
Speaker 2: As the US Army moves to scrap outdated crew to
Speaker 2: attack aircraft, including much of its Apache fleet, defense experts
Speaker 2: warn the US decision to scrap more than six hundred
Speaker 2: of the Boeing made attack helicopters in favor of autonomous
Speaker 2: aircraft means Australia will be left operating an expensive legacy
Speaker 2: platum well beyond its use by date. I mean, everyone
Speaker 2: knows that warfare is heading into drone territory. Now, if
Speaker 2: the UIs is giving up on it, why the hell
Speaker 2: would we be going headstrong into this?
Speaker 3: And that's been the big takeaway of the war in Ukraine.
Speaker 4: That's what has partly motivated the US decision is that
Speaker 4: Apache helicopters were being taken out by surface to air
Speaker 4: missiles and by drones are quite cheap compared to these
Speaker 4: very expensive helicopters. Japan had already made that decision, though,
Speaker 4: I will be surprised if the five billion dollars allocated
Speaker 4: by the Albanezi government ever gets paid out into defense
Speaker 4: because they don't exactly have a great track record on
Speaker 4: following through with their defense commitments.
Speaker 5: No, indeed, they don't seem to think it's a priority
Speaker 5: at all, hence defense spending still staying stagnant under their lead.
Speaker 5: To the front page of the Daily Telegraph, Now Commissioner
Speaker 5: ends a turbulent tenure.
Speaker 6: Karen cuts it short.
Speaker 5: Outgoing Police Commissioner Karen Where has been urged to step
Speaker 5: aside immediately to give the new South Wales Police Force
Speaker 5: clear air while her.
Speaker 6: Replacement is found.
Speaker 5: Miss web will retire as the state's top cop on
Speaker 5: September thirtieth, cutting her five year term short by almost
Speaker 5: eighteen months. The government yesterday scrambled to confirm the looming
Speaker 5: resignation after the Daily Telegraph rebeialed Miss Webb was Missweb,
Speaker 5: I should say, was planning to announce her exit next Sunday.
Speaker 5: The Commissioner emailed colleagues, saying serving in the role had
Speaker 5: been her greatest honor. Quote announcing my retirement now gives
Speaker 5: the state government time to recruit in appoint a new
Speaker 5: commissioner going into an election period in less than two
Speaker 5: years time, and quote love. We know it's got nothing
Speaker 5: to do with that. It never does. So my main
Speaker 5: memory of this woman, who I've always found completely underwhelming
Speaker 5: in this role, was when.
Speaker 6: Her cops got caught.
Speaker 5: Tasering that ninety year old grandmother who tragically died after
Speaker 5: the incident, and she was asked, have you watched the
Speaker 5: bodycam footage? And she was standing by her cops no
Speaker 5: matter what, And it became most apparent in that moment
Speaker 5: because she said, no, I haven't watched it, but I'm
Speaker 5: backing them in. Excuse me, lady, They could have done
Speaker 5: absolutely anything, and you haven't even watched the bodycam footage.
Speaker 6: You're just blindly backing them in.
Speaker 5: She said it would take a brave person to watch
Speaker 5: that footage, thereby inferring she was a coward. My goodness,
Speaker 5: she lost me very early on, and I'm afraid she
Speaker 5: never got me back. And I think most New South Walians, yes,
Speaker 5: I use that every time, I'm determined to make it
Speaker 5: a phrase would feel the same goodbye.
Speaker 4: I think the problems in the headline it's been a
Speaker 4: turbulent tenure and the last thing you want is turbulence
Speaker 4: in the hierarchy of your police force, especially during the crisis.
Speaker 2: And I don't think she ever really got it to
Speaker 2: She was underwhelming in public, and I know that she
Speaker 2: had the support of some in the police force, though
Speaker 2: they have increasingly been turning on her. But you know
Speaker 2: that the role of police commissioner is as much politician
Speaker 2: as it is copper and I don't think she had
Speaker 2: that in her And some of the reporting that the
Speaker 2: Telegraph has put out excellent stuff reporting they've been doing
Speaker 2: on web in the last few weeks. That she walked
Speaker 2: into the office of Tom Malone who runs nine Radio
Speaker 2: and basically compared herself to a DV victim on the
Speaker 2: basis of how she had been treated in the media.
Speaker 2: I mean, it just shows how she doesn't get it
Speaker 2: and flip flop. You know, she's meant to be in
Speaker 2: an interview with Ben Fordham and then she cancels that
Speaker 2: and goes to Hadley because she thinks you'll get a
Speaker 2: better run there and then Hadley turns on her because
Speaker 2: he works like on and on and on and on
Speaker 2: it went. It was just a poor time as commissioner.
Speaker 4: Really quickly before we go to a break, got to
Speaker 4: show you this headline from the advertiser because we talked
Speaker 4: about it last night.
Speaker 3: Will he ever learn? As the headline, this.
Speaker 4: Of course refers to port Power player Willi Rioli claims
Speaker 4: of more threats to opponents. The AFL is strongly considering
Speaker 4: fighting or suspending Port Adelaide forward Willi Rioli after a
Speaker 4: day of drama saw the league investigate fresh claims the
Speaker 4: powerstar made threats to opposition players. We talked last night
Speaker 4: about how it had come to light he'd sent a
Speaker 4: threatening text message to.
Speaker 3: A Bulldogs player.
Speaker 4: He was told, look just sort of out amongst yourselves,
Speaker 4: But now it's become apparent. Last year he made threats
Speaker 4: against a Geelong player and earlier this year against an
Speaker 4: Essendon footballer. The article says the AFL remains acutely aware
Speaker 4: of the cultural sensitivities surrounding this issue, so we will
Speaker 4: watch with fascination as to whether the AFL sanction Willy
Speaker 4: Rioli or not.
Speaker 3: We're going to go to a break.
Speaker 4: When we come back, a woman has taken the court
Speaker 4: for feeding her neighbor's cat.
Speaker 3: That's coming up in just a second.
Speaker 4: Welcome back in Switzerland, capable woman's been taken to court
Speaker 4: for feeding her neighbour's cats.
Speaker 2: Jass ridiculous, this poor bird in Switzerland. I will note
Speaker 2: that the story I read today calls her elderly. She's
Speaker 2: sixty eight, and I think that's probably the real offense
Speaker 2: that's been committed. Anyway, this woman, this cat lives in
Speaker 2: her building. Leo is the cat's name, and so she
Speaker 2: feeds friendly Leo, and Leo takes a liking to her,
Speaker 2: and she even put a cat flap in her door
Speaker 2: so the cat could come in and out and visit her.
Speaker 2: The actual owner of the cat said I don't want
Speaker 2: you feeding my cat anymore, but she continued to feed it.
Speaker 2: So she falls foul of the law because there is
Speaker 2: an offense in Switzerland called systemic feeding. Now, if someone
Speaker 2: wanted to systemically feed me, I wouldn't be going to
Speaker 2: the cops about them, it has to be said. But
Speaker 2: I mean, for heaven's sake, the cat obviously likes her more.
Speaker 2: It reminds me of this case that went viral online
Speaker 2: a few years ago, a neighborhood dispute over a cat
Speaker 2: that seems to like spending more time on one side
Speaker 2: of the fence instead of the owner's side of the fence.
Speaker 2: And you wouldn't believe what they had to say about
Speaker 2: that fella.
Speaker 3: I have done.
Speaker 2: I've done nothing to bring the cat.
Speaker 10: I've done nothing to bring the per.
Speaker 5: His last, his last.
Speaker 2: And so this woman in zi Rich is now charged
Speaker 2: with being a cat poop means, for Heaven's sake.
Speaker 6: Cat envy.
Speaker 5: It's a very real thing, punishable by Laura in some
Speaker 5: countries don't do it well. On Monday, we saw some
Speaker 5: heartwarming scenes as the royal family celebrated v Day, the
Speaker 5: eightieth anniversary, and as usual, Prince Louis, seven years of age,
Speaker 5: now took the gong.
Speaker 6: Here he is mocking his brother. So we've got Prince
Speaker 6: George there.
Speaker 5: He is just jouged his hair and Louis checking out
Speaker 5: his brother takes an exaggerated little flip of his hair
Speaker 5: as well. You ask me, Grandma in the background. There
Speaker 5: really steals the show. But Louis then, of course, he
Speaker 5: does this nearly every single ceremony.
Speaker 6: He was pulling.
Speaker 5: Faces, showing off his gaping missing two front teeth. While
Speaker 5: everyone else is celebrating, he's stealing the show. He's such
Speaker 5: a cutie and such the class clown every single time.
Speaker 4: That's all we've got time for tonight, stick around.
Speaker 3: Coming up, It's The Reader Penney Show. Good Night,