Speaker 1: Lateens General, Welcome to the Late Bay.
Speaker 2: Well good evening.
Speaker 3: I'm James Macpherson with Liz Staurer and Caleb Bond. If
Speaker 3: you thought that portrait of King Charles was bad, and
Speaker 3: it was, wait until you see what an artist has
Speaker 3: done to Princess Kate will show you that shocker a
Speaker 3: little later. Plus, when we look at all of tomorrow's papers,
Speaker 3: Melbourne's multimillion dollar sobering up centers are sitting empty, and
Speaker 3: Anthony Albanesi refuses to rule out enforcing an arrest warrant
Speaker 3: if indeed one is issued against the Israeli Prime Minister.
Speaker 3: All of that a little later, but first let's talk tennis.
Speaker 3: Australian tennis star Nick Curios will not be playing at
Speaker 3: Wimbledon this year. He's injured, so instead he'll be providing
Speaker 3: commentary with the BBC, and that decision has sparked outrage
Speaker 3: amongst conservative politicians and women's activists. They say having Curios
Speaker 3: as a commentator on the BBC is tantamount to endorsing
Speaker 3: violence against women. Now, the problem is that Curios pleaded
Speaker 3: guilty last year to shoving his ex girlfriend. Now a
Speaker 3: magistrate dismissed the charge saying the incident was low level
Speaker 3: and there was no suggestion that there was any danger
Speaker 3: of it happening again, but that was of no consequence
Speaker 3: to Curios's critics. Conservative MP Caroline Noakes, who's the chair
Speaker 3: of the Women's and Equity Committee in the UK Parliament,
Speaker 3: she slammed the decision, saying and I quote the BBC
Speaker 3: should hang its head in shame at disappointment. It's a
Speaker 3: disgrace and shows the utter contempt our national broadcaster has
Speaker 3: towards women. Another activist, noting that Curios has previously retweeted
Speaker 3: social media posts from Andrew Tait, whom some regard as
Speaker 3: a misogynist, said and I quote there are many potential
Speaker 3: wimbled and pundits out there.
Speaker 2: Why choose to employ an abuser?
Speaker 3: Another activist said it's amazing how quickly we're willing to
Speaker 3: dismiss violence against women, as long as the men and
Speaker 3: perpetuating it is good at hitting a ball or a
Speaker 3: musical note. Now, for the BBC's part, they said they
Speaker 3: didn't approach Curios until well after the court proceedings were concluded,
Speaker 3: and besides, as a current player and former Grand Slam finalist,
Speaker 3: he'll provide great analysis and insight.
Speaker 2: So let's start with you, Liz.
Speaker 3: Should Curios be commentating with the BBC or should he
Speaker 3: be banned from the platform because of that court case
Speaker 3: last year.
Speaker 4: I don't think you should be banned whatsoever, but it
Speaker 4: does definitely open up the much bigger question of how
Speaker 4: long should something like this affect a guy's career if
Speaker 4: it all So, the incident in question happened over three
Speaker 4: years ago now, and I think even using the term
Speaker 4: abuse maybe a little bit misplaced here, because it was
Speaker 4: an altercation.
Speaker 5: She would or wouldn't get out of the car.
Speaker 6: He would be in her apartment. They had a disagreement,
Speaker 6: and he was trying to leave, like he was actually
Speaker 6: trying to extricate himself from the app acumen in an
Speaker 6: uber and she went him in the way of the
Speaker 6: car door so he couldn't shut it. So he shoved
Speaker 6: her shoulders, by which he meant move get out of
Speaker 6: the way. Yeah, and she fell over. I mean that
Speaker 6: was the basis of this supposed abuse claim, I don't
Speaker 6: think exactly.
Speaker 4: So we're now hearing abuse and assaults thrown around, and
Speaker 4: how could.
Speaker 5: You give such a platform to such a man?
Speaker 4: Now, there are certain circumstances in which that's a very
Speaker 4: necessary conversation to have, but this is not one of them,
Speaker 4: and the BBC coppy flack for it. Like the MP
Speaker 4: that you just quoted, this is just way out of context.
Speaker 4: And what it actually does is take away from the
Speaker 4: cases in.
Speaker 5: Which that is a re very relevant question.
Speaker 4: To be asking, and we ask it every time we have,
Speaker 4: you know, AFL player or an NRL player grace our
Speaker 4: front pages having behaved very poorly, whether it's behavior toward
Speaker 4: women or whether it's a big night out on the town.
Speaker 5: Involving drugs and sex and rock and roll.
Speaker 4: But this is not one of those cases, and that's
Speaker 4: what they're trying to make it the equivalent of. And yeah,
Speaker 4: the reason why it really gets my goat is it
Speaker 4: takes away from those cases in which it's absolutely a
Speaker 4: necessary conversation to have it, but a little bit.
Speaker 1: He trivializes it, right.
Speaker 6: But I think this whole shabang proves exactly why Nick
Speaker 6: Kurrios is the perfect guy to be commentating for the BBC,
Speaker 6: because he is a walking controversy machine, right And it
Speaker 6: doesn't matter whether you like tennis or not. Everyone knows
Speaker 6: who Nick kurios Is and everyone at some point has
Speaker 6: watched him play, and everyone has thoughts on Nick Kurrios.
Speaker 1: Some people love him, some.
Speaker 6: People hate him. And I used to hate him, and
Speaker 6: I've sort of he's grown on me in recent years
Speaker 6: because the one thing I've always hated about curios is
Speaker 6: that he is so talented, right, he just has so
Speaker 6: much abundant natural talent. But because he's got so much talent,
Speaker 6: he's never felt the need to put in the work
Speaker 6: to take it that little bit further that would make
Speaker 6: him one of, if not the best, in the world.
Speaker 1: I mean, he's a Wimbledon finalist for heaven's.
Speaker 6: Sake, right, he is a seriously good tennis player, and
Speaker 6: if he just took it that bit more seriously, I
Speaker 6: reckon he could have won Grand Slams and done so
Speaker 6: much better than he did. And that frustrates me. But
Speaker 6: everyone has a thought about Nick curios And you know,
Speaker 6: just like on the tennis court, when he's in the
Speaker 6: commentary box, he's not going to pull his punches. He's
Speaker 6: going to say the things that other people wouldn't dare
Speaker 6: to say. He's going to make criticisms that other people
Speaker 6: wouldn't make, and that's what you want in a sports commentation.
Speaker 3: You'd watch the tennis to see him play. You'd also
Speaker 3: watch the tennis to hear him commentake exactly just on
Speaker 3: him as an athlete. My son played basketball with him,
Speaker 3: just a game of street ball that curios happened to
Speaker 3: be there, and my son, who's not shabby on the
Speaker 3: basketball court, reckoned. He is just an unbelievable athlete, said
Speaker 3: he was a total freak. But this is the problem
Speaker 3: when sports organizations start taking a stance on different issues.
Speaker 3: The AFL have just had a problem with this because
Speaker 3: they've just taken a big stance against violence against women.
Speaker 3: It was around the same weekend that Wayne Carey was
Speaker 3: going to be inducted into the new South Wales Football
Speaker 3: Hall of Fame. Now Wayne Carey's got his own pass
Speaker 3: to deal with and so all of a sudden that
Speaker 3: was a big no no. So sports organizations do get
Speaker 3: into this problem where do we honor someone purely for
Speaker 3: their sporting ability and ignore character issues or are character
Speaker 3: issues relevant when we're honoring them or giving them a
Speaker 3: platform to commentate or receive awards for their sport.
Speaker 6: Yeah, and it becomes that whole are they a role
Speaker 6: model thing. But you know, seriously, he shoved his girlfriend
Speaker 6: when he was trying to get away from an argument.
Speaker 6: I don't think that's the problem here. But I'm getting
Speaker 6: the popcorn out because Nick Kirios in the commentary box.
Speaker 1: If this is any.
Speaker 6: Start to what his career is going to be like,
Speaker 6: there will be fantastic. Let's go to South Australia now
Speaker 6: and let's talk about payroll tax, which it has to
Speaker 6: be one of the worst taxes in the world. It
Speaker 6: is a tax on employment and you'd think any government
Speaker 6: anywhere would want any.
Speaker 1: Business to employ more people.
Speaker 6: But if you employ too many people and you pay
Speaker 6: them too much in this country, you get penalized for
Speaker 6: doing so. Last year, multiple states or every state in
Speaker 6: the country now started charging doctors payroll tax. Previously, it
Speaker 6: was thought that doctors were largely exempt. And the problem
Speaker 6: here was that in medical centers where doctors rent rooms,
Speaker 6: the medical center pays for the receptionists and they pay for.
Speaker 1: The nurses, etc.
Speaker 6: But the doctors are essentially contractors. They're not employed by
Speaker 6: the medical center. They rent the room to work in there.
Speaker 6: So the medical centers figured we don't have to pay
Speaker 6: payroll tax on those doctors.
Speaker 1: They're not our employer.
Speaker 6: Then there was a case in the New South Wales
Speaker 6: Supreme Court that said no, you do have to pay
Speaker 6: that tax, and all of a sudden, medical centers all
Speaker 6: over the country were up for hundreds of thousands of
Speaker 6: dollars in tax that they never thought they'd have to pay.
Speaker 6: And that means medical centers closing down. And we all
Speaker 6: know how.
Speaker 1: Difficult it is to get a doctor's.
Speaker 6: Appointment now, a littlone, a bulk build doctor's appointment without
Speaker 6: even more places closing.
Speaker 1: So South Australia.
Speaker 6: Has come up with an ingenious idea which is that
Speaker 6: we will exempt doctors who bulg bill from having to
Speaker 6: pay the payroll tax.
Speaker 1: Take a look.
Speaker 6: This is the Health Minister of South Australia, Chris Picton,
Speaker 6: announcing this policy today.
Speaker 4: I think this is an excellent arrangement which helps to
Speaker 4: make sure that our gps are sustainable and helps to
Speaker 4: incentivize practices to Bob Bill.
Speaker 6: And sure we all want to incentivize practices to bug Bill,
Speaker 6: et cetera, et cetera, but let's talk about what this
Speaker 6: really is. State Government's reduced a new tax. Then they
Speaker 6: came up with a way for people to not pay
Speaker 6: that tax, and they called it a tax cut, and
Speaker 6: that is exactly what the Health minister said today. He
Speaker 6: said that this was tax relief. I'm not sure you
Speaker 6: really can call a tax relief when you brought the
Speaker 6: tax in last year, then you come up with a
Speaker 6: loophole and you go, how good are we We've come
Speaker 6: up with a way.
Speaker 1: Not to pay the tax anymore. You didn't have to
Speaker 1: levy it in the first place. Like sure, there was
Speaker 1: this Supreme.
Speaker 6: Court case in New South Wales that said that medical
Speaker 6: centers are liable to pay payroll tax. But every treasurer
Speaker 6: in the country the next day, with the stroke of
Speaker 6: a pen, could have just said, our revenue officers are
Speaker 6: not going to collect the payroll tax from doctors' offices.
Speaker 6: They could have done that, but they chose not to.
Speaker 6: And now they've patting themselves on the back for finding.
Speaker 3: A way to find people, well, look, you know, do
Speaker 3: not pay the Is it a tax cut or is
Speaker 3: it an embarrassing admission of ranking competence, Because of course
Speaker 3: that policy has meant a lot of people can't afford
Speaker 3: to go to the doctors. So imagine making sick people
Speaker 3: pay more to go to the doctors, not just in
Speaker 3: the middle of a cost of living crisis, but in
Speaker 3: the middle of a hospital's crisis in South Australia, in
Speaker 3: the middle of an ambulance ramping crisis. It was a
Speaker 3: terrible policy to begin with. But what they've done is.
Speaker 4: Payold tax across the board is a terrible.
Speaker 2: Point, particularly in this instance.
Speaker 3: What they've done is they've set you on fire and
Speaker 3: then when you started screaming, they've sprayed you with water,
Speaker 3: and now.
Speaker 2: They want gratitude for it.
Speaker 5: Well, that's government in a nutshell, Mac.
Speaker 4: But you would have thought that essential services at least
Speaker 4: should be no payroll tax across the board. We're talking
Speaker 4: about people seeking medical help, GPS, trying to do their job.
Speaker 5: And here we have this.
Speaker 4: Oh no, you guys, your heads are in the same
Speaker 4: noose as everybody else's. Payroll tax is one of those taxes.
Speaker 4: The more you try to learn about it, the less
Speaker 4: it makes sense. And it is genuinely just the government
Speaker 4: pocketing more money. It's incurred by everyone. Everyone thinks, oh no,
Speaker 4: it's really the employer that incurs the cost, but they
Speaker 4: already add all that up and therefore probably it's side
Speaker 4: your wages accordingly and put up the prices of their
Speaker 4: product accordingly. So it is another tax that is actually
Speaker 4: incurred by everyone.
Speaker 5: It just makes me absolutely mad.
Speaker 4: It makes no sense whatsoever except for as a massive
Speaker 4: revenue raiser, which is of course its main purpose in life.
Speaker 4: But let's talk about vegan dog food because a manufacturer
Speaker 4: is being sued by coming up with a dodgy batch
Speaker 4: of biscuits that killed seven or that's seven dogs, seven dogs.
Speaker 4: Sorry dogs, I'm more sorry about your owners thinking you're vegan,
Speaker 4: what a big mistake, and making sixty dogs seriously unwell.
Speaker 4: The people who sold these dog biscuits have paid out
Speaker 4: two hundred and thirty two thousand dollars in damages to
Speaker 4: thirty three dog owners. So now they're suing the manufacturer.
Speaker 5: Saying, cough it up, bucco. These dogs' lives are on
Speaker 5: your heads.
Speaker 4: It's going to be really interesting to see how this
Speaker 4: plays out and how much money they'll get for it.
Speaker 6: But the point is, what are you doing feeding vegan
Speaker 6: dog food dog abuse to your dog in the first place. Look,
Speaker 6: I don't want to say your dog deserved to die,
Speaker 6: but if you are feeding vegan dog food to your dog.
Speaker 1: Do you not think that.
Speaker 6: Maybe a carnivorous animal at some point might suffer some
Speaker 6: damage from doing that, Like dogs are not naturally meant.
Speaker 1: To eat vegan food.
Speaker 2: Well, I love me's.
Speaker 4: The RSPCA on this, by the way, Like we've known
Speaker 4: since time immemorial.
Speaker 5: Dogs eat meat, It's what they do.
Speaker 4: And then these brain dog owners get it into the
Speaker 4: head of.
Speaker 5: Oh no, no, mine, mine's special. He's vegan like me. Clips.
Speaker 3: So just before you show the clip, I think you
Speaker 3: just hit the nail on the head.
Speaker 2: They want to make the.
Speaker 3: Dog vegan like themselves, and that explains why they've done it.
Speaker 3: They have suffered a mental decline brought on by withdrawing
Speaker 3: from meet themselves.
Speaker 5: And now the dogs everyone.
Speaker 3: Exactly sorry to interrupt you carry on.
Speaker 4: Check out this clip on a morning show in the
Speaker 4: UK with this woman had bought on her oh so
Speaker 4: vegan dog and was extremely proud of that fact until
Speaker 4: the hosts presented said vegan dog with the choice of a.
Speaker 5: Bowl full of meat a bowl full of edgies.
Speaker 7: And they've got two balls here right, One is full
Speaker 7: of vegetables and one is full of meat.
Speaker 2: Store storm. We hit to put the temptation in front
Speaker 2: of you.
Speaker 5: She's obviously going to go obviously, Oh are you little?
Speaker 1: Yes, I didn't swear.
Speaker 2: And there is natural.
Speaker 4: Selection, and there is natural selection.
Speaker 5: Yes.
Speaker 4: Indeed, God knows how long that poor dog hadn't even had.
Speaker 5: A whiff of meat. It managed nostrils. It was probably like,
Speaker 5: oh my gosh, all my Christmases have come at once.
Speaker 3: If you want a vegan pet, you don't get a
Speaker 3: rock wheeler, you get a rabbit.
Speaker 6: Seriously, these people should be done for animal abuse. I'm
Speaker 6: sorry you asked where the RSPCAS. The RSPCA is too
Speaker 6: busy trying to ban jumps racing and not finding illegal
Speaker 6: knackeries out at woggle Wogger I think is what they've
Speaker 6: been up to. But if you are going to keep
Speaker 6: your dog as a vegan should the dog should be
Speaker 6: taken away and given to someone who will.
Speaker 1: Actually look after it.
Speaker 6: And you should be prosecuted for animal abuse because it's
Speaker 6: just unnatural to force a helpless animal, and you know,
Speaker 6: we know what dogs are like. People have tried it
Speaker 6: with cats as well, But the good thing about cats
Speaker 6: is that they're smart enough to run away and go
Speaker 6: and find their own food sources.
Speaker 5: When bring your.
Speaker 1: Back, we bring back the dead rad on the bird.
Speaker 6: But we know with dogs that they are reliant on you, right,
Speaker 6: and you are abrogating your responsibility to that animal by
Speaker 6: not feeding it the stuff that it is naturally bred
Speaker 6: to eat and that it needs for nutrition. There is
Speaker 6: just no excuse whatsoever. It's like people who try to
Speaker 6: make their babies vegan and it's like, yeah, it has
Speaker 6: and kids have been killed because of it, right, and
Speaker 6: I wouldn't be surprised. Sorry, if there are dogs out
Speaker 6: there that end up, you know, malnutrition because of female
Speaker 6: who feed them vegan food. It is absolutely disgusting. If
Speaker 6: you there's probably they have too many vegan viewers, to
Speaker 6: be honest. If you're watching this on YouTube or elsewhere
Speaker 6: and you are a vegan dog owner, just know that
Speaker 6: you are scum of the earth, and please take your
Speaker 6: dog to the pound so someone who will actually look
Speaker 6: after your dog can take it and give it.
Speaker 1: A nice life.
Speaker 2: Please. Vegans are likely to get their vegan dogs.
Speaker 3: Recording themselves doing CrossFit and boasting about it on social
Speaker 3: media the next thing that they would do. I'm not
Speaker 3: sure if Cate Blanchette is vegan, she probably is but
Speaker 3: she seems to be pretty pro Palestinian. Check her out
Speaker 3: at the Carnes Film Festival overnight parading on the red carpet.
Speaker 3: Was it a fashion faux pa or was it a
Speaker 3: pro Palestinian protest. She's wearing what seems to be a
Speaker 3: fairly simple and elegant black dress, but when she lifts
Speaker 3: up the back of it, underneath the dress it's green,
Speaker 3: and with the white back and of course the red carpet,
Speaker 3: it looks very much like she's making a deliberate protest
Speaker 3: on behalf of the Palestinians. This was a raging debate
Speaker 3: on social media. People weren't quite sure. What's your take, Caleb,
Speaker 3: optical illusion or do you think Cate Blanchette is making
Speaker 3: a protest? She's not immune to protesting different social causes.
Speaker 6: No, and the argument has been made at the back
Speaker 6: of the Dreas is actually a pale pink, so that
Speaker 6: somehow means that it is in no way related to
Speaker 6: the Palestinian flag. I tend to think that if if
Speaker 6: you have gone to the effort of showing the green
Speaker 6: bit with the white bit, knowing it's on the background
Speaker 6: of the red carpet, that it probably was a subtle message, right,
Speaker 6: And she has signed petitions calling for ceasefires, etc. So
Speaker 6: I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if that what
Speaker 6: she was doing.
Speaker 1: If that's what she was.
Speaker 6: Doing here we are talking about it, right, she has
Speaker 6: achieved her goal, which is to create discussion, and I
Speaker 6: suppose in that case she has garnered herself a win.
Speaker 1: But it's a very clever way of.
Speaker 6: Doing it without actually coming out and saying pause, you
Speaker 6: willn't not.
Speaker 4: Just cowardice as well, Like if you were going to
Speaker 4: use your platform Can's Film Festival. These photos are circulated
Speaker 4: around the globe. They're on the front of magazine's papers.
Speaker 5: You name it.
Speaker 4: If you're going to send such a big signal, why
Speaker 4: wouldn't you just own it, tweet it, say something when
Speaker 4: they interview you on the red carpet.
Speaker 5: She knew the color of the background leave. It's the same.
Speaker 4: Every year, so choosing the colors in her dress it
Speaker 4: does seem pretty obvious.
Speaker 5: But then my argument is, yet we just.
Speaker 4: Go the whole old Kate, just say so, say where
Speaker 4: you stand? Was your way of taking a view without
Speaker 4: taking so much of a view that you might.
Speaker 5: Get any pushback?
Speaker 4: Or upset anybody, you know, people who don't support hamas
Speaker 4: terrorists or believe in a two state solution, because those
Speaker 4: of us with a single firing neuron, no, it's not
Speaker 4: any kind of solution. But we know our Kate tends
Speaker 4: to be a lefty. She was very vocal last year
Speaker 4: about voting for the Voice in the referendum, and this
Speaker 4: is something that she's actually quite upfront about herself. Here
Speaker 4: she is explaining that, yeah, I'm probably a lefty.
Speaker 8: I mean, I'm white privileged, I'm middle class, and I think,
Speaker 8: you know, one can be accused of having a bit
Speaker 8: of a white savior complex. But to be perfect honest,
Speaker 8: my interaction with with refugees in the film in the
Speaker 8: field and also in resettled environments has totally changed my
Speaker 8: perspective on the world.
Speaker 4: I don't know about Cate Blanchette claiming to be middle
Speaker 4: middle at all.
Speaker 5: You're middle class. The rest of us.
Speaker 6: Are in pops, We're I think she surpassed that a
Speaker 6: little bit with the group she hangs with. Maybe maybe so.
Speaker 6: But the funniest.
Speaker 1: Thing about it all, I think is it.
Speaker 6: Is just such a typical example of the way that
Speaker 6: celebrities like to carry on about social issues, right, Because
Speaker 6: you're right. List, if she wanted to do something, not
Speaker 6: only could she come out and say something, I mean,
Speaker 6: she could get on a plane and go over to Gaza.
Speaker 1: And help distribute the.
Speaker 6: To the refugees and whatever she wants to do over there, right,
Speaker 6: But she doesn't do that. She rocks up to Can's
Speaker 6: film festival with a very expensive dress on to make
Speaker 6: her point, then switches out of that dress to put
Speaker 6: on a blaze or whatever she was wearing there to
Speaker 6: go and give a speech about how virtuous she is
Speaker 6: and her thoughts on the world, et cetera, all the
Speaker 6: while making lots of money and enjoying expensive champagne and
Speaker 6: having a wonderful time while people over in Gaza and
Speaker 6: Israel are suffering. It's just the ultimate example of how
Speaker 6: these people operate. I will lecture to you about how
Speaker 6: you should think, and I'll even admit that I'm middle class.
Speaker 2: And just on middle class.
Speaker 3: I believe if you're google Kate Blanchett you'll find she's
Speaker 3: worth about ninety five million dollars.
Speaker 2: Well, there you go, I mean that's how middle class.
Speaker 1: Well, well, look, let's be perfectly honest.
Speaker 6: If you want to buy a house in Sydney these days,
Speaker 6: ninety five million dollars may well classify you as middle class.
Speaker 6: But you know, come on, we just don't need the lecture,
Speaker 6: do we seriously? Anyway, let's move on to our favorite
Speaker 6: topic here energy.
Speaker 1: I know you're.
Speaker 6: Groaning in your chair, going, oh no, not again, renewable energy.
Speaker 6: But we must talk about it because we've had a
Speaker 6: small win today, which is of course that are rearing
Speaker 6: one of the biggest power stations in the country, certainly
Speaker 6: the biggest in New South Wales today has been given
Speaker 6: another two years before it goes off to the doggers.
Speaker 6: It is, of course a coal fired energy plant. It
Speaker 6: supplies nearly a quarter of the power in New South Wales,
Speaker 6: so it's pretty important to the energy grid, and we
Speaker 6: know renewables are not coming online as fast as we
Speaker 6: need them. The Energy Market Operator put out a report
Speaker 6: or an update to its ten year report the other
Speaker 6: day that said many parts of the country are going
Speaker 6: to struggle with the level of power they have in summer,
Speaker 6: particularly because South Australia has shut down gas generation, so
Speaker 6: we need to keep low and behold fossil fuels online.
Speaker 6: So the New South Wales state government has agreed to
Speaker 6: underwrite the losses of the Eraring power station for the
Speaker 6: next two years to basically make sure your lights don't
Speaker 6: turn off. And it's interesting because earlier in the week,
Speaker 6: Chris Min's, the Premier of New South Wales, came out
Speaker 6: and basically said, look, I just want to tell all
Speaker 6: the ecoactivists the best way to kill.
Speaker 1: Renewable energy is to go too.
Speaker 6: Fast, because a they won't have enough people won't have
Speaker 6: enough power to turn their lights on, and b they're
Speaker 6: going to see the shock in their power bill.
Speaker 1: If you want to turn people.
Speaker 6: Off renewable energy, the best thing you can do is
Speaker 6: have lots of it. Two days later, there's subsidies for
Speaker 6: a coal fired power station. A Victoria is having to
Speaker 6: do exactly the same thing with the loy Yang They
Speaker 6: have to keep it on longer, and your lawn as
Speaker 6: well because they simply don't have the renewable energy online.
Speaker 6: Surely it proves that our net zero goals are a
Speaker 6: total joke.
Speaker 1: We're not going to meet them. We all know that
Speaker 1: everyone in.
Speaker 5: The energy sector now, every single one of them.
Speaker 6: We're keeping the col fired power plants going longer than
Speaker 6: we expected why don't we just say, yep, ain't going
Speaker 6: to happen. Let's just continue situation normal.
Speaker 2: Please.
Speaker 4: No, Instead they say, oh, it ain't going to happen.
Speaker 5: So we've all got to.
Speaker 4: Try harder and do better and faster and more and
Speaker 4: bigger subsidies, and you guys, your energy bills just keep
Speaker 4: going up.
Speaker 5: We've got to do it. We've got to do it.
Speaker 5: We've got to make the targets.
Speaker 4: Even though every expert at this point has simply said, look,
Speaker 4: we can get there eventually, but right now, no, and
Speaker 4: the targets that you've sent, you're going to end up
Speaker 4: in the dark. I think we should start taking bets
Speaker 4: because right now a wearing is open for an extra
Speaker 4: two years, how many of us actually think it's going
Speaker 4: to be two years? Watch a blowout to four, maybe six,
Speaker 4: could be ten, and by then we'll all just be
Speaker 4: like and at that point, what we've paid out to
Speaker 4: keep it up, as they say, they're not paying out
Speaker 4: any extra unless it incurs a loss, and then the
Speaker 4: state government will give two hundred and twenty five million
Speaker 4: per year per year. But if that adds up, we
Speaker 4: might as well have just built a brand new coal
Speaker 4: fired power station, or put it toward New clear because
Speaker 4: that's going to be a tidy sum that is just
Speaker 4: going to keep climbing.
Speaker 3: The interesting thing about this is they've extended it for
Speaker 3: two years, right until August twenty twenty seven, which is
Speaker 3: just a couple of months after the next New South
Speaker 3: Wales state election, So that's rather convenient. It guarantee the
Speaker 3: Labor government won't have blackouts to deal with. But they've
Speaker 3: also got an option for it to be extended in
Speaker 3: another two years beyond that, so Lizia definitely on the money.
Speaker 3: It won't be two years, It'll more likely before and
Speaker 3: perhaps longer again. But I mean, Monty Python could not
Speaker 3: have scripted a comedy as good as our energy policy.
Speaker 3: First we've subsidized renewables, which.
Speaker 2: We were told we're going to be cheap.
Speaker 3: Then we subsidized householders to afford the renewables, which they
Speaker 3: were told we're going to be cheap. And now we're
Speaker 3: subsidizing col fired power stations, which our whole energy policy
Speaker 3: is centered around closing.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we're subsidizing them to stay open.
Speaker 6: And I've written my polities and in the advertiser about
Speaker 6: this tomorrow and how absurd it is that South Australia
Speaker 6: shutting down its gas generation at a time when just
Speaker 6: a few weeks ago the Federal Resources Minister Madeline King
Speaker 6: was writing in the AFR that gas is an important
Speaker 6: part of our energy future.
Speaker 1: Sow the Australia says no.
Speaker 6: Then you've got the Labor Premier, as I said before,
Speaker 6: of New South Wales, saying the best way to get
Speaker 6: rid of renewable energy is to have too much of it.
Speaker 6: Then a couple of days later he subsidizes a coal
Speaker 6: fired power station. And then you have all these people
Speaker 6: who of course put solar panels on their roofs, thinking
Speaker 6: that they were helping the environment and feeding their energy
Speaker 6: into the grid.
Speaker 1: Now they're being.
Speaker 6: Told that they're actually going to have to pay to
Speaker 6: feed their energy into the grid.
Speaker 1: Have we woken up yet?
Speaker 6: The whole renewable thing has been a total dud. We
Speaker 6: subsidized the renewables, then we subsidized the coal, and then
Speaker 6: all the people who thought they were helping the environment
Speaker 6: by generating soul power.
Speaker 5: It is doing.
Speaker 4: And yet here is Energy Minister Chris Bowen staring down
Speaker 4: the lens, assuring us all not like, oh, we've made
Speaker 4: this arrangement.
Speaker 5: So you guys aren't in the dark. Don't worry, We're
Speaker 5: looking after you in that respect. No.
Speaker 4: No, The assurance that he wants to make sure that
Speaker 4: everyone can sleep in their beds tonight just fine. Is
Speaker 4: a rearing will not be open a day longer than necessary.
Speaker 5: We're still shutting it as soon as possible.
Speaker 7: The Iraan power station should be open, not a day
Speaker 7: longer than it should be, and closed.
Speaker 2: On a day earlier than it should.
Speaker 7: I think the South Wales government has done a good
Speaker 7: job in negotiating that. Ensuring that you have that energy
Speaker 7: in the system as we make that transition, is I
Speaker 7: think appropriate.
Speaker 1: You.
Speaker 4: Oh, I'm so glad to agree that not leaving millions
Speaker 4: of Australians in the dark for the sake of your
Speaker 4: green dream actually isn't appropriate.
Speaker 5: And this is a good call all.
Speaker 4: By the way, I'm like, well, that's generous off here, mate.
Speaker 6: And by the way, the federal government today put aside
Speaker 6: five hundred and fifty million dollars for batteries as well,
Speaker 6: because you know, we need a national battery strategy. Apparently
Speaker 6: because we produce something like half of the world's lithium, right,
Speaker 6: we don't make any batteries in this country we send,
Speaker 6: we sell the lithium to China so we can buy
Speaker 6: the batteries back from them to put on the walls
Speaker 6: of our houses and in electric cars, et cetera. Because,
Speaker 6: of course, if you want to have a solar panel
Speaker 6: on your roof, the only way to make it viable
Speaker 6: now is to have a battery on the side of
Speaker 6: your house. Otherwise you're paying to feed that renewable energy
Speaker 6: back into the grid. But of course these batteries cost
Speaker 6: nine grand a piece, and that's nine grand for a
Speaker 6: Chinese made battery.
Speaker 1: Wait until you see what it'll.
Speaker 6: Cost to buy an Australian made battery, which of course
Speaker 6: we have to.
Speaker 1: They'll have to make it with Australian.
Speaker 6: Energy, the price of which keeps going through the roof
Speaker 6: because of the renewables that they want to store in
Speaker 6: these batteries.
Speaker 3: I just love that grab from Chris Bowen where he
Speaker 3: says that the station won't be open a day longer
Speaker 3: than it ought to be closed a day earlier than
Speaker 3: it should be, which basically means I've got no idea
Speaker 3: what's happy as long as it needs to be, making
Speaker 3: it up as we go, and when you begin to
Speaker 3: despair about the state of Australian politics, that the best
Speaker 3: thing to do is to start reading the American newspapers
Speaker 3: because it's a lot worse there.
Speaker 2: Believe it or not.
Speaker 3: Check out these Democrats from the state of Illinois. They've
Speaker 3: just tabled a bill seeking to change the word offender
Speaker 3: in their legislation to quote justice impacted individual. The bill
Speaker 3: they're referring to is the Crime Reduction Act, and by
Speaker 3: referring to criminals not as offenders but by justice impacted individuals,
Speaker 3: it seems like they're normalizing crime rather than reducing it.
Speaker 9: Have a listen, well, we don't mess with anything in
Speaker 9: terms of the term victim. We just change offender to
Speaker 9: just as impacted individual, adding the Department of Corrections, adding
Speaker 9: Human Services, adding sangmen and Cook County Adult Probation and
Speaker 9: two members. You've experience the ari system as offenders or
Speaker 9: justice impacted individual It.
Speaker 10: Might seem like a small thing. I mean, obviously changing
Speaker 10: a term can have a positive or negative impact when
Speaker 10: we do that, but I would say that over and
Speaker 10: over again, we keep changing the names for how we
Speaker 10: are referring to those who are have entered into criminal activity,
Speaker 10: and each time we make that change, each agency has
Speaker 10: to make that change on every one of their documents.
Speaker 10: So right now in the Department of Corrections, there's multiple
Speaker 10: changes that have been made, and it's costing thousands and
Speaker 10: thousands of dollars just to do a name change.
Speaker 3: That's Republican Terry Bryant making a great point that in
Speaker 3: the middle of the cost of living crisis, they're spending
Speaker 3: thousands of dollars changing a word, and they're doing it
Speaker 3: for ideological reasons.
Speaker 2: Caleb.
Speaker 3: They're trying to get away from stigmatizing criminals and having
Speaker 3: them as people who are bad, as these are people
Speaker 3: who are on their way to rehabilitation. We're moving towards
Speaker 3: nirvana and these people they're not bad people.
Speaker 2: It's just a system has been just impacted.
Speaker 4: Even me, you haven't been impacted by justice.
Speaker 2: Well, we're impacted by justice. They were sent to jail.
Speaker 2: That was the impact.
Speaker 6: So if someone will you don't want to stigmatize criminals
Speaker 6: because we need.
Speaker 1: More of them, right, and that's just common sense.
Speaker 5: Yeah, we wouldn't want to make it seem yealing.
Speaker 3: No no, no, no, don't want to upset their self esteem.
Speaker 2: It's the time they've been in preschool.
Speaker 3: Their self esteem has been the one thing we must coddle.
Speaker 6: Look, it's a legitimate career move. You know, what's the problem, guys,
Speaker 6: I'm just a you know, I'm just a justice impacted
Speaker 6: What do you mean you don't want to date me.
Speaker 1: I'm just a just packed the justice impact. You won't
Speaker 1: employ me.
Speaker 6: I'm a justice impacted into big old Thank you very much.
Speaker 2: So we'd love to employ We're going through your resume.
Speaker 3: There seems to be a ten year gap where what
Speaker 3: happened there.
Speaker 1: I was impacted by justice for teen years, you know.
Speaker 6: But so if someone who is a criminal is a
Speaker 6: justice impacted individual, does that mean that what we would
Speaker 6: now call a victim, which is a six letter word
Speaker 6: one word, is now.
Speaker 1: An individual who has had an interaction with a justice
Speaker 1: impacted individual.
Speaker 6: We're seriously, have we gone mad? Have they checked what's
Speaker 6: in the water in Illinois? Because I think there might
Speaker 6: be too much lead in that water.
Speaker 4: I think there's madness throughout the water in the United
Speaker 4: States of America, as we know, their border crisis has
Speaker 4: been left to fend for itself. Over nine million illegal
Speaker 4: aliens have poured over the border. The southern border between
Speaker 4: Mexico and the United States of America. Now, a few
Speaker 4: of the Republicans haven't shut up about this for as
Speaker 4: long as it's been happening. We've even showed you footage
Speaker 4: of the border guards cutting barbed wire to allow these
Speaker 4: illegal aliens through when they did that on the order
Speaker 4: of the Biden administration.
Speaker 5: The Biden administration knows that.
Speaker 4: This is happening, but is in fact facilitating it. Well,
Speaker 4: one very frustrated journal where years into this dilemma, now
Speaker 4: had the goal to ask the White House Press.
Speaker 5: Secretary what the heck is going on?
Speaker 4: Why isn't the President doing anything about it?
Speaker 5: Here's their response.
Speaker 7: The President has the authority to do something about this.
Speaker 1: Why should he have to do it?
Speaker 10: The latterly, why shouldn't we do it in a legislative way.
Speaker 10: You're right, he took many executive actions before.
Speaker 4: So the president has the power to stop this tomorrow,
Speaker 4: just issue an.
Speaker 5: Edict make it happen. And there's his press.
Speaker 4: Secretary going, why should he have to do this by himself?
Speaker 4: She suggested, why can't we do this via legislation, you know,
Speaker 4: put it to the House, have it go through Congress,
Speaker 4: as if that would or wouldn't get up. This is
Speaker 4: a clown show actually defending the president for what has
Speaker 4: been the greatest breach of United States any kind of security,
Speaker 4: national security. People's hometowns as well as cities are now
Speaker 4: overrun with.
Speaker 5: These illegal immigrants.
Speaker 4: It's costing the American taxpayer hundreds of thousands of dollars
Speaker 4: every single day to accommodate them, feed them, try to
Speaker 4: get them jobs. Some of them have no desire to
Speaker 4: be employed. And this is the Biden administration's response.
Speaker 3: What shocked me is that Biden apparently is considering using
Speaker 3: his executive powers if the number of illegals crossing the
Speaker 3: board exceeds four thousand per day.
Speaker 5: No.
Speaker 3: I think if there was one person per day crossing illegally,
Speaker 3: you've got a problem. But apparently it's not a problem
Speaker 3: until you've got four thousand and one per day.
Speaker 6: But let's be real here, right, So Trump used executive
Speaker 6: orders to close the border and put restrictions on people
Speaker 6: who had already crossed the border. Biden became president. Within
Speaker 6: a month of becoming president, he used executive orders to
Speaker 6: undo all of those orders and memorandums that Donald Trump
Speaker 6: has issued. So he's already used executive orders when it
Speaker 6: comes to the border. He could always issue another executive
Speaker 6: order when it comes to the border. But no, no, no,
Speaker 6: it should be done legislatively. Why just so we can
Speaker 6: let a few more people cross the border while you're
Speaker 6: waiting for that legislation to go through.
Speaker 1: And that's the point. He doesn't want to stem the
Speaker 1: flow of people.
Speaker 5: This is invasion by design and deliberate.
Speaker 6: The only reason that Biden would ever take action to
Speaker 6: close the border is if someone put a piece of
Speaker 6: paper in front of him that said you are guarante
Speaker 6: heed to win the next presidential election if you close
Speaker 6: the border. That is the only thing that would change
Speaker 6: his mind. Because the long term goal is you bring
Speaker 6: all of these people in.
Speaker 1: You hope one day they become a citizen.
Speaker 6: You give them jobs, and you put them up in hotels,
Speaker 6: and they are how wonderful is America? While everyone else starves?
Speaker 6: And then you hope one day they've become a citizen
Speaker 6: and therefore a voter.
Speaker 1: And who are you going to repay?
Speaker 2: Well, you know, the.
Speaker 6: Democrats were very nice to me once upon a time,
Speaker 6: and let me come to their wonderful country.
Speaker 1: Who am I going to vote for? Next?
Speaker 5: Way?
Speaker 1: He keeps letting them out.
Speaker 5: That all's got to know.
Speaker 4: With every passing day, the average Americans have been watching
Speaker 4: this happen for years now, this invasion by design.
Speaker 5: That is what it is.
Speaker 4: And that's all Trump has to talk about all the
Speaker 4: way to the White House, because Americans are sick to
Speaker 4: death of this and watching their own country transform before
Speaker 4: their eyes, not for the better. That's only has to
Speaker 4: talk about. It's a winning strategy. Nobody is voting for
Speaker 4: Biden on borders.
Speaker 3: No, what if there's a bunch of conservative Christians who
Speaker 3: live in the right to life and so on crossing
Speaker 3: the border.
Speaker 2: You reckon, Biden, shut the borders. I reckon. We're going
Speaker 2: to go to a break.
Speaker 3: When we come back, we'll look at what's making news tomorrow,
Speaker 3: including multimillion dollars sobering up centers in Melbourne completely empty.
Speaker 3: What's going on that's coming up in a moment, they're
Speaker 3: all drack.
Speaker 2: Welcome back.
Speaker 3: Let's take a look at what's making news tomorrow. Okay,
Speaker 3: if you've got the Herald Son from Melbourne.
Speaker 1: Indeed, what a great headline.
Speaker 6: Totally wasted and next to a scooter of beer there
Speaker 6: a multi million dollars sobering up centers are sitting largely empty,
Speaker 6: with just four hundred and seventeen people checking in over
Speaker 6: their first five months of operation. And what does that
Speaker 6: come to? An average of three people a day going
Speaker 6: to these centers in Collingwood and St Kilden. Now, this
Speaker 6: was part of the deal when they decided that they
Speaker 6: weren't going to have laws against public drunkenness anymore. So
Speaker 6: they decided, well, instead of locking people up putting in
Speaker 6: the cells for the night, we're going to have these
Speaker 6: sobering up centers.
Speaker 3: Let's never forget they introduced those laws on Melbourne.
Speaker 1: On Melbourne cop and what bitter day to introduce it.
Speaker 1: Let's be perfectly honest.
Speaker 6: So fifty three point four million dollars into these sobering
Speaker 6: up centers and they've had less than five hundred.
Speaker 1: People go through their doors.
Speaker 6: What are people just wandering around the streets of Melbourne
Speaker 6: drunk out of their brains? Or might it be that
Speaker 6: in the first place, the number of people who were
Speaker 6: getting locked up for public drunkenness was pretty damn low,
Speaker 6: and there was no cause for these sobering up centers
Speaker 6: to begin with.
Speaker 4: No, it's a perfect example of that knee jerk policy
Speaker 4: that we always talk about something atrocious is seen to happen,
Speaker 4: I e. Melbourne Cup, Oh the degeneracy, so much drunkenness.
Speaker 4: Let's do this now we look awesome. But there's absolutely no.
Speaker 5: Way to justify this.
Speaker 4: Over fifty three million the Allen government is now pouring
Speaker 4: into them despite.
Speaker 5: Those dismal numbers.
Speaker 4: So no one is using this, and they're still committed
Speaker 4: to pouring that money into them over the next two years.
Speaker 5: Just shut up shop. Nobody's using them. Why wasays taxpayer money.
Speaker 3: I find it hard to understand how they thought anyone
Speaker 3: would use them in the first place. If you're drunk
Speaker 3: and you're offered, we can drive you home, or we
Speaker 3: can take you to a sobering up center with a
Speaker 3: whole bunch of other else said, of course.
Speaker 2: You're going to go home. What were they think of?
Speaker 3: Some of these sobering up centers, by the way, were
Speaker 3: for Indigenous people only, and they've not been particularly frequented either.
Speaker 2: So the whole policy is just.
Speaker 6: I'm going to assume that whoever dreamed up the idea
Speaker 6: of these sobering up centers probably should have been in
Speaker 6: the sobering up center themselves at the time, because they're
Speaker 6: certainly spending like drunken sailors.
Speaker 5: Well they're still not sobering up. It's just our money anyway,
Speaker 5: so who.
Speaker 4: Cares, right, it's just taxpayer dollar, So go for your life.
Speaker 4: Alan government to the front page of the Australia now
Speaker 4: more chaotic than coherent. PM under fire on ICC, Anthony
Speaker 4: Albanezi has refused to say whether Australia would enforce the
Speaker 4: International Criminal Court arrest warrants against TOMP Israeli officials, while
Speaker 4: declaring in a chaotic press conference that his government had
Speaker 4: adopted a coherent and principled position on the war in Gaza.
Speaker 5: What position is he referring.
Speaker 1: To, I don't know, well, the one in his head. Obviously,
Speaker 1: nobody even.
Speaker 4: Knows what this government's actual position is. We certainly know
Speaker 4: it's not staunchly pro Israel.
Speaker 5: But every other day he's.
Speaker 4: Got some minister or backbencher breaking rank saying.
Speaker 5: From the river to the sea.
Speaker 4: After he said, guys, don't say that, Okay, that part
Speaker 4: we're ruling out.
Speaker 5: No, no, still going for it. He's got frontbenchers who.
Speaker 4: Are out and out supportive of Gaza and therefore, or
Speaker 4: I would argue Hamas, there is absolutely nothing coherent about
Speaker 4: this government's approach and that has been the case since
Speaker 4: October seven.
Speaker 6: Well, it's about as coherent as a Joe Barden speech really,
Speaker 6: because we had the PM the other day saying, oh,
Speaker 6: well it's not my place to comment on international court cases.
Speaker 6: I don't even talk about local court cases. Then that
Speaker 6: night Pennywong, the Foreign Minister, came out and said we
Speaker 6: support the ICC doing whatever the ICC wants to do.
Speaker 6: Now the Prime Minister says, well, I don't really know
Speaker 6: whether we'd enforced and arrest were like coherent.
Speaker 2: It's not coherent.
Speaker 3: Well, if you want incoherent, listen to this. In the article,
Speaker 3: it says asked whether Australia supported the ICC, mister Albanezi replied,
Speaker 3: the ICC exists.
Speaker 6: Pow.
Speaker 5: Wow, and do you support their right to exist? Prime Minister,
Speaker 5: I'm like another democratic nation in the Middle East.
Speaker 4: I mean, honestly, just keep saying the government has for
Speaker 4: days defended the ICC's independence. Yet we're not talking about
Speaker 4: their independence. We're asking you do you stand with them
Speaker 4: saying they're going to arrest net and Yahoo and war
Speaker 4: crimes have been committed.
Speaker 5: That is the question. This is just pure gas.
Speaker 4: Lighting and then having the temerity, after saying the ICC exists,
Speaker 4: to say.
Speaker 5: No, no, no.
Speaker 4: Our approach is completely coherent. It is very straightforward. It's
Speaker 4: in black and white options a lot about the ICC.
Speaker 3: They're about Australian policy and Australian public have the right
Speaker 3: to know what does our government think on these matters?
Speaker 3: And as for his refusal to say whether or not
Speaker 3: he would enforce an arrest warrant on Benjamin Nett and Yahoo,
Speaker 3: he's the leader of our major ally in the Middle East,
Speaker 3: didn't he last?
Speaker 2: No way to treat your friend.
Speaker 6: Look, I'm just so glad that the Prime Minister has
Speaker 6: given me exactly the answer I need. Next time someone
Speaker 6: says so like, did do you really get along with
Speaker 6: Lizen James off Air? And I'll just say, listen, James exist.
Speaker 3: Look well, since I exist, let's go to the front
Speaker 3: page of the Career do you really well?
Speaker 2: Who knows?
Speaker 3: Social media pushing kids to skip school? Teen body shame
Speaker 3: Crisis of Course News Limited papers have been leading a
Speaker 3: campaign against social media's effects on kids. The article reads,
Speaker 3: nearly half of all Australian high school students have skipped
Speaker 3: school due to poor body image, and the majority of
Speaker 3: them report that social media fuelled their insecurity shock new
Speaker 3: Butterfly Foundation research has revealed. Now the Butterfly Foundation Foundation
Speaker 3: surveyed three thousand kids aged twelve to eighteen. Fifty seven
Speaker 3: percent said they were dissatisfied with the way they looked,
Speaker 3: which I would have thought was rather low for teenagers.
Speaker 3: I would have thought it's probably higher than that.
Speaker 4: It's all the blokes being like, ah, I'm God's gift.
Speaker 4: I'm fine, mate, it's all the girls pulling down that number.
Speaker 3: But sixty two percent said social media did make them
Speaker 3: feel worse, though hardly any said it affected their use
Speaker 3: of social media, so they were willing to admit, social
Speaker 3: media makes us feel worse about ourselves, but we still
Speaker 3: use social media despite the fact it's depressing us. But
Speaker 3: fifty percent of kids staying away from school because they
Speaker 3: feel embarrassed by their physique fueled by social media is
Speaker 3: hardly a good thing for.
Speaker 6: I suspect the phenomenon exists and has always existed. Social
Speaker 6: media just exacerbates it, you know. Twenty years ago, the
Speaker 6: discussion was about whether Victoria's Secret Models and Supermodels, et
Speaker 6: cetera were creating body image problems for teenagers.
Speaker 2: About to say what school were you going to?
Speaker 6: Because they well, I didn't have Victoria's secret models.
Speaker 1: I don't know. Some of them might have grown up
Speaker 1: to be, but I haven't heard from them since then.
Speaker 1: But the problem was that they all wanted to be
Speaker 1: rake thin. Right. This was supposedly the body image ideal. Now,
Speaker 1: of course, it's.
Speaker 6: What you see on social media, and a lot of
Speaker 6: what you see on social media is completely docted because
Speaker 6: of filters that people use when they take these photos.
Speaker 6: And interestingly, there was a story on the front of
Speaker 6: the papers yesterday which we didn't get to last night,
Speaker 6: but it was around the fact that Mark Zuckerberg, the
Speaker 6: boss of Meta, which owns Facebook, personally vetoed a plan
Speaker 6: to ban certain filters on Facebook that allow you to
Speaker 6: basically look like you've had plastic surgery.
Speaker 1: Right, Because of course, it's.
Speaker 6: A weird hamster in the wheel situation where you know
Speaker 6: it hurts, but you keep going back because you get
Speaker 6: the dopamine hit every time you go on social media.
Speaker 6: But if it wasn't social media, it'd be something else.
Speaker 3: And that's a problem with social media. You're getting everybody
Speaker 3: else's highlights reel you never get. You're not getting most
Speaker 3: reality themselves on a bad day, and so you're not
Speaker 3: comparing apples with apples.
Speaker 4: Said it once, I'll say it a thousand times more.
Speaker 4: I'm sure as we keep watching this play out that
Speaker 4: we've known this for a very long time. We've known
Speaker 4: this for years and years and years. The data has
Speaker 4: been completely comprehensive, unlike our government's position on the conflict
Speaker 4: in the Middle East. But it's now that they want
Speaker 4: to do something about it. It's now that they're going
Speaker 4: so hard on it. And the reason for this is
Speaker 4: in order to implement this. That's where the digital idea
Speaker 4: which they just passed last week. Funny that how it's
Speaker 4: also beautifully timed, is going to come into play. Because
Speaker 4: the only way to enforce the ban on social media
Speaker 4: that they're talking about for underaged kids they're now talking
Speaker 4: about anyone under the age of sixteen not being allowed
Speaker 4: on there, is to use something like a digital ID.
Speaker 4: The Morrison government already talked about it in twenty twenty one,
Speaker 4: using a passport of sorts in order to use the internet,
Speaker 4: so we know who you are, we know that you're
Speaker 4: over sixteen, and we allow you access to your socials
Speaker 4: and everything else on the internet. So to me, it
Speaker 4: just seems like a very clear cut case because again
Speaker 4: we've known this for as long as social media has
Speaker 4: been around, that this is massively detrimental for our young people.
Speaker 4: They haven't cared and they haven't done anything about it
Speaker 4: for years.
Speaker 5: And years and years.
Speaker 4: Now they want to roll this out as the reason
Speaker 4: to implement something as drastic as a ban. And what
Speaker 4: does implementing such a band like that require, oh, a
Speaker 4: solution that we've been waiting to roll out for absolutely ages.
Speaker 6: Asked about whether social media was a problem, Anthony Albanezi said,
Speaker 6: social media exists very quickly. Before we get to the
Speaker 6: break the cans post tomorrow, crocodile accident is the headline.
Speaker 6: The state's environmental body is investigating reports to Saltwater crocodiles
Speaker 6: were accidentally quote unquote released into the Barren River.
Speaker 1: Accidentally released.
Speaker 6: How does a crocodile just sort of woops happen to
Speaker 6: be at accidentally released into the river? I mean someone
Speaker 6: just unfilled it off the back of the trailer or what.
Speaker 3: The crocodile slipped I believe into a popular swimming area
Speaker 3: as well, we're going to go to a break when
Speaker 3: we come back.
Speaker 2: That portrait of King Charles.
Speaker 3: You thought that was bad, wait until you see what
Speaker 3: they've done to Princess Kate. It's coming up in a moment.
Speaker 3: Welcome back, okayleb I was not much good at art
Speaker 3: at school?
Speaker 2: How are you?
Speaker 6: I was absolutely I was going to use words that
Speaker 6: starts with east and eat in house.
Speaker 1: But that's why I became a journalist. No good at Matt's,
Speaker 1: no good at art.
Speaker 6: I can deal with words, But I mean, you saw
Speaker 6: the King's new portrait the other day, right, all done
Speaker 6: up in redd. It's a bizarre looking by would the
Speaker 6: King I'd be commissioning a new one, but they've done
Speaker 6: one better now. Tatler Magazine has commissioned a portrait of
Speaker 6: Princess Catherine, the Princess of Wales.
Speaker 1: Have a look at that thing. It does not book
Speaker 1: any Princess Catherine.
Speaker 6: It was done by British zam ambient artist Hannah Usor.
Speaker 1: Apparently it's based on.
Speaker 6: Her dressing up for the first date dinner after King
Speaker 6: Charles the third was coronated.
Speaker 5: What is that?
Speaker 4: Okay, wild theory that just came to mind as I'm
Speaker 4: looking at it there did.
Speaker 5: This Is.
Speaker 4: This artist pro the Sussexes instead of because what.
Speaker 5: Looks more like Meghan than it does? Like, hey, it's
Speaker 5: a plant. I'm telling you that. That just occurred to me,
Speaker 5: and I think we're onto something here.
Speaker 3: What we need to mention is the artist was in
Speaker 3: the Melbourne Sobering Up Center.
Speaker 6: And when I asked if she'd ever actually seen Princess
Speaker 6: Katherine said, Princess Catherine exists.
Speaker 3: Well just on that she had never actually seen Princess Catherine.
Speaker 3: She did it from photographs and videos, and she claims
Speaker 3: that she was trying to capture the strength and dignity
Speaker 3: of the princess. She I think she achieved a sloppy
Speaker 3: schoolgirls art project.
Speaker 4: Well, mate, I'm good at stick figures. They're my strong point.
Speaker 4: And I still reckon I should I could have captured
Speaker 4: Kate's likeness better than that.
Speaker 1: So it should have just had a competition in all
Speaker 1: the schools and you see who can come up. Oh yeah, right, well.
Speaker 3: That's all from us, but don't go anywhere to stick around.
Speaker 3: Coming up in just a moment is the Rita Pennehesho