Speaker 1: Wait, welcome the Late Debates. Well, good evening and thanks
Speaker 1: for joining us on the Late Debate.
Speaker 2: James Macpherson with Liz Storer and filling in for Caleb
Speaker 2: Bond Danika di Georgio coming up tonight. Did you know
Speaker 2: you can be fined in Victoria for using your vacuum
Speaker 2: cleaner after ten pm? That's right, that's on the law
Speaker 2: books in Victoria, plus a lot of other crazy laws.
Speaker 2: Will bring to you a little later when we look
Speaker 2: at what's making news tomorrow. Adam Bant, of course is
Speaker 2: out of parliament. That's big news in all of tomorrow's papers,
Speaker 2: and of course Anthony Albanezi reshuffling his front bench.
Speaker 1: We'll get to all of that soon.
Speaker 2: But in big news from Queensland, experts want to make
Speaker 2: smacking your child a criminal offense. I hope my parents
Speaker 2: aren't watching because if this gets up, they could be
Speaker 2: in a lot of trouble.
Speaker 3: Actually think, hey, is it retrospective?
Speaker 1: Can can we make you retrospect? I've got to be honest, Liz,
Speaker 1: I just hope my kids aren't watching this.
Speaker 4: Currently, laws provide a key defense against assault charges when
Speaker 4: striking kids, allowing for reasonable corporal punishment, but experts want
Speaker 4: that defense scrapped, saying children deserve to have the same
Speaker 4: protections against assault as adults or pet.
Speaker 2: So here's the thrust of the argument from the Queensland
Speaker 2: Law Reform Commission, who are reviewing smacking laws nationally. They
Speaker 2: say smacking should be against the law because it's akin
Speaker 2: to beating.
Speaker 1: Wives and slaves.
Speaker 2: That's according to more than one hundred health and welfare
Speaker 2: experts who have had input into this review of domestic
Speaker 2: discipline laws lives. I just think keep experts away from
Speaker 2: parenting of children. But anyway, what do you think should
Speaker 2: smacking be illegal?
Speaker 3: Spare the rod, spoil the child.
Speaker 5: This is how kids have been disciplined for centuries, to
Speaker 5: great effects.
Speaker 3: And nobody knows a child better than its parents.
Speaker 5: So every parent knows there's plenty of really soft natured kids.
Speaker 5: One stern word and that precious bottom lip comes out.
Speaker 5: It's all over, discipline done. But if you're unfortunate like
Speaker 5: my parents.
Speaker 3: Were, to have a child like me, you need to.
Speaker 5: Employ some physical discipline.
Speaker 3: I was one of those kids.
Speaker 5: I tested them on a daily basis, and Lord knows,
Speaker 5: I'm sorry as an adult, but in our house it
Speaker 5: was Proverbs twenty thirty, which stays blues that wound cleanse
Speaker 5: away evil and strokes mets make clean the most inner parts.
Speaker 3: That's what my mum would say.
Speaker 5: She's like, strikes cleanse the inner parts. Ie, this is discipline.
Speaker 5: None of the other kids got smacked half as much
Speaker 5: as I did.
Speaker 3: But I was one of those.
Speaker 5: Kids, and parents know when they've got one of those
Speaker 5: kids and a good smack is called for. And I
Speaker 5: find that incredibly ironic that this is coming from the
Speaker 5: state that has the worst.
Speaker 3: Juvenile crime rate in the nation.
Speaker 5: One wonders if those parents had employed a few smacks
Speaker 5: in their younger years, if those.
Speaker 3: Juveniles would be acting out in the way that they are.
Speaker 5: It's tried, it's true, and like I say, it's not forever, Rekid,
Speaker 5: But I'd love to know how many of these healthcare
Speaker 5: experts and whatever they consider themselves are parents and b
Speaker 5: have parented a strong willed child.
Speaker 2: I can imagine why you would have needed a lot
Speaker 2: of smacks growing up, Lizbeth Denika, I'm sure you would
Speaker 2: never have needed discipline.
Speaker 6: No, I was actually a really good kid, as you
Speaker 6: can probably imagine.
Speaker 7: I was an angel, you know, I was.
Speaker 6: I was to be fair, I think maybe my parents
Speaker 6: smacked me maybe once, and I never did it again.
Speaker 6: I was just well, kid, oh god, I want kid.
Speaker 6: One little smack. Now, look, here's what I will say.
Speaker 7: This is what bothered me about these so called experts.
Speaker 7: It's one line.
Speaker 6: It says the experts said in their submission that corporal
Speaker 6: punishment is ineffective, harmful, and a violation of children's rights. Now,
Speaker 6: this is what these experts don't understand. There is a
Speaker 6: very big difference between child abuse, where a child is
Speaker 6: actually physically harmed, to a little tap a tap a
Speaker 6: minu smack, two very contrasting things. And this is what
Speaker 6: they don't understand here. Let parents be parents, Let parents
Speaker 6: be the judge. Let parents decide what is best for
Speaker 6: their kids.
Speaker 7: There is nothing.
Speaker 6: Wrong, in my opinion, with a little tap. Don't do
Speaker 6: that again. In fact, what I think is even more
Speaker 6: concerning is the soft parenting these days. You go to
Speaker 6: the shops and you've got these little devils running around
Speaker 6: driving everybody nuts, and you've got the parents going, oh, love, no,
Speaker 6: please don't do that. I've asked you really nicely. Drives
Speaker 6: me insay, that is worse. If that was my kid
Speaker 6: to go do that again, try that one again.
Speaker 7: But this is the problem. It's soft parenting. So I
Speaker 7: actually think that is worse than a.
Speaker 6: Little smack, a little bit of discipline, and actually talking
Speaker 6: to my parents about this, and my dad even raised
Speaker 6: a good point is that when I was at.
Speaker 7: School, we used to get the bellots, we used to.
Speaker 6: Get the gray can. Let me tell you this, we
Speaker 6: never did it again. We pulled our socks up. So
Speaker 6: discipline so that they don't grow up being little devils.
Speaker 2: Tell you, I've been at the shops, I've seen the
Speaker 2: kids you're talking about, and I've felt like volunteering to
Speaker 2: you know, have.
Speaker 1: You go at smacking that child.
Speaker 2: I think the experts here are confusing a couple of things.
Speaker 2: They're confusing discipline with violence. So they make the point
Speaker 2: that smacking your child sends the message that violence is acceptable,
Speaker 2: except any normal parent when they smack their child, it's
Speaker 2: not an active violence, it's an active discipline. Those two
Speaker 2: things are very different. The second thing they're confusing.
Speaker 1: Is love with abuse.
Speaker 2: Yes, you don't smack your child because you want to
Speaker 2: abuse your child. You smack your child because you love
Speaker 2: your child enough to correct them and to teach them
Speaker 2: boundaries and consequences exactly. You don't discipline your child because
Speaker 2: you don't love them. You discipline them because you do.
Speaker 2: I used to go to a Christian school and we
Speaker 2: used to get the paddle if we misbehaved, and one
Speaker 2: time the entire class got the paddle. We played war
Speaker 2: at lunchtime. We're throwing rocks at each other's heads and sticks.
Speaker 1: Everything in the class. I was the first one.
Speaker 7: Right, how many times did you get the paddle?
Speaker 2: So here was the thing we were eached to get
Speaker 2: four wax on the bum with the paddle, right, this
Speaker 2: is grade five. I get taken in first, I bend over,
Speaker 2: and what they did was they would hit you, and
Speaker 2: then you would have to give the teacher a hug
Speaker 2: and say thank you for caring enough about me to
Speaker 2: discipline me.
Speaker 1: And then they were there, so they were correcting you
Speaker 1: full on.
Speaker 2: Here anyway, I got smacked twice, by which point they
Speaker 2: meant to be four. But I cried so much they
Speaker 2: couldn't bear smack me again. But because I was first up,
Speaker 2: they couldn't smack me twice and everyone else four times,
Speaker 2: So I was the hero of the class.
Speaker 3: Name about punishment, you know.
Speaker 6: The problem with it's this soft approach, right, The kids
Speaker 6: do actually grow up to be little brats thinking that
Speaker 6: the world revolves around them because they've never had any discipline,
Speaker 6: they've never had someone to this is right from wrong.
Speaker 6: Don't do this again, and this is the problem, and
Speaker 6: I do. I think you raise a good point. There's
Speaker 6: a difference between love and child abuse and that and
Speaker 6: let parents make that say.
Speaker 1: Don't know the difference you've got. No, you should be
Speaker 1: a parent, parents, but you.
Speaker 7: Shouldn't be a parent if you don't know the difference.
Speaker 1: As well.
Speaker 2: The other thing they say to the commission's review is
Speaker 2: they say that smacking is quote out of step with
Speaker 2: current societal beliefs. Will God help us if everyone's got
Speaker 2: a parent their kids according to current societal beliefs, because
Speaker 2: that's just going to be, you know, lowest common denominator, right, Exactly,
Speaker 2: you parent your children according to the principles of your
Speaker 2: family and what you genuinely believe is in the best
Speaker 2: interests of your child, not according to a poll taken
Speaker 2: by experts of what everybody reckons should happen.
Speaker 3: Yeah, usually ridiculous.
Speaker 5: And I always say on these topics, if you want
Speaker 5: to talk to me about children's rights. You're all better
Speaker 5: be avid supporters of pro life because surely we can
Speaker 5: read that the right to life trump's all rights. Surely well, no,
Speaker 5: not if your New South Wales mlc Amanda Cone. She's
Speaker 5: tabled a bill in Parliament which is being debated this evening,
Speaker 5: which would make it impossible for any hospital in Australia
Speaker 5: to refuse to facilitate abortions. There are other elements of
Speaker 5: this amendment to the abortion laws here in New South Wales,
Speaker 5: but that is one of the primary ones. And of
Speaker 5: course this poses a huge problem because there are over
Speaker 5: eighty five hospitals here in Australia that are operated by
Speaker 5: the Catholic Church. There are obviously other hospitals that are
Speaker 5: run by other.
Speaker 3: Faiths, so we know who this bill.
Speaker 5: Is targeting, which is why last night, when the second
Speaker 5: rally opposing this bill took place on the steps of
Speaker 5: New South Wales Parliament, you can see.
Speaker 3: The crowds there. There were thousands in attendance. This was a.
Speaker 5: Gigantuan effort by the pre eminent pro life voice here
Speaker 5: in Australia, doctor Joanna Howell. She's led the charge on
Speaker 5: opposing this bill, and who shows up to speak strongly
Speaker 5: to this issue none other than former Prime Minister Tony
Speaker 5: Abbot himself.
Speaker 3: Here's what he had to say.
Speaker 8: May God bless you, May God bless our country, and
Speaker 8: may God bless our society from this shameful act of decline.
Speaker 1: I deem you were ready to think that there are.
Speaker 3: Thousands tell you his country and the sud It's a
Speaker 3: shameful attempt to cancel Christianity.
Speaker 7: It's an assault on our fundamental rights.
Speaker 8: And freedoms, and my friends, it must be fought.
Speaker 3: It must be.
Speaker 5: Fought here here, Tony Abbot. Now we all know that
Speaker 5: abortion is readily available and incredibly affordable throughout the nation
Speaker 5: thanks to government subsidies your tax dollar, whether you agree
Speaker 5: with it or not.
Speaker 3: So we know.
Speaker 5: Again who this bill is targeting. And Tony Abbott didn't
Speaker 5: waste words once again when he.
Speaker 3: Was speaking to Kredlin on this issue last night.
Speaker 8: It's trying to force health professionals with a conscientious objection
Speaker 8: to abortion to facilitate, not just to refer, but to
Speaker 8: actually facilitate people having abortions. Fundamentally, it's designed to force
Speaker 8: Christian people out of the healthcare system. It's designed to
Speaker 8: force Catholic and other Christian hospitals, other religious hospitals out
Speaker 8: of the healthcare system unless they are to sacrifice their principles.
Speaker 5: Good news tonight that part of the bill that provision
Speaker 5: that Amanda Cone has put up has been defeated, the
Speaker 5: one that would have given powers to the health minister
Speaker 5: in New South Wales to force all hospitals to facilitate abortions.
Speaker 3: But as doctor Joanna.
Speaker 5: How explained to Kredlin this evening, there are three elements
Speaker 5: of this bill that must be defeated.
Speaker 3: Have a watch. You mentioned four elements of the bill.
Speaker 7: You're defeated one. What are the other three?
Speaker 1: Look?
Speaker 9: The second aspect of the bill removes all to hard
Speaker 9: to keeping requirements on abortion, just essentially pushes it underground.
Speaker 9: The third element forces doctors to be involved in abortion
Speaker 9: that to actively transfer, which makes them morally complicit. And
Speaker 9: the fourth element, which is the one I'm most worried about,
Speaker 9: because my sources tell me that this is the one
Speaker 9: that Chris Mins and Labor want to push through, is
Speaker 9: the ability to turn nurses and midwives into abortioness if
Speaker 9: this passes, this will make it even easier to end
Speaker 9: the lives of innocent babies in this state.
Speaker 5: Indeed, at the moment, you must be a doctor in
Speaker 5: order to perform abortions here in Australia.
Speaker 3: This bill seeks to change that as well.
Speaker 5: Strength to the arm of absolutely everyone opposing this, Like
Speaker 5: I say, it's already available, already affordable throughout the nation.
Speaker 5: This bill is an absolute abomination and I hope none
Speaker 5: of these amendments to the abortion laws here in New
Speaker 5: South Wales get up.
Speaker 2: New South Wales already has incredibly liberal abortion laws.
Speaker 3: Abortion does yes right up until.
Speaker 2: The point of birth, and yet the Greens say no, no,
Speaker 2: that's not enough. The Greens want abortion to be available
Speaker 2: within a reasonable distance of everybody within New South Wales.
Speaker 2: It's not enough that abortion is not illegal. They want
Speaker 2: it to be a medical right, as if it's healthcare.
Speaker 2: In fact, the Australian College of Midwives who support this
Speaker 2: bill so that midwives who are charged with delivering babies
Speaker 2: would also be empowered to end the life of a
Speaker 2: baby before it's born. They describe abortion as quote unquote
Speaker 2: abortion care, and so not only are babies being killed,
Speaker 2: the English language is dying as well. The idea that
Speaker 2: they would remove all data is no accountability to know
Speaker 2: how many abortions are happening. What about babies born alive
Speaker 2: that's been a big issue after a foiled abortion, there
Speaker 2: would be no data on that.
Speaker 3: I can understand what they.
Speaker 1: Do to be made public.
Speaker 2: And of course the Greens MP who's pushing this, lamented
Speaker 2: the fact that only three of two hundred and twenty
Speaker 2: public hospitals in New South Wales routinely provide abortion and
Speaker 2: advertise the facts. So the Greens want hospitals to be
Speaker 2: advertised in the fact that you can get an abortion
Speaker 2: here as if, as I said, this is a standard
Speaker 2: healthcare practice. Tony Abbott once said abortion should be legal
Speaker 2: but rare. The Greens seem to want to make it
Speaker 2: not only legal, but a human right and abundant.
Speaker 7: Yeah.
Speaker 6: Look, I've got to admit I'm a bit different to
Speaker 6: you both when it comes to the abortion issue. I
Speaker 6: do not have an issue with medical abortions up to
Speaker 6: nine weeks, which is the general standard. It is something
Speaker 6: that I believe, you know, that's just my personal opinion.
Speaker 6: I firmly believe that a woman should have a choice.
Speaker 6: It is a woman's body. She should be able to
Speaker 6: do what she wants with it. However, I do. I
Speaker 6: do take issue with this Greens bill. I take a
Speaker 6: lot of issue with it because a woman, in my opinion,
Speaker 6: should have right to go to a facility to have
Speaker 6: an abortion if that is what she wants.
Speaker 7: To do at a safe facility.
Speaker 6: However, the issue is that they should not expect religious
Speaker 6: staff or people of faith, or midwives or nurses who
Speaker 6: do not want to terminate a child.
Speaker 7: Then I believe that they shouldn't have to.
Speaker 6: Then they shouldn't be going to those places, and those
Speaker 6: workers should not have to if their conscience says I
Speaker 6: cannot go ahead with this, then we should be able
Speaker 6: to respect that. I think the Greens are very dangerous
Speaker 6: to ram this bill through. The Greens have been dangerous
Speaker 6: on this issue. And I'll even admit that if though
Speaker 6: I have my personal views on it, putting healthcare workers
Speaker 6: in an impossible position, I just cannot even imagine what
Speaker 6: that decision would be like. I mean, imagine being faced
Speaker 6: with that impossible choice. So I think the Greens have
Speaker 6: taken this to an absolute new level. I do not
Speaker 6: agree with that, but if you're asking me for my
Speaker 6: opinion on it, then I don't have a problem with
Speaker 6: a medical abortion up to nine weeks.
Speaker 2: Well, the Greens certainly want to push the limits on.
Speaker 3: This and.
Speaker 5: Unfortunately that Danika, A lot of people would support that.
Speaker 5: It's a very secular view, that's that's what a lot
Speaker 5: of people would rally behind. But unfortunately, in every single
Speaker 5: state and territory in Australia.
Speaker 7: That's not the law.
Speaker 3: The law is far more liberal about late term abortion.
Speaker 7: Which I disagree with.
Speaker 3: I would put that on the red talking eye.
Speaker 5: I agree, and they still want to believe, oh club ourselves.
Speaker 6: I totally agree late term abortions make me feel sick.
Speaker 7: I completely disagree with that. It makes me feel absolutely sick.
Speaker 6: Talking medical abortions up to nine weeks, I'm not talking.
Speaker 6: I completely agree there, and I do think it is dangerous.
Speaker 2: I'm definitely curious to see how a Catholic premiere in
Speaker 2: chris Min's well will handle this problem.
Speaker 6: The problem is a very difficult topic, very difficult topic
Speaker 6: for politicians.
Speaker 7: None of them want to get involved in it. And
Speaker 7: you look what happened in the Queens.
Speaker 6: But the Queens, look what happened to David Chris Afay
Speaker 6: right David Chris a fall in Queensland This was raised
Speaker 6: during the Queensland election campaign and it could have been
Speaker 6: a disaster for the L and p up in Queensland
Speaker 6: because I don't want to touch it because it is
Speaker 6: such a sensitive issue. Well gut for no, gut for sure, No,
Speaker 6: but to.
Speaker 5: Get out in politics every hot topic is you're going
Speaker 5: to be like, oh, I care about saving my own
Speaker 5: hide more than standing up for what's right.
Speaker 3: That's what we saw in Crucify.
Speaker 5: I said for shame then and I repeat it now,
Speaker 5: like for shame. If you aren't going to stand by
Speaker 5: your convictions best in the past, when it's actually going
Speaker 5: to cost you, then guess what, you don't have it.
Speaker 6: No, look I don't disagree with that, but look it's
Speaker 6: a topic that politicians purchased, male politicians of particular, I
Speaker 6: hate talking about and I can understand why.
Speaker 7: But look, let's move on.
Speaker 6: We need to talk about the latest of course, with
Speaker 6: Jacinta Nampa Jim for Price, because this evening she gave
Speaker 6: that bombshell news that she was leaving the Nationals Party
Speaker 6: going to join the Liberal Party, saying that she wants
Speaker 6: to help rebuild of course, after the shocking election loss.
Speaker 6: At the weekend, here she was speaking to Peter Kredline
Speaker 6: a little earlier.
Speaker 10: I've always felt like the Liberal Party room is my
Speaker 10: natural home, given you know, the Liberal Party is the
Speaker 10: freedom Party, the party of responsibility. Given the current circumstances,
Speaker 10: I think now more than ever, when it's strong people
Speaker 10: within the Liberal Party, we need to be able to rebuild.
Speaker 10: We need to ensure that we don't lose support.
Speaker 6: Now, she sort of foreshadowed this news earlier in the week,
Speaker 6: and you can imagine she has great leadership ambition. She
Speaker 6: is one of the very rare voices of reason in
Speaker 6: this country.
Speaker 7: Now.
Speaker 6: It has been reported that she could run on a
Speaker 6: unity ticket with Angus Taylor, who set to be running
Speaker 6: for the leadership role of the coalition, and running with
Speaker 6: her as his deputy otherwise if not, of course, says
Speaker 6: Susan Lee in play, possibly Dan Tean, But you'd think
Speaker 6: with the star power that Jacinder Price brings, it's a
Speaker 6: pretty good unity ticket to be running on. No matter
Speaker 6: what you think about Angus Taylor. The problem is where
Speaker 6: does this leave the Nationals. The Nationals leader David little
Speaker 6: Proud put out a statement this evening saying that he
Speaker 6: was very disappointed by the decision.
Speaker 7: But it was Matt Canavan.
Speaker 6: Earlier on he told The Daily Telegraph he described Jaciner
Speaker 6: Price as being like the Lydia Thorpe of the Nationals Party.
Speaker 7: But here he was on Shari and he didn't hold back.
Speaker 11: She's doing a sperm She's doing this for her the rubbish.
Speaker 11: She's doing it for her ambition and good luck to her,
Speaker 11: good luck to her. But people are sick and tired
Speaker 11: of that. She's going to run for a party she
Speaker 11: hasn't even not even a member of yet, She's not
Speaker 11: even a member of yet she's going to.
Speaker 7: Run for the leader of that party.
Speaker 11: Just a week ago Jacenta was using National's party funds
Speaker 11: to be elected.
Speaker 6: Now I've got to sales surprised by those comments by
Speaker 6: Matt Canavan. Why can't she have leadership ambitions and who's
Speaker 6: to say that she won't do well? I think that
Speaker 6: just enterprise, as I said, is one of the only
Speaker 6: voices of reason.
Speaker 7: In this country.
Speaker 6: She basically single handedly won it for the No campaign
Speaker 6: during the Voice to Parliament referendum. She inspired Australians and
Speaker 6: I also think that she is a leader who unites
Speaker 6: this country.
Speaker 7: She doesn't see us by the color of our skin.
Speaker 7: She doesn't want to divide us by race. She says
Speaker 7: we are all one.
Speaker 6: She says we need to stand in front of the
Speaker 6: Australian flag.
Speaker 7: She wants to make Australia great again.
Speaker 1: Who would have thought, what a.
Speaker 6: Revelation making Australia great again. But this is a woman
Speaker 6: that I honestly think people could look up to. Young
Speaker 6: women in particular can also look up to her. Now,
Speaker 6: the issue here is how this all plays out, in
Speaker 6: particular with the Nationals Party. Now, if you've got Matt
Speaker 6: people like Matt Canavan already speaking out. Now, we know
Speaker 6: that the Nationals did quite well over the weekend in
Speaker 6: the election. The majority of them actually won their seats
Speaker 6: except for Peren Davy for example.
Speaker 7: But they're the ones.
Speaker 6: Actually propping up the coalition at the moment because the
Speaker 6: Liberals have not done very well. Does this now threaten
Speaker 6: to put a split in the party should she indeed
Speaker 6: run on this.
Speaker 7: Unity ticket, I'm not sure. I don't know.
Speaker 6: Where this leads the coalition, but that leadership showdown is
Speaker 6: happening to get ten am on Tuesday morning, so get
Speaker 6: your popcorn ready. But I think she would be brilliant.
Speaker 6: I honestly think she could be a future prime minis Weet.
Speaker 1: Well, here's my question.
Speaker 2: I'll ask you this, Liz, Are we a little hypocritical
Speaker 2: on this one? Because I imagine that you will say this
Speaker 2: is great, this is her opportunity to be thrown into
Speaker 2: national leadership, et cetera, et cetera. But I remember Fatama
Speaker 2: Payment when she left the Labor Party. She'd been elected
Speaker 2: as a Labor senator, then went independent, and we all
Speaker 2: said that's wrong. If you're elected for a particular party,
Speaker 2: you shouldn't then switch your being dishonest, you're letting down voters.
Speaker 2: But now I suspect we're going to applaud Senator Price
Speaker 2: for doing the exact same thing.
Speaker 1: Is there a difference?
Speaker 5: Well, I can't remember what I said about that of
Speaker 5: a payment, but she was kind of ejected really as
Speaker 5: well when it came to that Green PORP.
Speaker 2: We typically have criticized people who are elected to one
Speaker 2: party and then they move to become independents.
Speaker 1: What's the difference here with what Senator Price is doing.
Speaker 3: I don't know that I have.
Speaker 5: I remember supporting Corey Bernardi when he split with the
Speaker 5: Libs because he'd tried for well over a decade to
Speaker 5: affect change within he'd clearly given up, and that guy
Speaker 5: already had his own brand, And I argue, then I
Speaker 5: batched the renegade. I was like, good on you, you already
Speaker 5: have your own brand. You think you can do better
Speaker 5: by Australia by making this move, And he had a
Speaker 5: good go of it until he just bowed out.
Speaker 3: But I would say the same of Justinter.
Speaker 5: She thinks she can affect more change doing it this way.
Speaker 3: It's about the welfare of the nation. It's not just.
Speaker 5: About Canavan, which I found very disappointing.
Speaker 3: You know, I love you, Matt, back you.
Speaker 5: All the way, but on this one, I just thought
Speaker 5: it sounded like sour grape. She's still in the coalition
Speaker 5: family and in position like she may well go on
Speaker 5: to win with the Liberal Party. I mean, they'd be
Speaker 5: nuts not to give her a leadership position, even though
Speaker 5: she'd be brand new in the Libs, although I dare
Speaker 5: say for most Australians it would be a massive surprise
Speaker 5: for them to learn she's.
Speaker 7: Not a LIB already.
Speaker 5: I mean most of us think of just Inter number
Speaker 5: Jipper Prices already being a LIB.
Speaker 3: So she's coming home.
Speaker 5: Basically, I think that's how most people will see it.
Speaker 3: But I got to say.
Speaker 5: Personally, I'm disappointed because my dream team in about two
Speaker 5: terms time was Prime Minister Andrew Hasty with Just Centerprice
Speaker 5: as deputy. Because we know deputy must go to a
Speaker 5: NAT that's the nature of the coalition agreement.
Speaker 3: So my dreams have been crushed today.
Speaker 6: Can I just answer your question that you just about
Speaker 6: Fatima Payment and the difference? This is what I think
Speaker 6: when Fatima Payment defected from Labor, she defected but.
Speaker 7: Was running on in my opinion, not a.
Speaker 6: Platform for all Australians because she was looking to put
Speaker 6: Muslim vote first. She was running on a platform to
Speaker 6: support Gaza, to support Palestine, whereas de center Price is
Speaker 6: running on a platform.
Speaker 7: For all Australians. Yeah, and that name is the.
Speaker 6: Big difference between Fatima Payment and just Center put.
Speaker 2: The other difference is if you're moving from the Nationals
Speaker 2: to the Liberal Party, you could argue it's almost zero
Speaker 2: difference at all in terms of if you've voted for
Speaker 2: this Enter Price, you wouldn't feel like suddenly she's on
Speaker 2: a completely different platform. Surect and my interests are not
Speaker 2: going to be represented the way I think what they
Speaker 2: would be it's the same thing, just a different strike.
Speaker 6: Yeah, but it was very different with Fatama payment because
Speaker 6: that wasn't for Australia first.
Speaker 2: Indeed, well, the people in the UK are celebrating ve Day,
Speaker 2: the end of the Second World War, but I'm not
Speaker 2: sure those celebrating eighty years ago would have imagined that.
Speaker 1: In twenty twenty.
Speaker 2: Five, about half of Brits would say, you know what,
Speaker 2: if there was a war today, we wouldn't fight for
Speaker 2: our country, not under any circumstances. And yet that's exactly
Speaker 2: what a recent poll has found. Forty eight percent of
Speaker 2: people polled in the UK said under no circumstances would
Speaker 2: they ever be willing to take up arms to go
Speaker 2: to war. The numbers are particularly large amongst young people
Speaker 2: aged eighteen to twenty four.
Speaker 1: I guess back in at the end of.
Speaker 2: World War two people would have been shopped, but I'm
Speaker 2: not sure where that's surprised these days to hear that
Speaker 2: result here in Australia. In twenty twenty four, the IPA
Speaker 2: did a survey and found that fully thirty percent of
Speaker 2: Australian said they wouldn't bother fighting for this country. In fact,
Speaker 2: forty six percent said if a war broke out, they
Speaker 2: would get out of the country as quickly as they could,
Speaker 2: rather than stay and defend it.
Speaker 1: And I think the reason goes Liz to the.
Speaker 2: Point that you fight for what is yours, But if
Speaker 2: you don't feel like the country is yours, if you
Speaker 2: feel like it's been handed over to I don't know,
Speaker 2: globalists and being run by technocrats in Brussels, if you
Speaker 2: feel like the political system no longer listens to ordinary
Speaker 2: people but has its own agenda, where they give lip
Speaker 2: service to the will of the majority but continually just
Speaker 2: do their own thing anyway, Eventually you start to feel
Speaker 2: quite disenfranchised, and you start saying things like, and I
Speaker 2: hear this all the time at my local coffee shop,
Speaker 2: this isn't the country it used to be, and we're
Speaker 2: surprised people wouldn't fight for it.
Speaker 3: I'm not surprised at all.
Speaker 5: Nobody signs up to die for a melting pot of
Speaker 5: cultures and creeds, some of which openly hate their guts,
Speaker 5: and others they simply have no affinity with whatsoever they
Speaker 5: can't find common ground. To be clear, this has nothing
Speaker 5: to do with the color of anyone's skin and the
Speaker 5: complete lack and everything to do.
Speaker 3: I should say, with the complete.
Speaker 5: Lack of assimilation that governments throughout the West now require
Speaker 5: on the immigrants that flood into the West from all
Speaker 5: different countries around the world. This is now being seen
Speaker 5: in militaries around the world.
Speaker 3: No one wants to sign up.
Speaker 5: Britain is about to see historic lows in their armed forces,
Speaker 5: not seen since the Neapoleonic era.
Speaker 1: And we all know why.
Speaker 5: It was Jolly Lowe back there and everyone was dead.
Speaker 5: But in this case it's simply people looking around going
Speaker 5: I would fight for my country if it was still
Speaker 5: my country. But exactly like you say, people feel completely disenfranchised.
Speaker 3: Wars of the past were.
Speaker 5: Fought by men and women who went to war for
Speaker 5: a homogeneous culture. When they said they were fighting for
Speaker 5: God and country, they meant one God, and by country
Speaker 5: they met culture. We know that a country isn't a
Speaker 5: slab of land. If I took Sweden and filled it
Speaker 5: with Arabs, would it still be Sweden. No, no one's
Speaker 5: speaking Swedish, no one's eating Swedish food.
Speaker 3: There's nothing Swedish about it anymore. If I took Mexico
Speaker 3: and filled it with.
Speaker 5: Say, pakistanis just plucking one out of the air as
Speaker 5: an example, there would that still be Mexico.
Speaker 3: No, And so in these Western cultures.
Speaker 5: That have methodically seen their own government facilitate that Western cultures.
Speaker 3: Demise in their own country.
Speaker 5: Naturally they're like, no, fifteen years ago, Yes, I would
Speaker 5: have fought for this country and died in a ditch happily.
Speaker 3: And I'm one of those people.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's funny.
Speaker 2: There's a big discussion at the moment right around the
Speaker 2: Western world about the need to rearm right and so
Speaker 2: in Europe they're spending more money on defense.
Speaker 1: Here in Australia, it's in the news regularly.
Speaker 2: What we're not talking about, what we're talking about munitions, reilement.
Speaker 2: But there's a cultural realmment that needs to take place.
Speaker 6: The other issue is is that I think we are
Speaker 6: same here at Australia and obviously in the UK.
Speaker 7: We've been educated to be ashamed of our history.
Speaker 1: That's the cultural realment.
Speaker 6: And this is exactly and this is the problem, and
Speaker 6: it's coming from classrooms, it's coming from universities. Kids from
Speaker 6: such a young age are being brainwashed to hate this
Speaker 6: country and think that we are the enemy. And this
Speaker 6: is where this is where the problems start. And the
Speaker 6: other issue is that kids wouldn't even know what they
Speaker 6: are fighting for these days. They don't understand what it
Speaker 6: would be like to be patriotic for your country because
Speaker 6: they're told that they should be a shamed for the
Speaker 6: country that they that they were raised.
Speaker 2: And we thought Adam band who's now out of Parlia, well,
Speaker 2: Adam Banter, remember the leader of a fairly major political
Speaker 2: party in this country, and refuse to stand in front
Speaker 2: of an Australian flag.
Speaker 7: This is what I mean.
Speaker 6: And you're going to toll your it's your fault. You
Speaker 6: have to apologize to the stolen generation. You've got kids
Speaker 6: saying no, you have to apologize. No wonder and you've
Speaker 6: got at rallies they're saying bring down the colony.
Speaker 3: Colony.
Speaker 7: I hope the colony dies. The colony is us. We
Speaker 7: are the colony. And this is the problem.
Speaker 2: Well, speaking of problems, we've got one less problem with
Speaker 2: Joe Biden no longer in the White House, but he
Speaker 2: hasn't gone away completely. He sat down for a long
Speaker 2: form interview with the BBC and I was surprised at
Speaker 2: how lucid he was sounding. He actually managed to put
Speaker 2: whole sentences together. Here's a little bit of what he
Speaker 2: had to say. I found this interesting. He talked about
Speaker 2: his decision to walk away from the leadership of the
Speaker 2: Democrat Party into not contest, thereby allowing Kamala Harris to
Speaker 2: run for president. Should you have withdrawn earlier given someone
Speaker 2: else a bigger job?
Speaker 12: I don't think it would have.
Speaker 3: Mattered.
Speaker 12: I remember what I said when I started that I
Speaker 12: think is I'm preparing to hand this to the next generation.
Speaker 12: It's a transition government. But things move so quickly that
Speaker 12: it made it difficult to walk away. It was a
Speaker 12: hard decision.
Speaker 1: But regrets.
Speaker 12: No. I think it was a great decision.
Speaker 2: Joe Biden making it sound like it was his decision
Speaker 2: to walk away, I'm not so sure. I seem to
Speaker 2: remember an article by George Clooney that seemed to have
Speaker 2: a fairly powerful effect mobilizing the left to get rid
Speaker 2: of him. But of course Joe Biden now saying things
Speaker 2: moved quickly, they are moving quickly. Trump's been in office
Speaker 2: for one hundred days and Biden, by his own admission,
Speaker 2: hasn't got a clue what the hell is going on.
Speaker 12: The way we talk about now that, well, it's just
Speaker 12: the Gulf of America. Maybe we're going to have to
Speaker 12: take back Panama, Maybe we need to acquire Greenland, maybe
Speaker 12: Canada should be if what the hell's going on here?
Speaker 2: He spent four years of his termament is pretty much
Speaker 2: saying what the hell is going on?
Speaker 3: Didn't he indeed?
Speaker 5: And for him to talk about it like it was
Speaker 5: his decision to vacate the space, please, buddy, all in
Speaker 5: Sundry was shoving you out the door.
Speaker 3: That's the only reason why it happened.
Speaker 5: But look, I don't know why anyone's listening to Biden anymore.
Speaker 5: The guy is such a has been, especially after the
Speaker 5: whirlwin that the Trump administration has been just within his
Speaker 5: first one hundred days, this has got to be the
Speaker 5: most any American president has done within one hundred days.
Speaker 3: And we've got years of this left, I mean, buckle
Speaker 3: in for the long ride.
Speaker 5: So he's really just being utterly ridiculous here pulling out
Speaker 5: the silliest that's made everyone, even the Trump supporters, scratch
Speaker 5: their heads, pulling out those three examples as if to
Speaker 5: make out that this is a clown show.
Speaker 3: That is a clown show.
Speaker 6: Well, look good to say that he got out of
Speaker 6: bed just for this interview.
Speaker 7: It's wonderful.
Speaker 6: I mean, my favorite line from that whole interview was
Speaker 6: when he said when he was asked, do you have
Speaker 6: withdrawn from the campaign a lot earlier and let somebody
Speaker 6: else run?
Speaker 7: And he said, I don't think it would have mattered.
Speaker 7: Where is it? Did doctor Jell put him up to
Speaker 7: that line? For goodness sake? I mean, where does he
Speaker 7: get these delusions from?
Speaker 6: Look, he was mumbling, stumbling again, and this is why
Speaker 6: he is no longer the leader of the free world,
Speaker 6: isn't it exactly?
Speaker 1: And I've still made more sense than Kamala Harris. Well,
Speaker 1: I think.
Speaker 6: That that's probably pushing it a little bit. But look,
Speaker 6: this story, this next story absolutely well. In my opinion,
Speaker 6: it boggles the mind because an NHS worker in the
Speaker 6: UK has been handed awarded almost thirty thousand pounds in compensation,
Speaker 6: which is over sixty thousand Australian dollars, after her colleague
Speaker 6: compared her to the Star Wars villain dath Vede.
Speaker 2: Up.
Speaker 6: Yes, there you go, you heard it right, lorda Rook.
Speaker 7: Her name is.
Speaker 6: She was working for the NHS and was upset that
Speaker 6: a coworker took a Star Wars themed personality test on
Speaker 6: her behalf.
Speaker 7: You can't make this stuff up.
Speaker 6: Now. The Employment tribuneal actually ruled that being aligned with
Speaker 6: the infant sci fi characters personality was quote insulting and
Speaker 6: constituted a workplace detriment.
Speaker 7: In fact, the exact quote is Darth.
Speaker 6: Vader is a legendary villain of the Star Wars series,
Speaker 6: and being aligned with his personality is indeed insulting. A
Speaker 6: judge concluded, So here's a twist in all this. This
Speaker 6: is what I find quite baffling. You've got the co
Speaker 6: worker who has taken this personality test, so you might
Speaker 6: be familiar at home with the Meyers Brig questionnaire. So
Speaker 6: basically it asks you questions like are you an introvert?
Speaker 6: Are you an extrovert? It's a really good team building activity.
Speaker 6: It's something that people do in workplaces, or you can
Speaker 6: do amongst your friends. But this colleague has taken the
Speaker 6: test on behalf of this woman, and it was a
Speaker 6: Star Wars theme, and the colleagues gone to work and said, yes, well,
Speaker 6: this staff member is likened to Darth Vader. I mean,
Speaker 6: imagine being that precious that much of a sources, but
Speaker 6: you feel the need to take it all the way
Speaker 6: to a tribunal. I just feel like this individual would
Speaker 6: be one of those types that would like claim workers'
Speaker 6: compensation for a back injury that they got twenty years
Speaker 6: before actually joining the company. Just so precious and so
Speaker 6: highly offended. I wouldn't want to work with a person
Speaker 6: like that. They would drive you nuts.
Speaker 7: But it goes to.
Speaker 6: Show in the workplace it's not that hard. If you've
Speaker 6: got a problem, tell that person. Please don't call me that.
Speaker 6: If it goes further, go talk to your manager about it,
Speaker 6: go to a go to a tribunal. For goodness sake,
Speaker 6: Why would you do that when.
Speaker 5: You can get thirty thousand pound gosh by being offended?
Speaker 3: It's the offended Olympics. This is incredible.
Speaker 5: I've seen one of these millions of years ago.
Speaker 3: I'm pretty sure as an EMTP, I was R two
Speaker 3: D two.
Speaker 1: Shouldn't she be.
Speaker 7: Which I didn't react? Did I take offense?
Speaker 12: No?
Speaker 3: But shouldn't she be suing?
Speaker 5: Whoever it was who then decided which characters go with
Speaker 5: each four letters of the Mayas Briggs family. I mean,
Speaker 5: clearly someone has decided that whatever she is is Darth Vader.
Speaker 3: I mean, like this has any gravit whatever?
Speaker 1: Are too d two? Yeah, I thought you would have
Speaker 1: been the Emperor that.
Speaker 3: I can check this.
Speaker 2: I mean, it could have been worse for this woman, right,
Speaker 2: So she's been compared to Darth Vader. Okay, that's not great,
Speaker 2: but it could have been Judge our Binks or god forbid,
Speaker 2: Jabba the Heart. But who's crazier this woman for taking
Speaker 2: offense or the member of the judiciary who's awarded sixty
Speaker 2: thousand Australian dollars. It just shows how detached from reality
Speaker 2: judges in the UK are, and judgments like this only
Speaker 2: serve to encourage grievance. So I suppose we should expect
Speaker 2: to see more of this. This goes back to now
Speaker 2: where our culture is at, really, which is the primacy
Speaker 2: of feelings over facts. There's no objective truth. The only
Speaker 2: reality is how you feel, and so nothing can be
Speaker 2: worse than your feelings being hurt, because well, what else
Speaker 2: are you other than your feelings?
Speaker 5: But the fact that a judge literal he rules this,
Speaker 5: I mean, I mean game over in the UK if
Speaker 5: you can get a payout like that for being.
Speaker 3: Minorly offended that's what I pected. By the way, an
Speaker 3: e NTPs r R too details.
Speaker 7: There you go, and how are you, Jonas? How are you?
Speaker 2: I would be obviously, Han Solos, Why did.
Speaker 1: You even ask that question?
Speaker 7: Janika?
Speaker 1: Honestly, Wookie.
Speaker 3: But then they don't talk enough to cover you list.
Speaker 2: The judge is merely reflecting culture, and culture says you
Speaker 2: are your feelings.
Speaker 1: So if your feelings are hurt, that's you. It's wrong.
Speaker 1: That's where our culture is.
Speaker 2: That we're going to go to a break when we
Speaker 2: come back. The Labor Party reorganizing their front bench, and
Speaker 2: of course Adam Bant is well, he's Gonsky. That's coming
Speaker 2: up in just a moment. Welcome back to the program.
Speaker 2: Let's take a look at what's making headlines tomorrow. We'll
Speaker 2: start with the Herald's Sun, which of course has got
Speaker 2: the big news of the election. That is ousted by
Speaker 2: your own hate, good ridden Spanish Green's leader paid the
Speaker 2: price for stoking division and appalling treatment of Jewish community.
Speaker 2: That's right, Adam Bant lost his seat. The article reads,
Speaker 2: Adam Banters paid the price for the Greens stoking division
Speaker 2: and hatred across the country. According to leaders on both
Speaker 2: sides of politics, prominent Jews and anti Semitism victims. The
Speaker 2: assessment came as the ousted minor party leader finally conceded
Speaker 2: the long held Green seat of Melbourne. It's funny, isn't it,
Speaker 2: Tanthony Albaneze. He spent the last ten years in parliament
Speaker 2: being incredibly divisive, but he was a great unifier when
Speaker 2: he left parliament, bringing Liberal and Labor together to celebrate
Speaker 2: his demise. His part of his press conference, where aside
Speaker 2: from blaming Peter Dutton for he himself losing his seat,
Speaker 2: he urged the media to talk about the climate crisis
Speaker 2: in more strident terms.
Speaker 13: I really want the media to stop reporting on climate
Speaker 13: as a political issue and star thinking about it as
Speaker 13: if our country was being invaded. There's you should treat
Speaker 13: the climate crisis as if there is a war on.
Speaker 1: Begs the question who are we being invaded by? By
Speaker 1: Co two? It's just right to the end. It was ridiculous,
Speaker 1: you know.
Speaker 6: Adam Bann got up today and blamed every man and
Speaker 6: their dog except for himself.
Speaker 7: It is his own fault. Trella goodbye, and.
Speaker 6: Maybe this is opportunity to go to Gaza, his favorite place.
Speaker 5: To talk about here to the front page of The
Speaker 5: Australia Now PM leaves Husick Dreyfus behind camber con vulses
Speaker 5: in Alp no one held back, but these two two
Speaker 5: hoe profile, high profile labor ministers have been dumped to
Speaker 5: the back bend shafter one of the most heated factional
Speaker 5: brawls since the election of the Albanese government, with the
Speaker 5: refresh demoting the party's most senior Jewish and Muslim MPs
Speaker 5: while increasing representation for women and the left. Attorney General
Speaker 5: Mark Dreyfus and Industry Minister Ed Husick were forced out
Speaker 5: of the ministry after ruthless negotiations from the Victorian Right
Speaker 5: saw allies of Deputy Prime Minister Richard Miles promoted and
Speaker 5: the New South Wales right weakened. The article goes on
Speaker 5: to say that the new ministers will be Victorian Right
Speaker 5: MPs Sam Ray and Daniel Malino, while the left promoted
Speaker 5: former union bosses in New South Wales Senator Tim Eyres
Speaker 5: and Victorian MP Jess Walsh.
Speaker 3: Well, the blood letting continues.
Speaker 5: These cabinet reshuffles are never a good time and it
Speaker 5: always leaves a bad taste in the mouth of the faction.
Speaker 3: That didn't come out on top.
Speaker 2: It's interesting, of course Ed Hussick being a Muslim, he's
Speaker 2: now longer on the front bench. But Mark Dreyfus, the
Speaker 2: only Jewish minister, also gone, and obviously a lot of
Speaker 2: people very upset with the government's attitude towards Israel. Well
Speaker 2: you wouldn't think that's going to help people's understanding of
Speaker 2: how this government regards Israel.
Speaker 1: With Mark Drayfus being ejected, that's yeah.
Speaker 6: Because he was a most senior Jewish member of the
Speaker 6: Labor Party.
Speaker 2: And he was an advocate for Israel within the party.
Speaker 2: Now he's gone from killing.
Speaker 6: I mean, but he was booed remember at the Sky
Speaker 6: News Anti seven. You and I were there and there,
Speaker 6: so he was definitely not well received in that regard.
Speaker 6: But he is obviously the most senior duced so it
Speaker 6: is interesting that he has been punted. And also I
Speaker 6: just want to say Daniel Malino, the one that's been promoted.
Speaker 6: He was the one remember last late last year he
Speaker 6: went on Shari's program and said that Australia day is changing.
Speaker 6: He was the one that said that, So it's evolving,
Speaker 6: it's evolving, evolving, that's the word let's have a look
Speaker 6: now at the Courier mail. I've got a story their
Speaker 6: huge reno bill for l MP, a minister task with
Speaker 6: driving responsible expenditure, build taxpayers sixty seven thousand dollars to
Speaker 6: install a new door and kitchen, frosted glassdoor, and mega
Speaker 6: boardroom in her government office. The eye watering spending was
Speaker 6: posed in a nine hundred and nine page right to
Speaker 6: information document provided to the opposition about the request of
Speaker 6: new LMP ministers and their staff moving to one Williams Street.
Speaker 6: Two ministers build taxpayers are combined four thousand, six hundred
Speaker 6: and four dollars for twelve office stools, which were criticized
Speaker 6: for poor workmanship when they arrived. Well, there you go,
Speaker 6: sixty seven thousand for a frosted glass door and new bathroom.
Speaker 6: It's all wonderful and all the extensive expensive taxpayers.
Speaker 10: Terrific stool is three eighty four dollars.
Speaker 5: I don't think any stools are ergonomic because they don't
Speaker 5: support the back, even if.
Speaker 7: They've got that.
Speaker 3: Little backy bit.
Speaker 5: I mean this is I want to read the whole
Speaker 5: nine hundred and nine pages, because if this is just
Speaker 5: the bits that they've scooped into this little bit on
Speaker 5: the front page that is going to be a hilarious read.
Speaker 5: It's eye watering when you figure out that these people
Speaker 5: who we elect to represents spend our taxpayer dollars like
Speaker 5: it grows on trees.
Speaker 1: Well that's the point, right, Taxpayer dollars.
Speaker 2: Are other people free money, so it makes it very
Speaker 2: easy to spend and spend.
Speaker 5: They have incredible story featured in The Mercury tomorrow. Alzheimer's
Speaker 5: Early drug world first, a world leading experimental dementia drug
Speaker 5: designed to prevent the disease before it begins, will be
Speaker 5: trialed in Australia for the first time from next month.
Speaker 5: Local researchers will test whether a new injectable drug can
Speaker 5: delay or even stop the onset of Alzheimer's disease when
Speaker 5: given to patients before they begin having noticeable symptoms. Royal
Speaker 5: Melbourne Hospital will be one of more than a dozen
Speaker 5: sites around Australia taking part.
Speaker 3: In a major global trial for the new.
Speaker 5: Drug, named don asmitter rem Turner tug Ren turna tug
Speaker 5: You heard it here first, as Joe Hildebrand says, just
Speaker 5: pronounce it tomvidently and nobody will know any difference.
Speaker 3: So it's remturna tug. This is pretty incredible.
Speaker 5: Many many years ago, I worked for Alzheimer's WA and
Speaker 5: the stats around this disease are so freaky because it's
Speaker 5: growing in prevalence.
Speaker 3: We still don't know what causes it.
Speaker 5: We just know it's becoming more and more common and
Speaker 5: younger and younger people are also getting it. So it's
Speaker 5: absolutely frightening, completely insidious, and it's interesting to learn that
Speaker 5: these guys are trying to do something about it. And
Speaker 5: goodness knows what will come of this treatment that they've devised.
Speaker 2: Well, certainly there'd be a lot of people hoping that
Speaker 2: this treatment is effective, and if it can do what
Speaker 2: they're hoping it will do, it will be an absolute
Speaker 2: game change.
Speaker 7: Yeah, I think it's interesting that.
Speaker 1: Tragic disease for so many people.
Speaker 6: Yeah, before they begin having noticeable symptoms, that's when they're
Speaker 6: going to be trialing it. So I don't know whether
Speaker 6: it's a case of if you have a family history
Speaker 6: of Alzheimer's, a family history of sign up for something
Speaker 6: like this.
Speaker 7: I'm not entirely sure, but.
Speaker 6: I think any anything that can stop or cure this
Speaker 6: insidious disease, I think is just absolutely fantastic. So this
Speaker 6: is really really heartening to hear that there is something
Speaker 6: in the pipeline.
Speaker 1: Hopefully absolutely.
Speaker 2: Let's go to the front page of the cans Post.
Speaker 2: I was intrigued to read this story stroller lifted by
Speaker 2: chopper says their headline, so that immediately got my attention.
Speaker 1: And then we read an.
Speaker 2: Incident involving a toddler and the stroller it was inside
Speaker 2: being lifted into the air by the whirling blades of
Speaker 2: a rescue helicopter taking off outside Cann's Hospital has prompted
Speaker 2: a state government review. I imagine if a baby in
Speaker 2: a stroller was lifted into the air by the blades
Speaker 2: of a nearby helicopter, it would prompt a government review.
Speaker 1: Apparently the location of the.
Speaker 2: Helipad for the Can's Hospital is a little too close
Speaker 2: to walking paths on the esplanade there. This incident occurred
Speaker 2: in June two thousand and twenty two.
Speaker 1: I had a look before we went on air.
Speaker 2: I couldn't find any record online of the incident, so
Speaker 2: I don't know what happened to the toddler. I assume
Speaker 2: that toddler was okay and mum just got a massive fright,
Speaker 2: but If indeed that's what occurred, they would be quite
Speaker 2: wise to move the helly pet. I'm surprised it's taken
Speaker 2: them three years.
Speaker 1: I'm just to move it.
Speaker 7: I'm just confused how something like this can happen though.
Speaker 7: How does it lift up? How did this happen? I
Speaker 7: don't understand.
Speaker 2: It creates an updraft, so if you're too close, potentially
Speaker 2: you could actually.
Speaker 7: But that's that is pretty, that's pretty. That's frightening.
Speaker 6: It happens the parent involved must have had an absolute
Speaker 6: heart attack. That's hopefully the little kid was okay, But
Speaker 6: that's just terrible.
Speaker 2: They've put a fence around it. But they're going to
Speaker 2: move the location all together. Sounds like a smart move
Speaker 2: to me. We're going to go to a break. When
Speaker 2: we come back.
Speaker 1: I'll tell you what.
Speaker 2: There's some weird laws in Victoria. It's illegal, or can be,
Speaker 2: to vacuum after ten pm. And if you hook up
Speaker 2: a little harness to your goat and go for a ride,
Speaker 2: you can be fined one thousand dollars. That another razy
Speaker 2: laws in Victoria coming up in just a moment. Okay, well,
Speaker 2: we all know Victoria had some crazy laws during the pandemic,
Speaker 2: but that's not the half of it. Check out some
Speaker 2: of the laws that are still on the statute books
Speaker 2: in the state of Victoria.
Speaker 1: If you're one who likes to sing.
Speaker 2: Out loud, If you sing an obscene song in Victoria,
Speaker 2: you can be fined one nine hundred and seventy five
Speaker 2: dollars or two months in prison.
Speaker 1: Basically anything by Taylor Swift. If you hire a.
Speaker 2: Kite or play a game that annoys someone, they complain,
Speaker 2: you can be fined nine hundred and eighty seven dollars.
Speaker 2: Hitch Hiking is still a prime Why don't realize that
Speaker 2: you can get almost a four hundred dollar fine for
Speaker 2: hitch hiking. And if you dare to boy board a
Speaker 2: pirate ship.
Speaker 7: In Hya who's boughting pirate ship.
Speaker 1: Well, don't do it. It's twenty years jail if you
Speaker 1: do that in Victoria. Were here's some more vacuuming at night.
Speaker 2: If your neighbors complain and you persist, it's a twenty
Speaker 2: three thousand dollars. For someone's homing pigeon, you can be fined.
Speaker 2: You cut out at night. You can be fined if
Speaker 2: you release a helium balloon in Victoria, it's a five
Speaker 2: thousand dollar fine. If you release a series of balloons,
Speaker 2: it's twenty thousand dollar Fye, here's.
Speaker 1: A few more. If your dog keeps barking, that's a fine.
Speaker 2: A fortune teller risks ten years in prison because it's
Speaker 2: illegal to make money through misleading means, although they should
Speaker 2: have seen that one coming. Single use of plastics is illegal.
Speaker 2: And I'll give you one more. This is the most
Speaker 2: bizarre one. If you hitch up a wagon to your
Speaker 2: goat or to your dog in order to have a ride,
Speaker 2: that's a nine hundred and eighty seven dollar fine.
Speaker 5: Well, you actually expecting the goat to be able to
Speaker 5: pull your weight?
Speaker 1: You're asking me personally, or.
Speaker 5: Is that the only reason why you would hitch a
Speaker 5: ride with your goat is that that goat is supposed
Speaker 5: to be a horse like dragging.
Speaker 6: How many people have goats in their backyard? How many
Speaker 6: people in their backyard gotta goat?
Speaker 7: Come on, let us know.
Speaker 5: Well, if you I've been to New Zealand, you would
Speaker 5: have been to their airport and you would have noticed
Speaker 5: these giant eagles in the terminal, one of them bearing
Speaker 5: the likeness of the wizard ganned Off. Well, these magnificent
Speaker 5: sculptures are about to be retired, so if you haven't
Speaker 5: seen them in real life yet, your better high tail
Speaker 5: it to New Zealand. Nobody wants to see them taken down,
Speaker 5: but they're going to be put into storage. We haven't
Speaker 5: been told what they're going to be replaced with, but
Speaker 5: good luck topping that these things have fifteen meter wingspans
Speaker 5: and way more than a ton each.
Speaker 7: Wow.
Speaker 5: And the airport staff say, even the most like stoic
Speaker 5: businessman type as he's walking through always gets his phone
Speaker 5: out and takes a little cheeky snap to be seen
Speaker 5: with them.
Speaker 3: I mean, why would you get rid of something like this.
Speaker 3: It's a massive tourist attraction to this day in New Zealand.
Speaker 5: People visiting are there to see scenes from The Lord
Speaker 5: of the Ring.
Speaker 2: Wellington Airport many times and seen that exhibit and every
Speaker 2: time you see it it's incredible, and you're right, you
Speaker 2: take a photo every single time. It's amazing. I don't
Speaker 2: know why they'd get rid of it. It's the thing
Speaker 2: New Zealand is face. Absolutely well, that's it from us
Speaker 2: stick around. Coming up is the reader Penehy show Good
Speaker 2: Name