Speaker 1: Welcome the Late Debate.
Speaker 2: It's great to have your company on the Late Debate.
Speaker 2: I'm James Macpherson with Liz Staurer and Caleb Bond. Now,
Speaker 2: like me, you've probably seen some weird things on aircraft.
Speaker 2: But a little later we'll talk about a international passenger
Speaker 2: who's copped an absolute pasting for using her flight to
Speaker 2: make dough for bread.
Speaker 1: Did it all while.
Speaker 2: She was in the air will show you that a
Speaker 2: little later. Plus, when we look at the papers, an
Speaker 2: incredible story tomorrow detailing how Northern Territory police were too
Speaker 2: busy to conduct a welfare check on a woman who
Speaker 2: was allegedly murdered just nine hours after that welfare check
Speaker 2: was supposed to have taken place. And on the front
Speaker 2: page of Tomorrow's Canberra Times, an incredible story about bureaucrats
Speaker 2: who assured they're superiors that a project was going to
Speaker 2: come in under budget. Three months later it came in
Speaker 2: overbudget by forty million dollars, as Maxwell Smart would say,
Speaker 2: missed it by that much. But first you have to
Speaker 2: wonder if any organizations in this country have as finely
Speaker 2: tuned moral conscience as our football codes. Take the NRL,
Speaker 2: for instance, they have special games honoring ANZACs, honoring Indigenous people,
Speaker 2: honoring women until it all went wrong. They had a
Speaker 2: special round honoring the LGBTQ community. They've even got a
Speaker 2: round honoring members. It's like the NRL spend more time
Speaker 2: honoring and celebrating and respecting various niche groups than actually
Speaker 2: playing football. Or is something else going on here? You've
Speaker 2: got to understand that every time the NRL virtue signal,
Speaker 2: they need a brand new jumper in which to do so,
Speaker 2: and of course it's available at the merchandise stand. Take
Speaker 2: Anthony Albanese's much loved Sydney Rabbitdoz for instance. This year
Speaker 2: they've played six themed rounds which have required six brand
Speaker 2: newly designed jumpers, all of which you can purchase at
Speaker 2: the merchandise stand for about one hundred and seventy dollars each.
Speaker 2: That means if you were to purchase one of every
Speaker 2: jumper that team alone has worn this year, you'd be
Speaker 2: up for just over one thousand dollars. That's just for you,
Speaker 2: let alone your kids. This year, NRL clubs have a
Speaker 2: combined seventy seven different jerseys that they've worn over one
Speaker 2: hundred and eighty eight games of football. That's the equivalent
Speaker 2: of a new jersey for each club every five games.
Speaker 2: And so I'm starting to wonder Caleabin Liz, whether it
Speaker 2: goes like this The NRL clubs think what can we
Speaker 2: do to honor and celebrate and promote various minority groups?
Speaker 2: Who could we honor? Oh, by the way, we'll need
Speaker 2: a jumper to do that, or does it take place
Speaker 2: the other way? And they think we need a new
Speaker 2: jumper because you know, we need people to keep the
Speaker 2: cash registers chugging along, so we need a new jumper.
Speaker 2: Could we honor? Now that much sound cynical, but do
Speaker 2: you remember the Pride round back in twenty twenty two
Speaker 2: where Manly got their players to wear a Pride jersey.
Speaker 2: Seven Islander players famously decided not to play. But I
Speaker 2: remember at the time it was revealed the idea for
Speaker 2: that Pride round did not come from the club. It
Speaker 2: came from their jumper sponsor, who had pitched the idea
Speaker 2: of let's do a round on LGBTQ people. They'd pitched
Speaker 2: that idea not just to Manly but to other football
Speaker 2: clubs as well. Now, Manly bit, but the idea was
Speaker 2: not a group of benevolent rugby league officionados sitting around
Speaker 2: thinking what could our game do for social cohesion and
Speaker 2: to better the community. It was a jumper sponsor thinking
Speaker 2: how can we sell more jumpers to rugby league fans.
Speaker 3: Well, it just goes to prove that the virtue signaling
Speaker 3: is a load of crap. I mean, the NRL, the AFL,
Speaker 3: they're big business by the way.
Speaker 1: They don't pay tax.
Speaker 3: On the money they own because you know, they're deemed
Speaker 3: to be a social goods not for profits sort of organization,
Speaker 3: but they're big business, right, and so when they have
Speaker 3: these things pride around and indigenous round whatever, they cloak
Speaker 3: it in the idea of this is a lovely thing
Speaker 3: that we're doing for the community. We're honoring people where
Speaker 3: we're all lovely over here, it's all about making money.
Speaker 3: It's all about business, because in general, a business does
Speaker 3: not make a decision that it does not think is
Speaker 3: going to be beneficial for itself. And so every time
Speaker 3: you see a sporting code or a big business like Quantas,
Speaker 3: even though they've now said they're not going to get
Speaker 3: so involved in political issues unless they have a bard
Speaker 3: approval to do so, we know under Alan Joyce over there.
Speaker 3: They were just sort of running around endorsing everything they
Speaker 3: could possibly find that. They don't normally do something unless
Speaker 3: they think they can make a buck out of it,
Speaker 3: or it's going to be good for shareholders, or it's
Speaker 3: going to be good for the bottom line. The NRL,
Speaker 3: the AFL, big business. They don't give a hoot about you.
Speaker 3: They don't give a hoot about gay people. They don't
Speaker 3: really give a hoot about Indigenous people. Hell, they don't
Speaker 3: even give a hoot about the members.
Speaker 1: Look at how some of.
Speaker 3: The teams perform every year, and you've got to wonder
Speaker 3: how much they really care about the members. It's all
Speaker 3: about extracting as much money as possible from you. And
Speaker 3: I think the kids is the real number the issue here,
Speaker 3: because you know, it's a bit like little Johnny goes
Speaker 3: to school and his schoolmates have got the latest toys.
Speaker 3: So little Johnny comes home and he has to have
Speaker 3: the same toys all his schoolmates otherwise.
Speaker 1: He feels left out.
Speaker 3: And if you're a parent and you go along and
Speaker 3: all the other kids are wearing the brand new jersey
Speaker 3: and they design it's also the greatest scam ever because
Speaker 3: they have a different one every year, So like Indigenous
Speaker 3: Round for instance, right, there's a new.
Speaker 1: Design every year, so you're locked in.
Speaker 3: You've got to keep buying these things. It really has
Speaker 3: nothing to do with politics. It's all about revenue raising,
Speaker 3: which makes it so ridiculous that people keep buying into
Speaker 3: this stuff and they oh, it's so important that the
Speaker 3: NRL and the AFL has Indigenous Round and Pride Round.
Speaker 1: They don't care. They've got money out of you. They're happy.
Speaker 3: They're laughing all the way to the bank, thinking, how
Speaker 3: stupid are you?
Speaker 1: We pulled the wall over your eyes.
Speaker 3: You think it's all about lovely, lovely social issues.
Speaker 1: Nothing. Nothing.
Speaker 4: I'm just glad that the NRL have capped it at
Speaker 4: five Jerseys.
Speaker 5: Well at least they've capted it.
Speaker 4: Otherwise obviously these guys would keep going.
Speaker 5: But I just say, let the market decide.
Speaker 4: If people don't want the new virtue signaling Jersey, they
Speaker 4: won't buy it, and if they do want it, they
Speaker 4: will buy it. And obviously you keep buying them because
Speaker 4: they keep doing it.
Speaker 5: They make a lot of money off their merch.
Speaker 2: Do you own a GWS jumper?
Speaker 5: Nah?
Speaker 2: You don't even own one.
Speaker 4: Nah, But I do own a scaff got it off
Speaker 4: Facebook marketplace, so they didn't make a.
Speaker 2: Sunis out of me.
Speaker 4: To the States now, where Trump has been slapped with
Speaker 4: yet another indictment regarding the twenty twenty election, that's subversion case.
Speaker 4: They are not done with him yet. You will recall
Speaker 4: the original indictment was scuffered by the Supreme Court ruling
Speaker 4: that Trump enjoyed some presidential immunity from criminal prosecution. But
Speaker 4: Special Counsel Jack Smith is not done with him yet
Speaker 4: because you may also recall that the Supreme Court decided
Speaker 4: that there was three different areas of immunity, absolute immunity
Speaker 4: for acts that the president has done with his constitutional authority, immunity,
Speaker 4: presumed immunity with regard to official acts, and then of
Speaker 4: course unofficial acts zero immunity. So the Special Council has gone,
Speaker 4: hang on a minute, we can still get him on
Speaker 4: a few of these allegations. Special Counsel Jack Smith says
Speaker 4: the superseding indictment, which was presented to a new grand
Speaker 4: jury that had not previously heard evidence in this case,
Speaker 4: reflects the government's effort to respect and implement the Supreme
Speaker 4: Court's holdings and remand instructions.
Speaker 5: What He's basically saying, is there.
Speaker 4: This new version of the indictment includes all of the
Speaker 4: allegations from the last indictment, minus a few that they
Speaker 4: know would be considered completely covered off on by the
Speaker 4: fact that Trump was once the president. Trump has, of
Speaker 4: course responded in a very Trumpian way. He says, in
Speaker 4: an effort to rest you a dead witch hunt in Washington, DC.
Speaker 5: In an act of desperation and in.
Speaker 4: Order to save face, the illegally appointed Special Council, deranged
Speaker 4: Jack Smith has brought a ridiculous new indictment against me,
Speaker 4: which has all the problems of the old indictment and
Speaker 4: should be dismissed immediately. In Trumpian caps, he loves the caps. Now,
Speaker 4: of course, they've done this just ten days out to
Speaker 4: the Justice Department's sixty day rule, which means you can't
Speaker 4: bring and he charges against a presidential candidate more than
Speaker 4: sixty days out to an election.
Speaker 5: So they've chosen their timing.
Speaker 4: They've made it across the line, and experts are saying
Speaker 4: this prosecution will go long into after the election. Of course,
Speaker 4: if Trump makes it to the White House, he'll just
Speaker 4: throw it out because he will then have the power
Speaker 4: to do so, but I just can't believe how desperate
Speaker 4: they are. I really can't clinging on to the few
Speaker 4: allegations that may not fall under the scuppering that the
Speaker 4: Supreme Court pulls in this case, and they're going again.
Speaker 3: I can't believe that they're continuing to bother here because
Speaker 3: every time you've had one of these cases, it's generally
Speaker 3: been a boon for Donald Trump because it just gives him,
Speaker 3: as we've said so many times, the opportunity to say
Speaker 3: to people, look, it's not me they're coming for it's you.
Speaker 3: The idea here is that I stand between them and you,
Speaker 3: so they're coming for me, so they can get to you.
Speaker 3: And we know what the poles are looking like at
Speaker 3: the moment. Kamala Harris is going through something of a
Speaker 3: honeymoon period since she replaced Joe Biden because she's got
Speaker 3: the anyone but Biden advantage. They've just had the DNC,
Speaker 3: which gives her a little more wind behind her. And
Speaker 3: Trump actually has a threat now in the Democrat someone
Speaker 3: who could potentially beat him at the pole. So you
Speaker 3: would think at this moment in time, these Democrat justices
Speaker 3: and prosecutors, etc. Would maybe just take a step back
Speaker 3: and go Okay, every time we've tried to do this
Speaker 3: over the last year, it hasn't worked. It hasn't landed
Speaker 3: a blow on him, it hasn't hurt him whatsoever, if anything,
Speaker 3: has helped him. And right now, when he's actually looking
Speaker 3: like he might be receding in the polls, why don't
Speaker 3: we just step back for a moment and let him
Speaker 3: hang himself instead of saying, look, we know you're drowning
Speaker 3: a little bit, buddy, here's the life boy, the rope to.
Speaker 1: Just drag yourself in a little bit.
Speaker 3: Like they have handed him the advantage that he needs
Speaker 3: right now.
Speaker 1: I don't know why they're bothering.
Speaker 2: Well, as you say, After the DNC, Kamala Harris and
Speaker 2: the Democrats have had all the momentum. They've still got it,
Speaker 2: They've got all the press, and now they've made Trump
Speaker 2: headlines all over again. On top of that, they spent
Speaker 2: the whole of the DNC talking about how they would
Speaker 2: unite the country and they were the Party of Joy,
Speaker 2: and now they're using the justice system to go after Trump.
Speaker 3: Now.
Speaker 2: Of course, Donald Trump is a very clever politician. Whatever
Speaker 2: you think about him, he's not dumb and so he's
Speaker 2: linked this judicial process with the fact that the Biden
Speaker 2: administration is not only going after him in court, but
Speaker 2: there was also that little matter of failing to provide
Speaker 2: him with enough Secret Service security agents to keep him
Speaker 2: safe from an assassination. Here he is talking to doctor Phil.
Speaker 6: You know, when this happened, people would ask, who's Walter
Speaker 6: is it? I think, to a certain extent, it's Biden's
Speaker 6: and Harris's fault, and I'm the opponent. Look, they were
Speaker 6: weaponizing government against me. They brought in the whole DOJ
Speaker 6: to try and get me. They weren't too interested in
Speaker 6: my health and safety.
Speaker 5: I would be if I were in.
Speaker 6: Their position, but they weren't very interested. But they were
Speaker 6: always making it. From what I understood, and I could
Speaker 6: feel it. They were making it very difficult to have
Speaker 6: proper staffing in terms of Secret Service.
Speaker 2: So there you go, Trump grabbing the momentum all over
Speaker 2: again thanks to the Democrats. But it shows how desperate
Speaker 2: the Democrats are Kada that they would rather talk about
Speaker 2: Trump than anything else, i e.
Speaker 3: Policy, which is the idea in general. I mean, we
Speaker 3: showed that clip the other art of Quentin Tarantino in them.
Speaker 3: It wasn't mincing his words, telling Kamala Harris to don't
Speaker 3: Epan do any ef and interviews because you're just going
Speaker 3: to buger it up.
Speaker 1: Bugger was not the word he used.
Speaker 3: The idea, much like they did with Joe Biden in
Speaker 3: twenty twenty, is to keep her in the bunker so
Speaker 3: that you're not exposed to any of the policy. And
Speaker 3: it's all on the feeling and the fact that she's
Speaker 3: not Trump and she's not Barden. But if I may
Speaker 3: venture into conspiracy theory territory here or most we do
Speaker 3: off on you, A part of me wonders whether the
Speaker 3: whole point of this beyond the you know, let's get
Speaker 3: Trump for the opportunity to lock him up, because we
Speaker 3: know they'd love to lock him up. But part of
Speaker 3: me wonders whether going with the water down case is
Speaker 3: just to put the idea of January six back on
Speaker 3: people's minds, because they know that if Trump loses the
Speaker 3: election in November, you'll probably have a repeat of January
Speaker 3: six last time around. There will be so much unrest
Speaker 3: and questioning and concern about.
Speaker 1: The validity of the election.
Speaker 3: So what they're actually setting up here is almost goading
Speaker 3: people if Trump loses, to go and do it all
Speaker 3: over again, because they're saying, we've got a case on
Speaker 3: the books here that he's sort of proving that Trump
Speaker 3: made it all up last time, so we've got cause
Speaker 3: to encourage you to go and do it again. So
Speaker 3: we've got twice as much AMO to get Trump points.
Speaker 4: I'd say that's exactly why the Dems have gone again,
Speaker 4: because you're quite right in saying it galvanizes the Republican
Speaker 4: base and all the Trumpers, but it also galvanizes the
Speaker 4: Democrats base to keep him in the headlines. As I mean,
Speaker 4: when I watched the DNC last week, that mind numming.
Speaker 4: It was the most low IQ thing I've ever seen
Speaker 4: in my entire life.
Speaker 5: But the amount of.
Speaker 4: Times they were talking about him convicted felon, convicted felon.
Speaker 5: And people love it.
Speaker 4: They're absolutely gobbling up this narrative about Trump that actually
Speaker 4: he does be along behind bars and now we've got
Speaker 4: the DOJ still not letting him off the hook. This
Speaker 4: man should never make it into the White House. And
Speaker 4: because the poles are so tight at the moment, they're
Speaker 4: probably not so much worried about a boost in the
Speaker 4: polls for Trump should he be seen to be prosecuted.
Speaker 5: And this is just another.
Speaker 4: Witch hunt that has worked on whoever it's going to
Speaker 4: work on at this point. And now the Dems are
Speaker 4: going for the jugular again, playing up to the narrative
Speaker 4: that they have sewed so thoroughly over all this time,
Speaker 4: that they have been employing lawfair Again.
Speaker 2: That's the reductive message of the Democrats. Right, Kamala Harris
Speaker 2: is promoting herself, not as the vice president, to accomplish
Speaker 2: all these things. She's gone right back in history to
Speaker 2: when she used to be a prosecutor going after Felon.
Speaker 2: So that is the contest. It's not a contest of
Speaker 2: equal political identities. By the way, listening to you do
Speaker 2: that conspiracy theory, I'm sitting here listening, it's like watching
Speaker 2: Liz with a beard.
Speaker 3: That's actually a really scary thought I would not want
Speaker 3: to see.
Speaker 4: Is what you just called a conspiracy theory.
Speaker 5: I just called playing.
Speaker 1: So anyway, we'll get you there.
Speaker 3: Well, you know you're not quite old enough to be
Speaker 3: menopausaled is. But please please don't, please don't ever grow
Speaker 3: a bee. We don't want to cover up that beautiful.
Speaker 4: Ways you haven't just defended how many more than menopausal
Speaker 4: ladies at home you'll be hearing from Bola.
Speaker 3: You can write in your complaints, but I'm sure you
Speaker 3: all agree Liz should not grow a viear. But you know,
Speaker 3: in this modern world, she's allowed to do whatever she wants.
Speaker 3: I think maybe Liz identifies as a man, and tomorrow
Speaker 3: we'll have conscience here on this panel. Now, let's go
Speaker 3: to one of my favorite segments on this program, the
Speaker 3: Council round Up, and hell do we have some good
Speaker 3: ones for you tonight. Let's start here in Sydney with
Speaker 3: the North Sydney Council now Sydney or New South Wales
Speaker 3: more broadly, next month will have its council elections, where
Speaker 3: of course we know that many Liberal candidates won't be
Speaker 3: standing because the Liberal Party didn't bother to actually nominate
Speaker 3: one hundred and forty or so of their candidates. But
Speaker 3: it means that councils are now going through their last
Speaker 3: meetings of this term. And North Sydney Council last night
Speaker 3: had its last meeting for this term. And Jilly Gibson,
Speaker 3: who was once the mayor of North Seatan, has been
Speaker 3: a servant counselor for twenty five years gave her valedictory speech.
Speaker 3: So she got up and said a few nice words
Speaker 3: and received some flowers, etc. And then one of her
Speaker 3: fellow counselors, James Spenceley, decided that, well, maybe in her
Speaker 3: honor we should name.
Speaker 1: A plaza after her.
Speaker 3: The new Burton Street plaza in Kiribilly has just been opened,
Speaker 3: and he said, why do we just think nice for
Speaker 3: miss Gibson and name it after her twenty five.
Speaker 1: Years of service.
Speaker 3: She was happy to accept it, but then we found
Speaker 3: out why she'd been a counselor for twenty five years.
Speaker 1: She'd stuck it out all that time in order to
Speaker 1: get that plaza.
Speaker 3: And we know that because when she didn't get it,
Speaker 3: by god, did she wrick have it Upon the council.
Speaker 3: The Mayor, Zoe Baker, called a division on the motion
Speaker 3: and it was voted down. And instead of just walking
Speaker 3: out and saying Sia Narah, thanks for the twenty five years,
Speaker 3: Miss Gibson responded by saying.
Speaker 1: What an in actually yielded? She said, what an ending?
Speaker 1: Did you hear?
Speaker 4: That?
Speaker 3: They just voted down Council Expensively's amendment to name a
Speaker 3: little plaza after me?
Speaker 1: They can't find it in their hearts. No heart, no heart.
Speaker 3: She had to repeat it twice. She then went after
Speaker 3: the mayor, Miss Baker. She said, you can warn me
Speaker 3: all you like, Mayor. The mayor clearly has repudiated her
Speaker 3: for shouting so much that was mean.
Speaker 1: This has been the meanest counsel ever.
Speaker 3: I'm off you are so mean, You are so mean,
Speaker 3: You are so mean A plaza your mom.
Speaker 1: She's talking to the mayor. Your mom was mayor for
Speaker 1: a year and got a building named after her.
Speaker 3: Now the mayor's mother, Carol Baker was indeed mayor at
Speaker 3: one point, and the Carol Baker building in the Council
Speaker 3: Chambers is named after her. But she was the first
Speaker 3: female mayor of North Sydney, so she got something named
Speaker 3: after her. But we finally found out on the way
Speaker 3: out why Miss Gibson had been there for twenty five years,
Speaker 3: and it was to get that lit plaza.
Speaker 1: G did that sting on the way out.
Speaker 3: I'm glad they're spending our rate Kay's money to have
Speaker 3: squabbles like this at their.
Speaker 5: Last legacy, Deny.
Speaker 2: The hilarious thing about that story is that during her
Speaker 2: valedictory speech, Miss Gibson had described council as a preschool
Speaker 2: for bullies.
Speaker 4: Well point made you will a solid member for twenty
Speaker 4: five years.
Speaker 5: A lady.
Speaker 2: I got to say, though, as bad as that story is,
Speaker 2: I've got worse for you. Forget about the North Sydney Council.
Speaker 2: What about just the Sydney Council with Clover Moore. Now,
Speaker 2: Clovermore has been there a long time as the Mayor
Speaker 2: of Sydney and she's been campaigning hard for a slice
Speaker 2: of the pristine eighteen hole More Park golf course to
Speaker 2: be carved off as a park for local residents. Now,
Speaker 2: no one really wants this because it's a beautiful golf course.
Speaker 2: Even Hollywood stars like Mark Wahlberg, even they think it
Speaker 2: should be left as it is.
Speaker 7: I know I'm not a citizen of Australia, but I
Speaker 7: am pleading to you, everybody, New South Wales, to save
Speaker 7: More Park Golf Club. It's been here for over one
Speaker 7: hundred years and it's been giving people hundreds and hundreds
Speaker 7: of years of pleasure and joy and just people being
Speaker 7: able to come out, get a nice healthy walk, spend
Speaker 7: quality time together with family and friends, to meet new friends. Please,
Speaker 7: I've seen lots and lots of parks. I haven't seen
Speaker 7: too many lovely public golf courses like this and have
Speaker 7: access for everybody.
Speaker 2: Please save More Park Golf Club. Now I ignore Hollywood
Speaker 2: stars and ignore local golfers. Clover Or, the mayor of Sydney,
Speaker 2: she wants a significant section hived off as a park
Speaker 2: for local residents and Chrismin's, the new South Wales Premier,
Speaker 2: has finally agreed, saying that this park and we've got
Speaker 2: an image of the park that will put up for you.
Speaker 2: It's going to be an enormous benefit for local residents.
Speaker 2: It's going to have children's playgrounds, running paths, eskate park,
Speaker 2: outdoor fitness facilities, open meadows, walking tracks. Who wouldn't want
Speaker 2: that right near where they live? Well, as it turns out,
Speaker 2: Clovermore has two properties within walking distance of where this
Speaker 2: park will be located. Councilor Evonne Weldon, who is running
Speaker 2: for mayor at the next election against Clovermore, said, I
Speaker 2: think it needs to be acknowledged and people need to
Speaker 2: be made aware of the truth of what is happening here.
Speaker 2: And the truth is that Clovermore and her husband own
Speaker 2: a property just five hundred meters from where that park
Speaker 2: will be established, and another property only four hundred meters
Speaker 2: from the park. Now, when The Daily Telegraph asked the
Speaker 2: Sydney Lord Mayor about these properties and why she'd never
Speaker 2: told anybody about them, she said she didn't need to
Speaker 2: acknowledge her ownership of these properties when dealing with proposals
Speaker 2: for the park because and I quote it wasn't required
Speaker 2: by the Sydney Council Code of Conduct. That's a pretty
Speaker 2: low bar I would have thought for transparency and integrity
Speaker 2: when you say, well no according to cod of Conduct,
Speaker 2: we don't have to say.
Speaker 4: After twenty years as mayor, it is time to see
Speaker 4: the back of this woman. Come on, Sydney, pull it
Speaker 4: off at the next election. Also, I do love how
Speaker 4: we bash celebrity endorsements day and night.
Speaker 5: But then Mark Walber.
Speaker 4: The golf course and we're all like, everyone listened to him.
Speaker 5: He's an out of towner. But what a legend.
Speaker 3: It reminds me of the story of Russ Hins. And
Speaker 3: you you would remember, having lived in Queensland the bad
Speaker 3: old days of the Joe Bilky Peterson government. He was
Speaker 3: the Transport Minister there and he bought a pub and
Speaker 3: he had the highway diverted to go past the pub
Speaker 3: he had bought so that people would come in and
Speaker 3: buy beer from him.
Speaker 2: He can't get a plaza named after you, might as
Speaker 2: well have a highway diverted past your store.
Speaker 4: Don't give her ideas to Hornsby Counsel. Now we're a
Speaker 4: restaurant on the owner his restaurant's called the Smoke Shata
Speaker 4: is trying to save his smoker. The whole idea of
Speaker 4: his restaurant is brisket burgers, big juicy chunks of meat.
Speaker 4: But the council has received complaints about the smells.
Speaker 2: Who doesn't like.
Speaker 5: The smell of cooking meat?
Speaker 4: Some karens in Hornsby apparently, and they've told him he
Speaker 4: has to get rid of his smoker or else, which
Speaker 4: of course means the end of the entire concept of
Speaker 4: his restaurant. Restaurant owner Mehdi Madove says, they're saying, if
Speaker 4: we don't remove the smoker, it's a criminal offense and
Speaker 4: they can take me to court. And it's all because
Speaker 4: we had one person complaining about the smoke and food smells.
Speaker 4: I've spent thousands of dollars trying to address the council's
Speaker 4: concerns including hiring a town planner, commissioning four thousand dollars
Speaker 4: for air quality reports, three thousand dollars for an acoustic report,
Speaker 4: another three thousand dollars for surveys, four thousand dollars a
Speaker 4: traffic engineers. I have put everything into the business, and
Speaker 4: the council should be helping small business, not hindering us
Speaker 4: for crying out loud hornsby counsel. What are you thinking.
Speaker 4: It's just more of the same week in and week out,
Speaker 4: these councils not actually doing their job and having to
Speaker 4: be told by the rate payers what their job is,
Speaker 4: i e.
Speaker 5: Helping small business.
Speaker 2: I was actually getting hungry as you were describing the
Speaker 2: wares of the smoke shack. What's the bet that the
Speaker 2: person who complained is a.
Speaker 3: Vegan exactly exactly, for Heaven's sake, who doesn't like, as
Speaker 3: you said, Liz, the smell of the meat being cooked
Speaker 3: on the barbecue.
Speaker 2: I'm actually I'm near it.
Speaker 3: I'm thinking of moving to Mount Cola so i can.
Speaker 3: I'm going to find whoever it is who's complained and say, look,
Speaker 3: what do you want for your house? Get the hell
Speaker 3: out of there, because I can't think of anything better
Speaker 3: than living.
Speaker 2: There is the irony, though, Do you reckon if you
Speaker 2: complained about I don't know, the stench coming from a
Speaker 2: sewerage works, the council would be straight on it dealing
Speaker 2: with that. Or do you reckon you'd hear crickets, but
Speaker 2: you complain about some guy's barbecue. He's trying to eke
Speaker 2: out a living. The council can't shut him down fast.
Speaker 3: And all the people with yapping dogs next door that
Speaker 3: they've been complaining about for years and nothing have been
Speaker 3: done about it.
Speaker 1: And they're like, what the hell you? All I had
Speaker 1: to do is get.
Speaker 3: A smoker going and then the council would come and
Speaker 3: visit me. But look, we've gone through all the bad
Speaker 3: things that Australian councils have done this week.
Speaker 1: But maybe this will make you feel a little bit
Speaker 1: better because.
Speaker 3: A council over in the UK, the Norfolk County Council,
Speaker 3: has come up with an ingenious plan to save the planet.
Speaker 2: They're going to.
Speaker 1: Turn off all the street lights. No I'm not joking.
Speaker 3: They have decided they're going to turn off a thousand
Speaker 3: lights across the council at night. Now, street lights are
Speaker 3: generally there for I don't know safety, But who cares
Speaker 3: about safety? We've had a planet to save here, and
Speaker 3: they reckon they're going to save two hundred thousand quit
Speaker 3: a year and cut carbon emissions by seventy six tons
Speaker 3: six duns.
Speaker 1: Can you believe it?
Speaker 3: And one of the places where they're going to turn
Speaker 3: off these street lights is a particularly dangerous stretch of
Speaker 3: road were in the last six months alone they.
Speaker 1: Have had major crashes at night. So who cares about safety?
Speaker 3: Who cares about women walking home at night who want
Speaker 3: some lights so they feel safe? Who cares about people
Speaker 3: being safe on the road here? People are dispensable. We
Speaker 3: need to save the planet. I mean, of all the
Speaker 3: things we expect councils to do right, roads rates, rubbish,
Speaker 3: fill in the potholes. We know they can't do that
Speaker 3: unless apparently someone goes along and spray paints a penis
Speaker 3: over the top of it. We've seen cases of that
Speaker 3: and the council acts very fast, not giving you ideas.
Speaker 3: But you know, if it just magically appeared on the road,
Speaker 3: who knows where that came from. But you now have
Speaker 3: councils and this is not the only one. Apparently in
Speaker 3: the UK, and you can imagine if it's starting to
Speaker 3: happen in the UK, it will start to happen here.
Speaker 3: You know, turning the lights on a basic thing, but
Speaker 3: you will now have counsel saying no, to save the planet,
Speaker 3: we're not going to turn the lights on for safety ATNA.
Speaker 2: So the part I missed in your introduction was how
Speaker 2: much the global temperature will decrease because of this?
Speaker 1: Like five three is apparent?
Speaker 2: Five degrees?
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, yeah.
Speaker 3: And the sea levels, oh, the sea levels just planmmet mate,
Speaker 3: We're going to have to the island. It's going to
Speaker 3: create so much more room for us all to live on.
Speaker 3: But of course there won't be anyone left to live
Speaker 3: on the room because they will have all crashed their
Speaker 3: cars into each other.
Speaker 5: And unto all the lights.
Speaker 2: And maybe on that point, maybe they're smarter than we're
Speaker 2: giving them credit for. So they'll save seventy six tons
Speaker 2: of carbon misions by turning out the lights. Then people
Speaker 2: who die in head on collisions, think about it. They
Speaker 2: won't need food, they won't need transfer. Yeah, that's a
Speaker 2: whole lot more emissions that will be saved. Once you
Speaker 2: factor in cremation, that will probably increase. I mean, this
Speaker 2: is outrageous. And then what they'll do once this move
Speaker 2: starts to create traffic accidents, as they'll say, oh, this
Speaker 2: is not good, we're having too many accidents. So you reckon,
Speaker 2: they'll turn the lights back on. Or do you reckon,
Speaker 2: They'll lower the speed limit. And so no, no, we need
Speaker 2: to turn this eighty zone into a forty home scooters.
Speaker 4: I just can't believe norfolks that are council of this
Speaker 4: s far behind the times because so many of our
Speaker 4: lighting street lighting is using.
Speaker 5: The solar panels.
Speaker 1: Now I've seen that.
Speaker 4: So just get some CCP solar panels, whack them on
Speaker 4: your street lights, and then you can have safety and
Speaker 4: virtue signaling together.
Speaker 2: Let's go. Let's stay in the UK actually and talk
Speaker 2: about eminent biologist Richard Dawkins. He is proposing that perhaps
Speaker 2: the incredible rise in mental illness we're seeing across the
Speaker 2: western world is due to the astonishing rate of technical change. Now,
Speaker 2: before we hear what he's got to say, I've got
Speaker 2: to point out the irony. This is a man who's
Speaker 2: devoted his entire professional life to I convince us all
Speaker 2: that life has absolutely no existential purpose or meaning now
Speaker 2: he's worried about mental health anyway, Here he.
Speaker 8: Is, it is changing more rapidly, and many people do
Speaker 8: worry that the pace of change is such that we
Speaker 8: are no longer well adapted to live in it. And
Speaker 8: much of the mental illness that afflicts people maybe because
Speaker 8: we are in a constantly changing, unpredictable environment in a
Speaker 8: way that our ancestors were not. So that is a worry. Actually,
Speaker 8: I think it's amazing how resilient we are. I mean,
Speaker 8: we do seek to most of us managed to cok
Speaker 8: pretty well with the astonishing rate of change.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the mental health problem, it's got to be the Internet.
Speaker 2: This is a guy who wrote a book called The
Speaker 2: God Delusion, calling anyone who believes in God a sky
Speaker 2: fairy and a simpleton. He's basically gone all around the
Speaker 2: world telling people we came from nothing, We're going to
Speaker 2: end up as nothing, and therefore life is worth nothing.
Speaker 2: And now he's banging on about mental illnes and wondering
Speaker 2: what's gone wrong. More interesting than his comments on social
Speaker 2: media and the Internet are his comments back in April
Speaker 2: where he said, you know, I love hymns and Christmas carols.
Speaker 2: I feel at home in the Christian ethos. I feel
Speaker 2: like we're a Christian country in that sense. Now, to
Speaker 2: be sure, he's saying, I'm not a Christian, but I
Speaker 2: do like the Christian trappings. He reminds me of a
Speaker 2: man who's sitting on a branch, busy sowing it or
Speaker 2: from the trunk, and then all of a sudden he
Speaker 2: realizes just how far he's about to fall, and suddenly thinks, oh,
Speaker 2: maybe this wasn't such a smart idea after all. I
Speaker 2: think we've got a problem with technology. But the problem
Speaker 2: is not the technology. The technology simply magnifies or exacerbates
Speaker 2: what's already in the culture. And when you've had people
Speaker 2: like Richard Dawkins traveling the world telling everybody there's no purpose.
Speaker 2: People can put up with a lot of affliction, but
Speaker 2: they can't live with no purpose and no meaning. Even
Speaker 2: Dawkins himself saying, well, now I don't believe in Christianity,
Speaker 2: but I'm going to adopt it anyway, because I can't
Speaker 2: bear the thought it's all for. When you travel the
Speaker 2: world preaching that message, of course, you're going to have
Speaker 2: people with mental health challenges, and technology is just going
Speaker 2: to exacerbate that. It's not the cause, it's the magnifier.
Speaker 4: I think I've got to disagree with you there, because
Speaker 4: what we see technology doing is often very much driving
Speaker 4: the changes in the culture. It's not just a reflection
Speaker 4: of the culture. When you think of the way that
Speaker 4: pornography has changed the relationship between men and women even
Speaker 4: from a very young age. Now the most common age
Speaker 4: of introduction to pornography here in Australia is just.
Speaker 5: Eight years old.
Speaker 4: That is driving a massive cultural change. Where we talk
Speaker 4: about introductions to AI and that taking over different jobs,
Speaker 4: that is driving major cultural change. When we talk about
Speaker 4: social media and the way it does indeed drive a
Speaker 4: lot of social change, whether that's the way people dress
Speaker 4: nowadays or who they want to be because the influences
Speaker 4: are so cool. So got to disagree with you on
Speaker 4: that point. But all the stats bear him out with
Speaker 4: regard to him making a direct connection between depression anxiety.
Speaker 5: People's mental health has.
Speaker 4: Never been this poor throughout history, and there is no
Speaker 4: way that we can say, oh, it's got nothing to
Speaker 4: do with the fact that we've got these computers in
Speaker 4: our pockets twenty four seven that we all spend hours
Speaker 4: on every single day. We've got this twenty four hour
Speaker 4: news cycle that is updated every five seconds. I often
Speaker 4: find myself envying people from decades past, when in order
Speaker 4: to feel informed about what was happening in the world
Speaker 4: around you, you just had a paper, had a paper,
Speaker 4: a daily paper, and if you read that, that was great.
Speaker 4: You sent and received letters. There was no instant requirement
Speaker 4: for you to respond to every text as you got it, every.
Speaker 5: Email as you got it.
Speaker 4: This has changed us in ways that will never ever
Speaker 4: be able to fully fathom.
Speaker 3: And essentially arguing because he's an evolutionary biologist, is that
Speaker 3: we as a species, particularly our brains, has not evolved
Speaker 3: at the same rate as the technology has evolved, and
Speaker 3: we're not able to cope with the technology technology. Sorry,
Speaker 3: that's in front of us. And the example you use
Speaker 3: about responding to text messages and whatever there is such
Speaker 3: a great example because when I was away last week,
Speaker 3: I was up for a few nights in Cape Tribulation
Speaker 3: and I had no phone signal up there. Really lovely
Speaker 3: because no one could contact me. I was divorced from
Speaker 3: the rest of the world for a little while, sitting
Speaker 3: in the rainforest and on the beach drinking beers. That
Speaker 3: was fantastic, But of course there's an expectation now, whereas
Speaker 3: once upon a time you received a letter.
Speaker 1: You wrote back.
Speaker 3: You know, the letter might get there in a few
Speaker 3: days or whatever. You've got a telegram or whatever it
Speaker 3: might be. If someone seems you a text, they're expecting
Speaker 3: you to respond within five minutes.
Speaker 1: So the slowness of life has.
Speaker 3: Been taken away from us and it makes it so
Speaker 3: much more difficult to cope with the pace of life.
Speaker 3: And you add on top of that the jobs that
Speaker 3: will lose through things like AI. If you're unemployed, your
Speaker 3: mental health ain't all that good. I think it's true
Speaker 3: that perhaps technology can go too far, and we're starting
Speaker 3: to see that born out.
Speaker 2: I don't know about your example from being up in
Speaker 2: fun North Queens and I reckon not having access to
Speaker 2: my phone that would do my mental health incredible that
Speaker 2: you know.
Speaker 5: You have a problem.
Speaker 4: That the outcry when they introduce Wi Fi on plane,
Speaker 4: I know most people were like, this was guaranteed my
Speaker 4: own break where I had the ultimate excuse. Sorry, I'm
Speaker 4: on an airplane for five hours just to disconnect and
Speaker 4: no one could get at me.
Speaker 5: And then the airlines are like.
Speaker 4: We've got wi Fi, congratulations everyone. The vast majority of people,
Speaker 4: to my understanding anyway, we're like, no, don't do it
Speaker 4: to us.
Speaker 2: Oh I was not one of those people. Before we
Speaker 2: go to an ad break news this evening that the
Speaker 2: Muslim Votes Matter advocacy group now it's not a political part,
Speaker 2: but they are going to promote independent candidates who stand
Speaker 2: as Muslims at the federal election. They will launch their
Speaker 2: national campaign in Melbourne on Sunday. Group spokesperson says there
Speaker 2: are more than twenty seats where Muslims could have the
Speaker 2: deciding vote at the federal election. Told the media, in
Speaker 2: the last twenty five years, no federal government has been
Speaker 2: elected by more than a fifteen seat margin. This positions
Speaker 2: us strategically to support candidates who prioritize our issues. Interesting,
Speaker 2: he says, issues plural because there's really only one that
Speaker 2: they've ever talked about, and that's Gaza and challenge those
Speaker 2: who neglect our community. Now, speakers at the campaign launch
Speaker 2: on Sunday are going to talk about Gaza as the issue,
Speaker 2: and they're flying in people from the UK to talk
Speaker 2: about how Muslim votes in the UK managed to win
Speaker 2: numbers of seats over there, so that will be an
Speaker 2: interesting campaign launch and one that I know Anthony Albanezi
Speaker 2: will be what closely.
Speaker 3: Certainly, I think the only problem is you can bust
Speaker 3: people in from the UK to talk about how successful
Speaker 3: it was over there, but they have first passed the
Speaker 3: post voting, so you know you can get someone elected
Speaker 3: on thirty percent of the vote. The problem that they
Speaker 3: will run into is that they may well get thirty
Speaker 3: percent of the vote, but then you've got to talk
Speaker 3: about the preferences and where they go from there, and
Speaker 3: I suspect in most cases they'll just flow through back
Speaker 3: to labor anyway, and the Labour people like Tony Burke
Speaker 3: and whatever that have been touted as being under attacked
Speaker 3: by this will eventually get re elected.
Speaker 1: But you know they are going to flex their muscles.
Speaker 3: And again it goes back to the question of when
Speaker 3: you have people coming out to a country from a
Speaker 3: different culture and they all go into one place and
Speaker 3: they don't mix amongst the rest of us, create enclaves,
Speaker 3: and then you end up with movements like this essentially
Speaker 3: saying well, we want our own religious or ethnic power
Speaker 3: in this country. Sorry, you came to Australia, how about
Speaker 3: you try being Australian.
Speaker 2: Well, we're going to go to a break. When we
Speaker 2: come back, we'll have what the papers are going with tomorrow,
Speaker 2: including a really sad story from the Northern Territory about
Speaker 2: a woman who was allegedly murdered nine hours after police
Speaker 2: were supposed to do a welfare check but never got
Speaker 2: around to. That's coming up in a moment. Welcome back,
Speaker 2: some great stories in tomorrow's papers. One of my favorites
Speaker 2: on the front page of Tomorrow's Canberra Times. Liz, I
Speaker 2: know you like this one too.
Speaker 5: I do, because it's just another classic trust the experts story.
Speaker 4: Audit finds misleading reporting of millions. Bureaucrats told a board
Speaker 4: overseeing the Digital Health record that the program was under budget,
Speaker 4: but it ended up being forty million dollars over and
Speaker 4: audit found there was an inconsistent and misleading reports to
Speaker 4: the board which the project going, with the project going
Speaker 4: millions of dollars over budget. The article goes on to
Speaker 4: say the project is expected to be more than one
Speaker 4: hundred and sixty million over the initial budget. I guess
Speaker 4: they're a bit too far in at this point to
Speaker 4: pull out, but I'd be seriously reconsidering if I were them,
Speaker 4: part of the.
Speaker 2: Story details that you know they're giving incremental reports. Is
Speaker 2: this projects rolled out right and three months after saying no,
Speaker 2: it's going to come in under budget. Imagine the meeting
Speaker 2: where they walk in say, no, how we told it's
Speaker 2: gonna be under budget, bitter new it's going to be
Speaker 2: a bit over forty million.
Speaker 3: But if you've added forty million dollars to the expense
Speaker 3: within three months, I mean they must be going out
Speaker 3: to some bloody good lunches.
Speaker 1: Right, how do.
Speaker 3: You increase the cost by forty million in three months?
Speaker 5: It was just inconsistent and misleading.
Speaker 1: Oh well, it certainly was.
Speaker 4: Doing the reporting it was.
Speaker 2: Therefore, the story doesn't say do those bureaucrats keep their jobs?
Speaker 1: Correct?
Speaker 4: Of course exactly, Otherwise this would be the article to
Speaker 4: break it to taxpayers that oh, heads are rolling over this,
Speaker 4: don't worry. But no, there is nothing to say that
Speaker 4: any such thing is happening, So it's safe to it's not.
Speaker 2: I mean, why are we working here and not in
Speaker 2: the public service? I know, I know. Can we do
Speaker 2: it with our lives?
Speaker 1: Can you imagine?
Speaker 3: You know, if I was head of programs here at
Speaker 3: Sky News and I walked into the CEO's office and
Speaker 3: I said, look, I know, I told you I was
Speaker 3: actually going to come in under budget for programs this year,
Speaker 3: but have actually just gone over by forty million in
Speaker 3: the last three months.
Speaker 1: Is that going to be an issue?
Speaker 5: Do you reckon?
Speaker 1: I'd have a job tomorrow overnight.
Speaker 2: It's fine, We'll just cut this a salary and it'll be.
Speaker 1: A very good point.
Speaker 5: Wait, you guys get paid.
Speaker 2: Let's go to the front page of the Northern Territory Times.
Speaker 2: Back on beat in blue reads the headline playing clothes
Speaker 2: officers will start wearing uniforms and unmarked police cars will
Speaker 2: soon be branded in moves to make the Northern Territory
Speaker 2: police forces presence seen and felt. Now, of course, the
Speaker 2: election has just been decided in favor of the Was
Speaker 2: it the Country Liberal Party correct that won the election?
Speaker 2: There took the government back from Labor and it was
Speaker 2: obvious all fought over law and order and on day
Speaker 2: one this is one of the first decisions that's come
Speaker 2: out of a meeting with the Police commissioner. Makes a
Speaker 2: lot of sense to me, Liz. There's crime and order
Speaker 2: problems everywhere. People feel safe when police are around and
Speaker 2: criminals might think twice when they see men in blue
Speaker 2: wandering the streets.
Speaker 4: Yeah, but there's also the downside of the very fact
Speaker 4: that they were undercover in unmarked cars and just playing
Speaker 4: closed uniforms is that you can catch people out doing
Speaker 4: things that they would otherwise scuffer if you were driving
Speaker 4: in a police van or dressed up as a police officer.
Speaker 5: So, I mean, there's up in.
Speaker 4: A downside to this, because the people that you really
Speaker 4: want to get to, the crims, this makes that more difficult.
Speaker 5: But yeah, the people who are less likely.
Speaker 4: To perpetrate crime will feel safer seeing the white.
Speaker 5: And blue checks. I don't know i'd be voting.
Speaker 3: But surely the idea is that it's better to prevent
Speaker 3: crime than to apprehend criminals. And so if someone who
Speaker 3: you know might be inclined to mug the bloke who's
Speaker 3: walking up the street sees a copper on the street,
Speaker 3: they're less likely to mug someone, Whereas if you have
Speaker 3: the plane clothes copper there, the mugger will do the
Speaker 3: mugging and then the copper will nab them. Surely it's
Speaker 3: better for the person not to be mugged in the
Speaker 3: first place.
Speaker 4: Surely it's better to have that person then off the street.
Speaker 3: Well, but if they see the copper, they're not going
Speaker 3: to do the mugging in the first place.
Speaker 1: I've always just.
Speaker 4: Mug someone at another time when they can't see a
Speaker 4: marked car or mugger, they're going to.
Speaker 2: Market participate the mugging and arrest people before the.
Speaker 1: Very very good point.
Speaker 3: But from a from a traffic policing point of view,
Speaker 3: I've always thought that when you've got unmarked police cars
Speaker 3: driving around, you know, just waiting for someone to go
Speaker 3: five kilometers over the limit or run a red light
Speaker 3: so they can nab you, they should have marked police
Speaker 3: cars everywhere because the idea is to catch you out
Speaker 3: doing something that in all likelihood really isn't that dangerous,
Speaker 3: but they make money out of it. It goes straight into
Speaker 3: government coffers. And it's the same as in New South Wales.
Speaker 3: Previously they got rid of the signs warning you that
Speaker 3: there was an unfixed you know, one of those movable
Speaker 3: speed cameras ahead, and then that was changed because it
Speaker 3: was upbroad because people are like, well, you know, I'm
Speaker 3: getting fined for things that I really didn't think was
Speaker 3: that bad. The idea is to entrap you into committing crimes,
Speaker 3: and I don't like.
Speaker 2: Have you ever seen it when you're driving along the
Speaker 2: road and there's a police car up ahead and it's
Speaker 2: a sixty zone, but the police car is doing like
Speaker 2: fifty two and everyone's crawling along at fifty. No one's
Speaker 2: game to go past him, even though you know you're
Speaker 2: not breaking the law, but you just do whatever he does.
Speaker 3: Indeed, let's go to another story about the Northern Territory
Speaker 3: Police and this one is not so edifying. On the
Speaker 3: front of The Australian Tomorrow in t Cops too busy
Speaker 3: to do welfare check on murdered Aboriginal woman. Northern Territory
Speaker 3: Police were too busy to conduct a welfare check on
Speaker 3: an Aboriginal woman nine hours before she was allegedly murdered
Speaker 3: by her partner, who had been banned from contacting her
Speaker 3: for two DECA AIDS cases like this seriously make you
Speaker 3: think either we have complete under resourcing of police or
Speaker 3: there is possibly incompetence within police. It's the most basic stuff.
Speaker 3: I'm sure there will be a lot more to be
Speaker 3: said about that. Another story on the front of the
Speaker 3: Olds Tomorrow, Funds go for class action profits. What have
Speaker 3: your superannuation funds been up to. Let's says here, Australia's
Speaker 3: larger super funds are investing millions of dollars in both
Speaker 3: litigation funders and companies they are targeting in court, amid
Speaker 3: renewed calls for a crackdown on international vulture firms reaping
Speaker 3: huge profits from the government's light touch approach to class actions.
Speaker 3: It's interesting because obviously when you launch a class action,
Speaker 3: it's generally funded by someone a big benefactor, whether that
Speaker 3: be a billionaire or a businessman, or in this case.
Speaker 1: Big super funds.
Speaker 3: And the idea is that if the class action is
Speaker 3: pulled off, the money that is won, the line's share
Speaker 3: of that will go to whoever funded, so they're hoping
Speaker 3: to make a profit and then the remainder get sent
Speaker 3: out to the people who joined in on the class action.
Speaker 3: But the superannuation funds are not only backing the cases,
Speaker 3: they're investing in the companies that the cases are being
Speaker 3: run against. And part of me wonders whether it's an
Speaker 3: engineering tactic where you run the case which then decreases
Speaker 3: the share price because people pull out of the company,
Speaker 3: and then the superannuation fund rules in and takes the
Speaker 3: shares while they're at a good price.
Speaker 1: Ingenious.
Speaker 2: What rule you're really embracing the whole conspiracy theory thing tonight?
Speaker 4: Well, why again, that is a common thing.
Speaker 1: Why would you invest in both? Why would you invest
Speaker 1: in both?
Speaker 4: Sounds see the way, smack, we need to Okay, once
Speaker 4: you start talking about kem trows, they're not old. I'll
Speaker 4: credit you with the conspiracy theory. But right now, you
Speaker 4: guys are spruiting your feathers about now now a conspiracy
Speaker 4: theory and it just sounds like pure common sense, which
Speaker 4: most conspiracies turn out to be. Just give it a
Speaker 4: few weeks, sometimes hours.
Speaker 3: But you know, and we are forced to give our
Speaker 3: money to these superannuation funds, and this is what they're
Speaker 3: doing with it. You know, they're running class actions and
Speaker 3: there's no of course, no guarantee that a class action
Speaker 3: is going to be pulled off. It's a high risk investment.
Speaker 3: I suppose you would call it. I'm sure we'd prefer
Speaker 3: they did something a little better with our money. Another
Speaker 3: story on the front of the Yours tomorrow, Labour takes
Speaker 3: power walk on tightrope and join kel from Kath and Kim.
Speaker 1: In that job.
Speaker 4: There.
Speaker 3: Households face an ongoing multi year risk of power shortages
Speaker 3: in New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia from this summer,
Speaker 3: with authorities warning that major reliability risks could derail the
Speaker 3: electricity grid unless new energy supplies.
Speaker 1: Are urgently developed.
Speaker 3: And of course we're told repeatedly that renewable energy is
Speaker 3: the cheapest form of energy. You've got nothing to worry about,
Speaker 3: and it may well be the cheapest form of energy
Speaker 3: because of course, if you can't turn the lights on
Speaker 3: because you have no power, you're not spending any money
Speaker 3: on your power bills.
Speaker 1: Your power bills will go.
Speaker 3: Down under this government, chiefly because you didn't have any
Speaker 3: power in the first place.
Speaker 2: This is like the slowest moving car crash that you've
Speaker 2: ever seen in your life. We've had these warnings repeatedly
Speaker 2: and eventually it'll all come crashing down and everyone will
Speaker 2: be surprised. But not it's been ample warning. Not you.
Speaker 2: We're going to go to a break when we come back.
Speaker 2: A international airline passenger criticized for making bread dough in
Speaker 2: mid air. That's coming up in a moment. All right,
Speaker 2: welcome back the Late Debates Chief Cat. Correspondent Caleb Bond
Speaker 2: has got a story from the UK.
Speaker 3: Indeed, you may well have seen Larry, the chief mouser
Speaker 3: at Number ten Downing Street before he was adopted by
Speaker 3: Number ten in twenty eleven to entertain David Cameron's kids
Speaker 3: at the time. He's now seen six Prime Ministers, David Cameron,
Speaker 3: Theresa May, Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, Rischie Sunak and Kiir Starmer.
Speaker 3: But poor old Larry is seventeen years old and they're
Speaker 3: a bit worried that he might cark at soon. And
Speaker 3: so in the spirit of the plans they come up
Speaker 3: with for royal family members when they die. When the
Speaker 3: Queen died, they executed Operation London Bridge. They've come up
Speaker 3: with Operation Larry Bridges and they have decided when the
Speaker 3: chief mouser at Number ten dies, and he's become such
Speaker 3: a popular public figure, they've got the pictures chosen out.
Speaker 3: They're stored in a server at Number ten, ready to go.
Speaker 3: They've written up the press release, they have the graphics,
Speaker 3: they have a.
Speaker 1: Social media plan.
Speaker 3: This cat Larry and you can see him there and
Speaker 3: he often likes to shoup when there are press conferences
Speaker 3: out the front of number ten, and he sort of
Speaker 3: sits there and waits at the door to be let in.
Speaker 3: When Larry finally leaves this world, he is going to
Speaker 3: get more press attention than almost any other person on
Speaker 3: the face of this planet. And you know what, of
Speaker 3: all the people who've lived in number ten in the
Speaker 3: last twenty years, I reckon Larry's the one who deserves
Speaker 3: it the most.
Speaker 2: It's also reported that Larry gave Liz Trust the cold shoulder,
Speaker 2: as did most of the UK publics a smart cat
Speaker 2: most of her even when she was in the number ten,
Speaker 2: everyone had forgotten about her. Hey, yeah, we've got to
Speaker 2: show you this woman who was on an international flight
Speaker 2: to Barcelona visiting her sister, and she thought what could
Speaker 2: I give my sister? When I arrived at the airport,
Speaker 2: she thought, I'm gonna give her some sour dough bread.
Speaker 2: So she began making the dough on the aircraft. She
Speaker 2: filmed herself doing it. She's copped a lot of flak.
Speaker 2: I tell you about that in a second. But to
Speaker 2: have a look at the video she created making dough
Speaker 2: on the aircraft flight. Why wouldn't you just watch a
Speaker 2: movie for goodness sake? Anyway, She's copped a lot of
Speaker 2: flak from people saying it was inconsiderate to people on
Speaker 2: the plane who might be allergic to wheat or to
Speaker 2: the flower, could become airborne and could cause toxicically in
Speaker 2: the aircraft cabin.
Speaker 5: Terrible everywhere.
Speaker 2: That's it from us stick Around. Coming up is the
Speaker 2: Rita Pennahe Show.