Speaker 1: Lately.
Speaker 2: Welcome to the Late Base.
Speaker 3: Well, thanks for joining us on the Late Debate. I'm
Speaker 3: James Macpherson with Caleb Bond and freyer Leitch. Coming up tonight,
Speaker 3: Sydney Airport set to auction lost property. Wait until you
Speaker 3: hear some of the unusual items that passengers have left
Speaker 3: on planes that you can buy at an auction later
Speaker 3: this month. Plus when we look at the papers, grocery
Speaker 3: items set to increase in cost due to natural disasters,
Speaker 3: and an interesting story on one of the front pages
Speaker 3: tomorrow about the one city in this country where business
Speaker 3: is booming. We'll tell you what that city is and
Speaker 3: why we think it's the case a little later. But first,
Speaker 3: South Australian school teachers are set to use AI to
Speaker 3: mark student exams. Education Minister Blair Boyer says the technology
Speaker 3: will give teachers more time to teach. The Australian newspaper
Speaker 3: reported today that the task, or at least one of
Speaker 3: the tasks that AI will accomplish, to gauge the literacy
Speaker 3: levels of migrant students, usually taking teachers half an hour,
Speaker 3: but the AI app does the same job in just
Speaker 3: fifty two seconds. Last year, teachers manly assessed writing samples
Speaker 3: of thirty one thousand students. The app is set to
Speaker 3: save some fifteen thousand hours of manpower. Now, Freyer and Caleber,
Speaker 3: I get why the Education minister would love this idea.
Speaker 3: It means he doesn't have to spend more money on teachers.
Speaker 3: But I reckon the focus of education should not be
Speaker 3: saving the education budget.
Speaker 4: It should be on children.
Speaker 3: And using AI to mark their exams rather than a
Speaker 3: human being means that you don't get a.
Speaker 4: Teacher who's got a feel.
Speaker 3: For the strengths and weaknesses of students, and instead you're
Speaker 3: going to get a very mechanical rather than a process
Speaker 3: that is focused on individuals.
Speaker 4: I think that's a bad thing. Freyer, tell me, I'm right.
Speaker 5: I don't think you are. James.
Speaker 6: Look, I think that AI is going to revolutionize so
Speaker 6: many areas of our lives, and education is definitely one
Speaker 6: of them. But from my perspective, having AI assisting teachers
Speaker 6: in marking papers will be absolutely transformative.
Speaker 5: Because about twenty percent of a.
Speaker 6: Teacher's week is spent marking or writing student reports.
Speaker 5: Twenty percent. That's around ten hours.
Speaker 6: Imagine if that time could be spent well tru actually
Speaker 6: looking after students. Well, a lot of it is like
Speaker 6: standardized assessments that AI can very easily mark with less bias,
Speaker 6: often more accurately, in a and in a much timelier fashion.
Speaker 6: We've all been in that experience in school where you
Speaker 6: do an assessment only to get the feedback a month later,
Speaker 6: and at that point it's useless anyway. So I just
Speaker 6: see a whole bunch of positives.
Speaker 3: But it isn't that nature if we need more teachers
Speaker 3: rather than AI is superior, because sure it's no bias,
Speaker 3: but there's no nuance, there's no understanding of the individual
Speaker 3: studentuds progress and where they're at.
Speaker 2: Well, we've just had an each way elbow, so let
Speaker 2: me do an each way elbow here. I can see
Speaker 2: the four and against. I think there's probably a middle
Speaker 2: ground where teachers incorporate AI into their work, but we
Speaker 2: must not let AI supersede the teacher. And as for
Speaker 2: getting more time back, they probably won't because teachers do
Speaker 2: a lot of marking in their own time. It has
Speaker 2: to be noted they take stuff home and do it
Speaker 2: outside of school hours because there's simply no time in
Speaker 2: school hours to get that stuff done, so it won't
Speaker 2: actually buy them much time back in the classroom. That's
Speaker 2: not the issue, but it will speed up the process
Speaker 2: and AI will pick up on things that teachers might otherwise,
Speaker 2: basic spelling errors and grammatical errors that when you've got
Speaker 2: thirty papers to go through and you get to paper
Speaker 2: twenty nine and you're kind of like, man, I need
Speaker 2: a cup of coffee and or a glass of red
Speaker 2: to get through the last one. AI won't have those problems.
Speaker 2: But you are entirely right that what makes a good
Speaker 2: teacher is the teachers care for the student, and so
Speaker 2: the teacher understanding where a particular student is at, how
Speaker 2: a particular student performs the particular issues that they're having
Speaker 2: with the English language, or mathematics or whatever it might be, tenses,
Speaker 2: you know, one hundred different things that a teacher can
Speaker 2: instinctively feel and work with a student on. AI will
Speaker 2: never be able to achieve. And the issue I have
Speaker 2: is that we are going heading towards a world where
Speaker 2: AI is going to replace lots of jobs, and then
Speaker 2: we'll all be sitting around wondering, Oh, which is, who's
Speaker 2: got any money left to spend? Because no one's got
Speaker 2: any jobs anymore because AI is doing it all. So yes,
Speaker 2: use it, but don't do it in a way that
Speaker 2: means we as a people have nothing left to do.
Speaker 4: I remember when I was.
Speaker 3: At school, right, So you get a report card and
Speaker 3: the report card was handwritten by the teacher, which would
Speaker 3: have been laborious and would have taken ages. And as
Speaker 3: you said, they would get to kid number twenty nine
Speaker 3: and no doubt they'd be shortcutting. So they replace that
Speaker 3: with a tick the box thing like your child is
Speaker 3: doing doing excellent, good, average, poor, very poor, And every
Speaker 3: parent watching would know school reports tell you virtually nothing.
Speaker 4: These days.
Speaker 3: You have to go along to the parent teacher night
Speaker 3: to sit down with a human being to actually find
Speaker 3: out what's going on, because the report has become so
Speaker 3: standardized and mechanical. And before you jump in, I jump in.
Speaker 6: Go on, you know what could give you a really
Speaker 6: detailed breakdown of exactly where your child is at, analyzing
Speaker 6: every single assessment they've done, picking up on every bit
Speaker 6: of syntax, eraror grammar numerously if it's in mathematics AI
Speaker 6: because they can process vast quads and then give you
Speaker 6: an extremely personalized.
Speaker 4: Reportext message how it's going to go.
Speaker 3: I got a voice of myil message from my mom today, right,
Speaker 3: and my phone converts the voice my message to text,
Speaker 3: and my mom sends me a message. Right at three
Speaker 3: times she says, hey, babe, that's not the way my
Speaker 3: mom talks.
Speaker 2: You're not from that is not AI, that is AI.
Speaker 4: Somehow I'm going to find every syntax. And my other
Speaker 4: case soon is where does this go? I mean it.
Speaker 3: Starts with AI marketing exams and eventually we end up
Speaker 3: with classrooms like this.
Speaker 7: Somebody's got to alert the media and expose to everyone
Speaker 7: that this AI teacher thing is corrupt.
Speaker 2: Put the phone.
Speaker 8: Down than Yeah, I'll call it, Tim, We're right.
Speaker 3: I think it's a bad idea, getting robots AI whatever
Speaker 3: you want to call it, to do jobs that teachers
Speaker 3: used to do. They used to do it. Well, we
Speaker 3: just need more teachers. That's an issue for governments. Find
Speaker 3: the money for the budget for teaching. There's plenty of
Speaker 3: places to find government wastage. You don't need to revert
Speaker 3: to AI to.
Speaker 2: Say don't don't please, don't start talking about teaching in
Speaker 2: an education budget, James. We spend more than enough on education.
Speaker 2: We just don't spend it properly because we haven't gone
Speaker 2: back to the drawing board and redesigned the system. But
Speaker 2: you know again, I'll say what I said earlier. I
Speaker 2: have no issue with AI being involved if it's a
Speaker 2: tool that the teacher themselves is using to make their
Speaker 2: work better. Because look, if the AI is a ripper
Speaker 2: at doing the marketing, why couldn't the AIB ripper at
Speaker 2: teaching the students. I mean, you can do it with
Speaker 2: complete accuracy. I mean the kids will just be sitting
Speaker 2: in front of a screen all day. They'll have no
Speaker 2: human interaction whatsoever, no one who actually cares about We'll
Speaker 2: just get a robot to do everything.
Speaker 4: Why would the kid do an assignment if AI can
Speaker 4: do the assignment? We have AI marketing exactly exactly.
Speaker 2: That's where were living. And of course we showed you
Speaker 2: this vision a few weeks ago. I think of a
Speaker 2: bloke who was programming and an AI robot, and I
Speaker 2: think this was in China and something went amiss and
Speaker 2: it sort of went tropo at him, And I imagine
Speaker 2: that's what a lot of these AI robots will look
Speaker 2: like when they're going if you do badly exactly well,
Speaker 2: that that's how the robot will be feeling as it's
Speaker 2: trying to work out what the hell that kid in
Speaker 2: year ten meant. I can't believe a ray of common
Speaker 2: sense has come through today. You know, if you're a
Speaker 2: regular viewer of this program or any other program I've
Speaker 2: been on across Sky, if you're a regular reader of
Speaker 2: my columns, you will know for years I have been
Speaker 2: carrying on about the fact that the tobacco exercise in
Speaker 2: this country is way too high, and for years I
Speaker 2: have been warning that it will lead to a massive
Speaker 2: illegal tobacco black market. That is exactly what we have now.
Speaker 2: The latest numbers are that last year, forty percent of
Speaker 2: all cigarette sales in this country we're of illegal cigarettes.
Speaker 2: This is a problem created by the federal government because
Speaker 2: they are the ones who levy the tax, and then
Speaker 2: the poor old states are left to clean up the mess,
Speaker 2: because of course it's the states that have the police
Speaker 2: forces and enforce the local laws about the sale of tobacco.
Speaker 2: So the states are saying, for Heaven's sake, can you
Speaker 2: stop sending these illegal tobacco shops to our states. You know,
Speaker 2: in Victoria there have been more than one hundred fire bombings.
Speaker 2: It's spreading now to New South Wales and the New
Speaker 2: South Wales Premier Chris Mins says something must be done
Speaker 2: about it. He said today we ought to look at
Speaker 2: reducing the tobacco excise. Take a look.
Speaker 9: I'm not arguing with the public health benefits of putting
Speaker 9: an excise on tobacco, but the massive increase has exploded
Speaker 9: the ilicit tobacco marketplace.
Speaker 2: Indeed it has He's quite correct. Go and look on
Speaker 2: any main street anywhere in the country now they're just
Speaker 2: full of tobacconists. And yet I thought everyone was giving
Speaker 2: up smoking. I wonder why this might be. He said,
Speaker 2: the federal government's not getting the excise that they thought
Speaker 2: they would. The massive excise increase to tobacco has meant
Speaker 2: that people haven't stopped smoking. They've just transferred their sales
Speaker 2: into illegal tobacco sales, which I don't think is helping
Speaker 2: New South Wales or any other state. So my view
Speaker 2: is let's have a look at this policy and is
Speaker 2: it working. No, it's not, is the simple answer there.
Speaker 2: It takes the Premiere of New South Wales to point
Speaker 2: this out. He also says, as we're formulating the budget,
Speaker 2: the New South Wales government and the police are going
Speaker 2: to have to make a decision about ruling out resources
Speaker 2: to confront what is absolutely illegal behavior that is getting
Speaker 2: police to tackle this crime crisis in terms of illegal tobacco.
Speaker 2: He says that would mean allocating police officers that are
Speaker 2: currently working on domestic violence cases and youth crime cases
Speaker 2: and major organized crime networks in New South Wales, take
Speaker 2: them off those important inquiries and send them into tobacco regulation. Yes,
Speaker 2: ladies and gentlemen, this is where we are in twenty
Speaker 2: twenty five, when a packet of legal cigarettes costs forty
Speaker 2: to fifty dollars because the federal government is greedy and
Speaker 2: thinks it needs all that tax. And then you look
Speaker 2: around and everyone's now buying the illegal stuff. I mean,
Speaker 2: we knew this was coming. It was always going to happen.
Speaker 2: Chris Means is absolutely right. The excise has to drop
Speaker 2: if you want any hope of fixing this problem.
Speaker 5: Two things can be true at once.
Speaker 6: It is true that the tobacco excise is driving people
Speaker 6: to the black market where they can get substantially cheaper cigarettes.
Speaker 5: But it is also true that in New South Wales there.
Speaker 6: Are about twenty tobacco compliance officers in the Department of
Speaker 6: Health not even operating out of the police in the
Speaker 6: Health department who are responsible for regulating twenty thousand tobacconists
Speaker 6: in the state, twenty bureaucrats regulating twenty thousand tobacconists, many
Speaker 6: of whom who are participating the black market have links
Speaker 6: to organized crime. I think the primary issue here is
Speaker 6: why are the police not regulating tobacco at the moment.
Speaker 6: And I would say this is more of a failure
Speaker 6: of Chris Minz's labor government to not step in earlier
Speaker 6: and actually have the police crack down. You can just
Speaker 6: walk down any main street and spot the illegal tobacconists yourself.
Speaker 6: I don't get how hard it is to just look
Speaker 6: on Google maps tobacconists, go in, find the illegal cigarettes.
Speaker 5: And shut it down.
Speaker 3: I think Chrismin's explained why they're not shutting these illegal
Speaker 3: outfits downs because they're dealing with domestic violence, they're dealing
Speaker 3: with youth crime. And if those then hire a law police,
Speaker 3: then they could go after a lease.
Speaker 2: So Chris Mins, So Chris Mens has to fix up
Speaker 2: Elbow's problem, that's what you're saying.
Speaker 6: I'm saying Chris Mens needs to enforce the law by
Speaker 6: getting police to shut down illegal tobacco.
Speaker 2: You wouldn't have a legal problem if the federal government
Speaker 2: wasn't so greedy with its ridiculous tobacco x.
Speaker 6: You also wouldn't have this problem if Tobacconis knew that
Speaker 6: if they sold illegal cigarettes they would end up in
Speaker 6: jail for seven years.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well you can, well you can threaten that. They've
Speaker 2: already done that into state, by the way, and it
Speaker 2: doesn't seem to have changed anything in Victoria or South Australia,
Speaker 2: where the tobacco wars wars sorry, are continuing to spread.
Speaker 2: I mean, the facts are obvious that the federal government,
Speaker 2: what was it four or five years ago, was pulling
Speaker 2: in nearly seventeen billion dollars a year in tobacco excise.
Speaker 2: This year they project by the end of the financial
Speaker 2: year they've pulled in seven point four billion dollars. That
Speaker 2: is an enormous decrease. The smoking rate has only gone
Speaker 2: from ten percent to about eight point six in that time,
Speaker 2: so it almost halve your excise. Tells you where the
Speaker 2: market is going. It's all going to illegal cigarettes, principally
Speaker 2: because the federal government has increased the price of cigarettes
Speaker 2: so much and I would say you could dramatically drop
Speaker 2: the price of cigarettes. Let's go from forty fifty dollars
Speaker 2: down to what you're paying for a packet of the
Speaker 2: illegal ones fifteen to twenty dollars, and it will make
Speaker 2: zero difference to the smoking rate, because in the US,
Speaker 2: with this smoking rate is ten percent, a packet of
Speaker 2: durries Australian dollars on average costing twelve dollars and thirty cents,
Speaker 2: and their smoking rate is almost the same as ours,
Speaker 2: So it doesn't work in stopping people.
Speaker 3: I'm very sympathetic to your argument that we want to
Speaker 3: crack down on crime and we don't want to go
Speaker 3: easy on criminals. But this is a crime that was
Speaker 3: literally created by the Government's very different to most other
Speaker 3: crimes that are crime against people or that are obvious.
Speaker 3: This one would not exist except for government policy. So
Speaker 3: the government could change their policy, the crime disappears, police.
Speaker 4: Can focus on what's important. That's chris Min's point.
Speaker 6: Well, the last thing I would add to that before
Speaker 6: we move on, is that these illegal gangs who are
Speaker 6: running the tobacconists would have been dealing in hard drugs
Speaker 6: or other things, but they've done the risk reward calculation
Speaker 6: and realize, heck, I can make a lot of money
Speaker 6: selling illegal tobacco and I won't get caught because the
Speaker 6: police aren't even enforcing the law.
Speaker 5: So let's start there before we cut.
Speaker 2: The way and the border force, by the way, because
Speaker 2: it all comes through entertainers, so you know, the federal
Speaker 2: government's creatory.
Speaker 6: So the failure of law enforcement and policy at many,
Speaker 6: many levels. But let's move on now to the US,
Speaker 6: where Donald Trump's ongoing feud with Harvard is quite entertaining.
Speaker 6: Initially it was all around getting them to take stronger
Speaker 6: action on anti Semitism, but now his crackdown on Harvard's
Speaker 6: international students has expanded to Chinese international students as well.
Speaker 6: Now it has been noted in an article that the
Speaker 6: Harvard University is such a popular university for the Chinese
Speaker 6: Communist Party to send its officials, its rising political stars to.
Speaker 5: It's even been named the party school.
Speaker 6: Many senior CCP officials, including former VPS, members of the
Speaker 6: Chinese Pollit Bureau, and even Jijingping's own daughter have gone
Speaker 6: to Harvard University. So that raises some significant concerns. It's
Speaker 6: also deeply concerning when you think about the number of
Speaker 6: international research collaborations between the US and China, also Australia
Speaker 6: and China, and the potential access to sensitive information that
Speaker 6: the CCP may be getting through our universities. I just
Speaker 6: find that particularly shocking, and it's a problem we have
Speaker 6: here in Australia as well, because the reality is the
Speaker 6: fees for international students at Western universities are so high
Speaker 6: that really only the elites of Chinese society can afford
Speaker 6: to send their kids to Western universities. But then the
Speaker 6: next question is who are the elites of Chinese society.
Speaker 6: Chances are at some point you've either had to be
Speaker 6: a member of the CCP to advance in your political career,
Speaker 6: in your business career, or at least not critical.
Speaker 5: And so I think Donald.
Speaker 6: Trump's efforts to root out CCP influence and infiltration on
Speaker 6: US university campuses is very welcome. I just wonder if
Speaker 6: our government here in Australia would ever have the guts
Speaker 6: to do the same thing.
Speaker 4: Well, it's a really good question.
Speaker 3: Let's ever listen to Homeland Security Secretary Christy Nome talking
Speaker 3: about what the Trump administration is so upset about, particularly
Speaker 3: with regards Harvard.
Speaker 10: They've allowed their students to participate in activities that are
Speaker 10: paramilitary activities and supported them and feeding information back to
Speaker 10: our enemy, which is communist China. In fact, even the
Speaker 10: lead Hijipingov China's daughter has a degree from Harvard. And
Speaker 10: hundreds of thousands of these foreign students have come into
Speaker 10: our country, and our universities have facilitated it because they
Speaker 10: pay full tuition. They've taken away opportunities from our American students.
Speaker 3: And the universities have asked for this, haven't day frayer
Speaker 3: because they have been given opportunity to do something about
Speaker 3: anti Semitism, about discrimination, about work ideology that they continue
Speaker 3: to perpetuate, and about the Chinese influence, and on every
Speaker 3: point they've declined.
Speaker 4: To take any action.
Speaker 3: Famously, the former president of Harvard University, Claudine Gay, said
Speaker 3: that calling for Jews to be killed was probably wrong
Speaker 3: depending on the context. Well, no wonder the Trump administration
Speaker 3: has had to step in. I just think we've found
Speaker 3: out over the last couple of years that universities are
Speaker 3: ground zero for a lot of the ills that are
Speaker 3: besetting Western culture. And sure it's going to cost universities.
Speaker 3: It's going to cost business. It's going to cost reputation
Speaker 3: Trump to take the action he's taking. But you either
Speaker 3: pay now or you pay later. And Trump has just
Speaker 3: decided at some point we've got to deal with foreign
Speaker 3: influence in our nation being imported by universities without regard
Speaker 3: for what it's doing to the social fabric, let alone
Speaker 3: to national security. So you say, we'll pay the price now,
Speaker 3: we'll deal with it. And that's what he's doing. And
Speaker 3: I take your point. I think it's something that the
Speaker 3: Australian government. I don't think they will, but the Australian
Speaker 3: government could have a look at as well.
Speaker 2: You mean, the handsome boy won't be taking much notice
Speaker 2: of whether or not we're training up CCP operatives. I'm
Speaker 2: truly shocked, James, and we should note you say there
Speaker 2: that you know, universities have become the source of any
Speaker 2: of the ills of the world by design. You know,
Speaker 2: this has all been very deliberate. This is what the
Speaker 2: long March for the institutions is all about. But why
Speaker 2: should we sovereign nations in the West voluntarily train up
Speaker 2: people to go back to you know, what are essentially
Speaker 2: enemy countries like China and use the skills that we
Speaker 2: have given them to then go on and become the
Speaker 2: ruling class. We have no obligation to do that. The
Speaker 2: problem is universities have become businesses. And it's true across
Speaker 2: the Western world. It's no longer any more about creating
Speaker 2: bright minds and fostering bright minds and people who go
Speaker 2: on to achieve great things for their country. It's become
Speaker 2: about how many dollars you can get through the front door.
Speaker 2: I've said it many times. Where we went wrong in
Speaker 2: Australia was when Julia Gillard uncapped university enrollments in I
Speaker 2: think it was twenty ten, and that was basically the
Speaker 2: green light to say that anyone and everyone can go
Speaker 2: to university, and anyone and everyone should go to university,
Speaker 2: and especially if you want to pay full to odds
Speaker 2: to come from overseas, because we want that money. Why
Speaker 2: would we give that privilege to people who we know
Speaker 2: traceably are going to go back and then do things
Speaker 2: that may well harm our own country. I mean we
Speaker 2: may as well pick up the phone right now and say,
Speaker 2: oh you Mobert Harmas, get your ass down Australia were
Speaker 2: we're going to train you up. I mean, that is
Speaker 2: how ridiculous. The proposition is of training up the sons
Speaker 2: and daughters of CCP members.
Speaker 3: Yeah. Well, if CCP members want to skip the US
Speaker 3: and come to Australia, they can go to Macquarie and
Speaker 3: become experts in indigenous studies.
Speaker 2: Or they could win, Yeah, and will lock them up
Speaker 2: like they did to Chung Lay. I mean, you know,
Speaker 2: fear fear.
Speaker 4: I tell you what's funny. Though.
Speaker 3: The Guardian were reporting on this and they reckon that
Speaker 3: the reason Trump is cracking down on universities, He's trying
Speaker 3: to stifle all descent so he can implement his authoritarian agenda.
Speaker 4: So there you go, speaking of funny.
Speaker 3: I had to laugh at advertisements taken out in major newspapers,
Speaker 3: particularly the Australian Financial Review over the weekend by TikTok.
Speaker 3: They took out four and a half pages of advertising
Speaker 3: to promote themselves to parents. TikTok, as it turns out,
Speaker 3: is an educational tool.
Speaker 11: Now.
Speaker 3: The reason they're doing this is the Albanezy government has
Speaker 3: promised by the end of this year to introduce age
Speaker 3: restrictions on social media. YouTube has been left out of
Speaker 3: that because YouTube have convinced the government it's an educational tool.
Speaker 3: So TikTok is now arguing where educational. Some of their
Speaker 3: arguments are.
Speaker 4: TikTok gets kids outside. Did you know that? Because you
Speaker 4: can watch phishing content on.
Speaker 3: TikTok and that'll encourage your kids to go out and fish.
Speaker 4: Who knew? Plus they have videos of science and maths.
Speaker 3: And I've got two kids, and I know when they're
Speaker 3: in their rooms on TikTok they're looking at videos on
Speaker 3: science and maths.
Speaker 2: Did you say maths or maths because there's plenty of
Speaker 2: maths content on me.
Speaker 3: Here is Tristan Harris is the co founder of Center
Speaker 3: for Human Tech talking about the way TikTok manipulate their
Speaker 3: algorithms to set up kids in the West for things
Speaker 3: they'd never do to their own children in China.
Speaker 1: If you're under fourteen years old, they show you science
Speaker 1: experiments you can do at home, museum exhibits patriotism videos
Speaker 1: and educational videos, and they also limit it to only
Speaker 1: forty minutes per day. Now, they don't ship that version
Speaker 1: of TikTok to the rest of the world, so it's
Speaker 1: almost like they recognize that technology is influencing kids development,
Speaker 1: and they make their domestic version a spinach version of TikTok,
Speaker 1: while they've shipped the opium version to the rest of
Speaker 1: the world.
Speaker 4: I reckon he's spot on.
Speaker 3: But let me show you, just briefly one more thing
Speaker 3: he says, which I think is quite pertinent to what's
Speaker 3: happening right now in Western culture because of social media
Speaker 3: platforms like TikTok.
Speaker 1: There's a survey of pre teens in the US and
Speaker 1: China asking what is the most aspirational career that you
Speaker 1: want to have, and the US the number one was.
Speaker 5: Influencer, social media influencer, and in.
Speaker 1: China the number one was astronaut. Again, you will allow
Speaker 1: those two societies to play out for a few generations.
Speaker 1: I can tell you what your world is going to.
Speaker 3: Look like now, Kindabin Fray, I actually don't agree with
Speaker 3: the government's attempt to ban sixteen year old and under
Speaker 3: from accessing social media, but I certainly don't agree with
Speaker 3: TikTok that their device is educational exactly.
Speaker 2: I mean, I still believe that the age band will
Speaker 2: be unworkable and all the various things that come along
Speaker 2: with it are troubling in terms of biometric data that
Speaker 2: will have to be kept, and all this kind of stuff,
Speaker 2: but I mean, come on, pull the other one. Not
Speaker 2: only have they taken out these ads in the AFR,
Speaker 2: they've got billboards going around. I saw them walking through
Speaker 2: Melbourne Airport this morning. They've got billboards up there. They're
Speaker 2: all over the place now extolling the virtues of just
Speaker 2: how good TikTok is. But as you heard there, if
Speaker 2: TikTok were as great as it supposedly is, why do
Speaker 2: they have a completely different version in China. It's because
Speaker 2: it is designed to rot Western brains. And it might
Speaker 2: sound like hyperbole, but it is genuinely the point of
Speaker 2: TikTok to rot Western brains. So I won't go into
Speaker 2: too much detail, because you know, I don't want to
Speaker 2: particularly older viewers with the intricacies of how young people
Speaker 2: use the Internet. But there is a certain class of
Speaker 2: meme that is referred to ironically as brain rot, right,
Speaker 2: which is, you know, online jokes and videos and content
Speaker 2: that are completely meaningless and of no value to anyone.
Speaker 2: They literally call it brain rot, and that is the
Speaker 2: precise point of what TikTok is doing. It's designed to
Speaker 2: destroy your attention span because everything has to be taken
Speaker 2: in thirty minute doses, or they're sorry, thirty second thirty minutes,
Speaker 2: fantastic thirty second doses. You're constantly scrolling because it is
Speaker 2: moving so fast, and you lose track of time. You're
Speaker 2: watching stuff that is of absolutely no value to you whatsoever.
Speaker 2: It's so easy to fall into it, and China knows
Speaker 2: that that's why they're doing it. They want to weaken
Speaker 2: kids in the West so they can send their CCP
Speaker 2: kids to come to Harvard and take over the world.
Speaker 2: That is the point of TikTok. I don't know why
Speaker 2: we haven't banned the whole thing outright.
Speaker 6: And there are some other concerns as well, apart from
Speaker 6: the impact this is having on ch children's mental health,
Speaker 6: also the national security concerns. If you look at the
Speaker 6: data that TikTok tracks, it's far more invasive than any
Speaker 6: other social media platform. It tracks your unique device identifier,
Speaker 6: It can track your precise geolocation, you'll biometric data, how
Speaker 6: you speak, what you look like. It is extremely invasive,
Speaker 6: and then you have to ask where's that data being stored,
Speaker 6: And of course it's Chinese parent company has access to
Speaker 6: all of it, so it is extremely terrifying.
Speaker 5: I don't know why people aren't more concerned about that.
Speaker 2: Kraya, don't you have a TikTok account?
Speaker 5: Yes, but to post the long is it's still here.
Speaker 5: We have to reach young people with.
Speaker 6: Our message, so if they're going to be on TikTok,
Speaker 6: we've got to be on there.
Speaker 2: So we have to give in to the Chinese spy
Speaker 2: we're in order to talk to.
Speaker 6: Young people, well, we have to be on the platforms
Speaker 6: where young people are. I don't support TikTok as a platform,
Speaker 6: but if young people are going to be there. Something
Speaker 6: like thirty five percent of gen z get their news
Speaker 6: from TikTok, so why not there?
Speaker 5: What are they seeing?
Speaker 2: But doesn't it It becomes a chicken and egg thing
Speaker 2: because by support by using TikTok, you support the platform
Speaker 2: right and people will go to TikTok to get the
Speaker 2: content that you create, so you continue creating a market
Speaker 2: for TikTok. Like you know, Sky and News made a
Speaker 2: principal decision that we would remove ourselves from TikTok because
Speaker 2: we took a stand on what they were doing and
Speaker 2: said no, we just can't be part of that anymore.
Speaker 2: So by being part of it, does it not just
Speaker 2: perpetuate the value of TikTok.
Speaker 6: It does to an extent, but I would still say
Speaker 6: that it is incredibly influential in the Voice to Parliament referendum.
Speaker 6: The TikTok's that I made got millions of views in
Speaker 6: the last federal election as well. Hundreds of thousands of
Speaker 6: young people saw the videos that I created, and TikTok
Speaker 6: has a unique ability to reach people because things go
Speaker 6: viral so easily. The risk in that is we have
Speaker 6: no idea how the algorithms work and could be heavily
Speaker 6: manipulated to sow division within Australian society, which they probably are.
Speaker 6: But again, as long as young people are on there,
Speaker 6: if where not, they just simply will not hear our message.
Speaker 5: So I would rather be on there and.
Speaker 6: Risk the Chinese spyware and at least try and reach
Speaker 6: out to young people.
Speaker 2: This is why I say we've got a ban it,
Speaker 2: because there's just no other way of fixing it. It
Speaker 2: is Chinese spy where it is designed to rock Western kids' brains.
Speaker 2: I don't know why we tolerate it. It's as simple
Speaker 2: as this. Could the ABC or Sky News or anyone
Speaker 2: else go over to China and start a media outlet
Speaker 2: or a social media company. No, so why do we
Speaker 2: let them do it?
Speaker 11: Here?
Speaker 2: Let's move on to another topic. Down in South Australia,
Speaker 2: a couple of councils recently have decided that if you
Speaker 2: have a stillborn child, they will waive the burial fees
Speaker 2: at the cemetery. And fair enough fits up to each
Speaker 2: individual council to make these decisions. But one council that
Speaker 2: had emotion come up to do exactly that and said no,
Speaker 2: has come under fire because you know, they're saying, how
Speaker 2: heartless could you possibly be to say no to getting
Speaker 2: rid of burial fees for still born children. This is
Speaker 2: narrow court Lucindale Council down in the southeast of South
Speaker 2: Australia where they had this motion come up and only
Speaker 2: three councilors supported it, so it's fallen over. One of
Speaker 2: the councilors who didn't support it, Cameron Grundy, I think,
Speaker 2: made a very good observation and he said that it
Speaker 2: sets out if they do this, it sets out to
Speaker 2: put a price on grief, and that your grief is
Speaker 2: more deserving than mine, so we'll go and wave the fees.
Speaker 2: From that perspective, it's problematic philosophically, it's inconsistent, I think
Speaker 2: and look, I loathe to say a good word about
Speaker 2: councils or to support them in any way, but I
Speaker 2: think the bloke has a point because I understand why
Speaker 2: people might be upset that they haven't waived the fee
Speaker 2: for still born children. But then if your kid gets
Speaker 2: run over when they're three years old, do you not
Speaker 2: then deserve to have the burial fee waved. If your
Speaker 2: wife of forty years dies and you're completely devastated and
Speaker 2: this is the end of life as you know it,
Speaker 2: do you not deserve to have the burial fee waved.
Speaker 2: The reality is the temmetries have to be maintained by someone,
Speaker 2: in many cases their councils. Surely everyone pays the same
Speaker 2: price of admission. You can't just can't divide them up
Speaker 2: and say, well, you get this price and you get
Speaker 2: that price, because your grief is different to someone else.
Speaker 3: You're looking at about what is it five hundred and
Speaker 3: seventy dollars to about twelve hundred dollars depending on which
Speaker 3: symmetry it is in that particular shire. And I guess
Speaker 3: everyone will be sympathetic to anybody who's had any kind
Speaker 3: of loss.
Speaker 4: But once you start.
Speaker 3: Picking and choosing, there was a suggestion, Freya, why don't
Speaker 3: we introduce a hardship application where families who have lost
Speaker 3: a loved one, whatever the circumstances, and can't afford or
Speaker 3: are struggling to afford a burial would be given help
Speaker 3: by counsel.
Speaker 4: But it's not because of the kind of death.
Speaker 3: It's because of the need of the people who are
Speaker 3: seeking help.
Speaker 6: Well, I do understand the argument you guys are making,
Speaker 6: but I would say that losing a child, especially having
Speaker 6: a stillborn birth, is different because.
Speaker 5: It is so unexpected.
Speaker 6: And I think the hardest thing any parent could ever
Speaker 6: do is say goodbye to a child, because you're not
Speaker 6: only saying goodbye to your child, You're saying goodbye.
Speaker 5: To a future you never got to have.
Speaker 6: Whereas when you're burying someone who died in the natural
Speaker 6: course of life, there's more time to process, more time
Speaker 6: to grieve, you can kind of anticipate it a bit more.
Speaker 6: But with children, that is that it violates the natural
Speaker 6: order of life. And so look, I don't know if
Speaker 6: there's an easy answer here, because I do understand what
Speaker 6: you're saying. Once you make exceptions for these people? Do
Speaker 6: you make exceptions for them? But I would say grief,
Speaker 6: the grief of losing a child is different. It is
Speaker 6: not to say other grief is not painful, but it
Speaker 6: is different because it violates the natural order of life.
Speaker 6: And so I think we should I think we should
Speaker 6: be a compassionate society and do everything we can to
Speaker 6: help people who experience that.
Speaker 3: It's one of those interesting ones to debate, isn't it,
Speaker 3: Because you just said we should be a compassionate society.
Speaker 3: The danger is then you imply anybody like those at
Speaker 3: the council who say no, we're not going to do this,
Speaker 3: is lacking in compassion. But of course they were saying,
Speaker 3: we've got compassion for everybody, so we can't pick and choose.
Speaker 3: It's a difficult one to debate because you end up
Speaker 3: looking bad whichever way you get.
Speaker 6: And then the challenge is with stillborns as well. This
Speaker 6: is a council of eight thousand people. Statistically, how many
Speaker 6: stillborns are they going to have?
Speaker 5: One every one to two years?
Speaker 6: It is such a small, insignificant part of their overall
Speaker 6: budget six hundred dollars every two years. Say like, seriously, seriously,
Speaker 6: can you not find six hundred dollars we cover that,
Speaker 6: we talk about the stuff council spend money on. I'm
Speaker 6: sure they can find six hundred dollars to help a
Speaker 6: family who's just been through hell.
Speaker 3: The truth is they can't find the six hundred dollars
Speaker 3: because they're two hundred thousand dollars in deficit this budget
Speaker 3: for a town of eight thousand people. So maybe if
Speaker 3: they manage their budget better, there would be the capacity
Speaker 3: to do things like that. Speaking of managing budgets better,
Speaker 3: let's talk about Victoria and specifically the City of Melbourne.
Speaker 3: They've decided they going to manage their budget better by
Speaker 3: continuing to impose taxes on already over burdened citizens. The
Speaker 3: City of Melbourne is now charging businesses a special levee,
Speaker 3: or rather, businesses that collect rubbish will be charged a
Speaker 3: special levee in order to be allowed to collect the
Speaker 3: rubbish from the streets of Melbourne five five hundred dollars
Speaker 3: to those companies that go around emptying the bins in
Speaker 3: the city. This is on top of a levee that's
Speaker 3: already been imposed on businesses where their bin is on
Speaker 3: public land. They have to pay a special tax as well,
Speaker 3: and so it's just tax upon tax. Of course, the
Speaker 3: levee for those who are collecting the rubbish will be
Speaker 3: passed on to businesses who has a seid already paying
Speaker 3: a tax for having a bin sitting on the footpath.
Speaker 3: It just goes from bad to worse in Victoria. But
Speaker 3: I love the reason given by a council spokesperson who said,
Speaker 3: our community has told us that these trucks, these are
Speaker 3: the garbage trucks are clogging our streets. Why they're cloging
Speaker 3: the streets Calaber is because of all those bike lanes
Speaker 3: that the City of Melbourne put in place zone creating
Speaker 3: noise around the clock and negatively impacting public amenity. I'll
Speaker 3: tell you what would negatively impact public amenity, and that
Speaker 3: is if the garbage collectors just refuse to collect the
Speaker 3: garbage in protest at this five and a half thousand
Speaker 3: dollars levy that's being imposed upon them. The council spokesperson
Speaker 3: went on to say, I love this. The fee quote
Speaker 3: would encourage more efficient operations and reduce the number of
Speaker 3: trucks on our roads.
Speaker 4: Direct its can encourage people who more efficient.
Speaker 2: Or if it's reducing the number of tracks on the road.
Speaker 2: Where's the waste going? I mean it's rubbish. So you
Speaker 2: have a product that no one wants because it's rubbish,
Speaker 2: and the council says, we will charge you a fee
Speaker 2: to be able to drive your truck into the bounds
Speaker 2: of our council to take away the product we don't want. Now,
Speaker 2: I don't know whether the City of Melbourne, and you
Speaker 2: saw the Lord Nicholas Reis on with Paul earlier. I
Speaker 2: don't know whether Nicholas Reice is struggling with the concept
Speaker 2: of how city works right. But you have large volumes
Speaker 2: of waste created by businesses and funnily enough, all the
Speaker 2: apartments full of people that these councils have wanted because
Speaker 2: it means more rate payers and therefore more income, they
Speaker 2: create waste. It has to go somewhere. Surely they just
Speaker 2: want it out of the place, and they go, no,
Speaker 2: you have to pay a special fee as a private
Speaker 2: company to come and take waste away. I mean, next
Speaker 2: thing in Melbourne they'll be charging every time I walk
Speaker 2: over the bridge over the Yarra, they'll charge me fifty
Speaker 2: bucks for the ability to breathe in the bounds of
Speaker 2: the accountry.
Speaker 6: This is also just after they've already introduced an extra
Speaker 6: four hundred dollars levee just for the right to place
Speaker 6: rubbish on council land. They're just looking for any way
Speaker 6: to add tax onto small businesses. No wonder the city
Speaker 6: is shutting down. Do you guys remember the show Sasame Street.
Speaker 6: It was one of my childhood favorites. It teaches you
Speaker 6: the ABC's sharing is caring, all sorts of lovely lessons
Speaker 6: that children should really learn. Except this beloved childhood show
Speaker 6: has now come under fire for embracing Pride Months.
Speaker 5: Here is a.
Speaker 6: Little video to commemorate Pride Month that Sesame Street posted.
Speaker 7: Hi, Elma and I wanted to share that everyone is
Speaker 7: always welcome on Sesame Street this month and every month.
Speaker 7: We want to uplift and celebrate our lgbtqia plus family,
Speaker 7: friends and communities not.
Speaker 2: As friendly, very lot from our Sesame Street family to you.
Speaker 2: It Happy Pride.
Speaker 6: So that was from Pride Month a couple of years ago,
Speaker 6: and you'd think, you know, the cultures moved on now
Speaker 6: we are sort of generally a little more anti politicizing
Speaker 6: children's shows. I would say, yet again this year they
Speaker 6: didn't learn the lesson and they posted this photo, which
Speaker 6: seems very very strange. But this is also not the
Speaker 6: first time Sesame Street has waded into controversial political issues.
Speaker 6: They also did a special little episode on Black Lives
Speaker 6: Matter and on racism.
Speaker 11: People of color, especially in the black community, are being
Speaker 11: treated unfairly because of how they look, their culture, race,
Speaker 11: and who they are. They want to end racism.
Speaker 5: I'm almost an unracism kune.
Speaker 6: Now, I have no issue in teaching kids about racism,
Speaker 6: but the Black Lives Matter protests was a political movement.
Speaker 6: Pride Month is clearly politicizing children. That is my issue.
Speaker 6: Why does politics have to infest everything, including innocent.
Speaker 3: Child Well, the reason they infest everything with politics is
Speaker 3: because for them, politics is everything.
Speaker 4: And the image that you.
Speaker 3: Showed Freyer was attached to caption that said, on our streets,
Speaker 3: everyone is welcome together. Let's build a world where every
Speaker 3: person and family feels loved and respected for who they are.
Speaker 4: And no one.
Speaker 3: Would dispute that it's good to teach kids to be
Speaker 3: loving and be respectful, but that the clue calib is
Speaker 3: they only do it during Pride Month and it's specifically
Speaker 3: regarding LGBTQ, and then they accuse anybody who objects to
Speaker 3: this as being.
Speaker 4: Against love and acceptance.
Speaker 3: And someone wrote, if this irritates you, you have no soul.
Speaker 4: No one's against love and acceptance.
Speaker 3: What people are annoyed about, as you rightly pointed out,
Speaker 3: is politicizing children.
Speaker 2: We can only hope that the count comes so you know,
Speaker 2: the character and system street the count fixel of this,
Speaker 2: and he will do it by saying today we're going
Speaker 2: to count too genders. Ah. I mean, that's our only hope.
Speaker 11: Now.
Speaker 4: I think that was.
Speaker 3: Very, very good, Calob. We're going to go to a break.
Speaker 3: When we come back, we'll look at what's making news tomorrow,
Speaker 3: including the one city in this country where business is booming.
Speaker 4: Can you guess what it is.
Speaker 3: And why that's coming up in a moment, welcome back.
Speaker 3: Before we look at what's making news tomorrow, have a
Speaker 3: look at this vision from Sicily, where Europe's largest volcano
Speaker 3: has just erupted Mount Edna. Social media footage has shown
Speaker 3: people literally running down the mountain side to escape the eruption,
Speaker 3: which has thrown ash six four hundred meters into the air.
Speaker 3: You can see the footage. They're quite incredible, Caleb, but
Speaker 3: it's I.
Speaker 2: Mean, how often you get to see these sorts of things.
Speaker 2: It's marvelous to see, well, not marvelous if you've got
Speaker 2: to deal with it, But like the wonders of the
Speaker 2: natural world, however, they pop up in whatever form. You know,
Speaker 2: you don't sit around thinking about a volcano erupting every day,
Speaker 2: do you, Especially here in Australia. It's not something we
Speaker 2: have to deal with. But in some parts of the
Speaker 2: world this is still a very real thing, in sort
Speaker 2: of thing of dinosaurs and whatever. This is real. It's
Speaker 2: still going on, and of.
Speaker 3: Course all of those emissions who have to be accounted
Speaker 3: for somehow freyer exactly. Let's take a look at what's
Speaker 3: making headlines tomorrow.
Speaker 4: Frey, You've got the Daily Telegraph.
Speaker 5: Let's kick it off. Crooks on camera are no match.
Speaker 6: Facial recognition software is being used by New South Wales
Speaker 6: police to identify suspects in crimes ranging from violent protests
Speaker 6: to sexual.
Speaker 5: Offenses and murders.
Speaker 6: The Daily Telegraph can reveal the team of tech experts
Speaker 6: secretly work around the clock monitoring images of wanted people
Speaker 6: captured on CCTV cameras, police body cams and social media
Speaker 6: before feeding.
Speaker 5: Them into a police database.
Speaker 6: I mean, this is where it was always going to
Speaker 6: go with facial recognition technology.
Speaker 5: And I do see the risks.
Speaker 6: In this being overused in US turning into a surveillance state,
Speaker 6: but if it helps police catch criminal I kind of
Speaker 6: support it.
Speaker 4: So you'd give up your privacy in order to catch
Speaker 4: a few bits.
Speaker 6: I'm not committing the crimes, so I'm not too worried
Speaker 6: they always wrong.
Speaker 2: You're not nothing committing the crimes until mister CCP comes
Speaker 2: and takes over the country.
Speaker 6: And that's why we make sure Australia remains a liberal
Speaker 6: democratics day.
Speaker 4: If I were you, I would get TikTok off your phone.
Speaker 3: What's interesting to me about this story is I remember
Speaker 3: in April the police minister in New South Wales said
Speaker 3: that New South Wales police were getting rid of a
Speaker 3: German software program that provided facial recognition because it had
Speaker 3: been making too many errors, particularly in.
Speaker 4: Relation to minorities.
Speaker 3: So I'm not sure what software they're using these days,
Speaker 3: But anyway, then you go, you're.
Speaker 5: On a camera all the time, exactly.
Speaker 6: The next headline black market Siggi's sold right outside Parliament.
Speaker 6: Poly Puffs Premier Chrismins has waged a war on alicit tobacco,
Speaker 6: and he only needs to walk across the street for
Speaker 6: the first battle. As a major political blame erupted yesterday,
Speaker 6: the Delhi Telegraph discovered a convenience store on Macquarie Street,
Speaker 6: directly opposite state Parliament, flugging illegal cigarettes and vapes in
Speaker 6: broad daylight. Now, this is my fundamental problem with the
Speaker 6: fuel with.
Speaker 5: The tobacco excise tax argument.
Speaker 6: You only have to walk down the street to see
Speaker 6: the illegal tobacconists openly flouting the rules. So before we
Speaker 6: start cutting the tax, why don't we just enforce the law?
Speaker 6: And I think Chris Mins is trying to abrogate his
Speaker 6: responsibility to enforce the law by blaming.
Speaker 5: The federal government.
Speaker 6: When he's literally just got to walk out of his
Speaker 6: office and the convenience store across the road is openly
Speaker 6: selling black market cigarette.
Speaker 2: But then the point of the states enforcing the law
Speaker 2: is to run a protection recket for the extortion of
Speaker 2: money that the federal government wants to take out of it.
Speaker 2: That's the problem. It's not a problem of the state's creation.
Speaker 2: If the excise wasn't so high, these people wouldn't have
Speaker 2: a market and there is no genuine reason for the
Speaker 2: excise to be as high as it is. It's about
Speaker 2: a dollar forty of every cigarette is tax. It is ridiculous.
Speaker 2: As I said before, these people are the lifters of
Speaker 2: the country, not the leianas they pay tax voluntarily and
Speaker 2: good on them, but in increasing numbers they don't moving
Speaker 2: on to the Australian tomorrow. It says us in them
Speaker 2: or should that be us and them? PM defends low spend.
Speaker 2: Anthony Alberizi has been worn by a former army chief
Speaker 2: that the government risks abrogating its responsibility to the public
Speaker 2: and those in uniform by failing to increase military funding.
Speaker 2: As the co architect of the Defense Strategic Review called
Speaker 2: for spending to be lifted to between three a three
Speaker 2: and a half percent of GDP head of his first
Speaker 2: first sorry his first in person meeting with Donald Trump
Speaker 2: at the G seven in Canada, the Prime Minister on
Speaker 2: Monday came under pressure from former military chiefs, strategists and
Speaker 2: the Coalition to commit to increasing defense spending beyond the
Speaker 2: four past two point three three percent share of GDP
Speaker 2: over eight years. I mean, you know, this stuff is
Speaker 2: as obvious as the lack of hair on your head. James,
Speaker 2: we have to spend more on defense. I mean, I
Speaker 2: can't believe we're still the year talking about it, and
Speaker 2: last week you have the Prime Minister jumping up and
Speaker 2: down about Aspy for calling him out. And how do
Speaker 2: you do that? I mean, look, does Albo just want
Speaker 2: to sell us to China? If that's what he's doing,
Speaker 2: just do it, Just just get rid of it. I'll
Speaker 2: flow the whole joint, make lots of money while you
Speaker 2: do it, because that seems to be where we go.
Speaker 3: Well, the first responsibility of a government is border protection
Speaker 3: and national defense, and on both of those issues, the
Speaker 3: Albanezi government is hopelessly out of its depth. And you've
Speaker 3: got to wonder what this meeting with Trump will be like.
Speaker 3: I note that the meeting is at the G seven
Speaker 3: on the sidelines. Albanezi is smart enough not to go
Speaker 3: to the Oval office and sit down for Zelenski type meeting,
Speaker 3: and he wouldn't want to with just two point three
Speaker 3: three percent of GDP being spent on defense. In was
Speaker 3: it twenty thirty two? I was reading in the UK
Speaker 3: Times and Telegraph today. All the headlines are about the
Speaker 3: British military building new subs, building new bomb making factories.
Speaker 3: The whole world is rearming, and here we are sitting
Speaker 3: at the bottom of the world saying we'll be right.
Speaker 6: Well, if Albanezy did go to the Oval Office and
Speaker 6: had a meeting with Trump, he would probably pull up
Speaker 6: his big TV and play a video of the Chinese
Speaker 6: navy ships circumnavigating Australia and then go.
Speaker 5: So you're really not going to spend more on defense exactly.
Speaker 3: Let's go to the Adelaide Advertiser a story that's going
Speaker 3: to affect everybody.
Speaker 4: In the next couple of weeks.
Speaker 3: Milk butter prices surge in big dry reads, the headline
Speaker 3: milk and butter prices are predicted to search with the
Speaker 3: dryest conditions on record, crippling dairy farmers in South Australia
Speaker 3: and Victoria, and floods destroying operations in New South Wales.
Speaker 3: Leaders of the Australian dairy industry have called on governments
Speaker 3: to help. More than forty percent of Australia's dairy farmers
Speaker 3: are in drought, many of them battling the dryest conditions
Speaker 3: on record, and of course that's before you take into account.
Speaker 3: Dairy farmers in New South Wales who have just gone
Speaker 3: through a one in five hundred year flood. They're asking
Speaker 3: for special government assistance and I think most fair minded
Speaker 3: people would say yes to supporting our farmers who have
Speaker 3: to deal with all sorts of things and obviously whatever
Speaker 3: happens on the farm, you end up being affected by
Speaker 3: it in the supermarket. So let's hope the government give
Speaker 3: our farmers some assistance.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 6: Well, I don't know how much more expensive dairy can
Speaker 6: really get, because cheese is like ten bucks a bag
Speaker 6: now at Woolly's, which is pretty crazy.
Speaker 5: So let's hope for some rain.
Speaker 2: Move.
Speaker 6: Let's finish up with the Canberra Times going at a
Speaker 6: good clip. Businesses are booming in Canberra, apparently. New ABS
Speaker 6: data shows the Act had twenty five percent more businesses
Speaker 6: in twenty twenty four than in twenty nineteen.
Speaker 5: Hmm, the one state in Australia that seems to be growing.
Speaker 5: Why might that be, James, I've.
Speaker 4: Got no idea.
Speaker 3: Why would the Act be booming when everyone else is struggling?
Speaker 4: Caleb.
Speaker 2: Maybe we've hired thirty thousand new public service that might
Speaker 2: have something to do with it, you know, I've pointed
Speaker 2: out many times that all of these migrants they brought
Speaker 2: in fundamentally have been taking up jobs that are created
Speaker 2: with government money. Seventy five percent of jobs created in
Speaker 2: the country last year were in some way connected to
Speaker 2: the government, and they've gone so far as to import
Speaker 2: more public servants into the act so they can say
Speaker 2: they've got a business book. G we're living in a
Speaker 2: Ponzi scheme.
Speaker 3: We're going to go to a break when we come
Speaker 3: back Sydney Airport to sell off lost property. You'd be
Speaker 3: surprised at some of the things people live on planes.
Speaker 4: That's coming up at a moment.
Speaker 3: Well, if ever, there's a good horse racing story in
Speaker 3: this country, you can count on Caleb Bond to find it.
Speaker 2: That's right. I can't tell you a good story about
Speaker 2: my horse that ran at sand Down yesterday over the
Speaker 2: jumps came last. Never mind about that. But this was
Speaker 2: a little more interesting though. Warren in New South Wales
Speaker 2: today had its race meeting and on comes a kangaroo
Speaker 2: who decides he should join in the fun. Take a
Speaker 2: look at this. They're just tumbling down the straight. They're
Speaker 2: pulling into the strait and the road jumps right out
Speaker 2: in front and gets in. Well, now I can tell
Speaker 2: you that could have been very nice. Horse struck that kangaroo.
Speaker 2: It would have been on for young and old, and
Speaker 2: bad things could happen. But you know he woke up
Speaker 2: this morning with a death wish and he thought he'd
Speaker 2: give it a really hot go that room.
Speaker 6: Yeah, that kangaroo is not scared of anything, including huge
Speaker 6: animals moving at pay.
Speaker 2: I tell you I don't want to be in front
Speaker 2: of a big horse racing.
Speaker 5: Genuinely incredible.
Speaker 6: Well, get ready to see the weirdest council meeting you
Speaker 6: have ever witnessed. This is a UK council that encouraged
Speaker 6: people to dress up as non human constituents.
Speaker 5: Check it out.
Speaker 2: I am a butterfly, I am here to represent all
Speaker 2: the insects.
Speaker 12: I am the foxglove, and I represent all the wildflowers.
Speaker 8: I am net all and.
Speaker 12: I am here because we have been misunderstood, this is
Speaker 12: an interspecies democracy meeting. So it's a theatrical council meeting.
Speaker 12: We are inviting people to represent non human residents to
Speaker 12: Southampton and they are going to put forward questions emotions
Speaker 12: as you would in a council meeting.
Speaker 6: What the heck is an interspecies democracy, meaning how about
Speaker 6: you start by caring about.
Speaker 5: The human citizens you have.
Speaker 2: I am mad and I should not be allowed to
Speaker 2: go to a council meeting, I think is the bit
Speaker 2: that they left out of that.
Speaker 3: If ever, there was an argument for not doing drugs,
Speaker 3: I think that is a great argument. You know, forty
Speaker 3: million people pass through Sydney Airport every year, so you
Speaker 3: can imagine lots of stuff gets left on planes. God knows,
Speaker 3: I've left things on aeroplanes. Last year, Well done Sydney Airport.
Speaker 3: They returned seven thousand items to their rightful owners. But
Speaker 3: in the first three months of this year, two thousand
Speaker 3: items have gone unclaimed and so they're about to be
Speaker 3: auctioned for charity. What I found interesting, Caleb and Freyer
Speaker 3: was two hundred and fifty laptops left on airports and
Speaker 3: not claimed, eighty handbags. But here's what's amazing. Three surfboards
Speaker 3: were left on aeroplanes and whenever went back to get them.
Speaker 4: And a violin.
Speaker 3: So if you're in the market for a surfboard or
Speaker 3: a violin, you can pick one up cheap at the
Speaker 3: SID the airport auction this month.
Speaker 2: Look all I can say is if you're the sort
Speaker 2: of person who can afford to lose your laptop at
Speaker 2: the airport and then not follow it up, feel free
Speaker 2: to donate your laptop to me instead you send it
Speaker 2: to a needy home.
Speaker 4: Very good point.
Speaker 3: That's all we've got time for is stick around. Coming
Speaker 3: up is the read a Penalty Show.
Speaker 4: Good Night,