Speaker 1: Lateens General Man, Welcome to the Late Debase.
Speaker 2: Good evening and welcome to the program.
Speaker 3: I'm Caleb Bond with Joe Hildebrand and Liz Storer.
Speaker 2: Well, would you believe it?
Speaker 3: Yet another thing the Victorian government has managed to bugger up.
Speaker 3: We told you the other night that they've now got
Speaker 3: hard call criminals murderers being put into medium security prison
Speaker 3: because they don't have enough room left in the maximum
Speaker 3: security prisons.
Speaker 2: There is a prison.
Speaker 3: Shortage, except for the fact that there are four hundred
Speaker 3: beds lying unused in Victorian prisons and they might be
Speaker 3: about to demolish them.
Speaker 2: We'll tell you what's going on with that soon.
Speaker 3: In the papers, Anthony Albanezi has a big tax promise
Speaker 3: for trade's it's all on for young and old, and
Speaker 3: later the politician who's changed football teams for a photo op.
Speaker 3: As far as I'm concerned, you can not do it.
Speaker 3: But some good news, it would seem the idea of
Speaker 3: DOGE is starting to get through here in Australia and
Speaker 3: of course in my hometown of South Australia. In Adelaide,
Speaker 3: the Chairman of the Productivity Commission, Adrian Temble, has said,
Speaker 3: well there's merit in doing this here. I'm glad people
Speaker 3: are starting to wake up. He gave a speech yesterday
Speaker 3: entitled does doge have any relevance to essay?
Speaker 2: And his answer was yes.
Speaker 3: He said that the public sector must be just as informative,
Speaker 3: reform innovative, sorry, reformist, and generally open to change as.
Speaker 2: We expect our private sector to be.
Speaker 3: Funny about that, and his suggestion the way to do
Speaker 3: it is that every year there should be at least
Speaker 3: a day or perhaps even a week set aside where
Speaker 3: Parliament comes together to debate where the departments have actually
Speaker 3: met performance targets. You know those things we deal with
Speaker 3: in the private sector where the boss says you've got
Speaker 3: to achieve KPIs by the end of the year and
Speaker 3: if you don't do them, your job might be on
Speaker 3: the line. But of course for many public servants it's
Speaker 3: far too cushy for that.
Speaker 2: You know, we're just going to say, well, but we'd
Speaker 2: like this.
Speaker 3: One in a time frame that no one really knows
Speaker 3: what it is, but we'll come back and look at
Speaker 3: it in four years time, and then when it hasn't
Speaker 3: been done, we'll give you some more money to perhaps
Speaker 3: get the job done. I'm glad Liz that the message
Speaker 3: is finally getting through. We need a doge federally, we
Speaker 3: need a doge in every state. People are starting to
Speaker 3: wake up to the fact it's the Trump effect that
Speaker 3: has been permeating the world since he was elected in November. Again,
Speaker 3: the Trump affix saying, look, we do actually have to
Speaker 3: care a little bit about how our governments are operating.
Speaker 1: Oh one hundred percent. Who doesn't want government efficiency? But
Speaker 1: as I've said before, when the Trump administration just last
Speaker 1: month passed a continuing resolution that meant government spending was
Speaker 1: going to stay at the same levels as the Biden
Speaker 1: administrations until at least September, then all the doge rave
Speaker 1: for me went out the window. Because while you're slashing
Speaker 1: these projects and this bit and that bit, and it
Speaker 1: all looks wonderful and it's made Goodness knows how many
Speaker 1: incredible headlines, is massively looking amazing to the public, And naturally,
Speaker 1: people in other Western countries are saying, we'll have what
Speaker 1: they're having, thank you very much, spending our tax dollar
Speaker 1: better than you have been. The bottom line is, if
Speaker 1: government spending is staying at the same levels, it's a
Speaker 1: pile of hot air. They're simply fun funneling those funds elsewhere.
Speaker 1: Now one could argue, well they're funneling it in a
Speaker 1: better way, but we simply don't know that yet. And
Speaker 1: so I do wonder if much like this fellow in
Speaker 1: South Australia has cottoned onto making these announcements. Sounds absolutely wonderful.
Speaker 1: While we'll get you a doge, we'll take on this
Speaker 1: doge like style of slashing this and that these politicians
Speaker 1: have figured out, Well, we can get those headlines, we
Speaker 1: can look just as good. But are we actually going
Speaker 1: to be cutting government spending and thereby reducing inflation. No,
Speaker 1: but we'll get the headlines and will look amazing.
Speaker 4: Joe, I would not be holding your breath to see
Speaker 4: this great new revolution descend upon the fine free state
Speaker 4: of South Australia.
Speaker 2: Valley's a sensible now.
Speaker 4: He's a fantastic guye and I love him. He's also
Speaker 4: a pragmatist. The exact quote from the Productivity Commissioned chairman
Speaker 4: was that there was a quote small level of validity
Speaker 4: that dose could have a role there, which is the
Speaker 4: most bureaucratic thing you could possibly say. There is some
Speaker 4: element of programmatic specific specificity within certain parameter bound widths,
Speaker 4: which perhaps we could pursue with a view too at
Speaker 4: some point in the future, reviewing the existing operations as
Speaker 4: they currently stand, and seeing if at some point there
Speaker 4: might be scope for further examination of a business case
Speaker 4: for developing certain other procedures that might then lead to
Speaker 4: greater efficiency beyond the forward estimates period.
Speaker 3: You could not have put it better, Jo, I mean
Speaker 3: you clear as a Jada journalist like me have read
Speaker 3: through so many of these things. I think the reason
Speaker 3: it's so important now is that over the last few
Speaker 3: years what we've seen is an effective recession in Australia.
Speaker 3: It didn't show up on paper because we pumped the
Speaker 3: country up with so many migrants that it looked like
Speaker 3: there was economic growth because of course naturally if you
Speaker 3: have more people, you have to service more people, and
Speaker 3: so that creates some level of economic growth. Now it's
Speaker 3: been minuscule, you know, zero point one percent of whatever
Speaker 3: each court of it, just enough to say we weren't
Speaker 3: in recession, except of course that in real terms household GDP,
Speaker 3: we were going in recession. People have had less actual
Speaker 3: money in their hands relative to inflation to spend and
Speaker 3: If you look at the jobs that have been created
Speaker 3: for all of these new mirgrants that have come into
Speaker 3: the country, eighty percent of them, more than eighty percent
Speaker 3: of them are linked in some way to the government,
Speaker 3: so it's in the health sector, or it's in some
Speaker 3: sector that gets from the government in order to create
Speaker 3: these jobs.
Speaker 2: There's not actually any growth in the private sector.
Speaker 3: No, unless they're getting money from the government in order
Speaker 3: to do it. That's not growing an economy. It's just
Speaker 3: spending more text to make it look like you're growing
Speaker 3: an economy.
Speaker 1: Indeed, and it's not sustainable, which is why it's encouraging
Speaker 1: that Dutton. Despite the fact that I'm sorry, he's not
Speaker 1: going to be the next prime minister, they're there. It
Speaker 1: is just honestly, if I hear what conservative commentator say
Speaker 1: that this is neck and neck. I had a friend
Speaker 1: of mine on the phone to me just today and
Speaker 1: she's all downhearted because she's like, you know, do you
Speaker 1: think we're gonna make it? And I said to her,
Speaker 1: anyone telling you that this is possible, I'm sorry, is
Speaker 1: simply flying high. I'd love to have whatever they're having,
Speaker 1: but I do love this promise by Dutton to slash
Speaker 1: forty one thousand out of the public sector employees, because
Speaker 1: we all though this is bloated for the very reasons
Speaker 1: that you just outlined. This is bloated, This is unnecessary,
Speaker 1: and we all know that you could slash more than
Speaker 1: that tomorrow and nobody would know a difference in the
Speaker 1: levels of service that we receive from our government. Speaking
Speaker 1: of we all know that Victoria is now going to
Speaker 1: be looking at an uptick as high as twenty percent
Speaker 1: in terms of how many prison beds they need in
Speaker 1: the next twelve months, due to the fact that just
Speaker 1: last month they rushed through those tougher Bayer laws because
Speaker 1: they're finally cracking down on crime.
Speaker 2: This is it, This is the dawn of a new era.
Speaker 1: They're going to be punishing criminals, revelatory. But they have
Speaker 1: a massive problem on their hands because two new prison
Speaker 1: builds are proving to be infested with mold, which means
Speaker 1: that over four hundred and fifty brand new prison beds
Speaker 1: are unusable. Terrible timing for this to make the news,
Speaker 1: isn't it. Corrections Minister Enver Erdagan, sorry if I got
Speaker 1: that wrong, buddy, says the government has hired lawyers and
Speaker 1: they are ready to take the contractors who did these
Speaker 1: dodgy builds to court.
Speaker 2: So these two allegedly faulty.
Speaker 1: Builds at two maximum security prisons, namely the Metropolitan Remand
Speaker 1: Center in raven Hall and Bar One Prison at Lara,
Speaker 1: are just sitting there. Nobody can actually be in these beds,
Speaker 1: and the Corrections Minister is saying, no, no, this isn't
Speaker 1: going to be a problem because we've got the brand
Speaker 1: new maximum security center opening.
Speaker 2: Mid this year.
Speaker 1: But that, good sir, is replacing the Port Philip prison,
Speaker 1: and the new one that you're referring to, which has
Speaker 1: twelve hundred beds, is only got one hundred more breds
Speaker 1: than the prison that's closing. Again, you're not really making
Speaker 1: up the gap of the fact that you guys are
Speaker 1: going to need twenty percent more prison beds. The math
Speaker 1: isn't mathing, buddy over the next twelve months. And you're
Speaker 1: pointing to this brand new one called the Western Plains
Speaker 1: Correctional Center saying no, no, no, this is opening mid
Speaker 1: this year, so nothing to see here. Yeah, but it's
Speaker 1: replacing the one that you're closing Port Philip prison, and
Speaker 1: the new one only has one hundred more beds than
Speaker 1: that one, which one assumes is already pretty much at capacity.
Speaker 1: So it's not reassuring for Victorians at all.
Speaker 4: The Victorian government can't do Maths's suggesting there is anything
Speaker 4: wrong with the Victorian governments finances, forward planning, cost business.
Speaker 2: I don't think you need to get easy.
Speaker 4: I feel cost benefit analysis. Look, these guys are just
Speaker 4: obviously just a BASTONCA. It's getting to the point where
Speaker 4: it's kind of like fast, isn't it? Like sorry? What sorry?
Speaker 4: We can't open the prisons because because the beds are rotting,
Speaker 4: it's not burning like the midnight oil. So like every
Speaker 4: time there's a riot in a Victorian prison, which seems
Speaker 4: to have been quite up frequently as well, but they're
Speaker 4: just rotting, and it's just such a it seems like
Speaker 4: such a metaphor for my old home state as well,
Speaker 4: that that is literally just sort of decaying, just slowly
Speaker 4: falling apart into some weird formless primordial gunk.
Speaker 2: Overgrown with molds. Two things.
Speaker 3: One, it's a maximum security prison, right, so the sort
Speaker 3: of people they're putting in here are reasonably unsafe, right,
Speaker 3: So the keys, if they have to live in a moldy.
Speaker 2: It doesn't much matter to me them in there.
Speaker 3: But the other thing, of course, is we know that
Speaker 3: Victoria is running out of money.
Speaker 2: I mean, the state is essentially broke.
Speaker 3: They are a mindicant state now right, And they're trying
Speaker 3: to get taxes here in Texas here, and they've jacked
Speaker 3: up the land text to high heaven, on on and
Speaker 3: on it goes. They don't have the money to pay
Speaker 3: for these things. Meanwhile they're trying to do the suburban
Speaker 3: rail loop, et cetera. So is this a case of
Speaker 3: they just found like the cheapest guy they could in
Speaker 3: the white pages or the yellow badges, and was like.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, we'll get you. We'll do a cashy job.
Speaker 2: I will see how it goes well.
Speaker 3: They're finding out how it goes now. It reminds me
Speaker 3: of you might remember in Faulty Towers when Basil gets
Speaker 3: the builder o'reiley to come in and do some work
Speaker 3: on the hotel, and his wife Sybil pleads with him
Speaker 3: not to get this cut price.
Speaker 2: O'Reilly's loke in to do the job.
Speaker 3: It gets him in to do the job, and it
Speaker 3: goes about as well as you'd expect.
Speaker 5: I don't care right now on my dining room door
Speaker 5: put back, and it's other one take it away by
Speaker 5: one o'clock. You understand, no, no, no, I don't want
Speaker 5: a debate about it. If you're not over here in
Speaker 5: twenty minutes with my door, I should come over there
Speaker 5: and insert a large garden room and you're good there.
Speaker 6: I'm sorry, mister faulty, but my man just won't work
Speaker 6: on the Sunday. And that's the way it is.
Speaker 4: There's nothing they can do about it.
Speaker 2: How long is it going to take you? Well, I'm
Speaker 2: not going as fast as we can.
Speaker 3: I mean there's a probably the discussions they're having it
Speaker 3: the moment they won't work on tu we're doing it
Speaker 3: as fast as so disgracefully.
Speaker 4: I mean, we talked about this last time. I'm sick
Speaker 4: of my people, the Irish already colonized and enslaves. They
Speaker 4: bring it to overlords being treated to this ongoing intergenerational
Speaker 4: racism by wasby British Protestant elites. I won't have it.
Speaker 4: And if you would like a cheap bill, just call
Speaker 4: Jolly Joe's Bonds. The bills we do it three hundred.
Speaker 3: You know, I've said this before so many, so many
Speaker 3: government contracts I wish I could get my hands on.
Speaker 3: I mean, couldn't the three of us not together a
Speaker 3: building that doesn't turn moldy?
Speaker 7: Like?
Speaker 2: How hard can it be?
Speaker 4: I don't know how your youth is tracking, Kayla, but
Speaker 4: I have to say that every single bed that I
Speaker 4: encountered in every sharehouse ended up pretty much the saver
Speaker 4: as the.
Speaker 3: Bar it stood it out for the people in the
Speaker 3: sharehouses exactly frizzy and.
Speaker 4: Give them scabies for good measure. Oh dear, No, let's
Speaker 4: talk about liberation data.
Speaker 2: Let's let's go on to that. Of course, it's the
Speaker 2: story of the day.
Speaker 3: And I'm not going to go chapter and verse into
Speaker 3: what's happened, because if you haven't heard it by now,
Speaker 3: well you've been living under a rock. But of course,
Speaker 3: the pertinent thing for us is that the United States
Speaker 3: has put a ten percent tariff on any product that
Speaker 3: we export to the United States. They say that's because
Speaker 3: we have some sort of reciprocal tariff on them. Simply
Speaker 3: not true. The justification here seems to be that we
Speaker 3: slap the GST on US products that come into Australia,
Speaker 3: but we also slap the GST on Australian products that
Speaker 3: are made here in Australia.
Speaker 2: It is not a tariff.
Speaker 3: So the justification for all of this I cannot see.
Speaker 3: But Trump, of course is not doing it for the
Speaker 3: rest of the world. He's doing it for the people
Speaker 3: at home. He's doing it for America first, which is
Speaker 3: what he was elected to do. And here he is saying,
Speaker 3: this will be the rebirth of American industry.
Speaker 7: Fellow Americans, is Liberation Day waiting for a long time.
Speaker 7: April second, twenty twenty five will forever be remembered as
Speaker 7: the day American industry was reborn, the day America's destiny
Speaker 7: was reclaimed, and the day that we began to make
Speaker 7: America wealthy again.
Speaker 3: And Trump specifically pointed out Australian beef because we send
Speaker 3: a lot of beef to the United States. It is
Speaker 3: the best beef in the world, of course, but we
Speaker 3: refuse to take us beef because of concerns over mad
Speaker 3: cow disease. Now the experts in the US say that's
Speaker 3: not a problem anymore. The experts heresay, we're not quite
Speaker 3: so sure about that. But he opened up the possibility
Speaker 3: and we don't really know yet how this is going
Speaker 3: to land of banning Australian beef all together.
Speaker 7: Well, Australia bans and they're wonderful people and wonderful everything,
Speaker 7: but they ban American beef. Yet we imported three billion
Speaker 7: dollars of Australian beef from them just last year alone.
Speaker 7: They won't take any of our beef. They don't want
Speaker 7: it because they don't want it to affect their farmers.
Speaker 7: And you know what, I don't blame them, but we're
Speaker 7: doing the same thing right now, starting about midnay to night.
Speaker 2: We'll see where all of this actually lands.
Speaker 3: And of course it's one thing that both leaders of
Speaker 3: the government and the opposition are on a unity ticket
Speaker 3: on that these tariffs are bad. The Prime Minister Anthony Alberze,
Speaker 3: he tried to make hay while the sun shone today.
Speaker 2: He said this was not the act of a friend.
Speaker 6: President Trump referred to reciprocal tariffs. A reciprocal tariff would
Speaker 6: be zero, not ten percent. The administration's tariffs have no
Speaker 6: basis in logic, and they go against the basis of
Speaker 6: our two nations partnership. This is not the act of
Speaker 6: a friend.
Speaker 3: Now what he says is right, and I suspect quietly
Speaker 3: Albanize might have been a little bit pleased that all
Speaker 3: of this played out as it did today because it
Speaker 3: allows him to stand up so well, I'm going into
Speaker 3: that for Australia. So it comes at a good time
Speaker 3: in the middle of an election campaign. But what justification
Speaker 3: is there for a ten percent tariff on Australians products.
Speaker 4: There's none whatsoever, And Albo is completely right, there is
Speaker 4: no justification whether Trump and the administration have got confused
Speaker 4: by the ten percent GST on imports because remember there
Speaker 4: were some that were exempt. If you buy bought stuff
Speaker 4: on the wine from overseas, it was exempt, and then
Speaker 4: a GEST was put on that. So does he suddenly
Speaker 4: think that that's what the GST is. Of course in
Speaker 4: America they have different states have different sales tax all
Speaker 4: over the country. Is that a tariff because you go
Speaker 4: to Wyoming and you pay a seven and a half
Speaker 4: percent or whatever it might be. I don't know. So
Speaker 4: it's absolutely right about that and the issue, as you
Speaker 4: rightly said, the reason we have an issue with uncooked
Speaker 4: American beef coming to Australia is the same reason why
Speaker 4: anyone who brings a banana in here basically gets strip search.
Speaker 4: Because we have really really strict biosecurity laws because we
Speaker 4: are an island continent nation. But the interesting thing here
Speaker 4: is not what the US tariff what will happen just
Speaker 4: because the US tariffs on Australia will do it's because
Speaker 4: it's the tariffs that they're going to put on everyone else.
Speaker 4: So they're putting like thirty four percent on China. I
Speaker 4: think it's twenty six percent on India. Now they are
Speaker 4: two of our biggest trading partners. I think India's our
Speaker 4: biggest market for education, which our third of something biggest export.
Speaker 4: China of course our biggest export partner full stop. So
Speaker 4: if those countries can't do trade with the US on
Speaker 4: even terms, it can't export to them anymore. Suddenly their
Speaker 4: growth collapses, Their growth goes down, Global growth goes down
Speaker 4: from like three to two percent some people are suggesting.
Speaker 4: But their growth in particular is going to get smashed
Speaker 4: because they're to be hit by tariffs that are a
Speaker 4: quarter to a third of the cost of the goods.
Speaker 4: And then of course they don't have their economies strong enough.
Speaker 4: They don't have big consumers there who want to buy
Speaker 4: Australian iron ore to build stuff because they're not getting
Speaker 4: richer anymore. They're not making more money. So the real
Speaker 4: worry is what it does to China and India and
Speaker 4: the effect that that then has on us rather than
Speaker 4: just each way. And then the other big thing to
Speaker 4: worry about will be what happens if they go after
Speaker 4: the PBS. Will they start telling the government that it's
Speaker 4: not allowed to negotiate. But basically, you know, bulk buys
Speaker 4: of goods that it then subsidizes and sells off to
Speaker 4: us for cheap prices so that we don't die. So
Speaker 4: if I think if that happens, you know, I suddenly
Speaker 4: you hear stories of people not being able to get
Speaker 4: access to life saving cancer medication because you know, the
Speaker 4: pharmaceutical big pharmaceutical companies in America, who Donald Trump's health
Speaker 4: minister is meant to be going to war with and
Speaker 4: keeping in check whatever happened to that RFK Junior.
Speaker 8: That's when I think people will get really, really furious.
Speaker 8: And the reason why I won't say it's good for
Speaker 8: Anthony Abernezi, but the reason why it's bad for Peter
Speaker 8: Dartner is because previously he'd sort of tried to wedge
Speaker 8: the government and Donald Trump said, oh, I could have
Speaker 8: got a better deal, and he's been accused of being
Speaker 8: a bit like Trump himself, rightly or wrongly, fairly unfair,
Speaker 8: but that sticks, and the worst Trump is the worse
Speaker 8: it is, I think for Peter Dunn.
Speaker 2: Yes, it's definitely interesting.
Speaker 1: I think a few people would have been exhaling a
Speaker 1: sigh of relief actually with this baseline of ten percent
Speaker 1: when you see how high some of the tariffs are
Speaker 1: on the other nations which we just had on the
Speaker 1: screen earlier. Some of these are extortionate and targeting some
Speaker 1: of the poorest countries, So you really do wonder what
Speaker 1: the heck's going on there and what effect that's going
Speaker 1: to have on their economies, given that there are many
Speaker 1: of them poverty stricken nations as it is. So I
Speaker 1: do think Australia is getting off light here. We'd already
Speaker 1: been told that we weren't going to be exempt, and
Speaker 1: even the farmers, from what I've read today, are breathing
Speaker 1: a sigh of relief, saying, look, ten percent we can
Speaker 1: live with, and what we can't live with we can
Speaker 1: find other markets. And due credit to Albanzi, he's acted
Speaker 1: very swiftly on this today, announcing a response package, including
Speaker 1: fifty million dollars to pursue other markets for those sectors
Speaker 1: that are like, Okay, well we're really screwed now, we
Speaker 1: need to find other places to sell our product to.
Speaker 1: But I learned something today that the largest Australian export
Speaker 1: to the US is meat products.
Speaker 2: We made four billion off.
Speaker 1: Them just last year alone. I had no idea they
Speaker 1: loved our meat that much.
Speaker 3: Well, so they should. It's a bit since thing. I
Speaker 3: heard an interview overnight. I couldn't sleep this morning, I
Speaker 3: should say not last night. I was up at five
Speaker 3: in the morning listening to an interview on two GB
Speaker 3: of as you are a farmer, who was talking about.
Speaker 2: How big the export market is for our meat.
Speaker 3: And the fact that it's actually become nigh on impossible
Speaker 3: to sell your product locally because all the avatars have
Speaker 3: been bought up by big multinational congloberates that get the
Speaker 3: meat in specifically to send it overseas. Lot of me wonders,
Speaker 3: and I've written about this in my advertiser column tomorrow,
Speaker 3: whether this will be a moment where we actually start
Speaker 3: to wake up and think about, well, if America is
Speaker 3: doing America first, we should think about Australia first as well.
Speaker 2: And I don't mean putting tariffs on other nations.
Speaker 3: I think they're anachronistic in the modern market and they're
Speaker 3: a punitive measure. But things like we have two oil
Speaker 3: refineries left in this country right they're guaranteed by the
Speaker 3: federal government till the end of the decade.
Speaker 2: After that what happened last We produce no fuel.
Speaker 3: In this country, so we're entirely reliant on other countries
Speaker 3: that are pulling all out of the ground, like Saudi Arabia,
Speaker 3: and we've already seen them in recent years artificially inflate
Speaker 3: the price of oil by shrinking the market because they
Speaker 3: have total control of the market. So if they say
Speaker 3: we'll put less oil out tomorrow, it means.
Speaker 2: If your prices go up.
Speaker 3: We've got all this coal and gas under our feet
Speaker 3: that we dig up an export and send overseas and
Speaker 3: refuse to burn for ourselves because we say is bad
Speaker 3: for the environment, but we're happy for other people to
Speaker 3: burn it, and it's bad for the environment over there
Speaker 3: and not here, and we're paying through the nose for
Speaker 3: our renewable energy here. So maybe this is a moment
Speaker 3: where we have to wake up and say, well, actually
Speaker 3: we need to start thinking about looking after ourselves as well,
Speaker 3: not just you know, letting every other country take advantage.
Speaker 1: Yeah, here, you won't find an Australia and he'll disagree
Speaker 1: with that. Extraordinary announcement by the Trump administration just yesterday
Speaker 1: with Attorney General Pam Bondie announcing that they want the
Speaker 1: death penalty for Luigi mangione which you may recall, is
Speaker 1: charged with murdering Brian Thompson, CEO of United Healthcare in
Speaker 1: cold blood.
Speaker 2: Earlier this year, she posted.
Speaker 1: A general statement saying, Luigi Mangioni's murder of Brian Thompson,
Speaker 1: an innocent man and father of two young children, with
Speaker 1: a premeditated, cold blooded assassination that shocked America. After careful consideration,
Speaker 1: I have directed federal prosecutors to seek the death penalty
Speaker 1: in this case as we carry out President Trump's agenda
Speaker 1: to stop violent crime and make America safe again. It's
Speaker 1: an extraordinary instruction given he has yet to be convicted.
Speaker 2: All of that is still underway.
Speaker 1: But of course the deranged left who have enshrine Luigi
Speaker 1: Mangioni as this incredible anti capitalist taking down the system
Speaker 1: by murdering a corporate businessman in cold blood. They've made
Speaker 1: an absolute hero out of this guy. And so upon
Speaker 1: this announcement from Attorney General Pam Bondi, the usual looney
Speaker 1: left have taken to their social media to make known
Speaker 1: their disgrundlement.
Speaker 4: We love Luigi's let's pull out a question card here randomly,
Speaker 4: what makes life worth living?
Speaker 2: Luigi jumped there to hold on to that card. Oh oh,
Speaker 2: that's that's awful. It's awful, this is this is it's
Speaker 2: a joke game, it's comedy, right, it's nae. Let's see
Speaker 2: what this one has to say.
Speaker 1: Oh oh, oh, that's terrible. Calling for the assassination of
Speaker 1: President Johnald Trump because you know, it's actually perfectly okay
Speaker 1: to the deranged left that it's totally acceptable to get
Speaker 1: around shooting corporate businessmen in.
Speaker 2: The cold, hard light of day.
Speaker 1: According to them, that makes him a hero and renewed
Speaker 1: calls now for President Trump's assassinations simply because they're asking
Speaker 1: for the death penalty, which we know is oh, wouldn't
Speaker 1: go so far as to say common in the United
Speaker 1: States of America, but they still have death rows in
Speaker 1: several states.
Speaker 3: It's interesting because this is federal charges, And my understanding
Speaker 3: of the reason they charged him federally as opposed to
Speaker 3: in New York was specifically to open up the possibility
Speaker 3: of death penalty, right because they don't have the death
Speaker 3: penalty in New York, so there are certain circumstances where
Speaker 3: you can be charged federally. And I think what they're
Speaker 3: using here is to say that it's an act of terror,
Speaker 3: and that then opens up the possibility of facing the
Speaker 3: death penalty. But is it not extraordinary for an attorney
Speaker 3: general to come out and say that someone has murdered
Speaker 3: someone before they've even been convicted. Maybe they do things
Speaker 3: differently in the United States, But as far as I'm aware,
Speaker 3: that's prejudicial, I.
Speaker 4: Think you can. I think if I don't know, I'm
Speaker 4: not a lawyer, I'm an art student. I spent my
Speaker 4: entire university years just kicking back on Scabe's infested rotting beds.
Speaker 4: But I think you can say we are prosecuting this person,
Speaker 4: this is our case, and we will be seeking the
Speaker 4: death penalty. I don't think.
Speaker 2: But she said his murder of Brian Thompson, she said
Speaker 2: that he murdered him, not.
Speaker 4: Not alleged his murder of bread, this is this is
Speaker 4: the case that we're going to be making and so
Speaker 4: but yeah, maybe maybe it's a little bit cut before
Speaker 4: the hospital. I just trotskyite humor. I just don't understand it.
Speaker 4: Like the little kind of crazy lefties on Twitter who
Speaker 4: think that, you know, what are they doing? They're starting
Speaker 4: a revolution now or something. It reminds me, you know,
Speaker 4: is this male's cultural revolution again, where just everyone just
Speaker 4: kill all our elders, kill all the kill the teachers,
Speaker 4: kill the professors, kill the rich, eat the rich. That
Speaker 4: I do not understand. But also I was just wondering,
Speaker 4: imagine if the CEO that was shot allegedly by Luigi
Speaker 4: Manoni in cold Blood was a woman, or imagine if
Speaker 4: it was a black man, or imagine if it was
Speaker 4: any other monery, Like what would they do then? Would
Speaker 4: it still be totally justifiable because because there are plenty
Speaker 4: of females well out there, will they'd be women get
Speaker 4: jobs now in the workforce. I'm not sure if the
Speaker 4: left is aware of this, but you know, some of
Speaker 4: their hard work is paid off.
Speaker 2: It's a good point.
Speaker 3: We have had this discussion many times when James McPherson
Speaker 3: is here on this disc about the death penalties are
Speaker 3: the viewers at home, no were Liz and I stand,
Speaker 3: how do you feel about the death pinny?
Speaker 4: I don't look. I think it's like I don't really
Speaker 4: care about Luigi MANNGIONI. I think he's an absolute nutter allegedly,
Speaker 4: and I certainly wouldn't die on a hill trying to
Speaker 4: defend his right not to die in prison. But I
Speaker 4: don't think. I don't like the death money for a
Speaker 4: couple of reasons. One is it's inefficient because if you
Speaker 4: get the death penalty, then you basically exhaust every possible level,
Speaker 4: every avenue for appeal. You tie up lawyers whose time
Speaker 4: could be better spent elsewhere, probably defending less murderous types
Speaker 4: on combing through anything that might justify a retrial or
Speaker 4: redamination of the case, a podcast perhaps, remember that. So
Speaker 4: that's a problem with as well. And also it just
Speaker 4: you know, like imagine if and there have been cases
Speaker 4: where people you know, been convicted of murders and then
Speaker 4: science has evolved to the point where DNA evidence can
Speaker 4: now prove that they didn't do it.
Speaker 3: Whatever.
Speaker 4: If they've been you know, they've been fried in the
Speaker 4: electric chair, that was what that wasn't what Bob Carr
Speaker 4: always said I was, and he said no, And I
Speaker 4: said why not? He goes, what if you get it
Speaker 4: wrong enough?
Speaker 2: Reason, I've always thought it's.
Speaker 4: Too good for them anyway, Why I give them all
Speaker 4: the glamor and everything.
Speaker 3: I've thought for a long time that we've sort of
Speaker 3: scientifically got to the point now where you can moral
Speaker 3: lesk convict.
Speaker 2: Someone beyond any doubt like the d and.
Speaker 3: There are the tech that we've got enabled to be
Speaker 3: able to do it now is better than it's ever been.
Speaker 3: But one thing that has been playing on my mind
Speaker 3: recently is the advent of AI and the idea that
Speaker 3: you know, you could previously say in the court room,
Speaker 3: here's the CCTV vision that shows this specific man killing
Speaker 3: this specific man.
Speaker 2: Like you've got him. It's all over.
Speaker 3: But now with the advent of AI, and it gets
Speaker 3: better and better and better every day, do we start
Speaker 3: getting into territory where you can entirely fabricate.
Speaker 2: Evidence that could be used to convict them.
Speaker 1: Indeed, and that has been done in the past, long
Speaker 1: before we had this kind of technology. If the powers
Speaker 1: that be one to get you, they can set up
Speaker 1: any amount of evidence or discard any amount of evidence
Speaker 1: or behind the scenes make it so that certain evidence
Speaker 1: never makes it into the courtroom. So yeah, someone like
Speaker 1: myself who is obsessed with dark government and all the
Speaker 1: many things that go on behind closed doors. Historically, dating
Speaker 1: all the way back to the fifties with the birth
Speaker 1: of the CIA post World War Two, in insane, unspeakable
Speaker 1: things have been done by what we've always perceived to
Speaker 1: be the good guys. And in those cases, again, people
Speaker 1: have no way at the time of differentiating between what
Speaker 1: is real and what is false, and therefore the narrow
Speaker 1: tive of the day, which again is pushed by the
Speaker 1: powers that be through the media, through the government at
Speaker 1: the time, this is how they get rid of people
Speaker 1: who are going to squeal, et cetera, and so on.
Speaker 1: So that is definitely a strong case against the death penalty.
Speaker 1: But when it comes to rapists, when it comes to pedophiles,
Speaker 1: I'm just like.
Speaker 2: Get it done, guys.
Speaker 1: So Joe's Joe's misgivings with penalty when they.
Speaker 4: Just quickly I'm on an unrelated note, all those videos
Speaker 4: of me doing dodgy things circulating from there, they're all.
Speaker 3: That's the one David spears the for opposition leader, which
Speaker 3: South Australia tried to reven video came out of how
Speaker 3: you feel mate was a white powder and brother you
Speaker 3: said it was ai and then pleaded guilty to supply drugs.
Speaker 2: So we're all that landed.
Speaker 4: It was a accidutely the.
Speaker 2: More the old world we live in.
Speaker 3: Speaking of Murphy, we talked last week about the fact
Speaker 3: that the Albanzi government invited influences to be part of
Speaker 3: the federal budget lock up, and the Labor Party actually
Speaker 3: paid for the accommodation and flights of some influencers to
Speaker 3: go along and.
Speaker 2: Cover the federal budget.
Speaker 3: And you'd think, well, if you're being paid to be
Speaker 3: there by the Labor Party, they're probably expecting you to
Speaker 3: give them some positive press.
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 3: Well, one influencer and she says she has not been
Speaker 3: paid by the Labor Party. I'll take her at face
Speaker 3: value for this, but she's come under the scrutiny of
Speaker 3: the Electoral Commission. Abbi Chatfield is her name. She is
Speaker 3: one of the biggest influencers in the country right now.
Speaker 3: She's recently done interviews with the Prime Minister Anthony Albanesi
Speaker 3: and the Greens leader Adam Bant. Now she posted these
Speaker 3: two social media along with other videos where she essentially
Speaker 3: explained labor policy and endorsed the Labor Party and said
Speaker 3: you should put the liberals last, etc. And so there
Speaker 3: was a question last week in the Senate as to
Speaker 3: whether this actually constitutes a lie advertising and ought to
Speaker 3: have an endorsement on it.
Speaker 2: I'll show you a few of the videos. This is
Speaker 2: one of Abby with the Prime Minister Dune's nuclear plant.
Speaker 2: Did everyone laugh when they heard it for the first time?
Speaker 3: What's going on there?
Speaker 2: It's a fantasy.
Speaker 6: Can you imagine this bloke ever thinking or getting a
Speaker 6: policy that was aimed solely at women to reproductive health?
Speaker 5: He hasn't and he won't.
Speaker 2: There I know. And Adam Band. We have the incredible
Speaker 2: leader of the Greens, Adam Bands. Who is Adam Band?
Speaker 2: We thought we'd ask someone who knows you very well,
Speaker 2: and it's Peter Duttonham getting.
Speaker 4: How is Peter Dunton's war on going to help you
Speaker 4: pay the rent and won't or help you with the
Speaker 4: increase morgage? You won't, the.
Speaker 3: Incredible leader Adam mad Now the AEC has cleared her
Speaker 3: over these posts. They've seid their genuine commentary and I
Speaker 3: think that's probably the right decision. Just as I can
Speaker 3: sit here on TV and say that I endorse a
Speaker 3: particular government or a particular party, and that is editorial comment,
Speaker 3: an influencer should be able to do the same. But interestingly,
Speaker 3: the AAC is still looking into whether some of these
Speaker 3: posts posts sorry, may have breached the rules because on
Speaker 3: Instagram you can co post right, so two people can
Speaker 3: be linked on the same post as though they are
Speaker 3: posting it together, and Abbi Chatfield has done this with
Speaker 3: Adam Band and Anthony Albanisi, so they are essentially posting
Speaker 3: what could be considered election material together, and the AAC
Speaker 3: is looking into whether that ought to have an authorization
Speaker 3: on it because it is essentially political advertising. It's in
Speaker 3: this new media world, the social media world. We are
Speaker 3: moving into murky territory here. And like I said last week,
Speaker 3: I've got no problem with an influencer or whoever it is,
Speaker 3: showing up and reporting on something if they want to,
Speaker 3: as long as they're not being paid for it. But
Speaker 3: it is opening up a serious discussion about why real
Speaker 3: commentary in media.
Speaker 2: Who is looking like in the new.
Speaker 1: Work, Well, I don't think anyone prior to this was
Speaker 1: in the dark about where Abbi Chatfields stood politically. I mean,
Speaker 1: nobody is surprised that she's having elbow on, She's having
Speaker 1: Adam bant on. These are guys that she's cheered on
Speaker 1: in the past. She is a lefty and she's backing
Speaker 1: her team.
Speaker 2: She's got over.
Speaker 1: Half a million followers and she's using that clout in
Speaker 1: the upcoming election to ensure that her guys are seen
Speaker 1: by her followers and with regards to them.
Speaker 4: This is just smart.
Speaker 1: This is a younger audience, especially in Australia, completely disengaged
Speaker 1: from politics, but they follow Abbi Chatfield and her I
Speaker 1: would say, in my humble opinion, degenerate content. But here
Speaker 1: she's ventured into politics and she wants everyone to know
Speaker 1: where she's putting her vote. And we've seen countless movie stars,
Speaker 1: sports stars do this over it's relatively knew, but they've
Speaker 1: started doing this very much in the American elections we've
Speaker 1: seen in the past. It's creeping into Australian culture as well.
Speaker 1: It's just smart and whether or not it has an
Speaker 1: authorization on it doesn't make the slightest bit of difference
Speaker 1: to her kind of audience.
Speaker 2: They wouldn't bat an eyelid.
Speaker 4: Yeah, no, I completely agree. I think it's it's ridiculous.
Speaker 4: It was never going to be something that required authorization.
Speaker 4: The authorization rules are there basically to apply to political advertising,
Speaker 4: so any paid spots in the media, and it's particular,
Speaker 4: it's particularly to discern so that people can discern where
Speaker 4: it's actually coming from. So if you've got someone staying
Speaker 4: next to Anthie Albanese saying I reckon Anthe Albanese is
Speaker 4: great for Anthie Alberesi, doesn't take much brains to figure
Speaker 4: out that that's probably being promoted by Anthony Alberanesi or
Speaker 4: someone who supports the Labor Party. Where the authorization rules
Speaker 4: come in particularly handy is when you are trying to
Speaker 4: sort of if you're making a claim about something, did
Speaker 4: you know that Peter has a secret share portfolio who's
Speaker 4: not telling you about or whatever? And you go, oh,
Speaker 4: I didn't know that. I wonder where that came from?
Speaker 4: Authorized by the ALP camera and so that is why
Speaker 4: that is why that's there, So that if something if
Speaker 4: it is unclear as to who is trying making a
Speaker 4: particular assertion or allegation about someone in an election campaign,
Speaker 4: you know where that's coming from and you're not confusing
Speaker 4: it with real news. I don't think anyone would confuse
Speaker 4: Abby Chatfield.
Speaker 3: This is very organic, very quickly, before we get to
Speaker 3: a break, that the poor state politicians in South Australia
Speaker 3: are in trouble. Apparently they've been parking illegally at the
Speaker 3: front of Parliament the House too much and they've been
Speaker 3: a scan.
Speaker 2: By the Parliament telling them do not do this. We
Speaker 2: will not be covering your fines. This is not okay.
Speaker 3: I mean, for heaven's sake, I have to say that
Speaker 3: they already have parking provided in the city.
Speaker 2: I'm not sure why they need to park illegally out.
Speaker 3: The front of Parliament House, but they ain't going to
Speaker 3: get away with it, just as you and I don't
Speaker 3: get away with it, and that seems fair enough to me.
Speaker 3: After the break, we'll get into the papers. Anthony Albanezi
Speaker 3: has a big tax promise for trade.
Speaker 2: ES will tell you what it is after this. Of course,
Speaker 2: the story of the.
Speaker 3: Day has been Trump's tariffs and it carries on on
Speaker 3: tomorrow's os Li's it does.
Speaker 1: Indeed, PM seeks critical minerals path out of tariff's one
Speaker 1: hundred percent disorder, reads the Splash. Anthony Albertezi is working
Speaker 1: on a plan to stockpile key critical minerals to use
Speaker 1: a strategic leverage with Donald Trump amid expectations the US
Speaker 1: president could remove the ten percent tariff on Australian products
Speaker 1: within months. The Australian can reveal the Trump administration is
Speaker 1: considering a tariff deal with Camera that would incorporate a
Speaker 1: critical minerals agreement designed to address US strategic priorities. Now
Speaker 1: this is what I'm talking about. If you want an
Speaker 1: exemption or anything close to it, what levery do you
Speaker 1: have Australia instead of chucking a tanty like you did initially,
Speaker 1: this is what you should.
Speaker 2: Have always done.
Speaker 1: What do we have that they might want that we
Speaker 1: can use as leverage to get ourselves a better deal.
Speaker 1: It took him a few days, but they got there.
Speaker 3: And that's essentially they have been that motus operandi the
Speaker 3: whole time, hasn't you You used the tariffs's leverage to
Speaker 3: get something out of another country and then when they
Speaker 3: deliver it, you whack the tariff off and away we go.
Speaker 4: The exactly work for Ukraine. And now it's where we've
Speaker 4: asked it's the exact same stuff, critical memories. But look,
Speaker 4: he has been saying that they've been playing this for
Speaker 4: a long time, and I think they've been pretty you know,
Speaker 4: they've been They've been pretty cool headed about it. I
Speaker 4: haven't been going too crazy. At least the PM hasn't
Speaker 4: challenged him to fisty cuffs.
Speaker 3: I'd pay to see that. That would that would be
Speaker 3: a serious fight to watch. Get Greg Norman involved in
Speaker 3: it as well.
Speaker 1: I reckon, oh, Greg, Yeah, the ultimate go between Trump's
Speaker 1: middleman to the second headline stumbling PM seismic nook scare tactic.
Speaker 2: Will it work?
Speaker 1: Anthony Albanizias suggested residents in the New South Wales Hunter
Speaker 1: Valley would be in danger under the coalition's energy policy,
Speaker 1: declaring a major earthquake in the region more than thirty
Speaker 1: years ago, shoot, it was the last place a new
Speaker 1: Clear reactor should be built.
Speaker 2: He said.
Speaker 1: Our opponents need to find six hundred billion dollars to
Speaker 1: pay for their new Clear reactors. I was in Young
Speaker 1: Labor at the time when that earthquake devastated this community.
Speaker 1: This is the last place you put a new Clear reactor.
Speaker 1: There will be no no Claire under our government. Hire laid,
Speaker 1: says Anthony Albanesi in the Hunter Valley. Do you think
Speaker 1: that people in the Hunter are actually worried about that?
Speaker 2: Probably?
Speaker 3: I think people in the Hunter are worried about where
Speaker 3: jobs come from, and they understand energy jobs more than
Speaker 3: probably anyone else in the country indeed, to be perfectly honest,
Speaker 3: but it's almost as though he's talking about this as
Speaker 3: though if it got to the stage where we were
Speaker 3: seriously looking at building nuclear plants, that you wouldn't have.
Speaker 2: To go to the inter A.
Speaker 3: Sure all of this stuff up in order to happen.
Speaker 3: We we just wake up one day. Is a bloody
Speaker 3: plogt There no no barn, Middle studies.
Speaker 4: Toad a god. So yeah. So the modern nuclear actors,
Speaker 4: I think the Fushema reactors there was an issue obviously
Speaker 4: with the earthquake in Japan, but that's because they were
Speaker 4: built decades and decades and decades ago, very old. And
Speaker 4: also my understanding is that all the ones that are
Speaker 4: built now are earthquake proof and they have the reactors
Speaker 4: kind of believe they actually have them floating in water,
Speaker 4: so even if outside around them kind of shakes and everything,
Speaker 4: it doesn't impact the actual reactor itself because it's sort
Speaker 4: of floating there. I'm not a nuclear scientist, as you
Speaker 4: know about. Remember when Asia the Foo Kashima stuff happened
Speaker 4: and everyone was saying, this is why we can't have
Speaker 4: nuclear There are all these experts coming out and say,
Speaker 4: oh no, the modern mones are totally fine, but seismic
Speaker 4: activity in the Hunter is a real concern because, as
Speaker 4: you can see by the photo that they ran with
Speaker 4: that particular story, there was an incredibly localized earthquakes just
Speaker 4: underneath the Prime Minister's feet finished giving it.
Speaker 2: And well we'll show you that vision a little less.
Speaker 3: It would have been a bigger, bigger earthquake if he
Speaker 3: hadn't lost all that Wait a few years ago.
Speaker 1: Ye, do still mean picking on someone for tripping over?
Speaker 2: He doesn't. I'm not going on it.
Speaker 4: I'm not picking on him. Remember John Howard tripped. He
Speaker 4: brought it up Joe John Howard tripped over I think
Speaker 4: in nineteen ninety six and won about twenty seats.
Speaker 2: I know.
Speaker 3: But of course at the time they made it out
Speaker 3: like this was the end of the campaign. He's fallen
Speaker 3: over in the campaigns.
Speaker 1: Then he got all the pity votes and under I don't.
Speaker 2: Know that we've seen that a bit.
Speaker 4: Why do we fall down, Master Bruce, so we can
Speaker 4: learn to pick ourselves up again. Yes, that's right. Anthey,
Speaker 4: Albeasy is batman. Anyway, let's go to the mighty Daily Telegraph,
Speaker 4: an absolute cracker of yarn on the front page. Speaking
Speaker 4: of which, anything you can do, get it. I aren't
Speaker 4: going to do better. Rivals, Jewel over Western Sydney, Tradees,
Speaker 4: tradees and other small businesses will be promised an instant
Speaker 4: twenty thousand dollars asset right off Prime Minister Anthony Albanezi
Speaker 4: at today's Future Western Sydney event at Blacktown, which I
Speaker 4: will be going to thank you very much. I'll see
Speaker 4: both Albo and dot O there. Cannot wait. It's going
Speaker 4: to be awesome. But his pledge fall short of the
Speaker 4: thirty thousand dollars permanent incidant right off pledged by Opposition
Speaker 4: leader Peter Dutton, who will today also unveil an extra
Speaker 4: two hundred million in Western Sydney road funding. So it's great.
Speaker 4: We've got a bidding war over who's going to do
Speaker 4: more from Western Sydney, which is exactly the point of
Speaker 4: these forums we have, which is the future the future
Speaker 4: Western Sydney thing, which is in Blacktown, I think, as
Speaker 4: I mentioned, and it's going to be a massive event.
Speaker 4: Albow and Darton are both going to be delivering a
Speaker 4: speech and if that doesn't float your boat, I will
Speaker 4: also be speaking. Oh in compensation, I am.
Speaker 2: I'm convinced.
Speaker 3: If there's already an offer on the table and then
Speaker 3: you're like, we'll get two thirds of the way there, is.
Speaker 2: It really an impressive thing?
Speaker 3: I mean, Scott Morrison did twenty grand instant right off
Speaker 3: back in twenty nine nineteen, and then in twenty twenty
Speaker 3: mid COVID he made it twenty five grand. So duttens
Speaker 3: up in that to thirty and saying he'll make it permanent,
Speaker 3: and Albo comes in and says, old, what scomo six
Speaker 3: years ago?
Speaker 1: Well, the other guy's given us more. Obviously, votes don't
Speaker 1: come cheap. And whoever is in the whoever's aware of
Speaker 1: these announcements, which is always my biggest thing. I don't
Speaker 1: know how much attended people are actually baying.
Speaker 2: That's going to kinch their deal.
Speaker 1: If that you if you were a trade in Western Sydney,
Speaker 1: Dutton just got your Dutton just got your vote.
Speaker 4: There obviously the whole package of stuff. Like you know,
Speaker 4: Albo's also doing free tay for everybody. So traders and
Speaker 4: builders and stuff who have got an apprentice shortage, they're
Speaker 4: going to be looking that. Actually maybe that might be
Speaker 4: better for it. But it's great to say that if.
Speaker 3: We had Tony's Trade's that was Tony Abbott's thing.
Speaker 2: What are we going to have the elbows artist.
Speaker 4: Howard Battler's Tony's tradees and elbows awesome tasker.
Speaker 2: Wow, yeah, I don't think that.
Speaker 3: Let's go to the Gold Coast bulletin tomorrow. Interesting story
Speaker 3: here Meir calls for bed tax on tourists. Your snooze,
Speaker 3: you lose, says the Gold Coast bully meyor Tom Tate
Speaker 3: wants a bed tax imposed on visitors to the Gold Coast,
Speaker 3: saying it is needed to pay for tourist infrastructure. However,
Speaker 3: a hotel's boss blasted the idea as a self defeating tariff.
Speaker 2: I'm wondering whether he's just looked over to the US
Speaker 2: and gone, oh.
Speaker 4: Tax, Why would you Gold Coast Liberation days?
Speaker 3: But why would you voluntarily make it more expensive for
Speaker 3: a tourist to come to your region?
Speaker 2: I don't get it.
Speaker 1: No, and obviously everyone who's going to be copying the effects.
Speaker 4: Of this is like, excuse me, what?
Speaker 2: Also, since when does the.
Speaker 1: Mayor impose these kinds of things. When we think of
Speaker 1: these extra taxes, it's usually the Feds or the state governments.
Speaker 4: Now we've got a mayor weighing in being like.
Speaker 1: Oh, we're a local government idea, we've decided No, it
Speaker 1: just doesn't make sense, especially given of course Gold Coast
Speaker 1: he's most known for its massive tourist attractions, so I
Speaker 1: don't think he's made anyone in his constituency happy with
Speaker 1: this announcement.
Speaker 4: The media maids maybe they have to pay bed Tech.
Speaker 4: And finally, in the Mercury, the Tasmanian Mercury hobout Mercury
Speaker 4: cross Bench crosshairs MPs take labor to task over stadium support.
Speaker 4: This is a huge issue in Tazzy about this huge
Speaker 4: if old stadium in Quari Point that's being built. A
Speaker 4: whole bunch of hippies and lefties are saying, hang on it, no,
Speaker 4: we should be spending all the money on housing, so
Speaker 4: we'll never have any football ever again because of housing. Anyway.
Speaker 4: Ten of parliaments cross Bench MP's have condemned Labor for
Speaker 4: its decision to unconditionally back the proposed Macquarie Points stadium,
Speaker 4: prompting a furious response from Dean Winter. Go Labor, what
Speaker 4: a patriotic decision we need in tazzy forty forty forty
Speaker 4: forty footy and if there's time more footy, absolutely I
Speaker 4: a love it more than Melbourne.
Speaker 3: Any any part of the country where you can get
Speaker 3: more Ossie rules footy into the place, I think that's
Speaker 3: a good thing.
Speaker 2: Spread it far and wide across the country.
Speaker 3: While we're talking about ossie rules football, it's verboten to
Speaker 3: change your team. You simply can't do it. But would
Speaker 3: you believe one liberal politician has We'll tell you who
Speaker 3: it is and why after the break. Jane Hume, what
Speaker 3: are you thinking? The Liberal senator for Victoria is a
Speaker 3: renowned and Kilda Football Club fan. You can see her
Speaker 3: here with her kid scarf on. Everyone knows she's a
Speaker 3: Saints fan and that's good. Well, I mean, apart from
Speaker 3: the fact that they haven't won a premiership for fifty
Speaker 3: nine years. But that may explain why she's instead decided
Speaker 3: today to put on Hawk's scaf Because, of course, she
Speaker 3: was in on Territory at glen Ferry that if the
Speaker 3: Libs win there will be money coming in for an
Speaker 3: Oval upgrade. You can't do it like it's one of
Speaker 3: those you're just not able to change your football team.
Speaker 3: When I moved from Adelaide to the Herald Son in Melbourne,
Speaker 3: I had people coming up to me in the newsroom
Speaker 3: saying it should have been written in your contract that
Speaker 3: you had to pick a Melbourne team when you moved
Speaker 3: over here.
Speaker 2: There is no way. It's like saying you've got a
Speaker 2: favorite kid, like you just can not change.
Speaker 4: We all do, but we don't. Absolutely right. This is
Speaker 4: disgraceful behavior. It is UnAustralian. It's even worse, it's Unvictoriano. Yes, yes,
Speaker 4: that's right. I've got a mate, one of my best
Speaker 4: mates move on from Melbourne. Originally one of my best
Speaker 4: mates moved from Sydney to Melbourne just so we could
Speaker 4: go for the Swans. Still going for the Swans, still
Speaker 4: rocking up and Jane's there. Just I mean, you think
Speaker 4: you know.
Speaker 1: Someone unbelievable for shame Jane Hume before we.
Speaker 2: Leave, you ton't.
Speaker 1: The Prime Minister has taken a tumble today when he
Speaker 1: was posing for photos after a speaking engagement in Cessnock.
Speaker 1: Here it is.
Speaker 3: Photos with everyone.
Speaker 4: Okay.
Speaker 1: I feel terrible even bringing this up because I'm the
Speaker 1: kind of person who does that kind of thing.
Speaker 2: Every other day.
Speaker 1: But here he was in the RVO on ABC Radio
Speaker 1: and Newcastle assuring everyone he's absolutely fine.
Speaker 5: We saw that you fell from the stage and says
Speaker 5: not this afternoon, are you okay?
Speaker 2: No, I stepped back one step.
Speaker 5: I didn't fall off the stage, just one leg went down,
Speaker 5: but I was sweet.
Speaker 4: Reminds me of that song.
Speaker 2: I got back down, but I got up again. God, John,
Speaker 2: I've gone.
Speaker 4: That's him, the song of ourminds me of Neil Armstrong.
Speaker 4: One small step from man, one giant leap for a
Speaker 4: prime minister.
Speaker 2: But how can he say he didn't fall? I mean
Speaker 2: we all mind the footage there, mate. If you can't
Speaker 2: be if you can't even tell the truth about whether
Speaker 2: that's it for us this week? Up next to the
Speaker 2: reader Panecky shirt.
Speaker 3: Good night