Speaker 1: Welcome the Late Bait.
Speaker 2: Great to have your company on the Late Debate. I'm
Speaker 2: James Macpherson with Liz Storer and Caleb Bond coming up.
Speaker 2: Woolworths are selling shopping bags for twenty dollars a piece
Speaker 2: and people are buying them. What cost of living crisis.
Speaker 2: We'll talk about what's going on there.
Speaker 3: You don't have one, James. I saw you carting your
Speaker 3: stuff in with it tonight.
Speaker 2: I get resentful every time I have to pay twenty
Speaker 2: five cents for a paper shopping bag that then breaks
Speaker 2: as I walk across the road, scattering my groceries, and
Speaker 2: that's happened.
Speaker 4: Bored and don't buy them. I will carry an insane
Speaker 4: amount of groceries.
Speaker 2: I don't want to be to the car. What about
Speaker 2: you know you have you open someone's boot or you
Speaker 2: get in an uber and they've got just a boot
Speaker 2: full of like shopping bags that.
Speaker 4: They everyone's got that cupboard at home.
Speaker 2: I buy the paper bags that I get angry about
Speaker 2: it every time. Anyway, we'll talk about that a little later.
Speaker 2: Clearly we're stirred up on that subject. Plus when we
Speaker 2: look at tomorrow's papers. Peter Dutton and now since he
Speaker 2: will cut the fuel excise good news for motorists and
Speaker 2: a local council are ex signs at a city garden
Speaker 2: advising people, in fact, pleading with people, please don't spread
Speaker 2: human remains here. We'll get to that a little later,
Speaker 2: but first you would have seen on television those advertisements
Speaker 2: offering the chance to learn about your ancestry through genetic testing,
Speaker 2: and like me, you've probably been tempted. I mean, who
Speaker 2: wouldn't want to find out their backstory and maybe discover
Speaker 2: if they've got some sort of, you know, exotic history.
Speaker 2: One of the pioneers of this technology is a company
Speaker 2: called twenty three and Me. It started in San Francisco
Speaker 2: back in two thousand and six, and over the past
Speaker 2: twenty years they've collected saliva samples from more than fifteen
Speaker 2: million people whose DNA they've stored on company databases. Now
Speaker 2: here's where it gets interesting. Twenty three and Me the
Speaker 2: company are now facing bankruptcy, so to avoid that, they're
Speaker 2: looking at selling the company, which then raises the question
Speaker 2: does the buyer get access to millions of people's DNA?
Speaker 2: And who is this buyer? And what will they use
Speaker 2: the information for the chairperson of twenty three and Me
Speaker 2: is trying to assure clients that it's not going to
Speaker 2: be a problem no matter who buys the company. He
Speaker 2: released a statement saying we are committed to continuing to
Speaker 2: safeguard customer data and being transparent about the management of
Speaker 2: user data going forward, and data privacy will be an
Speaker 2: important consideration in any potential transaction. Which doesn't exactly fill
Speaker 2: you with confidence, It certainly didn't fill the Attorney General
Speaker 2: of California with confidence. He released a statement urging Californians
Speaker 2: who have given their DNA to this company to take action.
Speaker 2: In a statement, he said, given twenty three and Me's
Speaker 2: reported financial distress, I remind Californians to consider invoking their
Speaker 2: rights and directing twenty three and ME to delete their
Speaker 2: data and destroy any sample of genetic material held by
Speaker 2: the company. Of course, it may already be too late,
Speaker 2: because in an undercover interview, Nate Johnson, the policy advisor
Speaker 2: for the US Treasury, said that this company's major shareholders
Speaker 2: are all pharmaceutical companies who've already had access to people's
Speaker 2: DNA data. Here he is, then.
Speaker 4: Figure out what you were I actually did that.
Speaker 5: I should do that, though, do not give your information they.
Speaker 4: Saw it, do they sell it to pressure something? Study
Speaker 4: meet Nathaniel Johnson, a policy advisor for the United States
Speaker 4: Department of the Treasury.
Speaker 5: There's a clause in the country says like.
Speaker 3: The information sure there is.
Speaker 5: So set all their share a like pharmaceuticals. We're still
Speaker 5: with this pharmacipical and is for company's based in the country,
Speaker 5: And pharma recipal means in other countries they plant the
Speaker 5: property of like Administry of Defense and rush or like
Speaker 5: by change.
Speaker 2: So obviously this story raises all kinds of ethical questions. Liz,
Speaker 2: you ever been tempted to spit into a tube, send
Speaker 2: it to some company and find out if maybe your
Speaker 2: part Spanish or German law.
Speaker 4: Never and it genuinely boggles my brain that anyone is
Speaker 4: up for this. There is nothing more private than your
Speaker 4: personal DNA data. And this company actually just a few
Speaker 4: years ago had a five month security breach that met
Speaker 4: millions of their customers. Nobody knows where the data's even gone,
Speaker 4: but millions of them had their personal data. Almost seven
Speaker 4: million customers had their data just out there flapping around,
Speaker 4: and that resulted in twenty three and me paying out
Speaker 4: a thirty million dollar settlement. So that quote there from
Speaker 4: the CEO just laughter. You can't laugh any harder. I
Speaker 4: was like, oh, but we're going to keep it secure, mate,
Speaker 4: you haven't historically Anyway. This is a story that should
Speaker 4: make everyone sit up and take note, because what this
Speaker 4: means is the fate of millions of Americans. DNA is
Speaker 4: now subject to a court supervised sale. I don't know
Speaker 4: about you, but who's buying it? Who is that interested
Speaker 4: in your DNA? Indeed, you would notice that bloke, they're
Speaker 4: referred to the shareholders of twenty three and me And
Speaker 4: guess who the top shareholders are? Black Rock and Vanguard
Speaker 4: the world the's largest investment companies. And if you're sitting
Speaker 4: at home going well, I used Ancestry, so that's different. No,
Speaker 4: that was brought out in twenty twenty by Blackstone, another
Speaker 4: very large investment company, was bought for four foero point
Speaker 4: seven billion dollars. Again, the question remains, why are these
Speaker 4: guys so interested in getting their hands on your DNA data.
Speaker 4: It's a very very pertinent question to be asking. Someone's
Speaker 4: profiting off it and it's not you. And only a
Speaker 4: brief look at Blackrock and Vanguard's many, many, many entanglements
Speaker 4: and their clients. Shows that they have a lot of
Speaker 4: these pharmaceutical companies, that's what he's referring to there within
Speaker 4: their paddock. So it stands to reason, where is this
Speaker 4: DNA now? Has it already been sold off? That is
Speaker 4: what this report from James O'Keeffe is alluding to. So
Speaker 4: you've got this state supervised sale pending, but the suggestion
Speaker 4: here is that a lot of it has already been
Speaker 4: sold off. And if what Johnson said is even remotely
Speaker 4: true in that clip there, this is that is DNA
Speaker 4: being sold to private companies. This is a massive issue
Speaker 4: of national security type importance. And how you ask, Well,
Speaker 4: a man by the name of Jason Crow, he's a
Speaker 4: member of the House Committee on Armed Services and House
Speaker 4: Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. This was some years ago,
Speaker 4: but he was raising this issue, perhaps quite prophetically. He said, quote,
Speaker 4: that's what this is, where you can actually take someone's DNA,
Speaker 4: you know their medical profile, and you can target a
Speaker 4: biological weapon that will kill that person or take them
Speaker 4: off the battlefield, or make them inoperable. The bottom line is,
Speaker 4: why why would anyone just be like, oh, yeah, it's
Speaker 4: just about genealogy, It's just about finding out my family history.
Speaker 4: I cannot understand how millions of people are that naive.
Speaker 6: And that's I've always said that I wouldn't do it
Speaker 6: because who knows where my DNA is getting en up?
Speaker 6: I mean twenty three and meters until this point has
Speaker 6: already done fifteen deals with pharmaceutical companies to share the
Speaker 6: DNA data that they had. Glaxosmith Klein paid three hundred
Speaker 6: million US dollars in twenty eighteen to get access to
Speaker 6: five million people's DNA, So they're already profiting off this DNA,
Speaker 6: which is.
Speaker 3: A sacred thing.
Speaker 6: It's like your fingerprint, right, it is your unique identify Now,
Speaker 6: in some ways that identifier isn't totally unique, because we
Speaker 6: know people have been linked to crimes that they didn't
Speaker 6: actually commit because perhaps the coppers had your brother's DNA
Speaker 6: and all of a sudden, they think you've committed a crime,
Speaker 6: but it was actually someone else. And that's the other
Speaker 6: thing I've always wondered, Well, what's to stop a government
Speaker 6: anywhere in the world trying to get hold of this data,
Speaker 6: whether they do it through the courts or they buy
Speaker 6: it or whatever. So here I am, and I'm not
Speaker 6: saying I'm planning to commit any crimes that would require
Speaker 6: the police to gain access to my DNA. But in
Speaker 6: twenty fifty, when Comrade General Albow is still running the
Speaker 6: country and he's finally decided it's my time to go
Speaker 6: to the Gulag and you're going to put me up
Speaker 6: on some Trump DAP charges, and he gets my DNA
Speaker 6: from ancestry dot com or twenty three and me, what
Speaker 6: am I going to do about it? I mean, why
Speaker 6: would you voluntarily give that over to anyone else when
Speaker 6: you don't have to. I get that people want to
Speaker 6: trace their family trees, et cetera, But like.
Speaker 3: Could you make it any easier.
Speaker 6: For you to become a target of private companies or
Speaker 6: governments or whoever it might be with nefarious intent?
Speaker 2: It is so dumb that there's an interesting story Becker
Speaker 2: from twenty eighteen where police have been searching for decades
Speaker 2: for he was called the night Stalker or the Golden
Speaker 2: State Killer, someone who had raped and murdered dozens of
Speaker 2: women in the seventies and eighties, and they've been completely
Speaker 2: unable to find this guy. So police got DNA and
Speaker 2: they went into eed match and they looked at they
Speaker 2: found twenty possible great great grandparents. They narrowed it down
Speaker 2: to two suspects and eventually found the person using one
Speaker 2: of these ancestry websites to track down the killer so
Speaker 2: governments can access it.
Speaker 4: They do.
Speaker 2: Sometimes it's good. Sometimes it's a nefarious.
Speaker 4: Purpose, and they're happy for that to make it into
Speaker 4: the media because it's like, oh, look, this is a
Speaker 4: positive thing. Never mind that we compromise the DNA data
Speaker 4: of millions of people in order to just be like, hi,
Speaker 4: excuse me, ancestry dot com, excuse me twenty three and
Speaker 4: meter well where the government, where the law enforces. So
Speaker 4: it's in safe hands with us. Just hand it over,
Speaker 4: won't you that that's fine? No, it's not fine. Like
Speaker 4: I said, nothing is more private than your personal genetic info.
Speaker 4: And you have no idea how someone can webonize.
Speaker 2: That you'd wanted insurance companies well, exactly, I want it.
Speaker 3: Well, there's lots of I mean, the.
Speaker 2: Track your driving if they get DNA.
Speaker 3: Exactly, And that's the next thing.
Speaker 6: They'll be refusing health industans on the basis of your
Speaker 6: DNA because they'll do the genomic testing and they'll work
Speaker 6: out that you've got a family history of breast cancer
Speaker 6: or whatever it is, and then they'll start denying you insurance.
Speaker 6: That's where this is going. That's why this stuff is
Speaker 6: so valuable. I mean, you know, I worry about giving
Speaker 6: my bloody idea if I go into a nightclub or
Speaker 6: a registered club or something. No, I don't get but
Speaker 6: I have been to nightclubs. We're in order to get
Speaker 6: in the door, they scan your ID before you go in.
Speaker 6: Presumably you know, if you cause a raucus or something,
Speaker 6: it then means they've got your stuff on record. But
Speaker 6: I'm like, what's the rules here? Are you going to
Speaker 6: destroy that at any point? Do you just now have
Speaker 6: my photograph and my address on record forever?
Speaker 3: And what do you like? Seriously, I worry about that.
Speaker 6: And some people are willing to hand their DNA over
Speaker 6: to a private company.
Speaker 3: I don't get it.
Speaker 6: I'll tell you one thing else I don't get. Well,
Speaker 6: I do actually get it. I know why the federal
Speaker 6: government is doing it, but gee, it makes me uncomfortable
Speaker 6: is that they have started getting influences involved in their
Speaker 6: election and budget coverage. There were influences, thirteen of them
Speaker 6: to be specific, who were allowed into the federal budget
Speaker 6: lock up yesterday. Some of them had their flights and
Speaker 6: accommodation paid for by the ALP. The Labor Party wanted
Speaker 6: the social media influences there, ranging from people who do
Speaker 6: money podcasts to people who get maker living in notoriety
Speaker 6: out of modeling swimwear and activewear. I mean, they're the
Speaker 6: sort of people that you want to be taking your
Speaker 6: budget advice from, of course, but they want them in
Speaker 6: the room and will pay for their flights and accommodation
Speaker 6: to get them there, presumably because they want positive coverage.
Speaker 6: I mean, why else would you be paying for them
Speaker 6: to be there. Take a look at some of the
Speaker 6: content that these excellent influencers produced yesterday.
Speaker 1: Ultimately, it's not about me. It's about the audience that
Speaker 1: I have cultivated, who are engaged progressive Australians who give
Speaker 1: a talk about the future of this country. And he
Speaker 1: wants to use me to speak to them. What gives
Speaker 1: you hope? You no better than anyone in Australia right now?
Speaker 1: What gives you hope for the next generation? Not just
Speaker 1: as a politician but.
Speaker 3: As a person?
Speaker 2: Can I get a signature? They keep Jim away from it?
Speaker 6: I mean, how pathetic is that?
Speaker 1: Or excuse me for our next minister. Can I have
Speaker 1: your autograph please?
Speaker 6: I mean you're supposedly there to cover the budget, not
Speaker 6: to be a sicker fan. You heard the first woman,
Speaker 6: of course, saying, the Prime Minister is using me to
Speaker 6: talk to you.
Speaker 2: I mean, the.
Speaker 3: Jiggy is up.
Speaker 6: She's just said it. The Prime Minister is using her
Speaker 6: as a mouthpiece to run the ALP line to people
Speaker 6: and they will pay your flights and accommodation if you
Speaker 6: will do it.
Speaker 3: And ab had that softball.
Speaker 6: Question that the second woman, Oh, what gives you hope
Speaker 6: for the future. I mean, what gives elbow hope for
Speaker 6: the future is that he just bought a four million
Speaker 6: dollar cliff top mansion at Copa Cabata, and if it
Speaker 6: all goes sour, he'll be able to go there and
Speaker 6: enjoy the rest of his life outside of politics. This
Speaker 6: makes me really uncomfortable because we all know there are
Speaker 6: media outlets that are friendlier to the government and others
Speaker 6: that are unfriendlier to the It's always been thus we
Speaker 6: know that.
Speaker 3: But any media outlet that wants to.
Speaker 6: Go and cover the budget pays its own expenses.
Speaker 3: The Labor Party, the Liberal Party, whoever.
Speaker 6: Does not pay for journalists to come along and cover
Speaker 6: the budget. And that's for a very good reason, because
Speaker 6: if the politicians aren't paying you to do your job,
Speaker 6: you can at least do your job with a sceric
Speaker 6: of integrity and independence. Surely, the moment a political party
Speaker 6: literally starts paying in kind, as it is in this case,
Speaker 6: I'm not saying he's five grand to come to the budget,
Speaker 6: but will pay for your flights and accommodation. Surely they
Speaker 6: then expect in return some positive coverage that, as far
Speaker 6: as I'm concerned, is cash for comment. I try to
Speaker 6: do that on this network or on radio. I'm up
Speaker 6: before Akma for not declaring that because it's an advertising deal. Essentially,
Speaker 6: are these people not doing advertising deals with the government.
Speaker 2: Of a question? Where did they get this idea from? Caleb?
Speaker 2: Wasn't this a Trump administration idea?
Speaker 6: Well, he certainly spoke to a lot of podcasters.
Speaker 2: Famously allow influencers into the White House press briefing rooms.
Speaker 2: Now this is interesting because don't the Albanezi government continually
Speaker 2: criticize Peter Dutton for copying from Trump's playbook and accusing
Speaker 2: him of Trumpian politics. And here's the Labor Party lifting
Speaker 2: an idea straight from Donald Trump. I should point out
Speaker 2: we've got to be careful not to be hypocritical, because
Speaker 2: I think when Trump did this, we all said, oh,
Speaker 2: this is great. He's opening it up to the new media.
Speaker 2: Now Albanese is doing this and we're like, oh, this
Speaker 2: is dodgy. I had no issue.
Speaker 6: I have no issue letting them come in. If they
Speaker 6: want to do coverage, that's fine. But it's when they
Speaker 6: start being paid by the government or a political party problem.
Speaker 2: Some of these people have got clear biases. Sarah Ferguson,
Speaker 2: who's famous on Instagram, was one of the thirteen influencers
Speaker 2: invited by government ministers handpicked. She on her Instagram talks
Speaker 2: about things like how to convince your grandparents not to
Speaker 2: vote for Peter Dutton. I can't imagine why albany'ze has
Speaker 2: invited her to cover the budget.
Speaker 4: She's already on board, she's already peddling the message. But look,
Speaker 4: this is incredibly smart. The difference with what Trump's team did,
Speaker 4: obviously was to go on these podcasts that are millions
Speaker 4: of followers in the States. Both he and jd Vancey,
Speaker 4: his VP, did this, and it was incredibly effective because
Speaker 4: much like Australia. In America, the younger generations are completely
Speaker 4: disengaged from politics, but they watch these influences, they watch
Speaker 4: the podcasters. So what the Albanezy government is doing here
Speaker 4: is incredibly smart. None of these young people are reading
Speaker 4: the paper, none of these young people are following any
Speaker 4: pollies on any of the socials, but they're following these influences.
Speaker 4: So it's very likely that whatever these influencers say is
Speaker 4: going to be the only exposure that those young people
Speaker 4: get to Australian politics and the state of the nation
Speaker 4: in the lead up to the election, in the lead
Speaker 4: up to the day that they'll go to the ballot box.
Speaker 2: You know what Anthiobenes is going to do next, He's
Speaker 2: going to get contestants from Maps to go with him
Speaker 2: on the.
Speaker 4: That really can it does?
Speaker 6: It worries me about where politics is going though, and
Speaker 6: the greater body politic because you know, of course, as
Speaker 6: I said before, it's always been us. There are elements
Speaker 6: of the media that are friendly to the left and
Speaker 6: not so friendly to the right, and people will tend
Speaker 6: to gravitate towards sources of media that they think confirms
Speaker 6: their biases. We all know that, and it's always been
Speaker 6: that way. That's fine, it's a free market.
Speaker 3: But I feel like now, you know, previously it least
Speaker 3: there would be people in here.
Speaker 6: On Sky News, we have lefties who come on and
Speaker 6: talk to what is largely a conservative audience because we
Speaker 6: feel like, you know, we've actually got to provide a
Speaker 6: bit of balance here. But that doesn't exist on social media.
Speaker 6: And of course, with algorithms the way they work on
Speaker 6: social media, they will continually feed you stuff that they
Speaker 6: think you want to see. So it just reinforces and
Speaker 6: reinforces and reinforces whatever your existing.
Speaker 3: Biases are and doesn't challenge you in any way.
Speaker 6: So if it becomes influences that people get all their
Speaker 6: information from, and social media is feeding them what the
Speaker 6: algorithm thinks they want to see, they're never going to
Speaker 6: be exposed to anything the side. And so you don't
Speaker 6: actually know why you think what you think. You just
Speaker 6: think it because that's all you've ever seen. And I
Speaker 6: think that's a really dangerous place to be.
Speaker 4: Speaking of danger. In today's episode of are the Left
Speaker 4: just a dangerously violent bunch of whack jobs? The Dems
Speaker 4: with their twenty seven percent approval rating in the states.
Speaker 4: At the moment, I've decided the way they're going to
Speaker 4: dig themselves out of this hole is to launch a
Speaker 4: speaking tour featuring the most radical elements in their party,
Speaker 4: namely Rep. AOC and Bernie Sanders. They're going on a
Speaker 4: speaking tour speaking against oligarchs, and it doesn't take a
Speaker 4: genius to figure out who those oligarchs are, namely Musk
Speaker 4: and Co. They're doing this, of course, in conjunction with
Speaker 4: the domestic terrorists currently running rife on elon Musk's biggest company, Tesla,
Speaker 4: in which sixty percent of his wealth is wrapped up.
Speaker 4: So his AOC speaking at her own rally and check
Speaker 4: out what someone in the crowd yells out.
Speaker 1: That his campaigns big his how nice there and all
Speaker 1: of us are allowed to behind.
Speaker 4: Because a French Revolution reference with that sign on the
Speaker 4: stage is a okay if you're the Democrats. Notice the
Speaker 4: distinct absence of any like oh whoa whoa, no mate
Speaker 4: where we're not about that though. She just continues on
Speaker 4: like nothing happened. Let's check in with another Democratic Rep. Shelby.
Speaker 4: She's Jasmine Crockett and not a violent person at all.
Speaker 4: You'd think to watch this interview.
Speaker 2: I think that you punch.
Speaker 1: I think you punch.
Speaker 7: I think you're okay, you you okay, we're punching, you know,
Speaker 7: I think and I love Colin, and I think towards
Speaker 7: the end he started to punch a little harder.
Speaker 1: But like it's sare rules.
Speaker 7: I mean, like this dude has to be nuts over
Speaker 7: the head, like hard, right, Like there is no niceties
Speaker 7: with him, like at all, Like you go clean off
Speaker 7: on him, right.
Speaker 4: Oh, it's perfectly okay to threaten physical violence against the
Speaker 4: Secretary of State because we don't like him. He's on
Speaker 4: Trunk's team. So yeah, just whack him in the head
Speaker 4: as hard as you can. And before you think this
Speaker 4: is just limited to the radicals in the Democratic Party,
Speaker 4: some of the most popular talk show hosts in the
Speaker 4: United States of America are also featuring these stories regarding
Speaker 4: the takedown of Elon Musk to massive applause in their audiences.
Speaker 2: They're taking to the streets or the parking lots.
Speaker 8: Could I be FBI and ATF now investigating multiple cases
Speaker 8: of possible arts and targeting tesla's and cyber trucks.
Speaker 2: This dramatic video shows multiple cars and flames.
Speaker 7: Police say the attacker used molotov cocktails. It's the latest
Speaker 7: and more than a dozen instances of our sin.
Speaker 2: Cyber trucks were set on fire in Kansas City, and
Speaker 2: earlier this month, shots fired at a Tesla dealership in Oregon.
Speaker 2: Cyber trucks on fire in Seattle. Wow, you guys like
Speaker 2: pettiacts of domestic terrorism.
Speaker 4: Hardly call that a petty act. But you could tell
Speaker 4: that even the host was a little taken aback by
Speaker 4: the enthusiastic enthusiasm of the crowd there as they watched
Speaker 4: people's cars just go up in flames. Check out Jimmy Kimmel,
Speaker 4: he is one of the head honchos of late night
Speaker 4: TV in the States, trying to make it funny and
Speaker 4: suggesting that well, Elon Musk should have thought about this before.
Speaker 3: He lined with Trump, when you pull out a chainsaw
Speaker 3: to celebrate firing thousands of people diget mad.
Speaker 1: It's just you know, my.
Speaker 4: God, I mean, they are mad. They might start burning
Speaker 4: your businesses to the ground with Molotov cock downs. You
Speaker 4: know what were you expecting, Elon mask, Ladies and gentlemen,
Speaker 4: the Party of Joy and Tolerance just supporting the physical
Speaker 4: takedown of not only Elon Musk as a person references
Speaker 4: to guillotining is fine, and whacking people in the head
Speaker 4: is perfectly fine as hard as you can, mind you,
Speaker 4: because well they deserve it. We hate these people.
Speaker 6: Two words January sixth. I mean, we never heard the end.
Speaker 3: Of January sixth. They stormed the capital. It was an insurrection.
Speaker 3: How dare they this was violence. They're trying to overthrow democracy.
Speaker 3: This is what the right does.
Speaker 6: They can't accept the results of a democratic election, and
Speaker 6: now we have this. We have them going around setting
Speaker 6: cars on fire, bombing car dealerships, saying that people should
Speaker 6: face the guillotine, going around some of the attendees at
Speaker 6: these rallies, going around saying that, you know, Donald Trump
Speaker 6: should swing like Mussolini, on and on. It goes, oh, yeah,
Speaker 6: that's fine. I mean, January sixth was so bad that
Speaker 6: Donald Trump should be not allowed anywhere near the White
Speaker 6: House ever. Again they get a result they don't like,
Speaker 6: they want to start killing people and destroying property. I mean,
Speaker 6: they thought they had the moral high ground. They don't
Speaker 6: have the moral high ground. They have told on themselves
Speaker 6: so hard it's not funny. They are demented in the
Speaker 6: way they are carrying on about this.
Speaker 3: It was a democratic election. You lost it. Get over it.
Speaker 2: He gave us two words. I'll give you three. Trump
Speaker 2: assassination attempt. The Left have learned absolutely nothing from that. Remember,
Speaker 2: in the wake of that, there was a general agreement
Speaker 2: everybody needs to just tone it down, wind back the language.
Speaker 2: And here the Democrats have ramped it right back up.
Speaker 2: But aren't these the people who say words are violence.
Speaker 2: Don't they get all upset about a Trump tweet. That's
Speaker 2: the end of the world if Trump tweets something nasty
Speaker 2: or mean. And here they are calling for people to
Speaker 2: be slapped in the head, for people to be guillotined,
Speaker 2: and cheering for the destruction of a great American business. There,
Speaker 2: democracy is just ranked.
Speaker 4: Indeed, you speak of an assassination attempt. Someone did a
Speaker 4: pop fox with people who are lining up to go
Speaker 4: to this Bernie Sanders AOC rally, and three people in
Speaker 4: this same pop Fox were all like, yeah, off with
Speaker 4: his head. Literally, these guys said, oh, dead fascist is
Speaker 4: the only good fascist. These people are hell bent just
Speaker 4: saying off with their heads basically.
Speaker 2: And we saw an interview where a lady is asked
Speaker 2: at one of these rallies. Do you support violence? She's
Speaker 2: just no, I don't support violence. But we've done everything
Speaker 2: we can and they just don't listen to us. So
Speaker 2: it's all we've got left, which is violence.
Speaker 6: But the base bit is they don't even realize what
Speaker 6: they're doing or what they're actually advocating for. It was
Speaker 6: like we showed a video recently, didn't we of all
Speaker 6: these people going around saying, Elon Mussa, go back to
Speaker 6: where you came from. I mean, you know, for years
Speaker 6: and years they've carried on about how that's a racist slur,
Speaker 6: and all of a sudden, they're using it against people
Speaker 6: they don't like, like they are literally the thing they
Speaker 6: say they hate.
Speaker 2: Well, while left these to kill Donald Trump. Donald Trump
Speaker 2: is resisting the urge to kill his national security advisor
Speaker 2: after a massive security leak, the Trump administration was planning
Speaker 2: and then carried out a missile strike on Hohoti rebels
Speaker 2: in Yemen, and so they got together a chat group
Speaker 2: which comprised people like the Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, the
Speaker 2: Vice President JD. Vance. It was all put together by
Speaker 2: the National Security Advisor Michael Waltz. Now in putting together
Speaker 2: this chat group on the messaging app Signal. Michael Waltz
Speaker 2: somehow invited a journalist from the Atlantic magazine into this
Speaker 2: highly secure, supposedly chat group where they're talking about this
Speaker 2: missile strike among other things. Now will show you some
Speaker 2: of the text messages in just a moment, but to
Speaker 2: have a listen to the National security advisor explain how
Speaker 2: this all happened. How was it that on this chat
Speaker 2: group where they're discussing a missile strike against terrorists, this
Speaker 2: is highly classified material that an Atlantic journalist ends up
Speaker 2: part of the group.
Speaker 8: These were principles and and a couple and a couple
Speaker 8: of staff that were coordinating as you saw, having a
Speaker 8: policy discussion, as as we went forward, and then just
Speaker 8: in the days before what was an incredible strike.
Speaker 3: I don't know this guy.
Speaker 8: I know him by his horrible reputation and he really
Speaker 8: is a bottom scum of journalists.
Speaker 3: I take full responsibility.
Speaker 8: I built the I built the group to my job.
Speaker 3: Is to make sure everything's coordinated. But how that's a cute.
Speaker 8: I mean, I don't mean to be pedantic here, but
Speaker 8: how did the number have you ever had have you
Speaker 8: ever had somebody's contact that shows their name and then
Speaker 8: you have an and then you have somebody else that mistake. Right,
Speaker 8: You've got somebody else's number on someone else's contact.
Speaker 3: So of course I didn't see this loser in the group.
Speaker 3: It looked like someone else happens.
Speaker 2: To me all the time, kind of bonded on my phone,
Speaker 2: like get this store, I answering, it's just the weirdest thing.
Speaker 6: How could you think that was a genuine ecat when I.
Speaker 3: Should, Oh, yeah, haven't you ever had it?
Speaker 6: No? I mean normally I need someone, I'm like, what's
Speaker 6: your number? What's your name? And then I press their
Speaker 6: name and their number comes up. I mean, it's never
Speaker 6: happened to me, literally never.
Speaker 2: Here's Donald Trump but defending his national security advisor.
Speaker 1: I don't think he should apologize. I think he's doing
Speaker 1: his best.
Speaker 8: It's equipment and technology that's not perfect, and probably he
Speaker 8: won't be using it again, at least not in a
Speaker 8: very refuge.
Speaker 1: You sor, I agree with you.
Speaker 8: Let's get everybody in the.
Speaker 2: Room, Caleb. If this was the Biden administration, we would
Speaker 2: be going crazy on this, calling for heads to roll.
Speaker 2: I think the American public understand there are going to
Speaker 2: be mistakes. Trump's not the Messiah. He's just a very
Speaker 2: naughty boy. He's going to get some things wrong. But
Speaker 2: I think what the public want is just honesty when
Speaker 2: you stuff up, don't do what the National Security Advisor
Speaker 2: did then and just come up with these ridiculous excuses
Speaker 2: or the other thing that the administrator is doing is
Speaker 2: they're blaming the journalist and smearing him. And admittedly this
Speaker 2: journalist doesn't have a particularly great track record, Liz, you
Speaker 2: might talk about that in a moment, but surely the
Speaker 2: Trump administration should just be honest and maybe keep the
Speaker 2: advisor on, but admit it was a massive stuff up.
Speaker 2: If it ever happens again, you are gone. But just
Speaker 2: be honest with people.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean, you're right.
Speaker 6: If it was the bad administration, we'd say this bloke
Speaker 6: should be gone. I mean, how could you possibly do this.
Speaker 6: I get that leaks happen and whatever, but.
Speaker 3: This is a bad mistake.
Speaker 6: Now, in this case, they'll get away with it because
Speaker 6: it was after the fact, essentially, and there was nothing
Speaker 6: in it that's terribly damaging to the Trump administration. So
Speaker 6: the dog will bark and the caravan will move on.
Speaker 6: But imagine if there had been contents in those messages
Speaker 6: that was dangerous in any way. Now, of course, a
Speaker 6: journalist has to make a call in that situation whether
Speaker 6: it is in the national interest to.
Speaker 3: Report what is in front of them.
Speaker 6: In this case, fine to report essentially because it didn't
Speaker 6: lead to anyone's death or put anyone in danger. I mean,
Speaker 6: as a journalist, this is the story I would wish
Speaker 6: would happen to me of all the chat groups I
Speaker 6: could ever end up in as a journal I'm like, yes,
Speaker 6: please put me in that one, because it's a great yarn.
Speaker 6: But these kind of mistakes should not happen. I know
Speaker 6: mistakes happen, but they just should not happen at all.
Speaker 6: And anyone who does something like that and then tries
Speaker 6: to say, well, don't you have people's names with other
Speaker 6: people's phone numbers in their phones, I think that's a
Speaker 6: cop out and he needs to.
Speaker 4: Go well, this is quite literally possibly the most insane
Speaker 4: national security story of the last fifty years. In this chat,
Speaker 4: they were talking about weapons that would be deployed, they
Speaker 4: were talking about the targets, and they were talking about
Speaker 4: attack sequencing. So this falling into the wrong hands would
Speaker 4: have been one you mentally bad. But what I want
Speaker 4: to draw people's attention to is the fact that JD Vance,
Speaker 4: who was in this chat, was very much opposed to
Speaker 4: these strikes in Yemen. So you've got Jeffrey Goldberg, the
Speaker 4: journo who finds himself in this chat. He said, I
Speaker 4: didn't think it could be real. I literally sat in
Speaker 4: my car, thinking, well, if it's real, the bombs will
Speaker 4: start falling, and then I'll no. And then he tells
Speaker 4: the story. He's sitting in his car, checks the time,
Speaker 4: and sure enough, googled Yemen and the bombs had started falling,
Speaker 4: at which point he realized, I'm actually in a legit hack.
Speaker 4: This isn't some sort of weird people trying to hoax
Speaker 4: me here. I'm in there with Trump's top team, privy
Speaker 4: to all the private one would hope, well, not clearly,
Speaker 4: not really, and then proceeded to share screenshots. But JD
Speaker 4: Vance I got to take my hat off to him here,
Speaker 4: he texted at eight sixteen team, I am out for
Speaker 4: the day doing an economic event in Michigan. But I
Speaker 4: think we are making a mistake. Three percent of US
Speaker 4: trade runs through the Suez, forty percent of European trade does.
Speaker 4: There is a real risk that the public doesn't understand
Speaker 4: this or why it's necessary. The strongest reason to do
Speaker 4: this is, as Poters said, to send a message. He
Speaker 4: says he's not sure the president is aware of how
Speaker 4: inconsistent such a move would be with his current stance
Speaker 4: on Europe. He also speaks to the risk of severe
Speaker 4: spikes in oil prices. He finishes by saying, I'm willing
Speaker 4: to support the consensus of the team and keep these
Speaker 4: concerns to myself, but there is a strong argument for
Speaker 4: putting this off for at least a month. So my
Speaker 4: bit two biggest concerns about this security leak was firstly,
Speaker 4: to recap the contents of that chat. They didn't think
Speaker 4: the whoties were a real threat, not in this particular
Speaker 4: strike that they were doing. They didn't think Americans would
Speaker 4: understand the strikes. For that very reason, they didn't. They
Speaker 4: did it anyway to send a message, and they did
Speaker 4: it on an unencrypted chat on signal. You can't make
Speaker 4: this stuff up. But the part that I think everyone's
Speaker 4: missing here, Yes, the leak's a big deal, but the
Speaker 4: real scandal is waging war in a foreign country without
Speaker 4: congressional approval. You're normally supposed to let your mates know
Speaker 4: what's happening. It's supposed to go to a vote. None
Speaker 4: of that was happening. These were just a pile of
Speaker 4: warhawk neo cons being like, yeah, bomb them and then
Speaker 4: texting each other being like strong start, congratulations mate was
Speaker 4: auto like just mind blowing stuff.
Speaker 6: And it's an interesting window as well into obviously how
Speaker 6: much control Trump has of the people around him, because
Speaker 6: you've got the vice president saying to a group of
Speaker 6: people who he presumably thinks are not going to relay
Speaker 6: this back to the President that he's not entirely sure
Speaker 6: this is the right thing to do. He obviously thought
Speaker 6: he was in comfortable company there. But you would like
Speaker 6: to think that in that case the vice president would
Speaker 6: be going off and having those conversations with the President
Speaker 6: and saying, actually, this is my advice on this situation.
Speaker 6: It would seem that Trump basically says jump and other
Speaker 6: people say how high.
Speaker 3: I'm not sure that's always the best way.
Speaker 2: Student note, I'm happy to keep my concerns to myself.
Speaker 1: Et.
Speaker 4: Prudent bearing the lighter world.
Speaker 6: Don't you hate it when you've got someone else's name
Speaker 6: on top of a different person's number, Hey, let's talk
Speaker 6: about air travel, right Coantus is saying, can you believe it?
Speaker 6: I mean I would had gone off contus entirely.
Speaker 3: But the CEO of the new CEO.
Speaker 6: Of Quantus, Vanessa Hudson, has actually seen something quite sensible.
Speaker 6: We'll see whether she actually backs this up with action,
Speaker 6: but she says that it's quite possible that air travel
Speaker 6: will become quote so expensive that it's something for the
Speaker 6: privileged if they continue to follow through with their net
Speaker 6: zero targets. Now, Quantus is aiming to buy twenty thirty
Speaker 6: have ten percent of their fuel a sustainable aviation fuel.
Speaker 3: This is not jet fuel, which is kerosene.
Speaker 6: It's green stuff that is currently three to five times
Speaker 6: more expensive than jet fuel. So their plan is ten
Speaker 6: percent by the end of the decade. Britain has already
Speaker 6: mandated ten percent by the end of the decade, the
Speaker 6: EU is mandated six percent by the end of the decade.
Speaker 6: And further on in Quantus's plans is that they'll be
Speaker 6: using sixty percent of this sustainable aviation.
Speaker 3: Fuel by twenty fifty.
Speaker 6: But because it is so expensive, someone's got to pay
Speaker 6: for it. So who's going to pay for it? It's
Speaker 6: going to be you in air fares. Airbus has come
Speaker 6: out with the same concerns as well, saying that we
Speaker 6: will very likely hit a point where traditionally, over time
Speaker 6: airfares have been going down. And I know it might
Speaker 6: not feel like that domestically, but if you follow the trajectory,
Speaker 6: particularly for international flights, they have over recent decades on
Speaker 6: average gone down, but we will reach a point where
Speaker 6: they will start to go right back up again because
Speaker 6: you've got to pay for the world to be decarbonized. Now,
Speaker 6: the entire aviation sector plans to be net zero by
Speaker 6: twenty fifty, and if they're going to do that with
Speaker 6: this sustainable aviation fuel, then it looks like we're going
Speaker 6: to be paying for it, just as we're paying for
Speaker 6: it through the nose with our power bills, which we
Speaker 6: were told would be two hundred and seventy five dollars
Speaker 6: cheaper but aren't because we've gone headfirst into renewable energy.
Speaker 6: I mean, they might actually be able to achieve net
Speaker 6: zero because no one's going to fly anyway because they
Speaker 6: won't be able to afford to the only people will
Speaker 6: be flying around of those who can afford private jets.
Speaker 6: But again, this is the reality. This is what happens
Speaker 6: when you pursue net zero. Someone has to pay for
Speaker 6: it and it ends up being the average punter who
Speaker 6: go to afford.
Speaker 2: Virgin Airlines have just announced sustainable flights out of Proserpine
Speaker 2: in Queensland where they're using thirty to forty percent of
Speaker 2: the mixture of this fuel. At what struck me, Liz
Speaker 2: was the mayor of the Wit Sunday's Rye Collins. So
Speaker 2: this is perfect Virgin flying with this sustainable fuel which
Speaker 2: is three to five times more expensive out of Proserpine
Speaker 2: because we've got the great barrier reef here and so
Speaker 2: we want sustainable tourism. I thought you are mad because
Speaker 2: there's a great barrier reef in Cans, isn't there? So
Speaker 2: wouldn't you just howk a flight to Cans if it's
Speaker 2: going to be cheaper? So this is just meant to
Speaker 2: sand or they can fine you to within fifteen minutes
Speaker 2: of your home. We're going to go to a break
Speaker 2: when we come back with what's making news tomorrow, including
Speaker 2: Peter Dutton's plan to cut the fuel excise that's coming
Speaker 2: up in this run. Welcome back for Peter Dutton gives
Speaker 2: his budget apply speech tomorrow, but tomorrow morning's papers have
Speaker 2: already got details of what he's proposing. Lit This is
Speaker 2: gonna be a winner.
Speaker 4: With all and Sundry on the front page of the
Speaker 4: Daily Telly Pump it Up reads the splash drivers will
Speaker 4: save about seven hundred and fifty dollars on petrol if
Speaker 4: the Coalition wins government, with Peter Dutton pledging to have
Speaker 4: the fuel excise for twelve months, setting up an election
Speaker 4: contest on cost of living measures. Mister Dutton will use
Speaker 4: his budget reply today being tomorrow to announce a twelve
Speaker 4: month halving of the fuel excise at a cost of
Speaker 4: six billion, after Labor gave Australians a five dollars per
Speaker 4: week tax card in Tuesday night's budget. How do you
Speaker 4: like them apples, Labor? I mean, do you want five
Speaker 4: bucks a week or do you want seven hundred and
Speaker 4: fifty bucks of what you're currently forking out for fuel?
Speaker 6: Well, well it is better on a weekly scale that
Speaker 6: comes at to forteen dollars and forty three cents yessage,
Speaker 6: three times as much as we were going to get,
Speaker 6: and you would hope it would come in to being
Speaker 6: straight away as opposed to having to wait a year
Speaker 6: for it, so it wins on all of those counts.
Speaker 6: And I said last night, it's all good and well
Speaker 6: for the coalition to say they're not going to follow
Speaker 6: through with the promise that the alb and Easy government
Speaker 6: made in terms of tax cuts, but they've got to
Speaker 6: come through with something else better. I think this gets there,
Speaker 6: but again, you know, it's all sort of fiddling around
Speaker 6: the edges. Okay, so we'll have the fuel excise for
Speaker 6: twelve months, Well.
Speaker 3: What about beyond that?
Speaker 6: I mean, why does the fuel excise need to be
Speaker 6: as high as it currently is? And why can we
Speaker 6: not start talking about some real tax reform, not about all.
Speaker 3: You know, change things for five minutes.
Speaker 6: Why can we not actually talk about some real tax
Speaker 6: reform that means the government takes less of your money.
Speaker 2: Just on the last night's budget announcements, I had to
Speaker 2: laugh at Anthony alban Easy today he was asked about
Speaker 2: you know this five dollars a week tax cut that
Speaker 2: starts middle of next year, and he was asked, why
Speaker 2: are you rushing it through now, you know when it
Speaker 2: doesn't apply to the middle of next year, And he said,
Speaker 2: because I wanted to provide Australians with certainty, which I thought, Man,
Speaker 2: five dollars, you just want to be sure when that
Speaker 2: five bucks a week is going to be in your pocket.
Speaker 4: So I'm certain of something. What do you think?
Speaker 3: So certainly?
Speaker 2: All of the light, that's a good idea.
Speaker 6: Let's go to the front of the odds. We're more
Speaker 6: on this tax theme. Bracket creep wipes tax cuts.
Speaker 3: This is the problem.
Speaker 6: The average taxpayer stands to lose almost five thousand dollars
Speaker 6: due to inflation fueled bracket creep by twenty twenty nine.
Speaker 6: Despite Labour's latest round of tax cuts, with the federal
Speaker 6: budget increasing reliance on the so called stealth tax disproportionately
Speaker 6: affecting low income owners, Jim Charmers unveiled a fresh round
Speaker 6: of income tax cuts and Tuesday's federal budget, which of
Speaker 6: course we know will reduce the existing six percent tax
Speaker 6: rate on income between eight thousand, eighteen two hundred bucks
Speaker 6: and forty five grand to fifteen percent from mid next year.
Speaker 3: But this is the problem.
Speaker 6: Bracket creep eliminates all of this tomorrow. It's these are
Speaker 6: not real tax cuts we're talking about here, And that's
Speaker 6: what I mean when when I talk about genuine tax reform.
Speaker 6: Can we talk about a way that Okay, the tax
Speaker 6: regime may be completely different to the way it looks
Speaker 6: right now, but can we have one that involves the
Speaker 6: government not just taking more and more and more and
Speaker 6: more and more of your money and pretending they're giving
Speaker 6: you a tax.
Speaker 3: Cut because they're not giving you a tax cut, they're just.
Speaker 6: Recouping it later on while saying they're giving you a
Speaker 6: tax cut. And he was asked today, the treasurer, all
Speaker 6: this extra money, about four hundred billion dollars worth in
Speaker 6: increased tax receipts over what was estimated that you got
Speaker 6: in your term of government, Why did you not do
Speaker 6: something to change the debt? You know, why are we
Speaker 6: in the same position we were before when you've made
Speaker 6: four hundred billion dollars extra out of us.
Speaker 3: He doesn't have an answer to that. They've they've you know, done,
Speaker 3: you know what against the.
Speaker 2: Wall with And if the bracket creep doesn't destroy your
Speaker 2: five dollars a week tax cut, then inflation will by
Speaker 2: the time we get to the middle of next year. I'm
Speaker 2: not sure what five bucks is going to buy. The
Speaker 2: right things are going half a coffee, half a coffee,
Speaker 2: half coffee, probably decaf.
Speaker 6: Anyway, I didn't know we're going to do another story
Speaker 6: on the front of the oars, but let us do it.
Speaker 3: I'm going to find.
Speaker 6: Treasure, a blue lotto windfall. See, I will run with
Speaker 6: it here. Jim Chalmers has stridently rejected claims he squandered
Speaker 6: almost three hundred and fifty billion dollars of windfall revenue
Speaker 6: games despite the budget forecasting a decade of defericits as
Speaker 6: labor moved to which Peter Dadden by trying to ram
Speaker 6: legislation through Parliament to set up an election fight over
Speaker 6: a five dollars a.
Speaker 3: Week text cut that issue.
Speaker 6: It is The issue I was just talking about is
Speaker 6: that he was asked about, you know, how are we
Speaker 6: in a situation where you can make that much money
Speaker 6: and just essentially go Will it went puff?
Speaker 3: I don't know where it went.
Speaker 6: I mean he was saying in the budget speech last
Speaker 6: night that they banked seventy percent of this increased tax review.
Speaker 3: Well, why what have they done with it?
Speaker 6: I mean, if you're not paying down debt, what's the
Speaker 6: point in banking all this extra money you've taken from us,
Speaker 6: except to say, well, you know, we had two surpluses
Speaker 6: in my term of government. So how we only because
Speaker 6: they took all the money from us in our commodities,
Speaker 6: et cetera.
Speaker 2: Please all right, let's go to the front page of
Speaker 2: the Townshill bulletin a curious story, not over our dead Bodies,
Speaker 2: reads the headline Thornty issue over scattering ashes in park.
Speaker 2: Townsville City Council has been forced to put up signs
Speaker 2: in Queen's Gardens after staff were confronted by multiple instances
Speaker 2: of human remains being scattered or discarded in the gardens.
Speaker 2: The council spokesman said Townsholl's much loved Rose Garden had
Speaker 2: become a popular spot for people to scatter ashes. Now,
Speaker 2: we haven't been able to access the rest of this
Speaker 2: story to find out the detail as to why the
Speaker 2: council is so upset about this, because in Queensland it
Speaker 2: is legal to scatter your ashes in public places, including
Speaker 2: council owned parks. Queen's Park in Townsville is very beautiful.
Speaker 2: I can only imagine maybe the council have read about
Speaker 2: Mount Panorama where an indigenous groups scattered some ashes and
Speaker 2: automatically declared that the sacred site. Maybe they're worried they'll
Speaker 2: lose the Queen's garden. Now someone's going to scatter Grandma's
Speaker 2: ashes their enclaimate.
Speaker 6: Well, if there's anywhere that they try to, you know,
Speaker 6: sort of decolonize it to be Queen's guardens, wouldn't.
Speaker 2: It be exactly?
Speaker 3: But I mean, seriously, if.
Speaker 6: You can't go and scatter your loved ones ashes somewhere
Speaker 6: that they loved being, I'm.
Speaker 3: Just going to check out of this world.
Speaker 6: What's the point anymore? We cannot have nice things anymore.
Speaker 6: It's such a basic thing. Is there anything that the
Speaker 6: council won't interfere with if they get the opposite?
Speaker 4: Are right? Most people would be doing this at the
Speaker 4: request of the decease, like that where I'd like to
Speaker 4: have my remain scattered, No, says the count.
Speaker 3: Sorry, Granny, The council says no.
Speaker 4: To the front page of The Herald's son teals fall
Speaker 4: off support slides for Monique Ryan and Zoe Daniel tell
Speaker 4: us more. Peter Dutton and the Liberal Party are within
Speaker 4: striking distance of recapturing Victoria's two till seats, according to
Speaker 4: new polling, with the cost of living the biggest issue
Speaker 4: driving voters. Polling of almost eight hundred people in cou
Speaker 4: Yong shows Monique Ryan's vote has dived and she is
Speaker 4: just hanging on, while a similar sample in Goldstein reveals
Speaker 4: Zoe Daniel is way behind Liberal rival Tim Wilson. Well, well, well,
Speaker 4: we've been saying at nauseum, this is going to be
Speaker 4: a very interesting election when it comes to how the
Speaker 4: Teals do last election, of course, there were an unknown entity.
Speaker 4: They were the new kids on the block, and everyone
Speaker 4: was keen to give them a go. How are people
Speaker 4: feeling just a few years later.
Speaker 3: I hope this is true.
Speaker 6: I just really hope this is true because I've been
Speaker 6: people have been asking me privately, are the Teal's going
Speaker 6: to fall over? And I've been saying no. I don't
Speaker 6: think this election will be the end of the Teals.
Speaker 6: I think that's another election away. They've still got some
Speaker 6: wind in them. For the first time in my life.
Speaker 6: I hope I'm wrong about that.
Speaker 3: I hope this pollings are right.
Speaker 2: I thought Nick Ryan's husband was removing Liberal signs because
Speaker 2: they were in illegal places, But it turns out they're
Speaker 2: just doing really bad in the polling. Who knew were
Speaker 2: to go to a break when we come back well
Speaker 2: Worth shopping bags. They're selling them for twenty bucks and
Speaker 2: people are buying them. That's in a moment, welcome back,
Speaker 2: well calib The funny thing happened in the Senate today.
Speaker 6: I know, you know, sometimes they say that Parliament seems
Speaker 6: like a zoo. Today it seemed like an aquarium. There
Speaker 6: was certainly some fishy behavior from Green Senator Sarah Hanson Young.
Speaker 6: I'm sorry to say. She comes from my home state
Speaker 6: of South Australia. We hadn't really heard much from her recently.
Speaker 6: She just sort of seemed to be flitting around in
Speaker 6: the world. I don't know, but today she decided to
Speaker 6: do something very strange and well, take.
Speaker 9: A look on the eve of the election, had you
Speaker 9: sold out your environment credentials throwing often stinking and attention
Speaker 9: salmon hats in salmon Senate Shair Hats Young removed the
Speaker 9: prop from the chamber.
Speaker 3: And they say fish rots from the head.
Speaker 6: I noticed that one had its head removed, probably to
Speaker 6: signify the brains missing from most Green senators and supporters.
Speaker 3: But I mean, seriously, we've got.
Speaker 6: A bloody salmon in the Senate. Surely you can do
Speaker 6: better than that. I remember what was it I'm trying
Speaker 6: to remember if it was Wilson, Tucky or who it was.
Speaker 6: Someone once took a pipe bomb or a fake pipe
Speaker 6: bomb into the Senate, fronting up to estimates, complaining about
Speaker 6: the state of security in Parliament House and he's like, well,
Speaker 6: look what I brought in today, and.
Speaker 3: Now comes his pipe bomb to prove his point.
Speaker 6: I mean, yes, it's amusing, but I thought we were
Speaker 6: a bit better than that.
Speaker 2: At least the salmon didn't smell as bad as the
Speaker 2: Green's policy. So there's that. Well, shopping centers like Woolies
Speaker 2: and Coals, they've got revenue in the bag. Quite literally,
Speaker 2: they're selling bags. We used to get plastic bags for free,
Speaker 2: then they sold us paper bags. Now Woolworths are selling
Speaker 2: tote bags to fashion conscious shoppers for twenty dollars just
Speaker 2: so you can carry your milk home in that. People
Speaker 2: are so loving them. They're selling out and reselling on
Speaker 2: email BA baby, ba bail the dollars. They're designed by
Speaker 2: Anya Hindmarch, who's designed these bags for supermarkets all over
Speaker 2: the world. What I loved is Woolworth's a really upset
Speaker 2: about them being resold. They put out a statement saying
Speaker 2: the resale of these items is clearly unacceptable and does
Speaker 2: not meet our expectations and those of the wider community.
Speaker 4: Liz, they're just sad they're missing how They're like, wait,
Speaker 4: you're reselling them for six See, we've got to up
Speaker 4: our prices.
Speaker 3: Why don't they just do it?
Speaker 6: I mean, why are they complaining about someone else being
Speaker 6: able to make a buck? I mean, if you fancy
Speaker 6: a supermarket complaining that someone else's profit was too high.
Speaker 3: I mean, here we are struggling to pay for our groceries.
Speaker 6: They want twenty bucks for a bag, but it's those
Speaker 6: nasty people on Ebays.
Speaker 2: Someone should find out how much money they're making from
Speaker 2: selling all these bags. That's it from us to stick around.
Speaker 2: Coming up is the readA Penney Show. Good Night,