Latest / The Late Debate / The Late Debate | 6 February

Transcript

The Late Debate | 6 February · The Late Debate

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Lately.
• 0:02
  Speaker 2: Welcome to the Late pay.
• 0:06
  Speaker 3: Well.
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: Thanks for joining us on a Thursday night.
• 0:08
  Speaker 4: I'm James Macpherson with Liz Thorer and Caleb Bond coming up.
• 0:11
  Speaker 4: You know how local governments are always banging on about
• 0:14
  Speaker 4: health and safety. You won't believe what one Sydney council
• 0:17
  Speaker 4: has put smack bang in the middle of footpaths. Will
• 0:20
  Speaker 4: show you that a little later. Plus, when we look
• 0:23
  Speaker 4: at the papers, should police have the power to monitor
• 0:26
  Speaker 4: the phones of domestic violence offenders? And the act government
• 0:30
  Speaker 4: has blown its budget. What's new in this country. But
• 0:33
  Speaker 4: you'll be shocked by just how much they've blown the budget.
• 0:35
  Speaker 4: It's quite staggering. We'll get to all of that when
• 0:38
  Speaker 4: we look at tomorrow's news. But first now, I've always
• 0:41
  Speaker 4: thought the best way to stop racism is to stop
• 0:44
  Speaker 4: talking about race. I've got a couple of African sons
• 0:49
  Speaker 4: and I always say to them, while we honor your
• 0:51
  Speaker 4: African heritage, to be honest, that's the least important or
• 0:55
  Speaker 4: least interesting part of you. Far more interesting is your personality,
• 0:58
  Speaker 4: your gifts, your talent, your character. And it's true you've
• 1:02
  Speaker 4: got an African heritage, but it's not that important. It's incidental,
• 1:07
  Speaker 4: not essential to who you are as a person. So
• 1:11
  Speaker 4: it always surprises me when authorities in this country say
• 1:15
  Speaker 4: the only way we can unite people is by continually
• 1:19
  Speaker 4: dividing everybody according to ethnicity. One Sydney council in a
• 1:24
  Speaker 4: West has decided they've got to fight the scourge of racism.
• 1:28
  Speaker 4: So they've decided to fight racism by spending two hundred
• 1:31
  Speaker 4: and eighty thousand dollars focusing everybody on racial differences. The
• 1:36
  Speaker 4: Inner West Council has developed the first ever anti racism
• 1:40
  Speaker 4: strategy by a new South Wales council.
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: Here's what it entails.
• 1:45
  Speaker 4: Tell me how this builds unity amongst people in the community.
• 1:49
  Speaker 4: The key features of the strategy include investing one hundred
• 1:53
  Speaker 4: and twenty thousand dollars toward an evidence based, bespoke anti
• 1:57
  Speaker 4: racism training program to be developed over two years with
• 2:00
  Speaker 4: Western Sydney University. Let me pause for a moment just there,
• 2:04
  Speaker 4: or come back to the rest of it in a second.
• 2:06
  Speaker 4: What they're going to do is they're going to spend
• 2:07
  Speaker 4: two years developing a training course that they're then going
• 2:11
  Speaker 4: to run through with hundreds of people in the Inner West,
• 2:14
  Speaker 4: teaching them to spot racism and then to intervene when
• 2:19
  Speaker 4: and if they see it. I got to tell you,
• 2:21
  Speaker 4: when you see racism, you know it when my kids
• 2:24
  Speaker 4: are playing on the football field and someone calls them
• 2:26
  Speaker 4: a black so and so. In that instant, all of
• 2:29
  Speaker 4: their teammates are right beside them having a go at
• 2:32
  Speaker 4: whoever made the comment. Because when you see racism, it's
• 2:35
  Speaker 4: pretty obvious. You don't need a training course that's taken
• 2:38
  Speaker 4: two years to develop for you to know what racism is,
• 2:41
  Speaker 4: unless you're looking for microaggressions, in which case you're teaching
• 2:46
  Speaker 4: colored people to be hyper sensitive and you're teaching everybody
• 2:49
  Speaker 4: else to walk on eggshells.
• 2:50
  Speaker 1: It's rubbish. They shouldn't be doing this. It goes on
• 2:53
  Speaker 1: to say.
• 2:53
  Speaker 4: Another key aspect is fifty thousand dollars annually allocated toward
• 2:58
  Speaker 4: artists and community leaders from diverse backgrounds to showcase and
• 3:02
  Speaker 4: develop their cultures. Other funding commitments include fifteen thousand dollars
• 3:08
  Speaker 4: towards identifying and alleviating the cultural load of Aboriginal and
• 3:12
  Speaker 4: torrestrate under staff, with the same amount allocated towards commemorating
• 3:16
  Speaker 4: the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination on
• 3:21
  Speaker 4: March twenty first, but doesn't stop there. The Council are
• 3:25
  Speaker 4: going to erect thirty racism not Welcome signs around the
• 3:29
  Speaker 4: Inner West, as though somehow a racist will see the
• 3:32
  Speaker 4: sign and then think, oh, I'm not allowed to be
• 3:34
  Speaker 4: a racist here. I'll have to go somewhere where the
• 3:36
  Speaker 4: sign does not exist. They're going to erect three Aboriginal
• 3:39
  Speaker 4: survival monuments to create cultural safe spaces, in other words,
• 3:45
  Speaker 4: to try to bring us all together. They're going to
• 3:47
  Speaker 4: spend rate payer money dividing, dividing, dividing. If you want
• 3:52
  Speaker 4: to unite the country, a much better way would be
• 3:54
  Speaker 4: to take the two hundred and eighty thousand dollars and
• 3:56
  Speaker 4: spend it on Australia Day, put on a massive barbecue
• 4:00
  Speaker 4: and invite everybody from the community, no matter what the
• 4:02
  Speaker 4: color of your skin or what your ethnic background. They
• 4:06
  Speaker 4: put this anti racism strategy online to get feedback from
• 4:10
  Speaker 4: the community, and wouldn't you know it, forty percent of
• 4:14
  Speaker 4: the community said they liked it.
• 4:15
  Speaker 1: The rest didn't like it.
• 4:16
  Speaker 4: So even the anti racism strategy divine to bring everybody together,
• 4:21
  Speaker 4: has divided the community. We have this thing called a
• 4:25
  Speaker 4: national anthem. It's not very popular among anti racists, but
• 4:29
  Speaker 4: maybe they should take notice of it.
• 4:31
  Speaker 1: It begins Australians.
• 4:33
  Speaker 4: That would be a good place to focus on Australians.
• 4:36
  Speaker 4: All that's pretty good. Let us rejoice for we are
• 4:39
  Speaker 4: one and free. If you want an anti racism strategy,
• 4:44
  Speaker 4: I reckon that's about as far as you need to go.
• 4:46
  Speaker 1: And that's about all you need to know.
• 4:49
  Speaker 4: This attitude that to bring us together, they've got to
• 4:52
  Speaker 4: keep dividing us up, Liz, is absolute rubbish and entirely counterproductive.
• 4:57
  Speaker 4: They wonder why we've got social cohesion problems because even
• 5:00
  Speaker 4: in trying to solve the problem, they.
• 5:02
  Speaker 1: Make it worse.
• 5:03
  Speaker 5: Well, it creates way more resentment.
• 5:05
  Speaker 6: Who enjoys going to these workshops in their workplaces? In UNI,
• 5:10
  Speaker 6: you get a module being like you must complete this
• 5:12
  Speaker 6: module along with all the sexual harassment.
• 5:15
  Speaker 5: And don't do this and don't do that type stuff. Nobody.
• 5:19
  Speaker 6: Maybe go ahead with the sexual harassment stuff if you
• 5:22
  Speaker 6: find that's the problem on your campus. But in terms
• 5:25
  Speaker 6: of race, they are making this a thing, and what
• 5:29
  Speaker 6: it creates is resentment. I've heard it said several times before,
• 5:34
  Speaker 6: and I'm genuinely starting to believe it's true that the
• 5:37
  Speaker 6: coming generations, and indeed those already born are going to
• 5:40
  Speaker 6: be way more racist than their grandparents ever were. Because
• 5:44
  Speaker 6: notice in the West, as our countries have been flooded
• 5:48
  Speaker 6: with people from different parts of the world, that is
• 5:51
  Speaker 6: when all this anti racism you can't be racist, you
• 5:55
  Speaker 6: can't be racist, has started being pummeled into the indigenous populations,
• 6:00
  Speaker 6: whether you're talking the UK, America, Canada, Australia, because they
• 6:06
  Speaker 6: know that by creating a melting pot of cultures, people.
• 6:10
  Speaker 5: Are going to start noticing other.
• 6:12
  Speaker 6: People's differences and all that's racism. You can't even acknowledge difference.
• 6:18
  Speaker 6: Nowadays it's considered racism. Once upon a time, we used
• 6:22
  Speaker 6: to laugh at each other's differences and get along just fine.
• 6:27
  Speaker 1: You know.
• 6:27
  Speaker 6: We'd be like, oh, these are the wogs, these are
• 6:30
  Speaker 6: the greats, these are the winging ponds.
• 6:33
  Speaker 5: Nobody cared.
• 6:35
  Speaker 6: Nowadays we've lost that, like, oh, let's all just get along.
• 6:39
  Speaker 6: And it's due to a lot of these kinds of initiatives.
• 6:44
  Speaker 3: It's the if you push someone far enough, they will
• 6:46
  Speaker 3: eventually revolt against you, which is basically what we saw
• 6:49
  Speaker 3: with the Voice to Parliament, right. I mean, you went
• 6:52
  Speaker 3: with a piece of policy that was originally about sixty
• 6:56
  Speaker 3: forty in support and ended up being roughly sixty forty
• 6:59
  Speaker 3: again against it because people were lectured all the time, oh,
• 7:03
  Speaker 3: you're racist if you don't support this, and people start
• 7:06
  Speaker 3: to go, well, if you're telling me I'm racist because
• 7:08
  Speaker 3: I'm even questioning the validity of this thing, then I'll
• 7:11
  Speaker 3: vote no because I'll do what you're telling me not
• 7:14
  Speaker 3: to do, which is essentially what you're suggesting happens here.
• 7:16
  Speaker 3: And I think that's correct. You mentioned the national anthem.
• 7:19
  Speaker 3: I think the second verse isn't. It goes on to
• 7:22
  Speaker 3: say for those who come from foreign lands have boundless
• 7:25
  Speaker 3: planes to share. So we've already ticked that one off.
• 7:28
  Speaker 3: But as someone who lives in the Inner West Council
• 7:31
  Speaker 3: and has for the entire time I've lived in city, No,
• 7:35
  Speaker 3: I did not vote in this poll because I wasn't
• 7:37
  Speaker 3: to where it existed, just like ninety nine point nine
• 7:40
  Speaker 3: nine percent of other people in.
• 7:41
  Speaker 2: The inn A West Council.
• 7:42
  Speaker 3: But as someone who's lived there the entirety of my time,
• 7:44
  Speaker 3: I've been in Sydney and it's a place that is
• 7:47
  Speaker 3: very left wing. Our state member, the member for Balmain,
• 7:51
  Speaker 3: is a Green. The federal member. Depending on where you
• 7:54
  Speaker 3: are in the council is Anthony Albanizi your tenure pliver six.
• 7:58
  Speaker 3: So we know how people think in the Inner West.
• 8:02
  Speaker 3: I'm just glad that the Inner West Council has now
• 8:04
  Speaker 3: admitted that the people of the Inner West are racist,
• 8:07
  Speaker 3: because if the people of the Inner West were racist,
• 8:11
  Speaker 3: you wouldn't need to be training them to be anti racist,
• 8:14
  Speaker 3: would you.
• 8:15
  Speaker 2: And of course I'm in my.
• 8:16
  Speaker 3: Local booth where I lived before. I've moved suburbs, but
• 8:19
  Speaker 3: I'm just up the road from where I was my
• 8:21
  Speaker 3: local booth during the Voice, I think voted seventy percent
• 8:25
  Speaker 3: in favor of the Voice. So I think we're probably
• 8:27
  Speaker 3: quite right to say that there are a bunch of racists.
• 8:29
  Speaker 4: In You could be chosen, Caleb for some of this
• 8:33
  Speaker 4: bespoke anti racist in training.
• 8:35
  Speaker 3: Well, they would think I need it because I voted
• 8:37
  Speaker 3: against the Voice. I would say they need it because
• 8:40
  Speaker 3: they voted for the Voice. While we're talking about racism
• 8:43
  Speaker 3: and such things. You might have seen today, though perhaps
• 8:46
  Speaker 3: not because it didn't actually receive a great deal of coverage,
• 8:49
  Speaker 3: but new hate speech laws passed through the Federal Parliament.
• 8:53
  Speaker 3: Now this happened with barely an hour's discussion in the Senate.
• 8:58
  Speaker 3: It started in the Lower House, yes that I passed there,
• 9:01
  Speaker 3: then went through to the Senate today where it was
• 9:03
  Speaker 3: eventually passed. So this will now become law. Now there
• 9:06
  Speaker 3: are certain parts of it with which I agree and
• 9:08
  Speaker 3: others with which I am really worried. It means that
• 9:11
  Speaker 3: there will be mandatory minimum sentences of six years for
• 9:15
  Speaker 3: terror offenses, three years for financing terror and twelve months
• 9:19
  Speaker 3: for displaying terror symbols. But it then goes on to
• 9:23
  Speaker 3: talk about inciting violence essentially, and the means by which
• 9:28
  Speaker 3: someone incites violence and the rules by which you have
• 9:32
  Speaker 3: to meet if you are in court being accused of
• 9:35
  Speaker 3: inciting violence.
• 9:35
  Speaker 2: Now they have watered this down to the point where
• 9:39
  Speaker 2: you would question whether the things you.
• 9:41
  Speaker 3: Might just say in a normal conversation joking halfheartedly could
• 9:47
  Speaker 3: essentially now be called inciting violence here in Australia. If
• 9:51
  Speaker 3: you go to the Criminal Code, what they've changed is
• 9:54
  Speaker 3: in section eighty point two A. Now it previously said
• 9:58
  Speaker 3: that a person can it's an offense if the first.
• 10:01
  Speaker 2: Person, which is how they refer to it in the.
• 10:03
  Speaker 3: Act, intentionally urges. Remember that intentionally urges another person or
• 10:09
  Speaker 3: a group to use force or violence against a group.
• 10:14
  Speaker 3: That has now changed from intentionally urges to advocates, right,
• 10:20
  Speaker 3: so there doesn't necessarily have to be intention anymore. The
• 10:23
  Speaker 3: wording changes to advocate to water it down. You then
• 10:27
  Speaker 3: get to the next bit, which says that the person
• 10:30
  Speaker 3: does so intending that the force or violence will occur. Ie,
• 10:35
  Speaker 3: you say kill this bunch of people, et cetera, et cetera,
• 10:39
  Speaker 3: because you want people to do that. That now changes
• 10:42
  Speaker 3: from intending that it will happen to reckless as to
• 10:47
  Speaker 3: whether it will happen. So you could say something perhaps jokingly,
• 10:52
  Speaker 3: not meaning that it will happen, but if.
• 10:54
  Speaker 2: You are reckless to the fact that it could.
• 10:57
  Speaker 3: Happen, you have by the law now in violence and
• 11:01
  Speaker 3: the groups that we are talking about have also expanded.
• 11:03
  Speaker 3: It used to be race, religion, nationality, national or ethnic origin,
• 11:07
  Speaker 3: or political opinion, will now they insert into that sex,
• 11:11
  Speaker 3: sexual orientation, gender identity, into sex status and disability. Now
• 11:16
  Speaker 3: we all know there has been a scourge of anti
• 11:18
  Speaker 3: Semitism in this country and we want something to be
• 11:22
  Speaker 3: done about it. But this is being used as a
• 11:24
  Speaker 3: vanguard to water down free speech and add in other
• 11:28
  Speaker 3: protected groups like the ones I just read out there
• 11:30
  Speaker 3: sex sexual orientation. Speaking of sexual orientation. A Llegras Vender
• 11:36
  Speaker 3: was talking about this legislation last night on seven point thirty.
• 11:40
  Speaker 3: Now she is talking here about a sign that was
• 11:42
  Speaker 3: held up at an the.
• 11:43
  Speaker 2: On Nazi rally.
• 11:44
  Speaker 3: As she says, but that's not really pertinent to the
• 11:47
  Speaker 3: sign that was held up. She'll explain the sign she
• 11:50
  Speaker 3: thinks should be made illegal.
• 11:51
  Speaker 2: Take a listen.
• 11:53
  Speaker 7: I support where the government is going with this legislation,
• 11:56
  Speaker 7: but I want to go further. And that is the
• 11:59
  Speaker 7: question I'm really trying to address, is those people who
• 12:02
  Speaker 7: are promoting and really pushing hate in our community. So
• 12:06
  Speaker 7: currently under the current legislation, things like some a neo
• 12:12
  Speaker 7: Nazi protests which had destroy pedo Freaks as a banner
• 12:17
  Speaker 7: that wouldn't be covered under the current legislation.
• 12:20
  Speaker 3: Out I want to destroy pedo freaks to be speech
• 12:25
  Speaker 3: that is now considered a crime in Australia. I understand
• 12:30
  Speaker 3: the idea that you know, basically no one has been
• 12:33
  Speaker 3: charged under hate speech laws, and I don't think that's
• 12:36
  Speaker 3: a problem with the law necessarily. I think that's been
• 12:38
  Speaker 3: an unwillingness for at least to try the laws out
• 12:41
  Speaker 3: I mean, we're fiddling with laws here without really knowing
• 12:43
  Speaker 3: the bounds of what can be done with them, because
• 12:46
  Speaker 3: they haven't actually been tested in court.
• 12:48
  Speaker 2: So we jumped the shark and now say that if
• 12:51
  Speaker 2: you say something that is reckless or without reckless knowledge
• 12:56
  Speaker 2: of what might happen, you could be up on a defense.
• 12:58
  Speaker 3: I just wonder if, for instance, because sex is now included, right,
• 13:02
  Speaker 3: Clementine Ford, a feminist commentative, any of you would know
• 13:06
  Speaker 3: used to quite frequently say kill all men. Now sex
• 13:10
  Speaker 3: is now a protected group under this legislation. You say
• 13:14
  Speaker 3: kill all men. She means it as a joke or
• 13:17
  Speaker 3: ironically when she says it. But is she saying that
• 13:20
  Speaker 3: without reckless as to weather, someone might go and then
• 13:24
  Speaker 3: kill a man?
• 13:25
  Speaker 2: So does that mean that sentence.
• 13:27
  Speaker 3: Which is from her a joke, is now a crime
• 13:30
  Speaker 3: in Australia.
• 13:31
  Speaker 2: Is this where we've gone?
• 13:32
  Speaker 4: So let's take that as a rhetorical question. Here's the
• 13:35
  Speaker 4: bigger problem we've got in this country. As you pointed out,
• 13:38
  Speaker 4: the Senate took all of one hour to review this legislation,
• 13:42
  Speaker 4: which is not exactly simple. It's quite complicated in some
• 13:45
  Speaker 4: of its detail. Our senators spent more time debating whether
• 13:49
  Speaker 4: or not Donald Trump is a threat to the world
• 13:52
  Speaker 4: than they did debating this legislation, which then has direct
• 13:56
  Speaker 4: impacts upon things you post on social media, things you
• 13:59
  Speaker 4: say to a mate over a beer at the pub,
• 14:01
  Speaker 4: something you say outside your church or whatever. And so
• 14:07
  Speaker 4: the Senate, which is meant to be a place of
• 14:09
  Speaker 4: reviewing legislation, saying is this good? What are the unintended consequences,
• 14:15
  Speaker 4: has just become all about rubber stamping legislation according to
• 14:18
  Speaker 4: which senator, which which party each senator belongs to. It's
• 14:22
  Speaker 4: quite derelict in their duty of our senators to wave
• 14:26
  Speaker 4: through legislation which you've so brilliantly described, has got all
• 14:29
  Speaker 4: sorts of problems with it.
• 14:31
  Speaker 1: How do you interpret it?
• 14:32
  Speaker 4: What does it mean to wave it through without doing
• 14:35
  Speaker 4: due diligence?
• 14:35
  Speaker 6: And these things are never tested until it's before a court,
• 14:38
  Speaker 6: until someone brings the case, and then of course the
• 14:42
  Speaker 6: judge in control of that simply is held by the
• 14:47
  Speaker 6: bound and then you've got a precedent set because either
• 14:50
  Speaker 6: the judge said it applies or it doesn't apply. Hence
• 14:53
  Speaker 6: the case is build up, and then lawyers have precedents
• 14:56
  Speaker 6: to rely on. It's utterly insane. I've said it, be
• 15:00
  Speaker 6: all said again. I'm a free speech absolutist, I really am.
• 15:04
  Speaker 6: You can't have free speech without hay speech. You either
• 15:07
  Speaker 6: have both or neither.
• 15:08
  Speaker 5: And as we know, anything.
• 15:10
  Speaker 6: That's even incitement, how do you measure incitement? Now that
• 15:14
  Speaker 6: they've taken intent out of it, one would think, because
• 15:17
  Speaker 6: that lowers the bar, intent is very hard to prove.
• 15:20
  Speaker 6: I can say I was joking, you can say I
• 15:23
  Speaker 6: was dead serious and my intent was to cause you
• 15:26
  Speaker 6: grievous bodily harm. Who's to say so They've removed that now,
• 15:30
  Speaker 6: and all that matters is that I said it, and
• 15:34
  Speaker 6: the rest is.
• 15:34
  Speaker 5: Up to the judge. I mean, it's just a can
• 15:38
  Speaker 5: of worms.
• 15:39
  Speaker 6: I genuinely find it disgusting that we have any of
• 15:43
  Speaker 6: these kinds of bills, well now laws in our country
• 15:48
  Speaker 6: at all. It does not belong in a free democracy.
• 15:51
  Speaker 6: And I know that that means O people will be
• 15:55
  Speaker 6: able to.
• 15:55
  Speaker 5: Say very vile things.
• 15:57
  Speaker 6: But for centuries this has worked for us because people
• 16:01
  Speaker 6: say vile things and society rightly revials them.
• 16:07
  Speaker 5: And you said that.
• 16:08
  Speaker 6: No one's been convicted for a hate speech crime in Australia.
• 16:12
  Speaker 2: Well, I'm not aware of anything. This happened recently.
• 16:15
  Speaker 6: Now there was the case of this absolutely stupid kid,
• 16:18
  Speaker 6: Jacob Parsons in Victoria just last year he was sentenced
• 16:22
  Speaker 6: for one month to jail for doing a siege hile.
• 16:26
  Speaker 6: So that takes it to even another level where you've
• 16:30
  Speaker 6: got this judge who said it was a.
• 16:33
  Speaker 5: Display of hate speech.
• 16:35
  Speaker 6: Well, actually I could contend that this particular fellow had
• 16:39
  Speaker 6: actually said hate speech, but the case itself centered around
• 16:43
  Speaker 6: this Nazi salute that he'd done just weeks after Victoria
• 16:48
  Speaker 6: had made it a crime to do so. And so
• 16:51
  Speaker 6: I don't think that got enough media attention because that
• 16:55
  Speaker 6: is definitely the first of its kind in Australia where
• 16:59
  Speaker 6: someone is doing jail time while his lawyers are appealing
• 17:03
  Speaker 6: because of a gesture.
• 17:06
  Speaker 5: So then looking at this kind of.
• 17:09
  Speaker 6: Legislation, it's just an absolute cannib Wait this is and
• 17:12
  Speaker 6: once you start, you can't stop.
• 17:15
  Speaker 3: We can point to one case, right, but there's been
• 17:17
  Speaker 3: plenty of other hate speech happening in Australia. Have any
• 17:20
  Speaker 3: of these cases been tried?
• 17:22
  Speaker 2: And that's the thing.
• 17:23
  Speaker 5: How we say, does this capture the hate preacher?
• 17:26
  Speaker 2: How can we Kuran?
• 17:30
  Speaker 6: Can you now not quote that part of the Quran
• 17:33
  Speaker 6: as the man that we.
• 17:35
  Speaker 5: Played countless times. You probably remember him.
• 17:38
  Speaker 6: I can't remember his exact name, because unfortunately there's too
• 17:41
  Speaker 6: many of them.
• 17:42
  Speaker 5: I can't remember which it was.
• 17:43
  Speaker 6: But he was reading from an Islamic script when he
• 17:48
  Speaker 6: was quoting, saying there's a Jewish person behind me, come
• 17:53
  Speaker 6: get him. Basically, will that be captured by this legislation
• 17:58
  Speaker 6: because we know that so far to our knowledge, no
• 18:01
  Speaker 6: one's been prosecuted.
• 18:03
  Speaker 1: And that's the point you made.
• 18:04
  Speaker 4: They haven't tried to even use existing laws. Now they're
• 18:08
  Speaker 4: making new laws. And the other thing that gets me
• 18:10
  Speaker 4: about this is the premise for we need new laws
• 18:12
  Speaker 4: is antisemitism. Right, But we heard the Victorian premier justinto
• 18:16
  Speaker 4: Allen's say the other night, you know, antiseism is really bad,
• 18:19
  Speaker 4: and then she said next breath, you need to be
• 18:21
  Speaker 4: able to love who you love, marry who you want
• 18:23
  Speaker 4: to marry, and pray to who you want to pray to.
• 18:25
  Speaker 4: So all of a sudden, antisemitism was thrown out, and
• 18:28
  Speaker 4: all we came about all these other identities that are
• 18:32
  Speaker 4: now protected, which makes you think, is it really about
• 18:35
  Speaker 4: dealing with antisemitism, or is antisemitism just a very convenient
• 18:39
  Speaker 4: crisis right now for people who want to limit free
• 18:43
  Speaker 4: speech to take action, and.
• 18:44
  Speaker 6: They don't seem to have taken into account at all.
• 18:46
  Speaker 6: What say a case were to be bought against, say
• 18:49
  Speaker 6: one of these hate preachers, then what of religious freedoms
• 18:53
  Speaker 6: and the laws around that?
• 18:55
  Speaker 5: So then you've got your own laws having a face
• 18:58
  Speaker 5: off in court.
• 18:59
  Speaker 6: God help whoever that judge turns out to be, because
• 19:02
  Speaker 6: I'm sure it's just a matter of time to the
• 19:04
  Speaker 6: States now where you may have heard of Politico. It's
• 19:08
  Speaker 6: not that big here in Australia, but it is in America.
• 19:12
  Speaker 6: And we've just found out why the Biden administration was
• 19:16
  Speaker 6: sending this media outlet during its tenure over twenty seven
• 19:21
  Speaker 6: million dollars.
• 19:23
  Speaker 5: What a rot?
• 19:25
  Speaker 6: This isn't supposed to be a government funded media organization whatsoever.
• 19:32
  Speaker 6: DOGE has found this out, but it was brought to
• 19:34
  Speaker 6: their attention when all of a sudden, when the USAID
• 19:39
  Speaker 6: payments were put on hold, because DOGE was going line
• 19:43
  Speaker 6: by line through every single expenditure saying, excuse me, what
• 19:47
  Speaker 6: is this?
• 19:47
  Speaker 5: For that week, Politico did not pay.
• 19:52
  Speaker 6: Its employees, and the employees even joked amongst themselves is
• 19:57
  Speaker 6: this because USAID payment.
• 20:00
  Speaker 5: Have been frozen.
• 20:03
  Speaker 6: Here's a tweet from Elon Musk when it was brought
• 20:06
  Speaker 6: to his attention that the Biden administration had at one
• 20:09
  Speaker 6: point paid half a million dollars for just thirty seven subscriptions.
• 20:16
  Speaker 6: And that graph you can see on your screen right
• 20:18
  Speaker 6: now is where their money came from over.
• 20:22
  Speaker 5: The course of the Biden administration. Look at all the
• 20:25
  Speaker 5: different departments.
• 20:27
  Speaker 6: Biden really put his hand in the pocket for these guys,
• 20:31
  Speaker 6: and if you go over the years of media that
• 20:34
  Speaker 6: they pumped out during the Biden administration's term, you can
• 20:38
  Speaker 6: see that it was actually very well spent because Politico
• 20:42
  Speaker 6: made sure to absolutely give these guys a tongue bath
• 20:46
  Speaker 6: every single chance it got, whether it was.
• 20:49
  Speaker 5: Covering up Hunter Biden laptop.
• 20:51
  Speaker 6: Story, all the fact that this was a presidency that
• 20:55
  Speaker 6: started with denying the Hunter Biden story even existed, much
• 20:59
  Speaker 6: less had any credit to it, and ended with the
• 21:03
  Speaker 6: President hardening his son for the very thing that had
• 21:07
  Speaker 6: started out saying wasn't legitimate in the first place. So
• 21:11
  Speaker 6: a lot of questions have been asked, but here is
• 21:14
  Speaker 6: Press secretary, the White House Press Secretary, Carolyn Levitt telling
• 21:20
  Speaker 6: Politico to their face in the press conference room. Your
• 21:25
  Speaker 6: big payday, your big cash cow ends today.
• 21:29
  Speaker 8: Upon coming out here to the briefing room, I was
• 21:32
  Speaker 8: made aware of the funding from USAID to media outlets,
• 21:37
  Speaker 8: including Politico, who I know has a seat in this room.
• 21:41
  Speaker 8: And I can confirm that the more than eight million
• 21:44
  Speaker 8: taxpayer dollars that have gone to essentially subsidizing subscriptions to
• 21:47
  Speaker 8: Politico and the American taxpayer's dime will no longer be happening.
• 21:51
  Speaker 8: The DOGE team is working on canceling those payments.
• 21:53
  Speaker 2: Now.
• 21:55
  Speaker 6: What makes this revelation even worse is the fact that
• 21:59
  Speaker 6: due Toltico's fake subscription numbers being pumped up so high,
• 22:05
  Speaker 6: they were able to sell themselves to.
• 22:07
  Speaker 5: A German company.
• 22:09
  Speaker 6: So all these millions of American taxpayer dollars were actually
• 22:13
  Speaker 6: going into the pockets of people oceans away who were
• 22:18
  Speaker 6: then benefiting from them pumping out propaganda into the American public.
• 22:24
  Speaker 5: This is just extraordinary.
• 22:26
  Speaker 6: And on top of this, we've discovered that BBC got
• 22:30
  Speaker 6: over three million dollars. New York Times got over three
• 22:35
  Speaker 6: million dollars. These are supposed to be independent, well, not
• 22:38
  Speaker 6: the BBC that's supposed to be funded by the UK government, So.
• 22:45
  Speaker 5: What's going on there?
• 22:46
  Speaker 6: You're paying for a few favors from them as well.
• 22:50
  Speaker 6: This is horrendous and really opens up the door to
• 22:53
  Speaker 6: question marks over the legitimacy of every story written during
• 22:58
  Speaker 6: the Biden administration tenure.
• 23:00
  Speaker 5: That was just a big rate.
• 23:02
  Speaker 3: It's pretty good going, isn't Because the one you quoted
• 23:05
  Speaker 3: before four hundred and forty three thousand, nine hundred and
• 23:08
  Speaker 3: ninety eight dollars for thirty seven subscriptions to Politico Pro. Now,
• 23:12
  Speaker 3: Politico Pro I went on their website and I couldn't
• 23:15
  Speaker 3: find what a subscription cost, so I can't ten thousand. Well,
• 23:19
  Speaker 3: we'll see they've paid twelve thousand per person if you
• 23:22
  Speaker 3: divide that number by thirty seven thousand, thirty thirty.
• 23:26
  Speaker 2: Seven people, I should say.
• 23:28
  Speaker 3: But it's some sort of like public policy platform where
• 23:33
  Speaker 3: it colates legislation that's currently going through the House or whatever,
• 23:39
  Speaker 3: and it's got news pertinent to those pieces of legislation. Like,
• 23:43
  Speaker 3: if you're paying twelve thousand dollars per person a year
• 23:46
  Speaker 3: for that service, you're telling me you couldn't get someone
• 23:49
  Speaker 3: internally to go and do that. Now, I had no
• 23:53
  Speaker 3: problem in principle with the government paying for subscription to
• 23:57
  Speaker 3: news services so that members of the government can read,
• 24:00
  Speaker 3: because it's only fair that they pay the same as
• 24:02
  Speaker 3: every other member.
• 24:04
  Speaker 2: Of the public.
• 24:05
  Speaker 3: But compare and contrast through the entirety of the Biden administration.
• 24:11
  Speaker 3: You know how much money they spent on News Corp.
• 24:13
  Speaker 3: And news Corp has as well as Sky News of
• 24:16
  Speaker 3: course in Australia, and all the newspapers here. They've got
• 24:19
  Speaker 3: Fox News one of the biggest cable news networks in
• 24:22
  Speaker 3: the United States, the New York Posts one of the
• 24:25
  Speaker 3: biggest newspapers in the United States, the Wall Street Journal
• 24:29
  Speaker 3: one of the most important business newspapers in the United States.
• 24:32
  Speaker 3: You know how much money the Biden administration spent over
• 24:35
  Speaker 3: four years on news Corp. Zero until October the first
• 24:40
  Speaker 3: last year. They had spent zero dollars on any News
• 24:44
  Speaker 3: Corp publication until October the first, when they decided just
• 24:47
  Speaker 3: before they left office that they would spend thirty seven
• 24:51
  Speaker 3: five hundred dollars on one hundred and fifty.
• 24:53
  Speaker 2: Subscriptions to the Wall Street Journal.
• 24:56
  Speaker 3: So in all that time they spent all that money
• 24:58
  Speaker 3: on Politico and all these other to wing outlets, and
• 25:01
  Speaker 3: not once did they spend dissent until the dying days
• 25:05
  Speaker 3: on the Wall Street Journal of all the newspapers, So
• 25:09
  Speaker 3: it seems pretty clear that they were using this money
• 25:12
  Speaker 3: to give it to outlets that they thought would give
• 25:15
  Speaker 3: them favorable coverage.
• 25:16
  Speaker 2: Either that or they couldn't be able to read the
• 25:18
  Speaker 2: coverage that.
• 25:18
  Speaker 3: Biden was getting in the rest of the media because
• 25:20
  Speaker 3: they knew how bad it was.
• 25:22
  Speaker 2: But that's clearly the decisions they were making with that month.
• 25:24
  Speaker 6: Twenty seven million over the course of four years mag.
• 25:28
  Speaker 5: How many subscriptions is that.
• 25:30
  Speaker 4: I think clearly they understood the only way they're going
• 25:32
  Speaker 4: to get positive coverage for Joe Biden is to pay
• 25:34
  Speaker 4: for it and pay through.
• 25:35
  Speaker 1: The nose for it.
• 25:37
  Speaker 4: And of course you mentioned the story Politico did dismissing
• 25:41
  Speaker 4: the Hunter Biden Lapstock laptop store and trying to bury that.
• 25:44
  Speaker 4: Do you remember Politico Also they reported a leak from
• 25:47
  Speaker 4: the US Supreme Court when they were deliberating over what
• 25:51
  Speaker 4: to do with Roe v. Wade, Yes, and a draft
• 25:54
  Speaker 4: decision was leaked by Politico and it ended up with
• 25:57
  Speaker 4: conservative judges having death threats have guards outside judges' homes
• 26:02
  Speaker 4: because this decision, which of course the Democrats hated. This
• 26:05
  Speaker 4: decision was leaked by politicos. So the Democrats got value
• 26:10
  Speaker 4: for money.
• 26:10
  Speaker 1: But yeah, you're right.
• 26:11
  Speaker 4: They didn't invest in Fox, they didn't invest in The
• 26:13
  Speaker 4: Daily Wire, they weren't giving money to Joe Rogan, none
• 26:15
  Speaker 4: of those things.
• 26:16
  Speaker 5: They knew where to go, they knew where their.
• 26:18
  Speaker 1: Bread was buttered.
• 26:19
  Speaker 4: But I'll tell you who is starting to get the message.
• 26:22
  Speaker 4: The big tech companies Google, for instance, have got the
• 26:25
  Speaker 4: message that DEI under Donald Trump is now dead and buried.
• 26:29
  Speaker 4: You know, in twenty twenty four, five point seven employees
• 26:34
  Speaker 4: at Google were black and seven point five Google employees
• 26:37
  Speaker 4: were Latino. I know that affects you Google searchers greatly,
• 26:40
  Speaker 4: doesn't It makes no difference at all. But Google knew
• 26:43
  Speaker 4: because ever since George Floyd died in twenty twenty, Google,
• 26:47
  Speaker 4: along with most other corporations in the US, were very
• 26:50
  Speaker 4: focused on diversity and increasing the number of underrepresented people
• 26:55
  Speaker 4: in their organizations. From twenty twenty one through to twenty four,
• 27:01
  Speaker 4: Google every year announced in their annual report that they were.
• 27:04
  Speaker 1: Committed to DEI.
• 27:06
  Speaker 4: It was one of the vital things that they did because,
• 27:09
  Speaker 4: of course, we all know diversity is our strength. Will
• 27:13
  Speaker 4: this year, for the first time since George Floyd's death,
• 27:16
  Speaker 4: Google didn't bother in their annual report to Mention DEI
• 27:20
  Speaker 4: at all. In fact, they sent out an email saying
• 27:22
  Speaker 4: they will no longer set hiring targets for underrepresented groups.
• 27:27
  Speaker 4: They're going to focus entirely just on people who are
• 27:29
  Speaker 4: you know, good at their job. What a novel idea.
• 27:33
  Speaker 4: But Trump's only been in the White House.
• 27:35
  Speaker 1: What is it now?
• 27:35
  Speaker 4: Coming up to three weeks and already we're seeing massive
• 27:40
  Speaker 4: shifts right across the US. God willing it will start
• 27:44
  Speaker 4: to come to places like Australia, you know, see some kind.
• 27:48
  Speaker 6: Of So far no movement here, but it has been extraordinary.
• 27:52
  Speaker 6: We've had Meta, we've had Starbucks, We've had even these
• 27:56
  Speaker 6: massive brands that we're familiar over here in Australia. There's
• 28:00
  Speaker 6: many others in the States who have joined this long
• 28:03
  Speaker 6: growing list. They now know it's on the nose. People
• 28:06
  Speaker 6: aren't remotely interested. There was a day that by flying
• 28:09
  Speaker 6: all the different flags, etc. You were encouraging everyone through
• 28:13
  Speaker 6: your doors. Now you're actually discouraging people. They don't like it,
• 28:19
  Speaker 6: and they've had enough. Something else that they don't like
• 28:22
  Speaker 6: is biological men playing in women's sports and true to
• 28:26
  Speaker 6: his word, President Donald Trump has signed an executive order
• 28:31
  Speaker 6: banning it.
• 28:32
  Speaker 5: Here he was, you know, if you'd.
• 28:37
  Speaker 9: Like to gather around me, I think I'm going to be.
• 28:39
  Speaker 9: You come, secret services. Worried about them? If we have
• 28:53
  Speaker 9: to worry about them, we have big problems.
• 28:56
  Speaker 10: Are you ready? What a nice picture of this is?
• 28:58
  Speaker 3: Uh?
• 28:59
  Speaker 1: Governor?
• 29:00
  Speaker 9: You ready?
• 29:01
  Speaker 1: We'll do a good.
• 29:01
  Speaker 10: Joby a lett impress that.
• 29:07
  Speaker 9: I want to make this a really good signature because
• 29:10
  Speaker 9: this is you know, this is a big one.
• 29:12
  Speaker 1: Right oh, I think we.
• 29:19
  Speaker 10: Have a ten.
• 29:20
  Speaker 1: We have a ten.
• 29:30
  Speaker 6: And speaking of hoping these things will translate into Australian politics,
• 29:35
  Speaker 6: dunt't wasted no time with an exclusive on the Credlin
• 29:38
  Speaker 6: this evening, backing Donald Trump right in.
• 29:43
  Speaker 11: I think it's one of those debates that we have
• 29:47
  Speaker 11: to be honest in and it's not about discriminating against anyone,
• 29:51
  Speaker 11: including young girls. And young girls want to be able
• 29:54
  Speaker 11: to compete on a fair basis, and I think that
• 29:57
  Speaker 11: is a perfectly reasonable position to hold or young girls
• 30:03
  Speaker 11: not to be able to achieve their Olympic dream, their
• 30:08
  Speaker 11: pathway to a World Cup, or to be displaced from
• 30:12
  Speaker 11: a team because you know, somebody has a physiological advantage
• 30:18
  Speaker 11: over them. I just don't think that is that's not
• 30:21
  Speaker 11: in the spirit of sport.
• 30:24
  Speaker 5: And will you commit to banning it? Will you commit
• 30:26
  Speaker 5: to banning it?
• 30:27
  Speaker 1: Goods?
• 30:28
  Speaker 6: He was Trump saying the war on women's sports is over.
• 30:33
  Speaker 5: A bit more emphatic.
• 30:34
  Speaker 10: Than that, And we will defend the proud tradition of
• 30:39
  Speaker 10: female athletes. And we will not allow men to beat up,
• 30:43
  Speaker 10: injure and cheat our women and our girls. From now on,
• 30:47
  Speaker 10: women's sports will be only for women. With this executive order,
• 30:52
  Speaker 10: the war on women's sports is over.
• 30:57
  Speaker 5: Hallelujah.
• 30:58
  Speaker 6: So many women and across the States have missed out
• 31:02
  Speaker 6: big time, and it ends now. And it's thanks to
• 31:05
  Speaker 6: the tireless work of those brave ones who were reviled
• 31:09
  Speaker 6: by their schools, reviled by their universities, refused to play,
• 31:14
  Speaker 6: therefore missed out even before they had a chance to compete,
• 31:18
  Speaker 6: because they simply said, I will not compete against a
• 31:20
  Speaker 6: biological man.
• 31:22
  Speaker 4: It's so common sense it almost defies logic that it
• 31:25
  Speaker 4: has to be done.
• 31:27
  Speaker 1: But the reaction was quite astonishing.
• 31:29
  Speaker 4: I mean, The Guardian reported on Trump's decision, thus saying
• 31:33
  Speaker 4: it's the latest in a series of moves rolling back
• 31:36
  Speaker 4: the rights of trans people. So the Guardian were not
• 31:40
  Speaker 4: at all about way we need to protect girls, we
• 31:42
  Speaker 4: need to protect female sport. It was rolling back the
• 31:45
  Speaker 4: rights of trans people. But could you imagine, Caleb, how
• 31:48
  Speaker 4: confused lefties would have been watching that press conference that
• 31:52
  Speaker 4: Trump did because he was surrounded, did you see by
• 31:55
  Speaker 4: a group of people, and leftives would have been looking
• 31:57
  Speaker 4: at the group of people trying to.
• 31:58
  Speaker 1: Figure out what are they?
• 32:00
  Speaker 3: They?
• 32:00
  Speaker 1: Are they girls? Are they non binary? Gender neutral?
• 32:06
  Speaker 4: Are they boys trapped in girls' bodies?
• 32:09
  Speaker 1: Because, of course, this is the.
• 32:10
  Speaker 4: Difference between Donald Trump and the Democrats. Trump knows that
• 32:13
  Speaker 4: there are two genders, male and female, and he can
• 32:16
  Speaker 4: tell them apart. The Democrats had a nominee for Vice
• 32:19
  Speaker 4: president who was putting tampons.
• 32:21
  Speaker 1: In boys' bathrooms.
• 32:23
  Speaker 4: It's obvious, which is why Liz, I thought your point
• 32:25
  Speaker 4: about Peter Dutton's interview was well made. It would have
• 32:29
  Speaker 4: been nice to see Peter Dutton, our future Prime Minister.
• 32:32
  Speaker 1: Not say it's entirely reasonable.
• 32:34
  Speaker 4: I think to make sure that we don't have boys
• 32:37
  Speaker 4: in girls' sports entirely reasonable, it's common sense, it's basic logic.
• 32:42
  Speaker 4: It's an outrage that we've got to a point where
• 32:45
  Speaker 4: it needs to be said. It would have been nice
• 32:47
  Speaker 4: to see Peter Dutton. I appreciate what he said, but
• 32:50
  Speaker 4: he could have said it with a bit more.
• 32:52
  Speaker 6: You're waiting for that line, Caleb of in a coalition government.
• 32:57
  Speaker 5: And do the same.
• 32:58
  Speaker 2: And this is the trouble.
• 33:00
  Speaker 3: He's trying to walk a tight rope at the moment
• 33:02
  Speaker 3: where he doesn't want to upset the left of his
• 33:04
  Speaker 3: party and he doesn't want to alienate people in these
• 33:06
  Speaker 3: tlcs because they want to get those works back, et cetera.
• 33:09
  Speaker 3: But it doesn't have to be and it shouldn't be
• 33:11
  Speaker 3: a controversial issue because it's not fundamentally about I hate
• 33:16
  Speaker 3: transgender people. It's an issue of fairness and that's the
• 33:19
  Speaker 3: way in.
• 33:20
  Speaker 2: Which it should be sold. That look, we all send out.
• 33:23
  Speaker 4: It's not even an issue of fairness, it's an issue
• 33:25
  Speaker 4: of biology.
• 33:26
  Speaker 2: Well, of course it's an is fairness.
• 33:27
  Speaker 3: You can debate it's an issue of biology when we're
• 33:31
  Speaker 3: talking about you know, broader stuff when it comes to
• 33:33
  Speaker 3: transcender issues.
• 33:34
  Speaker 2: But we're talking specifically about sport. The reason it is
• 33:37
  Speaker 2: an issue.
• 33:38
  Speaker 3: Is because biologically, yes, men have more strength than women.
• 33:43
  Speaker 3: That's where the foenus issue comes into it right, and
• 33:46
  Speaker 3: so surely it's not hard to prosecute the argument that
• 33:49
  Speaker 3: if you're sending little Sarah or whoever it is, to school,
• 33:52
  Speaker 3: the chi should have just as much opportunity to excel
• 33:55
  Speaker 3: in sport as little Johnny when you send him off
• 33:58
  Speaker 3: to school. It's an issue of fairness, and particularly here
• 34:02
  Speaker 3: in Australia, we say we're the country the fair go. Right,
• 34:05
  Speaker 3: if the fair go is an Australian value, it should
• 34:08
  Speaker 3: be the easiest thing to possibly sell. And if you
• 34:10
  Speaker 3: want to watch the rest of that interview, if you
• 34:12
  Speaker 3: didn't catch it earlier to night, or you want to
• 34:14
  Speaker 3: watch the extended excerpts of it, you can get a
• 34:17
  Speaker 3: Sky news dot com dot au and stream that exclusive
• 34:20
  Speaker 3: interview with Peter Dutton conducted by Peter Kredlin this evening.
• 34:24
  Speaker 3: And he also says in that interview that he likes
• 34:27
  Speaker 3: to Clint Eastwood film on that count. Mister Dutton, I
• 34:30
  Speaker 3: am with you. Now let's go down to the saga
• 34:33
  Speaker 3: of Victoria's bail laws. We've been talking about this all
• 34:36
  Speaker 3: week here on the Late Debate. It started on Monday
• 34:39
  Speaker 3: night when we showed you the front of Tuesday's Herald
• 34:42
  Speaker 3: Son where premierges Cinta Allen said there will be a
• 34:45
  Speaker 3: review into bayl laws. Then last night we talked about
• 34:48
  Speaker 3: the fact that the Police Minister Anthony Carby and stood
• 34:51
  Speaker 3: up at a presser yesterday and said, look, there is actually.
• 34:55
  Speaker 2: No review going on.
• 34:56
  Speaker 3: I wouldn't even call it a review, he said, And
• 34:59
  Speaker 3: in fact, I have in my bottom draw at least
• 35:01
  Speaker 3: ten things I could do right now to fix the
• 35:04
  Speaker 3: bail laws here in this state. Jacinta Allan's response to
• 35:08
  Speaker 3: that was quote unquote, well that's terrific.
• 35:12
  Speaker 2: Well, Aga, it's even better because the other.
• 35:14
  Speaker 3: Minister, of course involved in all of this is the
• 35:16
  Speaker 3: Attorney General Sonya kill Kenny. Now, we hadn't heard from
• 35:20
  Speaker 3: her all week, and journalists had been asking for miss
• 35:23
  Speaker 3: kill Kenny to come out and address the media about
• 35:26
  Speaker 3: this report that apparently isn't a report into the bail laws.
• 35:30
  Speaker 3: In this morning, she at least twice said no to
• 35:32
  Speaker 3: doing a presser until one little problem popped up. See
• 35:37
  Speaker 3: just cent her Alan stood up in Parliament today and
• 35:40
  Speaker 3: said there are currently eight criminals who are on bail
• 35:43
  Speaker 3: walking around Victoria and we don't know where they are
• 35:47
  Speaker 3: because there was a private company called bail Safe that
• 35:50
  Speaker 3: was employed to monitor these people, and a week ago,
• 35:53
  Speaker 3: without telling the government, bail Safe shut down. So now
• 35:57
  Speaker 3: we have no idea where they are. Well, Miss Kilkenny thought,
• 36:01
  Speaker 3: oh god, I can't get out of it now, I
• 36:03
  Speaker 3: must go and do a press conference where she filled
• 36:06
  Speaker 3: us with so much confidence by letting us know that
• 36:10
  Speaker 3: It wasn't until the media asked her about fail safe
• 36:14
  Speaker 3: that she was even aware that private companies were monitoring
• 36:18
  Speaker 3: people in Victoria. Take a look, how many pies are
• 36:23
  Speaker 3: in this operating Victoria.
• 36:26
  Speaker 12: Well, we know of bao Safe, and what we also
• 36:29
  Speaker 12: know is that that bailsafe has failed to alert state
• 36:35
  Speaker 12: agencies of these developments. I also find that the use
• 36:40
  Speaker 12: of bow Safe, in fact, the use of any private
• 36:42
  Speaker 12: company for these purposes, is not appropriate whatsoever.
• 36:46
  Speaker 6: Sotatifically, you don't know how many other companies there are
• 36:51
  Speaker 6: other than.
• 36:52
  Speaker 5: I'm not responding to that.
• 36:54
  Speaker 3: She's not responding to that because she doesn't know the answer.
• 36:58
  Speaker 3: I mean, this has to be the greatest cockup I've
• 37:01
  Speaker 3: seen in quite a while.
• 37:03
  Speaker 4: Yeah, as we said the other night, there's a by
• 37:05
  Speaker 4: election on Saturday in Werribee, and so in preparation for
• 37:10
  Speaker 4: the by election.
• 37:11
  Speaker 1: The Premier Victoria grab a cigar, put it in her.
• 37:13
  Speaker 4: Mouth and lit it and it's exploded in their faces.
• 37:17
  Speaker 6: I love Michael O'Brien, the shadow Attorney General's response to this.
• 37:21
  Speaker 6: He said she might be a part time Attorney General
• 37:24
  Speaker 6: because she's got her planning portfolio, which is clearly more
• 37:27
  Speaker 6: interested in. But the Attorney General is the first law
• 37:31
  Speaker 6: officer in Victoria. She's obligated to come out and answer
• 37:36
  Speaker 6: questions about her government's absolute failure to regulate this industry,
• 37:41
  Speaker 6: which has led to this collapse, which means Victorians are
• 37:44
  Speaker 6: less safe when a politician responds to a question like
• 37:49
  Speaker 6: that simply saying I won't be responding.
• 37:52
  Speaker 5: To that one. Then what are we paying you for?
• 37:56
  Speaker 1: I just love.
• 37:56
  Speaker 4: They're going to have a review of bail laws as
• 37:58
  Speaker 4: soon as they can find all the people who are meant.
• 37:59
  Speaker 1: To bail who has disappeared.
• 38:02
  Speaker 4: Unbelievable, all of those people in Victoria watching, we love you,
• 38:06
  Speaker 4: were praying for you. We're going to go to a
• 38:08
  Speaker 4: break when we come back. Look at what's making news tomorrow,
• 38:10
  Speaker 4: including the act government have blown their budget big time.
• 38:14
  Speaker 1: We'll tell you how much by it In just a
• 38:16
  Speaker 1: moment welcome back.
• 38:21
  Speaker 4: Let's take a look at what's making news tomorrow. We'll
• 38:23
  Speaker 4: start with the Canberra Times and on the front page
• 38:25
  Speaker 4: they've got a photograph of what must be the most
• 38:27
  Speaker 4: unlucky man in the country. That's the former Transport Minister
• 38:31
  Speaker 4: of the Act, Chris Steele. In November, he thought he
• 38:35
  Speaker 4: was getting a promotion. Calebin Liz, the first Minister, Andrew Barr,
• 38:39
  Speaker 4: said to Chris Steele, how would you like to be
• 38:41
  Speaker 4: the treasurer? Andrew Barr had been doing it for quite
• 38:43
  Speaker 4: some time. Chris Steele thought he was getting a prize.
• 38:47
  Speaker 4: And as I said, he's only been doing it a
• 38:48
  Speaker 4: couple of months and he's had to update Camberians on
• 38:52
  Speaker 4: the state of the finances. Daddy of all deficits, reads
• 38:55
  Speaker 4: the headline. The Act's new Treasurer has warned of tough
• 38:59
  Speaker 4: and challenging to see heead of balancing the Act's budget,
• 39:02
  Speaker 4: with the territory now on track to post its highest
• 39:05
  Speaker 4: deficit in history. Here's the interesting part and maybe the
• 39:08
  Speaker 4: reason Andrew Barr was so keen to give Chris Steele
• 39:11
  Speaker 4: an opportunity to take the limelight. The definitis is expected
• 39:15
  Speaker 4: to reach nine hundred and seventy one point seven million
• 39:18
  Speaker 4: dollars in twenty twenty four to twenty five, more than
• 39:20
  Speaker 4: three hundred and forty seven million dollars larger than was
• 39:23
  Speaker 4: predicted in the budget just last year. That is a
• 39:26
  Speaker 4: fifty nine point nine percent budget blowout in less than
• 39:32
  Speaker 4: twelve months, and Chris Steele is left there holding the
• 39:36
  Speaker 4: can on behalf of his first minister. I wonder how
• 39:40
  Speaker 4: warm that relationship between those two politicians now is. He's saying,
• 39:46
  Speaker 4: and I love this quote, he says, there are tough
• 39:48
  Speaker 4: decisions that had to be made and we're prepared.
• 39:50
  Speaker 1: To work through those.
• 39:51
  Speaker 4: Well, it's good you're prepared to work through the tough decisions.
• 39:54
  Speaker 4: Since you're blown the budget by sixty percent in less
• 39:57
  Speaker 4: than twelve.
• 39:58
  Speaker 3: Months, I suspect it's as warm as North Pole right now.
• 40:01
  Speaker 3: But I mean, and they're saying that two hundred and
• 40:03
  Speaker 3: twenty seven million dollars of it was on the health system.
• 40:08
  Speaker 3: How do you just miscalculate spending on the health system
• 40:12
  Speaker 3: by two hundred million?
• 40:17
  Speaker 2: Really?
• 40:18
  Speaker 1: Yeah?
• 40:19
  Speaker 3: Right?
• 40:19
  Speaker 1: A lot of come on?
• 40:21
  Speaker 3: And then there's another one hundred and twenty odd that's
• 40:23
  Speaker 3: been spent hell swear that they didn't know was going.
• 40:26
  Speaker 3: How does that happen? What is no one actually in
• 40:29
  Speaker 3: charge of the budget in the act?
• 40:32
  Speaker 2: I know, public servant.
• 40:35
  Speaker 5: They still have a slim surplus.
• 40:37
  Speaker 6: Oh that's could still have a sim It's going to
• 40:40
  Speaker 6: be fine, Ken Barns hang in there to the Courier mail.
• 40:44
  Speaker 6: Now cops want to monitor phones of DV thugs password protect.
• 40:50
  Speaker 6: The splash reads domestic violence offenders would be forced to
• 40:53
  Speaker 6: share the device passwords with the police and have their
• 40:57
  Speaker 6: movements tightly controlled under sweeping changes proposed by the Queensland
• 41:02
  Speaker 6: Police Union. The article goes on to say that control
• 41:07
  Speaker 6: orders for high risk offenders would restrict associations, where they
• 41:12
  Speaker 6: went and who they communicated with.
• 41:15
  Speaker 5: They would also be banned.
• 41:16
  Speaker 6: From online dating apps and from going to nightclubs.
• 41:20
  Speaker 5: Now this sounds.
• 41:22
  Speaker 6: Fabulous maybe on first read, but I have some serious
• 41:26
  Speaker 6: questions about this because there's all kinds of criminals that
• 41:31
  Speaker 6: have more freedoms than that. Why is it if you
• 41:37
  Speaker 6: have a history of domestic violence, that me having access
• 41:41
  Speaker 6: to your passwords and all your online activity, your text
• 41:45
  Speaker 6: messages per se, you can't go to nightclubs.
• 41:49
  Speaker 5: I'm just not sure how this creates.
• 41:53
  Speaker 6: Someone who's less likely to offend or even prevent them
• 41:57
  Speaker 6: from offending.
• 41:59
  Speaker 3: Do not using dating apps and going to nightclubs. Bit
• 42:02
  Speaker 3: maybe makes sense from their perspective. The only thing I
• 42:05
  Speaker 3: can glean from it really is that it means that
• 42:08
  Speaker 3: a copper could inspect their phone without having to go
• 42:10
  Speaker 3: to a court for an order to do so. But
• 42:12
  Speaker 3: presumably you would only be doing so if you had
• 42:15
  Speaker 3: suspicion that they might have committed an offense that were
• 42:18
  Speaker 3: likely to commit an offense, in which case in cases
• 42:22
  Speaker 3: of DV, it's usually because someone's breached an apprehended violence order,
• 42:27
  Speaker 3: which means they've already fallen foul of the law, and
• 42:31
  Speaker 3: so that the law should be.
• 42:32
  Speaker 2: Dealing with them anyway.
• 42:33
  Speaker 3: And if you are that bad a repeat offender to
• 42:37
  Speaker 3: the point where they're that worried about you, create laws
• 42:40
  Speaker 3: that put them in the clink, but keep them in
• 42:43
  Speaker 3: the clink. I mean, I've argued this about repeat Peter
• 42:47
  Speaker 3: files before, people who are just constant dangers, who cannot
• 42:51
  Speaker 3: be reformed and have proven themselves to be unable to
• 42:54
  Speaker 3: be reformed, and we let them out and then they
• 42:57
  Speaker 3: go and offend again, and then we go through this
• 43:00
  Speaker 3: every ten years. They get out and they reoffend again,
• 43:02
  Speaker 3: and we go, oh, well, you know, that's just how
• 43:04
  Speaker 3: the cookie crumbles. Ought not be how the cookie crumbles.
• 43:07
  Speaker 3: You can go through their phone. But if this is
• 43:09
  Speaker 3: someone who continually reoffends with domestic violence, just put them
• 43:14
  Speaker 3: in jail and leave them there.
• 43:15
  Speaker 4: I think a lot of people would have sympathy for
• 43:17
  Speaker 4: doing whatever we can to keep domestic violence offenders from reoffending.
• 43:21
  Speaker 4: I mean, we've seen some horrific murders over the last
• 43:25
  Speaker 4: couple of years of women who and and authorities had
• 43:28
  Speaker 4: fair warning that things were going in the wrong direction.
• 43:31
  Speaker 4: So anything they can do to crack down on this
• 43:33
  Speaker 4: they should do. But this does seem a little odd.
• 43:35
  Speaker 2: It's talking of crime.
• 43:37
  Speaker 3: Go to the Herald Sun tomorrow where we're talking about prisoners. Here,
• 43:40
  Speaker 3: they're not getting it as good as.
• 43:42
  Speaker 2: They'd like it.
• 43:42
  Speaker 3: Apparently, King Pinn's food fight, It says, exclusive from Anthony
• 43:47
  Speaker 3: Dowsley dows I hope you will mate. One of the
• 43:49
  Speaker 3: nation's most volatile inmates is on a hunger strike over
• 43:53
  Speaker 3: a lack of meal choices. Convicted drug trafficker George Morogi
• 43:57
  Speaker 3: wants bar and prison to offer more hosher dishes. Well,
• 44:01
  Speaker 3: I'm sorry to inform you mate. But when you traffic
• 44:04
  Speaker 3: in drugs and all the other sorts of things that
• 44:06
  Speaker 3: go on in organized crime, and we send you off
• 44:09
  Speaker 3: to the clink to pay your penance to society, you
• 44:13
  Speaker 3: don't get to choose the food that you receive, and
• 44:16
  Speaker 3: good luck to you go on a hunger strike. I
• 44:18
  Speaker 3: hope you stay on the hunger strike forever and that
• 44:21
  Speaker 3: finishes you off. If you are literally that stupid that
• 44:24
  Speaker 3: you feel that you can go on a hunger strike
• 44:27
  Speaker 3: to get whatever food you want while you're in prison,
• 44:30
  Speaker 3: then I think you probably deserve to suffer the consequences
• 44:33
  Speaker 3: that come at the end of a hunger strike.
• 44:34
  Speaker 5: Don't you think there's not no kosher options?
• 44:38
  Speaker 2: He just went forward more.
• 44:42
  Speaker 1: Prison.
• 44:44
  Speaker 2: It's not a bloody days back.
• 44:46
  Speaker 4: Before you go to prison, do you get an opportunity
• 44:48
  Speaker 4: to peruse the menu and see what's on offer?
• 44:50
  Speaker 3: Is that well, I will be choosing the steak fruits
• 44:53
  Speaker 3: with a glass of read if favored up in that position.
• 44:55
  Speaker 4: Let's go to the front page of Sydney's Daily Telegraph.
• 44:58
  Speaker 4: Golf course cover up to spark property crash and cost
• 45:01
  Speaker 4: two hundred million dollars more madness, reads the headline, slashing
• 45:05
  Speaker 4: More Park golf course in half. That's the proposal by
• 45:09
  Speaker 4: the state government and backed by the City Council. Will
• 45:11
  Speaker 4: cost the cash strapped state government two hundred million dollars
• 45:14
  Speaker 4: and one of Australia's top witters, State Agents predicts nearby
• 45:17
  Speaker 4: property values would also crash by twenty percent. Now that
• 45:22
  Speaker 4: two hundred dollar figure has been billion dollars, sorry, two
• 45:25
  Speaker 4: hundred million dollar figure.
• 45:27
  Speaker 1: I'm sounding like the Treasure of the eighty.
• 45:31
  Speaker 6: It's what happened with the Burney General of Victorias.
• 45:36
  Speaker 1: I will not the.
• 45:36
  Speaker 3: Treasure of Victoria who doesn't use economic terms.
• 45:39
  Speaker 4: That two hundred million dollar figure has been put down
• 45:44
  Speaker 4: by a golfing consortium, so you know you've got to
• 45:48
  Speaker 4: take that into consideration. But if that is true, or
• 45:51
  Speaker 4: even remotely true, the New South Wales government have put
• 45:55
  Speaker 4: aside two point five million dollars to divide up the
• 45:58
  Speaker 4: golf course.
• 46:00
  Speaker 1: That money is tight.
• 46:01
  Speaker 4: If that's going to be the price, then that would
• 46:03
  Speaker 4: be a good reason to leave the golf course intact.
• 46:05
  Speaker 5: Why is it I feel like we have one of
• 46:07
  Speaker 5: these stories. At least every six months.
• 46:10
  Speaker 6: There's a golf course story, and everyone's like, save the
• 46:13
  Speaker 6: golf course, and the Premier who or whoever's in charge
• 46:17
  Speaker 6: of being like, look, we've crunched the numbers.
• 46:19
  Speaker 5: We've got to do this every single time. Is it
• 46:23
  Speaker 5: just me?
• 46:24
  Speaker 1: This one has been going for a while, this argument.
• 46:26
  Speaker 3: I think it's because Greenies hate people using open groups.
• 46:29
  Speaker 6: Last time it was the one in New South Wales
• 46:31
  Speaker 6: and everyone was like save the golf course and Min's
• 46:35
  Speaker 6: was waiting in on it.
• 46:36
  Speaker 2: This was the way park.
• 46:37
  Speaker 4: In fact, there was a Hollywood star Why the same one.
• 46:43
  Speaker 1: We're going to go to a commercial break.
• 46:45
  Speaker 4: When we come back, we'll talk about a council that
• 46:47
  Speaker 4: I mean, they're always going on about health and safety.
• 46:49
  Speaker 1: Right, wait till you see what this council has put
• 46:52
  Speaker 1: smack bang in the middle of for paths. That's coming
• 46:54
  Speaker 1: up in a moment.
• 46:58
  Speaker 4: Welcome back, well, Liz, the new US continues to provide
• 47:01
  Speaker 4: endless entertainment.
• 47:02
  Speaker 5: They do.
• 47:03
  Speaker 6: He is Carolyn Levitt telling the public even more ridiculous
• 47:08
  Speaker 6: projects that USAID has been splurging their heart earned dimes on.
• 47:14
  Speaker 8: And I would just say a strong message to Democrats
• 47:16
  Speaker 8: who are out there pretending to be outraged about the
• 47:20
  Speaker 8: long list of crop that this administration is cutting. Federal
• 47:25
  Speaker 8: waste and funding like two million dollars for sex changes
• 47:28
  Speaker 8: in Guatemala, six million to fund tourism in Egypt, twenty
• 47:32
  Speaker 8: million on a new Sesame street show in Iraq, four
• 47:36
  Speaker 8: point five million to combat disinformation in Kazakhstan. Democrats are
• 47:40
  Speaker 8: outraged that the American people want to be They want
• 47:44
  Speaker 8: their taxpayers going to good uses, not stuff like this.
• 47:47
  Speaker 8: But then they're very quiet about the fact that there
• 47:49
  Speaker 8: are still North Carolinians and people in California who have
• 47:53
  Speaker 8: lost everything and in the last four years, this federal
• 47:56
  Speaker 8: government did nothing to help them.
• 47:59
  Speaker 6: Every day by telling them more of the stuff that
• 48:01
  Speaker 6: they're cutting, more of these ridiculous projects that they're finding,
• 48:05
  Speaker 6: so much so that comedians are now taking to socials
• 48:08
  Speaker 6: to do their own parodies of this daily ritual.
• 48:12
  Speaker 13: Hi, Welcome to the Department of Government Efficiency. We were
• 48:15
  Speaker 13: looking over last year's budget and we found some anomalies
• 48:18
  Speaker 13: that we wanted to address. Okay, if you're talking about
• 48:20
  Speaker 13: the military budget, if you want a safe country, that's
• 48:22
  Speaker 13: how much we Oh, we didn't even start looking at
• 48:24
  Speaker 13: that yet, get ready for that. No, we were looking
• 48:26
  Speaker 13: at this list here. We wanted to start with the
• 48:28
  Speaker 13: National Pillow Fluffing Initiative. I mean, don't you want your
• 48:32
  Speaker 13: pillow to be fluffy? Also, the Bureau of Elevator Music Standards.
• 48:36
  Speaker 13: Explain yourself, forgive me if you're trying to set the
• 48:39
  Speaker 13: vibe bro eight hundred thousand dollars a year, the National
• 48:43
  Speaker 13: Velcrow Noise Study.
• 48:45
  Speaker 1: What's the problem here.
• 48:46
  Speaker 13: You don't have to spend a million dollars a year
• 48:48
  Speaker 13: to know that velcrow noise is annoying.
• 48:50
  Speaker 1: Now, the Federal Kazoo Orchestra Grant.
• 48:53
  Speaker 13: It's amazing what they could do with those things, honestly.
• 48:55
  Speaker 13: The Federal Bureau of Traffic cone counting two hundred and
• 48:59
  Speaker 13: fifty six three hundred and forty three. You're welcome now,
• 49:02
  Speaker 13: that's what I call eight hundred thousand dollars while spent.
• 49:06
  Speaker 3: And forget about traffic cone counting. The yay of the
• 49:08
  Speaker 3: day goes to Bayside Council in Sydney, which managed to
• 49:11
  Speaker 3: do this in the middle of their footpaths. Yes, that
• 49:14
  Speaker 3: is an electricity box. They have literally built the footpath
• 49:18
  Speaker 3: right around it.
• 49:19
  Speaker 2: How much better can you get?
• 49:21
  Speaker 1: Unbelievable? Well done, guys, that's.
• 49:22
  Speaker 4: It from us stick around. Coming up is the Reader
• 49:24
  Speaker 4: Penalty Show good night,