Latest / The Late Debate / The Late Debate | 23 February

Transcript

The Late Debate | 23 February · The Late Debate

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Welcome to the Late tur Play.
• 0:06
  Speaker 2: Well thanks for joining us on a brand new week
• 0:08
  Speaker 2: on the Late Debate. I'm James McPherson with Freeleitch and
• 0:11
  Speaker 2: Caleb Bond. Here's what's coming up tonight. The number of
• 0:14
  Speaker 2: poorly performing school graduates enrolling to become teachers is growing.
• 0:18
  Speaker 2: How can this be good when our students are already
• 0:21
  Speaker 2: struggling so badly? And divorce lawyers warn that people are
• 0:24
  Speaker 2: increasingly using AI in the family court to manipulate evidence
• 0:28
  Speaker 2: against their former partners. Plus, a talkback caller is very
• 0:32
  Speaker 2: supportive of Donald Trump. In fact, he sounded suspiciously like
• 0:37
  Speaker 2: Donald Trump. We'll get to all of that shortly, but first,
• 0:40
  Speaker 2: local government. It's meant to be about rates, roads and rubbish, right,
• 0:44
  Speaker 2: Well not if you're a Melbourne City council And no, no,
• 0:47
  Speaker 2: their minds are occupied by much weightier topics instead of
• 0:50
  Speaker 2: focusing on the things they're elected to do. They're attending
• 0:54
  Speaker 2: a conference to move emotion on the support of the
• 0:57
  Speaker 2: UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. And this
• 0:59
  Speaker 2: is important, they say, because if there's a nuclear war,
• 1:03
  Speaker 2: it's the Melbourne City Council who'll have to handle debris cleanup.
• 1:07
  Speaker 2: The motion to be moved by the Council begins in
• 1:10
  Speaker 2: the event of a nuclear detonation, local governments would be
• 1:14
  Speaker 2: required to respond to severe and long lasting impacts on
• 1:17
  Speaker 2: communities and infrastructure. The motion explicitly lists the fallout of
• 1:22
  Speaker 2: a nuclear detonation on debris management, waste disposal, emergency shelter,
• 1:27
  Speaker 2: public health measures, loss of essential services and workforce well being.
• 1:32
  Speaker 2: Calebin Frew I sure hope the Iranians and the North
• 1:34
  Speaker 2: Koreans pay attention to this very important motion because a
• 1:38
  Speaker 2: nuclear blast wally would be terribly inconvenient for the city
• 1:41
  Speaker 2: of Melbourne.
• 1:42
  Speaker 3: I think if there really were a nuclear war, what
• 1:44
  Speaker 3: local councils are having to deal with will probably be
• 1:47
  Speaker 3: one of the least of our concerns. I think maybe
• 1:51
  Speaker 3: the preservation of human life would come a bit higher
• 1:54
  Speaker 3: than worrying about poor old Melbourne council and their debris cleanup.
• 1:58
  Speaker 3: I don't think there would be a council left in
• 2:00
  Speaker 3: the event of nuclear war to do the cleaning up,
• 2:03
  Speaker 3: so maybe they should have a think about that. But
• 2:05
  Speaker 3: the fact that they're spending three thousand, six hundred dollars
• 2:09
  Speaker 3: per head to send counselors to Canberra is just ridiculous.
• 2:14
  Speaker 3: But it also raises this broader question of why do
• 2:17
  Speaker 3: we need so many layers of government in this country?
• 2:21
  Speaker 3: Federal government, state government, local council. Now they're supposedly going
• 2:25
  Speaker 3: to a conference where all the local councils will get
• 2:28
  Speaker 3: together to better lobby state and federal government. Come on,
• 2:32
  Speaker 3: enough of the lobbying, enough of the endless layers of
• 2:35
  Speaker 3: government and pointless motions like this one.
• 2:38
  Speaker 1: I mean, clearly, you have not been reading the history
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: books and watching the documentaries about when we drop the
• 2:43
  Speaker 1: A bomb on Japan, because at the top of the
• 2:45
  Speaker 1: list in all of the records is how the councils
• 2:48
  Speaker 1: had to deal with the fallout. I mean, honestly, no
• 2:53
  Speaker 1: one cares what councils think on these matters except for
• 2:56
  Speaker 1: councilors themselves, who you know, a lot of these people
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: wish they were in real politics, and so they end
• 3:03
  Speaker 1: up in local government and then they have to talk
• 3:05
  Speaker 1: about the sort of things they would talk about if
• 3:06
  Speaker 1: they were in real politics because it kind of makes
• 3:08
  Speaker 1: them feel important. There are signs up around the Inner
• 3:13
  Speaker 1: West Council in Sydney, part of which was formerly the
• 3:16
  Speaker 1: Like Art Council before it was amalgamated and they've got
• 3:19
  Speaker 1: them all up. There used to be one near where
• 3:20
  Speaker 1: I used to live in Lilyfield in the inner west
• 3:23
  Speaker 1: of Sydney on the City Westlink Nuclear Free Zone, as
• 3:28
  Speaker 1: though there was some sort of nuclear operation going on
• 3:31
  Speaker 1: in like art prior to that sign going up. I
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: don't think there was now, to be honest, I don't
• 3:37
  Speaker 1: have an issue with sending a person to the Australian
• 3:41
  Speaker 1: Local Government Association conference. There'll be someone there from every council.
• 3:46
  Speaker 1: They don't need to send three people, which is what
• 3:48
  Speaker 1: they did last year. Surely one would suffice and they
• 3:53
  Speaker 1: don't need to be wasting their time on such frivolous matters. Well,
• 3:56
  Speaker 1: I mean, it's not frivolous if you're a federal government,
• 3:58
  Speaker 1: but such frivolous matters for a local council as nuclear weapons.
• 4:03
  Speaker 1: You have no jurisdiction over nuclear weapons. It has nothing
• 4:07
  Speaker 1: to do with you deal with something that's in your
• 4:09
  Speaker 1: wheelhouse exactly.
• 4:11
  Speaker 2: The good news, if we can find a silver lining
• 4:13
  Speaker 2: in this cloud, is that Australia is not the only
• 4:16
  Speaker 2: place with useless local councils. Take this example from the UK.
• 4:21
  Speaker 2: A pub owner named Paul Hartfield, he owns the Flying
• 4:25
  Speaker 2: Horse pub in Kent, decided it would be a good
• 4:28
  Speaker 2: idea to buy a car and offer his patrons a
• 4:31
  Speaker 2: free ride home for their own safety, to make sure
• 4:34
  Speaker 2: they get home all right after a night on the drinks.
• 4:37
  Speaker 2: And he didn't require any payment, just a donation to
• 4:39
  Speaker 2: a local charity that supports people with motor neurons disease.
• 4:44
  Speaker 2: And he's been doing this since November last year. About
• 4:46
  Speaker 2: one hundred patrons have taken him up on the offer
• 4:49
  Speaker 2: and he's raised seven hundred pounds for research into MND.
• 4:54
  Speaker 2: So that's a great thing. The local paper did a
• 4:56
  Speaker 2: story on it because it was such a nice thing,
• 4:58
  Speaker 2: helping patrons raising money for charity. Well after the story
• 5:02
  Speaker 2: appeared in local paper, an overly officious council person thought, oh,
• 5:06
  Speaker 2: this guy doesn't have a license to be driving people home,
• 5:09
  Speaker 2: and so we read this report. The note sent to
• 5:12
  Speaker 2: mister Hartfield from council informed him that his offer of
• 5:15
  Speaker 2: a private hire vehicle meant he was subject to requirements
• 5:19
  Speaker 2: for local authority licensing the public, and explained he wasn't profiting.
• 5:23
  Speaker 2: But the council official wrote that an individual can be
• 5:25
  Speaker 2: said to derive commercial benefit even when a payment is
• 5:29
  Speaker 2: not made to the driver or company. So he's been
• 5:33
  Speaker 2: stopped from providing free rides to people in return for
• 5:37
  Speaker 2: a donation to a charity until he gets his cab license.
• 5:40
  Speaker 2: Can you believe that?
• 5:42
  Speaker 3: Unfortunately I can, But I feel like this story just
• 5:44
  Speaker 3: sums up everything that is wrong with local counsels. It's
• 5:48
  Speaker 3: nice to know Australia is not the only country dealing
• 5:51
  Speaker 3: with this scourge, but still, I mean, it just feels
• 5:55
  Speaker 3: like our society is now run by lawyers and the
• 5:58
  Speaker 3: law instead of common sense and principles. I mean, who
• 6:02
  Speaker 3: cares if he's giving people a lift home, it's his car.
• 6:05
  Speaker 3: People are taking him up on the offer. He's giving
• 6:08
  Speaker 3: the money to charity for goodness sake. How dare the
• 6:12
  Speaker 3: council bureaucrats come in and demand he get a special
• 6:16
  Speaker 3: license for this?
• 6:17
  Speaker 4: Now? Pubs in the UK are under a lot of pressure.
• 6:19
  Speaker 3: There's a tax rate going on, They're dealing with rising inflation.
• 6:23
  Speaker 3: Like everyone, this is the last thing they need, and
• 6:27
  Speaker 3: particularly this pub just another fee to pay more bureaucracy
• 6:31
  Speaker 3: to try and navigate. It's ridiculous.
• 6:34
  Speaker 1: This story came from the Telegraph in the UK, and
• 6:37
  Speaker 1: they're actually running a campaign at the moment called Save
• 6:39
  Speaker 1: out Pubs, and I was so glad to see them
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: doing it because the number of pubs and I know
• 6:44
  Speaker 1: when Colin Flynn, who talks to Paul Murray often, has
• 6:49
  Speaker 1: been doing a lot of work on this as well.
• 6:51
  Speaker 1: But the number of pubs that have shut down in
• 6:53
  Speaker 1: England and Wales and Scotland and Ireland, in Northern Ireland,
• 6:57
  Speaker 1: if we're talking about the UK in the last twenty
• 7:00
  Speaker 1: odd years, is staggering, and they are falling over at
• 7:03
  Speaker 1: a rate of knots. And of course this has been
• 7:05
  Speaker 1: such a large part of British culture for so long,
• 7:09
  Speaker 1: the pub, the local watering hole, a place for people
• 7:12
  Speaker 1: to meet, a community hub, right, and this is all
• 7:15
  Speaker 1: disappearing to some degree. And here's one bloke who's trying
• 7:18
  Speaker 1: to do a good turn not only for charity by
• 7:21
  Speaker 1: raising money, but also saying, wouldn't it be good if
• 7:24
  Speaker 1: we discourage people from driving their cars under the influence
• 7:27
  Speaker 1: of alcohol. So I have a solution, because he's in
• 7:30
  Speaker 1: a small village, right, So here's a solution. I'll just
• 7:34
  Speaker 1: get my car and drive your home from the pub
• 7:36
  Speaker 1: after you've had a few drinks. No, that's a bad thing.
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: Apparently we can't do that. I mean, for goodness sake,
• 7:44
  Speaker 1: these people are just allergic to fun. I've said it before,
• 7:47
  Speaker 1: I'll say it again. Imagine living with yourself as that
• 7:50
  Speaker 1: person who wakes up in the morning and goes into
• 7:53
  Speaker 1: the council offices and says, what can I do today
• 7:56
  Speaker 1: to make people's lives more miserable?
• 7:59
  Speaker 2: What's that old expression? Good deed will go on?
• 8:00
  Speaker 1: Take exactly exactly, Just get over it, seriously. Back in Australia,
• 8:07
  Speaker 1: something that we should not get over, of course, is
• 8:09
  Speaker 1: the quality of our teachers. You look at nap Land
• 8:12
  Speaker 1: results and other school results over the last decade at least,
• 8:16
  Speaker 1: and it will show that we are on the decline.
• 8:19
  Speaker 1: I mean, we are being beaten in so many categories
• 8:21
  Speaker 1: by countries overseas that you would not consider us to
• 8:25
  Speaker 1: be comparable to whatsoever. But we know on English kids
• 8:30
  Speaker 1: are well behind. I mean there are boys now going
• 8:34
  Speaker 1: into high school two years behind in terms of their English.
• 8:37
  Speaker 1: In mathematics, we're being beaten by countries including Vietnam. So
• 8:42
  Speaker 1: clearly we have something wrong here. So one of the
• 8:45
  Speaker 1: solutions to that, I would have thought, is to get
• 8:47
  Speaker 1: good people into teaching, good smart people who did well
• 8:51
  Speaker 1: at school themselves, who want to take that intelligence and
• 8:54
  Speaker 1: pass it on to the next generation. But we read
• 8:57
  Speaker 1: today that the largest number of people have been admitted
• 9:02
  Speaker 1: to teaching degrees with a tars of less than fifty
• 9:06
  Speaker 1: since twenty seventeen. And I i read this, I thought good,
• 9:10
  Speaker 1: this was being talked about ten years ago. I remember
• 9:12
  Speaker 1: writing about it extensively teen years ago. But we are
• 9:16
  Speaker 1: back where we were. In fact, we're worse than where
• 9:19
  Speaker 1: we were. This is in the papers today. Last year's
• 9:22
  Speaker 1: cohort was the highest number of low achieving students offered
• 9:25
  Speaker 1: a teaching place since twenty seventeen. As I said, when
• 9:27
  Speaker 1: four hundred and forty three students with an under fifty
• 9:32
  Speaker 1: were offered places. This is four hundred and ninety nine
• 9:36
  Speaker 1: now last year with atars of less than fifty. Now, ATAR,
• 9:40
  Speaker 1: if you're not familiar, is the score you get when
• 9:42
  Speaker 1: you finish high school and you've said that you are
• 9:44
  Speaker 1: interested in going to university. It's your university entry score.
• 9:48
  Speaker 1: And if your ATAR is under fifty, it means you
• 9:52
  Speaker 1: are in the bottom half of all people who got
• 9:56
  Speaker 1: an ATAR in order to go to university. And people
• 10:00
  Speaker 1: that were sending off to be teachers. It's outrageous.
• 10:04
  Speaker 2: Well, this is a demand issue, right, there's not that
• 10:06
  Speaker 2: demand for places in teaching, certainly not by students who
• 10:10
  Speaker 2: have done well in high school. And you've got to
• 10:12
  Speaker 2: ask yourself the question, why would you want to be
• 10:14
  Speaker 2: a school teacher. At the moment, it used to be
• 10:16
  Speaker 2: a revered profession, and we should revere our teachers. There's
• 10:20
  Speaker 2: not much more important than helping raise the next generation,
• 10:24
  Speaker 2: certainly educating them. But with the low rates of pay
• 10:27
  Speaker 2: that they get, with ill discipline, rife through classrooms, with
• 10:31
  Speaker 2: the lack of respect from parents, with the long hours
• 10:34
  Speaker 2: that they have to work, it's not that surprising that
• 10:37
  Speaker 2: people who do well at school aspire to do something
• 10:39
  Speaker 2: other than teaching.
• 10:41
  Speaker 3: Exactly right, And unfortunately, the problem kind of reinforces itself
• 10:45
  Speaker 3: because once standards start to decline, people are dissatisfied with teachers,
• 10:49
  Speaker 3: teachers get a bad rep you have worse people entering
• 10:52
  Speaker 3: the profession that reinforces the lower standards, so you enter
• 10:55
  Speaker 3: this kind of death spiral of poor academic standards. But
• 10:59
  Speaker 3: one of the other statistics that was just shocking from
• 11:02
  Speaker 3: this article is if you are commencing study as a
• 11:05
  Speaker 3: teacher of being offered a position, you're more likely to
• 11:08
  Speaker 3: have received a sub fifty etar than an atar above ninety. Now,
• 11:14
  Speaker 3: being in the top ten percent is not that difficult,
• 11:18
  Speaker 3: and the fact that you're more likely to be in
• 11:20
  Speaker 3: the bottom half of the cohort and entering teaching than
• 11:24
  Speaker 3: being in the top ten percent is just shocking. Both
• 11:27
  Speaker 3: of my grandparents were teachers, and back in the day
• 11:30
  Speaker 3: when they did teaching, it was a prestigious career. Lots
• 11:34
  Speaker 3: of kids from working class backgrounds who are very bright
• 11:39
  Speaker 3: saw teaching as a great profession, steady, good way to
• 11:43
  Speaker 3: increase your social standing and provide for your family financially. Unfortunately,
• 11:49
  Speaker 3: these days it is hard to see the attraction unless
• 11:52
  Speaker 3: you go into the private system. I think it's really
• 11:55
  Speaker 3: hard for public schools in particular.
• 11:57
  Speaker 2: The ABC reported the other day that fifty of of
• 12:00
  Speaker 2: new teachers quit the profession within five years. So if
• 12:04
  Speaker 2: you're a parent, would you be encouraging your child to
• 12:07
  Speaker 2: be a school teacher, you probably wouldn't encourage them in
• 12:09
  Speaker 2: that direction. That's no knock on school teachers. As I said,
• 12:12
  Speaker 2: it's an incredibly important profession. It's just not one that
• 12:16
  Speaker 2: most people would probably choose for a variety of reasons.
• 12:18
  Speaker 1: Now and the hoops you have to jump through now
• 12:20
  Speaker 1: as well in order to even be able to get
• 12:22
  Speaker 1: a job as a teacher. I mean, it's sort of
• 12:24
  Speaker 1: an expectation now that you have a postgraduate degree in
• 12:27
  Speaker 1: order to go and be to it is you have
• 12:29
  Speaker 1: to have a post which is insane. I mean, some
• 12:32
  Speaker 1: of the best teachers I had at school never went
• 12:35
  Speaker 1: to university itself. They went to teachers college and they
• 12:38
  Speaker 1: got a diploma, so they didn't have to do a
• 12:41
  Speaker 1: bachelor's and a postgraduate and the whole deal in order
• 12:44
  Speaker 1: to be a good teacher. And they went to teachers college.
• 12:47
  Speaker 1: And I think there's an argument that maybe we should
• 12:49
  Speaker 1: go a bit further back in that direction.
• 12:51
  Speaker 3: Well, I think one of the worst education policy mistakes
• 12:54
  Speaker 3: we made in this country was collapsing teachers colleges into
• 12:58
  Speaker 3: the universities, because also it meant was that teacher training
• 13:02
  Speaker 3: got infested with the left wing ideological bias that has
• 13:06
  Speaker 3: taken over universities. So not only are you then forcing
• 13:10
  Speaker 3: everyone into UNI even though you don't need a uny
• 13:12
  Speaker 3: degree to be a teacher, but you're also then making
• 13:15
  Speaker 3: them learn all this other left wing stuff that eventually
• 13:18
  Speaker 3: filters into classrooms.
• 13:20
  Speaker 4: But let's move on.
• 13:21
  Speaker 1: Now.
• 13:21
  Speaker 3: AI is transforming all aspects of society, and it feels
• 13:25
  Speaker 3: like at an increasingly rapid rate. Now, family and divorce
• 13:30
  Speaker 3: lawyers are warning that AI could be being used to
• 13:34
  Speaker 3: present false, misleading, or docted evidence in cases, particularly disputes
• 13:41
  Speaker 3: between partners who might be separating.
• 13:44
  Speaker 4: These are family lawyers saying that.
• 13:47
  Speaker 3: Australians were increasingly relying on text messages, calls, digital evidence
• 13:54
  Speaker 3: in family caught disputes. But that is the kind of
• 13:57
  Speaker 3: thing that is very easy for AI to manipulate. Now,
• 14:02
  Speaker 3: we've been talking about some of the downsides of AI,
• 14:06
  Speaker 3: and this seems like just the next frontier of it.
• 14:09
  Speaker 3: But it raises serious concerns because one, if you have
• 14:13
  Speaker 3: to forensically examine every screenshot, every photo, every video, I mean,
• 14:20
  Speaker 3: the cost of that and family law already is extremely
• 14:25
  Speaker 3: financially damaging for all participants involved. On the other hand,
• 14:29
  Speaker 3: if you're the defense, could you also now argue that's fake,
• 14:34
  Speaker 3: that's AI. I mean, there are so many potential ways
• 14:37
  Speaker 3: this could go so wrong.
• 14:38
  Speaker 2: That the only way to stop this, I think is
• 14:40
  Speaker 2: to introduce incredibly tough laws where if you're found to
• 14:44
  Speaker 2: be doctoring evidence or producing fake evidence in the family court,
• 14:48
  Speaker 2: it's instant loss that would fix it immediately. They won't
• 14:51
  Speaker 2: do it, of course, but that's the only way they're
• 14:54
  Speaker 2: going to do this, because otherwise forensics is going to
• 14:57
  Speaker 2: become a part of every family law case, the costs
• 15:00
  Speaker 2: which are already massively going to go through the roof.
• 15:02
  Speaker 2: No one can afford that.
• 15:04
  Speaker 1: And well, I have to say that the way this
• 15:06
  Speaker 1: federal government is fiddled with family law as well as
• 15:09
  Speaker 1: made it far more difficult to deal with than it
• 15:11
  Speaker 1: used to be in terms of what is now termed
• 15:13
  Speaker 1: to be abuse and the possibility of financial compensation essentially
• 15:18
  Speaker 1: for that. And I suggest you I won't go through
• 15:21
  Speaker 1: a chapter of verse here because I can talk about
• 15:23
  Speaker 1: it all night, but go and look at the changes
• 15:25
  Speaker 1: they've made and what they now deem to be forms
• 15:28
  Speaker 1: of abuse. I mean, it could be as simple as
• 15:31
  Speaker 1: things such as you know, you enjoyed having a bet
• 15:33
  Speaker 1: on the weekend, and you didn't tell your wife about it,
• 15:36
  Speaker 1: and then it comes to divorce time and she says, well,
• 15:38
  Speaker 1: this money disappeared from the bank account, and I now
• 15:41
  Speaker 1: deserve compensation for that in the settlement, right. Stuff that
• 15:44
  Speaker 1: otherwise you would go, oh, look, this is not really
• 15:46
  Speaker 1: that important can now be taken into account. So that's
• 15:49
  Speaker 1: another problem with the family law system as it currently stands.
• 15:52
  Speaker 1: But I wonder as well how this applies to criminal law,
• 15:57
  Speaker 1: because I mean, we showed a video last week of
• 16:01
  Speaker 1: was it Tom Cruise and I've forget with a Brad Pit?
• 16:05
  Speaker 1: But it wasn't Tom Cruise and Brad Pit. It was
• 16:07
  Speaker 1: an AI generated clip, but it looked so real that
• 16:11
  Speaker 1: I think the average person looking at that could reasonably
• 16:14
  Speaker 1: believe that it was a real, real film clip. So
• 16:18
  Speaker 1: how can you have any evidence in a court now
• 16:21
  Speaker 1: that is not to be questioned in this manner where
• 16:25
  Speaker 1: a defense will not say, well, that looks like it
• 16:28
  Speaker 1: was docted, and where a prosecution will say, well, of
• 16:30
  Speaker 1: course it's not. How do you prove it? On and
• 16:32
  Speaker 1: on we could go. You could create any kind of
• 16:35
  Speaker 1: evidence you want and make it look entirely realistic, and
• 16:39
  Speaker 1: we're just hoping that other systems will be able to
• 16:42
  Speaker 1: detect if it's been docted or not. What happens when
• 16:45
  Speaker 1: we start having cases where they don't detect that it's
• 16:48
  Speaker 1: being docted and people potentially are convicted of crimes that
• 16:52
  Speaker 1: they never committed because of AI generated content.
• 16:55
  Speaker 2: Well, we need an expert in forensics to investigate an
• 16:58
  Speaker 2: episode of c SPAN Liicle Talkback because one of the
• 17:02
  Speaker 2: callers sounded.
• 17:04
  Speaker 1: Very, very familiar.
• 17:05
  Speaker 2: The hosts were discussing the Supreme Court's decision to block
• 17:09
  Speaker 2: Donald Trump's tariffs when a caller rang in to us
• 17:13
  Speaker 2: speak very much on behalf of what the US President
• 17:17
  Speaker 2: was trying to achieve. Have listen and see if the
• 17:20
  Speaker 2: voice rings true to you.
• 17:22
  Speaker 5: Well, this is John Baron, and you have Look, this
• 17:25
  Speaker 5: is the worst decision you ever have in your life. Practically,
• 17:29
  Speaker 5: Jack and jacksconna agree with me, right, but this is
• 17:32
  Speaker 5: a terrible decision. And you have Hakeem Jeffries, who he's
• 17:35
  Speaker 5: a dope, and you have Chuck Humor who get cockacheeseburger.
• 17:40
  Speaker 5: Of course these people are happy. Of course these people
• 17:42
  Speaker 5: are happy, but true Americans will not be happy.
• 17:47
  Speaker 2: Sounded a little bit like Donald Trump. He said his
• 17:51
  Speaker 2: name was what John Baron. Baron sounded a lot like
• 17:53
  Speaker 2: Trump talking up Trump.
• 17:55
  Speaker 1: Or John Baron. It turns out he's actually a pseudonym
• 17:58
  Speaker 1: that Trump was using himself through the eighties. I think
• 18:02
  Speaker 1: that the first instance of it being used popped up
• 18:04
  Speaker 1: in nineteen eighty, and he used it for the last time,
• 18:06
  Speaker 1: maybe until today, in nineteen ninety because he was actually
• 18:10
  Speaker 1: forced to testify in court that he had been using
• 18:12
  Speaker 1: the name John Baron as a pseudonym. He might bring.
• 18:16
  Speaker 2: And he'd be on behalf of Donald Trump.
• 18:18
  Speaker 1: This John Baron character was allegedly a vice president of
• 18:22
  Speaker 1: the Trump Organization who was acting as a spokesman for
• 18:26
  Speaker 1: the Trump organization, but in fact John Barroon never existed.
• 18:30
  Speaker 2: It was just people became suspicious because he sounded like
• 18:33
  Speaker 2: Donald Trump, and he knew an awful.
• 18:35
  Speaker 1: Lot about Donald Trump. But having said that this is
• 18:40
  Speaker 1: not Donald Trump, there's no way that's Donald Trump. I'm sorry.
• 18:43
  Speaker 1: Donald Trump just calls up television programs anyway and does
• 18:47
  Speaker 1: it under his own name. If Donald Trump wanted to
• 18:50
  Speaker 1: go on Sea Span and criticize someone, I think he
• 18:53
  Speaker 1: just do it under his own name because he knows
• 18:56
  Speaker 1: it would generate headlines. And c Span has said that
• 18:59
  Speaker 1: the call came from Central Virginia at the same time
• 19:03
  Speaker 1: as Donald Trump was in a well publicized meeting at
• 19:07
  Speaker 1: the White House. So it can't have been him, but
• 19:10
  Speaker 1: it's a very good impersonation.
• 19:12
  Speaker 3: Oh look, I don't know. It may have been him. Washington, DC,
• 19:16
  Speaker 3: borders Virginia. It's not a stretch to say he could
• 19:20
  Speaker 3: have technically been in Virginia at the time of the call.
• 19:24
  Speaker 3: And you know, one thing we do know for certain
• 19:26
  Speaker 3: about Trump is that he loves drama. He loves stirring
• 19:30
  Speaker 3: the pot. And there is nothing more hilarious than being
• 19:33
  Speaker 3: the president of the United States and calling into a
• 19:36
  Speaker 3: television channel, and not even the most popular one, kind
• 19:40
  Speaker 3: of a.
• 19:40
  Speaker 4: Very random television channel as well.
• 19:42
  Speaker 3: It's not like it's Fox News or CNN, it's c
• 19:44
  Speaker 3: SPAN calling in under a pseudonym and talking down the
• 19:49
  Speaker 3: Supreme Court, who you hate.
• 19:51
  Speaker 4: I mean, why wouldn't Trump do something like that?
• 19:53
  Speaker 3: And if it wasn't him, I reckon he's watched this episode,
• 19:57
  Speaker 3: the amount of attention it's gotten, and he might consider
• 20:00
  Speaker 3: doing it in the future.
• 20:01
  Speaker 2: I think those who don't like Donald Trump have spread
• 20:04
  Speaker 2: this virally on the Internet to show what an idiot
• 20:07
  Speaker 2: the US president is that he would ring up and
• 20:09
  Speaker 2: pretend to be someone else. But no, I don't agree
• 20:12
  Speaker 2: with you, for there's no way Trump, he doesn't need to,
• 20:16
  Speaker 2: and he would get far more publicity and far longer
• 20:18
  Speaker 2: on the program. I mean they cut the call.
• 20:20
  Speaker 1: I know, I know because they don't worked out that
• 20:22
  Speaker 1: it was some guy pretending to be trying to have
• 20:24
  Speaker 1: moved on, but someone else who has publicly admitted to
• 20:28
  Speaker 1: being stupid, or at least he sort of wants you
• 20:30
  Speaker 1: to think that he's stupid, which is rather bizarre, right, Like,
• 20:34
  Speaker 1: as a politician, it's not normally the road you go down.
• 20:38
  Speaker 1: I know there are politicians who've sort of traded on
• 20:41
  Speaker 1: the fact that they give out this homespun wisdom and
• 20:44
  Speaker 1: I'm an average man like you. You know, ser Jobilki
• 20:48
  Speaker 1: Pedison sort of traded on that for nearly thirty years
• 20:50
  Speaker 1: as Premier of Queensland. Right, But he never admitted to
• 20:54
  Speaker 1: being dumb, because of course he wasn't and he wouldn't
• 20:57
  Speaker 1: want you to think that he was dumb. Enter Gavin Newsom,
• 21:01
  Speaker 1: who apparently does want you to think that he did
• 21:05
  Speaker 1: badly at school and he can't even read.
• 21:09
  Speaker 6: I'm like you, I know better than you. You know,
• 21:15
  Speaker 6: I'm a nine sixty sat guy, huh, and you know,
• 21:20
  Speaker 6: and I'm not trying to offend anyone you know, trying
• 21:22
  Speaker 6: to act all there. If you got nine forty, but
• 21:27
  Speaker 6: literally a nine sixty SAT, guy, I cannot you you've
• 21:31
  Speaker 6: never seen me read a speech because I cannot read
• 21:36
  Speaker 6: a speech.
• 21:38
  Speaker 1: What sorry? Sorry? The governor of California has publicly admitted
• 21:46
  Speaker 1: in a room being filmed that he can't read a speech.
• 21:51
  Speaker 1: Who does that? I'm even if you even if I
• 21:54
  Speaker 1: couldn't read a speech, if I were the governor of
• 21:57
  Speaker 1: a state of the United States, you wouldn't be able
• 22:00
  Speaker 1: to drag that information out of me. I would be
• 22:03
  Speaker 1: keeping that to myself. Now, for the record, he talks
• 22:05
  Speaker 1: about his SAT score, which is, you know, the sort
• 22:08
  Speaker 1: of school leaving score over there as nine hundred and eighty.
• 22:12
  Speaker 1: That the range is four hundred to sixteen hundred, and
• 22:16
  Speaker 1: the average is one thy fifteen to one thy and fifty.
• 22:20
  Speaker 1: So he's admitted to being below average at school, which
• 22:23
  Speaker 1: is fine. There are some I mean, you hear all
• 22:27
  Speaker 1: this stuff about Rhodes scholars and I mean Paul Keating
• 22:30
  Speaker 1: only went he dropped out of high school at fourteen,
• 22:33
  Speaker 1: wasn't it right? And he went on to be a
• 22:34
  Speaker 1: reasonably fine prime minister. So you don't necessarily have to
• 22:37
  Speaker 1: have been good at school, but to publicly you can't
• 22:40
  Speaker 1: read a speech.
• 22:41
  Speaker 2: I think it's a matter of record that he's got dyslexia.
• 22:44
  Speaker 2: Prior to being elected, there were articles talking about him
• 22:47
  Speaker 2: having dyslexia. So maybe it's true that the contrast, but.
• 22:50
  Speaker 1: He wasn't saying it in that context. He could say
• 22:52
  Speaker 1: I can't read a speech because I'm dyslexic. He's trying
• 22:55
  Speaker 1: to say to a room of people, I'm just an
• 22:57
  Speaker 1: average man with below average intelligence, which includes the fact
• 23:01
  Speaker 1: that I can't read. If it's d just lexia, that's
• 23:03
  Speaker 1: an entirely different problem. But he has linked it to
• 23:06
  Speaker 1: his school scores as if to suggest that a t
• 23:08
  Speaker 1: I'm in everyman and I can't read, and.
• 23:10
  Speaker 2: If you were below average at school, you can't say
• 23:13
  Speaker 2: I'm just like you. The truth would be I'm dumber
• 23:15
  Speaker 2: than yes.
• 23:17
  Speaker 3: But the full context of this video actually makes it
• 23:21
  Speaker 3: so much worse, because apparently this was part of his
• 23:24
  Speaker 3: book tour.
• 23:24
  Speaker 4: He's released a memoir.
• 23:26
  Speaker 3: I think it's all part of his run for the
• 23:29
  Speaker 3: Democrat presidential nominee for twenty twenty eight. But he's speaking
• 23:33
  Speaker 3: to this room in Georgia that, according to posts online
• 23:37
  Speaker 3: was a majority African American room, and so essentially what
• 23:42
  Speaker 3: he's trying to say, I'm.
• 23:43
  Speaker 4: No better than you.
• 23:44
  Speaker 3: Aka, I'm no better than the African Americans. It's room
• 23:49
  Speaker 3: and I'm stupid and illiterate. That is the subtext.
• 23:52
  Speaker 2: So he was having a short black people.
• 23:55
  Speaker 3: I think it was an unintentional, subconscious slip up. Yes,
• 23:59
  Speaker 3: I do think a lot of Democrats and a lot
• 24:01
  Speaker 3: of elites frankly have a disdain they look down.
• 24:05
  Speaker 2: Certainly arguing in favor of like subconscious racism.
• 24:09
  Speaker 1: Yes, I mean, I do think that is the biggotrey
• 24:11
  Speaker 1: of low expectation.
• 24:12
  Speaker 3: It is exactly he's going, I want to relate to you,
• 24:15
  Speaker 3: So I'm going to tell you about how bad my
• 24:17
  Speaker 3: SAT score is and how I can't read.
• 24:19
  Speaker 2: That's what he said. I mean, I know if Trump
• 24:21
  Speaker 2: had said that to a black audience, and it wasn't
• 24:23
  Speaker 2: an exclusively black audience, if Trump had said that, the
• 24:27
  Speaker 2: media would go mental accusing him of being a racist.
• 24:30
  Speaker 2: But I think you're allowed to say to an audience that,
• 24:33
  Speaker 2: you know what, as a politician, you might think that
• 24:35
  Speaker 2: I'm really smart. I'm actually not that smart. I did
• 24:37
  Speaker 2: pretty badly at school in fact I can't even read that. Well,
• 24:40
  Speaker 2: I'm like a lot of you. That's not a comment
• 24:43
  Speaker 2: on black people. It's just a comment on you know,
• 24:45
  Speaker 2: the general population surely.
• 24:47
  Speaker 4: But a lot of them probably can read. I think
• 24:52
  Speaker 4: a resulting, I'm like you, I can't read.
• 24:56
  Speaker 2: I don't think it was a racial thing.
• 24:57
  Speaker 1: But the other insulting angle it is that you're basically
• 25:01
  Speaker 1: suggesting that, you know, the average American, working class American,
• 25:06
  Speaker 1: you know, does badly at school and can't read, which
• 25:08
  Speaker 1: is just an insulting thing in and of itself. I
• 25:11
  Speaker 1: read a bizarre interview in The Guardian on the weekend
• 25:14
  Speaker 1: and I can't remember the name of the woman that
• 25:15
  Speaker 1: it was about. She's an actress, English actress and she's
• 25:18
  Speaker 1: just done some series on Netflix or something. But it's
• 25:21
  Speaker 1: the basis of it is that, you know, she went
• 25:23
  Speaker 1: to Cambridge and she was really hard done by because
• 25:26
  Speaker 1: she wasn't as high up the food chain as the
• 25:29
  Speaker 1: people she was going to university with, and she had
• 25:33
  Speaker 1: to work as a cleaner when she was at Cambridge.
• 25:35
  Speaker 1: You know, oh woe is me. But there's this quote,
• 25:37
  Speaker 1: there's this line in the interview about how she was
• 25:40
  Speaker 1: bullied and mocked by other students at Cambridge for, amongst
• 25:44
  Speaker 1: other things, rocking up to a party with a contribution
• 25:48
  Speaker 1: to the cheese board being a bag of grated cheddar.
• 25:52
  Speaker 1: Now they're putting this forward legitimately, as though, oh, you know,
• 25:55
  Speaker 1: it's a problem. She was just downtrodden and they didn't
• 25:58
  Speaker 1: like her because she was wors and she didn't understand.
• 26:01
  Speaker 1: We all know what goes on a cheese board, just
• 26:04
  Speaker 1: like most people know how to read. Making these comparisons
• 26:08
  Speaker 1: and making them about class is actually insulting.
• 26:11
  Speaker 3: Don't go searching for oppression points. It often ends up
• 26:15
  Speaker 3: being very embarrassing. But Australian fashion is being remade by
• 26:20
  Speaker 3: ultra fast fashion coming from China. You might have heard
• 26:24
  Speaker 3: of brands like Shean or Timu. Basically, factories can sell
• 26:29
  Speaker 3: directly to consumers on these platforms, letting them bring down
• 26:34
  Speaker 3: prices so you can buy things like T shirts for
• 26:37
  Speaker 3: as little as three dollars sometimes. Now this is decimating
• 26:42
  Speaker 3: Australian brands because who on earth can compete with that,
• 26:46
  Speaker 3: and it's creating a lot of landfill as people by
• 26:49
  Speaker 3: by buy more and more. Now, Australian fashion advocates and
• 26:55
  Speaker 3: waste reduction advocates are calling for a tax on the
• 26:59
  Speaker 3: import ploitation of cheap Chinese goods. Apparently in Europe they're
• 27:04
  Speaker 3: putting one of these taxes into place. In France now,
• 27:08
  Speaker 3: every single one of these fast fashion items has a
• 27:11
  Speaker 3: five euro markup that's going to go up to ten
• 27:15
  Speaker 3: euros by twenty thirty, so twenty dollars extra for every
• 27:19
  Speaker 3: single item.
• 27:21
  Speaker 4: I don't know about this, James.
• 27:22
  Speaker 3: I think there are many reasons Australian manufacturing has become
• 27:26
  Speaker 3: uncompetitive in retail. Maybe if you just designed better clothes,
• 27:31
  Speaker 3: people would buy them. Also, manufacturing costs here are just
• 27:35
  Speaker 3: so high because our energy costs are super high. I
• 27:38
  Speaker 3: think the answer is, why don't we make Australia more
• 27:41
  Speaker 3: competitive before we just tax people more.
• 27:44
  Speaker 2: Most of the stuff you buy from China is not
• 27:46
  Speaker 2: the same quality as that which could be manufactured here.
• 27:49
  Speaker 2: As you say, if you want to help local manufacturers,
• 27:51
  Speaker 2: before you start putting taxes on consumers to make goods
• 27:55
  Speaker 2: more expensive, try some deregulation, some cheaper, energy less red
• 28:01
  Speaker 2: tape that manufacturers and retailers have to comply with. That
• 28:06
  Speaker 2: would be the starting point, surely, And after you've done
• 28:09
  Speaker 2: all of that, all right, then talk about other ways
• 28:12
  Speaker 2: to help, but don't automatically start with let's put a
• 28:15
  Speaker 2: tax on. That's the easy way to deal with everything,
• 28:18
  Speaker 2: and it really doesn't benefit anybody.
• 28:20
  Speaker 1: I'm not sure a tax is the answer. But fast
• 28:22
  Speaker 1: fashion is a big problem, and it's not necessarily about
• 28:25
  Speaker 1: the cost of the item either. It's the way in
• 28:27
  Speaker 1: which people are shopping. They buy these things cheaply, knowing
• 28:31
  Speaker 1: that they're going to wear them three times and chuck
• 28:33
  Speaker 1: them away. Apparently, in Australia, the average person buys fifty
• 28:38
  Speaker 1: five items of clothing a year. Now I'm not buying
• 28:41
  Speaker 1: fifty five items of clothing a year, So someone's keeping
• 28:44
  Speaker 1: the average.
• 28:45
  Speaker 2: Ups which it's half the population of Kalib.
• 28:48
  Speaker 1: They're buying a lot. They're buying a lot of clothes
• 28:50
  Speaker 1: by exactly maybe. But you know, I buy quality products
• 28:55
  Speaker 1: that will last years, because that's how I like to
• 28:58
  Speaker 1: show I'm a true environmental estate. But I like to
• 29:01
  Speaker 1: go to op shops and all this sort of thing
• 29:03
  Speaker 1: and buy quality stuff that will last. But a lot
• 29:06
  Speaker 1: of people don't shop like that. They are buying something
• 29:09
  Speaker 1: that will last one season. They only want it for
• 29:11
  Speaker 1: one season. And we are creating so much waste when
• 29:14
  Speaker 1: we don't need to.
• 29:15
  Speaker 3: Yeah, but the reality is, I mean, I've bought things
• 29:17
  Speaker 3: from places like Zara or h and M and all
• 29:20
  Speaker 3: of it might not be from Shean or Timu, but
• 29:23
  Speaker 3: all their stuff is coming from the same Chinese factories.
• 29:25
  Speaker 3: Is what's on Shean and Timu, And a lot of
• 29:28
  Speaker 3: it does last many, many years. So I don't buy
• 29:32
  Speaker 3: the argument that just because something's made in China, it's
• 29:35
  Speaker 3: going to fall apart. Most of what we buy is
• 29:38
  Speaker 3: made in China and it survives.
• 29:40
  Speaker 2: There you go, Well, the shopping controversy will continue. We've
• 29:43
  Speaker 2: got some breaking news for you. The Prime Minister Anthony
• 29:46
  Speaker 2: Alberonizi has just released a letter that he sent to
• 29:50
  Speaker 2: Kiostama outlining Australia's position on Andrew mount Batton Windsor. Let
• 29:56
  Speaker 2: me read this statement for you. It's just been released.
• 29:59
  Speaker 2: The Prime writs to Prime Minister Starma, Dear Prime Minister Starmer,
• 30:03
  Speaker 2: in light of recent events concerning Andrew mount Batten Windsor,
• 30:08
  Speaker 2: I am writing to confirm that my government would agree
• 30:11
  Speaker 2: to any proposal to remove him from the line of
• 30:14
  Speaker 2: royal succession. The letter continues, I agree with his Majesty
• 30:18
  Speaker 2: that the law must now take its full course and
• 30:20
  Speaker 2: there must be a full fare and proper investigation. These
• 30:24
  Speaker 2: are grave allegations and Australians take them seriously. So that
• 30:29
  Speaker 2: letter just released, sent from Anthony Albanesi to the Prime
• 30:33
  Speaker 2: Minister of the UK, a couple of things. Reading that letter,
• 30:38
  Speaker 2: the cur immediately to me. The Prime Minister of Australia
• 30:42
  Speaker 2: says we would support Andrew being removed from succession. The
• 30:48
  Speaker 2: law now must take its course. It needs to be
• 30:51
  Speaker 2: full and fair and a proper investigation. Are those two
• 30:55
  Speaker 2: statements not contradictory? Can you say we remove him from
• 31:00
  Speaker 2: succession and there should be a full and fair investigation.
• 31:04
  Speaker 2: Shouldn't you outline Australia's position that we would agree to
• 31:07
  Speaker 2: have him removed for succession after the investigation. Otherwise it's
• 31:11
  Speaker 2: not exactly fair or unbiased, is it.
• 31:14
  Speaker 1: I guess it depends on whether you think his removal
• 31:16
  Speaker 1: from the line of succession is dependent on him being
• 31:20
  Speaker 1: convicted of a crime or whether it's based on general
• 31:23
  Speaker 1: conduct that is well within public knowledge, right, Because I
• 31:28
  Speaker 1: think that the problem for the royal family and the
• 31:30
  Speaker 1: monarchy is that regardless of whether he is ever charged
• 31:34
  Speaker 1: or convicted of a crime. He has done enough damage
• 31:38
  Speaker 1: as it is, for things that he may never be
• 31:42
  Speaker 1: charged with, but we know because they're in the Epstein files.
• 31:45
  Speaker 1: Or I mean, he's a man who maintained a friendship
• 31:49
  Speaker 1: with a convicted pedophile after he was released from jail, right,
• 31:53
  Speaker 1: and that is not a crime, but it's pretty unsavory.
• 31:57
  Speaker 1: And this is a guy who, look, let's be honest,
• 32:00
  Speaker 1: eighth in line to the throne. The number of people
• 32:02
  Speaker 1: who need to die before Andrew gets a look in,
• 32:05
  Speaker 1: and if they all happen to die, maybe we would
• 32:08
  Speaker 1: be looking at Andrew for why that happened. I mean, seriously,
• 32:12
  Speaker 1: you're not going to lose the William and Harry and
• 32:15
  Speaker 1: their kids like that. Yeah, it's never going to happen anyway,
• 32:19
  Speaker 1: it would be a symbolic move to remove him from
• 32:22
  Speaker 1: the line of succession because in all likelihood it's not
• 32:24
  Speaker 1: going to happen unless they all die in a car
• 32:26
  Speaker 1: crash together. I don't know, right, it is just so unlikely.
• 32:30
  Speaker 1: But the question is whether or not it requires you
• 32:32
  Speaker 1: to be convicted of a crime or not. I think
• 32:34
  Speaker 1: there's a fair argument that he's just done so much
• 32:36
  Speaker 1: damage to the monarchy and the royal family. Regardless of that,
• 32:40
  Speaker 1: he probably should doesn't deserve to be in the line
• 32:43
  Speaker 1: of succession.
• 32:44
  Speaker 3: Yeah, I would say enough's in the public record and
• 32:46
  Speaker 3: in the Epstein files to go look mate, it's dying.
• 32:50
  Speaker 3: He's already been stripped of his royal titles, he's been
• 32:53
  Speaker 3: moved down of royal residences.
• 32:55
  Speaker 4: And the problem is if you wait for the.
• 32:58
  Speaker 3: Investigation and the trial, well, I mean, who knows how
• 33:01
  Speaker 3: big this will be by then, As we talked about
• 33:04
  Speaker 3: the other night when the night Andrew was arrested, there
• 33:07
  Speaker 3: is so much more potential for this to be even
• 33:10
  Speaker 3: more explosive, is more evidence and more.
• 33:13
  Speaker 4: Charges are laid. So I think I do think it's just.
• 33:15
  Speaker 3: Posturing from Albo because really like, yeah, he's never going
• 33:20
  Speaker 3: to be king, but it's symbolically it's important.
• 33:23
  Speaker 2: I mean, they are talking about this in the UK,
• 33:25
  Speaker 2: and as I understand that Commonwealth nations would need to
• 33:29
  Speaker 2: agree because.
• 33:30
  Speaker 1: Because I mean, if he would become the king from.
• 33:32
  Speaker 2: Our king as well. I'm not sure whether this letter
• 33:36
  Speaker 2: has been requested from the UK, they've sought Australia's position,
• 33:40
  Speaker 2: or if this is just something Anthony Alberineze has put
• 33:43
  Speaker 2: out knowing that this is an ongoing discussion. It certainly
• 33:45
  Speaker 2: would distracted from other topics like isis bribes when we
• 33:48
  Speaker 2: look at the papers tomorrow.
• 33:49
  Speaker 1: I suppose, yes, indeed, you may well be right. But
• 33:51
  Speaker 1: I suppose that the letter did have to be seen
• 33:53
  Speaker 1: at some point, didn't it. But while we're talking about Andrew,
• 33:56
  Speaker 1: of course that photo that iconic now photo and is
• 34:00
  Speaker 1: not a word I often use because in the News
• 34:04
  Speaker 1: Corps style guide when I was a cadet, it's it
• 34:06
  Speaker 1: never to describe anything as iconic because very few things
• 34:10
  Speaker 1: are icons. But I reckon we can make an exception
• 34:13
  Speaker 1: for that photograph. It has now been hung in the
• 34:16
  Speaker 1: Loover take a look.
• 34:21
  Speaker 7: Leaving Custody was framed and displayed at the Museum in Parry.
• 34:25
  Speaker 7: A label below the photograph reads He's sweating now twenty
• 34:29
  Speaker 7: twenty six. Museum staff took it down after fifteen minutes.
• 34:33
  Speaker 7: But that's enough for that to be shown right around
• 34:36
  Speaker 7: the world and for more than a few people to
• 34:38
  Speaker 7: have a little giggle at it.
• 34:40
  Speaker 1: Now. I can't believe the staff took it down because
• 34:42
  Speaker 1: I think it deserves to be there. I mean that
• 34:45
  Speaker 1: it is genuinely one of the best news photographs that
• 34:48
  Speaker 1: has been taken in years. I mean, how would you
• 34:52
  Speaker 1: like to be the photographer who took that photograph on
• 34:55
  Speaker 1: the front of basically every newspaper in the Commonwealth, world
• 34:59
  Speaker 1: and beyond over the last few days. That is art,
• 35:03
  Speaker 1: That is pure art, and it deserves to be in
• 35:05
  Speaker 1: the loop.
• 35:06
  Speaker 2: As to the photographer, I don't think you'll ever need
• 35:08
  Speaker 2: to take another photograph.
• 35:09
  Speaker 1: Probably the Royalty should be able to dine.
• 35:11
  Speaker 2: Out forever on that photo.
• 35:12
  Speaker 3: I would have thought I agree with you, but the
• 35:15
  Speaker 3: photo was put up there by a bunch of left
• 35:18
  Speaker 3: wing French activists, the same mob who protests who throw
• 35:22
  Speaker 3: cans of super iconic paintings. I just don't think we
• 35:25
  Speaker 3: should give them the win. I agree that it's an
• 35:28
  Speaker 3: iconic photo. It should and it probably will go in
• 35:31
  Speaker 3: our galleries around the world, But these protesters should not
• 35:34
  Speaker 3: get that win.
• 35:35
  Speaker 2: I don't think anyone is going to be grudge them
• 35:37
  Speaker 2: putting that photo.
• 35:38
  Speaker 1: I'm just glad to see them contributing to art as
• 35:41
  Speaker 1: opposed to defacing it. They finally recognized what art is.
• 35:45
  Speaker 2: All right, We're going to go to a break stick around.
• 35:47
  Speaker 2: When we come back, we'll show you what's making headlines
• 35:49
  Speaker 2: in tomorrow's papers. So you hear it here first, welcome
• 35:58
  Speaker 2: back to the program. Let's take look at what's making
• 36:00
  Speaker 2: headlines tomorrow. Cayleb. You've got the Australian.
• 36:03
  Speaker 1: Indeed, I do where it says potential four hundred and
• 36:06
  Speaker 1: twenty billion dollar hit of Hanson's migration policy and a
• 36:11
  Speaker 1: widow's warning. That would be the widow Tim Fisher, who
• 36:15
  Speaker 1: used to be the Member for Farar. One Nation's plan
• 36:17
  Speaker 1: for net zero migration could blow out Australia's debt by
• 36:20
  Speaker 1: almost four hundred and twenty billion dollars over the next
• 36:23
  Speaker 1: ten years, while barely making a dent in the National
• 36:26
  Speaker 1: Welfare Bill over the same period, bringing into question the
• 36:30
  Speaker 1: core of Paul and Hanson's economic policy. Economists and immigration
• 36:34
  Speaker 1: experts have rejected One Nation's key policy platform to cap
• 36:37
  Speaker 1: thes as at one hundred and thirty thousand a year
• 36:40
  Speaker 1: and achieve a responsible net zero immigration policy, claiming the
• 36:43
  Speaker 1: cap would do untold damage to the budget in the economy.
• 36:47
  Speaker 1: Analysis conducted by The Australian using the Parliamentary Budget Officer's
• 36:50
  Speaker 1: Budget tool showed the Commonwealth's fiscal position could deteriorate by
• 36:55
  Speaker 1: almost ninety billion dollars in a decade, potentially blowing out
• 36:59
  Speaker 1: government debt four hundred and nineteen billion dollars if net
• 37:03
  Speaker 1: overseas migration is reduced to zero. Now, that may well
• 37:09
  Speaker 1: be true, but I think it proves the point about
• 37:13
  Speaker 1: what a pickle we are in and how reliant we
• 37:16
  Speaker 1: have become on migration in order to keep the cogs
• 37:20
  Speaker 1: of the economy moving. We keep bringing people in because
• 37:23
  Speaker 1: we're not generating our own people, right, and so we're saying, well,
• 37:28
  Speaker 1: there's just no other solution. We just have to keep
• 37:31
  Speaker 1: bringing people in. Well, there is another solution, which is
• 37:35
  Speaker 1: people having children. But we'd much rather than be at
• 37:38
  Speaker 1: work and doing other things, et cetera. But we'll just
• 37:41
  Speaker 1: have infinity migration or the whole thing's going to fall over.
• 37:44
  Speaker 1: I don't think people are going to swallow it.
• 37:46
  Speaker 2: Yeah, it's a giant Ponzi scheme at the end of
• 37:48
  Speaker 2: the day, isn't it, And one that's doing all sorts
• 37:52
  Speaker 2: of damage to all sorts of areas of people's lives
• 37:55
  Speaker 2: in terms of not being able to afford houses. Public
• 37:58
  Speaker 2: infrastructure is clear overrun. The other interesting thing about this story, though,
• 38:03
  Speaker 2: is the scrutiny that's now being applied to one nation,
• 38:06
  Speaker 2: which tells you that the argument over you know, their
• 38:10
  Speaker 2: great polling is is it going to stick or is
• 38:12
  Speaker 2: it just going to fade away when the ballot box arrives. Well,
• 38:16
  Speaker 2: I think people are starting to take one nation seriously,
• 38:19
  Speaker 2: that they're giving real scrutiny to their policies. I was
• 38:21
  Speaker 2: going to say, why don't the Greens get such scrutiny?
• 38:24
  Speaker 2: But I think I've just answered my own question.
• 38:26
  Speaker 4: Haven't I Yeah, exactly no, And as they should.
• 38:28
  Speaker 3: I mean, if one nation wants to be a serious
• 38:31
  Speaker 3: contender for a government party, then they should face the
• 38:35
  Speaker 3: same scrutiny any other party faces. But as Thomas Sole
• 38:39
  Speaker 3: famously said, there are no solutions, only trade offs, and
• 38:43
  Speaker 3: immigration is a similar thing.
• 38:44
  Speaker 4: You know you have this trade off.
• 38:46
  Speaker 3: High migration will boost GDP without it Australia, I mean,
• 38:50
  Speaker 3: the skills shortages in the labor force would be intense.
• 38:53
  Speaker 4: And even if you.
• 38:54
  Speaker 3: Did say everyone have more babies, you would be saying
• 38:58
  Speaker 3: women would basically have to have four for five children
• 39:01
  Speaker 3: each to make up for the migrants. If you went
• 39:05
  Speaker 3: to net zero migration, or you'd have to have massive
• 39:08
  Speaker 3: productivity gains and it would still even if everyone did
• 39:12
  Speaker 3: start having four or five kids, it would take twenty
• 39:15
  Speaker 3: years till they actually entered the workforce. So this is
• 39:18
  Speaker 3: an extremely difficult problem to solve, and one that doesn't
• 39:22
  Speaker 3: have a solution, but only a collection of trade offs.
• 39:25
  Speaker 1: And as we heard from Peter Malinowskis the other day,
• 39:27
  Speaker 1: all the kids born in Australia will be building submarines
• 39:30
  Speaker 1: and all the mirgrants will be wiping the bums of
• 39:32
  Speaker 1: naneas apparently. Another story on the front of the EADS
• 39:35
  Speaker 1: tomorrow forecast of blackouts in the dark, the Australian Energy
• 39:38
  Speaker 1: Market Operator predicted a rising chance of blackouts across New
• 39:41
  Speaker 1: South Wales because of a shortage in electricity generation and
• 39:45
  Speaker 1: the absence of a rearing power station, but just two
• 39:48
  Speaker 1: weeks later advised the government there would be no risks
• 39:50
  Speaker 1: for the system if the plant closed. The contradiction shows
• 39:54
  Speaker 1: how difficult it is for public policy makers to rely
• 39:57
  Speaker 1: on the Energy Market Operator for forecasts to be energy
• 40:00
  Speaker 1: reliability and for making decisions that can trigger multi billion
• 40:03
  Speaker 1: dollar investments in integrating renewable energies renewable energy sorry into
• 40:07
  Speaker 1: the system. New South Wales Nationals MLC WEZ Fang will
• 40:11
  Speaker 1: raise the issue in budget estimate's on Tuesday, noting Energy
• 40:14
  Speaker 1: Minister Penny Sharp has misjudged the amount of renewable energy
• 40:17
  Speaker 1: supply that could be in the system to make up
• 40:19
  Speaker 1: for the loss of a rearing. If the energy market
• 40:24
  Speaker 1: operator can't work it out, how is anyone else meant
• 40:27
  Speaker 1: to work out? I mean, it's not as though energy
• 40:30
  Speaker 1: is something that we rely on and is a basic
• 40:34
  Speaker 1: necessity in the modern world, and they can't even work
• 40:37
  Speaker 1: out whether taking a power station offline would affect the
• 40:41
  Speaker 1: supply of power.
• 40:42
  Speaker 2: That's something so fundamentally important to all of our lives.
• 40:46
  Speaker 2: Is so up in the air, just beggars belief.
• 40:50
  Speaker 3: But guys, remember, you've got to trust the experts.
• 40:53
  Speaker 4: You gotta trust them.
• 40:54
  Speaker 3: They know exactly what they're doing with this renewables transition.
• 40:58
  Speaker 3: In the Herald Sun tomorrow, isis brides eyeing vic. The
• 41:02
  Speaker 3: majority of isis brides could resettle in Victoria, according to
• 41:06
  Speaker 3: sources close to authorities, but the Alan government has refused
• 41:10
  Speaker 3: to reveal any details. All about one third of the
• 41:13
  Speaker 3: thirty four isis brides and children were linked.
• 41:16
  Speaker 4: To New South Wales.
• 41:17
  Speaker 3: Sources have told The Herald Son that virtually all the
• 41:20
  Speaker 3: rest planned to come to Victoria. Just another thing Victoria
• 41:25
  Speaker 3: is going to have going for it.
• 41:27
  Speaker 1: Well, these would be just the only people who want
• 41:29
  Speaker 1: to move to Victoria seemingly. I mean, good luck to them.
• 41:33
  Speaker 1: I suppose if you lived next to one of the
• 41:39
  Speaker 1: places where these people are going to apparently go. I mean,
• 41:43
  Speaker 1: can you imagine knock on the door, high, I'm the
• 41:46
  Speaker 1: new neighbor. Can I have some sugar please? Oh yeah,
• 41:48
  Speaker 1: where did you come from?
• 41:49
  Speaker 4: Oh?
• 41:49
  Speaker 1: You know, terrorist camp overseas? Like this is the practicalities
• 41:53
  Speaker 1: of what goes on. They actually have to move in
• 41:55
  Speaker 1: somewhere next to other people. The kids, if they still
• 41:59
  Speaker 1: school as, got to go to school. I mean, do
• 42:02
  Speaker 1: you want that.
• 42:03
  Speaker 2: I think it was a report yesterday, maybe it was
• 42:06
  Speaker 2: this morning that a third of the isis brides would
• 42:08
  Speaker 2: probably end up in New South Wales. And this is
• 42:11
  Speaker 2: the thing no one knows, and the governments, certainly at
• 42:14
  Speaker 2: state and federal level, are not saying what they know
• 42:17
  Speaker 2: to the public. So everyone's in the dark and everyone's
• 42:20
  Speaker 2: unhappy about it.
• 42:21
  Speaker 4: Yeah.
• 42:21
  Speaker 3: Also in the Harold stun Tomorrow Vital Facts doctored, Victorian
• 42:26
  Speaker 3: Hospital has been caught editing reviews into the care of
• 42:29
  Speaker 3: patients who suffered serious, potentially fatal harm before giving the
• 42:33
  Speaker 3: victim or their family their copy. Some health services investigating
• 42:38
  Speaker 3: a serious adverse patient safety event gave victims a shorter,
• 42:42
  Speaker 3: abridged review but told them it was the original report.
• 42:48
  Speaker 3: That is shocking. It's also shocking because often those reports
• 42:52
  Speaker 3: are used in insurance claims in court cases. If you're
• 42:57
  Speaker 3: not being truthful with the patients you've ptent actually mistreats
• 43:01
  Speaker 3: it all harmed, that erodes fundamental trust in the health system.
• 43:05
  Speaker 2: Just before we move on, can we show the front
• 43:07
  Speaker 2: page again of the Herald's son. This is something I
• 43:09
  Speaker 2: want to draw Caleb's attention to. You see the AFL
• 43:12
  Speaker 2: captain's there, and note the North Melbourne captain very close
• 43:16
  Speaker 2: to the Premiership Cup. So I'm going to take that
• 43:18
  Speaker 2: as a good omen for the season that's about to begin.
• 43:20
  Speaker 1: Caleb. That's about as close as you'll ever get to
• 43:23
  Speaker 1: the Premiership Cup, I think. And well, remember the last
• 43:27
  Speaker 1: time my team came up against your team in a
• 43:30
  Speaker 1: Grand Finally, Adelaid Crows, of course.
• 43:32
  Speaker 2: Is nineteen ninety eight.
• 43:33
  Speaker 1: We we walked away with the Premiership Cup that year,
• 43:35
  Speaker 1: so look, good luck to you. Is all I can say.
• 43:37
  Speaker 1: What I've offended me more actually is that it's his
• 43:39
  Speaker 1: AFL captains give the final words.
• 43:42
  Speaker 2: Only the Victoria.
• 43:42
  Speaker 1: It's only the Victorian team. It's not the entirety the
• 43:45
  Speaker 1: a I know the Victorians think they own the AFL,
• 43:47
  Speaker 1: but still.
• 43:48
  Speaker 2: Let's go to the Adelaide Advertiser, your hometown Caleb. The
• 43:51
  Speaker 2: headline reads Liberals to end culture of spending. The pun
• 43:56
  Speaker 2: is the word culture. There have listened to this. Taxpayers
• 44:00
  Speaker 2: paid more than fifty thousand dollars for a private firm's
• 44:03
  Speaker 2: cultural advice on Labour's doomed hydrogen project. Figures show, sparking
• 44:08
  Speaker 2: a Liberal vow to cut millions of dollars worth of consultants.
• 44:12
  Speaker 2: The Office of Hydrogen Power spent fifty three thousand, six
• 44:15
  Speaker 2: hundred and fifty bucks of public money to hire a
• 44:18
  Speaker 2: York Peninsula based firm for the provision of cultural advice.
• 44:22
  Speaker 2: Its latest report reveals, why do you need cultural advice
• 44:27
  Speaker 2: for a hydrogen project?
• 44:29
  Speaker 1: Oh?
• 44:30
  Speaker 2: And fifty three thousand bucks worth of colt land.
• 44:33
  Speaker 1: You know it's a good deal, isn't it. Speaking of
• 44:36
  Speaker 1: a good deal on the front of the Gold Coast
• 44:37
  Speaker 1: bulletin Tomorrow globe trotting top boss Gold Coast City Council
• 44:42
  Speaker 1: CEO Tim Baker has spent more than one hundred and
• 44:46
  Speaker 1: ten thousand dollars of rate pays money on travel in
• 44:49
  Speaker 1: the past twelve months. Now, look, you're a council CEO.
• 44:54
  Speaker 1: One hundred and ten grand is a fair bit of travel.
• 44:58
  Speaker 1: You know, if someone said a government minister had spent there,
• 45:01
  Speaker 1: you might go, oh, yeah, he's a counsel CEO. Maybe
• 45:04
  Speaker 1: it's all legitimate, but for goodness sake, he's traveling a
• 45:08
  Speaker 1: lot for a guy who's running accountcil.
• 45:09
  Speaker 3: It's eleven round the world trips eleven in a year.
• 45:14
  Speaker 4: That's strange.
• 45:15
  Speaker 2: It is a lot. He should be in federal politics.
• 45:18
  Speaker 2: All right, we're going to go to a break. When
• 45:19
  Speaker 2: we come back. Beach etiquette. Is it ever okay to
• 45:22
  Speaker 2: use someone else's towel? That's coming up in a moment.
• 45:29
  Speaker 2: Saturday was a beautiful day in Sydney. I spent the
• 45:31
  Speaker 2: day at the beach, but did not experience anything like
• 45:33
  Speaker 2: what you're about to tell us, Kayleb.
• 45:35
  Speaker 1: Well, thank god, James. Look, I don't know. Some people
• 45:38
  Speaker 1: seem to really be into feet, right, this the foot
• 45:41
  Speaker 1: fetish thing, right, huh. It turns them on. They love feet,
• 45:44
  Speaker 1: They go online, people make loads and loads of money
• 45:47
  Speaker 1: selling photographs of their feet online. I don't get it.
• 45:50
  Speaker 1: I think feet are disgusting and that's why I would
• 45:54
  Speaker 1: not want someone putting their feet on my beach towel.
• 45:58
  Speaker 1: Imagine Saturday, lovely day, you're at Cloverly Beach in Sydney,
• 46:02
  Speaker 1: You've gone out for a dip, and you come back
• 46:05
  Speaker 1: to see this. That is a man using someone else's
• 46:28
  Speaker 1: beach towel to dry his feet. I'm sorry, absolutely not.
• 46:34
  Speaker 1: What sort of level of entitlement do you have to
• 46:36
  Speaker 1: have to think you can use someone else's beach towel
• 46:39
  Speaker 1: to dry off, not just you know, your arms or something,
• 46:43
  Speaker 1: your feet, your smelly, disgusting feet.
• 46:47
  Speaker 2: I can't believe someone would do that. That's like the
• 46:49
  Speaker 2: height of rudeness. I totally agree. I can't believe the
• 46:51
  Speaker 2: girl's reaction that she didn't like go him for it.
• 46:54
  Speaker 2: Maybe she was so shocked she didn't know what to do,
• 46:57
  Speaker 2: but man, you'd be irate.
• 46:58
  Speaker 3: Well, I think anyone who's willing to dry their feet
• 47:00
  Speaker 3: on someone else's towel is clearly erratic, strange, lacking all
• 47:06
  Speaker 3: awareness of social convention, so you probably wouldn't want to
• 47:09
  Speaker 3: take them one in a fight either.
• 47:10
  Speaker 2: You know, it freaked the girl out so much she
• 47:12
  Speaker 2: actually threw the towel in the bin. She overwashed it.
• 47:16
  Speaker 4: It's just disturbing anyway.
• 47:18
  Speaker 3: Something very exciting is up on the Gold Coast. You
• 47:22
  Speaker 3: are getting your very own Trump Tower. Yes, the Trump
• 47:27
  Speaker 3: family has officially signed up to build a three hundred
• 47:31
  Speaker 3: and thirty five meter tall or ninety one story super tower.
• 47:36
  Speaker 3: This will be taller than any other skyscraper in Australia,
• 47:41
  Speaker 3: emblazoned with the classic Trump logo at the top of it.
• 47:45
  Speaker 3: It's gonna have hundreds of luxury apartments, hotel rooms, restaurants, entertainment.
• 47:52
  Speaker 3: I think this is pretty awesome, to be honest, if
• 47:55
  Speaker 3: I could afford an apartment in Trump Tower, I'd most
• 47:58
  Speaker 3: certainly be buying one.
• 47:59
  Speaker 4: I think it's a bit out of my budget, but
• 48:02
  Speaker 4: how good is that.
• 48:03
  Speaker 2: It'll certainly fit right in the Gold Coast Coast circus
• 48:07
  Speaker 2: Paradise to a tea.
• 48:08
  Speaker 1: Right fantastic And I think, of course, one of the
• 48:11
  Speaker 1: things that's famous about the Trump hotels overseas is that
• 48:14
  Speaker 1: they don't have casinos. In the now of course it's
• 48:17
  Speaker 1: a bit different here in Australia, but they've already got
• 48:19
  Speaker 1: that sorted out on the Gold Coast, so why not
• 48:21
  Speaker 1: adding a bit of trump glitz and glamour.
• 48:23
  Speaker 2: Indeed, all right, an exhibit of a very different kind
• 48:26
  Speaker 2: about to take place in Italy. The bones of Saint
• 48:29
  Speaker 2: Francis Assissi are about to go on display for one month.
• 48:33
  Speaker 2: This is to mark eight hundred years since Saint Francis
• 48:37
  Speaker 2: of as Sissi's death. What's interesting about this is that
• 48:40
  Speaker 2: four hundred thousand people have pre registered to view the bones.
• 48:45
  Speaker 2: You are brought into the area for ten minutes at
• 48:50
  Speaker 2: a time to look at the bones. And as I said,
• 48:52
  Speaker 2: almost half a million people pre registered for a look
• 48:55
  Speaker 2: at Saint Francis of the Sissy's bones.
• 48:58
  Speaker 1: Would you be putting yourself on the list, jam Sea,
• 49:00
  Speaker 1: I'd go and have a look.
• 49:01
  Speaker 2: I mean, why noted to his historic You know, they
• 49:03
  Speaker 2: were hidden for six hundred years, no one knew where
• 49:05
  Speaker 2: they were, and then they found him in eighteen eighteen.
• 49:07
  Speaker 1: There you go, And how five hundred there were his
• 49:10
  Speaker 1: I don't know, DNA.
• 49:11
  Speaker 2: Right, that's all we've got time for stick around coming up,
• 49:14
  Speaker 2: mister Reeder Petter Hey Show, good Night,