Latest / The Late Debate / The Late Debate | 27 October

Transcript

The Late Debate | 27 October · The Late Debate

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to The Late Debate. Thanks for
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: joining us on The Late Debate. I'm James Macpherson with
• 0:09
  Speaker 1: Caleb Bond and Danika DiGiorgio. I was about to call
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: you Caleb... DiGiorgio, second there.
• 0:16
  Speaker 2: That's a bit of a change. Wow. Danica Bond or something.
• 0:19
  Speaker 3: Danica Bond.
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: 007 gal.
• 0:22
  Speaker 3: That's it, one of the Bond girls. That's right.
• 0:25
  Speaker 2: Caleb DiGiorgio. There you go.
• 0:26
  Speaker 1: While I've got your attention, I've got to give a
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: special shout-out to Barbara Zupp. She lives in Ingham. She's
• 0:31
  Speaker 1: 94 years old, and I got an email during the
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: week saying she's just discovered the late debate, and she's
• 0:37
  Speaker 1: loving it.
• 0:38
  Speaker 2: Oh, thanks, Barbara.
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: Good on you, Barbara.
• 0:39
  Speaker 2: And she said how much she enjoyed watching Danica Bond
• 0:41
  Speaker 2: and Caleb DiGiorgio. That's right, that's it.
• 0:45
  Speaker 1: Alright, let's get into the program. Here's what's coming up
• 0:47
  Speaker 1: on the show tonight. Adelaide City Council members under fire
• 0:50
  Speaker 1: for accepting free tickets to an event they had earlier
• 0:53
  Speaker 1: protested against. A Coles worker sacked for tackling a shoplifter
• 0:58
  Speaker 1: is awarded a compensation payout. And a Sydney Council proposes
• 1:02
  Speaker 1: stripping heritage listed properties of protection... so that developers can
• 1:06
  Speaker 1: squeeze in thousands of dwellings closer to the city. We'll
• 1:09
  Speaker 1: get to all of that shortly. But first, former New
• 1:12
  Speaker 1: Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has been appointed a professor
• 1:16
  Speaker 1: at the University of Sydney, where she lectures students on
• 1:19
  Speaker 1: the importance of pathetic leadership. Sorry, empathetic, empathetic leadership. She's
• 1:23
  Speaker 1: going to be giving lectures on empathetic leadership, social cohesion
• 1:27
  Speaker 1: and civic trust. And hopefully... She'll also give lectures on
• 1:30
  Speaker 1: things she actually knows about. Jokes aside, I think it's
• 1:33
  Speaker 1: a good move by the University of Sydney. If you've
• 1:36
  Speaker 1: got a former prime minister, whether you liked her or not,
• 1:38
  Speaker 1: living on Sydney's northern beaches, well, why wouldn't you tap
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: her experience and why wouldn't you add someone of international
• 1:44
  Speaker 1: stature to your lecturing line-up? Ardern led New Zealand through
• 1:48
  Speaker 1: a terrorist atrocity, a pandemic and some enormously consequential political decisions.
• 1:53
  Speaker 1: Even if she's an example of what not to do,
• 1:56
  Speaker 1: I think good appointment. Caleb, tell me I'm wrong.
• 1:59
  Speaker 2: I kind of understand what you're saying, but empathetic leadership
• 2:05
  Speaker 2: and all that, like, come on. If she was there
• 2:08
  Speaker 2: giving lectures on, you know, what it's like in politics
• 2:13
  Speaker 2: and navigating geopolitics, maybe there'd be an argument, but I'm
• 2:17
  Speaker 2: not sure there's really an argument for this. I think
• 2:20
  Speaker 2: it's the University of Sydney doing what most universities seem
• 2:24
  Speaker 2: to do these days, which is, you know, stack the
• 2:26
  Speaker 2: ranks together with people who they ideologically agree with, fundamentally
• 2:30
  Speaker 2: of the left, and then you get those people in
• 2:32
  Speaker 2: there and then you fill the student's head with the
• 2:34
  Speaker 2: guff that they believe in. I mean, the thing with
• 2:36
  Speaker 2: Jacinda Ardern is that she was somehow quite popular on
• 2:41
  Speaker 2: the world stage because, of course, those people didn't have
• 2:44
  Speaker 2: to live under her government. She wasn't so popular at home.
• 2:48
  Speaker 2: I mean, this example of, you know, the great female
• 2:51
  Speaker 2: leader that she was sort of feted as everywhere else
• 2:54
  Speaker 2: across the world and at the UN and stuff, She was...
• 2:57
  Speaker 2: Knowing New Zealanders, she was never that popular in New
• 3:01
  Speaker 2: Zealand itself. And so I think she probably has a
• 3:05
  Speaker 2: level of folklore around her that isn't quite real, if
• 3:11
  Speaker 2: you talk to New Zealanders. And anyway, why do we
• 3:13
  Speaker 2: need to pay her to go and do this job
• 3:16
  Speaker 2: at UCEDD when they could just play this from her
• 3:20
  Speaker 2: final speech in Parliament on repeat?
• 3:23
  Speaker 4: I cannot determine what will define my time in this place,
• 3:27
  Speaker 4: but I do hope I've demonstrated something else entirely, that
• 3:30
  Speaker 4: you can be anxious, sensitive, kind, and wear your heart
• 3:35
  Speaker 4: on your sleeve. You can be a mother or not.
• 3:39
  Speaker 4: You can be an ex-Mormon or not. You can be
• 3:43
  Speaker 4: a nerd, a crier, a hugger. You can be all
• 3:46
  Speaker 4: of these things. And not only can you be here,
• 3:51
  Speaker 4: you can lead just like me.
• 3:56
  Speaker 2: Presumably that's what the students of UCEDD are now going
• 3:59
  Speaker 2: to be treated to. You can be a nerd and
• 4:01
  Speaker 2: a crier and a hugger and you can lead just
• 4:04
  Speaker 2: like me.
• 4:05
  Speaker 1: As much as you knock her, and I'm no Jacinta
• 4:08
  Speaker 1: Ardern fan, but she is a good communicator and she's
• 4:11
  Speaker 1: a much better communicator than most of the people we've
• 4:13
  Speaker 1: got in Canberra right now. They could learn some stuff
• 4:15
  Speaker 1: from her.
• 4:16
  Speaker 3: I'm really surprised that you're fawning over her so much.
• 4:18
  Speaker 1: I'm not fawning over her.
• 4:19
  Speaker 3: And you are exactly what the problem is because, like
• 4:22
  Speaker 3: Caleb pointed out, She had this fawning audience all around
• 4:26
  Speaker 3: the world. But in New Zealand, they were living under
• 4:28
  Speaker 3: very different conditions. And what she's going to go to you, Sid, now,
• 4:31
  Speaker 3: and she's going to be teaching people how to be empathetic.
• 4:34
  Speaker 1: OK, fine.
• 4:35
  Speaker 3: I'll say she was empathetic during the Christchurch terror attack.
• 4:38
  Speaker 3: I think that that was her finest moment as prime minister,
• 4:41
  Speaker 3: where she was able to bring the country together. But empathy. Well,
• 4:44
  Speaker 3: let's talk about empathy during COVID. She was obsessed by
• 4:47
  Speaker 3: a COVID zero policy. harsh lockdowns, harsh restrictions, was obsessed
• 4:51
  Speaker 3: with getting to the number zero, didn't work. People were dying.
• 4:55
  Speaker 3: People couldn't say goodbye to loved ones. She was the
• 4:57
  Speaker 3: Dan Andrews of New Zealand. So tell me then, James,
• 5:01
  Speaker 3: how she's going to come to you, Sid, and be all, oh,
• 5:03
  Speaker 3: I'm going to lecture you about empathy.
• 5:05
  Speaker 1: Well, I mean, if Anthony Albanese was sitting in the
• 5:07
  Speaker 1: front row while there's a lecture on empathy, I think
• 5:09
  Speaker 1: that would be a good thing. He could learn some.
• 5:11
  Speaker 3: I think she's... But she's going to be teaching the
• 5:14
  Speaker 3: next generation, who are already troubled, in my view.
• 5:17
  Speaker 1: I feel like because we ideologically disagree with her, we're
• 5:20
  Speaker 1: saying there's nothing to learn from you. And I think
• 5:22
  Speaker 1: you can learn from everybody, even those you disagree with
• 5:25
  Speaker 1: and even those who made mistakes. Now, whether she's got
• 5:27
  Speaker 1: the humility to stand in front of a lecture theatre
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: and say, you know what, during COVID, here's 10 things
• 5:33
  Speaker 1: I wish I hadn't have done.
• 5:35
  Speaker 2: Sure.
• 5:35
  Speaker 1: Who knows? But... Surely we can say, you know what,
• 5:39
  Speaker 1: having had, what was it, six, seven years as Prime
• 5:41
  Speaker 1: Minister of New Zealand, you'd learn more from her than
• 5:44
  Speaker 1: you would with some person who's studied leadership but never
• 5:48
  Speaker 1: done it.
• 5:48
  Speaker 3: But she was only picked because people fawn over her
• 5:52
  Speaker 3: and because people have this perception of her that she
• 5:54
  Speaker 3: is indeed empathetic. But her record would suggest otherwise. I mean,
• 5:57
  Speaker 3: look what happened with inflation in that country. She didn't
• 5:59
  Speaker 3: get a hold of the economy. She was obsessed with
• 6:02
  Speaker 3: woke politics. She wanted this co-governance with, you know, Maoris.
• 6:06
  Speaker 3: I mean, everything that she did had an agenda, but
• 6:09
  Speaker 3: people loved her. Her celebrity status was higher around the
• 6:13
  Speaker 3: world than what it actually was. So this is why
• 6:15
  Speaker 3: I think she's been cherry-picked for this role.
• 6:17
  Speaker 2: And there are plenty of people on the left side
• 6:20
  Speaker 2: of politics who I would love to go to and
• 6:24
  Speaker 2: hear give lectures. And some of them are not alive. But,
• 6:27
  Speaker 2: you know, Paul Keating, Bob Hawke, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown,
• 6:32
  Speaker 2: Barack Obama, right? All of them, I would absolutely love
• 6:36
  Speaker 2: to be in the room to hear them give an oration.
• 6:39
  Speaker 1: How to saunter downstairs from an aircraft.
• 6:42
  Speaker 3: Maybe.
• 6:43
  Speaker 2: But he is a good orator. I'll give it to him.
• 6:45
  Speaker 2: He's a good orator. I'm not that type. I mean,
• 6:48
  Speaker 2: I hate her style.
• 6:49
  Speaker 1: But she connected with people and people fawned over her.
• 6:52
  Speaker 1: But that's just the problem.
• 6:54
  Speaker 3: This is exactly the problem, James.
• 6:57
  Speaker 1: Her communication worked for her. She wasn't able to follow
• 7:00
  Speaker 1: through with any policies. She's a classic demonstration of the
• 7:03
  Speaker 1: power of rhetoric versus implementation. because she was good with
• 7:07
  Speaker 1: the promises, not much good with the policies and implementation,
• 7:11
  Speaker 1: but she did know how to... Surely you admit she
• 7:13
  Speaker 1: was a good communicator?
• 7:15
  Speaker 3: I think that she could get her point across. I'm
• 7:17
  Speaker 3: not saying that she couldn't.
• 7:18
  Speaker 1: Is that a good communicator?
• 7:19
  Speaker 3: No, but I just don't think that you can have
• 7:22
  Speaker 3: somebody come there and talk about leadership when my question
• 7:25
  Speaker 3: would be what leadership did she display? And the only
• 7:29
  Speaker 3: thing I can think of was Christchurch terror attack, and
• 7:32
  Speaker 3: that I commend her for. I absolutely support the way
• 7:35
  Speaker 3: that she handled that.
• 7:36
  Speaker 1: That was a pretty major event.
• 7:38
  Speaker 3: Well, COVID was a major event, was it not?
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: Yeah, sure, but your example of where she got it
• 7:43
  Speaker 1: right was in a pretty major event.
• 7:46
  Speaker 3: But COVID was also a pretty major event too, and
• 7:48
  Speaker 3: I know that they're completely different circumstances.
• 7:50
  Speaker 1: And you can learn from people's successes and you can
• 7:51
  Speaker 1: learn from people's failures.
• 7:52
  Speaker 3: Right, well, OK, so then, OK, so I said that
• 7:55
  Speaker 3: she's the Dan Andrews of New Zealand. How would you
• 7:58
  Speaker 3: feel about Dan Andrews going to be giving a lecture?
• 8:01
  Speaker 1: I think.
• 8:02
  Speaker 3: There were people that fawned over him that thought he
• 8:04
  Speaker 3: was fantastic.
• 8:04
  Speaker 1: I think the University of Beijing would benefit greatly from
• 8:06
  Speaker 1: Dan Andrews being on the faculty.
• 8:08
  Speaker 2: You know, to be quite frank, I'd rather go and
• 8:11
  Speaker 2: see Dan Andrews give a lecture than... Sorry, what? Why?
• 8:15
  Speaker 1: Because... It'd be more interesting.
• 8:16
  Speaker 2: It'd be far more interesting. And even though I kind
• 8:19
  Speaker 2: of hate the guy's guts, you can't argue with the
• 8:22
  Speaker 2: fact that he is one of the best political operators
• 8:25
  Speaker 2: this country has seen in a long time. Doesn't mean
• 8:27
  Speaker 2: I agree with anything he did. but his ability to
• 8:30
  Speaker 2: wield politics was without par in the last couple of decades. So, yeah,
• 8:36
  Speaker 2: as much as I'd hate it, I think I'd be
• 8:38
  Speaker 2: interested to hear what he has to say.
• 8:40
  Speaker 1: Look, this is my bottom line, right? It's just nice
• 8:42
  Speaker 1: to be talking about the University of Sydney... and Jacinda
• 8:45
  Speaker 1: Ardern rather than pro-Palestine rallies.
• 8:48
  Speaker 3: That's a very good point.
• 8:49
  Speaker 1: So that's a win, right?
• 8:50
  Speaker 2: Well, make sure you tune in to the Macpherson angle
• 8:52
  Speaker 2: on Sunday night at 8pm with his latest guest, Jacinda Ardern,
• 8:56
  Speaker 2: who after you have fawned over her tonight.
• 8:58
  Speaker 3: He'll be getting her autograph. He'll be sitting on set.
• 9:01
  Speaker 3: He won't know what to do with himself.
• 9:02
  Speaker 1: What, are you saying we wouldn't have her on your show?
• 9:03
  Speaker 2: Now, of course I would, but you'd be more... And,
• 9:05
  Speaker 2: of course, the.
• 9:06
  Speaker 1: University of Sydney would have her on their show.
• 9:07
  Speaker 3: That's my point.
• 9:08
  Speaker 2: But, of course, you'd be more likely to get her now.
• 9:10
  Speaker 2: You've given the G up here, so maybe you should.
• 9:12
  Speaker 1: Well, I'm not stupid, Caleb.
• 9:13
  Speaker 2: What do you think this whole thing... Exactly, you should
• 9:14
  Speaker 2: go and see if you can get her on Sunday.
• 9:16
  Speaker 1: I'll be calling you after the show at Sunday night,
• 9:18
  Speaker 1: 8 o'clock.
• 9:19
  Speaker 2: Indeed. And maybe you can chuck in a few freebies
• 9:22
  Speaker 2: along the way to induce her to come on the program, because,
• 9:25
  Speaker 2: of course, we know people love a freebie, and there's
• 9:27
  Speaker 2: not necessarily anything wrong with that. I mean, God, if
• 9:30
  Speaker 2: you can get something for free... Why wouldn't you if
• 9:33
  Speaker 2: you declare it? No problem whatsoever. But you might come
• 9:37
  Speaker 2: across a small problem when you've been protesting against the
• 9:40
  Speaker 2: sponsors of the event from whom you take freebies. This
• 9:45
  Speaker 2: has happened at the Adelaide City Council, where on the weekend,
• 9:48
  Speaker 2: two of their councillors, Kieran Snape and Eleanor Freeman, went
• 9:53
  Speaker 2: to an event, this was on Sunday, called the Dump
• 9:56
  Speaker 2: Santos Bike Ride. Now, the Tour Down Under, which is
• 9:59
  Speaker 2: our big UCI bike race that is held in South Australia,
• 10:04
  Speaker 2: is sponsored by Santos. It's been sponsored by Santos for
• 10:07
  Speaker 2: a very long time. So these two Adelaide City Councillors
• 10:10
  Speaker 2: rock up to this Dump Santos as the sponsor thing,
• 10:15
  Speaker 2: which has been going for a while now. It's all,
• 10:16
  Speaker 2: you know, oh, well, They're into mining and gas and whatever,
• 10:19
  Speaker 2: so we couldn't possibly have them sponsoring a major event
• 10:23
  Speaker 2: in Australia, could we? But it turns out, when you
• 10:26
  Speaker 2: go and look at the register of things they've received,
• 10:29
  Speaker 2: both of them have taken thousands of dollars' worth of
• 10:32
  Speaker 2: gifts in the form of tickets to events to the
• 10:36
  Speaker 2: Santos Tour Down Under. And what do they have to
• 10:39
  Speaker 2: say about it? Surely it's incongruous. You can't be going
• 10:41
  Speaker 2: to these sorts of events sponsored by Santos. Well... According
• 10:45
  Speaker 2: to the advertiser for Ms Freeman, she said she doesn't
• 10:49
  Speaker 2: oppose Santos as a cyclist and she is grateful for
• 10:53
  Speaker 2: its support to the Tour Down Under. And her attendance
• 10:56
  Speaker 2: at the rally was due to wanting to understand the
• 10:59
  Speaker 2: concerns of her constituents. Yes, she turned up just to
• 11:03
  Speaker 2: see what people had to say. She said it's important
• 11:05
  Speaker 2: to remember that the City of Adelaide is also a
• 11:07
  Speaker 2: sponsor and we have been for quite some time. We
• 11:09
  Speaker 2: give one of the biggest allocations of funds to the
• 11:11
  Speaker 2: Tour Down Under. from our event budget because we love
• 11:14
  Speaker 2: it and it's fabulous and I was very grateful to
• 11:17
  Speaker 2: be able to go. Now, look, yes, you can go
• 11:21
  Speaker 2: along to a protest just to see what people are thinking,
• 11:23
  Speaker 2: but I don't think it was about finding out what
• 11:26
  Speaker 2: her constituents think because, well, when it's a get-rid-of-Santos protest,
• 11:30
  Speaker 2: I think you know what they already think. And for
• 11:33
  Speaker 2: Councillor Snape's part, he is putting up a motion tonight
• 11:37
  Speaker 2: at the Adelaide City Council to ban fossil fuel companies...
• 11:41
  Speaker 2: from advertising on council signage, and he said that he
• 11:44
  Speaker 2: could support the Two Down Under without supporting Santos, and
• 11:47
  Speaker 2: his motion effectively puts that part of our policy in
• 11:49
  Speaker 2: line with our wider council policy, pointing to an integrated
• 11:53
  Speaker 2: climate strategy. He said, we just want the values of
• 11:55
  Speaker 2: the Two Down Under to align with the wider community
• 11:58
  Speaker 2: expectations and values. Pull the other one. I mean, come on.
• 12:03
  Speaker 2: Put your money where your mouth is, or lack of
• 12:06
  Speaker 2: money in this case. If you've got a problem with
• 12:08
  Speaker 2: it being sponsored by Santos, don't go and support it.
• 12:11
  Speaker 1: What do you think, Danika?
• 12:13
  Speaker 3: Well, I'm completely with you. I think that the hypocrisy
• 12:16
  Speaker 3: stinks to the high heavens. Why would you rock up
• 12:18
  Speaker 3: and go to this event if you have been an
• 12:20
  Speaker 3: avid campaigner against Santos? And let's not forget, we should
• 12:23
  Speaker 3: remind these councillors that Santos has actually been the backbone
• 12:26
  Speaker 3: of South Australia. It has really helped and guided along
• 12:31
  Speaker 3: industry in that state. So you might be against what
• 12:34
  Speaker 3: the company does, but you can't go against what it
• 12:37
  Speaker 3: has done for what you represent.
• 12:40
  Speaker 2: But.
• 12:40
  Speaker 3: You're very happy to receive the gifts. You're very happy
• 12:43
  Speaker 3: to go, but you stand against the sponsors. It doesn't
• 12:46
  Speaker 3: add up to me. I don't like the way that looks.
• 12:49
  Speaker 2: And you know what?
• 12:49
  Speaker 3: This is actually very typical of the left. It's do
• 12:51
  Speaker 3: as I say, not as I do attitude.
• 12:53
  Speaker 1: Can't you hold two positions at once? Can't you say
• 12:55
  Speaker 1: I oppose a sponsor, but I am in support of
• 12:58
  Speaker 1: the event? And so I'm not going there to support
• 13:00
  Speaker 1: the sponsor. I'm going there to support the cyclists, the
• 13:03
  Speaker 1: community that's involved.
• 13:04
  Speaker 3: But you were happy to receive the gift.
• 13:07
  Speaker 1: To the cycling event, yes.
• 13:08
  Speaker 3: But you don't agree with what the sponsor, you're very
• 13:11
  Speaker 3: anti the sponsor.
• 13:12
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I don't like the sponsor. I love the event.
• 13:14
  Speaker 1: So I've got a freebie to go to the event.
• 13:16
  Speaker 1: I'm going to go to the event. And at the
• 13:17
  Speaker 1: same time, next time there's a protest against a sponsor,
• 13:20
  Speaker 1: I'll go to that too, because I love this event.
• 13:22
  Speaker 1: They should have a different sponsor. But staying away from
• 13:24
  Speaker 1: the event is not going to change the sponsor, but
• 13:27
  Speaker 1: it will affect the event and its success. So I
• 13:30
  Speaker 1: can walk and chew gum at the same time.
• 13:32
  Speaker 2: Yeah, but I suppose it depends how far your principles go, right?
• 13:35
  Speaker 2: Because you could also.
• 13:36
  Speaker 1: We're talking about council members, so I'm not sure that
• 13:38
  Speaker 1: principles come into this at all. Fair enough.
• 13:40
  Speaker 2: I mean, because it would be a very principled stance
• 13:42
  Speaker 2: to say... I'm not going to accept free hospitality from
• 13:45
  Speaker 2: the two or down under for so long as Santos
• 13:47
  Speaker 2: is a sponsor, and I am telling them that that
• 13:49
  Speaker 2: is the reason that I am not attending. It is,
• 13:51
  Speaker 2: you know, it may have very little difference to them
• 13:54
  Speaker 2: being a sponsor overall, but you've at least had your
• 13:57
  Speaker 2: little protest, and you, in your conscience, can know that
• 14:02
  Speaker 2: you have done the right thing by yourself. Instead, you say, well,
• 14:06
  Speaker 2: they've given me $ 1, 500 worth of... $ 1, 500 worth of tickets...
• 14:12
  Speaker 2: to go to a free event and drink their grog
• 14:14
  Speaker 2: and eat their food, which is in part sponsored by Santos.
• 14:18
  Speaker 2: So at what point do you go, well, actually, I've
• 14:19
  Speaker 2: got to do the principal thing and not go?
• 14:21
  Speaker 1: So last night we talked about in London the trans
• 14:25
  Speaker 1: activists don't want the Christmas lights because JK Rowling is
• 14:28
  Speaker 1: getting the money and she's going to use it for whatever, right?
• 14:33
  Speaker 1: So we said, can't they enjoy the Christmas lights? And
• 14:37
  Speaker 1: the fact that J.K. Rowling is getting money, like, who
• 14:40
  Speaker 1: cares at the end of the day? Or drive your
• 14:41
  Speaker 1: Tesla and the fact that you don't like Elon Musk, whatever, right?
• 14:45
  Speaker 1: Isn't it the same principle here? I'm going to enjoy
• 14:47
  Speaker 1: the tour down under.
• 14:47
  Speaker 3: But J.K. Rowling hasn't offered them a gift.
• 14:50
  Speaker 1: Well, the gift was from the tour down under, not
• 14:52
  Speaker 1: from Santos.
• 14:52
  Speaker 3: But it doesn't matter if it goes against your values.
• 14:55
  Speaker 3: It does.
• 14:55
  Speaker 2: It does.
• 14:56
  Speaker 3: If it goes against your values, if you are so
• 14:58
  Speaker 3: strident to talk out against it, then you could have
• 15:01
  Speaker 3: excused yourself from the event.
• 15:03
  Speaker 2: Oh, by the way, I've just received a text to
• 15:05
  Speaker 2: say that the motion to ban fossil fuel advertising on
• 15:11
  Speaker 2: council land in Adelaide got up at the council meeting. Ah!
• 15:13
  Speaker 2: So there you go. So he's had a win.
• 15:15
  Speaker 1: Do you reckon he drove to the council meeting in
• 15:18
  Speaker 1: an internally combusted engine?
• 15:22
  Speaker 2: I'm not sure. He does live close by. I'm getting
• 15:25
  Speaker 2: another text. Oh, no, it's the same text. I'm not sure.
• 15:28
  Speaker 2: We'll have to ask Councillor Snape. how we got to
• 15:32
  Speaker 2: the council.
• 15:32
  Speaker 3: Harry Potter themed.
• 15:33
  Speaker 1: I'm getting a text that my son says we need
• 15:36
  Speaker 1: milk on the way home.
• 15:37
  Speaker 2: There you go. Far less useful, but anyway.
• 15:40
  Speaker 3: Exactly. Sorry, I thought you were going to say something else.
• 15:44
  Speaker 1: No, no, no.
• 15:45
  Speaker 3: Sorry about the awkward pause. OK, let's move on now.
• 15:47
  Speaker 3: So hundreds of properties in Sydney's inner west are set
• 15:51
  Speaker 3: to be heritage delisted amid plans to build high-rise apartments
• 15:55
  Speaker 3: to try and address the housing crisis. So more than
• 15:58
  Speaker 3: 580 heritage properties are could be stripped of their protection
• 16:02
  Speaker 3: as the state, government and local council look to squeeze
• 16:04
  Speaker 3: an extra $ 67 thousand dwellings into a cluster of suburbs.
• 16:09
  Speaker 3: So this is part of the Inner West Council's Our
• 16:11
  Speaker 3: Fairer Future plan. Now, we'll bring up the 3D model here.
• 16:15
  Speaker 3: This is the proposed density model. Here we go here
• 16:18
  Speaker 3: of Hubert, Francis and James Streets in Leichhardt. So this
• 16:22
  Speaker 3: is what it would look like if these plans do
• 16:24
  Speaker 3: go ahead to delist the heritage properties. However, of course,
• 16:29
  Speaker 3: there's been a number of a lot of backlash and
• 16:31
  Speaker 3: given that these areas do have protected homes and residents
• 16:34
  Speaker 3: fear that the proposed plan will irreversibly overload the area.
• 16:40
  Speaker 3: Doody Herman is the founding member of the Leichhardt Matters
• 16:44
  Speaker 3: community group. He says heritage tells you the story of
• 16:47
  Speaker 3: your community. And once you destroy that story, there's no
• 16:51
  Speaker 3: context for where you actually live. Look, I've got to
• 16:55
  Speaker 3: say I'm a little bit on the fence with this story.
• 16:58
  Speaker 3: I can appreciate and I can understand the need for
• 17:01
  Speaker 3: heritage properties, heritage buildings and the need to protect those
• 17:06
  Speaker 3: because You don't want to lose that culture that has
• 17:09
  Speaker 3: been around there. However, we are facing, we are in
• 17:14
  Speaker 3: the middle of, and it's getting worse, we are facing
• 17:16
  Speaker 3: a serious housing crisis in this country. We cannot get
• 17:20
  Speaker 3: people into homes. Labor has got its own housing accord,
• 17:23
  Speaker 3: of which all of the states and territories have adopted.
• 17:26
  Speaker 3: Places like New South Wales are far behind their approval ratings.
• 17:31
  Speaker 3: Building approvals are at record lows. Rents are through the roof.
• 17:36
  Speaker 3: We've got serious problems and the issue is with supply.
• 17:40
  Speaker 3: So what are we going to do about it? Well,
• 17:42
  Speaker 3: we can't just expect people to go and move out
• 17:45
  Speaker 3: into whoop whoop when not everybody wants to go and
• 17:48
  Speaker 3: move out into the regions, particularly if you live in
• 17:51
  Speaker 3: the city. We need more homes. And so if the
• 17:55
  Speaker 3: answer is high rises, I'm all in support of high rise.
• 17:59
  Speaker 3: I don't have a problem. And if it has to
• 18:01
  Speaker 3: come at the expense of heritage, That may be something
• 18:03
  Speaker 3: that we have to consider moving forward.
• 18:05
  Speaker 2: So you say the problem is supply.
• 18:07
  Speaker 3: We have a supply problem, yes.
• 18:09
  Speaker 2: What causes a supply problem?
• 18:11
  Speaker 3: Well, we don't have enough homes. We haven't built enough.
• 18:13
  Speaker 3: Successive governments, I would say this, successive governments have not
• 18:16
  Speaker 3: planned for a booming population.
• 18:18
  Speaker 2: I understand all of that. So we come to the
• 18:20
  Speaker 2: booming population. What causes the supply problem?
• 18:22
  Speaker 3: Well, I think that successive... Demand.
• 18:25
  Speaker 2: Demand. Demand.
• 18:26
  Speaker 3: I don't know what this school testing is for.
• 18:28
  Speaker 2: No, no, demand is what is causing the supply. Now,
• 18:31
  Speaker 2: there are other issues with the supply as well. Lots
• 18:33
  Speaker 2: of red tape, other things that prevent.
• 18:34
  Speaker 3: Sure.
• 18:35
  Speaker 2: the cost of the materials and whatever that cause problems.
• 18:38
  Speaker 2: But the reason we have a supply problem is largely
• 18:41
  Speaker 2: down to demand because we bring a hell of a
• 18:43
  Speaker 2: lot of people into this country and they go, oh,
• 18:44
  Speaker 2: my God, we haven't built any houses for them. What
• 18:46
  Speaker 2: are we going to do now? Like, you could have
• 18:48
  Speaker 2: turned the tap off a while ago. I agree. And
• 18:51
  Speaker 2: we wouldn't have a problem with supply. And I think
• 18:53
  Speaker 2: it is patently unfair to now expect that people who
• 18:58
  Speaker 2: have bought into an area, a suburb or whatever it is,
• 19:02
  Speaker 2: because it looks and feels a certain way and they
• 19:05
  Speaker 2: have been attracted to that area because of that, They
• 19:07
  Speaker 2: are now told that because of these failures of successive governments,
• 19:11
  Speaker 2: on which you were right, Danika, you now have to
• 19:13
  Speaker 2: pay for that by watching the face of your community change,
• 19:17
  Speaker 2: which potentially devalues your property, et cetera. Why do we
• 19:22
  Speaker 2: have to wear that failure?
• 19:25
  Speaker 3: I agree with you that migration is a problem. You
• 19:28
  Speaker 3: cannot tell me that I have not sat on this
• 19:30
  Speaker 3: channel day in, day out and spoken about the migration crisis, right?
• 19:34
  Speaker 2: Indeed.
• 19:35
  Speaker 3: But where do you propose we put people? Where do
• 19:37
  Speaker 3: you propose, Caleb, that we try and get everyday Aussies into...
• 19:40
  Speaker 3: Where are they going to go? What do we do
• 19:42
  Speaker 3: about the supply crisis?
• 19:44
  Speaker 2: Well, number one thing you could do is, one, fiddle
• 19:46
  Speaker 2: with the tax arrangements. Now, the government did that.
• 19:49
  Speaker 3: But I'm talking, where do we build property? Where are
• 19:51
  Speaker 3: we putting people? We can't put people out in the
• 19:54
  Speaker 3: regions because I don't think that's a fair... Why not?
• 19:57
  Speaker 1: Why?
• 19:57
  Speaker 3: I don't own a home. Why would I want to
• 19:59
  Speaker 3: go out into the regions for? Just so I can
• 20:00
  Speaker 3: be a homeowner or that I can move into.
• 20:02
  Speaker 2: A bigger property. It's rather insulting to our regional viewers,
• 20:04
  Speaker 2: I think.
• 20:05
  Speaker 3: But I don't want to. I work in the city.
• 20:07
  Speaker 2: Sure.
• 20:07
  Speaker 3: I'm employed full-time by this company. Why would I want
• 20:10
  Speaker 3: to move out into the regions? That's not an offence
• 20:12
  Speaker 3: to people in the regions.
• 20:13
  Speaker 2: What about further out of Sydney?
• 20:14
  Speaker 3: I don't want to move further out of Sydney. My
• 20:16
  Speaker 3: life is in the city. My friends are in the city.
• 20:19
  Speaker 3: My lifestyle is in the city. So why would I
• 20:20
  Speaker 3: want to move further out?
• 20:21
  Speaker 2: That's what you want.
• 20:22
  Speaker 1: But what about people in Leichhardt who bought in that
• 20:24
  Speaker 1: area because, as Caleb said, they loved the area?
• 20:26
  Speaker 2: I agree.
• 20:26
  Speaker 1: You're going to solve the housing crisis by destroying the
• 20:30
  Speaker 1: thing that made those locations desirable.
• 20:32
  Speaker 3: But where are you going to put people?
• 20:33
  Speaker 1: Put people in the regions.
• 20:35
  Speaker 3: But, again, I don't think that that is a fair expectation.
• 20:38
  Speaker 3: I think that is a very unfair expectation.
• 20:41
  Speaker 1: If you want a house, move to the region.
• 20:43
  Speaker 3: No, I think that's completely unfair. That is ridiculous.
• 20:45
  Speaker 1: It's called life.
• 20:45
  Speaker 3: No, it's not called life. I think that's a really unfair... No,
• 20:48
  Speaker 3: it is. It is an unfair expectation to expect people
• 20:51
  Speaker 3: to move a few hours out of the city when
• 20:53
  Speaker 3: they live and work in the CBD. Why would you
• 20:56
  Speaker 3: want to commute to... If people want to commute, good
• 20:58
  Speaker 3: on them. But there's not every person that's going to
• 21:01
  Speaker 3: want to sit on a train for three hours.
• 21:02
  Speaker 2: Yeah, but sometimes these are the things you have to
• 21:04
  Speaker 2: do to get ahead in life. I mean, do you think... Oh,
• 21:06
  Speaker 2: come on. No, seriously.
• 21:07
  Speaker 3: Seriously, that's so unfair.
• 21:09
  Speaker 2: OK, well, what should we do? Bomb the rest of
• 21:12
  Speaker 2: Sydney and have everyone live in the inner city? Like, people...
• 21:15
  Speaker 2: Not the rest of Sydney.
• 21:16
  Speaker 1: I could suggest three or four suburbs.
• 21:18
  Speaker 3: We need options.
• 21:19
  Speaker 2: OK, so, for example, right? People, forever and a day,
• 21:22
  Speaker 2: people might have said, you know, I want to live
• 21:24
  Speaker 2: closer to where I work or whatever... But it wasn't
• 21:27
  Speaker 2: feasible to buy there. And so they said, OK, I've
• 21:30
  Speaker 2: got to go further out to where I can afford
• 21:32
  Speaker 2: to buy a home. Now, is that necessarily the place
• 21:35
  Speaker 2: you'd like to buy first?
• 21:37
  Speaker 3: No.
• 21:37
  Speaker 2: But it gets you into the market. People have been
• 21:40
  Speaker 2: doing this forever. And now we're saying, well, actually, everyone
• 21:43
  Speaker 2: should live in the inner city. So let's knock over
• 21:45
  Speaker 2: all the things that are good so we can put
• 21:47
  Speaker 2: up high-rise dog boxes.
• 21:48
  Speaker 1: According to your argument, I mean, I want to live
• 21:50
  Speaker 1: in Vucluse. I can't afford it, but it's not fair
• 21:52
  Speaker 1: that I can't.
• 21:52
  Speaker 3: I'm not saying everyone is going to go to a
• 21:54
  Speaker 3: rich suburb. That's not what I'm saying here. I'm saying
• 21:57
  Speaker 3: it is an unfair expectation to expect people, if you
• 22:00
  Speaker 3: want to buy a home... then you need to move,
• 22:02
  Speaker 3: you know, one or two hours out. If you want
• 22:04
  Speaker 3: to do that, that is your prerogative. But the problem is,
• 22:07
  Speaker 3: and it does come down to planning for the future,
• 22:09
  Speaker 3: we have not had successive governments, and this is across
• 22:12
  Speaker 3: the country, this is not just a New South Wales problem,
• 22:15
  Speaker 3: that have not planned for a booming population. And the
• 22:18
  Speaker 3: issues do stem, obviously, from a runaway migration system. I
• 22:23
  Speaker 3: totally agree with you. But if there are ways that
• 22:26
  Speaker 3: we can build high-rise apartments in places, then I am
• 22:30
  Speaker 3: all for it. And we have had this argument.
• 22:31
  Speaker 2: They've never been before.
• 22:33
  Speaker 3: We have had this argument before. I think we discussed
• 22:36
  Speaker 3: areas around the dogs. There's a dogs track near Wentworth Park. Yeah, well,
• 22:40
  Speaker 3: they've just.
• 22:41
  Speaker 2: Mission Wentworth Park. Right, Wentworth Park. Great. City area, put
• 22:44
  Speaker 2: it up. Well, they're not going to... It's just going
• 22:46
  Speaker 2: to be a park, by the way. No, it's... Well,
• 22:47
  Speaker 2: if they're going to put it behind rice, it's a
• 22:48
  Speaker 2: whole forest. They're going to put them in at Bays West,
• 22:50
  Speaker 2: which is Pyrmont Island. Glebe Island, sorry, which is the
• 22:54
  Speaker 2: last deep working port in Sydney Harbour, which I think
• 22:58
  Speaker 2: is stupid. But you put 10,000 extra homes in an
• 23:02
  Speaker 2: area where there are none and there's no extra roads
• 23:05
  Speaker 2: or whatever to lead into... And then you go, oh,
• 23:07
  Speaker 2: what's going on here? We've got problems with infrastructure and whatever...
• 23:11
  Speaker 2: Why do we have to give up nice things like
• 23:13
  Speaker 2: heritage listed properties and make people who are currently in
• 23:17
  Speaker 2: the inner city watch the faces of their neighbourhoods change?
• 23:20
  Speaker 2: I don't think that's fair either.
• 23:22
  Speaker 3: No, I'm not. And as I said at the start
• 23:24
  Speaker 3: of this, I understand the need to protect heritage buildings.
• 23:28
  Speaker 3: I'm not arguing against heritage protection because I love the
• 23:33
  Speaker 3: look of heritage. We can all agree that heritage is
• 23:36
  Speaker 3: something that is beautiful. But my concern is we're going
• 23:39
  Speaker 3: to have to start building up. We don't have a choice.
• 23:43
  Speaker 1: Take Leichhardt, right? So the population will increase by 135%.
• 23:46
  Speaker 1: There's not a single new school planned. There's no metro.
• 23:52
  Speaker 1: There's no train. So they're going to pile a whole
• 23:55
  Speaker 1: lot more people in there. There's zero infrastructure to cater
• 23:58
  Speaker 1: for those people. And you raise a good point.
• 24:00
  Speaker 3: I get that.
• 24:00
  Speaker 1: So now you want to live in Leichhardt. But once
• 24:02
  Speaker 1: they've done that, are you still going to want to
• 24:04
  Speaker 1: live in Leichhardt?
• 24:05
  Speaker 3: Well, I do agree. Again, it comes down to infrastructure
• 24:08
  Speaker 3: planning just isn't there for the future. So I understand.
• 24:10
  Speaker 3: But I would argue we're going to have to start
• 24:12
  Speaker 3: building up.
• 24:13
  Speaker 1: Well, I think they should start heritage listing common sense
• 24:16
  Speaker 1: because it's so rare, certainly in short supply among Australian
• 24:20
  Speaker 1: public servants. And it's almost non-existent. at the Australian Human
• 24:23
  Speaker 1: Rights Commission last night, the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, Dr Anna Cody,
• 24:28
  Speaker 1: was asked if the rights at work for breastfeeding mothers
• 24:33
  Speaker 1: also applied to men identifying as women who wanted to
• 24:37
  Speaker 1: have a go at breastfeeding. Here's the exchange and have
• 24:39
  Speaker 1: a listen to the incredible answer.
• 24:43
  Speaker 5: Section 7 AA of the Sex Discrimination Act specifically refers
• 24:48
  Speaker 5: to discrimination against a woman on the grounds of breastfeeding.
• 24:52
  Speaker 5: The explanatory memorandum introducing those protections stated they were intended
• 24:57
  Speaker 5: to apply to women who breastfeed. Does the Commission interpret
• 25:02
  Speaker 5: Section 7AA as providing breastfeeding discrimination protections to a biological
• 25:07
  Speaker 5: male who identifies as a woman and induces lactation?
• 25:15
  Speaker 3: Yes, Senator.
• 25:17
  Speaker 1: And she's paid almost $ 400, 000 a year. But that's not
• 25:21
  Speaker 1: the funniest part of this story or the most frustrating, Danika.
• 25:25
  Speaker 1: Later in that Senate Estimates hearing, it was admitted that
• 25:29
  Speaker 1: Dr Anna Cody had used taxpayer-funded money to receive special
• 25:33
  Speaker 1: coaching so that she could answer the questions asked of
• 25:37
  Speaker 1: her in Senate Estimates. What a joke that Sex Discrimination Commission.
• 25:58
  Speaker 1: Has become.
• 25:59
  Speaker 2: It took her a little while to come up with
• 26:00
  Speaker 2: the answer too.
• 26:01
  Speaker 1: I don't think she wanted to say it.
• 26:03
  Speaker 2: Pardon the pun, pregnant pause.
• 26:05
  Speaker 3: Here we go again, she thought.
• 26:08
  Speaker 2: You can see the cogs going over in her head
• 26:11
  Speaker 2: and the dial-up tune going... Yes. Like, come on. You're
• 26:17
  Speaker 2: not the gender discrimination commissioner. You're the sex discrimination commissioner, right?
• 26:23
  Speaker 2: Very different things. Sex, biological sex. You ought to know
• 26:28
  Speaker 2: the difference between a man and a woman and the
• 26:31
  Speaker 2: basic fundamentals of each and what they can do. Nick
• 26:35
  Speaker 2: Coatsworth was on with Shari earlier, right? And Shari asked him,
• 26:40
  Speaker 2: can a man lactate? And he said, well, medically, yes,
• 26:43
  Speaker 2: it is possible because, you know, you can be on
• 26:46
  Speaker 2: treatments for different drugs or whatever, right? But the point,
• 26:50
  Speaker 2: the question is not whether it is possible medically, as
• 26:53
  Speaker 2: it is very rarely, for a man to lactate. The
• 26:56
  Speaker 2: question is whether a man, and that's not what we're
• 26:59
  Speaker 2: talking about here, we're talking about men who induce it
• 27:02
  Speaker 2: for themselves because they've got some delusion about the fact
• 27:05
  Speaker 2: that they can be a woman and lactate, etc., That
• 27:08
  Speaker 2: is then indulged by the law. That is just so
• 27:13
  Speaker 2: far from anything that a sex discrimination commissioner should be
• 27:19
  Speaker 2: fighting for or working on. And the fact that she
• 27:22
  Speaker 2: has said that, surely, and I know we've said this before,
• 27:25
  Speaker 2: but surely there needs to be a complete overhaul of
• 27:28
  Speaker 2: the law. When it comes to sex discrimination in this country,
• 27:32
  Speaker 2: it's just insane.
• 27:33
  Speaker 1: Just on that, Tanika, it all goes back to first principles, right?
• 27:36
  Speaker 2: Sure.
• 27:36
  Speaker 1: So if you start with the principle that gender, sex
• 27:40
  Speaker 1: is fluid, well, then working that out, you end up
• 27:44
  Speaker 1: at a point where anything goes. The only way to
• 27:47
  Speaker 1: stop this is to go right back to the beginning
• 27:49
  Speaker 1: and say, is sex fluid or is sex a fixed
• 27:53
  Speaker 1: biological reality? Which, of course, it is. And therefore... All
• 27:58
  Speaker 1: of this garbage disappears. But while ever we indulge the
• 28:00
  Speaker 1: trans ideology fantasy, then we keep getting stuff like this.
• 28:04
  Speaker 1: And I'll say this for Dr. Anna Cody, I'll give
• 28:06
  Speaker 1: her a compliment. Well, she's at least been consistent.
• 28:10
  Speaker 3: Oh, yeah, well, she has been.
• 28:11
  Speaker 1: She's consistently wrong, but she's consistent in the ideology that
• 28:16
  Speaker 1: they've adopted.
• 28:17
  Speaker 3: Well, look, I mean, it was only last year when
• 28:20
  Speaker 3: she said that she didn't know the difference between a
• 28:22
  Speaker 3: biological man and a biological woman because she wasn't a scientist.
• 28:25
  Speaker 3: So kudos to Anna Cody for her consistency. Look, I
• 28:30
  Speaker 3: look forward to the two of you presenting us with
• 28:31
  Speaker 3: your half-hour lactation special in coming weeks.
• 28:34
  Speaker 2: Good grief.
• 28:35
  Speaker 1: We weren't promoting what?
• 28:37
  Speaker 3: Because, you know, if this is correct, then this is amazing. Oh,
• 28:40
  Speaker 3: I better not have said that because I might get
• 28:42
  Speaker 3: hauled in front of a courtroom for daring to speak
• 28:45
  Speaker 3: out against it. Look, I am still baffled that Anna
• 28:50
  Speaker 3: Cody is Australia's sex discrimination commissioner when... Somehow she still
• 28:55
  Speaker 3: manages to not be able to define the first word
• 28:58
  Speaker 3: in her actual title. She doesn't know what sex is.
• 29:02
  Speaker 1: But that's the act, right?
• 29:03
  Speaker 2: It is.
• 29:04
  Speaker 1: If she could define sex, then she shouldn't be the
• 29:06
  Speaker 1: Sex Discrimination Commissioner currently because the law would not support
• 29:10
  Speaker 1: someone who believes in biological reality. She's the perfect person
• 29:13
  Speaker 1: because she's just alluded enough... to be able to enforce
• 29:16
  Speaker 1: the law.
• 29:17
  Speaker 3: Exactly. But we have seen this time and time again
• 29:20
  Speaker 3: from Anna Cody. She is indeed a repeat offender when
• 29:23
  Speaker 3: it comes to all these bizarre claims. And yet she
• 29:27
  Speaker 3: is paid $ 400, 000. And quite frankly, I think this is
• 29:31
  Speaker 3: yet another slap in the face for women. Another example
• 29:36
  Speaker 3: of the erasure of women's rights. It says that men's
• 29:38
  Speaker 3: rights are more important than those of women. And we're
• 29:42
  Speaker 3: not allowed to talk about it because, you know, you're
• 29:44
  Speaker 3: a bigot and you're a transphobe if you dare to
• 29:48
  Speaker 3: suggest that biological men can breastfeed and you get hauled
• 29:52
  Speaker 3: in front of a court as so many women in
• 29:54
  Speaker 3: this country have.
• 29:55
  Speaker 1: I agree with everything you just said, but I think
• 29:57
  Speaker 1: you left out the biggest victim in all of this.
• 29:59
  Speaker 3: Oh, no, who?
• 30:00
  Speaker 1: The babies.
• 30:01
  Speaker 3: Well, that's a very good point, actually. We don't talk
• 30:04
  Speaker 3: enough about the little babies about this.
• 30:06
  Speaker 1: There's a court case at the moment where a biological
• 30:10
  Speaker 1: man who reserves the right to induce lactation using some
• 30:15
  Speaker 1: sort of chemicals that you'd have to put in your
• 30:17
  Speaker 1: body to create that. And the court has ordered that
• 30:21
  Speaker 1: this person supply to the court the chemical compound or
• 30:26
  Speaker 1: make-up of whatever it is that they are actually lactating.
• 30:30
  Speaker 1: It just astonishes me that we're allowing this to be
• 30:33
  Speaker 1: given to babies when apparently we're not exactly sure what
• 30:36
  Speaker 1: it is.
• 30:37
  Speaker 3: It's child abuse, in my view. In my view, that's abuse.
• 30:39
  Speaker 1: It'd be hard to argue with that.
• 30:41
  Speaker 3: I think that's abuse. Yeah.
• 30:43
  Speaker 2: And just because you can medically induce a man to lactate, because,
• 30:47
  Speaker 2: of course, we have mammary tissue... It doesn't mean that
• 30:51
  Speaker 2: it is in any way the same thing as breastfeeding
• 30:53
  Speaker 2: or that the milk, as you're alluding to, that is
• 30:55
  Speaker 2: produced is in any way the same thing as what
• 30:58
  Speaker 2: a mother would breastfeed to her child. It is not
• 31:00
  Speaker 2: the same thing, and so it should not be considered
• 31:04
  Speaker 2: or treated by the law as the same thing, while
• 31:08
  Speaker 2: we're talking about goings-on in Senate estimates. Rather fun to discover,
• 31:13
  Speaker 2: of course, that the pre-cop cop, the cop you have
• 31:16
  Speaker 2: when you don't have a cop, the cop-out cop, as
• 31:19
  Speaker 2: I have previously called it, that we held in Fiji
• 31:23
  Speaker 2: and Tuvalu wasn't $ 20 million, as we were originally told
• 31:26
  Speaker 2: it would be.
• 31:26
  Speaker 6: It's actually more like $ 34. 6 million, including hundreds of thousands
• 31:32
  Speaker 6: of dollars spent on hotels where they had just one meeting.
• 31:38
  Speaker 7: So this is one hotel where meetings were held in
• 31:42
  Speaker 7: one hotel and there's a contract for $ 682, 000. So it
• 31:47
  Speaker 7: was multiple events and each event was multi-day and we
• 31:51
  Speaker 7: were hosting multiple international delegates. How much was in accommodation
• 31:56
  Speaker 7: cost out of that amount?
• 31:59
  Speaker 2: I would have to take that on notice, Senator.
• 32:00
  Speaker 7: Can you find that or could someone find it?
• 32:02
  Speaker 2: Certainly.
• 32:04
  Speaker 7: The reason we are so concerned about this is the
• 32:08
  Speaker 7: expenditure in this department is just simply out of control.
• 32:11
  Speaker 7: $ 150 million has been allocated for pre-cop.
• 32:15
  Speaker 5: $ 682, 000.
• 32:17
  Speaker 2: For a couple of days. That's not a bad contract.
• 32:21
  Speaker 2: I could have done it at my apartment in Balmain.
• 32:25
  Speaker 1: It's just another example of, you know, this government finds
• 32:28
  Speaker 1: it very easy to spend other people's money. And then
• 32:31
  Speaker 1: on top of that, we find out that the conference
• 32:34
  Speaker 1: they ran in Fiji, which virtually nobody actually attended... What
• 32:38
  Speaker 1: did they say? It was going to cost $ 20 million.
• 32:39
  Speaker 2: $ 20 million, $ 34.
• 32:40
  Speaker 1: 6 million. But you can be guaranteed with this government
• 32:42
  Speaker 1: it will blow out. They're now saying it's probably going
• 32:44
  Speaker 1: to be more like $ 34 million. Thank goodness we didn't
• 32:47
  Speaker 1: get the COP. Thank goodness we didn't. Well, yeah, imagine
• 32:50
  Speaker 1: if we got the actual COP.
• 32:51
  Speaker 3: Imagine had we actually hosted that official COP.
• 32:53
  Speaker 2: This is just the pre-COP.
• 32:54
  Speaker 3: This is just the pre-COP. But you've got the energy
• 32:57
  Speaker 3: minister who's the part-time energy minister, of course, swanning about
• 33:00
  Speaker 3: in his role as a COP chairman. I don't know
• 33:03
  Speaker 3: how Labor can weasel its way out of such ridiculous figures.
• 33:08
  Speaker 3: I just think that this whole thing has become a
• 33:10
  Speaker 3: rolling set of errors where the money is getting bigger,
• 33:14
  Speaker 3: Chris Bowen's lies are getting bigger. I mean, Bowen and
• 33:17
  Speaker 3: Alba were practically falling asleep at the climate conference two
• 33:20
  Speaker 3: weeks ago. So I'm not sure what they're getting out
• 33:23
  Speaker 3: of any of this at all.
• 33:24
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 33:25
  Speaker 1: Well, I think they were falling asleep because wasn't Jacinda
• 33:27
  Speaker 1: Ardern one of the speakers?
• 33:28
  Speaker 2: Oh, see?
• 33:29
  Speaker 3: You see? And you want to listen to her speak.
• 33:34
  Speaker 1: See?
• 33:36
  Speaker 3: It's all been exposed by you tonight.
• 33:38
  Speaker 1: The funny thing was Labor member Tim Ayres at the
• 33:42
  Speaker 1: Senate committee got stuck into Sarah Henderson because he said,
• 33:46
  Speaker 1: you know, you quibbling about, you know, 700 grand here,
• 33:50
  Speaker 1: a few million there, just shows you don't take climate
• 33:53
  Speaker 1: change seriously. So they fall back on that one. that
• 33:56
  Speaker 1: if it's an existential crisis, then how could you possibly
• 33:58
  Speaker 1: question the amount of money being spent, which is probably
• 34:03
  Speaker 1: a fair point if you believe it's an existential crisis.
• 34:06
  Speaker 3: Indeed. Well, yeah, that's it. All right, well, look, I
• 34:09
  Speaker 3: don't know what the heck's going on in the world.
• 34:11
  Speaker 3: Have a listen to this story. So a 10-year-old Coles
• 34:14
  Speaker 3: veteran has just won $ 6, 500 from his employer after he
• 34:19
  Speaker 3: was sacked for trying to tackle two would-be thieves out
• 34:23
  Speaker 3: of the store. So this happened in Sydney. Ryan Anderson,
• 34:26
  Speaker 3: a longstanding worker, spotted two teen shoplifters while working a
• 34:30
  Speaker 3: night shift in December last year. Now, he confronted the
• 34:34
  Speaker 3: teens as they entered an adjacent Liquorland store. He told
• 34:38
  Speaker 3: them they were not allowed to enter, but they ignored
• 34:39
  Speaker 3: him and began placing the four packs of alcohol there.
• 34:42
  Speaker 3: into cooler bags before moving to the exit. Mr Anderson
• 34:46
  Speaker 3: then attempted to restrain one of the suspected shoplifters, holding
• 34:49
  Speaker 3: her around the shoulders and upper body and moving with
• 34:52
  Speaker 3: her around the store as she pulled against him. So
• 34:55
  Speaker 3: then he was sacked after this, and this went on
• 34:58
  Speaker 3: for about two minutes and 20 seconds, by the way,
• 35:00
  Speaker 3: this whole incident. He was sacked after this. It was
• 35:03
  Speaker 3: taken to the Fair Work Commission. He's since won a payout,
• 35:05
  Speaker 3: though the Fair Work Commission did say that he had
• 35:08
  Speaker 3: the potential to cause serious harm. I mean, he was
• 35:12
  Speaker 3: defending not only himself but he was putting the needs
• 35:15
  Speaker 3: of the store first and they still sacked the bloke.
• 35:19
  Speaker 3: What have we become in society where you can't even
• 35:22
  Speaker 3: stand up for what's right?
• 35:23
  Speaker 1: He should have been given a pay rise and a promotion.
• 35:26
  Speaker 2: Seriously, I know these companies have these policies that, you know,
• 35:30
  Speaker 2: people shouldn't intervene in shoplifting because they don't want to
• 35:32
  Speaker 2: cause extra issues in their stores and have their staff
• 35:35
  Speaker 2: potentially assaulted, whatever. But come on. Like, it's there as
• 35:40
  Speaker 2: a kind of, like, maybe don't do this. Not a,
• 35:43
  Speaker 2: if you decide to, like, prevent us from losing money,
• 35:46
  Speaker 2: we're going to sack you. Like, justice. Justice for the guy.
• 35:50
  Speaker 1: We've got to go to a break, but is the
• 35:51
  Speaker 1: policy there to protect... or is it there to protect
• 35:54
  Speaker 1: the store from being sued in the event that either
• 35:57
  Speaker 1: a staff member or a shoplifter is injured? I think
• 36:00
  Speaker 1: that's more their concern. We're going to go to a break.
• 36:02
  Speaker 1: When we come back, we'll look at what's making headlines tomorrow,
• 36:04
  Speaker 1: including an interesting story on the front page of Tomorrow's Australian.
• 36:08
  Speaker 1: The government has created a special website giving advice to
• 36:11
  Speaker 1: people who are sexually attracted to kids, and some of
• 36:13
  Speaker 1: the advice might surprise you. That's next. Welcome back to
• 36:23
  Speaker 1: the program. Let's take a look at what's making headlines tomorrow. And, Danika,
• 36:28
  Speaker 1: you have got The Australian.
• 36:29
  Speaker 3: I do have The Australian. Sorry, excuse me. A headline
• 36:34
  Speaker 3: on the front page of The Australian.
• 36:35
  Speaker 2: We're together. Right, sorry.
• 36:38
  Speaker 3: Don't make me laugh. I'm trying to be serious here. OK,
• 36:41
  Speaker 3: there's an exclusive on the front page of the paper.
• 36:43
  Speaker 3: It says, Right and wrong. New RS at school. A
• 36:47
  Speaker 3: rewritten national curriculum would mandate detailed study of the Holocaust...
• 36:52
  Speaker 3: and guarantee schoolchildren are taught about the evils of anti-Semitism,
• 36:56
  Speaker 3: the rule of law and ethical online content sharing under
• 37:00
  Speaker 3: landmark reforms proposed by the National Curriculum Agency. As the
• 37:04
  Speaker 3: Royal Commission on Anti-Semitism and Social Cohesion prepares to hand
• 37:08
  Speaker 3: down its final report in response to the massacre in December,
• 37:12
  Speaker 3: the Australian can reveal a raft of recommendations put to
• 37:15
  Speaker 3: governments on reforming the curriculum that include teaching students the
• 37:19
  Speaker 3: skill of civil discourse and and the importance of individual dignity. Look,
• 37:24
  Speaker 3: I think this is a fantastic idea. And I think
• 37:26
  Speaker 3: that we actually need this more in schools. I think that, look,
• 37:30
  Speaker 3: this is something that's come up a lot since October
• 37:32
  Speaker 3: 7 is teaching children about the importance of the Holocaust.
• 37:36
  Speaker 3: And I think we absolutely need it. But also, yes,
• 37:40
  Speaker 3: we do need to teach children about discourse. I was
• 37:44
  Speaker 3: watching an interview on Fox today and they were asking
• 37:47
  Speaker 3: children about socialism. And the kids were saying, no, socialism
• 37:51
  Speaker 3: is really, really good. Socialism is great for the country.
• 37:54
  Speaker 3: And I really worry that we are totally brainwashing this
• 37:57
  Speaker 3: next generation. So let's teach them about some civil discourse.
• 38:00
  Speaker 3: Let's teach them about history in the right way. I'm
• 38:02
  Speaker 3: all for this.
• 38:03
  Speaker 1: Well, according to the article, the only mention of the
• 38:05
  Speaker 1: Holocaust in the school curriculum is one mention in the
• 38:09
  Speaker 1: year 10 history syllabus. And there's an example of a
• 38:12
  Speaker 1: teacher who refused to teach even that in the classroom
• 38:16
  Speaker 1: because she of fear that so many of the students
• 38:19
  Speaker 1: had anti-Jewish views. So they didn't bother teaching the Holocaust
• 38:23
  Speaker 1: at all. It should definitely be taught and it should
• 38:26
  Speaker 1: definitely have a fairly significant place in the curriculum. It's
• 38:30
  Speaker 1: a major historical issue that we still are learning from
• 38:34
  Speaker 1: and still feeling the ramifications from today.
• 38:37
  Speaker 2: Kind of sad, though, isn't it, that we're talking about, oh,
• 38:40
  Speaker 2: We need to beef up in the curriculum that we
• 38:42
  Speaker 2: tell kids that discrimination is bad. Like, you'd like to
• 38:46
  Speaker 2: think that that was just kind of pretty basic stuff
• 38:49
  Speaker 2: that comes through in everything that kids are taught, but
• 38:52
  Speaker 2: apparently we're in a position where we actually have to
• 38:54
  Speaker 2: spell this stuff out line by line.
• 38:56
  Speaker 3: Yeah, it's a sad state of affairs, but as I said,
• 38:59
  Speaker 3: I'm worried about the brainwashing. What are kids learning and
• 39:03
  Speaker 3: what are they picking up? Also there on the front page,
• 39:06
  Speaker 3: devil really is in the detail of taxpayer-backed advice to pedophiles.
• 39:10
  Speaker 3: The Albanese government is standing by a taxpayer-funded website that
• 39:13
  Speaker 3: tells pedophiles not to beat yourself up for having sexual
• 39:17
  Speaker 3: fantasies about minors, prompting the coalition to accuse Labor of
• 39:20
  Speaker 3: failing to prioritise the safety of children. a module linked
• 39:24
  Speaker 3: to government-supported Stop It Now Australia website, also pours doubt
• 39:28
  Speaker 3: on whether pedophiles can stop being attracted to children, arguing
• 39:31
  Speaker 3: it may be akin to gay conversion therapy. Some people
• 39:35
  Speaker 3: who have a sexual attraction to children want to change
• 39:37
  Speaker 3: this attraction, the module says. There is some debate about
• 39:40
  Speaker 3: how effective this change can be and some might suggest
• 39:44
  Speaker 3: it is akin to the historical use of such practices
• 39:47
  Speaker 3: for altering homosexuality. I mean, seriously? And part of this website,
• 39:53
  Speaker 3: it also says that people who have sexual fantasies about
• 39:56
  Speaker 3: children should treat it like a wave that will pass.
• 40:00
  Speaker 3: I'm not sure what sort of advice that is to pedophiles.
• 40:03
  Speaker 2: I wouldn't be treating it like a wave that will pass.
• 40:06
  Speaker 2: I mean, it's... The best advice you could give to
• 40:09
  Speaker 2: someone who has any inclination like that is go and
• 40:12
  Speaker 2: see a doctor, therapist immediately, right?
• 40:14
  Speaker 3: Go and get help.
• 40:15
  Speaker 2: Like, go and get help.
• 40:17
  Speaker 1: Because.
• 40:18
  Speaker 2: It is when that obviously then turns into being acted
• 40:21
  Speaker 2: upon that it causes damage to other people. Giving the
• 40:24
  Speaker 2: kind of advice like, oh, well, you know, it may
• 40:27
  Speaker 2: pass or that it's in some way akin to homosexuality. Like,
• 40:34
  Speaker 2: how does this? I don't even know what to say.
• 40:37
  Speaker 1: It's certainly a mixed bag. I do agree where it
• 40:40
  Speaker 1: says having thoughts doesn't mean acting on them. Well, that's true.
• 40:45
  Speaker 1: And there does say do not act on them. Correct.
• 40:49
  Speaker 1: And there does seem to be advice, which is good advice,
• 40:52
  Speaker 1: that even if you don't act on it, you should
• 40:54
  Speaker 1: not be fantasising or thinking about it. So if the
• 40:58
  Speaker 1: thought comes, go do so. It's the old expression, you know,
• 41:00
  Speaker 1: you can't stop a bird landing on your head. You
• 41:03
  Speaker 1: can stop it making a nest. And so if you're
• 41:05
  Speaker 1: having dodgy thoughts, think about something else. Don't indulge them
• 41:10
  Speaker 1: because that's how you overcome. The Daily Telegraph front page
• 41:16
  Speaker 1: says something smells PM forced to come clean on golf
• 41:19
  Speaker 1: course sewage claim. Anthony Albanese has been forced into a
• 41:23
  Speaker 1: grovelling retreat. It's not often that Anthony Albanese retreats on anything,
• 41:27
  Speaker 1: let alone a grovelling retreat. Over false claims, a $ 6
• 41:31
  Speaker 1: million federal grant for the Marrickville Golf Club was for
• 41:33
  Speaker 1: a sewage upgrade. The rare concession comes after the Prime
• 41:37
  Speaker 1: Minister repeatedly defended the grant and denied knowledge of an
• 41:40
  Speaker 1: honorary membership to the club. despite eminent constitutional law expert
• 41:44
  Speaker 1: Anne Toomey, thank you, lashing the decision as grey corruption.
• 41:50
  Speaker 1: It turns out that there was a sewage issue, but
• 41:53
  Speaker 1: that was dealt with by a grant from the New
• 41:55
  Speaker 1: South Wales state government, not part of the $ 6 million
• 41:58
  Speaker 1: grant that came from the Labor federal government. Anthony Albanese says, well,
• 42:03
  Speaker 1: how was I to know what the New South Wales
• 42:04
  Speaker 1: government gave? But he did admit he was incorrect in
• 42:09
  Speaker 1: saying that The $ 6 million grant, of which he was
• 42:11
  Speaker 1: a part, was for sewage.
• 42:13
  Speaker 3: Well, who would have thought that this would have gone
• 42:15
  Speaker 3: down the sewage route, this whole entire saga? I mean,
• 42:18
  Speaker 3: it could have been cleaned up from the very beginning.
• 42:20
  Speaker 1: Very good. Well, the golf club's flush with money now.
• 42:22
  Speaker 3: That's right.
• 42:23
  Speaker 2: But it's not just he had to come clean. I mean,
• 42:27
  Speaker 2: on September 9, he said, when it floods in Marrickville,
• 42:31
  Speaker 2: raw sewage flows into the Cooks River. That is what
• 42:34
  Speaker 2: the funding is for. He was very explicit about why
• 42:39
  Speaker 2: they were given that federal funding. And they go, oh, well,
• 42:43
  Speaker 2: I didn't know about the states giving them any money.
• 42:45
  Speaker 2: So what did the feds give them money for? A
• 42:48
  Speaker 2: dog track and some other things. I mean, a dog
• 42:51
  Speaker 2: track for dog racing, but, you know, to walk your
• 42:53
  Speaker 2: dog on and stuff.
• 42:53
  Speaker 1: A toto.
• 42:54
  Speaker 3: Exactly.
• 42:55
  Speaker 2: I mean, he lied, is what he did.
• 42:57
  Speaker 3: Correct.
• 42:57
  Speaker 2: He lied. On the front of the Herald Sun tomorrow,
• 43:00
  Speaker 2: closed for business... Victoria has been crowned the worst place
• 43:03
  Speaker 2: to do business in Australia. In a report that will
• 43:06
  Speaker 2: pile pressure on the Carroll government before next month's election,
• 43:10
  Speaker 2: the Business Council of Australia's report ranks Victoria dead last
• 43:13
  Speaker 2: for a third consecutive year. Is anyone surprised?
• 43:17
  Speaker 3: No, of course not. I mean, businesses have not recovered
• 43:19
  Speaker 3: from the COVID pandemic. The state is in so much debt,
• 43:22
  Speaker 3: as it is. Why would you want to go into
• 43:24
  Speaker 3: business right now if you were living in that state?
• 43:27
  Speaker 1: You would not. You'd move somewhere else and go into business.
• 43:29
  Speaker 1: Many people are.
• 43:30
  Speaker 2: Indeed, also on the front of the Herald Sun tomorrow.
• 43:33
  Speaker 2: You'll see up the top there, it says no royal
• 43:35
  Speaker 2: treatment for Meghan and Harry in Melbourne. The Victorian taxpayers
• 43:40
  Speaker 2: won't be footing the bill for her security when she
• 43:42
  Speaker 2: goes to Melbourne to film Junior MasterChef next year. So
• 43:46
  Speaker 2: there you have dodged that one.
• 43:48
  Speaker 1: Can I jump in for a second? Are we going
• 43:49
  Speaker 1: to be a little kinder to Meghan in light of
• 43:51
  Speaker 1: what's happening with her dad? Are we going to just
• 43:53
  Speaker 1: back off a little bit?
• 43:57
  Speaker 2: Look, it's hard because clearly it would seem, from what
• 44:00
  Speaker 2: has been inferred, she knew things, but why did she
• 44:05
  Speaker 2: not go to the police? That's my... She's apparently written
• 44:08
  Speaker 2: to her father and said, I know you're an abuser,
• 44:10
  Speaker 2: but why did she not go and... Tell the police.
• 44:13
  Speaker 1: I don't know.
• 44:13
  Speaker 3: If you want a full rundown, a full editorial, just
• 44:16
  Speaker 3: tune in to Danika Goes Global on today's News 24
• 44:19
  Speaker 3: YouTube and you'll get the full lowdown on it.
• 44:21
  Speaker 2: There you go. That's where you get all the answers.
• 44:23
  Speaker 2: Also on the front of the Herald Sun tomorrow, Dan's
• 44:26
  Speaker 2: IBAC referral. Victoria Police has referred the infamous Daniel and
• 44:30
  Speaker 2: Catherine Andrews bike boy car crash to corruption watchdog IBAC
• 44:33
  Speaker 2: for a second time. Chief Commissioner Mark Bush has assessed
• 44:38
  Speaker 2: new evidence on the case and sent the file to
• 44:40
  Speaker 2: the Independent Broad-Based Anti-Corruption Commission. I'm sure Dan will be
• 44:45
  Speaker 2: pleased to read that story.
• 44:47
  Speaker 3: Absolutely. Let's take a quick look at the advertiser. I
• 44:49
  Speaker 3: do love their splash there. Hear no evil, see no evil,
• 44:52
  Speaker 3: speak no evil. That's a good one. But down the bottom,
• 44:54
  Speaker 3: Writers Week on Randa. Controversial academic Randall Abdel-Fattah has accepted
• 44:59
  Speaker 3: an invitation to speak at Adelaide Writers' Week. Dr Abdel
• 45:02
  Speaker 3: Fattah was removed from the 2026 Writers' Week line-up on
• 45:06
  Speaker 3: the grounds that her appearance would be culturally insensitive. Adelaide
• 45:09
  Speaker 3: Jewish leader Norman Shruler said her participation was deeply insulting
• 45:14
  Speaker 3: and disrespectful. Here we go again.
• 45:16
  Speaker 1: There you go. All right, we're going to take a break.
• 45:18
  Speaker 1: When we come back, our dope of the day, arsonists
• 45:21
  Speaker 1: meant to set things on fire, not themselves. That's next. Well,
• 45:28
  Speaker 1: there was flash flooding in Brazil last month, so a
• 45:31
  Speaker 1: 35-year-old businessman decided to do what you do when there's
• 45:34
  Speaker 1: flash flooding. He got on his jet ski and went
• 45:37
  Speaker 1: for a ride at one point coming off and very
• 45:40
  Speaker 1: lucky not to have been swept away. That vision has
• 46:11
  Speaker 1: been viewed millions of times as it's gone viral around
• 46:14
  Speaker 1: the world and Brazilian authorities are now using it as
• 46:17
  Speaker 1: an example of what not to do in flash flooding.
• 46:20
  Speaker 2: I was going to say, I know we've got another
• 46:22
  Speaker 2: dope of the day coming, but he could almost qualify
• 46:25
  Speaker 2: as dope of the day as well. I mean... What
• 46:29
  Speaker 2: are you doing?
• 46:29
  Speaker 1: I love the people on the bridge going, yoo-hoo.
• 46:31
  Speaker 2: I know, I know.
• 46:32
  Speaker 1: Cheering him on.
• 46:33
  Speaker 2: He almost loses his life. Like, oh, my God, I
• 46:35
  Speaker 2: get being a daredevil, but, I mean, you'd do that
• 46:38
  Speaker 2: sort of thing, wouldn't you, Danika?
• 46:39
  Speaker 3: What, on a jet ski?
• 46:40
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I could see you doing that.
• 46:42
  Speaker 3: No, I've never been on a jet ski before.
• 46:44
  Speaker 2: Oh.
• 46:44
  Speaker 3: Have you?
• 46:44
  Speaker 2: No, I don't think I have, no.
• 46:46
  Speaker 3: Have you, James?
• 46:47
  Speaker 1: I have.
• 46:48
  Speaker 2: Have you?
• 46:48
  Speaker 3: Yeah. Oh, there you go.
• 46:49
  Speaker 1: A lot of fun.
• 46:50
  Speaker 2: James will be the next one going through the floodwaters
• 46:52
  Speaker 2: on a jet ski.
• 46:52
  Speaker 1: I'd do it.
• 46:53
  Speaker 2: Maybe you'd like to jet ski down to Tasmania.
• 46:55
  Speaker 1: I'll be on the jet ski. You two will be
• 46:56
  Speaker 1: on lilos.
• 46:58
  Speaker 3: We'll be on the banana boat. I'll be holding on
• 47:02
  Speaker 3: to Caleb's waist. We'll be on the banana boat.
• 47:05
  Speaker 2: I don't know where that was going anyway. Maybe James
• 47:10
  Speaker 2: will jet ski down to Tasmania because we've got a
• 47:13
  Speaker 2: great example of why you need to proofread your emails.
• 47:17
  Speaker 2: before you sent them. The Department of Natural Resources and
• 47:20
  Speaker 2: Environments had a bit of a problem recently with their payroll,
• 47:23
  Speaker 2: and $ 470, 000 has not been paid to their workers. So
• 47:27
  Speaker 2: they send out an email to the staff to say,
• 47:30
  Speaker 2: we've done an audit, we're going to fix it all up.
• 47:32
  Speaker 2: But there is a line in this email where they
• 47:34
  Speaker 2: tell the staff, who are already smarting over the fact
• 47:37
  Speaker 2: that they've been underpaid, that they were owed money for, quote,
• 47:41
  Speaker 2: Continuous overtime for shit work. Oh, no! To which a
• 47:47
  Speaker 2: lot of the staff said, yes, it is! Now, clearly
• 47:50
  Speaker 2: what they meant was shift work, but, you know, perhaps
• 47:54
  Speaker 2: a Freudian slip on behalf of the.
• 47:56
  Speaker 3: How would you be?
• 47:57
  Speaker 8: Seriously.
• 47:58
  Speaker 2: Whoopsie-daisy.
• 47:59
  Speaker 3: Good grief. All right, now it is time for... Oh!
• 48:07
  Speaker 2: Done with the day.
• 48:10
  Speaker 3: Now, this really isn't smart. A man believed to have
• 48:12
  Speaker 3: set a home on fire also accidentally set himself on fire.
• 48:17
  Speaker 8: Police are investigating this as a suspicious attack because I've
• 48:21
  Speaker 8: been told by multiple people who live here that they
• 48:24
  Speaker 8: saw two men running from the scene. One of them
• 48:27
  Speaker 8: had his leg on fire before they got into a
• 48:29
  Speaker 8: car and.
• 48:30
  Speaker 1: They sped off.
• 48:31
  Speaker 8: Now, police are investigating whether this was a targeted attack
• 48:34
  Speaker 8: or if it's a case of mistaken identity. But certainly
• 48:37
  Speaker 8: multiple people have told me that they did see two
• 48:41
  Speaker 8: men fleeing the scene, one with his leg on fire.
• 48:44
  Speaker 3: Whoopsie-daisy.
• 48:46
  Speaker 2: On fire. I think we've got the vision, actually, of
• 48:48
  Speaker 2: the bloke coming out. But, I mean, seriously, like, go
• 48:53
  Speaker 2: and look it up. He's going out to his car.
• 48:56
  Speaker 2: He looks like he's fully on fire.
• 48:58
  Speaker 1: It's crazy. Clearly an amateur. That's it from us. Stick around.
• 49:00
  Speaker 1: Coming up next is the Rita Pennehy Show. We'll see
• 49:02
  Speaker 1: you tomorrow.