Welcome to the late base.
Well, good evening.
I'm James Macpherson with Liz Storer and Caleb Bond.
Coming up.
A British public servant who left top secret documents at a bus stop is appointed to help review British defenses.
We'll get to that a little later.
Plus, when we look at the papers, scyrotting skyrocketing compensation claims for teachers having been assaulted by students, and the Defense Force saves almost half a billion dollars by getting rid of consultants.
Can you believe it.
We'll get to that when we look at the papers a little later. But first, falling fertility rates are a problem right around the western world, but particularly in Tasmania. As the old adage goes, demography is destiny. And if that holds true, well Tasmania doesn't have much of a future unless couples start having children.
Now.
To maintain a population, they say, you've got to have a fertility eight of two point one children for every child bearing woman. But have a look at what's happening in Tasmania, where the Hobart Mercury reports that there could
be severe consequences because of the low birth rate. The demographer doctor Lisa Denny is quoted saying that she used population data from the Australian Bureau Statistics to calculate trends in the total fertility rate in Tasmania, finding it's plummeted from one point six to eight children per woman in twenty eighteen to one point four to nine in twenty twenty four. It was back in two thousand and six that the state last had a fertility rate that was
the equivalent to maintaining the population now. She does go on to say that there are unique circumstances in Tasmania that are contributing that. She says our fertility rate has dropped considerably because a much larger proportion of our child bearing population is made up of temporary migrants compared with the rest of the country. And the women of rep deductive age that leave Tasmania aren't temporary migrants, so they're taking their future.
Children with them.
But the fertility rate in Tasmania, well it's one point four, is only one point seven nationally, So this is not just a Tasmania problem. It's Australia wide, and indeed it's a problem right around the Western world. Lives our politicians love to talk about sustainability. Ah, but if you're not having children, well nothing is sustainable.
Absolutely, And this is a massive problem, not just Australia wide, but literally throughout the Western world. And it's really hard not to lean into the plagued with problems the great replacement theory when you notice that every single one of these Western governments is doing absolutely nothing about it.
They don't care.
We'll just plug the gap with more and more and more immigration.
I mean, there's so much governments can.
Do to make it more affordable for families to have families, and they're doing absolutely nothing. There are small countries like Hungry massive tax breaks for families who choose to have children, and the more children you have, the more tax breaks you get, subsidized mortgages like these guys have stacked up incentives because they care about their culture and they want to keep Hungry hungry. But then you look at the
societal issues that surround this. Little boys and girls aren't taught to aspire to having a family one day.
They used to. Generation's gone past.
You ask any little boy or girl that was their game plan. These days, you ask any little boy or girl, and our poor kids are just stuck there going, well, you just told me that just because I have a penis doesn't even mean I'm a boy. I'm a little bit concerned with that right now. I've got other things on my mind. Marriage is no longer held up as this societal good that all the stats bear out that it is women aren't meeting men who want to settle down and have a family, and vice versa.
I'm not paying out on the men here.
The war on the nuclear family is multifaceted.
In today's day and age.
We no longer have governments or even institutions that uphold the sanctity of the family and how this is something awesome and to be aspired to.
And then we've got anxiety and depression.
Never been worse, loneliness never been worse in today's society, and people who aren't doing okay are less likely to meet each meet each other rather couple up and create a family of their own. But again, governments seem to be doing absolutely nothing about it, and that is what
is concerning. I mean, you've got we were talking about a Japanese at the other day that the government was getting behind this and being like ladies, gents, you want a dating app where we vet the people and make sure that they not lying about their income and how eligible they are. We're taking up your cause for you because Japan is incredibly Some would say racist.
I just say based, because that.
Is another country who we want to keep Japan Japanese and.
We're going to do what it takes in.
Today's demographics to make that happen. Western governments, No, I'm not seeing it happen.
I'm not sure I want a government chosen partner.
Though.
Chinese they're well, I think.
Look, I mean, can you imagine Anthony Albanezi playing Cuba for you?
Good heavens, I don't know that I'd want to get in on that. I think.
I think what this probably proves is that Tasmania needs to invest in groundbreaking.
Surgery, because of course all those two.
Headed Tasmanians now need to be split into two individual people in order to fix the population crisis. It's a joke, don't writing. You know, it's as old as time. But Tasmania is a microcosm here of what the rest of Australia is experiencing. Because what you've had in Tasmania is particularly during COVID, when people worked out that they could work from home. They went, well, geez, I don't have to live in Melbourne or Sydney or whatever anymore. Hobart
sounds quite nice. So a lot of people who've either had kids and have some disposable income all moved down to Hobart. You know, they fly up once a month or something to go to a meeting, but they now live down there and work remotely. Consequently, the housing prices in Tasmania went through the roof because all these yuppies came in and took over the joints.
Of course, that drives people out.
People who are seeking more work opportunities are clearly leaving Tasmania, and that's what the researcher is talking about. The women of childbearing age are leaving Tasmania and going elsewhere. Presumably they're going to the mainland.
So they have to plug these holes.
Some probably to find it maybe, but largely the way they're plugging the holes is with temporary migrants because of because if you are a potential permanent margrant again, you come to Australia and you want to go to Melbourne or Sydney because that's where to the jobs are so they're just pumping in people, filling holes, plugging holes for now until they leave, and then they bring more in
to plug the holes. And you think, well, that's bad for Tazzy right now because they're a small little state, But it's not long before that becomes the rest of Australia and it becomes the rest of the Western world. You can only bring in so many permanent migrants before there are all the other holes that you then have to fill in with temporary ones, and on and on it goes forever.
What amazes me about this issue is that the.
Left aren't more passionate about doing something to get the fertility rate up, because if you're importing your population, you're importing them from countries where they have a high fertility rate, and they are typically Islamic countries. So the more Muslim a country becomes, the less like it used to be.
So if you care about abortion, you care about gay rights, you care about feminism, then you want to make sure that your country is producing its own people rather than importing people with diat.
Watch the West exactly care they like.
And give him way too much credit.
You're trying to give them a hint.
And if There's one.
Thing we know is that they have no regard for human life whatsoever. In fact, they prefer there were fewer humans on the face of the earth because of course climate change.
Us humans, we're destroying the joint.
That's why they want a lower population. That's why they're not worried about the fertility rate. And it's also why they want you to be eaten by a shark. No, I'm not joking. It is a discussion that comes up every single year.
But it's weird.
It's ugly head again, this hoary old chestnut. Thanks to the Guardian stoking the coals of this fire. Though there wouldn't be much far underwater. It has to be said that we should get rid of shark nets in New South Wales. They write up today that in an eight month period covering twenty twenty three and twenty twenty four, there we'll wait for it, one hundred and thirty four animals killed by shark nets.
Don't worry about all the people who.
Might have been so by sharks that otherwise would have come on to beaches. No, we have to treat marine life as though it is more important than human life. We know that they think everyone else's life is more important than ours. Shark scientist who is part of the Australian Marine Conservation Society was quoted by the Guardian today saying the government literally has solutions in their hands.
They're called shaknits.
Technologies such as drone surveillance, personal shark deterance, and they're leading sharks Smart education program improving safety without harming marine life, as though that means we shouldn't take every precautionary measure possible, including sharknecks, even if it means we lose a few marine animals along the way. New South Wales Animal Justice Party MP Emma Hurst, of course she doesn't like it.
She says, we know they don't work, we know that sharks can swim under them or around them, but when did you last hear of someone being attacked on a New South Wales beach that is protected by sharknts.
I mean, for goodness sake.
What it comes down to, basically is that they believe that the water is the shark's domain and if you go into the water, you are going into their home and you deserve to be eaten if you get attacked.
I'm sorry. We rose to the top of the tree.
We are the apex predator, and if we want to go in the water, we should have every bloody right to do so. And I don't care how many marine animals you kill along the way so I can go for a swimp.
But it's not that many marine animals that are being killed. 're in thirty four yeah, and ten percent of those that were caught were sharks. So what's that ten percent of one hundred and thirty four cents thirteen fourteen sharks are caught for one hundred and thirty four turtles, dolphins.
Whatever, dougons, it's not that many.
As for the claim that you know, we've already got technology in place, well, I'd be using absolutely everything at our disposal. And I'm gonna ask what is sharks smart? Is that a program for sharks.
Where they kick them?
Yeah?
People are people, not food.
And what about this claim that, well, you know, sharks can swim around shark nets or under them, Well so con turtles, so good dolphins.
But that's like saying that, Okay, I have a fence on the front of my property to deter people from breaking into my property. People can scale fences, Therefore they should be no fences anywhere, ever, because people can get over the top of them.
You don't say that. You said, well, I'm going to.
Put the fence in. If someone manages to scale it, we'll deal with that problem when we come to it. It's a deterrent.
So she's saying, why don't we just use drone surveillance, personal shark deterrence and this education program that you mentioned, Mac, How much does that cost if we're going to do a cost benefit analysis here? I bet the nets stay the amount of crack pots because I encountered some of these when I was doing my master's degree in human rights. Right, and these people who are all about animal rights, even
plant rights. Yes, those people actually exist. They they genuinely considered them just as important and considered you a speciest if you dared to say something as simple as human life is more valuable than any kind of animal life in this case marine life. USA and Australia are the most shark infested countries in the world on the known planet, And here we are quibbling about saving some I'm happy to call chuck it in some batter, sell it for cheap, like if that's what they're worried.
About like we're killing them and they're going to waste. Fine, we'll eat them.
We'll eat them all, chuck them in a freezer and we'll get round to it. Like the fact that they genuinely consider these lives, these barocious lives above and beyond families going to the beach and having the peace of mind to let their kids play.
In the surf. Is no reasoner will rashable person is going to go with that kind of idiocy.
It sometime between you now, I just wondered how you were to finish that sentence. I think you were wondering how you're gonna finish that. At some point between now and some of there will be in s l M march through the streets of Melbourne shark lives. Remember, but one of the arguments that this animal rights activists put up was she said the problem with shark nets is they create a false sense of security for beach goers.
Could use that about no sense about thrones provide a false sense of security, or shark education provides a false sense of Yah, it's.
Just the lifeguard scurity.
People seriously think that if the sharks worked out how to get out of the water and walk on land as the fish did many years ago. Imagine if the sharks could walk out onto the beaches, do you reckon? They would spare a single human being in their way if they decided they wanted to colonize the land. No, you'd be dead in a second's flight. The shark does not care about your life, So why should I care about the shark's life. I want to go for a swim in the water. I'm a human being. I'm at
the top of the tree. The shark's got to pay the price for that.
As far as actually, don't even imagine you at the beach.
Well, I do prefer to sort of sit by the beach with a beer. I'm not a particular fan of hot sand, but I'll take a walk along the beach of a nice barmi evening.
But you know I was going to say, I can't petue you frolicking in the sand.
Well look, look, I may have many years ago been seen on a boogie board paddling along at the beach, but.
It didn't happen Kalb photos or it didn't.
Happen to Germany now, where two podcasts podcasters rather have been ordered to delete their podcast for calling a biological man, a biological man, a transgender woman. They have referred to as he him and said that he is ind.
A biological man.
And for this crime they have not only been told to delete the podcast, and they have indeed begged all their followers to delete any comments that they made relating to it, or any shares that they made relating to it. These guys are now facing potentially prison time or a finer up to two hundred and fifty thousand euros.
That's a lot of money.
We're talking over four hundred thousand dollars in Australian dollars, so a lot of money. If they do it again, they could be looking at two years in jail, and if they failed to pay that fine, prison for six months.
The court dropped everything it.
Was doing to exercise a great deal of emergency about them doing so. It's as if referring to a biological man these days is indeed a crime if that man insists that he is no longer a man. This particular fellow, who's now known as Laura Holstein, was known as Nicholas, has made headlines over the past few months demanding access to female spaces. First, it was the women's football league,
which he did gain access to. He was given a special showering roster because the women did not want to share changing rooms with him.
He has been.
Accused of not abiding by that roster, and now he's turned his attention to a woman's gym, demanding.
Access to it.
Also, this is what the podcast has covered, and this is what they got into trouble for.
One of the.
Podcasters says, our podcast Hotsenhoff was censored.
Welcome to Germany. Our podcast episode about.
The legal drama of a person who was born biologically male but wanted to go to a women's gym with the support of the independent Federal Commissioner for Anti Discrimination is now offline. He writes, the questions that arise are as explosive as they are uncomfortable. How should a society function in which biological realities and legal fictions come into
such a blatant contradiction. What if someone who appears to be clearly male, like Laura, is considered a woman by legal decree and thus gains access to spaces that were traditionally reserved for women.
So there you have it.
He already successfully sued the gym.
The lady who prohibited him from.
Coming to the women's only. Jim had to cough up one thousand euros. Then she heard from Laura's lawyers demanding a further two and a half thousand euros, which begs the question, can any trans woman now just make this into a money making scheme.
Yeah, So to be specific, these podcasters were threatened with a four hundred thousand Australian dollar fine. And this is specifically what they said. They referred to this person as quote, a man who feels he's in the wrong bloe. I'm allowed to say that, and they pointed out the quote unquote he still has a dick. And so for those comments,
they've been threatened with imprisonment. And the judgment said that the person concerns personal rights were violated by referring to him as a man, because legally and socially he's recognized as a woman. Now we're going to have these problems in Australia very soon.
Well we do.
We just had a case, didn't we be in Queensland. Now you can change your birth certificate in Western Australia. You're about to be able to in Victoria you can. There's a bill currently before the New South Wales Parliament. So you've got a situation where legally a person is a woman. So then according to the law, if you call them anything but a woman, you are in breach
of speech laws. But the law itself now violates your conscience because it forces you to say things that not only that you don't believe them, it forces you to say things that you know.
To be untrue. So my question is, and.
Again I'm going to be naive here, Caleb, where's Amnesty International? I see them collecting money at every shopping center I go to, and I just wonder, where are you, guys? When people's consciences are being violated by government laws such as this, Amnesty International and all of those groups that are really worried about rights never seem to show up for the rights of ordinary citizens having their consciences violated by government.
Because they've decided they're more interested in transgender rights. And as you pointed out, this was basically the premise of the judgment that was made in the Giggle versus Tickle case Giggle being a female only social media at Tickle being a biological male who is now legally decreed to be a woman who wanted access to the app was denied access and then the court rule that that was discrimination. It is proof of how far gone we are that you can no longer in certain parts of the world,
and I mean this is Germany. But don't think that this won't come to us, particularly once Labor gets its misinformation Disinformation bill up, which will go after like this.
You know, the consequences may be different in terms of what can be put upon you, probably not jail time, but potentially finds and being hounded by AKMA for posting something online as a user on social media saying that someone is a biological male when they are a biological male but now according to their birth certificate they are
a woman. The fact that in certain parts of the world you cannot skate facts anymore without being prosecuted for doing so because it is a form of discrimination supposedly is outrageous, and it starts with transgender people and then it becomes everything else. This is the vanguard that allows the left to completely control the narrative and decide what is and isn't true, regardless of how true it is or is not. And the whole point of this case, it's not about the podcasters.
The idea is to go after two people who.
Have a popular pod cast to send a message to the rest of the population, yes, that if you dare to even say things like this at the dinner table, or in your workplace, or to your friends on the weekend, that we will come for you too. These are simply the ones taking the fall. It's ultimately about telling people no, you can't even think that anymore, and that is chilling.
We famously had a antidiscrimination commissioner in this country a few years ago. I forget the lady's name. If it comes to me, old Gillian Triggs.
I think I can't be sure. I don't want to miss quotes.
It was running the Human Rights Commission.
But was it her or someone else who famously said, as a joke, but it's a pity that people are still allowed to say what they want around the kitchen table.
I believe it was Julius.
The Jillian Trigs, and it was said in jest, but often a word in jest, Liz is to.
Every joke there is an element of truth.
And for people in positions of power to be lamenting the fact that you know what, we're just about controlled all speech, it's just a pity we can't get our hands on the kitchen table.
It's quite chilling, and well, this.
Is compelled speech.
So the kitchen table is pretty much the only sacred place left people speaking in hush tones.
Truthfully, nowadays, when you.
Even meet someone who is brave enough to talk in black and white terms about not just this, but many other issues, it is so refreshing, which is why we have to keep it up, because that is what they do not want to have happen. Because if you're saying it, and I'm saying it, everyone within earshot feels emboldened to say trans women aren't women or insert issue.
This is compelled speech.
And I don't care what laws they make in this country, I will not be abiding by them because you cannot do that. And with every single one of these, particularly LGBTQ laws that are made, they disproportionately affect religious people, whether you're Christian, whether you're Catholic, whether you're Muslim. There's millions of us in this country and billions of us across the West.
We're not going away.
We're not gone down without a fight, and you will never brainwash us enough or fine us enough for us to turn our backs on pure biological reality, like God made man and woman. That was It wasn't a long list, was really short, is still very short.
End of remember mate from America having coffee about ten years ago, we're seeing a cafe and we're just talking about the state of the world, and he says, with it in a country with free speech, where you can say what you want, right, And I said yeah, And he said, but if you noticed, for the last ten minutes since we've been discussing AB and C, both of us have been leaning forward and we've lowered our tone.
So no one around us here is I thought, oh, you're right.
Of course, Elon Musk is warning that this is only going to get worse, and a lot worse if Kamala Harris wins the next election. In fact, he tweeted today freedom of speech is under massive attack around the world, and he's absolutely right. We've had the boss of Telegram arrested in France, being accused of not doing enough to go after people using his social media platform for nefarious purposes.
We've got the CEO of.
Rumble who's fled Europe fearing he will be arrest for his video platform. Mark Zuckerberg has just admitted that he was pressured by the Biden Harris administration and the FBI to censor people over COVID comments and to suppress information about Hunter Biden's laptop. And now Brazil have banned Twitter or X from being accessed there, threatening people with eight thousand dollars fines per day if they use a VPN
to access the platform. And here's Kamala Harris just to make the point, lamenting the fact that Elon Musk is still allowed to operate X.
He has lost his privileges and it should be taken down.
And the bottom line is that you can't say that you have one rule for Facebook and you have a different rule for Twitter. The same rule has to apply, which is that there has to be a responsibility that is placed on these social media sites to understand their power. They are directly speaking to millions and millions of people without any level of oversight or regulation.
Help unpack this to me, Liz, Elon Musk has lost his privileges, and his privilege is to give Liz James Caleb in every Tom Dick and Harry out there the ability to just say what they think.
Yeah, yeah, I love it when government give me rights that I was born with. Thanks for that, you're so magnanimous. What you really meant to say, there was censorship.
They're just allowed to say whatever they.
Want, like free people freely exchanging information for free.
We can't have that.
It's so dangerous, of course, because if you can't control the narrative, can't control the people, and anyone encouraging critical thinking, well they're extremely dangerous because there's a lot to criticize when it comes to government. So what she meant to say, there was censorship. They're just able to say whatever they want without any supervisory role over them, Like adults can't just decide for themselves what's bs and what we choose to believe in. No, no, we've got a sensor at all.
There's no one censoring it. This is out of control. And the trouble is a lot of people in the free world are actually gobbling this up because they've done such a good job.
Of saying this is about safety.
Look what happened with COVID and people like Trump telling people to drink bleach. He never said that, by the way, but didn't they run with it. We can't have people proliferating these dangerous kind of concepts. They always do it in the name of safety, and they're doing it again with Elon. Meanwhile, well, every single tweet that guy drops is absolutely based and that's why they're worried about him, because he's taking them on country after country.
X has just been banned in Brazil because it refused to shut.
Down all the accounts of the opposing the opposition in governments and the dodgy things that are happening in this space. You mentioned the Rumble guy, that's where everyone who's been booted off YouTube goes. You mentioned Telegram also, that guy's still just rotting away in a French prison. Nobody really knows what is going on. It's been over a week now, and their only crime is defending free speech and refusing
to censor people on their platforms. These are the three remaining platforms in the world where you can actually express yourself.
And Kamala Harris is up to old tricks here and this is the real concern, right because of course she's not said at any point that you know, I'm actually going to go online and then banned Donald Trump from being on Twitter, but she has previously previously suggested sorry that Twitter now X should remove Donald Trump from its platform.
That did eventually happen.
Of course, he was reinstated after Elon Muster took over and has recently started using the platform again. But here is a reminder of Kamala Harris saying Trump should be banished when he was president.
Mind you, I know you wrote to Twitter and the CEO, Jack Dorsey and asked him to take away the president's Twitter handle his account. How is that not a violation of free speech? I mean, the president has the same rights that you have that I have, And how would that not just be a slippery slope?
K I've heard that argument. But here's the thing, Jake. First of all, a corporation, which is what Twitter is, it does not have the has obligations. And in this case, Twitter has terms of use policy, and there are terms of use dictate who receives the privilege of speaking on that platform and who does not. And Donald Trump has clearly violated the terms of use and there should be a consequence for that.
And it's all good and well when it's the platform's terms of use, but what about when it becomes the government's terms of use? And Western governments, particularly left leaning Western governments, now, as we just talked about in Germany, all over the shop, trying to control people's speech and decide what is and isn't real. And as I said before,
misinformation disinformation laws here in Australia. So why would you not believe if that is Camala's attitude towards Donald Trump back then when he was president, that should she win in November, she would then not take the opportunity as president to have to extend those sort of restrictions in.
A legal way.
And that's why the lack of curiosity about Mark Zuckerberg's letter the other week, where you've got the Biden Harris administration and now Harris is running for president of the US pressured Facebook to suppress people's posts, to suppress news about Hunter Biden, And so good on Mark Zuckerberg for saying, look, in retrospect, we shouldn't have done it.
No way, you were just getting out ahead of a with baby. Let me no credit, let me finish the thirddit for that man.
Shouldn't we get specifics like shouldn't the public be demanding, well, who pressured whom? When, which posts did they suppress? What threats did they make? In a couple of months time. This lady could be the leader of the free world if she's involved in things like this or her administration.
We should know all the details, not just.
Have an a four letter from Mark Zuckerberg saying it happened, it won't happen again.
Move on, Yeah, and why should we believe you while you're admitting in the.
Same breath you did it.
You censor people in order to manipulate them. Who knows how the last election would have gone in the States were it not for a certain administration giving marching orders to the biggest social media platform in the world, and that social media platforming saying yes, actually we will censor it.
Nobody's really going to hear the true story of.
Hunter Biden and that came from the government.
You quite right. Here in Australia, we had over.
Four thousand posts censored by our government during the pandemic. And again, like U Saimak, such a lack of curiosity. Where is the outcry, especially after it was shown. Chris Kenny wrote an amazing article on this, especially after it was showed the vast majority of those posts were factual. Now, in hindsight, they were perfectly reasonable factual statements.
There was more interest in Raygun's Olympic performance, yes, than in Australians being.
Censored on the state of US.
Now, I'll tell.
You what though, if this does happen in the US and Kamala decides she's going to censor everything, maybe she should put Nancy Pelosi in charge of running that operation, because we know how on the ball she is, so on the ball that she actually lets slip. Talking to talk show host Bill Maher, that the whole idea of all these illegal immigrants coming into the country, undocumented migrants in the US, is that they should eventually become documented margrants.
And of course, once they become documented margarants, there's a road forward to citizenship and then ultimately a road forward to voting.
And who are you going to vote for except the.
Party that allowed you to illegally pour over the border and then eventually become a citizen. She was talking to Bill Maher or Bill Maher was questioning her about a scheme in California, her home state, called the California Dream for All program.
Now, this has existed for a little while.
By the way, it has no money left in it because it's all been spent. But the idea is that California gives you twenty percent of the value of a house to go off and get a loan. It's the down payment for the loan that is a huge leg up for first home buyers. And it was so popular that all of the money, the millions and millions that were put into it, is now gone. But that hasn't stopped the legislature in California passing a bill that now means that money, even when it ever becomes available again,
will be available to undocumented migrants. So someone who shouldn't be in the country, should not be in the US, an illegal migrant will be able to go to the government in California and get the down payment for a home to buy a house that someone else, who is a citizen who belongs in the United States has been slugging their guts out to buy.
Doesn't that make a lot of sense.
Well, Ma asked Pelosi about this, and this is how she responded.
Immigration had always been a bipartisan issue. I refer you to that no free houses. Well, there's not free housing. It's the American dream being available to more people. I'm not familiar with exactly what it is, but making the American dream of home ownership available to all people is something we have to do for people for a year now, this.
Is undocumented. This is for the undocumented.
Well, what I would like to do is move them to document.
It is that we can.
Move one to document. One of the best things that we can do for our economy is to pass comprehensive immigration reform.
Ah.
Yes, she wants to make them documented. I wonder why that would be.
And she wants them to be.
Able to buy houses in California so they won't leave. I wonder why that might be a bit different to what she said in two thousand and eight.
We need to address the issue of immigration and the challenge we have of undocumented people in our country. We certainly don't want any more coming in.
We certainly don't want any more coming in until we work out that they might eventually be able to vote for I mean, how can you just sit there and go, yeah, yeah, no problem at I want people who are in my country illegally to get access to government money to buy houses that other people, genuine US citizens could otherwise.
But we well that's exactly what's happening. But I like the way she reframes it. It's not about giving away free houses with taxpayer money.
It's about the.
American dream, American dream.
It's all about how it's all about Americans.
And of course, she says, right now it's out.
Of reach of Americans. And now, on top of that.
Their taxpayer dollar is fitting the bill for the illegals to live the American dream that they themselves cannot afford. What I love about this is Belosi finally said the quiet part out loud. Which is the reason why our administration has not only allowed, but facilitated over ten million illegals pouring over the Mexican border is because we fully intend the fully intend to make them legal and are allow them to vote, and they will, of course vote for us, because we are the administration who.
Let them in.
Now, Trump is the one who has promised mass deportation.
Look biggest deportation program in history if he makes it to the White House.
The Dems have already told you what they're going to do, and that is make these guys legal and they won't be going anywhere. Meanwhile, every major country is growning under the weight of trying to support these people.
The way they talk about it always makes me laugh. This is one of the Californian congressmen. He says, undocumented individuals have historically been removed from housing initiatives because of federal restrictions. No, it's because they're not citizens and so they don't have the right to house and going to go back to where they came from and come the legal way. It's all about the framing. We're going to
go to a break. When we come back, we'll look at the papers, including skyrocketing compensation claims for school teachers as solved it by students.
That's in tomorrow's papers. We'll talk about it in a moment. Welcome back.
Let's take a look at the papers tomorrow.
Liz, you've got the Herald Sun.
Yes, I do. Check out this splash teacher trauma. More than fifty million dollars has been paid out to Victorian teachers and tertiary staff who were injured on the job in the past two years, with experts blaming the explosion
of compensation claims on aggressive students and staff bullies. The article goes on to say teachers from state and private schools, as well as tertiary and TAFE educators, made one hundred and ninety nine claims in twenty twenty two and almost fifteen hundred claims last year, including for psychological stress, concussions, fractures,
and even deafness. You've got to really consider how helpless these teachers must feel in today's day and age, where you cannot even touch a student, even if it's in self defense. Arguably, I think the solution is bring about corporal punishment. Back in my day, we still had the paddle and it worked really well in certain types.
I mean the fact.
That these teachers just have to copy it and then file for some sort of compo it's probably quite hard.
To get as well.
And the number of them that's over fifty million dollars paid out just over two years, that's incredible.
Yeah, we know a lot of teachers are leaving the profession. And when you're being abused, and it's not just students, but you discipline a student, the next minute you've got the parents in claiming all sorts of things. It's a pretty thankless task.
Yeah, I mean in some of these cases, one hundred and forty one one thousand dollars for psychological harm, one hundred and twenty grand for head injuries, one hundred and three grand for risk injuries.
I mean, these are.
Pretty big gifts that these teachers are clearly getting caught up. And you know, it's a bit like being a copper. I suppose you know, you go to work every day expecting you that you're going to come home from the job. You know that there's a level of risk, But as a teacher, you expect that you're going to be able to go to work and do your job, which is to educate children, or I suppose, in the case of TAFE,
educate young adults. You don't expect that you're going to have to get into a fight or that someone's going to try to assault you.
No, you're worried about getting sun burnt on playground.
Judy, you're not worried about remember no play I mean, you know they're going to have to come up with Well, it's just indicative of where we are at as a society with the discipline of children that they would even feel in boldened.
Enough to do that.
There are a fact like, you know, if I tried that on with a teacher, even though I knew that the teacher legally wasn't going to be able to respond to do anything. I knew what was going to happen when I got home, So you just simply wouldn't do that. But I suspect a lot of these kids who do this sort of thing are so entitled and their parents are so entitled that there's nothing when they get home. In fact, they probably go, little Johnny, you should have done that to your teacher.
Absolutely disgusting.
Let's go to the front of the old tomorrow, where it says casualty of culture war arts should be neutral here. The former managing director of the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra has hit out at her sacking over the sidelining of a pianist to attack Israel's conduct in Gaza, declaring that music concerts should be safe havens for all Australians and free
from political protests. Sophie Galais is her name, and she was sacked essentially because all this pressure was put on the MSO because there was a pianist who started carrying on about Gaza and she said, well, no, people have come here to listen to nice music. They haven't come here for politics. They've come here to escape from politics. And the artsy Fatsi community has responded to that by saying, well, it's time.
For you to go.
Good on her for taking a stand and standing up for what she believes in, and I don't mean politics, standing up for what she believes in the arts, which should be available to everyone without discrimination or prejudice, regardless of your race, your religion, your sex, your sexuality, anything right, you should be able to enjoy the arts all the time. And that's what she's tried to do and she's paid the price with her job.
Well, not only was it the correct decision morally, it was the correct decision commercially and that was probably her guiding principle and foremost in her mind. Because they had an audience of only about one hundred and fifty people and the number of complaints they received about that particular performance and what was said prior to it to the audience, someone grandstanding, Well, she's just looking after the commercial interests of the business by making.
Sure that people don't stay away.
But the problem that the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra have got here, Liz, is they have been known for their political stances in the past. They took stances on gay marriage, they took stances on the voice. Then they chose not to take a stance on the Palestinian issue. So in a way, they've got themselves to blame that they've got into this pickle, because you can't pick and choose when you're going to
be political when you're not. If you're going to have a stance where about music and that's it, then you've got to stick to it. You can't duck and weave, pick and choose, chop and change.
But this one was different. This guy didn't Donner Kathie.
He wasn't standing up in the middle of his performance preaching to the audience, yelling about casualties in Gaza or anything like this. He simply chose a piece of music which I dare say most people wouldn't have even known had much significance. But he he dedicated it to the journalists and the work that they're doing on the ground in Gaza. So I don't see this as one of those like we've talked in.
The part, you're missing one point.
He accused Israel of assassinating journalists targeted assassinations of journalists during the performance. Yes, when he introduced chee okay, accord to the article, that's what he did.
That was the I've only read that he played this piece, and he dedicated to the work that they're doing.
In introducing the piece, he made that point that was the offensive point that he accused Israel of targeted assassinations against journalists.
This piece is in honor of journalists who have been killed.
Okay, well, you're quite right in that they've taken stances in the past and then chose to turf her over this particular one and nobody knows why, including her.
Yeah, look, you know, just lead that stuff out and quite right to rebuke the performer. I don't care whether they're getting up and saying they're pro Israel, anti Israel, pro pro that. I don't go along to the theater or to the opera or whatever to be lectured about politics.
I'm going along for entertainment, to.
Enjoy the beauty of the music or the performance that's in front of me. If I'm going to an overtly political performance, well of course that's what I expect. But I don't go along to the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra expecting someone to talk to me about politics.
Yeah, you don't go to the football.
For it, eiram down your throats all the time. So I do sympathize with frustrated artists no matter which side of the debate that they're on, because it's like, well, I'm trying to use my platform like certain it's plaform orchestras.
It doesn't belong to you.
Say the same about all the different movie stars, the sporting heroes, everyone who applies their weight behind any political cause.
And everyone says, shut up, shut up, shut up. We just want to watch sport.
You can use social media. You can't do that, can you.
Probably you'll get social media be taken down, So you can do it in your own time, but just don't do it my performance backer off. Another story on the front of the Ears Tomorrow, Too Far ALP front.
Bench is warning to Reserve Bank.
A government minister has warned the Reserve Bank against going too far in its fart against inflation, despite Jim Charmers denying he was attempting to influence the decisions of the Independent Central Bank after declaring its rate hikes were smashing the economy. Well, I'll let you in on a little secret,
Jim Charmers. The reason that their rate hikes are smashing the economy is in part because you keep spending money The RBA only has one lever to pull, and that is to increase interest rates, and we know that that only.
Affects a certain portion of the population.
But you ain't pulling your weight, buddy, So what do you expect the RBA to do? And then you have other members of the government running interference, saying, oh, it's going too far, it's going too far. But we're not criticizing, we're not rebuking the RBA whatsoever.
Please.
Angus Taylor's got a good line in this article. He's not really known for his zingers, but he said charmers is fighting everything except inflation, which is a pretty good point.
Very quickly, let's go to the Canberra Times.
This is an interesting story aps Australian public service to slash outsourcing. Sounds a little boring, but listen to the detailed Defense will cut spending on consultants and labor higher. Okay, fair enough, by nearly half a billion dollars this financial year. Now that is incredible. Commonwealth departments and agencies had been told to cut consultants who were doing core work that
should be done by public servant. So the Defense Department sharpened their pencil and found four hundred and seventy one million dollars worth of work that employees should be doing that was being outsourced. Absolutely incredible fat that was allowed to exist in that department. We're going to go to a break when we come back. A UK public servant who left top secret documents at a bus stop is
appointed to review defense. It's coming up in a month, all right, So here's a story for all those people have stuffed up at work and to spared. My life is over, Liz, you can make a comeback.
This is going to make you feel way better.
An exit servant in the UK best known for leaving top secret documents at a bus stop last June. These documents included details regarding the UK forces in Cabul, made it really easy if anyone wanted to find them. He's now been asked to join a review of.
The UK's forces.
The article says such sensitive intelligence is not allowed to be taken from government buildings unless properly logged out and securely stored.
However, according to a source who spoke with The.
Times lapsely that's his name, No pun Intended picked up the pages from the entray on his desk and took them home with him. It was the following morning when they fell out of his bag as he was rushing to work, before they were found wet and piled up at the bus stop before being dried out and handed over. Can you imagine if someone with nefarious ideas had discovered these first operations into able come to a grinding stop thanks to a blow called lap Speed.
He's now been appointed to this committee to review the British defense. I guess his first point of review will be don't let people like me anywhere near defense?
Like is he the one you want defending you? Like I would say if you really wanted to bugger up a war, he'd be the guy to get on side. Refeign Nation in the world should now be trying to get in Lapsley's pocket so that he can go in there and stuff up the UK Defense Force as much as possible.
Because it sounds like the sort of thing he might do.
They should take a leaf out of the book at the federal government here in Canberra, which is actually now getting rid of consultants. As we said before, and before we leave you tonight, I have to tell you about a crime against humanity. And this is a real crime against humanity. Tin spaghetti is one thing, but Heines has now introduced in the UK tinned spaghetti carbonara. No, I am not joking. This is a dish that can never
ever be put in a can. It is a dish that, by the way, can never ever have cream in the source. And you can just imagine how the Italians have responded to this lunacy. The Italian Tourism minister, he said, Italian cuisine is a serious thing.
As Alberto Sawt, he would say.
In an American in Rome, I give this canned carbonara to the mouse. I wouldn't even give it to a mouse, the poor bloody mouse having to eat that poor excuse for carbonara. If you are eating that, you really need to reassess your life choices.
That is discussed.
I haven't had dinner. I'm going to try and find a can on the way home. That's it from us. Stick around coming up is for readA Penney show.