Lately.
Welcome to the Lake to Base.
Well, good evening.
I'm James Macpherson with Freilich and Caleb Bond coming up tonight. Great news for coffee drinkers. Researchers say it will help you age well. But how many cups do you need to drink every day to look like Caleb Bond? We will explain that a little later plus when we get to what's making news tomorrow. Queensland prisoners of scone from jail to go and buy KFC.
I'm serious. That's a headline in tomorrow's papers.
And the Papua New Guinean government makes their choice between Australia and China as their security partners.
But let's start with a question. Do we need to crack down on dog owners?
Sydney councils are complaining that dog owners are out of control. They're walking their dogs off the leash and failing to pick up their poop, and so the New South Wales government is currently reviewing dog legislation, with councils wanting penalties that bite. They want fines for walking your dog flesh increased from three hundred and thirty dollars and Waverley council wants the power to compel dog owners to undergo responsible pet ownership training.
Is this a real.
Problem or Preyoh's councils just barking up the wrong tree with this one.
Obviously we want dog owners to be responsible, but I think the vast majority of them are. There are millions of pets in New South Wales. Yes, you hear about the occasional instance, but seriously, I just think this is some councils who love to get their hands on more and more power wherever they can, and what this will turn into. It starts as re education training to learn how to look after a dog, It ends with license fees, it ends with more and more regulation, and that's the danger here.
Well perhaps so, but I mean I've seen some pretty terrible dog owners getting about let their dog.
You know, crap all over the footpath at the front of my joint.
You know that there is nothing worse than going for a nice afternoon walk and you accidentally tread in some too that some third owner couldn't take the time to pick up. It happens all the time, and for some reason, dog owners have this attitude. Many dog owners, not all of them, I will note, But many dog owners seem to have this attitude. Their dogs should be able to go wherever they go at all times, and should be
treated like a child and doted upon. And if you have an issue with their dog being there, it's like saying you've got an ugly baby. Well, I'm sorry, it's a dog. Like if it's an animal, it doesn't have to be there. It should be on leash. It shouldn't be allowed to run around any park at wants.
They shouldn't be.
Allowed off leash on the beach, going up terrorizing little kids.
I mean, can you imagine? No, No, I'm serious, I'm serious.
I'm a small child, a small child that does not have experience with dogs.
S he's a.
Big dog bounding towards it. And I'm well aware that big dogs are generally more docile than little dogs. But sees a big dog bounding towards it, and it's scares a child's living wits out of them. The dog on a leash, look after it, keep it to yourself.
Fine, that's a great rant, But you failed to disclose that you are a cat person, and so I think hang on high conflict of interesting.
Well, I have two.
Cats at home. I also have a couple of dogs on the tracks. I have ownership in their cats, horses, dogs.
Dogs on the track are a completely different kettle fish. The Waverley Council were complaining they've had five hundred and fifty five breeches that's people walking their dogs off leash over the last three years, which sounds like a lot until you realize there's over ten thousand dogs in that council area, so it would be one point six percent of dogs being walked.
Off leash every year. This has been a major problem.
That have been caught.
That's you know, the fine I think the maximum three hundred the maximum three hundred and thirty bucks for walking your dog off every years out Wales. In Queensland it's eight hundred bucks.
And to be honest and have a problem.
I mean, look, if you catch me walking my cat off leash, you can find me that too. And the fine for not picking up a dog turd is two hundred and seventy five dollars. I mean that is as far as I'm concerned, it is a worse offense than speeding leaving a dog third on the footpath.
It is Are you serious, Caleb Honestly, I never expected you to be the kind of person to come out here and argue for more local council finds, more local council regulations.
It kind of flies in the face of everything you say every night.
But I just a certain overreaction, and it is stemming from your cat self.
Cat owners are the worse. I'm sorry, please.
Cats are conservative animals because they're not mendicant.
Dogs are mendicant. Dogs are left wingers.
They rely on their owners to do everything for them. Cats don't tread on me. They believe in the individual. They're self sustaining, they don't need someone to do something. But I mean, dogs are the welfare doll bloods of the world compared to cats.
The Waverley Council's insistence that if you are caught walking your dog orf leash you should be sent for mandatory pet responsibility training is simply ridiculou If you're allowed to run the workshop on the footpath outside closed place, that's not ignorance, that's just a lack of courtesy. So training isn't going to fix that.
That's a ridiculous side.
Well, I don't know, maybe if you sort of adopt the Singapore line of punishment and you start giving corporal punishment, it may teach them a lesson or.
Tell you what I did learn on this topic. Though there's four point seven million dogs and.
Cats as pets in New South Wales and you have zero of them.
See use, So I'm not responsible.
You have argued on this panel before that people shouldn't be allowed to take their dogs to the pub or the cafes.
So we're on a virgin aircraft and you can do that.
Again, but you know, each leave it.
Up to the individual venue owner. But like, don't tell me that you have a right to take your dog wherever you want.
You don't.
And while we're talking about council, is actually a good news story. You might remember last night we told you about morning Mornington Peninsula Shire Council in Victoria. But they sent out these leaflets for one of the kindergartens where they were saying, you know, sign up for next year, and they had on the bottom as you can see, they're the Pride flag and the Aboriginal flag and the Torystrade Islander flag and the Australian flag was nowhere to
be seen. It came up at their council meeting last night and Councilor Bruce Ranken, good on him, came out with some pretty common sense stuff and said, well, if we're going to use flags anywhere, we also have to
accompany it with the Australian flag. So that's now been passed by the Council and they've also said that within sixty days the staff have to come back with a revised flags Flags policy that takes all this stuff into account and the control of how flags are flown should be in the hands of councilors and not in the hands of staff, and good on them for responding very quickly and doing something. But can you believe out the front of their council chambers and you'll be able to
see the photo here they have six flags. I mean they love flags, clearly. You've got the Australian flag, the Victorian flag, the Aboriginal flag, the Torrest Trade Islander flag, the flag and the council flag. So I can understand why they need a flag's policy to deal with all of this stuff. But good on them for responding quickly and saying no, this is not good enough. The Australian flag should be used.
If flags being you.
Give them too much credit.
They've responded quickly to this instance, but this is not the first occasion they've done this. Last year they're a positive aging newsletter which is published and put out by the council five times at least. You can see on the bottom of the newsletter there same thing. They've got the Pride flag, the Torres Straight Islander flag, the Indigenous flag, And it was only after complaints that finally earlier this year they changed that newsletter and put the Aussie flag
on there as well. So it's not the first time this has happened. But obviously the backlash from I think it was because it was a kindergarten.
I think that made the difference.
Although I think they should have gone further than just saying the Aussie flag must be included.
Why wouldn't you just say no other flags.
There's one flag that unites us all the Australian flag.
All other flags fly them on your.
On a flyer at all, when all other flags really do just divide us into groups. We should be focusing on uniting as a country. But the other thing I love about this is they're stripping the power off the bureaucrats of course, it was the bureaucrats that put the other flags and not the Australian flag onto the fly, because that's how it often is.
The long march through the institutions is underway.
But also in Victoria, a freedom of information request has revealed that the former Premier Daniel Andrews, three weeks before the Voice to Parliament referendum, when he received news that polling showed it was tanking, authorized the expenditure of six point five million dollars to promote the yes case. Now, I can't say I'm especially surprised, but I think the fact that he tried, he didn't disclose this to the public. It was only made public through the freedom of information requests.
There will be no accountability for this because he is obviously gone and fifty five percent of Victorians voted no. It's like and three weeks before I get you know, if twelve months before they thought this was part of some grand strategy for reconciliation, but three weeks before they've looked at the polly and gone, oh crap, let's shovel in six point five million dollars, Like, what did they expect to achieve?
I felt conflicted with this story because the money was taken from an allocation towards treaty in Victoria.
So they took six point.
Five million dollars from their treaty proposal put it towards the Voice.
But here's the bad news.
They never spent it, and so I wish that they actually spent it. The Voice would have been lost and it would have been less funding for a treaty, which I think is unnecessary. However, I was amused by a government spokesperson. He said, well, it doesn't matter because the money wasn't actually spent.
It's the fact that they.
Took state government money and put it towards a federal issue, an issue that the majority of Victorians, as you pointed out, did not support. And you also pointed out quite correctly, this was done three weeks before the referendum, when it was pretty well known to polsters this thing was going to die, and yet they still were on the verge of committing six to a half million dollars of taxpayer money towards a lost cause.
Yeah, and it's the same as when we talk about councils not sticking to the knitting, you know, roads rates and rubbish. This is exactly the same situation. State governments should not be getting involved in federal issues. Local governments shouldn't be getting involved in state issues, and vice versa. Federal governments shouldn't be dictating to state governments how they run their business. So it's no business of a state
government to be taking taxpayers money. And that's the other thing that really annoys me about this is that it's not I understand government spend money to promote policies or to promote programs that they have going go and sign up for this and that and whatever.
But if you are.
Spending public moneies ostensibly to campaign for a political point of view, a contentious issue, a referendum, it has nothing to do with your state. That is a complete misuse of public money. It's sticking your nose in a place.
Where it does not belong.
But it's also using taxpayers money, which, beyond the point of executing policies that you have been elected to execute, should be a political that government. That money is there to be spent on government business. Campaigning on a federal issue is not state government business.
You have to wonder about the relationship between Anthony Albanesi, who desperately wanted this referendum to succeed, it would be his legacy moment.
And Dan Andrews who.
Makes this decision, as you said, just three weeks before the vote, trying to help his federal mate, and of course during the most recent elections, Dan Andrews who was coaching Anthony Albanesi in debating techniques. So the two are obviously close, and you have to wonder whether that played into the decision to take a bit of money from here and throw it over there.
It's funny I had thought about that for a while when you mentioned that Andrews was helping out with his debate practice. Of course, his role in the debate practice was to pretend to be Peter Dutton. And so do we think that perhaps the unpopularity of Daniel Andrews may have eventually rubbed off on Peter Dutton because of course he pretended to be the bloke. There are a few similarities that could be drawn there.
Let's go to the UK.
We're a fascinating study out of Buckingham University has found that in forty years time, white British people will be a minority in their own country. Now this was done through assessing migration levels, birth rates and death rates. You can see a graph that will show you in just a moment that demonstrates how right now, white British people
make up seventy three percent of the population. That's the light blue line on the far left of your screen there, that's seventy three percent, But it drops to twenty fifty when white British people will be fifty seven percent of the population, and then by twenty sixty three British white people will be less than fifty percent. By the end of the century, they estimate that white Brits will comprise just thirty three point seven percent of the population of Britain.
Now.
They're being replaced by foreign born and second generation immigrants, who now are less than twenty percent of the population, but in twenty five years will make up fully a third of the population, and by the end of the century, researchers estimate that six out of ten Brits will have been born outside the UK or have at least one
immigrant parent. When it comes to religion, the statistics have shown that the Muslim population now seven percent, will be eleven percent in twenty five years, and by the end of the century will be somewhere between twenty and twenty five percent. With under forties it'll be one in three people will be Muslim.
This is a massive.
Change in the demography of the UK and it begs the question the UK still with the UK, but with different people. If you've got a population that no longer agree on the symbols, the traditions, the culture or the religion, with nothing to unify them and no shared identity, are you headed for civil strife or freyer? Do we have leadership that can somehow navigate this and hold a country together?
And the important thing to note is that Australia is a multi ethnic society.
The West is multi ethnic.
But multi ethnic societies only work if we're united by shared values. We have to have a common set of values and culture and without that things do start to crumble. And I guess the question here is essentially, in three generations, the demographics of the Western world at large, because this is happening in Australia as well, it's happening in Canada, it's happening across the rest of Europe, have been totally changed.
This is unprecedented in global history. There has never been such a rapid and profound chain in the makeup of societies, and the question is can the center hold What does it look like when you know the country that started the Church of England now at the end of the century, one in five people will be Muslim like it does raise those serious questions around what the future of Britain is. And I also can't help but notice that there's a
double standard when it comes to diversity. We don't go to Japan or China and say you, guys need to be more diverse, you need to embrace multiculturalism. But people say that about the West all the time, and I would say no, we are very welcoming, very accepting, so much so that the country is going to look completely different.
Well, it will be unrecognizable. And that is a great chain because it should be noticed it's not specifically about race, because this will be people will turn this around and say, oh, it's white supremacists to say that you're worried about there won't be enough white people in Britain. Well, the definition of white people in this study was people who don't
have an immigrant parent. So you could be third generation living in England, but you're Bangladeshi by origin and you're counted as being white in this study, so we'll be clear about that.
But to say that it is bad to.
Worry about where a country is going, and that is essentially the inference when we talk about these things, is wrong because why did people move to Britain in the first place. Why did people move to Australia in the first place because they thought it was better than the country they came from. And what has always staggered me is that people move to another country because they think it's a better place than the one they've come from, and then set about trying to make it like the
country they've come from. Well, if you want to live in the country you came from, go back to the country.
You came from.
That's where you were. Why do you seek to turn other countries into.
What you left?
And if we don't have the culture and the various things that have made Australia and Britain and what a
great you don't have Australia in Britain anymore. I mean, if you're talking about twenty twenty five percent of the population being Muslim at that point, you'll be heading towards probably nearly majority Muslim in terms of the people who are religious in the country right, which is an insane position to be in because once you have that massive people, you can have serious legislative sway and then you can start dictating or particular parties that will form around this.
We'll start dictating that, you know, Sharia law should be instituted in places. We already have dozens and dozens of quasi Sharia courts that exist across the UK, Sharia councils I think they call them over there, which are dolling out, you know, a jurisdiction over Sharia law in the UK, not legally, but people respect these people and so they take their word for it. This sort of stuff will become law if you're not careful. That's what we're fighting
for here. It's not about we don't like the color of someone's skin or whatever. It's fundamentally the basis of a country and why exists. And if you throw that away, what's the point of the country exists.
Well, the point you make is very good, and the astonishing thing to me is that this is news today. But back in nineteen sixty eight, conservative politician in Not Powell, he was ridiculed as a racist for saying exactly what the researchers of this study have said, today have.
Listened those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad. We must be mad, literally mad, as a nation to be permitted the annual inflow of some fifty thousand dependents, who are, for the most part, the material of the future growth of the immigrant descended population. It is like watching a nation engaged in heaping up its own funeral.
Pile Enoppower was sacked from Shadow Cabinet the day after he made that speech because it was claimed he was racist for raising these very real and obvious concerns. What strikes me as amazing about this is a problem once thought too small to worry about, is now a problem so large that to deal with it you'd have to almost turn into a monster that we have typically derided and not wanted to be.
You see what's happening in the US. You see we'll talk in a minute.
I guess about other parts of Europe. To deal with this now is going to require very strong action. I'm not sure the West have got the stomach for it.
Yeah, And in the case of the UK, they're obviously still part of the European Human Rights Convention, which ties their hands on a lot of these issues, making it really hard for them to then depoor people that I found to be in the country illegally. In fact, one third of people who are granted asylum claims by UK judges are deemed.
To be exceptional cases.
Judges are granting exceptional asylum claims in a staggering one third of cases, which to me seems to invalidate the definition of exceptional, because how can one third of cases be exceptional? But what this then means And often they're pointing to things like family or children in the country, which means they can't be deported. So here's some examples of the kinds of people that are now allowed to stay because they're exceptional.
An Albanian man who.
Ran a cannabis factory is able to stay in the UK because him being deported would mean his daughter would lack a strong male role model. Or another woman who was supposed to be deported to Grenada couldn't because her
husband doesn't like Caribbean food or the heat. So these are the kinds of exceptional circumstances people are point to stay in the UK, and it's all stemming from Article eight of the European Convention on Human Rights, which states that you need to respect people's private lives and their family and so all sorts of ridiculous considerations are being taken into account, no doubt.
My favorite one, Frayer, that's the Albanian who could not be debaunted back to Albania because his son didn't like.
To check it.
In Albania, a judge literally ruled that.
What's amazing to me.
You mentioned the European Convention on Human Rights, which the UK has signed up to, and there are nine European countries that are currently calling for this to be reviewed because clearly these exceptions are ridiculous and they're increasingly becoming non exceptional. But the UK has not signed up to say, hey,
we want a review of this. And Keir Starmer, for all his talk about we're becoming an island of strangers, we need to do something about this, you'd think this would be one of the first things he would not just address, pull out of this convention and take responsibility for your own country who's coming to it. But he's not done that, which makes you wonder if Keir Starmer's retric on immigration.
Is just that well, and this is The biggest problem, right is we are strangling ourselves. Now, obviously, these cases make a mockery of the immigration system, the idea that you can come to a country illegally, then claim asylum, then commit a bunch of crimes, and then we say, oh, we can't get rid of you because your son doesn't love foreign chicken nuggets. Right, I mean, it's a joke, it's funny, whatever, but it proves that we are strangling
ourselves over and over again. Same as the last discussion. We just had the only way to fix these issues, and this sends a message not just to people who want to come illegally, but also people on the other side of the world who may will come legally but see a soft country that is right for infiltration. The problem is that we don't do anything to fix it ourselves, and the only way we can actually fix these issues is to.
Have lots and lots of children.
Basically, I mean the fertility rate as the across the world, it should be noted, but particularly in the West. I mean Sub Saharan Africa is about the only place where they actually have children above the replacement rate, but across the West it is declining. Every single year, which means
we're having fewer and fewer children. Now, if you've decided you must have eternal economic growth, the only way to achieve that is to have more people in the country, and so the only way to achieve that is to import more people into the country.
And so we sort of do this.
Without having any regard for who we're bringing in and why we're bringing them in, and then we all wake up one day and we go, oh, gee, this joint doesn't look like it used to well, because we did it to ourselves. We send messages with things like this that it's okay to come illegally to the UK because a third of cases are exceptional, and you'll be able to say because your son doesn't like chicken nuggets like it just seems a message to the world that we are weak, We're up for infiltration.
It doesn't matter anything.
The other question I have with this is how do all these asylum seekers know their way around the law so well?
I know they've clearly got some good advice, but it's interesting you mentioned kirs Sama as well, because for all this tough talk on migration, illegal boat crossings across the English Channel are actually already at record highs and they're basically doing this apparently by just packing.
More people into boats.
So these smugglers have gotten a lot more sophisticated.
Check this out.
These are the number of people per boat on average twenty twenty five fifty five point eight people per boat, so a really high number particularly, I mean, look at twenty eighteen compared to seven in twenty eighteen and thirty three. They're in twenty twenty two, that record year, so we are seeing more people crowding onto boats. There is more a play here than just the weather when it comes to why we are seeing called numbers of people this year so far crossing the Channel in small boats.
Since twenty eighteen, the UK has recorded a staggering one hundred and sixty five thousand illegal boat crossings across the English Channel, bringing in illegal migrants into the UK. One hundred and sixty five thousand boats. Now imagine they're all carrying ten twenty migrants. That is a shocking amount of people.
James, and we.
Shouldn't just blame the Labor Party, although they're now in government, they need to do something about it. But for quite a number of years the Conservatives oversaw huge immigration numbers.
The funny thing is, though I'll show you this clip, they're blaming it.
They're blaming it on the weather. Take a look.
Well, for the first time this year, the Home Office have released this data. These are red days days where effectively the weather conditions mean channel crossings are more likely sixe red days in the first four months of twenty twenty five, and.
You can see the comparison. It is significantly more.
Than those previous years.
Yes, that's the only reason they're coming across the channel is the weather is nice. Someone who is trying to do something serious about migration in his country's good Wilders, who, of course you will know, eight months ago won the Dutch election and then formed a coalition with two other right leaning parties. Well, he's walked away from that coalition now because he says they have not taken his demands
on migration seriously. He asked for three things, to end asylum migration, to deport Syrian refugees, and to close asylum shelters. It hasn't happened. And now we've ended up with this.
We can no longer bear responsibility for this. I signed for the strictest to silent policy, not for the downfall of the Netherlands and our responsibility for this cabinet therefore ends at this moment.
So now the Netherlands will have to go to another election, which will ostensibly be an election or a referendum as it were, on immigration. And ged Wilde's won eight months ago where he had the mose. He didn't have enough to form a government, but he had the most seats of any party at the election eight months ago, and so what he's doing here is staking his credibility on the fact that he did so well in that election.
Because people want a crackdown on migration, his coalition partners haven't handed it to him, and he's saying, well, let's go to the polls and see what the people really think.
Well, I think he got thirty one percent of the vote. The left wing opposition got thirty percent of the vote, and he has declared he will be the next Prime Minister of the Netherlands.
So he's rolled the dice.
Credit to him though that he stood for principle, and he's been accused of being reckless and a kamikazi politician.
I don't think so.
I think he went to the poll saying this is what I want to accomplish, found himself part of a coalition that will not do that, and so he said, all right, I'm removing myself from the co Let the people decide again.
And the coalition was always rocky to begin with.
It took them about eight months to negotiate it in the first place. And this also does highlight the problems with the EU system or the European systems, where no parties really can form majority, so you're always hamstrung by.
These awkward coalitions.
So it'll be interesting to see whether this referendum does work well.
The other coalition that's interesting to watch is the coalition between Donald Trump and Elon Musk, who have been best buddies since Trump went to the White House, but that relationship seems to have soured a little bit over Trump's economic plan. Elon Musk tweeted over the last twenty four hours, I'm sorry, but I.
Just can't stand that anymore.
This massive, outrageous pork Field congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Tell us how you really feel, Elon. Shame on those who voted for it. You know you did wrong, You know it. This, of course, is Trump's big beautiful bill. Caroline Leavitt, the White House spokesperson, was asked, is this the end of the bromance between Trump and Musk?
Look, the President already knows where Elon Musk stood on. This bell doesn't change the president's opinion. This is one big beautiful bell, and he's sticking to it.
Before we talk about the bill, if we get to it. The relationship I think is interesting because people were accusing Elon Musk of being a de facto president. They said he's only working for the Trump administration to get a favor for his business. But clearly that's not the case because Elon Musk, who only just finished up working as part of DOGE, has been straight on the front foot
a disgusting abomination, he says, of Trump's economic plan. He's clearly not trying to suck up to the Trump administration. The other thing that's funny is they got criticized for being too close, but.
Then everyone said, oh, but now they've broken up, So I knew it would last. I don't think it's any of that.
I think it's two fairly mature, strong men who have strong opinions and together where they can and where they disagree. They disagree, but that doesn't mean the relationship is fractured or see, we told you it was never going to work. There are two men with their own minds who've done very well for America and now have a disagreement, and.
They were always destined to butt heads in some way, right, I mean.
Exactly.
You can't put two blokes like that in a room and expect that they're going to agree all of the time and have a wonderful time. They had to disagree at some point.
And also the point that.
He was supposedly sucking up to Trump for his own benefit, well it's abundantly clear that was not the case, because he's taken a massive personal hit in terms of his companies and his wealth and the time that he was running DOGE, and he at the same time was taking great interest in interfering, if you want to use that word, in politics in other countries as well. It was never just about the United States. He was getting involved in Europe. He was making overtures in Australia, So it was never
just about favoring currying a favor with Trump. As for the big, the one big beautiful bill, I mean, most of it's stuff that Trump promised he would do when he was elected anyway. But the one thing that is a problem, and that's what Mask is carrying on about, is that the debt ceiling is increased to four trillion dollars, right, And the debt ceiling is the amount of money that the government is allowed to borrow in order to keep
doing its work. And so essentially what Musk is saying is, I was, you know, spent the last one hundred odd days working for you trying to reduce government spending, and then you've come along and basically given the green light to increase government spending. That's what he's upset about. And I don't think there's an issue with him being upset about that, because that's essentially what he's worked so long before.
He wasn't there to cut government spending. He was there to cut government waste. Sure, there's got to be a differentiation between government spending and government waste.
I know the CITC.
Says, what's the well, but Trump wants to spend a lot of money on the military.
It's military, it's defense, it's border security. And the bill does involve one point five trillion dollars in cuts and another point that the Trump administration made is that basically the costings released by the Budget Office, there is not accounting for the revenue generated by the tariffs, and that is part of Trump's economic strategy, essentially broad in the tax base by imposing tariffs so you don't have to tax Americans as much.
They're going to raise between two.
Point three and three point three trillion dollars, which is enough to offset, if not actually mean the Big Beautiful Bill is a surplus technically, So there are a lot of arguments around how they're costing this the precise numbers, but overall, the one thing I find so funny is the Democrats have spent the last six months trying to demonize Elon Musk, and now the first sign of trouble in Paradise. I feel like, see, we always knew Elon Musk would come back to the right side.
It's like, wait, two months ago, you were calling him a Nazi. How does this work that.
They're all buying Tesla's again?
Yeah, Tesla's are back.
But look also in America, in the Maga movement, they are really shaping culture. According to a plastic surgeon, Hollywood face is out.
People don't want to.
Look like Hollywood celebrities anymore. They want to look like maga. Republican women, specifically, Ivanka Trump is a main source of inspiration.
For the Maga movement. And you know, the Democrats, who are so lovely, so.
Inclusive, are of course making fun of these Trump women and their Mara Lago face. Here's what the lovely comedians at CNN had to say.
Who is this fresh face beauty?
It looks like one of the Brady Bunch children.
That's first daughter in law and recording an artist, Laura Trump. So Maga face is high cheekbones, full lips, big eyes. But it's not just the Republican women that are getting on Maga face.
It's also some of the men.
Matt Gates, who was briefly touted to be Attorney General by Trump, has as he can see there, clearly had a little bit of work done to his brows and everything. But if you think that plastic surgery is just taking over the Republican Party, you're also wrong because apparently Joe Biden is also a prolific user of plastic surgery. You can see he's changed his hairline, he's had botox, he's had his eyelids reduced, and he's removed some of his eyebags.
So, James, is this the new normal?
Should we just expect all our politicians to undergo hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of plastic surgery?
I think it's funny that people now want to look like politicians. Then they say politics has show business for ugly. Yeah, so it's pretty funny Americans wanting to look like the Trumps now. And the other irony, of course, is people in Hollywood criticizing those doing plastic surgery. So but Caleb, our producer, decided that we could look like Maga.
Pe mate, you just totally ruined my line. I was going to say that you'd been in and had yourself sort of done up to see what you could look like.
Because James, as you.
Know, you know about his hairline and whatever, so he has been looking at options and well, this is one of them. Likely he's going to go the full Trump look. I think we've got a couple of others here as well. If we've got Freyer, she's been he.
Was the youngest.
Actually, I mean that just looks like Don Junior. To be perfectly honest, I don't see much of myself in there.
But I'll go for it. The beard looks good. What about Frey? What have we got there? Oh again? Well, have you ever been a blonde before?
Front?
No, I'm not sure if I should start now, but I banker is pretty cool.
Well we can go the Marra a Lago.
Look, James won't be here tomorrow night because I'm told he's actually going off to see a plastic surch Is that correct?
Yeah, I'll be back in a couple of months.
We're to go to a break.
When we come back, we look at tomorrow's papers, including Queensland Prisoner's absconding to.
Go on by KFC. It's coming up, mister c welcome back.
Let's take a look at what's making headlines tomorrow. And I've got to say the front page of tomorrow's Cans Post got my attention when I saw it earlier. This evening prison break reads the headline inmates absconding to get KFC.
You break out of prison for McDonald it's not for chaos ah.
The state government says it will review security at Queensland Prison Farms after at least four detainees escaped on separate occasions, including one fugitive who fled on a tractor. Other inmates are leaving to get KFC. A former prisoner claims the prisoner who fled on a tractor it was from a low security prison a couple of days ago. It was a big red tractor actually, and so police put.
It chager, chagger, big really back put.
Out an appeal for the public. Anyone who's seen a prisoner on a big read to tract.
It was pretty identifiable.
But this allegation that prisoners are taking off to go get KFC, tell you what. The prison food must be bad if that's the reason they're not escaping to seat their girlfriend or escaping for you know, the joy of freedom.
They just need a Kernel Burger, they.
Need a KFC.
Yeah, I mean the chicken is good at KFC and probably beats MACS on that front. But I would say, if you want a holistic review of all like the two, definitely I would probably escape prison for McDonald's, not KFC. But moving on to the Daily Telegraph now, the headline is oh men proved the Liberal Party has a serious
issue with women. One of the men appointed in the federal takeover of the New South Wales Liberals has triggered fury among female colleagues after saying women in the party had become so assertive they may have to introduce reverse quotas for men. Sources confirmed. Alan Stockdale made the comments in a Tuesday meeting of the New South Wales Liberal Women's Counsel.
And what's wrong with that? Freya?
Not the approach I probably would have taken were I in his position, But I do think I mean, clearly it's a joke here, Clearly he's just this is an off the cuff comment that some people are really offended about. I do sort of understand why they might be, but like, come on, give.
Him a break.
I'm going to say, the bloke has serious balls. If he's willing to go into women's Council and say that, then he's the sort of bloke who ought to be premier because he'll stare anyone down right. But he does actually have a point, And I'm not saying that what he said was completely serious, But what he is getting at is the suggestion that keeps coming up that the Liberal Party ought to have quotas for women's nonsense. Because if you start saying that we don't choose people pre
select people on the basis of merit. Well, then we should have reverse quotas for men as well, and you have quotas for everything else. What he's doing is taking on the concept of quotas. He's not actually saying that you need reverse quotas for men, but perhaps we need reverse quotas for people with the name McPherson or something.
It's off topic, but I always wonder when does the quota finish? At what point do people say, you know what, well, we don't need quoters anymore. Yeah, and it's yet to be proven that a quota, once imposed, is ever lifted.
That's the problem precisely.
Let's go to the front of the Olds tomorrow where it says Charmers slams PMS door shut on gains tax. Jim Chalmers has declared he will not negotiate with the Coalition on superannuation tax reforms, just a day after Anthony Albinizi left the door open to a compromise with the Treasure of preferring to do a deal with the Greens
that retains the contentious tax on unrealized capital gains. Doctor Charmers lashed out at opponents of the government's proposed tax hike on superannuation balances above three million dollars, accusing critics of pretending to dislike the model of taxing unrealized capital gains while actually being against clamping down on tax concessions.
For the wealthy.
Ah, the oldest trick in the book. It's because you want to do nice things for rich people. It's not about doing nice things for rich people. It's about the fact that texting unrealized capital gains is completely without present. It is insane because you are texting people on something
that is not liquid, it doesn't actually exist. And of course we know that the three million dollars is not indexed, maybe will become two million dollars by the time the Greens get their hands on it is not indexed, and that a young person today earning the average wage, if they continue to earn the average wage for the rest of their life, will have three million dollars in super by the time they are sixty four. I mean, there is so much wrong with this, and all charmers can.
Say is, oh, it's because you like rich people.
Come on.
And the fact that this was not given more airtime during the election, like this was barely even mentioned during the campaign. So in some senses, I'm sort of glad he's ruled out a deal with the coalition because if they had started to negotiate on this, they would never come back.
That would shatter their credibility.
You cannot possibly be a liberal and support more taxes like it's an incompatible position, especially one as egregious as a tax on unrealized gains. Literally flies in the face of our entire tax law. But it's also interesting to see the number of people that have come out against this, former governors, senior labor people as well.
What's crazy about this is that it's making front page headlines now after the election. It should have been making headlines before the election, but the Liberal Party decided it wasn't an issue that they wanted to run with and so they ignored it.
Just is astonishing to me.
Indeed, another story on the front of the ODS tomorrow. We stand with Australia, p and G drives defense packed amid China push Papua New Guineas push for a defense treaty with Canberra. Sin's a message to all competing interests in the region that the Pacific nation stands with Australia and supports the international rules based order, P and g's Defense minister said in a landmark speech that nails the country's security allegiances.
To the mast.
Speaking of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute Defense Conference in Canberra on Wednesday, which I'm sure the Prime Minister didn't like because he doesn't like ASPI at the moment, Billy Joseph said the recent circumnavigation of Australia by Chinese People Liberation Army.
Navy ships, which also entered P and G waters.
Had underlined the potential threats faced by Pacific nations, like everybody else, have a very strong economic partnership with China, he said, and I'm sure Australia also the same as the US and everybody. But when it comes to security, which use our traditional partners, which is Australia and the US, I'm glad to hear them saying it.
I would like to see some action.
That proves it though, because of course we have seen China sacking up to all in sundry around the Pacific since the dawn of time basically, but they're putting the heavies on at the moment. If P and G wants to go into a pact. Great, but you know, we can't just go into these things with our eyes closed and believe everything that we're told.
Billy Joseph is speaking more strongly about the relationship between p and G and Australia than Anthony Albanesi speaks about the relationship between Australia and.
The United States.
He's speaking more strongly about the Chinese threat than Anthony Albanese is speaking about it. So and by the way, just proves what a rugby league team in Papua New Guinea can do, right, I mean, who said that wasn't a good idea. Let's go to the front page of
the Northern Territory News. Territory Day war triumph. After weeks of tense negotiations with interstate authorities that would be namely New South Wales, Territory Day has been saved after one hundred tons of fireworks bound for the Northern Territory was cleared to transit through New South Wales and Queensland. A couple of weeks ago, one hundred tons of fireworks was
seized in New South Wales. It was on its way to the Northern Territory, where on their special day you're allowed to set off illegal fireworks one.
Day a year.
In fact, they estimate three hundred and seventy tons of illegal fireworks will.
Be set off on that day. It's quite incredible.
But New South Wales officials seized the fireworks before they could get to the territory, which meant that the Chief Minister of the territory had to talk to Chris Min's right. But it's all been solved. The illegal fireworks are on their way. The Territorians will have their moment.
Yes, because that's right.
In New South Wales you can't actually buy fireworks, so I've heard of people driving down to the Act to try and smuggle fireworks across the border, which all seems a little bit ridiculous. But the Territorians get their fireworks, yippie. Moving on to Tasmanian Mercury, the saga with the Liberal leadership. There is clearly ongoing no confidence vote put Libs on brink.
Rocky's horror show.
Premier Jeremy Rockcliffe faces judgment day today as a no confidence motion in his leadership, moved by Opposition leader Dean Winter, moves closer to passing the House of Assembly. Key Cross benches have backed the motion leaving the minority Liberal government unlikely to unable to head off. A stunning defeat plunged Tasmania into political turmoil, raising the prospect of the state election.
It has left the state budget in.
Doubt and cars a shadow over Tasmania's AFL team. Debate resumes this all sounds like a whole lot of chaos.
You said the AFL team has a shadow over it, as if that's not the main thing. That's the main part of this story here, tesay, he needs an AFL team.
I hope they sought.
That out exactly in all this contention over the ground and whether it's got a roof of all this atm You know who would think that it would be an AFL team that could well bring the Tasmanian government dundune and take them to an early election.
Give the people their team. God damn it.
Exactly. We're going to go to a break. When we come back.
Researchers say drinking coffee will help you to age well. But how many cups do you need to drink every day? We'll tell you after the break. We talk a lot on this program about council stuff ups here in Australia, but I'll tell you what. The Lincolnshire Council in the UK, they have stuffed up pretty bad, spending fifty pounds on a bridge that goes nowhere. Check out the photo we've got of this bridge. They built it and then they ran out of money and they just haven't been able
to finish it at all. So the top right of your screen there there you go. The road literally just stops in the middle of a paddock. And they've told local constituents they'll have enough money to finish that road in five years time, so it's just going to sit there.
They come up with an idea, Caleb.
They could raise money by charging tourists to go and see a white elephant in the wild.
Oh, very good, very good.
But the old thing I think about that train spotters would love it too. If we just show that image again, I reckon that's how they can use it people wanting to you know, people love spotting trains.
That bridge is a perfect advantage.
Point charge price of admission to go.
Maybe they can raise the money to build it.
The only thing is, though, that we actually had a case reasonably similar in Mount Barker in Adelaide. I think we talked about it last week. Yeah, road where they built them, and the road came up to a fence, and they couldn't build the road through the fence because someone owned the easement between it, and so to go on like the two sides of the suburb, you literally had to drive out of one side and go all the way around because they had built a road that
led to nothing. Fantastic stuff, isn't it. James mentioned elephants though, how about this elephant over entirely, and of course if you're ever going to see one in the wild.
This where it would be.
It just wouldn't expect the wild in inverted commas to be in shop. This fella play bang leckt. This elephant is called walked out of his wild elephant. He lives in a nearby national park and he's allowed to roam around wander around. So he's walked out of the national park. The shopkeepers in there selling something to someone and in walks play Yang lick, and they tried to get him out of there by I'm not joking, pleading with him and yelling at him as though that was going to
make some sort of difference. And one of my favorite details, it has to be said, in story, it is that the shop owner said repairing the demage shelves and replacing the lost goods would cost more than a thousand bart and that sounds like a lot, but it's actually forty seven Australian dollars. You've heard about a bull in a china shop. I didn't know about the elephant in the tech shop. But for Ally does his forty seven dollars. They're not quite as dastardly as they look.
It's honestly extremely impressive given how huge the elephant is as well, really really remarkable stuff. A new study has come out which shows that for women's aging, it's actually beneficial to drink caffeine.
Apparently the ideal number is three.
Small cups of coffee a day make women age better. Now, I personally feel very validated by this study because people always call me out for my caffeine consumption, but hey, this is just a longevity strategy to extend my lifespan. This study of fifty thousand women over thirty two years has proven so, so no shame in coffee drinking.
Guys.
Does it work with lattes?
It does? It does?
Mean?
Is the question? I mean, it just gets better and better. Coffee is good.
For you, red wine is good for you. Nicotine helps prevent Alzheimer's.
I mean, every single day the Puritans checks.
Just get another reason to buger off back into there, but we're all.
Off to get a coffee that's from us. Stick around. Coming up is the Read a Penalty Show. Good Night