Lately, General man, welcome the late debase. Thanks for joining us.
I'm James Macpherson with Liz Storer and cayleb Bond coming up. But I don't know how far you'd go to get rid of a spider from your car. But in a story that could only take place in North Queensland, one guy goes the whole way. We'll show you what happens a little later. Plus when we look at the papers, the Australian newspaper tomorrow has a big expose on the ndis you guessed it, more funding problems and Quantus makes some decisions about how they will approach political and social
issues going forward. I know you're intrigued.
We all are. We'll talk about that a little later.
But first, there's a few nervous politicians in Queensland after it was revealed private conversations at the offices of the United Workers Union have been recorded for at least the past twelve months now. This is important because it was the United Workers Union that was responsible for getting rid of Station Pealage and inserting Stephen Miles as the Queensland
premiere at the end of last year. Oh to have been a fly on the wall when those discussions were taking place, Well there was no fly, but there were CCTV cameras and they weren't only watching. Turns out they were listening. Now, all of this came to light when a union worker was accused of using drugs on site and sacked. He's taken the union to court alleging unfair dismissal, and as part of that claim, he's seeking all CCTV
footage featuring himself to be released. Now the union have fought that claim, saying we can't do that because we've only just realized that the contractor who installed the CCTV cameras accidentally switched on the audio recording feature as well, and so if we release all of that, the video and the audio, we'd be in breach of privacy laws. Well, amazingly, the Fair Work Commission has said no, no, whatever footage exists of that worker, it should all be released, including
the audio. Now there's a few things to this story. There's a privacy issue. There's obviously do we believe the union that this was all just a big mistake by
the contractor. But the most intriguing part Calebin Liz, is that most of the CCTV footage relating to the period of time where this worker was alleged to have used drugs on site is around the same time that many union officials and current Labor Cabinet ministers were having little meetings at the union offices about what they would do regarding Anastasia Palage and whether Stephen Miles would be an
appropriate replacement. Now, I should mention the LNP have referred this matter to the police because of breaches of the Privacy Act. But it's an intriguing story, and as I said, there would be some nervous people right now waiting to see what is going to be made public.
You would think, so, I mean, for goodness sake, if the security cameras out in our newsroom and in other certain parts of this building have the audio enabled, I am sunk, is all.
I can say. And it really makes you think.
You would ordinarily think, Okay, you walk into a shop or an office or wherever there's a security camera there. You're kind of under the understanding that it's filming you while you're there, but you wouldn't immediately think that it has the audio enabled. Now terribly convenient for the union that they've only just realized that they were recording all
this audio for about a year. But not only would you be nervous, I suppose about the fact that it might have recorded you when you're in there, particularly if you went in for a high level political meeting, but anyone who walked into that office and unknowingly had their video not video but audio recorded, their voice recorded should be apoplectic because you should be told that in most places, if you walk in and there is a camera there, warned in some way that there is a camera there.
Of course, no warning was given that audio was being recorded. Not only is that a great breach of privacy, it's almost treacherous. And if they didn't know until this point, they have just discovered the greatest treasure trove of content that they could possibly have ever hoped for. I mean, look, you know it's I don't know whether it would be illegal now to go back through all of that recording and use it in some way.
Well what illegal to record exactly?
Which is why it's so hilarious that when the court requested this because of this fellow's fair workcase and the union saying no, we couldn't possibly release this because we've just realized that not only were we filming, but there's audio, and we don't want to break the Privacy Act. You've already broken the Privacy Act by recording people unbeknownst to them for months and months around the clock too.
This was twenty four hour valent.
So this bloke who simply needed the footage from the second and the fifth of October when he's alleged to have been caught out taking drugs on the premises, has blown this whole case wide open. And this is disastrous timing for Miles right, because this creates a reminder for everyone who he's tied to how he became premiere, this back room, factional, union driven deal that was done that
saw him in power. It also reminds everyone that out of his nineteen strong cabinet, twelve of them are in Gary Bullock's pocket.
Twelve of them belong to this same union, and this.
Union is so dodgy they want everyone to believe, Oh.
We haven't been recording totally on most us.
It was a CZTV guy and he just gave us an extra feature that we never us for and we made it very I mean, what CCTV footage do you know of that does include audio. Everyone says, CCTV, we all think of the mute footage, right, That's what the cops use. That's what everyone uses. That's what you just mentioned. When you walk into a shop and you see it up there, there's no sound being recorded, it's.
Just the images.
And you mean to tell me they just got some weird CCTV contractor.
Who was like, I'm just gonna do audio as well.
Can you imagineable like you're asking, you're asking us to believe a bit too much.
All the people watching at home tonight who are going to work in an office or wherever tomorrow will now be thinking, hang on, has the boss been recording me in the lunch.
Room what I've been saying?
Oh my god. I slagged off another colleague and said, you're like, you have reasonable belief that you're having quote unquote private conversation in certain parts of your workplace. And this opens up the possibility that perhaps you haven't been because if it can be done at the uwu's offices, how many other officers workplaces, supermarkets, shops, whatever across the country could this have been done at And if someone realized if you were an employer, obviously this has all
been blown out because it's gone to fair work. But if you were an employer who realized that this ability had been enabled by a contractor, let's just buy that idea for a minute, that this was enabled by a contractor, and you later realized when you went to check the CCTV footage for some reason or another that the audio
was enabled, would you, as an employer change that. Would you go and tell your staff that they had been recorded, or would you secretly go, hmm, this could be useful one day, and you couldn't blame them for doing it, because of course it's an upper handful.
This explains you know, we've always wanted why.
Do unions have so much power?
Now we know because they invite government ministers in from it for a meeting. Where should we have at the local coffee shop? No, no, let's have it in our offices. They're comfortable, you'll feel right home, and you know, consequently you've got leverage. But the other funny part about this, if it's true that this was a mistake by the contractor, that they've only just realized, that would imply, would it not, that they've not ever looked at CCTV footage for the
past twelve months. Well, because if they'd looked at it, they would have realized, Right, that's the argument. We've just gone looking for this footage and now we've realized have they not looked at any footage for over a year and realized?
So it's a little hard to buy.
This excuse that it was the contract of what done it?
Isn't it just And while we're on the topic of privacy, et cetera, let's go to abadarby And I'm going to open this with a joke which is somewhat unrelated to the topic. But you know what they're well, you know, you know what the difference is between Dubai and Abu Dhabi.
Go on, have a guess, Dubai.
This is going to have something to do with the fact that that's how you pronounce no, no, no, no.
There's a good Flintstones joke.
It's punchline, Jake, I can't remember the punch.
Yeah, people in st okay, okay, I'll start get you did not watch that last minute of television has been raised from your memory? What's the difference?
What's just a curd? Is going to be funny of it?
Clearly really well, what's.
The difference between Dubai and Abu Dhrby.
I don't know.
People in Dubai don't watch The Flintstones but people in Abu Dharby do. Anyway, there you go.
That was a long set up job.
In anti climax and it is my diary exactly.
How look, look, it's it's probably the highlight of your day. Do you view at home? But it is somewhat related. Is somewhat related because of course in The Flintstones, which is about the nineteen fifties, is all this futuristic stuff going on, and that is exactly what's going on in Abu Dharby. Now where they've said that in the Internet
National Airport they're going to enable facial recognition. Now you might think of facial recognition, Oh okay, you know, they're just going to be able to see that you've been in the airport and they can monitor that you've been in the airport. No, this thing is going to allow you to move through the airport without producing any papers. So the camera essentially looks at your face identifies who you are.
I mean, you don't have to pull out your passport, you don't have to pull out a visa because it will all be held electronically and they can tell it the minute you walk into the airport. It essentially means you don't have to go through all the rigmarole that you would normally go through going through an international airport. You just walk in the joint, go through the security clearance and that's it. You are totally done. And of course that sucks people in because they think, well, how
good is this? It makes the whole process so much more streamlined. I don't have to worry about leaving my passport at home and all this sort of stuff. But
just think about it for a minute. If they can literally track every piece of information they need about you to go through an international airport, and going through an international airport is not an easy task usually, what else could they be monitoring when they've got this facial recognition And we've talked about this before, a story about I think it was the Tube in England where they've been using facial recognition technology that can monitor your moods so
they can determine what sort of advertising should potentially be shown to you. Like, they're literally collecting absolutely everything about you, to the point that a camera can look at you and know whether you should be in that airport or not, whether you've got a visa or not, every single piece of that airport that you've moved through before you even know what you've done.
And it was insane, really concerning about this. Get this, This is a direct quote from Chief Information Officer Andrew Murphy.
He says it's designed with no pre enrollment required.
Passengers are automatically regnized and authenticated as they moved through the airport, significantly speeding up the entire process. So he's the airport's chief information officer and he's really tooting his horn about that. But notice no pre enrollment is required. So my first question is, hang on a minute. So I fly into Abu Dhabi, I'm an Australian citizen. How is it you have all my information? How is it that your system can recognize my face, doesn't need my passport?
And this is why whenever one of these stories come up, I always argue, do you genuinely think they haven't already amassed all this kind of face ID technology?
Or but we don't know that they're using it here in Australia.
Yeah, well, but we do know the good guys Bunnings and Kamar got busted roughly eighteen months ago using this on the millions of Ozzies who walked through their doors and nobody had a clue.
They didn't have to disclose it.
And again I asked the question, what were you doing with that info?
They always treat us like idiots and.
Say, oh, we're just doing it to keep people safe, right, so just stop a handful of shoplifters per week. Everybody else has to give up their rights and just live in a surveillance state.
I don't think so.
So when you've got a major airport like Abu Dhabi just announcing this and saying how grand it is and now people can get through security and don't have to show any papers and everyone's loving it.
Hang on a minute, who was asked about this?
Because the massive breach of privacy that we're talking about the amount of information that thing has to have on you and can recognize as soon as it looks at your base.
And we're talking about an international.
Airport here, So again, where are you getting that kind of information regarding people from all.
Over the world?
Just before we missed the idea completely, And I agree it's not good.
He's lining it up.
He's lining it up.
Could not what you're doing?
Could we not take thirty seconds just to ponder how magnificent it would be? They say it would be fifteen minutes from getting dropped off at the curb outside the airport to being at the gate of your plane that's going through customs, through immigration, getting your boarding pass.
You don't need it. It's all one.
Of those of them. I will trade in my bo it's a valent state. In the name of convenience.
I'm going to it.
Well, let's go to a cashless society.
Then, in the name of convenience, sign up for your digital IDMAC. In the name is so combinion, you should get one.
I'm going to agree with you guys that this is a bad thing, But just for a moment, let's consider if it wasn't so nefarious, how great would this technology be. No, it's have you ever stood in a catch like forever?
I have?
And then you get it there and you line up and trying to get cam immigration.
I do not care.
Like I said, I agree with you, but just for a second, it was a great thought. It reminds me of the Minority Report. Do you remember that scene where is it Tom Cruise and he's walking through a shopping center and everything is facial recognition, even the billboards, and they recognize him coming towards the billboard and immediately the advertisement on the billboard changes. We've already got that with you know, Instagram. He knows you and knows your algorithms and changes the advertising.
This would see. This technology is so close.
To what we've seen on science fiction movies in fairly recent times India, it's quite amazing. There's other things as well, like your idea could be stolen, you could be mistaken because it's not perfect technology, right, So next thing you know, you're being jumped by securitys. I'm not Caleb Bond, I promise I'm not.
You be really worried if they thought you were Caleb.
That good looking.
But the other problem, of course, well is even if all of those things were not problematic, it's the normalization of this technology. It's getting people used to it, first in the airport and then in every other area.
Just the normalization.
It's the implementation of something nobody asks for. We are talking about a full blown surveillance state, and.
The power of that is a power that.
No government should have, but clearly a lot of them have acquired it, whether it's two hour knowledge or not. No government should have that kind of power. No government should have that much information on you. And in case you're sitting at home and you're kind of one of those case rah people, you know, I'm not a criminal. So if you want to track me, track me, I've got nothing to lose. You can take my privacy, you
can take my freedom. I've got nothing to hide. Here's a little clip by Andrew Snowden, one of the massively original whistleblowers at the NSA, one of the most secretive government organizations in the world. Here he is trying to help everyday people like you and me understand why you should care.
Why should people care about surveillance, Because even if you're not doing anything wrong, you're being watched and recorded, and the storage capability of these systems increases every year consistently by orders of magnitude, to where it's getting to the
point you don't have to have done anything wrong. You simply have to eventually fall under suspicion from somebody, even by a wrong call, and then they can use this system to go back in time and scrutinize every decision you've ever made, every friend you've ever discussed something with, and attack you on that basis to sort of derive suspicion from an innocent life and paint anyone in the context of a wrongdoer.
Whise words from Edward Snowden there people need to realize, especially when we're talking about digital ID, this new age of digital ID. What he just said is exactly what we're already seeing happen in the likes of the UK, who arrested over three thousand people just last year because of things they'd interacted.
With on Facebook.
So what he's talking about there is they are putting together a genormous dossier on you, conversations that you've had, posts that you've interacted with.
Maybe you haven't even interacted with things, but.
You have watched this video on YouTube, You've watched this clip on Rumble, you googled this two years ago.
They are building what it is to be you, and.
That kind of power that gives someone complete power to be able to anticipate your decision making process, what you like, what you hate, and to manipulate you because they figured out how you tick on any given subject.
It's just freaky, freaky technology.
I wish it didn't exist, but I fear that there's absolutely no putting the genie back into the bottle at this point.
And going back to the point that you were making before, James, you know, think for thirty seconds about how wonderful the convenience of it would be. That's how they suck people in,
because it's, like you know it is. It is terribly convenient, and the idea of it sounds so wonderful because who doesn't want to make their life easier, But it's giving up that or accepting the easiness, requires you to give up so much more that is so much more powerful and valuable to you in the long run than the thirty or forty five minutes that you managed to buy back by using the technology.
That thirty seconds that I sat here just thinking about how glorious. Had I not had you two sitting beside me, I reckon, I would have gone.
We're keeping you on the state.
Thank God for both of you.
The US International Air Transport Association surveyed passengers and found you will not be surprised. Seventy five percent of passengers said they loved the idea thought it was really good.
You never know how big those poles are.
I'm like, they could just have interviewed or ah, surveyed one hundred people and then been like seventy five percent of passengers. These guys always seem to turn up the research that they want, right look one to roll out this surveillance system.
Meanwhile, there's been a massive backlash in the.
US when the TSA announced that they were going to roll out similar in four hundred airports across the United States of America, because people actually care about their privacy when you're talking about the United States of America and they've got the guns to back it up.
Well, I've just run a survey. It's a world first, exclusive late debate, exclusive survey. I've surveyed the people in this room, and I think we've come back with a one hundred percent denouncement of this technology. One hundred percent of people say this technology is bad.
How about the survey was legitimate.
They surveyed all the employees of the facial recognition technic and seventy five percent so they could.
Let's go to Paris for a second. You remember the.
Opening ceremony caused huge controversy and upset for Christians around the world with it mocking the Last Supper, portraying Jesus as an overweight lesbian and the Disciples as transgendered and as drag queens. Well, a group of Christians decided to protest this. They got a bus. They put an image of what happened at the opening ceremony on the bus and wrote the word stop attacking Christians, and they began to drive that around Paris. Well, they were arrested and
thrown in jail. Here's some vision of the bus. Let's have a look at that, and you'll see the police escorting them. So for driving that bus around, they were arrested for an unauthorized protest. The group responsible, as I said, six Christians. They put out the following tweet. Six of our team members were forced to spend the night in jail for simply denouncing the mockery of Christians by having the message stop attacks on Christians written on a bus.
This is not illegal in any way. As a lawyer states, it appears.
Impossible to constitute the crime of failing to communicate a protest because there's no protest in the presence of one unique vehicle. The prosecutor pushed the law to its limits to stop the bus and limit their free speech. Moreover, the procedure was highly irregular. Here's some of the Christians in the back of the police van talking about what's happened to them.
So as you can see, I've just been taken into a police van when there right now take the whole cities of local underground. It's going to be taken to the police office, to the police station where they want to play on a report.
They found some kind of recent way, had a harper.
Start on a here.
We did everything, we've been remas we asked if there was a new commission.
It seems like it's obviously above and I see it seem they it's an ideological attack.
That's absolutely ridiculous. Clearly it's not a protest.
It's a singular vehicle with a message that the French government didn't like because it shamed them and embarrassed them.
I mean, this is hair raising.
There was no protest, there was no riot. You've got a bus driving around. They had been driving around since nine am that morning. They were arrested at gunpoint. We're told the bus was stopped, surrounded by police and stopped at seven pm, so from nine am just peaceably driving around. Obviously this was reported by someone to someone who took great exception to it. They were making no noise, there was no kind of upheaval, no kind of upset whatsoever.
Peaceably driving around. The sign says it all. So that was the extent of the protest. And these guys spent a night in jail. They spent a night in jail for very respectfully, very quietly making their.
This was very distasteful, This was blasphemous.
This was disrespectful to our faith, as they should and have every right to do, apparently unless you're in France. So they're now going to press charges against this, and that is going to be a very serious and I hope a groundbreaking court case because they're like, you arrested us for doing nothing wrong, literally by your own laws.
We have broken no laws whatsoever. There was zero disturbance of the piece.
So it's going to be really interesting following this to see what the state comes up with to justify surrounding their vehicle at gunpoint and making these guys, six of them plus the bus driver, spend a night in jail.
Maybe if it was an electric bus.
Just indulge me for a moment. I'm going to mount an argument in favor of this, because I hate bumper stickers, particularly political bumper stickers. And if they could apply this rule in Australia so that anyone driving around with like a Greens bumper sticker or something on the back of the deck, save the whales, you know, put up the wind turbines. That is exactly the same premise here. That's some sort of protest and we're going to reach everyone
driving around with one of those bumper stickers. I wouldn't mind that so much. When I lived in South Melbourne, I used to drive past this car all the time and it had an f Sky newsed bumper sticker on the back of it, and I wouldn't have mind it if I got locked up. Now I am joking, because this is a flagrant attack on free speech. Like if you cannot that was a simply peaceful message written on the side of a bus. If you can't drive around doing that, how can you openly run any kind of
political campaign? And we then to suggest that someone on the side of a road with an a frame sign saying you know, I don't know. Once upon a time it would have been free Julian assane or something that that was some sort of unauthorized protest because there was one person waving a flag. And it says so much that what we saw at the Olympic opening ceremony was allowed to go ahead. That was an expression of free speech that was totally condoned and attack on religion that
there was no problem with that. But someone drives around with a bus that simply says stop attacking Christians, and that is somehow an unauthorized protest that needs to be stopped. I think says it all, doesn't it.
If you attack Christians, that's perfectly fine. They broadcast it to an international audience. But if you drive around the streets of parisaying please don't attack Christians, well that constitutes an offense.
Now you're in trouble.
How dare you?
How dare you ask not to how dare you ask to be treated with some respect? Ridiculous?
Before we go to a break, there's this great story about NASA.
So remember when we.
Were talking about how Boeing's not been doing too well lately.
The DOJ took them to court.
There was a small matter of those two planes that crash, killing everyone on board.
They're still being held to account.
For that and pleading guilty to a few things, but got off lightly with a sweetheart deal. And we joked at the time, were the people who were flying into space on Boeing vehicles? Were they worried maybe they weren't going to make it home safely. Well, it turns out they are stuck up in space and drink how to get home, and Elon Musk's Space X is going maybe.
We better rescue these guys, although to their credit, they are keeping in very good spirits while they're stuck up there. Check out of.
Them having their own little Olympics since they're missing out on it while they're out in space. Hilariously, Steve Stitch, program manager for NASA's Commercial Cruise, trying to trying to find out what the best way forward is and what the heck happened on this Boeing machinery they've.
Used to get up there.
He says, I think the NASA community in general would like to understand a little.
Bit more of the root cause and the physics.
I think especially the people who arrived on board that particularly Boeing vehicle and now are wondering how.
To get home.
This was supposed to be an eight week long journey, sorry, no long journey, and now is blowing out to potentially eight months long because they're just like, well, I guess we're in it for the long haul until somebody can get us home.
This all goes back to when NASA decommissioned the space shuttles, and then to get into space they either had to get the ride with the Russians or they had to get some private company to do it. So they gave multi billion dollar contracts to Boeing and to SpaceX, owned by Elon Musk. And you'd expect Boeing to be all over this, but of course, as you said, is they've had so many problems with their aircraft. I mean, spacecraft are so much more complicated. Some of their initial efforts
at this star line of spacecraft. This is Boeing software bugs, meant some of the first rockets they shot went in the wrong direction. Then they had flammable tape inside the cabin of the space ship, which is probably not good.
Two liftoffs were aborted.
And finally when they got a couple of astronauts on this spacecraft going to the International Space Station.
It had thruster problems and.
Gas leaks that they're still trying to work out what this And like you said, is I don't blame the astronauts for saying we'd like to understand a little bit more of the root cause before we get back in this thing and try and make it to Earth. So, now, elon Musk, who's getting smashed by governments all around the world. But the American the Biden administration can make a choice, can't They your astronauts and can come back with Musk, or there's a Russian rocket.
They can hitch a ride with which with which one would you trust more? The Russians who've been trying to beat us in the space race in forever, you know, while might just magically combust on the way home all Boeing, which may well do exactly the same thing. And they're surmising that, you know, maybe it was like some of the valves were too small, Like okay, but before you got on a rocket ship to go up to the International Space Station, you'd like to think they'd done their due diligence.
To make sure that every little bit.
Of that vessel was exactly as it should be but no, it's Boeing. They have doors fly off mid air. And what was the other story? We rely yeah, and they were using mental apparently that had been you know, come out of China, that hadn't been properly accredited, that came showing up dead and you're like, yeah, I'm going to go to space on a Boeing rocket. I would have
gone in totally the other direction, now, you know. The one silver lining could potentially be that if you got stuck on the International Space Station and you didn't particularly like your spouse, it may actually be a really nice holiday for a little while. They may well be saying, I don't want to go home. I'm quite enjoying it
up here on the International Space Station. And if they're getting up to that sort of fun like the the International Space Station Olympics, I mean I want to know how they do the diving and all the.
Stuff that I found that clip offensive to be honest, because I felt like they weren't appreciating the gravity of the city.
Oh yeah, I can't keep up with the dad jokes.
I can't dad jokes.
I'll be here again next week.
But it's a.
Brilliant opportunity for Elon to be the hero here, so he is now launching a rocket on the twenty fourth of September, but it's only going to have two people on board instead of the usual four, so they can go up there, retrieve the two.
Lost lambs that Boeing is left.
Hanging, and return triumphant in February of next year.
I love it. I absolutely love it.
I'm like, ahh, what a middle.
Finger to Boeing, and Elon, who has been so demonized, gets to be like, you're welcome.
Save the day.
While we're in the US, things just get worse for Kamala Harris. Remember she was appointed the Borders Are by Joe Biden, and then as soon as she was chosen as the Democratic presidential candidate, we were told her she
was never the Borders Are. There was nothing to worry about, there, nothing to see there, even though when she went to visit the border one time only once she's actually been down there, they sent everyone through to her to move on all the illegal immigrants, put them up in hotels for a few days, so it all looked lovely and
clean when she got down there. And we know that millions and millions of people have poured over the southern border under the Biden administration, because, of course, one of the first things that Biden did as president was to undo the closure of the border that Trump instituted while he was in charge, and to stop building the wall
that he had begun. Will we find out today that it's not only all these people who've poured over the border, which we already knew about, but terrorists or alleged terrorists, people who've been on terror watch lists have been released into the US after they were detected at the border. I mean, you'd think if there was anyone you didn't want to lead into the US, even though let millions of them in, these would be the handful few hundred
of them that you wouldn't let in. But this has come out of a new House Judiciary Committee report that says under the Baden Harris administration, of the more than two hundred and fifty illegal aliens on the terrorist watch list who were encountered by border patrol at the Southwest border between fiscal years twenty twenty one and twenty twenty three, the DHS has released into American communities at least ninety nine with at least thirty four others in DHS custody
but not yet removed from the United States. What on earth are they playing at releasing these people into the community. You would think that they would be the easiest ones to just very quietly send back home.
But no, even people on terror watch.
Lists have been allowed into the US. And I know we keep talking about the fact that it's Kamala's record that could ultimately bring her down. You just need a few of these stories to just keep trickling out between now and November to bring her undone, because even if you were arrested on Kamala's supporter, you'd have to ask the question, why are you releasing potential terrorists into the country.
And allowing people in from what they know are very unfriendly countries. I mean, the border patrol has encountered tens of thousands from countries that could present security risks, including over two thousand Afghan nationals, over thirty three thousand Chinese nationals, five hundred and forty one from Iran, five hundred and twenty from Syria, over three thousand from Uzbekistan.
So even putting the.
Ones that we know are a security rest to a side, you've invited tens of thousands into your country now from unfriendly nations. You don't know how many of those have nefarious intentions.
And Nancy Pelosi was right, she said Joe Biden is one of the most consequential presidents in history.
Well, there he has some consequences.
Has changed the faith for allowing all these.
People on terror watch lists into the country, that's for sure.
We're going to go to a break.
When we come back, we'll look at what's making news in tomorrow's papers, including the management of Quantus with some new guidelines around how they'll approach political and social issues going forward.
That's coming up in just a moment. Okay, welcome back.
Let's take a look at what's making news in tomorrow's papers. Liz store has got the Australian Right, Thank you.
James Mcphersonbanese is alternative facts.
Check out just how alternative these are. Anthony Albanesi has denied the.
Reserve Bank, has blamed higher inflation for asks on state and federal budget spending, widening the split between his government and the Central Bank, and prompting the economists to declare the Prime Minister is wrong.
Mate.
Michelle Bullock has stared down the barrel and told the entire nation it's due to government spending. So you the head of the government then getting up and trying to tell people.
That it's not like, what is this? Are you just accusing the RBA.
So he's not accusing the RBA of lying, he's simply lying by saying.
They say it, we all heard it.
Okay, I'm trying to gas light us into believing we didn't hear our lying.
Is is this misinformation or is this a very good, great question?
How many years in jail?
Very good? And Look, I was skeptical of Michelle Bullock being appointed the new governor of the RBA when it happened, because I felt that we would be better off with someone who hadn't lived in the RBA bubble most of their working life. But I think she's proven herself to be an excellent RBA governor. She is, you know, so much better than Philip Lowe ever was. She is a great communicator, and she's very direct. She just says it how it is, and she's not afraid to ruffle a
few feathers as she has in this case. And as I was saying on Shari earlier this evening, the comments of the Prime Minister and the Treasurer Jim Charmers, have been utterly duplicitous because if you read into what Charmers said, and he's rebuked the idea that you know, there is inflation continuing to go up or it will continue to go up because the RBA has forecast at once these subsidies of electricity at SPENNTCA come off, that the headline
inflation rate will increase, and Charmers has basically said, well, that's nonsense. It's not like people have spare cash floating around to spend. The point is they don't have spare cash floating around to spend because they've already had to spend all of it to keep up with the price increases that have come with the rate of inflation. And if you look at the figures from the last quarter,
it's not discretionary spending that's going up anymore. Discretionary spending has gone down and the inflation figures on those discretionary items have decreased. The inflation lies in essential goods and services like electricity, power, food, etc. So it's not that people are just going out spending money willy nilly because they want to. They're spending money.
Because they have to.
It's a supply and demand thing, as the RBA has said, and who is responsible for the supply and demand the government, because they've created all this demand with record levels of migration and not enough houses to put these people in, and not enough school places to put the kids.
In, et ce.
That creates the demand that doesn't meet the supply, and that's how you get inflation. So Charmers, you say, no, the RBA is totally wrong here. You created the problem in the first place, as they're trying to tell you, you can't claim that you've had.
Nothing to do with it. It's worse than that.
It's a double bind for the government because if the RBA is saying government spending is contributing to inflation, remember it's not just enough for the government to say no, no, no, we're not adding to inflation, because the whole point of their policy was they said, not only will this not add to inflation, this will help to bring inflation down.
So to say.
That their policy is adding to the problem is a complete discreditation. If that is a word, Liz, it is now of Charmer's entire policy. It wasn't meant to add it was meant to push downward pressure as the Albanez.
He loves to see. What we just having is the whole policy is bunk.
Well and we've had this for quite some time now, where the RBA is like, what are.
You guys doing?
Like when Chalmers brought out his new budget and was like, this is gonna be great and don't worry about inflation and rate rises because they're just gonna get better and my budget is counting on it, and the RBA literally came out the next day and we're like, mate, where are you getting that from?
Like that's not for you to say.
We just seem to be having this nonsensical back and forth between the government and what's supposed to be an independent body, but clearly the government is trying to tell it what to say. Don't tell people it's our fault, and the RBA is like, yeah, no, government spending is driving this, and the Government's like they didn't even say that.
It's ridiculous.
It's like kids in the playyard. Next flash on front of yours. Quantous activism only with approval. Quanta CEO Vanessa Hudson will have to get bored approval to involve the airline in any social or party political issues, such as last year's support for the Voice reverendum under recommended changes to corporate governance.
Well, well, well this will be interesting.
Does this mean we won't get slapped in the face with whatever is the current social cause when boarding or disbarking from a Quantus flight from here on in? Or we will, but this time we'll know it's with the blessing of the entire board, instead of Alan Joyce being like, here's my latest soapbox.
Everyone get on board.
I bloody will hope it means an end to it. I mean they should go even further. They should have to consult the shareholders before they do any of this sort of stuff, because that was my issue with it, not so much the fact that a corporate body like Quantus had taken a point of view. They're entitled to take a point of view whatever.
I don't want to be to enforce it on every customer that then walks in their door.
Well, in orders, the CEO entitled to turn the airline essentially into his privates.
And this was the issue, right because in the free market you can go with whatever you want, et cetera. And I always thought if you were an investor in quant and they're spending the money that you've invested in the company to take out an ad in the paper to say we support same sex marriage. I invested in Quantus because I want them to run flights and make
money for me, not spend money on social causes. And of course what the board of Quantus has now done is gone through everything that happened that led up to Alan Joyce leaving the airline. They've now decided they're ripping some nine million dollars out of the bonuses that he was due to receive because he did such a bad job, because what he did was run the reputation of Quantus
into the ground. And what they're now trying to say is well, part of the reason that we lost our reputation is because we were seeing not as the national carrier. We were seen as the national bandwagon mob that just jumped on whatever was the latest cause and spend how many there. I mean, let's not forget that Quantus gave free flights to Yes campaigners in.
The Voice referendum.
And again, I mean I have thought about pretending to support the Yes campaigns so I could fly between Sydney and Melbourne.
And fiction less flood.
You know will have got me a free flight. I mean, why wouldn't you get on board with that?
Show how easily you are bought?
Caleb Bond to the last slash on the front of the oars. Calculation on NDIS price totally broken. Disability service providers are demanding a two billion a year top up to fix a major mathematical error in how prices are set by the agency running the NDIS, which is leading to thousands of providers being underpaid by up to ten
percent and becoming financially unviable. Well this is a bit different, isn't it, Because we've been told at nauseum over the last few years how NDIS providers are rolling in the dough. They bump up their prices knowing well it's taxpayer money. Might as well take these flogs for a ride. So people at NDIS rather is paying out far more than an average client would.
Be for them the same service. We've been given the impression that these NDIS providers have been just laughing in.
What do you call them baths full of money?
Well, some of the mar you got to fill for Bill Shorton, Because Bill Shorton, of course, is where you don't have to fil for Bill Shorton, it's quite hilarious. But he's been charged with cut the cost of the ndias right, and now he's got the providers saying no, no, the model. It's always government modeling that gets you. The model was faulty and so we just need extra two billion dollars to pay.
Everyone what they need.
So you can imagine Bill short and he's trying to find like, you know, one hundred thousand dollars a year and fifty bucks there, and he's got to stump up two billion in extra payments.
He's supposed to be cutting costs.
We'd like to throw more money at it. That'll certainly fix it. Before we go, let's go to the Advertiser tomorrow where it says quit goes the Spears. David Spears quit the Liberals top job yesterday in South Australia and in a stunning exit statement said he was lacking energy and had quote unquote, had a gut full. The thirty nine year old pondered whether because he was from the southern suburbs, he might have been too different from the
Liberal Party. The party is in crisis with no clear successor, and look I can't half blame him for going because Malanowskis is running such a tight ship down there. The Libs are going to be in the wilderness for sixteen years like they were under ran and weather or why would you want to lead the liberal path?
Con I point out something about your former newspaper. The headline says David's no Goliath as he bows out lacking energy.
David beats Goliath.
The Adelaide advertising needs to get back to Sunday School. We're going to go to a break when we come back. How far would you go to get a spider out of your car? You won't believe what this North Queensland guy does.
That's coming up in a second.
Welcome back, Well caleber great Australian has passed away.
That's right. There are landmark events in your life that you remember where you were when they happened, When Diana died, when nine to eleven happened, and people will ask you where were you when Jack Carlson died. Now, if the name does not ring a bell, he is an ab salute Ossie legend. You may remember him for this though. When he was arrested in nineteen ninety one for eating a meal, a succulent Chinese meal.
But you just.
Assured me that I could speak, So sit down inside the car.
You're not assuring anything. I'm under what.
Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest.
Have a look at the headlock in. See that chap over the head. This is the blak who got me on the phoenis pople. Get some cups and why did you do this?
For what reason?
What is the charge?
Eating a meal, a succulent Chinese meal. Oh that's you nice headlocks up? Yes, I see that.
You know your judo well. And word has it that Copper is competing in the Olympics in Paris this year.
So mister Carlson was.
A low level crim you know, he'd done a few break and into type things. He was a serial prison escape, so he's not all that stupid. But he somehow wrongly ended up on a list of like the most wanted criminals in Australia. And they busted into this Brisbane restaurant in ninety one thinking he was another guy, and carded him out and arrested him, had the cameras there ready to go, and in the process he gave us one of the best bits of Australian news footage ever taken.
He's died at the age of eighty two. Mister Carlson, may rest in peace.
Amen, before we go.
Having lived in North Queensland, I mean, you've got snakes, you've got crocodiles, you've got poisonous jellyfish, so you wouldn't think a spider would bother you too much. But the Townsville guy was so bothered by a spider in his Nissan pathway he set his car on fire in what the newspaper described as a dramatic removal technique which backfired. Have a look at the vision and listened to the emergency Walker workout calling it in set the car.
On fire to try and kill a spider.
I'm known further details.
Over I mean the vision, the car is completely a wreck and burnt.
Out, But I love the emergency worker. I have no further details.
That's gotta be like.
Full blown rachnophobia.
Right there, he's got a lighter and chasing around it.
Just lower the top. We're going to go, but stick around. Coming up is the Rea Penny Show. Good Night,