Daily Insight

Premier of Victoria, Jacinta Allan, has been premier for about eight months. Natalie Hutchins is the Minister for Women. Do you think there is a Minister for Men? Of course not, don’t be stupid! Only half the population need a dedicated minister, even though according to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, males are around three times more likely to die by suicide than females, almost seven men every day. Even though the vast majority (93%) of workers killed from work‑related activities are men, over twelve times more likely to die at work than women. Even though most victims of homicide in Australia (69%) are male according to the most recent homicide report by the Australian Institute of Criminology, compared to 30% female (1% was indeterminate). Actually, it’s one of the safest times to be alive for females in Australia based on historical numbers. But No, despite the statistics, Victoria doesn’t need a Minister for Men. Ms Vicki Ward, the Minister for Prevention of Family Violence. Can you guess who’s responsible for most of that family violence? That’s right, men! Kat Theophanous is the Parliamentary Secretary for Women’s Health. Do you think there’s one for men’s health? Nah, men don’t need to worry about their health in Victoria. They even have a Minster for Equality, Harriet Shing, you know, to make sure everyone’s being treated equally in society. The Cabinet of Victoria consists of 22 members in total. 15 members are female, while only seven are male, outnumbered more than two-to-one. I don’t think the Minister for Equality is doing her job. But just when you thought this can’t get any worse, the Premier decides to release a statement demonising men even further. This was released a couple of days ago, 28 May. “I am announcing several changes to Parliamentary Secretary responsibilities. Tim Richardson will become Parliamentary Secretary for Men’s Behaviour Change, continuing the Allan Labor Government’s priority to make Victoria a safer place for women and children and work to end the tragedy of deaths of Victorian women at the hands of men.” Secretary for Men’s Behaviour Change? This makes it sound like there’s something wrong with men, something that needs fixing, whereas women need protecting from evil men. This is the most extreme form of identity politics that I have ever seen. Although they want you to think the opposite, let’s not mince words here, men are under political attack in Victoria. But why are they doing it? Obviously the overwhelming majority of men don’t support violence against women, or violence full stop for that matter! Most of us are loving husbands, partners and fathers. But there must be some statistics backing up the Premier’s position? Well, if you look at the most recent homicide report, Incidents of intimate partner homicide by victim sex, then yes, women are over-represented, 89% to 11%. But this is only one type of very specific homicide. Noting that this is the equal third lowest number of intimate partner homicide incidents perpetrated against females ever recorded. Plus this doesn’t take away from the fact that almost 70% of all homicide victims are male. The Allan Government’s sweeping generalisation about men as perpetrators is just blatantly wrong and unfair. It’s just an absurd piece of identity and victimhood politics. Imagine if it was any other group. For example, in the most recent homicide report, Homicide offenders by Indigenous status, we can see Indigenous males have a homicide rate of 17.13 compared to non-Indigenous males 1.39, that’s more than 12 times the rate! If you look at Indigenous females, it’s even worse, 17.5 times the rate of non-Indigenous females. Actually, Indigenous females commit homicide at a rate almost two-and-a-half times that of non-Indigenous males. I’m not trying to target Indigenous people here, but the Victorian Government are clearly trying to target men, when most of us are perfectly law-abiding, peace-loving individuals who world never think of harming a woman, or anybody else for that matter. Based on these statistics, they could rightfully have a Secretary for Indigenous Behaviour Change. Imagine the outcry if they did that, but in terms of whose committing the most violence, us innocent men are being scapegoated. And it’s just not fair. And just one more statistic. This is the Australia Institute of Family Studies, Intimate partner violence in the LGBT community. They found that lesbian women were more likely than gay men to report having been in an abusive same-sex relationship (41% vs 28%). This shows you that women can certainly be violent. In my opinion, Victoria is becoming some kind of political dystopian nightmare. The Government are creating a war between men and women for no good reason. This won’t end well. When the government pit one group of Victorians against the rest, this is just going to end in disaster. Men are bad? Or is the Allan Government bad? MUSIC Allégro by Emmit Fenn

There’s a campaign showing Queensland Premier Steven Miles holding a fifty-cent coin near a train. What’s going on? Breaking news, all public transport fares in Queensland will cost fifty cents from August 5th as part of a six-month trial. Is this campaign cheesy? Yes. Is this a political stunt? Yes. Is this a vote-buying exercise? 100% yes. There’s an election coming up in October. You’d be a fool to think this could be anything else. But is this a good idea? Well, that’s what we’re here to talk about. I’ve lived in Asia, and don’t get me wrong, I love cheap public transport. When I was in Beijing, I could travel anywhere in the city for like 40 cents. One complaint I’ve had about Australian public transport, is that it’s often very expensive, comparatively. That said, I understand why. Asia often has a much higher population density, so it’s much easier to get bang for your buck regarding massive transportation networks. You’re guaranteed many times more trips per day in Beijing than say Brisbane per distance travelled. So what are my thoughts on the recent Queensland Government announcement where they’re going to offer fifty-cent travel no matter how far you go? First of all, I’d just like to point out, I don’t use public transport – almost never. Before the pandemic, I used to work in the Brisbane CBD, and I had a couple of colleagues who used to commute from the Gold Coast. They hated it, but had no option. It was standing room only, five days a week. When the prices are dropped to fifty cents, how crowded will they be? Presumably, very! And what about parking? Many people in Brisbane have to drive to the station. They are not close enough to walk. Where will all these cars park? It’s all well and good to have fifty-cent tickets spurring on demand, but unless you build more car parks, where will all these extra people park their cars? I guess the government haven’t fully thought this through, but this is not about that, this is about getting reelected! So how much will it cost the government? Well of course, the government aren’t paying for it. We’re paying for it through taxes! $150 million for the six-month trial. Presumably, if they made it permanent, this will double the cost to at least $300 million each year and force additional investments in transport infrastructure to cope with the higher demand. Are they essentially just using taxpayer money to fund his reelection campaign? I don’t know, I’m just asking. Some will argue that this will all be paid for out of the hard work of folks in regional communities generating mining royalties. Folks living in places with no Translink services, not to mention a lack of teachers, doctors, and police. Is this the Queensland Government, or perhaps the Brisbane Government? I guess they’ve abandoned any dreams of holding onto any regional seats. Actually, I’m surprised they didn’t import American rapper 50 Cent to promote this new fifty-cent public transport initiative with his brand new song, “Get on the f***in’ train motherf***er!”. Yes, I know, I should work in marketing. When Mr Miles was asked why the initiative is not permanent, he said, “If it was permanent, then they might say, ‘Oh, I’ll think about it next year, I’ll think about it sometime in the future”, whereas with this trial people know that they need to use it to prove that they want almost free public transport.” When asked, why not just make it free, he said, “If it was free, it would be hard to still require people to tap on and tap off, and without that tap on and tap off data, we don’t have an accurate picture of how many people are using public transport, and we need that data not just to see whether this trial is successful, but also to manage the network, to make sure we’re using our resources and rostering staff and all of those things in a way that they need to be based on demand.” You know what I think, I don’t think that’s the real reason. If it were 100% free, they’re worried that there would be vagrancy. There would be anti-social behaviour. Homeless people might decide that a nice warm train would be the perfect place to camp out during the cold winter days. Although, one could argue that fifty cents is not much of a price to pay. As long as they pay their fifty cents per trip, they can travel on the buses, trains and ferries all day and all night (or at least until the last service). I believe some of the Nambour and Gold Coast trains have toilet and wash basin facilities onboard allowing them to have a wash if they desire, and as I said, it’s a cheap, warm place to lay their heads during the winter months. We know it’s cheesy. We know it’s a political stunt. But as I asked at the start, is it a good idea? Well, I’m a bit biased, so I think I’ll reserve my judgement until after it’s been running for a month or two. But what do you think? Has the Premier bought your vote? Has he won you over? Or is this just vote buying at its best? MUSIC Allégro by Emmit Fenn

Laura Tingle is the Staff Elected Director at the ABC, chief political correspondent for 7.30, as well as the president of the National Press Club of Australia. Ms Tingle holds a privileged, taxpayer-funded position as a senior journalist at the national broadcaster, whose charter mandates impartiality and balance. But Ms Tingle’s most recent rant, funded by you, was at the Sydney Writers’ Festival over the weekend. When discussing the Coalition’s immigration policy where basically Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has promised to slow down immigration temporarily in order to free up housing during a housing crisis – a fairly moderate proposal I would suggest – well, Ms Tingle unleashed, saying, “For a major political leader to be saying everything that’s going wrong in this country is because of migrants, and I had this sudden flash of people turning up to try to rent a property or at an auction and if they look different, whatever you define different as, basically he has given them licence to be abused. We are a racist country, let’s face it. We always have been, and it’s very depressing.” Is Ms Tingle right? Is Australia a racist country? For those of you who are impatient, my short answer is No. We’re one of the least racist countries on this planet. Let me explain. This is the National People’s Congress in China. What percentage do you think, how many foreign faces are there in leadership positions in China? What about the Indian Parliament? Or how about Africa’s most populous nation, Nigeria? How many non-African people do you think hold leadership positions? Noting that these three countries represent more than a third of the world’s population. How many foreign university lecturers do you think you can see in these countries? How many foreign doctors, dentists, lead actors on television, people manning petrol stations? How many Aussie sandwich shops do you think there are? The answer to all these questions is not 0%, but it’s close to 0%. Actually, I think Ms Tingle is completely wrong. Australia is not racist. Australia is actually very accommodating, we’re very accepting, we’re tolerant, we’re egalitarian – we demand that all people are given the same opportunities and are treated fairly. Look, I’m not saying it’s perfect, but tell me any other country that is. The Indigenous Voice to Parliament referendum failed not because of racism, but because it was inherently unfair. Aussies don’t like the idea of giving one group of people more privilege than the rest of us. Yes, the voice was only a so-called “advisory” body, but it would have given one group of Australians a political advantage, even if it was only slight, over other Australians, which is just not fair. To be fair to Aussies, we would be equally dismissive if say Americans living in Australia demanded exemption from land tax. Of course Aussies would reply, “Piss off, mate!”. This isn’t about race. This is about fairness. This is about Australia maintaining our egalitarian values. Probably around 80% of my social circle are foreign-born. All of them prefer living in Australia to their home countries. Why? Because they are given every opportunity in Australia. That’s very liberating for most people. My wife, who is Chinese, was basically given a free TAFE course to train up in a job that is facing shortages. She now works for the Government and has endless work if she wants it. In Australia, anyone who’s willing to put in a little bit of effort can get a job. The only thing holding people back in Australia is an unwillingness to work, or an unwillingness to better oneself. As I said, this is not me saying Australia is perfect, but racism is not the issue. Calling Australia racist, is like calling the pope a Buddhist. Remember those countries I mentioned earlier, well according to CNN, “Nigeria’s paramilitary raids birthday party, arrests 76 gay people”. The Guardian, “Elderly Uyghur women imprisoned in China for decades-old religious ‘crimes’”, and one from India, “As ethnic violence rages on in Manipur, Indian government accused of looking the other way”. Don’t get me wrong, I like Japan – I lived there for many years – but even in modern-day, democratic Japan, you can still find signs forbidding foreigners from entering. To be fair, I wasn’t even upset by this. I just moved on to the next bar. Oh yes, but according to the ABC’s Laura Tingle, Australia is the racist country, the one that welcomes people from all over the world to live and work here in relative peace and prosperity. The ABC used to be a means to report to regional Australia, but with today’s technology, that is no longer a requirement. In my opinion, we should give the ABC twelve months to set itself up as a paid subscription service, selling off any unused assets. No taxpayer funding will be required. Then they can say whatever the hell they want to the fifteen viewers who choose to pay for it. MUSIC Allégro by Emmit Fenn

Over the last few years, in the name of being woke, Simpsons (and others) have changed a number of voice actors because their real ethnic background didn’t match the fictional ethnic background of the cartoon character being depicted onscreen, not that you could tell from a voice. It’s funny how many of these awake individuals state on the one hand that race doesn’t exist and that we should be aiming for a post-racial future, but on the other hand they’re constantly categorising people into essentially different races. Everything has to be racialised. A number of people jokingly said that minor characters like Bumblebee Man should also change voice actors stating words to the effect, “Bumblebee Man better be voiced by a Mexican dressed like a bee or so help me God!” But it’s true! Bumblebee Man’s voice actor was replaced. Up until 2020, Bumblebee man was voiced by Hank Azaria, but in the name of diversity, since 2021 Eric Lopez is the new voice. According to his Wikipedia page, “Eric Lopez is an American voice actor of Mexican descent.” That seems like an odd thing to write, don’t you think? Couldn’t you just say he’s an American? In 2002, Homer moves in with Julio Franco, a gay man, who was also originally played by Hank Azaria up until 2020, but because Hank Azaria’s not gay, of course he was bumped for an actual gay person, Tony Rodriguez. Yes, apparently now your real sexuality has to match the fictional sexuality you’re playing onscreen. To be clear, I’m certainly not blaming the actors here. Many actors struggle to find jobs, so of course, they’ll take any work they can get. If I was a struggling actor and I was offered the voice role of say an Asian cartoon character, I’d happily take it, simply because I needed the work. Kumiko Nakamura a Japanese artist from Osaka, Comic Book Guy’s girlfriend, and later wife, used to be voiced by Tress MacNeille until 2020, but unfortunately for her, she had the wrong genetic makeup, and has since been replaced by Jenny Yokobori. Noting that, Ms Yokobori is not Japanese, she’s American, but because her ethnic background matches the character’s, then all is right in the world apparently. Judge Snyder, voiced for decades by Harry Shearer. Sorry Harry, your skin tone doesn’t match the imaginary cartoon character’s skin tone – piss off! Replaced by Kevin Michael Richardson. The funny thing about all this, the so-called “white” characters aren’t even white. They’re bright yellow! The Simpsons were kind of forced to spend extra money to get all these different actors to voice all these minor characters. But there was one easy fix. I mean, the characters portrayed on screen aren’t even real, right? At the stroke of the cartoonist’s pen (well, nowadays it’s all done on computers), the producers could have simply changed Dr Hibbert to be a bright yellow character, and kept his voice exactly the same. I mean, that’s how ridiculous this all is. I remember seeing a skit by funnyman Eddie Murphy where he put on makeup and dressed up as a white guy. I remember it being quite funny, and I certainly wasn’t offended by it. But that was live action. What we’re seeing with The Simpsons is just their voices. We’re not seeing the people behind the voices. Of course, skin colour sometimes matters when casting live action, since we see the actors and actresses. It would be weird if, say, Hua Mulan was played by Denzel Washington, no matter how well he delivered the lines. But we don’t see voice actors. So how they look doesn’t matter in the slightest. The only valid job requirement is, can they make the correct voices? Heck, Bart has been voiced by a woman for 35 years, and nobody seems to care. Nor should they. Gin Rummy in The Boondocks is voiced by Samuel L Jackson. Who cares? Are we going to demand that only white people can play white cartoon characters? Apu could have an Indian accent, or a British accent. Heck, he could even have absolutely no accent, because you know, that happens too. Forcing the casting of voice actors that match the ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation of the cartoon character they play, is bordering on ridiculous in my opinion, and is just limiting actors’ opportunities. It will end up creating more problems in the long run, and won’t fix a damn thing. I know this has become trite, but Martin Luther King Jr. dreamed of a day when people were judged by the content of their character, not the colour of their skin. So why are people who claim lineage from his movement striving so hard against this very idea? I never cared who did the voices, and I really don’t want to be pushed into conversations about how I should care now. Look, the bottom line is that if you have a problem with a voice actor because they have a different melanin content than the fictional onscreen character they portray, then aren’t you the one being racist? MUSIC Allégro by Emmit Fenn

I’ve just found out the person who voices Bart, isn’t a 10-year-old boy. The person who voices Groundskeeper Willie, isn’t an angry Scotsman, and the person who voices Mr. Burns isn’t a real-life evil billionaire. I find this highly offensive and I demand they get appropriate voice actors to replace these charlatans! Obviously, I jest. But this is the absurd level society has reached. Welcome to the Death of The Simpsons (Woke Death). As a kid, I loved The Simpsons, the American animated sitcom created by Matt Groening about a dysfunctional, Middle-American family. Sure, I’m Australian, but the issues covered in the earlier Simpsons’ episodes were universal, and it was funny. I pretty much regularly watched The Simpsons up until around the time of the 2007 Simpsons Movie, and then I moved to China where I pretty much didn’t watch The Simpsons again, apart from the odd episode now and again. I kind of grew out of it, I suppose, and just wasn’t that interested in The Simpsons anymore. Many fans will argue over when The Simpsons so-called Golden Age ended, but it’s usually around Season 9 in 1997, with the episode “The Principal and the Pauper” commonly cited as a turning point in the show’s quality. I’m not here to discuss that, but the number of viewers has been in decline for many years now. In this presentation, though, I’m not here to discuss why this happened. I’m here to discuss what’s happened in the last few years. In 2017, the character of Apu, one of my favourite characters, who was voiced by Hank Azaria, was cancelled, essentially. A 2017 documentary called The Problem with Apu, written by comedian Hari Kondabolu, criticised the character as a South Asian stereotype showing bias along racial/ethnic lines, and in the same vein as “blackface”, critics referred to Azaria’s portrayal of Apu as “brownvoice”. I am not joking. In 2018, the boys at South Park lampooned the documentary by creating an episode called “The Problem with a Poo”, where Mr. Hankey is expelled and sent to a land where people don’t care about bigotry and hate – Springfield! In 2019, Disney took over 21st Century Fox, meaning The Simpsons, among other franchises and studios, became property of The Walt Disney Company. Yes, here were go. In 2020, the powers that be decided that black characters could no longer be voiced by white voice actors because of the “stereotypes and bias it perpetuated”. Characters like Carl, who was originally voiced by Azaria, was re-cast with an African American voice actor, Alex Désert, who now also voices police sergeant Lou. Homer strangling Bart has been a long-running gag with more than 140 strangulations being depicted throughout the first 31 seasons (not just Homer and Bart, but mostly). But apparently the times have changed, and now it’s suddenly become unacceptable to depict scenes of a cartoon father strangling his cartoon children, “Homer has stopped strangling Bart in The Simpsons and it’s about time”, says the Guardian. Although other reports are saying that “The Simpsons Co-Creator Says Homer Will Keep On Strangling Bart: Nothing’s Getting Tamed”. So I really don’t know what’s going on. For 30 years, Dr. Hibbert was voiced by Harry Shearer, but in 2021, the producers decided that the voice actor’s real ancestry had to match Dr. Hibbert’s fictional ancestry, you know, to appease Black Lives Matter or whatever, so they changed the voice actor to Kevin Michael Richardson. The same thing happened to all the other non-white (what am I saying?), non-yellow characters. It’s strange, you can’t be discriminated against and denied a job based on the colour of your skin, but, you now apparently can’t be given an audition or a job to voice a fictional cartoon character that has a skin colour that doesn’t match the colour of your real skin. Harry Shearer found the whole thing rather ridiculous and said, “I have a very simple belief about acting… The job of the actor is to play someone who they’re not.” Hear, hear. It’s funny, these new voice actors had to mimic the voices of the old characters in order to not get the fans upset. So basically, we have a black guy mimicking a white guy playing a black doctor. It’s just absurd when you think about it. Anyway, that sort of sums up where The Simpsons is at. It was once a loved TV show, but now is in its death throes. I can’t see how this can go on for much longer. Unfortunately, these people who are constantly crying “racism”, are probably the most racist people of all, in that all they constantly seem to do is categorise people into racial and ethnic groups. I think that probably they are very unhappy people. They’re certainly not interested in unity and togetherness, quite the opposite. They’re more interested in hatred and division. Rest in peace The Simpsons. You were once great, but Disney or whoever has slowly destroyed you. MUSIC Allégro by Emmit Fenn

The Victorian Government’s First Peoples State Relations website asks the question, “What is Treaty in Victoria?” I want to know how the Government (and their lawyers) define treaty, so that we’re all on the same page. They state, “Treaty is the embodiment of Aboriginal self-determination. Treaty provides a path to negotiate the transfer of power and resources for First Peoples to control matters which impact their lives.” I think that’s the true intention and expected outcome, right? The transfer of power and resources. That’s what this is all about. In my reckoning, as long as the current government are in power, this treaty is going ahead. Premier Jacinta Allan is giving a big up yours to the Victorian people. The Honourable Natalie Hutchins, Minister for Treaty and First Peoples (she’s also the Minister for Women… I wonder who the Minister for Men is? Oh that’s right, there isn’t one). When the good Minister appeared before the Public Accounts and Estimates Committee hearing about the state’s treaty process, she was asked about reparations and dedicated Indigenous seats in parliament, which she replied, “After 200 years of colonisation, where this state took away lands in the settlement, murdered people, and took away culture and language, we are not going to be ruling anything in or out as we go to the negotiation table in regards to treaty.” Former Treaty Advancement Commissioner Aunty Jill Gallagher, weighed in on treaty negotiations between the state government and Indigenous Victorians. She said, “I think reparations should be on the table. And it might not be in the way of money form; it might be in the way of empowerment, it might be in the way of land, but definitely not private land. No one is going to lose their private land through this Treaty process… I don’t know what Natalie Hutchins or the Government is thinking, but I know land has to be part of the reparations. It would be amazing if our elected body, the First Peoples’ Assembly of Victoria, if land came on the market, that we have the opportunity to buy it also. Being empowered to influence decisions around what happens in our communities is vital in the treaty process. I don't know what that’s going to look like; whether that’s seats in parliament, I have no idea.” Obviously, the problem with having seats in parliament that only people of a certain ethnicity can attain, they won’t just be ruling for Indigenous Victorians, they’ll have a say over issues that affect all Victorians. So I can’t see how any rational person could agree with this. It should be noted that last month, in April, Ms Gallagher gave a speech to fellow Indigenous activists laying out a list of 10 demands she said must be part of a statewide treaty. Such demands included: Aboriginal People must be exempt from Land Tax, stamp duty, and council rates (Obviously, this lost revenue would have to be made up through equivalently higher taxes on non-Indigenous Victorians); Interest free loans must be provided to Aboriginal People to purchase homes; Aboriginal People must be exempt from HECS / HELP fees; Tertiary education must be provided to Aboriginal students without charge; Aboriginal history must be taught in all Victorian and Australian schools; and just one more: Aboriginal people must be provided designated seats on local buses, sorry, I mean councils. I was thinking, that was a bit of a strange demand. They even made a graphical representation of her speech. A few things to note: Aboriginal culture is a gift to white Australia; We need unity to fight and succeed – Well I think a treaty would not result in unity, especially if non-Indigenous people have to pay more in taxes and so on. Actually, I think it would result in the opposite of unity – Division; But the biggest one, the one I mentioned earlier: Transfer of power. Let’s face it, that’s what this is all about. Taking away power from one group of people, and giving it to another. And just one more thing that I found interesting before I end this video: The Honourable Leeanne Enoch, Minister for Treaty in my home state of Queensland has been doing a bit of jet-setting on the public dime. The Brisbane Times are reporting that documents obtained under right to information laws reveal Ms Enoch travelled around North America with three senior staffers, which cost us taxpayers $126,000 – just a drop in the ocean! While some Queenslanders were living in tents under bridges, she was off visiting around a dozen galleries or museums, and staying in modern-day Canadian castles. Treaty, anyone? Anyone? MUSIC Allégro by Emmit Fenn

As a kid, I loved Doctor Who, the British science fiction TV series broadcast by the BBC. As a bit of a nerd myself, Doctor Who felt a bit like a haven for the nerdy created by science geeks with authentic quirks and creativity. It was both funny at times, as well as a little bit scary, but ultimately, it was entertaining. The original writers’ genuine weirdness, wit, and sci-fi creativity have in many people’s opinion, been replaced by hollow gloss, focus-group keywords, forced inclusiveness and political correctness, which come off as disingenuous, reducing once rich characters to meagre stereotypes distracting from what could be, and should be, compelling storytelling. The Doctors I most remember were Tom Baker, Peter Davison, Colin Baker, and Sylvester McCoy, probably just because they were around when I was growing up. I also have some memory of the earlier Doctors, I guess because they probably showed a lot of reruns on TV. Doctor Who took a bit of a hiatus in the early 1990s, but there was a Doctor Who television movie in 1996, which I never watched, I think I was too busy with high school. But then in 2005, there was a revival of sorts with four more doctors taking on the role. I only ever watched a couple of episodes – I guess I had grown out of it a bit – but my friends and colleagues who were keen Whovians, generally liked this era of Doctor Who. I believe these four Doctors were typically highly regarded among fans of the show. But of course, all good things must come to an end. In 2017, the BBC noticed something a little bit unusual about the casting of these Doctors over the last 36 seasons or so, and I think you can guess what… They were all men! This clear favouritism and inequity couldn’t be allowed to go on any longer! The BBC correctly pointed out, “Ladies can be Doctors too”, don’t you know? So this brings us to our thirteenth Doctor, Jodie Whittaker, who starred in three seasons and a few specials between 2018 and 2022. From what I’ve heard, she’s a fine actor, but there was obviously some backlash casting a female Doctor Who. According to the ratings database, IMDb, of the 13 series since the 2005 revival, the three lowest ranked seasons were the three Jodie Whittaker seasons. It was towards the end of Jodie Whittaker’s stint as the Doctor that the BBC signed a deal with Disney meaning all new seasons of the show will stream exclusively on Disney+ outside the UK and Ireland ending the 50-year partnership between the BBC and the public broadcaster in Australia, the ABC. This means Whovians outside of the UK would have to fork out a subscription fee to watch the show from 2023 onwards. The tenth Doctor, David Tennant, reprised the role and became the fourteenth Doctor in 2023 starring in three specials to celebrate the program’s 60th anniversary with disability, sexuality, and gender all covered. The character of Davros, a major enemy of the Doctor, used to be wheelchair bound in the original series, albeit, a very futuristic looking wheelchair, but in the most recent incarnation, he is able-bodied. But why? Executive producer Russell T. Davies, who describes himself as “absolutely happily left wing”, said it was to avoid contributing to harmful tropes of disabled villains in media. But this year being the year of super-diversity and uber-inclusion. the pièce de résistance, as I kind of hinted at the start, is the next incarnation of the Doctor who turns out to be a different ethnicity, and perhaps, a different sexuality, with Rwandan-Scottish queer actor (his words, not mine), Ncuti Gatwa, taking on the role of the fifteenth Doctor. Look, I’m sure he’s a good actor, but is this what Doctor Who fans want, or is this what Disney and the BBC want? I don’t know. The series contains a villain by the name of Maestro played by real-life American drag queen Jinkx Monsoon, who has been described by showrunner Russell T. Davies as “the Doctor’s most powerful enemy yet.” I know, it sounds like I’m making all this up, but I’m not. Look, I think there’s only one of two ways this can go. Either I’m completely wrong, and actually hardcore fans, as well as new fans of the show, love the new super-diversity and uber-inclusion path that the Doctor is taking, or, this season sounds the death knell for Doctor Who as we know it. My feeling is that the once-loved Doctor has been ruined by the BBC’s self-righteous pandering and incessant moralising. Gone are the days where we could enjoy Doctor Who as an innocent adventure series. Now they desperately try to please everyone and avoid offence at all cost. Its preachy woke agenda is just resulting in losing viewers and credibility in the process. Unless something drastically changes, Doctor Who is destined for the same fate as other Disneyfied projects – forgotten and axed. Rest in peace Doctor Who. You were once great, but the BBC has utterly destroyed you. MUSIC Allégro by Emmit Fenn

Immigration in Australia has been relative stable over the last decade, but then the pandemic came and brought a halt to that. But since then, it’s been full steam ahead! That backlog of people wishing to come to Australia, well, their dreams came true, in spades! There was record overseas migration last year. If you look at the proportion or residents born overseas, it’s been steadily (rapidly?) increasing since the 1950s to its current level of over 30%. We are a nation of immigrants. Now of course, immigration is sometimes used as a scapegoat for other political and societal issues, but I think this time round, it’s really starting to hurt. Think about it mathematically. If you keep letting more and more people in, but don’t build enough housing, schools, hospitals, not to mention other infrastructure like water and electricity, well that’s going to end in disaster. There’s really only two things that can be done. We either build more infrastructure to keep up with the ever-increasing population, which is something we simply haven’t been able to do, and increasingly looks like we can’t do, or we cut immigration. Isn’t that the easiest option? I mean, it’s our country after all. It’s not like there’s an external force making us accept hundreds of thousands of new people every year. It’s ultimately a choice. We either continue along this path of continual housing crises, or we give ourselves a breather, so we have a chance to fix it. This is not just me rambling. I haven’t just been released from the asylum screaming that “Immigration is evil!” Other people agree with me. Take for instance the Premier of Queensland, Steven Miles. You might not like him, but he sees the writing on the wall. There’s too many people. He broke ranks a couple of days ago, as reported by the ABC, “Queensland Premier Steven Miles calls for reduction of overseas migration. The Queensland government says the state’s population increased by 144,000 people – 2.7 per cent – in the year to September, which was the highest growth on record in absolute terms.” Mr Miles said the population was climbing faster than homes could be built and urged the federal Labor government to consider reducing overseas migration levels. The Queensland Treasurer, Cameron Dick, said migration levels are just becoming too difficult for the state to manage, telling the ABC that he wants to see international migration levels halved! Whatever the federal government think they’re doing, is just not sustainable. Well, Albanese’s Government have reacted. “Government to cap international student numbers. In a move to cut migration, the Albanese government will limit the influx of international students by capping the number of new students.” They’ve basically tightened English-language requirements, and plan to create a genuine student test to crack down on those looking to come to Australia primarily to work rather than study. But of course, students are mostly temporary visa holders, are they not? So what are the Albanese Government going to do regarding the reduction of permanent migration? Well, this is the Department of Home Affairs Immigration and Citizenship website. “On 14 May 2024, the Australian Government announced that the planning levels for the 2024–25 permanent Migration Program will be set at 185,000 places.” Okay, how much was it before? Last year, the planning levels were 190,000 people per year, made up of about 70% skilled and 30% family visas. This year, it’s been reduced to 185,000. That’s a yearly reduction of 5,000 people. It’s almost laughable, it it not? How is a reduction of 5,000 people going to fix anything? That’s only a reduction of about 2.6%! Actually, the top national news on the ABC this morning was about Federal Opposition Leader Peter Dutton: “Dutton calls to slash permanent migration and international student numbers. Peter Dutton has announced that if elected he will reduce annual permanent migration from 185,000 to 140,000.” It’s better, I suppose. I don’t know if it’s enough, but as I said, we need to give ourselves a breather to catch up with housing construction, and so on. Pauline Hanson’s One Nation have openly stated that “Big Australia is a Big Mistake”. They have a “zero-net migration policy”. In the name of fairness, I’d like to show you the Australians Greens immigration policy. Of course, there’s a picture of a miserable looking boy behind barbed wire. Their policy is quite long and wordy, and consists of dozens of principles and aims, of course, invoking the “climate crisis”. I can’t seen any reference to exact numbers, but I suppose to be fair to them, they’re not in government. Although, Greens Leader Adam Bandt had a few choice words to say recently about Anthony Albanese and Peter Dutton. Anyway, I think Albanese has realised that immigration has become a problem, not just for Australia, but also for his political future. MUSIC Allégro by Emmit Fenn

Labor Senator for Western Australia, Fatima Payman, broke ranks yesterday saying something controversial about Israel, making Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s life even harder – “F**k! Just what I need!” On SBS News, with regards to the Israel–Hamas war, she said, “Today, more than ever, is the time to speak the truth – the whole truth – with courage and clarity.” Albo: “Oh God, please don’t.” Senator Payman: “My conscience has been uneasy for far too long. And I must call this out for what it is.” Albo: “Please, for the love of God, stop.” Senator Payman: “This is a genocide and we need to stop pretending otherwise.” Albo: “F**K!” Senator Payman: “I see our leaders performatively gesture defending the oppressors' right to oppress while gaslighting the global community about [Israel's] rights of self-defence. I ask our prime minister: How many international rights laws must Israel break for us to say enough? What is the magic number?” Albo: “As long as she doesn’t finish with that slogan, I think I’m in the clear…” Senator Payman: “I ask you to join me to continue to call for freedom from the occupation, freedom from the violence and freedom from the inequality.” Albo; “Oh my God, I think she’s finished…” Senator Payman: “FROM THE RIVER TO THE SEA, PALESTINE WILL BE FREE!” Albo: “MOTHERF**KER!” When asked if Payman’s use of the phrase “From the river to the sea” was appropriate, Albanese said: “No it’s not. What’s appropriate is a two-state solution where both Israelis and Palestinians have the right to live in peace and prosperity. It is not in the interests of either Israelis or Palestinians to advocate there just be one state that is a forerunner of enormous conflict and grief and we are seeing enormous grief in Gaza.” He also added, “The idea that we here in Australia can determine what is happening in the Middle East is just not correct”. That’s funny, that sounds almost like, “The idea that we here in Australia can determine the global climate is just not correct”. Sorry, he didn’t say that. He also said, “We have said very clearly that all lives matter, whether they be Israeli or Palestinian.” Hmm, that seems very familiar. The co-chief executive of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, Alex Ryvchin, commented, “Senator Payman should immediately apologise for stoking hatred in such a vile way. ‘From the River to the sea’ is an old Arab supremacist slogan calling for the destruction of Israel and the ethnic cleansing of its Jewish population. If she can’t refrain from using racist slogans at a time of extreme tension in our society, she should reconsider her position.” The president of the Australia Palestine Advocacy Network, Nasser Mashni, said, “I thank Senator Payman for speaking truth to power in the interests of the sanctity of human life and human rights.” Anyway, Albo is in a world of hurt. He seems to not be able to control some of his senators. But the question is: Has he lost control of his party? MUSIC Allégro by Emmit Fenn

These spears shown onscreen are known as the “Gweagal spears”. They’re a collection made up of three fishing spears and one hunting spear. They look like any other spear, I suppose, except according to the Australian media, these are the proceeds of crime! Not in that they killed animals, but rather they were stolen, by Captain Cook! “We used them as back scratchers.” But as I said, they were stolen! “Ancient spears handed back”. I think they’re misusing the word ‘ancient’, but let’s run with it. “More than 250 years after they were first taken, four spears, stolen by Captain James Cook and his crew after they arrived at Botany Bay, have been repatriated to their traditional owners.” “'Emotional moment' as spears taken by Captain Cook are returned to Indigenous community. Four spears stolen by Captain James Cook!” Even Kids News got in on the action, although they used the more euphemistic term “taken without permission”. Perhaps we should change his name to Captain James Crook. “I’m nought but a petty thief!” Of course, I jest. The spears were presented to Cambridge University’s Trinity College in 1771 by Lord Sandwich, the British naval chief at the time, with the spears being held at the college’s Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology since the early 20th century. Last year, the museum agreed to return the spears to the La Perouse Aboriginal Community, who are apparently the direct descendants of the Gweagal who crafted the spears 254 years ago. I find it deeply ironic that if these spears weren’t “stolen”, and I use that term loosely, in the 18th century, these objects wouldn’t be around today. If these spears hadn’t been taken, they wouldn’t exist anymore. Unlike many artefacts, these were just regular tools that would have been used and then discarded when they broke. It was only once they were removed from Australia that they became somewhat precious. Am I wrong in that assessment? Cook, a British naval lieutenant at the time, travelled to New Holland (Australia) on the HMB Endeavour (His Majesty’s Bark). He was accompanied by botanist Joseph Banks, who kept a journal. This journal can be viewed online. After arriving at Botany Bay on 28 April 1770, he described the animosity between the local inhabitants and the landing party. After reading the journal, in my reckoning, the British essentially confiscated the spears that were being thrown at them. If you wish to call that stealing, I suppose you could, but clearly the locals were not exactly friendly towards the landing party. I’m not saying they had to be, but of course, if you’re aggressive towards others, expect them to be aggressive back. And that’s pretty much what happened, although the landing party did still try to be friendly by giving the people some gifts. Captain Cook also kept a journal, which you can view online as well. He described how after giving the local people cloth, they “left it carelessly upon the Sea beach and in the Woods, as a thing they had no manner of use for; in short, they seem’d to set no Value upon anything we gave them, nor would they ever part with anything of their own for any one Article we could offer them.” Look, I don’t know if what Captain Cook wrote is 100% accurate, I’m just reading it. But this is the evidence we have. The media play up the idea of stolen spears, but to me it sounds like the Europeans were trying to be nice, but the local people were not having it, and consequently their spears were confiscated. The gifts the Europeans did give, weren’t welcome and were just left to lie on the beach. There are lots of people acting like these spears were significant cultural artefacts that were heartlessly stolen. But that’s glorifying, or romanticising what they actually were. These were hunting tools and had no significance beyond their purpose at that time. What happened to virtually all the other spears from that same time period? They were probably used and then burnt. The preservation is what has given these spears value and cultural significance. Some might argue that the people who preserved them are the rightful owners. MUSIC Allégro by Emmit Fenn

You’d think in 2024, discrimination wouldn’t exist when buying a house. If you can afford it, you can buy it! No other factors come into play, right? Especially not one’s ethnicity or gender? Well, you’d be wrong. Here’s a company called Nightingale Housing, who according to their website, are “a not-for-profit organisation building apartments that are socially, financially and environmentally sustainable. We believe that homes should be built for people, not profit”. Okay, sounds wonderful. But of course, there’s a catch. The Ballot. “Our homes are sold through a simple balloting process that gives everyone a fair chance”. I question their use of the word ‘fair’. I’d say it’s completely not fair. “Fair: Impartial and just, without favouritism or discrimination.” – Noting the words, “without favouritism”. Fair chance? Hardly. Scrolling down, “Those who qualify for our priority ballot (see below) have a slightly better chance of being successful.” Hmm, what happened to fairness? “Priority ballot. To help with creating equity within our communities…” Yes, here we go. “We are committed in assisting minority members of society gain access to social participation and secure housing.” “Up to 20% of homes are allocated to so-called ‘key community contributors’, individuals with a disability, carers, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, and women, trans people and gender diverse people aged 55 and over.” Priority Ballot Policy. Let me just fix that up for them – Discrimination Policy. “Discrimination: The unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of ethnicity, age, sex, or disability.” Yep, they’ve pretty much ticked all those boxes. So for example, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. “At Nightingale Housing it is important for us to demonstrate in practical and tangible ways our acknowledgement of the Traditional Custodians and Owners of the Lands on which we build and meet.” Okay, if it’s not your land, if you admit it’s Aboriginal land, give them a free house! Why are you charging them for it? “One way we try do to this is by providing priority balloting to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.” There’s a verification process, with the only requirement basically being a statutory declaration declaring that you are indeed Aboriginal. So for example, a cashed-up Indigenous-identifying university professor comes along, say Bruce Pascoe, wanting to buy an apartment with his, according to Crikey, $200,000-a-year salary, and let’s say he’s in competition with a struggling single Aussie Dad who lost his wife last year trying to raise his two young children on his $50,000 salary, who gets priority? Well, the rich Aboriginal professor does because he’s got the right ethnic background. Piss off single Dad with white skin. You’re not welcome in Woke Towers. You’re already too privileged! Heck, even if this guy was an Asian Australian, he still is not considered a priority. Indigenous people first! To be fair, the single dad still has a chance in the general ballot, noting, “On ballot day, two separate ballots are drawn: first, the priority ballot and then, once the priority allocations are exhausted, the general ballot.” So it’s just that the rich Indigenous professor gets to go first before the struggling single Dad. Also note that, “The second draw will be an open draw and drawn once the priority ballot allocation has been exhausted (or alternatively, once all priority ballot entrants have been allocated an apartment).” So if the rich Indigenous professor was the only minority person to apply, then he’s guaranteed a house, whereas everyone else has to go into the draw. I like how they pretend that this is all fair, “All entries have a random and equal chance of being drawn for an offer.” Unless of course, you’re Aboriginal, female, or transsexual. Obviously, this is complete discrimination what they are doing. Perhaps somebody should sue them. If this happened in any other industry, for example, if Woolworths supermarkets prioritised 20% of their groceries to go towards Indigenous, Transgender, and female Australians before going to other people, well, that would just be outrageous and surely illegal. Interestingly, on Nightingale’s website, they state, “Up to 10% of apartments will be pre-allocated to the project team. The project team includes Nightingale Housing staff, project architect staff and Nightingale Housing collaborators directly involved with the project.” But why, why would they do that? Well, they answer that question, “By experiencing a project first hand, we believe our team are better able to continuously improve upon the delivery of Nightingale projects.” So before even transgender and Aboriginal people get to move in, the staff have already allocated 10% to themselves! It’s as much laughable as it is corrupt. Yes, discrimination is alive and well here in Australia. MUSIC Allégro by Emmit Fenn

The Australian Book Industry Awards are “entirely unbiased” and “completely apolitical”, so I’ve been told. Here’s the winners of 2024! And the Book of the Year goes to: Brian’s Life by John Smith. “Brian is your typical Aussie bloke. He grew up on a dairy farm in regional Queensland. He’s always voted for the National Party. He likes eating meat pies and drinking beer. He voted No in the 2023 Australian Indigenous Voice referendum, and he drives a Ford Ranger. But his girlfriend, Kylie, just dumped him, and the dairy industry has been struggling of late, so earlier this year, Brian took a leap of faith and moved to the Big Smoke to find a job. Unfortunately, things didn’t go as planned. His boss accused him of using language that is not considered “politically correct”. The Government want him to get rid of his Ranger because it doesn’t meet the right “emissions targets”. His colleagues told him he has to change his diet to “save the planet”. What will Brian do? Brian’s Life is the award-winning novel by acclaimed author and proud North Queenslander John Smith.” If you couldn’t already tell, Brian’s Life is a work of fiction, in that the book doesn’t exist. I made it up. I guess it was just my attempt at humour to kick off this video. But here is the real Book of the Year for 2024, and this is not a joke. The Voice to Parliament Handbook by Indigenous leader Thomas Mayo and Australian journalist Kerry O’Brien. It was created as a simple guide to the 2023 Voice to Parliament referendum to address misinformation throughout the campaign. Mr Mayo said himself, “I thought a handbook — something simple that people could hold onto, pass around and share with others to help them find the truth — would be important.” Obviously, the only people who bought this book were people who were going to vote Yes anyway, so it didn’t really have the desired effect. On top of being the Book of the Year, it also won the Social Impact Book of the Year as well as General Non-Fiction Book of the Year. So it took up three categories! But in my mind, due to the overwhelming No vote at last year’s referendum, I would suggest that this book should now be reclassified as a work of fiction. The General Fiction Book of the Year went to The Bookbinder of Jericho by Adelaide author Pip Williams. It tells the story of two young sisters during World War I who must bind books at the Oxford University Press. While all the men are off fighting, it’s the job of the women to keep the nation running. One of the sisters has dreams of educating herself and using her intellect, not just her hands. It sounds like a very original storyline. In unrelated news, the Commissioning Editor/Publisher of the Year goes to these six individuals – not one pesky male to be seen! They must still all be off at war. The Small Publishers’ Adult Book of the Year goes to Edenglassie by Melissa Lucashenko. Ms Lucashenko tells a story about Brisbane before it was Brisbane in the mid-19th century when Aboriginal people still outnumbered white settlers. In her book, she torches Queensland’s colonial myths, while reimagining an Australian future. They even have a Bookshop of the Year category. One bookshop I found interesting was Big W! For those of you who aren’t Australian, Big W is a giant chain of discount department stores owned by Woolworths. How the hell did they get on there? Well, I’ll tell you how. They stocked a book called Welcome to Sex, a book written for children. And I tell you, it’s pretty graphic. I’ve seen it. I probably can’t even show you half of what’s in it, because I’d probably get banned. But yet, it was out on the shelves for your children to peruse. It actually refers to people as “penis-owners” and “vagina-owners”. If only we had specific English words that could describe those sort of people. In July last year, “Big W removes sex education book from shelves after staff members abused”. And guess which book won an award this year? That’s right! Book of the Year for Older Children (ages 13+), Welcome to Sex by Melissa Kang and Yumi Stynes. Co-author Yumi Stynes said the book is for 10-15 year-olds, but she’d be happy with a mature 8-year-old having a flick through. Why can’t children just be children for crying out loud? Anyway, they’re some of the books that won the prestigious Australian awards, but Big W winning a Bookshop of the Year award? I think I’m done. I can’t do anymore. So revisiting what I said at the start, the Australian Book Industry Awards are “entirely unbiased” and “completely apolitical”. Do you agree? Or did I really stuff that up? MUSIC Allégro by Emmit Fenn

It’s time for a bit of so-called truth-telling, the oft quoted term used here in Australia with regards to Aboriginal activism as well as the reconciliation movement. According to Reconciliation Australia, “Telling the truth about our history not only brings to light colonial conflict and dispossession, but also acknowledges the strength and resilience of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and cultures.” Well, in this video, I do some truth-telling of my own. Anybody who has lived in Australia will probably know about these so-called Acknowledgements of Country. “Taking the time to Acknowledge Country, or including a Welcome to Country at an event, reminds us that every day we live, work, and dream on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander lands.” I’d say that it less reminds people, but rather serves to annoy people. Or perhaps that’s just me. For example, on the Woolworths Supermarket website, on the front page, they state, “We acknowledge the Traditional Owners and Custodians of Country throughout Australia.” Obviously, they’re just saying this. They don’t actually care about the traditional owners, because if they truly believed that Aboriginal People are the traditional owners, well they’d give away all their supermarkets which sit on Aboriginal land, which is all of them. But they don’t, because the only thing that really matters to Woolworths is making money… obviously! They’re a business after all. But the word I want to focus on is this one: “Custodian”. I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but Indigenous people are always referred to as the custodians of the land. “Custodian: A person who has responsibility for taking care of or protecting something.” It gives the impression that without Aboriginal people, the land wouldn’t be able to look after itself, which I think rationally we all know is just not factual. Here in Australia (and I presume elsewhere), the role of Indigenous people has been romanticised. It’s like, without them, Australia would’ve fallen into disrepair. Well here’s my bit of truth-telling: Aboriginal Australians were never custodians… Aboriginal Australians were survivors. They didn’t protect the land… They exploited the land. I’m not even using that in a bad way. “Exploit: Make full use of and derive benefit from (a resource)”. And I think that’s exactly what they did. Australia has a harsh climate. It would have been incredibly difficult to survive in such circumstances. But Aboriginal people did it. They exploited the resources around them to survive. Indigenous people weren’t looking after the soil, they were digging the soil to look for things to eat. They didn’t protect koalas, they ate koalas. Here’s an image of an Australian Aboriginal hunter from the Port Macquarie region in New South Wales. That wallaby, echidna, goanna, snake and koala you see in the photo, they’re not sleeping, they’re dead. As I said, this isn’t custodianship, this is survival, and survival can be pretty harsh. I’m not even criticising this. They did what they had to do to survive on the world’s most arid continent. And that took skill. I’m not even taking that away from them. Survival is a very important skill – the most important skill! It’s not just me making all this up. This is backed up by research! Here’s a recent research paper titled, “Physiography, foraging mobility, and the first peopling of Sahul”, Sahul being the name of a paleocontinent that encompassed the modern-day landmasses of mainland Australia, Tasmania, and New Guinea. It looks this way because the sea level was around 85 metres lower than it is today. But when Aboriginal people first arrived, they were met with an Australia that was teeming with life. It was bigger, greener, and full of giant iguanas, kangaroos and koalas. Noting that around 45,000 years ago, research suggests that humans caused the extinction of Australia’s prehistoric giant animals. I wasn’t here then, so you can’t blame me. My point is, Australia was doing perfectly well before humans arrived. It didn’t need custodianship, so let’s stop pretending otherwise. Aboriginal people weren’t custodians, they were migrants who managed to survive by exploiting Australia’s natural resources, just like you and me. PHYSIOGRAPHY, FORAGING MOBILITY, AND THE FIRST PEOPLING OF SAHUL https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-47662-1 HUMANS CAUSED EXTINCTION OF AUSTRALIA’S PREHISTORIC GIANT ANIMALS https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14142 MUSIC Allégro by Emmit Fenn

In March this year, the Government of Ireland held two referendums to amend the Constitution. One was regarding the family. Value all our families. Vote Yes, Yes! The current wording of Article 41.1.1° of the Constitution read: “The State recognises the Family as the natural primary and fundamental unit group of Society”, well, the Government wanted to add: The State recognises the Family, “whether founded on marriage or on other durable relationships”. They also wanted to modify 41.3.1°: “The State pledges itself to guard with special care the institution of Marriage, on which the Family is founded”, by deleting that last part, basically saying that the family was no longer going to be founded on marriage. They gave the people a pretty simple instruction, Vote Yes!, but the Irish people didn’t listen and overwhelmingly voted No. 67% to 32%. It’s kind of like what happened here in Australia with the Indigenous Voice referendum. The Government (and the supermarkets) wanted us to vote Yes, but Australians just didn’t listen and voted No. The second referendum was about Care in the home. Article 41.2 stated: “In particular, the State recognises that by her life within the home, woman gives to the State a support without which the common good cannot be achieved. The State shall, therefore, endeavour to ensure that mothers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home.” Well, they wanted to delete all that, because it contained the words “woman” and “mothers”, and nobody seems to know what the word “woman” means anymore, not to mention that using the word “mother” makes some people feel bad, so they wanted to replace the whole lot with something else more politically correct. The Irish people were given a simple instruction, Vote Yes! But what did they do? They voted No even worse than before. Almost 74% No to 26% Yes. The Irish didn’t want the Government changing their traditional family values. As our media here in Australia put it, “Irish voters reject changing ‘sexist’ language in constitution” – I guess the Irish are sexist then, because SBS Australia said so – “Irish voters have overwhelmingly voted no in a dual referendum on redefining family and women’s roles in the constitution.” Remember, this result came despite the fact that the government, and most opposition parties, had supported the proposed changes. One thing I’ve noticed about the Irish, they don’t get pushed around. Well, fast forward a month or so later, and the Irish have had enough. They have been out on the streets protesting in the capital of Dublin. You won’t hear about on the news, though, well not in Australia. Our national broadcaster, the ABC, hasn’t mentioned these protests at all, as far as I can tell. SBS, our other publicly-funded broadcaster, which specialises in World News, doesn’t seem to mention the Irish protests either. But why? What aren’t the media covering this? Well, you probably already know. It’s the subject matter – Immigration. You see, Ireland only has a relatively small population of around 5 million people. It doesn’t take too many extra people to put pressure on basic services and housing. Even the Guardian admit that housing is at a crisis level. Although, of course they point out that the housing crisis is being weaponised against refugees. As expected, the Irish media are either downplaying, or labelling the protesters as far-right. “As the drumbeat of hate grows, how serious is the far-right threat to the State? A relatively small, but more emboldened far-right has made immigration and asylum a dominant issue in Ireland.” I don’t know, from the videos I’ve seen of the most recent protests, many of those marching are simply regular Irish folk. Recent polling has shown that around 50% of Irish people want checkpoints on the border to limit the number of asylum seekers coming from the UK. 82% want immigrants arriving from the north of the island to be deported back to Britain. I don’t think this is just a small, far-right few. Just as the Irish voted overwhelmingly against messing with the constitution with regards to family and mothers and so on, I think they also are seriously against mass-immigration. The Australian media may ignore it, but that doesn’t mean it’s not true. Even the BBC are reporting that dozens of tents have been erected along the Grand Canal in Dublin to house the ever-growing number of asylum seekers. This is a crisis, is it not? The Irish have a right to question this, don’t they? Look, I’m not Irish. I can’t control what’s going on in Ireland. But one thing I do know, if the Irish are famous for one thing, it’s their fighting spirit. The Fighting Irish, as they say. The powers that be might think they can push the Irish around, but expect the Irish to push back. MUSIC A Seafaring Adventure by All Good Folks

Earlier this year, I showed you this Draft Master Plan for the island of Woppa off the Capricorn Coast of Central Queensland, which relegated the Western name of Great Keppel Island to a smaller font and placed it in brackets. The Queensland Government in their infinite wisdom decided to pave the way for the quick deletion of the Western name, which to be fair, they have done before with the renaming of the island of K’Gari, formally known as Fraser Island, in June of 2023. Of course, the potential renaming of Great Keppel upset many people who have grown up with this name. Actually, every single person on this continent, no matter what your heritage, has grown up with the name Great Keppel Island, because not one person was alive 250 years ago when it was named that way. One Nation Party’s chief of staff James Ashby, who I believe will be running for the seat of Keppel in Queensland’s state election in October, was a vocal opponent of the Great Keppel Island name change, and ran a petition collecting more than 12,000 signatures. Well, there’s a bit of good news. The Queensland Government have somewhat capitulated, albeit quietly – there was no announcement of this. A few weeks ago, this was still the plan, but then the Government released a new version of the document. Both versions are linked below. As you can see, the image of the whale is facing the opposite direction, but more interestingly, the name seems to have been reverted back to Great Keppel Island with Woppa in brackets, both of equal-sized font. I don’t know about you, but personally, I think this is fine. It keeps the name that we all grew up with, as well as giving a nod to the traditional inhabitants. Sure, it’s only a small thing, I’m not saying it’s the deal of the century, but it shows you that people power can influence the government. We have something similar for arguably Australia’s most famous natural landmark. According to the Government’s Parks Australia, in 1993, the rock was officially renamed Ayers Rock / Uluru. In 2002 these names were reversed and the rock took on the official name of Uluru / Ayers Rock, which it still has today, which means you can use either Uluru or Ayers Rock. Anyway, the point is, you can’t just expect to delete a name without somebody being upset – obviously. People online will tweet things like: “I really don’t understand why you’re creating such division over celebrating the rich history we have in this country. There was a name before and we’re reverting to that name, what’s the issue?”. Well the issue is very clear in my reckoning, and this is backed up in academia, people don’t like being forced to change. Here’s an article from Bond University Professor Peta Stapleton, a clinical Psychologist, titled: “Why we just can’t force people to like change”. In the article, she states: “At the core of it all is that we all have a fundamental human need for consistency and certainty.  In other words, we’re not hardwired for things around us to suddenly be different. People have an inherent desire for stability and predictability in their lives which can lead to apprehension and discomfort when it’s not the case. The challenge of adapting can be difficult as it involves navigating the tension between the comfort of the familiar and the potential benefits of embracing new circumstances. Or in this case, place names that people might have grown up with and associate with good times, family holidays or even an imprinted childhood association with the labels in their school atlas. It is essential to consider the diverse perspectives involved in these discussions and work towards solutions that respect the rights and histories of all – and ponder how we can embrace change, rather than reject it, as an opportunity for adaptation, growth and advancement.” So when Homer Simpson asks, “I really don’t understand, what’s the issue?”, well the issue is very clear. Forcing people to change something they’ve always known is a psychological recipe for disaster. With regards to Great Keppel Island, I think the best solution to acknowledge the wishes of everyone, is to use this most recent incarnation. That is, people who wish to refer to it as Great Keppel Island should be allowed, and those who wish to refer to it as Woppa, okay, that’s fine too. But if the Government want to try to sneakily delete names that have been around for the last 250 years, well they’re going to piss people off, and that’s backed up in psychological science. GREAT KEPPEL ISLAND (WOPPA) CONCEPT MASTER PLAN PROJECT https://www.statedevelopment.qld.gov.au/infrastructure/projects-and-programs/great-keppel-wop-pa-island-master-plan-project 2023 WOPPA (GREAT KEPPEL ISLAND) DRAFT MASTER PLAN https://www.statedevelopment.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0023/82526/woppa-great-keppel-island-draft-master-plan-2023.pdf AYERS ROCK OR ULURU? https://parksaustralia.gov.au/uluru/about/ayers-rock-or-uluru/ MUSIC Allégro by Emmit Fenn

Gendered Violence is the new term to divide Australians even further. Of course, “gendered violence” is code for “violence against women”, which, if you’re cynical like me, is code for “men are bad”. There’s been a pile-on in the media this week about this topic. The ABC make it perfectly clear that men are the perpetrators here: “Lots of men are feeling uncomfortable about Australia's gendered violence conversation. They should be”. They’re not even trying to hide their bias anymore. In the article, they state: “So far this year 28 women have lost their lives — 28 families who have lost a loved one to gendered violence. In April alone, 11 women died allegedly at the hands of men.” What I don’t like about this sort of reporting, is that they’re only showing one side. Yes, 28 women being killed is tragic. I’m not disagreeing with that. But there’s no context. In the name of rational and honest debate, they should at least publish how many men were killed over the same time period. But they don’t, so that makes me feel like they’re trying to hide something, or at the very least, they’re focusing on one part of the conversation, and don’t want the reader to see the whole picture. So, in this video, I’m going to show you some statistics. I’m not even trying to take a side here. I just want to know the facts. But first, just quickly, I’d like to talk about Prime Minister Anthony Albanese showing up at a women’s rally in Canberra on the grass outside Parliament House. He thought it would be a nice photo op to join thousands of people nationally to demand an end to men’s violence, but instead, he got into a bit of a public disagreement with the organiser of the rally. After making an Indigenous woman cry, the ABC quickly turned on Albanese: “Albanese was so desperate to prove he cares about gendered violence, he forgot one thing: if you’re a proper leader, it’s not about you. The footage of Anthony Albanese at a gendered violence rally outside Parliament House is nearly unwatchable.” It’s both kind of sad, but also admittedly, quite amusing that everybody has kind of turned on Albanese. Anyway, the statistics! We take a look at the Australian Government’s Institute of Criminology’s latest report on Homicide in Australia released 30 April 2024. AUSTRALIAN INSTITUTE OF CRIMINOLOGY REPORT – HOMICIDE IN AUSTRALIA 2022–23 https://doi.org/10.52922/sr77420 Homicide in Australia. Celebrating 50 years! Perhaps they shouldn’t have put that on the front cover. The good news is, both the rate of Domestic and Acquaintance homicide has significantly reduced over the last 30 or so years, but they don’t seem to talk about this at the rallies. One would think that the murder rate is increasing. Victims of homicide by sex. Although both sexes have had significant reductions over the last 30 years, males comprise 69% of homicide victims, more than double that of females at 30%. It should be noted that most offenders are men, I’m not trying to hide anything, but this rate has been tracking significantly downwards. Whatever we’re doing as a society is somewhat working, noting that the rate of women offenders has stayed approximately the same over the years, or perhaps slightly decreased. Interestingly, Indigenous offenders, which they didn’t put in a graph for some reason (I think I know why), well, non-Indigenous people have a homicide offence rate of 0.79 – very, very low. Comparatively, Indigenous people have a rate of 10.18! This means that Indigenous people are more than 12 times more likely to commit homicide than a non-Indigenous person. Look, I’m not trying to pick on anybody here, but the facts are the facts. Obviously, this rate is still quite low. The overwhelming majority of Indigenous people are not murderous barbarians, and I’m sure most of them want peace just like the rest of us, but statistically they have committed homicide at a significantly higher rate. I don’t know if this is relevant, but the Northern Territory has the highest rate of homicide at 2.81. It should be noted that Indigenous people are more likely to be victims too, 5.36 vs 0.74, meaning Indigenous people are more than 7 times more likely to be killed than their non-Indigenous brothers and sisters. But of course, you can spin statistics however you please. The ABC recently wrote, “49 per cent of female victims of homicide were killed by a former or current intimate partner”. If you focus entirely on one particular type of homicide, then yes, women are over-represented. It gives the impression that women are under attack more than any other group, which if you look at the overall statistics, is just not factual. Actually, this rate of female intimate partner homicide is the second lowest rate ever recorded in almost 35 years. One might say this is an accomplishment, but no, the PM knows best, “Men are bad! (Unless you’re a woman, then you can just shut up, because I’m the Prime Minister!)”. MUSIC Allégro by Emmit Fenn

This is Lily D’Ambrosio. She has been a Labor Party member of the Victorian Legislative Assembly since 2002 in the safe seat of Mill Park. She is the Minister for Climate Action, Energy and Resources, and the State Electricity Commission. According to the Guardian, she is also a prominent member of the Socialist Left faction. Last year, it was alleged that her branch of the Labor party had forged the signatures of deceased people. Anyway, that’s neither here nor there. She recently gave evidence to the Yoorrook Justice Commission saying that it is “horrifying” that Indigenous people have been shut out of independence and prosperity. The Yoorrook Justice Commission is Australia’s first so-called “truth-telling” body. Apparently up until this point, we haven’t been telling the truth. “It's time to tell the truth about the impacts of colonisation on First Peoples in Victoria.” This is Professor Eleanor Bourke, Yoorrook Justice Commission Chair. According to SBS’s National Indigenous Television, Minister D’Ambrosio said that Traditional Owners will receive profits from renewable energy projects. NITV stated that “Environment Minister Lily D'Ambrosio told the Yoorrook Justice Commission that active efforts were being made to steer revenue streams to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.” They mistakenly referred to her as the Environment Minister, which is actually a completely different person, but let’s not let the truth get in the way of truth-telling. The Australian correctly referred to Ms D’Ambrosio as the Energy Minister, but also stated that she was flagging some kind of Indigenous wealth sharing arrangement. She said, “I acknowledge that my portfolio has had, and continues to have, a role in the continuation of practices that dispossess First Peoples of their traditional lands, waters, and other natural resources. As a result of that dispossession, the state has upset important natural and spiritual balances in the relationship between First Peoples and Country. We have to acknowledge that … traditional First Peoples cannot possibly be able to secure what self-determination means for them without having an embedded and reliable source of revenue for themselves.” Hmm, most people get a reliable source of revenue from a job, don’t they, you know, hard work? I think even the Labor Party believe in, you know, labour, don’t they? Well, at least they used to. She continued, “Either through processes that I hope to deploy through renewable energy processes, what the future might be in mineral extractions, and also ultimately through treaty. In terms of the potential for wealth sharing, we are very much looking at embedding, in a legal sense, benefit-sharing arrangements from infrastructure projects around transmission infra­structure, but also renewable energy zones and projects that are built. My commitment is to seek to apply the same approach to future extraction of resources.” So basically, she’s admitted that the government are planning to give away income that belongs to all Victorians to a select few based entirely on their ethnicity. They don’t have to work for it. They just have to be of the right ancestry. Is this not wrong? MUSIC Allégro by Emmit Fenn

MasterChef season 16 is under fire for greenwashing. The ABC ran a bit of a hit piece, well, not really a hit piece – well, kind of – attacking MasterChef’s green gas. “Why MasterChef is being criticised over a sponsorship deal” – we’ll get to that soon. Note, MasterChef is filmed in Australia’s most left-leaning state of Victoria where traditional flame-top cooking is under threat. As of January 2024, the Victorian government has banned all gas connections to new homes and government buildings. It doesn’t matter if you like cooking with gas, the Government will not allow you. This year’s season of MasterChef is sponsored by a whole bunch of companies, but one that stands out, and one that the ABC chose to focus its piece on, is Renewable Gas – Australian Gas Networks (AGN), an Australian energy company that operates gas transmission pipelines across many parts of Australia. Specifically, they’re promoting the use of hydrogen, the universe’s most abundant element, which can be produced from water using electricity, and when burned, it only produces water vapour and heat, so it’s a perfectly clean product. The ABC made sure to include this picture, though, warning that hydrogen gas is highly flammable, but isn’t all cooking gas flammable? If it wasn’t, then surely you couldn’t use it to cook! The MasterChef contestants are also using biomethane, which is captured from decomposing waste products, and can be used interchangeably with natural gas. But despite the green credentials of the gas products being used, Victoria’s Allan Government are not having a bar of it. Gas is bad, m’kay? How can we trust a fossil fuel company? The gas ban forges ahead! “Allan government steps up war on gas”, “Victoria bans gas rebates and incentives for homes as shift to all-electric gathers pace”. Basically, the Victorian Government have made it illegal for companies to offer cash incentives or rebates to households that install new gas appliances, or connect to the gas network, it doesn’t matter how green the gas is that you plan to use. It’s funny, if a whole bunch of solar panels are creating hydrogen from water using electrolysis, then from a pragmatic approach, shouldn’t we allow it? Why is the Victorian Government taking a hard line on this and just outlawing gas completely? It’s like they don’t even want people to have a chance to use a green gas option. Presumably in the future, gas production technology will become better, but if the government don’t allow infrastructure to be installed into new homes, well they’ve just destroyed a realistic option, they’ve burnt a metaphorical bridge. It’s like they don’t want to admit that there’s a possibility here. “Green hydrogen push as industry claims gas ban ‘doesn’t make sense’”. Look, I don’t work for a gas company, and I’m indifferent when it comes to using gas – I could take it or leave it – but surely if you can make a green option, allow it for crying out loud! So why are they kicking up a stink over this MasterChef green gas promotion? What is their reasoning? Is it just a power trip? The sponsorship deal is being slammed by the Grattan Institute think tank. Alison Reeve, the Climate Change and Energy Deputy Program Director, said that, “It was disappointing that the show was choosing to promote low-emission gas. MasterChef is a pretty high-profile show, so I understand why the gas industry would be eager to get their point of view onto it. It's sort of disappointing that MasterChef haven't realised what the direction of travel here is and realise what the reality is for households, and taken the opportunity to showcase something like induction cooking, which is going to be a much bigger part of people's futures. It's cleaner and cheaper for people. This is a tactic utilised by the gas industry to keep pushing the use of its infrastructure, including gas pipes. This is really a process of trying to protect those assets for as long as they possibly can. They're trying to hang on as long as possible. To make hydrogen cheap, you need to make electricity very, very, very cheap, because electricity is used to make hydrogen. And the thing is, that when electricity gets really cheap, sure your hydrogen gets cheaper, but that means the case for moving to electricity becomes even more compelling.” Just one more thing regarding the new MasterChef season. It was about one of the judges – renowned chef Jamie Oliver. When the guest judge walked into the room for the first time, he was met with screaming contestants, as well as some who were crying. It was completely over the top. It was as if he had somehow saved their lives. I’ve never like gushing over celebrities. Anyway, you get the idea – Green gas is not good for cooking, m’kay? MUSIC Allégro by Emmit Fenn

I wouldn’t normally talk about this sort of stuff, but it’s all over the news. It was front page on Australia’s biggest news website news.com.au. Even our ABC got in on the action and ran a piece about gig etiquette after American comedian Arj Barker ejected an Aussie mother and her crying baby. Obviously, this is indeed a First World problem. Sudan civil war: Starvation and death; Potential all-out war in the Middle East; Breastfeeding mother ‘humiliated’ after asked to leave Melbourne comedy show. It didn’t take us long to get over the terrorist attack, did it? So what happened? Arj Barker was performing his show in front of a large crowd in Melbourne on Saturday night when he was distracted by a noisy baby. He made a few jokes about the baby, then he eventually said, “I speak baby and it said ‘take me outside’”, which he repeated. Then he just directly asked the mother, Trish Faranda, and her seven-month-old child to leave, in which she did, as well as 10 or 12 other people – mostly women and mothers – who joined her in walking out of the theatre in solidarity. Of course, people jumped online trying to shame Arj Barker for daring to kick out an innocent breastfeeding mother: “Arj Barker should be ashamed for evicting breastfeeding mum”. “Let’s not give this sad, pathetic joke of a comedian a platform to speak from and instead just relegate him to the land of washed up, stale and forgotten comedians.” A bit harsh, isn’t it? The mother actually went on multiple TV shows to explain what happened. In her A Current Affair interview, ironically, Ms Faranda’s baby became unsettled and viewers struggled to hear what she or the interviewer were saying. The Project, of course, took the side of the mother, “Arj Barker Backlash – Mum and Baby Kicked Out”. But of course, what happened during the interview? The baby started crying, with the interviewer asking the mother, “Maybe she can go to dad just for a quick second?”. Perhaps the name of the segment should have been renamed, “Baby Booted off Naarm Television Show as Host Gets Frustrated With Incessant Crying”. Naarm is the Indigenous name for Melbourne, didn’t you know? “Using the indigenous name Naarm instead of Melbourne is a way to acknowledge the traditional owners of the land and to show respect for their culture and heritage.” Anyway, the point is: “How dare Arj Barker kick a crying child out of a comedy show?”, but also, “Can you ditch the baby for this interview? It’s pretty bloody annoying!” That pretty much sums up The Project in my opinion. The mother seemed to have learnt a lesson in her next interview on the morning TV show Sunrise and didn’t bring her baby. “Mother Breaks Her Silence”, they said. She’s been nothing but talking about it ever since! What silence are they referring to here? She told the interviewer, “He used his position on that stage, and his microphone, to really intimidate me.” I know, it’s the crime of the century. One of the lady’s relatives sent out a number of inflammatory tweets directed towards Mr Barker: “With all of the hatred and violence women are faced with, among the countless atrocities happening within the world today, I ask you to simply take a long, hard look at yourself.” Despite all the controversy, Mr Barker refused to back down. He said, “”The show is strictly aged 15+ as clearly stated on the ticket site. She had an infant with her. The baby was disrupting my performance. On behalf of the other 700 people who paid to see the gig, I politely told her the baby couldn’t stay. She thought I was kidding, which made the exchange a bit awkward. I felt bad about the whole situation and stated this on the night more than once. I offered her a refund. Theatre staff should not have seated a baby in my audience in the first place. In that theatre, sound travels, you can hear the drop of a pin. It doesn’t take much to distract an audience, and I’ve worked on these jokes and there’s timing and there’s pauses, and it’s just not going to work with the baby. I made the decision, it wasn’t easy, it was really awkward for me. I said ‘I’m really sorry but the baby can’t stay’.” Regarding the breastfeeding, he said, “I could just make out a woman holding a baby, I had zero idea if she was breastfeeding – nor would that have been a factor, because I don’t have any problem with that.” Anyway, despite the media’s attempt to label Barker as some sort of evil misogynist, it seems to have backfired somewhat, because I think most reasonable people think that he wasn’t in the wrong here. Perhaps they thought they could cancel him, but thank goodness he’s not giving in. MUSIC Allégro by Emmit Fenn

In yesterday’s video, I perhaps took the mickey out of Indigenous maths, or more specifically, woke university professors trying to force it upon their students, while also trying to make students feel guilty about Australia’s colonial past by stating that modern-day mathematics is primarily European and British-based, which was forced upon Indigenous peoples. But as some of you pointed out, mathematics has its roots in Mesopotamia (present-day Iraq) – the Babylonians and so on – followed closely by Ancient Egypt, so essentially, we’ve all learnt mathematics from other lands and peoples across time. Anyway, in this video, in the interest of fairness, I’d like to present a real-life example of Indigenous maths. In modern-day schooling, students typically learn multiplication through the use of times tables, right? No surprises there. So for example, 2 × 4 = 8, you can just think of it as two groups of four and then add them together using your fingers if your wanted to. But Dr Chris Matthews of the Aboriginal Torres Strait Islander Maths Alliance, and also an Associate Dean at University Technology of Sydney, describes how Aboriginal children turned the equation 2 × 4 = 8 into a dance about flying brolgas. A group of two children, acting as brolgas, flew together, and then linked up with another group of two, and then two more groups of two to become a collection of eight in total. Okay, so I’m not trying to take away from the learning potential of this activity. Perhaps it sounds like a lot of fun, at least for some children, but is it practical? There are dozens of number facts here, not to mention addition, subtraction and division. Are we going to make up an Indigenous dance for each one? I think as a one-off sort of thing, it’s probably okay and a bit of fun, but in the long run, I think students just need to be encouraged to put their heads down and do some good old-fashioned study and revision. As I mentioned previously, Indigenous children are falling behind when it comes to numeracy, and I don’t think it’s from a lack of Indigenous-specific mathematics. It’s certainly not from a lack of capability, or a lack of opportunity – there’s plenty of that in Australia. It’s from a lack of attendance. It’s easy to say that Indigenous children don’t attend school because they don’t find school fun, but surely non-Indigenous children also don’t find school very fun. I think lack of attendance is not from a lack of interest in school, it’s from a lack of parental guidance. My children don’t particularly like school, but I take them every day. I walk with them and we chat in the mornings, and they feel calm going to school in the morning. Sometimes I even do some revision with them. Now I’m not necessarily saying that school is the best way to educate a child, but that’s what we’re kind of stuck with in the present day. I’m not taking away from homeschooling, or whatever, but somehow I don’t think homeschooling is the answer for most Indigenous families. If we want to help Indigenous children get better at maths, I think we need to find a way to get them to go to school. If we’re not prepared to that, then expect worse and worse educational outcomes. MUSIC Allégro by Emmit Fenn

You’d think maths is maths, right? 2 + 2 = 4, no mater what culture you’re from. Well, Indigenous mathematics is apparently completely different to our western style of maths. And of course, perhaps unsurprisingly to many of you, Western maths is a result of evil colonisation, didn’t you know? As seen on a news article on the ANU website: “Maths has no borders: Professor Rowena Ball brings Indigenous mathematics to ANU”. I find it interesting that a non-Indigenous lady is bringing Indigenous maths to the uni. Wouldn’t that be similar to: “Food has no borders: Professor Ball brings Pakistani food to ANU”? Of course, I’m joking. She’d probably bring kangaroo tail stew. Anyway, where was I? Oh yeah, Indigenous maths! So why are we talking about Indigenous maths? Why is this even being brought up? Well, it’s because Indigenous people are falling behind when it comes to maths. “‘Unacceptable’: Indigenous maths achievement gap under scrutiny”. Basically, the achievement gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous students continues to widen. If you take a look at the Australian Government’s ACARA website, they report on the National Assessment Program, NAPLAN results, which take into account Indigeneity. These are the average achievement scores for Year 9 in Numeracy for 2023. You can see that the average score is 567, with boys doing slightly better than girls. However, Indigenous students are scoring significantly worse than their non-Indigenous peers at 491 vs 573 – a more than 80-point difference. Surprisingly, or not, the best performers are those that have a language background other than English. So if you can’t speak English, you do well at maths, if you’re Aboriginal, well for whatever reason, on average you’re doing quite poorly. Surely there’s a societal issue at play here. It’s certainly not from a lack of capability. Well it didn’t take me long to find the answer. This is the Government’s My School website where you can search for individual schools and their overall performance etc. If we take a look at a school in a low socioeconomic area, Woodridge State High School in Logan for example, we can see that most students are in the bottom quarter of Socio-Educational Advantage. Most students, 69%, are from a non-English speaking background, while 8% of students identify as Indigenous. But what’s most telling, is the attendance levels. Only 17% of Indigenous students attend 90% or more of the time. Noting that only 54% of non-Indigenous students attend 90% of the time, so that’s not particularly good either, but it certainly beats 17%. If we look at a school in an above-average socioeconomic area, say Kedron State High School, with most students coming from families in the middle and top quarter of Socio-Educational Advantage, there are 3% of students who identify as Indigenous. Again, if we look at attendance levels, although better, Indigenous student attendance is still significantly lower than their non-Indigenous peers, 43% vs 61%. Clearly, one’s ability at maths probably has more to do with how often you attend school than lack of capability or opportunity. And just out of interest, let’s take a look at a rich school, say Brisbane Girls Grammar, where most people fit into the top quarter. When it comes to Indigenous students, there are none. 0%. So I cannot show you any statistics. Just before we finish, let’s take a look a real-life example of Aboriginal mathematics at play. This is my favourite Aboriginal Australian, writer Bruce Pascoe. He lives on a farm in Victoria where he grows and harvests traditional Aboriginal food. Apparently, Aboriginal people have been growing and harvesting their own grains for the last 65,000 years, according to SBS. Mr Pascoe claims, “Aboriginal people were the first people in the world to make bread, 15,000 years in advance of the Egyptians”. Wow, I didn’t know that. Consequently, he’s made his own company called Black Duck Foods. For example, at Woolworths or Coles, you can pick up a kilogram of flour for about $1.40. Sounds reasonable. And this is where the Aboriginal maths comes in. At Black Duck foods, you can buy Kangaroo & Spear grass flour for $90 per 250g, which works out to be $360 per kg. It’s an absolute steal! Compared to Coles at $1.40 per kg, 360 divided by $1.40 equals 257 times the price! That’s how Aboriginal maths works. Just inflate the price by hundreds of times. And that’s why Indigenous maths is so much better than colonial maths. MUSIC Allégro by Emmit Fenn

Unless you have been living under a rock, you probably all know about the Sydney mass stabbing at a Bondi Junction shopping centre where seven people were killed including the perpetrator. It made the world news. The reason it made the world news, is because Australia is internationally seen as a safe country (except for those pesky redbacks and taipans), but otherwise free from incidents of mass violence, so this mass stabbing broke the mould. If the same thing happened in say Somalia, you’d be lucky to hear anything about it. Although interestingly, Somali refugee families are sending their sons back to Africa to escape out-of-control knife crime in the UK. Of course, regarding the Sydney stabbing, online commentators were quick to point the finger without knowing all the details. One side was blaming radical Islamists or jihadists for the attack. The other side was blaming Jewish extremists, even going so far as to naming a particular individual, an innocent Jewish university student, Benjamin Cohen, based entirely on his slight resemblance to a grainy mobile phone image, despite him being 20 years the man’s junior. As it turns out, both side were wrong. It wasn’t an Islamist or a pro-Israeli Zionist, it was an Aussie English tutor from Queeensland who liked surfing, and who was diagnosed with schizophrenia more than 20 years ago and was off his medication at the time of the stabbings. Look, I don’t think humans have got any worse over the years. Go back 50 years, and I’m sure there were people spreading similar types of rumours and gossip, but this was typically limited to their circle of friends. Fast-forward to the modern world, and now you can spread the same rumours and gossip to your five million followers. As we saw, things can rapidly get out of hand. My strategy is pretty simple, if I don’t know for sure, I’ll typically refrain from saying it, although, we all make mistakes, I’m sure, especially in these breaking news environments where the facts have not yet emerged. Although to be fair to some of these online commentators, Channel 7 were reporting that Mr Cohen was the perpetrator, but have since issued an apology. It should also be noted that despite the police knowing the identity of the perpetrator, they delayed the release of that information for whatever reason, perhaps to be 100% certain, allowing online rumours to spread over a 14-hour period. During that time, Mr Cohen was one of the most reviled men on the internet. NSW Police Inspector Amy Scott was the one that ran towards danger and shot and killed the perpetrator. She has been labelled a hero in the media, which I’m not going to disagree with, but to be fair, the job of a police officer, no, their sworn duty is to protect the public without fear or favour, so she did exactly what society expected of her and what she swore to do when she became a police officer. As many of you would know, it is illegal for Australians to carry weapons in a defensive capacity: guns, knives, even pepper spray are all outlawed. Consequently, we have individuals using environmental weapons, or improvised weapons, such as bollard man who bravely held the attacker at bay using a shopping centre bollard. The Australian Government obviously appreciate him using a weapon, even if it’s only an improvised one, because they have since offered the French National permanent residency for his extraordinary bravery. Despite the horror that unfolded in Sydney, it was not labelled a terrorist incident by police. It’s funny how we define these words. From a layman’s perspective, I would define terrorism as the act of causing terror, which certainly happened during this stabbing spree, but the official definition is: “the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims”. The fact that the perpetrator didn’t have any political aims, it didn’t matter how many people he killed, it was never going to be considered terrorism by the powers that be. On the other hand, just days later, a second knife attack occurred in Sydney in an Assyrian church, which was labelled an act of terrorism, despite nobody dying. A 16-year-old entered the church and rushed forward to stab the popular Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel who was presiding over the service. The Conversation ran a piece asking, “Why is the Sydney church stabbing an act of terrorism, but the Bondi tragedy isn’t?” Basically, we answered it before. The Bondi killer was not motivated by a larger political cause. He was just mentally unwell. Whereas the church attacker, although he acted alone, was very likely to have received encouragement and backing from a terrorist organisation. And now it’s being reported that the attacker received a good behaviour bond for a previous knife crime earlier this year. It seems like we don’t like locking up violent offenders here in Australia. MUSIC Allégro by Emmit Fenn

Ice hockey, maple syrup, gender, diversity and inclusion, Niagara Falls, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau dancing at Pride parades. These are just a few of the things Canada is famous for. But increasingly, Canada is becoming famous for having an incredibly and increasingly low fertility rate. Here’s the latest data from Statistics Canada. At a current rate of 1.33 births per woman – What is a woman? Canada doesn’t know – but one thing that is clear, this is the lowest total fertility rate in more than a century. It’s the lowest on record. Some might call this a crisis, right? How do you think Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is dealing with this? Well, in a recent tweet, he said, “Women should be free to choose the contraceptives they need without cost getting in the way. So, we’re making contraceptives free.” Look, I’m not here to debate whether contraceptives should be free or not, but when your birthrate is plummeting, is this the right course of action? Making it easier for people to prevent pregnancy? This can only have one result, right? Further declines in the fertility rate. There’s no way this would result in the opposite. It can only result in a fertility decline. I’m not suggesting that Justin Trudeau is intentionally trying to reduce the birth rate, but what else will this logically result in? Of course, when he says contraceptives will be free, he means the taxpayer will fund people’s contraception. Perhaps a more accurate tweet would have been: “all Canadians will now share the cost of birth control for those that can’t afford it.” Obviously, nothing in Canada is truly free, except perhaps the cold. Some cynical people might suggest that Trudeau’s announcement for free contraceptives could be translated as: “We want women to work and not have families”. Despite the dramatic fall in the fertility rate, the population of Canada has been rapidly increasing. For the first time in history, the population grew by more than a million in a single year surpassing 40 million. Why do you think this might be? Immigration, of course! This historic pace of population increase is being driven by immigration and the need for workers, but it’s also causing the already dire housing crisis to get even worse. The solution, according to Justin Trudeau, is not to reduce immigration, but to just build millions of more homes. Whether that’s feasible or not, I don’t know. Time will tell I suppose. But the message is clear. Fertility is going down, while immigration is ramping up. I don’t know if this what Canadians want, but that’s what’s happening in Trudeau’s Canada. MUSIC Allégro by Emmit Fenn

“In so called ‘Australia’, the voices of First Nations LGBTIQ+ people are often ignored.” Yes, here we go. “Gender binary is a construct that was enforced on this land through colonisation.” Of course it was. Anybody surprised by that statement? Even though I was always led to believe there was something called men’s and women’s business where certain places and practices were strictly for men or women only as part of ancestral law, well before colonists arrived. Anyhoo, in Australia, I always thought this was the acronym, well, technically, an initialism, but let’s run with acronym. Either way, they’re both abbreviations to ostensibly make things easier in speech and writing. In a previous video, I somewhat jokingly said that Canada is more inclusive because it’s got a longer acronym: 2SLGBTQIA+, where 2S stands for Two-Spirit, which is used to indicate a person whose gender identity comprises both masculine and feminine spirits. Australians, not to be outdone by the Canadians, have seemingly added some more letters to our acronym. I was reading this article on the ABC about the Cass Review in England, which recommends the National Health Service significantly limit the prescribing of medications — colloquially known as puberty blockers — for people aged under 18. In the article, they quote the Australian Medical Association who use the acronym: LGBTQIASB+. They seem to have used the letter B twice. I thought it must be a mistake, but no, it’s not. Just to be clear, I’m not here to attack individual people – people are who they are – I’m just here to point out the madness that has become this acronym. So I went to the AMA’s website and found their position statement on LGBTQIASB+ Health. Curiosity got the better of me and I wanted to find out what the S and the B stood for. Well, they stand for Sistergirl and Brotherboy. Excuse my ignorance, but what the hell does that mean? As I kind of hinted at at the start, it’s to do with Aboriginality. “Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people may use the terms Sistergirl: Gender diverse people who have a female spirit and take on female roles within the community.” Brotherboy is the opposite with people who have a “male spirit”. Yes, this is the Australian Medical Association who are the peak professional body for doctors in Australia. They are apparently at the peak of scientific and medical knowledge and research here in Australia, and they entertain the idea that there are female and male spirits inhabiting Aboriginal people’s bodies. Look, I’m not against a person’s religion or spirituality, but is a medical association the right place to entertain such ideas? Perhaps a temple or a shrine would be more appropriate. And if they recognise male and female spirits, why not animal spirits? It’s not so far-fetched. Some Native Americans believe that a spirit animal is assigned to a person from birth. Either way, this is supposed to be an abbreviation – a shortened form of a word or phrase. FBI is a great abbreviation… “FBI, open up!” It’s short and succinct. But what if the FBI kept adding letters to their acronym? CP – Crime Prevention; FC – Foreign Counterintelligence; NS – National Security; DITP – Domestic and International Terrorism Prevention. “FBICPFCNSDITP, open up!” It would be ludicrous, but yet here we are with this real-life acronym. And what’s its purpose? Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau famously couldn’t pronounce the acronym himself and stumbled when trying to say it. He also tweeted out the longest version yet: “2SLGBTQQIA+”, being rightfully mocked, remembering that the acronym is not agreed to by everyone that it encompasses. For example, some argue that transgender and transsexual causes are not the same as that of lesbian, gay, and bisexual people. Historically, the acronym was two letters. Well, it wasn’t even an acronym. It was gay and lesbian, as evidenced by the naming of the Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras. Then in the mid-to-late 1980s, gender identity started to be included and the acronym became LGBT, and then more and more letters were added to representing varying gender identities, or people questioning their identity, and the asexuality was added, and now, one’s spirit identity is being included. What’s next? There’s certainly going to be a next, right? Anyway, in the name of inclusion, the Australian Medical Association, the peak body for doctors in Australia, are now including specific spirit identities for Aboriginal people, whether or not Aboriginal people agree with it or not. AUSTRALIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION LGBTQIASB+ HEALTH POSITION STATEMENT https://www.ama.com.au/articles/lgbtqiasb-health-position-statement THE CASS REVIEW INTO MEDICAL CARE PROVIDED TO CHILDREN WITH GENDER DYSPHORIA HAS BEEN RELEASED https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-12/gender-dysphoria-cass-review-medical-treatment-children/103700476 MUSIC Allégro by Emmit Fenn

We all know that the Indigenous Voice to Parliament referendum, which cost around $450 million of your taxpayer money, was a complete flop with Australians collectively voting No, but it wasn’t from lack of trying! A number of major Australian companies donated millions of dollars towards the Yes campaign. What these businesses have to do with pushing for constitutional amendment, I don’t know. It seems rather absurd, if you ask me. In this video, we take a look at the Australian Electoral Commission’s Transparency Register. The AEC is obliged to publish financial information such as donations and expenditure before the end of 24 weeks after voting day. Noting this was updated 3 April 2024. It should also be noted that the disclosure threshold for this referendum was $15,200, This means many donations are not visible, because only those above the threshold need to be disclosed. It can be a little bit dodgy in that there is nothing to stop anyone making multiple small donations to avoid disclosure. Luckily, our big woke companies wanted people to know what they were donating. That was the whole point of their donations – Virtue signalling! It certainly wasn’t a very good business decision. Anyway, we’re interested in the Transparency Register. Specifically, Referendum Returns. The organisation Australians for Indigenous Constitutional Recognition, which ran the Yes23 campaign, received a massive $47.4 million or so, of which it spent around $43.8 million, by far the biggest beneficiary of donations during the referendum campaign. The University of New South Wales, which housed the Uluru Statement from the Heart group, received around $11.1 million in donations. Australians for Unity were the largest No campaigner receiving around $10.8 million in donations. With the Liberal Party of Australia, who backed the No campaign, coming in a distant fourth with $1.9 million. There’s dozens more entities listed, which we won’t go into here, but no matter how you look at it, the Yes campaign easily outspent the No campaign, and they still lost. Interestingly, if you sort by Referendum Expenditure, you’ll see that there were two major No campaigners, Australians for Unity, who we saw before, who spent $11.8 million, and Advance Australia, who worked with Australians for Unity, who spent $10.4 million. So together they spent around $22 million, but together they only received around $12 million. So where did the extra $10 million come from? Well, it didn’t. In its disclosure documents to the AEC, Australians for Unity said that many of its expenses were double counted, because it passed on donations to Advance Australia. I don’t know what the AEC are trying to pull, or if it’s just an accounting mistake, but either way, the Yes campaign way outspent the No campaign. According to the Guardian, “Yes campaign groups received more than five times as much in donations as no side in voice referendum”. When it comes to individual donors, we’ve got the Paul Ramsay Foundation who donated $7 million. According to their website, their purpose is to “help end cycles of disadvantage in Australia by enabling equitable opportunity for people and communities to thrive”. Coming in second at $4.4 million was Givia, the Yajilarra Trust. I can’t find much information about them. Australia’s fourth-largest bank I think, ANZ, donated $2.5 million of your deposits towards a socially divisive issue. Oil and gas production company Woodside Energy, $2.1 million. One of Australia’s largest listed companies and the largest bank, Commonwealth Bank happily spent $2 million of shareholder money trying to divide us up along ethnic lines. The third-largest bank Westpac, obviously didn’t want to be left out, and donated $2 mil, as did Wesfarmers, owners of Bunnings, Kmart, Target, Officeworks, just to name a few. My personal favourite, Woolworths, who donated over $1.5 million. Why would a supermarket involve itself in trying to promote constitutional change? Anyway, I think you get the idea. These companies spent millions of dollars trying to sway your opinion. It didn’t work, but they tried. What if these companies instead donated their millions directly to Indigenous causes? Wouldn’t that have been a more effective use of their money if they were truly interested in helping Indigenous people? I don’t know, maybe that would have been wasted too, but these donations, this money, was definitely wasted. It essentially went to advertising, right? Coalition’s Indigenous Affairs spokeswoman Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price also made comment on the funding, telling those larger corporations to focus on providing for their customers, not telling them what to think. “Where did my money go?” I hear some Indigenous people ask. Bluntly speaking, it was flushed down the toilet. AUSTRALIAN ELECTORAL COMMISSION’S TRANSPARENCY REGISTER https://transparency.aec.gov.au/ MUSIC Allégro by Emmit Fenn