Earlier in the pandemic, State Premiers let Black Lives Matter protests happen without a whisper of criticism. Now that protests criticise their attempts at tyranny, they crack down on them. Banning protests has been a hallmark of dictators for all of history. Let’s not follow them down that path.
Transcript
As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, my remarks will be on the most basic of human rights: freedom to protest. State premiers have declared a war on peaceful protests against their policies, including the ‘freedom day’ rallies, yet they allow protests they agree with such as Black Lives Matter.
An ethical nightmare over human rights is brewing between the parliaments and the people. It’s the fault of blind political ambition, leveraged off a virus that has turned out to be, according to government health experts’ own data, no more harmful than a bad flu. It’s time we cancelled the COVID apocalypse. It’s time to end the use of COVID as an excuse to implement all-powerful legislation that exempts itself from proper scrutiny. Both the Biosecurity Act 2015 and the National Emergency Declaration Act 2020 make a mockery of 120 years of legislation and 800 years of common law. Both pieces of legislation are being used in ways never put to the people. Together, these acts trespass unreasonably on the rights and liberties of everyday Australians.
No parliament that wishes to call itself a democracy can grant indefinite, absolute and unscrutinised power. State premiers have entered into a COVID arms race with each other, leaving Australians trapped in the middle of the crossfire—huge increases in suicide attempts, children phoning helplines in unprecedented numbers and small businesses in ruins. And what created this? Federal parliament’s failure to hold the line against fear and misuse of power.
‘Emergency’ should not mean a dissolution of rights, especially when a state of emergency can be stretched out for months, years or even indefinitely. COVID policy has turned into a parallel legal system, embraced by a Prime Minister that has encouraged health orders that permanently alter the landscape of work and travel. Death has become a matter of politics and mismanagement, used to prevent the sacred freedom to assemble and protest peacefully. If Australians cannot protest, parliaments will never be held accountable for errors in judgement.
One of parliament’s many mistakes is in the presentation of COVID data. Given without context, they tower over us. Viewed in context, COVID harm barely deviates from normal. Parliaments cannot promise safety. Safety is an outcome of parliaments following policies that protect our freedoms and our rights. Instead of handling COVID with a view to these important guiding principles, politicians have suffocated Australia under the weight of biosecurity powers, resulting in displays of cruelty that have shocked the whole world.
The fact is we are not safe. We are not safe from our own parliaments. Freedom protests are a criticism of COVID policies and parliaments’ atrocious governance. Like the manufacturers of vaccines, parliaments do not want to hear any complaints about the quality of their work. Despite this parliament’s best attempts to control people, we are blessed with a nation full of people who refuse to live under the coercion of fear. This may be considered civil disobedience—I call it commonsense.
The Prime Minister’s role is to perform his duty with pragmatism and calm. Instead, Scott Morrison has rattled the cage of fear and enticed state politicians to do the same. Instead of focusing on trust, this parliament endorses spending tens of millions of dollars advertising COVID fear. Operation COVID Shield is now an attempt to use military to force the behaviour associated with trust without any attempt to create the meeting of the minds necessary for trust. Abused people may well may obey their captors, but they do not trust them. The more rights parliaments steal from Australians, the less likely people are to trust.
Australians asked for choice in COVID treatments, and the government suppressed peer reviewed and internationally accepted alternatives like Ivermectin. Australians asked for vaccine manufacturers to accept liability for their products, and instead were denied any recourse in the event of personal harm. Australians tried to report fatal side effects, and for months the parliament, the legacy media and social media silenced them. Australians took to the streets to tell this parliament and state premiers that the health orders were destroying millions of lives, and the states hunted them down like criminals. To enforce compliance, parliaments will need more policies like Operation COVID Shield, more police and more Defence Force members in our streets. Force will still fail, because fear and intimidation are a terrible plan. The damage done to the sacred trust between the people and parliaments is catastrophic. Parliamentary policy has destroyed trust in vaccines, creating two classes of people in Australia—those who profit from the pandemic and those who suffer from it. Policy, not COVID, has destroyed trust in vaccines. COVID Shield seeks to repair it with the rhetoric of war. Everyday Australians are not buying this nonsense. Australians know what the parliaments, the military and the health bureaucrats do not know—we will not be divided, we have one flag, we are one community and we are One Nation.
Respect people’s rights and restore informed consent—a basic human right. Is it any wonder millions of people now question everything state and federal parliaments say and have reached breaking point?
Transcript
The safety of everyday Australians should never be a race on a political scoreboard. Instead, it must be about health and accountability. Yet this government and most people in parliament hastily rammed COVID injections on people. The vaccines are not fully tested and are only provisionally approved. These are vaccines with serious side-effects—they’re even killing people—and with plummeting efficacy. The injections are already losing their effect. We’ve been told that we do not need 100 per cent vaccination to protect. Why, then, do governments, parliaments and big businesses continue to persecute people rightly concerned about this injection? A constituent, Ben, asked a simple question that many are asking: if your vaccine works, why does he need one, and, if it doesn’t work, why should he get one?
Secondly, Australians have a right to sit this race out. Instead we’re hearing democracy choking—the death of our right to say, ‘No, this is not for me.’ Without blush or hesitation, Qantas CEO Alan Joyce threatens the jobs of people who are concerned about COVID injections. Yet the same man signalled the need for IR reform now, supposedly to protect workers from abuses of power. Respect people’s rights and restore informed consent—a basic human right. Is it any wonder millions of people now question everything state and federal parliaments say and have reached breaking point? No, it’s expected. The ongoing protests must be heard. Australians have legitimate concerns for health and safety, jobs and livelihoods, and rights and freedoms. The unions and Queensland Labor—old Labor—used to defend the right to protest. They’re now a symptom of the problem of taking away people’s freedoms, jobs and livelihoods. In turn, state and federal governments must get back to basics and focus on the virus, not the symptoms. Whether we came here before Captain Cook or came from Europe or from Afghanistan, we Australians have one flag, we are one community and we are one nation.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/hbmA4VHPTcc/0.jpg360480Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2021-08-25 14:37:392021-08-25 14:37:47Government has destroyed your right to say no
Our country has been ruined by governments trying to pick and choose winners instead of letting people be free to invent new and innovative solutions. We used to lead the world, inventing the refrigerator, electric drill, tanks, pacemakers, ultrasounds and wifi. Not anymore.
The right to raise ourselves up through hard work and enterprise is a freedom that must not be compromised. It must be protected.
Transcript
Later this year we will pass an amazing milestone when an Australian designed and made satellite will be launched into space using an Australian designed and made rocket and launch facility. We now have a domestic end-to-end space capability, creating jobs and injecting new wealth into our economy. Government has not achieved this, private enterprise has, proving once again that governments do not create wealth; free personal enterprise creates wealth. For many years, we led the world in innovation, inventing the refrigerator in 1856, electric drill in 1889, military tanks in 1912, pacemakers in 1928, ultrasounds in 1961 and wifi in 1992. But that’s where the list ends, 30 years ago.
Australia once led the world in patents; now China registers four times the patents per capita that Australia does. This is partly the fault of the big banks, whose tight hold on the capital sector funding for business development is throttling investment, suffocating beneath our banks greedy obsession with real estate. The government, through its future growth fund, has taken upon itself the role of picking winners and losers amongst start-ups, making private sector growth beholden to government bureaucrats. Lockdowns have decimated small business and forced medium and large businesses to shelve research and development plans.
Australia is going backwards and is losing the ability for citizens to support themselves through their own hard work and enterprise. Reliance on government handouts appears to be a design feature of Prime Minister Morrison’s socialist version of Australia. Instead, One Nation will shrink the government to fit the Constitution, we will get government out of the way of free enterprise, we will let the Australian spirit out of [inaudible] to then invent and create to carry this nation forward, even to space. We have one flag, we have one community, we are one nation. The right to raise ourselves up through hard work and enterprise is a freedom that must not be compromised. It must remain.
“Since the start of the pandemic, countries have heavily invested in the development of control strategies that aim to contain the spread of COVID-19. Australian citizens have sporadically faced lockdowns. Senator Malcolm Roberts from the One Nation Party talks to us about the approach towards the COVID-19 situation taken by governments. Watch this video for exclusive insights.”
Well, hello and welcome to another edition of Executive Corner Expert Talks, I’m James Preston. And Australia has reached a boiling point with citizens of Greater Sydney having now been locked down for over two months. More protests likely on the way and hollow promises constantly being made by not only the New South Wales state government, but that of Prime Minister, Scott Morrison. It’s fair to say that the people have had enough. The gap between the everyday Australian and the likes of Gladys Berejiklian, or Dan Andrews in Victoria continues to grow each and every day. But one politician who has been particularly outspoken about the approach towards the lockdowns, and of course the COVID situation in a larger aspect by our various governments is Senator Malcolm Roberts from the One Nation Party. And he now joins me live on Kalkine TV. Malcolm, a very good afternoon to you.
Malcolm Roberts:
Thank you, James, for the welcome, it’s a pleasure to be here with you.
James Preston:
Malcolm, great to have you on. Let’s start with the obvious one here. Now, we’ve been witnessing a lot of tampering with freedoms. There’s been lockdowns for a long period of time. Now, 18 months, we’ve been dealing with ons and offs in this regard. What’s your approach to the entire thing?
Malcolm Roberts:
My approach is really simple. First of all, well, I mentioned this back, in the first single day session of parliament dealing with this coronavirus back on Monday, March 23rd. I said to the government, we will wave everything through because we’re looking at tens of thousands of deaths overseas. We realised it’s probably serious, so we don’t know much about it. Let’s get on with it, but we want you to get the data. We want you to build a comprehensive plan for managing this and we will hold you accountable. And what I’ve been driven by is, you said it a moment ago, hollow statements from members of parliament and premiers and the Prime Minister, hollow statements. People have had a gut full of this, James. This has been mismanaged, COVID exposed the mismanagement of our country. We started COVID with no masks, with no capacity to really manufacture solid material.
Malcolm Roberts:
We’ve still got that, but we also now have 18 months confirmed mismanagement of this. So my approach is very simple. I’ve confirmed it with Senate Estimates, with the Chief Medical Officer and the Department of Health Secretary. And they both confirmed my list of seven strategies for managing this virus. I asked them specifically, have I missed anything? No. Is there anything in my list of seven that shouldn’t be there? No. So the first one is lockdowns, but even that should be used only initially and then put aside. I’m happy to expand on that in a minute. The second one is testing, tracing and quarantining like Taiwan, highly successful, but we are failing at it.
Malcolm Roberts:
Third one, some basic restrictions like social distancing, maybe masks, but from what I understand masks, we can discuss that more, masks are not the go. Vaccines, if they’re tested, if they’re properly proved and if they’re thoroughly tested, and these vaccines are not. Fifth one, Ivermectin or any other approved antiviral. Now the Chief Medical Officer and the Secretary of the Health Department, both confirm that that’s a valid strategy. We’re not using that. We could end this nonsense immediately. Sixth is personal hygiene, personal behaviours. And the seventh is health and fitness. That’s a comprehensive approach. And we’re seeing the federal and state governments do only one each and they’re making a mess of it.
James Preston:
Now look, it’s a pretty comprehensive list. Let’s just touch on the first point there, in terms of lockdowns being, I suppose, a final measure to approach with. When Scott Morrison, of course, our Prime Minister, he released a series of different phases. And part of that was supposed to be lockdowns as of course, a final decision here. It was supposed to be the stop gap solution if all else failed. But what we’ve seen in the last two months or so is that, that seems to be pretty much the first approach. So how we ended up in a position where that’s now the desire, I suppose, from our politicians, even though it was about a month before that, that we had this new line of messaging.
Malcolm Roberts:
Well, we haven’t got the data from the government and I don’t believe the government is following the data. None of the states, not the federal government, their plans are shooting each other, blaming each other, avoiding, dodging, ducking, weaving. They’re not being accountable and they are not presented the data. I asked the Chief Medical Officer for the data. He gave it to me. This virus is highly transmissible, but it has low severity to moderate severity. We also know within that group of people, that within the population, there are distinct segments, the old, for example, and those with comorbidities needs special precautions. So what we need to have is a comprehensive plan, a detailed plan. Now the World Health Organisation itself has said, and it’s a corrupt, dishonest, incompetent body. Nonetheless, even it has said openly, that lockdowns are for use initially and not thereafter.
Malcolm Roberts:
Lockdowns are used to get control of the virus. The very fact that the Prime Minister is bankrolling the states on one policy, and that is lockdowns, shows that we have not got control of the virus. We are not managing the virus, James. The virus is managing the states. The federal government is pouring money in the largest transfer of wealth from taxpayers to multinational companies that we have ever seen. It’s bankrolling the vaccine manufacturers, and they’re now having plummeting efficacy. So we are on a mess. This will continue and continue and continue until we wake up to ourselves.
James Preston:
Well, Malcolm, as part of the lockdowns, one thing that we’ve all been enduring, I suppose, is Gladys Berejiklian and Brad Hazzard addressing New South Wales each day with quite repetitive reports really. Now, I personally have quite a huge issue with how they are run. There never seems to be a message of hope. And for me, the language that’s used is just as important as the overall message. Why do you think the information is being conveyed in the way that it is, where we’re focusing on case numbers or positive results, as opposed to, for example, doing 115,000 tests. And then only 150 come back as positive, surely that should equate to some sort of goodwill for the community.
Malcolm Roberts:
Well, I don’t think they know what they’re doing. And quite clearly they don’t. Governor DeSantis in Florida enacted one lockdown upfront in Florida last year. He then subsequently very quickly apologised to the people of Florida. Now remember, Florida has a very high proportion of elderly people. Governor DeSantis promised his people that he would never do another lockdown because it failed. In the United States, we have 50 states and you can compare their performance. Those on lockdowns are doing not as well as those without lockdowns. California is a basket case and has been on virtually continual lockdown for months. It’s a mess. States that are freeing things up are far better performed when it comes to health.
Malcolm Roberts:
There are three aspects to this virus. The first is health, that’s got to be the first priority. The second one is freedom, basic freedom. Now freedom is essential for getting people’s minds and hearts into gear to solve the problems with regard to our health. The third one is governance and accountability. We are seeing an absolutely failed system at work here with the state and federal governments. We do need hope, the data gives us hope. This vaccine can be managed quite effectively as some countries overseas are showing, as states without lockdowns in America are showing, and without a vaccine. We have some countries, some states overseas that are highly effective in managing this virus by using Ivermectin, which the government has turned away from in this country without the due proper analysis.
James Preston:
Well, Malcolm, we’ll get to vaccines itself in a moment because obviously that is tied in with Ivermectin. And also we obviously have to tread quite carefully there because we know what has been happening previously with YouTube, for example, if we try and discuss such a topic. But I want to ask you this question, it might be a bit of a loaded one given your role as a Senator, but is there any merit in trying to, I suppose, tie politician salaries to lockdowns. If we, for example, go into a lockdown or stay in a lockdown for a prolonged period, would parliamentarians such as Berejiklian, Dan Andrews or Annastacia Palaszczuk, those who are in charge of making the decision, should they have their pay slashed to that of the disaster payment that they’re offering people who have had their livelihoods destroyed? Do you think that would create some sort of a different outcome?
Malcolm Roberts:
Yes, it would. But, and I agree with that sentiment and that idea. I don’t know the practicalities and the legalities of doing that. However, it would put responsibility back, but there’s an even better way. And that’s to vote some of these people out, that would really cut their pay. We need scrutiny. This lockdown nonsense will continue in our country until the people wake up and hold the governments accountable. That’s what’s happened in this country. We’ve had 80 years of atrocious governments that has let the people down. We’ve destroyed our manufacturing capability, our productive capacity. We have become dependent on overseas countries. We have the world’s best people. We have abundant resources, energy resources, metals resources, minerals resources. We have a fabulous agricultural sector. We have water that needs to just be moved around properly and efficiently. We are in shortage of many of the things that we should be abundant.
Malcolm Roberts:
We’re exporting our coal, our iron ore to other countries to turn into steel. And then we import the steel back. This is crazy. The people in this country have to wake up and have to make sure that they understand it’s not just a Morrison liberal national government. It’s not just a potential Albanese government. My goodness, I don’t know which would be worse. But the problem is parliamentary system in this country has stopped holding governments accountable. And that’s the key thing. And the way to hold parliaments accountable and to change the focus and drive of their parliament is to change the parliament. I’m not talking about changing the constitution. I’m talking about the changing the composition through the ballot box. That’s the way a democracy works. We’ve had 80 years of failed governance, and now we need to change that and start voting for a different parliament, an independent parliament to make sure that we hold governments accountable.
James Preston:
Malcolm, take your point there, but let’s now move on to vaccines. You’ve been a rather outspoken critic about the approach that both federal and state governments across Australia have been taking to date. For example, we’re seeing in your home of Queensland, the concept now of no jab no entry being proposed. Now that is of course, despite the fact that people who’ve been vaccinated can still contract it. They can get breakthrough infections and then obviously transmit them onto other people. So what’s your position on the concept of mandatory vaccinations?
Malcolm Roberts:
Totally opposed to it. I want to make it very clear, James. I wholeheartedly support medicines that have been tested thoroughly and proven to be safe, effective, and preferably affordable. I’m opposed completely to using untested medicines, untested drugs, and completely opposed and strongly opposed to forcing those drugs, untested drugs on people at the threat of losing their livelihood, which is what’s happening. Now, we have a range of people with a different views on vaccine. Some are vaccine compliant. Some are vaccine reluctant, some are vaccine hesitant, some are vaccine resistant and some are vaccine opponents. Generally speaking, I’m hesitant. Give me the data and then I’ll make my mind. It must be an informed choice from everyone, an informed choice. So I have a right as a Senator to listen to my constituents, to share the data I have. And I know that YouTube and Facebook are banning people for saying certain things.
Malcolm Roberts:
So, but that shows that we haven’t got a democracy anymore. What we need to do is to recognise that there’s this whole, there’s a broad spectrum of views towards vaccines. When people start calling people vaccine deniers, or anti-vaxxers, that’s a way of suppressing debate. That’s all it is. It’s a smear. There’s no data that goes with it. Anyone is allowed to have their own view about vaccines. That’s a free country. Everyone should have the free right to have an informed consent before they give their consent. To have an informed choice. It’s my body, my choice. It’s your body, your choice. And if you’re different from me, so be it. I don’t care. Now, vaccines, I’ve asked the Chief Medical Officer, the Head of the Therapeutic Goods Administration and the Secretary of the Department of Health in federal parliament, federal Senate Estimates about vaccines.
Malcolm Roberts:
I asked them, are they 100% safe? No, they’re not. What is the dosage required? We don’t know. How often will we have to get vaccine injections? We don’t know. Will there be booster shots? We don’t know. Will we be able to remove masks and restrictions and lockdowns? We don’t know. We all do know a few things, James, and that is these vaccines, as Pfizer has admitted, its own vaccine, the efficacy has plummeted very shortly after the vaccines have been administered. Israel is now finding an 11 fold increase in COVID cases in Israel. We know that they’re very concerned about the plummeting of vaccine efficacy. We know that Pfizer has admitted that they have made an application to the federal, the Food and Drug Administration in the United States to administer a third booster shot.
Malcolm Roberts:
How many booster shots do we need? How many booster shots will there be? And what we do know is that there have been massive adverse effects in America. There’ve been over 10,000 deaths recorded. There’ve been a thousand miscarriages. There’ve been people with heart problems, lung problems, other diseases. That we know also that Pfizer’s vaccine causes, the European Health Organisation has recognised that Pfizer’s vaccine can cause myocarditis of the heart and yet Pfizer now makes a drug to treat myocarditis. Pfizer made $18.9 billion in revenue in the last three months, the last quarter. It made a profit around $4 billion. And yet it is making people sick and getting money for that, and then selling more drugs to cure them from the disease that it’s caused and making more money from that. So what we’ve got here is a really tight circle where we do know the facts show that these vaccines haven’t got the efficacy they expected and even their own drug manufacturers are admitting that
James Preston:
Well, Malcolm, I think two points I’ll jump on from there is obviously, it’s quite important here to point out as well, just for our due diligence that no vaccine is 100% safe. We know that for a fact, there can always be adverse reactions. But certainly take your point that we don’t have long-term data for these either. We know that these are being pushed out. In general, the large percentage of people who are taking them aren’t having adverse reactions, but they do still exist. And that is something that does need to be discussed moving forward. I think that’s a very important issue.
James Preston:
One thing I want to ask as well is just for yourself, are you, I mean, you mentioned that you’re vaccine hesitant. Do you believe you will get the vaccine at some point? Or are you completely steering away from it until more data arrives?
Malcolm Roberts:
No, I won’t be getting the vaccine.
James Preston:
Okay. All right, well, let’s move on now to the concept of vaccine passports. [crosstalk 00:16:20].
Malcolm Roberts:
There are just too many risks there. [crosstalk 00:16:20]
James Preston:
Now we’ve seen some huge protests in France where they’ve obviously implemented that policy. It’s obviously a very loaded issue. What is your take with vaccine passport? I’d imagine it’s quite similar to the concept towards mandatory vaccinations.
Malcolm Roberts:
Correct. Mandatory vaccinations are murky for a start, because there is some people who say that they’re possible through employers. But I’d urge employees to put the question back on the employer and to indemnify the employee against death or against any serious injuries or illnesses. Now, vaccine passport, mandating vaccines may or may not be legal. That’s very vague and very fuzzy right now. Regardless, it’s unethical. So even if it is legal and the federal government cannot make it legal, it’s in the constitution that prevents that. The state government can in certain states and state governments have, others could change the law to make it legal. But in this case, James, what we’ve already seen is the federal government going through the state governments. So it’s really a federal initiative, which means it’s illegal. But it’s certainly unethical to force anyone and certainly unethical to force someone at the threat of losing their livelihood.
Malcolm Roberts:
That means a person has a choice between eating or not getting the vaccine. That’s it. If you want to eat, then you’ve got to get the vaccine. That’s totally wrong. And so vaccine prisons, I call them, not vaccine passport, it’s a vaccine prison because they’re designed to exclude people who are not vaccinated, who choose to not be vaccinated. That means we’re denying people their basic rights, their basic rights to move around, Facebook and YouTube even denying their basic rights to freedom of speech. Denying people livelihoods, denying people travel, denying people to exchange, denying people social activities, denying people to mix with their families.
Malcolm Roberts:
We have seen the real issue in this vaccine. And, sorry, in this virus, is not just health, it’s freedom and it’s government accountability. Governments have quickly moved into control and always throughout human history, we have control versus freedom. And at the moment, freedom is losing out. These vaccine prisons as I call them, they’re not vaccine passports, they’re vaccine prisons to restrict people, to force them to be vaccinated. That is immoral, unethical and totally wrong. Leave it up to each person to choose, but above all, give them the information so that they can make an informed choice.
James Preston:
Well, Malcolm, I think that’s a pretty good note to finish on the entire concept behind what you’re talking about here is basically freedom. Freedom of movement, freedom of choice, freedom of decision-making. So I want to just thank you so much for your time and getting across your insights today.
Malcolm Roberts:
You’re welcome, James. Health, freedom and government accountability. And your pleasure to be on the interview with you.
James Preston:
Brilliant, thank you very much, Malcolm. That is One Nation Senator Malcolm Roberts. And for all of our sake, hopefully we can find a way out of this mess very soon. And of course, manage to keep as many of our freedoms as Malcolm has been alluding to intact as possible. Well, that’s all for this edition of Expert Talks. If you missed any part of this conversation or you’d like to browse our complete catalogue of expert talks, simply head across to the website, kalkinemedia.com. And also our YouTube channel, Kalkine Media. I’m James Preston, signing off for now.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/fK57rGSIiNE/0.jpg360480Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2021-08-24 12:01:072021-08-24 12:01:14Vaccinations should not be mandatory and lockdowns a last resort – Kalkine TV with James Preston
Just like The US Federal Government, The UK Government, The New Zealand Government, the Canadian Government and Federal and State Australian Governments, no longer serve the interests of Australians. Australian Prime Minister Morrison thinks he’s being clever by using despotic Premiers and Businesses to do his dirty work to force almost every Australian to be vaccinated. But he will be destroyed by his own actions.
As with other Western pseudo democracies, Australia is now a divided nation, with Australians pitted against each other. Good Governments would not stoop to this during a real health emergency. Nor would they deny to the sick, inexpensive, safe and effective treatment.
Australia is an international disgrace with daily examples of police overreach and arrests. Dumb politicians lie through their teeth come out with ridiculous statements – because they are fighting a phony war.
Australians have good reason to refuse an experimental vaccine – making Government or Private sector coercion even more abhorrent. Business leaders are the useful idiots believing vaccines are the only way out of their Government imposed nightmare. This is twisted logic – with growing evidence that the new vaccines have dangerous side effects and lose their effectiveness in a short time. Little is known about these so called vaccines and less is known about the efficacy or dangers of the imminent round of booster shots.
So Corporations are legitimising ongoing and arbitrary restrictions on economic activity and the destruction of the business class. Really?
Some 18 months on, Government actions against the virus would be laughable if they weren’t so destructive. Record levels of fake positive testing, CCP style restrictions on the majority of the healthy, Internal and external travel restrictions, destruction of public health, risking the health of the most vulnerable and lives of the young with their vaccine mandates and risking front line health services.
All this madness has to stop now because the benefits more than outweigh the cost of the virus itself and these shocking Government interventions.
Senator Malcolm Roberts said the other day “As more and more people become understandably vaccine hesitant, the government is becoming more and more authoritarian. If we don’t want to end up in a dictatorship all vaccine choices, whether compliant or hesitant, must be accepted.
https://i0.wp.com/www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Capture-3.png?fit=774%2C407&ssl=1407774Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2021-08-23 11:29:492021-08-23 11:35:34Covid and the Transition from Democracy to Authoritarianism
As more and more people become understandably vaccine hesitant, the government is becoming more and more authoritarian.
If we don’t want to end up in a dictatorship all vaccine choices, whether compliant or hesitant, must be accepted and respected.
Transcript
[Marcus] All right, one nation. Senator, Malcolm Roberts joining me in just tick. Here was an early caller, Dane. And I think he, this is a sentiment that many of you share. All right, Dane. Hello.
[Dane] Look, I was just ringing with regard to the plan. And you had mentioned in the bio, what plan does the government have. Now they’re been plenty with the stick, And always say, if you want to change behaviour, it’s a carrot or a stick. Okay? We’ve got people vaccinated. I’m currently vaccinated. Lot of people amongst the community are vaccinated. They’ve all got access to immunisation passport now on their phones. I’ve currently got it downloaded. And there’s no fear or confusion having that. So, if you want to encourage or change behaviour, why not allow those people who are fully vaccinated to travel further distances within the Sydney region. That gives you that Liberty. That gives you that freedom. If you want to be an anti-vaxxer, your prerogative, your choice still, but you just are not allowed to partake in these activities.
[Marcus] All right. Well, I know Malcolm Roberts, one nation Senator, won’t be happy with that sentiment. Hello, Malcolm.
[Malcolm] Good day Marcus. How are you?
[Marcus] Yeah, not bad. Did you hear that caller?
[Malcolm] I did, and I’m disgusted.
[Marcus] Why?
[Malcolm] Very simply. Because it’s segregating people. We don’t want segregation in this, in this country. That’s apartheid. We want freedom.
[Marcus] Well, you’ll never
[Malcolm] We want freedom, and we want government accountability.
[Marcus] What about QANTAS? Alan Joyce announcing yesterday that all of his workforce will need to be vaccinated in order for them to work.
[Malcolm] Well, let’s have a look at something else your caller just said. He talked about vaccine, what did he call them, anti-vaxxers. That’s a lot of rubbish. I’ll get to alan Joyce in a minute because he’s a tinpot dictator. We’ve got a range of people with legitimate responses to the vaccine.
[Marcus] Fair enough.
[Malcolm] We have, we have vaccine compliant people.
[Marcus] Mm, hm.
[Malcolm] We have vaccine reluctant people who will take the jab, but reluctantly. We have vaccine hesitant people. We have vaccine resistant people, and we have vaccine opponents. Everyone, I don’t care where you are in that spectrum, that is your choice to be there. I’m vaccine hesitant because I don’t see the data. Now, when it comes down on Joyce, the data shows that in Israel, the most heavily vaccinated country on this earth,
[Marcus] Yup.
[Malcolm] Vaccine efficacy is less than 40% within a couple of months of vaccine vaccination. In other words, and we’re also seeing now a higher proportion of the vaccinated in Israel, getting the virus, then amongst the population. That’s fact. The vaccine manufacturer, Pfizer, has admitted that the vaccine efficacy plummets, and it’s something that they have now applied to the food and drug administration in America. They give permission to do a third booster shot.
[Marcus] All right.
[Malcolm] How many boosters are we going to have?
[Marcus] Well.
[Malcolm] This is insane. The data shows that there is no difference between stopping the transmissibility with a vaccine or not. So there’s no point in getting vaccinated if you’re going to start, try and stop the virus spreading. The only solution to this is ivermectin. It’s proven to stop the transmission.
[Marcus] All right. Lunacy. That’s what you call these lockdowns. We don’t know when the hell we’re going to get out of it here in New South Wales. This thing’s running rapid. 4,000 cases where they’re not quite sure where it’s come from all the rest of it. But in the Northern territory, they’ve locked down on one case in Victoria. There’s this curfew between 9:00 PM to 5:00 AM across the Dutch in New Zealand. There’s been a lockdown just with one case. And that’s being blamed on New South Wales . Queensland, New South Wales offering no guarantee of no lockdowns, even at 80% of vaccination rates.
[Malcolm] It’s insane. It is absolute lunacy. What we saw in the in the initial stages in New Zealand was they did the modelling. And the modelling showed a massive spike in cases. Then it would come down to lock downs. Then they showed repeated, the modelling. This is the modelling, the same modelling that came out of this country, they showed repeated lockdowns, repeated lockdowns, repeated lockdowns. You can’t get away from this virus, it’s here. Now in Australia, they only showed us the modelling results after one lockdown. Remember they all said, flatten the curve and get back to normal? Rubbish. We’ll have repeated lockdowns, and that’s not a way to manage this. Even the crooked, corrupt, incompetent, dishonest world health organisation has slammed lockdowns as being ineffective and a brutal tool that used only to get control of the virus. So every time a state government implements a lockdown here, it is admitting to the people that it does not have control of the virus. What we need is a proper plan. I said it on 23rd of January, 23rd of March, Last year when we were passing the first of the measures for this virus through parliament. We need the data, we need a plan, and we need government accountability. We have got none of those. These people are just playing games with each other and it’s costing peoples lives.
[Marcus] All right, Malcolm, good to have you on. Appreciate your point of view as always. I mean, we were not privy even opposing members of parliament, even though they’ve taken it to committees here in New South Wales, the chief health officer is talked over by the health minister who will not release, for whatever reason, the health advice. It’s. And this is the irony. It’s public health advice, but the public don’t get to know.
[Malcolm] Exactly. Now I’ve got the advice out of the data, out of the chief medical officer in federal parliament, and sent us estimates. And he, he gave me the graph. The transmissibility of this virus is nothing unusual. The severity, the mortality, is low to moderate. It is less than some flu’s in the recent past in this country. That’s the fact. And now, what we’ve got now, last week we had a sensor motion, a condemnation motion against George Christians, for simply telling the truth. And for simply speaking up what his electorates are paying him to speak. And that’s the ending of democracy in this country. We have incompetent premiers, disastrously incompetent prime minister spraying, tirades at each other, inflicting lockdowns on people. This is incompetence and it’s a lack of accountability. And what we’ve got to do Marcus, is we’ve got to change the composition of the parliament. Get back to being parliament, holding governments accountable. We have got to get people to wake up and start realising if you vote for labour, you’re basically getting the same thing as liberal.
[Marcus] All right.
[Malcolm] There’s nothing happening between these two parties. There’s half the state governments are labour, half a state governments are liberal. The federal government’s liberal, and they made a complete meal of this. We need to get back to proper parliamentary democracy, where we have a voice for the people and every member of parliament speaking for his, his constituents, not for the parties brokers. It’s rubbish.
[Marcus] Yep, you’re fired up and I don’t blame you. Thank you, mate, for your perspective. Always welcome on the programme. We’ll catch up next week. Stay safe.
https://i0.wp.com/www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/plate.00_02_55_23.Still001.png?fit=1920%2C1920&ssl=119201920Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2021-08-19 12:27:232021-08-19 12:39:20Carrot and the stick for vaccination?
Governments have been making policy that is completely out of touch with reality or data for decades. It’s all based on political whims or looking good, not the facts or data. As a result, our country is broken.
We have to return to policy based on tested data, not Labor or Liberal’s feelings on the day.
Transcript
As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, I will discuss the cost of shoddy science that is crippling people, families, communities and our nation. One Nation has repeatedly called for and continues to call for an independent office of scientific integrity and quality assurance to assess the science claimed to be underpinning government policy and decisions. We want objective, independent scientific scrutiny that is protected from politicisation. Science is a not a label; it is hard, verifiable, reliable data within a framework that proves cause and effect logically. It is every senator’s responsibility to ensure that she or he makes decisions using such data.
I’ll give you some examples of the cost of shoddy science that has not been scrutinised. Climate policies and renewable subsidies cost Australian households via electricity costs $13 billion per year, every year. That’s $1,300 per household per year needlessly wasted. The median income in this country is $49,000. After tax, that’s around $34,000 or maybe a little bit higher. How can someone on $34,000 after tax afford $1,300 flushed down the toilet, for nothing? The additional costs of climate policies on our power bills is a staggering 39 per cent, not the 6½ per cent that the government claims. Renewables distort the low cost of coal based power and more than double the wholesale electricity price from coal’s $45.50 per kilowatt hour to $92.50. China and India use our coal to sell electricity at 8c a kilowatt hour, while we burn the same coal without transporting it thousands of kilometres and the price of electricity from the coal is three times as much at 25c an hour.
All Australians have the right to benefit from our rich natural resources. The true cost of electricity in this country would be $13 billion per year less if cheap, affordable, reliable coal production was not lumbered with policies that distort the market. We commissioned independent expert and respected economist Dr Alan Moran to calculate those figures, and he used the government’s own data. So it can’t be sensibly refuted. The government stopped presenting it in consolidated form to hide what government policy is doing to everyday Australians in our nation.
Every subsidised green energy job or so-called renewable job, from renewable or unreliable power, such as wind and solar, costs 2.2 jobs lost in the real economy. Parasitic unreliables are killing their host, the people of Australia and the people of Queensland.
We can go further, beyond raw data on energy costs, to look at property rights. Property rights have been stolen in this country in the name of the Kyoto Protocol. John Howard’s Howard-Anderson government started it with Rob Borbidge’s National Party government in Queensland, followed quickly by Peter Beattie’s government and every government since, with the exception of Campbell Newman, who failed to repeal it. Property rights have been stolen with no compensation. That is fundamentally wrong. We see it in water policy, with corruption in the Murray-Darling Basin when it comes to water trading. We see the stealing of water rights, all based on shoddy science. The whole Murray-Darling Basin Plan is based on shoddy science—political science. Instead of having science based policy, we now have policy based science, and both sides of this parliament are responsible.
Senator Carr, who I have a lot of regard for in many ways, raised COVID. We have not been given the scientific data on COVID. We’ve been given models. The scientific data which I got from the Chief Medical Officer points to a completely different picture and to completely different management. COVID is being mismanaged in the name of science. It is wrong. By the way, the costs of all of those examples I’ve given are not in the billions but in the tens or hundreds of billions, and the impact on our country’s economy is in the trillions, with the lost opportunity and the lack of competitiveness.
COVID exposed to us that our country has lost its economic independence. We now depend on other countries for our survival—for basics. We’ve lost our manufacturing sector because of shoddy governance from the Labor, Liberal and National parties over almost eight decades, since 1944. In the last 18 months, we’ve seen the Liberals, Labor and the Nationals squabbling at state and federal level, because there is no science being used to drive the plan. There’s no plan for COVID management. Each state is lurching from manufactured crisis to manufactured crisis, and the federal government is bypassing the Constitution and conditioning them to suck on the federal tit. That’s what’s going on.
Let’s have a look at the science. I have held CSIRO accountable at three presentations from them, plus Senate estimates. Firstly, the CSIRO has admitted under my cross-examination that the CSIRO has never said that carbon dioxide from human activity is a danger—never. We asked them: ‘Who has said it? Politicians told us you said it.’ They said, ‘You’d have to ask the politicians.’ Secondly, CSIRO has admitted that today’s temperatures are not unprecedented. I’ll say that again—not unprecedented. They’ve happened before in recent times without our burning of hydrocarbon fuels.
Thirdly, the CSIRO then fell back on one thing—one paper, after almost 50 years of research, that said that the rate of warming is now increasing. That too was falsified by the author of that paper. It was falsified and contradicted by other references which the CSIRO had to then give us. There is no evidence for the CSIRO’s sole claim that the rate of temperature rise is unprecedented. Its own papers that it cites do not show that. The CSIRO then relied upon unvalidated computer models that were already proven to be giving erroneous projections. That’s what the UN IPCC relies on. They’ve already been proven wrong many times.
The clincher is that, to have policy based upon science, you would need to quantify the amount of impact on climate variables such as weather: rainfall; storm activity, severity and frequency; and drought. You’d need to be able to quantify the impact on that of carbon dioxide from human activity. The CSIRO has never quantified any specific impact on climate, or any climate variable, from human carbon dioxide.
With us, the CSIRO has repeatedly relied on discredited and poor-quality papers on temperature and carbon dioxide. It gave us one of each, and then, when we tore them to shreds, they gave us more. We tore them to shreds. It has never given us any good-quality scientific papers. That’s their science. The CSIRO revealed little understanding of the papers they cited as evidence. That’s our scientific body in this country—they could not show understanding of the papers that they cited.
The CSIRO admits it has never done due diligence on reports and data that it cites as evidence. It just accepts peer review. What a lot of rubbish that is! That has been shown in peer-reviewed articles to be rubbish. The CSIRO allows politicians to misrepresent it without correction. It doesn’t stand up—it doesn’t have any backbone. The CSIRO has misled parliament. Independent international scientists have verified our conclusions on the CSIRO science, and they’re stunned—people like John Christy, Nir Shaviv, Nils Morner, David Legates, Ian Plimer and Will Happer. There is no climate emergency—none at all. Everything is normal. It’s completely cyclical weather.
Now I’ll move to the UK’s Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, which has turned into a propaganda outfit and a mouthpiece and cheer squad for global policies. Politics has captured it and turned it into a massive bureaucracy that writes legislation rather than checks it. POST, as it’s called, comprises people, as Senator Carr said, ‘consistent with parliamentary composition’. That tells us straight away that it’s not independent. Instead of a body to drive legislation we want a body to vet it. Senator Carr mentioned the Office of the Chief Scientist. I asked the Chief Scientist for a presentation on his evidence of climate change caused by human carbon dioxide. After 20 minutes of rubbish we asked him questions and he looked at us and said that he’s not a climate scientist and he doesn’t understand it. Yet we have policies around this country based upon Dr Finkel’s advice. Some of those policies that I mentioned are based on his advice.
We’ve had activists, such as Tim Flannery, David Karoly, Will Steffen, Ross Garnaut, Ove Hoegh-Guldberg, Matthew England, Kurt Lambeck, Andy Pitman and Lesley Hughes, being paraded and paid by the government—both Liberal and Labor—and yet they’re nothing more than academic activists. None have provided any empirical scientific evidence in a logical framework proving cause and effect. That’s what has been paraded around this parliament as science for decades now. It’s rubbish. That’s why One Nation opposes this motion. It is wasting committee resources to send them off on a goose chase to adopt something like the UK’s Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology.
We invite Senator Carr to join us in legislating for an independent body of scientists to scrutinise government policy and decisions. Let the government put up the science upon which its policies are based and let the independent body scrutinise it. That requires a few things. First of all, it needs a team funded and set up to oppose the government’s position, and we’ll let them both go at it. Science, fundamentally, is about data and debate. We need the government to put up its science and let a team tear it apart—and be funded to tear it apart. Once that happens, and the science is dismissed, that will save the country billions of dollars. If it withstands the scrutiny, that’s good—we’ll know we’ve got a really solid scientific case. Another way is to have a transparency portal. Put the science out there and let anybody in the public domain tear it apart. If someone finds a chink, fix it. True scientists are not about protecting their egos; they’re about being open to the advancement of humanity. They welcome their own science being torn apart.
We need an independent view. The type of information, as the motion discusses, is simple. All we need is empirical scientific evidence in a framework proving cause and effect. We then need independent scrutiny, and I’ve given you two examples. That will replace policies—as Senator Carr has discussed, and I agree with him—based on ideology, headline-seeking, prejudice, opinions, looking after vested interests and looking after donors. This is what’s driving this country, and the people are paying for it. They’re paying for it through the neck, and we’re destroying our country. We need the ‘claimed’ science to be scrutinised and verified or rejected.
What a shameful, disgraceful incident we saw in this parliament just after midday today. We saw Senator Wong, Senator Watt and Senator Waters engaging in a screaming match. Not once did anyone raise empirical scientific evidence. This is day 701 since I asked the chief proponent of this climate change nonsense in the parliament to be accountable for her data. I asked Senator Waters. I challenged her 701 days ago—almost two years ago. I challenged her 11 years ago. She has never agreed to debate me. She refuses to debate me. She refuses to put up the scientific evidence. She refuses to discuss the corruption of climate science. Yet she espouses policies that will gut this country. Also, we’ve seen Senator Wong quoting a report from the IPCC. That’s not a report from scientists; that’s a report from political activists. She talks about what we are told—insert the catastrophe—will happen in the future. That’s not science. What we need is an honest debate. We need an honest debate to reveal the pure science and to hold people accountable in the parliament. We will not be supporting this motion because it will encourage politicisation.
Australians and people worldwide criticise politicians. After three years in parliament, I know why. Yet people allow politicians to rule their lives and allow governments to take control of their lives. Why? I invite people to ask basic questions and to then decide. Consider the drug ivermectin. It’s been given in 3.7 billion doses over 60 years—no adverse effects; safe. Ivermectin is off patent—affordable. In 2013 ivermectin was approved in Australia for treating diseases. In 2014 I took ivermectin after working in India. It cured me—no adverse effects. Australian doctors regularly prescribe ivermectin for illnesses.
Is it effective with COVID? In April 2020 in the Senate, I raised ivermectin’s promising in vitro trials at Monash University. Counties, states and regions in South America, Asia, Africa and Europe have had amazing success with ivermectin for treating, curing and preventing COVID. More than 40 peer-reviewed scientific papers have been published hailing ivermectin’s success in treating COVID. A study among Indian healthcare workers showed an 83 per cent reduction in COVID infections with just two tablets. Ivermectin, overseas, is recognised as a cure.
I’m told that Queensland doctors and dentists are stockpiling ivermectin for their families. An internationally respected Australian specialist recently saved 24 very sick patients in quarantine using ivermectin. All quickly recovered. Two others not treated died. Overseas, ivermectin is a prophylactic, stopping COVID transmission. Where vaccines are failing, ivermectin is succeeding. How many deaths would have been saved if the health minister had acted?
I have prescriptions for ivermectin from two doctors. Why can’t all Australians have that freedom to choose? Why isn’t Australia’s government adopting ivermectin? Why did the TGA threaten and try to silence me with a letter when I discussed ivermectin with constituents as their representative in parliament? I mentioned ivermectin in a YouTube video and was banned for a week. Member of parliament Craig Kelly made statements based on solid data. After speaking about ivermectin, Facebook banned him forever. Why are doctors scared of being struck off the doctors’ registry if they prescribe ivermectin to cure their patients?
Consider the vaccine maker Pfizer’s profits. It’s second quarter 2021 revenue was $19 billion, up 89 per cent. In three months, it made $4 billion profit. The European Medicines Agency discovered a definite link between Pfizer’s vaccine causing myocarditis. In September 2020, our TGA approved Pfizer’s Vyndamax drug to treat myocarditis. Our health department confirmed the AstraZeneca vaccine’s links with blood clots. Pfizer’s Eliquis drug treats blood clotting. Last quarter its sales were up 13 per cent. So are those blood clots rare? Really? In 2019 Pfizer’s Zavicefta drug was approved to ICU patients on ventilators. Is Pfizer making profits making people sick and more profit treating the sickness it caused?
Consider the ownership of vaccine makers. Alphabet owns YouTube and Google. Alphabet owns 12 per cent of Vaccitech, which created the AstraZeneca vaccine. YouTube bans videos mentioning ivermectin as a COVID treatment. Aren’t these conflicts of interest? If ivermectin was approved for COVID, what would happen to big pharma’s hundreds of billions of dollars in profits? These profits are a transfer of wealth from taxpayers to big pharma.
Before becoming health minister, Greg Hunt was the environment minister, where he joined Malcolm Turnbull steering a law through parliament as a basis for a global carbon dioxide tax. In 2000 and 2001, he spent two years at the World Economic Forum in Davos developing strategy. A simple question: did he work on the forum’s great reset? I have already spoken on the government’s lack of a proper COVID management plan. Why has Minister Hunt falsely claimed that the government’s COVID policy is based on science when he is contradicting science? Finally, who owns the legacy media suppressing news of ivermectin’s success? In summary, ivermectin would complement vaccines, give people informed choice, save many lives, end lockdowns—and, in doing so, save more lives—save money, restore our economy to secure future health and end any need for vaccine passports or vaccine prisons. Basic freedoms, jobs and livelihoods could be restored. Why is the government not using ivermectin as a proven, safe, affordable life saver? Feel welcome to share your answers with my office or Facebook page. Finally, I add, I have no financial interest in any drug or medical suppliers or companies.
The government is stumbling from thought bubble to thought bubble and looking more like dictators at each step. Australians are right to not trust them and believe they’ve got not idea.
Transcript
I speak to the Treasury Laws Amendment (COVID-19 Economic Response No 2) Bill 2021. This bill is notable for what it Is not. Before financing economic response packages using taxpayer funds government must pay taxpayers the respect and courtesy of a comprehensive definition of the problem being addressed and then a comprehensive detailed plan to which taxpayers and our parliament can hold the government accountable.
Yet state and federal governments are lurching from one Covid event to another with no detailed plan. This breeds confusion, duplication, waste and as we’ve seen, contradictions within and between governments that are, in plain language, stupid and leave taxpayers incredulous.
This is driving fear, confusion, frustration, insecurity and anger. Everyday Australians have had a gutful of states blaming and bickering with each other and with the federal government – while imposing arbitrary Covid lockdowns and restrictions killing businesses, employment and our economy – and killing people. People need leadership, competence and integrity – people want to be heard and want a proper plan. What’s involved in a comprehensive plan for managing a virus? Data, truth and care.
In March and April 2020 I spoke in the Senate and indicated that after seeing reports of tens of thousands of deaths in Italy, Spain, France & China we would vote for the Covid-19 measures the Government introduced.
At that time I repeatedly warned the government that in the months ahead we would hold the government accountable and I expected them to provide the people with data and with a proper, detailed plan for their Covid response.
I’ve been holding government accountable since May 2020. Yet we’ve not seen a proper plan. The govt has not even shared the underpinning data on the virus characteristics nor the Doherty Centre modelling nor the erroneous, flawed UK modelling on which the Doherty modelling is based. Yet the government has splashed a huge bucket of taxpayer cash – hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer money – like swill. Instead, economic measures need to be based on a solid plan.
In senate estimates hearings in March and May this year the Chief Medical Officer and head of the federal department of Health both agreed with my list of strategies for a proper plan to manage a virus. These are:
Isolation – Lockdowns, national border closure – initially;
Testing, tracing and quarantining of the sick and the vulnerable;
Restrictions such as social distancing, masks;
Injections – Vaccines; (provided properly, fully tested and safe)
Treatments using cures and prophylactics;
Personal behaviour such as washing hands – they added that;
Health and fitness.
Both confirmed that my list is complete, it does not miss anything. It does not contain anything that should not be in the plan. All these strategies need to be considered. I’ll return to this list in a moment. I asked these officials for data characterising the virus – in terms of severity, or, mortality and transmissibility. I specified clearly that I wanted data relative to past respiratory diseases such as SARS, MERS and severe flus including the 1918 Spanish Flu and 1997 H5N1 Avian Flu.
Their later written answer included a diagram showing that while COVID-19 is highly transmissible, contagious, it’s severity is LOW to moderate. The diagram does not show that some people with Covid-19 have no symptoms. Many people diagnosed with Covid show symptoms typical of flu. A few small groups with co-morbidities can die. Having that breakdown into groups is crucial to having a proper plan for managing the virus. Where is it?
Why has government not shared this data with the people? By the way, Texas and Florida have opened their economies and removed Covid measures – including lockdowns, masks and business closures. These jurisdictions have experienced an almost identical pattern of infection, hospital admission and mortality as other American US States that are still in lockdown.After Florida’s only lockdown, state Governor Disantis apologised to his residents and has had no further lockdowns despite Florida having a high proportion of aged residents.
How many of the seven strategies are our govts adopting? Firstly, the states are capriciously using lockdowns killing our economy, killing small business, killing the regions – and killing people through increased suicides and attempted suicides. That’s slamming a trillion-dollar debt on Australians not yet born.
Even the UN’s World Health Organisation – a corrupt, incompetent and dishonest body – now admits lockdowns are a blunt instrument to be used only initially to get control of a virus. In continuing to use lockdowns, states are revealing they have not mastered the virus. Instead, the virus is managing the states.
Six days ago, the NSW Deputy Premier and Leader of the Nationals openly admitted that the NSW state government has no clue what is happening with lockdowns. We welcome his honesty. Lockdowns are a form of controlling people, useful for increasing widespread fear. Fear is a weapon, not only for control. It’s used to win elections. Invoking a crisis is a well-known tactic to help incumbent governments.
The federal government’s partially closed national borders are a form of isolation yet there are valid, proven strategies for better managing this that are based on data.Due to a looming election it seems the Prime Minister has taken a lesson from Qld, the Northern Territory and WA that ramped up fear of the virus before state elections to invoke the power of incumbency. What a disgrace. When politicians and media talk about the cost of Covid they are lying. The truth is it’s the cost of politically driven government restrictions. Testing, tracing and quarantining of the sick and vulnerable.
Although improving, testing and tracing in Australia have been poor. Vulnerable people are largely NOT adequately and fairly quarantined. Taiwan, a small island crammed with a population similar to Australia’s, has achieved an amazing performance with no interruption to its economy and no legacy debt. Taiwan did not lock up everyone. Instead it protected the sick and vulnerable. Taiwan’s economy continued to hum along because this proven strategy drastically cut Covid’s economic costs. Restrictions such as masks and social distancing.
Initially there were not enough masks available and authorities here and overseas told us that masks were not important. Yet later when masks became available the same authorities told us masks are vital. When Qld’s Health Minister earlier this year forced mask use she was asked whether drivers alone in cars would have to wear masks. She clearly did not know and then hesitatingly said “yes”.
When Brisbane in one corner of our state had three Covid-19 cases in January this year the Labor government mandated masks across the entire state – including the tiny town of Bamaga 2,700 kms away on our state’s northern tip where there were no cases. Masks are becoming a form of conditioning people to follow orders and to submit to government.
Vaccines or Injections.
The federal Chief Medical Officer, head of the federal Dept of Health and the head of the Therapeutic Goods Administration all have refused to guarantee the safety of these expensive injections. There have been reversals of advice and the public is now afraid and hesitant. Health authorities do not know the dosage needed, don’t know the number and frequency of doses – and admit that injections will not prevent transmission of the virus, will not stop people getting the virus, will not end restrictions. The effect on children in the womb and on future generations is not known. The long term effects on people injected is not known. Why the hell is the government injecting people with an untested drug? Serious adverse-effects including deaths due to the injections have occurred here, and overseas, thousands of people have died.
Governments, state and federal, have repeatedly contradicted their own earlier advice and assurances. Federal Health Minister Greg Hunt publicly admitted, quote: “The world is engaged in the largest clinical vaccination trial.” We are not lab rats. Governments are using threats of digital passports, or as I call them digital prisons, that withdraw services and prevent access to work and livelihoods, to events and to travel. Government wants to remove basic freedoms. No wonder vaccine hesitancy is spreading. Never before have western governments injected healthy people with a substance that can kill.
At the same time our government is depriving us of Ivermectin, a known treatment for, and preventative for, Covid-19. Over a period of 60 years and for various diseases it’s proven SAFE in 3.7 billion doses. It’s already approved in Australia to treat a number of health conditions. In April last year I raised the topic of promising Ivermectin in-vitro trials on Covid in Melbourne, yet the government did nothing.
Ivermectin is easily affordable and over the last year overseas has become a highly successful and proven treatment for Covid. Plus, over 40 medical/scientific papers now hail Ivermectin’s success. Prominent doctors across many fields of medicine including immunology and respiratory diseases advocate Ivermectin for treating Covid-19. Yet the federal government in Australia sits on its hands, is not exploring Ivermectin’s potential and refuses to authorise its use for Covid. The government is ignoring a proven medicine that could end this virus’ reign as it has overseas. The government has blood on its hands. Overseas, this proven strategy is drastically cutting Covid’s economic costs and keeps people healthy and economies healthy.
Ivermectin has one hurdle: its use will eliminate the hundreds of billions of dollars revenue for vaccine makers from vaccines that have bypassed standard testing and approval processes. Personal hygiene such as hand-washing, personal behaviour and practical actions – the same as for stopping the flu or a cold – another strain of Corona virus.
Health & fitness.
Obesity and other diseases increase the risk of Covid-19 yet government has done nothing. Although this is mostly personal responsibility, there’s a role for government providing data and advice. Of the seven strategies that senior federal health officials confirmed, the government is relying on only one expensive strategy of injections with known adverse health effects and on partial closure of borders. Instead of data, governments are pushing fear. Instead of a detailed plan, governments are pushing paranoia. Instead of strengthening our economy governments are lining BigPharma’s pockets. Covid-19 exposed our country’s core problem – atrocious state and federal governance. Atrocious and deadly. Governments talk about a new Covid-normal. That’s nonsense.
If governments cared and wanted us to feel safe they would have an end-to-end solution for Covid. A solid plan based on solid data and specifying WHAT actions will be taken, WHY they will be taken, WHEN they will be taken, WHERE they will be taken, WHO will be responsible and HOW they will be taken. A solid plan. Before an economic package is produced, there must be a plan. Then it must be costed and a business and health case made for it.
When organisations, whether a business or government or not-for-profit work to a plan, the plan can always be changed as circumstances changed. Yet our state and federal Liberal-Labor-Nationals governments have never attempted to make a detailed plan. That shows Liberal-Labor-Nationals do not care about people’s health and lives, do not respect the taxpayers of Australia, do not provide solid governance. Governance of any entity has three aspects:
Trusteeship for the entity’s values. Yet governments are trashing Australian values;
Custodian for the entity’s future, for those Australians not yet born. Yet governments are trashing our children’s future and burdening them with a trillion dollars of avoidable debt;
Stewardship for the entity’s resources. Yet governments are wasting taxpayer funds and killing our country’s productive capacity.
Instead, the government in this bill is just going to spend taxpayer money and tell other departments who they’re giving it to. This is not a plan. It’s an excuse to splash cash and not be accountable. It will motivate unaccountable Premiers to waste more taxpayer money while destroying our country’s tax base. It’s the very opposite of our constitution’s foundation. Instead of competitive federalism, it’s yet another example of competitive welfarism.
The core issue this bill perpetuates is shoddy governance. Atrocious governance. Repeatedly this government shows it cannot plan. That means it cannot govern. It is based on hollow marketing slogans. It’s intent is to look good not do good. It aims to be re-elected not to serve. The only thing this government has going for it is … Anthony Albanese and the Labor party. This bill discusses government making, quote: “disaster payments”. It dishonestly does not discuss the fact that state and federal government caused the disaster.
Australia needs honest, competent, consistent leadership using solid data. Government needs to serve the people and serve Australia’s national interest. We need to restore governance that cares for people’s lives, people’s livelihoods, people’s security, people’s future. Governance that cares for our country’s security, our country’s values, our country’s economy, our country’s future.
We need a government that is honest and serves the people. We have one flag. We are one community. We are one nation.
We will be supporting one of the Greens’ second reading amendments to recover financial support from entities paying executive bonuses and Senator Patrick’s third reading amendment to instil a register of entities receiving taxpayer cash.
https://i0.wp.com/www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Screen-Shot-2021-08-04-at-2.15.44-pm.png?fit=1460%2C816&ssl=18161460Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2021-08-04 14:16:522021-08-19 16:28:47Financial Assistance means nothing if there is no plan (Treasury Laws Amendment (COVID-19 Economic Response No 2) Bill 2021)
