No one trusts politicians because of their lies. PM Albanese promised power bills would drop by $275 by 2025, but they’ve only increased. Despite claims that wind and solar are the cheapest, power bills have never been higher after 20 years of introducing these “renewable” sources.
The Liberal Party’s motion complains about high power bills but ignores the real issue – NET ZERO.
The ONLY elected party that opposes this scam and is committed to lowering power bills is One Nation. Labor, Liberals, and Nationals all support expensive energy. The truth is coal is the cheapest way to run our electricity grid. India and China use our coal, yet Australians can’t. Make it make sense!
One Nation has a plan to permanently reduce power prices by ensuring baseload power stability. This would cut bills immediately by 20% and ultimately by 50%.
Vote One Nation to put more money back in your pocket and end the net zero lies.
Transcript
No-one trusts politicians, because of lies. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese promised Australia that power bills would come down $275 by 2025; 2025 is here and power bills have never been more expensive, and they’re still increasing. Australians are constantly told wind and solar are cheapest. That might be the greatest lie in Australian political history, and that is saying something. Well, after 20 years of connecting all the wind, solar, batteries and pumped hydro to the grid, power bills have never been higher.
This is a motion from the Liberal Party, complaining, yet it says nothing about the reason power bills are still so expensive. There is a reason why Queenslanders are worried about running their air conditioning and why local small businesses are closing: that’s net zero. There’s only one elected party in the Senate that opposes the net zero scam, and that’s One Nation. We are the only ones that truly believe in making power bills cheaper. Labor is committed to wind and solar—super expensive. The Liberals the Nationals are committed to wind, solar and nuclear—very expensive. None of them will promise that your power bills will come down under their plan, because they can’t. The truth is that under net zero Australia faces decades of increasing power prices.
There’s a big secret that every politician in this room knows yet won’t say out loud: the absolute cheapest way to run an electricity grid today is coal. Even if you believe in net zero, let’s have a serious look. Australia’s annual carbon dioxide production is 465 million tonnes. India and China together are 16 billion tonnes, 35 times as much. India and China are allowed to buy Australia’s coal and use it, yet Australians can’t use their own coal here in our country. One Nation would get rid of this nonsense. We have a plan to bring down power prices permanently. Right now, baseload power is told to immediately shut down whenever wind and solar unpredictably turn on. Coal is what’s known as baseload power; it’s designed to run effectively and efficiently, 24/7, up to 98 per cent of the time. Turning baseload power off completely in unplanned ways is a huge problem. This leads to much higher prices, increased maintenance costs and, in some cases, power stations breaking down owing to the abuse they weren’t designed for.
The solution is very simple: just guarantee baseload power the minimum time needed to keep spinning. Wind and solar can fill in the rest if they happen to turn on. The most conservative scenario is that this will bring down power prices 20 per cent immediately. Taken to full effect, this could bring power bills down 50 per cent. The Liberals, Labor and the Nationals will never bring down your power bills like this, because they are completely committed to net zero nonsense—net zero lies. One Nation, and only One Nation, will put more money back in your pocket.
Joel Jammal: Ladies and gentlemen welcome to episode 25 of the Ark podcast. I have missed you guys. Just come back from the US watching exactly what happened at CPAC USA in Washington DC, my first time being to America – my first time seeing snow. It was amazing. It was actually really cool. I’ll get into a bit of that later in other videos where I’ll go into a bit more depth, but today I’m joined by a very special guest – The Honorable Senator Malcolm Roberts. Malcolm, welcome to the Ark Podcast.
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you very much Joel. Good to be here at last now.
Joel Jammal: Malcolm, I mentioned to a few people that you were coming on and I was obviously very keen to have our chat and people know we’re friends. People know we like to have chats every now and then on your Friday Q&A’s, which are very popular, but the big elephant in the room that I’ve addressed previously about the the hate speech bill. I wanted to give you first the opportunity before we get into it. Mate, what happened to that because a lot of people I’m coming up to in the Freedom Movement they’re like – why did Malcolm and Pauline not show up for that vote, for that hate speech Bill vote. Mate, what happened with that?
Senator ROBERTS: Well it was difficult. We had a discussion as to whether we oppose or abstain and I’ll explain why we abstained. But before doing so, the pile on that resulted from Senator Rennick’s lie when he said that we joined with the Liberal and Labor parties in supporting the hate crimes bill was a complete lie. Then the pile on from the Libertarians and the pile on from other parties was just disgraceful, but I want to compliment five people, yourself included, because you took a neutral stance and there are others – Topher Field, John Ruddick, Ralph Babet and Jim Wilmott – for their civility and their honesty. They didn’t pile on. They showed some character in abstaining from criticising us. So normally Joel, what happens is that if, as in happened in this case, the Labor party or the Liberal Party bring something in, rush it in, don’t have proper committee scrutiny of it, don’t have proper time for us to scrutinise it then guillotine the vote, then we just straight oppose it. It’s got to be very very outstanding to support a bill that goes through that mess. So, we were inclined to oppose it and then Ralph and a couple of others came up to me and said what are you doing. I said we’re abstaining. What? You’ve got to support it – got to oppose it and I said no mate, there’s a logic to what we’re doing. Because as you know, Pauline’s pretty strong on this kind of stuff as am I and it’s important to understand that it’s the Hate Crimes Bill – not the hate speech bill. It’s the Hate Crimes Bill and we said we cannot support it – this is just a discussion between Pauline and myself – we just cannot support this because of the language, because some of the assumption, some of the context of the bill, we just could not support it. It was a dog of a bill, plus it was bulldozed through the Senate and then Pauline said – you know, we got to be careful, because we were clearly going to stand on our own. That didn’t bother us. It doesn’t bother Pauline and me to be the only two in the Senate. So, we had – it was a stitch up. The Liberal and Labor had about 60 and the Greens all combined, and the Nationals combined to have about 66 of the 76 votes, so there’s no way we could win, no way we could influence the vote at all, so without having said anything, we wanted to send some signals because we believe, and I think most Australians would believe, that the use of physical force or the threat of violence or the threat of physical force is abhorrent and Australians don’t put up with that, so we couldn’t let that go just by opposing it, but we couldn’t support the bill so we had to oppose the way it was done and the way it was introduced. So we said okay let’s send a signal to Australians because we know there are people, the groups, and I haven’t got my notes with me, but there are many groups including people who are disabled, here they are. There’s sexual orientation, gender identity, intersex status, disability, disease, religion – many groups in Australia who are currently under threat, physical violence and physical threats. We’re not going to accept that. Hate crimes are real and they are being exercised on people, and so we wanted to send a signal saying we do absolutely support the protection of those people. Every Australian has a right to live in security and safety. So we wanted to say that, but we couldn’t support the bill because of the reasons I just mentioned – the language, the looseness – so we said well bugger, everyone’s going to expect us to oppose it, but we have to send a signal to those people that are looking for support, right?
Joel Jammal: So you do actually believe that there needs to be, there was a lot of good things about the bill now, but there’s a lot of bad about the bill as well. So you were sort of in an awkward position where it was like look, we don’t support the worst kinds of excesses on this bill on free speech but at the same time, you actually needed some work and the government wasn’t really working with you – they just sort of guillotining through. Is that right?
Senator ROBERTS: Correct. So normally what would happen is sometimes I’ll get up in the Senate and talk about some of the positive aspects of a bill – not this bill – but positive aspects of a bill and then say however, we’re going to oppose it for this reason.
Joel Jammal: Right.
Senator ROBERTS: Or I might say there’s some merit in this bill, there’s some dogs in this bill, we’re going to abstain.
Joel Jammal: Right.
Senator ROBERTS: We didn’t get a chance to speak.
Joel Jammal: No speeches.
Senator ROBERTS: No speeches at all.
Joel Jammal: No speeches, right.
Senator ROBERTS: And the core part of the bill is – a person commits an offense, if the person threatens to use force or violence against a group. The targeted group is distinguished by race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, intersex status, disability including disease, nationality, national or ethnic origin, or political opinion, so it also applies to political opinion, and a reasonable member of the targeted group would fear that the threat will be carried out and the threat if carried out would threaten the peace, order and good government of the Commonwealth. Well that makes sense to me, but then the language was so sloppy and so loose.
Joel Jammal: Yeah.
Senator ROBERTS: And we couldn’t support it. It was too vague.
Joel Jammal: Like you didn’t have to prove intent of the actual person that’s saying something as well, you just had to prove that the person felt hurt that received that comment.
Senator ROBERTS: Well no, that the person would genuinely feel fear that the threat will be carried out. So it can’t be just a reckless –
Joel Jammal: Right. That’s insane. That’s insane! So Pauline’s comments, when you guys were at that press conference, because from an outsider –
Senator ROBERTS: I was there.
Joel Jammal: You were there. From an outsider’s perspective, from me just sort of following what was going on, we’re about to kick off a campaign, we’re about to kick off a campaign for a big election, and it kind of has already started. Albanese and Dutton –
Senator ROBERTS: They’re copying our policies already. Both the two tired old parties are copying four of our policies. Pretending to.
Joel Jammal: Yeah exactly, like the alcohol excise.
Senator ROBERTS: Immigration, student caps.
Joel Jammal: So and they’re already campaigning on the public dime. What it seemed to me on that day – you guys, as part of your campaigning, had a press conference. You had, in my view, more pressing things actually going on that day and that’s what I remarked to people in the last episode before I left. I said look, Malcolm wasn’t sipping pina coladas in his office, it’s not like he was not doing anything else. He just knew that this vote was going to go 41 to 6, which is I think what it ended up being, which is not possible guys, it’s not possible to win that. It’s just not. And guillotining debate, guillotining –
Senator ROBERTS: And opposed all the guillotining which sends a very strong signal. Sometimes guillotine is necessary because people don’t understand why it’s done, but the Senate is the controller of what happens in the Senate and so sometimes a guillotine is necessary when it’s been debated plenty and it’s just one party trying to talk it out and stop the vote, so we will, everyone will sometimes support a guillotine but it’s very very rare. So, when you do something like this with a serious bill with …. to it, then you just, we opposed all the bills, so basically we were sending a signal. We opposed the guillotines. We basically opposed the bill. We were sending that signal right the way through.
Joel Jammal: Right. So when Pauline, who was doing a press conference for something completely unrelated, was asked an off-the-cuff question which, you won’t say this but I will say this, she doesn’t do off the cuff very well. She tends to get her back up a little bit about it. She’s not, she’s not a Rhode Scholar. I’ll put it that way.
Senator ROBERTS: She’s very bright. I’ll take exception to that. She is extremely intelligent.
Joel Jammal: I totally agree, but in terms of debating techniques and like I’m just saying, she’s no Rhode Scholar in that sense, she’s actually more a street smart sort of person. It’s a compliment in a way, but I can see how that answer she gave was misunderstood by people and I’m just watching this slow motion train crash knowing Pauline’s intent on that and I can see she wanted to deliver some actual results for some of those groups you were talking about and I can see how this bill with a few amendments could actually be quite a good bill.
Senator ROBERTS: It needed a lot of work on it.
Joel Jammal: It needed a lot of work.
Senator ROBERTS: Basic thrust is fine because it’s a Hate Crimes Bill not a hate speech bill, which is what Clive Palmer misleadingly reported it as and others in the debate.
Joel Jammal: No absolutely and so I look at this whole situation and I’m just like okay so this is what happened, this is the miscommunication between people and I feel very, this is going to come out very strange coming from a 27 yr old but I do feel very fatherly and protective of this sort of Freedom Movement including all of the freedom senators. And you know the different organisations and groups and podcasters and so when I see everyone fighting, it hurts, it actually feels like your family’s fighting, your mom and dad are having a fight. It’s terrible to see and so, then I see the opportunism from these other parties and these senators and these potential senators and candidates running and I’m just like this is a disaster. I mean we are not looking like a winning side. We’re going into an election, we need to be consolidating our efforts, consolidating our energies so that we can be one force just like the Greens are on the left. We need to become one force.
Senator ROBERTS: Exactly.
Joel Jammal: And that’s why I didn’t appreciate that whole saga with everyone and that’s where I’m coming from when I’m looking at all this because like I’ve just come back from America. I’ve seen the sense of coming together. They had Trump build an amazing coalition between RFK and Tulsi Gabbard and Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswarmy.
Senator ROBERTS: They all want the truth and they all want to fix America. That’s why RFK came in.
Joel Jammal: Absolutely and I’m looking at that spirit of camaraderie and coming together against this Goliath of a foe and I’m like okay great, so that’s the winning attitude we need to have, where are we at, and then this is what we’re doing and I’m like –
Senator ROBERTS: I could tell you’re concerned and I appreciate the way you spoke. It was very well done. So I don’t look at you as a 27 yr old, I look at you as a human, a mature human, very understanding of politics but you raised two points that I’d like to cover. One was the mandatory sentences. I can read out something from Pauline but I was there standing next to her – we actually posted about this – and by the way, I’ll get to that other point in a minute, but Pauline, our policies were introduced into the News Corp papers in Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne and maybe Adelaide I think and they were phenomenally well received and the comments below the articles from everyday Australians were amazing, just stunning and that caused a lot of turmoil amongst some other minor parties who were quite frankly jealous. We worked that out. They were like, what the hell do we do now they? They were thinking that, but Pauline she’s never one to back away from something and the policies were so well received that it was a funny conference, media conference, because no one was asking a question about the policies. Pauline gave a little speech, I said a couple of words and then she said “where are your questions” and there are only two journalists and they arrived late. The rest were all cameramen and so one of the cameraman, Pauline looked at the cameraman and when you have Pauline’s eyes on you, you do something you know. He asked a couple of sensible questions because they’re no journalists and we worked out later why the journalists weren’t there and that was because how could you possibly tear holes in these policies. So anyway, the cameraman asked a couple of questions and then the two journalists arrived Probin and somebody else from Sky I think, and they asked questions about Gaza and about, what was the other one? Oh, mandatory sentencing. Not the Hate Crimes Bill, just the mandatory sentencing and Pauline has long thought that mandatory sentencing is not good except for terrorism, where it’s necessary because some judges are just weak and so she explained that and she said yes I support it under certain circumstances but she basically said that she would – the bill had just been thrust upon her, been rushed through, and she had no time to look at it which is the absolute truth. Our office was still dissecting it and so she left it open because that was the only thing she could do. So that was one thing. The second thing that I want to talk about is we agreed exactly with you, so even though there were lies being told by the Libertarian party and by Senator Rennick and Clive Palmer later that day, we said we’re not going to get into a dust up because this is just a, come on it’s just a shit fight – everyone loses in a shit fight, so we zipped our lip and said just let it all subside a little bit but it didn’t stop me talking about it on Saturday night 2 days later at a function, nor the following week. We just waited for the heat to come out of it because no matter what we said the people who are incensed by Senator Rennick’s lie and some of the comments that the Libertarians were making, there’s no way you could pacify them. It’s just stupid. You don’t argue with it, with people who are crazed and then bit by bit we started realising and people started realising and they’re waking up and they’re saying hang on a minute, you guys have been lied about here and then we saw the people waking themselves. But then we came out and explained it in full. So, I’m happy to do that.
Joel Jammal: It’s astonishing to me –
Senator ROBERTS: I mean we did not want want to cause a fight in the Freedom Party. So we abstained. Because we also knew that it would be like talking to a madman.
Joel Jammal: It’s astonishing because I look at this and I’m just like Malcolm and Pauline between them, I don’t know how long – how many years have you guys both been serving in the parliament?
Senator ROBERTS: Pauline served three in the House of Reps, then she served six and one that’s seven, that’s 10 years for her. I’ve served one and 7 and a half.
Joel Jammal: So you know we’re we’re looking at you know almost 20 years of service and voting records and this one vote, this one vote, you know people were just so willing to just throw it out. I’m just like guys if this is how we treat our veterans for God’s sake, for God’s sake. And it’s just, cause –
Senator ROBERTS: Well, the other thing –
Joel Jammal: And again, it wasn’t the politicians that, I kind of expect from MPS and Senators that are trying and candidates that are trying to get votes out of one nation being the biggest fish out of the minor parties I get that but some of the podcasters, me being one, I was like guys why are you just spurring this on, why are you going hard.
Senator ROBERTS: There are a lot of trollss in there working for the, we believe, the Libertarian Party and a couple of bots as well, just spurring it on. So a lot of it was was orchestrated. It was orchestrated and it was coordinated across several different parties.
Joel Jammal: Mmm. And again, guys for those people thinking this is a One Nation love fest, you know Malcolm knows –
Senator ROBERTS: You can be pretty blunt with me at times.
Joel Jammal: Yeah exactly and you know and everyone knows that you know that Turning Point Australia we don’t support you know just One Nation blindly across the board. It certainly has not been the case with the elections and all of, Craig Kelly, Gerard Rennick, a lot of these candidates that were alluding to they’re actually coming on to this podcast at some point as well before the election, because I’m trying to help the movement and that’s kind of the whole point about this thing but you asked this question and so –
Senator ROBERTS: And we’re happy to answer it.
Joel Jammal: So, I’m being honest you know.
Senator ROBERTS: We’re happy to answer it and would we do it again? Well Pauline will always be true to herself and I will always be true to myself. Now as I said, I was conflicted. On the one hand we had a couple of people saying you should oppose it. Yes, but that’s leaving people vulnerable people alone and isolated. We need to send them a signal so that’s why. So would we do it again? We probably would do it again because it was a right thing to do and one of Pauline’s staff came up to me, he’s a very sensible politically astute person and he said I am so proud to be in One Nation because you did stand by principle and that was wonderful. And the other thing is that not only was One Nation a short-term casualty, but the English language was a casualty because the dictionary meaning of abstain was completely thrown out the window. The word abstain suddenly meant support which is completely wrong. The dictionary meaning of abstain is to “hold oneself back voluntarily especially from something regarded as improper.” Hello!
Joel Jammal: Well they made it sound like you proposed the bill yourself Malcolm, that’s what they made it sound like.
Senator ROBERTS: And it was improper because I’ve voted due to the rushed vote and a guillotined debate and the second definition is to “refrain from casting one’s vote” and that’s what we did. We couldn’t support it. No way we could support it but we want to send a signal but the other thing that’s really important for us is that within about 2 weeks, we got the highest polling numbers we’ve ever got right. Within two weeks we got more volunteers signing up than we’ve ever had before. Within two weeks we got an increase in membership with the party and we got a lot of people starting to change and say oh we can see who the villains are here and it’s just so sad that people who I e had a lot of time for and I wouldn’t have thought would tell a lie, told a blatant lie and when I pointed it out to Gerard, he acknowledged it and then I said you need to retract it and he acknowledged that and left it up there. You know that’s inexcusable in my opinion.
Joel Jammal: Yeah well look, I think people that, generally people that are listening to this right now and getting you know this end to end answer will appreciate it and I think they’ll see it in the perspective of – you know I want to see these parties work together a lot more. I don’t want to see my mom and dad fighting per se in the parliament. You know, I want to see them getting on.
Senator ROBERTS: Yeah.
Joel Jammal: And that’s the truth. I think that is the truth of the punters that are out there that are watching politics and that are voting and that are volunteering for these different parties. They want to see more collaboration.
Senator ROBERTS: One of the things that’s left a bit of taste in my mouth, not about this, back three years ago was that I was one of the most vocal in the country and so was Topher Field. He was a bloody good but we said, let’s work together, Libertarians, United Australia Party, One Nation and other freedom parties – let’s work together. We had joint candidate forums in an electorate and in the Senate. We would have a candidate from each of those people conducting a forum together and it was on the basis that we would support each other. We would recommend the other minor parties, we’re going to recommend One Nation 1 and then UAP, Katter, Libertarians, 2 3 4 etc.
Joel Jammal: There was 10 of them I think in the last federal
Senator ROBERTS: So that’s what we said we would do and Clive Palmer came out and said put the majors last and we then started saying put the majors last, and so we were wondering what happened to Clive Palmer’s party up in Queensland, why their ‘how to vote’ cards weren’t out. And then the day of the prepoll, not – it didn’t come out the couple of days beforehand, it came out on the day of the prepoll – we found out why. Because it was 1 United Australia Party, 2 LNP.
Joel Jammal: Yeah.
Senator ROBERTS: So he completely sold us out.
Joel Jammal: Yeah that’s right.
Senator ROBERTS: So we can’t trust someone like that.
Joel Jammal: Yeah. Look I God, I was in America when I, I haven’t said a thing on the Trumpet of Patriots thing but I was in America when it came out, just landed, and I went and gave a speech at the America for Tax Reform. It was huge. Amazing, it was amazing. It was, like they had 50 different groups, each person was the head of a group and you go to this thing if you’re trying to pitch yourself or just introduce yourself and I’m like hi everyone, I’m Joel Jammal, head of Turning Point Australia. You know, I teach people who’s punching them, why they’re punching them and how they can punch back and I just gave my two minute speech and whatever. I get out after –
Senator ROBERTS: It would have gone down well. It would have gone down very well.
Joel Jammal: You know how I am Malcolm. You know how I am. I’m a very shy person.
Senator ROBERTS: They love, the Americans love that when someone stands up and they love it when someone stands up in a country like Australia that was perceived during COVID to be the worst country in the world.
Joel Jammal: Yeah. No, you’re absolutely right and you know they did ask about that. But I got off stage and you know, I said don’t be shy, come up to me and give me your business cards or whatever. A few of them came up to me and said what’s this about the Trumpet of Patriots. I mean why would they pick such a stupid name and I’m I just, and I think it was because they were trying to back like you know, be like have Trump in it or something. I think that’s what Clive Palmer remarked in the press conference you know. Trumpets of Patriots! And I don’t mean any offense to that new party or Suella who’s obviously the head of it with Clive but it’s silly, the whole thing is silly and the idea that you know, in the news it came out that they were going around basically offering different parties to buy the parties and apparently they offered One Nation $10 million but Pauline wasn’t for selling.
Senator ROBERTS: We are not for sale. That was made very very clear to Clive.
Joel Jammal: Yeah and that’s what’s bizarre and maybe I should ask you about this you know back in December and most people missed this story, but I saw that Clive registered and trademarked the name The Clive and Pauline Party, as well as The Teal Party and a few other things. How –
Senator ROBERTS: I think that was before he approached Pauline and James.
Joel Jammal: That was before.
Senator ROBERTS: I think so, but I don’t know.
Joel Jammal: Look the story came out on the 26th of December so I think it was, this story came out after but maybe they had the –
Senator ROBERTS: Someone’s been reading the patents, not the patents the registrations.
Joel Jammal: The registrations right and it was just bizarre that he would like The Clive and Pauline Party? I mean how can he trademark the Clive and Pauline Party without her permission. It just struck me as odd.
Senator ROBERTS: Well, it’s a crazy name. You know, could you imagine the Pauline and Clive Party? It just does not make sense.
Joel Jammal: No.
Senator ROBERTS: I mean, I’m not saying that they shouldn’t get together. I’m not saying that at all but having that as a as a party name?
Joel Jammal: Yeah well it’s like what do you stand for?
Senator ROBERTS: Exactly.
Joel Jammal: Clive and Pauline?
Senator ROBERTS: Exactly. So you know, One Nation is Pauline Hanson because she’s got the name and then one nation. Let’s face it Joel and you know this. She’s been around since 1996. Everyone has tried to have a go at her. The Liberals and Labor have tried to jail her. She has stood firm. She has stood in truth the whole time and she survived and they’ve done everything they can to her. They’ve called her a racist which is the worst thing you can call an Australian woman and that was done deliberately to shut down people talking about her and that worked for a while until people started to wake up in the last couple of years and she’s not at at all a racist. Asian people who’ve come here for the Australian culture and Aboriginals love our work so they think very highly of us. So she’s not at all a racist but what I’m saying is they’ve thrown everything at her and she’s still standing. She’s still got two senators.
Joel Jammal: Yeah.
Senator ROBERTS: Her candidates are the seventh, next in line, the seventh senator in every state except for Queensland where I came fourth, so we’re primed – with just a very small increase in votes to get another senator in every state and so I guess, and I don’t know what’s in their mind but if I was Libertarians, if I was another Freedom Party, I’d be trying to take votes off the Liberal Party because if you get 2% off the Liberal Party, that’s a lot more votes than getting 2% of us and and I’d be trying to work with One Nation because we are so close to getting you know five or so senators in the parliament which will give us the balance of power and the conservatives in Australia the balance of power. There’s no one else capable of doing that, no one. No one at all, not even close.
Joel Jammal: Yeah, everywhere you run you get 5% in your back pocket. That is just a matter of fact.
Senator ROBERTS: And look look at the quality of the people. Warwick in New South Wales, Warren Pickering in Victoria. Warren’s amazing, a veteran, really switched on, energetic. We’ve got Jennifer Game – don’t argue with her mate, she’ll clean you up even you.
Joel Jammal: Oh, I believe it.
Senator ROBERTS: She’s highly intelligent, and in Western Australia we’ve got Tyron and you know they’re really solid people.
Joel Jammal: Yeah, yeah.
Senator ROBERTS: So it just doesn’t make any sense. If you would want to destroy the party with the best chances of actually getting conservatives into the Senate, go ahead and destroy One Nation.
Joel Jammal: Yeah look I remember making this argument to the Victorians in their state election in 2022 – it’s hard to believe we’re coming up on another state election for them next year but I made the point to them I said guys there are nine Freedom parties for your state election and your freedom vote is about 11.6% so you need 14% to become a senator, that’s a full quota.
Senator ROBERTS: Yeah.
Joel Jammal: Maybe you need about 9 or 10% you know, kick it over a bit with preferences. There’s nine parties splitting that 11.6%
Senator ROBERTS: And as you pointed out, One Nation’s got a very solid bedrock of 5 to 8 and sometimes, probably in South Australia it’s around about 13% so nationally we got up to 9% so we’re at about 9% I think.
Joel Jammal: Yeah.
Senator ROBERTS: Which is a pretty damn solid base, foundation. No one can come close to that.
Joel Jammal: No, I totally agree.
Senator ROBERTS: So no wonder Clive wanted to try and buy us but Pauline has never been for sale, she never will be for sale. She’s that kind of woman. You know when she asked me to to stand beside her, she got wind in 2016 of me doing some work on opposing the climate fraud and she she said to me one day at a forum when I finished speaking she said will you come on the Senate ticket with me and I said well I’ll think about it, I’ll talk with my wife first. So I talked with my wife and she said yes and, it’s always good to have her onside, and then I said to Pauline – right my wife’s fine with it, she’s comfortable with it and Pauline said sign up and I said no no no no, now I talk with you. We went out there and she was thinking maybe a couple of hours. 11 and 1/2 hours later I left and I came away so thoroughly impressed and I’ve done a lot of recruiting, I’m not a not a sloppy recruiter, very impressed with her. There’s no way anyone could have pulled that thing together but the fact that here she was 20 years later in 2016 leading this party and putting her own money, I’m talking hundreds of thousands of dollars in bank loans into that and putting it all on the line, she’s just phenomenal. She has never ever told me a lie and neither has James Ashby, never, both of them together. If James was not honest Pauline would have got rid of him straight away but she’s had you know colorful people around her, some people who haven’t been worthy of the trust but she gets rid of them very quickly.
Joel Jammal: So Queensland, you know it’s alluded it’s a very hotly contested election in terms of the parties that are running and you know it’s a hot contest between yourself and Senator Gerard Rennick and I’m excited to see how the campaign unfolds with that, both being great incumbents that have both had a great voting record.
Senator ROBERTS: And there’s a chance that both of us can get in.
Joel Jammal: That’s right, that’s right.
Senator ROBERTS: Depending upon the liberal vote.
Joel Jammal: Absolutely and I pray that you do kick off that third Liberal that’s on the candidate, the candidate there. I pray that you guys do knock him off.
Senator ROBERTS: So I’m going to be parochial but I think also factual in saying putting me 1 and Gerard 2 is the best way to get us both in because I’ve got the solid base of One Nation behind me, Gerard and I have got a similar level of personal support, social media as well as just in general in the public, both recognised, so I think that so long as I get in first then our leftover votes, our preferences can, not our preferences but our voter’s preferences can go to Gerard and get him in, so that would be phenomenal, get us both back in.
Joel Jammal: So a few people have mentioned to me they’ve said all right, because whenever I, I ask a lot of people every time I come across a Queenslander I say okay, I’m putting a gun to your head figuratively you have to answer this question. I say this to every one of them and you can’t say no and they’re like okay just give me the question Joel, what is it? Gerard or Malcolm? And they’re like oh no and it’s a compliment I mean they love both of you, they love both of you, you know and that’s really good to see because you you both, as I said you both had a phenomenal voting record over the years that you’ve had respectively but you got to pick one and it’s pretty much dead even with the vote, with the two of you.
Senator ROBERTS: So the personal level is there for both of us, it’s similar and I’ve got the One Nation run underneath me.
Joel Jammal: Yeah, so now one of the big concerns though with some of the people that have said to me that they would prefer Rennick and I’ve asked the question, some of them have said to me I like Malcolm but I’m not sure that he wants to serve the full six-year term and I guess that’s my question to you. Is that something you know, are you going to serve the full 6 years or do you see yourself just serving half of it and passing it off to someone else in One Nation because this is a concern some people have. They want to know. Alright you know Malcolm is committing to this. I know Gerard’s going to do you know another term after this and he’s trying, he’s going you know, he’s saying a lot of things, he’s saying “I’m going to build the party, I’m going to democratize a party” and this and that, and again I’ll believe it when I see it because only the Libertarians –
Senator ROBERTS: No runs on the board. Libertarians haven’t done too much of that either.
Joel Jammal: Well they’re democratized.
Senator ROBERTS: Yeah they’re democratized.
Joel Jammal: And they’re setting up branches and the branches of voting rights and that that’s good to see, but I guess going back to the point is –
Senator ROBERTS: But some of their branches Joel are more akin to One Nation policies.
Joel Jammal: Yeah.
Senator ROBERTS: Immigration and so on, so they’re not a united party.
Joel Jammal: Yeah, but let’s go back to it, do you see yourself running –
Senator ROBERTS: Yes.
Joel Jammal: Full six years -100%
Senator ROBERTS: Yep
Joel Jammal: Right.
Senator ROBERTS: And the other thing is that I’ve come into politics in the Senate based upon my opposition to climate fraud and I’ve done a better job of researching that and the connections I’ve made. I knew, I won’t go into the details, but I knew three different topics about climate fraud before I got into the Senate and because I’ve been dealing with other MPS and Senators, I had a fair idea of what I’d find in the Senate. Well what I’ve done is I’ve confirmed those but I’ve also identified more of the climate fraud animal through the CSIRO, through the Bureau of Meteorology, through the way the agencies work and I’ve also become very very solid on COVID. okay the first three months we were everyone was saying just give the government a go because we all the videos and we had to look after the people of Australia first then we realized it was it was a con uh serious problems with it but what I’m what I’m about to say is that in the next term I don’t have any niceties about me. I don’t- I’ll still be treating people with respect I’ll still tell the truth but they can go to hell because we are after them in a big way I’ve said to my staff we’ve chased a lot of different um topics as part of our agenda supported a lot of people we will continue to do that but we are going to go Rogue on climate and COVID. We are going to tell the truth but we are going to go really really hard on that, we’re going to.
Joel Jammal: You alluded earlier that um you know some of these parties are adopting- the major parties specific adopting your policies
Senator ROBERTS: Sort of.
Joel Jammal: Sort of, alcohol for example.
Senator ROBERTS: Yeah, we’ve been given the pat on the back immigration, foreign ownership, but they’ve been committing to it in weasel words they’re not really committing to it but they know that our issues are top of the tree.
Joel Jammal: Right, so when um- so I saw Pauline came out with a video I think yesterday she was on her farm and she mentioned that uh Albanese has announced a freeze to the uh –
Senator ROBERTS: Yeah –
Joel Jammal: The alcohol excise?
Senator ROBERTS: After just raising it. It currently raises every 6 months.
Joel Jammal: Right, it’s insane. I think it’s like half of your drink uh alcoholic drink is like Government taxes or something crazy it’s insane. um so on um immigration I was listening to Pauline on a podcast uh where she was very- you know- I know I didn’t describe her as a- and we’ll wrap this up in a sec I know I didn’t describe –
Senator ROBERTS: I’ve got another podcast straight after this.
Joel Jammal: That’s right, I’ve got Steve Tripp, Steve’s a friend of the show he sent me the the link and yeah –
Senator ROBERTS: I need to be early for that as you know
Joel Jammal: No worries. um I guess my last question is you know I described Pauline earlier as no Rhodes um Scholar um but I listened to her on a podcast um previously um about immigration and her analysis of the statistics and the facts, which is brilliant, I mean the numbers and recalling the percentages of okay but how many are actually tradies that are coming in for example was blown away by and and if the fact that no one’s clipped that yet is beyond me I should I should probably clip it
Senator ROBERTS: 0.6% are tradies 99.4% are not tradies and they’re going to have 0.6% of the people building houses for the other 99.4%, absolutely lies.
Joel Jammal: Right, and how do we get that out more? because people still are saying “ah well Aussies they don’t want to do the jobs so we need immigrants to do the jobs”, but that’s not who’s coming in.
Senator ROBERTS: No, they’re unskilled people, you know One Nation- Pauline talked about immigration from the the start. um she talked about two things she talked about numbers and she talked about because- John Howard is the first person to- first Prime Minister to have brought in massive immigration he doubled it in his term and every prime minister since, pretty much, has increased it. Pauline talked not just about numbers Joel she talked about the quality of the people and that’s something we’ve been talking about, I’ve been talking about the numbers and the quality ‘cos’ both need to be spot on. We need to bring in people who will contribute not take away, contribute through hard work and be productive immediately uh not go welfare not come soak up our pensions, we need to put time limits on people so they need to be here 8-15 years before they can qualify for a pension for example. So these are the kinds of things because our country has been fooled by the Liberal and Labor Prime Ministers making it so easy to come in here get our benefits get our welfare; Medicare fraud PBS fraud people getting cheap Pharmaceuticals based upon taxpayer through the PBS shipping them overseas and selling them overseas. Medicare Medicare cards without photo ID so that- not digital ID photo ID- um so that so that we can protect against fraud we’re just getting extorted. We’ve got to be very very much stricter on who we let in the country, I mean letting people into the country after one- from Gaza, a known terrorist Hotspot with HAMAS, after 1 hour of vetting?! come on. Letting 750,000 people into the country in one year?! come on. Letting uh students come in here, bring their Partners in here, bring their families in here, working well above the hours uh and then exporting $11.1 billion per year back exporting it out of the country which is money gone from our country then we’ve got 75,000 illegals at least in here what the hell have Liberal and Labor been doing? only one nation talks about this! only one nation, it’s the quality and the quantity of people that we we need to challenge.
Joel Jammal: That’s completely mad. Malcolm, um I’m glad that we- this- we’re about to cut this short now um because um I’m still feeling a bit under the weather since I got back but I want to thank you for making the time to come on here and um I appreciate that we’ve gone through that question at the with regards to the –
Senator ROBERTS: I’m not going to abstain from the question
Joel Jammal: no, not at all not at all, and that’s what I love about politics um and podcasts um I’m glad we addressed that hate um not hate speech bill but the hate the hate –
Senator ROBERTS: “Hate Crimes” Bill
Joel Jammal: Hate Crimes Bill thank you, I got to fix it myself that’s right um because I think a lot of people did have the concerns around that and it means that we don’t have to deal with that again people can watch it and it’s done
Senator ROBERTS: Well you know if I’d seen the lies that were told about us blatantly I would have had very big concerns about us but having been in the discussion with Pauline about what signals sent I am completely happy with we did
Joel Jammal: Sure, and that’s why we got to- we have to not leave it to um Liberal and Labor we need to work together to get these parties to combine their efforts combine their votes everyone that left a like even now a comment saying “Malcolm’s full of crap!” no worries, no worries, or you know maybe you don’t like what Rennick did it’s like “yeah that Renick’s he shouldn’t have gone after Malcolm in this way!” great go to both of their websites whoever, whichever one you like go volunteer get off your asses and hand out some ‘how-to-vote cards’ at the election and build the pie, build the freedom vote, do what the Yanks did, if you want- if you like what you’re seeing every day in your TV where Trump’s going after Zelensky you want that sort of thing in Australia, get off your asses and make it happen because no one’s coming to save you all right and that’s what I have to say to people that’s the truth of it and that’s why I don’t have time for um you know these sort of childish- I’m meant to be the child of the movement –
Senator ROBERTS: You’re the mature one, the sage.
Joel Jammal: It’s like ever since I left school I’ve just been like okay I’m excited to join the world of the adults and I’m still looking or the adults, I haven’t yet found them –
Senator ROBERTS: Well don’t go to Canberra
Joel Jammal: No, and don’t go to America ‘cos’ you know they’re great but they’re still not- they’re still kids. um but anyway Malcolm, thank you so much I’m looking forward to having you back on very soon so we can get a bit more into the policy because I know that is actually where your strength is and I’m itching to you know go even more into the migration data –
Senator ROBERTS: I would love- look I’ll come down especially for that it would be love to do that long as we can have a really good Go at ’em because there’s nothing like the policies in this country, my team did most of the work for it and the analysis, every one of them costed uh properly uh Pauline came in and some of her stuff added to it, it’s a real solid team effort. I am extremely proud of one policies for this election campaign there’s no nowhere that I’ve seen any party anywhere and I’ve been around a few years now that’s come even close to what we’re doing.
Joel Jammal: yeah, no absolutely –
Senator ROBERTS: And I they came from listening to you.
Joel Jammal: Yeah, and it was brilliant that podcast she did with those with those gentlemen where they put it into an app and an AI and the AI generated a podcast of the entire One Nation policy I thought that was just brilliant.
Senator ROBERTS: I didn’t even know about that
Joel Jammal: Yeah, this is what was amazing about that podcast and uh- she rocks up they’re like “yep, if you want to go to the website we’ve designed this whole website it’s got all of One nation’s policies on there. We even went and made a podcast, it generated a podcast, where two people they literally go through the entire One Nation policies it was talk about value rocking up- I’m sorry Malcolm like you’ve rocked up here, all I’ve got this is this bubble ahead for one of your staffers
Senator ROBERTS: That’s not even for me –
Joel Jammal: It’s not even for you like, here I am trying to give you value and that’s what they’ve gone and done
Senator ROBERTS: You just keep speaking up mate that’s the best way you can give value to to me, to the country, that’s it just keep going
Joel Jammal: No look my pleasure, and so look thank you for showing up and uh ladies and gentlemen there is a debate in Queensland uh virtually online uh between Malcolm, uh Gerard Rennick, uh a Greens candidate, and one other candidate
Senator ROBERTS: Legalise Cannabis –
Joel Jammal: Legalise Cannabis, and uh that’s that’s certainly one to watch.
Senator ROBERTS: Is it Greens or Libertarians? I think it’s Libertarians –
Joel Jammal: It’s Libertarians, ok maybe it’s Libertarians –
Senator ROBERTS: I don’t think a Green would be in front of a debate with me –
Joel Jammal: No –
Senator ROBERTS: I don’t think a Labor party (candidate) would either.
Joel Jammal: I think they’re shy, I mean in Victoria uh Warren Pickering he’s got a debate the Socialist, I mean the Socialist uh Alliance guy is debating so that’s going to be interesting –
Senator ROBERTS: I’ve challenged Larissa Waters, the head of the Greens party in Queensland, to debate three times and repeated the third time constantly in the Senate, no show. She’s even said publicly to me in front of an audience she will not debate me. Anyway.
Joel Jammal: So look 6News is doing that we we’re going to be streaming that so that it gets out to everyone so I want to thank Leo from 6News but Malcolm, without further Ado, thank you very much ladies and gentlemen if you enjoyed this podcast please go to uh subscribe in the description on uh on ‘Buy me a coffee’ to support the show thank you so much for listening uh Malcolm did you have any any other final –
Senator ROBERTS: No, just thank you for what you’re doing keep speaking up freely and independently, we need the truth.
Joel Jammal: Very good thank you guys, I’ll see you guys later, have a good one.
https://i0.wp.com/www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/The-Ark.jpg?fit=1389%2C781&ssl=17811389Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2025-04-10 11:49:542025-04-10 20:11:25Podcast: The Ark with Joel Jammal
This was my last chance to speak directly to Australians in the 47th Parliament. Thank you, Queenslanders, for trusting me to represent you in the Senate.
I’m running again with One Nation to continue serving you in the 48th Parliament.
Australians deserve honest representation and a government that puts them first.
Let’s defeat the Albanese Labor government and restore wealth and opportunity for all.
Vote One Nation for real change!
Transcript
This is my last opportunity to speak directly with the Australian people in the 47th Parliament. I thank Queenslanders for the opportunity you’ve given me on two occasions, in 2016 and 2019, to represent your interests in the Senate. It’s an honour to serve you, and I hope the duty that comes with service has shown in my work. I’m contesting the Senate election in Queensland with One Nation. I look forward to continuing my service to the people of Queensland and Australia in the 48th Parliament. I thank my wife, Christine, for her continued love and support in what can be a demanding role.
I’m standing in this election because Australians deserve honest representation and the Albanese Labor government must be defeated. Under Labor, Australians and Australian families have gone backwards further than at any time since the Great Depression 95 years ago. How can a government fail so badly and still have the hide to ask for the public’s vote? As I travel across Queensland I hear many stories of life becoming harder, families having to choose between buying groceries and paying bills, and stories of rents or mortgages which can only be paid for by foregoing spending in other areas. I hear stories of young Australians who’ve studied hard, graduated with a degree or trade, who have a good job and still can’t pay their rent and their HECS debt, let alone save for their own home, and who now feel betrayed and robbed. Australia has imported so many people in such a short space of time that falling living standards for those already here were foreseeable. Indeed, 29 years ago Senator Pauline Hanson warned Australia this would happen.
I will continue my campaign against the UN and against the World Economic Forum and their billionaire owners who have our Prime Minister on speed dial. I will continue my campaign to bring those responsible for harm during COVID to justice. The hardship many are feeling can be turned around, and One Nation’s election platform will do just that. It’s time to vote differently for a change—a real change. Vote One Nation and let us restore wealth and opportunity for all.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/I490I94Sv4E/maxresdefault.jpg7201280Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2025-04-10 10:25:062025-04-10 20:12:02Vote One Nation to Restore Wealth and Opportunity
During the recent Senate Estimates Session with the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM), I tabled a graph from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report to challenge some of the exaggerated claims we’ve been hearing about extreme weather events such as cyclones, floods, and fires.
For years the BOM has always referred me to the IPCC’s work as the authoritative source on climate science. I specifically pointed to the IPCC’s Assessment Report 6, chapter 12, where they provide an analysis of a wide range of weather events. What struck me—and I think it should strike everyone—is that for nearly every major type of extreme weather event, the IPCC finds that there has been no detectable change in frequency or severity over time. This includes river floods, fire weather, tropical cyclones, and coastal floods. The data doesn’t support the claims that these events are becoming more frequent or intense because of “climate change”.
This is important because politicians and the media have often linked these events to human-induced climate change. They claim that floods, fires, and cyclones are somehow the direct result of our carbon dioxide production.
Yet if the IPCC itself, the body these same politicians refer to, says there’s no significant change in these events, why aren’t we calling out this misinformation? Why isn’t BOM calling out this misinformation?
For example, tropical cyclones – the IPCC indicates no change in their frequency or severity, not just for today, but looking ahead through to 2100—even under the worst-case climate scenario. And yet, we continue to hear false claims that “human-induced climate change” is worsening cyclone events. This isn’t true. These events have been part of the natural weather cycle for millennia.
The BOM Director, Dr Johnson’s response acknowledged that the science on cyclones is evolving and confirmed that while there may be fewer cyclones in the future, the ones that do occur may be more intense. Yet again, these claims are based on unsubstantiated projections—not hard data. They’re misinformation!
What’s more, looking at the IPCC’s tables, which break down the evidence of (naturally) varying weather patterns, for nearly every phenomenon—whether it’s precipitation, floods, fire weather, or tropical cyclones—the data simply doesn’t support the idea of dramatic increases due to “human-induced” climate change.
So, why are we still seeing politicians and the media push these claims?
This is not saying to ignore the importance of understanding climate variability, it’s about dealing with the facts – the measured data. The science must guide us, not the political agenda. And if the observed, measured scientific data says these extreme weather events aren’t changing as some claim, we need to stand firm against the misinformation.
Let’s be clear: the data doesn’t support the alarmist rhetoric. We should be calling out the misinformation and ensuring that decisions, policies, regulations and public opinion are based on what the science actually tells us—not on what some want us to believe.
I will continue to hold taxpayer funded agencies and politicians accountable. The truth matters, because, as always, it’s we the people who pay.
Transcript
Senator ROBERTS: I’d like to table this graph from a United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report as the basis for some brief questions. I don’t have too many questions today. I’ll start with a little preamble just to set the scene for this. When you get the graph, you’ll see it. I refer to misinformation being put out that cyclones and floods are getting more frequent and severe. Over many years in this committee the BOM has referred me to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. This might surprise you, but I’m not actually going to argue with you on the merits of the IPCC today, even though they’re a bunch of net zero pushers and are politically driven. I’m going to quote them, because you claim they’re the authority. I’ll take you to Assessment Report 6, chapter 12, table 12.12, by working group 1, on the science of climate, at page 1856. In that table is just about every type of measurable weather event. Some call it extreme weather events.
The blank or white boxes indicate there is no detectable change in frequency or severity of the weather event. I’ll go down the list of what the IPCC itself says—not me. River flood—no change is detected in current period. No change is expected to be detected under the worst case climate scenario by 2050 or even by 2100. Fire weather—no change is detected in current period or expected in the next 75 years. Tropical cyclone—no change is detected in current period or expected in the next 75 years. Coastal flood—no change is detected in current period or expected in the next 75 years. Pluvial—there’s a minor risk in the most extreme, worst-case scenario. If your net zero gods at the IPCC say the data shows weather events are not getting worse because of climate change, why isn’t the Bureau of Meteorology calling out the misinformation peddled by politicians when they state that this flood is because of climate change, this fire is because of climate change or this cyclone is because of climate change? Everyone knows that’s not true. These events have been happening for millennia. Even the scientists in the United Nations that you reference say it’s not so.
Dr Johnson: I might make a couple of preliminary remarks and then ask Dr Braganza, who is online, to join in. I haven’t had a chance to study the page that you’ve just supplied me. I think many times I’ve referred you to the State of the climate report that the bureau produces with the CSIRO every two years, which contains the latest up-to-date information on climate.
Senator ROBERTS:I’ve read each of them.
Dr Johnson: I know you read it, and I’d encourage you to refer to it again. Across a range of phenomena we know there are very strong signals already from climate change, in particular around temperature and in particular around drying in the southern, south-east and south-west parts of Australia. Those signals are very strong. The level of confidence in them is very high. Some of the signals for other phenomena, including tropical cyclones, are still evolving and maturing. We have seen an increase in the incidence of high-intensity rainfall. We know as a matter of fact that, as the atmosphere warms, it holds more moisture—probably up to 10 or 11 per cent more—than it would otherwise have, and that we’ve seen an increase in high-intensity events. We’ve certainly been on record saying that we expect in Australia it’s likely that there will be a lower number and frequency of cyclones, but they’re likely to be more severe. We’ve been on the record for that for ages. We’ve also been on the record on many occasions—
Senator ROBERTS: Could you explain the basis for that? The UN says it’s not—
Dr Johnson: I’ll come to that. Dr Braganza might want to say something about this in a minute. We’ve also been on the record that, particularly when it comes to individual cyclones and individual rainfall events, it’s very difficult to attribute single events to climate change. We’re talking about longer term global trends here. That’s been our position for some time, and it remains so unless new evidence is entered into existence that would cause us to change our mind. I can only be accountable for the science we do. I can’t be accountable for how those in the public domain choose to talk about it. We certainly provide advice, as we’ve done to this committee many times and in many other fora, about what we’re observing and what our science is telling us is likely to come down the pipeline, and also where we have higher or lower confidence about what is or isn’t coming. They would be my general comments.
Senator ROBERTS:Did I hear you correctly—just before we go to Dr Braganza—that cyclones are not becoming more intense?
Dr Johnson: No, I didn’t say that. I said that in our outlooks we think there’s a reasonable likelihood—Dr Braganza will be able to quantify this in more specific detail—that the Australian region is likely to see fewer cyclones, but there’s a likelihood that they’ll be more intense rather than less intense. Dr Braganza is our lead in this space and I’d rather he answer these detailed questions that you might have.
Dr Braganza: For tropical cyclones, the bureau, as Dr Johnson has pointed out, has consistently communicated that we have potentially seen a reduction in the number of tropical cyclones in our region, in particular in the east. We haven’t communicated that we’ve seen any significant change in intensity. Categorising changes in tropical cyclones is difficult. We’re limited to the satellite era. Prior to the satellite era, categorising tropical cyclones for severity and even whether or not they’re a tropical cyclone in the mid latitudes becomes difficult. There are data limitations in trends in tropical cyclones. The bureau has been entirely consistent in how it’s described those and entirely transparent in the data limitations. We have not communicated that we have seen large changes in tropical cyclones that are due to climate change. We don’t communicate around these individual weather events that they were caused by climate change. For tropical cyclones there are multiple aspects to the weather event. When we talk about intensity, we’re often talking about wind speed. Wind speed is just one aspect of a tropical cyclone. There’s also rainfall intensity and there’s storm surge intensity. Due to sea level rise and increased warmth in the atmosphere, we expect increased heavy rainfall and increased storm surge activity from all such events, not just tropical cyclones. There are also events such as east coast lows and others. Observational data is what it is.
Senator ROBERTS: I don’t expect you to comment on this, because you don’t have the table in front of you, but I’ll just go through chapter 12 and table 12.12, emergence of climate impact drivers in different time periods. That’s with regard to the future. The white colour indicates that there’s no confidence in what they’re saying or what they’re projecting. In terms of already emerged and ‘worst case scenario’ in the future by 2050 and by 2100: mean precipitation, no confidence in the data. No trend has emerged. River flood is the same. Heavy precipitation and pluvial flood is the same. Landslide is the same. Aridity is the same. Hydrological drought is the same. Agricultural and ecological drought is the same. Fire weather is the same. Tropical cyclones is the same. Coastal flood is the same. These are often taken advantage of by politicians and the news media; there’s no evidence for their comments attributing them to climate change caused by humans.
Dr Braganza: I’ll have to take that on notice since I don’t have the material in front of me. Some of the phenomena you’ve called out again in terms of establishing observed trends is limited by sample size. You’re talking not about weather events necessarily; you’re talking about impact events such as the size of a flood following heavy rainfall. There are possibly data limitations involved, but I would have to see exactly the material that you’re referencing.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/ov82xAtxkAU/maxresdefault.jpg7201280Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2025-04-03 17:26:432025-04-07 10:32:44Setting the Record Straight with the BOM
One Nation moved an amendment to a tax bill to end bracket creep, demonstrating our commitment to ending the Liberal-Labor stealth tax, who use inflation to push people into higher tax brackets.
The last time we moved to end bracket creep, both major parties and the Nationals claimed they were against it, yet they voted against our amendment. Why? Because they lie! They like bracket creep because it’s a stealth tax – a secret tax. Both depend on bracket creep to quietly take more money from workers.
One Nation wants to reform taxation and put more money in people’s pockets. At this election, vote One Nation #1
Transcript
Here we go again—bracket creep. Australians rightly complain that politicians from both major parties have no vision for our country’s future prosperity. It’s all just short-term budgets that never look beyond the next election. That’s why, tonight, One Nation is moving an amendment to the 2025 budget that would benefit our children’s children and everyone in Australia today. If successful, our amendment would remove the secret tax, the stealth tax, known as bracket creep. Bracket creep is where the government quietly takes more tax from Australians because of inflation. The government uses inflation to take more tax out of every Australian. This simple amendment to end bracket creep would save Australians tens of billions of dollars each year. It’s another One Nation plan to put more money back in your pocket.
So let me explain. As inflation continues, wages increase to try and keep up. A salary might go up from $100,000 to $120,000, yet, because of inflation, you can still only buy the same things because prices have risen. Despite being able to only buy the same things, your tax bill goes up because, on paper, the salary has gone up and been pushed into a higher tax bracket with a higher rate of tax. Inflation pushes up the salary you need to survive every year, yet the tax thresholds stay in exactly the same place. As salaries increase, they enter a higher tax rate bracket. This is bracket creep. One Nation would end it. We would index the income tax thresholds to inflation so you do not enter a higher tax rate bracket, making sure Australians don’t pay a higher tax rate because of inflation.
Tax reform is mentioned a lot in parliament. Here’s a genuine opportunity to do it. Australians are being squeezed from every angle. The current tax system is bleeding Australians dry while letting foreign multinational corporations rip off the country. Tonight, One Nation is proposing a policy that will tip the balance back towards helping Australians because we believe in putting more money back in Australians’ pockets. At the election, vote One Nation No. 1.
How They Voted
The Liberals, Nationals and Labor claim to support tax bracket indexation, yet twice I have moved an amendment to introduce it, and both times they have voted it down. The major parties want to dishonestly continue their thieving stealth tax.
Grateful to be able to offer my support to Billboard Chris in person at Parliament House today after the concerning events in Queen Street Mall Brisbane.
As I’ve said many times in Senate speeches and other forums, gender dysphoria should be met with compassion and understanding, not a scalpel or hormone drugs.
Our children need support during adolescence, not automatic affirmation that could lead to irreversible harm. Given that children are not mature enough to consent to treatments that will result in permanent infertility and damage, a total ban on such treatments for anyone under 18 is necessary.
We must protect our children as they navigate this challenging period in their lives.
I stand with Billboard Chris and commend his dedication to ending this abuse of our children.
Above all, free speech and the right to peaceful protest must be safeguarded at all costs.
Last week at Senate Estimates, I asked the Australian Federal Police (AFP) about the measures that are in place to protect Australians that are in a country that is guided by a Christian influenced Constitution. The AFP clarified that while they don’t monitor social media, they will review evidence to determine if any hate crime offence has occurred.
Greens’ Senator Shoebridge challenged whether our Constitution is really influenced by Christianity, however the Chair ended this line of discussion, stating that the preamble of our Constitution referenced “Almighty God”. (It’s worth noting that the country was overwhelmingly Christian when the Constitution was drafted.)
The AFP took on notice my question about the total number of arrests that have been made to date, however so far, there have been two charges for displaying terrorist symbols and ten for advocating terrorism. My question regarding deportation of non-citizens convicted of hate crimes was also taken on notice.
Transcript
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you and your people for appearing here today, Mr Kershaw. According to our Commonwealth Constitution’s opening sentence Australia is constituted as a Christian country. What’s being done to charge those preachers in mosques of preaching hatred and threatening violence and use of physical force against Christians here in our country and bringing such hate preachers to justice?
Mr Nutt: Senator, I can take that one. Obviously, we’re very concerned where online hate speech and other actions of hate occur in the community. We obviously work in partnership with our state and territory colleagues, who are often first responders to certain offences. The AFP does not monitor the internet. We certainly review any allegation that relates to hate speech targeting any protected group against the Commonwealth offences that are available to us and we assess the content in those circumstances. That often involves obtaining legal advice. These offences change over time, in terms of what an offence may look like, decisions of court and those sorts of things, so we always ensure that, at the time, we are looking at not only current but past conduct and that we evaluate that conduct against not only the offences but the standards and decisions of courts in the jurisdiction where the offences occurred.
Senator ROBERTS: Have any such preachers of hate in Australia been charged, and, if not, why not?
Mr Nutt: I don’t have statistics relevant—
Senator ROBERTS: Can you get them?
Mr Nutt: I’m happy to take that question on notice. I take it you are just referring to the AFP, because that’s all we can respond to.
Senator ROBERTS: Yes.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: Chair, I have a point of order. I think in the circumstances this country finds itself, to leave on the record uncorrected the statement from Senator Roberts that the Constitution establishes Australia as a Christian country is unconscionable. Can I say the preamble to the Constitution references the ‘blessing of Almighty God’. As far as I can remember Christianity does not have a monopoly on the concept of ‘Almighty God’, and we shouldn’t allow that on the record.
CHAIR: Senator Shoebridge, order.
Senator ROBERTS: It’s a Christian God.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: Maybe for you, Senator.
CHAIR: Senator Shoebridge, thank you. You’re welcome to go and post those thoughts on Facebook. Senator Roberts is able to make his views known, and people can take them at his word, knowing his past reputation for—I’m not saying that you are misleading the parliament, but you have your views and they’re well known, and I think people can take your statements together with your previous statements. Senator Shoebridge, I don’t think anyone would be concerned at all about statements about the Constitution in this Senate. People say a lot of different things that aren’t true from time to time. People can just read it. It’s a document. I think we can move on. Senator Roberts, do you have any other questions?
Senator ROBERTS: Yes, I do. There have recently been faith based crimes committed in Australia involving fire bombings, graffiti painted on buildings, cars damaged and hate symbols displayed. How many arrests have been made, and what is being done to identify the criminals and bring them to justice?
Mr Nutt: Again, I’m happy to take those matters. Again, we can only speak on behalf of the AFP. Certainly, there are Commonwealth offences not only in the recent legislative amendment on 8 February, which has been described as the hate crimes bill, but other offences including in the prohibited hate symbols and other measures act. This legislation is available to our state and territory colleagues as well, and they can use those offences where state offences don’t apply.
Since 8 January 2024, when the prohibited hate symbols act came into effect, we have not charged anyone in relation to prohibited Nazi symbols under 80.2H of the Criminal Code Act 1995; however, we have charged two individuals in respect of the prohibited terrorist organisation symbols—that is, the intentional public display of proscribed terrorism organisation symbols—and we’ve also issued a direction under section 80.2K for the display of a prohibited terrorist organisation symbol. We have not charged anyone in terms of the trading of symbols, but we do have a number of investigations on the books with respect to prohibited terrorist symbols generally.
In terms of advocating terrorism, which, again, is the current version of the offence which came into effect in December 2023, we haven’t charged anyone. This is around advocating terrorism under section 80.2C of the Criminal Code. However, under the previous version, which was available between 2021 and 2023, we charged 10 persons for advocating terrorism under section 80.2C of the Criminal Code. As I mentioned, there was some updated hate crimes offences that came into effect on 8 February this year. Those offences are yet to be utilised by the AFP.
Senator ROBERTS: Minister, this question is for you. Will noncitizens convicted of hate crimes be subjected to deportation?
Senator Farrell: I’ll have to take that question on notice.
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you. Back to the AFP. Do AFP officers need to get permission from a higher authority before making an arrest, or may an AFP officer exercise their discretion to make an arrest for a crime unfolding in front of them?
Mr Kershaw: Normally, depending on the nature of the event—if it’s a public order matter and some other particular matters—a senior officer can direct someone to be arrested, but there is also what we call the ‘Office of Constable’, which is an independent office that goes way back in the day to the UK, where an individual officer is held liable if they make the arrest. It’s their decision, independent of anyone else. So you could have a situation where one officer may gather some facts and say, ‘I’m okay to arrest that person,’ and another officer may say: ‘I’m going to use a summons. I’m not going to arrest them. I’m going to treat it differently or give them a caution.’ We, as senior officers, have to respect that and understand that. Discretion is really important, and we teach that and we train that with our officers.
Senator ROBERTS: Is there an ongoing training program for AFP officers in relation to rapidly evolving legislation relevant to the issues I’ve raised today? Mr Nutt alluded to a number of pieces if legislation that have come in, in recent years.
Mr Nutt: There are others at the table, in terms of those who are responsible for our legislative reform area. But our legislative reform area provides guidance to staff, which then gets incorporated into relevant training programs. We also work closely with the Attorney-General’s Department, which has responsibility with respect to Commonwealth legislation, and it provides materials not only to us but also to our state and territory partners on guidance in the application of Commonwealth offences, particularly new ones.
I won’t speak on behalf of the Attorney-General’s Department, but when we have new legislation that relates to areas of mutual interest with our state and territory police we provide that advice to them by essentially circulating the Attorney-General’s Department’s material. In certain circumstances—for example, in the espionage and foreign interference arena—we develop a training course and provide it to the state and territory police to assist their officers and for them to incorporate it into their own training program. We aren’t responsible for training state and territory police.
Senator ROBERTS: This is my last question, Chair. There has been a lot of violence displayed on the internet and on TV—news et cetera—for the last 12 months or so. When will Christian, Jewish and other followers of faith be able to feel safe in our own country, knowing that the police will protect them from harm?
Mr Nutt: Perhaps where I’ll take that question is that we’ve had some success with a relatively new offence relating to the possession and communication of violent extremist material. This offence focuses on material that portrays terrorist acts. It is also material that aids—in terms of education—in the carrying out of violent acts in the advancement of a religious, political or ideological cause.
Since this offence was introduced, it has been quite effective in the early identification of individuals who are consuming and potentially acting on violent extremist material. You may note that in the last week we had our first conviction under these provisions. We were very concerned about the violent extremist material that that individual had. We’re concerned because of the nature of the material and how accessible it is—building on what the commissioner has already said, in terms of the role and responsibility of internet service providers and the like in preventing the spread, distribution and access to violent extremist materials—and more broadly around end-to-end encryption. When it comes to our young people and vulnerable people more generally, we have noted the digital algorithms that may come into play of people’s internet activity and developed what has generally been considered to be echo chambers where someone looking up something may be pushed along or drawn along a path. The result being increased exposure to violent extremist material. We’re quite concerned about that as an issue.
Senator ROBERTS: To build on your answer—and thank you for the answer—I’m guessing the AFP does a lot more intelligence work these days as a proportion of its overall crime fighting than it used to because of the internet.
Mr Nutt: It’s always a mix.
Ms Barrett: I’ll also take the opportunity to reference Special Operation Avalite, which we stood up in December. That specifically targets antisemitism in this country. We have charged six people since we stood up that special operation. But I want to take this opportunity to thank the community. When we stood up the special operation, we went particularly to the Jewish community and asked them to assist us and to work together in partnership with us in relation to how we could specifically target the right areas. So I want to take this opportunity to thank the community for their partnership with us.
Senator Farrell: Senator Roberts asked a question earlier and I took it on notice. The question that you asked the Attorney-General needs to be directed to the Department of Home Affairs.
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you. That’s the quickest answer I’ve ever got on questions on notice.
Throughout my entire time in the Senate, I’ve consistently spoken on the need to restore Australia’s productive capacity through the construction of new infrastructure.
It’s a simple metric: the living standard of each Australian is expressed as our gross domestic product divided by the population. With 5 million new Australians in the last 10 years – 2.5 million under this Labor government – our gross domestic product is being split into more slices for the new arrivals faster than it is growing.
As a result, the standard of living for individual Australians is going backwards and has fallen by 8% since Labor took over. Did anyone hear Prime Minister Albanese promise in his 2022 election campaign to reduce the living standards of everyday Australians by 8%? I didn’t.
The answer to falling living standards is to reduce immigration.
The Government must also embrace the other side of the equation, which is building new infrastructure to enhance our productive capacity.
This video explains One Nation’s ‘build baby build’ policy, which we are taking to this election.
Transcript
I thank Senator Rennick for this opportunity to speak about One Nation’s policies and note that, in March, his statements and policies are becoming increasingly loaded with One Nation policies that we released earlier the month before, in February. In that, it’s like Labor and the LNP too, who are copying elements of our policies.
For the entire time I’ve been in this Senate, I’ve spoken on the need to restore Australia’s productive capacity through the construction of new infrastructure. It’s a simple metric: the living standard of each Australian is expressed as our gross domestic product divided by population. With five million new Australians in the last 10 years, 2½ million of those under this Labor government, our gross domestic product is being split into new slices for the new arrivals faster than it’s growing. As a result, the standard of living of individual Australians is going backwards and has fallen by eight per cent since Labor took over. Did anyone hear Prime Minister Albanese promise in his 2022 election pitch to reduce the living standards of everyday Australians by eight per cent? I didn’t. The answer is clearly and certainly to reduce immigration, although the government must embrace the other side of that equation as well, which is building new infrastructure to grow our productive capacity.
One Nation are taking a platform to this election that includes building a national rail loop to take hundreds of thousands of truck movements off the roads, making freight handling cheaper and more efficient, reducing supermarket prices and making Australia more competitive. That’s vital in a large country with a small population; logistics is tops. Our platform also includes a new northern rail crossing from Port Hedland to Moranbah and the Port of Gladstone in Queensland to open the east Pilbara and the north-west minerals province in Queensland to the international market, facilitating exports worth hundreds of billions of dollars and tens or hundreds of thousands of breadwinner jobs. There’s also a multifunction corridor to take water, power and internet along the new northern crossing railway to bring town services to more than 100 remote communities across the Top End; Hells Gates Dam in Far North Queensland to provide flood mitigation, water security and hydropower; and the Urannah water project and pipeline, amongst others. What will be the source of these funds? There will be $90 billion from cutting waste and duplication, itemised. See our website; it’s fully costed.
Each year, we will put $40 billion of that back into people’s pockets. For example, couples with children income-splitting will save almost $10,000 a year. It’s fully costed. Each year, we will invest $20 billion in infrastructure to increase productive capacity to increase our children’s wages. Each year, we will pay down record debt of $30 billion, which is estimated to become $50 billion the year after next per year, to reduce interest. Only through building our productive capacity can we hope to provide for the millions of new arrivals, generate new government revenue from increased economic activity and restore wealth and opportunity to all who call this beautiful country home.
It’s time to take back control of our borders, protect Australian jobs, and ensure a future where Australians come first.
One Nation will:
🔸 Deport 75,000 illegal migrants – those that have overstayed their visas, illegal workers and unlawful non-residents that undermine national security, drive down wages, and take advantage of public services meant for Australians.
🔸 Make migration net negative, which means more leave Australia than arrive – and the population decreases.
🔸 Stop the skilled visa rorting that allows cheap foreign labour to undercut Australian workers.
🔸 End the student visa loopholes that turn study into a backdoor to permanent residency or low-wage labour.
🔸 Stop the Administrative Review Tribunal being abused with endless, weaponised appeals that clog the system and delay rightful deportations. Immigration enforcement must not be held hostage by legal loopholes.
🔸 Reintroduce Temporary Protection Visas a proven, effective policy that prevents permanent residency through the back door and deters illegal arrivals.
🔸 Deport any visa holder who breaks the law. Weak law enforcement policies have put Australians in danger for too long. If you commit a crime, you lose your visa and the right to stay.
🔸 Introduce an eight-year waiting period for citizenship and welfare, ensuring new arrivals contribute before they take.
🔸 Refuse entry to migrants from nations known to foster extremist ideologies that are incompatible with Australian values and way of life.
🔸 Withdraw from the UN Refugee Convention. because Australia will not be dictated to by foreign organisations when deciding who we accept into our nation on humanitarian grounds.
I travelled to Alice Springs to talk about actually supporting Australians in remote communities, not dividing us on race like the PM tried to do with his voice referendum.
One Nation will abolish the racially divisive indigenous departments that costs tens of billions a year and hasn’t closed the gap one bit.
Here’s what we’ll do instead.
The Northern Rail link is a 3,000 km proposal across the entire top of Australia.
The important part for remote communities is what will run right next door to that rail line: high speed internet, electricity and a water pipeline.
Those three essential utilities will allow us to turbocharge central Australia, for everyone who lives remotely.
Instead of handouts – One Nation will build real infrastructure that will allow remote Australia to make themselves richer. The best form of welfare is a job – we’ll build the infrastructure to create those jobs in rural Australia, based on need not race.
