Thousands of Australians came out to protest this Labor government’s digital identity bill and the evil agenda behind it. The Online Safety Act, the Identity Verification Services Act, the Digital ID Bill and the Misinformation and Disinformation Bill are designed to identify, apprehend, punish and imprison anyone who resists this slide back into feudalism and serfdom.
Everyday Australians recognise that this bill threatens their freedom, privacy and our way of life. If this entire serfdom agenda was presented to the Australian people in an election and they were asked – “Is this the future you want?” What do you think their answer would be?
Transcript
Last weekend across every capital city, as well as in Cairns and Mackay in my home state of Queensland, thousands of Australians came out to protest this Labor government’s digital identity bill and the evil agenda behind it. Everyday Australians recognise that this bill is an attack on their freedom, privacy and way of life. The Brisbane rally in King George Square, in the heart of the Greens electorate of Brisbane, drew more than a thousand everyday Australians. The crowd displayed a level of awareness of national and international issues that must be making those who mock One Nation nervous. The public are waking up to the plan that successive Liberal and Labor governments have had and are implementing to use Australia as a crash test dummy for the crony Communist seizure of the wealth and human rights of everyday Australians, the purpose of which is to transfer even more wealth into the hands of the world’s predatory billionaires by using the Online Safety Act, the Identity Verification Services Act, the Digital ID Bill and the misinformation and disinformation bill to identify, apprehend, punish and imprison anyone who resists this slide back into feudalism and serfdom.
Free speech defends every other human right. The witnesses to the Digital ID Bill inquiry, including the Human Rights Commission, drew attention to the lack of privacy and human rights protections in the bill. The committee ignored the evidence before them and returned a glowing recommendation to pass the bill in a report likely authored in the bowels of Geneva or New York, with almost identical legislation appearing in other Western wealthy nations at the same time. Then the bill passed through the Senate, with the debate guillotined—not one word of debate to air Australia’s views on this hideous, far-reaching bill. One Nation has a petition to immediately repeal this evil bill. So far 70,000 Australians have signed it.
The Albanese government now need to do something now that they have so far refused to do—listen to the public, to the people. Repeal the Digital ID Bill or take the whole serfdom agenda to an election and ask the Australian people: is this the future you want?
https://img.youtube.com/vi/Se5YptSlS3g/maxresdefault.jpg7201280Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2024-05-30 07:53:252024-05-30 07:53:29Free Speech Defends Every Other Human Right
Here are some bold ideas you won’t hear from anyone but One Nation.
1. Ensure cheap power by turning on coal-fired stations, building more, and ending solar and wind subsidies.
2. Stop inflation by halting excessive money printing.
3. Guarantee cheaper housing and rents, prioritising young Australians.
4. Secure cheaper groceries by supporting farmers and building dams.
And lastly, use our natural resources for Australians first.
One Nation is committed to putting Australians first and freeing them from unnecessary restrictions.
Transcript
Here are things you won’t hear from anyone in the budget, except for One Nation because we’ve got the guts to say what you’re thinking.
Firstly, guarantee cheap power—turn the coal fired power stations back on, build more coal fired power stations, and remove solar and wind subsidies. It’s the only thing that can save us right now. Secondly, stop inflation. Stop quantitative easing—printing excess money. A trillion dollars was concocted during the COVID response, which is a major cause of the inflation we’re still fighting today. Thirdly, we’ll guarantee cheaper houses, cheaper rents and get young people into their first home. Don’t just cut net overseas migration: start deporting. Prior to COVID, there were 1.9 million visa holders who needed housing and who were fighting Australians for a roof over their heads. That has increased to 2.3 million today, plus 400,000 tourists and others. Ten per cent of our population is on visas and needs extra housing. We will ban foreigners from buying Australian property. They’re currently snapping up nearly one in 10 new Aussie homes.
Fourthly, get cheaper groceries—build dams and help farmers produce tonnes of fresh, healthy produce for Australians. Give farmers water and the right to use their land, and we’ll never have to worry about grocery bills again. Fifth, use all of our natural resources we have right here for Australians first. There’s no need to become a green superpower, and we never will. We’re already an oil, gas, coal and uranium superpower. The government won’t do this because some foreign, unelected organisation in Zurich or New York will claim that we’re not complying with our international obligations.
Governments on both sides have forgotten that their first obligation is to Australians and no-one else. One Nation knows this. We’ll put our trust in Australia’s people and release them from the nanny state that tells them everything they can and can’t do, which will enable people to abound and flourish. That’s our promise of what would be a One Nation budget. We will always remind members of parliament to put Australians first.
At the last estimates in May, I asked CASA which experts they had consulted for their advice. After some delay, CASA admitted they had relied solely on information from the Chief Medical Officer, without conducting any independent research. They stated their sources were limited to the TGA and FDA and that the only data used came from Pfizer, which has since admitted to numerous fatalities.
Ms. Spence said she was aware AstraZeneca had been withdrawn and that Novavax had also been withdrawn. However, she noted that there had been no reported adverse events in the cockpit.
I raised concerns about CASA’s varying health test requirements for pilots of large commercial aircraft versus small private planes and pointed out that these differing standards posed a risk in shared airspace.
Transcripts
ACTING CHAIR: Thank you to your legal officer. Senator Roberts?
Senator ROBERTS: Mr Marcelja could not tell me the specific names of the experts upon which CASA relied for turning a blind eye to Qantas and Virgin on mandates, which weren’t government mandates. Dr Manderson, can you tell me specifically which medical experts you relied upon for allowing Qantas and Virgin to mandate the vaccines? Who gave you the advice? Dr Manderson: The chief health officer of Australia at the time would be one important name.
Senator ROBERTS: Did you actually get his advice?
Ms Spence: I think we have gone through this previously. I appreciate—
Senator ROBERTS: That was with Mr Marcelja—
Ms Spence: But I think what we—
Senator ROBERTS: and he wouldn’t tell me the names of the chief medical officer—
Ms Spence: Sorry, Senator. Do you want me to finish?
Senator ROBERTS: Do you want me to allow you to keep interrupting?
ACTING CHAIR: Senator Roberts, come on. You know that’s against standing orders.
Senator ROBERTS: There’s been a lot of protection of—
ACTING CHAIR: No. Allow Ms Spence to conclude her answer to your first question.
Senator ROBERTS: She’s not answering my question; Dr Manderson is.
ACTING CHAIR: I thought I heard Ms Spence, but—
Senator ROBERTS: She interrupted.
ACTING CHAIR: I’ll allow CASA to answer your question. CASA?
Ms Spence: All I was going to say is that we’ve tried to explain before that we don’t get individual advice on specific issues; we rely on the advice of the health experts, and, in this case—as Dr Manderson has said—the chief health officer of Australia was basically a key source. But the TGA was also providing advice. I think we have actually put that in response to questions or in some of the Hansard previously.
Senator ROBERTS: The reason I’m frying up is that Mr Marcelja said that it was the experts, and he wouldn’t name them, and the experts wouldn’t name them. And then we went to international experts, to I gave up. Your answer is the Chief Medical Officer—not the chief health officer. I presume you’re talking about the federal Chief Medical Officer.
Ms Spence: Yes.
Senator ROBERTS: That’s important. The Chief Health Officer is—
Mr Marcelja: Senator, perhaps you could refer me to your question specifically so that I’ve got in front of me what you’re talking about. What date was that? I’ve got the Hansard in front of me.
Senator ROBERTS: I can’t remember the date.
Mr Marcelja: You can’t remember it. My recollection of the conversation was that you were asking me on what basis we were taking the actions we were taking, and I told you that we were taking no actions to intervene in the Australian government’s response. The advice, as Dr Manderson pointed out, about Australia’s response was not being led by us; it was being led by health authorities. So we did not intervene and override the advice of Australia’s Chief Medical Officer or other health experts.
Senator ROBERTS: You have told me that the buck ends here for aviation safety. You did not do any testing at high-altitude pressures, correct?
Ms Spence: No.
Senator ROBERTS: You just assumed Pfizer, the Chief Medical Officer and the TGA knew that the pressure would be okay at high altitude?
Mr Marcelja: As I tried to explain a moment ago, what we’re interested in from a vaccination or medication perspective is: is it likely that you will get into a cockpit, have a sudden, incapacitating event and be unable to fly the plane? That’s our primary concern. For all vaccinations, including the vaccinations that were being—
Senator ROBERTS: In the cockpit at altitude.
Mr Marcelja: at altitude—our primary concern was whether that medication, the vaccination, would cause that event to happen. There is no evidence in Australia or anywhere around the world. We’ve checked with our regulatory authorities and colleagues in the US and Europe. There is no evidence of that event occurring anywhere in the world over the last several years. I think we were on pretty sound footing not to intervene and prevent a particular cohort of the population from being vaccinated when that’s not our role.
Senator ROBERTS: Let me ask you a few more questions around that. I want you to remember at all times in your answers to me that, when it comes to safety, the buck stops with you, CASA. There is no high-altitude testing done that you’re aware of. Are you aware that the TGA, when I asked them what tests they did in Australia on the vaccines, said they did no tests and relied on the FDA? Are you aware of that?
Mr Marcelja: I reiterate what I said. They are not matters for us. We look at it from an aviation safety lens. Dr Manderson has been involved in international panels looking at aviation safety on a number of different topics. I’m sure she can step you through that. There is no evidence whatsoever over several years now of there being an aviation safety risk. That’s our concern. Whether the vaccine has other effects or issues—
Senator ROBERTS: You relied upon the TGA. That was one of the people you relied on.
Ms Spence: Yes.
Senator ROBERTS: The TGA admits it did no testing and that it relied upon the FDA. The FDA, prior to the TGA’s announcement, admitted that it did no testing and relied on—wait for it—Pfizer.
Mr Marcelja: Are you suggesting—
Senator ROBERTS: Now we find out Pfizer in their trials had hundreds of fatalities.
Ms Spence: I don’t know how many times we can say this, but we treated the COVID vaccinations the same way we treat all vaccinations, and we don’t do individual, independent testing. But—
Senator ROBERTS: Let me continue, then. Are you aware of AstraZeneca being withdrawn?
Ms Spence: Yes, but I think—
Senator ROBERTS: Are you aware—
Ms Spence: Senator, sorry. I don’t think it’s quite as clear cut as saying it’s been withdrawn. They’re no longer using it. It wasn’t around inefficacy at the time, but now they’re no longer producing it. Yes, we are aware.
Senator ROBERTS: Do blood clots say anything to you. What about Novavax? We understand that has been withdrawn just recently.
Ms Spence: I wasn’t aware of that one.
Senator ROBERTS: Okay. Excess deaths, 13 per cent, in line with the COVID injections—before COVID outbreaks in Queensland and Western Australia—what would make you investigate whether or not pilots are suffering from COVID injection adverse events? Because you don’t do testing on pilots; you rely upon pilots to turn themselves in. What would make you investigate it?
Ms Spence: The only thing that would make us investigate is if there was an adverse reaction in the cockpit which could be directly attributed to a COVID vaccination.
Senator ROBERTS: What if I told you that pilots are telling us that they know of mates who have had adverse events but they won’t speak up for fear of losing their job?
Ms Spence: I would encourage them to report through the confidential reporting arrangements that I mentioned, both with us and with the ATSB, because we are not getting those reports, and there are mechanisms for them to do that.
Senator ROBERTS: With pilots losing their jobs, I wonder.
Ms Spence: As I said, they’re confidential, so they don’t need to report who they work for—but just giving us the information, if that is actually occurring, would be incredibly beneficial.
Senator ROBERTS: Given that CASA use Austroads fitness to drive as a guideline for recertification for TIA or stroke in class 5 medicals, on what are the class 1 and 2 medical recertification guidelines based, and do they differ from class 5 guidelines? If so, how and why?
Ms Spence: The standards for class 1 and 2, which is the commercial pilot and the private pilot medical certificates, are based on the International Civil Aviation Organization medical standards for certification for pilots—for commercial and private. They are quite different to the domestic Australian class 5 medical certificate, which is not an ICAO certificate and doesn’t need to comply with those medical standards. So class 1 and class 2 reference the international pilot standards.
Senator ROBERTS: And class 5—you make up the standards?
Ms Spence: Class 5 medical standard was developed through really extensive consultation through technical working groups with both doctors and pilots, with operational input from pilots in particular. It also went through a really strong risk assessment process within CASA to determine what those standards should be, mapped against the risk treatments for the operational restrictions with the class 5.
Senator ROBERTS: But my question was: CASA developed those standards? I’m not interested in the process. CASA developed those standards?
Ms Spence: Yes, CASA developed those standards.
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you. CASA allow airlines to push pilots to the limit as a routine practice. This is facilitated by a concession given to the airlines masquerading as ‘fatigue risk management’. CASA have allowed airlines to use this system as a shield when continuing to roster pilots to fly unreasonably long hours. Do class 5 medical holders and class 1 and 2 medical holders operate in the same airspace?
ACTING CHAIR: What are you quoting? I think the witnesses would like to see the source of that quote.
Senator ROBERTS: I’m not quoting from anything here. My research assistant—
ACTING CHAIR: I thought you were.
Senator ROBERTS: No, I’m not quoting.
ACTING CHAIR: Okay.
Senator ROBERTS: I’m just quoting the fatigue risk management title.
Mr Marcelja: So, for the record, we don’t agree with the statement you just said.
Senator ROBERTS: Okay. Do class 5 medical holders and class 1 and 2 medical holders operate in the same airspace?
Ms Spence: Yes, they do.
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you. Is a class 5 medical holder a single pilot operation?
Dr Manderson: Yes, it is.
Mr Marcelja: Yes.
Senator ROBERTS: Okay. You had some doubts, Dr Manderson?
ACTING CHAIR: I think they answered the question.
Dr Manderson: Sorry, only because I felt it was self-evident that—but, yes, it is.
Senator ROBERTS: Okay. Thank you. So, if a class 5 medical holder with a recent history of stroke or TIA after four weeks of grounding is back in an aeroplane at the holding point at an airport and has a relapse, his or her aircraft taxis out in front of the landing heavy jet fully laden. Class 1 and 2 medical holders can operate with multicrew and autopilots as well as current pilots repositioning as passengers in the cabin on numerous flights. Class 5 pilots have no back-up. Is that correct so far?
Ms Spence: Senator, I—
Mr Marcelja: Perhaps you could repeat the question. I’m not sure what the question was in that.
Senator ROBERTS: We’ve got a heavy laden jet coming in to land with class 1 and 2 medical holders, with other back-ups on their position, and we’ve got a class 5 just about to go in front of the path and they have a relapse.
Ms Spence: It feels like you’re describing—without being derogatory—a weekend warrior landing in the same place as a large commercial air transport operator, and I’m just trying to—
Senator ROBERTS: Okay. Let’s continue then. We’ll get on to your weekend warriors. What value does CASA place on the designated medical examiner’s ability to diagnose and recertify pilots? And what situations require CASA to intervene with their diagnosis?
Dr Manderson: So the designated aviation medical examiners are absolutely fundamental to us being able to make safe decisions about issuing medical certificates. They are the doctors that perform the examination and interact with the pilots and air traffic controllers at every medical certificate renewal application. We trust their assessment as clinicians as to whether or not there is any medically significant or safety relevant medical condition present in that pilot or air traffic controller applicant. We take their clinical information and their advice when we decide whether or not to issue a medical certificate.
Senator ROBERTS: Why then is CASA advocating self-certification for class 5 medicals—as I understand it?
Mr Marcelja: We are not advocating. What we’re presenting are options for different types of operations. So a pilot that chooses to operate with a single passenger in a light aircraft can choose a class 5 certificate or they can choose any other certificate. So we’re not advocating any particular medical. We’re creating options and different pathways for different pilots in different circumstances, and those circumstances are adjusted based on risk and the level of medical certification.
Ms Spence: This is a matter that has been under debate for a number of years, around CASA being a proportionate regulator. Under the class 5 medical, we put restrictions on the way you can operate, therefore you can operate within those constraints and then we will review to see how that’s working over time. We’re monitoring it closely to make sure that we’re auditing people’s self-declarations and the like. So I think people do expect us to be a proportionate risk-based regulator, and I think the class 5 medical is an example of how we can do that.
Senator ROBERTS: That’s what I’m exploring here. I’m trying to understand. I’m not a pilot. Considering CASA AvMed can override opinions of consulting physicians and specialists during the medical renewal process, how could the view of a CASA AvMed doctor come to its own diagnosis of an individual pilot in the absence of face-to-face consultation and overrule the opinions of independent specialists and consultants? Is that possible?
Dr Manderson: The aero-medical decision-making process is more than and different to the clinical decisionmaking process. The medical assessment process that we’re required to follow by the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations and the ICAO standards and recommended practices is that we take all of the advice that is available from all of the clinicians—including their expert opinions, the investigations and reports that are available, the medical examination from the DAME—and we apply that information against the medical standard for medical certification. The key difference is that the medical specialists who are seeing the patient and the patient pilot or controller are performing an assessment of the medical status of that person as a clinician for diagnosis and management, not for aero-medical risk assessment and not for medical certification processes. So it’s quite a different role and a different process. We consider their advice, but their advice is about the condition and its disease and severity, not about its safety relevance for medical certification.
ACTING CHAIR: Senator Roberts, we need to break for dinner. Are you close to finishing?
Senator ROBERTS: We might put these on next Senate estimates.
ACTING CHAIR: We are going to release CASA now. Thank you very much.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/Spj_cXdrdgk/maxresdefault.jpg7201280Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2024-05-29 18:10:032024-09-11 18:11:45CASA Relied on Chief Medical Officer’s Advice Only
I am strongly opposed to the Digital ID bill, which I see as a tool for authoritarian control that threatens our freedom and privacy. I believe this bill is part of a larger agenda aimed at identifying, controlling, and potentially punishing those who oppose government policies—a shift that feels like a return to feudalism and serfdom. Although initially presented as voluntary, the Digital ID is gradually becoming mandatory for everyday tasks, as more government departments require it for various services.
I’m deeply concerned that this system could lead to significant privacy violations, creating a live data file tracking people’s movements and activities that could easily be used to control and exploit citizens.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/j1xHNAgmhkw/maxresdefault.jpg7201280Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2024-05-27 09:26:292024-11-07 09:28:20Brisbane Rally: Say NO to Digital ID
The Treasurer handed down his third budget tonight (14/05/2024). These were my predictions earlier today in the Senate. What do you think of what he has handed down?
Transcript
As Treasurer Jim Chalmers hands down his third budget tonight, many Australians simply don’t care. All the talk about surpluses, deficits, subsidies and balance of payments is very low in the average Australian’s priorities today. The biggest budget concern across dinner tables is skyrocketing mortgage costs, rents, grocery bills, insurance premiums and power bills. Australians don’t need Treasurer Chalmers to tell them times are tough; they’re living through tough times. Unfortunately, this budget shows the government isn’t coming to help; in fact, to compensate for its poor decisions it’s going to have to have its hand deeper in your pocket, taxing more of your salary for years to come.
Let’s step through the budget and what it means for Australians. Firstly, the big headline: Labor wants everyone to know the budget is in surplus—$9.8 billion. It sounds good, doesn’t it? Anyone who’s ever had their bills laid out on the dining room table knows a good budget needs more money coming in than going out. Unfortunately, this budget surplus is terrifyingly small, given that fairies have kissed Treasurer Chalmers with good luck.
The government has won the biggest lottery prize we could ever have hoped for, yet it has just a tiny surplus. It would be like a family winning division 1 of Powerball and having $100 left over at the end of the year—and calling it a win! There should be rivers of gold flowing into the budget. Instead we have a miserable trickle because Labor doesn’t resist spending every bit of its lottery winnings.
Commodity prices for our exports like oil, gas, coal, metal minerals and agricultural produce have all been near or at record highs over the previous few years. That means huge amounts of extra money flowed into Treasurer Chalmers’s budget. ‘Oil’, ‘gas’ and ‘coal’ are all dirty words to this Labor government and the Greens, and they’re too embarrassed to admit they have, in large part, saved the budget.
The second lottery win is the Australian workers. They’re working more jobs, longer hours and harder than ever. All of the extra work is reflected by the record-low unemployment rate. That means more taxes from hardworking Australians are going into the budget coffers than ever before—a record. That’s the story of this budget: three years of some of the largest tax intakes government has ever recorded, yet Labor can only squeak out the tiniest of surpluses.
Despite Australians working multiple jobs for more hours, they’re still going backwards because of inflation. Inflation is the secret debilitating stealth tax on all Australians. It’s the reason Australia had the largest collapse of disposable income in the OECD. If you feel like you’re going backwards, it’s because you are.
The only way to get ourselves out of this infrastructure mess is by spending on productive assets that allow Australia to make more here. We need to raise our productive capacity. We need more dams so that Australians can have more food and exports. But don’t expect to see any dams in Labor’s budget. We need cheaper electricity so that small businesses can thrive and hire people in their local communities. Instead, Labor will continue to throw us down the path of the net zero pipedream, which is guaranteed to bring higher energy prices, whether Australians pay for it on their power bill or with more taxes.
Unfortunately, the Liberals, the Nationals and the Labor-Greens are a uniparty on net zero—all united in their commitment to kill our electricity grid. We need nation-building projects like the Iron Boomerang project to make millions of tonnes of the world’s best quality steel right here in our country.
One thing I can guarantee is that there won’t be enough action on immigration in this budget. The Prime Minister has leaked that they expect net overseas migration to come in at 300,000 next year—300,000! This is a horrifyingly large number. It’s excessive. Prior to COVID there were 1.9 million visa holders likely to require housing in the country. There are now 2.3 million plus 400,000 tourists. That’s causing the terrible rental and housing crisis. Now the government wants to make that 300,000 people worse again. Where will these people sleep, Prime Minister?
That sums up what we can expect from this Labor budget: more Australians sleeping in cars, under bridges, in tents and in caravans; first home buyers destroyed by their mortgage repayments, while inflation runs out of control; small businesses being strangled by power prices. Does this sound good? This is hopeless. There are many more shocking stories of how the Australian dream has been ruined by decades of the Liberals-Nationals-Labor-Greens uniparty, acting together to implement the agenda of the World Economic Forum and the United Nations.
A better way is possible. A much better way is possible, and One Nation will reveal how in our response to the budget this week.
Labor has been caught red-handed with a cheat sheet to circumvent democracy. The media has received a leaked copy of a manual from the office of the Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese. This clearly shows more damning evidence that Labor is seeking ways to side-step the responsibility and accountability of government.
Instead of respecting the role and powers of the Senate, the Prime Minister’s Office sends out a secret manual on side-stepping senate estimates’ questions.
This is nothing less than contempt of the senate from the PM’s office and reveals premeditated attempts at concealing the truth from the Australian people. This is a government that talks up transparency while writing the ‘How-To’ guide on hiding the facts. We will review this in more detail and will provide a detailed response on the manual.
Transcript
I speak to this motion to take note. I have yet to read the document in full and in detail, yet its existence is very disturbing, as other speakers have already said. At Senate estimates, Anthony Albanese’s office is putting words in the mouths of department heads. How can we trust their answers? We cannot trust this government. Repeatedly we’re getting the suppression of democracy—repeatedly—and we’re seeing arrogance. Let’s have a look at some data, and then I’ll come back to talking more about this document.
As of the end of December 2023—7 December, specifically—after 94 Senate sitting days in the 47th Parliament, Anthony Albanese’s parliament, 14 guillotine motions have been agreed to. Under the previous Morrison government, in the 46th Parliament, 14 guillotine motions were agreed to. Now we start to see the difference. A total of 87 bills have been subject to the guillotine in the 47th Parliament under the Labor-Greens-teals-Pocock coalition led by Anthony Albanese. In the 46th Parliament, under the Morrison Liberals, there were 59. So we have seen almost 50 per cent more under this government, under the coalition that Labor formed with the teals, Senator Pocock and the Greens, quite often with Senator Jacqui Lambie’s support.
They promised transparency and accountability. Instead we get the suppression of democracy, repeatedly. Arrogance—that’s what we say it is. Arrogance. We see that the suppression of democracy is a form of control.Always beneath control there is fear. Of what is the Albanese Labor-Greens-teals-Pocock coalition afraid? It’s afraid of truth and afraid, fundamentally, of an informed citizenry. They don’t want people to know.
The media has seen copies of the document. ‘The PMO’s secret manual on sidestepping Senate estimates questions’—that’s the headline in Capital Brief. The article says:
Capital Brief has seen a document sent by Anthony Albanese’s office advising departments on how to handle questions on notice from Senate estimates. Current and former senators say the edict represents contempt of the Senate.
Contempt of the Senate is a very serious matter. Another article in Capital Brief says:
Current and former senators, lawyers and a former top judge have said the drafting of the document could result in contempt of the Senate. … …
Anthony Albanese’s office has stood by a document it issued to senior bureaucrats which advised them how to sidestep Senate estimates questions on the basis that inquiries have “skyrocketed” since Labor came to government.
Well, that’s your job! I don’t care if they have skyrocketed. We’ll keep asking questions. I’ll get to the Prime Minister’s office’s manual—what we’ve seen of it so far; I haven’t dissected it.
When the interests of several departments are involved, the Government Guidelines for Official Witnesses before Parliamentary Committees and Related Matters call for departments to consult with other departments as part of the drafting process. This includes instances where the same or similar Senate estimates questions on notice are asked of all or multiple departments and agencies. Why are you worried about different answers from different departments? Look at some of the topics covered—well, we’ll go through that another time.
I know this is not a motion by leave to seek a variation of standing orders, but One Nation normally opposes them because the Senate should be focused, firstly, on Senate responsibilities and, secondly, on government business. We want the government to govern. Senate estimates, though, are a vital part of holding governments and bureaucrats accountable for taxpayer funds. Why do you hide from that? Anthony Albanese’s department wants to hide the truth from the people.
We have seen the Fair Work Commission and the Fair Work Ombudsman stumbling through an answer to my questions attempting to get to the bottom of their complicity with the CFMEU and major multinational labour hire firms in stealing $30,000 to $40,000 per miner each year from thousands of casual miners in Central Queensland and the Hunter Valley. They hide the facts wilfully. The Fair Work Ombudsman office relies on fraud, repeatedly.
The Labor minister for workplace relations ignores and diverts. It’s embarrassing for departments. We look forward to reviewing the formerly secret document in detail, because democracy is at stake.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/ki6XPZvIIyo/maxresdefault.jpg7201280Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2024-05-24 11:55:032024-05-24 11:55:06Labor’s Guide on How to Avoid Answering Questions in Senate Estimates
What happened to having vision for the future in this country?
You won’t get it from the Liberal and Labor Uni-party whilst they’re beholden to their donors.
Check out One Nation’s breakdown of the budget and how we would return Australia to leading the world.
Transcript
This is One Nation’s response to Labor’s Budget.
My comments will be in two parts.
Firstly, an analysis of what Treasurer Jim Chalmers has put into and left out of the budget.
Secondly, what a One Nation budget would look like to return Australia into a prosperous country again.
Starting with the measures in Labor’s budget for next year, 2024/25.
Treasurer Chalmers wants everyone to know about his surplus for THIS year 2023/24.
Yet his budget released two days ago for this coming year starting in less than two months aims to be a DEFICIT for 2024/25
Many Australians might not even know what a surplus is.
A surplus simply means that within a given year the Government is spending less than it’s income. It spends less than what it takes off Australians.
Usually that’s a good thing.
Like any Australian household, government shouldn’t be spending more than it has – that’s a deficit.
Treasurer Chalmer’s surplus of $9.3 billion isn’t a happy story, though.
It sounds like a big number until you compare it to the total budget spend: $683 billion dollars.
Unfortunately, given Treasurer Chalmers’ amazing run of good luck this budget surplus is terrifyingly small.
It would be like a family winning division 1 of Powerball and having $100 left over at the end of the year—and calling it a win!
There should be rivers of gold flowing into the budget.
Instead, we have a miserable trickle because Labor can’t resist spending every bit of its lottery winnings.
Commodity prices for our exports like oil, gas, coal, metal minerals and agricultural produce have all been near or at record highs over the recent few years.
That means huge amounts of extra money flowed into Treasurer Chalmers’s budget.
‘Oil’, ‘gas’ and ‘coal’ are all dirty words to this Labor government and its Greens partners. And they’re too embarrassed to admit mining and agriculture have, largely, saved the budget.
The second lottery win for the government is Australian workers.
They’re working more jobs, longer hours and harder than ever.
All of the extra work shows up in the record-low unemployment rate.
That means more taxes from hardworking Australians are going into the budget coffers than ever before—a record. RECORD tax taken from Australians.
That’s the story of this budget: three years of some of the largest tax intakes government has ever recorded, yet Labor can only squeak out the tiniest of surpluses.
From this year on the deficits return. Tens and tens of billions of dollars in the red each year as far as we can see. Going deeper into debt.
The Federal Government’s debt is due to reach nearly 700 billion dollars in coming years.
At the rate this government is going our children’s children will not repay it.
Despite working multiple jobs for more hours helping the government’s bottom line, Australians are still going backwards because of inflation.
Inflation is the secret debilitating stealth tax on all Australians.
It’s the reason Australia had the largest collapse of disposable income in the OECD.
If you feel like you’re going backwards, it’s because you are.
Inflation is leading to tax bracket creep.
That means you’re earning more while your money is worth less yet you’re paying more tax overall.
As your income rises with inflation, it takes you into a higher tax rate bracket.
The government takes more money from you through bracket creep because of inflation.
No wonder they voted against my amendment that would have removed bracket creep. My amendment would have removed the stealth tax.
The government is fudging the inflation numbers, making it appear better than the price increases you’re actually paying in the real world.
When they hand out energy and rent relief, it artificially lowers the inflation figures.
This is just papering over the inflation. It does nothing to actually fix it.
Economists across the country have slammed Treasurer Chalmers trickery on this.
Without rent assistance the CPI for rents would haver increased 9.5% in the 12 months to March.
Instead because of Treasurer Chalmers’ trickery it was recorded as just 7.8%.
The cost of electricity has gone up 15% in just a year. The bill relief is papering over that, showing up in the CPI as just 2%.
This is a clear, huge admission of failure of the net zero pipe-dream
With the most amount of wind, solar and batteries on the grid than ever before in history, Treasurer Chalmers must hand out another round of power bill relief – because prices are too expensive.
The inflation fight isn’t over for Australians who are still going backwards.
This budget will pour more fuel on the inflation fire.
There are only a few ways to genuinely reduce inflation:
First, never repeat the mistake of printing $500 billion out of thin air over COVID.
That created much of the inflation we’re fighting – as the former head of the Reserve Bank agreed to me.
Second, reduce the cost of energy: Abandoning the net-zero pipe dream.
While net-zero is pushing up power prices we’ll never get rid of inflation.
Thirdly, cut the amount of visa holders in the country now driving huge demand.
That’s not just a cut to the rate of immigration as this budget proposes, it needs to be negative, and people need to leave. As I’ll explain later.
Finally, make investments in productive infrastructure to increase the productive capacity of our country. Assets like dams, power infrastructure, ports and rail lines.
That’s called supply side economics. Improve productivity.
That’s how inflation can be cut. Not with trickery. Improving real productivity.
The next feature item of the Labor Budget is their Future Made In Australia plan.
This is a vague, unclear collection of weird policy ideas like a billion dollar computer and outright scams for a total of $22.7 billion dollars.
This will supposedly turn Australia into what they call a Green Superpower for wind, solar, so-called green hydrogen and other scams.
The government will use that money to pick losers that have failed to attract any investment from anyone with common sense in the real world.
This is a “Disaster made in Australia” Plan.
China manufactures and tightly controls more than 90% of all of the critical parts of wind and solar power.
Wind and solar make us completely reliant on China for our energy needs, Labor’s Future Made in Australia will only make that reliance worse.
There’s no reason to become reliant on wind and solar due to our abundance of oil, gas, coal and uranium in this country.
We’re the most resource rich country in the world.
Why would we spend tens of billions ignoring that and handing over control to China?
The Future Made in Australia plan is really a Future Made in China plan.
This effectively sets up an unsustainable model of business practice which relies on taxpayer subsidies for any meagre profit.
What a waste of Australian taxes.
Next the National Disability Insurance Scheme, the NDIS.
If left unchecked, the NDIS is going to eat this entire country alive.
Originally budgeted to only cost $25 billion a year, it will reach $90 billion a year within a decade.
Minister Bill Shorten says he can cap the growth at 8% a year. Yet it’s been growing at 14%.
Providers often charge NDIS double or even triple the price for the exact same services.
This draws carers to NDIS and drives huge worker shortages in aged care and childcare.
The huge NDIS money sink has certainly contributed to this.
The NDIS program has been a national shame with unconscionable budget blowouts, widespread rorting, use of taxpayer money for prostitutes and cruises and other scandals, And causes neglect of genuine disability cases.
At some point it’s time for Australia to agree this scheme can’t be fixed and it’s time to start fresh. Send it back to the states to enable competitive federalism that is proven to drive efficiency and accountability.
Let’s move on to the Future Drought Fund – $519 million dollars. Again seems a great headline. Just don’t read the detail.
That money will be split over 8 years meaning just a tiny $65 million for an industry worth more than $90 billion a year to Australia.
There’s only one real form of drought relief: WATER.
There’s not a drop of money in this budget towards a real dam.
To get cheaper groceries, we have to grow more of them.
We have some of the best farmers, in combination with the best soils and climate in the world.
Add water, and Australians won’t have to worry about grocery bills again.
A vital part of this budget is the forecasts for net overseas immigration.
That’s how many new people the government expects to take into the country.
Australia’s net overseas migration was 528,000 in the 2022 to 2023 financial year, a historic record, nearly double the previous record. Double.
That’s like adding a new Canberra to Australia, in one go. Without the political swamp.
That’s almost one and a half (1.3) Sunshine Coasts imported into Australia in just 12 months.
The Labor government claims this figure will decrease to 260,000 a year in 2025-2026, still far too much.
It’s a prediction, and like any Labor prediction, don’t bet your house on it.
Back in October 2022, 4 months into the 12 months they were predicting, the government said net overseas migration would be 235,000.
Just 8 months later, the 528,000 figure blew their forecasts out of the water.
Way more than double. Was it supreme incompetence? Or a lie?
We’ll wait and see if their prediction of 395,000, an entire Sunshine Coast added to the population, for this financial year turns out to be true.
If it’s not clear, no Australian should trust what a government says when it comes to immigration numbers.
It’s claimed that the country is ‘just catching up’ after a slow down in immigration. That’s a lie.
It’s a lie that’s causing a housing crisis, making Australians homeless and feeding inflation.
Prior to COVID, there were 1.9 million foreign temporary visa holders in the country likely to require housing.
Today, there are 2.3 million. That’s 400,000 more people in the country that are fighting Australians for a roof over their head and groceries at the supermarket.
Why? To inflate GDP to get out of the per-capita recession. To look good not do good. Labor doesn’t care about the homeless its causing.
That’s driven the massive crisis in the rental vacancy rate and huge increases in rents.
This Labor government wants to keep adding to that, another 395,000 predicted this financial year, plus 260,000 the following.
We don’t have enough houses to put these people in.
We don’t have enough houses to put Australians in.
We don’t have enough tradies to build enough houses to keep up with this many arrivals.
We need to start deporting some visa holders.
Net immigration needs to go negative until Australians have got an affordable roof over their head.
Perhaps the most important item is something that’s completely missing from this budget.
There’s not a single dollar allocated for a Royal Commission into the COVID response.
Millions of Australians were forced to lock down in their homes. Forced to take an experimental medical product. Businesses were ruined. Children’s educations ruined.
What’s the Labor government’s response? Silence.
One Nation will continue to fight for a COVID Royal Commission and for perpetrators of human rights abuses to be thrown in jail.
That covers some of the things that are in, and aren’t in, Labor’s budget.
Now I want to talk about a better way, what Australia could look like as a prosperous nation under a One Nation budget.
Here are things you won’t hear from anyone in a budget, except One Nation – because we’ve got the guts to say what you’re thinking.
Firstly, guarantee affordable power: turn the coal fired power stations back on. Build more of them and remove solar and wind subsidies.
It’s the only thing that can save us right now.
Cheap power is a matter of life and death for Australians as many of them are facing the wall in this cost of living crisis.
Nuclear should be on the table and we should simply let the cheapest power win – no handouts or subsidies.
$500 billion dollars was concocted out of nowhere during the COVID response.
That’s a major cause of the inflation we’re still fighting today.
The Former Governor of the Reserve Bank, Phillip Lowe, the culprit behind that money printing, even agreed with me on that.
Thirdly, we’ll guarantee cheaper houses, cheaper rents, and get young people into their first home.
Don’t just cut net overseas migration – start deporting some visa holders.
Prior to COVID there were 1.9 million visa holders who needed housing, fighting Australians for a roof over their head.
That’s now increased to 2.3 million today, plus 400,000 tourists and others.
And, we’ll ban foreigners from buying Australian property. They’re currently snapping up nearly 1 in 10 new Aussie homes.
We’ll convert the Labor government’s designed-to-fail Housing Future Fund and turn it into the People’s Mortgage Fund, issuing fixed rate 5% mortgages.
Fourthly, get cheaper groceries: build dams and help farmers produce tonnes of fresh, healthy produce for Australians.
Give farmers water and the right to use their land – we’ll never have to worry about grocery bills again.
Fifthly, use all of our natural resources we have right here for Australians first.
There’s no need to become a green superpower, and we never will.
We’re already an oil, gas, coal and uranium superpower.
Government won’t do this because some foreign unelected organisation in Zurich will claim we’re not ‘complying with our international obligations’.
Governments of both sides have forgotten that their first obligation is to AUSTRALIANS. No one else.
One Nation knows this.
Finally, we must have comprehensive tax reform.
The current system is highly destructive to our country and wholesale change must be made.
We’ll put our trust in Australia’s people, release them from the nanny state that tells them everything they can and can’t do, and enable people to abound and flourish.
That’s our promise of what would be a One Nation budget:
Putting truth, Australia, and Australians first to ensure prosperity like we’ve never seen.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/otIbhjj4iLk/maxresdefault.jpg7201280Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2024-05-23 16:36:002024-05-24 08:18:06This is What an Actual Vision for Australia Looks Like
Queensland residents can’t find a home because there are simply more people than homes. Our hospitals are ramping because there are too many patients and not enough healthcare staff, and the number of kids in Queensland classrooms are rising not falling, despite many parents opting to home school.
The COVID response era actually provided a great opportunity to catch up on building infrastructure while immigration was frozen and people were out of jobs. Instead the government paid people to stay at home and NOT contribute to or build social infrastructure.
I asked Minister Watt, who is a Queenslander himself, if the Government opened the floodgates on immigration without the necessary social infrastructure being ready. His answer confirmed the government has not done the sums on the impacts of our record level of immigration and, quite honestly, is not fit to govern.
Transcript
I move:
That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (Senator Watt) to a question without notice I asked today relating to social infrastructure.
For three years, from 2020 to 2022, with the nation mostly out of work, we had an opportunity to catch up on social infrastructure: hospitals, schools, transport, water and housing. Instead, we paid money that could have been used to build those things to people to sit at home and not build those things. It was a trillion dollar wasted opportunity. With a new Labor government in power, the immigration floodgates then opened without the social infrastructure to accommodate the new arrivals. What’s worse is that there are not enough land re-zonings, building applications, approvals and starts to ever make a noticeable improvement in housing.
The Albanese government created a problem it cannot solve. Australia needs to get a refund on that plan we heard so much about from the Prime Minister in the last election because it’s a dud. It’s not up to the minister in his answer to blame the previous government repeatedly. For three years a so-called National Cabinet of Liberal and Labor leaders ran the country, so failure is on both your hands. It’s true that the neglect of social infrastructure goes back through 30 years of Liberal and Labor governments—the uniparty.
The message from the last two weeks of elections in Queensland and Tasmania is simple. Voters worked out the link between immigration and social infrastructure and voters are not happy. Voters are angry with Minister Watt and the Albanese government for creating a housing crisis that’s rapidly escalated to now be a human catastrophe. The public are noticing the disparity between those benefiting from the property market and those falling behind. It now takes everyday Australians on a median salary up to 14 years to save for a deposit for their own home. The housing crisis the Morrison government started and the Albanese government multiplied is disenfranchising the young. The irony is that the Labor government—supposedly, once the party of the workers—is making inequality of wealth far worse. Before the thread of social cohesion unravels in this country, this government must turn off the immigration tap and start building social infrastructure.
As a Scientist and former vet school Dean, Professor Rose became concerned that critical information about SARs-CoV2 virus and COVID-19 vaccines was not being reported by mainstream media.
We discussed how the world and particularly Australia changed with the arrival of COVID and how the population seems to have forgotten the drastic restrictions that were put on our freedoms. We also discussed what, if any, lessons were learned.
Reuben received a notice from YouTube that he had “breached community guidelines” and the link to his channel can no longer be accessed.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/yxRWoySJHOY/hqdefault.jpg360480Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2024-05-23 16:34:182024-05-23 16:34:23A Chat with Emeritus Professor Reuben Rose | Sons of Issachar
Finally! After 5 plus years of calling out dodgy CFMEU union bosses, Labor and the Fair Work Commission, the Senate has backed my call for an investigation into the biggest wage theft in the coal sector.
The industrial relations community was staggered last week when Australia’s senators voting on a show of voices – no one asked for a formal vote – decided to demand that the government investigate what is potentially the nation’s biggest wage underpayment scandal.
If shown to be correct, the alleged underpayment of New South Wales and Queensland coal miners will involve repayment of more than $100 million.
When I first disclosed this scandal, I called on ALP politicians and other supporters of the CFMEU and Fair Work Commission in the parliament to set aside their links and think of what happened to the coal miners. And that’s exactly what the senators did. Full marks. Now the Senate must make sure the government carries out their instructions in a proper manner.
Some years ago, a small group of coal miners came to me telling him that they believed they were not being paid correctly. I have worked tirelessly to discover that thousands of NSW and Queensland coal miners had worked long hours underground for over a decade as casual labour, but did not receive the 25 per cent “casual” premium workers all over Australia receive.
