Malcolm’s Official Speeches in Parliament

Voice – Treaty – Lies

Uluru-Statement-in-Full

26-page-Doc-14-Uluru-Statement-from-the-HeartDownload

112 page document obtained under FOI is available for download below.

FOI-112-page-docDownload

The Prime Minister has deliberately hidden his true agenda and contradicted his own statements regarding the Voice with lies about the Uluru Statement and a Treaty. He failed to tell Australians that without the constitutional change called the ‘Voice’ there is no national body of Australians with which to sign a Treaty.

On a radio talk show, he was asked if he would move on to a Treaty and he answered ‘no’!

Prime Minister Albanese has called for a Treaty on the record in parliament, and the Uluru statement calls for a treaty. His denials of his intention to proceed to Treaty is a lie too far.

The fact is, PM Albanese is committed to implementing the Uluru statement in full. That is, the entire 26 pages of the Uluru Statement from the Heart that every Australian should read. Not the single solitary page passed off by the PM as the entire statement. Another lie.

The Uluru Statement outlines a plan to divide Australia into two separate nations that closely resemble the apartheid regime. Denying that he intends to proceed to treaty is a lie too far from PM Albanese.

The statement calls for annual reparations calculated as a percentage of our GDP, which even at 1% could amount to $20 billion a year, which as we all know would not reach those who truly need it.

The real aboriginal community look to a shared future of mutual respect and equality of opportunity.

The PM has lost the opportunity for that shared community because of his lies.

Sentiments of respect and equality are missing from this elitist and divisive leader whose real intention has been exposed.

Transcript

Senator Roberts: As a servant to the many different people who make up our one Queensland community, polling has turned against the Voice because the Prime Minister has told a lie too far.

Prime Minister Albanese said repeatedly that the Uluru statement fits on one A4 page and that he was committed to implementing the statement in full. The Uluru statement is 26 pages; the remaining pages have been released under freedom of information.

These contain a clear path for the partition of Australia into two separate nations that closely resemble South Africa’s apartheid regime. On committing to implementing the Uluru statement in full while lying about the contents of the statement, the Prime Minister has told a lie too far. As opposition leader—

The Acting Deputy President (Senator Sterle): Sorry, Senator Roberts, there is a point of order.

Senator Carol Brown: I ask Senator Roberts to withdraw those assertions about the Prime Minister.

Senator Roberts: I withdraw that statement and say he has told what seems to me to be a lie too far. As opposition leader, Prime Minister Albanese—

Senator Roberts: A mistruth too far. As opposition leader, Prime Minister Albanese said the Voice must be followed by a makarrata commission to inform a national treaty, yet he failed to tell Australians that without the Voice passing there is no national body of Australians with which to sign a treaty. The Prime Minister’s decision to not admit that without a voice there can be no meaningful treaty is a mistruth too far. When asked on ABC radio if he will move on to treaty if the Voice is passed, the Prime Minister said no; his exact word was ‘no’. Yet the Uluru statement includes a high-level treaty and the Prime Minister has called in parliament for a treaty. It’s on record, and he has the T-shirt to prove it!

The Prime Minister’s denial of his intention to proceed to treaty is a mistruth too far. The Uluru statement calls for reparations in the form of an annual cash payment calculated as a percentage of GDP. Even one per cent would be $20 billion a year in cash to 800,000 Aboriginals, or $100,000 for a family of four, which, as compensation, is tax free. The Prime Minister deliberately hid his true agenda. He’s been found out and he’s now lost any chance of a settlement with the real Aboriginal community that looks to a shared future of mutual respect and equality of opportunity. Loss of shared community is a heavy penalty for one man’s mistruth too far. (Time expired)

/7 Comments/by

Blaming Ukraine for Australian Energy Prices is Misinformation

Coal prices have risen internationally but Ukraine had nothing to do with energy prices rising in Australia. Investment in solar and wind is to blame.

It is important that the government in this country start facing reality and stop hiding the problem.

The Ukraine has nothing to do with coal prices in this country. In fact, Australian coal prices did not rise at all under their existing long term contracts for our coal-fired power stations.

The government must stop misleading parliament that rising electricity prices in Australia are due to a war in the Ukraine.

Massive solar and wind subsidies are the cause of Australians suffering some of the highest electricity prices in the world. Every time a coal fired power station is shut in this country we see yet the another spike in our power bills because unreliable ‘renewables’ cannot provide the same inexpensive baseload power supply.

This government’s Safeguard Mechanism Bill will add even more fines to reliable coal-fired power and yet more pain for Australian households.

Transcript

Blaming Ukraine for a problem that has been caused entirely in this country leads to misleading the population of Australia and hiding the problem. The real problem is our energy prices.

Coal prices have gone up internationally but not for Australian contracts feeding power stations in this country. Stop misleading the parliament.

Coal prices that feed our electricity in this country are still on the same long-term contracts at $80 to $100 a tonne as they had been before Ukraine became an issue. What’s really killing this country is investment in solar and wind, which are inherently more expensive because they produce far less and lower-density electricity and so their unit costs of electricity are far higher.

Every time a coal-fired power station is shut in this country, we see the spike and an increase in electricity prices.

Minister, it is important that governments in this country start facing up to the reality rather than blaming something in Ukraine. Ukraine had nothing to do with the continuation of coal prices in this country not rising at all. It had nothing to do with energy prices rising due to solar and wind and subsidies and now you safeguard mechanism adding to fines for coal-fired power. These are the things that are crippling our country and crippling our productive capacity.

/1 Comment/by

Labor’s Welfare Policy is Causing Tough Times for Australians

This welfare bill is trying to solve the problems government caused. The payments are needed because people are doing it tough in Australia.

Government is causing the problem with its Net Zero policies and unbridled money printing during the COVID response, slamming everyday Australians.

Isn’t the Government lucky that record mining and farming is providing the tax revenue to fund this increase in social security, which will ease the burden government has inflicted? These are the same industries that the United Nations’ Net Zero delusion wants to kill off.

I asked the Minister if they understood that the measures they are taking in increasing spending on welfare are the same measures that has caused our runaway inflation in the first place.

Rather than start a wages/welfare/price spiral, the Government should be immediately increasing productive capacity and reduce taxation so people can keep more of their own money.

Growing the pie for everyone will allow fair welfare and equality of opportunity for all Australians. Net Zero shrinks the pie.

Transcript

My questions are to the minister. I have two questions. This bill is specifically trying to partially solve a problem that government caused—not just your government but the previous government. The extra costs people are facing in our community right across the country are due to skyrocketing electricity prices cascading through all stages of our economy, driving inflation. That has been admitted by the energy relief payments that were announced in the budget. The 2050 net zero target, coming from the UN policy, is hurting Australians all over the country. It has been admitted. We’ve also got insane Greens climate policies destroying baseload power, forcing up prices, thanks to the Labor Party and the Liberals and Nationals, who’ve adopted these Greens and UN policies. We’ve got high immigration, driving up house prices and rents.

I’ve recently been travelling, for the last five weeks or so, in regional Queensland. In Bundaberg people are sleeping in tents, caravans and cars in parks. In Gladstone, people are sleeping in tents, caravans and cars in showgrounds, and that is happening across regional Queensland. We’ve had a mismanaged response to COVID, with half a trillion dollars in cash splashed around, driving inflation and, of course, higher prices. While shutting down the supply side of the economy, it was driving up prices.

People are doing it tough, Minister, because of your policies. My first question is: are you aware of that? Secondly, who’s paying for this solution to the problem you’ve created? I’ll tell you who’s paying for the largesse in this budget and the ability to afford these increased welfare payments, which are necessary because people are doing it tough due to your policies. I’ll tell you who’s paying for it: agriculture, with exports recently at record levels; the mining of coal—I’m proudly wearing a tie that I got 40 years ago from a coal company—and the mining of iron ore and other minerals. That’s what’s paying for our ability to afford these increased payments. Government is causing the problems, slamming everyday Australians, and mining and farming are providing the money to ease the burden government has inflicted. Are you aware of that, Minister?

When you sit back and look at it, every major problem in this country is due to government, largely the federal government. Who pays? It is always the people who pay. Yet who has the solutions? It is the people. We could fix this far better, Minister, if we just addressed productive capacity.

We will be supporting Greens amendment 2028, limiting the period for recovering errors from people overpaid to six years, and we will be supporting the bill as it stands at the moment.

/1 Comment/by

Labor Must Not Cut the Budget for Antarctica

Australia is fortunate, as one of the original Antarctic treaty signatories, to lay claim to the largest portion of the Antarctic continent. To cut back on infrastructure and research leaves Australia open to other nations’ claims to part of our territory.

China already has four bases within our Australian Antarctic territory for mapping, research, communications and resources. Based on their activity, they could claim our territory when the treaty comes up for review in 2048.

If we don’t treat our claim seriously and use it, we will lose this vitally important territory that sits on our doorstep.

We need Antarctica for our future security, for our future productive capacity, and for human progress.

We hold Antarctica through our efforts as a nation.

Don’t let Labor lose it through lack of effort.

One Nation will always put Australia’s interests first.

Transcript

Labor must not cut the budget that supports our presence in the Australian Antarctic Territory. We must support our presence through enhanced research and enhanced infrastructure. To not do so opens the gates to other nations’ claims over a part of our territory. Australia, as one of the original Antarctic Treaty signatories, lays claim to the largest portion of the Antarctic continent based on Australia’s significant role in the early days of Antarctic exploration and Australia’s proximity to the continent.

China already has four bases within our Australian Antarctic Territory for research, mapping, communication and resources, which are all vital to China. Based on China’s investment and activity, when the treaty is up for reconsideration in 2048, China will lay claim to Australia’s portion of Antarctica. When we cut the budget, our future claims will not be treated seriously if we do not treat our own claims seriously now. This is a matter of security, productive capacity and human progress.

One Nation will always put Australia’s interests first.

/by

How bad is my batch just morphed into how bad is my Minister for Health!

Minister Gallagher seemed to misunderstand the last question on both opportunities to answer it. She did not answer what happens with other medicines. She and others present around her made faces and lipreading Minister Wong would be interesting.

Minister Gallagher’s unguarded expressions give viewers the impression that she felt the question was inappropriate. She only wanted to talk about COVID emergency and repeat the tired pharma marketing messages.

Who does the batch testing? Not the safety testing which is part of vaccine approval.

Who is responsible for testing batches of medicines for quality when they are imported into Australia?

These are questions the Australian public are entitled to know the answers to because our lives depend on it. They are not impositions on ministers. They are part of the job of serving the best interests of the people.

Transcript

Senator Roberts: My question is to the Minister representing the minister for health, Senator Gallagher. Minister, the COVID batch release assessment for each COVID vaccine batch is produced after testing each batch. Who performed the test?

Senator Gallagher: This would have been work led by the TGA, but I will see if I can find further information about whether or not they were assisted by other laboratories. I imagine they were, as part of that work, but I will check and see if there’s anything further I can provide to Senator Roberts.

The President: Senator Roberts, a first supplementary?

Senator Roberts: If an Australian laboratory acting on behalf of the Australian government has not tested the COVID vaccines, we could be buying adulterated product, mislabelled product or
saline. How do the people and how does the Senate know what’s in the vaccines?

Senator Gallagher: It’s because it will go through the TGA’s established processes—that’s why. There would be significant checking of those arrangements with laboratories doing that work. This isn’t something that would be just left to a laboratory saying, ‘I’ve done it,’ and it being ticked off. The quality and safety measures that would be put in place by the TGA in getting those approvals are thorough. As we have seen through the rollout of the vaccine, the vaccine is safe and effective. We’ve seen that over the last three years after it was rolled out and millions and millions of vaccines have been provided through the vaccine rollout program, including the fact that we are now seeing significantly less severe disease or loss of life from— (Time expired)

The President: Senator Roberts, a second supplementary?

Senator Roberts: How many other vaccines or schedule 4 drugs are being imported into Australia in a situation where the safety testing was on the honour system, allowing the drug company or
manufacturer to provide their own safety testing?

Senator Gallagher: For a start, I don’t accept that it was done on an honour system. I do accept that in relation to the COVID vaccine process it was a shortened process because of the urgency and the crisis that the world was in, as the pandemic rolled through. It required the vaccine being created, and then—

The President: Senator Roberts, a point of order?

Senator Roberts: Thank you, President. My question was about other vaccines or schedule 4 drugs, not the COVID vaccines.

The President: I think the minister went to that, but I will remind her of that part of your question.

Senator Gallagher: I guess the point I’m making, Senator Roberts, is it was a highly unusual situation to be in. I think everyone’s acknowledged that the process around the approvals for the COVID vaccine were different and had been shortened, when compared to the approvals for other drugs. That is reflective of the fact that we were in a global pandemic and millions of people were dying from the effects of COVID and that we needed a vaccine in place to protect the community, and that’s actually what happened through the TGA’s approval processes.

/by

The Royal Commission Promised by PM Albanese Must Happen

,

Multiple peer-reviewed data coming to light in the wake of COVID demonstrate clearly how COVID medical interventions do more harm than good — far more harm. That ATAGI is not doing its job properly and is still persisting in supporting this ‘snake oil’ from pharmaceutical giants beggars belief.

In this video I review the latest data from peer-reviewed journals and from empirical data to show just how bad a situation we are now in.

Testing of samples of the vaccine show contamination with genetic material unrelated to the vaccine is ten times higher than approved levels. We have no understanding of the epidemiological effects in the years or generations to come. The direct link between COVID ‘vaccination’ and neonatal harm in Scotland is causing heartbreak and regret. It’s been found that one in 35 people who received a Moderna booster shot experienced myocarditis, not the 1 in 33,000 the TGA accepts.

ABS mortality data allows us a glimpse into just how bad the problem that nobody wants to acknowledge really is. In April this year we saw excess mortality of 27% above accepted level. 30,000 more people have died in Australia during the last 12 months than expected.

As a result of these excessively high rates of adverse events, a highly respected veteran oncologist, Prof. Angus Dalgliesh, has added his voice to the call for the immediate suspension of COVID vaccines. In his opinion the injections are related to the current unprecedented increase in cancers around the world.

One Nation could not agree more. We need a COVID Royal Commission today.

Transcript

As a servant of the many different people who make up our one Queensland community, tonight I’m going to speak about the need for a royal commission into the federal government’s response to COVID-19. Here are the latest reasons why, all coming to light since the last Senate sitting.

Firstly, there is the Pfizer ‘fakecine’ and malignant lymphomas. An article published in the journal Frontiers in Oncology in May asked if the emergence of malignant lymphoma, commonly called turbo cancer, was an adverse event caused by the COVID vaccine—the COVID injection. Researchers injected 14 mice with saline and 14 with the Pfizer COVID product. All the mice given the saline remained healthy. The mice injected with Pfizer appeared healthy. However, one died suddenly two days after the booster dose was administered. An autopsy revealed: ‘B-cell lymphoblastic lymphoma following the intravenous high-dose MRNA vaccination, at age 14 weeks.’ The autopsy further found:

… diffuse malignant infiltration of multiple extranodal organs (heart, lung, liver, kidney, spleen) by lymphoid neoplasm.

How many more of these studies showing fatal outcomes from the COVID products are needed before this government accepts our 30,000 excess deaths in the last 12 months are, in part, caused by these injections?

Secondly, one in 35 recipients of a Moderna COVID booster experienced myocarditis. According to the TGA, myocarditis is a very rare adverse outcome of the COVID injections, occurring at the rate of one in 33,000. A gold-standard, peer-reviewed study by leading cardiologists at the Basel University Hospital in Switzerland found that the rate of myocarditis serious enough to place the patient under restricted activity was not one in 33,000 but one in 35. Forty-four of the 777 participants were found with cardiac troponin markers in their blood at levels that showed their hearts were damaged, and that damage could not have resulted from any other factor but the Pfizer injection. Those same patients demonstrated reduced antibodies against viral and bacterial infections, as against an unvaccinated cohort. The average age of the subjects was only 37 years. This is an age when a heart attack is far from their minds. It’s an age when someone would get the injection and then go about their life, including exercising, and in so doing risk serious heart complications or even being another ‘died suddenly’ statistic. ‘Safe’ and ‘effective’ were two lies.

Third, hospital deaths from respiratory failure increased after the COVID products were at 90 per cent. This is data from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare on the ECMO protocol. ECMO was a controversial and experimental intensive care treatment for COVID. Protocols dictated that GPs were not allowed to treat patients in the community with antibiotics—not allowed! Instead, they were told to go home without treatment until they could not breathe. Instead of receiving antibiotics in the community, as they should have, they got sicker and sicker and developed pneumonia. Then they were put on ECMO, and then some of them died. The rate of ECMO protocol use rose from 12,000 in 2020 and 2021 to 18,000 in 2022, despite a 90 per cent COVID injection rate. Many in those cases resulted in death. We can add to this the growing list to data showing that COVID products did more harm than good. Peer reviewed papers show that.

The fourth item is plasmidgate: the vaccines may be contaminated. Leading virologists have tested the contents of the Pfizer vaccines and found they did not meet the standards set out by the FDA for contaminants. COVID vaccines contain mRNA strands, which are grown in a vat using a derivative of E. coli as the base solution. Contaminants from that process are removed and the remaining DNA strands are then encased in a protein, called a lipid nanoparticle, to protect the strand. It is impossible to completely remove contaminants, so the FDA and Australia have set a maximum standard for safety of 10 nanograms per dose. Samples tested had contamination of 330 nanograms per dose, 33 times above safe levels. Even worse, some of that contaminant was encased in lipid nanoparticles, protecting the E. coli derived genetic material and introducing that into subjects—into people. We don’t know the side effects resulting from this genetic material being taken up by the body, and that is malfeasance. It is deliberate ignorance to maintain the safe and effective lie.

Fifth, Scottish data shows a clear correlation between COVID injections and neonatal deaths. Data from Scotland shows a clear correlation between the rate of COVID injection in mothers and the rate of neonatal deaths nine months later. Deaths rose in line with vaccination rates and then fell once the booster rate fell. One correlation can be significant, but a correlation between both the increase in injections and then the decrease in injections is telling.

Sixth, excess deaths in Australia are 27 per cent above expected levels. That’s more than a quarter. Perhaps we do know the side effects of this malfeasance by the TGA and the Department of Health. The Australian Bureau of Statistics provisional mortality figures to April 2023 show mortality is running at 12.3 per cent above the expected level. But, wait, there’s more. When I asked the Australian Bureau of Statistics about this data at Senate estimates, the ABS were very clear in saying this data only shows 85 per cent of the deaths. It’s provisional. It is entirely correct to add that to the provisional mortality figure, meaning excess mortality in Australia in April this year was 27 per cent above where it has been since the COVID injections—about where it has been since the COVID injections started. Around 30,000 more Australians have died in the last 12 months than were expected to die, yet this body count is being ignored by our health authorities, by our parliament and by our media.

Seventh, Professor Angus Dalgleish has called for the COVID injections to be suspended. Highly respected veteran consulting oncologist Professor Angus Dalgleish has called for the immediate suspension of COVID vaccines because of the high rate of adverse events. The professor went on to say:

I have no doubt that the vaccines are associated with the current increase in cancers that are being witnessed around the world.

… they suppress the innate and T-cell system, making your body much weaker at defending itself from new viruses … This also has the additional effect of disturbing the T-cell surveillance of dominant cancers.

… the message RNA of the spike of the vaccine binds to genes that normally control cancer

… It is high time that patients and the medical profession rose against the dreadful imposition of what was essentially mandatory vaccine with no informed consent.

They’re the professor’s words. One Nation could not agree more. We agree entirely. It’s time for a royal commission. I call on the Prime Minister to call the COVID royal commission today.

/1 Comment/by

Bring Julian Assange Home Now!

If the United States’ government is making an example of Julian Assange – an Australian, NOT a US citizen – to dissuade other journalists from publishing the truth about illegal US government activity, then it is the job of the Australian government to protect him.

Whether or not he is found to have committed a crime, it’s terrifying that the rule of law protecting Australians from capricious government action can be trashed in this manner.

Julian has lost 13 years already to confinement, and now the United States is threatening him with life in prison for telling the truth in exposing the murder of innocent civilians during the ironically named Operation Enduring Freedom.

The United States values its relationship with Australia. It values our newly minted deal providing critical access to our mineral wealth. It values its ability to maintain a permanent military presence in the South Pacific through our close and longstanding relationship.

Our government needs to recognise its role in protecting one of our own and lean on the advantages Australia provides to the US to bring Julian Assange home now.

Transcript

As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, I note that the treatment of Julian Assange is not acceptable and should not be acceptable in a civilised society like Australia’s.

There are two issues: Australian citizenship and whether he committed crimes. Julian is an Australian citizen.

No matter what he may or may not have done, Julian has the same rights as any other Australian citizen. It’s terrifying that the rule of law protecting Australians from capricious government action can be trashed in this manner. Julian has already lost 13 years to confinement, and now the United States is threatening him with life in prison for telling the truth in exposing the murder of innocent civilians during Operation Enduring Freedom.

Enduring freedom—now, that’s ironic. Perhaps the United States needs a dictionary. ‘Freedom’ means the right to free speech, especially for investigative journalists who have investigated the US government’s illegal actions. Part of every journalist’s duty is exposing illegal behaviour. The US constitution guarantees freedom of speech. American governments have trashed their nation’s constitution. While freedom of speech is not enshrined in our Constitution, I’m advised it is enshrined in High Court rulings. Despite that, it means little, as many, including myself, discovered in COVID.

Clearly the US government is making an example of Julian Assange to dissuade other journalists from publishing the truth about other illegal US government activity.

Let’s connect the point about freedom of speech and COVID. We’re now seeing remarkable facts emerging about big pharma, big government and big tech. Imagine if Julian had been free during COVID and WikiLeaks was functioning properly. All the documents it has taken years to start prising out of the hands of big government and the big pharma state showing the most egregious and inhuman breaches of truth and decency may have been brought to light much earlier. Instead, we had compliant mouthpiece media that repeated the talking points of the pharmaceutical state.

Government has three roles: to protect life, to protect property and to protect freedom. Successive Australian and American governments are taking lives, killing people in unauthorised state sanctioned killings, stealing property, transferring wealth from ‘we the people’ to big pharma, removing freedom and imprisoning journalists, thereby destroying the nation’s freedom and every person’s freedom.

For serving the country, Julian has suffered 13 years of deprivation of liberty. Opponents say he jeopardised American soldiers and spies. Now, a court can decide that.

Do you remember the weapons of mass destruction claims? The perpetrators admitted they had no evidence. Who held them accountable? Not one member of parliament. Not one member of congress. They got away with it.

To anyone who thinks Julian Assange deserves the treatment he’s getting, I say: remember the wisdom of the words of St Francis of Assisi, who said, ‘There but for the grace of God go I.’

Our government needs to use our close relationship with America to bring Julian Assange home now.

/1 Comment/by

ASIC and Senate Lock Horns Over Accountability

Earlier this year the Senate failed to pass my proposal for confidential document discovery. The stoush currently underway between Senator Braggs’ Committee of Inquiry into ASIC and ASIC themselves confirms the need for confidential document discovery. Had this been available, the Committee would have the information they are after already.

Public officials have an obligation to allow scrutiny of their performance and the Senate must allow agencies due process. I am not convinced either is happening the right way in this stoush between ASIC and Senator Bragg.

Having said that, Senator Bragg’s diligence in trying to introduce accountability to Australia’s corporate watchdog, the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC), is much appreciated. The Senate serves the people and this Inquiry which began last October came about as a result of complaints about ASIC from everyday Australians, and is on behalf of the people of Australia, including investors and small business.

As I outline in this video, there are broad community concerns and systemic issues with ASIC’s investigations and enforcement capabilities.

Unfortunately, not only has ASIC has refused to cooperate with the Senate, displaying contempt for the process of review, Freedom of Information documents reveal ASIC was in contact with unknown people within parliament in an attempt to secure a watering down of terms of reference and to try to block disclosure.

In seeking to squash this inquiry into itself ASIC has this government using public interest immunity. This government is also showing contempt for the people of Australia.

The Albanese government is setting a world record for how fast they broke their promise of accountability and transparency.

Transcript

As a servant to the many different people who make up our one Queensland community, I thank Senator Bragg very much for his hard work trying to introduce accountability to Australia’s corporate watchdog, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission. I’ve watched his diligence, his patience, his commitment and his determination, and I admire and acknowledge all of that.

Last October the Senate referred an inquiry to the Economics References Committee into the capacity and capability of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, ASIC, in particular to answer the question: did ASIC meet the expectations of government, business and the community with respect to regulatory action and enforcement? A simple question.

This inquiry was prompted by complaints from everyday Australians and small business that ASIC was not doing its job. ASIC’s job is to ensure a level playing field and, where a company has engaged in corrupt conduct, ensure prosecutions occur. The evidence received has indicated that there are broad community concerns and systemic issues with ASIC’s investigation and enforcement capabilities. That mirrors what I have perceived. The committee has sought information surrounding a small number of closed investigations in order to understand how ASIC conducts investigations and understand its prosecution approach. The closed cases concern Nuix, ALS, super insider trading and Magnus, where there were serious allegations of commercial misconduct. Unfortunately, ASIC have shown contempt for the committee process, making public interest immunity claims to get out of handing over this information. ASIC were given one last chance to comply with this order, and here we are now. ASIC have again refused to cooperate with the Senate.

This should not be the end of the matter. The Constitution gives the Senate extreme powers of investigation and penalty on individuals for refusing to follow the instructions of the Senate. I’ll say it again: the Constitution gives the Senate extreme powers of investigation and penalty on individuals for refusing to follow the instruction of the Senate. That reflects the Constitution’s intent in making sure that the Senate serves the people, and I remind everyone that is the case. These powers should be considered in this case.

To say that ASIC have been dragged kicking and screaming into this inquiry is an understatement. Freedom-of-information documents obtained by Adams Economics reveal ASIC were in contact with unknown persons within the parliament to secure a watering down of the terms of reference or to deny the numbers entirely, to squash the inquiry. This is why we are here. How dare ASIC interfere to avoid review by the house of review on behalf of the people of Australia! One Nation rejected ASIC’s public interest immunity claims over materials concerning closed investigations into misconduct. ASIC’s reliance on public interest immunity claims to block disclosure has been an ongoing issue obstructing the committee’s ability to conduct a proper investigation on behalf of the people of Australia—this is not the Senate; this is on behalf of the people of Australia—the people who pay ASIC’s salaries, the people whom ASIC is supposed to serve. Public interest immunity is being used by a government that has nothing but contempt for openness and transparency.

Only today I discovered, by chance, that the industry groups the government are showing their new IR bill to are being required to sign a confidentiality agreement so that they can’t say what is in the bill. That shows contempt from this government for the people of this country. What sorts of nefarious provisions are in that bill that they require a cloak of secrecy? Every government is elected with a promise of transparency, and every government then breaks that promise. The Albanese government is, however, setting a world record for how fast they broke their promise and setting a world record for arrogance towards the people of Australia. This request from the Senate goes to a small number of closed cases. They cannot possibly effect an ongoing investigation. There’s no down side to revealing this information other than embarrassment, or worse, for ASIC management and the responsible minister.

I have received a report from a third party regarding ASIC senior executives using private phones for official business, and I look forward to further information around that issue. If a Commonwealth government agency spends $200,000 of taxpayers’ money on a secret investigation into allegations against ASIC’s deputy chair, the Senate has a right and a duty to ask what that was about. It’s our role as a Senate to do that, and we would be deficient in our duties to the people of Australia if we did not do so. This matter places the career interests of bureaucrats against the sworn duties of a senator and of the whole Senate. One Nation is betting on the Senate ultimately discharging its duties without fear or favour. ASIC has refused to disclose its correspondence in relation to public interest immunity claims with the minister. The committee has formed a view that ASIC’s refusal to provide the information sought is obstructing the committee’s ability to conduct this inquiry. That, by the way, is an offence. ASIC appear to be all lawyers. Let me say: you should know better, ASIC.

I’ve got some notes in front of me that I’ll divert to briefly. We are inquiring through the committee into the ability and, indirectly, the intent behind ASIC’s behaviours—the intent. The government is digging a deeper hole when it comes to the intent, because as Senator Brockman and Senator Bragg have pointed out in detail, the government is covering up, and that makes it even worse. If it was innocent, the government should welcome the disclosure. If it had something to hide or something to protect in ASIC, then it would shut down, and that’s what we see. I’ll go to the terms of reference:

… whether ASIC is meeting the expectations of government, business and the community with respect to regulatory action and enforcement …

It’s also not meeting the expectations of parliament. ASIC has failed persistently to enforce the law and investigate complaints of misconduct. Small business and consumers across Australia, who are tired of ASIC’s persistent failure to enforce the law and investigate complaints of misconduct, are the customers we serve. They’re the customers ASIC serves. The evidence received so far has indicated that there are broad community concerns and systemic issues with ASIC’s investigation and enforcement capabilities, and my personal concerns are similar.

The committee has sought information surrounding a small number of closed investigations. I’ve listed them, as have Senator Bragg and Senator Brockman. The government has a choice: release the documents and remove suspicions if you have nothing to hide, or, if you have something to hide, hide and stoke the suspicions. A private briefing is not adequate because that would be just ASIC giving selective disclosure. The executive government should support an inquiry to end white-collar crime in Australia and strengthen inquiry in our financial sector. Instead, the Labor government has defended ASIC at the expense of the work of the Senate, arrogantly keeping people in the dark. I ask the question: is ASIC protecting criminals or is it protecting its own incompetence or its own lack of intent to hold criminals accountable? Who watches over the regulator? We, the Senate, do, and the people watch over us. I call on the minister to stop obstructing the Senate, and I call on ASIC to rethink their obstruction to this inquiry.

/by

Cancel Culture Places Australia at a Political Turning Point

As a nation, do we believe in robust political debate? Or are we leaning towards the more suppressive model coming out of Communist China?

An Australian speaking tour by Donald Trump Junior was ended before it began. The former US president’s son had his visa delayed and it was only in the last 24 hours before he was due to board his flight that it was granted. The tour has been rescheduled for later this year.

British broadcaster and former politician, Nigel Farage, who was expected to tour with Donald Trump Junior has been going through his own brush with cancel culture in the form of debanking. The former Member of European parliament says that Coutts Bank (NatWest) decided to close his accounts because it didn’t like his political views.

We should be celebrating political diversity with some of the biggest names in international politics. It’s a chance for friend and foe to compete in debate, a practice that dates back to the world’s first known democratic societies in Ancient Greece.

It seems extraordinary that an Australian minister would intervene to prevent the visit of the son of a former US president, if that’s what really happened.

It’s easy to see the misuse of this discretionary power when you look at the performance of previous governments who have vetoed the visas of speakers, sports stars and political individuals who are known to hold views contrary to whatever the prevailing dogma is at the time.

Canceling the son of a former president is an undiplomatic act that could easily come back to bite those responsible.

/1 Comment/by

One Nation Will Always Protect the Innocence of Children

The Classification Board is required to protect children from all forms of sexual exploitation, abuse, and pornographic material. This is outlined in the legislation written in 1995. Restricting publications such as graphic novels, in the best interests of children, is not book burning, it’s common decency.

The motion I have introduced to the senate is about classifying books like ‘Welcome to Sex’ in such a way that prevents young children from reading them.

Why? Because it is not legal to instruct children in how to have sex before they have come of age. Basic morality and community standards are reflective of a civilized society and we would do well not to forget that.

Once lost, a child’s innocence cannot be replaced.

The ‘woke’ agenda’s increasing desire to enlist young children in an adult’s world of sex and depravity is nothing short of grooming.

My motion refers the classification to a committee review to create a new category for sexually explicit material directed to adolescents, to ensure kids don’t get their hands on this material without parental supervision.

Transcript

I move: 

That the following matter be referred to the Environment and Communications References Committee for inquiry and report by the first sitting day in March 2024: 

The adequacy of the current classification system for publications to protect children from age-inappropriate material, including: 

(a) the need, if any, for penalties on publishers who fail to meet their obligations under the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 to submit potentially offending material to the Classification Board for review; and 

(b) any other related matters. 

As a servant to the many different people who make up our one Queensland community, I’m speaking this evening in support of my motion to refer the classification system to a Senate inquiry. I’ve circulated a briefing document to explain this motion, and I hope senators have had time to review the material relating to cartoons for adults, otherwise known as graphic novels, in digital and printed form. The Classification Board administers the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995. Not every publication, though, is checked, of course. This would not be feasible. Instead, a system of voluntary referral is in place for questionable publications. That’s where the problem is—the system of referral or non-referral. 

A publication called The Boys has been available in Australia since the first issue in 1996. This is the same The Boys that Netflix turned into a hit streaming show. Children, having seen the sanitised Netflix version and then seeing the book version on the shelf of their local library, will, of course, pick the book up and borrow it, unaware of the depictions of extreme violence, rape, public sex and bestiality found in the publication. Even more troubling, all of these things are portrayed in a positive light. For 25 years, this material has been perfectly legal to sell, display and lend to minors of any age. 

A week after the Classification Board appeared before Senate estimates to answer questions from me and Senator Antic, the board reviewed all six volumes of The Boys as a result of a referral from campaigner, family protector and child protector Bernard Gaynor. A citizen fulfilling his responsibility to the community, to the nation, got it referred to the board. Three volumes were restricted and three were allowed to remain on sale unrestricted, meaning available in libraries to children. One of the banned works, episode 5 in volume 1, was titled ‘Herogasm’ and chronicled the sexual exploits of our superheroes. Graphic depictions included orgies and bestiality. This behaviour was presented in a positive light, with smiles, high fives, raised fists and whoops all around. 

Dynamite publishing did not refer their publication to the Classification Board as the law requires. I’ll say that again. Dynamite publishing did not refer their publication to the Classification Board as the law requires. The Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 does not prescribe a penalty on a publisher who does not refer a work that may be subject to sanction. That’s an incentive to not submit a work. This is one of the terms of reference of this motion. Penalties may be appropriate for a publisher who failed to submit a work that was subsequently restricted. 

One of the volumes that was not banned depicted the male lead character, Homelander, raping the lead female character, Starlight, complete with protestations, using language that should not be suitable for children. The board declined to restrict the volume because the nudity in the rape scene was not overly graphic. What about the rape? All senators and members of parliament are required to take a course on sensitivity to women. The Classification Board clearly needs to attend the same training. The second justification for not restricting the volume is even worse. It was, ‘The two characters both climaxed, suggesting the sex was not rape but consensual.’ The Classification Board is apparently bringing back, ‘But she came’—the old rape defence. Where are the women’s activists? Where are the Greens talking about women now? They’re nowhere to be seen. 

Another graphic novel currently on sale and on display in libraries unrestricted by the Classification Board is Nagano, which depicts sexual behaviour featuring girls who are actually labelled in the illustration as being seven years old, just in case there was any doubt about who these comics are really aimed at. 

Now we have the book Welcome to Sex. The authors are Yumi Stynes, Melissa Kang and Jenny Latham. It’s published by international publishing house Hardie Grant Children’s Publishing. Much has been said about this publication in recent weeks. For those who have not read it, let me explain a little about this book. The publication is officially aimed at ages 10 and up, with author Yumi Stynes publicly stating that she would have no problem with an eight-year-old reading the book. Certainly some of the information in this book will help adolescents come to terms with their changing bodies and their relationships around that process. If the authors had stopped there, we would have no problem. They didn’t stop there. The second half of this book is nothing short of an instruction manual on how to perform adult sex acts, commencing with advice to young girls to take their own virginity with a hairbrush and then moving onto hand jobs, sex and even anal sex, ending with advice on how to send naked selfies. This is all in a book published for ages 10 and up. How is it legal to advise kids to have sex before they are legally able and to send illegal child pornography and to advise children to ignore the counsel of their own parents? How is this legal? Ten-year-old children cannot have sex and should not be tutored on how to do so. 

It may be that this material is being sold because the Classification Board only has the choice between ‘unrestricted’ and R18+, which is restricted to sale in plain wrappers to adults. In effect, the current classification system has no jump between Cat in the Hat and actual porn. All publications become either one or the other. Legislation written in 1995 simply didn’t envisage this trend of graphic novels that are sexually violent and exploitative material that one could describe as child-grooming material. 

Children are far more valuable than this. I’m asking the committee to decide if there should be more steps in the classification options so material like this can be allowed for sale to adolescents old enough to actually engage in the sexual practices explained in this publication. After all, the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 does require the board to protect children from all forms of sexual exploitation, abuse and pornographic material. This publication is pornographic. Restricting a publication like this is not book burning, as some have suggested, some who are afraid of a debate. One Nation is not calling for the book to be banned. We are suggesting this book should be classified in a way that prevents young children from reading it. That is not book burning. That is basic decency reflecting community standards that say teaching 10-year-olds how to have anal sex is just plain wrong. A legally binding MA15+ classification would achieve that. I ask for the Senate’s support for my motion.

The Vote

After constituents told me children can access disgusting pornography on store shelves & libraries, I moved a motion to refer the book classification system to a senate inquiry so that Australians can have their say.

Our children deserve our protection.

We finally got the Liberal-Nationals to support an inquiry. Labor, Greens, Pocock and the Teals (LGPT) voted to stop an inquiry. The vote was: YES – 25 and NO – 30.

The LGPT brigade think it’s okay for children to access porn and that Australians shouldn’t be able to voice their concerns.

/3 Comments/by