Thank you, Madam Deputy President, as a servant to the people of Queensland in Australia, I support this bill, with reservations. Firstly, there is a growing belief among our governing class that Australian federalism relies, in many areas, on shared endeavour.
I do acknowledge that coordinated federalism, where each government works with the other, yet retains total determination over and exercise of, its own constitutional powers, needs some honing today. After all, the internet runs as a thread throughout society and connects us all across state borders.
Yet this does not mean, transfer of power, from the states to the Federal Government. This most definitely does not mean that. I’m advocating generally the reverse, that we need to send some powers back from the Federal Government, to the state governments, in accordance with our constitution.
It is fundamental to our constitution, and it is common sense, that the best service delivery, occurs when the person making a decision, is located closest to the people affected by that decision. I mean, that is obvious. That is the reverse of what has happened in our country since 1944.
The greater the distance apart, the worse the decision making. We need to stop centralising and restore competitive federalism. Competitive federalism, with six states working independently, yet together, is highly effective.
Our country was leading the world, in terms of per capita income from 1901, when we formed as a nation, to about the 1920s. And that was because of competitive federalism. I am concerned, secondly, that this bill… So before moving from that, I’ll just reiterate, that it is very important, to actually get back to competitive federalism, with the states working independently yet together.
My second point, is that I am concerned this bill will give the states, the chance to wash their hands of responsibility, for the integrity of the data in this register. I urge the Federal Government, to ensure that when this register is designed, there is suitable, effective grievance reporting, so people with an error in their entry, or who have been mistaken for someone else, can correct the record.
Australians have recently seen firsthand, a total failure of the Federal Government’s ID function, with the chaotic tragic Robodebt scheme. That’s not just a matter of having an apology from the government. It’s not just a matter of, hundreds of millions of dollars, approaching close to a billion being an error.
It’s wrecking people’s lives. And it’s important to understand, that the government never pays for its mistakes, the people do. And what I mean by that, is that the people pay twice. Once for what the government did, through our taxation system, and then through our own hip pockets.
For the consequences of the government’s error. And we can see that with the live cattle, banning that the Gillard government, put in place capriciously. Now we see the federal government, lining up to take over business registrations.
And people know that outsourcing the IT function, did not turn out so well for the government last time. Thirdly, I am concerned this bill, is not a bill about making a better system, for controlling business registrations and keeping track of company directors.
I am concerned, that the government has spotted yet another chance, to sling yet more taxpayers money, at one of their corporate backers. Who will it be? Mr. Acting Deputy President. KPMG, Indue, we can hardly wait to find out. But we will be watching.
All parties to this register, must show that the respect that is required, for the Australians whose livelihoods, whose legal liabilities are bound to this register. Please, Minister, take your time and get it right. Remember our constitution and competitive federalism, care about the people you are serving.
The government must do better this time. Because after all, government is here, by permission of the people, on behalf of the people, to serve the people. In accordance, and that service from government, must be in accordance, with our people’s governing document, our National Constitution.
In the Senate, I asked Senator Cormann three questions on the governments COVID19 response.
Transcript
[President]
Senator Roberts
[Roberts]
Thank you, Mr. President. My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Cormann. Southeast Asian nations like Taiwan quickly learned with regard to COVID that they just had to isolate the sick and the vulnerable.
And that allowed healthy and productive people in businesses to keep working and earning money. The result is that their economy in Taiwan and other Southeast Asian nations remained healthy, and they had far fewer deaths than Australia.
Minister, was there any consideration given in April to changing Australia’s COVID strategy when Taiwan and other Southeast Asian nations had already proved that their strategy worked and was far superior to your government’s strategy?
[President]
The Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Cormann.
[Cormann]
Thank you very much, Mister President. When the crisis hit, there’s no question that we considered a whole range of alternative options on how best to respond to it, but in making decisions and in making judgements we were guided by the advice of relevant experts and in relation to how best to deal with the health threat,
We were guided principally by the advice of the Australian Health Principals Protection Committee, the chief medical and chief health officers from around Australia and the Commonwealth, and I think it’s fair to say for a range of reasons,
But the early decision to impose border restrictions in terms of non-residents who had spent any time of the previous 14 days in mainland China, not being able to come to Australia, and imposing quarantine requirements on Australians and permanent residents having spent time of the previous 14 days in mainland China, has demonstrably helped delay the spread of the virus,
Giving us time to prepare both in terms of the hospital capacity to deal with the potential inflow of patients, but also to prepare the risk management processes that would best equip us to save lives by suppressing, slowing down and suppressing the spread of the virus and helping to put, of course, the economic support measures in place.
While every single death is tragic and it’s one more than you would like to see, but again, I mean, comparatively speaking, comparatively speaking, the number of deaths in Australia is very low internationally. The number of infections is very low.
The number of community transmission is extremely low right now, and we believe that by and large, our strategy has worked. Now, I mean, this is not a perfect environment, you were presented with, we were presented with a rapidly evolving crisis situation.
We made the best possible judgments in the circumstances, guided by the expert advice. On balance, I believe
[President]
Order, Senator Cormann
[Cormann]
that we’ve made good decisions as a country.
[President]
Senator Roberts, supplementing question.
[Roberts]
Thank you, Mr. President. I acknowledge Senator Cormann’s statement, but he fails to acknowledge that the economy has been devastated as a result of the government’s strategy when other economies have not been devastated.
Minister, hasn’t your government’s COVID strategy put the Australian economy and many Australian small businesses and jobs at unnecessary risk and left us with a debt we had to have?
[President]
Senator Cormann.
[Cormann]
Thank you very much, Mr. President. It is certainly true that we were forced to impose significant sacrifices on many Australians. The restrictions that we had to put in place as a country on the economy in order to save lives by slowing down and suppressing the spread of the virus has imposed, of course, significant burdens on many businesses and on many working Australians.
That’s why we put in place the economic support package that we have, in order to provide, to keep as many businesses in business through the transition as possible, to keep as many working Australians connected to their employer during this transition as possible and to provide enhanced support to those Australians who, through no fault of their own, lost their job because of the Coronavirus crisis.
Now, you know, you can argue whether one decision or the other decision could have been made differently, but if you look at the outcomes, if you look at the actual outcomes, both on the health front and on an economic front, I think that Australia’s in a very good position, comparatively speaking
[President]
Order, Senator Cormann.
[Cormann]
to other countries around the world.
[President]
Senator Roberts, a final supplemental question.
[Roberts]
Thank you, Mr. President. Minister, everyday Australians want to know how the Prime Minister will ensure that if businesses do close or go into liquidation, that receivers and administrators will ensure that Australian jobs are preserved and that affected businesses can only be sold to Australians first and not be cheaply flogged off to foreigners.
[President]
Senator Cormann.
[Cormann]
Thank you very much, Mr. President. In relation to foreign investments, you’d be aware that the Treasurer’s put in place some temporary measures to ensure that Australian businesses dealing with the consequences and the impact of the Coronavirus crisis are protected as appropriate in the context of any attempt at foreign takeover.
But, you know, in a broader sense, in a broader sense, when we’re of course focused on doing everything we can to maximise the strength of the economic recovery on the other side, and then we also said that on the other side, in order to maximise the strength of the economic recovery we will need to rely on foreign investment into the future, to maximise our economic growth opportunity to the future.
The ABC has the time and the money to indulge their personal hostility to President Trump by using a video that sticks together two unrelated videos, that made it falsely appear that president was claiming George Floyd would be looking down from heaven, thinking President Trump’s job figures were a great thing to happen, when he was really referring to his improved policing fairness order.
Rather than needing more money, let me say that the cuts to the ABC need to go far further. When the ABC doubles down on their fake news by claiming the broadcast was a direct quote from the president, the cuts need to go far further.
When the ABC reports that U.S. employment fell when in fact employment rose by 2.5 million in a single month, the cuts need to go far further. The ABC are fake news and do not deserve the funding they fraudulently steal under false pretences.
Lib/Labs refuse to investigate our relationship with China – AGAIN. I would like to congratulate Liberal Concetta Fierravanti-Wells who crossed the floor to support the motion.
Transcript
[President]
Senator Roberts.
[Roberts]
Thank you, Mr. Acting Deputy President. As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, I would like to say that One Nation is very supportive of the motion that Australia’s relations with the People’s Republic of China, be referred to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee for inquiry and preparation of a report.
We wish to commend Senator Rex Patrick, for his seventh attempt to have this or a similar motion, sixth, I’m corrected, to have this motion progress. Mr. Acting Deputy President, Senator Patrick, I can only guess must feel like he’s on the set of Groundhog Day.
And on each of those occasions, Liberal and Labour Parties have joined to defeat all five of his previous attempts. I wonder because, if it’s because Liberal Andrew Robb, when he retired received an $880,000 salary after selling a lease to the Port of Darwin or after Sam Dastyari’s bills were paid by the Chinese or after Liberal Gladys Liu’s contradictions of fact about her associations with China that were never resolved or about Labor’s ICAC revelations in New South Wales.
We keep seeing Liberal and Labor come together to defeat even looking at this very vital, important relationship. It is imperative that Australia and China maintain a mutually respectful and beneficial bilateral relationship.
China is Australia’s largest two-way trading partner in exports and imports representing 24% of total trade with a value of $183 billion. That alone shows significant influence on Australia. Australia is China’s sixth largest trading partner and fifth biggest supplier of imports.
25% of Australia’s manufactured imports come from China. Thermal coal represents 13% of all Australian exports to China, and recently they tried to blackmail us about that. In more recent times, China has embarked on the One Belt One Road Initiative.
This is the Chinese government economic and strategic agenda where Eurasia, Africa and Oceania are more closely tied along two routes, one land, and one maritime. It is intended to facilitate Chinese economic and strategic domination of smaller countries along the routes, indeed Chinese control.
For Australia, we see the growing Chinese involvement in projects from Northern Australia, right through to Tassie, all providing little benefit to Australia, yet substantial benefits to China. We need to understand this relationship. We don’t just let them have an open door.
Other examples of Chinese involvement have been in the funding and support of local academic conferences and seminars. The negative aspects of the Confucius Institute are only just being realised as some universities remove them from their offerings.
Australia has been a destination of choice for many Chinese students to further their education in an Australian academic institution. It’s important to our economy. In 2018, there were more than 166,000 enrollments of Chinese students in Australia representing 43.3% of the total international student cohort heading for half.
A concern noted in some Australian universities is the potential dependence generated by full-fee paying international students on the overall money pool available to university budgets. Should those numbers suddenly diminish, it may leave some of our universities destitute and many university staff unpaid.
Since the COVID-19 pandemic, these concerns have come to fruition and Australian universities are bleeding financially. To make matters worse, the Chinese government has just warned Chinese students not to study or return to study in Australia suggesting they would face discriminatory attacks.
Australia has been a favourite destination for Chinese tourists and this is shown again by recent numbers. More than 1.3 million Chinese tourists visited Australia last year, representing 15% of our total visitors. One seventh, this is a clear positive for Australia.
At the same time, there has been a growing boom of Australian tourists around 700,000 heading for China. This may also change rapidly as the Chinese government has recently warned off Chinese tourists from visiting our country through recent directives to their people.
One of the ongoing issues of concern relates to regional and global security. The growing tensions between the United States of America and the People’s Republic of China in terms of imposition of trade tariffs is placing Australia in a challenging position, given the importance of Australia’s relationships with both countries.
More recently, the Chinese government has imposed an 80% tariff on Australian barley without explanation, and refused to accept meat from four of Australia’s major meat abattoirs, again, causing concern to Australian producers.
These actions by the Chinese government appear to be in retaliation for being called on by Australia to allow an independent investigation into the cause of the COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan China, what I’ve referred to as the Chinese Communist Party and the UN virus.
How dare we want an independent investigation? The Chinese still denying being the source of the outbreak of the worldwide pandemic remain uncooperative in dealing with this just as Liberal and Labour remain uncooperative in dealing with any, any inquisition or any inquiry into our relationship with China.
The Chinese actions and or inactions likely indeed certainly made the pandemic far worse than it could’ve been. And their behaviour in China is responsible for the loss of tens of thousands of lives. Indeed, hundreds of thousands of lives.
The views taken of China’s growing military influence in the South China Sea remain of concern to our most important ally, United States of America and therefore, necessarily of concern to our country as an established ally of the US.
Regionally, China is having a growing influence by funding infrastructure projects for some of the Pacific Island countries, and our and very near neighbour, Papua and New Guinea, just over the horizon from Australia. This runs the risk of changing the whole dynamic between Australia and our near neighbours.
Given the potential for military and strategic use of these bases by China and the potential for resource extraction at some future time, there is need to consider this factor when examining our relationship with China.
We already feel this is at home with the outrageous decision to lease the Port of Darwin a strategic Northern gateway to China for 99 years. This is the home of our local naval presence. What on earth was the government thinking?
I point to Dutton, Mr. Dutton, Mr. Hastie, Senator Kitching who have raised valid concerns, both Liberal and Labor MPs and senators just as Senator Patrick mentioned.
Indeed it was reported, Mr. Dutton was reportedly stated as in 12th of October, 2019, one of the Morrison Government’s most senior figures has taken a direct swipe at Beijing accusing the Chinese Communist Party of behaving in ways that are inconsistent with Australian values.
The key points emerged, Mr. Dutton said that federal government would call out state actors if it was in the national interest. Well, let’s see an inquiry, Mr. Dutton said he wanted universities to be free from foreign interference. So let’s see an inquiry into that foreign interference that he acknowledges.
The Home Affairs minister, a very powerful minister, senior minister also criticised China’s Belt and Road Initiative and defended the ban on using Huawei to help build Australia’s 5G network. So it goes on to say in a newspaper article, “Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton warned Australia “would call out” quote “foreign and interference “in universities, as well as cyber hacks “and theft of intellectual property, “insisting it was the right thing to do.
“It represents,” the newspaper said, “some of the strongest language “yet from a federal government minister “on threat posed to China.” But we need more than language, we need more than inferences, we need an inquiry into the relationship.
The Chinese Communist Party behaves in ways that are inconsistent with Australian values and Western civilization. Recently in Queensland, my home state, a university student was suspended for daring to make pro-democracy statements about the suppression of students and demonstrators in Hong Kong by the Chinese government.
The University of Queensland appears now to be an agent of the Chinese government, which seems to have bought out an Australian university and is enabled by the university to oppress an Australian student for standing up for democracy.
And when I get to the point of quoting Clive Hamilton, then we know things are serious because Clive Hamilton to his credit has written a book calling out the issues that we have with China, raising serious threats and concerns to our country and our country’s security.
My issue, I must make clear is not with the marvellous Chinese people, including the amazing Chinese community we have here in Australia. We have the Chinese influence from North Queensland through the gold rushes in the 19th century, right through to the Southern parts and Western parts of our country.
And they made a marvellous contribution. My issue is with the Chinese Communist Party. The Communist Party of China and the policies that are inconsistent with our own values. And they have undue influence in Australian politics, values communities, and way of life.
Human rights is an area where China and Australia have vastly different views. Australia is the democracy and a signatory to many international agreements that preserve basic human rights. China is a Republic following a communist regime that is very rigid.
It is a controlling machine with little room to question the state and having limited rights for the individual. Watch the demonstrations for freedom happening in Hong Kong to see how that goes down? Many Australians remember the appalling and tragic events at Tiananmen Square where many people’s lives were sacrificed in the name of democracy.
A prime minister cried over that. And understandably so yet we can’t even have an inquiry into that relationship with China. Tiananmen Square was not merely an incident as recently reported in the media. It was one of the earliest signs in the West of this serial breaching of human rights and suppression of their own people in China.
The detention of those whose views differ from the regimes is a continuing disgrace and worthy of further review. The government and Labor have sold out Australia’s inheritance. No wonder they don’t want us to have a review of this catastrophic relationship, potentially catastrophic relationship.
Will the Liberal Party and the Labor Party will a Lib-Lab duopoly look beyond their Chinese donations to their parties and do the right thing by our country? These actions by China would appear to threaten the relationship of mutual respect between the two countries and are worthy of inquiry.
Actions of Lib-Lab MPs in governments handing control of essential services like electricity for goodness sake, our ports, our food producers to the Chinese Communist Party is insane. Why are we doing it? And why aren’t we bothering to look into it?
These deals threaten our honesty, fairness, and humanity, and our national security. One Nation supports the call for such an inquiry into a nation exerting powerful influences over our nation with potentially far more powerful influences on our nation’s future and on our people’s security. Thank you, Mr. Acting Deputy President.
https://i0.wp.com/www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/China.png?fit=550%2C306&ssl=1306550Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2020-06-11 11:58:002020-07-09 12:24:23Lib/Lab refuse to investigate relationship with China
This afternoon I opposed a motion from the Greens asking for more money for climate research for the Antarctic.
Transcript
[President]
Senator Roberts.
[Roberts]
Seek leave Mr president, to make a short statement.
[President]
Leave is granted for one minute.
[Roberts]
Thank you Mr.President. One Nation will not be supporting this motion. The antarctic is a largely untouched and entirely spectacular natural wonder which needs and deserves proper scientific investigation and research.
Every dollar wasted on research in claimed human caused climate change in the antarctic, steals research grants from genuine geologists, paleoclimatologists, biologists, glaciologists and other scientists doing real scientific investigations. This chamber is the house of review.
When will the Senate demand a review of the science into claims of human induced climate change that has tax payers funding billions of dollars a year with no environmental or economic benefits?
Today, Mr. President, is day 278, since I first challenged The Greens and Senators Di Natale and Waters to provide the empirical data and framework proving carbon dioxide from human activity affects climate and needs to be cut and to debate me on climate science and on the corruption of climate science. Thank you Mr. President.
This afternoon Pauline and I spoke on her ‘Matter of Public Importance’.
“Allowing activists to breach COVID19 restrictions without punishment, even as the same restrictions are devastating jobs, businesses and lives, is a grave insult to law-abiding Australians.”
In addition to discussing the border closure in Queensland, Pauline used facts and logic to discuss the Black Live Matter Movement and Indigenous deaths in custody but was labelled by Labor and the Greens as a racist.
This tells me that they have no evidence to dispute her so they resort to lazy name calling.
My speech starts at the 5 minute mark.
Transcript
[President]
Senator Hanson.
[Hanson]
Thank you very much, Mr. President. The matter of public importance I’ve raised today, is based on our state government’s, in particular, the weak leadership of Queensland Premier, Annastacia Palaszczuk, for allowing activists to breach COVID-19 restrictions without punishment.
Even as the same restrictions are devastating jobs, businesses and lives. It’s a grave insult to all law abiding Australians. Last weekend, we saw tens of thousands of Australians pack city centres across the nation in protest of Black Lives Matter.
This protest started in the United States with the unnecessary death of a Black American, at the hands of police officers. No one could possibly condone the way in which George Floyd died. But what upsets me, is the attitude of many people black and white, that his death matters more because he is black.
And yet when a white 40 year old Australian American woman by the name of Justine Damond was shot, there was no protest. No one really cared, because she was white. George Floyd had been made out to be a martyr. This man has been in and out of prison numerous times.
He was a criminal, and a dangerous thug. George Floyd had a criminal history of breaking into a pregnant woman’s home, looking for drugs and money, and threatening her by holding the gun to her stomach. It sickened me to see people holding up signs saying, Black Lives Matter, in memory of this American criminal.
I’m sorry, but all lives matter. And if I saw signs being paraded on the day, that said that very thing, we wouldn’t be having this debate. More whites die in Australia and America in relation to deaths in custody than blacks, that’s a fact. But where’s the outrage for white people?
For the majority people in custody, it’s because they’ve broken the law. In other words, they’ve committed crimes against innocent people. To hear brainless comments from people saying that our indigenous Australians should not be locked up, as was the case put forward in 1995, is absolutely ridiculous.
Black and white Australians must face punishment, if they commit an offence or break the law. We cannot allow bleeding hearts, and those on the left to destroy the fabric of our society, and our freedom. The public sentiment calls for those who do the wrong thing to be held to account for their actions.
I’m used to seeing gutless behaviour from political parties. But what I have seen transpire over the last few days, the word gutless doesn’t even begin to describe it. When the severity of the Coronavirus pandemic became apparent, we asked Australians to make some sacrifices.
We asked them to stay at home, to shut down their businesses, we asked people to put their livelihoods on the line, for the well being of every Australian. And they’ve done that, much to their own demise. So after what I saw over the weekend, I don’t blame the 445,000, small mom and dad businesses in my home state for saying they feel betrayed.
And although there were just two new cases of Coronavirus across Australia, the Queensland Labour Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk, has kept our state border in lockdown, like a scene out of Germany in the 1960s, when they established Checkpoint Charlie.
And while Checkpoint Palaszczuk claims to be saving Queenslanders from the COVID-19. She authorises a mass gathering of 30,000 Black Lives Matter protesters in Brisbane, which flew in the face of all social distancing laws. Not one person was reported to be fined, or held to account.
Even when someone was filmed jumping on a police car, what an insult to law abiding Australians. We saw the scene played out across Australia, and every politician who turned a blind eye, should hang their heads in shame. People are furious and I don’t blame them.
They want to know how can this happen when our pubs, clubs, gyms, restaurants and businesses are still crippled by the full force of COVID-19 restrictions. They can barely have 20 people in a room. Doesn’t Queensland’s economy matter? Doesn’t Australia’s economy matter?
These activists should never have been allowed to march, and call Australians racist, especially when we can’t even hold a proper funeral for our loved ones. I say shame on the politicians who were too gutless, too scared of losing votes to stand up to the mob.
[Roberts]
Thank you, Madam Acting Deputy President. As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, of all colours. I reinforce the right of people to protest, and speak lawfully. We are in favour, in one nation, of freedom over control.
I wanna address straight away though, and make the comment that Senator Hanson condemned the killing of George Floyd in her speech. It stuns me that Senator Ayres, can so blatantly reverse Senator Hanson’s clear position. That is dishonest.
I wanna refer to Senator Rice who said quote, “Racism exhibited by Senator Hanson.” That too from Senator Rice is a lie. It is false, it is dishonest, it is cowardly. Stating accurate data as Senator Hanson did, in a coherent, logical argument.
Calling for all people, regardless of skin colour, or race to be treated the same under our laws, is the reverse of racism. It is fairness, it is honesty, it is care. Yet out of touch and ignorant policies, such as those of the Greens, artificially raising energy prices, and tossing workers out on the scrapheap.
That is what exposes the Greens fault lines, across our society. These policies of the Greens are hurting all people, and most savagely our most vulnerable and poorest people, black and white. Resorting falsely to labels, shows that Senator Rice, cannot count a senator Hanson’s data, and logical argument.
And I remind the Labor Party, that Senator Polly tweeted, their Senator Polly tweeted, “All lives matter.” And she was slaughtered by her own Labor politicians, she withdrew the tweet. So accordingly, I can conclude that in the Labor Party, all lives do not matter. Now let’s turn to the protest.
I draw people’s attention the protest of activists last week, in breach of the COVID-19 restrictions. They blatantly ignored the stated health concerns, and willfully broke the law. That is the issue.
The protesters have not been punished, yet our law abiding businesses continue to be punished, and livelihoods are being crushed, complying with these restrictions. Tourism and hospitality are key sectors in Queensland, shouldering the burden.
A burden that the Queensland Labor government placed, and continues to place to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in the community. Well beyond these border restrictions use by dates. The Palaszczuk Labor government, implicitly gave permission for 30,000 demonstrators to turn out for the Black Lives Matter protest.
Meanwhile, Queensland businesses stay closed, restaurants stay closed, and stadiums stay empty. And Premier Palaszczuk remains obstinate, and defers critical distance decisions to Queensland’s Chief Medical Officer.
To add insult to injury, emotional and financial injury, the Queensland Labor government has now callously stated, our border closures and restrictions, have not created financial hardship for our border closures, what? Meanwhile, these economies continue to unravel.
That is Labor’s arrogance, insensitivity, callous disregard for people, dishonesty, weakness, gutlessness, and fear. This cold hearted indifference to the people and businesses of Queensland, undermines any remaining confidence that business may have had in Premier Palaszczuk’s Labor Government, to respond to COVID-19 pandemic based not on data, but on hidden agendas.
This simply does not make sense, and it is not fair to allow businesses to continue to collapse due to government hypocrisy, and cowardice. We all know the reality is quite different, because while some people can congregate and demonstrate, people on the border continue to suffer.
Over the next three months, which is when Queensland’s Chief Health Officer believes it is realistic to open the Queensland border, the Gold Coast will lose a further $1 billion in revenue, on top of the existing losses.
Southern visitors spend three times more than intrastate travellers, so it is not enough to expect that Queensland travellers alone, will save the Glitter Strip economy. The Gold Coast Airport, traffic has fallen 99% this April and May, versus the same time last year.
This is financial hardship, and the Queensland Labor Government, still has not provided the data they relied upon to close the borders in first place. Lifeline is taking calls of distress from people. State and federal politicians who attended the Black Lives Matter demonstrations, broke the law.
The Palaszczuk Labor Government in Queensland has a duty of care to all Queenslanders, and Labor’s blatant hypocrisy needs to stop.
https://i0.wp.com/www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/MPIBordersProtestors.png?fit=548%2C307&ssl=1307548Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2020-06-11 11:45:002020-07-09 12:23:51Matter of Public Importance: Different rules for protestors
Government votes to give the United Nations a blank check to fund 5 international bureaucratic organisations.
Transcript
Thank you, Mr. Acting Deputy President. As a servant to the people of Queensland in Australia, I oppose this bill, One Nation opposes this bill. And we do so because we support and love our country, we support Australia. One Nation opposes any remuneration bill, that does not specify how much money is being spent. So do the taxpayers know right now, that this bill has no spending limit?
It’s an open check to the UN. Now I understand that the agreements we signed specify how total budgets are to be broken up amongst members, but not how much the total budget should be. How can we do this? There are five different UN organisations that are subject of this bill. The Global Environmental Facility, to take an example, has grown from $1 billion in the original agreement that we signed to $4 billion today.
The World Bank’s international Development Association, has gone from $24 billion to $35 billion in just the last two years, our money. This bill gives the United Nations a blank check, to waste taxpayers money and just hold their hand out for more. That is the UN hold its hand out for more. Mr. Acting Deputy President, I do not believe these organisations are good value for money.
In fact many are corrupt to the core. The World Bank’s International Development Association, spends 24% almost a quarter of its public funds, of its funds on public administration. A quarter blown out the door through administration, and 19% almost one fifth on subsidising renewable energy. That does not lift people out of poverty, because it’s too unreliable, it consigns people to poverty, that’s what it’s doing to this country.
What does the World Bank’s International Development Association spend on health, Mr. Acting Deputy President? Any idea? Just 8%, and on education? The one thing that does lift people out of poverty, also a measly 8%. Perhaps the International Development Association, could spend more lifting people out of poverty, if they were not spending $3.3 billion every year on administrative expenses, $3.3 million, including our cash.
The Asian Development banks, Asian Development Fund, has been providing low interest loans to lift people out of poverty since 1974, 1974. So in 46 years, their low interest loans, have not lifted the people of Asia out of poverty, but maybe the millions more we are about to give these Asian Development Fund will do the trick. Maybe the past 46 years, nothing much, but let’s see what happens.
Actually, Mr. Acting Deputy President, I’m not sure why we’re even funding the Asian Development Fund. They currently have $457 billion in outstanding loans, 457 billion. Now, I’m not suggesting that the scheme has been unsuccessful, the two largest recipients have done extremely well. India has $68 billion of those loans, and then now the world’s fifth largest economy.
Not because of the Asian Development Fund I might add. China has 62 billion of those loans, and is now the world’s second largest economy. I really wonder if they’re using that to buy up islands and make islands sorry, in the South China Sea. Perhaps if Australia can get some of these loans, we can stop Australia sliding out of the top 10 of world’s largest economies.
And I’ll remind everybody Australia, that early last century, in the early days of our federated nationhood, Australia led the world in per capita income. We were number one in the world. We now sliding out of the 10 heading to slide out of the 20. Oh, sorry, we’ve already slid out of the 10. The top 10 largest economies.
Australia should be grateful, that at least the Asian Development Bank is careful with its administrative expenses, only spending $1 billion last year on administration. I did note this though, the Asian Development Bank, Asian Development Fund, spent $25 million last year on salaries and expenses for the board of directors.
Their 12 member board of directors, $2 million per director seems a little high for unelected internationalist bureaucrats. Or as the prime minister said, unaccountable internationalist bureaucrats. When the Asian Development Fund, talk about lifting people out of poverty, I don’t think the Australian taxpayers would take that to mean, the Asian Development Funds Board of Directors being lifted out of poverty.
The Multilateral Fund for the implementation of the Montreal Protocol is another soak for taxpayer cash. Montreal Protocol on substances that deplete the ozone layer, yeah, that’s another title. Montreal Protocol on substances that deplete the ozone layer, was ratified in 1987. It requires countries to reduce levels of production and consumption of ozone depleting substances, according to an agreed schedule.
Now, I expect Australian taxpayers thought that the ban on CFCs in the 80s, was the end of the CFC crisis. I won’t even mention well I will mention, that the hole in the ozone layer stopped growing, before the CFC ban came in, and is better explained by natural variability, caused by variations in solar energy, than by world killer spray cans.
The UN though, has spent half a billion dollars a year, half a billion dollars a year, including our money on the Multilateral Fund for the last 25 years for nothing. In true Yes Minister style the Multilateral Fund has kept itself in line for taxpayer handouts by moving on to other substances that also have nothing to do with the ozone layer, and they’re in general use in situations where they’re very hard to replace.
And that includes refrigeration. At this rate, refrigeration will be relegated to the footnote of history. This won’t be a problem Mr. Acting Deputy President, because with renewable power, everyday Australians won’t be able to afford to run our refrigerators. Except perhaps for those UN Development officials with the $2 million a year price tag.
They should be kept, they should be keeping them more way nice and cold. Now let’s turn to the Global Environment Facility Trust. Mr. Acting Deputy President, the Global Environment Facility Trust, I saved the best to last. The Global Environment Facility Trust, was founded at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, to fund developing countries and countries with economies in transition to meet the objectives of the International Environmental Conventions and Agreements.
The $1.5 billion a year to keep the global climate warming con going, to enable the UN parasites to continue sucking our blood through deceit and lies. I noticed that a generous federal government, as increased their contribution, to the Global Environment Fund, Global Environment Facility from $23.5 million, just two years ago to $38 million last year.
That’s an increase of about 60% in one year. So in the World Wildlife Fund, is used as a source for global warming proof, remember, they funded by the Global Environment Fund. Funded, Mr. Acting Deputy President to keep the greatest scientific swindle in history alive. I’m going to discuss the bigger picture for a minute.
And don’t take my word for it. Mr. Richard Court, the Premier at the time of Western Australia, a Liberal premier Rebuilding the Federation. In this book on page eight, he details the process that the international is used to usurp our sovereignty, take over our governance and put in place UN regulations. And he deals with the UN or other unelected international body.
Our Constitution has been pushed aside, bypassed, by these criminals in the UN and other slick gangsters. And Mr. Richard Court, remember was the Liberal premier, he details that and he did so 26 years ago. I’ll now read from UN Agenda 21 booklet, the opening page of the introduction. This came about at the UN Rio Declaration, UN Rio Convention in 1992, which Paul Keating’s Labour Government signed on our behalf.
Quote, Agenda 21 stands as a comprehensive blueprint for action to be taken globally, from now into the 21st century, Agenda 21, by governments United Nations organisation, development agencies, nongovernmental organisations, and independent sector groups, in every area in which human activity impacts on the environment.
In every area in which human activity impacts on the environment. That is every area of our civilization. Continuing the quote, the agenda should be studied in conjunction with both the Rio Declaration, which provides a context for its specific proposals. Specific proposals, that’s where the nitty gritty is, and the statement of first principles.
It is hoped, it is hoped that the first principles will form the basis for a future international level agreement. And that is how they put in place global governance, and that is how according to Richard Court who was absolutely correct, that governance then takes over ours. We have the UN’s Lima Declaration signed In 1975 by the Whitlam Labour Government ratified the following year in 1976 by the Fraser Liberal National Party Government.
Destroyed our industry deliberately made it clear that they were transferring it. By the way, the United States didn’t sign it. Several major European countries didn’t sign it, and I don’t think Japan did. China did it was a beneficiary. The UN’s Rio Declaration in 1992, brought about the Agenda 21, which I’ve just discussed, which is now killing land use for all of our farmers, it’s killing employment, due to its so called sustainability.
And it’s killing governance, through the climate change commitments. Which are not commitments until it legislated through here or bypassed through here. The UN’s Kyoto Protocol in 1996, the UN’s Paris Agreement which is now decimating our industry and exporting jobs in 2015. Red type strangling our country, green type strangling a country, blue type strangling our country.
Blue type is UN type, oh, where does UN blue type work? Fishing industry, we now have 36% of the world’s marine parks in this country alone 36% more than one third. Where do we where do we import, we import now three quarters of our seafood from China. Sorry, three quarters of our seafood is imported, the greatest biggest exporter is China, which has a tiny coastline and 53 times the population.
So the UN doesn’t touch China, but strangles our industry, and we happily pushing jobs off overseas closing down industry, fishing included. Oh, and we can’t get permission to lift the damn level at war again but damn, because the UN doesn’t like it. Oh, and World Heritage Sites, there’s another way the UN controls us. And then we have the globalist mantra of interdependency.
And that’s what these bills push. Interdependency means we are dependent on another country, it means we are dependent not independent anymore. Australia used to be number one in the world, in terms of per capita income.
And then we started shoving all of our jobs offshore, and now we are dependent on other nations. To speak nothing of the corruption, that the UN has nothing of the accountability that it doesn’t have. As I said in my first speech in the Senate, in 2016, we need exit, Australia exit the UN. The best thing we can do for people in poor countries, is to kill the UN.
Get back to accountability and create the business environment not an environment for parasites. The best thing we can do for our country, is to restore our sovereignty, restore our governance and restore our independence. We need to not fund entities like the UN.
Instead look after ourselves, make yourself strong again, so that we can help neighbours as they need. Thank you Mr. Deputy President.
This morning I asked a number of questions of the Foreign Minister about the COVIDSafe App, its performance so far and necessary improvements.
Disturbingly, she claimed not to know how many times a COVIDSafe App user had tested positive with COVID19 and their tracing data uploaded. “We do not have access to that information nor should we.”
This afternoon I spoke on the governments COVIDSafe App and why I won’t be downloading it. I understand this Government feels the need to get this app in wide use and is prepared to write good data protection rules to achieve that.
I would ask the Government to show it really cares about the privacy of everyday Australians by revisiting the wider issue of Government use of private data.
Transcript
Senator Roberts.
Thank you Madam Acting Deputy President. As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia I have pleasure in saying that One Nation will be supporting this bill. That doesn’t mean that I will be downloading the app as I’ll explain.
But firstly, I would like to compliment the attorney general for the work that went into this bill. When Minister Hunt’s regulations came out to accompany that app launch, my office had a number of reservations about the level of security provided on the data.
This bill is needed to clear up those issues and it has done so. I will mention these in passing for the benefit of our constituents. Then I’ll move on to the security risk that the app itself still represents. I did have a concern that the government was giving bad players an opportunity to access data on the server without detection.
So there are two aspects to this Madam Acting Deputy President, there’s the app itself and then there’s the uploading of data to the server and the storing of that data and the use of that data. So I did have a concern that the government was giving bad players an opportunity to access data on the server without detection.
The decision to ask the Office of the National Data Commissioner, the commissioner, to overview data storage and access is a wise choice that addresses this concern. We are pleased with that. I was also worried about Amazon having access to both the client file, which is needed, to identify app users and the data file for COVID positive users.
This in effect gave Amazon access to significant personal information of app users. So let me explain a bit more. The separation now of the key file and the data access, the data file itself, under the supervision of the commissioner is the best way of making sure Amazon and the government keep each other honest, well done.
So in other words, we’ve got the government storing the data, we’ve got Amazon storing the data and the government having the keys. Both are needed. It can’t be separate. There is one reason not one party can have control. There is one issue here to do with the cryptography on the unique user IDs.
The open-source app that the COVID-safe app took as a starting point only requires 32 bit encryption. I would have hoped the app developers have taken that up to 128 bit and we’d ask the commissioner to consider that. Now let me turn to a number of security issues in the app itself that need to be addressed.
My office has put out a detailed sheet on this, so let me quickly mention them here and move on. The user ID can stick in the phone case causing a phone to broadcast multiple different user IDs over extended periods of time, which increases the chances of a phone being tracked.
Secondly, the COVID-safe app overrides phone security settings to use the same handshake address for a phone over the life of the app instead of changing every few minutes. This is a major security issue in the app. Thirdly, the COVID-safe app stores the make and model of the other phones it has matched within plain text where it can be easily read.
This approach is not necessary since this data could easily be trapped when the app is registered instead of storing it in the phone. Fourthly, if someone has named their phone such as, in my case Malcolm’s iPhone under some circumstances, this real name is what the other phone stores, app users who have named their phone with their real name may be exposing themselves to danger.
This results from the app using different ways of broadcasting data to maximise the chance of a match. This tells us that the developers have taken a deliberate decision to compromise safety to achieve the most number of matches. Fifth, data stored to the cloud is not deleted.
If a cloud service is used to backup or sync a phone, the COVID-safe app contact blog gets backed up to the cloud. This can be viewed by anyone with a sign in without the phone user’s knowledge. So I acknowledge that this bill makes the behaviour illegal, but not storing some of the data in plain English would have been a far better choice.
Sixth, an app running in the background will not match with another app running in the background on an iPhone. The app does not meet the government’s, number seven the app does not meet the government’s own standard for app accessibility.
WCAG 2.0 A. It fails accessibility tests on font size and field width and people with a disability the first people that need to get this app. So that was sloppy. Eight errors that were detected early in the release of the app have still not been fixed. Registration fails over WiFi, which is used in poor reception areas.
Bluetooth conflicts with external devices. Power management on an iPhone interferes with the app. 3% of older phones cannot use the app an alert message advising users that they have tested positive for COVID was being accidentally triggered. This was fixed by deleting the message.
So currently the app can’t be used to alert users when they actually do test positive. I must however compliment the government for the sudden concern about security. Where was the concern about people’s privacy in this government’s capture and use of the metadata of every Australian?
This government is storing texts, telephone call details, social media posts, websites visited and website comments for every Australian. At Senate estimates, we discovered that in 2019 there were 297,000 accesses of the metadata records of everyday Australians by 22 different government agencies.
How many of these accesses were accompanied by a warrant? Madam Acting Deputy President? None. Not one warrant. Now I understand this government feels the need to get this app in wide use and is prepared to write good data protection rules to achieve that.
So I’d ask the government to show it really cares about the privacy of everyday Australians by revisiting the wider issue of government use of private private data. Because the government’s track record on security is poor.
So as I’ve explained Madam Acting Deputy President, the shortfalls initially in our assessment of the app were to do with the data storage and access of that. That has now been resolved or will be resolved once this bill, Privacy Bill passes. However, the reverse is the case for the app.
We were originally happy with the app. We now see a number of flaws in it. So that leaves security issues in regard to people being able to track the phone owner, the phone user and that is not acceptable. I also wanna make a comment about the blackmail that’s being used by the government to push this app.
Minister Hunt said, “you wanna go to the 40?” “Download the app.” We’ve just heard here Senator Bragg saying, “this is that ticket to freedom.” No it’s not. There are far more effective tickets to freedom.
The Australian people have already shown a highly responsible approach to managing this COVID virus and we need to extend that. We need to stop the blackmail stop the control that is pushed over us. We need to get back to the freedoms that are inherent and being everyday Australians.
That is part of our birthright, part of our citizenry that we have, are entitled to rights and freedom. When we have permission from something to do something from a government that is not a freedom, that is the reverse because there is being withheld until the permission is granted.
So we need to rely upon the trustworthiness and the competence and a sense of responsibility of everyday Australians right around the country. So Madam Acting Deputy President, let me summarise by saying that this bill is necessary, and that is why One Nation will be supporting it. It is welcome.
Secondly, the app is not up to scratch and that’s why I won’t be downloading it. And thirdly, we need to get back to freedom properly.
Pauline and I spoke on our ‘Matter of Public Importance’ in the Senate: “When Australia restarts our migration program, we do not want migrants to return to Australia in the same number and in the same composition as before the crisis.”
Thank you, Mr. President. As a servant to the people of Queensland in Australia, I recognise that for 230 years, migrants of many races and religions, amazing people from all over the world, have joined us to build our beautiful country into something greater than when they arrived.
Now, though, we may be ending 2020 with 1.2 million Australians out of work, and 1.2 million temporary visas. For 20 years, Senator Hanson has warned that this day would come. In 2016, the Productivity Commission issued its 700 page warning on the imbalance in our immigration policy. Their report questioned our high immigration intakes strain on infrastructure, the environment, and quality of life in our capital cities.
The government ignored the Productivity Commission, why? To keep the flood of cut price workers coming in and to hide the data showing a per capita recession. That led to a long-term pain on infrastructure, housing, wages, state budgets.
The inevitable result of that is high unemployment, and more underemployment. Many of these unemployed Australians are migrants who came to contribute their labour, yet now languish on job seeker benefits they don’t want instead of going to the job they do want.
I congratulate one of my Labour colleagues, on finally seeing the light and joining us in speaking up on the issue of excessive migration and foreign workers. People might not be aware that on the 3rd of May in a Sydney Morning Herald opinion piece, Senator Keneally asked, “Do we want migrants to return to Australia “in the same numbers and in the same composition “as before the crisis?”
Senator Keneally’s answer was, no. The question now is, will Senator Keneally stand by her words, and will the Labour Party stand by their Shadow Immigration Minister?
[Sen. Hanson]
Very much Mr. Acting Deputy President. Well, One Nation submitted today a matter of public importance. And that wording was, “When Australia restarts our immigration programme, “we do not want migrants to return to Australia “in the same numbers and in the same composition “as before the crisis.”
Well, I have to admit they are not my words that was Senator Keneally’s words that she actually said in her statement. So it’s quite interesting that I’ve always said, there should be a debate on this. And I’m pleased to see that we actually got the call on this debate.
Now, forcing the debate on immigration and foreign workers is often a thankless task. No one knows this more than me. When you bring up facts, like more than half the nation’s population growth since 2005 has come from overseas migration, you get called a racist.
When you explain that, instead of flooding Australia with migrants to drive economic growth, we should be increasing productivity or investing in skills and training, people call you xenophobic. When you make common sense statements like Australian should get a fair go and a first go at jobs, people call you a white supremacist.
When you argue like Senator Keneally did the other day through you chair, that once Australia starts its immigration programme, migrants must not return to Australia in the same numbers and in the same composition as before the coronavirus crisis.
People even might accuse you of stealing One Nation policy. This is why today I want to say thank you to Labour’s Shadow Immigration Minister, Kristina Keneally, because I know she will not be getting much support from her Labour colleagues.
Reading through some of the recent comments made by Senator Keneally, I can only assume she has spent much of her time in quarantine, reading through my speeches from 1996, and taking copious notes. And because so much of what she said could have been taken from comments and arguments I’ve made over the past 24 years, perhaps Senator Keneally might want to make an admission here today that she’s a closet One Nation supporter.
I know it took Mark Latham a couple of decades to come out of the One Nation closet, but look how great he’s doing. He’s a new man, and loving it, so are these Australian people. Today I want to reassure the Senate that if Senator Keneally wants to cross the floor in support of her own comments, and finds herself thrown out of the Labour Party for breaking ranks, I will always have a position in my office for talented immigration speech writers such as herself.
I know I don’t often get a chance to congratulate my Labour Senate colleagues, but I always give credit where credit is due. And credit is due because by revealing herself as a covert to One Nation position on immigration, Senator Keneally has proven what I have long said is true.
So powerful are my arguments on immigration that even a staunch opponent of One Nation like Senator Keneally, will eventually be dragged to kicking and screaming to supporting cuts to immigration, cuts to foreign workers.
And I know there are many in the Labour Party and even more among Labour’s allies in the unions, who will agree with my position on immigration and foreign workers behind closed doors, but refused to speak the truth publicly out of fear of being called racist, or some other meaningless insult.
Right now due to the coronavirus, there are millions of Australians unemployed or underemployed. These are the people we need to look after, not foreign workers. This is the debate we need to have. We can’t go back to our old immigration programme.
Australians have a right to a job and a way of life that is not tied to welfare handouts. For decades, the coalition Labour Parties have used mass migration and foreign workers to artificially pump up economic growth. For decades, they have cynically used insults and slurs to try and shut down this debate.
For decades, they have refused to admit that this is creating problems with increased demand on our limited services, housing affordability, unemployment, and underemployment, wage stagnation, and congestion in our cities.
Senator Keneally and I have now warned each and every one of you that if we continue down the same path of the mass immigration and foreign workers, our economy will come crashing down. I moved a notice of motion today in floor of parliament.
And I’ll just read out some of the comments in this notice of motion. And it’s relying on high levels of immigration to boost population to fuel economic growth is arguably a lazy approach. Letting lots of migrants come to Australia to drive economic growth rather than increasing productivity or investing in skills and training is a lazy approach.
Instead of letting lots of migrants come to Australia to drive economic growth, we should be increasing productivity, or investing in skills and training. As at June 2019, there were 2.1 million temporary visa holders in Australia.
Australia hosts the second largest migrant workforce in the OECD, second in total number only to the US. One in five chefs, one in four cooks, one in six hospitality workers, and one in 10 nursing support and personal care workers in Australia hold a temporary visa.
Another one, when Australia restarts its migration programme, we must understand that migration is a key economic policy lever that can help or harm Australian workers during the economic recovery and beyond. And when Senator David talks about regional areas, it says here, we must also ensure that regional areas don’t only get transient people but community members who will settle down, buy houses, start businesses, and send the kids to the local school.
The whole fact is that the Labour said I was pulling a stunt no, all those words were from Senator Keneally, her article, that was Labour’s Shadow Minister for Immigration. And yet they said I was pulling a political stunt. No, I wasn’t pulling a political stunt.
The fact is that I called Labour out for what they are, nothing but pulled political stunt themselves, and Keneally was the one that actually made those comments. But Labour clearly does not stand by them, because they did not support them notice of motion today.
So who’s really pulled the political stunt? They use it when it suits them. As I said, high immigration props up our economy, has been used by both major political parties. And I will have my comment about Senator Faruqi today, and her comments said that One Nation stands by white supremacy.
At no point have we ever. And I’m sick of the lies put across in this chamber with regards to One Nation, and I’m going to call it out for what it is. And I encourage people to go to One Nation’s website, look at our immigration policy, which is non-discriminatory.
So that is purely lies. And to talk about immigration policy, we need the debate, Australians want the debate.
https://i0.wp.com/www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Screen-Shot-2020-05-14-at-9.32.57-am.jpeg?fit=1998%2C1124&ssl=111241998Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2020-05-14 09:32:002020-05-14 09:52:45Matter of Public Importance: Immigration Program
