Malcolm’s Official Speeches in Parliament

NATIONAL WATER REFORM: DEAD IN THE WATER

,

I spoke on the National water reform 2020: Productivity Commission draft report. There have been way too many desk audits from bureaucrats in the big cities, falsely declaring the Murray-Darling Basin Plan is working just fine.

I ask our rural supporters listening to this speech: when was the last time you saw someone from the Productivity Commission on your farm, asking you about how agriculture really works?

Transcript

In serving the people of Queensland and Australia, tonight I will review the National water reform 2020: Productivity Commission draft report, dated February 2021, a periodic review of the operation of the National Water Initiative. Put simply, this report is a celebration of profit over people. Let’s go through the many failings of this report.

Failing No. 1: the National Water Initiative has resulted in water being taken from family farms that were producing food and fibre for the world. Instead, large corporate agriculture purchased that water. The result has been a huge reduction in the number of family farms growing varied crops that support a wide range of local services and local communities. Commercial agriculture, also known as monoculture, uses large acreage devoted to crops like almonds, grapes or oranges. These properties are highly mechanised, reducing local employment to just a handful. Compared with family farms, corporate agriculture puts a fraction of the wealth back into local communities. The profits from corporate agriculture are moved to capital cities and then to overseas tax havens. There’s nothing in corporate agriculture for everyday Australians and their communities. The Productivity Commission celebrates this increased profit, even though it comes at a massive cost to employment and the health of regional Australia.

Failing No. 2: corporate agriculture uses its ability to run at a loss during the growth phase to purchase water at whatever price it takes. That’s forcing family farms out of the water market and ultimately off the land. This water is then moved downstream through natural constraints like the Barmah Choke in search of cheaper land. Water has to be stuffed through these constraints to meet downstream irrigation requests. The environmental devastation in the Barmah Choke, the Goulburn River and elsewhere in the connected basin is not included in the Productivity Commission’s calculations, yet protecting the national estate matters. The extra profits accruing to the big end of town must be balanced against the environmental damage that the creation of these profits causes. Money might be all that matters to the Productivity Commission. One Nation suggests it goes back and factors environmental damage into its calculations now, not at some point in the future. These natural constraints can’t wait for the next review in 10 years, as suggested on page 13, table 2. By then, the damage will be irreparable.

Failing No. 3: the Productivity Commission failed to quantify the risk to Australia’s economy from shifting agricultural production from diversified family farms to monoculture. For example, one negative movement in the price for almonds, for oranges or for table grapes—and that has happened before—will decimate billions of dollars of agricultural production. The Productivity Commission might not understand risk; One Nation does. Before the National Water Initiative corrupted the water market, Australian agriculture was resilient and diversified; not now.

Failing No.4: the report praises water trading as transparent. This government tried to introduce a transparent water scheme register in 2012, and it failed. Following this sole attempt, the Murray-Darling Basin Authority simply gave up. We do not have a national water register. Water trading is a feeding ground for ruthless water traders and speculators. If the Productivity Commission considers this system to be transparent, the Productivity Commission must be using X-ray glasses. It’s not transparent; it’s broken. Shortly, the Senate will be asked to vote on a bill to create the office of the inspector-general for water compliance. The key responsibility of this office will be to investigate water trading. Since its inception in 2007, the Water Act has provided for a water register on which to record these trades. No such water register has ever been created. The Liberal-National government continues to break its own laws. How does the inspector-general inspect water trading when there is no register of water trades? It doesn’t and it can’t. A complete, transparent, basin-wide water register is 14 years overdue and should be started immediately.

Failing No. 5: water licences, once taken from family farms through unequal economic power, are then being traded into different valleys. The Productivity Commission report applauds this. There’s no analysis in the report of the effect on the land of this changed distribution of agricultural production. Corporate agriculture is buying up marginal farmland cheaply, then miraculously it’s brought to life with water transferred from traditional agricultural areas.

This is not for cropping purposes where the land can rest. These new areas are being devoted to permanent plantings that require continuous watering and continuous run-off. The result is massive salination and environmental damage. This is a time bomb with a short fuse. Just a few years of this irresponsible agriculture due to unrestrained water trading and the issue of salination will be back in the headlines. At that time we’ll ask: how did this happen? Well, it happened because we listened to the Productivity Commission. We valued corporate profits and so-called market efficiency over careful custodianship of the land, custodianship that family farms practised for almost 200 years successfully.

Failing No. 6: custodianship of the land goes back much further than just 200 years, and the Productivity Commission has ‘provided some views on Aboriginal submissions for consideration by the committee’. Meaningless nothing words is all the Productivity Commission has to offer, because Aboriginal use of water can only be quantified by volume, not by utility. Soon after my return to the Senate in 2019, I flew over the whole Murray-Darling Basin and then toured the whole Basin, including the northern Basin, which is northern New South Wales and southern Queensland. In Wilcannia, I spoke with Aboriginal community leaders, Wadi and Eddie Harris. I thank Eddie and Wadi for explaining that their people are a river tribe. At the heart of their culture is their connection to the river, the Darling River. Kids used to spend the day in the river entertaining themselves in a healthy and constructive way. Sometimes there were fish or yabbies for dinner. Elders used to take the young ones and sit in the river and tell Dreamtime stories to encourage respect for themselves and their culture. When mismanagement drains the river, these things are not possible. River tribes can’t move downstream chasing the water; they need water where they are—there.

Wilcannia has the same problem many country towns have; their town weirs are insufficient. Wilcannia’s weir is in the wrong spot and frequently suffers blue-green algae blooms. The New South Wales government has been promising a new weir for 30 years yet still construction has not started. What a metaphor that is for the way in which the Nationals have abandoned their so-called country constituency. That’s why One Nation’s weirs for life program will build new weirs in country areas to increase water storage for human needs. One Nation listens to and engages with rural Australians, with family farms. I ask our rural supporters listening to this speech: when was the last time you saw someone from the Productivity Commission on your farm, asking you about how agriculture really works?

In summary, the Productivity Commission report into water policy does not consider the damage to rural communities. It does not consider environmental damage in a meaningful and responsive way. It does not consider the risk to Australia’s economy and exports of having billions of dollars of production tied to monoculture. It does not consider employment lost from monoculture. It does not consider the final mile of the financial transactions, where the money winds up and who pays tax on the income. It does not consider that water-trading accountability must have a transparent accurate water register. It does not consider custodianship of the land, in particular, salination from corporate agriculture’s permanent plantings in areas that are not suitable for permanent plantings. Finally, it does not consider or factor in the dislocation of Aboriginal river tribes for whom water is the centre of their culture.

There have been way too many desk audits from bureaucrats in the big cities, falsely declaring the Murray-Darling Basin Plan is working just fine. They are audits that cannot quantify environmental damage, damage to rural communities and deprivation of Aboriginal cultural use of water. These things are ignored, and a glowing report card issued—falsely. Meanwhile, the Nationals, the self-proclaimed party of the bush, is busy chasing city votes and saying ‘yes, Sir’ to the Liberals. Rural Australia can’t take this. Rural Australia has had a gutful. If the final report does not widen its calculations to include the full issues, One Nation will move to reject the report.

/by

GOVERNMENT VS. FACEBOOK – News Media Bargaining Code

,

I have little sympathy for big tech, who have been systematically censoring and silencing conservative voices for years.

However, the government has no place getting involved in a fight between the billionaires in legacy media and the billionaires in new media, yet it looks like that is exactly what our parliament is doing.

Transcript

The Treasury Laws Amendment (News Media and Digital Platforms Mandatory Bargaining Code) Bill 2021 is a masterclass in self-interest from both the tired old parties. As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, my view is that this bill should more rightly be called the ‘Getting the News Media On Side Before the Next Election Bill’. It’s apparently co-sponsored by every party in this place that seeks to replace data based policy, fact based policy, with cynical political expediency and public gutlessness. The government has no place getting involved in a fight between the billionaires in legacy media and the billionaires in new media, yet it looks like that is exactly what our parliament is doing.

One Nation spoke with Google and we spoke with them again this morning, and it seems now that this matter has been resolved in private meetings with the government where assurances were exchanged. So Australia is now governed behind closed doors, and the people’s house, the house of review, the Senate, is simply here to rubber-stamp what is put in front of us. One Nation does not own a rubber stamp. Our many reservations about this bill remain, even if Google has found a way to work with them. It’s true that there are no clean hands in this debate.

When Facebook banned conservatives last year, the Left, or the control side of politics, applauded the move as the legitimate actions of a private company. Left or Right are useless terms; really it’s control versus freedom. The Left likes to control. Yet, when Facebook banned Australia’s left-wing news media last week, there was outrage. ‘They’re a public utility; they can’t do this to us,’ shrieked the left-wing commentariat. Perhaps Facebook got the idea of deplatforming from Channel 7 and Channel 9, who deplatformed Senator Hanson last year. Conservatives must now deal with the political Left and with a left-wing media that is so convinced of its own moral superiority that the suppression of dissenting opinions is now celebrated. The Left, the control side, have clearly not considered the norms they have created to destroy their opponents and that those same norms could one day be used against themselves.

Google is right on board with this agenda, demoting conservative websites in Google search results simply because they advocate values that everyday Australians still share and value. YouTube has cancelled thousands of conservative channels and demonetised many more to suppress our voice. Google has decided that conservatives and patriots are the enemy of their brave new world and must be silenced. Google propaganda is clearly on display in image search, where they operate to portray our world not as it is but as they wish it to be and judge that it should be. That is not their job. It’s no surprise, then, that many Australians, especially on the conservative side, have left Facebook and Google. They had it coming.

Let me be clear: One Nation is a trenchant critic of the Orwellian nightmare social media has become. Our left-wing legacy news media, though, are no better. Some sections of the left-wing legacy media print very little material that could be described as journalism and a great deal of material that could be described as propaganda. The ABC spent two years conspiring with a foreign power to prepare a story that misled viewers as to the intent of One Nation’s visit to the United States. We demanded the raw footage from the ABC to prove the story was manipulated, and the ABC refused. Truth and honesty are strangers to left-wing controlled media in this country.

One Nation is concerned about the small businesses this bill will hurt. Two examples are the Glasshouse and Maleny Country News and the Koondrook and Barham Bridge Newspaper—small businesses that are resisting the takeover of country news by the media oligarchs and printing truth without fear or favour. These papers are not protected by this bill, which is only concerned with protecting large media organisations, who will receive extra money to continue their buy-up of country news. The National Party seem to be happy with this, once again turning their backs on their rural constituents to woo the urban bubble, marching to the Liberal wets.

Australian Associated Press—AAP, as most people would know them—are not protected by this bill, since their model is copyright based and this bill only concerns itself with financial outcomes. AAP, though, employ 80 staff, and their newsfeed supports 250 rural news organisations. The increased revenue from Google will remain with the legacy media services and not feed back to AAP. This might have something to do with the Murdoch news media’s new wire service, NCA NewsWire. They are just waiting for AAP to fall over so they can have a monopoly on news wire too. This will lead to a further consolidation of news ownership in Australia and yet more power to News Corp. Labor are supporting a process that will lead to more power for Rupert Murdoch. Kevin Rudd will be upset, won’t he! When The Betoota Advocate sounds more like a real news site than an actual real news site does, Australian media must accept they are the agents of their own demise.

Television is also on the nose. The highest rating program on television since the Sydney Olympics was the Australian Open final way back in 2005, attracting 4.3 million viewers. The MasterChef final in 2010 rated 4.1 million. In 2020, the MasterChef final rated just 1.6 million—60 per cent less. Tent-pole programming is attracting half the audience it used to despite Australia’s growing population. When Malcolm Turnbull destroyed community TV 10 years ago, it was to force their million-strong audience back to commercial TV. That strategy has been a complete failure and must be unwound.

Print newspaper circulations are also falling. Listen to these figures, Madam Acting Deputy President. Over the last 10 years, the Herald Sun has gone from 550,000 to 303,000, a 45 per cent fall. One Nation’s great friends at Brisbane’s Courier Mail, who bash us, are down from 211,000 to 135,000, a 36 per cent fall. And, wait for it, The Sydney Morning Herald is down from 210,000 to just 78,000. That’s a 63 per cent collapse.

With a lower audience, our conglomerate media companies are in search of more revenue and now want to take Google’s. Is this the business of the Senate? This bill demonstrates a complete failure to understand how the internet works.

Let me give you an example. A startup media company trying to establish a user base would submit their news stories to Google. In return, that company, that startup, would pay Google so much per click for every person who clicked through to the startup news site. News stories cost between 20 and 50 cents a click in the Google advertising network. Over the last 20 years, Google has sent seven billion visitors to Australian news sites who, in turn, have used this traffic to monetise by showing advertising and encouraging subscriptions. If the Australian news media were paying for their traffic from Google, this bill would run into billions. This relationship, though, benefits both parties equally. So the basic assumption of the bill that there is a power imbalance is simply wrong. It is false.

Legacy media could have opted out, at any time, simply by adding a metatag to their header advising Google and other search engine crawlers to not index a page, section or entire site. News sites are not using that metatag, even though they could, because they want Google to index their stories in order to send them more traffic. Rather than paying Google for that traffic, legacy media now wants Google to pay them. We’re only having this fight now because internet search has reached the top of the exponential growth curve. The market has reached maturity, as have digital advertising and online subscriptions. The $18 billion advertising industry is now equally split between digital and real world, with little opportunity for significant growth in a post-COVID economy.

To read this bill, one would think that real-world advertising and digital advertising were interchangeable. That’s nonsense. They’re not. Online advertising is suited to short messages. Legacy media is still king of longer format advertising. For over 200 minutes of advertising consumed online, 300 minutes is consumed in the real world. Both have their role in the economy.

As with any maturing market, Australian media has narrowed ownership so much it has effectively become a cartel. This bill represents nothing more than the billionaires in the media cartel thinking they have more power than the billionaires in the social media cartel, and, with an election looming, the government has decided to pick a side—because Mr Murdoch picks sides and decides who wins. That is the history of elections, in federal parliament, in Australia. The Liberals and Nationals want that, and Labor can’t afford to let them have it. That is a terrible basis upon which to formulate public policy and legislation. The Treasury Laws Amendment (News Media and Digital Platforms Mandatory Bargaining Code) Bill 2021 is a solution in search of a problem and should never have come before the Senate.

/1 Comment/by

Will the government make a commitment to actual IR reform?

,

Instead of propping up the industrial relations club with excessive, needlessly complex legislation, we need to simplify it. Regulations are written at the moment for the few people, employers and employees, who do the wrong thing.

They should be written for the majority of good people, the fine Australians, with severe penalties for the bad.

We need to turn it upside down: instead of penalising the 100 per cent with the ridiculous workplace arrangements, we need to penalise the real shonks, the real criminals.

Transcript

As an Australian who has been elected to serve the people of Queensland and Australia, I’m very proud to say that I have worked in many countries and I am genuinely proud of Australian workers. We have a phenomenal human resource in this country, unequalled anywhere in the world—the initiative, the hard work, the honesty and the integrity of workers in this country, and of many businesses in this country, especially small businesses, which are the engine room of our economy. More people are employed in small business than in any other sector of the economy. We need to get back the dynamism that has been lost in Australia—lost largely because of the decisions that come out of this building.

The MPI is ‘The Morrison government’s failure to address job security is giving companies that exploit workers an unfair advantage against honest employers.’Let me talk about the example in the Hunter Valley of the exploitation, the abuse and the casual discarding of people who are tossed on the scrap heap when they’re burnt out. Casuals have been exploited in the Hunter Valley by BHP, a major mining company, and Chandler Macleod Group, one of the world’s largest labour hire firms, an offshoot of Recruit Holdings from Japan, with the complicity of the Hunter Valley division of the CFMEU. It would not have happened without all three being complicit and working together.

But let’s go back to the root cause. The root of casualisation started in small business because employers were so confused by the complexity of hiring people and so confused by the complexity when there was a problem to discuss, so they went to employing casuals because it became too hard to deal with disciplinary issues in small business.

Quite often we see a small business having problems with an employee who’s stolen something from their business, and the small business owner then simply trying to address that ends up just paying $8,000 or $10,000. We heard last week from COSBOA, the Council of Small Business Organisations Australia, about some companies, some small businesses, paying $20,000 in shut-up money for problems to go away. One of the root causes of the insecurity in this country is the highly complex, needlessly complex and destructive industrial relations situation.

Then what we saw was large companies taking the small business model and using casuals for a ‘try before we buy’. In other words, they would watch the casual worker on their mine site, in their business, and if he or she came up with the goods then they would hire them. That has led to extreme abuse of workers in this country. It’s led to safety hazards, which I have complained about in my submission to the Grosvenor inquiry. But in the Hunter Valley it led to miners being intimidated and being threatened with the loss of their jobs if they reported safety incidents. How stupid is a company when that happens? They’re losing that prime source of information about their company.

I want to give Mr Bukarica, the national legal adviser for the CFMEU mining division, a huge compliment. In Townsville he had the guts, the integrity and the courage to acknowledge that the Hunter Valley CFMEU is part of the problem at those mines in the Hunter Valley because they enabled casualisation to happen. I also want to give him praise because he said that the CFMEU has not done enough for casuals. Indeed, they have caused the casual issue in the Hunter Valley and the casual abuse of casuals. And he’s admitted that his union will need to do more about it.

So what we see is the mess that’s been created in the past by labour laws that have become far too complex and by the Liberals not addressing this issue in 2016 when they should have. Casuals show us the pain of people at work. Casuals are also a sign of the failed industrial relations situation—no getting away from it. What the government is doing in its latest industrial relations legislation, proposed to come before the Senate next month, is shifting the liability for that mess from large business to small business. They’re helping a couple of large companies manage their risk.

We’ve approached this differently. We’ve gone out to listen. We’ve written to 80 different organisations—employers, employee groups, unions, union bosses, welfare associations, organisations, small business groups—and we’ve asked them for their advice, their views. They have come and given us their advice. They said no-one else has invited them to do that; we’re the only ones. In addressing this legislation, we have three aims that ensure security for Australian workers, whether they be in small businesses or large businesses, and security for small businesses and large businesses.

Our three aims are to protect honest workers, to protect small businesses and to restore Australia’s productive capacity. We see the employer-employee relationship as fundamental. It is the primary workplace relationship, and that’s what’s needed to empower workers. We’ve got the best workers in the world. What’s needed is for employers and employees to work together—empowered employees and empowered employers—because that is the only way to create jobs. Government doesn’t create jobs. As much as the Labor Party and the Liberal Party talk about it, government does not create jobs. Honest workers create jobs. Small businesses create jobs. Large employers create jobs. The government creates the environment. Labor and Liberal governments have stuffed this country’s workplace environment.

The Morrison government talks about security and recovery from COVID. How can that be possible when we’ve destroyed our electricity sector? How can it be possible when we’ve got one of the worse tax systems in the world? How can it be possible when we’re not supplying the right infrastructure? How can it be possible when we haven’t got the skills development needed? How can it be possible when we’ve got overregulation? Just go and talk to people, not only small or large business employers but also employees, who are sick to death of energy prices, which have gone from the cheapest in the world to the highest in the world under this government and its predecessor, the Labor Party.

Instead of propping up the industrial relations club with excessive, needlessly complex legislation, we need to simplify it. In fact, I put that to Peter Strong when he was in my office last week. I said to him that regulations are written at the moment for the few people, employers and employees, who do the wrong thing. They should be written for the majority of good people, the fine Australians, with severe penalties for the bad. We need to turn it upside down: instead of penalising the 100 per cent with the ridiculous workplace arrangements, we need to penalise the real shonks, the real criminals. Instead of assuming people are bad—employees are bad, employers are bad—we need to free people to produce. We need to penalise and handicap those who deserve it. That’s what we need in this country: empowering, not frightening.

What we see at the moment is an IR club of big employers, big industry associations, large unions, employee consultants, employer consultants, industrial relations consultants and, above all, lawyers. Again I come back to the ETU legal adviser in Townsville, Michael Wright, and Mr Bukarica from the CFMMEU, who both said that we have far too many lawyers involved in industrial relations and that’s why it’s a mess. They both said they want fewer lawyers, that they want to remove the lawyers. Full credit to the CFMMEU mining division and full credit to the ETU for saying that. The big companies and the crooks are the ones who do the best out of the industrial relations club, because they have deep pockets and they can afford to fund the lawyers and others who live off the backs of Australian workers.

What we need to get back to is a simple workplace relationship. Will Labor make a commitment to properly and honestly reform IR? Will you? Will the Liberal Party and the National Party make a commitment to properly and honestly reform IR, to free people so that they’re free to compete with the people in Korea, China, India, Africa, Malaysia and Singapore? That’s the way to get security of employment: by empowering people. One Nation is the party of energy security and affordability. One Nation is the party of job security.

/by

Government admits power grid is critical after influx of renewable energy

,

My motion successfully carried today in the Senate.The government has admitted they know that our energy grid is at a critical status because of the influx of renewable energy into the system. Despite this, they continue to chase stupid green-left policies for solar and wind that will destroy the country without reliable, coal fired power.

Motion: The Senate-

  1. notes that:
    1. the Energy Security Board stated in January 2021 that the system security of the power grid is at a critical status after the influx of renewable energy into the system,
    2. in February:
      1. the River Thames froze for the first time in over 50 years,
      2. hundreds of United States cities recorded their coldest temperatures in decades,
      3. wind turbines in Texas froze solid, and
      4. solar panels in Germany were blanketed in snow,
    3. naturally variable weather events place serious strain on power grids,
    4. relying on weather-dependent power generation to save us from weather events is a recipe for power failure, and
    5. reliable baseload power is essential to provide safety and security for Australians; and
  2. calls on the Government to urgently commence the construction of reliable, baseload power generation.

https://parlwork.aph.gov.au/motions/825f4de4-5172-eb11-b861-005056b55c61

/by

Franchising Laws Amendment (Fairness in Franchising) Bill 2020

,

Small franchisees are often taken advantage of by large corporate franchisers. They are in a much less powerful position and their fights look like David vs. Goliath. I congratulate Senator O’Neill for her leadership on this bill and actually wanting to protect small business owners, unlike many of her “woke” colleagues in the Labor party.

Transcript

As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, I note that Senator O’Neill has taken on a real David and Goliath battle, and she’s taken it on well. I point to one corner, in which we have General Motors, one of the world’s largest corporations, which ruthlessly abandoned its franchisees in this country. It did it without any consideration, and the government stood by and watched. Families had put their businesses together over decades.

There had been blood, sweat and tears, and lots of hard work. Small to medium businesses had ploughed so much work into their businesses as well. And what did we see? General Motors just divested themselves of them. They were tossed aside on the scrap heap, and the government delayed. It promised to address this issue, but still it failed to do so.

No wonder people are feeling concerned, afraid, vulnerable and very worried at the hands of large multinational companies with huge imbalances of power. General Motors is treating their franchisees, the Holden dealers right across this country—small businesses, often with decades of history—like dirt.

Now we have Mercedes lining up to do the same, as are Honda and Renault. Honda, a company that has worked with its dealers so admirably around the world, is now looking to quit its dealer network as well. These companies are stealing databases that have been built up over decades.

I turn to the Queensland rural dealerships. Look at our state. It’s the most decentralised of any. It’s the only state with more people in the rural areas than in the capital city. Those dealer networks need support. But it’s not just car dealers; it’s also boat dealers, marine dealers, water sport dealers and motorbike dealers.

And it’s not just wheeled dealers; it’s people with small business franchises right across this country. What they need is support. They need fairness and they need support for locals. They need some security and some certainty. There are 60,000 workers in the auto sector alone, according to Senator O’Neill, and that includes many, many tradesmen and many apprentices. There are good people and local community businesses.

I want to commend Senator O’Neill, because Senator O’Neill came to us to explain her bill. She asked for our support. She did her research. She was willing to be on call at any time to answer questions and to put her staff on call. I acknowledge that—through you, Deputy President—to Senator O’Neill. I appreciate it and I endorse her work. She works. If other Labor senators had the same enthusiasm in general as Senator O’Neill then we’d be able to work much, much better with them. We commend Senator O’Neill for the way in which she came to us freely to offer her bill.

Senator O’Neill, sadly, is one of the very few real Labor senators in this parliament. I know that at least 20 per cent of Labor senators are upset with the way Labor has turned against workers, abandoned workers, in favour of woke policies supporting the globalists’ agenda. Look at things like taxation policy. Look at things like energy policy destroying manufacturing. The Liberals and Nationals are similar; they’re just a matter of grades apart.

The Labor Party’s policies and the Liberal-National coalition’s policies are abandoning manufacturing. They’re swallowing the UN dictates: the UN Kyoto protocol, the UN Paris Agreement—which is not really an agreement—and, going back to 1975, the UN’s Lima Declaration. They all sell out manufacturing. They sell out, to some extent, all industry, including agriculture. What about the so-called free trade agreements? We want, instead, fair trade agreements.

Labor’s support for free trade agreements means that they’re selling out workers and Australian employers, small and large. There are the tax policies, as I said, that let foreign multinationals off the hook. The Labor Party in the era of Prime Minister Bob Hawke let them off the hook with the petroleum resource rent tax. A few Labor senators stand up for workers, but, sadly, they’re in a very small minority.

Look at pay rates, which are stagnant because of the rising immigration we had until COVID. Rising costs and stagnant pay mean living standards are falling. Look at the oversupply of workers. We have an oversupply of workers, which is driving wage rates down. Look at the pressure on housing, driving housing prices up.

Look at the pressure on infrastructure in this country because the labour is tied to this large-country policy of letting in many, many immigrants, far more than we need. Look at the gender bending, the indoctrination in schools and the trendy virtue signalling that is taking over the Labor Party. We have good senators, like Senators Sterle, Farrell, Gallacher, Sheldon and others, who are great to work with. They support workers. They’re honest people. They are saddened that their Labor Party has abandoned them; that the Labor Party has swamped them in woke policies.

While Senator O’Neill supports real Australian businesses, her party has largely abandoned workers. Look at the energy sector. Coal has been tossed on the scrapheap by Labor’s virtue signallers. Look at industrial relations, where Mr Joel Fitzgibbon has abandoned and neglected the abused and exploited workers in the Hunter Valley—workers that I had to come in from Queensland to support, with Stuart Bonds, our candidate in the Hunter.

They are selling out our sovereignty to the UN globalists. These are the things that Labor now stand for.

As Senator O’Neill has shown leadership in working with all the parties on the crossbench and the Greens—Senator Whish-Wilson has complimented her, and rightly so—we would expect that Labor would have a reasonable accommodation in play. We would reasonably expect that the Labor Party would have a more favourable attitude to Senator Hanson’s bill to get foreign companies to pay tax on petroleum resources. Yet Labor denied support to our bill. When we asked them why, there was just a blank stare, no reason or justification.

I will finish talking about this bill by emphasising the two major benefits. It brings compulsory arbitration to rectify the imbalance between those who have enormous power, like General Motors, and the franchisees who have limited power. And there is the massive increase in penalties, all justified to restore some balance in power. However, the Australian Financial Review rightly said today that this is just plugging a hole in the dike.

Labor has lost its way in policy. Labor has lost its way in our Senate. One Nation reiterates again that we would support all parties, yet we expect parties to work with us and to give us a fair go. I support this bill. I thank Senator O’Neill, again, for her leadership in reaching out to me and my office.

We will work happily with Senator O’Neill. I remind the Labor Party that if they ever get back into power they will need to work with us. We will be happy to work with people like Senator O’Neill, Senator Farrell, Senator Sterle, Senator Gallacher and Senator Sheldon—these people, sadly, are in a minority. We will happily work with Senator O’Neill and her like.

/by

Greens live in a parallel universe

,

Transcript

As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, I need to say clearly that the climate change agenda seeks to mislead well-meaning Australians with pseudoscience to introduce and hide an economic and social agenda that Australians would otherwise reject. Senator Rice’s motion does mischief. Australia does not have a carbon budget. The Senate has not voted for a carbon budget. The coalition’s supposed climate action plan cap that underpins government policy does not include a carbon budget.

Our international agreements do not include a carbon budget. The only place one can find a climate budget is in the Greens’ own little parallel universe, where the aspiring elites in the Greens are in control of an economy that is not only green but rancid. The devastation that will be caused to our economy by the measures the Greens propose in order to limit carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will destroy our economy, destroy jobs and steal opportunity from our children.

The insult to real scientists is that Senator Rice calls climate change a science based agenda. No, it’s not—definitely not. The argument in favour of a looming climate disaster is based on unvalidated computer models—nothing else. These are the same models that have failed repeatedly and miserably to predict temperature movement.

The largest single driver of climate is the sun, which has moved into a solar minimum that is tracking the Dalton minimum, when the Thames froze over and crops around the world failed. In fact, crops are failing now. Northern China is experiencing widespread hunger, as exceptional cold destroyed the winter cereal crop. Australia, on the other hand, has moved from a dry cycle to a wet cycle. This is not climate change; it’s a natural cycle.

I have challenged the Greens on many occasions to prove their position with empirical scientific evidence—data—and they have repeatedly been unable to. Indeed, today is day No. 502 of my challenge in the Senate to the Greens to simply provide the scientific evidence for their claims and for their alarm and to debate me on the science. Look at them all, looking at their phones; they won’t look at me. I challenged the current Greens Senate leader 10¼ years ago, and nothing.

That is more than a decade, and nothing. I notice that world-renowned scientist Tony Heller, who relies on solid data, has today challenged the Greens to a debate on social media. That’s not going to happen either. And now we see the Nats. Well, that’s another joke. So the Greens have no carbon budget and they have no idea.

Subject MPI: https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Hansard/Hansard_Display?bid=chamber/hansards/0cd97387-e8a2-46f1-92cb-16f6be35aee2/&sid=0148

/by

Greens anti-development Motion – South Australia Quarry

,

Transcript

One Nation will not support the motion. Senator Hanson-Young’s motion proposes to kill off jobs in South Australia. South Australia is a low-opportunity economy because the Greens have stopped billions of dollars of investment in ecotourism, agriculture and mining.

The Greens support for wind farms has endangered species of large birds drawn into the turbine blades and their land management policies directly contributed to the catastrophic loss of millions of native animals in the Kangaroo Island fire—millions!

The Greens are no friend to Australian animals, no friend to the poor who need jobs and no friend to mum and dad farmers who produce food for us to eat. It will be a matter for the government of South Australia to assess the quarry expansion proposal.

Motion 953: https://parlwork.aph.gov.au/motions/e16ad7ce-e361-eb11-b85f-005056b57e20

/by

Native Title Legislation Amendment

,

Yesterday I spoke on an amendment to the Native Title legislation. While I support anything that removes complexities, the government still hasn’t promised to give farmers restoration or compensation of their property rights.

Make no mistake, farmers property rights have been stolen by governments to comply with international agreements like the Kyoto Protocol and Paris Agreement. They must have restoration or compensation.

/by

Coal LSL and mining entitlements fraud – Adjournment Speech 2 February 2020

,

I spoke on my ongoing investigation into the case of mine worker Simon Turner. A huge abuse has happened here and government agencies have done nothing.

Transcript

As a servant of the people of Queensland and Australia, I have a duty to raise and fix issues that are both hurting and concerning everyday Australians.  As a Senator I work for the people.

Today, I raise a matter of great concern for everyday Australians – particularly our hardworking coal miners.

Australian workers are feeling afraid for their jobs, for their livelihoods, for their future. Workers need fairness, integrity, trust and accountability.  I’m concerned for the many workers and businesses small and large that have suffered from state and federal govt COVID restrictions.  Business leaders and workers are all looking for direction from this government, yet at the same time a government authority is doing the wrong thing and abusing workers.

What I’ve witnessed since coal miner, Stuart Bonds and I took up the cause of the exploited, abused and discarded Hunter Valley casual coal miners, is a mass of evidence pointing to potential systemic failures and possibly corruption inside a government agency. An agency that Hunter Valley CFMEU bosses and Minerals Council of NSW executives jointly govern and direct.  We Australians cannot afford our own government to continue shonky behaviour at a time when we should be spending our money wisely.

Thanks to Stuart Bonds’ voluntary help for abandoned workers like Simon Turner and others the Coal LSL scam was uncovered.  Simon Turner and many workers wrote for help from their local MPs including Joel Fitzgibbon six times and to this day Joel Fitzgibbons has ignored their letters. Six times.

Joel Fitzgibbon has been the member for Hunter since 1996 so it’s surprising that he does not know that coal miners are the key to this area’s future.

The agency involved is the Coal Mining Industry (Long Service Leave Funding) Corporation – better known as ‘Coal LSL’. An Australian Government corporation established to regulate and manage long service leave entitlements on behalf of eligible employees in the black coal mining industry.

What I hear is that governance isn’t just lacking, it’s absent.  I’m yet to hear why causals get a different LSL rate to permanents on the same rosters, same work.

As an example, Coal LSL’s system seems incapable of checking whether an employee actually receives their correct long service leave entitlement. Coal LSL just accepts an employer letter and pays the employer. No validation or checking of payments to entitlements to actual payment to employees.

A recent analysis of information that Coal LSL themselves provided reveals evidence of duplication, even triplication, of transactions paid to employers. The reporting recently provided to me is unclear[1]. Levy reimbursements during 2018 include a category for details “Not readily available”. For example, the $264,000 of refunds, not reimbursements, paid out from July 2017 to November 2018. What are these refunds, where’s the transparency?   Coal LSL makes lump sum payments that, again, make reconciliation complex. For example, one of BHP’s OS entities in the Hunter Valley received $187,881.77 in a single transaction in May 2020. For who?

It seems that Coal LSL may not be able to confirm employees are even real people as they do not collect ABN or tax file numbers. They simply get a name and a date of birth. They’re operating in the dark ages and need a modern system to prevent fraud?

In some cases we have heard of companies in Singleton being reimbursed for long service leave even though they do not work in coal mining. In one case, Coal LSL paid reimbursements totalling approx. $57,000 to the wife of the owner of a Queensland company with no state office. Why?

We have learned of an employee not receiving on-boarding information about the Coal LSL scheme, particularly in regard to the employee option to opt out of the scheme and save money. In one case recently a coal miner reported that Coal LSL debited his entitlement for 250 hours of long service, when he actually had not taken leave from his employer. Where’s the governance?

Concerns have been expressed to me that Coal LSL’s current processes might enable a bogus company to register and then to possibly launder money through Coal LSL and then reclaim the funds ‘cleaned’ and available to be transferred to criminals. Where are the checks in the system?  The CEO whose annual remuneration is a staggering $430,187 and her Governance Officer have clearly been asleep at the wheel.

I have personally challenged Coal LSL many times in Senate Estimates and even they do not understand how entitlements are accrued, invested, reconciled and paid to individual coal miners. The CEO could not provide a satisfactory response to a simple question in regard to how Coal LSL accounts for monies paid in and monies paid to employees.

The question is that if bogus companies have been paid in the last seven years, then how could this not be picked up? I’m informed that Coal LSL takes registered companies at their word. That has already led to Coal LSL admitting serious errors in miners’ accounts and entitlements.

As Coal LSL has revealed in senate estimates, it has not listened to the complaints of many coal miners who’ve found discrepancies in their entitlements. Once raised, Coal LSL is slow or unresponsive.

I encourage all coal miners to check that Coal LSL has correctly stated their entitlements so they’re not ripped off. Simon Turner, an exploited Hunter Valley coal miner is a case in point where, after years of requests and complaints, Coal LSL took the word of his rogue employer, Chandler Macleod. Over solid evidence and over Simon’s legitimate requests for a fair go.

Coal LSL is lax at informing employees of their options with many casual miners not told that they’re entitled to choose to not contribute to the scheme and to instead take their employers’ contributions as cash in hand. Let’s face it, at the moment Coal LSL receives the employer contributions for many casual coal miners who it never has to pay out if employees do not stay for the eight year qualifying period. Where does this mountain of cash go and how is it accounted for? What I do know is that many casuals would be better avoiding Coal LSL.

There are many, many examples of Coal LSL failing in its obligations and failing to have appropriate checks and balances to verify that employees are getting their entitlements.

For all we know there may be systemic corruption on this governments’ watch. Have unaccountable union bosses and Minerals Council of NSW executives on this Morrison government authority lined their pockets using bogus companies at the expense of coal miners throughout Australia? We just do not know? Clearly, it’s time for change.

We’re talking about an authority that thousands of workers rely on to protect long service leave entitlements. An authority with a culture biased towards pleasing the employer not on protecting and being accountable for employee’s entitlements. This is not the Coal LSL clerical staff’s fault. It’s the Board and management who must stand up and be held to account. Governance does not exist and the culture of Coal LSL is not solutions or customer focussed. Clearly, it’s time for change.

For too long, Coal LSL has operated as a rogue government authority. Until I brought them before Senate Estimates they were never called upon to explain their actions.  It was the suffering of exploited and abandoned workers like Simon Turner that put a spotlight on Coal LSL and its culture that ignores abandoned workers. Clearly, it’s time for change. And it must be now.

Today, Stuart Bonds and I are strongly advocating for change in Coal LSL and a reconciliation of all accounts and entitlements to ensure that workers and employers are not being ripped off.

Stuart Bonds and I pledge to work for justice for workers hurting from the actions of unthinking, uncaring, unaccountable government authorities like Coal LSL. Authorities under the joint control of shadowy union bosses and a Minerals Council acting for uncaring mining conglomerates. The same mining companies and union bosses that enabled the exploitation of casual coal miners in the Hunter Valley.

Clearly, it’s time for a change. Coal LSL needs to be taken out of the hands of self-interested parties. Coal LSL management needs a broom put through it. A change to build an open, honest transparent, accountable culture to protect the entitlements of everyday Australian workers.

I implore all workers and everyday Australians – rural and city – to vote with your feet. Please go and tell your local union branch, member of parliament and senator that you expect that workers’ rights and entitlements to be protected.  Tell Joel Fitzgibbon that the time for talk is over and it’s time for action. Tell Joel Fitzgibbon, the NSW Minerals Council and the CFMEU Hunter Valley union bosses that Coal LSL like all government bodies must demonstrate the highest standards of integrity, to protect workers’ interests, to behave with common sense and transparency. Workers deserve integrity and support.

/1 Comment/by

Cashless Debit Card Explanation

,

The Cashless Debit Card is controversial. Last week One Nation voted to extend the trial of the system. Controversial because activists, Labor and the Greens are ignoring the facts and confusing the public with mistruths.

Firstly, it’s not a cashless program. Recipients still have between 20% and 50% in cash. Secondly, this is a program that was requested from communities to help protect children and families. This system stops people from using their entire taxpayer funded welfare payments on alcohol, gambling, drugs and cigarettes.

Reports from those on the system and their communities are already claiming that there are less hungry children and less violence and crime. This program protects children and families and taxpayer welfare payments. There are no plans to extend this program to the pension. This is a scare campaign by the left. And we wouldn’t support it anyway.

Transcript

Hi, I’m Senator Malcolm Roberts, and I’m in Parliament House, Canberra. And I want to discuss the cashless debit card or it’s actually the less-cash debit card because it still comes with cash. Why are we doing it? And why do we support the government’s trial? Because it’s all about kids and families, protecting kids and families.

Making sure that kids get a belly full of food and it’s not just consumed, the money is not just wasted on alcohol and booze from their parents. So it’s about the future of our country because kids learn better at school. They develop better physically when they’ve got full bellies and not starving. It’s about kids and families.

Making sure that the money from taxpayers goes to people who deserve the welfare. So that leads me to my second point. And that, that as a Senator, I have responsibility not just to the people who need welfare and support, but to the people who pay for the welfare and the support, the taxpayer. So we have to make sure that the taxpayer’s money provides value for the taxpayer.

‘Cause it’s a lot of money for taxpayers, who have worked hard to get that money and to see it wasted on booze and drugs and gambling and cigarettes, is just not on. The third thing is that, I hinted to it earlier. It’s a less-cash card, it’s not a cash-less card. There’s cash still involved, the proportion of cash varies from 20% through to 50%, depending upon the community.

This is a trial and they’re trialling many different parameters. And that means that as people learn from the trial, and the trial has now been going for a few years. As people learn, they tweak the trial because they learn from their mistakes and let’s remove the mistakes, and they see other opportunities. And so they wanna make sure that people benefit from that.

And remember, the less-cash card came out of requests from communities where there was massive abuse of kids and families. Waste of money, tearing up the communities. Those communities approached government and wanted help. Liberal National Party Government, and the Labour Party Government under Gillard.

So this is about protecting our future, and protecting taxpayers, and above all, protecting kids. So it is a difficult issue, an emotional issue. It’s been distorted by various people using lots of lies and slang, but it is about protecting kids, protecting families, and protecting taxpayers, and making sure that Australia gets value for its money.

/by