I talked to Paul Murray about restoring manufacturing in Australia so we can defend ourselves against China and how the ABC’s bias has become palpable.
SIMPLE QUESTION: HOW MUCH DOES THE U.N. COST AUSTRALIA?
I could not believe no one in government could give me a total cost on what we pay to the UN, its subsidiaries and how much we spend in complying with their dictates.
Transcript
[Senator Roberts] And thank you all for attending today. My questions are about the United Nations. So I don’t know who will answer those questions. In total, how much does Australia pay to the United Nations or subsidiaries each year, in dollar terms? Do we need to take that on notice?
[Minister Payne] No, I don’t think we do, I think someone’s coming down from upstairs. We will unfortunately get into questions of definition about which subsidiary agencies and all the rest of it, we may need to… in order to give a completely comprehensive answer, we may need to take it on notice, that there’ll be a number of things that we can say that are general level that I hope will be what you’re after Senator.
[Senator Roberts] I’m after a comprehensive level, yeah.
[Minister Payne] Well if you need comprehensive Senator, I’ll ask officials to do their best at the table.
[Senator Roberts] Yes.
And then if parts of it needs to be taken on notice, we’ll return to the committee.
[Senator Roberts] Of course. – Thank you.
[Justin Lee] Thank you, Senator. Apologies. I just had to come down the stairs. Justin Lee, first assistant secretary multilateral policy division. Senator, can I just ask you to repeat the question?
[Senator Roberts] Yes. In total, how much does Australia pay to the United Nations, or its subsidiaries, each year, in dollar terms?
[Justin Lee] Thank you, Senator. The key contribution that Australia makes is our assessed contribution to the United Nations and that’s based upon the size of Australia’s economy. Australia contributes 2.21% to the UN regular budget.
[Chair] The question was in dollar terms.
[Justin Lee] Yes. And that equates to, in 2021, around $82.2 million, is our assessed contribution to the UN. We also make other contributions for example, to UN peacekeeping. And that is also based on an assessed contribution to the United Nations. And in 2019/20, which was the last year, we had a figure out for that. Australia provided $212 million in assessed contributions to support UN peacekeeping missions. Senator that is not the total of course though, of our contribution to the United Nations. And I don’t have a figure because that is provided by a range of contributions that may be made through the development corporation programme. It may be made through contributions to UN specialised agencies. They would be looked after by other Australian government agencies as well. So getting the total contribution that Australia makes to the UN, and all of the subsidiary agencies, requires a collation of data from across government, which we don’t have.
[Senator Roberts] I’ll be happy to take that on notice. Thank you. This is a very important issue for our constituents because they’re concerned at the cost and the impact on the country. The next one is along the same vein. In total, how much does it cost Australia to comply with, or to implement, UN dictates in the form of various forms, treaties, agreements declarations, protocols that are expected of the UN members?
[Justin Lee] Thank you, Senator. I don’t think that we would be able to provide a figure on that because if Australia, Australia of course seeks to adhere to its international obligations, including treaty reporting processes, a lot of that would be the responsibility of Australian government agencies and, and to to calculate that, you would need to look at the the staff costs, the time costs. Sorry, I, I… I just don’t think that we would have that figure or be able to collect a figure, on implementation of international obligations in that, in the way that you portray it.
[Senator Roberts] It would be. Thank you for your openness. It would be enormous. I’m thinking of the compliance with the UN Kyoto protocol. That’s cost a lot of farmers to lose their property rights. That’s been estimated by some people to be either a 100 or $200 billion. So it’s rubbery but it’s a difficult thing. Compliance with the water act, which puts compliance with international obligations as it’s, one of its primary aims, right through. Compliance with the UN Paris agreement, particularly when other nations don’t have to wreck their economy to comply because their goals are so easy. So manufacturing the UN Lima agreement, a declaration from 1975 and the governance impacts from the UN Rio declaration in 1992. So just take it, but I am. I am wondering if anyone has figured out the cost to this country in dollar terms, the cost to our economy the cost to a loss of our governance and sovereignty.
[Justin Lee] Senator, I think the only other way to portray it though is the, is the benefits that, that Australia gets from these arrangements and these agreements.
[Chair] With respect, I understand that but this isn’t the forum for arguing somebody seeking costs. And if somebody else wants to ask a question about the benefits, then that’s up to them. But time is very limited. I’m sorry.
[Senator Roberts] So that, that leads to my third question which is given the globalist approach of the UN, what value is there for Australia to constantly pay out money directly and at huge indirect cost to our governance and our economy?
[Justin Lee] Oh, well, I think the answer to that would be the benefits that we get from those, those arrangements, both in terms of having, having rules that are that guide many things that, that guide the Australian economy. If we look for example, all the work that we have been doing around rules that guide international aviation, international shipping, telecommunications, all of those rules are set by the United Nations. That means that we’ve got a global economy that we can participate in that sets equal rules between countries which Australia is a, is an open trading economy and an economy of our size can, can benefit from. Similarly, we have international organisations dealing with global challenges. So the roles that the WHO is playing in response to COVID. Dealing with, dealing with those challenges that we want addressed in the world, by making contributions to those, we get benefit from that. So we appreciate that there are costs, both direct costs and obligations that Australia has to adhere but we also get a number of very significant benefits.
[Senator Roberts] And I’d put it to you that the benefits, for example in aviation, they could be done by a country hosting the other countries of the world to come up with a convention on that. So that doesn’t have to come from the UN. And we’ve shown that in the history of our planet. What would it mean to Australia, if Australia chose to withdraw from the United Nations? If we exited.
[Minister Payne] Senator, I can assure you that there is no consideration of that, that our engagement in the international system, and indeed Australia’s security and prosperity has been underpinned for a very long time, by what is known as the rules-based international order in the institutions that were created to support that. What we have seen in the last 12 months, frankly, the impact of COVID around the world. We’ve seen what happens when those systems can click into gear. And can support the countries and the communities that need them. The international cooperation that we have through those UN agencies and organisations is very important to that management. COVID-19, as I was saying, has really exposed the magnitude of the consequences if those global institutions are not working as well as they should, that does not mean, and I think the prime minister and you, have probably engaged on this before. It does not mean, as the prime minister said in his Lowy speech last year. He said, ‘We can’t be an indifferent bystander to these events that impact our livelihoods, our safety and our sovereignty. We must, as we have done previously, cultivate, marshal and bring our influence to bear to protect and promote our national interests.’ So what we seek, is an international system that respects the unique characteristics of individual states within it. In our case, Australia. That still provides a framework for cooperation on security and prosperity. Mr. Lee, Dr. Lee has advanced international aviation I think, if I was, if I was hearing correctly as a, as an example of that, but there are countless others, Senator, where we understand that working cooperatively with others is an important part of our national interest. It’s in our national interest, it allows us to pursue shared regional and global objectives. And it is a centrepiece of our international engagement. Now, we did a lot of work on this last year, a lot of work. And that has crystallised and firmed the government’s views on these matters.
[Senator Roberts] Well, thank you and I respect your right to have an opinion. I also have a different opinion.
[Minister Payne] As I do yours, Senator.
[Senator Roberts] Thank you. I know you’ve shown that in the past.
[Minister Payne] We’re in a very good democracy. Sorry. I took some of those minutes. My apologies.
[Senator Roberts] I do acknowledge the prime minister said, I think these words, on the 3rd of October, 2019 when he addressed the Lowy Institute in Sydney, ‘Unaccountable’ he spoke of, ‘The unaccountable internationalist bureaucrats or bureaucracies.’ I think those were the words. And then promptly gave, advocated to give World Health Organisation more power. I would argue with you about the World Health Organization’s benefits, because I think it contributed to the rampant spread of COVID, but nonetheless. How many funding arrangements between Australia and the UN are open-ended?
[Justin Lee] I, I’m not…
[Senator Roberts] They get ratcheted up automatically, or they’re they haven’t got a closing date.
[Justin Lee] Yes. I, I’ll try to take that on notice. But my, my initial reaction would be that we would have no open-ended commitments, or any commitment that we make would be on the basis of an agreement or an understanding. But I can take that on notice.
[Senator Roberts] I think there is some updates to our laws or our requirements, or our commitments that are made automatically if the UN document or protocol is, is changed. Are you aware of any of those?
[Justin Lee] You could be, I’m not sure Senator, you could be referring to what I mentioned earlier, which was our assessed contribution. And there is a committee that looks at our assessed contributions and adjusts that contribution according to changes and our national circumstances, our size of our economy, debt ratios and the like in comparison to other countries. That is still part of a committee which we participate in. But ultimately we would abide by the finding of that committee and at the end of that process. So there is that sort of process. And that was what I was referring to earlier about the calculation about assessing.
[Senator Roberts] It may be, I’ll finish up now, but it may be in the human rights area. Or the rights of the child area, where changes in the UN requirements are automatically fed through to us and we have to comply with them. So that may be something to consider, but I believe that’s the case.
[Justin Lee] I can take that on notice.
[Senator Roberts] Thank you, if you could. And, you know, from my, my questioning. I really question the need to stay in the UN and the advantage to this country because of the governance impact on our country, the sovereignty impact on a country and the economic impacts on a country. So, you know, I recognise and acknowledge that this country’s current government is not thinking about exiting the UN, but we certainly are. So a lot of our constituents want to.
[Minister Payne] Senator, can I also say, I understand the reform issues you’ve raised and we are strong supporters of the reform processes that have been underway in the UN and acknowledged, more to do. And I did raise that with the secretary general last week, in a conversation on a number of regional issues. But also in passing on the year-end reform questions.
[Senator Roberts] Thank you very much.
This morning I talked to Marcus Paul about coal-fired power, the mess our Industrial Relations are in and the fact that the corrupt World Health Organisation actually said Australia could be where COVID originated.
Transcript
[Marcus Paul]
Malcolm, good morning, mate.
[Malcolm Roberts]
Good morning, Marcus, how are you?
[Marcus Paul]
I’m okay. I’m very well. Listen, I just wanted to ask you first off the bat, a question without notice because I know you’re very good on your feet. New research has found Australia’s coal fired power stations are routinely breaching their licence conditions putting our community’s health and the environment at risk.
The newly released coal impacts index reveals there have been more than 150 publicly reported environmental breaches since 2015. However, the spokes person for Australia Beyond Coal, David Ridditz says only a fraction of these, 16, have resulted in penalties or enforceable undertakings. Now, if coal’s to be a part of our reliable energy future, we need to clean up our backyard I think.
[Malcolm Roberts]
Well, if that’s true then certainly we need to. No one should be exempt from those regulations, Marcus. The environment is very important. It’s also important to understand that solar power destroys the environment as well because they’re leaking cadmium and selenium and lead into the soil and into the water.
In fact, it’s monstrous what’s going on north of Brisbane. A proposed Chinese development of a solar panel farm. They’re not farms, they’re industrial complexes, directly affecting Brisbane’s water supply for two million people. So, I mean, we’ve got to protect the environment. That’s the number one thing. The environment can’t exist without civilization being productive and civilization can’t be productive without the environment being protected. So, the future of our civilization, the future of our environment are interdependent and rely on each other.
[Marcus Paul]
All right. Anthony Albanese, the federal opposition leader yesterday, talked policy. He’ll be on the programme a little later this morning, but by the way, he’s promising workers a better deal with a suite of reforms to improve job security and provide minimum pay and entitlements to those in insecure work. What’s your take on this?
[Malcolm Roberts]
I think he’s talking out of both sides of his mouth. For a start, his policies on energy, his policies on lack of taxation reform, are cruelling job security. Secondly, his policies on energies just mentioned, don’t take into account the fact that Australian workers need to be productive and we can’t be productive when we’ve got energy costs that are now amongst the highest in the world due to labour policies under Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard and due to liberal national policies under John Howard and every prime minister since. So, what we need to do is look at the big picture.
But also, it’s very hypocritical and I believe dishonest of Anthony Abanese to talk what he’s talking about casual because Joe Fitzgibbon had plenty of opportunity to address the casual issues in the Hunter Valley. Instead, what he did was he tried to misrepresent me going after it and now, what we’re seeing is I was absolutely right, with Simon Turner and other’s in the Hunter Valley, loss of worker’s compensation, loss of their leave entitlements, loss of their long service leave, accruals being accurate, loss of their accident pay, being suppressed when they had an accident or injury and being told to cover it up.
Anthony Abanese has got to come clean on this. Joe Fitzgibbon had six years to fix this. So did the liberal party. They’ve done nothing until their big corporate mates get into trouble and now they’re wanting to take on the little guy again.
[Marcus Paul]
Well, all right, let’s move onto the World Health Organisation and that dopey, ridiculous, so called investigation into Covid.
[Malcolm Roberts]
Yeah, can you believe it? That they think it might have come from our beef. I mean, this is absolutely monstrous. We know that the Chinese Communist Party and the UN, through the World Health Organisation, have colluded closely to suppress the news of Covid virus in China early last year. We know that.
That enabled the virus to get a march on around the world. I mean, the Chinese came out and the World Health Organisation echoed them saying, there is no human to human virus transmission, none at all. And then they suppressed news of that, they suppressed their own doctors of it and the World Health Organization’s chief has been beholden to China. So, this is not an investigation, it’s a cover up, it’s a complete cover up and can we really have confidence that this is a transparent and thorough investigation?
No, we can’t. What we need to do is get the hell out of the World Health Organisation and get out of the UN. That’s why I called for an Aus Exit from the UN back in 2016 and I keep calling for that. The UN is a corrupt, dishonest, incompetent, lazy organisation that is hurting our country.
[Marcus Paul]
Well, they say the likely scenario is that the virus passed from original animal host to intermediary animals including frozen and chilled animal products, including Australian beef to humans.
[Malcolm Roberts]
Yes. I mean, it’s ludicrous. They wouldn’t allow an investigation for 12 months basically. They covered everything up, they weren’t allowed to go to the lab. I mean, this is not an investigation, it’s a stitch up.
[Marcus Paul]
All right. What about the Nationals, are they backing away from manufacturing policy? They’ve collapsed on coal, they’re backing net-zero 2050. It means they’re, in your opinion, opposing jobs.
[Malcolm Roberts]
Yes. We talked last week about the fact that the Nationals came up with a lovely glossy booklet and the core of that booklet… Sorry, on their managing policy, but on the manufacturing policy, but the core of that booklet was a solid page on their support for coal.
Then we put a motion into the senate one week ago and we said we need to build a coal fired power station in Hunter Valley, which is exactly what the Nationals were proposing. In the face of the motion, in the senate, the Nationals ran away and voted with the Liberals against a coal fired power station in the Hunter, after they said just a week before, that they were supporting it. So, they abandoned coal last week.
Now, we see their manufacturing policy relies upon cheap energy, but with the net zero 2050, it means the liberal party will be opposing jobs and opposing cheap energy and opposing manufacturing. The Nationals have meekly rolled over again. Because this policy for net-zero, according to the IPA, will cost coal miners, farmers and steel and iron workers amongst the majority of the 654,000 jobs that will be lost by the adoption of Net-Zero. We can’t afford it. It’s absolute rubbish.
[Marcus Paul]
All right. Let’s move now to the north of the country. Western Australia in particular. The north west. Yet another overreach, you say, by Mark McGowan, the WA premier and closing down for some five days.
[Malcolm Roberts]
Yes. Marcus, I was supposed to be calling you from WA, up in the north west, up near the Kimberlys today. But unfortunately, we couldn’t go there because Mark McGowan capriciously locked down parts of WA again and made it impossible for us to get there and come back in the time without some risk.
So, we need a better way of managing our community and business in the face of the virus being here. It’s just ludicrous where we get one case and people get locked down. We get people jumping on a plane in Perth, coming to Brisbane, by the time they land in Brisbane, five hours later, they suddenly find out WA’s been locked down and they have to go into hotel quarantine for two weeks at their own expense.
It’s just not right. We’ve got people in New South Wales contacted me saying they’d love to spend a holiday in Northern Queensland, beautiful up there, and they’re not going to do it because they just don’t know what Annastacia Palaszczuk’s going to do. McGowan, Palaszczuk, the control freak in Victoria, they’re using lock downs capriciously and even the UN’s corrupt World Health Organisation has admitted that lock downs are a blunt instrument to be used when things are out of control to get control.
So, the premiers of Western Australia, Queensland and Victoria simply admitting that they can’t control their states properly with the virus in their state.
[Marcus Paul]
Always good to have you on for your views. I appreciate it.
[Malcolm Roberts]
You’re welcome, Marcus. Have a good day, mate.
[Marcus Paul]
Take care, Malcolm.
There has been many comments recently about a bill that people were concerned about which they claimed would allow foreign troops and police to enter Australia and act against our interests.
This is untrue.
The bill simply gives foreign troops and police who are invited into our country to help in emergencies an exemption of liability if they are acting in good faith while performing their duties. It’s the same exemption that our defence force and police are given in emergencies.
One Nation would clearly not have anything to do with allowing foreign troops or police into Australia to act against the interest of its people.
The bill was the “Defence Legislation Amendment (Enhancement of Defence Force response to Emergencies) Bill 2020”.
As a way of explanation, Clause 123AA:
A protected person (see subsection (3)) is not subject to any liability (whether civil or criminal) in respect of anything the protected person does or omits to do, in good faith, in the performance or purported performance of the protected person’s duties,…. A protected person is defined under 123AA :
- Each of the following is a protected person:
(a) a member of the Defence Force;
(b) an APS employee in the Department;
(c) a person authorised under subsection (4) to perform duties in respect of the provision of assistance mentioned in subsection (1).
Transcript
Hi, I’m Senator Malcolm Roberts, and I’m in Thursday Island just above the tip of Cape York. And we’re here for a Senate inquiry, but I also want to respond now to people who’ve contacted our office about something that concerns them. It’s another internet rumour that’s not true.
They’re asking questions about us, or the parliament or the government authorising foreign defence forces to come onto this country and be armed and to control the people, that’s nonsense.
The bill that was passed recently is merely to ensure that overseas volunteers who come here to help us in times of natural disaster have the same rights and protections as Australian soldiers and Australian volunteers, because they’re covered by insurance, foreigners are not, until now.
So it means that providing foreigners, whether they be armed, whether they be, they won’t be armed forces, but whether they be defence forces or police forces or volunteers, will be covered. People like the three pilots who died in the plane crash last year fighting the fires with a water bomber.
Volunteers, defence, police, and so on. They must be acting in good faith. If they’re not acting in good faith, or they do something deliberately harmful to people, then they lose that protection, and they’re vulnerable.
So all that’s happened is that the government is protecting the foreign volunteers to make sure that we keep getting foreign volunteers to come here and help us with their particular skills in terms of natural disasters.
That’s all it is. We checked it thoroughly, and it’s here for our protection.
Pepe Iovannella is one of the largest tour operators in Cairns. Cairns have suffered more than any other city in Australia because of COVID restrictions which has decimated the tourism industry.
Pepe tells us that even though the Labor government promised to dredge Trinity Inlet to allow large boats to increase opportunities, they have reneged on the deal.
Transcript
[Malcolm Roberts]
Hi, I’m Senator Malcolm Roberts and I’m in Trinity Inlet in Cairns. You see a Cruise Ship here, Trawler behind us and recreational boats and Trawlers on the other side of Trinity Inlet. Now I’m with Pepe Iovannella. How’s that?
[Pepe Iovannella]
Correct.
[Malcolm Roberts]
Thank you.
[Pepe Iovannella]
Perfect.
[Malcolm Roberts]
Pepe’s family is the owner of the largest tour operator Australian family owned tour operator in Cairns. They did tours to the Reef and he’s got many other businesses.
[Pepe Iovannella]
Yap.
[Malcolm Roberts]
Cairns depends on tourism, right Pepe?
[Pepe Iovannella]
We’re a key element of Cairns. We’re probably in the top five if not the first. It’s crucial for our business and obviously in a COVID year we’ve been struggling and if it wasn’t for JobKeeper, we’d be definitely, most of operators be closed by now.
[Malcolm Roberts]
Right. So the government’s restrictions around COVID state and federal have gutted Cairns. Cairns has suffered more than any other community in the country. It’s income gross domestic product has gone down 16%. It’s economy is folding.
[Pepe Iovannella]
Yes.
[Malcolm Roberts]
And it needs to come out of that. And what Pepe is doing, is he can see that the trend is toward larger Cruise vessels to get higher turnover. And yet the Port Authority is being restricted by the state government. So we kinda, you won’t get those larger boats.
[Pepe Iovannella]
So back in 2016, when they announced to dredge to allow larger Cruise ships, which are crucial to Cairns they bring millions of dollars of money and passengers and tourist numbers. They promised us four million cubic metres of dredging. After they got elected.
[Malcolm Roberts]
So just before the election.
[Pepe Iovannella]
Before the election.
[Malcolm Roberts]
And before the election they promised 120 million dollars.
[Pepe Iovannella]
All parties agreed and Labor were last to come on board. They finally agreed to dredge and give us the money for four million cubic metres. If they won, and whoever won that election and Labor won the election. So they had to commit to honour their commitment and promised us four million cubic metres. Two years later we got 700,000 which essentially is our maintenance dredging for the year.
[Malcolm Roberts]
That’s about 16% of what they promised.
[Pepe Iovannella]
Correct.
[Malcolm Roberts]
And so it’s very important to understand that Trinity Inlet is fed by creeks and just like every other inlet fed by creeks and rivers silt comes in. Silt builds up when it hits the stagnant water or the steady water of the ocean and silt fills up the Harbour. And so you have maintenance dredging to keep the Harbour at the right level.
And then you have capital dredging, which expands, deepens, widens the Harbour. And so Cairns is gonna miss out. It would missed out on the maintenance dredging and it is gonna miss out on the capital dredging to get these bigger cruise vessels.
[Pepe Iovannella]
Yeah. You know obviously as time goes on the Cruise ships get bigger. We need to cater as, even as the commercials our commercial vessels have got bigger over time. Cruise ships get bigger. We need to cater for Cruise ships. And that’s why it’s imperative that we get back and do the four million cubic metres of dredging that was promised by the Labor Party.
[Malcolm Roberts]
But Cairns, I didn’t realise this. Cairns has the largest, has the largest number of vessel movements of any regional port in Australia. Correct?
[Pepe Iovannella]
Correct. Yeah we got the largest number of class one vessels, class three vessels. We have the highest number- the Trawler industry is huge in Cairns. We have Reef boats that go out. The Coral Princess goes out taking passengers over board. So we got all those apart from our day passengers.
So we’ve got a whole plethora of combination of boats that run out of Port and and which makes us the number one port in Australia.
[Malcolm Roberts]
And what happened to this port was that somebody in their wisdom, and without any scientific evidence the state government moved the port limit, sorry moved the National Park limit to within the port. So that stopped any dredging within the port. I mean, this is dumb. It goes completely against the science.
So that then led to a large fight but you’ve also got not only the state government but the globalists and the federal government people like Greg Hunt at the time who all bowed to the almighty people in the WWF and the other UN led organisations which are now choking Cairns. That’s basically it.
[Pepe Iovannella]
Correct, yeah. So we’ve got the largest fleet in Australia running out of port, and yet we’re not a priority port. You know other ports, there’s four other ports in Queensland that are priority ports.
[Malcolm Roberts]
Townsville, Gladstone, Mackay and Hay Point.
[Pepe Iovannella]
And yet we’re the number one port for movements. Number one port for maintenance. People relying on boats that earn their income, Trawler industry, and yet we’re still stifled by the Labor government, by not allowing us to have priority. So if we had priority port status, that would fix a lot of our issues.
[Malcolm Roberts]
And this is so stupid. We’ve got cruise liners anchored off the coast here and passengers being ferried in and out. We’d have far more people, if they could put their feet on the ground. If they tied up here at a decent wharf and could get out and spend their money at service stations, motels, entertainment, restaurants and that’s what Cairns is missing out on.
Cairns is being belted by international tourism shutdown because of the airline traffic, being belted by the Cruise industry being shut down. But when you finally get out again you wanna thrive and you can’t do that with these dopey buggers in government
[Pepe Iovannella]
We’re the ideal port to be a turnaround port for Cruise ship industry. There’s the Brisbane port has been increased and they’ve spent a billion dollars on Brisbane port yet they don’t wanna spend a cent here in Cairns. So they’re stifling Cairns growth.
[Malcolm Roberts]
And get this, they see tankers taking oil from Northern countries down to Brisbane, putting it on road tankers and transporting it up by truck to Cairns. How stupid is that when these tankers should be unloading here? I mean, they’re just holding the North back holding the state back.
[Pepe Iovannella]
The stupidest thing is that sugar industry can’t even pick up from the sugar terminals anymore. ‘Cause obviously the ships are bigger, so they can’t fill the capacity. So we’re only half filling the sugar ships out of Cairns.
[Malcolm Roberts]
We blame the United Nations for the blue and the green tape but we especially blame the people who just bow to the UN. State and federal globalists, and that’s it. They’re the ones destroying the city.
[Pepe Iovannella]
Absolutely, 100% agreement.
Scott Morrison is due to attend another climate jamboree where he will no doubt promise to implement more of the United Nations agenda destroying more of our economy.
Well I have an idea. I can go in his place.
Transcript
One Nation opposes this motion. I for one, would be happy for our Prime Minister not to speak at the Climate Ambition Summit. Our prime minister has demonstrated that he will not put the interest of Australia first.
On the international stage under pressure, the prime minister turns to jelly and adopts the agenda of the United Nations without regard for the damage it does to our Australian economy or the lives of Australians.
If Australians want someone to represent and fight for Australia, may I suggest Senator Hanson or I would be happy to take the prime minister’s place. The greens won’t debate me, so maybe some of their globalist masters will.
Transcript
I move:
That the Senate notes that the current dispute between China and Australia is more deep-seated than a trade spat involving wine, coal and timber.
The motion I moved is the opening paragraph in Robert Gottliebsen’s newspaper article in The Australian yesterday, and I’ll quote it again:
When China declared that Australia had been “evil” it suddenly became clear that the dispute between the two nations is more deep-seated than a trade spat involving wine coal, timber etc.
As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia who is involved in the governance of Australia, I want to focus on Gottliebsen’s meaty fourth paragraph:
From President Xi down, there has been little respect for Australia for a long time and many in China believe we are a foolish country that makes mistakes at almost every turn, led by defence.
He then details serious flaws in the governance of three Defence projects, the submarine ‘shemozzle’, as he calls it, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighters and the Hunter frigates. We obviously are ‘a foolish country’ based on this, and the obvious point of his article is our shoddy governments over many decades, both Liberal-National and Labor.
People in this country are feeling concerned about the seriously deteriorating state of our country. We have lost our economic sovereignty. We’re losing our national sovereignty. We’re plunging towards catastrophe economically, and dependence with a complete loss of security. People are fed up and, across many communities and industries—and I mean right around the country—people are feeling dispirited, hopeless, confused, aimless, wary, concerned and even fearful, because most can sense our country’s destruction. Yet, 100 years ago Australia was No. 1 in the world in income per person and had the highest GDP—gross domestic product—per person.
There’s a worse aspect beyond economic demise though. Bullies like China prey on those perceived as being weak. Gottliebsen rightly says that, due to poor, and even stupid, decisions, we’re rightly perceived as being weak in defence. Yet he barely scratches the full extent of the deterioration of our security, because our productive capacity has been dismantled, and our economic security has been smashed, destroyed. We are vulnerable. Now, as a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, that is what I will discuss, because, like bullies in a schoolyard or in a workplace, China preys on those it perceives as weak or foolish. By the way, when I raise China, I refer to the Chinese Communist Party and not the millions of Australians of Chinese descent now in our country, descendants of those who came during the gold rushes almost two centuries ago, and those who immigrated more recently.
Not only does the Chinese Communist Party assess other nations against China’s values and standards; the Chinese Communist Party assesses our country against our own values, and from that it finds out: Does our government have courage? Does our government have integrity? Do the politicians in this country and this parliament have the strength of character needed to lead a country? I’ve been thinking about this for some years now and I’ve made a list of Australian values: mateship; a fair go; support; loyalty; being fair dinkum; telling the truth; honesty; fairness; freedom to live; freedom of speech; freedom of thought; freedom of belief; freedom of religion; freedom of faith; freedom of interaction; freedom of exchange; democracy; our flag; our nation; family; care; respect for people; respect for community; respect for the law; respect for the environment; making sure government fulfils its three primary roles, which are protecting life, protecting property and protecting freedom, and stays out of everything else; and our Constitution. We value our Constitution, especially competitive federalism, and we value human progress. Australia has led that improvement in progress in the past 150 years. It has been amazing progress, right across the world.
So let’s assess governments against these values and their impact on our productive capacity. Productive capacity depends on many things, but particularly energy costs—the primacy of energy. An ever-decreasing cost of energy has led to 150 years of human progress. Australia has gone from having the world’s lowest electricity prices to having the world’s highest, yet we’re now the world’s largest exporter of energy—gas and coal. China imports a lot of our coal, but the production of coal in their own country is eight times our total production—not just our exports but our total production. They make us look like small producers of coal. They have the largest coal reserves in the world, along with the United States. They use our coal. They’re building steel power plants out of our coal, and they’re building hundreds of coal-fired power stations.
We legislate to use their wind turbines and their solar panels. We subsidise them. It drives up the cost of our electricity, and we pay them for unreliables—their solar and wind generators. We pay them for components of electric vehicles, which we also subsidise. And then we have Chinese companies, affiliated with the Chinese Communist Party, owning electricity networks in our major cities. Then we have the Queensland Labor government stealing $1½ billion a year through the generators. All of this destroys jobs and destroys competitiveness.
Then taxpayers pay people, quite often foreigners, to come in and squat on the land, just to get carbon dioxide credits. It’s called carbon dioxide farming. It takes good farmland and destroys it with noxious weeds and feral animals—pests—and then that has to be reclaimed at some later date; who knows when. Then we have Angus Taylor, the Minister for Energy and Emissions, a farmer. He knows that the EPBC Act is hurting him—I’ve had conversations with him—but he just smiles, rolls his eyes and puts up with it. He is a sceptic on climate change—sceptical that we are affecting the climate. He’s been slammed, and he’s now coming back into parliament and driving up electricity prices. Matt Canavan, Barnaby Joyce: strong sceptics in their beliefs. Barnaby Joyce was the Deputy Prime Minister. The Chinese know that. They watch him. They saw him come into cabinet and they saw him run for election in New England, when he moved out of the Senate and into the lower house. And Malcolm Turnbull, to get Mr Joyce elected, showered $400 million of taxpayer funds on unreliable wind power. Then Matt Canavan and Barnaby Joyce were both in the cabinet, and they suddenly became alarmists, spouting alarm about carbon dioxide.
So I asked Matt Canavan in the Senate one day where his evidence was, and he just slid away from me. Now that he’s out of cabinet and Mr Joyce is out of cabinet, all of a sudden they’re becoming a little bit sceptical again in their words. But the Chinese Communist Party see this and that tells them a lot about the lack of leadership in this country.
The Chinese have their own agreement within the Paris Agreement. It says, ‘We will continue doing whatever we want, continue growing our economy, continue constructing our country, developing our country and putting in place infrastructure, and then in 2030 we may consider something.’ Meanwhile, this parliament in this building has legislated to destroy our economy to comply with Kyoto. That’s not an agreement; that is stupidity and economic suicide. The Chinese Communist Party watches us pay academics to tell lies about climate and to misrepresent the climate science. We even put some of them in charge of or in senior places in the CSIRO and pay them $800,000 a year to destroy our country. Dr Andrew Johnson went from head of the climate research agency department in the CSIRO to become head of the Bureau of Meteorology. Under him and his predecessors, the Bureau of Meteorology has been shown to be concocting the data and misrepresenting temperatures.
We pay people like Ove Hoegh-Gulberg and Ian Chubb, former chief scientists, to destroy the science, to misrepresent the science. In 1975, Whitlam signed an agreement saying we’ll comply with the Lima Declaration to shut down our manufacturing and export it. The following year, Liberal Prime Minister Fraser ratified the deal. In 1992, Paul Keating’s Labor government signed the Rio Declaration, which is about 21st century global governance. Then we had the Kyoto protocol destroying our country, stealing our farmers’ property rights. And now we have the Paris Agreement exporting jobs and shutting manufacturing.
Then the current Prime Minister has the temerity to say, ‘We will fiddle with the industrial relations system to bring back manufacturing.’ How the hell can you bring back manufacturing when you have the highest electricity costs in the world and a big component of manufacturing—the largest component, usually—is the cost of electricity? How the hell can you do it with a tax system that favours multinational companies and lets them off scot-free? How the hell can you do it with overregulation? How the hell can you do it with a lack of water? How the hell can you do it with a lack of infrastructure? The Chinese are watching this and they’re helping us destroy our electricity sector and export even more jobs, because our prices for electricity are going up, businesses are shutting and then the jobs start up in China.
We are now reversing the last 170 years of human progress, because the key to human progress is decreasing the price of energy, which raises productivity, raises wealth, raises the standard of living. That ended in this country 24 years ago. We have ceded governance to the UN: Lima, Kyoto, Rio, Paris and many other agreements. How does this comply with Aussie values? How does it comply with being fair dinkum? Worse, the granddaddy who concocted this climate change rubbish was Maurice Strong. He concocted it when he created and then took over as head of the United Nations Environment Program. He pushed that program, starting from the 1970s, and in the 1980s he ramped it up. In 1988 he formed the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a fraudulent organisation. And the Liberals, Labor, the Nationals and the Greens have fallen for it all. Maurice Strong was a crook. He was wanted by the police in America and died in exile in China. Who’s the beneficiary of all this destruction of Western civilisation? The Chinese government.
That’s what the people in this chamber and the chamber across the hall there have done to this country by blindly following the UN diktats. How does that comply with our values? It doesn’t. It breaks our values. What about water ownership? Destroyed by separating water ownership from property ownership. What about the Murray-Darling Basin and the corruption that is rife? What about the family farms shutting down? What about water projects? What water projects? That’s it; there aren’t any. And yet look at what amazing water projects the Chinese Communist Party has put together to develop its country.
What about infrastructure? Hardly anything built and no plan. The north is exposed without the Bradfield scheme and we see floods destroying Townsville. There is destruction and a waste of water flowing out to sea. We see the state governments joining in. The Labor Party in Queensland has reef regulations which are shutting down agriculture. Vegetation protection legislation is destroying agriculture. Firebreaks aren’t allowed and are being destroyed when farms are under fire. We put animals and fungus ahead of humans.
The Queensland Labor government put a Chinese company in charge of the electoral roll and then there is Queensland local council corruption linked to the Labor state government. This extends well beyond Ipswich and Paul Pisasale; it is systemic and it is widespread. We have foreign banks that were deregulated under John Howard and we saw the result of that through the Hayne royal commission. We see Adani frustrated by both the Liberal-National and Labor governments in Queensland and by the federal government, which was weak. That’s one man from India, which has a booming, growing economy, who wanted to spend $17 billion in our country. He was thwarted for eight years. That’s a blight on us that not even the Chinese can miss—that no-one in the world can miss. We go on and on and on.
I give Senator Rex Patrick credit for moving a motion to get an inquiry into the relationship between China and Australia six times—and I supported him every time. Both the Labor Party and the Liberal-Nationals squashed it. This is what the Chinese are seeing, yet Australians are wanting far more. Australians want leadership. Australians want security, reassurance, confidence, leadership, trust, pride and freedom—a restoration so that we can be No. 1 in the world again. What does Australia need? It needs principled leadership based on values. It needs disciplined leadership based on data and facts instead of ideology paying off donors. It needs honest leadership and strength of character. It’s the simple ability to say: ‘I’m wrong, I’m sorry—can you help me? Please explain.’ We need visionary policies, and that is what will take us back to being No. 1.
One Nation senator Malcolm Roberts’ motion to bin the Cash Ban bill received triumphant support in the Senate today.
The Currency (Restrictions on the Use of Cash) Bill would have banned the use of cash for transactions over $10,000 and put in place hefty fines and jail terms for breaches.
Senator Roberts said, “This is a fantastic win for all Australians, particularly rural and elderly Australians where the use of cash is still prevalent.”
“Even the Government’s own Committee Inquiry said that the bill was out of step with Australian values and was totally impractical.”
Senator Malcolm Roberts has been persistently vocal in the fight against this bill since August 2019.
“This bill was never about tackling crime or money laundering, and instead criminalised the use of legal tender, cash, for everyday Australians.
“Australians now retain their right and freedom to use cash with the bill now officially dead,” added Senator Roberts.
One Nation received a ground swell of support from a wide range of Australian communities for whom the use of cash is cultural.
Senator Roberts said, “I would like to thank the many groups who organised community campaigns against the cash ban bill including the Citizens Party, the John Adams and Martin North show, Heise Says, Nugget’s News, Taxpayer’s Alliance, Bank Reform Now and The Bitcoin community.”
While cash transactions over $10,000 must still be reported to AUSTRAC, it is timely to remind retailers with Christmas on the horizon that cash is legal tender and ought to be accepted from consumers. “One Nation’s resolve and persistence to stand in defending the rights of everyday Australians has won the day.”
Transcript
[Marcus] Malcolm good morning.
[Malcolm] Good morning, Marcus. I’m disgusted with that rort I’m bloody annoyed because look, what’s really going on here, mate is it’s not just that he’s got a job that’s being protected. What we’re doing is Mathias Cormann in the Senate, who often answered questions by saying we are fulfilling our global responsibilities.
To hell with the global responsibilities. We have to look after Australian sovereignty. I don’t need him in the OECD bringing back OECD stuff to steal wealth from Australians. I need as Australian parliamentarian to look after Australians.
[Marcus] Yeah, I thought that might have you fired up. And I’m glad I asked the question. You said it much better than what I did. I mean, you, you’ve dealt with this man, and it’s not a personal attack. It’s just the way the system’s set up. And you know, we’ve been talking at length this morning about the disparity, if you like, in opportunities and pay for men and women in our workforce. But I mean, this is just beyond the pail.
It really is and you know, 4,000 odd dollars. Now that’s before staff mind you, up to eight staff, the Prime Minister is apparently providing this former Senator, former Finance Minister with, to try and get him around the world to lobby people. So he gets his prime gig with the OECD, mind you at the same time, he’s going to receive a pretty decent politician salary upon the fact that he’s decided to pull the pin. He’s retired etc. He’s still of working age. I mean, the whole thing is just, it’s a joke.
[Malcolm] Well, it’s actually worse than a joke. It’s theft because the costs that you have just outlined are huge, but Marcus, they are tiny compared to the cost to the Australian people of pushing this globalist agenda. Morrison has appeared to be against the international globalist. But the fact is his behaviours show that he is a globalist.
He said on the 3rd of October, 2019, after we were pushing the fact that the message about the globalist taking over, he came out trying to steal our thunder by saying he is against the unelected, unaccountable, internationalist bureaucrats. He pretended to be against them. He didn’t say the UN, but since then, he’s said that we need to give the World Health Organisation, a UN body increased powers, powers of weapons inspectors, to just go into countries.
He’s just collected an award from Boris Johnson as for fulfilling his global agenda. And Morrison is just pushing policies. I’m tired of the liberal and labour and national parties, pushing policies that are destroying our water in accordance with UN, destroying our energy sector in accordance with the UN Kyoto Protocol, destroying property rights and farmers’ rights to use their own land in accordance with the UN Kyoto Protocol.
Both of these major parties have done that for 30, 40 years. Look at our tariffs look at it that have been smashed and left our companies vulnerable. Look at the taxes that we have paid to the foreigners and multinational companies in this country and 90% of the large companies in this country are owned by foreign owned multinationals, and they paid little or no tax.
[Marcus] That’s right.
[Malcolm] That’s fact. And then we’ve also got people being destroyed in the family law court system, which is a slaughter house of the nation, that’s fact. And that came from the UN as well. We’ve got to start running this country for Australians and let the Australians do the job. Instead of these bustards from overseas, it really fires me up.
[Marcus] Ah, well, I can tell all it’s missing next to the Australian flag behind the Prime Minister is a sign saying, “The Great Reset.”
[Malcolm] Correct. That is what is going on. And it’s just a return to feudalism. We will be surfed, serving the barons and the international barons. We have got one of the wealthiest countries on earth. We are the biggest exporters of energy in that gas and coal in the world, even greater than Middle East countries.
And yet we’re sitting at the crumbs, we’re taking the crumbs off the table now because the wealthy corporations are just taking it. They don’t pay taxes for taking our natural resources. This is ridiculous. They’re stealing it. And we end up poor and we’re taking the crumbs off a rich man’s table when we should be sitting at the bloody table.
[Marcus] All right, the Defence Inquiry has wrapped up the Brereton Report, there’s a whole range of issues. Here, Malcolm, you’d be happy to know that we are speaking to ex-Commando ‘H’ on our programme regularly. He’s outlining things from… And he’s not one of the people who’s been accused of any of the alleged war crimes, but he’s providing us updates on welfare of fellow serving Australians.
And they wanna start a petition to try and get their citations kept rather than taken off them. And also the other issue of course, is the fact that bloody War Memorial now wants to, before anything’s gone through courts before anyone’s been found guilty of anything. The War Memorial is already talking about setting aside a section of that sacred place in IsaLean, Canberra dedicated to the so-called atrocities of war in Afghanistan.
I mean, it’s almost as if these people have been found guilty. Don’t we have a presumption of innocence here, at first?
[Malcolm] Well, of course we do Marcus, and this is really, a really very difficult situation to walk through. You know, our country has a value that you don’t murder people in cold blood. That’s a value that we have to stand up for, whether it’s here or overseas. But we have to be compassionate and understanding that these people were sent overseas, if first of all, they must have a trial and they must have the resources.
Secondly, their generals above them are culpable because there’s no way, if this is true, there’s no way the general did not know this was going on. It’s their responsibility.
And I take it a step further, Marcus, John Howard came back from America, according to Alexander Downer, and when Downer retired, he said that John Howard came back from America after 9/11, and walked into the cabinet and said, “We’re off to Iraq,” no executive council meeting, no cabinet meeting, we’re just doing it on one mans say-so.
And apparently, I don’t know this for a fact, because I’m not educated on this. I haven’t been briefed on it yet, but apparently Afghanistan, we did not declare war. So there were no true terms of engagement. And so what we had, we had women and boys with land mines, with explosive tied to them.
And we also had Afghanis in an American training base and an Australian training base shoot Australians and Americans within. And so this is a war that’s not really a war.
And yet it’s diabolic, a very deceptive. And we went in there, based upon one man and that man later admitted, or his government later admitted, there was no evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, look at what we’re doing with our boys in this country.
So if we can’t uphold murder, but at the same time, you have to be compassionate because we sent these people there, to do our job, and we should have done a better job in looking after them.
[Marcus] Well, well said a lot of people we’ve spoken to, including Commando “H” said that, you know, the situation over there is best described by people who’ve been there rather than armchair critics. And even to be honest, generals who sit in their plush leather chairs in Canberra and direct these men.
Look, the issue obviously is that in relation to the enemy, it’s not an international war as such. It was more a civil war, so war within a country. So whenever they did manage to capture some of these people, Taliban and otherwise, they had to eventually, within a day or two release them, only to be shot at again by the same people that just captured.
I mean, the whole thing really needs a good looking at, and we need to bear in mind that it’s very correct what you say, Malcolm, we don’t condone outright cold-blooded killings, but at the same time, we also need to understand what went on over there, why we were there in the first place.
And the other issue, of course now, comes down to mental health and we know, and we’ve been told by our sources and Commando “H” that, you know, so many men and young women who’ve served overseas and are suffering mental health issues as a result of not only their service, but this inquiry as well.
[Malcolm] Yes, well, very well said. There’s an a Roman general who said that no one who’s been to war can understand what goes on and people who go to war do not come back with the same mental approach. They have enormous burdens mentally and emotionally. So let’s recognise that for start.
So we send them, we bend them, but we don’t mend them very well in this country, but it is good to see that the people have set up a hotline for these servicemen, but, you know, stripping medals from people who have earned that medal through an Act of Valour, it’s just wrong.
These people earned it through an Act of Valour, who knows as a result of the torturous and tough regime of cycling in and out of Afghanistan so quickly and so often, if these people weren’t under enormous pressure and they did something, they shouldn’t have done. That’s if they were guilty, let’s assume some of them were guilty.
Why should we strip the medals of these people when they earned it, earned the medals for doing something to protect other Australians or protect their country, or protect even Afghanistan people? So, and then let us strip them because they’ve cracked under pressure, that’s wrong.
[Marcus] I think so.
[Malcolm] They were given a medal and they deserve to keep it.
[Marcus] All right, let’s talk IR reform, we know March 21 is the date when JobKeeper ends, there are some very big concerns amongst some sectors of our community that as of next, well, March, April, you know, there needs to be an extension of some sort, for JobKeeper what do you make of it all?
[Malcolm] What I make of it is that the Morrison Government would yet, again, fiddle around the edges and not do a good job and make it worse. The Morrison Government is about building facades and not getting on with the job properly. Getting back to basics. We need to rebuild our country. There are several lessons from this COVID–
[Marcus] Pandemic.
[Malcolm] Virus that hit our country. And the primary lesson is that we have destroyed our productive capacity and manufacturing. Even our agricultural sector is being destroyed by unelected international bureaucrats that our governments, labour and liberal had put in place.
That’s the first thing we need to restore manufacturing. Marcus we cannot restore manufacturing and our economic sovereignty, our economic security, unless we address electricity prices. Electricity is the biggest cost, component of manufacturing today, greater than labour.
So we need to do a good job in reforming industrial relations. And I can talk about that in a minute, but we must do it with regard to energy prices, taxation, overregulation from the UN. We must do it with regard to where water and other resources and infrastructure. Without that we’re just playing with this stuff. Now, you know, that I’ve done a lot of work in protecting some miners in the Hunter Valley–
[Marcus] Yes absolutely.
[Malcolm] From exploitation with under the hand of BHP and Chandler MacLeod, but also the CFMEU was involved there because they agreed with the exploitation of workers and enabled it. And I’ve done nothing to protect those workers, which raises an interesting point, could these workers sue the CFMEU because they paid dues to be protected and the CFMEU actually in the Hunter Valley I must add actually did not fulfil their responsibilities?
But look at the corruption of some of the union bosses, the Health Services Union, the AWU, the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees’ union. This shows that our system is wrong. And the Hunter Valley has just brought it home to me just how corrupt our system is, we need to get back to basics because people at work feeling frustrated, hurt, literally crippled, painful, afraid of losing their job.
We are right now got people confused. If someone’s working on the job and wants something clarified, they’ve got to go to a bloody lawyer. It’s actually, that’s some of the advice that the Fair Work Ombudsman has given people. I mean who can afford to go to court our system is completely smashed, I’ve said it before.
People want to know that their job is safe. People want to know that they can be safe at work. People want to know that they’re protected, they’ve got protection for their rights. They want to be supported and be in compliance. They want fairness, they want choice. They want simplicity, understanding.
We’ve got to really rejig the whole of our industrial relations system because it’s not serving the people. It’s serving a few union bosses and a few company bosses, and that’s wrong and it’s serving a hell of a lot of lawyers. We’ve got to completely clean that out and do a good job. Get back to basics, to protect workers and honest employers.
[Marcus] Just finally, Malcolm, you’ve been on fire this morning. Are you gonna get that jab?
[Malcolm] That jab mate, I will get a jab when Alan Joyce takes the jab and I’ll watch him do it.
Look–
[Marcus] He probably will.
[Malcolm] He probably – ridiculous. How do we know the impact–
[Marcus] Well, hang on, just back to that, that comments you’ve just made. You’ll get the job when Alan Joyce does. Well, I believe that Alan Joyce probably will get the jab because of he wants to fly overseas, which you probably will for business on his aircraft. And that’s what he calls them, on my airline.
[Malcolm] Well, he’s become a national test guinea pig by the sound of it then, but maybe that’s his new job. But this is disgraceful because even the International Air Transport Association, IATA has distance itself from Qantas’ compulsory vaccination stance, the Prime Minister has done that too.
It’s certainly how do we know the impact of these viruses, which have been tested in minimal circumstances at the moment, very short term? How do we know the impact on these sort of these vaccines with other drugs, with complimentary medicines? How do we know the long-term impact? This is ridiculous. I’m not gonna take the jab, not until it’s proven.
[Marcus] All right, Malcolm. Great to have you on this morning. You been on fire and I love it. I love the passion and thanks as always. Mate, look after yourself, we’ll chat again soon and all that if you catch up with Mathias, make sure we get the window seat, okay.
[Malcolm] Mate. Yeah, we’ll try and make sure that we stop him bringing his OECD policies into this country. Well, I want Australia to be Australian.
Transcript
Thank you, Mr President.
As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia I proudly ask for the Senate’s support for the Banking Amendment Deposits Bill 2020.
Commonly called the NO bail-in bill.
Our purpose is to keep people’s money SAFE.
And to keep the banking system safe.
Let me first explain what is a bail-out and then a bail-in.
Bail-out’s have been used during financial crises when banks get into trouble and are a lifeline of money from taxpayers to banks to keep banks afloat. Govts act as a conduit from taxpayers to the corporate banks, even when the banks got into trouble due to their own greed or stupidity.
In times of profit banks are capitalists and in crises banks are socialist.
International Monetary Fund and G20 rules now though prevent taxpayers’ money being used to save a bank.
Instead requiring that rescue funds must come from shareholders and from depositors. A Bail-in.
Literally banks steal the money in retail deposit accounts and use that to save themselves. In exchange depositors get shares in the bank.
The shares are then suspended from trading – because the banks’ shares are worthless pieces of paper and will remain so for years.
‘Retail deposit accounts’ are the bank accounts of everyday Australians and small and medium-sized businesses.
This is money taken from these accounts, which people need to pay bills, buy stock, pay the rent and pay staff.
Gone.
This is money a couple is saving to buy their first home.
Gone.
This is money retirees cashed out of superannuation and is needed to live on, to buy food and clothing and pay bills.
Gone.
Gone. Overnight.
Reserve Bank figures show that 1 trillion dollars is available to be taken in a bail-in.
That’s what the Liberal, Nationals and Labor parties defend when opposing my bill.
Next, I’ll share a letter from a constituent, Peter Thompson, last week:
Quote: “As a self-funded retiree I shouldn’t be lying awake at night worrying how to safeguard my deposits from “bail in” by predatory and profligate banks, however I am!”
“I have Greek friends who lost most of their saving in the Greek bank bail in.”
“I don’t trust APRA nor the Treasury to protect my interests and certainly don’t trust any bank. We need a people’s bank… now.”
“What can I do to protect my bank deposits?”
Peter continues: “Withdraw cash, which by design is getting harder and harder to do, and take the risk it will be stolen by more obvious thieves?”
“One can’t buy land or property with the Australian real estate market in radical downturn, I want my deposits in a bank.”
“Your Banking Amendment (Deposits) Bill is a vote winner. It will give Australians, many of whom have no idea of what “bail in” entails, an opportunity to understand and take action to protect their savings and create confidence in the system. “
Thank you, Peter. Creating confidence is exactly why I have proposed this bill.
The public understands that the govt’s Cash Ban bill is designed to force everyday Australians to keep all their money in the banking system to make a bail-in much more effective.
Labor, Liberals and Nationals passed the Cash Ban bill through the House of Reps and are now terrified of the public and backbench backlash if it enters our senate.
The public understands our real estate prices are the third highest in the world.
The public understands that the govt’s COVID restrictions are destroying small and medium business and the ability of those business owners and their staff to service their mortgage, loans and credit card debt.
In fact, there is a sleight of hand going on here. A handful of large retail businesses, telcos and internet-based companies are doing better than ever.
While hundreds of thousands of small and medium businesses are doing much, much worse.
The effect on the economy of the govt’s COVID restrictions is much worse than the headline figures.
And yet State Governments recently doubled down with more lockdowns, more restrictions, more destruction of wealth, and more unemployment amongst small and medium businesses.
So the public are responding by removing cash from the banking system at an alarming rate – $20 billion in notes have gone missing in calendar 2020.
Cash is being stashed under beds.
My Bill is an opportunity to restore confidence in the banking sector.
It’s an opportunity to attract deposits from other countries where bank deposits are less secure than ours.
We could be a safe haven for legal investment in our banking sector – money that isn’t coming, for once, from the taxpayer.
Why shut that down and make banks even more reliant on the Government for funding?
What a missed opportunity that will be for our banks and for their customers.
The Liberal, National and Labor Parties now have a chance to stand up for everyday Australians.
To protect bank deposits from being bailed in.
The response from these tired old parties? Denial.
We’re told that this bill is not necessary. We’re told that the law does not allow for a bail-in.
I ask all Australians to listen more closely. Listen for their proof.
There is none.
No legal opinion, nothing but bland assurances from self-interested public servants hoping that constant repetition will fool the public.
Here’s MY argument. The Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures Act 2018, that was passed in the dead of night, with just 7 Senators present, uses weasel words to hide the reality.
The wording does allow for the banking regulator – APRA – to instruct the banks to bail-in retail deposit accounts.
The protections that the tired old parties rely on for the supposed opposite case are contained, not in the Crisis Resolution Powers Act, but in the Banking Act.
Their argument is a nonsense because the emergency provisions powers in the Crisis Resolution Powers Act over-ride the everyday protections in the Banking Act.
That’s why the govt has an emergency powers act. To provide extra powers in an emergency.
This is not just my opinion. It’s the International Monetary Fund’s opinion. Quote:
“The new ‘catch-all’ directions powers in the 2018 Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Bill provide APRA with the flexibility to make directions to the banks that are not contemplated by the other kinds of general directions listed in the Banking Act.”
“[APRA’s] Direction powers are a key element in the resolution process for a distressed bank. APRA could order a bank to recapitalize…using the funds of unsecured creditors”
The IMF goes on to define ‘unsecured creditors’ as shareholders and retail depositors.
Liberal MP Tim Wilson, Chair of the House Standing Committee on Economics has admitted the Crisis Resolution Powers Act does allow for a bail-in.
Liberal Senator Amanda Stoker in a letter to a constituent admitted that legislation allows for a bail-in.
Yet their party bosses say the complete opposite.
Why would they do that?
Well, the answer is yet again because of our international obligations. The G20 and the IMF have dictated that taxpayers’ money can’t be used to rescue a bank.
The tired old parties know that letting unelected bureaucrats in New York and Brussels tell Australians what to do in a crisis does not pass the pub test.
So the tired old parties hide the facts and contradict reality using weasel words.
It‘s instructional to note that New Zealand’s response to the same IMF and G20 instruction is to do the opposite. The Kiwis dutifully wrote their bail-in laws and made them honest and transparent. If a bank fails the bank closes, pays off it’s debts using depositor funds and then re-opens the next day. Depositors can access what remains of their money. If there is any.
I’m not suggesting the New Zealand model is better. More honest yes, better no.
There’s a simple solution for bank failures.
When a bank fails, the Government could issue bonds. Currently we’re offering just 1% interest on bonds, so it’s not a costly option. We then use that money to buy new shares in the failing bank. That injects enough capital for the bank to survive.
Then vest those shares with the Future Fund, who pay that small interest payment on the bonds.
In a few years those shares will be worth money again and the Future Fund can sell them back into the market in an orderly fashion.
In this simple, ‘One Nation bank survival plan’, taxpayers’ money would not be used to save the bank, so our IMF and G20 masters should be pleased.
Nobody in our process loses money. Depositors keep their cash; banks keep trading, mum and dad shareholders retain the value of their shares over the medium term.
What’s the Labor and LNP track record on corporate bail-outs?
Both gave foreign car companies billions and then watched them shut up shop as soon as the money tap was turned off.
If we’d been asking for shares for that money, we would now own the car companies. We would still have a car manufacturing sector, we would still have all those wonderful breadwinner jobs for workers.
Prime Minister Gillard gave ABC Child Care $120m. Not in exchange for shares, it was another gift from taxpayers.
If we’d asked for shares in ABC Childcare in return for the bail-out those shares would be worth $250 million today.
Our response to a bank failure should not be “go and steal it from customers.“
Our response should be to use capitalism to fix crony-capitalism.
Labor are having a lot to say about their Financial Claims Scheme Guarantee (FCS).
The Financial Claims Scheme Guarantee will advance up to $20 billion per bank, to protect deposits if a bank fails.
Let’s take a closer look at the Financial Claims Scheme Guarantee.
The vast majority of the $1 trillion in retail deposit accounts is held by the big 4 banks. $20 billion times 4 though is only $80 billion. The Financial Claims Scheme Guarantee will save less than 10% of bank deposits!!!!
The Financial Claims Scheme Guarantee is not active and is not funded. There’s no money sitting there ready to go. Not one cent.
Should a bank fail, the Treasurer must issue a notice to activate the scheme. Yet, the Labor scheme uses taxpayer’s money to bail-out banks so the Treasurer will not issue the notice because the notice would breach IMF orders.
In the unlikely event of the Financial Claims Scheme Guarantee being activated, there’s a second problem that Labor never discusses: once the Financial Claims Scheme Guarantee is activated APRA must liquidate the bank to get taxpayers’ money back.
How much does anyone think will be available to retail depositors if the bank is liquidated? And how long will customers have to wait to get their money back from the liquidator?
The Financial Claims Scheme Guarantee is worse than a con job. It will make things worse.
Earlier I said that once a bank fails, whether that failure is public or only known to the regulator, the Financial Claims Scheme Guarantee scheme can be activated if the Treasurer so chooses.
The whole point of a bail-in is to prevent a bank failing.
This means the bail-in can only come first. And will come first. Then if the bail-in doesn’t work the Financial Claims Scheme Guarantee triggers, 10% of bank deposits are saved and the bank is liquidated.
This is what Liberals, Nationals and Labor are relying on to falsely tell everyday Australians ‘our money is safe?’ Yet the reality is that it’s not safe.
Following the dictates of unelected globalist masters is more important to them than looking out for the interests of everyday Australians.
The Government has advanced a criticism of my bill, that the definition of ‘retail deposit account’ introduces a different definition than is contained elsewhere in the Banking Act.
This argument fails because the only place the phrase ‘retail deposit account’ appears in the Banking Act is in my amendment. We did that deliberately so as to not interfere with the rest of the act.
Criticism dismissed.
In concluding Mr President, at no time has the Government, the Treasurer or APRA actually said they will not order a bail-in. These govt agencies duck the question and say “APRA doesn’t have the power”.
Well Mr President my bill clears that up. My bill adds one clause to the Banking Act that simply says APRA does not have the power to order a bail-in.
No other powers are affected.
Passing my bill ensures everyone will read it the same way.
Let Australians know that our money is safe in a bank. Let Australians know that there’s no need to stuff cash under the bed.
Even the Australian Bankers Association in its submission said if there is any confusion about what the law actually says then consider passing my bill.
What a great idea.
Let’s pass this bill, to keep people’s money safe.
Malcolm’s Fight
Casual Coal Wage TheftFebruary 21, 2024 - 2:09 pmOver $30,000 a year being stolen, and it’s been signed off by the union and the government. Find out about the largest wage theft from casuals in Australia.
My Other IssuesFebruary 16, 2021 - 12:08 pm
Murray Darling BasinMarch 23, 2020 - 3:05 am
Foreign OwnershipOctober 16, 2019 - 4:58 am
Property rightsOctober 16, 2019 - 4:39 am
United Nations #AUSEXITOctober 16, 2019 - 2:31 am