By refusing to accept accurate data on deaths in custody from the Australian Institute of Criminology in my Motion, the senate has effectively voted that they are not interested in data, not interested in objectivity and not interested in truth.

I stand by my belief and statement, and that is this: all lives matter. I will continue to support free speech as crucial to democracy and freedom, and that is essential for human progress.

Have we reached the ultimate stage of absurdity where some people are held responsible for things that happened before they were born, while other people are not held responsible for what they themselves are doing today?

Transcript

Thank you Madam acting Deputy President. As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, I want to speak on a fundamental for human progress. Freedom and Freedom of Speech. Freedom of speech is enshrined in our country after many high court rulings.

It’s not specifically covered in our constitution, yet it’s implied. And because the high court’s rulings, it is enshrined in our country, and yet today freedom of speech is under threat and it’s under threat in this parliament. In fact, our whole way of life is under threat.

Listen to these wise words of American, African-American economist and philosopher, Thomas Sowell. He says, “We are living in an era “where sanity is controversial. “and insanity is just another viewpoint. “and degeneracy only another lifestyle.”

And this point from Thomas Sowell, “Have we reached the ultimate stage of absurdity “when some people are held responsible “for things that happened before they were born, “while other people are not held responsible “for what they themselves are doing today?”

Take the case of All Lives Matter. Surely there wouldn’t be anyone in Australia who would disagree that all lives matter. Yet in just four days, we witnessed the following events. Labor Senator Helen Polley tweeted the words “all lives matter” last Tuesday.

And she was eaten alive by her own party. She retracted the tweet. Senator Pauline Hanson stated in her matter of public importance speech that we need, and she wants all people to be equal under the law.

Yet Greens senators, Rice and McKim and labor senators Ayres, labor senator Ayres, implied, or stated that Senator Hanson is racist and that I am racist. Senator McKim said it before I even, even started my speech. “Their statements and implied statements are false.

“They are lies and lies are a form of control. “People lie when they lack a coherent argument “and it cannot counter our position, “cannot counter our argument. “So they resort to personal attacks and lies.” Liberal speakers, during Senator Hanson’s matter of public importance said many times that all lives matter.

And Senator Hanson moved a motion then, tried to move a motion the next day that all lives matter. The government and labor stopped Senator Hanson. All senators in this chamber, except for me and Senator Hanson disagreed it seems that all lives matter.

So the people leading this country don’t think that all lives matter. The next day, the fourth day, I tried to present graph, prior to present data, showing the data on deaths in custody and the government stopped me. Stopped me, presenting their own data.

Notice that I said deaths in custody, not black deaths in custody, not Aboriginal deaths in custody, deaths in custody. And it came in this report. Now I’ll go through that data, from the Australian government’s own Australian Institute of criminology. It’s the latest report.

It’s the 2020 report entitled “Deaths in custody in Australia” written by Laura Dotty and Samantha Bricknell. in 2017-18, the rate of death in custody for prisoner types was indigenous persons, 0.14 per 100 prisoners, non indigenous persons, 0.18 per 100 prisoners.

Now non-indigenous appears to be 25% higher yet I tell the truth and I did not mislead. This would not be a statistically significant difference as the sample numbers are so small. So we can say without any, without any doubt that non-indigenous and indigenous persons died in custody at roughly the same rate.

The 2017, 2018 total deaths in police custody and custody related operations was indigenous people, three, non-indigenous people, 14. In 2017-18, 79% of indigenous deaths in prison custody were due to natural causes. 4/5 of deaths in prison custody were due to natural causes.

Over the decade to 2018, non-indigenous persons were nearly, non-indigenous persons were nearly twice as likely as indigenous persons to hang themselves in prison custody. Motor vehicle pursuits represented 38% of indigenous deaths in police custody and custody related operations.

Almost four in 10, driving the vehicle themselves. From 2006 to 2016, a 41% increase in indigenous imprisonment rates corresponded almost exactly with a 42% increase in people identifying as indigenous. In other words, the rate of indigenous deaths in custody stay the same in proportion and did not increase.

Using the figure of 437 unconvicted indigenous deaths without reference to critical detail and context results in a distorted discussion of indigenous issues. And when real issues remain hidden, they cannot be solved. That leads to proposed solutions being not useful and possibly harmful.

The issue is not unequal treatment before the law, the real issue for Aboriginal people, maybe lifestyle or cultural or poverty or welfare dependency. But let’s have the truth because only then can we identify core problems and only then can we identify core solutions.

Only then can we really care for the disadvantaged and help them solve the challenges they face. But all people must be equal before the law. Another real issue then is dishonesty in parliament and fear of data. Fear of data, that’s what brings objectivity.

And yet the people in this parliament run from it. Their own data. So I wanna make these core points. Number one, these are hard data from the government’s own agency yet the government is jumping from its own shadow, afraid to debate, even though the points are supportive of their case.

That begs the question, is the government is afraid of a split within its own ranks? The wokes versus the real liberals? and several liberals have approached me and discussed the party’s fear of data and reality. Number two, the left or control side of politics hates data.

It undermines their use of opinion, hearsay, smears, emotions, propaganda, and lies to hijack issues. That fabricates victims and that weakens the very people they claim to be helping. Their ideology is based on victim-hood as a means of creating division and separation and that cripples people.

Thirdly, the government’s position in suppressing the data shows a fear of data, a disdain of data, a disrespect for people, highlights how, it highlights how issues are pushed to avoid data. Climate, Senator Ian McDonald stood up there.

The former Senator Ian McDonald stood up there in the last Monday of 2016 and said, looked across at me and said, “I don’t always agree with Senator Roberts, “but I’ve got to admit and respect him for starting “the debate on the climate science that we have never had “in this parliament and still have not had.”

The absence of data allows destructive policies that are hurting and killing people and certainly making life miserable financially, materially and emotionally. With the exception of Senator Hanson and myself, all other senators have effectively voted that all lives do not matter.

All other senators have effectively voted that they are not interested in data, not interested in objectivity, not interested in truth. I stand by my belief and statement, and that is this, all lives matter. I will continue to support free speech as crucial for democracy and freedom.

And essential for freedom that is essential for human progress. Thank you, Mr.President.