Posts

MEDIA RELEASE: CHINESE DIPLOMACY USELESS UNTIL AUSTRALIAN INTERESTS PUT FIRST

,

Senator Malcolm Roberts declared Prime Minister Albanese’s trip to China redundant while critical Australian manufacturing is offshored and essential commodities are shipped to the communist regime. He said:

“The net zero Transition is a national security risk to Australia and China knows it. China has a monopoly over almost every element of the wind, solar and battery supply chain.”

“China hasn’t had to apologise at all for its campaign of economic coercion against Australia to secure this meeting with Albanese. They will do it again if we try to stand for our interests.”

“China continued to be our number one trading customer throughout the diplomatic freeze, proving they need our high-quality coal and iron ore more than we need them.”

“We ship coal and iron ore to China, they use it to make cheap electricity and steel, then our net-zero chasing government pays to buy solar panels and steel wind turbines back off them.”

“The Labor government’s continued kowtowing to China on critical industries and dropping our sure-to-win WTO complaint over wine and barley will not work.”

“China will only ever respond to strength. If the previous years have taught us anything, it is that we should be doing everything we can do get out of Communist China Party supply chains and bring manufacturing back to Australia.”

231107-Statement-on-Albanese-Travel-to-China-Malcolm-RobertsDownload
/2 Comments/by

Labor Must Not Cut the Budget for Antarctica

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

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

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

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

We hold Antarctica through our efforts as a nation.

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

One Nation will always put Australia’s interests first.

Transcript

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

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

One Nation will always put Australia’s interests first.

/by

Why are we letting China use our coal?

,

China uses Australian coal to make cheap power and products which we then buy back off them, even subsidising them in the case of wind turbines and solar panels. This madness has to stop.

/11 Comments/by

The Wuhan “Conspiracy Theory” – Not a conspiracy any more

During the COVID response I was temporarily banned from social media for pointing out that COVID could have emerged from the Wuhan lab.

This fact is now widely acknowledged, even by the former directer of the US Centre for Disease Control. Who’s spreading misinformation now?

Transcript

In light of acting minister Senator Chisholm’s comments when he mentioned COVID, I wish to note and draw to the Senate’s attention that the bill that was passed this morning, the Therapeutic Goods Amendment (2022 Measures No. 1) Bill 2022, combined with this bill, makes it impossible to dodge vaccine mandates. 

I want to draw the attention of the Senate to two points. The first is an article by the Washington correspondent for the Australian, Adam Creighton. The article is headlined ‘”US helped fund Covid-19″: ex CDC director Robert Redfield’. Dr Robert Redfield is a former director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in the United States. It’s supposedly an authoritative body. The article says: Dr Redfield … said … during a House Select Coronavirus Pandemic Subcommittee hearing on “Investigating the Origins of COVID-19” that the deadly coronavirus “more likely was the result of an accidental lab leak”— 

Whoops! Those conspiracy theorists were right! The article says: 

The former head of the US Centers for Disease Control has told Congress the US government likely helped fund the development of Sars-Cov2, which he believed leaked from a Chinese lab in late 2019, ultimately killing more than 6 million people globally. 

Asked by Republican congresswoman Nicole Malliotakis whether “American tax dollars funded the gain of function research that created this virus”, Dr Redfield, who was CDC director between 2018 and 2021, replied “I think it did”. 

This is serious stuff. The article goes on to say: “As a clinical virologist I felt it was not scientifically plausible that this virus went from a bat to humans and became one of the most infectious viruses we have for humans … 

His testimony came a week after revelations the FBI and the US Department of Energy had assessed the lab leak theory — once dubbed a ‘conspiracy theory’ — where have I heard that before — to be the most likely explanation for the origin of the pandemic. 

Dr Redfield, who was appointed by the Trump administration … said he had been side-lined early on by Dr Fauci — where have I heard his name before — and NIH head Dr Francis Collins — where have I heard her name before — who, Dr Redfield said, wanted to “create a narrative” the virus emerged naturally. 

It’s rubbish. The article continues: The two hours of testimony and questioning by Democrat and Republican representatives of four expert witnesses on Wednesday … centred around private emails from top US scientists to Dr Fauci in late January, which suggested the new virus ‘looked engineered’ — Senator Babet — and what may have prompted their subsequent about face. 

On February 4th, four of those scientists among a group of 11, who had convened on a confidential conference call organised by Dr Fauci, from which Dr Redfield — head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — was excluded, claimed the lab leak idea was not feasible in a draft academic paper that became the “Proximal Origin of Sars-Cov2”, published in March. 

“I didn’t know there was a February 1 conference call until the Freedom of Information came out with the emails and I was quite upset as the CDC director that I was excluded,” Dr Redfield said. 

One of the witnesses, Nicholas Wade, both former editor of Nature and senior New York Times science writer, said the media had been “used” to establish the natural origin theory. 

Like this government has been used. The article continues: He also pointed out the scientists — remember, this is a Democrat — who seemingly changed their mind over the course of a few days later received a US$9 million grant from Dr Fauci’s NIAID in May 2020. 

This is serious stuff. The article continues: Another witness, Dr Jamie Metzl, said the idea the virus emerged from wet markets was never the most logical explanation. 

“I’m a lifelong Democrat. I consider myself a progressive person, but … I couldn’t find the justification for the strong arguments, calling people like me, investigating looking into pandemic origins in good faith, conspiracy theorists”. 

This smells. The TGA bill, combined with this bill, enables injection mandates. Let’s have a think about who could be the beneficiaries here. On Tuesday I discussed the fact that, over the last 15 years, 47 market-leading drugs have aged out of patent, costing pharmaceutical companies $30 billion a year in lost sales, including drugs that made up 42 per cent of Pfizer’s drug revenue and 62 per cent of AstraZeneca’s. This patent cliff is set to get worse, with another 15 leading drugs—nine of them among the world’s top-20 best-selling drugs—due to expire this decade. Pfizer will lose another $15 billion in annual sales. The only way to replace so much revenue is with a whole new class of drug: mRNA—not tested, thought to be dangerous, killing people in this country and globally. 

We’ve now seen that drug on the market, through mandates that the federal government drove.

The former Prime Minister drove the injection mandates in this country.

He bought the injections. He indemnified the states. He gave them to the states and gave them access to the health data that enabled the states to control the mandates.

We are looking at something being set up here that is heinous. 

/27 Comments/by

Marles must go

Deputy Labor Leader Richard Marles has shown that his first allegiance lies with China, not Australia.

Marles has clearly shown that his true colour is red, like Labor, when he delivered a speech praising the Chinese Communist Party, delivered in China in Beijing in 2019.

He said in the speech that Chinese investment in the Pacific was a good thing and called for closer military ties between China and Australia.

He had even cleared the contents of the speech with the Chinese Embassy in Canberra before delivering it, but it was not shared with the Australian government.

Why would Mr Marles cowtow to the Chinese unless he is either totally misguided, stupidly dangerous or a Chinese government servant?

In 2017 Mr Marles had given a speech praising China’s considerable humanitarian achievements, describing them as a “force for good”.

Pity the poor Uighurs who have been forced to live in labour camps for re-education.

Marles argued that China did not seek to export its ideology or to influence other countries’ political systems, even though this was contrary to then existing ASIO warnings about foreign influence in Australia.

Richard Marles is the Deputy Leader of the Labor Party and if elected at this federal election, he could become one of the most influential voices in Australian government. Will we all need to learn to speak Cantonese?

This must not be allowed to happen.

Labor will be soft on China if it comes into government.

To stop this happening Mr Marles must step down or be made to do so and Labor must not be voted into power.

Pauline Hanson’s One Nation represents all Australians and supports Australia as a sovereign country.

“Richard Marles praised Xi Jinping, China’s human rights record, said Australia should stay out of South China Sea dispute:  https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/richard-marles-praised-xi-jinping-chinas-human-rights-record-and-said-australia-should-stay-out-of-south-china-sea-dispute/news-story/d3ae177ff5a51c702183abbebbd4f517

/by

Government opening the door to China’s bullying in Antarctica

, , ,

Australia claims a very large part of Antarctica as our territory. Despite this, China is muscling in, refusing to sign treaties and building 5 research bases in the Australian Antarctic territory. To add to the worries, Australian Government has back-flipped on its plans to build a strategically important, all-weather runway at Davis research base.

This opens the door for China to do it instead, further eroding our claim to Antarctic territory.

The decision came from the minister for environment which begs the question, have we let China take a strategic win because we were a little bit worried about the penguin’s feelings?

Transcript

I think the last stretch.

Thank you, Chair. Thank you for being here tonight. Minister Sussan Ley recently made a decision to not proceed with the building of an all-weather runway at Davis research base in Antarctica. What level of consultation did the Minister have with the Department of Defence and what advice was received prior to making such a decision, which many see as retrograde?

Senator, I can probably assist with that. That was a decision taken by the Government. There was extensive consultation with a range of departments and indeed I and Mr. Ellis personally, were in discussions with the Secretary and the CDF and others on that matter before it was considered by Government.

I understand Defence were pushing it.

I think the view taken by the Government was that the combination of the very significant environmental impact, the proceeding with the airstrip, would do together with the very sizable cost, ultimately meant that proceeding with a project that would not provide results for another 15 or 20 years was not viable. However, there are a whole range of other ways that we are very confident we’ll be able to ensure continuing and indeed expanded presence in Antarctica.

Was the Minister aware of the likelihood of China then building the strategically important runway, thereby enhancing its claim for a portion of the Australian Antarctic territory when the Australian Antarctic territory is renegotiated, or even sooner, because China is not a party to the Treaty?

A full range of geopolitical and other considerations were available to government in taking the decision, Senator.

Is the Minister aware that China has already built five research bases within the Australian Antarctic territory to enhance its future claim?

The answer is yes, we certainly are aware. I’ll let Mr. Ellis answer as to the number, but certainly we’re aware that China, and indeed a number of other countries, have established bases in the area claimed by Australia.

Does this mean that environmental issues, such as the comfort of penguins can be used to negotiate, to negate issues of national security to the detriment of all Australians? You mentioned that, you mentioned the 15 year time span for the return, I’ve just come from the Australian Rail Trade Corporation and they’re talking about a 30 year timeframe.

Some of these projects do involve a long period of time, Senator. But the answer is that we are very confident that the right decision was made, taking into account all of the factors and, as I’ve said, indicating that Australia’s is continuing presence. Our scientific research, our expeditionary exploration are second to none and we’ll continue over the decades ahead.

So is this yet another example of the short-term strategy visions that have dogged Australian antarctic policy, antarctic policy making us a pushover for the Chinese Communist Party?

I wouldn’t agree with the premise of any of that Senator, Australia very significantly ensures that we are a strong player in the international system that focuses on Antarctica, on CCAMLR and Australia, through investments, such as the Nuyina, which we’ve just been talking about at 1.8 billion dollar investment together with all of the other activities that Mr. Ellis and our hundreds of staff, both in Hobart and in Antarctica undertake, we believe that we are very much ensuring Australia’s interests are protected and advanced.

Perhaps a question to Senator Hume. The Chinese Communist Party just rolls over weak leaders. They see in Australia a country that is handed over its sovereignty to many UN agreements, destroying our energy, for example, our property rights, UN policies gutting our culture. These get no respect from the CCP and I think it makes us targets. So, was this the best decision to make at a time of heightened concern about the expansion as policies and aggression of the CCP? Especially as what they’re doing to us in trade.

I don’t necessarily agree with the premise of your question, Senator Roberts, but what I will say is that Australia in no way will be ceding any of our territory. The decision that was made was always gonna be contingent on a final investment decision next year and careful consideration of the environmental impact, economic investment and broader national interests. Australia feels that it’s particularly important that all nations place the Antarctic environment at the absolute centre of their decision making, and respect to the Treaty system. And the government is now considering further investments in our scientific research and environmental programmes in Antarctica. That include to continue to create jobs and investment for Tasmania, as the international gateway to East Antarctica.

Thank you, Chair.

[Attendant] Thank you very much.

/by

Government delays moving Defence data from CHINESE-OWNED company

, ,

Sensitive Defence information is still being held at data centers owned by Global Switch, a Chinese-owned multinational company, despite promises to have all government data migrated out by 2020. Regardless of the complexity of the move or data being “less sensitive”, this is an unacceptable situation. The Chinese Communist Party must be laughing at our Government.

Transcript

Okay, thank you. Getting onto storage of defence data, including critical secure data. In February, 2021, the Australian federal government renewed its contract with the firm Global Switch, despite serious security concerns. The company has hosted Australia’s sensitive and high security data for some time. Elegant Jubilee, a Chinese consortium, bought 49% of the parent British company Alders Gate Investments, causing an ownership change for Global Switch in 2016. Then treasurer Scott Morrison said in 2017 that the defence data would be shifted back to a government owned hub for security reasons. After he became prime minister, he later decided to extend their contracts with Global Switch. Does the firm Global Switch still host Australia’s sensitive and high security defence data?

Senator, Jeff Goedecke, First Assistant Secretary ICT Service Delivery and Reform. The Global Switch facility, which is completely controlled by the commonwealth, does hold some of the less sensitive data. There are as indicated in the release by secretary Moriarty in February last year, there are plans in place to migrate that data from Global Switch by 2025. This is in accordance with the whole of government hosting strategy.

So why was it decided to continue this arrangement, hosted ultimately with, with Chinese ownership?

It’s, it’s, it’s not Chinese ownership. As I said, the Commonwealth owns, has complete control of the facility, both from a physical perspective and from a, and a, a protection from a logical sense, from an ICT perspective and security perspective. The amount of equipment and data, and the complexity and interdependencies, necessitate a longer term to remove these things. There’s a, a great deal of reliance on defence business continuity, that requires a staged approach to remove this stuff. It basically, the complexity and size of the footprint, the payload inside the data centre, means it was impossible to, to move that over a very short period of time.

So when was the decision last made to, to leave it there, and eventually you take it off by 2025?

So, just bear with me, Senator

And Senator, Greg Moriarty, Secretary of the Department. All of, all of the highly sensitive information is, is long gone. So what, so-

What sort of information is there?

Well, this-

So we, so what happened was the government approved, back 2018 for defence to be funded to move what was sensitive data from the data centre out. That occurred by June, 2020. So that was all removed. Because of the size of the footprint of the remaining data, which is less sensitive data, again, still protected from a government perspective and government controlled. There was a, there is a process in place now where we are, have an evolution to move that data out. And that ties in with the additional lease, which expires in 2025.

So what is that less sensitive data?

It, it’s for a range, range of things. It could be administrative related. It could be some sort of logistic, but we wouldn’t normally discuss exactly what type of data we hold in what locations.

So there’s no risk whatsoever of the Chinese accessing it, ’cause they’re pretty good hackers.

There, there is no risk.

What, what, why can you be sure of that?

It’s, it’s based on the, the the facility itself has physical controls in place. That’s everything from, from it being a fully manned facility, it has all of the CCTV capabilities. It has, you know, alarms, it’s fully accredited. And in fact, the facility is accredited to look after more sensitive data. That hasn’t changed. So there’s a higher level of security than would normally be afforded that level of data, which is an important factor as well. In addition to that, we have ICT securities. So cybersecurity controls where we, we monitor that we have a, the defence security operations centre monitors cyber activity. And that includes that within the footprint as well. Gateway, secure gateways also assure the information. So from a defence perspective there aren’t risks related to that, Senator.

Has it been tested at all? ‘Cause the Chinese, some Chinese are very good hackers. I’m sure you know that.

Absolutely. So there are, defence has no indications at all that there’s been any compromise at all related to data held in that facility.

So it’s not a case then of the, the Fox looking after the hen house?

Not at all.

Okay.

No, but, and, and just to make sure that, I mean, that, that is why the government has, has directed defence to move all of the data by a particular point in time. Senator, we believe that the mitigation strategy that we have in place is very robust for the, for that level in, in fact, as Mr. Goedecke said, it’s, it’s much more significant wraparound than what normal data of that level would be. But we are moving out. We are, we are gonna remove absolutely any risk by, by removing ourselves from that, from that data centre. And the government has, has agreed the timeline.

Thank you. And thank you, too.

Additional Information

https://www.itnews.com.au/news/defence-delays-global-switch-data-centre-exit-by-up-to-five-years-560042

https://www.afr.com/companies/telecommunications/federal-bodies-struggle-to-exit-chinese-owned-data-centre-20200304-p546p5

/by

The Drums of War – 2SM with Marcus Paul

,

Governments are destroying our country which is making it harder to stand up to China. I talked to Marcus Paul this morning about that and how I was reminded over the weekend about just how good Australian manufacturing used to be.

Transcript

[Marcus Paul] Hello, Malcolm.

[Malcolm Roberts] Good morning, Marcus, how are you?

[Marcus Paul] All right, thank you how are you?

[Malcolm Roberts] Very well, thanks.

[Marcus Paul] What do you make of it all, the drums of war beating and all this rubbish?

[Malcolm Roberts] Well, I think you summarised it very well, when you said marketing. It’s about pretending that the government is strong. Whereas in fact, I’ve just finished an inquiry report for the Northern Agenda. You know, what’s happening in our country, Marcus, is that the North is being held back along the same issues that the South is destroying. Energy, water, taxation, the basics. And the fundamental point about security is you have to have a strong economy. And the wombats in Canberra are destroying our economy through pandering to overseas bureaucrats, and selling our country out. It’s treasonous. So the fundamentals: we have to have a strong economy, a strong country, and that’s what we need to get back to.

[Marcus Paul] All right, with the fact that the, you know, the whole issue of quarantine during the pandemic, which is a federal responsibility, is being completely ballsed up, and palmed off by Morrison and his mates, with the fact that that’s completely being stuffed up. Be, you know, some of the reasons for the distraction, do you think?

[Malcolm Roberts] Possibly quite possibly, because you know, these politicians in Canberra have a habit of distracting, as you just said. But the whole pandemic has not been managed well. What we’ve got is an absence of data, that’s driving the plans. And we don’t have a plan, actually. We don’t even have a strategy. It just seems to be lurching from one thing to the next. One moment, one message to sell. Every single week, different message. There’s no coherent plan, that’s based on data. And I’ll talk more about that in a few weeks time, at senate estimates. But we need a plan for managing our economy, because that is fundamental to health. What we’re doing is destroying our economy, with some of the responses. I mean, people, you know, the Premiers of the States talk, and the Prime Minister talks about going and spending money in your state, and travelling. How the hell can people make plans when they could fly to Western Australia for example, and get locked down because they’ve got one positive test. They’d have to come back and spend $3,000 in quarantine. It’s just capricious. It’s destructive, it doesn’t consider the people.

[Marcus Paul] Your mates up there in the upper Hunter, might be as unhappy as what labor are at the moment, because I’m sorry, Pork-Barrelarow is out there with his chequebook, story this morning. And they’re promising funding to a number of women’s business organisations. While you know, there are other areas, probably should be prioritised. There’s a bit more pork barreling going on by the Berejiklian Barrilaro government, to sort of like keep your heads up on that, mate.

[Malcolm Roberts] I’m not surprised, are you?

[Marcus Paul] Well, of course not.

[Malcolm Roberts] But you know what these people are going around. What we have in this country is a system of having options every four years at the state level, every three years at the federal government level. And people don’t seem to realise that these promises have to be paid for. And who’s gonna pay for them? The very people who have taken part in the election, the voters. So, it’s a disrespectful way of running government, but it seems, the people seem to fall for it quite often. So we’ve gotta get more people aware of what’s going on in government, so that people realise that these promises are just hollow, and that they’re wasting money, quite often

[Marcus Paul] Aussie ingenuity and initiative, what’s happened to it? We used to make engines and wonderful pieces of technology.

[Malcolm Roberts] Well, you’re absolutely correct, Marcus. A lot of your listeners, the older listeners will remember names like Lister, Southern Cross, Cooper, Sundial, Barzakov. These are just some of the names on old engines, old diesel engines that were purring and puttering along at the Dalby, I went out to the Dalby Show. You know, you would have gone to shows when you were a kid.

[Marcus Paul] Oh yeah, yep.

[Malcolm Roberts] Yeah, Royal Easter, where did you grow up?

[Marcus Paul] Sydney’s West, the Luddenham Show, the Penrith Show. You know, they were wonderful.

[Malcolm Roberts] Yeah, and so what we saw at Dalby, which is west of Toowoomba on the Darling Downs, beautiful Darling Downs, it’s definitely a rural town. And we saw one whole field dedicated to 400, more than 400 engines, old engines. Had to be more than 30 years old. Some of them are a 100 years old that were puttering along, and they set a record for having the most engines running concurrently in a small area. But could you imagine this? Hundred metres long, five lines of engines, all with the enthusiasts with them, tinkering them along. You know and these engines, as I said, had to be more than 30 years old. But they worked across our country. They were essential in farming industry. Many were designed and built in Australia, highly dependable, highly reliable. Some were built under licence from overseas countries. We make none of these engines now, none at all. Yet we have great people like Jack Brabham, for example. He’s the only person ever, to have been an owner of a Formula One team, a designer of a car, and the driver, the only one ever. And he won three world champions. He’ll never be repeated. We’ve got the talent in this country. We’ve just destroyed our capacity to be productive.

[Marcus Paul] Ah, gee. All right, Malcolm. Great to have you on the programme, mate. We’ll catch up again next week. Thank you.

[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you, Marcus. Have a good one, mate. One Nation’s Malcolm Roberts. Marcus Paul in the Morning.

/by

How many foreign deals have we actually rejected? Questioning the Foreign Investment Review Board

, , ,

Despite the tough talk about foreign ownership, the government continues to allow foreign entities to buy up too much Australian land and critical infrastructure. While there is a lot of spotlight on larger deals, the government isn’t that concerned about the amount of small residential properties that are being lost to foreign ownership.

This pushes up the price of local house prices while other countries won’t even let us own property in their country. There is a difference between foreign investment and foreign ownership. Foreign investment, fine. But foreign ownership, absolutely not.

Transcript

And you have the call Senator Roberts.

[Senator Malcolm Roberts]

Thank you, Chair. Thank you all for being here today. Since the Foreign Investment Review Board lowered the dollar threshold for projects to be considered to zero, how many projects have been rejected because of unsuitability by the treasurer?

[Tom Hamilton First Assistant Secretary, Foreign Investment Division]

Senator, excuse me, Tom Hamilton First Assistant Secretary, Foreign Investment Division. I don’t have a specific response to a question in relation to the timeframe that you’ve asked. As you know, a very small number of rejections over the period of operation of the FADA itself. We work every carefully to facilitate investment into the country and we, you know, we’ve been very careful through the whole period of the $0 threshold to ensure that we are allowing investment works in the national interest.

[Malcolm Roberts]

So I understand it’s only investigated if the project is raised by someone, is that right?

[Tom Hamilton]

No, that’s not right Senator. So if- every investment that comes through under the foreign investment framework is assessed carefully by Treasury and its consult partners on a case by case basis, you referred to the $0 threshold, which is a temporary measure during the course of 2020. During that period, we looked at every proposal that came forward before the treasury in accordance with the operation of that threshold.

[Malcolm Roberts]

So can you get me the numbers?

[Tom Hamilton]

I can give you the numbers for, for the numbers that were considered. Let me start my numbers here. All right, so for the period of, in total in 2020, there were 2,943 proposals. Of those, 1,732 were not $0 threshold. So the balance were that the cases that came forward as a result of the operation of that new threshold.

[Malcolm Roberts]

And none were rejected?

[Tom Hamilton]

I don’t have that number Senator.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Could you get me that number please?

[Tom Hamilton]

We’ll take that notice Senator.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Thank you. When will the Commonwealth Government act to stop foreign purchases or leases of significant local real estate gems, including Keswick Island in the Whitsundays in Queensland, as foreign purchases continue to buy up local real estate, rural mining, and tourist properties?

[Minister Simon Birmingham]

Senator, a number of different waves in relation to foreign investment reform over the time, our time in government, to seek to make sure that the perspective that has long been Australia’s policy in relation to foreign investment, which is that it ought to occur, where it’s in national interest is one that is effectively applied under our foreign investment laws. You know, foreign investment is important to a country like Australia. It has continued to support economic growth, jobs growth and ultimately achieving wages and living standards above a level, certainly well above global averages and global standards commensurate with a small country in population terms able to achieve large economic outcomes, thanks to domestic growth and foreign investment activity. And so it remains important but it has to be in the national interest. And that’s why we have taken successive steps, particularly in areas of national security to make sure that we have the right safeguards there to make those decisions. Just make an observation in terms of your first question about numbers rejected as well that it’s not unusual through the screening process for applications to be withdrawn at different junctures depending upon the types of question scrutiny or otherwise perhaps that applicants find themselves facing. So numbers rejected should not be seen as the only measure of effectiveness in relation to the FIRB, the mere fact that we have the regime in place would stop some from even bothering to make an application quite clearly. And then even the process itself will occasionally deter some as they get a sense of the type of conditions or the type of rejections that or the potential for rejection that may ensue.

[Malcolm Roberts]

That’s a fair comment. I’m also interested then in the number of rejections, sorry the number that have withdrawn their applications.

[Tom Hamilton]

I mean, Senator I’ll take that on notice. I mean, one thing that we bear in mind is being very careful not to release information that might relate to the business dealings of the applicants. But we’ll take that question on notice.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Minister, I don’t think there’d be too many Australians who would argue with you that we need investment. However, there would be a lot of Australians who are upset about the control in foreign hands, and we’ve got Keswick Island, a beautiful gem in the Whitsundays, and it’s now been leased by the Queensland Government to a Chinese firm. And that is now acting like tin pot dictators over that island and trashing the barrier reef and the state government’s doing nothing. Now that’s not your responsibility to the state government as the lessee but lessor, rather, but these are the kinds of incidents that leave a bad taste in people’s mouth when we’ve got Chinese coming in here or anyone foreign and restricting what Australians can do and can’t do. And in fact, hurting our own environment. They are the things that annoy people.

[Simon Birmingham]

Look, I without personally knowing the circumstances around Keswick Island, so I’d be reluctant to comment directly on that, but as a general observation Senator Roberts you’re right, there’s a social licence aspect that goes to areas like foreign investment. It’s why making sure the Third Regime operates in the national interest has been so important to our government to seek to maintain that support for our own investment. And particularly as we face changed security risks and environments across our region to respond to that in the way in which we have structured those arrangements but indeed other things beyond our control, such as the way in which properties are operated, obviously can also undermine areas of confidence. And so all governments in that sense, have a responsibility to make sure that not only do we have effective screening but also that the laws and standards that we expect in this country, be they in relation to payment of wages and industrial conditions, be they in relation to payment of taxes, be they in relation to protection of the environment, apply equally to whoever you are. Absolutely.

[Malcolm Roberts]

And compliance with our laws. Is there any opportunity for us to contact someone in FIRB to discuss this particular issue? Do you have a review process?

[Witness]

Senator we are always happy for people to contact and give information. And I would just add to what the Minister has said that character of investors is part of the national interest tests that we look at as well. So we’re very happy for people to contact and provide information.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Okay, thank you. We will do that. Are there any more rule changes being considered to take into account the widespread purchases of Australian properties by overseas interests pushing up prices and making it harder for younger Australians to purchase a home?

[Witness]

So certainly in relation to foreign investment, as you know, the most recent and significant set of reforms came to effect from the 1st of January. The government has commenced a review of the legislation as set out in the legislation itself. That review is due for completion at the end of this year. We have made it clear in talking to stakeholders that we’re willing to, you know, hear from interested parties around the operation of the act.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Okay so then you’re just doing a review at the moment.

[Witness]

Yeah, that’s right.

[Malcolm Roberts]

No formal consideration of further changes yet.

[Witness]

Well, Senator the changes just took effect from 1 January. And so we’re actually quickly commencing our review process, which was part of what was passed in the legislation. And we’ve got until the end of this year to complete the review of the changes that were just made. So that’s why we’re sort of saying we’re very happy to hear from people because there are quite extensive legislative changes that were implemented as of 1 January.

[Malcolm Roberts]

That’s right. And we’re happy with some of them, but we’ll see how they’re implemented because it comes down to not just the legislation, but how it’s implemented. And that seems to be an area that’s wanting, especially when we see water and land and properties and essential services like electricity in foreign hands.

[Chair]

Senator Roberts, we want move rather soon.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Can I have the last question?

[Chair]

Yes.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Is it not time to consider stopping sales of Australian assets to overseas interests? Many countries do not allow foreign ownership of their land. Investment in Australia is fine and may include long-term leases but we need to sell stop selling off our country. Is there any consideration being given to at least stopping sales of land to those, citizens of those countries that don’t allow Australians to own land in their countries.

[Witness]

I think Senator, as the minister has said the positive impact of foreign investment is very, very obvious.

[Malcolm Roberts]

I don’t dispute that. I agree with that.

[Simon Birmingham]

But I think Senator Roberts, it’s particularly important given the way you frame the question there to understand the extensive restrictions that exist in relation to foreign investment in residential property. The tightened screening restrictions were put in place in relation to foreign investment in agricultural lands as well. And in terms of your question about how other countries treat us, I guess we have under our foreign investment arrangements an overall approach that sets the threshold for any country in the world and their eligibility to purchase, which usually entails more frequent screening and lower thresholds for screening. And then we have the thresholds and arrangements that are put in place under reciprocal arrangements, essentially as negotiated through our free trade agreements that do seek to provide a, usually then a slightly higher threshold for screening to apply because of the level of reciprocity that’s usually been negotiated.

[Witness]

And if I can add to what the minister said, which is all correct, the thresholds do vary. For foreign government investors, $0 threshold continues to apply. And there are some, much stricter thresholds in relation to agricultural land as well. And not withstanding the threshold, every time an investor comes to us, we look at that case very carefully.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Well perhaps, I said, I wouldn’t ask any more questions. So that was my last but perhaps I could just give you one area to consider in the future. Many foreign companies do not have to pay tax in this country, company tax. We know that, that gives them a hell of an unfair advantage over Australian companies. Maybe we should be generating more Australian investment by making sure we track tax foreigners properly. So thank you.

/by

Each-Way Albo at it again

,

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.

/by