Hong Kong is a lesson of what happens when communism is imposed on democracy. China assured the citizens of Hong Kong they would be respected, and then promptly broke that promise. The top 10% of income earners in Hong Kong own 40 times the wealth of the bottom 10%, with income inequality worsening every year under communism. This confirms that free enterprise lifts people out of poverty, while communism puts them in it. Communism promises joy and inclusion – while delivering misery and repression.
China is improperly imprisoning freedom journalist and businessman Mr Jimmy Lai. China is taking a well-worn path of totalitarian governments seen throughout history. We must remain alert here in Australia against the actions of a government with its own totalitarian tendencies.
One Nation firmly stands for free enterprise, small government, and the primacy of the family—unlike Communist China.
Transcript
Hong Kong is a lesson in what happens when communism is imposed on democracy. China assured Hong Kong citizens that they would be respected, and then promptly broke that promise. In Hong Kong, the top 10 per cent of income earners now own 40 times the wealth of the bottom 10 per cent. Every year under communism makes income inequality in Hong Kong worse. It confirms that free enterprise lifts people out of poverty, while communism puts them in poverty. Communism promises joy and inclusion, while delivering misery and repression. Repression leads to everyday citizens having less, leading to more repression, which leads to more inequality, and on it goes.
China is improperly imprisoning freedom journalist and businessman Mr Jimmy Lai. China is taking a well-worn path of totalitarian governments across history.
Australia has cause for reflection. We’re discussing this motion in the shadow of a looming Senate legislation guillotine. In a guillotine, the government gets the numbers to do whatever it wants, and it does just that, which is how communism starts—with unchallenged power. Senate guillotines have become commonplace. They should not be. Both parties have silenced democratic debate during guillotines, although it seems that Labor is wearing out its guillotine faster than Robespierre.
Three days of hearings into the misinformation and disinformation bill heard from expert witness after expert witness, all criticising the government for introducing a ministry of truth tasked with issuing sanctions against any social media platform which resisted removal of what the ministry considered ‘misinformation’. This is how communism starts. The committee report had little in common with witness testimony. The report was nothing more than the government’s ‘truth’. The first target for the Albanese government’s ministry of truth should be the Albanese government.
I welcome calling out Chinese communist repression, and I look forward to a wider conversation on where our actions in this chamber are leading Australia.
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.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/aYKPnNIN-ZM/hqdefault.jpg360480Sheenagh Langdonhttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSheenagh Langdon2023-03-15 15:38:152023-03-20 11:11:22The Wuhan “Conspiracy Theory” – Not a conspiracy any more
Reports last year indicated that the China has set up police stations across the world including one in Sydney.
Chinese authorities have said the stations, sometimes called “contact points”, provide services to citizens, such as renewing national identification cards, passports and drivers licences, by using facial recognition technology.
But human rights groups fear overseas police offices could also be used to target dissidents abroad or compel people to return to China where they could face potentially politicised trials.
Despite this potential National Security Breach, our spy agency ASIO doesn’t appear worried and claims to not know anything about it. China must be laughing at our government.
Transcript
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you for attending today. Mr Burgess, you said in your opening statement that
Australia is the target of sophisticated and persistent espionage and foreign interference activities from a range of hostile foreign intelligence services. I take it they use a range of means of doing so.
Mr Burgess: Correct.
Senator ROBERTS: Is there a Chinese Communist Party supported contact point in Sydney?
Mr Burgess: I’m not aware of that.
Senator ROBERTS: It’s been reported in the media, I understand.
Mr Burgess: I see many things in the media, but I let the data that we have available to us determine that. I wouldn’t comment on operational matters, but I’m not aware of that in the context of that media reporting.
Senator ROBERTS: So you’re not aware of how long it’s been in operation or what its purpose is?
Mr Burgess: You’re assuming it’s true.
Senator ROBERTS: Yes.
Mr Burgess: We will investigate things that are associated with acts of foreign interference, but I won’t bring colour to them in a public hearing.
Senator ROBERTS: Are there Chinese police officers working out of premises in Sydney?
Mr Burgess: Not that I’m aware of.
Senator ROBERTS: Are their operations of interest to our security agencies?
Mr Burgess: If anyone here were engaged in acts of espionage or foreign interference, that would be of concern and something that we would investigate.
Senator ROBERTS: What about potential breaches of Australian national sovereignty?
Mr Burgess: Again, my agency will investigate anything that’s a threat to security.
Senator ROBERTS: What about Chinese citizens or Chinese people living here in Australia? Should they be concerned? You would protect them, even though they may not be Australian citizens.
Mr Burgess: Anyone in this country is free to be here, assuming they’re on a valid visa, of course, or they’re a citizen or permanent residence, and they’re of no concern to us unless they’re engaged in matters of prejudicial security, in which case we would show an interest in them.
Senator ROBERTS: Individual security as well as national security?
Mr Burgess: Threats to security are what ASIO worries about.
Senator ROBERTS: You’re not aware of people operating from this contact point, so you wouldn’t know whether or not they have any contact with or influence on Australian Chinese residents or Chinese visa holders.
Mr Burgess: Again, I don’t comment on specific operational matters, but I will say this because I’ve said this publicly before: the threat of espionage and foreign interference is a real threat in this country. It is our principal security concern. It comes from a range of countries, and I think it’s unhelpful for me to call out specific countries and in particular when we talk about the vast range of diaspora communities in this country, the members of those communities are not the problem. It’s the foreign government and the foreign intelligence services that will be the focus for me and my agency.
Senator ROBERTS: The Chinese Communist Party itself has belted our country economically. What Australian overview of agencies that operate in this country is there for premises like the supported contact point in Sydney?
Mr Burgess: Again, I don’t comment on specific matters, but if we have a need to investigate things that may be of concern in relation to security, things that could be used as platforms for espionage or foreign interference, I can assure you my agency will be on it and investigate it. And I can assure you we had a very productive year last year, removing espionage and foreign interference problems from this country.
Senator ROBERTS: And you may or may not be able to tell us about those operations, depending upon the circumstances. Is that correct?
Mr Burgess: I wouldn’t talk about them publicly in detail.
Senator ROBERTS: Let’s move on to a series of very short questions on a topic that was underway in last Senate estimates in this room, as I was asking the questions, but it was denied. That was the ISIS brides that were brought back. What are the costs to Australia of bringing these women and children to Australia?
Mr Burgess: The repatriation was not a matter for ASIO. We gave advice on the individuals, but beyond that you’d have to pass that question to others.
Senator ROBERTS: What security measures are to be taken to keep Australian community members safe, because these people have been part of some radical terrorist groups and associated with them?
Mr Burgess: The only comment I’d make there is that ASIO gave security advice to government and, in particular, gave security assessments on all the individuals that returned. That was our job.
Senator ROBERTS: What was that again? You assessed them?
Mr Burgess: We did security assessments on returning individuals, and they returned, and that’s okay.
Senator ROBERTS: Are any of these women currently wives or partners or sisters of terrorists?
Mr Burgess: I won’t go into specific matters.
Senator ROBERTS: Are they genuine refugees?
Mr Burgess: They’re Australian citizens who have returned home.
Senator ROBERTS: Given their recent social circumstances, are any of these people going to need
deradicalization programs?
Mr Burgess: Again, I wouldn’t comment on that publicly, Senator.
Senator ROBERTS: How many of the women have been charged with terrorism related offences?
Mr Burgess: I’m not law enforcement. I’m aware of one charge.
Senator ROBERTS: One.
Mr Burgess: You should speak to the AFP about that.
Senator ROBERTS: Okay.
CHAIR: Senator Roberts, if it assists you, we do have the AFP a little bit later today. They can answer some of those questions for you.
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you, Chair. Given that most of the husbands and children’s fathers have been
killed by Western soldiers, how traumatised and angry were they when you assessed them?
Mr Burgess: I can’t speak for how they’re feeling.
Senator ROBERTS: No, but you would be aware, surely, of their potential threat?
Mr Burgess: As I said, we did security assessments on all the individuals, and anyone who falls into that
category that believes that violence is the answer would be subject to my agency’s inquiry and investigation.
Senator ROBERTS: Is ongoing support to be provided, and what is it?
Mr Burgess: Again, that’s not a matter for my organisation, other than to say that we will continue to watch anyone that is a threat to security, but I’m not making any comment on these individuals.
Senator ROBERTS: You may not be able to answer this, but I’m guessing you would know the answer
because it would form part of your assessment of terrorism threat. Given the children’s exposure to violence, either as victims or perpetrators, what are the plans for their assimilation, and did you make any comments about what was needed?
Mr Burgess: Again, that question is best put to others in Home Affairs and more broadly.
Senator ROBERTS: Does your agency work in providing a diagnosis and recommendations?
Mr Burgess: On individuals or children?
Senator ROBERTS: On treatment of people to make sure that they don’t violate our standards of behaviour.
Mr Burgess: No, we’re not involved in that. We talk about the security threats people might face, and others worry about what treatments, if any, might be needed.
Senator ROBERTS: So, you do interact. If you can see a potential threat, you pass it on to someone. You
don’t just—
Mr Burgess: We’re part of a broader apparatus that helps counterterrorism in this country, yes.
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you. I see Mr Pezzullo nodding in agreement. Have the communities where these people are to be housed been fully consulted? I guess that’s for other people to comment.
Mr Burgess: It’s not a question for me, Senator.
Senator ROBERTS: Does your assessment of the threat include any consideration of family members here in Australia whose friends or family members have been killed by ISIS terrorists? Do you consult with the community in which they’re going to be placed?
Mr Burgess: No, we’re not involved in that consultation of where they get placed.
Senator ROBERTS: Will the families be housed together or apart?
Mr Burgess: Again, I can’t answer that question.
Senator ROBERTS: I was thinking more from a security point of view.
Mr Burgess: No, that’s irrelevant. They’re Australian citizens; they’re entitled to be where they want to be
unless there’s some legal condition on them. But I’m not law enforcement, so I’m not part of that.
Senator ROBERTS: So, would you be monitoring them more closely if they’re living close together in an enclave?
Mr Burgess: We will monitor anyone that we deem to be a threat to security.
Senator ROBERTS: So, it wouldn’t be part of your recommendations to keep them separate in this country?
Mr Burgess: No, we were not in that space.
Senator ROBERTS: I just have a final question, Chair, on violence. Does ‘violence’ include destroying
artworks, interrupting everyday Australians and destroying roadworks? I note that left-wing extremism in the 20th century killed 120 million people. I presume you monitor all types of extremism?
Mr Burgess: We’ll monitor any individuals that have an ideology that thinks violence is the answer.
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you very much and thank you for your clear statements opposing violence.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/j3lIndoX3tY/0.jpg360480Sheenagh Langdonhttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSheenagh Langdon2023-02-13 19:37:122023-02-14 14:12:05Spy agency ASIO not aware of secret Sydney Communist China police station
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.
https://i0.wp.com/www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Marles.png?fit=650%2C367&ssl=1367650Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2022-04-27 13:13:302022-04-27 13:13:35Marles must go
Lib/Labs refuse to investigate our relationship with China – AGAIN. I would like to congratulate Liberal Concetta Fierravanti-Wells who crossed the floor to support the motion.
Transcript
[President]
Senator Roberts.
[Roberts]
Thank you, Mr. Acting Deputy President. As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, I would like to say that One Nation is very supportive of the motion that Australia’s relations with the People’s Republic of China, be referred to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee for inquiry and preparation of a report.
We wish to commend Senator Rex Patrick, for his seventh attempt to have this or a similar motion, sixth, I’m corrected, to have this motion progress. Mr. Acting Deputy President, Senator Patrick, I can only guess must feel like he’s on the set of Groundhog Day.
And on each of those occasions, Liberal and Labour Parties have joined to defeat all five of his previous attempts. I wonder because, if it’s because Liberal Andrew Robb, when he retired received an $880,000 salary after selling a lease to the Port of Darwin or after Sam Dastyari’s bills were paid by the Chinese or after Liberal Gladys Liu’s contradictions of fact about her associations with China that were never resolved or about Labor’s ICAC revelations in New South Wales.
We keep seeing Liberal and Labor come together to defeat even looking at this very vital, important relationship. It is imperative that Australia and China maintain a mutually respectful and beneficial bilateral relationship.
China is Australia’s largest two-way trading partner in exports and imports representing 24% of total trade with a value of $183 billion. That alone shows significant influence on Australia. Australia is China’s sixth largest trading partner and fifth biggest supplier of imports.
25% of Australia’s manufactured imports come from China. Thermal coal represents 13% of all Australian exports to China, and recently they tried to blackmail us about that. In more recent times, China has embarked on the One Belt One Road Initiative.
This is the Chinese government economic and strategic agenda where Eurasia, Africa and Oceania are more closely tied along two routes, one land, and one maritime. It is intended to facilitate Chinese economic and strategic domination of smaller countries along the routes, indeed Chinese control.
For Australia, we see the growing Chinese involvement in projects from Northern Australia, right through to Tassie, all providing little benefit to Australia, yet substantial benefits to China. We need to understand this relationship. We don’t just let them have an open door.
Other examples of Chinese involvement have been in the funding and support of local academic conferences and seminars. The negative aspects of the Confucius Institute are only just being realised as some universities remove them from their offerings.
Australia has been a destination of choice for many Chinese students to further their education in an Australian academic institution. It’s important to our economy. In 2018, there were more than 166,000 enrollments of Chinese students in Australia representing 43.3% of the total international student cohort heading for half.
A concern noted in some Australian universities is the potential dependence generated by full-fee paying international students on the overall money pool available to university budgets. Should those numbers suddenly diminish, it may leave some of our universities destitute and many university staff unpaid.
Since the COVID-19 pandemic, these concerns have come to fruition and Australian universities are bleeding financially. To make matters worse, the Chinese government has just warned Chinese students not to study or return to study in Australia suggesting they would face discriminatory attacks.
Australia has been a favourite destination for Chinese tourists and this is shown again by recent numbers. More than 1.3 million Chinese tourists visited Australia last year, representing 15% of our total visitors. One seventh, this is a clear positive for Australia.
At the same time, there has been a growing boom of Australian tourists around 700,000 heading for China. This may also change rapidly as the Chinese government has recently warned off Chinese tourists from visiting our country through recent directives to their people.
One of the ongoing issues of concern relates to regional and global security. The growing tensions between the United States of America and the People’s Republic of China in terms of imposition of trade tariffs is placing Australia in a challenging position, given the importance of Australia’s relationships with both countries.
More recently, the Chinese government has imposed an 80% tariff on Australian barley without explanation, and refused to accept meat from four of Australia’s major meat abattoirs, again, causing concern to Australian producers.
These actions by the Chinese government appear to be in retaliation for being called on by Australia to allow an independent investigation into the cause of the COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan China, what I’ve referred to as the Chinese Communist Party and the UN virus.
How dare we want an independent investigation? The Chinese still denying being the source of the outbreak of the worldwide pandemic remain uncooperative in dealing with this just as Liberal and Labour remain uncooperative in dealing with any, any inquisition or any inquiry into our relationship with China.
The Chinese actions and or inactions likely indeed certainly made the pandemic far worse than it could’ve been. And their behaviour in China is responsible for the loss of tens of thousands of lives. Indeed, hundreds of thousands of lives.
The views taken of China’s growing military influence in the South China Sea remain of concern to our most important ally, United States of America and therefore, necessarily of concern to our country as an established ally of the US.
Regionally, China is having a growing influence by funding infrastructure projects for some of the Pacific Island countries, and our and very near neighbour, Papua and New Guinea, just over the horizon from Australia. This runs the risk of changing the whole dynamic between Australia and our near neighbours.
Given the potential for military and strategic use of these bases by China and the potential for resource extraction at some future time, there is need to consider this factor when examining our relationship with China.
We already feel this is at home with the outrageous decision to lease the Port of Darwin a strategic Northern gateway to China for 99 years. This is the home of our local naval presence. What on earth was the government thinking?
I point to Dutton, Mr. Dutton, Mr. Hastie, Senator Kitching who have raised valid concerns, both Liberal and Labor MPs and senators just as Senator Patrick mentioned.
Indeed it was reported, Mr. Dutton was reportedly stated as in 12th of October, 2019, one of the Morrison Government’s most senior figures has taken a direct swipe at Beijing accusing the Chinese Communist Party of behaving in ways that are inconsistent with Australian values.
The key points emerged, Mr. Dutton said that federal government would call out state actors if it was in the national interest. Well, let’s see an inquiry, Mr. Dutton said he wanted universities to be free from foreign interference. So let’s see an inquiry into that foreign interference that he acknowledges.
The Home Affairs minister, a very powerful minister, senior minister also criticised China’s Belt and Road Initiative and defended the ban on using Huawei to help build Australia’s 5G network. So it goes on to say in a newspaper article, “Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton warned Australia “would call out” quote “foreign and interference “in universities, as well as cyber hacks “and theft of intellectual property, “insisting it was the right thing to do.
“It represents,” the newspaper said, “some of the strongest language “yet from a federal government minister “on threat posed to China.” But we need more than language, we need more than inferences, we need an inquiry into the relationship.
The Chinese Communist Party behaves in ways that are inconsistent with Australian values and Western civilization. Recently in Queensland, my home state, a university student was suspended for daring to make pro-democracy statements about the suppression of students and demonstrators in Hong Kong by the Chinese government.
The University of Queensland appears now to be an agent of the Chinese government, which seems to have bought out an Australian university and is enabled by the university to oppress an Australian student for standing up for democracy.
And when I get to the point of quoting Clive Hamilton, then we know things are serious because Clive Hamilton to his credit has written a book calling out the issues that we have with China, raising serious threats and concerns to our country and our country’s security.
My issue, I must make clear is not with the marvellous Chinese people, including the amazing Chinese community we have here in Australia. We have the Chinese influence from North Queensland through the gold rushes in the 19th century, right through to the Southern parts and Western parts of our country.
And they made a marvellous contribution. My issue is with the Chinese Communist Party. The Communist Party of China and the policies that are inconsistent with our own values. And they have undue influence in Australian politics, values communities, and way of life.
Human rights is an area where China and Australia have vastly different views. Australia is the democracy and a signatory to many international agreements that preserve basic human rights. China is a Republic following a communist regime that is very rigid.
It is a controlling machine with little room to question the state and having limited rights for the individual. Watch the demonstrations for freedom happening in Hong Kong to see how that goes down? Many Australians remember the appalling and tragic events at Tiananmen Square where many people’s lives were sacrificed in the name of democracy.
A prime minister cried over that. And understandably so yet we can’t even have an inquiry into that relationship with China. Tiananmen Square was not merely an incident as recently reported in the media. It was one of the earliest signs in the West of this serial breaching of human rights and suppression of their own people in China.
The detention of those whose views differ from the regimes is a continuing disgrace and worthy of further review. The government and Labor have sold out Australia’s inheritance. No wonder they don’t want us to have a review of this catastrophic relationship, potentially catastrophic relationship.
Will the Liberal Party and the Labor Party will a Lib-Lab duopoly look beyond their Chinese donations to their parties and do the right thing by our country? These actions by China would appear to threaten the relationship of mutual respect between the two countries and are worthy of inquiry.
Actions of Lib-Lab MPs in governments handing control of essential services like electricity for goodness sake, our ports, our food producers to the Chinese Communist Party is insane. Why are we doing it? And why aren’t we bothering to look into it?
These deals threaten our honesty, fairness, and humanity, and our national security. One Nation supports the call for such an inquiry into a nation exerting powerful influences over our nation with potentially far more powerful influences on our nation’s future and on our people’s security. Thank you, Mr. Acting Deputy President.
https://i0.wp.com/www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/China.png?fit=550%2C306&ssl=1306550Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2020-06-11 11:58:002020-07-09 12:24:23Lib/Lab refuse to investigate relationship with China
Senator Roberts has called on the Government to suspend funding to the University of Queensland if it continues to be an agent for the Chinese Communist Party.
Senator Roberts stated, “The recent expulsion of a fourth-year philosophy student, based on his outspoken views against China, has exposed the influence of a communist dictatorship on an Australian university.”
“This is another example of the recent worrying trend at Australian universities that is curtailing free speech and promoting left-wing ideology,” Senator Roberts said.
The University of Queensland is estimated to have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars and hired top tier legal and consulting firms in pursuit against the outspoken student. The vast majority of the 186-page dossier of allegations by the University against the student has been labelled absurdly trivial and borderline hysterical.
“This is a classical David versus Goliath scenario and the University of Queensland, hiding behind the purse strings of the Chinese Communist Party, has smashed our Australian value of free speech.”
The University of Queensland received $989 million in government funding in 2018 and today receives between 20-30% of its income from Chinese students.
Senator Roberts added, “UQ needs to remember where the bulk of their funding comes from and they need to assure the Australian taxpayer that they are an Australian university, and not an overseas agent of the Communist Party.”
“This is Australia; we are a free and democratic nation, and we will not be bullied in our own country nor in our universities by the Chinese Communist Party.”
https://i0.wp.com/www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/China.png?fit=2300%2C1294&ssl=112942300Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2020-06-01 13:11:432020-06-01 13:21:25Senator Roberts calls to suspend University of Queensland funding