Posts

Trust in Politicians at rock bottom | BNAP Today

,

This week I appeared on BUSINESS NOW ASIA PACIFIC to discuss the different approaches to COVID19 and how Australia needs to change course.

Transcript

[Mike

Senator Malcolm Roberts from Pauline Hanson’s One nation believes the lockdown in Victoria will succeed. However testing needs to be quicker. He also believes that government needs to be more truthful. Now, Victoria has serious problems with infection control will a harder breakdown be effective if they don’t know the source of so many infections.

[Malcolm]

Well, I think there are two things I need to say in response to that Mike. And that is that first of all, this is a very difficult issue. We said that right from the start on the single day sittings on 23rd of March and eighth of April, when we said, there’s no manual for this, it’s entirely new.

We’ve gotta give the government lots of room. We voted in favour that we supported them on their packages and away we went, but we said, you’ve got to get the data. And you’ve got to look elsewhere and start to manage this in accordance with the best practise around the world.

So we might come back to that more later, but what we’ve learned is that quite often, the places where people have prolonged contact in close quarters is where the virus is transmission is highest and that’s the family unit and workplaces. So the family unit in Melbourne is older than in any other city.

And that’s significant because I also saw these figures on one of the radio stations. I heard the figures rather than one of the radio stations. The other thing about Melbourne is that it’s flat and people travel very easily and they travelled to watch football matches, sporting events, games, social venues, et cetera.

So I think that it is difficult. And number one priority is life, securing life, making sure people are healthy and secure and safe. And so a lockdown is essential because they’ve lost control of their borders. They’ve let it go and sorry, lost control of the virus within, in I think multi, foreign, where people are speaking foreign languages.

So they’ve lost control of that because people have not been able to understand the messages about the virus. So that’s where the outbreaks have been. And so I think the lockdown will be effective because it’ll stop families The extended family visits and it’ll stop work obviously.

And so I think the lock downs will be successful in Melbourne. The other thing is that they need to get testing done more quickly because some people are basically having a test and not getting the result back for about 10 days. Now they’re not gonna stay cooped up for 10 days if they don’t believe they’re sick.

And many of these cases that they’re asymptomatic. So I think that while it will work, the government has got to do its bit and getting testing to be more responsive and get results back in two or three days rather than 10. So yeah, there’s potential.

[Mike]

It’s interesting. In South Korea, the testing, from the testing to getting the results back now 12 hours and that’s what it should be when I was talking to professor Justin Fendos in South Korea last week, and he was saying that 12 hours and I mentioned that we have at times up to 10 days and I could hear his jaw hit the table. That’s just atrocious. What should the authorities be doing though?

[Malcolm]

Well, let’s come back to Taiwan if you don’t mind, because South Korea has done a marvellous job. They actually, do you mind if we talk about that?

[Mike]

Yeah, for sure.

[Malcolm]

Okay, South Korea has done a marvellous job. They actually let go let it go. And they had to recover. So given that, and by the way, I’ve watched your interview with professor Fendos. Fabulous interview, very well spoken man knows his facts. And he has been on the same track we’ve been from the right from the start on Monday, March 23rd and April the eighth, in the Senate single day hearings.

We also said, make sure that you get the data to the federal government when we gave them our support. And we said, make sure you looked at Taiwan and Southeast Asia. The Southeast Asian nations, Taiwan, especially South Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong, have done a marvellous job.

Singapore with the exception of Singapore, all the other three and Israel, which had also done a good job, Mike, they have eternal vigilance and they’re ready to do respond quickly to threats because they’re constantly under threat. So that is something we don’t have.

But the, in Taiwan, their population is about the same as Australia. They have 24 million we have 25. The population density in Taiwan is far, far higher than us because their 24 are crammed into a small Island. And they also had an earlier and stronger exchange with China because they’re Chinese themselves.

And so they had a lot more travelling between Taiwan and mainland China. And so they had a much greater problem. Now what the Taiwanese did, and we need to recognise that Australia has had 130 deaths and that’s good, but the Taiwanese have had seven, even despite they had an earlier virus, earlier contact with the virus, seven.

And the other significant point with the Taiwanese is that they didn’t lock down their economy. They actually kept their economy going and they gave responsibility to the people. Now, there are three things that they have done really well. First of all, their basic strategy was to isolate the sick and isolate the vulnerable.

That’s what real quarantine is. Quarantine is not isolating everyone into lockdown. Quarantine is isolating the sick and the vulnerable and separating them out. The second thing they did was that they implemented massive testing and they have a screening process for the testing. And I think South Korea is the same.

They test for high temperature knowing that that’s not always reliable, but they test for high temperature. If someone has a high temperature, then they go and get tested for COVID. And if they test negative, but they still have, for COVID, but still have a high temperature, then they’re allowed to go to work.

So they put responsibility on the workplaces, and what we’ve got in those countries is the responsibility on the individual citizens. And when you have that responsibility, there’s a far greater sense of accountability rather than when it’s imposed.

And the other thing that they’ve done, and I’ve only learned about this recently is they’ve got a much stricter tracing regime, but the tracing apparently doesn’t go right into people’s whereabouts it goes into their localities, and that helps the authorities then get one step in front.

So what I think the, what I think now with those lessons from Taiwan, and we encourage the government to look at Taiwan and South Korea. What I think that we should be doing now is we should be in Australia revising and reviewing our current work. How effective have we been? Where have we not been effective?

We need to recover and plan for recovery in two areas. First of all, to get our economy back to pre COVID, which is February, but then we need to aim far, far higher Mike, we need to get our economy back to, so to the point where we have our sovereignty, restored, our economic sovereignty and economic security and our independence.

We’ve been following this nonsense from the United nations now for almost 70 years. And it’s destroying our sovereignty and our economic independence. And so what the UN has been preaching and our governments have been preaching is interdependence, which means that we are dependent on other countries.

And so what we need to do is to get back at productive capacity, especially for manufacturing and agriculture. And then the third thing we need to do is to plan for future viruses, because this won’t be the last one. And so the biggest thing of all Mike, that we’ve learned is that the Taiwanese, the South Koreans, the Israelis, the Singaporeans, they trust their government.

They don’t give them carte blanche, but they do trust their government. And the government’s lead. In this country governments are too busy, fabricating policies and making and misrepresenting the circumstances.

We haven’t seen the truth on this from the prime minister. We haven’t seen the truth on this from Daniel Andrews, nor Annastacia Palaszczuk. We wrote to Annastacia Palaszczuk and said, “where’s your data. “We want to have a look at it.” She said, it’s in two locations, we went to both locations.

There’s no data. So Scott Morrison right up front. He was saying, six months hibernation, six months hibernation, six months hibernation. We knew there was no plan. And now we know there’s no data driving that plan. These governments are not trusted in this country on a range of issues, electricity, agriculture, stealing farmers property rights.

I mean, you could go on forever, selling ourselves out through international agreements, selling ourselves out the free trade agreements that are giving the other parties the power, we have got to establish trust in our government. And that can only become, can only come with reliance on data and reliance on telling the truth its time Australia got back to that.

[Mike]

Just wondering about the data to have the data we need all the input. We actually have that at our fingertips with credit cards and with Apple, for example, and the other Android devices. And we can, we can actually find out where people have been. The problem we have at the moment, according to professor Fendos, was that it’s reliant on us being honourable or telling the truth. So by having all that data available, it’s going to impact on inverted commas ‘civil liberties.’

[Malcolm]

Well, I get, I go back to my experience when I graduated from university with a mining engineering degree, I thought I’d better go out and start learning something that really mattered. So I worked as a miner for about three years, various mines around the country. And then I went overseas and worked in mines overseas.

So I’ve worked at the coalface and I developed a very healthy respect for miners for all people. And then when I became a mine manager, I would go underground a lot, not to do people’s work, but just to have, listen, and to look so that I can understand what they were going through and what their needs were.

And I can remember turning up at one mine brand new and the workforce detested the mine management because the mine management told lies and it took me a few months, but people started to trust me and that’s extremely important. And then what I was able to do was also to hand over responsibility and authority to the people doing the job.

I mean, not everything we can’t expect the miner to make every decision for the business, but their own jobs. And when people are given that responsibility and that authority they usually come good. And so what’s happening here is government tries to impose things in a crisis.

And we think we’re, a lot of Australians then distrust that, but in, Southeast Asia they’re already practising those things. And we’ve gotta give those governments credit because they’ve had SARS before. So we understand that that’s made it easier, but they’ve learned from that.

And they put it into practise and people are now trusting the government. So if the government tells the truth, if the government hands over responsibility to business owners, venue managers, then they’ll see the people respond because then people take accountability.

But when it’s shoved on them under threat and under control, it’s not taken that accountability is taken when there’s freedom for people to make decisions that autonomy is really important. And we’ve gotta keep giving trust back to people in this country and get the government the hell out of people’s lives.

[Mike]

What about state government? When we have this, where, we’re all Australians, but we have, the new country of Queensland, the new country of Victoria, the new country, new South Wales, South Australia, blah, blah, blah, blah. And each state has its own, not agenda, but it its own approach.

And maybe an agenda also it becomes a little bit political because where the Joan of arc of WA, with a Joan of arc of Victoria, Tasmania. So how do we get all the States working as one country instead of being a number of different countries within this terrible state of Australia?

[Malcolm]

Well, first of all, the thing that unites strategies is data. When everyone’s got the correct data, you’ll end up seeing strategies similar, but across every state, but they will be fine tuned for each state because Queensland is the only state in the country. Yes, that’s correct.

It’s the only state in the country where there are more people outside the capital city than inside the capital city, we’re more decentralised. We’re more spread up the coast with the sparse population inland. And so that’s different from Victoria. That’s different from Tassie.

That’s different from new South Wales and then Western Australia is different again. So I’m very much a believer in our constitution, federal constitution, which is based on competitive federalism, giving a huge amount of sovereignty to the independent States.

Only on national issues should we come together that’s defence, border security, foreign affairs, those kinds of things. And so I’m in favour of letting the state run, but the States themselves also need to get the data so that they can manage effectively. And they need to manage trust in a trustworthy way.

The fundamental thing that we did wrong in this country, I believe with COVID was that we looked automatically to Britain and to a man called Neil Ferguson. And that was a mistake. This Neil Ferguson has done I’ve forgotten the name of the school in medical school, medical college in Britain, but he’s in there and they’ve done a lot of modelling and his models have been proven to be completely wacky.

They have exaggerated the consequences of just about every virus they’ve cared to model every disease they’ve cared to model. Foot and mouth disease they cost the British government way back then when a billion was worth a billion, $10 billion, they cost the British farm economy. They have completely exaggerated.

They forecast millions of deaths, when out of the virus out of the disease in Britain when there were only 120 deaths. I mean, it’s completely ridiculous. We looked to them went straight to lockdown. We didn’t look to Asia. We should’ve looked at Taiwan as well as Britain and worked out where the reality is.

Donald Trump himself started calling out the British. And I don’t think he named Ferguson, but he that’s what he was implying. And we should be coming up with our own strategy, but looking at Taiwan, looking at everywhere in the world and then developing our own. So it’s up to the state governments.

I believe they should be independent. They should be working independently. That’s what gives us greater accountability. It worked up until about 1923, and then that’s been smashed and we’ve centralised more and more. So we need to get back to that competitive federalism, independent States working together. And when they’ve got data, they will have a solid plan. We’ve got to get back to truthful government that relies upon objective data.

[Mike]

Very interesting times we must continue more discussions. There’s so many questions or conversation pieces such as border control, the forthcoming Queensland elections in Australia, the economy and even football. So we can do that next time.

[Malcolm]

I look forward to it Mike. Happy to contact me anytime.

[Mike]

Senator Malcolm Roberts, thank you very much.

[Malcolm]

Thank you, Mike. All the best.

/by

Throw the book at Black Lives Matter lawbreakers

,

It is vital that our premier takes a tough stand on any unnecessary and risky marches/protests in our State. We can not risk going down the path of Victoria.

Transcript

It’s so pleasing to see the New South Wales Police Commissioner in response to the Black Lives Matter protests, coming out tomorrow, saying to his policemen that they must fine as many people as they can for taking part in that protest.

That’s a welcome change from Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk, who said when the last Black Lives Matter protest occurred in Brisbane, that “Please don’t attend. “But if you do then maintain social distance.”

And as a result, 30,000 people followed her invitation to maintain social distance. Premier Dan Andrew pretty much did the same and just waved them on through and encouraged the protesters

And now look at Victoria and now look at New South Wales. So what we need to see is Premier Palaszczuk in this state, take the lead from New South Wales and be hard on criminals.

The Labor Government in Queensland has a history of being soft on criminals and very hard on everyday Australians.

/by

Senator Roberts Concerned about Australia’s reliance on Professor Ferguson’s exaggerated COVID-19 modelling

,

Senator Roberts has expressed deep concern that our national and state management of COVID-19 maybe responding to the exaggerated modelling predictions of Professor Ferguson.

Senator Roberts said, “Professor Ferguson’s assumptions that form the basis of his modelling have produced sensationally inaccurate predictions and this is not the first time Ferguson’s predictions have been wildly overstated.”

Professor Ferguson’s track record includes, but is not limited to, predicting 50,000 deaths from mad cow disease, reality was 177 deaths; 65,000 would die of swine flu, reality was 457 deaths and 200 million people may die from bird flu, reality was 282.

The Department of Health website cites the use of the Peter Doherty Institute Report, which references reliance on assumptions from the Imperial College COVID19 NPI Modelling Report, of which Professor Neil Ferguson is the first author.

“It is irrefutable that Professor Ferguson’s modelling predictions are exaggerated and his work has had far-reaching devastating impacts on national economies.”

Foot and mouth disease, which cost the British government £10 billion, was an extraordinary overreaction to an exaggerated claim made by Professor Ferguson.

The Australian Government has enacted a record $320 billion package, the economy is dismantling, the employment rate is rising and the nation’s mental health issues are starting to show themselves. 

Senator Roberts has written to the Prime Minister and Queensland’s Premier asking whether these significant health and economic responses, which will affect future generations, are based on the Doherty Institute Report and by default, the assumptions in Ferguson’s Imperial College Report.

“No business, economy nor community can hibernate and then just return to normal.  There will be devastating consequences from these decisions for some time to come,” Senator Roberts said.

“The people of Queensland and Australia deserve to have confidence that the Government’s serious and far-reaching decisions during this health crisis are based on credible and robust data and modelling,” Senator Roberts added.

200519-Professor-Fergusons-exaggerated-COVID-19-modelling_

/by

Questions to the Minister: COVIDSafe App

,

This morning I asked a number of questions of the Foreign Minister about the COVIDSafe App, its performance so far and necessary improvements.

Disturbingly, she claimed not to know how many times a COVIDSafe App user had tested positive with COVID19 and their tracing data uploaded. “We do not have access to that information nor should we.”

/by

COVID Safe App

,

This afternoon I spoke on the governments COVIDSafe App and why I won’t be downloading it. I understand this Government feels the need to get this app in wide use and is prepared to write good data protection rules to achieve that.

I would ask the Government to show it really cares about the privacy of everyday Australians by revisiting the wider issue of Government use of private data.

Transcript

Senator Roberts.

Thank you Madam Acting Deputy President. As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia I have pleasure in saying that One Nation will be supporting this bill. That doesn’t mean that I will be downloading the app as I’ll explain.

But firstly, I would like to compliment the attorney general for the work that went into this bill. When Minister Hunt’s regulations came out to accompany that app launch, my office had a number of reservations about the level of security provided on the data.

This bill is needed to clear up those issues and it has done so. I will mention these in passing for the benefit of our constituents. Then I’ll move on to the security risk that the app itself still represents. I did have a concern that the government was giving bad players an opportunity to access data on the server without detection.

So there are two aspects to this Madam Acting Deputy President, there’s the app itself and then there’s the uploading of data to the server and the storing of that data and the use of that data. So I did have a concern that the government was giving bad players an opportunity to access data on the server without detection.

The decision to ask the Office of the National Data Commissioner, the commissioner, to overview data storage and access is a wise choice that addresses this concern. We are pleased with that. I was also worried about Amazon having access to both the client file, which is needed, to identify app users and the data file for COVID positive users.

This in effect gave Amazon access to significant personal information of app users. So let me explain a bit more. The separation now of the key file and the data access, the data file itself, under the supervision of the commissioner is the best way of making sure Amazon and the government keep each other honest, well done.

So in other words, we’ve got the government storing the data, we’ve got Amazon storing the data and the government having the keys. Both are needed. It can’t be separate. There is one reason not one party can have control. There is one issue here to do with the cryptography on the unique user IDs.

The open-source app that the COVID-safe app took as a starting point only requires 32 bit encryption. I would have hoped the app developers have taken that up to 128 bit and we’d ask the commissioner to consider that. Now let me turn to a number of security issues in the app itself that need to be addressed.

My office has put out a detailed sheet on this, so let me quickly mention them here and move on. The user ID can stick in the phone case causing a phone to broadcast multiple different user IDs over extended periods of time, which increases the chances of a phone being tracked.

Secondly, the COVID-safe app overrides phone security settings to use the same handshake address for a phone over the life of the app instead of changing every few minutes. This is a major security issue in the app. Thirdly, the COVID-safe app stores the make and model of the other phones it has matched within plain text where it can be easily read.

This approach is not necessary since this data could easily be trapped when the app is registered instead of storing it in the phone. Fourthly, if someone has named their phone such as, in my case Malcolm’s iPhone under some circumstances, this real name is what the other phone stores, app users who have named their phone with their real name may be exposing themselves to danger.

This results from the app using different ways of broadcasting data to maximise the chance of a match. This tells us that the developers have taken a deliberate decision to compromise safety to achieve the most number of matches. Fifth, data stored to the cloud is not deleted.

If a cloud service is used to backup or sync a phone, the COVID-safe app contact blog gets backed up to the cloud. This can be viewed by anyone with a sign in without the phone user’s knowledge. So I acknowledge that this bill makes the behaviour illegal, but not storing some of the data in plain English would have been a far better choice.

Sixth, an app running in the background will not match with another app running in the background on an iPhone. The app does not meet the government’s, number seven the app does not meet the government’s own standard for app accessibility.

WCAG 2.0 A. It fails accessibility tests on font size and field width and people with a disability the first people that need to get this app. So that was sloppy. Eight errors that were detected early in the release of the app have still not been fixed. Registration fails over WiFi, which is used in poor reception areas.

Bluetooth conflicts with external devices. Power management on an iPhone interferes with the app. 3% of older phones cannot use the app an alert message advising users that they have tested positive for COVID was being accidentally triggered. This was fixed by deleting the message.

So currently the app can’t be used to alert users when they actually do test positive. I must however compliment the government for the sudden concern about security. Where was the concern about people’s privacy in this government’s capture and use of the metadata of every Australian?

This government is storing texts, telephone call details, social media posts, websites visited and website comments for every Australian. At Senate estimates, we discovered that in 2019 there were 297,000 accesses of the metadata records of everyday Australians by 22 different government agencies.

How many of these accesses were accompanied by a warrant? Madam Acting Deputy President? None. Not one warrant. Now I understand this government feels the need to get this app in wide use and is prepared to write good data protection rules to achieve that.

So I’d ask the government to show it really cares about the privacy of everyday Australians by revisiting the wider issue of government use of private private data. Because the government’s track record on security is poor.

So as I’ve explained Madam Acting Deputy President, the shortfalls initially in our assessment of the app were to do with the data storage and access of that. That has now been resolved or will be resolved once this bill, Privacy Bill passes. However, the reverse is the case for the app.

We were originally happy with the app. We now see a number of flaws in it. So that leaves security issues in regard to people being able to track the phone owner, the phone user and that is not acceptable. I also wanna make a comment about the blackmail that’s being used by the government to push this app.

Minister Hunt said, “you wanna go to the 40?” “Download the app.” We’ve just heard here Senator Bragg saying, “this is that ticket to freedom.” No it’s not. There are far more effective tickets to freedom.

The Australian people have already shown a highly responsible approach to managing this COVID virus and we need to extend that. We need to stop the blackmail stop the control that is pushed over us. We need to get back to the freedoms that are inherent and being everyday Australians.

That is part of our birthright, part of our citizenry that we have, are entitled to rights and freedom. When we have permission from something to do something from a government that is not a freedom, that is the reverse because there is being withheld until the permission is granted.

So we need to rely upon the trustworthiness and the competence and a sense of responsibility of everyday Australians right around the country. So Madam Acting Deputy President, let me summarise by saying that this bill is necessary, and that is why One Nation will be supporting it. It is welcome.

Secondly, the app is not up to scratch and that’s why I won’t be downloading it. And thirdly, we need to get back to freedom properly.

/by

COVID19 plan is fundamental for trust and hope

While Australia has been able to mitigate the deaths from Coronavirus, the Prime Minister still hasn’t given the country a plan for how we now get out of the lockdowns that are crippling the country. We need the modelling, we need the facts and we need a plan as soon as possible.

23rd of March speech

Coronavirus Speech

8th of April speech

Questions for the Prime Minister – COVID19

First letter to the Prime Minister

Letter to the PM: COVID-19 Strategy

Second Letter to the Prime Minister

Letter to the PM: COVID-19 – What is your plan?

Transcript

Hear that ticking? People’s frustrations. Building, with being kept in the dark. Because when it comes to the coronavirus, COVID-19, the government is sharing only part of the truth, and vital information seems to be withheld. To explain that, I will explain what seemed to be these three options.

Firstly, ending isolation with a sudden mass release, and why that is not on. Secondly, waiting for release until a vaccine is developed, and why that could hurt. Thirdly, isolating the sick and the vulnerable, and releasing the healthy, has proven successful overseas. And an added point, on treatment, for those with coronavirus. While I empathise with the government’s very difficult challenge, people need answers. There’s no manual on how to do this.

Yet people are feeling confused, afraid, concerned. Some feel lost, grieving for those dying, and grieving for our country. Some feel angry. Many are still living in disbelief, and plagued with uncertainty, and fear over how to pay their bills. People want to know what has to be done, why it has to be done, how long before it’s over, and what will be the cost, financial, social, personal, mental, emotional. It is the people who have to repay these huge bills of up to around 300 billion dollars, to which the government has committed Australian taxpayers.

People have a right to know the facts, yet the prime minister’s first discussion of modelling, on the 7th of April, lacks specifics on the expected duration of isolation, lacked a plan, lacked triggers for releasing people. Simply repeating the words, six month hibernation, is not enough. It kills people’s hope and raises their concerns. A solid plan is fundamental for trust and hope.

People expect governments to lead, and expect leaders to have a plan based on solid data and facts, and to share that plan, and the information behind the plan. We need to acknowledge successes, the government, and Australians generally, can claim success in avoiding the overwhelming of healthcare services, and avoiding a high death count. Sadly, 63 people have died.

Yet that is way better than many nations. In my speech in the first special one-day parliamentary session, on Monday the 23rd of March, I stressed the need to take hard, strong, and quick action. Because many politicians are afraid of being seen to be making mistakes, or being wrong. What would have happened if it had just been mild?

Two days later, I repeated that call in my letter to the prime minister. A little over two weeks later, in the second special one-day parliamentary session, on Wednesday the 8th of April, and in my letter to the prime minister yesterday, I discussed the need for a plan for recovery, and for sharing that plan with the people.

Now there are two health and safety aspects. Individual health, protecting people’s lives. Preventing an overwhelming of the healthcare services. After a lot of public pressure, the prime minister was pushed into a media conference on Tuesday the 7th of April, to discuss the government’s modelling of the virus’s potential impact. Disappointingly, he was light on details and fact, and big on words.

He did not release the modelling, did not discuss the key assumptions of infection, transmission, and fatality rates, did not discuss the variables modelled, discussed no results from the modelling. How then could people make meaningful conclusions? We couldn’t! The prime minister did not discuss various alternative strategies for a national plan. Our staff found the New Zealand modelling report, and, it’s worth noting, the Kiwis thanked Aussies for helping them build their model.

Yet the Kiwis released their report many days before the prime minister’s media conference! And the UK’s Imperial College of London model has been released for some time. Both show that unrestrained release of people from isolation would lead to an epidemic, unless successful treatments or vaccines are released. A key point is that the virus still exists in the community, and releasing restrictions without monitoring would be disastrous. Because when we’re let out, the virus will still be waiting for us.

Now the graph you see is from the Kiwi modelling report. The left-hand side, with blue background, shows isolation, the period of isolation. And the government strategy of lockdowns could be seen as the green line, the number of infections that hugs the baseline until isolation ends. Then, in the white background, that’s the period where isolation ends.

And the epidemic breaks out, because the virus is still among us. Now I’m no expert, and want you to make sure that you know that I don’t think I purport to be. I’m not an expert. I simply accessed information, and listened to people, including our staff who have done our basic research, and I convey the basic ideas and options to you.

The first option of quick, mass release of people from isolation, would mean an epidemic, many more people dying, and possibly our health system being overwhelmed. We can’t do that. That means we either need treatment, or a vaccine, or somehow build people’s immunity across the entire nation. A second option, is to keep people in isolation, lockdown, until a vaccine is developed.

We can’t do that for two reasons. Firstly, the emotional and mental health toll would be too high. And secondly, our economy would be slaughtered. There’s a third option, and that is to adopt something like an Australian version of the highly successful strategy used in East Asian nations, especially Taiwan, and latter, South Korea.

That involves isolating the sick, and those who have the virus, and isolating the vulnerable, the aged, and those with compromised immune systems, adding massive screening of healthy people for elevated body temperature, and then testing those with high temperatures, and with other symptoms of the virus. Then those with the virus are sent to isolation.

Those without the virus go back to work, or keep working. The point is that Taiwan has a population of 24 million people, almost the same as Australia, yet has recorded just six fatalities, despite heavy contact with the virus, before Australia, because it is near to China. And their economy had hardly missed a beat. So far, the prime minister and his medical advisors spend their time telling us what has happened, when we need to know what is going to happen next.

The prime minister has not shown us two things, the whole plan, including what happens next, and how long this will continue. The second half of the model seems to be missing. We the people deserve to know, and want to know, the whole story. On what basis is the prime minister spending 300 billion dollars of our taxpayer money?

The prime minister needs to tell us his government’s plan, and the triggers for strategy changes. This builds understanding, trust, and hope. The government does not trust the people. And eventually the people will not trust the government. The government has put parliament, and therefore democracy, in hibernation.

So in my second letter to the prime minister, I asked three sets of questions, on the modelling, the data, and the plan. Some medical specialists are asking, does COVID-19 attack our vascular, our blood circulation, and oxygen absorption system, or our respiratory system? We need to know, honestly. The chances of developing a vaccine against a virus that attacks our respiratory or blood system, that determines our fate.

People have dreamt of vaccines for the common cold. A type of corona vaccine, virus, rather, for a century or more. Yet there is still none. SARS is a coronavirus, and after 17 years intense research and billions of dollars, there’s still no vaccine. Experts say chances of a COVID-19 vaccine are very low. What about treatment, treating people with a cure?

What are the government’s plans to consider using Ivermectin to treat people who have the virus? It’s been a hundred percent successful in laboratory tests at Monash University. Are there any plans to treat people with a proven drug, like the malaria drugs, including hydroxychloroquine, that reportedly is having wonderful results in New York.

In summary, Australians want to know, how long will I be working from home? Or not working, and stuck at home? When can we get back to work and school? When will we be safe from this virus? Politicians won’t solve the COVID-19 problem. Research and science will. Until a vaccine is found, and despite all that we are doing, COVID-19 is still out there, waiting for us.

From what I’ve seen of Australians behaving, as we have in recent weeks, it’s marvellous. And from what I’ve learned from successful strategies overseas, there is a reason for optimism, and real hope. We must, though, continue to be disciplined, and the government must base policies, strategies, and plans, on solid data, on empirical evidence. And share that data accurately and fully, and honestly, with the people.

When this is over, everyday Australians of all backgrounds expect to see, and deserve to be, a healthy, secure people, with a proud, independent Australia once more, that reflects our lifestyle, culture, values, freedoms, democracy, and potential. All people want is a fair go, and governance that we can trust to serve us and work for our country.

If you’re concerned about this issue, please contact your local member of parliament, and get your friends and relatives to contact your local member, and demand to get a fair dinkum explanation, because we all deserve to know.

I’ve spoken on your behalf in the Senate, and I’ve written to the prime minister twice, and will continue to hold the government accountable on your behalf.

/by

Say NO to the Government’s tracing App

Prime Minister Morrison has spoken of the need for a tracking phone app, to help the government trace people who may have been infected with COVID-19.

The PM is refusing to rule out the app being made compulsory on your phones.

The privacy implications of this are frightening.

This app would create a record of your movements “in the real world” including everywhere you go, everyone you meet and how long you were in contact with each person.

One Nation opposes this measure and calls on Prime Minister Morrison to guarantee that should this app be rolled out it will never be made compulsory and if voluntarily installed by a user, will contain enforceable safety provisions.

Transcript

I just heard something very, very dangerous. Brian Carlton on Triple M, interviewed the Prime Minister. Pretty good interview, until around about the sixth minute to the ninth minute.

Three times, Brian Carlton asked the Prime Minister if he would make the app for tracing people on their phones with regard to the virus, compulsory. Three times, the Prime Minister refused to rule it out.

That’s not on! This is Australia. Secondly, what would be the penalty if someone refused to join the app? Would they be denied certain services? Would they be fined? In Singapore, where they already have the app, it’s voluntary.

Only 20% of people have taken it up. People are well and truly capable of making up their own damn mind about whether or not it’s needed. People are also remindful of Cambridge Analytica, data security and privacy issues.

Each of us should decide who looks over our shoulder into our lives, because as George Washington said, the first president of the United States, “Government is a fearful master and a dangerous servant.”

We have to watch them the whole time. Something about the human condition, give someone power and they want it all. We’re watching. Because this is an opportunity with this COVID virus, to run roughshod over people.

We’re gonna be watching to make sure that we have all of our freedoms and rights restored, once this is over.

/2 Comments/by

Letter to the PM: COVID-19 – What is your plan?

This is the third in a series of letters between the Prime Minister and I in regards to COVID-19. You can read my first letter and the Prime Minister’s reply below.

Letter to the PM: COVID-19 Strategy
Letter to the PM: COVID-19 – The PM’s reply

Dear Mr Morrison 

RE: COVID-19 RECOVERY PLAN 

Thank you for your reply dated 14 April to my letter of 25 March 2020. 

Noting that the government has put Australia’s parliament – and therefore democracy – into hibernation, I now raise questions that would in normal circumstances be asked of Ministers in the Senate or of their departments in Canberra. 

Before doing so I acknowledge again that there is no manual on how to respond to the serious and dynamic health and security crisis now confronting all Australians. I note that although we disagree with some aspects of your government’s COVID-19 financial packages, in the interests of ensuring swift support to people whose lives have been jolted through loss of income we voted to support both packages in full. In doing so, and of necessity, we gave your government an open cheque. 

As a Senator it is my duty to ensure accountability. Firstly, I note that your government and Australians generally can claim success in avoiding the scenario of overwhelmed health care services. Secondly, experience here and overseas is now such that the questions below need to be asked on behalf of the constituents I serve. 

While I empathise with the government’s challenge, people need answers. People are feeling confused, afraid, concerned; some feel lost, grieving for those dying and for our country. Some feel angry. Many are still living in disbelief and plagued with uncertainty. 

People want to know what has to be done. Why it has to be done. How long before it’s over. And, what will be the cost – financial, social, personal, mental and emotional? It is the people who have to repay these big bills of up to around $300 billion to which your government has committed Australian taxpayers. 

People have a right to know the facts, yet your discussion of modelling lacked specifics on the duration of isolation nor the plan and triggers for releasing people. 

A solid plan is fundamental for trust and hope. People expect governments to lead and expect leaders to have a plan based on solid data and facts.

These are questions that I ask on behalf of our constituents: 

1. Modelling 

a) What delayed your government so long before publicly discussing modelling as attempted in your media conference on Tuesday 7 April 2020? 

b) Does your modelling, like that from NZ and the Imperial College of London, show that after the lockdown the virus will still exist in the community and that unrestrained release of people from isolation would lead to an epidemic, unless successful treatments or vaccines are released? 

c) Why did your government not release the modelling at your conference? 

d) Why did your government not discuss the underlying assumptions including infection, transmission and mortality rates? 

e) Why did your government not discuss the variables modelled because without that people can make no meaningful conclusions? 

f) Why did the modellers release the draft version separately from you and not release the model? 

g) Why did your government not disclose and discuss the modellers’ result and various alternative future scenarios that could be the basis for a national plan? 

h) Did your government use the modelling as the basis for its COVID-19 support packages legislation? 

2. National Plan 

a) What is the government’s plan for maintaining health and safety while restoring the economy, and what is the time frame? 

b) On what medical or scientific data do you repeatedly state that people will be isolated in hibernation for six months? 

c) Is the government considering the latest data and facts from nations like Taiwan, and to a lesser extent South Korea, that are highly successful in combatting COVID-19, and if so what is your government learning? 

d) Is your government considering adopting their strategy of isolating the sick and the vulnerable, combined with wider screening of elevated body temperature and more widespread testing of the population for the virus, so that instead of isolating healthy people and destroying livelihoods we can isolate the sick and the vulnerable thereby allowing the healthy to get back to work and restore our economy while protecting lives and livelihoods? 

e) Experts are saying the likelihood of a vaccine for COVID-19 is low because after 17 years no vaccine for SARS, a coronavirus, has been developed despite massive investment. Despite possibly one hundred years of effort no vaccine has been developed for the common cold, another coronavirus. What is your plan for releasing people from isolation before a vaccine is developed? 

f) What is the government’s plan for treatment of people with the virus? Is it considering using hydroxy-chloro-quine, reportedly showing positive results in New York, and Ivermectin being 100% effective in Monash University’s laboratory tests? 

g) What is the plan for mental health issues that experts warn will likely rise as the isolation continues? One of the worst things that can be done to a person is to take their job from them. Humanity needs security, connection, family, and friends. The government’s shutdown is a ticking time bomb. 

3. Data 

a) Some medical specialists have suggested COVID-19 attacks human vascular, blood circulation and oxygen absorption, while other experts claim it attacks the human respiratory system. What is the government’s conclusion? 

b) Are casualties and deaths from influenza and pneumonia, both here and overseas, being reported as being due to COVID-19? 

c) How many people die WITH the virus and how many die FROM the virus? In some nations is the number of deaths attributed to COVID-19 inflated? 

d) Data suggests Australia’s testing for the virus is narrowly focussed and well below the world’s best in terms of testing per capita. Why? 

e) Will your government establish a website at which it will openly post the scientific data and basis for its plan and allow public scrutiny – a cornerstone of science? Will it openly post the modelling on which it depends? 

f) To ensure a diversity of medical views and to prevent group-think, will your government establish a fully funded independent scientific team to question and hold accountable the government’s medical advisers? 

When this is over, everyday Australians of all backgrounds expect to see – and deserve to be – a healthy secure people with a proud, independent Australia that reflects our lifestyle, culture, values, freedom, democracy and potential. 

All people want is a fair go and governance that we can all trust to work for our country. What many Australians want, looking beyond our health and financial safety, is to make sure that we leave COVID-19 behind us with the same, or more, freedoms and liberties that we had before. 

Yours Faithfully 

Malcolm Roberts

Senator for Queensland

200416-PM_ltr2

/1 Comment/by

One Nation calls for Australians to buy Australian-Made

, , ,

One Nation Senator Malcolm Roberts urges Australians to unite under our flag and buy Australian-made and Australian-owned.

“While the COVID 19 crisis reminds us of the importance of supporting Australian-made, it also shows we no longer make many essential goods here on our shores, which become a major security threat,” stated Senator Roberts.

Successive Australian governments have allowed, encouraged and at times driven our manufacturing industry to move off-shore leaving us dependent on overseas countries like China for basic goods.

In his senate speech on 8 April, Senator Roberts stated that Australia’s productive capacity has been smashed under Liberal-National and Labor-Green governments blindly adopting the globalist strategy of “interdependence” that has made us too heavily dependent on foreign sources.

One Nation calls on the Australian Government to immediately prioritise creating an environment where Australian businesses grow and thrive and are not hamstrung by a globalist agenda.

When Australia was in need of urgent medical supplies to treat people with COVID19 we were reliant on suppliers in China rather than having our own thriving manufacturing industry.

Australia’s manufacturing sector has deteriorated over the years with only 6% of GDP coming from manufacturing, down from 30% fifty years ago. 

Senator Roberts implores the Federal Government to remove government-imposed regulations like the self-imposed Paris Agreement, pointless climate regulations, unnecessary over-regulation and other government hurdles and instead encourage our manufacturing industries.

Senator Roberts added, “Our manufacturers have endured a new high in 2019 for electricity input prices, which now averages over 90% higher, almost double, than the prices in 2010. Gas prices have increased nearly 50% over the same ten-year period.”

“Australian energy prices have gone from the cheapest to the most expensive in the world due to climate policies and that is making manufacturing unviable in Australia.”

When the COVID19 virus has passed and we are left to repair a broken economy, we will need to reassess the importance of previous spending commitments, such as billions of dollars wasted in subsidising intermittent wind and solar power to virtue signal to the United Nations.

200416-One-Nation-calls-Australians-to-buy-Australian-made

/by

Letter to the PM: COVID-19 – The PM’s reply

On 25 March I sent a letter to the PM in regards to COVID 19. You can read that here:

Letter to the PM: COVID-19 Strategy

This is the reply I received from the Prime Minister.

Dear Senator

Thank you for your letter of 25 March 2020 about the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic.
The priority for the Commonwealth, State and Territory Governments is the health and wellbeing of Australians, their livelihoods, their jobs and ensuring that Australia is positioned to emerge strong and resilient.

We are working together as Australians do. We all have a part to play: employers, employees, governments, health workers and every one with social distancing.
From the earliest days, Australia has understood the seriousness of COVID-19.
We quickly established travel bans and scaled up screening on our borders. We evacuated Australians from virus hotspots and set up quarantine facilities.

We funded a $2.4 billion national health response plan to set up more than 100 pop-up clinics, and to provide extra support for those more at risk including the elderly, those with chronic conditions and Indigenous communities.

We have increased funding to public hospitals and aged care, boosted our National Medical Stockpile of essential medicines and masks, and have secured alternative supplies of vital personal protective equipment for our healthcare workers.
At the same time, we are taking action to keep Australians in jobs and businesses in business.

Already we have announced $320 billion in measures across the forward estimates, representing 16.4 per cent of annual GDP.

We are focusing these efforts on those in the frontline – those who will be feeling the first blows of the economic impacts of the coronavirus. Our measures support households including casuals and sole traders, retirees and those on income support. They include doubling the JobSeeker Payment, through the introduction of a temporary coronavirus supplement.

We are providing a historic wage subsidy to around 6 million workers who will receive a flat payment of $1,500 per fortnight through their employer, before tax. The $130 billion temporary JobKeeper Payment scheme will help businesses significantly impacted by COVID-19 with the costs of their employees’ wages so more Australians can retain their jobs and businesses and can restart quickly when the crisis is over. Further detail is available at the Treasury website (www.treasury.gov.au/coronavirus).

We are working to ensure Australia can bounce back stronger than ever once the virus has run its course. As our economy bounces back, so will our Budget.
We can take this action now because we have worked hard to bring the Budget back into balance, to maintain our AAA credit rating and work with State and Ten-itory Governments to provide a world-class health system.

As well, a National Cabinet has been formed with myself, Premiers and Chief Ministers. This is Australia’s first National Cabinet made up of all Australian governments.
I have also publicly reiterated the role that all Australians play. By practising social distancing, maintaining good hygiene practices and looking out for one another we will be able to limit to spread of the virus.

I trust this information will be of use to you.

Yours Sincerely

Scott Morrison

P.S. I strongly disagree with your assessment of the Government’s approach and the comparison made to Italy.  To the contrary our experience more closely follows that in South Korea.

I followed this response with a second letter, which you can read here:

Letter to the PM: COVID-19 – What is your plan?
/by