Posts

Sports rorts, carpark scandals, corrupt water trading, crooked disaster funding projects, AusPost CEOs being forced out for not pleasing government party hacks. This government disrespects the people of Australia so they can look after their corporate mates.

Transcript

Earlier this month in my flag speech I spoke of parliament’s duty to serve the people. Today I’m asking: who does this parliament really serve? I’ll review the Morrison government’s actions and this parliament’s actions that carry the stench of cronyism and corruption.

I’ll start with changes to water policy that Malcolm Turnbull and John Howard introduced in 2007. Those changes turned ownership and the trading of water rights into a $20 billion industry. Large corporate interests, trade union bosses controlling industry super funds and National Party powerbrokers have rushed to take advantage of this new wealth. And by taking advantage, I really mean make out like bandits at the expense of family farms that can no longer afford water for their crops. I’m raising this issue first up because it illustrates how things are done in federal parliament.

The Water Act requires a transparent water-trading register. The government tried to introduce one in 2012, stuffed it up and then gave up. I thought asking the government to take another run at it—to reveal who was lining their pockets with the proceeds of water speculation—would be straightforward. How naive was that! My amendment was opposed. The same parties, the Liberals and Nationals, that passed the legislation in the first place requiring a water-trading register, opposed my amendment that sought to ensure compliance with the parliament’s legislation. The Senate, with Labor’s support, passed my amendment. It proceeded to the lower house, where Labor rejected it. What happened in the 100 metres between the Senate and the House of Representatives? The fix happened—the fix to protect corporate water traders. Labor agreed to cover for its Liberal and Nationals mates and they returned the favour. That’s how this parliament works. Cronyism is an art form.

The same pattern of immoral behaviour occurred with the legislation One Nation introduced to stop banks bailing-in depositors’ funds to save banks in a crisis, stealing customers’ hard earned deposits. In 2018, parliament passed legislation to allow a bail-in as part of emergency financial measures. The Labor, Liberal, and National parties teamed up to oppose my bill and justified that action with a complete lie: that the emergency provisions did not give APRA the power to order a bail-in. My legislation to protect the one trillion dollars in bank deposits of everyday Australians was defeated, despite the Treasury admitting, in a briefing to my face, that those emergency provisions do allow a bail-in. The Liberal-National and Labor duopoly lied so their donors in the major banks can keep the right to steal your money to save themselves.

The same cronyism was in place over the Christine Holgate watch scandal at Australia Post. As we now know, those watches were given to management as a reward for completing a very profitable deal for Australia Post. Australia Post executives accepted the watches and agreed to forgo much larger bonuses. Why would the Prime Minister and the parliament misrepresent a measure that saved Australia Post money? It’s because Christine Holgate had negotiated a fee with the banks of $20 million a year for the provision of banking services through licensed post offices, but the banks wanted a bigger share of those profits. Christine Holgate made the mistake of costing the big four banks money, and an example had to be made of her. What a show Scott Morrison put on! After Ms Holgate was sacked, and Australia Post was placed back into the hands of friendlies, the deal was renegotiated. The banks are now only paying half that, $10 million per year, and 4,000 licensed post office franchisees got screwed. How much did it cost the banks to get the outcome they wanted from this parliament?

In the last election cycle Australian banks donated $500,000 to the Liberal and National parties and $400,000 to the Labor Party.

There’s more. The Australian people can see that cronyism extends to pharmaceuticals. Most people don’t know who funds the body that approves pharmaceuticals in Australia—the Therapeutic Goods Administration, known as the TGA. The big pharmaceutical companies applying for approvals themselves fund the TGA. The expert committees that advise the TGA on what to approve are comprised largely of university academics, whose departments receive funding from pharmaceutical companies. That doesn’t pass the pub test, nor does this. In the last election cycle the pharmaceutical industry donated $276,000 to Labor and $400,000 to the Liberals and Nationals.

Earlier this year One Nation combined with the Greens to extend the licences of community TV stations C31 in Melbourne and Channel 44 in Adelaide, after Malcolm Turnbull in 2012 confiscated those free-to-air transmission rights to force viewers back to commercial TV owned by his mates. C31 and Channel 44 survived on the back of large public campaigns. Why was it so hard to get an extension for community TV to use a spectrum that’s not needed until 2024? Could it be because the commercial stations, through Free TV Australia, donated $17,000 to Labor and $13,000 to the Liberals? That, of course, is the problem.

Yesterday in the Senate the Liberals-Nationals and Labor duopoly teamed up to stop the measures that One Nation and Senator Rex Patrick jointly proposed to make Woodside Petroleum pay for the $2 billion cost of cleaning up their environmental damage in the Timor Sea. Woodside easily evaded its responsibilities to the people of Australia. It simply sold the little bit of extraction left in the gas field, including its clean-up liability, to a small company for a few million dollars. That company was then wound up. Taxpayers are now on the hook for the clean-up. One Nation’s amendment would have restored the liability on Woodside. The crossbench supported that. Labor and the Liberals and Nationals opposed it. Then I discovered that Woodside donated $135,000 to Labor and $148,000 to the Liberals and Nationals. What a surprise!

Then there’s the Beetaloo basin. It’s in the news this week because the government passed legislation to allow cash payments to its mining mates to frack the Beetaloo basin. Guess who funds the cost of the exploration—some $7 million per well? Taxpayers via a grant, yet the gas extraction company owns the well and keeps the profits from the extraction. This little earner is called socialising the risk and the costs while privatising the profits. The first recipient of this cronyism was Empire Energy, a Liberal Party donor. But you didn’t hear this from the opposition, because Empire Energy donated $25,000 to the Labor Party. In echoing Senator Hanson’s repeated calls, Senator Patrick rightly pointed out that the oil and gas industry exported $62 billion in 2018-19 and paid taxpayers just $1 billion in royalties. The taxpayers are getting royally screwed by this crony capitalist approach to government.

One Nation support free enterprise; we do not support cronyism. Earlier this year One Nation introduced a motion to refer to a Senate inquiry the misuse of federal government disaster relief funds. Millions, possibly billions, of dollars are being misappropriated, with no suitable work being conducted. The Liberals-Nationals and Labor duopoly rode to the rescue of their mates and voted down our motion—no inquiry.

The car park scandal has seen the Morrison government give $420 million of taxpayer money for commuter car parks in areas that don’t need commuter car parks, including three in the Treasurer’s electorate and one for a train station that’s closing. I assume that even this government is not stupid enough to build a car park at a train station that is not there anymore, so I wait to see which of the government’s mates just got free car parks. The sports rorts scandal, the Inland Rail infrastructure grants, the Kimba radioactive waste dump, the Murray-Darling Basin’s upwater program and ‘watergate’ are all corruption scandals that a federal corruption commission, if we had one, would have dealt with. Parliament rubberstamps decisions and policies, costing the people trillions of dollars so mates can feed off taxpayers, bludge off taxpayers and transfer wealth from taxpayers. The people are rightly angry.

Decisions taken in the parliament must not only be honest, they must be seen to be honest and be justified with hard, solid data.

Australian voters will shortly be asked to pass judgement on this sorry parliament. Make no mistake, voting for the Liberal Party with their sellout sidekicks, the Nationals, or voting for Labor and their ticket to power, the Greens, will represent business as usual for the Liberal-Labor duopoly that has ruled this parliament for decades. It’s now time, at the next election, to break this cycle of abuse. Stop repeatedly alternating Liberal-Nationals with Labor and expecting anything to change. It’s now time to change the parliament.

There are many third parties putting their hands up in this election, and none have a track record of achievement greater than One Nation. I’m very proud of the contribution Senator Hanson, Mark Latham, Steve Andrew, Rob Roberts and I have made and are making to restore governance to Australia. Despite the Liberal, Labor and Nationals parties’ many dishonest attempts to destroy her, for 25 years Senator Pauline Hanson and One Nation have remained true to the Australian people, and we will continue to be so. In conclusion, I make an observation regarding the perspex security screen that now protects the Leader of the Government in the Senate from the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate and vice versa. This screen sends a powerful message to the Australian people: the Senate chamber now resembles a visitation centre at one of Her Majesty’s prisons. How very appropriate! This is not a parliament; it’s a crime scene.

Earlier in the pandemic, State Premiers let Black Lives Matter protests happen without a whisper of criticism. Now that protests criticise their attempts at tyranny, they crack down on them. Banning protests has been a hallmark of dictators for all of history. Let’s not follow them down that path.

Transcript

As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, my remarks will be on the most basic of human rights: freedom to protest. State premiers have declared a war on peaceful protests against their policies, including the ‘freedom day’ rallies, yet they allow protests they agree with such as Black Lives Matter.

An ethical nightmare over human rights is brewing between the parliaments and the people. It’s the fault of blind political ambition, leveraged off a virus that has turned out to be, according to government health experts’ own data, no more harmful than a bad flu. It’s time we cancelled the COVID apocalypse. It’s time to end the use of COVID as an excuse to implement all-powerful legislation that exempts itself from proper scrutiny. Both the Biosecurity Act 2015 and the National Emergency Declaration Act 2020 make a mockery of 120 years of legislation and 800 years of common law. Both pieces of legislation are being used in ways never put to the people. Together, these acts trespass unreasonably on the rights and liberties of everyday Australians.

No parliament that wishes to call itself a democracy can grant indefinite, absolute and unscrutinised power. State premiers have entered into a COVID arms race with each other, leaving Australians trapped in the middle of the crossfire—huge increases in suicide attempts, children phoning helplines in unprecedented numbers and small businesses in ruins. And what created this? Federal parliament’s failure to hold the line against fear and misuse of power.

‘Emergency’ should not mean a dissolution of rights, especially when a state of emergency can be stretched out for months, years or even indefinitely. COVID policy has turned into a parallel legal system, embraced by a Prime Minister that has encouraged health orders that permanently alter the landscape of work and travel. Death has become a matter of politics and mismanagement, used to prevent the sacred freedom to assemble and protest peacefully. If Australians cannot protest, parliaments will never be held accountable for errors in judgement.

One of parliament’s many mistakes is in the presentation of COVID data. Given without context, they tower over us. Viewed in context, COVID harm barely deviates from normal. Parliaments cannot promise safety. Safety is an outcome of parliaments following policies that protect our freedoms and our rights. Instead of handling COVID with a view to these important guiding principles, politicians have suffocated Australia under the weight of biosecurity powers, resulting in displays of cruelty that have shocked the whole world.

The fact is we are not safe. We are not safe from our own parliaments. Freedom protests are a criticism of COVID policies and parliaments’ atrocious governance. Like the manufacturers of vaccines, parliaments do not want to hear any complaints about the quality of their work. Despite this parliament’s best attempts to control people, we are blessed with a nation full of people who refuse to live under the coercion of fear. This may be considered civil disobedience—I call it commonsense.

The Prime Minister’s role is to perform his duty with pragmatism and calm. Instead, Scott Morrison has rattled the cage of fear and enticed state politicians to do the same. Instead of focusing on trust, this parliament endorses spending tens of millions of dollars advertising COVID fear. Operation COVID Shield is now an attempt to use military to force the behaviour associated with trust without any attempt to create the meeting of the minds necessary for trust. Abused people may well may obey their captors, but they do not trust them. The more rights parliaments steal from Australians, the less likely people are to trust.

Australians asked for choice in COVID treatments, and the government suppressed peer reviewed and internationally accepted alternatives like Ivermectin. Australians asked for vaccine manufacturers to accept liability for their products, and instead were denied any recourse in the event of personal harm. Australians tried to report fatal side effects, and for months the parliament, the legacy media and social media silenced them. Australians took to the streets to tell this parliament and state premiers that the health orders were destroying millions of lives, and the states hunted them down like criminals. To enforce compliance, parliaments will need more policies like Operation COVID Shield, more police and more Defence Force members in our streets. Force will still fail, because fear and intimidation are a terrible plan. The damage done to the sacred trust between the people and parliaments is catastrophic. Parliamentary policy has destroyed trust in vaccines, creating two classes of people in Australia—those who profit from the pandemic and those who suffer from it. Policy, not COVID, has destroyed trust in vaccines. COVID Shield seeks to repair it with the rhetoric of war. Everyday Australians are not buying this nonsense. Australians know what the parliaments, the military and the health bureaucrats do not know—we will not be divided, we have one flag, we are one community and we are One Nation.

Respect people’s rights and restore informed consent—a basic human right. Is it any wonder millions of people now question everything state and federal parliaments say and have reached breaking point?

Transcript

The safety of everyday Australians should never be a race on a political scoreboard. Instead, it must be about health and accountability. Yet this government and most people in parliament hastily rammed COVID injections on people. The vaccines are not fully tested and are only provisionally approved. These are vaccines with serious side-effects—they’re even killing people—and with plummeting efficacy. The injections are already losing their effect. We’ve been told that we do not need 100 per cent vaccination to protect. Why, then, do governments, parliaments and big businesses continue to persecute people rightly concerned about this injection? A constituent, Ben, asked a simple question that many are asking: if your vaccine works, why does he need one, and, if it doesn’t work, why should he get one?

Secondly, Australians have a right to sit this race out. Instead we’re hearing democracy choking—the death of our right to say, ‘No, this is not for me.’ Without blush or hesitation, Qantas CEO Alan Joyce threatens the jobs of people who are concerned about COVID injections. Yet the same man signalled the need for IR reform now, supposedly to protect workers from abuses of power. Respect people’s rights and restore informed consent—a basic human right. Is it any wonder millions of people now question everything state and federal parliaments say and have reached breaking point? No, it’s expected. The ongoing protests must be heard. Australians have legitimate concerns for health and safety, jobs and livelihoods, and rights and freedoms. The unions and Queensland Labor—old Labor—used to defend the right to protest. They’re now a symptom of the problem of taking away people’s freedoms, jobs and livelihoods. In turn, state and federal governments must get back to basics and focus on the virus, not the symptoms. Whether we came here before Captain Cook or came from Europe or from Afghanistan, we Australians have one flag, we are one community and we are one nation.

Our country has been ruined by governments trying to pick and choose winners instead of letting people be free to invent new and innovative solutions. We used to lead the world, inventing the refrigerator, electric drill, tanks, pacemakers, ultrasounds and wifi. Not anymore.

The right to raise ourselves up through hard work and enterprise is a freedom that must not be compromised. It must be protected.

Transcript

Later this year we will pass an amazing milestone when an Australian designed and made satellite will be launched into space using an Australian designed and made rocket and launch facility. We now have a domestic end-to-end space capability, creating jobs and injecting new wealth into our economy. Government has not achieved this, private enterprise has, proving once again that governments do not create wealth; free personal enterprise creates wealth. For many years, we led the world in innovation, inventing the refrigerator in 1856, electric drill in 1889, military tanks in 1912, pacemakers in 1928, ultrasounds in 1961 and wifi in 1992. But that’s where the list ends, 30 years ago.

Australia once led the world in patents; now China registers four times the patents per capita that Australia does. This is partly the fault of the big banks, whose tight hold on the capital sector funding for business development is throttling investment, suffocating beneath our banks greedy obsession with real estate. The government, through its future growth fund, has taken upon itself the role of picking winners and losers amongst start-ups, making private sector growth beholden to government bureaucrats. Lockdowns have decimated small business and forced medium and large businesses to shelve research and development plans.

Australia is going backwards and is losing the ability for citizens to support themselves through their own hard work and enterprise. Reliance on government handouts appears to be a design feature of Prime Minister Morrison’s socialist version of Australia. Instead, One Nation will shrink the government to fit the Constitution, we will get government out of the way of free enterprise, we will let the Australian spirit out of [inaudible] to then invent and create to carry this nation forward, even to space. We have one flag, we have one community, we are one nation. The right to raise ourselves up through hard work and enterprise is a freedom that must not be compromised. It must remain.

“Since the start of the pandemic, countries have heavily invested in the development of control strategies that aim to contain the spread of COVID-19. Australian citizens have sporadically faced lockdowns. Senator Malcolm Roberts from the One Nation Party talks to us about the approach towards the COVID-19 situation taken by governments. Watch this video for exclusive insights.”

From Kalkine TV: https://kalkinemedia.com/au Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/kalkineau/ Twitter – https://twitter.com/kalkineau LinkedIn – https://www.linkedin.com/company/4829818

Transcript

James Preston:

Well, hello and welcome to another edition of Executive Corner Expert Talks, I’m James Preston. And Australia has reached a boiling point with citizens of Greater Sydney having now been locked down for over two months. More protests likely on the way and hollow promises constantly being made by not only the New South Wales state government, but that of Prime Minister, Scott Morrison. It’s fair to say that the people have had enough. The gap between the everyday Australian and the likes of Gladys Berejiklian, or Dan Andrews in Victoria continues to grow each and every day. But one politician who has been particularly outspoken about the approach towards the lockdowns, and of course the COVID situation in a larger aspect by our various governments is Senator Malcolm Roberts from the One Nation Party. And he now joins me live on Kalkine TV. Malcolm, a very good afternoon to you.

Malcolm Roberts:

Thank you, James, for the welcome, it’s a pleasure to be here with you.

James Preston:

Malcolm, great to have you on. Let’s start with the obvious one here. Now, we’ve been witnessing a lot of tampering with freedoms. There’s been lockdowns for a long period of time. Now, 18 months, we’ve been dealing with ons and offs in this regard. What’s your approach to the entire thing?

Malcolm Roberts:

My approach is really simple. First of all, well, I mentioned this back, in the first single day session of parliament dealing with this coronavirus back on Monday, March 23rd. I said to the government, we will wave everything through because we’re looking at tens of thousands of deaths overseas. We realised it’s probably serious, so we don’t know much about it. Let’s get on with it, but we want you to get the data. We want you to build a comprehensive plan for managing this and we will hold you accountable. And what I’ve been driven by is, you said it a moment ago, hollow statements from members of parliament and premiers and the Prime Minister, hollow statements. People have had a gut full of this, James. This has been mismanaged, COVID exposed the mismanagement of our country. We started COVID with no masks, with no capacity to really manufacture solid material.

Malcolm Roberts:

We’ve still got that, but we also now have 18 months confirmed mismanagement of this. So my approach is very simple. I’ve confirmed it with Senate Estimates, with the Chief Medical Officer and the Department of Health Secretary. And they both confirmed my list of seven strategies for managing this virus. I asked them specifically, have I missed anything? No. Is there anything in my list of seven that shouldn’t be there? No. So the first one is lockdowns, but even that should be used only initially and then put aside. I’m happy to expand on that in a minute. The second one is testing, tracing and quarantining like Taiwan, highly successful, but we are failing at it.

Malcolm Roberts:

Third one, some basic restrictions like social distancing, maybe masks, but from what I understand masks, we can discuss that more, masks are not the go. Vaccines, if they’re tested, if they’re properly proved and if they’re thoroughly tested, and these vaccines are not. Fifth one, Ivermectin or any other approved antiviral. Now the Chief Medical Officer and the Secretary of the Health Department, both confirm that that’s a valid strategy. We’re not using that. We could end this nonsense immediately. Sixth is personal hygiene, personal behaviours. And the seventh is health and fitness. That’s a comprehensive approach. And we’re seeing the federal and state governments do only one each and they’re making a mess of it.

James Preston:

Now look, it’s a pretty comprehensive list. Let’s just touch on the first point there, in terms of lockdowns being, I suppose, a final measure to approach with. When Scott Morrison, of course, our Prime Minister, he released a series of different phases. And part of that was supposed to be lockdowns as of course, a final decision here. It was supposed to be the stop gap solution if all else failed. But what we’ve seen in the last two months or so is that, that seems to be pretty much the first approach. So how we ended up in a position where that’s now the desire, I suppose, from our politicians, even though it was about a month before that, that we had this new line of messaging.

Malcolm Roberts:

Well, we haven’t got the data from the government and I don’t believe the government is following the data. None of the states, not the federal government, their plans are shooting each other, blaming each other, avoiding, dodging, ducking, weaving. They’re not being accountable and they are not presented the data. I asked the Chief Medical Officer for the data. He gave it to me. This virus is highly transmissible, but it has low severity to moderate severity. We also know within that group of people, that within the population, there are distinct segments, the old, for example, and those with comorbidities needs special precautions. So what we need to have is a comprehensive plan, a detailed plan. Now the World Health Organisation itself has said, and it’s a corrupt, dishonest, incompetent body. Nonetheless, even it has said openly, that lockdowns are for use initially and not thereafter.

Malcolm Roberts:

Lockdowns are used to get control of the virus. The very fact that the Prime Minister is bankrolling the states on one policy, and that is lockdowns, shows that we have not got control of the virus. We are not managing the virus, James. The virus is managing the states. The federal government is pouring money in the largest transfer of wealth from taxpayers to multinational companies that we have ever seen. It’s bankrolling the vaccine manufacturers, and they’re now having plummeting efficacy. So we are on a mess. This will continue and continue and continue until we wake up to ourselves.

James Preston:

Well, Malcolm, as part of the lockdowns, one thing that we’ve all been enduring, I suppose, is Gladys Berejiklian and Brad Hazzard addressing New South Wales each day with quite repetitive reports really. Now, I personally have quite a huge issue with how they are run. There never seems to be a message of hope. And for me, the language that’s used is just as important as the overall message. Why do you think the information is being conveyed in the way that it is, where we’re focusing on case numbers or positive results, as opposed to, for example, doing 115,000 tests. And then only 150 come back as positive, surely that should equate to some sort of goodwill for the community.

Malcolm Roberts:

Well, I don’t think they know what they’re doing. And quite clearly they don’t. Governor DeSantis in Florida enacted one lockdown upfront in Florida last year. He then subsequently very quickly apologised to the people of Florida. Now remember, Florida has a very high proportion of elderly people. Governor DeSantis promised his people that he would never do another lockdown because it failed. In the United States, we have 50 states and you can compare their performance. Those on lockdowns are doing not as well as those without lockdowns. California is a basket case and has been on virtually continual lockdown for months. It’s a mess. States that are freeing things up are far better performed when it comes to health.

Malcolm Roberts:

There are three aspects to this virus. The first is health, that’s got to be the first priority. The second one is freedom, basic freedom. Now freedom is essential for getting people’s minds and hearts into gear to solve the problems with regard to our health. The third one is governance and accountability. We are seeing an absolutely failed system at work here with the state and federal governments. We do need hope, the data gives us hope. This vaccine can be managed quite effectively as some countries overseas are showing, as states without lockdowns in America are showing, and without a vaccine. We have some countries, some states overseas that are highly effective in managing this virus by using Ivermectin, which the government has turned away from in this country without the due proper analysis.

James Preston:

Well, Malcolm, we’ll get to vaccines itself in a moment because obviously that is tied in with Ivermectin. And also we obviously have to tread quite carefully there because we know what has been happening previously with YouTube, for example, if we try and discuss such a topic. But I want to ask you this question, it might be a bit of a loaded one given your role as a Senator, but is there any merit in trying to, I suppose, tie politician salaries to lockdowns. If we, for example, go into a lockdown or stay in a lockdown for a prolonged period, would parliamentarians such as Berejiklian, Dan Andrews or Annastacia Palaszczuk, those who are in charge of making the decision, should they have their pay slashed to that of the disaster payment that they’re offering people who have had their livelihoods destroyed? Do you think that would create some sort of a different outcome?

Malcolm Roberts:

Yes, it would. But, and I agree with that sentiment and that idea. I don’t know the practicalities and the legalities of doing that. However, it would put responsibility back, but there’s an even better way. And that’s to vote some of these people out, that would really cut their pay. We need scrutiny. This lockdown nonsense will continue in our country until the people wake up and hold the governments accountable. That’s what’s happened in this country. We’ve had 80 years of atrocious governments that has let the people down. We’ve destroyed our manufacturing capability, our productive capacity. We have become dependent on overseas countries. We have the world’s best people. We have abundant resources, energy resources, metals resources, minerals resources. We have a fabulous agricultural sector. We have water that needs to just be moved around properly and efficiently. We are in shortage of many of the things that we should be abundant.

Malcolm Roberts:

We’re exporting our coal, our iron ore to other countries to turn into steel. And then we import the steel back. This is crazy. The people in this country have to wake up and have to make sure that they understand it’s not just a Morrison liberal national government. It’s not just a potential Albanese government. My goodness, I don’t know which would be worse. But the problem is parliamentary system in this country has stopped holding governments accountable. And that’s the key thing. And the way to hold parliaments accountable and to change the focus and drive of their parliament is to change the parliament. I’m not talking about changing the constitution. I’m talking about the changing the composition through the ballot box. That’s the way a democracy works. We’ve had 80 years of failed governance, and now we need to change that and start voting for a different parliament, an independent parliament to make sure that we hold governments accountable.

James Preston:

Malcolm, take your point there, but let’s now move on to vaccines. You’ve been a rather outspoken critic about the approach that both federal and state governments across Australia have been taking to date. For example, we’re seeing in your home of Queensland, the concept now of no jab no entry being proposed. Now that is of course, despite the fact that people who’ve been vaccinated can still contract it. They can get breakthrough infections and then obviously transmit them onto other people. So what’s your position on the concept of mandatory vaccinations?

Malcolm Roberts:

Totally opposed to it. I want to make it very clear, James. I wholeheartedly support medicines that have been tested thoroughly and proven to be safe, effective, and preferably affordable. I’m opposed completely to using untested medicines, untested drugs, and completely opposed and strongly opposed to forcing those drugs, untested drugs on people at the threat of losing their livelihood, which is what’s happening. Now, we have a range of people with a different views on vaccine. Some are vaccine compliant. Some are vaccine reluctant, some are vaccine hesitant, some are vaccine resistant and some are vaccine opponents. Generally speaking, I’m hesitant. Give me the data and then I’ll make my mind. It must be an informed choice from everyone, an informed choice. So I have a right as a Senator to listen to my constituents, to share the data I have. And I know that YouTube and Facebook are banning people for saying certain things.

Malcolm Roberts:

So, but that shows that we haven’t got a democracy anymore. What we need to do is to recognise that there’s this whole, there’s a broad spectrum of views towards vaccines. When people start calling people vaccine deniers, or anti-vaxxers, that’s a way of suppressing debate. That’s all it is. It’s a smear. There’s no data that goes with it. Anyone is allowed to have their own view about vaccines. That’s a free country. Everyone should have the free right to have an informed consent before they give their consent. To have an informed choice. It’s my body, my choice. It’s your body, your choice. And if you’re different from me, so be it. I don’t care. Now, vaccines, I’ve asked the Chief Medical Officer, the Head of the Therapeutic Goods Administration and the Secretary of the Department of Health in federal parliament, federal Senate Estimates about vaccines.

Malcolm Roberts:

I asked them, are they 100% safe? No, they’re not. What is the dosage required? We don’t know. How often will we have to get vaccine injections? We don’t know. Will there be booster shots? We don’t know. Will we be able to remove masks and restrictions and lockdowns? We don’t know. We all do know a few things, James, and that is these vaccines, as Pfizer has admitted, its own vaccine, the efficacy has plummeted very shortly after the vaccines have been administered. Israel is now finding an 11 fold increase in COVID cases in Israel. We know that they’re very concerned about the plummeting of vaccine efficacy. We know that Pfizer has admitted that they have made an application to the federal, the Food and Drug Administration in the United States to administer a third booster shot.

Malcolm Roberts:

How many booster shots do we need? How many booster shots will there be? And what we do know is that there have been massive adverse effects in America. There’ve been over 10,000 deaths recorded. There’ve been a thousand miscarriages. There’ve been people with heart problems, lung problems, other diseases. That we know also that Pfizer’s vaccine causes, the European Health Organisation has recognised that Pfizer’s vaccine can cause myocarditis of the heart and yet Pfizer now makes a drug to treat myocarditis. Pfizer made $18.9 billion in revenue in the last three months, the last quarter. It made a profit around $4 billion. And yet it is making people sick and getting money for that, and then selling more drugs to cure them from the disease that it’s caused and making more money from that. So what we’ve got here is a really tight circle where we do know the facts show that these vaccines haven’t got the efficacy they expected and even their own drug manufacturers are admitting that

James Preston:

Well, Malcolm, I think two points I’ll jump on from there is obviously, it’s quite important here to point out as well, just for our due diligence that no vaccine is 100% safe. We know that for a fact, there can always be adverse reactions. But certainly take your point that we don’t have long-term data for these either. We know that these are being pushed out. In general, the large percentage of people who are taking them aren’t having adverse reactions, but they do still exist. And that is something that does need to be discussed moving forward. I think that’s a very important issue.

James Preston:

One thing I want to ask as well is just for yourself, are you, I mean, you mentioned that you’re vaccine hesitant. Do you believe you will get the vaccine at some point? Or are you completely steering away from it until more data arrives?

Malcolm Roberts:

No, I won’t be getting the vaccine.

James Preston:

Okay. All right, well, let’s move on now to the concept of vaccine passports. [crosstalk 00:16:20].

Malcolm Roberts:

There are just too many risks there. [crosstalk 00:16:20]

James Preston:

Now we’ve seen some huge protests in France where they’ve obviously implemented that policy. It’s obviously a very loaded issue. What is your take with vaccine passport? I’d imagine it’s quite similar to the concept towards mandatory vaccinations.

Malcolm Roberts:

Correct. Mandatory vaccinations are murky for a start, because there is some people who say that they’re possible through employers. But I’d urge employees to put the question back on the employer and to indemnify the employee against death or against any serious injuries or illnesses. Now, vaccine passport, mandating vaccines may or may not be legal. That’s very vague and very fuzzy right now. Regardless, it’s unethical. So even if it is legal and the federal government cannot make it legal, it’s in the constitution that prevents that. The state government can in certain states and state governments have, others could change the law to make it legal. But in this case, James, what we’ve already seen is the federal government going through the state governments. So it’s really a federal initiative, which means it’s illegal. But it’s certainly unethical to force anyone and certainly unethical to force someone at the threat of losing their livelihood.

Malcolm Roberts:

That means a person has a choice between eating or not getting the vaccine. That’s it. If you want to eat, then you’ve got to get the vaccine. That’s totally wrong. And so vaccine prisons, I call them, not vaccine passport, it’s a vaccine prison because they’re designed to exclude people who are not vaccinated, who choose to not be vaccinated. That means we’re denying people their basic rights, their basic rights to move around, Facebook and YouTube even denying their basic rights to freedom of speech. Denying people livelihoods, denying people travel, denying people to exchange, denying people social activities, denying people to mix with their families.

Malcolm Roberts:

We have seen the real issue in this vaccine. And, sorry, in this virus, is not just health, it’s freedom and it’s government accountability. Governments have quickly moved into control and always throughout human history, we have control versus freedom. And at the moment, freedom is losing out. These vaccine prisons as I call them, they’re not vaccine passports, they’re vaccine prisons to restrict people, to force them to be vaccinated. That is immoral, unethical and totally wrong. Leave it up to each person to choose, but above all, give them the information so that they can make an informed choice.

James Preston:

Well, Malcolm, I think that’s a pretty good note to finish on the entire concept behind what you’re talking about here is basically freedom. Freedom of movement, freedom of choice, freedom of decision-making. So I want to just thank you so much for your time and getting across your insights today.

Malcolm Roberts:

You’re welcome, James. Health, freedom and government accountability. And your pleasure to be on the interview with you.

James Preston:

Brilliant, thank you very much, Malcolm. That is One Nation Senator Malcolm Roberts. And for all of our sake, hopefully we can find a way out of this mess very soon. And of course, manage to keep as many of our freedoms as Malcolm has been alluding to intact as possible. Well, that’s all for this edition of Expert Talks. If you missed any part of this conversation or you’d like to browse our complete catalogue of expert talks, simply head across to the website, kalkinemedia.com. And also our YouTube channel, Kalkine Media. I’m James Preston, signing off for now.

From Asia Pacific Today:

Just like The US Federal Government, The UK Government, The New Zealand Government, the Canadian Government and Federal and State Australian Governments, no longer serve the interests of Australians. Australian Prime Minister Morrison thinks he’s being clever by using despotic Premiers and Businesses to do his dirty work to force almost every Australian to be vaccinated. But he will be destroyed by his own actions.

As with other Western pseudo democracies, Australia is now a divided nation, with Australians pitted against each other. Good Governments would not stoop to this during a real health emergency. Nor would they deny to the sick, inexpensive, safe and effective treatment.

Australia is an international disgrace with daily examples of police overreach and arrests. Dumb politicians lie through their teeth come out with ridiculous statements – because they are fighting a phony war.

Australians have good reason to refuse an experimental vaccine – making Government or Private sector coercion even more abhorrent. Business leaders are the useful idiots believing vaccines are the only way out of their Government imposed nightmare. This is twisted logic – with growing evidence that the new vaccines have dangerous side effects and lose their effectiveness in a short time. Little is known about these so called vaccines and less is known about the efficacy or dangers of the imminent round of booster shots.

So Corporations are legitimising ongoing and arbitrary restrictions on economic activity and the destruction of the business class. Really?

Some 18 months on, Government actions against the virus would be laughable if they weren’t so destructive. Record levels of fake positive testing, CCP style restrictions on the majority of the healthy, Internal and external travel restrictions, destruction of public health, risking the health of the most vulnerable and lives of the young with their vaccine mandates and risking front line health services.

All this madness has to stop now because the benefits more than outweigh the cost of the virus itself and these shocking Government interventions.

Senator Malcolm Roberts said the other day “As more and more people become understandably vaccine hesitant, the government is becoming more and more authoritarian. If we don’t want to end up in a dictatorship all vaccine choices, whether compliant or hesitant, must be accepted.

Transcript

Australians and people worldwide criticise politicians. After three years in parliament, I know why. Yet people allow politicians to rule their lives and allow governments to take control of their lives. Why? I invite people to ask basic questions and to then decide. Consider the drug ivermectin. It’s been given in 3.7 billion doses over 60 years—no adverse effects; safe. Ivermectin is off patent—affordable. In 2013 ivermectin was approved in Australia for treating diseases. In 2014 I took ivermectin after working in India. It cured me—no adverse effects. Australian doctors regularly prescribe ivermectin for illnesses.

Is it effective with COVID? In April 2020 in the Senate, I raised ivermectin’s promising in vitro trials at Monash University. Counties, states and regions in South America, Asia, Africa and Europe have had amazing success with ivermectin for treating, curing and preventing COVID. More than 40 peer-reviewed scientific papers have been published hailing ivermectin’s success in treating COVID. A study among Indian healthcare workers showed an 83 per cent reduction in COVID infections with just two tablets. Ivermectin, overseas, is recognised as a cure.

I’m told that Queensland doctors and dentists are stockpiling ivermectin for their families. An internationally respected Australian specialist recently saved 24 very sick patients in quarantine using ivermectin. All quickly recovered. Two others not treated died. Overseas, ivermectin is a prophylactic, stopping COVID transmission. Where vaccines are failing, ivermectin is succeeding. How many deaths would have been saved if the health minister had acted?

I have prescriptions for ivermectin from two doctors. Why can’t all Australians have that freedom to choose? Why isn’t Australia’s government adopting ivermectin? Why did the TGA threaten and try to silence me with a letter when I discussed ivermectin with constituents as their representative in parliament? I mentioned ivermectin in a YouTube video and was banned for a week. Member of parliament Craig Kelly made statements based on solid data. After speaking about ivermectin, Facebook banned him forever. Why are doctors scared of being struck off the doctors’ registry if they prescribe ivermectin to cure their patients?

Consider the vaccine maker Pfizer’s profits. It’s second quarter 2021 revenue was $19 billion, up 89 per cent. In three months, it made $4 billion profit. The European Medicines Agency discovered a definite link between Pfizer’s vaccine causing myocarditis. In September 2020, our TGA approved Pfizer’s Vyndamax drug to treat myocarditis. Our health department confirmed the AstraZeneca vaccine’s links with blood clots. Pfizer’s Eliquis drug treats blood clotting. Last quarter its sales were up 13 per cent. So are those blood clots rare? Really? In 2019 Pfizer’s Zavicefta drug was approved to ICU patients on ventilators. Is Pfizer making profits making people sick and more profit treating the sickness it caused?

Consider the ownership of vaccine makers. Alphabet owns YouTube and Google. Alphabet owns 12 per cent of Vaccitech, which created the AstraZeneca vaccine. YouTube bans videos mentioning ivermectin as a COVID treatment. Aren’t these conflicts of interest? If ivermectin was approved for COVID, what would happen to big pharma’s hundreds of billions of dollars in profits? These profits are a transfer of wealth from taxpayers to big pharma.

Before becoming health minister, Greg Hunt was the environment minister, where he joined Malcolm Turnbull steering a law through parliament as a basis for a global carbon dioxide tax. In 2000 and 2001, he spent two years at the World Economic Forum in Davos developing strategy. A simple question: did he work on the forum’s great reset? I have already spoken on the government’s lack of a proper COVID management plan. Why has Minister Hunt falsely claimed that the government’s COVID policy is based on science when he is contradicting science? Finally, who owns the legacy media suppressing news of ivermectin’s success? In summary, ivermectin would complement vaccines, give people informed choice, save many lives, end lockdowns—and, in doing so, save more lives—save money, restore our economy to secure future health and end any need for vaccine passports or vaccine prisons. Basic freedoms, jobs and livelihoods could be restored. Why is the government not using ivermectin as a proven, safe, affordable life saver? Feel welcome to share your answers with my office or Facebook page. Finally, I add, I have no financial interest in any drug or medical suppliers or companies.

The government is stumbling from thought bubble to thought bubble and looking more like dictators at each step. Australians are right to not trust them and believe they’ve got not idea.

Transcript

I speak to the Treasury Laws Amendment (COVID-19 Economic Response No 2) Bill 2021.
This bill is notable for what it Is not. Before financing economic response packages using taxpayer funds government must pay taxpayers the respect and courtesy of a comprehensive definition of the problem being addressed and then a comprehensive detailed plan to which taxpayers and our parliament can hold the government accountable.

Yet state and federal governments are lurching from one Covid event to another with no detailed plan. This breeds confusion, duplication, waste and as we’ve seen, contradictions within and between governments that are, in plain language, stupid and leave taxpayers incredulous.

This is driving fear, confusion, frustration, insecurity and anger. Everyday Australians have had a gutful of states blaming and bickering with each other and with the federal government – while imposing arbitrary Covid lockdowns and restrictions killing businesses, employment and our economy – and killing people.
People need leadership, competence and integrity – people want to be heard and want a proper plan.
What’s involved in a comprehensive plan for managing a virus? Data, truth and care.

In March and April 2020 I spoke in the Senate and indicated that after seeing reports of tens of thousands of deaths in Italy, Spain, France & China we would vote for the Covid-19 measures the Government introduced.

At that time I repeatedly warned the government that in the months ahead we would hold the government accountable and I expected them to provide the people with data and with a proper, detailed plan for their Covid response.

I’ve been holding government accountable since May 2020. Yet we’ve not seen a proper plan. The govt has not even shared the underpinning data on the virus characteristics nor the Doherty Centre modelling nor the erroneous, flawed UK modelling on which the Doherty modelling is based. Yet the government has splashed a huge bucket of taxpayer cash – hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer money – like swill.
Instead, economic measures need to be based on a solid plan.

In senate estimates hearings in March and May this year the Chief Medical Officer and head of the federal department of Health both agreed with my list of strategies for a proper plan to manage a virus. These are:

  1. Isolation – Lockdowns, national border closure – initially;
  2. Testing, tracing and quarantining of the sick and the vulnerable;
  3. Restrictions such as social distancing, masks;
  4. Injections – Vaccines; (provided properly, fully tested and safe)
  5. Treatments using cures and prophylactics;
  6. Personal behaviour such as washing hands – they added that;
  7. Health and fitness.

Both confirmed that my list is complete, it does not miss anything. It does not contain anything that should not be in the plan. All these strategies need to be considered. I’ll return to this list in a moment.
I asked these officials for data characterising the virus – in terms of severity, or, mortality and transmissibility. I specified clearly that I wanted data relative to past respiratory diseases such as SARS, MERS and severe flus including the 1918 Spanish Flu and 1997 H5N1 Avian Flu.

Their later written answer included a diagram showing that while COVID-19 is highly transmissible, contagious, it’s severity is LOW to moderate. The diagram does not show that some people with Covid-19 have no symptoms. Many people diagnosed with Covid show symptoms typical of flu. A few small groups with co-morbidities can die. Having that breakdown into groups is crucial to having a proper plan for managing the virus. Where is it?

Why has government not shared this data with the people? By the way, Texas and Florida have opened their economies and removed Covid measures – including lockdowns, masks and business closures.
These jurisdictions have experienced an almost identical pattern of infection, hospital admission and mortality as other American US States that are still in lockdown.After Florida’s only lockdown, state Governor Disantis apologised to his residents and has had no further lockdowns despite Florida having a high proportion of aged residents.

How many of the seven strategies are our govts adopting? Firstly, the states are capriciously using lockdowns killing our economy, killing small business, killing the regions – and killing people through increased suicides and attempted suicides. That’s slamming a trillion-dollar debt on Australians not yet born.

Even the UN’s World Health Organisation – a corrupt, incompetent and dishonest body – now admits lockdowns are a blunt instrument to be used only initially to get control of a virus.
In continuing to use lockdowns, states are revealing they have not mastered the virus. Instead, the virus is managing the states.

Six days ago, the NSW Deputy Premier and Leader of the Nationals openly admitted that the NSW state government has no clue what is happening with lockdowns. We welcome his honesty.
Lockdowns are a form of controlling people, useful for increasing widespread fear.
Fear is a weapon, not only for control. It’s used to win elections. Invoking a crisis is a well-known tactic to help incumbent governments.

The federal government’s partially closed national borders are a form of isolation yet there are valid, proven strategies for better managing this that are based on data.Due to a looming election it seems the Prime Minister has taken a lesson from Qld, the Northern Territory and WA that ramped up fear of the virus before state elections to invoke the power of incumbency. What a disgrace. When politicians and media talk about the cost of Covid they are lying. The truth is it’s the cost of politically driven government restrictions. Testing, tracing and quarantining of the sick and vulnerable.

Although improving, testing and tracing in Australia have been poor. Vulnerable people are largely NOT adequately and fairly quarantined. Taiwan, a small island crammed with a population similar to Australia’s, has achieved an amazing performance with no interruption to its economy and no legacy debt. Taiwan did not lock up everyone. Instead it protected the sick and vulnerable. Taiwan’s economy continued to hum along because this proven strategy drastically cut Covid’s economic costs. Restrictions such as masks and social distancing.

Initially there were not enough masks available and authorities here and overseas told us that masks were not important. Yet later when masks became available the same authorities told us masks are vital. When Qld’s Health Minister earlier this year forced mask use she was asked whether drivers alone in cars would have to wear masks. She clearly did not know and then hesitatingly said “yes”.

When Brisbane in one corner of our state had three Covid-19 cases in January this year the Labor government mandated masks across the entire state – including the tiny town of Bamaga 2,700 kms away on our state’s northern tip where there were no cases. Masks are becoming a form of conditioning people to follow orders and to submit to government.

Vaccines or Injections.

The federal Chief Medical Officer, head of the federal Dept of Health and the head of the Therapeutic Goods Administration all have refused to guarantee the safety of these expensive injections. There have been reversals of advice and the public is now afraid and hesitant. Health authorities do not know the dosage needed, don’t know the number and frequency of doses – and admit that injections will not prevent transmission of the virus, will not stop people getting the virus, will not end restrictions.
The effect on children in the womb and on future generations is not known. The long term effects on people injected is not known. Why the hell is the government injecting people with an untested drug? Serious adverse-effects including deaths due to the injections have occurred here, and overseas, thousands of people have died.

Governments, state and federal, have repeatedly contradicted their own earlier advice and assurances.
Federal Health Minister Greg Hunt publicly admitted, quote: “The world is engaged in the largest clinical vaccination trial.” We are not lab rats. Governments are using threats of digital passports, or as I call them digital prisons, that withdraw services and prevent access to work and livelihoods, to events and to travel. Government wants to remove basic freedoms. No wonder vaccine hesitancy is spreading. Never before have western governments injected healthy people with a substance that can kill.

At the same time our government is depriving us of Ivermectin, a known treatment for, and preventative for, Covid-19. Over a period of 60 years and for various diseases it’s proven SAFE in 3.7 billion doses.
It’s already approved in Australia to treat a number of health conditions. In April last year I raised the topic of promising Ivermectin in-vitro trials on Covid in Melbourne, yet the government did nothing.

Ivermectin is easily affordable and over the last year overseas has become a highly successful and proven treatment for Covid. Plus, over 40 medical/scientific papers now hail Ivermectin’s success. Prominent doctors across many fields of medicine including immunology and respiratory diseases advocate Ivermectin for treating Covid-19. Yet the federal government in Australia sits on its hands, is not exploring Ivermectin’s potential and refuses to authorise its use for Covid. The government is ignoring a proven medicine that could end this virus’ reign as it has overseas. The government has blood on its hands.
Overseas, this proven strategy is drastically cutting Covid’s economic costs and keeps people healthy and economies healthy.

Ivermectin has one hurdle: its use will eliminate the hundreds of billions of dollars revenue for vaccine makers from vaccines that have bypassed standard testing and approval processes. Personal hygiene such as hand-washing, personal behaviour and practical actions – the same as for stopping the flu or a cold – another strain of Corona virus.

Health & fitness.

Obesity and other diseases increase the risk of Covid-19 yet government has done nothing. Although this is mostly personal responsibility, there’s a role for government providing data and advice. Of the seven strategies that senior federal health officials confirmed, the government is relying on only one expensive strategy of injections with known adverse health effects and on partial closure of borders. Instead of data, governments are pushing fear. Instead of a detailed plan, governments are pushing paranoia. Instead of strengthening our economy governments are lining BigPharma’s pockets. Covid-19 exposed our country’s core problem – atrocious state and federal governance. Atrocious and deadly. Governments talk about a new Covid-normal. That’s nonsense.

If governments cared and wanted us to feel safe they would have an end-to-end solution for Covid. A solid plan based on solid data and specifying WHAT actions will be taken, WHY they will be taken, WHEN they will be taken, WHERE they will be taken, WHO will be responsible and HOW they will be taken.
A solid plan. Before an economic package is produced, there must be a plan. Then it must be costed and a business and health case made for it.

When organisations, whether a business or government or not-for-profit work to a plan, the plan can always be changed as circumstances changed. Yet our state and federal Liberal-Labor-Nationals governments have never attempted to make a detailed plan. That shows Liberal-Labor-Nationals do not care about people’s health and lives, do not respect the taxpayers of Australia, do not provide solid governance. Governance of any entity has three aspects:

  • Trusteeship for the entity’s values. Yet governments are trashing Australian values;
  • Custodian for the entity’s future, for those Australians not yet born. Yet governments are trashing our children’s future and burdening them with a trillion dollars of avoidable debt;
  • Stewardship for the entity’s resources. Yet governments are wasting taxpayer funds and killing our country’s productive capacity.

Instead, the government in this bill is just going to spend taxpayer money and tell other departments who they’re giving it to. This is not a plan. It’s an excuse to splash cash and not be accountable.
It will motivate unaccountable Premiers to waste more taxpayer money while destroying our country’s tax base. It’s the very opposite of our constitution’s foundation. Instead of competitive federalism, it’s yet another example of competitive welfarism.

The core issue this bill perpetuates is shoddy governance. Atrocious governance. Repeatedly this government shows it cannot plan. That means it cannot govern. It is based on hollow marketing slogans. It’s intent is to look good not do good. It aims to be re-elected not to serve. The only thing this government has going for it is … Anthony Albanese and the Labor party. This bill discusses government making, quote: “disaster payments”. It dishonestly does not discuss the fact that state and federal government caused the disaster.

Australia needs honest, competent, consistent leadership using solid data. Government needs to serve the people and serve Australia’s national interest. We need to restore governance that cares for people’s lives, people’s livelihoods, people’s security, people’s future. Governance that cares for our country’s security, our country’s values, our country’s economy, our country’s future.

We need a government that is honest and serves the people.
We have one flag. We are one community. We are one nation.

We will be supporting one of the Greens’ second reading amendments to recover financial support from entities paying executive bonuses and Senator Patrick’s third reading amendment to instil a register of entities receiving taxpayer cash.

Governments are squashing freedoms like never before. History will show that those on the side of freedom will always be on the right side.

Transcript

As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, I speak tonight on freedom. On many occasions in the last year I have addressed the Senate in regard to freedom as a counterbalance to medical tyranny. And I recently addressed the Canberra Freedom Rally, remotely. The side that is locking people up for the crime of being healthy, arresting protesters, pepper spraying kids, beating up grannies, banning books and electronic messages, censoring social media, sending threatening letters, forcing small businesses to close, urging people to dob in dissenters and banning safe drugs that have worked for 60 years are all on the wrong side of history.

In a frightening development, New South Wales has called in the troops to keep innocent, healthy citizens locked in their homes in what can only be called martial law. Recent freedom marches showed what happens to citizens who exercise their democratic right to protest. People are demonised, hunted down; the media vilifies them to discourage others from questioning the control state. If the government can decide who is free and who is not, then that is not freedom and no-one is free. A crisis will always be found to justify measures designed to protect the government, not the public—a crisis that is as is easy to create as turning up the PCR test from 24 cycles to 42, where a false positive is the most likely outcome, as has occurred.

Actions such as these have created a crisis of confidence in government, and that, fellow citizens, is on the Senate. We are the house of review. We’re tasked with a duty to ensure honesty, transparency and accountability in the government of the day. We have failed in that solemn duty, our duty to our constituents. We have failed those who are yet to vote, our children, who are now being injected with a substance that has not undergone meaningful safety testing. The Liberal, National and Labor parties have colluded to waive these measures through this place, reducing the Senate to the status of a dystopian echo chamber.

Each new restriction, although met with rightful public opposition, has not led to a re-evaluation but, rather, has led the government to crack down even further. The Morrison government is behaving like a gambling addict who loses a hand but doubles down instead of admitting error and walking away. With troops now on the streets, it’s frightening to contemplate where this will end. Everyday Australians are being deliberately demoralised to extract a higher degree of compliance. When COVID first arrived, there were few masks, and the experts and authorities told us masks were not necessary. Now, those same medically ineffective masks are used to condition people to fear and obedience. Crushing resistance crushes hope, and without hope we have no future.

Is it any wonder that small businesses are closing permanently? Every small business that closes is a family that was being provided for through hard work and enterprise. Who will look after those families now—the government? With whose money? The Reserve Bank, using electronic journal entries, can only create fiat money out of thin air for so long before it runs down our country. The government can only sell bonds until buyers stop coming forward. Then what happens? We will have no tax base left to pay government stipends to people who were once able to pay their own way.

Since when has the Liberal Party, the supposedly party of Menzies, been dedicated to making huge sections of the population totally reliant on the government for survival? The bad joke here is that the excuse used to justify the sudden rush to Marxism—public health—is moot. Death from all sources, including coronavirus and the flu, are at historic lows. Australia’s death rate in 2020 was less than in 2019, and 2021’s death rate is lower again. We’re strangling Australia’s economic life and future for no reason. Power has gone to the heads of our elected leaders and unelected bureaucrats, who are exercising powers yet do not feel the consequences themselves.

Never in history has Lord Acton’s famous quote rung more true: ‘Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.’ It’s been calculated that the civil disobedience tipping point—which is the maximum capacity of the police to arrest people, of the jails to hold people and of the courts to process people—is in Australia around 100,000 people. Anything more than that and the system comes crashing down. Attendance at the freedom rallies last month shows we’re almost there.

No wonder the Morrison government has been scared into resorting to the refuge of tyrants—using the military to intimidate civilians into compliance and to mandating injections and threatening to rip away people’s livelihoods.

Everyday Australians are seeing through the smokescreens of fear and intimidation. People now see that the costs of the restrictions to family and community exceed the medical cost of the virus. Everyday Australians have spoken. We will not be divided, we are united, we are one community, we are one nation.

Even though the government says they don’t want to mandate vaccination, they haven’t ruled out attaching it to everyday activities. That means they won’t rule out that you might have to be vaccinated to go to the pub which sounds as good as mandating it to me.

I believe in the vaccine being available to anyone who wants to take it, but it should be every individual’s choice whether they take it or not. I do not believe they should be government mandated. Where do you stand?

Transcript

[Malcolm Roberts]

Thank you chair. And thank you all for attending. What percentage of the population, that will, will receive a COVID 19 vaccine? Do you expect or plan?

[Brendan Murphy]

Well, we were, our target at present Senator, is to vaccinate all the adult population, the over eighteens off by the end of October, give them a first dose. So that’s I think approximately 20 million, I think?

About, about 20 million going on.

Yeah. Now we may then go on and vaccinate children. If we have vaccines that are registered and approved for children. And if they prevent transmission and that helps us with herd immunity, but there are no vaccine. There’s no trial data on children at the moment. So the vaccines are only registered for adults.

Or 16 to 18 in the case of one. But no nobody under 16 has a registered product at this point.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Will that include the elderly, the frail?

[Brendan Murphy]

Absolutely. Unless there is a medical contraindication which is very rare. So if someone is very close to end of life it may be decided that it’s not appropriate. But in general, absolutely. That’s what we’re doing in residential aged care. Vaccinating a lot of very elderly and very frail people.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Thank you. Do you have the constitutional or legislative power in your opinion, to impose mandatory vaccination?

[Brendan Murphy]

The government policy is very clear that we’re not. We’ve never imposed mandatory vaccination in Australia. We take the approach that we want to encourage, promote and provide the evidence for vaccination. There have been situations where, for example, with flu vaccination last year in aged care where there was a public health order that the States and territories made. That decided that you couldn’t enter a facility unless you had proof of flu vaccination. But that was that’s very different from, from making, from mandating a vaccine. It just means that you have to make a choice about whether you go into an aged care facility. And obviously for childhood immunisation similar rules have applied. With again, mostly enforced by the States and territories, with no jab no play and government policy with no jab, no pay. But none of those have said that you are by law required to be vaccinated.

[Malcolm Roberts]

In the States?

[Brendan Murphy]

Yeah, In the States. Nobody can force a medical intervention on another citizen. We can do a lot of things to encourage, promote. And in some cases to restrict situations of risk if you’re not vaccinated. But we have never taken the view that we can force a citizen to have a medical intervention.

[Malcolm Roberts]

And you won’t be taking that view.

[Brendan Murphy]

I, I can’t imagine. That’s not, we wouldn’t recommend it.

[Witness]

There is absolutely no proposal from the government to make any COVID vaccine compulsory for anybody.

[Malcolm Roberts]

So are there any policies or plans or ideas or has it been discussed to make something unavailable without the vaccine? Effectively making it compulsory?

[Brendan Murphy]

Well, again, there has been discussion at HBPC. About whether, and Professor Kelly can comment on that, whether, at some stage we might use the same approach that we used for flu last year. To say that if the COVID vaccine is really effective at preventing transmission, that to say that to work in aged care or to enter a facility you need to have a vaccination. But HBPC has decided that; A, there isn’t enough evidence on prevention of transmission at the moment. And, B it would be silly for such a public health order to be introduced until such time as all of those workers and community members who might visit aged care have had the opportunity to be vaccinated. So that is, that’s a live matter for consideration that will be reviewed as the evidence evolves.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Okay.

[Witness]

No, I’ll just be very clear here though, that the current position of the government is that this vaccine is voluntary and not withstanding that the HPCs work and the, and the health departments work. But the government’s position is very clear, that the vaccine is voluntary.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Thank you. And thank you, Dr. Murphy. I’ll just jump outside of vaccines for a minute. To understand the overall context, and then come back to vaccines. What are the main factors in managing a pandemic? I’ll just test my own knowledge with you first. Is isolate and arrest the vaccine, which is called a lockdown, I understand. Then there’s number two is, identify the location and the spread to get on top of the quickly. What’s that? testing, tracing and quarantine. Then there are attempts to reduce the transmissibility through restrictions like masks, gatherings, criticism, movement of people, sorry, not criticism, movement of people. Then the fourth one would be cure and prophylactic areas to try and prevent, to try and cure people of the virus. For example, antivirals. Number five would be vaccine. Have I, have any, have I included any that are wrong? Have I missed any?

[Brendan Murphy]

Well you’ve missed international borders, which is probably…

[Malcolm Roberts]

Isolate and arrest.

[Brendan Murphy]

Yeah, well, certainly that has been one of our most successful interventions. Was to prevent the importation of a virus from, despite all the impact that it’s had on our citizens overseas. It has been one of the most singularly important parts of our success in controlling COVID.

[Malcolm Roberts]

So there’s just isolate and arrest, which I include international borders. Identify the location and spread through testing, tracing, quarantine. Reduce the transmissibility through restrictions. Cure and prophylactic approach and vaccine.

[Malcolm Roberts]

That seems pretty complete Professor Kelly?

[Professor Kelly]

individual behaviours.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Sorry?

[Professor Kelly]

Individual behaviours. So the hand hygiene, cough into your elbow, that sort of stuff.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Okay. Thank you.

The following line of questioning occured after the end of the attached video clip (see HANSARD)

[Chair]

The last question.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Sure. Can I get, on notice, an assessment of the characteristics of the virus? We were told initially it was a respiratory disease and we shoved ventilators at people. Some people were telling us that it hinders the blood absorbing oxygen or uptaking oxygen. We were told about various treatments. Perhaps you could tell me, on notice, what are the characteristics you measure to assess the virus’s mortality and
transmissibility, and any other characteristics of the virus, and perhaps rank it relative to, for example, the decreasing order of impact. We’ve had the Black Death, the Plague of Justinian, smallpox, the Antonine Plague, the Spanish flu, the third plague, HIV/AIDS and now COVID-19, which is a fraction of the population affected. Is it possible to get that summary?

[Brendan Murphy]

We can certainly provide it. This virus is now well studied. Essentially, as we’ve said on many occasions, for most fit, young people it’s a relatively mild disease, but 126,000 people have died in the UK, a very similar country to us. We have avoided a very large death rate by controlling this virus, and we’re very proud of that achievement, Senator. Whilst it may be a mild disease, that means it transmits wildly. Older people and people with underlying conditions are at risk of getting severe respiratory disease and dying, as they have done in their millions around the world.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Thank you. Thank you, Chair.