Our children need to be armed with the critical thinking skills for a changing world. There’s no place for single-minded ideology in our curriculum. All viewpoints must be presented to students in a balanced manner.
Transcript
As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, I speak in support of Senator Hanson’s bill, the Australian Education Legislation Amendment (Prohibiting the Indoctrination of Children) Bill 2020. I support it because I have been the president of the board of a Montessori school. I’ve been on the advisory board of the International Montessori Council. I agree with the primacy of the family, the tripartite role between parents, teachers and child, in understanding education and supporting it. I want to correct something, though: the previous speaker seemed to have their imagination running wild, because he said, ‘These men come in here’. Well, Senator Hanson is a woman! She initiated this bill, and she’s a woman! During COVID, heavy-handed lockdowns forced children into learning from home, locked away from their friends and suffering through jerky attempts to teach through a Zoom screen. Of course parents were locked up at home with their children as well, listening to their classes in a way they never could before. Many were absolutely shocked as they heard the rubbish being taught to their children for the very first time. This bill tries to steer education back to the basics, to give our children critical thinking skills and to put the power back in parents’ hands to make sure that’s all they’re being taught.
In this bill, the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority would need to ensure that education provides a balanced presentation of opposing views on political, historical and scientific issues. Senator Hanson’s bill would require that, where opposing views exist, the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority is to ensure that the teaching profession is provided with the information, resources and support required to provide a balanced presentation to students. Wonderful! Federal funding would be conditional on states and territories requiring schools and their staff to provide a non-partisan education to students, while consulting with parents and guardians on the extent to which this has been achieved.
One Nation has been trying to keep this in check, with motions condemning the teaching of critical race theory and the curriculum’s erasing of history because it’s said to be too ‘white’ or Christian. There are lots of examples showing that stronger action is needed, and I commend Senator Antic and the others who spoke here today on that very point. There is, though, for example, the Parkdale Secondary College, where students were told to stand up if they were straight, white Christian males and be humiliated by the class because they were, ‘oppressors’. Without trial, they’re ‘oppressors’. Then there is Brauer College, where all the boys were forced to stand up at assembly and apologise to all of the girls on behalf of their gender. No specific crime was mentioned or identified for these boys to apologise for, except that they were the wrong gender. And only today One Nation New South Wales leader, Mark Latham, has drawn our attention to Mount Kuring-gai Public School. They are feeding fiction to students about history, forcing them to learn a play where Captain Cook arrives with the First Fleet in 1788 as a coloniser. For those who have forgotten history from their schooling, Captain Cook was long dead by the time of the First Fleet.
This bill is necessary to stop examples like this infecting our children, to return our teaching to the basics, to restore balance to the way topics are presented and to stop our schools from being indoctrination centres. This bill puts the teaching of balanced, critical analysis and parents in the driver’s seat of children’s education, as they should be.
The Queensland Labor Government’s decision to add an extra fine to unjabbed teachers is vindictive and cruel. It’s also about political donations and Labor taking care of their mates.
The Labor-aligned Queensland Teachers Union was nowhere to be seen when mandates were in effect and teachers were stood down without pay for more than half a year. The Red Union was different. They fought against mandates and teachers flocked to them and ended their memberships to the QTU who donates to the Labor party.
This fine was a move to punish unjabbed teachers who didn’t stay with the Labor-aligned QTU when they didn’t stand up for workers’ rights. If you ever thought Labor was the party for the worker, they certainly aren’t now.
Transcript
Rowan Dean Well, as I mentioned at the start of the show, we’ve seen so many conventions and rights, democratic rights tossed aside all in the name of public health. The sad reality is that it isn’t over. We learned today, we learned last night actually that the Queensland Government is planning to dock the pay of Queensland teachers who have decided not to get vaccinated.
00:26 Rowan Dean And the Federal Government seems fairly indifferent to what’s going on as well.
00:32 Anika Wells Ultimately I think everyone has the right to make a choice about whether or not to get vaccine. But no one has the right to be free from the consequences of that choice. And these have been set out a long, long time coming. And they’ve had their pay docked, you know, for the six months running up to this. So this isn’t a surprise and it’s something that the Queensland Government going to have to work through with this very small pocket of teachers, given 99% are actually vaccinated.
00:56 Rowan Dean A very small pocket of people we’re humiliating, demonizing and punishing. And here I was thinking labor was supposed to represent the workers. Hmm. Joining me now is One Nation Senator for Queensland, Malcolm Roberts. Great to see you, Malcolm. How are you?
01:15 Malcolm Roberts I’m very well, thanks, Rowan. How are you? It’s good to be here.
01:17 Rowan Dean Good mte, good. Listen, I got all these emails yesterday from several teachers, their families and other people who are absolutely livid with anger. You know, these are human beings. They’ve got feelings, they’ve got families. They’re being treated like dirt and scum, even though we know that, according to the CDC, the Center for Disease Control itself in the US, there’s no need.
01:42 Rowan Dean They’ve now announced there’s no need to distinguish between vaccinated and unvaccinated. Personally, I wonder whether there ever was. Malcolm Roberts, what did you make of this news and how vindictive can a government be?
02:01 Malcolm Roberts The real issue here is about political donations and about punishment. They’re the three words to remember. Now, I’ve been dealing with a teacher who’s been fighting for restitution for the teachers for a year and a half now. Sorry, sorry for half a year, because they were only cut on December 17th. But she’s been very strong. And so I called her up today and she pointed for four points with regard to punishment.
02:27 Malcolm Roberts She said, first of all, they’ve been penalized for losing seven months worth of work because they were suspended due to not complying with the vaccine or the injection mandates, not misconduct, suspended due to noncompliance. They lost their pay for seven months. They lost their homes, marriages broke up, distressed people making decisions that were not good and sometimes causing lots of problems and heartaches.
02:52 Malcolm Roberts Suicides. She’s personally had to talk four people out of suicide. Now after, if that’s not enough, they’ve been penalized for serious misconduct. So just January 23rd, which is only seven months ago, they were penalized, they were suspended, they were told, because noncompliance. Now they’re being accused of serious misconduct. Then the third thing is that some of these people have been living in state education, in state homes, and so they’ve been paying rent to the state government.
03:22 Malcolm Roberts The state government tossed them out, tossed them out. And some of them couldn’t get their furniture out in time, were charged rent because the furniture was still in the place. One woman was denied the right to even access the furniture in her house. She had to pay someone to get it out for her. The fourth thing is they have now been labeled with this:
03:41 Malcolm Roberts Quote “any further reprimand could lead to terminations.” This is belting them. It’s not just humiliating them. It’s belting them. This woman has been prevented from doing the work she loves for seven months.
03:56 Rowan Dean Exactly. Malcolm, these are teachers. These are the people we rely upon to educate our young. To show. To show our children the ways of behavior, the values to take forward in life, positivity, creativity, inspiration, education. These are the people we rely on to bring those values to our children. I tell you, the sheer vindictiveness is there a more nasty, vicious government than the Palaszczuk government?
04:32 Rowan Dean We saw Dan Andrews. He’s just a thug. We saw all the police brutality, throwing people to the ground, pepper spraying them and all this stuff. But we have this nasty, vindictive Palaszczuk government that seemed to want to hurt and punish anyone who disagrees with them. Is that an unfair comment?
04:51 Malcolm Roberts You’re exactly right. If a private employer or a public company were doing this wrong, the Queensland Government would have been down on them like a ton of bricks. Now these are doing it. It’s bastardry at its worst, but there’s a reason why they’re doing it. The teachers believe that it’s got something to do with the fact that the Red Union, I think it’s called the teachers professional Association of Queensland a new Union has been making very great increases in numbers in the last few years and the Queensland Teachers Union is scared of that increase.
05:20 Malcolm Roberts The Queensland Teachers Union has lost a lot of members. Now the Queensland Teachers Union is close to the ALP state government and they had d large sums of money from teachers dues to the Labor Party for their for their campaigns. Now all of a sudden they’re looking at membership drops and the Teachers Professional Association of Queensland, the Red Union, is taking over.
05:41 Malcolm Roberts And so when the vaccine mandate came along, the injection mandate came along the QTU the Queensland Teachers Union, abandoned these workers, abandoned these teachers and the red union saw them flocking to them because the red unions stood with them side by side and took them,
05:59 Rowan Dean Fascinating
06:00 Malcolm Roberts Defended these people, supported them and that’s what’s going on now. We’ve got an industrial relations amendment bill coming in that’s going to make it difficult for the red union to get more members. This is about labor punishing people who dared to join the Red Union.
06:15 Rowan Dean Malcolm Roberts, political donations. You’re 100% spot on there to point to the Machiavellian maneuvers behind it. Great to speak to you. Thanks so much for speaking up for those teachers and we’ll chat again soon. Thank you so much.
Your attention as a member of the University of Queensland senate is drawn to the accompanying copy of my letter to the Prime Minister discussing matters of considerable risk and concern to students and staff for whom you provide governance. You are responsible.
Similar letters were sent to the state Premier and to state and federal health ministers.
As a board member you are a person conducting a business for the purposes of Workplace Health and Safety compliance. Given the complete lack of longitudinal studies, ineffectiveness in stopping transmission and serious documented conflicts of interest and adverse events in relation to the COVID vaccines, your university’s vaccine mandate places UQ and you, as a member of the Senate, in a challenging position.
I wonder if you have been afforded independent or critical advice on the risks of the university’s policy of banning students and staff from campus based on Covid-injection status?
Has the UQ Risk Assessment and Management Plan identified that mandating vaccination is necessary and there are absolutely no alternatives to reducing the spread of COVID? How could it be necessary when COVID vaccines do not stop the transmission of COVID? Why is a Rapid Antigen Testing regime not an acceptable alternative to reduce the spread of COVID, given that a vaccinated person with a positive test result can still transmit COVID, presenting a bigger transmission risk than an unvaccinated person with a negative test result?
These are questions that UQ has not adequately answered and which you must answer to satisfy your duty of care.
A finding of misconduct on some students can mean they will effectively never be able to pursue a career in their chosen field. What justification is there for such a heavy-handed punishment for the supposed behaviour of a student or teacher entering land and buildings which taxpayers have funded for the purpose of providing a tertiary education?
Having seen one of the surveys and the Vice-Chancellor’s letter dated 20 December 2021 to students, I am deeply concerned with the process that led to an apparent 80+% implied “acceptance” of these mandates. The process, pressure and leading questions that the university applied to achieve this are a betrayal of critical thinking and an excursion down the slippery path of propaganda. [1]
It seems that feelings and appeals to ‘safety’ rooted in media and political statements have replaced health data, facts and objectivity. Your students and staff have raised with me their fear that their university is destroying the original aim of university as a place for rigorous thinking, and honest and vigorous debate.
The strongest indicators of COVID mortality rate appear to be old age and pre-existing co-morbidity conditions, not vaccine status. Perusal of Queensland’s reported COVID deaths confirms this. Despite a vaccination rate over 90%, transmission is occurring at the highest rate ever, with Israeli studies suggesting that even four injections are not enough to stop the Omicron variant.
Specifically, there is a distinct lack of COVID deaths among young people of tertiary student age and almost all of the few deaths in that age group are reportedly due to underlying health factors.
I know that several senior members of your university’s medical faculty are aware of significant concerns among the university community, at all levels, about the university’s mandatory vaccination policy.
Please refer to the attachment containing remarks and questions associated with the Vice Chancellor’s letter of 20 December 2021, the Risk Assessment and Management Plan and the Policy 2.60.09 COVID-19 Vaccination.
I ask, what have you done to satisfy yourself that the university’s vaccine mandates are soundly based on independent and objective empirical scientific evidence and that the mandates respect the aim of universities to be places of independent thought and critical analysis?
Our political leaders now tell us every day that we need to simply live with COVID, signalling that we are no longer in an emergency requiring declarations and mandates such as the punitive mandate that the university is enforcing.
On behalf of my constituents among the university’s students and staff, I ask that you please provide your students and staff with the respect and courtesy of a reasoned and proportionate policy that appropriately and accurately reflects quantified age-appropriate risks to students and to staff.
In view of the risk of serious adverse health effects, including death from the COVID injections, personal informed choice must be returned to students in place of your imposed risks. This is particularly important because COVID injections are publicly acknowledged among health professionals to not offer protection from transmission to those around them on campus.
It is a hallmark of our human civilisation’s values, and notably of our health system, that wherever there is risk, there must be choice.
In regard to the COVID injections, the federal Minister for Health, Mr Greg Hunt stated, quote: “The world is engaged in the largest clinical vaccination trial.” [2] The COVID injections have been granted provisional approval based on a literature review of overseas data that pharmaceutical companies provided. Australian health authorities have done no independent testing. Yet on that basis the University under your governance is mandating a medical procedure with no longitudinal studies and forcing students and staff to participate in a trial – against their will. You are forcing them to inject themselves with something for which nobody knows the long-term effects. It is essentially experimental.
Instead of being punished and exiled from your community, students who choose to analyse their individual risk profile and make their own choice should be respected and their individual autonomy and critical thinking encouraged. I implore you to take action to oppose and dismantle the vaccine mandate at UQ and to respect individual autonomy as part of the critical thinking process necessary to every university in Australia.
There are alternatives that enable students and staff alike to be safe and to complete their studies, research and work.
The Palaszczuk government must get kids back to school with no delay to keep their future safe.
Palaszczuk will delay the start of the school term by two weeks on the back of health advice claiming the omicron wave will peak at the end of January, similar to advice at the start of the pandemic that pandemic restrictions would only last two weeks to flatten the curve.
Over the past month government has rapidly shifted gear in what they say but not what they do. They say we need to live with the virus, but prove with the cancellation of schools that they are unwilling to do so.
The government is unwilling to give up control, again relying on secret “health advice” to throw parents everyday lives into chaos and hamstring students who have already suffered with years of disrupted learning.
Parents know that the logistical nightmare of not being ready for remote learning is detrimental compared to having their kids in school at a proper learning environment.
We hold the formative years of a child’s life sacred for a reason, sometimes you don’t get a second chance at them. There is no reason to mandate either students or their teachers to receive COVID vaccines.
Many teachers know this, which is likely why over 20,000 of them reportedly won’t be returning to work this year after the Palaszczuk government mandated injections for them and they were sacked or resigned.
Palaszczuk claims this is about safety. It’s not. The premier is trading short-term pretend safety for the long-term detriment of our children’s lives and learning journey to try to get Labor elected.
I’m calling on the Premier to drop the mandates, return kids to school without delay and live with the virus as politicians have promised us.
https://i0.wp.com/www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/palaschool-01-01.png?fit=1214%2C810&ssl=18101214Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2022-01-12 15:24:132022-01-12 15:24:20MEDIA RELEASE: Palaszczuk government must get kids back to school with no delay
Our education standards have been slipping for years, yet ACARA’s draft curriculum was more focused on erasing facts about our judeo-christian heritage and implementing Critical Race Theory.
Curriculum should be focused on ensuring our kids are skilled in reading, writing and numeracy first, not political ideas.
The ditching of the draft curriculum follows two successful One Nation motions on heritage and critical race theory drawing attention to the draft’s shortcomings.
Transcript
With the steady downward trend of education all standards for reading, mathematics and science for Australia’s children over the last 20 years, ACARA needed to deliver a curriculum review that reflected proven teaching methods. Rather than provide a robust review that would turn the tide, ideology got the better of ACARA and their efforts have been binned, as it deserves to be.
One Nation put forward two successful motions which highlighted significant fundamental flaws in ACARA’s reviewed curriculum. Instead of focussing on proven methods for teaching mathematics and reading, ACARA thought it more important to demolish out our Judeo-Christian heritage and the role of Western civilisation in Australian society, laws and customs.
Australia is proudly a liberal democratic society and these values should be at the very basis of our national curriculum.
I acknowledge that Minister Tudge has ditched the reviewed curriculum. He has recognised that ACARA has tried to turn our curriculum into a tool for indoctrination for left-wing ideologies that denounce Western civilisation as something to be ashamed of, by promoting notions of imperialism and re-packaging significant and defining Australian historical events.
There is an urgent need to lift the educational outcomes for our children and One Nation will continue to monitor the efforts of ACARA to ensure that our cherished western liberal democracy is enshrined in the national curriculum.
It is not by accident that Australia is one of the most sought after places to live. Safeguarding our way of life comes from the teachings we give our children, either at home or through the curriculum, which reminds them of what Australian men and women have defended in past decades – our right to a free society with laws and customs of Judaeo-Christian origins, and only when our children know that can they defend and uphold those values.
https://i0.wp.com/www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/file.jpeg?fit=873%2C480&ssl=1480873Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2021-08-23 13:59:302021-08-23 14:30:00Indoctrination curriculum sent back to the drawing board
There have been massive increases in debt in the last 12 months, without the necessary objective data to underpin them. That shows, yet again, poor governance of our country. When you take in government charges, rates, levies and fees as well 68% of someone’s average income is taken in tax. That’s working from Monday to mid-morning Thursday to pay for government.
Transcript
Senator Siewert’s motion is that the Senate notes that the Morrison government’s 2021-22 budget left people on low incomes behind. I would go further. This budget leaves the whole country behind, and that means it leaves everyone behind. There have been massive increases in debt in the last 12 months, without the necessary objective data to underpin them. That shows, yet again, poor governance of our country. In Senate estimates, I discussed with the chief medical officer and the secretary of the health department the seven essential components of a plan for managing a virus. The federal government is addressing one; the state governments are addressing another—that’s it—and they have both been addressed poorly.
I want to discuss the productive capacity because that’s what determines the wealth and the economic security, and, indeed, sometimes the defence security of our nation in the future. The productive capacity of our country has been declining considerably since 1944 and, in fact, since 1923, if we want to get into basics—but that’s for another day. Let’s look at the most important part of productive capacity—the human asset, our people. Look at education, because it’s the future leaders of this country who will determine the future productive capacity, as well as us determining that capacity today. We have declining scores in education. Reading and writing, mathematics and science—declining. By world standards, we are falling well behind in the core aspects of education but we devote plenty of resources, plenty of time, plenty of energy to teaching kids—misleading kids—about gender fluidity, critical race theory, non-gender language and a national curriculum that the government forks out money for yet cannot control. That’s what has been told to us by the federal government.
We need charter schools. We need parents to have more say in the running of their schools, and principals to have more say in the running of their schools; parents to control what values are passed on; and parents to decide whether or not their children will be taught about gender fluidity. I want to compliment Mark Latham in the New South Wales parliament and my colleague Senator Pauline Hanson for the bills they are introducing and evaluating right now to restore values and common sense to education. I note that Singapore, Japan, and Korea have really moved ahead in recent years, as has Taiwan. They all have solid basic education.
What’s happened to apprenticeships in this country? Senator Lines moved a motion today with regard to apprenticeships sadly lacking in WA. Senator Hanson has proudly introduced an apprenticeship scheme that the government has taken and refurbished and expanded, such is the success of her suggestion on apprenticeships. What has happened to universities? They followed our primary schools and high schools in becoming more woke and driven by anything but education. As for university education, it is now just pushing an ideology. Our TAFE systems have fallen into disrepair; our trades qualifications are falling into disrepair.
Let’s move on then to the workplace. The Fair Work Act is an abomination. It is about that thick in pages printed. It destroys the employer-employee relationship, which is essential for productive capacity. It is difficult for anyone, an employee or a small businesses employer who doesn’t have access to lawyers and consultants and HR practitioners to work their way through that. How can they possibly be held accountable for that relationship when they can’t even understand it and never will understand it, not because of lack of intelligence but because of lack of time and surely being overwhelmed? Again, just like education, this is poor governance to get into this state.
Then we go to energy—arguably the most critical in material resources because energy has determined the competitiveness of every country. Under President Trump America reversed the decline in its competitiveness because it reversed its increase of energy prices and it started to decrease its energy prices again. America became more competitive against its competitors and blossomed because of that. President Trump created more jobs than any president in history because of that and because he cut away regulations.
This government and its predecessors have fiddled the Renewable Energy Target, destroying our baseload coal-fired power stations, our grid. The network costs are destroying our grid, making it unaffordable. Retail sectors of electricity are just a fabrication. The national electricity market is now a national electricity racket. It’s not a market at all; it’s a bureaucracy that’s interfered with and manipulated by bureaucrats looking after vested interests. Then we see privatisation. The Queensland Labor government is taking about $1½ billion every year from people who use electricity—businesses, small businesses and families—and that is now a tax. We have taxes on electricity. Why is it that the Chinese can produce electricity and sell it for one-third the cost of electricity sold in this country when they use the same coal as we do? They take it thousands of kilometres, burn it and sell the coal-fired power to their consumers and we sell it for three times as much because of regulations that come out of both sides of this parliament.
Then we look at water. The Murray-Darling Basin has been gutted. Communities have been gutted. Regions have been gutted. And nothing is happening about it. Today we passed an amendment to restore compliance with the law, the Water Act of 2007, with regard to water trading. It was supported by the Labor Party but denied by the Liberals and Nationals. They don’t want to comply with the Murray-Darling Basin Plan. It went down to the lower house and Labor changed and sent it back here, in cahoots with the Liberals and Nationals. That will continue to destroy water allocations in our country because it will continue the corruption and the likely—I’m very confident in saying this—criminal activity going in the Murray-Darling Basin with regard to abuse of water trading.
Then we see property rights, which are fundamental to running a farm or a business. They were capriciously stolen under the Howard-Anderson government in 1996 and then progressively by Labor premiers from Queensland and New South Wales, jumping on the bandwagon to steal farmers’ property rights. Why? To comply with the United Nations Kyoto protocol of 1996—that’s why. Farmers have lost the value of their land. We see that extended in Queensland, for example, by the Queensland state government, relying on bogus claims about the reef to lock up land. We then see the federal government enacting carbon farming, where vast tracks of good farmland are laid waste, abandoned and taken over by feral animals and noxious weeds. There are costs to managing them as they spread around the country and fall on their neighbours’ properties. This is another example of poor governance. There’s a lack of infrastructure in water. The Bradfield scheme is crying out for investment.
Then we go to the most destructive system of all in our country, the Australian taxation system. In 1996 and 2010, Jim Killaly was the deputy commissioner of taxation for large companies and international matters. He said on both occasions—1996 and 2010—that 90 per cent of Australia’s large companies are foreign owned and, since 1953, have paid little or no company tax. They use our resources, people, assets, defence forces, police forces and education system and pay nothing in return and just take. The Japanese, by comparison, have in their large companies 2.5 per cent foreign owned. The American and the British figures are about 12.5 per cent. Who pays for these foreign companies to use our assets and to make money without paying company tax? The people of Australia pay for that through families paying taxes, individuals paying taxes, small businesses paying taxes and some large Australian come companies paying 30 per cent against their multinational competitors who don’t have to pay that. How can we possibly compete? Then we found out in the late 1990s and early 2000s—and I’ve asked the Parliamentary Library to update this figure—that a person on an average income in this country pays 68 per cent of their income to government. Housing is not our largest expenditure in life; government is, through taxes, rates, fees, levies, chargers, supercharges and special charges. Joe Hockey admitted when he was Treasurer that 50 per cent of a person’s income is taken in tax. He said people work from January through to the end of June for government and then they keep what’s left. The actual figure, when you take in government charges, rates, levies and fees as well, is 68 per cent, which means that someone on the average income is working from Monday to mid-morning Thursday to pay for government.
Then they have what’s left, the two-thirds of Thursday and Friday, to pay for their entire life: their retirement, their education, their food, their shelter, their car, their transport, their entertainment. That is not fair, and it shows poor governance. I haven’t got time now to talk about attempts to reform taxation, but both parties, both the tired old parties, have shown a reluctance to invest energy and political will and sheer guts in tackling—and they lack the integrity to tackle—comprehensive tax reform.
I mentioned infrastructure a minute ago. What about projects like the Richmond agricultural project? What about the irrigation project up in Hughenden? What about things like Iron Boomerang, which would transform our country and make it the most cost-effective and largest producer of steel, and give us enormous security for manufacturing and for our defence? Then we have things that tap into that Iron Boomerang—things like an inland rail that’s being destroyed by the Liberal-National government, an inland rail that is sucking up resources and coming up with something that will be far worse than the existing installations, especially when we consider the blowout in the cost. Again, it’s a lack of data, a lack of sound planning. An inland rail and a proper route through to Gladstone would be part, then, of a proper national rail circuit.
Madam Deputy President, I submit to you these points that show and prove that the government here has not only left the poor behind, as Senator Siewert points out; the government has put additional burdens on the poor, the government has put a regressive tax on the poor in terms of energy prices. Energy prices are increasing alarmingly, and the poor have to pay a higher and higher and higher proportion of their income on a fundamental, which is energy. And then the poor pay for it because they lose their jobs when our manufacturing jobs and some of our agricultural and agricultural processing jobs are exported to China, which uses our raw materials—gas and coal—to produce electricity far more cheaply than we sell it for in our own country. So we’re losing out entirely and we lose out in the diminishing of our defence security.
So I certainly agree with Senator Siewert that the Morrison government’s 2021-22 budget has left people on low incomes behind. It has left people right across the country behind. It has left Australia behind.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/XK4A-0W3fJ4/0.jpg360480Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2021-06-25 13:51:432021-06-25 14:02:48Do you feel like government spends your money well?
The Government has told ACARA, the Curriculum Authority in Australia, to re-write the draft curriculum. We thank Minister Tudge for listening to the criticism, including from myself, on what was an obviously deficient draft curriculum
Education Minister Alan Tudge says the board of the country’s schooling authority must substantially rewrite its draft national curriculum, warning he will not endorse the proposed document amid concern student outcomes would be harmed.
Writing to the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority’s acting chairman Norm Hart, Mr Tudge criticised the proposal for supporting “ideology over evidence” and presenting an “overly negative view” of the nation in the study of history and civics.
In the letter, seen by The Australian, Mr Tudge urged the board to seriously consider recent feedback from education experts, who have flagged concerns that the proposed changes amounted to a weakening of learning standards.
“Some of these groups, such as Australia’s peak mathematics association, believe that the current draft will take Australian kids backwards,” he wrote. “If the current draft is simply tweaked, it will not be supported. It needs fundamental changes.”
The warning comes as the ACARA board meets on Thursday and Friday to discuss feedback to the highly anticipated update of the Australian Curriculum – an important document laying out what students are expected to learn across the mandated subject areas of English, maths, science, the arts, humanities, health and physical education and languages.
The curriculum also seeks to cover general capabilities, or skills, such as critical and creative thinking, as well as ensure young people develop an understanding of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander histories and cultures. Its release in April, however, sparked a torrent of criticism, including from high-profile historians, academics and reading specialists.
Among the most scathing criticism was from the Australian Mathematical Sciences Institute, whose membership spans leading universities, government agencies and industry, which called for any ongoing review of the maths curriculum to be halted pending further consultation.
The institute was particularly critical of a proposed push towards having students learn maths by engaging in open-ended problem-solving activities, noting that “mastery of mathematical approaches is needed before student problem-solving can be effective”.
Under way for more than a year, ACARA’s curriculum review was launched in the wake of Australia’s declining performance on the OECD’s PISA, which has shown that Australian students have gone backwards in reading, maths and science over the past 20 years.
According to Mr Tudge, the curriculum should seek to be ambitious on students’ learning outcomes and should prioritise evidence-based practices, particularly in reading and maths.
“However, to my great frustration, evidence-based practices have not been consistently embedded in your current draft,” he said. “There is still too much emphasis on whole-language learning of reading and insufficient emphasis on phonics.
“Thirty years ago, determining the best way to teach reading may have been a legitimate debate, but it is not now. The evidence is crystal clear … that the teaching of phonics is vital.”
The minister also urged the ACARA board to re-examine the draft history and civics curriculum to ensure that it provided a balanced teaching of Australia’s liberal democracy that has made the nation attractive to millions of migrants.
“Your draft, however, diminishes Australia’s western, liberal, and democratic values,” Mr Tudge said. “The overarching impression from the curriculum is that the main feature of western civilisation is slavery, imperialism and colonisation.
“Important historical events are removed or reframed, such as the emphasis on invasion theory over Australia Day. Even Anzac Day is presented as a contested idea, rather than the most sacred of all days where we honour the millions of men and women who have served in war, and the 100,000 who gave their lives for our freedom.”
Referencing the coronavirus pandemic, Mr Tudge said the education system had “been shaken in the last 18 months … in ways we had never imagined”.
“I believe that the best way to serve the interests of our young people now is to seize every opportunity to lift educational standards,” he said.
“The draft of the Australian Curriculum is such an opportunity.”
Remember what critical race theory is? It says that the whole of our society is infected with racism and it only helps whites, that you can only succeed if you’re white and if you’re anything else you can’t succeed which is a shocking message.
Transcript
[Paul Murray] Let’s talk to one of the Senators who was in the chamber for that nonsense in and around coal but I want to talk more so about his success in being able to get the Senate to agree to keep critical race theory, the crazy stuff all about teaching white people to hate themselves including the video we showed you a bit earlier in it day. Malcolm Roberts is the One Nation Senator from here in beautiful Queensland. Lovely to be here and I’m sure you would prefer to be in Gladstone rather than Canberra now mate but alas that’s the gig you have. Tell us how important was this vote and what message does it send about critical race theory in the national school curriculum?
[Malcolm Roberts] Let’s help everyone to understand what critical race theory is. It says that – it claims that everything, every aspect, the whole of our society is infected with racism and it only helps whites so what it does is it says that you can only succeed if you’re white and if you’re anything else you can’t succeed which is a shocking message but what it also does is infects all whites – kids in particular – with guilt and shame. What they’re doing, Paul — with guilt and shame, and what they’re doing is using critical race theory to indoctrinate our kids, telling them what to think not how to think and that is what’s so damaging about it. Our kids are our productive capacity in the future and they’re killing off our productive capacity.
[Paul Murray] It is extraordinary to me that a country that has been able to achieve so much including in a multiracial fashion has been able to be the story of immigration from all over the world has been one of the great successes of Australia yet for some reason reason all of the people who want to sit in the modernity is only possible because of the great rise of the West who want to use their position in the power structure of the West to somehow say there is something fundamentally wrong with the system that pay their wages or think something like critical race theory is worth implementing via their jobs.
[Malcolm Roberts] You just nailed it. At the core of this it is about control and reveals an extremely arrogant approach. These people who are pushing this nonsense, they don’t want to get into parliament and go through the work of being elected, putting their policies and their ideas under scrutiny. They just want to get in through the back door and then they want to use their power over innocent kids. I mean, there’s nothing more shameful than that. They don’t want to have any scrutiny. They just want to work through the back door ideology. What they use, Paul, as you know, is they use shaming language to silence any dissent because if you go against it, mate, you’re a racist and there’s nothing worse than calling someone a racist and that’s what they do. It is all about control and getting control of the future of our kids. Don’t go through parliament, fight to change and enact laws, just bypass it all and indoctrinate the kids. It’s frightening stuff.
[Paul Murray] Thank goodness you are there to fight it and congrats on getting the Senate to see sense on this stuff. Well done and it is one of the many reasons I’m glad you and Pauline are in the parliament.
I talked to Marcus Paul last week about our motion to keep our Judaeo-Christian values in our education system and questioned why ivermectin wasn’t available in Australia when it has been proven safe.
Transcript
[Marcus Paul] Tell me about this motion you put in front of me here. I give notice that on the next day of sitting, I nearly said another word then. I shall move that the Senate, what?
[Malcolm Roberts] Well, that the Senate actually makes sure that the national curriculum, includes Judeo-Christian heritage as the basis for our laws and customs.
[Marcus Paul] Right?
[Malcolm Roberts] We want that in the national curriculum, because in 2014, there was a review by two people called Donnelly and Wiltshire, into the national curriculum. And they recommended more emphasis, more emphasis on our Judeo-Christian heritage Because that’s the role it played in Western civilization and contributing to our society and making our laws and our culture. And lo and behold, when the 2020 national curriculum recommendations came out, they had a de-emphasis on our Judeo-Christian heritage and going over a bit more to the, what could you say, the flavours of the month? You know, the fads.
[Marcus Paul] Like?
[Malcolm Roberts] And so what we wanted the basics back.
[Marcus Paul] Hang on. Like?
[Malcolm Roberts] Well they want to emphasise that the First Nations people think that there was an invasion. They want to emphasise that there are other multicultural aspects of Australia. Now we’ve got no problems with that at all but we’ve got to make sure that the basis of our culture the basis of our laws, gets prominence and not, is not removed.
[Marcus Paul] Yeah, or we could just focus on teaching kids how to add up and to construct a sentence.
[Malcolm Roberts] Ah Marcus, that’d be wonderful.
[Marcus Paul] All right. The federal budget, you say that there’s been a lack of spending on visionary infrastructure to improve our productive capacity. We’ve continued to ignore the basics, energy and tax which are vital for manufacturing.
[Malcolm Roberts] Yes, that’s right. You know, we talked many times about tax and about energy costs. The energy costs are artificially high. We went from being the cheapest electricity in the world, Marcus, to being amongst the most expensive all because of artificial regulations that are not needed. We are exporting our coal to China where they sell electricity made from our coal at 8 cents a kilowatt hour. Our cost here, our price here is three times that all because of the rubbish regulations.
[Marcus Paul] Yeah.
[Malcolm Roberts] And so what we’re really doing is we’re exporting jobs to China because our manufacturers leave here and go to China or other places in Asia that use our coal and don’t have our stupid governance. So what we’ve got to do is get back to basics and stop all the subsidies destroying our electricity sector and also fix the tax system because, you know, we talked about that at length last week. So probably don’t need to go into that, but they’re the things that are really destroying our country. And instead of killing jobs, we need to create jobs and we need to build our productive capacity in terms of our infrastructure, things like dams in particular, power stations, so that we have cheap reliable water and cheap, reliable, stable power. They’re the basics for any society. And, you know, we’re letting the UN, Warragamba Dam wall. They wanted to raise that and they’re not allowed because of the UN’s world heritage agreement. Well, I didn’t elect the UN I want, I want to budget for us.
[Marcus Paul] Yeah. Very true. All right, mate, now there’s plenty in there for women’s services in relation to domestic violence, which all of us agree is worthwhile. You say, but nothing for men. What do you mean by that?
[Malcolm Roberts] Yes. And that’s a really good point that you raised Marcus. I know an outstanding group. That’s doing phenomenal work on a voluntary basis and they’re really supporting men and women. They’re not specifying only men, just men and women and also kids and families. Family law system is really crook and it’s devastating people’s lives. It’s the slaughter house of the nation. And what he’s finding is that he can get no support from the federal government in terms of providing counselling services that he is putting on voluntarily and getting volunteers to do. I mean, it’s an amazing network that he’s got. He’s just opened offices in Newcastle, Australian brotherhood of fathers. So, but the point is that we know domestic violence is perpetrated by men on women. We also know that domestic violence is perpetrated by women on men, but only one side of the story comes out. And only one side of the equation gets the funding. So men are vulnerable too, and they need to be protected and need to be funded.
[Marcus Paul] All right, there was plenty of money for mental health, the national disability insurance scheme, aged care. But the reality is, is that the money will never get spent. You say.
[Malcolm Roberts] Much of it won’t get spent Marcus, because we don’t have the professionals. I mean, I was at an aged care rally here, aged care health and safety, health services union on Monday. Sorry. Yeah. Monday morning.
[Marcus Paul] Yeah. Monday it was.
[Malcolm Roberts] Here in Canberra and I mean they’re wonderful people I know from my parents care is they’re wonderful people and they work very, very hard. They’re under extreme emotional stress but they can’t get enough because of the pay rates. But the other thing is they can’t get enough of the professionals and registered nurses and they can’t get enough of the psychologists in when it comes to the NDIS and other professionals. So we won’t be able to have the services anyway. We’ve got to focus on getting these areas fixed.
[Marcus Paul] Okay. Well, I mean, I don’t disagree at all. I mean, the whole thing in particular, in my opinion has been packaged to look pretty good. You know, it’s a, it’s a budget that’s full of plenty of promises, almost like a labor-esque budget if you like, but there’s apparently more money. And this is what, a point I wanted to come to. And this is where I think people like you and Pauline Hanson need to really hold these people accountable in parliament. Apparently there’s some sort of war chest. So there’s billions of dollars that’s been set aside for, you know, the election campaign not too far away. So in other words, they’ve held off on some things and rather than spend the money now or put it toward, you know, extra money toward mental health or extra money toward the aged care sector, et cetera people suggesting that they’ve kept it aside for, I dunno future pork barreling or promises ahead of the next federal election.
[Malcolm Roberts] That could be right. And you raise a fantastic point there because what’s happening is that with both the main old parties the tired old parties, they do exactly what you’re saying. And what voters don’t seem to realise is they’re having an auction with the voters money.
[Marcus Paul] There we go.
[Malcolm Roberts] And the voters are bidding those prices up. So we’re doing it to ourselves as voters but we need to hold these people accountable. And that’s what Pauline and I will be doing. She was, budget papers are very, very thick and detailed. So she was already discussing with me in the Senate in a quiet moment, some ridiculous expenditure. I can’t remember the exact one that, that she raised but it was just outlandish. So they’re the things that we will do in the coming weeks going through the details and exposing them. But you’re absolutely right. We’ve got to stop this budget that puts us on an annual cycle of making promises and stealing money from taxpayers to give to other tax payers.
[Marcus Paul] Some of it, to be honest is borrowed anyway but we’ll deal with that another time. We can’t travel overseas as we’ve learned probably until mid 22. The budget itself, many of the promises and many of the figures announced you know, predetermined on, you know the whole joint being vaccinated in time, et cetera. International students will be let back in in small phase programmes later this year. I mean, and I noticed yesterday in question time in the house of representatives, that we couldn’t get a straight answer from the prime minister. And even the health minister had to jump in and have his say. And he just muddied the waters further. Vaccines and whether or not our borders will be reopened is something that the government just can’t seem to answer at the moment.
[Malcolm Roberts] Yes. And that’s right. And there are too many uncertainties here and too many unknowns Marcus. First of all, the vaccine that the prime minister himself has come out and said it may not stop the spreading of the virus. What, well, hang on. It’s all based on that, and yet he’s admitting that it won’t necessarily stop the spread of the virus. The other thing Marcus, that people may not be aware of, is that there’s a drug called ivermectin. It’s been used for treating people in Africa all over the world. In fact, I’ll tell you someone else who’s been treated by it in a minute. This ivermectin is an antiviral and it’s been used for around six decades, 60 years ago.
[Marcus Paul] This was the stuff that Craig Kelly was spruiking. Yes?
[Malcolm Roberts] Well, he’s just picking it up from overseas. I mean, Craig’s doing a wonderful job that man I can tell right now, every interaction I’ve had with Craig, he’s solid on the data and he doesn’t open his mouth. But anyway, without the data, now, the thing is that ivermectin has been given in 3.7 billion doses to 3.7 billion people. It’s proven safe. It’s an antiviral.
[Marcus Paul] Why then, why then Malcolm is not on the list as a as a well I don’t know, as a as a vaccine for COVID-19. I’ve heard ivermectin, we’ve had we’ve heard all of the stories that was originally criticised as a bit of a conspiracy theory vaccine proposal. I respectfully understand that there are many scientists who agree that it could be used, but I just wonder, I mean we’ve just spent, what we’ve just bought another 25 million cases of a new vaccine, Moderna from the United States. If ivermectin was all it was cracked up to be, surely it would have already been authorised.
[Malcolm Roberts] Well, that’s the real point Marcus. That I was getting to. In many countries now ivermectin is legal and is being used and they’re desperate to get it into into place because it’s very safe. I went to India and developed a condition in India as a consultant over there in the mining industry in 2014. And I was given ivermectin by an Australian doctor here quite legally, I had no side effects. It was fantastic. So we know it’s proven around the world. There are more and more countries that are doing two things, bringing ivermectin in and more and more countries are now stopping the use of some of these vaccines for COVID vaccines because the blood clotting and other issues. So the reason I believe, well we’ve got to ask this question why aren’t we using ivermectin when it’s completely safe? It’s got no side effects. It’s killed no one. And, and it’s also being proven as effective with the virus. Why are we not using that when these unproven, untested vaccines or partially tested vaccines? And when we know so much, so little about them, why are we doing that? Is it because if there is a viable solution in ivermectin that the vaccine makers wouldn’t get their money?
[Marcus Paul] I dunno it could be you’re the Senator. And these are the questions that you will ask. I’m sure. Mate, I’ve got to go. I really appreciate it. Talk soon. There he is. Malcolm Roberts.
https://i0.wp.com/www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Capture.png?fit=927%2C924&ssl=1924927Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2021-05-18 10:46:002021-05-26 15:29:43Ivermectin – 2SM with Marcus Paul
Too often, we are seeing ideas silenced and censored at our universities. University is a place where the exchange of conflicting and opposing ideas should thrive and be encouraged. Thanks to One Nation lobbying, this bill ensures that the definition of academic freedom to do that is put into law.
We only need to look at examples such as Peter Ridd to see why we need to protect academic freedom. He describes his experience of standing for academic freedom against that university as feeling ‘hunted’.
Peter’s so-called crime was to question the quality assurance of research outcomes related to reef science. But it is his duty, as a scientist, to question, to be rigorous and to protect the integrity of science. Every scientist’s first duty is to be a sceptic and to challenge what he or she is being told.
Transcript
As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, I want to start my contribution to the debate on the Higher Education Support Amendment (Freedom of Speech) Bill 2020 with the statement that central to scientific endeavour is an environment that gives permission for the work of talented people to challenge the status quo, to develop ideas and to deepen our knowledge and understanding. This work demands a creative and innovative spirit, courage and objectivity, and a deep respect for the scientific method. Universities had, and should once again have, a central role to play in advancing thought and finding better ways of doing things. Therefore, their scientific staff must work in an environment that supports academic freedom. The Dalai Lama said:
In order to exercise creativity, freedom of thought is essential.
One Nation introduced these concepts and requested action from the then education minister, Dan Tehan, and I commend Senator Stoker for commenting that the government supports this initiative. Mr Tehan took these concepts from One Nation, particularly from Senator Hanson. He made sure that the now education minister, his replacement, Minister Tudge, continues to champion true freedom of speech in academia.
Therefore, One Nation wholeheartedly supports the new and expanded definition of academic freedom and hopes that no-one will ever need to endure what Professor Peter Ridd is still going through to fight for these fundamental academic freedoms. Professor Ridd was an employee of James Cook University for nearly 30 years. He describes his experience of standing for academic freedom against that university as feeling ‘hunted’. Peter’s so-called crime was to question the quality assurance of research outcomes related to reef science. But it is his duty, as a scientist, to question, to be rigorous and to protect the integrity of science. Every scientist’s first duty is to be a sceptic and to challenge what he or she is being told.
Quality assurance is a concept that many corporate organisations are familiar with. They do not invest money, time, energy and effort without that quality assurance. Yet it seems that some of our universities have strayed away from the discipline of the scientific method so much that they don’t feel the need to justify research outcomes or to deal with challenges to quality and assurance. Considering that billions of dollars of taxpayers’ money is funnelled into policy development based on so-called research, it is not negotiable that these research outcomes must be above reproach. When we consider that the opportunity costs and the consequent costs for some policy based on so-called science are in the trillions of dollars for our whole nation, it is essential that science is challenged.
I have listened firsthand to many canefarmers and industry bodies from North Queensland and Central Queensland who attended the hearings into water quality in the Great Barrier Reef. These farmers and community members are exasperated, with one saying:
They trusted reef scientists to get the science right, … that trust has been destroyed. Instead cane farmers are being publicly demonised …
They also said that the reef regulations reflect a systematic abuse of science, based on assumptions and not evidence.
Communities are being gutted. Apart from the destruction of so many livelihoods, think of the cost to our society, to Queensland, to communities and to our nation when policies are knowingly based on poor science—which, by definition, is not science. Energy policies, climate policies and renewable energy policies based on so-called science are costing $13 billion in addition to the normal costs of electricity. That’s an average of $1,300 per household across Australia in addition to the cost of electricity. For every so-called green job created, 2.2 jobs in the real economy are destroyed. The Murray-Darling Basin act—the Water Act 2007—is now destroying communities across the Murray-Darling Basin, our No. 1 food bowl, and it’s based on rubbish that contradicts the empirical evidence.
Any scientist worth their professional reputation should have the freedom to stand against poor scientific outcomes and the lack of appropriate peer reviewing. I’ll go beyond that: it is the duty of every scientist to do so. The professional integrity of scientists should compel them to defend spending billions of dollars of taxpayers’ money on policies that do not have a robust scientific basis and which are destroying people’s livelihoods.
Professor Peter Ridd has over 100 scientific publications and he has co-invented a worthy list of instrumentation, including an instrument for monitoring the effect of sediment on the reef, which is technology now used around the world; a water current meter, which is marketed by James Cook University worldwide; an optical system for measuring pipeware, which is used in mines Australia wide; and a system for managing agricultural weeds, which is marketed through AutoWeed. This is an impressive list of achievements. After three decades of work, such a scientist ought to be held in high esteem. If a scientist of this academic calibre and such commercial achievements and practical nous can still feel hunted down by a university for challenging the quality of research results in other departments—and hunted to his emotional and financial detriment—how the hell can we ever expect our upcoming brilliant minds, with far fewer runs on the board, to ever have the courage to do the same? We can’t. The simple answer is that these newcomers will not challenge, because they do not have the safety of freedom of speech and can’t risk their careers crashing and burning before they’ve started. Instead, these upcoming brilliant minds will fall into line and continue to expand the increasing pool of homogenous groupthink. And there is the death of creativity and the narrowing of truly great solutions to tomorrow’s problems.
In recent decades we’ve seen our society, our country, being decimated by policy driven science—and that is not science. It’s costing us trillions. We need to return to science driven policy—policy that is driven by science, true science that passes quality assurance tests and questions from sceptics. Professor Ridd has become the modern-day Galileo, for daring to challenge the common myth that farming methods in the Great Barrier Reef catchment areas are damaging the reef. Professor Ridd’s research shows that commonly held myth to be incorrect, to be a lie. James Cook University didn’t like it, maybe because there is no doubt, in their view, that there would be a gaping hole in James Cook University’s funding for Great Barrier Reef research if water quality was indeed just fine, as Professor Peter Ridd’s work and the work of others confirms and suggests.
I acknowledge that universities are required to enshrine in their policy statement clear messages around freedom of speech and academic freedom. While we cannot intrude upon the enterprise agreements between universities and their employees, the amendment I will put forward today in the committee stage requests that higher education providers must take reasonable steps to ensure that enterprise agreements include provisions to uphold the freedom of speech and academic freedom. This commitment to academic freedom needs, wherever possible, to move beyond a policy statement that sits on the shelf and to enter the enterprise agreements, since that is where the cultural change will be brought about.
We cannot afford to be timid and ordinary when it comes to scientific endeavours. One Nation supports this bill, because we must give our scientific staff the academic freedoms they need to be at their creative best. Universities, businesses and governments all need to be prepared to update their outdated views when our brilliant minds in academia show us a better way. I’ll finish with the words of the late Steve Jobs, talking about his company Apple, one of the leaders in the world in new technology:
It doesn’t make sense to hire smart people and tell them what to do; we hire smart people so they can tell us what to do.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/25TTss0JE2I/hqdefault.jpg360480Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2021-03-16 14:38:202021-03-16 14:40:30Protecting scientists like Peter Ridd: Academic Freedom is essential to University
Thank you, Madam Deputy President. As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, I support the government’s changes to university funding. Firstly, though we agree with the government’s general thrust. Secondly, we want to go further to ensure responsibility among students and to reduce taxpayer load. Thirdly, we want to restore accountability and academic freedom in universities to make our universities better so that our future students will emerge better.
So let’s get to the government’s thrust. It reduces fees for courses that meet needs for future jobs and more practical courses like engineering, nursing, and teaching. We support that. It will make these courses more affordable. It raises fees through humanities courses, and I’ll explain later why that is so effective, because humanities people, well, graduates, are not getting jobs right now.
The government’s thrust focuses taxpayer funds on needed skills, and that is good for our country. So the second point I wanted to discuss was that we need to go further to ensure responsibility among students and to reduce taxpayer load. The current HECS debt is $65 billion and growing rapidly. That’s the outstanding HECS debt. With Australia’s national debt now pushing one trillion dollars, the repaid HECS money could be used productively.
We believe that we need to reinstate the 10% discount for fees paid up front. Now, people who pay their fees up front, people who, sorry, people who can afford university do not need the concessional interest rate. And as things start, do not need to repay debt, do not start repaying debt until earning an annual income of $46,620.
Financially, it is better value for the government and for taxpayers, and we do represent taxpayers, to have a loan paid up front at a discount than paid out over 10-plus years. It takes on average about 10 years for a student to repay a HECS debt. And we need to reduce the threshold for repaying HECS debt based on data and fairness to students and fairness to taxpayers. Remember them?
The people who are paying our salaries? The people who run this country? We need to limit and student entitlement to seven years full time equivalent and stop people on fee free university education with little or no chance of a job. Students cannot continue to live off the taxpayer forever.
We’ve got to get job ready graduates. We have a duty to protect taxpayers and to protect our nation, our community, as well as to protect students. The third area, restoring accountability and academic freedom in universities. Universities monitor student academic progress and students who repeatedly fail, for example, if they do not pass more than half of their subjects, should stop getting FEE-HELP.
This removes a fee free career for university students who keep failing. We also need students to be aware of what they’re getting from taxpayers’ money, and we need job ready graduates. I can give you some examples of universities suppressing free speech. Dr. Peter Ridd was sacked from his position at James Cook University for being critical of poor quality reef science.
He was fulfilling his duties as a scientist to challenge his colleagues and he was sacked. And the recent Senate inquiry, Vit in Queensland, vindicated him when academics admitted facts and data that revealed the Queensland state Labour government does not have the facts to support its recent reef regulations.
Peter Ridd was correct. Professor Bob Carter, the late professor Bob Carter, well known globally as a fine scientist, paleoclimatologist. He was prevented and hindered from speaking by James Cook University. And now just here recently at the ANU, Dr. Howard Brady, a noted geologist and who understands climate extremely well was invited by the staff at the University of Queensland at University ANU to make a presentation on the impacts of the study of climate science and why it’s gone wrong.
ANU prohibited him after the notice was sent out, ANU prohibited him from delivering that seminar. But here’s a welcome sign from ANU, professors and staff at ANU were so disgusted with the ANU’s response that they joined together and Dr. Brady will now be conducting his seminar later this month. And they’ve given him immense publicity internationally.
He’s received support from the University of Sydney’s staff, from the ANU stuff, from other universities within Australia and from overseas universities including Princeton.
The former high court Chief Justice, Robert French, recommended in his government commissioned review of free speech at Australian universities that academic freedoms would be protected so data and research can be put forward. That’s a scientist’s responsibility.
Justice French recommended that as part of academic freedom, academics should be allowed to, quote, to make lawful public comment on any issue in their personal capacities. Universities allow, indeed encourage, far left Marxists, anarchists, socialists, and communists to speak freely on university campuses.
Yet do nothing to stop these same fascists shutting down lecturers with whom these fascists disagree. In not protecting free speech of all voices, universities are complicit in the suppression of speech. Now, I went to the University of Queensland, where I got a master’s in business administration.
And I’m very proud to say that the Dean of that university just recently a few years ago welcomed students with a note saying, there are no free spaces, no free, no safe spaces at the University of Chicago. Basically he was saying, suck it up, discuss and debate freely. That’s what universities were about.
That’s what they need to get back to being about. And recently I was listening with a university vice chancellor, a regional university vice chancellor, who subtly admitted to me that the Capitol City unis have fouled their nests because of their craving for political correctness and their fear of upsetting people.
The media reported Professor Ridd as saying he supported, quote, any moves to improve the disastrous situation at the moment where academic freedom of speech effectively does not exist. At present, universities are applying their vague codes of conduct on top of academic freedom of speech.
And this means academics have to be respectful and collegiate. Any robust debate, as he points out, is likely to seem disrespectful to somebody. So that is a way of shutting down debate. That’s how universities that fear academic freedom or are too gutless to ensure freedom suppress academic freedom and free speech.
And we need practical graduates. And my three years underground as a coalface miner after graduate was priceless for me. So I left university and then I realised I’d better go and learn something. So I worked underground as at the coalface for three to four years. We also only need to remember that In addition to practical experience, universities are not for everyone and should not be for everyone.
We need to rekindle trades, rekindle the TAFE, rekindle apprenticeships, and Sen. Hanson has been leading the way in Australia in rekindling apprenticeships and the government has taken her policy two years ago and implemented it. We need to also stop political correctness at TAFE and get it back on track.
So we’re very pleased then to see that the government is undertaking a major shakeup of university fees in a bid to steer students towards fields where there are skill shortages and jobs for the future. And it’s better for students after graduation. University graduates have been slamming universities for meaningless degrees that have left students with dismal career prospects and crippling debt.
While a university degree leads some students to a bright future, for others, it currently leaves them with nothing but debt and disappointment. Now, I wanna take a break here because I wanna answer some comments from Sen. Murray Watt. His comments disrespect the university students and universities.
And his fabrications require me to respond. He said that since they have entered parliament centre the Hanson and one and Sen. Roberts line up with the LNP to pass legislation. Well, let’s see who lines up with the LNP. Let’s indeed have a good look at this. On climate policies, Liberal and Labour are similar.
They believe the nonsense. On energy policies, Liberal and Labour both believe in our renewable energy target. Both believe in stealing farmers’ property rights, as they have both done. Liberal and Labor both believe in gold plating the networks. Liberal and Labor both believe in a national electricity market that has turned into a national electricity racket.
One Nation opposes all of those. On water, the Turnbull-Howard 2007 Water Act is supported by Labour. Now some Liberals are waking up and some Nats are waking up. One Nation opposes the 2007 water act. And the destruction it’s caused across the Murray-Darling basin.
Electricity price, as I’ve just said, Labour and Liberal support the renewable energy target, they support subsidies to the intermittent unreliable energy sources of wind and solar, they support privatisation, They support the national electricity market which has been, which is a national electricity racket.
Both are anti-coal in their actions. The only difference between the Liberal and Labour is that liberals are positive in their talk, but not their actions. Labour and Liberal have been killing our fishing industry. Foreign ownership, Liberal and Labour have sold out Port of Darwin and other companies and water rights in our country.
Record debt, state and federal, Labour and Liberal join. Infrastructure, a lack of infrastructure and neglect. Taxes, foreign multinationals, tax-free, Labour and Liberal have enabled that over the last six decades. I could go on, but you can get the point that Liberal and Labour are actually closer than One Nation and Labour One Nation and the LNP.
The second point Sen. Watt talked about was One Nation candidates out there, masquerading, these are his words, as the people who are standing up for battlers in our community. Well let’s go through some of our candidates. Michael Blaxland at Gimpy. Sharon Lohse at Maryborough.
Sharon Bell, now here’s a good example, Sharon Bell, a real fighter, she’s out working class girl who’s come up and is now working in the construction industry. She is fighting the member for Bundamba who was parachuted in from a job from a union position in Melbourne, parachuted into Queensland outside the Bundamba electorate.
And then two months before the recent election, served by election, he moved into Bundamba, and he’s doing nothing. And what did the Labour Party do? They got rid of Joanne Miller, a first class true Labour member of parliament, and replaced her with this blow-in parachuted in from Melbourne.
Then I could talk about Deb Lawson, Christine Keys, who wants to restore solid education, Wade Rothery, a coal miner in Keppel, Torin O’Brien, Steve Andrew, an electrician who has got such a good rapport with the people of Mirani in his electorate, because he is a member of parliament.
These are the types of people that One Nation is very, very proud to say stand with us. And they are fed up with the tired old parties, both Liberal and Labour. And so as an increasing number of voters. And that’s why these candidates are standing up, because they’re sick and tired of Liberal Nationals and sick and tired of Labour.
They have been abandoned by both the tired old parties. Labour and the LNP actually make battlers. Sen. White talked about us as standing up for the battlers, that’s correct. And the reason we have to do that is because the Labour Party is creating battlers. It’s taking the middle class and making them poor.
It’s taking the poor and making life tougher for the poor. Look at your energy policies, look at your agriculture policies. They are coming to One Nation because people need someone in this parliament who stands up for them and someone in state parliament who stands up for them.
And Sen. Hanson, and this is something Murray Watt, Sen. Watt has said, ‘Sen. Hanson and her party come down to Canberra. they vote with the Liberal and National parties.’ It’s not us that have the policies that are the same. It’s not us, it’s you guys. Let’s then have a look at, let’s then have a look at what Sen. Watt said.
We’ve seen it, he raised pensions. Sen. Hanson and I have advocated for an increase in pensions. We’re advocated and advocating and got solid policies for decreasing cost of living. That’s more important because to a pensioner, the cost of energy is a highly regressive tax and burden.
Then Sen. Watt raised apprenticeships. Sen. Hanson introduced the apprenticeship scheme into this parliament and the government has taken it.
[Deputy President]
Sen. Roberts?
[Malcolm Roberts]
Yes?
[Deputy President]
I have been listening carefully and you certainly started off talking about the higher ed bill. And I think I’ve given you enough time to respond to other senators in this place. But I do remind you the bill before us is the higher education bill.
[Malcolm Roberts]
Thank you, Madam Deputy President, I’m simply responding clearly to everything that Sen. Watt has said-
[Deputy President]
Sen. Roberts?
[Malcolm Roberts]
Because his comments misrepresented the facts.
[Deputy President]
Sen. Roberts, the bill before us is the higher education bill. That’s the bill you need to be responding to. There are other opportunities to respond to other senators. Thank you.
[Malcolm Roberts]
Certainly, well, in response, Madam Deputy President, I wanna comment that this bill, with One Nation’s amendments that the government has agreed to, protects students, protects taxpayers, protects universities, protects Australians, and protects Australia. Because education is vital to the future of our country.
Education is vital as a source of foreign income. And while Labour is off with the rainbow coloured unicorns on this and many other topics, we are very, very proud to speak for the battlers and to support the battlers.
[Deputy President]
Order, order.
[Malcolm Roberts]
Students must be equipped educationally for a career in and beyond the COVID-19 economy with its focus on digital technologies, robotics, automation, science, and health services, real jobs.
