Labor Archives - Page 2 of 4

Posts

Is the AEC Lying About the Threat of Misinformation and Disinformation?

I asked the Australian Electoral Commission about their claims of misinformation and disinformation being a threat to elections. I was surprised to find that a taskforce that specifically reports on threats to the integrity of the election reported there was no interference that would undermine confidence in any results.

Why the discrepancy between a taskforce that says there are no issues and a Commissioner that says this is a big problem? Either the task force isn’t being upfront or the Commissioner is overblowing the threat of disinformation.

I also pointed at some complex shady transactions showing over $40 million in one year flowing from coal company Glencore through a subsidiary company, to the union, to the Labor Party.

Transcript

CHAIR: Senator ROBERTS.

Senator ROBERTS: As you may be aware, Mr Rogers, I’ve got the minutes of the Electoral Integrity Assurance Taskforce, the EIAT—sounds like something to eat—and the freedom of information request LEX 5612. I want to ask you if this response meets your expectations of transparency and accountability. Here are the first six pages. It’s almost entirely black—redacted. There are 100 more pages and most of them are a repeat of this. We’ve probably ran out of black ink trying to print the whole thing. Is this a transparent and open response for what is meant to be an ‘assurance task force’?

Mr Rogers: For a start, I don’t own the task force. I’ll put that on the table. The task force provides me advice about a range of issues. But I just want to point out—

Senator ROBERTS: It’s multi-agency, right?

Mr Rogers: That’s correct, yes. We’ve had discussions about this previously; there are security agencies involved in that process.

Senator ROBERTS: Yes.

Mr Rogers: We are actually talking about security issues. So I’m presuming that the agencies that make up the task force have gone through that document and are worried about releasing sensitive information and that is why it has been released in a redacted format. I’m happy to talk outside the public setting about the sorts of work they do. But, as we’ve said previously, they look at a whole range of different issues that impact on the AEC. They look at physical security, cybersecurity, and misinformation and disinformation with a particular vector about foreign interference. They are issues that they provide advice to me on. They examine a whole range of things, and I’m presuming that the agencies that make up that task force have examined that information and there are security implications or privacy implications, which is why they’ve redacted that information.

Senator ROBERTS: When every page is redacted, surely the EIAT is not dealing with 100 per cent secure information.

Mr Rogers: This is dealing with a sensitive area, which is the reason we’ve set that task force up to start with. But, again, I’m happy to talk to you outside a public setting about some of that information. But there will be privacy information there, there will be privileged information there, and there will also be security classified information there as well.

Senator ROBERTS: You have plenty of experience at Senate estimates, Mr Rogers, and you answer questions well, so I’m sure you’d be aware that freedom of information law used to redact freedom of information requests doesn’t apply to this committee. I want you to take on notice, please, to produce to this committee an unredacted version of the LEX 5612 documents, please.

Mr Rogers: The AEC doesn’t own the Electoral Integrity Assurance Taskforce. Let me take that on notice. I’ll work with the agencies that comprise the Electoral Integrity Assurance Taskforce. But it’s not an AEC entity as such. It is designed to be a cooperative body of the agencies represented on the task force to provide advice to me, particularly about foreign interference. So I can’t direct them to do that. Those agencies will have their own security issues that they have applied in the general clearance of that. But I’ll certainly raise it with the task force on your behalf.

Senator ROBERTS: Thank you. Failing an adequate response from them, let’s take up your offer to discuss it, please. I understand the integrity task force—which includes AFP, ASD and so on—delivered a statement to you to the effect that there was no interference that would undermine the confidence of the Australian people in the election result. That statement has effectively been a copy-paste from the 2019 election, to 2022, to the referendum in 2023. Mr Pope, for 2022 at least—it was actually him as Deputy Commissioner of the AEC that proposed that wording to the EIAT, wasn’t it?

Mr Rogers: I don’t have the minutes in front of me. I’d have to take that on notice.

Senator ROBERTS: Okay. If you could tell us.

Mr Rogers: To be abundantly helpful—it probably is the same words. I don’t have them in front of me, because that’s the same situation. If the situation hasn’t changed, they’re actually the words. If there had been interference, it would be an entirely different set of words that would come.

Senator ROBERTS: That’s where I want to go to next. If the integrity task force says in its statement that there is absolutely nothing to worry about, why is it necessary to hide the minutes of the meetings—completely hide them. I can understand some sensitive matters, some potential threats. Why is it necessary to hide the minutes?

Mr Rogers: Every member of that task force carries a current Commonwealth security classification. They’re dealing with information that in itself is classified. Again, I don’t own the task force. I’m not speaking on behalf of the task force. But each of the agencies has its own statutory responsibility to protect information as well. As a collective, that redaction would be the result of a security assessment done by the agencies on the task force. Whatever was discussed had some sort of security either classification or implication.

Senator ROBERTS: I accept that’s your answer. But I wonder if 100 per cent of it—okay. You’ve been very keen to become the truth cop and decide what is and isn’t misinformation at elections. You’ve told us that misinformation—

Mr Rogers: No. In fact, let me be very clear. I am the reverse of the truth cop. I do not want to be the truth cop at all. We had a discussion earlier this evening. ‘Truth’ at election time is quite often in the eye of the beholder. And the determination of what truth is is not something that I wish to be involved with. However, where disinformation about the electoral process is being spread—and you and I have discussed this previously—

Senator ROBERTS: Yes. I remember you discussing it with us.

Mr Rogers: Things that are legislatively and factually wrong, designed to confuse electors about the act of voting—for example, ‘You don’t have to vote’ or ‘Voting is not compulsory’ or ‘The AEC is using Dominion voting machines’ or ‘is erasing your ballot’—all of those sorts of issues. If someone says things like that that are designed to confuse voters, we correct the record. We don’t stop anybody from saying anything. But we certainly correct the record and we use the various tools at our disposal to do that, including social media and media, including at appearances like this. But I just want to be abundantly clear that the characterisation that you made at the start is the reverse of what we do.

Senator ROBERTS: Yes. I’ll take that back, because I didn’t mean it the way you understood it. But I can see quite clearly that that is a way of taking it. What I meant to say is that you have told us about the misinformation and disinformation repeatedly. From the amount of media and commentary you’ve done on this, it appears to be a very significant focus of yours, and that’s probably entirely correct. So where did this come from if your integrity task force is telling you in the statement that there isn’t a single issue to worry about? You’re telling us it’s a risk, a big risk.

Mr Rogers: One of the reasons we can have confidence about the Australian election is the existence of the Electoral Integrity Assurance Taskforce. Their work, the work of the AEC—the work within the AEC of our Defending Democracy Unit, our social media team and a range of other entities, the way we engage with social media organisations, the way we focus on getting correct information into the hands of voters—has actually assisted that process. We’re certainly not going to wait for a disaster to have those measures in place [inaudible] get to where we are. We are internationally renowned—not just the AEC, but Australia and Australia’s electoral system is internationally renowned—as being fair, transparent and of high integrity. That is because of the work the AEC has done and the work that our partner agencies have done in groups like the EIAT—and indeed parliament, including committees that have established legislation and inquiries into each election. So I’m abundantly proud of the work that the AEC has done to ensure that citizens have confidence in electoral outcomes. You might have seen at the end of last year there was an APS survey that was published where the AEC was ranked No. 1 for trust and satisfaction out of, I think, 20 agencies that were listed amongst citizens. That is as a result of the work of a whole range of organisations, including our partner agencies. If you don’t mind, because the EIAT is an important moment of what we do, the members of the EIAT, just because they are on the EIAT, that does not abrogate their legislative responsibilities that they have as individual agencies in any case. The EIAT exists as a taskforce but each of the agencies represented also has legislative responsibilities, not just at election time but outside of election time, and we also have a bilateral relationship with each of these agencies as well. As you know and as I said previously, we talk to the AFP on a regular basis. We talk to those other agencies. They provide us advice and we use that input to guide how we’re going. I think Australians should be very proud of their electoral system and also the work of all those bodies that I mentioned before that have assisted in creating such a high-integrity and transparent system.

Senator ROBERTS: I must say that we had a number of concerns about the electoral process and the electoral system. Many of those, with the exception of two, have been erased because of our discussions and because we now have audits as a result of me introducing legislation that the previous government then took up. I will endorse your comments with the proviso that we still have a couple of things we are not happy with, but you do have audits now. Some of the issues you are responsible for are not easy; I get that. One in particular I would like to raise with you now is maybe you could elaborate on some of the issues faced with getting a clear picture when it comes to donation law, a really complex situation. The returns for the Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union for 2022 and 2023 show they donated huge sums to the Labor Party. The CFMMEU has received more than $39 million from a company called Abelshore, which is a wholly-owned subsidiary of coal company Glencore. In 2021-22 they donated $9 million, so over two years they donated $48 million donated by Glencoreowned companies to the CFMMEU, to the Labor Party. So you have tens of millions, $48 million as I said, flying from a coal company through a subsidiary, through a union to the Labor Party but the coal company does not show up in the returns to the Labor Party. Can you explain the difficulties in finding out where the money was originally coming from on the returns that are lodged?

Mr Rogers: First of all, I have not seen that particular return, so I would have to take it on notice and have a look but I am not aware that any of that breaches the existing legislation. Our role is to adhere to the legislation, promote the legislation, ensure that agencies are adhering to that. As you know, the whole funding and disclosure issue is the most complex part of the Electoral Act. It is highly technical. As long as those entities are meeting their obligations for transparency under the act, and I have no information that they are not—I would have to look at that specific issue in detail—as long as they are within the legislation, changing that legislation is a matter for parliament rather than the AEC, which I know you are aware of, and it is something we were discussing earlier this evening. I would have to have a look at in detail.

Senator ROBERTS: Yes, we will send you a copy. It is on a register from the CFMMEU, I think I said. That is an awful lot of money to be hidden and it is not deliberately hidden. Perhaps it is inadvertently hidden. I think the intent is deliberate because it seems a bit strange that money is going from a coal company to a mining union to the Labor Party. Let’s move on. Can I confirm that you did not refer a single case of double voting at the referendum or the last election to the Federal Police for investigation?

Mr Rogers: I don’t have the statistics in front of me. Someone does. The chief legal officer does. I will drag him forward for a moment. Mr A Johnson: I will have to look up the statistics, but we have referred several multivoting cases from the federal election, around 37, and that 76 from the referendum were referred to the AFP, but that then is a matter for the AFP because it is a criminal offence and whether they proceed with prosecutions.

Senator ROBERTS: Yes, it is a criminal offence.

Mr Rogers: We work with the AFP on those matters and, as the chief legal officer said, we refer those matters to them. But we go through each of those cases with them in any case, and what they do with those from there is a matter for the AFP.

Senator ROBERTS: One of the concerns we have amongst the two or three concerns overall, which has dropped dramatically in number after working with you, is the physical audit of the voter rolls, doorknocking houses and confirming that voters listed at that address live there. How are you progressing on that?

Mr Rogers: I think you are referring to something that used to be referred to as a habitation review, which we used to do many years ago. We don’t do habitation reviews for a range of reasons. Frankly, we found them to be inaccurate when we did those reviews. The processes that we have in place now are far more accurate and bring a greater level of assurance to the integrity of the roll than the habitation review ever did. As you would imagine, with people walking around districts, knocking on doors, people give all sorts of answers, if they open the door at all. We had people not home. In fact, I will not go through some of the detail of some of the ways in which our staff used to be received. There were personal safety issues involved as well. But the process we have in place now, we have a roll integrity assurance system, which I think we might have discussed with you when we visited to talk about the various issues that are in place. It is a better system with higher integrity than ever was the case during the habitation review process. Also, what we are currently doing is a better use of Commonwealth funds. The habitation reviews were hugely expensive for a very poor outcome, so what we have managed to produce is a much better system, using the coordination of several datasets to ensure that people are where they say they are.

Senator ROBERTS: You have said that before.

Mr Rogers: We also manage a thing called the address register, which is complex, but that is the way that we give everyone a spot on the earth, effectively. We know where people are, not when they are moving around for the sake of it, but where their houses are to make sure that when people say they are enrolled in a spot that that spot is actually an agreed address and that they are enrolled in.

Senator ROBERTS: We get frequent reports about people voting more than once and voting instead of dead people and so on. If you will indulge me, Mr Rogers, and the CHAIR, before I get onto my last question, I am not sure if you have heard an old joke about a politician who has lost his seat in parliament. Talking to a party powerbroker, he says, ‘Comrade, to lose such a safe seat is a tragedy but losing an electorate with three cemeteries, that is unforgivable.’ You have probably heard that one.

Mr Rogers: There has been a number of variations to that. Just to give some idea of the scope of the movement on the electoral roll, from memory, every day there are about 7,000 people who move or sadly die or turn 18 that we need to somehow interact with the electoral roll on a daily basis.

Senator ROBERTS: Or get married.

Mr Rogers: There is huge movement in that roll. We are constantly managing it—people are on, people are off. We do a range of things to make sure that it is accurate. We hear stories from time to time with people on social media or they might phone up talkback radio and say, ‘I multiple voted.’ We do not have any evidence of that. It is a minuscule problem. I have said before that the problem is vanishingly small. There is a gulf between what people do and say in this regard. We are alert to it. There have been a number of studies done. There was a large study done by an academic from the new University of New South Wales almost a decade ago looking at a range of issues to do with this. It is a vanishingly small issue. I mentioned previously, to the extent that it does occur, there are some factors normally are associated with it. One is age. People who multiple vote are more likely to be over the age of 80. I am thinking back to some research here. English as a second language can be an issue, because new voters might be confused. They may have heard that if you do not vote in Australia you get a fine and they are desperate not to get a fine, so they double vote. Sometimes there is also mental confusion as one of the other factors. It is a small number. Just to also give you some comfort, we are very clear that if ever the level of multiple voting came close to the margin for those seats, we would refer that ourselves to the Court of Disputed Returns and it has never even been close to that. We watch for that, we look at it and we are very conscious of it.

Senator ROBERTS: Okay. Thank you. Last question—have you ever been involved in any correspondence or collaboration with the eSafety Commissioner?

Mr Rogers: Yes, we have. Well, actually, let me just craft my answer here. When I say ‘we’, we, as part of the Electoral Council of Australia and New Zealand, which is the electoral commissioners of Australia and New Zealand, have been collectively looking at an issue to do with the safety of our staff. As you know, the eSafety Commissioner has some powers about adult harm online—I’ll get that bit wrong, forgive me, but whatever those powers are—and we’ve been working with the eSafety Commissioner as a group of commissioners to make sure we have adequate protocols in place for how we engage the eSafety Commissioner in using those protocols for the safety of our permanent and temporary staff.

Senator ROBERTS: Thank you very much. Thank you, CHAIR.

June 3, 2024/by Senator Malcolm Roberts

Budget Predictions

National, Speeches

The Treasurer handed down his third budget tonight (14/05/2024). These were my predictions earlier today in the Senate. What do you think of what he has handed down?

Transcript

As Treasurer Jim Chalmers hands down his third budget tonight, many Australians simply don’t care. All the talk about surpluses, deficits, subsidies and balance of payments is very low in the average Australian’s priorities today. The biggest budget concern across dinner tables is skyrocketing mortgage costs, rents, grocery bills, insurance premiums and power bills. Australians don’t need Treasurer Chalmers to tell them times are tough; they’re living through tough times. Unfortunately, this budget shows the government isn’t coming to help; in fact, to compensate for its poor decisions it’s going to have to have its hand deeper in your pocket, taxing more of your salary for years to come.

Let’s step through the budget and what it means for Australians. Firstly, the big headline: Labor wants everyone to know the budget is in surplus—$9.8 billion. It sounds good, doesn’t it? Anyone who’s ever had their bills laid out on the dining room table knows a good budget needs more money coming in than going out. Unfortunately, this budget surplus is terrifyingly small, given that fairies have kissed Treasurer Chalmers with good luck.

The government has won the biggest lottery prize we could ever have hoped for, yet it has just a tiny surplus. It would be like a family winning division 1 of Powerball and having $100 left over at the end of the year—and calling it a win! There should be rivers of gold flowing into the budget. Instead we have a miserable trickle because Labor doesn’t resist spending every bit of its lottery winnings.

Commodity prices for our exports like oil, gas, coal, metal minerals and agricultural produce have all been near or at record highs over the previous few years. That means huge amounts of extra money flowed into Treasurer Chalmers’s budget. ‘Oil’, ‘gas’ and ‘coal’ are all dirty words to this Labor government and the Greens, and they’re too embarrassed to admit they have, in large part, saved the budget.

The second lottery win is the Australian workers. They’re working more jobs, longer hours and harder than ever. All of the extra work is reflected by the record-low unemployment rate. That means more taxes from hardworking Australians are going into the budget coffers than ever before—a record. That’s the story of this budget: three years of some of the largest tax intakes government has ever recorded, yet Labor can only squeak out the tiniest of surpluses.

Despite Australians working multiple jobs for more hours, they’re still going backwards because of inflation. Inflation is the secret debilitating stealth tax on all Australians. It’s the reason Australia had the largest collapse of disposable income in the OECD. If you feel like you’re going backwards, it’s because you are.

The only way to get ourselves out of this infrastructure mess is by spending on productive assets that allow Australia to make more here. We need to raise our productive capacity. We need more dams so that Australians can have more food and exports. But don’t expect to see any dams in Labor’s budget. We need cheaper electricity so that small businesses can thrive and hire people in their local communities. Instead, Labor will continue to throw us down the path of the net zero pipedream, which is guaranteed to bring higher energy prices, whether Australians pay for it on their power bill or with more taxes.

Unfortunately, the Liberals, the Nationals and the Labor-Greens are a uniparty on net zero—all united in their commitment to kill our electricity grid. We need nation-building projects like the Iron Boomerang project to make millions of tonnes of the world’s best quality steel right here in our country.

One thing I can guarantee is that there won’t be enough action on immigration in this budget. The Prime Minister has leaked that they expect net overseas migration to come in at 300,000 next year—300,000! This is a horrifyingly large number. It’s excessive. Prior to COVID there were 1.9 million visa holders likely to require housing in the country. There are now 2.3 million plus 400,000 tourists. That’s causing the terrible rental and housing crisis. Now the government wants to make that 300,000 people worse again. Where will these people sleep, Prime Minister?

That sums up what we can expect from this Labor budget: more Australians sleeping in cars, under bridges, in tents and in caravans; first home buyers destroyed by their mortgage repayments, while inflation runs out of control; small businesses being strangled by power prices. Does this sound good? This is hopeless. There are many more shocking stories of how the Australian dream has been ruined by decades of the Liberals-Nationals-Labor-Greens uniparty, acting together to implement the agenda of the World Economic Forum and the United Nations.

A better way is possible. A much better way is possible, and One Nation will reveal how in our response to the budget this week.

May 24, 2024/by Senator Malcolm Roberts

Labor’s Guide on How to Avoid Answering Questions in Senate Estimates

National, Speeches

Labor has been caught red-handed with a cheat sheet to circumvent democracy. The media has received a leaked copy of a manual from the office of the Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese. This clearly shows more damning evidence that Labor is seeking ways to side-step the responsibility and accountability of government.

Instead of respecting the role and powers of the Senate, the Prime Minister’s Office sends out a secret manual on side-stepping senate estimates’ questions.

This is nothing less than contempt of the senate from the PM’s office and reveals premeditated attempts at concealing the truth from the Australian people. This is a government that talks up transparency while writing the ‘How-To’ guide on hiding the facts. We will review this in more detail and will provide a detailed response on the manual.

Transcript

I speak to this motion to take note. I have yet to read the document in full and in detail, yet its existence is very disturbing, as other speakers have already said. At Senate estimates, Anthony Albanese’s office is putting words in the mouths of department heads. How can we trust their answers? We cannot trust this government. Repeatedly we’re getting the suppression of democracy—repeatedly—and we’re seeing arrogance. Let’s have a look at some data, and then I’ll come back to talking more about this document.

As of the end of December 2023—7 December, specifically—after 94 Senate sitting days in the 47th Parliament, Anthony Albanese’s parliament, 14 guillotine motions have been agreed to. Under the previous Morrison government, in the 46th Parliament, 14 guillotine motions were agreed to. Now we start to see the difference. A total of 87 bills have been subject to the guillotine in the 47th Parliament under the Labor-Greens-teals-Pocock coalition led by Anthony Albanese. In the 46th Parliament, under the Morrison Liberals, there were 59. So we have seen almost 50 per cent more under this government, under the coalition that Labor formed with the teals, Senator Pocock and the Greens, quite often with Senator Jacqui Lambie’s support.

They promised transparency and accountability. Instead we get the suppression of democracy, repeatedly. Arrogance—that’s what we say it is. Arrogance. We see that the suppression of democracy is a form of control.Always beneath control there is fear. Of what is the Albanese Labor-Greens-teals-Pocock coalition afraid? It’s afraid of truth and afraid, fundamentally, of an informed citizenry. They don’t want people to know.

The media has seen copies of the document. ‘The PMO’s secret manual on sidestepping Senate estimates questions’—that’s the headline in Capital Brief. The article says:

Capital Brief has seen a document sent by Anthony Albanese’s office advising departments on how to handle questions on notice from Senate estimates. Current and former senators say the edict represents contempt of the Senate.

Contempt of the Senate is a very serious matter. Another article in Capital Brief says:

Current and former senators, lawyers and a former top judge have said the drafting of the document could result in contempt of the Senate. … …

Anthony Albanese’s office has stood by a document it issued to senior bureaucrats which advised them how to sidestep Senate estimates questions on the basis that inquiries have “skyrocketed” since Labor came to government.

Well, that’s your job! I don’t care if they have skyrocketed. We’ll keep asking questions. I’ll get to the Prime Minister’s office’s manual—what we’ve seen of it so far; I haven’t dissected it.

When the interests of several departments are involved, the Government Guidelines for Official Witnesses before Parliamentary Committees and Related Matters call for departments to consult with other departments as part of the drafting process. This includes instances where the same or similar Senate estimates questions on notice are asked of all or multiple departments and agencies. Why are you worried about different answers from different departments? Look at some of the topics covered—well, we’ll go through that another time.

I know this is not a motion by leave to seek a variation of standing orders, but One Nation normally opposes them because the Senate should be focused, firstly, on Senate responsibilities and, secondly, on government
business. We want the government to govern. Senate estimates, though, are a vital part of holding governments and bureaucrats accountable for taxpayer funds. Why do you hide from that? Anthony Albanese’s department wants to hide the truth from the people.

We have seen the Fair Work Commission and the Fair Work Ombudsman stumbling through an answer to my questions attempting to get to the bottom of their complicity with the CFMEU and major multinational labour hire firms in stealing $30,000 to $40,000 per miner each year from thousands of casual miners in Central Queensland and the Hunter Valley. They hide the facts wilfully. The Fair Work Ombudsman office relies on fraud, repeatedly.

The Labor minister for workplace relations ignores and diverts. It’s embarrassing for departments. We look forward to reviewing the formerly secret document in detail, because democracy is at stake.

May 24, 2024/by Senator Malcolm Roberts

This is What an Actual Vision for Australia Looks Like

National

What happened to having vision for the future in this country?

You won’t get it from the Liberal and Labor Uni-party whilst they’re beholden to their donors.

Check out One Nation’s breakdown of the budget and how we would return Australia to leading the world.

Transcript

This is One Nation’s response to Labor’s Budget.

My comments will be in two parts.

Firstly, an analysis of what Treasurer Jim Chalmers has put into and left out of the budget.

Secondly, what a One Nation budget would look like to return Australia into a prosperous country again.

Starting with the measures in Labor’s budget for next year, 2024/25.

Treasurer Chalmers wants everyone to know about his surplus for THIS year 2023/24.

Yet his budget released two days ago for this coming year starting in less than two months aims to be a DEFICIT for 2024/25

Many Australians might not even know what a surplus is.

A surplus simply means that within a given year the Government is spending less than it’s income. It spends less than what it takes off Australians.

Usually that’s a good thing.

Like any Australian household, government shouldn’t be spending more than it has – that’s a deficit.

Treasurer Chalmer’s surplus of $9.3 billion isn’t a happy story, though.

It sounds like a big number until you compare it to the total budget spend: $683 billion dollars.

Unfortunately, given Treasurer Chalmers’ amazing run of good luck this budget surplus is terrifyingly small.

It would be like a family winning division 1 of Powerball and having $100 left over at the end of the year—and calling it a win!

There should be rivers of gold flowing into the budget.

Instead, we have a miserable trickle because Labor can’t resist spending every bit of its lottery winnings.

Commodity prices for our exports like oil, gas, coal, metal minerals and agricultural produce have all been near or at record highs over the recent few years.

That means huge amounts of extra money flowed into Treasurer Chalmers’s budget.

‘Oil’, ‘gas’ and ‘coal’ are all dirty words to this Labor government and its Greens partners. And they’re too embarrassed to admit mining and agriculture have, largely, saved the budget.

The second lottery win for the government is Australian workers.

They’re working more jobs, longer hours and harder than ever.

All of the extra work shows up in the record-low unemployment rate.

That means more taxes from hardworking Australians are going into the budget coffers than ever before—a record. RECORD tax taken from Australians.

That’s the story of this budget: three years of some of the largest tax intakes government has ever recorded, yet Labor can only squeak out the tiniest of surpluses.

From this year on the deficits return. Tens and tens of billions of dollars in the red each year as far as we can see. Going deeper into debt.

The Federal Government’s debt is due to reach nearly 700 billion dollars in coming years.

At the rate this government is going our children’s children will not repay it.

Despite working multiple jobs for more hours helping the government’s bottom line, Australians are still going backwards because of inflation.

Inflation is the secret debilitating stealth tax on all Australians.

It’s the reason Australia had the largest collapse of disposable income in the OECD.

If you feel like you’re going backwards, it’s because you are.

Inflation is leading to tax bracket creep.

That means you’re earning more while your money is worth less yet you’re paying more tax overall.

As your income rises with inflation, it takes you into a higher tax rate bracket.

The government takes more money from you through bracket creep because of inflation.

No wonder they voted against my amendment that would have removed bracket creep. My amendment would have removed the stealth tax.

The government is fudging the inflation numbers, making it appear better than the price increases you’re actually paying in the real world.

When they hand out energy and rent relief, it artificially lowers the inflation figures.

This is just papering over the inflation. It does nothing to actually fix it.

Economists across the country have slammed Treasurer Chalmers trickery on this.

Without rent assistance the CPI for rents would haver increased 9.5% in the 12 months to March.

Instead because of Treasurer Chalmers’ trickery it was recorded as just 7.8%.

The cost of electricity has gone up 15% in just a year. The bill relief is papering over that, showing up in the CPI as just 2%.

This is a clear, huge admission of failure of the net zero pipe-dream

With the most amount of wind, solar and batteries on the grid than ever before in history, Treasurer Chalmers must hand out another round of power bill relief – because prices are too expensive.

The inflation fight isn’t over for Australians who are still going backwards.

This budget will pour more fuel on the inflation fire.

There are only a few ways to genuinely reduce inflation:

First, never repeat the mistake of printing $500 billion out of thin air over COVID.

That created much of the inflation we’re fighting – as the former head of the Reserve Bank agreed to me.

Second, reduce the cost of energy: Abandoning the net-zero pipe dream.

While net-zero is pushing up power prices we’ll never get rid of inflation.

Thirdly, cut the amount of visa holders in the country now driving huge demand.

That’s not just a cut to the rate of immigration as this budget proposes, it needs to be negative, and people need to leave. As I’ll explain later.

Finally, make investments in productive infrastructure to increase the productive capacity of our country. Assets like dams, power infrastructure, ports and rail lines.

That’s called supply side economics. Improve productivity.

That’s how inflation can be cut. Not with trickery. Improving real productivity.

The next feature item of the Labor Budget is their Future Made In Australia plan.

This is a vague, unclear collection of weird policy ideas like a billion dollar computer and outright scams for a total of $22.7 billion dollars.

This will supposedly turn Australia into what they call a Green Superpower for wind, solar, so-called green hydrogen and other scams.

The government will use that money to pick losers that have failed to attract any investment from anyone with common sense in the real world.

This is a “Disaster made in Australia” Plan.

China manufactures and tightly controls more than 90% of all of the critical parts of wind and solar power.

Wind and solar make us completely reliant on China for our energy needs, Labor’s Future Made in Australia will only make that reliance worse.

There’s no reason to become reliant on wind and solar due to our abundance of oil, gas, coal and uranium in this country.

We’re the most resource rich country in the world.

Why would we spend tens of billions ignoring that and handing over control to China?

The Future Made in Australia plan is really a Future Made in China plan.

This effectively sets up an unsustainable model of business practice which relies on taxpayer subsidies for any meagre profit.

What a waste of Australian taxes.

Next the National Disability Insurance Scheme, the NDIS.

If left unchecked, the NDIS is going to eat this entire country alive.

Originally budgeted to only cost $25 billion a year, it will reach $90 billion a year within a decade.

Minister Bill Shorten says he can cap the growth at 8% a year. Yet it’s been growing at 14%.

Providers often charge NDIS double or even triple the price for the exact same services.

This draws carers to NDIS and drives huge worker shortages in aged care and childcare.

The huge NDIS money sink has certainly contributed to this.

The NDIS program has been a national shame with unconscionable budget blowouts, widespread rorting, use of taxpayer money for prostitutes and cruises and other scandals, And causes neglect of genuine disability cases.

At some point it’s time for Australia to agree this scheme can’t be fixed and it’s time to start fresh. Send it back to the states to enable competitive federalism that is proven to drive efficiency and accountability.

Let’s move on to the Future Drought Fund – $519 million dollars. Again seems a great headline. Just don’t read the detail.

That money will be split over 8 years meaning just a tiny $65 million for an industry worth more than $90 billion a year to Australia.

There’s only one real form of drought relief: WATER.

There’s not a drop of money in this budget towards a real dam.

To get cheaper groceries, we have to grow more of them.

We have some of the best farmers, in combination with the best soils and climate in the world.

Add water, and Australians won’t have to worry about grocery bills again.

A vital part of this budget is the forecasts for net overseas immigration.

That’s how many new people the government expects to take into the country.

Australia’s net overseas migration was 528,000 in the 2022 to 2023 financial year, a historic record, nearly double the previous record. Double.

That’s like adding a new Canberra to Australia, in one go. Without the political swamp.

That’s almost one and a half (1.3) Sunshine Coasts imported into Australia in just 12 months.

The Labor government claims this figure will decrease to 260,000 a year in 2025-2026, still far too much.

It’s a prediction, and like any Labor prediction, don’t bet your house on it.

Back in October 2022, 4 months into the 12 months they were predicting, the government said net overseas migration would be 235,000.

Just 8 months later, the 528,000 figure blew their forecasts out of the water.

Way more than double. Was it supreme incompetence? Or a lie?

We’ll wait and see if their prediction of 395,000, an entire Sunshine Coast added to the population, for this financial year turns out to be true.

If it’s not clear, no Australian should trust what a government says when it comes to immigration numbers.

It’s claimed that the country is ‘just catching up’ after a slow down in immigration. That’s a lie.

It’s a lie that’s causing a housing crisis, making Australians homeless and feeding inflation.

Prior to COVID, there were 1.9 million foreign temporary visa holders in the country likely to require housing.

Today, there are 2.3 million. That’s 400,000 more people in the country that are fighting Australians for a roof over their head and groceries at the supermarket.

Why? To inflate GDP to get out of the per-capita recession. To look good not do good. Labor doesn’t care about the homeless its causing.

That’s driven the massive crisis in the rental vacancy rate and huge increases in rents.

This Labor government wants to keep adding to that, another 395,000 predicted this financial year, plus 260,000 the following.

We don’t have enough houses to put these people in.

We don’t have enough houses to put Australians in.

We don’t have enough tradies to build enough houses to keep up with this many arrivals.

We need to start deporting some visa holders.

Net immigration needs to go negative until Australians have got an affordable roof over their head.

Perhaps the most important item is something that’s completely missing from this budget.

There’s not a single dollar allocated for a Royal Commission into the COVID response.

Millions of Australians were forced to lock down in their homes. Forced to take an experimental medical product. Businesses were ruined. Children’s educations ruined.

What’s the Labor government’s response? Silence.

One Nation will continue to fight for a COVID Royal Commission and for perpetrators of human rights abuses to be thrown in jail.

That covers some of the things that are in, and aren’t in, Labor’s budget.

Now I want to talk about a better way, what Australia could look like as a prosperous nation under a One Nation budget.

Here are things you won’t hear from anyone in a budget, except One Nation – because we’ve got the guts to say what you’re thinking.

Firstly, guarantee affordable power: turn the coal fired power stations back on. Build more of them and remove solar and wind subsidies.

It’s the only thing that can save us right now.

Cheap power is a matter of life and death for Australians as many of them are facing the wall in this cost of living crisis.

Nuclear should be on the table and we should simply let the cheapest power win – no handouts or subsidies.

Secondly, stop inflation: stop quantitative easing printing excess money.

$500 billion dollars was concocted out of nowhere during the COVID response.

That’s a major cause of the inflation we’re still fighting today.

The Former Governor of the Reserve Bank, Phillip Lowe, the culprit behind that money printing, even agreed with me on that.

Thirdly, we’ll guarantee cheaper houses, cheaper rents, and get young people into their first home.

Don’t just cut net overseas migration – start deporting some visa holders.

Prior to COVID there were 1.9 million visa holders who needed housing, fighting Australians for a roof over their head.

That’s now increased to 2.3 million today, plus 400,000 tourists and others.

And, we’ll ban foreigners from buying Australian property. They’re currently snapping up nearly 1 in 10 new Aussie homes.

We’ll convert the Labor government’s designed-to-fail Housing Future Fund and turn it into the People’s Mortgage Fund, issuing fixed rate 5% mortgages.

Fourthly, get cheaper groceries: build dams and help farmers produce tonnes of fresh, healthy produce for Australians.

Give farmers water and the right to use their land – we’ll never have to worry about grocery bills again.

Fifthly, use all of our natural resources we have right here for Australians first.

There’s no need to become a green superpower, and we never will.

We’re already an oil, gas, coal and uranium superpower.

Government won’t do this because some foreign unelected organisation in Zurich will claim we’re not ‘complying with our international obligations’.

Governments of both sides have forgotten that their first obligation is to AUSTRALIANS. No one else.

One Nation knows this.

Finally, we must have comprehensive tax reform.

The current system is highly destructive to our country and wholesale change must be made.

We’ll put our trust in Australia’s people, release them from the nanny state that tells them everything they can and can’t do, and enable people to abound and flourish.

That’s our promise of what would be a One Nation budget:

Putting truth, Australia, and Australians first to ensure prosperity like we’ve never seen.

May 23, 2024/6 Comments/by Senator Malcolm Roberts

Another Non Answer from Labor: High Immigration = Housing Crisis

National, Speeches

Queensland residents can’t find a home because there are simply more people than homes. Our hospitals are ramping because there are too many patients and not enough healthcare staff, and the number of kids in Queensland classrooms are rising not falling, despite many parents opting to home school.

The COVID response era actually provided a great opportunity to catch up on building infrastructure while immigration was frozen and people were out of jobs. Instead the government paid people to stay at home and NOT contribute to or build social infrastructure.

I asked Minister Watt, who is a Queenslander himself, if the Government opened the floodgates on immigration without the necessary social infrastructure being ready. His answer confirmed the government has not done the sums on the impacts of our record level of immigration and, quite honestly, is not fit to govern.

Transcript

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (Senator Watt) to a question without notice I asked today relating to social infrastructure.

For three years, from 2020 to 2022, with the nation mostly out of work, we had an opportunity to catch up on social infrastructure: hospitals, schools, transport, water and housing. Instead, we paid money that could have been used to build those things to people to sit at home and not build those things. It was a trillion dollar wasted opportunity. With a new Labor government in power, the immigration floodgates then opened without the social infrastructure to accommodate the new arrivals. What’s worse is that there are not enough land re-zonings, building applications, approvals and starts to ever make a noticeable improvement in housing.

The Albanese government created a problem it cannot solve. Australia needs to get a refund on that plan we heard so much about from the Prime Minister in the last election because it’s a dud. It’s not up to the minister in his answer to blame the previous government repeatedly. For three years a so-called National Cabinet of Liberal and Labor leaders ran the country, so failure is on both your hands. It’s true that the neglect of social infrastructure goes back through 30 years of Liberal and Labor governments—the uniparty.

The message from the last two weeks of elections in Queensland and Tasmania is simple. Voters worked out the link between immigration and social infrastructure and voters are not happy. Voters are angry with Minister Watt and the Albanese government for creating a housing crisis that’s rapidly escalated to now be a human catastrophe. The public are noticing the disparity between those benefiting from the property market and those falling behind. It now takes everyday Australians on a median salary up to 14 years to save for a deposit for their own home. The housing crisis the Morrison government started and the Albanese government multiplied is disenfranchising the young. The irony is that the Labor government—supposedly, once the party of the workers—is making inequality of wealth far worse. Before the thread of social cohesion unravels in this country, this government must turn off the immigration tap and start building social infrastructure.

Question agreed to.

May 23, 2024/1 Comment/by Senator Malcolm Roberts

Queensland Labor Buckles Under Pressure

Queensland

I’m grateful for the news that the State Labor government has buckled under pressure and agreed to withdraw its flawed legislative changes to homeschooling.

The overhaul of Queensland’s Education Act was put forward in state parliament last month. Two of the policies within the Bill triggered a staggering 900 public submissions via state parliament. Along with the many horrified parents, the Home Education Association stepped in and criticised many of the key reforms calling for a Home Education Advisory Board in its submission. 

Australia is famous for its ‘homeschooling’ successes. By virtue of the vast distances, many rural and regional families have used distance learning for decades with a choice of curricula.  

Homeschooling is an important right for Australians – in many cases it’s the only way to solve problems with bullying, to help low achieving students and give high achieving students the stimulus they need. Homeschooling families are a rising demographic, and act as an important barometer to assess how schools are serving students and parents. 

Yet again, Queensland’s Labor government failed to consult with or listen to Queenslanders. The proposed Education Bill’s changes to homeschooling were a knee-jerk reaction aimed at cracking down on parents who choose to educate at home. Many of these parents reached out to me in alarm. 

The vast majority of homeschooling parents are deeply invested in their children’s education and wellbeing. It’s their motivating factor. These families strive for a diverse education that reflects the individuality of children. They’ve chosen not to adopt the cookie cutter curriculum available in state education and are aware the proposed changes would undermine the very reasons why they’ve chosen homeschooling as the preferred mode of education for our children.   

The Bill proposed to amend the Education (General Provisions Act) 2006 and other legislation to: 

Modernise and improve education services by: 

enhancing the regulation of home education and streamlining the home education registration process 
removing the use of gendered language 
acknowledging wellbeing, inclusion and diversity

Below, I want to share some of the feedback I have received from homeschooling parents along with some research my staff has undertaken on this topic. Like you, I’m aware this threat to homeschooling has not gone away. Australians must retain the freedom to educate our children without the indoctrinating influences being pushed on Australians through the efforts of the UN-WEF-WHO conglomerate. That much is clear in the voices of parents who wrote to me. 

What did QLD homeschooling families say about the proposed legislation? 

“This proposed change to legislation is not in children’s best interests because it removes a parent’s fundamental right to home educate their child. It proposes that parents need to “prove” home education is in their child’s best interests. Who gets to decide this? The same education system that many of these parents see as having has failed their children? The same education system that is seen as ‘grooming’ children to become transgender and introducing them to inappropriate sexualised content and behaviour in response to guidance from the United Nations World Health Organisation – a foreign organisation with no jurisdiction in our country?” 

“The essence of homeschooling lies in the freedom it affords children to learn in a manner that aligns with their individual interests, abilities, and learning styles. By imposing a mandated curriculum, these proposed changes would impede my children’s autonomy and hinder their ability to pursue education in a way that best suits their needs. If governments want parents to act more like teachers and follow the Australian curriculum, should they not also receive proper funding and a wage? It’s been reported that home educators save the government, and therefore taxpayers, upwards of $22,000 per homeschooled child.” 

“One of the primary motivations for homeschooling is to provide our children with a personalized learning experience that fosters their intellectual curiosity and allows them to learn at their own pace. These new regulations threaten to restrict this flexibility and stifle their natural inclination to explore and discover the world around them.” 

“Enforcing a standardized curriculum fails to recognize the diverse interests and talents of homeschooling students. It overlooks the fact that every child is unique and may thrive in different subject areas or learning environments. By imposing rigid educational requirements, we risk depriving our children of the opportunity to pursue their passions and develop their full potential.” 

“In essence, these proposed changes would not only undermine the fundamental principles of homeschooling but also limit my children’s ability to learn and grow in a way that honours their individuality and creativity.” 

“Ms Di Farmer, the Minister of Education seems out of touch with Homeschooling Education and has not even consulted with the homeschooling parents concerning these amendments. She received over 1300 negative comments within a few days on her Facebook page from upset and angry homeschooling parents that do not want these changes implemented.” 

“These staggering amendments to this legislation are an attack on every homeschooling family and taking away the freedom to choose how to educate our own children in the best possible way. The current Australian Curriculum, with its rigid structure and overloaded content, often fails to resonate with many children and can lead to disengagement from the learning process. It is evident that a one-size-fits-all approach does not effectively cater to the unique learning styles, interests, and abilities of every student.” 

“The Australian curriculum is not in the best interest of every child and parents should have the right to choose the best way to educate our children. These legislative changes would have a detrimental effect on homeschooling parents and children. This is effectively taking away parental rights and the freedom of choosing the best way to educate children.”  

“Rather than imposing stricter regulations, Queensland should celebrate the individuals who are prepared to give their time and energy to their children. The results often speak for themselves, and Australia benefits from this commitment and must honour this freedom of choice.”    

“A collaborative dialogue is always a better approach. The committee could view the commitment level of homeschooling parents which constantly ensures that these children have access to a high-quality education that meets their unique needs.”  

“It appears that the committee would be better off prioritising understanding and addressing the root causes of homeschooling trends. This entails listening to and considering the feedback from homeschooling parents, who are directly impacted by these legislative changes. Their insights and experiences are invaluable in shaping effective policies that support the diverse needs of families while ensuring the well-being and educational success of children.” 

“We need to work towards a more inclusive and responsive educational system that respects the choices and concerns of all families.” 

Homeschooling across Australia 

Data from Queensland’s Department of Education shows a 20% increase during 2023, with 10,048 registered home schoolers up from 8,461. Over the last five years, there has been a 152% growth in primary students and 262% growth in high school students who are home schooled in the state. 

In New South Wales, 12,359 students were registered for homeschooling in January 2023, a 37% jump on the 2022 figures. In Victoria, the most recent figures show there were 11,912 homeschooled students as of December 2022, an increase of 36% since 2021. 

Across the country, there are more than 43,000 legally registered homeschooled students.  

Lion’s Education (a homeschooling site) says, the COVID-19 pandemic has shone a light on the way we educate children. The disruption to our lives forced people to throw convention out of the window and rapidly adapt to how we work, study and interact, shifting the dial on the ‘norm’. Homeschooling during this time is just one way that opened the door to new alternatives to help children learn and grow up to become productive members of society.  

As a result of the pandemic, many Australian parent’s hands were forced to adopt a hybrid education style as children could not attend regular school, causing various disruptions to their learning. 

Why are numbers growing? 

A 2023 Queensland government report shared data from a survey of more 500 parents in the state who homeschooled their children. It found 45% of families surveyed never intended to homeschool. It also found 61% had a child with a disability or health issue, including ADHD, autism, behavioural issues and mental ill health. Many also had concerns about bullying.  

Families also reported their child was not learning at school, and not wanting to go, so homeschooling became the only choice available. This reflects academic research, which finds most families who choose to homeschool have negative school experiences, withdraw because of bullying or are neurodiverse. 

While homeschooling was growing before the pandemic, the school-at-home arrangements during COVID led to a large growth in numbers. For some families, the experience showed them that learning at home was possible and enjoyable and they decided not to go back. 

Homeschooling is a valid choice 

International research suggests homeschooling outcomes are as good as at mainstream schools in terms of academic success. Homeschooling can work because it suits some children better and parents are motivated to help their children learn. 

The home-educated typically score 15 to 25 percentile points above public-school students on standardized academic achievement tests (Ray, 2010, 2015, 2017, 2024). (The public school average is roughly the 50th percentile; scores range from 1 to 99.)  
78% of peer-reviewed studies on academic achievement show homeschool students perform statistically significantly better than those in institutional schools (Ray, 2017). 
Homeschool students score above average on achievement tests regardless of their parents’ level of formal education or their family’s household income. 
Whether homeschool parents were ever certified teachers is not notably related to their children’s academic achievement. 
Degree of state control and regulation of homeschooling is not related to academic achievement. 
Home-educated students typically score above average on tests that colleges consider for admissions. 
Homeschool students are increasingly being actively recruited by colleges. 
Research on homeschooling shows that the home-educated are doing well, typically above average, on measures of social, emotional, and psychological development. Research measures include peer interaction, self-concept, leadership skills, family cohesion, participation in community service, and self-esteem. 
87% of peer-reviewed studies on social, emotional, and psychological development show homeschool students perform statistically significantly better than those in conventional schools (Ray, 2017). 
Homeschool students are regularly engaged in social and educational activities outside their homes and with people other than their nuclear-family members. They are commonly involved in activities such as field trips, scouting, 4-H, political drives, church ministry, sports teams, and community volunteer work. 
The balance of research to date suggests that homeschool students may suffer less harm (e.g., abuse, neglect, fatalities) than conventional school students. 
Adults who were home educated are more politically tolerant than the public schooled in the limited research done so far. 
69% of peer-reviewed studies on success into adulthood (including college) show adults who were home educated succeed and perform statistically significantly better than those who attended institutional schools (Ray, 2017). 
Adults who were homeschooled participate in local community service more frequently than the general population (e.g., Seiver & Pope, 2022).

Source: Research Facts on Homeschooling – National Home Education Research Institute (nheri.org) 

Summary 

If the state government wants more of a say in homeschooling it should consider doing more work with families. Listen to them, consult with them, and include parents in policy making about home education. Parents will see compliance with the legislation they helped create as a way to support their child’s education, not as a “punishment” for not sending them to a mainstream school. 

In Victoria and Tasmania, homeschooling families have been included on boards providing advice to government about regulation. This is what Queensland needs and hopefully what will happen now that the Bill has been squashed. 

No amount of documentation will help parents do a better job of homeschooling their children. The vast majority of homeschooling parents are capable and attentive to their children’s needs. The fact that these families are dissatisfied with the curriculum and the quality of education in the school system for their children’s needs says it all. It’s in the best interests of the state and federal governments to look to their own backyard and work out what they’re doing to ensure the best interests of the children put into their care are being met. 

Governments should also look more closely at why families leave schools. We know families are not homeschooling as an “easy option.” Often they are doing it because it’s a last resort and the school has let them down. Children who are being bullied or refusing school are better off at home.  

If you, as parents are prepared to make the effort to educate their children, the least the state can do is support you. 

April 18, 2024/4 Comments/by Senator Malcolm Roberts

One Nation Opposes Labor’s New Car Tax

National, Speeches

This Labor Government is promising cost of living relief and tax cuts while it’s actually increasing taxes. Already, this government wants to tax farmers off the land to make way for “FrankenFoods” — fake lab meat and bug protein. Recently Labor announced plans to tax clothing in the name of saving the environment. Labor now wants to tax cars based on weight and engine efficiency. Cars needed by tradies will go up by $4000, family people movers by $6000 and 4WD cruisers that are owned by every second farmer, will go up $13,000.

Taxing tradies will further force up the costs of building and maintaining the family home. Meanwhile, plans are underway to build and populate dystopian Smart Cities — Sydney’s first has been announced already. These make no provision for cars, so you can expect the Labor car tax to increase until car ownership is only afforded by the very rich.

I’ve been warning about the predatory billionaires and the World Economic Forum agenda, summed up by their slogan “you’ll own nothing and be happy”. It’s started and it’s being implemented by the Albanese Labor Government.

One Nation opposes all those promoting the Orwellian future that this government is fast tracking with its ‘taxing and spending’ and the legislation Labor is ramming through parliament.

The choice for voters is clear. One Nation or tyranny.

Transcript

This Labor government is maintaining the tradition of Labor governments: taxing and spending, taxing and spending. In the last few weeks, the government has revealed plans to tax clothing in the name of saving the environment and to tax food in the name of funding Australia’s world-leading biosecurity. I would have thought protecting Australia’s biosecurity, which underpins $100 billion in export earnings, was the responsibility of the whole country, considering the wealth it bestows on all Australians. I would consider funding biosecurity to be important to protecting the supply of food we all eat, but, no, this government wants to tax farmers off the land to make way for its billionaire mates’ Frankenstein foods. It doesn’t matter that Australians don’t want to eat bugs or fake meat cultured and then grown in bioreactors. This attack on Australia’s health and nutrition is happening because this government’s owners demand for themselves the wealth currently in the hands of our farming communities. They want to transfer the land and the wealth from our farmers to their billionaire parasitic friends.

When the billionaires that try to run the world say, ‘You’ll own nothing and be happy,’ amongst the things the public will no longer own is a car. Chris Bowen MP and his ministry of misery have announced fuel emission standards are being applied to new cars from 2030. ‘Increased fuel emission standards’, ‘tougher fuel emission standards’—it sounds innocuous until you read the fine print, and I thank the opposition for crunching the numbers. Utes will go up between $2,000 and $6,000 each. At a time when the government need as many tradies as they can find to build as many homes as they can, the government think it’s a smart move to add a new tax on tradies, raising the cost of houses and decreasing the supply of houses. What a bloody stupid idea!

More troubling is the increasing cost of passenger cars to Australian families. The Outlander from Mitsubishi—that’s a family SUV—will go up $4,000. LandCruisers, owned by every second family in the bush, will go up $13,000 each. That’s yet another attack on the bush from a government happy to harm the bush in order to win votes back from the teals in the city. This will not be the only price increase in cars. The materials needed for our suicidal net zero measures have much in common with materials used in making cars. The increase in demand from net zero means that these materials are getting scarcer and scarcer and much more expensive. A family car is likely to rise in price by $10,000 within five years in today’s dollars because of this materials inflation. Then add Minister Bowen’s car tax, and you can see where this is all going.

For those who still haven’t worked it out, the New South Wales government has just announced Australia’s first 30-minute city, surrounding the new Badgerys Creek airport. It’s called Bradfield City. It will be ‘cybersmart and digitally led’. That means digital surveillance on everyone. It’s happening in London already, and in other countries, with commercial and community facilities including retail, cultural facilities and work all in the one suburb. So, you don’t have choice of where you work; you work nearby. Plans for Bradfield City include car-free streets. No matter the weather, you will walk everywhere.

On the way to net zero the cost of driving will be artificially increased to raise costs, thanks to this government. That would dramatically increase the cost of living for everyone in this country, increase food prices for everyone in this country and ultimately lead to, in 2030, the very act of driving being an act of civil disobedience. It’s all about wealth transfer to their parasitic billionaire friends and about control.

March 4, 2024/7 Comments/by Senator Malcolm Roberts

PM Partying Instead of Running the Country

National

I called out the Prime Minister’s jet set lifestyle during parliament. Australians can see how out of touch and ineffective Anthony Albanese is as a leader.

The Prime Minister has spent too much time rubbing shoulders with pop stars, sucking up to billionaires and flying around the world in long overseas trips and too little time talking with everyday Australians.

Meanwhile Climate Change Minister Chris Bowen and his Ministry of Misery is making life harder for everyday Australians with every new net zero measure.

This is a PM who clearly cares more about globalists and celebrities than he does for the people of the country he was born into.

If ever the comparison to ‘Nero Fiddling While Rome Burned’ was appropriate for a political leader, it is Anthony Albanese.

Transcript

In a speech earlier this year, I made the point that one can judge a man by the company he keeps. I observed that one of Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese’s first orders of business was a private meeting with globalist billionaire and manipulator extraordinaire Bill Gates. And I spoke to a more recent meeting the Prime Minister had with Larry Fink, chairman of BlackRock, the merchant bank that now owns Australia and tries to control Australia.

In the break, the Prime Minister once again used taxpayers money and a taxpayers plane to hobnob at concerts, exhibition openings and attend a billionaire’s birthday soiree. In so doing, the Prime Minister has demonstrated he will show fealty to anyone he needs to, in order to keep swanning around as though the weight of responsibility of running this beautiful country of ours was somehow not on his shoulders.

It’s not the job of the Prime Minister to party at a time when everyday Australians are struggling to pay their rent, pay their mortgages, find a roof to put over their heads and pay their electricity bills. Especially because of his government’s policies. Can someone on the Government benches remind Prime Minister Anthony Albanese the word party in Labor Party doesn’t mean what he seems to think it means.

All the while, Chris Bowen MP, Minister for Climate Change and Energy, and now known as the Ministry of Misery, has been out there destroying our productive capacity, making people’s lives harder. His latest policy is a tax on commercial vehicles, including utes that tradies need to be a tradie. How can a so-called party of working Australians introduce a ute tax that will make it harder for tradies to own what is an essential tool of their trade?

Have you considered what that tax will do to housing construction? It will cut house production and raise house costs. If ever the analogy of fiddling while Rome burns is appropriate to a modern leader, it’s now: Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese. What a bloody disgrace!

February 27, 2024/7 Comments/by Senator Malcolm Roberts