GOVERNMENT VS. FACEBOOK – News Media Bargaining Code

,

I have little sympathy for big tech, who have been systematically censoring and silencing conservative voices for years.

However, the government has no place getting involved in a fight between the billionaires in legacy media and the billionaires in new media, yet it looks like that is exactly what our parliament is doing.

Transcript

The Treasury Laws Amendment (News Media and Digital Platforms Mandatory Bargaining Code) Bill 2021 is a masterclass in self-interest from both the tired old parties. As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, my view is that this bill should more rightly be called the ‘Getting the News Media On Side Before the Next Election Bill’. It’s apparently co-sponsored by every party in this place that seeks to replace data based policy, fact based policy, with cynical political expediency and public gutlessness. The government has no place getting involved in a fight between the billionaires in legacy media and the billionaires in new media, yet it looks like that is exactly what our parliament is doing.

One Nation spoke with Google and we spoke with them again this morning, and it seems now that this matter has been resolved in private meetings with the government where assurances were exchanged. So Australia is now governed behind closed doors, and the people’s house, the house of review, the Senate, is simply here to rubber-stamp what is put in front of us. One Nation does not own a rubber stamp. Our many reservations about this bill remain, even if Google has found a way to work with them. It’s true that there are no clean hands in this debate.

When Facebook banned conservatives last year, the Left, or the control side of politics, applauded the move as the legitimate actions of a private company. Left or Right are useless terms; really it’s control versus freedom. The Left likes to control. Yet, when Facebook banned Australia’s left-wing news media last week, there was outrage. ‘They’re a public utility; they can’t do this to us,’ shrieked the left-wing commentariat. Perhaps Facebook got the idea of deplatforming from Channel 7 and Channel 9, who deplatformed Senator Hanson last year. Conservatives must now deal with the political Left and with a left-wing media that is so convinced of its own moral superiority that the suppression of dissenting opinions is now celebrated. The Left, the control side, have clearly not considered the norms they have created to destroy their opponents and that those same norms could one day be used against themselves.

Google is right on board with this agenda, demoting conservative websites in Google search results simply because they advocate values that everyday Australians still share and value. YouTube has cancelled thousands of conservative channels and demonetised many more to suppress our voice. Google has decided that conservatives and patriots are the enemy of their brave new world and must be silenced. Google propaganda is clearly on display in image search, where they operate to portray our world not as it is but as they wish it to be and judge that it should be. That is not their job. It’s no surprise, then, that many Australians, especially on the conservative side, have left Facebook and Google. They had it coming.

Let me be clear: One Nation is a trenchant critic of the Orwellian nightmare social media has become. Our left-wing legacy news media, though, are no better. Some sections of the left-wing legacy media print very little material that could be described as journalism and a great deal of material that could be described as propaganda. The ABC spent two years conspiring with a foreign power to prepare a story that misled viewers as to the intent of One Nation’s visit to the United States. We demanded the raw footage from the ABC to prove the story was manipulated, and the ABC refused. Truth and honesty are strangers to left-wing controlled media in this country.

One Nation is concerned about the small businesses this bill will hurt. Two examples are the Glasshouse and Maleny Country News and the Koondrook and Barham Bridge Newspaper—small businesses that are resisting the takeover of country news by the media oligarchs and printing truth without fear or favour. These papers are not protected by this bill, which is only concerned with protecting large media organisations, who will receive extra money to continue their buy-up of country news. The National Party seem to be happy with this, once again turning their backs on their rural constituents to woo the urban bubble, marching to the Liberal wets.

Australian Associated Press—AAP, as most people would know them—are not protected by this bill, since their model is copyright based and this bill only concerns itself with financial outcomes. AAP, though, employ 80 staff, and their newsfeed supports 250 rural news organisations. The increased revenue from Google will remain with the legacy media services and not feed back to AAP. This might have something to do with the Murdoch news media’s new wire service, NCA NewsWire. They are just waiting for AAP to fall over so they can have a monopoly on news wire too. This will lead to a further consolidation of news ownership in Australia and yet more power to News Corp. Labor are supporting a process that will lead to more power for Rupert Murdoch. Kevin Rudd will be upset, won’t he! When The Betoota Advocate sounds more like a real news site than an actual real news site does, Australian media must accept they are the agents of their own demise.

Television is also on the nose. The highest rating program on television since the Sydney Olympics was the Australian Open final way back in 2005, attracting 4.3 million viewers. The MasterChef final in 2010 rated 4.1 million. In 2020, the MasterChef final rated just 1.6 million—60 per cent less. Tent-pole programming is attracting half the audience it used to despite Australia’s growing population. When Malcolm Turnbull destroyed community TV 10 years ago, it was to force their million-strong audience back to commercial TV. That strategy has been a complete failure and must be unwound.

Print newspaper circulations are also falling. Listen to these figures, Madam Acting Deputy President. Over the last 10 years, the Herald Sun has gone from 550,000 to 303,000, a 45 per cent fall. One Nation’s great friends at Brisbane’s Courier Mail, who bash us, are down from 211,000 to 135,000, a 36 per cent fall. And, wait for it, The Sydney Morning Herald is down from 210,000 to just 78,000. That’s a 63 per cent collapse.

With a lower audience, our conglomerate media companies are in search of more revenue and now want to take Google’s. Is this the business of the Senate? This bill demonstrates a complete failure to understand how the internet works.

Let me give you an example. A startup media company trying to establish a user base would submit their news stories to Google. In return, that company, that startup, would pay Google so much per click for every person who clicked through to the startup news site. News stories cost between 20 and 50 cents a click in the Google advertising network. Over the last 20 years, Google has sent seven billion visitors to Australian news sites who, in turn, have used this traffic to monetise by showing advertising and encouraging subscriptions. If the Australian news media were paying for their traffic from Google, this bill would run into billions. This relationship, though, benefits both parties equally. So the basic assumption of the bill that there is a power imbalance is simply wrong. It is false.

Legacy media could have opted out, at any time, simply by adding a metatag to their header advising Google and other search engine crawlers to not index a page, section or entire site. News sites are not using that metatag, even though they could, because they want Google to index their stories in order to send them more traffic. Rather than paying Google for that traffic, legacy media now wants Google to pay them. We’re only having this fight now because internet search has reached the top of the exponential growth curve. The market has reached maturity, as have digital advertising and online subscriptions. The $18 billion advertising industry is now equally split between digital and real world, with little opportunity for significant growth in a post-COVID economy.

To read this bill, one would think that real-world advertising and digital advertising were interchangeable. That’s nonsense. They’re not. Online advertising is suited to short messages. Legacy media is still king of longer format advertising. For over 200 minutes of advertising consumed online, 300 minutes is consumed in the real world. Both have their role in the economy.

As with any maturing market, Australian media has narrowed ownership so much it has effectively become a cartel. This bill represents nothing more than the billionaires in the media cartel thinking they have more power than the billionaires in the social media cartel, and, with an election looming, the government has decided to pick a side—because Mr Murdoch picks sides and decides who wins. That is the history of elections, in federal parliament, in Australia. The Liberals and Nationals want that, and Labor can’t afford to let them have it. That is a terrible basis upon which to formulate public policy and legislation. The Treasury Laws Amendment (News Media and Digital Platforms Mandatory Bargaining Code) Bill 2021 is a solution in search of a problem and should never have come before the Senate.

/1 Comment/by

Will the government make a commitment to actual IR reform?

,

Instead of propping up the industrial relations club with excessive, needlessly complex legislation, we need to simplify it. Regulations are written at the moment for the few people, employers and employees, who do the wrong thing.

They should be written for the majority of good people, the fine Australians, with severe penalties for the bad.

We need to turn it upside down: instead of penalising the 100 per cent with the ridiculous workplace arrangements, we need to penalise the real shonks, the real criminals.

Transcript

As an Australian who has been elected to serve the people of Queensland and Australia, I’m very proud to say that I have worked in many countries and I am genuinely proud of Australian workers. We have a phenomenal human resource in this country, unequalled anywhere in the world—the initiative, the hard work, the honesty and the integrity of workers in this country, and of many businesses in this country, especially small businesses, which are the engine room of our economy. More people are employed in small business than in any other sector of the economy. We need to get back the dynamism that has been lost in Australia—lost largely because of the decisions that come out of this building.

The MPI is ‘The Morrison government’s failure to address job security is giving companies that exploit workers an unfair advantage against honest employers.’Let me talk about the example in the Hunter Valley of the exploitation, the abuse and the casual discarding of people who are tossed on the scrap heap when they’re burnt out. Casuals have been exploited in the Hunter Valley by BHP, a major mining company, and Chandler Macleod Group, one of the world’s largest labour hire firms, an offshoot of Recruit Holdings from Japan, with the complicity of the Hunter Valley division of the CFMEU. It would not have happened without all three being complicit and working together.

But let’s go back to the root cause. The root of casualisation started in small business because employers were so confused by the complexity of hiring people and so confused by the complexity when there was a problem to discuss, so they went to employing casuals because it became too hard to deal with disciplinary issues in small business.

Quite often we see a small business having problems with an employee who’s stolen something from their business, and the small business owner then simply trying to address that ends up just paying $8,000 or $10,000. We heard last week from COSBOA, the Council of Small Business Organisations Australia, about some companies, some small businesses, paying $20,000 in shut-up money for problems to go away. One of the root causes of the insecurity in this country is the highly complex, needlessly complex and destructive industrial relations situation.

Then what we saw was large companies taking the small business model and using casuals for a ‘try before we buy’. In other words, they would watch the casual worker on their mine site, in their business, and if he or she came up with the goods then they would hire them. That has led to extreme abuse of workers in this country. It’s led to safety hazards, which I have complained about in my submission to the Grosvenor inquiry. But in the Hunter Valley it led to miners being intimidated and being threatened with the loss of their jobs if they reported safety incidents. How stupid is a company when that happens? They’re losing that prime source of information about their company.

I want to give Mr Bukarica, the national legal adviser for the CFMEU mining division, a huge compliment. In Townsville he had the guts, the integrity and the courage to acknowledge that the Hunter Valley CFMEU is part of the problem at those mines in the Hunter Valley because they enabled casualisation to happen. I also want to give him praise because he said that the CFMEU has not done enough for casuals. Indeed, they have caused the casual issue in the Hunter Valley and the casual abuse of casuals. And he’s admitted that his union will need to do more about it.

So what we see is the mess that’s been created in the past by labour laws that have become far too complex and by the Liberals not addressing this issue in 2016 when they should have. Casuals show us the pain of people at work. Casuals are also a sign of the failed industrial relations situation—no getting away from it. What the government is doing in its latest industrial relations legislation, proposed to come before the Senate next month, is shifting the liability for that mess from large business to small business. They’re helping a couple of large companies manage their risk.

We’ve approached this differently. We’ve gone out to listen. We’ve written to 80 different organisations—employers, employee groups, unions, union bosses, welfare associations, organisations, small business groups—and we’ve asked them for their advice, their views. They have come and given us their advice. They said no-one else has invited them to do that; we’re the only ones. In addressing this legislation, we have three aims that ensure security for Australian workers, whether they be in small businesses or large businesses, and security for small businesses and large businesses.

Our three aims are to protect honest workers, to protect small businesses and to restore Australia’s productive capacity. We see the employer-employee relationship as fundamental. It is the primary workplace relationship, and that’s what’s needed to empower workers. We’ve got the best workers in the world. What’s needed is for employers and employees to work together—empowered employees and empowered employers—because that is the only way to create jobs. Government doesn’t create jobs. As much as the Labor Party and the Liberal Party talk about it, government does not create jobs. Honest workers create jobs. Small businesses create jobs. Large employers create jobs. The government creates the environment. Labor and Liberal governments have stuffed this country’s workplace environment.

The Morrison government talks about security and recovery from COVID. How can that be possible when we’ve destroyed our electricity sector? How can it be possible when we’ve got one of the worse tax systems in the world? How can it be possible when we’re not supplying the right infrastructure? How can it be possible when we haven’t got the skills development needed? How can it be possible when we’ve got overregulation? Just go and talk to people, not only small or large business employers but also employees, who are sick to death of energy prices, which have gone from the cheapest in the world to the highest in the world under this government and its predecessor, the Labor Party.

Instead of propping up the industrial relations club with excessive, needlessly complex legislation, we need to simplify it. In fact, I put that to Peter Strong when he was in my office last week. I said to him that regulations are written at the moment for the few people, employers and employees, who do the wrong thing. They should be written for the majority of good people, the fine Australians, with severe penalties for the bad. We need to turn it upside down: instead of penalising the 100 per cent with the ridiculous workplace arrangements, we need to penalise the real shonks, the real criminals. Instead of assuming people are bad—employees are bad, employers are bad—we need to free people to produce. We need to penalise and handicap those who deserve it. That’s what we need in this country: empowering, not frightening.

What we see at the moment is an IR club of big employers, big industry associations, large unions, employee consultants, employer consultants, industrial relations consultants and, above all, lawyers. Again I come back to the ETU legal adviser in Townsville, Michael Wright, and Mr Bukarica from the CFMMEU, who both said that we have far too many lawyers involved in industrial relations and that’s why it’s a mess. They both said they want fewer lawyers, that they want to remove the lawyers. Full credit to the CFMMEU mining division and full credit to the ETU for saying that. The big companies and the crooks are the ones who do the best out of the industrial relations club, because they have deep pockets and they can afford to fund the lawyers and others who live off the backs of Australian workers.

What we need to get back to is a simple workplace relationship. Will Labor make a commitment to properly and honestly reform IR? Will you? Will the Liberal Party and the National Party make a commitment to properly and honestly reform IR, to free people so that they’re free to compete with the people in Korea, China, India, Africa, Malaysia and Singapore? That’s the way to get security of employment: by empowering people. One Nation is the party of energy security and affordability. One Nation is the party of job security.

/by

Franchising Laws Amendment (Fairness in Franchising) Bill 2020

,

Small franchisees are often taken advantage of by large corporate franchisers. They are in a much less powerful position and their fights look like David vs. Goliath. I congratulate Senator O’Neill for her leadership on this bill and actually wanting to protect small business owners, unlike many of her “woke” colleagues in the Labor party.

Transcript

As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, I note that Senator O’Neill has taken on a real David and Goliath battle, and she’s taken it on well. I point to one corner, in which we have General Motors, one of the world’s largest corporations, which ruthlessly abandoned its franchisees in this country. It did it without any consideration, and the government stood by and watched. Families had put their businesses together over decades.

There had been blood, sweat and tears, and lots of hard work. Small to medium businesses had ploughed so much work into their businesses as well. And what did we see? General Motors just divested themselves of them. They were tossed aside on the scrap heap, and the government delayed. It promised to address this issue, but still it failed to do so.

No wonder people are feeling concerned, afraid, vulnerable and very worried at the hands of large multinational companies with huge imbalances of power. General Motors is treating their franchisees, the Holden dealers right across this country—small businesses, often with decades of history—like dirt.

Now we have Mercedes lining up to do the same, as are Honda and Renault. Honda, a company that has worked with its dealers so admirably around the world, is now looking to quit its dealer network as well. These companies are stealing databases that have been built up over decades.

I turn to the Queensland rural dealerships. Look at our state. It’s the most decentralised of any. It’s the only state with more people in the rural areas than in the capital city. Those dealer networks need support. But it’s not just car dealers; it’s also boat dealers, marine dealers, water sport dealers and motorbike dealers.

And it’s not just wheeled dealers; it’s people with small business franchises right across this country. What they need is support. They need fairness and they need support for locals. They need some security and some certainty. There are 60,000 workers in the auto sector alone, according to Senator O’Neill, and that includes many, many tradesmen and many apprentices. There are good people and local community businesses.

I want to commend Senator O’Neill, because Senator O’Neill came to us to explain her bill. She asked for our support. She did her research. She was willing to be on call at any time to answer questions and to put her staff on call. I acknowledge that—through you, Deputy President—to Senator O’Neill. I appreciate it and I endorse her work. She works. If other Labor senators had the same enthusiasm in general as Senator O’Neill then we’d be able to work much, much better with them. We commend Senator O’Neill for the way in which she came to us freely to offer her bill.

Senator O’Neill, sadly, is one of the very few real Labor senators in this parliament. I know that at least 20 per cent of Labor senators are upset with the way Labor has turned against workers, abandoned workers, in favour of woke policies supporting the globalists’ agenda. Look at things like taxation policy. Look at things like energy policy destroying manufacturing. The Liberals and Nationals are similar; they’re just a matter of grades apart.

The Labor Party’s policies and the Liberal-National coalition’s policies are abandoning manufacturing. They’re swallowing the UN dictates: the UN Kyoto protocol, the UN Paris Agreement—which is not really an agreement—and, going back to 1975, the UN’s Lima Declaration. They all sell out manufacturing. They sell out, to some extent, all industry, including agriculture. What about the so-called free trade agreements? We want, instead, fair trade agreements.

Labor’s support for free trade agreements means that they’re selling out workers and Australian employers, small and large. There are the tax policies, as I said, that let foreign multinationals off the hook. The Labor Party in the era of Prime Minister Bob Hawke let them off the hook with the petroleum resource rent tax. A few Labor senators stand up for workers, but, sadly, they’re in a very small minority.

Look at pay rates, which are stagnant because of the rising immigration we had until COVID. Rising costs and stagnant pay mean living standards are falling. Look at the oversupply of workers. We have an oversupply of workers, which is driving wage rates down. Look at the pressure on housing, driving housing prices up.

Look at the pressure on infrastructure in this country because the labour is tied to this large-country policy of letting in many, many immigrants, far more than we need. Look at the gender bending, the indoctrination in schools and the trendy virtue signalling that is taking over the Labor Party. We have good senators, like Senators Sterle, Farrell, Gallacher, Sheldon and others, who are great to work with. They support workers. They’re honest people. They are saddened that their Labor Party has abandoned them; that the Labor Party has swamped them in woke policies.

While Senator O’Neill supports real Australian businesses, her party has largely abandoned workers. Look at the energy sector. Coal has been tossed on the scrapheap by Labor’s virtue signallers. Look at industrial relations, where Mr Joel Fitzgibbon has abandoned and neglected the abused and exploited workers in the Hunter Valley—workers that I had to come in from Queensland to support, with Stuart Bonds, our candidate in the Hunter.

They are selling out our sovereignty to the UN globalists. These are the things that Labor now stand for.

As Senator O’Neill has shown leadership in working with all the parties on the crossbench and the Greens—Senator Whish-Wilson has complimented her, and rightly so—we would expect that Labor would have a reasonable accommodation in play. We would reasonably expect that the Labor Party would have a more favourable attitude to Senator Hanson’s bill to get foreign companies to pay tax on petroleum resources. Yet Labor denied support to our bill. When we asked them why, there was just a blank stare, no reason or justification.

I will finish talking about this bill by emphasising the two major benefits. It brings compulsory arbitration to rectify the imbalance between those who have enormous power, like General Motors, and the franchisees who have limited power. And there is the massive increase in penalties, all justified to restore some balance in power. However, the Australian Financial Review rightly said today that this is just plugging a hole in the dike.

Labor has lost its way in policy. Labor has lost its way in our Senate. One Nation reiterates again that we would support all parties, yet we expect parties to work with us and to give us a fair go. I support this bill. I thank Senator O’Neill, again, for her leadership in reaching out to me and my office.

We will work happily with Senator O’Neill. I remind the Labor Party that if they ever get back into power they will need to work with us. We will be happy to work with people like Senator O’Neill, Senator Farrell, Senator Sterle, Senator Gallacher and Senator Sheldon—these people, sadly, are in a minority. We will happily work with Senator O’Neill and her like.

/by

Government dodges corruption investigation

, ,

The federal government showed its lack of commitment to addressing the misuse of federal funds today in voting down Senator Roberts’ motion to call for an inquiry into Queensland’s misuse of Commonwealth money.

Senator Roberts’ motion called for an inquiry into the gross misuse of Commonwealth disaster funds at a council level.

Senator Roberts said, “A Senate inquiry is essential to ensure an independent investigation, void of political interference, into these widely recognised corrupt practices.

“If we ever needed to validate the need for this inquiry, then the last week has done that given the number of council representatives who have lobbied in opposition to the inquiry going ahead.

“Their scrambling to shut this down confirms there is much to hide.”

Queensland councils received $5.339 billion in funding through the National Disaster Relief and Recovery Arrangements (NDRRA) from 2011-2019, of which 75% is Commonwealth funding.

Evidence shows that around 50% of the funded disaster money is siphoned into areas that currently avoid detection and is not used for the community’s benefit.

Senator Roberts stated, “Queensland communities need disaster funds to support infrastructure recovery.

“What they don’t need is their money going into the pockets of a few through massive profit taking, because of illegal and cost saving activities such as unlawful dredging of creeks for substandard road materials.”

The Federal government claims corruption is on their radar with their Commonwealth Integrity Commission, so it is disappointing to see them shy from an independent scrutiny of these funds.

Senator Roberts added, “Their actions today question the genuineness of their intentions to address federal corruption with their proposed Commonwealth Integrity Commission.” “The deliberate mis-use of public monies is never acceptable and be assured that this motion will be back on the agenda until these practices are independently investigated.”

/by

The detailed breakdown of the Industrial Relations Bill

https://youtu.be/lU4SFG_Uyl4

I was unable to give this speech in the Senate last night but it’s important you get these details. While the government has backed down on changing the BOOT test after One Nation pressure, there is still much to fix in the casual employment mess. There is a lot of chest beating about this bill but no real detail, only One Nation will give you this amount of detail and transparency about our analysis.

Transcript

In serving the people of Queensland & Australia I want to discuss our shared need for: 

  • Improving industrial relations to protect honest workers and employers, especially casual workers.
  • Our concerns for business, particularly small business.
  • The bigger picture and a vision for a secure future for Australia. Today the government took the first step in recognising One Nation’s legitimate concerns for employers and employees – it booted out the BOOT! 

We listened: We are listening to workers – casual and permanent – across Queensland and Australia. Listening to all stakeholders in employment including welfare organisations. Listening to UB’s and union bodies. Listening to small and medium sized businesses. Listening to employer and industry groups. Listening to the government.Listening reveals that across our country, people are hurting, feeling vulnerable. Afraid for their jobs, worried they won’t be able to pay the mortgage, afraid of the future. Everyday Australians are hurting from government COVID restrictions and lock-downs keeping people away from jobs, businesses and loved ones. 

The Problems with this Bill: There are many problems with this Bill that need to be resolved to make it safer for both employees and employers. There are many ‘hairs’ on this Bill that need to be trimmed to make it fit-for-purpose. Our concern is for the unintended consequences of this government’s so-called reforms that are really just tinkerings. We’re investing the time and effort to work with all parties to improve outcomes for employees and employers. 

The first problem is with the definition of “casual”, The proposed casual definition at Section 15A is lengthy and complex, it suggests that the employer’s intention expressed at the time of commencement of employment is the only important factor, determining employment status. It’s not.  Hunter Valley casual coal miners we’ve championed were clearly permanent and not casual as the dishonest labour hire company, Chandler MacLeod designated. 

This must be clarified in the Bill or Explanatory Memorandum. The definition also refers to “no firm advance commitment” yet many casuals have a firm advance commitment. Because it suits both them and the business as in single parents working during school hours and in takeaway shop. The definition of casuals in S.15(A)(2) is a loose compromise because the term ”as required” is confusing and must be removed. Last week, Mr Bukarica, Legal Director for the CFMEU Mining Division and his team agreed that their union had ignored casuals for many years. The same can be said of this government. The CFMEU in the Hunter Valley and the government have contributed to the exploitation and confusion in the permanent casual rort. 

The second concern we have is with the proposed ‘right to conversion’ Many casuals have a regular pattern of hours, yet Sections 66A and B suggests that this means casuals are actually permanent. This section as it stands throws many burdens on small business and puts the casual loading at risk for workers who enjoy the benefit of a casual loading. 

The proscriptive nature of required record keeping and timeframes for offers of conversion, as in the proposed Section 66B, represent a burden for small business who cannot afford the time off the tools.The answer is to take this unnecessary burden away from small business and likewise to review the silly ‘windows of opportunity’ workers have to apply for conversion.

Even more record keeping. Yet sadly this change will do nothing to change how companies like BHP exploit and abuse casuals through labour hire arrangements. BHP and big business can randomise rosters and extend casual arrangements to suit themselves. Some already are and that disrupts workers needlessly. 

The third concern is the new Section 545A for offsetting claims This introduces a statutory rule for offsetting claims for unpaid entitlements from permanent casuals.  Calling this double dipping in many instances is a lie. Let’s be clear I do not support double dipping on entitlements. Yet employees have a right to entitlements under circumstances where they have been treated differently to a true casual. 

We will fight for retaining and protecting these workers’ entitlements just as we have done for 18 months in the Hunter Valley. The Full Court in the Rossato case clearly stated that the casual loading paid to a casual worker did not offset their entitlement to paid leave as guaranteed to all permanent workers under the Fair Work Act.

The government seems to think it has to change this because the decision could impact big business profits. Section 545A (1) (b) takes this even further and states that it protects employers where they pay a flat hourly rate even when it’s not clear whether a loading is being paid. What’s going on here? How is this fair or making things simple? 

In the Hunter Valley, casual mine workers were put on permanent rosters and in permanent roles beside the permanent workforce. It could not be more clear, yet the IR laws created ambiguity and injured workers are still waiting for their just entitlements nearly six years later. As it stands, this provision could deny workers their lawful entitlements where they were not given a casual loading or when the EA resulted from a flawed process. 

I commend the CFMEU Mining Division’s Legal Director Mr Bukarica for the courage and integrity he showed when in answer to my questions he acknowledged the Hunter Valley CFMEU’s role in colluding with employers to deprive casuals of basic employment entitlements and rights. 

We will work with the government to create a workable solution to ensure workers are treated fairly. This is crucial and not negotiable. Small Business: Small business needs clarity and simplicity. It deserves a fair go and cannot afford the days or weeks away from work to defend a case when the big end of town can dig into deep pockets to pay lawyers and consultants. 

While the overwhelming majority of claims against small business settle before arbitration, small business owners have suggested this is because they have learned to pay ‘go away’ money. Thousands of dollars. We have received representations suggesting that the increases in fines (Schedule 5, Parts 1, 4, and 5) and new criminal penalties (Schedule 5, Part 7) be suspended for 2 years for small businesses to soften the blow for an already damaged part of Australia’s economy. 

We believe this is worthy of support. Small business deserves and needs a tailor-made solution for them. Small business spans multiple awards and cannot afford enterprise agreements. They cannot submit to the inflexible rules that the IR Club creates for its benefit and for lawyers’ financial benefit. 

The IR Omnibus Bill so far: The Prime Minister describes the IR system as, quote: “not fit-for-purpose, especially given the scale of the jobs challenge that we now face as a nation.” Who can forget the Dyson Heydon’s (Royal Commission) diabolical findings on union bosses? The whole nation saw the need for changes to protect workers from lawbreaking union bosses. 

One Nation supported govt legislation to implement the Royal Commission’s findings. We supported the ABCC, ROC and the first Ensuring Integrity bill. Yet we could not support the govt’s ill-considered second Ensuring Integrity bill. Nor can we support this Bill as it stands.

I’ve spoken often about Hunter Valley coal miners being exploited, abused and discarded as a result of the collusion between BHP, Chandler Macleod, the labour-hire firm and the Hunter Valley CFMMEU. And while the government knew about the “casuals” problem for years it did nothing until Rosatto threatened big business profits.

One Nation is standing up to protect workers’ and employers’ rights. One Nation knows that only employers, entrepreneurs, small businesses and workers create jobs. Government COVID restrictions have done enormous damage. Yet the govt-induced recession is not an excuse to cut pay or job security.

Instead, for our country’s sake, let’s make a genuine attempt at IR Reform together. 

We’re ready to work with the government and stakeholders to improve outcomes for employers and for employees. For businesses, especially small businesses and for honest workers.

/by

What we need to fix Industrial Relations

The biggest problem with the current Industrial Relations system is that it is too complex for most employees or Mum and Dad businesses to understand.

Complexity only helps fill IR lawyers’ pockets and make union bosses look busy. We need to simplify the entire IR system to restore the country’s productive capacity.

Transcript

Good news, Pauline and I have had a victory already in the industrial relations negotiations. Good industrial relations legislation is fundamental to rebuilding the productive capacity of Australian business. And for that we need to restore productive workplace relations between employees and employers.

That’s fundamental. The government claims its legislation, which will be before the Senate in March, will bring reform to create jobs and stimulate economic recovery after government-imposed COVID restrictions. I’m consulting with union bosses, industry groups, small business and many other groups on the government’s proposed bill.

My initial summary is that there is a long way to go yet, to get our support on the legislation. The stakeholders that I’ve listened to so far do not believe the legislation, as is, will deliver on reform, job creation, or economic recovery. For any chance to stimulate recovery and protect jobs, we need real improvement.

First and foremost, I’m passionate about positive employer-employee relationships and a fit-for-purpose IR system. From my experience my aims for real industrial relations reform include:

  • Firstly, protecting honest workers.
  • Secondly, protecting small business.
  • Thirdly, restoring our country’s productive capacity.

In summary, my view of the proposed legislation is that I do not support:

  • Firstly, complex legislation that is beyond the average small to medium business to understand and manage.
  • Secondly, more money being diverted to the IR club, the lawyers, the IR consultants, the union bosses, and industry associations, who profit from complicated legislation.
  • Thirdly, any change to the better off overall test, or the BOOT test, it needs to be left as it is to protect workers.

When we told the government we could not accept changes to the BOOT test, they backed down and agreed to leave it as it is. One Nation does support: Scaled back simple fit-for-purpose IR legislation. A better deal for small business.

IR legislation needs to be made more accessible for this vital sector of our economy, the biggest employer in Australia. Thirdly, a clearer definition of casual and the right to remain as a casual with appropriate casual loadings. And fourthly, protection of casuals’ back pay entitlements without double-dipping.

As I’ve already said, one of the most important elements of IR should be the employer and employee relationship, without the interference of the IR club. I’ve made a submission to the inquiry on the industrial relation legislation, and I’ve contributed to questions at the hearing in Townsville.

And it was pleasing to hear that even the union bosses are fed up with the excessive complexities in industrial relations and the need for lawyers. They wanna get rid of lawyers. There must be a better way and it’s time for a change. We know that small to medium sized businesses have suffered the most under government-imposed COVID restrictions.

And One Nation is committed to a better deal for small business and honest workers. While IR is a key piece of the bigger picture Australia needs for lasting economic recovery, of more importance are energy security and energy affordability, investment in skills development and a fair, honest and transparent tax system for individuals and businesses, and eliminating overregulation.

One Nation continues to listen to stakeholders to ensure we can bring about the improvements that are needed to make the legislation more useful for Australia’s economic recovery. Better for business, better for jobs, and better for honest workers.

/by

Bill “trashes” casual regime for small business: One Nation

This article is re-published with the permission of Workplace Express.

Pauline Hanson’s One Nation says the Morrison Government’s Omnibus IR Bill is “sadly lacking” on a range of key measures, including proposed changes to casual employment and the Better Off Overall Test. 

The party’s IR spokesperson, Senator Malcolm Roberts, has called for substantial amendments to the Bill, arguing it will “hurt many businesses and affect the working conditions and take-home pay of many everyday Australians”. 

The senator says in a submission to a Senate inquiry into the Fair Work Act Amendment (Supporting Australia’s Jobs and Economic Recovery) that the changes are aimed mostly at big business and the “IR Club” rather than small to medium employers. 

“We do not see genuine reform,” he says. 

“This is more words in legislation, more rules and more vagueness in complex definitions. 

“The outcome of this Omnibus IR Bill is that it will not create certainty for people who just want to get back to work. 

“It will add to the complexity of business life. 

“Australia’s industrial relations system no longer serves employers and employees; it serves the people who benefit from its complexity. 

“The IR Club, the class action lawyers, union bosses and the big employer organisations all earn money which could be better spent by employers and employees on securing jobs and income.” 

With Labor and the Greens opposed to the Bill, its fate looks set to turn on the votes of five crossbench senators – Jacqui Lambie Network’s Jacqui Lambie, PHON’s Pauline Hanson and Malcolm Roberts, Centre Alliance’s Stirling Griff and South Australian Independent Rex Patrick. 

Senator Roberts, a former coal mine manager and engineer, has long complained that big employers have abused casual work arrangements in the coal industry through the use of long-term labour hire arrangements (see Related Article). 

The Bill’s proposed definition of casual employment determines an employee’s status based only on the original offer made to the employee, without taking into account “any subsequent conduct of the parties”. 

Senator Roberts argues in the submission that IR Minister Christian Porter is “trashing the ‘long term flexible but predictable’ casual employment arrangements that suited many small business employers and employees”. 

He is doing so, he says, because of abuse by “big business”, citing as an example labour hire arrangements in the coal mining industry. 

Senator Roberts says the legislation will mean that a person is a casual employee if the employer makes an offer of employment on the basis of no firm advance commitment to continuing and indefinite work according to an agreed pattern of work. 

“It is arguable that a consequence of these provisions as they are envisaged is that, if an employer does not make an offer in the exact terms (be it in writing or orally), the employee will, at law, be considered a permanent employee as they will not fall within the definition of casual employee. 

“Many employers, especially small business employers, are unlikely to offer casual employment to a person in such clearly defined terms. 

“This is particularly the case when an offer of employment is made orally which is more common than formalised employment arrangements.” 

The senator says that an employer might consider they have offered casual employment but, if they have failed to meet the prescriptive terms, that employment will be permanent by default. 

“This is likely to lead to significant confusion among employers and employees about their employment relationship and the entitlements that derive from the characterisation of the relationship,” says Roberts. 

“Conversely, an employee who falls within the definition of casual employee at the commencement of employment but whose nature of employment subsequently changes, is nonetheless deemed to continue to be a casual employee. 

“While casual work is not for everyone, rewriting it as the Government has done may have many unintended consequences for everyday Australians, such as pay cuts and rosters that change from week to week to protect the employer from creating a ‘firm advanced commitment’.” 

BOOT change also problematic

Senator Roberts also argues against the Bill seeking to allow a two-year window for the FWC to approve enterprise agreements that do not meet the BOOT where the employer has been affected by the pandemic. 

He says the Fair Work Act already allows the Commission to approve an agreement that does not pass the BOOT if it is satisfied that, because of exceptional circumstances, the approval of the agreement would not be contrary to the public interest. 

The proposed change is an “unnecessary amendment and, furthermore, significantly dilutes the fundamental protection of the BOOT.” 

“I propose that the government keeps the BOOT as it is and ensures that the FW Commission has better governance to review and to improve agreements – due diligence not a rubber stamp.” 

Senator Roberts also calls for the Morrison Government to:

  • create a dedicated small business award or enterprise agreement;
  • simplify the small business code and reduce the maximum compensation payable by small businesses in dismissal cases from 6 months to 3 months;
  • review and rewrite the entire Fair Work Act and IR structure, after the two-year deadline for the flexible arrangements expires in about 2023;
  • focus the efforts of FWO inspectors primarily on solutions rather than penalties; and
  • introducing longer-term greenfields agreements for “tier 2” Australian construction companies.

Pauline Hanson’s One Nation submission to the Senate inquiry into the Fair Work Amendment (Supporting Australia’s Jobs and Economic Recovery) Bill 2020, February 2020

/by

Coal LSL and mining entitlements fraud – Adjournment Speech 2 February 2020

,

I spoke on my ongoing investigation into the case of mine worker Simon Turner. A huge abuse has happened here and government agencies have done nothing.

Transcript

As a servant of the people of Queensland and Australia, I have a duty to raise and fix issues that are both hurting and concerning everyday Australians.  As a Senator I work for the people.

Today, I raise a matter of great concern for everyday Australians – particularly our hardworking coal miners.

Australian workers are feeling afraid for their jobs, for their livelihoods, for their future. Workers need fairness, integrity, trust and accountability.  I’m concerned for the many workers and businesses small and large that have suffered from state and federal govt COVID restrictions.  Business leaders and workers are all looking for direction from this government, yet at the same time a government authority is doing the wrong thing and abusing workers.

What I’ve witnessed since coal miner, Stuart Bonds and I took up the cause of the exploited, abused and discarded Hunter Valley casual coal miners, is a mass of evidence pointing to potential systemic failures and possibly corruption inside a government agency. An agency that Hunter Valley CFMEU bosses and Minerals Council of NSW executives jointly govern and direct.  We Australians cannot afford our own government to continue shonky behaviour at a time when we should be spending our money wisely.

Thanks to Stuart Bonds’ voluntary help for abandoned workers like Simon Turner and others the Coal LSL scam was uncovered.  Simon Turner and many workers wrote for help from their local MPs including Joel Fitzgibbon six times and to this day Joel Fitzgibbons has ignored their letters. Six times.

Joel Fitzgibbon has been the member for Hunter since 1996 so it’s surprising that he does not know that coal miners are the key to this area’s future.

The agency involved is the Coal Mining Industry (Long Service Leave Funding) Corporation – better known as ‘Coal LSL’. An Australian Government corporation established to regulate and manage long service leave entitlements on behalf of eligible employees in the black coal mining industry.

What I hear is that governance isn’t just lacking, it’s absent.  I’m yet to hear why causals get a different LSL rate to permanents on the same rosters, same work.

As an example, Coal LSL’s system seems incapable of checking whether an employee actually receives their correct long service leave entitlement. Coal LSL just accepts an employer letter and pays the employer. No validation or checking of payments to entitlements to actual payment to employees.

A recent analysis of information that Coal LSL themselves provided reveals evidence of duplication, even triplication, of transactions paid to employers. The reporting recently provided to me is unclear[1]. Levy reimbursements during 2018 include a category for details “Not readily available”. For example, the $264,000 of refunds, not reimbursements, paid out from July 2017 to November 2018. What are these refunds, where’s the transparency?   Coal LSL makes lump sum payments that, again, make reconciliation complex. For example, one of BHP’s OS entities in the Hunter Valley received $187,881.77 in a single transaction in May 2020. For who?

It seems that Coal LSL may not be able to confirm employees are even real people as they do not collect ABN or tax file numbers. They simply get a name and a date of birth. They’re operating in the dark ages and need a modern system to prevent fraud?

In some cases we have heard of companies in Singleton being reimbursed for long service leave even though they do not work in coal mining. In one case, Coal LSL paid reimbursements totalling approx. $57,000 to the wife of the owner of a Queensland company with no state office. Why?

We have learned of an employee not receiving on-boarding information about the Coal LSL scheme, particularly in regard to the employee option to opt out of the scheme and save money. In one case recently a coal miner reported that Coal LSL debited his entitlement for 250 hours of long service, when he actually had not taken leave from his employer. Where’s the governance?

Concerns have been expressed to me that Coal LSL’s current processes might enable a bogus company to register and then to possibly launder money through Coal LSL and then reclaim the funds ‘cleaned’ and available to be transferred to criminals. Where are the checks in the system?  The CEO whose annual remuneration is a staggering $430,187 and her Governance Officer have clearly been asleep at the wheel.

I have personally challenged Coal LSL many times in Senate Estimates and even they do not understand how entitlements are accrued, invested, reconciled and paid to individual coal miners. The CEO could not provide a satisfactory response to a simple question in regard to how Coal LSL accounts for monies paid in and monies paid to employees.

The question is that if bogus companies have been paid in the last seven years, then how could this not be picked up? I’m informed that Coal LSL takes registered companies at their word. That has already led to Coal LSL admitting serious errors in miners’ accounts and entitlements.

As Coal LSL has revealed in senate estimates, it has not listened to the complaints of many coal miners who’ve found discrepancies in their entitlements. Once raised, Coal LSL is slow or unresponsive.

I encourage all coal miners to check that Coal LSL has correctly stated their entitlements so they’re not ripped off. Simon Turner, an exploited Hunter Valley coal miner is a case in point where, after years of requests and complaints, Coal LSL took the word of his rogue employer, Chandler Macleod. Over solid evidence and over Simon’s legitimate requests for a fair go.

Coal LSL is lax at informing employees of their options with many casual miners not told that they’re entitled to choose to not contribute to the scheme and to instead take their employers’ contributions as cash in hand. Let’s face it, at the moment Coal LSL receives the employer contributions for many casual coal miners who it never has to pay out if employees do not stay for the eight year qualifying period. Where does this mountain of cash go and how is it accounted for? What I do know is that many casuals would be better avoiding Coal LSL.

There are many, many examples of Coal LSL failing in its obligations and failing to have appropriate checks and balances to verify that employees are getting their entitlements.

For all we know there may be systemic corruption on this governments’ watch. Have unaccountable union bosses and Minerals Council of NSW executives on this Morrison government authority lined their pockets using bogus companies at the expense of coal miners throughout Australia? We just do not know? Clearly, it’s time for change.

We’re talking about an authority that thousands of workers rely on to protect long service leave entitlements. An authority with a culture biased towards pleasing the employer not on protecting and being accountable for employee’s entitlements. This is not the Coal LSL clerical staff’s fault. It’s the Board and management who must stand up and be held to account. Governance does not exist and the culture of Coal LSL is not solutions or customer focussed. Clearly, it’s time for change.

For too long, Coal LSL has operated as a rogue government authority. Until I brought them before Senate Estimates they were never called upon to explain their actions.  It was the suffering of exploited and abandoned workers like Simon Turner that put a spotlight on Coal LSL and its culture that ignores abandoned workers. Clearly, it’s time for change. And it must be now.

Today, Stuart Bonds and I are strongly advocating for change in Coal LSL and a reconciliation of all accounts and entitlements to ensure that workers and employers are not being ripped off.

Stuart Bonds and I pledge to work for justice for workers hurting from the actions of unthinking, uncaring, unaccountable government authorities like Coal LSL. Authorities under the joint control of shadowy union bosses and a Minerals Council acting for uncaring mining conglomerates. The same mining companies and union bosses that enabled the exploitation of casual coal miners in the Hunter Valley.

Clearly, it’s time for a change. Coal LSL needs to be taken out of the hands of self-interested parties. Coal LSL management needs a broom put through it. A change to build an open, honest transparent, accountable culture to protect the entitlements of everyday Australian workers.

I implore all workers and everyday Australians – rural and city – to vote with your feet. Please go and tell your local union branch, member of parliament and senator that you expect that workers’ rights and entitlements to be protected.  Tell Joel Fitzgibbon that the time for talk is over and it’s time for action. Tell Joel Fitzgibbon, the NSW Minerals Council and the CFMEU Hunter Valley union bosses that Coal LSL like all government bodies must demonstrate the highest standards of integrity, to protect workers’ interests, to behave with common sense and transparency. Workers deserve integrity and support.

/1 Comment/by

Inland Rail is off track

,

Yesterday I attended a hearing into the Inland Rail project. The massively expensive project will see up to 40 heavy freight trains a day travel through southern Queensland to Acacia Ridge. (20 into Brisbane and 20 out)

Inland Rail uses passenger lines through south west Brisbane that local residents were promised would never be upgraded to heavy freight. That promise, by Labor Premier Beattie has now been broken by Premier Palaszczuk.

It is telling that neither Premier Palaszczuk nor any of her administration had the courage to front the inquiry to respond to the criticism of the route her Government is promoting.

The Mayor of Logan City Darren Power testified that within 20 years more than 50,000 residents would live with 1km of the train line, putting up with noise and vibration from 1.8km long heavy freight trains 24 hours a day.

The current plan is to terminate the line at Acacia Ridge, and not upgrade the rail link to Brisbane Port until 2040. This stupid idea will put hundreds of additional A double heavy freight trucks and related traffic onto local roads that can’t handle the traffic they have now.

Inland Rail’s preferred alignment also goes across the Condamine floodplain near Millmerran. Building a 2m railway embankment across a major floodplain is a really bad idea. The small culverts being built into the embankment will quickly block during heavy rain and flood out thousands of local residents and businesses.

The much better route through Warwick, along mostly existing freight rail lines was not seriously considered by the ARTC, this is a poor decision.

The budget for Inland Rail now stands at $20 billion and will go much higher. At this cost Inland Rail will never pay for itself. Our investigations into this and listening are going to continue. The more I hear, the more concerned I am about this project.

/by

Red Tape Killling Businesses

One Nation always aims to protect honest workers, protect small businesses and simplify our Industrial Relations (IR) system. The current IR reforms need a lot of work to achieve that.

Transcript

[Marcus Paul]

G’day, Malcolm.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Good morning, Marcus, how are you?

[Marcus Paul]

I’m okay. I’m just having a little chuckle at the wankfest going on in the United States at the moment. I get that it’s a momentous occasion. I understand every time a President’s inaugurated that they have to get celebrities up there to sing songs and carry on. But for God’s sake, enough’s enough, surely.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Yeah, I’ve travelled through all 50 American States. I’ve lived there for five years. I’ve studied at one of the top universities over there and I’ve worked over there in eight different states. And I love Americans. They’re absolutely fabulous people, but they’re different. You know, in many ways they look like us. They dress like us. They have similar habits, they’re casual and they’re formal like us, they love us. But mate, they just go over the top when it comes to celebrating things. it’s just for Australians, it’s too much.

[Marcus Paul]

Well, you’d think that there’s no issue with COVID-19. You’d think that America is all this, there’s no social inequality. You think that there’s no civil unrest. It’s all, I don’t know, look, I’m seeing right now the presidential motorcade with the military escorting Joe Biden back to the White House, the bloke looks like he needs a good lie down.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Yeah, it’s a contradiction in America. Wherever I went you can see contradiction. And, you can get a very energetic country like America but there are so many, so many inequalities as well. But there’s one thing that’s very strong in Americans and that’s the love of their country and their passion for freedom. And so, I think there’ll be a lot of Americans holding their breath right now.

[Marcus Paul]

All right, mate. Now you’re on the road driving down the New South Wales coast, you’re around Singleton, are you?

[Malcolm Roberts]

Yes, and what a beautiful day it is. I used to live in Singleton, worked here several times but it’s a glorious day and blue sky. We just driven up the Valley from Singleton. We’re now in Musswelbrook and we went past Bayswater and Liddell Power Station. It’s just absolutely beautiful.

[Marcus Paul]

Yeah, nice, now the federal government’s so-called industrial relations reforms, you’ve had a fair bit to say about that ahead of Senate estimates hearings in March.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Well, they’re going to try and bring in the legislation into the Senate fairly soon, it’s an inquiry at the moment but we’ve had a good look at it and we still got a lot more work to do on it. But Marcus, you know, our aims are always to protect honest workers, to protect small business. And, in this case, to restore productive capacity. And you know, the government is really just playing at this, it’s not addressing energy, it’s not addressing tax, it’s not addressing infrastructure, it’s not addressing over regulation. It’s still making life hard for people. It’s not a real reform at all, it’s just tinkering to look after his mates and the overriding thing with this so-called industrial relations reform, it’s not reform, it’s tinkering with the deck chairs on the Titanic is that their aim seems to be to not upset anyone and to try and please everyone. And whenever you do that, Marcus, you’re coming out of fear.

[Marcus Paul]

Yes.

[Malcolm Roberts]

And so they’re afraid. And that means the country will suffer. These regulations, they don’t simplify and small business badly needs that. The key aspect of this supposed reform from the Prime Minister is to get jobs, mate.

[Marcus Paul]

Yeah.

[Malcolm Roberts]

It won’t get any jobs. It’s just gonna make things more complex. There are some positives in there but there are overwhelmingly a lot of negatives. We’re just going to have to do a lot of work on this.

[Marcus Paul]

All right, now, obviously, on this trip down the coast you’ve been catching up with people who may have reached out to you, made contact, what are you hearing on the ground?

[Malcolm Roberts]

Well, first of all, I’ve got to say how beautiful the country is on the coast coming south down through New South Wales. It’s just green, it’s glorious. And people, I’ve heard from small business, for example, a guy who run, well, I won’t tell you his business because it’s a boutique business and I don’t want anyone to come back on him but he was really talking about how difficult life is under state, federal and local government. Because they’re making things complex.

[Marcus Paul]

Absolutely, could you imagine all that bloody red tape a business owner has to go through these days? It’s just, it’s almost —

[Malcolm Roberts]

But, Marcus, he was telling me things like if you get a permit from the state government to do something and then by the time you’ve finished dealing with regulations for the local government, the state government permits have expired and you’ve got to get it again. And that means more fees. And he was talking about 20, $30,000, I think, 50, $45,000 in one case, just to get consultants in to do the work for the local government. You can’t afford that.

[Marcus Paul]

No.

[Malcolm Roberts]

But one good piece of news. We visited a workshop here in Philly, a large workshop here, well, in Rutherford which is near Maitland. And they’re telling us, they do a lot of work for agriculture and mining machinery and they’re telling us that the price of coal has gone up quite a bit and they’re hiring again which is good for the Valley. And it’s really good for the whole Hunter Valley and Newcastle because most people don’t realise this but for every job in the coal mine there are six other jobs depending upon those jobs. And so the price of coal and the use of coal is extremely important to everyone in New South Wales.

[Marcus Paul]

Well, look, you know, you’ve got a bloke up there in the Hunter who is making a fair bit of noise. I’m sure he’s scaring the pants off of Joel Fitzgibbon but, I don’t know, if things are looking okay or a little better up there in the Hunter maybe Joel might hold on a little bit.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Well, the problem with Joel is his party. His party won’t let him do things. His party has got their foot on the throat of the coal industry and they’re determined to kill the coal industry. I mean, some of the senior people in the labour party have admitted that and said that is what they want to do. And it’s insane. One of the things I did coming down the New South Wales coast, I’m doing a bit of research in southern New South Wales in the next couple of days and I stopped in Port Macquarie and worked for a day and a half with an absolutely astounding Scientist there who’s been going through the Bureau of Meteorology records and mate, the records are just so shoddy and he’s done advanced statistical analysis. Once he’s removed all the the deliberate movements or adjustments. And there’s no warming at all going on. So, this whole thing about coal is just a beat up.

[Marcus Paul]

Yep, all right. Now, well, just on coal, of course, the Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, he’s had a lot to say. Oh, by the way, when you visit these places, do you don on your high vis shirt and you untuck the top of the collar just to show a little bit of chest hair, look all macho like you’re in the moment? And do you have your professional photographer tailing your every move for a photo opp, Malcolm? I’m just wondering.

[Malcolm Roberts]

No, that’s not me. What I’m doing is I’m driving by myself. This morning I’ve got some of my, one of my staff with me but I’ve been driving down the coast on my own. I make all my own arrangements. Take my own notes, I just listen to people because you can’t listen to people through others. You’ve got to listen by firsthand, direct.

[Marcus Paul]

Fair enough.

[Malcolm Roberts]

So, I don’t go for all that crap.

[Marcus Paul]

Well said. All right, mate, listen, we’ve got a listener Gail Thornton who follows the programme. We want you to say hello. Can you just do me a favour, say, good day, Gail. Hope you’re having a wonderful morning. Just say that for me.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Good day, Gail, hope you’re having a great morning.

[Marcus Paul]

See, Gail says on our Facebook page and I’ll have to tell you, you got a little bit of hate on our social media. Mind you, I get a lot of hate on my social media as well. That’s just what it’s all about. But your posts, when we re-share things that you know you and I have a chat about a certain issue, it’s one of the, this is what I don’t get, this is the hypocrisy with it all and on this programme, we will speak to anybody, labour, liberal, callithumpian, you know, we have Pauline, yourself and also Mark Latham. So, we listen to all sorts, we try to as much as we can. We would love to have the Prime Minister or the Premier on here, but they don’t even know we exist or they probably know we exist but their media people don’t want them to come on because they’re probably upset that I’ll- first question to the Premier would be, when are you going to resign? And the second question to the Prime Minister would be, do you take any responsibility for robo-debt? And what about the thousands of people that have possibly taken their lives? So, that’s why they don’t come on. But your stuff that we talk about is well-received, you know, you gotta have your haters for those to really like you, Malcolm, but Gail says, there’s no way that we will listen to anything Malcolm Roberts has to say. So, I just wanted you to say good morning to Gail. She’s one of your biggest fans, I think.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Well, tell her that I’ll be very happy to meet her. And I look forward to her giving me evidence that contradicts my arguments.

[Marcus Paul]

Well, that’s it. Good on you, mate. Always great to catch up, drive safely. You can’t drop by and visit us, I hear.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Not this time, I was wanting to do that and I’ve got two outstanding retired people in Sydney that I want to meet because they’re both very, very good on water. And that’s a critical issue for us but I was hoping to drop in. But if I go anywhere near Sydney, then, mate, I’ve got to lock up in quarantine in Brisbane when I go back. So, even if I just don’t get out of the car. I’ve just got to lock up. So, I’m going to drive through Mudgee and then that way down through Bathurst and then to Canberra that way, so it’s an extra drive but, hey, that’s the way it has to do.

[Marcus Paul]

Ah, look, we’re broadcasting out into those regions right now and it’s pretty good out there as well. You reckon it’s green on the coast. You should see it inland. It’s just gorgeous around 2MG Mudgee area and out to Bathurst to our station 2BS and out to Orange . I love it out there, mate. Look after yourself.

[Malcolm Roberts]

Thanks Marcus. We’ve got to look after this country and stop the wombats ruining it, the wombats in Canberra.

[Marcus Paul]

All right, mate, bye-bye. Malcolm Roberts, Marcus Paul in the morning.

/by