Malcolm’s Official Speeches in Parliament

Exactly Who is Calling the Shots in Australia?

I asked Minister Gallagher how many vaccines are provided with an indemnity protection clause by the Australian government whereby those harmed cannot sue the company because the government has taken on the responsibility for harm done. Her answer was that indemnity was put in place due to the emergency nature of COVID response in the early stages. However 14 different COVID products have received indemnity protection from the Australian government, and one of them as recently as the 10th of October 2023.

In response, the minister fell back on confidentiality of agreements between the government and vaccine providers. This is the public’s money – the government is there to serve the people of Australia, not keep secrets from them and coerce them into risky products with mandates that even the Health Secretary, Prof Murphy, has said this year were not justifiable. The risk, from COVID, never justified the risk from the trial injections. After all that has been exposed globally, that the government is still promoting these products is shocking.

In saying that all necessary approvals to ensure its safety were followed through the TGA, Minister Gallagher is not being straight with us. The TGA did not test the Pfizer, AstraZeneca and Moderna COVID shots. It relied on the regulators overseas where these products were made. In the case of Pfizer, these were incomplete and aborted trials. The true magnitude of the harm is being released in the Pfizer papers ordered to be released by a judge in the USA.

Why is the government hiding behind confidentiality and exposing taxpayers to the risk of paying for costly damages for injection injuries as well as paying for products that are turning out to be unsafe and ineffective. Products that the public is no longer taking up and which the Minister appears to be pushing like a pharmaceutical sales rep on commission.

Big Pharma’s Stranglehold on Government Revealed

Senator Katy Gallagher claimed that the COVID product indemnity was put in place to secure product supply in a competitive market during the emergency of the COVID outbreak.

Senator Gallagher is the Minister for Finance overseeing contingent liabilities in the budget. With 14 more indemnities for COVID products and the most recent one last month, I think it’s pretty clear that this has nothing to do with a health emergency. It has everything to do with Labor’s deals with Moderna to get its production plants into Australia and pave the way for the World Health Organisation’s plans for 400 new mRNA vaccines for human and animal use. These are being designed to replace 400 regular vaccines with expiring patents.

Why is the government normalising indemnities? The process removes the incentive on the manufacturer to produce a safe, high quality product since any harm is paid for by the taxpayers. Follow the money and it leads to a patent cliff, not better health. It also explains the ongoing and seemingly frantic messaging of ‘safe and effective’ with every mention of these injections in government. It’s a shame the disinformation legislation does not cover messaging by the Government, so much misinformation originates there.

Transcript | Exactly Who is Calling the Shots in Australia?

Senator ROBERTS: My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Health and Aged Care, Senator Gallagher. How many vaccines are subject to an indemnity from the Australian government?

Senator Gallagher: Thank you, Senator Roberts. I’ll just see if I can provide you with an accurate answer. I do know that there were indemnity arrangements put in place under the former government for the vaccines that were approved then, in the early stages of the pandemic, and those indemnity arrangements continue. I think we have traversed this a bit at estimates. I’m not sure if there is anything else I can provide. Indemnity arrangements were put in place for the vaccines that the government procured to enable the national vaccine rollout program to be undertaken during the pandemic emergency. That was an important part of ensuring that we could procure the vaccine in the amount that we needed and provide it to the Australian people. I would also say that, whilst the indemnity arrangements were in place, all of the required approvals to ensure the safety of the vaccines—prior to the vaccines being rolled out—were followed, through the TGA processes, which we have also traversed at length in estimates. We also have the COVID-19 Vaccine Claims Scheme, which was established to run alongside the national rollout of the vaccine program. And I would say that it was an important response to the pandemic to ensure that we could get as many people vaccinated as possible in a safe way to ensure that we minimised the impact of significant disease and also, at the very serious end, the deaths that occurred from contracting COVID-19.

Senator ROBERTS: Indemnities have been issued for 14 different COVID products. Each new COVID vaccine or shot has been given an indemnity, the most recent on 10 October 2023. With demand for the booster down to 5½ per cent for those under 65, and with multiple vendors, the argument that indemnities are needed to get stock is a patent nonsense. What is the real reason for these new indemnities, issued only six weeks ago?

Senator Gallagher: I can’t go into the confidential agreements that have been reached in procuring vaccines. These are agreements that are reached between the government and the vaccine provider, and we do so in a way that allows for the rollout of continued vaccination and booster shots to protect people from COVID-19. These are the arrangements that were entered into during the pandemic. Those arrangements are continuing. We think there’s a very important public health reason to ensure that we are procuring vaccines and making them available so people can take their booster. I would say that booster levels remain low—and we do want to see those increase—and that people should go and get their booster if they’re ready for one or if they’re six months past the last COVID-19 bout.

Senator ROBERTS: Minister, you won’t explain to the taxpayers why you’re using their money and putting it at risk, so I’ll ask a second supplementary. This government has offered Moderna an indemnity for every vaccine or shot manufactured in its new Australian factory, currently under construction, including regular non-pandemic vaccines. Why has your government not been honest in telling taxpayers they are paying for new vaccine harm during the COVID period and for all time?

Senator Gallagher: I’m not sure what Senator Roberts is referring to, and I reject the claim that we are somehow using taxpayers’ money and causing vaccine harm. That is not appropriate, and I absolutely categorically reject that. If there is anything further I can provide Senator Roberts around the arrangements with Moderna in particular, I am happy to arrange that. I don’t have that information before me, but I do accept that governments do negotiate agreements with companies around the supply and availability of medicines—and vaccines, in this instance—to ensure that we are able to provide the medicines Australia needs and also ensure that we have enough of the vaccines to provide the appropriate coverage, particularly for COVID-19 protection.

Transcript | Big Pharma’s Stranglehold on Government Revealed

I move: 

That the Senate take note of the answers given by the Minister for Finance (Senator Gallagher) to questions without notice I asked today relating to vaccine indemnities. 

Senator Gallagher is the Minister for Finance and is overseeing contingent liabilities in the budget. Although I prefer the words ‘fake-cine’ or ‘injectable’, what these products are not are vaccines. A vaccine prevents a person getting and transmitting an illness; these COVID ‘fake-cines’ do neither. Australia first provided indemnities in 2015 under the previous Liberal government for mpox and flu vaccines. Those indemnities are still in place. 

Now we have 14 more indemnities for COVID products, and they’ll be permanent. Labor’s deal to get Moderna’s production plant into Australia was revealed last week. Any vaccine manufactured in Moderna’s Australian factory, which is now under construction, will receive an indemnity. The agreement sets out that these vaccines will be indemnified as part of a pandemic vaccine advance-purchase agreement and additionally as part of a routine, non-pandemic vaccine supply agreement. In other words, every vaccine made will be indemnified with no word about testing. The new Moderna indemnity extends to routine vaccine supply, and the minister is not able to claim securing supply in a crisis. 

The World Health Organization has mentioned that there are 400 mRNA vaccines and products under development to replace conventional vaccines with expired patents. The attraction of mRNA is protecting profit from the patent cliff—not protecting better health. Those products will be for humans, livestock and pets. Our health authorities and politicians are promoting experimental mRNA products and, in so doing, risking everyday Australians’ health. I was hoping to hear why in the minister’s answer. Why is the government normalising indemnities, giving foreign multinational pharmaceutical companies blanket indemnities so they can avoid being accountable and encouraging companies to lie in their clinical trials, fudge efficacy data and cover up enduring death, as Pfizer was proven to have done in their COVID ‘fake-cine’ development? This question is not going away. We will relentlessly hound you down. 

/11 Comments/by

Tough Questions Asked on Digital ID Bill

How can Minister Gallagher claim Digital ID will be secure given government is one of the largest perpetrators of data breaches?

I questioned whether it “wouldn’t be compulsory” in the same way the government claims vaccines were never compulsory.

What Minister Gallagher failed to mention is that Section 74(4) of the Digital ID Bill allows the Digital ID to be made compulsory if a bureaucrat is “satisfied it is appropriate to do so”.

This will almost definitely be abused and makes a joke of the claim Digital ID would be voluntary.

Transcript | Tough Questions Asked on Digital ID Bill

Senator ROBERTS: My question is for the Minister for Finance, Senator Gallagher. ABC reports in July revealed that hackers were able to exploit loopholes in the government’s myGov system and, as of February 2023, lodged more than half a billion dollars in fraudulent tax claims. Given the minister’s claims that a digital identity would be secure, can the minister please provide an updated figure on how many billions of dollars in fraudulent claims hackers have lodged to date in exploiting myGov system vulnerabilities?

Senator Gallagher: The first thing I would say about that is myGov is different to myGovID; they are completely different things. I don’t have updated information. MyGov is the site you go to, as many people in this place will have, to engage with government in an online way. But myGovID is a digital ID that you control and own and use for verifying your identity and, if you are a business, for engaging with the tax office in particular. There are 10.5 million Australians who have a myGovID and use it for that purpose, but it is very different to the question that Senator Roberts raises around the myGov system, which I don’t have an update on. It falls under the Minister for Government Services’ portfolio. I am happy to see if there is something that minister would be able to provide you around an update on that.

MyGov obviously is a system that we invest heavily in to make sure it is useable and safe for people when they are engaging with government, but that doesn’t change the comments I made last week about the digital ID system being safe and trustworthy and voluntary. If you are an individual, you will not have to have one of these digital IDs but, if you do want one, the option is there, and it’s a way of reducing the amount of information that government collects in order to verify your identity. So, the two things, myGovID and myGov—I accept they are similarly named—are very different things indeed.

The President: Senator Roberts, a first supplementary?

Senator ROBERTS: Minister, in June, Russian hackers compromised top secret Australian Defence Force data. In July, NDIS participants were exposed in a data breach, and the Department of Home Affairs leaked personal small business information. In August, the Department of Veterans’ Affairs leaked medical data. In September, Australian Federal Police data was hacked. Why is it falsely claimed the government’s digital ID is secure when the government can’t keep data secure?

Senator Gallagher: I don’t accept the proposition that’s being put by Senator Roberts. Yes, government systems are under constant attack and threat, as most businesses are in this country, from cybercrime, from hackers, and from scams and criminals that are engaged in such activity, so the government invests heavily in protecting our systems, making sure they are safe. But in a sense, you are making the argument for a digital ID, because a digital ID is about reducing the amount of information that the government holds on you about you for services. Because of the way the system works, you retain the information, but you’re able to have your ID verified through a process of exchange that allows those systems to be unlocked. Absolutely fundamental to the digital ID system is reducing the amount of information, having the safeguards in place— (Time expired)

The President: Senator Roberts, a second supplementary?

Senator ROBERTS: Minister, will the government support a One Nation amendment to the digital identity bill explicitly stating that no Australian will ever be denied access to services because they do not have a digital ID? Or is the claim that the digital ID won’t be compulsory just misinformation?

Senator Gallagher: I’m happy to engage with you genuinely on digital ID. I accept your interest in it and I am very willing to work with anyone in this chamber to make sure that the legislation that passes this place is the best that it can be. In relation to your specific question, as part of the bill we do require that services be maintained and offered for people that don’t want to have a digital ID. That protection is there. I am very happy to engage with you more broadly on the bill, including in other areas that you might have concerns about.

That clause relates specifically to individuals. As you know, myGov ID is required for business-related services, and part of that is about minimising fraud and identity theft, verifying individuals as part of their engagement with the tax office.

ONE ID TO RULE US ALL

Labor has pushed ahead in lockstep with other countries to implement the World Economic Forum’s globalist control measures. I take note of the government’s answer on Digital Identity Bill which it has introduced. The idea that the government can keep our data safe is a farce.

This legislation seeks to bring about one Digital ID that does more than the MyGov digital ID or any of the others floating around. It puts all your identity eggs into one digital basket. For hackers this is truly the pot of cyber gold at the end of the woke rainbow. 

Despite the minister’s protestations that this digital ID won’t be mandatory and “it’s only for your safety and convenience”, we all remember how “no jab no job” was considered free choice by the government. But this bill goes further and contains a clear provision for the government to make this digital ID mandatory if they so wish.  

For Senator Gallagher to say that even the current version of MyGov digital ID is not compulsory is blatant misinformation. Centrelink won’t talk to you without it, and the legislated Directors’ ID required a MyGov digital ID for anyone who wanted to keep being a director. You can see where this is all going.  

We are being corralled into a digital prison, one bill at a time. For our ‘convenience’. One Nation will oppose the government’s Digital ID.


Transcript | One ID to Rule Us All

I move: 

That the Senate take note of the answers given by the Minister for Finance (Senator Gallagher) to questions without notice I asked today relating to digital identity. 

If people want a taste of the dictatorship digital ID will be used to introduce, look no further than Minister Katy Gallagher’s social media posts. On Friday she took to X to announce that she was proud of introducing the digital ID bill, declaring it secure, convenient and not compulsory. Senator Gallagher’s post racked up a million views, many of which were from Australians gobsmacked that the minister blocked all comments on her post. So much for this Labor government’s promised accountability and transparency. I guess the minister knew that, if she allowed comments, Australians would have easily debunked the misleading claims that a digital ID would be secure and not compulsory. Despite the censorship, Community Notes—the people’s fact check—were added to the post, debunking the minister’s claims. These Community Notes have mysteriously disappeared and reappeared over the weekend, making us ask whether the government applied any pressure on X to have them removed. We know that the departments of home affairs and health pressured social media to remove COVID related posts. We know that the Department of Defence asked social media to remove posts critical of the Chief of the Defence Force. It’s not a stretch to imagine that the government has done the exact same thing here. 

The idea that the government can keep any data secure is a farce. As I illustrated in my questions, government departments are our country’s most frequent perpetrators of data leaks. We know that digital ID will, effectively, be compulsory. The government says people won’t be forced to have it, unless of course people want to access government services, get a driver’s licence or enter some buildings. Just like the COVID jabs, digital ID won’t be compulsory, they tell us, yet the government will make people get one to participate in society—to live. One Nation will continue fighting the dystopian digital ID and government censorship on every front. 

Question agreed to. 

/3 Comments/by

Digital ID Bill Passes First of Three Stages

The Labor Government is pushing ahead with their globalist control agenda by introducing the Digital ID bill. This proposal is nothing more than a 21st Century version of Soviet Russia’s favourite measure – papers please.

Senator Gallagher says myGov ID is not compulsory: that is “misinformation”. The Director’s ID legislation didn’t mention myGov IDs yet every director was required to get one. The reason 10 million Australians have a myGov ID is because 10 million Australians were coerced into getting one.

One Nation will be fighting this terrible bill at every stage.

/23 Comments/by

Government’s Runaway Spending on Disability

The government’s spending on NDIS threatens to bankrupt Australia.

The NDIS is a runaway spending rocket which is failing to serve the disabled and getting worse. The service was never set up correctly in the first place and continues to waste billions and let down those who need it because of endemic bureaucratic bungling. There’s zero accountability within this agency. It is letting some abuse the system and as taxpayers we’re footing an exorbitant bill. The NDIS is not fit for purpose, yet a disability service is desperately needed and not reaching many of those it was meant to assist.

In questioning Minister Gallagher about what Labor is doing to fix this problem her answers were unhelpful and it seems she is being deliberately obstructive. Creating another level of bureaucracy won’t address the problem. It’ll only add another burden for taxpayers and extra layers of complexity for those needing help to try and navigate. If Labor is hoping that by ignoring the NDIS problem it will go away, they will be disappointment.

The NDIS needs addressing now before it’s too late.

Transcript

In serving the people of Queensland and Australia, I have four questions. I’ll do a little bit of explaining to get to the point. One Nation simply cannot support a bill that establishes an entirely new disability bureaucracy when the bill does not even define ‘disability’. I wonder: is this an admission that the NDIS has failed or that the government is letting it run completely out of control? I’ll come back to that. 

I remind everyone of the hasty and ill-thought-out concoction of the NDIS. Prime Minister Gillard hastily introduced it for election purposes before an election. Then she was voted out, and the Liberals and the National Party inherited a complete mess. They tightened it up, but it’s still sloppy. In tightening it, we got mixed signals going about services that are being provided to the disabled. That leaves them in a totally inadequate situation. I’m concerned about taxpayers and the disabled in these remarks and questions. If the NDIS continues in its current form, it will send the entire country broke and continue to provide inadequate services to the disabled. 

This bill does not deal with the NDIS. It establishes an entirely new bureaucracy in an entirely new agency. If the Disability Services and Inclusion Bill 2023 and the associated consequential bill pass into law, the Minister for Social Services will be given legislative authority for new spending programs to cover the 88 per cent of Australians living with a disability who cannot access support under the National Disability Insurance Scheme at the moment. 

I want to talk about the NDIS now because it provides financial support to just 610,000 participants, or 12 per cent of Australia’s estimated population living with a disability, while being the second-most expensive social program after the age pension. The annual running costs in the year ending 30 June 2023 were $38.8 billion. That is 26 per cent higher than Medicare, $30.8 billion; 40 per cent higher than aged care, $27.7 billion; and 40 per cent higher than the support for state government hospitals, $27.3 billion. Minister Bill Shorten expects the annual running cost in 2026 to be $50 billion, making it almost double what is spent on state government hospitals. The NDIS is unsustainable at these levels and will not be able to properly provide services for the disabled. 

I’m not going to sign a blank cheque for any government. I won’t be giving the government more spending power until I know how taxpayer money goes to those to whom it is intended, and many of the disabled are not getting the services necessary. Like many Australians, I’ve worked hard to bring up my children and to pay my taxes. Every tax dollar that the NDIA wastes is a dollar that is not spent on health, education and keeping us safe. NDIS participants using their plan money to holiday in exotic places and paying excessively for ordinary items like transit wheelchairs and aluminium shower chairs diminishes support for the program and prevents services to other disabled people who deserve support. Until I’m satisfied the Labor government can manage their departments, I’m not going to give them any more spending power. 

The Auditor-General investigated decision-making in the NDIA, the agency, between 1 July 2016 and 31 March 2017 as part of his report Decision-making controls for sustainability—National Disability Insurance Scheme access. In one group of 150 cases that were reviewed, the decision-maker’s name was not recorded in 42 cases. In another 18 of the 150 cases, there was no record of the reasons for the decision. That’s not accountability for taxpayers’ money. In a review of another 1,339 cases, 13 per cent—that’s almost one in seven—did not have sufficient evidence to support decisions to give lifetime support under the NDIS Act 2013. 

These findings in 2017 led to the Auditor-General making a number of recommendations. Seven of the nine recommendations made in relation to improving decision-making controls and fraud controls were not fully implemented by the time the Auditor-General investigated the NDIA again last year. Despite a history of approving access to the NDIS without lawful authority, senior bureaucrats in the NDIA will not make sure all delegates are trained. Of the 1,147 NDIA planners employed by the NDIA on 30 June 2020, only 73 per cent—under three-quarters—of them had been trained to spend billions of hard-earned taxpayer money. No wonder the NDIA costs cannot be controlled! Not only does the government need to show me it can manage the NDIA in accordance with the law passed in this chamber, but it also needs to deal with the demand shock created by the introduction of the NDIS. The sudden high demand created by the tsunami of money in NDIS participant plans has caused the cost of seeing an occupational therapist, a speech therapist or a psychologist—as well as others—to skyrocket. NDIS is more generous than the Department of Veterans’ Affairs or aged care, and that leads to inequality. That should not be the case. It’s a mess. It’s time the government aligned the price it pays for the same service across different government programs.  

Anyone can apply for a participant package under the National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013, but only people with a disability who meet the age, residency and disability requirements and can demonstrate that support is reasonable and necessary are intended to get support for a lifetime. As I’ve already said, it’s a lottery at the moment because decision-making is so poor in the National Disability Insurance Agency due to its messy and improper formation and its lack of foundation at its birth.  

While public servants sit in air-conditioned offices, an army of poorly paid disability workers provide the core supports needed by people with a disability. Disability workers are poorly paid, trapped in a system with little job security or prospects. They’re often working with questionable service agencies. Their employers are small businesses which often have no relevant experience and are unable to provide training or support in what can be confronting and stressful situations. No wonder there’s a shortage of disability workers right now. 

I want to see all National Disability Insurance Agency plans de-identified and made public. Australians need to know what is being funded. They’re the ultimate payers for this service. Employing a qualified chef to teach someone how to cook at home is a luxury that we cannot afford. Prior to NDIS, it was estimated that families provided 80 per cent of the support for a person with a disability and the government provided 20 per cent. The introduction of the NDIS was to shift some, but not all, responsibility to government, with families providing 60 per cent of the support and the government providing the remaining 40 per cent. We don’t know much about the level of family support provided today, but we do know only 30 per cent of all plans are managed fully or partially by the participant or their family, which suggests that government is taking on far more responsibility than was ever planned. Participant managed plans account for 30 per cent of the number of plans but just 12 per cent of the NDIS budget. These budgets are spent, but not overspent. Another 60 per cent of plans are managed by someone other than the participant or their family. These managed plans account for 46 per cent of the NDIS, four times as much. The remaining 10 per cent of NDIS plans are NDIA managed, and they account for 42 per cent of the NDIS budget. The NDIA consistently underspends these plans. Why?  

Until I see lawful, responsible and effective by the National Disability Insurance Agency, I will not be supporting any new spending power by government. One Nation supports disability services, yet they have to be sustainable for the Australian taxpayer or there will be no services in the future, and those services that there are won’t be fit for the disabled. Spending on the NDIS will outstrip all Medicare services. There is billions of dollars of fraud currently happening in the NDIS that the government has done next to nothing to stop. We’ll be opposing this bill until the government can prove it is running the NDIS in a way that isn’t going to send the country broke. 

I’ll go back to my opening question from my first question: is this new legislation an admission that the NDIS has failed or that the government is letting it run completely out of control?

/by

Workers Left Unprotected Whilst Labor Play Their Games

Grandstanding is clearly more important to the Albanese government than actually governing.

Last week the Senate voted to pass four measures from the Government’s own industrial relations bill that all parties agreed were urgent. Because the vote was led by the crossbench, the government then refused to deal with the bills in the lower house.

What everyday Australians can learn from this ‘dummy spit’ by Prime Minister Albanese is the government is more interested in playing politics than protecting workers. The government’s actions are quite honestly a disgrace and a betrayal of working Australians.

This is my speech in support of the motion by the crossbench, supported by the Liberals and Nationals to suspended standing orders. This allowed the Senate to send a message to the House of Representatives to vote on the bills immediately.

This motion was passed and the ball is back in the Prime Minister’s court. Will he now vote to pass his own legislation or continue his childish antics?

Transcript

What an opportunity for the government to show that it believes in truth, integrity and honesty. What do they do? They run away from it. Senator Watt’s talking about the delays. No, it’s scrutiny. It’s proper scrutiny. That’s all we want. We want some urgency around bills that the government brought into the parliament saying that they were urgent and vital. What do we see? He’s leaving. They’re running away from it. Urgent bills? That’s why we want to support this suspension: so that we can vote on the motion of Senators Pocock and Lambie. 

This is about the Senate exercising the will of the Senate. The will of the Senate said, ‘We want these bills passed urgently.’ It went down to the House and has been put on the bottom of the order. To me, that shows the inconsistency with what Labor is saying about these bills and what the truth is. It proves that Labor is lying about the urgency of these bills. Senator Pocock reminded us very clearly of the long time frame for the wage theft provisions to be put in place—2025, I think he said. What is the government covering up? 

We’ll see more when we get to scrutiny of the other five sections of that bill, but I’ve been championing the cause of Hunter Valley and Central Queensland coalminers, and the only way that an enterprise agreement less than the award can be put in place is through an agreement with the Mining and Energy Union in the Hunter Valley. That’s the only way. There is no loophole in the coal industry; it just needs enforcement of the Fair Work Act, which the Fair Work Ombudsman has dodged, the Fair Work Commission has dodged, the MEU has contravened deliberately, and some employers and some labour hire firms have deliberately compromised. There’s no loophole; this is just designed to deflect and cover up. We will be getting to the bottom of this because I’m tired of these miners in Central Queensland and the Hunter Valley being put down. They’re still on below-award pay despite what the government is saying. 

We want scrutiny. We want it now. 

/1 Comment/by

Air Albotross: Australia’s Only Reliable Airline

The PMs frequent visits to foreign countries is a way of avoiding responsibility. The PM does not understand that leaders lead from the front, not from 30,000 feet. PM Albanese needs to pick up his leadership game instead of his carry-on baggage.

Australia desperately needs leadership. We have the worst outcome for real wages of any OECD country. Housing is unaffordable and our inflation is now home-grown. Two million new migrants is driving demand-inflation, making staples harder to get and more expensive. This situation will become worse after the passage of Minister Plibersek’s new bill to nobble agriculture in the Senate today, which reduces water available to farmers and will without doubt drive up food prices.

The PM needs to stop dodging responsibility and get back here to clean up the mess he’s made.

Transcript

As a servant to the many different people who make up our one Queensland community I started this week with my usual check to see if the Prime Minister is in the country today. He is. Hitting ‘home’ on his GPS still brings him back to Australia. What a memory that device has. Prime Minister Albanese clearly doesn’t suffer from airsickness, yet he has managed a medical first—spreading airsickness to the rest of the country. We are all thoroughly sick of his air travel. The Prime Minister doesn’t get that and with every flight he is crashing the government’s poll numbers. It’s why the internet has unkindly, though accurately, given the Prime Minister’s plane the new name—’Air Albatross’. 

Leaders lead from the front, not from 30,000 feet. Australia needs leadership. Inflation can no longer be blamed on world events beyond our control. All along our inflation has been and is homegrown—demand driven from this government’s record new arrivals. There was a time when Australia could have ramped up manufacturing and agriculture to meet demand from the 2.2 million new long-stay arrivals in just the last 12 months, but not anymore. The Hawke-Keating Labor government and the Howard Liberal government sent manufacturing to China. Now we’re at the mercy of the Chinese and world markets to source goods, including building materials, to meet the needs of new arrivals.  

Minister Plibersek is deliberately nobbling agricultural expansion, with another bill in the Senate today to take away farmers’ ability to grow food and fibre for new arrivals. Per capita income has gone backward faster than in any other developed nation in the world, as national wealth is spread across more and more people. A looming federal deficit will force interest rates up and steal even more wealth and opportunity from everyday Australians. Prime Minister, stop dodging responsibility, hang up your Biggles hat, get to work and clean up your mess. 

/4 Comments/by

Labor Holding Workers Rights Hostage

I supported Senators Lambie and Pocock in their motion to pull the four key, genuine elements from Labor’s ‘closing loopholes’ industrial relations bill. Even though these passed the Senate, the Labor Government refuses to deal with them in the House of Representatives that they control. They are holding PTSD compensation for paramedics hostage for political reasons rather than do the right thing.

I had to remind the Senate that this motion is in support of the Senate’s will, the Senate has already decided this. What the Labor Party government is demonstrating is its repeated, deep, ingrained fear of scrutiny.

It’s not hard to see why the media is reporting on Labor sliding in the polls.

Transcript

I want to remind the Senate that this motion from Senator Lambie and Senator Pocock is in support of the Senate’s will. The Senate has already decided this. That’s all we want. Secondly, has anybody in the Labor Party heard of the ‘Kevin Rudd slide’ or the ‘Julia Gillard slide’? The press is now reporting that the ‘Anthony Albanese slide’ is at an even steeper rate than the ‘Rudd slide’ and the ‘Gillard slide’. All are self made and imploding. And then Senator Ayres has the hide to impugn Senator Lambie as if she couldn’t think of this herself. They can’t think for themselves, because they rely upon one party boss to drive them. That’s it. This is egregious damage to Senator Lambie, and I support Senator Lambie in her own right. 

I also remind the Labor Party of housing, energy and immigration. They are destroying and gutting farming and gutting infrastructure, and now they want to tell lies about industrial relations with the closing loopholes bill that Senators Lambie and Pocock have seen their way through and from which they pulled out the four key elements that are genuine, which were lumped in there to hide the egregious loophole-closing when there is no such loophole. All we need is to enforce the Fair Work Act. The provisions are already there. This goes to honesty—or lack of honesty—in the Labor Party government, and it goes to their repeated, deep, ingrained fear of scrutiny. I’ll be supporting Senators Lambie and Pocock. 

/1 Comment/by

Perfect Storm of Government Incompetence

Labor’s failed management of the economy caused by insane Net Zero spending has resulted in the skyrocketing cost-of-living crisis that’s causing financial suffering in everyday Australians. This is callous behaviour from government.

We must confront the fact that the Net Zero fairy-tale is the biggest single cause of the economic downturn. Australians are seeing the result of this government’s pursuit of Net Zero goals in every aspect of life right now. If even the Bank of England accepts that fact and former Liberal Treasurer Peter Costello, along with Australia’s Reserve Bank have all publicly acknowledged Net Zero is inflationary, then the Albanese government needs to sit up and take notice.

End the Net Zero madness now.

Transcript

As the servant to the many different people who make up our one Queensland community, I agree with this matter of public importance from Senator Hughes. I’m not sure about ‘triple whammy’. Perhaps a more appropriate term is a perfect storm of government incompetence and callousness. Food essentials are dearer because successive Liberal-National and Labor-Greens governments have taken water off farmers to give to kill trees, driving up the price of irrigation water and, with them, the price of food. Profiteering from Coles and Woolworths is not helping. Both have just booked record profits on behalf of their foreign owners, including BlackRock and Vanguard. Real wages are falling—five per cent in the last year alone. Yet the inflation we’re currently experiencing is on the heads of the previous Liberal government, who, along with Labor, Greens and teals, destroyed the economy to control people and transfer wealth during COVID, in the process printing so much money that inflation was the inevitable result, as I said over and over across 2021 and 2022. 

Interest rates were always going to rise from an artificial low of 0.1 per cent. The reason they’ve risen so quickly and so high is on both sides of this chamber. The largest single cause of our economic woes is the net zero fairytale. Today even the Bank of England accepts that net zero is inflationary. Former Liberal Treasurer Peter Costello and Australia’s Reserve Bank accept that net zero is inflationary. When baseload power is replaced by fairytale weather-dependent power, energy costs rise. The sun and the wind are free, true. The materials to capture that very low density energy are not. That’s why the cost per unit of energy is so high. Australians are seeing the result of net zero in their mortgages or rent payments, at the shops and in their utility bills. Money doesn’t go far enough to pay for the net zero fairytale, yet this government continues down that path regardless, despite the financial suffering this is causing everyday Australians—callous behaviour indeed. 

/3 Comments/by

Let Australians Have Their Say on Gender Transition

Last sitting I was pleased to co-sponsor the Childhood Gender Transition Prohibition Bill 2023 from Senator Antic which seeks to prevent children from being surgically or chemically harmed in the name of gender identity. The Senate Committee that selects new legislation for inquiry refused to recommend this bill for a public inquiry. Senator Antic moved a motion to amend their report to require an inquiry.

The Greens opposed this amendment because they are clearly afraid of the truth coming out about child mutilation in the name of gender dysphoria. Labor opposed it in the name of wokism which is the cult they slavishly follow to avoid standing up for civil rights, decency and human values.

Why Senators Lambie, Tyrell and Pocock voted against sending our bill to a committee inquiry is anyone’s guess. It is very disappointing to see however, along with noting that so many of the Libs were out to lunch to avoid making a choice.

As I said in this speech, this is not about transphobia. It is about a child’s future and parental rights. By ensuring someone has reached the age of 18 before making such a final and irreversible decision about their future, they can avoid a lot of potential heartache and regret.

We don’t expect a child to know what they want to be when they grow up. Why would we let them decide they want to be the opposite sex?

Transcript

I speak in support of Senator Antic’s amendment. The Senate has portfolio committees to inquire into legislation for a good reason. Every committee is, from time to time, asked to inquire into a bill that raises issues of significance, as this bill does. The conventions and procedures of a committee inquiry are well suited to handing controversial issues such as this. Such inquiries are conducted all the time, because they’re essential to the legislative process. The Senate is open to denying a bill due process, so the question must be asked, why? What is it about this issue that has the Greens on the rampage, the ALP in hiding and the globalist wing of the Liberals rushing to cross the floor to avoid talking about it. 

Childhood gender surgery, whether physical or chemical, is not an insignificant matter. It is life changing, often life ending and irreversible. When young gender transitioners realise that it is irreversible and they regret their decision, that can often lead to them choosing suicide, to end their life. Billions of dollars of taxpayer money is involved. More importantly, the lives and health of tens of thousands of Australian children are at risk. There’s no room to vote this matter on feelings or fear. We need to get the facts. Gendered identity surgery on children relates to their physical health and to life itself. 

I appreciate that there are those even on the conservative side who refuse to question childhood gender surgery. That’s their right. Australians are increasingly asking why there is a cover up. Who are you protecting? I have received representatives from constituents from many different states approaching this issue from many different perspectives. Whenever One Nation has brought these perspectives to this place we have been shut down. That is not democracy. That is not the exercise of Senate powers without fear or favour; it is the complete opposite. It is control and shutting down. It is censorship. I have promised my constituents I will bring their perspectives to this place, and I will never take a step back from doing that fairly and honestly. 

The public have turned against causing chemical and physical mutilation and harm to children in the name of gender identity. The Senate will have to deal with this issue in the near future, so let us do it now. Let us get on with the job. Send this bill to a committee and let Australia contribute to the debate. Let parents have their say. Let victims of childhood transition have their say. And, yes, let trans people have their say. I point out, that all that is done by this bill that I co-sponsor with Senator Antic and Senator Babet is found mainly in section 8. It prohibits doctors prescribing surgery or puberty blockers to people under the age of 18. That’s all it does. A health practitioner— 

The PRESIDENT: Senator McKim on a point of order? 

Senator McKim: The point of order is relevance. The question before the chamber does not go to the substance of the bill. It goes to whether or not the bill should be referred to a committee. I ask that Senator Roberts be relevant to the question. 

The PRESIDENT: Senator McKim, these are broad-ranging discussions. Senator Roberts is being absolutely on point to the amendments before the chamber. 

Senator ROBERTS: Section 8, clause 1 reads: 

A health practitioner must not knowingly provide gender clinical interventions to a minor that are intended to transition the minor’s biological sex as determined by the child’s sex organs, chromosomes, and endogenous profiles. 

There are then details of the medical procedures and the prohibition of prescription drugs that achieve the same purpose except for the medical treatment of disorders of sexual development. Section 12 restricts the expenditure of Commonwealth money—taxpayers’ money—on treatment. 

A committee improves bills, a committee scrutinises bills and a committee, above all, gives an opportunity for the people of Australia to have their say. I know many trans people. I’m pleased to meet them and proud to have them as friends. I communicate with some of them regularly. This is not about transphobia; this is about making sure that people have the right to have a say in this bill, which is absolutely essential. I commend Senator Antic’s amendment to the Senate. 

/4 Comments/by

My Priorities for Australia’s Future

It’s easy to fall into the trap of saying what I don’t agree with. Today I set out the policies I do agree with. These are policies I have worked hard in the Senate to promote and will continue to do so.

Australia has natural advantages in mineral resources, agricultural land, water, sunshine and a moderate climate that in years past has made Australia the richest country in the world per capita — which is the wealth of the country divided by the number of inhabitants. Yet in recent years life has become so hard, not just under this Albanese Government but under successive Liberal and Labor Governments.

Income per capita is going backwards and opportunities we took for granted in our youth are now out of reach for today’s young Australians. Unemployment is much higher than the published rate, Australians can’t afford housing, electricity or even their groceries. Higher education is slipping from the reach of the middle class and many Australians are now unsafe in their homes and on the streets.

It does not have to be this way.

I spoke here in the Senate Chamber about the steps One Nation would take to solve the many problems Australians are facing after too many years of bad governance. Some of these steps include solving infrastructure issues, increasing productivity and wages, bringing back a people’s bank and ensuring cash continues to be available, and more.

Join us in helping our country to rebound and flourish.

Transcript

As a servant to the many different people who make up our one Queensland community, I am often asked by people why life under Labor has become so damn tough so quickly and how a One Nation government would help. Australians are decent people and can see through government and media misinformation and disinformation. We all know when life is harder than it should be and when governments are screwing up. Out of control cost of living has resulted from a screw-up resulting from the actions of Liberal, National, Greens and Labor parties during COVID, when our government turned to the use of excessive authority instead of respecting human rights and choice. During COVID, One Nation did advocate for human rights, including quarantining the sick and letting the healthy get about life. Countries that did that are now back to normal. Life in those countries is easier because there’s no massive COVID bill to pay. Australia has a huge inflation problem now due to printing $500 billion—half a trillion dollars—to cover COVID expenses, including JobKeeper and pharma products that are now past their use-by date. Money printing causes inflation. One Nation said so at the time. 

One Nation now stands ready to rebuild our economy and deliver wealth and opportunity to all Australians. We will reduce new arrivals to a level where arrivals equal departures. That’s called zero net migration, leaving room for about 130,000 new migrants each year. We will limit student visas to a level at which we can accommodate and teach students properly. We will not import more labour until those who’ve arrived have found a job. We don’t need new arrivals being handed Medicare cards, driving up government spending on health and on schools and infrastructure. We will decline to renew the visa of any new arrival who has failed to find a job or make a contribution during their visa period. 

We will license construction of new and efficient coal plants, which will bring electricity bills down 50 per cent. We will cancel any weather dependent generation project that we can legally terminate, and we will ensure that wind and solar sponsors pay into a bond account to pay for the removal of those monstrosities at the end of their short life. Electricity generation should be based on the cheapest source, not the dearest, and the dearest is wind and solar. We will fast-track mining approvals and port upgrades. We will terminate the Murray-Darling Basin Plan and leave everyone’s water where it is to ensure farmers are free to grow food and fibre to feed and clothe the world, and we’ll then get together with the states to review the actual data on river health, environmental outcomes and the social and economic costs of the basin measures taken so far. More work may need to be done, though only after a full basin review. We will build infrastructure projects like the Queensland tropics water and hydro project, the northern Australia’s east-west rail line, the Abbott Point and Pilbara steel parks and the inland rail to the port of Gladstone without crossing the Condamine. 

At the moment, Australia’s internet traffic from our east coast to Western Australia and vice versa routes through China. So, if you want to connect with Western Australia, it goes through China. We will build a direct connection instead and upgrade pinch points to lift our internet out of Third World status and make it First World. Human error being what it is, the recent Optus failure may happen again. Once there is network redundancy and proper planning, outages should not happen. The Optus failure is on the government’s infrastructure and communication ministers, who clearly have not done their job to ensure the redundancy we need to keep Australians connected. And we need to keep cash as a payment option, as should every business. These are just some of the many opportunities for infrastructure to harden our economy and provide wealth and opportunity for all. 

Infrastructure improves economic efficiency and underscores the productivity improvements that fuel wage rises. Workers don’t need to work harder to get a productivity rise. People are already at breaking point. Government needs to work harder—faster internet, faster ports and rail, better highways, cheaper power and more water. This is how we increase productivity and, with that, the wages of everyday Australians, without inflation. We will purchase the Suncorp Bank and operate that as a model bank to provide a full range of services, including cash through Australia Post outlets. Under One Nation you will have a real local bank branch that handles cash. 

We will stop foreign interests owning Australian land and residential property. The bounty of this beautiful land should accrue to those who call Australia home. Large corporations need to be held to account. For 30 years the share of the economy coming from wages has fallen, yet for 30 years the share from corporate profits has grown. There’s a point where a fair return on risk and investment has become a perceived entitlement to ever-increasing profits from rapacious and unprincipled merchant banks investing money on behalf of predatory billionaires, billionaires like Bill Gates, who we discovered just after the election is best mates with the Prime Minister. 

In response to running out of other people’s money to spend, the Treasurer, in a recent media appearance, walked back his responsibility to harden and grow the national economy. One Nation does not shirk from responsibility. Join us in restoring our country for people to abound and flourish. 

/3 Comments/by