You don’t become patron of an organisation that you don’t agree with its meaning. Therefore the GG does agree with it

A better question would be why is it almost impossible for a grown man to get onto testosterone replacement therapy in this country with severely low testosterone levels but a child can be put on hormonal treatments to change their gender? Explain it to me like there can actually be a logical answer to that question

You questioned them? Have they stopped laughing yet?

Sounds like that's exactly the same line of thought albanese takes at questions not appropriate...

They are either Fabian’s …or Freemasons…

A person having an “ Honorary Position “ Is a Formal and symbolic unpaid position However , it can be assumed that the person has a vested interest either financially or emotional stake in a specific system or project or Group Therefore, it can be argued the “Honorary “ person referenced DOES “ support specific advocacy “ to Equality Australia Group . The benefit to the EA is that the persons position gives weight/ validation to the Equality Australia Group/ Organisation.

That role should be neutral.

Good on you Malcolm, thankyou for your everything mate

This. This is why I have left the Libs and am now a Member of One Nation. We need a strong Opposition Party who will fulfil their mandate of actually opposing, questioning and criticising the government, and even the GG. Keep going Mr Roberts!

Keep asking! They need tp ne accountable Malcolm

You have difficulty understanding a lot of things, maybe you need a different role.

Just building his/her resume.

So why be a patron if you don't supporttheir position

Keep up the good work Malcolm.

If a child is put on hormone it is child abuse

Is there stamp 👈🏻 duty with all these endorsements

Malcolm doth protest too much, methinks.

The same way one neuron become a patron of Gina..

What the hell, please explain Governor-General of Australia ???

Can you ask the senate if they are willing to invest in anti-lizard people legislation Malcolm?

So , above the law

Politicians should retire at 70

Well done Malcolm

The GG is a paid up member of the Liebor Party so she will do what she is told.

Please state your scientific and medical credentials, senator.

drug companies get a 'trust me bro'? Do u have a link to a good 'how to start a drug company' video? i think i like that option. 🤔 😅

Quick question Malcolm. If you were in the USofA and got bitten by a bat. Would you take the Rabies vaccine?

It's SO good we have a Senator saying this. They will try to wriggle away but the people need to see this.

He didn’t expose anything here… he’s just repackaged how the system works and tried to make it sound sinister. Saying the Therapeutic Goods Administration “doesn’t test vaccines” like it’s some big gotcha is misleading. That’s exactly how regulators operate worldwide. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency don’t run full clinical trials themselves either. They assess the full data, challenge it, audit it, and decide if it stacks up. That’s the job. What’s left out is the hard part. The TGA doesn’t just “trust” companies. They go through raw trial data, assess the study design, inspect manufacturing, and can knock applications back if something doesn’t add up. That’s not a rubber stamp. That’s regulation doing exactly what it’s meant to do. Then there’s the placebo argument. Acting like every trial should use saline ignores basic ethics. If there’s already a proven vaccine, giving people a placebo can mean knowingly leaving them unprotected. That’s why active comparisons are often used. It’s not some shortcut. It’s how you balance safety with real-world responsibility. And the Pfizer claim is where it really falls over. Pointing to concerns about one subcontractor and jumping to “the whole system is fraudulent” doesn’t hold up. There were multiple trials, across different countries, all showing similar results, followed by real-world data from millions of people. That’s not a single weak link holding everything together. If the argument only works by stripping out context and turning normal regulatory processes into something shady, it’s not exposing a problem. It’s creating one. So the real question is this. Are you explaining how the system works… or just trying to make people distrust it?

Issue with your comprehension, Senator

It’s like putting the foxes in charge of the henhouse. What could possibly go wrong.

The cookers cooker cooking again

Daniel Kell you dont need qualifications to ask questions. Roberts has done his homework, and if proven wrong we are all here to see it.

Where’s your jet Mal?

Malcolm Your a Legend Thankyou GO ONE NATION

Do you even know the right questions to ask Robert.

Anyone who trusts the medical profession and pharmaceutical industry at this point in time would have to be insane.

Good on you Senator Malcom Roberts About time they were all held accountable. 🙏

They all need to be in striped pyjama's

I think with the reduction of child and adult vaccinations most people now know

An aerosol vaccine is inhaled and doesn’t require needles. This vaccine has already been studied in over 20 healthy people in a Phase 1 study. A clinical trial will further evaluate safety and how well this vaccine can protect against COVID-19. Purpose Because COVID-19 is an infection which mainly infects the lung, we want to study whether giving the vaccine by inhalation into the lungs is safe in humans who have already had at least three doses of an mRNA COVID vaccine. We also want to study what sort of immune response (protection level) develops in the blood after receiving the study vaccine. About COVID-19 and the Study Vaccine Public health measures such as testing, isolation and quarantine, masks, and physical distancing have helped to control COVID-19, however vaccination is the best way to control the virus. The widespread administration of COVID vaccines has led to fewer infections, less severe disease, and fewer deaths. However, new strains of COVID (called variants-of-concern) have been spreading that are not as well controlled by the current vaccines. It is important that we keep doing research to develop new kinds of COVID-19 vaccines that work differently and could be used to boost immunity to provide extra protection against the virus. The study vaccine, called ChAd-triCoV/Mac, is a new type of COVID-19 vaccine. It has been studied previously in over 20 healthy people in a Phase 1 study. The study vaccine was developed by researchers at McMaster University and is manufactured in compliance with GMP (Good Manufacturing Practice) at the Robert E. Fitzhenry Vector Laboratory at McMaster University. In the dose being used in this study, the study vaccine has been safe and has shown promising immune responses in the lung. Participation Criteria You may be eligible if: You are generally healthy; You are 18-65 years old; You have received at least 3 doses of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine; You agree to practice adequate birth control for 8 weeks post vaccination if you are able to get pregnant. Study staff will discuss any additional requirements with you before agreeing to take part. Participation Details Breathing in a mist-like study vaccine or a saline mist placebo (this will be given through a nebulizer, which is a machine that turns liquid medicine into a fine mist that can be inhaled directly into the lungs); Recording your temperature and any symptoms at home; Four (4) clinic visits; Three (3) follow-up phone calls.

You’ve got a greatest-hits compilation of half-truths glued together with suspicion. Let me pull it apart before it gets mistaken for evidence. Senator Roberts is framing normal regulatory practice as a conspiracy. That’s not analysis, that’s spin. 1) “The TGA doesn’t test vaccines” True in the most literal, misleading way possible. Therapeutic Goods Administration does not usually run its own full clinical trials. Neither does the FDA, EMA, or any comparable regulator. What they actually do: Audit clinical trial data (raw datasets, protocols, adverse events) Inspect manufacturing facilities Require independent expert review Monitor safety post-approval (pharmacovigilance) If regulators had to personally run every trial, you’d be waiting 30 years for a flu shot. This isn’t negligence, it’s how global drug regulation works. 2) “They just trust the company” Flatly wrong. Regulators: Reject applications regularly Demand additional data Cross-check results with independent studies and international regulators Drug companies submit the data, yes. Regulators scrutinise it. That’s the entire job. 3) “They should always use saline placebos” This is where it really drifts off. Using a saline placebo is not always ethical or appropriate. Why? If an effective vaccine already exists, giving people saline means denying protection Standard practice is often active comparator trials (new vaccine vs existing one) That’s not “hiding side effects.” It’s comparing: Is the new one as safe or safer? Is it more effective? Medicine isn’t a purity test, it’s risk vs benefit. 4) “Side effects are just compared and waved through” Another distortion. All vaccines have potential side effects. The question regulators ask is: Are the benefits significantly greater than the risks? If a new vaccine had worse safety outcomes, it doesn’t get approved. Full stop. 5) “Pfizer testing scandal proves fraud” This is the usual misfire. There was a whistleblower case related to a contractor in a Pfizer trial site. Key points: It involved data handling concerns at one site, not the entire global trial Regulators reviewed the totality of evidence (tens of thousands of participants across multiple sites) No credible evidence showed the overall trial results were fraudulent Turning that into “the whole thing was fake” is like finding a dodgy cashier and declaring the entire banking system imaginary. Bottom line TGA not running trials itself = normal Using company data = standard globally Not always using saline placebos = ethical requirement “Fraudulent vaccines” = unsupported claim What Roberts is doing is taking standard regulatory processes and presenting them as suspicious because most people don’t know how they work. It’s not a scandal. It’s just complicated, which on the internet is apparently indistinguishable from evil. In other words: Senator Roberts is describing standard global drug regulation like it’s some shady backroom deal. It isn’t. Therapeutic Goods Administration doesn’t run its own trials, but it audits, verifies, and can reject the data companies submit. That’s the whole job. Using an existing vaccine instead of saline isn’t “cheating,” it’s often the ethical requirement when a proven treatment already exists. The “Pfizer fraud” angle is massively overstated. A problem at one trial site ≠ the entire global dataset is fake. So the real translation of his rant is: “I’m taking normal, boring regulatory processes and presenting them as suspicious because it sounds dramatic.” It’s not exposing a scandal. It’s repackaging how the system works and hoping no one checks.

Lizards in the room

You’ve made a lot of claims in this post that have nothing to do with the video you shared. They were not trying to be confusing: the fact that you didn’t understand them is not their fault.

So try and answer questions without reading the response on you computer screen next time, I'm sure that shouldn't be all that difficult if you know the answer

Um Malcolm …. Just because YOU thought their answers confusing doesn’t mean most people would find them confusing ….. as we all know you are a bit. ‘Special’

Testing is done against existing drugs because we don't want to know if a new drug just works (which is all a comparison with saline can show), we want to know if its works better than existing ones, otherwise there is no point using it.

Did you write your questions in crayon, and eat them while you pretended to listen to the answers?