I asked Minister Wong about Labor’s failed promise to return the Port of Darwin to Australian hands.
Before the election, Anthony Albanese was happy to call foreign ownership of our ports a mistake. Now that he’s the PM, he has gone quiet.
When I pushed for a timeframe, Minister Wong couldn’t provide a date, nor a plan. All we got was more “we’re working on it.”
The PM didn’t even raise the Port during his recent trip to China! Is he too scared of retaliation from the Chinese Communist Party?
We have a foreign power (the CCP) controlling our most strategic northern port on a 99-year lease. This was a catastrophic mistake by the Coalition, yet Labor is proving they are too weak to fix it.
Australian assets must be held exclusively by Australians to ensure our national interests are protected.
It is time to put Australians ahead of Beijing’s feelings.
https://image2url.com/r2/default/images/1770862409015-76fa1e54-fc57-4468-8b39-1df0ba3d9245.png6341134Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2026-02-12 12:31:082026-02-12 13:03:07Foreign Control on Australian Soil: A Big Fail
Darwin Port under CCP control for 99 years! While PM Albanese calls Communist China a “friend,” they harass our aircraft, wage trade wars and control our most strategic northern port. Their actions speak louder than words.
One Nation stands firm: Australian assets MUST be in Australian hands. Our sovereignty and security are NOT for sale!
No more election promises – hand back Darwin Port now!
Transcript
Australians are sick of the benefits of our natural resources and critical infrastructure being siphoned off to foreign multinational companies. Chinese company Landbridge will operate the Port of Darwin for 99 years. Make no mistake; that means it’s under Chinese Communist Party control. While Australia differentiates between private companies and government, there’s no such separation in communist China. Every company is a direct arm of the ruling communist party and serves its purposes, so the Chinese Communist Party is running Darwin port.
It’s not just a profitmaking venture; it’s Australia’s most strategic major northern port. Darwin in general is crucial for our Defence Force’s deployment. It’s crucial for securing our borders and millions of square kilometres of northern ocean. The security implications of having a potential foreign adversary decide how the Darwin port is developed and used over the next 99 years are obvious. Australians should own Australian assets, especially ones as critical as our Darwin port.
To be clear, One Nation supports Australians with Chinese heritage, and they have been living here as Australians since our gold rushes in the 1880s, and we support the Chinese people. We oppose, though, the government of China, the Chinese Communist Party, with their totalitarian abuse of humans, censorship and rule though fear. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese this week said communist China is a ‘friend’. Let’s see what our friend has said about Australia. During our diplomatic freeze for asking where COVID came from, a Chinese government official said, ‘Why should China care about Australia?’ and said phone calls would be meaningless. In 2020 communist China issued 14 demands of Australia, criticising us for not censoring the press and for having honest conversations about China’s activities. They’ve illegally waged trade wars on Australian lobsters, beef and barley, trying to coerce Australia because we dared to ask where COVID really came from
This year communist China’s navy circumnavigated Australia, conducting unannounced live-fire exercises that diverted aircraft flights. This week Chinese aircraft harassed and released flares in front of an Australian aircraft over the disputed Paracel Islands, the latest in a string of similar dangerous incidents. It’s very weird behaviour for a friend! They seem to mean it when they say, ‘Why should China care about Australia?’
The United States seem to know the strategic value of northern Australia better than our own government does. They’ve been encouraging us to develop and fortify our infrastructure there so that we may have a chance of defending ourselves in a conflict. A US official reportedly said:
We are surprised this issue has not yet been settled, and we are closely watching what the Albanese Government is doing. There has been some concern that getting back control of Darwin Port is no longer a priority for Australia.
It’s hard to disagree.
Before the election we heard again and again, as early as February this year, that a big decision was around the corner. Since the election, we’ve heard nothing—another broken election promise. In July, Prime Minister Albanese met with President Xi, of China, and had the chance to sort it all out. Instead, when asked if he raised the issue of the port, the Prime Minister said he didn’t need to—gutless.
Should this foreign government have a 99-year hold on our most strategic northern port? On security reasons alone, One Nation’s answer very clearly is no. Putting aside the security and sovereignty issue, there’s basic common sense. As I’ve outlined, Darwin port will essentially be under the control of the Chinese Communist Party government for 99 years. They will operate, develop and profit from Darwin port for nearly a century. The communist Chinese government will reap the profits from Australia’s most northern strategic port.
There’s a reason a foreign government would seek to get a stranglehold on a critical asset like Darwin port for 99 years: to develop it, of course, and then squeeze every dollar they can out of it to return a tidy profit back to their treasury reserves. If anyone is reaping some kind of profit from critical infrastructure in Australia, it should be the Australian government and the Australian people. At the minimum, it should be a publicly owned, wholly Australian company. This extends to Australian farmland, water, critical power infrastructure and residential homes. All critical assets in Australia should be in our Australian hands, not in the hands of a foreign government or foreign multinational corporation. Labor, get some courage and integrity and put Australia first.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/CYtif1hLSOA/maxresdefault.jpg7201280Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2025-10-30 09:44:322025-10-30 09:44:40CCP Darwin Port Election Promise Still BROKEN!
During this session with the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water, I raised with them that in 2021, the Coalition government abandoned plans to build an all-weather, all-season paved runway in the Australian Antarctic Territory. Minister Watt confirmed that there are currently no plans to build such a runway and noted that Australia continues to rely on a blue ice runway during summer – leaving our bases largely isolated from the outside world for most of the year.
I pointed out that China is expanding its presence in the region, having already established three bases within the Australian Antarctic Territory. I also raised concerns about the recent reduction in the number of planned programs; however officials denied any funding cuts, asserting that Australia is meeting its obligations in Antarctic research despite China’s growing influence.
When questioned about China’s policy of conducting dual-purpose military and civilian research at its stations, the Department responded that military research would breach the Antarctic Treaty. China does not appear to share such concerns.
— Senate Estimates | October 2025
Transcript
CHAIR: Senator Roberts.
Senator ROBERTS: I’ll be quick. In November 2021, the then coalition government made the poor decision to abandon the proposed construction of an all-weather paved runway near the Davis research centre in Antarctica due to perceived concerns of potential disruption of bird and seal colonies. It was a very poor decision, in my opinion, that missed the opportunity for Australia to advance its claims to usage of their allocated portion of Antarctica under the existing Antarctic Treaty signed in 1959. That will be up for renegotiation in some years hence or sooner if the treaty is challenged. My understanding is that there’s no formal expiry date. My first question is: will this government, the Labor government, reconsider and confirm the building of an all-weather runway to open up the Antarctic to year-round access via an eight-hour flight and replace total reliance on sea access that may take weeks?
Senator Watt: I’m not aware of that being considered. The officials can elaborate if they have info on that.
Ms E Campbell: At the moment, there are no plans for an all-weather runway, but we do have a really strong and capable blue ice runway. We have four-hour flights that go to Antarctica through the summer, and that’s a critical support for our stations and access. It’s at the Wilkins runway, which is about four hours, by tractor train, from Casey Station. I’ve had the pleasure of going on that flight a couple of times. It is a wonderful asset for Australia.
Senator ROBERTS: My understanding is that an all-weather runway would radically reduce the operating costs and logistics of accessing Australia’s research stations. It would be the first and only all-weather runway on the continent and provide access to speedy evacuation in medical or other emergencies.
Ms E Campbell: We certainly use the blue ice runway for access to the station.
Senator ROBERTS: What do you mean by blue ice?
Ms E Campbell: It’s a runway set up on the glacier just above Casey Station. We land jets on that runway in the summer months. To your point about ‘cheaper and effective’, my understanding—and it was before my time in this role—is that one of the reasons that the previous government decided not to progress with the all-weather runway was cost.
Senator ROBERTS: In the context of changing geopolitical dynamics, especially when China is expanding its influence in the Southern Ocean and in Antarctica, what else is Australia doing to protect its interests from encroachment in the Southern Ocean and Antarctica?
Ms E Campbell: We’ve got a really strong program in Antarctica. We talked previously about our science voyages and the step-up in our science work in Antarctica. Elements such as inspections, which we’ve talked about, are part of our influence in Antarctica. Going to international meetings, rebuilding our stations—these are all really strong parts. We can certainly provide references to the strategy and action plan. We’ve got a million year ice core where we’re travelling 1,200 kilometres inland with a traverse tractor to drill for ice. We’ve also reestablished the ability to go across our territory and explore new areas, which is really exciting.
Senator ROBERTS: Correct me if I’m wrong, but I understand that scientific programs have been cut. Why is the supply of critical food and medicine no longer assured? Has the government not heard of the phrase: ‘Use it or lose it’? That’s important for my next question.
Ms E Campbell: I don’t accept that we’ve cut funding. The government has invested more than ever. Funding has gone up.
Senator ROBERTS: There’s been no cut to scientific funding?
Ms E Campbell: No.
Senator ROBERTS: This is my last question. China is currently the most active national player in the Antarctic, yet Australia has the largest designated proportion of area claimed of the Antarctic continent, at 42 per cent—so over 40 per cent. It is referred to as the Australian Antarctic Territory and, in landmass, is the largest territory of Australia. China has five research bases there, and it’s soon to be six, with three of the bases it’s built within the Australian Antarctic Territory. Australia has only three bases in the territory and a fourth at Macquarie Island. Am I correct so far?
Ms E Campbell: Yes.
Senator ROBERTS: Chinese research stations have a dual purpose, supporting both military and civil functions. Common sense suggests that this will influence a Chinese call for a recognised claim for a part of the Australian Antarctic Territory, at our expense. Australia must do something soon to reclaim its senior role in Antarctic affairs. Will this government do what the coalition failed to do and build this vital runway to protect our claim to our territory?
Ms E Campbell: I might correct a couple of points of fact. First of all, you said at the beginning that—and I did say it was right—China was the most active player. China is certainly very active in Antarctica, as are many other countries. I think the US would say they have been the most active player, and I think we’re close behind. There’s not evidence that there is a dual-use function of Antarctic stations, and that would be a breach of the treaty. There has been no finding—
Senator ROBERTS: What do you mean by ‘dual use’?
Ms E Campbell: You talked about dual military and scientific use. That would be a breach of the Antarctic Treaty, and there is no evidence that that has happened.
Senator ROBERTS: Do you think that would bother China?
Ms E Campbell: I think you’re asking my opinion. Under the treaty, that would not be allowed.
Senator ROBERTS: So we’re leaving it to the Chinese?
Ms E Campbell: That’s not what I said.
Mr Sullivan: They’re your words, Senator, not Ms Campbell’s.
Mentions pandas, trade, probably dumplings – but the Port of Darwin? Crickets.
Australia’s most strategic port is still run by a foreign power — and our PM forgot to bring it up. Classic!
Transcript
Senator ROBERTS: Albo off to China.
PM Albanese:It’s very good to be back in Beijing for my second visit as Prime Minister.
Senator ROBERTS: Here’s something that I don’t think he will bring up. The Port of Darwin.
Journalist: President Xi didn’t raise the Port of Darwin. And yeah, you didn’t use the opportunity meeting him to explain your policy on that.
PM Albanese: I don’t need to.
Senator ROBERTS: It was a huge election promise to get it back from the Chinese.
Journalist: Often times there’s a shot across the bow on the sale of the Port of Darwin. Did that issue come up in your two hour discussion?
PM Albanese: Well, the answer is no. The answer, well that shouldn’t come as any surprise.
Senator ROBERTS: He made lots of words, lots of promises, but he said he would do something about the Port of Darwin.
Journalist: Did the President express any objection to your plans about bringing the Port of Darwin back into Australian hands or any potential response that China might take to that?
PM Albanese: No, it wasn’t raised.
Senator ROBERTS: It’s Australia’s most strategic northern port. So does Australia operate it? No, it doesn’t. We don’t operate it. A foreign communist country operates it. So will Anthony Albanese stand up for this country and tell Xi Jinping to give the Port of Darwin back?
https://img.youtube.com/vi/BZKt2-FX_4c/maxresdefault.jpg7201280Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2025-07-17 18:14:522025-07-17 18:15:50The PM Goes to China – Again
Will Albanese question Xi Jinping about the CCP’s alleged human organ trade?
There’s an Act recently passed by the US House of Reps and currently awaiting approval by the Senate called H.R. 1503 Stop Forced Organ Harvesting.
‘To combat forced organ harvesting and trafficking in persons for purposes of the removal of organs.’
It seems globalisation has opened Western democracies to more than ‘trade’.
The suspected existence of international organ harvesting is a grisly reminder of the moral variance across borders.
This Act specifically aims to ‘hold accountable persons implicated, including members of the Chinese Communist Party’.
Unlike Australia’s vague foreign interference laws, the US did not shy away from naming the culprit.
The Act was introduced by Representative Chris Smith, who said of the measure:
‘Mr Speaker, every year under General Secretary Xi Jinping and his Chinese Communist Party, tens of thousands of young women and men – average age 28 – are murdered in cold blood to steal their internal organs for profit or to be transplanted into communist party cadres – members and leaders.
‘These crimes against humanity are unimaginably cruel and painful.
‘Between two and six internal organs per victim are extracted. It is murder masquerading as medicine.
‘Ethnic groups targeted included Uyghurs, who suffer from Xi Jinping’s ongoing genocide, and the Falun Gong, whose peaceful meditation and exercise practices and exceptional good health makes their organs highly desirable.’
This is the narrative of a horror film, and yet it is a real-world scenario carried out by the communist regime our Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, has gushed over meeting. He behaves as though shaking the hand of the CCP and climbing deeper into their economic sphere is a ‘good thing’ for Australia.
It is not.
Especially not at the expense of our US relationship.
Australian Senators may bicker over the finer details of international human rights, however, selling human beings into an organ-harvesting trade is universally condemned as an abomination against all moral and ethical standards.
‘In June of 1998 – 27 years ago – I chaired my first hearing on forced organ harvesting in China. A Chinese security officer testified that he and other security agents were executing patients with the doctors right there with ambulances ready to harvest their organs after the bullets were fired … at another hearing in 2022, we learned that some of the organs are stolen from victims who are still alive. One doctor testified how he had performed one such surgery on a victim of a botched execution and discovered, as he began cutting, that the victim was in a state of shock – not dead yet – and a live vivisection on a living human was being performed.’
If, as is claimed by our well-informed American counterparts, ‘state-sponsored forced organ harvesting is big business for Xi Jinping and the Chinese Communist Party which shows absolutely no signs of abating’ – what responsibility do Australian politicians have to ensure the 1.4 million people of Chinese ancestry within Australia are safe from this trade?
Politicians are aware that CCP influence reaches into Australia, with the communist regime spying on migrants via a network of Chinese chat apps and peers. They exert pressure on Australians of Chinese ancestry by threatening members of their family who remain in China. It’s a level of control that endangers both migrants and the wider Australian population.
On July 14, Sky News Australia published comments warning that Beijing might be weaponising expatriates to ‘interfere in domestic elections’.
‘Senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, Dr John Lee, said the People’s Republic of China had spent ‘enormous efforts’ influencing and interfering with Australian domestic politics to advance its interests.’
He added, ‘…it creates problematic structural problems for social cohesion in Australian society and politics.’
It was also recently published that Foreign Minister Penny Wong had been made aware of anonymous letters sent to Australians ‘offering a reward for information on the whereabouts of an Australian-based Hong Kong dissident’.
Ms Wong said, ‘The Australian government does not accept other governments interfering with our citizens, making anybody feel unsafe.’
Will Anthony Albanese bring this incident up with Xi Jinping on his trip?
Probably not.
Will he ask for the Port of Darwin to be peacefully returned to Australian hands?
He has already said that he will not.
Will he give Xi Jinping an earful over the live-fire exercises off our coast which disrupted commercial air traffic followed by a bit of casual circumnavigation of our borders?
Again, no, he will not.
Mr Albanese is a coward when it comes to diplomacy.
Socialist-leaning parties, such as Labor and the Greens, have a fascination with China’s dictatorial leadership. This leads them to turn a blind eye over repeated violations of international human rights laws and even the CCP’s utter disregard of environmental laws.
The CCP embodies everything these ‘humanitarian’ Australian political movements claim to be against. Their undying support and, in the case of the Prime Minister, diplomatic infatuation, remain a mystery to sensible people.
We cannot trust our international bureaucracies either. In 2021, the Office of the High Commissioner for the United Nations Human Rights said they were ‘alarmed’ by credible allegations of CCP organ harvesting.
Then, a few years later, the UN Human Rights Council elected China to serve its sixth term.
‘Diversity’ and ‘inclusion’ on an international level generally means ‘including’ ‘diverse’ approaches to morality, legality, and humanity.
This is far from the only dubious appointment by the UN. It’s time Australia asks whether we wish to have any part of this organisation as it collapses into a depraved quagmire of quasi-religious environmental propaganda, anti-capitalist dogma, and the empowerment of the world’s most ruthless and dangerous regimes while dragging nations such as Australia through the mud over trivial matters.
As an Australian Senator, I have many people come up to me at public events and ask for help.
Usually, they want me to combat the rise of brutal left-wing policy – a task that I’m dedicated to. They tell me heartbreaking stories about their lives that have been stolen by ill-conceived government directions and the general mismanagement of the Australian economy.
There are others, particularly migrants, who come to me wishing to raise awareness about the horrors of their homeland.
In particular, the hidden crimes of the Chinese Communist Party whose reach extends across our borders and into the Australian community.
For over 20 years, the world has been aware of the CCP’s disgusting underworld of human trafficking for black market organs.
However, because the CCP’s cheque book is vast, politicians have taken the money and sold the economic relationship back to the Australian people as a net benefit.
Since then, Australia has lost sovereignty over its manufacturing, energy, food, and communications network. Our natural beauty – beaches, oceans, forests, and farmland – are to be cut down and smothered with short-lived, CCP-built ‘renewable’ technology.
Cheap, substandard goods constructed with slave-like labour continues to out-compete our domestic retail landscape.
Is this the future we want for our children and their children?
Trade relationships have to be about more than just money.
They are about the future we create, the independence we hold, the stability of our civilisation, and the quality of our culture.
Pacific nations will no longer be able to come knocking at Australia’s door for assistance when a tariff from China can cripple our economy.
By sacrificing our economic independence to China, America will be the only entity policing freedom of navigation and trade routes in the Asia Pacific region.
And if Mr Albanese continues his antagonistic approach to America, we may no longer have that guarantee of safety either.
Murder masquerading as medicine by Senator Malcolm Roberts
Will Albanese question Xi Jinping about the CCP’s alleged human organ trade?
https://i0.wp.com/www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Panda.jpg?fit=719%2C960&ssl=1960719Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2025-07-17 17:14:152025-07-17 17:14:22Murder Masquerading as Medicine
This is the second Senate Estimates I have raised questions about Chinese Communist Party contact points (or Chinese overseas police stations) in Australia. We know they exist and that this issue has been investigated and confirmed by mainstream media.
I asked Home Affairs, the department responsible for Australia’s security, why there is a CCP contact point office in Sydney. Home Affairs avoided answering – this from the department responsible for national security policy. What hope have we got? This is the same department that helps META censor accurate social media posts from Australians, yet it won’t discuss CCP activity within Australia.
I was told Home Affairs was not the correct agency to ask these questions and was directed to the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO). The head of ASIO said he has no knowledge of a contact point in Sydney and referred me to the Australian Federal Police (AFP), who likewise stated that they had no evidence or information of this.
There must be a reason why they refuse to discuss this and are maintaining the secret.
Transcript below.
Transcript below.
Transcripts
Home Affairs
Senator ROBERTS: Yes. Given the general concern about the Chinese Communist Party’s global involvement in overseas affairs, in many countries’ affairs, why is there a Chinese contact point in Sydney? The contact point is a Chinese Communist Party-staffed office set up in a country outside China.
Mr Smyth: I would refer you to the Department of Foreign Affairs for matters in relation to that?
Senator ROBERTS: Well, you’re in charge of security.
Mr Smyth: I look after policy in relation to issues. But issues that go to bilateral relations with foreign governments or countries or their activities is a responsibility of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.
Senator ROBERTS: I’m after program 1.2, national security and resilience, so I’ll continue.
Senator Watt: With respect, Senator Roberts, you can’t just ask any question that includes those words in it. There are particular departments that are better suited to answering certain questions, and I think DFAT is probably the best department to answer the questions you’ve just asked.
Senator ROBERTS: I would doubt that, Senator Watt, because this is a security issue.
Senator Watt: Sure, but we want to make sure that you get the very best possible answers. You’ve already heard from the officials that DFAT is probably best placed, and they’ll be up on Thursday.
Senator ROBERTS: The AFP deputy commissioner investigations, Reece Kershaw, addressed this matter in a Senate estimates hearing in November 2022. He said that he did not believe the Sydney contact point was active, without going into further detail. So these questions are being asked to update the current situation. Is there still a CCP supported contact point in Sydney? That’s a yes or no answer. It doesn’t need to upset anyone.
CHAIR: Senator Roberts, the AFP will be appearing a little bit later today. If you’ve got questions for them or are following up from answers that they’ve given at previous estimates, they will be available for you to ask those questions then.
Senator ROBERTS: I’m stunned that the Department of Home Affairs cannot face questions about security?
Senator Watt: That’s not a fair way to put it.
Senator ROBERTS: It is true.
Senator Watt: That’s your take on it, Senator Roberts. We’ve tried to assist you by—
Senator ROBERTS: Let the people of Australia decide on what their take is.
Senator Watt: We’ve tried to assist you by telling you the two different groups you could put those questions to. We’re all going to be here all week and there are opportunities for you to ask those questions.
Senator ROBERTS: What’s the role of Home Affairs with regard to national security and resilience? Minister?
Senator Watt: I’ll suggest that the deputy secretary in charge of that area answers your question, Senator Roberts.
Mr Smyth: In relation to resilience, we have a task force that was established in November 2022, and that’s to better position Australia for what we see as a significant set of risks and challenges that it faces across the full spectrum of national and human induced crises. The task force leads on national resilience policy and strategy. That ensures that the Commonwealth has the necessary policy, legislation and capability to manage what is really an increasingly complex and cascading set of concurrent national crises in the current geostrategic and geopolitical environment. We provide advice to government around issues in relation to national security. We look after national security policy. We look after legislation for intelligence services. We look after countering foreign interference policy, terrorism policy et cetera.
Senator ROBERTS: Counter and foreign interference policy—that’s what I’m talking about.
Mr Smyth: And we do that in collaboration with other portfolio agencies.
Senator ROBERTS: I’d like to know your role in that collaboration.
Mr Smyth: My role is as the National Counter Foreign Interference Coordinator.
Senator ROBERTS: What would be your role in knowing whether or not there’s a CCP-supported contact point in Sydney?
Mr Smyth: I’d have to take that question on notice. I think the evidence that was given to you by Commissioner Kershaw was that that is not an active—
Senator ROBERTS: I’d like to know what it is now.
Ms Foster: I think that the difference perhaps is that Mr Smyth is responsible for the overall policy and coordination, but operational issues will typically fall within the purview of the operational agency which is why the Australian Federal Police is best placed to answer questions about current operations.
Senator ROBERTS: Wonderful! Before you start getting into policy—unlike climate change, where there’s no data, despite driving that policy—what is the purpose of the Chinese Communist Party contact point in Sydney? What is its purpose?
Mr Smyth: I would refer you to the AFP in relation to the evidence that has been previously given by Commissioner Kershaw.
Senator ROBERTS: I want to know what it is now. That was 12 months ago.
Ms Foster: Yes, Senator, and that’s an operational issue, which Senator Kershaw is well placed to answer, and he will be appearing later tonight.
Senator ROBERTS: I want to know what your take on it is, because we’re trusting you with our security.
Ms Foster: I’ve just made a distinction between our role in providing the overall policy framework and coordination and the role of individual operational agencies to manage specific operational issues. I think it’s evident from the fact that the evidence last time came from Commissioner Kershaw that this is an operational issue which the AFP is best placed to deal with.
Senator ROBERTS: What’s your policy for handling the Chinese Communist Party contact points, and what’s the basis of that policy?
Mr Smyth: The issues that relate to that, I think, are best referred to the Counter Foreign Interference Taskforce, which is an ASIO and AFP led taskforce that deals with operational matters in relation to foreign interference activity on Australian soil.
Senator ROBERTS: I’ll acknowledge that you’re talking about operations with other people. I want to know what the basis for your policy is in regard to the Chinese Communist Party contact points in Sydney, because initially they weren’t existing and then we find out they do.
Mr Smyth: Where foreign governments seek to interfere in the democratic process of Australia, we take an interest, but those issues relate more to operational matters for taskforce agencies. In relation to the contact point that you’re referring to, I’d have to take on notice any specific information that we have that resides in this portfolio.
Senator ROBERTS: Okay. That’s two questions you’ve taken on notice. Are there Chinese police officers working out of the premises? You can take that on notice. And are—
CHAIR: Senator Roberts!
Mr Smyth: That would be an operational matter for the taskforce members and also a matter potentially for the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.
Ms Foster: Senator, we’re not seeking to be unhelpful. It’s just not helpful to you if we take something on notice which we’re then going to refer to someone else.
Senator ROBERTS: Are there any concerns of the security agencies about potential breaches of Australian national sovereignty?
Ms Foster: That would have to be addressed to the security agencies.
Senator Watt: ASIO will be on later today as well, Senator Roberts. There are opportunities for you to ask these questions. It’s just that they’ve got to go to the people who can answer them.
Senator ROBERTS: I’d would like to know that Home Affairs knows something about this. Should Chinese people living in Australia be concerned? You’re in charge of security.
Mr Smyth: Again, I’ll refer you to previous answers that we’ve given.
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you.
CHAIR: Senator Roberts, are those all the questions you have?
Senator ROBERTS: Thanks, Chair.
Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO)
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you, Mr Burgess and your staff, for being here. I asked a question of Home Affairs, and they said to come here and also AFP. Given the general concern about Chinese Communist Party global involvement in overseas affairs, why is there a Chinese contact point in Sydney? A contact point, I’m sure you know, is a Chinese Communist Party staffed office set up in a country outside China.
Mr Burgess: I’m not aware of a Chinese contact point in this country other than the official consulate and embassy presence.
Senator ROBERTS: The Australian Federal Police deputy commissioner of investigations, Reece Kershaw, addressed this matter in a Senate estimates hearing in November 2022. He said he did not believe the Sydney contact point was active, without going into further details. These questions I’m going to ask are to update the current situation. You’re not aware of it, so what is the purpose of a CCP contact point?
Mr Burgess: I can’t comment about the purpose of something I’m not aware of. What I will say is my agency does consider and look for signs of foreign interference, and it’s more the behaviour we’re focused on in terms of anyone in this country that might be here doing something which is against our national interest, represents a threat to security and is not publicly declared.
Senator ROBERTS: Would it be something you’d investigate if it wasn’t a threat necessarily to Australian security but a threat to the security of Chinese citizens or former Chinese citizens?
Mr Burgess: Anyone in this country gets our protection.
Senator ROBERTS: Good. As I said, Reece Kershaw addressed the matter and said he didn’t believe it was active, without going into further detail. You can’t tell me how long it’s been in operation? You can’t tell me, a year later, whether there are Chinese police officers working out of the premises?
Mr Burgess: I would stand by my judgement that there is not a Chinese contact point in this country.
Senator ROBERTS: Are there concerns at the security agencies about potential breaches of Australian national sovereignty?
Mr Burgess: Every day in my line of business.
Senator ROBERTS: Do you surveil any threats from the CCP in this country that could affect Chinese residents or Taiwanese residents?
Mr Burgess: I do not talk about operational matters publicly.
Australian Federal Police
CHAIR: Thanks, Senator Scarr. Against my better judgement, Senator Roberts has got two minutes. That probably equates to two questions, and we thank you for your brevity.
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you for appearing tonight. The 60 Minutes program broadcast on 18 June this year—an investigative story—showed interviews with several Australian citizens who had been intimidated by Chinese authorities and showed proof of the existence of at least one Chinese overseas police station in suburban Sydney. What actions have been taken by the AFP with whom the information was shared?
Mr McCartney: I think we’ve been asked this question a number of times during past Senate estimates and I think we’ve been consistent. In terms of the construct of a Chinese police station operating in Australia, I also heard the Director-General of ASIO state today that we’ve got no evidence or information on that. But, having said that, is Chinese foreign interference a threat? Yes, it is, and we continue to work very proactively with ASIO and other agencies in relation to that space.
Senator ROBERTS: This is my last question. The Australian Federal Police deputy commissioner of investigations, Reece Kershaw, addressed this matter in Senate estimates hearings in November 2022, I understand. He said he did not believe the Sydney contact point was active, without going into further detail. These questions are asked to update the current situation.
Mr Kershaw: Senator, I’m the Commissioner of the AFP. I think you called me ‘deputy’. You’ve demoted me!
Senator ROBERTS: I have a lot of respect for the AFP; believe me. And I’m pleased you can see it with a sense of humour.
Mr Kershaw: So what was the end of a question?
Senator ROBERTS: Reece Kershaw said that the Sydney contact point was active, without going into further detail. I was going to ask more questions.
Mr McCartney: Senator, I think it was actually me who said that at the last Senate estimates. I would go back to my first answer: there’s no information that indicates that a Chinese police station is operating in Sydney, and that’s a position that’s supported by ASIO.
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you very much, Chair.
CHAIR: Thanks, Senator Roberts. We appreciate you keeping to your word. That’s all the questions we have for the Australian Federal Police. Thank you, Commissioner.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/dtUwEP53odo/maxresdefault.jpg7201280Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2023-10-25 07:44:032023-11-03 14:20:51CCP Office in Sydney? Nothing to See Here!
During the COVID response I was temporarily banned from social media for pointing out that COVID could have emerged from the Wuhan lab.
This fact is now widely acknowledged, even by the former directer of the US Centre for Disease Control. Who’s spreading misinformation now?
Transcript
In light of acting minister Senator Chisholm’s comments when he mentioned COVID, I wish to note and draw to the Senate’s attention that the bill that was passed this morning, the Therapeutic Goods Amendment (2022 Measures No. 1) Bill 2022, combined with this bill, makes it impossible to dodge vaccine mandates.
I want to draw the attention of the Senate to two points. The first is an article by the Washington correspondent for the Australian, Adam Creighton. The article is headlined ‘”US helped fund Covid-19″: ex CDC director Robert Redfield’. Dr Robert Redfield is a former director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in the United States. It’s supposedly an authoritative body. The article says: Dr Redfield … said … during a House Select Coronavirus Pandemic Subcommittee hearing on “Investigating the Origins of COVID-19” that the deadly coronavirus “more likely was the result of an accidental lab leak”—
Whoops! Those conspiracy theorists were right! The article says:
The former head of the US Centers for Disease Control has told Congress the US government likely helped fund the development of Sars-Cov2, which he believed leaked from a Chinese lab in late 2019, ultimately killing more than 6 million people globally.
Asked by Republican congresswoman Nicole Malliotakis whether “American tax dollars funded the gain of function research that created this virus”, Dr Redfield, who was CDC director between 2018 and 2021, replied “I think it did”.
This is serious stuff. The article goes on to say: “As a clinical virologist I felt it was not scientifically plausible that this virus went from a bat to humans and became one of the most infectious viruses we have for humans …
His testimony came a week after revelations the FBI and the US Department of Energy had assessed the lab leak theory — once dubbed a ‘conspiracy theory’ — where have I heard that before — to be the most likely explanation for the origin of the pandemic.
Dr Redfield, who was appointed by the Trump administration … said he had been side-lined early on by Dr Fauci — where have I heard his name before — and NIH head Dr Francis Collins — where have I heard her name before — who, Dr Redfield said, wanted to “create a narrative” the virus emerged naturally.
It’s rubbish. The article continues: The two hours of testimony and questioning by Democrat and Republican representatives of four expert witnesses on Wednesday … centred around private emails from top US scientists to Dr Fauci in late January, which suggested the new virus ‘looked engineered’ — Senator Babet — and what may have prompted their subsequent about face.
On February 4th, four of those scientists among a group of 11, who had convened on a confidential conference call organised by Dr Fauci, from which Dr Redfield — head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — was excluded, claimed the lab leak idea was not feasible in a draft academic paper that became the “Proximal Origin of Sars-Cov2”, published in March.
“I didn’t know there was a February 1 conference call until the Freedom of Information came out with the emails and I was quite upset as the CDC director that I was excluded,” Dr Redfield said.
One of the witnesses, Nicholas Wade, both former editor of Nature and senior New York Times science writer, said the media had been “used” to establish the natural origin theory.
Like this government has been used. The article continues: He also pointed out the scientists — remember, this is a Democrat — who seemingly changed their mind over the course of a few days later received a US$9 million grant from Dr Fauci’s NIAID in May 2020.
This is serious stuff. The article continues: Another witness, Dr Jamie Metzl, said the idea the virus emerged from wet markets was never the most logical explanation.
“I’m a lifelong Democrat. I consider myself a progressive person, but … I couldn’t find the justification for the strong arguments, calling people like me, investigating looking into pandemic origins in good faith, conspiracy theorists”.
This smells. The TGA bill, combined with this bill, enables injection mandates. Let’s have a think about who could be the beneficiaries here. On Tuesday I discussed the fact that, over the last 15 years, 47 market-leading drugs have aged out of patent, costing pharmaceutical companies $30 billion a year in lost sales, including drugs that made up 42 per cent of Pfizer’s drug revenue and 62 per cent of AstraZeneca’s. This patent cliff is set to get worse, with another 15 leading drugs—nine of them among the world’s top-20 best-selling drugs—due to expire this decade. Pfizer will lose another $15 billion in annual sales. The only way to replace so much revenue is with a whole new class of drug: mRNA—not tested, thought to be dangerous, killing people in this country and globally.
We’ve now seen that drug on the market, through mandates that the federal government drove.
The former Prime Minister drove the injection mandates in this country.
He bought the injections. He indemnified the states. He gave them to the states and gave them access to the health data that enabled the states to control the mandates.
We are looking at something being set up here that is heinous.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/aYKPnNIN-ZM/hqdefault.jpg360480Sheenagh Langdonhttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSheenagh Langdon2023-03-15 15:38:152023-03-20 11:11:22The Wuhan “Conspiracy Theory” – Not a conspiracy any more
Reports last year indicated that the China has set up police stations across the world including one in Sydney.
Chinese authorities have said the stations, sometimes called “contact points”, provide services to citizens, such as renewing national identification cards, passports and drivers licences, by using facial recognition technology.
But human rights groups fear overseas police offices could also be used to target dissidents abroad or compel people to return to China where they could face potentially politicised trials.
Despite this potential National Security Breach, our spy agency ASIO doesn’t appear worried and claims to not know anything about it. China must be laughing at our government.
Transcript
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you for attending today. Mr Burgess, you said in your opening statement that
Australia is the target of sophisticated and persistent espionage and foreign interference activities from a range of hostile foreign intelligence services. I take it they use a range of means of doing so.
Mr Burgess: Correct.
Senator ROBERTS: Is there a Chinese Communist Party supported contact point in Sydney?
Mr Burgess: I’m not aware of that.
Senator ROBERTS: It’s been reported in the media, I understand.
Mr Burgess: I see many things in the media, but I let the data that we have available to us determine that. I wouldn’t comment on operational matters, but I’m not aware of that in the context of that media reporting.
Senator ROBERTS: So you’re not aware of how long it’s been in operation or what its purpose is?
Mr Burgess: You’re assuming it’s true.
Senator ROBERTS: Yes.
Mr Burgess: We will investigate things that are associated with acts of foreign interference, but I won’t bring colour to them in a public hearing.
Senator ROBERTS: Are there Chinese police officers working out of premises in Sydney?
Mr Burgess: Not that I’m aware of.
Senator ROBERTS: Are their operations of interest to our security agencies?
Mr Burgess: If anyone here were engaged in acts of espionage or foreign interference, that would be of concern and something that we would investigate.
Senator ROBERTS: What about potential breaches of Australian national sovereignty?
Mr Burgess: Again, my agency will investigate anything that’s a threat to security.
Senator ROBERTS: What about Chinese citizens or Chinese people living here in Australia? Should they be concerned? You would protect them, even though they may not be Australian citizens.
Mr Burgess: Anyone in this country is free to be here, assuming they’re on a valid visa, of course, or they’re a citizen or permanent residence, and they’re of no concern to us unless they’re engaged in matters of prejudicial security, in which case we would show an interest in them.
Senator ROBERTS: Individual security as well as national security?
Mr Burgess: Threats to security are what ASIO worries about.
Senator ROBERTS: You’re not aware of people operating from this contact point, so you wouldn’t know whether or not they have any contact with or influence on Australian Chinese residents or Chinese visa holders.
Mr Burgess: Again, I don’t comment on specific operational matters, but I will say this because I’ve said this publicly before: the threat of espionage and foreign interference is a real threat in this country. It is our principal security concern. It comes from a range of countries, and I think it’s unhelpful for me to call out specific countries and in particular when we talk about the vast range of diaspora communities in this country, the members of those communities are not the problem. It’s the foreign government and the foreign intelligence services that will be the focus for me and my agency.
Senator ROBERTS: The Chinese Communist Party itself has belted our country economically. What Australian overview of agencies that operate in this country is there for premises like the supported contact point in Sydney?
Mr Burgess: Again, I don’t comment on specific matters, but if we have a need to investigate things that may be of concern in relation to security, things that could be used as platforms for espionage or foreign interference, I can assure you my agency will be on it and investigate it. And I can assure you we had a very productive year last year, removing espionage and foreign interference problems from this country.
Senator ROBERTS: And you may or may not be able to tell us about those operations, depending upon the circumstances. Is that correct?
Mr Burgess: I wouldn’t talk about them publicly in detail.
Senator ROBERTS: Let’s move on to a series of very short questions on a topic that was underway in last Senate estimates in this room, as I was asking the questions, but it was denied. That was the ISIS brides that were brought back. What are the costs to Australia of bringing these women and children to Australia?
Mr Burgess: The repatriation was not a matter for ASIO. We gave advice on the individuals, but beyond that you’d have to pass that question to others.
Senator ROBERTS: What security measures are to be taken to keep Australian community members safe, because these people have been part of some radical terrorist groups and associated with them?
Mr Burgess: The only comment I’d make there is that ASIO gave security advice to government and, in particular, gave security assessments on all the individuals that returned. That was our job.
Senator ROBERTS: What was that again? You assessed them?
Mr Burgess: We did security assessments on returning individuals, and they returned, and that’s okay.
Senator ROBERTS: Are any of these women currently wives or partners or sisters of terrorists?
Mr Burgess: I won’t go into specific matters.
Senator ROBERTS: Are they genuine refugees?
Mr Burgess: They’re Australian citizens who have returned home.
Senator ROBERTS: Given their recent social circumstances, are any of these people going to need
deradicalization programs?
Mr Burgess: Again, I wouldn’t comment on that publicly, Senator.
Senator ROBERTS: How many of the women have been charged with terrorism related offences?
Mr Burgess: I’m not law enforcement. I’m aware of one charge.
Senator ROBERTS: One.
Mr Burgess: You should speak to the AFP about that.
Senator ROBERTS: Okay.
CHAIR: Senator Roberts, if it assists you, we do have the AFP a little bit later today. They can answer some of those questions for you.
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you, Chair. Given that most of the husbands and children’s fathers have been
killed by Western soldiers, how traumatised and angry were they when you assessed them?
Mr Burgess: I can’t speak for how they’re feeling.
Senator ROBERTS: No, but you would be aware, surely, of their potential threat?
Mr Burgess: As I said, we did security assessments on all the individuals, and anyone who falls into that
category that believes that violence is the answer would be subject to my agency’s inquiry and investigation.
Senator ROBERTS: Is ongoing support to be provided, and what is it?
Mr Burgess: Again, that’s not a matter for my organisation, other than to say that we will continue to watch anyone that is a threat to security, but I’m not making any comment on these individuals.
Senator ROBERTS: You may not be able to answer this, but I’m guessing you would know the answer
because it would form part of your assessment of terrorism threat. Given the children’s exposure to violence, either as victims or perpetrators, what are the plans for their assimilation, and did you make any comments about what was needed?
Mr Burgess: Again, that question is best put to others in Home Affairs and more broadly.
Senator ROBERTS: Does your agency work in providing a diagnosis and recommendations?
Mr Burgess: On individuals or children?
Senator ROBERTS: On treatment of people to make sure that they don’t violate our standards of behaviour.
Mr Burgess: No, we’re not involved in that. We talk about the security threats people might face, and others worry about what treatments, if any, might be needed.
Senator ROBERTS: So, you do interact. If you can see a potential threat, you pass it on to someone. You
don’t just—
Mr Burgess: We’re part of a broader apparatus that helps counterterrorism in this country, yes.
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you. I see Mr Pezzullo nodding in agreement. Have the communities where these people are to be housed been fully consulted? I guess that’s for other people to comment.
Mr Burgess: It’s not a question for me, Senator.
Senator ROBERTS: Does your assessment of the threat include any consideration of family members here in Australia whose friends or family members have been killed by ISIS terrorists? Do you consult with the community in which they’re going to be placed?
Mr Burgess: No, we’re not involved in that consultation of where they get placed.
Senator ROBERTS: Will the families be housed together or apart?
Mr Burgess: Again, I can’t answer that question.
Senator ROBERTS: I was thinking more from a security point of view.
Mr Burgess: No, that’s irrelevant. They’re Australian citizens; they’re entitled to be where they want to be
unless there’s some legal condition on them. But I’m not law enforcement, so I’m not part of that.
Senator ROBERTS: So, would you be monitoring them more closely if they’re living close together in an enclave?
Mr Burgess: We will monitor anyone that we deem to be a threat to security.
Senator ROBERTS: So, it wouldn’t be part of your recommendations to keep them separate in this country?
Mr Burgess: No, we were not in that space.
Senator ROBERTS: I just have a final question, Chair, on violence. Does ‘violence’ include destroying
artworks, interrupting everyday Australians and destroying roadworks? I note that left-wing extremism in the 20th century killed 120 million people. I presume you monitor all types of extremism?
Mr Burgess: We’ll monitor any individuals that have an ideology that thinks violence is the answer.
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you very much and thank you for your clear statements opposing violence.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/j3lIndoX3tY/0.jpg360480Sheenagh Langdonhttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSheenagh Langdon2023-02-13 19:37:122023-02-14 14:12:05Spy agency ASIO not aware of secret Sydney Communist China police station
This morning I interviewed Paul Funnell who is a councillor in Wagga Wagga NSW.
Paul put to the council that they should cut ties with their Chinese sister-city Kunmin because the “Chinese Communist Government that delights in lies, subterfuge and coverups” has brought “death and destruction across the world with COVID-19”.
The motion passed.
Since then, Paul has been attacked by the usual control freaks labelling him racist and xenophobic.
Here is his story
Transcript
[Malcolm Roberts] Hi. I’m with Paul Funnell on Skype, and Paul is a sheep and irrigation farmer from southern New South Wales around Wagga Wagga. He’s also a councillor on the Wagga Wagga council. And last week he moved a motion to repeal or to end the sister city relationship that Wagga Wagga has with Kunming in China. You didn’t expect it to pass, but it did.
[Paul Funnell] No, I didn’t, Malcolm. It was about putting it up out of principle because I don’t want to be in a relationship with the CCP, which is what the Kunming provincial government actually is, it is the CCP. And with the coverups, etc., with COVID-19, I just felt it was time, enough’s enough. And that’s why I stood my ground. But of course it got up, right to my surprise.
[Malcolm Roberts] So here’s an everyday Aussie standing up for his beliefs, getting it through the council, and you’re just doing what you think is right. Now, you have got nothing against the Chinese people. In fact, you’re getting a lot of support from Chinese people including those in Communist China. But what your beef is is that you don’t want to be associated with the Communist Party of China that’s ruling that country by force, and you just want to dissociate yourself from it, not continue to condone them.
[Paul Funnell] That’s correct, Malcolm. This is nothing to do with the Chinese people. In fact, I’m trying to help the Chinese people. And that’s what this is all about. It’s not just a totalitarian regime, it is the most brutal regime in world history. And we are tacit in approving what they do by remaining in this soft infiltration. Because this is what they do through the sister city programmes. And eventually, you have to draw a line in the sand. And that’s what I’ve done.
[Malcolm Roberts] Well, good on you, mate. And now, you were expecting a lot of pushback, but surprisingly you got it through. Then the pushback came with the left and the control freaks in our society.
[Paul Funnell] Correct. And I thought it might upset a few people of the left-leaning persuasion, and the nice people. And there’s nothing wrong with being nice, but they don’t understand what they’re dealing with here. They don’t realise that we’re actually in bed with a brutal communist regime. So yes, I thought we might get a little bit of pushback around here in Wagga, but it absolutely exploded. It has gone global.
[Malcolm Roberts] But it’s been in support of you, not against you.
[Paul Funnell] In support of me, yes. I am getting support from all over the world. Obviously a lot of the Chinese nationals and Chinese Australians and people from all over. Some of them, however, only contact me directly through my text or email privately, because, as they say, they still have family living in China and they’re afraid. And of course, this speaks volumes to what this whole situation has brought out. But if that doesn’t make us stop and think, “We don’t want to be in this relationship,” and if we can’t stand up. And they are so pleased. So many of them have said, the majority, they’re so pleased that they finally found a politician, which, of course, local government is certainly far from being a politician, has actually stood up to help them. So it’s just been overwhelming. But of course the vitriol and the hatred that has come from the opposition is just absolutely astounding. But that speaks volumes.
[Malcolm Roberts] Here in Australia, Paul?
[Paul Funnell] Here in Australia, absolutely. I’ve received many threats, as in death threats. I can produce those documents. And it’s quite disheartening, actually, to think that people could be so vitriolic and so interested or disinterested in wanting to stand up for people and for what is right. But unlike in China, I will defend their right to do so, because we have a democracy where they have that choice.
[Malcolm Roberts] So you’re standing up on behalf of your constituents and on behalf of your own principles, and what you’ve been surprised by is the lack of interest from the mainstream media in this country, the vitriolic response and attacks on you personally, just by voicing your concerns, which got through council. Now you’re expecting it to be rescinded tomorrow, Wednesday, at the shire council meeting, correct?
[Paul Funnell] Correct. The mayor has called an extraordinary meeting because, as he said, he’s appalled. He thinks we’ve done irreparable damage, and there’s an absolute pile-on. But of course all that’s done is built my resolve to show, because he wants to apologise to the CPP for causing any harm, to the extent where the council general, I mean, this has drawn the ire of the council general of the Chinese embassy in Sydney, where he put out a media release last week. And in it, he actually states that my actions and I should be restrained. I mean, doesn’t that speak volumes? So we have drawn the ire of the Chinese consulate. This has has gone global. It is being reported in China and all over the world. And it’s interesting that the ire actually proves my point, as this is what we’re dealing with.
[Malcolm Roberts] And what’s happening is you’re getting a lot of support from mainstream Australians, everyday Aussies. You’re getting a lot of support from Chinese people all around the world. You’re getting interest from all around the world. And yet, the locals, media, won’t pay any attention and you’re getting attacked by some people who oppose what you’re doing. They just won’t leave you alone.
[Paul Funnell] No, that’s right. It runs from about six o’clock in the morning to one o’clock the following morning every day. but that’s fine. What they don’t realise is in, probably being a typical Aussie or whatever, I’ll just dig my heels in. I’m a reasonable person. I will defend their right to having a differing opinion to me. I will absolutely defend their right. Interestingly, the local media here immediately around Wagga, I can only say, must be left-leaning, because they’re giving an absolute dump and pile-on, even to the editorials, to say that my moral judgement should be assessed and I should be turfed out. I mean, it’s quite mind-boggling. Professors from our wonderful academic institutes are saying, it’s in the Daily Advertiser today, actually stating that Australia and America are also complicit in this COVID-19. I mean, it’s just astounding that this is the way our media has gone.
[Malcolm Roberts] Yeah, it’s crazy. Last week, I came out and made a tweet. Two weeks ago, I made a tweet that went around the world. And it’s got enormous support from just about every continent, saying that we need to hold the Chinese Communist Party responsible for the COVID virus, because they suppressed the news of it, they shut down doctors who wanted to talk about it publicly, to raise public awareness. The World Health Organisation came in and supported that shutting it down, and the World Health Organisation and China have colluded to make sure that the West didn’t know what was going on. That’s cost us more lives, delayed our response. We’re having a pandemic because of something that was released in China and because of suppression of that in China. And what you’re saying is you want truth, and just to wrap up, you’re saying we should end the sister city relationship between Wagga Wagga and the Kunming area because of the Chinese Communist Party’s role and rule over Kunming. That’s what you’re against.
[Paul Funnell] That is absolutely what I’m against. This is the same municipal government that actually has, it’s documented, in current times, of torture camps, of abuse against their own people. That is who we are in the relationship with, not the good people of Kunming. It’s the regime we’re in the relationship. That regime is the CCP, who has allowed this unleashing of this COVID-19, which has absolutely devastated world economies. Hundreds of thousands have died. Millions are infected. It’s going to take generations to pay back the debt. And everyone wants to turn around and walk everywhere else, but yet remain in our city council wants to harangue me and turn around and say, “Oh, no, it’s all nice. “We want to remain in a relationship with these people.” You’ve got to be kidding me.
[Malcolm Roberts] To be in a relationship, it has to be mutually respectful. And when they’re talking about cutting you off or suppressing you, what was the word?
[Paul Funnell] Restrain.
[Malcolm Roberts] Restraining you. Then that’s hardly mutually respectful, because you’re a citizen of a foreign country and their consulate wants to restrain you for that. Now, as I understand it, a lot of people have now contacted the Wagga Wagga council and are wanting this to continue, not to be rescinded tomorrow.
[Paul Funnell] That’s correct. There’s been enormous amount– The pendulum has swung the other way, actually. There’s been dozens and dozens of emails going through to all councillors. And there’s hard, factual evidence that’s being put through as to what we’re dealing with. So this will be on their conscience. This will be their decision. And all I want is an open and transparent and a fair relationship with any governing body anywhere in the world. But if we can’t have that, we cannot be complicit and give tacit approval and say, “Oh, we want to do our economic up here but we’re not going to look at what’s going over there.” There comes a point in time. I believe this is the time. And I urge everyone to stand up. I urge councils everywhere, people of all levels.
[Malcolm Roberts] And you’re getting a lot of support from the Chinese people themselves under Communist rule, also around the world, who are outside of China. And in Australia, local Chinese people who you admire and respect, and you’re trying to help them as well.
[Paul Funnell] That’s what I’m trying to do. I want to help the people. I want to be in a relationship with the people. I do not and will not be in a relationship with a brutal regime that has unleashed this on the world, and we know that that is a fact.
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you very much, Paul.
[Paul Funnell] My pleasure, Malcolm. Thank you for taking the time to speak with me.
