Posts

Question Time: I asked the government why its refugee program seems to favour cultures that struggle to integrate while ignoring persecuted Christians—people who share similar values to ours and are being slaughtered right now.

Minister Watt couldn’t answer and has taken my questions on notice.

Update: Minister Watt has since provided answers, which I’ll address in a follow-up video below 👇titled – Four Islamic Nations Dominate Our Refugee Intake

Transcript

Senator ROBERTS: My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Home Affairs, Senator Watt, regarding humanitarian visas. In the 2024-25 financial years or the 2024 calendar year,
what are the top five countries of origin of refugees to which your government granted humanitarian visas?

Senator WATT (Queensland—Minister for the Environment and Water): Thanks, Senator Roberts. I don’t have that level of detail with me but am happy to come back to you on notice.

The PRESIDENT: Senator Roberts, first supplementary?

Senator ROBERTS: In that period, how many refugee visas were granted overall, and how many of those were issued to Nigerian Christians and South African farmers?

Senator WATT: Again, I’ll come back to you on notice.

The PRESIDENT: Senator Roberts, second supplementary?

Senator ROBERTS: Minister, Islamic cultures and cultures foreign to Australia need a lot of work to integrate into our country, yet your government’s refugee program disproportionately favours
Islamic and foreign cultures over Christians, who have a similar culture to Australia’s. Minister, why does your government’s refugee program deliberately exclude Christians who are being slaughtered as we speak?

Senator WATT: Senator Roberts, I’m not quite sure that you’re telling the truth there. I have said that I will come back to you on notice with the facts, but
Australia has had a non-discriminatory immigration policy for many decades, which has been supported up until now, at least, by the Liberal Party. I’m not quite sure what their position is on these matters these days, but we remain proudly in support of a non-discriminatory migration policy, and it will remain that way under Labor as long as we’re in government

Four Islamic Nations Dominate Our Refugee Intake

Follow-up to my video titled “Why Is the Refugee Program Ignoring Persecuted Christians?”

In that video, I questioned the government about the refugee program appearing to prioritise cultures with poor integration outcomes over those who share our values and are facing severe persecution. Minister Watt undertook to provide answers on notice—and has since done so. I’ll address his response in this update.

After reviewing those answers, I again used Question Time to ask why 73% of Australia’s humanitarian visas—14,500 out of 20,000—are allocated to five countries: Afghanistan, Syria, Myanmar, Iraq, and Malaysia. Four of these nations are predominantly Islamic.

Minister Watt responded by stating that the Australian Labor Party supports a non-discriminatory immigration policy and does not discriminate against people on the basis of faith.

I asked the Minister whether Labor is cherry-picking UN advice to exclude Christians. Despite UN guidance to protect them, Christians persecuted in countries such as Nigeria, Pakistan, Iran, and Eritrea appear to be ignored.

Transcript

Senator ROBERTS: My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship, Minister Watt. I thank the minister for his written response to my last question without notice on refugee numbers. From your reply, Minister, the top five countries for our humanitarian program, comprising 14,500 of our 20,000 humanitarian visa intake, or 73 per cent, are Afghanistan, Syria, Myanmar, Iraq and Malaysia. Four of these have Islam as their dominant or state religion. The fifth, Myanmar, is Buddhist, yet the UN Human Rights Council prioritises Rohingya refugees, who are Islamic. It seems deliberate, Minister, that your humanitarian visa program is overwhelmingly favouring Islamic refugees over Christian refugees. Why? 

Senator WATT (Queensland—Minister for the Environment and Water): Thank you, Senator Roberts, for the question. I think the last time you asked me a question about this I pointed out that the Australian Labor Party, perhaps unlike other parties in this chamber, proudly stands for a non-discriminatory immigration policy. We don’t rule people out on the basis of their faith, on the basis of their race or on the basis of the country that they come from. Listening to the list of countries that you just provided to us— 

Senator McKim: Just their mode of arrival, hey? 

The PRESIDENT: Order! 

Senator WATT: I would argue that the common feature of each of those countries is not so much their religion but the fact that they are war torn and that they are countries that people are fleeing because of concerns for their safety. 

Senator McKim: What if they arrive by boat, Murray? 

Senator WATT: Senator McKim seeks to keep interrupting. It’s a— 

The PRESIDENT: Minister Watt, I’ve got Senator Wong on her feet. 

Senator Allman-Payne: Oh! 

Senator Wong: I’m sorry, Senator Allman-Payne—you don’t want me to take a point of order? President, there have been interjections from that particular senator, Senator McKim, through the response to the previous question that was asked by the Greens and now through this. I would ask you to ask him to cease the interjections on this minister. 

The PRESIDENT: Thank you, Senator Wong. I have personally called Senator McKim to account on the previous question, and I just called order. I am reluctant, always, to interrupt those that are either asking or answering questions, but, Senator McKim, just cease. Thank you. 

Senator WATT: As I was saying, our government and the Labor Party stand for a non-discriminatory immigration policy, and we don’t discriminate against people on the basis of their faith. As Senator Ayres was mentioning, I think what we’re seeing and hearing here from One Nation is foreshadowing where we’re going to see the coalition end up on immigration policy in a matter of weeks, because we know that’s what happened when it came to net zero policy. It started with One Nation railing against wind farms and railing against net zero, and then it spread to the National Party, and then it spread to the Liberal Party, and then it even spread to the so-called moderates in the Liberal Party, who had to cave in to the conservatives, the Nationals and One Nation on their opposition to net zero. So what we’re seeing here, I predict, is what we will see within a matter of weeks as the immigration policy of the Liberal Party. Hello, Senator Duniam. You’re in charge now, along with Senator Scarr. Senator Scarr might have to face a situation where he has to explain to those Brisbane multicultural groups why he’s followed One Nation when it comes to immigration policy. 

The PRESIDENT: Thank you, Minister Watt. Senator Roberts, first— 

Honourable senators interjecting— 

The PRESIDENT: Senator Roberts, just wait. I’m calming the chamber down. Please continue. First supplementary? 

Senator ROBERTS: Your letter admits Australia has not issued one humanitarian visa in Nigeria, yet the current United Nations Human Rights Council guidance, since 2016, has promoted protecting Nigerian Christians from Islamists, citing hundreds—now thousands—of deaths. Similar guidance exists for protecting Christians in Islamic Pakistan, in Iran, in Eritrea and in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Minister, are you cherrypicking which United Nations Human Rights Council guidance you follow to exclude Christians and favour Islam? (Time expired) 

Senator WATT: No. 

The PRESIDENT: Senator Roberts, second supplementary? 

Senator ROBERTS: Minister, it is a person’s religion—for instance, Christian in an Islamic country—that places them in danger, which is the reason for the United Nations Human Rights Council guidance in that country, for their own safety. Yet your letter says you can’t tell me how many of the humanitarian visas issued are for that reason. Isn’t that reason in their case file, and wouldn’t you have to let the United Nations Human Rights Council know how many refugees we took and why? 

Senator WATT: No. 

As we wrap up 2025, I want to thank you for your incredible support throughout the year. This support and your involvement made all the difference, and it’s been a privilege to serve you during 2025.

I’m deeply grateful to our hardworking team in our Senate office, and to all One Nation teams across Australia. Their dedication ensures we can keep delivering with integrity and purpose. There have been challenges and wins, and I couldn’t be prouder of what we’ve accomplished this year.

Christmas is a time to cherish the people who matter most—our family and friends.  It’s a time to pause and reflect on the hope brought into the world over 2,000 years ago with the birth of Jesus – a message of love, peace, and generosity. These are some of the values that unite us all.

As we celebrate Christmas, let’s take a moment to remember those facing difficult times. Some will have an empty chair at the table this year, others separated or alienated from their children.  Many Australians are without a place to call home, or are spending the day alone, and some are dealing with hardship or health struggles.   You are in our thoughts.

So, whether you will be spending a quiet day at home or celebrating with a big festive gathering, my wife Christine and I, together with our Senate team wish you a Christmas filled with laughter, love, and joy – and may the year ahead bring health, happiness, and opportunity for you and your loved ones.

🎄 Christmas Office Closure!

Just a heads up! Our hardworking office team is taking a well-deserved Christmas break.

📅 Closed: From 4:00 PM Friday, 19 December 2025

📅 Reopen: Monday, 12 January 2026 at 8:30 AM

As you can imagine, our inbox will be overflowing! If your message is important, please resend it just before the 12th so it pops to the top of the pile. We’ll do our best to respond where needed.

Senator Watt has circulated an edited version of my exchange with the Special Envoy to Combat Islamophobia, which omits a large part of the discussion. This is the full exchange.

I asked the new Islamophobia Envoy about a report he delivered to the Government a few months ago which, in One Nation’s view, whitewashed Islamic terrorism and Sharia Law, while advocating for the suppression of criticism under the guise of stamping out Islamophobia. We have seen how this same approach in the UK has resulted in 65 Sharia law courts and the development of a parallel society between Islamic and Christian citizens—where criticism of Christianity is permitted, but criticism of Islam is not.

The Envoy lectures on Sharia Law at the University of Technology, so he should be well aware of its provisions and its incompatibility with Australian and Western civilisation.

One Nation will oppose Sharia Law and the development of parallel societies within Australia.

— Senate Estimates | December 2025

Transcript (Draft)

Senator ROBERTS: Thank you, Mr Malik for appearing on notice.  Could you please tell me how many staff you have?  What is your annual budget and how much of that budget did you report titled A National Response to Islamophobia cost? 

Senator Shoebridge: Good luck with that. 

Mr Malik: So in regards to budget, I can take that on notice. I don’t have that at hand.  In regards to staff, I began recruitment for my own staff from my office once the federal election results have been made clear. Up until that point I have been using or utilising the support of the Envoy Support team.   
Home Affairs did however provide me two staff full time staff, one of them is an office manager and the other is a communication Support officer. So they have been dedicated towards me, supporting me in social media, website management, proofreading, graphic design, printing and basically ensuring that my day to day affairs are in order. 

Senator ROBERTS: What do you how many staff do you expect to have? 

Mr Malik: I have recruited for five staff.  I’m hoping to close.  I’m finalising interviews for the final member of staff. 

Senator ROBERTS: Thank you, thank you.  Your report, a national response to Islamophobia, does not mention Sharia yet.   Sharia law, should it be allowed in Australia, would replace Australian law, Australian courts, police and governance.  How can you talk about opposition to Islam without addressing the elephant in the room? 

Mr Malik: Sharia law?  I don’t believe it is an elephant in the room.  I mean, my role is to understand the reverse of that.  My role is to understand what have been the impacts of the past 25 years upon Muslim communities who are facing the brunt of discrimination, marginalisation, exclusion.  And so my job is to really understand that the question you raise is, is a good question because it highlights the misconception around Sharia law.  A statement I made in the House of Parliament at the end of July was that when people talk about Sharia law, it’s always good to ask them what do they mean by Sharia law.  So there tends to be different understandings of Sharia law.  And I further said that most Muslims would be, would be difficult for them to address one of the principles of one of the five principles of Sharia law.  So, a good question which highlights a challenge and which I hope to address in the coming months. 

Senator ROBERTS: Your report – thank you.  Your report does not include a definition of Islamophobia, but then makes more than 50 recommendations to solve the thing you haven’t defined.  How can you call for extensive legislation and a large bureaucracy to combat something you can’t or don’t define? 

Mr Malik: So the report does address that on the first page.  It’s 54 recommendations.  And there’s an argument amongst academics to how to define this term called Islamophobia.  What academics are not disagreeing about are the impacts of this prejudice or hatred or racism.  And one of the things I wanted to avoid is to avoid falling into the pits that Great Britain has fallen in and that is an annual conversation around the definition of Islamophobia masks all along the repercussions of this phenomenon of being ill advised or not being addressed.  And so what I do say however, is in the Commission of inquiry I do ask whether or not Australia requires a definition of Islamophobia in the Australian context and whether that will hinder or progress the cause. 

Senator ROBERTS: Minister, Mr Malik’s report does not accept that people who may have a legitimate concern about Islam.  For instance, the report does not mention ISIS, al Qaeda, nor does it mention that the latest briefing provided by the provided to the Senate by the ASIO Director General Mike Burgess showed 25 of Australia’s 29 prescribed terrorist organisations are Islamic based organisations.   
It seems that he’s simply redefining a factual and logical and genuine concern about Islamic terrorism as Islamophobia.  Minister, how would measures designed to combat Islamophobia differ from measures to combat anti Semitism or the growing anti Christian hate coming from the hard left?  Surely the words and actions directed to one group or the other would not differ in their legal implications. 

Minister Watt:  Well, Senator Roberts told you …  

Mr Malik: … 

Minister Watt: I think that question was to me. 

Senator ROBERTS: Yeah, it was. 

Minister Watt: Senator Roberts, I haven’t followed the work of either special envoy terribly closely. I’ve certainly followed media reporting of the work that both special envoys have done and I think that’s really valuable work at a time when social cohesion is deeply at risk in Australia because of the activities and language of a range of extreme groups in the community.  And the last time I looked, Mr Aftab’s role was to advocate for the needs of Muslim Australians, particularly in the face of gross Islamophobia that has been going on in our country.  Just as Miss Siegel has been engaged to advocate for the needs of Jewish Australians at a time when we are seeing gross anti Semitism in our country.  And I would encourage you and other members of your party to think about that Senator Roberts. 

Senator ROBERTS: Minister, all of the three: anti-Christian, anti-Semitism and anti-Islamophobia are religion-based hate.  They’re not anti-religion. 

Chair: Thank you. 

Minister Watt: I don’t really know what point you’re making … 

Senator ROBERTS: I know you don’t. 

Minister Watt: But I have to answer questions from you and your colleagues on a regular basis in the Senate chamber, which I would describe as Islamophobic.  So I would I would encourage you to think very carefully about the sorts of questions and sorts of statements that you and your colleagues make in the public domain at a time when we are seeing social cohesion under threat and when we are seeing at a time when we are seeing the rise of neo Nazis and other extremists with whom you sometimes associate.  And you should think about that. 

Senator ROBERTS: False. 

Chair: Thank you. 

Senator ROBERTS: I do not associate with neo-Nazis. 

Minister Watt: ??? experience. 

Senator ROBERTS: But let me tell you.  You make comments about – let me tell you my comments are about pro Australia.  I put Australia first -pro Australia. 

Minister Watt: Well, you have your view of what Australia is … 

Senator ROBERTS: We want unity.    

Minister Watt: And it’s out of step with the majority of Australians. 

Senator ROBERTS: My party’s name is One Nation because we believe in unity. 

Chair: OK, I am going to rotate the call. 

This decision is based on fear and will only lead to fear throughout the club.

The Essendon Football Club has forced Andrew Thorburn out of his CEO position because of his personal Christian beliefs, citing that they are “at odds” with the club’s views.

My question is, will the club apply this new rule on religious discrimination across the board? Will they audit all of their staff and players for supposedly “unacceptable” beliefs?

What will they do for the staff and players of Islamic faith if they are found to believe in practices like forced marriage, deception or even violence against infidels, domestic violence against wives and the punishment of homosexual acts by death.

Will anyone who believes in this fundamental version of Islam receive the same treatment as Andrew Thorburn? Or is religious discrimination only accepted against those of Christian faith?

Scott Morrison and Dominic Perrotett claim to be men of faith, yet seek to further divide our society.

There are fake Christians in politics. They pretend to be of faith but are actually trained to lead sheep to a slaughter, like a judas goat.

The Judas Goat: https://youtu.be/8_MDc77awHQ

Transcript

Fake Christians are the Judas goats of the 21st century. We have a fake Christian prime minister and in New South Wales, a fake Christian premier. Both are forcing the faithful to break their covenant with God or be destroyed, unable to provide for themselves and their families. Both are not ambassadors of God’s light; both are harbinger’s of hatred.

That the billionaires who own the world would advance these two men as their pawns says more about the billionaires than it does about Prime Minister Morrison and Premier Perrottet, who, we already know, are the elite’s sock puppets. Elite billionaires clearly consider Christianity as nothing more than attendance at church and pious words.

In the case of our prime minister, throw in a little happy-clappy Christian theatre. How little they understand us. The book of Matthew tells us that Jesus did not turn away lepers; Jesus healed lepers. In many such lessons throughout the Bible, Jesus was instructing the faithful, quote,

“Purity laws that categorise and isolate others are not of God. Our inner beings, our hearts must be pure and purity involves integrity of the whole person.”

These teachings support religious objection to COVID injections. If these fake Christians were indeed men of God, they would know this fundamental Christian belief and would defend that belief, not destroy it. There’s nothing Christian in these men’s actions.

Maintaining this facade of Christianity leads the faithful away from God towards segregation, towards persecution, towards the destruction of our families and our communities. That’s the role of a Judas goat.

The faithful will flourish. Those who desert their faith for anti-human corporatism will not. Perhaps this Christmas, Scott Morrison and Dom Perrottet can contemplate Jeremiah 34:8-22. Thank you.