Posts

Where is Our Flag?

,

During this Estimates session, I questioned why the National Australia Day Council’s website and their 2024-25 report seem to treat our flag as an afterthought. The report is full of glossy photos, yet the Australian flag is almost entirely absent, appearing only incidentally.

Is this a government directive to ignore our flag, or is the Council doing this on its own?

I noted that there has been a massive 120% increase in the Council’s grant budget, jumping from $4.5 million to $10 million. While the government claims this supports local events, I pointed out that this funding is being directed toward “reflective” activities like truth-telling workshops and smoking ceremonies.

I expressed concern that major events, such as the flag-raising in Sydney, emphasise Indigenous flags while the presence of the Australian flag remains unclear or secondary.

I confronted Minister Wong directly on whether the ALP government has “declared war” on our Western heritage. I wanted to know if this administration is ashamed of our history, as their actions suggest a move away from the traditional celebration of our nation.

The government’s response was to hide behind the “independence” of the Council, though they admitted to supporting these funding shifts.

I asked if they were ashamed of our heritage and the Minister responded with a simple “no,” – however their actions on the ground tell a different story.

— Senate Estimates | February 2026

Transcript

CHAIR: We are now going to rotate the call. I will go to Senator Roberts.  

Senator ROBERTS: Thank you for attending again. Good afternoon. Minister, national identity is important. I’m sure you’d agree. It’s one of the core issues for any country: national identity. Could you please explain why the website for the National Australia Day Council does not show the Australian flag? Does the government or the Prime Minister believe the Australian flag is not appropriate to the celebration of Australia Day?  

Senator Wong: Which website, sorry?  

Senator ROBERTS: The National Australia Day Council.  

Senator Wong: I think they appear separately, Senator. I’m not trying to be difficult.  

Senator ROBERTS: I understand that, but you’re overseeing them.  

Senator Wong: Am I?  

Senator ROBERTS: Your government is.  

CHAIR: I don’t believe they’ve been requesting the Australian flag.  

Senator ROBERTS: I want to know what the government’s attitude is.  

Mr Walter: Senator, the National Australia Day Council is a Commonwealth company, and they make their own decisions about their website. I haven’t looked at their website recently, but I can do that. But they’re an independent body. There’s an independent council that’s appointed that manages the secretariat and the company, so those decisions are a matter for it. 

Senator ROBERTS: Let’s continue. The 2024-25 report by the National Australia Day Council has lots of glossy pages full of photos of the world that matters to them. No Australian flags are treated as a photo illustration. Three are seen in incidental shots. Is the National Australia Day Council acting on a government instruction to ignore that we have a national flag, or are they doing so on their own initiative?  

Mr Walter: As I said, Senator, the National Australia Day Council is a company. It’s an independent company set up under Commonwealth company legislation. It makes its own decisions.  

Senator ROBERTS: I understand the National Australia Day Council budget for grants has risen from $4½ million in 2025, last year, to $10 million in 2026—a 120 per cent increase, more than double. This covers 849 grants in the amounts of $2,000 and 869 grants of $10,000 for larger events and a special rate for Aboriginal groups of up to $15,000. Are you aware, is this correct and do you condone it?  

Mr Walter: The government absolutely supports the grants process. Funding has been provided over many years for a grants program for the National Australia Day Council. What those grants are used for is to host Australia Day events. That’s the purpose of the grants. They’re provided largely to local government instrumentalities to support their holding of Australia Day functions—functions in support of Australia Day. So, yes, the government does support that program.  

Senator ROBERTS: This funding included funding for smoking ceremonies, truth-telling workshops and cultural performances and multicultural events. Direct National Australia Day Council examples include capital city events like Sydney’s flag-raising with Indigenous flags. Did those flag-raising events include the Australian flag?  

Mr Walter: I’d have to take that on notice. I assume so, but I would have to take it on notice. I didn’t attend the events, but I would presume they did, yes. They’re for Australia Day.  

Senator ROBERTS: This is my last question on this topic before switching briefly. I understand Minister Gorman required the National Australia Day Council to conduct these events—Minister Gorman; that’s my understanding—which he calls reflective. Minister, has the ALP government declared war on our Western heritage and flag? Are you, as a government, ashamed of our heritage?  

Senator Wong: No and no.  

/0 Comments/by

Government dodges corruption investigation

, ,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

/by

Select Committee proposed to investigate QLD Council Corruption

Through the Local Government Association of Queensland (LGAQ) Ltd the deep corruption that had been culturally entrenched in Ipswich and Logan Councils, is ingeniously and systemically infecting many other Queensland councils.

Senator Malcolm Roberts lodged a Senate motion this week calling for a Select Committee on Corruption in Queensland Local Government to be established to address the gross misuse of Commonwealth and State Disaster Funds, under the procurement practices of LGAQ Ltd and Queensland councils.

Senator Roberts said, “Evidence shows that around 50% of the funded disaster money is siphoned into areas that currently avoid detection and is not used for the benefit of the community.”

“Listening to many contractors and staff state-wide has uncovered a depth of dishonesty with public money that law-abiding citizens will find it hard to believe, but it is true.”

The National Disaster Relief and Recovery Arrangements (NDRRA) is the agency through which councils receive disaster recovery funding. From 2011 – 2019 all Queensland councils received a blockbuster $5.339 billion, 75% from the federal government and 25% from the state.

The LGAQ’s unfettered existence benefits from two statutory provisions. Firstly rule 234 of the Local Government Regulations 2012 exempts a Council from calling for quotes or contractors to tender if the contract is entered using the LGAQ as an intermediary. 

This practice, considered unlawful collusion in all states except Queensland, allows LGAQ’s procurement entity Local Buy, to award disaster recovery projects to “anointed contractors” that can be encouraged to inflate prices, use substandard materials and deliver inferior workmanship to maximise profit.

The other problem is s591 of the Industrial Relations Act 1999, that exempts LGAQ Ltd from appointing an independent auditor to inspect financial records.

Senator Roberts stated, “Access to large sums of disaster money, rule 234 and exemption from financial auditing, allows immunity from scrutiny and transparency creating a hot bed of systemic corruption.

A 2019 audit of Queensland Councils by the QLD Audit Office identified $793 million worth of assets – including roads – missing from public registers of 44 councils during 2017-2019.  The report stated that overspending, incomplete asset registers and systemic poor internal controls were widespread across Queensland Councils making fraud easy to do.

Queensland’s state government and the Crime and Corruption Commission are aware of these alleged corrupt practices and have inexplicably declined to investigate.

Senator Roberts added, “A Senate Committee will ensure an independent investigation, void of political interference, into these corrupt practices. “Every Queensland council should welcome the scrutiny to give rate payers reassurance their council’s governance and fiscal management are both moral and legal.” 

/3 Comments/by