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!
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
I travelled to Alice Springs to talk about actually supporting Australians in remote communities, not dividing us on race like the PM tried to do with his voice referendum.
One Nation will abolish the racially divisive indigenous departments that costs tens of billions a year and hasn’t closed the gap one bit.
Here’s what we’ll do instead.
The Northern Rail link is a 3,000 km proposal across the entire top of Australia.
The important part for remote communities is what will run right next door to that rail line: high speed internet, electricity and a water pipeline.
Those three essential utilities will allow us to turbocharge central Australia, for everyone who lives remotely.
Instead of handouts – One Nation will build real infrastructure that will allow remote Australia to make themselves richer. The best form of welfare is a job – we’ll build the infrastructure to create those jobs in rural Australia, based on need not race.
This budget is a mockery of governance that seeks to make Australians reliant on government handouts. It ensures that power is no longer vested in ‘We The People,’ instead it’s in ‘Them the Bureaucracy.’
The world has been here many times before and clearly, Treasurer Chalmers has failed to study history. The more the government borrows—$44 billion in this budget—the less private enterprise has available to invest and grow the economy for all who are here. The more the government spends, the less is available for private enterprise to create real jobs, making everyone more reliant on the government.
One Nation is offering the Australian people a comprehensive economic plan to restore wealth and opportunity for every Australian. One Nation will immediately return $40 billion into the pockets of everyday Australians, funded through savings of $90 billion. This plan includes paying off an additional $30 billion a year from our national debt and investing $20 billion a year for 10 years in infrastructure to grow our economy. In my budget reply, I explain how this will be achieved.
Transcript
This budget that we’ve just had delivered is a mockery of governance that seeks to make Australians reliant on government handouts, ensuring power is no longer vested in us, the people, but instead is vested in them, the bureaucracy. The world has been here many times before, and clearly Treasurer Chalmers has failed to study history. The more government borrows—$44 billion in this budget—the less private enterprise has available to invest and grow the economy for all who are here. And there are too many here: five million new arrivals in the last 10 years—five million. There have been 2½ million under this Labor government in just the last three years. This is the major reason for the cost-of-living and housing catastrophe. The more the government spends, the less is available for private enterprise to create real, productive jobs and the more reliant everyone becomes on the government.
One Nation is offering the Australian people a comprehensive economic plan to restore wealth and opportunity for every Australian. One Nation will immediately return $40 billion into the pockets of everyday Australians, funded through savings of $90 billion, which will also enable us to pay off an additional $30 billion from our national debt and invest $20 billion a year for 10 years in the infrastructure to grow our economy. Here’s how we’ll be putting more money in people’s pockets—more money in your pocket. No. 1 is reducing electricity prices by 20 per cent to save $6 billion. Currently the system of priority dispatch turns coal-fired power stations off during the day to make room for solar and wind. Operating a coal plant this way causes damage which shows up in much higher maintenance costs and breakdowns, increasing the price of coal fired electricity. One Nation will turn priority dispatch around and run coal plants to at least 80 per cent capacity 24/7. We expect this power will be sold into the grid at around $55 per kilowatt hour, compared to the average price last quarter across all types of power of $120 per kilowatt hour. That’s less than half of what it has been. This should reduce power prices by 20 per cent immediately, and, over time, as we build new coal plants, it should cut power prices by 50 per cent. The government pays for the electricity it uses, so this will reduce the government’s electricity costs by $3 billion and save consumers and businesses $6 billion a year. That’s more money in your pocket.
No. 2 is income splitting to save $8 billion. One Nation will introduce income splitting, allowing a couple with at least one dependent child to split their income between both partners. If there’s only one breadwinner earning the average wage, the family will save $9,500 a year in tax. That’s $9,500 that stays in your pocket. This measure will cost $8 billion a year, offset in part from tax on the resulting higher economic activity. And we expect more parents to be able to afford to stay home and mind their children, reducing government subsidised childcare.
No. 3 is $13 billion a year in excise cuts. One Nation will cut the fuel excise by 26 cents a litre for three years and then review it to see if it continues. The ACCC monitor fuel prices daily, and I’m confident the reduction will be passed on to consumers. Fuel is an input cost right across the economy. Lowering fuel prices lowers commuting costs for consumers and transport costs across the economy, including for groceries, saving consumers and industry $8 billion a year. That’s more money in your pocket. We will remove the GST on insurance policies, saving consumers $3 billion a year. And we will remove the excise on alcohol sold in hospitality venues. This will save consumers more than $1 billion a year. That’s more money in your pocket. This policy is not about drinking; it’s about supporting hospitality venues and offering Australians a safe place to drink in a social environment—a community.
No. 4 is increased funding for the ACCC. In February One Nation called for an increase in funding for the ACCC to enable a thorough investigation of supermarkets, airlines and insurance companies for profiteering and dishonest business practices. I note that Treasurer Chalmers tonight in the budget has required the ACCC to spend $38 million on policing supermarkets, which will be hard after he cut the ACCC’s budget by $48 million. One Nation will provide whatever it takes to investigate and prosecute illegal behaviour from supermarkets, airlines and insurance companies. Prices must come down, and profit margins should not be excessive in these essential industries.
No. 5 is increasing Medicare funding by $3 billion a year. One Nation will prosecute fraud in the Medicare and PBS system, which the government knows is happening yet does not have the courage to solve. We will impose longer wait times before new arrivals can access Medicare and review drugs being offered under the PBS that received emergency-use authorisation during COVID.
This $40 billion of more money in your pocket will be paid for with the following spending cuts to cut government waste. We will abolish net zero and climate change measures. One Nation will withdraw from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Kyoto protocol and the Paris Agreement. We will end net zero. We will abolish the department of climate change and their agencies, schemes and boondoggles. Existing solar and wind contracts will be honoured. No new subsidies will occur. Today’s budget reveals that the whole climate scam costs the government $35 billion a year. The cost to the private sector is anywhere from $1 trillion to $2 trillion depending on who’s doing the numbers. This is a massive cost on Australian households that One Nation will abolish.
One Nation will return the NDIS to its original purpose, helping the severely disabled, and introduce means testing, saving $20 billion a year and improving care.
We will withdraw from the World Health Organization and ban the World Economic Forum. For too long Australia has been held hostage to unelected, unaccountable, corrupt foreign bureaucrats at the World Health Organization and predatory billionaires operating their puppet organisation, the World Economic Forum. It’s a cabal which, during COVID, transferred $5 trillion from everyday citizens into their own pockets. One Nation will withdraw from the UN World Health Organization and will only provide cooperation where we believe it will assist in world health. We will withdraw from the World Economic Forum and the World Bank, saving around $1 billion a year in contributions, administration and in the costs of implementing policies such as One Health, which can only be described as anti-human.
We will end mass immigration. There are 75,000 people in Australia illegally, right now, mostly with expired visas. One Nation will deport them all. There are 1.1 million people here with student related visas, which are students and their families, who can now accompany students. Australia only has 480,000 student places, so clearly there are people who are rorting the system, at our cost. One Nation will send home any student and their family who is not following the terms of their visa, which are to study and to complete their course.
One Nation’s policy will initially result in a negative net immigration of 90,000 a year, meaning more people will leave than enter, because with around 220,000 departures a year we will only allow 130,000 people a year to enter. Ninety thousand more people will leave than enter. This will put downward pressure on the cost of housing and free up homes for Australians who are currently living in tents or who are underhoused. Unlike under Liberal and Labor policies, all people who enter will be skilled.
Education is a state responsibility. Yet we have federal bureaucrats telling state bureaucrats telling regional bureaucrats telling headmasters telling teachers what to teach—too many mouths to feed along the way and harming educational outcomes. The Program for International Student Assessment, PISA, is an OECD program which assesses reading, mathematics and science literacy of 15-year-old students. Australia is not in the top 10 nations, and our latest ranking shows a score below the OECD average. We will abolish the federal Department of Education, including the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority and NAPLAN, saving $2 billion a year, and return education to the states in accordance with the federal constitution.
Last year the Allianz insurance company found Australian businesses were spending $27 billion on DEI and related mental health measures in 2024-25. While One Nation supports legitimate mental health concerns, there’s clearly a significant cost involved in DEI. If half of this $27 billion is for DEI, and the government is a quarter of that, then DEI is costing taxpayers $3 billion a year and adding $10 billion a year to the cost of goods and services in Australia. One Nation will abolish woke and bank these savings for taxpayers and the Australian public.
Next, One Nation will end foreign multinational gas companies rorting the natural gas royalties. We will change from where royalties are levied from profits and switch to point of production—that makes perfect sense—and create a domestic gas reserve, raising up to a $13 billion a year from offshore sales.
We will reduce foreign aid, saving $3 billion a year, with the remaining aid being targeted to those in need instead of being a slush fund for political influence.
We will abolish the white and black Aboriginal industry. As already announced, we will replace the national Indigenous grants agency, the Aboriginal units across every department and agency and associated programs and boondoggles. We will replace that parasitic mess with direct grants and essential remote infrastructure based on need not race, saving $12½ billion and getting better care to the Aboriginals in the community.
Taken together, these savings will total $90 billion a year, with $40 billion going back to taxpayers and $20 billion going to infrastructure, which I discussed this afternoon. One Nation’s plan is a real economic plan, designed to lower the cost of living while expanding the economy and restoring wealth and opportunity for all Australians.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/pccw2JtvKzs/maxresdefault.jpg7201280Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2025-03-26 13:25:152025-03-26 13:25:21One Nation’s Plan for Economic Growth and Self-Reliance
This is how you close the gap. It’s what One Nation has always said – treat people based on need not race.
When that happens fundamental needs come out. For people to have purpose they need to be able to contribute and hold a job. For a job you need industry and industry needs basic things: power, water and internet.
The 3,000km Northern Rail link sometimes referred to as the Iron Boomerang would bring all of these fundamental things and allow remote communities to thrive like never before.
This is what is possible when we address needs instead of separating people based on race.
The Future Made in Australia (Production Tax Credits and Other Measures) Bill 2024 is a perfect example of legislation that One Nation would abolish. For 30 years, Australia has been held hostage to the green climate scam. This Bill continues wasteful spending, now with a hint of desperation.
The Bill introduces a hydrogen production tax credit of $2 per kilogram, aiming to meet net zero targets. However, if hydrogen were commercially viable, companies and banks would be investing, but they aren’t. One Nation believes in the profit motive, not subsidies.
Recent withdrawals from hydrogen projects by companies like ATCO and Shell highlight the unviability of green hydrogen. In contrast, One Nation supports practical projects like the Port of Gladstone’s container-handling development, which will bring thousands of jobs and $8 billion in private investment.
The Bill also offers tax incentives for refining critical materials used in renewable energy, costing $7 billion over 11 years. This benefits processors, not taxpayers. One Nation proposes infrastructure projects to support critical minerals development instead.
Lastly, the Bill changes borrowing rules for Aboriginal communities without actually specifying the new rules, creating uncertainty and potential debt for unviable projects. One Nation cannot support this lack of transparency.
The net zero transition is destroying Australia with absolutely no benefit to the natural environment.
It’s time we returned to reliable coal and gas fired power stations. This measure will put more money back in Australians pockets and end further suffering.
Transcript
The Future Made in Australia (Production Tax Credits and Other Measures) Bill 2024 is a perfect example of the garbage legislation a One Nation government would abolish. For 30 years, Australia has been held hostage to the green climate scam/climate fraud. With this legislation, the boondoggles continue—this time with a hint of desperation.
The bill has three schedules. The first introduces a hydrogen production tax credit of $2 a kilogram of hydrogen. This is supposedly to encourage the production of hydrogen for use in processes that contribute to the meeting of net zero targets. There it is again, raising its ugly head: net zero targets. There is a reason that green hydrogen is going up in flames faster than the Hindenburg. If hydrogen was commercially viable there would be a queue of companies producing and using hydrogen, but there aren’t. There would be a queue of bankers lending for new hydrogen production. That isn’t happening either. In fact, the reverse is true: companies and banks are pulling out. One Nation has a different strategy to encourage production. It’s called the profit motive.
Eighteen months ago Canadian gas giant ATCO scrapped plans for one of the first commercial-scale green hydrogen projects in Australia, despite strong funding support from the government. Why? Because the numbers did not add up. In a sign of the times, Shell withdrew from a project to convert the Port Kembla steelworks into a hydrogen powered green steel project in 2022. Only last week BlueScope announced a $1.15 billion upgrade to the same Port Kembla plant to produce steel for another 20 years, using coal. The Hydrogen Park project in Gladstone, in my home state, was suspended after the Queensland government and the private partner withdrew. Despite the hype, this project would have only produced enough hydrogen to power 19 cars, while employing a handful of people. On the other hand, the Port of Gladstone’s container-handling development, a real project, which One Nation has championed for years and which will be starting construction shortly, will bring thousands of jobs to Gladstone, with $8 billion of private sector investment—real breadwinner jobs, real future productive capacity.
Now, there have been some promising developments in hydrogen powered cars, mostly from Japanese makers. With zero tailpipe emissions, a longer range and faster refuelling, they contrast with the high cost and impracticality of EVs, electric vehicles, to achieve the same outcome. But the Japanese are trialling these on the basis that they may be legislated. The Japanese are covering their options. It should be noted that this research is being conducted in the private sector, acting out of a profit motive. Nothing our government has done will develop this technology. Consider Honda, for example. It is a disciplined, respected car maker—one of the leaders in the world—with an amazing culture. It is a leader in hydrogen. It’s marking time. It has hydrogen powered vehicles on the road, but it’s using it’s shareholder money to support them, prudently, just in case they’re legislated.
There’s nothing in the hydrogen schedule of this bill that will provide Australian taxpayers with value for money—nothing—and it’s a bloody lot of money: $6.7 billion over 10 years. I can just see Chris Bowen and Mr Anthony Albanese tossing out another few billion, $6.7 billion, to add to their trillions that will be invested eventually in this net zero madness. One Nation opposes schedule 1 of the bill, and if the bill is passed it will be repealed when One Nation repeals all of the green climate-scam legislation.
Let’s move to schedule 2. Schedule 2 of the bill creates production tax incentives for transforming critical materials into a purer or more refined form. The materials in question are those that are used in wind, solar and batteries, used to firm unreliable, unaffordable, weather-dependent power—more money being thrown down the sewer. This section of the bill is directed at an industry that already receives government support through other schemes, including the Critical Minerals Facility, which offers loans, bonds, equity guarantees and insurance; the National Reconstruction Fund, which offers concessional loans, equity and guarantees; the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility, which offers concessional loans, equity and letters of guarantee; and the Critical Minerals Research and Development Hub, which offers in-kind support via free research and development—not free to the taxpayers funding it, but free to the company—which is separate to the normal research and development tax incentives from the Australian Taxation Office. We’re tossing money at these people, and it’s wasted. How much assistance does one industry need? How much, government? After all this assistance, who gets to keep the profits generated from all this taxpayer largesse? The processors do. The critical minerals proposal in schedule 2 will cost $7 billion over 11 years—another $7 billion. ‘What’s a billion here or there?’ says the government.
The Albanese government is socialising the costs and privatising the profits. We pay for their development and the costs, and the companies take the profits. Worse, there’s no requirement that the recipients are Australian owned. What are you doing with people’s money? What would actually help critical minerals in Australia is One Nation’s proposal for a northern railway crossing from Port Hedland in the west to Moranbah in Queensland to open up the whole Top End and provide stranded assets like critical minerals with access to manufacturing and export hubs.
Let’s move on to the third schedule, the final schedule. It’s even worse. The bill changes the rules in the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Act to allow Aboriginal communities wider borrowing powers. The new rules are not specified. Those will come later from the minister. Not only is this a failure of transparency, it creates a second round of debate when the rules are released. It creates more uncertainty. Rules written under proposed legislation should be included with the legislation so the Senate knows exactly what it is voting on and how the powers will be used. But we don’t, and yet you’re going to vote on this. Without those rules, One Nation cannot support this schedule either.
In One Nation, we support the people. The Liberal-Labor-Greens, though, have decades of serving masters outside the party—globalist, elitist, parasitic billionaires, foreign corporations, non-government organisations, the United Nations and the World Economic Forum alliance. The Senate is open to conclude, given the location of this provision within a bill about injecting money into the net zero scam, that net zero is the destination for this extra borrowing—financing Aboriginal corporations to create their own government subsidised businesses and doing things private enterprise won’t touch.
Minister for Climate Change and Energy, otherwise known as ‘Minister for Blackouts’, Chris Bowen, member of parliament, is behaving like an addicted, compulsive gambler who has done all of his own money and is now dragging his friends into his black hole. If this bill is passed, the Aboriginal community will be shackled with debt for pointless financial boondoggles that have no chance of commercial success—none. If this is not the intention, then the minister must table the rules. Let’s see what the government does intend.
The net zero transition is destroying Australia and doing nothing for the natural environment. It is hurting the natural environment. The public are turning against the whole scam now that they realise the cost benefit is not there. It’s costing them money and needless suffering. Business is turning against net zero because its carrying the full cost of soaring power prices and extra green tape. It’s now coming out in the papers—the mouthpiece media. Minister, give it up, turn on the coal- and gas-fired power stations and save Australia from more suffering.
I’m now going to raise some additional points, related points, explaining what underpins the hydrogen scam and climate fraud. The Senate seems to be populated, mostly, with feeble-minded, gutless senators. Never has any empirical scientific data been presented as evidence, within logical scientific points, proving that carbon dioxide from human activity does what the United Nations and World Economic Forum and elitist, fraudulent billionaires claim—never, anywhere on earth. Or do such uninformed, gullible proponents in parliament have conflicts of interest? For example, the teals and possibly the Greens, it seems, receive funds from Climate 200, which spreads money from billionaire Simon Holmes a Court, who rakes in subsidies for solar and wind. Are the teals, including Senator Pocock, and the Greens gullible, or are they knowingly conflicted and pushing this scam? Only One Nation opposes the climate fraud and the net zero scam. One Nation will pull Australia out of the United Nations World Economic Forum’s net zero target. One Nation has a plan to put more money into Australian pockets, giving you choice on how you spend your money rather than letting these people here waste it for you with the needlessly high cost of living.
Why do electricity bills keep skyrocketing when we switch to LED lights and star appliances, and when we get power from huge solar and wind generators? The people have been conned by the energy relief fund, which has suppressed what they see in their electricity bills. When that fund comes off soon, you’re going to be in for a nightmare, a shock. Only One Nation has the policies to put more money into people’s pockets now. For some insight from overseas, President Trump says it so well in his 20 January executive order:
The United States must grow its economy and maintain jobs for its citizens while playing a leadership role in global efforts to protect the environment. Over decades, with the help of sensible policies that do not encumber private-sector activity, the United States has simultaneously grown its economy, raised worker wages, increased energy production, reduced air and water pollution …
That’s exactly what we’ve been saying for years, for decades in fact, in One Nation. And that’s exactly the opposite of what the Greens, the teals, the Labor Party, the Liberal Party and the Nationals are pushing with net zero.
I have one final point. I remember Scott Morrison as prime minister at the time, a few years ago, introducing some green hydrogen scheme incentive, with more subsidies from taxpayers to foreign, predatory billionaires. He said at the time that a price of $2 per kilogram for hydrogen would be fine. We worked out that the price of electricity at that price for hydrogen is $200 per megawatt hour, which is exorbitant. It’s almost 10 times what the fuel costs are for coal. What he didn’t tell you at the time, and what Labor has blindly followed, was that the actual price of hydrogen was $6 per kilo. Pipedreams are now becoming nightmares for people across Australia.
Only One Nation opposes the climate fraud and the net zero scam. Only One Nation will pull Australia out of the United Nations World Economic Forum’s net zero target. We are importing ideology from the United Nations and the World Economic Forum, and we are importing poverty and deprivation. One Nation, though, has a plan to put more money into Australians’ pockets, to give you choice on how you spend your money.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/8tb1aDXiOLk/hqdefault.jpg360480Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2025-03-20 18:00:112025-03-20 18:00:18One Nation’s View of “The Future Made in Australia” Bill 2024
In the North Queensland floods, three Sydney Harbours a day of fresh water flowed out of the Burdekin River into the sea. The government cancelled the Hells Gates Dam on the Burdekin River only two years ago.
How many more houses are going to flood in the future because of this cancellation? How many families will have to leave their town or go thirsty because not enough dams have been built to get us through the droughts.
One Nation says bugger the UN who says we shouldn’t build dams – droughtproof and floodproof as much of the country as possible, and stop that liquid gold uselessly flowing out to the ocean.
Transcript
One Nation is proposing an inquiry into the cancellation of Hells Gates Dam west of Townsville, which this Labor government cancelled for reasons that are still secret today. Some in the Canberra bubble might not be aware that North Queensland is currently very wet. It’s underwater. Hells Gates Dam was proposed on the Burdekin River north of Charters Towers and west of Townsville. Right now, downriver of the Hells Gates proposal, the Burdekin Falls Dam is at 217 per cent capacity, or three times what it’s designed to hold. Right now, a torrent of water is flowing over its spillway. Right now, just under 1,600,000 megalitres is overflowing out of the dam and straight into the ocean. Do you want to know how much is a megalitre? It’s one million litres. That’s 1,500,000 megalitres of rain and water flowing into the ocean. That’s 1,600 gigalitres. This is a lot of water. Using a common cliche, that’s the equivalent of three Sydney Harbours flowing over the dam wall into the ocean every day. Before all the climate scaremongers start to call this unprecedented and blame it all on cow farts, let’s be clear: this is not unprecedented. It’s happened many times before and has been worse. The dam still hasn’t broken its record set in 1991. The Burdekin is seemingly receding after thankfully failing to hit the peak levels recorded in 2009, 1998, 1991 and in many more years in the hundreds before those records began. This is common.
What’s unprecedented, though, is this government’s incompetence in cancelling the Hells Gates Dam—one of the first things it did. Despite the claim of the former climate chief, Tim Flannery, in 2005 that drought conditions would become permanent in Eastern Australia and that ‘the rain that comes won’t fill our dams because of climate change caused by man’s use of hydrocarbon fuels’. Australia continues to be a country of flooding rains. Inevitably, in the iconic Australian cycle of droughts and floods, another drought will come. That’s why we build dams. At least, any responsible government who takes their duty to Australia seriously would build dams. The Greens have stopped that, and you’re afraid to counter them. There will come a season, and Australians will think with envy about the time when an equivalent of three Sydney Harbours flowed out to sea every day from that river, the Burdekin. Those people will condemn the politicians of today, who have done nothing to try to capture a bit more of that liquid gold called water.
We know flooding rains will come again. We know seasons of drought will come again. Why is this government failing to build dams that would help us get through both droughts and floods and help us protect people? We seem to be forgetting that. In cancelling Hells Gates Dam, how many North Queensland homes and farms has the Albanese government condemned to flooding in the future? Every decade, there are fewer. How much blame does the coalition take for failing to start a single nation-building dam in their 10 years of government before Labor? Under the supercharged immigration policy being inflicted on the country, Australia will need much more water. Then I think of the rich farmlands that are potential irrigation areas that can be used and developed. That’s why water is like liquid gold to our agricultural sector. When the next drought comes, our existing water reserves will be sucked dry far more quickly because no government has built water storage to keep up with the massively increased population. Mark my words: the next drought will be a man made disaster. It will be the fault of more than a decade of politicians who were scared of the woke foreign organisations that told them not to build dams. Many politicians seem more scared of being called unpopular than of their grandchildren dying of thirst.
That’s why we need this inquiry—to get to the bottom of why Labor killed the Hells Gates Dam. The Labor Party has given no compelling justification—none—to the people of North Queensland, Queensland or Australia. It’s the Australian economy that will be affected. All that Labor is saying is: ‘It’s gone. Good luck in the next flood and the next drought.’ What happened in the department? What happened in the minister’s office? What possible reason was there for ditching such an important piece of infrastructure for an area that receives so much rain so often? This is what I hope an inquiry would be able to peek behind the curtain on. We would send a strong message that potentially life-saving infrastructure cannot just be subject to government whim without a proper explanation. Lives are at stake. Livelihoods are at stake. A whole region is at stake. A whole state is at stake.
The people of North Queensland deserve better. The people of Queensland and Australia deserve better. As a servant to the people, One Nation will continue to push for Australia to exit the worldwide organisations that try to dictate that we can’t build life-saving infrastructure, like dams. To protect people from floods, droughts and famines, One Nation will continue to push for work for dams that capture our flooding rains and sustain us through the precedented droughts to come. With our plentiful resources, Australia could be unbeaten on the world stage, but we can only make a start on more productively using our resources for the people’s wealth once our life source, water, is secured for future generations.
The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator Hughes): The question is that the motion moved by Senator Roberts, on a reference to the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee on Hells Gate Dam, be agreed to. Since we’re past 6.30 pm, a division will have to be rolled over to tomorrow.
We are experiencing the longest per-capita recession in Australian history. Many people are struggling with little light at the end of the tunnel.
Our plan will provide much-needed relief immediately, slash government waste and help build the big infrastructure that will generate more wealth for Australia.
Press Conference
Media Release
One Nation will take a signature plan to the Federal election slashing government spending by up to $90 billion a year while putting $40 billion back into Australians’ pockets and building infrastructure to generate long-term economic growth and wealth creation.
Party leader Senator Pauline Hanson said without substantial spending reform, tax reform and investment in nation-building, Australians’ living standards would continue to go backwards.
“We’re experiencing the longest per-capita recession in Australian history and many people are struggling with little light at the end of the tunnel,” Senator Hanson said. “Our plan will provide much-needed relief immediately, slash government waste and help build the big infrastructure that will generate more wealth for Australia.
“Our plan includes the policies we’ve already announced for aged and veteran pensioners to earn more without penalty, for income splitting and joint tax return filing for couples with dependent children, and to lift the tax-free threshold to $35,000 for self-funded retirees.
“We’ll pull the levers that Labor could, but won’t. Our plan includes changing the National Electricity Market (NEM) rules to enable and incentivise cheaper coal and gas-fired baseload power while also supporting nuclear energy in the medium term. We aim to slash electricity bills by 20%. We will halve the fuel excise to 26c per litre for 12 months, reserving the option to extend this measure even longer, providing relief for motorists and reducing the freight costs which add to the price of our groceries, goods and services.
“Our plan includes increasing the Medicare rebate to better remunerate GPs and promote bulk billing, and crack down on Medicare fraud estimated to be at as much as $3 billion per year. We will end the rort on natural gas by levying royalties at the point of production, creating a domestic gas reserve, raising up to $13 billion per year.”
One Nation Senator Malcolm Roberts said the plan included a comprehensive spending reform agenda focusing on eliminating unnecessary waste and duplication across a range of departments.
“We anticipate saving approximately $30 billion per year by abolishing the Department of Climate Change and related agencies, regulations and programs,” Senator Roberts said. “We expect to save up to $12.5 billion a year by abolishing the National Indigenous Australians Agency (NIAA) and bypassing the Aboriginal industry that stands in the way of closing the gaps by providing direct grant assistance to those who need it.
“Our plan includes a review of the functions and costs of the Federal departments of education and housing, eliminating duplication with state government departments and getting rid of costly building code mandates such as the requirement for all new dwellings to be wheelchair compliant.
“We’ll return the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) to its original purpose: providing reasonable and necessary support; introducing means-testing; reducing specialist and non-specialist pay rates to sustainable levels equitable with other health sectors. Our plan includes abolishing the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) and rolling its essential functions into the Department of Health, and reviewing about $3 billion worth of medications approved for the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) during the pandemic.
“We anticipate saving about $1 billion a year by withdrawing Australia’s participation from the United Nations, UN Refugee Convention, World Health Organisation, World Economic Forum, International Criminal Court and other global bodies which threaten Australia’s sovereignty while adding nothing of real value to our country. We’ll also reduce and redirect foreign aid spending to where it will make a difference, saving up to $3 billion, and review and reduce funding for arts and multicultural programs. We must also withdraw from the Paris agreement.”
Senator Hanson said some of the savings would be directed towards paying the principle off Federal debt now at almost $800 billion (net).
“It makes no sense to keep paying interest which may be as much as $50 billion a year by 2026-27,” she said. “We must reduce the debt to reduce this burden, and return the Budget to balance to prevent the accumulation of more debt.
“Our plan aims to put Australia back in the black, and enable the country to start investing in its future. We’ll end Labor’s effective ban on new dams, prioritising their development to open new agricultural opportunities and provide greater water security in Australia. We’ll revive the scrapped Hells Gate dam near Townsville, among others.
“We’ll back the construction of a fully national passenger and freight circuit incorporating the Inland Rail Project, which we plan to extend to Gladstone to facilitate a proposed major upgrade at that port to make it a multi-billion dollar container traffic and export hub.”
Senator Roberts said One Nation was the only party contesting the 2025 election with a suite of policies that put the interests of Australians and their country first.
“Australians deserve no less,” he said. “So many Australians watch Labor, the Coalition and Greens work hard to implement agendas on behalf of the big corporations, the corrupt union bosses and the hateful activists – but never to the benefit of the Australian people.
“One Nation believes in Australia and its people. Our plan is aimed at turning a lucky country into a clever country, and realising the potential of this great nation.”
https://i0.wp.com/www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/d6b0b7d1659ca2ff000b69752789bb6f4c04c258.jpg?fit=1200%2C798&ssl=17981200Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2025-02-12 03:30:002025-02-13 15:04:08Our Plan Will Put $40 Billion Back Into Australian Pockets
Inland Rail is a crucial project for Australia’s future and for the viability of the national highway network. As our population grows, the road network will become increasingly congested with large trucks. Creating an inland rail link between Melbourne and Brisbane will remove hundreds of thousands of truck movements off the road, while providing safer and faster freight transit.
Inland Rail has been problematic from the start due to the LNP Government’s decision to use a route (an alignment) that favoured certain landholders, airport owners, and port owners – in other words party donors. To please these interest groups, Inland Rail was designed to cross the Condamine River floodplain east of Millmerran before going across to Toowoomba, then down the range into Brisbane, with the The Port of Brisbane being the primary export port.
This route is patently stupid for several reasons. Crossing the Condamine floodplain is not technically feasible. The embankment necessary is located on about 30 m depth of clay, which becomes waterlogged and soft with a rain event known to occur, on average, every two years. Running a 40,000 tonne train across soft ground is unsafe. Even a few days of rain will require speeds to be slowed to 40 km/h, causing shipment delays, higher cost and destroying agriculture in the region through frequent flooding as flood water builds up behind the embankment.
Have we learnt nothing form the MITEZ rail link, which was also built across a floodplain and has been a drain on taxpayers ever since.
The second reason is because the Brisbane rail network is close to capacity and the corridor is constrained, meaning extra lines can’t be added. By the time trains are running along Inland Rail, there will be no slots left to bring the freight to the port. This is why there is now an insane suggestion to build a 60 km TUNNEL under Brisbane to bring the freight through.
You think cross-river rail is a disaster? This project is ten times the length, and should be ten times the cost = $60 billion – just for the tunnel. And remember, this is all taxpayer’s money that will never be repaid from rail revenue.
One Nation supports directing Inland Rail to the Port of Gladstone, where a modern container facility is currently under construction. This would require the alignment to turn north before Millmerran and head up to Dalby, with Wellcamp Airport and Brisbane freight coming back to the existing line, something that will be no slower because of the higher speeds available on this alignment.
Port of Gladstone is best located, cheaper and more efficient than Brisbane, with room to grow. The best news of all – the Millmerran to Port of Gladstone route has a strong advocate with IPG and is already holding offers of finance from infrastructure investment funds.
One Nation’s solution means no public money and a smarter route. ALP/LNP means $60 billion of taxpayers money for a slower, unreliable and more costly option.
Transcript
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you for appearing tonight. Where is the Inland Rail missing link at—Narromine to Narrabri? Where is that?
Mr Miller: I can update you on that. The Narromine to Narrabri section has completed all its planning approvals, so the primary planning approvals both at a state level and at a federal level have been granted. We are in a process of voluntary land acquisition. To date, on the section, we’ve completed around 23 per cent of the land acquisition through the alignment. We’re in the process of leading to some preliminary design contracts to inform us around scope, schedule and engineering design. And we’ve commenced the Pilliga revocation process through the Pilliga forest, with the New South Wales government. So it’s tracking well.
Senator ROBERTS: Have any of the Queensland sections of Inland Rail started construction?
Mr Miller: They haven’t started construction, Senator. We’re still in the planning processes in Queensland. Importantly, for the very significant section from the New South Wales-Queensland border to Gowrie, the final i’s have been dotted and t’s are being crossed in relation to the EIS submission. We expect to lodge that with the office of the Coordinator-General during November, and it will be up to the Coordinator-General as to the public exhibition, which we would hope would be underway this side of Christmas.
Senator ROBERTS: Has the ARTC been contacted by the PortConnex consortium, who are wanting to build their 60-kilometre tunnel under Brisbane?
Mr Miller: I have met with Martin Albrecht and his team. Importantly, we’ve got a very clear scope within Inland Rail, so it was really to inform that connection group as to where Inland Rail was at for their planning processes, and they informed us as to their program of a 60-kilometre tunnel with the electric train model. But, essentially, our scope of work does not include that, and we continue with the primary planning approvals from Gowrie to Kagaru.
Senator ROBERTS: Have you seen a business case, an environmental study and engineering details? We feel the cost for Inland Rail is undercooked and the economic benefits overstated.
Mr Miller: Could I clarify—are you referring to the alternate route 60-kilometre tunnel for $7 billion?
Senator ROBERTS: Yes.
Mr Miller: I’ve not seen their business case, no.
Senator ROBERTS: What about the whole Inland Rail? Has the business case been developed?
Mr Miller: The business case was developed some years ago, prior to my time.
Senator ROBERTS: Have you checked it?
Mr Miller: As the department outlined today, one of the recommendations under the Kerry Schott review was to have a verification process. The department has just recently appointed an entity to assist with that verification process, and they’re commencing works this month to verify both the cost and schedule that Inland Rail has developed internally.
Senator ROBERTS: Does the Inland Rail alignment still go across the Condamine flood plain? Have those engineering issues been resolved?
Mr Miller: We believe so. There has been extensive work around erosion velocities associated with those black soils. We’re about to commence embankment trials in that area to understand the shrink-swell characteristics and the erosive characteristics of those soils. We’ve had an international flood panel. The Queensland government and the Commonwealth did an independent review of the flood solutions. So we do believe that we have a solution for the Condamine.
Senator ROBERTS: Have you had contact with the I-PG, Inter-Port Global, led consortium offering to assist the Commonwealth government to build a forestry route alignment to Ducklo, then along the existing alignment to Dalby, with the Wellcamp and Brisbane freight route heading south-east and export freight heading north via Wandoan, Banana and on to the port of Gladstone?
Mr Miller: I’m aware of that proposal to Gladstone. I have not had engagement with that consortia. The reason, again, is it’s outside the scope of Inland Rail and the approved project works that the Commonwealth has outlined for our project.
Senator ROBERTS: There seem to be many benefits to that route. The cost of that route, which is mostly along either existing alignment or state government land, would not require tunnelling, would be faster and technically feasible, would not cross the Condamine flood plain and will attract private investment. Minister, why is the Albanese government not seriously looking at the I-PG consortium proposal?
Senator Chisholm: I’d have to take it on notice, Senator Roberts.
Senator ROBERTS: Mr Miller, with regard to the current project parameters that you’ve used, if there’s something attractive outside that, what would you do? What options do have?
Mr Miller: Essentially, we’ve got real clarity in terms of our current scope, but, in any engineering solution, we look at options. We look at the consideration of engineering optionality and impacts on communities. We have locked the alignment, essentially, and we’re going through an EIS process. We think that’s where it becomes critically important. The EIS environmental approval process is effectively working with the community and the stakeholders to come up with a solution with the least impacts for that area. Now, we understand that building a 1,650-kilometre rail alignment up the inland of Australia is going to have impacts. Our duty is to minimise those impacts and consult with stakeholders and communities, and through the EIS approval process is how we’re regulated, effectively, on the impacts.
Senator ROBERTS: As I understand it, there are many cost benefits to terminating the Inland Rail at Gladstone instead of Brisbane. There are many overall benefits to the nation in terms of the cost of freight coming into the country and in terms of port access. There is a huge amount of land available at Gladstone. There are many, many factors in favour of Gladstone, and there are many hairs on Brisbane.
Mr Johnson: We have met with the consortium from GreenLink, who are proposing and considering—
Senator ROBERTS: Who’s GreenLink?
Mr Johnson: GreenLink is the organisation you’re referring to, that you’re talking about—
Senator ROBERTS: I-PG?
Mr Johnson: Toowoomba to Gladstone. We have met with them, and, as they go through their relevant approvals and development of their own business case, we’ve committed to them to be able to provide them any input to the types of operational information that help them on their way, as we do for many adjoining infrastructure owners. Just to clarify, though, what is really clear, from both our position and what’s being proposed, is the discussion about how they leverage the backbone of what Inland Rail is and its connection at Toowoomba. It is not a replacement. That’s my understanding. Senator ROBERTS: What was the name of that company, again?
Mr Johnson: GreenLink.
Senator ROBERTS: Is there any connection with I-PG, Inter-Port Global?
Mr Johnson: Not that I’m aware of. I don’t know, sorry.
Senator ROBERTS: So you haven’t had connection with I-PG?
