Senate debates

Thursday, 12 September 2019

Bills

Criminal Code Amendment (Agricultural Protection) Bill 2019; In Committee

11:41 am

Photo of Pauline HansonPauline Hanson (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) | Hansard source

Senator Whish-Wilson made a comment that I called them terrorists. I certainly did. I also called them ratbags, idiots, morons and a few other words. The definition of terrorism is:

The unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.

And that's exactly what it is—and it is not only political aims but also their own personal agendas: because they are vegans, they don't want to eat meat, so no-one else should be eating it. This has nothing to do with what Senator McKim said about the piggery in Tasmania. I totally agree that if animals are treated that way, sure, it should be investigated, by all means. This legislation has nothing to do with that. We saw the footage where they went into abattoirs and locked themselves to the pipes. They stopped the plant from doing its work. They have taken animals. They actually had to negotiate so they could pack about 30 of the sheep in their cars and take them away, just to get rid of them and off the premises. We've had a cafe shut down because of intimidation and threats, and the business said, 'We can't deal with this.'

This has nothing to do with the welfare of animals. The animals are being looked after. There is no problem there. Any Australian will stand up and fight against animals being mistreated in this country. All Australians do. But Australians are actually fed up with this. This legislation has ended up on the floor of this parliament for us to try to do something about it because the judges have been too gutless to hand down decent fines to deter these people from carrying on and inciting violence and terrorism. We have to give the people of this country assurances that they can live in safety and security and run their businesses according to the law. We have not protected them enough through our judicial system. That's why I support this law.

By introducing amendment (1) to include a wood-processing facility—why wouldn't we? Haven't we seen over the years where these protesters have actually gone onto private plantations and hugged or tied themselves to a tree so people can't do their job? It has nothing to do with World Heritage listing of forests in Tasmania, because the people don't want to see that happen.

Comments

No comments