Malcolm Roberts (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Hansard source

As a servant of the people of Queensland and Australia, I oppose the Official Development Assistance Multilateral Replenishment Obligations (Special Appropriation) Bill 2019, One Nation opposes it and we do so because we support and love our country, Australia. One Nation opposes any remuneration bill that does not specify how much money is being spent. Do the taxpayers know right now that this bill has no spending limit? It's an open cheque to the UN.

I understand that the agreements we signed specify how total budgets are to be broken up amongst members but not how much the total budget should be. How can we do this? There are five different UN organisations that are the subject of this bill. The Global Environmental Facility, to take an example, has grown from $1 billion in the original agreement that we signed to $4 billion today. The World Bank International Development Association has gone from $24 billion to $35 billion in just the last two years—our money. This bill gives the United Nations a blank cheque to waste taxpayers' money and just hold its hand out for more.

I do not believe these organisations are good value for money. In fact, many are corrupt to the core. The World Bank's International Development Association spent 24 per cent, almost a quarter, of its funds on public administration—that is a quarter blown out the door through administration—and 19 per cent, almost one-fifth, on subsidising renewable energy. That does not lift people out of poverty because it is too unreliable. It consigns people to poverty and that's what it's doing to this country. What does the World Bank's International Development Association spend on health? Mr Acting Deputy President, do you have any idea? It is just eight per cent, and on education—the one thing that does lift people out of poverty—also a measly eight per cent. Perhaps the International Development Association could spend more lifting people out of poverty if it was not spending $3.3 billion every year on administrative expenses, including our cash.

The Asian Development Fund has been providing low-interest loans to lift people out of poverty since 1974. So in 46 years its low-interest loans have not lifted the people of Asia out of poverty but maybe the millions more we are about to give the Asian Development Fund will do the trick—maybe. In the past 46 years, there has been nothing much, but let's see what happens. Actually, I'm not sure why we're even funding the Asian Development Fund. They currently have $457 billion in outstanding loans.

I'm not suggesting that the scheme has been unsuccessful. The two largest recipients have done extremely well. India has $68 billion of those loans and is now the world's fifth-largest economy. Not because of the Asian Development Fund, I might add. China has $62 billion of those loans and is now the world's second-largest economy. I wonder if they're using that to make islands in the South China Sea. Perhaps if Australia can get some of these loans, we can stop Australia sliding out of the top 10 of the world's largest economies. I remind every Australian that, early last century, in the early days of our federated nationhood, Australia led the world in per capita income. We were No. 1 in the world. We're now sliding out of the top 10 and heading to slide out of the top 20. Sorry, we have already slid out of the top 10 largest economies.

Australia should be grateful that at least the Asian Development Bank is careful with its administrative expenses, only spending $1 billion last year on administration. I did note though, the Asian Development Fund spent $25 million last year on salaries and expenses for their board of directors—their 12-member board of directors. The amount of $2 million per director seems a little high for unelected internationalist bureaucrats or, as the Prime Minister said, unaccountable internationalist bureaucrats. When the Asian Development Fund talk about lifting people out of poverty, I don't think the Australian taxpayers would take that to mean the Asian Development Fund's board of directors being lifted out of poverty.

The Multilateral Fund for the Implementation of the Montreal Protocol is another soak for taxpayer cash. The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer—yes, that's another title—was ratified in 1987. It requires countries to reduce levels of production and consumption of ozone-depleting substances according to an agreed schedule. I expect Australian taxpayers thought that the ban on CFCs in the eighties was the end of the CFC crisis. I won't even mention—well, I will mention—that the hole in the ozone layer stopped growing before the CFC ban came in and is better explained by natural variability caused by variations in solar energy than by world-killer spray cans. The UN, though, has spent half a billion dollars a year—half a billion dollars a year, including our money—on the multilateral fund for the last 25 years, and for nothing. In true Yes Minister style, the multilateral fund has kept itself in line for taxpayer handouts by moving on to other substances that also have nothing to do with the ozone layer. They're in general use, in situations where they're very hard to replace. That includes refrigeration. At this rate, refrigeration will be relegated to the footnotes of history. This won't be a problem because, with renewable power, everyday Australians won't be able to afford to run our refrigerators, except perhaps for those UN development officials with a $2-million-a-year price tag. They should be keeping the Moet nice and cold.

Let's turn to the Global Environment Facility trust. I saved the best until last. The Global Environment Facility trust was founded at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit to fund developing countries and countries with economies in transition to meet the objectives of the international environmental conventions and agreements—$1.5 billion a year to keep the global climate warming con going to enable the UN parasites to continue sucking our blood through deceit and lies. I notice that a generous federal government has increased our contribution to the Global Environment Facility from $23.5 million just two years ago to $38 million last year. That's an increase of about 60 per cent in one year. So when the World Wildlife Fund is used as a source for global warming proof, remember they're funded by the Global Environment Facility—funded to keep the greatest scientific swindle in history alive.

I'm going to discuss the bigger picture for a minute. And don't take my word for it. Mr Richard Court, at the time the Liberal Premier of Western Australia, wrote Rebuilding the Federation. In this book on page 8, he details the process that the internationalists use to usurp our sovereignty, take over our governance and put in place UN regulations. He deals with the UN or other unelected international bodies. Our Constitution has been pushed aside—bypassed by these criminals in the UN and other slick gangsters. Mr Richard Court details that, and he did so 26 years ago.

I'll now read from the opening page of the introduction of a UN Agenda 21 booklet. This came about at the UN Rio Convention in 1992, which Paul Keating's Labor government signed on our behalf. It says:

Agenda 21 stands as a comprehensive blueprint for action to be taken globally—from now into the twenty-first century—by Governments, United Nations organizations, development agencies, non-governmental organizations and independent-sector groups, in every area in which human activity impacts on the environment.

that is, every area of our civilisation—

The agenda should be studied in conjunction with both the Rio declaration, which provides a context for its specific proposals—

'specific proposals'; that's where the nitty-gritty is—

and the Statement of Forest Principles. It is hoped that the Forest Principles will form the basis for a future international level agreement.

That is how they put in place global governance and that is how, according to Richard Court, who is absolutely correct, that governance then takes over ours.

We have the UN's Lima declaration, signed in 1975 by the Whitlam Labor government and ratified in 1976 by the Fraser Liberal-National government. It destroyed our industry; it deliberately made it clear that they were transferring it. By the way, the United States didn't sign it, several major European countries didn't sign it, and I don't think Japan did. China did; it was a beneficiary.

The UN's Rio declaration, in 1992, brought about Agenda 21, which I've just discussed, is now killing land use for all of our farmers. It's killing employment, due to its so-called sustainability, and its killing governance through the climate change commitments—which are not commitments until they are legislated through here, or bypassed through here.

The UN's Kyoto protocol, in 1996, and the UN's Paris Agreement, in 2015, which is strangling our industry and exporting jobs—red tape strangling our country, green tape strangling our country, blue tape strangling our country. Blue tape is UN tape. Where does blue tape work? In the fishing industry. We now have 36 per cent of the world's marine parks in this country alone—more than one-third. We now import three-quarters of our seafood from China. The biggest exporter of seafood is China, which has a tiny coastline and 53 times our population. So the UN doesn't touch China but strangles our industry—and we're happily pushing jobs off overseas and closing down industries, including fishing. And we can't get permission to lift the dam level at Warragamba Dam because the UN doesn't like it. And World Heritage sites are another way the UN controls us.

And then we have the globalist mantra of 'interdependency'—and that's what these bills push. Interdependency means we are dependent on another country; it means we are dependent, not independent any more. Australia used to be No. 1 in the world in terms of per capita income, and then we started shoving all our jobs offshore and now we are dependent on other nations—to say nothing of the corruption that the UN has and the accountability that it doesn't have.

As I said in my first but in the Senate in 2016, we need an 'Ausexit'—Australia exiting the UN. The best thing we can do for people in poor countries is to kill the UN, get back to accountability and create a business environment that is not an environment for parasites. The best thing we can do for our country is to restore our sovereignty, restore our governance and restore our independence. We need to not fund entities like the UN. Instead, we need to look after ourselves and make ourselves strong again so that we can help neighbours as they need.