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

[by video link] Despite harming the Aboriginal people in many ways, the Greens, dishonestly and falsely, pretend to care for Aboriginals. In pushing Greens policies, ripening in 2030, the Greens are in fact pushing Australia down the UN's agenda 2030 path.

For example, let's consider something as basic as land rights and land use before we get onto the Glasgow distraction. It's not immediately obvious, but the United Nations globalist strategy significantly influenced Australia's Native Title Act, which pretends to give Aboriginal people access to land yet actually limits and, in many ways, prevents all Australians, including Aboriginals, from using the land and even accessing the land. From my recent listening across Cape York, all Cape York communities in Far North Queensland confirmed yet again many Aboriginal and European community leaders' dissatisfaction with the reality and impact of native title legislation. The Native Title Act preamble refers many times to United Nations principles. When a claim is successful under native title, individuals find that they're prevented from owning their own home within the area of the claim and face impediments in raising money for business loans for lack of collateral. In practical terms, the rights of Aboriginal people and their lives have not been improved under the Native Title Act.

That said, let's look at the other policies that the Greens have raised here. The United Nations actually drives the Glasgow agenda. Let's look at that more closely, because it lacks substance—as do the Labor-Greens coalition climate and energy policies and the Liberal-Nationals coalition climate and energy policies. Contradictions erupt and abound in climate and energy policies, because no politician has ever provided the logical scientific points as evidence for those policies. John Howard's government introduced the abominable Renewable Energy Target and his government stole farmers' property rights to use their own properties. Yet, six years after being booted from office in 2007, he confessed in London in 2013 that he is agnostic on climate science. He had no science. The whole thing was drive just by whims and fairytales. He had no science to support what has become the gutting of our electricity sector and our productive capacity.

In 2016, the then Father of the Senate, Ian Macdonald, said that there has never been a debate on the climate science. He was correct, and there still hasn't been one. Two months ago, 10 federal parliamentarians confirmed in writing to me that they have never been provided with the scientific evidence. They had the integrity and courage to say so. In August last year, 19 federal parliamentarians from the Greens, Labor, Liberal and Nationals parties—who were all advocating climate alarm and climate policies—failed to provide me with any scientific evidence for their claims. In 2007 and 2008, Kevin Rudd claimed 4,000 scientists supported the claim that carbon dioxide from human activity affects climate and needs to be cut. The data from the UN IPCC—the climate body in the UN—shows that only five endorsed the claim, and there's doubt they were even scientists. The Greens, instead of science, have a well-worn trick of using emotional stories and have never produced the evidence.

There is no basis for these policies the UN is driving it in this country. Freedom of information requests and Parliamentary Library research revealed to me no evidence for this. Here we have the Labor-Greens coalition pushing this, and who does it hurt the most? It hurts the people who are poorest, who are not— (Time expired)