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

I rise today to speak on this Senate private member's bill, the Criminal Code Amendment (Prohibition of Full Face Coverings in Public Places) Bill 2017. It was only a matter of weeks ago that I actually entered the chamber wearing a burqa, and it was basically to say, 'This is not the place to wear full face coverings, in this chamber.' There are people in this place who are totally against full face coverings and there are also people who are supporting full face coverings on the streets of Australia, based on the fact that they say it is a person's right to wear whatever they wish. In a lot of cases, yes, I do support that and I do agree with that. But, then again, we have societies and cultures that are not reflective, like many other countries around the world that accept seeing women completely covered, in full face coverings, because it's oppressive to them and controlling of women and it is basically saying, 'You cannot be seen out in public with any part of your body, your face'—your face, mind you—'showing, because it is basically putting out a message to men that you're on the meat market.' That's basically what it is saying: 'These men can't control themselves, so you need to cover yourself up so that you are not tempting these men.' Heaven help us if that were ever made compulsory in Australia. We wouldn't have bikinis, we wouldn't have bathing suits, we wouldn't have our lifestyle in Australia. The whole fact is: this is a debate that this country needs to have because that is what the Australian people want.

My reasoning for wearing the burqa into this chamber was seen as a stunt. Call it what you want; I really don't care, because the whole fact is that it has got Australians talking, and Australians feel now they have a voice. It's created debate. But another reason I wore the burqa into this chamber was because there is no dress code for this chamber. When we actually sit down here to vote, the bells ring, we come into the chamber and we sit down. We have people go to either side and they recognise us by our faces as to who is voting and how they are voting. We are crossed off that way. I would love to know what the Greens would do in this matter if you had half-a-dozen people in this chamber wearing burqas. What are you going to say? 'Show your face so we can get your vote'? I don't think so. Because they will not show their face. If everyone's the same, covering their face, how is a vote going to be taken? So I am pleased to know now that it is going to be discussed, debated and brought back to the chamber. I hope that common sense prevails in this chamber. Everyone in this House must agree a full-face covering could never, ever be worn in this chamber purely for that fact. This is the heart of our democracy.

Now, I want to go back to the National Party conference on the weekend. It was quite interesting that it was a close vote—51 to 55 votes. The National Party is, clearly, very divided on this. For Barnaby Joyce, the Deputy Prime Minister of this country, actually came out and said he doesn't support banning of the burqa, and I think he said 'because we have a relationship with Indonesia and Saudi Arabia'. Well, Indonesia basically has the niqab, which is the scarf. They don't sort of promote or have the full-face covering. Saudi Arabia do. They like to control the women and they like to tell the women what to do. Women can't even go out of their house and they can't even leave their premises without having a male with them, even a male child. So they are totally controlled. 'But that's all right; we've got to change our culture and our way of life because we deal with these other countries.' It's not because we have a good product, not because it's at the right price, not because they want everything here in this country; it's because we actually need to appease them. So we are actually in control. And that's where our Deputy Prime Minister's head is at, instead of being a leader. Instead of listening to what they want, how about listening to what the Australian people want?

This is why I hear from so many people that say, 'We don't go to certain areas now,' especially in Sydney. If you look around Lakemba and Bankstown, these areas are no longer Australian. They don't know the person they are walking past in the street. This is so un-Australian. And it has grown more and more. The fact is there are women being paid to wear the burqa. There are people who are pushing their own agenda, their political ideology, which is Islam. And they're using our laws against us. That is what is happening in our country. Full-face covering offends a lot of people. They find it offensive and they find it confronting, as two of our former prime ministers have said—Tony Abbott and Julia Gillard. I find it terribly confronting. When I walked into this chamber here in the burqa, the number of people who got a jolt from it—and they said, 'Oh, it's terrible.' They didn't like it, and that's the fact of the matter. But we bury our true feelings and how we really need to look at the whole fact of where we are headed. We have separate laws in this country for some people and not for others. I hear it all the time from people who have a bike helmet. When they get off their bike there is no way in the wide world they can walk into some government areas or into banks if they have a bike helmet on. There is no way in the wide world they can go in with a balaclava on. So why are there different rules for one and not the other?

Again, are we appeasing the Muslim population in this country that is now growing at a rapid rate? Is it because the Labor Party have 15 lower house seats that are dominated by the Muslim vote? 'Oh, let's look after those people and forget about the rest of Australians and not look at what is logical!' Where do we want to go with this country? Every time someone stands up and says something, you want to shut them down. You want to call them a racist or a bigot without having a clear debate on this. So people feel that they are totally suppressed by this whole debate, this whole argument. It needs to be discussed.

I refer to a book that I have read—and I think it's a very good read—called Now They Call Me Infidel. It's by Nonie Darwish. She grew up in Gaza. Her father was in the military. She said at that time Egypt was a country where they wore Western dress. She moved to America. She has married an American. She has a couple of kids. She says that now, in America, other women that she grew up with are donning the full burqa when they never, ever wore it in Egypt. Now they're doing it in America and they are criticising her because she's accepted the Western way of life. She has been shunned. She has not been treated the same because they are trying to impose the burqa on her to wear. She said, 'This is not what I want my life to be.' She said she has been intimidated by their whole attitude towards her. She goes back to Egypt and she says that it is not the country she grew up in. It is now being heavily dominated by Islam, by Muslims. She said, 'That's not my country.' She can see the same thing happening in America.

We need to realise and understand that this is what is happening here in Australia. We are having things in this country because of their beliefs, their culture. Let me make this quite clear, as everyone talks about it: the burqa full-face covering is not a religious requirement. It does not have to be protected under section 116 of the Australian Constitution. This is an impact on our culture and our way of life, and it is growing quite rapidly. I know that they actually want to take over and form an Islamic state in this country. We are allowing that to happen, without standing up for our values and who we are as a nation.

I will go back to Nonie Darwish. It's not only her. There are other books written by Ayaan Hirsi Ali. She was a Muslim. She was born in Somalia. She ended up in the Dutch parliament. She fought against the Islamisation of the Western countries of the world. She is trying to warn us, and yet no-one wants to take any notice of this. We have seen it happen in other countries around the world. Let me just state this: the burqa has been banned in many countries around the world, even Muslim countries! We've got Congo, Tunisia and Turkey. We've got other countries as well that are not Muslim dominated that have banned the burqa. You have Spain, France and Germany, to name just a few. Why have they banned it? We are so far behind them in so many ways, but we don't look at what is happening around the world to implement it here and change our ways here before we become basket cases like other countries around the world. We have to actually allow the public to have a debate on this. If you're quite happy to have a plebiscite on same-sex marriage, then, if you haven't got the guts to bring in legislation here, I suggest we have a plebiscite and let the people have a say at the next election on whether they want full-face coverings in this country. Common sense tells you to treat everyone equally and the same. If you are not allowed to wear a helmet or even, in some cases, a hat into a bank, then you shouldn't allow full-face coverings and burqas.

Jacqui Lambie wanted to bring in an amendment to the Criminal Code Act for full-face coverings to be banned at times of national terrorist threat to the country. What are you going to do then? That is not going to solve the problem. That's not the way to go with this.

I will tell you something that I hear from the public. You think that it only goes one way and that we are critical of these women who are wearing full-face coverings. I've sat beside these women in doctor's surgeries and I've passed them in shopping centres, and they are rude to Australians. Their comments are rude. Their attitudes stinks. They feel they can say and do whatever they want to; no-one knows who they are because they're hiding under a full-face covering.

It is not a religious requirement. It is a debate that we need to have. We need to make the decision—and it needs to start here in this parliament—to stop full-face coverings, based on the fact that we need facial recognition here. We also need to ensure that they are banned in government buildings. We also need to say that they should not be worn in hospitals. If a nurse who is wearing full-face covering comes up to give you an injection or to do training on you, how do you know who she is—or he? We don't know the gender. So should we allow full-face coverings in hospitals? I don't think so. Why are we allowing full-face coverings for people driving cars? How can you have proper vision if you can't see? And I can tell you that you can't, because I wore one. You're flat out seeing what's going on around you.

Are we that pathetic as a nation that we would give up our values and who we truly are because we're worried about hurting someone's feelings? I've seen a lot of people get their feelings hurt in this country. I'm getting fed up with the fact that we stand up for these Muslim who stand up and protest. We've got the Greens and others who stand up and say, 'Good on you. You've got your rights,' but we forget about the rights of Australians—ordinary citizens—who are howled down. If you oppose the whole situation, if you speak up and have an opinion in this country, you're shut down, because those who are left leaning want to shut you down completely.

I know you're just going to say, 'No, we can't.' I'm sure that if this issue eventually goes to a vote everyone is going to vote against One Nation. We might get support from a couple of members in this house, but I know we won't get anyone from the coalition government, we won't have anyone from the Labor government, we won't have anyone from the Nick Xenophon Team, we won't have anyone from the Greens, and I doubt whether we'll actually get Lambie backing this, and we won't get Hinch.

John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I just want to make a point. Refer to those in this and the other place by their correct titles please, Senator Hanson.

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

I do apologise—or Senator Hinch. I'm sure they won't support me on this issue, because I don't believe they have the intestinal fortitude to stand up for what they truly believe and represent the Australian people. If you're going to have some say in this, put up the facts and debate them. Let the people be heard and have their say before we lose our country. The problems that I can see in the future are huge, and they need to be debated now. We need to discuss them now, here on the floor of parliament. Stop burying them. Stop thinking that we don't have a problem out there. As we see more Muslims coming into this country, especially those with full-face coverings, we need this legislation so that we have full facial recognition. They need to assimilate and integrate into our society, which they are not. That is the problem with the whole lot. We are seeing from that they are bringing in their other views with genital mutilation. We've seen the problems that is causing in our hospitals, reversal of these—they're not operations—for these young girls and women. Is this a culture that we really want here?

We think about the Muslims, and people say, 'They're not all bad.' No, they're not, and I totally agree with that. I've spoken to some, a taxi driver, and he said, 'You are so right.' We need to stop the Islamisation of Australia. We do need to ban it. He said, 'I was a Muslim. I am no longer, but my uncles told my father he must murder me because I've left the religion.' So these people are crying out also. There are women out there, I'm sure, who would like to see the burqa banned, then they can discard the garment. Who knows, their men, maybe their fathers, their brothers, their husbands may say, 'Well, you can't come outside the house.' These poor women! We have fought for women's rights in this country. We have fought for women to have the vote. We have fought for women's rights. Yet you're not prepared to stand up and fight for the rights of these women, who are probably made to wear these garments? You men have no idea. It's not going to impact on you. You can do and say whatever you want to do, but what about the women's rights out there? Have you considered that?

Some of these women say, 'I've got no problem with the hijab, the scarf.' That's fair enough; a lot of countries wear it; but let's look at the whole fact. Let the people have their say on this and stop shutting down debate and having a go at people because they might put up some commonsense points about this whole thing. And look at the book. I will say it again if anyone wants to read it: read Now They Call Me Infidelby Nonie Darwish. Or read Ayaan Hirsi Ali's book Infidel. Listen to these women who have been controlled by Islam and are no longer with it. They are trying to warn us. Listen to what they have to say. I commend the bill to the house.

Cory Bernardi (SA, Australian Conservatives) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to support the Criminal Code Amendment (Prohibition of Full Face Coverings in Public Places) Bill 2017. I'm mindful of some words that were given to me when I first started in the financial markets. An experienced gentleman said, 'In order to preserve your financial balance sheet, you're always better to be six months too early than one day too late.' It has some parallels with this debate about our national security, and particularly, specifically, about the burqa. I first raised this issue in May 2010—more than seven years ago. I didn't find a single supporter in this place. Very few in the public sphere publicly came out and made noise in support of what I said at the time. But it seems that we are getting to a point where people are recognising the prescience of the warnings that were sounded. For the benefit of Hansard, I wrote this on 6 May 2010:

In my mind, the burka has no place in Australian society. I would go as far as to say it is un-Australian. To me, the burka represents the repressive domination of men over women which has no place in our society and compromises some of the most important aspects of human communication.

It also establishes a different set of rules and societal expectations in our hitherto homogenous society.

…   …   …

The same can be said for any number of areas where photographic identification is required. How many of us would ask for the veil to be dropped so we can compare the photo with the burka wearer's face? I suspect the fear of being called bigoted, racist, Islamaphobic or insensitive would prevent many from doing what they would not think twice about under normal circumstances.

…   …   …

Equality of women is one of the key values in our secular society and any culture that believes only women should be covered in such a repressive manner is not consistent with the Australian culture and values …

New arrivals to this country should not come here to recreate the living environment they have just left. They should come here for a better life based on the freedoms and values that have built our great nation.

The burka isolates some Australians from others. Its symbolic barrier is far greater than the measure of cloth it is created from.

For safety and for society, the burka needs to be banned in Australia.

Those words today cause almost no reaction. People will, of course, disagree with them, but they cause almost no reaction because people know they're right. But, at the time, the abuse and the criticism came from all fields. In May 2010, when Mr Kevin Rudd was Prime Minister, it was reported:

Mr Rudd suggested yesterday Senator Bernardi was engaged in ''populist politics''—

well, that's worked pretty well for me so far, so he was wrong there—

and that Australians took a sensible approach to traditional dress.

A sensible approach, Mr Rudd, is not to cover your face while you're walking around the streets of Australia. He went on to say:

'The worst thing we can do is actually start ganging up on particular groups within our country.

No-one is ganging up on anyone. We're saying this is completely inappropriate and it shouldn't be here.

Senator Sarah Hanson-Young has never missed an opportunity to jump on a minority bandwagon. She said:

If people want to start banning items of apparel, perhaps we could start with budgie-smugglers?

May I make this point with respect to that: there are items of clothing that are inappropriate to wear in certain circumstances and, if anyone thinks it's okay to wear budgie smugglers or any other bathing attire into the Senate chamber, for example, they're barking mad. I would say it is the same for anyone who thinks it's okay to turn up in a court of law for a judicial appearance in some bathing attire or budgie smugglers. There is a time and a place for those sorts of things. Society renders those verdicts and expects others to abide by them. But let me tell you, I don't know a time and a place for anyone to walk around with the sack of anonymity over their heads in Australian society. It is a cultural export from the women-hating regime in Saudi Arabia, where they cover their women like chattels and export their extremist ideology to Afghanistan and other Wahhabist Islamic nations. We are in the country of Australia, a homogenous country, a country where we believe in giving people a fair go and you judge someone basically by the smile on their face and the glint in their eye. The burqa prevents that from happening.

Of course, it wasn't just Senator Hanson-Young and Mr Rudd. My old friend Keysar Trad, the guy who was found by a court to be an anti-Semite, a person who incites violence, steers people to jihadi websites and so forth—a really terrible person—said it's 'totally uncalled for to bring these phobias into Australia'. Sticking up for your own culture, sticking up for your way of life is, according to Mr Trad, a phobia, and this is a guy with a track record that I've just outlined. He also tried to take over AFIC and was booted out of that because one set of crooks couldn't get through another set of crooks. These are the sorts of judgements, and the media report these people as being credible.

Western Australian MPs were surveyed: 'A survey of state MPs found all who responded disagreed with a call by Senator Bernardi for burqas to be banned.' So all West Australian MPs disagreed with my call at the time. In September, this was reported:

Muslims Australia president Ikebal Patell said that while the burqa was "confronting", it was nonsense to suggest it was being used as a disguise to commit crimes—

notwithstanding the evidence to the contrary—

to use this as an excuse to ban the burqa, I would like to think Cory Bernardi has asked for helmets, balaclavas and other face coverings to be banned ...

In fact, it's not appropriate for someone to walk down the street with a balaclava on either, unless you're in the ski fields or somewhere like that. If someone walked into this place with a balaclava on, people would be alarmed. It is about a time and a place. If you want to wear your burqa in your backyard or your special fete or something like that, maybe it's appropriate there, but it's not appropriate in Australian society and culture.

Mr Abbott—I was his parliamentary secretary at the time—walked away from it and said they were my personal views rather than coalition policy, but he did acknowledge:

There is understandable concern in the community about what former prime minister John Howard called a 'confronting' form of attire.

It wasn't long after that that the reality hit some of those people. There was a case in the New South Wales police where a woman wearing a burqa, or a niqab, in fact, was pulled over by the police and questioned for not having P-plates and various other things on. She made a number of allegations against the police officer—that he was a rapist, that he had touched her inappropriately and all of these sorts of accusations. Fortunately, for this police officer, he had his dash cam on, and it demonstrated comprehensively that whomever was hiding under that burqa—because they hadn't been identified—wasn't telling the truth. They then sought to prosecute the individual because they had signed a statutory declaration making these allegations against the police. But, of course, the person taking the statutory declaration didn't ask to see the face of the person signing it, so they couldn't verify that it was actually the individual. So the prosecution of the person for making a false statement failed because they had the niqab on and society—and individuals involved—was too scared and too ashamed to ask them to show their face for fear of being called an Islamophobic. Shortly thereafter the New South Wales government, to their credit, changed the law.

We could go on and on and on. There are cases after cases after cases, here and internationally, where people have chosen to hide themselves behind the Islamic veil and refuse to take it off in a court of law, so much so that in Western Australia they were considering allowing people to give their evidence via video because they didn't want to offend them by insisting they show their face in the courtroom. These are the sorts of accommodations we're making for a subsection of the community which is so small, so minor and yet are so inextricably linked to fundamentalist Islam that the burqa could be called the flag of fundamentalism. No moderate Muslim wears the burqa. No secular Muslim wears the burqa. They are fundamentalists.

Every time you see a terror raid—and we saw one, and I tweeted this actually a couple of years ago, once again to much more abuse, when a family was raided for terror offences. Subsequently, one of the individuals was found guilty. We saw a number of people, individuals, walk out with a niqab and their faces covered. And I made the tweet, 'Well, there's the flag of fundamentalism.' If you want to identify where the radical threats are in your society, look for the individual wearing the burqa. Some may say, 'Well, that's good, we should keep it there so we know where the nests of extremism are residing.' But it's worse than that. It sends a message to every Australian, 'I do not want to be part of you.' It says, 'I am unemployable,' because no-one would rightfully give a job to someone who insisted upon hiding their face from everyone else. I can't imagine the circumstances where they were—maybe in a burqa modelling agency or something. I can't imagine.

But this is nonsensical. The defenders of this are the same people who have sold out our culture and our values in so many areas. It is this cultural relativism that if we dismantle what we've got here, which is something precious and something unique, it will all be okay. But by some quirk of fate, Australia has become the best country in the world. We risk dismantling it every time we surrender our values and our principles at the altar of political correctness.

I've only got through 2010 there, of course. I must compliment Senator Cash, who is actually in the chamber, because Senator Cash did say in April of 2011, 'It is inconsistent with our culture and values, and I truly believe that women should not do it.' So congratulations, Senator Cash. But very few other people came out and expressed any support. In fact, they would often lay traps so that when a visiting dignitary would come here they would say, 'Oh, the nutjobs want to ban the burqa,' or words to that effect. 'What do you think about that?' They fronted my old pal Hillary Clinton—I think you will get sarcasm for that. In November of 2010, on the day after my birthday—it must have been a gift from Hillary—an enterprising journalist said, 'The right-wing want to ban the burqa. What do you think about that on security issues?'

She said:

Well I am aware of the difference between a head scarf and a burka and hijab—

most people in this place, aren't, by the way—

and I think that there is a difference. I think that a head scarf is a very appropriate manifestation of a woman's choice, so long as it is her choice, which is a premise of my answer. But I think we have to face the reality that in a society where there is a legitimate threat of terrorism, not being able to see one's face, not being able to have some sense of communication in that way is for many societies a challenge. So I understand the dilemma and I think it is a legitimate dilemma.

So you had the left-wing cheerleader, who is beloved by so many—and I reckon 90 per cent of the people in the Senate and the House of Representatives were cheering her on for President last year; I wasn't one of them—prepared to say, 'Yes, it's inappropriate to have someone's face covered because of the security issues attached to it.' I could go on.

Councils, governments and building owners are spending millions upon millions of dollars on security cameras to identify the people in their area for security reasons alone. Yet if you've got a group of people covering their faces, it doesn't set off any alarm bells. If you saw a bunch of people in motorcycle helmets, you would raise questions. If you saw a bunch of people in balaclavas walking down the street, you would raise questions. But, for some reason, we are meant to suspend belief and reality and say that a bunch of people covering their face in the name of religious piety is okay. It represents exactly the same security threat, perhaps even more so, because it is so irregular in this country. If you can't identify the individual under that facial veil, how do you know which one of them has committed the crime?

It was brought home very starkly here in the parliament. When I was walking through the public gallery there were five or six women wearing niqabs. I went to security and asked, 'Did you ask to check their face when they were coming through?' Their answer was, 'No, we're not allowed to.' I said, 'What if they had balaclavas on?' 'Yes, we'd have to check their face.' The principle is exactly the same, which prompted me to write to the then presiding officers and ask: 'What's the story? Why is it that some people are asked to show their face and others aren't? If one of that group of burqa-clad individuals damaged or defaced one of the paintings, how would you know which one it was when they all look the same?'

These are legitimate questions in this place. It was raised on ABC radio. I raised in 2010-11 that, if we had a vote and we had multiple people here wearing niqabs or burqas, you wouldn't know who it was. That is the exact point that Senator Hanson herself made just the other day. They are very valid and legitimate points. Somehow we're not allowed to have a rational and sensible discussion about it because the snowflakes worry we're going to upset or offend a group of people. Well, I'm over that. I don't care about upsetting or offending a group of people. I get upset and offended because people are prepared to dismantle and destroy our culture, our values and our way of life to indulge the desires of a tiny minority.

It's about time that we confronted the sorts of threats that are in our society. I'm convinced that the reason people wear burqas is to directly challenge us, to say: 'No, I will not conform to your laws. I will not conform to your requirements.' We even had the inane circumstance in South Australia where the then prisons minister said it was okay for women to wear burqas in prison. What sort of mindless, mind-numbing stupidity is that? Fortunately, she lost her seat at the next election. But that's the sort of blinkered understanding or ideology that is behind some of the appeasement processes. Appeasement simply doesn't work. It doesn't work.

Sticking up for your values and defending your principles is what the Australian people want. They want it from this place. They want it from people in their own communities. I regret to say that every time we sweep these things under the rug. People say it is just a racist, Islamophobic rant; it's not. This is about genuine issues—about cultural assimilation and integration, about national security and about the type of country we want to see for ourselves.

I'd hazard a guess that the women of Saudi Arabia and the women of Afghanistan would welcome this sort of debate and discussion in their parliament, because they want to be free of this cloak of anonymity, this flag of fundamentalism, this dehumanising garment that reduces a woman to the property of her husband. That's exactly what it does. Yet the vitriol and the abuse spewed at those of us who are concerned not only about the welfare of the individual but also about the welfare and wellbeing of our nation is extraordinary.

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

Where are the feminists?

Cory Bernardi (SA, Australian Conservatives) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Hanson asks: where are the feminists? That's crickets chirping you can hear, because they're nowhere to be seen. Virginia Haussegger, an ABC News presenter here in Canberra, once made the point that she thought the burqa should be banned, and she remarked to me once that the vitriol and the abuse that she received in response was unbelievable. So why is it that so many in our country are prepared to surrender our rights, our history, our values, our societal expectations and our cultural heritage in favour of several dozen—maybe several hundred or maybe several thousand—people who want to directly challenge it? That is what I cannot come to terms with.

Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's not about telling people how to dress.

Cory Bernardi (SA, Australian Conservatives) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator McKim says it's not about telling people how to dress. But the big problem with Senator McKim and his rhetoric is that he's blinded by his own ideology. The big deal here is that Senator McKim is prepared to surrender our values and our culture at the altar of political correctness. He is a sell-out. He is the Neville Chamberlain of the Australian debate: 'Appease everyone, and it will be okay. We can be in some great global environment.'

Senator McKim interjecting—

What I would suggest to you is that if the Greens voters, led by Senator McKim, decided to go and perch themselves in Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia for a little while, let's see how far their discussion gets. That's the reality of it. We've got to defend our culture. (Time expired)

Sam Dastyari (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The burqa ban again! I am not going to take up any more of the Senate's important time having this ridiculous debate time and time again. We all get paid a lot of money to be parliamentarians, and we all have a lot of things to do. But I do want to leave with these immortal words that were left by Senator Hanson to us today. Ignore the advice of security agencies and ignore every expert in the field—it's okay, because Senator Hanson got up today and said, 'I spoke to a taxi driver about it once.' Oh, Senator, you met a Muslim in the wild. It must have been an exciting experience!

Debate adjourned.