ADJOURNMENT
Senator ROBERTS (Queensland) (20:51): In the week since I spoke about the huge volume of scientific papers on the COVID scandal, more new papers have been published. After years of censorship, Dr Yaakov Ophir from the University of Cambridge published an excellent paper in the EXCLI Journal titled 'Real-time pharmacovigilance and cardiac risk communication during the COVID-19 vaccination campaign in Israel'.
The paper included the Israeli Ministry of Health's actual internal pharmacovigilance dataset, showing that, far from being rare and mild, adverse events from the COVID jab are dangerously high. From March to May 2021, immediately after injection started among males under 20, 85 per cent of the hospitalisations involved myocarditis or pericarditis. Among females under 20, 68 per cent of hospitalisations involved myocarditis or pericarditis.
Two thirds of these patients had no medical history of heart disease, and 46 of these young people died. These are hospitalisations and deaths amongst healthy young people for whom COVID would not have been serious and certainly not fatal. This paper shows Israeli health authorities warned US and European authorities, 'We are seeing a large number of myocarditis and pericarditis cases in young individuals soon after Pfizer COVID-19 vaccination.' Yet the data behind that large number never reached the public.
Instead, the warning was framed as 'rare, mild and transient'—a lie—and the injection regimen was extended to even younger people. Australia did the same. Did we get the data Israel shared?
Was our pharmacovigilance compromised? Only a royal commission can get to the bottom of who knew what and when. Only a royal commission can unpack decisions made and recommend changes for those who ignored the adverse events and acted contrary to the best interests of the public.
Australian researcher Dr Raphael Lataster from the University of Sydney has published in the peer reviewed dedicated cancer journal Oncotarget. His paper shows a mechanistic link, which means the process that links, in this case, COVID injections with an outcome—in this case, cancer. I spoke last week of a paper from the McCulloch Foundation, which established a similar mechanistic link.
The work in this area is now impossible to ignore. Why is this not big news? We have cause and effect, absolute proof of actual cases and hundreds of autopsies of people who should still be alive, and nobody in authority cares.
Only One Nation will call a royal commission into a medical response that killed thousands—tens of thousands—of Australians due to adverse events, suicides, incorrect protocols or delays in medical treatment. That is criminal. What's also criminal is the performance of the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency, which is tasked with maintaining Australian medical standards.
In Senate estimates hearings I've questioned Ahpra on many occasions. I've mentioned their jihad against any doctor who refuses to follow their self-determined medical truths and I've spoken about capable, sound doctors who are deregistered for the crime of providing their patients with the best possible medical care. Their actions during COVID and since show that Ahpra is dedicated to protecting orthodoxy, maximising pharmaceutical use and causing doctors to break the Hippocratic oath.
I read an article in the Australian newspaper last weekend from obstetrician Dr Michael Gannon, former head of the Australian Medical Association. The headline correctly summarises the situation in which Ahpra has put us: 'System to catch bad doctors is causing harm to the good ones.' It's killing good ones, and the regulator meant to protect patients has no filter on accepting complaints.
Ahpra's own data shows 16 doctors took their lives while under its scrutiny. Doctors' registration fees have risen fivefold to pay for Ahpra's mission creep, which is more reminiscent of a ministry of truth than a studious group of medical professionals ensuring their colleagues' skill levels meet practising standards. In April this year, Ahpra convened the 'organisational review group—incidents of distress' to consider serious incidents relating to the suicide of people involved in their regulatory processes, and it's no bloody wonder.
This regulator has an appetite for more and more complaints, growing its budget and power. It's lacking the ability to manage complaints in a morally fair and expeditious manner and it's harming our society. A One Nation government will convene a conference of state health ministers to review the performance of Ahpra and explore alternative models of regulation based on correcting the balance between the practitioner's standards and rights and the patient's best interests.
In doing so, One Nation will listen to doctors, nurses and health practitioners. Liberal Senator Hume described One Nation's immigration policy as 'a headline number and a few slogans'. I have the policy here.
It's seven pages of details and facts. It took months of research to source the numbers and formulate the measures, which are comprehensive, detailed, consistent and will fix so many of the problems Australia is facing in housing, household wealth, service delivery, social cohesion and the current per capita recession in which Australians are suffering. It's clear that people criticising the policy have never read it or are lying out of political self-interest.
For clarity, there's no change in backpackers, no change in PALM workers, no change in tourism numbers. All three can increase if the market can sustain more. Labor Minister Watt made this criticism: 'One Nation policy will destroy the economy and drive the economy into recession.' The minister is not alone in this deceit.
Some Liberal-aligned business leaders and Labor-aligned media have repeated this unfounded fabrication, contrary to the facts. The Treasury's Fiscal Impact of New Australians model, FIONA, looks at the lifetime contribution of a new immigrant—the cost and the benefit. A young migrant in the sweet spot of 25 to 35 years of age—someone who assimilates, works his or her whole life and stays out of trouble—will add $198,000 to the economy in their lifetime, increasing GDP and wealth for all, which is why we are not reducing that cohort; we are increasing it.
This is our immigration target demographic. FIONA shows each person arriving under the family program, though, costs the Australian economy $126,000 across their lifetime. FIONA shows a migrant arriving after the age of 50 will never pay back the taxpayers either.
In addition, their lifetime value is negative. The current mix of this government's new arrivals is heavily weighted towards older migrants, family reunions and nonworkers, and there are hundreds of thousands of fake students working in the gig economy, cheating on their tax and sending home as much money as possible. Children of new arrivals or family reunions have a huge lifetime economic cost.
The younger the child, the more likely it is that they will have a negative lifetime economic impact. This is why FIONA only puts the average lifetime contribution of all migrants that this government is letting in at $41,000. The more committed, young, educated or skilled workers we let in, the more nonproducers we can screen out.
It only takes 20 per cent of all arrivals to be our target young demographic for the total value of arrivals to hit the $41,000 figure. So what do other arrivals contribute? They don't.
They add costs to Australians. Do the maths. Prime Minister Carney grew Canada's economy with the same approach One Nation is proposing.
He grew it. Canada's largest banks report that Canadian immigration cuts were easing rental pressures and supporting employment. In Canadian provinces where the immigration cuts were most significant, rents are falling fastest.
The banks concluded the immigration slowdown has been great news for Canada's battlers. Speaking last night on—of course—the ABC, George Megalogenis said our cut would cause the worst depression since the 1890s. Talk about seeing what you want to see!
What utter nonsense—a lie. The data I have just presented shows the reverse will be true. Canada proved the reverse will be true.
As for a supposed labour shortage, One Nation is not changing backpacker numbers. We're offering skilled visas to genuinely skilled workers in areas we need them, including construction; the care economy, such as nursing and aged care; and rural industry. Let's be clear; only one per cent of skilled arrivals last year under this government were construction workers, half a per cent were aged-care workers and one per cent were nurses.
Our numbers leave plenty of room for more skilled and educated workers where we need them. Our policy looks after those who are already here. Right now, there are 690,000 Australians out of work—690,000.
There are another 1.65 million Australians looking for extra work. Business lobbies should start there—with Australians who want a job. It's industry's fault that workforce planning was sacrificed on the altar of high profits and lazy management.
The workers are here in Australia. It's time for industry to get back in the business of training the new generation of apprentices and staff, instead of lazily importing them. Under One Nation, the cheap-labour gravy train will be over, and Australians can begin to restore Australian productivity and living standards.
Together we Australians can restore Australia.