This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2018/aug/14/frydenberg-energy-guarantee-politics-live

The article has changed 23 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 19 Version 20
Fraser Anning urges vote on ending Muslim immigration – politics live Fraser Anning: criticism of 'final solution' wording a bid to shut down debate – politics live
(35 minutes later)
Just in case I have to fact check Fraser Anning’s speech for anyone, Muslims have been in Australia since before federation.
There is evidence Muslims from south-east Asia traded with Indigenous people as far back as the 1600s.
If you want to talk nation building, their camel trains helped map out trading routes and then, actual train routes for this nation.
There has been a steady stream of migration from largely Muslim nations, since the 1800s, including from Lebanon, where Fraser Anning’s party leader Bob Katter’s family hails from.
Oh, and that is before we even consider that one of our largest trading partners, Indonesia, who are very, very fond of the products of our farmers, which Anning wants to support and protect, also happens to have the largest Muslim population in the world.
I could go on. I would hope though, that I really don’t have to. Because it has been debunked. So many times. And we still have a representative of this nation’s parliament, standing in your house, not only calling for a ban of all Muslim immigration, but a plebiscite on non-European migration, because Whitlam never asked you if it was OK.
And he did it while invoking the term, ‘the final solution’.
Last month marked the 71st anniversary since Nazi leader Hermann Goering gave the order to SS General Reinhard Heydrich to enact the ‘final solution’.
We all know how that ended. We all know what that phrase refers to. And it was just used in your parliament by someone who now claims that any sinister meaning taken from his use of that phrase is “simply ridiculous”.
If you are not up in arms about that, or demanding that your political representatives are up in arms about that, then that’s exactly the reason someone just stood in this building and used the language the Nazi party used to order the murder of millions of Jews, LGBTI people, migrants, and dissenters.
The standard you walk past is absolutely the standard you accept.
I’m going to end the blog here tonight. I’m too angry to even attempt to come up with a witty comment to finish today on. Instead, I will just say a very big thank you to everyone at The Guardian for their response to that speech, to all the readers who immediately condemned it, and hope that tomorrow is better. It’s all we can do.
Take care of you. And particularly, take care of all those who are continually made to feel like ‘the other’ in their own country, those who are consistently targeted by the ignorant and the hateful for reasons I could never even begin to understand.
We should be better than that. I had hoped we were. I hope we will be.
For those who can’t access the video, here is what Tony Burke said in full in response to Fraser Anning’s speech:
Don’t give them what they want. That’s a question that you always ask when there is an appalling speech. Don’t give them what they want. They want to incite a debate and the debate when it happens when you hit back is exactly what they might have hoped for. But there has to be a point when this Parliament says enough.
If we haven’t reached that point tonight then for some of us there is apparently no limit at all. In the other place Senator Anning has just delivered his first speech and in giving the sort of bile that we get from time to time against Muslim Australians he has decided to invoke the term ‘final solution’. Another speech belittling Australians. Another speech dividing the nation. Another speech wanting to incite debate. Those who have thought that maybe the best thing is to not give them what they want? I say if we continue to hold back they got exactly what they want. Muslim Australians, African Australians, Chinese Australians, when you invoke the Final Solution Jewish Australians in the same way as in years gone by Greek Australians and Italian Australians have been the subjects of prejudice the bigotry of today is no different to the bigotry of yesterday.
The bipartisanship against it that we had in years gone by we don’t have right now and it must return.
The words that happened in the other place are not the words of a proud Australian. They are the words of people who hate modern Australia, people who hate who we are as Australians.
The overseas voices have been encouraged and welcomed into this country. We had Lauren Southern turn up to my local area. She arrived with a camera crew here from North America looked around said it’s all monoculture, all monoculture just like we had the so-called person in charge of Multicultural Affairs claim that we’ve got all these monocultural areas throughout Australia.
The film crew and the journo there were good enough to say well which monoculture? Is it the Arabic culture represented by that shop? Or the Vietnamese culture represented by that shop? The Pakistani, the Pacific Islander, which monoculture are you talking about? To which Lauren Southern said there isn’t even an English pub and they said well there’s actually one immediately behind you.
Our diversity is nothing to be afraid of but the silence that has come from those opposite is everything to fear because the fight for modern Australia when it’s under attack in this way is only going to be won when we get to the point of bipartisanship again and be in no doubt we are not there right now. If anyone wondered whether we were there a lot changed at the last election. Immediately after the last election members of One Nation were returned to the Parliament. At that time instead of adopting the sort of language that John Howard had adopted the Government members started to refer to One Nation today as being more sophisticated than they used to be.
Bigotry is not sophisticated.
In the Longman by election they are now allocating preferences to One Nation, not following John Howard’s lead on putting One Nation last. We had the 18C legislation not referred to during the election campaign suddenly brought on the Parliament to give extra licence for racist hate speech.
We had the Immigration Minister stand right there and refer to Australians not as second and third generation Australians but as second and third generation Lebanese Muslims and then described them as a mistake. We had the Government introduce university level English test but you didn’t have to read university level English if you were immigrating from the five English speaking nations that are predominantly white.
Canada, the United States, Ireland, the UK or New Zealand, they didn’t have to do the test. Only the people from the non-white countries if they had grown up with English had to do it. We had the Member for New England constantly in his book ‘Weatherboard and iron’ referring to the poor, white regional fringe. Why is the White reference there all the time? I say to those opposite it’s not good enough to turn up to the community fundraisers and events and say all the right things there and think people won’t notice what’s been happening in the Parliament.
Don’t apologise for racism don’t imitate it and don’t preference it.
The senator’s office just sent this statement through:
Senator Anning has dismissed criticism of his use of the words “final solution” in regards to immigration as an effort by the left to shut down debate.
“Claims that the words meant anything other than the ‘ultimate solution’ to any political question is always a popular vote are simply ridiculous.
“Anyone who actually reads them in context will realise this.
“Some in the media and leftwing politicians are simply afraid of the Australian people having a say on who comes here.
“As I called for a plebiscite on the immigration mix, this baseless and ridiculous criticism is simply an effort to play the man and not the ball.
“It is ironic that those on the left such as the Greens and some Labor who seek to criticise me are the same people who refused to support my efforts to stop Australia funding the Palestinian Authority who finance terrorist attacks against innocent Israeli women and children.”
Tony Burke:
“Don’t give them what they want. That is a question that you always ask when there is an appalling speech. Don’t give them what they want – they want to incite a debate and the debate, when it happens, when you hit back, is exactly what they might have hoped for.
“But there has to be a point when this parliament says enough. And if we haven’t reached that point tonight, then for some of us, there is apparently no limit at all.”
Tony Burke on Fraser Anning’s speech in full:Tony Burke on Fraser Anning’s speech in full:
Tony Burke in the House of Representatives:Tony Burke in the House of Representatives:
“Don’t apologise for racism, don’t imitate it and don’t preference it,” he finishes with. He finishes with: “Don’t apologise for racism, don’t imitate it and don’t preference it.”
I only switched over at the last moment, but he also questioned why Barnaby Joyce used the phrase “the poor white regional fringe” repeatedly, in his book.I only switched over at the last moment, but he also questioned why Barnaby Joyce used the phrase “the poor white regional fringe” repeatedly, in his book.
“Why is the white reference there all the time?” he said.“Why is the white reference there all the time?” he said.
“I say to those opposite, it is not good enough to turn up to the community fundraisers and events, say all the right things there and think people won’t notice what has been happening in the parliament.”“I say to those opposite, it is not good enough to turn up to the community fundraisers and events, say all the right things there and think people won’t notice what has been happening in the parliament.”
My statement about the first speech from a Queensland senator. pic.twitter.com/89YgMUzKc4My statement about the first speech from a Queensland senator. pic.twitter.com/89YgMUzKc4
This is also what they told me. But it wasn’t “last solution” or “ultimate solution” or even just “solution” that was used, none of which have deeper meaning.This is also what they told me. But it wasn’t “last solution” or “ultimate solution” or even just “solution” that was used, none of which have deeper meaning.
It was “final solution”.It was “final solution”.
The statement is on its way I am told.The statement is on its way I am told.
I've spoken to Fraser Anning's office, who dispute that "final solution" had any deeper sinister meaning - said senator could as easily have said "last" or "ultimate" - official statement coming soon https://t.co/73Iu6bLPKvI've spoken to Fraser Anning's office, who dispute that "final solution" had any deeper sinister meaning - said senator could as easily have said "last" or "ultimate" - official statement coming soon https://t.co/73Iu6bLPKv
For those who missed the speech, here’s the moment he said it:For those who missed the speech, here’s the moment he said it:
here's the video of Fraser Anning saying "the final solution to the immigration problem, of course, is a popular vote" pic.twitter.com/n6ohvUW6Vphere's the video of Fraser Anning saying "the final solution to the immigration problem, of course, is a popular vote" pic.twitter.com/n6ohvUW6Vp
And from my colleague Luke Henriques-Gomes previous professional life comes this story:And from my colleague Luke Henriques-Gomes previous professional life comes this story:
Fraser Anning's latest foray into the immigration debate reminds me of the story I wrote last year showing he also believed Barack Obama was a secret Muslim. https://t.co/oi3qEZW5VI #auspolFraser Anning's latest foray into the immigration debate reminds me of the story I wrote last year showing he also believed Barack Obama was a secret Muslim. https://t.co/oi3qEZW5VI #auspol
Fraser Anning’s office has just been in contact with me.Fraser Anning’s office has just been in contact with me.
They are sending through a statement, but said it was “laughable” his words could be interpreted that way, given Anning’s admiration of Israel.They are sending through a statement, but said it was “laughable” his words could be interpreted that way, given Anning’s admiration of Israel.
I’ll put up the statement as soon as it arrives.I’ll put up the statement as soon as it arrives.
Richard Di Natale on Fraser Anning’s speech:Richard Di Natale on Fraser Anning’s speech:
Fraser Anning’s vile comments in the Senate today were absolutely beyond the pale and if he has a shred of decency, he will immediately apologise. Referring to immigrants, particularly Muslim immigrants, with the same language that the Nazi’s used to discuss the extermination of Europe’s Jews during the Holocaust is vile, racist, bigoted and has no place in out society, let alone our parliament. Australia is a proud multicultural society that is made better every day by the contributions of immigrants. If only Fraser Anning had a fraction of the decency I see in the many Muslim Australians I speak with across this country, perhaps he would realise just how harmful his words are.”Fraser Anning’s vile comments in the Senate today were absolutely beyond the pale and if he has a shred of decency, he will immediately apologise. Referring to immigrants, particularly Muslim immigrants, with the same language that the Nazi’s used to discuss the extermination of Europe’s Jews during the Holocaust is vile, racist, bigoted and has no place in out society, let alone our parliament. Australia is a proud multicultural society that is made better every day by the contributions of immigrants. If only Fraser Anning had a fraction of the decency I see in the many Muslim Australians I speak with across this country, perhaps he would realise just how harmful his words are.”
The states have agreed during their conference call with Josh Frydenberg to release an exposure draft of the amendments to the national electricity law, changes which will underpin the national energy guarantee.The states have agreed during their conference call with Josh Frydenberg to release an exposure draft of the amendments to the national electricity law, changes which will underpin the national energy guarantee.
As promised – here is what Richard Di Natale had to say during the censure motion:
I want to make this point. Senator Leyonhjelm’s defence seems to be that he was provoked. Let’s put on the record, firstly, that what Senator Leyonhjelm alleges was said is contested. Senator Hanson-Young and indeed her colleagues who heard what she said contest the nature of what Senator Leyonhjelm says was said to him. But that misses the point. It entirely misses the point. There is never an excuse for the personal, vindictive attack levelled at a colleague of the Senate. There is never an excuse under any circumstances.
What Senator Leyonhjelm did was that he attempted to humiliate and intimidate one of his fellow parliamentary colleagues. He was simply asked to apologise. Instead of apologising, he went as far as to double down. He went on to several radio and television interviews and sought to capitalise on those defamatory and sexist statements.
There is never an excuse to do what Senator Leyonhjelm did. It doesn’t matter what was said to him. His response was disgraceful; it was shameful; it was sexist; it was misogynist; and it was personal. Now, we can have robust debate in this place, but there is never an excuse, both within this chamber and outside of it, to exercise so-called free speech in the manner in which Senator Leyonhjelm chose to exercise it—by vilifying, intimidating and smearing the reputation of somebody who has made an enormous contribution to this place. And, at a time when we should be making this an environment that is welcoming to all people so that we have a more representative parliament, those comments undermined everything that needs to change in this place so that we welcome more women and more diversity to ensure that this place is much more representative of the people we seek to represent.
I just want to finish by saying we did not want this to happen. We did not want it to get to this point. All we sought from the outset was an apology from Senator Leyonhjelm. Instead, he chose to besmirch the reputation of somebody who has made an enormous contribution to this country. He chose to use a sexist and derogatory attack on an individual senator, and if we can’t censure a senator for those actions then there’s no good having that standing order within the provisions.
Penny Wong has responded to Fraser Anning’s speech:
My parents were married in the dying days of the White Australia Policy.
We’ve rightly consigned that policy to the dustbin of history.”
As far as I could tell, she was not in the chamber when he delivered it.
I have heard a lot in this place in the last couple of years.
But I am floored. I am absolutely floored.
The “final solution” is not a term used naturally. Most people would say, in that context – which, again, was calling for a plebiscite on whether we should return to the White Australia policy – “the answer is....”. It’s as if those words just roll off the tongue, or you hear them together, every day.
I don’t think I have ever put those two words together in speech. I don’t know any one who would.
I’m sorry, but I just can not believe that anyone could use the term “the final solution” and not understand the implications of what it means.
Particularly when talking about immigrants, and those you have decided you don’t want.
And that is what we just heard in the Australian Senate. In a chamber of the people’s house. In the context of the “final solution” to the “immigration problem” would be a popular vote on whether or not non-Europeans should be allowed in this country.
Or, more plainly, to return to the White Australia policy.
I am heartsick. Absolutely heartsick that I just heard that come from the Senate floor. And that people whose family history is forever torn by the actual “final solution”, that absolute stain on the fabric of human history, know it was uttered.
For shame. For absolute shame.
Fraser Anning:
[The migrants] who are thought to be the least able to assimilate and integrate is Muslims.
The first terrorist attack on Australian soil in 1915 was when two Muslim immigrants opened fire on a picnic train of innocent women and children in Broken Hill and Muslim immigrants have been a problem ever since.
To paraphrase the words of Winston Churchill, the fact that in Mohammad law, every women must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, his wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power.
The influence of the religion paralyses social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world.
I believe that the reasons for ending all further Muslim immigration are both compelling and self-evident. The record of Muslims who have already come to this country in terms of rates of crime, welfare dependency and terrorism, are the worst of any migrants and vastly exceed any other immigrant group.
The majority of Muslims in Australia of working age do not work, and exist on welfare. Muslims in NSW and Victoria are three times more likely than other groups to be convicted of crimes.
We have black African Muslim gangs terrorising Melbourne, we have Isis-sympathising Muslims trying to go overseas to try and fight for Isis and while all Muslims are not terrorists, certainly all terrorists these days are Muslims.
So why would anyone want to bring more of them here?
And finally, and really something which should go without saying, we are entitled to require those who come here not only have work, useful work skills and qualifications, but also commitment to work and to pay taxes.
In truth it appears that many of those who claim to be asylum seekers are actually just welfare seekers who only come here, to Australia, to live on welfare and public housing at the expense of working Australians.
In the days of Menzies, immigrants arriving here were not allowed to apply for welfare and that attracted exactly the right sort of hardworking people this country needed.
We should go back to that and ban all immigrants from receiving welfare for the first five years after they arrive.
The final solution to the immigration problem, of course, is a popular vote.
Of course, we don’t need a plebiscite to cut immigration numbers, we just need a government that is willing to institute sustainable population policy and end Australian job stealing 457 visas and make student visas conditional on foreign students returning to the country they came from.
What we do need a plebiscite for is to decide who comes here. Whitlam didn’t ask the Australian people whether they wanted wholesale non-European immigration, or migration, he introduced it, and neither has any subsequent government.
Who we allow to come here will determine what sort of nation we will have in the future. So therefore this isn’t the right of any one government to decide. It is too important for that.
Instead, we need a plebiscite to allow the Australian people to decide whether they want wholesale non-English speaking immigrants from the third world and particularly whether they want any Muslims, or whether they want to return to the predominately European immigration policy of the pre-Whitlam consensus.
I for one will be happy to abide by their decision.
To answer your censure motion questions:
For:
Labor, Greens, Hinch
Against:
Liberal/Nationals, Anning, Bernardi, Burston, Hanson, Leyonhjelm,
Crossbenchers who did not vote:
Griff, Patrick, Georgiou, Storer
It’s not only immigration which Fraser Anning has an issue with:
Given that everyone knows that there are only two genders, if you can persuade and agree to advocate in support of the false claim of an infinite number of genders, then without realising it, you have surrendered your political soul.
Today, with so many unwittingly in lockstep marching to the culture revolutionary tune, options to oppose them politically are increasingly limited.
So that is why I joined the Katter Australia party, the only political force which seeks to return to the pre-Whitlam consensus. I want to see the defeat of cultural Marxism and their ilk and the rolling back of the subversion of Australian culture and values that they have wrought.
There is no practical implication to a Senate censure. But it is noted by the Hansard record.
Semator David Leyonhjelm during a censure motion moved against him by the greens this afternoon @AmyRemeikis @GuardianAus #politicslive pic.twitter.com/69T4xbNTEy
Sigh. This is another thing which is happening:
Queensland senator Fraser Anning is using his first speech to the Senate to pay tribute to the White Australia Policy #auspol
Scott Morrison is so proud of the Taylor Swift line, he tweeted it:
In the last 12 months, a massive 95,200 young Australians got a job - strongest financial year since 1989. Cue the beat... #auspol #QT pic.twitter.com/siC8tOmqmU