The push to silence truth and to stem Public push back has never been healthier.

Ask your Government’s WHO is drafting their legislation on Misinformation and disinformation laws?
Judging by this post there seems to be an alignment of some degree world wide and AI is the scapegoat, even though it’s programmed by People.
Expect long term power blackouts in the coming years “Cyber insecurity“ even the QLD audit office have spoken to us about this.
If you want to see what inequity looks like, go and see the $$$ being flaunted and hear the out of touch with reality policies being cooked up in Davos atm.
Looks like the nonsense is about to kickoff…
Don’t say you were not warned via the WEF Global Risk Report.

SIGN THE PETITION to Keep Cash as a guaranteed payment option in Queensland


Sign the Petition here –

Yesterday’s announcement by South Burnett Regional Council that an earlier ban on cash at the Kingaroy waste facility, will now be extended to three more tips, has caused widespread outrage.

The Council is trying to ‘sell’ the policy as one solely motivated by its commitment to people’s ‘safety and security’.

They treat us like children.

By introducing these ‘go cashless’ policies in this gradual and piecemeal manner, all masked in ‘soothing’ buzzwords like ‘safety’, ‘convenience’, ‘protection’ etc, they think people won’t notice what is happening until it’s too late.

Their ultimate goal being to turn Queensland into a ‘cashless’ society by stealth.

The Courier Mail quoted one Councillor as saying: “cash poses several risks… including theft and damage from attempted break-ins.  Whilst this will not totally eliminate the risk of break-ins, it is expected to lower risks”.

Did you catch the key word in all that?


They slip it in all the time now, whenever the subject of cash is raised.

It’s all part of a deliberate strategy by banks and governments to “frame” cash as something risky, unsafe, dodgy even.

Similar ‘framing’ tactics are used to position cash as a ‘risk’ to public health – as something dirty, germ-ridden and dangerous.

The word “risk” is now regularly trotted out and used to demonise everything associated with the ‘old normal’, and cash is at the top of that list.

Allowing councils, big business, banks and other vested interest groups, to dictate public policy in this covert and sneaky manner, completely outside the normal democratic process, must not be tolerated.

Cash is legal tender.  It is also safe, private, reliable, bank charge-free and a handy back-up for when other systems fail.

Banning its use is discriminatory and will adversely impact the many groups and individuals within society who still prefer to use it.

Which is why I have put up a Parliamentary Petition calling on Government to urgently introduce legislation that guarantees people’s right to use cash in Queensland.

Click here to sign and share the Petition 


‘Long live the consensus’

The ability to hold government to account is the very essence of responsible government, and a core function of parliament.

In Queensland, parliament’s authority is steadily being eroded, as ‘executive power’ increases by the day.

The situation is worsened by several factors, not least being the abolition of the state’s Legislative Council in 1922.

Never has the lack of an Upper House been more sorely missed than it is today.

Without one, the power of the party with a majority on the floor, is virtually absolute.

Something that has bred arrogance in a government, that is becoming more and more dismissive of ‘critics’ and utterly resistant to change.

Any form of criticism is now routinely cast as ‘divisive’, ‘extremist’, ‘racist’ or just plain ‘misinformed’.

Seldom do they bother trying to refute opponents based on rational arguments.

They simply impute ‘bad faith’ to those who don’t agree with them and refuse to engage in meaningful debate.

This is contrary to all democratic norms and processes.

Emphasis is instead continually placed on strong leadership, efficiency and “getting things done”.

Any democratic ‘checks’ and ‘balances’ are little more than ‘obstacles’ to be neutralised or bypassed altogether.

It is a form of government usually referred to as ‘Napoleonic’.

Which is a nice way of saying ‘authoritarian’.

Historically, it was seen as the legitimate role of an Opposition Party to provide reasoned criticism and an alternative viewpoint.

Not anymore.

Today, when boisterous shouting matches erupt on the floor of the house, it is usually no more than a squabble over the best way to implement a particular government policy or program.

Rarely is there any serious disagreement on any of the key issues that matter – like climate change, globalisation, Agenda 2030, vegetation laws, coral reefs, global governance, automation, data gathering, surveillance and the digital economy.

On those issues, the majors are pretty much in ‘lockstep’.

True ‘dissenting voices’ are detested, no matter how reasoned or logical they are.

‘Conviction’ politics is dead.

Long live ‘the Consensus’.

Draconian new Stop And Search Powers To Become Permanent in Queensland


The Qld Government plans to give police enhanced powers to search people with a handheld metal detector in certain areas, without their consent or the usual ‘reasonable’ suspicion requirement.

Initially, the new laws will apply only to people within Queensland’s ‘safe-night precincts’ and ‘transport areas’, but there is little doubt they are intended to be applied more broadly over time.

Under current legislation, police cannot stop and search someone without their consent or without ‘reasonably suspecting’ them of having committed an offence.

It is a requirement which protects ordinary, law-abiding citizens from arbitrary interference that infringes on their right to privacy and free movement.

The requirement of ‘reasonable suspicion’ also gives police an objective standard for carrying out searches fairly and without discrimination.

In 2021, legislation was passed in Parliament enabling a ‘trial’ of the new laws at two sites on the Gold Coast.

According to the Premier, the laws will now be made permanent as a “necessary response to the increased incidence of weapon seizures” during the trial.

What the Premier failed to mention was that the Evaluation Report on that trial, had found that:

“…apart from the increase in weapons offences noted for Surfers Paradise, there was no statistically significant change in any other category of crime across the two areas, or in any of the adjacent areas we examined… From this we conclude that, as yet, there is no evidence to suggest that increased detection of knives has reduced violent or other offending”.

The potential invasiveness of the laws has also been downplayed by the government.

Given most people carry keys and other metal objects, a lot of people are going to be subjected to far more invasive public searches than a simple ‘once-over’ with a metal detector.

Such laws will inevitably cause increased feelings of distrust and resentment towards police, particularly from those groups/ethnicities who may feel unfairly singled out by police.

Deputy police commissioner, Mark Wheeler, said officers will be “judicious” in using the new powers, however, according to the Trial Report, the powers had been:

“inconsistently used across different groups in the community” and “there is some evidence of inappropriate use of stereotypes and cultural assumptions by a small number of officers in determining who to select for wanding”.

There is simply no clear evidence that these extra powers are needed in Queensland.

Or that such powers will lead to reduced crime levels.

What they will do, however, is further erode our civil liberties and lead to even more intrusive and coercive forms of policing down the track.


QCCL President, Michael Cope, made a bracing stand for ‘common sense’ at last week’s Committee hearing on the Government’s Public Health and Other Legislation (Extension of Expiring Provisions) Amendment Bill 2022.

The new bill seeks to extend a number of the Chief Health Officer’s extraordinary powers for another year.

As Mr Cope points out, by the time the new Sunset date rolls round, Queenslanders will have been living under emergency laws for 4 years, which is simply not acceptable in a “free society”.

The new Bill is being sold as a more ‘streamlined’, ‘step-down’ approach to exiting the current state of emergency in Queensland.

Queensland’s Civil Liberties’ Council chief, however, was having none of it.

Mr Cope pointed out that with the availability of ‘safe and effective’ vaccines and anti-virals there was no longer ANY reason for these emergency powers to be retained past their current expiry date of 31 October 2022.

According to QCCL, the emergency situation used to justify the granting of these extraordinary powers of the CHO in the first place, no longer exists.

In a written submission on the Bill, the Council said it was concerned this “long-term intervention into the lives of Queenslanders to micromanage them”, was becoming a “norm changing arrangement”.

In a news blog earlier this year, QCCL referenced the raft of anti-terrorism laws Australian parliaments had passed in the wake of the 9/11 attacks in 2001.

Most of those laws had also contained sunset clauses and these had all been extended again and again, with the most recent extension passed by the Commonwealth Parliament on 24 August 2021.

So 20 years on, not only are these anti-terrorism laws still in place, they are now being routinely extended without scrutiny or debate.

As QCCL notes:

“It is because of examples like this that the Council is not prepared to accept the assurances of the government that the current emergency will come to an end when the powers are no longer necessary”.

I couldn’t agree more!



(Note the visuals on it start after a minute or two)


New legislation proposing a ‘step-down’ approach to the current emergency powers framework in Queensland, was introduced to Parliament on 1 September.

The Bill has been forwarded to the Health Committee for review by the 14th of October 2022.


The new Bill seeks to replace the current emergency framework with a new set of “temporary and targeted powers”, which would allow the Chief Health Office to only issue public health directions across a few key areas.

Those directions could only be issued if the CHO believed it was “reasonably necessary” to:

  • respond to a “serious risk” to the public health system or community;
  • give effect to a National Cabinet decision; or
  • give effect to advice from national advisory bodies (eg. AHPPC).

Many people, I know, feel fairly strongly that this ongoing use of emergency powers in Queensland is unnecessary and that the whole lot should be allowed to expire on 31 October 2022 as they are supposed to.

I tend to agree.

I also believe that such powers should ONLY be exercised by a Minister, who is a democratically elected representative of the people, who is ACCOUNTABLE to the people for all actions taken.

The CHO is none of these things – neither elected OR accountable.

There is also an issue with a few broadly worded phrases, like “serious risk” that have not been defined in the Bill – the meaning is left entirely up to CHO’s own discretion.

I am also concerned with the Bill’s proposal to extend emergency power provisions at corrective services facilities for another year.

Apart from that, I find the virtual silence on the introduction of the Bill, both in the mainstream media and elsewhere, very strange.

The Departmental Briefing Paper states:

“A CONFIDENTIAL CONSULTATION paper about the proposed changes to the Chief Health Officer’s powers .. was distributed to targeted stakeholders”

That sounds suspiciously like stakeholders consulted on the Bill are being prevented by the Government from discussing the contents of the Bill, either publicly or with their membership.

If so, that’s disgraceful.

This is a significant issue and there should be a wide-ranging and open public debate on how the State steps away from the ongoing state of emergency powers framework.

We all saw the storm of controversy that erupted when The Australian revealed the shroud of secrecy governing the Queensland Government’s consultations regarding proposed new environmental laws.

Stakeholders were forced to sign an “unprecedented confidentiality deed before they were allowed to see proposed amendments”.

The Deed prevented stakeholders from discussing any of the proposals, either publicly or with members.

I sincerely hope the same tactics weren’t used here.



The committee invites submissions addressing any aspect of the Bill, from all interested parties.  Guidelines for making a submission to a parliamentary committee are available here:  Guide to making a submission. Please ensure your submission meets these requirements.

Click here to make an online submission.  The closing date for written submissions is 9am on Friday 16 September 2022.

Submissions may also be emailed to:   

Committee Secretary
Health and Environment Committee

Submissions should include:

  • the author’s name and signature
  • if the submission is made on behalf of an organisation, the level of approval (e.g. a local branch, executive committee or national organisation)
  • mailing address (and email if available), and
  • daytime telephone number.

Please ensure your submission includes the above or it may not be considered by the committee.


The committee has scheduled a public briefing on the Bill by officers of the Department of Health on Wednesday 28 September 2022, commencing at 9am.


The committee has scheduled a public hearing on the Bill for Wednesday 28 September 2022, commencing at 10am.  Further information will be published here in due course.


The committee is due to table its report on Friday, 14 October 2022. The report will be published here.


Submissions close: 9am on Friday, 16 September 2022
Public Briefing: 9am on Wednesday, 28 September 2022
Public Hearing: 10am on Wednesday, 28 September 2022
Report Due Date: Friday, 14 October 2022


In September 2021, the Rockefeller Foundation, New York Stock Exchange, Aberdare Ventures and Inter-American Development Bank, announced a new publicly tradable security called a ‘Natural Asset Company’ (NAC).

A NAC basically involves governments putting up their country’s natural assets for sale.

A piece of nature, like a protected area, forest or lake, is ‘valued’, assigned a price tag and then converted into financial capital and launched as an IPO (initial public offering) on the stock exchange.

The NAC (a state or federal government) no longer ‘owns’ the asset – institutional investors and hedge funds do!

That means global asset managers like BlackRock, who already own almost everything, could end up owning every piece of nature as well – basically what used to be regarded as the ‘commons’ – ie belonging to all.

Everything has its price when it comes to the Eco-Industrial Complex.

Proceeds from the NAC initial public offering (IPO) will be used by governments to manage the natural asset, with anything left over put towards buying more ‘protected’ natural assets to sell off.

NACs, we are told, will unlock $4 quadrillion in natural assets.

Can you imagine the feeding frenzy this will unleash?

Billionaires everywhere will be rushing to buy up the rights to clean water, clean air and fish-laden rivers, lakes and streams.

How about a snow-capped mountain or maybe an entire forest?

Hell they could end up buying the Great Barrier Reef with Uluru tossed in as a bonus!

The possibilities are endless.

Something as despicable as a NAC shouldn’t be allowed in a democracy.

Which is no help of course, since there isn’t a single democracy left on the planet.

Just a few dictators and a bunch of fascist corporatocracies.

Remember how we all tutt-tutted over African dictators looting their nations to the tune of billions in the 80s?

Well now we’ll get to witness it first-hand from the comfort of our own country.

So, let’s cut the crap.

Slapping a price tag on Nature is NOT ‘sustainable’ OR eco-friendly.

It’s straight up theft of the ‘commons’.

Do “green” ideologues seriously believe that global capital, rebranded as “stakeholder capitalists”, are actually going to ‘save’ Nature?

Can they actually be THAT stupid?

Call me crazy but I don’t trust governments and I sure as hell don’t trust transnational bankers or investment trusts.

I also don’t believe that any corporation, billionaire or globalist NGO should have the right or ability to “own” something as permanent as a mountain.


In May, Queensland Parliament passed the state’s new “shield laws”, which the Government said would project journalists from being forced to divulge their sources.

Contained in the Evidence and Other Legislation Amendment Bill, however, are a number of ‘get out’ clauses, which render its so-called “protections” as tokenistic at best.

One of the biggest loopholes is that it is left to the courts to decide whether a journalist’s ‘right to privilege’, is outweighed by a ‘public interest’ right for an informant’s identity to be made known.

If it is, then the judge can overrule the “shield laws”.

No criteria or rules are given to explain how the “public interest” is determined.

It is just left up to the discretion of the judge to decide.

Another problem is that the “shield laws” don’t apply to the secretive ‘star chamber’ powers of Queensland’s Crime and Corruption Commission (CCC).

Given the CCC star chamber has been the main instigator of attacks and threats against journalists in Queensland over the past decade, its exemption from the laws is a massive oversight.

All of which makes it surprising that no journalist or media organisation raised any objection to the “shield laws” at the time – or has criticised them since.

Surely they realise that any journalist or whistle-blower relying on these laws when exposing the wrong doings of power, would be taking an enormous risk.

The fact is, without strong and effective shield laws, informants and whistle-blowers simply won’t be prepared to divulge vital information that the public needs to know.

Even if they did, what journalist or editor in Queensland would be game enough to publish the details?

Just how secretive Queensland has become was exposed by an ABC report in February, which began:

“There is a politician we can’t name, using a non-publication order we can’t get, in a case to suppress a report by a corruption watchdog which won’t talk about it, in a court hearing that was held with no names.”

“Welcome to Queensland.”

Says it all really.

As Julian Assange once said:

“The overwhelming majority of information is classified to protect POLITICAL security, NOT national security”.



Queensland’s new Industrial Relations Amendment Bill claims to address the “confusion” over whether the State’s new, independent employee associations are entitled to represent and advocate for workers or not.

Currently, the use of the term ‘union’ is not restricted by law.  That’s because Australia has ratified an international convention guaranteeing the right of every worker to form their own union.

The Palaszczuk Government is trying to get around this by saying workers are still ‘free to choose” to join an “ineligible entity” if they want to, the entity just won’t be able to represent them, that’s all.

Just more ‘gaslighting’ from the same mob who told workers they were ‘free to choose’ to be injected or not – they just wouldn’t have a job if they chose wrong.

Not only does the Bill create new barriers preventing independent employee associations from representing their members, it sets a framework for punishing them as well.

New powers are created enabling the QIRC to issue orders against “ineligible entities” and hit them with heavy fines.

If passed, the bill will end the right to ‘freedom of association’ in Queensland.

As everyone knows, thousands of workers were left devastated last year when the government’s coercive control mandates were imposed.

Told by their union reps they were ‘on their own’ if they didn’t comply, these workers had no-one and nowhere to turn to.  If it hadn’t been for Red Union and other worker groups like them, these workers would have been abandoned and silenced.

The ‘new unions’ helped workers deal with unfair dismissal and pay negotiations, provided them with professional indemnity insurance, showed them how to set up public fundraising campaigns and helped them join forces with other workers to launch court actions.

By the end of 2021, Red Union associations were attracting more than 200 members a day.

Today, these organisations boast close to 50,000 workers combined.  A number that someone has estimated represents around $12 million in lost dues to the ‘legacy unions’.

No wonder union heavies like Sally McManus have been screaming blue murder in the media about “fake unions” and lobbying ‘stakeholder’ mates in Big Government and Big Media to get them banned.

As they say in the classics – “Hell hath no fury like a UNION scorned”.


The Palaszczuk Government introduced a new Bill last month which contain a number of radical IR reforms that Queenslanders should be very concerned about.

I will be discussing some of these concerns in future posts.  Here I just want to draw people’s attention to the new gendered language provisions and “nation-leading reforms” on “gender-based harassment” in the workplace.

The Bill’s amendments make “gender-based harassment” a “type of misconduct” which will result in “summary dismissal” of any worker found guilty of engaging in this “type of abhorrent conduct” Minister Grace said when tabling the Bill.

Also included are amendments removing gendered language from Queensland’s Industrial Relations Act.

Terms like ‘maternity’ and ‘she’ are removed from the Act and replaced with dehumanising terms like ‘birth-related’ and ‘the employee’.

One clause in the Bill replaces “maternity leave” with “birth-related leave”, while elsewhere “maternity leave” is replaced with “pregnancy-related”.

The idea is to rid the IR Act with anything that specifically denotes a woman and replacing it with the new “gender neutral language”.

Women I have spoken with on the subject have told me they feel insulted and disrespected by the Bill’s changes.

The legislation artificially does away with legal recognitions of male and female sexes.  At the very least it waters them down so as to make them virtually meaningless.

Many women feel they are increasingly being deprived of their right to a separate identity and voice within society.

Fair Go for Queensland Women (FGQW) said in their submission that the legislation propagates the “worrying trend” towards the “conflation of sex and gender” in Queensland, by elevating “gender over sex in social discourse, policy and legislation”.

“We firmly believe that sex, as an objective and immutable characteristic must be retained in public policy and legislation”, the feminist group wrote, adding:

“Removing language that respects women and their important as well as physically and emotionally demanding role in gestation, birthing and primary care (including breastfeeding, which is a significant undertaking) of infants is not in the interests of Mothers, their babies, their families or the larger community”.

Well said!