Senator HARRIS (12:22 PM) —Madam President, as a new member of this house, I thank the people of Queensland for their courage in voting for Pauline Hanson's One Nation. This seat was won by Heather Hill, who led One Nation's Senate ticket. A High Court challenge and a controversial decision that Great Britain is a foreign power under the terms of the Australian Constitution ruled Heather ineligible to take her place in this chamber. I respect Heather and have no doubt that she would have made a fine representative in the Senate for the people of Queensland.

I have been given an opportunity that I will not take lightly or for granted. I am pleased that Heather with Bronwyn, Brett and Joan are working with me to achieve the goals and objectives that have made Pauline Hanson's One Nation a new political force. This change is long overdue in a country that has been governed for too long by Tweedledee and Tweedledum.

I wish to make a very special thank you to my wife, Betty; to my children, Kent, Brendon and Dene, and their partners; and to my parents, Enid and Jack. To the team in North Queensland: thank you for your support.

We believe that truth will always prevail. We are very conscious of the words of Arthur Schopenhauer:

All truth passes through three stages. First it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident.

I am going to use this opportunity to peel away the myths surrounding One Nation and present some facts; to explain the platform of positive changes that drove me to stand up for my children and grandchildren and future generations of Australians; and to present the positive faces of those involved in this new development in Australia's political history.

I believe that a safe, secure and prosperous society depends on the integrity and sanctity of the traditional family unit. I am appalled that approximately one million children do not live with their fathers in Australia. During my trips around Queensland, I have been inundated with pleas for help from non-custodial parents who have been deprived of access to their children. Divorce is unfortunate but possibly the only solution for some families. But we must remember that children ideally should have a mother and a father. Denial of parental and grandparents' contact with children I believe is synonymous with child abuse.

Maintenance is a necessary tool to ensure that parents do not abdicate their parental responsibilities. But providers should not be forced into poverty and a position that restricts their opportunity to develop a new family. We advocate that the Family Law Court should be abolished and replaced with family tribunals. The current system is too expensive and too adversarial, and children are used like pawns in a game of chess. Family tribunals allow for consultation with no legal representation where quick talking and well-paid lawyers can confuse the issue.

Senior Magistrate Stan Deers has accused some partners of using domestic violence orders to enhance their opportunity to seek custody of their children, as stated in the Courier-Mail on 5 July 1995. People who make vexatious or malicious domestic violence orders should face the full force of the law and pay costs.

The current formula for determining child maintenance is unfair and unworkable and needs to be scrapped. Non-custodial parents want to provide for their children, but under the current system most are left in a life of poverty with no future of having another family life and in a lot of cases unemployed because that is the only way to survive. Suicide and murder have plagued many families. Members of the parliament must work together to find fair solutions.

The disabled in our society are some of the most overlooked members of our community. We recognise that many Australians have disabilities and benefit from, and contribute to, living in the community, but there are others who require centre based care. Both options require services with realistic staffing levels and adequate funding as a priority.

Aged care is not a social welfare burden; it is a just entitlement. The current consumer price index based method of calculating benefits does not reflect the cost of living of our pensioners. Self-funded retirees have worked responsibly to provide for themselves in their later years only to be faced with deeming on their investments. Deeming on their investments, savings and transfer of assets should be abolished. Community transport services, home help and support services are provided to ensure that the elderly can enjoy a safe and comfortable lifestyle in their surroundings for as long as they desire. It is time that we stopped expecting the aged and frail to erect bars on their windows and live in a virtual prison whilst criminals are treated with kid gloves. I commend the Deputy Prime Minister for adopting One Nation policy and recommending a referendum on capital punishment.

Madam President, I would like to take this opportunity to state my position on a controversial subject and correct some of the misunderstandings and untruths that have been propagated by our political opponents. As a result of Pauline raising the issue of immigration, it is pleasing to see that the major political parties have reassessed their policies. Australia has benefited from immigration. However, there is no doubt that previous government immigration, population policies and practices were implemented for their votes and not for the wellbeing and future of our nation, as stated by Barry Jones, the previous member for Lalor.

The fact is that, until very recently, the discussion of immigration was sternly discouraged because the government and the opposition did not want to discuss it, along with many other issues. The policy of immigration requires a process of balance. On one hand we have concern for the migrant and on the other we have concern for the host country and its people who will be supporting, accepting and providing a new home for the migrant. Employment, hospitals, nursing homes and infrastructure must be addressed before any future burden is carried by the taxpayers and all Australians.

Our policy of net zero immigration would result in approximately 30,000 new immigrations each year. Our policy of not exceeding net zero immigration is because we believe Australia is near her carrying capacity. A population policy must be the result of unbiased scientific thinking and must not be highjacked by self-interested pro-immigration elites, including big business who are all too frequently chasing profits, not Australia's interests. Immigration mistakes are big mistakes; they do not go away, they just continue to get more expensive for the Australian taxpayer.

Quality in the immigration debate is still lacking, particularly from some of our political and media opponents. There are still many legitimate questions to be asked regarding Australia's population and immigration policy, and I defend the rights of Australian people to continue to discuss and determine these issues.

Multiculturalism should be killed stone dead. Immigration could have a negative impact on Australia. The Labor Party was a haven for a growing band of family dynasties. Bill Hayden, a former Governor-General and Leader of the Labor Party, made the statement that endorses One Nation's principles. Australia is a multiracial country but multiculturalism will destroy us as a nation and a cohesive society. Whatever our cultural background may be we must consider ourselves to be Australians first and foremost. As one migrant has stated to me, home is not where you are born but where you are prepared to die.

The Australian on 27 July 1999 carried a report from the Social Policy Research Centre that states that almost one-third of Australians feel they have lost control of their economic future and worry about losing their jobs. The orthodox economic policies implemented by our governments have clearly failed to improve the standard of living for the majority of Australian people.

Pauline Hanson's One Nation is strongly opposed to free trade as it currently operates. Our citrus, lamb, pork, rice and sugar industries, to name a few, have found out the hard way that free trade is a misnomer. We want fair trade, not free trade. We also oppose the policies that have sent our manufacturing industries overseas, along with thousands of Australian jobs. No country can remain wealthy without a strong manufacturing and value adding industrial base. We are increasingly dependent on foreign goods to satisfy basic demands, creating more social and economic problems. The only way out of this mess is to re-industrialise this country. We have to stop being the world's quarry pit and start transforming our natural resources into finished products. It makes no sense to sell iron ore for a pittance and buy back steel. It makes no sense to export woodchips and import paper. It makes no sense to export silica sand and import fibre optics. Our rural industries need support to transform their raw commodities to value added products. Steps must be taken to protect our standard of living by increasing selective tariffs to protect Australian jobs.

We need to further encourage Australian industries by introducing truth in labelling that will enable consumers to clearly identify genuinely Australian owned and made products. Most Australians will buy Australian made and owned products if they can find them on the grocery shelves. Australia must not be seen as a tax haven for multinationals who pay little or no tax at all, while small business and PAYE citizens carry the burden. If they do not like it, they can leave and small business and Australian companies will fill the void.

Foreign ownership of our enterprises should not exceed 49 per cent. Foreign ownership of our assets is unacceptably high. We have signed 41 international tax agreements which give foreign owned companies a competitive advantage over Australian companies. By virtue of paying little or no tax they have a market advantage that enables them to out price and out service those Australian companies and businesses which pay their taxes. The government does not publish accurate and concise information about the level of foreign ownership of our land, businesses, companies and natural resources. When Pauline Hanson was a member of parliament even she could not access this information. What hope does the general public have?

Multinationals buy out their competition and monopolise the markets. Examples of multinationals destroying Australian owned companies are Conagra and Boral. Not only have they bought out their competitors and monopolised the market but government has financially assisted one of these multinationals in their expansion, whilst their Queensland owned competitor was thrown to the wolves and Queenslanders lost their jobs. We must protect Australian industries and protect Australian jobs like the United States protects theirs.

National competition policy is a textbook theory which has failed in practice. The Labor government must be held accountable for the pain and suffering inflicted on the Australian people through its national competition policy legislation. Proudly introduced and implemented by Mr Keating and the Labor Party and supported by the Liberal and National parties, this legislation has destroyed and continues to destroy the livelihoods of many in rural and regional areas, especially is Queensland, which is the most decentralised state in Australia.

Australians are demoralised at having a government and its agencies fail to defend our country's interests. The devastation of the lamb, pork and rice industries and the government's recent decision to allow the importation of salmon, with its potential to irreversibly damage the environment and industry, are unforgivable. The government are acting against the interests of those people who voted them in as their representatives to protect their rights and interests. Are milk, bread, electricity or local government rates any cheaper as a result of the national competition policy? A mixture of market forces and government controls in certain circumstances can operate for the overall public benefit. Although the economic purists hate to admit it, this mixture of market forces and government intervention is necessary to preserve an adequate level of competition and consumer choice. This mixture preserves the economic opportunities for the whole community, not just the big end of town.

The main problem with the national competition policy has been its overzealous implementation with little or no regard to the anti-competitive nature of unregulated markets and with little or no regard to the very real social costs of national competition policy. Pauline Hanson's One Nation supports a mixed economy that has two sorts of government controls: controls on big business that prevent oligopolies and outright monopolies forming, and measures that support small and medium size business to compete with big business. This counterbalances advantages enjoyed by the multinationals and big business, which include superior purchasing power, taxation advantages and economies of scale. This helps to ensure that the elusive level playing field can be achieved. The economic cost to consumers of protecting manufacturing industry is justified by the social benefits, more Australian jobs and less Australian debt. Australia is resource rich. We should be leading world technology, not selling our intellectual resources overseas where multinational companies can exploit them with minimal benefits for Australians.

The protection of our workers' entitlements is very important, and I am pleased to see that the government and the opposition are now taking this matter seriously. However, it was not until Pauline Hanson released her policy to protect workers' entitlements in 1998 that Labor or the coalition displayed an enthusiasm to fix this most serious problem.

Inland tourism is an industry with fantastic potential to be developed. For too long Australian promotions have concentrated on the eastern seaboard. The Australian outback is beautiful, and I will be doing my best to ensure that we promote the western side of the Great Divide to tourists and overseas visitors as well as the eastern seaboard.

Small businesses are doing it tough for a variety of reasons, but our unfair dismissal laws are adding to the problem. Unfair dismissal legislation as it presently stands is a disincentive to increasing small business employment, and I would like to work with the government to help our small business operators achieve their full potential.

There is a place for unions in Australia to protect the workers' rights. Enterprise bargaining has the potential to take away hard fought rights of workers. We do not support compulsory unionism, as it is an infringement of freedom of choice and freedom of association and encourages complacency on the part of the unions. We do not approve of the practice of channelling money from membership fees to political parties without the authorisation of the member.

Australians have a long and for the most part successful relationship with firearms, and I do not believe that imposing national gun laws was the correct action to deal with an increasingly violent, divided and amoral society. We believe that decent, law-abiding citizens should have reasonable access to firearms for legitimate reasons.

The PRESIDENT —Senator Harris, you have gone over your time. Could you bring your speech to a conclusion, please?

Senator HARRIS —I have always greatly admired Gandhi, and I believe his thoughts to conclude my maiden speech are fitting. I ask members of the chamber to reflect on these words:

The things that will destroy us are politicians without principle, pleasure without conscience, wealth without work, knowledge without character, science without humanity and business without morality.

Madam President, with humility, diligence and the grace of God, I, Leonard William Harris, pledge to serve each individual Australian, so help me God. I swear by the Southern Cross to stand truly by each Australian and fight to defend our rights and liberties.