Let's call it a night
The senate is sitting on into the evening but I think we are safe now to call it a night. Thanks for the marvellous company on a very big day – what treasures you are.
Let’s part by reviewing the new game show, You’ve Been Prorogued, which is how I’d categorise Tuesday.
- The prime minister banked his double dissolution trigger, and said the election would be on July 2, governor-general willing.
- On day one of the unofficial election campaign, the prime minister suffered a leak indicating the government is planning a taxpayer funded budget advertising campaign, faced concerns from MPs about Labor’s positioning on a royal commission into the banking sector, had the attorney-general George Brandis suddenly and randomly reopen the climate science debate during a filibuster, ran out of stuff to do in the House of Representatives shortly after question time, then faced some evening payback for bringing on this special session of the parliament from the Senate.
- The worst of the evening payback from the Senate was a new inquiry into political donations in New South Wales via associated entities, including an appearance by the cabinet secretary, Arthur Sinodinos. The government filibustered for some period of time to try and avoid that eventuality, but in the end, it couldn’t be avoided. Whether the government can subsequently take steps to avoid that eventuality remains to be seen.
- The Labor leader Bill Shorten for his part gave a broad hint that his budget-in-reply speech will outline measures on fiscal repair, and he left open the option of providing some personal income tax cuts down the track.
I’m sure there was more but those were the memorable things. I think our special sitting of the parliament is now over, but Magic Mike and I will be back in the morning with another edition of Politics Live, because we go off like frogs in socks.
Have a nice evening.
One of the motions that did not get up this evening, however, was moved by the Greens and called on the government to immediately legislate to create a federal Icac.
This was the motion in question.
Leader of the Australian Greens (Senator Di Natale): To move that the Senate
(a) notes that:
(i) corruption in any sector of society is unacceptable and threatens the fabric of our democracy; and
(ii) the government’s attempt to legislate the Australian Building and Construction Commission is not about corruption, but the enforcement of anti-worker laws; and
(b) calls on the government to immediately legislate to establish a national anti-corruption commission to address corruption among public officials and politicians that threatens the fabric of our democracy.
That motion was negatived. Ayes, 13; Noes, 36. I didn’t see the vote – because I was working through the donations inquiry and the estimates hearings – but I presume the major parties voted against it.
Also in the batch of motions, there will now be two days of estimates hearings in budget week, on 5 May and 6 May. The estimates hearings weren’t scheduled to happen until 23 May. This might seem an abstract point, but there’s a practical implication to it.
Think of it this way. The government is trying now to get what it needs out of this special sitting (a double-dissolution trigger), then get the heck out of Canberra, and then return for the budget week, push supply through the parliament, then race off to see the governor general.
If the agenda starts to get crowded out – say with two days of estimates hearings that weren’t expected – it makes it harder to land everything the government needs to land before calling the election. Not impossible, but complicated.
Updated
A couple of things to say about this turn of events.
The first is: I really hope this special sitting of parliament was worth it for the prime minister given Labor has just foisted this inquiry on the government, which probably wouldn’t have happened if the parliament had returned at budget week.
The second point is Brandis is quite right. This is a substantial precedent. And once precedents are set, they are generally used.
Updated
That was just resolved in the affirmative. That means Labor got the inquiry up, including the reference directing the cabinet secretary, Sinodinos, to appear before the inquiry.
(I should mention while these deliberations continue that Labor has got another inquiry up that I flagged earlier today, an inquiry into health and education funding with reference to the outcome of the recent Coag meeting.)
The Senate is voting on whether Sinodinos is called to the donations inquiry.
Updated
We are now onto the inquiry into Liberal party donations and associated entities. The attorney general, George Brandis, is objecting to the section of the motion requiring Arthur Sinodinos to appear before the inquiry.
Brandis says that request is unprecedented and a violation of fundamental principle. If this gets up, then any government with a majority will be able to compel any senator to appear before an inquiry. This way chaos lies, is Brandis’s, view.
Updated
The government is still trying to talk this out but the Senate president is not entertaining debate. Chop chop, people.
Updated
Here is the hours motion that is being voted on pic.twitter.com/wGZ2ZCF0Ra
— Tim Beshara (@Tim_Beshara) April 19, 2016
No round of applause, just a move to put the question. Ring the bells.
I’ve listened to many 20-minute options to speak, Mr President, and all of them have some value.
Labor’s Clare Moore. Someone should give her a round of applause after this I think.
Updated
Now its Clare Moore’s turn to filibuster. I’m not quite sure why – perhaps Wong is getting her papers in order. There’s a degree of darting about going on. Moore has just offered to stop talking if that’s a good idea. No, the instruction is keep talking. She’s on to the Dynamic Red being available on the Senate website at the moment. Someone may crack a bush poetry anthology shortly.
Updated
Now there is procedural argy-bargy about whether a subsequent motion just moved by Labor senator Clare Moore can be moved on behalf of Penny Wong. Brandis QC is objecting. The Senate president, Stephen Parry, is backing in Wong for now.
Penny Wong:
This is clearly time-wasting. We are trying to get motions voted on, they are trying to filibuster.
Wong says this is excessive lawyering. Brandis thinks this lawyers’ picnic invocation by Wong is the last refuge of the scoundrel, the implication being we are all lawyers in this joint, Penny. (Fair cop, really.)
Parry has backed in Labor.
Debate is proceeding.
Now we are dealing with the hours of business.
Liberal senator Ian Macdonald says he’s confused: what motion is this?
Parry says it’s quite clear: this is a motion amending a motion. Macdonald doesn’t look convinced.
Updated
Updated
The motion to suspend the standing orders has succeeded.
Updated
Barnaby Joyce did start today by observing frogs going off in socks. Just thought I’d mention that. It seemed the right time to mention it.
Ryan has been followed by Liberals Cory Bernardi and Dean Smith. Smith is telling the chamber there has been no filibustering. As if to prove his point, here’s the division.
Updated
The Greens leader, Richard Di Natale, is speaking now in the suspension motion. He says the disclosure regime requires attention.
We need donations reform, we need it now, and we need an anti-corruption watchdog.
(While applauding Di Natale’s sentiments, I note again through gritted teeth that the Greens declined the opportunity to press the Turnbull government to change the disclosure regime in the debate several weeks ago about Senate voting reform. Good to see him back on the job this evening, given the Greens have hitherto taken these issues seriously.)
Just because it was hours ago, I’ll repost the motion (one of them anyway) that Labor is attempting to get up courtesy of this suspension this evening.
(1) That the following matter be referred to the finance and public administration references committee for inquiry and report by 4 May 2016:
commonwealth legislative provisions relating to oversight of associated entities of political parties, with particular reference to the adequacy of:
(a) the funding and disclosure regime relating to annual returns;
(b) the powers of the Australian Electoral Commission with respect to supervision of the conduct of, and reporting by, associated entities of political parties; and
(c) any related matters; and
(2) That the Senate direct senator Sinodinos to appear before the committee to answer questions.
This proposal for an inquiry follows the Icac revelations about donations through associated entities in NSW. You’ll note the reporting date, the day after the budget.
Debate on the suspension is continuing. Liberal senator Scott Ryan is speaking now about Labor/Green governments and their TWU mates. Ryan says he wish he could confect outrage as effectively as Labor’s Penny Wong.
Updated
I don’t know if Labor has the numbers to drive through the suspension to bring on the motions. We’ll soon see. In the process of debating this suspension, the communications minister, Mitch Fifield, has confirmed the Senate will not sit beyond today. It will sit for the remainder of the day and then come back for the budget sitting.
Updated
Labor’s Senate leader, Penny Wong, wants to bust through the filibuster and bring on these motions. She’s contending it is embarrassing that senior cabinet ministers are filibustering in the Senate chamber when they could be doing something serious, like preparing a budget.
The best they can manage is a filibuster!
Updated
The rather unexpected decision by the attorney general to reopen the climate science debate came in the middle of what looked a lot like a filibuster exercise in the Senate. Just after question time, Kim Carr attempted to seek an explanation from Arthur Sinodinos, the responsible minister in the chamber, relating to unanswered estimates questions on notice relating to CSIRO. The government stretched out that particular debate for almost an hour and a half – which is somewhat unusual.
As a consequence, the Senate is running more than hour behind schedule. This means a couple of motions I flagged earlier on today, including an effort to set up a new inquiry into political donations in New South Wales, specifically into donations to the Liberal party through associated entities, may not get to a vote today.
Oh hang on.
Now Labor is attempting to suspend the standing orders.
Stay tuned.
Updated
"It doesn't seem to me that the science is settled at all ..."
Back to Brandis and climate science. Sorry. I had to go back over and listen to the whole exchange. For context, the debate concerns resourcing for the CSIRO and the recent decision by the organisation to exit climate research. Brandis was really trying to make a rhetorical point. He was trying to mount an argument that says, if Labor says climate science is settled, and this is an article of faith for the Labor party, why does the CSIRO need to devote resources to climate research? Why press so much on this point?
A lawyer’s point. And we know this is George Brandis, attorney-general, QC.
But he lunged in further.
George Brandis
Now, senator Carr, you are the one who says the science is settled.
I don’t.
I’m aware there are a number of views about the two questions – the nature and the causes of climate change.
It doesn’t seem to me that the science is settled at all. But I’m not a scientist. I’m agnostic, really, on that.
Updated
In the Senate, meanwhile, the attorney general, George Brandis, is suggesting the science of climate change is not settled. I didn’t catch the entire context. Perhaps he’s being rhetorical. I’ll attempt to find that out.
While not being able to listen closely enough to Brandis I have managed to find out that the House is now adjourned until the Monday of budget week.
They are gone. There is nothing for them to do.
Updated
The business of the House appears to be going away. The green chamber has now adjourned. I’m not quite sure for how long. Yes, really.
Further questions have been placed on the notice paper. Labor thought it might roll on to the matter of public importance. The government is thinking differently. Christopher Pyne has just moved that the business of the day be brought on. I’m not sure what that business is, but in any case, moving along in the green place.
Updated
What on earth was that question about?
Who can say? I can’t say.
Meanwhile, in the House, Labor’s Tony Burke yells across the dispatch box:
We shouldn’t be too mean to the prime minister. He hasn’t actually done anything.
Gag ensues.
Updated
My mother would say, if she was presented with this image, now be careful Christopher or the wind might change.
If you didn’t grow up in a highly superstitious Irish/Australian household this observation may feel a bit mysterious, but I think I’ll leave it out there anyway.
Updated
A Barnaby and a Bishop.
Updated
Chaotic and divided? Moi? The government is moving the gag.
Which gives me some time to share more pictures. Lots of lovely from Magic Mike today.
Updated
You saw the suspension coming didn’t you? Here comes the Labor leader now, censuring the prime minister for being out of touch and leading a chaotic government.
The foreign affairs minister, Julie Bishop, begins on ships and rounds back to the Labor senator Stephen Conroy being a disgrace.
Then Bill Shorten is curious about the prime minister’s big ideas.
Q: In the last seven months, the prime minister has floated ideas on cutting every dollar of commonwealth funding to public schools, allowing states to levy income taxes, and increasing the cost of everything with a 15% GST. How can Australians trust anything this prime minister says from one day to the next?
Malcolm Turnbull is glad to be asked about trust. He invokes the old Howardism. He says this election will be about trust.
Who do you trust to ensure that Australia continues successfully to transition from an economy fired up by a mining construction boom to one that is more diversified, more innovative, more productive, more open to the world?
(He means people should trust the government.)
Updated
The treasurer is invited to speak about productivity in the building industry and how the ABCC might help things. He says the ABCC helped things in the past. The argument Scott Morrison is mounting is heavily contested, by the by.
The shadow treasurer, Chris Bowen, comes back on the new federalism.
Q: My question is to the prime minister: why did the prime minister propose that states be allowed to levy their own income taxes?
Malcolm Turnbull tracks back to the moment of clarity at Coag.
Mr Speaker, what we have seen in recent times is state governments urging the federal government to raise the GST and to raise income tax and to give the proceeds to the states to spend. So we had a very good and revealing moment of clarity at Coag when I invited the states to consider taking responsibility for raising some taxes themselves. And they didn’t want to do that. They didn’t want to raise tax. Well, that’s great. Because we don’t want to raise income tax and neither do they. So what that means, Mr Speaker, the only people that want to raise income tax in this chamber are the opposition: the shadow treasurer and the leader of the opposition.
Updated
Labor’s health spokeswoman, Catherine King.
Q: My question is to the prime minister: given that it’s the first chaotic day of the prime minister’s marathon election campaign, Australians want to know: will the prime minister abandon his cuts to pathology that will make it more expensive for Australians suffering from cancer to get blood tests?
The health minister, Sussan Ley, says thus far Labor doesn’t have a health policy.
We’re a government that is running budget deficits, not surpluses, thanks to the mess that was left us by the Labor party.
In taking a rational, sensible, serious approach, it made sense to remove a small bulk-billing incentive, not the Medicare rebate, and to invest in the future health of the nation.
Updated
The building and construction industry, productivity in it, jobs and growth, will be a central issue at the coming election whenever that might be held, Mr Speaker.
The manager of government business, Christopher Pyne (who is providing this answer), pauses momentarily, knowing something’s off with his script.
On July 2, we now know that for sure.
(Colleagues are laughing behind him.)
Subject to his excellency’s approval, Mr Speaker.
Updated
Opposition spokeswoman on education, Kate Ellis.
Q: My question is to the prime minister. Given that today is the chaotic first day of the prime minister’s marathon election campaign, Australians have a right to know: why did the prime minister suggest that every single dollar of commonwealth funding for Australian public schools should be cut?
(I don’t think that was the prime minister’s suggestion. I think that’s a very large stretch.)
Malcolm Turnbull
Mr Speaker, neither the substance of the question nor the premise have any basis in fact.
Updated
Labor follows up on the banking royal commission. Bill Shorten wants to know whether or not the banks have signed off on the government’s plan for the banks yet. The prime minister says a royal commission will do nothing practical for people who have been given bad financial advice. He then throws to Scott Morrison who says Labor was against a royal commission into the banks before it was for it.
The treasurer:
The truth is they voted against a royal commission in June of last year ...
He [Shorten] would rather spend $51m going through an exercise for several years when he could have spent that on Asic.
No, Mr Speaker, he wanted the stunt.
He is the stunt-master.
Updated
Back in the House, the treasurer, Scott Morrison, is telling the chamber that in the looming budget the government will implement better targeting of our tax system to make sure that it’s sustainable, to meet the challenges ahead, to ensure it’s fairer, Mr Speaker, and to ensure that it’s doing its job, Mr Speaker – and that we don’t put the $100bn tax burden [on Australians] which those opposite would propose to do.
Updated
Over in the Senate, the attorney general, George Brandis, has also been asked about taxpayer-funded budget ads. This was his response.
George Brandis:
We will follow the caretaker convention to the letter, unlike the previous Labor government.
Updated
Independent Bob Katter has asked a question which I think you’d have to describe as completely incomprehensible. The prime minister has a go, and then throws to Barnaby Joyce, presumably in the hope he speaks Katter. Joyce certainly speaks dam. He plunges into dams. And things up north.
The shadow treasurer, Chris Bowen:
Q: The Liberal government cut Asic funding ... and ignored 41 warnings by Asic on its needs for greater powers and resources. How can Australians trust this prime minister to deal with high financial scandals? High-profile financial scandals, when the prime minister’s own record shows he would rather cover up misconduct in the banking and financial services industry than stand up for ordinary Australians?
The last part of the question is promptly ruled out of order.
Bowen has to rephrase.
Q: How can Australians possibly trust this prime minister to deal with high-profile financial scandals when his government has failed to stand up for victims of those scandals?
Malcolm Turnbull flicks the question to the treasurer, Scott Morrison.
Morrison sticks with the government’s formulation.
Royal commissions don’t deliver outcomes. Regulators deliver outcomes. This is all crass populism and hot air, he says.
Updated
Labor’s Brendan O’Connor would like to know about the humiliating and chaotic budget leak (the one about the taxpayer-funded campaign outlining the savings measures): Will the prime minister rule out spending taxpayers’ money to run election ads?
The prime minister says hang on a minute. During the last election campaign Labor ran taxpayer-funded advertisements against the advice of officials. This was the “by boat no visa campaign”, and Turnbull is quite right. Labor ran taxpayer-funded ads during the last election on border protection, to great controversy.
This is what the auditor-general, Ian MacPhee ,said subsequently about that campaign.
These circumstances demonstrate the latitude the government has when it comes to mounting advertising campaigns. The government establishes the advertising guidelines, then is able to exempt their application, and furthermore is able to rely on the flexibility provided for in the caretaker guidance and the non-binding character of the caretaker conventions as the basis for advertisements continuing at this time.
The current arrangements rely on the government acting in the public interest in deciding whether advertising campaigns should continue during the caretaker period, including their frequency, but there is nothing to stop other factors informing the decision to continue with campaigns. If a stronger regime is required, then more stringent advertising guidelines or a legislated basis for the arrangements would need to be considered.
So what does this mean? Labor ran ads during the last campaign and in all likelihood so will the current government. Thoughts to cheer the soul, right?
Updated
The prime minister is invited in the first Dorothy Dixer to reflect on how the government has saved family businesses. He’s happy to. He begins by describing truckie-ageddon.
All those independent operators, all of those mums and dads who borrowed money to buy their rigs to get a start, to be independent, to realise their dreams, they were put out of business.
Thousands and thousands of trucks were idle.
Until ... you can fill in the blanks, I reckon.
Updated
Question time
It being 2pm, Bill Shorten wonders why the prime minister is suddenly paralysed on election timing.
Malcolm Turnbull is beaming. And shouting. And possibly a bit miffed by the latest Shorten zinger: a prime minister who dithers but doesn’t deliver.
We delivered last night!
We delivered jobs back to tens of thousands of Australians!
As to the election, Turnbull says he’ll advise the governor general to dissolve both houses and issue the writs for 2 July.
It is up to him whether to agree to dissolve both houses and issue the writs.
Updated
In the senate, Liberal Cory Bernardi is having a shout about Safe Schools. I can hear him in the background, but can’t tune in at this point. Given he helped gut the program, don’t know why the shouting. Eternal mysteries.
Updated
Bill Shorten wrapped that press conference thus. Forgot the damn zinger. Me bad.
Australia needs a prime minister who will deliver not dither. Thanks everyone.
Question time coming up.
Updated
Updated
Shorten is asked finally whether or not he will match the funding the government will likely announce for Asic. He swerves around that by sticking to his formulation on the royal commission.
Bill Shorten:
Nothing less than a royal commission will do. Mr Turnbull knows this; he just won’t do the right thing here. His own backbench – some of them know it and they’re speaking up about it. Mr Turnbull seems only focused about the date of the election.
Updated
The Labor leader is asked about his tax agenda. He says the opposition does not support a company tax cut. He is asked whether he would do anything on bracket creep. Maybe, seems to be the non-answer.
Bill Shorten:
Only the Labor party can be trusted to help put downward pressure on the cost of living for Australians. In terms of the budget position we need to see what the government says.
Corporate tax cuts are not part of our agenda. We have to repair the budget – do budget repair that’s fair.
Updated
Shorten is asked whether he will bring back the truckies tribunal if Labor wins government. He says he will work on measures to improve road safety.
Bill Shorten:
In good conscience we’re not going to see unsafe workplaces and just ignore them.
Updated
Shorten is asked about health funding.
The deputy leader, Tanya Plibersek, says:
We are determined that our health policy reflects the need to invest in primary care, to keep people healthy and out of hospital, to work on prevention, making sure that we tackle the big lifestyle disease challenges of our time. We’ve done that in government and we’ll do that again.
Q: Will the private health insurance rebate stay under Labor?
Bill Shorten:
We’ll see what the government says ...
Q: Your plan?
We’ll announce our plan before the election. I think when you look at who has announced what, we’re well ahead of the government.
Updated
The Labor leader, his deputy and the shadow treasurer, Chris Bowen, are addressing reporters. This is a pre-election pitch essentially.
Bill Shorten says Labor is about health, education and nation building – about equality and about real action on climate change.
He’s now into a period of questions. The first is when will Labor bring the budget back to surplus? Shorten says Labor has produced savings measures already, and is continuing to work on budget repair. He throws to Bowen.
Chris Bowen:
To add to Bill’s remark, we’ve outlined more than $100bn of improvements to the budget bottom line over the next decade. We’ve made it very clear that we’re making those tough decisions in part to fund important initiatives in hospitals and schools, but also very importantly to fund budget repair.
Bowen says Labor will have more to say after the coming budget.
Updated
On Sky News, Labor’s Anthony Albanese is making the point the government is now in caretaker mode. We know the election date. All that remains is the visit to the governor general.
If this is the first time you are hearing about the caretaker convention, here’s the official explanation from the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet.
Successive governments have accepted that, during the period preceding an election for the House of Representatives, the government assumes a ‘caretaker role’.
This practice recognises that, with the dissolution of the House, the executive cannot be held accountable for its decisions in the normal manner, and that every general election carries the possibility of a change of government.
The caretaker period begins at the time the House of Representatives is dissolved and continues until the election result is clear or, if there is a change of government, until the new government is appointed.
During the caretaker period, the business of government continues and ordinary matters of administration still need to be addressed. However, successive governments have followed a series of practices, known as the ‘caretaker conventions’, which aim to ensure that their actions do not bind an incoming government and limit its freedom of action. In summary, the conventions are that the government avoids:
• making major policy decisions that are likely to commit an incoming government;
• making significant appointments; and
• entering major contracts or undertakings.
This is a significant shot across the bows by Albanese, not a bit of abstract commentary. He’s telling the government to tread carefully in the period ahead. We are obviously not in caretaker officially, but we may as well be. We are in unusual circumstances with this pre-election period. That’s what he’s saying.
Updated
Reporters, including my colleague Shalailah Medhora, are now down for the official version of the Coalition party room briefing.
Cash's oratory on road safety remuneration tribunal has been "electrifying", PM tells party room. @murpharoo
— Shalailah Medhora (@shalailah) April 19, 2016
#Electrifying
Politics, this lunchtime
Readers may be relieved to know that the government has found some legislation to debate in the House. The resources minister, Josh Frydenberg, has saved the day with a northern Australia bill, and looks very pleased with himself.
Let’s make sense of the day thus far.
- The government has had a scrappy morning, battling a leak about taxpayer- funded advertising during the budget period, internal tensions over the locations for shipbuilding and whether or not there should be a royal commission into the banks.
- The prime minister has confirmed he will proceed to a double-dissolution poll now that he has a trigger in the form of the rejected ABCC, and it will likely happen on 2 July. This morning the foreign affairs minister wasn’t in the business of giving any poll guidance at all, apart from the election being held in the second half of the year. So it’s useful we’ve cleared that up.
- The government has opened day two of its special sitting of the parliament with almost zero legislative agenda, which has led to procedural fun times in the House.
- Labor has moved a motion calling for a royal commission into the banking sector, which is mildly inconvenient given the government is yet to announce the “heading off the pesky royal commission” proposal we expect it to bring forward shortly to beef up Asic.
- The Labor leader, Bill Shorten, has signalled he will use the looming budget-in-reply address to nominate further measures to balance the budget.
More of course, but that’s the chunky bits.
Updated
I will stand still shortly and summarise all this, don’t fret.
But first, the prime minister looking at things (in Belconnen) by Mike Bowers.
Updated
Down in the House, Labor is on its second procedural sortie of the day given the absent legislative agenda. Labor’s Anthony Albanese has tried to bring on debate on a private member’s bill. The government is trying to shut that down too.
On the (non)governing point, I should note for the record this is what the prime minister said on the subject at his press conference.
Governing? Us? Bloody oath?
Malcolm Turnbull
I just want to be very clear that we are governing, we have a lot of decisions to make, not least of which is the budget, the most important economic policy statement of the year.
So we have all of that work ahead of us and we will be doing all of that and making a lot more decisions between now and when I expect both houses to be dissolved.
The debate on the Shorten motion on the banking royal commission and the government not interested in governing has been adjourned to this afternoon’s matter of public importance debate.
The prime minister has concluded his activities in Belconnen.
The Australian Financial Review’s Phil Coorey has some more particulars on the Coalition party room debate I alerted you to earlier on the banking royal commission.
Several MPs, including Nationals senator John Williams, and Queenslanders Warren Entsch and George Christensen, repeated their calls that there should be a royal commission [into banking], as Labor is promising. Turnbull, who was late to his first unofficial election campaign appearance in suburban Canberra because of the long meeting, assured the MPs that the changes to Asic would be sufficient. Sources said there was widespread criticism of Asic during the meeting, which in the past has ignored or failed to act on scandals.
Updated
Back in the House.
Christopher Pyne
Calm down. Calm down. You are like whipping yourselves in a horse race over there!
Updated
Two more questions in Belconnen.
Q: The department of innovation has put out an $8m tender for advertising from April 17 to 30 June – this on top of the money we’ve already spent advertising the ideas boom. Is this an appropriate use of that $8m in a period that will be in an election campaign?
Malcolm Turnbull
All government advertising is appropriate and cleared with quite a thorough process.
Q: Will you re-establish the money cut from Asic’s budget and give it a particular brief to look at the banks?
Malcolm Turnbull
Mark, we as you know, we undertook last year a capability review of Asic. That was a very thorough review that has been provided to government and the treasurer will be making a response to that shortly.
Updated
Back in the House, the manager of government business, Christopher Pyne, is concerned that the shadow treasurer, Chris Bowen, is going to pop a hernia. He needs to learn some modulation, Pyne thinks. Not start with the crescendo. Otherwise how do you build to a crescendo?
Still on banks, down there.
Updated
Back to Belconnen. The prime minister has been asked about the budget taxpayer-funded advertising campaign that Sky News reported on last night. No decisions have been taken in that regard, he says.
He is asked whether voters will know how much extra money, or whether the government is offering, for schools funding over the next term of government, and will they know with clarity what the government’s higher education policy is; whether it’s the one that’s in the budget now or is it a new one? The prime minister says all will be revealed, don’t you worry about that.
Malcolm Turnbull
You can be very safe in assuming that our education policy will be clearly set out in between now and the election.
Q: Including whether there’s extra money for schools?
Malcolm Turnbull
As I said, it will all be set out between now and the election.
Updated
In the House, the shadow treasurer, Chris Bowen, is thundering the government has failed every Australian with a bank account.
Updated
Turnbull: I expect the election will be held on July 2
Back to Belconnen.
Q: Just to be clear ... are you sticking to the July 2 date for the election?
Malcolm Turnbull
My intention is after the budget – an appropriate time after the budget has been delivered – I will be asking the governor general to dissolve both houses of the parliament for an election which I expect to be held on 2 July.
Q: Why is it still ‘expect’? You’ve announced in the courtyard that it will be on July 2. Now you’re saying you ‘expect’?
Malcolm Turnbull
I have a very strong expectation but I’m paying due respect to his excellency the governor general.
Updated
Here is the Shorten motion, for the record.
I seek leave to move the following motion. That the House:
1. Notes that:
(a) The House of Representatives is in the extraordinary position of a government having called a new session of parliament only to run out of legislation to debate within 12 hours of the governor general opening a new session; and
(b) This is just more evidence that the government has lost all interest in trying to govern, the only thing they are interested in is trying to stay in government; and
2. In the absence of any legislative agenda, standing orders be suspended to accord priority over all other business at this sitting to the following motion to be moved immediately by the leader of the opposition:
That the House calls on the prime minister to request his excellency the governor general of the commonwealth of Australia issue letters patent to establish a royal commission to inquire into misconduct in the banking and financial services industry.
Updated
In Belconnen, the prime minister says he’s re-establishing the rule of law on building sites. He also says we are off to the polls for a double-dissolution election.
Malcolm Turnbull
The ABCC will be a trigger for a double-dissolution election.
What that means is that when we go to election the Australian people will decide whether there should be an Australian building and construction commission.
You see, a double-dissolution election is about giving the people their say.
Updated
We did expect the government to announce its own counter offer today on the banks – strengthening the powers of the regulator – I pointed you to reports of that first up. But nothing from the government of a neutralising nature so far.
The government is moving to gag Shorten.
To borrow from the Seinfeld soup guy: no royal commission for you.
Updated
Bill Shorten is moving a motion noting the parliament has no agenda. The government has lost all interest in trying to govern, he says. Shorten wants standing orders to be suspended to allow consideration of the establishment of a banking royal commission. Labor was going to pursue this tomorrow. Looks like it’s coming today.
Updated
I note the Labor leader is in the House of Representatives. Perhaps I’m wrong, but I suspect procedural mayhem in short order.
I’ll bring you the PM as I get him. Apologies in advance for any channel surfing.
Joint parties is over, the chambers are about to burst into life and the PM is in Belconnen. Stay tuned.
I’ve been down in the thread engaging in a conversation about bollocking – bollocking of me by the Politics Live readership, and bollocking online more generally. I’ve posted my response in an orderly position in the thread, but for what it’s worth, I’ve lifted it up here for a post. Just in case you don’t dare venture below the line, or because you are tuning in and out.
Here’s what I think about reader commentary on this project, FWIW.
What an interesting conversation. Thanks for the vote of support ID9345255, that’s nice of you. My view is people can hang out here in the thread and hate read my live blog for as long as they like. I admire the tenacity of readers who hang on every word of a person they regard as fatally flawed or an idiot. That takes stamina. I certainly wouldn’t do it. I’d go and find things that give me joy.
I’m also very grateful for the constructive conversation that happens in this thread. I take the attitude here to try to host a conversation worth having. If people enter into that in good heart, and many people do, then great. If they just want to kick the cat, well, their loss.
As for the gender thing, it’s pretty obvious women get a hard time on the internet. I am a woman and I get a hard time on the internet. I agree men get bollocked too, but often in different spirit.
But I don’t intend to lose any sleep over it.
As far as I’m concerned the rise of the reader is a transformative development for journalism, with far more pluses than minuses. I persist in that view even though it’s unfashionable right now.
My whole approach to Politics Live is to build a community, and bring the reader in. If you want to come in, you are welcome. If you just want to vent, well by all means, vent away, but you probably aren’t really changing anything.
Perhaps you don’t want to change anything.
All the best KM
Updated
Part of the reason for the delay in the prime minister’s arrival in Belconnen may be a protracted Coalition party room meeting. Early mail is yesterday’s shipbuilding decision was ventilated (I’ve mentioned a couple of times this morning that Queensland MPs are unhappy that South Australia and Western Australia gets the boats). There’s also apparently been a discussion about the banking royal commission that Labor favours and the government does not.
Updated
Cameras down #waitingForMalcolm feels like a campaign @murpharoo @GuardianAus #politicslive pic.twitter.com/oQxcWbTmUk
— Mikearoo (@mpbowers) April 19, 2016
Meanwhile, to our north. The first day of the unofficial election campaign is characterised by that campaign standard: hurry up and wait.
The PM is late @CUhlmann entertains the gallery @murpharoo @GuardianAus #politicslive pic.twitter.com/xn77jrDgAG
— Mikearoo (@mpbowers) April 19, 2016
Over in the Labor caucus, Bill Shorten has rallied his troops as the unofficial election gets under way, telling them it is inevitable the Coalition will have a civil war. “Everyone knows they are going to have a civil war. The question is whether that will be in government or in opposition,” he said. “Beyond Malcolm Turnbull’s popularity, they have nothing.” But the opposition leader was playing down Labor’s chances of electoral success, saying it is still the underdog but “can win”.
Updated
Out of the Greens party room this morning: the party has selected former Democrat Andrew Bartlett at number two on the Queensland ticket and Newcastle’s deputy mayor, Michael Osborne, at number two in New South Wales.
A party spokesman says the Greens hope to win two Senate seats in both NSW and Queensland. The Greens also intend to target these lower house seats: in Victoria – Batman, Wills, Melbourne Ports and Higgins; in NSW: Grayndler, Richmond and Sydney; Fremantle in Western Australia.
Updated
Meanwhile, in Canberra’s north.
At a Geocon site waiting for the PM. Have already seen one worker wearing his CFMEU jumper #auspol #aapnewswire
— Jennifer Rajca (@jrajca) April 19, 2016
I mentioned earlier today that various government MPs from Queensland are cranky about the navy shipbuilding program the government announced yesterday.
There are reports the Liberal MP Warren Entsch is meeting with the defence minister, Marise Payne, to underscore his disappointment that ships won’t be built in Cairns. Entsch told the ABC this morning: “I’m not going to just step down and accept it and just be a noddy in the background trying to justify what I see as a bad decision.”
#StopTheNoddy
#Revolution
Updated
Labor caucus has just broken up and the prime minister is on his way to Canberra’s north for a press conference in about half an hour’s time.
Is the election going to be on 2 July?
Election on July 2?
— Adam Todd (@_AdamTodd) April 19, 2016
Perhaps they're just waiting for the PM to say the words. This morning's comments. pic.twitter.com/UTkGDlQLj5
Updated
I did mention earlier today my instinct that Labor will seek to give an agenda to the House today if the House fails to surface with one.
There is already pre-positioning in evidence in the Senate.
Yesterday, my colleague Lenore Taylor drew our attention to a committee Labor wants to establish to sift through donations to the Liberal party (via associated entities) in New South Wales. The proposal includes a direction that Malcolm Turnbull’s cabinet secretary, Arthur Sinodinos, appear before the finance and public administration references committee. The opposition wants that committee to inquire and report by 4 May 2016, which is of course the day after budget day. Current indications suggest that inquiry will get up with Greens support.
There’s also a second reference on today’s notice paper. Labor’s Senate leader, Penny Wong, is proposing to move a second inquiry with the same reporting timeframe. Here’s the motion on the notice paper.
Leader of the opposition in the Senate (Senator Wong): To move—
(1) That the following matter be referred to the Finance and Public Administration References Committee for inquiry and report by 4 May 2016:
The outcomes of the 42nd meeting of the Council of Australian Governments held on 1 April 2016, with particular reference to: (a) schools funding; (b) hospitals funding; and (c) taxation; and
(2) That the Senate directs the responsible ministers to ensure that relevant officials of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet and the Treasury appear before the committee to answer questions.
You can see what they are doing there, right? Revisiting Malcolm Turnbull’s uncomfortable week on the new federalism ... “perhaps the commonwealth doesn’t need to fund public schools anymore” ... with some pit stops around important and as yet unresolved medium and long term questions – like where is the money coming from?
Updated
As well as rejecting the ABCC, the senate last night passed legislation abolishing the truckies tribunal. The passage of the repeal bill follows a campaign in recent weeks by owner drivers concerned the system imposed by the tribunal will put them out of business. The government has framed the debate as sticking up for mum and dad truck drivers and sticking it to the Transport Workers Union. It’s part of the government’s current exercise of rallying the base, which I described on Twitter yesterday as being a bit like talking to 2GB’s audience without the inconvenience of having the speak to Alan Jones or Ray Hadley.
I linked you yesterday to some work by my colleague Paul Karp sifting through the various claims that are made about the tribunal.
The government has repeatedly said there is no link between minimum pay rates for truck owner-drivers and safety on the roads.
Paul has been looking at this issue again, and has filed another story this morning.
The government cites a PwC survey which found 82% of industry participants did not believe the road safety remuneration tribunal (RSRT) would have an impact on safety. It concluded “there is not enough evidence to conclusively prove that the road transport order has had an impact on safety outcomes given the multiple causal factors affecting road safety”.
But Prof Michael Belzer, a transport economics academic who conducted a study that found a strong link between pay and safety, has reviewed the PwC and concluded its claims on safety “should not be taken seriously”.
Belzer said PwC only surveyed 96 truck drivers, in part due to the Transport Workers Union refusing to distribute the survey because of complaints with the questions that he said seemed justified. As a result “results are biased toward the opinions of everyone but the truck drivers— the employers of drivers, the hirers of drivers, and those who pay the employers and hirers”, he said.
He said the survey questions “ask for opinions and feelings rather than documentable facts, but [PwC] reports the results as facts”.
This morning, Bill Shorten told reporters a vote for Labor was a vote for road safety. Labor has opposed the repeal of the tribunal.
It will be interesting to see if this issue persists now the fate of the bill has been resolved, whether Labor seeks to elevate the safety issue in the weeks before the campaign to counter the government’s union patsies message.
It being Tuesday, various party room meetings are underway. The chambers are due to resume at lunchtime. Thus far the House has no agenda, apart from speeches about the speech the governor general made yesterday. I suspect the opposition will move to supply an agenda if an agenda isn’t forthcoming.
Draft daily programme: Tuesday 19 April 2016 pic.twitter.com/nNw7ua4EIq
— andrew meares (@mearesy) April 18, 2016
Updated
Speaking of outside the building.
Updated
Outside the building, meanwhile, the shadow treasurer, Chris Bowen, has done what Shorten didn’t do this morning: rule out using taxpayers funds for a budget advertising campaign in the future. There are some caveats. “If I were treasurer ...”
Q: Are you saying that your government if you win the next election wouldn’t use taxpayer funds to advertise government policy?
Chris Bowen
What I’m saying is if I was treasurer I would not be using taxpayer funds in an election campaign to sell the budget. I would not be doing that, I would rely on interviews and the ability to communicate messages.
I would not be relying on taxpayer funds to communicate messages out of a budget in an election campaign.
Updated
While I’ve been preoccupied with budget leaks the Labor leader, Bill Shorten, has been interviewed on the ABC. There are news lines out of that. Principally, he’s flagging using his budget-in-reply address to outline Labor proposals to repair the budget.
Q: You’ve outlined $100bn in savings and revenue measures. How much of that will you put back into the budget?
Bill Shorten
Quite a bit of it and we haven’t finished outlining how we’ll do budget repair. We’ll see the political document the government is going to call the budget on May 3 and we’ll reply on May 5 and outline more of our approach to improving the budget.
Q: You have outlined $100bn in additional taxes and savings measures.
Bill Shorten
Yes, we have.
Q: How much of that is going to be savings and how much of that is going to be put back into restoring the budget?
Bill Shorten
We’ve got several priorities. One is to make sure we improve the budget bottom line over the cycle ... we won’t go ahead with this baby bonus payment that was cooked up between Mr Turnbull and the National party. We won’t go ahead with funding this emissions reduction fund cooked up by Tony Abbott to pay large polluters for poor environmental outcomes and we certainly won’t be funding the $160m of a plebiscite on marriage equality. These are all improvements to the budget bottom line and we will have more to say.
Q: You’re not going to have enough room, are you, to restore the full hospital funding taken out of the 2014 budget. What are you going to do with that area?
Bill Shorten
We will have to see what’s in the budget and the numbers the government produce.
Updated
In addition to the budget leak, Coalition MPs from Queensland are unhappy that future ship building will happen in Adelaide and Western Australia. The government announced yesterday surface vessels for the Navy will be built in the two states. The Liberal party has been in all sorts of political trouble in South Australia battling the combination of the departure of the carmakers and a broken pre-election promise on the building of submarines – two Abbott era legacies.
Yesterday’s ships announcement also included a vague suggestion that maintenance for the surface vessels might happen in Cairns down the track. Not good enough. LNP senator Ian Macdonald has been unhappy about that on the radio this morning.
Corridor cruising.
Labor's @billshortenmp jumps on ad campaign leak story: #auspol pic.twitter.com/fJ64ciC0c0
— Primrose Riordan (@primroseriordan) April 18, 2016
The Labor leader, Bill Shorten, is in my corridor now and has been asked about the budget leak. He notes the government is dysfunctional.
This is clearly a leak from within the Liberal party.
He says the government has always been more comfortable being an opposition and “in 74 days, there’s every chance they’ll be an opposition again.”
But asked whether Labor would rule out using taxpayer funds for a budget advertising campaign in the future, Shorten didn’t answer the question.
Instead, he declared the government needed to be upfront about its plans for schools funding, Tafe funding and university funding. Labor would put people first, he said.
Updated
Pushing on into the news cycle, Sky News reported last night the government plans to run a taxpayer funded advertising blitz about the budget initiatives which will be unveiled on 3 May. Depending on when the election is called it might be a short blitz. Sky host Paul Murray quoted a $16bn saving figure over four years in the putative advertising campaign.
It’s a funny sort of leak. If correct it’s obviously pretty inconvenient for the government. Pinging the taxpayer for an advertising campaign in sight of an election is never a great look, crossing an obvious boundary between public education and partisan propaganda. Labor’s shadow finance minister, Tony Burke, has been on the ABC already this morning declaring any budget advertising needs to be bankrolled by the Liberal party, not by the taxpayer.
The treasurer’s office aren’t denying the story. Various government folks in front of the open microphones are saying different things. Julie Bishop on Sky this morning said she thought the story was wrong, because she hadn’t heard anything to that effect, and the figures quoted were unfamiliar to her. The employment minister, Michaelia Cash, also on Sky, said she hadn’t seen any information about it.
Q: Is the leak a bad look?
No, not at all.
Updated
How’s your morning?
Foggy #Canberra morning pic.twitter.com/njv8RqddzW
— Adam Todd (@_AdamTodd) April 18, 2016
Like a frog in a sock
Good morning blogans, bloganistas, and welcome to Tuesday in Canberra, which is going off like a frog in a sock, to borrow an observation from the deputy prime minister Barnaby Joyce.
On the first day of Australia’s unofficial election campaign, the government has deployed Joyce on the wireless to declare the coming election will see a choice between a nation run by someone who has made a quid in their life, made a success of their life, or a nation run by Bill Shorten.
Joyce has predicted voters will reject what he’s characterised as a class one clown act – the previous Labor Green Independent alliance. (Independent deployed here for extra emphasis, Joyce is squaring off in his northern New South Wales electorate against Tony Windsor who was in the last parliament, and helped delivered class one clown act initiatives like needs based school funding and carbon pricing and a national disability scheme.)
Inevitably, the deputy prime minister was also asked about the video that broke the internet yesterday: the video recorded by Hollywood actor Johnny Depp and wife Amber Heard, confessing to their customs crimes and flogging the virtues of Australia’s biosecurity regime. Many observers have noted the pair looked like participants in a hostage video. Joyce thinks Hollywood classic. He’s noted Depp looked like he was auditioning for the Godfather. Depending on your perspective, that’s possibly a downside. The upside is the video is the best bit of viral advertising the department of agriculture has ever produced.
Barnaby Joyce
We have a message going off like a frog in a sock.
That we do. Now to the other things going off. Folks with me yesterday, or in proximity to a television, or a radio, or the interwebz, or the dead tree edition of the interwebz, will of course know the government has now secured a trigger for a double dissolution election. That means we will likely head to the polls shortly after the budget on 3 May, with the likely date 2 July 2 – although on Sky News this morning, the foreign minister, Julie Bishop, was suggesting options on election timing were still open.
Parliament is sitting today with a thin legislative agenda. There are various reports around (including from my new colleague, Gareth Hutchens, who has joined Guardian Australia this week, welcome Gareth!) suggesting the government could (“as soon as today”) restore hundreds of millions of dollars in funding cuts to the financial regulator, Asic, in the Abbott government’s first budget, while boosting the regulator’s intervention powers – in an effort to neutralise Labor’s politically popular call for a royal commission into the banking industry.
There are several other stories crackling away in the news cycle which I’ll come to shortly.
But let’s opening proceedings for you guys first. Today’s comments thread is open for your business. Magic Mike and I are up and about on the twits. He’s @mpbowers and I’m @murpharoo. You can also stop by my Facebook forum and leave a message there if you are so inclined.
Pop on your clown wigs and shove your frog in a sock. Here comes Tuesday.
Updated
