Link to video
Good night .. for a bit
Well blogans, it’s time for me to wind down before winding back up in a new fresh blog for this evening’s info-tainments. I’ll launch a fresh blog for Bill Shorten’s budget-in-reply around 7pm this evening, and we’ll stay live for all the reaction and analysis afterwards.
Today is pretty easy to summarise.
- The wheels came off the budget’s childcare package. Well, not the core childcare elements of the childcare package, but the savings required to pay for it.
- The government came under heavy political fire for characterising claiming entitlements from both public and private PPL schemes as double dipping or even rorting. That position became very hard to sustain when two of the government’s economic ministers revealed their wives had accessed the two schemes.
- Before those admissions, two government senior figures, Arthur Sinodinos and Malcolm Turnbull, said colleagues should tone down the rorting rhetoric and show empathy with new parents.
- The only bright moment for the government during question time was a ditty by Christopher Pyne (pictured above) about Bill Shorten’s problem with tenses and quotes from famous figures.
- The untidiness from the government hampered their efforts to pressure the Labor leader Bill Shorten ahead of his speech tonight. The government line was Shorten was a taxer not an expenditure restraint man.
In any case, all will be revealed concerning Shorten and his speechifying very soon. Do join me then.
Three examples of things not quite adding up: PPL
It’s worth pointing out the various convoluted PPL logic(s) of the day.
Here’s just three examples.
- The government says public servants should not be able to make claims from two parental leave schemes, but Tony Abbott says he’s really pleased that our police, our hard-working police, that our extraordinarily committed and dedicated military personnel, I’m really pleased that they are getting a good paid parental leave scheme.
- The social services minister Scott Morrison suggests the current PPL scheme is a boondoggle cooked up by Labor and the unions. This would be the same scheme the Coalition voted for, and once decried as being woefully inadequate.
- The treasurer Joe Hockey this morning expressed surprise that unions were using a government benefit (ie: PPL) in their workplace negotiations, yet the former social services minister Kevin Andrews said last year the government was aware parental leave schemes were being nutted out in industrial agreements and the government did not intend to displace those schemes. Andrews also said employers would continue to be able to offer top-ups to attract new staff.
Riddle us that.
Speers wants to know why he’s only just now calling out a scheme he voted for. Morrison says he’s the minister for social services now, so he’s calling it out now. This answer isn’t very convincing.
The social services minister Scott Morrison is next in the Sky hot seat.
Sky political editor David Speers. Didn’t the Coalition vote for this scheme?
Scott Morrison:
And we’re fixing it.
Q: Why is a rort now then?
Well, David we don’t have any issue with anyone claiming legitimate payments from the scheme.
I said it this morning but I’ll repeat it again. It’s always a bad idea to pick fake fights in politics rather than just tell voters the truth. The truth is the government has sought advice from the experts and thought about the best approach to childcare funding and changed its mind about paid parental leave.
Blaming voters or unions is just plain dopey.
Oh dear. The politics of this are really unsustainable now in my view.
Josh Frydenberg:
It’s fairer going forward that we allow people to access just one scheme.
My name is Josh Frydenberg and I am a double dipper
Assistant treasurer Josh Frydenberg on Sky News has just confirmed his wife accessed to the two parental schemes.
We accessed both schemes.
If you haven’t had a chance to poke round the rest of the offerings on Guardian Australia today, do have a look at the new datablog from Nick Evershed and Michael Safi about aid funding.
If you don’t want to look at the pretty graphs and other bells and whistles, here’s the short version.
Record cuts outlined in the 2015 federal budget will see Australia’s foreign aid relative to income fall to the lowest levels since the creation of a formal aid program more than 40 years ago.
Back to the finance minister, Mathias Cormann, now. I think it’s safe to assume, given he’s had two goes at answering questions with several hours in between, that the Cormann family may have accessed all the parental leave available to them at that time – which would be a yes on the double dipping.
Bit awks, that.
While we are on Cormann and double dipping, I mentioned earlier that I’d reviewed the Coalition’s pre-election policy in an effort to find a commitment to eliminate double dipping. I couldn’t find one. I said in that post from earlier on today that perhaps Cormann meant the Coalition’s intention to take away the Commonwealth and state public schemes – and replace it with the original Abbott gold plated scheme.
My colleague Gabi Chan has made inquiries of Team Cormann and they’ve produced several quotes from August 2013.
Here’s one of the references from 28 August 2013. He is talking about the public sector schemes.
Cormann:
We’ve always said that there would be some savings from discontinuing Labor’s current inferior schemes. There’ll be some savings from preventing double dipping by public servants which are currently able to access not one but two fully tax payer funded schemes and of course there will be out paid parental leave levy. So all up not only is this an important economic reform, an important reform to have to grow our economy more strongly, it also will leave the budget better off which will help us fix the mess that Labor has created with the budget.
Thou shalt not use props.
Liberal Andrew Nikolic, showing how it shouldn’t be done.
The treasurer is a liar
Fabulous shot. Here is Labor’s Wayne Swan shortly before his departure under 94A.
Further questions have been placed on the notice paper. Some photos and catch up bits and pieces in a sec.
Bill Shorten:
Q: My question is to the prime minister. Yesterday your current treasurer described concessions for people who have superannuation accounts of $10m as, and I quote, “extraordinary and ridiculous.” So why won’t the government have a go and fix it up?
Tony Abbott:
Madam Speaker, this from the leader of the opposition who once described superannuation accounts as legalised tax havens. Who effectively called people who were saving through superannuation people who are rorting the tax system. That’s effectively what he did.
By Labor’s logic, if you make a policy pronouncement about something, a tough-minded policy pronouncement about something, you are somehow guilty of blaggarding the people who take advantage of government policy as it stands.
Finance minister does not answer a second direct question about whether his wife "double dipped" with PPL
In the other place, Labor senator Sam Dastyari has asked the finance minister the question he was asked earlier by a journalist – had his wife “double dipped” when taking paid parental leave?
Mathias Cormann once again fails to provide a direct answer:
In response to the personal question Senator Dastyari has chosen to ask me, let me confirm for him I have indeed had a little child in 2013, and that our family of course, worked within the system that was available at the time, like any other family – and that my family will work within whatever system is in place in the future.
When is 'liar' unparliamentary?
Madam Speaker:
Now, the member for Chisholm has a point of order.
Labor MP and former speaker, Anna Burke.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. Twice during question time yesterday, in an answer to a question, the prime minister used the same word (liar) and was not asked to withdraw on either occasion. Is the word unparliamentary or not?
Madam Speaker says if someone accuses someone of being a liar that is totally and utterly unparliamentary.
She says the noun can otherwise be used.
You will also notice that in the course of question time yesterday I had cause to ask the prime minister to withdraw the use of the word in a different grammatical form and he did – however, what is beyond any doubt is to accuse anyone in this chamber of being a liar is totally and utterly unparliamentary – and that’s why the member for Lilley is no longer in the chamber.
Updated
Liberal Andrew Nikolic rises on a point of order.
During the treasurer’s eloquent reply the member for Lilley on four occasions called the treasurer an unparliamentary name and I ask him to withdraw.
Madam Speaker:
The member for Lilley would assist the House if he would withdraw.
Wayne Swan:
I’m not going to withdraw, Madam Speaker, because the treasurer is a liar!
Bye bye Wayne.
Shadow treasurer Chris Bowen wants to know the impact on the budget bottom line if the budget’s nominal growth forecast dropped by 1% in 2016/17.
Treasurer Joe Hockey wants to know when the former treasurer, Wayne Swan, is coming back to his old portfolio.
Labor has flicked the switch to health now. The government looks relieved. The pressure will be off.
Labor’s Catherine King:
Q: My question is again to the prime minister. Does the prime minister agree with the president of the Australian Medical Association, professor Brian Owler, who said in referring to this year’s budget, “If the rebates don’t rise, those costs have to be passed on in out-of-pocket expenses. We will see less bulk billing and there is the possibility of seeing a co-payment by stealth.” Won’t the prime minister’s four-year freeze on the MBS rebate mean patients be hit with a new $8 GP tax every time they visit the doctor?
Tony Abbott:
No.
This is, how can I say it politely? Bad. It’s going badly for the government. This is a bad look.
So bring on the education minister, Christopher Pyne. Pyne as we all know is a self confessed fixer. While the fixing is arguable, he’s often a morale booster.
Pyne:
Madam Speaker, I was very surprised in reading the transcript of the leader of the opposition’s speech to the Caucus today when he said rather profoundly, I might say, Madam Speaker, “We know the future’s happening right now. We know the future’s happening right now.”
This reminded me a bit of “everybody is somebody” by the Travelling Willbry’s which I think the leader of the opposition thought Martin Luther King had said.
Today it’s, “Know the future’s happening right now.” It came back to hit him in the face because of course the truth is if the future’s happening right now it’s the present, Bill.
If it’s happening now it’s the present. There’s the past, the present and the future.
The future can’t be happening now.
It has to be the present.
(Very hard to argue with that analysis.)
Bill Shorten. While we are on public servants. Police and ADF.
Q: My question’s to the prime minister. I advise the prime minister that AFP officers have negotiated an additional 16 weeks paid parental leave and the members of the ADF receive an additional 14 weeks. These people are not rorters. Why does the prime minister want the ADF personnel and AFP personnel to spend less time at home with their new children, and when will the prime minister back flip on this stupid idea?
Tony Abbott:
Madam Speaker, I am really pleased that our police, our hard-working police, that our extraordinarily committed and dedicated military personnel, I’m really pleased that they are getting a good paid parental leave scheme and, frankly, I want all Australians to get the best possible paid parental leave scheme.
There is absolutely nothing that we are doing to reduce or remove anyone’s employer-provided paid parental leave scheme. Absolutely nothing. Absolutely nothing. Under us, every person will get at least 18 weeks at the minimum wage. Every person will get it.
Labor’s Terri Butler
Q: My question is to the minister for social services. I refer to a mum-to-be in Brisbane, Sienna Perry. Sienna writes that if she and her husband had to choose between government and employee benefits because of the prime minister’s planned cuts to paid parental leave, ‘it’s likely I’ll have to go back to work at 19 weeks instead of 6 months.’ Why does the minister think Sienna is a rorter because he wants to spend more time with her baby?
Scott Morrison:
I thank the member for her question and I reject the assertion in terms of what she claims my statements have been. That is not my claim.
(It has been his claim as a point of fact, but let’s continue.)
Morrison says an evaluation of the PPL scheme has found an increase in people staying home up to 18 weeks but after 18 weeks, the proportion of people staying at home in these arrangements has actually fallen, but the public sector unions have been able to ratchet up the entitlements, as they do, and as they do, they are the masters of those who sit on that side of the house.
Butler says the women in question is not a public servant. Madam Speaker sends her out for that, and also the member for Hotham, Claire O’Neil.
Morrison continues.
What those opposite are trying to protect is an unfair scheme that they want to maintain that they put in with their union mates when they were in government but what this government is going to maintain is a safety net paid parental leave scheme for those who were never getting something before, and you know where they were working? They were working in small businesses.
They were working in small businesses because small business employers couldn’t afford to pay that and now under this scheme they can – and we support that, but what we’re not going to support, Madam Speaker, is cost shifting and subsidising of large employers, particularly those in the public sector, which is what the Labor public sector union scheme is designed to achieve.
So we support a fair scheme, Madam Speaker, not deals cooked up between the Labor party and public sector unions.
(I’d say Labor has Morrison right where they want him here, back snarling and shouting. What happened to Cuddly Scott?)
Tasmanian independent Andrew Wilkie is concerned that federal government subsidies for Bass Strait will be pocketed by the Port of Melbourne in sky rocketing port fees.
Tony Abbott says he’s concerned as well.
There is an issue, the member for Denison is quite right there, is an issue – the Victorian Labor government is slugging the exports of Tasmania. That’s the only way to describe it. The Victorian Labor government is penalising the exporters of Tasmania by ever-increasing fees and charges in the port of Melbourne.
Well, I share the member for Denison’s dismay, I share the dismay of all the Tasmanian members of this house at what the Victorian Labor government is doing.
Madam Speaker, if the leader of the opposition wants to be useful, if he really wants to be useful, as well as telling us his plans for Australia tonight, he might get on the blower to Daniel Andrews this very afternoon and say, “stop ripping off the exporters of Australia.”
More of Tony’s tradies.
Then Labor’s Tanya Plibersek.
Q: Madam Speaker, my question is to the prime minister. Prime Minister, is it better for new mums to be able to have 8 weeks at home with their new babies or is it better for them to be able to have 6 months?
Tony Abbott:
We want a fair system, and what the member for Sydney is suggesting is that public servants should get two lots of paid parental leave from the taxpayer. That’s what she’s saying. That’s what she’s saying, that public servants should get two lots of paid parental leave from the taxpayers of Australia.
I tell you what is the fairest thing of all. The fairest thing of all is what the families of Australia told us that they wanted – and what they want as their priority right now is a better childcare system.
Plibersek would like the prime minister to answer the question she asked. Madam Speaker would like Plibersek to sit down.
Labor’s Jenny Macklin.
Q: My question is to the minister for social services. Is the minister aware that many nurses need to take 6 weeks maternity leave before their baby is born and are currently able to spend 24 weeks with their baby after the birth. Does the minister believe this arrangement for nurses is a rort?
Social services minister, Scott Morrison:
The government supports paid parental leave and it recognises that it provides much-needed support and assistance for families.
Now, Madam Speaker, we support a safety net paid parental leave scheme, and we support a fair paid parental leave scheme – a fair scheme – but we’re not going to support the one cooked up by those opposite with the unions.
(I mentioned earlier unions are the new bad people today, not the parents.)
The first Dorothy Dixer is Tony’s tradies. Having a crack. Turbo-charging the backbone of the economy.
Question time
Can you guess the first question?
Bill Shorten:
Q: My question’s to the prime minister. Given the disrespectful and indeed regrettable language used by his ministers in recent days describing mothers who get paid parental leave from their employers as a rort, will the prime minister apologise to new mums on behalf of his government?
Tony Abbott:
Madam Speaker, there is a very simple issue here – is it or is it not fair for taxpayers to have to pay two lots of paid parental leave to the public servants of the Commonwealth? That’s the issue. And members opposite plainly think that it’s right and proper for taxpayers to pay two lots of paid parental leave to Commonwealth public servants.
Well, Madam Speaker, I want the good deal for the families of Australia. I want a fair deal for the families of Australia and it’s not fair that taxpayers should pay twice for the same thing. It’s just not fair.
Madam Speaker, the tragedy is that members opposite are opposing a better childcare system for the families of Australia. They’re opposing a better childcare system for the mothers of Australia.
Question time in a sec. If you want to watch Malcolm Turnbull’s advice on paid parental leave and childcare, here’s a clip.
Happy significant birthday indeed.
Happy 70th Birthday today to the wild man of the north, Bob Katter pic.twitter.com/UXh07Uzpa1
— Anthony Albanese (@AlboMP) May 14, 2015
Nobody kills Johnny Depp's dogs
Labor’s agriculture minister Joel Fitzgibbon wants us to know he’s not fooled by this elaborate global click bait unleashed by Barnaby Joyce – his clear pitch for a spot on Entertainment Tonight, or the Daily Show, or possibly, both.
Fitzgibbon:
Barnaby Joyce has chosen to blame and threaten Johnny Depp’s two cute puppies for a serious failing in our biosecurity system.
The agriculture minister held a press conference today to threaten Johnny Depp that he would euthanise the dogs if they weren’t flown back to the United Stated [sic] immediately.
But this is just a distraction from the key issue; how was the breach of our border security allowed to occur in the first place? By Barnaby Joyce’s own admission, the undeclared entry was only detected when the dogs were seen entering a “poodle groomer”[sic].
Instead of grandstanding before the media, Barnaby Joyce should be answering the hard questions about the breach and what role his biosecurity funding cuts may have played.
Just a note on the [sic]’s. The first is mine. The Fitzgibbon statement said the dogs would be sent back to the United Stated. The poodle groomer is Team Fitzgibbon.
LDP senator David Leyonhjelm is fond of cats and freedom. He’s also fond of quizzes. Ahead of tonight’s budget-in-reply speech from Bill Shorten, he’s issued a bingo card where people can play along when they hear various catch-phrases or recognise a certain sinking feeling within themselves.
Some examples of the bingo calls:
- Some lame folksy story about somebody Bill met who told him something
- That empty feeling upon realising he didn’t actually say anything
You get the drift.
Given Shorten in #ShortenSweet mode blesses us with abundant material, a small avalanche of material in fact, I’m sorry to say the Leyonhjelm quiz lacks attention to detail.
Two paws.
Politics this Thursday lunchtime
Let’s take stock of events. Thursday, thus far.
- The political fight over the budget childcare package has intensified, with Labor and various crossbenchers objecting to the savings measures required to fund the package – particularly the so-called double dipping of paid parental leave schemes.
- Two senior figures, senator Arthur Sinodinos and the communications minister Malcolm Turnbull, have advised colleagues to drop the inflammatory rorting language in favour of a bit more empathy and understanding with new parents.
- The Labor leader Bill Shorten is involved in throat clearing for his budget-in-reply speech this evening. The government is trying to make tonight about Bill Shorten’s addiction to taxation, and his reluctance to sign up to budget restraint; and Shorten is trying to make tonight about the Coalition being very bad for women and equality and the future.
- Meanwhile the agriculture minister Barnaby Joyce says he will shoot Johnny Depp’s dogs if they don’t bugger off in the next 50 hours. While that remark pings around the globe, the immigration minister Peter Dutton is trying to work out how the dogs got into the country in the first place.
Onwards and upwards, blogans, bloganistas.
Back to the Depp dogs before I post a lunchtime summary.
If we look through the memes and the outburst of ‘get back to where you came from’, we can ask a pertinent question. How did these pampered pooches manage to evade the watchful eyes of Our Border Force?
Be assured, the immigration minister Peter Dutton, is on the sniffer trail.
He told 2GB:
They (the Depps and the Dawgs) should be screened like everyone else. We’re having a look at this at the moment.
I’ve read back through the Coalition’s pre-election policy on PPL – this is the “signature” scheme – and I can’t see an explicit reference to ending double dipping.
The finance minister said earlier double dipping was telegraphed in the lead up to the election. Just for the record, this is what the costing section of the PPL policy says.
The Coalition’s paid parental leave scheme will commence from 1 July 2015. The net additional cost is $6.1bn over the forward estimates period (after allowing for savings from discontinuing Labor’s inadequate paid parental leave scheme). This cost will be fully met by associated reductions in other outlays, and increases in receipts, resulting from the Coalition‟s scheme paying mothers at their actual wage rather than at the minimum wage (and for 26 weeks rather than 18); together with revenue from the Coalition’s Paid Parental Leave levy on large companies. The Coalition’s Paid Parental Leave scheme has been fully costed by the Parliamentary Budget Office.
I’m sharing this, but I’m not saying definitively that Cormann is wrong. Lots of things are said in the run up to elections and there were also a number of different costings around. I’m just scratching my head really.
Perhaps Cormann means the Coalition’s intention to take away the Commonwealth and state public schemes – and replace it with the original Abbott gold plated scheme? Perhaps that’s the double dip?
I’ve addressed this already in the thread but just a quick word up here too for the sake of clarity. A couple of readers feel I had a crack at Labor in the post earlier about the women’s budget function. My intention was not partisan reflection, but a more general statement of ambition about women and politics.
This building is the ultimate boy’s club. Every female MP I’ve ever met, on all sides of politics, wants to change the default culture and rise to senior positions in their chosen profession. Labor thus far has been streets ahead of the Liberal party when it comes to women’s representation and leadership. But despite the progress, it’s still a boys club in this place. Until that changes, I’ll keep being ambitious for women in politics.
Clive Palmer (remember him?) has never been one to follow the old adage, “dignity, always dignity.” He’s quick today with the put down about Glenn Lazarus, and his new party.
Glenn Lazarus does not know what it is like to be on a proper team. He deserted the Palmer United party, betraying all those who voted for our party and our many members who worked so hard to get their representative elected in Queensland.
Glenn Lazarus will be solitary figure who plays solitaire in his office all day long. Team Lazarus will follow a tradition of sports related failures in politics like Mel Meninga and the Australian Sports party in WA, which got less than 1% of the vote.
Cormann and Frydenberg. Sounds like a very impressive law firm.
Before anyone asks where the treasurer is, I’ve seen him on the interwebz. He seems to be doing a periscope with BuzzFeed, which would be fun.
Given the saga of Johnny Depp’s dogs, and the ensuing pun fest, Cormann is asked whether he approved of the termination (geddit) of the Hollywood pooches. The finance minister can’t think of the right riposte, so, sensibly, he doesn’t go there.
The King of Zing has meanwhile stopped by Hughes primary school – a most excellent school.
Bill Shorten is hammering Tony Abbott and women and PPL once again.
Q: Do you consider this misogyny?
The worst thing we can do is get into every name calling.
Finance minister can't say whether his wife double dipped with parental leave
Parental leave now.
Q: Has the government now banned the term double dipping from its vocabulary and was it a mistake for ministers to use the term?
Mathias Cormann:
The measure in the budget in relation to parental leave pay is based on a simple proposition. Most women across Australia have access to one scheme funded by the taxpayer. Some women have access to two schemes and that’s great. What we’re saying is that it’s great if you can get access to a more generous scheme through your private or public-sector employer but if you have access to a more generous paid parental leave arrangement then we don’t think it is fair to all of the women across Australia who only have got access to one scheme for the taxpayer to be required to pay for access to a second scheme.
It’s a very basic proposition. From our point of view it is a fairness measure in the system.
Q: Is that double dipping?
We actually went to the last election as part of our paid parental leave policy, as part of had costings for our paid parental leave policy – the term double dipping was there then in the lead-up to the last election.
I’m interested that everybody’s focused on it because at the time when we explained very cleary our costings in the leadup to the last election, we said then we would pursue a measure like this in order to help repair the budget.
Q: Can you let us know whether your partners two paid parental leave schemes. Are they double dippers?
My partner? My wife you mean?
The mother of my 2-year-old girl, complied with all the systems in place.
Q: Did you get two dips?
I have got to check with my wife.
Cormann is trying to back in this point: Labor will tax you to repair the budget, we won’t tax you to repair the budget.
Phil Coorey from the Financial Review sees an obvious question as a consequence of this framing.
Q: If tax increases are so bad, are you tempted to lead by example and immediately abolish the deficit tax you introduced last year and the reindexation of fuel excise? Why is that allowable and Labor’s not allowed to increase taxes?
We’re not saying they’re not allowed to increase taxes. What we’re saying is ‘tell us what you will do.’
We’ve put our plan on the table. Revenue measures and savings measures. Most of the budget repair has been on the spending side of the budget. We have worked to control spending and our plan is working.
What I’m showing you here is so far all of Labor’s effort is on the revenue side.
Updated
Show us the savings, Bill
The finance minister Mathias Cormann is speaking to reporters now in the Blue Room. He’s responding to Shorten’s budget-in-reply speech which hasn’t been delivered yet. It’s one of those quaint budget rituals – because Shorten’s speech happens at 7.30 – after the TV news tonight broadcasts its main bulletins – you’ve got to get your lines up early. And this is an effort to declare what questions Bill Shorten needs to answer.
Cormann:
If Bill Shorten doesn’t like our savings, he will have to show us his savings. As you can see on the graph right now, Labor has come out with a series of proposals to increase taxes, including taxes on people across Australia saving for their retirement, he has actually identified so far zero dollars in spending reductions.
There are zero dollars in spending reduction proposals from Labor on the table right now.
He’s with Josh Frydenberg, the shadow assistant treasurer.
The leader of the opposition is all politics and no substance, so tonight he simply has to answer just one question: how will he and the Labor party fix the mess that they created?
Some pictures of Bill Shorten’s dry run for the budget-in-reply.
Much and all as I’m glad to hear a political party stand up assertively for equality, and for the rights of women – not many women lead political parties.
Labor has chosen only one at the federal level. She’s looking down on the contemporary colleagues. If you look at Mike’s picture, you can see her over on the wall.
Updated
The shadow treasurer is asked whether a government benefit should be part of a wage negotiation as in the case of PPL.
Bowen says everyone knows how the scheme worked, including the Abbott government.
The previous Labor government introduced paid parental leave scheme as a base, an important base so that every Australian parent had access to it. It was always intended, though, that where Australian workers could negotiate better benefits as well with their employer, that those benefits come in in addition to the existing paid parental leave scheme.
That was as it was always designed and the government knows that. Kevin Andrews himself when he was the relevant minister acknowledged that, and said there was no plans to change that – so of course there are government schemes in place, and employers can offer better schemes to sit in addition to those government benefits as well as has always been well understood.
(Tony Abbott) promised a rolled-gold paid parental leave scheme, he’s had to back flip on that and now, to make it worse, he takes away the ability of Australian parents to spend more time with their newborns where their employer has negotiated those arrangements with them, and in many cases people have given up pay rises in return for those better conditions right across the workforce.
Updated
The shadow treasurer Chris Bowen is in one of the courtyards now, having taken up the government’s advice to have a go.
Bowen’s having a go on super.
Now, we all know that the taxation treatment of superannuation in Australia is just not sustainable.
Joe Hockey’s own budget a couple of days ago told us that. We see the concessional treatment of superannuation tax earnings, the cost to the budget, doubling over just four years and we know that on current trends the cost of those concession will out-strip the entire size of the aged pension cost within the decade. We know that.
We’re prepared to be honest with the Australian people and say that is just not sustainable, Australia can’t afford it. Tony Abbott’s not prepared to be honest with the Australian people.
The Labor party is showing courage in dealing with this issue and we’ll continue to show courage and be honest with the Australian people about what we’ll do if we win the next election, something Tony Abbott did not do at the last election. He continually lied to the Australian people about his plans and he’s paid a very big political price for that.
Well, Australians know that tough decisions are necessary but unfair decisions are not.
I’ve been too busy to post this, apologies. Love it. Mike Bowers catches a slightly testy treasurer exiting the scene of his press conference earlier.
The Labor leader is clearly warming up for his budget-in-reply speech tonight. Lots of fighting words about equality and fairness and modernity.
Bill Shorten:
We believe in the empowerment of women and we will not compromise in that goal.
The future is happening right now
Bill Shorten:
This is a government that fundamentally doesn’t appreciate the needs of working women.
This government doesn’t get the future. Then ..
We know the future is happening right now.
(Er ..)
Zin-G
Now speaking of the King of Zing, the opposition leader is in the Labor caucus room launching the Labor women’s budget statement.
Bill Shorten is hopping into rorting. Women rorting. Unions rorting.
That’s what they are saying.
He says government ministers are currently attempting to navigate through the eye of a needle their inconsistencies.
This Liberal government suffers from the disease of trickery.
I will decide what words I use and the manner in which I use them
Courtesy of my colleague Gabi Chan, just one more Malcolmism on the unfortunate language of rorting.
Malcolm Turnbull:
As you can see, I respect every mother and I believe people are entitled to use whatever benefits, claims and entitlements, if you like, that are available to them. But the reality is we live in a world of scarce resources in this veil of tears, as Tony Abbott often describes the world, we have to be real, we have to accept that we can’t spend as much money on everything as we would like and so we have chosen to re prioritise, to change spending. I’m not going to - I will decide what words I use and the manner in which I use them. On that John Howard note, I will take my leave.
Before the communications minister took his leave, he also offered some choice words on Bill Shorten’s budget magic.
He wants to have ... a lower deficit, he wants to spend more and tax less. Now if you can pull that off, that would be budget magic, but sadly this is not a magical place. The acid really is on Shorten tonight. What is his alternative? And if he thinks we should spend the money on childcare that we’re proposing – I gather that he does – but we should also spend more on paid parental leave – and he certainly says that – then he should say where that’s going to come from.
The prime minister’s office has supplied a read out on a call between Tony Abbott and the newly re-elected British prime minister David Cameron.
Here ‘tis:
Prime minister Abbott spoke to prime minister Cameron of Great Britain on Wednesday evening (AEST) to congratulate him on his election victory, which he described as ‘a mighty effort’.
Prime minister Abbott briefed prime minister Cameron on the government’s recent budget and the two leaders discussed the domestic political situation in Australia and the United Kingdom.
The two leaders discussed the domestic and international threat posed by terrorism and radicalisation of young people. They welcomed the strong cooperation between the two countries’ security agencies and agreed to continue working closely together on ways to counter radicalisation.
They also discussed the international coalition’s efforts to disrupt, degrade and ultimately destroy the Daesh death cult.
The last line of the read out implies the two leaders may have discussed Iraq. If so, that’s interesting. The UK thus far hasn’t offered a big deployment in Iraq. But new prime ministers, with shiny new mandates .. who knows?
Updated
The risks associated with straw men
The Turnbull intervention this morning underscores an important point. It is so easy in politics to be dragged off your main issue into side fights. This happens all the time, and it certainly happens when you try and set up straw men in political debates.
The government would be much better placed to just say, as Turnbull suggests, we had to pull back paid parental leave entitlements to fund a more comprehensive childcare package. We did this for legitimate reasons. When governments blame the voters, call them soundrels, that never ends very well.
The government has tried to avoid saying we’ve cut back PPL presumably to protect the prime minister, who has gone through so many iterations on PPL that it’s hard to know what he really thinks about the issue.
The government this morning has moved away from blaming the voters into blaming unions for using the taxpayer funded PPL scheme in their negotiation with employers. Unions are the new bad guys. Silly. They should just stop pedalling.
Time to just front up to the truth of this issue: it’s a budget decision, there aren’t unlimited funds, we don’t like it, but we believe in what we are doing.
— Matt Burke (@matttburke) May 13, 2015
Speaking of PUPs, once-were-PUP and now Senate independent Glenn Lazarus has decided to, as some management consultant might say, grow his enterprise.
From the news wire AAP. Former Palmer United party senator Glenn Lazarus is starting his own political party. The rugby league great turned Queensland senator has lodged paperwork with the Australian Electoral Commission to establish the Glenn Lazarus Team political party.
Lazarus, who cut ties with Clive Palmer in March, already has a website for the team, with the tag line: “Doing the hard yards for Queensland”. Lazarus said he was “really excited” about setting up his new team, telling reporters in Canberra he wants to do the best job he can.
Updated
More Malcolm: parents should apply for whatever benefits they are entitled to
The communications minister left the Sky studios and was stopped by reporters somewhere in the building. If you are just tuning in, Malcolm Turnbull has joined the Liberal senator Arthur Sinodinos in suggesting the government might turn down the rorting rhetoric when you are talking about women who have just had children.
It’s fine to change your mind. Change your mind. Change your mind. Over.
Turnbull:
What you are doing? You are pushing on an open door here. You are criticising the prime minister for changing his mind, to which he says, ‘we’ve changed - the government, it’s not just Tony changing his mind, the government has changed its policy and we are now focusing more resources on childcare because we believe we will get a bigger productivity and participation bang from the buck by doing that.
Q: Fair enough to change the policy. Simply on tone and not necessarily a matter of semantics, should the government be calling mothers of Australia double dippers and rorters when they were following the rules as they existed?
Turnbull:
I have the greatest respect for all mothers and people are entitled to apply for, receive whatever benefits they are lawfully entitled to. I’m not going to get into any of that rhetoric.
That’s Malcolm Turnbull. 100% rort free.
Updated
No special deals if you've been the sexiest man alive, twice
You’ve got 50 hours to get the dogs out.
Updated
Go back to Hollywood or the puppies get it
Without doubt the story of the morning is the saga of Johnny Depp’s dogs. Apparently the Hollywood star snuck his two Yorkshire terrier dogs into Australia on his private plane, stepping around the quarantine strictures.
The agriculture minister Barnaby Joyce has said the dogs either go back to where they came from, or the puppies get it.
Joyce:
It’s time that Pistol and Boo buggered off back to the United States.
Updated
Cracking hardy. Got to love the Senate.
Good morning from Canberra where the temperature has climbed to a cheerful 2 degrees for today's #Senate sitting!
— Australian Senate (@AuSenate) May 13, 2015
Malcolm Turnbull backs Arthur Sinodinos on empathy and respect
The communications minister, Malcolm Turnbull, is in the Sky studios, looking perfectly serene. Turnbull is helping. He’s trying to sell the childcare policy by actually talking about the childcare policy rather than the associated issues – a somewhat revolutionary notion.
He says the government has produced a good policy because it looks at a longer horizon. It doesn’t just cover the early weeks and months of a child’s life, it covers what happens next. Turnbull says Tony Abbott has already acknowledged his various changes of mind on the question of paid parental leave, and the government has also changed direction on childcare policy – in a good way, he reasons. Rather like the Liberal senator Arthur Sinodinos, he’s offering colleagues a few thoughts about successful communication with voters.
I wouldn’t call it a contradiction, but I think we’ve got to be frank and call it a change of policy.
On the question of rorting, Turnbull is also cautious. He says it is ...
... very important we show empathy and respect to new parents.
Very. Important.
Updated
The treasurer stopped to speak to reporters after his radio interview. He is really irritated this morning. Reporters are trying to engage him on the current childcare fight, the double dipping question. He says if unions have used the government PPL scheme as “some kind of bargaining tool” that is “really quite extraordinary”.
He’s asked about the Sinodinos critique that I referenced in the first post – that the government shouldn’t be using harsh language about new mothers.
Hockey:
This is commentary on commentary. You guys can go and interview each other. Have you got any questions on the budget?
Updated
Greens leader to meet Tony Abbott today
The new Greens leader Richard Di Natale follows Joe Hockey in the AM studio. He tells his host he has a meeting scheduled with the prime minister today.
He also indicates he’s a fan of balanced budgets. Di Natale says governments running surpluses are basically collecting too much of people’s money. Balanced budgets are, well, balanced.
Updated
The treasurer Joe Hockey has done an FM radio interview and now he’s doing the ABC’s AM program. He sounds a bit irritated for so early in the morning. AM host Michael Brissenden is asking about the spending profile in the budget.
Hockey:
Spending is coming down. There is much more work to be done.
Q: Your growth figures have been described as heroic by some commentators.
Hockey:
That’s a foolish comment.
Brissenden asks about the rationale for not going after generous superannuation concessions when he would have a bipartisan agreement to do that. He says it would work as a retrospective tax.
Now’s not the time to hit those people.
Are the concessions unsustainable?
No.
Just some context here. The government is intent on having a fight with Labor on this issue in order to protray them as tax grabbers and the Coalition as tax cutters. This is all about short-term politics and the current posturing is, frankly, stupid. The government is locking itself in a policy area where it should be giving itself room to move, because the case for action is clear. But anyhow, I digress from the interview.
Brissenden asks why the big spend on security and the less big spend on domestic violence. Hockey doesn’t like the construction.
I do not see a link between terrorism in Australia and domestic violence. Domestic violence is evil.
Hockey says there is a serious security threat and the case for spending money on counter-terrorism measures is clear. He says the government will have more to say about domestic violence in due course, after discussions with the states. He says the $30m in budget for domestic violence is not the end of the story.
Thus ends the interview.
Updated
The agriculture minister Barnaby Joyce is speaking the reporters at the doors. I didn’t hear the question, but from the context he must have been asked whether he thinks taking payments from two parental leave schemes is a rort.
Joyce says he’ll choose his own words.
We must be prudent with people’s money.
While Katharine has been launching the blog I’ve been chasing the Labor leader Bill Shorten down the corridor. He’s done an interview on the Seven Network and a doorstop in the corridor afterwards.
Labor is opening the door on budget changes on the pharmaceutical benefits scheme. Shorten told Channel 7 this morning that “it is appropriate to be reigning in the costs”. However he’s not letting the government off that easy, saying Labor wants to closely look at the measure before committing either way, because they don’t want chemists to become “the public whipping boy” in the same way doctors were last year when the GP co-payment was proposed.
At the doorstop afterwards, Shorten said the prime minister’s budget lacked vision. The Labor leader said his budget in reply speech tonight will be all about the future. Because who doesn’t like the future, right?
The Labor leader wants the government to end the election talk once and for all. “I don’t think Tony Abbott shouldn’t let this speculation drag on. Australians get sick of these sort of games. If he’s going to have an election, he should tell people.”
Shorten’s not sold on the government’s paid parental leave scheme either, saying that Abbott offered a generous scheme before the election because there were votes in it.
“Working women have always been suss on Tony Abbott and the attitudes this week confirm what they’ve always expected.”
Updated
Good morning
Hello Thursday and hello blogans. Welcome to Canberra this Thursday. Thursday is the biggest day since Tuesday – today is a normal parliamentary day and it will roll through to this evening, when the Labor leader Bill Shorten will deliver his budget in reply speech. I’ll be covering all of that live.
Let’s begin at the beginning. With political consensus more or less settled on the budget’s small business package, the fight has switched to the government’s childcare package. Speaking broadly, the non-government players like the systemic changes the government is proposing to childcare, but they don’t like the savings measures the government has brought forward to pay for it.
Labor has really dug in against the government’s proposal to limit access to government-funded paid parental leave – the so-called “double dipping”. Families spokeswoman Jenny Macklin and deputy leader Tanya Plibersek really pushed Tony Abbott in the House yesterday about the “rort” language adopted by the social services minister Scott Morrison. Abbott tried to deny that Morrison had characterised claiming both public and private PPL as a rort, a brave sort of denial really, given Morrison has in fact characterised the behaviour as a rort.
That’s not Abbott’s only problem. As my colleague Gabrielle Chan reports this morning, the Liberal senator Arthur Sinodinos is also worried about that particular construction.
I think the problem is it’s not a good look to be having a go at the young mothers or new mothers of Australia and I think some of the language has been a bit unfortunate. We should be a bit more empathetic.
So noted.
Outside Labor, other Senate players are also troublesome. Independent Nick Xenophon thinks women who have claimed both schemes should be grandfathered at the very least. And because politics is always perverse, the LDP senator David Leyonhjelm likes the cuts, but he doesn’t like the spend. Leyonhjelm in fact objects to the whole budget because it’s way to generous, and doesn’t contain any notable deregulation. It will be interesting to see how the government responds to the various crosscurrents, and this will be the genuine test of Chuckles Morrison.
Lots more to get across, so lets get cracking. The Politics Live comments thread is wide open for your business, and if you’d like to send thoughts our way on Twitter, we are @murpharoo and @mpbowers
Updated
