Now that the gremlins have been tamed, we’re going to wrap up the blog for tonight – because we have another big day ahead of us tomorrow.
That’s right, it is budget reply day, where Bill Shorten will lay out Labor’s economic plan. That will happen later in the evening, and then he’ll head to 7.30.
We’ll be back with that, and everything else that happens tomorrow bright and early, so make sure you get your rest.
For anyone who missed it, we are heading to a super Saturday of byelections, probably on 16 June, where Labor will fight to keep Perth, Fremantle (where the Greens may pose a threat) Braddon and Longman (which will be the big contest) and the Liberals will attempt to wrestle Mayo from Centre Alliance. The campaigning has begun.
The budget seems like it was delivered a lifetime ago.
No doubt we will be back on it tomorrow though. Won’t that be exciting? I know I can’t wait.
A big thank you to Mike Bowers, for dragging my carcass through the day, and to the Guardian brains trust.
As always, a big thank you to you for reading, and for sticking through our technical difficulties. I am not kidding when I say we called the UK office to fix it.
Have a wonderful night, rest up – and take care of you.
Updated
Malcolm Turnbull is explaining to 2GB that the 200,000 migrant cap is a “ceiling, not a target”.
“We don’t take in anyone that we don’t need, or we don’t want,” he says.
That’s based on the budget line which showed there were no changes to the migration limit – despite people *cough Tony Abbott cough* agitating for it to be lower.
Pauline Hanson has already jumped on it, judging by her social media.
Updated
Now we are back, I can show you some more of what Mike Bowers was up to this afternoon:
From the citizenship press conferences:
Updated
Malcolm Turnbull says you can’t trust “Bill Shorten on citizenship and you can’t trust him with your money.”
Slow clap for whoever workshopped that segue.
Updated
Tim Storer is delivering his maiden speech to the Senate.
His entry into the Senate, as part of the section 44 merry-go-round, was a trial by fire, having dealt with the government’s company tax bill in the first two weeks he was in parliament – and then killing it off (for now).
He says everything he does is underscored by a foundation of integrity.
Updated
(from earlier, but it was deleted as part of the attempts to fix the blog)
The Greens, who are the only party who had MPs who resigned as soon as being made aware they were dual citizens, have weighed in on the latest round of section 44 resignations:
Rebekha Sharkie and the three Labor MP’s who ceded to the high court have done the right thing by resigning.
Had the Greens pushed for a full audit of Parliament taken on board months ago, we wouldn’t be in this mess today.
How many more MPs will have to be crowbarred out of their positions – kicking and screaming for months – rather than doing the right thing.
On a day when we should have been talking about how the budget impacts on Australians, politicians were talking about themselves.
Today’s resignations will not be the end of this ongoing crisis: there are several Liberal MPs that still have a cloud over their heads, and Malcolm Turnbull now needs to do the right thing and refer them to the high court to put an end to this uncertainty.
The only long-term solution is to abolish this outdated law through a referendum to make sure that Australians of all backgrounds can give back to their communities through parliamentary service.
Updated
Tony Abbott rang in to deliver his regular 2GB nuggets of gold. He thinks the Liberals are a chance to win in Mayo.
Malcolm Turnbull will also speak to 2GB. He’s due to be on air any moment now.
A big thank you to the boffins who just fought all of the gremlins, in mortal combat, to bring the blog back from the brink.
Updated
Susan Lamb’s whole speech to the chamber:
Speaker in February this year, I explained in detail to the Parliament – to the people of Australia, and of course the wonderful people in my electorate of Longman – the steps I took to renounce any entitlement to citizenship that I may have held.
Mr Speaker today a ruling made by the High Court of Australia has set a new precedent of course, giving a new interpretation on the “reasonable steps” test which has been in place for more than two decades.
Now in light of this judgment, I’ll be resigning as the Member for Longman and I will re-contest my seat in a byelection because, Mr Speaker, I am not done yet.
I put my hand up to represent people who were just like me.
To represent the workers in Narangba who rely upon on a job. A good job, a secure job, a safe job with fair pay.
I put my hand up to be a voice for parents in Morayfield with families who need schools that deliver an education that their children need.
And of course to stand up for affordable and accessible health care that the good people on Bribie Island, and in fact every person in Australia, deserves.
After nearly two years of having the privilege of taking up this fight – I am not done.
While there is $80 billion worth of taxpayers’ money still going to banks and big businesses instead of the pockets of people in Burpengary and Caboolture - I am not done.
And while there is still a housing crisis, elderly waiting for aged care packages, and an unreliable NBN connecting us with the rest of the world – I am not done.
Because in Longman, we deserve a government that’s fair, a government that cares and just as I have done since the 2016 election and for many, many, many years before that, I will keep fighting because, Mr Speaker, I am not done.
Speaker this is not a valedictory speech, let me be very clear. I’m putting the government on notice that, while ultimately the decision will be in the hands of the amazing people of Longman, I intend to be back.
Updated
The phone calls to electors in the Labor electorates heading to byelections are due to begin in a couple of hours. The campaign has officially begun.
No one is resigning, officially, until Friday though.
Updated
The crew at Buzzfeed very kindly allowed me to spew out words in between blog posts for their Buzzfeed OzPol show – if you ever wanted to know what a slightly manic, two-hours’ sleep, over-caffeinated Amy looked like, you are in for a treat. (Spoiler: not great)
.@AmyRemeikis says the plan to put people on $41k & $200k on the same tax rate in seven year’s time is a batshit crazy idea. “I could say in seven years I’m going to be living in Beyoncé’s mansion!” #BFOzPol pic.twitter.com/dKNnKx6ox1
— BuzzFeedOz Politics (@BuzzFeedOzPol) May 9, 2018
Updated
After the day that has been, we all deserve a little treat.
Today, I offer you this gem from the Chaser (thanks to Gareth Hutchens for the find) – which explains how Mark Latham was all a prank set up by the Chaser, which went terribly wrong. Watch out for the cameos, Ed Husic among them.
Updated
Here is Justine Keay’s whole statement to the chamber:
The greatest honour of my life was being elected as the member for Braddon in 2016.
In my first speech in this House, I said the people of West Coast and North West of Tasmania, and of course King Island, they’re a resilient lot. Ours is a community that genuinely cares for each other. We come together in challenging times, we’re generous of spirit, we’re always willing to pitch in and help one another.
I chose to put up my hand up for my community because the need to stand up for workers, for pensioners and those trying to make ends meet, convinced me that they deserved a progressive voice in Canberra fighting for them.
I’m also here to give my kids, and kids right across my electorate, the decent, secure jobs they deserve in the beautiful part of Tassie they know and love.
I want to make it very clear to every member of my community, and every member of this House, that I am not done working and fighting on behalf of those who sent me here.
This citizenship issue has been a difficult time for my family, friends, supporters and staff and of course, myself. It’s been a character building experience.
But I can hold my head high for being upfront and honest with my electorate. I have nothing to fear or hide, you just need to look at my disclosure for that. I’ve been criticised for being too honest. Bit of an oxymoron for a politician perhaps. People have commented that while I don’t have an allegiance to the United Kingdom, that perhaps I have an allegiance to my family. Well if they are my flaws, then so be it.
I am a seventh generation Tasmanian. A town in the Huon Valley bears my mother’s family’s name. I am proud of my heritage from both my mother and father, as I would expect all Australians are proud of theirs.
I’ve always been upfront about the fact that before nominating for Parliament I acted on the best available legal advice, which indicated that I had satisfied the eligibility requirements under the Constitution as they had been interpreted for 25 years.
Today, the High Court has set a new precedent. This is a new rule, and I respect this new rule without qualification.
As a consequence of today’s decision, I will be resigning my seat as the Federal Member for Braddon. I will be writing to you, Mr Speaker to advise you of my resignation.
I will nominate for preselection to contest the election in the seat of Braddon. The people in my community deserve a representative that cares about them, respects them and listens to them. This is what I have done and I will continue to do.
I am proud of the fact that one of the first things I was able to achieve after being elected was to successfully advocate on behalf of local farmers for an inquiry to get to the bottom of the floods that devastated the livelihoods and the lives of my local communities.
I am proud of the fact my office has been able to assist hundreds if not thousands of people in Braddon.
I am proud of the fact I have been the first Member of Parliament in my electorate in generations to take mobile offices to our outlying communities in the far North West and West Coasts.
I am proud of the fact I have been able to advocate on behalf of our local fishers, farmers, miners, foresters and industry and of course our pensioners and people who feel they don’t have a voice.
But I also know there is much more to be done.
The people of Braddon deserve a government that invests in them and puts them first. This is what a Shorten Government will do.
I have been privileged to have been given roles and responsibilities within the Shorten Opposition Caucus as Deputy Chair of the Parliamentary Committee on Agriculture and Water Resources and Secretary of Labor’s Caucus on Australian Jobs Taskforce. I want to thank my caucus colleagues for their unwavering support and mentoring a united and awesome Labor team.
I have been supported by a passionate labour movement in Tasmania, party members, union members and of course, my staff who go beyond what is required and to support me and to help the people of my electorate. This has been hard on them and on my family and has taken a personal toll on all of us.
But we will keep fighting – this is bigger than us, it is about giving a voice to those who feel they don’t have one. It’s about helping people. That’s why I’m here. It’s about making our region, as wonderful as it is, better and better.
Updated
Even the prime minister has given up on question time. It ends.
The Parliamentary Budget Office has released its budget snapshot.
For some facts and figures, head here
Chris Bowen to Scott Morrison:
How does the treasurer expect this Parliament to support policies when he doesn’t know or won’t say how much they cost?
Morrison: IT IS $140 BILLION. GOSH! THE BUDGET IS AWESOME
(I assume) He is yelling like he’s being swept up in a cyclone and there is a lot of pointing and fist-shaking and honestly, I am too tired to go through this for a millionth time today.
Updated
Bill Shorten to Malcolm Turnbull:
The government has refused to say the separate cost of all three steps of its personal income tax scheme, and refused to provide the year-by-year cost of its income tax scheme. Is it that the government does not know what these numbers are, or that it is refusing to provide the answer?”
Scott Morrison takes it, because he just hasn’t got his yelling-at-Labor quota in today (and someone in his office has been very busy researching).
“The Leader of the Opposition may be very used to changing the rules to suit himself in the union movement and the opposition. This is what the former finance minister said in the government of which he formed apart. This is Penny Wong in 2012: ‘We do not release 10-year costings.’ The treasurer Wayne Swan stood at the same National Press Club and talked about 10-year projection as being unreliable, and he said to Fran Kelly on 20 March 2012, ‘We do not do those 10-year estimates’. Mr Speaker, it is always one rule for the Labor Party and one rule for everyone else. One rule for their union mates, one rule for everyone else. You can’t change the rules ...”
He withdraws the union mates comment and ends his question.
Peter Dutton takes his daily dixer on how safe you are. VERY, VERY SAFE and now even safer because of the awesome budget.
Updated
Bill Shorten tries again to get Scott Morrison to say the corporate tax cuts will cost $80 billion, but Morrison is not having any of it.
And I really don’t think I have the energy at this stage to type out another answer saying nothing. It’s been a rough day.
Michael McCormack is yelling at the opposition because he is talking about infrastructure funding that is “ABOUT SAVING PEOPLE’S LIVES” (he is talking about the upgrade of the Cooroy-to-Curra section of the Bruce Highway, which is a particularly deadly section of road.
Anthony Albanese has a point of order to say they didn’t yell anything out.
Peter Dutton gets up to accuse Anne Aly of having made an unparliamentary remark, which Bill Shorten laughed at. She denies it, we move on.
And Chris Bowen has another go:
This morning the treasurer introduced legislation to implement the government’s entire seven-year personal income tax gain.
Already today at the National Press Club, the treasurer refused to say what the year-by-year cost of that scheme because he said those costings were unreliable. If the Treasurer won’t say what the year-by-year cost of the scheme is, and he also says the costing is unreliable, how could the Treasurer of the parliament vote for it?”
Scott Morrison:
The answer is simple. The cost of the measure is $140 billion over the next 10 years. That is more than twice the relief that has been provided to companies under our enterprise tax plan. We are putting the priority on ensuring the tax relief is provided to those on low and middle incomes ... If the opposition wants to deny Australians lower taxes, then they should just be honest about it. They should not come in here looking for excuses, Mr Speaker. They will look for any excuse not to reduce taxes for Australians. The bill is on the table. Vote for it or oppose it. Whichever way you do it, then the Australian people know where you sit on tax and where they sit on tax. Higher tax on Labor, low under the Liberal and National Party and you are making that clear to the Australian people.”
Updated
Chris Bowen tries again:
What is the year by year cost of the budget’s new personal income tax scheme over those seven years?”
Scott Morrison:
Page 33 of budget paper two, which sets out the costings, and as I have indicated the full cost is $140 billion over 10 years.”
So, still no answer.
He says Labor didn’t provide the year-by-year estimate beyond the forward estimates for its retiree tax, which is basically the “your face is” argument.
Updated
Chris Bowen to Scott Morrison:
This morning the treasurer introduced legislation to reform the income tax scheme. He refused to say what the year-by-year cost of the scheme would be. Will you tell the Parliament what is the year-by-year cost of the government’s personal income tax scheme over those seven years?”
Morrison: The shadow treasurer will be well aware of the process for putting together budgets. He was once a treasurer. If not for very long, and we will work very hard on this side of the house to ensure he doesn’t get that opportunity again, because of a lack of understanding that he has demonstrated in this place about how budgets are put together. I have made it very clear that the cost of that measure over the medium term is $140 billion.”
#theministerdoesnotanswerthequestion
Updated
Chris Bowen to Scott Morrison:
The budget includes a seven-year personal income tax scheme. The budget papers outlined three separate steps of the scheme, and the government this morning introduced legislation to implement all three steps of the scheme. Will the treasurer immediately release the separate cost of each step of its personal income tax scheme?”
Morrison: The cost of the plan over 10 years is $140 billion.
We should move to another dixer, but whoever it was supposed to be on the government side doesn’t get up in time, and Bowen jumps up to fill the gap with another question.
“My question is for the PM. Will the PM release a separate cost of each step of the government’s seven-year income tax plan?”
Turnbull: The Treasurer has answered that question very well. The question that the member for McMahon and his leader can’t answer is what is going to happen to the Australian economy and thousands of jobs if they were able to manage their tax plan, which is putting up taxes on businesses, on families, grabbing the cash out of retirees ...”
He’s told to sit down, because Tony Burke has a point of order, but then decides he has already said enough and concludes his answer.
We move on to the Member for Bonner, Ross Vasta, who gets a cheer for remembering to stand up, and another dixer on “how amazing is this budget, oh really amazing, I had no idea” is uttered. Craig Laundy gets this one. He is really looking forward to heading to Queensland this Friday to talk more budget amazingness, apparently.
Updated
Bill Shorten tries again:
Prime Minister, is the total cost of corporate tax cuts over 10 years from July 1, 2018 both legislated and proposed to be legislated by this government, is it more than or less than $100 billion?”
Malcolm Turnbull: The honourable member, by the year 2027-2028, the full enterprise tax plan, were it all to be legislated, will have been in full operation for two years. So asking what company tax receipts will be 10 years from now is effectively asking, “What will be the profitability of the corporate sector 10 years from now?” Medium-term estimate has been provided.
Scott Morrison in his latest effort of describing the budget as the greatest thing since Cronulla, refers to the opposition as “you muppet”.
That is ruled unparliamentary.
Updated
Bill Shorten to Malcolm Turnbull:
I missed the whole question, but it basically amounts to WHAT IS THE TOTAL OF CORPORATE TAX CUTS FROM JULY 1 2018 OVER THE 10 YEARS, OMG JUST SAY $80 BILLION
The prime minister does not say $80 billion.
I refer him to the earlier answer. The medium term cost of the unlegislated component of the enterprise tax plan currently before the Senate is $35.6 billion over the period from 2016-17 to 27-28. And in 27-28 the projected cost of that is around $9.8 billion.”
As Shorten’s eye begins to twitch, Scott Morrison moves on to the latest dixer, where the budget reaches Collingwood-magically-gets-all-its-greatest-players-from-the-past-100-years-onto-one-roster levels of awesome.
Updated
The next #deathtodixers puts the budget at if-a-unicorn-married-a-mermaid-and-held-the-reception-inside-the-world’s-sparkliest-wedding-cake-on-Atlantis-as-Billy-Joel-sang-Elton-John-songs levels of awesome.
Updated
Cathy McGowan has the independent’s question - it is on mobile phone blackspots:
“My question is what is the long-term plan to deliver mobile phone coverage to regional Australia? The budget overlooks the challenge of mobile connectivity in regional areas and there is no commitment for future rounds in the mobile phone blackspot program. What is your message to the 200 plus communities in Indi and across regional Australia that will be forced to go without this essential service?”
Malcolm Turnbull: [it’s under review, essentially]
I can also advise the house that the regional telecommunications review has been brought forward and the minister has asked them to hand down their recommendations to the government before the end of the year. The outcomes of the review will show how regional communication looks in the future. It will provide direction on where we need to focus our efforts to ensure contemporary communications in regional and rural Australia. We are committed to fixing the mobile blackspots.”
Updated
Paul Fletcher apparently said something interesting. I missed it, but it was enough for Tony Smith to ask him to stop interjecting, and for Tanya Plibersek to start her question to Scott Morrison again:
“When the Treasurer answered the exact same question last year, why was the treasurer refusing to tell Australians how much his corporate tax cuts cost over the next 10 years? So I ask, what is the total cost of corporate tax cuts over 10 years from 1 July 2018, both legislated and proposed to be legislated by the government?”
Morrison: [after being told to stick to the point, and responding with the parliamentary version of ‘I was totally gunna!’]
“Before the point of order was taken, the point I was about to make about the bank levy was how banks are major companies in this country who pay corporate tax and by the time that the major banks in this country would receive a corporate tax rate of 25%, they will have paid in the bank levy more than $16 billion in bank levy back to the government. But the figure ... Look, get your calculator out and get a pen. Write it down and I will help you with the maths. Add $9.8 billion to the cost. It is that simple. I know maths is not your strong suit and no-one on that side can help you. Just add 9.8. It is simple!”
Updated
Back to a #deathtodixers and in this answer, the budget is basically if Rihanna and Beyonce had a baby and it was raised in a commune with all the Hemsworths.
Updated
Chris Bowen to Scott Morrison:
Following last year’s budget, when asked what is the total cost of tax cuts both legislated and proposed to be legislated by the government, the treasurer answered $65.4bn. One year on, I ask, what is the total cost of the corporate tax cuts legislated and proposed to be legislated by the government?
Morrison, who looks like he is revving up to screaming-at-the-television-in-golden-point-time-yelling levels answers:
The ... medium-term cost of the unlegislated component of the enterprise tax plan, which is currently before the Senate, is $35.6bn. Over the period from now until 2027-2028. The last year of that, the cost is $9.8bn, which includes the cost of that measure as it applies economy-wide, so I will let the shadow treasurer add up if he can. But the point is this, the point is this, Mr Speaker, is that the costings I have just set out is for the unlegislated tax cuts. They would know that once a measure is legislated, it is legislated, so it begs this question Mr Speaker. It begs this question as to why they want to know. Why would you want to know the cost of tax legislation that has already been legislated for small- and medium-sized businesses, unless you wanted to reverse it? Unless you wanted to rip away the tax cuts given for small- and medium-sized businesses in this country, I will tell you! $25bn is the cost to revenue of what those legislated tax cuts gave to small- and medium-sized businesses over 10 years. And you will be out $25bn, $25bn unless you reverse those tax cuts in your plan. Because you went to the last election and you said ... Beating your chest, over there, the great man from McMahon, you are going to reverse the whole enterprise tax plan. You be honest with small businesses, and you tell them, are you going to rip away your tax cuts that have been legislated by this parliament? Or you going to strip it away?”
Updated
Question time begins
Holy moly, we haven’t even had question time today.
This is insane.
Here we go:
Bill Shorten to Malcolm Turnbull:
What is the total cost of corporate tax cuts over 10 years from the 1 July 2018, proposed to be legislated by the government?” (Labor has begun using a $80bn figure for it – they are now trying to get the government to say it.)
Turnbull: (after a bit of argy bargy over relevance):
The treasurer advises that the cost of the unlegislated tax relief business is $35bn, and the cost in the final year that is outside of the medium term, figures for which were given at the last budget, is just under $10bn. But Mr Speaker, what the Labor party is demonstrating in its questions, and a reference to an $80bn figure, to which they have simply added $15bn to $65bn, has no financial basis.
“What they have indicated is that their plan is to repeal all of the legislated tax cuts for Australian business. What they want to do is not simply oppose the unlegislated tax cuts for larger businesses, but repeal the tax cuts for Australian-owned, family-owned businesses up to $50m turnover, which employed 6.8 million Australians. That is what Labor wants to do, undermine the investment, the optimism, the entrepreneurship that is driving record jobs growth that we have seen. 415,000 jobs last year, the record jobs growth, the strong economy that is enabling us to deliver the outcomes for Australian families, 10 million Australians will receive tax relief from the treasurer’s budget, and we will move to a personal income tax system that is simpler and fairer.”
We move on to a dixer, the first of a series I am going to call: “Just exactly how amazing is this budget on a scale of Rhianna to Beyonce?” which, no offence to Trevor Evans, gives me a chance to run to the bathroom for the first time all day.
Updated
So, in the meantime, I have made some calls.
In Longman, the LNP don’t have a candidate ready as yet. And that worries them, because they don’t want the optics of losing a Queensland seat this close to the election. Because they need to hold Queensland to have any chance of holding on to power, and they are in danger of losing a whole bunch of them. Labor is less worried, but also aware they aren’t guaranteed to hold the seat. And given the amount of time Bill Shorten has spent in Queensland, vying for those votes, and talking fairness (a big deal in the lower- and middle-income seat of Longman), Labor would like a little more certainty that they will win it.
In short, both parties are feeling pressure – and that this is a test for the coming election. And neither of them are particularly happy about it.
Updated
Here is what Josh Wilson had to say:
The high court’s decision in the case of Katy Gallagher has changed the way the law is understood and interpreted in relation to eligibility under section 44 of the constitution. Until today’s decision the ‘reasonable steps’ test had been accepted for more than 25 years. It continues to be the basis of the Australian electoral commission’s advice to candidates (in the current candidate’s handbook), and was the guidance I followed when I nominated in 2016.
The new interpretation of the law means the question of whether a person took all ‘reasonable steps’ to renounce foreign citizenship simply doesn’t exist for dual Australian-British citizens, irrespective of the administrative delay in the process (which is generally two to four months). Under the new interpretation, any prospective candidate must have their British citizenship deregistered before the close of nominations. In my case, that was effectively impossible.
I was endorsed as a late replacement Labor candidate in Fremantle on 12 May 2016 and completed the requisite UK Home Office paperwork to renounce my British citizenship on that day. I mailed the renunciation form and attached documents on Friday 13 May, using express registered post. I received confirmation that the documents had been received by the UK Home Office on Monday 16 May. The processing fee for renunciation was withdrawn from my bank on 6 June. I nominated the following day, two days before the close of nominations. I received a letter from the UK Home Office dated 24 June saying that my British citizenship had been deregistered, with a copy of the renunciation form stamped 29 June 2016.
I was elected on 2 July 2016. I have not served a single day as anything other than an Australian citizen.
I was born in London when my parents were on a working holiday. My mum was expecting me when they travelled to the UK, and I returned home with them at the age of one after we’d travelled in Europe for six months in a Kombi van. Both my parents were born in Australia. My great-great-grandfather came to Fremantle as a convict in the 1860s. I have never lived in the UK, and have only visited there twice, in 1998 and 2012, for a few weeks each time.
In any case, the high court’s interpretation of the law has changed and I respect that ruling. That means I must resign as the member for Fremantle and contest the forthcoming byelection.
As I said in my first speech, I can’t imagine a more meaningful kind of work than to represent the community where I’ve lived virtually all my life. Every opportunity I am given to ask the people of Fremantle to trust me with the responsibility of being their representative in the national parliament is an opportunity I will relish.
I am looking forward to once again seeking that trust and responsibility in the weeks to come, and I am happy to be considered by voters in the Fremantle electorate on the basis of my character, principles, work-ethic, and record.
Updated
Georgina Downer (Alexander Downer’s daughter) looks like the strongest Liberal candidate to run against Rebekha Sharkie in Mayo.
Alexander Downer held that seat for 24 years, up until 2008.
Tony Burke says the case of Jason Falinski should be referred to the high court:
As you know last year, I did move for all of these cases to be referred to the high court, for all the ones where there could be considered any level of grey. The reason this court case doesn’t change anything for the Liberals involved, they are all people that took absolutely no steps. Absolutely no steps. So the reasonable steps test never helped them. There is still a cloud over their citizenship. The right thing for them to do, under, and this is all based on what they made public and what they left in doubt, with Jason Falinski being the one where the evidence appears strongest based on entry in 1958 and Polish passports there. We’re not saying he should leave the parliament tomorrow, but that is one case which should be referred to the court.”
Updated
Bill Shorten said his MPs did not resign, because they were waiting on the reasonable steps decision:
I’m giving you the answer. We relied on our advice that says all reasonable steps. Now what the high court has said is that all reasonable steps has to include the bureaucratic processing systems of a foreign government. That hasn’t been the advice we received. Whether or not we like what the high court has decided, they made that decision and we’re going to get on with it. Australians want to get on with debating what is the right sort of budget for the country.
Updated
Will Susan Lamb be ready (as in have her British citizenship null and voided by the time of the byelection)
Well, as we saw with more recent Coalition members, it would appear that British authorities are speeding up their responsiveness to resolving these citizenship matters.”
Tony Burke adds to that:
Since this issue has blown up even in the last few months, if you look at Fiona Nash, when that happened, the renunciation took place in three days. So the processes now are quite different. For the reference made earlier about the previous high court decision last year, as to why we didn’t have a response from that, that didn’t test reasonable steps. Because the people who were before the court then were people who had taken no steps to renounce. We have reasonable steps being tested and when you say, oh, what about the legal advice, can I just say, the Australian electoral commission had the same conclusion as the Australian Labor party, and kept that in the candidates’ hand book, even as recently as the Batman byelection.”
Updated
Bill Shorten says the Labor party won’t release its legal advice, but he says that he did check to make sure it was still sound when all the section 44 stuff started up again - and it was.
Updated
Susan Lamb has not yet renounced her British citizenship. Bill Shorten said he is “sure” she will have completed all the necessary steps by the time of any byelection.
Does he feel like “a goose”? (Don’t @ me, it was a question asked by a reporter at the press conference and I present it so you have the context for his response.)
At all times, the Labor party has acted in good faith. I have replied upon the legal advice provided to me by the Labor party, the same advice provided to Labor leaders since the mid-90s. Our quality candidates have relied on this advice. After asking all candidates to comply with the processes we thought were appropriate, the high court has set a stricter test. Legal experts such as Prof George Williams say they are surprised by this decision. The Australian electoral commission’s hand book for prospective candidates spells out [that] candidates, if they’re a dual national, have to take all reasonable steps. The high court has made the decision, these are the facts we’ve got to deal with, and that’s why all three of these quality candidate will be recontesting at the earliest possible date, and this provides, I must say, although this wasn’t the plan, it provides an early opportunity for Australians to pass a view about giving away $80bn to big business, of which $17bn alone goes the banks.”
Updated
Tony Burke on the details:
I met with the speaker and have explained to the speaker the situation, particularly for the members wanting to make sure, as good local members, they don’t want any of the constituent matters they have been dealing with to be disadvantaged in any way. They won’t be returning to the house of representatives until after they come back from the byelections. And they will be spending the next couple of days finalising different constituent matters they have to deal with [so] the resignations themselves will take effect on Friday. And I understand that Tim Hammond’s resignation will be received on the same day.”
Updated
Bill Shorten:
The high court has set a new precedent for the eligibility of candidates to nominate and still be constitutionally acceptable under section 44. In good faith, our candidates and the Labor party and I have relied on advice that’s been the same advice for over 20 years.
But the high court has looked at the facts in Senator Gallagher’s matter, they have developed a new test, a stricter test, and we have accepted that.
I’m pleased to announce today that all three candidates, members who have fallen into the section 44 problems which have taken many other people, they have all agreed to renominate, so at these byelections which weren’t sought, it’s an early opportunity for Australians to cast their view on Mr Turnbull’s proposal to give $17bn to the big banks.”
Updated
Mike Bowers was there to catch those resignations (except for Justine Keay, because while he is incredible, even he can’t be in two places at once).
Updated
Bill Shorten is holding a press conference in about 10 minutes.
A reminder that we still have question time ahead of us.
Oh, and Scott Morrison is still answering questions at the press club, but I might have to come back to that in a bit.
So since Scott Ludlam was made aware of his New Zealand dual citizenship and resigned on 13 July last year, and everyone in the government jumped up and down about how disorganised the Greens were, after Larissa Waters looked into her Canadian birth and found she too was a dual citizen, we have lost or held byelections for:
Barnaby Joyce
Fiona Nash
Stephen Parry
John Alexander
Malcolm Roberts
Jacqui Lambie
Skye Kakoschke-Moore
David Feeney
Katy Gallagher
Josh Wilson
Justine Keay
Susan Lamb
Updated
Queensland and Western Australia are also the two states the Coalition are desperate to win – or at least hold on to – at the next election.
So the “fuck” message I just received from a Coalition source makes sense in that context – the government might enjoy Labor having to eat some humble pie from the section 44 mess, but they are not overly excited about holding a bunch of byelections they may not win, when we are talking about the next election in terms of months, not years.
Updated
Out of all of those battles, Longman in Queensland will shape up as the one to watch. Susan Lamb holds that seat by 0.8%. It was one of the surprises of the 2 July 2016 election when she took it from Wyatt Roy and the demographics there are a little strange – it is a mix of working class and older residents, with some young families in pockets.
Updated
It does not seem like Scott Morrison is having a great time keeping the attention of the crowd on his National Press Club address:
I think every single person at this post budget address is on their mobile @AmyRemeikis #auspol
— Katharine Murphy (@murpharoo) May 9, 2018
Updated
Susan Lamb resigns
Completing the trio, the member for Longman also announces her intention to resign.
That means we are set for byelections in Longman (Qld), Braddon (Tas), Fremantle (WA) and Mayo (SA) as well as Perth (WA).
Lamb says she is “not done yet” and will recontest the byelection.
This Super Saturday is shaping up as quite the test for both the government and the opposition. The campaign starts now, I am told.
Updated
Josh Wilson said he will recontest the byelection.
Josh Wilson resigns
The member for Fremantle Josh Wilson has announced he will also resign.
Wilson said he was endorsed on 12 May 2016 and filled out his forms that same day, and sent them on 13 May. He said he received confirmation that the forms were received, the funds were taken out of his bank account on 16 May. But the confirmation did not come through until after the nominations closed, on 29 June, with the election on 2 July.
But the high court ruling today means filling out the paperwork doesn’t end it - it is the timing as well.
Susan Lamb is expected to follow suit.
Updated
We now officially have byelections planned for Perth, Mayo and Braddon.
Justine Keay says she will re-contest the byelection and will write to the Speaker later today.
Justine Keay resigns
The first of the Labor MPs has taken to the floor of parliament to announce: “I am not done working and fighting on behalf of those who sent me here.”
“I have nothing to fear or hide, you just need to look at my disclosure for that.”
She says she is a seventh generation Tasmanian, and operated under the best available legal advice.
She announces her resignation.
Updated
Rebekha Sharkie has resigned
The Mayo MP said she has done everything right, but the high court ruling is “quite clear”.
She will resign today and is seeking re-election. She wants the byelection held as early as possible - which would be 16 June.
Updated
David Smith, the director of Professionals Australia’s ACT branch, is the certain beneficiary of the high court’s ruling on Katy Gallagher’s ineligibility.
He was Labor’s second ACT candidate and will win the seat on a recount.
Smith told Guardian Australia he would keep the seat because “we can’t afford to have any interruptions in the representation of the ACT in the Senate” and it was “not a great look” to resign for Gallagher to resume her seat because it would be “seen to be trying to get around the high court decision”.
Smith thinks Gallagher would make a “great member” for the third seat in Canberra, presumably because he wants to avoid fighting her off in a preselection battle.
Updated
Labor is still working out its next move. And so is Katy Gallagher. There is some pressure on her to move to the lower house, but then there are others who want to see her back in the Senate.
Penny Wong has already stated the party wants her back (in so many words)
It’s worth noting that if Rebekha Sharkie resigns, it is going to put even more pressure on the Labor MPs.
And right before question time too.
If anyone remembered or still cares about the budget, Scott Morrison is about 15 minutes out from his National Press Club address.
Updated
If we do go to a byelection in Braddon, Jacqui Lambie won’t be on the ticket:
Statement regarding the decision handed down by the High Court today. #auspol #politas pic.twitter.com/6A0rxYrTt3
— Jacqui Lambie (@JacquiLambie) May 9, 2018
Rebekha Sharkie has called a press conference for 12.45
Updated
For everyone asking ‘what about’ the government MPs who have questions over their citizenship status, it is complicated.
International citizenship law is varied and complicated and while not all MPs put forward their documents, we can’t force them. The government has the numbers in the house, and would need to refer its members. The high court has put a 30-day limit on when electors can challenge an election.
So in short, yes there are questions, but we can’t answer them for you, or force them to provide answers.
As I have just been reminded, the committee looking into section 44 is a joint committee. My apologies.
Updated
Barnaby Joyce says he would have had sympathy for the Labor MPs who look like being forced to resign, “if they had left when I did”.
Talking to Sky, he says once his ruling was done, Labor should have sent their MPs through as well.
And a handy reminder of what we are talking about:
The constitution
Section 44 (i) of Australia's constitution bars "citizens of a foreign power" from serving in parliament, including dual citizens, or those entitled to dual citizenship. But the provision was very rarely raised until July 2017, when the Greens senator Scott Ludlam suddenly announced he was quitting parliament after discovering he had New Zealand citizenship.
That sparked a succession of cases, beginning with Ludlam’s colleague Larissa Waters, as MPs and senators realised their birthplace or the sometimes obscure implications of their parents’ citizenship could put them in breach.
The Citizenship Seven
By October, seven cases had been referred by parliament to the high court, which has the final say on eligibility. They were Ludlam and Waters; the National party leader Barnaby Joyce, deputy leader Fiona Nash and minister Matt Canavan; One Nation’s Malcolm Roberts; and independent Nick Xenophon.
The court found that five of the seven had been ineligible to stand for parliament, exonerating only Canavan and Xenophon. That meant the senators involved had to be replaced by the next candidate on the ballot at the 2016 federal election, while the sole lower house MP – Joyce – would face a byelection on 2 December in his New South Wales seat of New England. Joyce renounced his New Zealand citizenship and won the seat again.
Further cases
After the court ruling the president of the Senate, the Liberal Stephen Parry, also resigned on dual citizenship grounds. Then MP John Alexander quit, triggering a byelection in his Sydney seat of Bennelong – which he won. Independent Tasmanian senator Jacqui Lambie became the next casualty and NXT senator Skye Kakoschke-Moore soon followed. Labor MP David Feeney also had to quit, but Ged Kearney won his seat of Batman back for the ALP.
Legal implications
The case of senator Katy Gallagher tested the interpretation relied on by Labor that taking ‘reasonable steps’ to renounce citizenship was enough to preserve eligibility. In May 2018 the high court ruled against her, forcing a further three Labor MPs – Justine Keay, Susan Lamb and Josh Wilson – to quit, along with Rebekha Sharkie of the Centre Alliance (formerly NXT). The major parties have agreed that all MPs and senators must now make a formal declaration of their eligibility, disclose foreign citizenship and steps to renounce it. But the constitution cannot be changed without a referendum.
-
There is a senate committee which is looking into how they fix the section 44 issue. It is due to report next week.
The obvious (and only way, really) is a referendum. It is in the constitution. The constitution can only be changed by referendum.
However there is some chatter that there is another fix/bandaid in the works, which would improve vetting processes. We will see.
Updated
The Coalition is really doubling down on the ‘Bill Shorten needs to force his MPs to resign’ thing.
From Christian Porter and Christopher Pyne’s statement:
While Bill Shorten had many opportunities to refer each of his three Labor members to the high court and was urged to do precisely this to avoid unnecessarily politicising this issue, he repeatedly failed to do the right thing and make these referrals.
The situation now is that any referral to the high court of any of these members would do no more than cause a further delay and expense to the taxpayer before reaching a conclusion that now is beyond doubt. The time for the referral of this group has passed and the only course of action is their immediate resignations to allow for byelections to be held as soon as possible.
While it is never too late to do the right thing, it is now clear that both Bill Shorten and his shadow attorney-general, Mark Dreyfus, have deliberately mischaracterised the application of previous high court decisions to their own members of parliament and have misled Australians for months as part of a cynical delaying tactic.
Bill Shorten initially claimed that none of his MPs were dual citizens because of Labor’s ‘extremely stringent vetting process’ (Bill Shorten press conference 21 August 2017; The Australian 21 August 2017) and that the difference between Katy Gallagher and the cases of Barnaby Joyce and Fiona Nash were as different as ‘night and day’ (Canberra Times, 5 December 2017).
Dreyfus claimed Gallagher ‘… took the reasonable steps that the high court has spoken of in repeated decisions’ (Sydney Morning Herald, 10 December 2017).
These statements were deliberately designed to mischaracterise high court decisions and mislead the Australian people and what is now going to be tested is Mark Dreyfus’s claim that ‘…Labor care about the constitutional legitimacy of the Australian parliament’ (Sydney Morning Herald, 10 December 2017).
If Labor does care about the constitutional legitimacy of the Australian parliament, they must now accept the outcome of the high court decision and finally do the right thing and demand the resignations of the three Labor members who are in clear breach of the constitution so that the people in their electorates can elect a legitimate representative to the parliament.
Updated
Christian Porter:
They were delaying, they were obfuscating, and they did so at enormous expense to the Australian taxpayer and radically, they tried to take everyone for mugs and there was always going to be a day of reckoning and here it is, and where are they?
Christopher Pyne says the government sees no reason for the Labor party to refer its other MPs to the high court:
They will be wasting more taxpayer money, more time in order to run this protection racket around their caucus.
Updated
Neither Christian Porter or Christopher Pyne will say if the government will use its numbers (and break a longstanding convention) and force the MPs to the high court. They say it is up to Bill Shorten “demanding, requiring and effecting the resignation” of his three MPs.
Updated
Christian Porter says Rebekha Sharkie’s case is no different from the Labor cases and she should also resign.
Updated
Christian Porter went through a list of Labor claiming its MPs were fine, because of the reasonable steps test, over the last six months.
Christopher Pyne, rewriting history a little bit, says the Coalition MPs who were in question, “did the right thing and resigned”.
When we understood that members of our side of the house had a cloud over them, they were referred to the high court, or they resigned. In fact, quite a number – Fiona Nash, Matt Canavan, who was cleared by the high court, Barnaby Joyce, who wasn’t, and faced the byelection that he won.
John Alexander, when he couldn’t satisfy himself that he didn’t have dual citizenship, he resigned, faced the byelection. On our side, we did the right thing. When there was a problem, we responded to it, methodically, sensibly, as a good government would, faced byelections, and the people re-elected those two members.”
Which is not exactly true. The government held out until the last moment. And then after the ruling, Stephen Parry, the former Senate president, discovered he was in the same position. Then John Alexander discovered his.
Updated
The government says the four lower house MPs 'must resign'
Christian Porter:
It means that there four other dual citizens- in fact all dual citizens of Great Britain – who were dual citizens after the close of nominations, who are presently ineligible to sit in the federal parliament, and who should not be sitting in the federal parliament.
And those four people must resign. They must resign today. Bill Shorten must require the resignation of those three Labor members today, and that must occur before close of business today.
Updated
Christian Porter and Christopher Pyne have opened their press conference looking quite pleased.
Pyne gestured to Porter to speak first and he did, opening with an attack on Bill Shorten:
If I might start by saying that Bill Shorten said something very curious on Channel Nine yesterday. ‘If the high court today set the new precedent, the Labor Party will deal with it.’ He then, when pressed, said, if the interpretation of the law changes, we will consider what we have got to do.
I want to make it clear from the outset that this decision is not a reinterpretation or a change of the law, it is a crisp and crystal clear clarification of the law as it was stated in the Canavan decision last year, and anyone, Bill Shorten, Mark Dreyfus or anyone else, who says this is a reinterpretation or a change, is talking absolute rubbish.
Updated
So I have spent the last couple of weeks chatting to both parties about the possibilities of byelections, and I can tell you that neither is either enthused by the prospect.
Mostly because they are expensive and we are a year (less than a year?) out from a general election. But also because neither want a test so close to the election.
Updated
Christian Porter, the attorney general, has called a press conference in the Blue Room - the fancy one where ministers hold their “we have something important to say” pressers.
He is expected to say the four MPs need to stand down. Christopher Pyne will be with him.
And just like that, we are no longer talking about the budget.
Updated
Bill Shorten says it’s a new precedent – what he means there is Labor had interpreted the reasonable steps ruling from Skyes v Cleary to mean that as long as you filled out your forms and met all your own personal obligations to divest yourself of your dual citizenship before you nominated for parliament, then you were eligible.
The high court has now ruled that it is not just the taking of the actions – it is also the timing. Which means just filling in and sending off the forms is not enough, you have to take into account the time to send it off and receive your confirmation.
The only one of the four who are in question who might have a case on the timing issue is Josh Wilson – he was a late pre-selected candidate, who moved to divest his British citizenship on the day he was nominated. It just didn’t come back as confirmed until after the election. Not sure how much quicker he could have acted, but the high court may not care.
Updated
Bill Shorten has released a statement:
I am deeply disappointed for Katy Gallagher today.
This is a loss to the Senate, and a loss for Labor. We are a better parliament with Katy in it, and a stronger party with Katy in our caucus.
Katy has always acted on the best available legal advice, which indicated that she had satisfied the eligibility requirements under the constitution.
Today, the high court has set a new precedent.
I know this period of uncertainty has been tough for Katy and her family. She has shown great resilience and grace in difficult circumstances.
As a community worker, as a disability advocate, as chief minister and as a senator, Katy has always served others. She has made a valuable contribution to the Australian parliament, and to our shadow ministerial team.
Katy is a key part of Labor’s Senate leadership team. She is too good to lose from public life – and I know we won’t lose her. Katy has a lot more to contribute to Labor and to Australia.
The Labor party will now consider what further implications today’s decision by the high court may have.
Updated
The questions in this reference turn upon one issue – whether British law operated to irremediably prevent an Australian citizen applying for renunciation of his or her British citizenship from ever achieving it. An affirmative answer cannot be given merely because a decision might not be provided in time for a person’s nomination. The exception is not engaged by a foreign law which presents an obstacle to a particular individual being able to nominate for a particular election.
That’s the paragraph which has implicated the lower house MPs.
Does the British system stop Australians from being able to nominate for parliament? The court can’t be sure. So Katy Gallagher is out – and the others may be made to resign by the party.
Josh Wilson sent off his documents the day he was preselected. It wasn’t confirmed until after nominations closed. This could have even more layers but, as we have now seen, this high court bench is very black letter. It may not matter.
Updated
Given that Malcolm Roberts held on to the very, very last second, even insisting that he was “choosing to believe” that he was never British, and was basically forced into being referred to the high court, I am not sure Pauline Hanson should be the arbiter of what other parties in the same position should do.
Now that Katy Gallagher has been thrown out it is time for Susan Lamb to stop stalling and resign. -PH #auspol
— Pauline Hanson 🇦🇺 (@PaulineHansonOz) May 9, 2018
Updated
Katy Gallagher has issued her own statement:
Today the high court sitting as the court of disputed returns has ruled that I am ineligible to sit as a senator in the Australian parliament.
I am very disappointed by this outcome but I respect the decision of the court.
I have spent the last 17 years of my life representing the people of the Australian Capital Territory, firstly in the ACT legislative assembly and more recently in the Senate.
It has been an absolute honour to hold elected office.
I have always performed my duties to the ACT community with honesty, integrity and a desire to make Canberra and Australia a better place for all of us.
I have always acted on the best available legal advice, which at all times, indicated that I satisfied the eligibility requirements under the constitution. However, today the high court has made its decision, and I respect the outcome.
To the people of the ACT, I’m very sorry that this disruption has occurred to one of your federal representatives.
To have my place in the Senate end like this today is very deeply disappointing but I believe that I have more to contribute to public life and I will take the time to talk with Labor party members on how I can do this over the months ahead.
It has been a privilege to serve the Canberra community and the Australian Labor party in both the ACT and federal parliaments for almost two decades.
Updated
Here is the bit from the ruling which looks like the others will be forced to resign:
High court confirms in this par that Labor has been quoting only one half of the reasonable steps test. The foreign law must IRREMEDIABLY PREVENT renunciation. #auspol #auslaw
— Paul Karp (@Paul_Karp) May 9, 2018
This isn’t the last we’ll see of Katy Gallagher - you may remember that the ACT had a new seat drawn up in the boundary redistributions? She is expected to run for the lower house seat.
Rebekha Sharkie, the Centre Alliance MP for Mayo in South Australia, said she was investigating her options and seeking “urgent legal advice”:
I acknowledge today’s ruling of the high court regarding the citizenship status of Labor Senator Katy Gallagher.
Based on the recent high court judgment, I will now take urgent legal advice.
It is my belief that the particulars of my circumstances are materially different to Senator Gallagher’s case.
My paperwork was lodged and received by the UK Home Office before the election was called.
My paperwork was returned before the election was held.
Once I have received legal advice I will be in a position to comment further.
Updated
The Senate president, Scott Ryan, has made a statement to the chamber:
He has announced the Katy Gallagher ruling and said he would table the ruling.
Penny Wong says the Australian Labor party will respect the decision of the court (meaning that Gallagher will resign):
First thing she is a woman of great integrity who always acted in accordance with the advice given to her ... she has always acted in good faith …
She is an outstanding senator, an outstanding representative of the people of the ACT and she is an outstanding member of the Labor team, and she is too good to lose.
Updated
Summary
The high court website appears to have crashed.
Probably because everyone in this building is now trying to access it.
Updated
Antony Green is speaking on the ABC about dates – if it turns out that the others all have to resign as well.
The first date for the byelections would be the 16 June and that would mean potentially the new members could be sworn in before the parliament rises at the end of the budget session at the end of June.
If they do not, that is if the byelection is not called by next Monday, if it was the following Monday, it is the 23rd. Other than that, it could be held in July and they could not be sworn in until the next session starts in mid August, which is getting quite close to the next election.
Updated
If we do go to a byelection bonanza, you might find this handy to bookmark.
For those interested, here are my guides to the seats of Braddon, Longman and Fremantle (will require some small tweaks to turn them into by-election guides if needed):https://t.co/YblAiUW4UIhttps://t.co/I6ToyPPgGWhttps://t.co/Dh00MapdZL
— Ben Raue (@benraue) May 9, 2018
Updated
Katy Gallagher ruled ineligible to sit in parliament
We are waiting on the decision details – Paul Karp is running out of the court – but if “reasonable steps” include that candidates need to have the divestment of dual citizenship confirmed before they nominate for parliament, then we are off to Super Saturday.
That potentially means we will see byelections in Fremantle, Longman and Braddon (as well as Perth) for Labor and in Mayo for Rebekha Sharkie for Centre Alliance.
Gallagher will have to resign from the Senate though. She will be replaced and will most likely be back after the next election.
Updated
#breaking the High Court has unanimously ruled Katy Gallagher is INELIGIBLE to sit in parliament. Seems the "reasonable steps" defence is not the cure-all Labor has claimed. #auspol #auslaw #citizenshipXX
— Paul Karp (@Paul_Karp) May 9, 2018
The high court is almost back in session.
We’ll bring you that result as soon as it happens. Paul Karp’s fingers are POISED, I tell you. POISED.
What’s in the box? Some Mike Bowers magic, this is.
Updated
John Howard is very popular as a draw card for the post-budget breakfast – this time round he was the headline speaker at the PwC Melbourne event.
And even HE thinks its time to raise Newstart.
Former PM John Howard says its time to increase the Newstart Allowance.
— Henry Belot (@Henry_Belot) May 8, 2018
"I actually think there is an argument about that, I do. I was in favour of freezing that when it happened, but I think the freeze has probably gone on too long".
There was no change in the budget.
Full disclosure, I have been on Newstart. And it was bloody hard. I managed, but only because I had flatmates, didn’t drive, and was, at the time, quite ill, so I never actually did anything. I had lost my casual job because of the illness, and was still too sick to return to work. I was very, very lucky that nothing went wrong – no unexpected bill, no massive need to outlay cash – but I still got into a credit card debt, which took years to pay off. I get it, it’s difficult and I’m in and was in, a relatively privileged position compared with so many others.
Living on $40 a day, even with a bit of extra help from rent assistance, or whatever, is cruel.
Updated
Back in 2005, both Bill Shorten and Malcolm Turnbull had plans to fix the tax system – Rob Harris from the Herald Sun has dug up this Fairfax report:
This 2005 story was actually quite incredible in hindsight https://t.co/fR8f8zasyE pic.twitter.com/UJjejbeaDL
— rob harris (@rharris334) May 8, 2018
Updated
Chris Bowen was on Radio National this morning, talking about the tax package Scott Morrison just introduced in parliament:
We think that is worthy of some examination. We don’t make 10-year tax plans in 10 minutes. The government might just be happy not to have the figures in the budget, not to have the analysis of who wins who loses et cetera. We take a different approach. 2024, I’m not sure what you’ll be doing in 2024, I’m not sure what I’ll be doing in 2024, I’m not sure what the economy will be doing in 2024.
Normally you would vote on 2024 tax cuts in 2024 or 2023. The government is saying that you can’t have the tax cuts in 2018 unless you get the tax cuts in 2024. He’s holding a gun to the head of the 2018 tax cuts and now that’s just silly.
Updated
Malcolm Turnbull was on Sunrise this morning as part of his media blitz. He says the government knows what it is doing in terms of turning around the debt:
Well, the net debt is going to actually peak this year as a percentage of our economy, of GDP and then it will starts to decline. So we have actually turned the corner on debt. Then after a decade, it will be down to about 3.8% of GDP. So we’re both paying down debt and once we get back into balance, which is in 2019-20 of course, we’re not adding to the debt. So the debt declines in dollar terms and absolute terms and it also declines of course, because it’s not growing and the economy is growing.
So we are bringing down the debt, we’ve turned the corner on debt.
Updated
Presented without comment:
— Josh Taylor (@joshgnosis) May 8, 2018
The government wants to extend the budget tax bill debate, which is outside of convention, and Labor has given a “yeah, nah”, first with attitude, and now with an official no.
Chris Bowen: “Seriously guys, this is pathetic. What a joke. What a joke.”
The government did not call for a division so it seems it wasn’t overly into it either. Just wanted to stir the pot.
Updated
The parliamentary Twitter accounts are having fun celebrating the building’s birthday.
It has officially entered its dirty 30s.
Parliament first sat on 9 May 1901, following Federation and elections. Tom Roberts captured the Opening of the First Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia in this piece, otherwise known as The Big Picture. pic.twitter.com/w4tlyoRC4R
— Australian House of Representatives (@AboutTheHouse) May 8, 2018
Looking forward to it!! https://t.co/mz4jdY2Opn
— Australian Senate (@AuSenate) May 8, 2018
Updated
A bit of Mike Bowers from this morning:
Updated
Scott Morrison is entering his bill into the house. His speech includes the line “the snake eating itself from the tail”.
For something new.
Our plan will deliver a personal income tax system that is lower, that is simpler, that is fairer, consistent with Liberal party beliefs.
He is racing through this. He is going so fast that the Coalition MPs can barely get in a “hear hear”.
Julia Banks and Ann Sudamalis, who sit behind the dispatch box, are nodding for their lives. Luke Howarth is doing his absolute best to look extremely interested, while simultaneously concerned. It’s their art. They don’t have to explain their art to you.
Updated
Actually, we can tell you exactly when the treasurer will be entering his bill – 9.40.
And we know that because the chief whip, Nola Marino, has just sent an email to all Coalition MPs asking them to be in the chamber to “please support the treasurer in the house”.
Thank you to the secret squirrel who passed that on. Your work is appreciated.
Coalition MPs reading this, you are needed in the chamber. Please, and thank you.
Updated
Speaking of the treasurer, he is getting ready to enter his tax bill into parliament.
That should happen in the next few minutes.
The budget fight over the surplus is also continuing. Scott Morrison says he is on track to return the budget to balance –and then a surplus the next year.
Not surprisingly, Bill Shorten isn’t as sure:
But the point about it is, and you understand that you’re a student of economics, if China decided not to buy all of our minerals tomorrow, there goes the surplus. The reality is this government has no plan to pay down debt.
Debt is north of half a trillion dollars. Put in plain English, this government has run up a debt bill for every man, woman and child in Australia of $20,000.
These people aren’t economic managers, they just lurch from crisis to crisis, and, in the meantime, the only thing they do is their DNA hardwired reaction, look after the top end of town and just feed crumbs to other people.
Updated
The Senate will open at 9.30 with a message from the Queen.
She’s acknowledging the 30th anniversary of the opening of Parliament House.
Updated
Scott Morrison will address the National Press Club just after lunch.
That’s being held in parliament, because parliament is still being held. Despite us talking about everything other than parliament.
We have a BUSY morning.
We are all waiting on the high court. And while, publicly, Labor has been keeping its chin up, privately the party is preparing for the worst-case scenario – Katy Gallagher’s case fails – and sending people to the electorates “just in case”.
My sources tell me key campaigners are being placed around the states – Queensland, Tasmania and WA, so the party can hit the ground running if it turns out that Susan Lamb, Justine Keay and Josh Wilson also have to resign.
But no one really knows which way the high court will fall on this. The prime minister has learnt not to make such proclamations after the whole Barnaby Joyce will be fine “and the high court will so hold” thing.
Updated
“This isn’t a change to bracket creep, this is a total rewriting of Australia’s tax system,” Di Natale says.
He also has a problem with the lack of movement for Newstart. Just a reminder that it hasn’t moved in real terms in almost 25 years. Di Natale says it is not just the Greens urging this, and noting that the business and welfare sectors have been calling for the same thing for years.
He wants the Labor party to “draw a line in the sand” and say they won’t support the tax changes.
Updated
Richard Di Natale has picked up this morning where he left off last night – criticising the budget.
He says it will “turbo-charge inequality”. He’s talking about the 2024 plan to put those on $41,000 on the same tax rate as someone earning $200,000.
We think someone earning that sort of salary [$200,000] deserves to pay a little bit more than someone earning $41,000.
Updated
Just further from what Paul Karp told you on foreign aid, here’s a bit more from Penny Wong:
At a time when we know Australia’s influence in the region is diminishing. At a time when the government’s own white paper talks about the importance of soft power, what does Julie Bishop preside over? She presides over yet another cut to Australia’s overseas development assistance.
Yet another cut to aid on top of the $11bn that she has presided over in cuts to date. Another $140m and a new low. So, we’re already at a record low in terms of how much of our national income we give to the nations of our region and the poorer nations of the world. Well, we’re getting even lower, 19 cents in every $100 of national income.
That’s what Julie Bishop and Malcolm Turnbull are delivering at the same time as they are giving the banks a tax cut.
Updated
While Malcolm Turnbull continues his media blitz (which includes no fewer than three denials there will be an early election), Greg Jericho has had a look at all those future implications of the $140bn total tax plan.
You know, the one in the never-never. Seven years from now. Which is almost two budgets and two elections away.
Updated
The major non-budget story around this morning is news that Donald Trump has announced he will impose “the highest level of economic sanctions” on Iran, violating an international nuclear agreement and a UN resolution, breaking decisively with US allies in Europe, and potentially triggering a new crisis in the Gulf.
On Radio National, Malcolm Turnbull responded:
We regret the decision of the US. Of course, President Trump had foreshadowed that for a long time. We encourage all parties to continue to comply with the deal. And we certainly are trying to support that.
Turnbull said he had “some optimism” that an Iran deal could survive without the United States because there was still commitment from European parties.
Asked about Iran’s reaction, he said Tehran “have certainly indicated that they will show restraint so far”.
Updated
Another point of attack against the budget has been the $140m cut to foreign aid.
Labor’s foreign affairs spokeswoman, Penny Wong, said: “The Turnbull government has continued on its disastrous path of cuts to aid, and lessening influence which can only further weaken Australia’s standing.”
But while Labor claims it will spend more on foreign aid than the Turnbull government, it is very short on specifics.
On Sky News Bill Shorten said:
There’s no doubt the economic circumstances since the [global financial crisis] have changed what people hoped they could do. But I will put this general principle about foreign aid: foreign aid is also good politics.
We all saw the shock and outrage about discussions between Vanuatu and China about possibly putting a new base in Vanuatu. One of the issues is: it’s not China’s fault or Vanuatu’s fault, but if Australia abandons the region we create a vacuum others will fill.
So I just say to some of the people who say foreign aid is a waste of time – it is not only a good thing to do to help people, it’s good [for] strategic foreign relationships.
Pressed on specifics, Shorten replied: “We’re going to crunch our numbers and see what we can do.”
Updated
A lot of stakeholders have been out criticising the fact the budget has not lifted the Newstart allowance for jobseekers, stuck at just under $40 a day for singles.
Senator Tim Storer noted that both the Business Council and welfare groups want it lifted because they all recognise “it’s very important for this group to be able to present themselves for work”.
The Australian Council of Social Services chief executive, Cassandra Goldie, said “it’s shameful that the government hasn’t found the money required to lift the Newstart payment” because that would be the best policy to help some of the 3 million people living below the poverty line.
On Sky News Malcolm Turnbull said the government “believes the setting is right” because Newstart is a “safety net to support people while they’re looking for work”.
It’s not like disability or aged pension which is entitled to be a substitute for employed income.
Asked about people struggling to live on $40 a day, Turnbull noted the “vast majority are in receipt of other benefits as well”.
It’s a more complex picture than that. The important thing is that they’re looking for work.
Updated
Malcolm Turnbull is out selling the budget’s centrepiece income tax cuts – framing them as hip-pocket relief for workers who haven’t had a pay rise.
He told Radio National:
We know that tax should be no higher than it needs to be in order to deliver and guarantee our essential services. We want to ensure that Australians, particularly those on middle incomes, you know, a nurse and a teacher, they will be, next year, over $1,000 better off as a result of these reforms as a couple. This is ensuring that at a time when wage growth has been slow ... this is giving more money, enabling people to hang on to keep more of the money they have. It’s their money.
On Sky News Turnbull said: “It’s an income tax plan – we’re asking the parliament to support it all.”
He warned that if the top tax bracket of $180,000 were not lifted it would soon capture workers such as school principals and police superintendants – not just the “millionaires” that Bill Shorten targets with his rhetoric.
Turnbull described the budget as “very realistic”, arguing it was not built off record commodity prices but rather hard work and good policies. “We’ve made our own luck,” he said.
Updated
The Business Council of Australia’s Jennifer Westacott is largely happy with the economic plan though.
She told the ABC that she expected the $530 tax offset to help boost spending – which is what Scott Morrison said was the intention last night.
And of course, she would still like to see the business cut plan passed.
Well I think people are underestimating the impact of this personal tax cut. First of all, you are targeting those low- to moderate-income earners, for an average couple, that’s $1,000. That’s a lot of money to a lot of people.
But, you know, as it goes out, which is, kind of, fiscally calibrated and quite sensible, you know, you’re taking out a whole tax bracket. You’re taking out one of the great incentive sapping parts of our tax system. This bracket creep. You’re simplifying it, you’re allowing people from 40,000 onwards, to not have that constant anxiety that they’re going to pay more in tax.
I think, most people want more money in their pocket than in the government’s pocket. So, you know, I think the challenge now is not to reverse course. The challenge is to stay the course. The challenge is to get the business conditions working.
One thing that’s changed, is that other countries have put their tax rates down, particularly, the US. Yeah, we’ve got to make sure that we now make our economy more resilient to external factors like commodity prices, lift our productivity, lift our competitiveness. That’s why we need the full enterprise tax plan to be passed. And we’ve also got to remember, and I keep reminding people of this, that $100bn, I want it to be 120 but, you know, if it’s 65 or 80, we’ve got a very different budget in four years’ time.
Updated
The new cuts to the ABC are also raising eyebrows.
Michelle Rowland wants to know what happened to that 2014 commitment. You know – the one with Tony Abbott’s face in front of a giant board which promised no cuts to the ABC.
This budget lays bare the utter contempt the Liberals and Nationals have for the Australian people and the ABC services they trust and rely on. The Liberals promised there would be “no cuts to the ABC” on the eve of the 2013 election. Yet on top of $254min cuts they have imposed since 2014, this budget contains a further $127m in cuts.
The Liberals have frozen indexation of the ABC’s operational funding – amounting to a cut of $83.7m – to “ensure the ABC continues to find back-office efficiencies”. The reality is this government knows full well this means cuts to jobs, content and services at the ABC.
The Liberals and Nationals complain the ABC isn’t doing enough news coverage, yet these hypocrites have left a $43m hole in funding for ABC news and current affairs.
The Liberals gifted $30m to Fox Sports and relieved commercial broadcasters of $90m in spectrum license fees, yet they are imposing swingeing cuts on the ABC.”
Updated
The Greens have also been discussing issues they have found with the budget. The extension of robodebt isn’t winning any fans on that side of the political fence.
Rachel Siewert is worried about the plan to take money out of welfare payments, for those who have court ordered fines:
I have deep concerns about plans by the government to make compulsory deductions from income support recipients struggling to pay back fines.
This will disproportionately affect the most vulnerable in our community and I will be chasing up the detail in Senate estimates.
Updated
Good morning and welcome to the hard sell
Scott Morrison and Malcolm Turnbull have been out and about since the crack of dawn selling their message – they are very happy with the budget and think you should be too.
“The economic plan is to deliver strong economic growth,” Turnbull said this morning. “That’s the plan we’re working on, and what that is doing is ensuring that more hard-working Australian families can keep more of what they earn.”
Bill Shorten has also been out and about very early as well – and he is less happy with the budget.
“The real problem is with this budget, even though it was only one line in a speech last night, as to Morrison is giving away $80bn to the top end of town and, in the meantime, cuts to schools and pensioners being backed into the budget. They are pretty out of touch and I thought last night was uninspiring. What they are basically saying is, ‘Let’s get $80bn to the top end of town and, in the meantime, we might give you $10 a week.’”
Labor will support the July 1 tax changes – the ones that give workers up to $530 as a tax offset when they do their tax NEXT year, but doesn’t appear overly into the seven-year total plan, which includes a flat rate tax in 2024, meaning all earners between $44,000 and $200,000 would pay the same amount.
It’ll never happen, but Morrison plans on legislating it all together as a package, so prepare for that battle.
Meanwhile, Labor is keeping one eye on the high court this morning, with the justices handing down their decision on whether Katy Gallagher is eligible to remain in parliament because she took reasonable steps to divest herself of her dual citizenship.
The Labor senator didn’t receive her confirmation until after she had nominated. If the court rules reasonable steps are not enough when foreign law doesn’t “irremediably prevent” renunciation, then Susan Lamb, Justine Keay and Josh Wilson will have to resign, sparking byelections in Longman, Braddon and Fremantle. Centre Alliance’s Rebehka Sharkie would also find herself headed for a byelection. Throw in Tim Hammond from Perth, who resigned to spend more time with his family, and that is potentially, quite the super Saturday.
We’ll bring you that as soon as it happens – 10.15am is the scheduled judgment delivery, and Paul Karp will be at the court.
Mike Bowers is out and about – follow his adventures at @mpbowers and @mikepbowers.
You’ll find me in the comments, but more directly at @amyremeikis or @pyjamapolitics.
Ready to get going? I have had three coffees already, so I am BUZZING!
Let’s get into it!
Updated
