And with that, we are going to call it a night.
It is the midwinter ball tonight, and this year, after lobbying, it is officially on the record. As it should be. You may have noticed quite a few journalists were uncomfortable with the off-the-record understanding, given the guests, so that has been officially changed.
It is not taxpayer funded – it is run by the press gallery, and we pay for it, with everyone having to purchase tickets. There have been some great outcomes for charity. So I’ll let you know if anything interesting happens tomorrow when I am back here at sparrow’s.
Tomorrow Michael McCormack will be the acting prime minister.
Yup.
Scott Morrison is off to the US, which Katharine Murphy will cover (the Guardian, like all other media organisations, pays their own way on these things) so you’ll be kept up to date on that as well.
A big thank you to Mike Bowers, who is still working, Murph, Sarah Martin and Paul Karp. They are all typing away still on their computers as I wrap this up, so make sure you catch their work soon.
Thank you to everyone who read along and commented, or took the time to message, except for the men’s right activists who decided I desperately and forcibly needed to know of their views. It’s going to be a long year.
We’ll be back (not necessarily) bright, but early tomorrow morning. Until then – take care of you.
Updated
And we finally have that statement from Jason Wood’s office:
Assistant minister Wood manages his offices and expenses within the guidelines.
Resources provided for contacting a member or their staff, such as email addresses, PO boxes etc, can be listed as contact details where parliamentarians or their staff are reporting to regulators such as the Australian Electoral Commission.
It is not unusual for employees to provide their work contact details so that they can be reached during business hours for activities outside of their usual hours of work.
This is a desperate stunt from Labor today who have done exactly the same thing in the way they list addresses for reporting as in the case of Alicia Payne, Terri Butler and even Graham Perrett when he was holding a fundraiser for Anthony Albanese.”*
*We looked into this and in the Butler case, for example, the Griffith MP made a donation to her own campaign, listing her electorate office as her contact on her disclosure form. But this is politics and both sides will point to the other.
Updated
Richard Marles has spoken on Jason Wood:
Jason Wood has been caught out using his parliamentary office as a fundraising vehicle for the Liberal party.
This is a clear breach of the ministerial standards, and it raises serious questions for the prime minister to answer.
This is about the prime minister’s integrity and the type of government he wants to run.
The prime minister, Scott Morrison, needs to explain why this isn’t a breach of ministerial standards.
Australian voters expect basic standards of conduct from elected officials and what appears to be going on here clearly looks like it fails the pub test.
The prime minister is happy to front the cameras and applaud himself on the good days, but conveniently goes quiet any time a tough question gets asked.”
Updated
All of the flags.
Top meetings with Treasurer @JoshFrydenberg and Agriculture Minister @senbmckenzie about deepening links between our nations and making the case for free enterprise. #finance #farming #freedom pic.twitter.com/NxVljuHLKM
— Liz Truss (@trussliz) September 18, 2019
Updated
Julie Collins spoke to David Speers about why Labor didn’t support the inquiry:
Speers: What did you make of Pauline Hanson’s comments that some women do make up domestic violence complaints to get an outcome in the family court?
Collins: I think they were inappropriate and disappointing. I think that the survivors of family violence and their children will be quite upset by that. Accepting that not everyone tells the truth all the time, the vast majority of the statistics do not lie. The number of women in Australia that are experiencing family violence is significant and the number of women that are dying.
Speers: Is it something that should be looked at, at all?
Collins: The thing that Pauline has done unfortunately is she’s said to women coming before the committee “Now, I’m not going to believe you” essentially, and that is a problem, I think.
Speers: Do you think that is what she is saying?
Collins: Well she is saying that women can’t be believed.
Speers: Well she’s said that some women make up these complaints. Is that saying that women can’t be believed?
Collins: Well it depends on how people interpret it, obviously. That will be up to the witnesses if this committee inquiry gets up.
Updated
Larissa Waters spoke to Afternoon Briefing and was asked about whether she believed women, who had been in family violence situations would speak at the family court inquiry given deputy chair Pauline Hanson’s comments:
Well, I mean, would you? If you thought you were going to give evidence before someone that thought you were a liar? It is incredibly difficult for women to speak out.
That’s why the statistics are under-reported as it is. They often have to relive hideous experiences. We know that the numbers of prosecutions are less than they could be because it is traumatic for women to relive these experiences and to tell their tale.
Why would they bother doing that to an inquiry with the likes of those two heading it up? I think this inquiry will be a waste of time and I think it will do damage to women who don’t deserve to be disbelieved.”
Updated
A government spokesman says Labor MP, including Alicia Payne, Terri Butler and Graham Perrett have listed electorate office postal addresses for reporting in their own fundraising.
We believe Jason Wood’s office will be putting out a statement shortly.
Updated
We have an update on the #hometobilo case being heard in the federal court:
Bromberg says he expects to be able to deliver judgment at 2:15pm tomorrow. If it turns out he needs more time he will give notice.
— Josh Taylor (@joshgnosis) September 18, 2019
Just on the Tony Smith ruling in question time today, that questions can not include a person’s name, unless it can be verified, or is relevant to the question (as per the standing orders) I have been pointed in the direction of the Hansard from the Abbott opposition years in 2012:
My question is to the prime minister. I refer the prime minister to the statement of Pat Italiano, owner of Essendon Fruit Supply, in the electorate of Maribyrnong, who said, with regard to the carbon tax:
We are trying to absorb the costs as much as we can but it’s a real slap in the face and it’s making things much harder for us.
Can the prime minister explain to Mr Italiano and every other small business owner across Australia why they will not receive a cent of compensation for the world’s biggest carbon tax?
Who asked that question?
Tony Smith.
Updated
Pauline Hanson clapped as the vote was announced.
Senate passes family law inquiry
And it’s done
Senate votes 35-29 to establish Andrews/Hanson inquiry into the family law system #auspol
— Tom McIlroy (@TomMcIlroy) September 18, 2019
Updated
Patricia Karvelas: There are also accusations made today that assistant minister for customs Jason Wood’s office is being listed as the address for the Pinnacle Club. What do you make of that?
Simon Birmingham:
Look, I am not aware of the full detail of those. I know there was something running in the House of Representatives today, but I think there is a distinct difference between listing an address for reporting purposes versus actually conducting any events and the like and if the best the Labor party has got to go on is an address that receives information for reporting purposes that’s not much.
PK: Is it appropriate to use that address if the correspondence and the work is being done out of the parliamentary office?
SB:
Well, as I said, if the address is simply for reporting purposes, and from there, volunteers, as is usually the case in terms of Liberal party fundraisers, volunteer treasurers who operate across the country, collate information and report that back as part of our reporting requirements to the Electoral Commission then that doesn’t sound like much to me.”
Updated
Simon Birmingham on the Gladys Liu allegations:
The Labor party will smear anybody in this government they get the chance at. We saw that quoted in the media, Labor MPs are basically saying – they are so bitter from losing the last election that they will happily play dirty at every opportunity.
We’re not going to be distracted by that. We have got a job to do which is to govern in the Australian interests, to keep expanding the record volume of exports we have and create new opportunities for Australian businesses to get out there and export and that’s what we’re going to focus on doing, not engaging in the grubby tactics of the Labor party or being distracted by them.”
Updated
From AAP:
Crossbench MPs and senators are putting pressure on the Morrison government to provide better protections for journalists and whistleblowers as a new report highlights an erosion in press freedom.
Former Greens senator Scott Ludlum, who co-wrote the report – backed by GetUp and the Digital Rights Watch – said he was “horrified” by the police raids on the ABC headquarters and a journalist’s home a few months ago.
He said the report shows the heat has been turned on the media over the past 10 to 15 years.
“Nobody should be arrested or have their homes gone through or possessions or devices gone through simply trying to their job,” he said on Wednesday.
Journalists needed protections, as do their sources.
The independent MP Andrew Wilkie said the federal government now has “excessive powers” since the 9/11 attacks in 2001 – which has seen has 75 separate pieces of security legislation passed, many of which he believes are “entirely unnecessary”.
He said it was not good enough for the government to flick concerns of media freedom to the parliamentary intelligence and security committee because it had signed off on every one of those 75 pieces of legislation in the past 18 years.
Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young said the Senate was undertaking its own inquiry and expected legislation would come out of that in the new year.
Wilkie said there were already two bills in the House of Representatives put forward by himself and Centre Alliance on protections and a bill of rights.
However, the government controls the numbers in the house and decides what business is dealt with.
“We now look to the government and to the opposition to get behind these issues and to allow that business to be brought on,” Wilkie said.
Updated
Simon Birmingham is speaking to Patricia Karvelas about Pauline Hanson claiming family violence claims are being made up and says he doesn’t believe that to be the case, very often.
PK asks how woman are supposed to feel, given, if they give evidence at this inquiry, they will be cross-examined by Hanson knowing that is how she feels, because the government has made her deputy chair.
“Well, I mean I would encourage everybody to share their stories and I would hope and expect that every member of this inquiry, whomever they end up being, will show respect to every person that’s willing to come forward and share their story and their experiences and to listen to them and give them a fair hearing and make sure that what you are drawing out of this process is an understanding of how we can make life better for families in the future.
“This is something that we wish didn’t happen to anybody in terms of fronting up in the family law system.”
PK: I’m asking you in relation to the claims that women make up domestic violence claims. Are you alarmed by that statement? Were you worried when you heard senator Pauline Hanson making that statement this morning?
SB: Well, I didn’t hear her make that statement, Patricia. I have been busy with the UK trade secretary in town. I’m responding to your questions and I’m taking them all at face value.
“Those allegations have been put to me, put I’m sure to other members of parliament, and in some instances they may have been the case over time, and working to make sure that the system responds in relation to those sorts of allegations is important.
“Just as it is important, critically important, in making sure the system deals with those instances where family violence is genuinely occurring and make sure that protection is there for the victims of that family violence and that appropriate support is there for those victims.”
Updated
How Mike Bowers saw question time:
Updated
While everyone was Googling who the assistant minister for customs was, this was happening to Jason Wood’s face.
Updated
So from the paperwork Labor was trying to table in parliament, the Pinnacle Club fundraiser is being held at a private club, but the address registered with the AEC for the Pinnacle Club is also Jason Wood’s electorate office postal address.
The financial controller for the Pinnacle Club, according to the fundraising entity’s Australian Electoral Commission disclosure return, has an @aph.gov.au email address.
Using taxpayer-funded ministerial resources for private uses – such as fundraising – is against the ministerial code of conduct.
Jason Wood is the assistant customs minister. So that is why this is an issue.
Updated
You may have noticed that has been one of Labor’s question time strategies under Anthony Albanese – to ask questions about the economy and other issues bubbling away before hitting the prime minister a surprise in the second half of QT.
It’s the “unpredictable” strategy which was put in place fairly early on.
Updated
Speaker of the House @TonySmithMP has announced that Catherine Cornish has been appointed as Deputy Clerk of the House of Representatives. For the first time in Australian history, the House will have a female Clerk and Deputy Clerk.
— Australian House of Representatives (@AboutTheHouse) September 18, 2019
There are a whole heap of quotes about politics being show business for the, let’s just say not Hollywood types – and Vince Connelly, also known as Christian-Porter lite, or CP-lite – has done his best to prove that he missed out on a career on the stage, so he headed to parliament for the second day in the row.
And Christian Porter does his best to live up to the ridiculous warm up act.
Hemsworths they are not.
Updated
The reason for too many puns in QT today.
Updated
Nooooo, there must be another question the government needs to go ahead to go, because Richard Marles gets up with another question to Scott Morrison:
How is the assistant minister for health allowing the Pinnacle Club, an associated entity of the Victorian Liberal party, to use his taxpayer-funded office, his taxpayer-funded phone number and his ministerial PO box public consistent with the prime minister’s ministerial stance?
Christian Porter:
It is certainly the case that is asking the prime minister for an opinion, but secondarily, there is no date that attaches to any of these allegations that have been made by members opposite.
Tony Smith does not believe the date point to be relevant and he rules the whole question in order.
Morrison:
The deputy leader of the opposition has asserted a number of things and asked me for an opinion on these matters. I am not going to venture opinions based on assertions of the opposition for the reasons I said before. But I can tell you one thing wasn’t happening. No one walked into his office with a big plastic bag full of $100,000 and counted it out on the table like happens on Sussex Street on a regular basis.”
Updated
This also happened today
Kind of weird, the Speaker says MPs can't use the names of constituents or people who've been in touch with them in questions unless they're necessary to make the question intelligible. I always feel those kind of questions humanise politics! #qt
— Katina Curtis (@katinacurtis) September 18, 2019
Updated
We are getting the daily dose of JUST HOW SAFE ARE YOU from Peter Dutton and then I imagine we will be done.
Richard Marles to Scott Morrison:
I refer to the prime minister’s previous answer refusing to concede that facts about the minister for customs. And so to authenticate those facts, will the prime minister agree to the tabling of the following documents? An invitation from the Pinnacle Club, the Pinnacle Club’s AEC return, the AEC transparency register, the contact details of the assistant minister on the department of home affairs website, and the ministerial standards?”
“We are here to help,” says Anthony Albanese, loud enough to be picked up on the broadcast.
Tony Smith rules the question out of order.
Marles now seeks leave to table the documents. One by one.
Leave is not granted after the first one and Smith shuts it down.
Updated
Scott Morrison on the Jason Wood allegation:
I refer the member to the answer provided by the finance minister regarding the relevant rules in relation of this matter.
In relation to the question put to me on this, in question time today and indeed to now, Mr Speaker, I have no information in front of me that would suggest that any of the matter is that they have alleged is falling foul of what the standards are and Mr Speaker, I have, I have learned over a long period of time, long time, but when coming to the despatch box, to the allegations made by those opposite, that I have never taken them at their word Mr Speaker.
... From this very feeble position, Mr Speaker, from this very lame opposition, Mr Speaker, is the attempt to distract frankly from their own feebleness and their own lameness, Mr Speaker, by seeking to smear other members of this house! When at the same time, their own party is in an absolute shambles!”
Updated
Christian Porter objects to the question.
With respect to the standing order 98 see it is the case that the treasurer and the minister covering the minister of finance can be asked for the use of electorate officers, not the prime minister. It is not his responsibility.
It is also the case of the prime minister was being asked in the second part of the question with respect to fundraising and of course there is a well-known provision against asking those questions here as they are party political matters.”
Tony Smith allows it. The prime minister is sort of the minister for everything, after all.
Updated
Coalition assistant minister accused of running fundraiser out of taxpayer funded office
Richard Marles to Scott Morrison:
Is the prime minister confident that all members of the executive are abiding by his ministerial standards. Specifically is he aware that the Pinnacle Club associated entity of the Liberal party has been operating out of a taxpayer-funded office of the assistant minister for customs? Is the prime minister also aware that the Pinnacle Club is holding a fundraiser hosted by the assistant minister for customs attended by the assistant treasurer and featuring the member for Chisholm as auctioneer?”
The assistant minister for customs is Jason Wood.
Updated
Mark Dreyfus to Josh Frydenberg:
Can the minister confirm that members of parliament cannot use commonwealth resources including their taxpayer-funded office, telephone and post office box, to run associated entities not related to their parliamentary duties?”
Frydenberg:
I can confirm that office accommodation is provided for the dominant purpose of parliamentary business, Mr Speaker. Office and [associated entities] must not be used for the dominant purpose of providing a personal benefit to any person and that must not be used for any commercial purpose.”
This is going somewhere from the sounds of things. Stay tuned.
Updated
Michelle Rowland to Paul Fletcher:
I refer the government to the decision to scrap the use of the national relay service that helps Patricia Williams make and receive telephone calls through text relay. Why must Patricia who is deaf and 88 years old now learn to use a different technology instead of her Captel handset to contact 000?
Fletcher:
I do thank the member for her question, and I make the point that the national relay service is a very important communication service forAustralians who are deaf, hard of hearing or have a speech impediment.
The national relay service is delivered through a range of technologies and a range of devices, one of which is one that the member has cited, but it is delivered through a whole range of different devices.
Can I make it clear that all existing relay channels will continue to be available for users with the exception of the one device that the member has mentioned. I want to make it clear that the government is absolutely agnostic about the services provided through the national relay service. The owner of the particular device the member has mentioned has cited an exclusive agreement with the existing relay service provider, but of course if it is interested in speaking with the Australian government, we remain interested in speaking to them.
Can I correct one extremely misleading claim that the member has made, and it is very disappointing that the member would seek to create alarm and distress. Media reports which claim that making an emergency services call through the national relay service is difficult are misleading.
Users of a TTY device can dial 106 which provides a direct connection to emergency services through the national relay service relay officer. I the last financial year, there were [more than] 1,500 calls to the emergency services from national relay service users, successfully connected to the appropriate emergency service.
I repeat the point. The national relay service is continuing. It is a very important service for Australians who are deaf, who have a hearing or speech impairment. It is delivered through a whole range of devices and there will continue to be $22m a year being spent on the provision of this vital service to ensure that Australians who are deaf or hearing impaired or speech impaired can continue to make effective use of our telephone system.”
Updated
Centre Alliance will support family court inquiry
That’s the numbers right there.
Rex Patrick says:
Centre Alliance will support the motion for the family law inquiry. As a general rule, Centre Alliance supports inquiry referrals from other Senators.
In relation to Senator Hanson’s comments, while we accept that some people may perjure themselves in a court, we totally reject Senator Hanson’s sweeping generalisation that women lie in court in order to get favourable decisions.
The family court system is a difficult area for almost everyone that goes through it. Matters in the family court involve parties who are emotionally charged and have great personal stake in the outcome, including in many cases, the custody of their children.”
Updated
Shayne Neumann is up with a question, reminding me that I had sort of forgotten he had existed.
“My question is to the minister for veterans’ affairs. Can the minister confirm the government has a report in front of it which recommends scrapping the veterans’ gold card as we know it and will the minister be reducing the entitlements of veterans and their dependents, including veterans with a disability?”
Darren Chester:
“I assume by his question he is referring to the productivity commission report which was presented to the government six or eight weeks ago and released to the public six days later ... an extensive look at the department of veterans’ affairs which took over a year to do.
The report of the government makes 61 recommendations, and as the shadow minister is aware, it is an extensive report, 938 pages, and allowed a number of reforms proposed by the productivity commission.
The government has approved readily taking the time for further negotiation, further consultations ... with the ex-service community in relation to which of those recommendations it supports and which ones of those recommendations it doesn’t support.
It would be inappropriate for the government to rule things in and out at this stage ... This government is proud of its record in relation to looking after veterans and their families. We are committed to that first. It is an area which has enjoyed ... enormous bipartisan support.
It would be inappropriate to rule things out at this stage or ruling things in at this stage given the consultation occurring with the ex-service community around the nation.
Another shadow minister is agreeing with my comments and ... what I would say, Mr Speaker, in relation to the question more broadly, this is a government providing an excess of $11bn a year to support 280,000 veterans and their families.
We are working to make sure the veterans benefit enormously in the future in terms of reforms we make; the productivity commission report to the government outlines a whole range of recommendations and there is no intention whatsoever for this government to do anything detrimental to our veterans and their families.
We are working with the community, as you expect the government would do, and encourage those opposite to also listen to the concerns of the veteran community, work with us as we continue to reform the department of veterans’ affairs.
The Australian people can be very proud of the fact that their taxes, taxpayers dollars, go to support men and women who put on the uniform, serve our nation, and when they transition to life, they are supported in a way the Australian people can be proud of.”
Updated
Andrew Lamming starts a lickspittle to “the treasurer to whom we are hopelessly devoted” and that sound you hear is that song being ruined for me for all time.
Updated
Bill Shorten to Stuart Robert:
I’ve met Gold Coast mum Shannon Manning who lives in the minister’s electorate. She is still waiting today, after more than a year, for her profoundly disabled daughter to get a wheelchair and hoist, and in the meantime she has been injured lifting her daughter.
Are there other shortfalls in care and delays like this being caused by the massive underspend of $1.6bn in the NDIS?
Robert:
Let me think the member for his question. Can I assure you the office is aware of Ms Manning’s case.
It is complex and highly sensitive and if the member wishes to have a brief about this case, he only has to ask me and I will brief him about a very complex, very sensitive case regarding Ms Manning.
Can I also say that this is a demand-driven scheme, and in many ways not unlike any other demand-driven scheme – pensions, support pensions, Newstart – all demand-driven, and it is uncapped and if we wish to look at numbers, the 18-19 budget estimated the average participant cost will be $46,400.
The actual payment for 18-19 would be $46,800. So indeed, based on what the government projected in the 18-19 budget, and based on the actual, the average participant has actually increased.
Therefore, participant support has not been cut, as the member has alleged on the floor of the house. They have actually increased. Because this is a demand-driven scheme.”
Updated
The sentient loaf of white bread that serves as our deputy prime minister is reminding me that tomorrow he will be acting prime minister.
I think I feel smallpox coming on and I don’t think I will be able to make it into work tomorrow. *cough*
“Have you ever been mellow,” he asks a Labor MP who is heckling him.
“ ... I tried to get physical with the member for Hunter last week but please, just be quiet for now!”
Just be quiet for now. Timeless advice.
Updated
The member for Warringah, Zali Steggall, asks Greg Hunt what the government is doing about monitoring air quality (we don’t really monitor it any more).
There is currently a proposed revision of the national environment protection ambient air quality measure to strengthen the ozone nitrogen dioxide, the sulphur dioxide national standards.
Children are most vulnerable to air pollutants, as are the very frail, elderly and asthmatics. The recent infrastructure Australia audit report found Warringah has some of the most congested roads in Australia but there is no regular air quality testing to notify us of the pollution and health risks caused by congestion. Health experts are recommending the expansion of the networks of monitors with daily monitoring of key pollutants and adoption of a much stricter national standard for ambient air pollution.
Will you as health minister endorse these stricter health -based standards for air quality?
Hunt:
“We discussed this matter earlier this week and as I indicated there are a number of important steps. One is as government, we have moved to lift air quality standards in Australia and in particular as I recall from a previous portfolio by strengthening across the nation the standards ... In relation to air quality, the environment minister may have a more up to date account of that. As part of that, we moved across the country to ensure that those standards were being implemented by all of the states.
We in particular made clean air a fundamental element of our work as a government over the past six years for two reasons: one, because it is the right thing to do for health; two, the right thing for the environment.
So we have continued to do that. One of the essential elements in doing that is not just monitoring, and I am always happy to support additional monitoring in this space, as I indicated when we met this week, but two, we have a $4bn urban congestion plan.
The minister with responsibility for this, the minister for urban infrastructure, is overseeing that and cannot work fast enough with the states to get these projects delivered.
In particular, not only are these projects important for urban congestion, they are important for reducing impacts on air quality which would otherwise be detrimental to health. So I respect the question. We have set in place a national standard; we have been one of the global leaders in terms of air quality and health; we have in particular put in place standards for PM 2.5 and PM 10, and we have put in place a national approach and now we are working on reducing the source of those pollutants through the $4bn urban congestion fund and I think that will make a real difference, not just in the member’s electorate but in electorates around the country.”
Updated
Josh Frydenberg is yelling once again, this time in answer to a question from Jim Chalmers about the underspend of the NDIS.
“ ... WE ARE FULLY FUNDING THE NDIS WHERE THEY NEVER DID, MR SPEAKER, THEY NEVER DID. IT IS A DEMAND-DRIVEN PROJECT, MR SPEAKER. CURRENTLY THERE ARE AROUND 300,000 AUSTRALIANS WHO ARE ON THE NDIS, MR SPEAKER, 90,000 OF WHOM ARE GETTING CARE FOR THE FIRST TIME. NOW THE COST OF THE NDIS IS FORECAST TO INCREASE TO $41.75BN IN 2019-20 ...
Updated
Scott Morrison will be talking about how important stability and calm is in this chaotic world.
Jim Chalmers to Josh Frydenberg:
I refer to the reports that a final budget statement will be released tomorrow. How much of the improvement in the budget position last year came from a spike in the iron ore price and the low dollar, which have absolutely nothing to do with actions of the government?
Frydenberg
I THANK THE MEMBER FOR RANKIN FOR THAT QUESTION BECAUSE THE REALITY IS OUR BUDGET PERFORMANCE IS AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN BETTER THAN YOURS, MR SPEAKER. THE REALITY IS THAT TOMORROW WHEN WE RELEASE THE FINAL BUDGET OUTCOME IT WILL SHOW AN IMPROVEMENT NOT ONLY IN THE 18-19 BUDGET, BUT ALSO WHAT WAS FORECAST IN APRIL THIS YEAR WITH THE 19-20 BUDGET.
It continues but all the yelling runs into one.
Updated
Anthony Albanese to Scott Morrison:
My question is addressed to the prime minister. Does he agree with the Reserve Bank board which said in its September minutes that wages growth appeared to have stalled?
Morrison:
I thank the member for his questions and I am familiar with the minutes of the Reserve Bank. I will read the full quote for the assistance of the member. Wages growth had remained low and the upward trend in wages growth, something the leader of the opposition has been casting some doubt over in questions in recent time, there has been an upward trend in wages growth, Mr Speaker, and it appears to have stalled and they are looking forward and that is why, Mr Speaker ...
... What those opposite haven’t acknowledged is ... that real wage growth under this government through the last year is higher than it was when we came to government from what we inherited from last time.
I will help them out because I know the Labor party is not that good with numbers. When it comes to managing money, they focus on numbers on plenty of other things when it comes to managing money they are not so good on numbers. 0.7% growth in real wages through the year is higher than 0.5% growth in real wages.
The Reserve Bank rightly points to their observations that the news on the international economy had confirmed the risk to global growth out was a downside. The Reserve Bank has made it clear they acknowledge the complex and difficult times that the Australian economy is facing with global pressures. I am quoting from the Reserve Bank minutes.
... And I can quote further from the minutes which said there had been further signs of a turnaround in established housing markets, especially in Sydney and Melbourne.
The notes also say the minutes looking forward to the outlook for outward growth was being supported by the low level of interest rates, recent tax cuts, signs of stabilisation and established housing markets and a bright outlook for the resources sector. Our government has a plan to grow the economy to keep the budget in surplus and we are the ones that the Australian people wanted at the last election, and they voted for us to continue with our election plans and to implement those plans, and you are the ones they didn’t want on the Labor’s side!”
Updated
Olivia Newton-John is in the gallery for question time.
She is here to lobby on behalf of her cancer research institute.
The midwinter ball is on tonight. I would not be opposed to her dropping by the entertainment stage for that as well. I am an excellent Danny for any Grease duet.
Updated
We are minutes out from question time.
Anthony Albanese again confirms Labor will vote against the establishment of the inquiry:
We are not hostile to the parliament having inquiries about issues. That is not our starting position.
Our starting position would be: let’s sit down and talk about terms of reference; let’s talk about and make sure this is not a partisan issue.
Quite clearly you’ve had co-chairs appointed.
The prime minister informed me that Kevin Andrews would be the chair. Fair enough. It is up to the government to appoint a chair of the committee and Kevin Andrews has had an interest in these matters for a very long time.”
Updated
On Pauline Hanson’s assertion that women make up domestic violence claims to win custody in many, many cases:
They are completely unacceptable. The fact is you can always find, in any circumstances, you can find activity that is outside the norm.
The norm of these issues is something that we should not make normal. Women die, at regular intervals; the chances are in this country a woman will die at the hands of a partner.
This is a scourge on our society. It is something that all of government should respond to. It’s something that all of us, the media, have a responsibility to raise these issues. It is important we discuss it with our friends, our mates in our communities.
It is something that should be one of ... is one of the real challenges for our nation. I know that there are many people across this parliament, including members of the Liberal party and the National party and the minor parties who have worked very hard on these issues.
The people who worked on the committee last year, Sarah Henderson and Sharon Clayton, in the last term of parliament, have worked hard on these issues as well.
I think that really the comments of Pauline Hanson in the context of being made the co-chair of the committee, which will receive evidence, it would appear from those comments that Pauline Hanson has already judged what that evidence is and is saying that people do not tell the truth about family violence and that is a real concern given the prime minister’s deal to make her co-chair, which he announced this morning.
Updated
Labor will not support family court inquiry
Anthony Albanese says Labor was not consulted about the terms of reference for the family court inquiry and was surprised to learn that Pauline Hanson would be the deputy chair in what is supposed to be a bipartisan inquiry.
The issue of domestic violence should be taken seriously by everyone in this place. And we take it seriously and I know that there has been a range of activities around white ribbon day, around statements, around domestic violence that have enjoyed bipartisan support.
That is important that continues. I do not want this to be a political football. I say to the prime minister: we can’t support an inquiry in which he has unilaterally, along with Pauline Hanson, done a deal.”
Updated
On what Pauline Hanson has said this morning, Kevin Andrews says:
I don’t have a view on this. I’m coming to this as objectively as I can. I will try and address of the terms of reference which the government has given the committee. I will try to endeavour to enable everybody who wants to have a ... fair say. But does not mean we will necessarily agree with everyone.
Part of the role of a parliamentary committee is to question what people are putting forward. At the end of the day, we have to come to some sort of agreed decision as a committee, regardless of our political backgrounds, as to what is the best thing to do.”
And he confirms again, that Hanson will be the deputy chair.
Updated
Labor had indicated yesterday it was leaning towards supporting the family court inquiry, with Tanya Plibersek saying this early this morning as she walked into parliament:
Look, I think it is very fair for people who interact with the family law system to say that change is long overdue.
We’ve seen a very comprehensive report from the Australian Law Reform Commission – we can absolutely begin to implement the recommendations of that report before waiting for this new report to be completed. There are some very sensible suggestions that have been made after a deep study of the family law system – we don’t need to wait to implement those recommendations.
That doesn’t mean that it’s not also beneficial to hear from people who are interacting with the family law system about issues like the impact of family violence in the family law system and the impact that long delays and expensive procedures have on getting justice through the family law system.”
But don’t be surprised if we hear there has been a change of heart in the next few minutes.
Updated
Kevin Andrews is talking to the ABC about the need for the inquiry:
Colleagues have raised from time to time in the party room issues about whether the system works in a fair way for everybody involved. Those issues have been raised on behalf of men and women and all the participants, so I think it is important for a family law system that every now and again parliament has a look at how it is operating.
This is a very vexed issue and involves human beings with human emotions in very difficult – traumatic often – situations and so some sort of look at this from time to time, which we have done as a parliament for the almost 30 years I have been here, on numerous occasions, I think is a good thing.”
Updated
New statistics from the health department show the waiting list for aged care packages dipped slightly between April and June this year.
The waiting list is at close to 120,000 people as of the end of the financial year, which is a 9,000 decrease on the previous quarter, after the federal government brought forward funding for some packages.
The royal commission into the aged care sector has heard harrowing evidence about elderly people being forced into nursing homes because they cannot get appropriate assistance with daily tasks at home. An estimated 16,000 people have died waiting for a home care package.
Labor’s spokeswoman on ageing, Julie Collins, accused the government of being asleep at the wheel for six years.
“There are still more older Australians waiting for home care packages than there are home care packages being used,” she said.
The prime minister, Scott Morrison, insisted increasing home care packages was a priority: “Now the only way you can do that … is by ensuring you maintain a strong budget,” he said.
Last weekhe royal commission last week was extended six months and will deliver its final report in November 2020.A new commissioner has also been added to the line up: Tony Pagone QC.
Updated
Paul Karp will have more on this for you soon
Asked about religious discrimination bill Alan Joyce said the legal community's view is that the "financial hardship" test is the "hardest benchmark for a company to prove". Wants law to allow Qantas to set a code that promotes diversity and inclusion. #auspol #npc
— Paul Karp (@Paul_Karp) September 18, 2019
Virgin CEO Paul Scurrah says he wants company to be inclusive to "the greatest extent possible" but obviously they have to abide by discrimination law. #auspol #npc
— Paul Karp (@Paul_Karp) September 18, 2019
Anthony Albanese is holding a doorstop interview in about 10 minutes.
Given the rhetoric around the family court inquiry from Pauline Hanson I would expect he is about to announce that Labor will not be supporting the inquiry.
But if Centre Alliance does, and it has indicated it is favourable, it will get up.
Draft laws to protect domestic vocational education students on government loans have been introduced to federal parliament, AAP reports.
Under the proposed changes, students will be protected if their education provider fails to begin a course on time, makes a course unavailable before enrolled students can begin, or closes.
“Students protected under these new arrangements will be assisted to complete their studies in a similar course with another provider and gain a qualification,” the assistant minister for vocational education, Steve Irons, said on Wednesday.
“Or [they] may have their loan removed for the parts of their study they have commenced but were not able to complete.”
Once passed, the changes – which already exist for international students – would begin from January.
Trade Minister, Simon Birmingham, and UK Secretary of State for International Trade, Liz Truss, have held a press conference talking up the prospects of an Australia UK trade deal post Brexit.
Birmingham said that the UK’s membership of the EU had made it more difficult for Australian exporters to access the British market, and so a new deal between the two countries could improve access.
“It is no secret that as part of the EU market, access in terms of agricultural products has been limited,” Birmingham said.
“We stand absolutely ready to work with the UK as soon as they are ready to do so, as quickly as they are able to do so to pursue a free trade agreement.”
Truss said that the UK would be leaving the European Union “deal or no deal” on October 31, which would give Britain “new freedoms” to pursue ties with other countries.
“That will give us the opportunity to strike new trade deals with the rest of the world. This is the first time in 45 years that the UK has an independent trade policy.”
“One of the issues we have faced is increased regulatory harmonisation driven by the European Union which has prevented us from being able to strike these deals and be able to work with other partners around the world.”
In case you missed it, there is also this report from Anne Davies floating around today:
The former environment minister, Josh Frydenberg, went against the advice of his departmental experts when he blocked two wind turbines on Lord Howe Island in 2017, consigning the world heritage-listed island to relying on diesel fuel for the bulk of its electricity.
A freedom of information request by the Guardian has uncovered that the minister took the unusual action of blocking the project under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, deeming it “unacceptable”.
It was one of two projects that Frydenberg rejected while environment minister, the other being a nursing home at Sydney’s Middle Head on federal land. Both were criticised by the broadcaster Alan Jones, who particularly campaigned against the Middle Head development.
Updated
Update: This hearing did not happen today, and will be rescheduled to a later date. The Committee apologises for the inconvenience. https://t.co/BlQ6Bpm6eJ
— Australian House of Representatives (@AboutTheHouse) September 18, 2019
Updated
The National Press Club address with both the Qantas and Virgin chief executives will begin very soon. Paul Karp will be covering that for you.
Chief executive salary and businesses involvement in activism will both come up.
Updated
The Greens won't back government/One Nation inquiry into the family court
The Greens have responded to Pauline Hanson and the family court inquiry and the party won’t be supporting it:
The Greens support the calls by expert domestic violence legal service providers like Women’s Legal Services Australia to create a family law system that keeps women and children safe,” said Senator Larissa Waters, Australian Greens spokesperson on women.
“What we won’t support is an inquiry stacked with extremists that have pre-determined, non-expert opinions on the gendered drivers of violence against women and their children. This whole inquiry is a dangerous invitation to continue victim shaming, blaming and denial.
Pauline Hanson’s refusal to believe women that they are subject to family and domestic violence – when the statistics show it is at least one in four women – sets back our safety and equality to the dark ages.
“This inquiry is a sop to One Nation by the government. What’s been promised in return? What have women been sold out for?
“The parliamentary inquiry announced yesterday excludes the Greens and would be headed up by two of the most conservative and divisive members of the current parliament who have predetermined the outcome of the process.
“The evidence is already available on the type of changes needed for improving the family court system. The government should not be subjecting women who have experienced domestic violence to yet another intrusive inquiry that doesn’t even have oversight by domestic violence experts.”
Updated
Pauline Hanson is on Sky saying the same things she said on the ABC this morning.
Great.
Aleksov is arguing the bar wasn't lowered because the determination didn't have a self-executing lowering, and the minister hasn't written to revoke the determination.
— Josh Taylor (@joshgnosis) September 18, 2019
The second argument being advanced by Aleksov separate from this is incredibly complicated but about whether there has been a statutory process engaged for Tharunicaa. They're arguing it has because she was held in detention for so long.
— Josh Taylor (@joshgnosis) September 18, 2019
The assistant minister for superannuation, Jane Hume, has confirmed the Coalition will reintroduce legislation for a one-off amnesty for employers who failed to pay superannuation.
Hume said:
“The Morrison government is taking action to help hardworking Australians receive the superannuation they have earned ... The bill incentivises employers to come forward and do the right thing by their employees by paying any unpaid superannuation in full.
“Employers will not be off the hook. To use the amnesty, they must still pay all that is owing to their employees, including interest. However, the amnesty will encourage employers to come forward and pay outstanding superannuation, by not hitting them with the penalties usually associated with late payment.”
The amnesty was originally announced in May 2018 to apply from 24 May 2018 to 23 May 2019, but the legislation to establish it did not pass the last parliament.
Hume said:
“Since the one-off amnesty was announced, over 7,000 employers have come forward to voluntarily disclose historical unpaid super. The ATO estimates an additional 7,000 employers will come forward due to the extension of the amnesty. This means around $160m of superannuation will be paid to employees who would otherwise have missed out.”
Updated
Things are going great.
Minister Fletcher at social services consideration in detail: “Pensions have increased by these amounts since we came to government in 2013.” He either doesn't understand how indexation works, or he's taking all of us for fools.
— Linda Burney MP (@LindaBurneyMP) September 18, 2019
Updated
AAP has an update on the federal court directions hearing:
Challenges to the election of embattled Liberal MP Gladys Liu and the treasurer, Josh Frydenberg, over allegedly misleading signs at polling booths will go to trial in the federal court.
Justice Michelle Gordon made the direction on Wednesday in the high court, sitting as the court of disputed returns, to move the matter down so it could be dealt with more efficiently.”
Updated
Pauline Hanson has just posted this on Facebook:
I’m quite concerned that Queensland’s Women’s Legal Services appear hostile to the announcement of a joint inquiry into family law.
Their reason for not backing the inquiry is because they weren’t consulted by the government before the announcement.
On the other hand, the Australian Law Council is very supportive of the announcement even though they weren’t consulted either.
When Angella Lynch was asked whether men who ARE NOT involved in domestic violence are getting a raw deal, she said, ‘I work for the Women’s Legal Service and I can’t make comment on that.’
Give me a break. No wonder fathers get frustrated with the attitude of legal groups and the courts.”
Updated
Simon Birmingham is meeting with his British counterpart to discuss trade post-Brexit in just a bit.
Updated
Rex Patrick says Centre Alliance is still looking at whether or not it will support the family court inquiry, but he believes there are some procedural issues to be looked at.
Rosie Batty was talking to ABC Radio Melbourne and was asked if the nation needed another family court inquiry:
If there is something that is making me even more angry it is this. It is this decision. It is completely unacceptable for us to have another inquiry. We have had multiple inquiries about the failings of the family law system.
I have campaigned also for changes. There has been a law reform commission inquiry with 60 recommendations presented to the government earlier this year. Not one has been acknowledged or enforced.
It is completely unacceptable for these politicians with their own agendas to head up any inquiry.
I would call on Labor, Greens and the prime minister to block this unnecessary inquiry. We know the failings.
We need to start investing in the court system that is broken, overwhelmed and failing. It is continuing to put families and, in particular, children in danger.”
Updated
“I think we will land in a place where we can support the bill,” says Rex Patrick on the ensuring integrity legislation.
Speaking to Sky News, Rex Patrick, when asked about John Setka’s comments, says the parliament needs to have “zero tolerance” to anything which could be considered a threat to a member of parliament.
He says he believes Jacqui Lambie will also speak to the AFP today.
Patrick says he is looking at the ensuring integrity bill in a different light because he believes he has seen “first-hand” what some of the intimidation can feel like. But he says he still has problems with the bill and is working his way through it.
Updated
The government will support Pauline Hanson being made deputy chair (not co-chair) of the family law inquiry. https://t.co/rGSkg8DW4C
— David Crowe (@CroweDM) September 18, 2019
Guardian Australia’s Josh Taylor is sitting in the federal court for the #HomeToBilo case involving a Tamil family fighting to stay in Australia.
Case is getting underway. Lawyers for the family want to put on more evidence because Dutton made a determination when Immigration minister "lifting the bar" that prevented children like Tharunicaa from applying for visa. They argue as a result he must now consider application.
— Josh Taylor (@joshgnosis) September 18, 2019
Updated
The federal court is to hear a legal challenge to the election of the Liberal MPs Gladys Liu and Josh Frydenberg.
Justice Michelle Gordon made the direction at the high court, sitting as the court of disputed returns, on Wednesday.
Updated
I’ve just been informed by a secret squirrel that about 20 people or so were just locked into the security screening area by the main parliament entrance after it went into full lockdown.
Apparently, the lockdown security system was accidentally activated, immediately shutting down the area. It took about 15 minutes or so to override the system.
Everyone is OK and no one was in any danger. I’m told the security staff were nothing but reassuring and professional.
But I guess that’s one answer to, “What happens if I press this button?”
Updated
Mike Bowers was there when both Mathias Cormann and Penny Wong made their statements to the Senate.
Updated
And it must also be stated that John Setka denies he intimidated the senators, telling ABC radio this morning his comments were part of “campaigning”.
So in the last half an hour, Rex Patrick has announced he has referred the matter of whether or not John Setka threatened him and Jacqui Lambie to the federal police, has announced he will ask the Senate to examine whether or not Setka threatened senators in a motion tomorrow, Mathias Cormann delivered the Senate-ordered explanation on Gladys Liu by saying the government supported her, and Penny Wong has said Labor will continue to probe the matter.
Updated
Penny Wong finishes with:
Well, we’re not going to be deterred, nor intimidated by this obvious distraction. And I suspect members of the media won’t be.
I suspect members of the community won’t be. Because ultimately, we are judged in this country not by our ethnicity or our faith, but what we do.
By our values and our actions. And if one is elected as a member or a senator in this place, we are accountable to the people who elect us through the parliament.
That is the Westminster system. And as yet, we have not had the member for Chisholm have the courage and the decency to stand up in this parliament and respond to the very, very lengthy, very serious set of allegations and concerns which have been raised about her, and she should.
The member for Chisholm must be accountable and Mr Morrison should make her be so.
Updated
Penny Wong scorns Liberals crying racism to defend Gladys Liu
Penny Wong:
I’ll take that interjection.
They can see what I’m doing, yes. I’m raising legitimate questions about Australia’s national security and I’m responding to your grubby political tactic of trying to make this about race. I will not take ...
Yes, you, because you are part of it, you are a cabinet minister and it is shameful. It is shameful. And as someone who has experienced racism first hand, I do object, most strenuously, to the way you are using it in order to divert attention from legitimate questions that even your own Liberal party have asked about these issues. And I make the point that the prime minister, Mr Morrison, is taking this approach in spite of warnings, in spite of warnings from inside his own party room, as Mr [Peter] Hartcher quoted a senior Liberal said, “This is a profound error.”
“This is a profound error.”
Like, there are many Asian Australians who have experienced racism in their time in this country.
I do remember when Mr Morrison’s hero, John Howard, called for cuts to Asian immigration. I remember what that meant for our community. And I remember that there were some in the Liberal party then who stood up against it. But there were many who did not.
I also remember that this prime minister, the man who now says you can’t use race, and everything about this issue is about race, using the slur “Shanghai Sam” 17 times – 17 times. And then, misled the country and denied doing it. Misled the country and denied doing it.
And really, does anybody believe him? Did you listen to him in the House of Representatives? I didn’t hear the question. Did anyone listen to the audio? It’s as clear as a bell. And he’s saying, “I didn’t use either of those phrases”.
Well, I think anyone who watched the prime minister in the House of Representatives saw precisely what he was doing. He got caught out.
He hadn’t told the truth and he got caught out. And remember – this is the same Mr Morrison, who, according to leaks out of the Liberal party, urged the shadow cabinet to exploit community concerns about Muslim immigration. This is the bloke lecturing us about race.
His own colleagues leaked on him and said he urged the shadow cabinet, the Coalition shadow cabinet, to exploit community concerns about Muslim immigration.
He urged the Coalition to appeal to fear of immigrants. Well, everybody can see that this prime minister is seeking to avoid questions and he is using a grubby smear in order to try and avoid answering legitimate questions about the member for Chisholm.
Updated
Penny Wong:
He’s trying to shield himself from accountability by hiding behind the Chinese-Australian community.
He’s suggesting that to ask legitimate questions, when public concerns have been raised, not by the Labor party, but by others, is an attack on the entire Chinese-Australian population.
Well, I’m pretty confident .. If we follow his logic, every time you’re asked a different question, constitutes a racial smear on all Chinese-Australians.
I’m pretty confident that that is not his view if I’m asked a difficult question, or if any other Labor member who happens to be of Chinese heritage is asked a difficult question.
That’s not a smear on Chinese-Australians. And in fact, making this about race is really grubby political tactic, and a dishonourable political tactic.
It might help Mr Morrison deal with the political problem of his own making, but it certainly will not help Chinese-Australians who seek to and are making a contribution to this country.
And I do also want to make a comment about the diversity of the Chinese-Australian community. It’s a very diverse community.
You have Chinese-Australians who are descendants of those who came during the gold rush.
There are others, like myself, ethnically Chinese, in my case, my father. Born in other parts of Asia. So the south-east Asian community.
You know, children and grandchildren, great-grandchildren from southern China, into south-east Asia there are some who are Taiwanese Australian. There are those who were welcomed by prime ministers to stay in this country after the chairman had a crackdown. And there are those who came more recently from mainland China. It is a diverse community.
And it is a hardworking community. It is a community that does share a love and loyalty for this country, and it is also an informed community. And so many Chinese-Australians can see right through what the prime minister is doing.
Updated
Penny Wong:
Now, as I said, it’s clear that there are many in the Liberal party who simply do not have confidence in the handling by the prime minister, by Mr Morrison, or the member for Chisholm on these matters.
Last week we saw a report in the West Australian, anonymously quoting one of the prime minister’s own MPs, and I note that it is Mr Hastie’s home town paper: “There should have been concerns when she was chosen to stand as a candidate, and I believe that the concerns were ignored.”
The Herald Sun also reported, and this is an extraordinary allegation, that senior Liberals were warned by security agencies that concerns about the member for Chisholm’s links to the Chinese Communist party made it unwise to preselect her.
These are not my words. This is what has been reported in the Herald Sun. It was reported that security agencies had concerns such that it made it unwise to preselect her.
Now, I accept, given the position that I hold and the positions that I have held, that people don’t discuss the advice of security agencies.
But when such an allegation is made of such a serious issue on the front page of a national and serious newspaper, it should be answered. It should be answered. It should be answered by the government of the day.
Because it is a very serious allegation. That the Liberal party was warned that it was unwise to preselect her. It may be true, it may not. I’m not in a position to assert that.
But we are in a position to know that that was printed on the basis of sources, obviously within the Liberal party.
And at no stage has the prime minister of this country responded to that allegation. At no stage has his minister here represented or responded to that allegation. That has nothing to do with her interview.
It is whether or not the prime minister is putting his political interests ahead ofAustralia’s national interest?
Government ministers have repeatedly in this place refused to assure the parliament that the member for Chisholm is a fit and proper person to be in the parliament.
And it is obvious that the member for Chisholm will not provide that assurance. As I said earlier, much of this information in the reports that originates from leaks inside the Victorian branch of Liberal party, and you could probably tell me more about this than I would know, Mr President.
It’s obviously a very happy place at the moment! The government is trying to distract us from that fact by impugning the attempts by the Labor party, by the media, about to raise legitimate questions. And shamefully, Mr Morrison has injected race into this debate.
Updated
Penny Wong:
Now, let’s remember how we got here. For weeks now, questions have been raised over whether or not Ms Gladys Liu’s connections make her a fit and proper person to be in the Australian parliament.
And in an effort to address those questions, the member for Chisholm gave a TV interview, a now-infamous interview with Mr Bolt.
And the facts are that her interview, her answers, simply raised more questions. So, in an attempt to deal with that, the Prime Minister’s Office wrote a press release issued in Ms Liu’s name.
And when that, in turn, raised more questions about why her statements are so wildly inconsistent, the prime minister gave a press conference where he claimed that the only thing that happened is that she gave a clumsy interview.
He was trying to create the impression that she was a political novice. Well, those facts really are not supported.
The member for Chisholm has been an active fundraiser and an organiser for the Liberal party for a long time. She in fact first ran for preselection in 2006. She was an advisor to premiers Baillieu and Napthine and has run a social media campaign during the federal election in 2016, including one in relation to LBGTI Australians.
She subsequently denied doing so, until faced with clear evidence. She’s certainly been a prolific fundraiser.
According to her own preselection application, which can only have been leaked by her own colleagues in the Liberal party, she has fundraised $1m.
That’s a pretty extraordinary sum for somebody outside of parliament, let alone for somebody in the parliament. And if you see today’s Herald Sun, the latest in an avalanche of reports in the news raising serious questions that the member for Chisholm should answer.
We see, again, questions around a range of activities, a range of allegations, suggestions that references, for example, for permanent residency were promised to Chinese students or overseas students.
And we still have silence from the member for Chisholm. Now, I do ask this question – how are people supposed to have confidence in the member for Chisholm when she won’t be accountable to them? She won’t even speak in the place to which she’s elected on the issues which have been raised publicly?
Updated
Penny Wong responds:
Well, that was it. That was it. I move that the Senate take note of, dare I call it, an explanation. The few words, the pithy blurb by the leader of government in the Senate.
And yet again, we see the arrogance of this government refusing to be accountable to this parliament, refusing to respond to public allegations.
Refusing to put the national interest first. And as they leave the chamber, ladies and gentlemen, this shows what this government thinks of the national interest. Walk out. Because you don’t actually want to defend Australia’s national interest. What a shameful group of cowards they are. What a shameful group of cowards they are. On the past week and including ...
Richard Colbeck asks the Senate president, Scott Ryan, to ask Wong to withdraw, for comments which are a “clear reflection on senators on this side”, but Ryan says he does not believe them to cross the line of the precedent which has been set, given they were not specific to any one senator.
Wong:
Thank you, Mr President. I thank you for your consistency. What we have seen is Senator Cormann and Senator Payne having refused on seven separate occasions to assure this parliament and this Senate that one of its members, the member for Chisholm, is a fit and proper person to be in the Australian parliament.
And now we’ve had it for the eighth time. We had it for the eighth time with Senator Cormann again, refusing to assure the Senate that the member for Chisholm is a fit and proper person to be in this place.
In fact, he refused to talk about anything at all. He refused to talk about anything at all. Do you know what he said? “Gladys Liu was the elected member for Chisholm.”
That’s not an answer to the issues and questioned which are being raised. He said, “The Coalition won the election.” Well, that’s not an answer to the allegations ... allegations and questions which have been raised.
He said, “Their tax policy is better.” Well, that’s not an answer to the issues and allegations which have been raised.
In fact, there were no answers. There were no answers because they have none. So, we have nothing from government when it comes to responding to the allegations, the concerns, the issues which have been raised publicly, including by members of the Liberal party, about the member for Chisholm.
But, as inadequate as it was, we heard a little bit from Senator Cormann. But we’ve yet to hear anything at all in the parliament from the member for Chisholm. We are yet to hear anything at all in the parliament from the member for Chisholm.
The prime minister has hit the mute button when it comes to the member for Chisholm … to distract and claim that there’s nothing to see.
They’re saying that we shouldn’t dare, as the opposition, dare to ask questions about the member for Chisholm.
Why is it, then, that the media is filled with reports that have their origins in leaks from the Liberal party? Why is the media filled with reports that have their origin in leaks from your party, the Victorian branch of the Liberal party?
The government doesn’t want to talk about that. They try to distract attention from that by impugning our efforts to raise legitimate questions.
But while the prime minister is trying to project a united front, the member for Chisholm, herself, is yet to front the parliament. And you know, there are Liberal MPs and senators who are horrified at the prime minister’s failure to ensure the national interest.
We know from what has been written publicly and what the Liberal party members are saying privately, that there are concerns.
Updated
Mathias Cormann has made his statement to the Senate, as demanded by the Senate, after a Labor motion about Gladys Liu:
Gladys Liu is a proud Australian and a committed Liberal. She stands for our Liberal values of individual freedoms. Free enterprise. Reward for effort. Risk taking and having a go. As the best way to ensure that Australians today and into the future, right around Australia and in particular in her electorate of Chisholm, have the best possible opportunity to get ahead.
Those were the values supported by the people of Chisholm and those were the values supported by the Australian people at the last election who voted for our plan to make Australia stronger, more prosperous and ensure that Australian families have the best possible opportunity to get ahead.
Australians in Chisholm and all around Australia voted against Labor’s high-taxing, anti-business politics of envy socialist agenda.
The socialist agenda which Australians understood would have made our economy weaker and all Australians poorer.
Mr President, the member for Chisholm is a strong advocate for her constituents and a valued member of our team in this parliament. She has the government’s full support.
Updated
Rex Patrick refers John Setka matter to the AFP
From Rex Patrick’s statement to the Senate:
Tomorrow I will ask the Senate to refer this matter to the committee. I’m hoping for not just support but for unanimous support. No one in this chamber should ever cast a vote on the basis that if they don’t, they will be subject to abuse.
And the Senate must not only protect its members but the very core of democratic law making. The remarks made by Mr Setka go beyond threatening to run a campaign against Centre Alliance at the next election – an action which one would correctly characterise as “just politics”.
Rather, Mr Setka foreshadowed members of his organisations crossing paths with myself and Senator Griff at some future time and engaging in abuse.
Mr Setka’s comments must be considered in the context of an organisation which has a propensity evidenced in judicial decision reasonings in numerous cases of the regular contravention of law and apparent comfort with the use of coercive conduct.
As I shared with the chamber on Monday, I have been in the uncomfortable and concerned witness to two CFMEU members accosting former senators Nick Xenophon at Perth airport lounge at about the same time as the ABCC and ROC legislation was being voted on.
In asking for my motion to be supported tomorrow, I put it to you that it is not something that Senator Griff and I should have to factor in when dealing with how to vote in this chamber.
If we care about the integrity of the deliberations of this chamber. If we care about our deliberations, that they should be conducted free of external threat of coercion, then a very clear signal needs to be sent that this is not a situation that will ever be tolerated by the Senate. I wish to advise the chamber that as foreshadowed, the comments of Mr Setka have been referred to the Australian federal police, who are now looking into the matter.
In that regard, I would point out to the chamber that the elements and thresholds associated with a threat-related crime are different to the elements and thresholds associated with an attempt to improperly interfere with the free performance of any senator of their duties as a senator, or an attempt to improperly influence a senator in conduct as a senator by intimidation, force or threat of any kind. Although the alleged offences stem from the same set of facts, a criminal offence and the contempt of the Senate are different matters that must be dealt with separately by different matters.
The police have no ability or jurisdiction to deal with the contempt of the Senate. Only the Senate can deal with that.
As such, knowledge of the referral to the police should have no influence on whether the Senate should support my referral motion tomorrow …
Mr President, I seek protection from the Senate from threats of abuse, but I also seek protection for everyone who has, is or will serve in this chamber. I urge support for my referral tomorrow.
Updated
Rex Patrick is making a statement to the Senate, following John Setka’s interview on RN this morning, and following on from the statement Patrick made on Monday.
He is asking the Senate to consider the matter of whether: Whether there was an attempt to improperly interfere with the free performance of any Senator of their duties as a Senator. B: Whether there was any attempt to improperly influence any Senator in their conduct as a Senator by intimidation, force, or threat of any kind. And... C:Whether any contempt was committed in any of those matters.
To the privileges committee
Updated
The Australia Institute is launching its Climate and Energy Program report, finding that the ACT is about to become the first major jurisdiction (which they count with populations over 100,000) outside Europe to achieve a transition to 100% renewable energy, from a fossil fuel-dominated energy system.
Updated
The bells are ringing.
Let’s see how terrible this day can really get.
This is happening tomorrow:
Ceda’s annual two-day State of the Nation conference begins Thursday in Canberra featuring more than 20 leading speakers from politics, business, industry and community organisations including: Chair, beyondblue and former prime minister of Australia, the Julia Gillard AC; federal minister for foreign affairs,Senator the Hon. Marise Payne; attorney general, federal minister for industrial relations, Christian Porter; federal minister for communications, cyber safety and the arts, Paul Fletcher; federal shadow treasurer, Jim Chalmers; Infrastructure Australia chief executive officer, Romilly Madew AO and more.
Updated
And after that horrendous raw-boned cankery comes this story from Associated Press:
Like anyone who has ever spruced up their home, Melania Trump will have a few new touches to showcase Friday when guests visit the White House for only the second state dinner of the Trump presidency.
There’s refreshed wall fabric in the Red Room, repurposed draperies in the Green Room and restored furniture in the Blue Room. And those are just some of the home improvement projects the first lady has overseen to keep the well-trod public rooms at 1,600 Pennsylvania Avenue looking their museum-quality best.
Some of the projects were long overdue.
Sunlight streaming into the Red Room had left some of the wall fabric “so faded it was almost pink”, said Stewart McLaurin, president of the White House Historical Association, which helps finance upkeep of some rooms in the 132-room mansion. First lady Jacqueline Kennedy founded the private, nonprofit organisation in 1961.
“Those rooms should always look their very best and it was just very faded and really, really needed to be done,” McLaurin said.
Australian prime minister Scott Morrison and his wife, Jenny, and guests for Friday’s three-course state dinner in their honour should have an opportunity to check out the spiffed-up public rooms.
Updated
Massive slow clap to the government there, for allowing this all to happen. Fantastic. Great move. Well done.
Hamish Macdonald: You haven’t given us any evidence, though. Other than the case of your own son, I have asked you multiple times for specific evidence of this stuff and all you have said is: “I won’t give that to you.”
Pauline Hanson:
Hamish, this is going to be [an opportunity] for the people of Australia to have their voice and say it on record, in Hansard, they can be said in this inquiry – I am not going to raise names, I am not going to raise issues, I can tell you about different cases and instances, are you going to believe what I say? No. Leave it up to the people to have their say
Macdonald: Well, when we see some evidence ...
Hanson:
Right. When it is done in the inquiry, before the committee, the inquiry, that is put in Hansard that these instances are happening. Maybe you should talk to some of these mens’ groups and organisations who will back it up, because they are feeling the effects of it.
So don’t shut me down because I dare speak about this like many issues.
Macdonald: This is not shutting down ...
Hanson: You are.
Macdonald: ... this is teasing out the detail.
Hanson:
You are. You are actually saying ... I am a female and I am not going to use my gender. And I am not against the male, and I am not against the female. I am looking for the answers and at the end of the day, I want to see the children have access to both parents to see them, and you only ever have one mum and dad and these people need to move on with their lives, get on with their hate and their pain of a break-up. It is about working together to find the answers to this and that is my job now, as a member of parliament, in this inquiry, to push for.
Updated
"Domestic violence orders have got completely out of hand" – Hanson
Hamish Macdonald: What sort of message are you sending to women who may be experiencing domestic violence by saying the sort of stuff you have said this morning, about “well, you have to balance it”, “you’ve got to look at the other issues, you shouldn’t just focus on the statistics around male violence in the home”.
Pauline Hanson:
I am sending out a clear message to everyone. That domestic violence orders have got completely out of hand. Each state, their different in their laws with reference to domestic violence.
Macdonald: But coming on radio with such broad statements that women are making up violence accusations in the courts, what sort of message do you send to the many women who are being ...
Hanson:
Don’t do it then.
Macdonald: ... abused in their homes.
Hanson:
Well, I’ll say to those women, I’m not saying anything about those women who are legitimately being domestic violence against them, physical, but I’m saying to those women out there, don’t throw domestic violence orders at your ex-partners just to further your case or get control of the children, it is not fair or right and when you actually go out and you accuse your ex-partner of sexual molestation of that child, which is untrue, which they are using, and I’ve heard that from even lawyers, that it is cases being used like that, incidences, or stalking, that you know, these things are not true.
What we have to find, there are people out there, who are nothing but liars and will use that in the court system. You can’t defend these people and I will not defend them.
But I am looking at what is fair and just. What do you say to the fathers, or even women out there, who are faced with domestic violence orders against them – don’t forget that.
Updated
Pauline Hanson defends family court inquiry
Hamish Macdonald: The statistics are clear, that most of the violence is perpetrated by men. Do you want us to ignore it?
Pauline Hanson:
This is all part of the inquiry, everything needs to be on the table, to give everyone an opportunity to speak about this. It is not working. Don’t you understand that, there are people who are suiciding, there are people being murdered, and because there is a breakdown in the system, because it is not working. So if I am actually going to be upfront and say what I want to be looked at, that if people make false allegations, you are going to be held responsible for it. You don’t take your lies into that courtroom, so you’ll gain in the system, of possibly more time with your children, that is not the way it works. And I am a mother of four, but I never denied my ex-husbands from having time with their children. So this is what is about, a fair outcome and a just outcome for all parents.
Macdonald: I think we can all hear the strength of your feeling in relation to these matters, I am curious to know, how much your own personal family encounters with the family courts are shaping your views here.
Hanson:
No, I have been listening to the people since 1996 so I have been, it’s the biggest thing that comes across our desks, is family law and of course domestic violence has increased over that period of time since 1996 and I have been trying to listen to people and when people pull me up and you know they are on the brink of possibly taken their own lives, do you know what that does to me, how that tears me apart? And they say ‘please do something’ or I have grandparents saying ‘we don’t see our grandchildren, we miss them’, and they are denied that right as well. Don’t you want to find the answers to this?
Are you just going to pinpoint one issue, one area, because people have complained about it, because of the impact it is having? Yes it is, on our society right across the board, not only on mums and dads and grandparents and extended families, but the children as well. I haven’t got all the answers for it, but I am not going to be shut down from speaking about a topic or an issue because it may offend some people, or upset people, but the whole fact needs to be looked at holistically, and that is what I want this inquiry to cover.
Updated
Look, I am not going to lie. I may have just ground my teeth down to nubs listening to Pauline Hanson’s latest interview on RN.
I am going to transcribe some of it. But I’m just letting you know that some of you may want to skip the next post or two, because you don’t need that sort of shit in your life.
For actual facts and figures on domestic violence, you can go here.
For a nuanced take on domestic violence, I recommend Jess Hill’s book, See What you Made Me Do.
For those who need help you can call 1800RESPECT (1800 737 732), Lifeline 13 11 14 or the Men’s Referral Service 1300 766 491.
Updated
“Are you just going to pinpoint one issue, one area,” Pauline Hanson asks, adding that she is not going to be shut down from talking about an issue because some people may be “offended” or “upset” by it.
That would be the issue of one woman a week being murdered by her current or former partner.
It’s a red letter day on RN for Hamish Macdonald today. Pauline Hanson is up next.
She is talking about the family law inquiry. Asked what evidence she has that women make up domestic violence allegations in the family court, she says she has submissions from men telling her that is the case.
She can’t give a number. But she is sick of this “gender” issue.
Updated
Meanwhile, the Australian federal police has sent this to all members and senators before Friday’s climate strikes:
Climate Strike Protest – 20 September 2019
Various environmental issue-motivated groups (IMGs) have proposed widespread protest activity across Australia on Friday 20 September 2019. The IMGs are seeking to promote action on climate change in a show of solidarity with other protests occurring internationally. Protest activity is likely to be vocal with banners and signs used to promote the protest cause. At this stage there are at least 140 protests planned nationwide.
There are current indications that Extinction Rebellion (XR) are planning to join these protests. XR uses civil disobedience and non-violent unlawful activity to protest against climate breakdown, biodiversity loss, and the risk of social and ecological collapse. XR is a global initiative which appears to be gaining momentum in Australia. Previous tactics by XR members have included disrupting central business districts by blocking traffic.
Due to this large protest activity could you please provide updated program details of your principal movements for Friday 20 September for assessment and identifying any convergences with planned protest locations.
Updated
John Setka on whether he will change:
“I’ve always treated with respect, Hamish,” he said.
Hamish Macdonald: Well, that is not what Jacqui Lambie or Rex Patrick think, so I don’t think there is any point in arguing that.
Setka: Well maybe they should toughen up a little bit, because it is called campaigning and if they are not used to campaigning maybe they are in the wrong job. I mean, these are pretty bad laws we are looking at, and as a union leader, I have the right, and my union has the right, to campaign against these laws. If you don’t like what we are saying, well, I don’t like what they are saying, so, that is Australian isn’t it? We are a democracy, we are allowed to have our say, aren’t we?
Macdonald: So will you cool it, or not?
Setka: In relation to the swearing, look, I am obviously going to try and control it a bit more, and it is a time for everything, Hamish, but I mean just because someone swears does not make it threatening.
Macdonald: But you’ve been able to spend half an hour with me just now, talking, putting your case very forcibly, you haven’t sworn, you haven’t intimidated me, why can’t you do that when it comes to campaigning?
Setka: Well, I don’t intimidate anyone, but I do use some colourful language. Because you do and you sort of play to the audience where you are at. Now, when I am on a building site, and you’ve got people there talking and swearing sometimes, and dropping the word, I mean it is in what context it is said.
Macdonald: So you’re a bit of a show-off.
Setka: I am not a show-off, but I mean, you know, you are in that environment, now I mean, if dropping the F-word or the S-word is now a threat, then where is this country going to, really?
Updated
"I've always treated people with respect, Hamish." John Setka, 7.57am, Wednesday 18 September 2019
— Annabel Crabb (@annabelcrabb) September 17, 2019
John Setka says most of the issues people have with him are from statements which have been “taken out of context” and says he has no plans to step down.
“Why should I step down?”
Updated
John Setka is being interviewed by Hamish Macdonald on RN as I type:
He was asked about these statements Rex Patrick of Centre Alliance and Jacqui Lambie made in the Senate on Monday:
Patrick:
Senators may be aware of media reports over the weekend relating to threats made to me, Senator Griff and Senator Lambie by Mr Setka in relation to a pending vote in this chamber on the fair work bill 2019.
No senator should ever be threatened or intimidated in relation to a vote. Lobbied, challenged on the merits, presented with contrary views, and criticised? Yes. Threatened? No. This is a very serious matter.
Senators Griff, Lambie and I are giving careful consideration to what action we will take in relation to the threat. Under consideration are a number of options, including referral to the privileges committee, referral to the police, or inviting Mr Setka to appear before the education and employment committee to explain his remarks. It will likely be a combination of these things.
There should be zero tolerance for anyone who seeks to influence a senator’s vote by way of threat. We cannot possibly leave this matter unattended.
Lambie:
I rise to support the statement from Senator Patrick regarding the conduct of Mr John Setka. To seek to influence a vote in this chamber by threat or intimidation is completely inappropriate.
I dish it out myself a fair bit in this place, so I cannot be complaining when it comes back in my direction, but the comments attributed to Mr Setka in recent reports are entirely beyond the pale.
Politics can be brutal but it should never become violent. We are closely examining what options are available to us to ensure that this kind of intimidation gets the response it rightfully deserves. My vote will never be determined by who bullies me the most.
I won’t be swayed by threats or the people who make them. But allowing these threats to go unanswered is no longer an option. I won’t be saying anything further on the matter until we have determined the most appropriate course of action.
To John: I can only appeal to whatever is left of your sense of decency and honour, by asking you to consider doing what is plainly in the best interests of your union members – I urge you, once again, to stand down and resign.
Setka says there were no threats and he was just “campaigning” when he said this (as published in the Sydney Morning Herald):
I said [to Senator Lambie] ‘Listen, if them f---ing other crossbenchers want to f---ing vote for this integrity bill, let em’ f---ing vote for it but they will wear the consequences of it. The money we are saving by not giving to the ALP, we will start a f---ing campaign …
When [former Centre Alliance leader Nick] Xenophon voted for the (construction industry watchdog the Australian Building and Construction Commission) we launched a campaign in South Australia … We f---ing destroyed that f---er. That’s why he’s not around. They come from his party, right? So they are aware of the damage we are able to inflict.’
Updated
The president of the Queensland Womens’ Legal Service, Angela Lynch, spoke to ABC TV this morning.
She said she doesn’t understand the decision to set up this inquiry and domestic violence groups weren’t consulted, despite the rates of domestic violence incidents in family court matters:
There’s little doubt that there are complex issues in this system. And that there are real, systemic failings.
But this is the umteenth review here. We had one in 2019, the recommendations of the Australian Law Reform Commission. Sixty recommendations. On top of that, there have been the Sarah Henderson review in the parliament and prior to that, a Senate inquiry. This system has been reviewed upon reviewed.
What it needs is a specialist response in relation to domestic violence and abuse. Women and children’s lives are at risk …
They should be listening to domestic violence groups. It seems like the review was set up without consultation.
We weren’t consulted and no other domestic violence group was consulted. Fifty per cent to 85% of matters in the family law courts involve a history of domestic violence. You cannot make decisions in this system without seriously consulting with the experts in domestic violence, and that’s what we’re calling the government to do.
We’re calling on the prime minister to really rethink this decision ... We just had the Australian Law Reform Commission set up under the previous government take the most intensive review of this system. And make 60 recommendations in which the government has not even responded to.
Women’s lives and children’s lives are at risk. If we put this off for another 12 months, it means that more lives will be lost. Dangerous decisions are being made because they do not have the domestic violence specialisations that’s required to make safe decisions.
On the issue Pauline Hanson and others, including George Christensen, have raised, about how men are treated in the system, Lynch said:
Look, I work for the women’s legal service and I can’t make comment in relation to that. All I know is one woman a week in Australia continues to be killed and murdered by her partner or ex-partner. And that’s what the highest priority should be given. And the government has signed up to the national plan.
They just re-signed up to the national action plan to reduce violence against women and children. I don’t understand, when domestic violence is a priority in this nation, that they’ve made this decision.
Updated
And here was Pauline Hanson talking to Sydney radio 2GB in December 2018, about one of the reasons she was so passionate about family law reform:
I didn’t have that much of a problem with it, myself personally, but I’ve been through it with two of my sons.
And I’m going through it with one of my sons now at the moment, for the past three years. I’ve been very concerned about my son’s wellbeing, and trying to deal with it through the court system, representing himself.
So it’s been extremely difficult for him. I’ve given him the assistance, support and financial assistance through the trial. It’s extremely hard. I’ve got people pulling me up when I’m doing my shopping. I’m talking to men who are actually at the end of their tether. I’m very concerned about them.
It’s absolutely disgusting. Not only that, it’s the children that are lied to by the parents. They’re denied the right to see their parents, either one, the father or the mother. I think that the solicitors and lawyers out there, what they charge their clients, I think it’s disgusting. And it just goes on and on and on.
Updated
Scott Morrison has done the breakfast TV rounds this morning, appearing on Sunrise and Today. The family court review was one of the topics, particularly given some of Pauline Hanson’s comments about how men are treated within the court.
On Today Morrison repeated what he had said to the party room, when MPs including George Christensen raised the same concerns about men in the system:
This isn’t about picking sides. You literally do need the wisdom of Solomon in dealing with these issues.
They are very vexed, they are very difficult and they are highly emotionally charged. That is why you need to constantly make sure that you have got the settings of how you are getting information, you are sharing information about state and federal jurisdictions and the way that evidence is treated. All this needs to be taken into account.
One area that we are specifically looking at that hasn’t been done before, looking at the role of grandparents in all of this. Many get involved in custody issues. As the issues get more complex we look at this. We will make a response to that. This inquiry doesn’t necessarily prevent us from doing that.
But at the same time I want to hear from Australians and their stories and it will be a good opportunity for politicians to just sit there and listen.
Updated
Good morning
Happy acting prime minister Michael McCormack eve! Are you excited yet?
But before we get to what is sure to be a magical and unforgettable time, full of gravitas and deep thinking, we have to get through Wednesday.
I know, I know. But the faster we do it, the faster we can get to what is sure to be one of the most excruciating question times of all time. And that is saying something.
Overnight, we saw China state media praise Scott Morrison for his response to the Gladys Liu issue.
The Global Times published this piece from Chen Hong, a professor at the East China Normal University’s Australian Studies Centre. As the Australian Financial Review reported:
“It was a decent gesture that Australian prime minister Scott Morrison condemned the defamation of Liu’s political allegiance, calling such finger-pointing as ‘casting a smear on Chinese Australians’,” Professor Chen wrote.
“Recognisably, Morrison’s justification of Liu is not without partisan motive, but for the 1.2 million Chinese Australians who have been subject to unjust suspicion and bigotry, such remarks are significant.
“In contrast to his predecessor Malcolm Turnbull’s reckless spoiling of the Australia-China relations, clear reason and judgment have prevailed for Morrison.”
That comes ahead of Morrison’s trip to the US, where he will be a guest at only the second state dinner Donald Trump has held.
It’s going to be a delicate balance for Morrison, as it always is, given the importance of both China and the US to Australia’s own trade – and that is a very touchy subject for both the US and China at the moment.
Meanwhile, the questions over Liu continue. The Herald Sun had this article this morning:
Besieged MP Gladys Liu promised on Chinese social media she would write references for foreign students in return for volunteering on her campaign at this year’s federal election.
The references, to help the students find jobs which could lead to permanent residency, came along with the offer of internships in her office if she was elected in Chisholm.
Mathias Cormann will have to give an explanation to the Senate this morning, at about 9.30am, after a Labor motion was passed late yesterday.
There is also quite a lot of criticism around the latest family court inquiry Morrison announced, after intense lobbying from the One Nation leader, Pauline Hanson.
Kevin Andrews, who believes divorce is a bigger threat than terrorism or climate change, is leading the inquiry. Hanson is deputy chair. It will report back in October 2020, but Hanson has already said she believes the family court system to be biased towards mothers, and that will be one of the things she hopes to address. She wants 50/50 custody from the moment of separation. This has raised a lot of alarm bells for family court advocates and women’s legal services. Asked about a particular case where a woman’s former partner murdered her daughter, Hanson said men lost children too.
Yup.
We’ll have all of that and more. Mike Bowers is already hard at work, and you of course have the whole Canberra crew, with Katharine Murphy, Sarah Martin and Paul Karp. Plus whatever brain cells I scrape up. I need another coffee, that is for sure.
Ready?
Let’s get into it.
Updated
