Night time politics
I am going to wind up here.
- Today, financial services minister Kelly O’Dwyer came under sustained pressure after the government mistakenly voted for a Labor amendment. In question time, O’Dwyer was asked a very detailed question about her portfolio, which she obviously could not answer. Labor then asked a series of questions, some of which were ruled out of order, which asked Turnbull why he wasn’t sacking O’Dwyer and justice minister Michael Keenan. Labor suggested the government lost their first vote when Keenan left parliament early and the second vote when Keenan was in the chamber.
- Barnaby Joyce suggested people shouldn’t make threats when asked about interventions by George Christensen and Andrew Broad, suggesting they would take their bats home if the government allowed a free vote. But Joyce has also been very clear that if the plebiscite fails, it’s all over for this term of government.
- Meanwhile the plebiscite bill is still in the house. Even though the bill was scheduled to go to be clear of the house on Tuesday and into the senate on Wednesday. As of close of business, there is now no chance for the plebiscite to go to the senate until the week of November 7 - given next week senate estimates. There has been a long list of speakers in the house, to the point of which there has been speculation as to whether there is a filibuster going on. This scenario would be slightly incomprehensible, unless it is a time buying exercise to gauge public reaction.
- NXT senator Stirling Griff gave his first speech. The SA senator called for government ownership of essential utilities including electricity, water and gas and the national broadband network.
- Andrew Wilkie and Cathy McGowan have flagged their motion calling for the Choppergate recommendations into politicians “entitlements” be enforced. They want real time disclosure of spending, better information of the purpose of visits and to call it by its proper names - work expenses, no less. What is the world coming to?
Thanks for your company this week. Apologies for the fragmented afternoon but we had a little podcast to put together. Thanks to Gareth Hutchens, Paul Karp, Katharine Murphy and Mike Bowers for their contributions.
Tomorrow, we have Gunfight at the OK Corral, with George Brandis and Justin Gleeson appearing at the senate committee to explain their dispute. The schedule, formerly online, has been taken down. We hear Brandis is now appearing later at 12.30pm. Because the program is not online anymore, we don’t know who else is appearing.
As for politicslive, we will be back next week, for the house sitting and senate estimates where the job description is to keep eyes across the chamber and four or five different committee rooms. Plate spinning is the order of the day.
I leave you a message from the incomparable Matt Hatter as I shuffle off into the night.
Bonsoir.
Keep it together @gabriellechan, not long to go now. 😉 pic.twitter.com/HkmUOV8ynE
— The Matt Hatter (@MattGlassDarkly) October 13, 2016
Updated
If you haven’t been following the Williamtown story, it is awful. There was a Senate inquiry last year about it. But it is still going.
This story is just one of many, run by the ABC this week.
The Commonwealth Bank (CBA) has backed down on threatening foreclosure on homes in the NSW town of Salt Ash which have been contaminated by chemicals used at the nearby Williamtown defence base.
Property values in the area have plunged after it was declared to be in the ‘red zone’ because chemicals from the RAAF base had leached into the area’s bore water.
Banks had threatened foreclosure, but after the matter was raised at last week’s parliamentary inquiry into the banking sector, CBA says its foreclosure letters were the result of an administrative error.
Rob Roseworne, a home and business owner in Salt Ash who is a CBA customer, said his bank had been spooked by his properties’ subsequent drop in value.
‘Initially I felt that I was being harassed and bullied and threatened with foreclosure,’ he said.
Greens senator Lee Rhiannon is speaking now, saying none of the banks will lend in the contaminated area. She says in spite of the government admission that it is fully responsible for the contamination through the defence department, the residents effected have not been assisted. Rhiannon said the Senate inquiry found the residents should be compensated and provided free health care.
Updated
Now National senator John Williams says he is horrified at this Williamtown problem which he had only heard about in the past few days due to Burston’s motion.
He has contacted the banks because he learned a lot of the victims of this contamination had had their houses devalued. The big four banks and the Bankers Association told Williams they would look at it.
Through no fault of their own because of where they bought near Williamtown ...
Updated
It is Gabi back again.
I have retained some composure now. The house has adjourned but the Senate is still going. One Nation’s Brian Burston has moved a motion that appears to have the support of Labor or at least senator Doug Cameron.
This is the motion.
To move – that the Senate:
(a) supports the efforts of the Department of Defence and other commonwealth and state government agencies responding to environmental and health issues arising out of firefighting foam contamination at RAAF base Williamtown in New South Wales and army aviation centre Oakey in Queensland, including engaging the University of Newcastle family action centre (UNFAC) to develop and deliver mental health awareness and stress management activities in the Williamtown area;
(b) notes that:
(i) some landholders in the immediate vicinity of Williamtown air base and Oakey army aviation centre are reporting difficulties accessing equity, property value impacts and difficulty selling their land;
(ii) the Department of Defence has met with a number of lending institutions and the Australian Property Institute to discuss property lending policies and practices and how valuations are conducted in the Williamtown area, and
(iii) the Department of Defence has committed to review the issue of property acquisition once detailed environmental investigations at No. 10 13 October 2016 9 RAAF base Williamtown and army aviation centre Oakey have been concluded; and
(c) calls on the government to expedite environmental investigations of the impact of firefighting foam contamination at Williamtown and Oakey to enable landholders to address the dilemma of land remediation or relocation, and move on with their lives and deal with issues of mental health and stress management.
In a speech out of the “how to win friends and influence people” bucket, Cameron says he thinks a lot of what One Nation talks about is total rubbish. But this motion, Cameron says, is a good one and if he brings more like these Burston will have a successful career in the Senate.
Updated
Why hello again! I am back for the adjournment debate. Thanks to Paul Karp for stepping into the breach.
Arrghhhh I’m losing it.
Updated
Senator Derryn Hinch on Sky News has said that he wants to bring a motion in the Senate on Thursday so that the new photography rules apply from the next sitting day, 7 November (instead of 28 November).
Hinch also said his initial view was that a plebiscite on marriage equality as a last resort would be a good idea.
Then I saw the cost of it. And it’s not fair. We’re not here to judge people’s lives and who loves who. It’s not our call.
Updated
Liberal MP Craig Kelly is speaking on the plebiscite bill.
He’s attacked Labor for sending out text messages that “appeared to be official communications from Medicare” at the federal election, linking the two issues by arguing they both represent a disdain for democracy:
There was no embarrassment, no apology, just a ha ha ha we tricked you. That is the disdain we’re seeing for the democratic process.
If false statements are made in trade or commerce they are unlawful, Kelly said.
It’s an interesting point but it does tend to lend weight to the concern that the set up of the plebiscite allows third-party groups to run advertisements without any restraint on the nature or truth of their messages.
I’m back watching the debate on the government’s plebiscite bill in the lower house.
Labor’s Stephen Jones referred to new research on the negative social and psychological impacts of the no campaign in Ireland by researchers at Australia’s University of Queensland and Victoria University.
As Guardian Australia reported the survey of more than 1,600 LGBTI campaigners found:
- 75.5% of participants often or always felt angry when they were exposed to campaign messages from the no campaign before the referendum.
- 80% felt upset by the no campaign materials, and two-thirds felt anxious or distressed.
NXT senator Stirling Griff calls for public ownership of utilities
Stirling Griff is setting out an economic agenda quite at odds with the bipartisan consensus of economic rationalism (or neoliberalism, depending who you ask).
He’s just called for government ownership of essential utilities including electricity, water and gas and the national broadband network.
Griff also called for governments to “buy Australian first”, arguing the country is spending millions of dollars on foreign goods decreasing jobs and economic activity here. Even the crockery with the Australian emblem in the parliament dining rooms is made overseas, he says.
NXT senator Stirling Griff is delivering his first speech in the Senate.
Griff called for pre-university internships so young people consider what career is right for them rather than going to university just to get their parents off their backs.
Australia already has too many law graduates that instead of becoming solicitors, end up as baristas. And Nick [Xenophon] didn’t help me with that one.
This post has been amended as Griff was incorrectly called a One Nation senator. Guardian Australia apologises.
Updated
A detail I forgot to bring you from Senate question time:
One Nation senator Malcolm Roberts asked Simon Birmingham for empirical evidence of climate change, as Birmo was representing the environment and energy minister in Senate question time.
He responded:
The Turnbull government accepts the science of climate change. We take our advice from the chief scientist, the CSIRO, the Bureau of Meteorology and the departments of the environment and energy as well as leading world science organisations.
Birmingham then gives some of that empirical evidence, including:
- That 2015 was the warmest on record for the globe
- In Australia, the climate has warmed 1 degree since 1910
- 8 of 10 warmest years on record occurred since 2002
That’s the evidence: it’s getting hot in here.
Tony Burke has taken aim particularly at Kelly O’Dwyer, and said the revenue and financial services minister was not able to answer “one simple question” about the government’s multinational tax avoidance bill.
That question was shadow treasurer, Chris Bowen’s, question about the tax treatment of affected dividends. Seems that one wasn’t in the question time brief, as my colleague Gabi Chan concluded she was not able to answer the specifics.
Manager of opposition business, Tony Burke, is giving a press conference to suggest that Malcolm Turnbull did not defend his colleagues George Brandis, Sussan Ley, Kelly O’Dwyer and Chris Pyne in question time when asked if they were up to their jobs.
He can’t back them in because it’s too humiliating ... but nor can he discipline them, because the instability in the government is extraordinary and he can’t have a former minister joining a former prime minister on the back bench.
It was this big I tell you!
Updated
Kicked out under section 94A? A-OK
Updated
The Fixer? Moi?
Updated
Malcolm Turnbull found his happy place.
Updated
Julian Hill has a feeling he’s being watched by our Mike Bowers. Has the crazy clown craze come to Canberra?
Updated
Here is video of Jim Chalmer’s very pointed attack on Kelly O’Dwyer (ruled out of order) in question time.
“Is this the high point of your brilliant career?” @JEChalmers’ question to @KellyODwyer gets ruled out of order in #qt #auspol pic.twitter.com/0cIqrLRQsL
— Stephanie Anderson (@stephanieando) October 13, 2016
Kelly O’Dwyer comes to question time prepared for grilling on multinational tax avoidance stunt in the house last night.
Updated
I now have to step off this ship for an hour to do another project. I will hand you over to Paul Karp, who will bring you the best of Bowers.
Lucy Wicks to industry minister Greg Hunt: Could the Minister update the House on the actions that the Turnbull Government is making to boost medical research and grow jobs on the Central Coast? What action is the government taking to support the Central Coast medical school and Medical Research Institute and surrounding precinct in Gosford?
Tony Burke to Christopher Pyne: Given that in the first week of this parliament the government became the first majority government in over 50 years to lose control of the house of Representatives and last night, for the first time not in 50 years but the first time ever an Opposition’s second reading amendment was carried with the government voting against itself, how does the Leader of the House reckon it’s going and is there anything he needs to fix?
Speaker Smith rules out the question.
Anthony Albanese yells, oh he might want to answer it!
A government question to justice minister Michael Keenan on terrorism.
Then Shorten to Turnbull: Can the prime minister confirm that he fronts a government with a health minister destroying Medicare, a revenue minister not up to the job, ajustice minister who embarrasses the government even when he turns up to work, an attorney-general in conflict with the solicitor-general and a Leader of the House who can’t manage the parliament. Prime minister, is the only reason they keep their job because you are so afraid of losing your job?
Turnbull:
I think should have very careful regard to his own job if he keeps on asking questions like that. The ministry is governing. The ministry is delivering. The government is securing legislation through the parliament.
Then Turnbull winds up into a Churchillian-style address in tone and tempo. Minus fighting on the beaches. Or maybe I am losing it towards the end of the sitting week.
Shorten to Turnbull: Can the prime minister explain to the house how the attorney-general was able to consult with the solicitor-general about a direction which did not exist, receive advice from the solicitor-general about a bill the solicitor-general had not seen and receive advice from the solicitor-general about amendments the solicitor-general had not seen?Isn’t it becoming clear that the prime minister’s leadership is so unstable that the attorney-general is surviving for that reason and no other?
Turnbull:
The Leader of the Opposition has an experienced member of counsel in the member for Isaacs. He should avoid appearing for himself.
Updated
A government question to social services minister Christian Porter: Will the minister update the house on how the government intends to improve the lives of vulnerable Australians through the priority investment approach to welfare? Is the minister aware of any alternative approaches?
Mark Dreyfus to Malcolm Turnbull: Former solicitor-general Dr Gavan Griffith QC has said the attorney-general’s actions in relation to the solicitor-General bring to mind “the image of a dog on a lead”. Why is the prime minister continuing to express confidence in an attorney-general so obviously unfit for office?
Turnbull is not amused.
I can well understand the honourable member’s concerns about the disturbance in the Bar common room but I would never repeat such an unflattering remark as Gavan Griffith made about the Solicitor-General which I think was very unfortunate.
NT labors' Luke Gosling wears a red nose in #QT until whip Joanne Ryan intervenes @gabriellechan @GuardianAus pic.twitter.com/HGzOWGmZGK
— Mikearoo (@mpbowers) October 13, 2016
Bill Shorten asks Turnbull about O’Dwyer and Keenan: what exactly does a minister have to do to get the sack in your government? Is the fact you can’t move on any of these people, the fact they’re still here because your leadership is so unstable?
Turnbull:
The honourable member’s question reminds many of us how scant and sparse are the pleasures of Opposition.
While we have been getting on with governing, while we have been getting on with forging new free trade deals, creating new markets for Australian exporters,creating jobs, while we have beencreating the circumstances that willsee $2.25m invested in central and north Queensland, where we’ve seen the ability this week todefend the rights of 60,000 CFA volunteers, when we have been able to do that, when we’ve been able to stand up for the heros who stand up and fight for us, when nature flings her worst at us, people Labor abandoned, we defended them and we got that legislation through. We did that because we’re in government.
A government question to Greg Hunt: I refer the minister to a statement yesterday by manufacturing Australia which outlines the threat to SA and investment from unreliable and high-priced power. Will the minister outline the challenges facing South Australian industry and what action the Government is taking to safeguard jobs and investment in the future?
Labor asks justice minister Michael Keenan: A few weeks ago the government lost control of the House when the minister went home early. Yesterday the government voted against itself when the minister was still here and personally in the chamber. Given the minister has acted against the interests of his government by being absent and by being present, how on earth can this government trust the minister to deal with the serious issues of international crime within his portfolio?
Speaker Smith rules it “just” in order.
Keenan:
Whilst they’ve been playing these sorts of silly Parliamentary games that have absolutely no impact on the actual lives of the Australian people, particularly over the last 24 hours, let me go through some things that have actually been happening in the real world.
Christopher Pyne objects to an “unparliamentary remark” from Anne Aly, MP for Cowan, who was the targeted by Keenan during the election.
I can only guess at what that unparliamentary language would be.
Aly fesses up and withdraws.
From the senate:
Labor has again targeted attorney general George Brandis over his direction that the solicitor general must get his agreement before giving advice to other parts of the government.
Senator Jacinta Collins has asked about Gavan Griffith, a former solicitor general who, in an explosive submission to the inquiry into the matter, said the direction brought to mind the image of “a dog on a lead”.
Brandis replied: “It is a very unfortunate choice of words. It is an attack on the independence of the solicitor general.”
Barristers, including the solicitor general, are free to put whatever they want in their advice so it is inappropriate to suggest they can be so controlled, he said.
Brandis has also dredged up a quote from shadow attorney general Mark Dreyfus that “most legal questions are capable of a different outcome” to explain why he and solicitor general Justin Gleeson are having a difference of legal opinion and it is fine to get advice from elsewhere.
Penny Wong responds the controversy is about requiring Brandis’s consent for Gleeson to give advice, not the fact the attorney general may get advice elsewhere.
A government question to transport minister Darren Chester: Will the minister update the house on the progress of the government’s $50bn infrastructure investment program? Specifically, the construction of the Toowoomba second range crossing in my electorate of Groom. What benefits will this investment deliver to my community?
Like I say.
Labor’s Jim Chalmers to Kelly O’Dwyer: Given the minister for revenue can’t answer basic questions about her legislation, contradicts the prime minister on house prices and negative gearing and was the original architect of the Census disaster, can the minister [tell] the house what other spectacular policy achievements lie ahead or is this the high point of your brilliant career?
Speaker Smith rules the question out of order and Labor loses the question.
A government question to Barnaby Joyce: Will the deputy prime minister update the house on the government’s investment in water infrastructure? Is the minister aware of any threats to the rollout of these nation-building investments?
I’m not really sure of what that answer was about but it involved a hose, The Castle and Daryl Kerrigan.
Chris Bowen to Kelly O’Dwyer: Given the minister wasn’t in the house last night when detailed questions on the amendment bill could be asked, given the bill that was eventually passed last night affects the taxation of dividend payments, what will be the change to the tax treatment of affected dividends?
She talks about a new German tax treaty which must be one of the agreements that will be covered by the bill. However Labor’s question was very direct and not about that subject.
Labor is going after O’Dwyer by asking a very specific question (which would not be in the briefs). She cannot appear to answer the specifics.
Bowen is stonyfaced as O’Dwyer pads out.
Tony Burke asks her to be relevant and Speaker Smith notes that it is a more specific question than is normally asked. O’Dwyer cuts and runs, saying she has concluded her answer.
National MP Kevin Hogan to Scott Morrison: Will the Treasurer update the House on how the government’s enterprise tax plan will drive jobs and wages growth? How will increasing the turnover threshold definition for small business to $10m help employers in my electorate of Page and indeed across the country to invest in their business, develop new markets and employ more Australians?
Scott Morrison says the $2m threshold was set in 2007 and Labor did nothing about lifting it in spite of the Henry tax review in 2010 which recommended lifting it to $5m.
Wilkie to Turnbull: The University of Tasmania’s proposed STEM facility will transform Hobart and Tasmania. It’s a $400m project that ultimately would accommodate 5,200staff, researchers and students. Indeed, the UTAS project is nationally significant and anInfrastructure Australia priority because the percentage of Australian graduates with a STEM background is only 18% compared with Singapore and China which are 35 and 47% respectively. Prime Minister, further to our meeting earlier in the week, are you able to provide any sort of assurance of federal government support for the project should the University’s business case stack up?
Turnbull says the vice chancellor has raised it with him. The government is waiting for a detailed proposal and when it arrives, the proposal will go through the normal processes.
The inevitable Kelly O’Dwyer question.
Labor’s Jim Chalmers asks Kelly O’Dwyer:
Last night for the first time in the history of federation, an opposition second reading amendment passed the house on a bill the minister was responsible for and while the minister was in the chamber. Was that because the minister agrees the government has failed to close tax loopholes or is it because the minister is so incompetent that she pays no attention when revenue decisions are being made?
O’Dwyer tries to deflect to Chalmers but does point out the international tax agreement bill – which caused the vote stuff-up last night – has passed the Senate. Indeed it did.
She goes on to talk about tax changes passed.
Updated
A government question to the human services minister, Alan Tudge: Will the minister explain the importance of protecting the key trademarks and brands of the Australian government in the minister’s portfolio from misuse by third parties? What action is taken to ensure this protection?
This is about Labor’s Medicare texts during the election.
Updated
Tanya Plibersek to the health minister, Sussan Ley:
During the election campaign, the minister said: ‘I’ve said to doctors I want that freeze lifted as soon as possible but I appreciate that finance and treasury aren’t allowing me to do it just yet.’ Then this morning she claimed: ‘That’s not what I said.’ Given the minister complained on public radio that finance and treasury weren’t letting her lift the freeze, why is the minister now denying she ever said it?
Ley rips in.
It’s delightful to take a question from the member for Sydney who introduced the pause on GP wages, who said at the time ‘Doctors can afford it, they earn enough already’, who had no sympathy for the circumstances of the doctors of Australia ... I’m proud, Mr Speaker, to be part of a government that spends record dollars on Medicare. Proud of a government that recognises, unlike the economic illiterates opposite, that what you can’t pay for, you can’t deliver.
Ley accuses Labor of having no policies since the 2013 election.
Updated
Government question to Turnbull:
Will the prime minister update the house on the delivery of the government’s national economic plan – in particular how will our tax cuts benefit more than 500,000 middle-income Australians and how will the expanded Singapore-Australia free trade agreement provide more opportunities for Australian exporters?
Turnbull says the government had introduced the (bracket creep) income tax cuts, improved the Singapore free trade agreement and protected volunteers from “militant” trade unions.
Updated
The first question from Shorten to Turnbull:
After the election, the prime minister said that he’d learned a clear lesson about his attacks on Medicare, but last night, in a train wreck of an interview with Laura Jay about the government’s cuts to Medicare, the minister for health said ‘the policy settings are correct, where they need to be’. Who is correct, the prime minister or the minister, or has the government learned nothing about the election and its attacks on Medicare?
Turnbull says due to the government’s “strong economic management”, new drugs have been listed on the pharmaceutical benefit scheme. He quotes a single mother with breast cancer from Yass who now has access to a new drug that has changed her quality of life.
Updated
Just ahead of QT, in a 90-second statement George Christensen challenges Mark Dreyfus and other Labor members to go to Islamic, Jewish and Catholic schools in his seat and ask if they want to rent their halls for same-sex marriage.
Updated
We have question time coming up.
The Community and Public Sector Union has had a win, with Labor, the Greens, Nick Xenophon Team and Jacqui Lambie set to combine in the Senate to set up an inquiry into the government’s bargaining policy.
Thanks to @AustralianLabor @Greens @JacquiLambie @Nick_Xenophon for your support. 1000 days of damage and still not fixed. https://t.co/y07R7UasPk
— Nadine Flood (@NadineFloodCPSU) October 13, 2016
The policy restricts pay rises to 2% and mandates or encourages loss of other conditions as trade-offs for pay rises.
The Senate standing committee on education and employment is likely to ask the employment minister, Michaelia Cash, to explain why she doesn’t change the policy to let departments offer more generous workplace deals to help resolve industrial disputes that have lasted three years in many cases.
The inquiry will consider the impact of the protracted dispute on service provision, harms to tourism from strikes at airports, and the impact on staff conditions, productivity and morale.
Updated
Lunchtime politics
Phew. Lunch is required. But first, a summary.
- Labor tried to suspend parliament first thing to debate the Coalition’s stuff-up on the votes which saw the government slapping itself over the wrist. But ministers said The Fixer, Christopher Pyne, fixed it.
- The Senate has moved into the 21st century, lifting the veil for photographers and instituting the same rules as the house. This means photographers will be able to show the public how senators vote and what senators do when they are not speaking.
- Andrew Wilkie and Cathy McGowan have called for the government to institute the recommendations from the Bronwyn Bishop pollies’ entitlements report.
-
Barnaby Joyce said the Coalition would not split on the same-sex marriage issue. This follows George Christensen and Andrew Broad threatening that if the plebiscite bill failed and the government agreed to a free vote in parliament on marriage equality, they would take their bat and ball home.
Updated
Liberal MP Trevor Evans, one of four gay Liberal MPs or senators, has just finished speaking in the marriage equality plebiscite debate in the House of Representatives.
Evans accepts there are forms of speech that cause harm to LGBTI people, but has argued the plebiscite doesn’t create any new platform for them. Blocking the plebiscite will prolong the debate, he said.
Evans has warned that a parliamentary vote may not resolve the issue, and LGBTI people’s lives will continue to be subject to political argy-bargy. He said:
A plebiscite provides a comprehensive way to deal with the issue ... The Australian people would make the decision and own the decision.
On the key issue of what happens now:
What next? I don’t know the answer to that question ... There is the real risk that [blocking the plebiscite] will stall this reform for many years to come.
Evans also repeated a promise he made in a Guardian Australia feature about gay Liberal MPs to step in if debate in the plebiscite became vitriolic.
Updated
Senate photography rules enter 21st century: Mike Bowers refuses to drop his Lego
And so it has passed.
After 25 years of lobbying, arguing, badgering, bluster, flirting, flattering, pleading and on two occasions getting banned from the Senate for breaching the rules, we will now be allowed to operate the same way we do in the House of Reps.
With little fanfare and a push from the human headline Derryn Hinch, the restrictive, archaic rules governing the taking of photographs in the Senate have now been brought into line with the rules in the House of Representatives. The two houses had until now had very different rules.
Most photographs are allowed in reps but in the Senate you could only photograph the senator with the call, that is the person on their feet talking.
This meant that when the Senate chamber divided you could not photograph how various senators were voting.
The press gallery photographers have been pushing hard to change the rules for many years but a few dissenting voices in the chamber always seemed to scuttle any proposal.
With one of the main dissenting voices recently retiring and with a lot of help from Hinch, gallery photographers will from 28 November be able to show Australians more of the upper house, including how they are voting and what they do when they do not have the call.
I will, however, not be retiring my Lego #BrickParliament which I instituted as an alternative to illustrating the Senate. It’s too much fun.
But I may be too busy covering both houses.
Updated
Barnaby Joyce to Christensen and Broad on plebiscite: don't make threats
There was a more important point made by Joyce. He was asked about Broad and Christensen making threats against the Coalition if there is a free vote.
He said:
Don’t make threats. Have people clearly understand who you are.
Shark nets? Whatevs, says Barnaby Joyce
I have to bring you this question to Barnaby.
Q: What do you make of the NSW government’s decision to install the shark nets along the north coast?
I think there should be shark net put around me. I don’t know. Whatever! It’s just so you can go for a swim and not get chopped up. That is it.
Updated
Cathy McGowan makes two points in supporting the motion.
First, politicians have to restore community trust in the system.
Second, this spending is not “entitlements”. It is about work related expenses.
[We] need to give our communities trust in our system, that we do an inquiry, we get the recommendations and then we implement them. That’s my call on the government. We have done the inquiry, we have had the recommendations. Let’s now implement these really important recommendations.
I agreed with Joe Hockey when he said the age of entitlement is over. These are actually work-related expenses.
Updated
Wilkie says there should be instant reporting so the public can scrutinise the spending on the same day.
It is simply outrageous that it is common in this place for parliamentarians to go anywhere in Australia, pretty much for personal reasons, and then to dress it up as a legitimate trip.
For example, there was a case of an MP who went to Cairns and it does appear to any reasonable person that it was to buy an investment property. We are in the outrageous situation where a number of MPs travelled through country Victoria for a wedding, one of which might have been your former sparring partner. This is outrageous.
If they think they can look the community in the eye and say it was a legitimate use of public money, then they are crazy and they are completely out of step with community expectations. They should be forced to write down the substantive business they were involved in.
Not the purpose of the trip, but the substantive business.
Updated
Wilkie and McGowan call for reform of parliamentary entitlements
Cathy McGowan and Andrew Wilkie, independents both, are announcing a motion call on the government to reform parliamentarians’ entitlements.
[Bronywn Bishop] was discovered to have used a light aircraft and helicopter as a runabout at enormous expense to the taxpayer. As that unfolded, it was revealed other parliamentarians ... would use their so-called entitlements in ways that may well be within the rules, but they were completely out of step with community expectations. They were completely improper ways of spending public money. The government, to its credit, appointed five eminent people to conduct an inquiry. The report came out [with] 36 recommendations. As far as I can tell, only a handful, if that, of those recommendations have been implemented. In other words, the report has been virtually ignored.
Updated
Barnaby Joyce is giving a press conference.
These are the points and I will bring quotes in a minute.
He has not spoken to George Christensen, who overnight said the plebiscite was part of the Coalition deal.
He says there is no possibility the Coalition will split over the issue.
We have a strong Coalition. It is quite clear that we made a promise at the election for a plebiscite.
Updated
Yesterday Katharine Murphy wrote about senator John Williams being forced to step down for Pauline Hanson to move on to the joint committee that deals with the NBN. This was an unusual move for the government to give up a number.
The communications minister, Mitch Fifield, told Patricia Karvelas on RN last night that there was nothing to see here.
Q: So let me read between the lines, or maybe you can just be honest, I mean you can do that. You’re just trying to be nice to Pauline Hanson, to make her feel comfortable with the government’s bills perhaps?
Fifield:
Look, to be perfectly upfront, before the ballot occurred I made the same offer to both Stirling Griff and Pauline Hanson that whichever of them was unsuccessful in the ballot, we’d be happy to try and accommodate them. And that’s what we did.
Q: OK, so is this something we’re going to see more often?
Fifield:
We’re in the business of trying to have the parliament work well. The House of Representatives is working well. I think the Senate, where we don’t have a majority, is also working well.
Updated
Greg Jericho has written on the bracket creep tax cuts that we have covered here on the blog over the past few days. He applies the Jericho lens to a statement by the finance minister, Mathias Cormann, and applies a few numbers. Let’s call them facts.
Justifying poor policy often makes politicians say dumb things, and yesterday we saw a classic case by the minister for finance, senator Mathias Cormann, as he attempted to argue that a tax cut for people earning over $80,000 was necessary to encourage part-time workers to make the “additional effort” to work full time.
The policy to increase the threshold of the 37% income tax bracket from $80,001 to $87,001 is notionally about reducing bracket creep.
Bracket creep occurs when due to a wage rise you move into a higher tax bracket. In effect, it is a tax increase by stealth. For example, a person earning $79,000 who got a 2% wage rise to $80,580, goes from paying a marginal tax rate of 32.5% to 37%.
But we need a bit of context. They would only be paying 37% tax for the $579 they earned above $80,001. The rest would be unchanged.
The tax changes mean that now instead of going into a higher tax bracket, this person would remain with a tax rate of 32.5%. It makes a difference of $26 a year less in tax.
The biggest tax cut anyone will get is those who earn over $87,001 – they will get a cut of $315 a year, or $6 a week.
Updated
I told you there has been a storm of legislation.
*1 MR PORTER : To present a bill for an act to amend the law relating to social security, and for related purposes. ( Social Services Legislation Amendment (Transition Mobility Allowance to the National Disability Insurance Scheme) Bill 2016 )
*2 MRS K. L. ANDREWS : To present a bill for an act to provide for loans to students for vocational education and training, and for related purposes. ( VET Student Loans Bill 2016 )
*3 MRS K. L. ANDREWS : To present a bill for an act to deal with consequential and transitional matters in relation to the enactment of the VET Student Loans Act 2016, and for related purposes. ( VET Student Loans (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2016 )
*4 MR TEHAN : To present a bill for an act to amend the law relating to veterans’ entitlements and military rehabilitation and compensation, and for related purposes. (Veterans’ Affairs Legislation Amendment (Budget and Other Measures) Bill 2016 )
*5 MR HAWKE : To present a bill for an act to amend the Customs Act 1901, and for related purposes. ( Customs Amendment (2017 Harmonized System Changes) Bill 2016 )
*6 MS O’DWYER : To present a bill for an act to amend the law relating to seafarers, and for other purposes. ( Seafarers and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2016 )
*7 MS O’DWYER : To present a bill for an act to amend the law relating to social security and veterans’ entitlements, and for related purposes. ( Social Security Legislation Amendment (Youth Jobs Path: Prepare, Trial, Hire) Bill 2016 )
Except that the duties of the financial services minister, Kelly O’Dwyer, were taken by the assistant cities minister, Angus Taylor. The financial services minister must be on the bench.
Updated
Matt Hatter weighs in on the Coalition agreement.
@gabriellechan The Coalition agreement, whilst considered somewhat obscure by some, was often praised for its succinctness. #auspol pic.twitter.com/JYzwpsi1fh
— The Matt Hatter (@MattGlassDarkly) October 13, 2016
Updated
Trouble if I've ever seen it @gabriellechan #PoliticsLive #auspol @mpbowers @cochl @ellinghausen pic.twitter.com/ulgCPAvluN
— Katharine Murphy (@murpharoo) October 12, 2016
That Hinch matter. Gareth Hutchens reports:
The Senate just conducted an interesting ballot.
It was asked to vote on who should have a seat on the Senate privileges committee – and the contest was between the Greens senator Scott Ludlam and the new independent senator Derryn Hinch.
Hinch wanted to be on the committee and he was apparently upset that Ludlam looked likely to be renominated. The Senate voted 39-29 in Ludlam’s favour.
Some background.
The committee’s role is to investigate conduct deemed to be obstructing the work of the Senate. It also monitors the use and abuse of parliamentary privilege.
Hinch used parliamentary privilege in his maiden speech to name four men he claimed were paedophiles. He has threatened to keep doing so. He really wanted to be on the committee.
The committee has eight members. Four are nominated by the government, three by the opposition, and one by a minority party and independent senators.
The Greens and crossbenchers therefore have to talk among themselves to nominate someone.
Ludlam was previously on the committee, and his staff says he had consulted his crossbench colleagues to see if they minded him being on it again, and no one objected. So it looked as though Ludlam was on.
But Hinch said he wasn’t consulted and he wasn’t happy about it. Ludlam agreed to let the Senate vote on it.
Hinch lost.
Updated
After a veritable tornado of bills in the house this morning, the house is back on to the plebiscite.
Next, to the Senate.
Updated
Here we all are ...
How is the weather?
Updated
The Coalition agreement: the unicorn of federal politics
Paul Karp has reported on George Christensen:
The government cannot propose a free vote on same-sex marriage now the plebiscite is doomed because it would breach the Coalition agreement, the conservative MP George Christensen has said.
The chief nationals whip made the comment on Sky News on Thursday, as Nationals MPs who oppose same-sex marriage began a campaign to prevent reconsideration of a free vote now Labor has said it will vote the plebiscite down.
It comes after Malcolm Turnbull refused to rule out a free vote on marriage equality, in direct contrast to the stance taken by the Nationals leader, Barnaby Joyce.
“All I will say on that is if all of a sudden the policy becomes a free vote, my firm view, and it’s not just a view it’s actually the reality, [is] that is breaking one of the tenets of the Liberal National Coalition deal,” Christensen said.
“That would be quite a serious matter so I don’t think that’s going to eventuate.”
It is a really interesting question, this Coalition agreement. It is the unicorn of Australian politics, often cited, rarely seen. Or maybe to mangle my metaphors, a magic pudding, expanding to whatever is required.
The point of keeping it secret is that the deal can be all things to all people. No facts required. Bearing that in mind ...
As far as we can ascertain, there is a written deal and then there is a handshake deal between Malcolm Turnbull and Barnaby Joyce. I have it on good authority that the written deal is not seen by the National MPs in the party room. The discussion of the deal tends to be in broad brushes.
So if Christensen says its part of the Coalition deal, he must be talking about the handshake deal between Turnbull and Joyce.
In any case, given that the plebiscite bill looks to be going down the tube, the important question is what does the Coalition agreement say on the next step?
Broad and Christensen have come out to kibosh a free vote in anticipation of the next step – in case Turnbull gets the whacky idea of allowing the parliament to vote.
Updated
Karen Andrews, as assistant minister for education, has introduced the VET loan bills.
Lee and Turnbull are asked about the tendency towards protectionism. Lee says there is nothing to be gained by closing ourselves off in our little corner.
Turnbull:
The critical role for us as leaders is to set out the facts clearly, reassure our communities and explain to them that turning your back on technology, turning your back on innovation, turning your back on this change is only a road back to impoverishment, as Prime Minister Lee said. And the world has seen that film before, so this is not a theoretical proposition.
The first question to Turnbull and Lee is about trade-offs.
The second is on the role of the US in Asia (the South China Sea).
Lee says it is important that the US is in Asia.
PM Lee hopes the US ratifies the Trans Pacific Partnership.
It is important that there are good relations between America and China, America and Japan, which enable them to discuss individual difficult issues in the South China Sea and a broader context. So that there are restraints on pushing difficult problems [but], at the same time, there is a possibility of seeing it with a perspective and therefore, managing and preventing them from getting out of control.
Turnbull also supports the TPP.
The importance of American engagement in our region cannot be overstated … It is of vital importance to the region and of vital importance to our countries. The presence of the United States in our region has underpinned the peace and stability that has been the foundation for the prosperity of the last 40 years, and that extraordinary growth, perhaps most of all in China, has been underpinned by that foundation of peace.
Updated
This is interesting from Scott Ludlam’s adviser. It seems the thought of a Human Headline keen on transparency would be too much for the privileges committee.
The senate has conducted a ballot and confirmed that they don't think it's a great idea to have Senator Hinch on the Privileges Committee.
— the Paris sham (@DavidParis) October 12, 2016
Updated
Malcolm Turnbull is speaking with Lee Hsien Loong now. He talks about defence ties, people-to-people ties and trade. But he returns to his favourite theme:
Singapore has been founded as an open market. A nation dealt built on free trade. That provides jobs and growth … Perhaps, and some respects, underlying all of this, as a theme and the commitment, is greater collaboration with Singapore on innovation and science.
Updated
Put on a 🔴nose to support @RedNose_Aus. Their mission: to tackle all sudden and unexpected deaths in babies. pic.twitter.com/q4qvvVUd1q
— Mark Butler MP (@Mark_Butler_MP) October 12, 2016
Red Nose Day became red face day.
But O’Dwyer wisely chose not to wear a red nose with her colleagues.
Updated
The final votes on this Labor motion are now taking place. In the PM’s courtyard, reporters are gathering for a press conference with Malcolm Turnbull and Singapore’s prime minister, Lee Hsien Loong.
Updated
Breaking: The government wins the vote.
Bowen is gagged.
Updated
So pardon me, the last vote was a gag on Tony Burke. The government won this vote 74-70.
The current vote is a gag on Chris Bowen who stood up to second the aforementioned suspension motion.
Labor moves to suspend parliament to debate Coalition loss of control
Labor’s motion:
Mr Burke moved:
That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent that the house:
(1) notes that in the first 10 sitting days of the 45th parliament:
(a) the government lost control of the floor of the House of Representatives;
(b) the treasurer introduced legislation containing a $107m black hole;
(c) the Senate ran out of legislation to debate; and
(d) for the first time in the history of the federation, an opposition second reading amendment passed the House of Representatives, meaning the house, and all government members, voted unanimously that the government has failed to close tax loopholes and increase transparency in Australia; and
(2) given the house has resolved the government must explain these failures, therefore calls on the minister for revenue to attend the house to explain why the government has failed to close tax loopholes and increase transparency in Australia.
Updated
The house is now dividing to vote on Burke’s suspension. On the numbers, you would think Labor would lose but I have given up my crystal ball in this parliament.
First up, Tony Burke has moved that minister Kelly O’Dwyer attend the house to explain herself on the vote. The government says no.
So Burke is suspending standing orders to note the government lost control of the floor of the house. He has a long list of grievances which I shall bring you shortly.
Just before we go to the chambers, the member assisting the prime minister, George Christensen, had a quiet chat to Andrew Bolt on Sky last night. He took the same position on the plebiscite as his National party colleague Andrew Broad. That is he would support for the Coalition if there was a free vote on same-sex marriage. Christensen says it is part of the Coalition deal that a plebiscite must be honoured.
.@GChristensenMP says a free vote in parliament on same-sex marriage could threaten the Liberal National coalition https://t.co/3YTlmmH7qY
— Sky News Australia (@SkyNewsAust) October 12, 2016
Updated
Both houses begin sitting at 9.30am.
Bill Shorten has held a quick presser out the front of the building.
Q: What are the ramifications from this historic moment [the loss of a vote]? Does anything actually happen out of it?
Labor believes the government has been a soft touch on multinationals not paying their direct tax in Australia. The parliament has passed a resolution which confirms that view.
Updated
The assistant minister James McGrath has referenced the scary clown craze on Sky while talking about the vote last night.
There is a craze to look out for crazy clowns in Australia. You don’t need to look far. They are all down here in the Labor party.
Updated
Bronwyn Bishop: Where are the leftwing women on rape by refugees in Germany?
Bronwyn Bishop has weighed in on Julia Gillard’s comments suggesting women were being dissuaded from pursuing a career in politics because of abuse and threats online.
The artist formerly known as Madame Speaker let loose on Gillard’s temerity.
Former speaker Bronwyn Bishop calls for the 'left-wing voice' to speak out about violence against women https://t.co/qIpXiXCFZK
— Sky News Australia (@SkyNewsAust) October 12, 2016
Updated
By the way, after the vote stuff-up was revealed, there was general confusion over what to do because it had never happened before.
The Speaker, Tony Smith – who was not in the chair at the time of the vote – came to the chamber and made the following statement:
Earlier today, the question on a second reading amendment moved by the member for Fenner on the international tax agreements amendment bill 2016 was put to the house and, as I understand it, called for the ayes.
As the question on the amendment was called for the ‘ayes’ and not contested, the amendment was validly passed and proceedings on the bill should have ceased at that point. I understand that questions on the second and third readings of the bill were then put. This should not have happened and those proceedings were not valid. The votes and proceedings record will be corrected to show the second reading amendment being agreed to and proceedings on the bill ceasing at that point.
But the Speaker noted that Labor supported the bill and made mention in its motion that Labor did not want to stop the bill in its tracks. Smith said he would allow the change to the record if it was agreed on (by both sides).
As the member for Fenner’s [Andrew Leigh] amendment was in the form ‘whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading … ’ I consider this is a reasonable course of action and I will permit that to occur.
Some of the readers are wondering why Labor allowed the Coalition to amend their mistake.
In my view, three reasons:
- Labor’s political point had been made – that the government was not “stable”, ie running the house – albeit for a short time.
- The there-but-for-the-grace-of-God rule. That is, when Labor is in government, it also asks for favours on things. It is not all death stares at all times in here.
- It would not have materially changed anything in the house. The international tax agreement bill was going to pass anyway because Labor supported it.
Updated
Steve Ciobo on the procedural error: 'The fixer has fixed it'
The trade minister, Steve Ciobo, has been on ABC AM talking about the Singapore prime minister’s visit and the resulting trade and partnership deals which open the way for greater cooperation between the two countries.
What matters is that this has been fixed and the comment earlier that the fixer has fixed it. Christopher Pyne has fixed this issue. It was a procedural error in the house. There were multiple parties involved and that’s why this error took place. To throw a bouquet to the opposition they supported the government in having it declared null and void because it was a procedural error.
Let’s look at what the government has actually delivered this week. We’ve delivered now a comprehensive upgrade to Australia’s free trade agreement with Singapore, we have delivered tax relief to 500,000 Australians that are average wage earners and in middle incomes and made good on our commitment to CFA volunteers in Victoria. Now that sounds like a good track record of a government that is focussed on delivering for the Australian people.
If Bill Shorten and the Labor party want to run around and pretend a procedural vote in the House of Representatives in any way indicates anything otherwise, well good luck to them.
Updated
Three ministers, the health minister, Sussan Ley, the assistant health minister, Ken Wyatt, and the Indigenous minister, Nigel Scullion, will travel to Indigenous communities tomorrow to discuss suicide prevention techniques. Ley has told the ABC:
We don’t know what has worked and what hasn’t … Suicide was almost unknown in Indigenous communities before 1960 so it is indeed a national tragedy that the rate is now double of non-Indigenous communities.
The government has put $1m into a suicide prevention trial and Ley says the local communities will need to be happy with the programs that come out of the trial.
Part of my discussions tomorrow with Ken and Nigel Scullion will be about ensuring the local groups, the Aboriginal Medical Service and the community-controlled health organisations are indeed happy.
My Guardian colleague Calla Walquist has been reporting on this national tragedy for some time. This from June this year:
Indigenous people in the Kimberley region of Western Australia are seven times more likely to kill themselves and up to 20 times more likely to self-harm than other Australians, creating a situation where suicide has become “normalised behaviour”, a report has found.
There have been increasing calls for a royal commission into Indigenous suicide after a 10-year-old girl killed herself in the remote Aboriginal community of Looma, 250km east of Broome, in March.
The report, published in the Medical Journal of Australia on Monday, found that 102 of the 125 people who took their lives in the Kimberley between 2005 and 2014 identified as an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander.
Updated
Good morning, people,
Those who were with me just before the close of business will know there was a last-minute flurry in the house when the government voted against its own interests. Let me recap for those who do not follow for the full day. (You are only human.)
There was a Labor amendment to an international tax bill moved by Andrew Leigh. The financial services minister, Kelly O’Dwyer, was in the chair, which means she was in charge on the government side with the usual staffers. The Speaker in the chair called for the vote and the government waved it through. As O’Dwyer left the chamber, Leigh thanked the government for voting for a Labor amendment and only then did it dawn on the Coalition what just happened.
The manager of opposition business, Tony Burke, was up on his feet, making hay while the sun shone.
Let’s make clear what it is that was carried unanimously in this room today. Every member of the house earlier resolved the following – that the house calls on the government to explain why it has failed to close tax loopholes and increase transparency in Australia.
The leader of the house, Christopher Pyne, acknowledged the win.
The member is allowed to have his moment in the sun gloating about an inadvertent error. I would make the point that there are several owners of this error and I am not going to criticise them individually because it is wrong to criticise the people who work for us, the people who were sitting in the chair … and I am not going to do that.
Burke was having none of that this morning. He told Kieran Gilbert on Sky:
If it was an ordinary administrative error, it would have happened sometime in the last century. It hasn’t.
A point he made on Twitter straight after the vote.
Today for the first time in the history of Federation an Opposition second reading amendment was carried.
— Tony Burke (@Tony_Burke) October 12, 2016
This was not the government's plan
I spoke to Burke straight afterwards to confirm it because not even the live minutes of the house recorded the fact. No one was ready for it.
Labor allowed the government to amend the vote after it had made its point and events continued to the adjournment. The truth is Labor is very good at this procedural stuff, having survived the hung parliament. It knows how to run a tight parliamentary ship and thus, it can identify the weak points.
Onwards and upwards. Today we see the introduction of the bills which reform Vocational Education and Training sector. There are three bills associated:
- VET student loans
- VET student loans (consequential amendments and transitional provisions)
- VET student loans (charges)
The education minister, Simon Birmingham, announced reforms that tighten up a scheme that has allowed 1,000 dodgy colleges to bloom. We reported on this earlier.
The new system will impose tougher barriers to entry on private training colleges, loan caps will be applied to courses, course eligibility criteria will be strengthened in alignment with what the government terms “industry requirements”, and there will be mandatory student engagement measures.
Let’s get on with it. I am @gabriellechan on the Twits and he is @mpbowers. If you prefer a longer chat, you can get me through my Facebook page or below. Grab a cuppa, I am charged up on the camomile. Living on the edge ...
Updated
