Those company tax negotiations with Derryn Hinch and Tim Storer continue.
Hinch tells us he has nothing more to say on this until Monday, which means no chance of a vote before the Senate-palooza ends this afternoon.
So I am going to wrap it up this afternoon – but don’t despair, we will all be back on Monday, just after 8am, for three days of parliament fun before they all head off for a one month break.
What fun and insanity awaits us? I am all a-quiver with an anticipation.
A massive thank you to the Guardian brains trust, and to Mike Bowers, who not only kept prodding me back awake, he also bought me coffee. Because he is not only an amazing photographer, he is also an amazing human being. You can catch him at @mpbowers and @mikepbowers and he also pops up in the story on @pyjamapolitics. (And thank you to those who have sent me messages about our video updates, I may not have had a chance to reply, but I am reading them).
And all of the thank yous to you, for reading. The one bright point in this slower-than-usual week has been being able to spend a little bit more time with you in the comments. I hope to see you back here next week but, in the meantime, hope you have a lovely and happy, weekend.
Remember – take care of you.
Updated
One Nation to back company tax cuts
In the least shocking news this week, Pauline Hanson has decided One Nation will back the government’s tax cuts, after last month ruling out doing that very thing.
Now it is just up to Tim Storer and Derryn Hinch:
EXCLUSIVE: @PaulineHansonOz will vote for the Government's company #tax cuts, in exchange for more cash for apprenticeships for young Australians https://t.co/yC3baiQlCp #auspol pic.twitter.com/YJaIQSqgWa
— ABC Politics (@politicsabc) March 22, 2018
Updated
It may be sometime until we focus so intently on Senate question time, so, for the last time this week, here is how Mike Bowers saw it:
The Senate is officially full again
Updated
Malcolm Turnbull is having a chat to 2GB – he is ruling out excluding the banks from the company tax (in response to Derryn Hinch’s statement that he would “probably” support the government if the banks were part of it).
Updated
Asked whether or not Malcolm Turnbull should have contacted Michael Gunner earlier than yesterday, Bill Shorten said he is not “going to get political” and he cannot speak for Turnbull.
Sometimes when Australians are doing it tough, it is sensible to just show up and make sure that people don’t feel forgotten. We got to meet a lovely young couple, who really when you see the extent of damage to their house, the fact they have two little children, in some ways it is a blessing they weren’t there that night. But when you realise how many families, after the first adrenaline rush, when they come and see the damage they realise we have to start, we have to rebuild, we have to put things back together again, it is clearing out flood and storm damage, it is the fences, it is the tress, it is the green waste – these things might sound mundane to a stranger but, when you actually have to confront starting again ... some stuff will never be replaced. I just think it is important for the people of Darwin and Palmerston to know that the rest of Australia is aware, is concerned and is there to be supported. That is what Aussies do, we are there to look after each other.
Updated
Bill Shorten is in Darwin, inspecting the damage from Cyclone Marcus, the day after this story was released.
I am not sure that people in other parts of Australia quite realised the extent of Cyclone Marcus and the impact it had on Darwin. Clearly, Darwin is resilient community and the wisdom of some of the building standards introduced after 1974, the wisdom has been vindicated. Having said that, this is the first cyclone to hit directly on Darwin in 30 years. Anyone who travels along the roads, even three or four days afterwards, they see the scale of the trees that have collapsed and fallen over. You realise that it was a very, very big wind that hit Darwin. I think it is a miracle that there were no serious injuries nor loss of life. In someways, in no small way, that is a reflection of people having Cyclone plans. When I look at the damage that has been done and the potential for loss of life, the first reaction I have when I visit Darwin and see first hand is thank goodness. A miracle that somebody was not injured or killed. Having said that, Darwin has been hard hit and the rest of Australia should not underestimate [the damage].
Updated
Meanwhile, the ACTU has released its own letter to senators asking them not to support the company tax cuts:
ACTU has written to the crossbench on company tax cuts. Tl;Dr DON'T DO IT WRONG WAY GO BACK #auspol #ausunions pic.twitter.com/BXEHmkHczC
— Paul Karp (@Paul_Karp) March 22, 2018
Labor wants to know when Concetta Fierravanti-Wells will withdraw the statement she had to correct yesterday.
Fierravanti-Wells is a bit better prepared today and sticks to the script.
Glenn Sterle follows up with this:
While making the misleading statement on Tuesday, the minister claimed in relation to Labor’s proposed reform of dividend imputation cash dividend refunds: “It is a bit like The Castle.” Is it the minister’s understanding of Labor’s proposal based on level advice from Denis Denudo, is it the constitution or is it the vibe?”
“Tell him he’s dreaming,” yells Mathias Cormann
Fierravanti-Wells: As I have indicated to Senator Sterle, there are 21,011 pensioners with shares who will be negatively affected by your policy. Now, can I share with the Senate figures in relation to my home state of New South Wales, 84,569. In Victoria,60,956. In South Australia, 18,294. In Queensland, 42,721 and in Tasmania, 6,091. So you are robbing pensioners, you are taking thousands of dollars out of the pockets of pensioners at the same time as you are exempting groups associated with your union mates. That shows your priority, Senator Sterle.
Sterle: Rather than trying to use misleading information put forward by the Prime Minister and Treasurer Morrison, why doesn’t the minister reject their misleading scare campaign and to quote minister Cormann: “Tell them they are dreamin’”?
Cormann: It is a very important point of order. I think that Senator Sterle needs to work on his accent.
Scott Ryan: In the spirit of Thursday afternoon I won’t rule on that.
Fierravanti-Wells: In the spirit of Thursday afternoon, Senator Sterle, in relation to this issue, Senator Cormann is sitting right here and here presents the Minister for financial services and the Treasurer and so - scared of us, why don’t you ask him the question? What are you scared of asking Senator Cormann a question? Are you scared? Are you scared of asking Senator Cormann? My, my, my, Senator Cormann’s ferocious reputation is scaring Senator Sterle from asking a question.
An argument breaks out over what Labor is asking, where Deborah Collins refers to “she” instead of by name.
Linda Reynolds: I rise on a point of order and it relates to debate yesterday which again we have heard behaviour from those opposite today. Now, several comments from those opposite taken in isolation are one thing, but we have heard again just an exchange about cats and - the discussion about the cat’s mother and she. Yesterday the Leader of the Opposition referred repeatedly in a derogatory way referring not to the minister but as ‘she’ and Hansard will show that you are making comments about the minister being a joke. Again, this is a pattern of behaviour and language that I fine highly insulting and inappropriate.It is very reminiscent of the shameful behaviour from those opposite to Senator Fiona Nash in terms of the nature and inappropriateness.
‘She’ is withdrawn.
We move on to the next #deathtodixers series.
Skipping over #deathtodixers session, Sarah Hanson-Young wants to know about the Murray-Darling basin plan.
Hanson-Young:
Yesterday, Fairfax reported that the former water minister Barnaby Joyce approved the taxpayer-funded purchase of water from one of Australia’s biggest cotton producers, Eastern Australian Agriculture, at a price well above what the seller was asking, a whopping 25% more. In a separate incident, in October 2017, it was reported that when considering a buyback from cotton producer Webster Limited for a property in western New South Wales, the former water minister ignored the department’s own valuation and paid nearly double what the water was worth. Why is it, minister, that every time the Nationals get their hands on the water portfolio, rich cotton producers get richer and every other taxpayer gets ripped off and the river suffered?
Matt Canavan:
Unfortunately it contained a number of incorrect claims. The water purchase from Eastern Australian Agriculture was for water, an amount of water that was greater than five times than the figures or the price that was quoted in the media that you refer to in your answer, Senator Hanson-Young. So it is incorrect, it is absolutely incorrect to say that the government paid a price above the seller’s price, and I will take that interjection because you are right Senator Hanson-Young that we have released documents on this matter and those documents, if you had paid the time to take attention to them, did show that the original sale offer that you referred to was very different from the final purchase because those documents show that the amount of water purchase was a lot more than originally offered. When you end up getting a lot more, when you end up getting a lot more than was offered, of course the [inaudible] had to be higher as well. Now, Mr President, I can assure you and this chamber that the government’s purchase of water have been advised through independent analysis and valuation. We are confident that we have purchased water at good value for money for the taxpayer and we are confident that these water purchases will help deliver the environmental objectives and outcome of the Murray-Darling basin plan that the government is committed to making sure that we do deliver. We are trying our best to get this delivery done in the clear politicisation and opposition that we have seen to independent advice from your side and the Labor side who have ignored the results of the northern basin review and have put at risk the plan which is to the benefit of the whole Murray-Darling.
Hanson-Young:
This is a pattern of behaviour that every time the Nationals pay their mates for water, the taxpayer ends up paying more than the water is worth. Can the minister describe, is this a rort, is it a kickback or is it just good old-fashioned pork-barrelling for the National party at the cost of the taxpayer just to look after your mates?
Canavan:
I do agree with an aspect of Senator Hanson-Young’s question. Just a tiny aspect. There is a pattern of behaviour here, Mr President. There clearly is a pattern of behaviour. There is a pattern of behaviour from the Australian Greens that they don’t do their homework before they come in here. They rely on media articles from the Guardian or Fairfax without themselves looking at the documents I quoted in my first question are publicly available. So, Mr President, Senator Hanson-Young can reduce herself to investigate and confected claims, but I would encourage her to look at the documents that the government has transparently released in this case that clearly show that the allegations in the articles Senator Hanson-Young referred to were wrong, incorrect and the government is confident that with are getting value for money for the purchase of water in the Murray-Darling basin plan.
Hanson-Young:
My final supplementary is in relation to reports that the head of the northern Murray-Darling basin group Fred Hooper was told by an adviser in the minister’s office that he had received $10m if he could convince Labor to backflip on their opposition to the Northern Basin Review Disallowance back if February. Did the minister approve this $180m bribe? Who knew about it and did it go to cabinet?
Canavan:
I can [inform] Senator Hanson-Young that at no point did we offer funding to this group to secure the amendments. The government was in negotiations with both Labor and the crossbench to gain support for the Murray-Darling basin plan. Those negotiations of course were not successful as the northern basin review amendments were disallowed by the Senate. Mr President, as I was mentioning earlier, it is a shame in my view that those amendments, those northern review basin amendments weren’t passed because they were based on independent advice.
Updated
Peter Georgiou had some questions about the royal commission into the banks.
The answer boiled down to this:
Mathias Cormann:
The government is focused on the public interest. That is what we are focused on. Obviously, banks fulfil a very important function in our economy. Banks are facilitators in our economy and, for us to be as successful as we can be, we need strong and profitable ... regulated stable banks. From time to time, of course there are examples in recent years, things in all sorts of sectors of the economy go the wrong way. There is bad behaviour and bad conduct that needs to be addressed. Sometimes there are systematic issues that need to be addressed in a more systematic way. There is an inquiry that has not yet presented its findings. The findings are yet to be presented, the recommendations are yet to be presented. I can assure Senator Georgiou when the findings and the recommendations from the royal commission into the banks come forward, the government will carefully consider them and we will make judgments and decisions focused 100% in the public’s interested.
Updated
Jordan Steele-John to Michaelia Cash:
The majority of Australians mistakenly believe that political parties must abide by the Privacy Act. However, since 2000 there have been ... legal limits to the use of personal data for political purposes. The Australian privacy commissioner believes that the exemption should be reconsidered to determine whether it is appropriate, given that the data environment has significantly changed in the last 18 years. Why does the attorney general maintain that this legislation is appropriate in the modern data environment, particularly in light of recent revelation regarding Facebook and Cambridge Analytica?
Cash:
To the extent that I can, I will respond and, if I have to take part of the question on notice, I will. Senator Steele-John, the government is absolutely committed to protecting all Australians right to privacy. As you would be aware, the privacy about itself contains 13 Australian privacy principles which regulate how private sector organisations with an annual turnover above 3 million and most Australian government agencies can handle personal information. In terms of how the privacy act applies to...
(Steele-John interrupts to say he was asking about political party exceptions.)
Cash:
The exemption is designed to encourage freedom of political communication and support the operation of the electoral and political processes. However, the exemption does not authorise entities who are subject to the Privacy Act, such as social networking services, to disclose ... information that will be used by politicians or registered political parties for political purposes. Senator Steele-John, if I can get you any further information, I will.
Steele-John:
In 2000, Labor supported the Howard government in introducing the privacy exemption for political purposes. In what the privacy foundation has characterised aptly as a ‘deal with the devil’. It gives both parties special rights to exploit and misuse data. Is this not just another example in the sad litany of your lack of integrity and transparency?
Cash:
The answer to your question is no.
Steele-John:
Can the minister confirm whether minister Tehan did in fact meet with Cambridge Analytica in April 2017 or whether any member of the Liberal party has met with Cambridge Analytica at any time?
Cash:
I have no knowledge of any meetings but I will always be able to provide further information if it comes to hand.
Updated
Doug Cameron to Marise Payne:
I refer to the prime minister who prior to the 2016 election emphatically denied that the heavy sustainment work on submarines would shift away from Osborne saying: “The heavier work, if you like, was obviously always going to be done at Osborne, as it is now.” The FIY documents released on Monday contradict the prime minister revealing work on the relocation began immediately after the 2016 election. Why did the prime minister mislead the South Australian people about the minister’s plans?
Payne:
There is absolutely no question of any misleading being done whatsoever. What the material which is being referred to says and says sensibly, Mr President, is that in the planning process for a build of future submarines that will be undertaken in South Australia, the future has to be examined in terms of the size of the build that is required to be done, the size of the flare that is required to be established at Osborne and so on. I referred to a number of those matters in answer to a question by Senator Patrick yesterday. What is interesting, Mr President, is we can only have a discussion about this issue because this government is getting on with the job of delivering a future submarine capability for Australia, unlike those opposite who in the entire time of their period in office did not place one single order for one vessel built in Australia for the royal Australian navy. Not one.
Cameron:
I would ask, minister, on what date did the minute Pyne direct Defence to suspend work on the relocation plan and why was that work suspended?
Payne:
As I think has been discussed at estimates, not sure if you were in the room at the time or not Senator Carr, but obviously the work that proceeds in relation to the planning under the naval ship plan is based on a range of priorities, that includes the infrastructure being done as Osborne and the work being done for the future frigates and the offshore patrol senator vessels ...
(Cameron interrupts to say he just wanted a date)
Payne:
I don’t have a specific date with me. I am very happy to take that matter on notice and advice to the Senate. However, what I would say is that the only reason we are in a position of needing to manage the presence at Osborne, the size of the development at Osborne, the infrastructure creation at Osborne, is because this government has not only commissioned 12 new future submarines for Australia but also 42 future frigates and 12 offshore patrol vessels. Fifty-four vessels in total. In sharp contrast to those opposite who did nothing but, most importantly, did nothing to address the jobs issue that is attached to it.
Cameron:
Given the work on their location study was clearly staged to avoid political pitfalls, such as Senate estimates, the state elections, how can the government deny having politicised the defence department processes? Isn’t it now obvious that under Minister Pyne with the naval shipbuilding plan, it has now become nothing more that a Liberal party marginal seats plan?
Payne:
[I missed the first line but she disagreed with the premise of the question] ... This government is getting on with the business of delivering capability for the Royal Australian Navy. Offshore patrol vessels, future frigates and future submarines not to mention some for our regional neighbours, as you would be aware. Fifty-four vessels in total. That is extremely complex and is overseen with a naval ship-building plan which the minister should be familiar with. It is underpinned by a vast amount of work being done within the department, within the organisation, which the senator himself has asked about in estimates but chooses conveniently to forget some of those discussions when it comes to a day like today or a question like today. Mr President, most importantly, ships commissioned by those opposite, the Labor party, when in government? Zero.
Updated
Michaelia Cash then gets to talk about all the things she wanted to say at her press conference but didn’t get to, because pesky journalists were being pesky (asking her about the ongoing AFP investigation into leaks from her office and yes, obviously I am being facetious)
Updated
Senate question time begins
We are straight into it and it’s straight into company tax
*Kim Carr to Mathias Cormann:
Analysis by the prime minister’s former employer Goldman Sachs has found that up to 60% of the Turnbull government’s proposed $65bn tax cut for big business will go directly to foreign shareholders. Is this analysis correct? If not, why not?
Cormann:
I am not aware of that particular analysis but what I would say to you is the prospect of a return on your investment is precisely what we need in order to attract more investment into Australia so we can continue to develop our economy, create more jobs and create the environment for higher wages. I mean, the whole point, Australia needs foreign capital to develop our economy to its full potential and the more competitive that we are in offering the opportunity for the higher return, higher profits, the more capital that we will attract, the better we are able to improve our productivity. The more we are actually able to ensure that we can generate in returns for our businesses, and the more successful our businesses are, the more people they can hire as they grow. The more people businesses want to hire, the more competition there is for workers. The more competition there is for workers, the more the businesses have to pay to secure their services. I mean, this is what this is all about. I mean the whole reason we need to have an internationally competitive business tax rate is so that we can successfully compete for investment from around the world into Australia.
Carr:
I refer to Moody’s investment service, which says in relation to US tax cuts: ‘We do not expect corporate tax cuts to lead to a meaningful boost to business investment, which has remained tepid despite a support of economic environment. What guarantee can the minister provide senators that the Turnbull government’s $65b handout to big business will lead to a meaningful boost in business investment?
Cormann:
Firstly, I would say, if you look at the actual evidence in the real world, the tax cuts which were legislated through the US Congress reducing the corporate tax rate down to 21% has led to an immediate boost in investment. It has led to an immediate boost to capital returning to the US. It has led to an immediate boost in confidence. It has led to an immediate increase in the number of Americans getting job. It has led to an immediate increase to remuneration. International Monetary Fund upgraded the global economic growth outlook on the back of the Trump tax cut that passed the Senate. Whatever your view is on the Trump tax cuts, the reality is they are there. It is like the mountains in Switzerland, they are there. That now means that the tax rate in the United States is 9% lower than here in Australia. We can put our head in the sand and say ‘won’t have any implications for any businesses here in Australia’. The truth is it will. If we don’t pass business tax cuts we will hurt the economy.
Carr:
Over the past two years, wages have grown by only 4% while company profits have increased by a massive 32%, eight times faster than wages. Why should senators believe that $65bn handout to big business will flee through to wage growth when companies seeing massive profits have not passed it onto their employees?
Cormann:
The sad thing is Senator Cameron doesn’t understand economics. We have gone through a period of slow global growth and we have gone through a significant economic transition in Australia with significant drops in our prices for our commodity exports and, of course, instead of having massive increases in unemployment under our government, we have seen massive increases in employment. Over the last five months we’ve had 420,000 new jobs.
The truth is wages growth has been picking up as the economy has continued to improve. We want wages growth to pick up more and that is of course why we need businesses to be more profitable and more successful because, if they are less profitable and less successful, let me tell you they will hire fewer people and pay them less. That is common sense. Do you think a less successful business will be able to hire more people and pay them better wages?
*I originally wrote Doug Cameron asked these questions. Must just have that brogue accent on my mind. (fun fact, we both share Lithuanian ancestry)
Updated
Hold your fire – the video is back!
It was deleted because of a typo in someone’s name and then re-posted.
Updated
The marine park issue just got a little bit more complicated. As Katharine Murphy reports:
The Greens have signalled that they might not back a move by Labor to disallow controversial new marine park management plans proposed by the Turnbull government, calling for time to consider their position.
The Greens’ healthy oceans spokesman, Senator Peter Whish-Wilson, told Guardian Australia on Thursday that if the new government plans were disallowed, “then we move from some protections to no protections, and the protections of our oceans have to rely on Labor winning government and the conservative major and minor parties not having the numbers to disallow whatever plans Labor put in place”.
You can read that story, here
Late last night, the prime minister’s office put a video of Malcolm Turnbull meeting the Port Macquarie retirees on social media.
This morning, Rob Oakeshott tweeted that he knew the people in the video and questioned whether some of Port Macquarie’s most well known former businessmen were examples of those “most in need”.
Prime Minister, I know individuals personally in your video. Are you honestly saying well known, respected, former businessmen in Port Macquarie are your examples of those "most in need" in Australia? https://t.co/LITmJ4f0z5
— Rob Oakeshott (@RobOakeshott1) March 22, 2018
***Lo and behold, that social media video has now disappeared, with no sign of it on Facebook or Twitter.
So, I guess that’s a “no” to Oakeshott’s question then?
****Update: the video was taken down because of a typo and then reposted
Updated
Malcolm Turnbull also guaranteed wages will rise if the company tax rate falls:
There’s no question you’ll see a wage rise with reduction in company tax. That’s what has always happened. That is what Bill Shorten used to say. They used to recognise,before they got on the anti-business high-tax agenda, they’re trying to rob pensioners, so they’re quite unscrupulous. But in the days of Paul Keating, you had Labor leaders that recognised that everyone’s got a vested interest in a business like this being profitable. They’re all union workers here, aren’t they?
Updated
As the Cambridge Analytica story continues, Malcolm Turnbull said he was unaware of it doing any work for the Liberal party.
When asked if the Liberal party used Facebook to gather information, he had this to say:
Well, I have a Facebook account. I hope you like it, you know. Refer to it regularly, on the hour, I would suggest. But look, you’re asking very general questions. The specific issue is from Facebook’s policies. As I understand it, Mark Zuckerberg said he is reviewing that. That is – this is a big issue with all of the big platforms, in particular, Facebook, and also of course Google.”
Updated
The jobs and innovation minister, Michaelia Cash, gave a very brief press conference about the jobs figures in Canberra but got a bunch of questions from Buzzfeed’s Alice Workman about the media leak of the AFP raid on the Australian Workers Union headquarters.
The one new fact we got out of that is: Cash confirmed she has not been interviewed by the AFP.
Cash also said that her office was not tipped off by then-justice minister Michael Keenan’s office “to her knowledge” and said she did not know about the raids until she saw them on the TV.
Cash’s adviser then called last question, Cash asked if anyone wanted to ask about jobs, and when the rest of the journos refused to let her change the topic, the minister left.
Updated
In exciting news, the prime minister is continuing his habit (which started around the election campaign) of interviewing people at his press conferences. And when I say people, I mean the business owners and backbenchers he has invited to share his press conference with him.
Malcolm Turnbull is in Unanderra, at a steel company, whose owner thinks the company tax cuts are a really, really, really good idea.
Turnbull: Greg, if you have a lower company tax, what will you do with the additional earnings?
Greg: Our plant is quite old, we’ll invest the money into improving the plant, improve the production and capacity and all of our workers share in the profit bonus and the capacity bonuses.
Turnbull: Your deal with your workers, they share in production,they share in profits.
Greg: Yep.
Turnbull: There it is. One example of what is happening around the country, with an competitive tax rate, Greg will invest more, he’ll employ more, and that will result in higher wages. That’s what the economists tell you, you may be sceptical about the economists, you’re hearing it right now from someone right in the very front line of the most competitive industry, that is what Greg says, and he’s dead right. That’s why we need to have a competitive tax rate.
Well, if that is what Greg says, case closed then.
Updated
It took 10 paragraphs, but Michaelia Cash acknowledged the slight increase in the unemployment figures:
Australia’s run of the best jobs growth ever continues with the number of jobs increasing for the 17th straight month in February 2018. This is the longest consecutive run of jobs growth since the monthly labour force series commenced 40 years ago.
Labour force figures released today by the ABS show that seasonally adjusted employment increased by 17,500 to a record high of 12,480,500.
Importantly, full-time employment surged by 64,900 in February, to a record high of 8,533,600, and has now increased by 327,600 (or 4 %) over the last year, the largest annual increase in full-time employment ever recorded.
The Turnbull government has put in place the right policy settings and this is now paying off with our economy creating, on average, more than 1,100 new jobs a day. This is 900 more jobs than the economy created under Labor created per day.
In the last year the total number of jobs created was 420,700, compared with Labor’s last year of government of only 88,900.
In the last year 35,100 jobs were created per month, while under Labor the economy only managed 7,400 jobs per month.
Jobs growth over the last 12 months is almost six times stronger than Labor’s last year in government. In fact, 17,700 full-time jobs were lost in the last year of the Labor government.
Since the Coalition was elected in September 2013, the economy has created 997,800 jobs, an increase of 8.7%. Total employment and total full-time employment are at record highs.
The current rate of jobs growth remains high at 3.5% over the year and is more than double the decade average rate of 1.6%.
The unemployment rate in February 2018 is 5.6%, while this is up marginally up for the month, it is down 0.3 percentage points over the year and reflects the fact that the participation rate is up to 65.7%.
It’s always good to look on the bright side of life, I suppose.
Updated
The Australian economy continues to set new records in jobs growth. The 420,700 jobs created over the past 12 months is the strongest annual increase in our history, with 78 percent of those jobs full-time. The Turnbull Government equals jobs. #auspol
— Scott Morrison (@ScottMorrisonMP) March 22, 2018
Brendan O’Connor said it would be “absurd” for any senator to be convinced to support the government’s company tax cuts on the back of the letter the BCA sent to the Senate yesterday.
The Cairns Post had this story this morning:
Leichhardt MP Warren Entsch could face a quizzing over how the wife of his campaign director Trent Twomey won a $2.4m federal grant to expand her family pharmaceutical empire.
The Australian federal police are looking into a formal complaint of alleged fraud and misconduct in the handling of the multimillion-dollar handout.
Far North civic and business leaders told the Cairns Post many taxpayers held concerns about LNP pork-barrelling and whether it ‘passes the sniff test’.
Updated
Nick McKim had a few things to say about Peter Dutton to Samantha Maiden on Sky this morning:
What I am suggesting is that he has exhibited racism right through his public career ... where he boycotted the apology to the stolen generations, he walked out of the House assembly in a huff just before that apology was given. His regime in terms of Manus Island and Nauru is clearly race-based and he has also exhibited some of the things that we know through human history that are associated with fascists: for example, setting up an enemy to try and scare people and he has done that with Muslim people and then seeking to undermine the rule of law on that basis.
I mean it is fascism 101, we are seeing from Peter Dutton.
Asked whether he was saying Dutton was a fascist, McKim answered “yes”.
He is exhibiting tendencies that we through history, you will see are associated with fascism around the world, absolutely.
Maiden said one of Dutton’s cabinet colleagues once described the home affairs minister as a fascist to her but she thought he may have been joking, to which McKim said he believed he knew who she was talking about and he did not believe they were joking.
Updated
Unemployment increases by 0.1%
The labour force figures are in:
Trend unemployment stayed steady at 5.5%, while seasonally adjusted saw a slight increase from 5.5% to 5.6%.
Here is how the ABS described the February figures:
Australia’s trend estimate of employment increased by 19,300 persons in February 2018, with:
- the number of unemployed persons increasing by 4,300 persons;
- the unemployment rate remaining steady at 5.5%;
- the participation rate increasing by 0.1 percentage points to 65.7%; and
- the employment to population ratio increased by less than 0.1 percentage points to 62.1%.
Over the past year, trend employment increased by 399,500 persons (or 3.3%), which is above the average annual growth rate over the past 20 years of 1.9%. Over the same 12-month period the trend employment to population ratio, which is a measure of how employed the population (aged 15 years and over) is, increased by 1.0 percentage points to 62.1%.
Updated
I answered this in the comments, but just so you all know – Tim Storer, the other key player in the company tax vote, isn’t being ignored. He is just not talking. He has decided not to do interviews, or say anything beyond that he is listening to all sides.
The Senate is also different to the House, in that the Senate president does not have a casting vote. So, if Storer votes yes and Hinch votes no, or vice versa, the government falls one short of getting what it wants.
Updated
The other tax debate is also heating up:
Prime Minister, I know individuals personally in your video. Are you honestly saying well known, respected, former businessmen in Port Macquarie are your examples of those "most in need" in Australia? https://t.co/LITmJ4f0z5
— Rob Oakeshott (@RobOakeshott1) March 22, 2018
After the initial “yes”, to the question “would you support the company tax cuts if the big banks were excluded?”, Derryn Hinch then thought about it and walked it back to a “probably”.
Senator Derryn Hinch @HumanHeadline says he would 'probably' support the company tax cuts if they excluded banks: 'How can you justify a 5 per cent tax cut to the big banks, when there's a royal commission into their misconduct?'
— Sky News Australia (@SkyNewsAust) March 21, 2018
MORE: https://t.co/PjLLUJGXao #SkyLiveNow pic.twitter.com/i8lYGB3ySL
Updated
The slower week has given a little bit of time for class photos:
Celebrating the record number of women in Labor’s Senate Caucus - 16/26 or 61.5% of ALP Senators. Such a wonderful team. pic.twitter.com/OuNT7uPl6Z
— Senator Penny Wong (@SenatorWong) March 21, 2018
Updated
“At the moment they haven’t got me, that’s true,” Derryn Hinch says of the tax cuts.
And if he doesn’t support it?
“It will die.”
Hinch says he doesn’t believe he will have a decision before today. Or even before Easter. As it stands right now.
“If it has to die, it has to die.”
Speaking to Sky, Derryn Hinch says he has not returned Alan Joyce or Twiggy Forrest’s calls as yet (but will today).
“But there is nothing new for them to tell us,” he said, saying he knows all the arguments after the tax cut debate for companies earning more than $50m last year.
“They have to try and justify how you can give 5% tax cuts to the big banks, while there is a royal commission going into the banks at the same time ... they have to justify that.”
But he says he would support the cuts if the banks were excluded.
“I think I would, I am close to that, yeah,” he said.
He reiterated his concerns the savings would go to share buybacks and the likes, rather than wage increases or job growth.
“Everybody admits ...wages are so sluggish. We don’t actually know why. They boast of continual growth, 25 years of growth in Australia, but we don’t have it.”
Updated
Good to know:
Dutton tells Hadley that "crazy lefties" at the ABC and the Guardian are free to accuse him of racism over the South African farmers controversy, but they're wrong: "they can draw mean cartoons ... they don't realise how completely dead they are to me"
— Stephen Dziedzic (@stephendziedzic) March 21, 2018
Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton slams ABC and "crazy lefties" over white farmer criticism.
— 2GB 873 (@2GB873) March 21, 2018
“They don’t realise how completely dead they are to me.”https://t.co/5T9yt7REa0 #AUSpol pic.twitter.com/5QS9nc6CP7
Updated
Expect to see this issue get bigger:
Our plan for Aus marine parks is evidence-based, targeted & seeks to protect our natural assets for future generations, while providing certainty & stability for those whose jobs & livelihoods depend on our unique marine environment. My @couriermail op ed: https://t.co/kQnUsAC6E1 pic.twitter.com/vW3VnDQ2Ur
— Josh Frydenberg (@JoshFrydenberg) March 21, 2018
Speaking about David Leyonhjelm and tax, here is what he had to say this morning about a floated plan by the home affairs department to add a charge to overseas packaging:
This government has an endless capacity to come up with new taxes and increase existing taxes. We are already extremely highly taxed. I despair at the idea that we will ever end up with any of our own money left in our own pockets. It is just terrible.
Fairfax reports the department has put forward the idea, because security screening costs keep increasing. This comes after the government added GST to online purchases, in an attempt to even the playing field with domestic retailers. That comes into effect on 1 July.
Updated
The prime minister is in Wollongong this morning.
Honestly, this tells you what is happening with the company tax cut negotiations better than any words I could add.
David Leyonhjelm is on board (he is for anything which cuts tax). Derryn Hinch could go either way.
Updated
Speaking to journalists on his way into parliament this morning, Doug Cameron called bupkis on claims businesses will pass on the savings to workers, pointing to the US, which has passed company tax cuts:
It’s interesting to see that CNN Business are indicating that 87% of the tax cuts are going to business and Nancy Pelosi, the minority leader in the US, is saying it’s only crumbs that are going to the workers in the US.
That’s exactly what is going to happen here. I mean I was a union official for 27 years and if I signed off on a letter that promised nothing then I wouldn’t have been a union official for very long.
The Business Council letter means nothing. It’s absolutely meaningless and anyone who is engaged in this debate should be exercising a little bit of scrutiny to that letter because it’s meaningless. It won’t deliver anything and people should not be conned. Senators should not be conned by the Business Council seeking to deliver more into their own back pockets, more to shareholders, more to executive salaries, when we should be making sure money is spent on health, on education and on infrastructure.
Updated
The debate on the company tax cuts has started up again in the Senate.
Pauline Hanson said the letter the Business Council of Australia released yesterday, which was co-signed by 10 of the nation’s biggest businesses, promising to commit to investing in Australia’s economy if the tax cuts were passed, was helping nudge her across the line:
“It does help, very much so,” she said this morning, when asked about the letter.
Derryn Hinch, though, said he didn’t see anything in the letter that promised to increase wages or job numbers.
The business council letter was very Kumbaya, you know, we’ll do this and we’ll do that, but it didn’t guarantee anything.
Never a truer word #auspol pic.twitter.com/uNNjwfMu8c
— Amy Remeikis (@AmyRemeikis) March 21, 2018
Updated
Good morning and welcome to day 16
We start the last day of the Senate-only sitting week as we started it – talking about tax.
Which tax, you ask? Well, it depends which side of the chamber you are sitting on. The government looks to be just two votes away from getting its company tax rate cuts through the Senate, after Pauline Hanson opened the door she closed last month.
So which way will Tim Storer and Derryn Hinch go? Well, Storer is keeping his cards close to his chest, while Hinch says he still needs convincing.
Katharine Murphy found out what the government is telling the crossbench to get them onside – you’ll find that here.
The tax cut debate will start up in the Senate again this morning, with the government hoping to have it all locked away before the Easter break, the last sitting before the budget.
For the first time in 250 days, the Senate has every position filled. Scott Ryan says that’s the longest time since federation that the Senate has had vacancies. Amanda Stoker was confirmed by the Queensland parliament yesterday, filling the last spot.
For the first time since Scott Ludlam’s resignation on 14 July 2017, the Senate now has its complete membership of 76. 2/3
— Senator Scott Ryan (@SenatorRyan) March 21, 2018
Which also means, I think, we have seen a record number of maiden speeches in the Senate. Honestly, it feels like 84 years since the section 44 crisis hit the parliament. And it’s not over yet but the Senate, at least, seems pretty happy to have the House have to deal with the rest.
Labor is preparing for the government’s coming attacks over its tax dividend policy, with both sides looking to next week as one of the last chances to catch voters attention before minds switch off from politics for the holidays. Labor has grabbed on to the Grattan Institute’s description of the government’s claims against the policy as “misleading” and plans on using that at every opportunity.
Which led to Concetta Fierravanti-Wells having to correct one of her question time statements overnight:
I wish to clarify remarks I made in question time regarding the impact of Labor’s retiree tax on low-income Australians. This was based on advice that was provided to me and my office at the time. I have since been advised that the correct statement should be more than half of all individuals receiving refunded franking credits have taxable income less than the $18,200 tax-free threshold.
She had originally said:
“More than half of all refunded franking credits are paid to individuals who earn less than the $18,200 tax-free threshold, including pensioners and self-funded retirees. Ninety-seven per cent of people who receive franking credit refunds have a taxable income below $87,000 – people who have worked hard, saved hard and paid tax.”
The difference being between being “earned” and “taxable income”, which was the Grattan Institute researchers’ point, as well as Labor’s.
All of this means we’ll be seeing more Connie in question time later today.
So let’s get to it. Mike Bowers is in the hallways, so make sure you keep an eye on @mpbowers and @mikepbowers. You’ll also see him pop up on the Instagram story at @pyjamapolitics. You’ll find me in the comments and @amyremeikis.
I am on coffee number two and hunting for a third, so I hope you are all strapped in.
Let’s get into it.
Updated
