So on the eve of the government looking like it will have a victory, Tony Abbott pops his head up to say: beware the backbench.
And Barnaby Joyce will be back in the news.
So situation normal then!
We’ll leave it there, but will be back in the morning when it looks like the income tax debate will be wrapped up.
A massive thank you to Mike Bowers, who is still in the chamber getting that magic, and to the Guardian brains trust, without whom I could not do this.
And of course to everyone who read and played along today. It was a big day of incremental movements and your company made it all worthwhile.
I am going to grab an early night before the last sitting day this week, but I’ll be back early tomorrow.
And as always: take care of you.
Updated
The pinks and greens have dropped, so here is that question I missed earlier from Tanya Plibersek:
“Is the prime minister proud that he is the first prime minister in Australian history to unite the government, Catholic and independent school sectors against his policies? Why is this prime minister so devoid of judgment that he ignored the people who teach our kids when they told him that his schools funding regime was profoundly
flawed?”
Josh Frydenberg took it, on behalf of Simon Birmingham:
“I thank the member for Sydney for her question. I’m pleased to inform her that under the Turnbull government’s education reforms the schools in her electorate will on average be $2½ million better off.
“The Bourke Street public school in her electorate will see a 51.4% increase over the decade. That is a result of the Turnbull government’s reforms. The member for Maribyrnong, the leader of the opposition, has 54 schools in his electorate and 30,000 students, and every school will get more money under the Turnbull government’s reforms, an average of over $7.2m extra for schools in Maribyrnong.
“The leader of the opposition and the member for Sydney should know that when it comes to education we have ended the 27 special deals. We’ve ended the 27 special deals and we’ve put in place a fully funded improvement to education funding for Australian students, more than $20bn extra.
“When it comes to the seat of Longman, the Queensland Catholic Education Commission will see its funding increase from just over $9,000 to just over $12,000 per student over the decade, a 36½% increase. When it comes to the seat of Braddon, the Tasmanian Catholic Education Office will see their funding go from over $10,000 per student to over $15,000 per student over the decade, an increase of 44%.
“In the electorate of Mayo, Catholic Education South Australia will see its funding go from over $9,000 per student today to well over $12,000 per student within the decade, a nearly 40% increase.
“Mr Speaker, don’t look at what Labor says. Look at what Labor does. They had 27 special deals. The Turnbull government is increasing funding for school students across the country and across all sectors.”
Updated
Going back to the Senate, here is what Penny Wong said in response to Mathias Cormann’s ultimately successful motion to guillotine the debate:
Not happy in failing in their attempt to hold the tax cuts for low- and middle-income earners hostage to the tax cuts for high-income earners, what we now see are a government spitting the dummy and not even allowing debate in the Senate chamber. How pathetic! What a government! We gave you 3½ hours last night by agreement. You lose a vote on an amendment and you say: ‘Oh, my goodness! We have to guillotine debate because we don’t want any further debate.’ What are you so scared of? This is a complete dummy spit by senator Cormann, the man who styles himself as the leader of the government in the Senate. What a dummy spit! You lose on one amendment and now you want to guillotine the debate. I mean, really?
But let me just come back to this point. The government say, ‘Our priority is low- and middle-income earners.’ Do you know what? They’re holding tax cuts for low- and middle-income Australians hostage to tax cuts for high-income earners that they want to deliver in six years’ time. That’s what this guillotine is about. They’re saying, ‘Let’s hold hostage the tax cuts for low- and middle-income Australians that will apply from July this year – next month – that everyone in this chamber supports, except the Greens, to tax cuts for high-income earners in six years’ time.’ That is what this guillotine is all about. It’s not about low- and middle-income earners. It’s about executing a naked political tactic to prioritise high-income earners in six years’ time.
It only needs to be said to demonstrate how ridiculous it is.
I would say this to the crossbench: regardless of your position on tax, what a discourtesy to the chamber. We gave this government 3½ hours of debate last night, because we do understand that it is important to get on with this debate. We have amendments from senator Storer, we have amendments from the opposition and we have amendments from the other members of the crossbench which have not even been debated. Did Mathias send me a little text and say, ‘Can we please have a bit more time. Give up the MPI’? No. Because, you know what, they want the timetable to get it down to the House and back up again. This week it’s all entirely about the political tactics but don’t worry about the Senate chamber and actually debating amendments.
I say to the crossbench: why don’t you make them guillotined for tomorrow so we can actually finish the debate? How about that? You see, I can’t move an amendment because he’s moved the motion in a way that I won’t be able to amend it. How about we guillotine tomorrow, so that we can actually have a debate? If you don’t agree to finish debate here what is clear is that this government is able to walk right over this Senate chamber as a legislating chamber, because they want to execute a political tactic. This is nothing to do with anything other than holding tax cuts for low-income Australians hostage to tax cuts for high-income Australians in six years’ time.
It is an utter discourtesy, Senator Cormann, to me and to the opposition, when we gave you what you asked for – additional hours last night – to come in here and spring on us, during a question time debate, that you’re going to move a guillotine to not allow any further debate beyond 6.30pm, which will not even allow the crossbench to debate their changes. Senator Cormann, if you and your team think that you will get cooperation from the opposition around a range of issues you want I think you better think something else, because we’re not going to allow a discourtesy to the chamber like this to subsist. At no stage were we even asked to give up the MPI today – not even that – after we’d agreed to give up 3½ hours last night. Why? Because you want a political tactic.”
Updated
Natalie Joyce talks to Women's Weekly
Women’s Weekly has just broken the news that its big interview in its new issue is Natalie Joyce.
Much has been written, discussed and debated on the Barnaby Joyce affair. The extramarital relationship with his press secretary, Vikki Campion, culminated in his resignation as deputy prime minister and resulted in the birth of their baby boy, Sebastian.
The couple’s much-maligned interview with Seven’s Sunday Night program earlier this month brought media attention surrounding the story to fever pitch. However, despite intense interest from many quarters, Natalie has remained silent – until now.
Although by no means taken lightly, Natalie Joyce’s decision to finally speak up came easily. Along with a strong desire to set the record straight, she had four compelling reasons: her daughters Bridgette, 21, Julia, 20, Caroline, 18, and Odette, 15.
In an unpaid and candid interview, Natalie opens up about happier times with one of the country’s most polarising characters, a man she now believes is on the brink of an inevitable breakdown. She shares memories of growing up in the bush she still calls home, of teaching the importance of being kind, and with grace and conviction shares her feelings on Vikki Campion, a woman she says destroyed her family and stole her life.
Much has been made of the $150,000 price tag on Barnaby and Vikki’s Channel Seven exclusive, and Vikki’s role in negotiating the deal. Describing the TV interview as “an absolute disgrace” Natalie says it didn’t come as a great shock to her that Vikki was the driving force behind it.
“I wasn’t surprised she sold their ‘exclusive’ story, and certainly not surprised the $150,000 went to her child, but it begs the question: if Barney agreed to be a part of it, how could he allow his four girls to be overlooked? In saying that, I wouldn’t want a cent of that money. It was all we could do to watch it without throwing a brick at the TV!”
For Natalie, however, this was never about money. It was simply about being heard.
“I’m normally a very private person but I knew I had to find my voice. They thought I would lie down, but this time I couldn’t,” she says.
“I’m doing this so the girls feel empowered, and know their mum stood up and defended our fine name.”
As for those who may suggest her motivation was fuelled by revenge, Natalie says that couldn’t be further from the truth.
In reality it was her desire to be part of the Weekly’s special rural issue that cemented proud country girl Natalie’s decision to share her very personal story with friend and journalist Lizzie Wilson.
It was a decision made well before word of Barnaby and Vikki’s television tell-all had surfaced.
“I’m very proud to be honoured in this issue of the Weekly, a tribute to rural women across our land,” says Natalie. “I’m humbled to be amongst such an extraordinary group of inspiring women.”
And in so bravely and eloquently finding her voice, it’s now Natalie’s turn to inspire women across Australia.
Updated
'Stop taking the party room for granted' – Abbott warns Turnbull
Tony Abbott says by taking the Neg to the Coag meeting on Friday, the government is “subcontracting” the decision to the “Labor state governments”.
But will he cross the floor?
“I hope it is not going to come to that. I really hope it is not going to come to that.
“But I do think the government, the executive government, needs to understand that you can’t take the party room for granted. And I think there has been a bit of that, a bit of taking the party room for granted.
“For instance, the prime minister has developed this practice of discussing legislation at ENORMOUS length, every party room meeting, before we actually get to backbenchers’ questions and comments.
“Now, this is completely unprecedented. When John Howard was the leader, when I was the leader, Malcolm Turnbull was the leader last time round, when Brendan Nelson was the leader, we always went straight from the leadership statement to the backkbench questions and comments.
“But this has almost never happened under the current prime ministership.
“... It is a fundamental failure of process and it is stifling the proper debate that we should be able to have inside our party room.
“And the other point I should make – obviously, because it has to, the government spends an enormous amount of time negotiating with the crossbench. I reckon the government needs to spend a bit more time talking to the backbench.
“Yes, the crossbench senators are important – don’t forget the backbench – because you are only in government because you have a backbench that is prepared to support your legislation.
“I hope it doesn’t come to questions of crossing the floor, I really do. It is not something that any Liberal would like to do. But, but, I don’t think we can be expected to support a policy that will continue to drive prices up, and which will deny our industries the affordable 24/7 power for jobs to continue.”
But yeah, is he going to cross the floor?
“I think what you have had is a pretty strong statement from me, and please be grateful for the pretty strong statements you’ve got, rather than demand something which might be inflammatory and over the top.
“The point I make is: the government has got to sit down and take its own backbench as seriously as it takes the Senate crossbench. That is what has got to happen.
“No government can take its backbench for granted. I didn’t take the backbench for granted when I was prime minister. John Howard certainly never took the backbench for granted when he was prime minister, and I think there has been a little bit too much taking the backbench for granted on energy policy.
“I defy any of your listeners who have the time to go on to the relevant website and pull out the documentation on this Neg. And to tell me if they know exactly what it means.
“You see, the Neg is a set of aspirations, it is not an actual mechanism. The mechanism, such as it is, is dozens and dozens and dozens and dozens of power contracts between providers and consumers, which place very heavy responsibilities on them – not to get prices down, but to get emissions down. And it is interesting that when you do plough though this document and try and penetrate the very opaque language it uses, there are fines of up to $100m for breaching your emission requirements, but there are only fines of $10m for breaching your reliability requirements.
“So you can black out a state and face a fine of $10m but if you fail to meet an emission reduction requirement you might face a fine of $100m. I don’t think that’s sensible.”
Cool, but is he going to cross the floor?
“It is a vital issue. I don’t think there is any more cost of living issue at the moment than power prices and it is not just a cost of living issue for families. It is also a jobs issue for businesses and industry, so it is an absolute critical issue.
“Power prices were a critical issue in the 2010 election, they were a critical issue at the 2013 election, and in both of those elections the Coalition went in there saying we would do what we can to get prices down by not replicating Labor’s emissions obsession, in particular in 2013 by scrapping the carbon tax. And the only time power prices have gone down significantly in the last decade is when we abolished the carbon tax.
“Now, that has got to be the focus of a Coalition government getting power prices down.”
BUT WILL HE CROSS THE FLOOR?
“... It is a big mistake for the Coalition to subcontract out its energy policy to the Labor state governments. Now I am sure that any energy policy would be better managed by a Coalition government, then by a Labor one, but nevertheless we want a policy which is distinctively ours, which is why I say for me, the bottom line is ensuring that we continue to have affordable, 24/7 baseload power in our system and the only way we can get that in current and foreseeable positions is by getting our coal-fired power stations going and build new ones.’
BUT. WILL. HE. CROSS. THE. FLOOR? GOSH
“... There are very clear signals coming from the backbench and from the party room that we have to be taken seriously. That it is not good enough to release these impenetrable discussion documents, go off to Coag, cook up something which the Labor states will support, come back to the party room in August or September and say you’ve got to support this, it is a done deal and if you don’t you are wrecking the government.
“No, we are trying, in this case, to produce a better government.”
GAH! WILL YOU CROSS THE FLOOR OR NOT?
“... The point I am trying to make is that the backbench is at least as important to any government as the crossbench and it needs to be taken just as seriously as the crossbench.”
Updated
#breaking AWU raids trial has been postponed to September 3, set down for an estimated five days #auspol
— Emily Woods (@EmilyHWoods) June 20, 2018
Just a note on what the Senate has just voted on: when the House returns the bill tomorrow, there will be no further debate. It will just go straight to a vote.
Updated
Now Tony Abbott says he thinks the government has been “taking the backbench” for granted on the national energy guarantee.
Updated
And there we have it.
Tony Abbott says he “hopes it doesn’t come to that”, but he might have to cross the floor on the national energy guarantee.
Updated
Tony Abbott is having his regular chinwag to 2GB, his preferred platform outside the party room, to warn the government about the wars he is planning on waging.
Updated
Tony Shepherd, the former chairman of Transfield who conducted a review of the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility (Naif), has been up before a Senate committee examining the scheme.
Labor and Greens senators have been asking about why Shepherd recommended that Naif be exempt from the freedom of information process.
Shepherd said his perception was that in its early days Naif was “burdened by freedom of information requests” as a “campaign was mounted against [it]” which the agency found “disconcerting and difficult to deal with”.
He said:
“That was acting as a distraction and a deterrent and produced an over-abundance of caution.”
And which project was at the centre of this campaign? Shepherd said it was “a particular project in Queensland”. It sounds like the Adani Carmichael coalmine, which has generated fierce scrutiny about possible avenues of receiving taxpayer subsidy or concessional loans.
But Shepherd suggests the Naif has now developed a capacity to deal with “an excessive number” and “frivolous, campaign-driven FOIs” that are not “genuinely seeking information”.
Updated
Peter Dutton also addressed the Refugee Week event at Parliament House:
As the prime minister said, Australia is a great country and we’re built on the hard work and entrepreneurial have-a-go spirit of many who have come before us. Many of our captains of industry and commerce are part of our successful migrant history – including from the worst humanitarian events right across the last century. They have helped put Australia on the global stage and contributed immeasurably to our economic and social success.
As the prime minister pointed out, over 880,000 people have arrived through the humanitarian program since the Second World War, including 55,000 just in the last three years alone and with 20,200 offshore visas granted – that is the highest number since the 1980s – and it is something I think that all Australians should be very proud of. Today, as we mention, we celebrate the successes and the contributions of those who have arrived through the program, including and specifically today in relation to those who have settled in regional Australia.
At recent consultations I was struck by a remarkable story. It was a story of two Chin refugee families who settled in Coffs Harbour in 2006 and with further resettlement, this now has grown to some 250 people of Chin background in Coffs Harbour.
Now despite the obvious challenges of starting again in a new country, they have worked tirelessly to contribute and provide the best opportunities for their families. They carpool to get to work each day on the farms in the early years, they have bought houses, they’ve started businesses, many are now sending their children to low cost private schools and many of them are very proud of the fact, and rightly, that their children have gone on to higher education, including university.
It is the story of hard work, of sacrifice and of aspiration and that is the Australian story.
We will hear from other speakers today, as we heard earlier and we’ll hear right through this week across the country the wonderful success stories of people that have taken a chance, who have taken their family from poverty or from tragedy and they have provided a great opportunity, not only for their children today, but for generations to come – and that is a great success story and it’s one of which Australia can be incredibly proud.
In recent times around 9,000 humanitarian entrants have been resettled into rural and regional Australia and there is, as we know for those of us who live in the city, nothing quite like a country-welcome in Australia.
We have seen the generosity of regional communities and I pay tribute to all of the regional mayors and councils and communities who have provided a very open welcome and a very warm welcome to those from the most vulnerable parts of the world, the most persecuted who arrive through the offshore program.
Updated
Mathias Cormann has won the motion to rearrange government business.
Here is how the afternoon mess went down, as Mike Bowers saw it:
Updated
I missed this, just before question time.
Concetta Fierravanti-Wells announced this:
Today on World Refugee Day we announce the Australian government will provide additional humanitarian assistance to meet the urgent needs of Rohingya people in Bangladesh.
The UN estimates that more than 900,000 Rohingya are now living in Cox’s Bazar, including more than 700,000 people who have fled Myanmar since August 2017.
The additional assistance will support the delivery of food, shelter, health and protection services through the United Nations Refugee Agency, the International Organisation for Migration and the World Food Program.
Our latest funding package of $18.4m will contribute to the provision of food for more than 800,000 people and nutritious supplements for around 139,000 women and children. It will reinforce shelters, pre-position food supplies and relocate up to 135,000 people at the highest risk of landslides.
It will also help reunite children with their families, create safe areas for vulnerable women and children and provide incomes to around 40,000 women. With the onset of the monsoon season, conditions in the camps are deteriorating. There are up to 200,000 people living on land that is vulnerable to landslides and flooding. The risk of disease outbreak remains high and there are significant concerns for the safety of women and children.
The additional funding brings Australia’s total humanitarian response to the Rohingya crisis to $70m since September 2017.
In 2017-18, Australia provided more than $200m to assist with displacement crises in nine countries.
Updated
So after all of that, the Senate will continue to debate the tax bill until 6.30 tonight.
Then the House will get it tomorrow morning.
It will send it back to the Senate, because it won’t like that stage three has been knocked off.
The Senate, at this stage, and I stress, at this stage, will then probably pass it. Centre Alliance have said they would pass the whole package if it returned to the Senate.
Labor have committed to repealing it, if they get into government.
All round good times.
Updated
The bells have rung for the division guillotining the debate:
Ayes: 37
Noes: 33
Mathias Cormann is now asking the Senate to return to the income tax debate.
Updated
From Mike Bowers, to you:
Updated
Here was Chris Bowen’s take from just before question time:
One Nation voted with the government to keep stage three despite the rhetoric and positioning prior to the vote. This says a lot about One Nation. They always find a way to vote with the government. There’s a couple of explanations for this vote.
Pauline Hanson told the Senate: ‘The tax cuts are going to be up to $200,000. I am a very fortunate Australian to be earning more than $200,000. I’m paying tax at 45 cents on the dollar on that. I’m not getting tax relief.’
Senator Hanson appears to misunderstand how the Australian tax system works, how the marginal tax system works.
By voting for stage three she has voted for tax relief for herself and for every other high income earner in Australia. Australians over $200,000 will get a tax cut under stage three.
In fact the Government’s own calculator indicates stage three provides a tax relief of $7,725 for an Australian on $200,000.
So maybe Senator Hanson simply doesn’t know what she is voting on.
Alternatively there is some secret deal between the government and One Nation.
We’ve seen this before. We saw this on company taxes. One Nation declaring they were going to vote for these big business company tax cuts and us being told that that was a straight-forward arrangement.
Only months later did we find out there was a secret deal between the government and One Nation. We still don’t know the full details about what’s in that deal because the government refuses to release them.
Updated
Pauline Hanson does look like voting for the whole package though.
So the question remains – what did she get in return?
Updated
Richard Di Natale is also speaking out against the government attempt to guillotine the debate, so it can vote on the rest of the tax cuts – he uses the point that Pauline Hanson doesn’t understand what she is voting for. (Hanson had claimed earlier that she wouldn’t get a tax cut. She will – about $11 grand worth)
“If you don’t understand it, don’t vote for it,” he says.
Updated
So on my rough count we just heard:
33 aspiration/aspirationals
10 mystifieds
4 slimys
3 snob/snobby/snobbery
Malcolm Turnbull returns to the floor to give that answer which he had taken on notice:
The median of all wages is $53,000 a year.
And QT ends.
Updated
While looking to the Senate, I missed a question Tanya Plibersek asked on education and when the pinks and greens are out (the Senate and Hansard QT records) I’ll do my best to throw it up.
Updated
Mathias Cormann moves to gag Senate debate
So the debate can return to the tax bill
Here is the motion:
(a) government business order of the day no. 1 (Treasury Laws Amendment [Personal Income Tax Plan] Bill 2018) be considered under a limitation of time, and that the time allotted for all remaining stages be until 6.30pm today;
(b) paragraph (a) of this order shall operate as a limitation of debate under standing order 142; and
(c) on the reporting of any messages from the House of Representatives relating to the bill, the message be considered immediately in committee of the whole and any questions on the remaining stages of the bill be put immediately without amendment or debate.
Basically, that is a tactical move by the government, because the vote timing means it could return to the House this evening, before being rejected and then return to the Senate – where the government can once again call on a vote on the whole package – which, at this stage, it looks like winning.
Penny Wong has A LOT of things to say about this and none of them good.
Updated
Bill Shorten to Malcolm Turnbull:
Why is the prime minister telling working Australians to get a better job, but on the other hand, blocking Labor’s plan to give 63,000 people in Longman who earn less than $125,000 and includes aged care workers, a tax cut of up to $928 a year? Why is the prime minister blocking an income tax plan which will be double the tax cut that the government is currently offering people?
Turnbull:
“Labor party may be mystified by aspiration but nobody is mystified by the way in which the leader of the opposition again and again misleads the house, misleads the house. I said no such thing. You know that very well. You know that very well. And just because you repeat a falsehood does not make it true.
“Australians, whether they work in aged care, whether they work in manufacturing, whether they work in agriculture, are entitled to aspire to do whatever they want to do. They are entitled to aspire to better paid jobs, two different jobs, to promotions. They are entitled to aspire to dream, and our job, as the government, and I would say the parliament, is to do everything we can to enable them to realise those aspirations.
“And the Labor party stands in the way of those aspirations. They want those workers and particularly those that are getting on a bit in years, those 60-year-olds, yes, they have to stay put, don’t they? They can’t aspire to anything. It does not think, [with its] patronising smugness [and] slimy insinuations about older Australians, it is sickening, and it would embarrass the men and women who were leaders of the Labor party in years gone by.
“No doubt, we don’t have to have doubt why Paul Keating said Labor is fading because it is not able to connect to aspiration or Australians, and the reason why? It’s smug in those big government salaries, the Labor party is mystified by the way in which millions of Australians want to get ahead, and they want to keep them there in their place.”
Again – this is the do as we say, not as we do argument. Both sides are taking half a sentence and making it fact.
Updated
We just got our daily hit of “Big Trev”, which is Trevor Ruthenberg, the LNP candidate for Longman, who needs to be referred to as Big Trev, so people will have some idea of his name.
Updated
Julie Collins to Malcolm Turnbull:
“Why is this snobbish prime minister telling workers, Australians, to get a better job, instead of supporting Labor’s plan to give 39,000 people in Braddon who earn less than $125,000, including aged care workers, a tax cut of up to $928 a year, almost double the tax cut they will get from this government?”
Tony Smith takes umbrage with the word snobbish:
My personal view is this demeans the house, because it leads to very aggressive questions, that have statements in that imply questions, and that particular question has taken it, I think, to a new low.”
Tony Burke asks if that ruling also applies to answers and Smith sounds like he says yes, but it is hard to tell. But it is enough to quiet the House RIGHT down.
Turnbull:
“I will take the opportunity from the question to refer to some important benefits that will flow to the residents and constituents in Braddon from the government’s economic plan. Mr Speaker, there are 39,300 taxpayers in Braddon who will benefit from the 1 July this year, our personal income tax plan, with around 40,600 who will receive the full $530. But Mr Speaker, that is not all. There will be, if Labor were to be able to impose its retiree tax, grabbing back, grabbing back the franking credits that retirees are able to enjoy under a law that is fair and has had bipartisan support from the time ...”
Turnbull goes on to say that the opposition “can’t even run a successful class war” and goes on to talk about Labor’s franking credit plan, but not even he seems that in to it.
Greg Hunt is now trying very hard not to yell his dixer answer. He is leaning on the despatch box like it’s a bar, and he’s restraining himself from telling the group at the closest table that Stop! is actually the greatest Spice Girl song of all time.
Updated
Josh Frydenberg is taking a dixer on the national energy guarantee, and he says Labor, but we all know he means Tony Abbott.
Updated
Terri Butler to Malcolm Turnbull:
“Can this arrogant and out-of-touch prime minister confirm he is dealing with One Nation so that a banker from Clayfield earning a million dollars gets a tax cut of over $7,000 a year, the bank gets a tax cut of $17bn but a bartender gets a tax cut of only $10 a week?”
Scott Morrison takes this one:
Just trust me on this one – the Coalition has the better plan, aspiration is good, we pay for the services all those people rely on, and also, bigger earners pay more tax.
I just can not with these answers any more.
Updated
Shorter Peter Dutton:
People smugglers love Labor, people smugglers want Labor to win the next election, Labor is bad. Also, Labor policy which is not actually policy yet, because it is just an idea at this stage, is totally Labor policy, even though our policy which is not policy, is totally not policy.
Is everyone clear?
Chris Bowen to Malcolm Turnbull:
Prime minister, what is the median personal income in Australia?
Turnbull:
He takes it on notice.
And then, qualifies:
“But it is certainly well below the average full-time weekly earnings, because many Australians are working part-time and are therefore on low earnings. Rather than make an attempt to pick a number, I will take that on notice and I will come back to the honourable member on it.”
Updated
Michael McCormack is taking a dixer, which is the only inspiration I need to make myself another cup of tea. Maybe I’ll even throw in a mint slice. I’ve earned it. We all have.
Tony Burke to Malcolm Turnbull:
What policy commitments have been ... given to One Nation in return for their two votes in the Senate today?
Turnbull:
“I thank the honourable member for his question and I understand his interest in ensuring that the Bill that he voted for when it was last in the House of Representatives. [The Senate will send it here and we] will be voting to send it straight back. There is an opportunity for him to show a consistency, steadfast commitment to push aside the mystification of the members of Sydney and vote for the bill and ensure that Australians have a fairer tax system.”
Updated
Catherine King to Malcolm Turnbull:
“Can the prime minister confirm that he is dealing with One Nation so that an investment banker in a harbour side mansion earning $1m will get a tax cut of $7,000, but a nurse in Caboolture will get a tax cut of only $10 a week? Is this why this arrogant and out-of-touch prime minister is telling working Australians, who are doing it tough, to just get a better job?”
Turnbull:
“I was very pleased to meet today a leadership group from Ballarat. They were here, they come here every year. They are inspiring people. Great to see you. These young men and women came here as part of their leadership program to learn about the importance of leadership and values, and I can’t say how disappointed they would be to hear their federal member misrepresent what was said in this house, because they know very well that what leaders do is tell the truth, and what the honourable member did was not tell the truth and she knows that.
“The only party in this place that believes it knows better than workers, whatever their occupation and whatever their pay scale, is the Labor Party. We know that our job is to enable Australians to do their best. That’s our job. To dream their dreams and do all they can to realise, to aspire as they wish and work hard, to meet and reach those aspirations. The only people for whom aspiration is a mystery, the only people who want to keep 60-year-olds in their place and think they are too old to earn more money or get a promotion or do anything else are these smug young men and women on the Labor side.
“Let me tell you, Mr Speaker, I reckon the young leaders from Ballarat have got more integrity and more character than has been shown by their federal member today.”
(Sidenote: Tveeder keeps changing old to wild, making the sentence read that 60-year-olds are too wild to earn more money.)
(Sidenote two: The very argument the government is prosecuting, that Labor is taking it out of context and is being dishonest, is exactly the same argument they deploy, when they refer to the opposition as being “mystified” by aspiration. Would it be that difficult to get some consistency here please?)
Updated
A dixer to Julie Bishop has the government comparing Labor views to Venezuela – which she first raised during the weekend national council meeting, after a CFMEU official wrote to her “urging me to publicly applaud the recent corrupt election of this brutal regime in Venezuela”.
Sigh.
Updated
Michelle Rowland to Malcolm Turnbull:
Can this arrogant and out-of-touch prime minister confirm that under his tax scheme a telco executive from Sydney’s upper North Shore, earning $1m a year, gets a tax cut of over $7,000, but a shop assistant in western Sydney, selling phone plans, gets a tax cut of just $10 a week? Is this why the prime minister is telling working Australians who are doing it tough to just get a better job?
Turnbull:
“The tax relief depends on a person’s income and indeed, it would apply to a lawyer working for a large telco as well, it will. Indeed, they are well paid as well. Mr Speaker, Mr Speaker, what the honourable member is trying to argue is that the personal income tax reform is lacking in equity, and yet, and yet under our plan, not only ... will Australians pay no more than 32.5 cents on any dollar they earn over $41,000, until they get to $200,000, when the 45-cent tax rate comes in, at taxpayers earning over $200,000, if paid 35%, plus the Medicare levy, that they will constitute a larger share of the overall number of taxpayers and a substantially larger share of the total personal income tax receipts.
“... This government encourages aspiration and incentive and enterprise, and that is the big difference. We are inspired by the aspiration of Australians, the Labor Party is mystified by it.”
Updated
Bob Katter has the independents’ question and it is to Julie Bishop:
“I refer to articles on the front page of the Australian newspaper on Thursday and Saturday centring on secret American Korean War army files concerning Bruce Gillan and the other 42 missing Australians.
“In 1953, the Italian government received from its ally the United States a secret communique issued in September 1953 acknowledging that nine Australian personnel have been alive and in prison in Korea, and does our government continue to prefer they had been killed in action?”
Bishop:
“The Australian government, and I am sure I speak on behalf of everyone in this house, shares the grief and the frustration of the families of the 43 Australian servicemen missing in action after the War of 1950 to 1953.
“An official list of all missing in action was released in 1953, it was in fact published in the media of the day and I have a copy of an article from the Sydney Morning Herald in mid 1953, which lists those missing in action under various categories, both air force and army. It lists them as either confirmed POWs, confirmed killed, confirmed wounded, or believed POWs, it believed killed, believed wounded.
“In fact, Flying Officer Gillan is listed on this as missing, believed POW. Successive Australian governments had sought to ascertain the status of all 43 missing in action, but at that time, the North Korean regime did not confirm their status. And I know successive Australian governments have continued to make inquiries.
“In fact, I instigated exhaustive inquiries by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, to the defence department, of the US and South Korean governments, and I responded to the relative of Flying Officer Gillan, courtesy of your offers, in writing in October 2016 to confirm that no further information had been made available.
“The tragic truth is the only authority that would have more information, it could have more information, is the North Korean regime, and we have very limited diplomatic engagement with North Korea and that has been the case for some time. Nevertheless, our embassy in Seoul has continued to make representations to the North Korean government about our missing in action as recently as March of this year, the summit meeting between President Trump and Kim Jong-un and the declaration that was signed that specifically refers to the repatriations of the remains of POWs and missing in action does give us some hope that there will be a final resolution of the status of theAustralian defence servicemen.
Our defence personnel remain in constant contact with our counterparts in the United States, and I personally raised this issue with the acting ambassador of the United States during the course of this week.
Updated
Chris Bowen to Malcolm Turnbull:
Can the prime minister confirm that this government has previously told Australians to get ahead, to get richer parents? And just yesterday told a 60-year-old aged care worker to get a better job. Will [you] stop this snobbery? And why, prime minister, are you giving an investment banker a tax cut of $7,000 a year and an aged care worker and $10 a week tax cut. How arrogant and out of touch can this prime minister get?
Turnbull:
“Again, nothing better summed up the character of the modern Labor party than the dishonest question just asked by the honourable member.”
Updated
Scott Morrison is saying things. We move on.
Oh – and Tim Wilson was booted for interjecting.
Updated
Brian Mitchell to Malcolm Turnbull:
Yesterday he told a 60-year-old aged care work in Burnie to get a better job. Is this sort of snobbery the reason this Prime Minister is giving a millionaire investment banker a tax cut of $7,000 and an aged care worker a tax cut of just $10 a week?
Turnbull:
The member Lyons is no more truthful in his recounting of yesterday’s question time than his leader, and I am disappointed that he has shown that he is of the same character as the leader of the opposition. Here are the facts.
“The Labor party is patronising 60-year-old workers and is patronising people who work in the aged care sector, it is patronising them and it talks about millionaires getting $7,000 tax cuts. You know what? Under our tax plan, the honourable member will get a $7,000 tax cut.
“He will! He could always get it back. He could always give it back. The minister for revenue has a receipt book at the ready.
“The Labor party has betrayed and abandoned the people, the aspiring workers that Labor was founded to defend. They have abandoned them. This is modern Labor, it is a disgrace, it is an embarrassment, if aspiration is a mystery to the modern Labor party, I tell you what, it is not a mystery to millions of Australians who want to get ahead and know that only a strong economy will enable them to do that.”
Updated
Question time begins
Taking a break from the national biscuit war I have started on Twitter (it is the mint slice, don’t @ me) let’s head to the battle in the chamber.
Bill Shorten to Malcolm Turnbull:
“When 8,000 Telstra workers lost their job today, the minister for urban infrastructure shrugged his shoulders and said: ‘As a former telco executive, I can say these things do happen from time to time.’ Yesterday the prime minister told a 60-year-old age care worker in Burnie to get a better job. Doesn’t this reveal everything the prime minister stands for? Tax cuts for executives, cheap insults for Australian workers.”
Turnbull:
“That question demonstrates everything you need to know about the leader of the opposition. He cannot tell the truth. He cannot tell the truth. It’s only 24-hour is, 24 hours and he is already misleading the house about what I said to the house.
“And what about the slimy patronising insinuation he made about 60-year-old Australians? What about that? What about that? Apparently according to him, if you are 60 years of age, you have to stay in the same job forever, earn the same money forever. You can’t … Let’s say you are a 60-year-old registered nurse working in aged care. I’m sure there are many of that age in that industry. You can’t aspire to become a manager?
You can’t aspire to earn more? What if you are a personal care attendant? If you are 60, you can’t aspire to train and become an enrolled or registered nurse?
What this tells you again is the smug, slimy insinuations that Labor party make about the aspirations of Australians, we believe in their aspirations. We know that every Australian is entitled to do everything they can to realise their dream, to aspire, to go to work, to train, to earn more money, to move from one job to another, one department to another.
It is their lives. They should be able to manage their lives as they wish. Our job, we believe, is the government’s role is to enable Australians to do their best. You have just heard from this slimy, insinuating, patronising leader of the opposition that he believes that 60-year-old workers should stay in their place.
“That is what you believe. You don’t believe 60 is the new 40. You believe 60 is frozen in time. That is very significant they refer to a 60-year-old because the insinuation there was that is it, you can’t do anything else, you can’t earn anything more.
“Well, let me tell you. I have been 60 and I know. I am over 60 and 60-year-olds have got plenty of energy, plenty of ambition, and there is a lot of them and they are going to come after you at the next election.”
The problem with that argument, is in his very next dixer answer, he cherry picks the part of Tanya Plibersek’s answer yesterday, where she said she the aspiration debate “mystified” her – without going on to use any of the explanation.
So, ugh.
Updated
Malcolm Turnbull was stopped after his address to the Refugee Week Event and asked about Telstra:
The loss of so many jobs is very, very tough, heartbreaking news for the Australians, the Australian workers at Telstra - eight thousand over the next three years - that have been affected.
I’ve spoken with the chief executive about this last night. Telstra is putting in place a fund, as you know, to support the transition of the employees that leave Telstra onto new occupations and new opportunities.
But it’s a reminder of why it’s so important to have a strong economy. A strong economy where new jobs are being created all the time so that while one company reduces its workforce there are other businesses, new businesses and including in that telco sector which is a very dynamic one, that are creating new opportunities.
The most important thing is to maintain a strong economy and that is what our policies are doing and that is what our economic plan is doing. It is what our tax relief is doing at the corporate level and will continue to do and of course it is why our personal income tax reform is so important.
A strong economy ensures that people who lose a job in one business will be able to find a new job or start their own business. Andy Penn, as I said, has given me an undertaking that Telstra will be putting the $50 million he mentioned to work to ensure that transition is supported. But the greater security for the future of those employees comes from having a strong economy and the greatest threat to that is Bill Shorten and the Labor Party.
Updated
We are well and truly in election mode.
Labor have taken Malcolm Turnbull’s words, and well – let him say what they’d like, himself.
You’ll find it here
Updated
Let’s assess the state of play
Given that whole sequence could have been confusing for folks watching on at home, let me snapshot where things are at now in the tax debate, and point forward to what is likely to come next.
If you’ve been following on with Amy you’ll know that stage three (the tax cuts for the highest income earners) has been stripped out of the bill.
I suspect that is the only amendment to the bill that will carry during the Senate debate, because two of the critical crossbenchers, Stirling Griff and Rex Patrick, are about to switch camps.
Stirling and Rex just voted with Labor and the Greens and Tim Storer to knock out stage three, but they support stage two of the tax cuts. So now, they will start voting in the government column. When there is another vote later on to knock out stage two, there won’t be the numbers.
So what’s my best guess about what happens next?
Stage three will be the only casualty. We then move on the decisive vote: that the income tax bill as amended be agreed to.
At that point, things get hard to follow, so bear with me.
Even though Labor and the Greens just voted to strip out stage three, and have trousered that tactical victory, if these blocs do what they say they will do, then they will vote AGAINST the bill at that point. Labor will vote no because they oppose stage two.
The Greens will vote no because they oppose the whole bill.
So the government will have to line up the bulk of the crossbench voting with them in order to get the package lifted out of the Senate and back in the hands of the House.
That looks most likely at this stage, given Pauline Hanson and her merry band (of one) just voted to keep stage three.
On current indications, we could get Senate uplift of the amended package tonight.
Once the package goes back to the House I suspect the House will decline to accept the amendments, then the game of chicken moves onto end game.
The bill will come back to the Senate and Patrick and Griff will have to decide whether they dislike stage three sufficiently to vote the lot down, or whether they pass it through.
Fun times.
Updated
Earlier today, Pauline Hanson attacked the Greens after Sarah Hanson-Young accused her of voting to give herself “a massive big tax cut”.
Hanson said she earned the same as Hanson-Young - and would not be getting any tax cut.
But she appears to have misunderstood how the progressive tax cut system worked, as Hanson-Young pointed out shortly after:
She either has no idea what on earth she is voting on, or she is lying to the Australian people and she is misleading the Senate,” she said.
“Let’s crunch the numbers, let’s find out exactly how much Senator Hanson is going to get from this tax cut - $11,815 worth of a tax cut. That is how much Senator Pauline Hanson has just pocketed for herself, that is what she has just voted for. She has just voted to feather her own nest.
“And she came in here and she lied to the Australian people. She lied to One Nation voters. She said she wasn’t getting a tax cut at all.
“What a fraud.”
Chris Bowen said Labor was still in discussions with Centre Alliance about how it will vote with stage two of the tax cuts, but thanked them for how they handled themselves so far, despite government “bullying”.
As for the other votes:
Tim Storer only supports stage one.
Centre Alliance support stage one and two.
So, on that presumption, Labor might not have the numbers to win any further debates.
But we wait and see, because this is the 45th parliament Senate and guessing what it will do next is like guessing when Beyoncé will drop new music. YOU NEVER KNOW.
Updated
The @ParlLibrary analysis of the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Maintaining Income Thresholds) Bill - by Lauren Cook - is now up. Bill freezes indexation of income test thresholds for family payments and parental leave pay, + FTB supplement rates https://t.co/S9stOpS0YI
— Michael Klapdor (@whobekindto) June 20, 2018
And as we flagged earlier this morning – the tax debate will now go on hold until after 5pm, while the Senate deals with other business.
Sadly 12.45 has brought an end to @MathiasCormann trolling @SenatorWong and vice versa. Tax debate back on ice for now as the chamber pushes on with daily business @AmyRemeikis #auspol
— Katharine Murphy (@murpharoo) June 20, 2018
Updated
As for how that vote played out:
On the government side, you had Fraser Anning, Cory Bernardi, Brian Burston, One Nation, Derryn Hinch and David Leyonhjelm.
On Team Amendment, you had Labor, the Greens, Tim Storer and Centre Alliance.
(Four pairs were also given.)
Now because the vote was to proceed with stage three, the tie meant the question was negated – under Senate rules, it just defaults to negating the question. So the government lost its bid to move it forward.
It will go back to the House. The government will reject the Senate’s vote. And around-and-around the merry-go-round, we’ll go.
And who said the Senate wasn’t fun!
Updated
tl;dr
So the first major chamber victory on the income tax package goes to the splitters faction @AmyRemeikis #auspol
— Katharine Murphy (@murpharoo) June 20, 2018
But remember – this doesn’t mean it is dead, buried, cremated. It’s more the Tony Abbott version of that – it’ll go back to the House, where we know the government won’t accept it.
So, as Murph tells me, it’s a tactical victory for Labor, but there is a ways to go in this fight.
Updated
So what just happened?
Well, Scott Ryan brought it to a tied vote. And under the Senate rules, because it was a tied vote, the Senate has knocked out the third step, on the tied vote.
So stage three of the tax plan, is gone.
The amendment was negated because of a tied vote. Because it was tied, that means the Senate has just voted to strip out stage 3 (despite the Coalition holding Hanson for that vote) #auspol @AmyRemeikis
— Katharine Murphy (@murpharoo) June 20, 2018
Senate president uses vote
So the deadlock has been broken – and its a tie.
The Senate president Scott Ryan voted on the floor with the government #auspol @AmyRemeikis
— Katharine Murphy (@murpharoo) June 20, 2018
The amendment was negated #auspol @AmyRemeikis
— Katharine Murphy (@murpharoo) June 20, 2018
Updated
The background to that – from Katharine Murphy
The Senate is moving into the amendments stage of the income tax debate. The first amendment being moved by Labor is to split off the stage three tax cuts – the ones that benefit high income earners and start from 2024.
Labor’s Senate leader Penny Wong quotes the South Australian cross bencher Tim Storer, saying these tax cuts are designed to “hold future parliaments to ransom”. She says they will impact the progressivity of the tax system. Wong says voters will have to elect Malcolm Turnbull twice more if they are ever to receive the benefits.
The finance minister Mathias Cormann assures the Senate that’s not the case. No one has to re-elect Malcolm Turnbull twice more. The Senate can just legislate today and be done with it.
The Greens are supporting this amendment. So are the two Centre Alliance senators. Pauline Hanson is currently shouting about the Greens. The Greens want to block tax cuts to support foreign aid and “open up the floodgates” to refugees, Hanson says, before veering into comparatively low power prices in the UK compared to prices here.
Hanson doesn’t make her position clear on the amendment currently under consideration.
Updated
The Senate is voting on the first Labor amendment –
The Senate is currently voting on an amendment to strip out stage 3 of the tax cuts. Labor, Greens, Centre Alliance & Tim Storer voting in favour. Hanson voting with the government to not split the bill #auspol @AmyRemeikis
— Katharine Murphy (@murpharoo) June 20, 2018
Updated
Malcolm Turnbull will be making some comments on Refugee Week in the next few minutes.
Linda Reynolds not backing down on ABC comments
Asked about her Monday night comments about the ABC, while on the ABC (where she said it was valid to be having the debate and told Tony Jones that 40% of his salary was probably coming from WA, which is the most WA thing to say, ever), Linda Reynolds told Sky News she has no regrets about kicking the debate down the road, while the government desperately tries to stuff it back in a box:
“Not at all,” she said.
“I don’t walk back from anything I said. I made it very clear up front that the government won’t be privatising the ABC, but what I did say is Australian taxpayers spend $1.2bn a year on the ABC and I get a lot of feedback from rural and regional Western Australia, that they would like to see more services from the ABC, because they don’t get the same access to the media markets that those of us living in capital cities do.
“So it is absolutely a valid question to discuss where does that $1.2bn go. I think it should be more focused on rural and regional Australia and I have had a lot of support for that position since then.
“And it is taxpayer money. And every single dollar of taxpayer’s money is accountable.”
Except, apparently, when governments or government ministers don’t want you to know how some money is being spent – like Michaelia Cash’s legal bills. You have to wait until estimates for that. And then maybe, not even then.
Updated
The Senate has moved on to debating the amendments to the income tax bill.
You’ll find those here.
Over on Sky News, Linda Reynolds says the government is “achingly close” to having its bill passed.
A few early observations on the AEC’s redistribution of Victorian seats.
Labor is pleased because the final boundaries have not changed the proposal for Dunkley and have made only small changes to the proposal for Corangamite – both currently held by Liberal MPs, which the proposed redistribution turned notionally Labor or into a 50-50 contest. Given Labor will pick up the new seat of Fraser in Melbourne’s west, it could be looking at +3 seats from Victoria alone at the next election.
There’s also a suggestion that a few changes in Liberal MP Jason Wood’s seat of La Trobe and its boundaries with neighbouring seats Monash, Holt and Casey could help Labor, but the parties are still waiting for more info from the AEC.
On the plus side for Liberal MP Sarah Henderson and her successors, though, is the fact they will remain the member for Corangamite not the member for Cox.
Bill Shorten holds the seat of Maribyrnong, which had a big chunk taken out to create the new seat of Fraser. Previously Shorten said he will wait and see the final distribution before deciding which to contest, so he hasn’t ruled out a switch. However, Labor’s right faction has the numbers on the ground so will likely take them both unless there is an agreement to parachute a star candidate in from another faction.
Updated
That minister Bill Shorten was talking about in the post below was in response to Paul Fletcher’s interview on Sky News this morning.
Asked about the Telstra news, he said:
“Well as a former telco executive I can say these things do happen, from time to time in a very fast moving sector like telecommunications.
“Obviously it is never fun for people being made redundant and absolutely, my sympathies are with them. I understand the Telstra chief executive has said there will be a $50m fund to be used to support various aspects of those redundancies.
“It is worth making the point that the telecommunication sector is changing very fast. That has been the case for 20 years, but seems to be changing even faster now, with the arrival of new mobile technologies like 5G, but also the impact of the NBN, which is changing how people get their fixed line broadband.”
Updated
On the Telstra news, following Stephen Conroy’s comments that the structural change it has flagged was needed for quite some time, Bill Shorten says:
“I’m not going to start re-evaluating the Telstra announcement today just from that angle.
“For me the biggest news I took out of this morning’s announcement is that 8,000 people are told that their jobs will be ending.
“So the very first thing I want to say as Labor leader to these 8,000 Telstra workers and their colleagues is that this is a very tough time.
“To be told that after years and years all of a sudden you won’t have a job, this is big news.
“I want to make them a promise – we’ll make sure that Telstra pays people’s entitlements, everything that people have earned and deserved has got to be paid.
“We want to make sure people aren’t treated as being thrown on the scrap heap, there’s proper transition. I noticed today another Turnbull Government minister has boasted about his telco management experience on television and he said – he just said, ‘This is what happens. This is what happens.’ Well actually, it shows you again how out-of-touch this Turnbull government is. Eight thousand jobs being announced to go is not another day in the office.”
Updated
And the rebuttal in the aspiration debate:
I think that aspiration comes in all shapes and sizes. It’s a legitimate aspiration to want to make more money. That’s entirely legitimate and very important. But there are aspirations that go beyond that. I’ve got an aspiration to see aged care properly funded.
“Those aged-care workers have an aspiration to get a better tax cut than they’re getting. Aspiration can be for parents who want their kids to get an apprenticeship. Aspiration is for one of these Telstra workers to find a job more quickly than they would otherwise. If you have a child with disabilities in the school system,aspiration is getting them the support they need.
“Aspiration comes in all different shapes and sizes and I don’t let Mr Turnbull define aspiration by a bank account.”
Updated
Labor has held the press conference at an Ainslie aged care home, because of the comments Malcolm Turnbull had to say in question time yesterday.
Asked if he was taking Turnbull out of context, Bill Shorten says:
We didn’t put the words in his mouth. He said that an aged-care worker should aspire to get a better job. What a snob. What a snob.
“He thinks that aged-care is not a better job. Lisa, one of the workers in there said she wonders what it will be like when Mr Turnbull needs an aged-care worker.
“Will he tell the person caring for him to get a better job if they want a pay rise? Of course he won’t. For quality of life, they need quality aged-care workers.
“So rather than dismissing some occupations and telling people if they get low pay or low tax cuts, get a better job, I’ve got a different set of advice for Mr Turnbull. Why not work together to pay aged-care workers more?
“Why don’t you back Labor’s proposal which will see the great workers we met in there – the physios, exercise experts, carers and attendants – we could give them together a $3,000 tax refund in the next three years. That’s just a better plan.”
For the record, here is everything Turnbull said yesterday in relation to that:
The honourable member should remember that the 60-year-old aged-care worker in Burnie is entitled to aspire to get a better job, is entitled to get a promotion, is entitled to be able to earn more money ... [after interjections] no. Working in aged care is a good job, but you are entitled to seek to earn more. [More interjections] Everyone is entitled to aspire [more interjections] ... Every worker, every Australian, is entitled to aspire to earn a better income. Everyone is entitled to aspire to that.”
Ahhh, the dangers of the aspiration debate. So many minefields to stumble into.
Updated
Bill Shorten addresses Pauline Hanson tax attacks
Bill Shorten’s press conference starts just as Pauline Hanson’s speech finishes:
I’ve just got a message or Pauline Hanson - Pauline, remember who voted for you. You’re meant to be the champion of Queensland battlers. 1.9 million Queensland battlers will be better off under Labor’s tax plan than the government’s. It seems that now she’s come to Canberra, she’s forgotten who put her there and that’s a recipe for disaster.
“I say to Senator Hanson, back the battlers, Labor will. Let’s back them together. 1.9 million Queenslanders will be better off under our tax proposals, our tax refunds, than the government’s.
“Please stop just doing everything the Liberals ask of you and instead let’s just stand up for Queensland and stand up for 1.9 million Queenslanders who are better off under our plan.”
Updated
So, in the biggest anticlimax since the Solo Star Wars movie was released, here is Pauline Hanson’s wish list:
“My dilemma is, yes we have a blackhole. Are we going to actually fill that blackhole? My proposal is to go after the multinationals to pay their fair share of tax in this country.
“Look after the Australians, the hard-working families that need some relief and need help in this country.
“Yes, suspend taxation, suspend increases in politician wages and those of bureaucrats.
“How can you actually say to those hard-working Australians, you can’t get a tax relief of even the highest amount of up to $7,000 a year, yet we are seeing bureaucrats receiving pay increases of up to $17,000 a year.
“That doesn’t pass the pub test. It doesn’t pass the pub test with me. That is why my job in the Senate is to represent the Australian people with the best of my ability.”
Pauline Hanson’s +One Nation addresses the senate chamber this morning about her intentions for the governments tax cut bills @AmyRemeikis @murpharoo @GuardianAus #politicslive https://t.co/1eXHvoFUlj pic.twitter.com/xc0jUeb1aE
— Mikearoo (@mpbowers) June 20, 2018
Updated
Penny Wong has responded to the US withdrawal:
Labor is disappointed by the US decision to withdraw from the United Nations Human Rights Council.
It’s entirely a matter for the US which international bodies it chooses to be a member of. However, the absence of a nation looked to as global leader risks emboldening those who do not share our support for democracy and human rights.
We acknowledge the concerns voiced by the US in making its decision. At times the UNHRC has taken decisions which Australia has also opposed.
But Labor believes it is better to remain engaged in international organisations like the UNHRC in order to promote our values and protect our national interests.
That is why Labor welcomed Australia’s appointment to the United Nations Human Rights Council. As the foreign minister said when Australia took up its position:
“It is in our national interest to shape the work of the Human Rights Council and uphold the international rules-based order.”
Labor is a long-standing and consistent advocate for human rights and civil liberties. We will continue to pursue effective human rights diplomacy that supports international and regional security in Australia’s national interest.
We will also continue to work closely with key allies and partners, such as the US, through bilateral and multilateral mechanisms to promote and protect human rights around the world.
Updated
And all of that was for ... nothing.
“I will make my vote clear on the floor of parliament when it comes to vote.”
Updated
Pauline Hanson is setting this up to support the tax cuts:
“Hard-working Australians need a helping hand. They need to know that something will be done for them.”
Updated
Pauline Hanson has moved onto attacking the Greens.
Sarah Hanson-Young rises with a point of order, and is denied.
Hanson says that she has had to “toughen up in this place and it is a shame that others haven’t”.
Hanson, who cried on national television just two weeks ago, when she found out she was about to lose another of her senators.
Updated
New Victorian boundary proposal
There will be no member for Cox.
The Victorian Electoral Commission has just released this updated boundary change proposal:
The augmented electoral commission for Victoria today announced the outcome of its deliberations on the names and boundaries of the 38 federal electoral divisions in Victoria.
Tom Rogers, the presiding member and electoral commissioner, thanked the individuals and organisations who contributed to the redistribution.
“All written objections and comments as well as the information presented at the inquiries in Winchelsea and Melbourne have been carefully considered in deciding the final boundaries,” Rogers said.
“The augmented electoral commission has unanimously agreed to rename the Division of Batman to recognise William Cooper, and to modify the boundaries of 22 of the electoral divisions initially proposed. The augmented electoral commission has also unanimously accepted the redistribution committee’s proposed boundary changes to the remaining electoral divisions, the creation of the new Division of Fraser, and the adoption of three of the redistribution committee’s proposed new names.”
Electoral division names
Rogers said that the augmented electoral commission had adopted the majority of the names proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria with the following alterations.
- retaining the name of the Division of Corangamite (previously proposed to be renamed the Division of Cox), and
- renaming the Division of Batman to ‘Cooper’, to recognise the contributions of William Cooper.
William Cooper
William Cooper was a spokesman for Aboriginal people who, as secretary of the Australian Aborigines League, presented a petition and led deputations to authorities, calling for direct representation in parliament, enfranchisement, land rights and federal control of Aboriginal affairs.
In 1938 Cooper lodged a personal protest against the treatment of European Jews in Nazi Germany following Kristallnacht.
Victorian division names
Once the redistribution is formally determined on 13 July 2018:
- 11 of Victoria’s 38 electoral divisions (28.95%) will be named for an Aboriginal person or word;
- the number of Victoria’s electoral divisions named after a woman will have increased by one to five, as well as one electoral division being jointly named for a wife and husband; and
- more than 25% of Victoria’s electoral divisions names will be that of an original federation electoral division
Boundaries
The augmented electoral commission has modified the redistribution committee’s initial redistribution proposal by placing:
- the part of the locality of Kilsyth in Yarra Ranges Shire Council in the proposed Division of Casey
- the redistribution committee had proposed locating this part of the locality in the proposed Division of Deakin
- the entirety of the locality of Vermont South in the proposed Division of Deakin
- the redistribution committee had proposed locating part of this locality in the proposed Division of Chisholm
- the part of the locality of Surrey Hills to the east of Warrigal Road and south of Canterbury Road in the proposed Division of Chisholm
- the redistribution committee had proposed locating this part of the locality in the proposed Division of Kooyong
- the entirety of the localities of Bulla, Clarkefield and Wildwood, and part of the localities of Diggers Rest and Oaklands Junction, in the proposed Division of McEwen
- the redistribution committee had proposed locating these localities in the proposed Division of Calwell, with the exception of part of Diggers Rest which was proposed to be located in the Division of Gorton
- the localities of Barunah Park, Barunah Plains and Wingeel in the proposed Division of Corangamite
- the redistribution committee had proposed locating these localities in the proposed Division of Wannon
- the locality of Gowanbrae, and those parts of the localities of Keilor Park and Tullamarine south of the Western Ring Road, in the proposed Division of Maribyrnong
- the redistribution committee had proposed locating these areas in the proposed Division of Calwell
- the part of the locality of Springvale to the east of Springvale Road in the proposed Division of Bruce
- the redistribution committee had proposed locating some of this area in the proposed Division of Hotham
- the part of the locality of Springvale South to the west of Springvale Road, and all of the locality of Clayton South in the proposed Division of Hotham
- the redistribution committee had proposed locating these areas in the proposed Division of Isaacs
- the entirety of Knox City Council in the proposed Division of Aston, including part of the locality of Upper Ferntree Gully and the entirety of the locality of Rowville
- the redistribution committee had proposed locating this part of Upper Ferntree Gully in the proposed Division of Casey and part of the locality of Rowville in the proposed Division of Bruce
- those parts of the localities of Dandenong, Keysborough and Noble Park to the east of Eastlink and to the south of the Pakenham Railway line in the proposed Division of Isaacs
- the redistribution committee had proposed locating these areas in the proposed Division of Bruce
- the localities of Bunyip North, Garfield North, Maryknoll, Tonimbuk and Tynong North in the proposed Division of Monash
- the redistribution committee had proposed locating these localities in the proposed Division of La Trobe
- the entirety of the locality of Williams Landing in the proposed Division of Gellibrand
- the redistribution committee had proposed locating part of this locality in the proposed Division of Lalor
The augmented electoral commission has also made a small number of minor alterations, involving little or no elector movement, to adhere to features or administrative boundaries.
Updated
Mitch Fifield on Telstra:
This is a difficult day for the staff of Telstra and our thoughts are very much with them.
I have spoken to Telstra CEO Andy Penn who has assured me that the workforce reduction will occur over a number of years.
Telstra has established a $50m fund to assist affected staff during this transition. Telstra advises this will allow some staff to be redeployed within the company, while staff leaving the company will be given the assistance they need.
Australia has a telecommunications sector which is intensely competitive and constantly evolving.
All Australian businesses operate in a competitive environment which is why the government will continue to seek to secure the passage of our company tax plan through the Parliament.
Updated
She says Labor has come to see her this week to support their position to split the bill, so the first part can go through with majority support.
But she says that hundreds of thousands of Australian workers will miss out if Labor blocks stage two.
“You are denying those people you are supposed to support, the battlers and they are the battlers, it is not a fortune they are making.”
“... How can Labor and the Greens deny these tax cuts ... when they have accepted pay rises of up to 6% in recent times?”
Updated
Pauline Hanson says she doesn’t understand why the government won’t fund the income tax cut plans through multinational taxes, or why “it is so complex”.
“The government’s failure to split the bill into three stages creates a dilemma for me,” she says.
“... My dilemma is I know Australians are doing it tough.”
Updated
Pauline Hanson is using her speech as a campaign rallying cry for people to vote for One Nation in Longman.
She says when it comes to multinationals paying their taxes, the parties are as one and describes the Labor party as “like the scarecrow with no brains” and the Liberals “like the tin man with no heart”.
She says the income tax cuts are just to “buy your vote”.
Pauline Hanson talks tax in the Senate
Pauline Hanson is addressing the Senate on the tax cuts.
Updated
Which of course means, when she went on Sky News to talk about it, that Kelly O’Dwyer was asked about how women were treated in her own workplace – the Liberal Party.
Particularly after Jane Prentice was dumped.
Here’s what she said:
“There is no doubt that in the Liberal party, we can do better on better representation of women in the party serving the highest levels right down, and involved in the organisation as well, but we are not unique in that.
“I think this is actually a common problem for a number of political parties. The truth is, when you actually look at the legacy in the Liberal party and I, along with the prime minister and a number of my senior women colleagues are hosting an event for women in the Coalition – everyone is welcome, but it is predominately focused around women – we are actually going to be talking about some of the past successes that we have had.
“We’ve had the first woman elected to the parliament. We have had a whole series of firsts. I mean, Julie Bishop of course is our first foreign minister.”
Updated
Government to fund workplace sexual harassment study
As Katharine Murphy reported, the government is funding a study into workplace harassment – because once you report something to HR, then what?
Kelly O’Dwyer announced the study with the Sex Discrimination Commissioner Kate Jenkins this morning. Here is the statement her office sent out:
Australian women have the right to be safe in their homes, in their communities and in their workplaces.
That’s why the Turnbull Government is supporting practical action to address sexual harassment, today announcing it will contribute $500,000 towards the Australian Human Rights Commission’s Inquiry into Sexual Harassment in the Workplace to be led by Sex Discrimination Commissioner Kate Jenkins.
“No one should have to suffer sexual harassment at work, or in any other part of their lives,” the minister for women, the Hon Kelly O’Dwyer MP said.
“This inquiry will consider the drivers of sexual harassment in the workplace, the use of technology and social media, and the legal framework, as well as existing practices to inform practical recommendations that will assist Australian workplaces deal with this sensitive and difficult issue.”
“We already know that the personal and career consequences of workplace sexual harassment are very significant. The organisational impacts are also substantial, including reduced productivity, high staff turnover, absenteeism, compensation claims and early retirement. The inquiry will draw on economic modelling so we will have a better sense of how much it is costing individual Australians as well as Australian businesses.”
Sexual harassment continues to pervade Australian workplaces. More than 20 per cent of people over 15 years old in Australia have been sexually harassed, with 68 per cent of those harassed in the workplace.
The Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) is uniquely placed to undertake a national inquiry into this issue, due to its independent status, its legislative mandate in relation to sexual harassment under the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth), and specific expertise in relation to workplace sexual harassment. The AHRC is currently undertaking an expanded Fourth National Workplace Sexual Harassment Survey, with final results due in August 2018. The Inquiry into Sexual Harassment in the Workplace will run for 12 months and cost a total of $900,000.
“Recent prominent international and national coverage has highlighted the prevalence and detrimental impact of sexual harassment on individuals and organisations. This inquiry will be a positive and meaningful step forward in reducing sexual harassment at work and ensuring that, where it does occur, it is dealt with carefully and appropriately,” Minister O’Dwyer said.
The funding committed to the AHRC inquiry follows significant actions already taken by the Turnbull government to improve women’s safety in the home, at work and online.
To date the Turnbull government has committed well in excess of $300m to address women’s safety. The most recent federal budget included an additional $54m for women’s safety initiatives, including $11.5m for 1800 RESPECT, $6.7m for DV-alert, $14.2m for the Office of the eSafety Commissioner to help make cyberspace safe for women, and $22m to combat elder abuse.
The Turnbull government is also continuing to put in place the right settings to deliver a stronger economy to provide the right economic settings for women to help them work, save and make choices about their lives.
More women are working than ever before, with over 5.8m now employed in Australia. The government is committed to ensuring that women have every opportunity to engage in paid work, have the right support to expand their skills, take advantage of employment opportunities and to save for their retirement.
The minister for women will build on the government’s efforts to improve women’s economic security when she delivers a Women’s Economic Security Statement in spring.
Updated
Scott Morrison has spoken on the news Telstra is to slash 30% of its workforce – 8,000 people:
Like all Australians, I am very disappointed to learn that news, but there is only one thing that I can say in response – that the government has been working hard to ensure that the economy that they will go back into now, to find another job, there are more jobs in that economy today than there was before.
“We are a government which has been delivering more jobs.
“And in that sector in particular, there are much brighter prospects. But it will still be hard and it will still be an anxious time for those Australians and that is why we will just redouble our efforts to make sure that we are doing everything that we can to create the strongest economy [that we can] so that people who find themselves in that situation can go forth with confidence.”
And on the tax vote?
“It is now before the Senate. We have every confidence in our plan. We believe it is the right plan, it is a plan which delivers tax relief for all Australians. I mean, it is a pretty clear choice, for Australians.
“It is tax off with the Coalition, and tax on with the Labor party. That is what it is. That is the choice.”
I am pretty sure that is not what Mr Miyagi meant.
Updated
Bill Shorten is visiting an aged care home in Canberra this morning, following on from Malcolm Turnbull’s answer to this question yesterday:
Shorten: I refer to the prime minister’s earlier answer when he said that his government rewards aspiration. Should a 60-year-old aged-care worker from Burnie aspire to be an investment banker from Rose Bay so that, instead of their $10-a-week tax cut from the prime minister, they can get the prime minister’s $7,000-a-year tax cut for investment bankers?
Turnbull: The honourable member should remember that the 60-year-old aged-care worker in Burnie is entitled to aspire to get a better job, is entitled to get a promotion, is entitled to be able to earn more money ... [after interjections] no. Working in aged care is a good job, but you are entitled to seek to earn more. [More interjections] Everyone is entitled to aspire [more interjections]... Every worker, every Australian, is entitled to aspire to earn a better income. Everyone is entitled to aspire to that.
Julie Collins, the shadow minister for ageing had a chat about that this morning (and I think you can expect it to come up quite a bit in question time):
Yesterday what we heard from the prime minister in question time when it came to the aged-care worker question from Burnie was absolutely appalling.
“I was astounded to hear the prime minister and the way he spoke about the valuable contribution aged workers make to Australia every day. There are more than 360,000 aged-care workers in Australia today who are going about one of the most difficult jobs, caring for older Australians, many of them vulnerable, some of them with dementia, in their own homes in residential facilities who were insulted by what the prime minister said yesterday in Parliament.
“He should apologise, I called on him to apologise yesterday, he didn’t do it. I hope he’s had time to reflect on his comments and he realises just how out-of-touch and arrogant his comments were.
“To say, or to imply that aged-care workers in Australia do not make as valuable a contribution to our society as an investment banker is outrageous.
“That’s what the prime minister told aged care workers yesterday: their contribution is not valued. We do value aged-care workers on our side of politics, the community values aged care workers, the families and the carers of vulnerable older Australians value aged-care workers and the prime minister should value them too. He should come out today and he should apologise to aged care workers for what he said yesterday. It was outrageous.”
Updated
Australia responds to US withdrawal from UNHRC
Julie Bishop has responded to the news the United States is pulling out of the Human Rights Council:
Australia is disappointed by the decision of the United States to resign from the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC).
Australia shares many of the concerns held by the US about the UNHRC, particularly its anti-Israel bias, and we have consistently supported efforts to address other matters of contention.
We are committed to progress effective and meaningful reform to enable the Council to more effectively carry out its role.
Australia will continue to work constructively on human rights issues with other countries, including the US. It was our strong preference for the US to remain a member of the UNHRC and I had made this known to senior members of the Trump administration.
Australia’s Foreign Policy White Paper reiterated Australia’s commitment to a strong multilateral human rights system and to advancing human rights globally. It is in our national interest to shape the work of the council and uphold the international rules-based order.
Australia has pledged to be a principled, pragmatic and consultative member, bringing a unique Indo-Pacific perspective to our term and amplify the voices of our Pacific neighbours.
Australia’s second session as a member of the UNHRC commenced in Geneva this week.
Updated
Tony Abbott 'not a wrecker'
Back to the energy ‘wars’ and Tony Abbott has told the Daily Telegraph he would like to be able to question the Coalition’s energy policy, without being accused of trying to destroy it.
From Sharri Markson’s report:
“I’m sick and tired of government ministers running around the place saying that anyone who disagrees with them on energy policy is trying to wreck the government. Bollocks.”
He’s just trying to save the government from itself, y’all.
Josh Frydenberg, who really looks like he needs all of the mint slices in the world to get through this week, told Sky News:
“I’d say that my colleagues just want to make sure that the right policy is there for the country’s energy future and that is the national energy guarantee. There is strong support within the Coalition party room for the national energy guarantee because they understand that we need to integrate energy and climate policy and bring down prices and increase reliability. We have listened to the experts, we have taken this proposal to the states, we will look for final sign off in August.”
Updated
Not even the Albo-express could save the Blues. Although he, and his amazing retro outfit, did manage to give some Queenslanders some trouble:
Updated
The Senate will launch straight into the tax debate this morning, (thank you to my Senate whisperers for keeping me updated) and then leave it just before 1pm, because you know – there is still other stuff the red chamber has to do.
It’ll return to the debate after 5.
Updated
Speaking of deep dives, Gareth Hutchens had a look at multinationals and their tax habits. From his report:
A landmark study has found multinational corporations are shifting roughly $16bn in profits out of Australia into tax havens every year.
It has also found the steady decline in corporate tax rates globally since the 1980s has not been driven by countries competing harder for productive capital and pushing corporate tax rates down, despite what politicians say.
Instead, it says corporate tax rates have been driven lower by multinational corporations shifting profits into tax havens, and governments’ failure to curb the practice.”
You can read the whole thing here.
Updated
Just in case you forgot, One Nation has three WA state MPs.
According to the West Australian, things are going great. From Nick Butterly’s report this morning:
The State president of Pauline Hanson’s One Nation has quit the party in anger to run as an independent at this weekend’s Darling Range byelection amid growing internal ructions.
Doug Shaw confirmed he resigned as the administrative chief of One Nation several weeks ago after infighting with other party members.
“The major parties are ignoring Joe Public and One Nation are showing they are no better,” he said.
In case you missed it, I had a dig through the archives after Brian Burston’s resignation last week, to see what was said in the late 90s/early 2000s when One Nation imploded the first time round – not by the MPs, but from the people involved behind the scenes.
Like when one of the Queensland branch presidents quit after accusing One Nation of “doing exactly what it claimed the other parties were doing: not listening and it’s breaking more than a few hearts along the way”.
Updated
The annual pollies state of origin was held early this morning. And because I am a QUEENSLANDER forever, I couldn’t not post this Mike Bowers magic from this morning.
Soz, Michael McCormack. Better luck next year.
Oh, oh
There she goes
So close
And yet, so far
The Mighty Maroons ended up victorious 3-2 Graham Perrett tells me:
“The filthy Blues were up 2-0 early, but the pure mighty Queenslanders ended up victorious 3-2. First time in a few years.”
Apparently Queensland’s fortunes were improved without Barnaby Joyce’s famous crab run (the man always ran sideways) and Keith Pitt’s installation as captain.
Updated
Good morning
The crossbench has everyone waiting this morning, as both the government and Labor wait to see how the income tax battles will play out.
Labor is still working out how the bill should be split with its crossbench allies, while the government is still trying to convince enough crossbenchers that the package should be passed as an all-or-nothing deal.
Meanwhile, the Coalition’s fractures are being laid bare by Josh Frydenberg’s attempts to get an energy policy through the party room. He won the first battle by not bringing it back, before the plan went to the states and territories, so the first step is convincing them, come Friday.
Eric Abetz anti-ABC ball rolling, having a chat to Radio National this morning about all his complaints.
No surprises there:
Of course the ABC contributed $1 billion to the economy. They have a $1 billion budget from taxpayers that was mostly spent in Australia. Why do we need a costly report to tell us the obvious?! More ABC waste.
— Eric Abetz (@SenatorAbetz) June 19, 2018
And we still have six more days of this to go!
Mike Bowers was out and about early this morning, catching the annual political state of origin game. I’ll bring you some of that soonest. You can follow along with his day at @mikepbowers and @mpbowers and of course, doing his best to troll me behind the scenes on the instagram story at @pyjamapolitics. He just pointed out I have been humming Devil Woman all morning, so things are going great so far.
You’ll catch me, when I have time, or more immediately on Twitter at @amyremeikis (beware – you’ll also find some very strong opinions on biscuits.)
Grab your coffee, or whatever it is that gets you through and let’s get started.
Updated
