Get all your news in one place.
100's of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Guardian - AU
The Guardian - AU
National
Amy Remeikis

Election 2019: Peter Dutton apologises to Labor rival in radio face-off – as it happened

2019 Australian federal election: Peter Dutton has apologised to Ali France for his comments about her disability during their ABC radio debate
Peter Dutton has apologised to Ali France for his comments about her disability during their ABC radio debate. Photograph: Albert Perez/AAP

Bill Shorten is on his way to Perth, while Scott Morrison is still in Victoria, as far as we can tell.

So with the campaigns powering down for the day, we might too.

We would imagine that after two full days in Victoria, the Liberal campaign will be headed somewhere new tomorrow, but who knows. This whole campaign has the feeling of revving in second gear, while the parties wait for the holiday period to be over and for people to start paying attention again. That’ll be after Anzac Day, so you’ve got quite a few more days of this weird stop start pace.

It’s the campaign equivalent of Wet n Wild’s Calypso Beach attraction, which involves sitting in a tube and floating around in circles, getting occasionally tipped over by teenagers who are racing each other to nowhere.

Or maybe that’s just my Gold Coast showing.

Either way, tomorrow will be more of the same. Labor will most likely have more on health. In the state campaigns, they like to do it in weeks. So health week. Followed by infrastructure/climate/insert policy here week. You get the idea. So far, this campaign seems to be following that same pattern.

They’ll also, no doubt, have more to say on the Grattan Institute analysis on the government’s tax plan, which Morrison has already rejected as “absolute rubbish”.

On the government side, I think we can expect to hear a lot more about Shorten’s answer to the superannuation policy. He neglected to mention Labor’s plan, and Labor says that’s because the policy has stood for so long, he was responding to whether there were any more changes coming.

Just don’t expect anything new, is what I’m saying.

I’ll be back tomorrow, reading, watching and listening to everything so you don’t have to. And also because that’s my job and I need to pay my bills.

A big thank you to everyone who contributed today, and to all of you for following along with us. We’ll be back tomorrow morning. In the meantime, take care of you.

Updated

Ali France responded to Peter Dutton’s accusation about her in that answer:

I’ll quote Michelle Obama: when they go low, you go high. But I have never said that I am ashamed to be Australian. I shared an article, in which somebody in New York wrote an article talking about their experience. I didn’t say I was ashamed to be Australian, I have represented Australia twice in sport, I’ve won three gold medals. When I have stood on that podium, singing the national anthem, I couldn’t be prouder. I am a really proud Australian and I think it’s really, really unfair to be saying that, but anyway.

Updated

The debate between Peter Dutton and Ali France finishes with a question about Larissa Waters’ comments on The Bad Show overnight during an exchange with James McGrath:

As long as you share our values – and one of our values is its inclusivity, and we’re colour blind when it comes to the colour of your own skin … And I’m sure the Greens and I hope Labor would agree with that.”

“I’m not sure Peter Dutton would,” Waters retorted.

“I beg your pardon. Are you serious?” McGrath said.

Dutton:

When you have a look at the comments, it wasn’t just me, it was the whole government, that was her point. So why doesn’t she like me and why doesn’t she believe that to be the case? Because of our border protection policies.

Now, Ali has said before she is ashamed to be an Australian because of the border protection policies and that’s been deleted from the Twitter account. But that’s the reality and that’s the reality. So I’m not going to step back and say that we are going to change our border protection policies, because I think they have been in our country’s best interests. We have got every child out of detention, we’ve closed 19 detention centres and I don’t get the calls of a night-time, where 1,200 children and women and men drowned at sea. So I take deep offence at what she said, I think it was a publicity stunt, which is why I hate drawing attention to it. But the reality is, that why has she said this? Ask her to substantiate it, and why is she allowed to say it frankly, on a program on the ABC, the national broadcaster, and can get away with such an unsubstantiated claim, I think is quite wrong.

Updated

If you haven’t seen Christopher Knaus’s story:

A Liberal MP handed a $1.5m novelty cheque to a local sports club while the deputy prime minister was privately warning it not to spend the money because it was yet to go through due diligence and final approval.

Late last month, Liberal MP Jason Wood handed over a $1.5m cheque to the Berwick Football and Netball Club in his marginal seat of La Trobe, snapping photos with happy children and staff and posting the news to Facebook, writing “Delivered $1.5m.”

The deputy prime minister, Michael McCormack, wrote to the club about the same time to congratulate them and confirm the funding commitment of “up to $1.5m”. But he also warned them not to spend the money or begin any work.

The letter, obtained by Guardian Australia, said this was because the grant was contingent on “final due diligence” and final agreement.

“Whilst this letter confirms the commitment to your project, funding of $1.5 million is contingent upon the execution of a Deed of Agreement,” McCormack wrote.

“I recommend that you do not enter into financial commitments or begin work on the project until such time a Deed of Agreement has been signed with the Australian government.”

For those wanting a visual of this debate:

The two duke it out over the Schrodinger’s cat health fight.

Health funding has gone up – yes, Peter Dutton is right.

Health funding has not gone up by as much as was originally promised – yes, Ali France is right.

Updated

Peter Dutton said he felt he needed to have a go at the leadership because he did not want Bill Shorten to be prime minister, but believes Scott Morrison is doing “a great job”.

Updated

Asked about GetUp – which has a very high-profile campaign in the area, amounting to ‘anyone but Dutton’ – Ali France says she has not had any contact with the advocacy group and will not owe them anything.

I’ve had no contact with GetUp. I have been out for more than 12 months on the ground. We have a huge number of volunteers, that has been building over those 12 months. We have put a huge effort into this seat, it is actually going to be a hard slog, Mr Dutton has held the seat for 18 years, and I think it is going to be a huge effort.

Updated

Peter Dutton: "I made a mistake"

Peter Dutton:

I apologised for it the other day, I apologise to Ali for it now. Obviously I said at the time that I had spoke to a number of constituents, they raised issues with me in relation to it, I was conveying that. I could have done it in a more sensitive way. I made a mistake. We all make mistakes. I apologised and I repeat it again today.

Ali France:

Thank you for your apology.

I don’t want to go back too much into the issue but I guess what I do want to say on behalf of the many hundreds of thousands of people with a disability in Australia, I just want to say to them, your disability is not an excuse, it is our reality. We don’t want pity, we don’t want special treatment. What we do expect, in particular from leaders, is that they have an understanding, an understanding that we may do things differently in our world and that is OK.

The second thing is this contest should be about ideas. It is not really about me, or my story, it is not about my opponent, it is about the people of Dickson, it is about their stories, it is about listening to them.

Updated

Peter Dutton and Ali France face off on radio debate

The ABC Brisbane radio debate between Ali France and Peter Dutton has kicked off.

The first question is on the comments Dutton made about France using her disability “as an excuse” to not move into the electorate.

Dutton says he apologised.

On the other issue bubbling along today – Tony Abbott and his comments that he would lead the party again (but only in an uncontested ballot) – Arthur Sinodinos says:

My advice to Tony, which is the same advice I give all of my colleagues which is: We’ve got an election to win. Let’s focus on winning the election and worry about what happens afterwards. Of course, if we win the election, under our rules now, our new rules, Scott Morrison will be our prime minister for three years.

PK: But if you don’t, does Tony Abbott become the opposition leader?

AS: Well, I’m not contemplating a loss but what I’m saying is the focus now should be on winning the election rather than – Lynton Crosby once gave me a piece of advice: Do your current job as best as you can and the future will take care of itself.

PK: I want to be clear. Would you support drafting Tony Abbott to be leader ever again?

AS: That’s a hypothetical question.

PK: Not really, it could happen.

AS: What I support is Tony Abbott and all of our members doing their best to get elected so we get a Liberal government.

PK: So you might support Tony Abbott in the future if he wanted to come back?

AS: I’m not going to support anybody except Scott Morrison becoming prime minister again after the next election.

Updated

Karvelas brings up that Scott Morrison referred to Bill Shorten as “a liar”, which she describes as “a pretty extreme word”.

PK: Do you think that’s a fair way to run a campaign, to use language like that?

Arthur Sinodinos: Well, I think a lot of us will see it by the experience of the last election where the mediscare was allowed to get legs and that was something which was a gross misrepresentation and very misleading characterisation of some proposals that the Coalition had around some back-office part ofMedicare being outsourced in some way.

That was then, somehow, conflated with Medicare being privatised, an outrageous proposition. And yet Bill Shorten was happy to run with this day in, day out. That’s the sort of thing that gets people, on my side of politics, very angry, when they see something so blatantly misrepresented.

PK: But we are in a current campaign. The government has spent days trying to dispute Labor’s plan on cancer care. Is that an own goal? Have you raised Labor’s cancer care program which is popular among voters? I know this because some of your own colleagues have told me so.

AS: We owe the voters the obligation, when something is raised, to respond and to give a view. What we’ve said in relation to the cancer proposals which have been raised is we believe there’s quite a bit of overlap, as I alluded to before, with what we’re doing and, where there’s a gap, we’d be prepared to look at it. If that’s playing on Labor’s territory, we’re engaging them on our territory, on the economy, on national security, on tax.

Updated

In a similar vein, Sinodinos is asked about Labor’s pathology announcement:

I haven’t seen what they’ve said and I have to analyse it. Bulk billing rates in many of these areas are quite high, something like 99% for some of the tests. Let’s look at the facts and, of course, the white heat of a campaign is often the worst time to be looking at the facts of these things.

But the fact of the matter is what is good is that both sides of politics are talking about big increases in health spending at a time when, as you alluded to before, we do have challenges coming up, including the ageing of the population and so many of the healthcare costs that we incur are often in the later stages of life.

Sinodinos has had first-hand experience with cancer, so Karvelas asks him about Labor’s policy to cover out-of-pocket costs:

Well, my experience was, at the beginning, when I had to have a number of scans, I had some out-of-pocket costs because of that.

But once I was diagnosed, I was admitted to St Vincent’s – I had private health insurance but treated as a public patient and I had all of that treatment done on that basis and the subsequent scans and everything else, I had to pay obviously for medicines but, because of the PBS, I was paying the subsidised amounts rather than the full amounts.

So I was very fortunate that we’ve got such a first-class public hospital system, that so much of my treatment was covered by Medicare.

Now I understand people talk about out-of-pocket costs. They do exist. They exist not only in cancer, they exist with a number of other major categories of disease and chronic conditions that we have and what is, I think, important also is to have equality of treatment and, while it’s important the focus that is put on cancer, it’s important to remember there are other maladies which require attention.

What the government is seeking to do is not only put more resources into cancer treatment, diagnostics and medicines but also doing more to promote the treatment and diagnosis and pharmaceuticals associated with other conditions.

Updated

When it comes to Scott Morrison’s insistence that the leadership spill is a “bubble issue”, Arthur Sinodinos says:

If there are voters still concerned about that, and that’s a priority for them, that may well influence their vote. But what I’m getting feedback on, in places like Wentworth, for example, is people who may have been upset that Malcolm Turnbull was removed last August are now sort of focused more on the choice ahead of them and that this is playing potentially to Dave Sharma’s advantage. Patricia, let’s wait and see.

Updated

Arthur Sinodinos is next up on ABC TV with Patricia Karvelas. On the prime minister’s call that there will be no Notre Dame fund:

Well, I think the prime minister’s made it pretty clear the government itself won’t be setting up a fund but, of course, Australians are encouraged to contribute if they wish to such a fund.

This is a bit different to something like the tsunami that hit the Asian region in the early 2000s where, you know, massive damage, a lot of people in an area where incomes aren’t necessarily high.

We are talking here about, obviously, a spiritual, cultural and artistic icon but in a first-world country like France. I think the prime minister was indicating that, certainly while people can contribute, it’s not something that would be a priority of the government.

Updated

Here is the exchange on superannuation Bill Shorten had today:

Journalist: Can you rule out no new or increased taxes on superannuation?

BS: We have no plans to increase taxes on superannuation.

J: That’s different from ruling it out though.

BS: We have no plans to introduce any new taxes on superannuation.

J: So will you rule it out?

BS: Sure.

On the Notre Dame fund (which Josh Frydenberg supported, but Scott Morrison ruled out), Jim Chalmers:

I don’t think it’s an either or. We’ve been very strong in our support for farmers in regional Queensland who have done it tough in the last little while. Bill Shorten has agreed with not just, it was Malcolm Turnbull, but also Josh Frydenberg who thought Australia could make a modest contribution in the aftermath of this pretty heartbreaking fire in Paris at Notre Dame, but I think it does say something more broadly.

The fact that the treasurer and the prime minister can’t get on the same page on something as simple as this really is another indication of the chaos that has consumed the Liberal party in the last six years, the type of chaos Australians are sick of.

They are sick of the splits in the senior government ranks, sick of fights between Turnbull and Dutton and Morrison and Abbott and others. They want a government which is on the same page. They wanted a united and stable team and that’s Labor.

But what would Labor do?

It remains to be seen. We have said we are up for a conversation with the government on what a modest and responsible contribution may look like. It’s the start of the conversation, not the end of it.

I don’t accept it’s a choice between that and doing something meaningful for our farmers, which we’ve supported all along. There are choices in the budget more broadly. I’ve outlined them a moment ago, between more investment in health or bigger tax cuts for the top end of town, but I don’t think, fundamentally, we have to choose between a modest contribution to a fund as outlined by Malcolm Turnbull and Josh Frydenberg today and doing the right thing by farmers.

Updated

And on whether the pathology policy is filling a gap, given the government says there is a high rate of coverage, Jim Chalmers says:

The industry is under a lot pressure, Patricia, and we don’t want people to have to choose between paying more or going without. We think this is a responsible measure, a bulk billing incentive to make sure that we can keep people getting access to the tests that they need, to keep an eye on their diagnosis and that’s why we’ve made the announcement we’ve made today but it is part of a far broader suite of health announcements we’ve been making and health investments we want to make to try to start to undo the damage done by Scott Morrison to our health system.

Updated

On Labor’s negative gearing policy being taken down, Jim Chalmers says it’s for an update. Patricia Karvelas asks if that is to take in to account any underestimation of the impact of the policy, or new dwellings takeup:

Obviously if everything is updated, Patricia, then the costings for negative gearing will be updated. Not necessarily to take into account what you’re referring to but to take into account all of the changes in the economic parameters. That’s what I’m trying to tell you. Every policy gets updated. The Parliamentary Budget Office has relied on their own consultations, their own costings with the bureau of stats, the RBA and others to come up with that costing. So I don’t accept that there has been some kind of error made in the costing. It will be updated like all of our policies. It will be released well before the election and people will know how much it will cost.

Updated

Meanwhile, in Dickson:

Updated

Labor spokesman questioned over Shorten's comment on superannuation

Jim Chalmers, who is playing the role of one of Labor’s campaign spokespeople this election, is asked by Patricia Karvelas about what Bill Shorten meant when he said Labor had no plans to introduce any more changes to super, given Labor does have a policy to change super:

Well, I didn’t see Bill Shorten’s press conference but I’ve heard him answer this question before and we’ve got superannuation policies on the table. We’re asked from time to time whether we have any additional policies in the works that we might announce during the election campaign. We don’t. That, as I understand it, was the question that Bill was answering.

Updated

The Labor campaign is leaving Adelaide – for Perth.

Greg Hunt has released his official response to Labor’s pathology announcement in a statement:

Bill Shorten’s attempt to scare people about pathology ignores the facts:

    • 99% of people seeking a pathology test from their GP are covered by Medicare and bulk billed
    • Pathology funding has increased by more than $572 million since the Coalition was first elected
    • It will grow to over $3.4 billion in 2021-22
    • The government invested $2.95 billion in Medicare benefits for approximately 145 million pathology services last year alone, an 8.5% increase
    • These funding boosts mean patients will pay less for pathology services

Pathology bulk billing rates for out of hospital services have increased from 97.7% under the Coalition to 99.3% last financial year and continue to grow, up to 99.4% in the first half of this year.

This is perhaps his silliest scare campaign yet.

Updated

Did Sarah Henderson’s office call Liberal party members to invite them to the seniors’ forum this morning?

This morning’s seniors’ forum was an open invitation. We had flyers and posters all over Drysdale and the North Bellarine. It’s in stark contrast to the Labor party, which is in hiding when it comes to older Australians. We’ve seen from the retiree tax that the Labor party has deserted older Australians – that was very evident today – and I’m incredibly proud to be standing up for older Australians in Corangamite.

(That’s not a no.)

Scott Morrison steps in, when a journalist makes the point that a lot of the room seemed to be Liberal party members:

Well, there’s nothing wrong with that, you know...! It’s actually legal to be a Liberal member in this country and vote for the Liberal party. It was great to see some of them there.

Updated

Morrison: 'if you vote for Bill Shorten, you'll get Bill Shorten'

Does Scott Morrison think he is popular in Victoria, given he has spent two days campaigning there?

There will be two choices after May 18 – there’s myself and Bill Shorten. Both of our parties have changed our rules, not before time, but we both have. And those rules mean that whoever you elect as prime minister on May 18 they will be your prime minister for the next three years. So if you vote for Bill Shorten, you’ll get Bill Shorten.

And if you vote for me, and the Liberal and National parties, you will get me to serve you as your prime minister for the next three years, and to pursue the stronger economy that guarantees rely on for essential services.

Updated

On whether Sam Dastyari has any connection to Labor’s pathology announcement:

Well, this would seem to be the suggestion today - that Sam Dastyari was on Bill Shorten’s campaign bus at the last election and the suggestion now is he’s on Bill Shorten’s gravy train when it comes to this latest announcement. Let’s just see what happens there, I suppose. I mean, I have no knowledge of that. But it’s something for Bill Shorten to explain - from the campaign bus to the gravy train - that’s quite a passage for Sam Dastyari. But, you know, if anyone was gonna be able to do it, I suspect it was him.”

On the Notre Dame fund:

Well, there’ll be more than enough opportunities, I would have thought, if that’s what people want to do. But I’m not going to mandate it from anybody...!

I’m sure that France is a very prosperous nation and I’m sure they’ll be able to cover that.

There’s already been a massive donation made today by a very significant French philanthropist. Look, I’m focused on, you know, supporting Australian farmers in drought – Australian farmers and graziers and pastoralists up in north Queensland.

They’re the ones, frankly, who desperately need our help at the moment. That’s where I’m focusing my attention.

There are those – there’s a fondness for those of us who have had the great privilege and opportunity to be there – as I was saying this morning on social media, Jenny and I were there almost 30 years ago when we’d been married only a couple of years, and it was a very special memory for us, so it was upsetting to see that today.

But I’m sure that President Macron and the Catholic church are able to deal with this and, if individual Australians want to do something, well, it’s a free country – they can do whatever they like.

Q: Josh Frydenberg and Bill Shorten have, to my understanding, backed creating a government fund for Notre Dame.

Morrison: We’re not making a government fund.

Updated

On the Grattan Institute analysis of the government’s tax plan:

That’s complete rubbish. It’s absolute, complete rubbish.

Updated

On Labor’s pathology announcement, will the Liberals match it? Is he worried about a new Mediscare campaign?

Scott Morrison:

Bill Shorten lies. He lies. He lies all the time. I mean, Bill Shorten wanted people to believe that you could go to a public hospital for cancer treatment and that it wasn’t covered. He knows 99% of the pathology services that are provided out of hospital – 99% of them were provided out of Medicare.

But he wants to suggest to people that there are services not available that are actually there. Now, I know there’s out-of-pocket expenses that are involved in cancer treatment. No one ever said there wasn’t.

But I think to suggest to people that are suffering with cancer that somehow there aren’t cost-free services available in public hospitals, or that there are other tests that are referred by your doctor and not covered by Medicare – I think that’s very misleading. And in its worst case, it’s actually quite cruel.

Our health system – both at a state level and its federal support – is very significant. And we will continue to provide that. If you don’t have a strong economy, though – this is Bill’s problem – every time he’s spending money, he’s taxing you more. That’s what’s happening all the time. Every time he’s spending money, he’s spending your money. Cause he’s having to increase taxes – taxes that he can’t even remember that he is now proposing.

Updated

Scott Morrison and the Sharrouf children

Back on the Sharrouf children, Scott Morrison says:

I made it very clear that no Australian would be put at risk in terms of going into what is a very dangerous part of the world, and that is the clear instructions that have been provided to officials.

Khaled Sharrouf was a murderous terrorist. He was a despicable individual. The fact that he actually put his children in that environment is unthinkable as a parent. This is a very special brand of evil that he lived. No one’s unhappy to see the back of him, I’ve got to say.

But when it comes to the children – well, obviously we’ll deal with each and every case on its merits but, in every single case, we will be putting the security of Australians at the top of the list. There are processes to be followed, and there’s still a long way to go on these things, and we’ll deal with each case – every individual child – on its merits, and follow the proper process.

Updated

Back on superannuation, Scott Morrison says he is fine with the system now, because he has “dealt” with the fairness issues:

Because I’ve looked at this issue really closely. I dealt with it as a treasurer. It’s done.

It’s settled. That’s why I can say – probably more than anyone else who’s had experience in this area in policy and government – there is no need to increase taxes on superannuation.

We want people to invest in superannuation with confidence. So I can give Australians that guarantee. I have the background to be able to absolutely give that commitment, because I know what’s involved, we’ve dealt with the fairness issues – that’s settled, and there is no reason why Bill Shorten, for example, should be saying to tradies who work for themselves – why should they pay higher contribution taxes than people who work for an employer?

Why should people who are coming back from having children and are looking to catch up on their contributions pay higher rates of tax or be unable to invest in their superannuation when they’ve had time out of work?

Why should older Australians who are working when they’re over the age of 65 – or even not working over the age of 65, and they want to put more money into their superannuation – why should they be denied that?

These are all the higher taxes that Bill Shorten is putting on superannuation and moving the goalposts on people as they both prepare for their retirement and they live in their retirement. And that’s why you can’t trust him. He has put so much tax – he’s seeking to put so much tax – on the Australian economy, he’s now started to forget how much tax he’s put on, particularly on superannuation, and as we’ve seen with negative gearing, he’s trying to erase the record of the additional taxes he wants to put on housing and on capital gains tax. I mean, it’s supposed to be fair – $387 billion is a lot of tax to try and get your head around.

Clearly, he can’t get his head around it. If he can’t explain it, why would you vote for him?

Updated

On Gladys Liu, Scott Morrison says:

I was very pleased to be with Gladys yesterday to launch her campaign. Gladys has led an amazing Australian life. Gladys came to this country in the mid-80s, studied, became an Australian citizen, she’s a speech pathologist, she’s raised a family here, built businesses and worked with her community. As she said at the time when she was campaigning for the previous Liberal candidate, and now current member in Chisholm, she was simply saying that these were the views of that community.

Q: Do you think she’s phobic?

SM: No.

Updated

On Tony Abbott’s leadership ambitions (he’ll take up the mantle again, if the leadership is thrown open, but not in a contested ballot, he said), Scott Morrison says:

I think Tony was responding to a question that was very hypothetical.

Updated

Is this visit to restore confidence?

Scott Morrison:

It’s about giving Australians, as they prepare for their retirement, certainty, because Bill Shorten’s shifting the goalposts on them. They’re very angry at Bill Shorten, and Chris Bowen is the one that says, “If you don’t like Labor’s retirement package, don’t vote Labor.”

It’s very good advice. Bill Shorten was saying that these retirees – these pensioners that are affected – those who will benefit from the franked dividend credits scheme – they say it’s a gift.

They say they haven’t paid tax. I mean, Bill Shorten is treating older Australians with complete disrespect, as if they live off his largesse if he were to become prime minister. I don’t see it that way.

I see them as having worked hard, paid taxes all their life, having set themselves up to be in a position to live through their retirement, and we should allow them to do that and not treat them with the disrespect of putting the government’s hand in their wallets. Because that’s what Bill Shorten’s going to do.

Updated

On whether nuclear power is an option:

Well, I’m yet to see any proposal that has ever been considered that would stack up. Before you considered something like that, you’d need to see the feasibility of projects that potentially could.

Updated

Morrison says Shorten forgetful of all the taxes he wants to impose

Scott Morrison on Bill Shorten not mentioning Labor’s super changes:

I have no idea what Bill Shorten was talking about today when he says he won’t be putting increased taxes on superannuation.

That’s his policy. There’s $34 billion worth of increased taxes on superannuation in his own policy.

But I suppose, if you’ve already racked up $387 billion in higher taxes, he must have forgotten that he’d already – that includes $34 billion of taxes alone on superannuation.

When, I suppose, when the number gets that high, he’s either lying about it today or he’s just forgotten the last person he hit with higher taxes. And so that’s why he can’t be trusted on these issues. He’s taxing the economy so much not even he can keep count of all the taxes that he’s putting on the Australian economy.

Updated

Scott Morrison is holding his media conference in Torquay, with Sarah Henderson, and is repeating that there will be no added, or higher taxes on a government he leads “never ever”.

On the superannuation question, when Bill Shorten said Labor had no plans to introduce any new taxes, he also didn’t mention that Labor’s superannuation policy is already out there (and has been for a year).

Labor plans to cut non-concessional contributions from $100,000 a year, to $75,000.

It also wants to reduce the threshold where you pay a tax surcharge (currently at $250,000) of 30%, to $200,000.

The Labor camp says Shorten meant there were no more plans for any other changes to superannuation, beyond the policy it already has out.

Updated

Both campaigns appear to be at rest at the moment.

You would imagine though, that Scott Morrison, after two days in Victoria, would be looking to move on.

I imagine the Labor campaign will be headed on the road soon as well, having made its Boothby point.

This is at least the second game of pool.

Updated

Michael McCormack was also asked about Gladys Liu. He doesn’t answer with ‘dams’ this time, but it’s close:

Oh look, candidates often say things. Look, the fact is, we’re talking about the economy. We’re talking about the things that matter most to Australians and that is their retirees savings. That is, their negative geared investments. That is the jobs for them and their children in the future, building better roads, getting the inland rail happening. They’re the sorts of things that Australians want us to talk about. Candidates should focus on that. That’s the important thing. That’s what the people are pulling me up in the street and talking to me about. They’re not talking to me about what some candidate in another state might happen or not to say.

...Well, you know, she’s made those comments. Unfortunate as they are. Look, fact is, candidates make these statements during campaign trails. They’re long-time… you know, the fact is, the important thing and the real important issues for people, every day, ordinary Australians sitting around their breakfast table right at the moment is how are they going to pay their next bill? How are they going to make ends meet? They’ll make ends meet under a Liberal Nationals government. They’re going to be battling under a Labor government.

For the record, she made the comments in 2016, then said it was “fake news”, then said she was taken out of context.

Updated

Michael McCormack was asked on ABC Mid North Coast this morning about the government’s “$100bn” infrastructure spend. As Gabrielle Chan reported during budget time, just $42bn is to be spent in the next four years (a not tiny sum) with the rest over 10 years – or the “never never” as its known (because it is impossible to predict what the budget might look like that far out. It’s the same as the bulk of the government’s tax plan comes in, and where Labor plans on reinstating 50/50 hospital funding, for that matter as well).

McCormack:

No, that’s usually the way and particularly at the last budget, the one before this one, we had $75 billion worth of spending. That’s a record amount and we’re actually rolling that out right now and additionally, now we’ve got $100 billion. Well of course, you can’t spend all that money at once. Now Labor knows that. And certainly when it comes to rolling out infrastructure, it’s ongoing. There’s witches hats, there’s high-vis vests, there’s excavators, whether it’s a capital city, whether it’s regional, country, coastal, remote Australia, there’s work being done.

Updated

Gladys Liu and the 'fake news' audio

For those who missed the audio earlier, on the Gladys Liu story, (given she had previously dismissed it as “fake news”) you can hear some of it here:

Updated

On his comments on the weekend that people claiming more than $3,000 for accountants fees were a “loophole” and a “rort”, Bill Shorten says:

I think our CPAs are excellent. Love accountants. There was the usual propaganda from News Limited that we are against the professions. We are not!

Really, in this country, can we afford to be giving away millions of dollars of tax subsidy to people for the cost of minimising their tax already? We are talking about the taxes which nurses and tradies paid to Canberra.

I would rather spend that on the best schools in the world, the best Tafe, the best healthcare system. It is a matter of priority. Am I surprised a vested interest whose business model relies on tax subsidies isn’t happy if we are going to reform it? No, I get why they might not like it.

We have to ask ourselves in this country, are we just a country who wants to maintain tax subsidies and loopholes for the big end of town, or a country who wants to invest in our people?

At the end of the day, we are not changing the ability of accountants to do work for their customers. We are just saying that perhaps once you are paying over $3,000 a year to an accountant you shouldn’t be able to deduct that off your tax. It is not how it has been characterised in News Limited and I expect to see more of these campaigns about Labor.

And some point we have to put ordinary people at the top of the pile.

Updated

The Sam Dastyari issue comes up again – Shorten is asked whether it is appropriate that Dastyari’s employer will make “a motza” out of this policy. Bill Shorten:

First of all, Mr Dastyari is no longer a senator. He paid a pretty big price, I think, for mistakes he made. I’m not about to get... he’s got a right to a life after politics, as I think all political people do.

But I just got to go to this issue of pathology. Is the government really arguing that we shouldn’t be investing more in pathology? Is the government arguing we shouldn’t put downward pressure on the cost of pathology so we can make sure we maintain the bulk billing system? If they are arguing that then they are more out of touch than I originally thought.

Updated

Can Labor commit to not raising taxes on superannuation (or putting in new ones)?

Yeah, we have no plans to increase taxes on superannuation.

“No plans” are the key words there.

Updated

Bill Shorten, Sam Dastyari and the lobbyist register

Bill Shorten was just asked whether he consulted Sam Dastyari about Labor’s pathology policy.

A quick search of the lobbyist register shows Dastyari is registered with the Strategic Counsel, which has a range of pharmaceutical, aged care and healthcare clients:

Shorten replied: “I haven’t. And indeed, this pathology announcement stands on its own two feet.”

Guardian Australia has contacted Dastyari for comment.

Updated

Catherine King steps in to answer a question on whether or not the money will just go to the pathology companies’ bottom line:

We know that because pathologists are telling us that. Because of the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison government freeze on rebates, they are at breaking point. We knew when we were in government we wanted to keep bulk billing, why we introduced bulk billing incentives and this government tried to get rid of them.

This will be a new Medicare item we work with pathologies on, that will preserve the rates of bulk billing for pathology. It’s too important for us to not to. We know that 100% of cancers are reliant on pathology for diagnosis. We’re keeping the bulk billing rate high for pathology.

Updated

Have Bill Shorten or any of his colleagues spoken to Sam Dastyari, about the pathology policy?

I haven’t. And indeed, this pathology announcement stands on its own two feet. When you think about it, and I will get Catherine to supplement the answer, pathology makes sick people well. It has that potential.

A check of the lobbyist’s register reveals this:

Updated

On Labor’s living wage policy:

Well over one million people are award-dependent. They’re the people I’m talking about. If you improve the living wage, if you improve the minimum wage to a living wage, we want to see that flow through to the people still reliant on the award system.

That number is bigger than 100,000 people. But I get where the question is coming from.

It’s really about this ongoing boast that Mr Morrison keeps saying about a strong economy.

Let’s unpack what a Liberal strong economy is based upon. It’s based upon two principles, the first is keep wages as low as possible, and they’re proud of that, and keep making sure the profits go up and up.

This government has an almost religious conviction that if you can make the richest people in Australia richer, the richest companies richer, eventually some of the crumbs will fall off the table. That’s the first leg of the principles of Mr Morrison’s strong economy, keep wages down.

The second leg, and the Grattan Institute has blown the whistle on this today ... that they believe keeps the economy strong, cut services.

Low wages and reduction in real services, that’s not the strong economy Australian needs. Labor, by contrast, believes in a strong economy built upon fairness and decency. We’re not going to stand by and watch Mr Morrison boast with a strategy where the rich get richer, the cost of living is squeezing millions of wage earners.

Updated

Back on the Sharrouf children, Shorten won’t say whether he thinks people should be sent in to get them:

“I will not start giving security advice.”

On Notre Dame:

I think all of us were shocked to see that image. Notre Dame is a global icon. I don’t know how many people here, but certainly I and millions of Australians over the years have backpacked or travelled to Paris, and one of those post card moments of any young Australian’s trip overseas is to go to Notre Dame.

It’s an 800-year-old cathedral. It’s survived civil war and religious strife, German occupation. A lot of us were very saddened and shocked to see what happened today.

Imagine if we saw the Opera House on fire. That’s essentially what we have seen in France. It belongs to the world. I like Mr Turnbull’s idea there should be some modest commitment to help rebuild, if that’s the case, that’s what friends are for. I would encourage Mr Morrison to take up... Mr Turnbull’s idea.

Updated

Shorten and the Sharrouf children

Can Bill Shorten think of a reason why the Sharrouf children should not be allowed to return to Australia?

None that I can think of. On the Sharrouf children, they shouldn’t be a political football. They have suffered. Their parents took them to a war zone, incredibly irresponsibly. Their parents took them into a regime of terrorism. These children shouldn’t be held responsible for what their parents did.

Why did Labor remove its negative gearing policy from its website?

We’re updating the documents. Let’s face it, if you want to talk about putting policies upfront, we’re doing that. We put our negative gearing policy out from the Sydney town hall in about February, March, of 2016. As new numbers come to light, we update them.

If you want to look at the gold standard in terms of putting policies out there, I don’t think any of you can really look past Labor. But if you want to look at what is not in gold standard, have a look at this very important report the Grattan Institute has written today. I would encourage you all to read it. It has some real information there.

What it shows is the Liberals’ economic model on display yet again. It shows for tax cuts on the never-never. They are planning, though, to cut up to $40 billion a year in secret cuts. The government will have to answer during the course of this campaign. What are the secret cuts you’re planning to promise an illusionary tax?

Updated

Bill Shorten is in Adelaide, speaking on the $200m commitment for bulk-billing pathology (blood tests and the like), as part of Labor’s $2.3bn cancer plan.

Updated

AAP was also at the senior’s forum Scott Morrison addressed.

Other than footpaths, nuclear power and franking credits, the (very) friendly crowd also had this to say:

Drysdale resident Elisabeth Anderson told AAP she wanted more information about other parties before deciding who to vote for on 18 May.

‘I was really impressed. He was very open and real. He was really listening to people,’ she said.

Noni Bartlett is worried an elected Shorten government would introduce death duties.

‘I don’t think Labor have it on the agenda yet, but because of the pushing – as Morrison explained – that’s on the Greens agenda and on the ACTU agenda, I think it might happen,’ she said.

Retired unionist Alan Guihenneuc was among a handful of volunteers handing out anti-government flyers outside the forum, criticising the government for inaction on aged care.

‘People I’ve been talking to, especially about aged care, they want change,’ he said of Corangamite.

Julie Beattie took time out from her job to attend the forum.

‘We’re just little Drysdale, look at our town hall,’ she said.

‘It’s fantastic to have someone come into our region to understand our issues.’

Updated

Scott Morrison reveals love of Game of Thrones

Talking to Geelong radio Rock 95.5 FM, Scott Morrison went into a little more detail about his love of Game of Thrones.

Well yeah, I watched that first episode last night. I mean Jon Snow has always been my favorite character and all that, but I thought it was a bit of a slow start last night for the first episode of the final series. But anyway I think it’s all a bit of fun, a bit of fantasy that people can sort of chill out and zone out while they watch it. We were watching it with the some of the media gallery that are on the bus with us, trailing us around.

I haven’t watched Game of Thrones (don’t @ me, I have very limited time for TV and it just seemed like wayyyyyy too much of an investment) but I can’t imagine watching some of its scenes with the prime minister, no matter who it is, is any more comfortable than if your parents were in the room, if you know what I mean.

Updated

While we wait for Bill Shorten’s first press conference, if you missed Murph’s latest podcast a few days ago, on the history of Shorten, have a listen here or subscribe to it on an app such as apple podcasts.

Also, huzzah for being able to embed this stuff, thanks to the technical geniuses in the brains trust. (If it doesn’t work, it is absolutely my fault.)

Updated

Sky News’s Annelise Nielsen said she asked participants of that senior’s forum how they found out about it, and learnt most discovered it through the local Liberal party branch.

Right on schedule:

The ads keep on keeping on.

We’re not even a full week into the campaign yet.

Zali Steggall kerfuffle

You may have seen the front page of the Daily Telegraph this morning.

The response to it from Zali Steggall’s ex-husband and his wife came pretty swiftly.

Updated

Just a reminder that enrolments to vote close on Thursday. You’ll find more information here.

Updated

Again, the key words here are “taxable incomes”. That’s not their only earnings.

That sound you hear is the Kristina Keneally tweet thread storm gathering.

And yes, this is a timely reminder

AAP has collated the major party responses on this:

I think Australia should contribute to a restoration fund,” Bill Shorten told reporters in Melbourne.

“Notre Dame doesn’t just belong to Paris or France, it belongs to the world. I think we, all of us who’ve enjoyed that architecture, that history, we too should perhaps rally around and help Paris and Notre Dame.”

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg said he had no doubt many Australians would want to chip in.

“Absolutely, if money is going towards the restoration and Australians who want to contribute can, that is to be supported,” he told ABC TV.

“Every Parisian will dig deep as well, no doubt. I don’t think there will be a shortage of funds for this to happen.”

Updated

“Under pressure, who knows what deal Bill Shorten would do. Who knows what deal Bill Shorten might do. That’s why people don’t trust him. They’ve been watching him for five and a half years,” says Scott Morrison.

Legs eleven – it’s death taxes!

Section 44 will most likely continue to haunt us into the 46th Parliament.

Updated

Who had nuclear power on their boomer bingo card?

Cos knock at the door, you’ve got four.

Updated

From Sky News’ Canberra bureau chief:

Updated

Scott Morrison appears to playing ‘boomer bingo’ in this forum.

So far he has name dropped Ita Buttrose, Macca from the ABC and footpaths (as well as superannuation).

Any moment now, he’s going to mention the monte carlo. I can feel it.

Updated

Morrison says choice is between himself and Bill Shorten

Scott Morrison taking questions from the crowd, again repeats the most obvious line of this election:

You’ve got to focus on the future, and the choice at this election is between Bill Shorten as prime minister or myself as prime minister.

Both of our parties have now changed our rules. That means that whoever you elect as prime minister at this election, that’s who you get for the next three years.

Our rules have been changed. Our rules are now in fact stronger than what the Labor party’s rules are.

They only need a 50% vote in their party room to change all their rules. We need a two-thirds vote in our room. I have never seen that happen in our party room. You vote for Bill Shorten at this election, you will get him and you will get his higher taxes and everything that follows from it.

It is a clear choice that Australians have. I’m pleased that both parties have changed our rules to get rid of all of that nonsense. It is now a part of the past and now we look forward to the future. It is a real choice between who you want to lead this country. If you can’t manage money as Labor can’t, then you can’t run the country.”

Updated

Scott Morrison is promising no new taxes on superannuation “not now, not ever” to the seniors’ forum in Corangamite.

Scott Morrison is at a seniors’ forum, with Sarah Henderson.

Just thinking (given how hard the Coalition is working to save Victorian seats) that this election is the first real chance Labor has had of clawing its way back, federally in Victoria, since the 1990s. It’s been a while since I studied political science, but I’m pretty sure the tram strike resulted in Bob Hawke losing about eight seats in Victoria – and really, Labor hasn’t managed to take them back. This election seems to represent that chance.

Deakin, La Trobe, Corangamite, Chisholm and Dunkley are all on Labor’s hit list.

On the road again

In 2016, Gladys Liu also spoke to The Age about safe schools:

Gladys Liu, the Liberal party’s communities engagement committee chairwoman for Victoria, said she believed the school program undermined “conservative” Chinese values.

“We are concerned it will change society and the moral standard [of] the culture,” Ms Liu said.

“It’s not only directly affecting students, but will affect the makeup and future of our society.”

For those asking, the original story containing Gladys Liu’s comments, can be found here.

It included this:

If you ask how many Chinese people read mainstream news, the percentage is so, so low,” Gladys Liu says. “But the first thing they do in the morning is turn on the phone and go to WeChat straight away.”

She says the campaign was run by volunteers like herself and centred on three issues: the Safe Schools controversy, same-sex marriage and economic management.

“A lot of parents don’t agree with letting boys go into a girls’ toilet,” she says. “They strongly opposed the Safe Schools program. Cross-dressing and transgender – this is something they found difficult to accept. Chinese believe same-sex [marriage] is against normal practice.

“Chinese people come to Australia because they want good things for the next generation, not to be destroyed – they use the word destroyed – [by] same-sex, transgender, intergender. All this rubbish.”

Gladys Liu says refugees were also a key issue for Chinese voters. “If Labor is going to open the gate and let refugees in, that will affect people here and their lives here,” she says.

But she denies that there was an orchestrated disinformation campaign. “If Labor policies are good, they can dominate WeChat,” she says. “But Chinese don’t like their policies.”

I meant to mention this earlier, but forgot – the first leaders’ debate is set down for April 29, in Perth.

Future government surplus forecasts 'heroic' says Grattan Institute

Asked to put a dollar figure on the potential cuts to the growth of health funding, Danielle Wood said:

It would still be growing, but 0.3% a year is a very low rate of growth, particularly for health.”

What about the proportion of tax cuts that Labor has agreed with? Will they have the same impact?

Under Labor’s plan, [it’s] much more modest, the government’s plan is $300bn over a decade, under what Labor has announced, and they have foreshadowed they may well cut taxes at some point in the future, the cost will be $70bn over 10 years.

So it’s substantially less. Within the kind of envelope of the budget, it would be possible to run surpluses for the decade if they didn’t do any further tax cuts.

And in conclusion, what is the institute’s view on the likelihood of the government reaching its surplus forecasts?

I expect we would probably get there next year. Barring some kind of major economic shock, I think we’re on the right trajectory. But once you get beyond that, the spending growth numbers look really, really heroic. Once you got out to 2024-25, with the really big changes, I expect the budget to dip back into deficit at that time.”

Updated

Speaking of the Grattan Institute analysis, Danielle Wood, one of the institute’s directors, just had a chat to the ABC:

Under the government’s numbers, which say it’s going to be $300bn worth of tax cuts over the next decade, as well as running ever-growing budget surpluses, the only way those numbers stack up is if you have government payments falling as a share of the economy,” she said.

“We see that in the budget papers. They’re forecasting that government spending as a share of the economy is going to fall from 24.9% today to 23.6% out in a decade’s time.

“What that would mean is that spending could have to be about $40bn lower in a decade than if we had spending sit at the share of the economy where it is today and it has been effectively the last six years.”

So have any areas been identified as potentially going to suffer?

Woods: It’s partly lower interest costs. As you start to build surpluses, interest will come down.

They expect welfare to come down because of high jobs growth. There’s a whole lot of other areas where they’re forecasting spending growth is going to come down.

So health, for example, has grown 3% a year in real terms for the last four years. They’re forecasting that comes down to 0.3% a year, that would be historically unprecedented.

So there’s a whole lot of spending areas that we can see in the budget papers where spending is expected to come down over the next four years, but we don’t have a good sense of exactly why that is. It doesn’t seem to be driven by any policies that we can see in the budget.

...That would be over the next four years. So certainly if we look – this is based on the forecast in the budget papers – spending growth in those areas is coming down in the budget. That would be over the next four years to come.

Updated

Labor is running very hard with the Grattan Institute analysis of the government’s tax plan.

Bill Shorten (shortly before he left Melbourne for SA):

The whistle has been blown on the government’s secret cuts to spending in the Budget. This government is promising tax cuts in five years’ time for some people, but it’s doing it on the basis of $40bn worth of cuts. The secret’s out, this is a government with secret cuts to spending in its budget to fund its promises on the never-never, for tax cuts.”

Josh Frydenberg has been working just as hard to call it rubbish:

Updated

The prime minister was also asked about the Sharrouf children by the 5AA hosts.

Scott Morrison:

“Look, you’ve got to get the balance here. I mean Khaled Sharrouf was a terrorist. he declared war basically on Australia and what he did to his children and his wife did to their children is despicable, by taking them into that war zone.

“Now of course we are not putting any Australians at risk in terms of going to these conflict zones, I don’t think people would expect us to do that. But we have been working quietly, behind the scenes, with the international Red Cross, we are taking each and every case on its merits, Australia’s national security always comes first. But I am very mindful that we are dealing with children here, so the officials who are involved here and working on these issues, are examining them closely and we are working closely with families, where families are affected back here in Australia.

“...You just put your finger right on the issue here, and that is Australia’s national security interests always come first and there are a lot of hurdles to clear on this, and Australians can be absolutely satisfied that we will follow those processes extremely closely, but we are mindful of the fact that we are dealing with children. So what I am not doing, is getting drawn into any final decisions here, at this point. You just take this process one step at a time, we are dealing with human beings here, particularly children and we will be mindful of that, as we continue to deal with these very sensitive cases.

“But as always, Australia’s safety must always come first.”

Scott Morrison is talking to Adelaide radio 5AA before the Labor campaign rolls into town.

He calls South Australia the “turnaround state”. Which is what he called Tasmania last week, so he adds “just like Tasmania” at the end of the sentence.

Updated

The situation the Sharrouf children have found themselves in was also raised on Sunrise. Bill Shorten repeated his stance from last week – that the kids should be safe, but Australia should be led by its security agencies. (Which is very similar to Scott Morrison’s stance.)

Well, I don’t hold the children responsible for the mistakes of their parents. You know I don’t know all the circumstances but I can understand why a grandmother wants to see her grandchildren safe at home,” Shorten said.

“What I don’t understand is what on earth possessed the parents, one, to pursue this hateful ideology of the terrorist Isis organisation but dragging your kids into the middle of a war zone, no parent who loves their children would do that, would they? ...

“Well, I think you’ve got to work on that [bringing them back in]. We’ve got to make the kids safe. It’s difficult. We’ll work with the security agencies but I don’t hold the kids responsible for the mistakes of their parents and I think that’s just the humane thing to do, isn’t it?”

Updated

Speaking to Sunrise before heading off to South Australia, Bill Shorten responded to Josh Frydenberg’s claim that a Labor government under his plan would be the highest taxing government in Australian history:

Well, first of all, we don’t accept that. This is the government who’s raised more taxes than anyone before us. And as our promises come out during the course of the election campaign, this government untruth will be exposed for what it is.

But let’s be clear here: it’s all about choices in this election. This government wants to give tax cuts to the top end of town, this government wants to keep spending taxpayer money on subsidies to the lucky few. We want to make sure that we’ve got better hospitals and schools, that’s what we want to do with our scarce government resources, look after working- and middle-class families.

Updated

AAP has succinctly summed up today’s tax battle for you.

From their report:

According to the government’s analysis, a worker earning $59,000 would be $542 a year better off while someone on $176,000 could pay $11,739 less in income tax by the middle of next decade.

An early childhood worker would be better off by $943 a year under the Coalition’s plan than under Labor.

Labor argues the Coalition’s plan is unfair because it means everyone earning between $45,000 and $200,000 will be on the same 30% tax rate by 2024-25.

But Mr Frydenberg said that measure was aimed at reducing bracket creep – when inflation in wages pushes people into higher tax brackets – and thus benefit lower- and middle-income earners …

The opposition has also called the Coalition’s tax plan “reckless”, saying the government can’t know what the economic conditions will be in mid-2025.

“People will have to re-elect the Coalition two more times to see the tax cuts,” opposition finance spokesman Jim Chalmers told ABC TV.

Mr Frydenberg wasn’t concerned about potential economic challenges ahead, saying budgets are designed to prepare for them.

“That’s the whole purpose of a budget,” he told ABC Radio National.



Updated

This issue is also going to plague Coalition MPs today, so they might want to come up with a better answer for it.

Michael Rowland: Former prime minister Tony Abbott says he would be willing to be drafted back into the Liberal party leadership if the Coalition loses, do you ever see any circumstance where Tony Abbott will lead your party again?

Josh Frydenberg: I know Tony Abbott has his hands full in his own seat and that is where his focus is and that is where it should be. We are focused – Scott Morrison, myself, Michael McCormack and the whole Coalition team – is focused on delivering more jobs, lower taxes, record funding on hospitals, schools and roads. That is a record we’re proud of. That is the record we will continue with.

MR: Do you see any circumstances in which Tony Abbott will lead your party again?

JF: I see Scott Morrison as the leader of our party today. Tomorrow ...

MR: It is a simple question – yes or no will suffice.

JF: As I said, you’re asking me about Tony Abbott. I am saying his focus is on his seat.

MR: He is looking at the leadership as well. If he wins his seat firstly and if you’re in opposition, do you see any circumstance in which Tony Abbott will lead your party again?

JF: What I say is Scott Morrison is providing strong leadership. Bill Shorten’s been the opposition leader for six years. It doesn’t matter who he is up against, he is not the preferred prime minister and the reason is people can see through his lies. They can see through his bad policies and, ultimately, it is the Coalition that will deliver a stronger economy, lower taxes and more jobs.

Updated

Just as shocking as Jim Chalmers wanting to talk about the Grattan Institute report, which describes the Coalition’s tax plan as “heroic” without cuts, is Josh Frydenberg saying he believes the analysis to be wrong. He told ABC TV:

We have shown we can bring the rate of spending growth down to the lowest rate of any government in 50 years and, at the same time, spend record amounts on hospitals, schools and roads, grow the economy so we are growing faster than any G7 country, except the United States, create more than 1.2m new jobs, legislate tax cuts for more than 10 million Australians and provide a pathway forward for long-term structural reform, a pathway that is rejected by Bill Shorten who has $387bn of higher taxes to impose on the Australian people.

Updated

Josh Frydenberg is also on the ABC. He’s being asked about Gladys Liu’s comments by Michael Rowland:

JF: It was our party, our government, the Coalition that has seen same-sex marriage become law. We are very proud of that fact.

There is so many champions on our side, not least Warren Entsch and Tim Wilson and Trevor Evans and Trent Zimmerman and many others. We care deeply about these issues. I, like many of my colleagues, have spoken about this. Those comments were a few years ago but I thought you were going to ask me questions about Melissa Parke resigning in WA or Michael Daley’s comments. I am focused on the future.

MR: Those comments were made in 2016. Chinese people come to Australia – this is Gladys Liu – “Because they want good things for the next generation not to be destroyed, they use the word destroyed by same sex, transgender, inter gender, all this rubbish, to them they are ridiculous rubbish.”

JF: We strongly support equality and that is why we are able to preside over the same-sex marriage ...

MR: Do you strongly condemn these comments, based on that?

JF: Those comments don’t reflect my views or Scott Morrison or the party’s views.

MR: They reflect the view of a Liberal candidate in a closely watched seat. What action will the party take? Melissa Parke was disendorsed by the Labor party.

JF: The key point here was, as a party, we presided over the same-sex marriage debate when it became law. That is something we’re proud of.

MR: Will you disendorse Gladys Liu?

JF: I will not.

MR: Why not?

JF: I think she is a strong local candidate. The point is we, as a party, stand for tolerance, we, as a party and as a government have presided over the same-sex marriage debate which ended successfully.

MR: How do you think LGBTI Voters in Chisholm will think about those remarks?

JF: You would need to direct your questions towards them.

Updated

Bill Shorten is on his way to Boothby, where Labor is hopeful of picking up Nicolle Flint’s marginal seat.

Jim Chalmers just popped up on ABC.

He was pretty keen to talk about the Australian Financial Review story on the Grattan Institute analysis of the Coalition’s tax plan. (Insert shocked face emoji here.)

From the Fin’s report:

The Morrison government would need to cut spending by about $40 billion a year by 2030 to afford its big personal income tax cuts and deliver on its budget surplus forecasts, new analysis by the Grattan Institute shows.

Chalmers:

Everyone earning up to $125,000 in the next term of parliament will be the same or better off under Labor’s tax plan. We have a plan to match the government to $125,000, and we have a plan for a better tax cut for 3.6 million Australians, who earn up to $45,000 a year.

The difference between Liberal and Labor on tax, the Liberals will have to cut hospitals and schools to pay for their plan, we can implement our plan to prioritise low- and middle-income earners without cutting hospitals and schools.

Updated

Fireworks on Q&A

The Bad Show was just as much a train wreck as you would have expected.

James McGrath and Larissa Waters sparred.

From Lisa Martin’s report:

The Liberal National party is a party for all Queenslanders regardless of where you come from and how long you’ve been here,” McGrath insisted.

“As long as you share our values – and one of our values is it’s inclusivity, and we’re colour blind when it comes to the colour of your own skin … And I’m sure the Greens and I hope Labor would agree with that.”

“I’m not sure Peter Dutton would,” Waters retorted.

“I beg your pardon. Are you serious?” McGrath said.

When Waters pointed to Dutton’s immigration detention policies to justify the racist claim, McGrath exploded in rage.

“Where are your tears for those people who drowned at sea and were eaten by the sharks? Don’t come here with your crocodile tears talking to me about what Peter Dutton and Scott Morrison did. They made sure the borders of Australia were safe and secure,” McGrath bellowed.

“I’ll ask you not to shout,” the host, Virginia Trioli, responded.

Yup. A great contribution to political discourse. What a show.

Updated

Tony Abbott says he stands ready to lead the Liberal party again – but he won’t stand in a contested ballot.

Anne Davies reports Abbott was speaking to voters at the Manly Yacht Club overnight and said his leadership ambitions remained – under the right circumstances.

From the report:

I won’t go into a contested ballot,” Abbott said in answer to a question from the audience about whether he would seek the leadership again.

“It will be up to the party room. If they want me they will need to invite me. But I am not expecting that,” he said.

“I am not going to shoulder anyone aside for the top job, because for me it has never been about that,” he added.

Updated

Labor and Bill Shorten will head to South Australia today.

Shorten faces his own off-campaign issues. As reported by the Australian:

Bill Shorten is under renewed pressure to haul anti-Israel Labor MPs into line as an outbreak of pro-Palestinian sentiment within the opposition threatens to disrupt his election campaign.

West Australian Labor MPs Josh Wilson and Sue Lines were revealed to have attacked Israeli security forces and Australia’s own Jewish lobby at Labor Party events in recent months, days after Curtin candidate Melissa Parke quit over similar anti-Israel criticisms.

Jewish leaders yesterday called on the Opposition Leader to ­enforce his support for Israel and stop a tide of pro-Palestinian support within Labor that has been bubbling in recent years.

Shorten addressed some of this yesterday:

First of all, the MPs, Mr Wilson and Senator Lines have reconfirmed again this morning that they support Labor party policy. For the sake of clarity, the Israeli ambassador representing the Israeli government said they could work with both sides of politics. Labor party policy is very clear, and all of my candidates and members have signed up to it – a two-state solution. Sorry, let me answer your questions. Our policy is very clear, we support a two-state solution – that is the right of Israel to exist behind safe and secure borders, and the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people for statehood.

But expect to hear more on that today, especially as the campaigns inch closer to WA.

Updated

Back to the campaign and Scott Morrison will spend the morning in Victoria as the Liberals attempt to hold marginal electorates there.

Morrison launched Gladys Liu’s campaign for Chisholm yesterday. Shortly afterwards, an interview she gave to the Guardian in 2016 surfaced. From Lisa Martin’s report:

Liu ran an anti-Labor campaign on WeChat, the most popular Chinese-language social media network, ahead of the 2016 election and in the July 2016 report claimed credit for helping to get then Liberal MP Julia Banks elected to parliament …

Liu told the Guardian the campaign on WeChat was run by volunteers like herself and centred on three issues: the Safe Schools controversy, same-sex marriage and economic management. In discussing the role of the campaign, Liu commented on how issues including same-sex marriage were received in the Chinese community and on WeChat – the article did not represent those comments as Liu’s personal views …

“The Chinese people come to Australia because they want good education for their children, good environment, they want good things for their next generation, not to be destroyed – they use the word destroyed – by these sort of concepts of same-sex, transgender, intergender, crossgender and all this rubbish. To them this is just ridiculous rubbish,” Liu told the Guardian.

Hong Kong-born Liu, a former speech pathologist who is now running as the Liberal candidate for Chisholm, has now dismissed the Guardian’s reporting as “fake” and “wrong” and told the Australian on Monday that she had been “misrepresented”.

“I was asked about what I had heard from the Chinese community and I told the person who interviewed me what I heard. When it was reported, it became my words,” she said.

The Guardian has released audio of the interview and stands by its reporting.”

Updated

Of course there is always downtime on any campaign.

Updated

Good morning

It’s the fifith full day of campaigning, and if you feel like it already has a groundhog feel to it, well, I’m sorry.

But there are 32 days to go.

Last night’s episode of Four Corners is sure to raise questions about the Sharrouf children. Scott Morrison has previously said he will not risk Australian lives to bring them home, which is understandable, but the children are Australian citizens.

Anyone who saw the reunion between the kids and their grandmother Karen Nettleton will know just how much emotion surrounds this case. Today both leaders are sure to face questions about just what Australia should do in this harrowing case.

On the domestic front, the battle for the hearts and minds of voters when it comes to health continues. Labor has announced $200m for free pathology tests as it continues to drag the government into its preferred territory of Medicare, forcing the government to react to each of the opposition’s policies while continuing to fight off what it sees as a Mediscare 2.0 campaign.

For its part the government is trying to keep the focus on tax, releasing calculations for a range of professions, including those considered traditional Labor voters, to back its claim that workers earning more than $40,000 will be better off in 2024-25 under the Coalition’s plan.

Meanwhile, Labor is just gearing up with its own attack on Peter Dutton, taking every opportunity to remind Victorian voters that he was very almost prime minister. Dutton might be a boon for the Coalition in WA, but he’s the exact opposite in Victoria. So far, the fight for his own seat of Dickson is keeping Dutton fairly contained within his electorate’s boundaries, with the Liberals trying to work out how, if any way, they will use the home affairs minister in their campaign.

But today the campaign will all be competing with the heartbreaking scenes of Notre Dame burning.

We’ll keep you up to date with the blow by blow of the day, so keep checking back. If only to see if I am still standing.

Ready?

Let’s get into it.

Updated

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100's of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
Sir Paul McCartney Banned From Reddit After Attempting to Post in r/PaulMcCartney
Paul McCartney's Reddit activity faced moderation after attempts to post in r/PaulMcCartney, sparking debate about platform rules, subreddit moderation, and how even global celebrities navigate online communities.
International Business Times UK
International Business Times UK
Say my name: For newcomer and racialized children, belonging begins with classroom greetings
The first time I understood that names could hold two worlds was not by changing mine, but by hearing it differently. As a Pakistani child growing up in Canada, I learned early that my name could sound different depending on who was saying it. My name is simple and deeply…
The Conversation
The Conversation
‘Death hunted him since he was a kid’: how Lamar Odom survived to become a villain in his own tale
A new documentary charts the tragic events that led to the former NBA star overdosing in a Nevada brothel – and what came next
The Guardian - US
The Guardian - US
Manhattan taco spot defeats German tourist who filed $100k lawsuit after their ‘dangerous’ hot salsa gave him ‘diarrhea for days’
It was his first time ever eating tacos!
We Got This Covered
We Got This Covered
We analyzed Philly street scenes and identified signs of gentrification using machine learning trained on longtime residents’ observations
What does gentrification in Philadelphia look like?
The Conversation
The Conversation
Daredevil Creator Explains Why The Netflix Show Happened Despite Being Pitched As Two Movies
Drew Goddard goes way back with the Man Without Fear.
Cinemablend
Cinemablend
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.
Download on the AppStore Get it on Google Play