See you all on the morrow
It’s been fun, it’s been real – and I’m very sorry to have to pull up stumps. We are about to have some very transitory technical issues that will make it impossible for me to deliver the blog live reliably. We’ll be back at sparrows in the morning.
Just before we go, that slight mystery of Joe Hockey saying in question time that Paul Keating had advocated super be used for home purchases in 1993. Seemed a bit odd.
The policy Hockey was talking about was actually Labor’s retirement incomes policy. That policy said that folks should be able to use some if their super for a home purchase. Which is different from the Hockey proposal, which was first home buyers using super, not retirees. Yes, I nit pick for a living.
Today, Monday:
- The government did everything it could to look like it was trying to salvage its higher education policy – but it looks like nothing can save the governor-general. Sorry university fee deregulation. That started the day looking dead, and it is ending the day looking dead.
- Labor asked several questions about the very curious sacking of the agriculture secretary Paul Grimes but elicted only very careful formulations from the prime minister, rather than compelling new insights.
- Rupert Murdoch stamped his foot about Malcolm Turnbull and media reform and various Coalition types stamped their foot about Tanya Plibersek and boat turnbacks.
There was more, but it was sound and fury signifying not much. You’ve all been ace. See you tomorrow.
Updated
Blogans, bloganistas, I’m sorry to say that Politics Live has to fold the tent a fraction early this evening for a combination of reasons. I’ll be back very shortly with an evening summary.
Gorgeous snap here that I didn’t quite get to during the slanging match. Visitors, from East Timor.
Question time. Two dispositions. I don’t think anymore need be said than that.
The prime minister has placed further questions on the notice paper.
Shadow treasurer Chris Bowen.
Q: Why is the government cutting pension indexation that will see the value of the pension fall from 28% of male total average weekly earnings today, to just 16% by 2055?
Tony Abbott:
Pensions will go up twice a year every year. That is point number one, point number two is that the pensioners of Australia are significantly better off, thanks to this government, because the carbon tax has been abolished and the carbon tax compensation has been kept.
There’s been a little run about Bill Shorten doctoring transcripts, which seems a teensy weensy bit .. confident today. A question about why the prime minister didn’t seem to understand his own superannuation policy measures. A question about the wickedness of Labor in Victoria and sovereign risk.
Infrastructure minister Jamie Briggs.
Arnold Dick, the chairman of the legal committee of the international tunneling and understood ground space association ..
(Apparently Mr Dick is a real person.)
Updated
None of the Grimes questions went to Barnaby Joyce. Well, none thus far.
He’s watching on attentively, though.
Back to the outrage.
A question to the treasurer Joe Hockey pointing out that colleagues have smacked him down sharply in recent days for suggesting that superannuation savings could be used to purchase homes yields a declaration from Hockey that the architect of this idea was none other than Paul Keating, in a 1993 campaign speech.
Joe Hockey:
It was a 1993 election campaign speech of Paul Keating, where he stood up and he said, ‘Australians - young Australians should be able to use their superannuation to purchase their first home. Paul J. Keating. I know he is a mate of yours. Pick up the phone to him.
(We’d best check that one.)
Oh brilliant.
The immigration minister Peter Dutton has been tasked with giving Tanya Plibersek a slap (or really an implied slap) over her boat turnbacks comments at the weekend – Labor’s flips and flops on boat arrivals policies. A biiiig Dutton rhetorical offensive.
Which enables me to unveil Dutton in his brick form – #TheBrickDuttons The constabulary always patrols in twos. So Brick Peter is no exception. ‘Ello ello. ‘Ello ello Tanya, what would be happening here?
A third question on Grimes.
Bill Shorten.
Q: I refer to reports that the prime minister’s own department contacted Mr Grimes a number of times about his request to convene an extraordinary Senate committee hearing to reveal the circumstances and truth about changes to the minister for agriculture’s Hansard record. Did the prime minister personally instruct his department to communicate with Dr Grimes, or anyone in his office?
Abbott:
This matter was handled entirely by the secretary of my department, as it should be.
Labor’s agriculture Joel Fitzgibbon is back on the sacking of secretary Grimes.
Q: I remind the prime minister that the secretary of the department of agriculture made undertakings to Senate estimates that he would provide further documents relating to changes to Hansard. Now that the secretary is no longer in the employ of the Commonwealth, will be prime minister still commit to providing these documents?
(This reference from Fitzgibbon relates to Grimes suggesting he had information about changes made to the Hansard in order to correct an answer in the House by Barnaby Joyce.)
Abbott offers a non-specific formulation.
Madam Speaker, it would be the standard practice of the government to honour undertakings made in senate estimates.
Labor finally gets round to the question about the sacking of the secretary of the department of agriculture, Paul Grimes.
Shorten wants to know why the prime minister sacked the agriculture secretary (in the relevant processes the prime minister is the person who hires and fires departmental heads) if, as Abbott said at the weekend, he was not privy to all the details.
The prime minister says he followed advice.
Tony Abbott:
I asked my secretary to look into this matter. My secretary did so.
He made a recommendation to me and that recommendation has been acted upon.
Chris be nimble, Chris be quick ..
Christopher Pyne is berating the opposition for running questions on the higher education package when he, Christopher Pyne, has utterly obliterated the whole critique by the decisions that the government announced earlier today to re-fund the national collaborative research infrastructure scheme.
Pyne:
The thing about Opposition as you would well remember, Madam Speaker, is you have to be nimble.
You have to be capable of changing your tactics when circumstances change, Madam Speaker.
(This is how Pyne gets through monumentally absurd contortions that would quite literally end the careers of his colleagues – his working grasp of absurdity and irony. He’s mocking himself here, while directing the mocking words across the chamber. Dial H for chutzpah. Of course contortions do generally get you in the end. They can’t all be outrun or out spun.)
I did wonder how the government would work Tanya Plibersek’s comments about boat turnbacks and Australia’s relationship with Jakarta into question time. Independent Andrew Wilkie opens a door by asking about children in detention.
Tony Abbott:
We are taking children out of detention because the boats have stopped and the member for Denison needs to know that, if the Labor were ever again to form a government, not only would the carbon tax be back, not only would the mining tax be back, but the people smugglers would be back and the children would be back in detention – and the children would be dying at sea because, Madam Speaker, as the deputy leader of the opposition made clear on the weekend, the policies needed to stop the boats would instantly be scrapped by members opposite.
Shame on them.
Labor’s Tanya Plibersek quotes the Liberal senator Cory Bernardi, who was critical over the weekend about the linkages between deregulation and the research funding. Is today’s backflip about good government or about shoring up the prime minister’s leadership?
Tony Abbott looks through all the explicit threats the government has issued in recent days and asks why Labor didn’t fund the program if it considered it so important.
We think it’s important. That is why it is being funded now.
Foreign affairs minister Julie Bishop, representing the attorney-general, gets a Dorothy Dixer inviting her to reflect on Labor’s fondness for illegal firearms. (This is about the legislation with mandatory minimum sentences for illegal firearms importation, which we’ve already flagged.)
Bishop:
There were very significant cuts to the Australian customs and border protection service between 2008 and 2013 – and I have to point to that because it led to a 25% reduction in the screening of sea cargo and a 75% reduction in the screening of air cargo – and of course that has had an adverse impact on efforts to prevent the importation of illegal firearms.
I can assure the House and the people of Australia that the Australian government will give the police and our security agencies the tools they need to do their job. One of those tools is adequate penalties on people who are trafficking in illegal firearms.
When in government the Labor party introduced mandatory minimum sentences for people smuggling.
So I now call upon the Labor party to similarly support a minimum sentence for trafficking in illegal firearms.
The prime minister updates the House on the latest in Vanuatu. More RAAF flights will go today – and there is $5m in aid.
Now Abbott’s back on the liberation of the university sector.
Madam Speaker, this is a good package and as a result of the announcements that the minister for education has made early today, there should be no impediments whatsoever to this reform being considered on its merits, the merits are great and it should be supported by members in another place.
Question time
Crikey, 2pm.
Bill Shorten opens on the humiliating backflip.
Q: Now that the government has backed down on its shameful attempt to hold 1,700 scientists and their work hostage for its own political purposes, will the prime minister now back down on his plans for $100,000 university degrees?
Tony Abbott:
There are no such plan, Madam Speaker. There are no such plans.
Our plan is to liberate our great universities to be as good as they possibly can.
(The rest of the answer was silent on fraternity and equality.)
Updated
Uh oh. Nobody has told Labor’s Anna Burke, who is currently on Sky News, and who, like me momentarily thought Labor might be actually going to do something, as opposed to talking about doing something, about metadata and journalist’s sources.
Anna Burke:
We shouldn’t be voting on something and hoping that it can be retrieved afterwards.
I take it all back. In the next breath, Shorten said Labor would insist on having a vote on the (unspecified) amendment. Not necessarily on the substance of the amendment itself. I should have known, really. A Clayton’s commitment.
Journalists have moved on from the humiliating backdown, which rather speaks for itself. There’s some interest in whether Labor might actually get serious on metadata.
Q: Given that the new metadata regime is being phased in over two years would you consider insisting on changes regarding journalist sources before you pass the whole bill?
Shorten:
We are prepared and I’ve said this to the prime minister directly, that if concerns about press freedom are not dealt with we would seek to move an amendment in the senate.
(The Labor leader is clearly toughening up here on Labor’s previous position, but it’s not clear what model of press source protection that he’d favour.)
Humiliating backdown in five, four, three ..
The Labor leader Bill Shorten has found the television cameras.
Shorten:
We’ve just heard that the Abbott government and Christopher Pyne have been forced into a humiliating backdown about their threats to cut science funding in Australia. What we saw is Christopher Pyne and Tony Abbott take science funding in Australia hostage unless senators agreed to vote for $100,000 university degrees. Now the government’s backed down on this crazy proposal as they should have.
Keeping your eyebrows fixed is an act of will. My eyebrows are perfectly still.
The no's have it, Christopher
A quick call around the crossbench by my colleagues Lenore Taylor and Daniel Hurst has yielded the following intelligence:
No to higher education 3.0: Jacqui Lambie, Nick Xenophon, Dio Wang, Glenn Lazarus.
Likely no.
Ricky Muir.
Therefore the no’s have it, unless of course anyone cracks.
Do the ayes have it? No, the eyebrows have it.
Christopher Pyne, today, that would be Monday – asked about what he said on Sunday.
That’s looking back in the mirror, I’m looking forward.
Speaking of Pyne magic.
Sunday, Insiders. That would be yesterday.
Christopher Pyne:
The savings and the spending are linked. You can’t do one without the other.
Given all these crossbenchers actually object to deregulation, I can’t see this tactic working .. but let’s see. Pyne magic. Very powerful.
A short segment on eyebrow signalling.
Universities Australia chief Belinda Robinson, with Pyne for this announcement of higher ed 3.0, said this a moment ago on the 20% cut in the Commonwealth grants scheme.
Robinson:
So we are very pleased today to hear that the government has finally listened to that point and has removed the 20% cut or split the bill so there will be no 20% cut.
A reporter points out that Pyne raised his eyebrows when Robinson made the remark.
Q: Your eyebrow raising ..
Pyne:
I don’t usually raise my eyebrows, am I raising them now?
Updated
Pyne says the cost of restoring the research funding will be $150m for the 12 months he’s just flagged.
Q: Just to clarify, so one bill will go in this week, that’s the deregulation bill and the other bill will go in later? We have just heard that universities expect that bill to be defeated – that is, the 20% cut. Is that your expectation?
Pyne:
Well, the government will argue for the savings measures, but they are two separate debates.
Pyne now appears to be saying the government will proceed with deregulation this week and set aside a separate debate on the savings measures for later.
Deregulation of the sector is the major reform. Now, we can all have a debate about that this week, and then we can come back and have a debate about savings later on.
There are some cross-benchers that don’t want any savings measure.
There are others that think we should go further in terms of savings. And there are some that would like to change the percentage, but believe some savings do need to be delivered.
Government splits the higher education bills, finds the cash
Pyne is announcing several things. Take it away Christopher.
The government will be splitting the higher education reform bill in the Senate, so that the reform, the deregulation ... will be able to stand and fall on its own merit, separate from the reduction in the commonwealth grant scheme by 20%.
So the 20% commonwealth grant scheme cut will be hived off and put in a separate bill, so two debates can be held, one on the government’s deregulation agenda, which we see as having extraordinary benefits for students and universities – and we’ll have a separate debate around the government’s reduction of the commonwealth grant scheme to gain savings.
The second thing I’m announcing is that the National Collaborative Research Infrastructure scheme will be continued to be funded for a further 12 months beyond June 30 this year.
We are doing that, and our first announcement, primarily because we want to clear away any distractions or hurdles that stand in the path of the crossbenchers openly considering the government’s deregulation agenda.
Updated
If at first you don't succeed
Oh looky here. Here is the education minister Christopher Pyne and he’s found the research money. For 12 months anyways.
Pyne:
The National Collaborative Research Infrastructure scheme will be continued to be funded for a further 12 months beyond June 30 this year.
Updated
Politics this lunchtime
Quick, let’s sneak in a super quick stocktake before the Pyne press conference. Politics, this lunchtime.
- Failing last minute miracles, the higher education package looks doomed. Crossbenchers did not take well to the government’s instruction to vote for fee deregulation or the research puppy gets it.
- The government is unhappy that Labor’s deputy leader Tanya Plibersek said Indonesia and boat turnbacks in the same sentence. Radio host Ray Hadley suspects Plibersek is just getting a bit emotional.
- Also getting emotional, Rupert Murdoch, who doesn’t much like communications minister Malcolm Turnbull thinking about media reform that is not specifically beneficial to his organisation. The horror, the horror.
- Environment minister Greg Hunt says he’s passionate about the RET. Labor says it (might) be a bit passionate about journalists and their professional requirement to protect their confidential sources – which will be made somewhat difficult under the Abbott government’s metadata laws. The test of both passions will not be in the epic feels but in what actually happens in coming days.
- The ABC would like us all to watch Four Corners this evening so we can think about horsewomen of the apocalypse.
Pyne coming up.
The education minister is due to address reporters in Canberra in about 20 minutes, by the by. Moving forward. Moving backward. A bit of both? Stay tuned.
The environment minister is in Brisbane at an event about dredging in the Great Barrier Reef. Reporters seem more interested in the fate of the RET. Greg Hunt declares he is passionately committed to resolving the renewable energy target – and claims he has already travelled two thirds of the way. (I’m not brilliant at fractions, but I’m entirely confident that two thirds is highly contestable.) Hunt is saying he’s hoping for a breakthrough within a fortnight, but he’s not into hard timeframes. Or hard fractions. (For clarity. He’s the hard timeframe. I’m the hard fraction.)
Updated
Things that make you go hmmmm.
I’ve flagged already that renewables and the future of the RET is one focal point of today. The Coalition has been in negotiations with Labor to try and achieve bipartisanship on this subject, thus far to not much avail.
A joint statement from the environment minister Greg Hunt and the industry minister Ian Macfarlane makes the ‘not much avail’ eventuality entirely comprehensible. It’s clear the government is a distance short from Labor’s bottomline, which is 35,000 gigawatt hours plus for the LRET.
Here’s the joint statement from Hunt and Macfarlane:
We have been in good faith negotiations with the Opposition for several months now and continue our open door policy to resolve uncertainty. The government remains committed to the original overall Renewable Energy Target of 45,000 gigawatt hours, but the composition of the target should better reflect the market and the way Australians are using power. Our proposal would see at least 23 per cent of Australia’s energy come from renewables – 15,000 gigawatt hours in existing renewable energy generation, 31,000 gigawatt hours under the Large-scale Renewable Energy Target (LRET) and approximately 14,000 gigawatt hours under the Small-scale Renewable Energy Scheme (SRES).
- Note to readers, this post has been corrected from the original. The original post referred to 34,000 gigawatt hours for the LRET as Labor’s bottomline. Labor’s bottomline is north of 34,000. The author had a small brain explosion. Apols.
Updated
Continuing with China and the bank.
Julie Bishop was asked on the ABC whether her view on the China bank had evolved along with the prime minister’s. Bishop played a dead bat on that. She said Australia has been always considering participation in the proposal – that wasn’t new – the question had been whether our preconditions would be met.
Bishop said she argued very strongly that we had to put in place certain requirements before we would consider entering into it and we are continuing to discuss those issues with China in a very constructive way, a very cooperative way. And we continue to inform the United States of what we’re doing and I’d like to see the United States involved in the discussions as well. She said she would be keeping the United States informed as I would Japan, South Korea - there are a number of countries that have not joined, a number of G7 countries have not joined. So different countries are assessing the involvement of their respective country according to their national interest and that’s what Australia should and will be doing.
Updated
An interesting topic that I didn’t get time to cover in all the morning air traffic control is the Abbott government’s evolving disposition on the China-led infrastructure bank.
The prime minister was interviewed on Saturday afternoon by Sky News, and sent a pretty clear signal that Australia was trending from negative to positive. The treasurer Joe Hockey has been in favour of Australia participating in the $50bn proposal – but during an internal debate about the merits or otherwise of Australian participation in the China Investment Regional Bank – the foreign minister Julie Bishop pointed out US concerns.
Tony Abbott consequently sounded cool. Now he’s sounding warmish.
Now, our position all along has been that we are happy to be part of something which is a genuine multilateral institution such as the World Bank, such as the Asia Development Bank. What we’re not prepared to do is sign on to something which is just an arm of one country’s foreign policy.
Now, I note that the UK has indicated an intention to sign up for the negotiations, the New Zealanders before Christmas signed up for the negotiations, the Singaporeans likewise, the Indians likewise. We’re looking very carefully at this and we’ll make a decision in the next week or so.
I would like to think that it is possible for this to be a genuinely multilateral institution and I think it could well be an important part of brining China fully into the international community if they do become the largest partner in a genuinely multilateral institution in the same way that the United States is the dominant partner, but by no means the controlling partner of the World Bank – Japan is the dominant but by no means the controlling partner in the Asia Development Bank.
If China is prepared to set up such an institution, well I frankly hope that many countries, including the United States and Japan, would join it.
Four Corners is in teaser mode for its story tonight.
Liberal treasurer Higginson refers to the PM's chief of staff, Credlin, as "Horsewoman of the Apocalypse". #4corners https://t.co/9hXwm7LESP
— 4corners (@4corners) March 16, 2015
Politics Live readers will recall Phil Higginson’s observations about how things could be done better caused a stir a few weeks ago. Here we go round the mulberry bush.
Scott Morrison has developed a habit of the post-Hadley doorstop. After Ray tells Scott what he thinks for 20 minutes or so – leaving scope for garbage truck and M4 updates – then Scott tells the assembled hacks what he thinks for about five minutes.
The routine seems to work for everyone.
Mr Bowers has a theory that the coders have been at work on the program that was formerly known as Scott Morrison. He suspects a patch has been added to achieve ScoMo 2.1 – smiley happy Scott. We await the system crash under pressure. Control ALT delete. Be spiffy in a jiffy.
Updated
Darren Davidson, writing in Murdoch-owned the Australian.
Sweeping reforms to the media laws that could unleash an avalanche of corporate deals have already met with hostility from some major media companies.
Shall we open a book on which companY(ies)?
Updated
Nice to see how MT plays.
Bit petulant of Mr Mogul, isn’t it?
(Murdoch. Sorry.)
Bit churlish. Almost like he mightn’t like Malcolm Turnbull very much. Better be careful with the hair tossing. Ray Hadley might think he’s getting emotional.
Speaking of the internet. Cheeky.
@murpharoo Hello! Not accusing an old bloke of exaggerating, but is Ms Credlin War, Famine, Pestilence or Death? pic.twitter.com/KkeblKAbfl
— The Matt Hatter (@MattGlassDarkly) March 15, 2015
It really is a morning of high velocity incomings and deep insights. I’ve been waiting for some rustlings in mogul land. Here’s a big rustle from Mr Mogul. Sorry. Mr Murdoch.
Aust! Turnbull's plans to scrap certain rules suit buddies at Nine. Can't oppose dumping all regs but not this. Nice to see how MT plays.
— Rupert Murdoch (@rupertmurdoch) March 15, 2015
I reported last Friday that the communications minister Malcolm Turnbull has popped on the prime minister’s desk the small matter of a decision about whether to press forward with overhauling Australia’s current media ownership regime.
Nice of him, really. (“Would you like half my cheese sandwich Tony, it’s a bit savoury?” “Why, sure Malcolm. After all I like savoury things and I don’t have much on at the moment.”)
The prime minister has said he doesn’t want to go there until there is an industry consensus. There will never be an industry consensus. So Turnbull would like to know now whether to press on regardless or whether to dump the idea.
Mr Mogul is underscoring the lack of industry consensus.
Murdoch, sorry.
Updated
Those senators, how can we keep up? Glenn Lazarus has just formally resigned from the Palmer United party in the Senate.
My decision to resign from the party has been a difficult one. I have a different view on how a team or a party works, and as such over the last few months have come to the conclusion that it would be in the best interest for me to resign from the party and pursue my career as an independent senator. I would like to thank Clive Palmer for the opportunity to be involved in the party and I wish him all the best.
Thanks to Shalailah Medhora for the Lazarus quote.
Thanks too to AAP for this statement of commitment from David ‘small government’ Leyonjelm.
Even if David Leyonhjelm had a terminal illness, he would rather die than see a cent of taxpayer money spent on research to find a cure. The Abbott government has linked $150m in annual science funding to its controversial university deregulation plan, risking the jobs of 1,700 researchers.
Leyonhjelm is unsympathetic to their plight. The Liberal Democrat does not believe research should be publicly funded. Asked if his stance would remain the same if he hypothetically had a terminal illness, senator Leyonhjelm was defiant.
“We’re talking about inventing a pharmaceutical which a company will put on the market and sell for profit for its shareholders,” he told reporters in Canberra on Monday. “Just because it happens to be me and cancer doesn’t justify public funding for that.”
Leyonhjelm maintained the vast majority of medicines were developed by private sector research. The great supporter of freedom acknowledged he would not be able to enjoy much freedom if he was dead. “That’s right. You can’t enjoy freedom in a communist society either,” he said.
Updated
In the words of a broken heart/It’s just emotion that’s taken me over/Tied up in sorrow, lost in my soooooul
Yes. That is the Bee Gees. I’m not ashamed. There’s no point in saying for God’s sake Ray, is there? No point at all.
Those ladies and their emotions
Ray has moved on from the garbage truck. He doesn’t mind the Labor deputy leader Tanya Plibersek. He doesn’t mind her husband either, Michael Coutts-Trotter – a senior bureaucrat in the NSW publi service.
But Hadley suspects Plibersek might have become emotionally involved in the case of two Australians on death row in Indonesia. (In making pleas for clemency for Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran, Plibersek has spoken compellingly of her husband’s success in turning his life around after a drug conviction in his youth.)
Ray suspects it is this emotion which caused Plibersek to misspeak yesterday about the boat turnbacks. (See the post at 8.28am if you are just tuning in.) This rant on Sky News was way out of order, Ray thinks.
Scott Morrison tiptoes around very carefully on the subject of Plibersek’s emotions. Morrison has no doubt that Plibersek has been sincere in her efforts to have an impact in the clemency debate. But when it comes to turnbacks ...
... they are just against a policy that works.
Updated
My colleague Shalailah Medhora has been chasing up horsewomen of the apocalypse. Yes, she has.
Tony Abbott’s chief of staff, Peta Credlin, has been described as a “horsewoman of the apocalypse” as further leaks emerge from within the Liberal party executive. ABC’s Four Corners program has obtained a text message sent from federal Liberal party treasurer Philip Higginson to a senior party figure, in which he describes Credlin as the “horsewoman of the apocalypse” with “black robes flowing”. The text message continues: “I do hope you can negotiate the removal of Credlin. That would be a huge win in itself,” the ABC reports.
The story is due to air tonight on the ABC.
Over on radio 2GB, the social services minister Scott Morrison has been chatting with Ray Hadley. Sadly the conversation has just been disrupted by a garbage truck blocking traffic in Sydney. Ray needs to update the listeners.
Updated
Security. Woot. Got there.
This is metadata week, and the prime minister also flagged at the weekend that the government will reintroduce a requirement that people found guilty of trafficking in illegal firearms receive a mandatory five-year jail sentence.
Metadata first. The government has indicated it wants to press ahead this week with debate on legislation that would force telcos to store our private communications data for two years – just in the event that the data is ever needed by police or other agencies. The media industry is beginning to stamp its foot over what this package means for journalists who have a professional obligation to protect their sources. (Not to put too fine a point on it, this legislation is a disaster for investigative journalism. Nine network political editor Laurie Oakes wote a good column about all this over the weekend, which you can read here.)
Some media organisations will stamp their foot about press freedom on Friday at a special committee hearing. Labor is saying today that it reserves the right to move amendments that protect journalists and their sources. Whatever that might mean. Shortly we’ll see whether it means something or nothing.
Now to firearms.
The Coalition dusted off legislation to impose mandatory minimum sentences for firearms trafficking. Apparently mandatory sentencing means you are tough on guns and tough on the sources of guns and ... tough. On security.
Very tough.
Labor, however, says nup. Mandatory sentences are not tough, says the shadow attorney general Mark Dreyfus. They just don’t work. Sorry, Tony.
Updated
Renewables will be another focal point of today. As my colleague Lenore Taylor reports this morning, Cabinet will get an update later on about the lack of progress in the current negotiations between the government and Labor about the Renewable Energy Target (RET).
With the business rather stuck, the Labor leader Bill Shorten has convened a meeting of the renewable energy industry on Monday. Lenore characterises Shorten’s reach out as an apparent attempt to gather support to put a compromise position to the Abbott government over the RET.
I will get to renewables and to security. Yes she can. Yes, I will. But not quite yet.
Tony Abbott’s office has issued a statement relating to tropical cyclone Pam, which has caused terrible devastation in Vanuatu. The statement outlines Australia’s contribution to providing humanitarian assistance in cooperation with the United Kingdom.
Last night, prime minister Abbott spoke with prime minister Natuman of Vanuatu and prime minister Cameron of the United Kingdom. The prime minister spoke to prime minister Joe Natuman about the situation in Vanuatu. He outlined the government’s humanitarian response to tropical cyclone Pam’s devastation of Vanuatu, including RAAF flights which have transported personnel and materiel to Port Vila. Prime minister Natuman thanked the Australian government and people for their assistance. He advised that Vanuatu had declared a state of emergency to enable its National Disaster Management Office to get on with the recovery task. Prime minister Abbott indicated that RAAF flights would deliver additional personnel and supplies today.
Last night, prime minister Abbott also spoke to prime minister David Cameron. The prime minister welcomed the UK’s announcement of £2 million of assistance. The two prime ministers agreed that Australia and the United Kingdom would cooperate in assisting with Vanuatu’s recovery from tropical cyclone Pam.
Good gracious me, and good morning Mike Bowers. The agriculture minister Barnaby Joyce evidently forgot his hand towel this morning. Here he is on the doors just a little while ago.
Joyce is likely to have an interesting day. He’ll face questions about why his departmental head Paul Grimes was sacked last week. Grimes had requested a special Senate committee meeting on the basis that he had information “highly pertinent” to a long-running saga involving changes made to Hansard to an incorrect answer given in parliament by Joyce. The highly pertinent information wasn’t forthcoming.
A very curious case, this.
Labor smells a rodent. Senate leader, Penny Wong, yesterday:
I think this is absolutely appalling, the sacking of a respected public servant, who appears to have been sacked because he didn’t want to join the cover-up that his minister was engaging in, in terms of changes to what was said in parliament.
Updated
Keeping on top of the political news cycle between 6am and 8am on a parliamentary sitting morning is a bit like being an air traffic controller – big loud planes landing on several different runways.
Yes, that’s just a random comment.
Onwards and upwards.
I’ll get to security and renewable energy shortly, but first, the foreign minister Julie Bishop has been roaming the press gallery corridor on the breakfast shift. Speaking as we were in the opening post of outrage, Bishop is amplifying the prime minister’s unhappiness about a remark from the deputy Labor leader Tanya Plibersek this past weekend concerning relations with Indonesia.
I confess I missed it, but I read that Plibersek was on Sky News on Sunday morning. She must have been asked about why the prime minister can’t currently secure a return phone call from Jakarta. She must have reminded viewers that the Coalition has not always had the happiest relations with Jakarta.
Plibersek:
We certainly have been opposed to turnbacks. Tony Abbott can’t get a phone call returned from the Indonesian president – it has affected our relationship with Indonesia in the past, it (the turnback policy) has not been good for it.
Abbott thought this observation loose and irresponsible at a delicate time. Two Australians are on death row in Indonesia for drug offences.
Bishop this morning characterised the Plibersek aside as a ...
... very crude and ill-informed comment to make.
I imagine we’ll hear more of this today.
Updated
Good morning and welcome to today’s live coverage of politics from Canberra. As always, I’m glad of your company. It’s a policy heavy opening to this sitting fortnight, and to this Monday morning.
Let’s begin at the beginning. The government’s higher education package appears to be heading for defeat in the Senate midweek. So far, the Family First senator Bob Day is the only confirmed yes vote in the Senate.
The government has chosen to link its contentious university fee deregulation package with future funding for high-level research (through the National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy) in an effort to get the Senate across the line – but the tactic has backfired.
The crossbench is saying noooo thank you.
Once-were-PUP and now independent Jacqui Lambie is even threatening to leave her hospital bed (she’s currently having back surgery) to vote against the package, such is the outrage of linking the fee deregulation and research funding measures.
Lambie:
Hell or high water, I’m going to be there.
Another once-were-PUP/now independent Glenn Lazarus has told the ABC this morning he’s a no.
If they don’t take deregulation of university fees off the table then I won’t be voting for the bill.
Crossbench senator Nick Xenophon (who must be on his twentieth interview of the past 12 hours or so), is declaring the linkage of research funding and deregulation a serious miscalculation by the education minister Christopher Pyne. He’s another no on this bill in its current form.
On ABC24 Labor’s higher education spokesman Kim Carr is confirming he’ll proceed today with tabling a notice of motion in the Senate. Let’s call this motion the Tony Harrison motion. (If you are not a fan of the Mighty Boosh this reference may be confusing.)
Let me help you.
Kim Carr:
We have the support of senators Muir, Rhiannon, Wang and Xenophon indicating that senators will not be intimidated by the government’s blatant attempt to hold our 1700 scientists hostage in these negotiations.
Lots lots more on the go. We’ll get to all that very shortly. Speaking of outrage, the Politics Live comments thread is now wide open for your business, and I’ve fired up the Twits. You can reach me there @murpharoo and the man with the camera on @mpbowers
Updated
