And on that note, I am going to wrap it all up for this week, because the internet issues have driven me to the brink of a Michael McCormack (and the House is adjourning).
A massive thank you to Mike Bowers, Katharine Murphy, Sarah Martin and Paul Karp for all their work, and to those behind the scenes, for keeping me, and the blog, all going.
Next week we will no doubt be talking again about Gladys Liu. Scott Morrison is also off to the United States to see Donald Trump.
And the Nationals are holding their federal council meeting in Canberra this weekend, which should mean some gossip is floating around by Monday as well.
We’ll bring you everything that happens, in the chamber and out (as long as the internet is working. If not, I guess I’ll be sending smoke signals).
Thank you to everyone for spending time with us this week. If you have a moment, check on someone to see if they need to chat. Not just because it is R U OK? Day, but because we all need to look out for each other.
I’ll be back on Monday, bright and early and caffeinated to the hilt. In the meantime, as always – take care of you.
Updated
Russell Broadbent is telling the chamber that “principles are important” as is the rule of law. It seems to be an announcement – he may not always stand with the government on issues.
Interesting.
Updated
Russell Broadbent is making an interesting speech in the adjournment debate in the chamber right now. He says his job is not to follow the whims of the party leader of the day and that he needs to follow his judgment.
“I always in essence in the end, when it comes down to it, I offer the people I represent, this parliament and this nation, my judgment on any particular issue,” he says.
Broadbent has spoken out against mandatory detention as well as wanting Newstart increased.
Updated
The House has already agreed to the Criminal Code Amendment (Agricultural Protection) Bill 2019, but it's being debated again. Why? Amendments were made to the bill in @AuSenate, and a bill must be agreed to in the same form by both Houses to become law. pic.twitter.com/hUsvuBDErI
— Australian House of Representatives (@AboutTheHouse) September 12, 2019
Here’s the moment David Littleproud rediscovered science, but not necessarily the whole truth about how he got himself into the mess in the first place (which was through a written response to a question on whether he believed climate change was manmade, to which he answered, in writing, “I don’t know,” but sure, go off about being imaginarily interrupted).
David Littleproud - Australia’s minister responsible for drought and natural disasters - now says he accepts the science on man-made climate change: ‘I’m just a poor humble bloke with a Year 12 education but I’m prepared to accept what our scientists are telling us". pic.twitter.com/dQljftGhpp
— Guardian Australia (@GuardianAus) September 12, 2019
Updated
The speaker, Tony Smith, confirmed just after question time that the Gladys Liu statement would not count as misleading parliament, in the event it is found to be incorrect, because it came from outside the parliament. So it doesn’t count towards the Hansard record, no matter who tabled it. Which makes sense. People table documents all the time, and it doesn’t become Hansard.
There is no suggestion the statement is incorrect, or could be. Tony Burke was just trying to clear up whether it was subject to the same privileges rules.
Updated
Penny Wong during the attempt to suspend standing orders, on the government’s response to Gladys Liu:
I will say this: there is only one person who is making these specific and serious concerns about the member for Chisholm an issue about race, and that is Scott Morrison. There is only one person who is linking these specific, serious concerns about the member for Chisholm to the entire Chinese-Australian population, and that is Mr Morrison.
This is the prime minister who is using this issue as a shield from accountability to the parliament and the Australian people. The prime minister is hiding behind the entire Chinese-Australian community to avoid saying why he has ignored warnings from our national security agencies.
Can I say that is one of the lowest acts I have seen in all my time in this place – that you would use Chinese-Australians in order to avoid answering questions about why you are ignoring advice from national security agencies.
Because of what the prime minister has done, it is more important than ever for Chinese-Australians and our inclusive democracy for these specific concerns to be addressed, because all of us in this place must be able to provide a public assurance that we have no conflict of interest in serving the Australian people. That is a basic democratic requirement.
And I would say to the minister: if you avoid this motion, if you avoid coming in to give a statement that provides the assurance that senator Payne has repeatedly declined to give – that Ms Liu is a fit and proper person to sit in this parliament – it really says that you do not understand the role you have in this democracy.”
Updated
Question time, as seen by Mike Bowers.
Updated
Not sure if Stirling Griff was in the chamber for that one, but Rex Patrick voted against suspending standing orders. Jacqui Lambie and One Nation voted with Labor and the Greens.
The motion to suspend standing orders was tied – and then lost – because when there is a tie in the Senate, the status quo remains (in this case, not to suspend standing orders).
Updated
OK, before I burn my computer because of the internet issues I have been having all week, Rex Patrick supports the substance of the motion, but not the motion to suspend standing orders.
Updated
Over in the Senate, Centre Alliance has announced it will support Labor’s motion to suspend standing orders.
Question time ends with a “Go Sharks.”
That happened.
*Contacts Elon, leaves planet*
Updated
Scott Morrison has just taken a dixer about the mining tax.
What even is this.
Sorry, not a dixer. It was a question from Joel Fitzgibbon:
“When will the PM introduce legislation into the parliament to establish the biosecurity import levy that he promised in the 2018-19 budget? Why has he already banked the $300m in revenue to prop up his budget bottom line?”
(Phil Coorey at the Fin has taken this issue on with gusto.)
Morrison answered with a response on the mining tax.
Again, what even is this.
Updated
In the Senate, Labor is moving to suspend standing orders.
Penny Wong has put forward this motion:
I move that –
(1) The Senate notes widespread reports in the media about the member for Chisholm this week which raise questions concerning her fitness to be a member of the Australian parliament.
(2) At 12.20pm on 16 September 2019, before government business is called on:
(a) requires the minister representing the prime minister (senator Cormann) to provide, for no more than 20 minutes:
i. an explanation of the government’s response to the allegations raised against the member for Chisholm, and
ii. an assurance to the Senate that the member for Chisholm is a fit and proper person to remain a member of the Australian parliament; and
(b) a senator may, at the conclusion of the minister’s explanation, move without notice, that the Senate take note of the explanation.
Updated
Sarah Martin, who is in the chamber, tells me Gladys Liu is crying.
'Gladys Liu is a great Australian,' says Scott Morrison
Mark Dreyfus to Scott Morrison:
Did the PM receive any advice about the current member for Chisholm from government agencies before or since the May 18 election?”
There is some back and forth over whether or not the prime minister can answer a question involving security advice, but Tony Smith rules it in order.
Morrison:
Your ruling on the matter makes clear that just as the member did yesterday in coming to this dispatch box, that on this occasion that member has come to the dispatch box again, particularly given what the attorney general has set out, with the very clear knowledge that he would know, as I would know, having sat around the national committee of cabinet table for five of the last six years, that on no occasion would any responsible minister and in particular a PM go into any operational matters regarding Asio or any of these intelligence agencies. So what is the intent of the question?
The intent is to infer, infer against a member of this House, a disloyalty to this country, and that member has in some way been the subject of some investigation.
And that member knows, who raised this question, that member knows that by simply coming up here and speaking to smear a member, knowing that the PM is not in a position to make comment on these matters, that he hopes the mud sticks.
Now, Mr Speaker, what this member is doing here in seeking a smear a member and I refer to the member for Chisholm, the member for Chisholm who has probably done more than anyone else in this place, but like many to overcome barriers in her life to overcome discrimination, to overcome domestic violence, to overcome disability, and there are members on the other side of the House who I applaud for doing exactly the same thing.
Now the member for Isaacs should take a good hard look at himself and he should have a good hard look at the 1.2 million Australians who will see exactly what he is doing to Australians of Chinese descent.
Just because someone was born in China doesn’t make them disloyal. What the member for Isaacs is doing a casting a smear on Chinese-Australians. But this is not unknown in the Labor party, because we remember Michael Daley, the former Labor leader before the last state election, on most of those remain silent: “Asian migrants taking our jobs.” That’s what the Labor party wreaks of. She’s a great Australian who deserves to be in this house [which is more than I can say for the member for Issacs].”
Updated
Mark Dreyfus to Scott Morrison:
“Yesterday the PM specifically referred to the media statement released by the member for Chisholm. Is the report by journalist Sam Maiden correct that the PM’s office prepared that statement? What steps did the PM or his office take to verify the information contained in the statement?”
Morrison:
“I have the statement. I’m happy to table the statement for the benefit of the House as I indicated I would do earlier today when I addressed the press.
“This is a statement made by the member for Chisholm.”
Updated
Angus Taylor, who can’t answer questions on the details and impacts on Australia’s ACTUAL emissions reduction policy, is attacking Labor for not having answers on the details and impacts of a policy which is not being enacted.
Mark Butler has a follow up question for David Littleproud:
My question is to the minister for drought and various other things. And I refer to the minister’s earlier answer. And also to an article in the Guardian in which the minister responded to written questions about whether or not there was a link between human activity and climate change and he responded that he was not convinced about that. Does he still hold that view?
Littleproud:
I thank the honourable member for his question. With respect to my response: I accept the science. I’m just a poor humble bloke with a year 12 education but I’m prepared to accept, prepared to accept what our scientists are telling us. As simple as that.”
A “poor, humble bloke” who just happens to be helping to shape our climate change response. That new planet is looking better every minute.
Updated
And here is the exchange he says he was interrupted in.
David Speers: You say the climate is changing and that is certainly true. The question is: is this manmade climate change?
David Littleproud: I have no idea, but does it really matter?
DS: Sorry, you have no idea whether ...
DL: I am not a scientist. I haven’t made an opinion one way or the other, but I don’t think it really matters.
DS: Sorry, I just want to be really clear on this. You are not sure whether manmade climate change is real?
DL: I am going to be honest with you. I don’t have an opinion, but I don’t think it really matters. I think these extremes from both sides have taken away the maturity of debate we should have about keeping, simply, a clean environment and making sure we give our people the tools they [need to address it].
Updated
Just on that answer from David Littleproud there, Paul Karp’s article which was followed up by David Speers, leading to that “interrupted exchange” was based on an emailed question to Littleproud’s office.
Here was the emailed question sent to Littleproud:
Q: Parts of Queensland that are not expected to burn are now burning. The overall fire danger index has increased for most of southern Australia over the past 40 years and the bushfire and natural hazards cooperative research centre says the trend is expected to continue. It says the frequency of really bad fire days like those on Ash Wednesday or Black Saturday will increase. It says we need to prepare for that.
Given that expert advice, why step around the human contribution to climate change as the minister did yesterday on the ABC (by arguing whether climate change is manmade or not “is irrelevant”)?
And here is the emailed answer:
“I don’t know if climate change is manmade.
“I’m about practical outcomes. Whether that’s about having a cleaner environment or giving farmers and emergency services the right tools to adapt.
“I am responsible for making sure we have the tools we need to adapt to a changing climate.”
Updated
David Littleproud suddenly believes in manmade climate change
Justine Elliot to David Littleproud:
The minister was asked, “Just to be clear on this, you’re not sure manmade climate change is real?” The minister responded, “I’m not.” The Washington Post leads with the headline Australia’s natural disaster minister doubts manmade climate change is real. Does the minister still doubt the science?
Littleproud:
Let me make this clear. I accept the science ... (the Labor side of the House arcs up).
... I thank the member for her question. Let me make it clear. I accept the science on manmade impact on climate change. Always have.
The interview that was taking place was interrupted by a division. And I wasn’t able to finish my response.
Let me make it clear: I have a track record with respect to climate change. The future fund, the drought future fund, the $5bn future fund that will be paid, part of that $100m dividend has a response around climate adaptation for our farmers, equipping our farmers with the tools to be able to adapt to a changing clime. That is what my record is.
My record in relation to the budget last year was to get a stewardship fund, a $34m project that will see our farmers rewarded for the stewardship of our land, protecting their environment. This is a debate about protecting our environment, having cleaner air. I believe in it. I’ve led it.”
Updated
It’s another question to Michael McCormack, from his new best mate, Joel Fitzgibbon, because politics in 2019 means hugging in front of the cameras when a 2GB radio host tells you to, apparently:
“I refer him to the answer he gave yesterday with respect to the terrible drought impacting upon our farmers and our rural communities. In six years the government has appointed a drought coordinator, a drought taskforce, and the member for New England as the drought envoy. Deputy PM, why hasn’t the government ever made any of these reports available to the parliament?
McCormack:
Mr Speaker, reports are one thing. Getting on the ground and doing the real work, the real work that regional Australia wants and expects and deserves is another thing. We have been very responsible, as a government, to help our regional communities through this drought.”
He continues with more buzzwords.
Anthony Albanese asks him to stick to the question’s relevancy.
McCormack:
Indeed, Mr Speaker, they have reported to government and government has acted accordingly to their advice and that has been important, and I also commend the member for New England for his role as the drought envoy.
Indeed, we cannot make it rain. If we could we would have. These are desperate times for farmers throughout Queensland, farmers throughout New South Wales. Indeed in the member for Parkes’ electorate they have destocked. There are farming communities on their knees. He is working hard, as we all are.
I appreciate parts of your electorate are not affected by this drought as much as ours but we are working very, very hard. Whether it’s Victoria, South Australia. That’s why we’ve provided a million dollars to 110 councils throughout the drought-affected community to keep employment generating in their towns. To keep money in their towns. We can, as I said, and we must and will do more to help those drought communities. And I know the farm household assistance has provided valuable assistance to those farming families and getting rural financial councillors around the table to talk to farming families.”
Fitzgibbon asks him to table those reports he referred to, but he doesn’t have to.
Updated
Josh Frydenberg takes a lickspittle where he again refers to Wayne Swan as “Chairman Swan” and siggggghh.
Updated
Now Labor starts up on the foreign affairs minister, Marise Payne, who has also defended Gladys Liu by saying she has been “clear and open about her associations” and “proactively disassociated herself” from organisations that claimed her as a member without her knowledge or consent.
Asked by Kimberley Kitching if she had received security briefings about Liu, Payne refused to comment on engagement with intelligence and security agencies or private conversations with colleagues.
Asked if Liu is a fit and proper person to sit in parliament, Payne replied:
“I have said that twice. I am not sure quite what it is senator Kitching seeks to imply. If she is intending to advance some alternative proposition, then they should actually say it. If not, she should stop attempting to smear a member of the House of Representatives.”
Payne then suggested that Labor was “uncomfortable” about having similar associations, and the mess of the developer donations allegations heard in the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption.
Updated
McCormack:
“But he’s a good man. Good St Michael’s Regional high school, Wagga Wagga, boy. The PM is a good man too. They’re both very, very good. They both want the best for our country. And the Reserve Bank governor, Dr Philip Lowe, he’s called for continued spending on infrastructure projects including rail, on bridges, on roads. He understands that, yes, building infrastructure is helping the economy.
“That’s why under the Morrison government we’ve got a $100bn plan. Those opposite could only have hoped when it was the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd years they could have had anywhere near the millions to spend on infrastructure that’s getting Australians home sooner and safer.
“We are working with the states and territories. I don’t really care what their political persuasion is. If it helps to build infrastructure, to save people’s lives, to make sure that we get the roads, the bridges, the rail that we need, then we’re happy to do it. And we are doing it.
“Indeed, the PM was just in Melbourne just last week talking to premier Andrews, a Labor premier ...
Catherine King interrupts to say the question was about which one [statement] was right.
McCormack:
Pardon me for correcting your grammar, but it wouldn’t be which, it would be who. People are actually who. I was taught a lot in English [he names his English teacher]. I’m sure she taught Philip Lowe as well. Both the Reserve Bank governor and indeed the PM are both right for putting forward our infrastructure plan for this nation.”
There is more, but I am distracted by a memory from my own English classes, where we studied Much Ado About Nothing:
Four of his five wits went halting off, and now is the whole man governed with one: so that if he have wit enough to keep himself warm, let him bear it for a difference between himself and his horse; for it is all the wealth that he hath left, to be known a reasonable creature.”
Updated
Catherine King brings Michael McCormack back to the despatch box and the chamber is once again filled with beige noise.
Last week the PM said, “We’re really starting to hit our head on the ceiling in terms of how much infrastructure work you can get under way at any one time.” But the Reserve Bank governor says, and I quote, “We can do more.” Deputy PM, who is right?
McCormack:
Well, Mr Speaker, the Reserve Bank governor’s a good fella. I went to school with him. He was the dux of the school. Something I never achieved.”
No shit, Sherlock.
Updated
Honestly, white noise has more of an impact.
George Christensen is the latest to inflict Michael McCormack upon us and, in what has become McCormack tradition, includes the reference to the “Morrison-McCormack government”, which is the only time it is ever used.
The deputy prime minister is attempting to talk about the carbon tax, but there is still a tub of cream cheese sitting on my desk from my lunch and it’s a bit hard to tell them apart.
Updated
Jim Chalmers to Scott Morrison:
Does the PM agree with the Reserve Bank governor that, and I quote: “The challenge we face in monetary policy is carrying too much of a burden?” When economic growth is the slowest it’s been since the global financial crisis, why has the government left all of the heavy lifting to the Reserve Bank?
Morrison:
Mr Speaker, I’m happy to respond to the member’s question and simply quote the Reserve Bank governor again in his testimony before the House economics committee on 9 August this year, where he says: “I 100% agree with you that the Australian economy is growing.” Sorry, a press conference with the treasurer on 11 July. “I agree 100% with you that the Australian economy is growing and the fundamentals are strong.”
The outlook is being supported by our lower interest rates, by our tax cuts, by higher levels of investment in infrastructure, by a pick-up in the resources sector and the stabilisation of the housing market in Sydney and Melbourne. But I don’t think we should forget more Australians have jobs today than ever before in Australian history and that’s a remarkable achievement and I also agree with you that a priority is to make sure that Australia remains a great place for business to expand, innovate, invest and employ people and I’m sure we can do that, Mr Speaker.
Updated
The first lickspittle is about how amazing Liberals are at supporting multicultural Australia.
Updated
The Labor leader in the Senate, Penny Wong, has asked whether the prime minister received any security advice about Gladys Liu.
The government leader in the Senate, Mathias Cormann, responded that preselections are matters for the party organisations: “I am not aware of any such advice being received, but out of an abundance of caution, to be 100% sure, I’ll take that question on notice.”
He said it was “irresponsible” to ask if Scott Morrison had sought advice today.
“The prime minister has full confidence in the member of Chisholm. This is nothing but an attempt at a Labor smear.”
Cormann suggested that Labor’s candidate in Chisholm, Jenny Yang, was a member of similar organisations, which sets Wong off. She says it is “cowardly to smear someone who isn’t in the parliament” and Cormann should answer the “serious national security questions raised on the front page of the paper”.
Cormann rejected the view there are “serious national security issues at stake” arguing it was simply a “clumsy interview” by a new MP of Chinese descent. Liu is “absolutely suitable” and was duly elected by the people of Chisholm.
“The prime minister has full confidence in the member for Chisholm, as people expressed their confidence in member for Chisholm at the election. All this is the seven stages of grief of the Labor party. You can’t accept that you lost the election, and you lost the election in Chisholm too.”
Updated
Someone misses the call and Brendan O’Connor gets the next question.
It’s to Josh Frydenberg:
When the Reserve Bank of Australia is calling for improved wages growth, why has this government presided over the worst wages growth on record?
Frydenberg:
The honourable member would like to know that when Labor was last in office for three out of six years minimum wages fell. The real minimum wage fell. Now, Mr Speaker, under us, under the Coalition, every year real minimum wages have gone up, Mr Speaker. I repeat that for the honourable member. Under Labor, in three out of the six years that they were in office, real minimum fell. Under us, every year, real minimum wages went up.
Now to educate the honourable member from the other side of the House, inflation today is 1.6%, Mr Speaker. Inflation today is 1.6%. But the wages price index which is a euphemism* for wages growth was 2.3%.
Mr Speaker, the reality is that real wages have been going up, Mr Speaker. The reality is that under our government, lower taxes are creating more jobs and higher wages, Mr Speaker. And if Labor ever got their time in government, $387bn of high taxes would have reduced wages and cost jobs. It doesn’t matter what the question is, for Labor the answer is always higher taxes.
* I don’t think this means what Frydenberg thinks it means.
Updated
Question time begins
Anthony Albanese to Scott Morrison:
My question s addressed to the PM. Does the PM agree with the Reserve Bank governor that the economy is being, and I quote him: “Weighed down by a protracted period of low income growth.”
Morrison:
Mr Speaker, the challenge of getting incomes to rise in this country is not a new one. It’s one the government has been working with with the Reserve Bank for many years. As treasurer I have had numerous engagements with the Reserve Bank governor about this very issue. And I can tell you that’s why our government initiated the tax relief that we took through this parliament, not just in the most recent budget, but in the budgets before that because we wanted to ensure that Australians keep more of what they earn. In the most recent quarterly figures, the most recent quarterly figures, 0.7% was real wage growth through the year. That’s higher than what we inherited from the Labor party in their last year, when they were in government, and ensuring that we continue to grow wages is a function of implementing our economic plan.”
There is more, but you have heard it all before.
Updated
Peter Dutton will miss question time for “personal reasons”.
Updated
Mehreen Faruqi has responded to the vegan terrorist bill being passed by the Senate:
This bill is an absolute fraud. It’s nothing more than ag-gag legislation aimed at protecting big agribusiness from scrutiny at the cost of animal welfare and the community’s right to know and protest.
The Greens are proud to oppose laws aimed at stamping out protest and jailing activists and whistleblowers.
We should be passing national animal welfare laws with real accountability and enforcement to protect animals, not taking another step down the road to a police state.
Rather than improving animal welfare laws and practices, this government is obsessed with attacking those that expose horrific mistreatment of animals. They are on the wrong side of history.
It’s shameful that Labor is lock, stock and barrel with the government in supporting this draconian bill.”
Updated
And for everyone telling me how Pokemon Go is still cool, here you go: the moment it became part of our Hansard record.
Nick McKim questions whether the creators of Pokémon Go could be liable under the 'vegan terrorists' bill as it might incite people to trespass onto agricultural land. Bridget McKenzie responds: "chasers of Pikachu are safe”. pic.twitter.com/1fkeEKuj49
— Guardian Australia (@GuardianAus) September 12, 2019
Updated
Senate question time has begun though, and Penny Wong is straight into the issue of Gladys Liu.
Paul Karp will have something on that for you very soon
Ahead of question time, Scott Morrison is making a statement by indulgence on R U OK? Day.
Anthony Albanese will also make a statement on this.
Updated
Christian Porter spoke to his local Perth radio station, 6PR, this morning. He, of course, was asked about Gladys Liu. From the transcript:
Well, I think there’s three separate issues there. I mean, Andrew Bolt’s a great interviewer and it’s his job to make politicians look a bit unsteady from time to time, and he’s done that to me, does that to the best of us – he’s a great interviewer.
The fact that Gladys Liu declines to adopt precisely Andrew Bolt’s descriptive legislation of the Chinese government, that isn’t her doing something negative for Australia. I put to you this proposition: that’s actually her doing something in Australia’s interest. It’s not in Australia’s interest to adopt precisely the language that was used on that show to describe the Chinese government when other accurate and alternative language is available.
With respect to the South China sea, she said she absolutely puts Australia’s interests first, which might be in some people’s view an unsophisticated way of saying that she supports Australian policy. But nevertheless, that’s what it is.
With respect to these three organisations, she was asked about three organisations. One of them she said that she had previously been the honorary president of. One of them she was asked whether she was presently the honorary president, and she said she wasn’t, which was correct. The third organisation she said firstly that she couldn’t recall whether she was a member, and then afterwards said that she hadn’t been a member. She was clearly confused. She’s corrected that in a statement.
But the fact of being previously a member of the Guangdong Overseas Exchange Association – as I said in parliament this morning, that doesn’t make you a communist, that doesn’t make you a traitor, that doesn’t make you not a fit and proper person to be a member of parliament. A very similar organisation sponsored the travel of the member for McMahon – the Labor member for McMahon – to China who’s met with Communist party officials.”
Updated
The vegan terrorist bill has passed the Senate.
Given Peter Dutton’s earlier claims about the Biloela family, this is a good point (although there are journalists who have fact checked Dutton’s claims).
The asylum claims of Pryia - whose former fiancé was burnt alive in front of her - and Nades - who was conscripted to the Tamil Tigers as a child soldier - were processed by 2 public servants.
— Sally Rugg (@sallyrugg) September 12, 2019
The courts have assessed if correct bureaucratic was followed-not their asylum claims.
Updated
Centre Alliance aren’t letting it drop either.
Rebekha Sharkie was very strong on Labor’s motion earlier today:
Rebekha Sharkie says the motion to suspend standing orders over Gladys Liu goes to “confidence” of MPs and urges the government not to use its numbers to “run a protection racket”. pic.twitter.com/RjcQvDVihG
— Guardian Australia (@GuardianAus) September 12, 2019
Rex Patrick wants a whole inquiry into Australia’s relationship with China:
In light of political developments this week, I am more determined than ever to press for a comprehensive parliamentary review of Australia’s relations with China.
“This is a vital relationship and the parliament urgently needs to undertake a most rigorous inquiry to see how we can maximise benefit from a mutually beneficial trading relationship, but equally gain an understanding of where caution is warranted in Australia’s national interest.
“On Monday the Coalition government and Labor opposition joined together in an extraordinary and worrying instance of political self-censorship to block Centre Alliance’s proposal that the Senate foreign affairs, defence and trade references committee conduct a holistic review of Australia’s relations with China.
“Labor justified its position on the grounds that the shadow foreign affairs [spokeswoman], senator Penny Wong, had requested briefings for parliamentarians by relevant government agencies on Australia’s relationship with China, and such an behind closed doors approach was apparently preferred.
“Yesterday the foreign [affairs] minister, senator Marise Payne, gave the government’s response, telling the Senate there will be no government agency briefings on China as requested by Labor, though she also noted that ‘the foreign affairs, defence and trade committees’ may receive ‘extensive briefings’ from agencies.
“In these circumstances, the Labor opposition would be well advised to embrace Centre Alliance’s proposed Senate inquiry and I have lodged a new motion for debate when parliament sits next week.
“The proposed inquiry would be chaired by the foreign affairs, defence and trade references committee chairperson, Labor senator Kimberley Kitching. It would provide a much-needed forum for a comprehensive and sober discussion of this hugely important relationship, and involve the full range of expertise and interests from within and outside the Australian government. While government agency briefings are important, they are only part of the wide range of information and views a Senate inquiry may consider.
“If Labor is not now prepared to support the proposed inquiry, there will little doubt that behind their current political bluster relating to the controversy surrounding the federal member for Chisholm, Gladys Liu, they are running scared on the issue of China.
“Obviously it would also be good if the government came on board as well, but their inclinations still appear to be to suppress any debate and discussion on China policy.
“Further political self-censorship about this key international relationship would not bode well for Australian democracy and sovereignty.”
Updated
It is almost question time.
Or, in this case, the Gladys Liu hour.
Stop sending me your Pokemon Go defences. It’s over.
This is why no one should ever indulge in name calling, even when it seems like a great marketing sell.
“Shanghai Sam” was a stupid way to refer to the Sam Dastyari issue then. And now.
It’s rare that Andrew Bolt gets a guernsey in these pages, but given his interview with Gladys Liu gave the whole issue legs, I’ll include part of his response to Scott Morrison’s press conference:
There is 1.2 million Australians of Chinese heritage in this country. This has a very grubby undertone in terms of the smear that is being placed on Gladys Liu and I think people should reflect very carefully in the way they have sought to attack Gladys over this matter and the broader smear that I think is implied in that to over more than one million Australians.
Extraordinary. Are the dictators in Beijing now writing Morrison’s lines?
Morrison is offensive not just to everyone asking legitimate questions about Liu’s associations and untruths, from Asio to Labor, and including many journalists.
It is also grossly offensive to every Chinese-Australian and every democracy dissident in China and Hong Kong.
Morrison is in effect suggesting that criticism of someone close to China’s Communist party is a criticism of every Chinese man and woman. As I said, Beijing couldn’t have put that lie better than did Morrison today.”
Updated
People would still need to be playing it, for this to be a thing.
Nick McKim is questioning whether the creators of Pokemon Go could be liable under the 'vegan terrorists' bill because it might incite people onto agricultural land. #auspol
— Paul Karp (@Paul_Karp) September 12, 2019
Bridget McKenzie is now talking on this bill, reminding me why I very rarely watch the Senate.
Updated
Labor to continue Gladys Liu pursuit
Labor is not backing down on the Gladys Liu issue.
Penny Wong and Mark Dreyfus have just sent out this press release:
Today there are extraordinary reports that senior Liberals were warned by security agencies that concerns about Gladys Liu’s links to the Chinese Communist party made it ‘unwise’ to preselect her.
One Government MP is quoted: ‘There should have been concerns when she was being chosen to stand as a candidate and I believe those concerns were ignored.’
These reports raise serious questions as to whether the prime minister and the Liberal party put winning marginal seats ahead of Australia’s national security.
This goes far beyond whether an interview was clumsy. It goes directly to the national interest.
In light of these reports, the prime minister must urgently demonstrate to the Australian people what steps he took to ensure that Gladys Liu is in fact a fit and proper person to sit in the Australian parliament.
It is in the interests of Chinese-Australian communities and our inclusive democracy for these specific concerns to be addressed.
The only person linking these specific and serious concerns about Ms Liu to the entire Chinese-Australian population is Scott Morrison and he should stop.
All parliamentarians must be able to provide assurance that they have no conflict of interest in serving the Australian people.”
Updated
In the Senate the government has lobbed in a last minute amendment to the so-called vegan terrorist bill.
The amendment adds wood processing- and wood fibre-processing facilities to the definition of primary production businesses protected by the laws criminalising social media posts that incite trespass, a demand of the forestry industry that increases its remit beyond food production.
On Tuesday the Labor caucus agreed to seek to amend the bill to address numerous concerns raised by Kim Carr in an inquiry examining it but – if these failed – ultimately to support it. The Labor leader, Anthony Albanese ,told MPs that “vegan terrorists” were not part of Labor’s constituency but trade unions were.
This new amendment could pose a difficulty for Labor because it didn’t go through caucus and expands the bill’s remit to deterring organisation of environmental protests generally, not just those that could cause biosecurity concerns.
Tim Beshara, federal policy director of The Wilderness Society, has responded to the new amendment:
“This minute to midnight amendment makes clear that the government’s intentions with this bill is to constrain and intimidate groups it disagrees with.
“It’s clear now, this bill was never about farmers, biosecurity and animal welfare, it was simply an identity politics crusade that has now been broadened from targeting activist vegans to targeting conservationists. Soon every group the government disagrees with will be on this list.
“When Labor signed off on passing this bill did that include the amendment targeting conservationists too? Are they onside with the government’s legal intimidation of the people who care about the environment?”
Updated
Joel Fitzgibbon and Michael McCormack have “cuddled” in front of the cameras after yesterday’s tantrums.
In unrelated news, water has been discovered on a planet with earth-like temperatures, if you are looking for a change.
Updated
Gladys Liu attack has "grubby undertones" says Morrison
And for those who missed it, here is the main message from Scott Morrison and his MPs
Scott Morrison says the Gladys Liu motion has “grubby undertones”. He refuses to come out and label it as racism when asked but says the “1.2 million Chinese Australians get the point”. pic.twitter.com/dNy4Nfbltf
— Guardian Australia (@GuardianAus) September 12, 2019
Updated
The PMO has put out the transcript to the press conference Scott Morrison held.
You may have seen a note that Morrison did not address this first part of the ABC’s Andrew Probyn’s question:
Firstly, have you inquired with Gladys Liu as to the nature of her work with the Chinese Consulate down in Melbourne? And secondly, what advice, if any, have you received from security agencies about Gladys Liu’s background or the people with whom she associated?
There was as follow up:
AP: What of my first question about the work with the Chinese Consulate?
Morrison: There is no matter before me that would give me concern.
Draft laws giving federal police more power to conduct identity checks at Australian airports are a step closer to being rubber-stamped, AAP reports.
“The proposal passed through the lower house on Thursday with shadow attorney general, Mark Dreyfus, pleased the legislation had been amended in line with recommendations from parliament’s intelligence and security committee,” it said.
“The recommendations include requiring police to publicly report how many times the powers are used and how many people miss flights as a consequence.”
Kristina Keneally, in an interview with ABC RN last week, raised the point that the Biloela family debate was straying into “anchor baby” territory:
This is an importation, quite frankly, of an American debate about so-called anchor babies, and the law is very different in the United States where citizenship is accorded to anybody born on American soil.
That is not the law in Australia so it’s an importation of that debate. No.
The issue here, I would say, is that the Biloela community, Australians, have embraced this family, want them to be part of their community, have integrated them into the fabric of their community. It’s not simply the act of having a child.”
Updated
Also in the Senate, Kristina Keneally has just had this motion passed:
I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move that:
1) The Senate notes that:
a. Paladin – the small company registered to a beach shack on Kangaroo Island which was awarded a $523m contract without a proper tender process – has been fined over one thousand times in eighteen months for failing to provide contracted services.
b. The Minister representing the Minister for Home Affairs, Minister Cash, told the Senate on Tuesday 10 September 2019 that these fines “often related to relatively minor administrative failures”.
c. Documents produced under order of the Senate revealed that the total abatement could have totalled $11 million, if not for monthly penalty limits.
2) There be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Home Affairs, by no later than 12:20pm on 16 September 2019:
a. An unredacted copy of each Performance Management Report, which details the aforementioned fines, relating to Paladin’s contract to provide services on Manus Island.
b. A copy of the full report prepared by the Independent Health Advice Panel for the Second Quarter of 2019 in accordance with Section 199E of the Migration Act 1958.
Which means the un-redacted Paladin documents and the full independent health panel report on medevac has to be tabled in parliament by Monday lunchtime.
Over in the Senate
Govt & ALP have just voted together to limit the time of the inquiry into drug testing of income support recipients, the inquiry has to report 10 Oct. They have also limited the time for inquiry into the extension of cashless debit card reporting 7 Nov
— Rachel Siewert (@SenatorSiewert) September 12, 2019
Peter Dutton refers to Biloela Tamil family children as 'anchor babies'
Peter Dutton has phoned in for his regular love in with Ray Hadley on 2GB.
They are still really cool friends, yadda, yadda, yadda.
But then the home affairs minister gets into the Tamil family from Biloela. And, well, Dutton is going a new direction on this now. And it’s not the direction Michelle Obama recommends we all take.
He says the family’s case has cost taxpayers “literally millions of dollars”.
“The matter has been to the high court. These people came by boat. It’s been made clear to them at every turn that they were not going to stay in Australia and they still had children. We see that overseas in other countries, anchor babies so-called: the emotion of trying to leverage a migration outcome based on the children and they claim they have new grounds to test with the federal court in Victoria.
“... I regret to say I don’t think this will be dealt with quickly. I think it will go on now for potentially a couple of months because lawyers will try and delay and that is part of a tactic. They think if they delay they can keep the pressure on the government and we’ll change our mind in relation to this case.”
Hadley says his listeners in Biloela don’t agree with the “left-wing advocates in the southern part of the continent”.
Updated
The assistant minister for superannuation and financial services, Jane Hume, has launched the Australian financial complaints authority roadshow in Canberra, along with its chair, Helen Coonan.
Since December the authority – the “one-stop-shop” financial complaints body established by the Turnbull government when it was avoiding calling a banking royal commission – has received 60,000 complaints and resolved 73% of them, resulting in $144.7m of compensation being paid.
At a doorstop, Hume said that rather than being surprised by the number of complaints she is surprised there aren’t more, and the roadshow will lift the authority’s profile so disgruntled customers know where to go.
Hume also confirmed that not only is it still government policy to have an amnesty for employers who fail to pay superannuation but we should expect fresh legislation to do so “imminently”.
Hume:
“It is still our plan to go ahead with that superannuation guarantee amnesty that will allow companies that have inadvertently not paid the correct amount of superannuation to come forward to the tax office ... to make sure we can reunite as many people as possible with superannuation they haven’t been paid.”
Updated
“Grubby smear” and “clumsy interview” is the official government line when it comes to Gladys Liu.
Jane Hume is repeating it on Sky.
Angus Taylor, the energy and emissions reduction minister, just told an off-the-record Australian Industry Group gathering at parliament that Australia is doing “extremely well” on its emissions reduction task.
Taylor cited as evidence that Australia is expected to exceed its 2020 target by 367m tonnes but strangely neglected to mention that Australia’s emissions are at a record high and still rising.
In the context of the fact Scott Morrison won’t attend the UN climate summit because Australia has no new emissions reduction goals to unveil, Taylor said that Australia – unlike other countries – does not “lecture” at these international events. It just gets on and “achieves”.
The rest of the speech rehearsed facts about strong investment in renewables in 2018, although as Katharine Murphy has reported this is set to drop off a cliff in 2020 because of a lack of certainty after the renewable energy target expires.
This bullish view of the renewables scene was rebutted thoroughly by Labor’s Mark Butler and the Greens Richard Di Natale at a Clean Energy Council event on Wednesday night, both of whom noted the success was despite rather than because of Coalition government policy.
But at the AIG event Taylor was followed by the immigration minister, David Coleman, so it seems the business types wanted to hear a lot more from the re-elected Coalition than a bit of back and forth on what we’re doing for the planet.
Updated
On the British-Australian bloggers who have been detained in Iran, named as Jolie King and Mark Firkin, Scott Morrison said:
I refer to the comments made by the foreign [affairs] minister. These are always very sensitive cases. They are never issues that are addressed well by offering public commentary on them and I note that in at least one of these cases that is a view that has been expressed by family members.
“We will continue to pursue these matters in the interests of the Australians at the centre of these cases and we will do that carefully and in close consultation through our officials who have been part of this process now for some time. I will respect the wishes of the family and I will respect the best interests of those citizens.”
Updated
Question: [I’ve been] involved in the reporting on [these issues] for the last four years. A lot of that involves China and we have been accused of racism from start to the finish of that. Clearly that is a concern the government has. How do you propose we report about this if it [does] involve some people who are members of the Chinese-Australian community?
Morrison:
What I think the problem here is Gladys Liu has given a clumsy interview. That is all that’s happened here. There is no credible suggestion of any inappropriate behaviour in relation to Gladys Liu.
What we’re left with is just a grubby smear by the Labor party who is in one of their most desperate hours unable to explain their position on anything and so they have gone after a Chinese-Australian woman, the first so elected in this parliament.
They should be celebrating their election, not attacking it.
Updated
Question: You mentioned earlier some local Chinese community groups of which Ms Liu seems to have been a member. What concerns do you have about the China Overseas Exchange Association? It is not a local Chinese community group but an organ of the communist party of China.
Morrison: We are looking at all these issues carefully in terms of the impact on Australia’s interests and will take whatever action we have to ensure Australia’s interests.
Updated
Question: On the broader issue of the smoke and mirrors around the advice or otherwise from security agencies, do you think it is worth considering given the concern of foreign interference in Australia ensuring that all MPs undergo security clearances so the Australian people can be confident that everyone who is sitting in parliament has passed those security checks?
Morrison: Honestly I don’t think that is a practical suggestion given the broad range of candidates you have at any election. There are foreign interference laws in this place. We know because we introduced them and the standards are very clear and the agencies undertake their work as is appropriate and deal with the government on those matters as they think is appropriate.
Updated
Question: Firstly, have you inquired with Gladys Liu as to the nature of her work with the Chinese consulate down in Melbourne? Secondly, what advice, if any, have you received from security agencies about Gladys Liu’s background or the people with whom she associated?
Morrison: Let me deal with the second question first because this is a very important question ... I’m not suggesting anything by your question that this is any sort of alliance or alignment in your reasoning for asking them.
The Labor party has been saying that these are questions the government has to answer today.
Anyone who sits around the national security committee of cabinet table, and anyone who takes the management of our national security issues and how we deal with security agencies seriously, and to ensure that that is never compromised, to ensure that it is always carefully attended to, always knows that you are never in a position to be able to offer commentary on inquiries of that nature.
That would be to undermine absolutely the nature of the relationship between agencies and the government. Anyone who would suggest that responding to a question like that in that way provides any inference in any way, shape or form, would know that that could not be done.
What’s worse, and I’m not suggesting you are doing this at all, but I think there is a concern, given what we saw in the parliament yesterday, when Labor deliberately sought to ask questions, it would appear, as the speaker inferred, with a view to them not being able to be actually raised under the standing orders – simply to smear.
Labor knows that that is the responsible answer to that question. So why do they raise it? They seek to smear an Australian of Chinese heritage simply for the fact that she did a clumsy interview. Now if that were the case the entire Labor frontbench would have to resign. She gave a clumsy interview. Fair enough. She is in her first term. She has been here for a few weeks and I think she should be extended some comfort and support.
I know full well what Gladys Liu had to overcome to get here. I remember sitting in the chamber and listening to her maiden speech.
It was a story of great Australian success and you know, Australians of Chinese heritage, regardless I think of their political persuasion, celebrated the fact that we had the first Chinese-born Australian woman in our parliament and I think Labor should think carefully at the way they’re dressing up a political attack on Gladys Liu and I think they should reconsider the line that they’ve taken. There is no matter before me that would give me concern.
Updated
Question: Firstly, she has made that statement publicly but she hasn’t made to the parliament. Why is she not required to do that or why are you not requiring her to do that? Secondly, do you advise your members not to have any association with these Chinese groups now? Are you saying this is racist?
Morrison: I will let others draw their conclusions but what I do know is that – firstly, let me deal with your first point. I would be happy to table Gladys’s statement she has made publicly in the parliament. I have no problem with that.
[Let’s] get into is this accusation by Labor in seeking to exploit this issue. Gladys is a Chinese-born Australian. Does that make her in cahoots with the Chinese Government? Of course not. It is a ridiculous suggestion and I think it is an insult to every single Chinese-Australian in this country.
You know, it wouldn’t be the first time – wouldn’t be the first time – the Labor party has made comments like this in my home state of New South Wales. We all remember the last NSW state election. What did they say? “Asians will take your jobs.” The Labor party have to take a good, hard look at themselves as to why they are pursuing this matter. They might want to dress it up as national security but I think 1.2 million Australians of Chinese heritage get the point. I don’t think they would be too fussed by it.
Updated
'Gladys Liu is a victim of a grubby smear', says Scott Morrison
Scott Morrison on Gladys Liu:
Gladys Liu has made a very clear statement. Let’s be clear. Gladys gave a clumsy interview.
She is a new member of parliament. If that were the grounds for which people weren’t sitting in the parliament, it would be a pretty empty place. None of you would have had a good story in your lives.
There are clumsy interviews that are given from time to time. On this occasion one was given by a new member of parliament. Let me tell you about Gladys Liu.
Gladys Liu, yes, was a Chinese-born Australian. Born in Hong Kong. Gladys has overcome incredible challenges to be a member of this place.
She’s overcome disability. She’s overcome domestic violence. She’s overcome the challenges that people from many different backgrounds in our ethnic communities face in this country to actually come through the ranks of our own party and to represent our party here and represent the people of Chisholm in this parliament.
She is someone who has run a small business. She is someone who came here to get an education and has created a life here for her and her family. Now she is a part of her community and as anyone in this building knows, particularly in communities of Chinese-Australian, there are many, many different organisations and those organisations confer membership on lots of different people, oftentimes without their knowledge, but these organisations are part of the community.
Indeed, her Labor candidate at that very same election was a member of at least two of the organisations that Gladys has been a member of.
Let me tell you what Gladys Liu hasn’t done. She hasn’t had someone pay for her legal expenses which we understand was up to about $40,000 in the case that Labor wants to create an equivalency over.
She didn’t take travel expenses personally. She didn’t stand at a lectern like this in Sydney with a crest on the front of it with a person who paid for those expenses and advocate for a change in her party’s policy on the sensitive issue of the South China sea. She didn’t do any of these things.
Gladys Liu is part of a community. She is a great Australian. What I am very concerned about – very concerned about – given what I have just outlined to you about her background. There is 1.2 million Australians of Chinese heritage in this country. This has a very grubby undertone in terms of the smear that is being placed on Gladys Liu and I think people should reflect very carefully in the way they have sought to attack Gladys over this matter and the broader smear that I think is implied in that to over more than one million Australians.
Updated
And just on that, Labor’s Tanya Plibersek pointed to the party holding firm on its climate change policy, if nothing else, in a doorstop interview a little earlier:
The leader has made it very clear – Anthony has made it very clear – that all of our policies are up for re-examination ...
“But I would say Labor party members are proud of our ambitious climate change agenda and it’s really the government that should be answering questions about what is happening with climate change policy in Australia. We have got a government – I mean I have literally lost count of how many energy policies they’ve had. I don’t know if we are up to 15 or 16 and what we know about those policies is power prices are still going up, pollution is still going up, we are spending billions of dollars of taxpayers’ money and achieving none of the objectives that the government has set itself. Energy prices are up, and pollution is up.
“We need in this country certainty for people to invest in new electricity generation capacity. We know that renewables are getting cheaper all the time. We need to act strongly in Australia to reduce our pollution, and that has the added benefit of reducing power prices for households. There is a reason that people are putting solar panels and batteries on their homes: renewables are becoming cheaper all the time.”
Q: So saying all of that, you would be opposed to changing the reductions target that Labor took to the last election?
TP: We are years out from the next election. Our leader has made it very clear that we are looking at all of our policies and we are not in any rush to make these sorts of announcements.
“What I would say is that Australians understand that we need to act decisively on climate change or we are leaving our grandchildren a diminished planet. I’d also say it is up to the government, that the government actually needs to have an energy policy and a climate change policy. We have people in this government today who are still saying that they’re not really sure whether manmade climate change is actually a thing. I mean, truly, in 2019 we’ve got government ministers who aren’t really sure whether the overwhelming evidence, scientific evidence, the overwhelming scientific opinion around the world – they aren’t really sure whether that’s right or not. Come on.”
Updated
Just for a change of pace, the Greens are calling for David Littleproud to step down from his ministries after he said he didn’t know whether manmade climate change was real or not.
David Littleproud has admitted that he does not believe the accepted science that human action is driving climate change, so how can he possibly be responsible for oversight of the water resources, drought, natural disaster and emergency management portfolios?” Richard Di Natale asked.
“That’s why the Greens are calling on minister Littleproud to do the right thing and immediately resign from the frontbench so that he can be replaced with someone who understands the science of climate change. If he refuses to do so, then Scott Morrison must stand him down.
“If Scott Morrison won’t remove minister Littleproud from the frontbench now that it’s clear he doesn’t believe the overwhelming scientific evidence that manmade climate change is real, then the public would have no choice but to assume that the prime minister agrees with his position.”
Updated
I mean, obviously they are just discussing the Caroline Calloway article in the Cut.
What is anyone else talking about?
Updated
Sarah Henderson will be officially welcomed back by the prime minister in that press conference. She has just walked into the PMO for her briefing now.
Updated
Seems like the ideal time to look at memes.
Updated
I’ve just heard from people within the chamber over what Tim Watts said that had him kicked out from the chamber under 94a during the debate to suspend standing orders:
You’ll regret this, Porter. It’s going to come back and bite you on the arse.”
That’ll do it.
Updated
Scott Morrison has just called a press conference for 11am.
It is in the Blue Room (the second most serious press conference location).
It’s the first one he has held all week.
Gee, I wonder what it could be about?
Updated
Mark Dreyfus moves to suspend standing orders over Gladys Liu, saying the member for Chisholm needs to explain her "absolutely extraordinary" interview with Andrew Bolt pic.twitter.com/9KuaQrVwfO
— Guardian Australia (@GuardianAus) September 12, 2019
For those interested, all of the crossbench voted with Labor on that motion.*
*I never really count Bob Katter as the crossbench. He very rarely gets involved.
Updated
Totally normal sitting arrangement.
PM Scott Morrison and the Treasurer Josh Frydenberg Sir next to Gladys Liu during a division @AmyRemeikis @murpharoo @GuardianAus #politicslive pic.twitter.com/64BmClIZg6
— Mikearoo (@mpbowers) September 12, 2019
Scott Morrison sat next to Gladys Liu during that vote.
Optics, optics, optics.
Motion to suspend standing orders ends.
Ayes 68
Noes 72
Updated
Time on the debate concludes – the divisions begin.
Even without Tim Watts, Labor was going to lose this one.
Updated
Rebekha Sharkie is now speaking on the motion.
She says the motion goes to “confidence” of MPs in the parliament and urges the government not to use its numbers to “run a protection racket”.
Sharkie says the motion is “simply calling on the member to make a statement” to the parliament, to clear up her comments to Andrew Bolt.
“The trust, the confidence, the integrity of this place rides on this matter – don’t think it doesn’t,” Sharkie says.
Updated
Christian Porter says the motion is an “outrageous slur” on the first Chinese-born MP in the parliament.
“At the end of the day, you would have someone excluded from the parliament because of their heritage, and associations with that heritage,” Porter says.
Updated
Tony Smith has already issued the 94a warning and reminded MPs that they might want to be around for the vote.
But they keep going, so Smith then uses it.
Tim Watts is kicked out.
Christian Porter points out that Chris Bowen travelled to China as a guest of the Guangdong Chamber of Commerce and the Chinese Communist party in 2015.
He asks if Bowen is under question for his associations.
Updated
Christian Porter is up and arguing against the motion.
He opens with:
It’s pretty awful stuff, isn’t it? It’s pretty awful stuff.
Earlier this week we had a condolence for the last living member of the Menzies government, who helped unravel the white Australia policy, and all these years later ...
All these years later, this is where we are. What a lovely way to spend the morning. And there are two – there are two fundamental propositions ...
There are two propositions that have been put by members opposite. The first proposition is this: Is that if you are associated in any way with one of the three organisations, or, indeed, others like them, that somehow you are not a fit and proper member of parliament. That’s the proposition. And the three organisations ...
That’s precisely the proposition that you are putting. And here are the three organisation that is are in question. The Guangdong Overseas Exchange Association. The Australian General Commercial Association.
And United Chinese Commerce Association. The fundamental proposition that they are putting is that a Chinese Australian, with a wonderful heritage, who overcame domestic violence, who came to this country, who came to this country and has natural associations with Chinese organisations, by virtue of those associations, is not a fit and proper person to be here.
The question is, are you fit and proper people to be here, when you run arguments like that? That’s the central question.
Updated
For those wondering, there were 1,090 votes in the Chisholm count.
I think, after Macquarie, it is the second slimmest margin in the country.
Updated
Mark Dreyfus says the government needs to hold Gladys Liu to the same standard it held Sam Dastyari:
It suited the current prime minister of Australia at that time to say that there was a lack of patriotism on the part of that senator because of the statements that he had made about the conduct of the People’s Republic of China in the South China Sea.
Now we have a Liberal member of parliament, a recently elected Liberal member of parliament who has said something virtually identical to the statements made by that former senator.
Statements in respect of which that senator ultimately resigned from his position in the Senate.
And we’ve had nothing from the prime minister and nothing from the member for Chisholm in relation to this. Instead, she has simply distributed – not come and explained herself to this House – but instead she has simply distributed a written statement that was self-evidently prepared for her by the foreign affairs minister and the Prime Minister’s Office, self-evidently is not in her words, self-evidently is not the language that she herself chose to use when she was being interviewed by Andrew Bolt.
And the ridiculous hypocrisy of all of the people in the government benches, starting with the prime minister and including the member for Chisholm, is on full display for the Australian people to see.
That’s why standing orders should be suspended, in order to have the member for Chisholm come into this House, as she should, as convention would require that she should.
Updated
Here is the motion Mark Dreyfus has put forward,
Labor’s motion to suspend standing orders over Gladys Liu pic.twitter.com/lbzRDYzIh5
— Amy Remeikis (@AmyRemeikis) September 11, 2019
Updated
After that talk to Dave Sharma, Gladys Liu has left the chamber.
Dave Sharma has walked over to Gladys Liu’s seat and is having a chat to her as Mark Dreyfus gives his speech.
Updated
Labor moves to suspend standing orders over Gladys Liu
We are right into it this morning.
Mark Dreyfus is straight into it, saying the member for Chisholm needs to explain her interview with Andrew Bolt and clear up, in the parliament, what the situation is.
Updated
The bells are ringing.
I hear them in my sleep.
Updated
Richard Marles was sent out by Labor this morning to give the opposition’s position on Gladys Liu. Here is some of that doorstop:
Q: Should Gladys Liu resign?
RM: Well, right now I think there are questions which are at large, and I think actually it is for the prime minister to act. The prime minister needs to be fronting the Australian people and making it really clear what his position in respect to these allegations are.
Q: The Labor candidate for Chisholm, Jennifer Yang, she was also associated with some of these organisations that Gladys Liu has been linked to. How can Labor then criticise her?
RM: Well, firstly, the allegations that are being made in this morning’s paper are being made in respect of Gladys Liu. And the other point to make is that Jennifer Yang isn’t here. Gladys Liu is. Gladys Liu was sworn in as the member for Chisholm and represents that constituency in this parliament, right now, and forms part of the government’s majority. It is absolutely essential given the seriousness of the allegations that have been made in the papers this morning that the prime minister provides an answer to the Australian people on these questions immediately and I would imagine that from Gladys Liu’s point of view she would want those answers given straight away. But the prime minister needs to be speaking on this.
Updated
Greg Hunt has been asked about Gladys Liu as he was leaving an event this morning:
I am very uncomfortable with the way that some people have focused on her Chinese heritage, the fact that she has an accent, I think Senator Payne set that out and I agree with Senator Payne’s concerns about the characterisation. I have a deep discomfort at the way that some have focused on her Chinese heritage.
I’ve just had a look through some of the comments. I’m just going to say it again. Think about what you are posting. I don’t want to see those “jokes”. Be better.
Updated
As Alice Workman first reported in the Australian, Gladys Liu is meant to head the Sydney Institute’s “How the Coalition won Chisholm” event on 25 September.
We have a feeling this event will be quietly shuffled off the Sydney Institute’s calendar after their headline speaker is suddenly unable to attend.
Updated
Sarah Henderson will be officially sworn into the Senate at 9.30am today.
Updated
Seems there might be something in the water when it comes to our water ministers lately.
On the heels of David Littleproud admitting that he did not know if climate change was human-made or not, we have this from the NSW water minister, Melinda Pavey.
Oh my god. Water minister for NSW on climate change and drought. She’s remembering there was no rain in King Arthur’s time. pic.twitter.com/O8C8Y9jJJp
— david munk (@davidmunk) September 11, 2019
Updated
Sarah Henderson is back in the building.
Henderson lost the seat of Corangamite at the last election after a boundary change, but scraped by in the Victorian Senate selection to replace Mitch Fifield.
Updated
Frank Bainimarama will arrive for his first official Australian visit since becoming Fijian prime minister today, with a meeting scheduled with Scott Morrison for Monday.
It’s also the pair’s first meeting since Bainimarama said this about the Australian leader in an interview with Guardian Australia, after the Pacific Islands Forum last month:
After yesterday’s meeting I gathered [Morrison] was here only to make sure that the Australian policies were upheld by the Pacific island nations,” said Bainimarama. I thought Morrison was a good friend of mine; apparently not.
The prime minister at one stage, because he was apparently [backed] into a corner by the leaders, came up with how much money Australia has been giving to the Pacific. He said: ‘I want that stated. I want that on the record.’ Very insulting.
Morrison has since said the pair are cool friends again, and message each other all the time. Bainimarama has said he thinks the meeting will be more positive.
Given one of the major concerns of our Pacific neighbours is climate change, and Australia isn’t shifting on that end – and, as Katharine Murphy revealed, Scott Morrison will not attend the UN climate summit, despite being in the US, that might be a little bit of a stretch.
Updated
Government MPs have been pretty quiet this morning.
But the Senate crossbencher Rex Patrick has not been.
He was on ABC RN this morning and had this to say about Gladys Liu.
I actually think that with all of the evidence that’s emerging, she’s reached the Sam Dastyari threshold, where she must consider her tenure.
Patrick said he believed Liu had not been “candid” with the Australian people or the parliament and he wanted more answers.
There’s a standard that’s been set for the parliament ... I don’t think she’s been open and transparent about it.
Updated
Scott Morrison is off to the US next week. He’ll be at the White House but not the UN climate summit.
Katharine Murphy has this report:
Scott Morrison will not attend the UN climate action summit despite him being in America to visit the Trump administration at the time – deploying the foreign affairs minister, Marise Payne, and the Australian ambassador for the environment, Patrick Suckling, instead.
Guardian Australia understands speaking slots at the event in New York on 23 September were reserved for countries announcing new emissions reduction targets or financial commitments to the UN Green Climate Fund – and Morrison has been signalling Australia won’t be going further, at least at this point, than commitments previously announced.
A draft program for the summit, and a list of member states intending to present at the event, seen by Guardian Australia, did not include any reference to Australian participation.
Updated
Good morning
It’s the last sitting day for this week, and the government has its first official “embattled” MP.
The member for Chisholm, Gladys Liu has had the adjective proceed her name in morning news coverage, as the fallout from an unsanctioned interview she gave to Sky News’s Andrew Bolt continues.
A statement Liu released on Wednesday to clarify her comments raised more questions.
Question time was largely dedicated to the first-term MP, but most questions on the subject were ruled out of order.
The foreign affairs minister, Marise Payne, said then it was “offensive” to suggest that Liu’s previous associations suggested she was not fit and proper to sit in parliament.
“The member is duly elected as the representative of the people of Chisholm,” she said.
Labor and the crossbench are expected to ask more questions today as parliament prepares for the weekend break.
Meanwhile, questions over what policies Labor will hold on to and what the party is looking to scrap continue for the opposition, as the much-lauded 50% carbon reduction plan by 2030 comes under the microscope. The review is ongoing, so Labor won’t say, but it has so far not revealed which way it will vote on the crossbench motion to have the parliament declare a climate emergency. Why is that important? Because Labor has spent much of the six years talking about climate, and if it suddenly walks back its position, it tells you more about the direction of the party moving forward.
We’ll have all that and whatever else the day throws at us, so I hope you come along. Mike Bowers is wandering around the hallways and Katharine Murphy, Paul Karp and Sarah Martin are here for you as well. It’s a four-coffee day. I’m just saying.
Ready?
Let’s get into it.
Updated
