Get all your news in one place.
100’s of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Guardian - AU
The Guardian - AU
National
Gabrielle Chan

Rod Culleton and Bob Day referred to high court – as it happened

One Nation senator Rodney Culleton
The One Nation senator Rodney Culleton in the Senate at Parliament House. Photograph: Mick Tsikas/AAP

Night-time politics

  • Pauline Hanson has backed the referral of her party’s senator Rod Culleton to the high court for a ruling from the court of disputed returns. Former Family First senator Bob Day has also been referred on a deal regarding his electoral office.
  • Culleton has tabled the government solicitor general’s advice on his eligibility, which the government had tried to withhold. Culleton also tried to amend the government’s high court referral motion. He failed.
  • The Senate debate over the marriage plebiscite bill continues, with Liberal senator Dean Smith warning his government’s plans would irretrievably undermine parliamentary sovereignty.
  • Labor attacked the prime minister over when he knew of advice that Day’s office deal was possibly dodgy. Turnbull said he did not know the details of what happened under the former special minister of state Michael Ronaldson in 2014. Turnbull said he found out in August 2016 when the new SMOS Scott Ryan found out.
  • The government used question time to focus on the CFMEU to push the case for the Australian Building Construction Commission and the registered organisations bill.
  • The Human Rights Commission has hit back at criticism from Turnbull for accusing the commission of “bringing a case” against the Queensland University of Technology students under section 18C. The commission did not bring the case, it was the complainant, Cindy Prior. This detail appeared to elude the PM. It will be worth watching 7.30, where Leigh Sales will interview HRC president, Gillian Triggs.
  • The chair of the government environment committee, Craig Kelly, talked about previous renewable energy policies which increase the cost of heating swimming pools at the same time as speaking of child drownings.

That is all, my friends. Thanks for your company today and thanks to the brains trust of Gareth Hutchens, Paul Karp and Katharine Murphy and to my blogan co-conspirator Mike Bowers.

I am off to lie in Reclined Goddess (yoga speak) and hope that tomorrow is a little more normal. Well, in terms of pace. I have given up hoping for normal.

Good night.

Updated

Asked if Pauline Hanson’s senior staffer James Ashby wants to parachute into his Senate seat, One Nation senator Rodney Culleton told Sky News:

Well he probably wants to parachute into a lot of places. But at the moment it would be very difficult to parachute into my seat because the West Australian people want me to stay there as a senator.

Is he accusing Ashby of being a political opportunist or was there a slur intended by that remark? You decide.

Culleton was far more civil about Hanson agreeing to the referral of his eligibility to the high court:

It is a different playing field here. I have to respect the party leader and the other senators.

Updated

The prime minister has commissioned an independent review into Australia’s intelligence agencies.

This is an opportunity to assess whether our current intelligence arrangements, structures and mechanisms are best placed to meet the security challenges we are likely to face in the years ahead.

Consistent with previous reviews conducted in 2004 and 2011, this process will examine how our intelligence community serves Australia’s national interest. The review will consider the ongoing suitability of legislative and oversight provisions.

I have asked Professor Michael L’Estrange AO and Mr Stephen Merchant PSM to conduct the review and report to the government in the first half of 2017.

The terms of reference are here.

Updated

Culleton says it would cost a lot of money to go to the high court.

Everyone is confused [over the eligibility issue], it’s all a belief, I don’t want to be sent to an abattoir with a blunt knife, it’s got to be a clean kill.

Updated

One Nation’s Rod Culleton is speaking to Laura Jayes on Sky.

He calls the government referral an “ambush”. He says George Brandis has ambushed him.

He says the whole Senate process to refer his eligibility was rushed and did not represent procedural fairness.

Updated

Today is the first day of new Senate rules to allow photographers to take pictures of senators on the benches – in line with lower house rules.

Bowers was not like the dog that caught up with the car. When the Senate opened the doors, Bowers was there with bells on.

Updated

Rod Culleton addresses the Senate on his eligibility to sit in the upper house
Rod Culleton addresses the Senate on his eligibility to sit in the upper house. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian

I thought you might like a substantial chunk of Pauline Hanson’s speech.

It is a very difficult time for me and the party but even more so for Senator Culleton. He has been a man who has stood up to represent his electorate, the farming sector and many other issues. But this motion is on the floor now and I must address it. I have always stood for honesty, integrity and the truth. The people deserve no less, especially from this chamber. It goes to the very heart of our democracy. With this at hand, it is a question over Senator Culleton’s eligibility to hold his seat in this place.

I was of the opinion when he was nominated for Pauline Hanson’s One Nation as a Senate candidate that he stated that he was eligible to stand under the requirements of section 44 of the constitution. I took that to be his oath, and his signature was witnessed by a JP.

My fellow colleagues and I support Senator Culleton, but we have seen on too many occasions politicians in this place and the other place who have not been accountable to the Australian people and I will not stand here and be of the same ilk.

I believe that it should go to the high court to make their ruling on this matter. I hope their findings are in his favour and I would dearly love to see Senator Culleton take his place here again as a One Nation senator. I believe that they have the support of my other senators. I know that Senator Culleton will not be too happy with what I have just said …

I have fought for 18 years to be on the floor of this parliament as a representative of the people and I cannot sit back and disregard what may have been a wrong judgment. But I will leave it up to the court to make the final decision.

She could make no other decision, in my opinion. But it was well executed.

Updated

Just on the plebiscite bill, we are expecting a vote on this either late today or tomorrow.

One Nation’s Rod Culleton wants to adjourn the Senate until all evidence relating to the case is brought before the chamber. (He wants to pursue the aforementioned judges.)

Given he has a vote of one, his attempt fails.

The Senate is back on to the plebiscite bill.

Updated

Rod Culleton to moves to amend government motion

Pardon me. I may have lapsed into semi-consciousness.

The motion regarding Day and Culleton is back in the Senate now.

Nick Xenophon is speaking.

He and the other Xenophones are supporting the high court referral.

He notes that the One Nation senator Rod Culleton plans to move an amendment to the government’s motion.

The Senate needs some more bodies in the chamber and the president rings the bells.

Updated

The report into the backpacker tax was expected today but the committee is seeking an extension until Wednesday. It is expected to go through the chambers shortly.

The LNP MP George Christensen wants citizenship to be revoked for new residents who break Australian law to comply with Sharia law.

Special consideration should be given to anyone who, having signed up to Australian citizenship and Australian law, breaks that Australian law out of compliance with a foreign religious law, such as forcing a child into marriage or female genital mutilation. They should forfeit their citizenship and their residency and return to where Sharia is the law of the land because there is no room for Sharia law in Australia.

Updated

To cabinet and beyond.

Tony Abbott leaves question time in the House of Representatives
Tony Abbott leaves question time in the House of Representatives. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian

Updated

To infinity and beyond.

Malcolm Turnbull with the second man on the moon, Buzz Aldrin
Malcolm Turnbull with the second man on the moon, Buzz Aldrin. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian

Updated

Mr Speaker, on weirdness ...

Immigration minister Peter Dutton and the prime minister Malcolm Turnbull during question time
Immigration minister Peter Dutton and the prime minister Malcolm Turnbull during question time. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian

Updated

I’m sweeping up here after the flurry of the day.

Thank you Matt. Regards, Cluck Trent.

Liberal senator Dean Smith: a plebiscite will irretrievably undermine parliamentary sovereignty

Smith spoke earlier on the plebiscite bill.

I shudder to think that we may see a day in this country where determinations about our right to freedom of speech and freedom of worship or on whether or not Australia accepts immigrants from a particular nation are made by a popular vote of the people at the expense of our parliamentary system of government. It sounds like a ridiculous notion. Indeed, I hope it is a ridiculous notion. But I would prefer that we in this parliament do not expose future generations to that real risk. That is why I am passionate about protecting the foundational principle of parliamentary sovereignty. I believe we as parliamentarians have a responsibility to seek the best way to resolve difficult issues rather than the easy way to resolve them. I do not believe a plebiscite is the best means for resolving this question, and I believe it will forever and irretrievably undermine the principle of parliamentary sovereignty which has served our country so well.

Updated

OK I missed this bit because of the Rod Culleton matter earlier.

It happened before question time.

A government MP, the whip Scott Buchholz no less, seconded a motion that the government was shortchanging pensioners. It was one of those procedural motions that go through in the general hubbub.

As a result, Labor tried to suspend standing orders.

Burke moved that the house:

(1) Notes that:

(a) The Senate is today sitting while it remains unclear which senators were validly elected under the constitution; and

(b) The government has not revealed how long it has known there were questions over the validity of the composition of the Senate and why it has kept this information secret from the Australian people;

(2) Therefore, calls on the prime minister to immediately attend the chamber to provide a full and honest account of the government’s knowledge and involvement of the potential constitutional issues concerning the composition of the Senate;

(3) Notes the chaos in the Senate has today extended to the House of Representatives, when for the first time a government MP has seconded a private members’ motion which condemned the government for “shortchanging Australian pensioners”;

(4) Congratulates the member for Wright in joining the minister for revenue and the minister for justice in their willingness to condemn the Turnbull government on the floor of the House; and

(5) Condemns the government for its failure to manage the parliament where every week there is a new stumble in the house and we now know the Senate has been sitting with a cloud over whether its composition is valid under the Australian constitution.

Labor lost on the numbers. But they made their point on the record.

Updated

I forgot to pack my angry eyes....

George Christensen bones up on Time To Get Tough by Donald Trump.

Labor MP Tim Watts holds up a book he found on George Christensen’s seat during a division in question time.
Labor MP Tim Watts holds up a book he found on George Christensen’s seat during a division in question time. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian

Labor’s Tanya Plibersek to Greg Hunt, representing the education minister: I refer to reports that the grants to a trades training centre college linked to former senator Bob Day was equivalent to $92,000 for each of the 20 students enrolled in the program, despite the fact that an equivalent qualification could have been completed at Tafe for just $3,000 per student. Does the minister agree that this grant was excessive?

Hunt says:

  • The liquidation of Bob Day’s building and construction company, Home Australia, will not have an impact on North-East Vocational College’s student builder pilot.
  • The pilot is being delivered currently and in accordance with the agreement.

Thirdly,

I’m also advised that the senator has resigned as a member of the college board and I’m advised that board members do not receive any payment and I am also advise that the former senator does not have a financial interest in the North East Vocational College and so the advice we have is that it is being delivered on time and in accordance with the grant.

So Hunt does not answer the question as to the appropriateness of the $92,000 grant.

Updated

Labor’s Anthony Albanese gets up to take a point of order.

Mr Speaker, on weirdness....

It is a very strange answer from Dutton.

Another government immigration question, on CFMEU and visas. This is a Peter Dutton stream of consciousness.

Updated

Labor loses suspension motion.

Back to question time briefly.

The Labor huddle.
The Labor huddle. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian

The Coalition wins the gag.

Labor’s Tony Burke gets up to second the motion.

Burke yells:

They held it because they wanted his vote! They wanted his vote!

That is, Labor says Turnbull did not act earlier on Bob Day (even though he knew in August this year) because they wanted his vote on other bills.

Turnbull says he did not act earlier because the matter had to fully investigated.

Updated

Malcolm Turnbull during question time.
Malcolm Turnbull during question time. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian

Labor is moving to suspend standing orders on the Bob Day matter.

The Coalition employs the gag – to shut down Labor.

A vote is called.

Updated

Labor to Turnbull: How can it be that for every single day that the 45th parliament has sat, the PM has been aware that the composition of the Senate was potentially illegitimate, and why did the PM decide to keep this information secret from the Australian people?

Turnbull:

The reality is simply this: as you know, as we all know, senator Ryan, senator Ryan became aware that there was an issue concerning the nature or the extent, the character of senator Day’s interest in his office. He investigated that. He did so diligently. He sought advice. The idea that any member of the government, the special minister of state or any other, would have gone out and made allegations or made conclusions until the facts had been thoroughly investigated and advice sought is absurd and reckless.

Labor moves to suspend standing orders.

Updated

Pyne is losing his voice.

The defence industry minister, Christopher Pyne, gets a question on new senator Kimberley Kitching and the CFMEU.

Updated

Sanctamonious humbug! Turnbull says government acted with diligence

Shorten to Turnbull: The PM has just confirmed that he was aware in August that senator Day’s election possibly contravened the constitution. How can it be that since then, for every single day that the 45th Parliament has sat, the PM has been aware that the composition of the Senate was potentially illegitimate, and why did the PM decide to keep this information secret from the Australian people?

The PM says:

We have yet another example of the sanctimonious humbug we get time and time again from the leader of the opposition ... The fact is that as senator Ryan and senator Cormann have set out, as the facts emerged concerning senator Day’s office, they then investigated it, taking great care to do so diligently, seeking legal advice from the Australian government solicitor, seeking legal advice from senior counsel, and then when that advice was received, provided it to the president of the Senate. The government has acted with the utmost integrity and with diligence.

Updated

Treasurer Scott Morrison gets a government question on the CFMEU.

Senator Nick McKim has been on the attack in Senate question time, asking the attorney general, George Brandis, about the government’s openness to reform section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act.

Brandis rejects the idea that 18C is part of a rightwing culture war, pointing out that Guardian Australia columnist David Marr – who he described as a “lion of the left” – could not said to be engaged in a culture war when he called for its reform. Even the right’s bette noire Gillian Triggs has suggested she is open to reform of the way 18C claims are processed, he said.

Brandis concludes by saying the government are “determined defenders of free speech” of both people that agree and disagree with them.

Updated

Burke to Turnbull: The special minister of state has today told the Senate that he informed the PM’s office on 18th August this year, that there was a potential issue under section 44 of the constitution in relation to former senator Day. On what date was the PM personally aware of this information?

Several days thereafter, says Turnbull.

Updated

A government question allows foreign minister Julie Bishop to update the house on the Mosul offensive.

There is a government asylum seeker question.

Shorten to Turnbull: In light of the PM’s refusal to endorse the Coalition government’s handling of Bob Day’s electoral office in 2014, has the PM made any inquiries as to whether senator Ronaldson advised the finance minister or the then PM that senator Ronaldson was rejecting the department’s advice in order to assist Bob Day?

No dramas, says Turnbull, because there was no net cost to the commonwealth from Day’s office. See finance minister Mathias Cormann’s answer in the Senate, he says.

What about Kimberley Kitching, Shorten’s “handpicked senator”?

Updated

Greens to the energy and environment minister Josh Frydenberg: A number of eminent Australians including the head of AGL, a former governor general and a former head of Telstra have urged the government to facilitate the phased and controlled closure of coal-fired electricity. Now that Hazelwood, Australia’s dirtiest power station is to be closed, will the government agree to put into law a plan for the orderly retirement of coal-fired power stations so he that workers, communities and clean energy investors can plan for the future, or will you continue to leave it to the chaos of the market so that Australia’s future energy security and welfare of places like the Latrobe Valley are left to the boardrooms of Paris, Tokyo and Hong Kong?

Shorter Frydenberg: Greens are hypocrites and driven by ideology. The Coalition is worried about energy security.

Updated

Extraordinary, that last answer. It is the same as George Brandis’ formula to 7.30 last week.

Essentially, he is saying, the Turnbull government is not responsible for what the Abbott government did – even though it remains the same Coalition government.

Updated

Malcolm Turnbull: I don't know what happened in 2014 re Day's office

Bill Shorten to Malcolm Turnbull: Is the PM satisfied that the government’s handling of Bob Day’s electorate office in 2014 was appropriate?

Malcolm Turnbull:

The circumstances of 2014 are not matters that I have any personal knowledge of.

Well, they were matters handled by the then special minister of state, senator Ronaldson. The important thing to recognise is that when the issues relating to senator Day’s office came to the knowledge of senator Ryan, the matters were thoroughly investigated, advice was dutifully and diligently sought and the actions that followed, including providing those conclusions to the present of the Senate were carried out. Mr Speaker, I’m satisfied that my government has conducted itself with respect to this matter with great diligence and great integrity and great thoroughness.

Updated

Will the PM update the House on the government’s efforts to counter people smuggling? Are there any impediments to keeping Australia’s borders secure?

Turnbull answers but everyone is just drawing a breath until the next question.

Labor to Morrison again: My question is to the minister representing the special minister of state and goes to items that are not covered in the document he just tabled. On May 2014, the special minister of state accepted Bob Day’s advice that he sold his interest in the taxpayer-funded electoral office, but if the minister, his office or his department had checked available land title records, they would have discovered that senator Day still owned the property. Has the government conducted any investigation as to why basic due diligence was not performed?

Morrison says Ryan’s statement “makes note of the fact that in November 2014, the Department of Finance undertook a title search which confirmed that the property was transferred to Fullerton Investments in September 2014”.

Updated

Question time.

Labor to Scott Morrison representing the special minister of state Scott Ryan: On 24 February 2014, the department finance advised the special minister of state to reject former Senator Day’s request to establish his taxpayer-funded electoral office in a property he owned saying, “Finance has concerns about how such a transaction might be perceived.”

Why did the minister ignore this advice?

Morrison tables Ryan’s speech and sits down again.

He refuses to answer the question.

Hanson to vote to refer her own senator Culleton to high court

Pauline Hanson has supported the referral of her own senator Rod Culleton to the high court to determine his eligibility.

Hanson says he provided a signed statement telling One Nation he was eligible to stand.

She says she knows Culleton will not like her stand but politicians have to be accountable.

Rod Culleton has stated vested interests are out to get his Senate seat.

Updated

Pauline Hanson supports Culleton referral to high court

Pauline Hanson says Culleton stated he was eligible to stand for parliament and he signed to that effect in front of a Justice of the Peace.

She supports Culleton but says it should be sent to high court.

Rod Culleton promises to table government's legal advice on him

The Coalition has refused to table legal advice from the solicitor general regarding Culleton’s eligibility.

Culleton has just told the chamber he would table it himself.

Hanson is up now.

I really can’t keep up with this but here are a few points:

  • Rod Culleton is not perfect, only Jesus was perfect but even he was beaten and crucified.
  • Rod Culleton requests a full jury trial as is his “right in the nation’s Constitution”.

Rod Culleton says vested interests are out to get him

Certain parties believe they have the vested interests in the Senate seat. Their actions and reactions today reflect that vested interest in securing this West Australian Senate seat through which I was elected to serve my constituents in WA for the next three years.

Rod Culleton:

This very nature of this situation confirms to me what Australians have seen in the Parliamentary representation for far too long. Parliamentary representatives who actually stand up and represent their constituents will always be under attack from within and without.

Rod Culleton:

In my discussions with the clerk of the Senate this morning, I was clearly informed that I have the right to exercise my vote in the Senate and continue to represent the people of WA as I was elected to do. I intend to dutifully and responsibly fulfil my commitment.

Rod Culleton has just started speaking. Josh Butler of the Huff Post with a lunchtime summary of the tsunami – bless him.

Updated

The attorney general, George Brandis, is now moving onto the Rod Culleton matter, specifically the details around the challenge to his eligibility by a former associate.

Updated

Human Rights Commission: we had no role in law suit against QUT students

The Human Rights Commission has issued a statement.

There has been considerable public interest in the commission’s complaint handling processes under the Australia Human Rights Commission Act 1986. There has been particular interest in the commission’s handling of complaints under the Racial Discrimination Act 1975.

In relation to the recent QUT case, it is a matter of public record that the commission terminated this matter in August 2015. The commission has had no role in the subsequent law suit in the federal circuit court.

At no stage does the commission initiate or prosecute a complaint. If the commission receives a complaint in writing alleging a discriminatory act, the act provides that the commission must investigate the facts and attempt to conciliate the matter.

The commission’s focus is on resolving disputes so parties can avoid court proceedings. Of complaints where conciliation was attempted, 76% were successfully resolved in 2015-16.

Only 3% of complaints finalised by the commission were lodged in court. For example, of the over 80 complaints finalised under the racial hatred provisions of the Racial Discrimination Act last year, only one proceeded to court at the initiation of the complainant.

In the 2015-16 reporting year the average time it took the commission to finalise a complaint was 3.8 months. In that same reporting year, 94% of surveyed parties were satisfied with the Commission’s service.

The commission has no judicial powers and it makes no legally binding determinations as to whether unlawful acts have occurred. The commission has no statutory power to prevent a complainant proceeding to court once the commission terminates the complaint.

The commission has provided advice to successive governments and attorneys general on amendments to the Australian Human Rights Commission Act. In particular, the commission has asked for amendments to streamline the process by raising the threshold for accepting complaints.

Updated

Senator Derryn Hinch told the Senate he would support the referral of Bob Day and Rod Culleton but he wants to look at the eligibility of all senators.

Crikey. This could go a long way ... just checking with Hinch’s office on exactly what that might mean.

Updated

Labor urges Coalition to release legal advice on Day's eligibility

The Labor leader in the Senate, Penny Wong, has said the opposition supports the referral of Day’s eligibility for election to the high court.

But she criticised the government for not providing legal advice it received on 27 October from lawyer David Jackson that concluded Day was ineligible.

She noted the referral is broad and includes any potential bar to Day’s eligibility. That means his solvency and the issue of a grant to a training school linked to Day could be considered.

Updated

Senator David Leyonhjelm objects to the Greens’ characterisation.

He says he thinks the link between Bob Day’s arrangements regarding his electoral office to section 44 of the constitution is too remote.

But he does not signal which way he will vote on the high court referral motion.

Updated

The Greens’ senator Larissa Waters says a federal independent commission against corruption may have helped in matters of the constitutional matters.

Her point is that any perception of stinky business would be closely watched.

Her point is also around the speed camera argument. That just having the Icac would have a chilling effect on potentially allegedly dodgy deals.

Updated

Penny Wong speaks to the Day/Culleton matters.
Penny Wong speaks to the Day/Culleton matters. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian

It’s complex ... the courts will decide.

The special minister of state, Scott Ryan, addresses the Senate on the validity of the election of senator Bob Day. The finance minister, Mathias Cormann, waits for his turn
The special minister of state, Scott Ryan, addresses the Senate on the validity of the election of senator Bob Day. The finance minister, Mathias Cormann, waits for his turn. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian

Updated

Mathias Cormann: I was not advised of potential breach re Day until last month

The finance minister, Mathias Cormann, has explained that he believed that the non-payment of rent meant that there was no constitutional issue with Bob Day’s electorate office.

“At no time” was Cormann advised by his department that the commonwealth’s lease “absent rental payments” could constitute a breach of the constitutional section on eligibility, he said.

That is, until the government received advice on 27 October from David Jackson QC that the lease – even without rental payments – was a breach. For the basis of that advice, check the post lower about the case as set out by special minister of state, Scott Ryan.

Updated

Government didn’t give me clear advice about Fullarton Road, Bob Day says

A bundle of documents has landed in the Senate relating to the affairs of the former Family First senator Bob Day and (in so far as we know) the current One Nation senator Rod Culleton.

In the Day documents, a couple of things are interesting immediately.
The first thing is he is corresponding with the government via an email address – bobday@77fullarton.com.au

Fullarton Investments is the company that bought the building Day used to own – the building in which he wanted to situate his electoral office in Kent Town.

Day says he sold the building to avoid a conflict of interest; by this he presumably meant a problem with the constitution.

Section 44 of the constitution prohibits parliamentarians from having “any direct or indirect pecuniary interest in any agreement with the public service of the commonwealth”.

So, in that context, interesting email address.

The bundle of emails also yields some other interesting facts. Day told an official of the finance department on January 25 2016 that, in the complicated financial arrangements surrounding the building, that he, Day, retained the loan from the National Australia Bank.

He told the department that Fullarton Investments was to receive rent from the commonwealth to cover Day’s occupancy in the building “then make vendor payments to me using those funds. No rent, no vendor finance payments,” Day tells finance official Shane McGaughey on 25 January.

Then there is correspondence between the special minister of state, Scott Ryan, and Day in early August.

In this correspondence Day characterises the arrangements with the building in the following terms: “I have an agreement with someone else who has an agreement with the crown.” This explanation is provided by Day to Ryan in the event “the department pulls the pecuniary interest card”.

In this email on 7 August, Day says he has spoken to finance about the pecuniary interest issue, and told them it isn’t relevant.

Ryan clearly disagrees with this and seeks further advice. Day also furnishes him with further particulars.

In this email exchange on 29 August, Day says he has not been given clear advice by either the department, or by the special minister of state when he was elected in 2013 (which was Michael Ronaldson) on the problems associated with him having some kind of financial relationship with the building which houses his electoral office.

Bob Day:

Their advice basically centred on the principle that it was “not a good look” for a senator to own his or her own office. That was basically it. I was told there was no law against it but that it “wouldn’t look good” or “pass the pub test”.

Updated

Here is a summary from Paul Karp:

The special minister of state, Scott Ryan, has explained the basis of the referral of former senator Bob Day’s eligibility to the high court.

First, he runs through a chronology, including that he was only alerted to the possible constitutional issue on 7 August, after which he and the attorney general promptly got legal advice.

The nub of the referral is that Day’s family trust was liable for the mortgage over Fullarton Road, which he had sold to a business associate. Day gave a guarantee to the bank over the mortgage so that essentially if the commonwealth doesn’t pay rent to the company that owned the building, Day or his trust has to pay.

Ryan said that may lead to the conclusion that Day has an indirect pecuniary interest in the lease, which would make him ineligible to be in the Senate. But only the high court can decide and legal advice is only preliminary, Ryan warns. Hence the referral.

Updated

The SMOS, Scott Ryan, on former senator Day and his referral to his eligibility:

This is a complex legal and constitutional ... this issue does not relate to a direct pecuniary interest because Senator Day disposed of his interest in the building. It relates to the financial arrangements for the building and the lease for the electoral office with the owners ...

Updated

Roberts hits back.

SMOS (special minister of state) Scott Ryan is giving chapter and verse on his dealings with former senator Bob Day relating to his offices.

Cartoonist Bill Leak meeting MPs on 18C

The News Corp cartoonist Bill Leak is meeting with Coalition MPs in Canberra on Monday to talk about plans to change section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act.

He is being chaperoned through Parliament House by the executive director of the Menzies Research Centre, Nick Cater.

It comes as conservatives within the Coalition continue to push for 18C to be overhauled and as Malcolm Turnbull said he was open to the idea of considering changes.

Leak is at the centre of the push to remove the words “offend” and insult” from the act. He is being investigated by the Human Rights Commission for breaching 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act for a cartoon he drew for the Australian newspaper.

The cartoon shows an Aboriginal policeman returning an Indigenous boy by the scruff of the neck to the boy’s father, who is also Indigenous. The father is holding a beer can and cannot remember his son’s name.

Leak says he drew his cartoon in response to a Four Corners story on the Don Dale detention centre in the Northern Territory and its treatment of Indigenous children.

“A lot of these kids are coming from the most desperate circumstances,” he told the ABC’s Lateline program this month.

“I thought to myself, ‘Well, it comes back ultimately to parents.’ We all know that’s true.”

Updated

The special minister of state, Scott Ryan, is now speaking to the Day/Culleton referrals to the high court.

Updated

Liberal MP Craig Kelly appears to link renewable energy policies to child drownings

It is descending into the basement here. Mark Di Stefano of Buzzfeed reports on the chair of the backbench committee on environment:

The backbencher, who was speaking in parliament during a motion on the number of child drownings in Australia, said renewable energy policies would drive up the cost of electricity, which meant public pools would raise the prices of swimming lessons and therefore fewer children would be taught to swim.

“We cannot ignore that fact in this parliament that there are policies being put in by governments, both state and federal, that are increasing the costs of electricity, and by doing so we increase the cost of swimming lessons. That is a fact,” said Kelly, to howls of condemnation from the opposition.

Kelly cited a local swimming centre operator who had complained to him about the cost of electricity under the previous government.

“He looked at the increases that were projected on electricity costs and he projected under previous policies if we allowed electricity costs to increase in this country, he would be paying … an extra $100,000 in electricity costs up to the year 2020.”

Updated

Is gravity real? We are entering the twilight zone in parliament ...

Updated

One Nation senator Rod Culleton alleges widespread contempt of parliament though no exact deets

One Nation senator Rodney Culleton has written an explosive and highly legally questionable letter to the president of the Senate, Stephen Parry, claiming widespread and systematic contempt of parliament and the constitution.

Culleton takes aim at high court rules written 64 years ago in which he said judges reserved the right to decide which cases come to the high court. This amounted to an “unelected aristocracy” engaged in “sabotage” of the constitution, he said.

He claims that twice in October courts in Queensland and Perth breached a requirement not to proceed where a case raises constitutional issues without notification first being given to the attorney general. I am seeking proof of this and whether it relates to legal proceedings against Culleton.

In the letter, Culleton says he will raise a privileges matter and alleges misbehaviour by judges which may result in their removal (if there were any case to answer, which, on my reading, there is not). He said the contempt “seriously deprives people of the political and physical liberty” guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

The letter rattles off two other sections of the Criminal Code and Crimes Act which relate to imprisonment but, as far as I can tell, have no application whatsoever to his complaint.

This contempt creates two classes of people. Those who can afford lawyers and those who cannot.

Culleton described the matter as one of urgency because “people are losing their homes and lives because this parliament is held in contempt”.

Updated

Gotta love #politicslive readers.

Aruna Sathanapally, a barrister at the Sydney bar and visiting lecturer at Sydney University, has clarified more on the process of complaints under section 18C.

To recap, Malcolm Turnbull seemed to suggest that the Human Rights Commission was pursuing the QUT case under 18C.

Turnbull said:

I think the Human Rights Commission has done a great deal of harm to its credibility by bringing the case against the Queensland students ...

Now, frankly, what the Human Rights Commission needs to do is reflect on whether, in making its decisions as to which cases to pursue and which cases not to pursue, it has been doing so in a manner that enhances the reputation both of the commission and respect for the Racial Discrimination Act.

It seemed to me (no lawyer) that Turnbull was at odds with the commission’s advice on the website that it does not pursue the cases so I asked for a clarification of the process.

This is from Sathanapally:

In short, the process is the same across all grounds of what is referred to as “unlawful discrimination”, which includes age discrimination, sex discrimination and race discrimination. The commission’s role, as you’ve identified, is to conciliate. Complaint to the commission is required before a person can proceed to either the federal circuit court or federal court. The commission’s role is to inquire into and attempt to conciliate the dispute, in a private and informal way.

It does not make determinations, nor does it bring legal proceedings (though it may seek to intervene). The relevant provisions are sections 46P-PN of the Australian Human Rights Commission Act.

The AHRC has, and employs, the power to terminate (dismiss) complaints on various grounds, including that they are trivial or vexatious.

The AHRC does not make any determination on whether unlawful discrimination is made out, that is the job of a court ... The AHRC cannot stop a court proceeding ...

Updated

Day and Culleton documents tabled

The documents related to senators Bob Day and Rod Culleton and their eligibility or otherwise have just dropped on the parliamentary website.

We are still trawling through them but if you want to crowd check, feel free. We are combing through them as we speak and I will bring you the guts of it shortly.

Updated

Staying classy in here at all times.

David Leyonhjelm was asked earlier today about whether he may bargain his vote on Australian Building and Construction Commission, in return for some movement on 18C.

How could you say I’m holding the government to ransom? I’ve got them by the balls and squeezing. That’s not holding them to ransom. What are you talking about?

One Nation senator Rod Culleton to make a statement to Senate at 12.30pm

Rod Culleton is going to grab the tiger by the tail – as he likes to say – and make a statement when the motion is moved to send the question of his eligibility to the high court.

Questions at issue:

Pauline Hanson has been ambiguous on her senator. There have been weird statements, no comments and then shutting down of a press conference today.

Culleton has said he will continue to support the West Australian Australian people.

Will he go independent?

Will he be pushed by One Nation?

We may know at 12.30pm.

Earlier today, the Coalition and Labor had agreed to postpone the high court motions on senators Day and Culleton until 12.30pm so that crossbench senators could comprehend what is being proposed.

This is what the attorney general, George Brandis, said earlier in the senate:

The government proposes to move referral to the disputed court of returns in relation to both the qualifications of Senator Culleton and in relation to the vacancy created by the resignation of Mr Day. The ordinary time to do that would be now but, given the volume of material that has been tabled, and following informal discussion between was myself and Senator Wong, of which the crossbench have also been apprised, what we propose to do is to move those motions sequentially at 1230 or to seek leave of the Senate to do so. The motion concerning Mr Day’s vacancy will be moved first by Senator Ryan and upon that motion being disposed of I will move a motion in relation to Senator Culleton.

This is what the Labor leader in the Senate, Penny Wong, said:

I indicated the opposition is broad agreement with the approach taken by the government. We think it is reasonable given the documents that you have just tabled for senators who may only have been reading about these matters in the press to be able to, should they wish, appraise themselves of the documents which have been tabled prior to the motion is being discussed. I thank the government for taking up that suggestion and we indicate our agreement to proceeding with the debate at 12.30.

Updated

The Cloak is Green but don't mention CONSPIRACY!

The One Nation senator Malcolm Roberts just held a bizarre press conference in Parliament House.

He did not tell the media what the press conference was for, so roughly 20 journalists from the press gallery turned up, and a dozen cameras, expecting an announcement about Rod Culleton’s fate.

But he had two scientists with him, who had flown here from North America.

Senator Malcolm Roberts with a geologist, Tony Heller, right and Timothy Ball, a professor in climate science at a press conference.
Senator Malcolm Roberts with a geologist, Tony Heller, right and Timothy Ball, a professor in climate science at a press conference. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian

It turns out he’d called the press conference to say the CSIRO could not be trusted when it comes to climate science.

They then talked for 20 mins about the global scientific community’s perpetuation of the climate change hoax.

As the minutes ticked by the press became increasingly frustrated.

Crikey’s Bernard Keane eventually asked:

Senator Roberts, you’ve spoken a lot about the work or the involvement of the Rothschilds in this global conspiracy, can you tell us a little bit more about that because you’ve written about this before haven’t you?”

Roberts replied:

I have never used the word conspiracy. People who are using the word conspiracy, no hang on just a minute here. People who are using the word conspiracy are people like you and it’s quite often used to denigrate because the facts are clear.

Timothy Ball, a professor in climate science holds The Cloak of Green at a press conference
Timothy Ball, a professor in climate science holds The Cloak of Green at a press conference. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian

The press conference then unravelled.

When reporters wanted to know about Culleton’s fate, One Nation’s senior adviser James Ashby interjected:

We’re not on the subject of Rod Culleton this morning. We have a different agenda this morning.

Fairfax reporter Amy Remeikis shot back:

Well I think it’s a press conference, so we can ask whatever questions we want to.

The press conference was then cut off.

Malcolm Roberts walks out of his press conference with geologist Tony Heller, left and Timothy Ball.
Malcolm Roberts walks out of his press conference with geologist Tony Heller, left and Timothy Ball. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian

Updated

Wong said she went through a lot of soul searching when considering a plebiscite. She concluded it would be damaging.

She says major reforms like the abolition of death penalty, native title rights, the Racial Discrimination Act, the Sex Discrimination Act did not require a plebiscite.

Updated

Penny Wong addresses arguments about the tradition of marriage, that it is not set in stone.

She says “marriage has endured precisely because it has evolved and adapted”.

Wong goes to religion.

Personally speaking, I don’t think the god of my faith would be affronted by who I am.

She says her children are no different, her relationship is no different, her feelings for her family are no different.

Wong says the debate has shifted from the merits of marriage equality to the method of addressing the issue. It is a shift that should not be underestimated.

Updated

On to Labor’s Senate leader, Penny Wong.

Wong says Malcolm Turnbull has made a Faustian pact for the leadership to support a position (a plebiscite) he previously opposed.

Wong is recapping the history on the decriminalisation of homosexuality.

Whilst our nation once led the world on reforms, now we are laggards.

Updated

A reminder as to the guts of the plebiscite bill from the explanatory memo:

  • The Plebiscite (Same-Sex Marriage) Bill 2016 (the bill) would establish the legislative framework for a compulsory, in-person vote in a national plebiscite that would ask Australians if the law should be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry. Under clause 5 of the bill, the question to be asked would be ‘Should the law be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry?’. The result of the plebiscite would be determined by whether more than 50% of the votes cast are in favour or not in favour of the plebiscite proposal under clause 6 of the bill. The bill would also provide that, should this bill become an act, the writ for the plebiscite must be issued within 120 days after the act commences.
  • Clause 15 of the bill would require the establishment of two committees, each comprising five members of Parliament and five citizens. These committees will be known as the Committee for the Yes Case and the Committee for the No Case and will be appointed jointly by the attorney general and the special minister of state. Each committee will have two government members (one of whom will be the chair), two opposition members and one crossbench member. Each committee would receive $7.5m in public funding to conduct official yes and no campaigns and the ability to receive up to $1,500 in tax deductible gifts from donors.
  • The Electoral Commission will be responsible for overseeing the vote under clause 7 to ensure Australian voters are informed about the procedural elements of the plebiscite, the Electoral Commission will prepare and distribute to households in Australia general information about how to vote in the plebiscite. This is appropriate given the role of the Electoral Commission as an independent impartial body responsible for overseeing parliamentary elections.

Updated

The special minister of state, Scott Ryan, is now speaking to the marriage equality plebiscite bill.

It is mostly mechanics but makes a quick political point that this is the first government to bring this (marriage equality) matter to the parliament. The former Labor government never did.

Updated

Penny Wong has concurred. The Day and Culleton matters have been delayed until midday-ish.

George Brandis is speaking to the referrals to the high court.

He says the government has reached agreement to delay the high court motions until midday to give other senators time to digest the referrals which have just been tabled.

Labor senator Kimberley Kitching has been sworn into the Senate.

Now the Bob Day and Rod Culleton referrals.

Updated

Herewith, the speakers list of senators on the marriage equality bill.

  • Liberal Chris BACK
  • Labor Penny WONG
  • Greens Nick MCKIM
  • LNP Ian MACDONALD
  • Labor Sue LINES
  • Liberal Democrat David LEYONHJLEM
  • Liberal Dean SMITH
  • Labor Anne URQUHART
  • Greens Jane RICE
  • Labor Louis PRATT
  • Justice party Derryn HINCH
  • Labor Jenny McALLISTER
  • NXT Stirling GRIFF
  • Labor Malarndirri McCARTHY
  • Murry WATT
  • Labor Carol BROWN
  • Labor Catryna BILYK
  • Liberal Scott RYAN

Marriage equality plebiscite bill in the senate: where to from here?

The government’s bill to hold a plebiscite on same-sex marriage on 11 February is the first bill up in the Senate.

My colleague Paul Karp updated the current state of play in an article on Saturday about more than 100 allies of LGBTI people calling for a free vote.

Paul reports this morning:

The plebiscite bill is expected to be defeated, with Labor, the Greens, Nick Xenophon Team and Derryn Hinch against it. The Coalition’s Dean Smith will abstain, but is prepared to vote against it if he has the casting vote.

If the bill is defeated as expected, attention will turn to whether the prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, will advocate or allow a free vote on same-sex marriage, which he has not ruled out, or whether the government will maintain its policy for a plebiscite, as conservatives in the Coalition have demanded.

There are two same-sex marriage bills currently in the lower house: one from Labor and one from a cross-party group.

Labor’s equality spokeswoman, Terri Butler, told Guardian Australia Labor would join the cross-party bill if a Coalition MP joined. But Coalition MPs have steadfastly maintained there is no “plan B” if the plebiscite bill is defeated and said marriage equality could be delayed for years.

Labor, the Greens and others in favour of same-sex marriage may also introduce a Senate bill to increase pressure for a free vote.

On Thursday, Turnbull said the bill was up for debate next week because it was “very, very time-sensitive legislation” that had to pass before a plebiscite on 11 February.

That contrasted with his approach to the Australian Building and Construction Commission bill, about which Turnbull said the government would not commit to a vote unless it could win.

On Friday, he recognised the plebiscite bill was unlikely to pass on current numbers and called on Labor to support it.

Back to the prime minister’s suggestion on ABC AM that:

I think the Human Rights Commission has done a great deal of harm to its credibility by bringing the case against the Queensland students.

The Commission does not bring the case. If conciliation breaks down, it is up to the person making the complaint to decide what happens after that. In the QUT case, Cindy Prior decided to take the case further.

This is from the Commission’s website:

What will happen with my complaint?

When the Commission receives a complaint about something that is covered by the RDA, the President of the Commission can investigate the complaint and try to resolve it by conciliation.

The Commission is not a court and cannot determine that discrimination has happened. The Commission’s role is to get both sides of the story and help those involved resolve the complaint.

Commission staff may contact you to get further information about your complaint.

Generally, the Commission will tell the person or organisation the complaint is against (the respondent) about your complaint and give them a copy of the complaint. The Commission may ask the respondent for specific information or a detailed response to your complaint.

Where appropriate, the Commission will invite you to participate in conciliation. Conciliation is an informal process that allows you and the respondent to talk about the issues and try to find a way to resolve the complaint.

If your complaint is not resolved or it is discontinued for another reason, you can take your complaint to the Federal Court of Australia or the Federal Circuit Court.

Updated

This is the thrust of the Malcolm Roberts press conference.

Some housekeeping before the derp:

Parliamentary chambers start at 10am today.

The House has private member’s business (where individuals can talk about their stuff).

But the Senate is where it is at.

  • (Stephen Conroy’s replacement) Kimberley Kitching will be sworn in as a senator for Victoria
  • The president will table a letter from Senator Day resigning his place as a senator
  • The president will present information about the qualification of former Senator Day and Senator Culleton
  • Joko Widodo, the president of the republic of Indonesia, was going to speak to the parliament but he had to cancel his visit.

We know that Labor had intended to support the referrals but they only saw the documents late last night so I am really not game to predict anything this morning.

Government business for debate in the Senate is the plebiscite.

Updated

There is no line of sight on One Nation (in terms of televisual feasts) so we shall have to wait. It looks like some climate change denial extravaganza.

Updated

Regular watchers will know 18C has been a totemic issue for the conservatives in the Coalition. They have been pushing relentlessly on the issue recently – along with the Australian newspaper – with nary a peep out of the other end of the Coalition, some of whom represent some diverse seats.

For example, Craig Laundy, the Liberal MP for Reid, represents one of the most diverse seats in Australia. He spoke out at the time against changes to the Racial Discrimination Act but, in more recent times, moderates in the Libs have been trying not to give the cons oxygen on the issue.

Now the mods are getting restless. This morning Phil Coorey of the Australian Financial Review reports unsourced comments suggesting the mods are not going to take the push on 18C any more.

In an escalation of tensions inside the Coalition, NSW Liberals, speaking on condition of anonymity, said their state was the most multicultural and, apart from Tony Abbott, no one from NSW was willing either to amend or repeal section 18C of the act.

“There’s no NSW people who support this. It says a lot about this,” said one of several NSW Liberals. “This is the most ethnically diverse state. This is not an issue in NSW that people care about.”

A colleague concurred, saying 18C was a niche issue being pushed by either “ideologues in the Senate” or MPs “who don’t come from multicultural parts of Australia”.

“We’re the most multicultural state in Australia,” he said. “The NSW people have no appetite to go there. We’re comfortable with the laws.

“We all preside over ethnically diverse communities except the member for Warringah [Mr Abbott].”

One of the leading mods, the education minister, Simon Birmingham, has just been interviewed on Sky News by Kieran Gilbert.

He says the Liberal senator Dean Smith’s proposal to have a joint committee examine section 18C was on the table.

Ultimately this is not the government’s No 1 priority, we are not seeking to rush legislative change through.

Updated

More Malcolm.

The PM was asked whether the Queensland University of Technology case brought by an Indigenous staff member against three students showed the law was working.

Turnbull said:

What is shows is that the Human Rights Commission must urgently review the way in which it manages these cases. To have a case like that, which will have involved the expenditure of considerable commonwealth money, taxpayers’ money, considerable money on behalf of the students, imposed enormous stress on them, and have it chucked out, struck out as having no reasonable prospects of success – what the court was saying, what the judge was saying to the Human Rights Commission is, ‘You’ve been wasting the court’s time. You’ve been wasting government money.’

He spent a bit of time on the process of complaints made under 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act.

I think the Human Rights Commission has done a great deal of harm to its credibility by bringing the case against the Queensland students.

The commission undertakes the process for administering section 18C but, in this case, the conciliation broke down. The Indigenous staffer Cindy Prior was suing the students so I did not think the commission brought the case against the students.

I am sure the prime minister, formerly known as the smart young Spycatcher barrister, would not be wrong on a legal point.

But I have put a call to the Human Rights Commission seeking clarification on the process. If any human rights lawyers happen to be blog readers, send me a message via the thread or the Twits or Facebook.

Updated

Good morning to a mini festival of democracy,

There is a whole lot going on this morning in the third-last sitting week of the year. (Who is counting?) Members are streaming back into the House. As I fell in the Senate doors in a mess of earphones streaming Malcolm Turnbull from ABC AM, I almost ran into the other Malcolm, smiling sweetly next to the security check. Malcolm Roberts’ office has released an alert for a press conference for One Nation at 9am. This causes reporters to prick up their ears because One Nation senator Rod Culleton is expected to be referred to the high court this morning for a ruling on his eligibility. Former Family First senator Bob Day will also be referred. Will One Nation be talking about the future of Culleton, shearer of sheep and key collector? We shall await the hour of nine.

Meanwhile, your prime minister has been on ABC AM.

There are a couple of news points.

Turnbull says if he accepted that the boats had stopped he would fall into the complacency that hit Kevin Rudd. It’s a more challenging environment – with social media – than John Howard faced, says Turnbull.

Bill Shorten is pandering to the left of his party on speaking out against the lifetime ban on asylum seekers who have come by boat, says the prime minister. (Shorten has yet to commit to voting against the legislation).

Turnbull moves on to 18C. His words are a bit mashed but I will relay as much as possible so you can see the nuance.

There ... has been, and I have sympathy for this argument... there is a view ... the bar that is set is too low. In other words, in particular that prescribing conduct which insults and offends is too much a restriction on free speech. You’re obviously trying to get the balance between ensuring that we maintain the courteous discourse and debate that again, mutual respect that underpins our strong multicultural society and, on the other hand, freedom of speech, which is of critical importance in a democracy. I think the Human Rights Commission has done a great deal of harm to its credibility by bringing the case against the Queensland students.

There was a lot more in that interview which I will bring you shortly but let’s get this wheel spinning. Mike Bowers has been chasing the PM down corridors. You can speak to both of us in the thread or on the Twittersphere, or indeed on my Facebook page.

Onwards ... upwards ... downwards ... sideways.

Updated

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100’s of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
Movies and series leaving Netflix in March 2026, including hugely re-watched sitcom
A deal is yet to be struck to keep the show on the service
The Independent UK
The Independent UK
No, autistic people are not ‘mind blind’ – here’s why
For four decades, a controversial idea has shaped how autism is understood by researchers, healthcare professionals and the public: the claim that autistic people are “mind blind”. The phrase suggests an inability to grasp what others think or feel. It is simple, memorable – and wrong.
The Conversation
The Conversation
Demna brings sexy back in effort to reinvigorate Gucci
Designer’s first catwalk for the brand in Milan flirts with bad taste with short, tight dresses and a diamante G-string
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Neil Sedaka death: Legendary singer-songwriter behind ‘(Is This the Way to) Amarillo’ was 86
Sedaka was the songwriter behind a string of popular hits including ‘Breaking Up Is Hard to Do’ and ‘Love Will Keep Us Together’
The Independent UK
The Independent UK
A 'Mansion Tax' in Los Angeles Is Worsening the City's Housing Crisis
A transfer tax on high-value real estate transactions is reducing the number of homes on the market and limiting new construction.
Reason
Reason
Pink ‘has moved to New York and is in running to take over Kelly Clarkson’s talk show’
After being spotted in the Big Apple, singer Pink is said to have moved to New York and is said to be in the running to take over Kelly Clarkson’s NBC talk show.
BANG Premier
BANG Premier
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.
Download on the AppStore Get it on Google Play